Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
SEPA E99-0023 - RW THORPE & ASSOCiATES - GRADING
RW THORPE & ASSOC GRADING E99-0023 City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMORANDUM November 12, 2003 To: Steve Lancaster, Director and SEPA Responsible Official From: Moira Carr Bradshaw, Associate Planner Subject: SEPA: Tukwila Rock Pile (File No. E99-0023) Project Description: The applicant proposes to grade the subject site, cutting and filling using blasting and mechanical removal and earth movement equipment so that the property is more useable in the future for light industrial development. The applicant has not presented any plans that show size or location for a building on the site. To achieve a more level site, the applicant proposes to remove approximately 221,326 cubic yards of rock/dirt from the site and to use the remaining rock/soils for preload and fill and grade. The site is a 10.96 acre undeveloped parcel bounded by the Duwamish River on the south, Puget Sound Power & Light Right of Way on the west, City of Seattle electric and water rights of way on the north and approximately 39 Av. S., if extended, on the east. Over half of the site is a rock outcrop of volcanic origin and variable rock types that are not neatly layered or areally arranged. There are also alluvial soils around the base of the rock outcrop that are weak in strength and prone to settlement. Surface elevations vary from 17.3 to 144.5 feet. (See Attachment A) The applicant proposes two methods of excavating the dirt and rock from the site. The upper layer (four to ten feet) of earth is proposed to be excavated by mechanical means (dozer blading and light ripping) The remaining layers (approximately eight feet to 102 feet) will be removed through a combination of mechanical extraction and blasting. Two different types of blasting are proposed: controlling or loosening blasts and production blasts. Up to 200 feet of the east (residential) property line controlled production blasting will occur. Between 200 and 100 feet of the east property line loosening/controlling blasting will be used. The last 100 feet along the east line will remain as is with a seventy-foot high rock slope with four benches each approximately 7.5 feet deep and fifteen feet high. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 The applicant has also submitted an erosion control plan that includes silt fencing, a sediment pond and an interceptor swale that connects to existing outfall to the Duwamish River. The time to complete the work is approximately one year; however, the time frame may be somewhat longer in order to complete the work during favorable wet weather. The applicant's geotechnical consultant suggests that the work be done in two six month periods that will coincide with the fall winter seasons. Proponent: R.W. Thorpe & Associates, Inc. for David White, property owner Location: 3800 S. 115 Street (Tax Parcel ID No. 1023049057) Approvals required: Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Surface Mine Land Reclamation Permit (DNR) General NPDES Stormwater Permit (DOE) Miscellaneous Public Works Permit for Land Altering, Hauling, and Storm Drainage. Tree Clearing Permit Lead Agency: City of Tukwila, Department of Community Development Relevance to Nonproject Environmental Impact Statement for the Tukwila Manufacturing Industrial Center A staff level administrative decision was made that the proposal does not qualify for a Planned Action. The proposal does not meet the initial qualification criteria because it is not a "permitted use" and , as proposed will have unmitigated impacts. Other Agencies of Jurisdiction: Department of Natural Resources Department of Ecology Public Input A Notice of Application was mailed to surrounding property owners and residents and posted on the site on October 20, 1999. Correspondence from eight people and a petition signed by 70 residents opposing the project on the basis of concern for structural damage to houses and roads, overall land instability, air pollution, noise pollution, and destruction of a visual landmark, a paleontological resource, and wildlife habitat were submitted. -2- Recommendation: Determination of Significance Documents considered in preparing SEPA report: Reference No. Title Author Date 1. Tukwila Fossils Elizabeth Nesbitt Research Paleontologist Burke State Museum 20 January 1995 2. Off -Site Wetlands Delineation and Typing Wetland Resources, Inc 26 April 1999 3. Rock Excavation Issues Milbor-Pita & Associates 15 June 1999, 4. Erosion Control Report DOWL Engineers July 1999 5. SEPA Checklist R.W. Thorpe and Associates, Inc. August 1999 6. Request for Additional Information Letter City of Tukwila 17 November 2000 7. Peer Review of Tukwila Rock Pile Application Shannon & Wilson 10 April 2000 8. Response to November 17, 1999 Letter R.W. Thorpe and Associates, Inc. 9 May 2000 9. Revised SEPA Checklist R.W. Thorpe and Associates, Inc. 9 May 2000 10. Geotechnical Response to City Letter Milbor-Pita & Associates 17 December 1999 Submitted 9 May 2000 11. Response to Peer Review Milbor-Pita & Associates 24 April 2000 12. Vehicle Trip Generation Analysis Transportation Planning & Engineering PE 5 May 2000 13. Native American Cultural Articles The Weekly (1980) Waterman Files (no date) Ballard (1929) 9 May 2000 -3- Summary Findings on Primary Impacts Earth The site is mapped on the City's sensitive area maps as being both Class 1, where landslide potential is low and have slopes less than 20%. The site also includes Class 3 soils, where landslide potential is high and includes areas sloping between 20% and 40% and which are underlain by relatively impermeable soils or by bedrock and which also include all areas sloping more steeply than 40%. Within areas of potential geologic instability, the City requires a geotechnical analysis and recommendation for the need for and the width of any buffers necessary to achieve the goals of the Sensitive Areas Chapter. The State Department of Natural Resources defines a surface mine as "any area or areas where extraction of minerals results in more than three acres of disturbed areas or surface mine slopes greater than thirty feet high and steeper than 1 foot horizontal to 1 foot vertical. The definition of surface mining excludes excavations or grading used primarily for on-site construction, on-site road maintenance, or on-site landfill construction. Surface Mining Chapter (RCW 78.44.031) The rock outcrops, excluding the eastern buffer, comprise approximately 4.5 acres. DNR geologists say the application is likely to require a DNR reclamation permit especially in light of there being no application for actual construction on the site. According to Milbor-Pita, existing vertical rock faces show evidence of the site being previously quarried and that these vertical faces appear to be stable. The main rock types are andesite and breccia or what is referred to as Tukwila Formation. Smaller amounts of soft sedimentary rock outcrops occur on the flanks of the hill and alluvial soils occur on the flat areas surrounding the hill. Milbor-Pita reviewed previous site analysis conducted by Shannon and Wilson and Earth Consultants. Supplemental test pits were done, in addition to those conducted by Earth Consultants, and included two bores, which were used to evaluate: • the excavation requirements of the site, and • slope stability of the finished excavated perimeter. Milbor-Pita conclude that all the proposed excavation could be accomplished by mechanical means but such excavation will be very slow and costly and could create greater levels of noise and dust impacts on surrounding residents than blasting. They estimate that site excavation will be 1/3 light mechanical, 1/3 heavy mechanical and 1/3 blasting. Milbor-Pita states that excavated material will be of a size that is suitable for use as site fill. Any oversize rock will be separated by dozer and/or loader and stockpiled for removal to an off-site location. No dimensions or further discussion is given on the excavated material. -4- • Of the two different types of blasting proposed, the loosening or controlled blasting is proposed in the area closest to the property edge that abuts residences. Within the 100 to 200 feet area west of the east property line, these loosening types of blasts are designed to heave the jointed rock mass rather than significantly break it. Heaving is accomplished by limiting the amount of explosive and matching the speed of the explosive to the sonic velocity of the rock mass. This requires closely spaced holes, which results in significantly higher costs per cubic yard of material. Production blasting will occur west of the 200 -foot setback from the east property line. The applicant describes a three-step excavation method. The benches will first be excavated with a large ripper dozer. Hard spots will then be attacked with a large hydraulic breaker. Any spots resistant to the breaker will be drilled and shot with blasts. The location will determine whether a production or controlling loosening blast will occur. In addition they state that blasting will average (emphasis added) one a day and will be limited to relatively small events, which in their experience significantly reduces complaints. The applicant proposes to create a new hill crest and rock face 100 feet west of the eastern boundary line. The plans submitted with the application are contradicted by the most recent drawing (Soil & Rock Excavation sketch Cross Section, no date) from the applicant's geotechnical consultant Milbor-Pita, that shows the 100 foot wide buffer from the eastern property line. The depth of the blast hole and subsequent excavation bench will be 15 feet deep by approximately 7.5 feet in distance resulting in a 75 foot high rock face. Shannon and Wilson, the peer reviewer, indicate that because a new rock face/slope is being created, its stability is uncertain. However because the proposed slope/rock face will be 100 feet from the east property line, it is unlikely that slope instability will result in disturbance off the property. Three types of impacts are possible from blasting: 1. Flyrock Milbor-Pita states that flyrock distances are dependent upon powder factors rather than hole diameters. They estimate flyrock potential of 100 feet and that this is somewhat irrelevant because they plan on controlling for any flyrock through proper stemming (packing of the drilled blast hole after the charge has been placed,) loading of the blast holes and through the use of blast mats. Flyrock impacts may also result when the sequence of blasts does not occur in the correct order. The applicant proposes to submit a Project Safety Plan that will provide a more detailed blast plan that controls for potential flyrock problems. -5- • . 2. Ground Vibrations There are two types of concerns associated with ground vibrations: structural damage and neighborhood complaints. The standard considered when evaluating potential impacts is maximum peak particle velocity (ppv, or intensity of the vibration) which is affected by the weight of explosives detonated within 8 millisecond time intervals during the blast. For background, the design of the blast loads creates ground vibrations that are measured on a seismometer, which can measure both the ppv and also the frequency of the ground vibration, measured in Hertz. The more closely spaced the wave created by the blast from peak to peak or the higher frequency of the vibration combined with a low ppv results in a lower impact to humans and structures. A high ppv combined with a wider spaced or lower frequency vibration results in a higher impact to humans and structures. The Office of Surface Mining (OSM) and the U.S. Bureau of Mines (USBM) have guidelines for maximum peak particle velocities that, if not exceeded, will limit the potential for structural damage. The agencies list a range of 0.2 to 2.0 inches per second of maximum velocities, which are tied to and dependent on either the predominant blast vibration frequency or the distance to the nearest structure. Milbor-Pita researched records that show the predominance of frequencies in the range of 10 to 100 Hertz when the ppv are less than 1.0 to 2.0 inches per second. Structural damage occurs at frequencies greater than 10 Hertz. The Milbor-Pita blast plan states that the maximum ppv achieved will be 1 inch per second. It is not clear if this is at all points around the property line. The Shannon and Wilson peer review cites a study showing complaints by persons located near a blast site. See below. The report does not mention the distance from the blast that the respondents are located but lists .20 as troublesome. Response Particle velocity (in.sec.) Noticeable .02 Troublesome .20 Severe .70 3. Air Blasts Air blast is an atmospheric pressure wave consisting of both high frequency and low frequency sound. The high frequency sound can be audible to people and the low frequency sound may be inaudible but experienced as concussion. According to Shannon and Wilson, the OSM limit air blasts to 128 decibels at any structure located within 1/2 mile of the permit area. Milbor-Pita calculates that their production blasting will result in a maximum air blast of 120 decibels during production blasts and 100 —105 decibels during controlled blasting. It is not clear at what distance this measurement would occur. -6- • 4. Fumes and Smoke See AIR below. In addition to the issues surrounding the blasting and mechanical removal of the rock are the issues of actual removal of the earth to other portions of the site and off site. The area of excavation on any given day will range from 1000 to 2000 square feet. The applicant has not clearly indicated if they are proposing an engineered fill and_preload. Shannon and Wilson state that the material excavated may not be suitable fill if the gradation of the rock is poor. That is, if the fill consists of a high percentage of boulder sized fragments with insufficient fines and smaller particles to fill between the voids of the larger rock fragments. Applicant states that they will monitor and be responsible for appropriate fill placement on site. Shannon & Wilson in a previous analysis recommended preloading the compressible soils on site, including clearing organics then placing and compacting the fill in controlled lifts. They recommended installation of settlement plates in 100 foot grids. The Erosion Control Plan and Report prepared by DOWL engineers states that work will start east and move west. This staging sequence requires greater description. Discussion is needed of how the site will be preloaded and filled in conjunction with the earth removal activities. Additional Analysis Needed/Potential Mitigation • Project Safety Plan including: ❖ fencing of unstable or sensitive slopes, extraction areas, etc. ❖ signage ❖ qualifications of blasting personnel • Revised Blast Plan that meets the more restrictive of the OSM and USBM guidelines/standards for surface mining activities. It should include: ❖ air blast calculations and controls analysis ❖ typical blast pattern and estimate of the number of blasts ❖ how blast holes will be stemmed and rock surface cleaned to control flyrock ❖ blast hole loading diagrams ❖ blast locations ❖ number and location of delays ❖ plans and procedures for conducting trial blasts ❖ description of trial blasts for control of flyrock and fumes ❖ quantity of explosives and blasting agents on the property at any time ❖ description of transportation, handling and use of explosives and blasting agents ••• traffic control • Public Notice Plan to all residents and business owners within %z mile of site -7- • Pre and post Blast Structure Surveys that includes: + location and description of nearest structures and other site specific information ❖ description of how complaints and damages will be handled • Trial blasts: Charge per delay (one hole per delay) monitored with a seismograph • Monitoring ❖ A registered professional engineer or geologist familiar and experienced with rock slope stability shall observe the excavation in order to identify geologic conditions including discontinuities in the rock that could result in rock slope instability that extends off the property and to recommend remedial measures to reduce slope instability ❖ ground vibrations and air blasts Air Detonation results in carbon dioxide gas, nitrogen gas and water vapor. Lesser amounts of carbon monoxide and oxides of nitrogen gases can also be produced. In addition to the gases and water vapor, blasting also produces smoke that is a combination of water vapor and products of detonation and combustion. Excessive exposure to smoke can result in severe headaches. Smoke and gas fumes can be reduced by properly selecting blasting agents and explosives, by limiting the quantity of powder in the hole and by adopting appropriate blasting methods and procedures. Milbor-Pita asserts that design of the limited individual blasts to small events minimizes the negative effects of smoke and fumes. Milbor-Pita states that in addition to the proper design of the blasts themselves, there are operational efforts that will limit air impacts. A Project Safety Plan would not permit personnel access to the blast site until smoke has cleared and the registered blaster in charge has inspected the site. There are a number of weather conditions that can positively effect the impacts from the project. On windy and or rainy days smoke and fumes dissipate very rapidly. Working during the wet season and/or wetting the excavation site will control dust. The applicant states that haul roads on the site will be wetted and the blast hole drilling rig will be fitted with a dust suppression kit. Enviroanalysis, a subconsultant on the peer review team, states that dust from construction is generally not a serious health hazard though it can present a nuisance to some people. The Puget Sound Clean Air Agency does not issue permits for the type of activity proposed because the applicant affirm that no rock crushers are to be used. The Agency does have control measures for fugitive dust that would be appropriate for the types of activity proposed and are included below. -8- • • Potential Mitigation • Project Safety Plan • Maintaining a damp working surface area near the quarry's working face • Keeping the aggregate moist when loaded into trucks • Treating traffic areas with water or chemical stabilizers, reducing vehicle speeds, constructing pavement or riprap exit aprons and installing a shell wash at the truck exit location to prevent the track -out of mud or dirt onto paved public streets. • Covering or wetting truck loads or allowing adequate freeboard to prevent the escape of dust bearing materials. • Curtailing activities during high wind. Water A Type 2 (greater than 1 acre/monoculture) isolated wetland exists on the City of Seattle . property to the north. The wetland is unmapped on City Sensitive Area maps but is identified and described in a report by Wetland Resources. The wetland edge at its closest is within 35 feet of the northern boundary. A 50 foot buffer and a 15 foot commercial setback are required between the wetland boundary and any work on the subject site. The proposed erosion control plan and the grading plan do not show the required 15 foot setback from the 50 foot buffer. The wetland is located within a closed depression of approximately 55 acres. Six acres of the 10 acre subject site drains to the north into the closed depression. This storm water runoff area is approximately 10 % of the contributory area of the closed depression. During and following the proposed activities, the applicant proposes to route all site drainage through a sedimentation pond, through a biofiltration and detention swale to the Duwamish river through an existing City outfall and drainage system located in S. 115 St. Erosion/Sedimentation Control Notes state that facilities shall be inspected and maintained a minimum of once a month or within 48 hours following a storm event. Potential Mitigation • DOWL Engineers suggests that a storm event be defined as any 24-hour storm event of 0.75 inches or greater. • Maintenance and inspection records Plants The Existing Tree Study, (R.W. Thorpe; August 11, 1999) identifies trees types and their calipers within the sloped areas classified as sensitive areas per the Tukwila Zoning Code, Sensitive Areas Chapter (TMC 18.45.020E.) The area to be cleared does not exactly match the Milbor-Pita proposed finished grades. The number of trees to be removed and replanted is significant. The replacement plan shows the majority of the -9- • 206 trees to be planted in the public right of way adjacent to the river. While replanting the riverbank is a good thing. Planting trees in this location of the public right of way is not acceptable to the City. The spacing and density of trees proposed would create a complete visual and physical barrier to the river from S.. 115 Street. The proposed project will need to be revised to show how and if the applicant can plant the required number of trees outside of the right of way and above the ordinary high water mark of the river. Animals The applicant notes that typical urban wildlife, such as Bald Eagles, raccoons, possums, etc, may use the site. The Duwamish/Green River abuts property and is habitat for threatened Chinook salmon and possibly includes the presence of Bull Trout, which has been spotted in the river. The project will connect to an existing outfall to the Duwamish and the impacts are unknown. Environmental Health Noise Short term The applicant has characterized the proposal as a construction project to clear and grade the site for future development. As such, all noise generated on the site during daytime hours will be exempt from the City's noise standards. The Peer Review consultant raised the question of whether the proposal should be characterized as a construction operation or a quarry operation because of the length of time involved in clearing the site. If the proposal was classified as a quarry rather than a construction site, the consultant thinks that the proposal could exceed maximum permissible sound levels allowed by City ordinance. The equipment on site and the truck traffic moving the excavated material off site will be the primary noise source from the project. Excavation activities are proposed during daylight hours and only from 7:30 to 5:00 p.m. The area affected most adversely by noise will be the residential neighborhood south of the Duwamish River. This area receives a significant amount of noise due to the surrounding freeways, railroad, airport and firing range. The peer review consultant took a short term noise sample from the crest of the hill along the project's east property line and found the maximum noise level to be 76.5 dB (A.) and the minimum to be 53.6 dB(A) and the average to be 64.1 dB(A.) The sound measurements along S. 115 St. on the south side of the property were lower 64.6 dB(A) and 46.7 dB(A) with an average of 51.5. dB(A.) The City's standard for residential areas that receive noise from industrial areas is 60 dB(A.) This standard may be increased from 5dBA to 15 dBA depending on the type and duration of sound being generated. -10- • Long Term The long term effects of the project will be that a natural noise barrier, the rock outcrop, will be eliminated and the residential neighborhood to the south of the site might experience increased Boeing Field aircraft noise and from the railroad and firing range noise. The City's Comprehensive Plan has a goal on Noise Abatement Goal 7.2 Residential neighborhoods protected from undue noise impacts, in order to ensure for all residents the continued use, enjoyment and value of their homes, public facilities and recreation and the outdoors. Soil Contamination A 1988 Shannon and Wilson Soil Report for Elmer White had six borings and 30 samples taken. Five had a noticeable petroleum odor with the odor becoming less strong with depth at the one boring. The lateral extent of the contamination was not explored. In its analysis for a previous project proposal, S& W recommended chemical testing and further evaluation. Because of the amount of mechanical equipment on site there is the potential for further spills and contamination. Are remedies for this prudent or required prior to filling the site? Land/Shoreline Uses A staff site visit revealed that the property currently provides storage for what appear to be construction materials. According to the geotechnical consultant the site has been quarried in the past. Fossil hunters have also used the site. In the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan, the site is designated as Manufacturing Industrial Center Light. The site is also zoned Manufacturing Industrial Center Light. The parcel is approximately 10.97 acres in size and is bisected on the south side by S. 115 Street. (A portion of the parcel, approximately 20 feet deep by 590 feet long exists between S. 115 St. and the river. Puget Sound Energy Right of Way on the west is being used for vehicle storage. The City of Seattle electric and water rights of way border on the north contains utility lines and pipes. Beyond the 200 foot wide right of way to the north is a City of Seattle Police Department firing range. To the west of the 100 foot wide Puget Sound Energy right of way is a commercial light industrial building. Single family homes in a Low Density Residential District abut the parcel on the east and continue south of the site along S. 115 St. and 42 Av. S. The applicant proposes razing a portion of Poverty Hill to create a relatively flat site that will be suitable for an office/warehouse building, which is a typical use of the MIC/L zone. -11- • • Housing Not applicable. Aesthetics No structure is proposed at this time. Views in the area will change with the removal of this valley visual landmark. Light/Glare The applicant has not proposed any lighting of the site during the grading project, Recreation The Interurban/Green River Trail is across the river from the site. A neighborhood park, Duwamish Park is, located at 42 Av. S., approximately 2 blocks from the site. Historic/Cultural Preservation Documents exist that describe the importance of this site for Native American Indian culture as well as for paleontology research. For Native American Indians, more specifically Duwamish mythology, this outcrop along with several other nearby knolls in the Duwamish Valley, are incorporated into a story about climate and weather - the story of the battle between the North and South winds. The myth recounts the battle between northwind and stormwind ... explains the origin of the seasons and also provides the basis for rituals designed to alter the weather. Duwamish women carried baskets of water to wash the face of a rocky knoll at Riverton, called Grandmother of Stormwind, so she could exercise her power to bring rain and cause floods, and young boys swung specially made bull- roarers around their heads mimicking the sound made by Stormwind when he drove cold northwind from the land. These same myths tell of the collapse of a great ice dam on the Duwamish River near Allentown. (Bruerge, 1980.) The applicant contacted the Department of Natural Resources to verify the importance of the site for paleontological purposes. Two documents were referenced by the applicant as verification that the site is not significant geologically to the state: • Geologic Time, Rocks, Fossils, and Mineral in Washington, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Mines and Geology (no date) • Fossils of Washington, Vaughn E. Livington, Jr. (1972) Dave Norman, Geologist with the Department of Natural Resources, stated in a conversation with City of Tukwila staff that Washington State does not require the -12- • • protection of marine invertebrate and plant fossils, which are relatively abundant, and which are found on Tukwila Hill in the Tukwila Formation. He said that if a large vertebrate fossil is found then work should stop and DNR contacted. He also suggested that a paleontologist at the Burke Museum be contacted, as DNR does not have a paleontologist on staff. Elizabeth Nesbitt, a research paleontologist with the Burke Museum wrote a paper in 1995 regarding the Tukwila fossils. She explains that the fossils are 40 million -year-old clams, snails, coral and fish. Within the Puget Sound Area she states that only two exposures of these fossils are still accessible. The other site has been studied and does not have the value of the subject site. Ms. Nesbitt states that very little research has been conducted on these deposits and that there are similar fossils preserved in southwestern WA but this is the farthest north that animal fossils as old as 40 million years have been found. These fossils and rocks indicate that 40 million years ago this area was the western coast of the continent. And that the climate was very different — it was warm and subtropical. Three new species have been found on the site. There are goals and policies within. the City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan that are relevant to the cultural and paleontological significance of the site. Goal 1.2 A heritage conserved and interpreted so that Tukwila's citizens can be aware of connections with the past. Policy 1.2.1 Identify sites and structures of historic importance. The Sensitive Areas Chapter of the Tukwila Zoning Code establishes standards for "Areas of Important Geological or Archaeological Evidence." It states: 1. "Development on a legal lot of record determined to have historic or prehistoric geological or archeological evidence shall be prohibited until that evidence has been studied or researched for any valuable information about our history. Removal or salvage of the evidence shall be done in accordance with RCW 27.53..." (Revised Code of Washington Archaeological Sites and Resources Chapter) 2. Once geologic or archaeological evidence or articles have been studied or researched, or the importance of the site is declared to be marginal or not of use to the scientific community, development shall be allowed on the site." -13- • • If salvage is the only option available and because of limited storage space, Ms. Nesbitt says that only a small amount of materials could be salvaged. She roughly estimated that if salvage could occur at the location and elevation where she knows there are significant fossils, then it will take one day with four people. Transportation Access to the site is via East Marginal Way S. to S. 115 Street, a collector arterial. Truck and other vehicle traffic will result in 168 one direction trips per day. During each of the am and p.m. peaks, there will be 26 one way trips. Tandem dump trucks hauling approximately 900 cubic yards of excavated material will account for 71% of the daily trips. The City Engineer considers this amount and the type of traffic to be significant for S. 115 Street and that a geotech study/analysis is needed to determine if the street can handle the heavy loads. Additional Analysis Needed/Potential Mitigation • Geotechnical analysis of street conditions on S. 115 Street • Traffic control measures such as flaggers or warning signs, as determined by the City Engineer, during all hours of operation. • Applicant responsibility for improving street to accommodate proposed traffic, cleaning of debris and repair of street damage. Public Services Police and fire protection services are the only anticipated services needed for this proposal. The applicant does not plan on storing explosives on site because they are available locally from suppliers. The Fire Department requests a plan outlining the transportation of the explosives. Utilities City of Tukwila Sanitary Sewer — 12" line City of Tukwila Storm Sewer City of Tukwila Water — 6" line Telecommunications Phone: US West Cable AT&T Electricity — Seattle City Light -14- Conclusions Overall The impacts from this proposal have not been sufficiently described to know if or how the project can be adequately mitigated. In addition, the applicant has not completed all of the research necessary to successfully conduct and accurately described the proposed project. There appears to be modification of the proposal since its initial submittal, which resulted due to the subsequent drafting of a preliminary blast plan. There is also the potential for significant noise impacts on a residential neighborhood and the loss of a portion of a significant paleontological and cultural site. Earth Milbor-Pita submitted additional details regarding blasting procedures that were not included in the peer review. A peer review of these details and more specific blast and fill details is needed to evaluate the applicant's proposal. The Erosion Control Plan does not match the most recent drawing submitted by the applicant's geotechnical consultant. Nor does the grading plan adequately describe the site preparation for a future light industrial building. The applicant's proposal is not clear on how excavated material will be placed on the site. They state that most of the initial excavated rock will be used as fill, as part of the site preparation work. However, an engineered fill is needed to support any future building that may be constructed on the site on top of fill material. Milbor-Pita states that all rock will meet required gradation for fill. The City needs to know how gradation will be tested and how fill will be placed on the site. Shannon and Wilson raise the issue of slope instability developing after excavation and that the owner should take remedial measures to prevent instability from impacting adjacent properties. How will instability be detected following the excavation project? A discussion what types of remedial measures might be needed is required of the applicant. Water The applicant's wetlands and civil engineering consultants, Wetland Resources and DOWL, have concluded that the diversion of all site drainage to the Duwamish River will not adversely impact the wetlands natural functions and value. The Erosion Control and Grading Plans do not show the minimum required setbacks from the wetland; therefore revised plans need to be submitted. Trees The applicant has not demonstrated how they can meet the revegetation requirement of the Tree Regulations Chapter of the Zoning Code. Environmental Health The applicant has not fully discussed the long term noise impacts from the proposal. The City's peer review indicated that impacts to the Duwamish neighborhood could be -15- • ,. significant because the hill that is proposed for removal currently acts as a noise barrier for the airport, railway tracks and firing range. The peer review recommends a more detailed analysis to evaluate the project's impacts on noise levels and potential mitigation. The applicant has not investigated the chemical contamination of the site and needs to discuss the evidence of contamination and remedies. Land/Shoreline Uses The proposed use of the site for an office/industrial use is in keeping with the Comprehensive Plan designation and zoning. Historic and Cultural The site, which is a portion of what is called Poverty Hill, makes up an important feature in Duwamish mythology. It is also important for paleontological purposes. Its destruction will remove a physical reference point for a culture. Salvage of fossils, which is required per City code, will allow the paleontological evidence to be studied and preserved albeit without it relevant geology. Recommendation Determination of Significance C:\mcb\rockpile\sepa-rpt.doc MARTIN SMITH INC Established in 1974 January 29, 2002 City of Tukwila Department. of CommunityDe_v_elopment_ �� . 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Ces OF`O,y,, 07 v® A��tir 1109 First Avenue Suite 500 Seattle, WA 98101-2988 206.682.3300 FAX 206.340.1283 Subject: White Property; L99-0061 Shoreline File; E99-023 SEPA File Dear Moira: Pursuant to your correspondence of January 15, 2002 we hereby wish to. withdraw the above noted application. We will re -submit at some later time with a revised plan. Thank you for your efforts regarding this application. Moving Forward, John A. Speirs Martin Smith Inc. Asset Manager for the -*lite Family Estate January 15, 2002 • City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director John Speirs 1109 First Avenue, Suite 500 Seattle, WA 98101-2988 Subject: White Property on S. 115 Street; L99-0061 Shoreline File; E99-023 SEPA File Dear Mr. Speirs: The last written correspondence that we received on this application was in May 2001 when you informed the City that you would be transferring contact and applicant information from R.W. Thorpe to Opus Northwest. Opus Northwest however chose to withdraw their interest in development of the site. Prior to that, in August 2000, the City was prepared to issue a Determination of Significance (DS) and Scoping Notice based upon the proposal and the information we had received to date. The applicant requested an opportunity to revise the application either with additional information or revision. Although we met in September 2001 to discuss your ideas for further action, no further work/revisions have been received on the specific applications. You may be working on development of the site but the specific applications and subject proposal are not active. We therefore request that you write to us withdrawing your applications. As I mentioned in the June 5, 2001 letter to you, your work to date has resulted in significant research and information about the site, potential impacts associated with developing the site, and possible solutions. This information is not lost with a new application. The existing applications did not contain sufficient information and were incrementally amended and reviewed. My understanding from you is that a revised proposal would be substantially different. When you are ready to proceed with development of the site, a new application would be an opportunity to be comprehensive and move forward using relevant information already generated instead of revising or rescinding previous aspects of the project. I am sorry if this does not fit with your current schedule, I know your desire is the option of keeping the files open for an additional 6 months; however, we are unable to accommodate this request. If we do not hear from you by January 30, 2002, the City will proceed with the DS and Scoping. If I can be of any other assistance or if you have any questions, please call me at 206 431-3651. Yours truly, - it 616 Moira Carr Bradshaw Associate Planner C:\mcb\rockpile\021tr l O.doc 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 The Seattle Time...: Duwamish site may be sacred, but it's slated for developmen Page 1 of 6 t' d ravel Featured Destination: Bellingham aSeattle University A Service of The Seattle Times Company seattletimes.com NWclassifieds NW seattletimes.com ans1t. LOCAL NEWS .; Home Ccntac Search HOME Site index « Local news Tuesday, September 04, 2001 - 12:00 a.m. Pacific Duwamish site may be sacred, but it's slated for development By Sara Jean Green Seattle Times staff reporter For the Duwamish, the center of the universe is in the heart of Tukwila's industrial zone, a drab little hill that is the setting for one of the oldest stories told by early Puget Sound people. But the family that now owns the hill wants to dynamite it and build warehouses or office buildings there. Neighbors don't want to see that happen. They're trying to find a way to buy the property and turn it into a park and interpretative center. At stake is more than a green oasis in a city with precious little undeveloped space: This mound of rock and dirt represents the northern -most evidence of a tropical climate, telling its story through clam shells and sharks' teeth 40 million years old. The hill, rising 144 feet above the tide flats of the Duwamish River, is a neighborhood landmark where locals swear they can feel the energy of some spirit or natural power. Geologists marvel at the mound's existence. It should have been leveled during the last Ice Age, but for reasons unknown the glaciers must have bypassed it. The hill, on a little over 10 acres near South 115th Street just off East Marginal Way South in the Poverty Hill neighborhood, has been owned by the White family for 30 years. Behind a chain-link fence, blackberry brambles burgeon among rusted pipes and old wood crates. Glass shards and crumpled beer cans lie in clusters on dirt paths that wind through madronas and Scotch broom. It's a place where people dump garbage, where teenagers ride dirt bikes and party. Develop it or sell it — those are the choices, said John Spiers, ®E -ma a Print Spon Service Get mat screene rated h contract Bargain Get the delivere inbox! Luagag The we and brie superst http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/134336933_povertyhill03m.html 9/4/01 The Seattle Time...: Duwamish site may be sacred, but it's slated for developmen Page 2 of 6 an asset manager with Martin Smith Inc., which oversees property owned by Wallace Enterprises. Wallace Enterprises is a holding company for assets owned by brothers Elmer James White Jr. and Nikolas White. The owners, who call this place the Tukwila rock pile, are worried about liability and the property's unsightly condition, said Spiers. And it doesn't generate any revenue. They've been trying to get permits to dynamite the hill but dealing with the city of Tukwila has been frustrating, Spiers said. "If the Indians want it, we'd love to sell it to them," he said. "We'd be happy to sell the land to a neighborhood group, to a developer, to anyone who would want it. The family has been sitting on it a long time, and now it's time to do something." Tropical fossils found Forty million years ago, Western Washington didn't exist. The Pacific touched shore roughly where Interstate 5 now runs. Seattle was part of the ocean floor. There were marshy bayous, river deltas and palm trees; winter temperatures probably didn't dip below 70 degrees. The fossilized remains of 95 species, ancestors of mussels, clams and snails now found in Mexico, were first buried by silt, then volcanic ash that gradually filled in shallow waters and pushed the shoreline west. Two million years ago, mile -thick ice covered the region. Glaciers carved out the Duwamish River valley but somehow left this hill and a handful of others. Earthquakes and what geologists call "uplift" brought ancient invertebrates to the surface. This hill in Tukwila is the farthest north tropical fossils this old can be found, said Elizabeth Nesbitt, the Burke Museum's invertebrate paleontology curator and an adjunct professor at the University of Washington. "It's the only one so