HomeMy WebLinkAboutSHR2008-00010 Hearing - SHR Letters / Memos - 7/1/2008 tSON
°o°N MASON COUNTY
Shelton (360) 427-9670
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Belfair (360) 275-4467
Planning
Mason County Bldg. 1 411 N.5th Elma (360) 482-5269
P.O.Box 279 Shelton,WA 98584
1854
July 1, 2008
NOTICE OF FINAL DECISION
Case Number: Shoreline Substantial Development and Conditional Use Permit,
#SHR2008-00010
Applicants: Brian McGinnis, Alderbrook Resort & Spa
Notice is hereby given that Alderbrook Resort & Spa applicants for the above referenced
Shoreline Permit, have been granted conditional approval of the project. The Decision
was dated 6/25/08 and approves the permit by the Hearing Examiner per the conditions
added within the staff report.
The request for the Shoreline Permit was approved pursuant to the Mason County
Development Regulations and the Mason County Shoreline Master Program
Requirements specifically for the proposed the accessory dwelling unit.
If you have any questions or require clarification on this issue please contact Grace
Miller, Planner with the Mason County Department of Community Development at (360)
427-9670, x 360.
This is a final decision. No further appeals to the County are available. Appeals may be
made to the appropriate state administrative agency or superior court pursuant to RCW
36.70C. It is the appellant's responsibility to meet all legal requirements of any appeal
process.
R G C I E
JUP!
1 f�1 - P1 'NING
BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR MASON C -
2
Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner
3
4 RE: North Forty Lodging,LLC FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS
5 OF LAW AND FINAL DECISION
Shoreline Substantial
6 Development/
Conditional Use Permit
7 (SHR2008-00010)
8
9 INTRODUCTION
10 The applicant has applied for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and
Conditional Use Permit for stormwater outfall improvements. The proposal is to
I 1 extend two stormwater outfalls from the existing shoreline, to repair and modify an
existing marine float to provide an outfall extension corridor, to improve aquatic
1 habitat, and to restore/improve beach and intertidal habitats. The Examiner approves
13 the shoreline substantial development permit and the conditional use permit subject to
the conditions herein.
14
EXHIBITS
15
16 See Exhibits list attached to the staff report dated May 30, 2008.
17 FINDINGS OF FACT
Procedural:
18
1. Applicant. The applicant is North Forty Lodging, LLC. Their
19 representatives are Brian McGinnis and Allison Reak.
20 2. Hearing. The Hearing Examiner conducted a hearing on the subject
2 1 application on June 11, 2008, at or about 1:00 p.m., in the Mason County
Commissioners Meeting Chambers. The hearing was recorded.
Substantive:
23
24 3. Site/Project Description. The project area comprises the resort property
and the adjacent marine waters and substrate of Hood Canal within one-half mile.
25 The resort is a 17.4-acre facility located on the south shore of Hood Canal; 1.5 miles
east of Union, Washington. The property is zoned Rural Tourist. Current use of the
property is as a commercial resort which includes a hotel complex, resort cottages,
meeting facilities, a public restaurant, a public marina (with sewage pump-out and
North Forty Lodging,LLC P. 1 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
PA0699163.DOC;1/13009.900000/}
fuel), a swimming area, beach and Class 2 tidelands, and a restored salmon-bearing
stream (Alderbrook Creek) with public viewing areas. The tidelands are used for
2 oyster production and harvesting by the resort restaurant and visitors. The resort dock
is used by the public for access to recreational moorage, fuel, a sewage pump-out
3 station, the resort shoreline and waters, and the restaurant.
4 This is a project to restore the beach to pre-erosion elevations throughout the upper
intertidal area of the oyster beds, to modify and extend both outfalls to reduce beach
5 erosion and improve water quality, to modify the floating dock to accommodate one
6 outfall extension and recover intertidal habitat, to repair a rock wall on adjacent
property damaged by the erosion, and to remove old debris exposed by the erosion.
7 Repair of one outfall will require the replacement of the existing dock to reroute the
pipeline between oyster beds. The proposed stormwater outfalls will be restricted to
8 the outfalls and other in-water structures and substrates. In-water work for this
proposal includes restoration of 0.14 acres of eroded beach, burial of new stormwater
9 pipes, removal of abandoned pipes and concrete debris, gain of fine-grained intertidal
10 habitat, removal of creosote-treated wood piles, construction of concrete separator
between one stormwater pipe and the resort sewer line, reduction of dock
11 "grounding" footprint, removal/replacement of existing chemically preserved wood
and solid Styrofoam-slab floating dock and replacement with recycled wood-
12 composite supports, and increase of light transmission through dock by replacing
solid decking with grated decking. The current stormwater collection and discharge
13 system was upgraded and reconstructed in 2003-2004 to discharge site stormwater
14 through two outfalls at the edge of the upper intertidal area where the resort upland
structures terminate at the beach. That renovation met the requirements of
15 Washington Department of Ecology's 2000 Stormwater Management Manual for
Western Washington.
16
In order to minimize construction impacts on fish and critical habitats, most
17 excavation and backfill will be conducted during low tides. Construction will be
18 scheduled after September so that access to the resort, waterfront, and water-
dependent facilities are not closed during the peak season. This will necessitate that
19 some work be conducted at night, during minus tides.
20 The proposed project is to mechanically install the pre-built pipe section. The pre-
21 build pipe sections will be brought by barge to the site and placed along the alignment
using a float-and-sink method. Installation of this portion will be entirely within the
22 footprint of the existing dock. The pipes will be full of entrapped air so that the pipe
can be floated into place and positioned using pulleys and tug boats. Once in a final
23 position, water will be allowed to fill the pipe, sinking the pipe into the trench. All
pipe will be installed with pre-cast concrete anchors to counter the pipe's natural
24 buoyancy; which will be buried below grade. Habitat mix or native beach material
25 will be used for final backfill and final grading. Under the deeper part of the dock,
the pipe will be suspended at least four inches above grade, on concrete anchors in
order to minimize the impairment of the littoral sediment drift by the pipeline and
reduce drag forces on the side of the pipeline from currents. When the pipeline is
North Forty Lodging,LLC p. 2 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
{PA0699163.DOC;l/13009.900000/}
installed, new galvanized steel pilings will be put into place for the new dock. Once
1 the piles are in place, the dock and all attacked floats will be replaced at the same
2 location and within the same footprint. Dock components will be assembled in
sections off site and floated into place above the pipeline during high tide.
3
Most equipment access and staging will be provided either between the resort parking
4 lot and beach through the adjacent property (a construction easement will be
obtained), or along the emergency access road that ends at the existing outfall
5 structure. Some site access and materials will be brought via boat and barge. No
6 equipment will be driven on the beach or across the Alderbrook Creek estuary.
7 4. Characteristics of the Area. The property is located approximately 1.5
miles outside of Union, Washington. Current land use in the area is primarily
8 residential with some businesses west of the site. Adjacent properties to the west and
east are residential. To the south, across SR 106, approximately 80 acres of hillside
9 are undeveloped and owned by the same ownership that holds Alderbrook Resort and
10 Spa.
11 5. Comprehensive Plan and Shoreline Designation. The Comprehensive
Plan designation is "Rural" and the shoreline designation is "Urban Commercial."
12 Hood Canal is a Shoreline of Statewide Significance. The marine waters which lie
immediately adjacent to shorelands designated as Urban Commercial Environment
13 shall be considered as Urban Commercial Environment to the line of mean higher
14 high tide to a depth of ten fathoms as determined by the USGS.
15 6. Adverse Impacts. A Determination of Non-Significance was issued by the
Mason County Department of Community Development Planning Division. The
16 analysis determined that the project will not have a probable significant adverse
17 impact on the environment.
18 The Notice of Shoreline Management Permit (Exhibit #3) was posted in three (3)
public places on May 8, 2008: at the Union Post Office; on the Alderbrook Resort
19 and Spa sign, facing westbound SR 106 traffic; and on the Alderbrook Resort and Spa
sign, facing eastbound SR 106 traffic. The Affidavit of Posting is marked as Exhibit
20 #3. The only comment received to date was from the Port of Shelton in support of the
21 request (Exhibit #7). In support of the request, the Port pointed to the facts that
Alderbrook provides work for 125 employees and is a vital asset for Mason County's
22 tourism sector and that the project should result in long-term improvement to both
Hood Canal water quality and intertidal habitats. The Port supports the staff
23 recommendations for conditional approval of the proposal.
24 A Biological Assessment that was prepared determined that the project would have a
25 long-term beneficial effect on all listed species and critical habitats as a result of
intertidal habitat restoration from reduction in stormwater discharges on intertidal
beaches, improved mixing of stormwater with marine water, removal of debris,
modifications to the floating dock, and replacement of eroded sediment to restore the
North Forty Lodging,LLC p. 3 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
(PA0699163.DOC;1/13009.900000/)
beach to natural elevations. In addition the proposed habitat improvements will result
1 in the restoration of 0.14 acres of intertidal habitat. No evidence has been introduced
to demonstrate that the mitigation measures set forth in the BA or BMP are
inadequate to avoid and minimize the impact on the environment.
3
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
4
Procedural:
5
6 1. Authority of Hearing Examiner. MCC 15.03.050(9) authorizes the
Examiner to review and issue a final decision regarding shoreline substantial
7 development permit requests and conditional use permits.
8 Substantive:
9 2. General Review Criteria for Shoreline Substantial Development Permit.
10 The applicant is required to obtain a shoreline substantial development permit for any
substantial development within the shoreline jurisdiction. MCC 15.09.055(a).
1 l Applications for substantial development permits are subject to review by the Hearing
Examiner. MCC 15.09.055(f). The Hearing Examiner shall base a decision on a
12 substantial development permit application on the Shoreline Master Program for
Mason County ("MCSMP"), and the policies and procedures of Chapter 90.58 RCW,
13 the Shoreline Management Act ("SMA"). MCC 15.09.055(f)(2)(C). A "substantial
14 development" is any development of which the total cost for market value exceeds
$5,000 or any development that materially interferes with any normal public use of
15 the water or shorelines of the state. The proposal requires a Shoreline Substantial
Development Permit because the project will exceed $5,000 in cost. This proposal is
16 reviewed under the SMP Sections for Flood Protection and Shoreline Stabilization
17 and Landfill (riprap is considered landfill). In addition, filling activities require a
Conditional Use Permit. The applicable review criteria are quoted below, followed
18 by the Examiner's consideration and conclusion of law.
19 MCCP Chapter IX,Aquaculture Policy No. 1:
20 Potential locations for aquaculture practices are relatively restricted due to specific
21 biophysical requirements such as water quality, temperature, substrate, dissolved
oxygen, and salinity. Priority should be given to aquaculture uses in areas having a
22 high potential for such uses.
23 3. The parcel has not been in use as commercial oyster farming, and its
aquaculture use is for mostly recreational purposes and some use by Alderbrook for
24 use in their on-site restaurant.
25 MCCP Chapter IX,Aquaculture Policy No. 9:
North Forty Lodging,LLC p. 4 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1 PA0699163.DOC;1/13009.900000/)
1
Maximum effort to protect water quality should be made in areas with high potential
1 for aquaculture and current aquaculture areas that have been identified as sensitive
areas.
3 4. Proposed development and construction are intended for the purpose of
restoring the natural habitat, minimizing future harm to the oyster beds, and reducing
4 conflict with any other uses in the vicinity.
5 MCC 17.50.060,Aquaculture Use Regulation No. 1:
6 The shoreline development adjacent to areas especially suitable for aquaculture shall
7 practice strict pollution control procedures.
8 5. Site civil engineering drawings contain the design requirements to control
9 pollution, to provide filtered storm drain, and to prevent erosion.
10 MCC 17.50.060,Aquaculture Use Regulation No.5:
11 Aquaculture development shall not cause extensive erosion or accretion along
adjacent shorelines.
12
6. The proposal is specifically intended to prevent further erosion on the site
1 and to restore currently eroded habitats to their pre-erosion levels. Best Management
14 Practices will be implemented in order to further mitigate any concerns regarding
erosion or accretion along adjacent shorelines.
15
MCC 17.50.060,Aquaculture Use Regulation No. 6:
16
Aquaculture structures and activities that are not shoreline dependent shall be
1 located to minimize the detrimental impact to the shoreline.
18
7. The relocation of the dock and stormwater pipes is to minimize the
19 detrimental impact to the shoreline, regarding both erosion control as well as any
visual or use related impacts. No adverse or detrimental impacts are expected, but
20 Best Management Practices shall be used in order to prevent any possible harm to the
21 shoreline.
?I? MCC 17.50.060,Aquaculture Use Regulation No. 8:
23 Aquaculture structures and fisheries enhancement activities shall, to the greatest
extent feasible with regard to the economic viability of the operation and protection
24 of the environment, be located, designed and operated so that native plant and animal
25
populations and their respective habitats and the local ecological balance are
maintained. .
North Forty Lodging,LLC p. 5 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
(PAo699163.DOC;1/13009.900000/)
8. As previously noted, this proposal will directly increase the viability of
1 aquaculture operations and re-establish the habitat for the oyster population.
2 Protection of the environment, native plants, and animal populations has been
addressed in the Biological Assessment and Evaluation (Exhibit#5).
3
MCCP 17.50.060,Aquaculture Use Regulation No. 11:
4
Aquaculture development shall be designed and constructed to harmonize as far as
5 possible with the local shoreline environment and shall be maintained in a neat and
6 orderly manner.
7 9. As previously discussed, the main motivating factors behind the proposal
are to restore the habitat of the oyster population, to repair the erosion that has
8 occurred from previous and current stormwater output, and to prevent any further
harm to either the shoreline or the underlying habitat. Accordingly, the proposal will
9 create a more neat and orderly operation.
10 MCCP 17.50.060,Aquaculture Use Regulation No. 14:
11
Equipment, structures and materials shall not be abandoned in shoreline area.
12
10. As conditioned, all equipment access material will be removed from the
1 area, and waste material will be discarded at approved disposal sites. In addition, no
14 construction equipment will be permitted on the beach for the duration of the project.
Access will be limited to currently existing roads and structures.
15
MCCP 17.50.060,Aquaculture Use Regulation No. 15:
16
Special precautionary measures shall be taken to minimize the risk of oil or other
1 toxic materials from entering the water or shoreline area. Precautionary measures
18 are subject to approval by the County Environmental Health Specialist.
19 11. Process, storm drainage, and on-site sewage disposal all incorporate
measures aimed at minimizing the risk of oil spills or other toxic materials from
20 entering the Hood Canal or its adjacent wetlands. Best Management Practices will be
21 implemented. Construction will take place away from water and shoreline areas, and
the opportunity for oil contamination in waters appears to be little to non-existent.
72 Construction in general will be completed off site, and the finished products will be
brought to the site for installation. In addition, most excavation and backfill will be
23 conducted during low tides so as to minimize impact. Sanitary waste is regulated by
the Department of Health and as conditioned, the Department of the Health will be
24 consulted.
25 MCCP 17.50.060, Aquaculture Use Regulation No. 16:
North Forty Lodging,LLC p. 6 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
{PA0699163.DOC;1/13009.900000/1
Landfills are prohibited waterward of the ordinary high water mark or on biological
I wetlands, except that they may be permitted for aquacultural practices and water-
2 dependent uses where no upland or structural alternative is possible.
3 12. All landfill activities occurring waterward of the ordinary high water mark
have been designed to fulfill a dual purpose. The first is to aid in restoring underlying
4 habitats and growth of aquaculture. The second is to relocate structures and
accessories to locations where there will be a minimized effect on the shoreline and
5 underlying habitats; as the current location is clearly not suitable in that regard.
6 There does not appear to be any upland alternatives to the stormwater outfall system,
simply by the nature of the use of such a method of water removal.
7
MCCP Chapter IX, Commercial Development Policy No. 1:
8
Commercial development on shoreline should be encouraged to provide physical
9 and/or visual access to the shoreline, and other opportunities for the public to enjoy
10 the shoreline.
11 13. As noted previously, the part of the motivation behind this project is to
restore the shoreline to its pre-erosion status, thus increasing both physical and visual
12 access as well as creating more uses for the public.
13 MCCP Chapter IX, Commercial Development Policy No. 2:
14
Multiple use concepts, which include open space and recreation, should be
15 encouraged in commercial development.
16 14. The current use of the area shall remain the same following the project.
The existing dock will simply be replaced with more ecologically and
17 environmentally beneficial materials, but will maintain its size and use. In addition,
18 by restoring the shoreline and oyster beds to their pre-erosion status, they will be
more available for recreational purposes.
19
MCCP Chapter IX, Commercial Development Policy No.3:
20
21 Commercial development should be aesthetically compatible with the surrounding
area. The structure should not significantly impact views from public properties,
22 public roadways or from the water.
23 15. Use of the shoreline from adjoining property should be improved by the
project, due to restoration of the shoreline. Visually, the aesthetic quality of the area
24 will increase following construction. Removing the current stormwater outfalls,
25 restoring areas where erosion has occurred, and replacing the current dock with newer
materials should benefit the views from any adjoining properties.
MCCP Chapter IX, Commercial Development Policy No.4:
North Forty Lodging,LLC p. 7 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
{PA0699163.DOC;1/13009.900000/)
1 Location of commercial developments along shorelines should ensure the protection
of natural areas or systems identified as having geological, ecological, biological or
cultural significance.
3
16. As previously stated, part of the purpose of this project is to ensure the
4 long lasting protection of the natural areas and systems that are being adversely
impacted by the current stormwater outfalls. The proposed project provides
5 protection for all of the natural areas identified above through the mitigation measures
6 recommended as part of this decision from the Biological Assessment and Evaluation.
See Exhibit#5.
7
MCC 17.50.060, Commercial Development Use Regulation No. 1:
8
The County shall utilize the following information in its review of commercial
9 development proposals:
10
• Nature of activity;
11 • Need for shore frontage;
12 • Special considerations for enhancing the relationship or the activity to the
13 shoreline;
• Provisions for public visual or physical access to the shoreline;
14 • Provisions to ensure that the development will not cause severe adverse
environmental impacts;
15 • Provisions to mitigate any significant noise impacts; and
16 17. All factors identified above have been previously addressed.
17
MCC 17.50.060, Commercial Development Use Regulation No. 2:
18
Commercial development may be permitted on the shoreline in the following
19 descending order of priority: water-dependent, water-related, and water-oriented.
20 18. As noted in the Staff Report, portions of the project range from water-
21 dependent (the oyster beds) to non-water dependent (stormwater outfall). See
MCC 17.50.040. However, the Staff Report points out that although the stormwater
22 outfall system is a non-water dependent use, it is being used to benefit a water-
dependent use. The objective is to ensure optimum utilization of shoreline within
23 urbanized areas by managing commercial development. Although on its own the
24 stormwater outfall system would likely not meet this priority because it has been
deemed non-water dependent, the water-dependent nature of this project as a whole
25 and the benefits to other water-dependent activities rely on the stormwater outfall
system renovation in order to benefit from the project. If the project were not
allowed, the water-dependent uses would greatly deteriorate, defeating the objective
of this standard.
North Forty Lodging,LLC p. 8 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
(PAO699163.DOC;1/13009.900000/)
I MCC 17.50.060, Commercial Development Use Regulation No. 8:
Commercial developments adjacent to aquaculture operations shall practice
3 pollution control procedures.
4 19. Strict pollution control is provided in the construction plans (Exhibit#5).
5 MCCP 17.50.060, Commercial Development Use Regulation No. 9:
6 Setbacks — Water dependent commercial structures may be constructed over the
7 water if this is a functional requirement. No variance from setback is required.
8 20. The construction plan (Exhibit#5)provides for the building and preparing
of all of the components of both the dock and pipes to be completed off-site and
9 brought to site completed in order to be installed. Therefore, no water-dependent
10 structures will be constructed over the water.
1 I MCCP Chapter IX,Landfill Use Policy No. 1:
12 Any permitted fills or shoreline cuts should be designed so that no significant damage
to existing ecological values or natural resources, or alteration of local currents will
I occur, creating a hazard to adjacent life, property ecological values or natural
14 resources.
15 21. According to the reports, the purpose of this project is to prevent any
damaging impact that may result from continued use of the current system and to
16 restore the natural habitats that had been eroded. There will be a need during the
construction process to dig along the shoreline and in the beds to remove old pipes
17 and lay new ones, but the construction plan calls for replacement or repair of any
18 damage to fill levels that occurs. In addition, areas that are not a part of the
construction but have suffered damage in the past are being restored and renewed.
19
MCCP Chapter IX,Landfill Use Policy No. 2:
20
21 Priority shall be given to landfills for water dependent uses.
22. The main water dependent use in this project is the oyster beds. The
project aims to restore deteriorating oyster beds,which meets this standard.
23
MCCP Chapter IX, Landfill Use Policy No.3:
24
25 In evaluating fill projects and in designating areas appropriate for fill, such factors
as total water surface reduction, navigation restriction, impediment of water flow and
circulation, reduction of water quality and destruction of habitat should be
considered.
North Forty Lodging,LLC P. 9 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
(PA0699163.DOC;1/13009.900000/)
1 23. According to staff and descriptions in the BA, no water surface reduction,
navigation restriction or impediments to water flow and circulation and no reduction
of water quality or destruction of habitat are anticipated as a result of this slide repair.
3 Again, as mentioned previously, the goal of this project is to restore currently eroding
habitats and prevent further harm. Also, the Biological report has addressed the issue
4 of water quality and established construction and site standards so as to prevent
5 lowering of water qualities.
6 MCC 17.50.060, Landfill Use Regulation No. 1:
7 Landfills are prohibited waterward of the ordinary high water mark except that they
may be permitted as a Conditional Use for aquacultural practices and water
8 dependent uses where no upland or structural alternative is possible. Landfill in
biological wetlands for non-water dependent uses may be permitted. Such fill may be
considered as a Conditional use PROVIDED the applicant can demonstrate the
10 following: (1) Extraordinary or unique circumstances relating to the property exist
which require the proposed shoreline location; (2) No viable alternative using a
I I different method or structural solution exists.
12 24. According to staff reports, this project does not have an upland or
structural alternative. Due to the nature of the stormwater outfall system, there is no
I feasible alternative option because no viable alternative using a different method or
14 structural solution exists. A Conditional Use Permit has been applied for and is
addressed further below.
15
MCC 17.50.060,Landfill Use Regulation No.2:
16
Landfills are not permitted on estuaries, tidelands, marshes, ponds or swamps except
17 that they may be allowed for water dependent uses as a Conditional Use.
18
25. The landfill will restore intertidal areas enjoyed by the public and restore
19 oyster beds. As such,the activity is water dependent.
20 MCC 17.50.060,Landfill Use Regulation No. 8:
21 Fill materials shall be of such quality that they will not cause degradation of water
22 quality.
23 26. According to the Biological Assessment and Evaluation, the project
complies with the above criterion as designed and conditioned. The construction plan
24 states that fill materials will be native sediment and washed sand and gravel of similar
25 size and composition.
MCCP Chapter IX,Piers and Docks Policy No. 1:
North Forty Lodging, LLC P. 10 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
(PA0699163.DOC;1/13009.900000/)
Piers and docks should be designed and located to minimize obstruction of views and
1 conflicts with recreational boaters and fishermen.
27. The dock to be installed will mimic almost exactly the dock that is
3 currently in place. The only difference will be in structure and material. Placement
of the new dock will be directly in the footprint of the one currently standing. As
4 such,no new obstructions or either view or for recreational purposes will be created.
5 MCCP Chapter IX,Piers and Docks Policy No. 3:
6 The type, design, and location of docks and piers should be compatible with the
7 shoreline area where they are located. Consideration should be given to shoreline
characteristics, tidal action, aesthetics, adjacent land and water uses.
8
28. As previously mentioned, the new dock will be located in the footprint of
9 current one, and the only differences will be in materials used. As such, the new dock
should conform to the shoreline characteristics, tidal action, aesthetics, adjacent land
and water uses the same as the current dock does. The dock is being designed to
1 facilitate the extension of the stormwater outfall system, and as such, its design is
being used in a manner beneficial to the overall shoreline. In addition, the new dock
12 will be made of materials that will be beneficial to the underlying habitats, which
increases the uses available.
l3
14 MCC 17.50.060,Piers and Docks Use Regulations No. 1:
15 The location and design of docks and piers, as well as the subsequent use, shall
minimize adverse effects on fish, shellfish, wildlife, and water quality.
16
29. In addition to the design benefits mentioned above, the project as a whole,
17 of which the new dock is a part, is being undertaken in order to improve the
18 surrounding water habitats, as well as to minimize any future adverse effects to either
the shoreline or other water habitats.
1�)
MCC 17.50.060,Piers and Docks Use Regulations No. 2:
20
21 Docks and piers shall be located, designed and operated to not significantly impact
or unnecessarily interfere with the rights of adjacent property owners, or adjacent
22 water users. Structures shall be located a minimum of five feet from side property
lines.
23
30. Neither of these factors is an issue, as it is well beyond five feet from the
24 side of the property, and it will be located and designed almost identically to the dock
25 that is currently in use. As such, no significant impact or unnecessary interference
with the rights of adjacent property owners will occur. In the one instance where
adjacent property was needed to access the site, a Construction Easement will be
obtained.
North Forty Lodging, LLC P. 11 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
{PA0699163.DOC;1/13009.900000/1
I MCC 17.50.060,Piers and Docks Use Regulations No. 6:
2 There is no maximum length, width, or height for commercial or industrial piers and
3 docks. The proponent mush show the size of the proposal is the minimum necessary
to allow the intended use.
4
31. The new dock will be the same dimensions as the previous one and fit
5 within its current footprint, making adjustments only to the supporting piers. As
6 such, this element does not appear to be in issue.
7 MCC 17.50.060,Piers and Docks Use Regulations No. 16:
8 All facilities shall be constructed and maintained in a safe and sound condition.
Abandoned or unsafe docks and piers shall be removed or repaired promptly by the
9 owner.
10
32. The construction plan as established in the Biological Assessment and
I 1 Evaluation (Exhibit#5) details the procedures to be followed for the construction and
placement of the dock so as to maintain safe and sound conditions. In addition, there
12 does not appear to be any reason to believe that a commercial venture that benefits
from its guests' desire to use the dock would either abandon the dock or leave it in an
13 unsafe condition for use.
14 RCW 90.58.020:
15
This policy(Shoreline Management Act policy) is designed to insure the development
16 of these shorelines (of the state) in a manner which, while allowing for limited
reduction of rights of the public in the navigable waters, will promote and enhance
17 the public interest. This policy contemplates protecting against adverse effects to the
18 public health, the land and its vegetation and wildlife, and the waters of the state and
their aquatic life, while protecting generally public rights of navigation and corollary
19 rights incidental thereto.
20 33. As previously discussed,the project will not interfere with public access to
21 the shoreline or interfere with navigation of water areas and will actually increase
public access and enjoyment. The proposal has been thoroughly mitigated to ensure
22 that it will not have any adverse impacts upon the shoreline environment and will
leave the shoreline and underwater habitats in a better position than before the
23 project.
24 RCW 90.58.020(1):
25 Recognize and protect the state-wide interest over local interest.
North Forty Lodging,LLC p. 12 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
{PAO699163.DOC;1/13009.900000/}
34. As previously discussed, the project has been thoroughly mitigated to
I address all adverse impacts and as such Statewide interest is protected, in addition to
P
the local interest..
3 RCW 90.58.020(2):
4 Preserve the natural character of the shoreline.
5 35. As previously discussed, the proposal involves repair of the shoreline and
6 prevention of further future damage. There will be no negative change in the natural
character of the shoreline as a result of the proposal..
7
RCW 90.58.020(3):
8
9 Result in long-term over short-term benefit.
10 36. Mitigation of all environmental impacts, in conjunction with ecological
benefit of enhanced aquaculture, will result in long-term over short-term benefits. In
I I addition, the repair to damaged shorelines and oyster beds, as well as replacement of
the stormwater outfall pipes that were doing the damage, will prevent further future
12 harm.
13 RCW 90.58.020(4):
14
Protect the resources and ecology of the shoreline.
15
37. As previously discussed, all adverse environmental impacts have been
16 thoroughly addressed and mitigated and, therefore, the resources and ecology of the
17 shoreline are adequately protected.
18
RCW 90.58.020(5):
19 Increase public access to publicly owned areas of the shorelines.
20 38. The project does not include any steps that would adversely impact the
21 current ability of the public to access the shoreline. It is likely, due to shoreline
erosion repair that the size and quality of the shoreline would be increased, and public
22 access and enjoyment would increase as well.
23 RCW 90.58.020(6):
24 Increase recreational opportunities for the public in the shoreline.
75 I
39. Again, it is likely that public enjoyment of the shoreline would increase
following this project. In addition to shoreline erosion repair and improved oyster
North Forty Lodging,LLC p. 13 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
{PA0699163.DOC;1/13009.900000/1
bed conditions, access to the boat launch and other recreational facilities would
1 increase following this project.
2 MCC 15.09.055(C):
3
Required Review: The Hearing Examiner shall review proposed development
4 according to the following criteria:
5 1. The development does not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and meets
6 the requirements and intent of the Mason County Code, especially Title 6, 8, and 16.
7 2. Development does not impact the public health, safety and welfare and is
in the public interest.
8
3. Development does not lower the level of service of transportation and/or
9 neighborhood park facilities below the minimum standards established within the
10 Comprehensive Plan.
11 40. As noted in the Staff Report, the project does not conflict with the
Comprehensive Plan. Title 16 does not apply to the project. The conditions of
12 approval will require that the applicant acquire an environmental permit, which will
ensure that any development within the shoreline area shall be consistent the
13 Comprehensive Plan. SEPA review has already been completed for the project, and a
14 Determination of Non-Significance was found. As discussed at length in other parts
of this decision, all adverse impacts have been thoroughly mitigated under the
15 conditions of approval and the project will have a positive economic impact upon the
community. For this reason, the project will not adversely impact the public health,
16 safety and welfare and is in the public interest. As further noted in the Staff Report,
the proposal will not lower the level of service of transportation and/or neighborhood
17 park facilities below the minimum standards established within the Comprehensive
18 Plan
19 Conditional Uses
20 As noted previously, a conditional use permit is required for the proposed fill activity.
21 The conditional use criteria are addressed below:
22 MCC 17.50.080(1):
23 That the proposed use will be consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58 and the
policies of the master program;
24
25 41. The proposed use will be consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58 and
the policies of the Master Program. The staff considers the stormwater portion of the
development to be a non-water dependent commercial development, yet it is being
utilized for a water-oriented use; which may be allowed as a Conditional Use Permit,
North Forty Lodging, LLC p. 14 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
(PA0699163.DOC;1/13009.900000/)
if it meets further criteria. This project will not adversely affect the shoreline, as it is
1 intended to both repair damage done previously and to prevent future adverse impact.
2 This project will not adversely affect the shoreline because it will not change the
natural character of the shoreline and will result in the long-term benefit and
3 protection of the resources and ecology of the shoreline. In addition, cumulative
impact, if any, should be consistent with the SMA and SMP.
4
MCC 17.50.080(2):
5
6 That the proposed use will not interfere with the normal public use of the shorelines;
7 42. Normal public use will not be permanently impacted; only during the short
construction period will public use be impacted. As noted above, this project is being
8 undertaken in order to protect the natural environment and habitats of the shoreline
area, which are beneficial to the normal public uses of the shoreline. In addition, it is
9 likely that public use, in regards to the repaired oyster beds, will increase.
1 MCC 17.50.080(3):
11
That the proposed use of the site and design of the project will be compatible with
12 other permitted uses within the area;
13 43. The proposed design will maintain the current uses of structures and
14 systems already in place. The new ones however, will improve environmental and
ecological aspects of the shoreline and adjacent areas. A Hydraulic Project Approval
15 has been issued by the Washington State Department of Fish &Wildlife (Exhibit 10).
All conditions of this permit have been incorporated into the approval of this
16 SOP/CUP.
17 MCC 17.50.080(4):
18
That the proposed use will cause no unreasonable adverse effects to the shoreline
19 environment in which it is to be located,
20 44. The Biological Assessment and Evaluation clearly addresses this issue and
21 states that the proposed project action will not likely adversely affect either species or
habitats in the area. In addition, the report also found that the proposed project is
likely to have a long-term beneficial effect on the species and habitats of the area, as a
result of intertidal habitat restoration. The proposed configuration will enhance the
23 immediate shoreline environment by greatly reducing erosion. Thus, no unreasonable
adverse effects to the shoreline are anticipated during or after construction.
24 Consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries
25 Service will ensure that project activities do not jeopardize listed species or destroy or
adversely modify designated critical habitat. Conservation measures outlined in the
Biological Assessment will be included in the construction contract. In addition,
cumulative impact,if any, should not be detrimental to the shoreline environment.
North Forty Lodging,LLC p. 15 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1 PAO699163.DOC;1/13009.900000/1
I
MCC 17.50.080(5):
That the public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect.
3
45. Repairing the eroded shoreline and oyster beds, replacing the current dock
4 with a newer more environmentally and ecologically friendly one, and generally
removing debris from the area will not cause substantial detrimental effect to the
5 public.
6 Additional Review Criteria
7
MMC 15.09.050 Type III review
8
(1) The development does not conflict lict with the comprehensive plan and meets the
requirements and intent of the Mason County Code, especially Titles 6, 8, and 16.
10 46. The policies of the Mason County Shoreline Master Program are
11 considered part of the Mason County Comprehensive Plan, as specified in RCW
36.70A.480. Those policies, the most directly applicable of the Comprehensive Plan,
12 are consistent with the development proposal as discussed throughout this decision.
The proposal does not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. Title No. 16 does not
13 apply to this particular proposal.
14
(2) The development does not impact the public health, safety and welfare and is in
15 the public interest.
16 47. As noted previously, the proposed project will enhance public health,
safety, and welfare by improving the quality of the shoreline and oyster beds; while
17 minimizing the future potential for further erosion and harm. If the project is not
18 done, there could be detrimental effect to the public interest due to the increasing
erosion of the shoreline and aquaculture.
19
(3) The development does not lower the level of service of transportation and/or
20 neighborhood park facilities below the minimum standards established within the
21 comprehensive plan. If the development results in a level of service lower than those
set forth in the comprehensive plan, the development may be approved if
22 improvements or strategies to raise the level of service above the minimum standard
are made concurrent with the development. For the purpose of this section,
23 "concurrent with the development" is defined as the required improvements or
strategies in place at the time of occupancy, or a financial commitment is in place to
24 complete the improvements or strategies within six years of approval of the
25 development.
48. This project, a stormwater outfall system renovation and dock repair, will
not lower the level of service for transportation or park facilities.
North Forty Lodging, LLC p. 16 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
{PA0699163.DOC;1/13009.900000/}
I DECISION
2 The Examiner approves the requested shoreline substantial development and
3 conditional use permit, subject to the conditions recommended by staff in the staff
report(Exhibit#1).
4
5 Dated this . day of June, 2008.
6
7 it A. Olbrechts
8 Mason County Hearing Examiner
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
North Forty Lodging, LLC p. 17 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
(PAO699163.DOC;1/13009.900000/)
May 30,2008 EXHIBIT 1
TO:Phil Olbrechts,Mason County Hearings Examiner
FROM: Grace Miller,Senior Planner,(360)427-9670,ext 360.E-mail:gbm@co.mason.wa.us
RE:Shoreline Substantial Development/Conditional Use Permit #SHR2008-00010 request by Alderbrook
Resort and Spa.
STAFF REPORT
I. INTRODUCTION.This report evaluates an application for a Shoreline Substantial Development
and Conditional Use Permit for the Alderbrook Resort&Spa Stormwater Outfall Improvements
project.I am recommending conditional approval of the proposal.
II APPLICANT.The applicant is the Alderbrook Resort and Spa.Their representatives are Brian
McGinnis and Allison Reak.
II. PROPERTY LOCATION.Alderbrook Resort&Spa,E 7107 SR 106,east of Union.Project will
be constructed on south shore of Hood Canal,between MHHW and -15 ft MLLW,on resort
property including tidelands.
III. LEGAL DESCRIPTION. Section 3,Twn 22 N,R 3 W.Lattitude 47 20'53"N,Longitude 123
04'01"W.Parcel Number:32233-50-00014.
IV. EVALUATION.
PROPOSAL:The project has three construction elements: 1)Extension of two stormwater outfalls
from the existing shoreline near MHHW to intertidal depths below—3 ft MLLW. 2)Repair and
modification of an existing marine float to provide an outfall extension corridor and improve
aquatic habitat. 3)Beach restoration and intertidal habitat improvements. A Biological
Assessment/Evaluation was prepared for this proposal by Allison Reak of Sea-Run Consulting.
The assessment was sent to the WDF&W and the Skokomish Tribe for comment.No comments
were received but the Hydraulic Project Approval has been issued by WDFW.
A. Characteristics of the site and area:Current use of the property is as a commercial resort
which includes a hotel complex,resort cottages,meeting facilities,a public restaurant,a
public ally accessible marina(with sewage pump-out and fuel),a swimming area,beach and
Class 2 tidelands,a restored salmon-bearing stream(Alderbrook Creek)with public viewing
areas.The tidelands are used for oyster production and harvesting by the resort restaurant and
visitors.The resort dock is used by the public for access to recreational moorage,fuel,a
sewage pump-out station,the resort shoreline and waters and the restaurant.
Structures existing on the property consist of the resort hotel complex and spa;an enclosed
swimming pool;21 resort cottages;a concrete bulkhead along the shoreline;a floating dock with a
sewage pump-out station,fuel and associated office,a kayak rental float and swimming float;
paved parking areas a sewage treatment system and a stormwater collection and treatment system
with two outfalls that are the subject of this application.Adjacent properties are primarily
residential with some businesses west of the site.
1
\\CLUSTERI_HOME SERVER\HOME\GBM\sdpcupstaff4.doc
B. Shoreline environment.The shoreline environment is Urban Commercial.Hood Canal is a
Shoreline of Statewide Significance.The marine waters which lie immediately adjacent to
shorelands designated as Urban Commercial Environment shall be considered as Urban
Commercial Environment to the line of mean higher high ride to a depth of ten fathoms as
determined by the USGS.
C. Comprehensive Plan.The Mason County Comprehensive Plan designation for the site is
Rural.
D. Zoning:The property is zoned as Rural Tourist.
E. SEPA Compliance: A Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance was issued on May 1,
2008 by Mason County under WAC197-11-340.Comments were received from the
Department of Ecology and added as conditions of this permit.
F. Other Permits:A Hydraulic Project Approval from the Dept of Fish and Wildlife has been
issued.The Washington State Department of Ecology will require a section 401 Water
Quality Certification and Coastal Zone Management Consistency Approval.The National
Marine Fisheries Service will require a section 7 Endangered Species Act Concurrence.
The US Fish and Wildlife Service will require a Section 7 Endangered Species Act
Concurrence and the US Army Corps of Engineers will require a Section 404 Individual
Perot.Mason County Building Permits will be required for the dock replacement.
V. ANALYSIS.
Description of proposed action:
The resort has two permitted stormwater outfalls that currently discharge treated stormwater into the upper
intertidal areas of the Hood Canal shoreline.The discharge from each outfall has eroded a large area of
intertidal beach to the edge of nearby oyster beds.Two intertidal channels created by discharge scour are
the result of relatively high stormwater discharges directly on the dry beach when tides are lower than
approximately 10 ft MLLW,resulting in the loss of natural substrate and suppression of the normal
intertidal upper range of the shoreline structures and general intertidal conditions are in Appendix B of the
Biological Assessment.
This project proposes to 1)restore the beach to pre-erosion elevations throughout the upper intertidal area
and oyster beds, 2)modify and extend both outfalls to reduce beach erosion and improve water quality,
3)modify the floating dock to accommodate one outfall extension and recover intertdal habitat,4)repair a
rock wall on adjacent property damaged by the erosion and 5)remove old debris exposed by the erosion.
Repair of one outfall will require the replacement of the existing dock to re-route the pipeline between
oyster beds.
The proposed stormwater outfalls repair project will be restricted to the outfalls and other in-water
structures and substrates as described above.No other changes to the adjacent upland area or stormwater
collection and treatment system are proposed.In-water work for this proposed project includes the
following elements:
- Restoration of 0.14 ac of eroded beach with native sediment or similar sized material.
- Temporary disturbance of about 0.12 as of beach to bury new stormwater pipe.
- Removal of over 200 sq ft(0.06 ac)of fine grained intertidal habitat through reduction of existing
styrofoam dock"grounding"footprint by 87.5 percent,through the use of smaller,discrete
polyethylene floatation tubs.
2
\\CLUSTER 1_HOME_SERVER\HOME\GBM\sdpcupstaff4.doc
Removal of 21 creosote-treated wood piles(12-in-dia)and replacement with 21 galvanized steel piles.
-Installation of about 950 feet of new stormwater outfall pipe.
Construction of a concrete drop structure(5.5 cy)for the western outfall.
Construction of 0.25 cy concrete seperator between one stormwater pipe and the resort sewer line.
Filling of pipeline trench foundation with 45 cubic yards of gravel and bedding material,three concrete
thrust blocks,and 76 concrete anchors.
Filling and covering of pipeline trench upper layers and all eroded areas of beach with native beach
sediment or similar sized imported material spread over 0.14 ac.
Removal/replacement of 10,136 square feet of existing chemically preserved wood and solid
styrofoam slab floating dock and replacement with recycled wood composite supports,grated decking
and polyethylene floatation tubs.
Increase of light transmission(52 percent)through dock by replacing 5,234 sq ft(0.12 ac)of solid
decking with grated decking. sO ,,�,,;,�,pA CAPik., 4ky w�a.(dAA"WWW iC�is W r Fhb : 4
The current stormwater collection and discharges stem was upgraded and Feconstructed in 2003-2004 to
meet Washington State Department of Ecology's 2000 Stormwater Management Manual for Western
Washington,to discharge site stormwater through two outfalls at the edge of the upper intertidal area where
the resort upland structures terminate at the beach.The eastern outfall drains the eastern two-thirds of the
resort and the western outfall drains the western third of the resort.The Alderbrook Resort and Spa
stormwater collection and treatment system consists of two drainage areas that discharge through the
eastern and western outfalls. Details on water collected are located within section 3.1 of the Biological
Assessment.
The eastern outfall pipe will be extended approximately 260 feet parallel to the seawall before turning
waterward under the existing dock for 289 feet to an elevation of—3.0 MLLW.The purpose if this route is
to 1)reduce beach erosion by extending the outfall into a deeper area where it will be submerged most of
the year,2)increase stormwater mixing with Hood Canal marine water,3)avoid extending the pipe
through existing oyster beds,and 4)keep the outfall on resort property. Similarly,the western outfall will
be extended approximately 375 feet from the bulkhead to an elevation of—3.5 ft MLLW.This will increase
the amount of time the outfall will be submerged to almost 100 percent of the year.The purpose of this
extension is to 1)extend the outfall into a deeper area where it will be submerged most of the year to
reduce erosion,2)increase stormwater mixing with Hood Canal marine water,and 3)keep the outfall on
resort property. Long term benefits should outweigh the short-term construction impacts on critical habitat
and oyster beds.
To reduce beach erosion,increase stormwater mixing with Hood Canal marine waters and minimize
construction impacts on existing oyster beds,the existing eastern outfall will be extended to—3 ft MLLW.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVIEW:
Type III Review for permit applications require that the hearing examiner evaluate the proposal for
consistency with the County's Development Code,adopted plans and regulations.The Hearing Examiner
shall review the proposal according to the following criteria: 1)The development does not conflict with the
Comprehensive Plan and meets the requirements and intent of the Mason County Code,especially Title 6,
8 and 16.
2)The development does not impact the public health,safety and welfare and is in the public
interest.
3)The development does not lower the level of service of transportation and/or
neighborhood park facilities below the minimum standards established within the
Comprehensive Plan.
3
\\CLUSTERI—HOME—SERVER\HOME\GBM\sdpcupstaff4.doc
The development meets the applicable criteria and does not conflict
with the Comprehensive Plan and meets the requirements and intent of the Mason County
Code.
B.SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM REVIEW
Per the Mason County Shoreline Master Program,this proposal requires a Shoreline Substantial
Development Permit due to the cost exceeding$5718.00 per Section 7.13.010 and by reference to the
Project Classifications Matrix. It requires a Conditional Use Permit because the stormwater expansion is
considered as non-water dependent commercial development with waterfront within the Project
Classification Matrix and the beach restoration is considered water dependent landfill beyond the OHWM.
A Conditional Use Permit is intended to allow for flexibility and the exercise of judgement in the
application of regulations in a manner consistent with the Policies of the Shoreline Management Act and
the Master Program.While not prohibited,these uses are an exception to the general rule.Criteria used for
judging conditional uses are outlined in Chapter 7.28 of the Shoreline Management Program.(17.50.050
Project Classifications)
The existing use of the property and the proposed development is considered to be for a water oriented use.
The definition of "water oriented use"is: A use that provides the opportunity for a substantial number of
the general public to enjoy the shoreline without causing significant adverse impacts upon other uses and
shore features.Examples include but are not limited to restaurants,parks,recreation areas,marine or
freshwater educational facilities,fresh seafood only sales.The use must be consistent with at least one of
the following: (1)offer a view of waterfront activities;(2)make use of a unique characteristic of the site(3)
support other proximate water dependent,water related or water oriented facilities.(17.50.040 Defmitions)
Staff considers the stormwater portion of the development to be non-water dependent commercial
development yet it is for a water-oriented use which may be allowed as a Conditional Use Permit if it meets
the criteria.The upland property and all of the area between MHHW_out to a depth of ten fathoms has a
shoreline environment designation of Urban Commercial .The objective of the Urban Commercial
Environment is to ensure optimum utilization of shoreline,within urbanized areas by managing commercial
development.The Urban Commercial Environment is an area of high intensity commercial land use.The
environment does not necessarily include all shorelines within an.unincorporated city,but is particularly
suitable to those areas presently subjected to extremely intensive use pressure,as well as areas planned to
accommodate commercial expansion.Shorelines planned for future commercial expansion should not have
a high priority for designation as an alternative environment.Because shorelines suitable for urban
commercial uses are a limited resource,emphasis should be given to development within already developed
areas and particularly to water-dependent commercial uses requiring frontage on navigable waters.
(See Project Classification Table of Chapter 17.50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use
Regulations)
The applicable Landfill policies are:
Policies(MC Comprehensive Plan Ch IX Shoreline Management Program):
1) Any permitted fills or shoreline cuts should be designed so that no significant damage to
existing ecological values or natural resources or alteration of local currents,will occur,
creating a hazard to adjacent life,property or ecological values,or natural resources.
2) Priority shall be given to landfills for water dependent uses.
3) In evaluating fill projects and in designating areas appropriate for fill,such factors as total
water surface reduction,navigation restriction,impediment of water flow and circulation,
reduction of water quality and destruction of habitat should be considered.
4
\\CLUSTER I_HOME_SERVER\HOME\GBM\sdpcupstaff4.doc
The applicable Landfill Use Regulations follow:
Use Regulations(Ch 17.50 MC Shoreline Master Program Use Regs):
1) Landfills are prohibited waterward of the ordinary high water mark or on biological wetlands
except that they may be permitted as a Conditional use for aquacultural practices and water
dependent uses where no upland or structural alternative is possible.
2) Landfills are not permitted on estuaries,tidelands,marshes,swamps,except that may be
allowed for water dependent uses as a Conditional Use.
8) Fill materials shall be of such quality that they will not cause degredation of water quality.
The proposed beach restoration is for the resort's aquacultural practices and water dependent use
of the shoreline by the public.It has been given Hydraulic Project Approval from the State Dept of
Fish and Wildlife with conditions.
The applicable Piers and Docks Chapter Policies per MC Comprehensive Plan Ch IX Shoreline
Management Program:
#1. Piers and docks should be designed and located to minimize obstruction of views and
conflicts with recreational boaters and fishermen.
#3. The type,design and location of docks and piers should be compatible with the shoreline area
where they are located. Consideration should be given to shoreline characteristics,tidal action,
aesthetics,adjacent land and water uses.
The applicable Piers and Docks Use Regulations are(Ch 17.50 MC Shoreline Master Program
Use Regs):
#1.The location and design of docks and piers,as well as the subsequent use,shall minimize
adverse effects on fish,shellfish,wildlife and water quality.
#2. Docks and piers shall be located,designed and operated to not significantly impact or
unnecessarily interfere with the rights of adjacent property owners,or adjacent water uses.
Structures shall be located a minimum of five feet from side property lines.
#6.There is no maximum length,width or height for commercial.or industrial piers and docks.
The proponent must show the size of the proposal is the minimum necessary to allow the intended
use.
#16. All facilities shall be constructed and maintained in a safe,and sound condition.Abandoned
or unsafe docks and piers shall be removed or repaired promptly by the owner.
The Aquaculture Chapter applies to this proposal because a portion of it involves beach restoration for
aquaculture purposes including the addition of over 50 cubic yards of native sediment and washed sand and
gravel of similar size and composition will be added to the upper six inches of the beach to restore natural
grades.
The applicable Aquaculture Policies are:
1. Potential locations for aquaculture practices are relatively restricted due to specific biophysical
requirements such as water quality,temperature,substrate,dissolved oxygen and salinity.Priority shall be
given to aquaculture uses in areas having a high potentail for such uses.
9. Maximum effort to protect water quality should be made in areas with high potential for aquaculture
and current aquuaculture areas that have been identified as sensitive areas.
The applicable Aquaculture Use Regulations are:
1. Shoreline developments adjacent to areas especially suitable for aquaculture shall practice
strict pollution control procedures.
5. Aquaculture development shall not cause extensive erosion or accretion along adjacent
shorelines.
5
\\CLUSTER 1_HOME_SERVER\HOME\GBM\sdpcupstaff4.doc
6. Aquaculture structures and activities that are not shoreline dependent shall be located to
Minimize the detrimental impact to the shoreline.
8. Aquaculture structures and fisheries enhancement activities shall,to the greatest extent
feasible with regard to the economic viability of the operation and protection of the
environment be located designed and operated so that native plant and animal populations,
their respective habitats and the local ecological balance are maintained.
11. Aquaculture development shall be designed and constructed to harmonize as far as possible
with the local shoreline environment and shall be maintained in a neat and orderly manner.
14. Equipment,structures and materials shall not be abandoned in the shoreline area.
15. Special precautionary measures shall be taken to minimize the risk of oil or other toxic
materials from entering the water or shoreline area.
16. Landfills are prohibited waterward of the ordinary high water mark or on biological wetlands
except that they may be permitted for aquacultural practices and water dependent uses where
no upland or structural alternative is possible.
The fill being proposed is for both restoration of the eroded beach and enhancement of the
applicant's oysterbeds.Gravel enhancement for aquacultural purposes(when over 1000 cy)is
permitted with a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit per the MC Project Classification Table
Chapter 17.50.050.
The applicable Commercial Development Policies are:
1. Commercial development on shorelines should be encouraged to provide physical and/or
visual access to the shoreline and other opportunities for the public to enjoy the shoreline.
2. Multiple use concepts which include open space and recreation should be encouraged in
commercial developments.
3. Commercial development should be aesthetically compatible with the surrounding area.
Structures should not significantly impact views from upland properties,public roadways or
from the water.
4. The location of commercial developments along shorelines should ensure the protection of
natural areas or systems identified as having geological,ecological,biological or cultural
significance.
The applicable Commercial Development Use Regulations are:
1. The County shall utilize the following information in its review of commercial development
proposals:
-nature of activity
-need for shore frontage;
special considerations for enhancing the relationship of the activity to the shoreline;
-provisions to ensure that the development will not cause severe adverse environmental impacts;
-provisions to mitigate any significant noise impacts.
2. Commercial development may be permitted on the shoreline in the following descending
order of priority:water dependent,water related and water-oriented.
8. Commercial developments adjacent to aquaculture operations shall practice strict pollution
control procedures.
9. Setbacks—Water dependent commercial structures may be constructed over the water if this
is a functional requirement.No variance from setback is required.
Because the proposal is for water dependent uses associated with the existing commercial
development and this is a functional requirement it may be allowed as a Conditional Use.Within
the applicable Environment Designations Section 17.50.070,Hood Canal is a Shoreline of
Statewide Significance.In the implementation of this policy the public's opportunity to enjoy the
6
\\CLUSTERI HOME SERVER_ _ \HOME\GBM\sdpcupstaff4.doc
physical and aesthetic qualities of the natural shoreline of the state be preserved to the greatest
extent possible consistent with the overall best interest of the state and the people generally.To
this end uses shall be preferred which are consistent with control of pollution and prevention of
damage to the natural environment or are unique to or dependent upon use of the state's shoreline.
Alterations of the natural condition of the shorelines of the state in those limited instances when
authorized,shall be given priority for single family residences,ports,shoreline recreational uses
including but not limited to parks,marinas,piers,and other improvements facilitating public
access to shorelines of the state,industrial or commercial developments which are particularly
dependent on their location on or use of the shorelines of the state and other development that will
provide an opportunity for substantial numbers of people to enjoy the shorelines of the state.
The Conditional Use Permit Criteria from Chapter 7.50.080 require that the proposal be consistent
with the policies of the Shoreline Management Act and the Master Program.Please see attached
Exhibit#2,titled "Additional Information For Shoreline Conditional Use"This exhibit states the
Conditional Use Criteria and addresses Shorelines of Statewide Significance with the applicant's
responses. Staff concurs that the proposal is consistent with the criteria.
A. CONCLUSION
Based upon the Comprehensive Plan guidelines and Mason County regulations,the project
conforms to the policies and land use regulations of the County's Shoreline Master Program for
issuance of a Substantial Development and Conditional Use Shoreline Permit.No public comment
letters were received regarding this proposal.As proposed with the recommendations of the
Habitat Management Plan,the project is consistent with the Mason County Shoreline Master
Program and will reduce impact on existing wildlife habitat and water quality and enhance the
quality of the FWHCA.
Staff recommends approval of the project with the following conditions:
1. Proper disposal of construction debris must be on land in such a manner that debris cannot
enter Hood Canal,Alderbrook Creek or cause water quality degradation of state waters.
2. Construction debris must be safely managed,especially if it contains painted wood or concrete,
treated wood,or other possibly dangerous materials.All dock materials not suitable for re-use
will be disposed of at a permitted upland waste facility.
3. Water quality is not to be degraded to the detriment of the aquatic environment as a result of
this project.
4. Erosion control measures must be in place prior to any clearing,grading,or construction.
These control measures must be effective to prevent stormwater runoff from carrying soil and
other pollutants into surface water or storm drains that lead to waters of the state.Sand,silt,
clay particles,and soil will damage aquatic habitat and are considered to be pollutants.
5. Any discharge of sediment-laden runoff or other pollutants to waters of the state is in violation
of Chapter 90.48,Water Pollution Control,and WAC 173-201A,Water Quality standards for
Surface Waters of the State of Washington and is subject to enforcement action.
6. The recommendations made within Section 8 the Biological Assessment/Evaluation prepared
by Allison Reak of Sea-Run Consulting and dated December 2007 with Addendum dated
Apri12008,are to be implemented throughout the project.
7. During construction,all releases of oils,hydraulic fluids,fuels,other petroleum products,
paints,solvents and other deleterious materials must be contained and removed in a manner
that will prevent their discharge to waters and soils of the state.The cleanup of spills should
take precedence over other work on the site.
7
VII. Choice of Action.
\\CLUSTERI_HOME SERVER\HOME\GBM\sdpcupstaff4.doc
1. Approve Shoreline SDP request with conditions.
2. Approve without conditions.
3. Deny(reapplication or resubmittal is permitted).
4. Deny with prejudice(reapplication or resubmittal is not allowed for one year).
5. Remand to for further proceedings and/or evidentiary hearing in accordance with section
15.09.090 of Title 15.
8
\\CLUSTERI_HOME SERVER\HOME\GBM\sdpcupstaff4.doc
SHR2008-00010 Alderbrook Resort&Spa
EXHIBITS:
1—Staff Report.
2—Shoreline Permit Application
3—Public Notice
4—SEPA Determination w/JARPA application&comments.
5—Biological Assessment/Evaluation&Addendum,Site Plan&vicinity map,Notice for comments
6—Hydraulic Project Approval
\\CLUSTERI—HOME—SERVER\HOME\GBM\sdpcupstaff4.doc
CONDITIONS:
Proper disposal of construction debris must be on land in such a manner that debris cannot enter
Hood Canal, Alderbrook Creek or cause water quality degredation of state waters.
Construction debris must be safely managed, especially if it contains painted wood or concrete,
treated wood, or other possibly dangerous materials. All dock materials not suitable for re-use will be
disposed of at a permitted upland waste facility.
Water quality is not to be degraded to the detriment of the aquatic environment as a result of this
project.
Erosion control measures must be in place prior to any clearing, grading or construction. These
control measures must be effective to prevent stormwater runoff from carrying soil and other
pollutants into surface water or storm drains that lead to waters of the state. Sand, silt, clay particles
and soil will damage agautic habitat and are considered to be polltants.
Any discharge of sediment-laden runoff or other pollutants to waters of the state is in violation of
Chapters 90.48, Water Pollution Control and WAC 173-201A, Water Quality standards for Surface
Waters of the State of Washington and is subject to enforcement action.
''The recommendations made within Section 8 of the Biological
Assessment/Evaluation prepared by Allison Reak of Sea-Run Consulting and dated December 2007,
with Addendum dated April 2008, are to be implemented throughout the project.
During construction, all releases of oils, hydraulic fluids, fuels or other petroleum products, paints,
solvents and other deleterious materials must be contained and removed in a manner that will take
precedence over other work on the site.
This permit has been granted by Mason County persuant to the Shoreline Management Act of 1971
and nothing in this permit shall excuse the applicant from compliance with any other federal, state or
local statutes, ordinances or regulations applicable to this project but not inconsistent with the
Shoreline Management Act. (Chapter 90.58 RCW).
This permit may be rescinded pursuant to RCW 90.58.140(7) in the event the permittee fails to
comply with the terms and conditions hereof.
S H R2008-00010 2 of 2
A4a
MASON COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Courthouse Annex
P.O.Box 279,Shelton,WA 98584
(360)427-9670
SHORELINE PERMIT APPLICATION
PERMITNO. 5W,7 9-0=0 SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT X Der�.pl,�uMr and
SHORELINE VARIANCE ""
DATE RECEIVED y 2/ o SHORELINE CONDITIONAL USE
SHORELINE EXEMPTION
The Washington State Shoreline Management Act (RCW 90.58) requires that substantial developments within
designated shorelines of the state comply with its administrative procedures(WAC 173-14)and the provisions of the
Mason County Shoreline Management Master Program.The purpose of this Act and local program is to protect the
state's shoreline resources. The program requires that substantial development(any development of which the total
cost or fair market value exceeds $5,000.00 or materially interferes with the normal public use of the water or
shorelines of the State be reviewed with the goals,polices, and performance standards established in the Master
Program.
Answer all questions completely. Attach any additional information that my further describe the proposed
development. Incomplete applications will be returned. p-u
APPLICANT: i5r,;M M C,0 1)4 n15 , /�l��,r�J/Dr)vli�CSe>'t 1t ,�pd
ADDRESS: �;W 'c a/d
1 ss&d r c�r t't.. ( ) wo- 9 -7
(city) (state) (zip)
TELEPHONE: Y2S 36,7 9
(home) // (business)
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE: All i50Yi
ADDRESS: 16,& Attt /VW
(str�le urk 98!/
(city) state) (zip)
TELEPHONE: 7IS - 3 2S
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
General location(include property address,water"body/and associated wetlands—identify the name of the
shoreline): 7/6—7
r1,
Legal description (include section, township, and range to the nearest quarter, quarter section or latitude and
longitude to the nearest minute. Projects located in open water areas away from land shall provide a longitude
location)—include all parcel numbers:
S 3 T.,Z:2-W ie3U/ ; 'f-7".20 'S3 "/4V 12300�'o! le,ky
-o 3 23 r900o1
OWNERSHIP: Contract
Applicant J5 Owner _ Lessee Purchaser (Identify) Other
Owner:
(street)
(city) (state) (yip)
1:\PLANNINGICHARELL&RENEEISHORELINEPERMIT.APP REVISED: 06-25-03
Eke
DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTON
Development(identify and describe the proposed project,including the type of materials to be used,construction
methods,principle dimensions,and other pertinent information):
Use(identify current use of property with exist improvements:
Reason for requesting development:
ACKOWLEDGEMENT i
I hereby declare,to the best of my knowledge and belief,the forgoing information and all attached information is
true and correct.
(applicant or authorized representative) (date
....:..........................................................................
TO BE COMPLETED BY LOCAL OFFICIAL
Identify and describe existing features of the site and surrounding area:
�E�.STgt� ?EPOrLT
If proposed structures will exceed a height of 35 feet above the existing grade level,indicate the location of any
residential units that will have an obstructive view:
tik
If a Conditional Use or Variance is requested,make reference to the appropriate section in the Master Program:
SEA '5qr F RCP&ZT
[:\PLANN MGICHARELL&RENEE/SHORELINEPERMIT.APP REVISED: 06-25-03
Sf/Xaoo�aooro C�3�
/-izlderb►2elt,Pc�o,�-��
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE � �s. �r`►zr,�„ 5
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
COUNTY OF MASON ) ss.
1, ��-�,�o ,U,I lei do hereby certify that I post
ed copies
of
the attached A)o--ru
on day of 20 o�9, in public places as follows:
one at
01
tv
one at !s e& e), ,4 AA4 ,ov4 Z f
one at _ ck ✓ovd scar- eao ,v,„d �v �r� �,.��
0
In witness whereof, the party has signed this Affidavit of Posting Notice this day
of ;, 20
BY:
Address: -2-7g Sties-taH wA g85g�
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
ss.
COUNTY OF MASON )
Subscribed and sworn to me this
day of , 20 < �'
l,• o Ap
�. �� Notary Public for the State of Washington
2 Residing at
APR ^D, 011
�.• ;�: Commission Expires U-3o-poi/
NOTICE OF SHORELINE MANAGEMENT
PERMIT
SHR2008-00010
Notice is hereby given that NORTH
FORTY LODGING, who is the owner of the
described property, has filed an application Affidavit of Publication
for a Shoreline Management Permit for the
development of:
Sub.Dev./Conditional Use
Restore a large area of eroded intertidal STATE OF WASHINGTON 1 SS.
beach by re-routing and extending two COUNTY OF MASON J
stormwater outfalls from upper intertidal to
low intertidal/subtidal elevations. Proposed
project has three construction elements: 1) Koleen Wood being first duly sworn
extension of two stormwater outfalls from
existing shoreline near mean higher high on oath deposes and says that she is the clerk
water to intertidal depths below -3 ft mean of the SHELTON-MASON COUNTY JOURNAL, a weekly newspaper. That
lower low water, 2) repair and modification said newspaper is a legal newspaper and it is now and has been for more than six
of an existing marine float to provide an
outfall extension corridor and improve months prior to the date of the publication hereinafter referred to, published in
aquatic habitat,and 3)beach restoration and the English language continuously as a weekly newspaper in SHELTON,Mason
intertidal habitat improvements. County, Washington, and it is now and during all of said time was printed in an
Site Address:7101 E STATE ROUTE 106 office maintained at the aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper. That
UNION the said SHELTON-MASON COUNTY JOURNAL was on the 9th day of
Parcel Number:322335000014 August, 1941, approved as a legal newspaper by the Superior Court of said
WA Location of Project:7107 SR 106, Union Mason County.
Within:SE(quarter section)of Section:33
Township:22 N Range:3 W,W.M. That the annexed is a true copy of a Notice of Shoreline MQmt Permit
in,Mason County Washington.
Said development is proposed within North Forty Lodging
Hood Canal and/or its associated wetlands.
Any person desiring to express their view #1181
or to be notified of the action taken on the
application should notify: as it was published in regular issues and not in supplement form of said
MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT newspaper once each week for a period of two
P 0 BOX 279 consecutive weeks,commencing on the
SHELTON,WA 98584
in writing of their interest.The comment I st day of May ,20 08 and ending on the
period is at least 30 days from the final date
of publication given pursuant to WAC 173- 8th day of May 2008 both dates inclusive,
14-020.The final date of publication,posting,
or mailing of notice is 5/8/2008. and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its subscribers during all of
Written comments will be accepted up to the said period.That the full amount of the fee charged for the
the date of the hearing.
A public hearing will be hold on this permit foregoing publication is the sum of$ 12 _
request.Contact this office at(360)427-9670,
ext.360 for date and time of hearing.
A Determination of Nonsignificance
was issued on 5/1/2008 under WAC 197- �� day of
11-340. Written comments regarding Subscribed and sworn to before me this_
this determination must be received by
5/15/2008. , ,20
_ 1181 5/1-8 2t -Z
6 -4 o Notary P ic_in and for the State of Washington
SC.z�
r ; Residing at Shelton,Washington
S'c;��.� My commission expires ,20�.
'''''�4f 1�IIIII
qra
MASON COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Building III, 426 W. Cedar St.
P.O. Box 186
Shelton, WA 98584
(360)427-9670
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR SHORELINE CONDITIONAL USE
1. Show that the proposed use will be consistent with the policies of R.C.W. 90.58
and the policies of the Master Program.
The Shoreline Management Act(R.C.W. 90.58) states the local governments,when
making decisions about shorelines of statewide significance, such as Hood Canal, shall
give preference to uses in the following order of preference:
(1)Recognize and protect the statewide interest over local interest. The proposed
project will not affect statewide interest, other than enhancing a state resource (shellfish).
(2)Preserve the natural character of the shoreline. The proposed action will move two
stormwater outfalls that currently erode the intertidal shoreline to near-subtidal depths at
which erosion will be minimized, thereby allowing restoration and long-term
preservation of the character of the shoreline.
(3)Result in long term over short term benefit. The proposed action will result in
long-term benefits to the shoreline by moving the resort's stormwater outfalls into near-
subtidal depths, resulting in practically complete mixing of stormwater with marine water
during most tidal stages, and allowing recovery of upper and mid-intertidal beach habitat.
The goal of the stormwater outfall extensions is to allow a return of oysters and other
shellfish to mid-intertidal elevations that are currently scoured by high-volume
stormwater discharges on dry beach. Modifications to the floating dock, to allow the
extension of the eastern outfall between existing oyster beds, will result in long-term
benefits to the shoreline by elimination of the grounding footprint(recovering 3,025 ft2 of
intertidal substrate) and an increase in light transmission by replacing 5,234 ft2(0.12 ac)
of solid decking with grated decking. The replacement of 21 creosote-treated wood pile
with galvanized steel pile will also provide long-term benefits to sediment and water
quality. The restoration of 0.14 ac of fine-grained intertidal habitat to natural elevations
will also provide long-term habitat benefits.
(4) Protect the resources and ecology of the shoreline. In addition to the habitat
restoration goals described above, additional efforts were made to protect ecological
resources at the site. Early outfall design alternatives considered the possibility of
connecting the western outfall to the eastern outfall under the dock, so that no oyster beds
would be affected by construction. The connected outfall design was rejected because of
construction complications: the western outfall is already at a lower elevation than the
eastern outfall, and the pipeline extension would have resulted in trench construction
Alderbrook Resort&Spa 1 April 2008
Stormwater Outfalls Repair
through Alderbrook Creek's estuary. The final design will extend the western outfall
directly off the shore to -3 ft MLLW, using the shortest distance possible. Although
construction of this alignment will temporarily disturb the resort's oyster beds,the
potential impacts were considered to be less harmful to ESA-listed fish than construction
through the Alderbrook Creek estuary(per discussions with National Marine Fisheries
Service).
The western alignment was designed to achieve a near-subtidal elevation for the outfall
and remain on resort property. At -3.5 ft MLLW, the outfall will be submerged 100
percent of the year. A preliminary design used a shorter pipeline extension,to avoid
digging up oysters. The shallower outfall would have been exposed during low tide for
about 25 percent of the year and required a hardened pad at the outlet to protect the beach
from erosion during very low tides. The shorter alignment was rejected after discussions
with National Marine Fisheries Service because it placed the outfall in the middle of
critical habitat for juvenile salmonids, and it required rock fill to control erosion. A
deeper outfall was proposed and the negative impacts to the oyster beds(i.e., short-term
construction disturbance and subsequent re-seeding) were evaluated against the
environmental benefits of a permanently submerged, subtidal stormwater outfall. It was
decided that the proposed alignment was advantageous because it reduces stormwater-
caused erosion,removes most stormwater discharges from upper intertidal fish habitat,
and increases stormwater mixing with Hood Canal marine water.
Following discussions with Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife,the
replacement dock design was modified to include 48 pile stops to elevate the floating
dock at least one foot above grade during low tides,to eliminate grounding and recover
benthic and epibenthic habitat under the dock.
To minimize construction impacts on water quality and fish habitat, excavating and
filling will be scheduled during low(minus)tides. Because the resort relies on the use of
its beach and waterfront facilities during the summer, construction is planned for
fall/winter 2008-2009 (during the federal and state approved in-water work window).
During fall/winter months, minus tides occur during the night, so some work will occur at
night.
Additional protection and conservation measures include:
- Adherence to the state-designated in-water work period of July 16 to February
15, 2008-2009 to avoid or minimize disturbances to ESA-listed species.
