The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLUA-05-104457W Wh32-24-5 ~rTE ~I~~~~~~~~~~ J~~-' ~ I~ '(" -1;,-0-\'--->ii~~iTi~L-~~~;_~;;:::==;;:;:=~~=~~C=; Coun~ T"'lOI~O CD fiOUMNumt>oo, IZi!m 6~"d,ng c:::1 ~".SIOi'_ C::i ... z "-.... "" ............... \ I "-"-'\ \ \ \ \ . -=' ~,:s~ ~O=-~,-,:;;'::'cJdf::~ 2<:r.~:·=:: ·I.r:: ·i:,~·~Or((:: 0.~~~~~ Restored Beach: Pea-Gravell I __ .... -. ~_o_ ~ O\...'l' .... · ~ 1 I \ L . ----.-'-. ~o .•• ,.:, ·~.'·~.\rropo : I 1-1/2 Inch Minus Gravel I ' : I I • ....... 7 5 1 Slope DNR AQUATIC ~~~d~~~~v~Tt~~:-__ . L ___ I ........ ....-/' 10 LEASE AREA: 20:1 Slope : Proposed Rock Beach Anchor ~ ~ -------. - - -__ J ~ --y '" ~'"M'_,""","","' '-:.. [" ,,,' ~ .,........---------------___...... 1 1 ... \ / 4 B' -----. 1 c G " L .. 1 I Existin Building EXisting OHWM 1"-.... ~ , to be ~emoved (Typ.) (Bulkhead to be Removed) '--/ : J'~ / / / ./ "-----, : ,~ L.41(~ *-. ~S,y/I\IG" '01\1 : L '" : Existing Pilin~ : 1 t~ be Removed '-- --\. (yp.) ........ Existing Dock to be Removed ~ ~ ~ ~ "--/'/' ______ ~ 4 A' ------- ~ "-...... -10---- / ./" / / ..-- ",-----/ :~:~. /' ---- "~,,,,;;?,~~ ,.,. ···Zi·- "~.9' J ':".'1 .:. -'4D 20 SCALE'IN FEET ,.'. " t£6~f.1j9g SHEET 1 SITE PLAN BARBEE MilL SHORELINE RESTORATION CITY OF RENTON PLANNING / BUILDING / PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM Date: February 7, 2006 To: City Clerk's Office From: Stacy Tucker Subject: Land Use File Closeout Please complete the following information to facilitate project closeout and indexing by the City Clerk's Office. r---------". ----"----------------,-: --~============-: ~i Project Name: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project '1:1' 11 LUA (file) Number: LUA-05-104, SME, ECF i! Cross-References: jllil !\ AKA's: I~---------------------------------------I' l'i:_p_r_o...:.j_e_ct_M_a_n_a...:g_e_r_: ______ Ji_II_D_i_ng_---,-____________________ :il I ,I :1 Acceptance Date: September 15, 2005 11 irl --~·----------------~--------------------------------------------~III , Applicant: Robert Cugini, Barbee Mill Co. Ii Owner: ' Washington State Dept. of Natural Resources II ii' Contact: Kritin Noreen, Anchor Environmental, LLC I I--------~----------------~----------I :! PID Number: 3224056666; 3224059034 !I II Public Hearing Date: I !I Date Appealed to HEX: i! !: By Whom: il d HEX Decision: Date:!l ;.--------------------------------_____ :1 ti Date Appealed to Council: Ii 1\ By Whom: i: ;: Council Decision: Date::1 1.:----------------------------------------,;1 Ii Mylar Recording Number: ;! I d ;: Project Description: Applicant proposes to restore land along Lake Washington that was:: !i historically converted to upland to a sand and gravel beach. The restoration will be accomplished 1'1 Ii with the following steps: removal of in-water structures (pilings and pier); excavation of ,I Ii approximately 8,500 cubic yards, of ~ill soils too achieve subgrade elevations; installation of toe rock 11 !1 and qua~ry spall boerm; and. the Importation of 0 sand, gravel, and ro~k materials for beach II l' construction., Submitted draWings show future public access would be proVided to the beach via an !1 f Open Space Tract (Tract E). ' , 11 i! Location: 4101 Lake Washington Blvd N II " 11 ,: Comments: I ti Ii " _, j II lL---,;: . ,~.,",.,,-t~~f_;Z;:;:::;;;;: __ .~_ ~__ .~..=;;;::=.::.~-.. ---::::=->:~~~... =:o:::=:z::=. ::L~ I 1~===_=-:!J PARTIES OF RECORD BARBEE MILL SHORELINE RESTORAT LUA05-104, SME, ECF Kristin Noreen Anchor Environmental, LLC 1423 Third Avenue ste: #300 Seattle, WA 98101 tel: 206-287-9130 eml: knoreen@anchorenv.com ( contact) Updated: 09/06/05 Robert Cugini Barbee Mill Co. 4101 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton, WA 98056 tel: 425-226-3900 (applicant) c/o Loren Stern Washington State Dept. of Natural Resources 1111 Washington Street SE MS 47027 Olympia, WA 98504-7027 tel: 360-902-1240 (owner) (Page 1 of 1) City of Rea Department of Planning / Building / Public as ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: APPLICATION NO: LUA05-104, SME, ECF 5 APPLICANT: Robert Cu ini PROJECT TITLE: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Pro·ect SITE AREA: 28,300 s uare feet BUILDING AREA LOCATION: 4101 Lake Washin ton Blvd N WORK ORDER NO: 77471 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Aquatic land that was historically converted to upland during the operation of the Barbee Mill, which ceased operations in the late 1990's, is proposed to be restored to a sand and gravel beach. The restoration plan would be accon:'plished wit~ the fo~lowi~g steps:. demolition and rem~)Val ~f uplan~ lumber mill facilities; removal of in-water structures (pilings and pier); excavation of fill sOils to achieve subgrade elevations; installation of toe rock and quarry spall berm; and the importation of sand, gravel. and rock materials for beach construction. The project area is located within the Urban Shoreline Designation. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housinq Air Aesthetics Water Liqht/G/are Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy! Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10.000 Feet 14.000 Feet nl~ B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional infOrmatiO;iS rneded to properly assess this proposal. L,t-J~ .. 12~~-Or Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date CITY. RENTON Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor PlanningIBuildingIPubtic Works Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator November 2, 2005 Kristin Noreen Anchor Environmental, LLC 1423 Third Avenue ste: #300 Seattle, WA 98101 SUBJECT: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project LUA05-104, SME, ECF Dear Ms. Noreen: This letter is to inform you that on October 31, 2005 the appeal period ended for both the Environmental Review Committee's (ERC) Determination of Non-5ignificance -Mitigated and the Certificate of Exemption from Shoreline Development Permit for the above.;.referenced project. No appeals were filed on the ERC determination. This decision is final and application for the appropriately required permits may proceed. The applicant must comply with all ERC Mitigation Measures. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at(425) 430-7219. For the Environmental Review Committee, ( tr:'}~' l Y~'(~7/'~ V Jill K. Ding U Associate Planner cc: Washington State Dept. of Natural Resources -clo Loren Stern I Owner Robert Cugini I Applicant ------}-0-5-5 -So-u-th-G-r-a-dy-W.-ay---R-e-n-to-n-, W.-as-h-in-g-to-n-9-8-05-5-------~ * This paper.contains 50% recycled material, 30% post consumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE October 19, 2005 Karen Walter Muckleshoot Indian Tribe -Fisheries 39015172nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Re: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Dear Karen: 1423 3rd Avenue, Suite 300 Seattle, WA 98101 Phone 206.287.9130 Fax 206.287.9131 www.anchorenv.com During the SEP A comment period for this project, you raised concerns about the beach anchors, I've enclosed a CD containing .pdf files of drawings from the 90 percent construction specifications that reflect changes made to the design in response to comments from you and the Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife. I hope this helps to address your concerns. Sincerely, Kristin Noreen Anchor Environmental, L.L.c. Cc: Jill Ding, City of Renton Robert Cugini, Barbee Mill Co, (w/o enclosure) Lynn Manolopoulos, Davis Wright Tremaine LLP (w/o enclosure) NOTE: 19 FT CONTOUR IS WITHIN 6" OF g'ROPERTY LINE EDGE 6FR.OC~ .••...... .. RIPRAPBEACH ANCHOR MAX. SLOPEA:1 ." •• c "",'-<'" ••• d O"·· / »»CAUTION«« CALL BEFORE YOU DIG! NOT LESS THAN TWO OR MORE THAN TEN BUSINESS DAYS PRIOR TO COMMENCING EXCAVATION OR DEMOLITION. SECURE THE SERVICES OF A COMMERCIAL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES LOCATOR SERVICE TO IDENTIFY BELOW-GROUND IMPROVEMENTS THAT MAY NOT BE INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS. »800 424 5555« .......... " .. ." ........... , ...... ,-" ", "' .. , D .. ~i ;,;. BARBEE MILL COMPANY , ! .... ·····3····· ................. ~ . ----20---- N " "1 " N "'" ., ..... , ... LAKE WASHINGTON PROJECT LIMIT: DEMOLITION AND CONSTRUCTION ACCESS PROPERTY LINE EXISTING ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK (OHWM) EXISTING CONTOUR PROPOSED CONTOUR PROPOSED ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK (OHWM) ···i4 ..... 1'; . ... -4(, / o / / / 20 / / / 40 ,........... SCALE IN FEET VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD 88 CONTOUR INTERVAL: 1 FOOT 90% REVIEW SUBMITAL NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION DESIGNED BY: -'-==c==..----_-l DRAWN BY, ~~~~~==+_---B-A-R-B-E-E-M-IL-L-5-H-O-R-E-L-IN-E-R-E-5-T_O_RA __ T_IO~N~_~ CHECKED BY; APPROVED BY: _________ -1 C-3 SHEET NO. ~ OF_8_ SCAlE: ~~~~~====j DATE: _ GRADING PLAN .' ................... . PROJECT LIMIT: DEMOLITION CONSTRUCTION AND CONSTRUCTION ACCESS --- ----- ---PROPERTY LINE EXISITNG ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK (OHWM) »»CAUTION<<<< CALL BEFORE YOU DIG! NOT LESS THAN TWO OR MORE THAN TEN BUSINESS DAYS PRIOR TO COMMENCING EXCAVATION OR DEMOLITION. SECURE THE SERVICES OF A COMMERCIAL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES LOCATOR SERVICE TO IDENTIFY BELOW.GRQUNO IMPROVEMENTS THAT MAY NOT BE INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS. »800 424 5555« ~ i-l ~~ ;;; N .. ······11 . ... , ..... "' ...... ,- o 150 300 o SCALE IN FEET BUILDING/STRUCTURE REMOVAL (BY OTHERS REMOVE REMAINING FOUNDATIONS ASPHALT PAVING REMOVAL WOOD PIER REMOVAL CLEAR AND GRUB LOW VEGETATION LINEAR ELEMENT TO BE REMOVED WOOD PILING TO BE REMOVED LOG BOOM WITH 8 DOLPHINS (5 PILING PER DOLPHIN) TO BE REMOVED BARBEE MILL COMPANY 0 0 0 0 0.,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD @ @ @ ® ® 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i f, 0' 0 0 ~ ~1 o o o 0 0 ;0········ 0 0 0 " .... " 0 0 0 0 LAKE WASHINGTON g _ .. 0 0 DEMOLITION NOTES: REMOVE WOOD BULKHEAD AND PILINGS. METAL STAKES. CHAINS, AND CABLE REMOVE WOOD PIER AND AlL PILINGS REMOVE ALL PILINGS THIS AREA REMOVE ASPHALT PAVING, CONCRETE PAVING, CONCRETE FOUNDATIONS, VAULTS, PIPES AND PILES REMOVE BUILDING CONCRETE FOUNDATION TO MATCH PAVING REMOVAL REMOVE ASPHALT, METAL, AND CONCRETE SLABS AND FOUNDATIONS AND PILING TO MIN. TWO FEET BELOW FINISH GRADE ® @ ® @ @ @ ..... (~ REMOVE SALVAGE LOGS FOR LARGE WOODY DEBRIS REMOVE ROCK AND SALVAGE FOR RE-USE AS ROCK ANCHORS (CONCRETE AND ASPHALT NOT ACCEPTABLE) REMOVE STEEL SHEETPILE BULKHEAD AND CONCRETE CAP. SAWCUT CONCRETE CAP AND REMOVE ENTIRE SHEETPILE SEGMENT REMOVE CONCRETE PIER ABUTMENT REMOVE MISC. PILING/DOLPHINS AND LOG BOOMS WITHIN DNR LEASE AREA (SEE INSET) REMOVE FLOATING RAFT, PIPE AND SUPPORT PILES DECOMMISSION MONITORING WELL SAWCUT AND PLUG CONCRETE DRAINAGE PIPE AT FACE OF NEW ROCK BERM. DESIGNED BY: -,P~. ==~ ___ --I DRAWN BY: -====------1 GENERAL DEMOLITION AND EARTHWORK PRIOR TO ANY CLEARING, DEMOLITION AND EARTHWORK ACTIVITIES, CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE AND INSTALL TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL MEASURES AND TEMPORARY CHAINLINK FENCING. IN ACCORDANCE WITH SPECIFICATIONS AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS. INCLUDING FLOATING SEDIMENTATION CURTAIN. EXISTING UTILITY NOTES: 1. LOCATIONS OF MOST EXISTING UTILITIES ARE NOT SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS AND SHALL BE FIELD LOCATED BY THE CONTRACTOR. WHERE SHOWN LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. 2. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THAT ALL UTILITIES WITHIN THE PROJECT LIMITS AREA ARE ABANDONED AND CLEANLY CUT OUT AND CAP ABANDONED UTILITIES TO THE LIMITS OF EXCAVATION AND PAVEMENT REMOVAL. 3. WATER IN DRAINAGE SYSTEM SHALL BE EXTRACTED AND TRANSPORTED TO PROPER DISPOSAL. BARBEE MILL SHORELINE RESTORATION ........... o 20 40 H SCALE IN FEET 90% REVIEW SUBMITAL NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION D-1 CHECKEDBY''''''''=~=~ ___ -t--_______________________ --l ST"TEOF WolSHlNGTON REGISTERED ~ARCHrreCT I-+--t---t--+------------------I APPROVED BY, _______ --1 SCALE, --=-"""= ____ --1 DATE, ...2S=~=-----l DEMOLITION AND CLEARING PLAN SHEET NO. --L OF_8_ TYP. TOE ROCK ffi AND QUARRY SPALL BERM~ 30r------+~--------------------~~ co 25 ~ ~ 20 .... w w u. 15 ~ z o i= 10·· ~ w 5. It ! ........................... 1 GRADE ---j--- PROPOSEDSUBGRADE EXISTING GRADE @SECTIONA C-3 30,_--------------------------------------------------, i 25' .......... + .................................................................. . It£ EXISTING GRADE 120 ,-=~~~ ..... ~.-. ~--------l ··_--·_·_--····OHWM1B.67'-·------t;j • ···---···--7-···~···---···---···---··· w u. 15 ~ z o i= 10 <C. ~ PROPOSEDSUBGRADE w 5 .------.. -.-.. " --.. ----'"---"-~----,,.-.---.-.-... ---.-... ----~-.. --~ .~.-.- @SECTIONB C-3 30,---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------, i 25 . o ~ 20· t;j ~ :: ----------------L~-----.-.. ----------~-----~ PROPOSED SUBGRADE W 5 »»CAUTION«« CALL BEFORE YOU DIG! NOT LESS THAN TWO OR MORE THAN TEN BUSINESS DAYS PRIOR TO COMMENCING EXCAVATION OR DEMOLITION. SECURE THE SERVICES OF A COMMERCIAL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES LOCATOR SERVICE TO IDENTIFY BELOW-GROUND IMPROVEMENTS THAT MAY NOT BE INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS. »800 424 5555« @SECTIONC C-3 BARBEE MILL COMPANY TIMBER ---_, BULKHEAi:L. ___ ..._, _ ST~Te Of' \'jAoSHINGTON REGISTERED l.AtCJSCAI'EARCH\T£CT "-, 30,---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~ !: ---~L --.0.--00-_______ u __ -f;~~=:~~=~---__ d/="""RB""",," -,~ ... ___ ... ~15----____ [_ ~ _ ¥_~_ f 11 ! ~ PROPOSED GRADE j -------:-=-:--..::.-..::...::.-------------- j:: 10 . ~ PROPOSED SUBGRADE w 5 .............................................................. . @SECTIOND C-3 ~r---------------------------------------------------------------~ 125 ~ 20 t;j w u. 15 ~ z g 10 ~ W 5 ·································1······ ........................................................................................................................ ··················································t =~I~~I~~~ftb.iTIMBER -!:>£:>.g,?b... .. ~L-:--==:-: ~~=,:':"::::::::::...=:::::::.::::..-=; ;'::=-=::;:::;:';;;::;;"';:;_:;::;::;;;::';;;:"-:~:y'= ~~~~I:l~_~[): ~l~ -' -----"< PROPOSED SUBGRADE PROPOSED GRADE @SECTIONE C-3 ~,-----------------------------------------, Q) 25 ~ ~ 20 t;j 2 F 1 ............................. -.... -...............['""0 ,"SOMe, W 5 @SECTIONF C-3 DESIGNED BY: ....:...0-'=='--______ --1 DRAWN BY: -"'''''''''"''"''''--______ --1 BARBEE MILL SHORELINE RESTORATION o 10 20 SCALE IN FEET VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD 88 90% REVIEW SUBMITAL NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION CHECKED BY, ....!O..!!!O!=~~-------t---------------------------------------------------I C-4 APPROVED BY: _____________ --1 SCALE: -"''-'''''''''''-_______ -\ CROSS SECTIONS SHEET NO. lOF_8_ DATE --"''''''~~~ _____ -I / »»CAUTION«« CALL BEFORE YOU DIG! '" ;j , " NOT LESS THAN TWO OR MORE THAN TEN BUSINESS DAYS PRIOR TO COMMENCING EXCAVATION OR DEMOLITION SECURE THE SERVICES OF A COMMERCIAL • UNDERGROUND UTILITIES LOCATOR SERVICE TO IDENTIFY BELOW-GROUND IMPROVEMENTS THAT MAY NOT BE INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS. »800 424 5555« ~ C , :~ N ---" e ~ ~ -' c' ~ i'~ , m" ~ " \ :;; :f) N " ~::( rcxxx:a ~ I~"'I \ \ ~ -, QUARRY SPALL BERM @ COARSE GRAVEL OVER BEACH ANCHOR (1\ \gl TOE ROCK OVER BEDDING ROCK W \gl BEACH GRAVEL ffi \gl SAND/GRAVEL MIX f3\ \gl UNANCHORED LARGE WOODY DEBRIS (SALVAGED LOGS) ffi \gl BARBEE MILL COMPANY ST.ltTEOf W"-SHINGTON ~:~ITF.CT '" ". N ~ , , "1 " N , LAKE WASHINGTON ....... , .. PROJECT LIMIT: DEMOLITION AND CONSTRUCTION ACCESS PROPERTY LINE EXISTING ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK (OHWM) EXISTING CONTOUR 11 'V" PROPOSED ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK (OHWM) DESIGNED BY: --'-====-------1 r'O." / BARBEE MILL SHORELINE RESTORATION o 20 40 H SCALE IN FEET VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD 88 CONTOUR INTERVAL: 1 FOOT 90% REVIEW SUBMITAL NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION DRAWN BY, -"-.!!!!~~L ____ -l CHECKED BY, -Ec~~~~'----f----------------------------...J C-1 APPROVED BY' ----------1 SCALE -"''-''''''''!'!... _____ -I LAYOUT AND CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS PLAN SHEET NO. _5_ of_8_ DATE:-"'-==== ____ -I DISTANCE VARIES SEE GRADING PLAN SHEETC-3 ---"C..~XISTING GRADE »»CAUTION«« CALL BEFORE YOU DIG! NOT LESS THAN TWO OR MORE THAN TEN BUSINESS DAYS PRIOR TO COMMENCING EXCAVATION OR DEMOLITION. SECURE THE SERVICES OF A COMMERCIAL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES LOCATOR SERVICE TO IDENTIFY BELOW-GROUND IMPROVEMENTS THAT MAY NOT BE INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS. »800 424 5555« I-APPROX. 7' -l I APPROX. 8' =1 COARSE GRAVEL PROPOSED GRADE .OH~ ... __ C-1 LIGHT RIPRAP BEDDING LAYER ROCK TYPICAL COARSE GRAVEL OVER BEACH ANCHOR CROSS SECTION 3 6 SCALE IN FEET It I TOEROCK@ ! EXISTING GRADE PROPOSED GRADE HALF BURIED 18" MIN. DIAMETER UNANCHORED LOGS -6" MAX. BELOW OHWM BEACH GRAVEL 2 C-1 TYPICAL BEACH GRAVEL CROSS SECTION o 10 SCALE IN FEET --------------:-:-==--.-.-:-~_:_:_.-...:..=.::.~_:__:_=_=_=_-_:_._._===_:_:_:_===_-.-9HWM--_:_:_:_==_-:_._:=_,_.,_c_=-.~~_=~ ____ _ 2'MIN. HAlF BURIED 18" MIN. DIAMETER TRANSITION -WIDTH VARIES ----------1 UNANCHORED LOGS -6" MAX. BELOW OHWM 3 TYPICAL SAND/GRAVEL MIX CROSS SECTION C-1 0 5 -- SCALE IN FEET 10 TOE ROCK: HALF BURIED ! EXISTING GRADE PROPOSED GRADE 12" MIN. DEPTH--+-----'" 24" MAX. DEPTH ---- 4 C-1 BEDDING LAYER ROCK: J 6" MIN. DEPTH ffi ffi TYPICAL \§3J ~ BEACH SECTION TYPICAL TOE ROCK AND QUARRY SPALL BERM CROSS SECTION o 5 10 M SCALE IN FEET DESIGNED BY: ...:.c.'-='=~ ___ -I BARBEE MILL SHORELINE RESTORATION DRAWN BY: -=-==""------1 90% REVIEW SUBMITAL NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION BARBEE MILL COMPANY CHECKEDBY;...s~~~~ __ -I---------______________ -I STATE Of WASHlNGT(lN REGjSTERED LANDSCAPEARCHrT'£CT 1-+---1--+-+-----------------1 APPROVEDBY: _______ -I SCALE, -",,~e='--___ -I DATE. --"''''''''''''-''''''''------1 LAYOUT AND CONSTRUCTION DETAILS SHEET NO . .....§..... OF_8_ CITY OF RENTON CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION FROM SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT EXEMPTION FILE NO.: PROJECT NAME: OWNER: APPLICANT: CONTACT: PROJECT MANAGER: PROPOSAL: PROJECT LOCATION: LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS: SEC-TWN-R: WATER BODYIWETLAND: Exemption from Shoreline Management.doc October 17, 2005 LUA-05-104, SME, ECF Barbee Mill Shoreline Exemption Washington State Department of Natural Resources C/o Loren Stern 1111 Washington St SE, MS 47027 Olympia, W A 98504-7027 Robert Cugini Barbee Mill Co. 4101 Lake Washington Blvd. N Renton, WA 98056 Kristin Noreen Anchor Environmental, LLC 1423 Third Ave, Suite 300 Seattle, W A 98101 Jill K. Ding, Associate Planner Aquatic land that was historically converted to upland during the operation of the Barbee Mill, which ceased operations in the late 1990's, is proposed to be restored to a sand and gravel beach. The restoration plan would be accomplished with the following steps: demolition and removal of upland lumber mill facilities; removal of in-water structures (pilings and pier); excavation of fill soils to achieve subgrade elevations; installation of toe rock and quarry spall berm; and the importation of sand, gravel, and rock materials for beach construction. The project area is located within the Urban Shoreline Designation. 4101 Lake Washington Blvd N (See attached Lease Agreement) NW % 32-24-5 Lake Washington An exemption from a Shoreline Management Substantial Development Permit is hereby granted on the proposed project described on the attached form for the following reason(s): Watershed restoration projects as defined herin. Local government shall review the projects for consistency with the shoreline master program in an expeditious manner and shall issue its decision along with any conditions within forty-five days of receiving all materials necessary to review the request for exemption from the applicant. No fee may be charged for accepting and processing requests for exemption for watershed restoration projects as used in this section. (i) "Watershed restoration project" means a public or private project authorized by the sponsor of a watershed restoration plan that implements the plan or a part of the plan and consists of one or more of the following activities: (A) A project that involves less than ten miles of streamreach, in which less than twenty-five cubic yards of sand, gravel, or soil is removed, imported, disturbed or discharged, and in which no existing vegetation is removed except as minimally necessary to facilitate additional plantings; (8) A project for the restoration of an eroded or unstable stream bank that employs the principles of bioengineering, including limited use of rock as a stbilization only at the toe of the bank, and with primary emphasis on using native vegetation to control the erosive forces of flowing water; or (C) A project primarily design to improve fish and wildlife habitat, remove or reduce impediments to migration of fish, or enhance the fishery resource available for use by all of the citizens of the state, provided that any structure, other than a bridge or culver or instream habitat enhancement structure associated with the project, is less than two hundred square feet in floor area and is located above the ordinary high water mark of the stream. (ii) "Watershed restoration plan" means a plan, developed or sponsored by the department of fish and wildlife, the department of ecology, the department of natural resources, the department of transportation, a federally recognized Indian tribe acting within and pursuant to its authority, a city, a county, or a conservation district that provides a general program and implementation measures or actions for the preservation, restoration, re-creation, or enhancement of the natural resources, character, and ecology of a stream, stream segment, drainage area, or watershed for which agency and public review has been conducted pursuant to chapter 43.21 C RCW, the State Environmental Policy Act. Exemption from Shoreline Management.doc The proposed development is consistent or inconsistent with (check one): CONSISTENT INCONSISTENT XX Policies of the Shoreline Management Act. N/A The guidelines of the Department of Ecology where no Master Program has been finally approved or adapted by the Department. ~ The Master Program. Neil Watts, Director Development Services Division Attachments: Shoreline Restoration Site Plan cc: Owner Applicant File Exemption from Shoreline Management.doc \ I "-"-"-\ \ \ " " 1-112 Inch Minus Gravel "-7 5:1 Slope "-. -~\----~Restore~-Beach: P:::~';;:;;'-- "-... ~ 10 ------__ _ " "--- ~6~f.1j9,~ Proposed Rock Beach Anchor (Typical Each End of Beach) I ./ ~ -----5 --'+8' --- L..ttlrs-Vk. ~S,y/I\IG "01\1 I I I __ -....,t i :"-. : c : ---{ , , :.~ I' L-' I -.........; Co 0 : "'- ? L _ \ _J ~X~~i'k'le~lin~ ~ (Typ.) oved ~ ~xisting Dock be Removed r+A -\7--.- \ / e / " / "" ,/ .............. ../"../" ~ Existing OHW~ Removed) (Bulkhead to ~ '" __ --. '+ A' --------10-- ~ '" "",---5 --/-,/" " / ./' /' .- ... 1'" J I. --..! .. ~. :\'" ... e ::~}. ;~.,~~ ~ ... , .. - "" .' ........ ': .. ' .... ~ ...... -',1-0, Of ~~ :-~ .c .• i. '.~: sQt.~EiN FEET SHEET 1 SITE PLAN BARBEE Mill SHOREUNE RESTORA liON STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING } AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION PUBLIC NOTICE Tom Meagher, being first duly sworn on oath that he is the Legal Advertising Representative of the King County Journal a daily newspaper, which newspaper is a legal newspaper of general circulation and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication hereinafter referred to, published in the English language continuously as a daily newspaper in King County, Washington. The King County Journal has been approved as a Legal Newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. The notice in the exact form annexed was published in regular issues of the King County Journal (and not in supplement form) which was regularly distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a Public Notice was published on October 17, 2005. The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of $98.00. dJz---~\\\"II"I', ~,'Ii L B.,.:t ii, $' S) ~ •••• : ....... ~».~'''''" -~r"~OT~J-''''O~ Tom Meagher ~ ~ "\ ~ ~ Legal Advertising Representative, King County Journal : en EXP. \ E Subscribed and sworn to me this 17th day of October, 2005.~ ~. 04128/2009 ~!~: '~" ~-. ~ ~,~·· •• ~L\C" $ -_:::::::>-~'",o;WA~".s" """""\\\\ Jod . Barton Notary Public for the State of Washington, Residing in Auburn, Washington PO Number: Cost of publishing this notice includes an affidavit surcharge. NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMI'ITEE RENTON, WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Com- mittee has issued a Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigatcd for the fol- lowing project under the authority of the Renton Municipal Code. Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project LUA05-104, SME, ECF Location: 4101 Lake Washington Blvd N. Applicant proposes to restore land along Lake Washing- ton that was historically converted to upland to a sand and gravel beach. The restoration will be accomplished with the following steps: removal of in-water struc- tures (pilings and pier); excavation of approximately 8,500 cubic yards of fill soils to achieve subgrade elevations; installation of toe rock and quarry spall berm; and the importation of sand, gravel, and rock materials for beach construc- tion. Submitted drawings show future public access would be pro- vided to the beach via an Open Space Tract (Tract E). Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM on October 31, 2005. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Exam- iner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Sec- tion 4-8-110.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. Published in the King County Journal October 17,2005. #849706 e e • • CITY OF RENTON CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 1 yth day of October, 2005, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Certificate of Exemption from Shoreline Development Permit documents. This information was sent to: " ' , , '< .~!, " , , , ' Name -,.::' . ,.:'-' ' .. ' Representing,.,-" . .: r· ' ~",-" ."j: ' ~. 1f Agencies See Attached Kristin Noreen, Anchor Environmental, LLC Contact Robert Cugini, Barbee Mill Co. Applicant c/o Loren Stern, Washington State Dept. of Owner Natural Resources fA-JadM/ (Signature of Sender): ~A'.14 I"'UAn~ .-r-" F"KOKk " ;' )U ---.. " ..... "'. .. .'-J STATE OF WASHINGTON ~OTARY PUBUC ) SS STATE OF WASHINGTC,~\1 COUNTY OF KING ) COMMISSION £=XPifi[::::~ MARCH 10, Lon: ~ ~ 'V' ?~~.!!'""::::-:>'.:"'-: •.. ' I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy Tucker signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. ~, j } b Dated: If) /zgjo ,) _----:-7~_"_:_1 ~:--::--:-1-'--1....!.;-~:----:-:-~__:_:_:_:----:-:--_- Notary Public in and for the Sate of Washington Notary (print):_--,,--(J_~-:---,~---;--_F_~_f!J_% _____ _ My appointment expires: 3/lq (Oc. PrQject, Name: , " ~.' ': -• • l _, .'-. ' Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project l:Ji:oje,~t ~umber:, LUA05-104, SME, ECF template -affidavit of service by mailing ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS-M) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: LOCATION: OESCRIPTION: Barbee Mill Shoreline Reltoratlon ProJect LUA05-104, SME, ECF 4101 Lake Washington Blvd N Applicant proposes to restore land along Lake Washington that was historically converted to upland to II sand and gravel beach. The restoration will be accomplished with the following steps: removal of In-water structures (pilings and pier); excavation of approximately 8,500 cubic yards 01 till 10US to achieve lubgrade elovatlons; Installallon 01 toe rock and quarry spall berm; and the Importation of land, gravel, and rock materials for beach construction. Submitted draWings show future public access would be provided to the beach via 8n Open Space Tract (Tract E). THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERG) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Appeals 01 the environmental determination must be flied In writing on or before 5:00 PM on October 31, 2005. Appeals must be flied In writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Wey, Renton, WA 98055. Appeele to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4o-8-110.B. Additional Information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION IS APPEALED, A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE SET AND ALL PARTIES NOTIFIED. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION AT (425) 430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOnCE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION Please include the project NUMBER whencalllng'for proper file Identlficatlon_ CERTIFICATION I, 1kr..k.. ~"" , hereby certify that ~ copies of the above document were posted by me in ~ conspicuous places or nearby the described property on DATE: 10{l7/o'S. SIGNED:--"",O:<.:.R~ ....... .".~~ __ ==~~ __ ATTEST: Subscribed and sworn before me, a Notary Public, in and for the State of W U"'-W~onthe 1'6 day";-o-.. ~,~".~~'t -t' . t ---------------8 F. K0i·\.i\u ~ . NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF WASHINGTON COMMISSION EXPIRES MARCH 19, 2006 "~ .. ~ /J .-, -J I/;J 1/ . ngton resid. ing in rd ()..L-r t< t:.Jt6 .. ' 1, CITY OF RENTON CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 13th day of October, 2005, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing ERC Determination documents. This information was sent to: .<' I' ':.' "1~· .... , ,. -'. ; ~ .. • " ',<' Agencies Kristin Noreen, Anchor Environmental, LLC Robert Cugini, Barbee Mill Co. c/o Loren Stern, Washington State Dept. of Natural Resources See Attached Contact Applicant Owner , -~ (Signature of Sender)'~: ",~~~~~·'I~""/1~A~~~~':1.7~ .. ~d~~"A:::::'. ______ .x:::::=~. ~-~""::' .,.. , ./ ) (J v~Lt::s F. KOKKOti.· STATE OF WASHINGTON ~ NOTARY PUBliC ' ) ss STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ~ COMMISSION EXPIRES .' MARCH 19,2006 COUNTY OF KING I certify that I know or have satisfactory eVidence that Stacy Tucker • .~,-;S:~~~;~~~~!..~. signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: /0/23'/D; i Notary Public in and for the Sate of Washington Notary (print):._---"'D~/;:;:_~7_Ir_::k~d~F-~---.:.~-~-------- My appointment expires: ~(/1(66 Project Name: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project ProjecfNumber;· LUA05-104, SME, ECF template -affidavit of service by mailing / " ,.- , .. .... Dept. of Ecology· Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olymj>ia, WA 98504-7703 WSDOT Northwest Region • Attn: Ramin Pazooki King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers· Seattle District Office Attn: SEPA Reviewer PO Box C-3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Jamey Taylor· Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Servo Attn: SEPA Section 900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 Metro Transit Senior Environmental Planner Gary Kriedt AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERe DETERMINATIONS) WDFW -Stewart Reinbold· Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. • clo Department of Ecology Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer 3190 160th Ave SE 39015 -172nd Avenue SE Bellevue, WA 98008 Auburn, WA 98092 Duwamish Tribal Office· Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program· 4717 W Marginal Way SW Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert Seattle, WA 98106-1514 39015 172nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 KC Wastewater Treatment Division· Office of Archaeology & Historic Environmental Planning Supervisor Preservation· Ms. Shirley Marroquin Attn: Stephanie Kramer 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 PO Box 48343 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 City of Newcastle City of Kent Attn: Mr. Micheal E. Nicholson Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director 13020 SE 72nd Place 220 Fourth Avenue South Newcastle, WA 98059 Kent, WA 98032-5895 Puget Sound Energy City of Tukwila Municipal Liason Manager Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official Joe Jainga 6300 Southcenter Blvd. 