HomeMy WebLinkAboutMisc•
•
•
•
LAKE and STREAM STUDY
Barbee Mill Community Dock Project
For:
Conner Homes at Barbee Mill, LLC (Attn: Charlie Conner)
846 l 081h Ave NE
Bellevue, WA 98004
At:
Conner Homes at Barbee Mill
4151 and 4125 Williams Ave N
Renton, WA 98056
Parcels #051850 0350( 4151) and 051850 0360 (4125)
Prepared by:
Marine Surveys & Assessments
521 Snagstead Way
Port Townsend, WA 98368
Phone: (360) 385-4073, Fax: (360) 385-1724
E-mail sea@cablespeed.com
January 19,2010
i.-
}~1 Iii ... ·: c_~;' ![))
• List of Figures
Figure Number Page
1. Vicinity and area maps ...................................................................... 6
2. DNR withdrawal area .......................................................................... 7
3. Plot plan ................................................................................................ 8
4. Proposed pier plan and elevation views ........................................ 9
• 5 . Proposed section and framing views A-A. ..................................... l 0
6. Proposed section and framing views B-B ....................................... 11
7, Planting areas .................................................................................... 12
8. Planting legend ................................................................................. 13
9. Planting plan ...................................................................................... 14
l 0. Tree and shrub planting detail ........................................................ 15
•
• MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 2
•
•
•
•
Barbee Mill Community Dock Project
Lake and Stream Study Assessment Narrative
I. PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
Project Purpose and Location:
The proposed Community Dock will consist of a fully grated 1,592 ft2 dock with a 5 '-1 O" x I 72' (1,003 ft2) main
walkway, a 7'-1 O" x 56' (437 ft2) "T" and a 5' -10" x 26' (152 ft') finger pier (Figures 3-6). The dock will have a
100% grated surface with 46% open space. The dock will be supported by (14) 6" And (14) 8" diameter steel
battered piles. Piles will be driven using a vibratory pile driver to practical refusal. A native planting plan
will be installed (Figures 7-9). A 6' wide walkway is needed to safely serve the anticipated number of
users .
The proposed Community Dock will be located adjacent to Lot 35, 4151 Williams Ave N and Lot 36, 4125
Williams Ave. N, Renton, WA 98056, presently owned by Conner Homes at Barbee Mill LLC ( the "applicant" for
the requested shoreline substantial development permit). The purpose of the project is to provide water access and
transient moorage for 100 property owners from the Barbee Mill community and private moorage for I property
owner. The proposed Barbee Mill Community Dock would be a day use only structure except for the 5'-10" x 26'
finger pier, which will provide full time private moorage for Lot 36, 4125 Williams Ave. N.
The properties are located within the Barbee Mill Community, a major waterfront subdivision currently under
development by Conner Homes at Barbee Mill LLC. The subject property is located along the eastern shore of Lake
Washington in the City of Renton in Section 32, Township 24N, Range 5E; Latitude: 47.515745°N/Longitude:
122.206114°W.
Two bodies of water are adjacent to, or flow through, the Barbee Mill Community: Lake Washington and May
Creek. The subject property is located along Lake Washington, a Shoreline of Statewide Significance as provided in
RMC 4-3-090FI, and a Shoreline of the State under RMC 4-11-190. This Standard Stream or Lake Study is
prepared in accordance with the requirements ofRMC 4-8-120D with respect to the Lake Washington shoreline of
the subject property and the I 00' of abutting lakeshore lots both to the north and to the south of the subject property
(the "study area"). May Creek, a Shoreline of the State (RMC 4-3-090F2), flows through the Barbee Mill
Community. The distance from the closest edge of the project site to the OHWL of May Creek is 190'. The project
location itself is 345' from the OHWL of May Creek. The community May Creek open space (a riparian buffer),
parking spaces and a street cover the area between the southeastern corner of the subject property and May Creek.
Project Description:
The Barbee Mill community is being developed by Conner Homes at Barbee Mill LLC on the approximately 22
acre site of the former Barbee Mill Company lumber mill. Upon completion, the Barbee Mill community will have
114 multi-story paired homes, a pond, walking trails and lakefront open space for the use of residents. Lots 23
through 48 are lakefront lots. To restore the former industrial site to a parcel suitable for a residential waterfront
subdivision, the mill buildings were demolished; fill soils were removed from behind the bulkhead; asphalt paving,
a pier, the wooden bulkhead and piling associated with the mill operation were removed; and extensive shoreline
restoration was completed. The subject property is located south of, and was not included in this extensive
remediation. The project shoreline is a sheet pile bulkhead with a concrete cap. The substrate immediately
waterward of the bulkhead consists oflarge and small cobble.
The proposed Community Dock would be oriented to keep all structures and moorage within the side property
setbacks of each property in compliance with all City of Renton zoning and municipal codes (Figure 3). As
mentioned above, the purpose do the Community Dock is to provide water access and transient moorage for I 00
property owners from the Barbee Mill community and private moorage for I property owner. Residents and their
MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 3
• guests would have use of the Dock for swimming, fishing, water skiing and any number of other water sports and
activities. In establishing design parameters for the proposed project, the applicant required that the proposed
structure does not interfere with the general public's use and enjoyment of Lake Washington, that no structure pose
a navigation hazard to boaters, and that no structure interfere with the use of existing or future neighboring docks or
piers. The location of the proposed Community Dock also removes it entirely for the DNR withdrawal area to the
north.
2. LAKE AND STREAM CLASSIFICATIONS
As a Shoreline of Statewide Significance (RMC 4-3-090Fl), Lake Washington is included in the definition ofa
Shoreline of the State (RMC 4-11-190). Lake Washington is a Class I lake as it is a perennial salmon id-bearing
body of water classified as a Shoreline of the State (RMC 4-l l-190SI). May Creek is an important salmonid stream
that is classified by the City of Renton and the State of Washington as Class I waters and included within the
defmition of a Shoreline of the State (RMC 4-3-090F2).
e 3. SHORELINE RESTORATION AND OHW MARK
Shoreline Restoration:
•
•
Prior to restoration of the beach in conjunction with vacation of the land, the Lake Washington shoreline north of
the subject property was heavily bulkheaded, back-filled and covered with impervious asphalt paving; numerous
piling and substantial quantities of concrete rubble and other shoreline debris were on the site. Pursuant to the
general development site remediation, upland and in-water structures including the timber bulkhead and piling were
removed, shoreline rubble was removed, fill soil was excavated to subgrade elevations, toe rock and a temporary
quarry spall erosion control berm were installed, and sand, gravel and rock materials were used to construct a beach
to mimic natural conditions. Although the area of extensive remediation did not encompass the subject property, a
planting buffer of native vegetation was installed along all the lakefront lots, including the subject property, to
environmentally and functionally enhance the entire development shoreline. There would be no clearing or grading
associated with the proposed Community Dock.
OHW Mark:
The Ordinary High Water (OHW) mark for Lake Washington is the line of mean high water (RMC 4-11-150
Definitions 0). The Lake Washington water depth is controlled by the Army Corps of Engineers at the Hiram M.
Chittenden Locks and is at 21.8' oflake elevation. The OHWL at the project site is seen in Figure 4.
4. VEGETATIVE COVER OF THE SITE
The study area includes no wetland or flood hazard areas; it does include Lake Washington riparian areas. Prior to
the Barbee Mill Beach Restoration project, riparian vegetation was found to be generally absent within the study
area as the shoreline behind the bulkhead was paved. In unpaved areas, vegetation noted included Juncus ejfusus
(soft rush) and Iris pseudocaris (a non-native iris). The upland redevelopment required extensive regrading and
clearing; a mitigation planting plan was agreed upon that includes planting along the Lake Washington shoreline. In
accordance with this mitigation plan, plantings on the subject property have been installed. In conjunction with
construction of the proposed Community Dock, additional native plants, shrubs and/or trees will be planted as
specified in applications to, and as approved by, the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and the U.
S. Army Corps of Engineers (Figures 7-9).
5. ECOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS OF LAKE WASHINGTON ALONG STUDY AREA
Until relatively recently, the industrial structures and use of the site limited the ecological functions that would
otherwise have been provided by Lake Washington and its adjacent riparian area. As a result of the extensive
general site restoration work completed north of the subject property, including removal of the wooden bulkhead,
large pier and numerous pilings, excavation of fill soil from behind the bulkhead, and reconstruction of the beach to
mimic ·its natural state, the ecological functions of the portion of the lake within the study area should be greatly
MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 4
• enhanced. Recently planted riparian vegetation and additional plantings in conjunction with the proposed project
will further assist in restoring the ecological functions of Lake Washington. Much of this new vegetation will be
overhanging, providing shade and predator protection for fish and aquatic invertebrates. The newly planted riparian
vegetation will add significant organic matter to the lake substrate in the form of leaves and woody debris that fall
and wash in; an additional source of food, shelter and shade for aquatic invertebrates and fish. This increased
vegetation will also provide food and shelter for terrestrial insects, and in tum provide an additional food source for
birds and animals that feed upon them. The addition of riparian vegetation to this formerly near-barren site should
also help water quality by filtering pollutants, removing nutrients and reducing sediments in any runoff from the
adjacent upland development. The smaller design of the proposed project as compared to the structures removed,
together with increased overhanging vegetation, may facilitate the migration of juvenile salmon.
6. FISH OR WILDLIFE USE OF AREA
Birds:
Birds observed on or near the site include hawks, herons, eagles, quail, osprey, cormorants and songbirds. Before
the mill structures were demolished, an osprey nest was successfully relocated from the top of the old mill sawdust
collector to a platform built on a 25' pole over the water not far from the original nest site. The osprey have accepted
e the new nest and a video camera records their activities for viewing over the Internet. Although the bald eagle is no
longer on the list of threatened or endangered species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), bald eagles
continue to be protected by the Bald and Golden Eagles Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and are
protected as a "sensitive species" within the state of Washington (WAC 232-12-011). The only eagle nests observed
near the project site are two nests approximately 0.65 mile from the site on the opposite shore.
•
•
Mammals:
The only wild mammals reported as observed in the area are deer.
Fish:
Salmonids observed at the site include salmon and trout. Salmonids known to be present in southern Lake
Washington include Puget Sound chinook salmon, coho salmon, sockeye salmon, steelhead trout, hull trout and
cutthroat trout. Puget Sound chinook, Puget Sound steelhead and bull trout are all listed as threatened under the
ESA. Other fish observed at the site include bass, black crappie, bluegill, pumpkinseed sunfish, tench and yellow
perch. The shoreline remediation was designed to be consistent with Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 8
Conservation Plan recommendations. As a result of the remediation, shoreline that was previously unsuitable habitat
for fish and other aquatic life due to extensive shoreline modifications and industrial use of the site has been
restored. The restored gravel substrate and gently sloping bottom should provide favorable habitat for winter rearing
of salmon fry. The new gravel substrate to the north and the existing cobble on the subject property should be
suitable habitat for benthic invertebrates which would likely attract juvenile salmonids.
7. MEASURES TO PROTECT TREES AND VEGETATION
At the present time, the study area has no living woody plant with a trunk six inches or greater in diameter or any
other plant falling within the definition of "Tree" in RMC 4-11-200. This is likely because of the prior asphalt
paving over, and industrial use of, the area and subsequent excavation and regrading in accordance with the
approved upland development plan. The proposed Community Dock area has been landscaped pursuant to the
general development planting plan. Additional native plants, shrubs and/or trees will be installed in accordance with
state and federal project permits. Trees planted in accordance with all landscaping plans will likely have trunks less
than six inches in diameter at the time of planting (Figures 7-9).
MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 5
•
•
•
•
Figure 1. Vicinity map
PROJECT OES~ED BY
Waterfront Constra:tioo loc.
lHIS DOCUMENT IS ~ PROPERrr Of WATERFRONT
crn.iSIRUCTION fl!C., .I.ND rS NOT lO Br LJSE:O, 1N 'HNOl£ OR ,N
PAAT, FOR ANY 01'1"Ert NtOJECT WITl-lOUT THE ViR]nEN
Au1HORIZAT10N Of" WATERFROJIIT CONSTRUCTION fl!C
~ p.
~
>:.:::.::~;!-=' :·
i
., ..... ft~ft!!l.~"t. .. ,
I . I~ -'?ft? f!'
"-'.?,~::.~~ ;=.-:-, ~:. q
VICINITY MAP/NO SCALE
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
1/4 SEC: NW J2-24N-05E
TAXLOT f: 051850 0350 (4151) & 0518500360 (4125)
BARBEE "'41LL TGW UND INT IN TRS
A, B.C,D,E,F ,G,H, 1, l, M.N ,O&P
lAT: 47.515745N
LONG: -1 22,20611 4W
PROJECT NA E:
, ..
l\c_'._
-IIV'~ ..
PURPOSE:PROYIDE CO MVNITY ACCESS
AND PRIVATE l.100RAGE
DA.TUM; COE o.o· EST 1919
BARBEE MILL
COM~UNITY DOCK
ADJACENT OWNERS:
Q) CONNER HOl.1E5 AT &\RBEE MILL LLC
4157 WILLIMjS AVE N
RENTON, WA, 98056
@ CONN[R HOI.AES AT BARBEE ~ILL LLC
4119 W!LLIA~S AVE N
RENTON, WA. 9S056
MS&A
REFERENCE j:
SITE LOCATION ADDRESS:
4125 & 415\ WILUA~S AVE N
RENTON, WA. 91:1056
'NG#: 05-3077-.A..1-1
t
I
LA,E
FOREST
PARK
w
_J
~
<l'. w
(/)
AREA MAP/
.3 MILES
1 l>.llLE
KIRKLAND
RENTON
0
PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK
IN: LAKE WASHINGTON NEAR: RENTON
COUNTY: KING STATE; WA
liJJL[S
APPL BY: CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE MILL LLC
SHEET: 1 Of": 7 DA.TE: 1-12,-10
Barbee Mill Communily Dock Project • 6
•
ONR WITHDRAWL AR
•
•
• MS&A
Figure 2. DNR withdrawal area
' '
-~'\,,
\
,-~-"'
',,,',,,
' r ___ ,--_____ ,
!