- Minimization of the quantity and size of construction equipment allowed on the
beach area at any one time.
- Use of only lower-impact construction equipment(e.g.,rubber track or balloon
tires) on the beach.
- Regularly monitoring and maintenance of construction equipment to prevent
hazardous material leaks on the beach.
Alderbrook Resort&Spa 2 April 2008
Stormwater Outfalls Repair
• Staging and stockpiling equipment and materials away from the water, on
paved areas.
• Transportation of materials to the construction area using small (e.g.,three- or
seven-yard capacity)rubber-tracked transporters.
• Implementation and maintenance of sedimentation and erosion control
measures at the stockpile locations.
• Use of rubber mats in areas where native soils do not provide sufficient support
for construction activities.
• Limiting low-tide construction travel routes to within 25 ft of the bulkhead and
western pipeline alignment and within 10 ft of the eastern outfall alignment.
• Use of pre-cast anchor blocks and pipe sections assembled off site to limit in-
water concrete curing and minimize in-water construction time.
• Use of vibratory hammer instead of impact hammer to reduce potential harm to
aquatic species and habitat.
• Scheduling of most upper intertidal work to occur from land, during low tides,
to minimize turbidity.
• Scheduling of dock replacement, float-and-sink pipe placement, and pile
driving during high tides, to avoid grounding barges on shellfish beds.
• Removal of all construction debris from upland and intertidal areas, daily and
immediately after project completion.
• Replacement of styrofoam dock flotation with specially configured tubs to
create openings for fish passage under and between the floats.
• Installation of pile stops to prevent the dock from grounding at low tides and
recover benthic and epibenthic habitat underneath.
• Replacement of solid decking with grated decking for enhanced light
transmission under and around the dock.
• Replacement of chemically preserved wood with chemically inert recycled
wood composite material (i.e., Trex) on new dock sections.
• Restoration of all disturbed upland areas and utilization of native plants, if
necessary.
• Disturbance of the smallest area feasible.
(5) Increase public access to publicly owned areas of the shorelines. The proposed
action is within a privately owned shoreline with public access. The project proposes to
repair(i.e., replace) a 40-year-old floating dock to accommodate the extension of the
eastern outfall around existing oyster beds. The replacement dock will maintain the
existing public access to the shoreline. The floating dock is the only public access to the
shoreline in this area.
Alderbrook Resort&Spa 3 April 2008
Stormwater Outfalls Repair
Q(19_
6 Increase recreational opportunities for the public in the shoreline. The proposed
( ) pp p p p
project will increase recreational opportunities by recovering shellfish habitat in Class 2
tidelands that are certified for shellfish harvest and accessible to the public for
recreational harvest. The resort will maintain a publicly accessible sewage pump-out for
visiting boaters and access to the resort restaurant on shore.
2. Show that the proposal will not interfere with the normal public use of the
shoreline.
The scheduling of construction for fall or winter of 2008-2009, during the available
minus tides (at night), will avoid interference with normal public use of the shoreline.
During the limited(three-week) construction period, access to the shoreline will be
limited when the floating dock is temporarily removed, but this is a time of year when
few people use the shoreline.
3. Show that the proposed use of the site and design of the project will be compatible
with other permitted uses within the area.
Other permitted uses of the resort waterfront include short-term boat moorage (DNR
lease) and shellfish harvest. The proposal is intended to improve both of these uses. No
additional uses or changes in current use will result from the proposed project.
4. Show that the proposed use will cause no unreasonable adverse effects to the
shoreline environment in which it is to be located.
The proposed use of the stormwater outfall extensions was evaluated for possible adverse
effects on the Hood Canal shoreline in terms of shellfish and ESA-listed fish in the
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair Biological Assessment/
Biological Evaluation (BA/BE), December 2007. Regarding water quality, the analysis
determined that the proposed project would provide long-term benefits to ecological
habitat and biological resources. A description of water quality conditions and
improvements from the BABE is repeated here.
Baseline water quality conditions include stormwater discharge from two recently
constructed stormwater outfalls that discharge in the upper intertidal zone. As part of the
2002-2004 resort renovation, the stormwater collection system was redesigned and
reconstructed to capture and treat runoff from the parking lots and adjacent areas around
the resort, including large areas of vegetation. Treatment includes stormwater detention,
particulate settling, oil/water separators, infiltration, and discharge through a grass-lined
biofiltration swale or sand filter, before discharge into the upper intertidal. Stormwater
quality is assumed to be low in pollutants because most of the runoff is generated from
about 10 ac of clean surfaces, such as the grassy slope (4.57 ac), landscaped areas
(3.4 ac), roofs (1.51 ac), sidewalks, and perennial seeps (0.48 ac). The paved surfaces
probably contribute little pollutant load to the stormwater because of their relatively low
use and moderate to low vehicle speeds. The paved parking areas (2.3 ac)reach parking
capacity for only part of the year, and the slow driving/parking speeds of resort visitors
Alderbrook Resort&Spa 4 April 2008
Stormwater Outfalls Repair
do not usually result in brake wear, which is considered to be the source of metals
derived from roads. Stormwater runoff from the area of SR 106 (less than 1.2 ac) is also
low in oils/grease and dissolved metals because the highway was recently reconstructed
to improve travel both around and into the resort, with slower speeds, longer line-of-sight
distances, and exit lanes. These improvements reduce quick acceleration/deceleration
and accidents,which in turn reduces brake wear and oil leakage. Most importantly,
stormwater from the parking areas and SR 106 is detained and treated before discharge.
Baseline stormwater discharge water quality will not change under this proposed action.
Under baseline conditions,the stormwater discharged at MHHW from the two outfalls
causes beach erosion during tides lower than MHHW when large storms exceed the
capacity of the detention swales. The proposed project will improve marine water quality
(i.e., decrease turbidity) by moving the stormwater outfalls to low intertidal elevations, so
that marine waters of Hood Canal will dissipate stormwater discharge energy during most
or all of the tidal cycle. The deeper discharges will also be immediately mixed with
marine waters, which reduces the risk of direct exposure to juvenile salmonids that might
be foraging in the upper intertidal. Overflow openings at MHHW in both outfalls will
release excess stormwater on the beach,but this is not expected to commonly occur.
The new eastern outfall extension will be constructed outside of the oyster beds, to avoid
trenching through shellfish resources. The eastern outfall pipe alignment was designed to
minimize long-term harmful effects on beach habitat by diverting up to 7.5 cfs of
stormwater discharges into low-intertidal depths, burying the new pipe along the
bulkhead, and extending it under the existing dock. The dock separates the east and west
oyster beds and offers the only pathway that avoids trenching through the oysters. To
further minimize effects on marine waters, nearshore currents, and sediment transport,
most of the exposed (i.e.,unburied)pipe will be elevated four inches off the substrate.
This alignment was chosen as the best solution to submerge the outfall, reduce beach
erosion and turbidity, increase stormwater mixing with marine water, and improve upper
intertidal water quality with the least habitat disturbance during construction and long-
term operations.
The western outfall pipe was designed to be buried for most of its length. The outlet
elevation was determined to be the deepest possible location, within resort property, that
would fully submerge the outfall, reduce beach erosion and turbidity, maximize
stormwater mixing with marine water, and restore upper intertidal water quality for long-
term operations. The benefits of this alignment to threatened salmonids(and critical
habitat)outweighed the short-term harm to the western oyster bed that construction will
inflict..
Potential short-term effects on water quality would consist of temporarily elevated levels
of turbidity caused by disturbed sediment(i.e., native sediment sidecast during trenching
and backfill material used to restore beach elevations) during an estimated three-week
construction period. Pile extraction and driving, estimated for 10 days, would also cause
localized areas of short-term turbidity.
Alderbrook Resort&Spa 5 April 2008
Stormwater Outfalls Repair
�xa
Temporarily elevated levels of turbidity following pile extraction and replacement and
sediment disturbance during trenching are not expected to have any measurable harmful
effect on juvenile salmon and trout. First,based on juvenile outmigration timing,
juveniles would not likely be present in the shallow intertidal areas during the mid-
summer. At this time of year, most juveniles should be foraging in deeper waters and
preying on larger fish. Second,the footprint of the backfilled areas will be relatively
small, compared to the action area, so the amount of turbidity from the backfill is
expected to be minor. Third,the turbidity should gradually increase along the front of the
flooding tide and disperse slowly through the water, allowing salmon escape time and
access to deeper water to avoid the turbidity. Along each pipeline,the duration of
elevated turbidity should be measured in minutes,rather than hours, during the three to
five days of in-water construction. This level of disturbance would likely have no
noticeable effect on juvenile salmon and trout, if present in the action area during
construction.
The replacement of 21 creosote-treated wood piles with equivalent or smaller galvanized
steel piles will improve water quality over existing conditions and result in a beneficial
effect. The replacement of chemically preserved wood railings and stringers with a
chemically inert wood composite material (i.e., "Trex"or similar type) and composite
grating will also reduce potential chemical leacheate into marine waters and increase light
transmission. The replacement of 9,000 ft2 of Styrofoam slab flotation with polyethylene
tubs will eliminate the potential release of Styrofoam waste into marine waters. The
addition of 48 pile stops would convert a total of 17 ft2 of fine-grained habitat into
vertical solid habitat,but the environmental benefits outweigh the loss of natural habitat.
The dock and floats were re-designed to allow the dock to rest on the pile stops at low
tide, eliminating the grounding footprint. The pile stops would allow benthic and
epibenthic organisms to colonize approximately 3,072 ftz(0.07 ac)under the dock. Net
gain of fine-grained habitat around the dock would be 3,025 ft2. Many benthic and
epibenthic invertebrates are an important food source for forage fish and juvenile
salmonids, especially Chinook salmon. Pile stops may also enhance sediment transport
over greater distances along upper intertidal elevations, improving beach substrate quality
and reducing sedimentation at the mouth of Alderbrook Creek. The addition of 48 piles
perpendicular to the shoreline is not expected to measurably affect water circulation in
the action area because the piles are short, small in diameter, and spaced relatively far
apart.
These water quality improvements would be beneficial to all fish in the action area,
including ESA-listed species of salmon and trout.
5. Show that the public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect.
The project was designed to reduce to the greatest extent possible any impacts on public
interest because the resort's business depends on it. Therefore,the project will remove a
discharges of treated stormwater from permitted outfalls at MHHW to near-subtidal
depths to decrease beach erosion and restore beach habitat for fish and shellfish. As part
Alderbrook Resort&Spa 6 April 2008
Stormwater Outfalls Repair
��L
of the project,the resort will repair the existing floating dock, which provides public
access to the shoreline for recreation,and to the resort restaurant. The benefits to the
pubic interest are served by the project because shoreline erosion will be reduced,
shoreline habitat will be restored, and fish and shellfish resources will benefit.
Additional project information is provided in the JARPA (submitted in December 2007)
and April 2008 Addendum (attached).
Alderbrook Resort&Spa 7 April 2008
Stormwater Outfalls Repair
(a3)
oN_STA MASON COUNTY
o Py A o N DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
s U = Planning Division
o Y P 0 Box 279,Shelton,WA 98584
0 �Dti (360)427-9670
1864
SHR2008-00010 NOTICE OF SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT
Notice is hereby given that NORTH FORTY LODGING,who is the owner of the described property, has filed an
application for a Shoreline Management Permit for the development of:
Sub. Dev./Conditional Use
Restore a large area of eroded intertidal beach by re-routing and extending two stormwater outfalls
from upper intertidal to low intertidal/subtidal elevations. Proposed project has three construction
elements: 1) extension of two stormwater outfalls from existing shoreline near mean higher high
water to intertidal depths below -3 ft mean lower low water, 2) repair and modification of an existing
marine float to provide an outfall��eextt�e-nsiorpn corridor and improve aquatic habitat, and 3) beach
restoratio tte Ad ress: 710�Wt9TATE WOU I t 106 UNION
Parcel Number: 322335000014
Location of Project: 7107 SR 106, Union WA
Within:SE(quarter section)of Section:33 Township:22 N Range:3 W,W.M.
in ,Mason County Washington.
Said development is proposed within Hood Canal and/or its associated wetlands. Any person desiring to express
their view or to be notified of the action taken on the application should notify:
MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
P 0 BOX 279
SHELTON,WA 98584
in writing of their interest.The comment period is at least 30 days from the final date of publication given pursuant to WAC 173-14-020. The
final date of publication,posting,or mailing of notice is 5/8/2008.
Written comments will be accepted up to the date of the hearing.
A public hearing will be held on this permit request. Contact this office at(360)427-9670,ext.360 for date and time of hearing.
A Determination of Nonsignificance was issued on 5/1/2008 under WAC 197-11-340. Written comments regarding this determination must
be received by 5/15/2008.
SHR2008-00010
I
L 't
P�pN STATFO MASON COUNTY
��
C 14 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
o s ) Planning Division
i 0 T �? P O Box 279, Shelton,WA 98584
�oJ Y Y (360)427-9670
1864
MITIGATED
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE
(WAC 197-11-350)
SEP2008-00052
Description of Proposal: Alderbrook Resort & Spa Stormwater Outfall Improvements.
Project has three construction elements: 1) extension of two
stormwater outfalls from existing shoreline near MHHW to
intertidal depths below -3 ft MLLW, 2) repair and modification of
an existing marine float to provide an outfall extension corridor
and improve aquatic habitat, 3) beach restoration and intertidal
habitat improvements.
Proponent: NORTH FORTY
Site Address (If Assigned): 7101 E STATE ROUTE 106 UNION
Directions to Site: 7107 S.R. 106, Union
Parcel Number: 322335000014
Legal Description: SUNNY BEACH PCL 1 OF BLA #04-58
Lead Agency: Mason County
The Lead Agency for this proposal 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). This decision was made after review of a completed
Environmental Checklist and other information on file with the Lead Agency. This information is
available to the public upon request. MITIGATED MEASURES ARE ATTACHED.
Please contact Grace Miller at ext. 360 with any questions. This DNS is issued under WAC
197-11-340(2). The Lead Agency will riot act on this proposal for 14 days from the date shown
below, when the determination is final. Comments must he submitted to Dept. of Community
Development, P.O. Box 279, Shelton WA 98584 by 5/,5%2008. Appeal of this determination
must be filed within a 14-day period following this final determination date, per Mason County
Code Chapter 15.11 Appeals.
K
C
uthonzed Local Government Official Date
�CI = DOS PNk 0K'0&AIS�f TIZ I S
q PPL i c/r&-r LvPo}{
MITIGATED
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE
(WAC 197-11-350)
SEP2008-00052
CONDITIONS OF THIS DETERMINATION
1) Water quality is not to be degraded to the detriment of the aquatic environment as a result
of this project.
2) Residential developers and individuals shall be required to control erosion during
construction. Removal of vegetation should be minimized and any areas disturbed should
be restored to prevent erosion and other environmental
impacts.
3) All Conservation Measures listed within Section 8 of the Biological Assessment/Evaluation
must be implemented during project.
5f:_!_Pd-00y
MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
BACKGROUND
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable:
Alderbrook Resort & Spa Stormwater Outfalls Improvements
2. Name of applicant:
North Forty Lodging, LLC
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
Applicant
North Forty Lodging, LLC
c/o Brian McGinnis
22526 SE 64th Place
Suite 210
Issaquah, WA 98027
(424) 369-9290
Contact Person
(1)Brian McGinnis
22526 SE 64th Place
Suite 210
Issaquah, WA 98027
(424) 369-9290
(2)Allison Reak
Sea-Run Consulting
6531 1Oth Ave NW
Seattle, WA 98117
(206) 718-3285
(3)Jason Van Gilder
Cosmopolitan Engineer*- 6v*v--P
ree
(206) 920-8781
4. Date checklist prepared:
April 10, 2008
S. Agency requesting checklist:
Mason County
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT I
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
Approximately three weeks of onsite construction activity during the approved in-water
work period (July 15, 2008 to Feb 15, 2009).
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity
related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain.
No.
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or
will be prepared, directly related to this proposal.
JARPA Application(includes 2007 Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls
Repair BABE) submitted to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in December 2007 and
April 2008 Addendum.
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of
other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes,
explain.
No.
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your
proposal, if known.
Mason County--Substantial Development and Conditional Use permits, Shoreline
Management Program Environmental Checklist, ESA-Salmonids Checklist
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)--Hydraulic Project Approval
Washington Department of Ecology (WDOE}—Section 401 Water Quality Certification
Washington Department of Ecology (WDOE)—Coastal Zone Management Consistency
approval
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS aka NOAA Fisheries)—Section 7 Endangered
Species Act concurrence
U.S. Fish& Wildlife Service (USFWS)—Section 7 Endangered Species Act concurrence
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers(USACE)—Section 404 Individual Permit
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.)
This project proposes to restore a large area of eroded intertidal beach by re-routing and
extending two stormwater outfalls from upper intertidal to low intertidal/subtidal
elevations. Habitat restoration will include replacing eroded beach sediment with similar
material to its original contours and elevations and removing old construction debris from
intertidal habitat. Stormwater outfall improvements will include repairing and improving
Alderbrook Resort Stormwater Outfalls Repair -2- April 2008
Environmental Checklist
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
an existing floating dock and replacing part of a collapsed stone wall on adjacent property
that was damaged by stormwater discharges.
The project site is a commercial resort in operation since 1913 with a floating dock that
provides fuel and a sewage pump-out for south Hood Canal visitors and public access to
the resort and its facilities. Resort facilities and amenities include a restaurant, saltwater
swimming float, swimming pool, kayak rentals, beach combing, and shellfish digging
within the resort's Class 2 tidelands with oyster beds certified for harvest and
consumption. The total area of project site, within Alderbrook tidelands between mean
higher high water(MHHW) and extreme low water(ELW) is 21,700 ft2 (0.5 ac).
In 2004, the resort completed a major renovation and expansion,which included a new
stormwater collection and treatment system, restoration of a small creek(Alderbrook
Creek) for salmon habitat, and extensive landscaping improvements with native plants.
The new stormwater treatment system uses bioswales and filters that retain and treat
stormwater from all paved areas, including sidewalks, access drives, and parking areas, in
addition to small areas of lawn and large areas of native vegetation. The treated
stormwater is released via two stormwater outfalls located at mean higher high water on
the east and west sides of the resort.
This project would restore 0.14 ac/58 cy of eroded upper intertidal beach with native (or
matching) fill, remove more than 200 ft2 of debris from intertidal beach, extend two
existing stormwater outfalls from approximately MHHW to subtidal elevations (below
-3 ft MLLW),modify the existing marine float to eliminate its grounding footprint,
replace 21 creosote wood piles with 21 galvanized steel piles, replace 5,234 ft2 of marine
float solid decking with grated decking, and replace part of a collapsed stone wall on an
adjacent property. The project would result in a net increase of 3,322 ft2 of fine-grained
intertidal habitat.
The existing standpipe at the eastern outfall will be removed and replaced with a concrete
coupling that will allow the outfall extension pipe to drop below grade and run westward,
parallel to the bulkhead, turn northward,under the floating dock, before terminating at
-3 ft MLLW. Pipe material will consist of 395 ft of 18-in-dia corrugated polyethylene
storm sewer pipe (CPSSP) and 195 ft ofl 8-inch high-density polyethylene (HPDE). All
pipe laid parallel to the bulkhead will be buried three to six feet below grade. Under the
dock,the pipe section nearest the bulkhead will be buried for a distance of 90 ft, 50 ft of
pipe will be partially buried, and 190 ft of pipe will be elevated above the seafloor using
concrete anchors to allow littoral movement of fish, oyster spat, and beach sediment.
The floating dock and perpendicular moorage floats will be removed to accommodate
pipeline construction. After the pipeline is installed, all floats will be replaced(within the
same footprint) by sections that will use improved flotation, grated decking, and steel
piles. Forty-eight(48) 8-in-dia steel piles will be installed to support the bottom of the
floating dock a minimum of 12 inches above grade at low tides. Piles will be installed in
pairs across the width of the dock from the bulkhead to -4.5 ft MLLW. Each pair will be
connected by an 8-ft-long treated wood beam (12-by 12-in cross section)to support the
dock at low tides. Wood treatment will be ACZA (ammoniacal copper zinc arsenate).
Alderbrook Resort Stormwater Outfalls Repair -3- April 2008
Environmental Checklist
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT iixr
Pairs of pile stops will be spaced between 14 and 18 ft apart. New flotation will consist
of high-density polyethylene (HDPE)tubs configured to allow fish passage between and
under the tubs. Fifty-two percent of existing solid wood decking will be replaced with
grated decking. The old dock will be donated to the Skokomish Tribe.
The existing western outfall will be extended from the bulkhead for a distance of 330 ft to
terminate at-3.5 ft MLLW. The section of pipe nearest the bulkhead will be buried for a
distance of 270 ft. The remaining 60 ft will be partially buried up to the outfall.
Following pipeline construction, approximately 58 cy of material similar to the existing
beach substrate will be salvaged from the site (from the pipeline trench sidecasting)
and/or imported to restore the natural beach profile. In addition, over 200 feet of
abandoned concrete,metal, and wood stave and plastic pipe will be removed and
disposed of in a landfill.
Construction equipment will consist of a small, rubber-tracked or similar type of
excavator to dig the pipeline trenches during low tides. Pile extraction and installation
will be done during high tides by a vibratory pile driver mounted on a barge. Equipment
access to the upper beach will be provided by a private drive on the adjacent east
property. Other material, including pipe,anchors, replacement float sections, and
imported fill, will be brought to the site by barge. Construction(in 2008) is estimated to
take 14 days over a period of 3 weeks to take advantage of the tides. The salmon and
trout combined allowable in-water work periods are July 15 —February 15. No forage
fish spawning areas or herring holding areas are recorded by WDFW at this location.
Additional details of the project construction and schedule information were provided in
JARPA Attachment A (December 2007). Engineering drawings and design details,
revised in April 2008, are provided in JARPA Attachment B (attached).
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to
understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street
address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would
occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s).
Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if
reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency,
you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any
permit applications related to this checklist.
East 7107 Highway 106,
East of Union, WA 98592
470 20' 53" N 1230 04' 01" W
Section 33 Township 22N Range 3 W
See attached Figures 1 and 2 from the April 2008 JARPA Attachment B Project Figures.
Alderbrook Resort Stormwater Outfalls Repair -4- April 2008
Environmental Checklist
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Earth
a. General description of the site(circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes,
mountainous, other.
The shoreline adjacent to the project construction area is flat.
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?
3- 5 percent
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.
Marine sediment is sandy gravel, with a fraction of surficial fines (i.e.,this is a low-
energy marine beach between mean higher high water and extreme low water). No
construction will occur waterward of MHHW. Upland soils are a mix of native and
imported material.
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If
so,describe.
No.
e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading
proposed. Indicate source of fill.
Not applicable.
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally
describe.
No upland clearing or construction will occur from this project. Shoreline access is
almost entirely on existing paved drives, so erosion is not anticipated. A short distance of
grass between a private drive and the upper shoreline(on an adjacent property)will be
covered with plywood to prevent vehicle ruts through the property. Any disturbed areas
will be immediately restored following construction.
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project
construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?
Alderbrook Resort Stormwater Outfalls Repair -S- April 2008
Environmental Checklist
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Y
No upland areas will receive new impervious surfaces. The total area of new impervious
surface in the intertidal would be about 247 ft2, consisting of the 19 concrete anchors that
will elevate part of the eastern outfall extension,the pipe sections that transition from
buried to exposed(each about 50 ft long),48 pile stops, and the bulkhead connections
between the existing stormwater outfalls and the new pipe extensions. This total area is
about one percent of the Alderbrook intertidal property(21,700 ft2). The increase in new
impervious surface will be offset by the removal of about 200 ft2 of old pipe and debris
and the elimination of 3,072 ft2 of dock flotation that currently rests on the beach
substrate at low tides. The project would result in a net increase in fine-grained
intertidal substrate of 3,322 ft2.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth,if any:
A Temporary Erosion Sedimentation Control plan will be fully implemented.
Construction techniques will utilize Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as those
described in the Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington(2004). Silt
fences,plywood sheets, or other appropriate erosion control measures will be erected at
appropriate locations.
To reduce or control erosion in the intertidal, the construction area will be limited to a 25-
ft-wide corridor along the alignment. The allowable outfall construction area will be
semi-permanently flagged before construction vehicles begin working below MHHW.
Flagging, especially rebar stakes, will be removed after construction has been completed.
Excavation and fill within the upper to mid-intertidal zone will occur only during periods
of low tide. Trenches will be backfilled within a day of excavation.
Float-and-sink pipe installation, dock replacement, and pile extraction/driving will occur
only during high tides. Barges and boats will not be allowed to ground during low tides.
A Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC)Plan will be prepared and
implemented by the contractor. The plan will be site-specific, cover the project scope of
work, and include the following elements:
• Site- and project-specific information.
• Spill prevention, control and containment methods.
• Response protocols and reporting procedures for construction-related leaks or
spills.
• Contingency plan and provisions.
• Waste disposal methods and locations.
• Proper management of oil, gasoline and solvents used in the operation and
maintenance of construction equipment.
The SPCC will ensure that equipment will be free of external petroleum-based products
prior to entering the work area and during the work, and for making any necessary repairs
prior to returning the equipment to operation in the work area. This SPCC will be
consistent with requirements of WSDOT 2006 Standard Specifications section 1-07.15(1)
and the State of Washington Oil Spill Contingency Plan. No vehicles or equipment will
be serviced with oil-based products or refueled within the Alderbrook intertidal property.
Alderbrook Resort Stormwater Outfalls Repair -6- April 2008
Environmental Checklist
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT [r
Equipment staging and/or materials storage will not be allowed on the beach. Equipment
and materials will be delivered as-needed on a daily basis by rubber-tracked vehicle or
barge.
All unplaced construction materials and debris will be removed from the shoreline on a
daily basis prior to leaving the site for the work day.
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.
Construction equipment exhaust will occur during the expected two-three weeks of
construction. No emissions will occur from the project after construction is completed.
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so,
generally describe.
None.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any:
None.
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.
The proposed work will be in Hood Canal (WRIA#14). A nearby stream is Alderbrook
Creek, which was reconstructed in 2002 from a narrow drainage channel into a
meandering creek with a riffles/pool habitat complex and native riparian vegetation. The
mouth of Alderbrook Creek is within the project area,between the marine float and the
western outfall.
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.
Yes, the entire project will occur within intertidal elevations of marine waters (see
JARPA for details and construction drawings). No construction will occur above
MHHW.
Construction for the eastern outfall extension will occur from an elevation of
approximately 9.2 ft MLLW to -3.0 ft MLLW. Construction for the western outfall will
Alderbrook Resort Stormwater Outfalls Repair - 7- April 2008
Environmental Checklist
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
occur from approximately 9.2 ft MLLW to -3.5 ft MLLW. Repair/replacement of the
floating dock, including piles,will occur between mean higher high water(about
13.5 ft MLLW) and about-16.5 ft MLLW.
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.
The purpose of the project is to restore intertidal habitat that has been severely eroded by
stormwater discharges in the upper intertidal; therefore,the project will result in a net
increase of fill material to restore native grades and fill eroded areas. Any removal of
material is either temporary(to lay pipe)or restorative (debris removal).
Roughly 45 cy of material will be temporarily removed(sidecast)along the pipeline
construction alignments to install the outfall extensions. The total intertidal area that may
be disturbed during construction is about 0.53 ac. This area is within a 25-ft-wide swath
that extends along the pipeline alignment and is referred to as the allowable construction
limit.
Imported fill includes the following: small gravel and sand"habitat mix" sized similarly
to the site's natural substrate,rock and large gravel that will be added under and around
the buried sections of pipe to create a stable foundation, about 3 cy of concrete to build
connections between the bulkhead and both proposed pipeline extensions, about 0.25 cy
concrete to separate the eastern outfall extension from the sewer pipeline near the
bulkhead, 920 ft of 18-in-dia pipe to extend the outfalls, 17 ft2 of stop piles, and about
22 cy of concrete anchor/supports.
Approximately 58 cy will be used to restore the natural surface grade over 0.14 acres of
eroded beach. Part of the fill material will be salvaged from native material excavated
from the pipeline trenches and the remainder will be imported; grain size will be similar
to the native beach material.
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general
description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
No.
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so,note location on the site plan.
Yes; the entire intertidal area is considered floodplain.
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so,
describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.
No. The removal of 19 creosote-treated wood piles may be considered waste removal
from surface waters.
Alderbrook Resort Stormwater Outfalls Repair -8- April 2008
Environmental Checklist
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
b. Ground:
1) Will groundwater be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to groundwater? Give
general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
No.
2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or
other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following
chemicals. . . ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of
such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals
or humans the system(s) are expected to serve.
None.
c. Water runoff(including stormwater):
1) Describe the source of runoff(including storm water) and method of collection and
disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water
flow into other waters? If so, describe.
The project will not change the source of stormwater runoff or method of collection
and disposal. Site stormwater will continue to discharge into Hood Canal, but at
deeper intertidal elevations, where the new outfalls will be submerged almost all the
time.
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe.
The proposed project will not generate or disturb waste materials. A sewage pump-
out station for visiting boats will be temporarily removed during dock replacement.
The pump-out station does not store waste, so disconnecting the pump will not result
in the release of waste.
The removal of 21 creosote-treated wood piles may be considered waste removal
from surface waters. The piles will be transported from the site by barge, cut into 4-
ft-long pieces, and transferred to an upland disposal facility.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts,
if any:
(Repeated from B.l.h.) A Temporary Erosion Sedimentation Control plan will be fully
implemented. Construction techniques will utilize Best Management Practices(BMPs)
such as those described in the Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington
(2004). Silt fences,plywood sheets, or other appropriate erosion control measures will be
erected at appropriate locations.
To reduce or control erosion in the intertidal, the construction area will be limited to a
25-ft-wide corridor along the alignment. The allowable outfall construction area will be
semi-permanently flagged before construction vehicles begin working below MHHW.
Flagging, especially rebar stakes,will be removed after construction has been completed.
Alderbrook Resort Stormwater Outfalls Repair -9- April 2008
Environmental Checklist
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Excavation and fill within the upper to mid-intertidal zone will occur only during periods
of low tide. Trenches will be backfilled within a day of excavation.
Float-and-sink pipe installation, dock replacement, and pile extraction/driving will occur
only during high tides. Barges and boats will not be allowed to ground during low tides.
A Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure(SPCC) Plan will be prepared and
implemented by the contractor. The plan will be site-specific, cover the project scope of
work, and include the following elements:
• Site- and project-specific information.
• Spill prevention,control and containment methods.
• Response protocols and reporting procedures for construction-related
leaks or spills.
• Contingency plan and provisions.
• Waste disposal methods and locations.
• Proper management of oil,gasoline and solvents used in the operation and
maintenance of construction equipment.
The SPCC will ensure that equipment will be free of external petroleum-based products
prior to entering the work area and during the work, and for making any necessary repairs
prior to returning the equipment to operation in the work area. This SPCC will be
consistent with requirements of WSDOT 2006 Standard Specifications section 1-07.15(1)
and the State of Washington Oil Spill Contingency Plan. No vehicles or equipment will
be serviced with oil-based products or refueled within the Alderbrook intertidal property.
Equipment staging and/or materials storage will not be allowed on the beach. Equipment
and materials will be delivered as-needed on a daily basis by rubber-tracked vehicle or
barge.
All unplaced construction materials and debris will be removed from the shoreline on a
daily basis prior to leaving the site for the work day.
4. Plants
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:
X_ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other:
_X_ evergreen tree: Douglas fir, western red cedar, pine, other
_X_ shrubs: snowberry, rhododendron, salal
grass
pasture
crop or grain
wet soil plants: cattail, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other: Salicornia sp. (pickleweed)
water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other
other types of vegetation
The shoreline adjacent to the intertidal area is vegetated with some native and non-native
shrubs and grass. Near the mouth of Alderbrook Creek are several patches of pickleweed
(Salicornia sp.). Eelgrass is not present within the intertidal elevations of the project.
Alderbrook Resort Stormwater Outfalls Repair -10- April 2008
Environmental Checklist
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Macroalgae,possibly a Fucus sp., has been reported as attached to the waterward side of
some moorage floats.
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
Any attached algae on the old floats will be removed when the floats are removed.
Replacement floats will provide attachment area for new algae.
C. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
No threatened or endangered plants are known to be on site.
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or
enhance vegetation on the site, if any:
No shoreline vegetation will be disturbed, so no replacement is proposed.
5. Animals
a. List any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are
known to be on or near the site:
birds: hawk, heron, bald eagle, songbirds, other: marbled murrelet
mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver,other: river otter
fish: salmon,trout, herring, sandlance, shellfish,other:
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
From Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 2007 BABE
Common Name Listing Status Designated Critical Habitat
Chinook salmon(Puget Sound) Threatened Marine Nearshore
Chum salmon(Hood Canal Summer Run) Threatened Marine Nearshore
Critical Habitat for Chinook and Chum Salmon Designated Yes
Bull Trout(Puget Sound-Coastal) Threatened Marine Nearshore
Critical Habitat for Bull Trout Designated Yes
Puget Sound Steelhead and Critical Habitat Threatened Marine Phases
Bald Eagle Threatened No
Marbled Murrelet and Critical Habitat Threatened Yes
C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.
Yes,the site is part of a migration route for both juvenile and adult salmon, steelhead,
and bull-trout.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
The project was designed to eliminate beach erosion from two stormwater outfalls,
restore the beach to its native grade, and recover oyster beds. To achieve its restoration
Alderbrook Resort Stormwater Outfalls Repair -11- April 2008
Environmental Checklist
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANTG/
goal, the two outfalls were designed to be extended to near-subtidal elevations, routed
around existing oyster beds, and buried along most of the new alignments. Along the
deepest section of the extended eastern outfall, where the pipe emerges from below
grade, about 190 ft of pipe will be elevated about four inches off the bottom to allow
water and sediment circulation and fish passage.
To avoid digging through existing oyster beds, the eastern outfall alignment was routed
along the bulkhead and under the existing floating dock. This route will require the
floating dock to be replaced with a modified floatation system that will accommodate the
pipe. The dock will be replaced within the same location and footprint. Dock
components will be assembled in sections off site and floated into place above the
pipeline alignment during high tide. The replacement dock will be constructed from a
recycled wood-composite material (e.g., Trex® ). Replacement details are shown in the
April 2008 JARPA Attachment B, Figures 21-23. About 52 percent of the decking will
consist of expanded steel grating to allow greater transmission of light through the dock.
The old friable Styrofoam slab flotation will be replaced with small polyethylene tubs
configured to fit around the new pipeline. Pile stops will be used to eliminate all dock
area that currently grounds on the beach at low tide, recovering about 3,025 ft2 of
substrate. Dock modification and debris removal will result in a net increase of 3,322 ft2
of fine-grained intertidal habitat.
All 21 creosote piles will be removed and replaced in approximately the same locations
by steel piles. All piling removal and installation will be completed using vibratory
hammers to minimize the noise impacts on wildlife, especially marbled murrelet. Any
piles that cannot be removed will be cut off at or below the seafloor level. All creosote
piles will be disposed of at a suitable upland disposal facility. All removal and
replacement of piles will be conducted by barge at high tide. No pile driving equipment
will be allowed to anchor in oyster beds or ground on the beach.
The western outfall will be extended from the existing bulkhead approximately 330 ft to
an outlet elevation of-3.5 ft MLLW. About 270 ft of pipe will be buried and 60 ft will be
exposed. During discussions in the fall of 2007 with Dan Guy (NMFS), this alignment
was determined provide the maximum benefits for federally listed threatened and
endangered species and critical habitat,while causing only temporary harm (i.e., digging)
to the oyster beds.
All in-water activities will take place during the WDFW and USACE(combined) in-
water work window of July 16 to February 15 for the protection of salmonids.
The restoration of the existing eroded channels will include the removal of the abandoned
pipes(over 100 ft of wood stave pipe and 100 ft of concrete pipe), concrete and rock
debris, and plastic conduit, and the demolition of an existing cantilevered concrete block
at the end of the outfall standpipe. The collapsed section of the adjacent property's rock
wall will be replaced in-kind. The eroded channel near the existing bulkhead will be
filled with native or similar material.Native beach material and/or habitat mix
(approximately 35 cy) that matches the existing surface grain size will be used for final
backfill and grading east of the floating dock to natural beach grades.
Alderbrook Resort Stormwater Outfalls Repair - 12- April 2008
Environmental Checklist
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT 7
Beach restoration will include the removal of abandoned pipes (over 100 ft of wood stave
pipe and 100 ft of concrete pipe),concrete and rock debris,plastic conduit, and the
demolition of an existing cantilevered concrete block at the end of the outfall standpipe.
About 35 cy of native or similar-sized imported habitat mix will be used to fill eroded
channels and return beach near the eastern outfall to native grades. Nineteen creosote
piles (about 10-in-dia) will be replaced with equivalent diameter steel piles.
Approximately 23 cy of native material and/or habitat mix will be used to re-grade the
erosion that has occurred on the beach in the vicinity of the western outfall. A total of
approximately 58 cy of fill material will restore about 0.14 ac of intertidal habitat and
allow oysters and other shellfish to recolonize the currently impacted beach.
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.
None. Both outfall systems work via gravity.
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties?
If so, generally describe.
No.
C. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this
proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts,if any:
None(no energy will be used).
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? If so, describe.
No. The existing stormwater treatment system will not be affected by this project. The
stormwater outfalls will be extended to discharge into near-subtidal waters, to achieve
maximum dilution. The resort stormwater is not known to be toxic or hazardous. Most
of the stormwater runoff is composed of natural drainage from seeps and runoff from
"clean"areas (e.g., landscaped areas, roof drains, sidewalks). Runoff from the parking
areas is wither infiltrated or treated before release. Runoff from SR-106 is either
infiltrated or treated before release. Alderbrook is located in a rural,remote location that
does not have heavy traffic or industrial activity nearby.
1) Describe special emergency services that might be required.
Not applicable
Alderbrook Resort Stormwater Outfalls Repair - 13- April 2008
Environmental Checklist
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any:
Stormwater from both parking lots are collected and directed into bioswales,
infiltration trenches and sand filters per the Washington State Department of Ecology
Stormwater Design Manual (2000).
b. Noise
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project(for example:
traffic, equipment, operation, other)?
None. Existing noise onsite would come from recreational boats, but no boats will
have access to the resort during construction because the dock will be temporarily
removed.
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.
During construction there will be short-term noise from the equipment used,which
may include rubber-tracked excavators, light-weight dump trucks, a pneumatic
powered jack hammer(for concrete removal), a tug-assisted barge and a vibratory
pile driver. No pile proofing is required. Construction will occur during daylight
hours.
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:
Air compressors for the pneumatic powered jack hammer will be placed away from
beach and guests. Land-based construction vehicles will be equipped with mufflers.
8. Land and shoreline use
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
The current use of the site is hotel/resort that has been in existence since 1913. The resort
dock is used by the public for access to recreational moorage, fuel, a sewage pump-out
station, the resort shoreline and waters, and the resort restaurant.
Adjacent properties to the west and east are residential.
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe.
No. The site includes Class 2 tidelands and is currently certified for shellfish harvest.
C. Describe any structures on the site.
Structures existing on the property consist of the resort hotel complex and spa; an
enclosed swimming pool; 21 resort cottages; a concrete bulkhead along the shoreline; a
Alderbrook Resort Stormwater OuValls Repair -14- April 2008
Environmental Checklist
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT /
floating dock with a sewage pump-out station, fuel, and associated office; a kayak rental
float and swimming float; paved parking areas; a sewage treatment system; and a
stormwater collection and treatment system with two outfalls that are the subject of this
application. Details and photos of the structures affected by this proposal are provided in
JARPA Attachment A (December 2007) and the latest engineering details are in JARPA
Attachment B of April 2008 (attached).
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so,what?
The existing eastern outfall standpipe and concrete slab will be removed.
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
Rural tourist
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
Rural
g. If applicable,what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site?
Urban Commercial
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If
so, specify.
The site is a privately owned Class 2 Tideland certified for shellfish harvest. The site
has extensive oyster beds. The site is also habitat for federally listed threatened and
endangered species of salmonids(i.e., Hood Canal summer chum salmon, Chinook
salmon, Puget Sound steelhead, and bull trout).
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 purpose is to restore and enhance 0.14 ac of intertidal beach habitat and
oyster beds. The outfall extensions were designed to eliminate intertidal erosion,prevent
future erosion from stormwater discharges by submerging the outfalls, achieve maximum
Alderbrook Resort Stormwater Outfalls Repair -1 S- April 2008
Environmental Checklist
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
stormwater mixing in Hood Canal outside the elevations of critical habitat use by juvenile
salmonids, and allow shellfish beds to recover. The outfall extensions were designed to
minimize impacts to existing oyster beds and minimize the footprint of pipe resting on
the beach. The dock replacement was designed to eliminate the area of dock that
currently grounds on the beach, maximize the amount of light penetration through the
dock(by using grated decking over 52 percent of the surface) and remove creosote from
the marine environment(by using steel piles). The dock will retain its fuel and sewage
pump-out services and public access to the shoreline.
9. Housing
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high,
middle, or low-income housing.
Not applicable.
b. Approximately how many units, if any,would be eliminated? Indicate whether high,
middle or low-income housing.
g
Not applicable.
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 outfall extensions will be 18-in-dia black plastic pipes. About 50 ft of the western
outfall will be visible at extreme low tides. The eastern outfall will be buried and hidden
by the floating dock. At low tides,the replacement dock will project about one foot
higher than the existing dock because of the pile stops. The pile stops will be installed
under the dock, so no additional piles will be visible.
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
No views will be altered by the eastern outfall extension. About 50 ft of the western
outfall will be visible at extreme low tides for about an hour during daylight, a few days
each year. At low tides,the replacement dock will project about one foot higher than the
existing dock because of the pile stops. The pile stops will be installed under the dock, so
no additional piles will be visible.
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts,if any:
The eastern outfall alignment was designed to be buried along the bulkhead and hidden
under the existing dock for the remainder of the extension. The alignment was chosen to
avoid oyster beds and reduce aesthetic impacts for the resort. The western outfall
Alderbrook Resort Stormwater Outfalls Repair -16- April 2008
Environmental Checklist
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT /
alignment was designed to move the outlet to the deepest elevation possible,while
remaining on resort property and to minimize the length of pipe visible during low tides.
About 50 ft of the western outfall will be visible at extreme low tides for about an hour
during daylight, a few days each year.
The pile stops were designed to support the dock from below so that the 48 additional
piles would not affect aesthetics.
Removal of old debris, replacement of the damaged rock wall, removal of the stormwater
outfalls from the bulkhead to near-subtidal elevations, and restoration of the eroded beach
are aesthetic improvements.
11. Light and glare
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it
mainly occur?
The proposed project would not alter existing lighting. If construction occurs at night,
P p p J g
temporary lighting would be required.
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with
views?
If construction is scheduled at night, temporary lighting would be necessary for safety.
Construction lighting would temporarily interfere with views,but the interference would
be of short duration, at night, during winter low tides,when fewer people use the resort or
adjacent summer homes.
c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
None.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any:
Due to the higher cost of night construction,the project would try to minimize night
construction, and consequently, night construction lighting.
12. Recreation
a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?
Swimming, boating, clamming, kayaking, oyster collection, and dining occurs within or
adjacent to the project area. The dock provides public access to the shoreline and to the
resort restaurant.
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe.
The proposed project would temporarily displace some recreational uses during dock
replacement.
Alderbrook Resort Stormwater Outfalls Repair -17- April 2008
Environmental Checklist
L--V7
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation
opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:
Because the project site is a resort, the proposed project has been designed to minimize,
reduce, and control impacts on recreational opportunities. The extension and burial of
stormwater outfalls was designed to eliminate beach erosion and recover shellfish beds
for recreational users. The replacement dock will enhance public access between the
shoreline, water, and resort. The removal of abandoned pipes and creosote piles will
enhance recreational use. The restoration of the beach and tidelands will provide
enhanced recreational opportunities.
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? If so, generally describe.
No.
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological,scientific,or
cultural importance known to be on or next to the site.
There are no known historic landmarks located on or near the site (per Washington
Department of Historic Preservation WISAARD online search).
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts,if any:
If any evidence of historic, archaeological or cultural importance is discovered during
construction,the State Historic Preservation Office will be notified immediately and
appropriate measures taken.
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 major road in the project vicinity is State Route (SR) 106. Access will be via
existing connections
b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not,what is the approximate distance to
the nearest transit stop?
The Alderbrook Inn is currently serviced by public bus, which travels between Belfair
and Shelton. It passes the resort twice a day, and stops when requested.
c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the
project eliminate?
Not applicable.
Alderbrook Resort Stormwater Outfalls Repair - 18- April 2008
Environmental Checklist
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
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.
e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of)water, rail, or air
transportation? If so,generally describe.
No.
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If
known, indicate when peak volumes would occur.
Not applicable.
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any:
Not applicable.
15. Public Services
2.
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.
No.
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any.
Not applicable.
16. Utilities
a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas,water, refuse
service, telephone, sanitary sewer,septic system, other.
The existing dock has electricity,water, telephone and sanitary sewer utilities.
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 which might
be needed.
The dock will be repaired utilizing the existing utilities. Electricity and water is provided
by Mason County PUD No. 1. Sewage treatment is provided by a WDOE-approved
collection and treatment system that is owned and operated by North Forth Lodging,
LLC. Telephone service is provided by Qwest. No change in service is expected.
Alderbrook Resort Stormwater Outfalls Repair -19- April 2008
Environmental Checklist
I
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
B. 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 its decision.
Signature:
Brian McGinnis, applicant
Date Submitted:
Prepared by: 4�
Allison Reak
Alderbrook Resort Stormwater Outfalls Repair -20- April 2008
Environmental Checklist
ESA LISTED SALMONIDS CHECKLIST
Applicant Information Project Information
Name e Name e
Phone tlas-36q _ qa FD Location �+--
Description 2
M# i
/Val �
ih)
This worksheet was designed to help project proponents, and government agencies, identify when a project
needs further analysis regarding adverse effects on ESA (Endangered Species Act) listed salmonids. Salmonids
are salmon, trout and chars, e.g. bull trout. For our purposes, "ESA Listed Salmonids" is defined as fish species
listed as endangered, threatened or being considered for listing.
If ESA listed species are present or ever were present in the water shed where your project will be located, your
project has the potential for affecting them, and you need to comply with the ESA. The questions in this section
will help determine if the ESA listings will impact your project.
The Fish Program Manager at the appropriate Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW) regional office can provide information for the
following two questions.
w�rba
1. Are ESA listed salmonids currently present in the wa�� in which your project will be located?
YES —,X NO Please describe. �G *A,� —
/� ,4/,86
2. Has there ever been an ESA listed salmonid stock present in this wvAers red?
YES NO Uncertain Please describe. �'
If you answere "yes" to either of the above questions, you should complet4te remainder of Ahis
checklist.
April 2003
Mason County Environmental Checklist Page 15
PROJECT SPECIFICES: The questions in this section are specific to the project and vicinity.
1. Name of watershed: /N�i�i-!
2. Name of nearest waterbody: rl
3. What is t e distance from this project to the nearest body of water:
w Often a buffer between the project and a stream can reduce
the chance of a negative impact to fish.
4. What is the current land use betw
een theoject and the potentially affected water body arking lots,
farmland,etc.)? & �{?'yL.Qit � Z � l
5. Is the project above a:
* natural permanent barrier(waterfall) YES NO
* natural temporary barrier (beaver pond) YES NO x
man-made barrier(culvert,dam) YES NO x
other(explain):
6. If yes, are there any resident salmonid populations above the blockage?
YES NO Don't know
NlAy
7. What percent of the project will be impervious surface (including pavement&roof area)?
IV14Y
Mason County Environmental Checklist Page 16
FISH MIGRATION: The following questions will help determine if this project could interfere with
migration of adult and juvenile fish.
Both increases and decreases in water flows can affect fish migration.
1. Does the project require the withdrawal of:
a. Surface water? YES NO )_
Amount
Name of surface water body
b. Ground water? YES NO -7 6
Amount
From where
Depth of well
2. Will any water be rerouted: YES NO
If yes, will this require a channel change?
3. Will there be retention or detention ponds? YES NO
If yes, will this be an infiltration pond or a surface discharge to either a municipal storm water system or
a surface water body?
If to a surface water discharge,please give the name of the waterbody.
4. Will this project require the building of new roads? YES NO
Increased road mileage may affect the timing of water reaching a stream and may impact fish habitat.
5. Are culverts proposed as part of this project? YES NO >0
6. Will topography changes affect the duration/direction of runoff flows?
YES NO _ 0 If yes, describe the changes.
7. Will the project involve any reduction of the floodway or floodplain by filling or other partial blockage
of flows? YES NO _ If yes, how will the loss of flood storage be mitigated by your
project?
Mason County Environmental Checklist Page 17
E0
WATER QUALITY: The following questions will help determine if this project could
Adversely impact water quality. Such impacts can cause problems for listed species.
Water quality can be made worse by runoff from impervious surfaces,altering water temperature,discharging
contaminants,etc.
1. Do you know of any problems with water quality, in any of the streams, within this watershed? YES
NO If yes, describe.
d�tf?Z-;'- a.
2. Will your project either reduce or increase shade alQng or.over a waterbody? �"
YES �4 _ NO �,�,�L /��� .C.� � 2
S Z3�1 Z �
Removal of shadirg egetation or�buildingf structures such as docks or floats often results in a change in shade.
3. Will the project increase nutrient loading or have the potential to increase nutrient loading or
contaminants (fertilizers, other waste discharges, or runoff) to the waterbody? YES NO _1�0—
4. Will turbidity be increased because of construction of the project or during operation of the project?
YES NO
��'him,
In-w ter or near water ork will often increa t bidity.
5. Will your project require long term intenance, i.e. bn�ge cleaning, highway salting, and chemical
sprays for vegetation management, clearing of parking lots?
YES NO If yes, please describe.
Mason County Environmental Checklist Page 18
VEGETATION: The following questions are designed to determine if the project will affect riparian
vegetation,thereby,adversely impacting salmon.
1. Will the project involve the removal of any vegetation from the stye anks: , y XA'-I -e
YES NO
If yes, please describe the existing conditions, and the amount and type of vegetation to be removed.
2. If any vegetation is removed, do you plan to re-plant?
YES NO If yes, what types of plants will you use?
10412
Mason County Environmental Checklist Page 19
AGENCY USE ONLY JARPA FORM LAST t`PDATED: March 19,2007
Agency Reference#: Date Received:
Circulated by: (local govt.or agency)
Project Tracking Number:
Washington State JOINT AQUATIC RESOURCES PERMIT APPLICATION (JARPA) Form
Step 1: Get Ready Step 2: Complete Form Step 3: Check Work Step 4: Copy and Send In
❑ Fish Habitat Enhancement Projects per RCW 77.55.181. You must submit copy of completed JARPA form and Fish Habitat
Enhancement JARPA Addition to your Local Government Planning Dep't and WA Dep't of Fish and Wildlife(WDFW)Area Habitat
Biologist on same day. Note for Local Governments:You must submit comments to WDFW within 15 working days.
Based on instructions at www.epermitting.org, I am sending copies of this application to the following: (check all that apply)
]Local Government for Shoreline: substantial Development nConditional Use FIVariance []Exemption []Revision
FIFloodplain Management ❑Critical Areas Ordinance
]Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife for Hydraulic Project Approval (Submit 2 copies to WDFW Region)
❑X, Washington Department of Ecology for 401 Water Quality Certification (to Regional Office-Federal Permit Unit)
❑Washington Department of Natural Resources for Aquatic Resources Use Authorization Notification
❑X. Corps of Engineers for: nSection 404 permit ection 10 permit
❑Coast Guard for: ❑General Bridge Act Permit ❑Private Aids to Navigation (for non-bridge projects)
❑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
PROJECT TITLE: Alderbrook Resort& Spa Stormwater Outfalls Improvements
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed project has three construction elements: 1)extension of two stormwater outfalls from existing
shoreline near mean higher high water to intertidal depths below-3 ft mean lower low water, 2) repair and modification of an existing marine
float to provide an outfall extension corridor and improve aquatic habitat, and 3) beach restoration and intertidal habitat improvements. A
detailed project description and site photos are provided in JARPA Attachment A.
SECTION A -Use for all permits covered by this application. Be sure to ALSO complete Section C(Signature Block) for all
permit applications.
CO 1.APPLICANT Brian McGinnis, North Forty Lodging, LLC
MAILING ADDRESS
22526 SE 64th Place; Suite 210; Issaquah, WA 98027
WORK PHONE E-MAIL ADDRESS HOME PHONE FAX#
425-369-9290 brian@pinnaclereal state.us I N/A 425-369-9008
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
CM 2. AUTHORIZED AGENT
1 Allison Reak 2 Jason Van Gilder
MAILING ADDRESS
(1)Sea-Run Consulting, 6531 10th Ave NW, Seattle, WA 09117-5208
2 Cosmopolitan En ineering Group, PO Box 1678,Tacoma,WA 98041-1678
WORK PHONE E-MAIL ADDRESS HOME PHONE FAX#
(1)206-718-3285 (1) sea-run@earthlink.net N/A (1) N/A
(2)253-272-7220 (2)jvangilder@ (2)253-272-7250
cosmo olitanen .com
C, 3. Relationship of applicant to property: x❑ OWNER ❑ PURCHASER ❑ LESSEE ❑
4. Name, address and phone number of property owner(s) if other than applicant:
5. Location (street address, including city, county and zip code,where proposed activity exists or will occur)
Alderbrook Resort&Spa, E.7107 Highway 106, Union, WA 98592
CM Local government with jurisdiction (city or county) Mason County
CM, Waterbody you are working in Hood Canal CM Tributary N/A
of IM WRIA# 14
Is this waterbody on the 303(d) List ❑ YES x❑ NO
(The waterbody segment near Alderbrook Resort is not listed under
Category 5 for any excursions.) I Shoreline designation Urban Commercial
If YES,what parameter(s)?
Office of Regulatory Assistance,JARPA JARPA FORM LAST UPDATED:March 19,2007 For help call 800-917-0043 or visit www.epermitting.org 1
�C
Zoning designation Rural Tourist
Section Section Township Range Government Lot
N/A 33 22N 3W N/A m7 DNR stream type if known N/Applicable
IM Latitude and Longitude: 47°20'53"N 1230 04'01"W Tax Parcel Number 322335000014
CM 6. Describe(a)the current use of the property, (b)structures existing on the property, and (c)existing environmental conditions.
Have you completed any portion of the proposed activity on this property? ❑ YES x❑ NO
For any portion of the proposed activity already completed on this property, indicate month and year of completion.
(a) Current use of the property is as a commercial resort, which includes a hotel complex, resort cottages,
meeting facilities, a public restaurant, a public ally accessible marina (with sewage pump-out and fuel), a
swimming area, beach and Class 2 tidelands, and a restored salmon-bearing stream (Alderbrook Creek) with
public viewing areas. The tidelands are used for oyster production and harvesting by the resort restaurant and
visitors.
(b) Structures existing on the property consist of the resort hotel complex and spa, an enclosed swimming pool,
21 resort cottages, a concrete bulkhead along the shoreline, a floating dock with sewage pump-out and fuel, a
kayak rental float and swimming float, paved parking areas, a sewage treatment system, and a stormwater
collection and treatment system with two outfalls that are the subject of this application.
The resort stormwater collection and treatment system, which is not affected by this project, is described in detail
in JARPA Attachment A. The stormwater treatment system was designed according to the Washington
Department of Ecology (Ecology) 2000 Stormwater Manual, with additional improvements to infiltrate as much
stormwater as possible. Stormwater quality is assumed to be low in pollutants because most of the runoff is
generated from clean surfaces, such as the grassy slope (4.57 ac), landscaped areas (3.4 ac), roofs (1.51 ac),
sidewalks, and perennial seeps (0.48 ac). The paved surfaces probably contribute little pollutant load to the
stormwater because of their relatively low use and moderate to low vehicle speeds. The paved parking areas
(2.3 ac) reach parking capacity for only part of the year, and the slow driving/parking speeds of resort visitors do
not usually result in brake wear, which is considered to be the source of metals derived from roads. Stormwater
runoff from the area of SR 106 (less than 1.2 ac) is also low in oils/grease and dissolved metals because the
highway was recently reconstructed to improve travel both around and into the resort, with slower speeds, longer
line-of-sight distances, and exit lanes. These improvements reduce quick acceleration/deceleration and
accidents, which in turn decreases brake wear and oil leakage. Most importantly, stormwater from the parking
areas and SR 106 is detained and treated before discharge.
(c) Existing environmental conditions consist of a recently (2002-2004) re-developed and improved resort
complex. Resort improvements included the relocation of SR 106, construction of new parking areas, expansion
of the hotel, installation of a new sewage treatment system, and installation of a new stormwater collection and
treatment system. The current stormwater system collects, treats, and infiltrates or discharges all stormwater
generated from impervious surfaces at the resort. Natural conditions on the resort property include renovated
landscaping (ongoing since 2004) using native plants, a reduction in lawn area, and a restored Alderbrook
Creek. Alderbrook Creek was reconstructed from a short, steeply incised drainage into a longer, wider, lower-
gradient stream through a riffle-pool complex.
The existing shoreline edge is defined by a low concrete bulkhead with its base between mean high and mean
higher high water (MHHW) [equal to 11.8 ft mean lower low water (MLLW)], and its top at approximately 14.3 ft
MLLW. The resort's intertidal property extends from the bulkhead along a low-gradient beach from MHHW to
extreme low water (ELW). The resort's intertidal property is part of a small embayment in a nearshore water
circulation cell of no net drift. Substrate is a mix of gravelly sand and mud that is eroded along upper intertidal
elevations by stormwater discharges and covered with shells and live shellfish along lower intertidal elevations.
Extensive oyster beds occur both east and west of the floating dock. Numerous other clam and mussel shells
and burrows are found among the oysters. The shellfish beds occupy the resort's Class 2 tidelands and are
certified for harvest. No aquatic vegetation has been observed in the mid- to low intertidal. Several small
patches (about five sq ft total) of pickleweed (Salicomia sp.) and fleshy jaumea (Jaumea camosa) have
established at the mouth of Alderbrook Creek.
Two stormwater outfalls convey resort stormwater through the bulkhead and onto the beach at elevations at or
above MHHW. Of the total stormwater volume discharged onto the beach, the eastern outfall conveys about
two-thirds and the western outfall conveys the remainder. Because the tide rarely reaches these high outfall
elevations, stormwater is discharged mostly on dry beach. The stormwater discharges have caused extensive
Office of Regulatory Assistance,JARPA JARPA FORM LAST UPDATED: March 19,2007 For help call 800-917-0043 or visit www.epermitting.org 2
GJ
beach erosion along the resort waterfront, under the bulkhead, and throughout the oyster beds. Erosion has /
resulted in the loss of 58 cy of native sand and gravel, displacing the upper range of the oyster beds by 25 to 80
feet along the resort bulkhead. Erosion from the eastern outfall limits the upper elevation of the oyster beds to
2.2 ft MLLW, instead of their natural elevation at 6.0 ft MLLW. Oyster beds near the western outfall are limited to
an elevation of 4.2 ft MLLW.
A floating wood dock with 21 (12-in-dia) creosote wood piles extends 529 ft from the bulkhead to a 608-ft-long
moorage float. Dock materials include solid wood decking over Styrofoam solid slab flotation and creosote-
treated piles. At low tide, about 3,072 ft2 (384 ft by 8 ft) of the dock rests directly on intertidal beach.
Site photographs and supplemental information can be found in JARPA Attachment A. Site maps and drawings
can be found in JARPA Attachment B.
CM Is the property agricultural land? ❑ YES NO Are you a USDA program participant? ❑ YES Q NO
CM 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.
This project would restore 0.14 ac/58 cy of eroded upper intertidal beach with native (or matching) fill, remove
debris from intertidal beach, extend two existing stormwater outfalls from approximately MHHW to subtidal
elevations (below -3 ft MLLW), modify the existing marine float to reduce its grounding footprint by 87.5 percent
and recover 2,688 ft2 (0.06 ac) of fine-grained intertidal habitat, replace 21 creosote wood piles with 21
galvanized steel piles, replace 4,766 ft2 of marine float solid decking with grated decking, and replace part of a
collapsed stone wall on an adjacent property.
The existing standpipe at the eastern outfall will be replaced with an open tee coupling that will retain the
standpipe (for excess stormwater overflows) but allow the outfall extension pipe to drop below grade and run
westward, parallel to the bulkhead, then turn northward, under the floating dock, terminating at -3 ft MLLW. Pipe
material will consist of 405 ft of 18-in-dia corrugated polyethylene storm sewer pipe (CPSSP) and 195 ft of18-
inch high-density polyethylene (HPDE). All pipe laid parallel to the bulkhead will be buried three to six feet below
grade. At the bulkhead, 10 ft of pipe between the standpipe and the underground section will be exposed at
grade. Under the dock, the pipe section nearest the bulkhead will be buried for a distance of 90 ft, 50 ft of pipe
will be partially buried, and 190 ft of pipe will be elevated above the seafloor using concrete anchors to allow
littoral movement of fish, oyster spat, and beach sediment.
The floating dock and perpendicular moorage floats will be removed to accommodate pipeline construction.
After the pipeline is installed, all floats will be replaced (within the same footprint) by sections that will use
improved flotation, grated decking, and 21 (12-in-dia or less) steel piles. New flotation will consist of high-
density polyethylene (HDPE) tubs configured to allow fish passage between and under the tubs. Only the corner
tubs will rest on the beach at low tide, resulting in a 87.5 percent reduction of the grounding footprint. Fifty-two
percent of existing solid wood decking will be replaced with grated decking. The old dock will be donated to the
Skokomish Tribe.
The existing western outfall will be extended from the bulkhead for a distance of 330 ft to terminate at-3.5 ft
MLLW. The section of pipe nearest the bulkhead will be buried for a distance of 270 ft. The remaining 60 ft will
be partially buried up to the outfall.
Following pipeline construction, approximately 58 cy of material similar to the existing beach substrate will be
salvaged from the site (from the pipeline trench sidecasting) and/or imported to restore the natural beach profile.
In addition, over 200 ft2 of abandoned concrete, metal, and wood stave and plastic pipe will be removed and
disposed of in a landfill.
Construction equipment will consist of a rubber-tracked or similar type of small excavator to dig pipeline trenches
during low tides. Pile extraction and installation will be done during high tides by a vibratory pile driver mounted
on a barge. Equipment access to the upper beach will be provided by a private drive on the adjacent east
property. Other material, including pipe, anchors, replacement float sections, and imported fill, will be brought to
the site by barge. Construction (in 2008-9) is estimated to take 14 days over a period of 3 weeks in fall or winter,
during day and/or night, to take advantage of the tides. The salmon and trout combined allowable in-water work
periods are July 15 — February 15. No forage fish spawning areas or herring holding areas are recorded by
WDFW at this location.
Additional project construction and schedule information are provided in JARPA Attachment A. Engineering
Office of Regulatory Assistance,JARPA JARPA FORM LAST UPDATED: March 19,2007 For help call 800-917-0043 or visit www.eaernnitting.orq 3
15Y<<
drawings and design details are provided in JARPA Attachment B.
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 8-112 X 11 INCH SHEETS. LARGER DRAWINGS MAYBE REQUIRED BY OTHER AGENCIES.
IM 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.
The purpose of the proposed work is to 1) restore 0.14 ac of eroded beach to natural elevations and conditions,
2) extend two stormwater outfalls (the cause of periodic beach erosion) from MHHW to low intertidal elevations
to prevent continuing erosion, and 3) allow the Class 2 tidelands to recover oyster production at mid-intertidal
elevations. The protection of the existing oyster habitat has been a primary consideration in the design of both
outfall extensions and related site improvements. Minimizing potential impacts from stormwater and habitat
erosion on ESA-listed fish is another key reason the outfalls will be moved to a deeper elevation, per discussions
with Dan Guy (NMFS fisheries biologist). A third consideration in the outfall design is to keep the outfalls within
Alderbrook Resort property.
The eastern alignment was designed to achieve a near-subtidal elevation for the eastern outfall, remain on
Alderbrook property, and avoid pipeline construction through Alderbrook oyster beds. At -3 ft MLLW, the new
outfall will be submerged practically 100 percent of the year. Replacing the existing float between the shore and
the moorage float is necessary to construct the eastern outfall extension. Repair of the moorage float was
identified as a pending maintenance need and was included with this project to consolidate permitting, save
money, and reduce impacts on resort operations. The replacement dock sections will remain within the same
footprint of the original structure. The creosote piles will be removed and replaced with steel piles. The old piles
had been installed through holes in the dock sections; the new piles will be installed immediately outboard of the
old piles, to allow future access to the new pipe under the dock without needing to pull piles (see drawing details
in JARPA Attachment B).
Early outfall design alternatives considered the possibility of connecting the western outfall to the eastern outfall
under the dock, so that no oyster beds would be affected by construction. The connected outfall design was
rejected because of construction complications: the western outfall is already at a lower elevation than the
eastern outfall, and the pipeline extension would have resulted in trench construction through Alderbrook
Creek's estuary. The final design will extend the western outfall directly off the shore to -3 ft MLLW, using the
shortest distance possible. Although construction of this alignment will temporarily disturb the resort's oyster
beds, the potential impacts were considered to be less harmful to ESA-listed fish than construction through the
Alderbrook Creek estuary.
The western alignment was designed to achieve a near-subtidal elevation for the outfall and remain on resort
property. At -3.5 ft MLLW, the outfall will be submerged 100 percent of the year. A preliminary design used a
shorter pipeline extension, to avoid digging up oysters. The shallower outfall would have been exposed during
low tide for about 25 percent of the year and required a hardened pad at the outlet to protect the beach from
erosion during very low tides. The shorter alignment was rejected after discussions with Dan Guy (NMFS)
because it placed the outfall in the middle of critical habitat for juvenile salmonids, and it required rock fill to
control erosion. A deeper outfall was proposed and the negative impacts to the oyster beds (i.e., short-term
construction disturbance and subsequent re-seeding) were evaluated against the environmental benefits of a
permanently submerged, subtidal stormwater outfall. It was decided that the proposed alignment was
advantageous because it reduces stormwater-caused erosion, removes most stormwater discharges from upper
intertidal fish habitat, and increases stormwater mixing with Hood Canal marine water.
To minimize construction impacts on water quality and fish habitat, excavating and filling will be scheduled
during low (minus) tides. Because the resort relies on the use of its beach and waterfront facilities during the
summer, construction is planned for fall/winter 2008-2009 (during the federal and state approved in-water work
window). During fall/winter months, minus tides occur during the night, so some work will occur at night. All
property owners within 500 ft of the resort property lines will be notified in advance by Mason County when
ni ht-time construction is scheduled to occur.
GM 7c. 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.
Office of Regulatory Assistance,JARPA JARPA FORM LAST UPDATED: March 19,2007 For help call 800-917-0043 or visit www.epernnitting.org 4
This proposed project will not change the characteristic uses of Hood Canal. Under current conditions, ongoing
beach erosion and the continual disturbance of oyster beds have negatively affected the Hood Canal nearshore.
The proposed action is an effort to reduce erosion and restore intertidal habitat to recover fish habitat, oysters
and other shellfish, improve nearshore water quality, improve recreation and aesthetics, and provide public
access to the waterfront and resort.
Potential negative impacts are anticipated to be short-term, caused by construction. Construction impacts will
arise from disturbances to oysters and substrate during pipeline installation. Short term turbidity from pipe
installation will occur sporadically, during the two- to three-week construction period. Pile removal and
replacement will create elevated turbidity of short duration for several days. Trench excavation and backfill will
be done during low tides, in the dry. Because the site substrate is relatively coarse-grained gravel and sand,
most material will settle rapidly and turbidity should be minimal. Detailed analysis of construction and beach
restoration, potential short-term harmful effects, and long-term beneficial effects is found in the biological
assessment prepared for this proposed action (Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair Biological
Assessment/Biological Evaluation December 2007).
The fish species evaluated for this proposed project include Puget Sound Chinook salmon, Hood Canal
summer-run chum salmon, Puget Sound bull trout, and Puget Sound steelhead. Federally designated critical
habitat evaluated for this proposed project includes nearshore marine habitat for Puget Sound Chinook salmon,
Hood Canal summer-run chum salmon, Puget Sound bull trout, and Puget Sound steelhead. The analysis
concluded that the outfalls repair project may affect, but would not likely adversely affect any listed fish species
or designated critical habitat, because construction-related effects on fish species and their critical habitats
would be either avoided by construction design and timing, or effects would be short-term and/or insignificant.
The proposed action was determined to have long-term beneficial effects on all listed species and critical
habitats as a result of intertidal habitat restoration from 1) reduction in frequency of erosive stormwater
discharges on intertidal beach, 2) improved mixing of stormwater with marine water by relocation of the outfalls,
3) removal of debris from the beach, 4) modifications made to the design of a floating dock, and 4) replacement
of eroded sediment to restore the beach to natural elevations. Proposed habitat improvements will result in the
restoration of 0.14 ac of intertidal habitat.