rich, the only one worth working on in the area," Nesbitt said. "You'd have to go down to Centralia to find something similar." Nesbitt spent two years conducting research on the hill before the property owners withdrew permission. Up until five years ago, Nesbitt led field trips for schoolchildren there, one of which was filmed for the television show, "Bill Nye, The Science Guy." The fossils aren't as well-preserved as those found in southeastern Washington, she said, but they are "a valuable http://seattletimes. nwsource.com/html/localnews/134336933_povertyhill03m. html 9/4/01 The Seattle Time...: Duwamish site may be sacred, but it's slated for developmen Page 3 of 6 and finite resource," especially considering that so many research areas have already been lost to development. "We won't find anything new that'll change the face of science," Nesbitt said. "But it's... an incredible educational resource within the city." About the time her research ended, Nesbitt said there was talk of the city and museum forming a partnership to buy the property for a park. Nothing came of it. Duwamish territory Centuries before white homesteaders settled in the valley, before the Duwamish River was straightened by the Army Corps of Engineers, before dairy farms and vegetable crops dotted the landscape, Tukwila was Duwamish territory. The city was never the site of the most important villages, nor has it produced significant archaeological finds. But few other places in Washington have such a high concentration of mythic sites, places where the Ancients — supernatural beings who inhabited the Earth before humans — lived. This hill is where Grandmother lived in the story of the War of the Winds. It's a complex story, but in its most basic terms goes like this: North Wind, selfish and mean, sent ravens to taunt Grandmother after he killed her son and the rest of the South Wind people. He had the ravens defecate on Grandmother's face, and she sobbed and sobbed, her tears turning to ice. When Storm Wind, born after his mother escaped North Wind's massacre, grew into a man, he came to find his Grandmother. Together, they broke the ice trap North Wind built to keep salmon from traveling upriver. The men fought; the younger proved stronger and drove North Wind out of this land. Farther downriver from the hill, behind two Boeing buildings, there's a rock shelf — the remnants of the ice trap North Wind built across the Duwamish to block salmon, starving upstream people. "The people who lived here thousands of years ago knew it was important and created a story so people would remember this landmark," said Vi Hilbert, an elder of the Skagit Tribe who recently visited the Tukwila hill. "The story reflects that, for thousands of years, it was buried under water and then buried under ice." Six versions of the story told by tribal elders were recorded by Arthur Ballard in his book, "Mythology of Southern Puget Sound," first published in 1929. http://seattletimes. nwsou rce. com/html/local news/134336933_povertyh ill03m. html 9/4/01 - The Seattle Time...: Duwamish site may be sacred, but it's slated for developmen Page 4 of 6 Ethnography pioneer Thomas Talbot Waterman, who collected thousands of Puget Sound place names from elders in the 1910s and '20s, also refers to the hill in his unpublished manuscript that's now housed in the UW archives. "This is as ancient as you can get, and Grandmother's house is the cosmic center for the Duwamish people," said Jay Miller, a Seattle -based anthropologist who has studied numerous North American cultures. Not only does the story accurately reflect the geology of the land, it's embedded with teachings, he said. For instance, the ice trap created by North Wind stretched across the river. "It was selfish and mean-spirited and starved people who lived further upstream," said Miller, noting native fishing weirs — sophisticated, fence -like traps — never went all the way across a river so fish could swim around them. Though the Duwamish and Muckleshoot tribes support preservation efforts — for this hill and other sacred sites clustered in Tukwila — neither has the money to buy the property. Property not developed Part of the hill was blasted in the early 1960s when a previous owner had dreams of making millions selling rock for Interstate 5's construction, said Tony Carosino, a third -generation resident of the area. But the rock was little more than hardened sandy loam that easily crumbled. The property, annexed from King County by Tukwila in 1989, hasn't been developed because it's impossible to build without leveling the mound. A dozen years ago, the current owners applied for grading permits but gave up after a year. When signs went up 10 months ago notifying residents of the new proposal, Georgina Kerr, who lives across the river from the site, worked with neighbors to notify local tribes, contact city officials and solicit signatures for a petition. She also got the Cascade Land Conservancy involved. The conservancy is a nonprofit organization that's preserved 7,500 acres of green space in King, Pierce and Snohomish counties. Cascade officials verified they've held informal talks with the owners but declined comment on the substance of their discussions. "It's a project that has merit and one we're looking at," said conservancy president Gene Duvernoy. Coming up with the cash to buy the property along with a smaller, adjacent parcel — listed last year for $90,000 — could be the greatest challenge. The hill is valued at $836,200, http://seattletimes. nwsource. com/html/localnews/134336933_povertyhill03m. html 9/4/01 The Seattle Time...: Duwamish site may be sacred, but it's slated for developmen Page 5 of 6 according to the King County Assessor's Office. Bellevue -based Opus Northwest, the regional arm of one of the country's largest real-estate developers, was willing to pay $1.6 million until backing out of the deal a few weeks ago "because they thought the hurdles to development were beyond what they wanted to take on," said Spiers, the White family's assets manager. Before permits can be issued, city officials need to assess the effects of noise, dust and truck traffic as well as historical and cultural implications, said Steve Lancaster, Tukwila's director of community development. But according to City Councilwoman Pamela Linder, the city doesn't have money in its parks budget to buy the property. Still, Kerr and her neighbors are convinced preservation is in the neighborhood's best interest. "I think there's a feeling that permeates from this hill that just makes you feel calm inside," said Kerr, following a well-worn path up the hill's east side. Helen Dingle, 86, moved to the area with her late husband in the early 1940s. She used to make jam from the hill's blackberries, and her daughters played there, searching for arrowheads and fossils. "I sure don't want 'em coming here and dynamiting our hill," she said. "This whole hill is full of Indians, and you can feel it when you go up. They're all good spirits." Sara Jean Green can be reached at 206-515-5654 or at sgreen@seattletimes.com. Copyright © 2001 The Seattle Times Company SeattleFSBO.com Buy or Sell Homes Commission FREE' More local news headlines seattletimes.com home Local news 1 Sports 1 Business & technology 1 Education 1 Investigation & special projects Nation & world 1 Personal technology 1 Obituaries 1 Editorials & opinion 1 Columnists 1 Arts & entertainment Health & science 1 Lifestyles 1 Northwest Weekend 1 Pacific Northwest magazine 1 Travel NWclassifieds 1 NWsource 1 Advertising info 1 Home delivery 1 Contact us 1 Search archi http://seattletimes. nwsource.com/html/localnews/134336933_povertyhill03m. html 9/4/01 SERVING ALLENTOWN, DUWAMISH AND FOSTER POINT SINCE 1964 Committee Officers President— Ude Archer (206) 248-2551 Vice President -Georgina Kerr (206) 444-9695 Treasure -Mary Ellen Whitehead (206)242-1689 Trustee- Christela Aragon (206)762-6669 Trustee- Audrey Davis (206) 242-9188 Trustee-Treva Gomez (206) 762-7971 lames Barnett, Newsletter Editor The Sacred Secrets of Poverty Hill "Histories and Sacred Secrets" Do you know that an area of Tukwila which has some of the riches history of our city and arguably some of the best view prop- erty of this city is called "Poverty Hill'? One of the most influential and best known Duwamish Improvement Club's Presidents, loved to garden upon it's slopes . Never- theless, long before Mr. Petersen was a resident of Poverty Hill and long before any white settler ripped a harvest from it rich soil, this area of land was sacred to it's na- tive people. Today Georgina Kerr, who is the Vice -President of the Duwamish Im- provement Club and the President of the Friends of the Duwamish Riverbend Hills, has been working diligently to save this historic and sacred 10 acre area from being leveled and converted into an industrial park. Some believe, the last thing that this area should be is an industrial park, unfor- tunately that is what the city has zoned it for. This area is privately owned, but this still effects our community. According to the Burke Museum of the University of Wash- ington this land has 42 million -year-old fos- sils on it and "Bill Nye, The Science Guy " filmed a segment on it that included middle school children from Tukwila. These con- cerns have been brought to our city by the Friends of the Duwamish Riverbend Hills and the Duwamish Improvement Club. Our Last Farewell to Petersen Hall The Club has moved to our new meeting place, the Tukwila Community Center, therefore we must say farewell to Petersen Hall. Artifacts and pictures from Petersen Hall will be moved to our new location and the building which was the Public Works Building for the City of Tukwila will be, by prior agreement, removed by the city. The Club expresses a sincere thanks for the city's previous accommodations and be- cause Tukwila sees value in the Duwamish • Improvement Club, they are granting us present and future accommodations. Come and meet with the Duwamish Im- provement Club this September 20, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the ` Tukwila Community Cen- Where were you on December 12, 1969? "Twister Hits Wier This phenomena happens on such a rare occasion in the Northwest, that when it does manifest, we call it a freak inci- dent . Hived on the North -end of Tacoma when a movie called "Twister" was showing in the movie theaters and guess what; a real twister uprooted trees in the North -end of Tacoma. No one wanted to believe it, not even the • local newspaper. The Sunday, De- cember 14, 1969 Renton Record- "amide M, it's a Chronicles read: "A freak tornado Twister " s ce • a no east • ug e reen Friday afternoon and reportedly touched ground areas seven.times." Mr. And Mrs. Leroy Archey and family, the residence of 2284 Russell Road were fortunate after the . twister strnck their home. The family goat, who was tied to a shed, which crumbled around the animal, was uninjured. Five-year-old Teresa Archey escaped injury when the tor- nado toppled the garage that she and her brother, David, were playing in. The only injury to this family was to nine- year-old David Archey, who suffered a broken leg from fal- ling debris and was rushed to the Valley General Hospital. Exert from the Tukwila Historical Society Thanks to all Participants of the Night Out Against Crime How do we proactively do something about crime and thereby keeping our community safe; by participating in community activities. A special thank you to all in our community who made the August 9, 2001 "Night Out Against Crime" a big suc- cess. There various locations throughout the City of Tukwila, primarily in our city parks. Thank you to our support systems of the City Council, the Police Department, the Fire Depart- ment, the Parks Department, our community committees, and the Mayor of Tukwila. An Invitation to support or join the Duwamish Improvement Club „'C'i�`crti..I,.. Y ��1jy'.f'iG:•.}iv's?+'Y'�^.v ;S?: �4•:^. The Duwaznush Improvement Club �-s Join the Duwamish Improvement Club nowt The dues are $8 yearly (per person or family), payable to the Duwamish Improvement Club. Mail this slip and your check to: Mary Ellen Whitehead, 13338 66th South , Tukwila WA 98178. Thanks Name: Address: Phone or E-mail Interest? Send your email to: DawamishhnprovementCiub@hotmail. Vo DUWAMISH TRIBE July 12, 2001 Opus Northwest, L. L. C. 915 118th Avenue SE, Suite 300 Bellevue, WA 98005 Attn: Bill Bieber, Senior Project Manager Dear Mr. Bieber: JUL 1 6 2001 Do EVEII CPn, imrir I believe there is a serious mistake regarding our phone call where you thought the Duwamish Tribe supports your future plans for the site on 115th Street. I do not recall you mentioning it was the "sacred hill" and had you told me in the beginning that it was that property, then I would have informed you that the Duwamish Tribe supports total preservation of that property. James Rasmussen, council member and myself have attended many meetings advocating that position. Yes, the Duwamish always maintains the position that should any land or property may hold historical significance or artifacts that it should always be preserved and protected for eventually return to the Duwamish Tribal Cultural Center for study by our membership. There has been too many developments where these artifacts are totally taken away and the our Tribe never sees them or has the benefit of personally preserving them for our membership. We believe that all the land in the Seattle area is precious and tells a story about the indigenous people, the Duwamish. This letter will stand as the Tribe's position and we do not support Opus Northwest's plans for future development: - S" rely, evelopment:- Sirjerely, Cecile A. Hansen cc: Tribal Council members Mike Ruhl, Opus Northwest, LLC Terra Vall-Spinosa, Opus Northwest , LLC Bart Bryestal, Opus Norhwest, LLC Moira Carr Bradshaw, City of Tukwila Doug Holme, Martin Smith, Inc. • 14235 Ambaum Blvd. SW — Front A • Burien, WA 98166 • (206) 431-1582 • Fax (206) 431-1962 OPUS. THE OPUS GROUP ARCHITECTS CONTRACTORS DEVELOPERS July 4, 2001 Ms. Cecile Hansen 14235 Anbaum SW Burien, WA 98166 Dear Cecile, RECEIVED ,;UL 0 5 2001 coaQii uliTY DEVEL4P ENT OPUS NORTHWEST, L.L.C. 915 118th Avenue Southeast, Suite 300 Bellevue, WA 98005 Phone 425-453-4100 Fax 425-453-1712 www.opuscorp.com It was a pleasure speaking with you on the phone the other day. I appreciate your willingness to discuss Opus Northwest's future plans for the site on Southwest 115th Street. The sentiment of the Duwamish Tribe regarding this development is one of significance to our organization. We recognize your verbal consent and approval to move forward with our plans for this location. I can assure you Opus will put forth every effort to preserve artifacts indigenous to it. Please feel free to contact me at 425-519-6831 with any questions or concerns. Yours very truly, Bill Bieber Senior Project Manager Cc: Mike Ruhl, Opus Northwest, L.L.C. Terra Vall-Spinosa, Opus Northwest, L.L.C. Bart Brynestad, Opus Northwest, L.L.C. Moira Carr Bradshaw, City of Tukwila Doug Holme, Martin Smith, Inc. Allentown • Atlanta • Austin • Chicago • Columbus • Dallas • Denver • Fort Lauderdale • Houston • Indianapolis • Kansas City • Los Angeles • Miami • Milwaukee • Minneapolis Orange County • Orlando • Pensacola • Philadelphia • Phoenix • Portland • Sacramento • San Francisco • San Jose • Seattle • St. Louis • Tampa • Washington, D.C. June 5, 2001 • Cizy of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Douglas Holme 1109 First Avenue Suite 500 Seattle, WA 98101-2988 Subject: White Property on S. 115 Street. Dear Mr. Holme: Thank you for your letter regarding the development of Jim White's property. You asked if Opus could take over as applicant on the SEPA checklist and Shoreline Permit Application. The existing applications resulted in the preparation of a Determination of Significance (DS,) which requires an Environmental Impact Statement, due to the anticipated unmitigated significant impacts. The application that precipitated the DS was to "grade" the site, leaving a 100 foot buffer along the east property line and to remove over 221,000 cubic yards of rock and dirt over a 2 year period. We last met on this proposal in September of 2000. If you wish to continue with this application, a response to the City's proposed DS should be submitted by August 31, 2000 or we will close the file. The information we have on the Opus proposal is verbal. In addition to engaging in some amount of clearing and regrading, they will construct a building. That by itself will require a new shoreline application, because the existing information does not refer to any buildings in the application or on the cross sections. I assume there will be phases in the Opus proposal because of the need to preload some of the soils, whereas there are none described in the existing proposal. An unclassified use permit would be required for any proposal that removes 50,000 cubic yards or more, (Tukwila Municipal Code 18.06.575.) In addition to the criteria for an unclassified use, there are specific rules regarding rock quarries that are enclosed. Because a building is proposed, the City requires design review as well as the shoreline and SEPA reviews. The unclassified use permit and design approval could be done in one public hearing before the City Council and could be processed simultaneously as a Type 5 permit. The affected community is very informed on the current proposal and very concerned about the cultural, noise, hauling, and blasting impacts associated with the applications. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 Beginning anew versus modifying the existing application is a potentially better option and does not lose the significant investment by Mr. White in the entitlement process for a number of reasons. 1. The surrounding community is very concerned about the current proposal. Perceptionally and stilistantively it may be an advantage to clearly indicate that a new project is being proposed. 2. The majority of the funds expended have been for the generation of professional information regarding impacts associated with a project. Information that is relevant to your new proposal is transferable. 3. The cost of the applications are relatively small (SEPA - $325.00 and Shoreline - $550.00) compared to the costs of generating information and drawings related to a proposal. The process to date has resulted in significant knowledge about the site, potential impacts associated with developing the site, and possible solutions. This is not lost with a new application. The existing applications were incomplete and were incrementally amended and reviewed. A new application would be an opportunity to be comprehensive and move forward using relevant information already generated instead of revising or rescinding previous aspects of the project. I will be happy to assist in any way that I can in ensuring a smooth transition. Please call me at 206 431-3651. Yours truly, /if / ZAL Moira Carr Bradshaw Associate Planner Enclosure C: Mike Ruhl, Opus Northwest, L.L.C. Steve Lancaster C:\mcb\rockpile\011tr601.doc TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE Chapter 5.36 ROCK QUARRIES Sections: 5.36.010 Quarry defined. 5.36.020 License required. 5.36.030 Council investigation. 5.36.040 License issuance. 5.36.050 Business tax. 5.36.060 Dirt and waste removal exemption from tax. 5.36.070 Weighing rock or coal on lawful scale. 5.36.080 Record of weight required. 5.36.090 Statement of weight to City Council. 5.36.100 Hours of operation. 5.36.110 Operating rock crusher within City limits unlawful. 5.36.120 Compliance with State and City laws required. 5.36.130 Removal of debris. 5.36.140 Liability. 5.36.150 Compliance with State Highway Department. 5.36.160 Impairing lateral support of adjacent land. 5.36.170 Grade level depth. 5.36.180 Removal of temporary buildings. 5.36.190 License revocation. 5.36.200 Guarantee to pay damages. 5.36.010 Quarry defined. "Quarry" as described in this chapter, means any place within the City where rock is removed with machinery. (Ord. 182 §1, 1948) 5.36.020 License required. It is unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to operate a quarry within the corporate limits of the City without having first secured from the City Council a license to operate the quarry. The application for a license shall state the location of the proposed quarry and the number of years for which the license is required. (Ord. 182 §2, 1948) 5.36.030 Council investigation. Upon the request for a license to operate a quarry within the City limits, the City Council shall investi- gate such request, giving special consideration to the location of the proposed quarry and the desirability of a quarry in such a location. The Council's decision shall be made without delay and shall be final. (Ord. 182 §3, 1948) 5.36.040 License issuance. Upon the approval of the City Council for the operation of a quarry within the City, the Clerk shall be instructed to issue a license without charging a fee. (Ord. 182 §4, 1948) 5.36.050 Business tax. A. The operator of a quarry shall be required to pay to the City a business tax of two cents per ton on all rock removed from the premises, which is suitable for rockery work, construction work, rip -rapping or road work. B. The operator shall pay to the City a business tax of five cents per ton on all coal removed from the premises but shall be privileged to leave on the premises, as waste, any coal of which he cannot profitably dispose. (Ord. 182 §5, 1948) 5.36.060 Dirt and waste removal exempt from tax. The operator of a quarry may remove dirt and waste material, as defined in this chapter, other than coal, from the premises without paying a business tax. Waste, as defined in this chapter, shall be only the material that will not be sold. (Ord. 182 §6, 1948) 5.36.070 Weighing rock or coal on lawful scale. No rock or coal shall be removed from the licensed premises without having been weighed upon an accu- rate and lawful scale, which shall be open to the inspection of the City Council or its authorized repre- sentative at any time. (Ord. 182 §7, 1948) 5.36.080 Record of weight required. A record of each load weighed shall be entered, at the time of weighing, in a permanent bound book, to be kept on the premises, and the load slip for each truck load removed, showing the time, weight and type of material, whether rock or coal, shall be made out and signed by the weight -master and the driver of the truck, and shall be retained by the operator for the examination by the City Council or its authorized representative. Such load slips shall be on a special printed form bearing consecutively numbered serial numbers, and each slip shall be accounted for. All such records shall be made in duplicate and the City furnished with a copy. Records shall be carefully pre- served by the operator and be constantly available to the City Council or its authorized representative for audit or inspection. (Ord. 182 §8, 1948) Page 5-24. Printed September 7, 2000 • • TITLE 5.36.090 Statement of weight to City Council. On the 15th day of each month the operator shall furnish to the City Council a written statement showing the weight of all rock and coal removed from the premises during the preceding month, and at the same time shall remit therefor. (Ord. 182 §9, 1948) 5.36.100 Hours of operation. The quarry shall be operated only on regular work- ing days. The hours of operation shall be between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on regular working days. (Ord. 182 §10, 1948) 5.36.110 Operating rock crusher within City limits unlawful. It is unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to operate a rock crusher within the corporate limits of the City. (Ord. 182 §11, 1948) 5.36.120 Compliance with State and City laws required. The operator of a quarry shall at all times conduct the operation of the quarry in compliance with all requirements of the laws of the State and the City, and legally authorized requirements of public officials, and shall not commit or permit any nuisance on the premises where operating. (Ord. 182 §12, 1948) 5.36.130 Removal of debris. All wood waste and other debris shall be burned or removed from the premises by the operator and must not be allowed to accumulate. (Ord. 182 §13, 1948) 5.36.140 Liability. The operator shall post sufficient public liability and property damage insurance as required by the State for the operation of a quarry. Proof of such insurance must be filed with the City Clerk. (Ord. 182 §14, 1948) 5.36.150 Compliance with State Highway Department. The operator must comply with all requirements of the State Highway Department in all matters such as safety, approaches, fills and culverts. (Ord. 182 §15, 1948) 5.36.160 Impairing lateral support of adjacent land. The operator shall not impair the lateral support of any adjacent land and in any event shall not, as the result of any excavation, mining or quarrying done by him, leave the property with any slope thereon steeper than a fall of 100 feet and 25 lateral feet if the 5 — BUSINESICENSES AND REGULATIONS surface of the slope is solid stone, or such lesser grade as may be reasonably necessary to provide an angle of repose and safety if the surface of the slope is of softer material or liable to slough by reason of cracking or crumbling. (Ord. 182 §16, 1948) 5.36.170 Grade level depth. If the lower level of operation shall be along a street or highway, the grade shall be left level with the street or highway for a depth of 100 feet. Grade level depth must be maintained parallel to the street or highway for the entire distance of operation. (Ord. 182 §17, 1948) 5.36.180 Removal of temporary buildings. All buildings not of a permanent nature must be removed when the period of operation is ended. (Ord. 182 §18, 1948) 5.36.190 License revocation. If any amount of the tax, to be paid under the terms of this chapter, becomes due and remains un- paid, or if default is made in any of the sections herein contained, the license so issued shall be revoked. (Ord. 182 §19, 1948) 5.36.200 Guarantee to pay damages. The applicant for a license to operate a quarry shall be required to sign a guarantee to pay, or to have his insurance company pay, any and all damages that may be made against the City by any person or persons on account of injury or damage to persons or property occasioned by, or in any manner resulting from, the operation of a quarry under his license. In the event of any damage or injury occurring and an action being brought against the City therefor, the City shall promptly notify the operator and his insurance com- pany of the commencement of the suit and notify him or them to take charge of the defense thereof. (Ord. 182 §20, 1948) Printed September 7, 2000 Page 5-25 • May 23, 2001 RE: Draft Fact Sheet for the Duwamish Riverbend Hills project The attached draft Fact Sheet includes your name and contact information. Is it okay to provide this information? The Fact Sheet will be provided to those who request information about this project, including potential sponsors and media. I'm assuming a regional and national audience. The Fact Sheet will go a long way towards providing people with the pertinent facts about this project — at a glance. It will usually be presented as a cover or summary of the project, along with other documents (such as newspaper clippings, book excerpts, and so on). Please review this information and retum your comments to me. I'm especially interested in: • Your approval to provide your contact infommation. • Accuracy (please mark whatever corrections are necessary to 'make it right') • Holes (have I left anyone or anything out?) My deadline is: • Friday, May 25. Thanks for your help. If you have any questions, concerns, or suggestions, contact me. Georgina Bezenar-Kerr 3834 S 116th St Tukwila WA 98168 206.444.9695 DuwamishRiverbendHills@home.com Fact Sheet • • DRAFT DUWAMISH R..IVER.BEND HILLS Friends of the Duwamish Riverbend Hills c/o Georgina Bezenar-Kerr, President 3834 S. 116th St., Tukwila, Washington, 98168 206.444.9695 / DuwamishRiverbendHills@home.com Georgina Bezenar-Kerr President Rosemary Unterseher I Sharon Nakata I Treasurer Vice President Other contacts: Victoria Woods I Secretary Steve Mullet, Mayor City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila WA 98188 206.433.1805 email: fax: website: tukwila@ci.tukwila.wa.us 206.433.1833 www.ci.tukwila.wa.us Pamela Linder, Councilwoman City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila WA 98188 206.439.2473 1 email: ! fax: website: tukwilac ci.tukwila.wa.us 206.433.1833 www.ci.tukwila.wa.us Bruce Fletcher, Director Department of Parks & Recreation Tukwila Community Center 12424 42nd Ave. S. Tukwila WA 98168 1 206.767.2343 email: E fax: ' website: bfletcher@ci.tukwila.wa.us 206.768.0524 www.ci.tukwila.wa.us Moira Carr Bradshaw, Associate Planner, or Steve Lancaster, Director, Department of Community Development City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila WA 98188 206.431.3651 (Moira Bradshaw) 206.433.1805 (Steve Lancaster) email: fax: I website: mbradshaw@ci.tukwila.wa.us 206.431.3665 www.ci.tukwila.wa.us Elizabeth Nesbitt, Ph.D., Curator of Paleontology, Burke Museum of Natural History and Culture Box 313050, University of Washington, Seattle 98195 206.543.5949 email: fax: website: Inesbitt@u.washington.edu 206.685.3039 www.washinaton.edu/burkemuseum Cecile A. Hansen, Chairwoman Duwamish Tribe 14235 Ambaum Blvd. S.W. Burien, WA 98166 206.431.1582 I email: fax: website: milopahome.com 206.431.1962 http://members.nbci.com/duwamish/ FACT SHEET - DUWAMISH RIVERBEND HILLS 1 05/23/01 • Frequently asked questions: What are the Duwamish Riverbend Hills? ! Two adjoining hills – a large one and a small "toe" – on 10 acres of undeveloped land ; in Tukwila, Washington, just south of Seattle. The two hills adjoin a larger hill with houses on it (Poverty Hill). Why are these hills so important? j Two reasons: I 1) They're sacred to Native Americans. Observers say they're the spot where the world was created, based on various Native American legends that were recorded by noted anthropologists in the 1920s. 2) They're the furthest north that paleontologists have found the seashells, shark teeth, and other fossils that prove that 40 million years ago, this entire region was under water and part of a hot and steamy tropical oasis. It's extremely unusual to find undisturbed, undeveloped land of this size that contains fossils—in a densely populated, urban setting. Where are the hills located? The hills are located at 3800 S. 115th St., just east of E. Marginal Way S. in Tukwila, j Washington. Tukwila shares its northern boundary with Seattle, and is located about 10 miles south of downtown Seattle. Who owns the land? There are two pieces of land, and two separate owners. The land is zoned light industrial. According to the King County Assessor: • The first site (tax lot # 1023049057) is 10.97 acres; the owner is Wallace Enterprises; and the assessed value as of 12-13-99 was $836,200. I • The second site is in the southwestem comer of the first site. It measures 100 feet by 100 feet. The owner is William Looney. This parcel is currently for sale for approximately $90,000. Why is it important to act quickly? +: This is one of the only sacred sites along the river that's undeveloped. The hills may ; soon be dynamited and removed, if the owner's application to level these hills is approved by the city of Tukwila. Also, the small 100x100 foot parcel is currently for sale (November, 2000) for approximately $90,000. What's the goal? j To preserve these hills for future generations. What's the vision for this site? Restricted -access site (conducted tours or school field trips) with trails, a small parking lot, and a building to contain educational displays and restrooms. Who would own and maintain the site? i To be determined. What documents contain details on the site? ! Mythology of Southern Puget Sound – Legends Shared by Tribal Elders, reprint of I the 1929 publication by Arthur Ballard, with additional material by Kenneth G. Watson, published by Snoqualmie Valley Historical Museum, 1999. Field Guide to Mysterious Places of the Pacific Coast, by Salvatore M. Trento, published by Henry Holt & Co., 1997. The Geographical Review, by T. T. Waterman. The Geographical Names Used By the Indians of the Pacific Coast, p. 179 and 194, 1922. Washington Geology, Vol. 26, No. 1, April 1988, "Marine Fauna of the Middle Ecocene Tukwila Formation, King County", by Elizabeth A. Nesbitt, Ph.D. Highline Times/Des Moines News, "Proponents Want Poverty Hill Mounds to be Park", by Eric Mathison, Aug. 16, 2000. • FACT SHEET - DUWAMISH RNERBEND HILLS 2 05/23/01 Gravel -diminishing returns opinion Docket Number: Title of Case: File Date: Oral Argument Date: Supreme Court of the State of Washington Opinion Information Sheet 70356-6 City of University Place v. Brian P. Mcguire 09/06/2001 05/22/2001 SOURCE OF APPEAL Appeal from Superior Court, Pierce County; 98-2-10758-3 Honorable Thomas J. Felnagle, Judge. Authored by Tom Chambers Concurring: Charles Z. Smith Barbara A. Madsen Charles W. Johnson Richard B. Sanders Faith E Ireland Visiting Judge Bobbe J. Bridge Susan J. Owens JUSTICES COUNSEL OF RECORD Counsel for Petitioner(s) William T. Lynn Gordon Thomas Honeywell etal P.O. Box 1157 1201 Pacific Ave.STE 2200 Tacoma, WA 98401-1157 Margaret Y. Archer Gordon Thomas Honeywell Etc. Page 1 Gravel -diminishing returns opinion PO Box 1157 1201 Pacific Ave.STE 2200 Tacoma, WA 98401-1157 Counsel for Respondent(s) Timothy X. Sullivan City of University Place 3715 Bridgeport Way W University Pl, WA 98466-4455 Michael C. Walter Keating Buckl,in & McCormack P.S. 4141 Seafirst 5th Av Plza 800 5th Ave. Seattle, WA 98104 THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY OF UNIVERSITY PLACE, ) a municipal corporation, organized ) under the laws of the State of ) Washington, ) Respondent, ) No. 70356 -6 v. ) En Banc BRIAN P. McGUIRE, a single man, ) Petitioner. ) Filed Sep tember 6, 2001 CHAMBERS, J. - Developer Brian McGuire seeks to grade a 1.4 - acre knoll as fill for a nearby development. The City of University Place has refused permission. McGuire argues he has a valid nonconforming u se right to mine the knoll, as it is historically part of a site owned a nd operated by his predecessor in interest. University Place argues that t he nonconforming use either never accrued to the knoll or, in t Page 2 Gravel -diminishing returns opinion he alternative, has been abandoned. McGuire urges this Court to adopt the d octrine of diminishing asset, which extends the boundaries of the nonco nforming mining use to the entire parcel intended to be mined at the time th e zoning ordinance was promulgated. We concur with the overwhelming number of jurisdictions considering the question and conclude the dimi nishing asset doctrine is applicable to mining operations. We also conclu de University Place has failed to establish the hearing examiner erred in deciding the nonconforming use had not been abandoned. We reverse the Co urt of Appeals. STATEMENT OF FACTS The knoll at issue is a 1.4 -acre parcel that was once a part of 80 acres of property owned by the Holroyd Land Company (Holroyd). Since the 1940s, Holroyd has been gradually and continually mining various po rtions of this 80 acres of land for sand and gravel. Pierce County, and la ter University Place, enacted zoning ordinances that restricted or prohibit ed mining, but Holroyd continued to mine as a valid nonconforming use. In 1991, Holroyd sold a portion of the property to McGuire who has been grad ually developing the former Holroyd property for residential and c ommercial uses. McGuire seeks to reclaim one former mine in part by grading the adjacent 1.4 -acre knoll to use as fill. University Place denied per mission. Since McGuire grounds his right to grade the 1.4 acres upon the property's prior nonconforming use as a mine, we turn to the property's mining history. Originally Holroyd operated the mine unfettered by zoning or dinances. In 1944, Pierce County adopted a zoning ordinance covering t Page 3 Gravel -diminishing returns opinion he Holroyd site that permitted continued nonconforming uses subject to an ab andonment provision.1 In 1955, Pierce County amended Resolution 1650 to pe rmit the operation of "{q}uarries, sand and gravel pits" in "1-G GEN ERAL USE DISTRICT{S}. . {o}n sites approved by special permit." I n 1956, a Pierce County Commissioner stated at a public hearing that H olroyd could continue to operate the mines, presumably applying the nonco nforming use doctrine. This zoning scheme was amended in 1957 allowing '{ q}uarries, sand and gravel pits' to operate in Holroyd's area only with spec ial permits. It does not appear Holroyd ever sought a special permit. Holr oyd mined the parcel continuously during this period and until sale, in sm all portions, occasionally seeking permits from the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). In 1970, Washington State enacted the surface mining ac t (SMA) , chapter 78.44 RCW. Under the SMA, mine owners must obtain surface mining permits from the DNR. The SMA requires mine owners to file a reclamation plan outlining how the property will be brought to beneficia 1 use after mining ceases before a permit will be issued. RCW 78.44.081. While the land need not be level, steep slopes are discouraged. RCW 7 8.44.141(4). Mine owners must establish that they can lawfully mine so, a t Holroyd's request, Pierce County informed DNR that Holroyd's mines wer e legal nonconforming uses previously established when the zoning or dinance was promulgated. Holroyd only sporadically sought permits for th e various mining projects engaged on the property and by 1972 had expa Page 4 Gravel -diminishing returns opinion nded his mines outside the permitted area Holroyd did indicate an intent to mine the entire 80 acres i n some of the permit applications by including the property in an attached map. However, the legal description of the area he sought to mine did not always reference the 1.4 -acre knoll at issue today. In 1973, Bridgeport Way and Anderson -Pierce Road were r ealigned to cut off the knoll from the rest of the 80 acres. The 1.4 acres was essentially an island boarded by paved roads. The 1.4 acres was not mi ned before the road was moved and no one has attempted to mine the 1.4 acre s until McGuire sought to level the hill on the parcel for fill. In 1991, the DNR ordered Holroyd to cease mining outsid e of the area covered by permits. Holroyd acknowledged this order, and a greed not to mine outside of the permitted area without permission. The 1.4 -acre knoll was outside the permitted area. In May 1991, Holroyd sold t he property, which is now within the city limits of University Place, to McGuire. University Place has prohibited all new mining activities. U niversity Place Municipal Code (UPMC) 18.44.020. Nonconforming uses are all owed to continue, and may be changed by permit. UPMC 19.75.070. If the nonconforming use is abandoned for more than one year, the r ight is extinguished, unless extended by a hearing examiner. UPMC 19 .35.130(D), (J) McGuire is a property developer, not a miner. He test ified his intention was to develop the property, not to mine it. He purchased the property adjacent to the 1.4 acres contingent upon Universit y Place approving a shopping center and two residential subdivisions Page 5 Gravel -diminishing returns opinion . These developments were approved. The required January 1993 Fin al Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) noted McGuire planned to level a hill on the 1.4 acres to provide fill material for the shopping c enter. McGuire estimates the 1.4 acres will provide 2,600 cubic yards of fi 11 material. The 1.4 acres is a treed knoll that provides a buffer from roads and commercial development to residents. Many residents protest ed the destruction of the knoll's use as a buffer zone University Place denied McGuire's application for a site development permit to remov e fill material from the 1.4 acres on the following grounds: (1) the land wa s zoned residential and mining was nonpermitted use; (2) mining the site would be an impermissible expansion of a nonconforming use; and (3) M cGuire did not have a DNR reclamation permit to mine the 1.4 acres. McGuire appealed the denial to a hearing examiner. The he aring examiner reversed the city's denial of the permit and allowed McGuire to go forward with his construction plan. University Place appealed to th e Pierce County Superior Court. The trial court upheld the hearing examiner , but granted a stay pending appeal. University Place prevailed before the C ourt of Appeals, which assumed without deciding the diminishing asse t doctrine was the law in Washington, but found Holroyd had abandoned any r ight to continue a nonconforming use by not indicating objectively a n intention to mine the 1.4 acres. City of Univ. Place v. McGuire, 102 Wn. App. 658, 9 P .3d 918 (2000). McGuire sought review in this Court, which was granted. ANALYSIS Review is governed by the Land Use Petition Act (LUPA), Page 6 Gravel -diminishing returns opinion chapter 36.70C RCW. To prevail er the hearing examiner made a mistake evidence to support the decision, or that the decision was eous.2 Errors of law are reviewed de novo. Girton v. City of n. App. 360, 363, 983 P.2d 00). Whether the hearing examiner correctly doctrine to the 1.4 acres will be reviewed y erroneous. Schofield v. Spokane County, 277 (1999) . The decision as a whole dence supporting the hearing examiner's decision. idence is "a sufficient quantity of evidence to persuade rson of the truth or correctness . Puget Sound Growth Mgmt. Hearings Bd., 1998) (quoting Callecod v. State (1997)). (T}he initial burden of proving the existence of a nonconfor ming use is on the land user making the assertion. However, once a nonconf orming use is established, the burden ment or discontinuance of the nonconforming ther abandonment has occurred is a question of fact as to which t he municipality has the burden of proof ' This burden of proof is not an eas y one. University Place must establish eith of law, that there wasinsufficient clearly erron Seattle, 97 W 1135 (1999), review denied, 140 Wn.2d 1007 (20 applied the diminishing asset to determine if it was clearl 96 Wn. App. 581, 586, 980 P.2d will be reviewed for substantial evi Substantial ev a fair-minded pe of the order." City of Redmond v. Cent 136 Wn.2d 38, 46, 959 P.2d 1091 Patrol, 84 Wn. App. 663, 673, 929 P.2d 510 shifts to the party claiming abandon use to prove such. 