, ____ _
l'ROJ(Cl DE51GNEO 9'!':
Waterfrolll Constroction loc.
lHIS DOCUIKNT IS PAOPACM't' PROf'ffi!Y OF \¥AT£Rl'RONT
COt,fSTl<UC'IID"I INC., ,!,NO IS l.o1 TO BE USED, lt>I ..,HOLE OR IN
PART, FUR AW OTHER PROJECT l\'llHOUT TH£ WRITTEN
AUTHORIZ/1.rlQN Of \\'AfERF'RONT CONSrRUC:liON I~.
DNR WITHDRAWL AREA
100· 50' o· 100·
.' ~~-· --.. --.
..... '11!!'f---f-I:l!!!:l __ l+ii8llli\"$f ;/E
APPLICANT: CONNER HO~ES AT BARBEE MILL LLC
PROPOSED: INSTALL COM~lUNITY DOCK
SH[ET;.3 OF: 7 NEAR AT: RENTON
ATE: 1-12-10 D G · 05-.)077-A,J-1
* I
Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 7
•
•
•
•
PROPO::iED FULLY
GRATED DOCK_
----,----
' '
Figure 3. Plot plan
OHWL 2.t:BO· (COE)
18.80' (NAVO 88) 0
'\ ( __ / FACE ,-OF BULKHEAD
t PEND;~G FREESTANDING
\ '\ BOA.TUFT 0~ (2) 10M SlEEL
\, \ ~O,ORING--PtLES (OPTIONAL)
',, \ \, PENDING •
',, ~OINT-USE
'; \ \ PIER
: \\ J_ : \ '---
.\ f ,,-toi· Ir-•
' 1~ ~ ' ,,· --
'~,/}, , PEND;N"& ;~E£STAN~1N -
''·-,__ ·-,, ·~oATUFT OR \2) 16·-.sr,,,
--,, ____ '··,-------'.,!...10DRING PILES 'TqPTt~AL},
'
'
-------'•,,_ l, ,1 \
'-,,, \.. \ ( (2) iPENOING
\ ', \ ·, BOATUFTS
i . \\\ -+>\,
/ ,.-------,;,::,~ L r-,a,.'.j;· a:1-,,"-
: \ P,EN01NG : j , ,/
NATNE PLANTING PLAN 35 , JOB SITE
2~ 4151/CONNER HOMES ',, 3: I '---, om --
\
/ JOB SITE
4121}/CONNER HOMES
'1 OE] ._
/
!
28.4
36
/ 4113/CONNER HOMES
38
4,
N
I
~-_ _I 28. B l _ ~ _ "'_ ""=='i.l:.d
39
4101/CONNER HOMES ; 40
Q!µ'
' ,'
/ /JOINh~SE _. ,• •1. , I
/ lO PfER· ,/ 1',P 16
~ ,____ _/ '----~--~· -~-'-
------,, '>,, ·-::,--· •· ---________ :~ \,,
',, ' -----I ' R
MS&A
PROJECT DESIGNED Bl':
Waterfront Constra:tioo hi;_
lHIS DOCUMENT IS PROPRtllRY PROPERTY OF WAn;:RFRONl
CONSTHUCTION 1NC., ANO !S NOT TO BE USED, IN Wto...E OR IN
PART, FOR At,('( OlHER PROJECT WITHOUT THE WR11lfN
AUTHORIZAT~ OF WATERfRONT c0Nsmuc11ot.i INC. ·-< CONSTRUCT A FULLY GRA lED 1,592SOFT COMMUNITY DOCK WITH A ~-10' X 172 (1,C03SQFl)fWIN
WALKWAY, 7'-10" X 56' (437SQFT) 'l' AND 5'-10" X26'(152SQFl) FtG:RPER
< THE DOCK WILL HAVE A 100% GRATE0SlffACEWITH46%0PENSPACE
< THE DOCK WILL BE SUPPORTrn BY (14) 6' AND (14)8'DW.-ElERSlEELBATTEREDPL.ES
< PILES Will BE DRIVEN US!NG A VIBRATORY PlfDRIVERTOPRACOCAl.fEFUSAL
( A NATIVE PLANTING PLAN WUSE NSTAU.EO
PLOT PLAN
so· 25' o' so'
REFERENCE :
APPUCANL CONNER H01.1ES AT BARBEE Mill LLC
PROPOSED; INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK
SHEET;4 OF; 7 NEAR AT: RENTON
DATE: 1-12-10 : 05-3077-A.4-1
Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 8
•
~
9<> :>
"' Q a-
(D
(D
~
n
0
3
3
C :,
~
0
0
(l
"' 1
Q.
•
"'
\,
\ r
• •
.., 1'/ ,' \ ' ' \ I \ ,
\, ', .... ____ _
~ .. ~7-~--,_, \ :~.r,-. ' = (\ <: .. ~) ~ ~A~IY-:-:N;,N: PLAN -
,·"--............. ..
\ ,.,,
\, ,:1-i.L 7'-10·
l
i
N
'
56'
t {
\i
1
~--,,.-
'
}
( ______ \_.,.,,' PROt~il& FDU~E~
/ l (14)/~ROPOSED 6"
/ STEE\i BATTERrn PILING
/ 5'-10" -I
·---.
·,,',,,
' \
,
' ' i
'
·-
(1'4) PROPOSED 8"
STEEL BAnERED PILING
: \,
\ \,
! \ .' .-+ ---+ -----~ -
OHWL21.8
NAVD88
(18.80')
10 10
PROPOSED DOCK DETAIL VIEW
SCALE: 1 "=JO'
f-------------180' -------------1
f-------------172' -------------1
2'-6"
(14) PROPOSED B"
STEEL BATTERED PILING
PROJECT 0(SIGN£0 B'T':
PROPOSED FULLY EXISTING CONCRETE/SHEET PILE
GRATED DOCK -. BULKHEAD TO REMAIN
PROPOSED
( 14) PROPOSED 6'
STEEL BATTERED PILING
DOCK ELEVATION VIEW
EXISTING
GRADE
EXISTING
CONCRETE
WALKWAY
HOMES AT BARBEE MILL LLC
Waterfront Constructioo loc. JO' 15' o· JO' PROPOSED: INSTALL COMIAUNITY DOCK
THIS DOCUt.CNT IS PIIQPR£1#rY PROPERTY OF VYAT(RFHONT
CONSTRUCTION ll'i(:., !>ND 1$ N01' TO BE USED. IN WH01£ OR IN
PART. FOR Atfl' OTHER PAOJECl 'i\'llHOUT fHE WRITTEN
AUTHORIZATION OF WATERFRONT CONSTRUCTION INC. SCALL 1 ~o::30" ISHEET S OF, 7
DA.TE, 1-12-=_1.Q
_!jEAR/AT: RENTON
DWG#: 05-3077-A.~ 1
20
... cc·
C
iii
"'" -0
0 -g
"' ID a.
'C
0
:l
0
:l a.
ID
[
0
:l
<
!
•
•
•
•
PART
PlUNG
CAPS
GLU-LAMS
JOIST
RIM JOIST
NAILERS
GRATING
HARDWARE
• MS&A
figure 5. Proposed section and framing views A-A
1--------------s·-10·---------------,
2~x+" NAILER 0
18~ 0/C MAX.
GRATING
PJLE COVER
PLATE
CM' BEAM
ASSE~6L Y
STAINLESS STEEL
DECK SCREWS 5-1/B"x12"
GLU-l.AM BEAM
3/4" GALV.
LAG BOLT
'-.1.L.c!,..OHWL 21.80' (COE)
OHWL 18.80' (NAVO 88)
6" OR 8" STEEL SATIERED PILING
PROPOSED 6' DOCK SECTION A-A
SCALE, 3/4"= 1'
f--------------5'-10"---------------<
STAINLESS STEEL
DECK SCREWS
16d CALV, COMMON
NAILS (TYP)
5-1/B"x1r
GLU-LAM BEAM
3/4" GALV
THRU ROD 2"x6" RIM JOIST 3 .. x4" LEDGER
2ft•6" JOIST
0 2' 0/C WI 1/2",7" GALV.
LAG BOLT O 16" 0/C
PROPOSED 6' SECTION FRAMING
12" e· 3· o· r
I --SCALE, 3/4"=1'
i,jAT[RIAL LIST
SPECS TREAT~ENT
6"&8" STD WALL STEEL EPOXY COATED OR HOG
W6x 15 "W SEAM HOG
5 1/B~x12~ & 7 1/B"x12" DF (24F-V4) ACZA
2"x6" OF HZ OR BTR A.ClA
r,e· OF H2 OR BTR ACZA
2"x4" OF f/2 DR BTR ACZA
SUNWALK POLYPROPYLENE NONE
STEEL STAINLESS OR HOG
PROJECT DESIGJIIED BV:
Waterfront Const111:tioo loc.
1H1'5 DOCUI.IENT lS PA0PRCURY PROPERTY Of 'kATa:lFROtfl
CONSTRUCTIO~ 11,fC., AND IS t«JT fO 8E usto, It.I WHO!..£ OR IN
PART. FOR ANY OTHER PROJECl wm-K)UT 11-!E WRITTE~
AuTHORIZAT~ OF 'NATERFRQIIIT COt,fSTRUCTtON INC,
NOTE:
ALL PILES 10 BE DRIVEN TO PRACTICAL REFUSAL.
REFERENCE :
APPLICANT; CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE MILL LLC
PROPOSED: INSTALL C0),,0,WNITY DOCK
HEET:6 OF:7 NEAR AT: RENlON
DATE: 1-12-10 D G · 05-3077-A.6-1
Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 10
•
~
I?'
)>
CD
0 a-
<D
<D
~
n
0
3
3
§
~
0 a
l
Q.
•
PART
Pl UNG
CAPS
GLU-1.AMS
JOIST
RIM JOIST
NAILERS
GRATING
HARDWARE
• •
>----------------7'-10"----------------
2"x4~ NAILER 0
18" 0/C MAx.
PROJECT DE.S1Gt.lEO B'V!
Waterfront Construction In:.
THIS OOCU~NT IS ~ PROPERTY OF" VfATCRFRONT
CONSTRUC1!0N tNC,, ~D IS NOT TO BE USED. IN WHOLE OR ~
PART, f"OR Am OTHER PROJECT \tfTHOIJT TME WFlrtTtN
AUTHORIZATION OF \1/ATrnrRONl CONSTRUCTION INC.
GRATING
PILE COVER
Pl.ATE
CAP BEAM
ASSEMBLY
el
PROPOSED 8' DOCK SECTION 8-8
SCALE, 3/4"= 1'
STAINLESS STEEL
DECK SCREWS 7-1/8'\12"
GLU-LAM BEAl.-1
3/4H CALV.
LAG BOLT
2'-6"
1'-6"
OHWL 21.ao' {COE)
·oHWL 18.80' (NAVD 88)
8" STEEL BATTERED PILING
i-------------------7'-10h--------------------l
2'\:4 • NAILER 0
18" 0/C t-JAx.
GRATING
3/4" CALV.
THRU ROD
STAINLESS STEEL
DECK SCREWS 7-1/B"x12~
GLU -LA~ BEAM
~---,'I/ 16d GALV. ;;:i===t.-COM ~ON
NAILS (NP)
2"x6" RIM JOIST 3":,t4" LEDGER
W/ 1 /2~x7" GALV.
LAG BOLT a» 16.,. 0/C
2·~5" JOIST
0 2· 0/C PROPOSED 8' SECTION FRAMING
IIATERIAI. UST
SPECS TREATMENT
6" &s• STD WALL STEEL EPOXY COATED OR HOG
'//6x15 "H" BEAM HDG
6" ;f' o·
~
SCALE: 3/4'"-1'
12"
I
,·
NOTE:
ALL PILES TO BE DRNEN TO PRACTICAL REFUSAL
5 1/8",12" & 7 1/8'x12" OF (24F-V4) ACZA
2"x6• DF' #2 OR BTR ACZA
HO MES AT BARBEE tJJLL LLC
2"xs· DF #2 OR BTR ACZA PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK
2"x4" DF #2 OR BTR ACZA
SUNl'/ALK POLYPROPYLENE NONE
STEEL STAll'4L£SS OR HOG SHEET: 7 OF: 7 NEAR/AL RENTON
DATE: 1-12-10 DWG#: 05-:-3077-A.7-1
..,,
(Q
C
iD
~ .,,
0 -g ..
(I) a. ..
i = 0 :,
Q :, a.
