HomeMy WebLinkAboutSHX2020-00001 DEMO Replace Shore Structures Biological Eval, Engineering - SHX Permit / Conditions - 11/18/2019 Table of Contents
1.0 Proposed Action.............................................................................. 3
1.1 Background ................................................................................... 3-4
1.2 Project Need and Objectives............................................................. 4
2.0 Project Description........................................................................... 4-5
2.1 Project Activities.............................................................................. 5-6
2.2 Timing.......................................................................................... 6
2.3 Conservation Measures.....................................................................1 6-7
2.4 Best Management Practices.................................................................. 7-9
3.0 Action Area..................................................................................... 9-10
4.0 ESA Species and Habitat Information..................................................... 10-11
4.1 ESA Listed Species.......................................................................... 12-14
5.0 Environmental Baseline Conditions....................................................... 15
5.1 Action Area................................................................................. 15-16
5.2 Proposed Project Area..................................................................... 16
6.0 Effects of the Action.......................................................................... 16
6.1 Direct Effects.................................................................................. 16-21
19
6.2 Temporary Direct Effects.................................................................. 20-
6.3 Primary Constituent Elements............. ............................................ 20-21
...
6.4 Direct Effects to ESA Listed Species...................................................... 21-22
6.5 Indirect Effects.................................................................................22-24
6.6 Primary Constituent Elements............................................................ 24-25
6.7 Direct Effects to ESA Listed Species.......................................................25
6.8 Interrelated/Interdependent Effects......................................................... 26
6.9 Primary Constituent Elements............................................................ ..26-27
6.91 Cumulative Effects............................................................................27
7.0 Conclusion......................................................................................27
7.1 Take Analysis.._........ ........... :...... _......_...._._... ..._.._._.._...._..._....,....._.27
7.2 Determination of Effect.......................................................................27-28
8.0 References.......................................................................................29-32
Attachments
1. Project location...................................................................................33
2. Site plan with existing and proposed development.......................................... 34
1 Cross section with proposed development...... .........___........... ......... 35
4. Site photograph................................................................................ 36
5. Site photograph................................................................................. 37
6. Site photograph....................:............................................................
38
7. Site photograph...................................................................................39
S. Site photograph................................................................................. 40
9. Site photograph. .....,. ................ ..., ..41
10. Essential fish habitat.... ... .................. ......................... 42-43
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 2
1.0 Proposed Action
This Biological Evaluation has been submitted on behalf of Jonathan and Shari Schwartz
at the request of the Seattle District United States Army Corps of Engineers to comply
with Endangered Species Act(ESA)regulations regarding shoreline development. The
proposed action on their Lake Cushman property is however, this latter project will not
be discussed in detail in this report.
Mitigation for the proposed project will include the removal of an existing five by sixty-
foot(5' x 60')walking pier that is associated with the bulkhead. The face of the
replacement bulkhead will move landward approximately(approx.) five feet. Overwater
structure coverage at the site will be reduced from 426 square feet (sf)to 292 sf for a total
reduction of 134 square feet. The replacement pier, ramp, and float will be grated (the
existing structures were ungrated), and untreated Alaska yellow cedar will replace
existing treated lumber shoreline structures. An existing mooring buoy will also be
removed.
1.1Background
The proposed project site is located in Mason County at 5901 North Lake Cushman
Road, Hoodsport Washington (Attachment 1). The Mason County tax parcel number is
42332-12-60032. The property is located in Section 32, Township 23N, Range 04 of the
Western Meridian. The latitude is 47.44579 north, and the longitude is -123.21446 west.
The proposed project site is on Lake Cushman in the Skokomish/Dosewallips Water
Resource Inventory Area 16 (WRIA 16) in Mason County. Lake Cushman is regulated
under the Mason County Shoreline Master Program and the Mason County Resource
Ordinance as a Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area. The Shoreline Management
Act of 1971 designated Lake Cushman as a Shoreline of Statewide Significance. In
addition,Lake Cushman is regulated by Tacoma Public Utilities (aka Tacoma Power),
which has designated Shoreline Management Classification(SMC) zones. The proposed
project site is located in an SMC zone classified as"A." Tacoma Power defines the"A"
management classification as shoreline areas with no known significant
environmental/cultural resources or associated resource management goals precluding
existing or future shoreline uses;this classification acknowledges existing private uses
and anticipates potential future private and light commercial shoreline uses (Kleinschmidt
2012).
The proposed project site is located in a rural neighborhood on a 1.4 acre lot with approx.
260 feet of shoreline, which supports a single-family residence located approx. fifty feet
(50')horizontally and forty feet(40')vertically from the shoreline of Lake Cushman.
Existing shoreline appurtenances (Attachments 4-7) include shoreline access stairs, an
approx. five by sixty-foot (5' x 60') bulkhead and associated walking pier(300 sf), a
wood pier(126 sf), and a mooring buoy.
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 3
1.2 Project Need and Objectives
The bluff toe at the site exhibits erosion damage that is common to the Lake Cushman
shoreline. There are three primary causes of erosion and concomitant shoreline instability
on Lake Cushman:
• The seasonal raising and lowering of Lake Cushman, a reservoir with two
functioning dams.
• The lake's unique landscape features, including a steep, unnatural lakebed
topography that lacks a shallow foreshore to diminish wave energy generated by
strong prevailing winds and approx. eight miles of fetch.
• A steep terrestrial shoreline that receives an average of approx. 100 inches of
rainfall per year.
The west side of Lake Cushman is also subjected to damaging surface flows due to clear
cut logging on the steep slopes above the shoreline. The applicant's property is located on
the east side of the lake and features heavily vegetated steep slopes. The site is also
directly exposed to over four miles of fetch from north winds. The exposed lakebed as
observed during the low water season (Attachments 8 & 9) is extremely steep. The toe of
the existing bulkhead has been exposed and bluff erosion has occurred landward of the
bulkhead and associated walking pier, along the bulkhead's north side.
Additionally,the applicants' existing pier is old and in need of replacement, as are the
existing shoreline access stairs. Therefore,the project objective is to install a replacement
bulkhead to protect the applicant's shoreline access and the existing residence, and a
replacement overwater structure that is safer, all-the-while avoiding or minimizing
impacts to ESA-listed species and improving shoreline habitat at the site.
2.0 Project Description
As per the engineered design by MET Engineering,PLLC (Attachments 2 & 3),the
existing sixty-foot wood bulkhead will be removed from the site and approx. seventy feet
(70')of post and plank wood bulkhead will be installed along the bluff toe at a lakebed
elevation of approx. 736 feet. The additional ten feet will not be linear but will consist of
two, five-foot(5')wing walls at each end that will be angled thirty (30) degrees into the
bluff slope for a total of approx. ten feet(10'). The proposed bulkhead will be a
maximum above grade height of six to eight feet (6' to 8'). The bulkhead will be backed
with geotextile fabric and native soil and rock. The bulkhead will be constructed of
fifteen (15) six by six inch(6"x 6")Alaska yellow cedar posts,three by twelve-foot(3' x
12')yellow cedar planks, and galvanized hardware.
The existing pier and walking piers associated with the bulkhead will be removed from
the site and replaced with a six by twenty-two-foot(6' x 22')pier, a three by ten-foot(3'
x 9')manufactured,grated aluminum ramp, and an eight by twenty-foot(8' x 20') float.
The pier will be supported by six (6) six by six inch (6"x 6") Alaska yellow cedar posts.
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 4
'2 r
The float will have four(4), 6"x 6" cedar posts. Two of the posts will be positioning
pilings and two will be used in conjunction with the positioning piles and lumber to
create a float cradle that will give the float a minimum of eighteen inches (18") of
lakebed clearance during the low water season. The ramp will be installed between the
pier and float to facilitate access.
The pier and float will be constructed of galvanized steel or aluminum hardware, and
Alaska yellow cedar posts,joists, decking, and trim.No pressure treated lumber will be
used in this project. The decking of the pier and float will have grating installed, a
minimum fifty percent total with 60 percent light passage as required by the Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). The grating will be provided by ThruFlow
decking panels,which are made of reinforced polypropylene, contain no toxic
preservatives, and are recyclable. The float will be fitted with polyethylene encapsulated
Styrofoam® float billets. The total overwater coverage at the site will be 292 sf, a
reduction of 134 sf from the existing 426 square feet.
Post pile holes will be approx. eighteen inches(18')wide and filled with concrete to a
maximum depth of four feet(4'). All concrete for the bulkhead,pier, and float will be
hand-mixed per engineered drawings and poured in place.
A circular saw and various hand tools will be used throughout the proposed project.
Workers, equipment, debris, and materials will be transported to the site either by boat or
by cars or trucks. Geo-textile fabric will be spread over the dry lakebed before
commencement of project construction in order to contain any manmade construction
debris. At the completion of construction,the geo-textile fabric will be removed from the
shoreline at the site, along with all construction debris and other existing manmade
debris. All debris will be disposed of at a licensed landfill or other licensed disposal site.
2.1 Project Activities
Demolition of the Bulkhead, Pier, and Walking Pier
The existing treated lumber bulkhead,pier, and walking pier will be disassembled and
removed from the site. Approximately twenty existing post piles and associated concrete
footings will be removed. The footings will be excavated using hand tools and the holes
refilled with the excavated lakebed sediments.
Excavation of the Post Pile Footings
Due to the difficulty of accessing the site with heavy machinery, it will be necessary to
manually excavate substrate material for the bulkhead, pier, and float post pile footings.
The footing holes will be approx. eighteen inches (18')wide and filled with concrete to a
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 5
maximum depth of four feet (4'). A small amount of excavated substrate material will be
stockpiled on the shoreline and later used to fill in any depressions. The remainder of the
excavated material will be used to back the replacement bulkhead or removed from the
lakebed at the site as per Tacoma Power's rules and regulations.
Pouring of the Post Pile Footings
Concrete for the bulkhead and pier and float post pile holes will be poured at the same
time.All concrete will be hand-mixed and poured in place. Before concrete is poured,the
yellow cedar posts will be positioned in the appropriate holes, and then the concrete will
be poured and allowed to cure.
Bulkhead, Pier, and Float Construction
The bulkhead,pier, float, and float cradle will be constructed of Alaska yellow cedar and
galvanized steel or stainless steel hardware. The pier and float will be grated with
ThruFlow decking panels, and the float will be fitted with polyethylene encapsulated
Styrofoam® float billets. The aluminum ramp will be installed between the pier and the
float using galvanized hardware.
2.2 Timing
Work will be completed over an approx. sixty(60) day period during daylight working
hours normal to a rural neighborhood. Work will only take place when the water level of
Lake Cushman is low, which is generally between October and April.
2.3 Conservation Measures
l. No construction to occur unless Lake Cushman's waters are lowered and the
shoreline work area is dry.
2. No pile driving to occur.
3. The face of the replacement bulkhead will move landward approximately
(approx.) five feet.
4. No pressure treated or other treated lumber will be used in the construction of
the bulkhead or pier, ramp, and float.
5. Overwater coverage at the site to be reduced by 134 square feet.
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 6
1
6. The decking of the pier, ramp, and float will have grating installed, a
minimum fifty percent total with 60 percent light passage as required by the
WDFW.
7. An existing mooring buoy will be removed.
8. Construction to take place as per the HPA provisions from the Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife.
9. Previously discussed BMPs to be strictly adhered to.
2.4 Best Management Practices
In order to maintain the present water quality of Lake Cushman during project
construction, Best Management Practices (BMPs)will be implemented. BMPs are
defined as physical, structural, and/or managerial practices that prevent or reduce the
pollution of water(WDOE). The following source control BMPs, which are detailed in
the W DOE's Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington, Volume H
Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention (2012),will be implemented for long-term
protection of Water quality at the site:
BMP C101: Preserving Natural Vegetation
Wherever practical, native vegetation shall be preserved to reduce erosion.Natural
vegetation should be preserved on steep slopes, near perennial and intermittent
watercourses or swales, and on building sites in wooded areas.
BMP C154: Concrete Washout Area
Purpose. Prevent or reduce the discharge of pollutants to stormwater from concrete waste
by conducting washout off-site, or performing on-site washout in a designated area to
prevent pollutants from entering surface waters or ground water.
Conditions of Use: Concrete washout area best management practices are implemented
on construction projects where:
*Concrete is used as a construction material.
•It is not possible to dispose of all concrete wastewater and washout off-site (ready
mix plant, etc.).
*Concrete trucks,pumpers, or other concrete coated equipment are washed on-site.
•Note: If less than 10 concrete trucks or pumpers need to be washed out on-site,the
wash water may be disposed of in a formed area awaiting concrete or an upland
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 7
disposal site where it will not contaminate surface or ground water. The upland
disposal site shall be at least 50 feet from sensitive areas such as storm drains,
open ditches, or water bodies, including wetlands.
•A temporary washout facility shall be constructed on-site or the concrete truck will be
washed out off-site.
When temporary concrete washout facilities are no longer required for the work,the
hardened concrete, slurries and liquids shall be removed and properly disposed of.
•Materials used to construct temporary concrete washout facilities shall be removed from
the site of the work and disposed of or recycled.
BMP C151: Concrete Handling
Purpose: Concrete work can generate process water and slurry that contain fine particles
and high pH, both of which can violate water quality standards in the receiving water.
Concrete spillage or concrete discharge to surface waters of the State is prohibited. Use
this BMP to minimize and eliminate concrete, concrete process water, and concrete slurry
from entering waters of the state.
Conditions of Use:Any time concrete is used, utilize these management practices.
•Wash out concrete truck chutes,pumps, and internals into formed areas only. Assure
that washout of concrete trucks is performed offsite or in designated concrete
washout areas. DO not wash out concrete trucks onto the ground, or into storm
drains, open ditches, streets, or streams.
•Return unused concrete remaining in the truck and pump to the originating batch
plant for recycling. Do not dump excess concrete on site, except in designated
concrete washout areas.
eWash off hand tools including, but not limited to, screeds, shovels, rakes, floats, and
trowels into formed areas only.
*Wash equipment difficult to move in areas that do not directly drain to natural or
constructed stormwater conveyances.
•Do not allow washdown from areas, such as concrete aggregate driveways, to drain
directly to natural or constructed stormwater conveyances (or Puget Sound).
•Contain washwater and leftover product in a lined container when no formed areas
are available. Dispose of contained concrete in a manner that does not violate
ground water or surface water quality standards.
•Always use forms or solid barriers for concrete pours, such a pilings, within 15-feet
of surface waters.
BMP C233: Silt Fence
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 8
Silt fence shall be used downslope of all disturbed areas. Silt fence shall prevent soil
carried by runoff water from going beneath,through, or over the top of the silt fence but
shall allow the water to pass through the fence.
The following additional BMP shall be used to insure that water quality is not
degraded during and after construction:
1. Equipment will be cleaned and checked for leaks, offsite and daily, before
commencing work.
In addition,the following Spill Prevention Control measures will also be followed: 1)the
applicant will supply the site with a portable bathroom or allow workers access to an
onsite bathroom so that solid or liquid waste will not become a source of stormwater
pollution. 2) The applicant will be responsible for alerting the appropriate authorities in
the event of a hazardous spill. 3) The applicant will have a spill kit and be able to
perform basic control, containment, and/or confinement operations within the capabilities
of the resources and personnel protective equipment available. In other words, minor
spills, such as paint or oil, will be promptly and fully collected and disposed of at a
suitable disposal site. In the event of a spill, a fish kill, and/or if fish are observed in
distress the Washington State Department of Ecology(800.258.5990) and the
Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife's Area Habitat Biologist, Darrin
Masters(360.764.9942), will be notified immediately.
3.0 Action Area
The action area is located on the shoreline of Lake Cushman at the proposed project site.
Besides the proposed project location,the action area includes the surrounding area
within a designated distance from the site in order to account for construction impacts
that may affect species listed under the Endangered Species Act by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service as either endangered or
threatened. The limits of the action area are based upon the geographic extent(in both
aquatic and terrestrial environments) of the physical, chemical, and biological effects
resulting from the proposed action, 'including direct and indirect effects, as well as effects
of interrelated and interdependent activities(WSDOT 2010). Turbidity and noise are
expected to be the most detrimental project effects. Because work will occur when Lake
Cushman is lowered,project turbidity is expected to be no greater than turbidity that is
common to the area during heavy rains, when various ephemeral and perennial streams
and the north fork of the Skokomish River discharge sediment laden water into Lake
Cushman. It is probable that the project's distance from the lake's lowered shoreline will
be great enough that disturbed sediments will disperse gradually (via precipitation) over
the exposed lakebed without ever reaching water until the lake is raised. Additionally,the
excavation required to remove existing and install replacement pilings is expected to be
minimal. Therefore, terrestrial noise is expected to be the most far-reaching effect from
the proposed project.
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 9
The action area for terrestrial noise effects is based upon an ambient sound level of 40
dBA for an area with a population of less than 100 people per mile(WSDOT 2010). In
addition, the Olympic National Forest programmatic biological assessment uses an
estimated ambient level of 40 dBA for undisturbed forested areas (USDI 2003). Noise
frequency and levels for the installation of the replacement bulkhead and overwater
structures and the demolition of the existing structures is expected to be short term and
moderate, as the contractor will be using hand tools such as a skill saw. The sawing of the
lumber is expected to produce the proposed project's maximum noise level. The noise
level of a circular saw at fifty feet was determined as follows: The noise level at 50 feet
from a chain saw is 84 dBA(WSDOT 201.4). The noise level of a chain saw at three feet
is 110 dBA,while a circular saw is 100 dBA. Assuming that a chain saw is between
approx. five and ten percent noisier than a circular saw, the noise level of a circular saw
at fifty feet was assigned. 79 dBA.
To determine the distance that the proposed project's maximum point source construction
noise will travel before it attenuates to the ambient sound level; the following Practical
Spreading Loss Model equation was used:
D =Do * 10((Construction Noise Ambient Sound Level in dBA)/a) Where D=the
distance from the noise &Do =the reference measurement distance of 50'.
Average construction noise from the proposed project will travel approx. 3,970 feet over
hard site conditions (Lake Cushman)and 1,656 feet over soft site conditions (forested
areas) before it (the noise) attenuates to the ambient sound level. Therefore,the extent of
the action area is 3,970 feet or 0.75 mi. over the lake's surface and 1,656 feet or 0.31 mi.
inland from the proposed project site and adjacent shorelines.
In addition,the action area includes one fish bearing stream approx. 0.2 mi. to the south
and four unnamed ephemeral streams located approx. 0.3 and 0.7 mi. north and 0.6 and
0.7 mi. south of the project site. There are no streams adjacent to the project work area.
4.0 ESA Species and Habitat Information
In the proposed project area,there are five species listed under the Endangered Species
Act by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as either threatened or endangered.
The bull trout(Salvelinus confluentus), marbled murrelet(Brachyramphus marmoratus),
northern spotted owl(Stridex occidentalis), streaked horned lark(Eremophila alpestris
strigata), and yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus)are listed as threatened and
critical habitat has been designated for the former four species. The project area is located
on Lake Cushman, which has been designated critical habitat for the bull trout. Two other
species in the project area are listed as proposed.The fisher(Martes pennanti) is listed as
proposed threatened; and the Dolly Varden (Salvelinus malma)'is listed as proposed
under the ESA "similarity of appearance"provision.
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 10
I
In the proposed project area, there is one species listed under the Endangered Species Act
by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) as either threatened, endangered, or a
candidate species. The Puget Sound Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) is
listed as threatened and critical habitat has been designated. Lake Cushman is a historical
watershed of the Chinook that has been anthropogenically blocked;however, it has been
designated critical habitat.
The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) GIS maps reveal the
documented presence of two other species of salmonids on the State's Priority Habitat
and Species list within the action area: Kokanee (Oncorhynchus nerka) and the Puget
Sound/Coastal cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki clarki). The presence of these two
species has been documented in Lake Cushman. WDFW data reveals that Lake Cushman
was stocked with 23,896 cutthroat trout in 2005 and 205,800 Kokanee (landlocked
sockeye salmon) in 2004. A WDFW biologist reported that other species that inhabit the
lake include rainbow trout(Oncorhynchus mykiss) and non-native largemouth bass
(Micropterus salmoides).
Additionally, Tacoma Power is presently working in association with the Skokomish
Tribe and the WDFW to reestablish migrating salmonid runs in the North fork of the
Skokomish River. The North Fork Skokomish Powerhouse and Fish Facility has recently
been completed. This facility collects adult fish at the base of Cushman Dam No. 2 and
transports them to the top of the dam for sorting. It also provides sorting facilities for
juvenile fish and transports them to the base of the dam for release into the river. The fry
are released in Lake Cushman, and smolts are collected and released into the lower North
Fork Skokomish River. Two new hatcheries were also recently constructed, one on the
Hood Canal at Potlatch for sockeye,the other on Lake Kokanee for Chinook, coho, and
steelhead.
The former, Saltwater Park Sockeye Hatchery, on Hood Canal, is dedicated specifically
to sockeye rearing. More than 200,000 sockeye fry were released into Lake Cushman in
2017. Smolts are collected via the floating juvenile fish collector and released into the
lower North Fork Skokomish River,while returning adult sockeye will eventually be
collected at the base of Cushman Dam No. 2. (Tacoma Power 2019). More than 500,000
sockeye are on station at the hatchery in 2018 (Tacoma Power 2019). The latter,the
North Fork Skokomish Salmon Hatchery, located next to Lake Kokanee, is dedicated to
rearing spring Chinook, winter-run steelhead and coho salmon. Tacoma Power is
incubating more than 500,000 of the three species combined in early 2018 (Tacoma
Power 2019).