In addition, the proposed project action may affect, but would not likely adversely affect bald eagle and marbled
murrelet because their breeding territories are not documented within 1.5 miles of the action area and their
intertidal habitat use at the project site is insignificant.
A review of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries Office of Protected
Resources-Marine Mammals online information about marine mammals revealed that humpback whale, Steller
sea lion, and Southern Resident killer whale are not known to occur in Hood Canal
The following conservation measures will be implemented to ensure that impacts to plants, fish, and wildlife are
minimized during project construction:
• Adherence to the state-designated in-water work period of July 16 to February 15, to avoid or minimize
disturbances to ESA-listed species.
• Minimization of the quantity and size of construction equipment allowed on the beach area at any one time.
• Use of only lower-impact construction equipment (e.g., rubber track or balloon tires) on the beach.
• Regularly monitoring and maintenance of construction equipment to prevent hazardous material leaks on the
beach.
• Staging and stockpiling equipment and materials away from the water, on paved areas.
• Transportation of materials to the construction area using small (e.g., three- or seven-yard capacity) rubber-
tracked transporters.
• Implementation and maintenance of sedimentation and erosion control measures at the stockpile locations.
• Use of rubber mats in areas where native soils do not provide sufficient support for construction activities.
• Limiting low-tide construction travel routes to within 25 ft of the bulkhead and western pipeline alignment and
within 10 ft of the eastern outfall alignment.
• Use of pre-cast anchor blocks and pipe sections assembled off site to limit in-water concrete curing and
minimize in-water construction time.
• Use of vibratory hammer instead of impact hammer to reduce potential harm to aquatic species and habitat.
Office of Regulatory Assistance,JARPA JARPA FORM LAST UPDATED: March 19,2007 For help call 800-917-0043 or visit www.epermitting.org 5
oc Ll
• Scheduling of most upper intertidal work to occur from land, during low tides, to minimize turbidity.
• Scheduling of dock replacement, float-and-sink pipe placement, and pile driving during high tides, to avoid
grounding barges on shellfish beds.
• Removal of all construction debris from upland and intertidal areas, daily and immediately after project
completion.
• Replacement of styrofoam dock flotation with specially configured tubs to create openings for fish passage
under the floats and reduce the grounding footprint.
• Replacement of solid decking with grated decking for enhanced light transmission under and around the dock.
• Replacement of chemically preserved wood with chemically inert recycled wood composite material (i.e., Trex)
on new dock sections.
• Restoration of all disturbed upland areas and utilization of native plants, if necessary.
• Disturbance of the smallest area feasible.
IM 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-410)? Q YES ❑ NO
IM 8. Will the project be constructed in stages? ❑ YES Q NO
Proposed starting date: After August 15, 2008; most likely after September 2008
Estimated duration of activity: Three weeks
100 9. Check if any temporary or permanent structures will be placed:
❑ Waterward of the ordinary high water mark or line for fresh or tidal waters AND/OR
0 Waterward of the mean higher high water for tidal waters?
CM 10. Will fill material (rock,fill, bulkhead, or other material) be placed:
❑ Waterward of the ordinary high watermark or line for freshwaters?
If YES, VOLUME (cubic yards) /AREA (acres)
0 Waterward of the mean higher high water for tidal waters?
If YES, VOLUME (cubic yards) 430 CY excavated/replaced for pipes+58 CY for beach restoration/AREA 0.14(acres)
IM 11. Will material be placed in wetlands? ❑ YES 0 NO
If YES:
A. Impacted area in acres:
CM B. Has a delineation been completed? If YES, please submit with application. ❑ YES ❑ NO
IM C. Has a wetland report been prepared? If YES, please submit with application ❑ YES ❑ NO
CM D.Type and composition of fill material (e.g., sand, etc.)
CM E. Material source:
IM F. List all soil series(type of soil)located at the project site, and indicate if they are on the county's list of hydric soils. Soils
information can be obtained from the natural Resources Conservation Service(NRCS).
M3 G. WILL PROPOSED ACTIVITY CAUSE FLOODING OR DRAINING OF WETLANDS? [3 YES 0 NO
If YES, IMPACTED AREA IS ACRES OF DRAINED WETLANDS.
NOTE:If your project will impact greater than 1/10 of an acre of wetland,submit a mitigation plan to the Corps and Ecology for approval along with the JARPA form.
NOTE:A 401 water quality certification may be required from Ecology in addition to an approved mitigation plan if your project wetland impacts are greater than 1/10 acre in size.
Please submit the JARPA form and mitigation plan to Ecology for 401 certification review.
IM 12. Stormwater Compliance: This project is (or will be)designed to meet ecology's most current
stormwater manual, or an Ecology approved local stormwater manual. E] YES ❑ NO
If YES—Which manual will your project be designed to meet? WDOE 2005 manual
IM If NO—For Clean Water Act Section 401 and 404 permits only—Please submit to Ecology for approval, along with this JARPA
application, documentation that demonstrates the stormwater runoff from your project or activity will comply with the water quality
standards, WAC 173.201 A
IM 13. Will excavation or dredging be required in water or wetlands? 0 YES ❑ NO
If YES:
A. Volume: 430 (cubic yards) /area 0.53 (acre)
B. Composition of material to be removed: Sand and small gravel
C. Disposal site for excavated material: On site--Replace into excavated trenches and eroded beach channels
D. Method of dredging: Primarily back hoe,with water jet to install some pipe supports. Contingency dredge plan includes use
of a clamshell dredge to complete pipeline trenches at deepest elevations during high tides.
Office of Regulatory Assistance,JARPA JARPA FORM LAST UPDATED: March 19,2007 For help call 800-917-0043 or visit www.epermitting.org 6
LX C
14. Has the State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA) been completed DYES x❑ NO(Checklist to be submitted with this JARPA)
SEPA Lead Agency: Mason County
SEPA Decision: DNS, MDNS, EIS,Adoption, Exemption Decision Date(end of comment period)
SUBMIT A COPY OF YOUR SEPA DECISION LETTER TO WDFW AS REQUIRED FOR A COMPLETE APPLICATION
CM 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 commission 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 and/or stormwater.
TYPE OF APPROVAL ISSUING AGENCY IDENTIFICATION DATE OF APPLICATION DATE APPROVED COMPLETED?
NO.
Section 404 Individual Permit USACE
401 Water Quality Certification Ecology
HPA WDFW
SEPA review Mason County
Shoreline SD/CU Permits Mason County
Building Permit Mason County
16. Has any agency denied approval for the activity you're applying for or for any activity directly related to the activity described
herein?
❑ YES x❑ NO
If YES, explain:
SECTION B - Use for Shoreline and Corps of Engineers permits only:
17a. Total cost of project. This means the fair market value of the project, including materials, labor, machine rentals, etc.
—$250,000
17b. If a project or any portion of a project receives funding from a federal agency,that agency is responsible for ESA consultation.
Please indicate if you will receive federal funds and what federal agency is providing those funds.
FEDERAL FUNDING ❑ YES x❑ NO If YES, please list the federal agency.
18. Local government with jurisdiction: Mason County
19. Provide names, addresses and telephone numbers of adjoining property owners, lessees, etc. Please note: Shoreline
Management Compliance may require additional notice—consult your local government.
NAME ADDRESS PHONE
Larry A. Power, Patrick Wheat,&M.Wheat 3430 Pacific Ave SE Olympia,WA 98501 N/A
Larry Power 8934 Buttonwood Lane NE Olympia,WA 98516 N/A
Jeffrey and Patricia Raikes 3355 E. Laurelhurst Dr. NE Seattle,WA 98105-5335 N/A
Brian McGinnis North Forty Lodging LLC 10 East Alderbrook Drive Union,WA 98592 425-369-9290
Alderbrook County Club Inc. E 7090 Hwy 106 Union,WA 98592 N/A
Allan and Janice Undem c/o Golf Villas 10950 North La Canada Gig Harbor,WA 98335-5912 N/A
Allan and Janice Undem Cottage#1 10 E.Alderbrook Dr. Union,WA 98592 N/A
Barbra Bordeaux 2300 River Rd., Unit 11 Yakima,WA 98902-1293 N/A
Leon Jr and Carolyn Titus 2001 Titus Family Ltd. Pts. 2806 N Garfield Rd. Tacoma,WA 98403-2922 N/A
Fred and Charolette Merritt and Michael Merritt 2821 2nd Ave NE,#1502 Seattle,WA 98121-1249 N/A
Dean and Patricia Nichols P.O. Box 43 Everett,WA 98206 N/A
Dean and Patricia Nichols P.O.Box 129 Sun Valley, ID 83353 N/A
Margaret Berg 2471 42nd Ave W Seattle,WA 98109 N/A
Doris and Lou Berg 9026 N.E. 19th Bellevue,WA 98004 N/A
William Gates III P.O. Box 274 Union,WA 98592 N/A
Watermark Estate Mgmt. N/A
Wm.H.Gates III Services 2365 Carillon PI. Kirkland,WA 98033-7353
Dixie Fox 2491 Yukon Harbor Rd SE Port Orchard,WA 98366 N/A
Dixie A.Fox P.O.Box 594 Manchester,WA 98353-0594 N/A
Watermark Estate Mgmt. N/A
Christopher Carletti TRSE Services 2385 Carillon Pt. Kirkland,WA 98033
Christopher Carletti 2365 Carillon PI. Kirkland,WA 98033-7353 N/A
Chris Carletti K&L Gates 925 Fourth Ave., Ste.2900 Seattle,WA 98104-1158 N/A
SECTION C- This section MUST be completed for any permit covered by this application
Office of Regulatory Assistance,JARPA JARPA FORM LAST UPDATED: March 19,2007 For help call 800-917-0043 or visit www.epermitting.org 7
SECTION C- This section MUST be com leted for any permit covered by this application
CM 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 accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the proposed activities. I hereby grant to the agencies to
which this application is made,the right to enter the above-described location to inspect the proposed, in-progress or completed
work. 1 agree to start work ONLY after all necessary permits have been received.
DATE
SI NATURE OF APPLICANT
DATE
SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED AGENT
DATE
1 Z-11 07
SI ATURE OF AUTHORIZED AGENT
I HEREBY DESIGNATE Allison Reak and/or Jason VanGilder TO ACT AS MY AGENT 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.0§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.
COMPLETED BY LOCAL OFFICIAL
A. Nature of the existing shoreline. (Describe type of shoreline, such as marine, stream, lake, lagoon, marsh, bog, swamp,flood
plain, floodway, delta;type of beach, such as accretion,erosion, high bank, low bank,or dike; material such as sand, gravel, mud, clay,
rock, riprap; and extent and type of bulkheading, if any)
B. In the event that any of the proposed buildings or structures will exceed a height of thirty-five feet above the average grade level,
indicate the approximate location of and number of residential units,existing and potential,that will have an obstructed view:
C. If the application involves a conditional use or variance,set forth in full that portion of the master program which provides that the
proposed use may be a conditional use, or, in the case of a variance,from which the variance is being sought:
These Agencies are Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action employers.
For special accommodation needs,please contact the appropriate agency in the instructions
Office of Regulatory Assistance,JARPA JARPA FORM LAST UPDATED: March 19,2007 For help call 800-917-0043 or visit www.epermitting.org 8
RECEIVEL
MAY 15 2008
MCCD - PLANNING
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
PO Box 47775 • Olympia, Washington 98504-7775• (360) 407-6300
May 14,2008
Ms. Grace Miller Your address
Mason County is in the
Department of Community Development
Planning Division T Kt't1t1G'Ca/-
PO Box 279 Goldshorough
Shelton,WA 98584 watershed
Dear Ms.Miller:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the mitigated determination of nonsignificance for the
Alderbrook Resort& Spa Stormwater Outfall Improvements project(SEP2008-00052)located at 7101
East State Route 106 in Union as proposed by Brian McGinnis,North Forty Lodging,LLC. The
Department of Ecology(Ecology)reviewed the environmental checklist and has the following
comment(s):
SOLID WASTE&FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE: Anya Caudill(360)407-6084
The applicant proposes to remove a structure(s)that may contain treated wood. Please refer to
Ecology's publication"Focus on Treated Wood Exclusion," available at
htip://www.ecy.wa.gov/pubs/0304038.pdf,for suggested best management practices and disposal
requirements for treated wood. For additional information or clarification,please contact Dee
Williams with Ecology's Hazardous Waste and Toxics Reduction program, at(360)407-6348.
It is equally important that construction debris is also safely managed, especially if it contains painted
wood or concrete,treated wood,or other possibly dangerous materials.
WATER QUALITY: Roberta Woods(360)407-6269
Erosion control measures must be in place prior to any clearing,grading,or construction. These
control measures must be effective to prevent stormwater runoff from carrying soil and other
pollutants into surface water or storm drains that lead to waters of the state. Sand, silt,clay particles,
and soil will damage aquatic habitat and are considered to be pollutants.
Any discharge of sediment-laden runoff or other pollutants to waters of the state is in violation of
Chapter 90.48 RCW, Water Pollution Control,and WAC 173-201A,Water Quality Standards for
Surface Waters of the State of Washington,and is subject to enforcement action.
Proper disposal of construction debris must be on land in such a manner that debris cannot enter the
Hood Canal,Alderbrook Creek or cause water quality degradation of state waters.
During construction,all releases of oils,hydraulic fluids, fuels,other petroleum products,paints,
solvents,and other deleterious materials must be contained and removed in a manner that will prevent
their discharge to waters and soils of the state. The cleanup of spills should take precedence over
other work on the site.
ex y
May 14,2008
Page 2
Ecology's comments are based upon information provided by the lead agency. As such,they do not
constitute an exhaustive list of the various authorizations that must be obtained or legal requirements that
must be fulfilled in order to carry out the proposed action.
If you have any questions or would like to respond to these comments please contact the appropriate
reviewing staff listed above.
Department of Ecology
Southwest Regional Office
(SM: 08-3175)
cc: Anya Caudill,SW&FAP
Roberta.Woods,WQ
Brian McGinnis,North Forty Lodging,LLC(Applicant/Contact)
Allison Reak, SEA-Run consulting(Contact)
Jason Van Gilder,Cosmopolitan Engineers(Contact)
� S
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair
April 2008 Addendum
to the
Joint Aquatic Resources Project Application (DARPA) and
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation (BABE)
USACE Reference No.NWS-2007-732-SO
During a February 21,2008 meeting at the Alderbrook Resort and Spa, Washington Department
of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) mandated the use of piles to prevent the floating dock from
grounding at low tides. The dock design has been changed to incorporate pile stops under the
dock sections that extend from the bulkhead to-4.5 ft MLLW. This addendum to the December
2007 JARPA and Biological Evaluation/Biological Assessment(BA/BE)describes the pile stop
design and construction, addresses changes to the affected JARPA sections,and provides an
analysis and determination of effects for the BABE.
Construction addition to JARPA 7a and BABE:
Forty-eight(48)8-in-dia steel piles will be installed to support the bottom of the floating dock a
minimum of 12 inches above grade. Piles will project about 22 inches above grade. Piles will be
installed in pairs across the width of the dock. Each pair will be bridged by an 8-ft-long treated
wood beam(12-by 12-in cross section)that will support the dock at low tides. The pile stop
structures (i.e.,two piles plus the connecting beam) will project 34.5 in above grade. Wood
treatment will be ACZA (ammoniacal copper zinc arsenate).
Each of the eight 48-ft4ong float sections will be supported by three pairs of pile stop structures
(i.e., six piles and three connecting beams per section). Along the alignment,pairs of pile stops
will be spaced between 14 and 18 ft apart.
The installation of 48 piles would take about 10 days. In water construction is estimated to take
14 days over a period of 3 weeks.
Pile stops would eliminate any grounding of the floating dock and allow the benthic recovery of
3,025 ft'(0.07 ac)of fine-grained intertidal habitat
A revised set of construction drawings, including a modified flotation design and pile stops, is
found in the April 2008 JARPA Attachment B (attached).
Environmental Effects Analysis for JARPA 7c and BE/BA:
Potential adverse effects on ESA-listed fish(i.e., Chinook salmon, Hood Canal summer-run
chum salmon, Pacific steelhead, and Puget Sound/Coastal bull trout) could result from the use of
pile stops, due to pile driving and increased turbidity, and permanent small-scale(17 ft2)habitat
loss. These potential adverse effects would similarly apply to critical habitat for Chinook and
chum salmon (designated)and Pacific steelhead(not yet designated). However, these potential
1
i
�xs
adverse effects would be outweighed by the environmental benefits of recovered habitat under
the floating dock.
Salmon and trout, if present in nearshore waters,would likely avoid the area during pile driving
because of the noise and in-water activity. Short-term turbidity effects are expected to be
relatively minor because most sediment is coarse sandy gravel that would quickly settle in the
vicinity of the piles. A small fraction of suspended sediment, consisting of fine-grained silt,
clay, and organic material, would remain in the water column for a longer period and move with
the tidal currents. Most likely,turbidity would be minor and of short duration(i.e.,within one
tidal cycle). Because salmon and trout are not particularly sensitive to low levels of turbidity for
short periods of time,the increased turbidity during pile driving would not likely have an adverse
effect. Furthermore,construction would occur during a time of year when all juvenile salmonids
would be off shore, in deeper water.
Long-term potentially adverse effects could result from habitat alteration, including water
circulation,by the pile stop structures. The addition of 48 piles perpendicular to the shoreline is
not expected to measurably affect water circulation in the action area because the piles are short,
small in diameter, and spaced relatively far apart. Pile stops may enhance sediment transport
over greater distances along upper intertidal elevations, improving beach substrate quality and
reducing sedimentation at the mouth of Alderbrook Creek.
The 48 piles would convert 17 ft2 of fine-grained benthic and epibenthic habitat into vertical
solid habitat. However, the permanent loss of 17 ft2 of benthic and epibenthic habitat would be
compensated by the recovery of 384 ft2 of benthic and epibenthic habitat under the new floats
that would no longer ground during low tides. Considering the entire dock replacement,the
proposed design would recover about 3,025 ft2 of fine-grained intertidal and shallow subtidal
habitat under the dock that is currently degraded by twice-daily grounding.
The 24 ACZA-treated wood connecting beams would displace water column habitat and release
low concentrations of dissolved copper into marine waters at intertidal and shallow subtidal
elevations commonly used by juvenile salmonids for foraging. However, dissolved copper
released from the treated beams would be rapidly diluted by the surrounding water column.
Dissolved copper would decrease within a few days to concentrations below thresholds
determined to have chronic effects on salmon(e.g., less than 15.5 parts'?er trillion for piling at
30 ppt salinity) and would continue to decrease over time (Brooks 1997 ).
Potential adverse effects from construction of pile stops would be of short duration and localized
around the project construction corridor,during a time of year when vulnerable juvenile
salmonids are not likely to be present. The area of habitat permanently lost to pile stops would
be small compared to food resources within the action area. Dissolved metals concentrations
from the ACZA-treated wood are anticipated to decrease to levels below any chronic injury
threshold within days of installation. Therefore, the addition of pile stops may affect,but would
not likely adversely affect,Chinook and chum salmon, Pacific steelhead, bull trout, and
Brooks,Kenneth. 1997. Literature Review and Assessment of the Environmental Risks Associated With the Use
of ACZA Treated Wood Products in Aquatic Environments. Prepared for Western Wood Preservers Institute,
Vancouver,WA. Aquatic Environmental Sciences,Port Townsend,WA
2
1
designated critical habitat for Pacific salmon and trout. In addition,the pile stops are expected to
have a beneficial effect on fish and fish habitat by allowing the recovery of an additional 384 ft2
of benthic habitat under the floating dock. The pile stops may also improve sediment
distribution from Alderbrook Creek along upper intertidal elevations.
Conservation Measure for JARPA 7c and BA/BE:
Following the USACE recommendation in a 29 January 2008 letter, the contractor will be
required to cut all creosote piles into 4-ft-long sections before disposal at an approved upland
disposal facility.
JARPA 8 Estimated Duration of Activity: Time needed to install pile stops: 10 days. Total
construction duration estimate: 14 days over 3 weeks.
JARPA 17a Total cost of project.: —$300,000
3
� S
JARPA ATTACHMENT A
Supplemental Information for JARPA Form Questions
6. Describe (a) the current use of the property, (b) structures existing on the
property, and (c) existing environmental conditions.
(b) structures existing on the property
The resort stormwater treatment system, which is not affected by this project, is described in
detail here.
The Alderbrook Resort and Spa's stormwater collection and treatment system consists of two
drainage areas that discharge through the eastern and western outfalls. The west side of the
resort contributes about one-third of the resort's stormwater discharge by volume and the east
side contributes about two-thirds. Stormwater discharge volumes were estimated at 1.5 MG/yr
for both outfalls assuming average annual rainfall of 68 inches. The stormwater treatment system
was designed in accordance with the Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology)2000
Stormwater Manual.
Stormwater from the west side of the resort is collected from the west parking area, a service
drive, cottage roof drains, and large areas of landscaping. Stormwater is collected in catch basins
and routed through a Vortechs®oil/water separator and then through an underground sand filter
before release via the west outfall. Although the west drainage area includes Alderbrook Creek,
most of the creek's water comes from seeps and runoff from the grassy slope on the south side of
the highway. Stormwater from the resort was separated from the creek drainage as part of the
creek restoration plan to control creek flows and protect salmon habitat.
Stormwater from the east side of the resort is collected from the hotel entrance drive,roof drains,
adjacent grounds,the east parking area, about 1,700 ft of SR 106, and part of the grassy slope
south of the highway. The grassy slope comprises the largest drainage area of the east outfall
(about 4.57 ac) and also contributes runoff year-round from numerous natural seeps (about
0.48 ac). Thus, "baseline" stormwater discharge always consists of a constant volume of clean
surface water from seeps plus a variable volume of clean runoff from the grassy slope.
Stormwater runoff from SR 106 drains into engineered treatment swales along the road that
consist of grass-covered channels filled with sand and gravel. The bioswales slow the runoff,
settle particulates, and detain oils and grease. The stormwater is then routed to an engineered
detention pond that consists of a deep basin filled with sand and organic material(acting as a
filtering medium), covered with shrubs and trees for additional biological treatment. During
extreme storms,the first several inches of rainfall (i.e., first flush plus part of the ascending
hydrograph) is detained,treated, and released, but later inflow may fill the basin and overflow
into a bypass pipe that discharges via the east outfall. In any case,the first flush of stormwater,
carrying the most pollutants, is treated, and any subsequent flows that are bypassed can be
considered clean.
Alderbrook Resort&Spa -I- JARPA Attachment A
Stormwater Outfalls Improvements December 20,2007
Stormwater runoff from the east parking area is routed into a biotreatment detention basin before
being released to the east outfall. Runoff from the resort entrance drive is collected in a catch
basin and treated through a Vortechs®oil/water separator before being released to the east
outfall.
Eastern Outfall
The eastern outfall is located at latitude 47' 20' 53"N and longitude 123° 04' 01" W. It consists
of an 18-inch corrugated polyethylene storm sewer pipe (CPSSP) standpipe extending 32 inches
above the adjacent beach grade with a concrete thrust block. The elevation of the base of the
seawall is about 9.2 ft MLLW(Photo 1).
Photo I
Eastem Outfal Standpipe
Rods Wd
3} ti
MA
w,
A
Al"4
E CA,..
Prior to discharge, stormwater flow is collected and directed into retention ponds,bioswales, and
infiltration facilities in accordance with the Washington State Department of Ecology, (WDOE)
Stormwater Design Manual (2000). The flow rate for the one-per-25-year storm is estimated at
7.5 cfs.
The outfall discharges between a sanitary effluent sewer, covered by a 3-ft-wide concrete
topping slab (for pipe protection and to counteract pipe buoyancy), and a five-ft-high stone wall
located on the adjacent parcel. Between these two hard structures, a channel has eroded that is
over 50 ft in length, approximately 6.5 ft wide, and over five ft deep at its upper end. The
channel is estimated to have a volume of over 27 cubic yards. Within the scoured channel is an
Alderbrook Resort&Spa JARPA Attachment A
Stormwater Dutfalls Repair -2- December 2007
�x5
abandoned six-inch-diameter wood stave pipe, an eight-inch-diameter concrete pipe, four-inch-
diameter plastic pipe, and areas of concrete rubble and rock debris. Part of the adjacent
property's stone wall was undercut and has fallen into the eroded channel (Photo 2).
Photo 2
{
I
The oyster beds below the discharge are currently 112 ft from the seawall at an approximate
elevation of 2.2 ft MLLW.
Western Outfall
The western outfall is located at Latitude 47° 20' 53" and Longitude 123° 04' 08". Prior to
discharge, stormwater passes through a sand filtration treatment system that was designed in
accordance with WDOE Stormwater Manual(2000). The peak flow from a one-per-25-year
storm event is estimated at 5.7 cfs.
The outfall penetrates a 2.5-ft-high concrete bulkhead wall with a 15-inch-diameter CPSSP pipe.
The CPSSP pipe is connected to a short section of 15-inch-diameter corrugated metal pipe
(CMP). The CMP has a 45 degree miter-cut end with a debris barrier constructed of aluminum
bars. The invert of the outfall is at an elevation of 12.6 ft MLLW.
Stormwater discharge has undercut the bulkhead to a depth of 18 inches from the concrete base
to below the invert of the outfall pipe (Photo 3).
Alderbrook Resort&Spa JARPA Attachment A
Stormwater Outfalls Repair -3- December 2007
' �;„,;' :it '•
r
jy
h J 4
go
rw •'ta41' rx,A• 'e..
About 23 cubic yards of native substrate have been eroded from an area about 45 ft wide,
altering the beach profile (Photo 4).
Photo 4
_ SIR EME
a
The oyster beds downstream of this discharge are approximately 75 ft from the bulkhead, at an
elevation of 4.2 ft MLLW.
Alderbrook Resort&Spa JARPA Attachment A
Stormwater Outfalls Repair -4- December 2007
�
7a. Proposed Work Needing Aquatic Permits
Details of the proposed materials,placement, and construction sequencing for both outfall
extensions are described here:
EASTERN OUTFALL DETAILS (JARPA Attachment B Figures)
Most equipment access and staging for the eastern outfall construction will be provided between
the resort parking lot and the beach through the adjacent property to the east. A construction
easement agreement will be obtained from the adjacent property owner and verbal agreement has
already been obtained. Some site access and materials(e.g., dock sections,piling,pre-built pipe
sections) will be brought via boat and barge.
The existing 18-in-dia stormwater discharge standpipe will be removed along with the existing
thrust block and the collapsed stone wall. An 18-in-dia corrugated polyethylene storm sewer
pipe (CPSSP)tee will be installed connecting to the existing corrugated polyethylene storm
sewer pipe penetrating the bulkhead wall. The open-ended vertical tee section will be at the
same elevation as the existing stand-pipe (12.2 ft MLLW). The open tee section will release
stormwater onto the beach when flows exceed the conveyance capacity of the new outfall or the
pipe is blocked. No data are available to predict overflow frequencies or volumes.
The pipe will be extended under the beach surface approximately 10 ft beyond the bulkhead and
turned 90 degrees to pass under the existing sanitary sewer outfall. A thrust block, using about
1 cy of concrete,will be installed to stabilize the pipe at the bend. Approximately 6 in of vertical
separation between the stormwater and sewer pipes will be maintained by 0.25 cy of new
concrete. The concrete will be placed during an extended low tide to maximize curing time prior
to tidal inundation. Construction of this section will take one to two days.
Between the sewer line and the dock, 260 ft of stormwater outfall pipe will be installed parallel
to the existing bulkhead,below grade, at a 0.5 percent slope. A series of concrete anchors will
be attached to the pipe every 20 ft, for a total of about 44 anchors for the eastern outfall. The
pipeline alignment will be 10 ft from the bulkhead to prevent undermining of the bulkhead
foundation. Two 45-degree bends and 40 ft of CPSSP will be used to transition the pipeline
from the bulkhead alignment to the dock alignment. Each bend will require a thrust block to be
installed in place to counteract the hydraulic forces within the pipeline. Each thrust block will
consist of approximately 1 cy of concrete.
Pipeline excavation depths will range from 3 to 6 ft. A trench box will be used for pipeline
construction to provide temporary shoring. The edge of existing oyster beds will be flagged to
help workers avoid the beds during pipeline construction.
From the landward end of the dock, 95 ft of CPSSP will be coupled with 18-in-dia high-density
HDPE pipe and extend about 195 ft from 7.5 to -3 ft MLLW terminating at an
,
polyethylene ( )pP g
open-ended outlet. To construct the pipeline without digging through oyster beds,the eastern
outfall pipe alignment will run under the centerline of the existing dock. The dock will be
dismantled and removed from the proposed pipe corridor. The dock will be disconnected from
the existing pilings and utilities(i.e., water, electric, sewage pump-out station),transferred to a
Alderbrook Resort&Spa JARPA Attachment A
Stormwater Outfalls Repair -5- December 2007
�x S
barge, and removed from the project site. The four attached floats will be removed and replaced
at the same time as the dock. The existing creosote-treated wood piling will be vibrated out of
the substrate and transferred by crane to a barge. Piles that break during removal will be cut off
below mudline and covered with clean fill. All dock materials not suitable for re-use will be
disposed of at a permitted upland waste facility.
Along the dock alignment, a trench will be excavated from the bulkhead at low tide to
approximately 6 ft MLLW and shored with a trench box. Prior to alignment excavation in the
dry,the allowable construction corridor(a maximum 25-ft width)will be marked through the
oyster beds to help the contractor minimize construction impacts. The trench will be excavated
using a small rubber-tracked(or similar)excavator. At deeper elevations during high tide, a
clamshell dredge may be used to excavate and backfill the trench as a contingency. Beach
material will be sidecast along the alignment and used to backfill the upper trench. Any
excavated material left over will be used to restore the eroded beach to a natural profile.
At high tide,the pre-built pipe section will be brought by barge to the site and placed along the
alignment using a float-and-sink operation. Installation of this portion of the outfall will be
staged entirely within the footprint of the existing dock(8 ft wide). No equipment will be
allowed outside of this corridor at low tide.
The float-and-sink operation consists of capping both ends of the pipe to entrap air inside. In the
water,the entrapped air will provide flotation so that the pipe can be floated into place and
positioned using pulleys and tug boats. Once in its final position, water will be allowed to fill the
pipe while air is slowly released, sinking the pipe into the trench. The end caps can then be
removed from both ends of the pipe.
All pipe will be installed with precast concrete anchors to counter the pipe's natural buoyancy.
Along the bulkhead and under most of the dock, the pipe and anchors will be buried below
grade. A six-inch layer of crushed gravel or similar bedding material will be placed below and to
the sides of the new pipe to provide structural support. Small gravel and/or sidecast native
material will be used to backfill the upper half of the pipe trench. Habitat mix or native beach
material will be used for final backfill and final grading. Only native material and/or habitat mix
will be used to cover or fill the top six inches of the beach.
Under the deeper part of the dock, about 190 ft of pipe will not be buried,but will be suspended
at least four inches above grade on 19 concrete anchors. (Elevating the pipe slightly above the
seafloor will minimize the impairment of the littoral sediment drift by the pipeline and reduce
horizontal drag forces on the side of the pipeline from currents.} These anchors will be partially
buried to a depth of six inches by using a small water hose to "jet" substrate out from under each
anchor. Each anchor will displace less than one cubic foot of substrate.
After the pipeline is installed along the dock alignment, new galvanized steel piling will be
vibrated into place. The creosote piles will be removed and replaced in approximately the same
locations by steel piles of equal or smaller diameter. The new dock piles will be installed
adjacent to, but outboard of the old piles to accommodate the attachment collars. Some piles
may be shifted to better support dock sections. All piling removal and installation will be
Alderbrook Resort&Spa JARPA Attachment A
Stormwater Outfalls Repair -6- December 2007
completed using vibratory hammers to minimize the noise impacts. Any piles that cannot be
removed will be cut off below the mudline level and covered with clean fill. All creosote piles
will be disposed of at a suitable upland disposal facility. All removal and replacement of piles
will be conducted by barge at high tide. No pile driving equipment will be allowed to anchor in
oyster beds or ground on the beach.
After the new piles are in place,the dock and all attached floats will be replaced at the same
location and within the same footprint. Dock components will be assembled in sections off site
and floated into place above the pipeline alignment during high tide. The replacement dock will
be constructed from a recycled wood-composite material (e.g., Trex®). Replacement details are
shown in Appendix C. About 52 percent of the decking will consist of expanded composite
grating to allow greater transmission of light through the dock. The old Styrofoam slab flotation
will be replaced with small polyethylene tubs configured to fit around the new pipeline. The
flotation tubs will also be designed to eliminate most(87.5 percent) of the dock area that
currently rests on the beach at low tide,recovering about 2,700 ft2 of substrate. About 5,234 ft2
(0.12 ac) of grated decking will replace the old solid decking to improve marine habitat through
increased light transmission.
East Beach Habitat Restoration
The restoration of the existing eroded channels will include the removal of the abandoned pipes
(over 100 ft of wood stave pipe and concrete pipe), concrete and rock debris, and plastic conduit,
and the demolition of an existing cantilevered concrete block at the end of the outfall standpipe.
The collapsed section of the adjacent property's rock wall will be replaced in-kind. The area
around the new open-ended tee will be backfilled with quarry spalls,to protect the shoreline
from stormwater erosion during overflow events, and capped with six inches of imported habitat
mix,to restore the beach surface. The eroded channel extending from the existing standpipe will
be filled with quarry spalls (27 cy)covered with a six-in-deep layer of either native material or
habitat mix(8 cy) for a total fill of approximately 35 cy. Native beach material and/or habitat
mix that matches the existing surface grain size will be used to restore surface grades east of the
floating dock.
Final site grading will restore 0.14 ac of eroded intertidal beach to its former natural elevations
and condition. Dock reconstruction will recover about 2,700 ft2 of substrate under the dock from
grounding and increase light transmission through 5,234 ft2 of new dock. Flotation
improvements will allow water and aquatic organisms to circulate under and between the floats.
Replacement of creosote-treated wood piles with steel piles will eliminate the release of creosote
tars and oils in the intertidal.
WESTERN OUTFALL DETAILS (DARPA Attachment B Figures)
Most equipment access and staging for the western outfall construction will be provided by the
resort along the emergency access road that ends at the existing outfall structure. Some site
access and materials(e.g., dock sections,piling,pre-built pipe sections) will be brought via boat
and barge. No equipment will be driven on the beach across the Alderbrook Creek estuary.
Alderbrook Resort&Spa JARPA Attachment A
Stormwater Outfalls Repair - 7- December 2007
�C s
The western outfall extension will be connected to the existing outfall at the bulkhead. The
connection will consist of a cast-in-place concrete drop structure attached to the existing concrete
bulkhead. The drop structure will consist of approximately 2 cy of concrete. The concrete will
be placed during an extended low tide to maximize curing time prior to tidal inundation. The
existing outfall grating and pipe (15-in-dia CPSSP, invert elevation at 11.85 ft MLLW), will be
cut flush with the bulkhead. The drop structure will be cast around it,with a new pipe
connection(18-in-dia HDPE, invert elevation at 7.8 ft MLLW)buried below grade at the bottom
of the structure. A 12- by 30-in grate will cover an overflow opening near the top of the
structure to release stormwater onto the beach when flows exceed the conveyance capacity of the
new outfall or the pipe is blocked. No data are available to predict overflow frequencies or
volumes. Construction of this section will take one day.
The western outfall will be extended from the existing outfall approximately 330 ft to an outlet
invert elevation of-3.5 ft MLLW. About 270 ft of pipe will be buried and 60 ft will be partially
to fully exposed.
Prior to alignment excavation in the dry,the allowable construction corridor(a maximum 25-ft
width)will be marked through the oyster beds to help the contractor minimize construction
impacts. The trench will be excavated using a small rubber-tracked(or similar) excavator.
Beach material will be sidecast along the alignment and used to backfill the upper trench. At
deeper elevations during high tide, a clamshell dredge may be used to excavate and backfill the
trench as a contingency. Any excavated material left over will be used to restore the eroded
beach to a natural profile.
At high tide,the pre-built pipe section will be brought by barge to the site and placed along the
alignment using a float-and-sink operation. The float-and-sink operation consists of capping
both ends of the pipe to entrap air inside. In the water,the entrapped air will provide flotation so
that the pipe can be floated into place and positioned using pulleys and tug boats. Once in its
final position, water will be allowed to fill the pipe while air is slowly released, sinking the pipe
into the trench. The end caps can then be removed from both ends of the pipe.
All pipe will be installed with precast concrete anchors to counter the pipe's natural buoyancy.
Each anchor will displace less than one cubic foot of substrate. A six-in layer of crushed gravel
or similar bedding material will be placed below and to the sides of the new pipe to provide
structural support. Small gravel and/or sidecast native material will be used to backfill the upper
half of the pipe trench. Habitat mix or native beach material will be used for final backfill and
final grading. Only native material and/or habitat mix will be used to cover or fill the top six
inches of the beach.
Along most of the alignment,the pipe and anchors will be buried below grade. The pipe will
emerge from the substrate and be partially buried for about 60 ft. The last five ft will rest on the
substrate.
West Beach Habitat Restoration:
Alderbrook Resort&Spa JARPA Attachment A
Stormwater Outfalls Repair -8- December 2007
�s
Approximately 23 cy of native material and/or habitat mix will be used to re-grade the erosion
that has occurred on the beach in the vicinity of the existing outfall. This fill will restore native
grades along 25 ft of each side of the existing outfall, and up to 50 ft away from the bulkhead
wall.
Alderbrook Resort&Spa JARPA Attachment A
Stormwater Outfalls Repair -9- December 2007
r
JARPA ATTACHMENT B
Supplemental Information for JARPA Form
Project Figures
April 2008
=WTY MAP
20
- g30 30 _
12
PORT ff5� 9 92
ANGELES 25
04
EVER TT-
9
40 03
02
PROJECT
LOCATION 90
REMERT AT LE
09 r 06 02 18
,s
SHELTON � 64 69
� .
410�
06 p 5 TAC M
J ABERDEEN
o, OLYMPIA 10 00 ' 65
12 07
05
CENTRALIA 06
CHEHALIS
6 06
03
"06
5
4D3 04 1
KELSOAPPROX. SCALE: 1" = 20 MI
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
LATITUDE: 47' 20' 53" N WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
LONGTITUDE: 123' 04' 01" W AT: ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
SECTION: 33
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING TOWNSHIP: 22N
22526 SE 64TH PLACE RANGE: 3W
ry rrn IISSAQUAH, WA 98027 COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
�HGINRItiG FIGURE 1 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
f 111 1 G 0UP NUSACE UMBER RONWST 007-732ESO V PRIOVMapNTS
�X 5
LOCATa ON MAP
HOOD CANAL
1.Utliptt
4th St ' N
E. Kuhn Ave' III6
E 5th 8t
E Orra
E fine St.
rrl Rd
a�
�a
E Dalby Rd
ALDERBROOK
[d I N N {C�
E Nyland Dr
ti. +
Dr
APPROX.SCALE:1"=2.65 MI Nt
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
�NGIhRING FIGURE 2 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
`11 MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
USACE' G 0 U P NUMBER: NWST 2007-732ES0 Location EMap IMPROVEMENTS
�c5
0 .
PROPERTY OWNERSHIP INFORMATION:
TPN OWNER E--
01 322335000015 PRIVATE PROPERTY 9
O 322335000014 NORTH FORTY LODGING LLC
0 322335100023 ALDERBROOK COUNTRY CLUB INC N
® 322335000012 PRIVATE PROPERTY
ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS
ARE LISTED IN THE JARPA
DOCK
HOOD CANAL
WESTERN OUTFALL EASTERN
SEE FIGS 4,15 OUTFALL
SEE FIGS 8-13
AN
4 F
"F",—
-- --_---
LDERBROOK
INN
STATE HWY 106
-Tffm JA-"41 LE: 1"= 150'
PROPERTY MAP
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAOUAH, WA 98027
�NGINRING FIGURE 3 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
1,1 I MARCH 2O08 STORMWATEIMPROVEMENTS
OUTFALL
I G R O U P USACE PROJECT REFERENCE
NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Property Map
�c5
MATCHLINE - SEE FIG 5
I I
- - --- 320LF 18" HDPE
SDR 21 PIPE
I I —
I I
I I
\ l
I I
I I
I I
1 j 25' WIDE ALLOWABLE
--I- --�� OUTFALL CONSTRUCTION
AREA LIMITS
I I
I I
I I
RESTOR %A �CENT
H GRADE TO
MATCH AREAS `� I i ANCHOR BLOCKS
USING UjO 16" OF 1 I _ 10' OC SEE DET B ON FIG
"HABITAT MIX" 0�--1.A�TIVE I /�
SURFACE MATERIA-tS---_.---____
MATCHING EXISTING SURFACE I 1
GRAVEL GRADUATION
(APPROXIMATELY 23 CU YDS) I I
I
I APPROXIM
LIMITS
DROP SfRUCTURE EXISI G
SEE DET D ON jG/1�� / _ _ 76' ER BEDS
EXISTING
/
BULKHEAD
COTTAGE MN� - -1- - —_ - —---'------- -Eu
-i----z I
I
EXISTING MH WESTERN OUTFALL
PLAN
SCALE: 1" = 40'
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027 _
�NGINRING FIGURE 4 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
n O II n G
{S lJ Y USACE PROJECT REFERENCE IMPROVEMENTS
NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Proposed Western Outfall Plan
f
EXISTING DOCK TO BE a�
REPLACED
_ --- C?
CURRE DYRECTION
o EBB
LOCATION: FOOD
LAT 47' 20' 56" N
LONG 123' 04' 09" W _8
DATUM: MLLW p
HOOD CANAL
MHHW: 11.85
MHW: 10.87
WATER DEPTH ABOVE OUTLET: 6
AT MLLW = 2.0t
AT MHW = 12.5t
AT MHHW = 13.5t I I
- r- ---�
I I
I I
I
oLO I I ALLOWABLE OUTF
I I CONSTR AREA
I I
I
MATCHLINE - SEE FIG 4
WESTERN OUTFALL
PLAN
SCALE: 1" 3 40'
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
�NGINING FIGURE 5 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
USACE PROJECT REFERENCE IMPROVEMENTS
NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Proposed Western Outfall Plan
40 EXISTING
.............. ........... ............................... .....................- ...........---------................
R'ETkrN ---------- ...................... ........................... ............... 40
W ALL A REA TO BE RjESTORLID
30 ................... 10 PR-E-.r.XiSTINC GRADE 30
5
a
CPSSPSp
T-2
EXIST NG G ADE -6" MI NI COVE-R
20 APPROX 25 LF-7
............ ................ .............................................................................................................................. ............. .......... ................ 20
-230 Lf 18" HIDPE
10 S .3%±
1 MHH�V 1111.85.
.. ............................................................... ............z 10
:D
Lh
0 00 <
c
........... 0
L 0.0
00 NCH OR CKS La m w
—10 �ANCH( B L
-10
II I B ON FIG 1
-20
L 1 20
LLJ
-30
-30
-cr
F-
V) z
LLJ 0
0
-40
Cy- LLJ
Ln
I i { i
10+00 10+50 11 +00 11 +50
WESTERN OUTFALL
PROFILE
H: 1" = 20' V. I" = 20'
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
NIHON FIGURE 6 of 23 ALIDERIBROOK INN & RESORT
MARCH 2008 STORMWATER OUTFALL
USACE PROJECT REFERENCE
IMPROVEMENTS
Now 6 � 0 u P 1"=20-0 10 20 NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Proposed Western Outfall Profile
X
I�
I
40 ;
_ ... __....... - 40
--...... __ ................. .--
I
30
20 ._. ... . . ...
:
i
----.__._ , 20
EXISTING GRADE
90 t�F 18" HDPE 1
�I
; I, S =i 05�10 i I - MHHW 111.85
._. ...... - _....... - -___ V- 1�-8- ._......_..
I
I
10
I .
0 i ----- MLLW -
I ,
-10
I
10
i Z ANCHOR BLOCKS ,D-
-20 p i._. _ ._ 10' OC SEE DET w w `O
U E3 GN---!FIG 1..¢_ .>
w p p 20
J i i I i O m
-30 l _ I pall _30
- - , -- -
I O p 4 W
Q M i
-40 ! ' xo -
i w
.... _............ .. ...._..- .I... .....1 - i
440
w i I - 0 0-
I > w i I O z Q
I t j j I
1 1 +50 12+00 12+50 13+00
WESTERN OUTFALL
PROFILE
H: 1" = 20' V. I- = 20'
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
�NGIh RING FIGURE 7 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
1 MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
00 0 0 P 0 , 12p 20 USACE PROJECT REFERENCE IMPROVEMENTS
NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Proposed Western Outfall Profile
STA 12+85.8 j I
45- BEND W/ THRUST BLOCKING
I E = 4.7 3
ob z•. ' ! i I
5 I � � 2 I
/ I �� EXISTING s TOP OF RET. WALL
I BUILDING
TPN EL = 14.3 MLLW (ASSUMED) ' 7�
. / =2zsss,occa3 15 ELF 18"
`a/ / ��� 6q• STA 12+70.4
JEXISTING 45- BEND THRUST C SSP 14N /� j BULKHEAD gL�£iCG(�L��
(MHHW) i I - 4.8 ;
_ w Apo
Gam., 04, e' ✓ ? n:.1-/ / p� ____�-mil/ /
\ - -
\ WORK LIMITS BEYOND
\ r--`O l" _ -- �- - � FROM THE BULKHEAD MALL 0
BE LIMITED TO THEOOTPRI4
CHOR BLOCK 20' OC
260 LF 18" OF THE EXISTING DOCK
mac" TYPICAL 13 PLACES
EE DE.3-ArC A SEE DET B FIG 1_4_ , CPSSP
fjfI FIG 14 �- _ _ - EXISTING DOCK TO BE
RECONSTRUCTED AS SHOWN
A f!�ROXIMA-TC ACCESS ' - ON FIGS 18, 19 & 20
CUTE/NMITS \\ APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF NOTES:
� ! EXISTING OYSTER BED 1. LOCATION �-ACCESS ROUTE
/LOCQT1O U. _ -- ---4 __- - _—_. _
N EXISTING :- SS- -- EAST PROPERTY TO BE
LAB 47'�20' S3'//P��__� - PROVIDED BY THE OWNER
L NG 1�23' 04' �08" W EFFLUENT PIPE
/ \ EASTERN OUTFALL 2. ALIGNMENT WITHIN THE DOCK TO
A)ATI-I i1: ML�W FOLLOW THE CENTERLINE OF THE
PLAN EXISTING DOCK FOOTPRINT
SCALE: 1" = 40'
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER 3. MHHW IS AT TOE OF EXISTING
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS BULKHEAD
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL 4. COORDINATE PIPE ALIGNMENT WITH
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027 DOCK STOP PILING LOCATIONS
�tiGIN RItiG FIGURE 8 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
N MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
I 111 G O U P 0 1"2040' 40 USACE PROJECT REFERENCE IMPROVEMENTS
NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Proposed Eastern Outfall Plan
APPROXIMATE LIMITS NOTE: SECOND CLASS
I n OF EXISTING OYSTER TIDELANDS HAVE BEEN
BEDS I ESTABLISHED AS STARTING
AT ELEVATION —4.5 MLLW
NEW DOCK ST' P PILINGS
ANCHOR BLOCK 10' CC 48 OCATIONS I EXISTING TIMBER
/ ( ) j PILING (TYP.)
TYPICAL 31 PLACES I TO BE REMOVED
SSE DIET B FIG 14 PIPE SUPPORT`�I (TYP.) (TYP. 21 LOCATIONS)
I i 7.5' O.C. MAX SPACING I
�EE DETAIL K ON ISHT 23
I OPEN L 65 LF 18 PIPE SUPPORTED FROM
LL
PPE OUTLET
o, s PSSIP i DOCK STOP STRUCTURE ,E I
+!i
`rs 00 ` \ ' 1 4+0 I
15+00 16+00
coil rEXISIfING
NEW GALVANIZED
STEEL PILING
DPE / 256 LF 18" 3 N (TYP. 21 LOCATIONS)
G HDPE SDR 21I TI
EX S NG DOCK TO BE
LIMITS OF , RECONSTRUCTED AS SHOWN
� ON FIGS 21, 22 & 23
TER BED S% H006 CANAL
LOCATION: NOTE: PIPE ALIGNMENT TO BE ALONG
LAT 47° 20' 53" N EASTERN OUTFALL CENTERLINE OF EXISTING DOCK FOOTPRINT
LONG 123` 04' 08" W PLAN
DATUM: MLLW SCALE 1" = 40' WATER DEPTH ABOVE OUTLET:
AT MHHW = 12.5±
AT MHW = 11.5f
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
NINO% FIGURE 9 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
Z MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
n O n 0 20 40 USACE PROJECT REFERENCE IMPROVEMENTS
AS V Y 1"=40' NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Proposed Eastern Outfall Plan
40 - - I _ 8,� :S EFFLUENT PIPE I j ; ! a
----
__
71 ARANEMINIM M CL .5' -. TOP !F BULII<-HE-A-D
BACK BTWEEPIPEWITH CONC ETE30 (14.3 EMLLW) -
'r--....-- 30�-Af�R-0XL - 2 -Y[
I
20 I I I ( . I . EXISTING GRADE
- ---- --` - - - 1 , i _1
20
f i -- -- T-- --- -- -- --1--- -�-- -1-- - - - - w
rLu
10 i co--- - 10
- i +
' I I I 1 Q
0 -El-SHIN-G 1-8" - + -- ( !--- I-- - -- - --- ~
I i o
0
CJPSSP IPE -- -� Z-
J I IE ;9.91 1 : i I (; 2 LF 10.*%8 CPSSP _
I
` 0
I _
-10
--- —- - --
i, ' E I S TIN Q ! N j o j i 10
�-............i .
BU�KHEA WALL
-20 -I -I i I i ANCIHOR BLOCKS; (TYP.)
----, - ---�- ---- — - - -,� ' ' X S FAA IiV G ' -
- - -1 r�- r--- -- -- - ' 8-fl. - - C- -- - -
�� 20
i o w Imo- SEE DETAIL B ON SHT 114
-30 ! +
_._. i _ ---- -
Z + z
----
w
-30
N ml j
QN � Q Q
(n c� o V) �' 0 mj v, j I
--a -- - — -- - - i -40
- j —� - I .
1 j ! MHHW 1785_
I
i MHW: 1087
i I I
10+00 10+50 1 1 +00 1 1 +30
EASTERN OUTFALL
PROFILE
H: 1" = 20' V. I" = 20'
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
1WHInunih FIGURE 10 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
��� 1 0 �0 20 MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
G 0 U P USACE PROJECT REFERENCE IMPROVEMENTS
1"=20'
40 NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SCProposed Eastern Outfall Profile
W
5 LF 8 CPSSP
40 S 0.5% j
40
� ANCH BLt�CK.-(TFP-� 1 '�C I t
MAX. SPACING I .
30
'iSE_E- D T--B- .F. IG 14
_- 30
_ f .
TOP OF EI LKH.E
_..---
o i DOCK SITOP S rRUCTUJRE
20LL f fEXIST G G------ ADE � 5 � - - - N_ 20N g - SP-- LL
LLJ -- — — — — — — — — — — — — -- — - - - -�- - I -- -- - _._uj
_5___5 w
10co
- - -
- m j 10
0 Cj I ' Q
LU
'.
J =
I �
Ua. _ ( I U J
-10 ANLHOR LOCKTYI I
•).._ I I , -10
G
20i O.C. MAX SPACING i..
SEE DETL B QN SH7 14 I I
:
-20
:
I I I
_ 20
o Mn
i rF .0 W • /
1
-30 i i , loco ++ o €�
_ N -30
fCO
—40 I i w
_ _
I :
40
� .85
MHHW. 11
M H'W: 10.87
1 1 +30 1 1 +50 12+00 12+50 13+00
EASTERN OUTFALL
PROFILE
H: 1" - 20' V.- I- = 20'
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
�NGIN RING FIGURE 11 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
1 MARCH 2O08 STORM WATER OUTFALL
' G O U P 0 �:•100, 20 USACE PROJECT REFERENCE IMPROVEMENTS
NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Proposed Eastern Outfall Profile
ift
40 ANCHOR BLOCKS. T P. _ 40
--- --- �- - - ---- - - -- --TE
O C. MAX ,SPACING DETAIL B ON SHT 1.4
30 DOCK STOP 30
65 LF 18''- CPSSP :STRUCTURE __.
S VARIES
20 � _ __ _ . —_EXISTING; PIPE SUPP_ ORTt$ (TYP.) 20
-
LL
i GRACE-- _ 7 5` -O.Cr MAX I SPACING LL
W
W I I I SEE DERAIL K SON SHT 23
10 coco
_ 10
0
0
� z I z 0
J �
U :
J
1 U J
-10 _ I_ _ CPSSP _X._..H PE-� - -10
i I COUPLING j . 105 I LF 18 HDP
I j -
S
VARIES
-20 -
- - - -- --i --- ----- - --- --- ;-- ----- ------- -- - - -- - ._ _
1 TT - � 20
CbMPLETELY BURIED PARTIALLY BURIED : PIARTIALLY BI�RIED PIPELINE INSTALLED j
-30 PIPELINE PIPELINE i I PiP LINE i460VE, GR -30
ADALLED 4 j
_......._I. j
I
-40 ; -40
I
MHHW' 111.85
MMW: :10'87
I
13+00 13+50 14+00 14+50 14+70
EASTERN OUTFALL
PROFILE
H: I" - 20' V. I" = 20'
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
�NGIh RING FIGURE 12 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
G 0 U P 0 10 0 20 USACE PROJECT REFERENCE IMPROVEMENTS
NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Proposed Eastern Outfall Profile
40
40
30
I
30
I � , DOCK; STOP STRUCTURE
20 __... I ! ! PI E
SUPPORT TYP.}
'
i---- -- 2 C EXISTNG GRADE
7 O.
CMAX SPACING
w I i SEE DET! IL K N SHOT. 23 i ; I
I __
10
v MHH 111.85
10
0 — _ r
M LW 0.0o 0
3 Z
-
i
J S J
-10 -10
" ! .
140 i F 18" !HDPE , i l
S = �VARIES!
-20 --- --1 i
C, _
20
-30 f . I ! ! ( o Q
--—!
i L I -30
z j
-40 I
w.
—— ..- -_ - � 40
V� 00:
14+70 15+00 15+50 16+00
EASTERN OUTFALL
PROFILE
H: 1" = 20' V 1" = 20'
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
�NGINING FIGURE 13 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN 8 RESORT
i MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
G n O � 0 1 10 0 20 USACE PROJECT REFERENCE
IMPROVEMENTS
}{ P NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Proposed Eastern Outfall Profile
� 5
MINIMUM CLEARANCE = 0.5'
BACKFILL BETWEEN PIPES WITH CONCRETE CONCRETE OUTFALL
PROTECTION TO REMAIN
(APPROXIMATELY 0.25 CU YDS)
j
I �
EXISTING CONCRETE BULKHEAD
AND CHAIN LINK FENCE � EXISTING 8" HDPE SANITARY
EFFLUENT PIPE
18" SPOOL 18" 90' BEND WTxWT
�
18" 45` BEND WTxWT 10 t W/ THRUST BLOCK
REMOVE EXISTING FILL ERODED AREA WITH
BLOCK SLAB
ELBOW AND THRUST , �—QUARRY SPALL MATERIAL
II
TO 6" BELOW ADJACENT
BEACH GRADE. FILL TO
MATCH ADJACENT GRADE
e USING NATIVE OR
-- -� "HABITAT MIX" MATERIALS
0 00 00000�� (APPROX. 35 CU YDS)
18" TEE WTxPE
REMOVE 8" ABANDONED
EXISTING ROCK WALL EASTERN PIPE ALIGNMENT CONCRETE PIPE
TO BE REPAIRED DETAIL (APPROX. 100 LF)
No SCALE — REMOVE 6" ABANDONED
WOOD STAVE PIPE
18" CPSSP OR (APPRX. 100 LF)
18" HDPE 18" CPSSP
PRECAST REIF. 6" TYP 2 1/2 OR 18" HDPE
CONCRETE 5/16" SST PLATE
ANCHOR BEND TO FIT �� SEE NOTE 2
1/4" FELT 1/2" SST_ ANCHOR BOLTS - z
BETWEEN PIPE — � �
AND CONCRETE DOUBLE NUT
SADDLE 12" MIN
6" MIN-J
2'-10" CONCRETE
8" FOR HDPE ANCHOR ANCHOR BLOCK
12" FOR CPSSP ANCHOR
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL ANCHOR BLOCK
IMPROVEMENTS & DOCK DETAIL / B�
REPLACEMENT NOTES: No SCALE -
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING 1. INSTALL ANCHOR BLOCKS AT ALL JOINTS AND FITTINGS AND
22526 SE 64TH PLACE WITH A MAXIMUM SPACING OF 10' O.C.
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED 2. ANCHORS WILL REQUIRE DIFFERENT BLOCK WIDTHS AND
STORMWATER OUTFALL SADDLE RADIUS' FOR CPSSP & HDPE PIPE. CONTRACTOR TO
EXTENSIONS VERIFY DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION.
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
3. REINFORCING TO BE #3 BARS AT EACH CORNER WITH 2" MIN
COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON COVER.
FIGURE 14 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
��/INI'�11IN/ MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
V t�K V IMPROVEMENTS
USACE PROJECT REFERENCE Proposed Pipe Alignment and
NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Anchor Block Details
EXISTING CMP PIPE AND
T REMOVED
GRATING 0 BE RE 0
EXISTING 18" 18"
CPSSP PIPE 18" HDPE PIPE
IE = 9.30
FINAL RESTORED GRADE
EXISTING GRADE
EXISTING 18" !�
I E = 11.85 --
6" SUMP
6" CSBC
FIRM & UNYIELDING
NATIVE MATERIALS 18" FLANGE INSIDE
DROP STRUCTURE
30"x12" FRP GRATING EXISTING RETAINING WALL
-EXISTING FOOTING
----- FINAL RESTORED GRADE
EXISTING CPSSP PIPE AO EXISTING GRADE
18" HDPE PIPE
3'
NOTES:
1. REINFORCING TO BE A #3 BAR AT EACH CORNER
AND #3 BAR @ 12" OC
WESTERN OUTFALL
2. MINIMUM WALL THICKNESS = 4" DROP STRUCTURE
3. EPDXY DOWEL CORNER BARS INTO EXISTING DETAIL
SCALE: i" = 4' -
RETAINING WALL (MIN. EMBED 6")
4. CONCRETE TO BE CLASS 3000 AS SPECIFIED IN THE
WSDOT STD SPECIFICATIONS
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
�NGIN� ING FIGURE 15 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
I 1►� G O U P IMPROVEMENTS
USACE PROJECT REFERENCE
NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Proposed Details
FORM CONCRETE
REMOVAL OF BOLTS
20 LB. TAR PAPER
TO ALLOW FOR
| |
�— UNDISTURBED EARTH
EVA ION
L
200 # CONCRETE
POURED IN PLACE
ID
______THRUST BLOCK
�
DETAIL
NO SCALE
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
USACE PROJECT REFERENCE IMPROVEMENTS
0 U P NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Proposed Thrust Block Detail
GENERAL NOTE:
1. "HABITAT MIX" GRAVEL SHALL CONSIST OF THE FOLLOWING:
A. GRAVEL SHALL BE CLEAN ROUND "PEA GRAVEL", NOT CRUSHED.
B. AT LEAST 80% OF THE GRAVEL SHALL BE SIZED BETWEEN 1/16" AND 1/4" IN
DIAMETER.
C. GRAVEL SHALL BE SPREAD ALONG THE ENTIRE AREA OF DISTURBANCE TO A UNIFORM
DEPTH OF 6".
D. GRAVELING SHALL BE COMPLETED WITHIN 48 HOURS FOLLOWING BACKFILLING TRENCH.
5' MAtXUND MATERIAL AT PIPE TRENCH
6" MIN
IVE MATERIAL OR HABITAT
GRAVEL
ABLE NATIVE MATERIAL OR
RTED GRAVEL BACKFILL
BEDDING MATERIAL
FIRM & UNYIELDING 2'±
NATIVE MATERIAL --
NOTES:
1. REDUCE CRUSHED ROCK
TYPICAL PIPE TRENCH LAYER THICKNESS WHERE
NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN 6"
SECTION MIN. OF NATIVE SURFACING.
NO SCALE -
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
�NGINRING MARCH 17 of 23 OATOER OUTNN FALL
� RESORT
2O08 STORMWATER
I `11 G 0 U P USACE PROJECT REFERENCE IMPROVEMENTS
NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Proposed Details
0
0 0 0 0 0
o p
14'x10' ARINA FLOAT WITH
SMALL RENTAL BOAT SOLI DECKING
STORA CKS (30'x18'
- & 20'x18')
o APPROX. LIMIT OF 2nd CLASS
TIDE LANDS (-4.5 MI-LW)
RETE�FLOAT(22'x16')
ASONAL SWIM FLOAT ono
(24'x18')
00
00
� EXISTING PILE (TYP.) APPROX. MLLW
MHW & MHHW LIN S AT
G BULKHEAD
r
R'bl
EXISTING DOCK LAYOUT
PLAN 0 40 80 N
SCALE: 1" = 80' — 1"=80'
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
�NGINRING FIGURE 18 of 23 O
MARCH 008 STORMWATER R I OUTFALLSORT
ENC IMPROVEMENTS
—� G A 0 U P NUMBER PROJECT
SO Existing Dock Detail
Exs
12" DIAMETER
CREOSOTE
TREATED PILINGS SOLID PLYWOOD
DECKING
8'
CHEMICALLY
TREATED
Fill,
BATTER BOARD
AND TIE RAIL
STYROFOAM FLOATS
EXISTING DOCK TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION
DETAIL
NO SCALE —
NOTE: THIS DETAIL DEPICTS A CROSS SECTION OF THE
DOCK STEM. THE MARINA FLOAT, SMALL BOAT RENTAL
FLOATS AND THE SEASONAL SWIM FLOAT HAVE SIMILAR
CONSTRUCTION WITH VARIABLE DIMENSIONS AS SHOWN
ON FIG 20
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
�11�I1rublK FIGURE 19 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER oUTFALL
V O U P USACE PROJECT REFERENCE IMPROVEMENTS
NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Details
NOTE: MARINA FLOAT 8' �
STRUCTURE TO BE
REPLACED WITH MATCHING
DIMENSIONS AND NEW
FLOAT MATERIALS
MARINA FLOAT
m
rn I
DOCK STEM—N,\\\
0
10'
MARINA FLOAT
SECTION (N�
NO SCALE -
8'-4„
NOTE: CONCRETE FLOAT
IS EXCLUDED FROM THE
CURRENT PROJECT AND
WILL REMAIN IN ITS
CURRENT CONDITION
0
i
00
y
16'
CONCRETE FLOAT
SECTION
NO SCALE -
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
�NGIN��RING FIGURE 20 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
I �'� �� G iS n 0 II n IMPROVEMENTS
U Y USACE PROJECT REFERENCE
NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Details
lc_x
_ o
I' 368' 232'
o I
SMALL RENTAL BOAT EXISTING 14'x10' MARINA
STORAGE DOCKS TO BE
FLOAT WITH SOLID DECKING
�REPLACED WITH GRATED TO BE REPLACED_
DECK FLOATS (2 EA) � I
APPROX. LIMIT OF 2nd CLASS
(30'x18' & 20'x18') /I TIDE LANDS (-4.5 MLLW)
CONCRETE FLOAT TO BE
RETAINED IN PRESENT
CONDITION (22'x16') 00 Ln- 00
----__---- - SEE PILE ATTACHMENT
SEASONAL SWIM FLOAT TO
BE REPLACED WITH (x) DETAIL M ON FIG 19
GRATED DECK FLOAT `j (TYPICAL)
(24'x18') -- ........._._
Ncv w 00
00
APPROX. MLLW
..................._.............
8" GALVANIZED DOCK
STOP PILES
NOTE: UTILITY SYMBOLS NOT TO SCALE
FOR VISUAL REFERENCE ONLY
0 NEW STEEL PILE
m
o o EXISTING PUMP OUT AND WASH STATION -j-
MHW & MHHW LINE IS AT
NOTE: ALDERBROOK CREEK OUTLET IS EXISTING BULKHEAD
APPROXIMATELY 40' WEST OF THE DOCK
ALIGNMENT —
PROPOSED DOCK LAYOUT
PLAN �� 0 �O8o N
SCALE. 1" = 80' - 1"=80'
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
u �rrn y! FIGURE 21 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
ROT 8EPROJECT
IMPROVEMENTS
NUMBER: NWS007732SO Proposed Details
48'
v
U,
TYPICAL AREAS FOR EACH 48' SECTION THRUFLOW GRATING
382.5 SO FT OF FLOAT FREEBOARD WITH DL 18" GRATING LAYOUT 5/ 4x6 LOWES WOOD
201.3 SO FT GRATING DETAIL rH� GRAIN CHOICE DECK
FREEBOARD WITH DL + LL 11 " NO SCALE
52.6% GRATED AREA #15 PER SO FT LIVE LOAD POLYETHYLENE FLOAT UNITS
>< >
,e \-36"x72"x16" (TYP.) 36x96"x16" (TYP.) 2"x12" PIPE SUPPORT STRINGERS
BETWEEN FLOAT STOPS
------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------
PLAN/PROFILE (—I EXIST BEACH GRADE
NO SCALE -
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER 12"x12" WOOD BEAM
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS FLOAT STOP
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL 8" GALVANIZED STEEL PILING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
�tiGINRING FIGURE 22 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
1�1 �
G O U P 0 „100, 20 USACE PROJECT REFERENCE IMPROVEMENTS
NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Proposed Details
ALTERNATE 5/4x6 CHOICE THRUFLOW GRATING DOWN CENTER
Xj
DECK AND THRUFLOW GRATING 3x10 STRINGERS
3x10 FASCIA 200 STRINGERS
3x10 WALERS
2x12 PIPE SUPPORT STRINGER
12x12 WOOD BEAM FLOAT STOP
POLYETHYLENE FLOAT UNITS
�-8" GALVANIZED STEEL PILING
1'-10 1/2" �� �� �� 18" STORM DRAIN W/ SADDLE CLAMP
12" MIN CLEARANCE PROPOSED SECOND FLOAT
SECTION
12'x12" WOOD BEAM NO SCALE -
FLOAT STOP 2'x12" PIPE SUPPORT STRINGER
SLOPE VARIES STAINLESS STEEL
BOLTS, NUTS,
WASHERS, THREADED
RODS AND ANGLE
BRACKET
EXISTING BEACH /���%:�
GRADE ��/��/i;/� %
18"0 HDPE 9 SST PIPE SUPPORT
SLOPE Z 0.5%
@7.5' O.C.
PIPE SUPPORT FROM DOCK STOP
DETAIL
GALVANIZED ANGLE SCALE: 1" = 4• —
IRON FRAME
1'-2 9/16"
12" DIAMETER
GALVANIZED STEEL PILE
00
PILE ATTACHMENT DOCK
Ln
m
SECTION
NO SCALE -
PILING ROLLER BRACE
(MAINTENANCE FREE HARD PLASTIC)
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAOUAH, WA 98027
A"5-6k- , �NGINRlNG FIGURE 23 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
6 0 PROJECT
REFERENCE
DetailsIMPROVEMENTS
NUMBER: NWS 2007732 SO Proposed
cX
ALDERBROOK RESORT AND SPA
STORMWATER OUTFALLS REPAIR
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENTBIOLOGICAL EVALUATION
Prepared for
NORTH FORTY LODGING,L.L.C.