~
Q
3 s·
(Q
i
0/J • 0/J
•
•
•
•
•
figure 7. Planting areas
16'
' 1' ' ' \ )
\
' ' ·~-·
' '\ /
w ) ,,// z /
_J / I
\
\\ ~/~'\
\,~/' \\
I
-----r-----: I
g§tl :/,, II ,/ ,./
f ,/ // /
$1 ,l ,,1 / ,l
-1-// ' I ~\ j l / / / ,
Lr... ' ,' I I ,I
~\1,, \ / / / ,.,,,.! z ' \ / / -1 \ \ V /
I \\ I ' / ; 1,\ !/ ,/ ./
I \, \ : \ ! ,,! ,.I I \ I I
I ' ' / ,' L ' \ / +--4--!----I--~
I \ If : :
PLANTING AREAS
8' O' 16'
Pl.ANTING DESIGN Ill' I THE
WATERSHED
COMPANY
7S0Sblh--
-WA911033
,a425.822.S242 (425.827.81)6.
www ............. .mm
S.cie-nce & Design
MS&A
LOT 35
JOB SITE
4151/CONNER HOMES
'" "·,,.,_
NATIVE_f_'lANTING_~ (-3,( 00 SF)
',\\
\
I ;
/ JOB SITE
(4125/CONNER HOMES
',
\ LOT 36 \
)
-----'-----------,,, ---
PROJCCT OCS GNCO BY:
Waterfmit vmtrud;Ja, Ire.
THIS DOCUMENT IS PROPRIETARY PROPERTY OF WAlffif'RONT
COIIISTRUC'!lON IMC., ~ IS NOT TO BE USED, IN WHOL[ OR lN
PAA'T, FOR N,ff <mt(R PRO.ECT \ll'f"HQU"" THE WRITTEN
AUTHORIZATION Of WATIRFJIONT CONSTRUCllON INC.
REFERENCE ff:
APPL CANT: CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE MILL LLC
PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK
SHEET: 1 OF: 4-
DATF: 1-12-10
NEAR/AT: RCNTON
DWG : 05 3077 A.2
Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 12
•
•
•
•
Figure 8. Planting legend
! i I I 1' I I I I
' I ;r, ! I 1 1 I I 1
' ' I ---.L-J.
1 ·:
I I ' I I r:::~ ' ~-.
' ' " . " . . . "
I
! I I ' I
I
' I I I
PLANTING AREAS
1\ t 16' B' o·
16 i: \
~--.. . ----4, : \ ·: 1 I
1: !
GENERAL PLANTING SEQUENCE,
I • Native plant fnmlladon shall ocet.r during frost-fNe periods only. Preferred
monthsfoi-installation are~ Se!ptember 15th and April 15, prier to hot, dry
weather. Plants may only be installeddur'lng hot weather If the contractor agrees
to immediate Jnijation of the entire pbntlng area. derrvering at least 2" ct water per
week.
2. Procure pbnts in legend and insure ht material meets the minimum requirements
outlined ln <he plant legend ""' planting-.
3. LOCllte aD existing utilities within the limit of work. The contractor is responsible
for-.ny udllty dmtage • a l'e$uk of the landscape ~n.
4. Rem<M, ,JJ ....,Ive weed, (W encounten,d) by~ out roo<s.
5. Amend soils as needed to provide min. 20% organk material throughout the
plandng area. Add c:omposc to Increase organic content, rototill Imo planting area
6. Note: The contractor is responsibte for any adverse drainage conditions that may
aff'9Ct proper plant growth and estallislN,ient. Notify owner of any poor drainage
conditions prior to c:onstructlon.
7. layout plant"""'""' per plan for lnspodion by <he Landscape An:h-. Plant
substitutions wiN NOT be alowed without the approval or the Landscape -· 8. ·-· piano per planting detalh, ,t-, 3. 9. W-ext, plant thoroughly to"'""""' air pocket,.
10. I....U a 4' depth, '°""" W<>Od-<hlp mulch ring throughout ...... pn,je,:t an,a,
11. Install a temporary irrigation system capable of dellwrilg 2• d water per week to
<he......, planted anoa. Mantaln '1iption ')'Stem In worklna con<fitlon for two (2)
sumrnen after irmal plant inSlabtion.
The landscape contractor shall maintain all plant material until final lnspec:cion and
approval bot thl!l Owner or °""1ler's representative. All plantings and worlananship
shall be guaranteed for one year foltowlng final owner acceptance..
PLANTING DESIGN BY
THE
WATERSHED
COMPANY
750 Sbdh Street: South
Kirkland WA 98033
p -425.822.S2-f2 f 425.827.8 l :U,
www.watenhodco.com
Science & Design
MS&A
I
PROJECT OES'GNED BY:
Waterfront C<>1otructkoTI [r,;,
THIS OOCUl.'ENT IS PROPRIET/\RY PROPERTY OF WATERFRONT
CONSTRUCTION INC .. ANO s NOT TO BE usto. IN WHOLE OR IN
PART. FOR ANY OTHER PROJECT WITHOUT THI: WRITTE:N
AUTHORIZATION OF WATC:RFRONT CONSTRUCTION INC.
PLANTING LEGEND
~FIC/COMMONNAME -ACEftORO~TUH
~""'''"
9!Y,_ SIZ1:/COMMENTS
" lGAI.., 'WEl.i.BAANCHEO
' SGAL. 'WEU.BAANCHEO
' 5 GAL. WELL IRANOIEO
' l GAL, 11.JL 11..sTEM
1 l GAL., FULL I 8USHY
' l GAL. F1AL a BUSHY
1l l GAL. FUU l lUSHY
• "'''-
' l GAL., J'lJLL 5 BUSHY
" l ~ FUU. & BUSHY
' l GAL, FULL &-MHY
.. 1.J' l'OTS. l'f'O.C.
"" '1.5" POTS, 1..-0.c .. I GAL.l-'f'O.C.
" "'"' ,.
~;~lOFTH
IGAl..,JO"O.C.
! REFERENc{ H: · ----·--
I APPLICANT: CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE MILL LLC i
f-------------------------,1 PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK
SHEET: 2 OF:4
DATF: 1-12-10
JNFAR/A : RCNTON
IOWG#: 05 3077 A.2 1
Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 13
•
•
•
•
Figure 9. Planting plan
I FOR PL.ANTING LEGEND SEE SHEET 2j
PL.ANTING PL.AN
16' t 16' a· o·
THE
WATERSHED
COMPANY
750 Sl>ah ScreBI: Sotah
Kkldand WA 980l3
p-425.822.5242 fffi.827.8136
www.watetl-.U.i:om
Science & Oesjen
MS&A
'
PROJ[CT DCS Gt,i(O BY:
Waterfroni Cci,~tlcti Inc,
THIS DOCUMENT IS PRCPRIET/IRY P,f()f>ERT'f Of WATERfRONl'
CONSTRUCTION INC. AND I'S NOT TO BE US£0. IN WHOLE OR IN
PART, FOR /Wf OTHER PROJECT WrrHOUT THE WRITTEN
AUTHORIZATION Of WATERFRONT CONSTRUCTION INC.
REFERENCE #:
APPLICANT: CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE MILL LLC
PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK
SHEET: 3 Of: 4 NEAR/ AJ: RENTON
OATF: 1-12-10 OWG : 05 3077 A.2 1
Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 14
•
•
•
•
Figure 10. Tree and shrub planting details
NOTES;
I. PIANT GM)UNOCO'lcR AT Sl'EOFIED DISTANCI: ON-CENTER (O.C.) USING
TRIANGULAR SPACING, TYP.
2. LOOSEN SIDES AND BOTTOM OF PLANTING PIT AND REMOVE DEBRIS
3. LOOSEN ROOTBOUND PlANTS BEFORE INSTAWNG
<. SOAK PIT BEFORE ANO AFTERINSTALUNG PIANT
~--41 DEEP SPECIAEO MULo-1 LAYER
HOLD BACK FROM STEMS
2' HT. WATER BASIN; NATIVE SOIL OR MULOI
-"'!!of----SOIL AMENDMENTS AS SPECIFIED
0 :,-ouNDCOVER & PERENNIAL PLANTING DETAIL
I THE
WATERSHED
COMPANY
150 Sbrth Snet. Soudl
Klrkland WA '18033
pID.tn.5242. (.QS.1:27.8136
wwwn,=-11 aJ:~.COfl'l
Science & Design
MS&A
NOTES;
I. Pl.ANTING PIT SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN (2) TIMES
THE WIDTH OF THE ROOT BALL DIA.
2. LOOSEN SIDES AND BOTTOMS OF PlANT1NG PIT
3. SOAK PIANTING PIT AFTER PUWTlNG
REMOVE FROM POT & ROUGH-UP ROOT BALL BEFORE
INSTALUNG. UNTANGLE AND STRAIGHTEN ORCUNG
R<X>TS -PRUNE IF NECESSARY. IF PLANT IS
EXCEPTIONALLY ROOT-BOUND. DO NOT Pl»IT AND
RETURN TO NURSERY FORAN ACCEPTABLE AL TERNA TI
--4• MUL.Of LAYER-HOU) BACK MULCH FROM
lltUNl</STEMS
3" MIN HT. WATER BASIN
FINISH GRADE
SLOW RELEASE GRANULAR FERTILIZER. OSMOCOTE
~ OR APPROVED EQUIV. (OUTSIDE OF 0.H.W.M.
2X MIN DtA.. RC>C>TIW.l.
ONLY) APPLIED ONE YEAR AFTER INITIAL PLANTING
REMOVE DEBRIS AND LARGE ROCKS AND BACKFILL
WllHNATIVESOIL RRMUPSOILAROUNDPLANT
fn\ TREE & SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL
~NTS
PROJECT DESIGNW Erl':
Waterfront Ccwlruct.:,,, Ire.
THIS D0CUM£~ IS PROPRIETI\RY PROPERTY OF WATERFRONT
CONSTRUCTION INC., ANO rs NOT TO et USEO. IN WH(KE QR IN
PART, FOR mf OTHER PROJECT W!THOUT THE WFl'f'l'TEN
AUTHORIZATION OF WATERFRONT CONSTRUCTION IMC.
RE::f(RE:.NCE ff:
,l,,PPL CANT: CONNER H01.A£S AT BAABEE M!LL LLC
PROPOSED: INSTALL CO!AMUNlTY DOCK
SHE:.t.1:4 Ot:4 "lfAR/AT: RENTON
DATF: 1-12-10 DWG : 05 3077 A.2 1
Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 15
•
•
•
•
Barbee Mill Community Dock Project
Army Corps of Engineers Reference #
Biological Evaluation/ Habitat Data Report
January 19, 2010
For:
Conner Homes at Barbee Mill, LLC (Attn: Charlie Conner)
846 108th Ave NE
Bellevue, WA 98004
At:
Conner Homes at Barbee Mill
4151 &4125WilliamsAveN
Renton, WA 98056
Parcels #051850 0350 (4151) and 051850 0360 (4125)
Prepared by:
Marine Surveys & Assessments
521 Snagstead Way
Port Townsend, WA 98368
Phone: (360) 385-4073, Fax: (360) 385-1724
E-mail: sea@cablespeed.com
• list of Figures and Attachments
Figure Number Page
l. Vicinity and area maps .................................................................... 14
2. DNR withdrawal area ........................................................................ 15
3. Plot plan .............................................................................................. 16
4. Proposed pier plan and elevation views ...................................... 1 7
• 5 . Proposed section and framing views A-A. ..................................... 18
6. Proposed section and framing views 8-B ....................................... 19
7, Planting areas .................................................................................... 20
8. Planting legend ................................................................................. 21
9. Planting plan ...................................................................................... 22
10. Tree and shrub planting detail ........................................................ 23
Attachment Number Page
1. Photograph of the site ................................................................ 24-25
• 2. Species list for King County ........................................................ 26-27
3. Essential Fish Habitat Assessment .............................................. 28-29
4. Assessment of Impacts to Critical Habitat
for Puget Sound Chinook ........................................................... 30-31
5. Assessment of Impacts to Critical Habitat
for Coastal -Puget Sound Bull Trout .......................................... 32-33
MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 2 •
•
•
•
•
Biological Evaluation/Habitat Data Report
Barbee Mill Community Dock Project
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. Project Location: ·
Y. Section NW32, Township 24N, Range 05E.
4151 and4125 WilliamsAvenueN.
Renton, WA 98056
Latitude: 47.515745"N/Longitude: 122.206114°W
See Figure I for project location .
B. Project Description:
The proposed project is the construction of a commnnity use dock intended to facilitate access to Lake Washington
for Barbee Mill community residents (Figures I, 3 and 4). The Barbee Mill community is being developed by
Conner Homes at Barbee Mill LLC on the approximately 22 acre site of the former Barbee Mill Company lumber
mill. To restore the former industrial site to a parcel suitable for a residential waterfront subdivision, the mill
buildings were demolished; fill soils were removed from behind the bulkhead; asphalt paving, a pier, the wooden
bulkhead and piling associated with the mill operation were removed; and extensive shoreline restoration was
completed pursuant to sale of the site to Conner Homes. The shoreline restoration was completed by the Barbee
Mill Company in conjunction with vacation of the land.
The proposed community dock is adjacent to one vacant lot (36) (4125) scheduled for residential development and
located at the vacant lot (Lot 35) (4151) recently reallocated to the Barbee Mill Community as a result of DNR
disallowing the Community Dock to be constructed over a withdrawal area (Figure 2). This north property (Lot 35)
has been reallocated to the community to provide lake access for all upland owners and those waterfront owners
located north of the site adjacent to the DNR withdrawal area. In addition to a landing and day moorage facility for
watercraft, the proposed community dock would be a suitable place for launching canoes and kayaks, for sun-
bathing, for swimming, fishing, water skiing and any number of other water sports and activities. Both properties
are currently vacant but Lot 36 is planned for a single-family residence.