4.1 ESA Listed Species
BULL TROUT
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 11
Bull trout are members of the char subgroup of the salmon family and are native to the
Pacific Northwest and western Canada. Water temperature above 15 degrees Celsius is
believed to limit bull trout distribution, as eggs and juveniles require extremely cold
water for survival. Bull trout are also vulnerable to degraded stream habitat,poor water
quality, dams and other stream blocking structures, and predation by non-native fish.
Typically,juvenile bull trout emigrate from tributaries to large lakes or reservoirs
between the ages of one to six in British Columbia, Idaho,and Montana(Fraley and
Shepard 1989; Goetz 1989; Pratt 1992). However, unlike some reservoir and river
systems containing lacustrine-adfluvial populations, spawning areas in the North Fork of
the Skokomish River are close to the reservoir(Brenkman 1998). The close proximity of
the spawning areas to the reservoir and the lack of juvenile rearing habitat in intermittent
and high gradient tributaries may result in immediate emigration from the river to the
reservoir(Brenkman 1998). Local fishermen questioned by the author have reported
frequently catching (and releasing) large(in excess of twenty pounds)bull trout in Lake
Cushman.
Critical habitat includes Lake Cushman and the upper North Fork of the Skokomish
River(70 FR 56304). Critical Habitat in the former includes spawning and rearing
habitat, while the latter provides rearing, foraging, and migration habitat, so it is expected
that bull trout may be found in the action area of the proposed project site.
MARBLED MURRELET
A small, diving seabird in the family Alcidae,the marbled murrelet forages for small fish
and invertebrates almost exclusively in nearshore marine waters, while nesting inland in
old-growth or mature conifer forests. Threats include loss of habitat,predation, gill-net
fishing operations, oil spills,marine pollution, and disease. The USFWS assembled a
team of scientists in October 2011 to investigate causes for the continued decline in
murrelet populations. The outcome of these discussions listed many factors, chiefly loss
of potential nesting habitat as the main reason for hindrance of population recovery goals
(WDFW 2012).
Potential nest trees are coniferous trees within 55 mi (88.5 km)of marine-waters that
support at least one 4-inch(10.2-cm) diameter platform located at least 33 feet(10
meters) above the ground, with horizontal and vertical cover(USFWS 2012). If a tree or
forested area does not support these habitat features, it is"extremely unlikely"to support
a murrelet nest(USFWS 2012).Nest success is influenced by forest structure,the spatial
mix of habitat and non-habitat, human disturbance,prey availability, and marine foraging
conditions. Human disturbance can lead to higher predation levels by Steller's and gray
jays, crows,ravens, and other species that seek human-related foods and refuse at high-
use recreational areas (Peery et al. 2004, Marzluff and Neatherlin 2006).
Critical habitat for the marbled murrelet was designated in May of 1996 and revised in
October of 2011, but it is not located within the proposed project's action area. In
addition,the proposed project will not result in excessive noise or the loss of any trees or
other vegetation, and water quality at the site will be minimally impacted.
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 12
NORTHERN SPOTTED OWL
The Northern Spotted Owl is one of the largest owls in North America, and the average
adult female is approx. 18 inches tall with a 48-inch wingspan.Northern spotted owls are
strictly nocturnal, and require old-growth forests with multi-layered canopies of trees,
including large trees with broken tops, deformed limbs, and large holes and cavities to
nest in. The Northern spotted owl is very territorial and intolerant of habitat disturbance,
and a pair requires a large amount of forest for hunting and nesting. Habitat loss has
occurred as a result of forest conversion,timber harvest, fire,windthrow, insect outbreak
and disease (WDFW 2012).
The USFWS designated revised critical habitat for the northern spotted owl under the
Endangered Species Act. In total, approx. 9,577,969 acres (ac) (3,876,064 hectares (ha))
in 11 units and 60 subunits in California, Oregon, and Washington fall within the
boundaries of the 2 critical habitat designations. The action area does not include
designated critical habitat for the Northern spotted owl. In addition, due to the close
proximity of human habitation, it is unlikely that any Northern spotted owls may be
found in the action area. Also, the proposed project will not result in the loss of any trees
or shrubs.
STREAKED HORNED LARK
Horned larks are birds that utilize wide open spaces with no trees and few or no shrubs.
The streaked horned lark nests on the ground in sparsely vegetated sites dominated by
grasses and shrubs. Historically this type of habitat was found in prairies in western
Oregon and Washington, in dune habitats along the coast of Washington, on the sandy
beaches and spits along the Columbia and Willamette Rivers, and in grasslands, estuaries,
and sandy beaches in British Columbia(WDFW 2012). Today the streaked horned lark
nests in a broad range of habitats, including native prairies, coastal dunes, fallow and
active agricultural fields, wetland mudflats, sparsely-vegetated edges of grass fields,
recently planted Christmas tree farms with extensive bare ground, moderately-to heavily-
grazed pastures, gravel roads or gravel shoulders of lightly-traveled roads, airports, and
dredge deposition sites in the lower Columbia River(WDFW 2012).
It is expected that the action area contains unsuitable habitat for the streaked horned lark.
YELLOW-BILLED CUCKOO
The yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) is a neotropical migrant bird that
winters in South America and breeds in western North America. The yellow-billed
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 13
cuckoo is insectivorous and lives in riparian woodlands (USFWS 2014). Reports of
individual cuckoos have been very rare in recent decades,with only three known reports
since 2000, these being near Lind(Adams Co.) in 2001,near Eureka(Walla Walla Co.)
in June 2007, and from Little Pend Oreille National Wildlife Refuge (Stevens Co.) in
June 2012. Habitat loss and pesticide use are thought to be two of the main causes for the
precipitous decline of western yellow-billed cuckoos. Agriculture, grazing, reservoir
construction, flood control, urbanization, and other factors across the West have caused
the large-scale loss and degradation of lowland riparian forest, which is the cuckoo's
primary habitat.
It is expected that the action area contains unsuitable habitat for the yellow-billed cuckoo.
CHINOOK SALMON
Chinook salmon in Lake Cushman are a land-locked population that originated from
anadromous fish, although loss of genetic variation makes it difficult to determine
whether they are descended from historical Hood Canal populations or introduced
hatchery fish(NOAA 2006). Lake Cushman Chinook are genetically different, smaller in
size (and presumably less fecund)than their anadromous counterparts(Myers et al.
1998). On Jan. 12,2009,Tacoma Power,the Skokomish Tribal Nation and state and federal
agencies signed a settlement agreement that resolved a$5.8 billion damages claim and
long-standing disputes over the terms of a long-term license for Cushman Hydroelectric
Project. Tacoma Power has proposed to introduce sockeye and spring Chinook and
enhance the existing winter steelhead and coho populations in the North Fork in
cooperation with the WDFW and the Skokomish Tribe (Tacoma Public Utilities 2014). In
addition, Tacoma Power will annually release up to 1.00,000 rainbow trout for sport
harvest(TPU 2014).
Lake Cushman has been designated Critical habitat, and the site provides rearing,
foraging, and migration habitat, so it is expected that adult and/or juvenile Chinook
salmon may be found in the action area.
5.0 Environmental Baseline Conditions
5.1 Action Area
The environmental baseline represents the existing set of conditions, to which the effects
of the proposed action are then added. The environmental baseline is defined as "the past
and present impacts of all Federal, state, and private actions and other human activities in
the action area,the anticipated impacts of all proposed Federal projects in the action area
that have already undergone formal or informal section 7 consultation, and the impact of
state or private actions which are contemporaneous with the consultation process" (50
CFR 402.02).
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 14
The proposed project site is in WRIA 16 (Water Resource Inventory Area), on Lake
Cushman in Mason County. The majority of the fresh and marine waterbodies in WRIA
16 suffer from water quality issues;however Lake Cushman is not listed on the state's
2012 Water Quality 303(d) list of impaired waterbodies for any parameters. Two
waterbodies in the Skokomish watershed,the South Fork of the Skokomish River and
Lebar Creek are listed for the parameter of temperature (high). The current
Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) approved Water Quality Assessment data for
Washington State reveals that tissue samples from fish(various species, including
salmonids) collected in Lake Cushman were tested for twenty (20)pesticides and other
pollutants, including mercury, PCBs, DDT, Toxaphene, Lindane, Dieldrin, and
Hexachlorobenzene. The twenty tested parameters (all)met the FTEC (fish tissue
equivalent concentration) and received Category 1 water quality listings. The FTEC is the
concentration of a contaminant in fish tissue that Washington equates to the National
Toxics Rule water quality criterion for the protection of human health (WDOE 2016).
Fish tissue data from the most recent year showed that the FTEC was met; therefore the
Assessment Unit meets the requirements fora Category 1 determination (WDOE 2016).
The water quality criterion for a Category 1 water quality listing is defined by the
Washington Department of Ecology(WDOE), as:
Meets tested standards for clean waters:placement in this category does not necessarily
mean that a water body is free of all pollutants. Most water quality monitoring is
designed to detect a specific array of pollutants, so placement in this category means that
the water body met standards for all the pollutants for which it was tested.
The proposed project site is located on the west side of Lake Cushman in an extremely
rural neighborhood on a lot with 260 feet of shoreline frontage.Neighboring parcels
support recreational cabins,piers, floats, and bulkheaded shoreline. Forested land in the
vicinity of Lake Cushman has been logged heavily. Erosion impacts from surface flows
have been particularly damaging in the logged areas above the lake's west shore.
Before the completion of two dams in 1926 and 1930, Lake Cushman was a natural
oligotrophic lake with a mean depth of 200 feet.Now Lake Cushman is 4,010-acre water
body in the Olympic National Forest,having been altered in size to accommodate the
hydroelectric dams. Because of the dams, water levels in Lake Cushman can fluctuate up
to 21 meters (69 feet),with peak levels occurring during summer and minimum levels
during winter. The magnitude of these fluctuations results in periodic inundation of 1.2
hectares (30 acres) of land surrounding the inlet to the reservoir, resulting in high water
temperatures in the shallow waters of the inlet during the summer months (Brenkman
1998). Currently, the reservoir inundates 17.2 kilometers (10.7 miles) of river, including
areas of the original Lake Cushman (Brenkman 1998).
5.2 Proposed Project Area
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 15
A field investigation was conducted in January of 2020, and the project area was
surveyed visually on foot. The elevation of the lake's water level was approx. 715 feet,
which is twenty-three feet lower than the current ordinary high water mark of 738 feet.
The 1.4 acre site supports a residential structure located approx. 40 feet vertically and 50
feet horizontally from the shoreline of Lake Cushman. The lot slopes steeply to the
shoreline and is heavily vegetated with native species, including large trees and shrubs.
The shoreline was accessed via existing shoreline access stairs from the residence.
Existing over water structures include a wood bulkhead and associated walking ramp and
a wood pier.
The lakebed at the site is steep and consists primarily of rock, cobble, and dirt. A
significant number of exposed tree stumps were observed on the exposed lakebed.No
fish, invertebrates, or macroalgae were observed in Lake Cushman at the site.
6.0 Effects of the Action
6.1 Direct Effects
Direct effects are the immediate effects of the project on the listed species and their
habitats (FWS &NMFS 1998). The direct effect to the project site will be the
construction of a replacement bulkhead and overwater structure in an area that is Critical
Habitat for two previously discussed salmonid species. Direct effects to the shoreline
along the Hood Canal include the following:
*Loss of benthic habitat from the installation of the bulkhead, and pier and float post
piles
•Shading impacts from the pier, ramp, and float
•Migratory impacts from the pier,ramp, and float
•Removal of pressure treated lumber
Loss of benthic habitat from the installation of the bulkhead, and pier and
float post piles
As per the engineered design by MET Engineering, PLLC,the existing sixty-foot wood
bulkhead and associated walking pier will be removed from the site and approx. seventy
feet(70') of post and plank wood bulkhead will be installed along the bluff toe at a
lakebed elevation of approx. 736 feet. The bulkhead will occupy an elevation that is
waterward of the lake's OHWM of 738; therefore, it will displace approx. 70 sf of
benthic habitat. Additionally,the proposed replacement pier and float will result in the
installation of ten posts piles. The area of the posts (approx.0.25 sf for each post,totaling
2.5 sf)will initially constitute the only lost surface area, as the concrete bases for each
post piling will be covered by the lake's (bottom) substrate. However, it is expected that
erosion will eventually expose the footings,which will occupy approx.2.25 sf each,
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 16
totaling 22.5 square feet. Therefore, the project will occupy a total of approx. 92.5 sf of
benthic habitat. Since the existing bulkhead and associated walking pier occupy approx.
300 sf of benthic habitat, the project would seem to result in a gain of 207.5 sf, although
it is probable that small or juvenile fish and invertebrates utilize the lakebed habitat
beneath the walking pier but to what degree is unknown. What is known is that bulkheads
placed further landward result in fewer detrimental impacts to the aquatic environment.
The replacement bulkhead will be installed approx. five feet landward of the existing.
Due to the seasonal fluctuations of the lake's water level, it is probable that benthic
species do not thrive in the nearshore areas of the lake that lack permanent water.No
empirical evidence was found to document if both terrestrial and aquatic species utilize
the upper shoreline habitat, or if it has been too altered to support normal concentrations
of either species.
Shading impacts from thepier, ramp, and float
Another direct effect is the creation of shade from the replacement pier, ramp, and float.
The overwater structures at the site produce a reduction in light to the underlying aquatic
environment by creating a light/dark boundary that may give piscivorous species an
advantage over their prey. The use of over-water structures in western Washington waters
by bass, a common,non-native predator of juvenile salmonids, has been documented by
several authors. Largemouth bass in Lake Washington prefer areas of heavy log and
brush cover over other habitat types;however, they are commonly found under docks in
early spring and are thought to be present until late summer(Stein 1970). Substrate type
typically determines the acceptability of an area for bass spawning, but adjacent cover
and structural complexity are also necessary for protection while the fish are concentrated
in shallow water(Stein 1970; Cooper and Crowder 1979; Helfman 1981b; Pflug and
Pauley 1984). Largemouth bass prefer moderate to dense vegetation and silt or sand
substrate, and nests are constructed at depths from 0.6 to 1.5 meters, in vegetated areas
with soft sediment or gravel substrate on moderate to steep slopes (Pflug 1981). The
substrate type at the proposed project site is primarily cobble,rock, and dirt. The lakebed
supports no macrophytic vegetation, and has no potential to support macrophyte
vegetation, due to the lake's (anthropogenic) seasonal water fluctuations; so it is doubtful
that the proposed overwater structure replacement will increase the concentration of bass
at the site or the occurrence of juvenile salmonid predation by bass. In addition, White
(1975) determined that phytoplankton primary production is not significantly reduced by
narrow residential piers, due to the presence of more optimal light conditions than found
in surface waters,where light intensities are higher than those in which algae thrive..
Data suggests that other fish species, including salmonids, are also attracted to the shade
produced by over-water structures, so it is possible that adult salmonids could prey on
juveniles at the site.However, researchers have indicated that structural complexity can
moderate predator-prey interactions by providing more refuges for prey species as well as
reducing the foraging efficiency of the predator(Cooper and Crowder 1979). This
moderation may apply to naturally occurring structural habitat complexity, as well as
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 17
habitat complexity due to the presence of docks, piers, boathouses and associated pilings
(WDFW, WDOE, WSDOT 2001).
Shade can also affect migrating salmonids. It is not known whether over-water structures
disrupt the migration of salmonids in lakes.Numerous studies suggest that docks, piers,
and floats attract fish, and that the attraction of fish is linked to shade produced by the
object not tactile stimulus. While the effects of shade on migrating juvenile salmonids in.
lakes is unknown, it is also unclear in marine waters, and there is no empirical evidence
of mortality. The significance of predation to migrating populations has never been
empirically assessed(Simenstad et al. 1999).No studies have examined mortality due to
predation much less that mortality is attributable to overwater structures (Nightingale&
Simenstad 2001).
As previously noted,the proposed project will result in a 134 sf reduction of overwater
structure coverage at the site. Additionally, the replacement overwater structures will be
grated to allow 60 percent light passage, as the existing pier and bulkhead walking pier .
are presently ungrated. In conclusion, shade created by the proposed project is expected
to have discountable and insignificant direct effects on ESA listed salmonids that may be
in the action area.
Migratory impacts from the pier, ramp, and float
It is generally accepted that overwater structures can alter migration behavior of juvenile
salmon and reduce salmon prey resources and habitat by shading aquatic vegetation. For
example, a 2010 study by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service revealed that
juvenile Chinook swam around or under the deep end of a Lake Washington pier before
resuming their migration along the shoreline(Celedonia and Tabor 2010). The
significance of these effects, however, is debatable as studies have not documented
negative impacts on salmonids. Simenstad et al. (1999) reported that the significance of
predation to migrating populations has never been empirically assessed.No studies have
examined mortality due to predation much less that mortality is attributable to overwater
structures.
Additionally, large fallen conifers, lying partially or mostly submerged, perpendicularly
or angled along the shoreline are a common habitat feature on area lakes with heavily
forested, undeveloped shorelines. It is expected that these trees impact migrating fish, but
whether that impact is beneficial or detrimental appears to be unknown. On Lake
Cushman's shoreline, large fallen conifers are a nonexistent habitat feature. Because the
lake is a reservoir, large woody debris is removed by Tacoma Power. While an overwater
structure is manmade and not a tree,they both create structural habitat and a potential
obstacle for fish migrating along the shoreline.
Removal of pressure treated lumber
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 18
The leaching of wood preservatives is a common contaminant-related issue with the
construction of shoreline appurtenances. ACZA pressure treated wood,which is more
prevalent on the west coast because it effectively treats Douglas fir, contains copper, zinc,
chromium, and arsenic. The main active ingredient of concern for effects to fish is
copper. Environmentally realistic concentrations of free copper are noted to impact the
resistance of fishes to disease, cause hyperactivity, impair respiration, disrupt
osmoregulation or impair olfactory performance(NOAA 2009).
The existing pressure-treated bulkhead,walking pier, and pier will be replaced by
structures constructed with untreated Alaska yellow cedar.
6.2 Temporary Direct Effects
Temporary direct effects caused by the proposed project include:
•Turbidity and sedimentation in Lake Cushman
•Noise
*Water pollution from incidental release of fuel, oil, or other contaminants
Increased turbidity in Lake Cushman
Disturbed substrate from the removal of existing post pilings and the installation of new
ones may result in increased turbidity and sedimentation. As previously discussed, BMPs
will be strictly adhered to during construction in order to maintain the present water
quality of Lake Cushman and prevent runoff and pollution. In addition,the proposed
project will take place when the water level in the lake is much lower than the OHWM
(738'), so it is probable that rainfall will slowly disperse any disturbed substrate before it
comes into direct contact with the lake's waters. Therefore, it is expected that turbidity
and sedimentation will be minimal.
Noise
The main source of construction noise will be from the sawing of lumber. Noise will be
intermittent and is expected to be a maximum of 79 dBA at 50 feet.No pile driving will
occur and no in-water work will occur. Therefore, underwater noise will not be a factor.
Potential water pollution
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 19
Potential water pollution from accidental release of fuel, oil, or other contaminants is
another possible temporary direct effect. As previously discussed, Spill Prevention
Control measures and BMPs shall be implemented during the proposed project.
6.3 Primary Constituent Elements
PRIMARY CONSTITUENT ELEMENTS
In order to properly analyze the effects on designated critical habitat, a logical framework
must be utilized. In determining what areas constitute critical habitat, agency regulations
require the NMFS to focus on the principal biological or physical constituent elements
that are essential to the conservation of the species. The regulations identify Primary
Constituent elements (PCEs) as including, but not limited to: "roost sites, nesting
grounds, spawning sites, feeding sites, seasonal wetland or dryland,water quality or
quantity, host species or plant pollinator, geological formation,vegetation type,tide, and
specific soil types (69 FR 71888)." In 2003 NMFS biologists developed a list of PCEs
specific to salmon, based on a decision matrix(NMFS, 1996)that describes general
parameters and characteristics of most of the essential features under consideration when
critical habitat is designated. There are six specific types of sites essential to support one
or more life stages of an ESU (sites for spawning, rearing, migration, and foraging). Each
site names physical or biological features (PCEs) essential to the conservation of
salmonids. In 2010, USFWS biologists developed a list of PCEs specific to bull trout,
based on a decision matrix(NMFS, 1996)that describes general parameters and
characteristics of most of the essential features under consideration when critical habitat
is designated. Lakes and reservoirs figure prominently in meeting the life-cycle
requirements of adfluvial bull trout. Lake Cushman is designated critical habitat for the
bull trout and the Chinook salmon; therefore,the direct effects on the designated critical
habitat of bull trout and Chinook salmon have been analyzed using the appropriate PCEs
for the nearshore lacustrine environment.
BULL TROUT PCEs:
Water temperatures that support bull trout use. Bull trout have been documented in
streams with temperatures from 32 to 72 degrees F but are found more frequently in
temperatures ranging from 36 to 59 degrees F---the project will have no direct effect on
water temperatures that support bull trout use.
Migratory corridors with minimal physical, biological, or water quality impediments
between spawning, rearing, overwintering, and foraging habitats, including
intermittent or seasonal barriers induced by high water temperatures or low flows—
the prcject's grating of the replacement overwater structure may have a beneficial direct
effect on migratory corridors that support bull trout use when shoreline water
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 20
temperatures do not exceed the bull trout's upper limit. From June through September,
when most bull trout inhabit the reservoir, Lake Cushman is thermally stratified
(Brenkman 1998). As this coincides with the lake's high water season when the
overwater structure is typically exposed to water, it is possible that shoreline waters will
be too warm for bull trout. Also,passage will not be altered during construction as no
construction will occur unless the waters of Lake Cushman are low.
An abundant food base including terrestrial organisms of riparian origin, and aquatic
macroinvertebrates—the bulkhead will move landward, which is expected to increase
feeding opportunities for juvenile bull trout provided shoreline water temperatures do not
exceed the bull trout's upper limit.