'Whe Van Sant v. City of Everett, 69 Wn. App. 641, 647-48, 849 P. 2d 1276 (1993) (citations omitted); see also 1 Robert M. Anderson, American Law of Zoning Page 7 Gravel -diminishing returns opinion sec. 6.09 (3d ed. 1986). In short, McGuire bears the burden of establishing vested nonconforming use covering the 1.4 acres a lawful or under some theory; the burden then shifts he use has been abandoned. Nonconforming Use Local governments have the power to chemes, consistent with the Town of Hempstead, 369 U.S. (1962). 'If {the} ordinance police powers, the fact that it deprives the 1 use does not render it unconstitutional. he zoning ordinance must merely be reasonable in light of the menace f aced, the availability and effectiveness of less drastic alternatives, and the loss faced by the property owner. 'A nonconforming use is for to the enactment of a zoning ordina er the effective date of the ordinan with the zoning restrictions s situated.' Rhod-A-Zalea & 35th, Inc. v. Snohomish County, 136 Wn.2d 1, 6, 959 P.2d 1024 (1998) (citing 1 Robert M. Anderson, American Law of Zo ning sec. 6.01 (Kenneth H. Young ed., 4th ed. 1996)). g legislation is to phase out a nonconforming use. unty, 81 Wn.2d 312, 323, 501 P.2d 594 (1972). Lawful nonconforming uses ar e allowed to continue for some period of time, though t may regulate or even terminate the nonconforming use, to University Place to show t promulgate zoning s United States Constitution. Goldblatt v. 590, 592, 82 S. Ct. 987, 8 L. Ed. 2d 130 is otherwise a valid exercise of the town's property of its most beneficia Goldblatt, 369 U.S. at 592. T Goldblatt, 369 U.S. at 594-95. a use which lawfully existed pr nce, and which is maintained aft ce, although it does not comply applicable to the district in which it i 'The policy of zonin Anderson v. Island Co Page 8 the local governmen subject to constitu Gravel -diminishing returns opinion tional limits. Rhod-A-Zalea, 136 Wn.2d at 8. Nonconforming uses are no t favored, and may be extinguished, either after a period of nonuse or a re asonable amortization period allowing the owner to recoup on investme nt.3 Rhod-A- Zalea, 136 Wn.2d at 7; see also Choi v. City of Fife, 60 Wn. App. 458, 803 P .2d 1330 (no intent to abandon necessary if zoning scheme a llows termination of nonconforming use rights after use has been u nintentionally vacated, rather than intentionally abandoned), review denied , 116 Wn.2d 1034, 813 P.2d 583 (1991). Under Washington common law, no nconforming uses may be intensified, but not expanded. See, e.g., Kelle ✓ v. City of Bellingham, 92 Wn.2d 726, 731-32, 600 P.2d 1276 (1979). The hearing examiner concluded Holroyd had a legal nonc onforming use right to mine gravel on his entire acreage. To reach that conclusion, he employed the doctrine s in accord with Washington law. g asset doctrine to determine Diminishing Asset Whether Washington State recognizes the doctrine of diminish ing asset is a question of first impression, and will be reviewed de novo. The term likely derives from the amortization calculation used by acc ountants to determine the worth of an asset at a particular time whose v alue will be exhausted by use -- for example, a mine, which has a finite useable term as a mine. See generally Edwin Hood et al., Valuation of Closel y Held Business Interests, 65 UMKC L. Rev. 399, 420 (1997). It is especial ly applicable to mining operations: {C}ourts have observed that the very nature of the excavatin of diminishing asset, concluding it wa Accordingly, we turn to the diminishin if this was error. Page 9 Gravel -diminishing returns opinion g business contemplates the use of land as a whole, not a use limited t o a portion of the land already excavated. Such a diminishing -asset enterp rise is 'using' all of the cal matter must begin e boundary its land. n must be regarded as a permits a nonconforming land contained in a particular asset; as a practi it digging at one spot and continue from there to th of The entire tract of a diminishing -assets operatio 'lot' within the meaning of an ordinance which use to continue on 'such lot,' for to hold oth erwise would be to deny the excavator his use. 1 Robert M. Anderson, American Law of Zoning sec. 6.52, at 6 04-05 (3d ed. 1986) (footnotes omitted). Most courts that have considere d the proper scope of a legal nonconforming mining activity have adopted the diminishing asset doctrine to protect the owner's expectation for the us e of the land which otherwise would be severely disrupted by a later enact ed zoning system. It can be seen as either an exception to the genera 1 principle that a nonconforming use will be restricted to its original site or as a substantive adaptation of the nonconforming use doctrine to recognize the realities of extractive industries. The Supreme Court of C alifornia observed: The very nature and use es the continuance of such ole, without limitation or restriction to the immediate area excavated at the time the ordinance was passed. A mineral extractive operation is su sceptible of use and has value only in the place where the resources are found, and once of an extractive business contemplat use of the entire parcel of land as a wh Page 10 Gravel -diminishing returns opinion the minerals are extracted it cannot again be used for that purpose. 'Quarry property is generally a one -use property. The rock must be quarried at the site where it exists, or not at all. An ab solute prohibition, therefore, practically amounts to a taking of t he property since it denies the owner the right to engage in the only bu siness for which the land is fitted.' Hansen Bros. Enters., Inc. v. Bd. of Supervisors, 12 Cal. 4t h 533, 907 P.2d 1324, 1336-37, 48 Cal. Rptr. 2d 778 (1996) (quoting Morton v . Superior Court, 124 Cal. App. 582, 269 P.2d 81 (1954)). Similarly, the Supreme Court of Illinois held a lawfu 1 nonconforming use of land as a mine could be extended to the boundaries of that parcel of land: We think that in cases of a diminishing asset the enterprise is 'using'all that land which contains the particular asset and which cons titutes an integral part of the operation, notwithstanding the fact tha t a particular portion may not yet be under actual excavation. It is in t he very nature of such business that reserve areas be maintained which are left vacant or devoted to incidental uses until they are needed. Obviousl y it cannot operate over an entire tract at once. Du Page County v. Elmhurst -Chicago Stone Co., 18 M. 2d 479 , 484, 165 N .E.2d 310, 313 (1960).4 We agree with the overwhelming number of jurisdictions consi dering the issue. The proper scope of a lawful nonconforming use in an exhaustible resource is the whole parcel of land owned and intended to b e used by the owner at the time the zoning ordinance was promulgated. We Page 11 Gravel -diminishing returns opinion therefore adopt the doctrine of diminishing asset to determine the lawful sc ope of the nonconforming use in mining operations. We note that potent ial damage to zoning schemes may be ameliorated through reasonable amortiz ation periods. We also conclude that Holroyd had a legalnonconforming use and had a right to mine gravel from the entire acreage, based on the hearing examiner's findings. Holroyd's The hearing examiner properly found the entire parcel of land could be m ined under the diminishing asset doctrine.5 Abandonment We conclude that the nonconforming use attached to the entir e parcel owned by Holroyd including the 1.4 acres. The next issue is wheth er the nonconforming use if a nonconforming use he use of the property and structure onform to a use permitted in the zone ' UPMC 19.35.130(J)(1). Nonconforming uses are treated like vested property rights, and may not be voided easily. Van Sant, 69 Wn. App. at 649. University Place ndon; and (b) an overt act, or failure to act, which carries the implicati on that the owner does not claim the nonconforming use Id. at 648 (quoting 8A Eugene McQuillin , Municipal Corporations sec. 25.192 (3d ed. 1986)). This is a question of fact. Van Sant, 69 Wn. App. at 648. Since the hearing examiner found the use had not been abandoned, University Place bears the burden of showing right vested in his successor, McGuire has been abandoned. In University Place, is 'discontinued for more than one year, t shall be deemed abandoned and shall c classification in which it is located. must establish "(a) {a}n intention to aba or retain any interest in the right to Page 12 Gravel -diminishing returns opinion either 'land use decision is not supported by evidence that is substantia 1' or the 'decision is a clearly erroneous application of the law to t he facts.' RCW 36.70C.130(c), (d). We conclude there was substantial evidence supporting the he aring examiner's decision, and University Place has not demonstrat ed he misapplied the law of diminishing asset doctrine to the fact s of this case. Evidence will be viewed in the light most favorable to McGui re, as 'the party who prevailed in the highest forum that exercised fact -finding authority, a process that necessarily entails acceptance of the factfinder's views regarding the credibility of witnesses an d the weight to be given reasonable but competing inferences.' State ex rel . Lige & Wm. B. Dickson Co. v. County of Pierce, 65 Wn. App. 614, 618, 829 P .2d 217 (1992). Review is deferential. Schofield, 96 Wn. App. at 586. The fact the parcel was never mined does not reverse the pre sumption the hearing examiner correctly decided it was appropriate to min e now as it was part of the original plan for the property. The fact it was geographically isolated from the main parcel was caused by a government act ion, the rerouting of a road, and does not speak to the intention of Holroyd at all. The fact the site was not included in some of the permits is evidence of intent to abandon. However, the hearing examiner could have included that this was an inadvertent omission. Finally, the fact the pro perty was sold without mention of mining is potentially evidence of abandon ment, but not conclusive.6 There is no act or omission that, as a matter of law, is proof of abandonment. See generally 1 Robert M. Anderson, A Page 13 Gravel -diminishing returns opinion merican Law of Zoning sec. 6.65 (3d ed. 1986). CONCLUSION We adopt the doctrine of diminishing asset as applied t o nonconforming mining operations. We conclude that the City of University P lace has not established the nonconforming use was abandoned. We reverse the Court of Appeals and reinstate the trial court's order a ffirming the order of the hearing examiner. WE CONCUR: 1 Resolution 1650 said in relevant part: 1. The lawful use of . . land . . existing at the time of the passage of the resolution establishing any zoning district, although such use does not conform to the provisions therein, may be continued, but if such non- conforming use is discontinued for a period of one year, any future use of said . . . land . shall be in conformity with the provis ions of said established use district, unless the use, thereof, is issued a permit by the Pierce County Commissioners Pierce County Zoning Resolution 1650, sec. 7 (1944). 2 To prevail, University Place must establish one of the fol lowing: (b) The land use decision is an erroneous interpretation of the law, after allowing for such deference as is due the construction of a law by a local jurisdiction with expertise {or}; (c) The land use decision is not supported by evidence that is substantial when viewed in light of the whole record before the court; { or} (d) The land use decision is a clearly erroneous applic ation of the law to the facts{.} RCW 36. 70C. 130 (b) - (d) . Page 14 Gravel -diminishing returns opinion 3 This case does not involve an amortization schedule requir ing nonconforming use property owners to end their use in a reas onable period of time. Such a schedule has been approved in Washington St ate. See Rhod- A-Zalea, 136 Wn.2d at 7; accord Teuscher v. Zoning Bd. of Ap peals, 154 Conn. 650, 228 A.2d 518, 522-23 (1967). 4See also Stephan & Sons, Inc. v. Municipality of Anchorage, 685 P.2d 98 (Alaska 1984); Town of Wolfeboro v. Smith, 131 N.H. 449, 556 A.2d 755 (1989) (nonconforming use right extends to all areas manifes ted an intention to excavate); Moore v. Bridgewater Township. 69 N. J . Super. 1, 173 A.2d 430, 437 (Ct. App. Div. 1961) (lawful nonconforming use of diminishing asset extends to the boundaries of original trac t); Syracuse Aggregate Corp. v. Weise, 51 N.Y.2d 278, 414 N.E.2d 651, 654 -55 (1980) (holding restricting nonconforming use to the original quarr y site the equivalent of denying the use of the property and thus impro per); R.K. Kibblehouse Quarries v. Marlborough Township Zoning Hearing Bd., 157 Pa. Cmmw. Ct. 630, 630 A.2d 937, 943 (1993) (finding constitut ional right to continue nonconforming use under due process clause but limi ting expansion to 'reasonable restrictions on the extension of a nonconfor ming use'); Gibbons & Reed Co. v. North Salt Lake City, 19 Utah 2d 329, 431 P.2d 559 (1967); Smart v. Dane County Bd. of Adjustments, 177 Wis. 2d 445, 501 N .W.2d 782 (1993); cf. Fredal v. Forster, 9 Mich. App. 215, 156 N.W.2d 606 (1967) (must balance right to use property as planned agains t danger to zoning schemes; land being used can be expanded, but land ma y not be reserved in anticipation of actual use); but see 4Town of Bi Page 15 Gravel -diminishing returns opinion llerica v. Quinn, 320 Mass. 687, 71 nonconforming loam removal to original hether a mine could be expanded beyond ustment, 27 S.W.3d 162 (Tex. Ct. App. 2000) (recognizing other states 'n early unanimous' in adopting diminishing asset doctrine; expressly reserving judgment as to whether doctrine applies in Texas), review gr anted April 26, 2001 5 This case does not afford an opportunity to explore whethe r a local government could explicitly not allow the use of the diminis hing asset doctrine to define the scope of a nonconforming use. 6 See, e.g.,Verbatim Transcript of Proceedings (Apr. 30, 199 9) at 26 (McGuire's attorney argued: 'He's trying to grade the proper ty. What he doesn't want to have to comply with are city ordinances that say he has to preserve the trees at the top of the hill. He can't very we 11 preserve the trees and mine the gravel. That's really what this case is about, in essence.'). N.E.2d 235 (1947) (limiting lawful site, but expressly not ruling on w original site); Wende v. Bd. of Adj Page 16 MARTIN SMITH INC Established in 1974 May 21, 2001 Moira Bradshaw Assistant Planner City of Tukwila 6200 Sottthcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 RECERTO MAY 232001 CMTY DEVELOPMENT Re: South 115th Street, Tukwila, approximately'10.36 acres Dear Moira, 1109 First Avenue Suite 500 Seattle, WA 98101-2988 206.682.3300 FAX 206.340.1283 On behalf of Jim White and as his agent this letter shall serve as notice to the City._of Tukwila that Jim White, owner of the above referenced property, has elected to change his agent /agency for the SEPA entitlement process from R. W. Thorpe and Associates, Inc. to Opus Northwest, L.L.C. effective this date. Mr. White expects that the process will continue uninterrupted to completion with his use of Opus Northwest or any other qualified agent Mr. White may elect to assist him and Wallace Enterprises in developing the subject property. Mr. White has spent 2 years and over $150,000.00 to advance the entitlement process to its current status and Mr. White sees no need or justification to start over again as you suggested in our meeting of May 15, 2001. Mr. White is merely changing from one • qualified agent to tliVt tci, an action which has no affect en the entitlement d • permitting process. Opus Northwest will amend the SEPA documents to reflect its involvement from this date forward and will clarify the following points raised by you during our recent meeting: 1.) Department of Natural Resources (DNR) - reclamation permit decision 2.) Perceived loss of sound barrier - effects of site excavation and construction 3.) Lack of site/ building plans with original submittal — appropriate plans are forthcoming 4.) Shoreline sensitivity (Duwamish River)' 5.) Cultural awareness (Muckleshoot Tribe) 6.) Good neighbor policy — effects of material removal from site and the associated. blasting procedures • Moira Bradshaw Page Two May 21, 2001 I look forward to working with you and the City of Tukwila's departments to facilitate the issuance of the necessary permits to commence development of Mr. White's property by Spring 2002. Sincere Douglas M. Holme CC: Steve Mullet, Mayor of Tukwila John McFarland, City Administrator of Tukwila Acknowledged and Requested: WALL RPRISES By: Date: 2- f Moira Bradshaw - Re: Tukwila Freeway- to meeting notes From: To: Anna Date: Subject: Page 1 Steve Lancaster Alice Strand; 'Allyson Brooks, SHPO; 'John Witmer, FTA'; Lynn Miranda; Mallon, 4/11/01 10:57AM Re: Tukwila Freeway Route meeting notes Thanks for providing a copy of your notes from our Feb 27 TFR meeting. I'd like to offer the following clarifications of the City's position relative to South Hill (Poverty Hill). 1. Your notes correctly state that the site is not specifically identified as a future park property in our park plan. Our park plan typically does not identify specific properties for a variety of reasons. Rather, it generally describes geographic areas where additional park land is needed, or general types of properties having a high priority for aquisition. In our Park Plan update currently nearing completion, language recognising "culturally significant properties" as eligible and desireable for aquisition has been proposed and is likely to be included. 2. The Director of Community Development administers the development regulations and processes that will affect the current Poverty Hill development proposal. Neither the Director nor other staff involved in this regulatory process will therefor be involved in discussions or efforts to aquire this property. This does not necessarily rule out the involvement of other City representatives in such discussions. Please let me know if you need further clarification of these comments. CC: Irish, James; Krikawa, Jeanne; McGhee, Leonard 6— 8-01;'10:08AM;NATURAL RESOURCES WASHINGTON STATE .DEPARTMENT OF Natural Resources ;360 825 1672., •# 2/ DOUG SUTHERLAND Commissioner of Public Lands April 3, 2001 Dennis D. Reynolds, Attorney at Law Williams, Kastner. & Gibbs PLLC P 0 Box 21926. Seattle, WA 98111-3926 Subject: Mobile Crane Corp. Dear Mr. Reynolds: On Wednesday, March 28, 2001, representatives of the Department and Mobile Crane Corp. toured the Tukwila. site to further evaluate the need for a surface mine reclamation permit for the proposed activity. At the conclusion of the tour, the department suggested two possible courses of action to Mobile Crane Corp: If Mobile Crane Corp. intends to complete the excavation of the site and begin construction activities in a short time frame (e.g., less than six months), that is independent of market conditions for the material to be excavated and a site development plan has been substantially approved by the County, then no surface mining reclamation permit will be required. If these conditions cannot be met, then Mobile. Crane Corp. should apply for a surface mining reclamation permit. The required compliance with the state environmental policy act is being done by the County, so the Department can adopt that document for the purposes of issuing a surface mining reclamation permit. The site plan information submitted totheCounty contains virtually all of the information required by an application for a surface mining reclamation permit. Very little additional work would be necessary beyond filling out the application forms and attaching a copy of the existing information.. The permit could probably be issued within 60 to 90 days after receipt of the application, perhaps less.. However, if neither of the above options is acceptable to Mobile Crane Corp., please let me know and we will proceed to process your request for Petition for Declaratory Order and Application for Adjudicative Proceeding. Feel free to call me at 360-902-1440 if you, or your clients, wish to discuss this matter further. Sincerely, Ron Teissere Assistant State Geologist Copies to: Frank W. Pita, P.E., P.G. Douglas M. Holme Steve Reneaud, AAG Dave Pierce APR 0 4 2001 GEOLOGY AND EARTH RESOURCES ®.1111 WASHINGTON ST SE ® PO BOX 47007 ® OLYMPIA, WA 9S504-7007 FAX.- (360) 902-1785 l® 77Y: (360) 902-1125 Ca TEL: (360) 902-1450 Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer AreA WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENTOF Natural Resources February 22, 2001 Dennis Reynolds, Attorney at law Williams, Kastner & Gibbs, PLLC P.O. Box 21926 Seattle, WA 98111-3926 JENNIFER M. BELCHER Commissioner of Public Lands RECEIVED FEB 2 8 2001 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Re: Tukwila Development proposal located on South 115`h Street near Boeing Field Dear Mr. Reynolds: Thank you for providing the geotechnical analysis report as requested. The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has reviewed the proposed development project with respect to the Surface Mine Reclamation Act (RCW 78.44) and provides the following determination. A Reclamation Permit is required for the proposed project. The reason is because materials are planned to be exported off-site. The term "on site construction", found in RCW 78.44.031 (17)(d)(i), means all materials as defined in 78.44 remain on the site such as in grading and filling situations. DNR made the determination based upon a review of the following information: • The geotechnical analysis report of the materials to be mined.. • The review of the development proposal by Tukwila official, Moira Carr Bradshaw and Maureen Kwolek, P.E. of Milbor-Pita & Associates Inc. on February 6th, 2001. Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposal. If you have further questions, I can be reached through the Enumclaw office at (360) 825-1631. David S. Pierce Natural Resources Program Specialist DSP/in dsptukwiledev c: Steve Reneaud SOUTH PUGET SOUND REGION 1 950 FARMAN ST N 1 PO BOX 68 1 ENUMCLAW, WA 98022-0068 FAX: (360) 825-1672 1 TTY: (360) 825-6381 1 TEL: (360) 825-1631 Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer RECYCLED PAPER CJ bc: Geology & Earth Resources (Tukwila Rock Pile) Region File (Tukwila Rock Pile) Moira Carr Bradshaw Maureen Kwolek REGION COPY FIELD COPY OLYMPIA COPY • City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster Director August 8, 2000 Mr. Gareth Roe, R.W. Thorpe and Associates 705 Second Avenue, Suite 710 Seattle, WA 98104 Subject: White Rock Pile: L99-0061, E99-0023 Dear Mr. Roe: In response to your request for early notice pursuant to WAC 197-11-350(2) and TMC 21.04.150.B, I have enclosed a copy of the draft SEPA report prepared by Moira Bradshaw. This report indicates the specific areas of concern that leads me to consider a Declaration of Significance. If you wish to respond to the items in the draft report, you will need to submit all your comments at one time. Should you have any questions, please fell free to call me or Moira Bradshaw. Sincerely, Steve Lancaster, Director Department of Community -Development Enclosure cc: Moira Carr Bradshaw C:\mcb\rockpi le\00ltrthorpe808.doc 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 PRINCIPAL: Robert W. Thorpe, AICP August 7, 2000 R. W. THORPE & ASSOCIATES, INC. f 3 Planning: • Landscape • Environmental' • Economics ++. Stephen Speidel, t1SLA, Vice President Gareth V. Roe, AICP, Director of Planning • Mr. Steven Lancaster, Director Department of Community Development City of Tukwila 6200 Southceriter.Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 RE Tukwila Rock Pile (L99-0061 E99-0023) — Threshold Determination;_ Possible. Determination_of Significance issued by the City, and Request for Early Notice Process. Dear Mr. Lancaster, I have recently received notification from Moira Bradshaw, Project Planner with the City; of Tukwila, that her preliminary recommendation for a threshold determination submitted for.your review and approval was to recommend that the City issue a Determination of Significance 'for the proposed industrial project. It has been our,goal right from the start of this project to prepare and undergo a detailed technical analysis and provide the city with technical reports, an expanded SEPA checklist covering all elements of the environment, and extended public comment'periods - all for the purpose of avoiding the significant costs and delays, associated withthe preparation of an environmental impact statement. We would like the opportunity to discuss the City'sthreshold determination and get a better understanding: of the environmental issues that: are felt to be adverse, could not be mitigated and would warrant thepreparation of an Environmental Impact Statement. As provided for in WAC 197-11-350, and on behalf of the applicant, we,are formally requesting an opportunity through the "Early Notice process" to discuss with the city additional mitigation measures,i design alternatives 'or the provision of additional technical information or analysis so that the city could explore the option of issuing a Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance (MONS). Please contact either Robert W. Thorpe, AICP or myself at 206/624-6239 to schedule a meeting time when we could come down to the city and discuss the.issues. at hand: We look forward to hearing from you soon. Sincerely, R.W. Thorpe ciates, Inc. . Roe, AICP. Attachment: - WAC 197-11-350 John Speirs, Martin Smith.Real Estate James White; Property Owner/Applicant : ❖ 705 Second Avenue 'Suite 710 Seattle; Washington 98104 (206) 624-6239 Fax (206) 625-0930. e-mail planning@rwta:com :• cc. WAC 197-11-350 Mitigated DNS. The purpose of this section is to allow clarifications or changes to a proposal prior to making the threshold determination. 1) In making threshold determinations, an agency may consider mitigation measures'that the agency or applicant will implement. (2) After submission of an environmental checklist and prior to the lead agency's threshold determination on a proposal, an applicant may ask the lead agency to indicate whether it is considering a DS. If the lead agency indicates a DS is likely, the applicant may clarify or change features of the proposal to mitigate the impacts which led the agency to consider a DS likely. The applicant shall revise the environmental checklist as may be necessary to describe the clarifications or changes. The lead agency shall make its threshold determination based upon the changed or clarified proposal. If a proposal continues to have a probable significant adverse environmental -impact, even with -mitigation measures, -an -EIS shall- be -prepared-.----- — - — — -- -- (3) Whether or not an applicant requests early notice under subsection (2), if the lead agency specifies mitigation measures on an applicant's proposal that would allow it to issue a DNS, and the proposal is clarified, changed, or conditioned to include those measures, the lead agency shall issue a DNS. (4) Environmental documents need not be revised and resubmitted if the clarifications or changes are stated in writing in documents that are attachments to, or incorporate by reference, the documents previously submitted. An addendum may be used, see Part Six. (5) Agencies may clarify or change features of their own proposal, and may specify mitigation measures in their DNSs, as a result of comments by other agencies or the public or as a result of additional agency planning. (6) An agency's indication under this section that a DS appears likely shall not be construed as a determination of significance. Likewise, the preliminary discussion of clarifications or changes to a proposal shall not bind the lead agency to a mitigated DNS. (7) Agencies may specify procedures for enforcement of mitigation measures in their agency SEPA procedures. Document Page 1 of 8 1999 REVISED CODE of WASHINGTON Title 78 MINES, MINERALS, AND PETROLEUM Chapter 78.44 RCW SURFACE MINING Chapter 78.44 RCW SURFACE MINING RCW 78.44.010 Legislative finding. 78.44.011 Intent. 78.44.020 Purposes. 78.44.031 Definitions. 78.44.040 Administration of chapter --Rule-making authority. 78.44.045 Surface mining reclamation account. 78.44.050 Exclusive authority to regulate reclamation --Department may delegate enforcement authority to counties, cities, towns --Other laws not affected. 78.44.055 Surface mining of coal --Preemption of chapter by federal laws, programs. 78.44.060 Investigations, research, etc. --Dissemination of information. 78.44.070 Cooperation with other agencies --Receipt and expenditure of funds. 78.44.081 Reclamation permits required --Applications. 78.44.083 Reclamation permit --Refusal to issue. 78.44.085 Application fee --Annual permit fee --Appeals. 78.44.087 Performance security required --Department authority. 78.44.091 Reclamation plans --Approval process. 78.44.101 Joint reclamation plans may be required. 78.44.111 Segmental reclamation --Primary objective. 78.44.121 Reclamation setbacks --Exemption. 78.44.131 Reclamation specifics --Basic objective --Modifications for metals mining and milling operations -- Timeline. 78.44.141 Reclamation --Minimum standards --Waiver. 78.44.151 Reclamation plans --Modification, when required--SEPA. 78.44.161 Reclamation compliance --Inspection of disturbed area --Special inspection requirements for metals mining and milling operations. 78.44.171 Reclamation --Transfer of permits. 78.44.181 Reclamation --Report by permit holder on anniversary date. 78.44.190 Deficiencies --Order to rectify --Time extension. 78.44.200 Immediate danger --Emergency notice and order to rectify deficiencies --Emergency order to suspend surface mining. 78.44.210 Order to suspend surface mining --Injunction. 78.44.220 Declaration of abandonment--Reclamation--Subsequent miner. 78.44.230 Abandonment --Cancellation of the reclamation permit. 78.44.240 Reclamation by the department --Order to submit performance security --Cost recovery. 78.44.250 Fines --Civil penalties --Damage recovery. 78.44.260 Operating without permit --Penalty. 78.44.270 Appeals --Standing. 78.44.280 Underground operation --Surface disturbances subject to chapter. 78.44.300 Reclamation awards --Recognition of excellence. 78.44.310 Reclamation consulting --No cost service. 78.44.910 Previously mined land. 78.44.920 Effective date --1970 ex.s. c 64. 78.44.930 Severability --1970 ex.s. c 64. RCW 78.44.010 Legislative finding. Applicable Cases .../om_cgi. exe?clientlD=63 0 84944&hitsperheading=on&infobase=rcw.nfo&jump=78.44& softpa 7/17/00 May 12, 1994 Feb. 16, 1995 Mar. 9, 1995 Mar--.4449-9,5ftwayme Draft Tukwila Comprehensive Plan .`yyy!.:.y}.,r..e?:}...csv.....,.s'.::?t)[cq;.!!!c[!;+,.;+,.t;;}t`.•'.•^.•.^.•'.i,:•,:+,.!cc... c�.c;..n�!�y}...;.c�cc}c�R;.!}g,:•,:s�}tc}c�;yt�ccnc•:., -y y a"tt9tt•]J'1' 1fc'F J9Y3•IN/YN• Mi1+i4'[Y�`4.t1`H}�Y�7 i_ 3Y !�1' s •7':7C7 h Skid' h a1, _.. _ ii\y:...}>.::ti:}`,�.......�..v�.v..�.�.... n}.......s :.:}}}}}.:...�..: r.r_r.....v.•ry •r.�•yrrrr ir}}} ::}\}}}.< ii?:4}:.} ...» ;: a.•....,,arxiiir»»ss=aiiia`iuiwwzc`iw33e Light Industrial: Areas characterized by distributive and light manu- facturing uses, with complementary and associated commercial and office uses. Heavy industrial: Areas characterized by heavy or bulk manufacturing uses and distributive and light manufacturing uses, with accessory commercial and office uses. Public Recreation: Areas owned itilainfiedIN brig..k` public agency, the-City-ef-Tukwila-er passive or active public recreation use. SPECIALOVERLAYS Urban Center. .Qj ?}?v an area of retail and commercial services, residential, industrial development, entertain- ment, and recreational and cultural amenities connected by an expand- ed transit system to a +��p(j}��'onal system of centers,.. i t ?iii•'iifv}t}i}irtiti}'L<???M:•rhe..L:xm}}}::.:n:?�jt.:irr???;:}•ll:^}\}:?t:•:ti?•\•:BYy:;:•:K{m{{{x+??f??}:.}}}}trr: }.., •,.?Y.?., } j.: •:•?yy.SS��,11 ::. jY\}}}}}x \;:♦ •,: �n{xi}v rrrr'..Vr»rUbrkYSShvr3l�iYYYb&4::riiii: Manufacturing/Industrial Center: }%«., 73 w „ ?frm a major employment area containing manufacturing or other uses supportive of manufacturing/industrial industries which cannot easily be mixed at higher densities or with other uses or which rely upon the transportation facilities and infrastructure of the area. development-zones:- Xvll Document • Page 2 of 8 The legislature recognizes that the extraction of minerals by surface mining is an essential activity making an important contribution to the economic well-being of the state and nation. It is not possible to extract minerals without producing some environmental impacts. At the same time, comprehensive regulation of mining and thorough reclamation of mined lands is necessary to prevent or mitigate conditions that would be detrimental to the environment and to protect the general welfare, health, safety, and property rights of the citizens of the state. Surface mining takes place in diverse areas where the geologic, topographic, climatic, biologic, and social conditions are significantly different, and reclamation specifications must vary accordingly. Therefore, the legislature finds that a balance between appropriate environmental regulation and the production and conservation of minerals is in the best interests of the citizens of the state. [1993 c 518 § 2; 1970 ex.s. c 64 § 2.] Notes: Captions --1993 c 518: "Captions used in this act do not constitute any part of the law." [ 1993 c 518 § 41.] Severability --1993 c 518: "If any provision of this act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the act or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances is not affected." [1993 c 518 § 43.] Effective date --1993 c 518: "This act is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, or support of the state government and its existing public institutions, and shall take effect July 1, 1993." [1993 c 518 § 44.] RCW 78.44.011 Intent. Applicable Cases The legislature recognizes that the extraction of minerals through surface mining has historically included regulatory involvement by both state and local governments. It is the intent of the legislature to clarify that surface mining is an appropriate land use, subject to reclamation authority exercised by the department of natural resources and land use and operation regulatory authority by counties, cities, and towns. [1993 c 518 § 1.] Notes: Captions--Severability--Effective date --1993 c 518: See notes following RCW 78.44.010. RCW 78.44.020 Purposes. Applicable Cases The purposes of this chapter are to: (1) Provide that the usefulness, productivity, and scenic values of all lands and waters involved in surface mining within the state will receive the greatest practical degree of protection and reclamation at the earliest opportunity following completion of surface mining; (2) Provide for the greatest practical degree of state-wide consistency in the regulation of surface mines; (3) Apportion regulatory authority between state and local governments in order to minimize redundant regulation of mining; (4) Ensure that reclamation is consistent with local land use plans; and (5) Ensure the power of local government to regulate land use and operations pursuant to *section 16 of this act. [1993 c 518 § 3; 1970 ex.s. c 64 § 3.] Notes: *Reviser's note: 1993 c 518 § 16 was vetoed by the governor. Captions--Severability--Effective date --1993 c 518: See notes following RCW 78.44.010. RCW 78.44.031 Definitions. Applicable Cases .../om_cgi.exe?clientlD=63084944&hitsperheading=on&infobase=rcw.nfo&jump=78.44&softpa 7/17/00 Draft Tukwila Comprehensive Plan may -1-21-9-94 Feb.16,Mar. 9, 1995 Mer-1-41-9-9&ffilffikatain Planned Area: This reataNNOM designation is based on unique conditions including large -parcel -ownership, the presence of signifi- cant water features such as wetlands, watercourses and the river, and topographic changes conditions, that will influence the future devel- opment of the land. The complex problems unique to this planned area can be overcome best through coordinated development of the area as a total unit corridor; and t" " ":::::::*::", ••%:::M;:::::"MWanniirnni:MMIM•Mir":".".":,M."W-ii:V"*"::?..n?;::::'"..7.?:*.:??.r*.:a.:1..I.REAM. • • • y• W,River ,M:•,.:•.approe::ft:::::::%M.:.,. ..::i.k:fti..?::•%.:::''.:.*.ex:::".::.4":::::&.Wk:::*•::::.114: '‘'sst...'12 <",,s4.•Nt• as • ...... ;.73N.:41'sk::,.. ;.... s , n, L:. ,, ':.!..MAX4'• . Mffiligisk ‘ ' ‘ ,..*:,.;::•.:t,.,:••41::E„..,,.;71.:..Z:1 t..44'.' t..:: ?:tfor,:iats.3::.., .,,PitliiiMPOA! atertkiiTtei%r „ :::‹...% .... tstwip.::,...— lur..;,..m.:::::....... ,:: iskfttron „.7.-wz,,,,... :Mk', .i•••::,f. m:* iMA::•"•::::::.:;.:1"'!:!.:::::.::M7 Flfg. 2::16ra .. '• of the111'447 as a ""7191 . I:M.INIc::::zzr- uad z •,...... ....-.-;,,k,......, •":::::x.orMtral . raWS - .4Cee& k* '..a.:•:•.:,:,.%•::":"4:•:,.:•:::•::;:::,:•L.m'SARiF.M0..4,:,:•.:1: SUB -AREAS frastmetufe-ef-the-afea7 Document • • Page 3 of 8 Unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, the definitions in this section apply throughout this chapter. (1) "Approved subsequent use" means the post surface -mining land use contained in an approved reclamation plan and approved by the local land use authority. (2) "Completion of surface mining" means the cessation of mining and directly related activities in any segment of a surface mine that occurs when essentially all minerals that can be taken under the terms of the reclamation permit have been depleted except minerals required to accomplish reclamation according to the approved reclamation plan. (3) "Department" means the department of natural resources. (4) "Determination" means any action by the department including permit issuance, reporting, reclamation plan approval or modification, permit transfers, orders, fines, or refusal to issue permits. (5) "Disturbed area" means any place where activities clearly in preparation for, or during, surface mining have physically disrupted, covered, compacted, moved, or otherwise altered the characteristics of soil, bedrock, vegetation, or topography that existed prior to such activity. Disturbed areas may include but are not limited to: Working faces, water bodies created by mine - related excavation, pit floors, the land beneath processing plant and stock pile sites, spoil pile sites, and equipment staging areas. Disturbed areas shall also include aboveground waste rock sites and tailing facilities, and other surface manifestations of underground mines. Disturbed areas do not include: (a) Surface mine access roads unless these have characteristics of topography, drainage, slope stability, or ownership that, in the opinion of the department, make reclamation necessary; (b) Lands that have been reclaimed to all standards outlined in this chapter, rules of the department, any applicable SEPA document, and the approved reclamation plan; and (c) Subsurface aspects of underground mines, such as portals, tunnels, shafts, pillars, and stopes. (6) "Miner" means any person or persons, any partnership, limited partnership, or corporation, or any association of persons, including every public or governmental agency engaged in surface mining. (7) "Minerals" means clay, coal, gravel, industrial minerals, metallic substances, peat, sand, stone, topsoil, and any other similar solid material or substance to be excavated from natural deposits on or in the earth for commercial, industrial, or construction use. (8) "Operations" means all mine -related activities, exclusive of reclamation, that include, but are not limited to activities that affect noise generation, air quality, surface and ground water quality, quantity, and flow, glare, pollution, traffic safety, ground vibrations, and/or significant or substantial impacts commonly regulated under provisions of land use or other permits of local government and local ordinances, or other state laws. Operations specifically include: (a) The mining or extraction of rock, stone, gravel, sand, earth, and other minerals; (b) Blasting, equipment maintenance, sorting, crushing, and loading; (c) On- site mineral processing including asphalt or concrete batching, concrete recycling, and other aggregate recycling; (d) Transporting minerals to and from the mine, on site road maintenance, road maintenance for roads used extensively for surface mining activities, traffic safety, and traffic control. (9) "Overburden" means the earth, rock, soil, and topsoil that lie above mineral deposits. (10) "Permit holder" means any person or persons, any partnership, limited partnership, or corporation, or any association of persons, either natural or artificial, including every public or governmental agency engaged in surface mining and/or the operation of surface mines, whether individually, jointly, or through subsidiaries, agents, employees, operators, or contractors who holds a state reclamation permit. (11) "Reclamation" means rehabilitation for the appropriate future use of disturbed areas resulting from surface mining including areas under associated mineral processing equipment, areas under stockpiled materials, and aboveground waste rock and tailing facilities, and all other surface disturbances associated with underground mines. Although both the need for and the practicability of reclamation will control the type and degree of reclamation in any specific surface mine, the -154 -sic q cobjective`shalrbe to reestablish-_ori=a perpetu`ahbasis-the-vegetative-cover; soil_ staliility;-and water conditions appropriate -to the -approved subsequent use, of the surface_mine and to prevent or mitigate„ Jfutureenvironmental- degradation', (12) "Reclamation setbacks" include those lands along the margins of surface mines wherein .../om cgi.exe?clientlD=63084944&hitsperheading=on&infobase=rcw.nfo&jump=78.44&softpa7/17/00 Ma994 fob. 16, 1995 Mar. 9, 1905 Mar. 14, 1995 Mar. 21, 1995, Draft Tukwila Comprehensive Plan Transportation Corridors: Three corridors that are coliiParableili their planning needs due to their location, land uses, and significance as regional arterials. Pacific Highway Corridor. An area of regional significance due to its transportation and commercial functions. Interurban Corridor. A corridor historically significant for its role in Tukwila's early development, characterized by unique physical features in the river and hillsides. Southcenter Boulevard Corridor. A corridor significant for its role as a "gateway" to Tukwila, and as a "spine" connecting large residential areas with commercial services. Tukwila South: An area extending south of the Tukwila Urban Center to South 204th Street, that indudes the City of Tukwila and unincorpo- rated King County parcels, with a portion covered by the Planned Area Area overlay. The area has unique physical features, such as the river, hillsides to the west, and wetlands, and is a transition area to the Tukwila Urban Center. Residential Neighborhoods: Residential areas located throughout Tukwila, presently characterized by a mix of single-family residences, Multi -family residences and commercial areas. Policies and land use designations guide the development of residential land uses, and the recreational, environmental, and social amenities which support them. xix • • Document • Page 4 of 8 minerals and overburden shall be preserved in sufficient volumes to accomplish reclamation according to the approved plan and the minimum reclamation standards. Maintenance of reclamation setbacks may not preclude other mine -related activities within the reclamation setback. (13) "Recycling" means the reuse of minerals or rock products. (14) "Screening" consists of vegetation, berms or other topography, fencing, and/or other screens that may be required to mitigate impacts of surface mining on adjacent properties and/or the environment. (15) "Segment" means any portion of the surface mine that, in the opinion of the department: (a) Has characteristics of topography, drainage, slope stability, ownership, mining development, or mineral distribution, that make reclamation necessary; (b) Is not in use as part of surface mining and/or related activities; and (c) Is larger than seven acres and has more than five hundred linear feet of working face except as provided in a segmental reclamation agreement approved by the department. (16) "SEPA" means the state environmental policy act, chapter 43.21 C RCW and rules adopted thereunder. (17)(a) Surface mine" means any area or areas inclose�,proximity to each other, as determined by the department, where_extraction_of mineralsresultsi'n: (i) More than three acres of disturbed area; t/ -- (ii) (ii) Surface mined slopes greater than thirty feet high and steeper than 1.0 foot horizontal to 1.0 foot vertical; or (iii) More than one acre of disturbed area within an eight acre area, when the disturbed area results from mineral prospecting or exploration activities. (b) Surface mines include areas where mineral extraction from the surface or subsurface occurs by the auger method or by reworking mine refuse or tailings, when the disturbed area exceeds the size or height thresholds listed in (a) of this subsection. (c) Surface mining occurs when operations have created or are intended to create a surface mine as defined by this subsection. (d) -Surface mining shall exclude excavations_ or grading used: (i) Primarily_ for on-site construction,4o"n=site road msintenance, or on-site landfill construction; (ii) For the purpose of public safety or restoring the land following a natural disaster; (iii) For the purpose of removing stockpiles; (iv) For forest or farm road construction or maintenance on site or on contiguous lands; (v) Primarily for public works projects if the mines are owned or primarily operated by counties with 1993 populations of less than twenty thousand persons, and if each mine has less than seven acres of disturbed area; and (vi) For sand authorized by *RCW 43.51.685. (18) "Topsoil" means the naturally occurring upper part of a soil profile, including the soil horizon that is rich in humus and capable of supporting vegetation together with other sediments within four vertical feet of the ground surface. [1999 c 252 § 1; 1997 c 142 § 1; 1993 c 518 § 4.] Notes: *Reviser's note: RCW 43.51.685 was recodified as RCW 79A.05.630 pursuant to 1999 c 249 § 1601. Severability --1999 c 252: "If any provision of this act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the act or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances is not affected." [1999 c 252 § 3.] Captions--Severability--Effective date --1993 c 518: See notes following RCW 78.44.010. RCW 78.44.040 Administration of chapter --Rule-making authority. Applicable Cases The department of natural resources is charged with the administration of reclamation under this chapter. In order to implement and enforce this chapter, the department, under the administrative procedure act (chapter 34.05 RCW), may from time to time adopt those rules necessary to carry out the purposes of this chapter. [1993 c 518 § 6; 1984 c 215 § 2; 1970 ex.s. c 64 § 5.] .../om cgi.exe?clientlD=63084944&hitsperheading=on&infobase=rcw.nfo&jump=78.44&softpa7/17/00 May 12, 1994 i> Draft Tukwila Comprehensive Plan GLOSSARY Not all of the terms and names used in the Comprehensive Plan may be familiar to all readers. Some of the more important ones are defined here. Affordable Housing. Housing that costs less than 30 percent of gross income for households that earn less than 80 percent of the county -wide median income. Block Grant: Federal funds received by the county, distributed yearly to entitlement cities such as Tukwila on the basis of percentage of low - and moderate -income population. y ,Q (-syr }r> 7 [}y M1 dM1 k 8 te 4:�t h�v rt •4f4'�' k `nth R Yi.2.:`>k,'`> ..;:`;.,..i2ii,>.