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-01W Tukwila, WA 98188 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Bellevue, WA 98009-0868 Seattle Public Utilities Real Estate Services Title Examiner 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities will need to be sent a copy of the checklist, PMT's, and the notice of application. • Also note, do not mail Jamey Taylor any of the notices she gets hers from the web. Only send her the ERC Determination paperwork. template -affidavit of service by mailing ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS-M) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: LOCATION: DESCRIPTION: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project LUA05-104, SME, ECF 4101 Lake Washington Blvd N Applicant proposes to restore land along Lake Washington that was historically converted to upland to a sand and gravel beach. The restoration will be accomplished with the following steps: removal of In-water structures (pilings and pier); excavation of approximately 8,500 cubic yards of fill solis to achieve subgrade elevations; Installation of toe rock and quarry spall berm; and the Importation of sand, gravel, and rock materials for beach construction. Submitted drawings show future public access would be provided to the beach via an Open Space Tract (Tract E). THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Appeals of the environmental determination must be flied In writing on or before 5:00 PM on October 31, 2005. Appeals must be filed In writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.B. Additional Information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION IS APPEALED, A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE SET AND ALL PARTIES NOTIFIED. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION AT (425) 430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION Please include the.pr()ject·.f\JUM.Ii:JER·wh~~.¢~lli!1gfQr.·()rop~r~il.e\i~el1tifiC::atiqn. .... cul,,,cl-Wheeler. Mayor CITY eF RENTON PlanningIBuildinglPublic Works Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator October 13. 2005 Kristin Noreen Anchor Environmental. LLC 1423 Third Avenue #300 Seattle. WA 98101 SUBJECT: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project LUA05-104, SME. ECF Dear Ms. Noreen: This letter is written on behalf of the Environmental Review Committee (ERG) to advise you that they have completed their review of the subject project arid have issued a threshold Determination of Non- Significance~Mitigated with Mitigation Measures. Please refer to the elitlosed ERC Report and Decision. Section D for a list of the Mitigation Measures. Appeals of the environmental·.·determination must be filed.in writing on or.before ·5:00 PM on October 31,2005. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton. 1055 South GradyWaY,Henton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4:8~ 11 O.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from.the Reht6nGityClerk'sOffice, (425) 430-6510. . . . If .the Environmental Determination is appealed, a public heating date will be set and all parties notified. The preceding information will assist you in planning for implementation of your project and enable. you to exercise your appeal rights more fully, if you choose to do so. If you have any questions or desire clarification of the above, please call me at (425) 430-7219. For the Environmental Review Committee, 'f(;;;;2 I Jill K. Ding U Associate Planner cc: Washington State Dept of Natural Resources -c/oLoren Stern I Owner(s) Robert Cugini I Applicant Enclosure -------------IO-5-5-S-ou-t-h-a-ra-d-y-W-a-y---R-e-nt-o-n,-W-a-S-hi-n~gt-o-n-9~8-05-5-------------~ * This paper contains 50% recycled material, 30% post consumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE CITY.F RENTON Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor Planning/BuildinglPublic Works Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator October 13, 2005 Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Subject: Environmental Determinations Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination for the following project reviewed by . the Environmental Review Committee (ERG) on October 11, 2005: DETERMINATION OF NON~SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: LOCATION: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration LUA05-104, SME,E.CF 4101 Lake Washington Blvd N ,," DESCRIPTION: Applicant proposes to restore land along Lake Washington that was historically converted to upland to a sand and gravel beach. The restoration will be accomplished with the following steps: . removal of in..;water structures' (pilings and pier); excavation of . approximately 8;500 cubic yards of fill soils to achieve subgrade elevations; installation of, toe rock and '.quarry. spall berm;· and the importation of sand,·· gravel, . and . r9ck materials for' beach construction. Submitted drawings sHow future public access would be provided to the beach via an Open Space Tract (Tract' E) Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or b~fore 5:00 PM on October 31,2005. Appeals mustbe filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South GradyWay, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. If you have questions, please call me at (425) 430-7219 .. For the Environmehtal Review Committee, d»# ;A' ~IK.Di~9 V Associate Planner cc: King County Wastewater Treatment Division WDFW, Stewart Reinbold David F. Dietzman, Department of Natural Resources WSDOT; Northwest Region Duwamish Tribal Office ' Karen Walter, Fisheries, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (Ordinance) Melissa Calvert, Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program us Army Corp. of Engineers Stephanie Kramer, Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation -E-n-c-lo-su-re----I-O-SS-s-ou-t-h-G-ra-d-Y-W-a-y-_-R-e-n-to-n-, W-'-as-h-in-g-to-n-98-0-S-S-------~ * This paper contains 50% recyded material, 30% post consumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE e CITY OF RENTON e DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) APPLICATION NO(S): LUA05-104, SME, ECF APPLICANT: Robert Cugini, Barbee Mill Co. PROJECT NAME: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Applicant proposes to restore land along Lake Washington that was historically converted to upland to a sand and gravel beach. The restoration will be accomplished with the following steps: removal of in-water structures (pilings and pier); excavation of approximately 8,500 cubic yards of fill soils to achieve subgrade elevations; installation of toe rock and quarry spall berm; and the importation of sand, gravel, and rock materials for beach construction. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: LEAD AGENCY: 4101 Lake Washington Blvd N The City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Development Planning Section The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c). Conditions were imposed as mitigation measures by the Environmental Review Committee under their authority of Section 4-6-6 Renton Municipal Code. These conditions are necessary to mitigate environmental impacts identified during the environmental review process. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM on October 31, 2005. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11 O.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. PUBLICATION DATE: October 17, 2005 DATE OF DECISION: October 11 , 2005 SIGNATURES: It) 1;1 lor; DATE ' I CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA05-104, SME, ECF APPLICANT: Robert Cugini, Barbee Mill Co. PROJECT NAME: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Applicant proposes to restore land along Lake Washington that was historically converted to upland to a sand and gravel beach. The restoration will be accomplished with the following steps: removal of in-water structures (pilings and pier); excavation of approximately 8,500 cubic yards of fill soils to achieve subgrade elevations; installation of toe rock and quarry spall berm; and the importation of sand, gravel, and rock materials for beach construction. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: LEAD AGENCY: MITIGATION MEASURES: 4101 Lake Washington Blvd N The City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Development Planning Section 1. The project will be required to comply with the Department of Ecology's Erosion and Sediment Control Plan outlined in Vol. 11 of the 2001 Stormwater Management Manual during construction. 2. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the Biological Evaluation prepared by Anchor Environmental, LLC, dated May 2005. 3. In the event that archaeological deposits are found during construction, work shall stop and the contractor(s) shall contact the State Archaeologist at the State of Washington Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, phone (360) 586-3065; and the Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program, phone (253) 939-3311 ERG Mitigation Measures Page 1 of 1 • CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED ADVISORY NOTES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA05-104, SME, ECF APPLICANT: Robert Cugini, Barbee Mill Co. PROJECT NAME: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Applicant proposes to restore land along Lake Washington that was historically converted to upland to a sand and gravel beach. The restoration will be accomplished with the following steps: removal of in-water structures (pilings and pier); excavation of approximately 8,500 cubic yards of fill soils to achieve subgrade elevations; installation of toe rock and quarry spall berm; and the importation of sand, gravel, and rock materials for beach construction. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: LEAD AGENCY: 4101 Lake Washington Blvd N The City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Development Planning Section Advisory Notes to Applicant: The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the environmental determination. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for environmental determinations. Planning: 1. The applicant is to obtain applicable City of Renton Construction Permits 2. The applicant is to obtain a City of Renton and possible King County Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Exemption. 3. Other permits from other agencies may be required prior to construction. Required permits may include but are not limited to a Department of Ecology Water Quality Certification, Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Hydraulic Project Approval, and an Army Corps of Engineers Fill Permit. Property Services: 1 . No fees are triggered. Plan Review: 1 . A construction plan indicating haul route and hours, construction hours and a traffic control plan shall be submitted for approval prior to any permit being issued. Haul hours shall be restricted to 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. unless approved in advance by the Development Services Division. ERG Advisory Notes Page 1 of 1 • ENVIRONIYIENT'ALREVlEvvCQM M l"FtEe: MEETIN.GNOTI.qE· October It, 2005 ... To: Gregg Zimmerman, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator Dennis Culp, Community Services Administrator From: Meeting Date: Time: Lee Wheeler, Fire Chief Jennifer Henning, Development Planning 'Tuesday,October 1{ 2005 9:00,AM . ..... .......... . Location: Sixth 'Floor Conference Hoom#620 ..••. .• Agenda listed below. .. Sprint Fiber Optic at Springbrook (Ding) LUA05-100, SM, CU-A, ECF Applicant proposes to install 5,707 lineal feet of lateral fiber optic line on the north side of SW 16th Street, and 5,751 lineal feet on the south side of SW 16th Street. The fiber optic line would be installed using the Hydraulic Directional Drill (HOD) bore method except for a small section (approximately 100 to 300 feet) to the west, adjacent to the railroad. Excavation at each bore pit would involve removal of approximately 1.5 cubic yards of soil. Soil excavated would be used to back fill holes following lateral line installation. Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project (Ding) LUA05-104, SME, ECF Applicant proposes to restore land along Lake Washington that was historically converted to upland to a sand and gravel beach. The restoration will be accomplished with the following steps: removal of in-water structures (pilings and pier); excavation of approximately 8,500 cubic yards of fill soils to achieve subgrade elevations; installation of toe rock and quarry spall berm; and the importation of sand, gravel, and rock materials for beach construction. cc: K. Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor J. Covington, Chief Administrative Officer A. Pietsch, EDNSP Administrator ® B. Wolters, EDNSP Director ® J. Gray, Fire Prevention N. Watts, P/B/PW Development Services Director ® F. Kaufman, Hearing Examiner S. Engler, Fire Prevention ® J. Medzegian, Council S. Meyer, P/B/PW Transportation Systems Director R. Lind, Economic Development L. Warren, City Attorney ® STAFF REPORT A. BACKGROUND ERC MEETING DATE: Project Name: Project Number: Project Manager: Project Description: Project Location: Exist. Bldg. Area gs(: ~rTE ercrpt_BarbeeMill.doc City of Renton Department of Planning / Building / Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE October 11, 2005 Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project LUA05-104, SME, ECF Jill K. Ding, Associate Planner Applicant proposes to restore land along Lake Washington that was historically converted to upland to a sand and gravel beach. The restoration will be accomplished with the following steps: removal of in-water structures (pilings and pier); excavation of approximately 8,500 cubic yards of fill soils to achieve subgrade elevations; installation of toe rock and quarry spall berm; and the importation of sand, gravel, and rock materials for beach construction. Submitted drawings show future public access would be provided to the beach via an Open Space Tract (Tract E). (Project Description continued on following page) 4101 Lake Washington Blvd N (King County Parcel Nos. 3224056666 and 3224059034) N/A Site Area: 28,300 sq. ft. (0.65 acres) ... z City of Renton PIBIPW Department e BARBEE MILL SHORELINE RESTORATION REPORT AND DECISION OF (OCTOBER 11,2005) PROJECT DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND (CONTINUED) EnViemtal Review Commiuee Staff Report LUAOS-I04, SME, ECF Page2 of2 A lumber mill, previously operated by the Barbee Mill Co., is currently located on the subject site. The mill ceased operations in the late 1990s. Between approximately 1944 and 1957, approximately 550 linear feet of uplands were created on the waterward side of the Inner Harbor Line. Most of this area is paved, and two former lumber mill buildings are located within the lease area footprint. A timber bulkhead protects the southern 300 linear feet of shoreline fill. A 135-foot long by 25-foot wide timber pier separates this area from the northern 225 feet of shoreline. Approximately 28 non-creosote timber pilings (former boomsticks) on the south side of the pier delineate a former dock that has recently been removed. The northern shoreline is steeply sloping and does not currently have a bulkhead, although a row of pilings near the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) delineates a bulkhead that may have existed there historically. The subject site is currently used on an occasional basis for log rafting. B. RECOMMENDATION Based on analYSis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommend that the Responsible Officials make the following Environmental Determination: DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE Issue DNS with 14 day Appeal Period. C. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGA TED. XX Issue DNS-M with 14 day Appeal Period. Issue DNS-M with 15 day Comment Period followed by a 14 day Appeal Period. In compliance with RCW 43.21 C. 240, the following project environmental review addresses only those project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. 1. Earth Impacts: According to the information submitted by the applicant, the existing topography of the upland portion of the subject site is flat, however the proposal is to excavate the fill placed on the subject site and restore the site to a graded beach, which will mimic natural conditions. The soil located behind the bulkhead is clean fill. The substrate waterward of the bulkhead consists of silty sand. The Barbee Mill Company in the summer/fall of 2002 completed sediment dredging and cleanup activities. Approximately 28,140 sq. ft. of impervious surfaces will be removed before soil excavation begins. Pavement will be broken using a tracked excavator with a jackhammer, and the asphalt fragments will be loaded onto trucks and disposed of at an appropriate upland facility. Fill soils will be excavated from behind the bulkhead. Excavation of fill soils will occur either from a barge-mounted clamshell crane, or from the uplands using a track-mounted excavator. All fill will be removed prior to bulkhead removal to control erosion and turbidity. All excavated soils will be placed on-site in the upland private property. Following completion of soil excavation, the bulkhead will be dismantled and untreated timbers will be reused on the upland parcel. A relatively small number of creosote-treated pilings associated with the former de-barking facility at the mill will be disposed at a facility authorized to receive such material. ercrpCBarbeeMill.doc City of Renton PIBIPW Department e BARBEE MILL SHORELINE RESTORATION REPORT AND DECISION OF (OCTOBER 11.2005) EnVi_nlat Review Committee Staff Reporr LUAOS-I04, SME, ECF Page30f3 A permanent line of toe rock will be installed on the landward side of the Inner Harbor Line/property line as a method of erosion control. Approximately 700 cubic yards of rock will be placed as toe rock, which will consist of 900-1,200 Ib individual stones, which will be half buried. Toe rock will be bedded in a 6-inch minimum layer of 2 to 4-inch crushed rock. Approximately 12 inches of toe rock will be exposed above the OHWM. Temporary measures to control erosion above and on the landward side of the toe rock will employ Construction Best Management Practices (Construction BMPs) and will consist of a combination of geotextiles and a graded quarry rock (quarry spall) forming a protective berm. The temporary quarry spall berm will extend 2 feet vertically above the toe rock and have a maximum slope of 2 horizontal to 1 vertical (2H:1 V). The width of the berm will be a minimum of 4 feet, with an additional 2 feet of width for the toe rock, for a total width of approximately 6 feet. The total height of the toe rock and berm will be approximately 3 feet above the OHWM. The underlying soil will be graded to the appropriate slope before beach materials are overlaid. Finished beach slopes will range from up to 20H:1 Von the south beach segment, to 7.5H:1 Von the north segment. These grades would vary in response to existing bathymetry and represent a range of slopes that are suitable and desirable for nearshore habitat and recreational use on Lake Washington. The proposed excavation and grading could result in erosion. Therefore, staff recommends a mitigation measure requiring the applicant to comply with the Department of Ecology's Erosion and Sediment Control Plan outlined in Vol. 11 of the 2001 Stormwater Management Manual during construction. Mitigation Measures: The project will be required to comply with the Department of Ecology's Erosion and Sediment Control Plan outlined in Vol. 11 of the 2001 Stormwater Management Manual during construction. Policy Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations, DOE Stormwater Management Manual 2. Air Impacts: During project construction, on-site emissions will consist of fugitive dust and emissions from construction equipment. There impacts are anticipated to be minor and largely confined near the site. Short-term noise from construction equipment would occur between 7:00 AM and 5:00 PM. The equipment and construction of this project will meet federal, state, and local emissions and noise requirements; therefore no further mitigation is recommended. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation is recommended Nexus: N/A 3. Water Impacts: The subject site abuts Lake Washington, which is a Shoreline of Statewide Significance. A Biological Evaluation prepared by Anchor Environmental, LLC, dated May 2005 was submitted with the application. The Biological Evaluation provides recommendations for the removal of in-water structures, temporary and permanent erosion control measures, and beach construction. The in-water pilings will be removed using a vibratory hammer mounted on a barge. A collar will be fastened around the pile and the pile will be removed by vibrating it out of the sediments. When the pile is released from the sediment, the vibratory hammer will be disengaged and the pile pulled from the water and placed on a barge until the piles are transferred upland. Pilings that break during removal will be directly pulled with a clamshell bucket. The pilings will either be reused or disposed of off-site in accordance with WAC 173-304. A permanent line of toe rock will be installed on the landward side of the Inner Harbor line/property line and will establish the new shoreline edge at OHWM. The toe rock line will also provide a permanent method of erosion control for the subject site. Temporary measures to control erosion will consist of a combination of geotextiles and a graded quarry rock (see section above under earth). Approximately 3,500 cubic yards of sand and gravel will be imported for the construction of the beach. Imported beach materials will include a relatively fine-grained sand/gravel mix (coarse sand up to 1-1/2 inch minus gravel) in the more ercrpCBarbeeMill.doc City of Renton PIBIPW Department e BARBEE MILL SHORELINE RESTORATION REPORT AND DECISION OF (OCTOBER II, 2005) EnViemtal Review Committee Staff Report LUAOS-I04, SME, ECF Page40/4 gently sloping south beach segment, and a coarser pea gravel to 1-1/2 inch minus gravel blend in the steeper north beach segment. At the north and south ends of the beach, rock "beach anchors" are proposed to contain the imported beach materials and prevent longshore transport processes from moving beach materials into much steeper and deeper adjacent areas, The beach anchors will be constructed of imported basalt quarry rock of varying size gradations, The rock will be installed in two to three layers of different gradations to build a stable mass, The beach anchors will extend approximately 20 feet out into the water. The proposal may result in some increased siltation and vibrations within Lake Washington, Therefore, staff recommends a mitigation measure requiring the applicant to comply with the recommendations found in the Biological Evaluation prepared by Anchor Environmental, LLC, dated May 2005. Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the Biological Evaluation prepared by Anchor Environmental, LLC, dated May 2005, Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations. 4. Noise Impacts: The proposed project will result in some additional short-term noise impacts during demolition and construction. The demolition of the existing structures will be accomplished by dismantling and carrying off the pieces rather than by using wrecking eqUipment. The existing pavement will need to be broken apart before it can be hauled away. Generally, noise impacts will come from the operation of the heavy construction equipment. Louder noises from the jackhammers to be used to beak up the concrete will be temporary and of short duration. The applicant indicates that all the construction noise impacts are anticipated to occur during daylight hours, No unusual noise impacts are proposed, which would require further levels of mitigation. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation is recommended. Nexus: N/A 5. Archeological and Cultural Resources Impacts: The subject site was identified by the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe as a high potential for archeological discovery. However, until the early 1900s when Lake Washington was lowered by 9 feet, the subject site was under water. In the event any potential cultural resources are found during excavation/construction, the contractor will be instructed to stop work and contact the appropriate local and state officials and follow established protocol for culturally significant resource finds. Mitigation Measures: In the event that archaeological deposits are found during construction, work shall stop and the contractor(s) shall contact the State Archaeologist at the State of Washington Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, phone (360) 586-3065; and the Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program, phone (253) 939-3311. Policy Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations D. MITIGATION MEASURES 1. The project will be required to comply with the Department of Ecology's Erosion and Sediment Control Plan outlined in Vol. 11 of the 2001 Stormwater Management Manual during construction, 2. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the Biological Evaluation prepared by Anchor Environmental, LLC, dated May 2005. 3. In the event that archaeological deposits are found during construction, work shall stop and the contractor(s) shall contact the State Archaeologist at the State of Washington Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, phone (360) 586-3065; and the Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program, phone (253) 939- 3311. ercrpt_BarbeeMill.doc City of Renton PIBIPW Department e BARBEE MILL SHORELINE RESTORA TWN REPORT AND DECISION OF (OCTOBER II, 2005) E. COMMENTS OF REVIEWING DEPARTMENTS EnVi_ntal Review Committee Staff Report LUAOS-104, SME, ECF Page50/5 The proposal has been circulated to City Departmental/Divisional Reviewers for their review. Where applicable, these comments have been incorporated into the text of this report as Mitigation Measures and/or Notes to Applicant. -X-Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File. __ Copies of all Review Comments are attached to this report. Environmental Determination Appeal Process: Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM October 31, 2005. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510. Advisory Notes to Applicant: The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the environmental determination. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for environmental determinations Planning: 1. The applicant is to obtain applicable City of Renton Construction Permits 2. The applicant is to obtain a City of Renton and possible King County Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Exemption. 3. Other permits from other agencies may be required prior to construction. Required permits may include but are not limited to a Department of Ecology Water Quality Certification, Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Hydraulic Project Approval, and an Army Corps of Engineers Fill Permit. Property Services: 1. No fees are triggered. Plan Review: 1. A construction plan indicating haul route and hours, construction hours and a traffic control plan shall be submitted for approval prior to any permit being issued. Haul hours shall be restricted to 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. unless approved in advance by the Development Services Division. ercrpCBarbeeMill.doc e "'-.... "" e \ I I I l \ • FUTURE REDEVELOPMENT: Future Develo ment I NOT INCLUDED IN BEACH TRACT "E" (Typ,) I I Residential Lot LIne I 1 I l I Future DeveloRment Future Development I I 15' Yard Area (Typ,) Private Beach Access I ' (Typ,) ~gt'i-r:ti~~X7~~~~i;~~ I l \ Inner Harbor Line/Property ine Area (Typ,) I r+S J-_ ~ 1 ___ ~ --'----~" --'r1'~--\' \ , ~ l , , ,',I I. . , >, ::'" .,.! ' '.!J..... >.z:c-"" -'-, :j:2"~1 ; ,~~:~g: .. i . ~ .. T:.~i_(',i ~ ,"f '_,)I '~, ',~.j,. , ",L< 'L'" ',-.. , ""'".1 ... ~ _~~. ~. /,-3.A~~'o):.~ \ /~vY!!!I.r.(J r+A _1-_- ~-'-'-'-=---:---:::::-'_)\-':":'_' _0_",_,_<_' ';;" _ :=:f;"':~:¥+L{"L::':': ~J,~ '~:~~~,~r(: :;~,P~' \ ~ I --'-'., ~o'. , ';, .1) "6_,1Pi'OPO , • Restored Beach: Pea-Gravell -...:::::~ I ---!..2...-::. ~ 0\..""'·' ~-' I 1·112 Inch Minus Gravel I, : I I - 751 Slope DNRAQUATIC" Proposed Beach. :. __ . /1 ........ Sand/Gravel M,x --_. ....... ..-/ 10 LEASE AREA~: 20:1 Slope : Proposed Rock Beach Anchor L - - - - - - - -_____ 1 (TypIcal Each End of Beach) t 15 ~., • ,....---------5 ________ __.. I I ... \ / 4s' -..... Ie" ~ t....... I Existing Building Existing OHWM I --... I, to be Removed (Typ.) (Bulkhead to be Removed) "- ............... '" / I ~ '-... I I'~ '--__ ___ I : ,~ / / / ./ : L " I Existing Pilin~ I to be Removed '-... L _ \.. (Typ.) ....... :;X~S~i~e~~~~d '" "'" '-'-... 4 A' ------10 '--41(/: to/. "1 Sft/t'tIG l'Ot'tl ~ .............. ~ .............. "--..."-- ---- 5 // ---~ ----- ./ / ,/ / / .- . , 20 ~~ SCALE IN FEET <Ill " / /' :t ' j • V; ~~~.tj9L~ SHEET 1 SITE PLAN BARBEE MilL SHORELINE RESTORATION ZONING P!BIPW TJ!CBNICAL SBllVlCBS UIZ8IO+ CDR - - - -Renton dit" Umitll 1,...00 C3 31 T24N R5E E I tONING MAP B~K RESIDENTiAL ~ Resource Conservation ~ Residential 1 dulac g Residential" dulac I R-8 I Residential 8 dulac ~ Residential Manufactured Homes I R-IO I Residential 10 dulac I R-141 Residential 14 dulac I RH-rl Residential Multi-Family IRH-T I Residential Multi-Family Traditional I RH-U I Residential Multi-Family Urban Center- MIXED USE CENTER INDUSI'RlAL ~ Center Village ~ Industrial -Heavy IUC-Ntl Urban Center -North ~ Industrial -Medium IUC-N21 Urban Center -North 2 0 Industrial -Ugbt ~ Center Downtown- ~ CommerCial/Office/Residential <?> Publicly owned COMMERCIAl. ----Renton City Limits ~ Commercial Arterial- [§] Commercial Office- ---Adjacent City Limits _ Book Pages Boundary ~ Commercial Neighborhood • May include Overlay Districts. See Appendix maps. For additional regulations in Overlay Districts. please see RMC 4-3. Printed by Print & Mail Svcs, City of Renton KROll. PAGE PAGE# INDEX SECTITOWNRANGE Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor October 4, 2005 Laura R. Murphy Tribal Archaeologist MuckleshootCultural Resources Program 39015 172nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 CITY L RENTON PlanninglBuildinglPublic Works Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator Subject: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration, City File #LUA05-1 04 Dear Ms. Murphy: Thank you for your letter dated September 29,2004 regarding the above-referenced project. This particular project site was historically underwater until the early 1900s when. the level of Lake Washington wasloweredby~pproximately nine feet. . Additionally, the proposed fill tobe removed was originally plabed'on the subject site betwe~n ~pproximately 1944 and 1957 for the operation of the Barbee Mill. Therefore, we will not be reqUiring a study to be conducted in this particular instance. However, the will apply a standard mitigation measure to the SEPA Determination that should any archaeological deposits or human remains be encountered during the project, construction will immediately cease and he will notify your office as·well as the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. . . Please feel free to contact me at 425-430-7219 should you have al")y questions . regarding this letter. Thank you for your comments regarding the Barbee Mill Restoration project. Sincerely, ----------~-1-05-5-S-o-u~th-G-r-a-dy-W--ay---R-e-n-to-n-,W--as-h-in-g-to-n-9-8-0-55-------------·~ ® This paper oontains 50% recyded material, 30% post consumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE Jill K. Ding Associate Planner MUCKLESHOOT CULTURAL RESOURCES PROGRAM 39015 172nd Avenue S.E.