Permanent water of sufficient quantity and quality such that normal reproduction,
growth, and survival are not inhibited--the project is expected to have a minimal direct
effect on water quality. Project construction is unlikely to cause temporary turbidity or
sedimentation as work will occur when the Jake's waters have been lowered. BMPs are
expected to prevent or moderate potential water pollution during construction. In
addition,pressure treated lumber will be replaced by untreated yellow cedar.
CHINOOK SALMON PCEs:
Unobstructed passages--passage will not be altered during construction as no
construction will occur unless the waters of Lake Cushman are low. The project's grating
of the replacement PRF may have a beneficial direct effect on Chinook passage along the
shoreline.
Water Quality—project construction is unlikely to cause temporary turbidity or
sedimentation. BMPs are expected to prevent or moderate potential water pollution
during construction. In addition,no pressure treated lumber will be used.
Water Quantity—the project will have no effect on water quantity.
Forage—the bulkhead will move landward,which is expected to increase feeding
opportunities for juvenile Chinook.
Natural Cover—the project will not impact existing large woody debris or native rock
and cobble on the lakebed.
6.4 Direct Effects to ESA Listed Species
The direct effect from the proposed project to other ESA listed species that are likely to
be found in the action area have been analyzed as follows:
NORTHERN SPOTTED OWL
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 21
Due to the close proximity of forest land, it is possible that Northern spotted owls may be
found in the action area of the proposed project site. However, with the extensive acreage
of undeveloped forest land nearby, it seems unlikely that Northern spotted owls will be
nesting, roosting,or foraging in close proximity to anthropogenic development.
MARBLED MURRELET
The primary threats to marbled murrelet from anthropogenic activities include loss of
nesting habitat, gill-net fishing operations, oil spills, and marine pollution. Previously
noted BMPs and Spill Prevention Control Measures will be adhered to during project
construction to protect the water quality of Lake Cushman.Noise impacts to any nesting
or foraging murrelets in the action area are expected to be negligible. With the extensive
acreage of undeveloped forest land nearby, it seems unlikely that marbled murrelet will
be nesting, roosting, or foraging in close proximity to anthropogenic development.
6.5 Indirect Effects
Indirect effects are those effects that are caused by or will result from the proposed action
and are later in time, but are still reasonably certain to occur(50 CFR 402.02). Possible
indirect effects from the proposed project include:
•The loss of shoreline aquatic vegetation
*The replacement bulkhead exacerbates passive erosion and impoundment of
shoreline sediments
•The replacement pier,ramp, and float results in an increased motorized boat
presence at the.site
Loss of shoreline aquatic vegetation
The replacement overwater structure will cause a reduction in light to the underlying
aquatic environment,which can have significant impacts on the health and productivity
of both native and non-native macrophytes and algae. Macrophytes and algae are the
foundation for most freshwater food webs and their presence or absence affects many
higher trophic levels (NMFS 2004). As previously noted,the replacement overwater
structure will be grated to allow 60 percent light passage, and the proposed project will
result in a reduction of overwater structure coverage of 134 square feet. However,
because the lakebed beneath both proposed structures lacks water for approx. six to seven
months each year, it is doubtful that it(lakebed) is capable of supporting macrophytic
vegetation that would be benefited by the grating. For the past two high water seasons,
Lake Cushman was not been raised to its normal full pool of 738 feet and the majority of
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 22
the lake's overwater structures were left dry. In conclusion, it is expected that the impact
of the lake's fluctuating water level on littoral productivity will overshadow the impacts
of shading from the pier and float at the site.
The bulkhead exacerbates passive erosion and impoundment of sediments
When waves reflect off shoreline armoring structures,particularly concrete or other types
of flat-faced bulkheads,they can cause scouring and hardening of the substrate and
steepening of the beach. The sediment in front of a bulkhead will gradually become
coarser as wave action and littoral drift removes the finer sediment and there is no
sediment available for replenishment because it is impounded behind the bulkhead
(Macdonald et al. 1994). Hard-armored bulkheads cut off sediment that was once
available to feed the beach,thus adversely affecting natural beach-forming processes.
The steep, unnatural topography of the majority of Lake Cushman's shorelines (and at the
proposed project site) are routinely subjected to substantial wave action from the lake's
long fetch (approx. 4 mi. at the project site) and strong prevailing winds. Accordingly,
this results in significant scouring and erosion, as there are few areas with a shallow
foreshore to diminish the energy from incoming waves. Cobble and rock,therefore, are
the predominant sediments along the shoreline at both bulkheaded and steep-shored un-
bulkheaded sites. Additionally, Lake Cushman is relatively deep with a maximum depth
of approx. 275 feet, so it is expected that sediment movement along steep foreshore
moves primarily one-way: into deeper waters.
Referenced materials for this report primarily assess bulkhead impacts to marine
shorelines and, in particular, Puget Sound. While some impacts are applicable to lake
shorelines, beach feeding/forming processes appear to differ significantly and be site
specific. Like most lakes, Lake Cushman has an inlet source of water(the North Fork of
the Skokomish River) and an outlet one (the same river funneled through Cushman Dam
No. 1), so it is probable that the primary source of sediments to the lake is the North Fork
of the Skokomish River,while numerous smaller streams and eroding shorelines
contribute smaller sediment quantities. A 2012 study by Stanford University on a large,
deep Alpine lake in Italy revealed that suspended sediment concentrations(SSC) can
significantly affect the ecological health and function of lakes and reservoirs for several
reasons, including the following:
1) Sediments can regulate primary production by limiting light availability and also
by acting as a source of nutrients (Schallenberg and Burns 2004).
2)High sediment concentrations in a lake or reservoir can lead to poor water quality
from high turbidity levels as well as decreased basin volume through
sedimentation (Morris a al. 2008).
3)Lakes and reservoirs can act as sinks for many sediment-bound contaminants that
can accumulate and deleteriously affect aquatic ecosystems (Mariani et al. 2008).
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 23
Additionally, a 2004 USDA Forest Service Technical Report(PSW-GTR-193)revealed
that another large, deep Alpine lake, Lake Tahoe, was found to be very sensitive to the
input of fine sediments (less than 63 micrometers in size). Because of its slow settling
rate and the long hydraulic residence time in the lake,the impact of fine sediment on
water clarity is persistent: a 2 micrometer particle takes 2 years to settle out of the water
column(in Lake Tahoe).
In conclusion,regarding Lake Cushman, a lake whose shorelines lack water for roughly
six to seven months each year(and the last two years, as previously noted), it seems
counterproductive to consider beach feeding a positive habitat process as the lake was
significantly enlarged to accommodate two hydroelectric dams that produce
environmentally friendly electric power free of carbon emissions.
Potential increased motorized boat presence in the area
The PRF may result in an increased motorized boat presence in the area. Fuel spills from
powerboats can contaminate water quality and potentially affect listed salmonids directly
or indirectly through their prey source(NMFS 2005). Powerboats also create amplified
wave action that can erode the shoreline, and prop scouring can erode benthic habitat,
although benthic habitat in the littoral zone is already significantly marginalized by the
lake's fluctuating water levels. Powerboats also provide some oxygenation of surface
waters, although the extent is probably negligible at best. Overall,the indirect effects of
powerboat usage on Lake Cushman is likely insignificant due to the lake's large size,the
small number of boats that access the remote lake, and the short boating season
(primarily May thru September).
6.6 Primary Constituent Elements
PRIMARY CONSTITUENT ELEMENTS
The indirect effects on the designated critical habitat of Bull trout and Puget Sound
Chinook have been analyzed using the appropriate PCEs for the nearshore lacustrine
environment.
BULL TROUT PCEs:
Water temperatures that support bull trout use. Bull trout have been documented in
streams with temperatures from 32 to 72 degrees F but are found more frequently in
temperatures ranging from 36 to 59 degrees F--the project will have no indirect effect
on water temperatures that support bull trout use.
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 24
Migratory corridors with minimal physical, biological, or water quality impediments
between spawning, rearing, overwintering, and foraging habitats, including
intermittent or seasonal barriers induced by high water temperatures or low flows the
project will have no indirect effect on migratory corridors that support bull trout use.
An abundant food base including terrestrial organisms of riparian origin, aquatic
macroinvertebrates, and forage fish--the project will have no indirect effect on an
abundant food base for bull trout.
Permanent water of sufficient quantity and quality such that normal reproduction,
growth, and survival are not inhibited—the use of yellow cedar is expected to improve
water quality.
CHINOOK SALMON PCEs:
Unobstructed passage—the project will not have any indirect effect on unobstructed
passage.
Water Quality—the project will benefit water quality (see bull trout).
Water Quantity the project will not have any indirect effect on water quantity.
Forage the project will not have any indirect effect on foraging opportunities for
Chinook.
Natural Cover—the project will not have any indirect effect on natural cover.
6.7 Indirect Effects to ESA Listed Species
The indirect effects from the proposed project to other ESA listed species that are likely
to be found in the action area have been analyzed as follows:
NORTHERN SPOTTED OWL &MARBLED MURRELET
While it is highly unlikely that either species would nest in trees that are located in a rural
neighborhood, the proposed project may result in increased recreational usage at the site,
which could prompt both species to nest elsewhere.
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 25
6.8 Interrelated/Interdependent Effects
Interrelated and interdependent effects are described as the effects of the action under
consultation analyzed together with the effects of other activities that are interrelated to,
or interdependent with,that action. An interrelated activity is an activity that is part of the
proposed action and depends on the proposed action for its justification. An
interdependent activity is an activity that has no independent utility apart from the action
under consultation(FWS &NMFS 1998). The project will have no obvious interrelated
or interdependent effects.
6.9 Primary Constituent Elements
BULL TROUT PCEs:
Water temperatures that support bull trout use. Bull trout have been documented in
streams with temperatures from 32 to 72 degrees F but are found more frequently in
temperatures ranging from 36 to 59 degrees F--the project will have no interrelated or
interdependent effects on water temperatures that support bull trout use.
Migratory corridors with minimal physical, biological, or water quality impediments
between spawning, rearing, overwintering, and foraging habitats, including
intermittent or seasonal barriers induced by high water temperatures or low flows the
project will have no interrelated or interdependent effects on migratory corridors that
support bull trout use.
An abundant food base including terrestrial organisms of riparian origin, aquatic
macroinvertebrates, and forage fish--the project will have no interrelated or
interdependent effects on the bull trout's food base.
Permanent water of sufficient quantity and quality such that normal reproduction,
growth, and survival are not inhibited--the project will have no interrelated or
interdependent effects on water supply or quality.
CHINOOK SALMON PCEs:
Unobstructed passage—the project will have no interrelated or interdependent effects on
unobstructed passage.
Water Quality—the project will have no interrelated or interdependent effects on
unobstructed passage.
Water Quantity the project will have no interrelated or interdependent effects on water
quantity.
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 26
Forage—the project will have no interrelated or interdependent effects on water quantity.
Natural Cover—the project will have no interrelated or interdependent effects on natural cover.
6.91 Cumulative Effects
Cumulative effects are defined as "those effects of future state or private activities, not
involving Federal activities,that are reasonably certain to occur within the action area of
the action subject to consultation" (50 CFR 402.02). Cumulative impacts are difficult to
access. Continued growth and urbanization is likely to detrimentally impact fish and
wildlife resources. Global warming could raise the water level of Puget Sound, leaving
many waterfront properties underwater. Global warming could also result in warmer
water temperatures,to the detriment of species such as bull trout. Additionally, over-
fishing may deplete stocks of salmon, even as restoration of habitat in the watershed
furthers their likelihood of survival.
7.0 Conclusion
7.1 Take Analysis
Section 9 of the ESA prohibits take of endangered or threatened species, "take" being
defined in Section 3 as to harass, harm,pursue, hunt, shoot,wound,trap, capture, or
collect listed species, or attempt to engage in any such conduct. "Harm" is further defined
as a significant habitat modification or degradation that actually kills or injures listed
species by"significantly impairing behavioral patterns such as breeding, Spawning,
rearing, migrating, feeding, and sheltering" (50 CFR 222.102). "Harass" is further
defined as an intentional or negligent act which creates the likelihood of injury to wildlife
by annoying it to such an extent as to significantly disrupt normal behavior patterns
which include, but are not limited to, breeding, feeding, or sheltering (50 CFR 17.3). In
regards to the proposed project and the existing development activities, it is extremely
unlikely that any"take will occur. Previously listed conservation measures will further
insure the likelihood that no"take"will occur
7.2 Determination of Effect
A determination of May affect, not likely to adversely affect is the appropriate conclusion
when effects on the species or their critical habitat are expected to be beneficial,
discountable, or insignificant. After reviewing the appropriate data and survey
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 27
information, I have concluded that the proposed project will have an insignificant impact
on the previously discussed Endangered or Threatened species if the previously discussed
conservation measures are implemented. In my most honest and professional opinion,
while the proposed project may impact individual Endangered or Threatened species in
the project area, it is not likely to adversely affect or jeopardize the continued existence
of those species or their designated Critical Habitat. The determination of effect for each
of the listed species is:
1. Bull trout and their designated Critical Habitat—May affect, not likely to
adversely affect.
2. Chinook salmon--May affect, not likely to adversely affect.
3. Marbled murrelet May affect, not likely to adversely affect.
4. Northern spotted owl—No effect.
5. Streaked horned lark---No effect.
6. Yellow-billed cuckoo—No effect.
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 28
8.0 References
Literature
Federal Register/Vol. 70,No. 170/September 2,2005/Rules and Regulations
Federal Register/Vol. 70,No.185/September 26, 2005/Rules and Regulations
Federal Register/Vol. 71,No. 176/Tuesday, September 12, 2006/Proposed Rules
Federal Register/Vol. 75,No. 200/October 18, 2010/Rules and Regulations
Federal Register/77 FR 14062/March 8, 2012/Proposed Rules
Federal Register/Vol. 77,No. 106/June 1, 2012/Proposed Rules
Federal Register/Vol. 76,No. 193/October 5, 2011/Rules and Regulations
Brenkman, S. 1998 Factors Influencing Spawning Migration of Bull Trout(Salvelinus
confluentus) in the North Fork Skokomish River, Olympic National Park, Washington
Internet report. URL:
Celedonia,M. and R. Tabor. 2010. Chinook Salmon Smolt Behavior in Lake
Washington and the Ship Canal: 2004 -2008 Acoustic Tracking Studies. U.S. Fish&
Wildlife Service. Internet report. URL:
'010
Coats,R. 2004.Nutrient and sediment transport in the streams of the Lake Tahoe Basin: a
30-year retrospective. USDA Forest Services general technical report PSW-GTR-193.
Deal, R.L.,tech. ed. 2008. Integrated restoration of forested ecosystems to achieve
multiresource benefits: proceedings of the 2007 national silviculture workshop. Gen.
Tech.Rep. PNW-GTR-733. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service,Pacific Northwest Research Station. 306 p.
Google Earth. 2018.Aerial Imagery. Internet report. URL:
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 29
Johannessen, J., A. MacLennan, A. Blue, J. Waggoner, S. Williams, W. Gerstel, R.
Barnard,R. Carman, and H. Shipman. 2014. Marine Shoreline Design Guidelines.
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington.
Kelty,R.A. and S. Bliven. 2003. Environmental and Aesthetic Impacts of Small Docks
and Piers, Workshop Report: Developing a Science-Based Decision Support Tool for
Small Dock Management, Phase 1: Status of the Science.NOAA Coastal Ocean Program
Decision Analysis Series No. 22.National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science, Silver
Spring,MD. 69pp.
Kleinschmidt. 2012. Shoreline Management Plan, Cushman Project,FERC Project
Number 460. Tacoma Power, Tacoma Washington.
Leigh,M. 1996. Grow your own native landscape: a guide to identifying,propagating,
and landscaping with Western Washington native plants. Washington State University
Cooperative Extension/Thurston County, Olympia, WA.
Mason County, Washington. 2020. Assessor-Treasurer Electronic Property Information
Profile. Internet report. URL:
Mason County, Washington. 2018. Planning Department Critical Areas Resource
Ordinance. Internet report. URL:
ifil«; �e.� ) dtlol.�(�t tYu�-ate :;�",! E5K]1111d.ftlFtt'` �'OIYI<1ct _
Menashe, E. 1983. Vegetation Management:A Guide for Puget Sound Bluff Property
Owners. Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program, Washington Department of
Ecology. Olympia. Publication 93-31.
MET Engineering, PLLC. 2019. Schwartz engineered drawings, 10-22-19. Unpublished
document. 9 p.
National Marine Fisheries Service. 2019. Distribution of Threatened and Endangered
Species.Internet report. URL: t�h
NOAA. 2016. Endangered and Threatened Marine Species. Internet report. URL:
Nightingale, B. and C. Simenstad. 2001. Overwater Structures: Marine Issues.
Washington Departments of Fish and Wildlife,Ecology, and Transportation. Olympia,
Washington. 177 p.
Poston, T. 2001. Treated Wood Issues Associated with Overwater Structures in Marine
and Freshwater Environments. Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 30
Scheu, K.R., D.A. Fong, S. G. Monismith, and O.B. Fringer. 2012. Sediment transport
dynamics near a river inflow of a large alpine lake. Environmental Fluids Mechanics
Laboratory, Stanford University. Stanford, CA.
Skokomish Indian Tribe &Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2010.
Recovery Plan for Skokomish River Chinook Salmon. Internet Report. URL:
Tacoma Public Utilities. 2014. Cushman Hydro Project. Internet report. URL:
dlfi9 :; ail\fir 1i11 '7l t ' lip=7lliti (i11�E �1�}+tUt tlltlllti �f3\ z c11 )iit [ dt`a`t-
t s
Tacoma Public Utilities. 2015. Cushman Fisheries Program. Internet report. URL:
< T ti tl €§1 t tl citr I�ICais ld )il1cY'fJS1 1�'I9C3�1#t #1�114�f1a"tt ( G 14i1176d11
"ie 4�1 Lti�(111tEIS {i`.�1C,tlL� ltC1?C1fii �ltill
Tacoma Public Utilities. 2019. Cushman Fisheries Program. Internet report. URL:
.v,' F [J�E o t fiE 3 .`. _IC!, s f1 r ( -n .� i +,,.iiu ,i•1,
Cr '� 4, i iCi. i€f u
�I{1 sC� 11E5�1Frlci91 �S,,�lc,lit� �Its72jlTl �111T1 —___
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1997. Recovery Plan for the Threatened Marbled
Murrelet in Washington, Oregon, and California. Published by USFWS, Portland, OR.
URL: €R�t> t. ,: it'Ct t4C43S( 41 )� llc ii�(ivT () (}(} t 'ii
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2004. Draft Recovery Plan for the Coastal-Puget
Sound Distinct Population Segment of Bull Trout(Salvelinus confluentus). Volume 11(of
II): Olympic Peninsula Management Unit.
Portland, Oregon. 277 +xvi pp
�U7.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2011. Species Profile,Marbled Murrelet. Internet report.
14v.,J,:It c it Al`! l:_S Ill 0"` d1111 111 id it ci t1 3 I$
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2012. Guidance for Identifying Marbled Murrelet Nest
Trees in Washington State. Internet report. URL:
U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service. 2012. Marbled Murrelet Nesting Season and Analytical
Framework for Section 7 Consultation in Washington. Internet report. URL:
<t C�C3hi0 i ;tb do iil�ry> t8=i r'1 Dt}`-B K' 471A -81 011)-
i`... I
l a - 1"116 1 1£ ( 1?l I111z iY5¢!3t5i ,ih i
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2013. Conducting Masking Analysis for Marbled
Murrelets and Pile Driving Projects. Internet report. URL:
B-S_ �-
04 s' i_1 1` i i 1,�i .. t i x ie
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 31
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.2017. Official Species List#OIEWFW00-2016-SLI-0984
re-checked 1-04-20 URL: 3ittps:./cc o,,.3 sv s.�.cli I pac./
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2014. Species fact sheet, Streaked Horned Lark,
Eremophila alpestris strigata. Internet report.
URL: law:
4 w: Ll eti � �'t 11 'f;tt)i4 r It f rl�l' <l) lEsli t( cl r:Cl1> ri�c�ll iklin t 7c 1
-_ _. .______ ____�
Washington State Department of Ecology. 2012. 2012 Water Quality Assessment 303(d)
List: Skokomish/Dosewallips Water Resource Inventory Area(WRIA 16). Internet
report. URL: .gov/prog)raii + L;0(') 9(3/CL1lTeI1U1S`0sSInt lit nill
Washington State Department of Ecology. 2012. 2012 Stormwater Management Manual
for Western Washington. Internet report. URL:
[,14�-,•;.:, .?f's.?s'S`r.��"sl.!;d)t';a^t;,• . �?l.d` �i6..iild'91.`> f`i11„ �t<11`tl�al, +,`k%� � �{'€t}��.ol`C:CIi�
Washington State Department of Natural Resources. 2014. FPARS ARCIMS mapping
application. Internet report: URL litter
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2008. Priority Habitat and Species List.
Olympia, Washington. 177 pp.
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2012. Annual Report: Marbled Nlurrelet.