The shoreline consists of a sheet pile/concrete. Additional native riparian plantings on both parcels will be offered
as part of this project. The substrate consists of small angular rock and cobble.
C. Habitat Data:
As mentioned above, the general project area is located at the former Barbee Mill Company lumber mill site. As a
former industrial site, the general development area, including the subject property, was subject to decades of
disturbance and degradation by human activity. The Lake Washington shoreline was heavily bulkheaded, back-
filled and covered with impervious asphalt paving. Numerous piling and substantial quantities of concrete rubble
and other shoreline debris were on site. To restore this former industrial site to a parcel suitable for a residential
waterfront subdivision, upland and in-water structures including the mill buildings, timber bulkhead and piling were
removed, shoreline rubble was removed, fill soil was excavated to subgrade elevations, and toe rock and a
temporary quarry spall erosion control berm were installed. In addition, extensive shoreline restoration was
completed which included using sand, gravel and rock materials to construct a beach to mimic natural conditions
MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 3
•
•
•
•
and installing coir rolls along the Lake Washington ordinary high water line. No additional excavation, grading,
clearing or fill material will be required for the proposed pier project.
The subject property is located south of, and was not included in, the area requiring the most extensive remediation.
The study area includes no wetland or flood hazard areas but it does include Lake Washington riparian areas. Prior
to the site restoration, riparian vegetation was found to be generally absent in the Barbee Mill community
development area due to extensive paving. In unpaved areas, vegetation noted included Juncu.s e.ffusus (soft rush)
and Iris pseudocaris (a non-native iris). In accordance with the general development mitigation planting plan, native
plants were installed along the entire Barbee Mill community Lake Washington shoreline, including the subject
property shoreline. In conjunction with construction of the proposed community dock, additional native plants,
shrubs and/or trees will be planted as specified in applications to, and as approved by, the Washington State
Department of Fish and Wildlife and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Figures 7-9).
Until the extensive site restoration was completed, the industrial use of the property limited the ecological functions
that would otherwise have been provided by Lake Washington and its adjacent riparian area. As a result of the
extensive remediation, beach reconstruction and plantings, the ecological functions of the Lake Washington
shoreline within the study area should be greatly enhanced. The addition of riparian vegetation to this formerly
near-barren site should help water quality by filtering pollutants, removing nutrients and reducing sediments in any
runoff from the adjacent upland development while helping to stabilize and protect the shoreline from erosion. The
riparian vegetation planted and to be planted should increase the habitat available for aquatic invertebrates and fish;
the addition of organic matter to the lake substrate from fallen and washed in leaves and woody debris will provide
them with food, shelter and shade. Increased overhanging vegetation will also provide shade and predator protection
for fish and aquatic invertebrates and may facilitate the migration of juvenile salmon. Terrestrial insects will benefit
from the food and shelter provided by newly planted vegetation, which in turn will provide an additional food
source for the birds and animals that feed upon them.
The Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Priority Habitat and Species database
(http://wdfw.wa.gov/hab/phslist.htm) identifies habitats and species considered to be priorities for conservation and
management. Listed species observed in the general Barbee Mill community development area include bull trout,
Puget Sound chinook salmon, Puget Sound steelhead, and marbled murrelet, all of which are discussed below.
Protected wildlife in Washington State shall not be hunted or fished (WAC 232-12-011). Protected wildlife noted
from time to time within the general Barbee Mill community development area include the marbled murrelet and
the bald eagle. The marbled murrelet is classified as a "threatened species," a species likely to become endangered
within the foreseeable future throughout a significant portion of their range within the state without cooperative
management or removal of threats. The bald eagle is no longer on the list of threatened or endangered species
under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) but continues to be protected by the Bald and Golden Eagles Protection
Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and is protected as a "sensitive species" in Washington. Sensitive species are
vulnerable or declining and likely to become endangered or threatened in a significant portion of their range within
the state without cooperative management or removal of threats. The only eagle nests observed near the subject
property are two nests approximately 0.65 mile from the site on the opposite shore.
MS&A
D. Project Description:
The proposed community dock will consist of a fully grated 1,592 ft2 Community Dock with a 5'-10" x 172'
(1,003 ft') main walkway, a 7'-10" x 56' (437 ft2 ) "T" and a 5'-10" x 26' (152 ft 2) finger pier (Figures 3-6). The
dock will have a 100% grated surface with 46% open space. The dock will be supported by (14) 6" And (14) 8"
diameter steel battered piles. Piles will be driven using a vibratory pile driver to practical refusal. A native
planting plan will be installed (Figures 7-9). A 6' wide walkway is needed to safely serve the anticipated number
of users.
Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 4
•
•
•
•
E. Construction Sequence:
I. Mobilize construction barge to the site with all construction materials and equipment on board. Moor the barge as
to prevent grounding on the lake bottom at any time during construction.
2. Install silt containment curtain around work area to contain any debris that may fall into lake waters. In the event
any materials enter lake waters they will be retrieved immediately and placed in debris containers on the barge.
3. Using the barge-based crane and vibratory insertion/extraction system, install (14) 6", (14) 8" diameter steel
batter piles practical refusal.
4. Cut steel piling as necessary at the appropriate elevation.
5. Install pre-fabricated dock, "ELL" and finger sections onto pipe collar assemblies and secure to piling.
6. Demobilize and dispose of all debris at approved upland disposal site.
General Notes:
I. All treatments will be applied and fully cured prior to delivery to the site.
2. Ramp and pier section will be prefabricated at contractor's Lake Union Facility and delivered to the site via
construction barge.
3. Native riparian planting plan will be installed by others following construction.
ATTENTION: Fisheries alert! Ifat any time, as a result of project activities, fish are observed in distress, a fish kill
occurs, or water quality problems develop (including equipment leaks or spills), operations shall cease and the
WDFW at (360) 534-8233 and Washington Department of Ecology at (425) 649-7000 shall be contacted
immediately. Work shall not resume until further approval is given by the WDFW.
F. Action Areo:
The action area should include the area within a one-mile radius of the project location. This area includes potential
turbidity and noise impacts from the construction process.
II. SPECIES AND HABITAT INFORMATION
A. Species Information:
In the project area, the Puget Sound chinook (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) is listed under the Endangered Species
Act as a threatened species according to the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)(Federal Register, Vol. 64,
No. 56). On May 11, 2007, NMFS also listed the Puget Sound steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) as a threatened
species under the ESA (Federal Register/ Vol. 72, No. 91 / Friday, May 11, 2007 / Rules and Regulations). Bull
trout (Salvelinus conjluentus) were listed as threatened by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in
October of 1999.
On September 2, 2005, NMFS issued the final rule designating critical habitat for 12 Evolutionarily Significant
Units (ESUs) of West Coast salmon, including the Puget Sound Chinook Salmon ESU and the Hood Canal
Summer-run Chum ESU. The project site is in an area designated as critical habitat for the Puget Sound Chinook
ESU (Federal Register/ Vol 70, No.170 I Friday, September 2, 2005 Rules and Regulations). USFWS has
MS&A Barbee Mill Communify Dock Project • 5
•
•
•
•
designated critical habitat in Lake Washington for Coastal-Puget Sound bull trout (Federal Register I Vol. 70, No.
185 I September 26, 2005 I Rules and Regulations).
Puget Sound Chinook: Puget Sound chinook, also called the king salmon, are distinguished from all other Pacific
salmon by their large size. Most chinook in the Puget Sound are "ocean-type" and migrate to the marine
environment during their first year (Myers et al. 1998). They may enter estuaries immediately after emergence
as fry from March to May at a length of 40 mm., or they may enter the estuaries as fingerling smolts during May
and June of their first year at a length of 60-80 mm. (Healey 1982). Chinook fry in Washington estuaries feed
on emergent insects and epibenthic crustaceans (gammarid amphipods, mysids, and cumaceans). As they grow
and move into neritic habitats, they feed on decapod larvae, larval and juvenile fish, drift insects, and
euphausiids (Simenstad et al. 1982). These ocean-type chinook use estuaries as rearing areas and are the most
dependent of all salmon species on estuaries for survival.
In the Lake Washington system, adult chinook salmon usually arrive at the Chittenden Locks in July, although
there are some arrivals before and after July (Synthesis of Salmon Research and Monitoring. 2008). According
to Fresh et al. (2000), the total time for salmon migration from the Locks to arrival at their tributary spawning
grounds "can take up to 55 days, but averages less than 30." During much of this time, salmon hold in the
upstream area from the Locks before moving through the Ship Canal and Lake Union. Fresh et al. (2000) found
the average holding time to be from 17 to 19 days. After reach their spawning streams between September and
November, spawning occurs from October to December.
According to Tabor et al. (2006), "Fry emerge from their redds from January to March. Juvenile Chinook
salmon appear to have two rearing strategies: rear in the river and then emigrate in May or June as pre-smolts,
or emigrate as fry in January, February, or March and rear in the south end of Lake Washington or Lake
Sammamish for three to five months." In the project area vicinity,juvenile chinook salmon from the Cedar
River enter Lake Washington and rear in the south end of the lake primarily from January to May.
Tabor et al. (2006) also reported that:
Similar to results of 2002, juvenile Chinook salmon were concentrated in the south end of Lake Washington
from February to May ..... Therefore, it appears that the lake shore area near the natal stream is an important
nursery area for juvenile Chinook salmon. In Lake Washington, the major part of this nursery area appears
to be roughly from Pritchard Beach on the west shoreline and the mouth of May Creek on the east shore and
the south part of Mercer Island. The distance from the mouth of the Cedar River to the edge of the nursery
area is around 6 km. North of this area, the number of Chinook salmon would be expected to be relatively
low until mid-May or June.
In the same study cited above, it was found that marked chinook did not move far from their release site at Gene
Coulon Park (approximately 1.5 miles south of the current project site). Marked juveniles were observed I, 7,
15, and 21 days after release at Gene Coulon Park. All of the marked salmon that the investigators observed had
moved less than 150 m from their release site at the park.
After moving slowly away from the Green River and south Lake Washington,juveniles reach the Chittenden
Locks during the period between May and August, with peak migration through the Locks taking place in June.
According to Kerwin (2001) chinook, coho, sockeye and winter steelhead use May Creek near the project site
for spawning, rearing and migration. However, volunteers from the Volunteer Salmon Watchers Program have
been observing salmon in May Creek since 2000. They have reported that only sockeye are seen consistently,
while chinook, coho, cutthroat trout and kokanee salmon are less commonly seen.
Bull Trout: Coastal-Puget Sound bull trout have ranged geographically from northern California (at present they
are extinct in California) to the Bering Sea coast of Alaska, and northwest along the Pacific Rim to northern
Japan and Korea. Bull trout are members of the char subgroup of the salmon family. Spawning occurs typically
from August to November in streams and migration to the open sea (for anadromous populations) takes place in
the spring. Eggs and juveniles require extremely cold water for survival. Temperatures in excess of about 15
MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 6
•
•
•
•
degrees C are thought to limit bull trout distribution (Rieman and McIntyre 1993). They live both in fresh and
marine waters. Some migrate to larger rivers (fluvial), lakes (adfluvial), or saltwater (anadromous) before
returning to smaller streams to spawn. Others (resident bull trout) complete all of their life in the streams where
they were reared. Habitat degradation, dams and diversions, and predation by non-native fish threaten the
Coastal-Puget Sound population. The Coastal-Puget Sound bull trout population is thought to contain the only
anadromous forms of bull trout in the contiguous United States (Federal Register, Vol. 64, No. 210, 1999).
Two subpopulations of bull trout (also known as "native char") are considered within the Lake Washington
area: the Chester Morse Reservoir population and the Issaquah Creek-Sammamish River population (Federal
Register, Vol. 64, No. 210, 1999). "Only two 'native char' have been observed during the past 10 years in the
Issaquah Creek drainage and none have been observed in the Sammamish River system. It is questionable
whether a viable subpopulation remains." (Federal Register, Vol. 64, No. 210, 1999).
Puget Sound Steelhead: Wild winter steelhead enter the Lake Washington system in mid-December with peak
spawning taking place in May. There have been high rates of predation by California sea lions at the Ballard
Locks, which is one of the leading factors in the declining steelhead production in the Lake Washington system
(1992 Washington State Salmon and Steelhead Stock Inventmy. Appendix One-Puget Sound Stocks .
Washington Department offish and Wildlife, Olympia, WA.).
According to Kerwin (2001 ):
The Lake Washington system supports one native winter steelhead stock but not a summer steelhead stock
(SASS! 1994). The winter steelhead stock was listed in SASS! as "Depressed" but has recently shown some
evidence ofrebounding. A limited hatchery program utilizing the native winter steelhead stock was initiated
in I 997 as a supplementation type program to assist in recovery of winter steelhead populations in the north
Lake Washington tributaries. The sharp decline in Lake Washington winter steelhead was noted as a reason
for concern by NMFS in their stock status review (Busby 1996).
However, in a more recent analysis, between 1986 and 2004 escapement for the Lake Washington winter-run
steelhead ranged from 1,816 (1986) to 44 (2004) (WDFW 2004). Based on the chronically low escapement and
short-term severe decline in escapements, the stock status has decreased from its 1992 "depressed" status to
"critical" in 2002.
Marbled Murrelets: Marbled murrelets are small marine birds in the alcidae family. They spend most of their time
at sea and only use old growth areas for nesting. In the critical nesting areas, fragmentation and loss of old
growth forest has a significant impact on the survival and conservation of the species (WOW, 1993). Adult
birds are found within or adjacent to the marine environment where they dive for sand lance, sea perch, Pacific
herring, surf smelt and other small schooling fish, and feed on invertebrates.