· Auburn, Washington 98092-9763 Phone: (253) 939-3311 • FAX: (253) 876-3312 September 29, 2 05 Development Services Division, City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 RE: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project Dear Ms. Ding: On behalf of the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe's Cultural Resources Committee, I have reviewed the infQrmation sent on September 15, 2005 regarding the proposed Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project and have the following comments. The Barbee Mill property is an area the Tribe has flagged as high potential for archaeological discovery. There is a known village site at the mouth of May Creek that was occupied at Treaty times. There has been a previous archaeological investigation at the Barbee Mill, but the document and its recommendations are not mentioned in the SEP A checklist. In my opinion, the SEP A checklist has not been adequately filled out. The SEPAchecklist also lists an ACOE Section 404 permit that will be required for the project. In the case offederal funds or permits, Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, and its implementing regulations, 36CFR800, are triggered, and will need to be followed to determine if the project will impact any historic properties. The Tribe's Cultural Program will expect to be contacted by the Project Manager for the US Army Corps of Engineers for this project. If the Army Corps of Engineers becomes the lead federal agency, the Tribe will consult with them directly for the project. The Cultural Resources Program does not represent the Wildlife Program and the Fisheries Program which are separate departments under the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe. Please contact these departments for their input on this project. We appreciate the effort to coordinate with the Muckleshoot Tribe prior to site preparation. The destructive nature of construction excavation can often destroy a site and cause delays and unnecessary expense for the contractor. If you have any questions, please contact me at 253-876-3272, or laura.murphy@muckleshoot.nsn.us. Thank you for keeping the Tribe informed. Sincerely, ~W1-Q/~C OilHa~"'o Laura R.Murphy Tribal Archaeologist cc: Stephenie Kramer,· Assistant State Archaeologist, DAHP Jennijer Henning -Fwd: Barbee Mill Shorw Restoration Project LUA05-104 From: To: Date: Subject: Jennifer, Jill Ding Henning, Jennifer 09/30/20058:47:49 AM Fwd: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project LUA05-104 Here are some of the questions I received from the Muckleshoot Tribe. Page 1 Jill K. Ding ,-"-<.>-~' . ,~-,>-~-.. ~.~.< .' '_-.. , •• -_. ~ Associate Planner . " " ' ,." ' i .. ~ <, :.) ,. City of Renton ,., ~~. Ph: (425) 430-7219 ,"-) > ::> (~:::e:3::::~ <KarenWalter@muc~eshoot.nsn.us> 091291 .;~6.;-, ''-l~I/00<f7 t, Jill . ,. ',,',' ,::. U"< Th~nk you so much for getting the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fish _~ " ,} .:.'" . ' Division a copy of the Biological Evaluation prepared for the abo~ :. ;,: .. ;. '; referenced project. Based on a review of the BE and the envirom' \" ," ,', ""'. checklist, we have a couple of questions. I, .. ,,,, ....,;:.,'.:-:~,. ".j:' ·~1; . ' 'I I 1 , i 1. What is the purpose of the toe rock and quarry spall berm to bJ,,: '.:";;'. ' .. ",;:<-~." s . -,' placed landward of the Inner Harbor Line? I' .~ .:~ .:,: . ; ,'" ;. ',:, i 2. Why do the BE and checklist fail to discuss impacts to shorelinl" . "';,' -, .• ~ .,:'-'.1 processes and lakeshore riparian areas that may occur as the re~: ,';;<o~', .,< ,.' ';"~ this toe rock and berm? I' .. :. : .. __ ._:-,~:_. _.e ...... ~·-.~~: .. "~_~,,~:~ 3. Is there an analysis to demonstrate that the beach anchors are necessary to prevent longshore processes? What is the concern about allowing longshore transport processes to occur? 4. Where is the analysis in the BE and checklist that assesses potential impacts to increasing salmonid predator habitat due to these beach anchors? 5. Why is the restoration proposal being considered separately from the proposed upland development? How will potential cumulative impacts from the two proposals be addressed? We appreciate your response to these questions as they will help us better understand the project and determine potential impacts to salmonids. Karen Walter Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division 253-876-3116 09/30/2005 FRI 15:47 FAX 2538763312 .' ' e MUCKLESHOOT CULTURAL RESOURCES PROGRAM 39015 172nd Avenue S.E .• Auburn, Washington 98092-9763 ~002/002 Phone: (253) 939-3311 • FAX: (253) 876-3312 September 29,2 Jill K. Ding Associate Planner Development Services Division, City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, W A 98055 RE: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project Dear Ms. Ding: On behalf of the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe's Cultural Resources Committee, I have reviewed the information sent on September 15,2005 regarding the proposed Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project and have the following comments. The Barbee Mill property is an area the Tribe has flagged as high potential for archaeological discovery. There is a known village site at the mouth of May Creek that was occupied at Treaty times. There has been a previous archaeological investigation at the Barbee Mill, but the document and its recommendations are not mentioned in the SEPA checklist. In my opinion, the SEP A checklist has not been adequately filled out. The SEP A checklist also lists an ACOE Section 404 permit that will be required for the project. In the case offed.era! funds or permits, Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, and its implementing regulations, 36CFR800, are triggered, and will need to be followed to determine if the project will impact any historic properties. The Tribe's Cultural Program will expect to be contacted by the Project Manager for the US Army Corps of Engineers for this project. If the Army Corps of Engineers becomes the lead federal. agency. the Tribe will consult with them directly for the project. The Cultural Resources Program does not represent the Wildlife Program and the Fisheries Program which are separate depamnents under the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe. Please contact these departments for their input on this project. We appreciate the effort to coordinate with the Muckleshoot Tribe prior to site preparation. The destructive nature of construction excavation can often destroy a site and cause delays and unnecessary expense for the contractor. If you have any questions, please contact me at 253-816-3272, or lauramurohy@muckleshoot.nsn.us. Thank you for keeping the Tribe informed. Sincerely, ~ Laura R Murphy Tribal Archaeologist cc: Stephenie Kramer, Assistant State Archaeologist, DAHP DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM October 5, 2005 Jill Ding Juliana Fries x:7278 BARBEE MILL SHORELINE RESTORATION -LUA 05-104 4202 Lake Washington Blvd I have reviewed the application for the shoreline restoration and have the following comments: GENERAL 1. The applicant shall be required to provide a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESCP) designed pursuant to the Department of Ecology's Erosion and Sediment Control Requirements, outlined in Volume II of the 2001 Stormwater Management Manual. This condition shall be subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division .. 2. A construction plan indicating haul route and hours, construction hours and a traffic control plan shall be submitted for approval prior to any permit being issued. Haul hours shall be restricted to 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. unless approved in advance by the Development Services Division. cc: Kayren Kittrick H :\Division.s\Develop.ser\Dev&plan. ing\PROJECTS\05-1 04.Jill\plan review.doc\cor City of Re.n Department of Planning / Building / Public .S ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: 'fb.n 1<.e\lfe.;..~ COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 29, 2005 APPLICATION NO: LUA05-104, SME, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 15, 2005 APPLICANT: Robert Cugini PROJECT MANAGER: Jill DinQ PROJECT TITLE: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project PLAN REVIEW: Jan lilian SITE AREA: 28,300 square feet BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A LOCATION: 4101 Lake Washington Blvd N WORK ORDER NO: 77471 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Aquatic land that was historically converted to upland during the operation of the Barbee Mill, which ceased operations in the late 1990's, is proposed to be restored to a sand and gravel beach. The restoration plan would be accomplished with the following steps: demolition and removal of upland lumber mill facilities; removal of in-water structures (pilings and pier); excavation of fill soils to achieve subgrade elevations; installation of toe rock and quarry spall berm; and the importation of sand, gravel, and rock materials for beach construction. The project area is located within the Urban Shoreline Designation. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public SeNices Energy/ Natural Resources Historic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS ~v We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas wh r additional informa n is needed to properly assess this proposal. Date City of Re. Department of Planning / Building / Public .s ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT~~~ lSY\ COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 29, 2005 APPLICATION NO: LUA05-104, SME, ~CF DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 15,2005 APPLICANT: Robert Cugini PROJECT MANAGER: Jill Ding PROJECT TITLE: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project SITE AREA: 28,300 square feet BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A LOCATION: 4101 Lake Washington Blvd N WORK ORDER NO: 77471 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Aquatic land that was historically converted to upland during the operation of the Barbee Mill, which ceased operations in the late 1990's, is proposed to be restored to a sand and gravel beach. The restoration plan would be accomplished with the following steps: demolition and removal of upland lumber mill facilities; removal of in-water structures (pilings and pier); excavation of fill soils to achieve subgrade elevations; installation of toe rock and quarry spall berm; and the importation of sand, gravel, and rock materials for beach construction. The project area is located within the Urban Shoreline Designation. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public SeNices Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date City of Re. Department of Planning / Building / Public .s ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Sv.(·f~jl ~ i~""" COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 29, 2005 APPLICATION NO: LUA05-104, SME, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 15,2005 APPLICANT: Robert Cugini PROJECT MANAGER: Jill Ding PROJECT TITLE: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project PLAN REVIEW: . .JaR lilian (J u J I an CA... SITE AREA: 28,300 square feet BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A LOCATION: 4101 Lake Washington Blvd N WORK ORDER NO: 77471 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Aquatic land that was historically converted to upland during the operation of the Barbee Mill, which ceased operations in the late 1990's, is proposed to be restored to a sand and gravel beach. The restoration plan would be accomplished with the following steps: demolition and removal of upland lumber mill facilities; removal of in-water structures (pilings and pier); excavation of fill soils to achieve subgrade elevations; installation of toe rock and quarry spall berm; and the importation of sand, gravel, and rock materials for beach construction. The project area is located within the Urban Shoreline Designation. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housinq Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS ~ ai:tcx-ckd We have eviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or re additional informati is needed to properly assess this proposal. IO-S-O~ Date City of ReA Department of Planning / Building / Public .S ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: -~ h~ COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 29, 2005 APPLICATION NO: LUA05-104, SME, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: I "'1:1;" I ~~~n 'C:;:O ~ APPLICANT: Robert Cugini PROJECT MANAGEf ~II~II ~ l~ ts U \jj ~ n PROJECT TITLE: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration PrOlect PLAN REVIEW: Jan Ili~n~ II! SITE AREA: 28,300 square feet BUILDING AREA (gl] J~):t~1A SEP 15 2005 I~ I I I LOCATION: 4101 Lake Washington Blvd N WORK ORDER NO: 177471~ • . . • .. 'J,I ~ Y Ut-M.t~ I UI~ ~! SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Aquatic land that was historically converted to upland du Ing the ope~aUotl:)QfHlile~earbee Mill, hich ceased operati~ns in the la~e 1990's, is prop~sed to be restored to a sand an~ gra,:,':l~ U~i:1\;II. I.", '''''''VI a,;vl I-lI<," .v ... ld be accomplished with the following steps: demolition and removal of upland lumber mill facilities; removal of in-water structures (pilings and pier); excavation of fill soils to achieve subgrade elevations; installation of toe rock and quarry spall berm; and the importation of sand, gravel, and rock materials for beach construction. The project area is located within the Urban Shoreline Designation. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth HousiflJL Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public SeNices Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources PreseNation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly a ess this proposal. Signature of Director or Authoriz Date City of ReA Department of Planning / Building / Public .5 ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: ~ ~4-"'4 SV'CS APPLICATION NO: LUA05-104, SME, ECF~ APPLICANT: Robert Cugini PROJECT TITLE: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project SITE AREA: 28,300 square feet LOCATION: 4101 Lake Washington Blvd N COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 29, 2005 DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 15, 201il&_ ...... PROJECT MANAGER: Jill Ding nCl,«:'VED PLAN REVIEW: Jan lilian BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A WORK ORDER NO: 77471 ~ L.UU.) r--" , u, Ht:NTON UTILITY SYSTEMS SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Aquatic land that was historically converted to upland during the operation of the Barbee Mill, which ceased operations in the late 1990's, is proposed to be restored to a sand and gravel beach. The restoration plan would be accomplished with the following steps: demolition and removal of upland lumber mill facilities; removal of in-water structures (pilings and pier); excavation of fill soils to achieve subgrade elevations; installation of toe rock and quarry spall berm; and the importation of sand, gravel, and rock materials for beach construction. The project area is located within the Urban Shoreline Designation. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housinq Air Aesthetics Water Liqht/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. ~~~DCDMM~ City o.nton Department of Planning I Building I pUb.orks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: r~ COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 29, 2005 APPLICATION NO: LUA05-104, SME, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 15,2005 APPLICANT: Robert CUQini PROJECT MANAGER: Jill DinQ PROJECT TITLE: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project PLAN REVIEW: Jan lilian SITE AREA: 28,300 square feet BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A LOCATION: 4101 Lake Washington Blvd N WORK ORDER NO: 77471 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Aquatic land that was historically converted to upland during the operation of the Barbee Mill, which ceased operations in the late 1990's, is proposed to be restored to a sand and gravel beach. The restoration plan would be accomplished with the following steps: demolition and removal of upland lumber mill facilities; removal of in-water structures (pilings and pier); excavation of fill soils to achieve subgrade elevations; installation of toe rock and quarry spall berm; and the importation of sand, gravel, and rock materials for beach construction. The project area is located within the Urban Shoreline DeSignation. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals TransPQt1ation Environmental Health Public SeNices Energy/ HistOric/Cultural Natural Resources PreseNation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS ~/LO~ rIv {;;1h. We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional info ion is needed to properly assess this proposal. Date City o.nton Department of Planning / Building / pUb.orks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: ~A.D..h)~ COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 29, 2005 APPLICATION NO: LUA05-104, SME, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 15, 2005 APPLICANT: Robert Cugini PROJECT MANAGER: Jill Ding PROJECT TITLE: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project PLAN REVIEW: Jan lilian SITE AREA: 28,300 square feet BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A LOCATION: 4101 Lake Washington Blvd N WORK ORDER NO: 77471 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Aquatic land that was historically converted to upland during the operation of the Barbee Mill,' which ceased operations in the late 1990's, is proposed to be restored to a sand and gravel beach. The restoration plan would be accomplished with the following steps: demolition and removal of upland lumber mill facilities; removal of in-water structures (pilings and pier); excavation of fill soils to achieve subgrade elevations; installation of toe rock and quarry spall berm; and the importation of sand, gravel, and rock materials for beach construction. The project area is located within the Urban Shoreline Designation. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public SeNices Energy! Natural Resources Historic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where ditional information is needed 0 properly assess this proposal. NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED (DNS-M) DATE: September 15, 2005 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA05·104. SME. ECF PROJECT NAME: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Aquatic land that was historically converted to upland during the operation of the Barbee Mill, which ceased operations in the late 1990's, is proposed to be restored to a sand and gravel beach. The restoration plan would be accomplished with the following steps: demolition and removal of upland lumber mill facilities; removal of in-water structures (pilings and pier); excavation of fill soils to achieve subgrade elevations; installation of toe rock and quarry spall berm; and the importation of sand, gravel, and rock materials for beach construction. The project ar98 is located within the Urban Shoreline DesignatIon. PROJECT LOCATION: 4101 Lake Washington Blvd N OPTIONAL DETERMINATlON OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE. MITIGATED (DN5-M): As the Lead Agency, the City at Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as pennitted under the RCW 43.21C.l10. the City of Renton is using the Optional ONS-M process to give notice that a DNS- M is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS-M are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination 01 Non-Significance- Mitigated (ONS-M). A 14-day appeal period w1l1 follow the issuance of the DNS-M. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: NonCE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: August 26, 2005 September 15. 2005 APPLICANTJPROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Kristin Noreen, Anchor Environmental, LLC; Tel: (206) 287-9130 Eml: knoreenOanchorenv.com PermltalRevlew Requested: Environmental (SEPA) Review, Shoreline Exemption Other Permits which may be required: Shoreline Exemption Permit Requested Studies: SEPA Checklist, Biological Evaluation Location where application may be reviewed: PlannlnglBulldlnglPubllc Works Department. Development Services Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Zonlng/Land Use: Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Development Regulations Used For Profect Mitigation: The subject site is designated Residential Single-Family on the City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and Residential - B (A-B) on the City's Zoning Map. Environmental (SEPA) Checklist The project will be subject to the City's SEPA ordinance, AMC 4-3-090 Shoreline Master Program and RMC 4-4-030 Development GUidelines and Regulations and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. I Proposed MItigation Measures: The following MitIgation Measures will Hkely be imposed on the proposed project. These recommended Mitigation Measures address project impacts not covered by existing codes and regulations as cited above. The project w{l/ be required to comply with the Department of Ecology's Erosion and Sediment Control Plan outlined in Vol. 11 of the 2001 Storrnwater Management Manual during construction. The project shall comply with the recommendations found in the Biological Evaluation, prepared by Anchor Environmental, LLC, dated May 2005. Comments on the above application must be submftted In writing to Jill Ding, Associate Planner, Development Servl~es Olvlslo~, 1055 South G.rady Way, Renton, WA 98055, by 5:00 PM on September 29, 2005. If you have questions about thiS proposal, or Wish to be made a party of record and receIve additional notification by mail contact the Project Manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notIfied of any decision on this project. CONTACT PERSON: Jill K. DIng, Assoclata Planner; Tel: (425) 430-7219 PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION If you would like to be m~de a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project. complete thiS form and return to: City of Renton, Development Planning, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Name/File No.: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration ProjectlLUA05-104, SME, ECF NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: ________________________ _ TELEPHONE NO.: ________ _ CERTIFICATION ""'~"""""\ --AlE:." ~~~: ..... -~~\ (\ L ~ .,. ~ ~ •. ;j,\ON €":t-.-~ I. I, ~ ~r4n ,hereby certify that ~ copies of the above qr;~m~t 1AR' ..<)(~"'~\ were posted by me in ~ conspicuous places or nearby the described prope~~~ ~c:....-( ~ ~ ~ d __ ~ \~ PUBUC ... ? } SIGNED: OjQ. ~ I,~. a ,;)1{) •• > . ...0 ' .. f,'" ~ 19~' .. ·· 0 .-'\~ ...... -~:~:- ATIEST: Subscribed and sworn before me, a Notary Public, in and for the State of Washington residing in \\",OFWpS_---~cilj12 DATE: 9/151 oS _St_t_4_~ ___ , on the _1jAq __ day Of_S_tpi:tf'Yl--'--__ ~ ___ _ NOTARY PUBLIC SIGNATURE: ., . .crrVOFRENTON CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 1Sth day of September, 200S, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Acceptance Letter, NOA, Environmental Checkslist, & PMT's documents. This information was sent to: Agencies -Env. Checklist, NOA, & PMT's Robert Cugini -Accpt Ltr & NOA Kristin Noreen, Anchor Environmental, LLC- Accpt Ltr Washington State Dept. of Natural Resources- Acc Ltr Surrounding Property Owners (Signature of Sender);~ ~ STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) See Attached Applicant Contact Owner See Attached I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy Tucker ~--''''''''''''\\, signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the,,~~.I)~~~~\ purposes mentioned in the instrument. ~ ;' #",,#\ON €'..r~" ~~ Ii a /)/AI~ {~/-~ O:iAR'(~'·.~'il ~ I"'~-(0.(' VVLo-L ~ O.:!I~ ,.. Dated: -c (.A.V ) . I. « : 0 _._ en: : Notary Public in and for the Sate of waS~)ng1(?n PUB\..\0 ..: ~} ". .Xl··O, Jldn~h... Au,y~#(~r-""~$:.-?;.1tt~<V .7 __ 10 '-0 r \, Qp Wf'f' _--o -, '-", .............. , .... Notary (Print): My appointment expires: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project LUAOS-104, SME, ECF template -affidavit of service by mailing Dept. of Ecology " Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 WSDOT Northwest Region" Attn: Ramin Pazooki King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers" Seattle District Office Attn: SEPA Reviewer PO Box C-3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Jamey Taylor" Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Servo Attn: SEPA Section 900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 Metro Transit Senior Environmental Planner Gary Kriedt AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERe DETERMINATIONS) WDFW -Stewart Reinbold" Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. " c/o Department of Ecology Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer 3190 160th Ave SE 39015 -172nd Avenue SE Bellevue, WA 98008 Auburn, WA 98092 Duwamish Tribal Office" Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program" 4717 W Marginal Way SW Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert Seattle, WA 98106-1514 39015 172nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 KC Wastewater Treatment Division" Office of Archaeology & Historic Environmental Planning Supervisor Preservation" Ms. Shirley Marroquin Attn: Stephanie Kramer 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 PO Box 48343 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 Olympia, W A 98504-8343 City of Newcastle City of Kent Attn: Mr. Micheal E. Nicholson Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director 13020 SE 72nd Place 220 Fourth Avenue South Newcastle, WA 98059 Kent, WA 98032-5895 Puget Sound Energy City of Tukwila Municipal Liason Manager Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official Joe Jainga 6300 Southcenter Blvd. 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-01W Tukwila, WA 98188 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Bellevue, WA 98009-0868 Seattle Public Utilities Real Estate Services Title Examiner 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities will need to be sent a copy of the checklist, PMT's, and the notice of application. " Also note, do not mail Jamey Taylor any of the notices she gets hers from the web. Only send her the ERC Determination paperwork. template -affidavit of service by mailing •• 334270000501 BARBEE FOREST PRODUCTS INC PO BOX 359 RENTON WA 98057 362916002003 DENISON STEVEN+ELIZABETH 1100 N 38TH ST RENTON WA 98056 334270041802 HERTEL MARSHA JANICE 3836 LK WASH BL N RENTON WA 98056 334270041505 HUNT TIMOTHY ALLAN+HUNT JEN 1129 N 40TH ST RENTON WA 98056 334270042701 NICOLI BRUNO I & SARAH C 3404 BURNED AV N RENTON WA 98056 334270041406 QAASIM TASLEEM T 3830 LAKE WASHINGTON BL N RENTON WA 98056 362916004009 TANNER MARGARET A 1108 N 38TH ST RENTON WA 98056 334270007001 BOYDSTON TONY 3920 NE 11TH PL RENTON WA 98056 334270041000 DENNEY ROBERT K+NANCY H 3818 LAKE WASH BL N RENTON WA 98056 322405903608 HICKS GARDNER W 4008 LAKE WASH BL N # 4 RENTON WA 98056 362916001005 KOLESAR LARRY+SUSAN M 1030 NORTH 38TH ST RENTON WA 98056 334270041208 PETED J SCOD 3824 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N RENTON WA 98056 362916003001 RANZ MARK K 1106 N 38TH ST RENTON WA 98056 334270010005 TASCA JAM ES G 14805 SE JONES PL RENTON WA 98058 05-Ia.} 322405900505 BURLINGTON NORTHRN SANTA FE ADN: PROP TAX PO BOX 96189 FORT WORTH TX 76161 334270012605 ERIKSON BRUCE E+MARY R 3815 LK WASHINGTON BL N RENTON WA 98056 334270042503 HUNT THOMAS R+CARYL J 1125 N 40TH ST RENTON WA 98056 334270011003 NELSON FRITZ W 3825 LAKE WASHINGTON BL N RENTON WA 98056 362916007002 PIPKIN GARY C & YVONNE M 1120 N 38TH RENTON WA 98056 334270012506 SIVESIND R STANLEY RIGGS JAYNE 3821 LAKE WASHINGTON BL N RENTON WA 98056 334270008009 ZILMER MARK E+ROSEMARY 3837 LAKE WASHINGTON BL N RENTON WA 98056 NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED (DNS-M) DATE: September 15, 2005 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA05-104, SME, ECF PROJECT NAME: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Aquatic land that was historically converted to upland during the operation of the Barbee Mill, which ceased operations in the late 1990's, is proposed to be restored to a sand and gravel beach. The restoration plan would be accomplished with the following steps: demolition and removal of upland lumber mill facilities; removal of in-water structures (pilings and pier); excavation of fill soils to achieve subgrade elevations; installation of toe rock and quarry spall berm; and the importation of sand, gravel, and rock materials for beach construction. The project area is located within the Urban Shoreline Designation. PROJECT LOCATION: 4101 Lake Washington Blvd N OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE, MITIGATED (DNS-M): As the Lead Agency, the City of Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 43.21 C.11 0, the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS-M process to give notice that a DNS- M is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS-M are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non-Significance- Mitigated (DNS-M). A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS-M. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: August 26, 2005 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: September 15, 2005 APPLICANTIPROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Kristin Noreen, Anchor Environmental, LLC; Tel: (206) 287-9130 Eml: knoreen@anchorenv.com Permits/Review Requested: Other Permits which may be required: Requested Studies: Location where application may be reviewed: CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Zoning/Land Use: Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Deveiopment Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: Proposed Mitigation Measures: Environmental (SEPA) Review, Shoreline Exemption Shoreline Exemption Permit SEPA Checklist, Biological Evaluation Planning/BulidinglPublic Works Department, Development Services Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 The subject site is designated Residential Single-Family on the City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and Residential - B (R-B) on the City's Zoning Map. Environmental (SEPA) Checklist The project will be subject to the City's SEPA ordinance, RMC 4-3-090 Shoreline Master Program and RMC 4-4-030 Development Guidelines and Regulations and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. The following Mitigation Measures will likely be imposed on the proposed project. These recommended Mitigation Measures address project impacts not covered by existing codes and regulations as cited above. The project will be required to comply with the Department of Ecology's Erosion and Sediment Control Plan outlined in Vol. 11 of the 2001 Stormwater Management Manual during construction. The project shall comply with the recommendations found in the Biological Evaluation, prepared by Anchor Environmental, LLC, dated May 2005. I Comments on the above application must be submitted In writing to Jill Ding, Associate Planner, Development Services Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055, by 5:00 PM on September ·29, 2005. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail, contact the Project Manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. CONTACT PERSON: Jill K. Ding, Associate Planner; Tel: (425) 430-7219 I PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION I SI i E .J--~-:::=.rl D""Cr~'~1p,' n.,i[ !