Internet report. URL:
tiel�3;,= 1 d��,�; id 1 't3� ( tr,Cte ttti�il �41Cat41r"s.9tiet y��tt_.Sc� t�11t�7�tiC� 11�L4Ct�.�(:"t �+ti,;
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2012. Annual Report:Northern Spotted
Owl. Internet report.URL:
3 i f7 t C3 �E3ti ir4 1 3Cot� i t 'i'a ski€C� Fl C 11{)1 .YpCd31 a7C)ttl.t t)14 , 7t�
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2012. Annual Report: Streaked Horned
Lark. Internet report. URL: 7 /,y�y
lttt}�: iLii�-,1 ri f "\ coi -`el-t a' �E 1Li dii 5�i 'C�� ��CL�i ti stl,:a1, d lio l.5�
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2012. Annual Report: Yellow-billed
Cuckoo. Internet report. URL:
'tiL 1i' tt x «lt tflsi2 t�1CtA 4�1L 111 t 1ELlr 7 CdE�'�5-ll«�r' i7illc�l cliclwo rill'
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2019. SalmonScape. Internet report. URL:
Washington State Department of Transportation. 2014. BA Preparation for
Transportation Projects—Advanced Training Manual—Version 4-02-2014.URL:
k> ''i) !ty tP i i $` _s.'R3 "llr3i )11( ': 9T
Schwartz Biological Evaluation 32
i'
d r.t rye:.
aF
kk9y'�
t
i
Untitled Map
N .
5901'N Lake Cus.nma n Rd
2 �r
boogie Earth N
Attachment 2
Site plan with existing and proposed development.
w
jz
' ~ A b
Schwartz Biological Evaluation Page 34
Attachment 3
Cross section with existing proposed P and ro osed development.
T
Fi 1714�, 1
F�
i
1.
wu 1. �
. �. V,
5
J 4,
t.
k I �
t
Schwartz Biological Evaluation Page 35
Attachment 4
The existing pier.
x v
r a
Schwartz Biological Evaluation Page 36
Attachment 5
The existing pier and bulkhead with associated walking pier(south end).
i
z
t
"1
M e
rw�
y �ax yN
,a
` t e
_• tom`"'" i 1110 `,.�..
Ham^ ' x / # ¢.6' mw 4w� • + g°
�5
Schwartz Biological Evaluation Page 37
m
a >
Attachment 7
The existing pier and bulkhead with associated walking pier(north end).
�w
V.
i
_ x
r % T
M
-, c ,t *.�
Schwartz Biological Evaluation Page 39
Attachment 8
The lakebed shoreline at the site looking south..
-yj
E�
` VI
' aNw .,
� a
nk
It A
Schwartz Biological Evaluation Page 40
1
ti
aR�a Y
a ,
Attachment 10
Essential Fish Habit Assessment
Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
A. Background
The Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act was signed into law on April 13,
1976. Under provisions of the Act, eight Regional Fishery Management Councils were
established to prepare FMP's in conformance with national standards published in 50 CFR Part
600.305-340. The Magnuson Act was renamed the Magnuson-Stevens Act in a 1996
appropriations bill. On October 11, 1996,the Sustainable Fisheries Act,which amended the
Magnuson-Stevens Act,was signed into law. Provisions included a mandate that the Councils
amend each FMP to include a description of Essential Fish Habitat, including adverse impacts on
EFH and conservation measures to protect EFH. Essential Fish Habitat is defined as those waters
and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity.
The Pacific Fisheries Management Council has designated EFH for federally-managed species
on the Pacific West Coast, including 82 species of groundfish, 5 coastal pelagic species, and 3
species of salmon. The following species may occur in Lake Cushman during some period of
their life history: Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) and Coho salmon
(Oncorhynchus kisutch).
B. Essential Fish Habitat
The designated EFH for Pacific salmon species is identified using U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS) hydrologic units as well as habitat association tables and life history descriptions of each
life stage(PFMC 1999). The EFH for the Pacific coast salmon fishery is defined as those waters
and substrate necessary for salmon production needed to support a long-term sustainable salmon
fishery and salmon contributions to a healthy ecosystem (WSDOT 2014). To achieve that level
of production, EFH must include all those streams, lakes,ponds, wetlands, and other currently
viable water bodies and most of the habitat historically accessible to salmon in Washington,
Oregon, Idaho, and California(WSDOT 2014). This does not include habitats above the
impassible barriers identified by the Pacific Fishery Management Council Fishery Management
Plan (PFMC 1999).
C. Proposed Action
The proposed project is the replacement of an existing bulkhead and associated walking pier, and
existing pier with a bulkhead and a pier, ramp, float and landing cradle.
Schwartz Biological Evaluation Page 42
D. Effects of the Proposed Action
The effects of the proposed project on designated EFH are expected to be comparable to the
effects described in the attached BE.
E. Conservation Measures
The conservation measures and BMPs discussed in the attached BE will be implemented to
minimize any adverse effects to Essential Fish Habitat.
F. Conclusion
The proposed project is likely to have no significant impact on designated EFH for Pacific
salmon.
G. References
NOAA, 2006. Final environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact for
Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; Essential Fish Habitat. Internet report. Website:
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/habitat/eth/finalenvironmentalassessmentandfindingofno.htm
PFMC (Pacific Fishery Management Council), 1999. Fisheries Management Plans for
groundfish, coastal pelagic fish, and Pacific salmon. Internet reports. Website:
www.pcouncil.org/
Washington State Department of Transportation. 2014. BA Preparation for Transportation
Projects—Advanced Training Manual, Chapter 16—Version 4-02-2014.
Internet report. ;»tip is��'ti ;�.t.� � �}t,t� i. c�i,�;`vR Idolllvres A 1 1`8 5
Schwartz Biological Evaluation Page 43
Mason County
Planning Division of Community Development
GO
615 W.Alder St. Bldg.8
Shelton,WA 98584
360-427-9670 ext 352
www.co.mason.wa.us
SHX2020-00001 SHORELINE EXEMPTION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:REPLACE EXISTING SHORELINE ACCESS ISSUED: 04/07/2020
STAIRS. DEMO 5'X 38' PIER THAT RUNS PARALLEL TO SHORELINE, EXPIRES: 04/07/2022
DEMO 6'X 21' PIER PERPENDICULAR TO SHORELINE,AND REPLACE
PIERS WITH A 6'X 22'PIER,8'X 20' FLOAT, AND 3'X 9' RAMP(NO
NEW OVER WATER COVERAGE CREATED).CONSTRUCT 6 PILING
ASSOCIATED WITH PIER AND 4 PILING ASSOCIATE WITH FLOAT
AND CRADLE SUPPORT. REPLACE 38'BULKHEAD WITH 70'
BULKHEAD.
PARCEL: 423321260032
APPLICANT: JONATHAN&SHARI SCHWARTZ OWNER: JONATHAN&SHARI SCHWARTZ
2008 E ALOHA ST 2008 E ALOHA ST
SEATTLE,WA98112 SEATTLE,WA98112
FEES: Pad. Qm
PLA-SHORELINE EXEMPTION $300.00
Totals : $$00.00
Fprovisions
rtify that I have read and examined this application and know the same to be true and correct.
of Laws and Ordinances governing this type of work will be complied with whether
erein or not. The granting of a permit does not presume to give authority to violate or cancel
ons of any er state/local law regulating construction or the performance of construction.
Issued By: Ate
Contractor or uthorized Agent: Date:
Printed by:Madssa Watson on:04/07/2020 03:31 PM
Page 1 of 1
B i OW?() —000-fZ
1X-1_0--lO.IGv -- ------ -
' AGENCY USE ONLY '
t t
t r
RECEIVED;:
r Date received:
WASHINGTON STATE .1E giy� s t
of Engineers• r '
Seattle Oistnat
JAN 1 b
Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Agency reference#:
Application (JARPA) Form' i Tax Parcel#(s): 615 w. Alder Strmt
t r
USE BLACK OR BLUE INK TO ENTER ANSWERS IN THE WHITE SPACES BELOW. '
t t
ME----------
t r
' t
Part 1—Project Identification
I. Project Name (A name for your project that you create. Examples: Smith's Dock or Seabrook Lane Development) Lcgjp]
Schwartz Bulkhead and Overwater Structure Replacement Project.
Part 2—Applicant
The person and/or organization responsible for the project. [i_t ]
2a. Name (Last, First, Middle)
Schwartz, Jonathan &Shari
2b. Organization (If applicable)
2c. Mailing Address (street or PO Box)
2008 East Aloha St
2d. City, State, Zip
Seattle, WA 98112
2e. Phone(1) 2f. Phone(2) 2 . Fax 2h. E-mail
Additional forms may be required for the following permits:
• If your project may qualify for Department of the Army authorization through a Regional General Permit(RGP),contact the U.S.Army Corps of
Engineers for application information(206)764-3495.
• If your project might affect species listed under the Endangered Species Act,you will need to fill out a Specific Project Information Form(SPIF)or
prepare a Biological Evaluation. Forms can be found at
• Not all cities and counties accept the JARPA for their local Shoreline permits.If you need a Shoreline permit,contact the appropriate city or county
government to make sure they accept the JARPA.
2To access an online JARPA form with[help]screens,go to
ar _.....'i.-, �_-form/ Gi'��rt r.;.,°_f I- a, _q�
For other help,contact the Governor's Office of Regulatory Assistance at 1-800-917-0043 or E .m
JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 1 of 15
Part 3—Authorized Agent or Contact
Person authorized to represent the applicant about the project. (Note: Authorized agent(s) must sign 11 b of this
application.) [t�tg,,,pj
3a. Name (Last; First, Middle)
Valdeman, Caralyn
3b. Organization (if applicable)
Integrated Northwest Construction, Inc.
3c. Mailing Address (street or PO Box)
60 N Lake Cushman Rd, Suite 109
3d. City, State, Zip
Hoodsport, WA 98684
3e. Phone(1) 3f. Phone(2) 3 . Fax 3h. E-mail
(263) 888-6314 (206) 319-4239 caralyn@integratednwconstruction.com
Part 4--Property Owner(s)
Contact information for people or organizations owning the property(ies)where the project will occur. Consider both
upland and aquatic ownership because the upland owners may not own the adjacent aquatic land. G I
❑ Same as applicant. (Skip to Part 5.)
❑ Repair or maintenance activities on existing rights-of-way or easements. (Skip to Part 5.)
❑ There are multiple upland property owners. Complete the section below and fill out jAR.PA Attachment A for
each additional property owner.
❑ Your project is on Department of Natural Resources (DNR)-managed aquatic lands. If you don't know,
contact the DNR at (360) 902-1100 to determine aquatic land ownership. If yes, complete DARPA Attachment E
to apply for the Aquatic Use Authorization. rt
4a. Name (Last, First, Middle)
4b. Organization (if applicable)
Tacoma Power
4c. Mailing Address (Street or PO Box)
P.O. Box 11007
4d. City, State, Zip
Tacoma, WA 98411.0007
4e. Phone(1) 4f. Phone(2) 4 Fax 41h. E-mail
JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 2 of 15
Part 5—Project Location(s)
Identifying information about the property or properties where the project will occur. [hkf_1p]
❑ There are multiple project locations (e.g. linear projects). Complete the section below and use JA PA
Attachn,,ent B for each additional project location.
5a. Indicate the type of ownership of the property. (check all that apply.) [_!L,iJ
® Private
❑ Federal
❑ Publicly owned (state, county,city,special districts like schools, ports, etc.)
❑ Tribal
❑ Department of Natural Resources (DNR) —managed aquatic lands (Complete�ARP,�_Attachmesr E)
5b. Street Address(Cannot be a PO Box. If there is no address,provide other location information in 5p)
5901 North Lake Cushman Rd
5c. City, State, Zip(If the project is not in a city or town, provide the name of the nearest city or town.)
Hoodsport,WA 98548
5d. County
Mason
5e. Provide the section, township, and range for the project location. Ln�-
'/4 Section Section Township Range
32 23N 4W
5f. Provide the latitude and longitude of the project location. Ltj:'Lra
• Example:47.03922 N lat./-122.89142 W long. (Use decimal degrees-NAD 83)
47.44679 N -123.21446 W
5g. List the tax parcel number(s)for the project location. [he,ip]
• The local county assessor's office can provide this information.
42332-12-00032
5h. Contact information for all adjoining property owners. (if you need more space, use v�1. t t r r cs,) [!p_P]
Name Mailing Address Tax Parcel #(if known)
VARANO FAMILY TRUST, PO BOX 69 42332-12-00031
JAMES F VARANO & HOODSPORT WA 98548
REBECCA J VARANO TRSE
..............................................................................................................................................................................................................1.1...........................
WAGNER ET UX, ERIC C 5811 N LAKE CUSHMAN RD 42332-51-00010
NINA HSU HOODSPORT WA 98548
............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 3 of 15
Si. List all wetlands on or adjacent to the project location. [nei
5j. List all waterbodies (other than wetlands) on or adjacent to the project location. [rem]
Lake Cushman.
5k. Is any part of the project area within a 100-year floodplain? flei a
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Don't know
51. Briefly describe the vegetation and habitat conditions on the property. ne3
Site is heavily vegetated with native vegetation.
5m. Describe how the property is currently used. [�< �
Residential/recreational.
5n. Describe how the adjacent properties are currently used. q?ip
Res idential/recreational.
5o. Describe the structures (above and below ground) on the property, including their purpose(s) and current
condition. [Litip]
In addition to a single-family residence, existing shoreline appurtenances include shoreline access
stairs, an approx. five by sff*ty4eat (5' x fi" bulkhead and associated walking pier(300 sf), a wood pier
(126 sf), and a mooring buoy. r�I YL$�
5p. Provide driving directions from the closest highway to the project location, and attach a map. G.-g
From Shelton, take SR 101 North to Hoodsport, turn left on Lake Cushman Rd (SR 119)and follow
approx. 5.7 miles to the applicant's driveway on the left side of the road. Site is the last SFR at the
bottom of the hill.
Part 6—Project Description
JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 4 of 15
6a. Briefly summarize the overall project.You can provide more detail in 6b. [i,t!L]
The proposed action on their Lake Cushman property is the replacement of a wood bulkhead and a an
existing overwater structure. Shoreline access stairs and associated landings will also be replaced.
61b. Describe the purpose of the project and why you want or need to perform it. LrTl I
The bluff toe at the site exhibits erosion damage that is common to the Lake Cushman shoreline. There
are three primary causes of erosion and concomitant shoreline instability on Lake Cushman:
• The seasonal raising and lowering of Lake Cushman, a reservoir with two functioning dams.
The lake's unique landscape features, including a steep, unnatural lakebed topography that
lacks a shallow foreshore to diminish wave energy generated by strong prevailing winds and
approx. eight miles of fetch.
A steep terrestrial shoreline that receives an average of approx. 100 inches of rainfall per year.
The west side of Lake Cushman is also subjected to damaging surface flows due to clear cut logging on
the steep slopes above the shoreline. The applicant's property is located on the east side of the lake and
features heavily vegetated steep slopes. The site is also directly exposed to over four miles of fetch
from north winds. The exposed lakebed as observed during the low water season (Attachments 8& 9) is
extremely steep. The toe of the existing bulkhead has been exposed and bluff erosion has occurred
landward of the bulkhead and associated walking pier, along the bulkhead's north side.
Additionally, the applicants' existing pier is old and in need of replacement, as are the existing shoreline
access stairs. Therefore, the project objective is to install a replacement bulkhead to protect the
applicant's shoreline access and the existing residence, and a replacement overwater structure that is
safer, all-the-while avoiding or minimizing impacts to ESA-listed species and improving shoreline
habitat at the site. Sul c..� doc� „� a 3� r'S i s etx��t�•�9 0.3 ?d
1/,e�(t:G C.LyKCh�f Lvl•��► Cc lvh..a�.t✓
6c. Indicate the project category. (Check all that apply) [0�&J
❑ Commercial X❑ Residential ❑ Institutional ❑ Transportation ❑ Recreational
❑ Maintenance ❑ Environmental Enhancement
6d. Indicate the major elements of your project. (Check all that apply) [helpl
Aquaculture ❑ Culvert Float ❑ Retaining Wall
❑ Bank Stabilization ❑ Dam /Weir ❑ Floating Home
(upland)
❑ Boat House ❑ Dike/ Levee/Jetty ❑ Geotechnical Survey
❑ Road
❑ Boat Launch ❑ Ditch ❑ Land Clearing El ScientificMeasurement Device
❑ Boat Lift ® Dock/ Pier ❑ Marina/ Moorage ® Stairs
❑ Bridge ❑ Dredging ❑ Mining ❑ Stormwater facility
® Bulkhead ❑ Fence ❑ Outfall Structure ❑ Swimming Pool
❑ Buoy ❑ Ferry Terminal ❑ Piling/Dolphin ❑ Utility Line
❑ Channel Modification ❑ Fishway ❑ Raft
❑ Other: i wp`
JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 5 of 15
f
6e. Describe how you plan to construct each project element checked in 6d. Include specific construction
methods and equipment to be used.
• Identify where each element will occur in relation to the nearest waterbody.
• Indicate which activities are within the 100-year floodplain.
As per the engineered design by MET Engineering, PLLC, the existing sfxtq=fcotwood bulkhead will be
removed from the site and approx. seventy feet (70') of post and plank wood bulkhead will be installed
along the bluff toe at a lakebed elevation of approx. 736 feet. The additional ten feet—will feet—will not be linear 32l
but will consist of two, five-foot(5')wing walls at each end that will be angled thirty (30) degrees into the
bluff slope for a total of approx. ten feet (10'). The proposed bulkhead will be a maximum above grade
height of six to eight feet (6' to 8'). The bulkhead will be backed with geotextile fabric and native soil and
rock. The bulkhead will be constructed of fifteen (15)six by six inch (6"x 6")Alaska yellow cedar posts,
three by twelve-foot(3' x 12')yellow cedar planks, and galvanized hardware.
The existing pier and walking piers associated with the bulkhead will be removed from the site and
replaced with a six by twenty-two-foot(6' x 22') pier, a three by ten-foot (3' x 9') manufactured, grated
aluminum ramp, and an eight by twenty-foot(8' x 20')float. The pier will be supported by six (6)six by
six inch (6"x 6")Alaska yellow cedar posts. The float will have four(4), 6"x 6" cedar posts. Two of the
posts will be positioning pilings and two will be used in conjunction with the positioning piles and
lumber to create a float cradle that will give the float a minimum of eighteen inches (18") of lakebed
clearance during the low water season. The ramp will be installed between the pier and float to facilitate
access. Nti -¢,� ,V� W
r-Ov,"``-�l�--
The pier and float will be constructed of galvanized steel or aluminum hardware, and Alaska yellow
cedar posts,joists, decking, and trim. No pressure treated lumber will be used in this project. The
decking of the pier and float will have grating installed, a minimum fifty percent total with 60 percent
light passage as required by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). The grating will
be provided by ThruFlow decking panels, which are made of reinforced polypropylene, contain no toxic
preservatives, and are recyclable. The float will be fitted with polyethylene encapsulated Styrofoam®
float billets. The total overwater coverage at the site will be 292 sf, a reduction of 134 sf from the existing
426 square feet.
Post pile holes will be approx. eighteen inches (18')wide and filled with concrete to a maximum depth of
four feet(4'). All concrete for the bulkhead, pier, and float will be hand-mixed per engineered drawings
and poured in place.
A circular saw and various hand tools will be used throughout the proposed project. Workers,
equipment, debris, and materials will be transported to the site either by boat or by cars or trucks. Geo-
textile fabric will be spread over the dry lakebed before commencement of project construction in order
to contain any manmade construction debris. At the completion of construction, the geo-textile fabric
will be removed from the shoreline at the site, along with all construction debris and other existing
manmade debris. All debris will be disposed of at a licensed landfill or other licensed disposal site.
Activities are within the 100-year flood plain. The nearest waterbody is Lake Cushman.
6f. What are the anticipated start and end dates for project construction? (MonthNear) [i,P1]
• If the project will be constructed in phases or stages,use JAR PA Aftach men,Q to list the start and end dates of each phase or
stage.
JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 6 of 15
Start date: unknown End date:60 days, after issuance of all required
permits. ❑ See JARPA Attachment D
6g. Fair market value of the project, including materials, labor, machine rentals, etc. [ l l
Vr'T - 1110.to V-
6h. Will any portion of the project receive federal funding? [t-j�j
• If yes,list each agency providing funds.
El Yes ® No ❑ Don't know
Part 7—Wetlands: Impacts and Mitigation
❑ Check here if there are wetlands or wetland buffers on or adjacent to the project area.
(If there are none, skip to Part 8.) L�Lpl
7a. Describe how the project has been designed to avoid and minimize adverse impacts to wetlands. [ �=1
® Not applicable
7b. Will the project impact wetlands? [rieipl
[]Yes ❑ No ❑ Don't know
7c. Will the project impact wetland buffers? [h,�P]
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Don't know
7d. Has a wetland delineation report been prepared? [ 1
• If Yes,submit the report, including data sheets,with the JARPA package.
❑ Yes ❑ No
7e. Have the wetlands been rated using the Western Washington or Eastern Washington Wetland Rating
System? [ig!p]
• If Yes, submit the wetland rating forms and figures with the JARPA package.
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Don't know
7f. Have you prepared a mitigation plan to compensate for any adverse impacts to wetlands?
• If Yes, submit the plan with the JARPA package and answer 7g.
• If No,or Not applicable,explain below why a mitigation plan should not be required.
[] Yes ❑ No ❑ Not applicable
DARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 7 of 15
7g. Summarize what the mitigation plan is meant to accomplish, and describe how a watershed approach was
used to design the plan. [npjL
7h. Use the table below to list the type and rating of each wetland impacted, the extent and duration of the
impact, and the type and amount of mitigation proposed. Or if you are submitting a mitigation plan with a
similar table, you can state (below) where we can find this information in the plan [ r
Activity (fill, Wetland Wetland Impact Duration Proposed Wetland
drain, excavate, Name' type and area (sq. of impact3 mitigation mitigation area
flood, etc.) rating ft. or type" (sq. ft. or
category' Acres) acres)
If no official name for the wetland exists,create a unique name(such as"Wetland 1"). The name should be consistent with other project documents,such
as a wetland delineation report.
2 Ecology wetland category based on current Western Washington or Eastern Washington Wetland Rating System.Provide the wetland
rating forms with the JARPA package.