The project site is located in an urban environment adjacent to a major highway. There is a high level of
ambient noise in the project vicinity. There is no nesting habitat near the site. Therefore it is unlikely that
murrelets will be present in the project vicinity.
Ill. EFFECTS OF THE ACTION
The status of each of the listed species in the action area has been provided. The proposed project has been
described and the action area defined. When reviewing all the data, the potential direct and indirect effects of the
proposed action on the listed species and their critical habitat should be considered.
A. Direct Effects:
When considering the direct effects of the proposed project, one must determine if the proposed project will
MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 7
•
•
•
MS&A •
immediately reduce or destroy the listed species and/or their habitat. The potential, direct impacts caused by the
construction process include increased noise and turbidity.
Pile driving noise: A vibratory pile driver will be used to drive the piles to practical refusal. Feist et al. (1992)
reported that salmonids could be expected to hear pile driving noise approximately 2,000' from the source.
Based on the studies at the Everett Homeport, these researchers concluded that pile driving di~ alter the
distribution and behavior of juvenile pink and chum salmon. However, the Everett Homeport results may not be
entirely applicable to the proposed project, because a diesel powered compression hammer was used in that
study. As stated in the Feist report, "It would be reasonable to say that juvenile salmonids might respond
differently to the sounds of a vibratory hammer, compared to that of a diesel compression hammer."
As noted above, It is unlikely that murrelets will be present in the action area. Therefore, the construction
process should have little or no impact on marbled murrelets.
Turbidity: Increased turbidity caused by pile driving could, under certain circumstances, have adverse effects on
salmon and bull trout. The effects depend on duration of exposure, concentration of turbidity and the life stage
of the salmon during the increased exposure. The effects can be discussed in terms of lethal, sub lethal or
behavioral (Nightingale and Simenstad 2001 a and Simenstad, editor, I 988). A silt containment curtain will be
installed in the project area to contain and minimize turbidity impacts.
To minimize the adverse effects of increased turbidity and noise on migrating salmonids and bull trout, inwater
construction work will take place during the approved work window from July I 6 to December 31. Overwater
work can proceed outside of the inwater work window.
B. lndirec:t Effects:
Indirect effects are effects of the project that occur later in time. For this project, indirect effects might include
alteration of juvenile salmon migratory pathways, increase in salmonid predation and reduction in prey resources
and refugia due to shading of the epibenthic substrate by the structure.
Migratory pathway alteration:
Freshwater: There were no studies specifically investigating the effects of piers on salmonid migration in lakes
cited by Kahler et al. (2000) in their review of pier-related impacts in lakes. Concerning the Jake environment,
Kahler et al. (2000) state, "The question remains whether juvenile salmonids in lakes migrate under, or
otherwise utilize, piers, or if they avoid them and/or traverse their perimeter."
However, more recent reports have provided additional information concerning salmon responses to overwater
structures .
Tabor and Piaskowski (2002) noted that, "In February and March, chinook salmon were found using overhead
structures (piers, docks, and overhanging vegetation) during the day but in April and May, no chinook salmon
were ever observed using overhead structures. At night, chinook salmon rarely used overhead structures." The
authors hypothesized that the overhead structures were being used as a substitute for natural overhead cover
during the days in February and March.
In a later study, Tabor et al. (2006) noted slightly different results. They state that, "When migrating Chinook
salmon approach a pier they appeared to move to slightly deeper water and either pass directly under the
structure or swim around the pier. Most likely they move to deeper water as a way ofreducing their predation
risk." The pier where these findings we made is approximately 7.8' wide, 138' Jong and had solid decking. The
dimensions of the piers in the earlier study are not known. The results from the later study were noted in May
and July, whereas the 2002 study results were for the earlier months of February and March.
Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 8
•
•
•
•
The results ofCeledonia et al. (2008) were similar to those of Tabor et al. (2000). Celedonia et al. stated,
"Juvenile Chinook salmon generally avoided areas directly beneath overwater structures. However, areas along
the edges of structures (within about 2 m horizontal distance) were sometimes used for prolonged periods ( up to
2 hours in one case)." However, these authors offered the following qualifying statement:
These observations may be representative of holding fish near structures in general, but may not be an
accurate indication of how untagged Chinook salmon would generally behave upon volitionally entering
these specific areas. Actively migrating fish (i.e., most fish released off-site and observed at the Seattle
Tennis Club site) often appeared to change course as they approached a structure. Structure width and water
depth appeared to influence degree of avoidance. Fish appeared less hesitant to pass beneath narrow
structures. Fish also appeared to move into deeper water to travel beneath or around structures.
These authors also observed:
Behavior at structures differed (i.e., swim beneath or travel around perimeter), and may have been related to
such interrelated factors as: fish size, light levels beneath the structure, degree of contrast at the light-dark
edge, width of the structure, height of the structure above the water surface, and water column depth
beneath the structure. Further study is needed to conclusively determine how these and other factors interact
to influence Chinook salmon behavior.
Marine Waters: In the marine environment, it is generally accepted that overwater structures can alter
migration behavior of juvenile salmon (though the effects may vary depending on the design and orientation of
the structure, degree of shading, and the presence of artificial light), and reduce salmon prey resources and
refugia by shading aquatic plant life (Simenstad et al. 1999; Nightingale and Simenstad 2001 b ). However, the
significance of these effects is not clear. As Simenstad et al. state, "We found no studies that described
empirical evidence supporting or refuting that modification of juvenile salmon behavior in shoreline habitats
was reflected in changes in survival." Nightingale and Simenstad (200\b) state, "Presently, although we know
that under some conditions small juvenile salmon will delay or otherwise alter their shoreline movements when
encountering an overwater structure, the conditions under which this behavioral modification is significant to
the fishes' fitness and survival is relatively unknown."
A study by Williams et al. (2003) at the Mukilteo ferry terminal, found that, "Salmon fry were observed in all
nearshore habitats during each transect sampling period ( day and night). The fry were observed under a wide
range of PAR values (0.0 µmol m-2 s-1 to 2370 µmol m-2 s-1 ). Fry were observed both outside the terminal
and underneath the terminal at all times, and shadows produced by the I 0-m-wide terminal structure did not
appear to act as barriers to fry movement at this location."
There is no question that underwater structures may alter migration patterns -that is not in dispute. As seen in
the study by Williams and in many other studies (see the literature review by Weitkamp-2003), there are
studies that indicate that salmon migration is not affected by the presence of overwater structures. Of course,
there are other studies indicating migration patterns are altered by overwater structures .
The issue is that no one has shown that these migration changes lead to increased mortality or decreased fitness.
None of the studies that report changes in salmonid migration patterns caused by overwater structures in the
marine environment have reported that these changes have a negative impact on salmonids.
Increased predation: An additional concern about the impacts of overwater structures on migrating salmon is that
they will be forced to move out into deeper water, where they will be consumed by predatory fish species.
However, in a study conducted in the marine environment, Williams et al. (2003) noted:
MS&A
We found no evidence that avian, marine mammal, or fish predators consumed more juvenile salmon
near WSF terminals than along shorelines without overwater structures. Few species appeared to be
targeting abundant fry in nearshore habitats, and we observed only two occasions in which predators
(one tern sp., one staghorn sculpin) had consumed juvenile salmon.
Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 9
•
•
•
•
The authors also state,
Our analysis of fish diets at the Mukilteo ferry terminal provides one piece of conclusive evidence that
juvenile salmon were not a major dietary component of predatory fish species during our study.
It should be noted that the Williams study was conducted in the marine, not lake, environment.
In Lake Washington, smallmouth bass migration into the littoral zone corresponds with the peak occurrence of
migrating salmonids in this zone (Fresh et al. 2001). Because of these similar migration patterns, salmonids are
most at risk of predation from smallmouth bass in Lake Washington. Bass prefer complex, natural cover for
their foraging environment. When there is a scarcity of natural cover for foraging, as is the situation in Lake
Washington, they tend to use the dominant structures in the environment, such as pilings and piers, for foraging
cover (Kahler et al. 2000). There is concern that increasing the number of overwater structures will increase the
predation success of smallmouth bass on migrating salmonids.
Tabor et al. (2004) investigated predation of juvenile chinook salmon in three areas of the Lake Washington
Basin. One of the areas they looked at was the south end of Lake Washington, an important rearing area. The
investigators found that:
The only predators observed to consume Chinook salmon were cutthroat trout, prickly sculpin ( C. asper),
smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieui), and largemouth bass (M salmoides). Consumption of Chinook
salmon by cutthroat trout was observed in February, March and early April. Predation by prickly sculpin
was only observed in February. Smallmouth bass consumed Chinook salmon in May and June. Few
largemouth bass were collected; however, we did document a largemouth bass that had consumed a
Chinook salmon in June. We estimated a total of 1,400 Chinook salmon fry were consumed by littoral
predators from February to mid May ..... Based on consumption estimates and expected abundance of
juvenile Chinook salmon, predatory fishes probably consumed less than 10% of the fry that entered the lake
from the Cedar River.
The investigators in this study did not comment on the impacts of overwater structures on the predation rate found
in south Lake Washington.
The following design components will reduce foraging cover and allow more light penetration under the proposed
pier.
I .The dock will have a fully grated surface with 46% open space to allow light to reach the lake waters below.
2. The bottom of the dock will be 18" above the OHWL.
3. The smallest number and diameter steel piles will be used to minimize the amount of structure in the water
and disturbance to the substrate.
4. Glu-lam stringers will be used to allow the longest spans possible between piles .
C. Interrelated/Interdependent Effects:
Completion of this project will not promote future construction or other activities that would not otherwise occur
without its completion. Therefore, no additional interrelated or interdependent actions that could affect species
regulated under ESA will occur because of this project.
D. Take Analysis:
"Take" is defined as, "to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, trap, capture, collect or attempt to engage in any
such conduct." The USFWS further defines "harm" as "significant habitat modification or degradation that results
in death or injury to listed species by significantly impairing behavioral patterns such as breeding, feeding, or
MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 10
•
•
•
•
sheltering." It is likely that no "take" will result from this project.
E. Conservation Measures:
In order to minimize any direct effects on the listed species caused by this project, inwater work should take place
between July 16 and December 31. It is requested that overwater work be allowed to take place outside of this work
window. Additional impact reduction and mitigation measures will reduce adverse impacts of the project. They
include:
I .The dock will have a fully grated surface with 46% open space to allow light to reach the lake waters below.
2. The bottom of the dock will be 18" above the OHWL.
3. The smallest number and diameter steel piles will be used to minimize the amount of structure in the water and
disturbance to the substrate.
4. Glu-lam stringers will be used to allow the longest spans possible between piles .
5. The construction barge will not be allowed to ground out on the lake bottom at anytime.
6. Piles will be driven using a vibratory pile driver to practical refusal.
7. Construction will take place during authorized inwater work windows design to protect listed species and/or
critical habitat.
8. All dock sections will be prefabricated at the contractor's lake union facility and delivered to the site via
construction barge.
9. A native planting plan will be installed.
F. Determination of Effect:
After reviewing the appropriate data and surveys, the effect determinations for the impacts of the project, as
designed, are:
1. Puget Sound chinook -"May affect, not likely to adversely affect"
2. Bull trout -"May affect, not likely to adversely affect"
3. Puget Sound steelhead -"May affect, not likely to adversely affect"
4. Marbled mu"elet-"No effect"
This is the appropriate conclusion when effects on the species and their critical habitat are expected to be beneficial,
discountable or insignificant. Limiting construction work to the approved work window will reduce direct impacts
on the listed species. Shading impacts on the benthic environment will be minimized by the conservation measures
discussed above.
MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • l l
•
•
•
•
Literature
Celedonia, M. T., Roger A. Tabor, Scott Sanders, Daniel W. Lantz, and Ian Grettenberger. 2008.Movement and
habitat use of chinook salmon smolts and two predatory fishes in Lake Washington and the Lake Washington
Ship Canal. 2004-2005 acoustic tracking studies. Final report to Seattle Public Utilities.
Federal Register/ Vol. 61, No. 102 / May 24, 1996 / Rules and Regulations.
Federal Register/ Vol. 64, No. 56 / March 24, 1999 / Rules and Regulations.
Federal Register/ Vol. 64, No. 210 / November I, 1999 / Rules and Regulations.
Federal Register/ Vol 70, No.170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations.
Federal Register/ Vol. 70, No. 185 / September 26, 2005 / Rules and Regulations.
Federal Register/ Vol. 72, No. 91 / Friday, May 11, 2007 I Rules and Regulations .
Feist, Blake E., J.J. Anderson and R. Miyamota. 1992. Potential impacts of pile driving on juvenile pink
( Oncorhynchus gorbuscha) and chum (0. keta) salmon behavior and distribution. FRI-UW-9603, Fish. Res.
Inst., UW, Seattle, WA.
Fresh, K.L, E. Warner, R. Tabor, and D. Houck. 2000. Migratory behavior of adult Chinook salmon spawning in the
Lake Washington watershed in 1998 and 1999 as determined with ultrasonic telemetry. Extended abstract and
presentation prepared for the Washington Chinook Salmon Workshop, November.
Fresh, K. L., D. Rothaus, K. W. Mueller and C. Mueller. 2001. Habitat utilization by predators, with emphasis on
smallmouth bass, in the littoral zone of Lake Washington (draft). WDFW.
Healey, M. C. 1982. Juvenile Pacific salmon in estuaries: the life support system, pp. 315 -341. In: V.S. Kennedy
(ed.), Estuarine comparisons. Academic Press, New York, NY.