{ti},,� • ,..,�,....VV..,,..,.',,,,..:..,..i-�.��..•..•..:thy`..}�::.`.:;2b::t:"',•...�:::Y:�:::b:,...,.,�,��,yM1„•.,4..n:..�..µi•.';4µ`:;`.�,,;fi•;�;i Commute Trip Reduction Program: Passed by Washington State in 1991 and incorporated into the state's Clean Air Act, this law is intended to improve air quality, reduce traffic congestion, and decrease fuel con- sumption. Affected employers are required to implement programs encouraging employees to reduce their number of single-occupancy- vehide (SOV) commutes as well as vehicle miles travelled (VMT) per employee. Concurrency: The Growth Management Act stipulates that facilities re- quired to meet a community need must be in place when the need oc- curs. This is the doctrine known as "concurrency" in facility planning. Councilmanic Bond: Bonds issued by the City Council without a vote of the people. The state statutory capacity for this type of debt is 75 per- cent of the City's assessed valuation. ttt,.:tett;•:a•:t}tjtt•tttty:tttt••••ltttttt;;:ttta:•t};tt••• t•t•:ttt•:jttittitt2itttittittittttttt;t.:ttt•t222tiy.•itttttt•}:•}:ttav:<..tt2.tt{•tttttttaMtt:.:R.t:natii2t?\44`.` �' -"`.:.:1<issC•<:::.:t}���<.:I:'!$?�.�•=:}; ::::•,: < • o 4.\4:0:8,4 ':2::,i;} t':}:;}itttvy •; •:t? ttt;::?:•.;:.a �ti:[•'t 2�:,1,M1.,:' �M1• t2 ♦ ��yyy} j, hyo ::::: ..... .. S..v.. },•v} }::....... .h....h.... ?. n .}}}}.}h. R.•}N.....}h'..fi}}}}}} „}xx:: } }h h}}} Enterprise Funds: Funds supported by revenues generated by fees and charges, supplemented by contributions from grants and develop- ers. These funds can be used only for the particular utility that is the source of the revenue—in Tukwila these are water, sewer, storm and surface water, and the Foster Golf Course. xx • • Document • • Page 5 of 8 Notes: Captions--Severability--Effective date --1993 c 518: See notes following RCW 78.44.010. RCW 78.44.045 Surface mining reclamation account. Applicable Cases The surface mining reclamation account is created in the state treasury. Annual mining fees, funds received by the department from state, local, or federal agencies for research purposes, as well as other mine -related funds and fines received by the department shall be deposited into this account. The surface mine reclamation account may be used by the department only to: (1) Administer its regulatory program pursuant to this chapter; (2) Undertake research relating to surface mine regulation, reclamation of surface mine lands, and related issues; and (3) Cover costs arising from appeals from determinations made under this chapter. Fines, interest, and other penalties collected by the department under the provisions of this chapter shall be used to reclaim surface mines abandoned prior to 1971. [1993 c 518 § 10.] Notes: Captions--Severability--Effective date --1993 c 518: See notes following RCW 78.44.010. RCW 78.44.050 Exclusive authority to regulate reclamation --Department may delegate enforcement authority to counties, cities, towns --Other laws not affected. Applicable Cases The department shall have the exclusive authority to regulate surface mine reclamation. No county, city, or town may require for its review or approval a separate reclamation plan or application. The department may, however, delegate some or all of its enforcement authority by contractual agreement to a county, city, or town that employs personnel who are, in the opinion of the department, qualified to enforce plans approved by the department. All counties, cities, or towns shall have the authority to zone surface mines and adopt ordinances regulating operations as provided in this chapter, except that county, city, or town operations ordinances may be preempted by the department during the emergencies outlined in RCW 78.44.200 and related rules. This chapter shall not alter or preempt any provisions of the state fisheries laws (Title 75 RCW), the state water allocation and use laws (chapters 90.03 and 90.44 RCW), the state water pollution control laws (chapter 90.48 RCW), the state wildlife laws (Title 77 RCW), state noise laws or air quality laws (Title 70 RCW), shoreline management (chapter 90.58 RCW), the state environmental policy act (chapter 43.21C RCW), state growth management (chapter 36.70A RCW), state drinking water laws (chapters 43.20 and 70.119A RCW), or any other state statutes. [1997 c 185 § 1; 1993 c 518 § 7; 1970 ex.s. c 64 § 6.] Notes: Captions,Severability--Effective date --1993 c 518: See notes following RCW 78.44.010. • RCW;78.44.055 Surface mining of coal --Preemption of chapter by federal laws, programs. Applicable;,Cases In the' event, state law is preempted underfederal surface mining laws relating to surface mining of coal or the department of natural resources determines that a federal program and its rules and regulations relating to the surface mining of coal are as stringent and effective as the provisions of this chapter, the provisions of this chapter shall not apply to such surface mining for which federal permits are issued until such preemption ceases or the department determines such chapter should apply. [1984 c 215 § 8. Formerly RCW 78.44.175.] RCW 78.44.060 Investigations, research, etc. --Dissemination of information. Applicable Cases .../om cgi.exe?clientlD=63084944&hitsperheading=on&infobase=rcw.nfo&jump=78.44&softpa7/17/00 Draft Tukwila Comprehensive Plan May 12, 1994 March 21, 1995 Apr. 6, 1995 Environmental Impact Statement: A statement on the effect of devel- opment proposals and other major actions which may significantly affect the environment, usually consisting of an inventory of existing environmental conditions, a project description, an assessment of the probable impacts of the project, and proposed steps to minimize impacts, and alteratives. Fair -Share Funding. The breakdown of transportation improvement costs anticipated and planned over the next 20 years to maintain level - of -service standards and proportionately allocate costs by develop- ment -generated vehicle trips. FAR: The ratio of total building square footage on a lot to the square footage of the lot. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA): See National Flood Insurance Program. Financial Planning Model: A forecast of revenues and expenditures for a six-year planning period. It includes all general government ex- penditures and general capital funds. This model is the basis for the annual budget process and the Six -Year Capital Improvement Plan Flood elevation, 100 year. The elevation of the 100 -year flood flow or 100 -year storm event (5 inches of rain in a 24 hour period), which de- lineates the 100 -year floodplain. Flood elevation, 25 -year The elevation of the 25 -year flood*flowµ"M- which is the flow that has a .25 percent chance of occurring in any giv- en iven year (or occurs on average once in twenty-five years), or the 25 -year storm event (3 inches in a 24 hour period). Flood Hazard Areas: Areas of deep and fast flowing water, large de- bris or rapid bank erosion and channel migration. Flood Hazard Areas, Lesser. Areas of shallow, slow moving water. Flood Insurance Rate Maps: Maps produced by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) that delineate the 100 -year floodplain elevation for the purpose of assessing flood hazard and establishing flood insurance rates for shoreline development. These FEMA maps are on file at City of Tukwila Department of Public Works. xx1 • • Document • Page 6 of 8 The department shall have the authority to conduct, authorize, and/or participate in investigations, research, experiments, and demonstrations, and to collect and disseminate information relating to surface mining and reclamation of surface mined lands. [1993 c 518 § 8; 1970 ex.s. c 64 § 7.] Notes: Captions--Severability--Effective date --1993 c 518: See notes following RCW 78.44.010. RCW 78.44.070 Cooperation with other agencies --Receipt and expenditure of funds. Applicable Cases The department may cooperate with other governmental and private agencies and agencies of the federal government, and may reasonably reimburse them for any services the department requests that they provide. The department may also receive any federal funds, state funds and any other funds and expend them for reclamation of land affected by surface mining and for purposes enumerated in RCW 78.44.060. [1993 c 518 § 9; 1970 ex.s. c 64 § 8.] Notes: Captions--Severability--Effective date --1993 c 518: See notes following RCW 78.44.010. RCW 78.44.081 Reclamation permits required --Applications. Applicable Cases After July 1, 1993, no miner or permit holder may engage in surface mining without having first obtained a reclamation permit from the department. Operating permits issued by the department between January 1, 1971, and June 30, 1993, shall be considered reclamation permits. A separate permit shall be required for each noncontiguous surface mine. The reclamation permit shall consist of the permit forms and any exhibits attached thereto. The permit holder shall comply with the provisions of the reclamation permit unless waived and explained in writing by the department. Prior to receiving a reclamation permit, an applicant must submit an application on forms provided by the department that shall contain the following information and shall be considered part of the reclamation permit: (1) Name and address of the legal landowner, or purchaser of the land under a real estate contract; (2) The name of the applicant and, if the applicants are corporations or other business entities, the names and addresses of their principal officers and resident agent for service of process; (3) A reasonably accurate description of the minerals to be surface mined; (4) Type of surface mining to be performed; (5) Estimated starting date, date of completion, and date of completed reclamation of surface mining; (6) Size and legal description of the permit area and maximum lateral and vertical extent of the disturbed area; (7) Expected area to be disturbed by surface mining during (a) the next twelve months, and (b) the following twenty-four months; (8) Any applicable SEPA documents; and (9) Other pertinent data as required by the department. The reclamation permit shall be granted for the period required to deplete essentially all minerals identified in the reclamation permit on the land covered by the reclamation plan. The reclamation permit shall be valid until the reclamation is complete unless the permit is canceled by the department. [1997 c 192 § 1; 1993 c 518 § 11.] Notes: Captions--Severability--Effective date --1993 c 518: See notes following RCW 78.44.010. RCW 78.44.083 Reclamation permit --Refusal to issue. Applicable Cases .../om cgi.exe?clientlD=63084944&hitsperheading=on&infobase=rcw.nfo&jump=78.44&softpa7/17/00 May 12, 1994 Draft Tukwila Comprehensive Plan .M:.:?::ff:}} xa=`:MSi:Y•:i4,.:Y,•yyy;2ri:2Y2:::::*akiM1:.:.::::.M`zP::hRA:h:$,* 2.:::`Rik::.:.: ii: i:y,+•t`v : All. 4 o " ` .{.ea x` ,,, 4 _:..}..Q > t tlfln and a tent l flood..14110.,,,..,141,..-t:,....•.. e•ass fl; 4 ; } . x } Ltiv •} . zafl s �. hand wW � € >} nt%h ex th d Y...:::,,,-::7M!‘::::',s n �..e x Vishillti ; A �arf x„�,xx:,x,",::xx:::;;,w.,x.:;�#z2:� .,,x � x,xzzzw;:�;av,,,.,xzz;x:�4:zzzzz,x,,,�•?azzxzzx„�.,,zxzx ;•zx,,,,• A d. laic i 141.1v1 . 14 • n t xe*x r chann a 4Cellt .�yi.?:j:,',,':ikx,..�.:•::•:`vi�::,;..�f�:,•}ly�}}}.??.`.?kk:kkk`k�y�}»}}}, }}}}}}}}�};C}?}yy.•,:?�ay>...,y:....}}l"�w.?;.w;:w.}:??t}:kk: ,F'7t7•C�+�.•� '`�. V� }i ii ..�•�,�lkP. ♦' ♦ ( ♦: x,44 4�4 'x{0 :n .. y}:4 :, }}4x:iA ??': basay.:{.• x M1: ti }:}iix:}:::},s• .{:y\�: ti.`LJy4: 4p:•:\i. ;:.`�h•<'•`N•'• ::::� aw .••,:i�.:'y.: L`•:;p;:3:y:,>.},y},},}, }xx}4• :p::y;.; ,••:.,C; t;Li;••::�ti"""'i'::. }• ;:.}�}•n;;a ..4, x}}w. 4z t ':fl.� dietea £aruxwr' t' Worn: ,iieikt dveL ••'.} .. }••}'p: .:.:;� •`: :} „y t• : 'st. y-i',}`.:'t..,:.-..:...�....,...�.::...:•�•'3.3:� toc w. abaci € dmc t x ?p::�a \;;•M1;:;\:\: rig{: :\{{L{ \{,{•::: ,_}, \}Sytyti.\}'{{{{{}�•i ,t.. 4 utr :}},.:\xi x44 .: v.,::, •. .• vti{ti{tiiiii::LLti;22��•.:v v :�:y: ,,,�...,�yy. ��Z •4\\tiLLk�i•: : :V ure ::::::. �::.•::. �:f`ut 1 a tEy 8 E A ent sc o;.: . • •ta he ' ♦K{` z?: :::�:v ii iii:iii::\:;i: :•:tib::;+.::::{'}::k:•: x:: : .::::v:•:.:L ••:�}y..,, •. x,•.k,,:x,}\x,xxx:•n•x•v,xx:::::::`::::::v`.'.::::: •\::;::::::::::ti }}}'r•$}iv;:::ii:� Vii:::::;::: 'v::}: Y`2:�,zY...:•S2#Y#::,,;a:�::::x,,,:• •.,x:,,:,:,,:,,,..,,:i;:??iit ssks:;.: >.......3.:.�t, �. �., x•:.,,x,a:.:>...;'Fcy,>.iiii,?L•}:>.};�. rsrw.\r•.,,�#„4}};;..L,, xz>.z2z:«zzz .z).}}{.. x,x•:,,,,,xx,vnxxxx,xwnx,xw.v.,:v: nnx„ ,x,,,,x,,, vriGiri{{{{:,,,,,,,,::,x„xx,,,,a,,,{;{xxLvx:,,x,w.x,xx,vk2„t<„ - :,w„t ;::::::w`x""xx{,` L,x.{:,,� Gateway: An important and definable point of entrance into Tukwila or one of its neighborhoods. General Government Funds: Funds for all general government needs, derived primarily from sales and property tax revenues, and supple- mented by grants, bond proceeds, developer agreements, and local im- provement districts. GMA: The commonly used acronym for the Growth Management Act GMPC: The commonly used acronym for King County's Growth Management Planning Council. XXU • • Document • . Page 7 of 8 The department shall refuse to issue a reclamation permit if it is determined during the SEPA process that the impacts of a proposed surface mine cannot be adequately mitigated. The department or county, city, or town may refuse to issue any other permit at any other location to any miner or permit holder who fails to rectify deficiencies set forth in an order of the department within the requisite time schedule. However, the department or county, city, or town shall issue all appropriate permits when all deficiencies are corrected at each surface mining site. [1993 c 518 § 33.] Notes: Captions--Severability--Effective date --1993 c 518: See notes following RCW 78.44.010. RCW 78.44.085 Application fee --Annual permit fee --Appeals. Applicable Cases (1) An applicant for a public or private reclamation permit shall pay an application fee to the department before being granted a surface mining permit. The amount of the application fee shall be six hundred fifty dollars. (2) After June 30, 1993, each public or private permit holder shall pay an annual permit fee of six hundred fifty dollars. The annual permit fee shall be payable to the department on the first anniversary of the permit date and each year thereafter. Annual fees paid by a county for mines used exclusively for public works projects and having less than seven acres of disturbed area per mine shall not exceed one thousand dollars. Annual fees are waived for all mines used primarily for public works projects if the mines are owned and primarily operated by counties with 1993 populations of less than twenty thousand persons, and if each mine has less than seven acres of disturbed area. (3) Appeals from any determination of the department shall not stay the requirement to pay any annual permit fee. Failure to pay the annual fee may constitute grounds for an order to suspend surface mining or cancellation of the reclamation permit as provided in this chapter. (4) All fees collected by the department shall be deposited into the surface mining reclamation account. (5) If the department delegates enforcement responsibilities to a county, city, or town, the department may allocate funds collected under this section to the county, city, or town. [ 1997 c 413 § 1; 1996 c 70 § 1; 1993 c 518 § 14.] Notes: Captions--Severability--Effective date --1993 c 518: See notes following RCW 78.44.010. RCW 78.44.087 Performance security required --Department authority. Applicable Cases (1) The department shall not issue a reclamation permit until the applicant has deposited with the department an acceptable performance security on forms prescribed and furnished by the department. A public or governmental agency shall not be required to post performance security. (2) This performance security may be: (a) Bank letters of credit acceptable to the department; (b) A cash deposit; (c) Negotiable securities acceptable to the department; (d) An assignment of a savings account; (e) A savings certificate in a Washington bank on an assignment form prescribed by the department; (f) Assignments of interests in real property within the state of Washington; or (g) A corporate surety bond executed in favor of the department by a corporation authorized to do business in the state of Washington under Title 48 RCW and authorized by the department. (3) The performance security shall be conditioned upon the faithful performance of the requirements set forth in this chapter and of the rules adopted under it. (4) The department shall have the authority to determine the amount of the performance security using a standardized performance security formula developed by the department. The amount of the security shall be determined by the department and based on the estimated costs of completing reclamation according to the approved reclamation plan or minimum standards and related .../om_cgi. exe?clientlD=63 084944&hitsperheading=on&infobase=rcw.nfo&jump=78.44&softpa 7/17/00 Draft Tukwila Comprehensive Plan May 12, 1994 • .w.�k::,#3}::>.;}:}.`,>:.>}>:S><. ,.mm}»:•m>•.:i:4v.:,..\:x::+,wvm�wrXcax�xx,vvac �.wg:•s : �`,•nr,?;:>'izr.'.,... r,,.M1\.\•.L;.LkwearammYwriA,..4Y:w£{. t� 1 Growth Management Planning Council: The Council (a King Coun- ty entity) establishes the Countywide planning policies that serve as the consistent framework from which city and county comprehensive plans are developed. '•i'v\•�'• {{•.{•:{{ti::{'' ri{i{{•,.:.,{{.:{{{<{^yG•2:2::{r.:;:?•:{:2x i}:: {iji•:�;i: :}}:•{::v}}:{•':i•:}x:03::{{•{.;_•.::}•: ij::t{{{.}i • .::;n'•:� #22# xd :t... {.: ::•."}• • ::...........,.: » - J} >i#<`:3ix•%{3333:222## 2i3{''.4t:#'.':#•':::#: ##'# aad • ��{, • 2 { :}} v.:: 5 .z • .': #$ 5 ad'.`„7:4,Aeil.tt•• i{3{ sx <2 •.,,\ 22 22.2:x`>222222222:2:::,:2.{2x �;•:,:2� ;`}�2: • ' tk vu.wwcia• �,vi��}'{ } � v: \::.+Y.•{.•: `v�w.vnvxx.... 2... ..:2. �\�.vvv vxxy #:`•.{�� 4"..04:100 .2"'•2. •. :'.'2Yx2Y'<:{22;22:�.vii22•::v.:{' ..v :•v2 x p 11I 2 4:714— x,,.:,v:.;isc""""'•,•...w,,,,,,wcd2.''''''"' '•`2.2222:; 2,.ti M1`yM1} `2y:} iti2222ti�:2 $� �`, aii{2:'4:': .::hill2.:2222F..22{2 2 404- c:R:,rIMs ..ate . ....: i...,,.�.xx.+.,n...x.,x„Y,x,x„2,iii,x,xx•.,{;.`.{2;{„nw:,,.x,::k{t{tt22222222,\`.22:,22,'�2::..{,x - 2:c}y,,,xi.:22ZY x'212222, Level -of -Service: This defines an established minimum capacity of public facilities or services that must be provided per unit of demand or other appropriate measured need; in transportation capacity, a grading system from A to F is used, it is based on the average vehicle delay. LOS A is best (no more than 7.5 seconds delay) and LOS F is worst (greater than one minute delay). Local Improvement District: Voted debt by property owners for a special benefit to their property, including streets, water, and sewer fa- cilities, and other special benefits such as sidewalks. The city usually participates by providing preliminary engineering. The value of the benefit must be at least as much as the cost per owner. LOS: The commonly used acronym for level -of -service. Manufacturing/lndustrial Center. A land use designation established in the King County countywide planning policies for areas character- ized by a significant amount of manufacturing or other industrial em- ployment, that differ from other employment areas in that a land base is an essential element of their operation. :;{.• ;: x}}}}} _ _.x}}x4 }u}xy'ry}x}}}}}x2x„xv � Document • • Page 8 of 8 administrative overhead for the area to be surface mined during (a) the next twelve-month period, (b) the following twenty-four months, and (c) any previously disturbed areas on which the reclamation has not been satisfactorily completed and approved. (5) The department may increase or decrease the amount of the performance security at any time to compensate for a change in the disturbed area, the depth of excavation, a modification of the reclamation plan, or any other alteration in the conditions of the mine that affects the cost of reclamation. The department may, for any reason, refuse any performance security not deemed adequate. (6) Liability under the performance security shall be maintained until reclamation is completed according to the approved reclamation plan to the satisfaction of the department unless released as hereinafter provided. Liability under the performance security may be released only upon written notification by the department. Notification shall be given upon completion of compliance or acceptance by the department of a substitute performance security. The liability of the surety shall not exceed the amount of security required by this section and the department's reasonable legal fees to recover the security. (7) Any interest or appreciation on the performance security shall be held by the department until reclamation is completed to its satisfaction. At such time, the interest shall be remitted to the permit holder; except that such interest or appreciation may be used by the department to effect reclamation in the event that the permit holder fails to comply with the provisions of this chapter and the costs of reclamation exceed the face value of the performance security. (8) No other state agency or local government other than the department shall require performance security for the purposes of surface mine reclamation. The department may enter into written agreements with federal agencies in order to avoid redundant bonding of surface mines straddling boundaries between federally controlled and other lands within Washington state. (9) When acting in its capacity as a regulator, no other state agency or local government may require a surface mining operation regulated under this chapter to post performance security unless that state agency or local government has express statutory authority to do so. A state agency's or local government's general authority to protect the public health, safety, and welfare does not constitute express statutory authority to require a performance security. However, nothing in this section prohibits a state agency or local government from requiring a performance security when the state agency or local government is acting in its capacity as a landowner and contracting for extraction -related activities on state or local government property. [1997 c 186 § 1; 1995 c 223 § 3; 1994 c 232 § 23; 1993 c 518 § 15.] Notes: Severability --1994 c 232: See RCW 78.56.900. Effective date --1994 c 232 §§ 1-5, 9-17, and 23-31: See RCW 78.56.901. Captions--Severability--Effective date --1993 c 518: See notes following RCW 78.44.010. .../om_cgi. exe?clientlD=63 084944&hitsperheading=on&infobase=rcw.nfo&jump=78.44& softpa 7/17/00 May 12, 1994 Draft Tukwila Comprehensive Plan Mitigation Payment System: A system for determining impacts and measures to lessen the impacts. It includes calculation of mitigation measure costs and allocation of cost per unit of impact Tukwila uses this type of system for congestion to determine impacts on streets and intersections. {ti{i{'+;A+'{iy\4fitt{p{q�{{• {{+�ti •: ti;{:: {�+h:`tl {{{ti ' \Yti{ti +': \\gC{K{ittC\Sti \titittiff{{iJitij{}[{{{{{+•4:titititiitiii�t,{titi4titi.�';�:'a{{av��{••{:{{{at: }:Yl iii^\\'.� f' C_„'Y• i \i,: Multimodal Center. A facility serving more than one transit service, ac- cessible to motorized and nonmotorized transportation modes. ti3.' $�?�( i< \\•,\•. Y,\ Lt`"3%3.' \�i SCPh' 444'SSSti4ti M1*M1li • •]vM1:-::x'::•v,• ,`.iv,'Y iivj:;y�i•.iv,fY:v•.':v:Ky•Y:�: ii i •.m.1�{{7y�•.:.ovti..''.}ii:?x:d v�auYn:w� v:,i' y,4•�M1»2t.•�t:o •}'Yt'.k'<.,��,. ��.�..:. u.,.•�.u: .n, .y �' .v.�•Ni..\ ;::.:.•: •. ::.z„.z:»:i�,z4} 3 vi,Ayv4„ii•..:.vi•.�ri•iy:isiii�v:s}sxs�:s;.:,�zi+Y{.i.HY'•' =um.ance'.��m�:*}dm�ve,Y:Vr4�4Y n<;ii•,', M•, x•„SY. `h:.Y•,sC \ti\z\x4IXi • FS.v:\:otv\r \nUyv}:;(•\l. ,,.t :.{{•:::•�• �•,•y •...•: • ;y yyyyY• :�� Witt- d•t ptech f^ d mIt .:s:::-, ,z. es €`clflood insures lore f€i fl • ns ..�:,. ,,:•., It <. - ;?.;,:},:.":.y.;22, ...: h'•Y.Y.'w%s�#Y:;}?;y,,,•.;'ta:�Rv{M1 .... National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System: The federal regula- tion governing the discharge of pollutants and contaminants into sur- face water bodies. Node: A point where several branches or subsidiary parts originate or come together. NPDES: The commonly used acronym for the National Pollutant Dis- charge Elimination System. Personal Rapid Transit System A proposed system of separate guide- way vehicles carrying up to three persons. :4 �Cjjt}Gft{;::: S:t{t{K3:{4{{ti"{{xxj{{{{{ {{{{;`{{{\•:`i•'+tit Afo . , �d xxiv • • Moira Bradshaw - Re: Tukwila Rock Pile. Page 1 From: "George Lightwood" <GTL@shanwil.com> To: tuk-mail.6300-po(Moira) Date: 7/5/00 6:16PM Subject: Re: Tukwila Rock Pile Moira: I faxed some material to that I used in preparing my report. The purpose of this email is to document or telephone conversation and clarify our recommendations. I think the King County Code actually refers to the "OSM Blasting Guidance Manual" which is really just a plain english version of the regulations. I could not find a copy in our office, but both OSM and the International Socieity of Explosive Engineers sell it. Note that in our report there are two concerns with ground motions. One is structural. The OSM guidelines are recommended to reduce the liklihood of damage to structures due to ground vibrations. The second concern is complaints. The OSM guidelines do not address this issue, but on page 6, we list published peak particle velocities and corresponding human responses. We put this in to show you that even if the owner limits ground vibrations to the extent that structural damage is not observed, it is possible and perhaps likely to still get complaints of damage and annoyance. In our conclusions we recommended that the owner explain to the City how they will handle complaints or reduce the tendency for complaints from neighbors due to blast vibration, noise, fumes and flyrock. If the public is well informed and has confidence that the project is done in a manner that will protect their property they may tolerate higher peak particle velocities than listed on page 6. If they have low confidence, just the knowledge of blasting may result in complaints. At a minimum, we recommend that the owner submit a blasting plan that would contain the information required by OSM for permitting a coal mine. Most blaster's are familiar with the OSM requirements. It is incorporated into both King and Snohomish County Codes for quarry sites. They are considered to be fairly conservative. Some older local codes are less conservative, but in the absence of additional information, I would recommend the more conservative criteria. The owner could hire a blasting consultant and a structural engineer to establish a less restrictive criteria based on site specific studies. No information was provided in the previous submittals on the type and distance of structures near the site. Meeting the OSM permitting and performance requirements is then a minimum requirement, as I do not know if there are nearby very sensative structures or overhead utilities that could be damaged by blasting. The owner's blasting plan would need to be evaluated to see if it is likely to conform to the performance requirements of the regulations. This usually requres some knowledge of blasting practices. While OSM allows mine owners to perform blasting in the absence of vibration measurements in this case, it would be best to require measurements and use Figure 1 in the OSM regulations (or USBM RI 8507) to evaluate compliance. Using this method the blaster would measure particle velocity and frequency (Hz) with a blast vibration monitor (blasting seismograph) and plot his measurements on Figure 1 of the OSM regulations to check if he is in compliance. In addition, we recommended that the owner conduct test blasts to demonstrate that blasting can be done in a manner that does not effect adjacent properties. This is very important because not all effects (flyrock and fumes) can be measured or quantified by just reviewing a blasting plan. I think most blasters would understand what is required from what we listed as recommendations for additional conditions (page 10 of our report) to place on the permit. They are fairly common requests not only for permits but also construction projects in the private sector. »> "Moira Bradshaw" <mbradshaw@ci.tukwila.wa.us> 07/05/00 10:50AM »> My fax number is 206-431-3665. I tried callling but wasn't able to connect with you. Moira Bradshaw - Re: Tukwila Rock Pile, Moira Carr Bradshaw Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter BI, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 206-431-3651 Mc iy:r?-Bradsh'aw - Re: tuk/white rock pile` Page 1j From: Brian Shelton To: Jill Mosqueda Date: 7/5/00 7:10PM Subject: Re: tuk/white rock pile Jill, Sorry. A condition will be that the applicant shall provide a geotech study/analysis of S. 115th Street due to the significant volume of truck traffic. The study shall be performed by a consultant selected by the City and paid by the applicant. The study shall include but is not limited to coring, sampling, testing of the existing roadway section to determine structural adequacy. If inadequate to sustain the proposed traffic, the applicant shall provide mitigation before beginning the project, during or on completion. Brian »> Jill Mosqueda 07/05/00 05:08PM »> how is the review going? can i get it today? Jill Mosqueda Moira Bradshaw - Re: Tukwila Rock Piletland boundarys _ Page 1 From: Gary Schulz To: Moira Bradshaw Date: 7/5/00 6:07PM Subject: Re: Tukwila Rock Pile wetland boundarys Moira, The "field investigation" may have included a wetland delineation and this would include a flagged boundary. "Identification" may only have an approximate mapped boundary and if the wetland is off-site then this is appropriate. I remember the wetland being shown as off-site? Gary »> Moira Bradshaw 07/05/00 02:37PM »> Wetland REsources said that the boundaries of the wetland were determined using field investigation. Is this sufficient? Is boundary identification the same as delineation? Thanks Moira Sent by: SHANNON & WILSON, INC. 206 695 6777; 07/05/0 5:32; JetFax #799;Page 1 =111 SHANNON 6WILSOCNSINC. 400 N. 34TH STREET, SUITE 100 P.O. Box 300303 . SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98103 SEAT I Er) •= CHt�AlV Ett ,ANKs • ANCHORAGE • ST. LOUIS • BOSTON 206.632.8020 FAX. 206.695.6777 � Ql�� '4 JUL 05 2000 COMMUNITY IEVELOPMENT FAX TRANSMISSION Attn Company /"foie a pais is Fax (2o,) /43/,_ 3645- 6SCompany d, ricfcu/i�it) l i. tom• P..-aze, Phone 0o6) 2/3/-_3(S% Location Date (Tidy Zoon From T . ,G `c211. GO � Time Job No. 30 2.,,,,I ,?i_ I -os e.6 .-0 Subject TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES (including cover sheet) /% • -Pav4 715. lq are p o fur hY W # 1s,2 ruu S c2.0 u 2 ii ozdt "� O "Pu{780. /3 .0s-1-wlpicske4„-(-4 '2* • For 4) .G/ - 8/f. GB e5+0_b(;s/Lee o rm•k2ir,4 10 1 gds 7 e Re "6. W o u. � eeTri '-i „b r auo s; fe bs d e Q-ld 7- 1 r 93 fez 9y. 46 dso IWirc4gj + rel f ddeAl 0; 7,7 "kiwi -.Le;?‘y di rk you The original of this fax iv�lf will not be mailed. NOTE: The attached information i proprietary in its entirety and is intended for the use of only the individual to whom is is transmitted. It may contain privileged and/or confidential information. Any reproduction or use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this facsint in error, .lease notif Shannon & Wilson immediate) Sent by: SHANNON & WILSON, INC. 206 695 6777; 07/05/00 15:32; jetFax #799;Page • §715.19 registered professional engineer to en- sure construction according to the ap- proved design. On completion of con- struction, the structure shall be cer- tified by a registered professional engi- neer experienced in the field of dam construction as having been con- structed in accordance with accepted professional practice and the approved design. . (ix) A permanent identification marker, at least 6 feet high that shows the darn number assigned pursuant to §77.216-1 of this title and. the name of the person operating orcontrolling the dam. shall be located on or imme- diately adjacent to each darn within 30 days of certification of design pursuant to this section. (4) All dams, including those not meeting the size or other criteria of §77.216 (a) of this title, shall be rou- tinely inspected by a registered profes- sional engineer. or someone under the supervision of a registered professional engineer. in accordance with Mining Enforcement and Safety Administra- tion regulations pursuant to §77.216-3 of this title. (5) All dams shall be routinely main- tained. Vegetative growth shall be cut where necessary to facilitate inspec- tion and repairs. Ditches and spillways shall be cleaned. Any combustible ma- . serials present on the surface. ocher than that used for surface stability such as mulch or dry vegetation. shall be removed and any other appropriate maintenance procedures followed. (6) All dams subject to this section shall be certified annually as having been constructed and modified in ac- cordance with current prudent engi- neering practices to minimize the pos- sibility of failures, Any changes in the geometry of the impounding structure shall be highlighted and included In the annual certification report.. These cer- tifications shall Include a report on ex- isting and required monitoring proce- dures and instrumentation. the average and maximum depths and elevations of any impounded waters over the past year, existing storage capacity of Im- pounding structures, any fires occur- ring in the material over the past year and any other aspects of the structures affecting their stability. 80 C/63P4V 30 CFR Ch. VII (7-1-99 Edition) (7) Any enlargements, reductions in size, reconstruction or ocher modifica- tion of rho darns shall be approved by the regulatory authority before con- struction begins. (8) All dams shall be removed and the disturbed areas regraded, revegetated, and stabilized before the release of bond unless the regulatory authority approves retention of such dams as. being compatible with an approved postmining land use (§715.13). § 715.19 .+Ufexploses (a) General. (1) The permittee shall comply with all applicable local. State, and Federal laws and regulations and the requirements of this section in the storage, handling, preparation, and use of explosives. (2) Blasting operation that use more than the equivalent of 5 pounds of TNT shall be conducted according to a time schedule approved by the regulatory authority. (3) All blasting operations shall be_ conducted by experienced, trained. and e competent persons who understand the hazards involved. Persons working with explosive materials shall— (i) Have demonstrated a knowledge of, and a willingness to comply with, safety and security requirements; (ii) Be capable of using mature judg- ment in all situations: (iii) Be in good physical condition and not addicted to intoxicants, nar- cotics, or other similar types of drugs: (iv) Possess current knowledge of the local. State and Federal laws and regu- lations applicable to his work; and (v) Have obtained a certificate of completion of training and qualifica- tion as required by State law or the regulatory authority. (b) Preblasdng survey,.4(1) On the re- quest to the regulatory authority of a resident or owner of a manmade dwell- ing or structure that is located within one-half mile of any part of the permit area, the permittee shall conduct a preblasting survey of the dwelling or structure and submit a report of the survey to the regulatory authority. (2) • Personnel approved by the rogu- 4 latory authority shall conduct the sur- vey to determine the condition of the dwelling or structure and to document any preblasting damage and other. Sent by: SHANNON'S. WILSON, INC 206 695 6777; 07/05/00 15:33; JeWFax #799;Page 3/19 "S�r urface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Inteiior §715,19 physical factors that could reasonably be affected by the blasting. Assess ments of structures such as pipes, ca- bles. transmission lines. and wells and other water systems shall be limited to surface condition and other readily available data. Special attention shall be given to the preblasting condition of wells and other water systems used for human, animal, or agricultural pur- poses and to the quantity and quality of the water. (3) A written report of the survey shall be prepared and signed by the per- son or persons who conducted the sur- vey and prepared the written report. The report shall include recommenda- tions of any special conditions or pro- posed adjustments to the blasting pro- cedures outlined in paragraph (e) of this section which should be incor- porated into the blasting plan to pre- vent damage. Copies of the report shall be provided to the person requesting the survey and to the regulatory au- thority. (c) Public nonce of blasting schedule. At least 10 days, but not more than 20 days before beginning a blasting pro- gram in which explosives iha�, t �mcre Lthan the equivalent of 5) pounds of 1 -NT -11:,, are detonated. the permittee shall pub- lish a blasting schedule in a newspaper of general circulation in the locality of the proposed site. Copley of the sched- ule shall be distributed by mail to local governments and public utilities and to each residence within one-half mile of the blasting sites described in the schedule. The permittee shall republish and redistribute the schedule by mail at least every 3 months. Blasting schedules shall not be so general as to cover all working hours but shall iden- tify as accurately as possible the loca- tion of the blasting sites and the time periods when blasting will occur. The blasting schedule shall contain at a minimum— (1) Identification of the specific areas in which blasting will take place. The specific blasting areas described shall not be larger than 300 acres with a gen- erally contiguous border: (2) Dates and times when explosives are to be detonated expressed In not more than 4 -hour increments; (3) Methods to be used to control ac- cess to the blasting area; 81 (4) Types of audible warnings and all - clear signals to be used before and after blasting; and (5) A description of possible emer- gency situations (defined in paragraph (e)(1)(ii) of this section), which have been approved by the regulatory au- thority, when it may be necessary to blast at times other than those dc- scribed in the schedule. . (d) Public notice of changes to blasting schedules. Before blasting In areas not covered by a previous schedule or whenever the proposed frequency of in- dividual detonations are materially changed. the permittee shall prepare a revised blasting schedule in accordance with the procedures in paragraph (c) of this section. If the change involves only a temporary adjustment of the frequency of blasts, the permittee may use alternate methods to notify the governmental bodies and individuals to whom the origin,�a1 sschedule-wassent. 