3Indicate the days,months or years the wetland will be measurably impacted by the activity.Enter"permanent'if applicable.
4Creation(C),Re-establishment/Rehabilitation(R),Enhancement(E),Preservation(P),Mitigation Bank/In-lieu fee(B)
Page number(s) for similar information in the mitigation plan, if available:
7i. For all filling activities identified in 7h, describe the source and nature of the fill material, the amount in cubic
yards that will be used, and how and where it will be placed into the wetland. ft,,ii
7j. For all excavating activities identified in 7h, describe the excavation method, type and amount of material in
cubic yards you will remove, and where the material will be disposed. fr}eu
JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 8 of 15
Part 8—Waterbodies (other than wetlands): Impacts and Mitigation
In Part 8, "waterbodies" refers to non-wetland waterbodies. (See Part 7 for information related to wetlands.) (�
❑ Check here if there are waterbodies on or adjacent to the project area. (If there are none, skip to Part 9.)
8a. Describe how the project is designed to avoid and minimize adverse impacts to the aquatic environment.
❑ Not applicable
• No construction to occur unless Lake Cushman's waters are lowered and the shoreline work
area is dry.
• No pile driving to occur.
• The face of the replacement bulkhead will move landward approximately (approx.)five feet.
• No pressure treated or other treated lumber will be used in the construction of the bulkhead
or pier, ramp, and float.
• Overwater coverage at the site to be reduced by 134 square feet.
The decking of the pier, ramp, and float will have grating installed, a minimum fifty percent
total with 60 percent light passage as required by the WDFW.
• An existing mooring buoy will be removed.
• Construction to take place as per the HPA provisions from the Washington Department of
Fish and Wildlife.
• Previously discussed BMPs to be strictly adhered to.
81b. Will your project impact a waterbody or the area around a waterbody? [gtjpj
®Yes ❑ No
8c. Have you prepared a mitigation plan to compensate for the project's adverse impacts to non-wetland
waterbodies? LIqip]
• If Yes,submit the plan with the JARPA package and answer 8d.
JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 9 of 15
• If No,or Not applicable,explain below why a mitigation plan should not be required.
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Not applicable !
Yes.
8d. Summarize what the mitigation plan is meant to accomplish. Describe how a watershed approach was
used to design the plan.
• If you already completed 7g you do not need to restate your answer here. [held)
A watershed approach is an analytical process for making compensatory mitigation decisions that
support sustainability or improvement of aquatic resources in a watershed (33 CFR 332.2). This
generally involves large projects that impact wetlands. The proposed project will be mitigating impacts
with on-site mitigation. Conservation Measures were previously noted in this document.
8e. Summarize impact(s) to each waterbody in the table below. [�lpl
Activity (clear, Waterbody Impact Duration Amount of material Area (sq. ft. or
dredge, fill, pile name' location of impact3 (cubic yards) to be linear ft.) of
drive, etc.) placed in or waterbody
removed from directly affected
waterbod
Lake Upper Approx. 7 Approx. 10 cu/yds out Approx. 70
Cushman shoreline days and 15 in linear feet
z if no official name for the waterbody exists,create a unique name(such as"Stream 1")The name should be consistent with other documents provided.
Indicate whether the impact will occur in or adjacent to the waterbody. If adjacent,provide the distance between the impact and the waterbody and
indicate whether the impact will occur within the 100-year flood plain.
3Indicate the days,months or years the waterbody will be measurably impacted by the work. Enter" ermanent"if applicable.
8f. For all activities identified in 8e, describe the source and nature of the fill material, amount (in cubic yards)
you will use, and how and where it will be placed into the waterbody. [heM
Approx. 15 cu/yds of concrete will be placed below the lakebed grade for post pile footings.
8g. For all excavating or dredging activities identified in 8e, describe the method for excavating or dredging,
type and amount of material you will remove, and where the material will be disposed. f,eipa
JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 10 of 15
All excavating will be done by manual labor.
Part 9—Additional Information
Any additional information you can provide helps the reviewer(s) understand your project. Complete as much of
this section as you can. It is ok if you cannot answer a question.
9a. If you have already worked with any government agencies on this project, list them below. [ iu]
Agency Name Contact Name Phone Most Recent
Date of Contact
9b. Are any of the wetlands or waterbodies identified in Part 7 or Part 8 of this JARPA on the Washington
Department of Ecology's 303(d) List?
• If Yes,list the parameter(s)below.
• If you don't know, use Washington Department of Ecology's Water Quality Assessment tools at:
❑ Yes ® No
9c. What U.S. Geological Survey Hydrological Unit Code (HUC) is the project in? [L° s)
• Go to Intl . ti ca.� +r guaf ingex cfm to help identify the HUC.
L�
17110018
9d. What Water Resource Inventory Area Number (WRIA#) is the project in? [rv= ]
• Go to w��rr��, ; c ,�'✓. , { �a �',r _ .4vri dt���_to find the WRIA#.
WRIA 16
9e. Will the in-water construction work comply with the State of Washington water quality standards for
turbidity? [n,cjpj
• Go to +ram„t y_,^,A�u Vr "E ra+k S_'tiY sW2 Srl"itt?rla.an for the standards.
❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not applicable
9f. If the project is within the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act, what is the local shoreline
environment designation? (h ]
• If you don't know, contact the local planning department.
JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 11 of 15
• For more information, g0 t0: it ;fiihlN h raa,'�aws rules/1 II3 2/211 desio 3tions.htl7it.
❑ Rural ❑ Urban ❑ Natural ❑ Aquatic ❑ Conservancy ® Other
9g. What is the Washington Department of Natural Resources Water Type? {nil
• Go to dm.wa.gov/Businr �sF,- ,Jts, o,-_-s ForestPracticesA p i tso��iF' s.` �v tart f aspx for the Forest
Practices Water Typing System.
® Shoreline ❑ Fish ❑ Non-Fish Perennial ❑ Non-Fish Seasonal
9h. Will this project be designed to meet the Washington Department of Ecology's most current stormwater
manual? [.�tip]
• If No, provide the name of the manual your project is designed to meet.
® Yes ❑ No
Name of manual: Stormwater Management Manua/for Western Washington.
9i. Does the project site have known contaminated sediment? (,Ipipj
• If Yes, please describe below.
❑ Yes ® No
9j. If you know what the property was used for in the past, describe below. [he!pj
It was a forest.
9k. Has a cultural resource (archaeological) survey been performed on the project area? [�_tu
• If Yes, attach it to your JARPA package.
❑ Yes ® No
91. Name each species listed under the federal Endangered Species Act that occurs in the vicinity of the project
area or might be affected by the proposed work. [r,erylpj
The Chinook salmon, the bull trout, the Puget Sound steelhead, the marbled murrelet, the horned
lark, the yellow-billed cuckoo, and the spotted owl are the ESA listed aquatic threatened or
endangered species in the area.
9m. Name each species or habitat on the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife's Priority Habitats and
Species List that might be affected by the proposed work. [r,e;�]
See above.
Part 10—SEPA Compliance and Permits
Use the resources and checklist below to identify the permits you are applying for.
• Online Project Questionnaire at httc:f,�a�,ps.ec .v a.gov>cpas;.
JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 12 of 15
• Governor's Office of Regulatory Assistance at (800) 917-0043 Jrv.
For a list of addresses to send your JARPA to, click on paE, v idr mfar rri tad lF.l�PA.
10a. Compliance with the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). (Check all that apply.) [i,_ipj
• For more information about SEPA, go
❑ A copy of the SEPA determination or letter of exemption is included with this application.
M.A SEPA determination is pending with—Mason County (lead agency). The expected
decision date is
❑ I am applying for a Fish Habitat Enhancement Exemption. (Check the box below in 10b.) L ?l
e ow !v O
❑ Categorical Exemption. Under what section of the SEPA administrative code (WAC) is it exempt?
❑ Other:
10b. Indicate the permits you are applying for. (Check all that apply.) [±_ 1
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Local Government Shoreline permits:
❑ Substantial Development ❑ Conditional Use ❑ Variance
® Shoreline Exemption Type (explain): KV LW O.l � �V 2 \00\YA'%C0-d
Other city/county permits:
❑ Floodplain Development Permit ® Critical Areas Ordinance
STATE GOVERNMENT
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife:
® Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) ❑ Fish Habitat Enhancement Exemption— r ;;, E,,e L ti�
Effective July 10, 2012, you must submit a check for$150 to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife,
unless your project qualifies for an exemption or alternative payment method below. Do not send cash.
Check the appropriate boxes:
❑ $150 check enclosed. (Check#
Attach check made payable to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.
❑Charge to billing account under agreement with WDFW. (Agreement# 1
❑My project is exempt from the application fee. (Check appropriate exemption)
❑ HPA processing is conducted by applicant-funded WDFW staff.
(Agreement # )
❑ Mineral prospecting and mining.
❑ Project occurs on farm and agricultural land.
(Attach a copy of current land use classification recorded with the county auditor,or other proof of current land use.)
❑ Project is a modification of an existing HPA originally applied for, prior to July 10, 2012.
(HPA# )
JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 13 of 15
Washington Department of Natural Resources:
❑ Aquatic Use Authorization
Complete JARPA, ,tta�.i�rYlariC and submit a check for$25 payable to the Washington Department of Natural Resources.
Do not send cash.
Washington Department of Ecology:
❑ Section 401 Water Quality Certification
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
United States Department of the Army permits (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers):
® Section 404 (discharges into waters of the U.S.) ® Section 10 (work in navigable waters)
United States Coast Guard permits:
❑ General Bridge Act Permit ❑ Private Aids to Navigation (for non-bridge projects)
❑ SEPA is pre-empted by federal law.
t )
JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 14 of 15
Part 11—Authorizing Signatures
Signatures are required before submitting the JARPA package.The JARPA package includes the DARPA form,
project plans, photos, etc. ItLeA
11a. Applicant Signature(required) [ 1
I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief,the information provided in this application is true, complete,
and accurate. I also certify that I have the authority to carry out the proposed activities, and I agree to start work
only after I have received all necessary permits.
I hereby autho ' e the agent named in Part 3 of this application to act on my behalf in matters related to this
application. (initial)
By initialing he , I state that I have the authority to grant access to the property. I also give my consent to the
permitting agencies entering the property where the project is located to inspect the project site or any work
related to the project. (initial)
Ql�_'Wr /)
Applicant Printed Name licant Signature Date
11 b. Authorized Agent Signature L_ei
I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief,the information provided in this application is true, complete,
and accurate. I also certify that I have the authority to carry out the proposed activities and I agree to start work
only after all necessary permits have been issu
Caral yn Valdernan 01/14/20
Authorized Agent Printed Name A rized Agent Signature Date
11 e. Property Owner Signature(if not applicant)
Not required if project is on existing rights-of-way or easements.
I consent to the permitting agencies entering the property where the project is located to inspect the project site
or any work. These inspections shall occur at reasonable times and, if practical,with prior notice to the
landowner.
Property Owner Printed Name Property Owner Signature Date
18 U S C§1001 provides that Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly
falsifies;conceals,or covers up by any trick. scheme, or device a material fact or makes any false,fictitious,or fraudulent statements or
representabons 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.
If you require this document in another format,contact the Governor's Office of Regulatory Assistance(ORA)at(SM)917-0043,
People with hearing loss can call 711 for Washington Relay Service.People with a speech disability can call(877)833-6341.
ORA publication number. ENV-019-09 rev.06-12 -
DARPA Revision 20121 Page 15 of 15
MASON COUNTY
Planning Division of Community Development
Planning DEPARTMENT
615 W.Alder St. Bldg. 8, Shelton,WA 98584
360-427-9670 ext 352
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE
(WAC 197-11-340)
SEP2020-00004
Description of Proposal: REPLACE EXISTING SHORELINE ACCESS STAIRS. DEMO 5'X 38' PIER
THAT RUNS PARALLEL TO SHORELINE, DEMO 6' X 21' PIER
PERPENDICULAR TO SHORELINE, AND REPLACE PIERS WITH A 6'X 22'
PIER, 8'X 20' FLOAT, AND TX 9' RAMP (NO NEW OVER WATER
COVERAGE CREATED). CONSTRUCT 6 PILING ASSOCIATED WITH PIER
AND 4 PILING ASSOCIATED WITH FLOAT AND CRADLE SUPPORT.
REPLACE 38' BULKHEAD WITH 70' BULKHEAD.
Proponent: JONATHAN & SHARI SCHWARTZ
Location of Proposal: 5901 N LAKE CUSHMAN RD
Parcel Number: 423321260032
Legal Description: TR 3-C of NE TR 4 of SP#1727
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 43.21C.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.
Please contact Marissa Watson at 360-427-9670 x367 or MWatson@co.mason.wa.us with any questions. This
DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2). The Lead Agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the
date shown below, when the determination is final. Comments must be submitted to the Dept. of Community
Development, 615 W Alder St, Shelton WA 98584 by 04/02/2020. Appeal of this determination must be filed
with a 14-day period following this final determination date, per Mason County Code Chapter 15.11 Appeals.
O !`t Zo 2c7
A horized Local Government Official Date
Printed by:Marissa Watson on:03/19/2020 01:08 PM Page 1 of 1
S Puzv -c()0 tlpo
MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST �
6
MASON CO. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 615 w Alder
�
A. BACKGROUND
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Schwartz Bulkhead and
Overwater Structure Replacement Project.
2. Name of applicant: Schwartz, Jonathan & Shari
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Integrated
Northwest Construction, Inc., Caralyn Valdeman. 60 N Lake Cushman
Rd, Suite 109, Hoodsport, WA 98584. (206) 319-4239 or (253) 888
5314. caralyn@integratednwconstruction.com.
4. Date checklist prepared: 1-09-20.
5. Agency requesting checklist: Mason County.
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): No
phasing. Work to be completed ASAP after receiving all required
permits.
7. Do you have any plans for future 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. A BE has
been prepared.
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. A Mason County Shoreline exemption permit and
a building permit; an HPA from the WDFW; A USACE permit.
11. Give a 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).
As per the engineered design by MET Engineering, PLLC, the
existing-stj' dy-foot wood bulkhead will be removed from the site and
bu�4�-ham to
r
MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2
approx. seventy feet (70') of post and plank wood bulkhead will be
installed along the bluff toe at a lakebed elevation of approx. 736
feet. The additional ten feet will not be linear but will consist of two,
five-foot (5') wing walls at each end that will be.angled thirty (30)
degrees into the bluff slope for a total of approx. ten feet (10'). The
proposed bulkhead will be a maximum above grade height of six to
eight feet (6' to 8'). The bulkhead will be backed with geotextile fabric
and native soil and rock. The bulkhead will be constructed of fifteen
(15) six by six inch (6"x 6") Alaska yellow cedar posts, three by
twelve-foot (3' x 12') yellow cedar planks, and galvanized hardware.
The existing pier and walking piers associated with the bulkhead will
be removed from the site and replaced with a six by twenty-two-foot
(6' x 22') pier, a three by ten-foot (3' x 9') manufactured, grated
aluminum ramp, and an eight by twenty-foot (8' x 20') float. The pier
will be supported by six (6) six by six inch (6"x 6") Alaska yellow
cedar posts. The float will have four (4), 6"x 6" cedar posts. Two of
the posts will be positioning pilings and two will be used in
conjunction with the positioning piles and lumber to create a float
cradle that will give the float a minimum of eighteen inches (18") of
lakebed clearance during the low water season. The ramp will be
installed between the pier and float to facilitate access.
The pier and float will be constructed of galvanized steel or
aluminum hardware,and Alaska yellow cedar posts, joists, decking,
and trim. No pressure treated lumber will be used in this project. The
decking of the pier and float will have grating installed, a minimum
fifty percent total with 60 percent light passage as required by the
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). The grating
will be provided by ThruFlow decking panels, which are made of
reinforced polypropylene, contain no toxic preservatives, and are
recyclable. The float will be fitted with polyethylene encapsulated
Styrofoam@ float billets. The total overwater coverage at the site will
be 292 sf, a reduction of 134 sf from the existing 426 square feet.
Post pile holes will be approx. eighteen inches (18') wide and filled
with concrete to a maximum depth of four feet (4'). All concrete for
the bulkhead, pier, and float will be hand-mixed per engineered
drawings and poured in place.
A circular saw and various hand tools will be used throughout the
proposed project. Workers, equipment, debris, and materials will be
transported to the site either by boat or by cars or trucks. Geo-textile
fabric will be spread over the dry lakebed before commencement of
project construction in order to contain any manmade construction
debris. At the completion of construction, the geo-textile fabric will
T ,
MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
3
be removed from the shoreline at the site, along with all construction
debris and other existing manmade debris. All debris will be
disposed of at a licensed landfill or other licensed disposal site.
Activities are within the 100-year flood plain. The nearest waterbody
Is Lake Cushman.
12. What is the 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 The site is located on Lake Cushman at 5901 North
Cushman Road, Hoodsport. Section 32, Township 23N, Range 04W.
The legal description is: TR 3-C OF NE TR 4 OF SP #1727
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS:
1. EARTH:
a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep
slopes, mountainous, other.
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approx. percent slope)? Greater
than 100 percent.
C. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand,
gravel, peat, muck)? If you know classification of agricultural soils, specify
them and note any prime farmland. Glacial till, cobble, rock.
d. Are there surface indications of 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. Approx. 15 cu/yds of concrete
will be used for new/repaired piling footings.
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use: If so,
generally describe. The WDOE's BMPs and the WDFW's HPA
provisions shall be followed during construction to prevent erosion.
e r
MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 4
g. About what percentage of the site will be covered with impervious
surfaces after project constructions (for example, asphalt or buildings)?
The project adds no new impervious surface area to the site, as the
replacement float will be smaller than the existing and grated (unlike
the existing).
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the
earth, if any: All HPA provisions and the WDOE's BMPs shall be
adhered to during construction. See BE, please.
2. AIR:
a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e.
duct, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and
when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give
approximate quantities, if known N/A
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odors that may affect your
proposal? If so, generally describe.
N/A
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air,
if any: N/A
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.
Lake Cushman.
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. No, the lake will be lowered during
construction.
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.
Approx. fifteen cu/yds concrete in.
MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 5
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.
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.
b. Ground:
1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground
water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities,
if known. No.
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 will be
discharged.
C. Water runoff(including storm water):
1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of
collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where
will this water flow? Will this flow into other waters? If so, describe.
Any runoff would be from precipitation. WDOE's BMPs and
the WDFW's HPA provisions shall be adhered to during
construction.
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters: if so,
generally describe. No.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and
runoff water impacts, if any: The HPA provisions and the
WDOE's BMPs shall be adhered to.
MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST g
4. PLANTS:
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:
X_deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
x_evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
x_shrubs
X grass
pasture
crop or grain
wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other
_water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other
other types of vegetation
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
None.
C. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
Unknown.
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to
preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any:
The site is heavily vegetated with native species, including large
trees.
5. ANIMALS
a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the
site or are known to be on or near the site:
Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other
Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other
Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near
the site. bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus), marbled murrelet
(Brachyramphus marmoratus marmoratus), Puget Sound Chinook
salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), Puget Sound Steelhead
(Oncorhynchus mykiss), yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus
americanus), the spotted owl (Strix occidentalis), and the horned lark
(Eremophila alpestris strigata).
MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 7
C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Fish migrate from
Lake Cushman to the North Fork of the Skokomish River, but
migration to or from Puget Sound is not possible due to major
anthropogenic blockages. Tacoma Power transports salmonids
manually from Lake Cushman to the Skokomish River.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None.
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.
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.
7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH:
a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic
chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, which
could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. No.
1) Describe special emergency services that might be required.
An ambulance in the event of a construction accident.
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health
hazards, if any: WDOE's BMPs shall be adhered to.
b. Noise:
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project
(for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? None.
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:
MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST g
traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise
would come from the site. N/A
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any"
N/A
8) LAND AND SHORELINE USE:
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
Residential and recreational.
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe.
No.
C. Describe any structures on the site.
In addition to a single-family residence, existing shoreline
appurtenances include shoreline access stairs, an approx. five by
*hety-feet (6'' * 6W4 bulkhead and associated walking pier (300 sf), a
wood pier (126 sf), and a mooring buoy.
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
Yes, the existing bulkhead, associated walking pier, and pier will be
disassembled and removed from the site. Existing shoreline access
stairs will also be disassembled.
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
U"kaQwn. FT_5
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
g. If applicable, what is the current Shoreline Master Program designation of
the site? Residential.
h. Has any part of the site been classed as an "Environmentally sensitive"
area? If so, specify. Lake Cushman is a Fish and Wildlife Habitat
Conservation Area .
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed
project? None.
j. Approximately how may people would the completed project displace?
None.
MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 9
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any:
None.
i. Proposed measure to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and
projected land uses and plans, if any: Bulkheads and overwater
structures are common to residences on Lake Cushman.
9. HOUSING:
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate
whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None.
b. Approximately how many units, if any would be eliminated? Indicate
whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None.
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None.
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 float sits on the lake's surface when it actually has water. The
replacement stairs will be installed on a steep slope and will not
block views.
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
None.
C. Proposed measure to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:
None.
11. LIGHT AND GLARE
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day
would it mainly occur?
None.
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere
with views? No.
C. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal:
None.
MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 10
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any:
None.
12. RECREATION
a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the
immediate vicinity?
Boating, fishing, hiking, etc.
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so,
describe. No.
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including
recreational opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:
None.
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.
None.
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any:
None.
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.
State Routes 101 and 119.
b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate
distance to the existing street system? Show on site plans, if any.
Unknown.
C. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many
would the project eliminate? None.
MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
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, indicated When peak volumes would occur. None.
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, If any:
None.
15. PUBLIC SERVICES
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public service (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:
None.
16. UTILITIES
a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas,
water, refuse service,telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other:
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. None.