/ W·_\·c::J _'M I, c==:o -! r:n ItGrbn 11111/ c.o.l'?t ... .;:! ~;. If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, Development Planning, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Name/File No.: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration ProjecVLUA05-104, SME, ECF NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO.: Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor CITY.F RENTON Planning/BUildinglPublic Works Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator September 15, 2005 Kristin Noreen Anchor Environmental, LLC 1423 Third Avenue #300 Seattle, WA 98101 Subject: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project LUA05-104, SME, ECF Dear Ms. Noreen: The Development Planning Section of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, is accepted for review. . It is tentatively schedul~d for consideration by the Environmental Review Committee on October 11, 2005. Prior to that review~ YOLJy/iUbe notified if any ~dditional' information is required to continue processing YOlU' appl,ication. Please contact meat (425) 430-7219 if you have any questions. Sincerely, c;t41f~ /' 0 (I Jill K. Ding . . Associate Planner cc: Washington State Dept. of Natural Resources / Owner Robert Cugini / Applicant ----------~I-O-55-S-0-u-th-G-r-ad-y-W-a-y---R-e-nt-o-n,-W-a-Sh-i-ng-t-on--98-0-5-5------------~ * This paper contains 50% recycled matenal, 30% post consumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE City of Renton LAND USE PERMIT AUG 262005 MASTER APPLICA TIOrJlECEIVED PROPERTY OWNER(S) PROJECT INFORMATION NAME: c/o Loren Stern,Washington State PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: Dept. of Natural Resources (DNR) Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project ADDRESS: 1111 Washington St. SE, MS 47027 PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION AND ZIP CODE: 4101 Lake Washington Blvd. N., Renton 98056 CITY: Olympia ZIP: 98504-7027 KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): 3224056666; 3224059034 TELEPHONE NUMBER: 360-902-1240 APPLICANT (if other than owner) EXISTING LAND USE(S): Lumber mill (defunct) NAME: Robert Cugini PROPOSED LAND USE(S): Aquatic land that was historically converted to upland is proposed to be COMPANY (if applicable): Barbee Mill Co. restored to a sand and gravel beach. EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: ADDRESS: 4101 Lake Washington Blvd. N. Center Office/Residential PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION CITY: Renton ZIP: 98056 (if applicable): N/A TELEPHONE NUMBER 425-226-3900 EXISTING ZONING: Urban PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): N/A CONTACT PERSON SITE AREA (in square feet): 28,300 fe (0.65 acre) NAME: Kristin Noreen SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ROADWAYS TO BE DEDICATED C..C?MPANY (if applicable): Anchor Environmental, L.L.C. FOR SUBDIVISIONS OR PRIVATE STREETS SERVING THREE LOTS OR MORE (if applicable): N/A PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET ADDRESS: 1423 Third Ave., Suite 300 ACRE (if applicable): N/A CITY: Seattle ZIP: 98101 NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable): N/A TELEPHONE NUMBER AND E-MAIL ADDRESS: 206-287 -9130; knoreen@anchorenv.com NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): N/A Q:web/pw/devserv/fonns/planning/masterapp.doc 08111105 PI :CT INFOR NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): N/A SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): N/A SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): N/A SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): N/A SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): N/A NET FLOOR AREA OF NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): N/A NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): N/A MATION (contin.) PROJECT VALUE: $581,500 IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): o AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA ONE o AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA TWO o FLOOD HAZARD AREA sq. ft. o GEOLOGIC HAZARD sq. ft. o HABITAT CONSERVATION sq. ft. o SHORELINE STREAMS AND LAKES 28,300 sq. ft. o WETLANDS sq. ft. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY (Attach legal description on separate sheet with the following information included) SITUATED IN THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 24N, RANGE 5E, IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. TYPE OF APPLICATION & FEES List all land use applications being applied for: 1. Shoreline Exemption t(C 3. 2. en((rt'fY1tnen~ /2eNreuJ 4. Staff will calculate applicable fees and postage: $ L()O() d~ AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, Robert Cugini, declare that I am (please check one) X the current owner of the property involved in this application or __ the authorized representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. (Signatu of 0V1lLirAlX~~tro NOTARY PUBUC STATE OF WASHINGTON COMMISSION EXPIRES JUNE 29, 2009 Q:web/pw/devserv/fonns/planning/masterapp.doc I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that RObe .... t C Ug i 71 ., signed this instrument and acknowledged it to b@her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary (print),_....:....VV-'------, .L..:JI......!..,--='1:...:....:1'Y)'-!..----!....JL_--,)j-,,{J~ /, -2Q -0° My appointment expires: ___ <=' ___ -.J-.ll...-__ -=--, 08/11105 · ............ -',- .' . .-----~.------~--------- STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Brian J. Boyle Commissioner of Publfc Lands Olympia. Washington 98504 AOUATICLANOS LEASE NO. 22·090004 BY THIS LEASE. by and between the STATE OF WASHINGTON. acting by and through the Department of Natural Resources. hereinafter called the Lessor and BARBEE MILL COMPANY, a Washington Corporation. hereinafter called the Lessee, the lessor leases to the Lessee on the terms and conditions as here1nafter set forth the following described tract or parcel of'aquatic lands situate in King County. Washington, to wit: All that portion of the harbor area of Lake Washington lying between the inner and outer harbor lines 1n front of and adjacent to the second class shore lands abutting upon Government Lot 1. Section 32. Township 24 North. Range 5 East. W.M., which harbor area is bounded on the north by the north line of said Government Lot 1 produced westerly to said outer harbor l1ne. and on the south by the south line of said government lot pro- duced westerly to said outer harbor line, containing 17.17 acres, more or less. SECTION 1 OCCUPANCY 1.1 Term. This lease shall commence on the 1st day of December. 1985. and continue to the lsr-day of December. 2003. SECTION 2 USE OF PREMISES 2.1 Permitted Use. The Lessee shall have use of the· leased premises for the purposes of log storage. comprising 16.18 acres; and sawmill. wharf, pier, and associated 109 manufac- turing. shipping, and handling facilities. comprising 0.99 acres as shown on the attached ellhibH and approved by the Lessor: ElIh1bit A -drawing entitled "Barbee Mill Co., Inc •• Kennydale, Washington" dated ~uly 1. 1963. prepared by Kenneth J. Oyler. Engineer. a copy of which is 'attac~ed hereto and which, by this reference. is made a part of this lease .• SECTION 3 PAYMENT 3.1 Rent. ~ Annual Rent. Initial ~nnual rent 1n the amount of $4.145.00. and subsequent . annual rent. as determ1ned by the Lessor in accordance with Chapter 221, Laws of 1984 (ReW 79.90.450 -.902), or as amended by subsequent legislation. is due and payable in advance by the Lessee to the Lessor and is the essence of this lease. and 1s a condition precedent to the continuance of this' lease or any rights thereunder, Payment is to be to the Department of Natural Resources, Olympia. Wash1ngton, 98504. (2) Inflation Adjustment. After payment of the initial rent, annual rent Shall be adjusted each year thereafter according to the change in. the Producer Price Index. as pro- vided by regulations of the Department of Natural Resources. (3) Interest Penalty for'Past Due Rent Balances. A one percent charge. per month. shall be due to Lessor. from lessee. on any rent balance which is more than thirty days past due. 3.2 Leasehold Tax. The Lessee shall pay to the Lessor at Olympia, Washington 98504. the' leasehold tax. if appl icable. as set forth in chapter 61 .• Laws of 1976. 2nd Ex. Sass •• or as may be amended. The tax shall be due and payable at the same time the rental charged herein is due and payable. Failure to pay said tax when due and payable shall be con- sidered a breach of the provisions of this lease and the Lessor shall"be entitled to all remedies they are entitled to by law. and the remedies provided herein for a breach of a provision of this lease. Any delinquent taxes shall be a debt to the Lessor and in the event the'Lessor is subject to any penalties or interest because of the failure of the Lessee to pay such taxes. such penalties and interest shall be payable by the Lessee to the Lessor and shall be considered a debt to the Lessor. In the event the Lessor suffers any costs of whatsoever nature F including attorney fees. or other costs of litigation in collecting said tax, such costs shall be payable by the Lessee and shall be considered a debt due and owing to the Lessor by the Lessee. App. No. 22-090004 " -1- .... :, A . . ' , . ., .... ~ ~ lAKE J1I.: ! .'. iIISHI#ISroN --~'-'~~-... i • ,", ." '., .. ' \ \ ~.!:I L· ... ; \ '\\-~ ,-, \~ .. _ .... -_ ... + _ .... _. .'. .' j hiH ..:;p.;;s" I" ' .,--.. -.• 1,. -..:. \ . . _ _ .. ' '. \ t~ ... , . ...:. . .:;eli' .... '-.~~ \ i I ... ,." \ • F \;. --~).--r- ., I f\ ;~ \" '! ~~ -- '. I' • .. : .... :; .. J .... : .. . ',' :'1 .. ' <I--~s~.======~~=-__ ~ ___ .z;, .' . . '. .' .. :\ . .:.. ... . .' .':. .. ' ," .' ',' "': ..... ',' a .... ' .: '.~. :::: \ ..... "" . . .... ...... . t t ........ -...... -.. --. ~ " ........ l:: ~ liU:",. "_.L . ,.: ." ytt- • flo; ,,'.:. \ t -,' ,0 •• ~ ! .'!1 :1.':°·"" ••. '. I', ... ~ ." '.' • ,.', ~ ·::~HIBi7 :A .EVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION • WAIVER~F SUBMITTAL REQUIRE1VIENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS This requirement may be waived by: 1. Property Services Section PROJECT NAME: t:2&r1YJ/ IJJd£ JIJO"U~Zhr 2. Public Works Plan Review Section 3. Building Section 4. Development Planning Section DATE: ----l..O.L...j....Jo/()L-5 ____ _ I O:\WES\Pw\OEVSERv\Forms\Planning\waiver.xls 07/29/2005 I • DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISI0a. WAIV~ OF SUBMITTAL REQU!M:MENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS Applicant Agreement Statement 2 AND 3 Inventory of Existing Sites 2 AND 3 Lease Agreement, Draft 2 AND 3 Map of Existing Site Conditions 2 AND 3 Map of View Area 2 AND 3 Photosimulations 2 AND 3 This requirement may be waived by: 1. Property Services Section PROJECT NAME: 2. Public Works Plan Review sectiT~~ !: ~~~~~~~:~:i~~anning Seclion Il~;~~oT~l~o~;D DATE t&utbu-i?t:e!! Jkut~: ud: y/os- I 1 ha'v, 1,;;;:' -,~~---------- Q:\WE8\Pw\OEVSERv\Forms\Planning\waiver.xls 07/29/2005 , August 25, 2004 Ms. Laureen Nicolay, AICP Development Services Division City of Renton Renton City Hall, 6th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washington 98055 Re: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project Dear Laureen: e DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY ,oF RENTON AUG 262005 RECEIVED 1423 3rd Avenue, Suite 300 Seattle, WA 98101 Phone 206.287.9130 Fax 206.287.9131 www.anchorenv.com I've enclosed the submittal packages for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (SSDP) exemption and for State Environmental Policy Act (SEP A) environmental review. As you know, the Barbee Mill Company wishes to vacate an aquatic land lease that they have held with the Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) since the 1940s. Between approximately 1944 and 1957, approximately 550 linear feet of uplands were created on the waterward side of the Inner Harbor Line by filling behind a bulkhead. Lumber mill facilities were built on this created upland. Overwater dock structures and associated piling were also installed. The Barbee Mill Company proposes to remove the mill and dock structures and restore the created upland to aquatic habitat up to the Inner Harbor Line. A letter of support for this project by the DNR is attached. We believe the SSDP exemption is appropriate because the project meets two of the City of Renton's criteria for exemption: • It is a watershed restoration project, consistent with the Watershed Restoration Plan for WRIA 8, and endorsed by one of the WRIA 8 Steering Committee agencies. • It is intended to improve fish habitat and fish passage. While the project did not fall under a categorical exemption for SEPA, we hope that the nature of the project and the support from DNR will allow for expedited review and approval. The applicant wishes to begin work in November of this year. « -' Laureen Nicolay, City of Renton August 25, 2005 Page 2 If you have any questions or need further information, you may call me at 206-903-3337, or Clay Patmont at 206-287-9130. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, ~7JM~ Kristin Noreen Anchor Environmental, L.L.c. Cc: Robert Cugini, Barbee Mill Company WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENTOF Natural Resources DOUG SUTHERLAND Commissioner of Public Lands May 16,2005 Lynn T. Manolopoulos Davis Wright Tremaine 777 108th Avenue N.E., Suite 2300 Bellevue, W A 98004 Subject: Barbee Mill Restoration Plan for State-Owned Aquatic Lands Dear Ms. Manolopoulos: I am writing to express my support for the proposed Barbee Mill Restoration Project on state-owned aquatic land (SOAL). The Barbee Forest Products, Inc. has operated pursuant to an Aquatics Lands Lease from the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) number 22-090004. According to the terms of the lease, DNR is requiring the removal and disposal of all Lessee owned improvements located on the 17.17 acres of SOAL. DNR has reviewed the proposed Barbee Mill Restoration Project, and offers the following comments in support of the project. The Department encourages moving forward with the objective to restore and enhance fish and wildlife habitat on SOAL. The proposed project is consistent with the termination requirements of the lease. Components of the project include: 1) Removing any and all structures, improvements, fixtures and refuse including, but not limited to, the buildings, a timber bulkhead, fill materials (including contaminated fill/media, if any) including soils, a pile supported timber pier, tImber pilings, the log boom, and shoreline armoring; 2) Re-grading the shoreline to accommodate a gentler slope; and 3) Providing a stable beach substrate including a sand/gravel mix in the more gently sloping areas, and a range of gravel sizes in more steeply sloping areas. The restoration will provide components that create functional salmon habitat conditions, such as a reduction of over water structures, naturally sloped shoreline, native vegetation, large woody debris, and appropriate sized substrates. DNR strongly supports the Barbee Mill Restoration Project, as it will restore significant habitat on SOAL along the nearshore of Lake Washington. SOUTH PUGET SOUND REGION I 950 FARMAN AVE N I ENUMCLAW, WA 98022-9282 TEL: (360) 825-1631 I FAX: (360) 825-1672 I TTY: (360) 825·6381 Equal Opportunity Employer RECYCLED PAPER -() Lynn T. Manolopoulos May 16,2005 Page 2 DNR recognizes that your client will be applying for the appropriate regulatory pennits for the Barbee Mill Restoration project. Please feel free to share this letter of support with the relevant regulatory agencies and have them direct any questions regarding DNR's involvement in this project to Monica Durkin at (360) 825-1631 extension 2006. cNair, Aquatic fward c: Robert Cugini Campbell Mathewson Region File Aquatic Resources File fml22090004LetterOfSupport ENVmONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 2. Name of applicant: Robert Cugini, Barbee Mill Company 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Contact: Robert Cugini Barbee Mill Company 4101 Lake Washington Blvd. N. Renton, W A 98056 425-226-3900 4. Date checklist prepared: June 3,2005 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): The project will take place in autumn 2005 or the summer 2006 and will take approximately 6 weeks to complete. The project will be completed within the in-water work window of July 16 to December 31,2005. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? H yes, explain. The project will be undertaken to restore the State-Owned Aquatic Land lease portion of the applicant's former mill operation. The project site extends to the adjacent upland parcel, which the applicant wishes to sell for redevelopment. Removal of the mill and subsequent redevelopment will result in the removal of a large amount of impervious (paved) land surface, and is consistent with the land use trend in the surrounding area to convert industrial land to residential, commercial, and shoreline recreational uses. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Biological Evaluation for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? Hyes, explain. SEPA Checklist 1 June 15, 2005 . ' .. ,~~ \" ~ 'J .::'~ ~~ . : .j,~.:.. j _. ,"::\:"~~:~':N~~ending applications are known. ~c '. ~ , , ., .1 0: List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known . . . Shoreline Substantial Development Pennit exemption, City of Renton Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA), Washington Dept. ofFish and Wildlife (WDFW) 401 Water Quality Certification, Washington Dept. of Ecology Section 404 Pennit, U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers ESA Consultation, National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) The project site is on the southeastern shore of Lake Washington, just north of the mouth of May Creek (Figure 1). The Barbee Mill is located on two parcels. One upland parcel is operated by the Barbee Mill Co.; the other is aquatic land leased from the Washington State Dept. of Natural Resources. This application concerns only the aquatic parcel (photos 1 and 2). The property is currently developed as a lumber mill. The mill ceased operations in the late 1990s. Between approximately 1944 and 1957, approximately 550 linear feet of uplands were created on the waterward side of the Inner Harbor Line. Most of this area is currently paved, and two fonner lumber mill buildings are located within the lease area footprint (Figure 2, Photos 3 and 4). The southern 300 linear feet of shoreline fIll is protected by a timber bulkhead. A 135-foot-Iong by 25-foot- wide timber pier separates this area from the northern 225 feet of shoreline. Approximately 28 non-creosote timber pilings (fonner boomsticks) on the south side of the pier delineate a former dock that has recently been removed (photo 5). The northern shoreline is steeply sloping and does not currently have a bulkhead, although a row of pilings near the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) delineates a bulkhead that may have existed there historically (photo 6). The leased area is currently used on an occasional basis for log rafting (photo 7). Aquatic land that was historically converted to upland is proposed to be restored to a sand and gravel beach. Restoration will be accomplished with the following steps: • Demolition and removal of upland lumber mill facilities • Removal of in-water structures (pilings and pier) • Excavation of fIll soils to achieve sub grade elevations • Installation of toe rock and quarry spall berm • Importation of sand, gravel and rock materials for beach construction Demolition of Upland Lumber Mill Facilities The features to be removed are two fonner lumber mill buildings and asphalt paving. All demolition debris will be loaded onto trucks and disposed of at appropriate upland facilities. Removal of In-Water Structures' The in-water structures to be removed include a wooden bulkhead, a timber piling-supported pier, approximately 40 other stand-alone piling no longer associated with structures, log boom and associated SEPA Checklist 2 June 15, 2005 piling, a log raft, and concrete and other debris along the shoreline. (The existing dolphin line on adjacent aquatic lands owned by Barbee Mill will be retained.) Timber decking will be removed from the existing wooden pier. Piling will be extracted using a vibratory hanuner mounted on a barge. A collar will be fastened around the piling, and will pull up on. the piling while vibrating it out of the sediments. When the pile is released from the sediment, the vibratory hanuner will be disengaged and the pile pulled from the water and placed on a barge until it is transferred upland. Piling that break during removal will be directly pulled with a clamshell bucket. Some of the untreated piling will be reused to provide large woody debris along the shoreline. The remaining piling will be loaded on to the barge and disposed off-site in accordance with WAC 173-304. Sediments attached to the outside of the pile will be allowed to fall back onto the lake bed. Resuspended sediments (if any) are anticipated to settle back onto the lake bottom within a short period of time (from several minutes to a few hours, depending on the specific sediment type, currents, and weather conditions). Excavation of Fill Soils and Bulkhead Removal Paved surfaces will be removed before soil excavation begins. Pavement will be broken using a tracked excavator with a jackhanuner, and the asphalt fragments will be loaded onto trucks and disposed of at an appropriate upland facility . Fill soils will be excavated from behind tlle bulkhead. Excavation of fill soils will occur either from a barge- mounted clamshell crane, or from the uplands using a track mounted excavator. All fill will be removed prior to bulkhead removal to control erosion and turbidity. All excavated soils will be placed on-site in the upland private property. Following completion of soil excavation, the bulkhead will be dismantled and untreated timbers will be reused on the upland parcel. A relatively small number of creosote-treated piling associated with the former de-barking facility at the mill will be disposed at a facility authorized to receive such materials. Installation of Toe Rock and Quarry Spall Berm A permanent line of toe rock will be installed on the landward side of the Inner Harbor line/ property line. The toe rock will consist of 900-1,200 pound individual stones which will be half buried. Toe rock will be bedded in a 6-inch-mininlum layer of2-to-4-inch crushed rock. Approxllnately 12 inches of toe rock will be exposed above the OHWM. Temporary measures to control erosion above and on the landward side of tlle toe rock will employ Construction Best Management Practices (Construction BMPs) and will consist of a combination of geotextiles and a graded quarry rock (quarry spall) forming a protective berm. The temporary quarry spall berm will extend 2 feet vertically above the toe rock and have a maximum slope of 2 horizontal to 1 vertical (2H: 1 V). The widtll of the berm will be a minimum of 4 feet, with an additional 2 feet of widtll for the toe rock, for a total widtll of approximately 6 feet. The total height of tlle toe rock and berm will be approximately 3 feet above tlle OHWM. Importation of Sand. Gravel and Rock Materials for Beach Construction The underlying soil will be graded to the appropriate slope before beach materials are overlaid. Finished beach slopes will range from up to 20H:IV on the SOUtll beach segment, to 7.5H:IV on tlle norili segment. These grades would vary in response to existing batllymetry and represent a range of slopes that are suitable and desirable for nearshore habitat and recreational use on Lake Washington. Imported beach materials will include a relatively fme-grained sand/gravel mix (coarse sand up to 1-1/2 inch minus gravel) in tlle more gently sloping south beach segment, and a coarser pea gravel to 1-1/2 inch minus gravel blend in the steeper norili beach segment. SEP A Checklist 3 June 15, 2005 I At the north and south ends of the beach, rock "beach anchors" are proposed to contain the imported beach materials and prevent longshore transport processes from moVing beach materials into much steeper and deeper adjacent areas. The beach anchors will be constructed of imported basalt quarry rock of varying size gradations. The rock will be installed in two to three layers of different gradations to build a stable mass. The beach anchors will extend approximately 20 ft out into the water (see Figure 3). 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity may, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The Barbee Mill site is on the southeastern shore of Lake Washington, just north of the mouth of May Creek (Figure 1). The site is in Section 32, Township 24N, Range 5E~ Latitude 47.50 NlLongitude 1220 W. The Barbee Mill is located on two parcels. One upland parcel is operated by the Barbee Mill Co.; the other presently comprises upland and aquatic areas currently leased from the Washington State Dept. of Natural Resources (DNR). This application concerns only tlle portion of the Barbee Mill site within the DNR lease parcel (photos 1 and 2), with the exception of the quarry spall erosion control berm, which will be placed upland of the leased parcel boundary. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of t~e site (circle one): ~, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? North of the bulkhead, the shoreline grade declines within Lake Washington at up to an approximate 10 percent slope. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. The soil behind the bulkhead is clean fill. The substrate waterward of the bulkhead consists of silty sand. Sediment dredging and cleanup activities were completed by the Barbee Mill Company in summer/fall 2002 under the Voluntary Cleanup Program, with input from Ecology, and in accordance with applicable local, state, and federal permits. Soils and sediments in the area meet State Model Toxics Control Act cleanup standards. Contaminants in the area prior to cleanup were related to accumulated wood debris from the lumber mill. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. There is no known history of unstable soils, nor are there surface indications of any problem. The site does is SEPA Checklist 4 June 15, 2005 not designated as a landslide hazard area on the King County Sensitive Areas Ordinance map. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. The site will be graded to fonn a beach habitat that mimics natural conditions. Clean soil excavated during grading will be reused upland. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Erosion could occur during grading and pavement removal, and after construction from wave action. Measures to prevent erosion are described in (h) below. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? None of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces. Approximately 28,140 ft2 of paved suiface will be removed as a result of construction. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth if any: For long-tenn erosion control, a pennanent line of toe rock will be installed on the landward side of the Inner Harbor line/ property line. The toe rock will consist of 900-1,200 pound individual stones which will be half buried. Toe rock will be bedded in a 6-inch-minimum layer of 2-to-4-inch crushed rock. Approximately 12 inches of toe rock will be exposed above the OHWM. Temponuy measures to control erosion above and on the landward side of the toe rock will employ Construction Best Management Practices (Construction BMPs) and will consist of a combination of geotextiles and a graded quarry rock (quarry spall) forming a protective benn. The temponuy quarry spall berm will extend 2 feet vertically above the toe rock and have a maximum slope of 2 horizontal to 1 vertical (2H: 1 V). The width of the benn will be a minimum of 4 feet, with an additional 2 feet of width for the toe rock, for a total width of approximately 6 feet. The total height of the toe rock and benn will be approximately 3 feet above the OHWM. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Emissions to the air would be temporary and would come from heavy equipment such as the excavator, and possibly dust from soil removal. The soil is expected to be moist due to its proximity to the lake, and therefore soil dust is not anticipated to be a concern. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. There are no off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect this proposal. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: SEPA Checklist 5 June 15, 2005 I Equipment used at the site will meet King County emission requirements. Equipment will be inspected regularly to ensure that uncontrolled emissions do not occur. 3. Water a. Surface 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Work will be done in-water in Lake Washington. The project site includes an upland area of state-owned land that is part of Lake Washington. The site will be restored to aquatic land, and existing in-water structures extending beyond the created upland area will also be removed. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. The entire project will occur over, in, and adjacent to Lake Was!lington (see Section A.ll for a complete description ofa11 project elements). 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Approximately 8,500 cubic yards will be removed from behind the bulkhead before the bulkhead is demolished. The area affected is approximately 0.55 acre. Approximately 3,500 cubic yards of sand and gravel will be placed during beach construction, and approximately 700 cubic yards of rock will be placed as toe rock. ' 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. . The proposal will not require surface water withdrawals or diversions. 5) Does the proposal lie within a Un-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. The site does not lie within a 100-year floodplain. While it is on a lakeshore, the water level is regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers at the Hiram M. Chittenden Locks. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. The proposal does not involve the discharge of any waste materials to surface waters. b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No groundwater will be withdrawn, and no water will be discharged to groundwater. SEPA Checklist 6 June 15, 2005 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the foUowing chemicals .• . ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. No waste material will be discharged into the ground. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. The fmished project will be a beach and stormwater will infIltrate or sheet flow into Lake Washington. During construction, silt curtains will be used to prevent any turbid runoff from entering the lake. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Debris could fall into the lake during demolition. A containment boom and silt curtains will prevent debris from floating out of the immediate area, and debris that sinks to the bottom will be picked up and properly disposed of before the beach substrate is graded. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Conservation measures to control temporary turbidity include: • All work will be conducted within the approved timing windows for listed species in this area of Lake Washington, which extends from July 16 to December 31. • If a barge is used, it will remain in adequate water depths to prevent grounding. • An emergency spill containment kit will be located on-site and promptly used for cleanup of accidental spills. • A silt curtain and floating boom will be deployed during all demolition activities. All floating debris will be removed at the end of every work day. Fallen debris will be retrieved prior to grading the beach slopes. 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: x x x SEPA Checklist deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, ~the~ (Iris pseudocaris, a non-native iris) water plants: water lily, eelgrass, Wlfoiij, other (the presence of milfoil has not been confmned but it is likely to be there.) 7 June 15, 2005 other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? A small amount of grass and Iris pseudocaris will be removed. Some Eurasian milfoil may be removed wateIWard of the bulkhead as well. Eurasian milfoil is an invasive, non-native species and removal is desirable. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. No threatened or endangered vegetation species are known to exist on or near the site. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: None proposed, the OHWM delineates the extent of the proposed project area so upland vegetation is not included. 5. Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: aw ero, ~ ~ongbird~, other: osprey, connorant, domestic quail mammals: dee ,bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: ~, aImo, ~routj, herring, shellfish, other: black crappie, bluegill, pumpkinseed sunfish, tench, and yellow perch b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Puget Sound chinook salmon, bull trout, and bald eagles (two nests approximately 0.65 mile from the site on the opposite shore). c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. The site is part of the Pacific Flyway, a major north-south seasonal migration route for many bird species. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: The applicant has coordinated with WDFW regarding an osprey nest near the site. To avoid impacts, the nest will be relocated to an area nearby, but not as close to the activity, before construction begins. The proposed restoration was designed to be consistent with Water Resource Inventory Area (WRlA) 8 Conservation Plim recommendations. It provides nearshore habitat that is scarce in the project vicinity due to extensive shoreline modifications. This habitat is especially valuable to salmon fry (up to 40 mm length) for winter rearing. Where upland will be converted to aquatic land, the bottom substrate will consist of the gravels favorable to nearshore rearing habitat. The new gravel substrate will provide habitat for benthic invertebrates, which will likely attract juvenile salmonids. The shallower water will provide protection for juveniles from larger predators. The gently sloping bottom mimics natural conditions in the littoral (nearshore) zone, distinguishing SEPA Checklist 8 June 15, 2005 it from the more sharply dropping limnetic (water column) zone, both of which are used by salmonids for different life history stages. According to the WRIA 8 Steering Committee, this section of Lake Washington is a high priority for restoration projects, ranking second out of the five lake sections defined ill their Proposed Lake Washington/Cedar River/Sammamish Watershed Conservation Plan released in February 2005. 