1(e) awing prrocedwres-(I) Gcnordl.'(i) All blasting shall be conducted only during the daytime hours. defined as sunrise until sunset. Based on public requests or other considerations. in- cluding the proximity to residential areas, the regulatory authority may specify more restrictive time periods. (11) Blasting may not be conducted at times different from those announced in the blasting schedule except In emergency situations where rain, light- ning, other atmospheric conditions, or operator or public safety requires un- scheduled detonation. (11i) Warning and all -clear signals of different character that are audible within a range of one-half mile from the point of the blast shall be given. All persons within the permit area shall be notified of the meaning of the signals through appropriate instruc- tions and signs posted as required by §715.12, (iv) Access to the blasting area shall be regulated to protect the public and. livestock from . the effects of blasting. Access to the : blasting area shall be controlled to prevent unauthorized entry at least 10 minutes before each blast and until the permittee's author- ized representative has determined that no unusual circumstances such as imminent slides or undetonated charges exist and access to and travel Sent by: SHANNON & WILSON, INC. 206 695 6777; 07/05/00 15:33; JetFax j799;Page 4/19 § 715.19 In or through the area can safely re- sume. (v) Areas in which charged holes 'are awaiting firing shall be guarded, barri- caded and posted, or flagged against unauthorized entry. (vi) Airblast shall be controlled such that it does not exceed 128 decibel lin- ear -peak at any manmade dwelling or structure located within one-half mile of the permit area. (vu) Except where lesser distances are approved by the regulatory author- ity (based upon a preblasting survey or other appropriate investigations) blast- ing shall not be conducted within— (A) 1.000 feet of any building used as a dwelling, school, church, hospital, . or nursing facility; (B) 500 feet of facilities including, but not limited to. disposal wells, petro- leum or gas -storage Facilities, munic- ipal water -storage facilities. fluid - transmission pipelines. gas or oil -col- lection lines, or water and sewage lines; and (C) S00 feet of an underground mine not totally abandoned except with the concurrence of the Mining Enforce- ment and Safety Administration. (2) Blasting standards. (i) Blasting shall be conducted to prevent injury to persons, damage to public or private property outside the permit area, ad- verse impacts on any underground mine. and change in the course, chan- nel, or availability of ground or surface waters outside the permit area. (11) Ground vibration—(A) General. In all blasting operations, except as oth- erwise authorized in paragraph (e)(2)(111) of this section. the maximum ground vibration shall not exceed a value approved by the regulatory au- thority. It shall be established in ac- cordance with the maximum peak -par- ticle -velocity limit of paragraph (e)(2)(i1)(3). the scaled -distance equa- tion of paragraph (e)(2)(ii)(C), or the blasting -level chart of paragraph (e) (2) (ii) (D), or such other standard es- tablished under paragraph (e)(2)(ii)(E). of this section. All structures in the vi- cinity of the blasting area, not listed in paragraph (e) (2) (i i) (B) , of this section. such as water towers. pipelines and other utilities, tunnels. dams, im- poundments, and underground mines, shall be protected from damage by es - 82 30 CFR Ch. VII (7-1-99 Edition) tabiishment of a maximum allowable limit on the ground vibration, sub- mitted by the operator and approved by the regulatory authority before the initiation of blasting. 03) Maximum peakparr.IcJe velocity. (1) The maximum ground vibration shall not exceed the following limits at the location of any dwelling, public build- ing. school, church, or community or institutional building outside the per- mit area. Distance (0). ham eLasdng site, In (eel Nuimum anowatee peak par- ede velocity (/ mar) fa ground vi- bration, in inpwsisec- and r 5'Caledd4- tance factor to Oe eg- ged w1IflQ 11 sersmk moniaonng a 0 to 300 ................ ...-....-.......... 301 to 5,000 ...... •..... - ...... -........ S,OC1 and beyond ..,..,....... 1.25 1.00 0,75 5O 56 65 'Ground vexation ehall be maaaurad az panicle. velocity. Parade velocity shall be recorded in totem mu wally perpan• dlcular.directions. The maXimum aUO*eble peak parade vv. rociw eras appy to each of the three meaauementa. oAppkable to the scaled -Balance equation of paragraph (e)(2X11)(C)(11 of We section. (2) A seismographic record shall be provided for each blast.. (C) Scaled -distance equation. (1) The operator may use the scaled -distance equation. i$(DiDs)=. to determine the allowable charge weight of explosives to be detonated in any 8 -millisecond period without seismic monitoring; where We -the maximum weight of ex- plosives. in pounds; D=the distance, in feet, from the blasting site to the near- est protected structure; and Ds=the scaled -distance factor, which may ini- tially be approved by the regulatory authority using the values for scaled - distance factor listed in paragraph (e) (2) (11) (B) (J). of this section. (2) The development of a modified scaled -distance factor may be author- ized by the regulatory authority on re- ceipt of a written request by the oper- ator, supported by seismographic records of blasting at the minesite. The modified scaled -distance factor shall be determined such that the particle ve- locity of the predicted ground vibra- tion will not exceed the prescribed maximum allowable peak particle ve- locity of paragraph (e) (2) (B) (J) of this section at a 95 -percent confidence level. Sent by: SHANNON & WILSON, INC. 206 695 6777; 07/05/0 15:34; jetFax #799;Page 5/19 Surface Mining Reciamanon and Enforcement Interior 5715.19 (D) Blasting -level chart. (1) An oper- its in Figure 1 to determine the max- ator may use the ground -vibration lim- imum allowable ground vibration. u c u 0 0 u a 1.0 0 3 co • 0,6 0.5,- E 0.4 E 10.0 2.0 1.5 0.9 0,3 02 0.1 2 in/sec 0.75 in/sec 1 4 10 20 30 10.0 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 100 Blast Vibration Frequency, HZ fu3ure 1. Alternative blasting level criteria. (Source Modified from figure 8-1. Bureau of Mines RI85071 (2) If the Figure 1 Limits are used, a seismographic record including both particle -velocity and vibration -fre- quency levels shall be provided for each blast. The method for the analysis of the predominant frequency contained in the blasting records shall be ap- proved by the regulatory authority be- fore application of this alternative blasting criterion. (E) The maximum allowable ground vibration shaU be reduced by the regu- latory authority beyond the limits oth- erwise provided by this section, If. de - 83 termined necessary to provide damage protection. (F) Tho regulatory authority may re- quire an operator to conduct seismic monitoring of any or all blasts and may specify the location at which the measurements are taken and the de- gree of detail necessary in the meas- urement. (iii) If blasting is conducted in ac- cordance with paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section. the maximum ground -vi- bration and alrblast standards shall not apply at the following locations: Sent by: SHANNON & WILSON, INC. 206 695 6777; 07/05/00 15:34; Je[Fax #799;Page 6/19 § 715.20 (A) At structures owned by the per- mittee and not leased to another per- son. (B) At structures owned by the per- mittee and leased to another person. if a written waiver by the lessee is sub- mitted to the regulatory authority be- fore blasting. (3) Reciorois of bJasunn operations. A record of each blast. including seis- mograph reports. shall be retained for at least 3 years and shall be available for inspection by the regulatory au- thority and the public on request. The record shall contain the following data— (i) Name of permittee, operator, or other person conducting the blast; (ii) Location. date, and time of blast; (111) Name. signature, and license number of blaster -in -charge; (iv) Direction and distance, in feet, to nearest dwelling, school, church, or commercial or institutional building neither owned or leased by the per- mittee; (v) Weather conditions; (vi) Type of material blasted; (vii) Number of holes. burden. and spacing (viii) Diameter and depth of holes; (ix) Types of explosives used; (x) Total weight of explosives used; (xi) Maximum weight of explosives detonated within any 8 millisecond pe- riod; (xii) Maximum number of holes deto- nated within any 8 mllllsecond period; (xiii) Methods of firing and type of circuit; (xiv) Type and Length of stemming; (xv) If mats or other protections were used; (xvi) Type of delay detonator used, and delay periods used; (xvil) Seismograph records, where re- quired. including— (A) Seismograph reading, including exact location of seismograph and its distance fromthe blast; (B) Name of person taking the seis- mograph reading; and (C) Name of person and flcm ana- lyzing the seismograph record. 142 FR 82680, Doc. 13. 1977; 43 FR 2722. Jan. 19, 1978. as .amended at 48 PR 9805, Mar. 8. 19831 84 30 CFR Ch. VII (7-1-99 Edition) § 715.20 Revegetation. (a) Cenral (1) The permittee shall establish on all land that has been dis- turbed, a diverse. effective. and perma- nent vegetative cover of species native to the area of disturbed land or species that will support the planned postmining uses of the land approved according to $715.13. For areas des- ignated as prime farmland, the rec- lamation procedures of §716.7 shall apply. (2) Revegetation shall be carried out in a manner that .encourages a prompt vegetative cover and recovery of pro- ductivity levels compatible with ap- proved land uses. The vegetative cover shall be capable of stabilizing the soil surface with respect to erosion. All dis- turbed lands, except water areas and surface areas of roads that are ap- proved as a part of the postmining land use. shall be seeded or planted to achieve a vegetative cover of the same seasonal variety native CO the area of disturbed land. If both the pre- and postmining land use is intensive agri- culture, planting of the crops normally grown will meet the requirement. Veg- etative cover will be considered of tho same seasonal variety when it consists • of a mixture of species of equal or supe- rior utility for the intended land use when compared with the utility of nat- urally occurring vegetation during each season of the year. (3) On Federal lands. the surface management agency shall be consulted for approval prior to revegetation re- garding what species are selected, and following revegetation. to determine when the area Is ready to be used. (b) Use of Introduced species. Intro- duced species may be substituted for native species only if appropriate field trials have demonstrated that the in- troduced species are of equal or supe- rior utility for the approved postmining land use, or are necessary to achieve a quick. temporary, and sta- bilizing cover. Such species substi- tution shall be approved by the regu- latory authority. Introduced species shall meet applicable State and Fed- eral seed or introduced species stat- utes, and shall not include poisonous or potentially toxic species. (c) Timing of revegetation. Seeding and planting of disturbed areas shall be. Sent by: SHANNON & WILSON, INC. 206 695 6777; Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement. Interior (b) A narrative explaining the con- struction. modification. use, mainte- nance, and removal of the following fa- cilities (unless retention of such facili- ties is necessary for postmining land use as specified in 5816.133): (1) Dams. embankments. and other impoundments; (2) Overburden and topsoil handling and storage areas and structures; (3) Coal removal, handling, storage, cleaning, and transportation areas and structures; (4) Spoil, coal processing waste. and non -coal waste removal. handling. stor- age, transportation, and disposal areas and structures; (5) Mine facilities; and (6) Water and air pollution control fa- cilities, 141 FR 15357. Mar. 13, 1979, as amended at 45 FR 51550. Aug. 4. 19801 § 780.12 Operation plan: Existing structures. (a) Each application shall contain a description of each existing structure proposed to be used in connection with or to facilitate the surface' coal mining and reclamation operation. The de- scription shall include— (1) Location; (2) Plans of the structure which de- scribe its current condition: (3) Approximate dates on which con- struction of the existing structure was begun and completed; and (4) A showing, including relevant monitoring data or other evidence.. whether the structure meets the per- formance standards of subchapter K (Permanent Program Standards) of this chapter or, if the structure does not meet the performance standards of subchapter K of this chapter, a showing whether the structure meets the per- formance standards of subchapter B (Interim Program Standards) of this chapter. (b) Each application shall contain a compliance plan for each existing structure proposed to be modified or reconstructed for use in connection with or to facilitate the surface coal mining and reclamation operation. The compliance plan shall include— (1) Design specifications for the modification or reconstruction of the structure to meet the design and per - 07/05/00 15:35; • JetTa: #799;Page 7/19. § 780.14 formance standards of subchapter K of this chapter; (2) A construction schedule which shows dates for beginning and com- pleting Interim steps and final recon- struction; (3) Provisions for monitoring the structure during and after modification or reconstruction toensure that the performance standards of subchapter K of this chapter are met; and (4) A showing that the risk of harm to the environment or to public health or safety is not significant during the period of modification or reconstruc- tion. § 780.13 Operation plan: Blasting. 44— (a) Blasting plan. Each application shall contain a blasting plan for the proposed permit area, explaining how the applicant will comply with the re- quirements of §§ 816.61 through 816.68 of this chapter. This plan shall include, at a minimum, information setting forth the limitations the operator will meet with regard to ground vibration and airblast, the bases for those limita- tions, and the methods to be applied in controlling the adverse effects of blast- ing operations. (b) Monitoring system. Each applica- tion shall contain a description of any system to he used to monitor compli- ance with the standards of §816,67 in- cluding the type, capability, and sensi- tivity of any blast -monitoring equip- ment and proposed procedures and lo- cations of monitoring. (c) Blasting near underground mines. Blasting operations within 500 feet of. active underground mines require ap- proval of the State and Federal regu- latory authorities concerned with the health and safety of underground min- ers. 148 FR 9806. Mar. 8, 19831 §780.14 Operation plan: Maps and plans. Each application shall contain maps and plans as follows: (a) The maps and plans shall show the lands proposed to be affected throughout the operation and any change In a facility or feature to bo caused by the proposed operations, if the facility or feature was shown under 30 CFR 779.24 through 779.25. 219 144 t rerir Sent by: SHANNON & WILSON, INC. 206 695 6777; 07/05/00 15:35; JetFax #799;Page 8/19 • § 816.56 event specified by the regulatory au- thority. 148 FR 44004. Scpt. 26. 1983. as amended at 50' FR 18200, Apr. 24. 1985; 53 FR 43605, Oct. 27, 1998: 59 FR 53029. 53030. Oct. 20, 19941 §816.56 Postmining rehabilitation of sedimentation ponds, diversions, impoundments, and treatment fa- cilities. a- cil tl ies. Before abandoning a permit area or seeking bond release. the operator shall ensure that all temporary struc- tures are removed and reclaimed, and that all permanent sedimentation ponds, diversions, impoundments, and treatment facilities meet the require- ments of this chapter for permanent Structures. have been maintained prop- erly, and meet the: requirements of the approved reclamation plan for perma- nent structures and impoundments. The operator shall renovate such struc- tures if necessary to meet the require- ments of this chapter and to conform to the approved reclamation plan. 148 FR 44005. Sept 26, 10831 5816.57 Hydrologic balance: Stream buffer zones. (a) No land within 100 feet of a peren- nial stream or an intermittent stream shall be disturbed by surface mining activities. unless the regulatory au- thority specifically authorizes surface mining activities closer to, or through, such a stream. The regulatory author- ity may authorize such activities only upon finding that— (1) Surface mining activities will not cause or contribute to the violation of applicable State or Federal water qual- ity standards. and will not adversely affect the water quantity and quality or other environmental resources of the stream; and (2) [f there will be a temporary or permanent stream -channel diversion,. it will comply with §816.43. (b) The area not to be disturbed shall be designated as a buffer zone, and the operator shall mark it as specified in §816.11. 148 FR 30327, June 30, 19831 §816.59 Coal recovery. Surface mining activities shall be conducted so as to maximize the utill- 30 CFR Ch. VII (7-1-99 Edition) zation and conservation of the coal, while utilizing the best appropriate technology currently available to maintain environmental integrity, so that reaffecting the land in the future through surface coal mining operations is minimized. 5816.61 Use of explosives: General re- quirements. (a) Each operator shall comply with all applicable State and Federal laws and regulations in the use of explo- sives. (b) Blasts that use more than 5 pounds of explosive or blasting agent shall be conducted according to the schedule required under 4816.69. (c) Blasters. (1) No later than 12 months after the blaster certification program for a State required by part 850 of this chapter has been approved under the procedures of subchapter C of this chapter, all blasting operations in that State shall be conducted under the direction of a certified blaster. Be- fore that time, all such blasting oper- ations in that State shall be conducted by competent, experienced persons who understand the hazards involved. (2) Certificates of blaster certifi- cation shall be carried by blasters or shall be on file at the permit area dur- ing blasting operations. (3) A blaster and at least one other person shall be present at the firing of a blast. (9) Any blaster who isresponsible for conducting blasting operations at a blasting site shall: (1) Be familiar with the blasting plan and site-specific performance stand- ards; and (ll) Give direction and on-the-job training to persons who are not cer- tified and who are assigned to the blasting crew or assist in the use of ex- plosives. (d) Blast design. (1) An anticipated blast design shall be submitted if blast- ing operations will bo conducted with- in— (1) 1,000 feet of any building used as a dwelling, public building, school, church, or community or institutional building outside the permit area; or (ii) 500 feet of an active or abandoned underground mine. 290 De ffit"1 ) 1 ui rrrua2.4 171�„r -t e 1 vN i 4- vu.t(S f ski c7t1.4. ejrk ea DK meet Q Sent by: SHANNON & WILSON, INC. 206 695 6777; 07/05/00 15:36; Wax #799;Page 9/19 Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior (2) The blast design may be presented as part of a permit application or at a time, before the blast. approved by the regulatory authority. (3) The blast design shall contain sketches of the drill patterns, delay pe- riods, and decking and shall indicate the type and amount of explosives to be used, critical dimensions, and the location and general description of structures to be protected, as well as a discussion of design factors to be used. which protect the pubic and meet the applicable airblast, flyrock, and ground -vibration standards in §816.67. (4) The blast design shall be prepared and signed by a certified blaster. (5) The regulatory authority may re- quire changes to the design submitted. (48 FR 8492. Mar. 4, 1983, and 48 FR 9806, Mar. 8. 1989. as amended at 61 FR 19161, May 29, 1986] §816.62 Use of explosives Problasting survey. (a) At least 30 days before initiation; of blasting, the operator shall notify, in writing, all residents or owners of dwellings or ocher structures located within 1/2 mile of the permit area how to request a preblasting survey. (b) A resident or owner of a dwelling or structure within Ye mile of any part of the permit area may request a preblasting survey. This request shall be made. in writing. directly to the op- erator or to the regulatory authority, who shall promptly notify the oper- ator. The operator shall promptly con- duct a preblasting survey of the dwell- ing or structure and promptly. prepare a written report of the survey. An up- dated survey of any additions. modi- fications, or renovations shall be per- formed by the operator if requested by the resident or owner. (c) The operator shall determine the condition of the dwelling or structure and shall document any preblasting damage and other physical factors that could reasonably be affected by the blasting. Structures such as pipelines, cables. transmission lines, and cis- terns, wells, and other water systems warrant special attention; however. the assessment of these structures may be limited to surface conditions and other readily available data. § 816.64 (d) The written report of the survey shall be signed by the person who con• ducted the survey. Copies of the report shall be promptly provided to the regu- latory authority and to the person re• questing the survey. If the person re- questing the survey disagrees with the contents and/or recommendations con- tained therein. he or she may submit to both the operator and the regu- latory authority a detailed description of the specific areas of disagreement. (e) Any surveys requested more than 10 days before the planned initiation of blasting shall be completed by the op- erator before the initiation of blasting. (48 FR 9807, Mar. 8. 1983] § 816.64 Use of explosives: Blasting schedule. (a) General requirements. (1) The oper- ator shall conduct blasting operations at times approved by the regulatory authority and announced in the blast- ing schedule. The regulatory authority may limit the area covered, timing, and sequence of blasting as listed in the schedule, if such limitations are necessary and reasonable in order to protect the public health and safety or welfare. (2) All blasting shall be conducted be- tween sunrise and sunset, unless night- time blasting is approved by the regu- latory authority based upon a showing by the operator that the public will be protected from adverse noise and other impacts. The regulatory authority may specify more restrictive time periods for blasting. (3) Unscheduled blasts may be con- ducted only where public or operator health and safety so require and for emergency blasting actions. When an operator conducts an unscheduled blast, the operator, using audible sig- nals, shall notify residents within Vi mile of the blasting site and document the reason for the unscheduled blast in accordance with §816.68(p). (b) BJasring schedule publication and distribution. (1) The operator shall pub- lish the blasting schedule in a news- paper of general circulation in the lo- cality of the blasting site at least 10 days, but not more than 30 days, before beginning a blasting program. 291 Sent by: SHANNON & WILSON, INC. 206 695 6777; 07/05/0Q_15:36; Jeff= #799;Page 10/19 • §91646 (2) The operator shall distribute cop- ies of the schedule to local govern- ments and public utilities and to each local residence within 1 mile of the proposed blasting site described In the schedule. (3) The operator shall republish and redistribute the schedule at least every 12 months and revise and republish the • schedule at least 10 days. but not more than 30 days, before blasting whenever the area covered by the schedule changes or actual time periods for blasting significantly differ from the prior announcement. (c) Blasting schedule contents. The blasting schedule shall contain. at a minimum— (1) Name, address, and telephone number of operator; (2) Identification of the specific areas in which blasting will take place; (3) Dates and time periods when ex- plosives arc to be detonated; (4) Methods to be used to control ac- cess to the blasting area; and (5) Type and patterns of audible warning and all -Clear signals to be used before and after blasting. 148 FR 9807. Mar. 8. 1983) 5816.66 Use of explosives: Blasting. signs, warnings, and access control. (a) Blasting signs. Blasting signs shall meet the specifications of 5816.11. The operator shall— (1) Conspicuously place signs reading "Blasting Area" along the edge of any blasting area that coins within 100 feet of any public road right-of-way, and at the point where any other road provides access to the blasting area; and (2) At all entrances to the permit arca from public roads or highways, place conspicuous signs which state "Warning! Explosives in Use," which clearly list and describe the meaning of the audible blast warning and all -clear signals that are in use, and which ex- plain the marking of blasting areas and charged holes awaiting firing within the permit area. (b) Warnings. Warning and all -clear signals of different character or pat- tern that are audible within a range of to mile from the point of the blast shall be given. Each person within the per- mit area and each person who resides 30 CFR Ch. VH (7-1-99 Edition) or regularly works within 1,4 mile of the permit area shall be notified of the meaning of the signals in the blasting. schedule. (c) Access control. Access within the blasting area shall be controlled to pre- vent presence of livestock or unauthor- ized persons during blasting and until an authorized representative of the op- erator has reasonably determined that— (1) No unusual hazards, such as immi- nent slides or undetonated charges. exist: and (2) Access to and travel within the blasting area can be safely resumed. (48 FR 9807, Mar. 8. 1983) (1 816.61 Use of explosives: Control of adverse effects: (a) Genera! requirements. Blasting shall be conducted to prevent injury to persons. damage to public or private property outside the permit arca. ad- verse impacts on any underground mine, and change in the course, chan- nel, or availability of surface or ground water outside the permit area. (b) Airblast—(1) Limps. (i) Airblast shall not exceed the maximum limits listed below at the location of any dwelling. public building, school, church, or community or institutional building outside the permit area, ex- cept as provided in paragraph (e) of this section. Lover frequency lint of measuring sys- tem. In Hz (z3 dB) Maximum level. In dB 0.1 NA or lower -Lit response, ...-.....- 2 Hz or lower–oat response B FIZ at frost–dist response C-weightedslow response + 194 peak- 133 eak133 peek 129 peik. 105 peek 4BC. +Only when approved by the regulatory Authority. (l1) If necessary to prevent damage. the regulatory authority shall specify lower maximum allowable airblast lev- els than those of paragraph (b) (1) (i) of this section for use in the vicinity of a specific blasting operation, (2) Monitoring. (i) The operator shall conduct periodic monitoring to ensure compliance with the airblast stand- ards. The regulatory authority may re- quire airblast measurement of any or all blasts and may specify the locations at which such measurements are taken. 292 Sent by: SHANNON & WILSON, INC. 1 of3 206 695 6777; 07/05/0 15:37; JctTax #799;Page 11/19 (ii) The measuringsystems shall have an upper -end flat -frequency response of at least 200 Hz. (c) Flyrock. Flyrock travelling in the air or along the ground shall not be cast from the blasting site - (1) More than one-half the distance to the nearest dwelling or other occupied structure; (2) Beyond .the area of control required under Sec. 816.66(c); or (3) Beyond the permit boundary. (d) Ground vibration --(i) General. In all blasting operations. except as otherwise authorized in paragraph (e) of this section, the maximum ground vibration shall not exceed the values approved in the blasting plan required under Sec. 780.13 of this chapter. The maximum ground vibration for protected structures listed in paragraph (d)(2)(1) of this scction shall be established in accordance with either the maximum peak-parcicle-velocity limits of paragraph (d)(2), the acaled- 3/24/00 11:51 AM Sent by: SHANNON & WILSON, INC.• .206 695 6777; 07/05/0 15:37; jetFax #799;Page 12/19 :. Retrieval hap://1'rwebgate.sccess.gpo,ga i...=816&SECTION=67&YEAR=1999&TYPE=TE; distance equation of paragraph (d)(3), the blasting -level chart of paragraph (d)(4) of this section, or by the regulatory authority under paragraph (d)(5) of this section. A11 structures in the vicinity of the blasting area, not listed in paragraph (d)(2)(i) of this section, such as water towers, pipelines and other utilities, tunnels, dams, impoundments, and underground mines, shall be protected from damage by establishment of a maximumallowable limit on the ground vibration, submitted by the operator in the blasting plan and approved by the regulatory authority. (2) Maximum peak particle velocity. (i) The maximum ground vibration.; shall not exceed the following limits at the location -of any dwelling, public building, school,. church, orcommunity or institutional building outside the permit area: Distance (D), from the blasting site, in feet Maximum allowable peak particle velocity. (v max) for ground vibration, in inches/ second \1\ Scaled - distance factor to be applied without seismic monitoring \2\ (Ds) • 0 to 300 1.25 50 301 to 5,000 1.00 55 5,001 and beyond 0.75 65 \1\ Ground vibration shall be measured as the particle velocity. Particle velocity shall be recorded in three mutually perpendicular directions. The maximum allowable peak particle velocity shall apply to each of the three measurements. \2\ Applicable to the scaled -distance equation of paragraph (d)(3)(i) of this section. (ii) A seismographic record shall be provided for each blast. (3) Scale -distance equation. (i) An operator may use the scaled distance equation, W=(D/Ds)\2\,to determine the allowable charge weight of explosives to be detonated in any 8 -millisecond period, without seismic monitoring; where W=the maximum weight of explosives, in pounds; D=the distance, in feet, from the blasting site to the nearest protected structure; and Ds=the scaled -distance factor, which may initially be approved by the regulatory authority using the values for scaled distance factor listed in paragraph (d)(2)(i) of this section. (ii) The development of a modified scaled -distance factor may be. authorized by the regulatory authority on receipt of a written request by the operator, supported by seismographic records of blasting at the minesite. The modified scale -distance factor shall be determined such that the particle velocity of the predicted ground vibration will not exceed the prescribed maximum allowable peak particle velocity of paragraph (d)(2)(i) of this section, at a 95 -percent confidence level. (4) Blasting -leve (i) An operator may use the ground - vibration limits in figure to determine the maximum allowable ground vibration. ( [Page 294]) Sante eo , 83 , (GRAPHIC] (TIFF OMITTED) TC210C91.025 tor: 3124/00 11:5] M Sent by: SHANNON & WILSON, INC. • 206 695 6777; 07/05/05:38; JetFax #799;Page 13/19 Retrieval hnp;//frwebgate.access.spo.seviegi., =816&SECT10N=67&YEAR=1999&TYPE'-TEXT (ii) If the Figure 1 limits are used, a seismographic record including both particle velocity and vibration -frequency levels shall be provided for each blast. The method forthe analysis of the predominant frequency contained in, the blasting records shall be approved by the regulatory authority before application.of this alternative blasting criterion. (5) The maximum allowable ground vibration shall be reduced by the regulatory authority beyond the limits otherwise provided by this section, if determined necessary to provide damage protection. (6) The regulatory authority may require an'operator to conduct seismic monitoring of any or all blasts or may specify the location at which the measurements are taken and the degree of detail necessary in the measurement. (e) The maximum airblast and ground -vibration standards of paragraphs (b) and (d) of this section shall not apply.at the following locations: (1) At structures owned by the permittee and noc leased to another person. (2) At -structures owned by the permittee andleased to another person, if a written waiver by the lessee is submitted co the regulatory authority before blasting., (48 FR 9807, Mar. 8, 1983, as amended at 40 FR 44780, Sept. 30, 1983] ([Page 295]] Sent by: SHANNON & WILSON, INC. ..206 695, 6777; 07/05/0 5:38; JetFax #799;Page 14/19 Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior § 816.68 Use of explosives: Records of blasting operations. The operator shall retain a record of all blasts for at least 3 years. Upon re- quest, copies of these records shall be made available to the regulatory au- thority and to the public for inspec- tion. Such records shall contain the following data; (a) Name of the operator conducting the blast. (b) Location. date. and time of the blast. (c) Name, signature, and certification number of theblaster conducting the blast. (d) Identification, direction, and dis- tance. in feet, from the nearest blast hole to the nearest dwelling. public building, school. church, community or institutional building outside the per• mit area. except those described in §816.67(e). (e) Weather conditions, including those which may cause possible adverse blasting effects. (�"IWe of material blasted. (,g) Sketches of the blast pattern in- cluding number of holes. burden, spac- ing, decks, and delay pattern. (h) Diameter and depth of holes. (1) Types of explosives used. 0) Total weight of explosives used per hole. (k) The maximum weight of explo- sives detonated in an 8 -millisecond pe- riod. (1) Initiation system. (m) Type and length of stemming. (n) Mats or other protections used. (o) Seismographic and airblast records, if required. which shall in- clude— (1) Type of instrument, sensitivity, and calibration signal or certification of annual calibration; (2) Exact location of instrument and the date, time, and distance from the blast: (3) Name of the person and firm tak- ing the reading; (4) Name of the person and firm ana- lyzing the seismographic record; and (5) The vibration and/or airblast level recorded. (p) Reasons and conditions for each unscheduled blast. (18 FR 9809, Mar. 9, 1983, as amended at 52 FR 29181, Aug. 8. 19871 § 816.71 § 816.71 Disposal of excess spoil: Gen- eral requirements. (a) General. Excess spoil shall be placed in designated disposal areas within the permit area. in a controlled manner to— (1) Minimize the adverse effects of leachate and surface water runoff from the fill on surface and ground waters: (2) Ensure mass stability and prevent mass movement during and after con- struction: and (3) Ensure that the final fill is suit- able for reclamation and revegetation compatible with the natural sur- roundings and the approved postmining land use. (b) Design cerriflcadon. (1) The fill and appurtenant structures shall be de- signed using current, prudent engineer- ing practices and shall meet any design criteria established by the regulatory authority. A qualified registered pro- fessional engineer experienced in the design of earth and rock fills shall cer- tify the design of the fill and appur- tenant structures. (2) The fill shall be designed to attain a minimum long-term static safety fac- tor of 1.5. The foundation and abut- ments of the fill must be stable under all conditions of construction. (c) Location, The disposal area shall be located on the most moderately sloping and naturally stable areas available. as approved by the regu- latory authority. and shall be placed, where possible. upon or above a natural terrace, bench, or berm. if such place- ment provides additional stability and prevents mass movement. (d) Foundation. (1) Sufficient founda- tion investigations. as well as any nec- essary laboratory testing of foundation material. shall be performed in order to determine the design requirements for foundation sta'bi]ity. The analyses of foundation conditions shall take into consideration the effect of under- ground mine workings, if any, upon the stability of the fill and appurtenant structures. (2) Where the slope in the disposal area is in excess of 2.8h:1v (36 percent), orsuch lesser slope as may be des- ignated by the regulatory authority based on local conditions, keyway cuts (excavations to stable bedrock) or rock toe buttresses shall be constructed to 295 • Sent by: SHANNON & WILSON, INC. 206 695 6777; 07/05/0 6 15:38; Jetrax #799;Page 15/19 Surface Blast Design Calvin J. Konya; Precision Blasting Services', Montville, Ohio Edward J. Walter Seismological Observatory John Carroll University Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey 07632 2.25 2.00 1.75 N. 1.50 . 1.25 g 1.00 -2 0.75 of 0.50 0.25 0 All structures - 2.0 fps Harlem homes -0.75 Oa Older homes -0.50 Ips 0 10 20 30 40 5D 60 70 80 90 100 Frequency (Hz) Figure 11.4 Safe vibration kveis. (From RI 8507. U.S. Bureau of Mines) damage control. Little or no damage is likely to occur when they are in force. However, the increase in damage would probably not be significant if a simple 1.0 in. per second regulation were applied across the vibration frequency spectrum. Alternative Blasting Criteria In addition to the above proposed vibration standards an "Alternative Blasting Level Criteria" was put forth in RI 8507. This alternative blasting level criteria employed displacement and velocity each applied over specific frequency ranges. The measurement requirements are much more severe than anything used up to this time. Fig. 11.5 shows their criteria. When these criteria using both displacement and velocity over respective frequency ranges were presented there was no instrumentation available that could do this. This gave an impetus to the industry and soon instrumentation capable of measuring displacement, velocity, acceleration, frequency, and resultant particle velocity became available. In RI 8896, (1984), "Effects of Repeated Blasting on a Wood -Frame House" U.S. Bureau of Mines, it states that cosmetic cracks,occurred during construction of the test house and also during periods when no blasts were detonated. Cosmetic crack formation increased when ground particle velocity exceeded 1.0 in./sec. It was further noticed that human activity, temperature, and humidity changes caused strains equivalent to ground particle velocity of 1.2 in./sec to 3.0 in./sec. 10.0 10 FREQUENCY, Hr rFlgure 11.5 Alternative blasting -level criteria. (From RI 8507, U.S. Bureau of Mines.) 100 0 0 cn What constitutes vibration damage? This is not a simple question. The co 0 cept of damage has changed from cracks in plaster—readily visible cracks—i presented in Bulletin 442 and Bulletin 656 to "cosmetic damage of the most superfi- ".' cial type ..." in RI 8507. Most structures have cracks of some kind usually due to normal environmental stresses. When blasting comes into the area it usually gels credit for these environmentally induced cracks. Vibration damage because of blast- �.. ing can and does occur but blasting operations are so well engineered and controlled today that genuine cases of blasting damage are a small minority. Annually millions �_..of blasts are detonated that are safe.and do.not cause damage. It is not likely that a lower limit of vibration exists beyond which damage will not occur. There will always be structures at the point of failure due to normal v environmental stresses waiting for the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back. ua That straw may be vibration but in many cases there is no apparent cause and an rD 4 t10 Oto5.," evxserL/alicc# C;/�Pid.tM , Vis' Mee 5t:K.a d parr -sf 41t/e(occ77 Ak.11 Ffictpeccc,. Poli i OW" atQ e h Ce-p,Wic4t intensive investigation is usually necessary to ascertain the cause. There are many reported cases of structural collapse, apartment building, commercial buildings, sports arenas, and so on, which were unexpected and had no apparent cause. Had a vibration source suddenly appeared on the scene e.g.. construction blasting, drop ball operation, demolition, it undoubtedly would be judged to be the cause when in truth the structure was ready to collapse, an accident wailing to happen. The Office of Surface Mining Regulations The Office of Surface Mining has adopted a modification of the Bureau of Mines Alternative Safe Blasting Criteria for the surface mining industry. Since RI 8507 proposed that frequency is an important factor affecting vibration as well as distance, the Office of Surface Mining presented its regulation as shown in Table 11.1. It may seem strange that a higher particle velocity is permissible at short distance than al greater distances. This reflects two things: First high -frequency vibration attenuates more rapidly with distance than low -frequency vibration, hence, low -frequency vibration persists longer. Second, structural resonance re- sponse associated with the low -frequency vibration may occur. At short distances, high -frequency vibration predominates. At larger dis- tances, the high -frequency vibration has attenuated or died out and low -frequency vibration predominates. Buildings have tow -frequency response characteristics. If the sintctural frequency and the ground frequency match, resonance can occur and at high particle velocity damage may result. Therefore, at large distances a Iower peak particle velocity, 0.75 ips, and a larger scaled distance, Ds = 65, am man- dated. At the shover distances, a higher peak particle velocity, 1.25 ips and a smaller scaled distance, Ds = 50, are permitted. The Office of Surface Mining graph for displacement and velocity and the frequency ranges over which each applies are shown in Figure 11.6. Note that the 2.0 in./sec range begins at 30 Hz as distinct from the USBM RI 8507 range which begins at 40 Hz. Regulation enforcement. On the job regulation of vibration and general safety_ measures is generally relegated to the safety forces, fire department, police department or there may be a person specifically responsible for this job. TABLE 11.1 Office of Surface Mining Required Ground Vibration Limits Distance (D) from the blasting site (fr) Maximum Allowable Peak Panicle Velocity (V max) for Ground Vibration (io./sec) Scaled -distance Facgor to be Applied Without Sei:.mic-MonitvringT •=�---:°-� 0-300 301-5000 5001 and beyond 1.25 1.00 0.75 50 55 65 Maximum Allowable Particle Velocity, in/sec 10.0 2.0 /- 1.5 - 1.0 - 0.9 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.1 1 0.75 in/sec 1 11 11 1 1 2 in CD - m 10.0 rt 2.0 - 1.5 -� 0.7 0.6 .X0.5 - 0.4 - 0.3 - 0.2 'ONI.