Kahler, T., M. Grassley and David Beauchamp. 2000. A summary of the effects of bulkheads, pier and other
artificial structures and shorezone development on ESA-listed salmonids in lakes. City of Bellevue.
Kerwin, J., 2001. Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Limiting Factors Report for the Cedar-Sammamish Basin (WRIA
8). Washington Conservation Commission. Olympia. WA.
Myers, J.M., R. G. Kope, G. J. Bryant, D. Teel, L. J. Lierheimer, T. C. Wainwright, W. S. Grand, F. W. Waknitz,
K. Neely, S. T. Lindley, and R. S. Waples. 1998. Status review of Chinook salmon from Washington, Idaho,
Oregon, and California. U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NOAA Tech Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-35, 443 pp .
Nightingale, Barbara and Charles Simenstad. 2001a. Dredging activities: marine issues. Submitted to Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Ecology, and Washington State Department of
Transportation, Olympia, WA, 144 pp.
Nightingale, B. and Charles Simenstad. 2001b. Overwater structures: marine issues. Submitted to Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Ecology, and Washington State Department of
Transportation, Olympia, WA, 177 pp.
Rienman, B. E. and J. D. McIntyre. 1993. Demographic and habitat requirements for conservation of Bull Trout.
Gen. Tech. Rpt. U.S. Forest Service, lntermountain Research Station, Ogden, UT. 38 pp.
Simenstad, C. A., K. L. Fresh and E. 0. Salo. 1982. The role of Puget Sound and Washington coastal estuaries in
the life history of Pacific salmon: an unappreciated function. Pp. 343-364. In: V. S. Kennedy, (ed.), Estuarine
comparisons. Academic Press, New York, NY.
Simenstad, C. A., (ed.). 1988. Effects of dredging on anadromous Pacific coast fishes, Workshop proceedings,
MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 12
•
•
•
•
Washington Sea Grant, Seattle WA, September 8-9, 1988.
Simenstad, C.A., B.J. Nightingale, R.M. Thom and D.K. Shreffler. 1999. Impacts offerry terminals on juvenile
salmon migration along Puget Sound shorelines. Phase I: Synthesis of state of knowledge. Report to
WSDOT(fJSDOT Research Report T9903, Task A2, l 16 pp.+ appendices.
Synthesis of salmon research and monitoring. Investigations conducted in the Western Lake Washington Basin.
December 31, 2008. Seattle Public Utilities and the Army Corps of Engineers. Contributors: Mike Cooksey
Peter N. Johnson, Paul De Vries, Michele Koehler, Charles J. Ebel, Lynne Melder, Frederick A. Goetz, Jim
Muck, Julie Hall Eva Weaver
Tabor, R. A. and Richard M. Piaskowski. 2002. Nearshore habitat use by juvenile chinook salmon in lentic systems
of the Lake Washington Basin. Annual Report, 2001. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Western Washington Fish
and Wildlife Office, Fisheries Division. 510 Desmond Drive SE, Suite 102, Lacey, Washington 98503.
Tabor, R. A., M. T. Celedonia, F. Mejia, R. M. Piaskowski, D. L. Low, B. Footen and L. Park. 2004. Predation of
juvenile chinook salmon by predatory fishes in three areas of the Lake Washington Basin. U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe and Northwest Fisheries Science Center .
' Tabor, R. A. Howard A. Gearns, Charles M. McCoy III , and Sergio Camacho. 2006. Nearshore habitat use by
juvenile chinook salmon in lentic systems of the Lake Washington Basin. Annual Report, 2003 and 2004. U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Western Washington Fish and Wildlife Office, Fisheries Division. 510
Desmond Drive SE, Suite 102, Lacey, Washington 98503
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 2004. Salmonid Stock Inventory (SaSI).
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, WA.
Weitkamp, Don E. September 2003. Young Pacific Salmon in Estuarine Habitats. Review Draft. Pararnetrix, Inc.
Kirkland, WA.
Williams, G.D., R. M. Thorn, D. K. Shreffler, J. A. Southard, L. K. O'Rourke, S. L. Sergeant, V. I. Cullinan, R.
MS&A
Moursund, and M. Stamey. Assessing Overwater Structure -Related Predation Risk on Juvenile Salmon: Field
Observations and Recommended Protocols. September 2003. Prepared for the Washington State Department of
Transportation Under a Related Services Agreement With the U.S. Department of Energy Under Contract DE-
AC06-76RLO 1830 .
Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 13
•
•
•
MS&A •
Figure 1. Vicinity map
PROJECT OESICNEO 9Y:
Waterfront Constnl:tian In:.
THIS. OOCIJl.4EN1 IS PllCIPAIElAln' PROPERTY Of WAT(AfRONT
CONSTRUCTION NC., AND JS Nor TO BE USED. IN Wt-IDLE OR !Pi
PART. FOR >J.IY OltlE:R PROJECT WlfHOUT THE ','IRmni
.olUTI-IORl?ATION OF WHERF'RONT CONSTRUCTIOIII t.lC
+ P',
. \::.":-;..-:~:it·,'
r!~JtPI
<• ----,( rf ~am__,".L. i
""·-,
~A -~7th ~1
1-:/·~·:_;'! q
,,.j,t'Z!.!=
VICINITY MAP /NO SCALE
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
l/4 SEC: NW .32-24N-OSE
TAXLOT #: 051850 0350 (4151) & 0516500360 {4125)
BARBEE MILL TCW UNO !NT IN TRS
A, B,C,D,E ,f ,G,H, I, l, M ,N,0&:P
LAT: 47,515745N
LONG; -122.206114W
PURPOSE:PRO~OE CO f.1UNrrY ACCESS
AND PRIVATE f.iOORACE
DATUM; COE a.o' EST 1919
ADJACENT OWNERS:
Q) CONNER HOt.ilES AT BARBEE MILL LLC
4157 WILLIAMS AVE N
RENTON, WA. 98056
@ CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE ~ILL LLC
4119 WILLIAMS AVE N
RENTON, WA, 98056
PROJECT NA E.
REFERENCE j:
BARBEE MILL
COMMUNITY DOCK
SITE LOCATION ADDRESS:
4125 & 4151 Y/1LUAl.4S AVE N
RENTON, WA, 98056
WCI; 05-X177-.4..1-1
t
I K[l';IA()RE
<AKE
fOREST
PARK
w
__J s w
(f)
AREA MAP/
.3 MILES
1 t.llLE
JUANITA
KIRKLAND
BELLEVUE
RENTON
0
PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK
IN: LAKE: WASHINGTON NEAR:RENTON
COUNTY: KING STAT(: WA
MILES
APPL SY· CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE t..llll LLC
SHEH:1 or: 1 OATE: 1-12-10
Borbee Mill Community Dock Project • 14
•
•
•
MS&A •
Figure 2. DNR withdrawal area
DNR WITHORAWL AR
' ' ' ' ' ' ' I
.
' '
r·---
, _______ _
:; ,A•. : ',,
I, ~,'-A---,::,, l! ( ',\ ::l .--·· '. r~---/ \
PROJECT DESIGIIIED Ire
Waterfront Constru:tioo loc.
THIS oocul.t .. T 15 PROPRIElMn' PRQPERTY or WATUlrRONT
CONSTRUCl1Q)i lNC., JINO IS MJ1 TO 6E USEC, 1111 WHOLE OR 1111
PART. FOR #fl' OTH[R PROJECT Wll~Ul THE '/ffillTEN
AU1'110RIZATQI or WATEFlrnQNT CQl'qSffilJCTION ll<IC..
DNR WITHDRAWL AREA
1(]0' 50° o· 100·
APPLICANT; CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE MILL LLC
PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK
NEAR AT: RENlON
G ·05-.3077-A. -1
t
I
Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 15
•
•
•
MS&A •
Figure 3. Plot plan
PROPOSED FULLY
GRATED DOCK.
\
\,
)
/'
·--~.
PROJECT DE5IGN£O B"f:
Waterfront Constroctioo loc.
1HIS oocu~NT IS PA0PR£JMY PROPERTY OF WAT[RfRONl
CONSTRUCTION INC., ANO IS NOT TO BC \JSED, IN YlHClt.E CR 1N
PART. FOR Afff OTHER PROJECl 't\'lll·tOIJT THE WRITTEN
AUTl-lDA1ZATICl'i Of W'AT[RFRON.1 CONSTRUCTION INC. ....,._
I CONSTRUCT A FULLY GRATED 1,592SQFTCOMMUNITY DOCK WITH A 5'·1CTX17l(1.cm=;CFJ)tMN
WAu<.WAY. T-10' X 56' (437SQFT) "T" ANO 5'-10' X:!3'(1S2SQFT)FI..GERPER
I THE DOCK Will HAVE A 100% GRATED SUPfACE Wm-146%0PEN:::PACE
( THE DOCK WILL BE SUPPORTED BY {14) 6' ANO (14)B'D1AAE1ERSTEELBATTER!:0PlES
< PILES WILL BE DRIVEN VSING A VJBRA TORY PlE (ff.lERTOPAACTI:ALREFIJSAL
( A NATIVE PLANTING PLAN WUBE NSTAll.EO
R
NATIVE PLANTING PLAN
JOB SITE 35
'2u 4151/CONNER HOMES
--. 3: 1
'·,,. ~ --
\
/ JOB SITE
412~/CONNER HOMES
l Cfil.::l
28.4
'
/
36
_,-/ 4113/CONNER HOI.AES
38
OM] --------------
4107/KESKAR 39
_[ ,·-s· []IT]
4101/CONNER HOMES : 40
I 29.! I'
PLOT PLAN
so· 25' o·
REFERENCE •
APPLICANT; CONNER HOl.1ES AT BARBEE MlLL LLC
PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK
HEET;4 OF;7 NEAR AT• RENlON
DATE: 1-12-10 ! 05-3077-A.4-1
t
I
Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 16
•
~
11<>
)>
"' a a-
re
~
()
0
3
3
C ::,
~
0
0
()
7<'
J
(1)
() -•
"
OHWL21.
NAVD88
(1B.BD')
(\ ',,
t
'
(1'4) PROPOSED 8"
STEEL BATTERED PILING
•
,, __ ~-----. -··-
,----/
\ f
"' i "
\ '
' ' }
·------•• // PROPOSED FULLY
,' ,-GRATED DOCK
/ \_ (14)/P~OPOSED 6"
i STEEL,' BATIERED P!UNG
/ 5'-10' -I
OHWL 21.60 (COE)
18.80 (NAYDBB)
•
•' \ '1 ! : : ,--, ·._ \_\J __ L__ .. ___ ((::. \ ----r, ..... ,__ -,.)
'•. -_::[ .
10
' ' / ,
I
,' / -;-
10
PROPOSED DOCK DETAIL VIEW
SCALE: 1 "=.30'
1-------------180' -------------;
!-------------172' ------------1
2'-6''
( 1 4) PROPOSED B''
STEEL MTIERED PILING
PROPOSED FULLY
GRATED DOCK
(14) PROPOSED 6"
STEEL BATTERED PILING
REFERENCE /j:
NATIVE PLANTING PLAN
'2Q,
·,,, ... ,,.
',,',,,
',\
------~-
EXIST/NG
GRADE
EXISTING
CONCRETE
WALKWAY
20
PROPOSED DOCK ELEVATION VIEW PPLICA°NT: CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE ~ILL LLC
PROJECT DESIGNED BYr
Waterfront Constructioo loc.
THIS DOCU..CNT tS Pfl(JPl'N:1JrltY PROPERTY OF V{Ar(fffROhlT
CONSTRUCTION INC •• .MID IS N01 TO BE: USED. IN WHOLE OR IN
PART. FOR ANY OTHER PROJECT WJTHOLIT THE WRnTEN
AUTHORIZA TJON OF WATE:RfRON1 CONSTRUC'TJON INC.
30' 15' o·
SCALE, 1"=30'
30' PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK
[SHEET 5 OF: 7 NEAR/AT: RENTON
_DAT~_1_::1_:?-:..1Q DWC#: ~-3077'.':"A.5-1
.,, cc
C
iii
!"-.,,
i3
"C
0 ..
(D a.
"C
Q
::,
Q ::,
a.
(D
[
0 ::,
< iD
!
•
•
•
•
PART
PILING
CAPS
GLU-LAMS s
JOIST
R!IA JOIST
NAILER$
GRATING
HAROWAR[
MS&A •
Figure 5. Proposed section and framing views A-A
2~x4" NAILER @
18~ 0/C MAX.
GRATING
PILE COVER
PLATE
CAP BEAM
ASSEIABLY
STAINLESS STEEL
D(CK SCREWS 5-1/8·,,;12 ..
GLU-LAM BEAM
3/4" CALV.
LAG BOLT
'--.1."----'"-0HWL 21.80' (COE)
OHWL 18.80' (NAVD 88)
6~ OR BH STEEL BATIERED PILING
PROPOSED 6' DOCK SECTION A-A
SCALE. 3/4"a1'
STAINLESS STEEL
DECK SCREWS
16d GALV. COMMON
NAILS (T'fP)
S-I/B'·x1r
GLU-LAIA BEAM
3/4" GALV
THRU ROD 2"x6~ RIM JOIST J"x4" LEDGER 2~x6" J01ST
0 2' 0/C WI 1/2",7" CALV.