22526 SE 64 h Place; Suite 210
Issaquah, WA 98027
Prepared by
Allison Reak
Sea-Run Consulting
6531 10th Ave NW
Seattle, WA 98117
Under contract to
Cosmopolitan Engineering Group,Inc. Aq` f u.N Vo- �kA'_r
1.1'7 S q fl Stre_t 0,t�CD( 1a7S
T 2 T0. wA Q$Ko1-i�7ft
December 2007
I
�x5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1. DETERMINATION OF EFFECTS SUMMARY....................................................................................................1
2. BACKGROUND............................................................................................................................................................2
3. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION....................................................................................................3
3.1 EXISTING CONDITIONs...........................................................................................................................................4
3.2 DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION DETAms..................................................................................................................6
4. DESCRIPTION OF THE ACTION AREA............................................................................................................13
5. SPECIES AND HABITAT INFORMATION.........................................................................................................15
5.1 PUGET SOUND CH NOOK SALMON.......................................................................................................................16
5.2 HOOD CANAL SUMMER-RUN CHUM SALMON....................................................................................................17
5.3 PUGET SOUND STEELHEAD AND CRITICAL HABTTAT..........................................................................................18
5.4 COASTAL-PUGET SOUND BULL TROUT...............................................................................................................19
5.5 CRITICAL HABITAT FOR PACIFIC SALMON AND STFF LJffiAn..............................................................................20
5.6 COASTAL-PUGET SOUND BULL TROUT CRITICAL HABITAT...............................................................................20
5.7 BALD EAGLE.........................................................................................................................................................20
5.8 MARBLED MURRELET..........................................................................................................................................22
6. DETERMINATIONS OF EFFECTS.......................................................................................................................22
6.1 EFFECTS ON CI IINOOK SALMON...........................................................................................................................22
6.2 EFFECTS ON CHUM SALMON................................................................................................................................29
6.3 EFFECTS ON PUGET SOUND STEELHEAD AND CRITICAL HABITAT......................................................................36
6.4 EFFECTS ON BULL TROUT....................................................................................................................................42
6.5 EFFECT'S ON CRITICAL HABITAT FOR PACIFIC SALMON AND STEELHEAD..........................................................48
6.6 EFFECTS ON BULL TROUT CRITICAL HABITAT....................................................................................................55
6.7 EFFECTS ON BALD EAGLE....................................................................................................................................60
6.8 EFFECTS ON MARBLED MURRELET......................................................................................................................60
6.9 EFFECTS ON STELLER SEA LION...........................................................................................................................61
6.10 EFFECTS ON HUMPBACK WHALE.........................................................................................................................61
7. CUMULATIVE,INTERRELATED,AND INTERDEPENDENT EFFECTS.................................................61
8. CONSERVATION MEASURES..............................................................................................................................62
9. REFERENCES............................................................................................................................................................64
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Gutfalls Repair i December 2007
Biological AssessmentlBiological Evaluation
�S
TABLES
1. SUMMARY OF DETERMINATIONS OF EFFECTS FOR LISTED AND PROPOSED THREATENED
AND ENDANGERED SPECIES AND CRITICAL HABITAT.........................................................2
2. DETAILS OF EXISTING RESORT OUTFALLS.................................................................................................7
3. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION DETAILS................................................................................10
APPENDICES
A ALDERBROOK RESORT RENOVATION 2002 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
B PROJECT AREA PHOTOGRAPHS
C JARPA CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair ii December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
LIST OF ACRONYMS
BA Biological Assessment
BE Biological Evaluation
DPS Distinct Population Segment
ESA Endangered Species Act
ESU Evolutionary Significant Unit
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service
PCE primary constituent element
PHS Priority Habitat and Species
TES Threatened and/or Endangered Species
WDFW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Ow alls Repair iff December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
JCS
1. DETERMINATION OF EFFECTS SUMMARY
A Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation (BABE) was prepared by Sea-Run Consulting to
determine potential effects of the Alderbrook Resort and Spa stormwater outfalls repair on federally
listed threatened or endangered species and their designated critical habitats in southern Hood Canal,
Washington. The federal action that triggered consultation in consideration of the Endangered
Species Act(ESA) is a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) section 404 Individual Permit for
dredging and filling in the maintenance of outfall structures and the presence of federally listed
threatened species and designated critical habitat within the action area. Analyses of potential
impacts were based on a review of plans for the proposed action, a site evaluation of existing habitat
conditions, current and historical distribution data available for each species, and personal
communications with local biologists.
The fish species evaluated for this proposed project include Puget Sound Chinook salmon, Hood
Canal summer-run chum salmon, Puget Sound bull trout, and Puget Sound steelhead. Federally
designated critical habitat evaluated for this proposed project includes nearshore marine habitat for
Puget Sound Chinook salmon, Hood Canal summer-run chum salmon, and Puget Sound bull trout.
Designated critical habitat for Puget Sound steelhead is in development; for this BABE,habitat was
considered to be similar to critical habitat for the other marine salmonids in this project's action area.
The analysis concluded that the outfalls repair project may affect, but would not likely adversely
affect any listed fish species or designated critical habitat, because construction-related effects on
fish species and their critical habitats would be either avoided by construction design and timing, or
effects would be short-term and/or insignificant. The proposed action was determined to have a
long-term beneficial effect on all listed species and critical habitats as a result of intertidal habitat
restoration from 1) reduction in frequency of erosive stormwater discharges on intertidal beach, 2)
improved mixing of stormwater with marine water by relocation of the outfalls, 3)removal of debris
from the beach,4)modifications made to the design of a floating dock,and 4)replacement of eroded
sediment to restore the beach to natural elevations. Proposed habitat improvements will result in the
restoration of 0.14 ac of intertidal habitat.
In addition, the proposed project action may affect, but would not likely adversely affect bald
eagle and marbled murrelet because their breeding territories are not documented within 1.5 miles of
the action area and their intertidal habitat use at the project site is insignificant.
Online information about marine mammals from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) Fisheries Office of Protected Resources-Marine Mammals website indicates that
humpback whale, Steller sea lion, and Southern Resident killer whale are not known to occur in
Hood Canal.
A review of the determinations of effects for each species is summarized in Table 1.
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 1 December 2007
Biological AssessmentlBiological Evaluation
�x5
Table 1. Summary of Determinations of Effects for listed and proposed threatened and endangered species
and critical habitat.
Common name
Scientific name ESA Status' Life Stages Considered Effects Determination
Chinook salmon(Puget Sound) T Marine Phases May Affect,NLAA2
Oncorhynchus tshawytscha
Chum salmon(Hood Canal summer run) T Marine Phases May Affect,NLAA
O. keta
Critical habitat for Pacific salmon and trout D Nearshore Marine May Affect,NLAA
Bull trout T Marine Phases May Affect,NLAA
Salvelinus confluentus
Critical habitat for bull trout D Nearshore Marine May Affect,NLAA
Puget Sound Steelhead and critical habitat T Marine Phases May Affect,NLAA
O.mykiss
Bald Eagle T Foraging May Affect,NLAA
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
Marbled Murrelet&critical habitat T Foraging May Affect,NLAA
Brachyramphus marmoratus
'T=Threatened,D--Designated
2NLAA=Not Likely to Adversely Affect
2. BACKGROUND
As part of a proposed outfalls repair project by the Alderbrook Resort and Spa(resort), the resort is
seeking regulatory approval from USACE for a section 404 Individual Permit to repair two
stormwater outfall structures. Because this proposed action is in a location with federally listed
species and designated critical habitat, authorization from USACE requires compliance with section
7 of the Endangered Species Act(ESA), including preparation of a Biological Assessment(BA) and
consultation with NOAA Fisheries and the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service(USFWS).
This BABE addresses the potential effects of the proposed outfalls repair project on six federally
listed,threatened species and associated critical habitat(see Table 1). It also addresses the potential
direct and indirect effects on critical habitat and the forage base of salmonids. The assessment is
based upon literature reviews, discussions with resource agency staff and project designers,a review
of WDFW's Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) database, site photos, and notes from site visits.
Biological conditions were noted during a site visit by a fish biologist on April 17,2006. Supporting
information was also obtained from a 2002 Biological Assessment prepared for the resort
renovation, highway relocation, and stream restoration project (Appendix A) that was completed in
2004.
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 2 December 2007
Biological AssessmentlBiological Evaluation
�}c5
3. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
The resort has two permitted stormwater outfalls that currently discharge treated stormwater onto
the upper intertidal area of the Hood Canal shoreline. The discharge from each outfall has
eroded a large area of intertidal beach to the edge of nearby oyster beds. Two intertidal channels
created by discharge scour are the result of relatively high stormwater discharges directly on the
dry beach when tides are lower than approximately 10 ft MLLW,resulting in the loss of natural
substrate and suppression of the normal intertidal upper range of the oyster beds by a horizontal
distance of 25 to 65 feet. Site photos of the shoreline structures and general intertidal conditions
are in Appendix B.
This project proposes to 1)restore the beach to pre-erosion elevations throughout the upper
intertidal area of the oyster beds, 2)modify and extend both outfalls to reduce beach erosion and
improve water quality, 3)modify the floating dock to accommodate one outfall extension and
recover intertidal habitat, 4)repair a rock wall on adjacent property damaged by the erosion, and
5)remove old debris exposed by the erosion. Repair of one outfall will require the replacement
of the existing dock to re-route the pipeline between oyster beds. Detailed drawings of all
existing and proposed structures and a vicinity map,taken from the Joint Aquatic Resources
Project Application(JARPA), are included in Appendix C.
The proposed stormwater outfalls repair project will be restricted to the outfalls and other in-water
structures and substrates as described above. No other changes to the adjacent upland area or
stormwater collection and treatment system are proposed. In-water work for this proposed project
includes the following elements:
• Restoration of 0.14 ac of eroded beach with native sediment or similar-sized imported
material.
• Temporary disturbance of about 0.12 acre(ac)of beach to bury new stormwater pipe.
• Removal of over 200 ft2 of abandoned pipes and additional concrete debris from beach.
• Net gain of 2,688 ft'(0.06 ac)of fine-grained intertidal habitat through reduction of existing
styrofoam dock"grounding"footprint by 87.5 percent,through the use of smaller,discrete
polyethylene floatation tubs.
• Removal of 21 creosote-treated wood piles(12-in-dia)and replacement with 21 galvanized
steel piles(12-in-dia).
• Installation of about 950 feet(ft)of new stormwater outfall pipe.
• Construction of a concrete drop structure(5.5 cy)for the western outfall.
• Construction of 0.25 cy concrete separator between one stormwater pipe and the resort sewer
line.
• Filling of pipeline trench foundation with 45 cubic yards(cy)of gravel and bedding material,
three concrete thrust blocks,and 76 concrete anchors.
• Filling and covering of pipeline trench upper layers and all eroded areas of beach with native
beach sediment or similar-sized imported material, spread over 0.14 ac.
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Owfalls Repair 3 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
• Removal/replacement of 10,136 square feet(sq ft)of existing chemically preserved wood
and solid styrofoam-slab floating dock and replacement with recycled wood-composite
supports,grated decking,and polyethylene floatation tubs.
• Increase of light transmission(52 percent)through dock by replacing 5,234 ft2(0.12 ac)of
solid decking with grated decking.
3.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS
The resort is located north of SR 106 along the south shore of Hood Canal, east of the town of
Union in Mason County, Washington(Appendix C,Figures 1 and 2). The current stormwater
collection and discharge system was upgraded and reconstructed in 2003-2004 to meet
Washington Department of Ecology's 2000 Stormwater Management Manual for Western
Washington,to discharge site stormwater through two outfalls at the edge of the upper intertidal
area where the resort upland structures terminate at the beach. The eastern outfall drains the
eastern two-thirds of the resort and the western outfall drains the western third of the resort
(Appendix C, Figure 3). Details of the existing outfalls and beach are summarized in Table 2.
Table 2. Details of existing resort outfalls.
Eastern Outfall Western Outfall
Location N47.348055 W 123.066944 N47.348055 W 123.068889
Pipe diameter 18 in 15 in
Discharge elevation 12 ft MLLW 11.9 ft MLLW
Bulkhead elevation--base 9.2 ft MLLW 10.9 ft MLLW
Bulkhead elevation--top 15 ft MLLW 15 ft MLLW
Distance from bulkhead tooysters 112 ft 2.2 ft MIL 75 ft 4.2 ft MLL
Part of year outfall is exposed on 72% 100%
beach
The Alderbrook Resort and Spa's stormwater collection and treatment system consists of two
drainage areas that discharge through the eastern and western outfalls. Stormwater discharge
volumes were estimated at 1.5 MG/yr for both outfalls, assuming an average annual rainfall of
68 inches.
Stormwater from the west side of the resort is collected from the west parking area, a service
drive,cottage roof drains, and large areas of landscaping. Stormwater is collected in catch
basins and routed through a Vortechs®oil/water separator and then through an underground
sand filter before release via the west outfall. Although the west drainage area includes
Alderbrook Creek,most of the creek's water comes from seeps and runoff from the grassy slope
on the south side of the highway. Stormwater from the resort was separated from the creek
drainage as part of the creek restoration plan to control creek flows and protect salmon habitat.
Stormwater from the east side of the resort is collected from the hotel entrance drive,roof drains,
adjacent grounds, the east parking area,about 1,700 ft of SR 106, and part of the grassy slope
south of the highway. The grassy slope comprises the largest drainage area of the east outfall
(about 4.57 ac) and also contributes runoff year-round from numerous natural seeps (about
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 4 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
�xs
0.48 ac). Thus, "baseline"stormwater discharge always consists of a constant volume of clean
surface water from seeps plus a variable volume of clean runoff from the grassy slope.
On the east side of the resort, stormwater runoff from SR 106 drains into engineered treatment
swales along the road that consist of grass-covered channels filled with sand and gravel. The
bioswales slow the runoff, settle particulates, and detain oils and grease. The stormwater is then
routed to an engineered detention pond that consists of a deep basin filled with sand and organic
material (acting as a filtering medium), covered with shrubs and trees for additional biological
treatment. During extreme storms,the first several inches of rainfall (i.e., first flush plus part of
the ascending hydrograph) is detained,treated, and released,but later inflow may fill the basin
and overflow into a bypass pipe that discharges via the east outfall. In any case,the first flush of
stormwater, carrying the most pollutants, is treated, and any subsequent flows that are bypassed
can be considered clean.
Stormwater runoff from the east parking area is routed into a biotreatment detention basin before
being released to the east outfall. Runoff from the resort entrance drive is collected in a catch
basin and treated through a Vortechs®oil/water separator before being released to the east
outfall.
3.1.1 Eastern Outfall
The eastern outfall lies between the resort bulkhead, the resort sanitary sewer pipe, and a five-foot-
high stone wall on an adjacent property. The outfall is an 18-inch-diameter corrugated polyethylene
storm sewer pipe (CPSSP) standpipe extending 32 in above the adjacent beach grade and a concrete
thrust block (Appendix B, Photo 2). The elevation of the adjacent bulkhead base is 9.2 ft MLLW.
The elevation of the standpipe opening is about 12.2 ft MLLW. The sanitary sewer pipe is covered
by a 3-ft-wide concrete topping slab to protect the pipe and counteract pipe buoyancy.
Prior to discharge, the stormwater flow is collected and directed through an oil/water separator into
retention ponds, bioswales and infiltration facilities in accordance with Ecology's 2000 Stormwater
Design Manual. The flow rate for the one-per-25-year storm is estimated at 7.5 cubic feet per
second (cfs). Because the outfall overflows the standpipe at about 12 ft MLLW, onto mostly
exposed beach, a deep channel has eroded about 27 cy of beach substrate from the standpipe
seaward. The channel is about 50 ft long, 5 ft deep,and 6.5 ft wide near the standpipe.
Within the eroded channel were found 50 ft of an abandoned six-in-dia wood stave pipe, 50 ft of an
abandoned 8-in-dia concrete pipe, about 25 ft of plastic conduit, and concrete and rock debris. A
section of the adjacent property's stone wall that was undermined by the erosion collapsed into the
eroded channel.
Oyster beds (certified for harvest on the resort's Class 2 tidelands) are about 112 ft from the
bulkhead at an approximate elevation of 2.2 ft MLLW. In most other areas,the oyster beds are 25 to
35 ft from the bulkhead at maximum elevations of 6 to 8 ft MLLW.
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 5 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
EX S
Additional details about site conditions, including the recent construction of the stormwater
collection system and restoration of Alderbrook Creek, are described in a series of permit
applications, including a detailed SEPA Environmental Checklist and a Biological Assessment
prepared in 2002 in support of a resort renovation and highway realignment project. Information
from the Alderbrook Resort Renovation Biological Assessment (Engineering Services Associates
and Environmental Mariculture Services 2002)was used where noted in this BABE. A copy of the
2002 BA is included in Appendix A.
3.1.2 Western Outfall
The western outfall is located about 510 ft west of the eastern outfall and about 75 ft from the west
property line. The western outfall is a 15-in-dia CPSSP pipe connected to a short section of
15-in-dia corrugated metal pipe(CMP),with an invert elevation at 11.85 ft MLLW. The CMP has a
45 degree miter cut end with a debris barrier constructed of aluminum bars. The CMP emerges from
a 2.5-ft-high concrete bulkhead at about 11.9 ft MLLW(invert elevation).
Prior to discharge, stormwater passes through a VortechsO oil/water separator and a sand filtration
treatment system, which was designed and permitted in accordance with Ecology's 2000
Stormwater Manual. The peak flow from a one-per-25-year storm event is estimated at 5.7 cfs.
Because the outfall discharges at MHHW, onto mostly exposed beach, a channel has undercut the
bulkhead to a vertical distance of 18 in and eroded about 23 cy along a swath about 45 ft wide.
Oyster beds (certified for harvest and owned by the resort) downstream of this discharge are
approximately 75 feet from the bulkhead at an elevation of 4.2 ft MLLW.
3.2 DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION DETAILS
To reduce beach erosion,increase stormwater mixing with Hood Canal marine waters, and minimize
construction impacts on existing oyster beds,the eastern outfall will be extended to-3 ft MLLW and
the western outfall will be extended to -3.5 ft MLLW. Both outfall extensions will be constructed
entirely on resort-owned tidelands. Detailed engineering and construction drawings are provided in
Appendix C.
The eastern outfall pipe will be extended approximately 260 feet parallel to the seawall before
turning waterward under the existing dock for 289 feet to an elevation of-3.0 ft MLLW. Currently,
the eastern outfall is submerged about 28 percent of the year, which only partially limits the
frequency of potentially erosive discharge events. The proposed outfall depth will be submerged by
tides above-2 ft MLLW(about 100 percent of the year), which will reduce the frequency of erosive
discharges. The purpose of this route is to 1) reduce beach erosion by extending the outfall into a
deeper area where it will be submerged most of the year, 2) increase stormwater mixing with Hood
Canal marine water, 3)avoid extending the pipe through existing oyster beds,and 4)keep the outfall
on resort property.
Similarly,the western outfall pipe will be extended approximately 375 feet from the bulkhead to an
elevation of-3.5 ft MLLW. This will increase the amount of time the outfall will be submerged to
almost 100 percent of the year. The purpose of this extension is to 1) extend the outfall into a
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 6 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
�xs
deeper area where it will be submerged most of the year(to reduce erosion), 2) increase stormwater
mixing with Hood Canal marine water, and 3) keep the outfall on resort property. Although this
extension would require construction within oyster beds, discussions with Dan Guy (NWS) in the
fall of 2007 concluded that long-term benefits to federally listed threatened and endangered species
outweighed the short-term construction impacts on critical habitat and oyster beds.
In addition, over 50 cy of native sediment and washed sand and gravel of similar size and
composition will be added to the upper six inches of the beach to restore natural grades.
To minimize construction impacts on fish and critical habitat, most excavation and backfill will be
conducted during low tides. Construction will be scheduled after September, so that access to the
resort, waterfront, and water-dependent facilities are not closed during the peak season. This will
necessitate that some work be conducted at night,during minus tides.
Proposed construction details are listed in Table 3.
Table 3. Proposed construction details.
Construction Detail Eastern Outfall Western Outfall
Outfall extension length(including fittings) 590 ft(268 ft along bulkhead+ 330 ft
322 ft under dock)
Length of buried pipe 350 ft 270 ft
Length of exposed pipe 190 ft 60 ft
Length of exposed pipe resting on substrate 50 ft(-90 ft2) 55 ft(-100 ft-)
Length of exposed pipe elevated 4"over substrate 140 ft 5 ft
Proposed discharge invert elevation -3 ft MLLW -3.5 ft MLLW
Part of year proposed outfalls will be submerged —100% — 100%
Repaired/improved dock 1,137 ft (10,136 fe)
Number of creosote piles replaced with galvanized 21 piles
steel piles(— 12-in-dia)
Beach debris to be removed —200 ft2 --
Quarry spall under 6 inches of native material to fill 27 cy
eroded channel
Beach surface restoration with native material 8 cy 23 cy
3.2.1 Eastern Outfall Construction Plan
Most equipment access and staging for the eastern outfall construction will be provided between the
resort parking lot and the beach through the adjacent property to the east. A construction easement
agreement will be obtained from the adjacent property owner and verbal agreement has already been
obtained. Some site access and materials (e.g., dock sections,piling,pre-built pipe sections)will be
brought via boat and barge.
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 7 December 2007
Biological Assessment✓Biological Evaluation
clamshell dredge may be used to excavate and backfill the trench as a contingency. Beach
material will be sidecast along the alignment and used to backfill the upper trench. Any
excavated material left over will be used to restore the eroded beach to a natural profile.
At high tide,the pre-built pipe section will be brought by barge to the site and placed along the
alignment using a float-and-sink operation. Installation of this portion of the outfall will be
staged entirely within the footprint of the existing dock(8 ft wide). No equipment will be
allowed outside of this corridor at low tide.
The float-and-sink operation consists of capping both ends of the pipe to entrap air inside. In the
water,the entrapped air will provide flotation so that the pipe can be floated into place and
positioned using pulleys and tug boats. Once in its final position, water will be allowed to fill
the pipe while air is slowly released, sinking the pipe into the trench. The end caps can then be
removed from both ends of the pipe.
All pipe will be installed with precast concrete anchors to counter the pipe's natural buoyancy.
Along the bulkhead and under most of the dock,the pipe and anchors will be buried below
grade. A six-inch layer of crushed gravel or similar bedding material will be placed below and
to the sides of the new pipe to provide structural support. Small gravel and/or sidecast native
material will be used to backfill the upper half of the pipe trench. Habitat mix or native beach
material will be used for final backfill and final grading. Only native material and/or habitat mix
will be used to cover or fill the top six inches of the beach.
Under the deeper part of the dock, about 190 ft of pipe will not be buried,but will be suspended
at least four inches above grade on 19 concrete anchors. (Elevating the pipe slightly above the
seafloor will minimize the impairment of the littoral sediment drift by the pipeline and reduce
horizontal drag forces on the side of the pipeline from currents.} These anchors will be partially
buried to a depth of six inches by using a small water hose to "jet" substrate out from under each
anchor. Each anchor will displace less than one cubic foot of substrate.
After the pipeline is installed along the dock alignment, new galvanized steel piling will be
vibrated into place. The creosote piles will be removed and replaced in approximately the same
locations by steel piles of equal or smaller diameter. The new dock piles will be installed
adjacent to,but outboard of the old piles to accommodate the attachment collars. Some piles
may be shifted to better support dock sections. All piling removal and installation will be
completed using vibratory hammers to minimize the noise impacts. Any piles that cannot be
removed will be cut off below the mudline level and covered with clean fill. All creosote piles
will be disposed of at a suitable upland disposal facility. All removal and replacement of piles
will be conducted by barge at high tide. No pile driving equipment will be allowed to anchor in
oyster beds or ground on the beach.
After the new piles are in place,the dock and all attached floats will be replaced at the same
location and within the same footprint. Dock components will be assembled in sections off site
and floated into place above the pipeline alignment during high tide. The replacement dock will
be constructed from a recycled wood-composite material (e.g., Trex®). Replacement details are
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Ouy'alls Repair 9 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
�xs
shown in Appendix C. About 52 percent of the decking will consist of expanded composite
grating to allow greater transmission of light through the dock. The old Styrofoam slab flotation
will be replaced with small polyethylene tubs configured to fit around the new pipeline. The
flotation tubs will also be designed to eliminate most(87.5 percent) of the dock area that
currently rests on the beach at low tide, recovering about 2,700 ft2 of substrate. About 5,234 ft2
(0.12 ac)of grated decking will replace the old solid decking to improve marine habitat through
increased light transmission.
3.2.2 East Beach Restoration
The restoration of the existing eroded channels will include the removal of the abandoned pipes
(over 100 ft of wood stave pipe and concrete pipe), concrete and rock debris, and plastic conduit,
and the demolition of an existing cantilevered concrete block at the end of the outfall standpipe.
The collapsed section of the adjacent property's rock wall will be replaced in-kind. The area
around the new open-ended tee will be backfilled with quarry spalls,to protect the shoreline
from stormwater erosion during overflow events, and capped with six inches of imported habitat
mix,to restore the beach surface. The eroded channel extending from the existing standpipe will
be filled with quarry spalls (27 cy) covered with a six-in-deep layer of either native material or
habitat mix(8 cy)for a total fill of approximately 35 cy. Native beach material and/or habitat
mix that matches the existing surface grain size will be used to restore surface grades east of the
floating dock.
Final site grading will restore 0.14 ac of eroded intertidal beach to its former natural elevations and
condition. Dock reconstruction will recover about 2,700 if of substrate under the dock from
grounding and increase light transmission through 5,234 f of new dock. Flotation improvements
will allow water and aquatic organisms to circulate under and between the floats. Replacement of
creosote-treated wood piles with steel piles will eliminate the release of creosote tars and oils in the
intertidal.
3.2.3 Western Outfall
Most equipment access and staging for the western outfall construction will be provided by the
resort along the emergency access road that ends at the existing outfall structure. Some site
access and materials (e.g., dock sections,piling,pre-built pipe sections)will be brought via boat
and barge. No equipment will be driven on the beach across the Alderbrook Creek estuary.
The western outfall extension will be connected to the existing outfall at the bulkhead. The
connection will consist of a cast-in-place concrete drop structure attached to the existing
concrete bulkhead. The drop structure will consist of approximately 5.5 cy of concrete. The
concrete will be placed during an extended low tide to maximize curing time prior to tidal
inundation. The existing outfall grating and pipe, will be cut flush with the bulkhead and a new
drop structure will be cast around it,with a new pipe connection(18-in-dia HDPE, invert
elevation at 7.8 ft MLLW)buried below grade at the bottom of the structure. A 12-by 30-in
grate will cover an overflow opening near the top of the structure to release stormwater onto the
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 10 December 2007
Biological AssessmentlBiological Evaluation
GCS
beach when flows exceed the conveyance capacity of the new outfall or the pipe is blocked. No
data are available to predict overflow frequencies or volumes. Construction of this section will
take one day.
The western outfall will be extended from the existing outfall approximately 330 ft to an outlet
invert elevation of-3.5 ft MLLW. About 270 ft of pipe will be buried and 60 ft will be partially
to fully exposed.
Prior to alignment excavation in the dry,the allowable construction corridor(a maximum 25-ft
width)will be marked through the oyster beds to help the contractor minimize construction
impacts. The trench will be excavated using a small rubber-tracked(or similar) excavator.
Beach material will be sidecast along the alignment and used to backfill the upper trench. At
deeper elevations during high tide, a clamshell dredge may be used to excavate and backfill the
trench as a contingency. Any excavated material left over will be used to restore the eroded
beach to a natural profile.
At high tide,the pre-built pipe section will be brought by barge to the site and placed along the
alignment using a float-and-sink operation. The float-and-sink operation consists of capping
both ends of the pipe to entrap air inside. In the water,the entrapped air will provide flotation so
that the pipe can be floated into place and positioned using pulleys and tug boats. Once in its
final position,water will be allowed to fill the pipe while air is slowly released, sinking the pipe
into the trench. The end caps can then be removed from both ends of the pipe.
All pipe will be installed with precast concrete anchors to counter the pipe's natural buoyancy.
Each anchor will displace less than one cubic foot of substrate. A six-in layer of crushed gravel
or similar bedding material will be placed below and to the sides of the new pipe to provide
structural support. Small gravel and/or sidecast native material will be used to backfill the upper
half of the pipe trench. Habitat mix or native beach material will be used for final backfill and
final grading. Only native material and/or habitat mix will be used to cover or fill the top six
inches of the beach.
Along most of the alignment, the pipe and anchors will be buried below grade. The pipe will
emerge from the substrate and be partially buried for about 60 ft. The last five ft will rest on the
substrate.
3.2.4 West Beach Restoration
Approximately 23 cy of native material and/or habitat mix will be used to re-grade the erosion
that has occurred on the beach in the vicinity of the existing outfall. This fill will restore native
grades along 25 ft of each side of the existing outfall, and up to 50 ft away from the bulkhead
wall.
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 11 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
&XS
3.2.5 Environmental Considerations
For the protection of Chinook salmon, summer-run chum salmon, steelhead, and bull trout, all in-
water activities will take place during the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' (USACE) recommended
combined in-water work window of July 16 to February 15. Any other related construction
activities that may be performed out of the water (defined as those activities occurring above
extreme high water, interpreted as the highest estimated tide or 15 ft MLLW for this location) may
take place at any time. In-water work to attach the replacement section of the dock,using hand tools
only,may take place at any time of year.
Construction of the proposed stormwater outfalls repairs will result in the temporary disturbance of
about 0.53 ac of intertidal beach area; however, only 0.02 ac (less than four percent) lies between 4
and-4 ft MLLW,at elevations that are most important to foraging juvenile salmon.
At the western outfall, about 100 ft2(55 linear ft) of intertidal substrate will be permanently covered
by the seaward end of the pipe that will rest on the beach. The last 5 ft of pipe will be elevated by an
anchor block above the substrate. About 6 ft2 of substrate at M14HW will be covered by a new
concrete drop structure that will connect the upland drainage pipe to the new western outfall
extension and provide an overflow opening.
For the eastern outfall, about 90 ft2 (50 linear ft) of intertidal substrate will be permanently covered
by the middle section of pipe under the dock that will rest on the beach. The rest of the pipe will
either be buried or elevated four inches above grade. The proposed eastern outfall will not present a
significant environmental change from existing conditions because the exposed length of pipe will
be located in an area that is covered entirely by the existing dock,which rests on the substrate at low
tides. Further offshore, but still under the dock, the pipe will be elevated so as not to affect
longshore currents, sediment drift,and fish movement.
About 52 percent of the existing dock's solid wood decking will be replaced with composite grating,
to increase light transmission and enhance benthic productivity under the dock. This grated area
(5,234 ft2 or 0.12 ac)will improve benthic productivity under the new dock.
An intertidal area of about 0.14 ac that has been continually eroded by the outfalls will be restored to
natural elevations. About 200 ft2 of artificial hard substrate(debris)will be removed from the upper
intertidal to compensate for new structures/impervious surface in the intertidal. An additional 2,688
ft2 (0.06 ac) of substrate will revert to productive habitat following the replacement/reconfiguration
of flotation supporting the existing dock. Altogether, the proposed action will recover intertidal
habitat, resulting in a net gain of 2,600 ft2 of fine-grained intertidal beach. The proposed
improvements will restore water circulation,remove creosote,improve access to foraging habitat for
juvenile salmonids, improve salmon migration and escape passage under the dock, and allow the
beach to be recolonized by marine invertebrates, including oysters and other shellfish. Measurable
environmental benefits are listed in Table 4.
Table 4. Environmental benefits.
Environmental Benefit
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 12 December 2007
Biological Assessment✓Biological Evaluation
The existing 18-in-dia stormwater discharge standpipe will be removed along with the existing
thrust block and the collapsed stone wall. An 18-in-dia corrugated polyethylene storm sewer pipe
(CPSSP) tee will be installed connecting to the existing corrugated polyethylene storm sewer pipe
penetrating the bulkhead wall. The open-ended vertical tee section will be at the same elevation as
the existing stand-pipe (12.2 ft MLLW). The open tee section will release stormwater onto the
beach when flows exceed the conveyance capacity of the new outfall or the pipe is blocked. No data
are available to predict overflow frequencies or volumes.
The pipe will be extended under the beach surface approximately 10 ft beyond the bulkhead and
turned 90 degrees to pass under the existing sanitary sewer outfall. A thrust block,using about
1 cy of concrete, will be installed to stabilize the pipe at the bend. Approximately 6 in of vertical
separation between the stormwater and sewer pipes will be maintained by 0.25 cy of new
concrete. The concrete will be placed during an extended low tide to maximize curing time prior
to tidal inundation. Construction of this section will take one to two days.
Between the sewer line and the dock, 260 ft of stormwater outfall pipe will be installed parallel
to the existing bulkhead,below grade, at a 0.5 percent slope. A series of concrete anchors will
be attached to the pipe every 20 ft, for a total of about 44 anchors for the eastern outfall. The
pipeline alignment will be 10 ft from the bulkhead to prevent undermining of the bulkhead
foundation. Two 45-degree bends and 40 ft of CPSSP will be used to transition the pipeline
from the bulkhead alignment to the dock alignment. Each bend will require a thrust block to be
installed in place to counteract the hydraulic forces within the pipeline. Each thrust block will
consist of approximately 1 cy of concrete.
Pipeline excavation depths will range from 3 to 6 ft. A trench box will be used for pipeline
construction to provide temporary shoring. The edge of existing oyster beds will be flagged to
help workers avoid the beds during pipeline construction.
From the landward end of the dock, 95 ft of CPSSP will be coupled with 18-in-dia high-density
polyethylene (HDPE)pipe and extend about 195 ft from 7.5 to -3 ft MLLW,terminating at an
open-ended outlet. To construct the pipeline without digging through oyster beds,the eastern
outfall pipe alignment will run under the centerline of the existing dock. The dock will be
dismantled and removed from the proposed pipe corridor. The dock will be disconnected from
the existing pilings and utilities(i.e., water, electric, sewage pump-out station),transferred to a
barge, and removed from the project site. The four attached floats will be removed and replaced
at the same time as the dock. The existing creosote-treated wood piling will be vibrated out of
the substrate and transferred by crane to a barge. Piles that break during removal will be cut off
below mudline and covered with clean fill. All dock materials not suitable for re-use will be
disposed of at a permitted upland waste facility.
Along the dock alignment, a trench will be excavated from the bulkhead at low tide to
approximately 6 ft MLLW and shored with a trench box. Prior to alignment excavation in the
dry, the allowable construction corridor(a maximum 25-ft width)will be marked through the
oyster beds to help the contractor minimize construction impacts. The trench will be excavated
using a small rubber-tracked(or similar)excavator. At deeper elevations during high tide, a
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 8 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
Repaired/improved dock materials 1,137 ft (10,136 ft2)
Number of creosote piles replaced with 21 piles
galvanized steel piles(— 12-in-dia)
Reduction in dock grounding footprint 87.5% (2,688 ft2 recovered)
Reduction in shading 52% (5,234 ft2 recovered)
Beach debris to be removed —200 ft2
Net gain in fine-grained habitat —2,600 ft2
Beach profile to be restored 6,100 ftz(0.14 ac)
Net gain in fine-grained habitat —2,600 ft2
4. DESCRIPTION OF THE ACTION AREA
The action area comprises the resort property and the adjacent marine waters and substrate of Hood
Canal within one-half mile. The resort is a 17.4-acre facility located on the south shore of Hood
Canal,in Township 22N,Range 3W, Section 33, 1.5 miles east of Union, Washington(Appendix C,
Figure 2).
The shoreline in the action area consists of a broad intertidal and shallow subtidal mud/sand flat that
terminates at a two- to five-foot high concrete bulkhead supporting grass-covered fill and several
buildings, including rental cabins and an enclosed swimming pool (Appendix B, Photo 1). The
bulkhead is discontinuous for about 150 ft around the mouth of Alderbrook Creek.
Key structures in the action area consist of the two stormwater outfalls that are the focus of this
repair project, two concrete bulkheads that define the upper intertidal edge of the resort lawn and
pool building,a floating dock and moorage float,and a rock wall on the adjacent property east of the
action area. Currently, the stormwater outfalls discharge stormwater from the upland facilities
through east and west outlets, through a standpipe (Appendix B, Photo 2) and concrete bulkhead
(Appendix B, Photo 5), respectively. Because the outlets are relatively high in the intertidal (invert
elevations at MHIIW ), stormwater discharges have eroded large areas of beach substrate at a
relatively high frequency. Erosion is greatest whenever tides are lower than the outfalls, which
occurs fairly frequently (i.e., 72 percent of the year at the eastern outfall and over 95 percent of the
year at the western outfall). The frequency of discharges at lower tides has resulted in severe erosion
immediately downgradient from the outfalls, and lesser erosion in conical swaths extending further
down the beach. Although the conical areas of erosion do not result in channels, frequent substrate
disturbance has prevented successful colonization by shellfish and other small invertebrates,
resulting in surrounding areas devoid of shellfish.
In the center of the resort shoreline,an eight-ft-wide floating dock extends 530 ft from the bulkhead
to depths around-15 ft MLLW. Perpendicular to the offshore end of the dock is a float used for
transient moorage and sewage pump-out. Several smaller floats with water-related functions
(marina office, kayak rentals, swimming) are attached. The floats that are part of this proposed
action are built of pressure-treated wood over solid slabs of styrofoam, attached to creosote-treated
wood piles. (One small kayak float is concrete;it will not be changed by this project.)
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 13 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
�s
A small stream, called Alderbrook Creek, crosses the resort facility and discharges onto the beach
immediately west of the dock. WDFW records show Alderbrook Creek as Type 4 (or Type Np)
that supports cutthroat trout, although the records are unclear about the presence of historic
spawning habitat. In 2003,the creek was the subject of an extensive restoration project to enhance
salmonid habitat by restoring substrate, opening access to upstream habitat, and creating additional
spawning and rearing habitat in the middle and lower reaches for anadromous salmonids. A limited
fish stocking proposed.effort was ro osed. Recent WDFW records do not indicate whether the current
cutthroat run consists of stocked fish or wild strays.
Marine biological resources in the action area, identified by WDFW, include National Wetland
Inventory estuarine intertidal wetlands(extending along the shoreline from the upper intertidal to the
waterward edge of the moorage float), resident anadromous fish (cutthroat trout), Pacific oysters,
and Dungeness crab (WDFW 2006a, b, and c). Although surf smelt spawn along beaches within a
mile of the action area (WDFW 2006c), no spawning areas were identified in the action area—
possibly because suitable spawning elevations from 7 ft MLLW to MHHW have been covered or
filled along most of this shoreline (Appendix B, General Features and Habitats Map). A large
Pacific herring holding area is found along much of south Hood Canal within the Great Bend;
WDFW 2006d on the south shoreline
however, no holding or spawning areas were identified by ( ) ,
including the action area. The absence of suitable aquatic vegetation may be a reason that herring do
not spawn along the south shore.
Aquatic resources protected under the ESA in Hood Canal include Chinook salmon [Puget Sound
Evolutionarily Significant Unit(ESU)], listed as threatened, chum salmon(Hood Canal summer-run
ESU), listed as threatened, steelhead [Puget Sound Distinct Population Segment (DPS)], proposed
for listing, and bull trout (Puget Sound DPS), listed as threatened. Additional ESA-listed species
identified by USFWS as potentially occurring in the Hood Canal area include bald eagle (listed as
threatened,proposed for de-listing)and marbled murrelet(listed as threatened)(see Table 1).
Other ESA-listed species identified by NOAA Fisheries as potentially occurring in Washington
State inland waters include Southern Resident killer whale (listed as threatened), humpback whale
(listed as endangered), and Steller sea lion(listed as threatened). These species are not documented
b NOAA Fisheries as occurringin Hood Canal so the are not evaluated further.
Y Y
Shoreline habitat within the action area is designated critical habitat under the Endangered Species
Act for bull trout, and Chinook and summer-run chum salmon. Critical habitat elevations range
i from extreme high water to a depth of-10 ft MLLW(for bull trout) or-30 in MLLW for Chinook
and chum salmon).
A beach survey was conducted in 2002 to document biological resources near the mouth of
Alderbrook Creek (see Appendix A). The survey reported no eelgrass (Zostera marina or
Z.japonica) growing anywhere within the intertidal or shallow subtidal areas of the resort property.
The substrate throughout the intertidal zone was a mixture of coarse sand and small gravel extending
from the upper intertidal area to approximately 4 ft MLLW. Between 4 and -4 ft MLLW, the
substrate was predominantly sand with mud. Small patches of saltmarsh vegetation (e.g.,
pickleweed and fleshy jaumea) were observed at the mouth of Alderbrook Creek at upper intertidal
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 14 December 2007
Biological AssessmentlBiological Evaluation
�s
elevations. Patches of the macroalgae Ulva sp. and Enteromorpha sp. were common at lower
elevations along the dock. The dominant shellfish occupying the beach was the Pacific oyster,
Crassostrea gigas. Small pockets of Manila clam(Tapes philippinarum) were observed in the mid-
intertidal area. Numerous holes, possibly mud shrimp or ghost shrimp burrows, were also
commonly observed.
A site visit was conducted in July 2006 to update the biological observations of the previous BA.
Observations in 2006 corresponded to the original survey observations, with two exceptions: the
recently restored Alderbrook Creek mouth no longer has saltmarsh vegetation, and the beach
substrate composition along mid-intertidal elevations is no longer just gravelly sand, but now
includes a significant component of fine-grained organic material (i.e., mud). The site visit also
confirmed the dominant presence of Pacific oysters in dense bands across the action area(Appendix
B,Photos 6-9). The south shoreline of Hood Canal,including the action area,is mapped by WDFW
(2006b) as a continuous bank of Pacific oysters. Most oysters were observed between 75 and 112 ft
from the bulkhead, placing the current upper bed limit between 4.2 and 2.2 ft MLLW. In muddy
areas between oysters, numerous burrows and active siphon holes were present and empty Manila
clam shells were common (Appendix B, Photo 9). Small (less than 1-inch-long) mussels (Mytilus
sp.) were common on the dead oyster shells. Oyster beds are highly productive habitats for benthic
and epibenthic invertebrates, which provide important foraging for juvenile salmonids. Several
studies suggest that invertebrate productivity, especially species diversity, is actually greater in
oyster beds than eelgrass meadows(Brooks 1995, Sayce 1997,Pregnall 1993).
5. SPECIES AND HABITAT INFORMATION
Fish and wildlife information was obtained from the Federal Register, NOAA Fisheries websites,
USFWS websites, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Priority Habitats and
Species database,published literature,and personal communications with agency representatives. A
list of all federally listed threatened and endangered species, designated critical habitat, and species
or habitat proposed for listing was compiled for Mason County in the vicinity of the proposed action
(see Table 1). The Federal Register documents the potential presence of Chinook salmon
(Oncorhynchus tshawytscha),Hood Canal summer-run chum salmon(O. keta),bull trout(Salvelinus
confluentus), steelhead (O. mykiss, proposed for listing) and designated (or proposed) salmon and
trout critical habitat in the project vicinity. These species are known to occupy streams in southern
Hood Canal and have nearshore marine critical habitat designated in the action area, so they were
evaluated in this BABE.
Other ESA-listed species identified by NOAA Fisheries as potentially occurring in Washington
State inland waters include Southern Resident killer whale (listed as threatened), humpback whale
(listed as endangered), and Steller sea lion(listed as threatened). These species are not documented
by NOAA Fisheries as occurring in Hood Canal,so they were not evaluated in this BABE.
The USFWS Western Washington Fish and Wildlife Office website (revised December 20, 2005)
indicated that bald eagle, marbled murrelet, northern spotted owl, and bull trout are found in Mason
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 15 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
L�(5_
County. There were no records in the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)
database of Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) of bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) nesting,
wintering, or communal roosting habitats within a 1.5 mile-radius of the action area, so this species
was evaluated onlyfor possible presence along the shoreline when foraging. There were no
Po p g �g
f marbled murrelet Brac am hus marmoratus territory
records in the WDFW database of PHS o b d ( hyr p )
within a 1.5 mile-radius of the action area, so this species was evaluated only for a possible presence
along the shoreline when foraging. There were no records in the WDFW database of PHS of
northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina)territory within a 1.5 mile-radius of the action area,
so this species was not evaluated in this BABE.
Currently, there are six federally listed or proposed species, most with designated critical habitat,
that may be found within the action area(Table 5).
Table 5. Federally Proposed and Listed Species and Designated Critical Habitat Potentially Within the Action
Area.
Listing Status Designated
Common Name Scientific Name Critical Habitat
Chinook Salmon(Puget Sound) Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Threatened Marine Nearshore
Chum Salmon(Hood Canal Summer-run) Oncorhynchus keta Threatened Marine Nearshore
Bull Trout(Puget Sound-Coastal) Salvelinus confluentus Threatened Marine Nearshore
Critical Habitat for Chinook and Chum Designated
Salmon
Puget Sound Steelhead and Critical Habitat Oncorhynchus mykiss Threatened Not Yet Specified
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Threatened No
Marbled Murrelet Brachyramphus Threatened Yes
marmoratus
5.1 PUGET SOUND CHINOOK SALMON
The Evolutionarily Significant Unit(ESU)for Puget Sound Chinook salmon includes stocks from all
rivers in Hood Canal. The Hood Canal Subbasin (HUC4#17110018) contains six occupied
watersheds occupied encompassing approximately 605 sq mi (1,567sq km) (64 FR 14208; March
24, 1999). Fish distribution and habitat use data from WDFW identified approximately 59 mi
(95.0 km) of occupied riverine/estuarine habitat in Hood Canal watersheds. The Mid-Hood Canal
population is the only historically independent population documented in this subbasin.
In southern Hood Canal, near the action area, summer/fall-run Chinook salmon spawn in the nearby
Tahuya, Union, and Skokomish rivers (Meyers et al. 1998). These rivers are to the north, east, and
west of the action area, so it is assumed that both adults and juveniles migrate and feed along the
shoreline within the action area. Adult Chinook in marine waters forage on a large array of fish
species,especially herring and sand lance(Pritchard and Tester 1944 as cited in Scott and Crossman
1973). Juveniles forage in nearshore intertidal and subtidal elevations, often along eelgrass beds
and along fine-grained substrates, preying on epibenthic crustacea and small fish. Prey for both
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Owfalls Repair 16 December 2007
Biological AssessmentlBiological Evaluation
juvenile and adult Chinook would likely be abundant in southern Hood Canal nearshore habitat,
including the action area, although no eelgrass beds are visible in the project site or mapped by
WDFW in the action area.
Nearshore marine critical habitat has been designated from extreme high water out to a depth of-30
meters MLLW and adjacent to watersheds occupied by the ESU. This area generally encompasses
photic zone habitats supporting plant cover(e.g.,eelgrass and kelp)important for rearing,migrating,
and maturing Chinook salmon and their prey (70 FR 52630; September 2, 2005). Only intertidal
marine habitat would be affected by the proposed action. Within the resort property, the vertical
bulkhead, with its base covering the beach between 9 and 12 ft MLLW, has eliminated most of the
upper three-ft-wide band of habitat, except for a 150-ft-wide break around the mouth of Alderbrook
Creek.
5.2 HOOD CANAL SUMMER-RUN CHUM SALMON
Hood Canal summer-run chum salmon was listed as a threatened species in 1999. The
Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU) for population includes all naturally spawned summer-run
chum salmon in Hood Canal and its tributaries (64 FR 14508; March 25, 1999),plus some artificial
propagation programs determined to be necessary for the recover of the species,including the Union
River/Tahuya River summer-run chum hatchery program (69 FR 33101; June 14, 2004). The
Hood Canal Subbasin (HUC4#17110018) contains seven occupied watersheds encompassing
approximately 715 sq mi(1,852 sq km)(64 FR 14208;March 24, 1999).
In southern Hood Canal, near the action area, summer/fall-run chum salmon spawn in the nearby
Union River. Tahuya and Skokomish rivers chum are believed to be extinct, although
a River is anticipated b 2007 following stock transfers from the Union
recolomzation of the Tahuya p y g
River by the Hood Canal Salmon Enhancement Group and WDFW.
In Hood Canal, adult chum salmon migrate to spawning grounds from late August through late
October, following the deeper waters away from shorelines. This is the time period during which
the proposed action is likely to occur. Eggs incubate in redds for five to six months and fry emerge
between January and May. After hatching, fry move rapidly downstream to sub-estuarine habitats
(64 FR 14508; March 25, 1999). Juvenile chum are expected to feed in the Hood Canal shallow
intertidal areas from May to early July, but move into deeper waters by mid-July, before
construction would begin for the proposed project.
Sub-estuary deltas support a diverse array of habitats (tidal channels, mudflats, marshes, and
eelgrass meadows) that provide essential rearing and transition environments for summer chum
salmon. Based on similar habitat characteristics and proximity, the nearshore marine areas of
southern Hood Canal beyond the proper deltas of the Skokomish,Union,and Tahuya rivers could be
considered sub-estuary delta habitat for juvenile chum. Juveniles rear in these habitats for days to
weeks before entering the ocean, and returning adults stage in sub-estuaries before ascending natal
streams to spawn. Juveniles feed primarily on plankton and epibenthic organisms, while subadults
feed on similar items as well as larger prey(including fishes and squid)(WDFW and PNPTT 2000).
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater OuV'alls Repair 17 December 2007
Biological AssessmentlBiological Evaluation
The nearshore marine area considered by the ESA listing includes the zone from extreme high water
out to a depth of 30 m and adjacent to watersheds occupied by the ESU(described above). This area
generally encompasses photic zone habitats supporting plant cover (e.g., eelgrass and kelp)
important for rearing, migrating, and maturing chum salmon and their prey. Deeper waters are
occupied by subadult and maturing fish,but these waters were not included in the listing for specific
protection.
5.3 PUGET SOUND STEELHEAD AND CRITICAL HABITAT
The Puget Sound steelhead DPS was listed as threatened in 2007. This DPS includes all naturally
spawned winter- and summer-run steelhead populations and two hatchery steelhead stocks, below
natural and manmade impassable barriers, in the river basins of Hood Canal. The Salmon and
Steelhead Inventory(SASI) database from WDFW identified the Skokomish River as a major Hood
Canal steelhead system. The Skokomish River is about four miles west of the action area. A
steelhead stock status review by National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) also identified an
independent steelhead run in the Tahuya River, across the Hood Canal about 2.5 miles north of the
action area,and another steelhead run in the Union River,several miles east(NMFS 2005).
The current listing evaluated the existing populations based on numbers of fish and DPS-wide
reproductive trends, but did not identify habitat use or features considered impaired or necessary for
recovery. Little is known about steelhead behavior, including habitat use, after the two years of
freshwater and estuarine residency typical of Hood Canal juveniles. Juveniles in marine waters are
reported to prey on small fish (mostly forage fish species, although sculpin and salmon were also
noted in some stomachs) and pelagic invertebrates, such as larval crustaceans. Upon leaving their
natal estuaries, steelhead migrate rapidly to sea, not closely associating with the shoreline, but
staying near the surface. A recent study by NMFS/NOAA (2005) reported a median travel time of
12.8 days from the Hamma Hamma River estuary to the Strait of Juan de Fuca. This short duration
indicates that marine nearshore habitat is not used by juvenile steelhead for a significant portion of
their 4-year life cycle. Studies of Hood Canal steelhead nearshore behavior have been proposed by
Barry Berejikian and Skip Tezak of NOAA Fisheries, Northwest Fisheries Science Center,
Manchester Research Station in 2006 to begin to address this data gap.
Within weeks of out-migration, steelhead apparently move into the ocean and head north to Alaska
and Arctic waters;again,not associating with the coastline.
Few juvenile few steelhead are captured in nearshore beach seines for juvenile salmonids, so
steelhead may not be as dependent on nearshore habitat as Chinook or chum salmon. Nevertheless,
the modification and loss of intertidal habitat, through urbanization of the shoreline (e.g., cleared
vegetation, filled and armored intertidal shoreline, altered stormwater runoff volumes and peak
discharges, and degraded water quality) could be considered contributing factors to steelhead
population declines. Therefore,this BABE assumes that actions that are protective of Chinook and
chum salmon would also be protective of steelhead.
It is likely that nearshore marine habitat will be identified for protection under future listing
proposals because Puget Sound steelhead may spend considerable time as juveniles or adults in the
protected marine environment of Puget Sound (NMFS 2005). Because critical habitat has not been
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 18 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
specifically identified by NMFS, this BABE assumed that marine nearshore critical habitat
(including features, prey, and habitat use) for steelhead would be similar to Chinook salmon or bull
trout.
5.4 COASTAL-PUGET SOUND BULL TROUT
Since 1999, the Coastal-Puget Sound DPS of bull trout has been federally listed as a threatened
species in Hood Canal (50 FR November 1, 1999). The Skokomish River, about four miles west of
the action area, is the only Hood Canal river with documented bull trout spawning; it is considered
the Hood Canal core area for bull trout production and recovery (USFWS 2004). Upland, tideland,
riverine,and estuarine wetland ecosystems are found within the Skokomish estuary.
Subadult bull trout in the Coastal-Puget Sound DPS can move into marine waters to forage or
migrate and return to freshwater to take advantage of seasonal forage provided by salmonids eggs,
smolts, or juveniles. Bull trout in this population segment also move through marine waters to
access independent tributaries (tributaries that connect directly to marine waters) to forage or,
potentially, to take refuge from high flows in their core areas (Brenkman and Corbett, in litt. 2003,
b). Independent tributaries used by bull trout on the Olympic Peninsula are not believed to support
spawning populations of bull trout and are only accessible to bull trout by swimming through marine
waters from core areas. Although there are anecdotal and historical observations of bull trout in
Hood Canal tributaries (e.g. Hamma Hamma, Dosewallips, Duckabush Rivers),there are no current
records of bull trout in independent tributaries to Hood Canal (U.S. Commission on Fish and
Fisheries, in litt. 1913; McLeod 1944; P. Hilgert, R2 Resources, pers. comm. 2000, as reported in
USFWS 2004). Thus,Alderbrook Creek(within the action area)is not considered bull trout habitat,
although it may eventually provide a foraging base of cutthroat trout fry and eggs for bull trout.
The Coastal-Puget Sound populations of bull trout require access to marine habitat to complete their
life history. For these populations, estuaries and marine nearshore areas provide an important
component of their feeding, migrating, and over-wintering habitat, and are integral to maintaining
the complex amphidromous life-history strategy, which is unique to the Coastal-Puget Sound
distinct population segment. When juvenile bull trout emigrate downstream to marine waters, they
enter a more productive marine environment that allows them to achieve rapid growth and energy
storage (similar to adfluvial forms migrating to lakes and reservoirs) (WDFW et al. 1997). Larger
juvenile and subadult bull trout can migrate throughout a core area looking for feeding opportunities,
or they can move through marine areas to independent tributaries. Subadult and adult bull trout in
the Coastal-Puget Sound DPS also forage in marine waters where the principal forage include surf
smelt and other small schooling fish(e.g., sandlance,Pacific herring)(Kraemer 1994,Brenkman and
Corbett, in litt. 2003). Although foraging bull trout are likely to congregate in forage fish spawning
areas, outside the action area, they could be found throughout accessible estuarine and nearshore
habitats(USFWS 2004).
Subadult bull trout use marine habitat to forage, generally from late spring to early fall. Subadults
typically leave marine waters in the fall to overwinter in mainstem rivers for a period of time before
returning to marine areas to forage (WDFW 1998). Because the allowable in-water work period
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 19 December 2007
Biological AssessmentlBiological Evaluation
begins July 15, it is possible that subadult bull trout could be present in the action area during the
first few months of the work period.
5.5 CRITICAL HABITAT FOR PACIFIC SALMON AND STEELHEAD
Critical habitat was designated in Hood Canal for the Puget Sound Chinook salmon ESU and the
Hood Canal summer-run chum salmon ESU (70 FR September 2, 2005). Within the action area,
which consists solely of marine nearshore habitat, critical habitat is designated from the shoreline
extending out to the maximum depth of the photic zone (i.e., from the line of extreme high tide out
to a depth no greater than 30 m relative to the mean lower low water). Determining PCEs include
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." Within the action area, the project will temporarily affect about a half-acre of critical
habitat, limited to long, narrow (25-ft-wide maximum) construction corridors, from about
9 ft MLLW(i.e., the base of the bulkhead) to -3.5 ft MLLW at the eastern outfall and-3 ft MLLW
at the western outfall.
Important salmon prey fish species, such as sand lance and surf smelt, are documented to spawn on
southern Hood Canal beaches near the action area. Pacific herring, a major dietary component of
Chinook salmon, have a large holding area across the canal (presumably with associated
eelgrass/kelp meadows) (WDFW 2006d). Eelgrass and kelp have not been observed along the
shoreline within the action area.
5.6 COASTAL-PUGET SOUND BULL TROUT CRITICAL HABITAT
The USFWS has designated bull trout critical habitat for the Puget Sound DPS (70 FR September
26, 2005). The final rule identified the Skokomish River, and nearshore waters along the west and
south shores of Hood Canal,as critical habitat. This designation includes the action area.
Critical habitat extends offshore to the depth of 33 ft(10 m)relative to the mean low low-water line
(MLLW) (average of all the lower low-water heights of the two daily tidal levels). This equates to
the average depth of the photic zone and is consistent with the offshore extent of the nearshore
habitat identified under the "Notice of Change to the Nation's Tidal Datums With the Adoption of a
New National Tidal Datum Epoch Period of 1983 Through 2001." This area between IVgHHW and
minus 10 MLLW is considered the habitat most consistently used by bull trout in marine waters
based on known use, forage fish availability, and ongoing migration studies,and captures geological
and ecological processes important to maintaining these habitats. This area contains essential
foraging habitat and migration corridors such as estuaries, bays, inlets, shallow subtidal areas, and
intertidal flats (70 FR September 26, 2005). Intertidal flats and shallow subtidal areas are present in
the action area.
5.7 BALD EAGLE
Bald eagles are typically found near water bodies such as seacoasts, large lakes, and rivers. In
winter,northern birds migrate south and gather in large numbers near open water areas where fish or
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 20 December 2007
Biological AssessmentlBiological Evaluation
other prey are plentiful. Although bald eagles may range over great distances,they usually return to
nest within 100 mi of where they were raised. Home ranges can cover approximately 20-30 mi and
include nesting, feeding,roosting,and courtship areas(EA EST 1996). Nests are often built within a
mile of the water body used for foraging.
Watson and Pierce (1998) monitored the movements of six adult bald eagles captured in the Hood
Canal area via satellite telemetry. Between May and August, eagles migrated northward along
coastal and interior British Columbia, as far as southeast Alaska. Evidence suggested that the
migration was in response to summer and fall spawning runs of coastal salmon. The two breeding
adults eagles monitored returned to breeding territories following a migration northward and other
than five short (<75 km) and brief(n= 4 days) excursions from breeding territories just before and
after migration,they remained on territories the rest of the year.
Hood Canal bald eagles are primarily piscivorous. Watson et al. (1995) conducted a bald eagle
foraging study in the Hood Canal area and identified 308 prey classes, with fish accounting for 85
percent and birds forl 5 percent of the prey items. Only 16 fish were identified to species,with 11 of
those being starry flounder. Fish comprised 91 percent of prey captured by eagles in a separate
study on Hood Canal(Watson and Pierce 1998).
Egg-laying begins in late February, with most pairs incubating by the third week of March(Watson
and Pierce 1998). Eaglets hatch after a 35-day incubation period (Stalmaster 1987). Most eaglets
fledge in mid-July but remain in the vicinity of the nest for several weeks prior to dispersal
(Anderson et al. 1986, Watson and Pierce 1998). Most juvenile and adult bald eagles that nest in
western Washington migrate to British Columbia and southeast Alaska in late summer and early fall.
Adults return to their Washington territories by early winter(Watson and Pierce 1998).
Migrant eagles from other states and provinces begin arriving at their traditional Washington
wintering grounds during late October, and most disperse by March(Hunt et al. 1980, 1981; Fielder
and Starkey 1980; Garrett et al. 1988; Stalmaster 1989; Watson and Pierce 2001). Wintering bald
eagles are attracted to western Washington because of its abundant prey, particularly salmon
carcasses on tributaries. Activities such as boating, fishing, and aircraft can negatively affect eagle
behavior. Foraging eagles on the Columbia River estuary maintained an average distance of 400 m
(1,300 ft) from stationary boats, and they responded to boat presence by reducing feeding time and
the number of foraging attempts (McGarigal et al. 1991). However, Watson and others (1995)
found that low levels of clam harvest activity by boats on Hood Canal was unlikely to affect
foraging eagles.
The Bald Eagle Recovery Plan regulates construction activities during the January 1 to August 15
eagle breeding season if a project occurs within 0.5 mile of a nest and is in line-of-sight, or within
0.25 mile of the project and is not in line-of-sight. No bald eagle nests are within the mile-wide
circle defining the action area. The nearest bald eagle nest was identified across Hood Canal,within
a territory that is farther than 1.5 miles from the proposed project(WDFW 2006e).
The USFWS website indicated that wintering bald eagles occur in Mason County from October 31
through March 31. No concentrations of wintering eagles are noted in WDFW's Priority Habitats
and Species database within 1.5 miles of the project area. The only bald eagle wintering
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 21 December 2007
Biological AssessmendBiological Evaluation
concentration in the county is located along the Lower Hamma Hamma River. Four communal
winter night roosts are located in the county,but none is near the action area.
5.8 MARBLED MURRELET
The marbled murrelet is a small iscivorous seabird that dives and swims for prey, feeding on small
P p Y g
fish and invertebrates,usually within two miles of shore. Although murrelets both feed and roost on
water, they nest in stands of mature and old-growth forest (typically in trees greater than 150 years
old). The marbled murrelet typically forages for prey during the day and visits its nest site in the
canopy of old-growth forests at dawn or dusk. The breeding season is generally April to September
(BioSystems 1994).
The loss of old growth forests to logging and development has contributed to the decline of this
species--trees younger than 150- to 175-years-old do not have suitable nesting branches. Forest
fragmentation is presumed to make murrelet nests near forest edges vulnerable to predation by other
birds, such as jays, crows, ravens, and great-horned owls. In addition, this species is vulnerable to
fishing nets and oil spills.Because the murrelets reproductive rate is low,recovery from these effects
is slow(BioSystems 1994).
One study of marbled murrelet behavior (Hamer and Thompson 1997) observed avoidance by
diving murrelets in response to the approach of recreational boats.
The Hood Canal region was surveyed from October to mid-November 1996(SEI 1997)to document
occurrences of marbled murrelet individuals. In general, marbled murrelet numbers were very low
(n=4) in south Hood Canal, and increased toward the north. Marbled murrelets were concentrated
in well-defined areas that shifted in location seasonally. Most murrelets occurred between 600 and
1600 feet from shore. The total numbers of marbled murrelets slightly increased in the north Hood
Canal region until late fall(counts of 200 in October to 400 in November);however,the distribution
within the region changed dramatically. Most observations of birds were within 500 m of shore.
A USFWS list of federally listed threatened and endangered species for Mason County includes
marbled murrelet (USFWS 2005). No marbled murrelet breeding territories were identified within
1.5 mi of the action area(WDFW 2006a), possibly because of the extensive logging and increasing
urbanization throughout the Skokomish and Mason river watersheds(USFWS 2004).
6. DETERMINATIONS OF EFFECTS
6.1 EFFECTS ON CHINOOK SALMON
The Federal Register describes activities that have been determined to negatively affect Chinook
� g Y
salmon and habitat, contributing to the decline of this ESU. Those activities are harvest and
freshwater/estuarine habitat modifications. Habitat modifications were identified specifically as
agriculture, channel modifications/diking, forestry, road building, and urbanization. No nearshore
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 22 December 2007
Biological AssessmentlBiological Evaluation
marine habitat modifications were identified as a significant contributing cause of declining Chinook
runs. Destruction of aquatic vegetation, (specifically, eelgrass and kelp beds) was considered a
potentially contributing factor in habitat degradation, but not linked to Chinook population declines.
Construction and maintenance of bulkheads were discussed as factors contributing to alterations in
beach slope and substrate composition, potentially affecting eelgrass beds (and possibly, in turn,
juvenile Chinook salmon), but the effects were indirect, generalized, and not substantiated by the
listing support documentation. Baseline conditions in the project area include a bulkhead and a
small rock wall,but these structures would remain essentially unaltered by the proposed action. The
proposed action would not affect eelgrass beds because the action area does not currently support
eelgrass (Appendix A); the habitat areas below mid-intertidal elevations consist of muddy sandy
gravel,dense with Pacific oysters and other shellfish(Appendix B,Photo 6).
This BABE focuses on potential effects on the juvenile,rather than adult,Chinook salmon life stage
because salmonid habitat for juveniles is present in the intertidal waters of the action area. Adult
salmon are not expected to be found in the intertidal nearshore because adult salmon are not
commonly associated with this shallow habitat range. Adult Chinook salmon may use intertidal
nearshore habitat while foraging for juvenile fish (including juvenile salmonids), but this use is
probably insignificant within the action area because of the absence of productive habitats(i.e.,river
estuaries with salmonid prey, forage fish spawning areas, Pacific herring holding areas, and eelgrass
beds)that are plentiful in other areas of lower Hood Canal.
Habitat for juvenile Chinook salmon is present in the action area. The sand flats and oyster beds
would provide high-quality foraging habitat for juvenile Chinook salmon,with abundant benthic and
epibenthic invertebrates.
This biological assessment identified the following relevant habitat features/conditions in the project
area:
• water quality(including turbidity and chemistry),
• prey availability and type (dependent on substrate quality and quantity and intertidal
elevation),and
• access to refugia and migratory routes.
Habitat conditions not found in the action area include freshwater and estuarine waters and their
associated foraging habitats,aquatic vegetation,and forage fish spawning habitat.
6.1.1 Water Ouality
Baseline water quality conditions include stormwater discharge from two recently constructed
stormwater outfalls that discharge in the upper intertidal zone. As part of the 2002-2004 resort
renovation, the stormwater collection system was redesigned and reconstructed to capture and treat
runoff from the parking lots and adjacent areas around the resort, including large areas of vegetation.
Treatment includes stormwater detention, particulate settling, oil/water separators, infiltration, and
discharge through a grass-lined biofiltration swale or sand filter, before discharge into the upper
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Owfalls Repair 23 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
intertidal. Stormwater quality is assumed to be low in pollutants because most of the runoff is
generated from about 10 ac of clean surfaces, such as the grassy slope (4.57 ac), landscaped areas
(3.4 ac), roofs (1.51 ac), sidewalks, and perennial seeps (0.48 ac). The paved surfaces probably
contribute little pollutant load to the stormwater because of their relatively low use and moderate to
low vehicle speeds. The paved parking areas (2.3 ac) reach parking capacity for only part of the
year, and the slow driving/parking speeds of resort visitors do not usually result in brake wear,
which is considered to be the source of metals derived from roads. Stormwater runoff from the area
of SR 106(less than 1.2 ac) is also low in oils/grease and dissolved metals because the highway was
recently reconstructed to improve travel both around and into the resort, with slower speeds, longer
line-of-sight distances, and exit lanes. These improvements reduce quick acceleration/deceleration
and accidents,which in turn reduces brake wear and oil leakage. Most importantly, stormwater from
the parking areas and SR 106 is detained and treated before discharge. Baseline stormwater
discharge water quality will not change under this proposed action.
Under baseline conditions,the stormwater discharged at MHHW from the two outfalls causes beach
erosion during tides lower than MHHW when large storms exceed the capacity of the detention
swales. The proposed project will improve marine water quality(i.e., decrease turbidity)by moving
the stormwater outfalls to low intertidal elevations, so that marine waters of Hood Canal will
dissipate stormwater discharge energy during most or all of the tidal cycle. The deeper discharges
will also be immediately mixed with marine waters, which reduces the risk of direct exposure to
juvenile salmonids that might be foraging in the upper intertidal. Overflow openings at MHHW in
both outfalls will release excess stormwater on the beach, but this is not expected to commonly
occur.
The new eastern outfall extension will be constructed outside of the oyster beds, to avoid trenching
through shellfish resources. The eastern outfall pipe alignment was designed to minimize long-term
harmful effects on beach habitat by diverting up to 7.5 cfs of stormwater discharges into low-
intertidal depths,burying the new pipe along the bulkhead,and extending it under the existing dock.
The dock separates the east and west oyster beds and offers the only pathway that avoids trenching
through the oysters. To further minimize effects on marine waters,nearshore currents, and sediment
transport, most of the exposed (i.e., unburied) pipe will be elevated four inches off the substrate.
This alignment was chosen as the best solution to submerge the outfall, reduce beach erosion and
turbidity, increase stormwater mixing with marine water, and improve upper intertidal water quality
with the least habitat disturbance during construction and long-term operations.
The western outfall pipe was designed to be buried for most of its length. The outlet elevation was
determined to be the deepest possible location,within resort property,that would fully submerge the
outfall, reduce beach erosion and turbidity, maximize stormwater mixing with marine water, and
restore upper intertidal water quality for long-term operations. The benefits of this alignment to
threatened salmonids(and critical habitat)outweighed the short-term harm to the western oyster bed
that construction will inflict..
Potential short-term effects on water quality would consist of temporarily elevated levels of turbidity
caused by disturbed sediment (i.e., native sediment sidecast during trenching and backfill material
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Owfalls Repair 24 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
used to restore beach elevations)during an estimated three-week construction period. Pile extraction
and driving,estimated to two or three days,would also cause localized areas of short-term turbidity.
Temporarily elevated levels of turbidity following pile extraction and replacement and sediment
disturbance during trenching are not expected to have any measurable harmful effect on juvenile
Chinook salmon. First,based on juvenile outmigration timing,juvenile Chinook would not likely be
present in the shallow intertidal areas during the mid-summer. At this time of year, most juveniles
should be foraging in deeper waters and preying on larger fish. Second, the footprint of the
backfilled areas will be relatively small,compared to the action area, so the amount of turbidity from
the backfill is expected to be minor. Third,the turbidity should gradually increase along the front of
the flooding tide and disperse slowly through the water, allowing salmon escape time and access to
deeper water to avoid the turbidity. Along each pipeline,the duration of elevated turbidity should be
measured in minutes, rather than hours, during the three to five days of in-water construction. This
level of disturbance would likely have no noticeable effect on juvenile Chinook salmon, if present in
the action area during construction.
The replacement of 21 creosote-treated wood piles with equivalent or smaller galvanized steel piles
will improve water quality over existing conditions and result in a beneficial effect. The
replacement of chemically preserved wood railings and stringers with a chemically inert wood
composite material (i.e., "Trex" or similar type) and composite grating will also reduce potential
chemical leacheate into marine waters and increase light transmission. The replacement of 9,000 ft2
of Styrofoam slab floatation with polyethylene tubs will eliminate the potential release of Styrofoam
waste into marine waters. These water quality improvements would be beneficial to all fish in the
action area,including Chinook salmon.