`NOS1IM '8 NONNVHS 4 10 20 30 100 Blast Vibration Frequency, Hz Figure 11.6 OSM alternative blasting -level criteria. (Modified from Fig. 131, RI 8507. U.S. Bureau of Mines.) Procedures will vary with the type of job, is it governmental, federal, state, county, municipal, or is it a private industry job? Some political entities such as municipalities with previous experience have regulations based on 2.0 in. per sec peak particle velocity , others use 1.0 in. per sec peak particle velocity, while still others leave it up to the discretion of a hired consultant. Surface mining operations are generally governed by the Office of Surface Mining Regulations. Reports must be made for all blasts and copies must be filed with the princi- pals involved. In the case of public projects, they become pari of the public record that is availablerfor.,examination and study by interested. parties. --In thecase of private industry. the reports are usually proprietary. Not uncommonly, an initial blasting plan is required before blasting permits are issued. Significant variations from this plan must be requested in writing by submission of the modified plan and justified before approval is granted. `•LLL9 S69 90Z `•6E:S O O/SO/L0 6L/LL e6ed`66L#Bf Sent by: SHANNON & WILSON, INC. 206 695 6777; 07/05/0 15:40; JetFax #799;Page 18/19 Construction Vibrations Charles H. Dowding Professor of Civil Engineering McCormick School of Engineering (ft Applied Science Northwestern University Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 Sent by: SHANNON & WILSON, INC. 206 695 6777; 07/05/0 15:40; JetFax #799;Page 19/19 26 Blasting and Vibrations (Division 1) 429 of the geotechnical engineer, it any). As a minimum, he must be a licensed blaster la the state where blasting operations take place. He shall be responsible for the design the of all blasting operations, and his services shall be continued as long as the engineer lent. deems them to be necessary. )ssi- .reit n of Il of i in time ably In some cases, and where the project is complex or of enough importance, the con- tractor shall assign to the blasting operations, either temporarily or full-time during the time that blasting is in progress, an additional supervisor specialized in the det- onation of explosives. His qualifications shall be subject to the same approval as for the blasting specialist. These requirements are necessary to ensure that an appropri- ately trained person designs and continues the work. Blasting plan (Section 1.3) (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7) General No less than three weeks prior to commenting the test blast program, or at the preconstruction conference (whichever is earliest), or at any time the contractor proposes to change the drilling and blasting methods, the contractor shall submit a ives blasting plan to the engineer for review. The blasting plan shall contain the fWl de - is to tails of the drilling and blasting patterns and controls the contractor proposes to use tory for both the production and controlled blasting. The blasting plan shall contain the le to following minimum information: ex- acil- e of oth- ame m.i trety U. and It of who sub- h:rs His :nee • Station limits of proposed shots • Plan and section view of proposed drill pattern, including free face, burden, blast hole spacing, blast hole diameters, blast hole angles, lift height, and sub - drill depth • Loading diagrams for each blast showing type and amount of explosives, primers, initiators, and location and depth of stemming • Form for reporting the vibration results for each blast • Initiation sequence of blast boles, including delay times and delay system • Identification of explosives suppliers and blasting specialists • Manufacturer's data sheets for all explosives, primers, and initiators to be em- ployed • Procedures to inform and protect the public and adjacent property • Plan for deinitiation in case of misfire. The blasting plan submittal is for quality control and record-keeping purposes. Review of the blast plan by the engineer does not relieve the contractor from his re- sponsibility for the accuracy and adequacy of the plan when implemented in the field. De;cument Page 12 of 23 conveyance. (t) Explosives and/or blasting agents, not in original containers, shall be placed in a suitable container when transported manually. (u) No explosives or blasting agents shall be transported on any locomotive. At least two car lengths shall separate the locomotive from the powder car. (9) When explosives are carried to the blasting site from the main storage magazines by the blaster or helper: (a) Special insulated containers or original DOT shipping containers shall be used for this purpose, either boxes or bags, one container for explosives and one for detonators. (b) Detonators or explosives shall never be carried in pockets of clothing. [Statutory Authority: RCW 49.17.040. 98-19-056, § 296-52-489, filed 9/15/98, effective 11/8/98. Statutory Authority: Chapter 49.17 RCW. 95-07-014, § 296-52-489, filed 3/6/95, effective 4/20/95; 92-17-022 (Order 92-06), § 296-52-489, filed 8/10/92, effective 9/10/92; 91-03-044 (Order 90-18), § 296-52-489, filed 1/10/91, effective 2/12/91; 88-23-054 (Order 88-25), § 296-52-489, filed 11/14/88. Statutory Authority: RCW 49.17.040 and 49.17.050. 86-10-044 (Order 86- 24), § 296-52-489, filed 5/6/86.] PART F --USE OF EXPLOSIVES WAC 296-52-493 Use of explosives and blasting agents. (1) General provisions. (a) While explosives are being handled or used, smoking, matches, or any other source of fire or flame shall not be allowed within 100 feet of the blast site. No person shall be allowed to handle explosives while under the influence of intoxicating liquors, narcotics, or other dangerous drugs. This rule does not apply to persons taking prescription drugs and/or narcotics as directed by a physician providing such use shall not endanger the worker or others. (b) Original containers or day box magazines shall be used for taking detonators and other explosives from storage magazines to the blast site. (c) When blasting is done in congested areas or in close proximity to a structure, railway, or highway or any other installation that may be damaged, the blast shall be covered before firing with a mat or other suitable protective material that is capable of preventing fragments from being thrown. (d) Persons authorized to prepare explosive charges or conduct blasting operations shall use every reasonable precaution, including but not limited to warning signals, flags and barricades or blasting mats to insure the safety of the general public and workers. (e) Blasting operations shall be conducted during daylight hours whenever possible. (f) Whenever blasting is being conducted in the vicinity of gas, electric, water, fire alarm, telephone, telegraph, and steam utilities, the user (blaster) shall notify the appropriate representatives of such utilities at least twenty-four hours in advance of blasting, specifying the location and intended time of such blasting. Verbal notice shall be confirmed with written notice. The blaster shall ensure that appropriate measures for safe control have been taken. (g) Due precaution shall be taken to prevent unintended discharge of blasting caps from extraneous electric current or from transmitted radio frequency (RF) energy. Examples: Common sources of extraneous electricity include but are not limited to adjacent powerlines, dust storms and lightening storms. Common sources of hazardous RF transmissions include but are not limited to: (MOBILE) citizen band (CB) or side band radio transmitters, VHF (FM) radio transmitters, UHF cellular telephones and radar transmitters. (FIXED LOCATION TRANSMITTERS) base stations for CB, side band or FM radio communications, UHF cellular telephone transmitters and service extension repeater systems, AM and FM (commercial) radio broadcast transmitters, TV broadcast transmitters and repeater system transmitters, surface scan and radio navigation beacons. (h) Low flying aircraft and in particular military aircraft create the most common serious RF exposures. These highly unpredictable mobile transmitters are very powerful and transmit on a broad spectrum of frequencies including radar, laser and all common communications bands. Probably the two most dangerous examples are low flying automatic terrain following guidance systems and airplanes which are equipped to jam all common radar and communications frequencies for a distance of several miles around the airborne transmitters. h.../om_isapi.dll?clientlD=111872&infobase=wac.nfo&record={ 6B 86 } &softpage=Document4 6/15/00 • C O M M U N I C A T I O N so u ions Document Page 13 of 23 (i) Precautions to prevent unintended discharge of electric blasting caps from extraneous electric currents or RF transmission shall include: (i) Positive identification of voltages in electrical transmission and distribution lines and specific required clearance for each specific system; and (ii) Complete suspension of all blasting operations and removal of all personnel from the blast site during the approach and progress of heavy dust storms which may create static lightening or conventional thunder and lightening storms; and (iii) The posting of signs warning against the use of radio frequency transmitters including CBs, mobile phones and two- way radios. The required signs shall be placed in a manner to adequately warn transmitter users, including all routes into the required clearance zone around where electric blasting caps are used. (A) The required clearance zone for construction and/or demolition operations shall be 1000 feet; (B) The required clearance zone for general industry operations which are not subject to construction requirements shall be 350 feet. Note: See Appendix II, WAC 296-52-552 for illustrations and specific posting requirements. (iv) Ensuring that mobile RF transmitters which are less than 100 feet away from electrical blasting caps are deenergized or disconnected when the caps are not fully contained in the original DOT shipping containers; and (v) Fixed location RF transmitters represent a higher level of hazard to both storage and/or blasting operations involving electric caps because the transmitters are more powerful and transmit dangerous levels of RF exposure over much greater distances. Storage or blasting operations with electric caps shall only be carried out in full compliance with the appropriate recommended distance tables published in INSTITUTE OF MAKERS OF EXPLOSIVES (I.M.E.) Publication No. 20, 1988, "SAFETY GUIDE FOR THE PREVENTION OF RADIO FREQUENCY HAZARDS IN THE USE OF COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC DETONATORS (Blasting Caps) " ; and (vi) When necessary to conduct blasting operations within the required separation distances specified in I.M.E. Pamphlet 20-1988, the storage and use of electric blasting caps shall be prohibited on the site and only detonating cord, safety fuse, shock tube or other approved nonelectric systems may be used. (j) No fire shall be fought where the fire is in imminent danger of contact with explosives. All employees shall be removed to a safe area and the fire area guarded against intruders. (k) Electric detonators shall be shunted until wired into the blasting circuit. (1) Explosives shall not be handled near open flames, uncontrolled sparks or energized electric circuits. (m) Delivery and issue of explosives shall only be made by and to authorized persons and into authorized magazines or approved temporary storage or handling area. (n) Blaster in charge. (i) The blast site shall be under the control of a fully qualified and currently licensed "blaster in charge" throughout the course of every blasting operation. That obligation shall commence with a site survey to determine potential safety conflicts with: Public utility transmission systems, dwellings or other occupied buildings, roads or railroads, radio frequency transmitters, preexisting explosives storage magazines. (ii) Whenever the site survey identifies conditions which conflict with safe blasting operations, the blaster in charge shall prepare a written site blasting plan before beginning blasting operations. The written plan shall identify the methods, materials, procedures and/or engineering calculations which will be used to address each identified conflicting condition. Note 1. required. When the site survey identifies that no conflicting conditions exist, a written blasting plan is not Note 2. Written blasting plans may be discarded at the end of a job provided that no blasting incident has occurred which resulted in bodily injury or property damage. h.../om_isapi.dll?clientlD=111872&infobase=wac.nfo&record={6B86}&softpage=Document4 6/15/00 •COMMUNICATIONSO tion Al& n Document Page 14 of 23 (iii) All on- site transportation, storage, loading and firing of explosives shall be supervised by the blaster in charge. Trainees and inexperienced personnel shall work only under direct supervision of licensed personnel fully qualified in the blasting method in use, including safety procedures and blasting signals in use at that site. (iv) The site blasting plan shall include designated safe location(s) for personnel during actual blasting and a method for determining when all personnel are accounted for in the designated safe location(s). Note: It is desirable that all potential means of egress into the blast site should be under observation immediately prior to each blast. The observer(s) should be provided with a means of communication with the blaster in charge. (o) The employer shall permit only competent and authorized personnel to handle explosives. (p) No explosive shall be loaded or used underground in the presence of combustible gases or combustible dusts unless approved as permissible by MSHA. (q) In either electric or nonelectric blasting, the firing line(s) shall not be connected to the blast initiating device until all personnel have been accounted for and removed from the blast danger area or are in a blast shelter or other location which affords adequate protection. (2) Storage at use sites. (a) Empty boxes and paper and fiber packing materials which have previously contained high explosives shall not be used again for any purpose, but shall be destroyed by burning at the blast site or at an approved isolated location out of doors, and no person shall be nearer than 100 feet after the burning has started. (b) When opening kegs or wooden cases, no sparking metal tools shall be used; wooden wedges and either wood, fiber or rubber mallets shall be used. Nonsparking metallic slitters may be used for opening fiberboard cases. (c) Should cartridges or packages of explosives show signs of deterioration, the manufacturer or the department shall be notified. Such explosives must be carefully set aside and properly disposed of. (3) Loading of explosives or blasting agents in blast holes. (a) Procedures that permit safe and efficient loading shall be established before loading is started. (b) All drill holes shall be sufficiently large to admit freely the insertion of the cartridges of explosives. Holes shall be checked prior to loading to determine depth and conditions. (c) Tamping shall be done only with wood rods or with approved plastic tamping poles without exposed metal parts, but nonsparking metal connectors may be used for jointed poles. Violent tamping shall be avoided. The primer shall never be tamped. (d) No holes shall be loaded except those to be fired in the next round of blasting. After loading, all remaining explosives and detonators shall be immediately returned to an authorized magazine or day box. (e) Drilling shall not be started until all remaining butts of old holes are examined for unexploded charges, and if any are found, they shall be refired before work proceeds. (f) When a charge of explosives has been exploded in a bore hole to enlarge or "spring" it, an interval of at least two hours must be allowed to pass before an additional charge of explosives can be loaded into the hole. Note: There may be an exception made to this rule provided the sprung hole is thoroughly wet down with water before it is loaded. (g) No person shall be allowed to deepen drill holes which have contained explosives or blasting agents. (h) No explosives or blasting agents shall be left unattended at blast sites unless stored in a licensed magazine. (i) Users (blasters) shall not load, store or use explosives closer than the length of the steel being used for drilling and in no event nearer than fifty feet of drilling operations. (j) Machines and all tools not used for loading explosives into bore holes shall be removed from the immediate location of holes being loaded with explosives. Equipment shall not be operated within h.../om_isapi.dll?clientlD=111872&infobase=wac.nfo&record={6B86}&softpage=Document4 6/15/00 • C OM M U NICATI O N s 0 D n S Document Page 15 of 23 50 feet of loaded holes except when equipment is needed to add burden, mats or tracking of drills out of the loading area. (k) Powerlines and portable electric cables for equipment being used shall be kept a safe distance from explosives or blasting agents being loaded into drill holes. Cables in the proximity of the blast area shall be deenergized and locked out by the blaster. (1) Holes shall not be drilled where there is danger of intersecting a charged or misfired hole. (m) All blast holes in open work shall be stemmed to the collar or to a point which will confine the charge. (n) No explosives for underground operations other than those in Fume Class 1, as set forth by the Institute of Makers of Explosives, shall be used; however, explosives complying with the requirements of Fume Class 2 and Fume Class 3 may be used if adequate ventilation has been provided. (o) Warning signs, indicating a blast area, shall be maintained at all approaches to the blast area. The warning sign lettering shall not be less that 4 inches in height on a contrasting background. All loaded stumps must be marked for identification on logging sites. (p) A bore hole shall never be sprung when it is adjacent to or near a hole which has been loaded. Flashlight batteries shall not be used as a power source (blasting machine) for springing holes. (q) No loaded holes shall be left unattended or unprotected. (r) The user (blaster) shall keep an accurate, up-to-date record of explosives, blasting agents, and blasting supplies used in a blast and shall keep an accurate running inventory of all explosives and blasting agents stored on the operation. (s) When loading blasting agents pneumatically over primed boosters, semiconductive delivery hose shall be used and the equipment shall be bonded and grounded. (4) Initiation of explosive charges - electric blasting. (a) Blasting cap leg wires shall be kept short-circuited (shunted) until they are connected into the circuit for firing. (b) Before adopting any system of electrical firing, the user (blaster) shall conduct a thorough survey for extraneous currents, and all dangerous currents shall be eliminated before any holes are loaded. (c) In any single blast using electric blasting caps, all caps shall be of the same style or function and be of the same manufacture and compatible with each other. (d) Electric blasting shall be carried out by using blasting circuits or power circuits in accordance with the electric blasting cap manufacturer's recommendations. (e) The firing line shall be checked with an approved testing device at the terminals before being connected to the blasting machine or other power source. (f) The circuit including all caps shall be tested with an approved testing device before being connected to the firing line. (g) When firing a circuit of electric blasting caps, care shall be exercised to ensure that an adequate quantity of delivered current is available, in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations. (h) Connecting wires and lead wires shall be insulated single solid wires of sufficient current - carrying capacity, and shall not be less than twenty gauge (American wire gauge) solid core insulated wire. (i) Firing line or lead wires shall be solid single wires of sufficient current -carrying capacity, and shall be not less than fourteen gauge (American wire gauge) solid core insulated wire. Bus wires - depends on the size of the blast, fourteen gauge (American wire gauge) copper is recommended. (j) The ends of lead wires which are to be connected to a firing device shall be shorted by twisting them together or otherwise shunting them before they are connected to the leg wires or connecting wires, and they shall be kept in the control of the person who is doing the loading until loading is completed and the leg wires attached. Lead wires shall not be attached to the firing device until the blaster is ready to fire the shot and must be attached by the user (blaster) themselves. (k) The ends of the leg wires on electric detonators shall be shorted in a similar manner and not separated other than for testing until all holes are loaded and the loader is ready to connect the leg wires to the connecting wires or lead wires. (1) When firing electrically, the insulation on all firing lines shall be adequate and in good condition. h.../om_isapi.dll?clientlD=111872&infobase=wac.nfo&record={6B 86}&softpage=Document4 6/15/00 •COMMUNICATIONSO tion • Document Page 16 of 23 (m) A power circuit used for firing electric blasting caps shall not be grounded. (n) In underground operations when firing from a power circuit, a safety switch shall be placed at intervals in the permanent firing line. This switch shall be made so it can be locked only in the "off' position and shall be provided with a short-circuiting arrangement of the firing lines to the cap circuit. (o) In underground operations there shall be a "lightning" gap of at least 5 feet in the firing system ahead of the main firing switch; that is, between this switch and the source of power. This gap shall be bridged by a flexible jumper cord just before firing the blast. (p) When firing from a power circuit, the firing switch shall be locked in the open or "off' position at all times, except when firing. It shall be so designed that the firing lines to the cap circuit are automatically short-circuited when the switch is in the "off' position. Keys to this switch shall be entrusted only to the user (blaster). (q) Blasting machines shall be in good condition and the efficiency of the machine shall be tested periodically to make certain that it can deliver power at its rated capacity. (r) When firing with blasting machines, the connections shall be made as recommended by the manufacturer of the electric blasting caps used. (s) The number of electric blasting caps connected to a blasting machine shall not be in excess of its rated capacity. Furthermore, in primary blasting, a series circuit shall contain no more caps than the limits recommended by the manufacturer of the electric blasting caps in use. (t) The blaster in charge shall be in charge of the blasting machines, and no other person shall connect the lead wires to the machine. (u) Users (blasters), when testing circuits to charged holes, shall use only blasting testers especially designed for this purpose. (v) Whenever the possibility exists that a lead line or blasting wire might be thrown over live overhead powerlines, communication lines, utility services, or other services or structures by the force of an explosion, care shall be taken to see that the total length of wires are kept too short to hit the lines, that the wires are securely anchored to the ground and owners or operators are notified. If those requirements can not be satisfied, a nonelectric system shall be used. (w) In electrical firing, only the person making lead wire connections shall fire the shot. All connections shall be made from the bore hole back to the source of firing current, and the lead wires shall remain shorted and not be connected to the blasting machine or other source of current until the charge is to be fired. (x) After firing an electric blast from a blasting machine, the leading wires shall be immediately disconnected from the machine and short-circuited. (y) When electric blasting caps have been used, workers shall not return to misfired holes for at least thirty minutes. (5) Use of safety fuse. (a) A fuse that is deteriorated or damaged in any way shall not be used. (b) The hanging of fuse on nails or other projections which will cause a sharp bend to be formed in the fuse is prohibited. (c) Before capping safety fuse, a short length shall be cut from the end of the supply reel so as to assure a fresh cut end in each blasting cap. (d) Only a cap crimper of approved design shall be used for attaching blasting caps to safety fuse. Crimpers shall be kept in good repair and accessible for use. (e) No unused cap or short capped fuse shall be placed in any hole to be blasted; such unused detonators shall be removed from the working place and disposed of or stored in licensed magazine. (f) No fuse shall be capped, or primers made up, in any magazine or near any possible source of ignition. (g) Capping of fuse and making of primers shall only be done in a place selected for this purpose and at least one hundred feet distant from any storage magazine. (h) Fuse must be cut long enough to reach beyond the collar of the bore hole and in no case less than three feet. When shooting choker holes, not less than three feet of fuse shall be used. (i) At least two persons shall be present when multiple cap and fuse blasting is done by hand lighting methods. (j) Not more than 12 fuses shall be lighted by each blaster when hand lighting devices are used. However, when two or more safety fuses in a group are lighted as one by means of igniter cord, or other similar fuse -lighting devices, they may be considered as one fuse. h.../om_isapi.dll?clientlD=111872&infobase=wac.nfo&record={6B86}&softpage=Document4 6/15/00 •COMMUNICATION S 0 ution 11..6 . .11 Document Page 17 of 23 (k) The so-called "drop fuse" method of dropping or pushing a primer or any explosive with a lighted fuse attached is prohibited. (1) Cap and fuse shall not be used for firing mudcap charges unless charges are separated sufficiently to prevent one charge from dislodging other shots in the blast. (m) When blasting with safety fuses, consideration shall be given to the length and burning rate of the fuse. Sufficient time, with a margin of safety, shall always be provided for the blaster to reach a place of safety. (n) The burning rate of the safety fuse in use at any time shall be measured, posted in conspicuous locations, and brought to the attention of all workers concerned with blasting. No fuse shall be used that burns faster than one foot in forty seconds or slower than one foot in fifty- five seconds. (o) For use in wet places the joint between the cap and fuse shall be waterproofed with a compound prepared for this purpose. (p) In making up primers only nonsparking skewers shall be used for punching the hole in the cartridge to insert the capped fuse. No blasting cap shall be inserted in the explosives without first making a hole in the cartridge of proper size or using a standard cap crimper. (q) Only sufficient primers for one day's use shall be made up at one time. They shall be stored in a box type magazine in which no other explosives are stored. (r) Any loose cartridges of explosives, detonators, primers and capped fuse unused at the end of the shift shall be returned to their respective magazines and locked up. (s) Safety fuse and caps shall only be used for conventional blasting where: (i) Extraneous electricity or radio frequency transmissions make the use of electric cap and wire systems dangerous; (ii) Overhead electric transmission lines cannot be deenergized and there is danger that blasting wires may be thrown into the overhead lines during a blast; (iii) For avalanche control hand charges; (iv) For specialized applications where cap and fuse is more suitable than electric or other nonelectric initiation systems. (6) Use of detonating cord. (a) Care shall be taken to select a detonating cord consistent with the type and physical condition of the bore hole and stemming and the type of explosives used. (b) Detonating cord shall be handled and used with the same respect and care given other explosives. (c) For quantity and distance purposes detonating fuse up to 60 grains per foot should be calculated as equivalent to 9 lbs. of high explosives per 1,000 feet. Heavier cord loads should be rated proportionately. (d) Trunk lines in multiple- row blasts shall make one or more complete loops, with crossties between loops at intervals of not over two hundred feet. (e) All detonating cord knots shall be tight and all connections shall be kept at right angles to the trunk lines. (f) The line of detonating cord extending out of a bore hole or from a charge shall be cut from the supply spool before loading the remainder of the bore hole or placing additional charges. (g) Detonating cord shall be handled and used with care to avoid damaging or severing the cord during and after loading and hooking -up. (h) Detonating cord connections shall be competent and positive in accordance with approved and recommended methods. Knot- type or other cord- to- cord connections shall be made only with detonating cord in which the explosive core is dry. (i) All detonating cord trunklines and branchlines shall be free of loops, sharp kinks, or angles that direct the cord back toward the oncoming line of detonation. (j) All detonating cord connections shall be inspected before firing the blast. (k) When detonating cord millisecond -delay connectors or short -interval -delay electric blasting caps are used with detonating cord, the practice shall conform strictly to the manufacturer's recommendations. (1) When connecting a blasting cap or an electric blasting cap to detonating cord, the cap shall be taped or otherwise attached securely along the side or the end of the detonating cord, with the end of the cap containing the explosive charge pointed in the direction in which the detonation is to proceed. (m) Detonators for firing the trunkline shall not be brought to the loading area nor attached to the h.../om_isapi.dll?clientlD=111872&infobase=wac.nfo&record={6B86}&softpage=Document4 6/15/00 1'. COMMUNICATION S o c i o n Document Page 18 of 23 detonating cord until everything else is in readiness for the blast. (7) Initiation of explosive charges - nonelectric blasting. (a) All nonelectric initiation systems and components of these systems shall be used in accordance with their manufacturer's recommendations and instructions. (b) All members of the blasting crew shall be instructed in the safe use of the initiation system and its components. It shall be the duty of the blaster in charge to provide adequate on- the- job training and supervision in the safe use of such systems. (c) When a nonelectric shock tube initiation system is used, the tubing shall be free of all knots and tight kinks. The shock tube shall be free of cuts or abrasions that could expose the core to moisture. (d) All blasting operations shall cease during the approach and progress of a thunderstorm, regardless of the type of initiation system used, and all personnel shall withdraw to a place of safety. (e) When an explosive bulk truck or other vehicle is operated on a blast site, care shall be taken to ensure that the vehicle does not tread on the tubing, connectors, or any surface delay component. If a vehicle operated on a blast site must pass over loaded blastholes, precautions shall be made to consolidate these elements at the collar of the hole to prevent vehicle contact. (f) Before firing the shot, the blaster in charge shall make a visual inspection to ensure that the initiation system is hooked up in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations. (8) Firing the blast. (a) A code of blasting signals equivalent to Table T- 1 shall be posted on one or more conspicuous places at the operation, and all employees shall be required to familiarize themselves with the code and conform to it. Warning signs shall be placed at suitable locations. (b) All charges shall be covered with blasting mats or other protective material before firing, where blasting may cause injury or damage by flying rock or debris. (c) Before a blast is fired, a loud warning signal shall be given by the blaster in charge, who has made certain that all surplus explosives are in a safe place and all employees, vehicles, and equipment are at a safe distance, or under sufficient cover. (d) Flaggers shall be safely stationed on highways which pass through the danger zone so as to stop traffic during blasting operations. (e) It shall be the duty of the blaster to fix the time of blasting. The blaster shall conduct all blasting operations and no shot shall be fired without the blaster's approval. (f) Before firing an underground blast, warning shall be given, and all possible entries into the blasting area, and any entrances to any working place where a drift, raise, or other opening is about to hole through, shall be carefully guarded. The blaster shall make sure that all employees are out of the blast area before firing a blast. TABLE T-1 WARNING SIGNAL A 1 -minute series of long blasts 5 minutes prior to blast signal. BLAST SIGNAL A series of short blasts 1 minute prior to the shot. ALL CLEAR SIGNAL A prolonged blast following the inspection of blast area. h.../om_isapi.dll?clientID=111872&infobase=wac.nfo&record={6B86}&softpage=Document4 6/15/00 s •COMMUNICATIONSO i 0 f c Document Page 19 of 23 (9) Inspection after blasting. (a) Immediately after the blast has been fired, the firing line shall be disconnected from the blasting machine, or where power switches are used, they shall be locked open or in the off position. (b) Sufficient time shall be allowed, not less than fifteen minutes in tunnels, for the smoke and fumes to leave the blasted area before returning to the shot. An inspection of the area and the surrounding rubble shall be made by the user (blaster) to determine if all charges have been exploded before employees are allowed to return to the operation, and in tunnels, after the muck pile has been wetted down. (10) Misfires. (a) If a misfire is found, the user (blaster) shall provide proper safeguards for excluding all employees or other personnel from the danger zone. (b) No other work shall be done except that necessary to remove the hazard of the misfire and only those employees necessary to do the work shall remain in the danger zone. (c) No attempt shall be made to extract explosives from any charged or misfired hole; a new primer shall be put in and the hole reblasted. If refiring of the misfired hole presents a hazard, the explosives may be removed by washing out with water or, where the misfire is under water, blown out with air. (d) If there are any misfires while using cap and fuse, all employees shall remain away from the charge for at least one hour. Misfires shall be handled under the direction of the person in charge of the blasting. (e) When electric blasting caps have been used, workers shall not return to misfired holes for at least thirty minutes. All wires shall be carefully traced and a search made for unexploded charges. (f) If explosives are suspected of burning in a hole, all persons in the endangered area shall move to a safe location and no one shall return to the hole until the danger has passed, but in no case within one hour. (g) No drilling, digging, or picking shall be permitted until all missed holes have been detonated or the authorized representative has approved that work can proceed. (11) Underwater blasting. (a) A user (blaster) shall conduct all blasting operations, and no shot shall be fired without the blaster's approval. (b) Loading tubes and casings of dissimilar metals shall not be used because of possible electric transient currents from galvanic action of the metals and water. (c) Only water-resistant initiation systems shall be used for underwater blasting. Loading shall be done through a nonsparking loading tube when tube is necessary. (d) No blast shall be fired while any vessel under way is closer than 1,500 feet to the blasting area. Those on board vessels or craft moored or anchored within 1,500 feet shall be notified before a blast is fired. (e) No blast shall be fired while any swimming or diving operations are in progress in the vicinity of the blasting area. If such operations are in progress, signals and arrangements shall be agreed upon to assure that no blast shall be fired while any persons are in the water. (f) Blasting flags shall be displayed. (g) The storage and handling of explosives aboard vessels used in underwater blasting operations shall be according to provisions outlined herein on handling and storing explosives. (h) When more than one charge is placed under water, a float device shall be attached to an element of each charge in such manner that it will be released by the firing. Misfires shall be handled in accordance with the requirements of WAC 296-52-493(10). (12) Blasting in excavation work in pressurized air locks. (a) Detonators and explosives shall not be stored or kept in tunnels, shafts, or caissons. Detonators and explosives for each round shall be taken directly from the magazines to the blasting zone and immediately loaded. Detonators and explosives left over after loading a round shall be removed from the working chamber before the connecting wires are connected up. Explosives in transit shall not be left unattended. (b) When detonators or explosives are brought into an air lock, no employee except the powderperson, user (blaster), lock tender and the employees necessary for carrying, shall be permitted to enter the air lock. No material, supplies, or equipment shall be brought through with the explosives. (c) Primers, detonators and explosives shall be taken separately into pressure working chambers. h.../om isapi.dll?clientlD=111872&infobase=wac.nfo&record={6B86}&softpage=Document4 6/15/00 • • C O MM U NICATI O • solutions Document Page 20 of 23 (d) The user (blaster) or powderperson shall be responsible for the receipt, unloading, storage, and on-site transportation of explosives and detonators. (e) All metal pipes, rails, air locks, and steel tunnel lining shall be electrically bonded together and grounded at or near the portal or shaft, and such pipes and rails shall be cross -bonded together at not less than 1,000 -foot intervals throughout the length of the tunnel. In addition, each air supply pipe shall be grounded at its delivery end. (f) The explosives suitable for use in wet holes shall be water-resistant and shall be Fume Class 1, or other approved explosives. (g) When tunnel excavation in rock face is approaching mixed face, and when tunnel excavation is in mixed face, blasting shall be performed with light charges and with light burden on each hole. Advance drilling shall be performed as tunnel excavation in rock face approaches mixed face, to determine the general nature and extent of rock cover and the remaining distance ahead to soft ground as excavation advances. (13) Vibration and damage control. Blasting operations in or adjacent to cofferdams, piers, underwater structures, buildings, structures, or other facilities shall be carefully planned with full consideration for all forces and conditions involved. (14) Black blasting powder shall not be used for blasting. (15) No person shall store, handle, or transport explosives or blasting agents when such storage, handling, and transportation of explosives or blasting agents constitutes an undue hazard to life. (16) It shall be unlawful for any person to abandon explosives or explosive substances. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 49.17 RCW. 95-07-014, § 296-52-493, filed 3/6/95, effective 4/20/95; 92-17-022 (Order 92-06), § 296-52-493, filed 8/10/92, effective 9/10/92; 91-03-044 (Order 90-18), § 296-52-493, filed 1/10/91, effective 2/12/91. Statutory Authority: RCW 49.17.040 and 49.17.050. 