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. The project will not require the use of energy sources. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? H so, generally describe. The project will not affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Equipment used in construction will meet applicable efficiency and emissions standards. 7. Environmental Health a. . Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? H so, describe. Both soils and sediments in the project area have been characterized through environmental sanlpling programs, and have been determined to be composed of clean (below State Model Toxics Control Act cleanup standards) silt and sand materials. Sediment dredging/cleanup actions in the area were completed by the Barbee Mill Company in summer/fall 2002 under the Voluntary Cleanup Program, with input from the Washington Department of Ecology, and in accordance with applicable local, state, and federal permits. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. There are no unusual risks associated with this proposal. The construction foreman will have emergency medical contact numbers and directions to the nearest hospital. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Voluntary cleanup has already taken place as described in 7(a) above. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic equipment, operation, other)? SEP A Checklist 9 June 15, 2005 The project area is a former saw mill. Limited industrial operations continue to occur at the adjacent Quendall Terminals parcel to the north. There are no known sources of noise in the area that will affect the proposed project. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short- term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. There will be some noise during construction, more so during the demolition phase. The demolition will be accomplished by dismantling and carrying off the pieces rather than by wrecking equipment. Pavement will need to be broken apart before it is hauled away. Generally, noise will come from heavy equipment operation. Louder noises such as jackhammers will be temporary and of short duration. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Construction will take place during daylight hours. No unusual noise impacts are anticipated that would require further measures of control. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site is currently developed as a lumber mill. The mill has not operated since the late 1990s. The closest adjacent property is the Quendall Terminals parcel to the north, which supports limited industrial operations. The May Creek delta is located south of the project area. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? H so, describe. The site has not been used for agriculture. c. Describe any structures on the site. Two lumber mill buildings sitting on paved fill behind a bulkhead, and a 135-foot-Iong by 25-foot-wide timber pier. Approximately 40 stand-alone wood pilings exist in addition to those supporting the pier. d. Will any structures be demolished? H so, what? All structures on the project site (described above) will be removed .. The two mill buildings and pier will be demolished prior to removal. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Commercial Office. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The project site itself (the DNR-leased portion) is outside the Renton city limits and is within King COWlty. The upland adjacent area, which is within the Renton city limits, is designated "Employment-Office" by the· City of Renton. Parcels immediately south and east of the parcel are designated Singe Family Residential .. g. H applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? SEPA Checklist 10 June 15, 2005 Urban. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? H so, specify. The site has not been designated Wlder King COWlty' s Sensitive Areas Ordinance. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? None. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not applicable. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The project is compatible with the recommendations of the WRIA 8 Steering Committee, and consistent with the trend in the area toward conversion of industrial shore lands to residential. The project will be reviewed by a variety of regulatory agencies, including King COWlty and/or the City of Renton. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Not applicable. 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The temporary erosion control berm will be approximately 3 feet above OHWM. No other structures are proposed. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? SEPA Checklist 11 June 15, 2005 Views to the shoreline that are currently blocked by the mill buildings would be opened up. There are no existing residences that would be affected by any alteration to the view. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None required; the proposed project will enhance the aesthetic quality at the site. 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? The project will not produce light or glare. b. Could light or glare from the imished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Not applicable. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? No existing light/glare sources are known. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None needed 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Recreational boaters use Lake Washington. A swimming beach exists about 2 miles north (Newcastle Beach Park), and a bicycle trail exists, set back from the shoreline. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? H so, describe. No existing recreational uses will be displaced. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None needed. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? H so, generally describe. No nearby historical or cultural sites are known. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. SEPA Checklist 12 June 15, 2005 None known. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None needed. 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The site is near Interstate Highway 405 and served by Lake Washington Boulevard North. No additional street access plan is proposed, as the site will be a fish habitat beach. b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? There are no transit stops within walking distance of the site. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? No parking spaces will be created or eliminated. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). No new roads or streets will be needed, nor will road improvements be needed. e. Will the project use (or occur in immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Railroad tracks pass near the site, set back from the shoreline. The project will not use any transportation other than construction vehicle access. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. ' The completed project will not generate any vehicle trips. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None needed. 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. The project will not result in an increased need for public services. SEPA Checklist 13 June 15, 2005 b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None needed. 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: ~lectriciri1, ~atural g3Sj, ~, lrefuse servicq, ~elephonq, Isanitary sewe~, septic system, other. The site is directly served by electricity. Other utility connections are available on the adjacent upland parcel. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity that might be needed. No utility service is needed. C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make· decision. " Signature: Date Submitted: SEP A Checklist 14 June 15, 2005 \ : ... _~"""'~ .. :w(,:. .. ~,._.~.:, •. , < LAKE WASHINGTON ELEVATIONS o 1000 . --I VICINITY MAP Scale in Feet o ~L-__________________________________ ~ ________________________________________ ~ ________________________________ ~ .$ PURPOSE: BEACH RESTORATION AND " FISH HABITAT ENHANCEMENT E ~ DATUM: LAT: 47.5308 N N LONG: 122.2009 W tn VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88 o ~ ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: oi QUENDALL TERMINAL BNSF NAME: BARBEE MILL CO. BEACH RESTORATION REFERENCE #: SITE LOCATION ADDRESS: 4101 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD. N RENTON, WA 98056 PROPOSED: IN: LAKE WASHINGTON AT: RENTON COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA SHEET: 1 OF 3 DATE: MAY 2005 I:r-I I Ie \ DEVELOPMENT: . I F~J¥~:&~OEQIN:BEACtI ~(;T "E" . 1 TYPicalPlatted. RESrORATION~ OP8nSJllli 1 PReSldenllallOI Une 1 .. , .' .... I ' t, FUtura:oeilalQpmenl I . , '.' PrivateBea(:h AcceSS) . . . .. ' . (Typ. , (l,,:>r.h ANoA .. :I •. ""'.""" , ~B J '\ \'"~Hiu~d:_ ~ I ....• :.,. : \ -------------------- ··:·.;l:'~ _/ '-----,; .' L~~~"~";0L'.LJ.t~.,,~ ~Xl:!I\'tle~~d .' • 4/(1211;:. ~S}fII\lG 1'01\1 o 60 I I Scale in Feet LAKE WASHINGTON ELEVATIONS ~ LOWER LlMITSI 16.67 I 20.00 I 7.02 SITE PLAN ~. "'-, ."",. ". ./ .'. / .,/'" ~r---------------'-----------.------------------------------------------------------------.---------________________ ~ .g PURPOSE: BEACH RESTORATION AND NAME: BARBEE MILL CO. BEACH RESTORATION PROPOSED: u FISH HABITAT ENHANCEMENT DATUM: LAT: 47.5308 N LONG: 122.2009 W VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: QUENDALL TERMINAL BNSF REFERENCE #: SITE LOCATION ADDRESS: 4104 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD. N. RENTON, WA 98056 IN: LAKE WASHINGTON AT: RENTON COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA SHEET: 20F3 DATE: ~ 0:: <l: -, '" (!) u::: c;; ! ;; C;; o o 9 w z ::::; W 0:: o I (j) ..:. --' ::E W W III 0:: <l: II? C;; o ! :;J :>:: c Future Residential lot Redevelopment Area ,-Inner Harbor line/Property line / DNR Aquatic Lease Area Q; 30, Q) I o~ Incti.-ided-m BeBch Restoration Future Redevoloomonl 50 OHWM Setback ~ 20L "":&~:c"""" '" >""":"}PC¥, Q • )4!t~,~M '" ~ I '" 10" Future Residential Lot / Redevelopment Area ---rIIofincluded in-ae"d, Resloration dS 30, ~ j a 201 .~ ~ i '" 10- I_ Future Recevelopment 50' OHWM Setback r ---------, -,,""Existing Lumber Mill Building I 1'#/ to be Removed I I I I r I I _1- /~ExiSting Grade 20 ,r--1._./_ Proposed Grade Section A·A' r Inner Harbor line/Property Une I DNR Aquatic Lease Area Toe Rock LAKE WASHINGTON -r jt" ';/"1" Q --= ,;.) (,',', Proposed Grade ----~ __ Beach Pea Gravell 1· 112 Inch Minus Gravel Section B-~~ SCHEMATIC CROSS SECTIONS LAKE WASHINGTON o 30 Scale in Feet ~~-------------------------------r-----------------------------------------------------------------------'r-------------------------------~ '~ PURPOSE: BEACH RESTORATION AND '8 FISH HABITAT ENHANCEMENT E ~ 0; L() g N DATUM: LAT: 47,5308 N LONG: 122,2009 W VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: QUENDALL TERMINAL BNSF NAME: BARBEE MILL CO, BEACH RESTORATION REFERENCE #: SITE LOCATION ADDRESS: 4104 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD, N, RENTON, WA 98056 PROPOSED: IN: LAKE WASHINGTON AT: RENTON COUNTY OF: KING SHEET: 3 OF 3 STATE:WA e Photos of Existing Conditions A Lake Washington CC, 2DOl Kinv Coumy 1 Aerial view of aquatic parcel that is the subject of this application 2 Adjacent Barbee Mill upland parcel. No work is being done on this parcel; it is shown here for context. (Source: King County iMap) 3 Bulkhead and mill buildings 4 Northern section of shoreline 5 Existing pier and pile field 6 Pilings possibly delineating old bulkhead Technical Memorandum To: Laureen Nicolay, City of Renton From: Kristin Noreen, Anchor Environmental, L.L.c. cc: Robert Cugini, Barbee Mill Clay Patmont, Anchor Environmental, L.L.c. Date: August 22, 2005 .Char Environmental, L.L.c. 1423 3rd Avenue, Suite 300 Seattle, Washington 98101 Phone 206.287.91tJkv Fax 206.287.9131 gt-grMENT p OFqf:Ni'1,~NtNG AUG 26 2DG5 RECEIVED Re: Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project Environmental Review Lake Washington Ordinary High Water Mark Reconnaissance Report The City of Renton Municipal Code 4-8-120D requires that shoreline data are needed for environmental review of the Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration project. The Barbee Mill parcel (No. 3224056666) is located on the east shoreline of Lake Washington in the City of Renton, east of Seattle, Washington (Figure 1). In this study, the lake shore was evaluated and the location of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) was recorded. Because the proposed project is self- mitigating, mitigation performance standards, monitoring, and plans are not discussed here. A site visit was conducted by biologists on August 22, 2005 to evaluate the substrate, plant, and animal communities present in the parceL In most places on the north end of the parcel, asphalt is present and extends waterward to approximately the OHWM. Waterward of the asphalt, rip rap and quarry spall rock substrate dominate, extending into the water. On the south end of the parcel, either treated wood or concrete bulkheads form the shoreline, with some riprap and quarry spall present in places. A top view and typical cross-section of the lake bed are provided in Attachment A. Vegetative cover on the lake banks is sparse and disturbed due to the presence of the asphalt and rock substrate, and is composed chiefly of pioneer and weedy species. Dominant bank vegetation includes reed canary grass (Phalaris arul1dil1acea), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor), and common rush UUI1CUS effusus); also present are birds foot trefoil (Lotus comiculatus) and dock (Rumex spp)., among others. There were no fish or wildlife observed on the site visit; I • Laureen Nicolay, City of Renton August 22, 2005 Page 2 ... , ,',r, , 1 .,'~p,eci~~J>nown to occur in the parcel are described in detail in the Biological Evaluation .' ". ','. , ,~ .. ' .. prep.ared for the site (Anchor 2005). The location of the OHWM was marked along the shoreline ',~, of the parcel using yellow numbered pin flags and was recorded using a Trimble Differential =.,( 'GIgpaJPbsitioning System (DGPS). The OHWM and vegetated areas are illustrated on Figure 2. For this figure, the locations of the five southern-most DGPS points were determined relative to building location because these DGPS precision is limited in close proximity to buildings and overhead structures. This memorandum is intended to provide shoreline data necessary to support environmental review, under the requirements given in Renton Municipal Code 4-8-1200. If needed, additional details can be obtained from Kristin Noreen at (206)287-9130 or knoreen@anchorenv.com. List of Figures Figure 1. Vicinity Map Figure 2. Ordinary High Water Mark and Vegetation Survey List of Attachments Attachment A. Permit Drawings showing top view and typical cross section of lake bed. References Anchor Environmental, L.L.c. 2005. Biological Evaluation. Barbee Mill Beach Restoration, HUC 17110102. Prepared for Barbee Mill Company. May 2005 . UPPER LIMITS h~;;'-+--C~~+---=;-:~-j LOWER LIMITS o 1000 VICINITY MAP Scale in Feet ~ ~r-----------------------------------~----------------------------------------r---------------------------------~ it PURPOSE: BEACH RESTORATION AND "E FISH HABITAT ENHANCEMENT ;;; ~ DATUM: LAT: 47.5308 N ~ LONG: 122.2009 W Lf) VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88 o ~ ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: ai QUENDALL TERMINAL BNSF NAME: BARBEE MILL CO. BEACH RESTORATION REFERENCE #: SITE LOCATION ADDRESS: 4101 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD. N RENTON, WA 98056 PROPOSED: IN: LAKE WASHINGTON AT: RENTON COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA SHEET: 1 OF 3 DATE: MAY 2005 ,~~.,.., Anchor OHWM ,-: .. ~ J King County Parcel Boundary a 25 50 I Scale in Feet 100 I z Figure 2 Ordinary High Water Mark and Vegetation Barbee Mill -Lake Washington OHWM Reconnaissance Report Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration Project , . Attachment A gj ~ D o ;:l ~ o 1:1-I I Ie \ REDEVELOPMENT: . L F~J¥~:CLUDEQ'IN:SEAC1-I TRACT "S." .. pITy!). iee. IPlatte(! U RESrORATION--........ I. opensJlllee, I t ResldenUallot ne ~ ... f t . Develo!1mem . Future 06;'B. k!Pment: 1 .j '. . . . _... PrivateBeael1 "'if's~ . {~re.pe~lopr:n~ .. ·· .... 8-•..• 1 "''I r"-H.-u-l. m\ I r+ . \ \ I _.-,<_' __ ." ~'.{:.: • to be i'femoved . ~ .. I (Typ.) . ", .... L_\_J".. ",. i.,. "-Ex be lSUWemOV8d """ ... ' ... . "'-60 41\~1'k. ~.s'~I\IG )"01\1 Scale in Feet LAKE WASHINGTON ELEVATIONS "-- \ .. / .'. ":. :H" ...•.. : ···/~Y~ gLOWER LIMITSI 16.67 I 20.00 I 7.02 SITE PLAN ~~-------------------------,-------------------------------------------------------------r------------------------~ ~ PURPOSE: BEACH RESTORATION AND NAME: BARBEE MILL CO. BEACH RESTORATION PROPOSED: I:S FISH HABITAT ENHANCEMENT DATUM: LAT: 47.5308 N LONG: 122.2009 W VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88 ADJACENT PROPERlY OWNERS: QUENDALL TERMINAL BNSF REFERENCE #: SITE LOCATION ADDRESS: 4104 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD. N. RENTON, WA 98056 IN: LAKE WASHINGTON AT: RENTON COUNlY OF: KING STATE: WA SHEET: 20F3 it ~ '" (!) u::: ;; gj o 9 ;; ;;; g 9 w z :J w 0:: o J: ~ ~ w W <II 0:: ~ ;;; g ~ o :? ::<: c w w- Future Residential lot Redevelopment Area ollncluded-hBeach Restoration Future Redevelooment 50' OHWM Setback 10 30,-, I: 'f~~.. ,f I Il •• ""..¥i'i£E37tJJ" :g 20[-t;,'4~,;i;{,;~~ '" . > I ~ 10L ~ 30r "-I c 1 "8 201 '"" I ~ 1 a, i jjJ 10'-- Future Residential Lot Redevelopment Area No! [neludea in seachRestoration ,_ Future Redevelopment 50' OHWM Setback ;-Inner Harbor line/Prollcrty line DNR Aquatic Lease Area r ------- -.--.. ......-Existing lumber Mill Buildjng I I,. to be Removed I I I I I 20 ,r--- Beach Sand & Gravel Section A·A' ;-Inner Harbor line/Property Une DNR Aquatic Leasa Area -Toe Rock rExisting Grade '-Praoosed Grade / 7.5 LAKE WASHINGTON ,r-- Beach Pea Gravelll-1r2 Inch Minus Gravel Section B·B' SCHEMATIC CROSS SECTIONS LAKE WASHINGTON o 30 Scale in Feet ~r-----------------------,------------------------------------------------------.----------------------~ .~ PURPOSE: BEACH RESTORATION AND "8 FISH HABITAT ENHANCEMENT E ~ a; It) g N DATUM: LAT: 47.5308 N LONG: 122.2009 W VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: QUENDALL TERMINAL BNSF NAME: BARBEE MILL CO_ BEACH RESTORATION REFERENCE #: SITE LOCATION ADDRESS: 4104 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD. N. RENTON, WA 98056 PROPOSED: IN: LAKE WASHINGTON AT: RENTON COUNTY OF: KING SHEET: 3 OF 3 STATE:WA -' - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION BARBEE MILL BEAC 1-1 RESTORATION Hue 1711 0102 Preparec:l for Barbee Mill Company 4101 Lake Washingt<Jn Boulevard N. Renton, Washirn.gton 98056 Prepared by Anchor Environ1Olental, L.L.c. 1423 Third A verme, Suite 300 Seattle, Washin.gton 98101 May 2005 I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION BARBEE MILL BEACH RESTORATION Hue 17110102 Prepared for Barbee Mill Company 4101 Lake Washington Boulevard N. Renton, Washington 98056 Prepared by Anchor Environmental, L.L.c. 1423 Third A venue, Suite 300 Seattle, Washington 98101 May 2005 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 1 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Project Setting ............................................................................................................................ 5 2.2 Project History ........................... '" ............................................................................................. 6 2.3 Construction .............................................................................................................................. 7 2.3.1 Methods ................................................................................................................................. 7 2.3.2 Conservation Measures ..................................................................................................... 10 2.4 Project Schedule ...................................................................................................................... 11 3 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE ..................................................................................................... 12 3.1 Action Area .............................................................................................................................. 12 3.2 Physical Indicators .................................................................................................................. 12 3.2.1 Substrate, Slope, and Depth .............................................................................................. 12 3.2.2 Salt/Freshwater Mixing ...................................................................................................... 12 3.3 Chemical Indicators ................................................................................................................ 12 3.3.1 Water Quality ...................................................................................................................... 12 3.3.2 Sediment Quality ................................................................................................................ 13 3.4 Biological Indicators ............................................................................................................... 13 3.4.1 Riparian Vegetation ................. : ......................................................................................... 13 3.4.2 Prey Species ......................................................................................................................... 13 3.4.3 Aquatic Vegetation ............................................................................................................. 14 4 SPECIES OCCURRENCE, EFFECTS ANALYSIS, AND EFFECTS DETERMINA nON ........ 15 4.1 Puget Sound Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) .............................................. 15 4.1.1 Status .................................................................................................................................... 15 4.1.2 Critical Habitat .................................................................................................................... 16 4.1.3 Biology and Distribution ................................................................................................... 17 4.1.4 Direct and Indirect Effects ................................................................................................. 18 4.1.5 Effects Determination ........................................................................................................ 20 4.1.6 Critical Habitat Effects Determination ............................................................................ 20 4.2 Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus) ......................................................................................... 20 4.2.1 Status .................................................................................................................................... 20 4.2.2 Critical Habitat .................................................................................................................... 21 4.2.3 Biology and Distribution ................................................................................................... 23 4.2.4 Direct and Indirect Effects ................................................................................................. 24 4.2.5 Effects Determination ........................................................................................................ 24 4.2.6 Critical Habitat Effects Determination ............................................................................ 24 4.3 Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) ..................................................................................... 24 4.3.1 Status .................................................................................................................................... 24 4.3.2 Critical Habitat .................................................................................................................... 25 4.3.3 Biology and Distribution ................................................................................................... 25 4.3.4 Direct and Indirect Effects ................................................................................................. 26 Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration May 2005 040091-01 I Table of Contents I 4.3.5 Effects Determination ........................................................................................................ 27 4.3.6 Critical Habitat Effects Determination ............................................................................ 27 4.4 Interrelated/lnterdependent Actions ................................................................................... 27 4.5 Incidental Take Analysis ........................................................................................................ 27 I I 5 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................................... 29 I List of Tables I I I I I I I I I I I I Table 1 Threatened, Endangered, and Candidate Species that May Occur in the Project Area ..... 1 List of Figures Figure 1 Vicinity Map .......................................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2 Site Plan .................................................................................................................................. 3 Figure 3 Schematic Cross-Sections .................................................................................................... 4 List of Appendices Appendix A Essential Fish Habitat Consultation Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration ii May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I • Introduction 1 INTRODUCTION The Barbee Mill Company has operated a lumber mill on the shore of Lake Washington for 40 years (Figure 1). The Barbee Mill facilities are built partially on leased aquatic land owned by the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The leased aquatic land was converted to upland by filling the area behind a constructed bulkhead approximately 45 years ago. In the late 1990s, the lumber mill closed and the Barbee Mill Company now wishes to vacate the DNR aquatic land lease by removing all structures within the leased area. The Barbee Mill Company proposes to remove the fill behind the bulkhead, then remove the bulkhead and piling, and construct a beach habitat conducive to use by salmon and other native fish. Figure 2 shows proposed conditions with an overlay of existing conditions. This Biological Evaluation (BE) examines the effects of the Barbee Mill Beach Restoration project on listed, proposed, and candidate anadromous fish and wildlife species that may occur in the project area, pursuant to Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Species addressed are listed below in Table 1. Table 1 Threatened, Endangered, and Candidate Species that May Occur in the Project Area I I Critical Habitat : 1,' I Effects Critical . Effects Species ~ Status Agency Determination Habitat Determination ~~~~~:*:;~=q_~!~_I_~IL. __ NN-LAA~-j pP-rr:.°o~ooss_eedd I i~::: - (Sa/velinus confluentus) I (Coastal-Puget Sound ESU) USFWS =--+---=r:n_~=odification Bald eagle I None (Haliaeetus /eucocepha/usl! Threatened USFWS NLAA designated N/A NLAA = Not likely to adversely affect ESU = Evolutionary Significant Unit USFWS = U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service NMFS = National Marine Fisheries Service Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 1 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I It) o 1'l ..,f N Note: Base map prepared from Terrain Navigator Pro USGS 7.5 minute quadrangle map of Bellevue, WA. o I 1000 I Scale in Feet Figure 1 Vicinity Map Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration --- " "--- ~ 40 o ""'"""' 1"""1 Scale In Feet \l;, ~~~.'jQ,~ -- - -- -- --- -- -- -- Proposed Rock Beach Anchor (Typical Each End of Beach) I I I l \ FUTURE REDEVELOPMENT: I NOT INCLUDED IN BEACH TRACT "En I esidential Lot line I I l': 1 Future Develqpment . I I Private Beach Access (Typ.) B I \ I'~'"'''''''--''' I ~ I __ ~~ __ _ \ . ~A ---!--- ,.----";"--5 .. I·. ~'<;CEXiSti~90HWM " , / / I I / 1..41(~~ ~S,y/IVGrolV ___ "-"'-. I. , • I...... I I ..... ' I, .~ .'. . ::". (Bulkhead to be Removed)' I "'i--'.. , I·~ I L~' ~ . "-..... ' , . 7 "'--. .,.' '. /. ............... ,. ',' '. .,.' .,/"" .,/"" . Exislil)g Pilin~ , to be Removed ""'- I '(I (Typ.) ......., ---'" Existil)g Dock ......., to be Removed "'" __ •• ' ~A' ..-:--~ -'-.10-.' '" "'--'-.. '--5 __ / ./" Figura 2 Site Plan Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration ---- - Future Residential Lot Redevelopment Area - Not Included in Beach Restoration Future Redevelopment 50' OHWM Setback ~ 3°1 ' . """",,, "","ow c 201-"g;i;~j~~~M .9 ,'Io,l-.; •. '! ;;;:r:"!,:: .. ,~ ro ' . > '" . iii 10'- ~ 30r LL , .f: i 6 20L "" I ro > '" iIi 10L Future Residential Lot Redevelopment Area Not inclUded in Beach Restoration I . Future Redevelopment 50' OHWM Setback Erosion 8~~i;;;F~;;;:: ~6,~S;ti9g -- - /Inner Harbor Line/Property Line DNR Aquatic Lease Area - -- r ----------, ~Existing Lumber Mill Building I 1./ to be Removed Toe Rock I I I I I 20 lr- Sand & Gravel Section A·A' Inner Harbor Line/Property Line DNR Aquatic Lease Area Toe Rock Grade Proposed Grade LAKE WASHINGTON -. It . ""~'r (Iff,,-. '-Proposed Grade Pea Gravell1-1I2 Inch Minus Gravel Section B·B' -- - LAKE WASHINGTON o 20 Scale in Feet -- -- Figure 3 Schematic Cross Sections Barbee Mill Shoreline Restoration I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Project Description 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION This project consists of removing existing structures and fill, and constructing a beach to mimic natural conditions. The project will be accomplished in the following steps, detailed in Section 2.3.1-Construction Methods: • Demolition and removal of upland lumber mill facilities • Removal of in-water structures (piling and pier) • Excavation of fill soils to achieve subgrade elevations • Installation of toe rock and quarry spall berm • Importation of sand, gravel, and rock materials for beach construction The following structures will be removed: • Two lumber mill buildings • Approximately 28,000 square feet (ft2) of asphalt paving • 3,375 ft2 wooden pier • Log boom and associated piling • Approximately 40 other timber piling • Approximately 8,500 cubic yards of fill soil • 300 linear feet of timber bulkhead • Concrete rubble and other shoreline debris The following features will be placed at the site: • Permanent toe rock at the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) • Temporary quarry spall erosion control berm • Approximately 525 linear feet of sand and gravel beach • Approximately 0.6 acre of shallow-water aquatic habitat 2.1 Project Setting The project site is on the southeastern end of Lake Washington, just north of the mouth of May Creek (see Figure 1). The shoreline in the area is generally armored with bulkheads from just north of the site down to the southern end of the lake. The Quendall Terminal lies north of the mill site, and residential development extends to the south, including houseboats along most of the shoreline. Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 5 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Project Description The project site is adjacent to and contiguous with upland property operated by the Barbee Mill Company, which is also part of the lumber mill site. This BE mainly addresses activities on the aquatic land parcel. The only activities that will take place landward of the DNR property line are placement of excavated fill, placement of a single line of permanent toe rock, and placement and removal of the temporary quarry spall berm for erosion protection. On the waterward side of the Inner Harbor Line, 550 linear feet of uplands have been created. Most of this area is paved, and two former lumber mill buildings are located within the lease area footprint (see Figure 2). The southern 300 linear feet of shoreline fill is protected by a timber bulkhead. A 135-foot- long by 25-foot-wide timber pier separates this area from the northern 225 feet of shoreline. Approximately 28 timber piling on the south side of the pier delineate a former dock that has recently been removed. The northern shoreline is steeply sloping and does not currently have a bulkhead, although a row of piling near the OHWM indicates that a bulkhead may have existed there historically. 