Signature:
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge.
understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision.
Signature: '�'`'
0ED2 0 Zo — 000e)3
T;�LCJ202.0 —O00+z.
SHORELINE STABILIZATION AND
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT FOR A
NEW 70' LONG BULKHEAD ON THE LAKE
CUSHMAN SHORELINE
Located at 5901 N Lake Cushman Rd, Mason County,
Hoodsport, WA 98548 (Parcel #: 42332-12-60032)
Prepared for: Jonathan and Shari Schwartz
2008 E. Aloha St.
Seattle, WA 87112
(425) 417-1491
1SchwartzL.]nicrosoft.coin
Prepared by: MET Engineering, PLLC
1018 E. Wishkah St.
Aberdeen, WA 98520-2937
(360) 289-0958 bus.
(360) 310-0270 cell
SMorta itaol.com
Contact: Steven P. Morta, P.E.
3 f�f?Oz.�
P.
0
May 14, 2019
sass
Rev: Mar. 5, 2020 o��soNo
, a
2/Z3
May 14,2019
Rev: Mar.5,2020
Page 1 of 6
MET Engineering, PLLC
To: Mason County Community Services
Attn: Marissa Watson,Planner
615 W.Alder St.
Shelton,WA 98584
(360)427-9670, Ext. 367
e-mail: mN�,°atsonuico.mason.wa.us
cc: Jonathan Schwartz
2008 E Aloha St.
Seattle, WA 98112
(425)417-1491
e-mail:jsch"art microsoft.co III
_
Subject: SHORELINE STABILIZATION AND GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
REPORT for Property Located at 5901 N Lake Cushman Road, Mason County,
Hoodsport,WA 98548 (Parcel#: 42332-12-60032
Scope of Review
On Monday July 30,2018,this geotechnical engineer registered as a professional engineer in the
State of Washington visited the above site to evaluate the condition of the existing slopes that is
covered with trees and vegetation. There is also an existing set of beach access stairs that leads
down to the pier below on the shoreline of Lake Cushman. Digital photographs were taken at the
site and have been incorporated into the appendix of this report. Also a vicinity map is located on
Sheet 1.0.
The owner was concerned about the longterm stability of the bank down below since there were
signs of shoreline instability such as major scouring along the shoreline. Digital color
photographs were taken of the bank erosion and have been included in this slope stabilization and
geotechnical engineering report.
This report provides the rational and reasons for constructing a 70-foot long bulkhead along the
shoreline to provide long term stabilization. This geotechnical engineer observed trees leaning
down toward the water as a result of undermining of the tree roots from a combination of wave
action and the lowering and raising of the lake level.
Description of the Site Development
There is currently a set of beach stairs as shown on Sheet 2.0 that will need to be replaced that
leads down to an existing pier that will also need to be replaced. The residence itself is located
near the top of the relatively steep bank with an elevation of approximately 795 feet.
It is planned that a new 6' x 22' pier as well as a new 8' x 20 floating dock is to be constructed
per the attached engineering Sheet 3.0. As mentioned above a 70' bulkhead as shown in the
1018 E.Wishkah St.,Aberdeen,Washington 98520
(360)289-0958 Bus,(360)861-8493 Fax,(800)590-0958 Toll Free
Smorta'd-aol.co►n
3/Z3
May 14,2019
Rev: Mar.5,2020
Page 2 of 6
MET Engineering, PLLC
attached engineering drawing that will provide longterm shoreline stabilization since major soil
erosion is currently taking place as seen in the attached digital color photographs.
The existing pier and wooden walkway along the shoreline will be replaced with a new 70' long
bulkhead constructed of Alaska yellow cedar(AYC)that will significantly increase the longterm
stability of the shoreline as well as the new stairs and the residence above.
Assessment of Relevant Wetlands,Surface Water Drainage,and Site Vegetation
This geotechnical engineer did not observe any wetland areas or surface water drainage areas
since the site is located on a relatively steep bank. The relatively steep heavily forested slope is
also covered with ground vegetation as well. It is important that all trees and vegetation be
preserved since their extensive root systems help to reinforce the soils and keep them from
sloughing especially during the adverse combination of high winds and saturating rainfall.
It appeared that most of the Douglas firs and cedar trees were growing near vertical indicating
that during the life of these trees estimated to be between 60 and 80 years old the trees were
growing near vertical. Any curvature of the tree trunks would have indicated that the slope was
gradually shifting down-hill. However, it is important to point out that continued scouring and
soil erosion along the shoreline which includes the toe of the slope could potentially initiate a
major slide event if nothing was done to stabilize the shoreline.
Upland wetland waterbodies and wetlands were not observed by this geotechnical engineer.
Also, there were evidence of seeps or groundwater in the general upland area that could
potentially cause a slide.
Geologic,Hydrologic Site and Soil Description
The geologic unit for this area has been designated as Quanternary Undivided deposits per the
USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle geologic maps. The general location is located within the base of
the Olympic mountain range.
The area along the Lake Cushman shoreline is relatively steep with 60 to 80% slopes. A
detailed slope stability analysis was completed and the results are described later in this
geotechnical engineering report.
According to the online Web Soil Survey the local soils have been defined as a rough
mountainous Hoodsport soil material (Rc). A detailed soil description has been attached to this
soils report that describes the characteristics of these soils.
The groundwater conditions vary depending on the Lake Cushman water level which rises and
falls on an annual basis. Upslope geomorphology consists primarily of steep mountainous slope
with no indications of upland water bodies or wetlands.
1018 G.Wishkah St.,Aberdeen,Washington 98520
(360)289-0958 taus,(360)861-8493 Fax,(800)590-0958 Toll Free
Smorta(daol.com
4 ,125
May 14,2019
Rev: Mar.5,2020
Page 3 of 6
MET Engineering, PLLC
Also,there has been evidence of sloughing and slides along the shoreline of Lake Cushman due
primarily to wave scouring especially when the lake level is near its peak. This scouring
condition along the toe of these relatively steep slopes gets exacerbated when watercraft such as
jet skies generate significant wave action as well during seasonal high windstorm events.
Regional Site Geomorphology Including the Influence of Wave or Tidal Processes
As mentioned earlier in this shoreline stabilization report, the annual rising and falling of the
Lake Cushman water level has continued to saturate the even the most-dense glacial till type soils
resulting in the eventual removal of fines. Eventually,the shoreline including the toe of the slope
will eventually continue to slough since the removal of fines and silt binders results in the gravels
and cobbles continuing to slide down the relatively steep lake shoreline embankment.
It is recommended that a 70' long bulkhead be constructed to substantially slow down the
shoreline sloughing of these loose smooth gravels and cobbles. It is to be noted that these
rounded gravels and cobbles are the result of the grinding action of the recessional glaciers that
occurred over 40,000 years ago.
Upslope geomorphology consists primarily of dense conifers and vegetative ground cover on
relatively steep upward slopes of greater than 45%. There was no evidence of groundwater or
seeps in the area that could potentially cause a slide. However, if no mitigation took was to take
place on the scouring and soil erosion that is currently taking place along the shoreline below,
there is the potential of a slide on the relatively steep slopes that could eventually damage the
residence located at the top of the hillside. It is recommended, therefore, that a 70' long
bulkhead be constructed at the toe of the relatively steep slope to significantly reduce the
likelihood of a slide in the future.
Evaluation of Erosion and/or Flooding Issues Including Causes,Rates,and Timeframes
This geotechnical engineer observed severe scouring of the shoreline including the toe of the
slope as can been seen in the attached digital color photographs in the Appendix. As mentioned
earlier in this shoreline stabilization and geotechnical engineering report, that the rising and
lowering of Lake Cushman for hydroelectric purposes results in saturation of even the very dense
glacial till soils resulting in the removal of fines and silts that act as binders. The fines and silts
when loosened due to high water conditions along with the adverse combination of storms and
watercraft than can cause significant wave action that also can increase the rate of the eroding
shoreline as well as the toe of these relatively steep 65 to 75% upward steep slopes.
Slope Stability Analysis
A detailed slope stability analysis was completed for the site as indicated on Engineering Sheet
6.0 which took into account the height of the slope,the density of the insitu till soils,the cohesion
of the native soils, and the internal friction angle of the slope material. For the static or non-
seismic case,the resulting factor of safety was determined to be 1.113 and since this was less than
the normally accepted value of 1.500,the slope was considered unstable.
1018 E. Wishkah St.,Aberdeen,Washington 98520
(360)289-0958 Bus,(360)861-8493 Fax,(800)590-0958 Toll Free
Srnorta(a'aol.coin
May 14,2019
Rev: Mar.5,2020
Page 4 of 6
MET Engineering, P'LLC
It is to be noted that a new wooden bulkhead would increase the overall longterm stability of the
60 to 80% slope and would help to mitigate a slide event by reinforcing the toe of the slope,thus,
minimizing the potential of another slide event since the reinforced toe helps to hold the slope in
place especially in the case of a seismic event. The following analysis determines the stability of
the existing slope in the case of an earthquake.
Using similar input parameters as was input for the static case, the resulting factor of safety
resulted in 0.846 and since this is less than the normally accepted value of 1.100, the slope was
considered unstable. Again, a new bulkhead would help to stabilize the toe of the slope which
in-turn increases the longterm stability of the hillside.
Evaluation of the Amount of Time that Major Structures Will be Damaged if no Action is
Taken on the Site
The primary structure that is relatively close to the shoreline is the residence located at the top of
the stairs as indicated on engineering Sheet 2.0. If nothing was done to stabilize the relatively
steep hillside which was considered unstable from a static and quasi-static, i.e., seismic event,
then there is the potential of slide event that could compromise the integrity of the residence
resulting in potential damage. This catastrophic event could occur if there was an adverse
combination of saturating heavy rainfall that could last for days and eventually loosen the soils,
along with high winds and a significant seismic event. Back in 1999 there was the Nisqually
delta earthquake followed by another earthquake and was designated the Satsop earthquake which
resulted in severe damage to the Grays Harbor County Courthouse building which took of years
to repair the major cracks in the building.
Land Slide Activity in the Area
This geotechnical engineer has observed some slides along the shoreline of Lake Cushman
which actually is an artificial lake formed by the construction of the Lake Cushman hydroelectric
dam. As the level of the lake falls some fines from the glacial till soils is removed which can
result, in some cases, the loosening of gravels and cobbles. This has the potential of dislodging
some of these smooth gravels at the toe of the slope and then could cause a slide event due to the
undermining of the bottom of the slope. To reduce the potential of a major slide event on the
Schwartz property, it is recommended that a 70' long bulkhead be constructed at the toe of the
slope located near the Lake Cushman shoreline.
Alternative Approaches such as a Bio-retention Bulkhead Replacement
This"soft" solution is not applicable for this slope since the base of the slope currently is nearly
vertical and that any plantings in this area is not feasible. For this steep toe condition, the most
effective solution is a mechanically stabilized wood bulkhead.
1018 F.Wisbkah St.,Aberdeen,Washington 98520
(360)289-0958 lies,(360)861-8493 Fax,(8O0)590-0958 Toll Free
Smortatuiaol.com
May 14,2019
Rev: Mar.5,2020
Page 5 of 6
MET Engineering, PLLC
Proposed Bulkhead is the Minimum Size Necessary and Placed on the Landward Side and
Will not Result in the Net Loss of Shoreline Ecological Functions
This geotechnical engineer observed scouring along the shoreline and along the toe of the
relatively steep slope. It is recommended that a 70' long bulkhead constructed of AYC be built
along the owner's lake boundary line to significantly reduce the likelihood of a major slide event
if a combination of adverse site conditions should occur.
It is also to keep in mind that there are major storms in the area that can generate significant
damaging wave action that can severely scour the shoreline and could cause a slide event since
the slopes would be saturated from heavy continual rainfall.
On-Site and Off-Site Impacts
It is anticipated that there will be Little to no on-site impacts since the only construction activity
is the construction of a new wood bulkhead. Also, there is no off-site impacts since all the
construction activity will take place on the site. It is to be noted that once the 70' long AYC
bulkhead is constructed,the overall stability of the neighboring slopes will also increase since the
likelihood of a slide on the property as well as the neighboring properties has been significantly
reduced once the bulkhead has been constructed.
Final Development Conditions and Structural Mitigation
Most of the planned work will be addition of a new wooden bulkhead that will increase the
longterm stability of the 60 to 80%slopes and the retrofit of the existing pier. Also,a new float is
planned that will be located on the lake side of the pier.
The planned bulkhead replacement location is shown on Sheet 1.0 and will be constructed on
both sides of the stairs. Currently,there is undermining and scouring at the toe of the slope. The
planned wood bulkhead will help to reinforce the toe of the slope and, therefore, increase the
long-term overall stability of the vegetated 60 to 80%slope.
It is to be noted that the residence will be in jeopardy within 3-years if the new 70' long AYC
bulkhead is not installed.
This geotechnical engineering and shoreline stabilization report also satisfies Mason County's
submittal checklists which has been attached. It is also to be noted that this report has been
prepared according to accepted engineering practices. This report is only to be used for this site
and not to be used at any other locations in the area.
1018 E. Wishkah St., Aberdeen,Washington 98520
(360)289-0958 Bus,(360)861-8493 Fax,(800)590-0958 Toll Free
Smortafa`aol.coni
�
123
May 14,2019
Rev: Mar.5,2020
Page 6 of 6
MET Engineering, PLLC
Any questions or comments regarding this shoreline stabilization report and geotechnical
engineering report can be addressed by calling(360) 310-0270 or by e-mail at 5Mort���a��( com.
It is to be noted that if there are any changes to this project or if there should be any anomalies
during or after the construction phase, this geotechnical engineer shall be contacted immediately
by e-mail,text,or phone.
Respectfully Submitted, � �j2 O
P.
WASH
O
Steven P.Morta,P.E.
/0�73�8�tip
OJVAL�
References:
1. Websoil Survey that is available online that has been prepared by the USDA
2. Stability Charts for Uniform Slopes by Radoslaw L. Michalowski, F. ASCE, published in
the "Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenviromnental Engineering",April 2002
3. Cushman Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 460: "Shoreline Use Specification and
Permitting Guidelines", dated March 2014
1018 E.Wishkah St.,Aberdeen,Washington 98520
(360)289-0958 Bus,(360)861-8493 Fax,(800)590-0958 Toll Free
Sntorta(iiaol.com
r RE rVED
JAIL';
615 W. AIaer Street
,
3 t
,yip
O f
Biological Evaluation
Schwartz Bulkhead and Pier, Ramp, and Float Replacement
Project
Lake Cushman, Hoodsport WA
For:
Jonathan & Shari Schwartz
2008 East Aloha Street
Seattle, WA 98112
Prepared by:
BioResources,LLC
Kim Schaumburg
Fisheries biologist,University of Washington, 1981
10112 Bay View Rd. KPN
Vaughn, WA,98394
(253)884-5776 or 225-2973
Email:
January 9,2020
GEOLOGIC UNIT FOR LAKE CUSHMAN AREA 2_7
-
, ` , 1^.b �,,.. .
Mac
r
� � a k �.:, Quaternary
h!rom deposits
T ! :and c hems, 'imir, J.a
TACOMA FAUt,i Pre-Quaternary
,< .• •.;, �'`/ sedimentary rocks
I
ud
♦ Pre-Quaternary
volcanic rocks
`"'
7 _
f _ Geologic
structures
0.
1.5 ,�Gc ��9
G .Q tt pt4 r t:dy
Ice limits
- t
,
Water features
'F 'b ♦/ ip, � . Fan' `l�� �ti ��� ...�Y. $ k 1�:.. rl♦ .'i,Cr
r "
OTY FAU71
I
�� 1f
'
..^2 0 t U rrt�
� ,; tYY47tt+ t 1 t
Geologic Unit for Lake Cushman Area Prepared by: MET Engineering,PLLC,1018 E.Wshkah St,Aberdeen,WA 98520-2937
(360)310-0270 cell,(360)289-0958 bus,SMorta@aol.com
Site Visit on: Mon.7-30 2019
Prepared for:Jonathan Schwartz May 14,2019 SHEET 4.0
at 10:30 am
Schwartz: Slope Stability Calculations (Simplified Bishop's Method of Circles)
�313
55 ft 1`3�kX. Not to scale(NTS)
' Sli Failure Plane
Alpha=.3"aeg
(750/6 slope)
1. Compute factor of safety(FS)against sliding-Static Case(Ref: "Stability Charts for Uniform Slopes"by
Radoslaw L Michalowski,F.ASCE) - "Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering",April 2002.
From Figure 3"Stability charts for uniform slopes"the following parameters are known for rough mountainous
soils:
c(cohesion)=200 psf,gamma(insitu unit density)=134 pcf,H(height of slope)=55 ft,
phi(internal friction angle)=24 deg, then
cl[gamma x H x tan(phi)]=200/(134 x 55 x tan 24)=0.0610
Then for a 36.9 deg(75%)slope from Fig.3:
FSttan(phi)=FS/tan(24)=2.5 or, FS=Factor of Safety Against Sliding= 1.113<1.500 NOT OKAY
2. Compute factor of safety(FS)against sliding-Quasi-Static(seismic)Case(Ref: "Stability Charts for Uniform Slopes"
by Radoslaw L.Michalowski,F.ASCE) - "Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering",April 2002.
From Figure 4"Stability charts for uniform slopes"the following parameters are known for a rough mountainous
soils:
c(cohesion)=200 psf,gamma(insitu unit density)=133 pcf,H(height of slope)=55 ft, ��N f'•M
phi(internal friction angle)=24 deg, then �<,o�WASy
c/[gamma x H x tan(phi)]=200/(134 x 55' x tan 24)=0.0610
Then for a 33.99 deg slope(75%slope)from Fig.4 for a quasi-static analysis coefficient of 0.1:
ri .p 30758
F/tan(24)=2.1 or FS=Factor of Safety=0.935 FcISr
F '�G
For a quasi-static analysis coefficient of 0.2: SS70NAL
F/tan(24)=1.70 or FS=Factor of Safety=0.757
As a result,for a quasi static analysis coefficient of 0.15,the Factor of Safety,FS=(0.935+0.757)/2=0.846< 1.100 NOT OKAY
MITIGATION: INSTALLATION OF A 70'LONG BULKHEAD THAT WILL PROVIDE TOE REINFORCEMENT
AND SHORELINE STABILIZATION TO MITIGATE SLIDE EVENT.
Slope Stability Analysis (360)
by: MET Engineering,PLLC,1018 E.Wishkah St,Aberdeen,WA 98520-2937
(360)289-0958, (800)590-0958,(360)310-0270 text,SMorta@aol.com
Prepared for:Jonathan Schwartz Oct.23,2018 Site Visit on Wed.7-30-2018 SHEET 6.0
Rev: Mar. 5,2020 at 10:30 am
,d PPCAr 1) t)c 123
,s
- rr n
,m
e
,
r
There's evidence of undermining at the toe of the slope due to wave scouring. A
detailed slope stability analysis indicated that this slope is unstable. It is
recommended that a new bulkhead wall be constructed at the toe of the slope to
increase long term slope stability.
The annual lowering raising of the lake level for hydroelectric purposes can saturate
even very dense glacial till type soils and results in the loss of fines in between the
gravels and cobbles. Eventually, once the fines have been removed due to adverse
combination of high water levels and wave action, the remaining smooth rocks
eventually become loose and start migrating down the steep lake slopes.
f
fK' �
x
� t" W 9
K � I a
q}
Y � �
i
K
As can be seen, scouring at the toe of the slope has occurred due to wave action
during high water level conditions. It is recommended that a bulkhead wall be
constructed at the base of the slope to increase long term slope stability.
The water level of Lake Cushman is controlled by a dam at the south end of the
lake for hydroelectric purposes. This is turn results in shoreline erosion as indicated
above where the soils get saturated and eventually slough off down the relatively
steep lake shoreline. A bulkhead would significantly slow this beach erosional
process down.
X�1? /;1123
Ir
a ,xf�d
r
Bank erosion can be seen in this digital color photograph necessitating the
placement of planking to help slow down the shoreline erosional process. It is
recommended that at least a 70-foot long bulkhead be constructed along Jonathan
Schwartz's shoreline to prevent further sloughing of the bank. This would
significantly slow down the shoreline erosional process.
The residence is located at the top of this relatively steep vegetated bank and by
stabilizing the shoreline below with a bulkhead, then the overall longterm stability
of the residence will increase.
i ?lay
o %
65 ..
ate.
fir, fie" -i
n r
Fallen tree trunks can be seen on the north side of the pier in this digital color
photograph. Severe shoreline scouring can also be observed just on the other side
of the tree trunks that appears to be working its way up the bank.
A 70' long bulkhead constructed along the property line on the lake side would
substantially slow down the shoreline erosional process and increase long term
shoreline stabilization.
1P
7771D /cp/23
r
This photo shows the existing stairs leading down to the shoreline below and gives
an indication of the relatively steep bank which is close to a 65 to 75% downward
slope.
It is important to preserve and leave undisturbed all the vegetation and trees on this
steep slope which will significantly help to increase long term slope stability. The
trees' extensive root system reinforces the granular soils to help hold the soils
together especially during the adverse combination of saturating rainfall and high
winds.
a rr.
G
�4
i
r
. y
j
w
y
elm
1
This is another view of the beach stairs looking up from the shoreline below. It is
planned that these stairs are to be replaced with Alaska yellow cedar that can
withstand the wet high humidity environment.
The residence is located at the very top of the existing stairs. Reference is made
to the attached engineering plan view of the stairs that will be replaced by AYC.
MASON COUNTY
' COMMUNITY SERVICES
Building,Planning,Environmental Health.Community Health Shoreline Stabilization
Note:This checklist must be submitted with a Shoreline Geotechnical Assessment and completed, signed,and
stamped by the licensed professional(s)who prepared it for review pursuant to the Mason County Shoreline
Master Program. If an item is found not applicable,the Assessment should explain the basis for the
conclusion.