6.1.2 Prey Availability and Tyne
Benthic and epibenthic prey for juvenile salmonids in the action area consists of small crustacea and
other invertebrates associated with the fine-grained intertidal sediment and dense shellfish beds at
lower intertidal and subtidal zones. Foraging juvenile Chinook salmon are likely to concentrate in
the productive areas of the lower intertidal zone, between +4 and -4 ft MLLW, and within the
shellfish beds, rather than the higher intertidal elevations near the bulkhead or the shaded areas
under the existing dock.
Sections of the dock will be removed to allow placement of the eastern outfall underneath. The dock
location and general footprint will not change; however, new materials and a new floatation design
will improve habitat conditions that will significantly benefit salmonid prey and foraging access.
Long-term harmful effects from the proposed project are limited to the permanent loss of 100 ft2 of
intertidal habitat under the exposed section of pipe that will rest directly on the substrate at the end
of the western outfall. An equal area of pipe will rest on the substrate along the eastern outfall,but it
is not a change from existing conditions because the area is not currently available as habitat, due to
the marine float that rests on the substrate about half the day. In addition, the proposed action will
permanently convert about 270 f� of intertidal fine-grained sediment into hard substrate for the
western outfall connection at the existing bulkhead (5.5 W), and 22 concrete anchors (—45 W)that
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Owfalls Repair 25 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
will elevate the pipes es above grade. To compensate for this habitat conversion,
about 200 ft2of debris
will be removed from the intertidal beach and replaced with fine-grained native-type material.
Construction may have short-term negative effects on foraging salmonids because of excavation,
followed by a temporary reduction in benthic and epibenthic food resources. However,the disturbed
area is relatively small (about half an acre) and most is within upper intertidal elevations near the
bulkhead, where the fewest salmonid prey resources are found. Construction will occur in less than
four percent of the critical intertidal foraging habitat at elevations between 4 and -4 ft MLLW,
leaving 96 percent of the intertidal site undisturbed and available to foraging fish. Because the
trenches will be excavated and backfilled primarily in the dry, during low tide,juvenile salmon, if
present in late summer,will not be prevented from feeding by pipeline installation.
During pile extraction and driving, forage fish and foraging salmon would likely avoid the
immediate construction area because of the noise and activity; however, to minimize potential
effects from noise,a vibratory pile extractor/driver will be used. No pile proofing is needed.
Some benthic and epibenthic productivity would be temporarily reduced during the proposed action
because of alterations to habitat during pipeline construction. After the pipelines are installed, the
trenches will be backfilled with native sediment and macroinvertebrates will return to the alignments
on the incoming tide. Epibenthic invertebrates will reappear on the flooding tide in high densities
and likely repopulate the alignments within several weeks. Benthic invertebrates will likely
repopulate the disturbed areas within months,quickly reaching pre-construction densities,but it may
take several years to reach species diversity similar to preconstruction,unless the area is reseeded for
oysters. Numerous studies of dredged intertidal sites have demonstrated that benthic and epibenthic
invertebrates rapidly repopulate large disturbed areas equal to or exceeding pre-disturbance levels,
well within two years(Anchor Environmental 2002,Parametrix 1997, CH2M Hill 1995,Romberg et
al. 1995,Parametrix 1994).
Long-term beneficial effects on salmonid prey resources from the proposed project include 1)
0.14 ac of restored intertidal substrate, 2)recovery of 2,688 ft2 of benthic habitat under the dock,due
to flotation improvements, 3) improved substrate quality (i.e., increased benthic colonization from
improved water circulation and new substrate), 4) reduction of undiluted stormwater discharges in
the intertidal, 5) removal of 21 creosote-treated piles from the environment, and 6) shade reduction
over 4,766 ft2 of substrate.
Overall, the net area of intertidal habitat that will be converted to hard substrate will be more than
compensated by the net increase of 2,658 ft2 (0.06 ac) of fine-grained intertidal habitat and the
0.14 ac of intertidal beach that will be restored to pre-erosion conditions. The temporary loss of
invertebrate prey species during construction and restoration would be insignificant because the total
potentially disturbed area(0.53 ac) comprises only a fraction(6 percent) of the action area(8.2 ac).
In addition, construction will be short-term, during low tides when juvenile Chinook, if present
during this period, would find ample foraging opportunities within the action area. The areas of
greatest macroinvertebrate productivity (i.e., the shellfish beds) are extensive throughout the action
area and adjacent nearshore habitat;these areas will not be affected by the project.
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Ou#lalls Repair 26 December 2007
Biological Assessmentliological Evaluation
6.1.3 Refutia/Safe Access
Long-term potentially harmful effects on juvenile salmon could be caused by physical obstructions
on the sea floor, such as the two 60-ft-long sections of new outfall pipes that will rest directly on
substrate. During ebb tides, the pipes will project into the water column an average of 11 inches,
from 0 in where the pipes emerge from below grade, to 22 in where the pipes transition onto
elevated supports. The eastern pipe would present the longest obstacle during tidal heights between
5 and 6 ft MLLW, when the top of the pipe would be even with the water level. This condition
would occur for about 50 minutes every six hours of most daily tidal cycles. The western pipe
would present the longest obstacle at tidal heights between —2 and -3 ft MLLW. This condition
would occur less frequently, only once every 12 hours, for those relatively few days with low minus
tides. At lower or higher tidal stages, the length of pipe presenting an obstacle would be reduced
until it was either completely submerged or completely dry.
The exposed pipe sections would closely mimic waterlogged tree trunks that were once common
along the protected shorelines of Hood Canal. Even at low tides, the pipe obstructions would not
likely present an obstruction to migrating juvenile salmon because juvenile salmon would perceive
the pipe as a variation in intertidal contours, similar to narrow spits of sediment that are deposited
perpendicular from the shore near stream and river mouths. Both pipes would never affect fish
passage at the same time because their elevations are different—one is mid-intertidal, the other is
almost subtidal. All other exposed pipe will be elevated 4 inches above the substrate to allow fish
passage and water circulation. Given these considerations, it is unlikely that the proposed outfall
extensions would hinder juvenile Chinook salmon migration, access to foraging habitat, or safe
passage through the action area.
The new floating dock will benefit salmon migration and access throughout the site because it is a
significant design improvement over baseline dock conditions. Baseline flotation is nearly
continuous blocks of styrofoam that rest completely on the beach at low tides, but the new flotation
will have two-ft-wide spaces between the tubs and will rest on the bottom only at the four comers of
each 48-ft-long dock section. The new flotation will allow practically unobstructed fish movement
under each dock section. The new flotation will also improve water circulation.
Short-term construction impacts on fish access and refugia are not anticipated because excavation
and filling will occur almost entirely at low tides, in the dry. Pile extraction and installation may
reduce fish passage in the immediate area of disturbance, but the effect would be of short duration
(about three days) and localized around whatever pile was being installed, leaving the vast majority
of the action area accessible to salmon. In addition, a vibratory hammer will minimize noise
disturbance.
6.1.4 Determination of Effects on Chinook Salmon
Proposed project activities in the action area would have no measurable short-term effects on Puget
Sound Chinook salmon because of the limited area of disturbance,the short duration of disturbance,
and the timing of excavation/backfilling and pipe installation. Most construction will occur during
low tides, in the dry, at a time of year when juvenile Chinook are presumed to be foraging in deeper
water. Turbidity effects from sediment disturbance will be short (lasting only until the next tidal
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Out calls Repair 27 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
cycle, or less) and limited to the small area of the pipeline alignments. The construction area is in a
quiescent bay without currents, so sediment suspended during construction will stay localized. A
temporary decrease in benthic productivity will occur in the construction corridor (about 0.53 ac),
due to pipeline construction and access. About 30 percent of the proposed excavation area is near
the bulkhead, at intertidal elevations above 8 ft MLLW, in the less-productive upper intertidal range
where benthic productivity of salmon prey decreases with increasing elevation.
About half of the estimated area of disturbance would be due to vehicle access along the alignment,
rather than excavation. The use of small, tracked or balloon-tire vehicles will minimize and
distribute vehicle loads over a greater area of substrate. Larger, surface-dwelling invertebrates may
be crushed, but smaller, subsurface-dwelling invertebrates will probably survive in burrows. About
400 ft of dock currently ground on the beach during low tides; construction under this area will not
impact the benthic invertebrate community any worse than baseline conditions.
A large part of the construction area is already disturbed from outfall-related erosion,so construction
disturbance in the upper intertidal is not a change from baseline conditions, in terms of turbidity and
benthic prey resources' density and diversity. Continued beach erosion is possible from stormwater
overflows at the bulkheads; however, this would occur only because of reduced outfall capacity
(caused by rising tides) and heavy storms. The proposed project would continue to discharge
stormwater that exceeds outfall capacity from new overflow openings onto intertidal beach, but
these discharges would be just a fraction of the current discharges. Under proposed conditions,
excess stormwater overflows would be significantly less than baseline conditions because total
discharge volumes at MHHW would be reduced by the capacity of the new outfalls (provided the
outfalls are not blocked by rising Hood Canal tidewaters).
The construction corridor comprises about six percent of the resort's property (i.e., owned tidelands
and leased bedlands under the moorage float) and an even smaller percentage of the greater action
area. Most of the area to be disturbed already exhibits low benthic productivity because of a high
intertidal location, ongoing stormwater erosion, and grounding/shading from the existing dock.
Almost all of the area that will be directly affected by construction will be significantly improved
over baseline conditions following completion of the project. After construction and beach
restoration,invertebrate recovery should occur rapidly because the restored beach area will provide a
stable substrate for re-colonization by onsite invertebrate populations. The adjacent lower intertidal
areas are highly productive and the native backfill material will already contain microfauna and
nutrients from the site that will encourage rapid new growth. The native backfill material will
already contain microfauna and nutrients from the site that will encourage colonization and rapid
new growth.
The only long-term negative effects on salmon habitat would occur at those areas where beach
substrate will be covered or replaced with hard surfaces(i.e.,the lengths of pipe that will rest on the
substrate, plus the pipeline anchors under the elevated pipe sections, plus the western outfall
bulkhead drop structure). However, the negative effect of converting 260 ft2 of fine-grained
intertidal habitat to hard surfaces will be compensated by the recovery of about 200 ft2 of fine-
grained substrate, after the abandoned pipes and debris have been removed, plus 0.12 ac of habitat
under the new dock.
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 28 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
For the sections of floating dock that will be repaired/replaced to accommodate the new pipeline,
several changes to the dock design will benefit water quality within intertidal habitat. The use of
chemically inert recycled wood composite materials in place of chemically preserved wood and the
one-for-one replacement of creosote-treated wood piles with galvanized steel piles will provide
long-term small-scale benefits to water quality for all aquatic organisms near the dock, many of
which constitute a prey base for juvenile salmonids. The addition of open grating over most of the
dock decking will improve light transmission under the dock and encourage greater benthic
colonization under and near the dock. The new tub floatation will significantly reduce the area of
dock that grounds at low tide and allow open areas for fish passage under and through the dock. It
will also improve water circulation and invertebrate colonization throughout the action area.
The most significant benefit of the proposed stormwater outfall extensions will be to redirect most
discharges into deeper water, where erosive velocities will be reduced by Hood Canal waters. The
new outfalls will be submerged most of the year,which will reduce beach erosion. Restoring eroded
beach channels and contours to their original grade will recover about 0.14 ac of productive shellfish
habitat,including benthic and epibenthic invertebrates that are important prey for salmonids.
Therefore, this analysis determined that the proposed action may affect, but would not likely
adversely affect Puget Sound Chinook salmon, due to the temporary negative effects of
construction and pile driving. The proposed action would have a long-term beneficial effect on 0.14
ac of restored intertidal habitat area, function, and productivity, and a net gain of 0.12 ac of fine-
grained intertidal habitat.
6.2 EFFECTS ON CHUM SALMON
Degradation of spawning habitat, reduced river flows, increased urbanization of the Kitsap
Peninsula, and increased pinniped populations in Hood Canal were cited as habitat limiting factors
for the Hood Canal summer-run chum ESU(Johnson et al., 1997) (62 FR 43937;August 18, 1997).
None of these factors is relevant to this proposed action. The proposed action will not affect these
habitat limiting factors.
This BABE assumes that juvenile chum habitat use is similar to juvenile Chinook habitat use;
although the prey species types and sizes may differ between the species (e.g.,juvenile chum are
assumed to have a greater dependence on planktonic and epibenthic invertebrates than juvenile
Chinook, and a lesser dependence on benthic invertebrates),their habitats overlap in intertidal areas.
Because of the similarity in nearshore habitat dependence between Chinook and chum salmon, the
analysis of effects for Chinook salmon is repeated here for chum salmon, with several exceptions
(e.g.,outmigration timing).
According to Federal Register documentation, sub-estuary deltas support a diverse array of habitats
(tidal channels, mudflats, marshes, and eelgrass meadows) that provide essential rearing and
transition environments for Hood Canal chum salmon. Juveniles rear in these habitats for days to
weeks before entering the ocean, and returning adults stage in sub-estuaries before ascending natal
streams to spawn. Juvenile chum salmon are expected to have moved into sub-estuarine habitat by
late May, and into deeper nearshore areas of Hood Canal shortly afterward; thus juveniles would
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 29 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
not likely be present in the shallow nearshore of the project area during the construction period
(beginning in mid-July and ending in mid-February).
The relevant habitat features/conditions for chum salmon in the sub-estuary habitat of the action area
are: water quality(including sediment grain size), prey availability and type(dependent on substrate
quality and quantity), and refugia/safe access. Habitat conditions not found in the action area
include freshwater and estuarine waters and associated foraging habitat, aquatic vegetation, and
spawning and holding habitat for forage fish.
6.2.1 Water Ouality
Baseline water quality conditions include stormwater discharge from two recently constructed
stormwater outfalls that discharge in the upper intertidal zone. As part of the 2002-2004 resort
renovation, the stormwater collection system was redesigned and reconstructed to capture and treat
runoff from the parking lots and adjacent areas around the resort,including large areas of vegetation.
Treatment includes stormwater detention, particulate settling, oil/water separators, infiltration, and
discharge through a grass-lined biofiltration swale or sand filter, before discharge into the upper
intertidal. Stormwater quality is assumed to be low in pollutants because most of the runoff is
generated from about 10 ac of clean surfaces, such as the grassy slope (4.57 ac), landscaped areas
(3.4 ac), roofs (1.51 ac), sidewalks, and perennial seeps (0.48 ac). The paved surfaces probably
contribute little pollutant load to the stormwater because of their relatively low use and moderate to
low vehicle speeds. The paved parking areas (2.3 ac) reach parking capacity for only part of the
year, and the slow driving/parking speeds of resort visitors do not usually result in brake wear,
which is considered to be the source of metals derived from roads. Stormwater runoff from the area
of SR 106 (less than 1.2 ac)is also low in oils/grease and dissolved metals because the highway was
recently reconstructed to improve travel both around and into the resort, with slower speeds, longer
line-of-sight distances, and exit lanes. These improvements reduce quick acceleration/deceleration
and accidents,which in turn reduces brake wear and oil leakage. Most importantly, stormwater from
the parking areas and SR 106 is detained and treated before discharge. Baseline stormwater
discharge water quality will not change under this proposed action.
Under baseline conditions, the stormwater discharged from the two outfalls causes beach erosion
under the combined conditions of low tides and large storms that exceed the capacity of the
detention swales. The proposed project will improve marine water quality (i.e., decrease turbidity)
by moving the outfalls to low intertidal elevations, so that marine waters will dissipate stormwater
discharge energy during most or all of the tidal cycle. The deeper discharges will also be
immediately mixed with marine waters, which reduces the risk of direct exposure to juvenile
salmonids that might be foraging in the upper intertidal. Overflow openings at MHHW in both
outfalls will release excess stormwater on the beach,but this is not expected to commonly occur.
The new eastern outfall extension will be constructed outside of the oyster beds, to avoid trenching
through shellfish resources. The eastern outfall pipe alignment was designed to minimize long-term
harmful effects on beach habitat by diverting up to 7.5 cfs of stormwater discharges into low-
intertidal depths,burying the new pipe along the bulkhead, and extending it under the existing dock.
The dock separates the east and west oyster beds and offers the only pathway that avoids trenching
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 30 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
through the oysters. To Ruther minimize effects on marine waters,nearshore currents, and sediment
transport, most of the exposed (i.e., unburied) pipe will be elevated four inches off the substrate.
This alignment was chosen as the best solution to submerge the outfall, reduce beach erosion and
turbidity, increase stormwater mixing with marine water, and restore upper intertidal water quality
with the least habitat disturbance during construction and long-term operations.
The western outfall pipe was designed to be buried for most of its length. The outlet elevation was
determined to be the deepest possible location,within resort property,that would fully submerge the
outfall, reduce beach erosion and turbidity, maximize ize stormwater mixing with marine water, and
restore upper intertidal water quality for long-term operations. The benefits of this alignment to
threatened salmonids(and critical habitat)outweighed the short-term harm to the western oyster bed
that construction will inflict..
Potential short-term effects on water quality would consist of temporarily elevated levels of turbidity
caused by disturbed sediment (i.e., native sediment sidecast during trenching and bac fiill material
used to restore beach elevations)during an estimated three-week construction period. Pile extraction
and driving,estimated to two or three days,would also cause localized areas of short-term turbidity.
Temporarily elevated levels of turbidity following pile extraction and replacement and sediment
disturbance during trenching are not expected to have any measurable harmful effect on juvenile
chum salmon. First, based on juvenile outmigration timing, juvenile chum would not likely be
present in the shallow intertidal areas during the mid-summer. At this time of year, most juveniles
should be foraging in deeper waters and preying on larger pelagic invertebrates and fish. Second,
the footprint of the backfilled areas will be relatively small, compared to the action area, so the
amount of turbidity from the backfill is expected to be minor. Third, the turbidity should gradually
increase along the front of the flooding tide and disperse slowly through the water, allowing salmon
escape time and access to deeper water to avoid the turbidity. Along each pipeline, the duration of
elevated turbidity should be measured in minutes,rather than hours, during the three to five days of
in-water construction. This level of disturbance would likely have no noticeable effect on juvenile
chum salmon,if present in the action area during construction.
The replacement of 21 creosote-treated wood piles with equivalent or smaller galvanized steel piles
will improve water quality over existing conditions and result in a beneficial effect. The
replacement of chemically preserved wood railings and stringers with a chemically inert wood
composite material (i.e., "Trex" or similar type) and composite grating will also reduce potential
chemical leacheate into marine waters and increase light transmission. The replacement of 9,000 ft2
of Styrofoam slab floatation with polyethylene tubs will eliminate the potential release of Styrofoam
waste into marine waters.
6.2.2 Prey Availability and Tyne
Juvenile chum salmon feed primarily on plankton and epibenthic organisms,while subadults feed on
similar items as well as larger prey (including fishes and squid). Planktonic and epibenthic prey for
juvenile salmonids in the action area consists of the pelagic phases of small crustacea and other
invertebrates associated with the fine-grained intertidal sediment and dense shellfish beds at lower
intertidal and subtidal zones. Foraging juvenile chum salmon are likely to concentrate in the
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Ogralls Repair 31 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
productive areas of the lower intertidal zone, between+4 and -4 ft MLLW, and within the shellfish
beds, rather than the higher intertidal elevations near the bulkhead or the shaded areas under the
existing dock.
Sections of the dock will be removed to allow placement of the eastern outfall underneath. The dock
location and general footprint will not change; however, new materials and a new floatation design
will improve habitat conditions that will significantly benefit salmonid prey and foraging access.
The removal of creosote-treated wood piles and the use of chemically inert recycled wood composite
material in place of pressure-treated wood will improve habitat quality for benthic and epibenthic
invertebrates that may be consumed by salmonids or their prey. The addition of open grating for the
dock decking, plus substantial openings between and under the new tub flotation, will result in a
beneficial effect on critical habitat.
Long-term harmful effects from the proposed project are limited to the permanent loss of 100 ftz of
intertidal habitat under the exposed section of pipe that will rest directly on the substrate at the end
of the western outfall. An equal area of pipe will rest on the substrate along the eastern outfall,but it
is not a change from existing conditions because the area is not currently available as habitat, due to
the marine float that rests on the substrate about half the day. In addition, the proposed action will
permanently convert about 270 ft2 of intertidal fine-grained sediment into hard substrate for the
western outfall connection at the existing bulkhead (5.5 ftz), and 22 concrete anchors (—45 ft2) that
will elevate the pipes above grade. @ To compensate for this habitat conversion, about 200 ft2 of
debris will be removed from the intertidal beach and replaced with fine-grained native-type material.
Construction may have short-term negative effects on foraging salmonids because of excavation,
followed by a temporary reduction in benthic and epibenthic food resources. However,the disturbed
area is relatively small (about half an acre) and most is within upper intertidal elevations near the
bulkhead, where the fewest salmonid prey resources are found. Construction will occur in less than
four percent of the critical intertidal foraging habitat at elevations between 4 and -4 ft MLLW,
leaving 96 percent of the intertidal site undisturbed and available to foraging chum. Because the
trenches will be excavated and backfilled primarily in the dry, during low tide,juvenile salmon, if
present in late summer,will not be prevented from feeding by pipeline installation.
During pile extraction and driving, forage fish and foraging salmon would likely avoid the
immediate construction area because of the noise and activity; however, to minimize potential
effects from noise,a vibratory pile extractor/driver will be used. No pile proofing is needed.
Some benthic and epibenthic productivity would be temporarily reduced during the proposed action
because of alterations to habitat during pipeline construction. After the pipelines are installed, the
trenches will be backfilled with native sediment and macroinvertebrates will return to the alignments
on the incoming tide. Epibenthic invertebrates will reappear on the flooding tide in high densities
and likely repopulate the alignments within several weeks. Benthic invertebrates will likely
repopulate the disturbed areas within months,quickly reaching pre-construction densities,but it may
take several years to reach species diversity similar to preconstruction,unless the area is reseeded for
oysters. Numerous studies of dredged intertidal sites have demonstrated that benthic and epibenthic
invertebrates rapidly repopulate large disturbed areas equal to or exceeding pre-disturbance levels,
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outjalls Repair 32 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
well within two years(Anchor Environmental 2002,Parametrix 1997,CH2M Hill 1995,Romberg et
al. 1995,Parametrix 1994).
Long-term beneficial effects on salmonid prey resources from the proposed project include 1)
0.14 ac of restored intertidal substrate, 2)recovery of 2,688 ft'of benthic habitat under the dock,due
to flotation improvements, 3) improved substrate quality (i.e., increased benthic colonization from
improved water circulation and new substrate), 4) reduction of undiluted stormwater discharges in
the intertidal, 5) removal of 21 creosote-treated piles from the environment, and 6) shade reduction
over 4,766 ft2 of substrate.
Overall, the net area of intertidal habitat that will be converted to hard substrate will be more than
compensated by the net increase of 2,658 ft2 (0.06 ac) of fine-grained intertidal habitat and the
0.14 ac of intertidal beach that will be restored to pre-erosion conditions. The temporary loss of
invertebrate prey species during construction and restoration would be insignificant because the total
potentially disturbed area(0.53 ac) comprises only a fraction (6 percent) of the action area(8.2 ac).
In addition, construction will be short-term, during low tides when juvenile chum, if present during
this period, would find ample foraging opportunities within the action area. The areas of greatest
macroinvertebrate productivity (i.e., the shellfish beds) are extensive throughout the action area and
adjacent nearshore habitat;these areas will not be affected by the project.
6.23 Refuaia/Safe Access
Long-term potentially harmful effects on juvenile salmon could be caused by physical obstructions
on the sea floor, such as the two 60-ft-long sections of new outfall pipes that will rest directly on
substrate. During ebb tides, the pipes will project into the water column an average of 11 inches,
from 0 in where the pipes emerge from below grade, to 22 in where the pipes transition onto
elevated supports. The eastern pipe would present the longest obstacle during tidal heights between
5 and 6 ft MLLW, when the top of the pipe would be even with the water level. This condition
would occur for about 50 minutes every six hours of most daily tidal cycles. The western pipe
would present the longest obstacle at tidal heights between —2 and -3 ft MLLW. This condition
would occur less frequently, only once every 12 hours,for those relatively few days with low minus
tides. At lower or higher tidal stages, the length of pipe presenting an obstacle would be reduced
until it was either completely submerged or completely dry.
The exposed pipe sections would closely mimic waterlogged tree trunks that were once common
along the protected shorelines of Hood Canal. Even at low tides, the pipe obstructions would not
likely present an obstruction to migrating juvenile salmon because juvenile salmon would perceive
the pipe as a variation in intertidal contours, similar to narrow spits of sediment that are deposited
perpendicular from the shore near stream and river mouths. Both pipes would never affect fish
passage at the same time because their elevations are different-one is mid-intertidal, the other is
almost subtidal. All other exposed pipe will be elevated 4 inches above the substrate to allow fish
passage and water circulation. Given these considerations, it is unlikely that the proposed outfall
extensions would hinder juvenile chum salmon migration,access to foraging habitat,or safe passage
through the action area.
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 33 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
The new floating dock will benefit salmon migration and access throughout the site because it is a
significant design improvement over baseline dock conditions. Baseline flotation is nearly
continuous blocks of styrofoam that rest completely on the beach at low tides, but the new flotation
will have two-ft-wide spaces between the tubs and will rest on the bottom only at the four comers of
each 48-ft-long dock section. The new flotation will allow practically unobstructed fish movement
under each dock section. The new flotation will also improve water circulation.
not anticipated because excavation
Short-term construction impacts on fish access and refit 'a are o
P � p
and filling will occur almost entirely at low tides, in the dry. Pile extraction and installation may
reduce fish passage in the immediate area of disturbance, but the effect would be of short duration
(about three days) and localized around whatever pile was being installed, leaving the vast majority
of the action area accessible to salmon. In addition, a vibratory hammer will minimize noise
disturbance.
6.2.4 Effects Determination for Chum Salmon
Proposed project activities in the action area would have no measurable short-term effects on Hood
Canal summer-run chum salmon because of the limited area of disturbance, the short duration of
disturbance, and the timing of excavation/backfilling and pipe installation. Most construction will
occur during low tides, in the dry,at a time of year when juvenile chum are presumed to be foraging
in deeper water. Turbidity effects from sediment disturbance will be short (lasting only until the
next tidal cycle, or less) and limited to the small area of the pipeline alignments. The construction
area is in a quiescent bay without currents, so sediment suspended during construction will stay
localized. A temporary decrease in benthic productivity will occur in the construction corridor
(about 0.53 ac), due to pipeline construction and access. About 30 percent of the proposed
excavation area is near the bulkhead, at intertidal elevations above 8 ft MLLW, in the less-
productive upper intertidal range where benthic productivity of salmon prey decreases with
increasing elevation.
About half of the estimated area of disturbance would be due to vehicle access along the alignment,
rather than excavation. The use of small, tracked or balloon-tire vehicles will minimize and
distribute vehicle loads over a greater area of substrate. Larger, surface-dwelling invertebrates may
be crushed, but smaller, subsurface-dwelling invertebrates will probably survive in burrows. About
400 ft of dock currently ground on the beach during low tides; construction under this area will not
impact the benthic invertebrate community any worse than baseline conditions.
A large part of the construction area is already disturbed from outfall-related erosion, so construction
disturbance in the upper intertidal is not a change from baseline conditions,in terms of turbidity and
benthic prey resources' density and diversity. Continued beach erosion is possible from stormwater
overflows at the bulkheads; however, this would occur only because of reduced outfall capacity
(caused by rising tides) and heavy storms. The proposed project would continue to discharge
stormwater that exceeds outfall capacity from new overflow openings onto intertidal beach, but
these discharges would be just a fraction of the current discharges. Under proposed conditions,
excess stormwater overflows would be significantly less than baseline conditions because total
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 34 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
discharge volumes at MHHW would be reduced by the capacity of the new outfalls (provided the
outfalls are not blocked by rising Hood Canal tidewaters).
The construction corridor comprises about six percent of the resort's property(i.e., owned tidelands
and leased bedlands under the moorage float) and an even smaller percentage of the greater action
area Most of the area to be disturbed already exhibits low benthic productivity because of a high
intertidal location, ongoing stormwater erosion, and grounding/shading from the existing dock.
Almost all of the area that will be directly affected by construction will be significantly improved
over baseline conditions following completion of the project. After construction and beach
restoration, invertebrate recovery should occur rapidly because the restored beach area will provide a
stable substrate for re-colonization by onsite invertebrate populations. The adjacent lower intertidal
areas are highly productive and the native backfill material will already contain microfauna and
nutrients from the site that will encourage rapid new growth.
The only long-term negative effects on salmon habitat would occur at those areas where beach
substrate will be covered or replaced with hard surfaces (i.e., the lengths of pipe that will rest on the
substrate, plus the pipeline anchors under the elevated pipe sections, plus the western outfall
bulkhead drop structure). However, the negative effect of converting 260 ft2 of fine-grained
intertidal habitat to hard surfaces will be compensated by the recovery of about 200 ftz of fine-
grained substrate, after the abandoned pipes and debris have been removed, plus 0.12 ac of habitat
under the new dock.
For the sections of floating dock that will be repaired/replaced to accommodate the new pipeline,
several changes to the dock design will benefit water quality within intertidal habitat. The use of
chemically inert recycled wood composite materials in place of chemically preserved wood and the
one-for-one replacement of creosote-treated wood piles with galvanized steel piles will provide
long-term small-scale benefits to water quality for all aquatic organisms near the dock, many of
which constitute a prey base for juvenile salmonids.. The addition of open grating over most of the
dock decking will improve light transmission under the dock and encourage greater benthic
colonization under and near the dock. The new tub floatation will significantly reduce the area of
dock that grounds at low tide and allow open areas for fish passage under and through the dock. It
will also improve water circulation and invertebrate colonization throughout the action area.
The most significant benefit of the proposed stormwater outfall extensions will be to redirect most
discharges into deeper water, where erosive velocities will be reduced by Hood Canal waters. The
new outfalls will be submerged most of the year,which will reduce beach erosion. Restoring eroded
beach channels and contours to their original grade will recover about 0.14 ac of productive shellfish
habitat,including benthic and epibenthic invertebrates that are important prey for salmonids.
Therefore, this analysis determined that the proposed action may affect, but would not likely
adversely affect Hood Canal chum salmon, due to the temporary negative effects of construction
and pile driving. The proposed action would have a long-term beneficial effect on 0.14 ac of
restored intertidal habitat area, function, and productivity, and a net gain of 0.12 ac of fine-grained
intertidal habitat.
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Ou#'alls Repair 35 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
6.3 EFFECTS ON PUGET SOUND STEELHEAD AND CRITICAL HABITAT
The Federal Register's listing for Puget Sound steelhead, including Hood Canal populations,
identified numerous factors contributing to the decline of the Distinct Population Segment (DPS).
The listing proposal specifically emphasizes that past and continued destruction and modification of
steelhead habitat are the principal factors limiting the viability of the Puget Sound steelhead DPS
into the foreseeable future. However, the areas and contributing factors of degraded habitat
described in detail were riverine and estuarine in nature, not nearshore marine. The VMA 14
Limiting Factors Analysis for lower Hood Canal salmon and steelhead inventoried available habitat,
discussed factors contributing to habitat degradation and impairment, and identified critical factors
leading to the decline of steelhead in the watersheds of lower Hood Canal. Again,the data pertained
to riverine and estuarine habitats and did not address habitat features, conditions, or limiting factors
in the marine nearshore.
Due to the lack of information about nearshore habitat use by steelhead, this BABE assumes that
critical habitat features and functions for steelhead would likely be similar to Chinook and chum
salmon. This assumption is likely to be overly conservative because steelhead juveniles are not
often found in nearshore habitat and because recent studies in Hood Canal demonstrate a short
outmigration period(about two weeks)to the Strait of Juan de Fuca. The part of the effects analysis
for Chinook salmon applicable to Puget Sound steelhead is repeated here.
This BABE focuses on potential effects on the juvenile, rather than adult, steelhead life stage
because salmonid habitat for juveniles may be present in the intertidal waters of the action area.
Adult steelhead are not expected to be found in the intertidal nearshore because adults are reported
to be strongly oceanic (e.g., mid-Gulf of Alaska/Bering Sea/Arctic Ocean) after outmigration, not
commonly associated with this nearshore habitat or even Hood Canal waters, unless returning to
spawn. Sub-adult steelhead may use intertidal nearshore habitat while foraging for small fish
(including juvenile salmonids), but this use is probably uncommon within the action area because of
the absence of productive habitats (i.e., river estuaries with concentrated salmonid prey, forage fish
spawning areas, Pacific herring holding areas, and eelgrass beds)that are plentiful in other areas of
lower Hood Canal.
Habitat for juvenile steelhead may be considered to be present in the action area. The sand flats and
oyster beds would provide high-quality foraging habitat for steelhead prey,including forage fish and
juvenile salmon, because of abundant benthic and epibenthic invertebrates. Juvenile steelhead
would be attracted to schools of forage fish that, in turn, are attracted to invertebrate food resources
in the action area.
This biological assessment identified the following relevant habitat features/conditions in the project
area: water quality (including turbidity and chemistry), prey availability and type (dependent on
substrate quality and quantity), and refugia/safe access. Habitat conditions not found in the action
area include freshwater and estuarine waters and their associated foraging habitats, aquatic
vegetation,and forage fish spawning and holding habitat.
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Owfalls Repair 36 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
6.3.1 Water Ouality
Baseline water quality conditions include stormwater discharge from two recently constructed
stormwater outfalls that discharge in the upper intertidal zone. As part of the 2002-2004 resort
renovation, the stormwater collection system was redesigned and reconstructed to capture and treat
runoff from the parking lots and adjacent areas around the resort,including large areas of vegetation.
Treatment includes stormwater detention, particulate settling, oil/water separators, infiltration, and
discharge through a grass-lined biofiltration swale or sand filter, before discharge into the upper
intertidal. Stormwater quality is assumed to be low in pollutants because most of the runoff is
generated from about 10 ac of clean surfaces, such as the grassy slope (4.57 ac), landscaped areas
(3.4 ac), roofs (1.51 ac), sidewalks, and perennial seeps (0.48 ac). The paved surfaces probably
contribute little pollutant load to the stormwater because of their relatively low use and moderate to
low vehicle speeds. The paved parking areas (2.3 ac) reach parking capacity for only part of the
year, and the slow driving/parking speeds of resort visitors do not usually result in brake wear,
which is considered to be the source of metals derived from roads. Stormwater runoff from the area
of SR 106 (less than 1.2 ac)is also low in oils/grease and dissolved metals because the highway was
recently reconstructed to improve travel both around and into the resort, with slower speeds, longer
line-of-sight distances, and exit lanes. These improvements reduce quick acceleration/deceleration
and accidents,which in turn reduces brake wear and oil leakage. Most importantly, stormwater from
the parking areas and SR 106 is detained and treated before discharge. Baseline stormwater
discharge water quality will not change under this proposed action.
Under baseline conditions,the stormwater discharged at MHHW from the two outfalls causes beach
erosion during tides lower than MHHW when large storms exceed the capacity of the detention
swales. The proposed project will improve marine water quality(i.e., decrease turbidity)by moving
the stormwater outfalls to low intertidal elevations, so that marine waters of Hood Canal will
dissipate stormwater discharge energy during most or all of the tidal cycle. The deeper discharges
will be immediately mixed with marine waters,which reduces the risk of direct exposure to juvenile
salmonids that might be foraging in the upper intertidal. Overflow openings at MHHW in both
outfalls will release excess stormwater on the beach,but this is not expected to commonly occur.
The new eastern outfall extension will be constructed outside of the oyster beds, to avoid trenching
through shellfish resources. The eastern outfall pipe alignment was designed to reduce long-term
harmful effects on beach habitat by diverting up to 7.5 cfs of stormwater discharges into low-
intertidal depths, burying the new pipe along the bulkhead, and extending it under the existing dock.
The dock separates the east and west oyster beds and offers the only pathway that avoids trenching
through the oysters. To further minimize effects on marine waters,nearshore currents,and sediment
transport, most of the exposed (i.e., unburied) pipe will be elevated four inches off the substrate.
This alignment was chosen as the best solution to submerge the outfall, reduce beach erosion and
turbidity, increase stormwater mixing with marine water, and improve upper intertidal water quality
with the least habitat disturbance during construction and long-term operations.
The western outfall pipe was designed to be buried for most of its length. The outlet elevation was
determined to be the deepest possible location, within resort property,that would fully submerge the
outfall, reduce beach erosion and turbidity, maximize stormwater mixing with marine water, and
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 37 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
restore upper intertidal water quality for long-term operations. The benefits of this alignment to
threatened salmonids (and critical habitat) outweighed the short-term harm to the western oyster bed
that construction will inflict..
Potential short-term effects on water quality would consist of temporarily elevated levels of turbidity
caused by disturbed sediment (i.e., native sediment sidecast during trenching and backfill material
used to restore beach elevations)during an estimated three-week construction period. Pile extraction
and driving, estimated to take two or three days, would also cause localized areas of short-term
turbidity.
Temporarily elevated levels of turbidity following pile extraction and replacement and sediment
disturbance during trenching are not expected to have any measurable harmful effect on juvenile
steelhead. First, based on juvenile outmigration timing, juvenile steelhead would not likely be
present in the shallow intertidal areas during the mid-summer. Migration studies of juvenile
steelhead from the Hamma Hamma.River show a 12-day Hood Canal residency. By mid-summer,
most juveniles should in northern Pacific mid-ocean waters, preying on larger fish and squid.
Second,the footprint of the backfilled areas will be relatively small, compared to the action area, so
the amount of turbidity from the backfill is expected to be minor. Third, the turbidity should
gradually increase along the front of the flooding tide and disperse slowly through the water,
allowing steelhead escape time and access to deeper water to avoid the turbidity. Along each
pipeline,the duration of elevated turbidity should be measured in minutes,rather than hours, during
the three to five days of in-water construction. This level of disturbance would likely have no
noticeable effect on juvenile steelhead,if present in the action area during construction.
The replacement of 21 creosote-treated wood piles with equivalent or smaller galvanized steel piles
1 improve water quality over existing conditions and result in a beneficial effect. The
� p q tY g
replacement of chemically preserved wood railings and stringers with a chemically inert wood
composite material (i.e., "Trex" or similar type) and composite grating will also reduce potential
chemical leacheate into marine waters and increase light transmission. The replacement of 9,000 ft2
of Styrofoam slab floatation with polyethylene tubs will eliminate the potential release of Styrofoam
waste into marine waters. These water quality improvements would be beneficial to all fish in the
action area,including steelhead.
6.3.2 Prey Availability and Type
Benthic and epibenthic prey for forage fish and juvenile salmonids in the action area consists of
small crustacea and other invertebrates associated with the fine-grained intertidal sediment and
dense shellfish beds at lower intertidal and subtidal zones. Foraging juvenile steelhead are likely to
follow schools or concentrations of forage fish in the productive areas of the lower intertidal zone
(e.g., eelgrass and kelp beds), rather than the higher intertidal elevations near the bulkhead or the
shaded areas under the existing dock.
Sections of the dock will be removed to allow placement of the eastern outfall underneath. The dock
location and general footprint will not change; however, new materials and a new floatation design
will improve habitat conditions that will significantly benefit steelhead foraging access.
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 38 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
l
Long-term harmful effects from the proposed project are limited to the permanent loss of 100 ftz of
intertidal habitat under the exposed section of pipe that will rest directly on the substrate at the end
of the western outfall. An equal area of pipe will rest on the substrate along the eastern outfall,but it
is not a change from existing conditions because the area is not currently available as habitat, due to
the marine float that rests on the substrate about half the day. In addition, the proposed action will
permanently convert about 270 fl of intertidal fine-grained sediment into hard substrate for the
p Y �'
western outfall connection at the existing bulkhead (5.5 ftz), and 22 concrete anchors (—45 ftz) that
will elevate the pipes above grade. To compensate for this habitat conversion,about 200 ftz of debris
will be removed from the intertidal beach and replaced with fine-grained native-type material.
Construction may have short-term negative effects on foraging steelhead because of excavation,
followed by a temporary reduction in benthic and epibenthic food resources. However,the disturbed
area is relatively small (about half an acre) and most is within upper intertidal elevations near the
bulkhead, where the fewest salmonid prey resources are found. Construction will occur in less than
four percent of the critical intertidal foraging habitat at elevations between 4 and -4 ft MLLW,
leaving 96 percent of the intertidal site undisturbed and available to foraging fish. Because the
trenches will be excavated and backfilled primarily in the dry, during low tide,juvenile steelhead, if
present in late summer,will not be prevented from feeding by pipeline installation.
During pile extraction and driving, forage fish and foraging steelhead would likely avoid the
immediate construction area because of the noise and activity; however, to minimize potential
effects from noise,a vibratory pile extractor/driver will be used. No pile proofing is needed.
Some benthic and epibenthic productivity would be temporarily reduced during the proposed action
because of alterations to habitat during pipeline construction. After the pipelines are installed, the
trenches will be backfilled with native sediment and macroinvertebrates will return to the alignments
on the incoming tide. Epibenthic invertebrates will reappear on the flooding tide in high densities
and likely repopulate the alignments within several weeks. Benthic invertebrates will likely
repopulate the disturbed areas within months, quickly reaching pre-construction densities,but it may
take several years to reach species diversity similar to preconstruction,unless the area is reseeded for
oysters. Numerous studies of dredged intertidal sites have demonstrated that benthic and epibenthic
invertebrates rapidly repopulate large disturbed areas equal to or exceeding pre-disturbance levels,
well within two years(Anchor Environmental 2002, Parametrix 1997,CH2M Hill 1995,Romberg et
al. 1995,Parametrix 1994).
Long-term beneficial effects on salmonid prey resources from the proposed project include 1)
0.14 ac of restored intertidal substrate, 2)recovery of 2,688 ftz of benthic habitat under the dock, due
to flotation improvements, 3) improved substrate quality (i.e., increased benthic colonization from
improved water circulation and new substrate), 4) reduction of undiluted stormwater discharges in
the intertidal, 5) removal of 21 creosote-treated piles from the environment, and 6) shade reduction
over 4,766 ftz of substrate.
Overall, the net area of intertidal habitat that will be converted to hard substrate will be more than
compensated by the net increase of 2,658 ftz (0.06 ac) of fine-grained intertidal habitat and the
0.14 ac of intertidal beach that will be restored to pre-erosion conditions. The temporary loss of
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 39. December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
invertebrate prey species during construction and restoration would be insignificant because the total
potentially disturbed area(0.53 ac) comprises only a fraction(6 percent) of the action area(8.2 ac).
In addition, construction will be short-term, during low tides when juvenile steelhead, if present
during this period, would find ample foraging opportunities within the action area. The areas of
greatest macroinvertebrate productivity (i.e., the shellfish beds) are extensive throughout the action
area and adjacent nearshore habitat;these areas will not be affected by the project.
6.3.3 Refuaia/Safe Access
Long-term potentially harmful effects on juvenile salmon could be caused by physical obstructions
on the sea floor, such as the two 60-ft-long sections of new outfall pipes that will rest directly on
substrate. During ebb tides, the pipes will project into the water column an average of 11 inches,
from 0 in where the pipes emerge from below grade, to 22 in where the pipes transition onto
elevated supports. The eastern pipe would present the longest obstacle during tidal heights between
5 and 6 ft MLLW, when the top of the pipe would be even with the water level. This condition
would occur for about 50 minutes every six hours of most daily tidal cycles. The western pipe
would present the longest obstacle at tidal heights between —2 and -3 ft MLLW. This condition
would occur less frequently, only once every 12 hours,for those relatively few days with low minus
tides. At lower or higher tidal stages, the length of pipe presenting an obstacle would be reduced
until it was either completely submerged or completely dry.
The exposed pipe sections would closely mimic waterlogged tree trunks that were once common
along the protected shorelines of Hood Canal. Even at low tides, the pipe obstructions would not
likely present an obstruction to migrating juvenile steelhead because they would perceive the pipe as
a variation in intertidal contours, similar to narrow spits of sediment that are deposited perpendicular
from the shore near stream and river mouths. Both pipes would never affect fish passage at the same
time because their elevations are different—one is mid-intertidal, the other is almost subtidal. All
other exposed pipe will be elevated 4 inches above the substrate to allow fish passage and water
circulation. Given these considerations, it is unlikely that the proposed outfall extensions would
hinder juvenile steelhead migration, access to foraging habitat, or safe passage through the action
area
The new floating dock will benefit trout migration and access throughout the site because it is a
significant design improvement over baseline dock conditions. Baseline flotation is nearly
continuous blocks of styrofoam that rest completely on the beach at low tides, but the new flotation
will have two-ft-wide spaces between the tubs and will rest on the bottom only at the four corners of
each 48-ft-long dock section. The new flotation will allow practically unobstructed fish movement
under each dock section. The new flotation will also improve water circulation.
Short-term construction impacts on fish access and refugia are not anticipated because excavation
and filling will occur almost entirely at low tides, in the dry. Pile extraction and installation may
reduce fish passage in the immediate area of disturbance, but the effect would be of short duration
(about three days) and localized around whatever pile was being installed, leaving the vast majority
of the action area accessible to steelhead. In addition, a vibratory hammer will minimize noise
disturbance.
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 40 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
6.3.4 Determination of Effects on Steelhead
Proposed project activities in the action area would have no measurable short-term effects on Puget
Sound steelhead and critical habitat because of the limited area of disturbance, the short duration of
disturbance, and the timing of excavation/backfilling and pipe installation. Most construction will
occur during low tides, in the dry, at a time of year when juvenile steelhead are presumed to be
foraging in ocean waters. Turbidity effects from sediment disturbance will be short (lasting only
until the next tidal cycle, or less) and limited to the small area of the pipeline alignments. The
construction area is in a quiescent bay without currents, so sediment suspended during construction
will stay localized. A temporary decrease in benthic productivity will occur in the construction
corridor(about 0.53 ac), due to pipeline construction and access. About 30 percent of the proposed
excavation area is near the bulkhead, at intertidal elevations above 8 ft MLLW, in the less-
productive upper intertidal range where benthic productivity of salmonid prey decreases with
increasing elevation.
About half of the estimated area of disturbance would be due to vehicle access along the alignment,
rather than excavation. The use of small, tracked or balloon-tire vehicles will minimize and
distribute vehicle loads over a greater area of substrate. Larger, surface-dwelling invertebrates may
be crushed, but smaller, subsurface-dwelling invertebrates will probably survive in burrows. About
400 ft of dock currently ground on the beach during low tides; construction under this area will not
impact the benthic invertebrate community any worse than baseline conditions.
A large part of the construction area is already disturbed from outfall-related erosion,so construction
disturbance in the upper intertidal is not a change from baseline conditions, in terms of turbidity and
benthic prey resources' density and diversity. Continued beach erosion is possible from stormwater
overflows at the bulkheads; however, this would occur only because of reduced outfall capacity
(caused by rising tides) and heavy storms. The proposed project would continue to discharge
stormwater that exceeds outfall capacity from new overflow openings onto intertidal beach, but
these discharges would be just a fraction of the current discharges. Under proposed conditions,
excess stormwater overflows would be significantly less than baseline conditions because total
discharge volumes at MHIiW would be reduced by the capacity of the new outfalls (provided the
outfalls are not blocked by rising Hood Canal tidewaters).
The construction corridor comprises about six percent of the resort's property (i.e., owned tidelands
and leased bedlands under the moorage float) and an even smaller percentage of the greater action
area. Most of the area to be disturbed already exhibits low benthic productivity because of a high
intertidal location, ongoing stormwater erosion, and grounding/shading from the existing dock.
Almost all of the area that will be directly affected by construction will be significantly improved
over baseline conditions following completion of the project. After construction and beach
restoration, invertebrate recovery should occur rapidly because the restored beach area will provide a
stable substrate for re-colonization by onsite invertebrate populations. The adjacent lower intertidal
areas are highly productive and the native backfill material will already contain microfauna and
nutrients from the site that will encourage rapid new growth.
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 41 December 2007
Biological AssessmentBiological Evaluation
I
The only long-term negative effects on steelhead habitat would occur at those areas where beach
substrate will be covered or replaced with hard surfaces (i.e.,the lengths of pipe that will rest on the
substrate, plus the pipeline anchors under the elevated pipe sections, plus the western outfall
bulkhead drop structure). However, the negative effect of converting 260 ft2 of fine-grained
intertidal habitat to hard surfaces will be compensated b the recovery of about 200 ft2 of fine-
grained substrate, after the abandoned pipes and debris have been removed, plus 0.12 ac of habitat
under the new dock.
For the sections of floating dock that will be repaired/replaced to accommodate the new pipeline,
several changes to the dock design will benefit water quality within intertidal habitat. The use of
chemically inert recycled wood composite materials in place of chemically preserved wood and the
one-for-one replacement of creosote-treated wood piles with galvanized steel piles will provide
long-term small-scale benefits to water quality for all aquatic organisms near the dock, many of
which constitute a prey base for juvenile salmonids. The addition of open grating over most of the
dock decking will improve light transmission under the dock and encourage greater benthic
colonization under and near the dock. The new tub floatation will significantly reduce the area of
dock that grounds at low tide and allow open areas for fish passage under and through the dock. It
will also improve water circulation and invertebrate colonization throughout the action area.
The most significant benefit of the proposed stormwater outfall extensions will be to redirect most
discharges into deeper water, where erosive velocities will be reduced by Hood Canal waters. The
new outfalls will be submerged most of the year,which will reduce beach erosion. Restoring eroded
beach channels and contours to their original grade will recover about 0.14 ac of productive shellfish
habitat,including benthic and epibenthic invertebrates that are important prey for salmonids.
Therefore, this analysis determined that the proposed action may affect, but would not likely
adversely affect Puget Sound steelhead and critical habitat,due to the temporary negative effects of
construction and pile driving. The proposed action would have a long-term beneficial effect on 0.14
ac of restored intertidal habitat area, function, and productivity, and a net gain of 0.12 ac of fine-
grained intertidal habitat.
6.4 EFFECTS ON BULL TROUT
The decline of the Coastal/Puget Sound bull trout DPS has been attributed to habitat degradation,
blockage of migratory corridors by dams,poor water quality,introduction of non-native species, and
the effects of past fisheries management practices (USFWS 1999). These factors of decline are
attributable to development and habitat alteration in rivers and estuaries, and to excessive harvest of
bull trout and bull trout prey,especially forage fish and juvenile salmonids. Factors for decline have
not been attributed to marine nearshore development, although development affects on water quality
and forage fish habitat could affect bull trout.
This BABE focuses on potential effects on the sub-adult, rather than adult, bull trout life stage
because foraging habitat is present in the intertidal waters of the action area. Adults are not expected
to be found in the intertidal nearshore because their prey base (i.e., large pelagic fish) is not
commonly associated within this shallow habitat range. Sub-adults may use intertidal nearshore
habitat while foraging for juvenile fish (including juvenile salmonids), but this use is probably
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 42 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
insignificant within the action area because of the absence of more productive habitats (i.e., river
estuaries with salmonid prey, forage fish spawning areas, Pacific herring holding areas, and eelgrass
beds)that are plentiful in other areas of lower Hood Canal. Because bull trout sub-adults forage in
nearshore areas throughout the summer, they may be present in the action area during construction,
so they are evaluated here.
Little is known about sub-adult bull trout behavior and habitat use, especially in Hood Canal, so the
analysis of effects for Chinook salmon is repeated here, with several exceptions (e.g., prey species,
migration timing).
This biological assessment identified the following relevant habitat features/conditions in the project
area:
• water quality(including turbidity and chemistry),
• prey availability and type (dependent on substrate quality and quantity and intertidal
elevation),and
• access to refugia and migratory routes.
Habitat conditions not found in the action area include freshwater and estuarine waters and their
associated foraging habitats,aquatic vegetation,and forage fish spawning habitat.
6.4.1 Water Ouality
Baseline water quality conditions include stormwater discharge from two recently constructed
stormwater outfalls that discharge in the upper intertidal zone. As part of the 2002-2004 resort
renovation, the stormwater collection system was redesigned and reconstructed to capture and treat
runoff from the parking lots and adjacent areas around the resort,including large areas of vegetation.
Treatment includes stormwater detention, particulate settling, oil/water separators, infiltration, and
discharge through a grass-lined biofiltration swale or sand filter, before discharge into the upper
intertidal. Stormwater quality is assumed to be low in pollutants because most of the runoff is
generated from about 10 ac of clean surfaces, such as the grassy slope (4.57 ac), landscaped areas
(3.4 ac), roofs (1.51 ac), sidewalks, and perennial seeps (0.48 ac). The paved surfaces probably
contribute little pollutant load to the stormwater because of their relatively low use and moderate to
low vehicle speeds. The paved parking areas (2.3 ac) reach parking capacity for only part of the
year, and the slow driving/parking speeds of resort visitors do not usually result in brake wear,
which is considered to be the source of metals derived from roads. Stormwater runoff from the area
of SR 106(less than 1.2 ac)is also low in oils/grease and dissolved metals because the highway was
recently reconstructed to improve travel both around and into the resort, with slower speeds, longer
line-of-sight distances, and exit lanes. These improvements reduce quick acceleration/deceleration
and accidents,which in turn reduces brake wear and oil leakage. Most importantly, stormwater from
the parking areas and SR 106 is detained and treated before discharge. Baseline stormwater
discharge water quality will not change under this proposed action.
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 43 December 2007
Biological AssessmentJBiological Evaluation
Under baseline conditions,the stormwater discharged at MHHW from the two outfalls causes beach
erosion during tides lower than MHHW when large storms exceed the capacity of the detention
swales. The proposed project will improve marine water quality(i.e., decrease turbidity)by moving
the stormwater outfalls to low intertidal elevations, so that marine waters of Hood Canal will
dissipate stormwater discharge energy during most or all of the tidal cycle. The deeper discharges
will also be immediately mixed with marine waters, which reduces the risk of direct exposure to
juvenile salmonids that might be foraging in the upper intertidal. Overflow openings at MHI3W in
both outfalls will release excess stormwater on the beach, but this is not expected to commonly
occur.
The new eastern outfall extension will be constructed outside of the oyster beds, to avoid trenching
through shellfish resources. The eastern outfall pipe alignment was designed to minimize long-term
harmful effects on beach habitat by diverting up to 7.5 cfs of stormwater discharges into low-
intertidal depths, burying the new pipe along the bulkhead, and extending it under the existing dock.
The dock separates the east and west oyster beds and offers the only pathway that avoids trenching
through the oysters. To further minimize effects on marine waters,nearshore currents, and sediment
transport, most of the exposed (i.e., unburied) pipe will be elevated four inches off the substrate.
This alignment was chosen as the best solution to submerge the outfall, reduce beach erosion and
turbidity, increase stormwater mixing with marine water, and improve upper intertidal water quality
with the least habitat disturbance during construction and long-term operations.
The western outfall pipe was designed to be buried for most of its length. The outlet elevation was
determined to be the deepest possible location,within resort property,that would fully submerge the
outfall, reduce beach erosion and turbidity, maximize stormwater mixing with marine water, and
restore upper intertidal water quality for long-term operations. The benefits of this alignment to
threatened salmonids(and critical habitat) outweighed the short-term harm to the western oyster bed
that construction will inflict..
Potential short-term effects on water quality would consist of temporarily elevated levels of turbidity
caused by disturbed sediment (i.e., native sediment sidecast during trenching and backfill material
used to restore beach elevations)during an estimated three-week construction period. Pile extraction
and driving,estimated to two or three days,would also cause localized areas of short-term turbidity.
Temporarily elevated levels of turbidity following pile extraction and replacement and sediment
disturbance during trenching are not expected to have any measurable harmful effect on sub-adult
bull trout. First, the footprint of the backfilled areas will be relatively small, compared to the action
area, so the amount of turbidity from the backfill is expected to be minor. Second, the turbidity
should gradually increase along the front of the flooding tide and disperse slowly through the water,
allowing salmon escape time and access to deeper water to avoid the turbidity. Along each pipeline,
the duration of elevated turbidity should be measured in minutes,rather than hours, during the three
to five days of in-water construction. Third, bull trout are highly mobile and far-ranging, so they
would not likely be present in the action area for more than a few minutes (at most, a few hours)
while searching for forage fish or juvenile salmonids to eat. This level of disturbance would likely
have no noticeable effect on sub-adult bull trout,if present in the action area during construction.
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Ouoralls Repair 44 December 2007
Biological AssessmentlBiological Evaluation
The replacement of 21 creosote-treated wood piles with equivalent or smaller galvanized steel piles
will improve water quality over existing conditions and result in a beneficial effect. The
replacement of chemically preserved wood railings and stringers with a chemically inert wood
composite material (i.e., "Trex" or similar type) and composite grating will also reduce potential
chemical leacheate into marine waters and increase light transmission. The replacement of 9,000 ft2
of Styrofoam slab floatation with polyethylene tubs will eliminate the potential release of Styrofoam
waste into marine waters. These water quality improvements would be beneficial to all fish in the
action area,including bull trout.
6.4.2 Prey Availability and Tune
Foraging sub-adult bull trout are likely to concentrate in the productive areas of the lower intertidal
zone, between +4 and -4 ft MLLW, wherever forage fish might be found, rather than the higher
intertidal elevations near the bulkhead or the shaded areas under the existing dock.
Sections of the dock will be removed to allow placement of the eastern outfall underneath. The dock
location and general footprint will not change; however, new materials and a new floatation design
will improve habitat conditions that will significantly benefit salmonid prey and foraging access.
Long-term changes to the action area include the loss of 100 ft2 of intertidal habitat under the
exposed section of pipe that will rest directly on the substrate at the end of the western outfall. This
change will not directly affect bull trout because sub-adults and adults are pelagic piscivores that are
not known to prey on benthic invertebrates in nearshore marine areas. An equal area of pipe will
rest on the substrate along the eastern outfall,but it is not a change from existing conditions because
the area is not currently available as habitat, due to the marine float that rests on the substrate about
half the day. In addition, the proposed action will permanently convert about 270 fl of intertidal
fine-grained sediment into hard substrate for the western outfall connection at the existing bulkhead
(5.5 ft2), and 22 concrete anchors (—45 ft2)that will elevate the pipes above grade. To compensate
for habitat conversion, about 200 ft2 of debris will be removed from the intertidal beach and replaced
with fine-grained,native-type material.
Construction may have short-term negative effects on foraging bull trout because their prey (other
fish)would likely avoid areas of in-water construction disturbances. However,the construction area
is relatively small (about half an acre) and most is within upper intertidal elevations near the
bulkhead,where the fewest salmonid prey resources are found. Construction will occur in less than
four percent of the critical intertidal foraging habitat at elevations between 4 and -4 ft MLLW,
leaving 96 percent of the intertidal site undisturbed and available to foraging bull trout. Because the
trenches will be excavated and backfilled primarily in the dry,during low tide, sub-adult bull trout,if
present,will not be prevented from feeding by pipeline installation.
During pile extraction and driving, forage fish and foraging bull trout would likely avoid the
immediate construction area because of the noise and activity; however, to minimize potential
effects from noise,a vibratory pile extractor/driver will be used. No pile proofing is needed.
Long-term beneficial effects on salmonid prey resources from the proposed project include 1)
0.14 ac of restored intertidal substrate,2)recovery of 2,688 ft2 of benthic habitat under the dock,due
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 45 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
to flotation improvements, 3) improved substrate quality (i.e., increased benthic colonization from
improved water circulation and new substrate), 4) reduction of undiluted stormwater discharges in
the intertidal, 5) removal of 21 creosote-treated piles from the environment, and 6) shade reduction
over 4,766 ft2 of substrate.
Overall, the net area of intertidal habitat that will be converted to hard substrate will be more than
compensated by the net increase of 2,658 ft2 (0.06 ac) of fine-grained intertidal habitat and the
0.14 ac of intertidal beach that will be restored to pre-erosion conditions. The temporary loss of
invertebrate prey species during construction and restoration would be insignificant because bull
trout are piscivorous. The total potentially disturbed area (0.53 ac) comprises only a fraction
(6 percent) of the action area(8.2 ac). In addition, construction will be short-term, during low tides
when sub-adults, if present, would find ample foraging opportunities within the action area and
better foraging opportunities in other parts of Hood Canal. The areas of greatest forage fish
productivity (i.e., spawning and holding areas) are extensive along the northern shoreline of the
Great Bend and near the major river estuaries of southern Hood Canal; these areas will not be
affected by the project.
6.4.3 RefuaWSafe Access
Long-term potentially harmful effects on sub-adult bull trout could be caused by physical
obstructions on the sea floor, such as the two 60-ft-long sections of new outfall pipes that will rest
directly on substrate. During ebb tides,the pipes will project into the water column an average of 11
inches, from 0 in where the pipes emerge from below grade,to 22 in where the pipes transition onto
elevated supports. The eastern pipe would present the longest obstacle during tidal heights between
5 and 6 ft MLLW, when the top of the pipe would be even with the water level. This condition
would occur for about 50 minutes every six hours of most daily tidal cycles. The western pipe
would present the longest obstacle at tidal heights between —2 and -3 ft MLLW. This condition
would occur less frequently, only once every 12 hours,for those relatively few days with low minus
tides. At lower or higher tidal stages, the length of pipe presenting an obstacle would be reduced
until it was either completely submerged or completely dry.
The exposed pipe sections would closely mimic waterlogged tree trunks that were once common
along the protected shorelines of Hood Canal. Even at low tides, the pipe obstructions would not
likely present an obstruction to migrating bull trout because they would perceive the pipe as a
variation in intertidal contours, similar to narrow spits of sediment that are deposited perpendicular
from the shore near stream and river mouths. Both pipes would never affect fish passage at the same
time because their elevations are different—one is mid-intertidal, the other is almost subtidal. All
other exposed pipe will be elevated 4 inches above the substrate to allow fish passage and water
circulation. Given these considerations, it is unlikely that the proposed outfall extensions would
hinder bull trout migration,access to foraging habitat,or safe passage through the action area.
The new floating dock will benefit bull trout migration and access throughout the site because it is a
significant design improvement over baseline dock conditions. Baseline flotation is nearly
continuous blocks of styrofoam that rest completely on the beach at low tides, but the new flotation
es between the tubs and will rest on the bottom only will have two-ft-wide spaces Y at the four corners of
P
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Ouv'alls Repair 46 December 2007
Biological AssessmentlBiological Evaluation
each 48-ft-long dock section. The new flotation will allow practically unobstructed fish movement
under each dock section. The new flotation will also improve water circulation.
Short-term construction impacts on fish access and refugia are not anticipated because excavation
and filling will occur almost entirely at low tides, in the dry. Pile extraction and installation may
reduce fish passage in the immediate area of disturbance, but the effect would be of short duration
(about three days) and localized around whatever pile was being installed, leaving the vast majority
of the action area accessible to salmon. In addition, a vibratory hammer will minimize noise
disturbance.
6.4.4 Determination of Effects on Bull Trout
Proposed project activities in the action area would have no measurable short-term effects on bull
trout because of the limited area of disturbance, the short duration of disturbance, and the timing of
excavation/backfilling and pipe installation. Most construction will occur during low tides, in the
dry. Turbidity effects from sediment disturbance will be short(lasting only until the next tidal cycle,
or less) and limited to the small area of the pipeline alignments. The construction area is in a
quiescent bay without currents, so sediment suspended during construction will stay localized. A
temporary decrease in benthic productivity will not affect bull trout because they are piscivorous. A
decrease may displace forage fish (which are bull trout prey), but would not affect population
density or distribution, so bull trout would not be affected.
A large part of the construction area is already disturbed from outfall-related erosion,so construction
disturbance in the upper intertidal is not a change from baseline conditions, in terms of turbidity.
Continued beach erosion is possible from stormwater overflows at the bulkheads; however, this
would occur only because of reduced outfall capacity (caused by rising tides) and heavy storms.
The proposed project would continue to discharge stormwater that exceeds outfall capacity from
new overflow openings onto intertidal beach, but these discharges would be just a fraction of the
current discharges. Under proposed conditions,excess stormwater overflows would be significantly
less than baseline conditions because total discharge volumes at MHHW would be reduced by the
capacity of the new outfalls(provided the outfalls are not blocked by rising Hood Canal tidewaters).
The construction corridor comprises about six percent of the resort's property (i.e., owned tidelands
and leased bedlands under the moorage float) and an even smaller percentage of the greater action
area. Most of the proposed construction corridor already exhibits low habitat value for forage fish
and juvenile salmonids (i.e., bull trout prey) because of a high intertidal location, ongoing
stormwater erosion, and grounding/shading from the existing dock. Almost all of the area that will
be directly affected by construction will be significantly improved over baseline conditions
following completion of the project. After construction and beach restoration, habitat recovery
should occur rapidly because the restored beach area will provide a stable substrate for re-
colonization by onsite invertebrate populations, which will attract forage fish and juvenile
salmonids. The adjacent lower intertidal areas are highly productive and the native backfill material
will already contain microfauna and nutrients from the site that will encourage rapid new growth.
About 270 ft2 of intertidal fine-grained substrate (260 ft2) will be permanently replaced with hard
surfaces (i.e., the length of pipe that will rest on the substrate, plus the pipeline anchors under the
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Owfalls Repair 47 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
elevated i e sections lus the western outfall bulkhead
pp � p drop . However, the conversion
structure).
will not measurably affect bull trout because they are pelagic piscivores. The converted area will
have no effect on forage fish spawning and no measurable effect on forage fish food resources. The
area of converted habitat will be offset by the recovery of about 200 ft2 of fine-grained substrate,
after the abandoned pipes and debris have been removed,plus 0.12 ac of habitat under the new dock.
For the sections of floating dock that will be repaired/replaced to accommodate the new pipeline,
several changes to the dock design will benefit water quality within the action area. The use of
chemically inert recycled wood composite materials in place of chemically preserved wood and the
one-for-one replacement of creosote-treated wood piles with galvanized steel piles will provide
long-term small-scale benefits to water quality in the action area. The addition of open grating over
most of the dock decking will improve light transmission under the dock and encourage greater
complexity and function under and near the dock. The new tub floatation will significantly reduce
the area of dock that grounds at low tide and allow open areas for fish passage under and through the
dock. It will also improve water circulation throughout the action area.
During pile extraction and driving, bull trout and their fish prey would likely avoid the immediate
construction area because of the noise and activity;however,to minimize potential harm from noise,
a vibratory pile extractor/driver will be used.
The most significant benefit of the proposed stormwater outfall extensions will be to redirect most
discharges into deeper water, where erosive velocities will be reduced by Hood Canal waters. The
new outfalls will be submerged most of the year,which will reduce beach erosion. Restoring eroded
beach channels and contours to their original grade will recover about 0.14 ac of productive foraging
habitat for all juvenile salmonids,including bull trout.
Therefore, this analysis determined that the proposed action may affect, but would not likely
adversely affect Puget Sound bull trout,due to the temporary small-scale effects of construction and
pile driving. The proposed action would have a long-term beneficial effect on 0.14 ac of restored
intertidal habitat area, function, and productivity, and a net gain of 0.12 ac of fine-grained intertidal
habitat.
6.5 EFFECTS ON CRITICAL HABITAT FOR PACIFIC SALMON AND STEELHEAD
Potential adverse project effects on designated critical habitat for Puget Sound Chinook,Hood Canal
summer-run chum salmon, and Puget Sound steelhead and critical habitat that were described above
are repeated here.
This BABE focuses on potential effects on the juvenile, rather than adult, salmonid (i.e., Chinook
chum,and steelhead) life stage because habitat for juveniles is present in the intertidal waters of the
action area. Adult salmonids are not expected to be found in the intertidal nearshore because adults
are not commonly associated with this shallow habitat range. Adults may use intertidal nearshore
habitat while foraging for juvenile fish(including juvenile salmonids as prey for steelhead), but this
use is probably insignificant within the action area because of the absence of productive habitats
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 48 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
(i.e., river estuaries with salmonid prey, forage fish spawning areas, Pacific herring holding areas,
and eelgrass beds)that are plentiful in other areas of lower Hood Canal.
Habitat for juvenile salmonids is present in the action area. The sand flats and oyster beds would
provide high-quality foraging habitat for juveniles, with abundant benthic and epibenthic
invertebrates. Juvenile Chinook and steelhead, if present in the action area, would likely forage in
subtidal areas of Hood Canal,following eelgrass beds and concentrations of forage fish.
Critical habitat for the Chinook and summer-run chum salmon consists of six Primary Constituent
Elements (PCEs). Nearshore marine areas (PCE 5) occurs within the action area and is defined as
"Nearshore marine areas free of obstruction and excessive predation 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, etc." This
biological assessment identifies the following relevant habitat features/conditions in the project area:
• water quality(including sediment grain size and chemical quality),
• prey availability and type(dependent on substrate quality and quantity),and
• access to refugia and migratory routes.
Habitat conditions not found in the action area include freshwater and estuarine waters and
associated foraging habitat,aquatic vegetation,and forage fish spawning and holding habitat.