86-10-044 (Order 86-24), § 296-52-493, filed 5/6/86.] WAC 296-52-497 Blasting agents. (1) General. Unless otherwise set forth in this section, blasting agents, excluding water gels, shall be transported, stored, and used in the same manner as explosives. Water gels are covered in WAC 296-52-501. (2) Fixed location mixing. (a) Buildings or other facilities used for mixing blasting agents shall be located, with respect to inhabited buildings, passenger railroads, and public highways, in accordance with Table H- 20. In determining the distance separating highways, railroads, and inhabited buildings from potential explosions (as prescribed in Table H- 20), the sum of all masses which may propagate (i.e., lie at distances less than prescribed in Table H-22) from either individual or combined donor masses are included. However, when the ammonium nitrate must be included, only fifty percent of its weight shall be used because of its reduced blast effects. (b) Buildings used for the mixing of blasting agents shall conform to the requirements of this section. (i) Buildings shall be of noncombustible construction or sheet metal on wood studs. (ii) Floors in a mixing plant shall be of concrete or of other nonabsorbent materials. (iii) All fuel oil storage facilities shall be separated from the mixing plant and located in such a manner that in case of tank rupture, the oil will drain away from the mixing plant building. (iv) The building shall be well ventilated. (v) Heating units which do not depend on combustion processes, when properly designed and located, may be used in the building. All direct sources of heat shall be located outside the mixing building. (vi) All internal-combustion engines used for electric power generation shall be located outside the mixing plant building, or shall be properly ventilated and isolated by a firewall. The exhaust systems on all such engines shall be located so any spark emission cannot be a hazard to any materials in or adjacent to the plant. (c) Equipment used for mixing blasting agents shall conform to the requirements of this subsection. (i) The design of the mixer shall minimize the possibility of frictional heating, compaction, and especially confinement. All bearings and drive assemblies shall be mounted outside the mixer and protected against the accumulation of dust. All surfaces shall be accessible for cleaning. (ii) Mixing and packaging equipment shall be constructed of materials compatible with the fuel- h.../om_isapi.dll?clientlD=111872&infobase=wac.nfo&record={6B86}&softpage=Document4 6/15/00 • C O M M U N I CAT I ONso iutions:i) I II I SII ilk HI //Ili\\ Dmcument Page 21 of 23 ammonium nitrate composition. (iii) Suitable means shall be provided to prevent the flow of fuel oil to the mixer in case of fire. In gravity flow systems an automatic spring-loaded shutoff valve with fusible link shall be installed. (d) The provisions of this subsection shall be considered when determining blasting agent compositions. (i) The sensitivity of the blasting agent shall be determined by means of a No. 8 test blasting cap at regular intervals and after every change in formulation. (ii) Oxidizers of small particle size, such as crushed ammonium nitrate prills or fines, may be more sensitive than coarser products and shall, therefore, be handled with greater care. (iii) No hydrocarbon liquid fuel with flashpoint lower than that of No. 2 diesel fuel oil 125°F. minimum shall be used. (iv) Crude oil and crankcase oil shall not be used. (v) Metal powders such as aluminum shall be kept dry and shall be stored in containers or bins which are moisture -resistant or weathertight. Solid fuels shall be used in such manner as to minimize dust explosion hazards. (vi) Peroxides and chlorates shall not be used. (e) All electrical switches, controls, motors, and lights located in the mixing room shall conform to the requirements in chapter 296-24 WAC, Part L; otherwise they shall be located outside the mixing room. The frame of the mixer and all other equipment that may be used shall be electrically bonded and be provided with a continuous path to the ground. (f) Safety precautions at mixing plants shall include the requirements of this subsection. (i) Floors shall be constructed so as to eliminate floor drains and piping into which molten materials could flow and be confined in case of fire. (ii) The floors and equipment of the mixing and packaging room shall be cleaned regularly and thoroughly to prevent accumulation of oxidizers or fuels and other sensitizers. (iii) The entire mixing and packaging plant shall be cleaned regularly and thoroughly to prevent excessive accumulation of dust. (iv) Smoking, matches, open flames, spark- producing devices, and firearms (except firearms carried by law enforcement bomb squad members or qualified guards) shall not be permitted inside of or within 50 feet of any building or facility used for the mixing of blasting agents. (v) The land surrounding the mixing plant shall be kept clear of brush, dried grass, leaves, and other materials for a distance of at least 25 feet. (vi) Empty ammonium nitrate bags shall be disposed of daily in a safe manner. (vii) No welding shall be permitted or open flames used in or around the mixing or storage area of the plant unless the equipment or area has been completely washed down and all oxidizer material removed. (viii) Before welding or repairs to hollow shafts, all oxidizer material shall be removed from the outside and inside of the shaft and the shaft vented with a minimum one-half inch diameter opening. (ix) Explosives shall not be permitted inside of or within 50 feet of any building or facility used for the mixing of blasting agents. (3) Bulk delivery and mixing vehicles. (a) The provisions of this subsection shall apply to off-highway private operations as well as to all public highway movements. (b) A bulk vehicle body for delivering and mixing blasting agents shall conform with the requirements of this subsection. (i) The body shall be constructed of noncombustible materials. (ii) Vehicles used to transport bulk premixed blasting agents on public highways shall have closed bodies. (iii) All moving parts of the mixing system shall be designed as to prevent a heat buildup. Shafts or axles which contact the product shall have outboard bearings with 1- inch minimum clearance between the bearings and the outside of the product container. Particular attention shall be given to the clearances on all moving parts. (iv) A bulk delivery vehicle shall be strong enough to carry the load without difficulty and be in good mechanical condition. (c) Operation of bulk delivery vehicles shall conform to the requirements of WAC 296-52-489 (2). These include the placarding requirements as specified by department of transportation. (i) The operator shall be trained in the safe operation of the vehicle together with its mixing, h.../om_isapi.dll?clientlD=111872&infobase=wac.nfo&record={6B86}&softpage=Document4 6/15/00 • CO M M U N I CAT I O N S 0 u ionYs- l) iii iii ipali n Document Page 22 of 23 conveying, and related equipment. The employer shall assure that the operator is familiar with the commodities being delivered and the general procedure for handling emergency situations. (ii) The hauling of either blasting caps or other explosives but not both, shall be permitted on bulk trucks provided that a special wood or nonferrous -lined container is installed for the explosives. Such blasting caps or other explosives shall be in DOT -specified shipping containers: See 49 CFR Chapter I. (iii) No person shall smoke, carry matches or any flame -producing device, or carry any firearms while in or about bulk vehicles effecting the mixing transfer or down -the -hole loading of blasting agents at or near the blasting site. (iv) Caution shall be exercised in the movement of the vehicle in the blasting area to avoid driving the vehicle on to or dragging hoses over firing lines, cap wires, or explosive materials. The employer shall assure that the driver, in moving the vehicle, has assistance of a second person to guide the driver's movements. (v) No intransit mixing of materials shall be performed. (d) Pneumatic loading from bulk delivery vehicles into blastholes primed with electric blasting caps or other static -sensitive systems shall conform to the requirements of this subsection. (i) A positive grounding device shall be used to prevent the accumulation of static electricity. (ii) A discharge hose shall be used that has a resistance range that will prevent conducting stray currents, but that is conductive enough to bleed off static buildup. (iii) A qualified person shall evaluate all systems to determine if they will adequately dissipate static under potential field conditions. (e) Repairs to bulk delivery vehicles shall conform to the requirements of this section. (i) No welding or open flames shall be used on or around any part of the delivery equipment unless it has been completely washed down and all oxidizer material removed. (ii) Before welding or making repairs to hollow shafts, the shaft shall be thoroughly cleaned inside and out and vented with a minimum one -half-inch diameter opening. (4) Bulk storage bins. (a) The bin, including supports, shall be constructed of compatible materials, waterproof, and adequately supported and braced to withstand the combination of all loads including impact forces arising from product movement within the bin and accidental vehicle contact with the support legs. (b) The bin discharge gate shall be designed to provide a closure tight enough to prevent leakage of the stored product. Provision shall also be made so that the gate can be locked. (c) Bin loading manways or access hatches shall be hinged or otherwise attached to the bin and be designed to permit locking. (d) Any electrically driven conveyors for loading or unloading bins shall conform to the requirements of chapter 296-24 WAC, Part L. They shall be designed to minimize damage from corrosion. (e) Bins containing blasting agent shall be located, with respect to inhabited buildings, passenger railroads, and public highways, in accordance with Table H-20 and separation from other blasting agent storage and explosives storage shall be in conformity with Table H-22. (f) Bins containing ammonium nitrate shall be separated from blasting agent storage and explosives storage in conformity with Table H-22. (5) Transportation of packaged blasting agents. (a) When blasting agents are transported in the same vehicle with explosives, all of the requirements of WAC 296-52-489 shall be complied with. (b) Vehicles transporting blasting agents shall only be driven by and in charge of a driver at least twenty-one years of age who is capable, careful, reliable, and in possession of a valid motor vehicle operator's license. Such a person shall also be familiar with the states vehicle and traffic laws. (c) No matches, firearms, acids, or other corrosive liquids shall be carried in the bed or body of any vehicle containing blasting agents. (d) No person shall be permitted to ride upon, drive, load, or unload a vehicle containing blasting agents while smoking or under the influence of intoxicants, narcotics, or other dangerous drugs. (e) It is prohibited for any person to transport or carry any blasting agents upon any public vehicle carrying passengers for hire. (f) Vehicles transporting blasting agents shall be in safe operating condition at all times. (g) When offering blasting agents for transportation on public highways the packaging, marking, and labeling of containers of blasting agents shall comply with the requirements of DOT. h.../om_isapi.dll?clientlD=111872&infobase=wac.nfo&record={ 6B 86 } &softpage=Document4 6/15/00 • C O M M U N I CAT I O N solutions Document Page 23 of 23 (h) Vehicles used for transporting blasting agents on public highways shall be placarded in accordance with DOT regulations. (6) Use of blasting agents. Persons using blasting agents shall comply with all of the applicable provisions of WAC 296-52-493. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 49.17 RCW. 95-07-014, § 296-52-497, filed 3/6/95, effective 4/20/95; 91-03-044 (Order 90-18), § 296-52-497, filed 1/10/91, effective 2/12/91. Statutory Authority: RCW 49.17.040 and 49.17.050. 86-10-044 (Order 86-24), § 296-52-497, filed 5/6/86.] h.../om_isapi.dll?clientlD=111872&infobase=wac.nfo&record={6B86}&softpage=Document4 6/15/00 • C O M M U N I CAT I O N S O 1 O fl S Al& n • • ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FILE NO: FEE: RECEIPT: RECEIVED CITY OF TIUKWILA MAY 0 9 2000 PERMIT CENTER Purpose of Checklist: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. Instructions for Applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Government agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write do not know or does not apply. Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Use of checklist for nonproject proposals: Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered does not apply. IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words project, applicant, and property or site should be read as proposal, proposer, and affected geographic area, respectively. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Tukwila Rock Pile 2. Name of applicant: Jim White 3. Address and phone number Applicant: Jim White c/o Mobile Crane Co., Inc. 5900 2nd Ave S Seattle, WA 98108 (206) 767-4767 Fax: (206) 763-9975 of applicant and contact person: Agent: R.W. Thorpe & Associates, Inc. Contact: Robert W. Thorpe, AICP 705 2nd Ave, Suite 710 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 624-6239 Fax: (206) 625-0930 email: planning@rwta.com 4. Date checklist prepared: July 19. 1999 Originally submitted on 8/11/99 to City of Tukwila Revised and resubmitted on 5/9/00 to the City of Tukwila 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Tukwila 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Excavation of the subject site has been estimated to take approximately 12 months with an estimated average of 900 cubic yards being removed each day. It is possible that the 12 month period could be broken into two six-month periods during consecutive fall -winter seasons. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. The site is being graded in preparation for light industrial development on the site. Information specific to the future development will be made available a t the time of development. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. • Preliminary Evaluation of Rock Outcrop, Shannon & Wilson, Inc. February 25, 1988. • Geotechnical Engineering Study. Earth Consultants Inc. May 22, 1992. • Erosion Control Report for Tukwila Rock Pile, DOWL Engineers, 7/99 • Rock Excavation Issues, Milbor-Pita & Associates, Inc. 12/17/99 • Response to Peer Review, Milbor-Pita & Associates, Inc. 4/24/00 • Trip Generation Analysis, TP&E, 5/5/00 EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT • 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 other applications pending governmental approval for other proposals are known to exist. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. • Grading Permit • Shoreline Substantial Development 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. The applicant is pursuing approval of a Land Alteration (grading permit). In the case of Alternative One the intent is to have an site balance between the cut and fill and in the case of Alternative Two to remove approximately 221,326 cubic yards of fill from the site. This grading will prepare the site for future light industrial development. The subject property is 10.96 acres in size and is currently vacant. Please see the attached Plans. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the City, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with the application related to this checklist. The subject property is located on S 115th St. in the northwest corner of Section 10, Township 23 N, Range 4 E, W.M. , in the City of Tukwila, Washington. Please see the attached Vicinity Map. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT • • B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other: The site is generally level around its north, south and west margins. Rising above this level of the Duwamish River Valley is an outcrop of rock about 110 feet high. The summit is approximately at elevation 130 feet. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The steepest slope is vertical. There are cuts from old quarrying, a former use, on the site's . rock that are now vertical. Please see the attached slope analysis. c. What general types of soils are found m the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. The rock was observed to consist of soft to moderately hard volcanic andesite, breccia, and sedimentary siltstone. The andesite is the harder rock and forms most of the outcrop (Shannon & Wilson, Earth Consultants). Rock testing was conducted which indicates that the andesite appears as massive rock of high quality, and representative core testing at 9,000 to 11,000 psi compressive strength. The breccia is only slightly less massive, testing at 8,000 psi (Milbor-Pita and Associates). The upper surface of the outcrop consists of loose, brown, weathered silty sand to sandy silt soil mixed with rock fragments. Sieve analyses performed on two samples of this material indicate the soil as classified as silty sand with gravel. Below the surficial loose silty sand soils, loose to medium dense, brown to gray -black, weathered rock with variable amounts of silty sand matrix was encountered. These soils continued until hard, light gray, unweathered rock prevented further progress. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. There are no indications of unstable soils cm the subject property or in the immediate vicinity. The soil on the slopes appear quite stable as far as landsliding is concerned. The rock currently stands near vertical in many locations. Please see the attached Geotechnical Reports for more information. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. It has been estimated that approximately 221,326 cubic yards of material will be exported off the site. It is intended that the entire excavation will take place over a 12 month period or possibly over two six-month period. This will require that approximately Some of this material, as it is being removed would be used as a preload to consolidate the alluvial soils so construction on the softer soil can occur without settlement being a major issue. After consolidation, the excess material shall be removed from the site. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT • • The removal of the andesite and breccia could be accomplished by very heavy hydraulic breaking, however small loosening blasts would greatly speed up the operation. Off site impacts will be minimized whenever possible. Limited controlled blasting produces fewer neighborly complaints than prolonged mechanical rock breakage with its accompanying high level of repetitive noise and dust. Calculations by Milbor-Pita & Associates have shown that loosening blasts can be designed so they produce ground vibrations below the Office of Surface Mining limits at the nearest off site structures (peak particle velocity of 2 inches per second or less). All blasting will be conducted in accordance with the King County Development Standards for Mineral Extraction, Chapter 21A.22. If appropriate a pre -blast survey will be conducted on nearby structures and monitor the blasting with vibration measuring equipment. In addition, excavation resulting in no flyrock or objectionable airblast can be achieved by proper stemming of the holes and by placing blast mats over the blast area (Milbor-Pita & Associates Report dated 12/17/99). f . Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Erosion could occur on the site as a result of the grading. In order to minimize erosion, control measures will be employed during the grading process. As the material being excavated is rock, and not soil, the amounts of erodable material will be decreased:: g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or. buildings)? Currently about 60% of the site is covered with rock, which is an impermeable surface. After future development, it is anticipated that about 60% of the site' will be covered with asphalt and building. h . Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, other impacts to the earth, i f any: Standard erosion control measures will be taken during construction. These will include measures outlined in Washington State Department of Ecology publications. It is anticipated that specific measures will include the use of silt fences, straw bale dams, detention basins and timing construction to coincide with dry weather as much as is practical. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. The site will generate vehicle emissions from trucks and 'construction equipment during grading and future vehicles utilizing the site after development. Proposed grading activities will also generate some temporary dust and diesel emissions.. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT There are no off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect this proposal. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, i f any: Short term emissions resulting from future grading and construction activities would be controlled through the use of common dust -suppression techniques. 3. Water a . Surface 1) Is there any surface water body on orin the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. The southern portion of the property, south of 15th Street is adjacent to the Duwamish River, a Type 1 Stream. There are Type 2 wetlands located to the north of the property. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. The proposed grading of the Rock Pile occurs within 200' of the Duwamish River, however 15th Street separates the river from the proposed construction area. 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. No fill or dredge material will be placed into/removed from any surface waters or wetlands. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. The proposal will not require any surface water withdrawals or diversions. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. The proposal area does not lie within the 100 year floodplain, although parts of the property south of 15th Street do lie within the floodplain. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. The proposal does not involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT • • 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 ground water will be withdrawn and no water will be discharged to the ground water as a result of this proposal. 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. No waste material will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources. c. Water Runoff (including storm water) 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities,, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. The following is a summary of the findings found in the "Erosion Control Report for Tukwila Rock Pile" completed by DOWL Engineers. Refer to this document for further information and clarification. The site currently discharges crossing the property lines to the north and south. The proposal is to adjust the natural discharge location for surface water runoff from the site. Site investigations by DOWL Engineers and Wetland Resources, Inc., conduded that the drainage which discharges across the north property line is contributory to a closed depression. Field investigations of this depression uncovered no piped outlet to this depression, and it appears stormwater infiltrates in this area. The proposal is to install an erosion control facility which will divert stormwater generated by this site south, which can be tight lined to an existing outfall pipe to the Duwamish River. This facility will divert approximately 6 acres of this site which discharges to the north in this closed depression. This facility meets SWDM requirements/standards by reducing the volume of water which enters this closed depression and thereby reduces the stage and duration of ponding occurring within this area, which is in agreement with the public interest, health and safety. The proposal will also offer environmental protection and maintainability, as it facilitates construction of one sedimentation pond rather than two. A single pond will be more easily monitored and maintained for the duration of construction. The pond is designed to discharge into a swale located within the southwest comer of the site, which will be easily accessed and observed from the South 115th Street right-of-way. We expect that having the discharge within a more visible portion of the site will promote a more pro -active maintenance program. No impact to the adjoining property is anticipated if this adjustment is approved. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY i TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT • • The seasonal ponding within this area significantly affects the City of Seattle's ability to conduct monitoring and maintenance activities associated with the utilities in this corridor. We have reviewed City of Seattle aerial topography maps and estimate the closed depression to be approximately 55 acres. Our site makes up only approximately ten percent of the contributing area. As part of this work, Wetland Resources Inc. evaluated the closed depression wetland. The off-site wetland is larger than one acre in size and is dominated by one class of vegetation. After discussions with the Wetland Resources, DOWL Engineers is of the opinion that their will be no measurable impact to the wetland hydrology if this site's water is diverted to the Duwamish River via a tight line storm drain system. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Waste materials, such as oil and anti -freeze from trucks or automobiles using the site, will not be allowed to enter ground water or surface runoff. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: None required as the amount of impervious surface area on site will not be increased as a result of the grading permit. 4. Plants a . Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: X deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other X shrubs grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, 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? Shrubs that have grown out of the rock pile will be removed as the rock pile is graded. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. No threatened or endangered plant species are known to be on or near the site. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: A Landscape Plan has been prepared that shows the replacement of the trees removed from the site as a result of the proposed grading activity. Landscaping consistent with the City of Tukwila's industrial (I) zoning designation will be provided on the subject site in accordance with possible future development. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 10 BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT • • 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. Chinook Salmon, a recently federally listed endangered species, is found in the Duwamish River. The Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Priority Species/ Habitat database was searched and no other habitats or species were found on or near the subject property. Birds and small mammals typically found in an urban environment may utilize the site for foraging and nesting activities. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. The site is not a part of any known migration route. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None required. Once redeveloped, landscaping on the subject property will provide some habitat for birds and small mammals. 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 i t will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Fuel for trucks and other equipment used for grading and removal of the rock material is the only type of energy that will be used as a result of this proposal. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. This project would not affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: None required. 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. Milbor-Pita has addressed the potential hazards and recommended mitigation measures related to blasting activities in an urban environment. No other environmental health hazards would occur as a result of this proposal. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. No special emergency services would be required. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT • • 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None required. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example, traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Automobile traffic from the adjacent roadways and air traffic from planes using Boeing Field to the north are the main sources of background noise heard on the subject site. The police firing range and the adjacent railway activity are other lesser sources of noise. It is anticipated that these sources of noise, typical in an industrial environment, will not have an adverse impact on the proposed action. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Short term noises on the subject site resulting from blasting and grading activities will last for the duration of the proposed project from approximately 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. weekdays (within the time limits of the City of Tukwila's Noise Ordinance - TMC 8.22). Blasting will occur preliminary at the start of the construction activities. In general limited controlled blasting produces fewer neighborhood complaints than prolonged mechanical rock breakage with it's accompanying high .level of repetitive noise and dust. Milbor-Pita has addressed noise and air -blast topics related to the proposed project in the attached reports. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None required. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site consists of approximately ten and one-half acres of undeveloped property. The property is bounded by the Duwamish River on the south, and a City of Seattle transmissions line on the north. The property is bounded on the west by industrial and commercial land uses and on the east by residential areas, which would be aligned with extensions of 35th and 38th Avenues south, in Tukwila, Washington. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. The site has not been used for agriculture. c. Describe any structures on the site. One dilapidated mobile structure is located on the western portion of the site which will be removed prior to any construction activity. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No structures will be demolished as a part of this proposal. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY • • TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT The City of Tukwila shows the subject site designated Manufacturing Industrial Center/Light Industrial (MIC/L) on its official Zoning Map dated November 1997. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The City of Tukwila shows the subject site designated Manufacturing Industrial Center/Light Industrial (MIC/L) on its Comprehensive Land Use Map. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? The current shoreline master program designation is Urban. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an environmentally sensitive area? If so, specify. The southern part of the site, south of S 15th Street is within the 100 year floodplain. This area is outside of the proposed project area. Portions of the rock outcroppings on the subject site meet the City's definition of sensitive area slopes. As such, trees removed from these areas will be replanted along the river bank and street front. Please see the attached Shoreline Planting Plan Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? No additional residences or jobs would be created through the grading process. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? The proposed project would not displace anyone. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None required. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing- and projected land uses and plans, if any: The applicant and associated development/permit team has had meetings and ongoing conversations with City Staff to assure land use compatibility. The proposed use is consistent with the current industrial zoning on the subject site and the subject application for a land altering permit is consistent with the City's criteria for industrial land uses. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. No additional units will be provided. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. No units will be eliminated. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None required. 10. Aesthetics EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT • • a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? No structures are proposed during this grading phase. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Views onto and from the site would be altered as the approximately 110' tall rock pile would be removed and the site will be leveled in anticipation of a future industrial use. c. Proposed measures to reduce aesthetic impacts, if any: None required in conjunction with the grading permit. 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? The proposal will not increase the levels of light or glare on or off the site. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Light or glare should not increase due to the removal of the rock pile. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? No off-site sources of light or glare are anticipated to affect the proposal. 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? • Duwamish Park • Rainier Golf Course & Country Club • Glen Acres Golf Club • Allentown P -Patch Park b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. The project proposal will not displace any existing recreational uses. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None required or proposed. 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. There are no places or objects listed on local preservation registers on or near the site. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT • • A search of state and local records, including the Washington State Department of Natural Resources archives and database, did not turn up any evidence indicating the presence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. Two documents provided by the Washington State Department of Natural Resources identified the geologic formations in the area of the site but do not specifically address the subject site. The geologic age of the rock outcrops in the area like the one found on the site is Miocene (a subset of the Tertiary period of the Cenozoic Era) dated to 40 to 50 million years ago. These documents are Geologic Time, Rocks, Fossils, and Minerals in Washington by the Department of Natural Resources, Division of Mines and Geology (no date) and Fossils of Washington by Vaughn E. Livingston, Jr., 1959 (updated in 1972) and are attached. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None proposed. All of the rock outcrops on the site will not be removed by the proposed grading, and if specifically permitted by the property owner, fossil collectors may be able to have access to portions of the site. However, should any evidence of historic, archeological, scientific, or cultural importance be unearthed during the proposed grading, all construction activities would be placed on hold and the appropriate state or local agencies would be contacted. 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. S 115th Street runs through the southern section of the site and serves a short driveway connecting to this street and serves as the primary access point to the northern part of the site. b. Is site currently served by public transit? distance to the nearest transit stop? Route # 124 tuns along S 115th Street. Allentown, and Georgetown. Several vicinity. If not, what is the approximate This route serves Southcenter, other routes exist in the near c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Removal of the rock pile would not involve the creation of any new parking spaces. 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). The proposal will not require any new roads or streets. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. The project is not expected to use water, air, or rail transportation. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 10 BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT • f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. The proposed project, operating as described under earlier sections of this Checklist, would generate approximately 168 total trips on an average weekday It is estimated that approximately 26 vehicle trip ends would be generated by the proposed project during both the AM (7:15 — 8:15) and PM (4:15 — 5:15) peak hours. Please see the attached Trip Generation Analysis prepared by TP&E (5/5/00). g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None required. 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. The project would not result in an increased need for public services. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, i f any. No required or proposed. 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. No utilities _currently exist on site, but are located nearby for convenient hookups. The closest sanitary sewer is located at 115th St. and 42nd and the storm drain runs along 115th St. 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. No utilities are needed for the grading of the site. C. SIGNATURE The above answer are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that th4lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY ( r 1% R enact > - R.W. • -c ,r44 Date Submitted 8.111S $ 1&1ASa L') REV(ED S 4.40 PRINCIPAL: Robert W. Thorpe, AICP May.9, 2000 R. W. THORPB & ASSO.CIATES, INC. 4., Planning • Landscape. • Environmental • Economics +4' Stephen Speidel, ASLA, Vice President Gareth V. Roe, AICP,;Director of Planning RECEIVED CITY (ic 7!1 'v_'''i' n MAY 0 9 ZO00 Ms. Carol Lumb City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 4#100= Tukwila, Washington 98188 PERMIT CENTER Tukwila Rock Pile (L99-0061 E99-0023).-_ Response to City of Tukwila Letter Dated 11/17/99 Requesting Additional Information Dear Carol; Please .-find . the enclosed information in :direct response'. to the City of Tukwila's letter requestingadditional information dated November 17, 1999' (copy attached). As agreed, we have waited until Shannon & Wilson had an opportunity to complete, their peer review of the proposed project and the materials submitted as part of the applicationbefore providing our responses. This approach 'seemed reasonable at the .time. However. we did not expect completion of Shannon & Wilson's peer review of the application materials to take until April= of 2000.. With hindsight always being clearer, it is now apparent the had we responded to the original request for information in the latter part oflast year, the majority of the issues pointed; out,byShannon & Wilson would have been answered and'addressed: Our responses to the requested items includes- technical reports; prepared .by. Milbor=Pita & Associates, Inc. (addressing the blasting related issues) and a Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TP&E. In addition, the SEPA Checklist that was originally submitted on August 11, 1999 has beep updated to include any new information we now have as a result of .the additional ❖ ❖ 705 Second Avenue Suite 710 Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 624-6239. Fax (206) 625-0930 e-mail planning@rwta.com :• : . Ms. Carol Lumb-.City .of Tukwila- Tukwila Rock Pile (L99-0061 & E99-0023) . Page 2 of 5 technical-analysis_and research'prepared for the project as proposed A copy of each completed technical report and the updated,SEPA Checklist are included as attachments to this letter.. The following information references the numbered items (1 through 13) in the November 17th 1999 letter from the City: The project, as proposed, would involve excavation and preparation of the site as one effort over a 12 month. period. The alternatives, as originally discussed and as represented in the grading and drainage' plans , represent contiguous phases of the project. Please see the attached Milbor-Pita report dated 12/17/99 fora detailed response to this question. 2. Excavation of the -subject site has been estimated to take approximately 12 months with an estimated average of 900 cubic. yards' being ;removed each day. It is possible that the 12 month period would bebroken into two six-month periods duringconsecutive fall -winter seasons. Please seethe attached Milbor-Pita report dated 12/17/99for a detailed response to ", this 'question:: • 3. No mechanical processing of the excavated material is planned to occur on the subject site. Please see the attached Milbor--Pita report dated_ 12/17/99 for a detailed response to this question. The term "micro-blasting":was incorrectly used in the original SEPA.Checklist... The correct term ' should be "controlled" or "loosening blasts. The . attached Milbor-Pita reports, dated 12/17/99 arid 4/24/00 provide'a detailed responses to,this question. 5. The. •SEPA .Checklist has been revised and an updated copy that addresses the City. of ": Tukwila's Noise.Ordinance (TMC 8.22) is attached. • 6: Additional information has been prepared as part: of the City's peer review'process by En'vironalysis in their study titled The Tukwila Rock:Pile Industrial Site Project A'Preliminary Look d•4. RWT/A. 705 Second Avenue Suite 710. Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 624-6239 Fax (206) 625-0930 e-mail planning@rwta.com •: Ms. Carol Lumb = City of Tukwila 'Tukwila Rock Pile (L99-0061 & E99-0023) Page 3 of 5 . . at Potential Noise Impacts, 4/10/00) Environalysis ;report states. that,"... basic calculation of the possible equipment and its noise impacts indicates the possibility of noise impactsreaching or exceeding the City's maximum permissible levels." Milbor-Pita provided a response to that statement in their 4/24/00 report that says... "the Environanalysis report does not present the basis for the 'basic calculation'"nor a reference for such calculation. The data for noise levels at 50 feet from the source is irrelevant since no construction activities occur within 50 feet of 'off- site structures. The estimated noise levels 500 feet away do not seem `credible to use and we would like to see the calculations (Mill)Or-Pita letter 4/24/00, page 7). In addition, Milbor-Pita states that there will be a maximum air blast of 120 decibels for the production blasting and 100 to.105 for the controlled blasting (Milbor-Pita letter 4/24/00, page 6).., In addition, the SEPA'Checklist has been revised and an updated copy that addresses the long and short-term impacts to the adjacent neighborhoods as a result of the proposed project is attached. In the Environalysis Report, The Tukwila Rock Pile Industrial Site Project A Preliminary Look at Potential Noise Impacts, 4/10/00) it is stated that, "It is questionable whether the increase in noise from these sources will be audible (or measurable) over the' fairly high noise levels currently experienced due to motor vehicle traffic. The short term measurements shown in Table 1 would seen to indicate that the firing range and railway noise is much less. than :the - traffic noise and would be inaudible if there were an unobstructed line of sight. There will be a small window of opportunity for eastbound 'aircraft takeoff noise to reach the residential areas south of the Duwamish. However, aircraft noise will represent a small proportion of any increase noise levels due to the speed at which aircraft will move during takeoff and climb up ' beyond the area where the existing hill could block that noise." 