MCC 17.50.340 B.2. New structural stabilization measures shall not be allowed except as follows:
a. To protect existing primary structures:
i. New or enlarged structural shoreline stabilization measures for an existing primary structure, including
residences,shall not be allowed unless there is conclusive evidence documented by a Shoreline Geotechnical
Assessment*that the structure is in danger from shoreline erosion caused by tidal action, currents,waves, or
sea level rise. Normal sloughing, erosion of steep bluffs, or shoreline erosion itself,without a scientific or
geotechnical analysis, is not demonstration of need. The geotechnical assessment shall evaluate on-site
drainage issues and address drainage problems away from the shoreline edge before considering structural
shoreline stabilization.
ii. The erosion control structure will not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions. This shall be
demonstrated in a Habitat Management Plan as required in MCC 8.52.170(J).
iii. Primary structure means the structure or the only access associated with the principal use of the
property that cannot feasibly be relocated. It may also include single family residential appurtenant structures
that cannot feasibly be relocated.
Applicant/Owner—�� �/-l�d�t/ �R2:z Parcel#_ _ 'V2 33
Site Address 9'o r /V L/Jkt- C-us/w peaV Q 1&!2bV.o oR-r 1/(/,4 cf�cSy�
Items to be included in assessment4and
cated on
age(s):
Scope of review,including landowner concerns and site assessment objectives.
Discussion of site development,including the location and setback of important pr
appurtenant structures,roads and utilities.
Assessment of relevant wetlands and surface water drainage and control systems.
Assessment of site vegetation,including species and communities present.
Assessment of regional/site geology,including relevant rock/soil unit descriptions,geologic
history and stratigraphic correlation. 2,3
Assessment of regional/site geomorphology,including the influence of wave or tidal processes in
controlling sediment transport and the evolution of the site's landform. Include assessment of
the drift cell sediment budget and local beach conditions.
May 2018
Z 11�3
Evaluation of erosion and/or flooding issues,including assessment of causes, and rates or 3
timeframes associated with each issue.Include evaluation of how historic shoreline
modifications near the site may have impacted patterns of erosion.
Evaluation of the amount of time until primary structures or major utilities will be damaged by
wave or tidal action,based on evidence of erosion rates,a slope stability analysis or other [�
geotechnical considerations if no action is taken on the site.
Discussion of alternative approaches to reduce risk from erosion on the site,including the use of
nonstructural measures such as drainage and vegetation,and soft shoreline techniques such as
gravel berms,large woody debris,or other measures. Explain why these techniques would be
infeasible or insufficient to reduce the threat from erosion.
Discussion describing the proposed shoreline stabilization is the minimum size necessary,placed S,
as far landward as possible and will not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions.
A site map drawn to scale which identifies property boundaries,scale,north arrow and the
location of proposed development,geologic features and ordinary high water mark(OHWM).All �"�� -�
development setbacks should be delineated and marked.
Cross-section(s),identified on site map,showing both horizontal and vertical scales,and T 0
identifying important features such as:MHHW and OHWM,top and bottom of bluff,location of
upland structures and utilities,and geologic units where relevant.
Supplementary photographs. MEn10 V
pyozo's/-6
i, STEVEN P /"O/?7A hereby certify under penalty of perjury that I am a civil engineer licensed in the State of
Washington with specialized knowledge of geotechnical/geological engineering or a geologist or engineering geologist licensed in
the State of Wash'gto with special knowledge of the local conditions.I also certify that the Geotechnical Assessment,dated
MAac/a u�, ?�U2D.and entitled
�F�nr�� meets all the
7
O requirements of the Mason County Shoreline Master Program,Shoreline
Stabilization Section(MCC 17.50.340),and is complete and true.
30738
Atl.�
(Signature and Stamp)
*MCC17.50.020 Definitions:Shoreline Geotechnical Assessment. A scientific study or evaluation conducted by a qualified expert
that includes a description of the ground and surface hydrology and geology,the affected land form and its susceptibility to mass
wasting,erosion,and other geologic hazards or processes,conclusions and recommendations regarding the effect of the proposed
development on geologic conditions,the adequacy of the site to be developed,the Impacts of the proposed development,
alternative approaches to the proposed development,and measures to mitigate potential site-specific and cumulative geological
and hydrological impacts of the proposed development,including the potential adverse impacts to adjacent and down-current
properties. Geotechnical assessments shall conform to accepted technical standards and must be prepared by qualified professional
engineers or geologists who have professional expertise about the regional and local shoreline geology and processes.
Page 2 of 2
Disclaimer.,Mason County does not certify the quality of the work done in this Geotechnical Assessment.
2 2123
MASON COUNTY
COMMUNITY SERVICES
•y\ �' Building,Planninct,Environmenttl Health.Community Health Geotechnical Report
Instructions:
This checklist must be submitted with a Geotechnical Report and completed,signed, and stamped by the licensed
professional(s)who prepared the Geotechnical Report for review by Mason County pursuant to the Mason County
Resource Ordinance. If an item is found not applicable, the report should explain the basis for the conclusion.
Note:Unless specifically documented, this report does not provide compliance to the International Residential Code Sections
R403.1.7 for foundations on or adjacent to slopes, Section R403.1.8 for expansive soils or section 1808.7.1 of the International
Building Code Section for Foundations on or adjacent to slopes.
Applicant/Owner Joup�-�/R�w s�4wrz parcel 2 06k?
2-1
Site Address_ ��Q/ /11 L A k-- A C IGSIc//V1,4/�
(1) (a) A discussion of general geologic conditions in the vicinity of the proposed development,
Located on page(s) /+ Z
(b) A discussion of specific soil types,
Located on page(s) 4 2
(c) A discussion of ground water conditions,
Located on page(s) Z.
(d) A discussion of the upslope geomorphology,
Located on page(s) .?
(e) A discussion of the location of upland waterbodies and wetlands,
Located on page(s) 2
(f) A discussion of history of landslide activity in the vicinity, as available in the referenced maps and records.
Located on page(s) 4
(2) A site plan which identifies the important development and geologic features.
Located on Map(s) .fiA.(&W���r�LNGEa�l�"�7
(3) Locations and logs of exploratory holes or probes.
Located on Map(s) s x.,_,z
(4) The area of the proposed development, the boundaries of the hazard,and associated buffers and setbacks shall
be delineated (top, both sides, and toe)on a geologic map of the site.
Located on Map(s) .SWtzE 7 /- Q ( UJC &&_5- _gnl0 S' T-84GkS N A
(5) A minimum of one cross section at a scale which adequately depicts the subsurface profile, and which
incorporates the details of proposed grade changes.
Located on Map(s) Siq is c-
(6) A description and results of slope stability analyses performed for both static and seismic loading conditions.
Analysis should examine worst case failures.The analysis should include the Simplified Bishop's Method of
Circles.The minimum static safety factor is 1.5,the minimum seismic safety factor is 1.1,and the quasi-static
analysis coefficients should be a value of 0.15.
Located on page(s) . y E F T / L2
P
(7) (a) Appropriate restrictions on placement of drainage features,
Rev. February 2018
z 3/z3
Located on page(s
(b) Appropriate restrictions on placement of septic drain fields,
Located on page(s)
(c) Appropriate restrictions on placement of compacted fills and footings,
Located on page(s)
(d) Recommended buffers from the landslide hazard areas shoreline bluffs and the tops of other slopes.
Located on page(s)
(e) Recommended setbacks from the landslide hazard areas shoreline bluffs and the tops of other slopes.
Located on page(s) N !}
(8) Recommendations for the preparation of a detailed clearing and grading plan which specifically identifies
vegetation to be removed, a schedule for vegetation removal and replanting, and the method of vegetation
removal.
Located on page(s) N��
(9) Recommendations for the preparation of a detailed temporary erosion control plan which identifies the specific
mitigating measures to be implemented during construction to protect the slope from erosion,landslides and
harmful construction methods. /
Located on page(s) N1
(10) An analysis of both on-site and off-site impacts of the proposed development.
Located on page(s) S
(11) Specifications of final development conditions such as,vegetative management,drainage, erosion control,and
buffer widths.
Located on page(s)
(12) Recommendations for the preparation of structural mitigation or details of other proposed mitigation.
Located on page(s) .`
(13) A site map drawn to scale showing the property boundaries, scale, north arrow, and the location and nature of
existing and proposed development on the site.
Located on Map(s)
1e hereby certify under penalty of perjury that I am a civil engineer licensed in the
State of Washington with specialized knowledge of geotechnical/geological engineering or a geologist or engineering
geologist licensed in the State of Washington with special knowledge of the local conditions. I also certify that the
Geotechnical Report, dated MAke �y Z U 2 d , and entitled
IV AC 6&Lto �*7-
meets all the requirements of the Mason County Resource Ordinance,
4 Geologically Hazardous Areas Section,is complete and true,that the
30758 - / assessment demonstrates conclusively that the risks posed by the
wy 3-`/ujZO landslide hazard can be mitigated through the included geotechnical
JJJ design recommendations, and that all hazards are mitigated in such a
(Signature and Stamp) manner as to prevent harm to property and public health and safety.
Page 2 of 2
Disclaimer.,Mason County does not certify the quality of the work done in this Geotechnical Report.
f r
3628 South 35'h Street 1,
Tacoma,Washington 98409-3192 Je
r _ 4€
POWER t�
TACOMA RURtIC UTlt.1rtES TACOMA PUBLIC UTILITIES 61s W.
AWer
November 18, 2019 PUNNING
VIA EMAIL and USPS
i Jonathan & Shari Schwartz
2008 E Aloha St
Seattle, WA 98112
SUBJECT: UPDATED Schwartz Shoreline Proposal on Tacoma Power Property
I
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Schwartz:
The City of Tacoma, Department of Public Utilities, Light Division (Tacoma Power)was
recently contacted to review the enclosed updated drawings by Steven Mort, P.E, dated
October 22, 2019, for proposed demolition of existing structures and construction of new stairs,
bulkhead, fixed pier, and float with landing cradle on Tacoma Power property fronting your
development lot CPN:42332-12-60032 at 5901 N Lake Cushman Rd, Lake Cushman.
The proposed action will require issuance of a short-term license from Tacoma Power before
any work occurs on Tacoma Power property waterward of 742 feet elevation, and a Shoreline
Use Permit once work is completed. Tacoma Power has no objection to you moving forward
with regulatory permitting for the proposed activities on Tacoma Power property.
Please provide a copy of this letter to the regulatory agencies when you submit your plans to
them. Feel free to contact me at 253-441-4180 or wwri ht ci.tacoma.wa.us if you have any
questions.
Sincerely,
i
Wynnae right
Shoreline and Lands Coordinator
Tacoma Power
Enclosures
cc: Dori Bishop, Sr. Real Estate Specialist, City of Tacoma
i
i
i
" 3628 South 35"'Street
Tacoma,Washington 98409-3192
T va- -
p'�,\( (" -1 A POWER TACOMA PUBLIC UTILITIES
TACOMA PUBLIC UTILITIES _
November 18, 2019
VIA EMAIL and USPS
Jonathan &Shari Schwartz
2008 E Aloha St
Seattle, WA 98112
SUBJECT: UPDATED: Tacoma Power Shoreline Use Permit Application Review:
Lot 4, Lake Cushman Short Plat 1727
(Tax Parcel No.42332-12-60032)
REFERENCE: Project No. 2019-064/SUP406
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Schwartz,
Thank you for applying for a Shoreline Use Permit(SUP)for your proposed removals and
reconstruction of shoreline structures located on Tacoma Power property adjacent to and
associated with your development lot No. 4, Short Plat 1727 of Lake Cushman. As you know,
Tacoma Power's Cushman Hydroelectric Project area (Project)includes all lands located
waterward of the 742-foot elevation Project boundary on Lake Cushman. Tacoma Power also
retains a 10-foot lateral strip on your leased development lot adjacent to the Project boundary
(see enclosure). All structures and uses located waterward of 742 feet elevation, and all
structures and fill placed within the 10-foot lateral strip require authorization from Tacoma
Power.
Tacoma Power has reviewed your SUP application package for conformance with Tacoma
Power's Shoreline Use Specifications and Permitting Guidelines(SUSPG)and has the following
comments:
Items Reviewed:
• SUP application dated February 23, 2019, received March 5, 2019 and associated fees
received March 12, 2019,
• UPDATED engineering drawings by Steven P. Morta, P.E., dated October 22, 2019,
• Geotechnical report by Steven P. Morta, P.E., (MET Engineering PLLC)dated May 14,
2019,
• Scope of work,
• Tacoma Power records.
1. Stairs from development lot to Tacoma Power property. Allowed as proposed. As
shown in the above referenced drawings, you propose to remove the existing wood stairs
that connect the development lot to Tacoma Power property and install new 4-foot wide
wood stairs slightly north of the current footprint to avoid a mature tree. Approximately 4
steps associated with the new stairs will be located waterward of 742 feet elevation. Stairs
to access the shoreline are an allowed use per Appendix B Section 10 of the SUSPG.
Schwartz
November 18, 2019
Page 2 of 3
2. Replace and extend bulkhead.Allowed. As shown in the above referenced drawings, you
propose to remove the existing 38-foot long bulkhead and construct a new wood bulkhead
extending the length north for a total length of 70 lineal feet, including a 5-foot long
wing
at each end to tie the structure into the hillside. The new bulkhead will be constructed at the
oe o sop woo pi mgs set in concrete footers, and extend u� to 8 feet
tall. Shoreline stabilization is an allowed use per Appendix B, Section 4 of the SUSPG when
justified with a geotechnical engineering report, which you have provided.
3. Fixed pier and float with landing cradle and ladder. Allowed. As shown in the above
referenced drawings, you propose to remove the existing wood fixed pier and associated
pilings which runs both parallel and perpendicular to shore. You propose to construct a new ;
wood fixed pier and float with a landing cradle and ladder supported by 10 wood pilings set
in concrete footings. The total overwater coverage of the proposed dock structure is 296
square feet. The proposed fixed pier, float, landing cradle, and ladder comply with Appendix
ec�tGn 2 of the SUSPG.
4. Buoy anchor. To be removed. As shown in the above referenced drawings, you propose to
remove the existing buoy anchor in its entirety. I
5. Tree Removal. Allowed as proposed. As shown in the above referenced drawings, you
propose to remove six undermined leaning trees located along the shoreline to facilitate
construction of the new bulkhead. The proposed tree removal complies with Section 11.3 of
the SUSPG. -
6. Debris. To be removed. All debris and abandoned building materials located on Tacoma
Power's property waterward of 742 feet elevation and on the lakebed fronting your
development lot must be removed and properly disposed.
Other Information:
I
7. Tacoma's 10-foot lateral strip area Tacoma retains a 10-foot lateral strip on the
development lots adjacent to the 742-foot elevation boundary. Any permanent structures or
fill in this area must be approved by Tacoma, You propose stairs and a stair landing located
in the 10-foot lateral strip area.
8. Cultural Resources Survey, Completed. A Cultural Resources Survey(CRS) for the
ground disturbance that will occur when your project is underway was completed on March
16, 2019. You were provided the results and a refund of unused funds on April 18, 2019.
I
9. All Structures Must Be Built to Approved Plans and Specifications Completed
structures must match Tacoma Power approved plans. Any changes to approved plans
must first be approved by Tacoma Power and then by the applicable regulatory agencies
before the change is implemented. Any existing structures not shown on approved plans are
assumed to be slated for removal. It is the responsibility of the applicant and their agents to
determine the viability of the proposed project and to assure that the submitted plans are
complete. The total overwater coverage of new structures must not exceed 300 square feet.
Only projects that are constructed consistent with the plans approved by Tacoma Power will
be eligible for a Shoreline Use Permit.
Schwartz
November 18, 2019
Page 3 of 3
Next Steps:
10. Required regulatory permits. (Applicant) Regulatory permits are required from Mason
County, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and the US Army Corps of
Engineers for your project. Per Section 1 of the SUSPG, copies of the necessary regulatory
permits are required before Tacoma Power can issue you permission to work on our Project
lands. Once obtained, please provide a copy of the required permits to Tacoma Power to
satisfy this requirement. If necessary, Tacoma's allowable use requirements will be modified
to reflect the most stringent requirement of the other agencies.
11. Short-term License. (Tacoma Power)After you have provided copies of the required
regulatory permits, Tacoma Power will issue you a short-term license to perform the work
described above.
12. Shoreline Use Permit. (Tacoma Power) Upon verification that you completed the
requirements of the short-term license, Tacoma Power will issue a 5-year Shoreline Use
Permit for the allowed uses and structures.
Please do not commence any work on Tacoma Power Project lands, waterward of 742
feet elevation or within the 10-foot lateral strip area,without written permission to do so
from Tacoma Power.
If you have questions regarding this review of your application, please contact me at
(253)441-4180 or via email at wwrightCcpcityoftacoma.org.
Sincerely,
Wynn right
Shoreline and Lands Coordinator
Enclosures
c: Dori Bishop, Sr. Real Estate Specialist, City of Tacoma
Bret Forrester, Wildlife and Lands Manager, Tacoma Power
Marissa Watson, Mason County
Kyrra Wilson, Wildlife and Recreation Lands Officer, Tacoma Power
w¢OE<IL le OLOZ ZZ"PO nab 616Z'61 low wab
o t l-qS OIOZ'OE APr ua p m al!S ( &DZ U 6-V wab 69OZ'tt qa!"gab MM439 Pe45 Puo ueyleuoZ:tq pmeday
610Z'9 '6aV AgN Ot6Z'Ot PO
Pe@h-VJS OS60-069(ON)9960'6OZ(090 '—
tf6t OZSB64PA'uaapta6V'IS QMMAA 3 OtOt N77d RISPOOdMADNGM
*jVBupaaq&91M hV pamdwd
V
�)
W� CL .
j Q� D
CL e
W
o4,
:
Aw ,LD
W
m ^-
Q y
C9 Y_
Z ( z
5 Z
p
a Z S
WV
i
ev
OC U m
L
Z C CCU 7'�,('T b1S O�V�i
OC
i
C�
h
L E,R gg
~ O N
W W
4
752g m Tl a to Re O 2(P-O'(MSI. n
z
ti-•�g � O F � rR �� �� � n. .�- i 4 � ��� go���+siDg$ n .r� • • • • • • •
Q F �i �� m x pm '� � fS � � �� r4 dPr O ���z � {�1 m m N% • n
z� L7
K n < O CFp Ox _T�_ �_`� _J yy�• � q P 0_->i 2 n'� mw
tl,_7 a mi n� �3y y c Zm 00� D g A .
n $ Q e1 m N
3 Fri
@ X
7n 41 a _
p0 Fs 'ti r -�— o Q�y le rQ
mm r x .n I r re y " e
n
?= a � �`� i .+a r ✓ � tl�t g�ti11S�O`t1J 3 -' � � � "`'�¢ o � (� gg r r7. Z
EhleEpiErvR fyi'4 • • • • • �
oyr�i w gm r4n1 a z„ �
MIyb� i CAR ofs ?
s.se•:;Rro;1 _ Qmw c 4 h@ g Sm Fo
� g -
�F Yi � jo3{ 9AS C 'n 0 •+y
ZL6
Im
o Q _Tp
Y.i _ _ _ _. .— _jf_._ y-- —----._ _ _ =8 ��n
O
F is-o•
Jig
D X
OD m XS� 'Sy� B F % F ffim a
O Z V u O n M N a
yy T F N
DaA A `cif�_ Y RR}Trr° -._._.- ffig". 4
Off
C g m 3 10 STEPS f
,q{ O mmn dd
N n
an S w
m 9 ACC
w
55TEP5 m
W PI 0 STEPS 1
w y
_ _ - -77
r - - - - - - - s,
DOA
OyR .•.IT* Zm
m 4411
�n o x �O
hy�-b TAT^T`�L (?��[
2 N�. .v. �'^I y !" q gyp"
> � N
,a C QF0 Div
ti
FFR a �
1
DESIGN OF STARS DEG(REP AND BULKHEAD Prepared by MET Engineering,PLLC
1018 E.V*hkah SL.AheNean.M 9BS20 SCALE.118"-1 FEET
5907 N Lake agurm W Hoodspad,WA 98548 )360)289.0958,18001 95 0-09 5 0.SMona;;Jaoi a—
OCL 10.2018 Rev:Mar.19 2019 tr 2' 4' 6' fT 10' 12' 19' 18'
Rev: Nov.1.2018 Rbv:Aug. 5.2018 Ore'k ds;t oh Mnn 7-30.2018 Sheet 2.0
Prepared(or:Jet.*..aril Shari Schvnrh Re,.Feb.10,2019 Rev.W.22.2019 ib 10:30 am
1.
CD
Rip
m o° " x n +.