6.5.1 Water Quality
Baseline water quality conditions include stormwater discharge from two recently constructed
stormwater outfalls that discharge in the upper intertidal zone. As part of the 2002-2004 resort
renovation, the stonmwater collection system was redesigned and reconstructed to capture and treat
runoff from the parking lots and adjacent areas around the resort,including large areas of vegetation.
Treatment includes stormwater detention, particulate settling, oil/water separators, infiltration, and
discharge through a grass-lined biofiltration swale or sand filter, before discharge into the upper
intertidal. Stormwater quality is assumed to be low in pollutants because most of the runoff is
generated from about 10 ac of clean surfaces, such as the grassy slope (4.57 ac), landscaped areas
(3.4 ac), roofs (1.51 ac), sidewalks, and perennial seeps (0.48 ac). The paved surfaces probably
contribute little pollutant load to the stormwater because of their relatively low use and moderate to
low vehicle speeds. The paved parking areas (2.3 ac) reach parking capacity for only part of the
year, and the slow driving/parking speeds of resort visitors do not usually result in brake wear,
which is considered to be the source of metals derived from roads. Stormwater runoff from the area
of SR 106 (less than 1.2 ac)is also low in oils/grease and dissolved metals because the highway was
recently reconstructed to improve travel both around and into the resort, with slower speeds, longer
line-of-sight distances, and exit lanes. These improvements reduce quick acceleration/deceleration
and accidents,which in turn reduces brake wear and oil leakage. Most importantly, stormwater from
the parking areas and SR 106 is detained and treated before discharge. Baseline stormwater
discharge water quality will not change under this proposed action.
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Ouy'alls Repair 49 December 2007
Biological AssessmentlBiological Evaluation
Under baseline conditions,the stormwater discharged at MHHW from the two outfalls causes beach
erosion during tides lower than N HHW when large storms exceed the capacity of the detention
swales. The proposed project will improve marine water quality(i.e.,decrease turbidity)by moving
the stormwater outfalls to low intertidal elevations, so that marine waters will dissipate stormwater
discharge energy during most or all of the tidal cycle. The deeper discharges will be immediately
mixed with marine waters, which reduces the risk of direct exposure to juvenile salmonids that
might be foraging in the upper intertidal. Overflow openings at MHHW in both outfalls will release
excess stormwater on the beach,but this is not expected to commonly occur.
The new eastern outfall extension will be constructed outside of the oyster beds, to avoid trenching
through shellfish resources. The eastern outfall pipe alignment was designed to reduce long-term
harmful effects on beach habitat by diverting up to 7.5 cfs of stormwater discharges into low-
intertidal depths,burying the new pipe along the bulkhead,and extending it under the existing dock.
The dock separates the east and west oyster beds and offers the only pathway that avoids trenching
through the oysters. To further minimize effects on marine waters,nearshore currents, and sediment
transport, most of the exposed (i.e., unburied) pipe will be elevated four inches off the substrate.
This alignment was chosen as the best solution to submerge the outfall, reduce beach erosion and
turbidity, increase stormwater mixing with marine water, and improve upper intertidal water quality
with the least habitat disturbance during construction and long-term operations.
The western outfall pipe was designed to be buried for most of its length. The outlet elevation was
determined to be the deepest possible location,within resort property,that would fully submerge the
outfall, reduce beach erosion and turbidity, maximize stormwater mixing with marine water, and
restore upper intertidal water quality for long-term operations. The benefits of this alignment to
threatened salmonids(and critical habitat)outweighed the short-term harm to the western oyster bed
that construction will inflict..
Potential short-term effects on water quality would consist of temporarily elevated levels of turbidity
and siltation caused by disturbed sediment (i.e., native sediment sidecast during trenching and
backfill material used to restore beach elevations) during an estimated three-week construction
period. Pile extraction and driving, estimated to take two or three days, would also cause localized
areas of short-term turbidity.
Temporarily elevated levels of turbidity following pile extraction and replacement, and sediment
disturbance during trenching, are not expected to have any measurable harmful effect on critical
habitat. First, the area of disturbance will be relatively small, compared to the action area, so the
volume of turbidity from excavation and fill is expected to be minor. Pile extraction and driving,
estimated to take three days, would cause small, localized areas of short-term turbidity between
6 and-10 ft NILLW along the dock and between -10 and -16 ft NILLW along the moorage float.
Second, the duration of elevated turbidity would be measured in minutes, rather than hours, during
the three to five days of in-water construction. Third, the existing substrate is primarily sand and
gravel that will settle quickly, within a short distance. Turbidity and subsequent siltation is not
expected to have a significant harmful effect on critical habitat.
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 50 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
The replacement of 21 creosote-treated wood piles with equivalent or smaller galvanized steel piles
will improve water quality over existing conditions and result in a beneficial effect. The
replacement of chemically preserved wood railings and stringers with a chemically inert wood
composite material (i.e., "Trex" or similar type) and composite grating will also reduce potential
chemical leacheate into marine waters and increase light transmission. The replacement of 9,000 ft2
of Styrofoam slab floatation with polyethylene tubs will eliminate the potential release of Styrofoam
waste into marine waters. These water quality improvements would be beneficial to all fish habitat
in the action area..
6.5.2 Prey Availability and Type
Planktonic, benthic, and epibenthic prey for juvenile salmonids in the action area consists of the
small crustacea and other invertebrates associated with the fine-grained intertidal sediment and
dense shellfish beds at lower intertidal and subtidal zones.
Sections of the dock will be removed to allow placement of the eastern outfall underneath. The dock
location and general footprint will not change; however, new materials and a new floatation design
will improve critical habitat conditions that will significantly benefit salmonid prey and foraging
access. The removal of creosote-treated wood piles and the use of chemically inert recycled wood
composite material in place of pressure-treated wood will improve habitat quality for benthic and
epibenthic invertebrates that may be consumed by salmonids or their prey. The addition of open
grating for the dock decking,plus substantial openings between and under the new tub flotation,will
result in a beneficial effect on critical habitat.
Long-term harmful effects from the proposed project are limited to the permanent loss of 100 ftz of
intertidal critical habitat under the exposed section of pipe that will rest directly on the substrate at
the end of the western outfall. An equal area of pipe will rest on the substrate along the eastern
outfall, but it is not a change from existing conditions because the area is not currently available as
habitat, due to the marine float that rests on the substrate about half the day. In addition, the
proposed action will permanently convert about 270 f of intertidal fine-grained sediment into hard
substrate for the western outfall connection at the existing bulkhead (5.5 ft2), and 22 concrete
anchors(—45 ft2)that will elevate the pipes above grade. To compensate for this habitat conversion,
about 200 ft2 of debris will be removed from the intertidal beach and replaced with fine-grained
native-type material.
Construction will have short-term negative effects on critical habitat because of excavation,followed
by a temporary reduction in benthic and epibenthic food resources. However, the disturbed area is
relatively small (about half an acre)and most is within upper intertidal elevations near the bulkhead,
where the fewest salmonid prey resources are found. Construction will occur in less than four
percent of the critical intertidal foraging habitat at elevations between 4 and-4 ft MLLW, leaving 96
percent of the intertidal site undisturbed.
Some benthic and epibenthic productivity would be temporarily reduced during the proposed action
because of alterations to habitat during pipeline construction. After the pipelines are installed, the
trenches will be backfilled with native sediment and macroinvertebrates will return to the alignments
on the incoming tide. Epibenthic invertebrates will reappear on the flooding tide in high densities
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 51 December 2007
Biological AssessmentlBiological Evaluation
and likely repopulate the alignments within several weeks. Benthic invertebrates wi
ll likely
i
repopulate the disturbed areas within months,quickly reaching pre-construction densities,but t may
take several years to reach species diversity similar to preconstruction,unless the area is reseeded for
oysters. Numerous studies of dredged intertidal sites have demonstrated that benthic and epibenthic
invertebrates rapidly repopulate large disturbed areas equal to or exceeding pre-disturbance levels,
well within two years(Anchor Environmental 2002,Parametrix 1997,CH2M Hill 1995,Romberg et
al. 1995,Parametrix 1994).
Long-term beneficial effects on salmonid prey resources from the proposed project include 1)
0.14 ac of restored intertidal substrate,2)recovery of 2,688 ft2 of benthic habitat under the dock,due
to flotation improvements, 3) improved substrate quality (i.e., increased benthic colonization from
improved water circulation and new substrate), 4) reduction of undiluted stormwater discharges in
the intertidal, 5) removal of 21 creosote-treated piles from the environment, and 6) shade reduction
over 4,766 ft2 of substrate.
Overall, the net area of critical habitat that will be converted to hard substrate will be more than
compensated by the net increase of 2,658 ft2 (0.06 ac) of fine-grained intertidal habitat and the
0.14 ac of intertidal beach that will be restored to pre-erosion conditions. The temporary loss of
invertebrate prey species during construction and restoration would be insignificant because the total
potentially disturbed area(0.53 ac) comprises only a fraction(6 percent) of the action area(8.2 ac).
The areas of greatest macroinvertebrate productivity (i.e., the shellfish beds) are extensive
throughout the action area and adjacent nearshore habitat; these areas will not be affected by the
project.
6.5.3 Refupia/Safe Access
Long-term potentially harmful effects on critical habitat accessibility and refugia could be caused by
physical obstructions on the sea floor, such as the two 60-ft-long sections of new outfall pipes that
will rest directly on substrate. During ebb tides, the pipes will project into the water column an
average of 11 inches, from 0 in where the pipes emerge from below grade,to 22 in where the pipes
transition onto elevated supports. The eastern pipe would present the longest obstacle during tidal
heights between 5 and 6 ft MLLW, when the top of the pipe would be even with the water level.
This condition would occur for about 50 minutes every six hours of most daily tidal cycles. The
western pipe would present the longest obstacle at tidal heights between—2 and-3 ft MLLW. This
condition would occur less frequently, only once every 12 hours, for those relatively few days with
low minus tides. At lower or higher tidal stages,the length of pipe presenting an obstacle would be
reduced until it was either completely submerged or completely dry.
The exposed pipe sections would closely mimic waterlogged tree trunks that were once common
along the protected shorelines of Hood Canal. Even at low tides, the pipe obstructions would not
likely present an obstruction to migrating juvenile salmon because juvenile salmon would perceive
the pipe as a variation in intertidal contours, similar to narrow spits of sediment that are deposited
perpendicular from the shore near stream and river mouths. Both pipes would never affect fish
passage at the same time because their elevations are different—one is mid-intertidal, the other is
almost subtidal. All other exposed pipe will be elevated 4 inches above the substrate to allow fish
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 52 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
passage and water circulation. Given these considerations, it is unlikely that the proposed outfall
extensions would hinder juvenile salmonid migration, access to foraging habitat, or safe passage
through the action area.
The new floating dock will benefit migration and access conditions of critical habitat throughout the
site. Baseline flotation is nearly continuous blocks of styrofoam that rest completely on the beach at
low tides, but the new flotation will have two-ft-wide spaces between the tubs and will rest on the
bottom only at the four corners of each 48-ft-long dock section. The new flotation will allow
practically unobstructed fish movement under each dock section. The new flotation will also
improve water circulation.
Short-term construction impacts on fish access and refugia are not anticipated because excavation
and filling will occur almost entirely at low tides, in the dry. Pile extraction and installation may
reduce fish passage in the immediate area of disturbance, but the effect would be of short duration
(about three days) and localized around whatever pile was being installed, leaving the vast majority
of the action area accessible to steelhead. In addition, a vibratory hammer will minimize noise
disturbance.
6.5.4 Effects Determination for Critical Habitat for Pacific Salmon and Steelhead
Proposed project activities in the action area would have no measurable short-term effects on Puget
Sound critical habitat for Pacific salmon and steelhead because of the limited area of disturbance,
and the short duration of disturbance. to minimize turbidity,most construction will occur during low
tides, in the dry. Turbidity effects from sediment disturbance will be short(through one or possibly
two tidal cycles)and limited to the small area of the pipeline alignments. The construction area is in
a quiescent bay without currents, so sediment suspended during construction will stay localized. A
temporary decrease in benthic productivity will occur in the construction corridor (about 0.53 ac),
due to pipeline construction and access. About 30 percent of the proposed excavation area is near
the bulkhead, at intertidal elevations above 8 ft MLLW, in the less-productive upper intertidal range
where benthic productivity of salmon prey decreases with increasing elevation.
About half of the estimated area of disturbance would be due to vehicle access along the alignment,
rather than excavation. The use of small, tracked or balloon-tire vehicles will minimize and
distribute vehicle loads over a greater area of substrate. Larger, surface-dwelling invertebrates may
be crushed, but smaller, subsurface-dwelling invertebrates will probably survive in burrows. About
400 ft of dock currently ground on the beach during low tides; construction under this area will not
impact the benthic invertebrate community any worse than baseline conditions.
A large part of the construction area is already disturbed from outfall-related erosion, so construction
disturbance in the upper intertidal is not a change from baseline conditions, in terms of turbidity and
benthic prey resources' density and diversity. Continued beach erosion is possible from stormwater
overflows at the bulkheads; however, this would occur only because of reduced outfall capacity
(caused by rising tides) and heavy storms. The proposed project would continue to discharge
stormwater that exceeds outfall capacity from new overflow openings onto intertidal beach, but
these discharges would be just a fraction of the current discharges. Under proposed conditions,
excess stormwater overflows would be significantly less than baseline conditions because total
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 53 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
discharge volumes at MHHW would be reduced by the capacity of the new outfalls (provided the
outfalls are not blocked by rising Hood Canal tidewaters).
The construction corridor comprises about six percent of the resort's roe i.e., owned tidelands
p p property rtY (
and leased bedlands under the moorage float) and an even smaller percentage of the greater action
area. Most of the area to be disturbed already exhibits low benthic productivity because of a high
intertidal location, ongoing stormwater erosion, and grounding/shading from the existing dock.
Almost all of the area that will be directly affected by construction will be significantly improved
over baseline conditions following completion of the project. After construction and beach
restoration,invertebrate recovery should occur rapidly because the restored beach area will provide a
stable substrate for re-colonization by onsite invertebrate populations. The adjacent lower intertidal
areas are highly productive and will provide an immediate source of new invertebrates. The native
backfill material will already contain microfauna and nutrients from the site that will encourage
colonization and rapid new growth
The proposed project will not affect spawning habitat for forage fish or Pacific herring holding
habitat.
The only long-term negative effects on critical habitat would occur at those areas where beach
substrate will be covered or replaced with hard surfaces (i.e.,the lengths of pipe that will rest on the
substrate, plus the pipeline anchors under the elevated pipe sections, plus the western outfall
bulkhead drop structure). However, the negative effect of converting 260 ft2 of fine-grained
intertidal habitat to hard surfaces will be compensated by the recovery of about 200 ft2 of fine-
grained substrate, after the abandoned pipes and debris have been removed, plus 0.12 ac of habitat
under the new dock.
For the sections of floating dock that will be repaired/replaced to accommodate the new pipeline,
several changes to the dock design will benefit water quality within intertidal critical habitat. The
use of chemically inert recycled wood composite materials in place of chemically preserved wood
and the one-for-one replacement of creosote-treated wood piles with galvanized steel piles will
provide long-term small-scale benefits to water quality for all aquatic organisms near the dock,many
of which constitute a prey base for juvenile salmonids. The addition of open grating over most of the
dock decking will improve light transmission under the dock and encourage greater benthic
colonization under and near the dock. The new tub floatation will significantly reduce the area of
dock that grounds at low tide and allow open areas for fish passage under and through the dock. It
will also improve water circulation and invertebrate colonization throughout the action area.
Baseline conditions of water quality from stormwater discharges will not change under the proposed
actions. The most significant benefit of the proposed stormwater outfall extensions will be to
redirect most discharges into deeper water, where erosive velocities will be reduced by Hood Canal
waters. The new outfalls will be submerged most of the year, which will reduce beach erosion.
Restoring eroded beach channels and contours to their original grade will recover about 0.14 ac of
productive critical habitat, including benthic and epibenthic invertebrates that are important prey for
salmonids.
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Ou#'alls Repair 54 December 2007
Biological AssessmendBiological Evaluation
Therefore, this analysis determined that the proposed action may affect, but would not likely
adversely affect critical habitat for Pacific salmon and steelhead, due to the short-term, temporary,
negative effects of construction and pile driving. The proposed action would have a long-term
beneficial effect on 0.14 ac of restored intertidal critical habitat area, function,and productivity,and
a net gain of 0.12 ac of fine-grained intertidal habitat.
6.6 EFFECTS ON BULL TROUT CRITICAL HABITAT
The decline of the Coastal/Puget Sound bull trout DPS has been attributed to habitat degradation,
blockage of migratory corridors by dams,poor water quality, introduction of non-native species,and
the effects of past fisheries management practices (USFWS 1999). These factors of decline are
attributable to development and habitat alteration in rivers and estuaries, and to excessive harvest of
bull trout and bull trout prey,especially forage fish and juvenile salmonids. Factors for decline have
not been attributed to marine nearshore development, although development affects on water quality
and forage fish habitat could affect bull trout.
Relevant PCEs for bull trout critical habitat in marine waters include water quality (unimpaired by
chemical contaminants or turbidity), unimpeded migratory corridors and access to forage habitat,
abundant food base (including forage fish), and the absence of predatory or competing non-native
fish.
6.6.1 Water Ouality
Baseline water quality conditions include stormwater discharge from two recently constructed
stormwater outfalls that discharge in the upper intertidal zone. As part of the 2002-2004 resort
renovation, the stormwater collection system was redesigned and reconstructed to capture and treat
runoff from the parking lots and adjacent areas around the resort,including large areas of vegetation.
Treatment includes stormwater detention, particulate settling, oil/water separators, infiltration, and
discharge through a grass-lined biofiltration swale or sand filter, before discharge into the upper
intertidal. Stormwater quality is assumed to be low in pollutants because most of the runoff is
generated from about 10 ac of clean surfaces, such as the grassy slope (4.57 ac), landscaped areas
(3.4 ac), roofs (1.51 ac), sidewalks, and perennial seeps (0.48 ac). The paved surfaces probably
contribute little pollutant load to the stormwater because of their relatively low use and moderate to
low vehicle speeds. The paved parking areas (2.3 ac) reach parking capacity for only part of the
year, and the slow driving/parking speeds of resort visitors do not usually result in brake wear,
which is considered to be the source of metals derived from roads. Stormwater runoff from the area
of SR 106 (less than 1.2 ac)is also low in oils/grease and dissolved metals because the highway was
recently reconstructed to improve travel both around and into the resort, with slower speeds, longer
line-of-sight distances, and exit lanes. These improvements reduce quick acceleration/deceleration
and accidents,which in turn reduces brake wear and oil leakage. Most importantly, stormwater from
the parking areas and SR 106 is detained and treated before discharge. Baseline stormwater
discharge water quality will not change under this proposed action.
Under baseline conditions,the stormwater discharged at MHHW from the two outfalls causes beach
erosion during tides lower than MHHW when large storms exceed the capacity of the detention
swales. The proposed project will improve marine water quality(i.e., decrease turbidity)by moving
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair SS December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
the stormwater outfalls to low intertidal elevations, so that marine waters will dissipate stormwater
discharge energy during most or all of the tidal cycle. The deeper discharges will be immediately
mixed with marine waters, which reduces the risk of direct exposure to juvenile salmonids that
might be foraging in the upper intertidal. Overflow openings at MHHW in both outfalls will release
excess stormwater on the beach,but this is not expected to commonly occur.
The new eastern outfall extension will be constructed outside of the oyster beds, to avoid trenching
through shellfish resources. The eastern outfall pipe alignment was designed to reduce long-term
harmful effects on beach habitat by diverting up to 7.5 cfs of stormwater discharges into low-
intertidal depths, burying the new pipe along the bulkhead, and extending it under the existing dock.
The dock separates the east and west oyster beds and offers the only pathway that avoids trenching
through the oysters. To further minimize effects on marine waters,nearshore currents, and sediment
transport, most of the exposed (i.e., unburied) pipe will be elevated four inches off the substrate.
This alignment was chosen as the best solution to submerge the outfall, reduce beach erosion and
turbidity, increase stormwater mixing with marine water, and improve upper intertidal water quality
with the least habitat disturbance during construction and long-term operations.
The western outfall pipe was designed to be buried for most of its length. The outlet elevation was
determined to be the deepest possible location,within resort property,that would fully submerge the
outfall, reduce beach erosion and turbidity, maximize stormwater mixing with marine water, and
restore upper intertidal water quality for long-tern operations. The benefits of this alignment to
threatened salmonids(and critical habitat)outweighed the short-term harm to the western oyster bed
that construction will inflict..
Potential short-term effects on water quality would consist of temporarily elevated levels of turbidity
and siltation caused by disturbed sediment (i.e., native sediment sidecast during trenching and
backfill material used to restore beach elevations) during an estimated three-week construction
period. Pile extraction and driving, estimated to take two or three days, would also cause localized
areas of short-term turbidity.
Temporarily elevated levels of turbidity following pile extraction and replacement, and sediment
P Y tY g
disturbance during trenching, are not expected to have any measurable harmful effect on critical
habitat. First, the area of disturbance will be relatively small, compared to the action area, so the
volume of turbidity from excavation and fill is expected to be minor. Pile extraction and driving,
estimated to take three days, would cause small, localized areas of short-term turbidity between
6 and-10 ft MLLW along the dock and between -10 and -16 ft MLLW along the moorage float.
Second, the duration of elevated turbidity would be measured in minutes, rather than hours, during
the three to five days of in-water construction. Third, the existing substrate is primarily sand and
gravel that will settle quickly, within a short distance. Turbidity and subsequent siltation is not
expected to have a significant harmful effect on critical habitat.
The replacement of 21 creosote-treated wood piles with equivalent or smaller galvanized steel piles
will remove contaminants and improve water quality over existing conditions and result in a
beneficial effect. The replacement of chemically preserved wood railings and stringers with a
chemically inert wood composite material (i.e., "Trex" or similar type) and composite grating will
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 56 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
also reduce potential chemical leacheate into marine waters and increase light transmission. The
replacement of 9,000 ft2 of Styrofoam slab floatation with polyethylene tubs will eliminate the
potential release of Styrofoam waste into marine waters. These water quality improvements would
be beneficial to all fish habitat in the action area.
6.6.2 Abundant Food Base
Foraging sub-adult bull trout are likely to concentrate in the productive areas of the lower intertidal
zone, between +4 and -4 ft MLLW, wherever forage fish might be found, rather than the higher
intertidal elevations near the bulkhead or the shaded areas under the existing dock.
Sections of the dock will be removed to allow placement of the eastern outfall underneath. The dock
location and general footprint will not change; however, new materials and a new floatation design
will improve habitat conditions that will significantly benefit salmonid prey.
Construction may have short-term negative effects on bull trout prey (i.e., other fish) that would
likely avoid areas of in-water construction disturbances. However,the construction area is relatively
small (about half an acre)and most is within upper intertidal elevations near the bulkhead,where the
fewest forage fish prey resources would be found. Construction will occur in less than four percent
of the critical intertidal foraging habitat at elevations between 4 and-4 ft MLLW,leaving 96 percent
of the intertidal site undisturbed and available as critical habitat for bull trout. Because the trenches
will be excavated and backfilled primarily in the dry,during low tide, forage fish,if present,will not
be prevented from feeding by pipeline installation. The proposed action will have no effect on
forage fish abundance.
During pile extraction and driving, forage fish would likely avoid the immediate construction area
because of the noise and activity; however,to minimize potential effects from noise,a vibratory pile
extractor/driver will be used. No pile proofing is needed.
Long-term beneficial effects on prey resources from the proposed project include 1) 0.14 ac of
restored intertidal substrate, 2) recovery of 2,688 ft2 of benthic habitat under the dock, due to
flotation improvements, 3) improved substrate quality (i.e., increased benthic colonization from
improved water circulation and new substrate), 4) reduction of undiluted stormwater discharges in
the intertidal, 5) removal of 21 creosote-treated piles from the environment, and 6) shade reduction
over 4,766 ft2 of substrate. These improvements would support an abundant forage fish prey base
for bull trout critical habitat.
Overall, the net area of intertidal habitat that will be converted to hard substrate will be more than
compensated by the net increase of 2,658 ft2 (0.06 ac) of fine-grained intertidal habitat and the
0.14 ac of intertidal beach that will be restored to pre-erosion conditions. The temporary loss of
invertebrate prey species during construction and restoration would be insignificant because bull
trout are piscivorous. The total potentially disturbed area (0.53 ac) comprises only a fraction
(6 percent) of the action area(8.2 ac). In addition, construction will be short-term, during low tides
when sub-adults, if present, would find ample foraging opportunities within the action area and
better foraging opportunities in other parts of Hood Canal. The areas of greatest forage fish
productivity (i.e., spawning and holding areas) are extensive along the northern shoreline of the
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 57 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
Great Bend and near the major river estuaries of southern Hood Canal; these areas will not be
affected by the project.
6.6.3 Migratory Corridors and Access to Forage Fish
Long-term potentially harmful effects on bull trout critical habitat could be caused by physical
obstructions on the sea floor, such as the two 60-ft-long sections of new outfall pipes that will rest
directly on substrate. During ebb tides,the pipes will project into the water column an average of 11
inches, from 0 in where the pipes emerge from below grade,to 22 in where the pipes transition onto
elevated supports. The eastern pipe would present the longest obstacle during tidal heights between
5 and 6 ft MLLW, when the top of the pipe would be even with the water level. This condition
would occur for about 50 minutes every six hours of most daily tidal cycles. The western pipe
would present the longest obstacle at tidal heights between —2 and -3 ft MLLW. This condition
would occur less frequently, only once every 12 hours, for those relatively few days with low minus
tides. At lower or higher tidal stages, the length of pipe presenting an obstacle would be reduced
until it was either completely submerged or completely dry.
The exposed pipe sections would closely mimic waterlogged tree trunks that were once common
along the protected shorelines of Hood Canal. Even at low tides, the pipe obstructions would not
obstruction migration corridors or access to forage fish in the action area. Both pipes would never
affect fish passage at the same time because their elevations are different—one is mid-intertidal,the
other is almost subtidal. All other exposed pipe will be elevated 4 inches above the substrate to
allow fish passage and water circulation. Given these considerations, it is unlikely that the proposed
outfall extensions would hinder bull trout migration, access to foraging habitat, or safe passage
through the action area.
The new floating dock will benefit bull trout migration and access throughout the site because it is a
significant design improvement over baseline dock conditions. Baseline flotation is nearly
continuous blocks of styrofoam that rest completely on the beach at low tides, but the new flotation
will have two-ft-wide spaces between the tubs and will rest on the bottom only at the four corners of
each 48-ft-long dock section. The new flotation will allow practically unobstructed fish movement
under each dock section. The new flotation will also improve water circulation.
Short-term construction impacts on migratory corridors and access to forage fish are not anticipated
because excavation and filling will occur almost entirely at low tides, in the dry. Pile extraction and
installation may reduce fish passage in the immediate area of disturbance,but the effect would be of
short duration(about three days)and localized around whatever pile was being installed,leaving the
vast majority of the action area accessible to bull trout. In addition, a vibratory hammer will
minimize noise disturbance.
6.6.4 Absence of Predatory or Competing Non-native Fish
The proposed project will not affect predatory or non-native fish in lower Hood Canal. Pelagic fish
predators would not be attracted to or displaced by actions at the project site. Predatory fish that
might be associated with the moorage float would be temporarily displaced during pile extraction
and driving. Grated decking on the replacement floats will reduce glare and soften the visual
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Oulfalls Repair 58 December 2007
Biological AssessmentlBiological Evaluation
contrast between shaded and open water, which would increase visibility of any predatory fish that
may be lurking under the dock.
6.6.5 Determination of Effects on Bull Trout Critical Habitat
The proposed project will not adversely affect bull trout critical habitat in marine waters,considering
water quality, abundance of prey resources, access to migratory or foraging habitat, or predatory
and/or non-native fish competitors.
Baseline water quality conditions from the stormwater (within the pipes) will not change under the
proposed actions; however, Hood Canal receiving waters will benefit from improved mixing at the
new near-subtidal discharge locations and from increased circulation under the modified dock. By
moving the existing outfalls to nearly submerged depths,beach erosion and associated turbidity will
be largely reduced from intertidal habitat,which will improve critical habitat in the action area.
Turbidity effects from sediment disturbance following excavation and backfilling will be short
(lasting only until the next tidal cycle, or less) and limited to the small area of the pipeline
alignments. With the exception the 60 fl section of the western outfall that will rest on the beach,the
areas of construction are already continually disturbed by erosion or dock grounding,so construction
disturbances will not present a significant change to bull trout critical habitat from baseline
conditions.
For the sections of floating dock that will be repaired/replaced to accommodate the new pipeline,
several changes to the dock design will benefit intertidal habitat. The use of chemically inert
recycled wood composite materials in place of chemically preserved wood and the replacement of
creosote-treated wood piles with galvanized steel piles will provide small long-term benefits to water
quality. The addition of grated decking will improve visibility for fish passing along or under the
dock,reducing the ability of predatory fish to hide undetected within the dock's shade.
The new tub floatation will significantly reduce the area of dock that grounds at low tide and allow
open areas for fish passage under the dock, which may benefit bull trout critical habitat by
improving habitat access for foraging and migration.
Bull trout prey resources (i.e., juvenile salmon, trout, and forage fish) will not be affected by
construction, other than possible temporary displacement of forage fish for short periods,during the
three-week period of construction and pile driving. The possible temporary displacement of forage
fish is not a measurable harm to bull trout because the project area does not provide forage fish
spawning or holding habitat, and forage fish foraging habitat in the project area is only a tiny
fraction of lower Hood Canal. The temporary disturbance to benthic and epibenthic habitat will not
affect bull trout critical habitat because these invertebrates are not prey resources of bull trout.
The most significant benefit of the proposed stormwater outfall extensions will be to redirect
discharges into deeper water, where erosive velocities will be reduced by Hood Canal waters.
Restoring eroded beach channels and contours to their original grade will recover about 0.14 ac of
productive intertidal habitat for forage fish and some juvenile salmonids, which constitute a prey
base for bull trout.
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 59 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
Factors of decline in bull trout(i.e.,habitat alteration in rivers and estuaries,and excessive harvest of
bull trout and bull trout prey)are largely unrelated to conditions and actions in the action area. PCEs
for bull trout critical habitat in marine waters may be temporarily affected by construction, but
improved over the long term. Short-term construction impacts would not measurably affect bull
trout critical habitat, because the project will occur in about 270 fl of currently disturbed intertidal
habitat, with only sporadic use by bull trout prey species. Post-construction conditions will benefit
bull trout critical habitat in terms of water quality and migratory/foraging access through the site.
The proposed project will also increase habitat area and improve habitat quality for forage fish and
juvenile salmonids, which are prey for bull trout. Therefore, this analysis determined that the
proposed action may affect, but would not likely adversely affect bull trout critical habitat. The
proposed project would have a beneficial effect on bull trout critical habitat, by improvements to
water quality,accessibility,and access to prey.
6.7 EFFECTS ON BALD EAGLE
The nearest bald eagle nesting territory is over 1.5 miles from the proposed action, across Hood
Canal on the Tahuya River. This distance is greater than the area of concern described by USFWS
for effects from visual or noise disturbances from construction. The project will not require the
removal of any perching or roosting habitat in the action area that may be used by nesting or
wintering bald eagles. The outfall extensions will be constructed during low tides, so no fish species
(i.e.,potential eagle prey)will be disturbed.
Alderbrook Creek lacks a significant anadromous fish population and the resort has a relatively high
concentration of people year-round (compared to the adjacent single-family residences) plus
transient boat moorage along the shoreline. Although the action area shoreline offers foraging
habitat, other areas offer more attractive foraging habitat with less-intensively used shoreline and
large anadromous salmon runs. Outside the action area, several miles away, both the Tahuya and
Skokomish rivers have large chum salmon runs and areas of comparably lower human activity, and
a small chum run is present west of the action area in an unnamed creek (WDFW 2006a). These
conditions present more attractive eagle foraging habitat.
Considering the short duration of construction-related disturbance (about three weeks) and the
choice of lower-impact construction equipment (e.g., small track hoe, vibratory pile extractor),
confined to a relatively small part of the action area, it is unlikely that bald eagles would be affected
by the proposed action. No degradation of bald eagle habitat or prey resources would occur as a
result of this project. Therefore, we determined that the project may affect, but would not likely
adversely affect bald eagle.
6.8 EFFECTS ON MARBLED MURRELET
Baseline conditions within the action area consist of intertidal sandflat surrounded by a dock and
moorage float,and upland resort property. Marbled murrelets would not likely use this area because
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Ou#'alls Repair 60 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
they forage primarily in open water, at deeper elevations. Marbled murrelets are known to actively
avoid small boats and are not typically found along urbanized shorelines in Puget Sound and Hood
Canal. Forage fish spawning habitat is not present(WDFW 2006d), so marbled murrelets would not
be attracted to the beach in search of forage fish.
To avoid potential injury to marbled murrelets from impact pile driving, the proposed project will
use a vibratory pile extractor. Although the sound and construction activity may cause marbled
murrelets to avoid the construction area, it is unlikely that they would be present anyway.
Considering the small level of construction noise disturbance (about three weeks) within a small
action area, with baseline conditions unattractive to marbled murrelet (i.e., concentrated human
activity, no concentrated prey resources, and boating activity) it is unlikely that marbled murrelets,
if present, would be affected by the proposed action. No degradation of murrelet habitat or prey
resources would occur as a result of this project. Therefore, we determined that the project may
affect,but would not likely adversely affect,marbled murrelet.
6.9 EFFECTS ON STELLER SEA LION
Steller sea lions have not been reported in Hood Canal. Project activities would not disturb Steller
sea lions because they are not expected to occur in the action area. The proposed action will not
affect Steller sea lion habitat, including haul out areas and breeding areas,or the sea lion's prey base.
Therefore,we determined that the project will have no effect on Steller sea lion.
6.10 EFFECTS ON HUMPBACK WHALE
Humpback whales are observed infrequently in Puget Sound and there were no records of
occurrence in Hood Canal. The proposed action will not affect the humpback whale's prey base
(i.e., forage fish, such as Pacific herring). Because suitable pelagic habitat is not present in the
project area, and because humpback whales are not recorded to occur in Hood Canal, the proposed
project will have no effect on humpback whale.
7. CUMULATIVE,INTERRELATED,AND INTERDEPENDENT EFFECTS
The replacement and modification of the floating dock is an interrelated effect because it would not
occur but for the alignment of the eastern outfall. The dock replacement is not interdependent on the
stormwater outfall because the dock has independent function and utility. Dock modifications and
repairs are also independent of the outfall extension; however, the timing and extent of repairs are
related to the need to adapt the floats to accommodate the pipe and install the pipe. Interdependent
P pP
effects of the floating dock have been analyzed within the context of the project.
No cumulative or interdependent effects were identified in conjunction with this project. Future
upland redevelopment plans for the resort are unknown.
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 61 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
8. CONSERVATION MEASURES
Potential impacts to fish and wildlife habitat will be minimized or avoided by the following
measures during construction and dredging:
• Adherence to the state-designated in-water work period of July 16 to February 15, to
avoid or minimize disturbances to ESA-listed species.
• Removal of about 200 f1 of miscellaneous debris (rock, old pipe, concrete slab, etc.)
from intertidal areas to recover fine-grained habitat to offset 270 fl of hard substrate.
• Net gain of 2,688 fly' of fine-grained intertidal habitat to compensate for new hard
substrate.
• Minimization of the quantity and size of construction equipment allowed on the beach
area at any one time.
• Use of only lower-impact construction equipment(e.g., rubber track or balloon tires) on
the beach.
• Regularly monitoring and maintenance of construction equipment to prevent hazardous
material leaks on the beach.
• Staging and stockpiling equipment and materials away from the water,on paved areas.
• Transportation of materials to the construction area using small (e.g., three- or seven-
yard capacity)rubber-tracked transporters.
• Implementation and maintenance of sedimentation and erosion control measures at the
stockpile locations.
• Use of rubber mats in areas where native soils do not provide sufficient support for
construction activities.
• Limiting low-tide construction travel routes to within 25 ft of the bulkhead and western
pipeline alignment and within 8 ft of the eastern outfall alignment.
• Use of pre-cast anchor blocks and pipe sections assembled off site to limit in-water concrete
curing and minimize in-water construction time.
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 62 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
• Use of vibratory hammer instead of impact hammer to reduce potential harm to aquatic
species and habitat.
• Scheduling of most upper intertidal work to occur from land, during low tides, to
minimize turbidity.
• Scheduling of dock replacement, float-and-sink pipe placement, and pile driving during
high tides,to avoid grounding barges on shellfish beds.
• Removal of all construction debris from upland and aquatic areas (especially within the
intertidal zone),daily and immediately after project completion.
• Replacement of styrofoam dock flotation with specially configured tubs to create
openings for fish passage under the floats and reduce the grounding footprint.
• Replacement of solid decking with grated decking for enhanced light transmission under
and around the dock.
• Replacement of chemically preserved wood with chemically inert recycled wood
composite material(i.e.,Trex)on new dock sections.
• Restoration of all disturbed upland areas and utilization of native plants, if necessary.
• Disturbance of the smallest area feasible.
If project activities are observed to result in fish kills, fish in distress, or water quality problems,
contract documents will indicate cessation of construction and immediate contact of WDFW
personnel. The contract documents will also specify that construction will resume pending
authorization by WDFW.
In addition to the conservation measures listed above, construction BMPs will include:
• A Temporary Erosion Sedimentation Control (TESC)plan to be fully implemented.
Construction techniques will utilize Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as those described
in the Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington(2004). Silt fences or other
appropriate erosion control measures will be erected at appropriate locations.
• A Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure(SPCC) Plan to be prepared and
implemented by the contractor. The plan will be site specific and cover the project scope of
work.
• Construction equipment will be equipped with mufflers and required to meet noise limit
standards.
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 63 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
9. REFERENCES
Anchor Environmental. 2002. Interim Remedial Action: Log Pond Cleanup/Habitat
Restoration—Year 2 Monitoring Report. Prepared for Georgia Pacific West, Inc.
Bellingham, WA. Prepared by Anchor Environmental,LLC, Seattle, WA. December
2002.
Anderson, B., J. Frost,K. McAllister, D. Pineo,and P. Crocker-Davis. 1986. Bald eagles in
Washington. Washington Wildlife 36(4):13-20.
BioSystems. 1994. Life on the Edge. A Guide to California's Endangered Natural Resources:
Wildlife. Published by BioSystems Books, Santa Cruz, California. Editor in chief: Carl
G. Thelander, BioSystems Analysis, Inc.
Brenkman and Corbett 2003. Reference in Bull Trout CFR Proposed Rule.
Brooks,K. 1995. Long term response of benthic invertebrate communities associated with the
application of carbaryl(Sevin)to control burrowing shrimp, and an assessment of the
habitat value of cultivated Pacific oyster(Crassostrea gigas)beds in Willapa Bay,
Washington,to fulfill requirements of the EPA carbaryl data call in. 69 pp.
CH2M Hill. 1995. South Cap monitoring report, Seattle Ferry Terminal. Task 4,Amendment
No. O,Agreement Y-5637. Prepared for Washington Department of Transportation,
Olympia, Washington.
EA EST(EA Engineering, Science, and Technology) 1996. Integrated Natural Resources
Management Plan,Naval Air Station Whidbey Island. Prepared for U.S.Navy,
Engineering Field Activity,Northwest,Poulsbo, WA. Prepared by EA Engineering,
Science, and Technology, Bellevue, WA.November 1996.
Engineering Services Associates and Environmental Mariculture Services 2002. Alderbrook
Resort Remodel Biological Assessment. Prepared by Engineering Services Associates,
Belfair, WA, and Environmental Mariculture Services,Port Ludlow, WA.
Fielder, P. C., and R. G. Starkey. 1980. Wintering bald eagle use along the Upper Columbia
River, Washington. Pages 177-194 in R. L. Knight, G. T. Allen, M. V. Stalmaster, and
C. W. Servheen,editors. Proceedings. Washington Bald Eagle Symposium, Seattle,
Washington, USA.
Garrett,M. G.,R. G. Anthony, J. W. Watson, and K. McGarigal. 1988. Ecology of bald eagles
on the lower Columbia River. Final Report, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland,
Oregon, USA.
Hamer, T.E., and C. Thompson. 1997. Avoidance of boats by marbled murrelets during marine
surveys. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Olympia, WA 17pp.
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 64 December 2007
Biological AssessmendBiological Evaluation
Hunt, W. G., J. B. Bulger, and C. Thelander. 1980. Impacts of a proposed Copper Creek dam
on bald eagles. Report to Seattle City Light, Office of Environmental Affairs.
BioSystems Analysis, Incorporated, San Francisco, California, USA.
Hunt, W. G.,J. B. Bulger, C. Thelander., and B. S. Johnson. 1981. Impacts of a proposed
Copper Creek dam on bald eagles: second winter study. Report to Seattle City Light,
Office of Environmental Affairs. BioSystems Analysis, Incorporated, San Francisco,
California, USA.
McGarigal, K., R. G. Anthony, and F. B. Isaacs. 1991. Interactions of humans and bald eagles
on the Columbia River estuary. Wildlife Monograph 115.
Meyers, J.M., R.G. Kope, G.J. Bryant, D. Teel,L.J. Lierheimer, T.C. Mainwright, W.S. Grant,
F.K. Waknitz, K.Neely, S.T. Lindley, and R.S. Waples. 1998. Status review of Chinook
salmon from Washington, Idaho, Oregon, and California. U.S. Department of
Commerce,NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-35,443 pp.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 2005. Status Review Update for Puget Sound
Steelhead. Northwest Fisheries Science Center, Seattle WA.
Parametrix. 1994. Metro North Beach epibenthic operational monitoring program, 1994
surveys. Prepared for King County Department of Metropolitan Services, Seattle,
Washington by Parametrix, Inc.,Kirkland, Washington.
Parametrix. 1997. St. Paul Waterway area remedial action and habitat restoration project. 1997
monitoring report. Prepared for Simpson Tacoma Kraft Co., Tacoma, Washington.
Pregnall, M.M. 1993. Regrowth and recruitment of eelgrass (Zostera marina)and recovery of
benthic community structure in areas disturbed by commercial oyster culture in the
South Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve, Oregon. A thesis; Bard College,
Annandale-On-Hudson,New York.
Romberg,P., C. Holman, and D. Wilson. 1995. Monitoring at two sediment caps in Elliott Bay.
Puget Sound Research '95 proceedings,Puget Sound Water Quality Authority, Olympia,
Washington. pp. 289-299.
Sayce,K., 1997. Comments at a Tillamook Bay National Estuary Project meeting, Garibaldi,
March 11.
Scott, W.B. and E.J. Crossman. 1973. Freshwater fishes of Canada. Fisheries Research Board of
Canada,Bulletin No. 184. p. 966.
Stalmaster, M. V. 1987. The Bald Eagle. Universe Books,New York,New York, USA.
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 65 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
Stalmaster,M.V.. 1989. Effects of recreational activity on wintering bald eagles on the Skagit
Wild and Scenic River System, Washington. Technical Report. PNW Research Station,
USDA Forest Service,Portland, Oregon, USA.
Sustainable Ecosystems Institute(SEI). 1997. Seabird Surveys in Puget Sound 1996, Report to
Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission,March 1997 (Executive summary).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service(USFWS). 1999. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants;
determination of threatened status for bull trout in the coterminous United States. Final
Rule November 1, 1999. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Federal Register 64 (210):
58910-58933.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2004. Draft Recovery Plan for the Coastal-Puget
Sound Distinct Population Segment of Bull Trout(Salvelinus confluentus). Volume II
(of II): Olympic Peninsula Management Unit. Portland, Oregon. 277+xvi pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2005. Listed and Proposed Endangered and
Threatened Species and Critical Habitat; Candidate Species; and Species of Concern in
Western Washington as Prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Western
Washington Fish and Wildlife Office for Mason County. Website
<http://www.fws.gov/westwafwo/se/SE_LisVMASON.htm> Revised December 20,
2005.
WDFW et al. 1997. Reference from CFR bull trout Proposed Rule.
WDFW 1998. Reference from CFR bull trout Proposed Rule.
WDFW(Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2006a. Priority Habitats and Species
Map and Report in the Vicinity of T21R03W Section 4. Scale 1:24,000. Report date:
July 11, 2006.
WDFW (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2006b. Oyster, Clam, Geoduck, and
Abalone Map in the Vicinity of T21R03W Section 4. Scale 1:24,000. Report date: July 11,
2006.
WDFW(Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2006c. Dungeness Crab,Pandalid Shrimp,
and Sea Urchin Map in the Vicinity of T21 R03 W Section 4. Scale 1:24,000. Report date:
July 11,2006.
WDFW(Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2006d. Surf Smelt, Sand Lance,Rock Sole
and Herring Map in the Vicinity of T21R03W Section 4. Scale 1:24,000. Report date: July
11,2006.
WDFW(Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2006e. Bald Eagle Buffer Management
Zone Map in the Vicinity of T21R03W Section 4. Scale 1:24,000. Report date: July 11,
2006.
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 66 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
WDFW(Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife) and PNPTT(Point No Point Treaty
Tribes). 2000. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative;An Implementation Plan
to Recover Summer Chum in the Hood Canal and Strait of Juan de Fuca Region. Report
for WDFW and Point-No-Point Treaty Tribes.
Watson, J.W. and D.J. Pierce. 1998. Migration, diets, and home ranges of bald eagles breeding
along Hood Canal and at Indian Island, Washington. Final Report. Wash. Dept. Fish and
Wildlife, Olympia, Washington. 28 pp.plus appendices.
Watson, J.W. and D. J. Pierce. 2001. Skagit River bald eagles: movements, origins, and
breeding population status. Final Report, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife,
Olympia, Washington, USA.
Watson, J.W., D. Mundy, J.S. Begley, and D.J. Pierce. 1995. Responses of nesting bald eagles to
the harvest of geoduck clams (Panopea abrupta). Final Report. Wash. Dept. Fish and
Wildlife,Olympia. 23 pp.
Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair 67 December 2007
Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation
APPENDIX A
ALDERBROOK RESORT RENOVATION
2002 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
ALDERBROOK RESORT REMODEL
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
Prepared by:
ENGINEERING SERVICES ASSOCIATES
210 Cherokee Beach Road
Belfair,WA 98528
360 275-7384
AND
ENVIRONMENTAL MARICULTURE SERVICES
121 Resolute Lane
Port Ludlow,WA 98365
(360)437-0811
October 2002
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION 1
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1
2.1 Location and Project Description------------------------------------------------------------I
2.1.1 Proposed Alderbrook Resort Remodel ------------------------------------------5
2.1.2 Proposed SR 106 Realignment ---------------------------------------------------6
2.1.3 Proposed Sire Drainage ----------------------—--------------------_ 8
2.1.4 Proposed Riparian Habitat Restoration ------------------------------------------13
2.2 Action Area 19
2.2.1 Alderbrook Resort Remodel 18
2.2.2 SR 106 Realignment---------------------------------------------------------------18
2.2.3 Project Affects to Alderbrook Creek----------------------------------------------0
2.2.4 Project Affects to Dalby Creek---------------------------------------------------22
2.22.2.4 Project Affects to Terrestrial Habitat--------------------------------------------23
2.2.5 Project Affects to Marine Intertidal Habitat-------------------------------------24
z enFr'Mc A'.rnUADrrAT 117
3.1 Fish Species Information
3.1.1 Chinook Salmon --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 27
3.1.1.1 Description of Species------------------------------------------------------------- 27
Z 1 1 17 Nahitat 17
3.1.1.3 Determination------------------------------------------------------------------------ 28
3.1.2 Colic.Salmon --------------—------—-------------------------------------------- 30
3.1.2.1 Description of Species--------------------------------------------------------------30
3.1.2.2 Habitat-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 31
3.1.2.3 Determination ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 32
3.1.3 QlnnmPr C%iim Calmnn 11
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3.1.3.2 Habitat-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 34
3.1.3.3 Determination ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 34
3.1.4 Bull Trout(Native Char)---------------------------------------------------------------------36
3.1.4.1 Description of Species--------—--------------------------------------------------— 36
3.1.4.2 Habitat------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 37
3.1.4.3 Determination -----------------—----------—--------------------------------------- 38
3.2 Wildlife Species------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------40
3.2.1 Bald Eagle-------—--------------------------------------------------------------------40
32.1.1 Description of Species--------------------------------------------------------------40
3.2.1.2 Nesting Habitat -41
Wintering Habitat---------------------------—-----------------------------------41
32.1.4 Use of Project Area ..................................------------------------------------
3.2.1.5 Determination 42
3.2.2 Marbled Murrelet 43
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------
3.2.2.1 Description of species.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------43
------------------------------------------------------------
3.2.2.2 Use of the Proiect Area----------------------------------------------------------- 44
44
3.2.2.3 Determination--------------------------------------------------------------------11
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------
5.REFRENCES48---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
11
LIST OF EXHIBITS AND FIGURES
FIGURE IA Alderbrook Location Map---------------------------------------------------------------2
FIGURE 1 B Topographic Map of Area ................................................................................... 3
EXHIBIT G-1 Alderbrook Existing Site Topography ............................................................._4
EXHIBIT P-1 Proposed Roadway Over Existing Terrestrial --------------------------------------7,19
EXHIBITT-3 Site Plan 9 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------
EXHIBIT D-1 Alderbrook Existing Site Drainage_ ................................................................. 10
EXHIBIT D-2 Proposed Drainage Plan and Alderbrook Creek Restoration . .. -------------------11
EXHIBIT D-3 Stormwater Treatment Plan for Western Portion of SR 106 -------------------12_
FIGURE 2 Alderbrook Creek Restoration Plan Drawing --------------------------------------------15
FIGURE 3 Bottomless Arch Culvert 16
EXHIBIT W-1 Alderbrook Existing Streams and Wetlands .....................................................21
EXHIBIT S-1 Alderbrook Beach 26-------------------------------------------------------------------------
TABLE OF APPENICIES
APPENDIX A. WETLANDS INVENTORY FOR THE ALDERBROOK SR 106RELOCATION 51
APPENDIX B. BEACH SURVEY FOR THE ALDERBROOK RESORT REMODEL 61
--------------------------
APPENDIX C. 1. Summary of the Alsea Valley Alliance v. Evans U.S. District Court Decision .........................65
2.Endangered Species Act Status of West Coast Salmon&Steelhead.........................................67
APPENDIX D. Checklist for Documenting Environmental Baseline and Effects of
Proposed Action(s)on Relevant Indicators -------------------------------------------------------------68
APPENDIX E. Draft Bald Eagle Status Report .......................-----------------------------------------------------------
iii
1. INTRODUCTION
The National Marine Fisheries Service(NMFS) formally listed Puget Sound Chinook
(Oncorhynchus tschawytscha) and Hood Canal summer chum salmon as threatened under the
Endangered Species Act(ESA)on May 24, 1999 and March 25, 1999 respectively.NMFS has
designated the coho salmon (0. kisutch) as a candidate for listing. The U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service(USFWS) listed bull trout(Salvelinus confluentus) in Puget Sound as
threatened December 1, 1999. Section 7 of the ESA requires Federal agencies to ensure that
their actions do not jeopardize the continued existence of an endangered or threatened species,
or their critical habitats. The Alderbrook Resort Remodel qualifies for such action. Under
ESA section 7,the lead federal agency, in this case the U.S.Army Corp of Engineers must
prepare a biological assessment(BA)of the potential influence of its action(permitting the
remodel of the Alderbrook Resort)on listed species and their habitat.
This BA is for Corps review and possible submittal to NMFS and USFWS as an aid to ESA
decision making regarding the potential effects of the Alderbrook Resort Remodel.Analyses
of potential impacts were based on review of proposed site plans,an on-site inspection of
existing habitat conditions,a review of current and historical distributional data available for
each species, and personal communication with local biologists. The BA addresses potential
effects of the proposed project on chinook salmon,coho salmon,Hood Canal summer chum
salmon,bull trout,and the habitat of each species. The bald eagle (Haliaeetus
leucocephalus) and marbled murrelet(Brachyramphus marmoratus) are also included in this
BA as they are federally listed as threatened and may occur in the project area.
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 Location and Project Description
Alderbrook is a 96-room resort located on SR 106, 1.5 miles east of Union,in Mason County,
Washington(Fig. 1 A and 1 B).The resort has been in existence since 1913.The fundamental
goal of this project is to enhance and reposition Alderbrook as a leading Pacific Northwest
year round resort and conference center.Adjacent properties to the west and east are
residential. To the south, across SR 106, approximately 80 acres of hillside are undeveloped
and owned by the same ownership that holds Alderbrook,North Forty Lodging,LLC.
The main campus is located on the north side of SR 106 and fronts Hood Canal with a
marina(Exhibit G-1). West of and adjacent to the main campus is a grouping of 21 cottages,
of which 13 are owned by North Forty Lodging,LLC and the remaining eight are individually
owned by other parties. Insert Fig. 1 A-Map of Hood canal showing Alderbrook
I
Opposite the main campus and the cottages,on the south side of SR 106,are approximately 6.3
acres containing surface parking lots,a commercial building,Alderbrook's sewage treatment
plant and undeveloped lands. Located about 307 feet west of the aforementioned property,
also on the south side of the highway,is a 0.77-acre lot,which contains an old barn structure.
2.1.1 Proposed Alderbrook Resort Remodel
Main Campus
The Main Hotel Building, sometimes referred to as The Plaza Building, 'is a three-story
wood-frame structure built in 1979. It is located along the west side of the main campus
parcel. The building houses 44 guest rooms, conference/ballroom facilities, restaurant and
kitchen facilities, lounge, main lobby, administrative offices, and some back-ofhouse
support functions. There is a small additional area, below the first floor on the canal side
of the building, housing the hotel laundry and some support space. The square footage of
this building is approximately 43,831 SF. The Main Hotel Building will be renovated
extensively, inside and outside.
The "Lanai" Buildings are two,three-story,wood-framed, connected structures,both built
in 1965. Each building houses 18 guest rooms, six rooms on each of three floors, comprising
36 total rooms. The Lanai buildings are east of the lobby of the Plaza Building and separated
from SR 106 by a 40 feet of parking lot.. The combined areas of these buildings are
approximately 15,966 SF. The two lanai buildings will be demolished.
The Pool House is located at the northeast corner of the property,and is a one-story,aluminum,
glass and plastic building housing the swimming pool,Jacuzzi and restrooms/changing areas.
The structure was built in 1979,at the same time as the main hotel building. The square
footage of this building is approximately 4,500 SF. The Pool House will maintain its
functions and receive some architectural modifications and improvements.
The Eastwood Building is a one-story,wood-frame structure built in 1965. It houses a
large,column-free meeting room and support facilities. It is located to the south of the Pool
House. The square footage of this building is approximately 3,350 SF. The Eastwood
Building will be renovated extensively,inside and outside,and will house a new spa. Between
the Pool House and the Spa(Eastwood Building), a new fitness room will be added.
The Conference Center is located to the south of the Eastwood Room and east of the
lanai buildings. The building is a two-story, wood-framed structure, believed to have
been built in 1965. A series of meeting and support spaces, restroom facilities and the
Alderbrook maintenance shop are located in this structure. The square footage of this
building is approximately 4,318 SF. The Conference Center will be demolished.
4
The covered walkways are a network of wood-framed canopies,which connect many of the
buildings,providing shelter in inclement weather. Separately,there is an assortment of stairs
and elevated walkways were added in front(on the west side)of the Conference Center. The
covered walkways in the courtyard and the Conference Center stairs and walkways combined
are approximately 6,503 SF. The covered walkways and Conference Center stairs will be
demolished.
The marina consists of a"T"configuration dock,wood-frame,floating and anchored with
wood pilings. A walkway extends approximately 500 feet from the shoreline to a 600-foot
long moorage pier running perpendicular to the walkway. There is a small marina shack at
the juncture of the walkway and the pier. The square footage of the marina is
approximately 9,584 SF. The marina will remain as is with no modifications outside of
routine maintenance.
Cottages
West of the Plaza Building,there are 21 cottages,which are organized in a horseshoe plan
configuration around a central green space.Eight are privately owned and 13 are property of
Alderbrook. The total square footage of Alderbrook's 13 cottages is approximately 10,088 SF.
The total square footage of all 21 cottages is approximately 17,431 SF. The exteriors and
interiors of these units will be partially renovated(including those owned privately by
others). One cottage,number 103,which is owned by North Forty Lodgingwill be partially
demolished to make room for emergency vehicle access/turning radii.
South of SR 106
The Brookside Building is a one-story, wood-framed building,built in 1965. The square
footage of this building is approximately 3,600 SF. The Brookside Building will be
renovated inside to accommodate the primary hotel administration components and staff
facilities.
Alderbrook will be trading its off-site maintenance and storage barn and the lot it is on for
maintenance and storage building lot located south of the new SRI 06 realignment and west of
the realigned Beach Drive. The maintenance building Alderbrook will construct is a one-
story,wood-frame structure of approximately 2,400 SF.
Alderbrook's Sewage Treatment Plant serves the hotel campus and cottages exclusively. It is
located south of the Brookside Building. The Sewage Treatment Plant will be maintained
and no modifications are anticipated.
2.1.2 Proposed SR 106 Realignment
A major component of the Alderbrook Resort Remodel is the proposed realignment of SR 106
(Exhibit P-1). Under existing conditions,the majority of resort parking lies to the south of SR
106. To access the main campus guests must cross SR106 creating vehicle/pedestrian
conflicts. The proposed realignment will eliminate this conflict. The
4
Realignment of SR 106 will incorporate current design standards to improve intersection skew
angles, horizontal and vertical sight distances, and overall safety in the project area. A traffic
study (The Shea Group, 2002) shows realignment of SR 106 will accommodate traffic
volumes projected to the year 2022.
4
The new road will require clearing of approximately 7.0 acres of second growth forest
(Exhibit P-1).Approximately 4.3 acres of the proposed site will be terraced and revegetated
with native vegetation(Exhibit T-3)to merge naturally with upslope second growth forest.
The owner of Alderbrook resort,North Forty Lodging,LLC.,plans to maintain about 80
acres of second growth forest above the SR 106 Realignment as open space for wildlife.
There will be two new stream crossings in the new road construction. The first over Dalby
Creek and the second over Alderbrook Creek.Each crossing will be designed over a 12-foot
bottomless arch aluminum culvert. The present crossing of SR 106 over Dalby Creek is over
an existing 24" aluminum culvert. The perch of this culvert makes it a barrier to fish passage.
It will be replaced with a 14 foot wide 24 foot long prefabricated bridge. The present
crossing of SR 106 over Alderbrook Creek is over an existing 36" concrete culvert,which
represents a velocity barrier to fish. This culvert will be replaced with a 12-foot bottomless
arch aluminum culvert.An existing section of Alderbrook Creek will be modified into a
community watershed habitat viewing area with a juvenile salmon rearing pond.A new
channel will be created within this area to maintain a spawning zone for returning salmon
(Exhibit T-3).
According to the Wetlands Inventory for the Alderbrook/SR-106 Relocation,there are two
low value wetland systems in the corridor of the proposed SR 106 realignment.
These wetlands have a weak technical connection to Hood Canal (Shanewise, 2002). The
drainage from the two wetlands will be directed towards the Alderbrook Creek channel.
2.1.3 Proposed Site Drainage
The existing resort is spread over 7-acres(Exhibit D-1). Impervious space in the existing
resort development is 1.5 acres in roofs and 2.3 acres of pavement for a total area of 3.8 acres. In
the proposed resort development,total impervious space will increase to 5.9 acres with 1.4
acres in roofs and 4.5 acres in pavement. An extensive drainage system has been designed to
control and treat stormwater run-off from impervious surfaces within the resort complex and
the proposed SR 106 realignment(Exhibit D-2). These modern storm water drainage and
collection systems will greatly improve the quality of run off water entering Hood Canal.
Surface pollutants and road oils will be largely removed as water filters through settling
ponds, infiltration galleries and bioswales. Prior to these improvements stormwater run-off
flowed un-treated into Hood Canal.
Surface runoff from the western half of the proposed development will be directed first into a
100'x 6'diameter storm water settling and detention facility(Exhibit D-2,#7)and second into a
65'x 10' storm water infiltration gallery(Exhibit D-2,# 1)before discharging into the Hood
Canal. A gravel parking lot, isolated from the new drainage system in the SW corner of the
development,will be designed with a gravel surface and oil water separator(Exhibit D-2,#2).
Storm water from the eastern half of the development will be directed into a 192' long
bioswale and infiltration trench(Exhibit D2, #9),a 140'x 6'wide infiltration trench(Exhibit
D-2, #12)and into 120' of 4'-0"
4
diameter detention pipe to limit flow to the beach outfall (Exhibit D-2, # 10). Building roof
discharges(Exhibit D-2, 11)run through a separate discharge to the beach.
Road drainage systems will be incorporated into the east and west sections of SR 106
realignment(Exhibit D-2,# 13, #14). Hillside drainage above the SR 106 realignment will
collect in a 4'deep x 12"diameter curtain drain that runs along the top of the proposed roadway
cut(Exhibit D-2,#15 and# 16). Storm drainage from the new SR 106 extension west of Dalby
Creek will flow into a 3'wide by 2'deep sand infiltration trench with perforated pipe prior to
flowing into Big Bend Creek(Exhibit D-3,#19).
2.1.4 Proposed Riparian Habitat Restoration
The proposed Alderbrook Resort remodel and SR 106 realignment will affect the lower riparian
area of Alderbrook Creek and adjacent terrestrial habitat(Exhibit D-1). An extensive riparian
habitat restoration project will be an integral part of the resort remodel.The Hood Canal Salmon
Enhancement Group (HCSEG)will oversee this part of the project,and a habitat management
plan has been prepared for this activity. The goals of the riparian habitat restoration project
are to restore the natural characteristics of the lower sections of Alderbrook Creek and to
provide a an area for guests to view salmon in a natural setting. This will be done by improving
riparian diversity,increasing channel sinuosity,adding in-stream structure,and increasing the
salmon population(Fig 2 and exhibit D-2,#4). Salmon viewing stations will be conveniently
located along the new channel.
The change in in-stream and riparian habitat within the development boundary will increase by
0.5 acres from the existing area of 0.27 acres to 0.77 acres after the stream restoration project is
completed(Fig. 2). The stream flood plain will increase from an existing area of 4,500 n.
ft. to 10,119 sq. ft. An existing section of Alderbrook Creek will be modified into a
community watershed habitat viewing area with five pools for juvenile salmon rearing.
Within Alderbrook,there will be two stream crossings incorporated in the new road construction.
Each stream crossing will be designed over 12-foot bottomless aluminum arch culverts(Fig.
3). The upstream culvert will open over 3000 feet of optimal upstream habitat to salmon
migration and juvenile rearing. It will also restore natural fluvial processes to the downstream
habitat such as large woody debris(LAID)movement and nutrient cycling. The overall
impact of the lost riparian habitat to the stream ecosystem is expected to be minimal
considering the goals of the restoration project.
New Stream Channel
A new channel will be created to maintain a spawning zone for returning salmon.Moving the
existing stream channel to the new location will affect roughly 200-feet of instream habitat
(Exhibit D-2,#4). The new channel, with seven pools and six log weirs will be constructed
to mimic natural conditions including sinuosity and structural instream habitat. This will be
conducive to more beneficial habitat relating to salmon productivity and overall abundance of
aquatic organisms.
4
it
The new channel will consist of a meandering stream flowing roughly 70 GPM through a matrix
of native landscape (Exhibit D-2; #4,5). To accomplish this,Beach Drive the existing road
along the east bank of Alderbrook Creek will be removed and relocated to the west side of
the reconstructed Alderbrook Creek. The parking area between the existing Beach Drive road
and the Brookside Building will be removed. The new riparian area will be planted with native
shrubs and trees in accordance with an approved landscape plan. The planted trees will provide
an immediate source of shade,nutrients, and bank stability to the new channel.
The in-stream structure of the new channel will be enhanced through the addition of LWD. This
will provide a natural pool forming mechanism as well as cover for aquatic organisms.
Research has found that pools formed from constructed log structures result in a 3-fold
increase in summer juvenile coho numbers.At Big Beef Creek,Quinn and Peterson(1996)
indicated a positive correlation between LWD volume and coho overwinter survival. Figure 8-
1A and 8-1B from Fish Habitat Rehabilitation Procedures show the documentation of the
positive correlations between LWD addition and coho smolt abundance within streams (Slaney
and Zaldokas 1997).
5
r 'ORelarencr iE�rad Loggers Choica
10.000 9.000 N 4W
(A)
251 \
Trealad,�.+ 11)
G3
8.000 200° 0 300
r,a 0
0
2
a 2W
m
E 8.000 a
z 100
2000 Control
:989 19M 1991 1 199I 1993 1954
°1988,1990 1992'18—t Pre-Enharrcexrrent Past•£nha-ocrmcrt
°1980 1990 1992 1994
Pro- PW Pr Fat
aoavraert veamanl JEgg71t treaUlcW
Left Figure 84A. Increases in number of
outmigrant coho salmon smolts after
experimental addition of LWD to debris poor streams in the Alsea River basin (A) and Nestucca River
basin (B)in western Oregon.Treatment occurred in summer 1990.(Murphy 1995).
Right Figure 8-111.Colo smolt yield increases three years before and three years after large woody
debris enhancement in Porter Creek,a tributary of the Chehalis River,coastal Washington(Cederholm
et al.in prep).
Spawning success of returning adult salmon is directly related to the quality, size, and
abundance of spawning gravel (Groot and Margolis, 1994). To maximize the potential
spawning success of returning coho and chum salmon,the benthic environment created for the
new stream will consist of mostly one to three-inch substrate. Because the average depth of
chum and coho spawning redds range between 15 and 30cm into the gravel,the new stream bed
will contain at least a 30 cm depth of the optimal spawning substrate previously described
(Groot and Margolis, 1994).
4
It must be considered that the benthic environment existing in the previous channel upheld
complex nutrient cycles and other functions associated with the concept of river continuum
that will not immediately occur in the new channel. It can be assumed that these functions
will eventually transpire;however,this process can be supplemented and expedited by
mimicking natural nutrient input processes. Adding salmon carcasses to stream systems has
been documented to increase juvenile salmon abundance and elevate levels of benthic
macroinvertebrates throughout the northwest and British Columbia(Cederholm et al. 2000),
(Bilby et al., 1998). Since there are currently no adult salmon returning to this system,salmon
carcasses will be added to the new stream section during the natural time of returning salmon.
The amount of carcasses added to the stream will be determined using protocols established by
Nickelson et al. (1996)in which water surface area is measured and used to determine the
biomass of salmon nutrients necessary to support the identified section of aquatic ecosystem.
Conversion from Entrenched Channel to Off-Channel Rearing Pond
Riffles and pools provide different functions to stream habitat. Riffles tend to oxygenate
water, lower the temperature, and cause the water to lose carbon dioxide. Pools provide
nutrient storage,areas of energy conservation for fish,and relief to aquatic organisms from
terrestrial predation. Converting the entrenched channel to an off channel-rearing pond will
change roughly 200-feet of riffle habitat to 200-feet of pool habitat. Most of the water(70
GPM)will be diverted elsewhere to create the new pool/riffle habitat described previously,
while roughly 30 GPM will flow into the new off channel rearing pond.
Off channel ponds are documented to provide productive fish habitat for certain species and
life stages of salmonids especially chum and coho,and to a lesser degree steelhead.They provide
cover and protection from peak flows making them extremely stable overwintering habitat.
Narver(1978, Carnation Creek)reported that over-winter survival of juvenile coho in a side
channel pond averaged 74%over four winters while comparable survival in the main channel
was only 23%. Figure 3-2 as published in Fish Habitat Rehabilitation Procedures(Slaney
and Zaldokas, 1997) shows the relationship between surface area of off channel ponds and
salmon abundance as documented by various scientists.
4
i
loo (b)
•
m •
a �
•
•
•
i
i
•
0.001 10
N
J3000
0 1000
E
7 J300
0
E
V; 100
w
30
0.01 0.1
Pond A=(ha)
Figure 3-2. The relationship between surface area of off-channel ponds and
estimated number of salmonid fish present. Equation of the line is logo fish
number=0.51 logo pond area (ha) + 3.47, n=19, r 2=0.64, P< 0.001. (Data
are from Bustard and Narver 1975; Lister et al. 1980; Peterson 1982a; Swales
et al. 1986; Beniston et al. 1987; Beniston et al 1988; Swales et al. 1988;
Cederholm et al. 1988; Swales and Levings 1989; Cederholm and Scarlett 1991;
M.Foy,Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Vancouver, B.C., unpublished
data. Figure after Keeley and Slaney 1996 published in Slaney and Zoldokas
1997)
2.2 Action Area
2.2.1 Alderbrook Resort Remodel
Land area affected by this project is 16.1 acres(Exhibit D-2). Roof surfaces amount to 1.4
acres,pavement amounts to 4.5 acres, landscaped area amounts to 4.7 acres,roadway slopes
4
equal approximately 4.6 acres, and stream area equals about 0.9 acres. Impervious roof
surface decreases slightly in the proposed project to 1.4 acres compared to 1.5 acres in the
existing resort complex. Paved area in the proposed development, however, increases from an
existing surface area of 2.3 acres to 4.5 acres.