2.2 Project History The Barbee Mill Company lumber mill operated on the shoreline of Lake Washington from the 1950s to the 1990s. To accommodate water-dependent activities such as docking and log rafting, piers were built over the water in the aquatic land area leased from DNR. A bulkhead was placed in the water at approximately elevation 15 feet (NA VD 88 Datum), and fill was placed behind the bulkhead to create additional upland area. The mill closed in 1998 and the Barbee Mill Company plans to vacate their DNR aquatic land lease. Barbee has planned a restoration project that provides high-quality shoreline habitat and a setting compatible with redevelopment of the adjacent uplands. Sediment dredging/cleanup actions in the area were completed by the Barbee Mill Company in summer/fall 2002 under the Voluntary Cleanup Program in coordination with the Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 6 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Project Description Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology), and in accordance with applicable local, state, and federal permits. The proposed Barbee Mill Beach Restoration project is adjacent to the May Creek restoration area (Mouth of May Creek) included in the Proposed Lake Washington/Cedar River/Sammamish Watershed Conservation Plan, by the WRlA 8 Steering Committee, King County Department of Natural Resources (KCDNR 2005a). The mouth of May Creek restoration is listed as a recommended restoration action in Volume 2 of the Conservation Plan. General plan recommendations include: • Reduce bank hardening by replacing bulkheads and riprap with sandy beaches with gentle slopes designed to maximize littoral areas with a depth of less than 1 meter. • Reconnect and enhance small creek mouths as juvenile rearing areas. Historically these small creeks had sandy deltas at the creek mouth and were associated with wetland complexes. • Begin restoration efforts with lake segments at the southern end of the lake, near the mouth of the Cedar River, along with other high priority reaches along the southern shore of Mercer Island and in Union Bay at the entrance to the Ship Canal. The Barbee Mill Beach Restoration is consistent with the objectives of the Proposed Lake Washington/Cedar River/Sammamish Watershed Conservation Plan. 2.3 Construction Restoration will be accomplished with the following steps: • Demolition and removal of upland lumber mill facilities • Removal of in-water structures (piling and pier) • Excavation of fill soils to achieve subgrade elevations • Installation of toe rock and quarry spall berm • Importation of sand, gravel and rock materials for beach construction 2.3.1 Methods 2.3.1.1 Demolition of Lumber Mill Facilities The features to be removed are two buildings, asphalt paving, a wooden bulkhead, a timber piling-supported pier, approximately 40 other piling, log boom and Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 7 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Project Description associated piling, a log raft, and concrete and other debris along the shoreline. Bulkhead, pavement, and piling removal are described in detail below. All demolition debris will be loaded onto barges or trucks and disposed of at appropriate upland waste handling facilities., 2.3.1.2 In-Water Structure and Piling Removal Timber decking will be removed from the existing wooden pier. Piling will be extracted using a vibratory hammer mounted on a barge. A collar will be fastened around the pile and the pile will be removed by vibrating it out of the sediments. When the pile is released from the sediment, the vibratory hammer will be disengaged and the pile pulled from the water and placed on a barge until the piles are transferred upland. Piling that break during removal will be directly pulled with a clamshell bucket. The piling will either be reused or disposed of off-site in accordance with WAC 173-304. 2.3.1.3 Excavation of Fill Soils and Bulkhead Removal Paved surfaces will be removed before excavation begins. Pavement will be broken using a track-mounted excavator with a jackhammer, and the asphalt fragments will be loaded onto trucks for disposal at an appropriate upland facility. Fill soils will be excavated from behind the bulkhead, then the bulkhead will be dismantled and hauled away to an appropriate upland facility. Excavation of fill soils will occur either from a barge-mounted clamshell crane, or from the uplands using a track mounted excavator. All fill will be removed prior to bulkhead removal to control erosion and turbidity. All excavated soils will be placed on the adjacent upland private property. 2.3.1.4 Installation of Toe Rock and Quarry Spall Berm A permanent line of toe rock will be installed on the landward side of the Inner Harbor line/property line and will establish the new shoreline edge at OHW. The toe rock will consist of 900 -1,200 pound individual stones which will be half buried. Toe rock will be bedded in a 6-inch-minimum layer of 2-to-4-inch crushed rock. Approximately 12 inches of toe rock will be exposed above the OHWM. Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 8 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Project Description Temporary measures to control erosion above and on the landward side of the toe rock will employ Construction Best Management Practices (Construction BMPs) and will consist of a combination of geotextiles and a graded quarry rock (quarry spall) forming a protective berm. The temporary quarry spall berm will extend 2 feet vertically above the toe rock and have a maximum slope of 2H:1V. The width of the berm will be a minimum of 4 feet, with an additional 2 feet of width for the toe rock, for a total width of approximately 6 feet. The total height of the toe rock and berm will be approximately 3 feet above the OHWM. 2.3.1.5 Importation of Sand, Gravel and Rock Materials for Beach Construction The underlying soil will be graded to the appropriate slope before beach materials are overlaid. Finished beach slopes will range from 20H:1V on the south beach segment, to 7.5H:1V on the north segment. These grades would vary in response to existing bathymetry and represent a range of slopes that is suitable and desirable for nearshore habitat and recreational use on Lake Washington. Imported beach materials will include a finer-grained sand/gravel mix (coarse sand up to 1-1/2 inch minus gravel) in the more gently sloping south beach segment, and a coarser pea gravel to 1-1/2 inch minus gravel blend in the steeper north beach segment. At the north and south ends of the beach, rock "beach anchors" are proposed to contain the imported beach materials and prevent longshore transport from moving imported beach materials into much steeper and deeper adjacent areas. The beach anchors will be constructed of imported basalt quarry rock of varying size gradations. The rock will be installed in two to three layers of different gradations to build a stable mass. The beach anchors will extend approximately 20 feet out into the water (see Figure 2). Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 9 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I Project Description 2.3.1.6 Future Revegetation No planting is proposed below the OHWM. Shoreline revegetation landward of this line would be performed as part of a separate upland redevelopment action and permit. 2.3.2 Conservation Measures Conservation measures that will be used to avoid environmental impacts during fill excavation, bulkhead removal, and piling removal include: • All work will be conducted within the approved timing windows for listed species in this area of Lake Washington, which extends from July 16 to December 31 annually. • A silt curtain and/or debris boom will be deployed where possible to contain silt or debris that may enter the lake during demolition activities. The silt curtain and/or debris boom will be checked prior to and during construction to ensure that it is functioning properly. • All debris that is removed from the project area will be disposed of offsite in an approved upland disposal area. • If a barge is used, it will remain in adequate water depths to avoid grounding. • An emergency spill containment kit will be located on site and promptly used for clean up of accidental spills. • Any creosote-treated material, pile stubs, and associated sediments will be disposed of by the contractor in a landfill that meets the liner and leachate standards of the Minimum Functional Standards, Chapter 173-304 WAC. • Creosote-treated piling, stubs, and associated sediments (if any) will be contained on a barge. The storage area will consist of a row of hay or straw bales, or filter fabric, placed around the perimeter of the barge. (Only a small number of piling to be removed are treated.) • Timber piling that break or are already broken below the waterline will be removed with a clamshell bucket. To minimize disturbance to bottom sediments and splintering of piling, the contractor will use the minimum size bucket required to pull out piling based on pile depth and substrate. The clamshell bucket will be emptied of piling and debris on a contained barge before it is lowered into the water. If the bucket contains only sediment, the bucket will Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 10 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Project Description remain closed and be lowered to the mudline and opened to redeposit the sediment. • A containment boom surrounding the work area will be used during creosote- treated timber pile removal. The boom will collect any floating debris. Oil- absorbent materials will be employed if a visible sheen is observed. The boom will remain in place until all oily material and floating debris have been collected and sheens have dissipated. Used oil-absorbent materials will be disposed of in a landfill that meets the liner and leachate standards of the Minimum Functional Standards, Chapter 173-304 WAC. • Any floating debris in ~e containment boom shall be removed by the end of the work day or when the boom is removed, whichever comes first. Captured material shall be disposed of in an upland disposal site. • The Barbee Mill Company will comply with water quality restrictions imposed by Ecology (Chapter 173-201A WAC), which specifies a mixing zone beyond which water quality standards cannot be exceeded. Compliance with Ecology's standards is intended to ensure that fish and aquatic life are being protected to the extent feasible and practical. • The Barbee Mill Company will obtain Hydraulic Project Approval (HP A) from Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and adhere to all conditions of the HP A. Additional conservation measures that will be used during gravel beach construction include: • Gravel to be placed along the beach will be washed off site prior to placement to eliminate the potential for increased temporary turbidity. • Any stockpiled material in the upland will be covered to minimize the potential for material to enter the water. 2.4 Project Schedule The project is planned to begin in autumn 2005 or summer 2006 and will be completed during the approved in-water work window. The work will take about 6 weeks to complete. Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 11 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Environmental Baseline 3 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE 3.1 Action Area The action area is the area directly and indirectly affected by the project and includes the project area plus the aquatic area extending from the existing bulkhead out to the edge of the 150-foot water quality mixing zone determined by Ecology to comply with state water quality standards (WAC 173-201A-llO). 3.2 Physical Indicators 3.2.1 Substrate, Slope, and Depth Subst~ates in the project area consist of clean silt and sand. Currently the shoreline drops abruptly from the bulkhead to approximately 5 feet of water depth. This shoreline is altered from its natural condition. Water depth in Lake Washington is regulated by the Hiram M. Chittenden Locks. The water depth fluctuates no more than 2 feet throughout the year. During the winter months, the lake level is lowered 2 feet from OHW of 18.67 feet to Ordinary Low Water (OLW) of 16.67 feet (NGVD). Draw- down is very gradual beginning in July and reaches the low between October and December. OLW is maintained through the wet season and potential flood periods. Water levels in Lake Washington are increased in mid-February, reaching OHW by June (USACE 2001). 3.2.2 Salt/Freshwater Mixing Lake Washington is a freshwater lake. Saltwater intrusion through the Lake Washington Ship Canal is limited by the Hiram M. Chittenden Locks, which restrict saltwater backflow. 3.3 Chemical Indicators 3.3.1 Water Quality Lake Washington water quality varies depending on location and is monitored by King County at various locations around the lake. The closest monitoring station to the project area is located at Newcastle Beach to the north, and is part of the county's swimming beach monitoring program. Monitoring data from 2004 shows slightly elevated levels of fecal coliform and e. coli bacteria in the summer months, with one very Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 12 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Environmental Baseline high reading in July (KCDNR 2005b). Lake Washington is listed on Ecology's 303(d) List of Impaired and Threatened Waterbodies for fecal coliform exceedances (Ecology 1998). 3.3.2 Sediment Quality Sediment dredging and cleanup activities were completed by the Barbee Mill Company in summer/fall 2002 under the Voluntary Cleanup Program, with input from Ecology, and in accordance with applicable local, state, and federal permits. Soils and sediments in the area meet State Model Toxics Control Act cleanup standards. Contaminants in the area prior to cleanup were related to accumulated wood debris from the lumber mill. 3.4 Biological Indicators 3.4.1 Riparian Vegetation Riparian vegetation is generally absent in the project area. The shoreline behind the bulkhead is paved. Where the shoreline is not paved, there is vegetation including soft rush Uuncus effusus) and Iris pseudocaris, a non-native iris. 3.4.2 Prey Species Studies in 1999 to 2000 investigating juvenile chinook salmon rearing in the littoral zone of Lake Washington found that fish primarily consumed insects from the family Chironomidae (Dipterans -flies), but switch to the planktonic crustacean Daphnia spp. in late spring (Koehler 2002). Other prey resources include various benthic and epibenthic invertebrates that are consumed frequently but in lesser quantities than chironomids and Daphnia. In comparisons of various shoreline developments, prey abundances were highly variable in the presence of shoreline modifications, but specific effects of those modifications were difficult to quantify. In addition, fine organic (mud) substrates along the shoreline (outside of the project and action area) produced significantly higher abundances of chironomid larvae than sand substrates. Koehler (2002) concluded that quality habitat for important chinook prey resources included fine organic (mud) substrates in undisturbed littoral zones. In the proposed project area, chinook salmon prey abundance is expected to be low due to the presence of the bulkhead and corresponding lack of shoreline vegetation, and the recent sediment cleanup activities in which wood debris was removed from the bottom. Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 13 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Environmental Baseline 3.4.3 Aquatic Vegetation Growth of aquatic vegetation was discouraged in the past by wood debris on the bottom. The wood debris was cleaned up in 2002. It is not known whether vegetation has colonized the area since the 2002 dredging, however, if vegetation is present, it is likely to be Eurasian milfoil, a non-native invasive species that has choked out much of the native aquatic vegetation in Lake Washington (KCDNR 2003). Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 14 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Species Occurrence, Effects Antis, and Effects Determination 4 SPECIES OCCURRENCE, EFFECTS ANALYSIS, AND EFFECTS DETERMINATION Resident and anadromous juvenile and adult salmonids use Lake Washington. Specific species using the lake include chinook, coho, sockeye, cutthroat and rainbow/steelhead trout. Pink and chum salmon were historically abundant in the lake system, but now are considered extinct in the watershed (GLWTC 2001). Other fish species found in Lake Washington include black crappie, bluegill, largemouth bass, smallmouth bass, pumpkinseed sunfish, tench, and yellow perch (KCDNR 2003). The listed species under National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) jurisdiction that potentially occurs in the project vicinity is chinook salmon (Appendix A). The identified Evolutionary Significant Unit (ESU) for chinook salmon includes all naturally spawned populations from rivers and streams flowing into Puget Sound. Species under U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) jurisdiction potentially occurring in the project area include bald eagles, bull trout, and marbled murrelet. 4.1 Puget Sound Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) 4.1.1 Status Puget Sound chinook are listed as threatened by the NMFS. The status of each stock of chinook salmon that are present in the Lake Washington watershed has been determined by WDFW et al. (1993), based on at least one of the following parameters: escapement, run size, survival, or fitness levels. The Cedar River stock status is unknown; however, the Muckleshoot Tribe believes that this stock is depressed (WDFW et al. 1993). The Issaquah Creek stock was classified as healthy based on post-spawning carcass counts (WDFW et al. 1993). The stock status for the North Lake Washington tributaries is unknown due to a lack of consistent spawning ground data. However, all the tributaries used by this stock have been intensely urbanized, which masks the natural population limiting factors of low summer stream flow and poor spawning gravel quality. The Lake Washington chinook stock is now considered depressed (City of Seattle 1998). Based on the 1987 to 1996 adult returns, each of the three Lake Washington stocks has shown a steep downward trend (Paron and Nelson 2001). Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 15 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Species Occurrence, Effects An.s, and Effects Determination 4.1.2 Critical Habitat On December 14, 2004, NMFS published proposed rules for designating critical habitat for 13 ESUs of Pacific salmon and steelhead in Washington, Oregon, and Idaho (NMFS 2004). This designation includes the Puget Sound ESU of chinook salmon, which is currently listed as threatened under the ESA. Critical habitat is designated for areas containing the physical and biological habitat features, or primary constituent elements (PCEs) essential for the conservation of the species or that require special management considerations. PCEs include sites that are essential to supporting one or more life stages of the ESU and that contain physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the ESU. Specific sites and features designated for Puget Sound chinook include the following: 1. Freshwater spawning sites with water quantity and quality conditions and substrate supporting spawning incubation and larval development. 2. Freshwater rearing sites with water quantity and floodplain connectivity to form and maintain physical habitat conditions and support juvenile growth, and mobility; water quality and forage supporting juvenile 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. 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. 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. 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 boulders, and side channels. Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 16 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Species Occurrence, Effects Ana., and Effects Determination The critical habitat proposal for Puget Sound chinook includes 61 occupied watersheds in 18 associated subbasins, as well as 19 nearshore marine zones. In setting this designation, the conservation value of each habitat area was considered in the context of the productivity, spatial distribution, and diversity of habitats across the range of five geographical regions of correlated risk. In estuarine areas, the in-shore extent is defined by the line of extreme high water. The proposed offshore extends to the depth of 30 meters (98 feet) relative to mean lower low water (MLL W). The project area falls within Unit 10, the Lake Washington Subbasin. Two historically independent chinook populations exist in this subbasin: North Lake Washington and Cedar River (69 Fed Reg. 74587). Lake Washington provides rearing and migration PCEs for salmon spawned in tributary streams. 4.1.3 Biology and Distribution Monitoring conducted by the WDFW on the Cedar River discovered two groups of naturally produced chinook enter the lake: fry and smolts (Seiler 1999, as cited in GLWTC 2001). Chinook fry (40 millimeter [mm] average) enter Lake Washington from mid-January through mid-April where they reside and rear. The most important area used by the fry while rearing in the lake is the littoral zone (less than 27 feet deep). Surveys of both the limnetic and littoral zones of Lake Washington have indicated that chinook (0 to 12 months old) occupy the littoral zone from early February through late May (Tabor et al. 2002). Chinook fry typically prefer areas that are gently sloping with small-grained substrates as well as areas around creek mouths and undeveloped shorelines (Tabor as cited in GLWTC 2001). In 2002, Tabor et al. also observed a higher abundance of juvenile chinook at a boat ramp than at nearby gravel/silt/mud sites at Beer Sheva Park in south Lake Washington. Chinook smolts (60 to 100 mm) typically enter the lake from May through June and migrate rapidly through the lake en route to the marine environment. Therefore, chinook fry are more dependent on littoral habitats in the lake for growth and refuge than smolts. In the project area, juvenile chinook are expected to use the shallow water for migrating and rearing. Juvenile salmonids are heavily reliant on shallow water habitats during Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 17 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Species Occurrence, Effects An_S, and Effects Determination their periods of residence (20 days to several months) in the lake (Fresh 2000; Koehler 2002). Areas most heavily utilized by juvenile chinook salmon exhibited shallow gradients, overhanging vegetation, and small substrates, and were not highly developed (Tabor et al. 2002). In addition, juvenile chinook salmon abundance was correlated with proximity to the mouth of the Cedar River (Tabor et al. 2002). All of this information indicates that the proposed restoration site at Rainier Beach Park is well positioned within the landscape to provide needed juvenile salmonid habitat in an area where favorable habitat attributes can be restored (Anchor 2003). Adult chinook return to Lake Washington between mid-June and October, with spawning in their natal river or tributary occurring between mid-September and mid- December (Paron and Nelson 2001). Spawning has been documented along the shoreline of other lake systems (Healey 1991); however, no confirmed spawning events have been documented in the littoral zone of Lake Washington. 4.1.4 Direct and Indirect Effects Potential direct and indirect effects to Puget Sound chinook salmon from the proposed beach restoration project are related to the physical, chemical, and biological indicators described in Section 3. 4. 1.4. 1 Physical Indicators Substrate, Slope, and Depth The existing substrate will not change. Where upland will be converted to aquatic land, the bottom substrate will consist of the gravels favorable to nearshore rearing habitat. The new gravel substrate will provide habitat for benthic invertebrates, which will likely attract juvenile salmonids. The shallower water will provide protection for juveniles from larger predators. The gently sloping bottom mimics natural conditions in the littoral (nearshore) zone, distinguishing it from the more sharply dropping limnetic (water column) zone, both of which are used by salmonids for different life history stages (KCDNR 2003). Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 18 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Species Occurrence, Effects An_s, and Effects Determination Salt/Freshwater Mixing Saltwater intrusion is limited by the Hiram M. Chittenden Locks, miles away from the project area. This project will not affect the salt/freshwater interface. 4.1.4.2 Chemical Indicators Water Quality Temporary turbidity could occur during construction. Conservation measures described in Section 2.3.2 will be implemented to minimize turbidity. This effect is short-lived, and the silt curtain will prevent fish from entering the turbid area. Sediments attached to the outside of the piling fall back to the lake bed in a short period of time (from several minutes to a few hours, depending on the sediment type, currents, and weather conditions). Removal of creosote-treated piling will improve long-term water quality at the site. Only a small number of piling associated with the former debarking facility are treated. Sediment Quality Sediments in the area are already clean, as described in Section 3.3.2. This project will add the gravel substrate needed by juvenile salmonids that has largely been eliminated from the area by shoreline alterations, resulting in an improvement to sediment quality. Removal of creosote-treated piling will improve the sediment quality of the areas surrounding the piling. Only a small number of piling associated with the former debarking facility are treated. 4.1.4.3 Biological Indicators Riparian Vegetation Riparian vegetation is currently absent from the site due to the paved shoreline. The project plans for a gently sloping gravel beach up to the OHWM. Upland planting is planned as part of the adjacent, subsequent development project, but is not part of the scope of the Beach Restoration project. Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 19 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I il I I I I I I Species Occurrence, Effects Anae, and Effects Determination Prey Species Benthic invertebrates are expected to colonize the gravel substrate below the OL WM. While it is difficult quantify an increase in prey availability, the continuity of beach to nearshore habitat will be restored, so some benefit is expected. Prey availability will not be decreased by this project, and is likely to increase. Aquatic Vegetation Native aquatic vegetation in Lake Washington has been choked out by explosive growth of Eurasian milfoil (KCDNR 2003). Until milfoil is controlled throughout the lake, a change in the composition of aquatic vegetation at the project site is unlikely. 4.1.5 Effects Determination The activities described for this proposed project will not result in long-term adverse impacts to Puget Sound chinook salmon. The long-term effects will be beneficial by providing improved habitat conditions for chinook salmon. The short-term and temporary impacts associated with this proposed project would be offset by the previously described conservation measures that would be used during construction, and by the long-term beneficial effects of the beach restoration. Thus, it is determined that this project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect Puget Sound chinook salmon. 4.1.6 Critical Habitat Effects Determination Impacts to critical habitat will be temporary and short-lived. Long-term benefits to existing critical habitat are anticipated, and scarce beach habitat will be restored where there is currently upland intrusion. This project will not destroy or adversely modify proposed critical habitat for Puget Sound chinook ESU, and will in fact realize a long- term benefit. If critical habitat for this ESU becomes designated prior to completion of the project, the project may affect, but would not be likely to adversely affect critical habitat for the Puget Sound chinook ESU. 4.2 Bull Trout (Sa/velinus confluentus) 4.2.1 Status The bull trout is listed as threatened. Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 20 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Species Occurrence, Effects Ana, and Effects Determination 4.2.2 Critical Habitat On June 25, 2004, USFWS published proposed rules for designating critical habitat for the Coastal-Puget Sound population of bull trout, which was listed as a threatened species in 1999. Critical habitat designates areas that contain PCEs essential for the conservation of a threatened or endangered species and that may require special management considerations. For an area to be included as critical habitat it has to provide one or more of the following functions for bull trout: 1. Spawning, rearing, foraging, or over wintering habitat to support essential existing local populations. 2. Movement corridors necessary for maintaining essential migratory life history forms. 3. Suitable habitat that is considered essential for recovering existing local populations that have declined or that need to be re-established to achieve recovery. Areas providing one or more of these functions and at least one of the following nine PCEs are designated as critical habitat: 1. Water temperatures ranging from 36 to 59°F (2 to 15°C), with adequate thermal refugia available for temperatures at the upper end of this range. Specific temperatures within this range will 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. 2. Complex stream channels with features such as woody debris, side channels, pools, and undercut banks to provide a variety of depths, velocities, and instream structures. 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. A minimal amount of fine substrate less than 0.25 inch (0.63 centimeter [cm]) in diameter and minimal substrate embeddedness are characteristic of these conditions. Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 21 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I • Species Occurrence, Effects An.s, and Effects Determination 4. A natural hydrograph, including peak, high, low, and base flows within historic ranges or, if regulated, a hydro graph 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. 5. Springs, seeps, groundwater sources, and subsurface water connectivity to contribute to water quality and quantity. 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. 7. An abundant food base including terrestrial organisms of riparian origin, aquatic macroinvertebrates, and forage fish. 8. Few or no nonnative predatory, interbreeding, or competitive species present. 9. Permanent water of sufficient quantity and quality such that normal reproduction, growth, and survival are not inhibited. The critical habitat proposal calls for a total of 2,290 miles of streams in western Washington to be designated as bull trout critical habitat, along with 52,540 acres of lakes and reservoirs and marine habitat paralleling 985 miles of shoreline. All areas proposed as critical habitat for bull trout are within the historic geographic range of the species and already contain features and habitat characteristics that are necessary to sustain the species. However, not all areas that are currently occupied are designated as critical habitat because the USFWS determined that some small scattered areas with bull trout are not essential to the conservation of the species based on current scientific and commercial information. In marine nearshore areas, the inshore extent of critical habitat is the mean higher high water (MHHW) mark, including tidally influenced freshwater heads of estuaries. Adjacent shoreline riparian areas, bluffs, and uplands are not proposed as critical habitat. The proposed offshore extent of critical habitat for marine nearshore areas is to the depth of 33 feet (10 meters) relative to MLLW (average of all the lower low water heights of the two daily tidal levels), which is the average depth of the photic zone. Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 22 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I Species Occurrence, Effects An.s, and Effects Determination The project area lies within Unit 28, Puget Sound, and Critical Habitat Subunit (CHSU) x (lowercase Roman numeral 10), Lake Washington. This CHSU provides foraging, migration, and overwintering habitat for bull trout from Lake Washington tributary streams (69 Fed Reg 35795). Water temperatures are slightly higher than ideal in the summer months (GLWTC 2001), but food supply and water quality and quantity are sufficient for migration and overwintering. 4.2.3 Biology and Distribution Bull trout and Dolly Varden (5. malma) are the only char in the family Salmonidae that are native to Washington. Until recently, bull trout were classified with Dolly Varden under one scientific name. In 1991 the American Fisheries Society supported the decision to split them into two distinct species. Information on the distribution and life history of each species is not yet distinct because the species are biologically similar and methods to separate them are new and not widely applied (Bonar et aI1997). There is no survey protocol currently endorsed by the USFWS for establishing absence of bull trout, so its presence is assumed where there is suitable habitat (USFWS 1999). Four life history strategies are known to be used by bull trout, but only two could be used by individuals in Lake Washington: adfluvial and anadromous. Bull trout using the ad fluvial life history strategy spend their entire lives in freshwater. Adfluvial bull trout grow and mature in lakes, then move into tributary streams to spawn. Anadromous bull trout spawn in freshwater, but have some period of growth and development in the marine environment. Reproducing populations of bull troutlDolly Varden occur in the upper Cedar River basin in Chester Morse Lake, but have not been confirmed in the lower Cedar River, Lake Washington, Lake Sammamish, or other tributaries. Cedar Falls is a complete barrier to anadromous fish, and is located just below Chester Morse Lake (WDFW 1998). Reports of Dolly Varden in Lake Washington are rare; however, one was identified during a 2-year creel survey conducted in 1981 to 1982. Two bull troutlDolly Varden were reported holding below a culvert in the headwaters of Issaquah Creek in the fall of 1993 (WDFW 1998). Water temperatures in the lower Cedar River and Issaquah Creek may be too high to support these fish. Water temperature is probably the most Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 23 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Species Occurrence, Effects An.s, and Effects Determination important habitat feature limiting the distribution and abundance of bull trout. Bull trout are uncommon in waters where the temperature exceeds 15°C for extended periods (KCDNR 2000). During the last decade, the mean temperature of Lake Washington in August at 15 feet has ranged from 19.8°C to 22.4°C (GLWTC 2001). Therefore, a self-sustaining population of bull trout is unlikely in Lake Washington. 4.2.4 Direct and Indirect Effects If bull trout are present in Lake Washington, the potential direct and indirect effects to bull trout from the proposed beach restoration project are the same as those discussed for Puget Sound chinook salmon in Section 4.1.4. 4.2.5 Effects Determination The activities described for this proposed project will not result in long-term adverse impacts to Puget Sound bull trout. The short-term and temporary impacts associated with this proposed project would be offset by the previously described conservation measures that would be used during construction, and by the long-term beneficial effects of the beach restoration. Thus, it is determined that this project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect bull trout. 4.2.6 Critical Habitat Effects Determination Impacts to critical habitat will be temporary and short-lived. Long-term benefits to existing critical habitat are anticipated, and scarce beach habitat will be restored where there is currently upland intrusion. This project will not destroy or adversely modify proposed critical habitat for Puget Sound bull trout, and will in fact realize a long-term benefit. If critical habitat for this ESU becomes designated prior to completion of the project, the project may affect, but would not be likely to adversely affect critical habitat for the Puget Sound bull trout ESU. 4.3 Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) 4.3.1 Status The bald eagle is listed as threatened. Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 24 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Species Occurrence, Effects Anes, and Effects Determination 4.3.2 Critical Habitat No critical habitat has been designated for bald eagles. 4.3.3 Biology and Distribution 4.3.3.1 Nesting and Wintering Nesting occurs from January 1 to August 15. Bald eagles commonly nest in wild settings, but will nest close to urban areas if there is an abundant food source nearby. Bald eagle nests are frequently associated with water, such as Lake Washington and the Puget Sound, and most often occur close to shorelines. Wintering activities for bald eagles occur from October 31 through March 31. Habitat used by bald eagles in winter is similar to that used during breeding season. In winter, eagles prefer to use perch sites close to water and with a panoramic view. During the winter months, bald eagles forage, construct nests, and engage in courtship activities. There may also be eagles from outside the region that forage along the coastline of Puget Sound in winter. Winter is a high-stress period for eagles because food is scarce and adverse weather requires the birds to expend more energy. Wintering bald eagles concentrate near food sources, and where there is minimal disturbance. The Pacific States Bald Eagle Recovery Plan recommends limiting construction activities near bald eagle nests during critical wintering and nesting periods. The plan recommends construction and disturbance setbacks of 400 meters (1,313 feet) if the nest does not have a line of sight to the proposed construction activity, or 800 meters (2,625 feet) if the nest is within line of sight of construction. In addition, the USFWS may place restrictions on timing of in-water activities during bald eagle nesting if a nest is within 1 mile of a construction site where pile driving is to occur. Any actions that do not meet these criteria must be conducted outside the nesting period for bald eagles, which is from January 1 through August 15 (USFWS 1986). The closest bald eagle nests to the project area are located on Mercer Island, approximately 3,500 feet (0.65 mile) away. A pair of nests exists near the shoreline. These nests probably have a line of sight to the project site on the opposite shoreline. Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 25 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Species Occurrence, Effects Ane, and Effects Determination Bald eagle territory is delineated about 3,000 feet north of the project site and all along the opposite shoreline (more than 3,000 feet away) (WDFW 2005). 4.3.3.2 Foraging Foraging habitat for bald eagles is typically associated with water features such as rivers, lakes, and coastal shorelines where fish, waterfowl, and seabirds are preyed upon. They are usually seen foraging in open areas with wide views (Stalmaster and Newman 1979). Bald eagles typically forage at or near the surface of any body of water, close (less than 500 meters) to shoreline perching habitat and often in proximity to large numbers of congregating waterfowl or spawning salmon. 4.3.3.3 Perching Perch sites may be used for activities that include hunting, prey consumption, signaling territory occupation, and resting. Perches are most often associated with food sources near water and will have visual access to adjacent habitats (Stalmaster and Newman 1979). The upland areas immediately landward and north and south of the project site are developed and paved. Stands of trees exist east of the project site and across Lake Washington Boulevard, close to residential development. Given their distance from the shoreline and the lack of adjacent forage habitat, these trees are probably not used by eagles as perch trees. 4.3.4 Direct and Indirect Effects Potential direct and indirect effects of the proposed project are related to noise disturbance from the construction equipment. There are no bald eagle nests within the project site and the closest ones are approximately 3,475 feet away, across the water from the project site. There are no nesting areas in the immediate project area. The only trees are medium-sized deciduous trees located several hundred feet back from the shoreline. In addition, construction is expected to occur beginning in October, which is outside of the bald eagle nesting period Oanuary 1 to August 15). Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 26 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Species Occurrence, Effects An.s, and Effects Determination Wintering bald eagles prefer perch sites close to water and with a panoramic view. The only potential perch sites in the project area are the deciduous trees set back from the shoreline, which do not contain suitable perching habitat. Wintering bald eagles could, however, be foraging in the project area and may avoid it during construction due to the noise. This avoidance is considered a minimal impact due to bald eagles large foraging territories and the short term timing of construction. 4.3.5 Effects Determination The activities proposed for this project would not result in long-term, permanent adverse impacts to bald eagles. Construction noise would only be expected to minimally impact wintering, foraging bald eagles. Given the biology and life history characteristics of bald eagles and the proposed construction elements, this project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect bald eagles. 4.3.6 Critical Habitat Effects Determination Not Applicable. 4.4 Interrelated/Interdependent Actions This project is taking place in order for the Barbee Mill Company to vacate aquatic lands leased from DNR. The proposed use of the upland property is development for residential use. That project will result in removal of impervious surface from the shoreline, and the residential use is compatible with the creation of beach habitat. The upland development has been evaluated under a separate environmental review process. 4.5 Incidental Take Analysis The potential for incidental take is minimal because of the absence of ESA-listed species in the project area at the time of construction, and the use of the specified conservation measures during construction activities. The activities have a very low likelihood of disturbing any listed species to an extent that would significantly disrupt normal behavior patterns. There will be no significant habitat degradation, and habitat modification will be Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 27 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I Species Occurrence, Effects An.s, and Effects Determination beneficiaL Therefore, incidental take of any threatened or endangered species is not expected. Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 28 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I References 5 REFERENCES Anchor Environmental, L.L.e. 2003. Seattle Shoreline Park Inventory and Habitat Assessment. Prepared for Seattle Parks and Recreation. June 2003. Bonar, S.A., Divems, M., and Bolding, B. 1997. Methods for sampling the distribution and abundance of bull troutlDolly Varden. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Inland Fisheries Investigations, Resources Assessment Division, Report No. RAD97-05. Olympia, Washington. City of Seattle. 1998. Cedar River Watershed Draft Habitat Conservation Plan. Prepared for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service. Fresh, K.L. 2000. Use of Lake Washington by juvenile Chinook salmon, 1999 and 2000. Proceedings of the Chinook salmon in the Greater Lake Washington Watershed Workshop, Shoreline, Washington, November 8-9, 2000, King County, Seattle, Washington. Greater Lake Washington Technical Committee (GLWTC). 2001. Draft Reconnaissance Assessment-Habitat Factors that Contribute to the Decline of Salmonids. Greater Lake Washington Watershed WRIA 8. Prepared by the GLWTe. Healey, M.e. 1991. Life history of Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha). In: Groot, e. and L. Margolis [eds]. Pacific Salmon Life Histories. University of British Columbia Press. Vancouver, British Columbia. 564 pp. King County Dept. of Natural Resources (KCDNR). 2005a. Proposed Lake Washington/Cedar River/Sammamish Watershed Conservation Plan, by the WRIA 8 Steering Committee, King County Dept. of Natural Resources. February 25, 2005. King County Dept. of Natural Resources (KCDNR). 2005b. Swimming Beach Monitoring Program. http:Udnr.metrokc.gov/wlr/waterres!1akeslbacteria.htm. Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 29 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I References KCDNR 2003. SWAMP (Sammamish/Washington Analysis and Modeling Program). Lake Washington Existing Conditions Report. Prepared by Tetra Tech ISG, Inc. and Parametrix, Inc. September 2003. KCDNR 2000. Literature Review and Recommended Sampling Protocol for Bull Trout in King County. Seattle, WA. Koehler, M.E. 2002. Diet and prey resources of juvenile Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) rearing in the littoral zone of an urban lake. M.S. Thesis. University of Washington, Seattle. National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 2004. List of threatened and candidate species occurring in the project area: accessed March 7, 2003 at the NMFS website- http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/lhabcon/habweb/listnwr.htm. Paron, D.G. and E. Nelson. 2001. Seward Park Rehabilitation Study: Juvenile Salmonid Use of Shoreline Habitats in Seward Park, King County, Washington. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District. Prepared for the City of Seattle Parks Department. PFMC. 1999. Identification and description of EFH, adverse impacts, and recommended conservation measures for salmon; Amendment 14 to the Pacific Coast Salmon Plan. Pacific Fishery Management Council, Portland Oregon. Seiler, D. 1999. As cited in GLWTC 2001. Stalmaster, M.V. and J.R Newman. 1979. Perch-site preferences of wintering bald eagles in northwest Washington. Journal of Wildlife Management. 43:221-224. Tabor, R, J. Scheurer, H. Gearns, C. McCoy, and E. Bixler. 2002. Nearshore Habitat Use by Juvenile Chinook Salmon in Lentic Systems of the Lake Washington Basin, Annual Report, 2002. USFWS, Western Washington Fish and Wildlife Office, Division of Fisheries and Watershed Assessment; Lacey, Washington. Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 30 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I References Tabor, R. 2001. As cited in GLWTC 2001. USACE. 2001. Lake Washington Summary Hydrograph. Hydrology and Hydraulics Section; Reservoir Control Center. http://www.nwd-wc.usace.army.mil/nws/hh/basins/cgi- bin/lkwash.pl, accessed on August 2,2001. USFWS Western Washington Office. 1999. "Biological Assessment Preparation and Review." workshop handout, October 20, 1999, revision of March 10, 1993 document. USFWS. 1986. Recovery plan for the Pacific bald eagle. Portland, Oregon. 160 pp. Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 2005. Priority Habitats and Species Maps. Olympia, Washington. WDFW et aL 1993. 1992 Washington State Salmon and Steelhead Stock Inventory, Appendix One Puget Sound Stocks. Prepared by Washington Department of Fisheries, Washington Department of Wildlife, and Western Washington Treaty Indian Tribes, Olympia, Washington. WDFW. 1998. Washington Salmonid Stock Inventory. Appendix: Bull Trout and Dolly Varden. Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). 1998. 303(d) List of Threatened and Impaired Waterbodies. Available at: (http://www .ecy. wa.gov /programs/wq/303d/1998/wrias/wria8. pdf). Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration 31 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I ; I I I I I I APPENDIX A ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT CONSULTATION I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Appendix A-Es_al Fish Habitat Consultation ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT CONSULTATION Essential Fish Habitat Background Pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSFCMA) and the 1996 Sustainable Fisheries Act (SFA) an Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) evaluation of impacts is necessary for activities that may adversely affect EFH. EFH is defined by the MSFCMA in 50 CFR 600.905-930 as "those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity." Further definitions include: Waters Aquatic areas and associated physical, chemical, and biological properties that are used by fish. Substrate Sediment, hard bottom, structures underlying the waters, and associated biological communities. Necessary The habitat required to support a sustainable fishery and managed species' contribution to a healthy ecosystem. This document was also prepared as a resource document for concurrent consultation with NMFS for compliance with the MSFCMA. EFH consultations are required for federally managed fishery species. The federally managed species with EFH in Lake Washington are Pacific salmon, including chinook, coho, and sockeye salmon, and coastal cutthroat trout. EFH for Pacific salmon includes all those streams, lakes, ponds, wetlands, and other currently viable water bodies and most of the habitat historically accessible to salmon in Washington (PFMC 1999; full citation for references in Appendix A are found in the BE Section 5 -References). Other anadromous salmonids, such as chum salmon and steelhead trout are rarely captured in the Pacific Fishery Management Council's ocean fisheries and are therefore not addressed with regards to EFH. However, the EFH evaluation for Pacific salmon species considers similar habitat needs and uses to those of these additional species. Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration A-1 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Appendix A-Es_al Fish Habitat Consultation Chinook Salmon Freshwater EFH for chinook salmon consists of four major components (PFMC 1999): • Spawning and incubation • Juvenile rearing • Juvenile migration corridors • Adult migration corridors and adult holding habitat Within these areas, essential features of critical habitat include adequate: • Substrate composition • Water quality (e.g., dissolved oxygen, nutrients, temperature, etc.) • Water quantity, depth, and velocity • Channel gradient and stability • Food • Cover and habitat complexity • Space • Access and passage • Floodplain and habitat connectivity Lake Washington habitats are important for all chinook essential habitat types except spawning. Essential features of chinook habitat that may be affected by the proposed project include substrate composition, water quality, food, cover/habitat complexity, access/passage, and habitat connectivity. Analysis of Effects on EFH Substrate Composition The existing substrate will not change (waterward of the project area). Where upland will be converted to aquatic land, the bottom substrate will consist of the gravels favorable to nearshore rearing habitat. The new gravel substrate will provide habitat for benthic invertebrates, which will likely attract juvenile salmonids. Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration A-2 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Appendix A-EsAal Fish Habitat Consultation Water Quality Temporary turbidity could occur during construction. Conservation measures described in Section 2.3.2 will be implemented to minimize turbidity. This effect is short-lived, and the silt curtain will prevent fish from entering the turbid area. Water temperatures in Lake Washington are warmer than optimal for salmon during the summer months. This project is of a small scale and will not affect water temperatures in the area. Food The gravel substrate in the constructed beach environment will encourage colonization by benthic invertebrates, which are a lesser component of the salmonid diet. Cover and habitat complexity The project will improve habitat complexity by providing nearshore habitat that is generally lacking in the area. The nearshore habitat is shallow, giving juvenile chinook salmon cover from larger predators. Access and passage The project will improve fish passage during juvenile migration by allowing fish to remain in shallow water as they move down the shoreline. Currently, fish have to venture into deeper water in order to bypass the bulkhead. Floodplain and habitat connectivity The project will benefit habitat connectivity because it adjoins the Mouth of May Creek restoration project, allowing for smooth transition between complimentary habitat types. EFH Assessment and Determination The activities described for this proposed project would not result in long-term, permanent adverse impacts to chinook salmon EFH. The short-term and temporary impacts associated with this proposed project are insignificant given the long-term benefits of the project and the conservation measures (described in the project BE Section 2.3.2) that would be used Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration A-3 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Appendix A -Es_al Fish Habitat Consultation during construction. A silt curtain would be maintained at adequate depths to prevent silt from washing into the lake. The long-term effects of the proposed project are expected to improve baseline substrate conditions and be beneficial to Pacific salmon EFH. Given the reasons mentioned previously, this project would have no adverse effects on chinook salmon EFH. Coho Salmon The important elements of coho salmon freshwater EFH are (PFMC 1999): • Spawning and incubation • Juvenile rearing • Juvenile migration corridors • Adult migration corridors Important features of essential habitat include adequate: • Substrate composition • Water quality • Water quantity, depth, and velocity • Channel gradient and stability • Food • Cover and habitat complexity • Space • Access and passage • Habitat and flood plain connectivity Lake Washington habitats are important for all coho essential habitat types except spawning. EFH in the project action area that may be affected include substrate composition, water quality, food, cover/habitat complexity, access/passage, and habitat connectivity. In the project area, substrate is degraded due to the presence of overwater structures and concrete rubble and debris. Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration A-4 May 2005 040091-01 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Appendix A -Es8al Fish Habitat Consultation Analysis of Effects on EFH Effects on EFH for coho are similar to those for chinook salmon. See discussion above for chinook salmon EFH. EFH Assessment and Determination See discussion above for chinook salmon EFH. Given the reasons mentioned for chinook salmon, this project would have no adverse effects on coho salmon EFH. Sockeye Salmon and Coastal Cutthroat Trout Essential habitat elements for sockeye salmon and coastal cutthroat trout are not included in the PFMC guidance document because incidental catches of these species in PFMC- managed fisheries are rare (PFMC 1999). However, habitat requirements are similar to those for other salmonids and the discussion of effects on chinook salmon is relevant to these species. EFH Conclusion Pursuant to the MSFCMA and the SF A, an EFH Assessment has been completed and concludes that the proposed action may affect EFH. Consultation on EFH is requested in conjunction with the ESA consultation. Biological Evaluation Barbee Mill Beach Restoration A-5 May 2005 040091-01 ,., JOINT AQUATIC RESOURCES PERMITAPPLICATION FORM (JARPA) Ift:CEIVED (for use in Washington State) PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT IN BLACK INK o Application for a Fish Habitat Enhancement Project per requirements of RCW 77.55.290. You must submit a copy of this completed JARPA application form and the (Fish Habitat Enhancement JARPA Addition) to your local Government Planning Department and Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife Area Habitat Biologist on the same day. NOTE: LOCAL GOVERNMENTS -You must submit any comments on these projects to WDFW within 15 working days. Based on the instructions provided, I am sending copies of this application to the following: (check all that apply) I2SI Local Government for shoreline: 0 Substantial Development o Conditional Use o Variance I2SI Exemption o Revision o Floodplain Management o Critical Areas Ordinance I2SI Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife for HPA (Submit 3 copies to WDFW Region) I2SI Washington Department of Ecology for 401 Water Quality Certification (to Regional Office-Federal Permit Unit) I2SI Washington Department of Natural Resources for Aquatic Resources Use Authorization Notification I2SI Corps of Engineers for: I2SI Section 404 o Section 10 permit Note: Because this proposed Barbee Mill shoreline restoration project includes the removal of historical fill materials, re-establishment of open-water and nearshore vegetated habitats, and will result in substantial net gains in aquatic resource functions and values, this project qual!fies for a Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit 27. 0 Coast Guard for General Bridge Act Permit 0 For Department of Transportation projects only: This project will be designed to meet conditions of the most current Ecology/Department of Transportation Water Quality Implementing Agreement SECTION A -Use for all permits covered by this application. Be sure to ALSO complete Section C (Signature Block) for all permit applications. 1. APPLICANT Robert Cugini, Barbee Mill CO. MAILING ADDRESS 4101 Lake Washington Blvd. N, Renton, WA 98056 WORK PHONE E-MAIL ADDRESS I HOME PHONE I FAX # 425-226-3900 robert_cugini@barbeemill.com If an agent is acting for the applicant during the permit process, complete #2. Be sure agent signs Section C (Signature Block) for all permit applications 2 AUTHORIZED AGENT Clay Patmont, Anchor Environmental, L.L.C. MAILING ADDRESS 1423 Third Ave., Suite 300, Seattle, WA 98101 WORK PHONE E-MAIL ADDRESS I HOME PHONE I FAX # 206-903-3324 cpatmont@anchorenv.com 206-287-9131 3. RELATIONSHIP OF APPLICANT TO PROPERTY: DOWNER o PURCHASER 181 LESSEE o OTHER: 4. NAME, ADDRESS, AND PHONE NUMBER OF PROPERTY OWNER(S), IF OTHER THAN APPLICANT: Washington State Dept. of Natural Resources P.O. Box 47001, Olympia, WA 98504-7001 360-802-7020 (Mark Mauren, Mgr., Aquatic Lands, Shoreline District) 5. LOCATION (STREET ADDRESS, INCLUDING CITY, COUNTY AND ZIP CODE, WHERE PROPOSED ACTIVITY EXISTS OR WILL OCCUR) 4300 Lake Washington Blvd. N., Renton 98056 (King County) LOCAL GOVERNMENT WITH JURISDICTION (CITY OR COUNTY) King County .IARP A, Revised 7/02 Contact the State of Washington Office of Permit Assistance for latest version, 360/407-7037 or 800/917-0043 1 I WA.TERB;?D:;;>:~\U,~~~~.~RKI;',jG IN _ ' v.!t>~k.r=. 'Npsomgten ~)\'1 \.\f)·\d~:;' .~ IS THIS WATERBODY ON.THE 303(d) LIST? YES 181 NO 0 . , IFYES.WHAT<PARAM~TER(S)? Fecal coliform "'j";'i::' .' . hllp~lI~ww.ecv. wa.gov/pro!!.rams/wgllinks/impaircd wtrs.html WEBSITE FOR 303d LIST (_ l' ,;~'" ';\':" ;.>~ : y. SECTION .1 SECTION 1 TOWNSHIP I RANGE I GOVERNMENT LOT 32 24N 5E N/A LATITUDE & LONGITUDE: I 47.50 N 1220 W TAX PARCEL NO: 3224056666 TRIBUTARY OF Puget Sound SHORELINE DESIGNATION Urban ZONING DESIGNATION Commercial Office DNR STREAM TYPE, IF KNOWN N/A WRIA# 8 Cedar/Sammamish 6. DESCRIBE THE CURRENT USE OF THE PROPERTY,AND STRUCTURES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. HAVE YOU COMPLETED ANY PORTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY ON THIS PROPERTY? 0 YES 181 NO FOR ANY PORTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY ALREADY COMPLETED ON THIS PROPERTY, INDICATE MONTH AND YEAR OF COMPLETION. The project site is on the southeastern shore of Lake Washington, just north of the mouth of May Creek (Figure 1), The Barbee Mill is located on two parcels. One upland parcel is operated by the Barbee Mill Co.; the other is aquatic land leased from the Washington State Dept. of Natural Resources. This application concerns only the aquatic parcel (Photos 1 and 2), . The property is currently developed as a lumber mill. The mill ceased operations in the late 1990s .. Between approximately 1944 and 1957, approximately 550 linear feet of uplands were created on the waterward side of the Inner Harbor Line. Most of this area is currently paved, and two former lumber mill buildings are located within the lease area footprint (Figure 2, Photos 3 and 4). The southern 300 linear feet of shoreline fill is protected by a timber bulkhead, A 135-foot-long by 25-foot-wide timber pier separates this area from the northern 225 feet of shoreline. Approximately 28 non-creosote timber pilings (former boomsticks) on the south side of the pier delineate a former dock that has recently been removed (Photo 5). The northern shoreline is steeply sloping and does not currently have a bulkhead, although a row of pilings near th.e ordinary high water mark (OHWM) delineates a bulkhead .that may have existed there historically (Photo 6). The leased area is currently used on an occasional basis for log rafting (Photo 7). Both·soils and sediments in the project area have been characterized through environmental sampling programs, and have been determined to be composed of clean (below State Model Toxics Control Act cleanup standards) silt and sand mat~rials. Sediment dredging/cleanup actions in th'e area were completed by the Barbee Mill Company in summer/fall 2002 under the Voluntary Cleanup Program, with input from the Washington Department of Ecology, and in accordance with applicable local, state, arid federal permits. . IS THE PROPERTY AGRICUL JURAL LAND? 0 YES 181 NO ARE YOU A USDA PROGRAM PARTICIPANT? 