A
tio�e n2`� N y v N c
m
P
gym. sg 4 0o
R� A IR
ym
M
a
co
> 6x8fe�
` 10` v N m q n n n Sq ynx
) \ �\e D C 5iZ �I qq Dc4bya
P pa111 O$m Iq$ �
rZ b D fn In y iF
SEEM - M J
T y m
I 4 A t�j
v
i 4 26-0--AYC BEA AS(3) ni
0
i 4x8x AVC BEAM
4x8x tp'YC BEAM
` N
� Ip N�
44y � NZ
S
a > \ _ 0
ti
o m g AT I
> N
y A
/ a
A c'S 25
4 D -rAn
AT 0 .0
R $ O �Zn x �oN Zm r m
x m
N Z O � �TI C� _� an m2 rTii� y% ZD
Z
S$��
'� �v pTa ]l pp fTl�.lzi Irt t�mn0 4
09 DODAz S < Dn i<7x .0
ez
y a a oy
n O
NEWPlERandDOCH ENCtfNEER7N6 DETAB-S Prepared by'.BET En9ineaft PLLC
1018 E 1Mahkah St.Aberdeen M W520-2937
(380)289-0958,(e9B)590.0958.St:,onaicaul nnli SCALE Mr a 1 FEET
Prepared ow imathm smr4 Nov 1.2019 Rev. .28.2019 Rev:Otl.22.2019 Omi1e Nek on Mon. feel 3,0 0 Y 4' 6 6 16 12 14- 16
Rev:feb.11.2019 Rev.A09. 5.2019
fkv hW.19.2M9 Rev:Aug.31.2019 7-3b2018 a110:30 am
6&OL'$ '61tV"mil
Oa1-49 t'uo UL wmi 6tOV&1�Oj AaH slelx�O'+Pa+WW'S PNS PIw uWPwM'�Pl Pax.Veid
A 1 8 S b ,C z A A 9tOL-OE-L W 6�?^�!S f 6t0L'tt Qa3
wm roe�i Qum:g'''�f MO-Mg fO9E)'0560.6BL 1090
13331=.tqt umWAV-PAQVIS 4"4aM39tot In I NOWO SN2G3N19N3 MIS
o nd'5-Vm 6t13 M:Aq Puede+d
w $
a co
W� ? to
0
S 0.o wO rC �M �Qp
�s bl r > 08 OT g �
NS rW WW ads W� XZ Ka Q2 H
77 J Q Q N
O'U) Z� w� w0 z X �
ir LL
� � E ,6 0 9 5, Nw@I
�bX' Cow
:: ,- \ .\
5318tlA 1}fO13H -• � /
------------
t j
LL
t r €
co
o \U) o
• � t— C� az
C Z �
z �g
Zp
QQ L x
N ---------- v �-' N cc
N M 5312NA 1HO13H c__asc.sv_nas.9 „
Q Cl) 'f .0-,0—rr OU
Q=it
m
0
W
a
z
w
z ��
Z a3 m`O
tL oa Owp
W N 0 �� ��E
Z ma a
Z
M W 2 N WU mO�
J W QQ
Q V �N ~
m '� U)o
a � W
�� �r
C � t�A!tei
Q
00 -
�O
O
cl:
•�I ♦1•flx()
3628 South 35u Street
Tacoma,Washington 98409-3192
-----------------
POWER
TACOMA PUBLIC UTILITIES TACOMA PUBLIC UTILITIES
November 18, 2019
VIA EMAIL and USPS
Jonathan &Shari Schwartz
2008 E Aloha St
Seattle, WA 98112
SUBJECT: UPDATED Schwartz Shoreline Proposal on Tacoma Power Property
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Schwartz:
The City of Tacoma, Department of Public Utilities, Light Division (Tacoma Power)was
recently contacted to review the enclosed updated drawings by Steven Mort, P.E, dated
October 22, 2019,for proposed demolition of existing structures and construction of new stairs,
bulkhead, fixed pier, and float with landing cradle on Tacoma Power property fronting your
development lot CPN:42332-12-60032 at 5901 N Lake Cushman Rd, Lake Cushman.
The proposed action will require issuance of a short-term license from Tacoma Power before
any work occurs on Tacoma Power property waterward of 742 feet elevation, and a Shoreline
Use Permit once work is completed. Tacoma Power has no obiection to you moving forward
with regulatory permitting for the proposed activities on Tacoma Power property.
Please provide a copy of this letter to the regulatory agencies when you submit your plans to
them. Feel free to contact me at 253-441-4180 or wwright(a)ci.tacoma.wa.us if you have any
questions.
Sincerely,
Wynnae right
Shoreline and Lands Coordinator
Tacoma Power
Enclosures
cc: Dori Bishop, Sr. Real Estate Specialist, City of Tacoma
NORTH 3 �' �Q 2
SCHWARTZ: VICINITY MAP FOR STAIRCASE, PIER, FLOATING DOCK,AND 70'BULKHEAD DESIGN W �sa ,�0
W E 5901 N Lake Cushman Rd, Hoodsport, WA 98548
(Parcel #: 42332-12-60032)
S W
W n
---------- J�F�F 30758�0 4 LL v
- ALEN
i
-. .m. o
co
N
—, arm r ?�
12
o
t
O
Nm
J r c v
For
. :o CD a cis eo 0
------ ,�_ - _�_ c m c �
C y
L
N
Q1
C O N
WN
ELEVATION CROSS-SECTION AA-AA: NEW 70'LONG W o
PROJECT INFORMATION AYC BULKHEAD �
LAKE LEVEL FLUCTUATIONS REMOVES FINES NEW 5505 N LAKE i USNMAN RDZt25QM0 a
OWNER: Jonathan and Shari Schwartz AND SILTS THATACTAS BINDERS FOR GRAVEL. 8'X 20' a
COBBLES,AND BOULDERS. THIS RESULTS IN FLOATING 2
SHORELINE EROSION THAT COULD POTENTIALLY n MAILING ADDRESS: 2008 E.Aloha St. DOCK coM N
CAUSE DAMAGE TO THE RESIDENCE ABOVE IF 00, N LAKE C usnMAN Ra n` Q¢a
Seattle,WA 98112 THE 70'BULKHEAD WAS NOT CONSTRUCTED.
PROPERTYADDRESS: 5901 N Lake Cushman Rd Elevation,ft
Qi33 i i?5a it t
Hoodsport.WA 98548 41S322272222
PARCEL NUMBER: 42332-12-60032 850' \
EXISTING oN N o
LEGAL DESCRIPTION. TR 3-C OF NE TR 4 OF SP#1727 RESIDENCE NEW ' t3EACH o CN"
6'I R STAIRS 002
PROFESSIONAL ENGR: MET ENGINEERING,PLLC 800' PIER
1018 E.Wishkah St.
Aberdeen,WA 98520-2937
(360)289-0958 c. RESIDENCE - Of rr
(360)310-0270 b. 750'
(360)861-8493 ff.. /'738
42'(TP ELEV.DELINEATORS) v'
e-mail: SMorta aol com PROPERTYAA
Contact: Steven P.Morta,P.E. V LINE
700' \.
GENERAL CONTRACTOR: Integrated NW Construction,LLC 0' 50' 100' 150' 200' 250'
60 N.Lake Cushman Road,Suite 109
P.O.Box 1008
W
Hoodsport,WA 98548
(253)888-5314 a
e-mail: Carafyn a IntegratedNVJConsiruction cam
m L
a
Contact: Caralyn Valdeman,Owner :Is33s!o25+n
9
2
N
ShIONLAKECUSNMAN RU _. S d.
Ol
a`
FLOATING DOCK: SCHWARTZ-DESIGN OF STAIRS, DECK, PIER,AND BULKHEAD l Z 3
�/k2� NORTH
• CONSTRUCT _V_ `FLOATING DOCK USING AYC at 5901 N Lake Cushman Rd, Hoodsport, WA 98548
zo
• INCLUDES ENCASED STYROFOAM BILLETS PER CODE Parcel#: 42332-12-60032
E -v
• INCLUDES THRU-FLOW GRATING ON AT LEAST 50%OF DOCK r
SURFACE PER CODE,TO ALLOW AT LEAST 60%OF LIGHT PASSAGE /
w V
• 4 x 8 AYC FLOAT GIRDERS I w f
IN
• 2 x 8 AYC FLOAT JOISTS I !
/ / o
• 2 x 12 AYC FACEBOARD NOTE: NEW STAIRS TO BE CONSTRUCTED WITHIN / I g I TOP OF BEACH STAIRS
I THE SAME FOOTPRINT AS THE EXISTING co
• EDGE-BAND DECKING WILL BE 5/4"x 6"AYC STAIRS EXCEPT AS NOTED BELOW
• TWO FLOAT PILES SHALL BE 6 x 6 AYC,BURIED UP TO 6'INTO GROUND, I
I ¢ �
ENCASED IN CONCRETE I I TT�FgqII��S LOWER DECK TO BE co
'SED TO SAME
• CRADLE FOR FLOAT TO BE CONSTRUCTED OUT OF 6 x 6 AYC i I I ASIIJPPER DECK LEVEL
30 DEG 5'WNG-WALL
(STAYS WITHIN I I 4'-0" I 5-7" 4'-
No PROPERTY LINE)
REFER TO ENGINEERING LOWER DECK
SHEET 3.0 FOR BULKHEAD ELEV:742' SIX(�6)LEANING TREES I I I 4'x 4' 1 0
CONSTRUCTION DETAIL \ i TO BE REMOVED ARE I I LANDING LANDING#1 UPPER DECK o
(TOTAL OF 70 LIN.FT. SHOWN IN GREEN I I 4'-0" 2'-9" #4 1 N
AND 15 AYC 6x6 POSTS) 1 4'x 8' N
I T
1 I LANDING 6 STEPS
�? BULKHEAD: zo
I #5
LAKE CUSHMAN , • CONSTRUCT BULKHEAD USING{AYC UP TO 70 LINEAR FEET 1 I' 4'x 8'3" I LLJ
w a
g-4" AND UP TO 8'TALLAND SPACED5'O.C.FORA TOTAL OF 15 POSTS'
APPROXIMATE AVERAGE 1 0 0
• 6 x 6 AYC PILES SHALL BE BURIED 6' AND ENCASED I LANDING 3 STEPS I - o J °'
PILE SPACING: (S TO 6') IN CONCRETE I r
RESULTS INAPPROX. t LANDING#7 I, Io
m
co 6
RE 6x6 AYC PILES(TOTAL) • FACEBOARDS WILL BE 3 x 12 AY�ATTACHED USING TIMBERLOCKS 5 2
w l m 1 AND 5/8"GALVANIZED LAGS 1 I I I
AND 70'IN LENGTH a 0 4'x 4' 4'11"x 4 o
• TWO WING WALLS WILL BE CONSTRUCTED ON EACH END AT I ) i LANDING LANDING 7 0 a o >o
-n�n APPROXIMATELY 30 DEGS AND EXTEND INTO BANK UP TO 5' v #3 #2 v o W r>
NOTE: ALL CONCRETE AND SHORELINE I O m M 1 Q
DEBRIS WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE i �s rn X • GEO-TEC FABRIC INSTALLED BEI�IND BULKHEAD FOR EROSION Y I <°� c
SHORELINE _ orn�a 6' CONTROL _j Q o O a
co
-°G Z • BULKHEAD WILL BE BACKFILLEDIAPPROXIMATELY TWO FEET J
NOTE EXISTING MOORING O WITH NATIVE SOIL AND ROCK 1 cA I t��' rn°'
BUOY TO BE REMOVED _ I L2 16 STEPS I _ cN
d � Nrn o00
IN ITS ENTIRETY N O ! I I c�'°m ° TI N
w N
1_ IJ C
8'-0"(NTS) (70'x 51) I I I I w o � o
¢'o
EXISTING PIER ; ,� I W
TO BE REMOVED �
I I )
i I I r �
NEW 8'x 20'FLOATING w WEST PROPERTY LINE; a
DOCK(REF.SHEET 3.0) zo ) � I I I 2
wl GUIDE POSTS 1&2 I
/ CONCRETE I STAIR CASE: I ° o 0 0
--- 1
1 - -- ---- --'- 5'-0" ( g'-9" 4' LANDING • CONSTRUCT STAIRCASE SING ALASKA YELLOW CEDAR AND PRE SURE TREATED LUMBER
F-------------k--------- 13' 0,. ra U g �o
#8 I I
z i= b o NEW 6'x 22' • PILES SHALL BE 4 x 4 AYC,BURIED 3'INTO THE GROUND,ENCASED IN CONCRETE O z LL
I I ;� I • ALL HARDWARE SHALL 8E GALVANIZED OR STAINLESS STEEL
>o: PIER(NTS)
O o i REP SHT 3.0 I d' I • STAIR TREADS AND RISEFS SHALL BE 5/4 x 6 AYC i
04 L �,(a�; 21'_3" - _ I I • ALL BRACING SHALL BE 21 x 6 PRESSURE TREATED
20 ----1---- -----`- -- (t I T-0„ • TOP RAIL SHALL BE 2 x 6 INCENSE CEDAR
0
17'-0" c LANDING#9 ( 1 1 • PICKETS SHALL BE 2 x 2 AIYC,SPACED TO CODE(I.E.,4"DIA BALL N6T ABLE TO PASS THROUGH)
} HILLSIDE
- - — in 1 I I • STAIR STRINGERS SHALL�E 2 x 12 PRESSURE-TREATED Ico
• HANDRAIL SHALL BE CEDAR
21 3'x x 6' 1
EXIST PIER io -- a--0 I • STAIRS SHALL MEET 20151NTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE
PIER: TO BE REMOVED) REPLACE EXISTING ri RELOCATE THE LAST I I SECTION R-311.7 STAIRWAYS
BULKHEAD w/AYC I I I
STAIR CASE TO THE 1 • MINIMUM TREAD WID H: 10"
•CONSTRUCT 6'x 22'PIER NORTH-5'TO 10'DUE 1 I • MAXIMUM RISER HEIGHT: 7-3l4 N
•ALL PIER PILING WILL BE 6 x 6 AYC,BURIED 4'INTO -t I TO TREE I " I /�/Z�
THE GROUNDAND ENCASED IN CONCRETE(UP TO 4'-7" S 1 • MAXIMUM DIFFERENCE IN RISER HEIGHT: 3/8" V Z
v
6 PILES) I I i I I c
PIER DECKING WILL BE THRU-FLOW GRATING OF AT LEAST 1 tix P. �
M Y a c
50%OF SURFACE TO ALLOW LIGHT PASSAGE PER CODE 30 DEG
5'WNG- N \ o
AYC 5/4x6 FOR DECK EDGE BOARDS ELEV:780' ELEV:790' ��40 't'CoY O n o
WALL g ELEV: vj o
ELEV:760' rx o
*PIER GIRDERS WILL BE 4 x 8 AYC BULKHEAD a ELEV:750' "' �r F`Q_d
D
PIER JOISTS WILL BE 2 x 8 AYC U_ cL
PIER FACE BOARD WILL BE 2 x 12 AYC ELEV.742'$- 3011758
n
•ALL BRACING WILL BE 2 x 6 PRESSURE TREATED(PT) SHORELINE: � �� �
c�
ALL HARDWARE WILL BE STAINLESS STEEL RAMP • ALL CONCRETE AND SHORELINE DEBRIS WILL BE REMOVED ONAl, o
• W 3 C FROM THE SHORELINE
Lo
OR GALVANIZED o�E
• INCLUDES ONE FOLDING PRE-FAB LADDER ELEVATION VIEW
(UP TO FIVE STEPS) Z� t" OF STAIRS
5i w 'll3
SCHWARTZ. PIER AND FLOAT ENGINEERING DETAIL at 5901 N. Lake Cushman Rd, Hoodsport, WA 98548 PIER
(Parcel#: 42332-12-60032) GRATING TO COMPLY
(8)x 2'x 4'=64 sf WITH WDF&W.60%
Net Light Passage(%) 8'x 20' (FLOATING DOCK) 132 SF(PIER)+160 SF(FLOAT)= 296 SF<300 SF OKAY "Thru-Flow"LIGHT PASSAGE
=[(20'x 8')-64]/(20'x 8')] x 100% (T 8")x(22')/(6'x 22')=61%>60%OKAY
TYPICAL FLOATING DOCK ASSEMBLY =60%>60%OKAY (-60%GRATED) j N
w
\�
� i� 6'x 22'PIER I ii o
2 x 8 x 6'AYC PIER JOISTS @ 16"Q C. `-
INSTALL"DOCK BUILDERS SUPPLY"METAL CORNERS(IC) STRUCTURE AREAS OVER WATER: co U 22'_0„ w/JB_28 TOP FLANGF HANGER @ FA.END r'
ATALL 4 x 8 CONNECTIONS. INSTALL AN(OC-E)"OUTSIDE > w
J
CORNER END"ON ALL 4 OUTSIDE CORNERS OF FLOAT AREA=(10'x 16)+(8'x 1 T) o U
= 160+136 X
= 296 SO-FT.<300 SQ.FT. OKAY m
FROM"DOCK } REMOVE EXISTING PIER BUILDERS SUPPLY": Q � N
(ALL HOT DIPPED GLV) Q�Q / I AND REPLACE WITH o
►TM LAKE CUSHMAN m 6'X 22'PIER(AS SHOWN) LAND SIDE
(THIS SIDE) N U
�1 (REF: SHEET 2.0)
INSTALLATION
OF HOOP-10G o
J ``' r '• L L L L
i . x 8'-0" T-0" 7 -0' T NEW 70'LONG AYC CD
00 BULKHEAD 6'TO 8'HT
x \f 4 x 8 AYC BEAM 0)' OUTSIDE CORNER v a)
FLOATATION BILLETSARE ENCAPSULATED / (2)6 x 6AYC J)
— 2'x 4'x 1.0'STYROFOAM(FOR ENCAPSULATED GUIDE POSTS --- — ELEV: 742.0 FT
EXPANDED POLY-STYRENE)NET BUOYANCY: FOR FLOAT
[(8)x(433)]-1,000#(dead load)=2,464 Ibs 3'x 9'(NTS) m
STDALUMINUM rn
(Float Capacity: 2,464/200=12 max.persons on float) o oM
RAMP w/RAILING d o_
ELEV: 738 0 FT N
THRU-FLOW' w rn
GRATING 00
o m
� m gg o
INSIDE CORNER,IC,i
EA.LEG:8-1/2"Lx REF: ATTACHED ENGINEERING ANALYSIS: 5` 4)N�,�+ E<=- ,. ._
L 5"H,1/2"BOLTS, f <gr= x 4 x 8 x 8'AYC PIER BEAM CC M
1/4"COMMERCIAL 2 x 8 x 6'AYC PIER JOISTS @ 16"O.C. a o r
GRADE METAL 4 x 8 x 10'AYC FLOAT BEAM w!6 CANTILEVER a5 C) —
z 2 x 8 x 8'AYC FLOAT JOISTS @ 16"O.C. Q ° o
^. 4x8x8' �--�o
i
HEIGHT(FIELD VERIFY) AYC a r �i N
x m N
I (O M d C Y lf)
+ " EPC6Z t m ti o 0 m
ANGLE:2.5"L x 5"H, END POST rn U
rn co
1/2"CARRIAGE BOLTS, CAP w ui N
Of
1/4"COMMERCIAL (4 x 8 x 8'AYC BEAM) �a
LU
GRAGE METAL BULKHEAD STABILITYANALYSIS Q rn rn
/ T O N O
ACTIVE EARTH PRESSURE FROM BACKFILL ON WALL: cl,co
CN
�
VERTICAL DATUM: LAKE CUSHMAN OLW 710' coHUC-48 CONCEALED HORIZONTAL FORCE..Fh=(1/2)(Ca)(RH0)(H"2) cm o)
FACE-MOUNT HANGER as
NOTE: TOP OF WALL REMAINS AT 750'ELEVATION. (w/CORROSION PROTECTION) WHERE Ca=COEFFICIENT OF ACTIVE EARTH PRESSURE a
THE FLOAT LANDING CRADLE ACTUAL WALL HEIGHT IS DETERMINED BY = (1 -SIN PHI)/(1+SIN PHI) PHI=INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE ff M
IS CONSTRUCTED A THE EXISTING ELEVATION PROFILE AT TOE =26 degs FOR TILL SOILS
YELLOW CEDAR(AYC)
)TITIMBER.MBER. OF SLOPE ALONG BULKHEAD WALL LINE = (1 -SIN 26)/(1 +SIN 26)
AS SHOWN ON ENGINEERING SHEET 2.0 = 0.390 CIJ No
RHO = DENSITY OF SILL SOILS=131 LBS/CU.FT.(PCF) r
3 S ToZO H = HEIGHT OF BACKFILLAGAINST BULKHEAD=6 FT >-
THEREFORE, z w
�tity P.MO Fh = (1/2)(0.390)(131)(6"2)=920 LB/LIN.FT.
�%-QF WASyZ 'Qj+ Provide at least
HC y 4'ht.clearance OVER-TURNING MOMENT,M(OT)=(Fh)(113)(H)=(920)(1/3)(6)=1,840 LBS/LIN.FT.
behind wall
H for stability PASSIVE EARTH PRESSURE FROM ENCASED CONCRETE AYC POST:
v
DENSE HORIZONTAL FORCE,Fh'_(1/2)(Ca)(RH0)(H"2)
4 NEW TILL SOILS
,pF30 558 BULKHEAD — — _ — . _ . — . — _ . _ WHERE Cp=COEFFICIENT OF PASSIVE EARTH PRESSURE W
(UPT08'HT) O
_NA1-
(1+SIN PHI)/(1-SIN PHI) PHI=INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE
=26 degs FOR TILL SOILS ? �
co = (1 +SIN 26)/(1-SIN 26)
x 742' = 2.56 W c
`O RHO = DENSITY OF SILL SOILS=131 LBS/CU.FT.(PCF) w
° oo H = DEPTH OF CONCRETE ENCASED AYC POST=6 FT
ELEV.738' o 0 o THEREFORE, W
° Fh'= (1/2)(2.56)(131)(6"2)=6,040 LBS/LIN.FT OF POST U o
SCALE: 1/8"=1 FEET — _ — — — — — RESISTING MOMENT, M(R) _ (Fh')(1/3)(6')(2')=(6,040 LBS)(1/3)(6')(2')=24,200 FT-LB/LIN.FT. °
0 2' 4' 6' 8' 10' 12' 14' 16' FACTOR OF SAFETY,FS,AGAINST OVERTURNING: E a
W
1 � a
FS=(24,200 FT-LBS)/(920 x 6')=4,33>1.50 OKAY ?
1