LAG BOLT O 16" 0/C
PROPOSED 6' SECTION FRAMING
12· 6" ;· o·
I --SCALE: 3/4.a1'
IIATERl.\l LIST
SPECS TREATMENT
6"&:8 .. STD WALL STEEL EPOXY COATED OR HDG
W6x15 ~H-BEAM HDG
l/B~xl2'' & 7 1/8.,<12~ DF (24F-V4) ACZA
2",6" DF #2 OR BTR ACZA
2"x6· DF #2 OR BTR ACZA
2"x4~ DF #2 OR BTR ACZA
SUNWALK POLYPROPYLENE NONE
STEEL STAINLESS OR HDG
PROJECT DESIGNED BY:
Waterfront Construction Ire.
THIS DOCU~NT 1'5 PROPR£1MY PROPERTY CF WATERFRONT
CONSTffUCTlON lf,fC., 'ND IS NOT ro BE US(D, IN 'l'/HOI..£ OR lN
PART, FOR AW OTHER PROJECT WITHOUT THE WRrTTHI
AUTHOFIIZA.flON OF WATERFROl<IT CONSffiUCl10N INC.
NOTE:
ALL PILES TO BE ORNEN TO PRACTICAL REFUSAL
REFERENCE :
APPLICANT; CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE t-.'!Ll lLC
PROPOSED; INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK
SHEET; 5 OF: 7 NEAR AT· RENTON
DATE: 1-12-10 D G : 05-3077-A,6-1
Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 18
•
~
~
"' ~
(I)
~
n
0
3
3
C :e.
"<
0
0
()
" "U
.Q.
(I) u
•
"'
PART
PILING
CAPS
GLU-L.Al.lS
JOIST
RIM JOIST
NAtLERS
GRATING
HARDWARE
• •
1----------------7'-10~----------------
2"x4~ NAILER 0
18" 0/C 1/.AA.
TYP ') 1/4"' . ~
PROJECT OESl[;tiED BYc
Waterfront Constructioo loc.
THIS DOCUMENT IS PROPR£1.IRV PROPERTY or WAT(Rra-ONT
CONSrRllCTION tNC •• .AND /S NOT ro BE U'SED. IN WHOLE OR IN
PART. fOR ANT' OTHER PROJECT \t!THOUT THE WRITTEN
AUTHORIZA.TIOt.l OF WATtRFRONT CONSTRUCTION !NC.
GRATING
PILE COVER
PLATE
CAP B£,1M
ASSEMBLY
6 l
PROPOSED 8' DOCK SECTION 8-B
SCALL 3/4"= 1 •
STAINLESS STEEL
DECK SCREWS 7-1/8"x12"
GLU-LAM BEAM
3/4" CALV.
LAG BOLT
2·-0·
1'-6"
OHWL 21 .80' (COE)
·oHWL 18.80' (NAVD 88)
8" STEEL BATIERED PILING
f--------------------7'-10"-------------------,
2"x4~ NAILER @
18" 0/C MAx.
GRATING
3/4' Cl>LV.
THRU ROD
STAINLESS STEEL
oi;:cK scm:ws
2'\:6" RIV. JOIST
7-1/B"x12"
GLU-LM BEAM
16d CALV.
COMMON
NAILS (TYP)
3"x4-" LEDGER 2"~6" JOIST
0 2· 0/C PROPOSED 8' SECTION FRAMING W/ 1 /2"x7" GALV.
LAG 80LT @ 16" 0/C
\U,TERIA!. UST
SPECS TREATMENT
6"&8'" STD WALL STEEL EPOXY COATED OR HOG
W6x15 'H" BEAM HOG
5" 3" o·
~
12·1
I
,·
NOTE:
ALL PILES TO BE DRIVEN TO PRACTICAL REFUSAL
SCALE: 3/4"= 1'
5 1/8"x12" & 7 1/8''12" OF (24F-V4) ACZA
2"x6w Df #2 OR BTR ACZA
REFERENCE N:
PPLICANT; CONNER HOi.1ES AT BARBEE MILL LLC
2"x6" or #2 OR BTR ACZA PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK
2"x4· or f/2 OR BTR ACZA
SUNWALK POLYPROPYLENE NON£
STEEL STAINLESS OR HOG SHEET 7 or: 7 NEAR/AL RENTON
DATE: 1-J~-10 QfiGJh_05-3077-A._7-1
.,,
6"
C:
iii
!'-.,,
a
"C
0 ..
(I) a. ..
(I)
0 ::::
0 :,
0 :, a. a
3 s·
(0
!S.
~ ..
"' • "'
•
•
•
•
MS&A •
' 1' ' ' ' ' \ .,,
\
\
\ ·-~ ------------
\ / / / \ / / /
w ,,J ! , l z .. ,/ ,/ /
__J/ l/ / 7---/ I ' / Q' I / ! J
+
ti ... // // / ~ /'/ ll ' I l ,,l ~ \\, ,/ ,/ / ./'
ZZI\ \ \ / ,,,//
-1 \ \ \J /
I \\, \ ,/ /
' •• 1····! ,i I \, \ /
' t ,'
I \ \ / / I \ , , ,, :
! \ I I I L_1 ,, ' '
I t-v--r--r-
16'
PLANTING
8' O'
AREAS
16' t ----
PlANTING DESIGN BY I THE
WATERSHED
COMPANY
750 SIKdi :scr.t Sauth
l<>ldondWA""'3.l
jl>42S.m.5241 f425.ll7.136
www.w.-.al-.:0.corn
Sele-nee & Design
I
Figure 7. Planting areas
\
LOT 35
JOB SITE
4151/CONNER HOMES
NATIVE_~NG_~(-3,!00SF) ·,,"
\
\
1/ JOB SITE
{ 4125/CONNER HOMES
\
\\ LOT 36
} \ ___ ___
------............. , --
PROJCCT DCS GNCO SY:-
WaterfrGfl& vrotructlon Inc;,
THIS DOCUMENT IS PROPRIETJ\RY PROPERTY ~ WATERFRONT
CONSTRUCTION INC., NO IS HOT TO ee: USED, IN WHOL£ OR IN
PART, FOR Am OTHER PROJECT wr1fOU"" THE WRITT£N
AUTHORIZATION OF WATERFRO!(T CONSTRllCTION INC..
REFERENCE ff:
APPLCANT: CONNER HOl.lES AT BARBEE MILL UC
PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNrTY DOCK
SHEET: 1 OF:4
DATF: 1-12-10
NfAR/AT:R[NTQN
DWG : 05 3077 A.2
Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 20
•
•
•
MS&A •
Figure 8. Planting legend
::::~
PLANTING AREAS
16' 8' o·
---------
i I ! i I
I \ 1
. I I
,..J.
\
I
I
' '
' I
'
n ... .
\
I ' -I
I
I
' I
I
' ' I
I
1it ···1;
--1, ;
I
I
I
-l==it--tti\
I 1: I
f.-----------------"--''--"----'L-"',11
GENERAL PIANTING SEQUENCE,
I. NatlYa plant lnstallaclon shall occur during frost-free periods only. Preferred
months f..-inmllation an, between Septembe,-15th ,nd April 15, pnor to hot. d,y
weather. Plants may only be lnstaUed during hot weather If the contractor agrees
to irnrnedi'am irrigation of the entire pl.irtting MN, delivering at least r of water per
week.
2. Prac:ure plants in lflll!ll\d and insure that material meets the minimum requirements
oo<l1ned ln the plant legend and plantlng detail,.
3. Locate an existing utilldas: within the l1mit of work. The contractor is responsible
for any utility damap illli a result of the landKape ~115tnKtion.
i. Rem= a8 ,,,.,..,.,. woods (• ena,untared) by grubbing out roots.
S. Amend soils as needed to provide min. 20% organic material throughout the
plandng area. Add compose to tncrease orpnk: content,. rotodl Into plandng area
6. Note: The contnctor is responsible for any adverse drainage concfltlons that may
aff«t proper plant g,vwth and --Notify owner of any poo.-drainage
conditions prior to conscruc:tion.
7. Layout plant materlal per plan for -by the LJondocape AA,-,_ Plant
,-..., w;o NOT bealowed'""'°"'the~ of the Landscape
Ard>itect.
8. Install plan<s per pMting detal~, sheet 3.
9. W-each plant tho<oughly to.......,. air pockets.
10. lnstBII a 4• depth, coarse wood-chip mulch ring throughout entire prqec:t area.
11. Install a temponry irrigation system capable of deUvering r of water per week to
the ...,,.. pbn1"d are,_ Maintain lrriga<lon sy,tom ln workJna condition f..-two (2)
summers altar initial plant instalation.
The landscape contractor shall maintain all plant material untU final Inspection and
~ by the Owner or Owner's reptesentatlYe. All plantings and worlananship
shall be guaranteed for one year followlng final OWJH!r acceptance.
PLANTING DESIGN BY
I THE
WATERSHED
COMPANY
750 ~ Street South
Klrldahd WA 98033
p"41S.82l.5242 f.ffi.827.8136
www.,:.ahiis.'wdco.com
Science & Design
PROJECT DESIGNED SY:
Waterfrmt C0t1:>tructl0t1 Inc,
THIS OOCUME!>ff IS PROPRIET/\RY PROPERTY OF WATERFRONT
CONSTRUCTION INC., ANO S NOT TO BE USED. IN WHOLE OR IN
PART. FOR AffY OTHER PROJECT WITHOUT THE WRITTEN
AUTHORIZATION OF WATERFRONT CONSTRUCTION INC.
PLANTING LEGEND
SCIENTIFIC I COMMON NAME .QIT,_ SIZE/ COMMENTS
"""
lfTUI.A PAf"'l1Qf£AA
"""'""" 11-tlJJ'f"UCATA
"WESTERN RED ceo,.,t
13 2 GAL WEU. Bl'NtlCHED
5 GM.. W'EU BMNO-IED
s GAL. WB..L BMN01m
9 2 ti1L. MULTI-STEM
7 lCAL.,UU.UUSHY
3 2GAL,FULL.I.BUSHY
ll 2 CAL FULL & IUSHV . '""-
7 2 GAi.. FULL I, II.J$HY
12 2G,l,l..,FUU.•w..&«
3 2 GAL, FUU HUSM"I'
280 :2.J' POT$, 2-+"0.C:.
IDB 2SPOTS,2'1"0.C
k 1~24'0.C
18 Pl.ANT AT 1.V,ST10FTHI umo"'°"' IG.'.1..lD"O.C.
REFERENC( #: -------~
APPLICANT: CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE Mill LLC
PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK
SHEET: 2 OF:4
DATF: 1-12-10 INfAR/A~: R[NTON
DWGII: 05 3077 A.2 1
Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 21
•
•
•
MS&A •
Figure 9. Planting plan
!FOR PLANTING LEGEND SEE SHEET 21
PLANTING PLAN
16' t 16' 8' O'
THE
WATERSHED
COMPANY
7SOSkth-Soudl
JClrid.ind WA 98033
p 425.812.5241 f-425.827.8136
WWW.Hatatl.edto.a:xn
Scien.ce & Desir,,
'
PROJ[CT OCS GNCO BY:
Waterfr0t1t Con,,l:rud;IOrl !I'll.,
Trt1S DOCUMENT IS PROPRl[Tr,;:iy PROPERTY Of WATERFRONT
CONSTRUCTION INC .. AND IS NOT TO 8E usrn. IN WHOLE OR !N
PA.'rr, fOR Nl!' OTHER PROJECT wrTH0UT THE WRITT[N
AIJTHORIZAllON Of WATERFROl'JT CONSTRUCTION INC.
REFERENCE ff:
APPLICANT: CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE Mill LLC
PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK
SHEET:3 OF;4 NEAR/ AT: RENTON
DATF: 1-12-10 DWG : 05 3077 A.2 1
Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 22
•
•
•
MS&A
•
Figure 10. Tree and shrub planting details
NOTES,
I. PLANT GROUNDCOVERAT SPECIRED DISTANCE ON-CENTER (O.C.) USING
TRIANGULAR SPACING. "TYi'.
2. LOOSEN SIDES ANO BOTTOM OF PLANTING PIT ANO REMOVE DEBRJS
J. LCX>SEN ROOTBOUND PLANTS BEFORE INSTALLING
4. SOAK PIT BEFORE AND AFTER INSrAUJNG Pl.ANT
~--4• DEEP SPECIAED MULCH LAYER
HOLD BACK FROM STEMS
2" HT. WATERSAStN; NATIVE SOIL OR MULCH
0 ~OUNDCOVER& PERENNIAL PLANTING DETAIL
I THE
WATERSHED
COMPANY
750 S4xd'I SU'eet Scud\
Kirkland WA 98033
p 41.S.l!lll.5242 f 415.817.8136
www.w .. .dlWW.com
Science & Oe$ign
NOTES,
1. PLANTING PIT SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN (2) TIMES
THE WIDTH OF THE ROOT BAU. DIA.
2. LOOSEN SIDES AND BOTTOMS OF PLANTING PIT
3. SOAK Pl.ANTING PIT AFTER Pl.ANTING
REMOVE FROM POT & ROUGH-UP ROOT BALL BEFORE
INSTAU.JNG. UNTANGLE AND STRAIGHTEN CIRCLING
ROOTS -PRUNE IF NECESSARY. IF PLANT IS
EXCEPTlONALL Y ROOT-BOUND, DO NOT PL.ANT AND
RETURN TO NURSERY FOR AN ACCEPTABLE AL TERNATI
~· MULCH LAYER-HOLD BACK MULCH FROM
TRUNK/STEMS
r-3" HIN HT. WATER BASIN
:~ RNISH GRADE
J · SLOW RELEASE GRANULAR FERTIUZER, OSMOCOTE
2X MIN DIA.. ROOTBAU..