0 YES 181 NO 7a. DESCRIBE THE PROPOSED WORK THAT NEEDS AQUATIC PERMITS: COMPLETE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS SHOULD BE PROVIDED FOR ALL WORK WATERWARD OF THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK OR LINE, INCLUDING TYPES OF EQUIPMENT TO BE USED. IF APPLYING FOR A SHORELINE PERMIT: DESCRIBE ALL WORK WITHIN AND BEYOND 200 FEET OF THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK. IF YOU HAVE PROVIDED ATTACHED MATERIALS TO DESCRIBE YOUR PROJECT. YOU STILL MUST SUMMARIZE THE PROPOSED WORK HERE. ATTACH A SEPARATE SHEET IF ADDITIONAL SPACE IS NEEDED. Aquatic land that was historically converted to upland is proposed to be restored to a sand and gravel beach .. Restoration will be accomplished with the following steps: • Demolition and removal of upland lumber mill facilities • Removal of in-water structures (pilings and pier) • Excavation of fill soils to achieve subgrade elevations • Installation of toe rock and quarry spall berm • Importation of sand, gravel and rock materials for beach construction Demolition of Upland Lumber Mill Facilities The features to be removed are two former lumber mill buildings and asphalt paving. All demolition debris will be loaded onto trucks and disposed of at appropriate upland faCilities. .IAR~A, Revised 7/02 Contact the State of Washington Office of Permit Assistance for latest version, 360/407-7037 or 800/917-0043 2 Removal of In-Water Structures • The in-water structures to be removed .de a wooden bulkhead, a timber piling-s ported pier, approximately 40 other piling, log boom and associated piling, a log raft, and concrete and other debris along the shoreline. (The existing dolphin line on adjacent aquatic lands owned by Barbee Mill will be retained.) Timber decking will be removed from the existing wooden pier. Piling will be extracted using a vibratory hammer mounted on a barge. A collar will be fastened around the piling, and will pull up on the piling while vibrating it out of the sediments. When the pile is released from the sediment, the vibratory hammer will be disengaged and the pile pulled from the water and placed on a barge until it is transferred upland. Piling that break during removal will be directly pulled with a clamshell bucket. The piling will be loaded on to the barge and disposed off-site in accordance with WAC 173-304. Sediments attached to the outside of the pile will be allowed to fall back onto the lake bed. Resuspended sediments (if any) are anticipated to settle back onto the lake bottom within a short period of time (from several minutes to a few hours, depending on the specific sediment type, currents, and weather conditions). Excavation of Fill Soils and Bulkhead Removal Paved surfaces will be removed before soil excavation begins. Pavement will be broken using a tracked excavator with a jackhammer, and the asphalt fragments will be loaded onto trucks and disposed of at an appropriate upland facility. Fill soils will be excavated from behind the bulkhead. Excavation of fill soils will occur either from a barge-mounted clamshell crane, or from the uplands using a track mounted excavator. All fill will be removed prior to bulkhead removal to control erosion and turbidity. All excavated soils will be placed on-site in the upland private property. Following completion of soil excavation, the bulkhead will be dismantled and hauled away to an appropriate upland facility. A relatively small number of creosote-treated piling associated with the former de-barking facility at the mill will be disposed at a facility authorized to receive such materials. Installation of Toe Rock and Quarry Spall Berm A permanent line of toe rock will be installed on the landward side of the Inner Harbor line/ property line. The toe rock will consist of 900-1 ,200 pound individual stones which will be half buried. Toe rock will be bedded in a 6-inch-minimum layer of 2-to-4-inch crushed rock. Approximately 12 inches of toe rock will be exposed above the OHWM. Temporary measures to control erosion above and on the landward side of the toe rock will employ Construction Best Management Practices (Construction BMPs) and will consist of a combination of geotextiles and a graded quarry rock (quarry spall) forming a protective berm. The temporary quarry spall berm will extend 2 feet vertically above the toe rock and have a maximum slope of 2 horizontal to 1 vertical (2H: 1V). The width of the berm will be a minimum of 4 feet, with an additional 2 feet of width for the toe rock, for a total width of approximately 6 feet. The total height of the toe rock and berm will be approximately 3 feet above the OHWM. Importation of Sand, Gravel. and Rock Materials for Beach Construction The underlying soil will be graded to the appropriate slope before beach materials are overlaid. Finished beach slopes will range from up to 20H:1V on the south beach segment, to 7.5H:1V on the north segment. These grades would vary in response to existing bathymetry and represent a range of slopes that are suitable and desirable for nearshore habitat and recreational use on Lake Washington. Imported beach materials will include a relatively fine-grained sand/gravel mix (coarse sand up to 1-1/2 inch minus gravel) in the more gently sloping south beach segment, and a coarser pea gravel to 1-1/2 inch minus gravel blend in the steeper north beach segment. At the north and south ends of the beach, rock "beach anchors" are proposed to contain the imported beach materials and prevent longshore transport processes from moving beach materials into much steeper and deeper adjacent areas. The beach anchors will be constructed of imported basalt quarry rock of varying size gradations. The rock will be installed in two to three layers of different gradations to build a stable mass. The beach anchors will extend approximately 20 ft out into the water (see Figure 3). PREPARATION OF DRAWINGS: SEE SAMPLE DRAWINGS AND GUIDANCE FOR COMPLETING THE DRAWINGS. ONE SET OF ORIGINAL OR GOOD QUALITY REPRODUCIBLE DRAWINGS MUST BE ATTACHED. NOTE: APPLICANTS ARE ENCOURAGED TO SUBMIT PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PROJECT SITE, BUT THESE DO NOT SUBSTITUTE FOR DRAWINGS. THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS AND COAST GUARD REQUIRE DRAWINGS ON B-1/2 X 11 INCH SHEETS. LARGER DRAWINGS MAY BE REQUIRED BY OTHER AGENCIES. 7b. DESCRIBE THE PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSED WORK AND WHY YOU WANT OR NEED TO PERFORM IT AT THE SITE. PLEASE EXPLAIN ANY SPECIFIC NEEDS THAT HAVE INFLUENCED THE DESIGN. Barbee Mill proposes to remove the mill structures, vacate its leased aquatic land, and sell its adjacent upland property for redevelopment. The lessee also proposes restore the created land to aquatic habitat up to the Inner Harbor Line. The proposed restoration was designed to be consistent with Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 8 Conservation Plan recommendations. It provides nearshore habitat that is scarce in the project vicinity due to extensive shoreline modifications. This habitat is especially valuable to salmon fry (up to 40 mm length) for winter rearing. The gravel substrate and gently sloping beaches were planned for maximum benefit to juvenile salmon. According to the WRIA 8 Steering Committee, this section of Lake Washington is a high priority for restoration projects, ranking second out of the JARPA, Revised 7/02 Contact the State of Washington Of1ice of Pennit Assistance for latest version, 360/407-7037 or 800/917-0043 3 I five lake sectior:Js defined in their ,posed Lake Washington/Cedar River/sawmish Watershed Conservation Plan released in February 2005. 7e. DESCRIBE THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO CHARACTERISTIC USES OF THE WATER BODY. THESE USES MAY INCLUDE FISH AND AQUATIC LIFE. WATER QUALITY. WATER SUPPLY. RECREATION. and AESTHETICS. IDENTIFY PROPOSED ACTIONS TO AVOID. MINIMIZE. AND MITIGATE DETRIMENTAL IMPACTS. AND PROVIDE PROPER PROTECTION OF FISH AND AQUATIC LIFE. IDENTIFY WHICH GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS YOU HAVE USED. ATTACH A SEPARATE SHEET IF ADDITIONAL SPACE IS NEEDED. Lake Washington is used primarily for recreational boating. The shoreline is currently used for a wide range of upland waterfront park, retail, and residential development uses. Lake water quality has been historically degraded largely because of untreated sewage discharges, but since the 1960s water quality has been steadily restored by the diversion of sewage outfalls away from the lake for treatment. Due to the 1916 construction of the Lake Washington Ship Canal and Hiram M. Chittenden Locks (prior to initial construction of the Barbee Mill), lake waters are currently approximately 9 feet lower than historical (pre-1916) levels. Lake Washington is part of the salmon migration corridor for the Cedar River and Sammamish River systems, and the Lake Washington Ship Canal is the only outlet for these systems to the Puget Sound. The lake is used by chinook, coho, and sockeye salmon, rainbow trout, and some bull trout. Other fish species found in Lake Washington include black crappie, bluegill, largemouth bass, smallmouth bass, pumpkifJseed sunfish, tench, and yellow perch. Nearshore habitats are productive sources of the benthic invertebrate prey for salmonlds, and the shallow water provides protection for migrating juveniles. Consequently, altered shorelines and degraded beaches are viewed as fisheries enhancement opportunities (King County DNR 2005). The proposed project will result in significant long-term environmental benefits. Relatively minor, short-term water quality impacts are also expected during construction, as described below. Potential Erosion During Construction Conservation measures will be followed to minimize to the extent practicable construction-related erosion: • Fill soils will be excavated from behind the bulkhead before the bulkhead is removed to prevent sloughing of soil into Lake Washington. • A silt curtain and/or debris boom will be installed waterward of the bulkhead to prevent silt or debris from entering the lake during demolition activities. The silt curtain and/or debris boom '!ViII be checked prior to and during construction to make sure it functions properly. . . Temporary measures to control erosion above and on the landward side of the toe rock will employ Construction Best Management Practices (Construction BMPs) and will consist of a combination of geotextiles and a graded quarry rock (quarry spall) forming a protective berm. The temporary quarry spall berm will extend 2 feet vertically above the toe rock and have a maximum slope of 2H:1V. The width of the berm will be a minimum of 4 feet, with an additional 2 feet of width for the toe rock, for a total width of approximately 6 feet. The total height of the toe rock and berm will be approximately 3 feet above the 0MWM. This height is greater than the existing grades bordering the proposed beach which range from 1 to 2.3 feet above the OHWM. The 3 feet of vertical height and 6 feet of width of the toe rock and temporary berm will prevent lake-generated waves from causing erosion on the landward side of the project. The geotextile and gradation of rock size in the quarry spall temporary berm will protect soils adjacent to the beach from erosion due to upland sheet flow. Temporary Turbidity From Piling Removal Conservation measures to control temporary turbidity include those for erosion prevention, listed above, plus: • Allwork will be conducted within the approved timing windows for listed species in this area of Lake Washington, which extends from July 16 to December 31. • If a barge is used, it will remain in adequate water depths to prevent grounding. • An emergency spill containment kit will be located on-site and promptly used for cleanup of accidental spills. Noise Disturbance to Osprey Nest An osprey nest is located on the upland portion of the Barbee Mill site, about 150 ft from the inland edge of the work area. The nest is on top of the sawdust collector, which emits some dust and a great deal of noise during operation. The osprey pair has nested at the site since 1986 and has remained there even during operation ofthe sawdust collector. To prevent disturbance to the nest during construction, the osprey nest will be moved in the fall (before construction) to another location on the upland site. Return of Created Upland to Aquatic State This project removes a barrier to nearshore movement. Presently, fish must venture into deeper water to pass by the bulkhead. This project will restore the natural beach configuration and allow juvenile salmonids to stay in shallower water. The shallower water provides protection for juveniles from larger predators. The gently sloping bottom mimics natural conditions in the littoral (nearshore) zone, distinguishing it from the more sharply dropping limnetic (water column) JARPA, Revised 7/02 Contact the State of Washington Office of Permit Assistance for latest version, 360/407-7037 or 800/917-0043 4 zone, both of which are used by sal mo. for different life history stages. _ Removal of Impervious Surface ., Approximately 28,140 fe of paved surface (0.65 acre) will be removed as a result of this project. This surface will be replaced by permeable gravel beach material and open water. This will reduce the level of runoff from the area and will improve long-term water quality at the site. Removal of Over-Water Coverage Approximately 3,375 fe of over-water coverage will be removed with the demolition of the wooden pier. Over-water coverage blocks light that would normally reach the bottom, reducing productivity in the shaded area. Predators are also known to use piling for cover while hunting juvenile salmon. Removal of Creosote-Treated Timber from the Aquatic Environment Approximately 40 non-treated piling, plus 300 linear feet of timber bulkhead will be removed from the lake. These components will not be replaced. A relatively small number of creosote-treated piling associated with the former de- barking facility at the mill will be removed and transported to a facility authorized to receive such materials. Creosote- treated timber is designated as a potential sediment contaminant source by the Washington Hydraulic Code (WAC 173- 303-9904). Creation of High-Qualitv Aquatic Habitat The beach and nearshore habitat that will be created as a result of this project are immediately north of the mouth of May Creek. Restoration in this area has been recommended in the Proposed King County DNR Lake Washington/Cedar River/Sammamish Watershed Conservation Plan, released in February 2005. Other complementary restoration projects have been and are continuing in the May Creek delta area (e.g., the voluntary sediment cleanup project implemented by Barbee Mill in 2002), and the Barbee Mill beach will adjoin that habitat, increasing the habitat value of the integrated restoration effort. 7d. FOR IN WATER CONSTRUCTION WORK, WILL YOUR PROJECT BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE STATE OF WASHINGTON WATER QUALITY STANDARDS FOR TURBIDITY WAC 173.201A-110? 181 YES D NO (SEE USEFUL DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS) 8. WILL THE PROJECT BE CONSTRUCTED IN STAGES? DYES 181 NO PROPOSED STARTING DATE: Autumn 2005 or summer 2006 ESTIMATED DURATION OF ACTIVITY: 6 weeks 9. CHECK IF ANY TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT STRUCTURES WILL BE PLACED: 181 WATERWARD OF THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK OR LINE FOR FRESH OR TIDAL WATERS; ANDIOR DWATERWARD OF MEAN HIGHER HIGH WATER LINE IN TIDAL WATERS 10. WILL FILL MATERIAL (ROCK, FILL, BULKHEAD, OR OTHER MATERIAL) BE PLACED: 181 WATERWARD OF THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK OR LINE FOR FRESH WATERS? IF YES, VOLUME (CUBIC YARDS) 4,200/AREA 1.0 (ACRES) Approximately 3,500 cy of sand and gravel will be placed as beach material and 700 cy of toe rock. D WATERWARD OF THE MEAN HIGHER HIGH WATER FOR TIDAL WATERS? IF YES, VOLUME (CUBIC YARDS) (ACRES) 11. WILL MATERIAL BE PLACED IN WETLANDS? DYES 181 NO IF YES: A. IMPACTED AREA IN ACRES: B. HAS A DELINEATION BEEN COMPLETED? IF YES, PLEASE SUBMIT WITH APPLICATION. DYES D NO C. HAS A WETLAND REPORT BEEN PREPARED? IF YES, PLEASE SUBMIT WITH APPLICATION. DYES D NO D. TYPE AND COMPOSITION OF FILL MATERIAL (E.G .. SAND, ETC.): E. MATERIAL SOURCE' F. LIST ALL SOIL SERIES (TYPE OF SOIL) LOCATED AT THE PROJECT SITE, & INDICATE IF THEY ARE ON THE COUNTY'S LIST OF HYDRIC SOILS. SOILS INFORMATION CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE (NRCS): G. WILL PROPOSED ACTIVITY CAUSE FLOODING OR DRAINING OF WETLANDS? DYES D NO IF YES, IMPACTED AREA IS ACRES OFDRAINED WETLANDS. NOTE: If your project will impact greater than y, of an acre of weiland, submit a miligation plan to the Corps and Ecology for approval along with the JARPA form .NOTE: a 401 water quality certification will be required from Ecology in addition to an approved mitigation plan if your project impacts wetlands that are: a) greater than ~ acre in size, or b) tidal wetlands or wetlands adjacent to tidal water. Please submit the JARPA form and mitigation plan to Ecology for an individual 401 certification if a) or b) applies. JARP A, Revised 7/02 Contact the State of Washington Office of Permit Assistance for latest version, 360/407-7037 or 800/917-0043 5 12. STORMWATER COMPLIANCE FOR NATIONWIDalTS ONL Y: _ THIS PROJECT IS (OR WILL BE) DESIGNED TO MEET .. OGY'S MOST CURRENT STORMWATER MANUAL, OR AN ECOL APPROVED LOCAL STORMWATER MANUAL DYES DNO· IF YES -WHICH MANUAL WILL YOUR PROJECT BE DESIGNED TO MEET If NO -FOR CLEAN WATER ACT SECTION 401 AND 404 PERMITS ONL Y -PLEASE SUBMITTO ECOLOGY FOR APPROVAL, ALONG WITH THIS JARPA APPLICATION, DOCUMENTA TlON THAT DEMONSTRATES THE STORMWATER RUNOFF FROM YOUR PROJECT OR ACTIVITY WILL COMPLY WITH THE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS, WAC 173.201(A) 13. WILL EXCAVATION OR DREDGING BE REQUIRED IN WATER OR WETLANDS? 181 YES DNO IF YES: A. VOLUME: 8,500 ·(CUBIC YARDS) IAREA 0.55 (ACRES) B. COMPOSITION OF MATERIAL TO BE REMOVED: Imported fill soil c. DISPOSAL SITE FOR EXCAVATED MATERIAL: Soil will be reused on the parcel directly upland. D. METHOD OF DREDGING: A track mounted excavator or barge mounted clamshell crane will be used to remove fill from behind the existing bulkhead before removing the bulkhead. 14. HAS THE STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA) BEEN COMPLETED? DYES 181 NO SEPA LEAD AGENCY: City of Rention SEPA DECISION: DNS, MONS, EIS, ADOPTION, EXEMPTION DECISION DATE (END OF COMMENT PERIOD): SUBMIT A COPY OF YOUR SEPA DECISION LEDER TO WDFW AS REQUIRED FOR A COMPLETE APPLICATION , 15. LIST OTHER APPLICATIONS, APPROVALS, OR CERTIFICATIONS FROM OTHER FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL AGENCIES FOR ANY STRUCTURES, CONSTRUCTION, DISCHARGES, OR OTHER ACTIVITIES DESCRIBED IN THE APPLICATION (I.E., PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL, HEALTH DISTRICT APPROVAL, BUILDING PERMIT, SEPA REVIEW, FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMM·ISSION LICENSE (FERC), FOREST PRACTICES APPLICATION, ETC.) ALSO INDICATE WHETHER WORK HAS BEEN COMPLETED AND INDICATE ALL EXISTING WORK ON DRAWINGS. NOTE: FOR USE WITH CORPS NATIONWIDE PERMITS, IDENTIFY WHETHER YOUR PROJECT HAS OR WILL NEED AN NPDES PERMIT FOR DISCHARGING WASTEWATER ANDIOR STORMWATER. TYPE OF APPROVAL ISSUING AGENCY IDENTIFICATION DATE OF APPLICATION DATE APPROVED COMPLETED? NO. ESA Consultation NMFS and USFWS 16. HAS ANY AGENCY DENIED APPROVAL FOR THE ACTIVITY YOU'RE APPLYING FOR OR FOR ANY ACTIVITY DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED HEREIN? 0 YES 181 NO IF YES, EXPLAIN: " JARPA, Revised 7/02 Contact the State of Washington Office of Permit Assistance for latest version, 360/407-7037 or 800/917-0043 6 SECTION B • Use for Shoreline and RENTALS, ETC. IF A PROJECT OR ANY PORTION OF A PROJECT RECEIVES FUNDING FRDM A FEDERAL AGENCY, THAT AGENCY IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ESA CONSULTATION. PLEASE INDICATE IF YOU RECEIVE FEDERAL FUNDS AND WHAT FEDERAL AGENCY IS PROVIDING THOSE FUNDS. SEE INSTRUCTIONS FOR INFORMATION ON ESA" I8INO IF YES, PLEASE LIST THE FEDERAL AGENCY , COAST GUARD, AND DNR PERMITS, PROVIDE NAMES, ADDRESSES, AND TELEPHONE NUMBERS OF ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS, LESSEES, ETC ... NOTE: SHORELINE MANAGEMENT COMPLIANCE MAY REQUIRE ADDITIONAL NOTICE -CONSUL T YOUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT. Quendall Terminals 4503 Lake Washington Blvd., Renton, WA 98056 Burlington Northern Santa Fe 4500 Lake Washington Blvd., Renton, WA 98056 SECTION C • This section MUST be completed for any permit covered by this application 20. APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE FOR A PERMIT OR PERMITS TO AUTHORIZE THE ACTIVITIES DESCRIBED HEREIN. I CERTIFY THAT I AM FAMILIAR WITH THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS APPLICATION, AND THAT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF, SUCH INFORMATION IS TRUE, COMPLETE, AND CCURATE. I FURTHER CERTIFY THAT I POSSESS THE AUTHORITY TO UNDERTAKE THE PROPOSED ACTIVITIES. I HEREBY GRANT TO THE AGENCIES TO WHICH HIS APPLICATION IS MADE, THE RIGHT TO ENTER THE ABOVE-DESCRIBED LOCATION TO INSPECT THE PROPOSED, IN-PROGRESS OR COMPLETED WORK. I AGREE TO START WORK ONLY AFTER ALL NECESSARY PERMITS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED. SIGNAT DATE e-~ I~ -oS DATE 8-1S-()~ I HEREBY DESrcl AT. DATE TO ACT AS MY A T IN MATTERS RELATED TO THIS APPLICATION FOR PERMIT(S). I UNDERSTAND THAT IF A FEDERAL PERMIT IS ISSUED, I MUST SIGN THE PERMIT. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE SIGNATURE OF LANDOWNER (EXCEPT PUBLIC ENTITY LANDOWNERS, E.G. DNR) THIS APPLICATION MUST BE SIGNED BY THE APPLICANT AND THE AGENT, IF AN AUTHORIZED AGENT IS DESIGNATED. 18 U.S.C §1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact or makes any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than 5 years or both. :~[~[j~jiif~tii~~i.~t;'~~f,!!~~~I~t~~i~~~li~l~tt~illk~1t~.~,~til~~~f~~~~~i~J~~if::;C. .... .... ".' . '.'. ." .,., '.' ')""\' ··:::t:'< .:':' (:';>;:<i:->' .. .. ..; >:: ,/."., '" ' .. /. . .<.... .;.,. ''''':.:.. ......... ", , .. , .' .... , .....• ",.' .". '. "." ,:~: ;.": <-::i;. . ,'. :~:-'; :.~~,:~:::~~ .:<; ',> ;. ,~-::.:::,:<.". -.' ?.: ':;::<}::-~<: .. ::::" ~:::' .. ;-:': -:'·':"··/::'::\):;:::>i\/· '~;·'~::~:~:);~~/<~L<:'\;::··· . '::\ .~:,: :" . .-:. {~.::.:~~.: .. :/ ':{;:-> </( :IS!{:>:: :-;} ~:7~\ .... C, If the application involves ·a.conditional'use or variance,', set forth in full that portion of the master program which provides that "r. the 'proposed use may be a conditional use, or, (n the case,o! a v,,!ria[1,ce, from whi~h'tt\e'variance is being ?ought: ' > • '?:: :>;.: >\; ,., '{j5.,,'! .>,; .••... >:; .. :; ....... . .. ;' ... >?}+; ...... ,> '.>;C:,',..;' ," These Agencies are Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action employers. For special accommodation needs, please contact the appropriate agency in the instructions. JARPA, Revised 7/02 Contact the State of Washington Office of Permit Assistance for latest version, 360/407-7037 or 800/917-0043 7 e Photos of Existing Conditions .A Lake Washington + lC I 2OlI.l Kin1J Counly 1 Aerial view of aquatic parcel that is the subject of this application Lake Washington + lCI2OlI.lK~ COMly 2 Adjacent Barbee Mill upland parcel. No work is being done on this parcel; it is shown here for context. (Source: King County iMap) 3 Bulkhead and mill buildings 4 Northern section of shoreline ; .~i· <. 5 Existing pier and pile field 6 Pilings possibly delineating old bulkhead 7 Log raft ;; VICINITY MAP o i Scale in Feet ~~--------------------------------.---------------------------------------.---------------------------------~ it PURPOSE: BEACH RESTORATION AND "E FISH HABITAT ENHANCEMENT ~ ~ DATUM: LAT: 47.5308 N N LONG: 122.2009 W '" VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88 o ~ ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: m QUENDALL TERMINAL BNSF NAME: BARBEE MILL CO. BEACH RESTORATION REFERENCE #: SITE LOCATION ADDRESS: 4101 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD. N RENTON, WA 98056 PROPOSED: IN: LAKE WASHINGTON AT: RENTON COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA SHEET: 1 OF 3 DATE: MAY 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.------------------ I I I l \ DEVELOPMENT: . I F~J¥~.i&~J1'ED'IH:BEAC1_I TRACT "E" ,I ,sldentlallot une, I 'l .: " " t 'ulum Develoomen1 Future'Deil~enl' I " . r' ~--~ • __ -r •.. _. "privateBea<:hAOceSS , , ' (Typ.) "'''-'"'"', ...... >1· \ r"-IU~:",: ExlsUI1Q Dock " to be Removed " ,," "", .-o 60 I I Scale in Feet ~Ir~~ 8/)'IJ\tGro...". '~",~.', .. , LAKE WASHINGTON ELEVAnONS '".:.; .. ' :5 LOWER LIMITS I 16.67 ( 20.00 ( 7.02 SITE PLAN \ .>// ~~--------------------------.---------------------------------------------------------------.---------------------------~ ~ PURPOSE: BEACH RESTORATION AND NAME: BARBEE MILL CO. BEACH RESTORATION PROPOSED: u FISH HABITAT ENHANCEMENT DATUM: LAT: 47.5308 N LONG: 122.2009W VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: QUENDALL TERMINAL BNSF REFERENCE #: SITE LOCATION ADDRESS: 4104 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD. N. RENTON, WA 98056 IN: LAKE WASHINGTON AT: RENTON COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA SHEET: 20F3 a: ~ .., '" " u:: ;; ~ ~ ;; ;;; g 9 w z ::::; w a: o :I: (Jl j ~ w w II] a: ~ ~ o ~ o :;l ~ g 30r w.. < Future Residential Lot Redevelopment Area Not frlCh;'ded in Beach RestoraHorl Future Redevelooment 50' OHWM Setback c l ,'_' 't"n". "~~".o .. '''f'!:'C .~ 2°1-Ai~:~'iI.#_~4li -I ~ ! o 10L ~ 30r "-s g 20'- ~ a; i o 10e.. Future Residential Lot Redevelopment Area NofTnCluded in-BeaCh Restoration I . Future Redevelooment 50' OHWM Selba(".k r tnner Harbor Line/Property Line / . DNR Aquatic Lease Area r ---------J "..-Existing Lumber Mill Building \ I /' to be Removed I LAKE WASHINGTON Section A-A' r Innet Harbor lineiProperty Line / DNR Aquatic Leaso Area Existing Grade LAKE WASI-I(NGTON Pea Gravell1-112 Inch Minus Gravel o 30 Section 8-8' Scale in Feet SCHEMATIC CROSS SECTIONS ~r-----------------------------r-----------------------------------------------------------------'-----------------------------~ .~ PURPOSE: BEACH RESTORATION AND NAME: BARBEE MILL CO. BEACH RESTORATION PROPOSED: "8 FISH HABITAT ENHANCEMENT E '" ~ a; DATUM: LAT: 47.5308 N LONG: 122.2009 W :£1 VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88 ~ ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: ~ QUENDALL TERMINAL BNSF REFERENCE #: SITE LOCATION ADDRESS: 4104 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD. N. RENTON, WA 98056 IN: LAKE WASHINGTON AT: RENTON COUNTY OF: KING SHEET: 3 OF 3 DATE: STATE: WA Printed: 08-26-2005 Payment Made: .cITY OF RENTON ., 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Land Use Actions RECEIPT Permit#: LUA05-104 08/26/2005 11 :34 AM • Receipt Number: R0504694 Total Payment: 1,000.00 Payee: ANCHOR ENVIRONMENTAL Current Payment Made to the Following Items: Trans Account Code Description Amount 5010 000.345.81.00.0007 Environmental Review 1,000.00 Payments made for this receipt Trans Method Description Amount Payment Check #18288 1,000.00 Account Balances Trans Account Code Description Balance Due 3021 303.000.00.345.85 Park Mitigation Fee 5006 000.345.81.00.0002 Annexation Fees 5007 000.345.81.00.0003 Appeals/Waivers 5008 000.345.81.00.0004 Binding Site/Short Plat 5009 000.345.81.00.0006 Conditional Use Fees 5010 000.345.81.00.0007 Environmental Review 5011 000.345.81.00.0008 Prelim/Tentative Plat 5012 000.345.81.00.0009 Final Plat 5013 000.345.81.00.0010 PUD 5014 000.345.81.00.0011 Grading & Filling Fees 5015 000.345.81.00.0012 Lot Line Adjustment 5016 000.345.81.00.0013 Mobile Home Parks 5017 000.345.81.00.0014 Rezone 5018 000.345.81.00.0·015 Routine Vegetation Mgmt 5019 000.345.81.00.0016 Shoreline Subst Dev 5020 000.345.81.00.0017 Site Plan Approval 5021 000.345.81.00.0018 Temp Use or Fence Review 5022 000.345.81.00.0019 Variance Fees 5024 000.345.81.00.0024 Conditional Approval Fee 5036 000.345.81.00.0005 Comprehensive Plan Amend 5909 000.341.60.00.0024 Booklets/EIS/Copies 5941 000.341.50.00.0000 Maps (Taxable) 5954 604.237.00.00.0000 Special Deposits 5955 000.05.519.90.42.1 Postage 5998 000.231.70.00.0000 Tax Remaining Balance Due: $0.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 /: I I , I I r- iC > C) V1 I -o -I:: 57W RENTON NOTE: Kroll Maps are compiled from OliiQial Records and Field Surveya, They are produced for (a~rence use only and no wauanty is expressed or i",phe!;, \ \ ------" -----'------/-;'--1'-:1---/ ;n~'fY --,::~) ------------------~-----~·~'r-"~~~~ .2 o l- t..? Z ~=O O i J ~ (/ , \ i I ~l I I [1:)1\ ,--r _-.!..I' I , I I I I I I 1m WArER I , I Barbee MiH (,0. tn,/- 't. Lot 2 ---- 32.00 Acr~f-~- I I I J ,: :::::::::~~!f!:!ll9LlQ.Ll.'lJ~illi ~ClO: i!!:L.!-.I..,;""~~!2...I:::':-"-~'::"'-;; J.... ~"--I..;=::;:::J...-"--'-""'-'--'-'-"-'-.::....J...""-' . I~~~~~~~~N~. ~~35~TTHnrn~~'"'~~~~ ~ J J Ji \ 50 " o 49 48 47 46 4, 44 ~~ ~, " 33RD 16 35 33RD 44 37 ~ 3S 11l , " N. 32ND 47' 46 4S I 44 ~[iJ 31ST ~ N. A OF SEATTLE COPYRIGHTEO & PUBLISHED BY KROLL MAP COMPANY, INC., SEATTLE SCALE: 1 INCH = 200 FEET ~ 17 J4 ~ 17 17 PL ~ ~ 18 19 20 21 2~ ~ 28 1.7 N 2 ,. ~ 0 ~ . 33 ~ 31 30 29 , ~ lID 00 00 , , , " ST. 0 ~, Ja " '" , 1 0 20 21 22 25 _"1' 30 rID 18 N. 30TH '" ST. ,~ , , , 18 rJg -, GJ~_.j_ "1 33 :2 ~ ~ 29 2~ :'t ~ t! .' ST, ----lA 0 I . "-rn 18 Q PlEASE NOTE; Kroll Atlas Pages are revised ilt least once a year with regard to piaN, short plats, condominluffi8, and eorporate liu1its. AddrqS$lng and stfUcturallnforrnution is updated less frequently. This map is copyr1uhted In bath form ,,00 comeo!. Reproduction In whole or In part, or tnlnsferrtng into dlgiwl form, Is prohibited by law. Copyright 1997, Kroll Map Company,lnc:.· S!lattie, WHhlngtOIl. AI riijhttl'l3served. , 38:~ ,~ ,,,, lIut ~I ~: "w jI I: ' II I, , , , "" to '" , Coun'y To. Lo' No (]) Building c::J Approx Stories 0 '. '. '. .:: House Number Private Road Short Plat , , 60 $9 , , , I , , 12.03Ac. ® 115 z 0 IIi: 117'" II:: May LLI Z II II II II 1\ \ I \ I \ \ \ \ \ c 1\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ , ek King County Parks Dept, 66 CD u-/ 0 Co en c CD Co 0 ~ -'<: 3~O t Lu CD CD Lu .... 0 0::. U :>. 62 0 :2: • 0 61 " 5.P.178144 AUG 262005 RECEIVED I c ~ ~ ~ E ~ 'iI " 11 o N <i I i r i / i , { ,J , , ~ ,; ---- I Future Development 50' OHWM Setback (Typ.) ! , Future Develop-ment 15' Yard Area (Typ.) ! Future Development 35' Native Vegetation Area (Typ.) ] I I I I Typical Platted Residential Lot Line Future Development Private Beach Access --, (Typ.) --------,-"-- ~ I i , • I , , \-"--' , 1".1"'\ • Proposed Rock Beach Anchor (Typical Each End of Beach) I / -5 ~B' - i I I I --FUTURE REDEVELOPMENT: NOT INCLUDED IN BEACH RESTORATION - Inner Harbor Line/Property ine I I I ---------- I I l TRACT "E" Open space) ~ , , Future Public Beach ACI::::es,s\ .. '\ / , I-----"~ . ------~"-----... I J --....... I C c "".~~-, ".-,.. '-," r+-A -i.-,_ I I • \ , 15 \ ... '" .. a -. OJ ...;..-..,~~-~---- --- --- / ~"-) t ~'~ c Existing Building to be Removed (Typ.) / J I / "' " .' .. ' .' Existing OHWM (Bulkhead to be Removed) i I J;~ c : : c ~~ ? c i: ~ I I , EXisting Pilings "-..... f I to be Removed '-.... L,,--J (Typ.) '" Existing Dock to be Removed , , ----_---.,~A' 10 5 . ,'< , o 20 40 SCALE IN FEET ril PLANNING DEV1li~~~ RENTON AUG? 0 20~5 RECEI'JEO !'L-----------------------.----------------r----------------~---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------:S:HE;.E~T~11 ~ ,,_ ,~-,. ~_, __ -.L _____ ' . -' --:':"---'-'~'.-.. ,-------~ ---~~ SITE PLAN BARBEE MILL SHORELINE RESTORATION 57W W Y232-24-5 RENTON NOTE: Kroll Maps are compiled frorri Offi<;;al Records and Field Surv .. They are produc~fI for re~rence use only and no wasranty is expressed-or Impllmt, c:=r==(o ov't. Lot 2 --- 32.00 Acr~~=- \ AKE 38TH I ~,j~~~~~ . I r-=-r-:,....,-,...,.....,....",.,,=-r....-r-;;-'T"7"T""~~,.::.=,.~~~;-:-r...-r.:-~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 50 '::i so • :i\ ~7 ~ ~~ lO[ 5. 49 f ~ ~ 47 46 ~ , 'J2.. s. I' ~ 1 '3 4 5 , ~B 47 46' C,J .[ 4S 44 43 mJ " N . .. ~ .. "[ ti . 6 7 • rB 9 10 1I 45 44 ~ Il.:. 1~ ~ ~ Jl ~ '$i1 1.51Z. N. PL -~ 'lSi"'" ~ If[ . .. ~ " ~ Id cjJ ~ t ~ la J: 16 17 18 19 20 21 2Z 23 ~J 25 , "" " 3,~ ~~ ~ 36 35' J4 ~ f< 32 31 30 29 28 21 ; 0" r$ '" ,; 1m . " .. .. " . 33RQ ~r ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. I 44 37 ~ 35 l8 27 tlJ N ~ .. , . :;: SO 49 48 " ® ~ ~ • . " '" \ N. 32ND 47 46 45 lID 44 00 43 N. rID 7 8 A COPYRIGHTED II. PUBLISHED BY KROLL MAP COMPANY, INC., SEATTLE" SCALE: 1 INCH = 200 FEET " '" " 33 \i7I 31 30 29 ~ :::OOOOOO~ ".. .. It " ST. I ~ '::i 20 21 22 e3 ;@l Z5 PLEASE NOTE~ Kroll AtllfI; Pagee m'll\Ntaed &tlearrtonce a yearwilh regard to plata.. ahort pl_ coodomlnlumtl, lind CUrtXll"!!ta 11mb. AddI'8SllIng end utructurallnformatfon Ie updated less frequently. This map b till.yn9htad In bothform and comant. Reproduc1Jon tn whOle or In part. or Ir8n8ferrlng \"ntu I.IIUitBl fl)rm,.1a prohibited by law. Copyright 1997, KroU Map Company, I"". -Seattle. Washington. AI rights meMid. 110 3~1 .. , ,. ',' ,,' .. ; ":: .. , ' , : .. 325 " 325 1 , I !;i9 • • • I • I Il.03Ac.. ® \15 Z 0 116[ 117'" 0: May LLI Z 1\ II I' I' ,I \' I' " \ , 1\ C , \ \ \ \ \ \I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ , \ ek King County Parks Dept. o 0. Cf) c Q) 0. o 66 '~ -==-=---lU 58 lU 0::. u 62 LEGEt~D~~~~~~~~~~T ® Hou •• Number Imm, I County Tax Lot No Building Appro. Stories r::::::J Private Road c::iJ Shorl Plat ---------- S,P,178144 ! , j; }',;, ! / j .. \ I " "" '\. \ \ '\ I I Future Development 50' OHWM Setback (Typ.) I Future Develop-ment 15' Yard Area (Typ.) I I I Typical Platted Residential Lot Line Future Development Private Beach Access ----; (Typ.) I I --FUTURE REDEVELOPMENT: NOT INCLUDED IN BEACH RESTORATION --- I I l TRACT "E" Open space; : Future Public Beach ACices.s, , ~ S,lt (~" \ Future Development 35' Native Vegetation Area (Typ.) Inner Harbor LinelProperty ine I ---. '." , "Z:. \ '; .04--'--' , -1--1"- I .-'1//( \ . I 1 , , j , , , (""' ... _; J ~~ \ .. \., ,~./ 1 j I 15 , .,,-.", . ',' . ",:0" , ", .',," '---'-;Kelsto'red Beach: Pea-Gravell 1-nch Minus C3rav~I' . _ .. , .. "_",,,. __ .• ,,' 7.5:1 Slope-"'-"""'~' ,.""" "'~ .. ".-t "--1-_ ONRAQUAilC. ~ _),-~f$----"--------~ 10 ',. ..~ .,..... ........ 'lEASE AREA -- Proposed Rock Beach Anchor (Typical Each End of Beach) 5 , - i f J ( J C r I I I I I I " I I ExistifJ9 Pilings "- c I to be Removed " L _ \ -J . (Typ.) " L Existing Dock to be Removed ~. / r+A _t._~ _ , \ . .. " "It a. " " . --""'i\:~-~--- I L-- -,. ',-' Existing Building to be Removed {Typ.) -..-Existing OHIJI(M -- (Bulkhead to be Removed) I ... ~ ---____ .~A' 10 --- 5 ./'" /'" ~ I / o 20 40 SCALE IN FEET / / / DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF flENTON AUG 262005 RECEIVED !'I-------~-----.-----------r----------~--._II"~~~--_r~~~~---,~.-Al~--_p~~~~~--------------------------------------~~~ t-SHEET 1 -SITE PLAN BARBEE MILL SHORELINE RESTORATION