2.2.2 SR 106 Realignment
The realignment of SRI 06 will pass roughly parallel and 200-feet south of the old section and
require clearing of 7.0 acres of second growth forest(Exhibit P-1).Approximately 4.3 acres
of this forestland will be terraced and landscaped with native vegetation to merge naturally
with upslope second growth forest(Exhibit T-3). The remaining 2.7 acres will be in
impervious road surface and roadside slope.
4
The eastern third of the road alignment represents an established early successional ecosystem
characterized by past low-level development(Exhibit P-1). The primary plant species
occurring are Willow(Salix spp) and Red Alder(Alnus rubra). There were no wildlife
species of concern identified in this area.
The middle third of the zone consists of mature conifer forest impacted by low levels of business
development. The plant species identified in this area were Douglas Fir (Pseudotsuga
menaiesii), Hemlock(Tsuga heterophylla), Big Leaf Maple (Acer macrophyllum), and
Western Red Cedar(Thuja plicata) with an under-story of Willow(Salix spp.), Vine Maple
(Acer circinatum), and Red Alder(Alnus rubra). This area maintains potential habitat for
Pileated Woodpecker(Drycopus pileatus), Bald Eagle (Haliaetus leucocephalus), and Great
Blue Heron (Ardea herodias) which are all wildlife species of concern. Evidence of Pileated
Woodpecker was observed during the site inspection. There was no direct evidence of Bald
Eagle or Great Blue Heron regularly using this tract of land,although these species are known
to frequent this habitat type in the Hood Canal area.
The western third of the upland habitat zone maintains plant and wildlife characteristics
comparable to the middle third with lesser impacts from development. There are no
documented eagle nests within a one mile radius of the Alderbrook property according to the
WDFW database of nesting sites(Boad and Hannaflous 2002).
The clearing of the road will result in the lose of approximately 80 large diameter trees in the
western third of the realignment zone.North Forty Lodging will be submitting for a
conversion of timber to road,which does not require reforestation.
Geological Assessment
The recent geologic history of the Puget Sound region has been dominated by several glacial
episodes. The most recent,the Vashon stade of the Fraser glaciation is responsible for most of
the exposed geologic and topographic conditions in the area. The Puget lobe of the
Cordilleran ice sheet deposited a heterogeneous deposit of preglacial lacustrine soil, advance
outwash, lodgment till, and recessional outwash. These deposits were placed upon either
bedrock or older pre-Vashon sediments and bedrock. Once the melting ice retreated
northward, it uncovered a sculpted landscape of elongate uplands and intervening valleys. The
project site is located within this type of terrain.
The geologic units encountered during drilling were found to match those described in geology
references for the site (HartCrowser, 2002).These references and our explorations at the site
indicate it is underlain by a coarse-grained sequence of glacial,fluvial, and deltaic deposits. In
general, glacially overridden till, advance outwash, and pre-Vashon sand and gravels
predominate on the slopes south of SR 106. The till exists on the steeper slopes to the east,
while the advance outwash and pre-Vashon sands and gravels exist on flatter slopes to the
west.North of SR 106, near the Hood Canal,postglacial alluvial soils overlying glacially
overridden outwash deposits were encountered.
4
Localized surficial areas of man-made fill and/or native soil altered by man(i.e.,fill)were
encountered near the sewage treatment plant and the Alderbrook Inn.
4
2.2.3 Project Affects to Alderbrook Creek
Alderbrook Creek is a spring fed stream system. The low flow is approximately 100 gallons
per minute below the culvert at Beach Drive,through the resort property,and into Hood Canal.
Between Beach Drive and SR 106 downstream,there is approximately 200 feet of stream
habitat(Exhibit G-1).Beach Drive parallels the stream channel to the east and a gravel
parking lot lies to the west. These features limit riparian habitat within this section to a
narrow band of 20 to 50 feet on each side of the streambed. The entire channel below Beach
Drive culvert is confined to about a twenty-foot wide by ten-foot deep trench that lacks
sinuosity. This is likely the result of the improperly designed culvert at Beach Drive,which is
now perched three feet above the stream channel and acts as a scouring,high water velocity
P g, g
barrier preventing fish migration(Exhibit W-1).
The riparian habitat is dominated by an over-story of mature Douglas fir(Pseudotsuga
menziesii), Hemlock(Tsuga heterophylla), and Western Red Cedar(Thuja plicata) with an
under-story of Willow (Salix spp.), Big Leaf Maple (Acer macrophyllum), Vine Maple (Acer
circinatum), and Red Alder(Alnus rubra) as well as younger Cedars. The stream is well
shaded with over 85%canopy cover. This canopy cover helps to maintain the low water
temperature of this spring fed system making for ideal salmon habitat. The instream large
woody debris(LWD)abundance in this section,however, is minimal resulting in lesser
structural habitat and a lower pool to riffle ratio than what would naturally occur.
Benthic macroinvertebrates identified in the stream are stoneflies (Plecoptera), caddisflies
(Tricoptera), and mayflies (Ephemeroptera). These orders of aquatic insects are pollution
intolerant and indicate high water quality. The aquatic insects identified in this system
indicate the water quality of this system to be well within the tolerance range of priority species
such as coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch), chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta), and
steelhead(Oncorhynchus mykiss). However,the pool to riffle ratio,channel confinement and
fish passage barriers are interacting in complex ways that significantly limit salmon
productivity.
The lack of LWD within the active stream channel of the lower reach is preventing pool habitat
that is essential for juvenile coho and other salmonid survival. The increased velocity below
the Beach Drive culvert has limited spawning habitat throughout the accessible reach by
entrenching the stream channel and flushing out most of the spawning gravel, leaving mostly
cobble sized substrate. The SR 106 crossing represents a partial barrier while the Beach Drive
barrier is preventing access to over 3000 feet of optimal upstream habitat(Exhibit W-1). There
were no anadromous fish species of concern identified in this area. One juvenile cutthroat
trout(Oncorhynchus clarki) was identified in a pool directly downstream from the Beach
Drive crossing.North of SR 106,in the resort complex,there is very little riparian complexity
compared to the upper watershed(Exhibit W-1).
4
In its present state,Alderbrook Creek is a poor fish-bearing stream. The habitat is already
severely degraded and no significant negative impact is expected to Alderbrook Creek as a result
of Alderbrook Resort remodel and SR 106 realignment project.Ambient temperature and
naturally occurring aquatic insects indicate that conditions are optimal for Pacific salmon.
Restoration of Alderbrook Creek will significantly enhance natural conditions for Pacific
salmon species, and more than adequately compensate for changes to the existing riparian
habitat.
During rehabilitation of Alderbrook Creek, cutthroat in the existing channel could be affected
because of an intermittent period of no water in the channel. This water will be pumped
around the channel during construction. To avoid fish mortality,the cutthroat will be removed
from the project section using seine nets,and placed in other parts of the stream that will not be
affected by construction. The stream section under construction will be isolated upstream and
downstream using block nets so that fish will not be able to swim near the construction area from
other sections of the stream. Within the construction zone,there will be mortality to benthic
organisms, such as aquatic insects,from lack of water during the construction phase. The
impact of this on the stream ecosystem will be minimal considering the contribution of benthic
fauna from the upstream habitat once stream flow is restored.
2.2.4 Project Affects to Dalby Creek
Dalby Creek is a spring fed stream system located approximately 15 miles west of Belfair and
crossing underneath SR 106 approximately 400 feet west of Alderbrook Resort before emptying
into Hood Canal(Exhibits T-3 and D-3).The riparian zone above SR 106 is dominated by an
over-story of mature Douglas Fir(Pseudotsuga menziesii), Hemlock(Tsuga heterophylla),
Big Leaf Maple(Acer macrophyllum), and Western Red Cedar (Thuja plicata) with an under-
story of Willow (Salix spp.), Vine Maple (Acer circinatum), and Red Alder(Alnus rubra).
Like Alderbrook Creek,this section is well shaded with over 85%canopy cover. Despite a
moderate level of channel confinement,the habitat in this section still seems representative of
natural conditions. There is a lower pool to riffle ratio than what would occur naturally,
however,due to a lack of LWD.North of existing SR 106,the riparian zone is primarily
residential with very little native successional vegetation.
There were no fish identified in Dalby Creek above the culvert at the existing SRI 06.The
habitat,however,is similar to Alderbrook Creek where cutthroat trout(Oncorhynchus clarki)
were found,so it is likely that this species also occurs in Dalby Creek. Aquatic insects
identified in the stream are stoneflies (Plecoptera), caddisflies (Tricoptera), and mayflies
known to be pollution intolerant and
E hemero tera . These orders of aquatic insects are p
( P P ) q
indicate high water quality well within the tolerance range of priority species such as coho
salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch), chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta), and steelhead
(Oncorhynchus mykiss).
The proposed crossing for the SR 106 realignment will occur roughly 200 feet south of the
current SR 106 crossing. There will be roughly 60-feet of riparian habitat on both
4
stream banks removed and converted to roadway and semi-impervious surface. Impacts to
aquatic habitat will be minimized by the installation of a 12-foot bottomless arch aluminum
culvert(Fig 3). The size of this culvert will allow for the natural fluvial process including
nutrient transfer and cycling of LWD to continue downstream. The current crossing of SR
106 is over an under sized culvert that represents a partial barrier to fish passage. This culvert
will be removed and replaced with a 12-foot wide 24-foot long prefabricated bridge. The
removal of this culvert will open up over 3000 feet of productive upstream fish habitat.
LWD will be placed throughout the stream to improve the in stream structural habitat and
increase pool to riffle ratio. The overall impact from construction to this stream system will be
minimal given the scope of the stream bed restoration.
2.2.5 Project Affects to Terrestrial Habitat
The eastern third of the road alignment represents an established early successional
ecosystem characterized by past low-level development. The primary plant species
occurring are Willow(Salix spp.) and Red Alder(Alnus rubra). There were no wildlife
species of concern identified in this area.
The middle third of the zone consists of mature conifer forest impacted by low levels of business
development. The plant species identified in this area were Douglas Fir (Pseudotsuga
menziesii), Hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), Big Leaf Maple (Acer macrophyllum), and
Western Red Cedar(Thuja plicata) with an under-story of Willow (Salix spp.), Vine Maple
(Acer circinatum), and Red Alder(Alnus rubra). This area maintains potential habitat for
Pileated Woodpecker(Drycopus pileatus), Bald Eagle (Haliaetus leucocephalus), and Great
Blue Heron (Ardea herodias), which are all wildlife species of concern. Evidence of Pileated
Woodpecker was observed during the site inspection. There was no direct evidence of Bald
Eagle or Great Blue Heron regularly using this tract of land,although these species are known
to frequent this habitat type in the Hood Canal area.The western third of the upland habitat
zone maintains plant and wildlife characteristics comparable to the middle third with lesser
impacts from development. There are no documented eagle nests within a one-mile radius of
the Alderbrook property according to the WDFW database of nesting sites(Boad and
Hannafious 2002)
The realignment of SRI 06 will pass roughly parallel and 200-feet south of the old section and
require clearing of 7.0 acres of second growth forest(Exhibit P-1).Approximately 4.3 acres
of this forestland will be terraced and landscaped with native vegetation(Exhibit T-3)to merge
naturally with upslope second growth forest. The remaining 2.7 acres will be in impervious
road surface and roadside slope. The clearing of the road will result in the loose of
approximately 80 large diameter trees in the western third of the realignment zone.North Forty
Lodging will be submitting for a conversion of timber to road,which does not require
reforestation.
Wetlands
4
A wetland inventory was conducted along the proposed construction path for the SR 106
realignment(Shanewise, 2002; Appendix A). The proposed road realignment has
dramatically different topography between the east and west ends(Exhibit G- 1). The east end
cuts across a steep slope typical of shoreline bluffs common to Hood Canal.At the point
where Alderbrook Creek is crossed,the topography flattens to a gentle slope to the project's
western terminus. The wetlands and stream described within this report all occur within the
eastern, steep-sloped part of the proposed new roadway.
Two,small wetland systems(Exhibits G-1,P-1 and W-1), approximately 0.37 acre,occur
along the realignment route. These are minor, hillside seeps. Surface water is restricted to
flows artificially consolidated by human caused alterations to the ground surface. Soil
saturation is caused by daylighting groundwater,and appears to occur at many locations along
the uphill wetland boundary. Both wetlands have downslope terminuses where hydrology
seeps subsurface again and soil saturation ceases. Minor outlet channels that drain from the
downslope points on both wetlands also fade from defined channels to vegetated swales that
technically lack either stream or wetland conditions.
An old dirt roadway was cut across the slope where the two wetlands occur,and this roadway
now intercepts most wetland hydrology. Where this roadway occurs, downslope conditions
are entirely upland. It seems likely that the past road builders cut their path just below where
the wetland seep naturally disappeared,but the hydrology then drained into the flat roadway
and created new wetland conditions below where the natural wetlands had previously
occurred.
The two slope wetlands technically terminate both wetland and stream conditions prior to their
connection with the ditch along SR106. Water from this ditch drains through culverts and
beneath adjacent developed ground before finally reaching Puget Sound roadside ditch where
water flows through culverts to the shoreline of Puget Sound over 200 feet away.Although
storm event generated surface flows drain from the wetlands to the roadside ditch during
winter,this weak connection to Puget Sound should qualify these sloped wetlands as not
associated with tidal waters.A small, Type 5 stream also occurs along the steep slope near
the two minor wetland systems. This system drains to an intake grate at the slope toe where
solid pavement begins. From here,the surface flow is culverted west into the Alderbrook
Creek channel.
Both the wetlands and stream described here are low value systems with minimal function
performance. Water quality benefits from the densely vegetated sloped wetlands are the
primary function of these systems. The seasonal stream flows should contribute organic
matter to Alderbrook Creek,but the low volumes involved limit the total value of this action.
Habitat structures of all three systems are simple, and past disturbances have occurred.
Mitigation should is required for impacts to these wetlands. The proposed restoration of
Alderbrook Creek and improvements to Dalby Creek will qualify,as adequate mitigation for
the lose of these low value wetlands.however, in the event that mitigation is required the
stream restoration project on Alderbrook Creek will provide adequate compensation.
Restoring Alderbrook Creek and Dalby Creek to anadromous fish runs will immensely
improve the overall environment here well beyond the impacts that will occur to these minor
wetlands(Shanewise,2002).
4
2.2.5 Project Affects to Marine Intertidal Habitat
A beach survey conducted for the Alderbrook Resort Remodel identified no critical eelgrass
(Zostera marina or Z.japonica) habitat in the intertidal area fronting Alderbrook Resort
(Thompson, 2002; Appendix B).
The beach at Alderbrook Resort lies against the southern shore of Hood Canal in a semiprotected
embayment sheltered from southwesterly storms and winds. The beach is fairly exposed,
however,to northeasterly winds along the canal.
The substrate throughout the intertidal zone is a mixture of coarse sand and pebbles extending
from the higher tidal elevations of about+10'mean lower low water(MLLW)down to
approximately+4' MLLW. Below a+4' MLLW tidal elevation the substrate was
predominantly sand. Minor patches of saltmarsh vegetation occur at the outfall of Alderbrook
Creek. There is very little other vegetation on the beach aside from sparse patches of
common macroalgae Ova sp. and Entermopha sp. The dominant shellfish species occupying
the beach is the Pacific oyster, Crassostrea gigas(Exhibit S-1).Minor pockets of manila
clams, Tapes philippinarum, were identified in the mid intertidal area.
In the event of a large-scale sediment release,the small area of salt marsh vegetation at the
outfall of Alderbrook Creek could be effected, however this would not be long-term,and this
vegetation would re-colonize the area once elevations returned to normal. The geological
report prepared for this BA, indicates that the soil within the project site is composed
predominantly of sand and gravel and this material would settle out before reaching the oyster
beds. Clam species would be able to move up through any accumulation of sediments to the
substrate surface. Proper construction and sediment control measures should prevent any
large-scale release of sediments to Alderbrook Beach
The upper reaches of the beach are documented spawning sites for marine forage fish including
sand lance (Ammodytes hexapterus)and surf smelt(Hypomesus pretiosus). These species
comprise an important part of the diet for juvenile salmon including listed summer chum and
Puget Sound chinook salmon. For this reason,the spawning habitat of forage fish is
considered critical for the eventual rehabilitation and continued maintenance of threatened
salmon species. Finer grained sand that may reach the upper shoreline of the beach during
proposed construction activities would add to and complement existing spawning habitat of
these forage fish species. Pacific Herring (Clupea harengus pallasi) are also documented to
spawn in this section of Hood Canal. Pacific herring,however,spawn on eelgrass and the
absence of eelgrass on this beach precludes its use as a potential spawning site for Pacific
herring.
Strict sedimentation control guidelines will be adhered to during construction and this will
minimize the potential for negative impacts to critical habitat,salt marsh vegetation,and shellfish
species.Restoration of the Alderbrook Creek will likely improve the flow of fine sediments,
nutrients and detritus to Alderbrook Beach that will compliment fish
4
1
forage habitat.A new drainage system for the resort will greatly eliminate the potential for
road oils and other pollutants to for reach the beach.
4
3. SPECIES AND HABITAT
3.1 Fish Species
The NMFS completed an ESA status review of chinook salmon populations along the Pacific
coast and interior rivers in 1998 and identified 15 Evolutionary significant Units(ESU); each
considered a species under the ESA. Subsequent to this review,NMFS proposed a
threatened status for Puget Sound Chinook salmon. The ESU includes all naturally spawned
spring,summer,and fall run chinook salmon populations in the Puget sound basin including
Hood Canal. In 1999,the NMFS formally listed Puget Sound chinook as threatened under
the ESA. The ESU's and ESA listings are now being reassessed by NMFS due to legal actions
and the U.S.District Court ruling in Eugene,OR in Alsea Valley alliance vs.Evans that NMFS
was negligent in not ruling hatchery fish as an ESU (Appendix Q. For the purpose of this
BA, Puget Sound chinook salmon and Hood Canal summer chum salmon are still treated as
listed under the ESA.
3.1.1 Chinook Salmon
3.1.1.1 Description of Species
II
Chinook are largest of the salmon species. A mature spawner can range from two to seven
years old (Moyle 1976). Redds are often 3.6 meters long and 30 cm deep with a female
laying between 2,000 and 14,000 eggs. Eggs laid in the fall hatch in the early spring. In fresh
water the juveniles are opportunistic drift feeders; adults feed primarily on fish in the marine
environment. As the juveniles grow,they gradually move out into swifter water, smolting to
enter the marine environment. They are primarily subyearling emigrants and are known to
utilize estuarine habitat for a significant part of their juvenile life stage, Groot and Margolis
(1994).
In Hood Canal,chinook salmon are found in the mainstem of major Hood Canal tributaries
including the Dosewallips,Duckabush,Hamma Hamma,and Skokomish Rivers. Historically
these runs were composed of spring, summer, and fall chinook. Presently,the runs on these on
these rivers are now composed of mixed Hood Canal hatchery stocks of summer/fall chinook
(USFS, 1995).Natural spawning is influenced by straying of these hatchery-released fish to
adjacent river systems. Chinook produced in hatcheries nearest to the project area are not
considered essential to the recovery of chinook in the Puget Sound ESU nor are they listed
under the ESA listing by NMFS in 1999.
3.1.1.2 Habitat
The designation of critical habitat for listed species is required under Section 4(a)(3)(A)of the
ESA. The ESA defines critical habitat in Section 3(5)(A)as "the specific areas within the
geographic area occupied by the species,on which are found those physical or biological
features that are essential to the conservation of the species and that may require special
management considerations or protection.NMFS has designated critical habitat for Puget
Sound chinook salmon to include "all waterways, substrate, and
4
adjacent riparian zones below longstanding naturally impassable barriers(i.e., natural
waterfalls in existence for several hundred years)."
No marine habitats occur within the project area. Habitat within the project area is limited to
the freshwater environment,which includes potential spawning and subyearling foraging
habitat.The existing freshwater riparian habitat within the project area,however,is presently
degraded and not suitable as a spawning or rearing stream for salmon(Boad and Hannafious
2002).
Alderbrook Creek flows through the middle portion of the project area. The
streamswatershed, is spring fed, and flows year round. The upper watershed includes
approximately 40 acres of the Alderbrook residential community and Golf Course. Storm
runoff from the developed portion of the watershed is not controlled by detention and heavy
rains create a substantial increase in flow in the stream. Studies are currently underway to
retrofit the upper watershed with Stormwater flow control and treatment facilities.
Two culverts create fish passage barriers on the stream. The lower culvert is located at SR
106(Exhibit D-1)and is a 36"diameter concrete culvert that is 100'long with a slope of 2.6%and
no perch at the outlet. This culvert is a velocity barrier to fish passage. The second culvert
(Exhibit D-1)is located approximately 400 feet up Beach Drive from SRI 06. It is a 36" diameter,
40' long concrete culvert with a slope of 4.7 percent. The outlet of the upper culvert is
perched 3 feet above the stream bed. This culvert has down cut the stream up to 3 feet for 200
feet downstream. It is a total blockage to fish passage.
The portion of the stream below SR 106 is highly structured and disturbed. The course of the
stream has been altered to protect adjoining structures. The outlet in elevated so that the only
time salmon can access the stream is during a very high tide.
Alderbrook Creek has the opportunity to become an excellent salmon stream. It has cool,
year round spring water flow and excellent spawning area with riparian habitat above Beach
Drive. There has been a small run of Fall Chum Salmon and cutthroat in the stream. It is
proposed to reestablish all the wild salmon runs in the stream using a wild salmon incubator
(Boad and Hannafious 2002).
Dalby Creek flows through the western portion of the SRI 06 Realignment. The streams
watershed is spring fed, and flows year round. A 24" culvert create a fish passage barrier on
the stream were it crosses underneath the existing SRI 06.This culvert will be removed and
replaced with a 12-foot wide 24-foot long prefabricated bridge. The removal of this culvert
will P
open u over 3000 feet of productive upstream fish habitat. The proposed crossing for the
P
n will occur roughly 200 feet above the current SR 106 crossing.There w ill
SR 106 reali e t
g Y
be roughly 60-feet of riparian habitat on both stream banks removed and converted to
roadway and semi-impervious surface. Impacts to aquatic habitat will be minimized by the
installation of a 12-foot bottomless arch aluminum culvert(Fig 3). The size of this culvert will
allow for the natural fluvial process including nutrient transfer and cycling of LWD to
continue downstream. In
4
addition LWD will be placed throughout the stream to improve the in stream structural
habitat and increase pool to riffle ratio. Dalby Creek has the opportunity to become an
excellent salmon stream.
The property owner of Alderbrook Resort,North 40 Lodging,LLC desires to make Alderbrook
Creek, and the restored salmon runs in Alderbrook Creek, an environmental "experience" for
its guests at the lodge. The HCSEG has been requested to collaborate with them in this
endeavor. HCSEG will also complete similar restoration efforts as outlined above for Dalby
Creek.
3.1.1.3 Determination
The Checklist for Documenting Environmental Baseline and Effects of Proposed Action(s) on
Relevant Indicators is included in Appendix D and was used to guide in the determination of
the proposed action on chinook salmon. An extensive field survey of the habitat parameters
identified in the checklist was performed by HCSEG biologists in the field survey(Boad and
Hannafious 2002).
Overall,no long-term local or wide spread deleterious effects to chinook salmon or their habitat
in Alderbrook Creek or Dalby Creek are expected as a result of the Alderbrook Resort
remodel and associated stream habitat restoration projects. Given the available information,
the potential for"take'to occur is negligible.Therefore,these activities are not likely to
adversely affect chinook salmon and will not result in the destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat for chinook salmon in the action area. Information to
support this determination is provided in the following sections.
Potential Direct Effects
Chinook salmon do not occupy the work area(Boad and Hannafious,2002)and no direct
effects are likely to occur to chinook salmon resulting from The Alderbrook Resort Remodel
project or from the SR 106 Realignment Project. Construction on Alderbrook Creek to
improve riparian habitat and Dalby Creek to improve LWD is expected to have minimal
impacts.No construction will take place in near shore marine environment and as such,
disturbance from construction noise will be negligible. It is anticipated that there will be short
term turbidity plumes resulting from construction that will cause minor decreases in water
quality,due to the size and composition of the substrate(see Geology Section 2.1.3). Much of
the riparian substrate is composed of cobble and gravel,and sedimentation from construction
activities is expected to cause only minor,short-term increases in sediment levels in the project
area.
In addition, impacts from erosion and run-off will be minimized using well designed erosion
and sediment control measures,which may include the use of silt fencing, filters on storm
drains, hay bales and other measures as recommended in the King County Surface Water
Manual(King County DNR 1988).A pollution prevention plan will be in effect during
construction.
4
Potential Indirect effects
Potential indirect effects from the proposed Alderbrook Creek and Dalby Creek construction
activities may include temporary changes to invertebrate food resources in the immediate
project area due to short-term disturbance of the substrate and water diversion during
construction. Within the existing 200-foot channel, there will be mortality of benthic
organisms such as aquatic insects because of lack of water during the construction phase. The
impact of this on the stream ecosystem will be minimal considering the contribution of
benthic fauna from the upstream habitat once stream flow is restored. Minor sediment plumes
in the near-shore marine environment are expected to have no impact on the epibenthic
crustaceans utilized by juvenile chinook salmon as a food resource.
Impacts to chinook forage fish prey are expected to be short-lived and minimized by project
BMP's and HPA restrictions. Potential impacts to chinook salmon food resources,
including surf smelt,that may occur as a result of this project will have an "insignificant
effect" on chinook salmon and should never reach the scale where "take" will occur.
Cumulative Effects
Anticipated cumulative effect will be a temporary disturbance from construction of new riparian
habitat within Alderbrook Creek and LWD in Dalby Creek. Sediment plumes resulting from
this construction, if they occur,will be minor and short-term. Overall,the action will
contribute to the long tern improvement,over existing conditions,of the riparian habitat.
A new drainage system is designed to handle surface flow from the new SRI 06 alignment,
parking areas and other impervious surfaces within the resort complex(Exhibit D-2 &D-3).
Much of the surface water and accompanying pollution will be channeled into stormwater
infiltration galleries and bioswale catchment basins that will entrap suspended solids and filter
hydrocarbons and oil products draining from road surfaces. Parking lots are designed with oil
water separators. Water leaving bioswales and infiltration galleries will drain through a 4'-
0" diameter detention pipe to limit flow to outfall at NE corner of property. Stormwater
outfall will have minimal impact on salinity of seawater in Hood Canal,and is not expected to
alter salinities except in the immediate area of discharge pipe. The cumulative effect of the
drainage system project will be to reduce sediment and pollution contaminants entering
hood canal compared to existing conditions.
3.1.2 Coho Salmon
3.1.2.1 Description of Species
Coho are not currently listed under the ESA but are part of a vulnerable Evolutionally
Significant Unit and are presently a candidate for listing. Wild coho spawn in the
4
Dosewallips,Duckabush,Hamma Hamma,and Skokomish River systems on Hood Canal
(USFS, 1995, 1997-98). The redd site is chosen by the female. The preferred location is at the
head of a riffle in small to medium sized gravel (Moyle and Cech. 1982). Each female lays
1,000 to 5,000 eggs, depending on her size. The eggs hatch in eight to twelve weeks and the
fry emerge from the gravel four to ten weeks later,depending on the water temperatures
(Moyle 1982).
The fiy school in the shallow stream margins,feeding on a wide variety of small invertebrates.
As the fish grow, individuals establish territories. This territory is characteristically quiet
backwater or off channel areas in winter and main stem pools during summer. LWD is known
to be directly related to juvenile success because of its pool forming function (Cederholm
and Bilbe 1997). Coho salmon spend a year in fresh water before migrating to sea.
Young coho are voracious feeders,ingesting any organism that moves or drifts through its
territory. A major part of their diet is aquatic insect larvae and terrestrial insects; small
fishes are taken when available(Moyle 1982). Coho salmon migrate to the sea after their
first year in freshwater.At sea, coho are pelagic and prey mostly on other fishes(Moyle
1982),returning in two to five years to their native stream to spawn,die and start the cycle
again.
Although stock-specific information is not available,it is assumed that Hood Canal coho are
primarily harvested in Canadian troll,net and sport fisheries and in Washington net and sport
fisheries. In preterminal areas,the harvest rates on coho are determined by the needs for the
other stocks of coho or other species.There is a terminal area fishery on Hood Canal coho.
Overall, harvest rates are also a limiting factor for this coho stock(WDFW and WWTIT
1994).
3.1.2.2 Habitat
No marine habitats occur within the project area. Habitat within the project area is limited to
the freshwater environment,which includes potential spawning and subyearling foraging
habitat. The existing freshwater riparian habitat within the project area,however,is presently
degraded and not suitable as a spawning or rearing stream for salmon (Boad and Hannafious
2002). Alderbrook Creek flows through the middle portion of the project area. The streams
watershed is spring fed, and flows year round. The upper watershed includes approximately
40 acres of the Alderbrook residential community and Golf Course. Storm runoff from the
developed portion of the watershed is not controlled by detention and heavy rains create a
substantial increase in flow in the stream. Studies are currently underway to retrofit the upper
watershed with Stormwater flow control and treatment facilities.
Two culverts create fish passage barriers on the stream. The lower culvert is located at SR
106(Exhibit D-1)and is a 36"diameter concrete culvert that is 100'long with a slope of 2.6%and
no perch at the outlet. This culvert is a velocity barrier to fish passage. The second culvert
(Exhibit D-1)is located approximately 400 feet up Beach Drive from
4
I
I
SRI 06. It is a 36" diameter,40' long concrete culvert with a slope of 4.7 percent. The outlet
of the upper culvert is perched 3 feet above the stream bed. This culvert has down cut the
stream up to 3 feet for 200 feet downstream. It is a total blockage to fish passage.
The portion of the stream below SR 106 is highly structured and disturbed. The course of the
stream has been altered to protect adjoining structures. The outlet in elevated so that the only
time salmon can access the stream is during a very high tide.
Alderbrook Creek has the opportunity to become an excellent salmon stream. It has cool, year
round spring water flow and excellent spawning area with riparian habitat above Beach Drive.
There has been a small run of Fall Chum Salmon and cutthroat in the stream. It is proposed to
reestablish all the wild salmon runs in the stream using a wild salmon incubator(Boad and
Hannafious 2002).
Dalby Creek flows through the western portion of the SR106 Realignment. The streams
watershed is spring fed, and flows year round. A 24" culvert create a fish passage barrier on
the stream were it crosses underneath the existing SR106. This culvert will be removed and
replaced with a 12-foot wide 24-foot long prefabricated bridge. The removal of this culvert
will open up over 3000 feet of productive upstream fish habitat.The proposed crossing for the
SR 106 realignment will occur roughly 200 feet above the current SR 106 crossing. There will
be roughly 60-feet of riparian habitat on both stream banks removed and converted to
roadway and semi-impervious surface. Impacts to aquatic habitat will be minimized by the
installation of a 12-foot bottomless arch aluminum culvert(Fig 3). The size of this culvert will
allow for the natural fluvial process including nutrient transfer and cycling of LWD to
continue downstream. In addition LWD will be placed throughout the stream to improve the
in stream structural habitat and increase pool to riffle ratio. Dalby Creek has the opportunity
to become an excellent salmon stream.
The property owner of Alderbrook Resort,North 40 Lodging, LLC desires to make
Alderbrook Creek,and the restored salmon runs in Alderbrook Creek,an environmental
"experience" for its guests at the lodge. The HCSEG has been requested to collaborate with
them in this endeavor. HCSEG will also complete similar restoration efforts as outlined
above for Dalby Creek.
3.1.2.3 Determination
The Checklist for Documenting Environmental Baseline and Effects of Proposed Action(s) on
Relevant Indicators is included in Appendix D and was used to guide in the determination of
the proposed action on coho salmon. An extensive field survey of the habitat parameters
identified in the checklist was performed by HCSEG biologists in the field survey.
4
Overall,no long-term local or wide spread deleterious effects to coho salmon or their habitat
in Alderbrook Creek or Dalby Creek are expected as a result of the Alderbrook Resort
remodel and associated stream habitat restoration projects. Given the available
information,the potential for"take'to occur is negligible. Therefore,these activities are
not likely to adversely affect coho salmon and will not result in the destruction or
adverse modification of critical habitat for coho salmon in the action area. Information
to support this determination is provided in the following sections.
Potential Direct Effects
Coho salmon do not occupy the work area(Boad and Hannafious,2002)and no direct effects are
Rely to occur to coho salmon as a result of remodeling activities to the Alderbrook Resort or as
a result of realignment of SR 106. Construction on Alderbrook Creek to improve riparian
habitat and Dalby Creek to improve LWD is expected to have minimal impacts.No
construction will take place in near shore marine environment and as such, disturbance from
construction noise will be negligible. It is anticipated that there will be short term turbidity
plumes resulting from construction that will cause minor decreases in water quality,due to the
size and composition of the substrate(see Geology Section 2.1.3).Much of the riparian substrate
is composed of cobble and gravel,and sedimentation from construction activities is expected to
cause only minor,short-term increases in sediment levels in the project area.
In addition, impacts from erosion and run-off will be minimized using well designed erosion
and sediment control measures,which may include the use of silt fencing,filters on storm
drains,hay bales and other measures as recommended in the King County Surface Water
Manual (King County DNR 1988).A pollution prevention plan will be in effect during
construction.
Potential Indirect effects
Potential indirect effects from the proposed Alderbrook Creek and Dalby Creek construction
activities may include temporary changes to invertebrate food resources in the immediate project
area due to short-term disturbance of the substrate and water diversion during construction.
Within the existing 200-foot channel,there will be mortality of benthic organisms such as
aquatic insects because of lack of water during the construction phase. The impact of this on the
stream ecosystem will be minimal considering the contribution of benthic fauna from the
upstream habitat once stream flow is restored. Minor sediment plumes in the near-shore
marine environment are expected to have no impact on the epibenthic crustaceans utilized by
juvenile chinook salmon as a food resource.
Impacts to coho forage fish prey are expected to be short-lived and minimized by project
BMP's and HPA restrictions. Potential impacts to coho salmon food resources, including surf
smelt, that may occur as a result of this project will have an "insignificant effect" on chinook
salmon and should never reach the scale where"take"will occur.
4
Cumulative Effects
Anticipated cumulative effect will be a temporary disturbance from construction of new
riparian habitat within Alderbrook Creek and LWD in Dalby Creek. Sediment plumes
resulting from this construction will be minor and short-term. Overall,the action will
contribute to the long tern improvement,over existing conditions,of the riparian habitat.
A new drainage system is designed to handle surface flow from the new SRI 06 alignment,
parking areas and other impervious surfaces within the resort complex(Exhibit D-2). Much of
the surface water and accompanying pollution will be channeled into stormwater infiltration
galleries and bioswale catchment basins that will entrap suspended solids and filter
hydrocarbons and oil products draining from road surfaces. Parking lots are designed with oil
water separators. Water leaving bioswales and infiltration galleries will drain through a 4'-0"
diameter detention pipe to limit flow to outfall at NE corner of property. Stormwater outfall
will have minimal impact on salinity of seawater in Hood Canal,and is not expected to alter
salinities except in the immediate area of discharge pipe. The cumulative effect of the drainage
system project will be to reduce sediment and pollution contaminants entering hood canal
compared to existing conditions.
3.1.3 Summer Chum Salmon
3.1.3.1 Description of Species
Summer chum are currently listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act.Genetic
studies show that the Hood Canal and Juan de Fuca summer chum salmon are
distinguishable from other Northwest chum salmon stocks(WDFW 1995). Summer
chum are in the Hood Canal Evolutionally Significant Unit(ESU)while the late fall chum
are considered part of the Puget Sound ESU.
Hood Canal summer chum spawn from early September to late October and late fall chum
spawn from mid-November to mid-January(WDFW and WWTIT 1994). Chum salmon
spend little time in fresh water. They usually occupy the lowermost sections of anadromous
habitat,not extending beyond barriers that are easily passed by other salmon. Some populations
of parr spend several months in the estuaries making estuarine habitat vital to their overall
success(Moyle 1982). The female digs a series of depressions to form the redd in gravel
riffles, laying 2,400 to 4,000 eggs(Moyle 1982). Fry leave the gravel when they reach 30-35
nun. Some populations of parr spend several months in the estuaries (Moyle 1982). The chum
spend three to five years at sea before returning to their native stream to spawn, die,and
regenerate the cycle.
4
3.1.3.2 Habitat
No marine habitats occur within the project area. Habitat within the project area is limited to
the freshwater environment,which includes potential spawning and subyearling foraging habitat.
The existing freshwater riparian habitat within the project area,however,is presently
degraded and not suitable as a spawning or rearing stream for salmon(Boad and Hannafious
2002).Alderbrook Creek flows through the middle portion of the project area. The streams
watershed is spring fed, and flows year round. The upper watershed includes approximately 40
acres of the Alderbrook residential community and Golf Course. Storm runoff from the
developed portion of the watershed is not controlled by detention and heavy rains create a
substantial increase in flow in the stream. Studies are currently underway to retrofit the upper
watershed with Stormwater flow control and treatment facilities.
Two culverts create fish passage barriers on the stream. The lower culvert is located at SR
106(Exhibit D-1)and is a 36"diameter concrete culvert that is 100'long with a slope of 2.6%and
no perch at the outlet. This culvert is a velocity barrier to fish passage. The second culvert
(Exhibit D-1)is located approximately 400 feet up Beach Drive from SRI 06.It is a 36"diameter,
40'long concrete culvert with a slope of 4.7 percent.The outlet of the upper culvert is perched 3
feet above the stream bed. This culvert has down cut the stream up to 3 feet for 200 feet
downstream. It is a total blockage to fish passage.
The portion of the stream below SR 106 is highly structured and disturbed. The course of the
stream has been altered to protect adjoining structures. The outlet is elevated so that the only
time salmon can access the stream is during a very high tide.
Alderbrook Creek has the opportunity to become an excellent salmon stream. It has cool,year
round spring water flow and excellent spawning area with riparian habitat above Beach Drive.
There has been a small run of Fall Chum Salmon and cutthroat in the stream. It is proposed to
reestablish all the wild salmon runs in the stream using a wild salmon incubator(Boad and
Hannafious 2002).
Dalby Creek flows through the western portion of the SRI 06 Realignment. The streams
watershed is spring fed, and flows year round.A 24" culvert create a fish passage barrier on
the stream were it crosses underneath the existing SRI 06.This culvert will be removed and
replaced with a 12-foot wide 24-foot long prefabricated bridge. The removal of this culvert
will open up over 3000 feet of productive upstream fish habitat.The proposed crossing for the
SR 106 realignment will occur roughly 200 feet above the current SR 106 crossing. There will
be roughly 60-feet of riparian habitat on both stream banks removed and converted to
roadway and semi-impervious surface. Impacts to aquatic habitat will be minimized by the
installation of a 12-foot bottomless arch aluminum culvert(Fig 3). The size of this culvert
will allow for the natural fluvial process including nutrient transfer and cycling of LWD to
continue downstream. In addition LWD will be placed throughout the stream to improve the
in stream structural habitat and increase pool to riffle ratio. Dalby Creek has the opportunity
to become an excellent salmon stream.
4
The property owner of Alderbrook Resort,North 40 Lodging,LLC desires to make Alderbrook
Creek,and the restored salmon runs in the stream,an environmental "experience" for its
guests at the lodge. The HDSEG has been requested to collaborate with them in this
endeavor. HCSEG will also complete similar restoration efforts as outlined above for
Dalby Creek
3.1.3.2 Determination
The Checklist for Documenting Environmental Baseline and Effects of Proposed Action(s)
on Relevant Indicators is included in Appendix D and was used to guide in the determination
of the proposed action on summer chum salmon. An extensive field survey of the habitat
parameters identified in the checklist was performed by HCSEG biologists in the field survey
(Boad and Hannafious 2002).
Overall,no long-term local or wide spread deleterious effects to summer chum salmon or their
habitat in Alderbrook Creek or Dalby Creek are expected as a result of the Alderbrook Resort
remodel and associated stream habitat restoration projects. Given the available information,
the potential for "take'to occur is negligible. Therefore,these activities are not likely to
adversely affect summer chum salmon and will not result in the destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat for summer chum salmon in the action area. Information
to support this determination is provided in the following sections.
Potential Direct Effects
Summer chum salmon do not occupy the work area(Boad and Hannafious,2002)and no direct
effects are likely to occur to summer chum salmon as a result of remodeling activities to the
Alderbrook Inn or as a result of realignment of SR 106. Construction on Alderbrook Creek to
improve riparian habitat and Dalby Creek to improve LWD is expected to have minimal
impacts.No construction will take place in near shore marine environment and as such,
disturbance from construction noise will be negligible. It is anticipated that there will be
short term turbidity plumes resulting from construction that will cause minor decreases in
water quality,due to the size and composition of the substrate (see Geology Section 2.1.3).
Much of the riparian substrate is composed of cobble and gravel, and sedimentation from
construction activities is expected to cause only minor,short-term increases in sediment levels
in the project area.
In addition, impacts from erosion and run-off will be minimized using well designed erosion
and sediment control measures,which may include the use of silt fencing,filters on storm drains,
hay bales and other measures as recommended in the King County Surface Water Manual
(King County DNR 1988).A pollution prevention plan will be in effect during construction.
4
Potential Indirect effects
Potential indirect effects from the proposed Alderbrook Creek and Dalby Creek construction
activities may include temporary changes to invertebrate food resources in the immediate
project area due to short-term disturbance of the substrate and water diversion during
construction. Within the existing 200-foot channel,there will be mortality of benthic
organisms such as aquatic insects because of lack of water during the construction phase. The
impact of this on the stream ecosystem will be minimal considering the contribution of
benthic fauna from the upstream habitat once stream flow is restored. Minor sediment plumes
in the near-shore marine environment are expected to have no impact on the epibenthic
crustaceans utilized by juvenile summer chum salmon as a food resource.
Impacts to summer chum prey species are expected to be short-lived and minimized by project
BMP's and HPA restrictions. Potential impacts to summer chum salmon food resources,
including surf smelt that may occur as a result of this project will have an"insignificant effect"
on summer chum salmon and should never reach the scale where"take" will occur.
Cumulative Effects
Anticipated cumulative effect will be a temporary disturbance from construction of new
riparian habitat within Alderbrook Creek and LWD in Dalby Creek. Sediment plumes
resulting from this construction will be minor and short-term. Overall,the action will
contribute to the long tern improvement, over existing conditions, of the riparian habitat.A
new drainage system is designed to handle surface flow from the new SRI 06 alignment parking
areas and other impervious surfaces within the resort complex(Exhibit D-2&D-3). Much of
the surface water and accompanying pollution will be channeled into stormwater infiltration
galleries and bioswale catchment basins that will entrap suspended solids and filter
hydrocarbons and oil products draining from road surfaces.Parking lots are designed with oil
water separators. Water leaving bioswales and infiltration galleries will drain through a 4'-0"
diameter detention pipe to limit flow to outfall at NE corner of property. Stormwater outfall
will have minimal impact on salinity of seawater in Hood Canal,and is not expected to alter
salinities except in the immediate area of discharge pipe. The cumulative effect of the drainage
system project will be to reduce sediment and pollution contaminants entering hood canal
compared to existing conditions.
3.1.4 Bull Trout (Native Char)
3.1.4.1 Description of Species
FWS listed bull trout in the Coastal-Puget Sound DPS as threatened under ESA on 1
November 1999. FWS (1998a)recently completed a determination of the status of bull
trout, identifying five distinct population segments (DPS) in the conterminous U.S. The
4
Coastal-Puget Sound bull trout DPS is composed of 34 sub-populations(FWS 1999).Bull trout
have been sighted in the Dosewallips River watershed(USFS, 1999)and are considered by
WDFW to be present in the Skokomish river watershed(USFS, 1995).Therefore,bull trout do
have the potential for occurring in the nearshore and freshwater environment of the project
area. In the Final Bull Trout and Dolly Varden Management Plan September 2000(WDFW
1998b),one stock is listed as healthy in Hood Canal and two other stocks are listed as
unknown. The river drainages where these stocks occur, however, are not listed.HCSEG
biologists found no bull trout in a recent survey of the fish population in Alderbrook Creek
and Dalby Creek drainages(Boad 2002).
Four life history forms are generally recognized for bull trout,which include resident
(nonmigratory),adfluvial(lake migrants),fluvial(stream and river migrants),and anadromous
fish (saltwater migrants). The Coastal-Puget Sound population segment of bull trout is
unique because it contains the only anadromous bull trout within the conterminous U.S.(FWS
1998a).The status of the migratory forms are of greatest concern throughout most of their
range. The majority of the remaining populations in some areas may be largely composed of
resident bull trout(Leary et al. 1991;Williams and Mullan 1992).
Bull trout are widely distributed across their range but the distribution tends to be very patchy
even in pristine environments (Rieman and McIntyre 1993). Bull trout have been extirpated
from many of the large rivers within their historic range and exist primarily in isolated
headwater populations.The decline of bull trout has been attributed to habitat degradation,
blockage of migratory corridors by dams,poor water quality,the introduction of non-native
species,and the effects of past fishery management practices(FWS 1998a).
Newly hatched anadromous bull trout emerge from the gravel in the spring(WDFW 1998b).
They typically spend 2 years in fresh water before they migrate to salt water,the mainstem
of rivers, or reservoirs. Some populations remain their entire lives in the same stretch of
headwater stream. These fish may not mature until they are 7 to 8 years old, and rarely reach a
size greater than 14 inches in length(WDFW 1998b).
Bull trout typically use pristine headwaters to spawn(WDFW 1998b). Spawning begins in
late August,peaks in September and October, and ends in November. Fish in a given stream
may spawn over a period of two weeks or less. Almost immediately after spawning,adults
begin to work their way back to the mainstem rivers, lakes,or reservoirs to overwinter. Some
of these fish stay in these areas while others move into saltwater in the spring. Bull trout will
spawn a second or even third time. Bull trout are opportunistic feeders, eating aquatic
insects, shrimp, snails, leeches, fish eggs, and fish, Early beliefs that these fish are serious
predators of salmon and steelhead are generally not supported today(WDFW 1998b).
4
Anadromy In Bull Trout And Stock Status
The status and occurrence of anadromous populations of bull trout in Puget Sound are subject to
some scientific debate. Separation of anadromous bull trout from the closely related
anadromous Dolly Varden char(S. malma) is very difficult and can only be determined
through electrophoretic techniques (Leary and Allendorf, 1997). For many years,biologists
believed the anadromous char in Washington were Dolly Varden and freshwater char were
bull trout. The confusion may be because within any given river system there may be fluvial,
adfluvial,and anadromous components within the bull trout population. The majority of
information on anadromous bull trout populations was obtained from surveys in northern
Puget Sound(Kramer 1991). For a complete discussion on anadromy in bull trout see
WDFW(1998b)
3.1.4.2 Habitat
Bull trout are believed to be glacial relicts whose distribution has expanded and contracted with
natural climate changes (Reiman et al. 1997). They are strongly influenced by temperature
and are seldom found in streams exceeding summer temperatures of 18°C. Cool water
temperatures during early life history results in higher egg survival rates,and faster growth
rates in fry and possibly juveniles as well (Pratt 1992) (WDFW 1998b).
All life history stages of native char are associated with complex forms of cover,including large
woody debris,under cut banks,boulders, and pools. Preferred spawning habitat consists of
low gradient streams with loose, clean gravel and water temperatures of 5 to 9°C in late
summer and early fall. Depending on the life history form,rearing and overwintering habitat
vary but still require cool clean water with insects,macrozooplankton,and small fish for larger
adults(WDFW 1998b).
Habitat within the project area is limited to the freshwater environment. The existing
freshwater riparian habitat within the project area,however, is presently degraded and not
suitable as a spawning or rearing stream for bull trout according to critical habitat elements
outlined above. Alderbrook Creek flows through the middle of the project area. The streams
watershed is spring fed, and flows year round. The temperature in Alderbrook Creek is cool
enough to support the requirements of bull trout.
The upper watershed includes approximately 40 acres of the Alderbrook residential community
and Golf Course. Storm runoff from the developed portion of the watershed is not controlled
by detention and heavy rains create a substantial increase is flow in the stream. Studies are
currently underway to retrofit the upper watershed with Stormwater flow control and
treatment facilities.
Two culverts create fish passage barriers on the stream. The lower culvert is located at SR
106(Exhibit D-1)and is a 36"diameter concrete culvert that is 100'long with a slope of 2.6%
and no perch at the outlet. This culvert is a velocity barrier to fish passage. The second
culvert(Exhibit D- 1)is located approximately 400 feet up Beach Drive from
4
SR106. It is a 36" diameter, 40' long concrete culvert with a slope of 4.7 percent. The outlet
of the upper culvert is perched 3 feet above the streambed. This culvert has down cut the
stream up to 3 feet for 200 feet downstream. It is a total blockage to fish passage. The portion
of the stream below SR 106 is highly structured and disturbed. The course of the stream has
been altered to protect adjoining structures. The outlet in elevated so that the only time salmon
can access the stream is during a very high tide.
Alderbrook Creek has cool,year round spring water flow and excellent spawning area with
riparian habitat above Beach Drive. The temperature and complex riparian habitat may be
suitable to support a small population of resident or anadromous bull trout once fish passage
barriers are removed from the lower stream drainage. It is proposed to reestablish all the
wild salmon runs in the stream using a wild salmon incubator(Boad and Hannafious 2002).
Dalby Creek flows through the western portion of the SRI 06 Realignment.The streams
watershed is spring fed, and flows year round. A 24" culvert create a fish passage barrier on
the stream were it crosses underneath the existing SR106. This culvert will be removed and
replaced with a 12-foot wide 24-foot long prefabricated bridge. The removal of this culvert
will open up over 3000 feet of productive upstream fish habitat. The proposed crossing for the
SR 106 realignment will occur roughly 200 feet above the current SR 106 crossing.There
will be roughly 60-feet of riparian habitat on both stream banks removed and converted to
roadway and semi-impervious surface. Impacts to aquatic habitat will be minimized by the
installation of a 12-foot bottomless arch aluminum culvert(Fig 3). The size of this culvert will
allow for the natural fluvial process including nutrient transfer and cycling of LWD to
continue downstream. In addition LWD will be placed throughout the stream to improve the
in stream structural habitat and increase pool to riffle ratio.The temperature and complex
riparian habitat may be suitable to support a small population of resident or anadromous bull
trout once fish passage barriers are removed from the lower stream drainage.
The property owner of Alderbrook Resort,North 40 Lodging,LLC desires to make the stream,
and the fish runs in the stream,an environmental "experience"for its guests at the lodge. The
HCSEG has been requested to collaborate with them in this endeavor.
3.1.4.3 Determination
The Checklist for Documenting Environmental Baseline and Effects of Proposed Actions)
on Relevant Indicators is included in Appendix D and was used to guide in the determination
of the proposed action on bull trout salmon. An extensive field survey of the habitat
parameters identified in the checklist was performed by HCSEG biologists in the field
survey.
Overall,no long-term local or wide spread deleterious effects to bull trout or their habitat in
Alderbrook Creek or Dalby Creek are expected as a result of the Alderbrook Resort remodel and
associated stream habitat restoration projects. Given the available information,the potential
for"take'to occur is negligible. Therefore,these activities
4
will have no affect on bull trout and will not result in the destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat for bull trout in the action area. Information to
support this determination is provided in the following sections.
Potential Direct Effects
Bull trout do not occupy the work area(Boad and Hannafious,2002)and no direct effects are
likely to occur to bull trout because of remodeling activities to the Alderbrook Resort or because of
realignment of SR 106. Construction on Alderbrook Creek to improve riparian habitat and
Dalby creek to improve LWD is expected to have minimal impacts.No construction will take
place in near shore marine environment and as such, disturbance from construction noise will
be negligible. It is anticipated that there will be short term turbidity plumes resulting from
construction that will cause minor decreases in water quality,due to the size and composition of
the substrate(see Geology Section 2.1.3).Much of the riparian substrate is composed of cobble
and gravel,and sedimentation from construction activities is expected to cause only minor,short-
term increases in sediment levels in the project area.
In addition,impacts from erosion and run-off will be minimized using well designed erosion
and sediment control measures,which may include the use of silt fencing,filters on storm drains,
hay bales and other measures as recommended in the King County Surface Water Manual
(King County DNR 1988).A pollution prevention plan will be in effect during construction.
Potential Indirect effects
Potential indirect effects from the proposed Alderbrook Creek and Dalby Creek construction
activities may include temporary changes to invertebrate food resources in the immediate
project area due to short-term disturbance of the substrate and water diversion during
construction. Within the existing 200-foot channel,there will be mortality of benthic
organisms such as aquatic insects because of lack of water during the construction phase. The
impact of this on the stream ecosystem will be minimal considering the contribution of
benthic fauna from the upstream habitat once stream flow is restored.Minor sediment plumes
in the near-shore marine environment are expected to have no impact on the epibenthic
crustaceans utilized by juvenile bull trout salmon as a food resource.
Impacts to bull trout re res
ources such as aquatic insects are expected to be short-lived and
p prey q P
minimized_by project BMP's and HPA restrictions. Once construction is completed and
water flow restored to the stream channels it is expected that aquatic insects and other
organisms will quickly re-inhabit the stream channel from the upper sections.Potential impacts
to aquatic insects and other food resources from construction will have an"insignificant effect"
on bull trout and should never reach the scale where "take"will occur.
4
Cumulative Effects
Anticipated cumulative effect will be a temporary disturbance from construction of new
riparian habitat within Alderbrook Creek and LWD in Dalby Creek. Sediment plumes
resulting from this construction will be minor and short-term. Overall,the action will
contribute to the long tern improvement, over existing conditions,of the riparian habitat.
A new drainage system is designed to handle surface flow from the new SRI 06 alignment
parking areas and other impervious surfaces within the resort complex(Exhibit D-2 & D-3).
Much of the surface water and accompanying pollution will be channeled into stormwater
infiltration galleries and bioswale catchment basins that will entrap suspended solids and filter
hydrocarbons and oil products draining from road surfaces. Parking lots are designed with oil
water separators. Water leaving bioswales and infiltration galleries will drain through a 4'-0"
diameter detention pipe to limit flow to outfall at NE corner of property. Stormwater outfall
will have minimal impact on salinity of seawater in Hood Canal,and is not expected to alter
salinities except in the immediate area of discharge pipe. The cumulative effect of the drainage
system project will be to reduce sediment and pollution contaminants entering Hood Canal
compared to existing conditions.
3.2 Wildlife Species
3.2.1 Bald Eagle
3.2.1.1 Description of Species
In 1978,the Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) was federally listed as threatened in
Washington State under the Endangered Species Act. Bald eagles are also protected under
the Migratory Bird Treaty Act(1918),The Eagle Protection Act(1940),and the Lacey Act
(1901). Bald eagles occupy most of their historical range in the Pacific Northwest,but until
recently,the population had been declining. A recovery plan for the pacific bald eagle was
developed in 1986. Recovery has been especially dramatic in Washington State where there
are now over 600 nesting pairs with approximately 300 pairs in Puget Sound alone(Appendix
E). Bald eagle nesting territories are now found along much of the shorelines of Puget
Sound and lake Washington. Washington State also the largest wintering population of bald
eagles in the continental U.S.
With reference to forested habitat,the recovery plan calls for maintenance and improvement of
forested habitat in both the breeding and wintering range that is presently used by eagles. This
includes the development of nesting and roosting habitat for future use by eagles;the
management of young tree stands to meet desired physical characteristics;the planting of new
trees in potential bald eagle use areas devoid of tree reproduction;the provision of artificial
perches and nest structures where natural sites are not available; and to create snags where
suitable perch trees are not available. Human activities will be restricted in established buffer
zones around nest sites. Logging,construction,habitat improvement,and other activities will
be restricted during critical
4
periods of eagle use. Building construction will be prohibited near key bald eagle nesting and
wintering habitats and vehicle traffic will be prohibited at sensitive key areas during periods
of eagle use.
The recovery plan identified several aquatic tasks needed for eagle recovery that emphasize
recovery of food species and that each watershed be managed to improve breeding and non-
breeding habitat. Specifically,the plan calls for the management of inland and anadromous
fish populations and habitats to maintain and enhance adequate food for eagles. The plan calls
for increased management of water levels to maintain and enhance eagle food sources. The
plan further calls for the protection and enhancement of natural spawning populations and
spawning grounds of salmon and other important fish spawners to increase availability to
eagles. Lastly, the recovery plan calls for the maintenance and improvement of habitat for fish.
The proposed Alderbrook Creek restoration projects will enhance the natural spawning
populations and spawning grounds for anadromous fish populations within the project area,
which may be a direct benefit to eagles occupying the lower section of Hood Canal and
frequenting the project area.
3.2.1.2 Nesting Habitat
Nesting,foraging,and perching habitat for bald eagles is typically associated with water features
such as rivers, lakes, and coast shorelines where eagles prey upon fish,waterfowl,and seabirds
(Stahnaster 1980, 1983, 1987 in Garrett and Green 2000).During breeding season eagles establish
and maintain territorial boundaries and breeding birds are rarely found in high numbers.
Breeding pairs show strong fidelity to nesting territory,which may be considerable in size,and
will prevent other eagles from entering(Grubb 1980 in Garrett and Green 2000). Territories
frequently contain two or more nests,but will be used exclusively by one breeding pair,which
allows a monopoly on the resources there and affords protection to the young(Garrett and Green
2000).
Suitable nesting habitat for bald eagles is typically in mature forests that contain large,dominant
trees for nesting,and is in close proximity to aquatic foraging habitat.Douglas-fir appears to be
the most common tree species used for nesting in forests of western Oregon and Washington.
Lack of suitable nesting habitat has been shown to be a limiting factor for population growth
in some raptors(Newton 1979). Unoccupied nests may indicate suitable physical habitat are
available but human activity or other unknown factors may prevent their successful use(Anthony
and Isaacs 1980 in Garrett and Green 2000).
3.2.1.3 Wintering Habitat
Foraging and perching habitat is typically the same as the nesting season. Eagles are
opportunistic scavengers and predators who will consume a wide variety of prey.They prefer
high structures for perching such as high trees along the shoreline. However,will also use
cliffs,pilings,and open ground.They are usually seen foraging in open areas having wide views
(Stalmaster and Newman 1979). Perch sites may be used for a
4
number of activities including hunting,consumption of prey and nesting. Perch sites are most
often associated with food sources neat water and will have visual access to adjacent habitats
(Stalmaster and Newman 1979).Eagles often choose the highest tree on the edge of a stand,
selecting the strongest lateral branches(Garrett and Green 2000).
Bald eagles may spend nights together in communal roosts, more commonly in winter and
extreme weather. Many roosts are traditional sites that are used repeatedly and are typically
located in areas where the eagles have protection from the weather, and away from human
activity(Hansen et al. 1980 in Garrett and Green 2000).
3.2.1.4 Use of Project Area
There is no direct evidence of Bald Eagle regularly using the tract of land within the proposed
project area although these species are known to frequent this habitat type in the Hood Canal
area.There are no documented eagle nests within a one mile radius of the Alderbrook property
according to the WDFW database of nesting sites(Boad and Hannafious 2002). The bald Eagle
Recovery Plan(FWS 1986)regulates activities within
mile of nests.
3.2.1.4 Determination
Construction activities can disturb bald eagles by degrading habitat or by frightening nesting
eagles from their nests.Anthony and Isaacs(1989) found that secluded nests away from
human activities are more productive compared to nests close to human activities. Other
studies suggest that eagles become habituated to human presence depending upon the level,
proximity,and duration of the disturbance(Fraser et al. 1985;Matheson 1968; Stalmaster and
Newman 1979). Foraging eagles can be affected by disturbance,which may cause birds to
move to less favorable areas(Stalmaster and Newman 1979).
The SRI 06 realignment for the Alderbrook Inn remodel will require the removal of
approximately 7.0 acres of second growth forest and the lose of approximately 80 large diameter
trees in the western third of the realignment.No nesting or perching sites will be removed.
The greatest potential impact to eagles is disturbance from construction activity. Since no
documented nesting sites are within this radius,no timing restriction on construction
activities are necessary to avoid disturbance of nesting bald eagles. In addition,bald eagles
are expected to be delisted(WDFW 2002). Furthermore,the importance of the project area to
wintering eagles is probably low due to the high human activity and the lack of concentrated
prey on Alderbrook Creeks. A considerable number of alternate foraging sites occur outside
the project area.Therefore,the proposed action is not likely to directly or indirectly
adversely affect bald eagles,which may occur in the project vicinity.
4
Potential Direct Effects
No negative direct effects from the SR 106 realignment and associated resort remodel and
stream rehabilitation projects are expected. To the contrary, it is expected that once
Alderbrook Creek is restored to support salmon runs there will additional prey for eagles
within the project area.
Potential Indirect Effects
No, negative indirect effects from the SR 106 realignment and associated resort remodel and
stream rehabilitation projects are expected. The new drainage system for the resort is
designed to handle surface flow from parking areas and other impervious surfaces within the
resort complex(Exhibit D-2)which will effectively reduce the potential for pollutants entering
the stream channel and Hood Canal.
Much of the surface water and accompanying pollution will be channeled into stormwater
infiltration galleries and bioswale catchment basins that will entrap suspended solids and filter
hydrocarbons and oil products draining from road surfaces. Parking lots are designed with oil
water separators. Water leaving bioswales and infiltration galleries will drain through a 4'-0"
diameter detention pipe to limit flow to outfall at NE corner of property. Stormwater outfall
will have minimal impact on salinity of seawater in Hood Canal,and is not expected to alter
salinities except in the immediate area of discharge pipe. The cumulative effect of the drainage
system project will be to reduce sediment and pollution contaminants entering Hood Canal
compared to existing conditions.
3.2.2 Marbled Murrelet 3.2.2.1
Description of Species
The marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus)was federally listed as threatened in
September 1992 under the Endangered Species Act. Marbled murrelets are sea birds that
nest in forest habitats and feed at sea. The nesting season in Washington is from April to
mid-September. Marbled murrelets spend the remainder of the year at sea in coastal areas.
Murrelets generally nest in low-elevation old-growth forest habitats on trees with large limbs
that provide a nesting platform greater than five inches. The principal limiting factor for
marbled murrelets in Hood Canal watersheds is suitable nesting habitat. In the lower watersheds
of Hood Canal,there is almost no suitable habitat because of logging,agriculture,and
urbanization(USFS, 1999).
The marbled murrelet population is estimated at 5,000 in the state of Washington,and historical
numbers are thought to have been higher. Removal of nesting habitat by timber harvest is
considered a primary factor in population decline (USFS 1999). Other factors that may
contribute to population decline,now and in the future include predation,reduced prey
populations, oil pollution,and entanglement in gill nets.
4
Suitable habitat is abundant in the upper watersheds of the Olympic Peninsula,and is available in
large, contiguous tracts. Therefore, nesting habitat for the Marbled Murrelet is well removed
and distant from the project area. The greatest opportunities for management are in protecting
and developing suitable nesting habitat. Priority should be given to those areas that are
contiguous to existing habitat so they will eventually provide large blocks of habitat. Those
areas identified as Late-Successional Reserve are particularly important.
The other opportunity available to positively influence murrelet populations is the
conservation of fish populations in Hood Canal. Throughout the year,murrelets are known
to spend time foraging in the canal,and declines in prey populations would affect murrelet
population levels.Murrelets generally forage in shallow,nearshore waters. They are
opportunistic feeders,and will consume the most available prey species,which may include
Pacific sandlance,Pacific herring,and surf smelt(Burkett 1995; in Garrett and Green 2000).
3.2.2.2 Use of the Project Area
As stated above abundance of murrelets in marine foraging areas may be related to the
availability of nesting habitat in the surrounding area. In the case of Hood Canal there is
little nesting habitat within close proximity to the project site.Nesting is in the upper
watersheds and late successional forests on the Olympic Peninsula. There is potential for
murrelets to enter the project area while foraging for food,however,nesting sites will be greater
than 50 miles west in the late successional forests of the Olympic Peninsula.
3.2.2.3 Determination
The Alderbrook Resort Remodel Project is not likely to affect foraging activities of marbled
murrelets as all construction activities are upland from the marine environment.Potentially
there may be some sediment discharge from construction activities to rehabilitate Alderbrook
Creek,however the geology report prepared for this BA indicates that there would be
minimal fines. Larger grain sediments will settle out quickly from the water column. There is
little potential to impact breeding habitat of marbled murrelet prey species - Pacific sand
lance,Pacific herring,and surf smelt.
Sufficient BMP's will also be in place to ensure no new contaminants(Stormwater runoff,
fuels, chemicals, etc.) are introduced during construction. The new drainage system for the
resort is designed to handle surface flow from parking areas and other impervious surfaces
within the resort complex(Exhibit D-2). Much of the surface water and accompanying
pollution will be channeled into stormwater infiltration galleries and bioswale catchment
basins that will entrap suspended solids and filter hydrocarbons and oil products draining from
road surfaces. Parking lots are designed with oil water separators. Water leaving bioswales
and infiltration galleries will drain through a 4'-0" diameter detention pipe to limit flow to
outfall at NE corner of property. Stormwater outfall will have minimal impact on salinity of
seawater in Hood Canal,and is not expected to alter salinities except in the immediate area of
discharge pipe. The
4
cumulative effect of the drainage system project will be to reduce sediment and pollution
contaminants entering Hood Canal compared to existing conditions.
Because proposed project activities will be confined to upland activities and pollution
control measures will be in place,the proposed Alderbrook Resort Remodel and
associated projects will have No Effect on marbled murrelets that may occur in the
project vicinity.
Potential Direct Effects
No negative direct effects from the Alderbrook Resort Remodel is expected for marbled murrelets.
A pollution plan will be in effect during construction and the project has built in long-term
pollution control measures. Overall,the project should result in a slight improvement in local
water quality,translating to an improvement of the potential murrelet foraging habitat in
Hood Canal.
Potential Indirect Effects
No negative indirect effects to murrelets from the Alderbrook Resort project are
expected.
4. CONSERVATION MEASURES
• HPA guidelines will be strictly adhered as to timing of the construction and
construction guidelines. WDFW biologists will be notified at the out set of
construction.
• Sediment control measures will be put in place to minimize disturbance to riparian
and nearshore marine environments. Impacts from erosion and run-off will be
minimized using well designed erosion and sediment control measures,which may
include the use of silt fencing, filters on storm drains,hay bales and other measures
as recommended in the King County Surface Water Manual(King County DNR 1988).
A pollution prevention plan will be in effect during construction.
• Surface water will not be directed onto sloping areas or randomly daylight on the site
during or after construction. All facilities used to collect permanent surface will be
directed into tightlined systems that would discharge into the stormwater control
system.
• Prior to the onset of winter,any exposed subgrade will be hydroseeded and covered with
plastic netting or other similar material. In addition, exposed construction slopes will
be trackwalked(up and down) in order to roughen the ground surface and reduce
potential runoff velocities.
4
• Check dams will be established along roadways during construction,and silt fences will
be used along the lower elevations of roadways and future residential lots.
• Temporary sedimentation ponds will be established during construction to provide erosion
and sediment transport control. Infiltration ponds are not designed to function as
sedimentation ponds and,therefore,will not be utilized as part of the erosion control
measurers during construction.
• All outlets from temporary and permanent settling/infiltration ponds will be designed
to prevent direct flow over unprotected slope. This will be accomplished by either
tightening the outlets or by armoring the outlets down to less steep areas.An erosion
control inspector will periodically be on-site during construction to observe that the
mitigation measures function as intended.
• Groundwater seepages may be encountered during grading for the proposed roadway.
The contractor will be prepared to provide temporary and/or permanent drainage
control measures as necessary. These could include interceptor drains, curtain pipes,
or rip-rap on slopes.
• The drainage from the two wetlands and hillside seepage impacted by the proposed
roadway will drain into an interceptor ditch that will direct the flow to Alderbrook
Creek to the west and Brookhaven Creek to the east.Restoring Alderbrook Creek to
anadromous fish runs will immensely improve the overall environment here well
beyond the minor impacts that will occur to hillside seepage and associated wetlands.
• The newly designed drainage system for the resort include bioswale collectors and
stormwater infiltration galleries,that will greatly control and improve the quality of
surface runoff entering Hood canal from the resort complex.
• The treatment of the storm water discharge off the new SRI 06 realignment will enhance
overall water quality into Hood Canal
• With the relocation of SR 106,the new hotel design provides a large,new front yard.
Presently, SR 106 is in extremely close proximity to Alderbrook with parking lots
abutting the highway-within the right of way as well as outside the right of way. In
addition to tremendous opportunities to improve the aesthetic condition of this zone,
public safety concerns will be greatly improved,as the guest parking areas will be
proximal to the hotel,not requiring pedestrian crossing of the highway.
4
•Landscaping will predominantly feature the use of native plants. Landscape areas
associated with the project will include landscaping around the buildings to better
integrate their placement and soften their presence, and at parking lots to screen and
buffer them as appropriate. Feature landscape elements will occur at the main entry
and within the public courtyard of the hotel,providing areas of additional interest.