--OR APPROVED EQUIV. (OUTSIDE OF O.H.W.M,
ONLY) APPLIED ONE YEAR AFTER INITIAL PLANTING
REMOVE DEBRIS AND LARGE ROCKS AND BACKRLL
WITH NATIVE SOIL ARM UP SOIL AROUND Pl.ANT
0 ~REE & SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL
r>ROJFCT OESIGNEO 8V·
Waterfront Cu11.truct1<>1 Inc.
THIS DOCUMENT IS PROPRIFTARY PROPERTY or WATERFRONT
CON!:JTRUCTION INC .. AND IS NOT TO 8[ VSW, 1111 WHOL.£ 0~ IN
PAR'f, FOR ANY OniER PRO...E:CT Will-OUT THE WRITTEN
AUTHORIZATION Of" WATERFROIIIT CONSTROCTION INC.
l'IE:~ rnENCE fl:
:APPL CANT: CONNER HOMES AT 8ARB~E MILL LLC
PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNl1Y DOCK
ISHl:.U:4 m:4 N[AR/AT: RENTON
'DATF· 1-12-10 DWG : 05 3077 A.2 1
Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 23
•
Attachment 1. Photographs of the site
•
Looking north along the site's bulkhead
•
Looking south from the site
MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 24 •
•
•
Project site
•
MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 25 •
• Attachment 2. Species list for King County
LISTED AND PROPOSED ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES AND CRITICAL HABITAT;
CANDIDATE SPECIES; AND SPECIES OF CONCERN
LISTED
IN KING COUNTY
AS PREPARED BY
THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
WESTERN WASHINGTON FISH AND WILDLIFE OFFICE
(Revised November 1, 2007)
Bull trout ( Salvelinus co,ifluentus)
e Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis)
Gray wolf (Canis lupus)
•
•
Grizzly bear ( Ursus arctos = U a. horribilis)
Marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus)
Northern spotted owl ( Strix occidentalis caurina)
Major concerns that should be addressed in your Biological Assessment of project impacts to listed species include:
1. Level of use of the project area by listed species.
2. Effect of the project on listed species' primary food stocks, prey species, and foraging areas in all areas
influenced by the project.
3. Impacts from project activities and implementation (e.g., increased noise levels, increased
human activity and/or access, loss or degradation of habitat) that may result in disturbance
to listed species and/or their avoidance of the project area.
Castilleja levisecta (golden paintbrush) [historic]
Major concerns that should be addressed in your Biological Assessment of project impacts to listed plant species
include:
I. Distribution oftaxon in project vicinity.
2. Disturbance (trampling, uprooting, collecting, etc.) of individual plants and loss of habitat.
3. Changes in hydrology where taxon is found.
DESIGNATED
Critical habitat for bull trout
Critical habitat for the marbled murrelet
Critical habitat for the northern spotted owl
MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 26
•
•
•
•
PROPOSED
None
CANDIDATE
Oregon spotted frog (Rana pretiosa)
Yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus)
SPECIES OF CONCERN
Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)
Belier's ground beetle (Agonum belleri)
California wolverine (Gulo gulo luteus)
Cascades frog (Rana cascadae)
Hatch's click beetle (Eanus hatchi)
Larch Mountain salamander (Plethodon larsel/i)
Long-eared myotis (Myotis evotis)
Long-legged myotis (Myotis volans)
Northern goshawk (Accipiter gentilis)
Northern sea otter (Enhydra lutris kenyoni)
Northwestern pond turtle (Emys (= Clemmys) marmorata marmorata)
Olive-sided flycatcher (Contopus cooper,)
Pacific lamprey (Lampetra tridentata)
Pacific Townsend=s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii townsendii)
Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus)
River lamprey (Lampetra ayresl)
Tai led frog (Ascaphus true 1)
Valley silverspot (Speyeria zerene bremeri)
Western toad (Bufo boreas)
Aster curtus (white-top aster)
Botrychium pedunculosum ( stalked moonwort)
C imicifuga elata ( tall bugbane)
MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 27
•
•
•
•
Attachment 3. Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
A. Background
The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA), as amended by the Sustainable
Fisheries Act of 1996 (Public law 104-267), requires Federal agencies to consult with NMFS on activities that may
adversely affect designated Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) for the relevant species. According to the MSA, EFH
means "those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity." For the
Pacific West Coast, the Pacific Fisheries Management Council (Council) has designated EFH for federally managed
groundfish (PFMC 1998a), coastal pelagic (PFMC 1998b) and Pacific salmon fisheries (PFMC 1999).
The purpose of the EFH Assessment is to determine the effects of the proposed project on the EFH for the relevant
species and to recommend conservation measures to avoid, minimize or otherwise offset adverse effects on EFH.
B. ldentfficallon ot EFH
The designated EFH for groundfish and coastal pelagic species encompasses all waters from the mean high water
line, and upriver extent of saltwater intrusion in river mouths, along the coasts of Washington, Oregon and
California, seaward to the boundary of the U.S. exclusive economic zone (370.4 km) (PFMC 1998a, 1998h). The
designated EFH in estuarine and marine areas for Pacific salmon species extends from the nearshore and tidal
submerged environments within state territorial water out to the full extent of the exclusive economic zone (370 .4
km) offshore of Washington, Oregon and California north of Point Conception to the Canadian border PFMC,
1999).
Freshwater EFH for Pacific salmon includes all those streams, lakes, ponds, wetlands and other water bodies
currently, or historically accessible to salmon in Washington, Oregon, Idaho and California, except areas upstream
of certain impassable man-made barriers, and longstanding, naturally-impassable barriers.
Chinook salmon and coho salmon are the species with designated EFH that are found in Lake Washington
C. Proposed Action
The details of the proposed project are presented in Project Description section of the attached BE/Habitat Data
Report.
D. Effects of the Proposed Action
The effects of this project on designated EFH are likely to be similar to the effects described in detail in the Effects
Analysis section of the attached BE/Habitat Data Report. The project is likely to have no permanent, long-term
effects EFH designated for chinook and coho salmon.
E. EFH Conservation Measures
The conservation measures and BMP's mentioned in the attached BE/Habitat Data Report will be implemented to
minimize possible adverse effects to EFH.
MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 28
•
•
•
•
F. Conclusion
The project may have temporary adverse effects on EFH the salmon species, but will not produce long-term adverse
effects on EFH for the above species. The conservation measures and BMP's mentioned in the attached BE/Habitat
Data Report will be implemented to minimize any possible the temporary adverse effects on EFH.
G. Additional References
PFMC (Pacific Fishery Management Council). 1999. Amendment 14 to the Pacific Coast Salmon Plan. Appendix
A: Description and Identification of Essential Fish Habitat, Adverse Impacts and Recommended Conservation
Measures for Salmon (August 1999).
PFMC, 1998a. Final Environmental Assessment/Regulatory Review for Amendment 11 to the Pacific Coast
Groundfish Fishery Management Plan (October, 1998).
PFMC, 1998b. The Coastal Pelagic Species Fishery Management Plan: Amendment 8 (December, 1998) .
MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 29
• Attachment 4. Assessment of Impacts to Critical Habitat for Puget Sound Chinook
Project description: Construction of a new community-use dock on Lake Washington in Renton,
This assessment covers the primary constituent elements (50 CFR Part 226, page 74581-2) determined essential to
the conservation of Puget Sound Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha):
(1) Freshwater spawning sites with water quantity and quality conditions and substrate supporting spawning,
incubation, and larval development.
Existing Conditions: There are no suitable freshwater spawning sites at the project location.
(2) Freshwater rearing sites with water quantity and floodplain connectivity to form and maintain physical habitat
e conditions and support juvenile growth and mobility; water quality and forage supportingjuvenile development;
and natural cover such as shade, submerged and overhanging large wood, log jams and beaver dams, aquatic
vegetation, large rocks and boulders, side channels, and undercut banks.
•
•
Existing Conditions: Native vegetation has been planted immediately landward of the bulkhead in conjunction
with the upland development. There is a concrete/sheet pile bulkhead along the shoreline of both properties. No side
channels or undercut banks were noted.
(3) Freshwater migration corridors free of obstruction with water quantity and quality conditions and natural cover
such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, side channels, and
undercut banks supporting juvenile and adult mobility and survival.
Existing Conditions: See (2) above.
(4) Estuarine areas free of obstruction with water quality, water quantity and salinity conditions supporting juvenile
and adult physiological transitions between fresh-and saltwater; natural cover such as submerged and overhanging
large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, and side channels, and juvenile and adult forage, including
aquatic invertebrates and fishes, supporting growth and maturation.
Existing Conditions: See (2) above .
(5) Nearshore marine areas free of obstruction with water quality and quantity conditions and forage, including
aquatic invertebrates and fishes, supporting growth and maturation; and natural cover such as submerged and
overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulder and side channels.
Existing Conditions: The site is in a freshwater area.
( 6) Offshore marine areas with water quality conditions and forage, including aquatic invertebrates and fishes,
supporting growth and maturation.
Existing Conditions: The site is in a freshwater lake area.
MS&A Barbee Mill Communify Dock Project • 30
•
•
•
•
Effects Analysis: A complete discussion of the effects of this project is seen in the BE/Habitat Data Report.
Construction will produce brief and localized increased turbidity, which will be contained by a silt curtain. The
project will have no long-term impacts on water quantity, salinity conditions or water temperature. Construction
during work windows will prevent impacts to the listed fish species.
Shading impacts on the benthic environment will be reduced by design components of the proposed project. The
entire dock will be fully grated. The smallest number and diameter steel piles will be used to minimize the amount
of structure in the water and disturbance to the substrate. Glu-Iam stringers will be used to allow the longest spans
possible between piles. The construction barge will not be allowed to ground out on the lake bottom at anytime. A
native planting plan will be installed.
Determination of Effect: "May affect, not likely to adversely affect"
MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 31
•
•
•
•
Attachment 5.
Assessment of Impacts to Critical Habitat for Coastal -Puget Sound Bull Trout
COE reference: Unknown at this time
Applicant: Conner Homes at Barbee Mill LLC (Attn: Charlie Conner).
The primary constituent elements determined essential to the conservation of bull trout (Salvelinus conjluentus) are:
(1) Water temperatures that support bull trout use. Bull trout have been documented in streams with temperatures
from 32 to 72 °P (0 to 22 °C) but are found more frequently in temperatures ranging from 36 to 59 °P (2 to 15 °C).
These temperature ranges may vary depending on bull trout life history stage and form, geography, elevation,
diurnal and seasonal variation, shade, such as that provided by riparian habitat, and local groundwater influence .
Stream reaches that preclude bull trout use are specifically excluded from designation.
Existing Conditions: The project will take place in Lake Washington, a large body of fresh water.
Effects to PCE: The project is not expected to have any influence on the water temperature of Lake Washington.
(2) Complex stream channels with features such as woody debris, side channels, pools, and undercut banks to
provide a variety of depths, velocities, and in stream structures.
Existing Conditions: Project will take place in Lake Washington -not in a stream environment
Effects to PCE: No effect
(3) Substrates of sufficient amount, size and composition to ensure success of egg and embryo overwinter survival,
fry emergence, and young-of-the year and juvenile survival. This should include a minimal amount of fine substrate
less than 0.25 in (0.63 cm) in diameter.
Existing Conditions: No spawning activity at the site
Effects to PCE: No effect
(4) A natural hydrograph, including peak, high, low, and base flows within historic ranges or, if regulated, currently
operate under a biological opinion that addresses bull trout, or a hydrograph that demonstrates the ability to support
bull trout populations by minimizing daily and day-to-day fluctuations and minimizing departures from the natural
cycle of flow levels corresponding with seasonal variation: This rule finds that reservoirs currently operating under
a biological opinion that addresses bull trout provides management for PCEs as currently operated.
Existing Conditions: Project will take place in Lake Washington
Effects to PCE: The project does not involve any alteration in the lake level; therefore it will have no impact on
this PCE.
MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 32
•
•
•
•
(5) Springs, seeps, groundwater sources, and subsurface water to contribute to water quality and quantity as a cold-
water source.
Existing Conditions: See 4 above
Effects to PCE: This project will have no impact on springs, seeps, groundwater sources or subsurface water
(6) Migratory corridors with minimal physical, biological, or water quality impediments between spawning, rearing,
overwintering, and foraging habitats, including intermittent or seasonal barriers induced by high water temperatures
or low flows.
Existing Conditions: Native vegetation has been planted along the site shoreline.
Effects to PCE: The proposed dock will incorporate design components that will decrease negative impacts on
foraging habitat and migratory corridors. The proposed dock will be fully grated and supported by the smallest
number and diameter steel pilings, which will cause minimal physical, biological or water quality impediments.
(See the BE/Habitat Data Report for details) .
(7) An abundant food base including terrestrial organisms of riparian origin, aquatic macroinvertebrates, and forage
fish.
Existing Conditions: Native vegetation has been planted along the site shoreline.
Effects to PCE: See 6 above
(8) Permanent water of sufficient quantity and quality such that normal reproduction, growtb and survival are not
inhibited.
Existing Conditions: See 4 above.
Effects to PCE: Pile driving may produce temporary turbidity impacts. These are expected to be short term and are
not expected to have a significant impact on critical habitat. Any debris associated with the project construction
phase will be contained by a silt containment curtain.
Determination of Effect: "No destruction or adverse modification"
Conservation Measures: Conservation measures for this project are seen in the BE/Habitat Data Report .
MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 33