• Alderbrook stream will undergo extensive enhancements,covered in more detail
elsewhere in this submittal. The current stream conditions are poor from the
standpoint of aesthetic as well as drainage/runoff issues.A culvert will be eliminated
with the elimination of the drive south of the cottages.New culverts, at the highway
and at the parking area drive will be improved from the present,undersized
conditions. Rocks, boulders, log weirs and natural and native vegetation will be
utilized to control flow, erosion and to create an aesthetically pleasing environment.
Plants that provide cover for the stream and line the banks for erosion control will
compliment the reconstruction of the stream for Salmon.Trees proposed along the
stream include Western Red Cedar, Cascara,and Vine Maple.The shrubs include
Dogwoods, Indian Plum,Pacific Willow, Elderberry and Huckleberry. The
groundcovers and perennials include Salal, Wild Ginger, Trillium,and ferns such as
Maidenhair Fern, Sword Fern and Lady Fern.
• Extensive stream rehabilitation will be completed under the direction of the Hood Canal
Salmon Enhancement Group (HCSEG). The goals of the riparian habitat restoration
project are to restore the natural characteristics of the lower sections of the stream
systems,provide a people/wildlife interface associated with salmon,and improve the
intrinsic appeal of the Alderbrook Resort by increasing the distance between the resort
and highway 106.This will be done by improving the riparian diversity,channel
sinuosity,in-stream structure,accessibility to viewing salmon migration, and increasing
the salmon population.
• Moving the existing stream channel to the new location will affect roughly 200feet of in-
stream habitat. The new channel will be constructed to mimic more natural
conditions such as sinuosity and structural in-stream habitat. This will be conducive
to more beneficial habitat relating to salmon productivity and overall abundance of
aquatic organisms.
• The cutthroat in the existing channel could be affected during construction because of
an intermittent period of no water in the channel. This water will be pumped around
the channel during construction. To avoid fish mortality,the cutthroat will be
removed from the project section using seine nets, and placed in other parts of the
stream that will not be affected by construction. The stream section under
construction will be isolated upstream and downstream using block nets so that fish
will not be able to swim near the construction area from other sections of the stream.
Within the existing 200-foot channel,there will be mortality of benthic organisms
such as aquatic insects because of lack of water during the construction phase. The
impact of this on the stream ecosystem will be
4
minimal considering the contribution of benthic fauna from the upstream habitat once
stream flow is restored
• The removal of the dalby Creek 24" culvert were the stream crosses underneath the
existing SRI 06 and replacement with a 12-foot wide 24-foot long prefabricated bridge
will open up over 3000 feet of productive upstream fish habitat.
5. SUMMARY
Based on this BA, a determination of impacts was made for the proposed Alderbrook
Remodel Project. The determination concluded that project construction and future use
would result in the following determinations; "not likely to adversely effect" for salmon
species,bull trout,and bald eagles,and"no effect"for marbled mun elets.
6.REFRENCES
Anthony,R.G. and F.B. Isaacs. 1989. Characteristics of bald eagle nesting sites in
Oregon. Journal of Wildlife Management 53:148-159.
Boad, L. and D. Hannafious. 2002. A plan for restoration of Alderbrook Creek and
Dalby Creek as part of the Alderbrook Inn remodel project. Hood Canal Salmon
Enhancement Group,Belfair,WA.
Bilby,R.E,B.R. Fransen,P.A. Bisson, and J.W. Walker. 1998. Response of juvenile coho
salmon(Oncorhynchus kisutch)and steelhead(Onchorynchus mykiss)to the addition of
salmon carcasses to two streams in Southwestern Washington. ,U.S.A.Can.J. Fish.
Aquat. Sci. 55:1909-1918.
Cauble,N. and K. Oswell. 2002. Alderbrook Lodge Traffic Impact Analysis, Tech.
Memorandum to Engineering Services Associates. Entranco Engineering.
Cederholm, C.J.,D.H. Johnson,R.E. Bilby, L.G.Dominguez,A.M. Garrett, W.H. Greaber,
E.L. Greda,M.D.Kunze,B.G.Marcot,J.F.Palmisano,R,W,Plotnikoff, W.J.Pearcy,
C.A. Simenstad,and P.C. Trotter. 2000. Pacific Salmon and Wildlife Ecological
Context and Implications for Management. Special edition technical report,Prepared for
D.H.Johnson and T.A. O'neal(Managing Directors), WildlifeHabitat Relationships in
Oregon and Washington. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia,
Washington.
Groot,C.,and L.Margolis. 1994.Pacific Salmon Life Histories.Government of Canada
Department of Fisheries and Oceans. 312-396.
Garrett,A.M. and G.A. Green.2000. Allyn dock Improvement biological assessment.
Parametrix, Inc. 5808 Lake Washington Boulevard NE, Kirkland, WA98033.
4
HartCrowser, Inc. 2002. Draft Geotechnical design study proposed SR 106 realignment
Union,Washington 1910 Fairview Avenue East, Seattle, Washington 98102.
Tel:206.324.9530
Fraser, J.D.,L.D. Frenzel, and J.E. Mathisen. 1985. The impact of human activities on
breeding bald eagles in north-central Minnesota.Journal of Wildlife management
49:585-592.
FWS (Fish and wildlife Service). 1986. Recovery plan for the pacific bald eagle. U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. 160 pp.
FWS. 1998a. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants;proposal to list the coastal
Puget Sound,Jarbridge River and St.Mary-Belly River population segment of bull trout as
threatened species. U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service. Proposed Rule June 10, 1998. federal
register 63(111):31693-31710.
FWS. 1999. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; determination of threatened
status for bull trout in the coterminous United States; Final Rule. November], 1999.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.Federal Register.64(210):58910-58931.
Kraemer,C. 1991.Unpublished char investigations data from files.Washington
Department of Wildlife,Fisheries Management Division,Mill Creek,WA.
Leary, R.F. and F.W.Allendorf. 1997. Genetic confirmation of sympatric bull trout and Dolly
Varden in western Washington.Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 126:715-720.
Matheson, J.E. 1968.Effects of human disturbance on nesting bald eagles. Journal of
wildlife Management 32:1-6.
Moyle, P.B. 1976. Inland Fishes of California. University of California Press.
Moyle,P.B. and J.J. Cech. 1982.An Introduction to Ichthyology. Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Englewood cliffs,N.J. 593 pp.
Newton, I. 1979. Population ecology of raptors. Buteo Books, Vermillion, S.D. 399 pp.
Nickelson, T.E. 1998. A Habitat based assessment of coho salmon production potential and
spawner escapement needs for Oregon coastal streams. Portland, Oregon Department of
Fish and Wildlife, Information Report 98-4.
Pratt, L.K. 1992. A review of bull trout life history. In: Howell, P j. and D.V. Buchanan, eds.
Proceedings of the Gearhart Mountain bull trout workshop. Oregon Chapter of AFS
Corvallis OR. 67 pp.
Quinn, T.P. and N.P. Petersen. 1994. The effects of forest practices on fish populations.
Timber Fish and Wildlife Report F4-94-001 to Washington Department of Natural
Resources. 157p.
4
Rieman, B.E.,D.C. Lee,and R.F. Thurow. 1997.Distribution, status, and likely future
trends of bull trout within the Columbia River and Klamath River Basins.North
American Journal of Fisheries Management. 17:1111-1125
Saltmaster, M.V. and J.R.Newman. 1979. Perch-site preferences of wintering bald
eagles in northwest Washington.Journal of Wildlife Management 43:221-224.
Shanewise, S.2002.Wetlands Inventory for the Alderbrook SR-106 Relocation.Prepared for
Engineering Services Associates 210 NE Cherokee Beach Belfair Wa 98528. The Coot
Company Wetland and Wildlife Consulting Services 416 s.Washington, Olympia WA
98501 360-352-9897
Thompson, D. 2002. Beach survey for the Alderbrook Resort remodel. Prepared for
Engineering Services Associates 210 NE Cherokee Beach Belfair Wa 98528.
Environmental Mariculture Services. Port Ludlow, WA 98365. 360-437-0811.
Slaney, P.A.,and D.Zaldokas. 1997.Fish Habitat Rehabilitation Procedures Watershed
Restoration Technical Circular No.9. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks
Watershed Restoration Program. 3-6, 3-10
USDA Forest Service. 1905. South Fork Skokomish watershed analysis.
USDA Forest Service. 1997.Hamma Hamma River and hood canal tributaries watershed analysis.
USDA Forest Service. 1998.Duckabush watershed analysis.
USDA Forest Service. 1999.Dosewallips watershed analysis.
Washington Department of Fisheries, Washington Department of Wildlife, and Western
Washington Treaty Tribes. 1993. 1992 Washington State salmon and steelhead stock
inventory, appendix one Puget Sound Stocks, Hood Canal and Strait of Juan de Fuca
volume. Olympia, WA. 424 pp.
WDFW and WWTIT (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and Western
Washington Treaty Indian Tribes), 1994. 1992 Washington State Salmon and
Steelhead Stock Inventory. Appendix One: Puget sound Stocks. WDFW and
WWTIT, Olympia.
WDFW 1995.genetic Diversity Units and Major Ancestral Lineages of Salmonid Fishes in
Washington. C. Busark and J.B. Shaklee,editors.Fish Management program Resource
Assessment Division. Technical Report No.RAD 95-02.
WDFW 1998b. Washington's native chars [on line report]. WDFW, Olympia
http/Av ./wdfw/outreach/fishing/char.htm.
4
APPENDIX B
PROJECT SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
ALDERBROOK RESORT AND SPA PHOTO LOG
i #.i�l�-��£��+`}.i•`° +��t }� a-r-.Wt t�� �trt7jt :}. t �' �.. F:fir
Y Z+-e ffr4 r.E.,-+3 -ly xf,iF i� ltklZ i s ++c f i i f
}ia ..,R. j + `k
. �� �.� +� r •A4 tS :7+•t�'�� Z Z� 1•f!%� �.�t I.+:
Pacific Herring Holding Area
r
a#
4
Surf Smelt Spawning
;-,?1+}��'' •' "..+ x��'�1+�';,1 �+i yf�� l��+�+}t. I �t b:t S.� .7
.- 4•„c, j �y' E Y. f'i,;,�,�.r. Ft°-{[3 r�E�3 yrYx7.f71y } r. ffT i ' tT..ts.�
* ,,+�..��� j,,, '+M.t �#` 'Fi +i ti{ t�1{+t. Tn #.t vT�.Y`'<.�-,•4l' `a'•L I
1 J,�J"�'Nw� �, M "� � .1 :".f,,Z•+ 7 -•S"� f t�""slr�`#��•ei�j 2+�.�. "�� f�+ ir�r�+
.+�' _ •..- /� f i jx 22 tr1YTM}'.t�b.t1:F. xx r• '-3'7�.�' �i + �" i. N'ot�
�+"^��+-^-' � y� 9'1 � } ";iiF;�ti�Y i*+7 j�+'^.3<.x'�•l�ti•.2+�'�t—•;.%y�^;�if$�,�,yi, ''
T4221N-43W P
,,��(( :.h' '1 .�'. � ,j.1'. �'+4. ♦:"^S^ Y:�iy. �. Yea,
'TM ''�'! •�r� Ln i♦1� �'r�-..f-tj..i �'.] t +�i•
\ • i•1I+� ,+ram
47
Resort Floating Dock Surf Smelt S awning
1 ., i,i `
< p
Western Outfall ..•. Eastern Outfall .
Big Bend Creek '- + � t� - + ■
+fir � ✓� s. - ■*.. '1i /r 1
„r J ..ii.. ': f ♦..� .. .`'' .t - ,x,� ':�-•��. �.fit:
". Alderbrook Creek
r.a`, .. +� M.:ram+ .n...J.a- �. _ � Y � ..✓w�"!, -tw<+
u Alderbrook Resort& Spa
-- ,
Action Area
�� mow.." '..�•^ �t.+' "
• � ��J � >y 1 �Riabdt2�'^ay W,_ �l � � .� � A i
General Features and Habitats Map
Alderbrook Resort&Spa B-1 December 2007
Project Area Photographs
ALDERBROOK RESORT AND SPA PHOTO LOG
r,}+}�4 1#eft-a+?r•� l� t'{ I t�{�, 1�# I It }+�' F �t ti
°"' •.(M�'�>j4..xf ,"�"� ..J{-p, ,yy...Ekt} {F �d
'-{ai�rli +NiY
` -- - -- Pacific Herring Holding Area -_ r
_ ..
� ef. ♦ { r I it +"r y.«l i-s $ wr � �hrr M f .a "�..
���++$t� L.I.W y�{�aµ''.�+.%47[1� ��' t` atp.{y.�.n:�t-�?3 .�y�,� ♦7 Ci r' iT�1�!
ff y�`y {gi�r{. 'l{+s..3.+'3i yi+1�-i��i�•�'7-F� ;Fµ ♦J �`.4 G± t�.,-1 42+ 4 1/1�
•����'j4? �'F lit N:�.�{.•
Surf Smelt Spawning , reasT �C? r"i}. tr'+ t + 41 �
t a t �� 144 t tt +�+ i >� sit tt 4 i t1{ 7
�r�Sr+'��`�t
14.
)��C/,X",r+'". ti•Y: „t iS� ' YT j"��r•7- s t`�'-1�� ��4+e+' ..3 l �,:� >,"� 7
r,. ���,,,,.,,,. !4'� � :GIa$�`Y3'�-2Fh Pt s,y"'�a 41� ;�1�e+.t`"�a..t' /•�fitt
4 �j�1 ray( r
✓ � ,k •�~ r_.r�`--`"x'''" ',;��. �Gl1-cl�1�Jt1 �'�+� •-{.Isy���'T`*i�..... r
Resort Floatin=Dock
' ,`� �!�' .' ,. �,,,�#.'",;: r•- - Surf Smelt Spawnin4.
Western Outfall ..•. Eastern Outfall k
Big Bend Creek
!n' f
Alderbrook Creek
v. Alderbrook Resort pa&
Action Area
R S l
✓'"M Z J r '�� err .�� ��e x � .4�t Y
.17
A 4
1` �
a
{
T ,'t
General Features and Habitats Map
Alderbrook Resort&Spa B-1 December 2007
Project Area Photographs
Photo 1. Alderbrook Inn shoreline before current stormwater system(pre-2002-2004
remodel , showin floating dock, creek mouth ri lit of ram ,rock wall.
, a
x ,
i
V
r
Photo 2. Eastern outfall, failing rock wall, eroded beach, and debris.
'� a,u�l, �{•�„A�.. I „'n +i4.� {�?f`w11j t�,��1'.`�,Rrfm--;.. "
s
y�
Eastern OuttaR Stand '
Rock'.
VIA
ti JJr
w
y
>.i.
"I
,,
MEW
�`^ t
..uf���.�,. .h x.�:`:tip ?;c:,.rz;?;.cd...i.�1.•". ,r°2•§'�i.L?,xP-"`' e#�`'ief}dm�".rll�
Alderbrook Resort&Spa B-2 December 2007
Project Area Photographs
Photo 3. Ramp, floating dock(section to be replaced), and eastern oyster bed. Western
outfall is just right of picture.
Western OutfaM
.. IMP-
Photo 4. Western outfall and intertidal section of dock.
Alderbrook Resort&Spa B-3 December 2007
Project Area Photographs
4
I_
0',
Photo 5. Western outfall, eroded beach, and undercut bulkhead.
04
.,N'" �.i 4 y4�y� .�*r j f�} ^.�dt �.. �` a"w ��I r Ary �y,�'►4`_.:�
��~ ,;l
�I I '.• _. Y�'�+—Y J��_.9�.sr�M2_M�ffii aa�;r� ,,�_ ��`"' '�o r
Photo 6. Oysters on mudflat at mid-intertidal elevation,transitioning toward lower
elevations with greater oyster density.
Alderbrook Resort&Spa B-4 December 2007
Project Area Photographs
r7-7-1
1
Photo 7. Looking west from eastern outfall at grounded and floating dock(all sections to be
replaced) and creosote piles (to be replaced).
7w
. r
a
M
x
Photo 8. From upper intertidal beach, looking northwest across oysters to seaward end of
moorage dock(to be replaced).
Alderbrook Resort&Spa B-S December 2007
Project Area Photographs
0
s..
e
Photo 9. Close-up of gravelly sand substrate, oyster shells, and shellfish and polychaete burrows
at mid-intertidal elevation.
Alderbrook Resort&Spa B-6 December 2007
Project Area Photographs
1
APPENDIX C
JARPA CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS
=WTY( flap
20
112 .
30 30
PORT 9 92
ANGELES 25
04
1o1 EVEREI I--
� C9
40 03
02
- PROJECT
LOCATION 90
REMERT AT LE
09 °� 18
106
16
_\ 69
SHELTON � \,64
410_
TA C M
ABERDEEN � 161 v
07 7
07 OLYMPIA 10 65
02
12 _ti07
05
CENTRALIA oG
CHEHALIS
06
5
i
� 4
KELSOAPPROX. SCALE: 1" = 20 MI
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
LATITUDE: 47' 20' 53" N WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
LONGTITUDE: 123' 04' 01" W AT: ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
SECTION: 33
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING TOWNSHIP: 22N
22526 SE 64TH PLACE RANGE: 3W
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027 COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
�NGINRING FIGURE 1 of 23STORMWATEROI SORT
MARCH 2O08 O OU FALL
I ,11 I G O U P IMPROVEMENTS
USACE PROJECT REFERENCE
NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Vicinity Map
LOCATWN MAP
HOOD CANAL
t n Qr7
4tfa
L= K uhr� A-m' 1
E r h rr.
E fine µ'r
v
II R�
'J
E' Dalb y R '
ALDERBROOK
INN Z'
r ,
r
"ft 0 Dr
APPROX.SCALE: 1"=2,65,MI r y
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
�t�GINING FIGURE 2 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
' 111 I G O U P IMPROVEMENTS
USACE PROJECT REFERENCE
NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Location Map
PROPERTY OWNERSHIP INFORMATION: 4
TPN OWNER
O1 322335000015 PRIVATE PROPERTY
OZ 322335000014 NORTH FORTY LODGING LLC
O3 322335100023 ALDERBROOK COUNTRY CLUB INC N
® 322335000012 PRIVATE PROPERTY
ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS
ARE LISTED IN THE JARPA
DOCK
HOOD CANAL
WESTERN OUTFALL EASTERN
SEE FIGS 4 & 5 OUTFALL
SEE FIGS 8-13
4 O
r
Cr1�� .� _
LDERBROOK _
INN
STATE HWY 106
-J I I I If
J_ 'RPRR ALE: 1 = 150'
PROPERTY MAP
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
�NGIt1ING FIGURE 3 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
,11 I G O U P IMPROVEMENTS
USACE PROJECT REFERENCE
NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Property Map
MATCHLINE — SEE FIG 5
\ I I
I I o µLIW
---- -- .-�� 320LF 18" HDPE
I
SDR 21 PIPE
I I
I I
� I
I
� I I
I I
---- 1 I 25' WIDE ALLOWABLE
OUTFALL CONSTRUCTION
I i AREA LIMITS
i I
I I
\ I
I I
RESTOR EACH GRADE TO Ln I °�
MATCH A CENT AREAS "� I I ANCHOR BLOCKS
USING U 0 16" OF I I 10' OC SEE DET B ON FIG
"HABITAT MIX" OR`N-QTIVE I ��
SURFACE MATERI
MATCHING EXISTING SURFACE I I
GRAVEL GRADUATION
(APPROXIMATELY 23 CU YDS) I i
I I
-J,
A P P R 0 X I M,
LIMITS PF
DROP STRUCTURE I I EXIST G
SEE DET D ON FIG / I 76 ER BEDS
Q -1 EXISTING
/Nw L I BULKHEAD
COTTAGE z I"
EXISTING MH WESTERN OUTFALL
PLAN
SCALE: 1" = 40'
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
mInaw FIGURE 4 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
0 U P USACE PROJECT REFERENCE IMPROVEMENTS
NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Proposed Western Outfall Plan
EXISTING DOCK TO BE
REPLACED
0 0
so 0
CURRE U ECTION
0
EBB
LOCATION: FOOD
LAT 47' 20' 56" N '_--
LONG 123' 04' 09" W
DATUM: MLLW '-�� O
HOOD CANAL
MHHW: 11.85 __----
M H W: 10.87
WATER DEPTH ABOVE OUTLET: 6�—
AT MLLW = 2.0t /
AT MHW = 12.5E
AT MHHW = 13.5t
I I
I I ALLOWABLE OUTF
I I CONSTR�-T+ AREA
MATCHLINE — SEE FIG 4
WESTERN OUTFALL
PLAN
SCALE: 1" = 40'
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
�NGINT�RING FIGURE 5 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
0 U P USACE RO NUMBER: NWST RE
FERENCE
Proposed Western Outfall Plan
40 EXIS IING
ETAf 'N-G--..._. -------......._....-- ------ _ ----- -- __........- -------- ----...- -..._... _.._...
4
!
W LL I r
A ' EA TQ BE R STORED
30 _....._........... TO PRE---XISTI G GRADE I30
EXIST 15 _
CID SP EXIST NG GRADE
20 APPROX 251LF 6`' MI COVER
_.-_......_....-__..._._. ..._................._......4_.._..._..._
zo
__ 230 F 18" HDPE i
I S = .3%t ' MHHW - 11
10 -
-..........._._................_.........._......_.. _..._......_. .... ....._._._..__..._................._._............ I............_._._......----.._..1._.-..-— -... _- 111.85 10
�....._. ! _........._...................._. ! -- _ ---- .. _._.. _.. ......_ -;v-
�
p a I °°
___ ._.__._._.. 0
- I M LW = 10.0 3�
—10 u III 00 I ANCHOR BLOCKS
-- - --- g --- ! ---- -- �> DFT - —10
--- 113 ON FIG 1
-20
vUa.Q
q� L' j
—
30
—40
—40
0 cw >< — ----- —
10+00 10+50 1 1 +00 1 1 +50
WESTERN OUTFALL
PROFILE
H: 1" = 20' V. 1" = 20'
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSArQrUAAH, WA 98027
�tiGIN��RIhG FIGURE 6 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESOR
M 111 I I G -R O U P 0 10 20 MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER IMPROVEMENTS
OUTFALL
USACE PROJECT REFERENCE
1"=20' NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Proposed Western Outfall Profile
40 .. . . ............................... .....
- .._ .. . _.__...._ ' .� ! � 40
30 -' 30
I , !
20 ! i
i
0
EXISTING GRADE ' -!- 90 LF 18" HDPE
10
i S ci MHHW = 111.85
....------- _... _ :..._ -_-- 0
_.._...__..._.....___
i i I
10
0 ! -
i
i
i
o ML LW 0.0 0
I
-10 _
;ANCHOR BLOCKS
z 10
_.
Q ;
-20 .� O 10' OG SEE PET I ~ -20
- - - '8-0 _...-- -- ...- -----
j w F1 G.-..T ._ o r�
J I i O
-30 -- - - u -30
J '
LL ;
�w 1
p - - ! -- ---- - - - -- - ---....
: O
J
I ,
!
i i. I pZ
; Q t. � W
-40 IU i w
1
! O
L. -1 - _._..-..-�------.y..... __........_..- Z--
i � II i wf- d 4
w ! O Z Q
1 1 +50 1 2+00 12+50 13+00
WESTERN OUTFALL
PROFILE
H: I" = 20' V. 1" = 20'
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL li
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
�hGIN ING FIGURE 7 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
IMPROVEMENTS
I G R O U P o 1"120' 20 USACE PROJECT REFERENCE
NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Proposed Western Outfall Profile
STA 12+85.8 -
i 45 BEND W/ THRUST BLOCKING j
c". IE = 4.73 i
ob "= TB M
EXISTING TOP OF RET. WALL i
BUILDING TPN EL = 14.3 MLLW (ASSUMED)
a, 32235510-0C23 LF 18"
69 ` STA 12+70.4 15 !L EXISTING 45' BEND THRUST SP
BULKHEAD g
/ I (MHHW) I = 4.8
404 \
15 LF 18" $SAP
WORK LIMITS BEYOND
_ FROM THE BULKHEAD ALL tTO
\ CHOR BLOCK 20' OC
BE LIMITED TO THE 0 TPRIN.L_._
TYPICAL 13 PLACES 260 LF 18" OF THE EXISTING OCK
EE D A SEE DET B FIG 14 CPSSP
FIG 14 6� EXISTING DOCK TO BE
�3 RECONSTRUCTED AS SHOWN
A ROXIM ACCESS — ON FIGS 18, 19 & 20
OUTE ITS a l APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF
~ EXISTING OYSTER BED NOTES: ___
1. LOCATION CAS ESS ROUTE
/L0C T10 cov _ _______A�{�@� EAST PROPERTY TO BE
L.Af 47' 20' 53" EXISTING 8' SS PROVIDED BY THE OWNER
L NG 23. 04' 8" W EFFLUENT PIPE
EASTERN OUTFACE 2. ALIGNMENT WITHIN THE DOCK TO
ATU MLLW FOLLOW THE CENTERLINE OF THE
PLAN EXISTING DOCK FOOTPRINT
SCALE: t" = 40'
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER 3. MHHW IS AT TOE OF EXISTING
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS BULKHEAD
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING 4. COORDINATE PIPE ALIGNMENT WITH
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAOUAH, WA 98027 DOCK STOP PILING LOCATIONS
FIGURE 8 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
�NGINRING N MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
n 0 20 40 USACE PROJECT REFERENCE IMPROVEMENTS
G A 0 u Y 1"=40' NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Proposed Eastern Outfall Plan
APPROXIMATE LIMITS NOTE: SECOND CLASS
OF EXISTING OYSTER TIDELANDS HAVE BEEN
I BEDS ESTABLISHED AS STARTING
I AT ELEVATION —4.5 MLLW
NEW DOCK ST P PILINGS I
EXISTING TIMBER
NCHOR BLOCK 10' OC (48 OCATIONS) PILING (TYP.)
T PICAL 31 PLACES � TO BE REMOVED
VS E DIET B FIG 14 PIPE SUPPORTSI� (TYP.) (TYP. 21 LOCATIONS)
7.5' O.C. MAX PACING
.EE DETAIL K ON SHT 23 OPEN ENDED
65 LF 18" i PIPE SUPPORTED FROM
PIPE OUTLET
PSSIP DOCK STOP STRUCTURE 'E
93 00 01
14+0 I 15+00 16+00
1 Z \ rEX
1 = ENEW GALVANIZED
�0ISTEEL PILING17� ' (TYP. 21 LOCATDPE 256 LF 18"G HDPE SDR 21
EXISTING DOCK TO BE
LIMITS OF RECONSTRUCTED AS SHOWN
ON FIGS 21, 22 & 23
1 TER BEDS HOOD CANAL
r
LOCATION: NOTE: PIPE ALIGNMENT TO BE ALONG
LAT 47' 20' 53" N EASTERN OUTFALL CENTERLINE OF EXISTING DOCK FOOTPRINT
LONG 123' 04' 08" W PLAN
SCALE: 7" = 40' WATER DEPTH ABOVE OUTLET:
DATUM: MLLW AT MHHW = 12.5f
AT MHW = 11.5f
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
aGINlaw FIGURE 9 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
O U P 0 20 40 z IMPROVEMENTS
USACE PROJECT REFERENCE
1"=40' NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Proposed Eastern Outfall Plan
8' S EFFL E
40
NT
i ; I APE 40
I MINIMIbM: CLEARANCEI : _ 0..5' : i j ` TOP OF :BU.LKHEAD
30 ! ! I BACKIi ILL BITWEEN PIPES WITH I CONC�ETE i 4:3 MLLW)
' I '
i--- I I (1 i 30 .
j II i j EXISTING GRADE _
20 -- - L - I I 20
Z
w.
10
- - ' 10
21
D
I
pa_ .. ---� E a-SDI N-GI _s ---` - , I i I co 0
O,RSSP PIPE ' j ui
z
J i lE _ 19.91 i i I 26 LF 1.8 C. ! _
,
—10 -10
i .— d I I S — p %
EXISTING
I
BULKHEAD WALL —' GH
—20 ! n ( _
_ ; --- - — --- -� - —-- - -- - - - - 2 I-N
,
AN OR BLOCKS! YP 20
_ I I t�lx—SSA G
w �-r ! SEE' DETAIL B OIL SHT '14
:
' ! 0 w ram-- r` CDI _
z
w Q I —
,�c� ` � 30
(n --
Q cn 0. Q Q
-- - ► 1 ! _ -40
i_._._..M W 11.85.
MF W 10'87
1 0+00 10+50 1 1 +00 1 1 +30
EASTERN OUTFALL
PROFILE
H: 1" = 20' V. I" = 20'
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
-10
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
�NGIN RItiG FIGURE 10 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
1 G U U P 0 1 100 20 USACE PROJECT REFERENCE IMPROVEMENTS
NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Proposed Eastern Outfall Profile
25 LF j 8., CPSSP
40 i S = C .S�
- -- } 40
-
-r ANCRUR -
i
MiAX SPACING I
30 i !SEE D T B OIG 14 I
....... -- ! — - --- ---- _ 30
TOP OF BULKH:EA j ! 1
DOCK. SiTOP S RUCT RE
i ;W
20 _.... ._ _.r.f=XISTINE-_G GRADE. i I 20
f --- - - - 1-5 t-�--l-g - S-
LL
W - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - _ - -- - = W
--�-
10 i i L
: I
i
_.. . 10
LLJ
LLI-.-�
-10 a ANCHOR. $LOCKS (TY ) ._ I i -10
._._ _- I _-.. __.�. _ _ _..
_"
- . ..
20 O C.. SAX SPACING I
SEE DETAIL B ON .SH1' .14 I i i
—20 .
- -- - --
i
I + , --j-- 00 2 0
:O i . oo R'7
-30 I I i +'� ao o Nw
_ - - Z-
_ z
30
m
i
i i ! QI II i Q I11
LLJ
—40_ —
i ,
MHiHW: 11.85
I M:HI,W: 10.87
1 1 +30 1 1 +50 12+00 12+50 13+00
EASTERN OUTFALL
PROFILE
= 20- V- 1" = 20'
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
�tiGIN RING FIGURE 11 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESOR-F "
i MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
0 I'
G i5 OUP 100 20 USACE PROJECT REFERENCE IMPROVEMENTS
� '� NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Proposed Eastern Outfall Profile
:
40 — ANCHOR BLOCS- TY - ----- ---- ---- -- '---% - — -- --- - - .._ .. - --
--- ----
( _. . 40
10 O C I MAX 'SPACING -- _
SEE DETAIL B ON SMT 14
30 p TORI
K , 30
65 LF 18" CPSSP ! STRI7 'TURE- _-
S i
/ !
20 �. EXISTING; PJPE_ SUPPORTS (TYR
ARIES
�.. �- -G B - - 20
----------- -- - - -- - - - - -
_RA
LL i
7 S O.0 MAX ;SPACING- LL
uj
i SSE DETAIL .K ON SHT 23 W
10
— v �
..
!
10
Q
0 0 ! o
ZEn
0
z
-10 _- CPSSP X H6PE i Q -10
I i
-._.__ _ ._ _ _ ._.... _ .._....
i COUPLING i I j 0 !LF 18' :HDPE �
-20 -
: �S _ _
i
i
' I i 20
COMPLETELY BURIED PARTIALLY BURIED! PARTIALLY BURIED PIPELINE INSTALLED! 4"
-30 PIPELINE PIPELINE ! PP�LINE ABOVE GRAD _
- - - _4 -_- 30
._.......
- - I. .... . ._...,..
: e
—40 :
40
I
' M N H W: 11.85
I
MHW: 10187
13+00 13+50 14+00 14+50 14+70
EASTERN OUTFALL
PROFILE
H: 1" = 20' V. I" = 20'
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
�NGIH RING FIGURE 12 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
0 U P 0 �„��p, 20 USACE PROJECT REFERENCE
IMPROVEMENTS
� .Nu NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Proposed Eastern Outfall Profile
4040
I
i
30 I i !
---- - --- --- DOCK STOP S TR U G TU R E _--j_- --�--- -=!------ 30
{
20 I PIpE: SUPPORT S (TYPE) :GRADE' ; I
- -c�. ._.- --!— i - -- -- I---- -- I EX T NG _
ISI---_ 20
a T: 0. MAX ISPACING i lLu
Lu SEE DETAIL .K SON SH1T 23 ' _
10cn
i i i i v MHHW - 11i.85
10
0 v~i7- -
U? IL I0
-- - ---- -
i
ui
� Z
MI W 0 0
J = _ _i
-10 -10
140 LF 18 HDPE
; S = VARIES-2020-30 LLJQ _30
uji: I -40
I oo L
14+70 15+00 15+50 16+00
EASTERN OUTFALL
PROFILE
H: 1" = 20' V. I" = 20'
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
------------
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAOUAH, WA 98027
�tiGIN RING FIGURE 13 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
I 11, 0 0 0 P p �"lOp'10 Zp USACE PROJECT REFERENCE IMPROVEMENTS
NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Proposed Eastern Outfall Profile
MINIMUM CLEARANCE = 0.5'
BACKFILL BETWEEN PIPES WITH CONCRETE CONCRETE OUTFACE
PROTECTION TO REMAIN
(APPROXIMATELY 0.25 CU YDS)
EXISTING CONCRETE BULKHEAD EXISTING 8" HDPE SANITARY
AND CHAIN LINK FENCE EFFLUENT PIPE
18" SPOOL 18" 90' BEND WTxWT
18" 45' BEND WTxWT 10 t W/ THRUST BLOCK
REMOVE EXISTING FILL ERODED AREA WITH
ELBOW AND THRUST QUARRY SPALL MATERIAL
BLOCK SLAB—.,,, TO 6" BELOW ADJACENT
BEACH GRADE. FILL TO
MATCH ADJACENT GRADE
USING NATIVE OR
! 0 00 0000000 —� HABITAT MIX" MATERIALS
(APPROX. 35 CU YDS)
18" TEE WTxPE
REMOVE 8" ABANDONED
EXISTING ROCK WALL EASTERN PIPE ALIGNMENT CONCRETE PIPE
TO BE REPAIRED DETAIL (APPROX. 100 LF)
NO SCALE — REMOVE 6" ABANDONED
WOOD STAVE PIPE
18" CPSSP OR (APPRX. 100 LF)
18" HDPE 18" CPSSP
PRECAST REIF. 6" TYP 2 1/2 OR 18" HDPE
CONCRETE 5/16' SST PLATE I-- SEE NOTE 2
ANCHOR BEND TO FIT
1/4" FELT 1/2" SST_ ANCHOR BOLTS z
BETWEEN PIPE — DOUBLE NUT
AND CONCRETE
SADDLE --
12" MIN
6" MIN-1-
2'—10" CONCRETE
8" FOR HDPE ANCHOR ANCHOR BLOCK
12" FOR CPSSP ANCHOR
PURPOSE- STORMWATER OUTFALL ANCHOR BLOCK
IMPROVEMENTS & DOCK DETAIL
REPLACEMENT NOTES: No SCALE —
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING 1. INSTALL ANCHOR BLOCKS AT ALL JOINTS AND FITTINGS AND
22526 SE 64TH PLACE WITH A MAXIMUM SPACING OF 10' O.C.
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED 2. ANCHORS WILL REQUIRE DIFFERENT BLOCK WIDTHS AND
STORMWATER OUTFALL SADDLE RADIUS' FOR CPSSP & HDPE PIPE. CONTRACTOR TO
EXTENSIONS VERIFY DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION.
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
3. REINFORCING TO BE #3 BARS AT EACH CORNER WITH 2" MIN
COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON COVER.
FIGURE 14 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
�NGINRIi�G MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
i ,'' ' I�APRII\/EI;AFPITC
6 A 0 U P USACE NUMBER PROJECT
20078732E SO AnochoreBlockeDetAlignment and
Details
EXISTING CMP PIPE AND
EXISTING 18" GRATING TO BE REMOVED
„
CPSSP PIPE 18 18" HDPE PIPE
IE = 9.30
FINAL RESTORED GRADE
EXISTING GRADE
EXISTING 18"
85
6" SUMP
6" CSBC
FIRM & UNYIELDING /
NATIVE MATERIALS —18" FLANGE INSIDE
DROP STRUCTURE
30"x12" FRP GRATING EXISTING RETAINING WALL
- — EXISTING FOOTING
--: FINAL RESTORED GRADE
EXISTING GRADE
EXISTING CPSSP PIPE /O
18" HDPE PIPE
3'
NOTES:
1. REINFORCING TO BE A #3 BAR AT EACH CORNER
AND #3 BAR @ 12" OC
WESTERN OUTFALL
2. MINIMUM WALL THICKNESS = 4" DROP STRUCTURE
3. EPDXY DOWEL CORNER BARS INTO EXISTING DETAIL
SCALE: i" = 4' -
RETAINING WALL (MIN. EMBED 6")
4. CONCRETE TO BE CLASS 3000 AS SPECIFIED IN THE
WSDOT STD SPECIFICATIONS
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAOUAH, WA 98027
�NGIN ING FIGURE 15 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
1�� G ROT 8EPROJECT
IMPROVEMENTS
" P NWS2007732SO Proposed Details
FORM CONCRETE
TO ALLOW FOR
REMOVAL OF BOLTS
20 LB. TAR PAPER
4 \ \
L/2
L : 3D± j a
D O O
\ D
UNDISTURBED EARTH
j
E_ EVA ION
200 # CONCRETE
POURED IN PLACE
PLAN
BEARING AREA 1 AE3L�`
FITTING D TEE 90' 45' 22 1 /2° ' ; 1 /4`
6" 4 SQ.FT. 6 SQ.FT. 3 SQ.FT. 2 SQ.FT. 2 SQ.FT.
8" 7 SQ.FT. 10 SQ.FT. 6 SQ.FT. 3 SQ.FT. 2 SQ.FT.
10" 10 SQ.FT. 9 SQ.FT. 9 SQ.FT. 5 SQ.FT. 3 SQ.FT.
12" 14 SQ.FT. 22 SQ.FT. 12 SQ.FT. 6 SQ.FT. 4 SQ.FT.
16" 25 SQ.FT. 38 SQ.FT. 21 SQ.FT. 11 SO.FT. 7 SQ.FT.
18" 32 SQ.FT. 48 SQ.FT. 27 SQ.FT. 14 SQ.FT. 8 SQ.FT.
THRUST BLOCK
DETAIL
NO SCALE -
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
�NGIh��RING FIGURE 16 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
USACE I `11 6 � 0 U P NUMBER PROJECT
20078732E SO Proposed Thrust Block Detail
GENERAL NOTE:
1• "HABITAT MIX" GRAVEL SHALL CONSIST OF THE FOLLOWING:
A. GRAVEL SHALL BE CLEAN ROUND "PEA GRAVEL", NOT CRUSHED.
B. AT LEAST 80% OF THE GRAVEL SHALL BE SIZED BETWEEN 1/16" AND 1/4" IN
DIAMETER.
C. GRAVEL SHALL BE SPREAD ALONG THE ENTIRE AREA OF DISTURBANCE TO A UNIFORM
DEPTH OF 6".
D. GRAVELING SHALL BE COMPLETED WITHIN 48 HOURS FOLLOWING BACKFILLING TRENCH.
�5' MAX_ MOUND MATERIAL AT PIPE TRENCH
6" MIN
NATIVE MATERIAL OR HABITAT
MIX GRAVEL
SUITABLE NATIVE MATERIAL OR
IMPORTED GRAVEL BACKFILL
6"
PIPE BEDDING MATERIAL
FIRM & UNYIELDING =2"±---�
NATIVE MATERIAL NOTES:
1. REDUCE CRUSHED ROCK
TYPICAL PIPE TRENCH LAYER THICKNESS WHERE
SECTION NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN 6"
MIN. OF NATIVE SURFACING.
NO SCALE -
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAOUnAH, WA 98027
�HGINttiSING IGURE 17 of MARCH 2O08 23 STORMWATER RI OUTFALL SORT
O U P IMPROVEMENTS
USACE PROJECT REFERENCE
NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Proposed Details
O
0 0 0 0 0
° o
14'x10' ARINA FLOAT WITH
SMALL RENTAL BOAT SOLI DECKING
STORA CKS (30'x18'
& 20'x18')
o APPROX. LIMIT OF 2nd CLASS
TIDE LANDS (-4.5 MLLW)
ETE FLOAT (22'x16')
ASONAL SWIM FLOAT 0000
(24'x18')71
00
00� EXISTING PILE (TYP.) APPROX. MLLW
MHW & MHHW LIN S AT
G BULKHEAD
EXISTING DOCK LAYOUT
PLAN �40o N
SCALE: 1" = 80'
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH,, WA 98027
�IIG�IFfrtfS�IIG FIGURE 18 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
I �
11' G O U P IMPROVEMENTS
USACE PROJECT REFERENCE
NUMBER: NWS-2007-732—SO Existing Dock Detail
12" DIAMETER
CREOSOTE
TREATED PILINGS SOLID PLYWOOD
DECKING
8'
CHEMICALLY
TREATED
I I BATTER BOARD
AND TIE RAIL
I
I
STYROFOAM FLOATS
EXISTING DOCK TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION
DETAIL
NO SCALE -
NOTE: THIS DETAIL DEPICTS A CROSS SECTION OF THE
DOCK STEM. THE MARINA FLOAT, SMALL BOAT RENTAL
FLOATS AND THE SEASONAL SWIM FLOAT HAVE SIMILAR
CONSTRUCTION WITH VARIABLE DIMENSIONS AS SHOWN
ON FIG 20
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
�NGIh RING FIGURE 19 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
Ii T S
u �J USACE PROJECT REFERENCE 1Mrmm0vEv E N
NUMBER: NWS-2007-732—SO Details
NOTE: MARINA FLOAT 8'
STRUCTURE TO BE
REPLACED WITH MATCHING
DIMENSIONS AND NEW
FLOAT MATERIALS
MARINA FLOAT
I 0)
� I
DOCK STEM
v
10'
MARINA FLOAT
SECTION
NO SCALE -
8'-4"
NOTE: CONCRETE FLOAT
IS EXCLUDED FROM THE
CURRENT PROJECT AND
WILL REMAIN IN ITS
CURRENT CONDITION
o_
� I
00
v _ .V P' .a .' v. .a v. a v. a v.. . a v. a><
v....
v
16'
CONCRETE FLOAT
SECTION
NO SCALE —
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
�NGINING FIGURE 20 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
,,1 G 0 U P USACE PROJECT REFERENCE IMPROVEMENTS
NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Details
368 k 232
U
N
SMALL RENTAL BOAT EXISTING 14'x10' MARINA
FLOAT WITH SOLID DECKING
STORAGE DOCKS TO BE TO BE REPLACED
REPLACED WITH GRATED
DECK FLOATS (2 EA)
Ln
(30'x18' & 20'x18') APPROX. LIMIT OF 2nd CLASS
TIDE LANDS (-4.5 MLLW)
CONCRETE FLOAT TO BE
RETAINED IN PRESENT
CONDITION (22'x16') /x� Ln
00
SEE PILE ATTACHMENT
------- "-
SEASONAL SWIM FLOAT TO DETAIL M ON FIG 19
BE REPLACED WITH ��
GRATED DECK FLOAT (TYPICAL)
(2 4'x 18')
(\j 00
cv
11' 00
APPROX. MLLW
al
cx�
8" GALVANIZED DOCK
STOP PILES
NOTE: UTILITY SYMBOLS NOT TO SCALE
FOR VISUAL REFERENCE ONLY
O NEW STEEL PILE
a;
o o EXISTING PUMP OUT AND WASH STATION
MHW & MHHW LINE IS AT
NOTE: ALDERBROOK CREEK OUTLET IS 00 EXISTING BULKHEAD
APPROXIMATELY 40' WEST OF THE DOCK
ALIGNMENT —
PROPOSED DOCK LAYOUT
PLAN 0 �080 N
SCALE: 1" = 80' — 1"=80'
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
�tiGIh RING FIGURE 21 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
USACE PROJECT REFERENCE IMPROVEMEN T 5
ta[=' 6 � 0 U P NUMBER: NWS-2007-732—SO Proposed Details
48'
I-
TYPICAL AREAS FOR EACH 48' SECTION GRATING LAYOUT THRUFLOW GRATING
382.5 SO FT OF FLOAT FREEBOARD WITH DL 18" DETAIL 5/ 4x6 LOWES WOOD
201.3 SO FT GRATING FREEBOARD WITH DL + LL 11 " NO SCALE _ GRAIN CHOICE DECK
52.6% GRATED AREA #15 PER SO FT LIVE LOAD POLYETHYLENE FLOAT UNITS
>1 < >< ><
�e \-36"x72"x16" (TYP.) 36"x96"x16" (TYP.) 2"x12" PIPE SUPPORT STRINGERS
BETWEEN FLOAT STOPS
PLAN/PROFILE EXIST BEACH GRADE
NO SCALE -
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER 121x12" WOOD BEAM
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS FLOAT STOP
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL 8" GALVANIZED STEEL PILING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
�NGINItiG FIGURE 22 of 23 ALDERBROOK INN & RESORT
MARCH 2O08 STORMWATER OUTFALL
G O U P 0 „��0, 20 USACE PROJECT REFERENCE IMPROVEMENTS
NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Proposed Details
ALTERNATE 5/4x6 CHOICE THRUFLOW GRATING DOWN CENTER
DECK AND THRUFLOW GRATING 3x10 STRINGERS
300 FASCIA 2x10 STRINGERS
3x10 WALERS
2x12 PIPE SUPPORT STRINGER
I 12x12 WOOD BEAM FLOAT STOP
POLYETHYLENE FLOAT UNITS
8" GALVANIZED STEEL PILING
1'-10 1/2" �� �� �� 18" STORM DRAIN W/ SADDLE CLAMP
12" MIN CLEARANCE PROPOSED SECOND FLOAT
SECTION
12'02" WOOD BEAM NO SCALE -
FLOAT STOP 2'x12" PIPE SUPPORT STRINGER STAINLESS STEEL
SLOPE VARIES BOLTS, NUTS,
WASHERS, THREADED
[RODS AND ANGLE
BRACKET
EXISTING BEACH
GRADE
18"0 HDPE SST PIPE SUPPORT
SLOPE >- 0.5% @7.5' O.C.
PIPE SUPPORT FROM DOCK STOP
DETAIL
GALVANIZED ANGLE SCALE: 1" = a• —
IRON FRAME
1'-2 9/16"
12" DIAMETER
GALVANIZED STEEL PILE—,,,,.
00
PILE ATTACHMENT
� DOCK
SECTION
NO SCALE -
PILING ROLLER BRACE
(MAINTENANCE FREE HARD PLASTIC)
PURPOSE: STORMWATER OUTFALL IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY: INSTALL PROPOSED STORMWATER
& DOCK REPLACEMENT OUTFALL EXTENSIONS
WATERWAY: HOOD CANAL
APPLICATION BY: NORTH FORTY LODGING
22526 SE 64TH PLACE COUNTY OF: MASON, WASHINGTON
ISSAOUAH, WA 98027FIGURE 23 of &
—_
NN
NINO% MARCH 2O08 23 STO MWATALDERBROO RIOU FALLSORT
1'1 n II n O lJ iS Y USACE PROJECT REFERENCE IMPROVEMENTS
NUMBER: NWS-2007-732-SO Proposed Details
L � 7
oo MASON COUNTY
Shelton (360) 427-9670
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Belfair (360) 275-4467
Planning
Mason County Bldg.1 411 N.5th Elma (360) 482-5269
P.O.Box 279 Shelton,WA 98584
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 1,2008
TO: Margie Schirato,WDFW
Marty Ereth,Skokomish Tribe
FROM: Grace Miller,Planner
RE: Shoreline Substantial Development and Conditional Use Permit#SHR2008-00010,for your
review and comment.The applicant is North Forty Lodging.The proposal includes three
construction elements: 1)extension of two stonmwater outfalls from existing shoreline near mean
higher high water to intertidal depths below—3 ft mean lower low water,2)repair and
modification of an existing marine float to provide an outfall extension corridor and improve
aquatic habitat,and 3)beach restoration and intertidal habitat improvements.
NOTE:Please submit comments by May 28,2008,to the address above,attn Grace Miller.The public
hearing is scheduled for June 10`h.
Please find enclosed Habitat Management Plan for your review and comment.The Mason County Resource
Ordinance Fish&Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area Chapter 17.01.110 provides that management plans
shall be reviewed by local Tribes,Washington State Dept of Fish and Wildlife and other applicable
state/federal agencies.A 28-day comment period is provided for the Habitat Management Plan review and
additional time is possible due to comments being accepted up to the public hearing date for the shoreline
permit. Details of the project follow and are attached.
SITE ADDRESS: 7107 SR 106,Union,WA
APPLICANT:North Forty Lodging
Legal Description: Sec 33,Twn 22 N,R 3 W.
Parcel No.32233-50-00014.
Project description:Extension of two stormwater outfalls,modification of an existing marine float,beach
restoration and intertidal habitat improvements.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.I can be reached at 427-9670,ext 360.Thank you.
'i
EJC (a
' 1 Washington HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL Coastal
Department of 48 Devonshire Road
FISH and RCW 77.55.021-Appeal pursuant to Chapter 34.05 Montesano,WA 98563
WILDLIFE (360)249-4628
0 � M
n ,may
Issue Date: May 12,2008 Control Number: 111611-1 0 � � d�'
Project Expiration Date: February 14,2012 FPA/Public Notice#: N/A
rMOM
N
O {
PERMITTEE AUTHORIZED AGENT OR CONTRACTOR O°
North Forty Lodging, LLC Sea-Run Consulting
ATTENTION: Brian McGinnis ATTENTION: Allison Reak
22526 SE 64th Place, Suite 210 6531 10th Avenue NW
Issaquah,WA 98027 Seattle, WA 98117
425-369-9290 206-718-3285
Fax: 425-369-9008
Project Name: Alderbrook Resort Outfall Repair and Dock Replace
Project Description: Reconstruction of dock and reconstruction of oufalls into pipe to inwater
discharge.
PROVISIONS
1. Work below the ordinary high water line shall not occur from February 15 through July 14 of any
year for the protection of migrating juvenile salmonids.
2. Work below the ordinary high water line shall not occur from September 15 through December
31 and from January 1 through March 1 of any year for the protection of surf smelt spawning beds.
3. Work shall be accomplished per plans and specifications approved by the Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife entitled "Alderbrook Resort and Spa Stormwater Outfalls Repair
April 2008 Addendum to the Joint Aquatic Resources Project Application (JARPA) and Bioogical
Assessment/Biological Evaluation (BA/BE)" and dated April 4, 2008, except as modified by this
Hydraulic Project Approval. A copy of these plans shall be available on site during construction.
Pipeline:
4. The pipeline outfall anchor shall be the minimum necessary to stabilize the outfall and shall be
configured so as to minimize both erosion of bed materials and adverse impacts to habitat.
5. Wet concrete shall be prevented from entering waters of the state. Forms for any concrete
structure shall be constructed to prevent leaching of wet concrete. Impervious materials shall be
placed over any exposed concrete not lined with the forms that will come in contact with state
waters. Forms and impervious materials shall remain in place until the concrete is cured.
6. Use of equipment on the beach shall not occur when the project area is inundated by tidal
waters.
7. Use of equipment on the beach shall be held to a minimum, confined to a single access point,
and limited to a 25-foot work corridor parallel to the pipeline. Construction materials shall not touch
the beach outside this work corridor.
Page 1 of 6
Washington HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL Coastal
Department of 48 Devonshire Road
FISH and RCW 77.55.021-Appeal pursuant to Chapter 34.05 Montesano,WA 98563
WILDLIFE (360)249-4628
Issue Date: May 12,2008 Control Number: 111611-1
Project Expiration Date: February 14, 2012 FPA/Public Notice#: N/A
8. Excavated material shall not be placed outside the 25-foot work corridor parallel to the pipeline.
9. If excavated material is to be temporarily placed where it will come into contact with tidal waters,
this material shall be covered with filter fabric and adequately secured to prevent erosion and/or
potential entrainment of fish.
10. All trenches, depressions, or holes created in the beach area shall be backfilled prior to
inundation by tidal waters.
Float:
11. The existing float shall not be re-located within waters of the state without written authorization
from WDFW. They shall be removed and disposed of upland such that they do not re-enter such
waters.
12. The solid decked portions of the structure shall not exceed the following widths: the 529-foot
long float 8 feet and the 608-foot long float 8 feet.
13. The 529 by 8 foot and the 608 by 8 foot rectangular shaped floats shall contain at least 50%
configuration of grating that passes a minimum of 50 percent sunlight, approved by WDFW.
Floatation shall be located under the solid decked area only. The grated area shall not be used for
storage purposes.
14. No portion of the dock or float system shall ground. A minimum space of 12 inches shall be
maintained at all times between the bottom of the dock or float and the beach grade.
15. Floats, rafts, and associated anchoring systems shall have been designed and shall have been
deployed so that the bed is not damaged.
16. Floatation for the structure shall be fully enclosed and contained to prevent the breakup or loss
of the floatation material into the water.
17. The existing pilings shall be removed and disposed of upland such that they do not enter waters
of the state.
18. As specified in the application, the 48 pilings shall be steel pilings.
19. All piling, lumber, and other materials treated with preservatives shall be sufficiently cured to
minimize leaching into the water or bed.
20. All treated wood piling and lumber to be used for the project shall meet or exceed the standards
established in, 'Best Management Practices For the Use of Treated Wood in Aquatic Environments'
Page 2 of 6
�D
Washington HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL Coastal
Department of 48 Devonshire Road
FISH and RCW 77.55.021-Appeal pursuant to Chapter 34.05 Montesano,WA 98563
WILDLIFE
(360)249-4628
Issue Date: May 12,2008 Control Number: 111611-1
Project Expiration Date: February 14,2012 FPA/Public Notice#: N/A
8. Excavated material shall not be placed outside the 25-foot work corridor parallel to the pipeline.
9. If excavated material is to be temporarily placed where it will come into contact with tidal waters,
this material shall be covered with filter fabric and adequately secured to prevent erosion and/or
potential entrainment of fish.
10. All trenches, depressions, or holes created in the beach area shall be backfilled prior to
inundation by tidal waters.
Float:
11. The existing float shall not be re-located within waters of the state without written authorization
from WDFW. They shall be removed and disposed of upland such that they do not re-enter such
waters.
12. The solid decked portions of the structure shall not exceed the following widths: the 529-foot
long float 8 feet and the 608-foot long float 8 feet.
13. The 529 by 8 foot and the 608 by 8 foot rectangular shaped floats shall contain at least 50%
configuration of grating that passes a minimum of 50 percent sunlight, approved by WDFW.
Floatation shall be located under the solid decked area only. The grated area shall not be used for
storage purposes.
14. No portion of the dock or float system shall ground. A minimum space of 12 inches shall be
maintained at all times between the bottom of the dock or float and the beach grade.
15. Floats, rafts, and associated anchoring systems shall have been designed and shall have been
deployed so that the bed is not damaged.
16. Floatation for the structure shall be fully enclosed and contained to prevent the breakup or loss
of the floatation material into the water.
17. The existing pilings shall be removed and disposed of upland such that they do not enter waters
of the state.
18. As specified in the application, the 48 pilings shall be steel pilings.
19. All piling, lumber, and other materials treated with preservatives shall be sufficiently cured to
minimize leaching into the water or bed.
20. All treated wood piling and lumber to be used for the project shall meet or exceed the standards
established in, 'Best Management Practices For the Use of Treated Wood in Aquatic Environments'
Page 2 of 6
Washington HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL Coastal
Department of 48 Devonshire Road
FISH and RCW 77.55.021-Appeal pursuant to Chapter 34.05 Montesano,WA 98563
WILDLIFE
(360)249-4628
Issue Date: May 12,2008 Control Number: 111611-1
Project Expiration Date: February 14,2012 FPA/Public Notice#: N/A
developed by the Western Wood Preservers Institute, revised July 1996.
21. The pier, ramp, float, and associated moorings shall have been designed and shall have been
located to avoid shading of eelgrass (Zostera spp).
Habitat:
22. Eelgrass and kelp shall not be adversely impacted due to any project activities (e.g., barge shall
not ground, equipment shall not operate, and other project activities shall not occur in eelgrass and
kelp).
23. Intertidal wetland vascular plants shall not be adversely impacted due to project activities (e.g.,
barge shall not ground, equipment shall not operate, and other activities shall not occur in intertidal
wetland vascular plants). If such vegetation is adversely impacted, it shall be replaced using
proven methodology.
24. Project activities shall be conducted to minimize siltation of the beach area and bed.
25. If at any time, as a result of project activities, fish are observed in distress, a fish kill occurs, or
water quality problems develop (including equipment leaks or spills), immediate notification shall be
made to the Washington Military Department's Emergency Management Division at 1-800-258-
5990, and to the Area Habitat Biologist listed below.
26. All debris or deleterious material resulting from construction shall be removed from the beach
area and bed and prevented from entering waters of the state.
27. No petroleum products or other deleterious materials shall enter surface waters.
28. Wood treated with preservatives, trash, waste, or other deleterious materials shall not be
burned below the ordinary high water line. Limited burning of untreated wood or similar material
may be allowed at or above the mean higher high water line.
29. Project activities shall not degrade water quality to the detriment of fish life.
Page 3 of 6
Washington HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL Coastal
Department of 48 Devonshire Road
FISH and RCW 77.55.021-Appeal pursuant to Chapter 34.05 Montesano,WA 98563
WILDLIFE (360)249-4628
Issue Date: May 12, 2008 Control Number: 111611-1
Project Expiration Date: February 14,2012 FPA/Public Notice#: N/A
PROJECT LOCATIONS.
Location #1 Alderbrook Resort
WORK START: July 15, 2008 IWORK END: February 14, 2012
WRIA: Waterbody: Tributary to:
14.9120 Wria 14 Marine Hood Canal
1/4 SEC: Section: Township: Range: Latitude: Longitude: County:
SW 1/4 �33 22 N �03 W N 47.34712 W 123.06794 Mason
Location#1 Driving Directions
APPLY TO ALL HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVALS
This Hydraulic Project Approval pertains only to those requirements of the Washington State Hydraulic Code,
specifically Chapter 77.55 RCW(formerly RCW 77.20). Additional authorization from other public agencies may be
necessary for this project. The person(s)to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval is issued is responsible for applying
for and obtaining any additional authorization from other public agencies (local, state and/or federal)that may be
necessary for this project.
This Hydraulic Project Approval shall be available on the job site at all times and all its provisions followed by the
person(s)to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval is issued and operator(s)performing the work.
This Hydraulic Project Approval does not authorize trespass.
The person(s)to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval is issued and operator(s) performing the work may be held
liable for any loss or damage to fish life or fish habitat that results from failure to comply with the provisions of this
Hydraulic Project Approval.
Failure to comply with the provisions of this Hydraulic Project Approval could result in a civil penalty of up to one
hundred dollars per day and/or a gross misdemeanor charge, possibly punishable by fine and/or imprisonment.
All Hydraulic Project Approvals issued pursuant to RCW 77.55.021 (EXCEPT agricultural irrigation, stock watering or
bank stabilization projects)or 77.55.141 are subject to additional restrictions, conditions or revocation if the Department
of Fish and Wildlife determines that new biological or physical information indicates the need for such action. The
person(s)to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval is issued has the right pursuant to Chapter 34.04 RCW to appeal
such decisions. All agricultural irrigation, stock watering or bank stabilization Hydraulic Project Approvals issued
pursuant to RCW 77.55.021 may be modified by the Department of Fish and Wildlife due to changed conditions after
consultation with the person(s)to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval is issued: PROVIDED HOWEVER,that such
modifications shall be subject to appeal to the Hydraulic Appeals Board established in RCW 77.55.301.
APPEALS INFORMATION
If you wish to appeal the issuance or denial of, or conditions provided in a Hydraulic Project Approval,there are
informal and formal appeal processes available.
Page 4 of 6
-r Washington HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL Coastal
Department of 48 Devonshire Road
FISH and RCW 77.55.021-Appeal pursuant to Chapter 34.05 Montesano,WA 98563
WILDLIFE (360)249-4628
Issue Date: May 12, 2008 Control Number: 111611-1
Project Expiration Date: February 14, 2012 FPA/Public Notice#: N/A
PROJECT LOCATIONS.
Location #1 Alderbrook Resort
WORK START: July 15, 2008 IWORK END: February 14, 2012
WRIA: Waterbody: Tributary to:
14.9120 Wria 14 Marine Hood Canal
1/4 SEC: Section: Township: Range: Latitude: Longitude: County:
SW 1/4 33 22 N 03 W N 47.34712 W 123.06794 Mason
Location#1 Driving Directions
APPLY TO ALL HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVALS
This Hydraulic Project Approval pertains only to those requirements of the Washington State Hydraulic Code,
specifically Chapter 77.55 RCW(formerly RCW 77.20). Additional authorization from other public agencies may be
necessary for this project. The person(s)to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval is issued is responsible for applying
for and obtaining any additional authorization from other public agencies (local, state and/or federal)that may be
necessary for this project.
This Hydraulic Project Approval shall be available on the job site at all times and all its provisions followed by the
person(s)to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval is issued and operator(s)performing the work.
This Hydraulic Project Approval does not authorize trespass.
The person(s)to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval is issued and operator(s)performing the work may be held
liable for any loss or damage to fish life or fish habitat that results from failure to comply with the provisions of this
Hydraulic Project Approval.
Failure to comply with the provisions of this Hydraulic Project Approval could result in a civil penalty of up to one
hundred dollars per day and/or a gross misdemeanor charge, possibly punishable by fine and/or imprisonment.
All Hydraulic Project Approvals issued pursuant to RCW 77.55.021 (EXCEPT agricultural irrigation, stock watering or
bank stabilization projects)or 77.55.141 are subject to additional restrictions, conditions or revocation if the Department
of Fish and Wildlife determines that new biological or physical information indicates the need for such action. The
person(s)to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval is issued has the right pursuant to Chapter 34.04 RCW to appeal
such decisions. All agricultural irrigation, stock watering or bank stabilization Hydraulic Project Approvals issued
pursuant to RCW 77.55.021 may be modified by the Department of Fish and Wildlife due to changed conditions after
consultation with the person(s)to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval is issued: PROVIDED HOWEVER, that such
modifications shall be subject to appeal to the Hydraulic Appeals Board established in RCW 77.55.301.
APPEALS INFORMATION
If you wish to appeal the issuance or denial of, or conditions provided in a Hydraulic Project Approval,there are
informal and formal appeal processes available.
Page 4 of 6
Washington HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL Coastal
Department of 48 Devonshire Road
FISH and RCW 77.55.021-Appeal pursuant to Chapter 34.05 Montesano,WA 98563
WILDLIFE (360)249-4628
Issue Date: May 12, 2008 Control Number: 111611-1
Project Expiration Date: February 14,2012 FPA/Public Notice#: N/A
A. INFORMAL APPEALS(WAC 220-110-340)OF DEPARTMENT ACTIONS TAKEN PURSUANT TO RCW 77.55.021,
77.55.141, 77.55.181, and 77.55.291: A person who is aggrieved or adversely affected by the following Department
actions may request an informal review of:
(A)The denial or issuance of a Hydraulic Project Approval, or the conditions or provisions made part of a Hydraulic
Project Approval; or
(B)An order imposing civil penalties. A request for an INFORMAL REVIEW shall be in WRITING to the Department
of Fish and Wildlife HPA Appeals Coordinator, 600 Capitol Way North,Olympia,Washington 98501-1091 and shall be
RECEIVED by the Department within 30 days of the denial or issuance of a Hydraulic Project Approval or receipt of an
order imposing civil penalties. If agreed to by the aggrieved party, and the aggrieved party is the Hydraulic Project
Approval applicant, resolution of the concerns will be facilitated through discussions with the Area Habitat Biologist and
his/her supervisor. If resolution is not reached, or the aggrieved party is not the Hydraulic Project Approval applicant,
the Habitat Technical Services Division Manager or his/her designee shall conduct a review and recommend a decision
to the Director or his/her designee. If you are not satisfied with the results of this informal appeal, a formal appeal may
be filed.
B. FORMAL APPEALS(WAC 220-110-350)OF DEPARTMENT ACTIONS TAKEN PURSUANT TO RCW 77.55.021
(EXCEPT agricultural irrigation, stock watering or bank stabilization projects)or 77.55.291:
A person who is aggrieved or adversely affected by the following Department actions may request a formal review of:
(A)The denial or issuance of a Hydraulic Project Approval, or the conditions or provisions made part of a Hydraulic
Project Approval;
(B)An order imposing civil penalties; or
(C)Any other'agency action'for which an adjudicative proceeding is required under the Administrative Procedure
Act, Chapter 34.05 RCW.
A request for a FORMAL APPEAL shall be in WRITING to the Department of Fish and Wildlife HPA Appeals
Coordinator, shall be plainly labeled as'REQUEST FOR FORMAL APPEAL'and shall be RECEIVED DURING
OFFICE HOURS by the Department at 600 Capitol Way North, Olympia,Washington 98501-1091, within 30-days of
the Department action that is being challenged. The time period for requesting a formal appeal is suspended during
consideration of a timely informal appeal. If there has been an informal appeal, the deadline for requesting a formal
appeal shall be within 30-days of the date of the Department's written decision in response to the informal appeal.
C. FORMAL APPEALS OF DEPARTMENT ACTIONS TAKEN PURSUANT TO RCW 77.55.021 (agricultural irrigation,
stock watering or bank stabilization only), 77.55.141, 77.55.181, or 77.55.241: A person who is aggrieved or adversely
affected by the denial or issuance of a Hydraulic Project Approval, or the conditions or provisions made part of a
Hydraulic Project Approval may request a formal appeal. The request for FORMAL APPEAL shall be in WRITING to
the Hydraulic Appeals Board per WAC 259-04 at Environmental Hearings Office,4224 Sixth Avenue SE, Building Two-
Rowe Six, Lacey, Washington 98504;telephone 360/459-6327.
D. FORMAL APPEALS OF DEPARTMENT ACTIONS TAKEN PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 43.21 L RCW: A person
who is aggrieved or adversely affected by the denial or issuance of a Hydraulic Project Approval, or the conditions or
provisions made part of a Hydraulic Project Approval may request a formal appeal. The FORMAL APPEAL shall be in
accordance with the provisions of Chapter 43.21 L RCW and Chapter 199-08 WAC. The request for FORMAL APPEAL
shall be in WRITING to the Environmental and Land Use Hearings Board at Environmental Hearings Office,
Environmental and Land Use Hearings Board, 4224 Sixth Avenue SE, Building Two-Rowe Six, P.O. Box 40903,
Lacey,Washington 98504; telephone 360/459-6327.
E. FAILURE TO APPEAL WITHIN THE REQUIRED TIME PERIODS results in forfeiture of all appeal rights. If there is
no timely request for an appeal, the department action shall be final and unappealable.
Page 5 of 6
• III
Washington HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL coastal
Department of 48 Devonshire Road
FISH and RCW 77.55.021-Appeal pursuant to Chapter 34.05 Montesano,WA 98563
WILDLIFE (360)249-4628
Issue Date: May 12, 2008 Control Number: 111611-1
Project Expiration Date: February 14, 2012 FPA/Public Notice#: N/A
ENFORCEMENT: Sergeant Makoviney (31) P2
Habitat Biologist
Qr for Director
Margie Schirato 360-427-2179 WDFW
CC: Grace Miller, Mason County DCD, P.O. Box 279, Shelton, WA 98584
Page 6 of 6
z Washington HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL coastal
Department of 48 Devonshire Road
FISH and RCW 77.55.021-Appeal pursuant to Chapter 34.05 Montesano,WA 98563
WILDLIFE (360)249-4628
Issue Date: May 12,2008 Control Number: 111611-1
Project Expiration Date: February 14, 2012 FPA/Public Notice#: N/A
ENFORCEMENT: Sergeant Makoviney (31) P2
Habitat Biologist for Director
Margie Schirato 360-427-2179 WDFW
CC: Grace Miller, Mason County DCD, P.O. Box 279, Shelton, WA 98584
Page 6 of 6
Port of Shelton
21 W. Sanderson Way•Shelton,WA 98584•Office:(360)426-1151 •Fax: (360)427-0231
www.portofshelton.com
[JUN 0 9 21008
June 6, 2008
MCCD - PLANNING
Mr. Phil Olbrechts
Mason County Hearing Examiner
Attn: Grace Miller, Planning Dept.
PO Box 279
Shelton WA 98584
RE: Shoreline Substantial Development/Conditional Use Permit
#SHR2008-00010 request by Alderbrook Resort and Spa
Dear Mr. Olbrechts:
The Port wants to go on record in support of Alderbrook's request for Shoreline
Substantial Development/Conditional Use permit #SHR2008-00010.
Alderbrook provides work for 125 employees and is a vital asset for Mason County's
tourism sector. The proposed project design and improvements should result in long-
term improvement to both Hood Canal water quality and intertidal habitat. As a fellow
marina owner/operator, the Port strongly commends these actions and supports the staff
recommendation for conditional approval of the proposal.
Sincerely,
Patti Miller-Crowley
Planning & Development Manager