7. : The proposed project .would generate approximately -168 total trips on an average weekday* It is estimated that approximately 26 vehicle trip ends would be generated by the proposed project during both the AM (7:15 - 8:15) and PM "(4:15 - 5:15) peak hours. Please see the .attached Trip Generation' Analysis prepared by TP&E (5/5/00).TP&E has completed a Vehicle Trip Generation Analysis for the proposed project that 'addresses the numberof trips r•❖ RWT/A 705 Second Avenue Suite 710 Seattle, Washington 98104 (206),624-6239 Fax (206) 625-0930 e-mail plannirig@rwta.com Ms. Carol Luinb - City of Tukwila . , Tukwila Rock Pile (L99=)061 & E99-0023) Page4of5 generated by the proposed project. Please see -the attached TP&E report. dated 5/5/00 -;for a detailed response to -this question: 8., Minor revisions the SEPA checklist where made: Chinook Salmon, a recently federally listed- endangered species, is' .found in the Duwamish River. The Washington.. State Department of. Fish' and Wildlife Priority,Species/: Habitat database was, searched and no other habitats or species Were found on or, near `the subject property. • Birds and small mammals • typically found in an. urban environment may utilize the site for foraging and nesting activities. 9. 'Milbor-Pita has provided a response that addresses, the dust emissions resulting form the proposed project. Typical mitigation that could be employed on this site to limit dust • emissions will likely includewetting down the area being excavatedand all haul :roads. ' In addition, the blast -hole drilling rig Will be fitted with a dust suppression kit. Please see the • Milbor-Pita report dated 12/17/99 for more detailed information: 10: . A discussion with Steve Fletcher (Val Vue Sewer. District) and 'a detailed review of their mapping for the area' and subject site indicates .that there is not a Metro sewer line running through the, property. A 42": metro pressure line runs ' adjacent'and to the west of the site (see attached map): A search of assessor's maps and a Title Report for the subject property • could mot locate a Puget :Sound Energy .(PSE) Right -of -Way running through the property: However, a PSE Right -of -Way does run north -south through the adjacentproperty along: the western boundary of the subject site. These items are believed to be what Ms. Joanne Spencer( Public Works) Was referencing in the Pre -application checklist dated 3/18/99. 11 .A copy of the original Affidavit of Posting for the Notice of Application 10/5/99) is attached longwith a copy of the original transmittal as ,submittedto the City. 12. A 1'andseape plan for the replanting of: trees within the shoreline area;has been prepared and is attached. r• •• RWT/A 705 Second Avenue Suite 710 Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 624-6239 Fax (206) 625-0930 e-mail planning@rrwta.com :• •3 Ms. Carol Lumb - City of Tukwila • • Tukwila Rock Pile (L99-0061 & E99-0023) Page 5of5 13. As a direct result of the proposed project, no'. new. out -fall to the river is being created, the drainage characteristics of the closed depression drainage basin adjacent'to:the site arenot being altered,; nor are we seeking a permit, or approval for our project from the Army Corps of Engineers: Therefore, it was agreed upon by the City (Carol Lumb - 2/14/00) that .this requirement be eliminated from the request for additional information. Required public . notification for the proposed project, has taken place and.a Notice of Application was issued by the"Ci of Tukwila for the. ro'ect:' No' comments have been received to date from the Army city project' Corps of Engineers. In closing, we believe we have answered in detail all of theitems listed in the City request for additional information: , We trust that the . provision of this information on behalf of the applicant, Mr. Jim White, 'is, sufficient for the City to continue with its review ofthe application for Land Alteration (L99-0061 E99-0023). Please feel free to contact me directlyat 206/624-6239 or viae -mail at plannig@rwta.com if.you have questions with regards to the above information. Thanks in advance for your timely review of the pending application,and enclosed materials. Respectfully submitted, . • R.W. Thus: Associates; Inc. reth V. Roe, AICD Director of Planning Attachments: City of Tukwila's Request for Additional Information (dated T1/17/99) Revised SEPA Checklist (dated 5/9/00) Milbor-Pita Response Letters (dated 4/24/99'& 12/17/99) Shannon & Wilsons DraftPeer Review Report (dated 4/10/0,0) TP&E Traffic; Generation Analysis (dated 5/5/00 Val Vue "Sewer Map (Fax. copy dated '1/24/00) Shoreline Tree Planting Plan (dated 2/7/00) Affidavit of Posting & Original Transmittal (datedl0/13/99) CC: Jim White,;Applicant John Spiers, Martin Smith Real' Estate •3❖ RWT/A 705 Second Avenue Suite 710 Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 624-6239. Fax (206) 625-0930. a mail planning@rwta.com ❖❖ HAY 05 '00 16:15 T0 -2066250e VICTOR M. BISHOP, P;@, Pia klard WO H. ENDER, PEN1co Piwltlenl FROM-TPE T-571 P.02/05 F-992 TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & ENGINE 2223 • t 12" AVENUE N.E.. SUITE 101 • SE1l.EvUE,1 Ti May 5, 2000 Mr. James White Wallace Enterprisers C/o Mobile Crane Company, Inc. 5900 Second Avenue South Seattle, WA 88108 Re: Tukwila "Rock Pile" Excavation Project Vehicle Trip Generation Analysis City of Tukrvila File Nos. L99-0061, E99-0023 Dear Mr. White: ERINC% INC. FASHIN4{TON 98004-2862 £PHONE (425)456-6320 ACSIMILE (425) 453.5752 We are pleased to present this vehicle trip generation analysis for the pn 'posed Tukwila "Rock Pile" excavation project. The purpose of this letter is to respond to question no. 7 in the November 17, 1999 letter from the City of Tukwila to Mr. G areth Roe of R.W. Thorpe & Associates, which requested detailed information on the number of trips anticipated from the project. The project site is located on the north side of S. 115th St. approximately 170 feet east of East Marginal Way S. in the City of Tukwila_ The project consists of a tr .tcking operation to remove approximately 221,328 cubic yards of material from the site . The project does not include the construction of any new buildings or other permane it facilities. The site access is onto S. 115th Street. We have visited the project s Le and surrounding street network, One or more trucking contractors would be hired to haul the materiel fron I the site. The contractor(s) has not been hired, and it is unknown exactly what type, and sizes of trucks would be used. Most likely, dump truck with dump trailer tanderr combinations would be used. Newer, multi -axle trucks tend to have higher cap cities and can haul somewhat greater volumes and weights of materials than some oI; ler trucks. It is our understanding that the material to be removed is mostly rock, a id is relatively heavy as compared to other natural materials. Considering these fact ►rs, it is estimated that each tandem dump truck combination could carry 15 to 20 cubic cards of material. TOi 4400tgttr.dac MAY 05 '00 16:16 TO.2066250940 FROM-TPE • T-571 P.03/05 F-992 Mr. James White Wallace Enterprises May 5, 2000 Page - 2 For this analysis, we have made the conservative assumption that a but kload is approximately 15 cubic yards of material. The removal of 221,326 cubic yards 5f material from the isite would require 14,755 truckloads (at 15 cubic yards each) If more material could be hauled in each truckload, the number of loads would decrees a (although each Ioiid would be heavier). For example, at an average of 20 cubit : yards per truckload, 11,087 truckloads would be required. As described in the December 17, 1999 letter from Milbor-Pita, Inc., the excavation and removal of material from the site is estimated to occur over a 1: -month period. Based on a five day work week (Monday through Friday), the removal of 221,326 cubic yards over 12 months would require the removal of an average c i approximately 900 cubic yards each work day. Assuming a conservative nate o 15 cubic yards per truckload as discussed above, this would result in the removal of approximately 60 truckloads each workday. As further described In the December 17, 1999 letter from Milbor--Pita, In ;., excavation activities will be performed during daylight hours only, typically from about 7:30 AM to about 5:00 PM. This would result in the removal of an average of approximately seven truckloads per hour during the workday. On the average, about seven loaded trucks would Leave the site, and seven empty trucks would return to the site each hour. We requested information on when the weekday AM and PM peak hours occur on East Marginal Way South from the City of Tukwila Department of Public Worcs. The City has an extensive history of 15 -minute recorded traffic volume counts condu Ked each month on East Marginal Way South at S. 126"' Street. The City reported t tat based on this data, the AM peak hour occurs from 7:15 to 8:15 AM, and the PM peak hour typically begins at either 4:15 or 4:30 PM, and ends at either 6:15 or 5:30 F M. It has been estimated that in addition to the truck drivers, up to 12 additio ial people would be wrarking on-site to accomplish the material excavation, grading and truck loading operations. For this analysis, these employees are assumed to we rk a typical day shift, from about 7:30 AM to about 5:00 PM. Assumed trip generatioi i rates per on-site employee are four vehicle trips per employee on an average weekda ,, including one trip dying the AM peak hour and one trip during the PM peak hour . About 75% of these AM peak hour trips are expected to enter the site, and about 75% )f these PM peak hour trips are expected to exit the site. A vehicle trip is defined as a single or one direction vehicle movement with either the origin or destination (exiting or er tering) Inside the study sites. Tos. 400ter doo MAY 05 '00 16:16 TO.206625093 i. Mr. James White Wallace Enterprises May 5, 2000 Page - 3 - FROM-TPE _ T-571 P.04/03 F-992 Table 1 shows the estimated vehicle trip generation for the proposed Tul wile "Rock Pile" excavation project during an average weekday and during the stree . traffic AM and PM peak hours. For most typical land uses, vehicle trip generation est gates are usually eetimated using the rates and equations in the Institute of Transport 3tion Engineers (ITE) Generation, Sixth Edition, 1997. However, Trip Generatiq 3 does not contain trip generation data for a trucking operation, quarry,construction sit 3, or other land use similar to the proposed Tukwila "Rock Pile"excavation project. Therefore, the trip generation estimates shown in Table 1 are based on the info mation and assumptions for this site discussed above. These trip generation estimate: are conservative, and account for ail site trips made by all vehicles for all purposes, including truck, excavation equipment, employee, and service and delivery vehi :le trips. Please contact me if you have any questions. DHE: Cc: Mr. Gareth Roe, R.W. Thorpe & Assoc. Very truly yours, TRANSPORTATION PLANNIN s & ENGINEERING, INC. 0-4,4 )v, David H. Enger, P.E., P.T.O.E. Vice President s -s -o0 WARES ti 6/ TO 34400tgltrdoc MAY 05 '00 16:17 TO.206625099 FROM-TPE • T-571 P.05105 F-992 TABLE 1 VEHICLE TRIP GENERATION TUKINILA "ROCK PILE" EXCAVATION PROJECT Time Period Trips Entering Trips Exiting Total Traps Average Weekday: Tandem Dump Trucks - ■ 60 120 Other Vehicles . 24 48 Total Trips 84 84 168 Weekday AM Peak Hour: 11.1111111 7 7 14 Tandem Dump Trucks Other Vehicle's 9 3 12 Total Trips 16 10 26 Weekday PM Peak Hour Tandem Dump Trucks 7 7 14 Other Vehicles 3 9 12 Total Trips 10 18 26 Note: A vehicle trip is defined as a single or one direction vehicle movement wit h either the origin or destination (exiting or entering) inside the study site. 7U844QOgttr.d0, TO: City of Tukwila r ' 0 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, Washington 98188 MEMORANDUM Mayor Steve Mullet John McFarland, City Administrator Members of the City Council FROM: Don Williams, Parks and Recreation Director DATE: May 4, 2000 SUBJECT: Poverty Hill Land Purchase Proposal from Local Citizens Steven M Mullet, Mayor RECEIVED MAY 0 5 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT The purpose of this letter is to inform you about a discussion I have had with two citizens from the Poverty Hill area. They visited my office asking what the process is for the city to purchase park land. It appears they wish the city to purchase a parcel of land that fronts South 115t Street in the Poverty Hill area and would like to have it preserved as a city park. I am told that several citizens will be attending the Community and Parks Committee meeting on May 9th to propose this purchase and to add it to the list of park projects in the new Parks, Golf and Public Places Plan. The purchase of this property is not in the drafted plan. I am not proposing the purchase of this site and understand that there are numerous issues related to it. This being said, it has been our past practice to consider such citizen's requests. DW:nk cc: Steve Lancaster, DCD Director Lucy Lauterbach, Legislative Coordinator Bruce Fletcher, Assistant Parks & Recreation Director Phone: (206) 433-1800 • City Hall Fax (206) 433-1833 Tukwila Rock Pile Peer Revill TO: Moira Bradshaw DATE: May 1, 2000 SUBJECT: Tukwila Rock Pile Peer Review of Permit Application I have read the Draft peer review summary provided by Shannon & Wilson. I agree with all of the recommendations in the review. The following comments come directly from the report. 1 1. For Alternative 2, the crest of the slope will be at least 60' from the east boundary. 2. A geotechnical engineer or geologist should be onsite during blasting to observe excavation and recommend remedial measures to reduce slope instability. Applicant needs to provide discussion for possible remedial )1/ measures. 3. For Alternative 1, the Applicant must describe gradation of blasted rock to be used as fill. In addition, PW will want a description of how the Applicant will achieve the gradation and how Applicant will test the gradation. PW will also want a description of how Applicant will place and compact blasted rock used as fill. 4. Blasting will occur above ground surface and flyrock could be thrown up to 2500' from the site. 2500' is almost 2 mile. Applicant must provide methods to protect all surrounding properties from damage due to flyrock. 5. Applicant should provide a traffic plan which protects travelling public from flyrock. Q/projects/tukwila rock pile/review of draft peer review Page 1 Tukwila Rock Pile Peer Rev• • 6. Applicant should perform a crack survey of surrounding buildings before and after the excavation. Applicant should provide description of mitigation for damage and how Applicant will handle complaints. Stc.harit D2. 7. Applicant s o 6de-a blasting plan which specifically prevents air blast above levels recommended in O5M and USBM. 8. Add discussion of smoke and fumes generated due to blasting. 9. Provide: o typical blast pattern and estimate the number of blasts ✓ o quantity of explosives and blasting agent on the property o how oversize material will be broken o hole loading diagrams J ❑ blast locations v o number and location of delays ✓ o location and description of nearest structures and other site specific information o description of trial blasts for control of flyrock and fumes ❑ description of storage, transportation, handling and use of explosives and blasting agents. t✓ 10. Conditions recommended for the permit: ❑ Mechanical breaking and fragmenting of rock BEFORE blasting methods employed. forsd Wi?,/ott 41/4/14-- ✓ Comprehensive blasting plan submitted to the City prepared by an experienced blasting consultant. (Criteria for "experienced" is described in the review.) o Blasting should meet the more restrictive of the O5M or USBM ground vibrations and overpressures. ✓ ti Pre and Post -blast surveys. ❑ Monitoring of ground vibrations and overpressures Q/projects/tukwila rock pile/review of draft peer review Page 2 Tukwila Rock Pile Peer Revie • 1.6 Blasting operation conducted in compliance with O5M's standards for surface mining activities. o Plan to reduce complaints about ground vibration, air blast, fumes and flyrock. Plan to address blast -induced damage. attiFcludeXpublic notice. o Test blasts to demonstrate blasting can occur without adverse impacts to nearby property and the public. Plans and procedures included as part of the comprehensive blasting plan. Q/projects/tukwila rock pile/review of draft peer review Page 3 rCarol Lumb - Re: Tukwila rock Pile 0 From: Jill Mosqueda To: Carol Lumb Date: 4/28/00 7:55AM Subject: Re: Tukwila rock Pile Carol, I have a copy of the peer review. I agree with the review. I did not realize you needed a response from me, sorry. I assumed we would take Shannon and Wilson recommendations. Do you need something from me in writing? Jill »> Carol Lumb 04/27/00 11:48AM »> Hi - hope you're feeling better. Did you get the peer review material I sent over to PW from Shannon and Wilson on the rock pile blasting and noise impacts? I'm trying to track down who has it and whether they have had a chance to read it. I'm looking for any comments PW might have on it. If you are doing this project, FYI, Moira Bradshaw is going to take it over for me as I am now the lead on the Shoreline Master Plan Update. I'm trying to wrap up a few loose ends. Thanks. Page 1-j Shoreline Panel Meeting November 18, 1999 • Section 11.1 E may be more appropriately located in the section on the MIC since the river is not navigable south of the Turning Basin. • The term `River Access' should be defined in Section 11.1 F • Staff should confirm Fire Department requirements for Incidental Hazardous Material Storage (11.1 G) • Parcels that have unusual shapes, more than one side exposed to the shoreline or other features may be negatively impacted by Section 11.1H. More standards pertaining to screening may resolve issue. • The Urban -Open Space Designation should be added to Section 11.1I • Height limit may be more appropriate for commercial development due to construction methods • The proposed lot coverage maximum in 11.3 A -C should indicate that impervious surfaces are included in calculation • Staff should look at Section 11.5 and compare what other jurisdictions require for screening of service yards and outdoor storage • The design review for shoreline projects should be administrative rather than requiring a public hearing before the Planning Commission. For the next meeting staff will: • Research what the Fire Dept. considers incidental hazardous waste and where the 100 -foot setback came from. • Research how other jurisdictions address screening of large objects/structures (such as an airplane) • Identify what sections of Zoning Code or Comprehensive Plan would change with the implementation of the draft Shoreline Master Plan. Next Assignment: Continue with Sections 12-16 for the December 2nd meeting. Please let Michael or Carol know if you can meet beginning at 4:00 p.m. and ending at 7:00 p.m. on December 2nd q:\carol\Shoreline\11-18notes.doc 1 • April 24, 2000 Mobile Crane Company, Inc. 5900 2nd Avenue South Seattle, Washington 98108 Attn: Mr. James White Mr. Gareth Roe, R.W. Thorpe & Assoc. RE: Response to Peer Review Submittal Tukwila "Rock Pile" • M ilbor- Pita ASSOCIATES, INC. SC -148R We have reviewed the "Peer Review of the Permit Application, Tukwila Rock Pile" .prepared by Shannon & Wilson, Inc. dated April 10, 2000, and present our comments and answers in the report. The Peer Review bibliography infers that only our June 1999 report was made available to the reviewer, and not our December 1999 report (answers to letter from .Tukwila Department of Community Development) that dealt specifically with the detailed excavation plan, including mitigation methods for vibration, noise, dust, etc. that are prominently noted in the Peer Review. The June report specifically states that "it is beyond the present scope of this report to comment on...factors related to heavy excavation (noise, dust, etc. from blasting or hydraulic breakers)". Our December report is included as Appendix A to the current report and a summary of the excavation plan is presented below. We fully understand the issues raised in the November 19.99 letter from the Department of Community Development, City of Tukwila and the current Peer Review. We would like to emphasize that the proposed excavation plan prepared by us in conjunction with our client is for a site grading project and not for acommercial quarry. The size and design of proposed blasts and related mitigating features would not be economically feasible for a quarry operation. The proposed excavation and site preparation plan goes far beyond normal practice in minimizing ground vibration, air blast overpressure, dust control, and construction traffic to and from the site. Proposed Excavation Plan (December 1999 Report) The intention is to perform the entire excavation and site preparation as one effort. Most of the initial excavated rock will be used as fill as part of the site preparation work, with the advantage that this will create a temporary storage area for rock produced later in the work. We estimate that the excavation will require approximately 12 months in a fairly low -intensity effort, very possibly. executed in two six-month periods during consecutive. fall -winter seasons. Excavation utilizing heavy .mechanical and/or blasting techniques will be less Geotechnical, Tunnel and Environmental Engineers 3080 125th Avenue N.E. Phone (425) 869-5778 Bellevue, WA 98005 Fax (425) 861-0677 bothersome during periods of fairly constant rainfall and short daylight. This occurs because the rain both muffles construction noise and reduces dust from the excavation operations. Furthermore, there are less outdoor activities in adjoining neighborhoods during the fall -winter period. Light excavation (ripping and blading of soil and soft rock) and placement of fill on the site may • occur outside of this fall -winter period. The 12 -month excavation plan requires that an average of 900 cubic yards of material be moved each day. Excavation activities will be performed during daylight hours only, 7:30 to 17:00. We estimate that 1/3 of the total rock/soil can be excavated by Tight mechanical. means (MEX-1 on the accompanying sketch; dozer ripping and blading). The remaining 2/3 will require heavy mechanical (MEX-2; hydraulic breaker) or drill -and -blast excavation (BEX-1 and 2). We have assumed an equal amount of heavy mechanical and blast excavation. .In effect, 1/3of the total excavation will be light mechanical (MEX-1), 1/3 heavy mechanical (MEX-2), and the remaining l/3 blasting (BEX-1 and 2). Most of the early production will remain as fill on-site. At some point the 900 cy per day. (average) will be trucked off-site; this represents approximately 60 Toads per day or approximately 7 per hour. The equipment spread for the bulk of the excavation (MEX-2 and BEX-1,2) will consist of a hydraulic drill or air track, a D-8 or -9 ripper dozer, a medium-size endloader and/or a track excavator. Specifics of the Blasting Plan Controlled blasting (within 200. feet of the property line, see accompanying sketch, BEX-1) in our plan reduces the hole spacing .to 2.5 and 4 feet, depths to 15 feet or Tess, limits burdens to 4 feet, 4 to 8 pounds of explosiveper delay (hole), and approximately 20 to 40 holes per shot. Our production blasts, tobe. used at distances greater than 200 feet from the property line, are likewise reduced in size: Both.our controlled blasting and production blasting plans are designed to limit ground vibrations (peak particle velocity) to <1.0 inch per second and air blast overpressure to 120 decibels, both significantly below the Office of Surface Mining and King County requirements. Controlled blasts and loosening blasts are commonly used in structural excavations, notably for existing highway and railroad widening projects where ground vibrations, air blast, and flyrock from blasting are strictly controlled. We see the work at the site as more similar to structural excavation than quarrying. Our excavation plan anticipates developing benches that are lowered' in 15 -foot increments. The use of .15 -foot benches limits the depth of drill holes and therefore the amount of explosive per hole and per delay to quantities that limit ground vibrations to .<1.0 inch per second, as previously mentioned. Excavation on the bench will be first attempted with a large ripper dozer (D-8 or D-9). Any hard spots would then be attacked with a large hydraulic breaker (6000 ft/lbs or larger). Any spots resistant to the breaker would be drilled and shot, with production blasts consisting of 20 or fewer holes and controlled/loosening blasts containing approximately 20 to 40 holes. Using 25 -millisecond (MS) delays between holes and 40 to 80 MS between rows, the entire shot would take between 2/3 to 1 second. A 20 -hole production shot (BEX-2) would produce approximately 500 cubic yards, and a 40 -hole controlled/loosening shot approximately 400 cubic yards. We estimate that only one shot per day will be required. We have previously mentioned that ground vibrations will be controlled by limiting the amount of explosive detonated per delay (one hole per delay). Generally accepted formulas and graphs were used to- design the blasts. Site- specific charge -per -delay will be developed by monitoring trial blasts with a seismograph. Air blast calculations and controls will similarly be modified by analyzing site-specific data developed in trial blasts. Flyrock will be controlled by adequate stemming of blast holes (stemming equal to the burden) and cleaning of the rock surface to be blasted. In preparing our response we have numbered the paragraphs in the Peer Review report for ease of reference. The Peer Review report with numbered paragraphs is presented in Appendix B. COMMENTS ON THE PEER REVIEW Slope Stability Paragraph 1 General Information. No comment. Paragraph 2 General Information. No comment. Paragraph 3 Agree with opinion about general slope stability. See comments to Paragraphs 4 and 5. Paragraph 4 Agree with opinion concerning monitoring of excavation for slope stability conditions. Paragraph 5 Agree. Same as Paragraph 4. Suitability of Rock for Fill Paragraph 6 Refer to Answer 3, December Report. This is our responsibility. We will design the excavation (blasting and/or mechanical) to produce adequately -graded fill. Over -sized rock will be used as rockery material on-site or exported off-site. Methods of Rock Excavation Paragraph 7 Agree. Rock Blasting Paragraph 8 No comment required. Flyrock Paragraph 9 No comment required. Paragraph 10 Refer to Answer 4, December report. Hole diameter is much less critical than the powder factor (pounds of explosive per cubic yard of rock excavated). For the powder factors of 0.5 to 0.7 lbs%cy estimated for the site, flyrock throws of 100 feet have been estimated (Ref. 1, Chapter 11). In any case, flyrock is controlled by the correct -stemming and loading of holes along with the use of blast rnats. Blasts of the magnitude described in our December report are routinely and safely executed in major urban areas worldwide. Paragraph .11 The layout of the excavation is away from the residential sector that is located behind the permanent backslope. The blasts will be designed to direct the "throw". of the material away from structures by proper layout and sequencing of the delays. Paragraph 12 Refer to: answer for Paragraph 10, and Answer 4, December Report. Our proposed excavation plan utilizes small blasts, short holes, and light explosive charges in properly stemmed holes, all with the intent to control flyrock, minimize ground vibrations, and air blast. The excavation is not designed to be a commercial quarry, but rather more like a structural excavation for a building or a slope cut in a congested area (highway, railroad). The comment that the control of flyrock is dependent •on proper implementation etc. can be applied to any technical endeavor. We have presented a blast plan that adheres to the best current practice for mitigating the effects noted in Par. 8. Paragraph 13 We do not feel that flyrock can be directed towards the residential areas around the site for the reasonsexpressed above. Obviously, access to the site will be controlled during all excavation operations as part of the project safety plan. Blasting Induced Ground Vibrations Paragraph 14 The blast plan presented in our December report attempts to limit peak particle velocity to 1.0 in/sec by regulating the charge - per -delay versus distance relationship (Ref. 1, Chapter 11). Note for instance that within 200 feet of the property line (controlled blast), blast plan BEX-1 limits the charge per delay to 4 to 8 pounds, for which the estimated ppv is significantly less than 1.0 in/sec. We estimate that the production blasts (> 200 feet to nearest structure) will have maximum charge per delay of 25 pounds, burdens and spacings of 7 feet, and 20 to 30 holes per blast. This blast also is estimated to produce ppv less than 1.0 in/sec. As the distance from the blast to the structure increases (i.e. 500 feet .to structures along the Duwamish), the ground vibration decays rapidly. Paragraph 15 Refer to comments in Paragraph 14. Paragraph 16 During the design of our proposed excavation plan, . we reviewed actual seismograph records of blasts in similar bedrock within King County. These records indicate the predominance of frequencies in the range of 10 to 100 +/- Hz where both the USBM and OSMRE guidelines restrict velocities to less than 1.0 to 2.0 in/sec., hence our proposed ppv limit of 1.0 in/sec. Many studies indicate that structural damage occurs at frequencies .greater than 10 Hz (Ref, 2, Chapter 3). Paragraph 17 . PPV of .02 is noticeable in the same sense that walking down a. staircase is noticeable, and less so than a childjumping in an adjacent room (Ref: 2., Chapter 3). We would like to reiterate that we are proposing a blast excavation plan that averages one shot per day in daylight hours. The ppv of 0.70 would require that the person be within 50 feet of the blast, a physical impossibility. Paragraph 18 A pre -blast survey of nearby structures is common practice and serves to protect the interests of both the owner ofthe structure and the excavation contractor. Paragraph 19 To be answered by others. We should note that designing blasts for ppv< 1.0 significantly reduce complaints in studies carried out by USBM (Ref. 2, Chapter 3). Limiting blasts to • 5 • relatively small events and an average of one per day also significantly reduces complaints, in our experience. Air Blast Paragraph 20 Agree. Paragraph 21 Agree. Paragraph 22 Refer to Answer 4; December report. Our plan is based on a maximum air blast of 120 decibels for the productionblasting and 100 to .105for the controlled blasting. Paragraph 23 Refer to Proposed Blast Plan and Answer 4. Our blast plan has been specifically designed to limit air blast to below OSMRE and USBM guidelines. As in the case for ground vibrations, we reviewed monitoring data from another King .County blasting operation in . similar geology in the preparation .of our proposed blasting plan. . Using industry -standard equations relating the distance of the blast to the nearest structures, the amount of explosive . per delay, and the burden/stemming relationships presented in our excavation plan, the estimated air blast overpressures are 100 to 105 decibels for the controlled blasting, and Tess than 120 decibels. Fumes and Smoke Paragraph 24 Agree. Paragraph 25 Agree. The project safety plan will not permit personnel to approach the blast site until smoke has cleared and the registered blaster -in -charge has inspected the site. Paragraph 26 We have limited individual blasts to quite small proportions, thereby mitigating the effects of smoke and fumes. • On windy and/or rainy days, smoke and fumes dissipate very rapidly, while on calm days the smoke and fumes will not move off-site very quickly, giving time for the smoke and fumes to be diluted. Other Considerations Paragraph 27 Refer to Answer 1. The December report does include typical blast patterns and notes that an average of one blast per day will be sufficient to excavate the site in theprogrammed schedule. Paragraph 28 Refer to Answer 4 and Proposed Blast Plan. At an average of 500 cy of blasted rock per day and a powder factor of 0.5 #/cy, 250 pounds of blasting agents would be consumed daily. Explosive storage and handling will comply with all Federal and Local. requirements. Explosives are readily available on a daily basis by suppliers, . so on-site storage of major amounts of explosives is neither necessary nor desirable. Paragraph 29 Our responsibility. Refer to Answer 3, . December report. Large rock will be rare, given the close spacing of our drill holes. In any case, large rock is desirable for somefuture on-site ornamental development and rockery -sized rock is a desirable commodity. We do not plan to do secondary processing of the material produced in the .excavations. We would like to reiterate that the project is not envisaged as.a commercial quarry, but rather as a site clearing effort to produce valuable development property. Paragraph 30 Agree....; Conclusions and Recommendations for Blasting Operations No comments required since these points have already been covered in the preceding paragraphs. COMMENTS ON ENVIROANALYSIS REPORT — Potential Noise Impacts Construction Impacts Paragraph 13 The report does not present the basis for the "basic calculation" nor a reference for such calculation. The data for noise levels at 50 feet from the source is irrelevant since no construction activities occur within 50 feet of off-site structures. The estimated noise levels 500 feet away do not seem credible to. us and we would like to see the calculations: The assumption that 5 trucks would be working at the site simultaneously is also incorrect, given our proposed excavation plan that estimates 7 truck loads an hour leaving the site. . COMMENTS ON ENVIROANALYSIS REPORT — Potential Dust Impacts Paragraph 1. Refer to Answer 9, December report. Our proposed excavation plan includes wetting the surface that is being drilled for blast holes or broken with breakers. Note also that the excavation is planned for fall and winter months when rainfall is most common. CLOSURE This report was authorized by, and has been prepared for the exclusive use of, Mobile Crane and its consultants. The observations and analyses refer only to the specific project for which the study was authorized. The scope of this work precludes its use as a guide to the design of this or any other project. The report was prepared by Mr. Gerry Millar and reviewed by Mr. Frank Pita. Milbor-Pita, Inc. Gerry Millar, R.G... Manager of Tunnel. Services Frank W. Pita, P.E. President APPENDIX A Rock Excavation Issues Tukwila "Rock Pile" Milbor-Pita, Inc. December 1999 n 1 r 1 1 w 1 1 1 1 1 • =lij SHANNON 6WILSON, INC. GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS 0 SULTANTS April 10, 2000 Ms. Carol Lumb City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: PEER REVIEW OF PERMIT APPLICATION, TUKWILA ROCK PILE, TUKWILA, WASHINGTON Dear Ms. Lumb: SEATTLE RICHLAND FAIRBANKS ANCHCRAGE SAINT LOUIS BOSTON This letter contains our peer review of the geotechnical aspects and certain construction related aspects of the proposed Tukwila Rock Pile. The review is on the following documents: 1. Tukwila Rock Pile — Shoreline Substantial Development & Land Altering Permits, Tukwila, Washington, prepared by R.W. Thorpe & Associates, dated August 1999. 2. Erosion Control Report for Tukwila Rock Pile, prepared by DOWL Engineers, Inc., July 13, 1999. The following comments and discussion summarize our interpretation of the project as it relates to following: 1. Geotechnical related impacts of the proposed grading activities 2. The rock excavation methods proposed, including impacts from blasting. 3. Noise and dust impacts from the proposed grading activities. 4. Recommendations on conditions to place on the land altering permit for this work. Based on the above documents, two alternatives have been proposed for grading the site. The first alternative is to grade the site by a balanced cut and fill. The cut in this alternative contains approximately 50,228 cubic yards and the fill is estimated to contain approximately 48,631 cubic yards. This alternative is referred to as Alternative One. The second alternative is to grade the site by removing approximately 221,326 cubic yards of material. Some of the material would be used to preload the site to consolidate softer soils. Excess material would be removed from the site, after sufficient consolidation has been accomplished to make the land suitable for a light industrial park. This alternative is referred to as Alternative Two. 400 NORTH 34TH STREET • SUITE 100 P.O. BOX 300303 SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98103 206.632.8020 FAX 206.633.6777 TDD: 1.800.833.6388 21-1-08906-001 Ms. Carol Lumb City of Tukwila April 10, 2000 Page 2 • SHANNON 6WILSON, INC. Our comments and discussion refer to both alternatives unless noted. GEOTECHNICAL RELATED IMPACTS: Geotechnical related impacts relate to stability of the rock slopes and suitability of the excavated rock as a structural fill Slope Stability The two grading alternatives will result in rock slopes at the site. In Alternative One, the cut slopes will be approximately 15 to 40 feet in height and approximate the orientation and geometry of the existing slopes. In Alternative Two, a rock slope oriented in a north south direction and approximately 70 feet high will be created. The upper 20 feet of the slope will be cut at a slope of 2:1 (H:V). The lower 50 feet of will be created by leaving successive vertical benches so as to result in a 70 degree overall slope. The crest of the rock slope will at least 60 feet from the east boundary of the site. The geotechnical studies included in the documents indicate that the slopes are expected to consist of hard rock. The stability of slopes in hard rock is dependent on the orientation, length, and shear strength properties of discontinuities such as joints, faults, and shear zones exposed in the face of the slope during excavation. The geotechnical studies included in the application provide limited information concerning the orientation and surface characteristics of rock discontinuities. The proposed slopes in Alternative One are approximately the same as the orientation, height, and overall slope angle of the existing slopes so it is reasonable to assume that the proposed slopes will be stable. For Alternative Two, the slope will be excavated in an orientation that is different from the existing slopes, so there is less certainty that this slope will be stable. However, the rock slope in Alternative Two is set far enough back from the east property boundary of the site that it is unlikely in our opinion, but not impossible, that slope instability would result in disturbance off the property. Prior to excavation, it is very difficult to identify all the rock structures that may result in rock slope instability by geologic mapping and drilling exploratory borings. Observation of the excavation by a geologist familiar with rock slope stability can identify conditions and geologic features that could result in rock slope instability. If such features are observed during 2!- 1 -08906-001. L2. D OC/ W P/ E ET 21-1-08906-001 1 w r 1 a 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • Ms. Carol Lumb City of Tukwila April 10, 2000 Page 3 SHANNON 6VVILSON, INC. excavation, remedial measures can be taken to reduce slope instability from impacting adjacent properties. As a condition of the permit, we recommend that a registered professional engineer or geologist familiar with rock slope stability observe the excavation during construction in order to identify geologic conditions, including discontinuities in the rock, that could result rock slope instability that extends off the property. If slope instability develops during or after excavation, the owner should take remedial measures to prevent the rock slope instability from impacting adjacent properties. Suitability of Rock for Fill No information has been provided in the documents concerning either the gradation of the blasted rock to be used as fill in Alternative One or how it will be placed. This material may not be suitable fill for some uses if the gradation is poor, that is, if the fill consists of a high percentage of boulder sized fragments with insufficient fines and smaller particles to fill between the voids of the larger rock fragments. This is a potential concern if the purpose of Alternative One is to grade the site for sale as a building site. METHODS OF ROCK EXCAVATION According to the geotechnical report prepared by Milbor-Pita, Inc. (1999) and included in the permit documents, the rock at the site consists of massive andesite, breccia (a welded pyroclastic rock), and smaller amounts of soft sedimentary rocks. In their report, it is concluded that either blasting or heavy hydraulic breaking could break the rock. Given, the hard, unfractured nature of the rock described in the boring logs, we agree with this conclusion. While alternative methods of rock excavation other than blasting, such as water jet cutting have been developed; they are still considered experimental and are not a practical method of rock excavation for this project, in our opinion. ROCK BLASTING In the documents, rock blasting using small, loosening blasts has been proposed as a method for breaking the rock at the site. The potential impacts of rock blasting on private and public property near and adjacent to the site include damage due to blasting induced flyrock, ground 21-1-08906-001.L2.DOGWP/EET 21-1-08906-001 Ms. Carol Lumb City of Tukwila April 10, 2000 Page 4 SHANNON iWILSON, INC. vibrations, and air blast (noise). Potential impacts to people residing, working, or traveling through the area include death or injury due to being struck by flyrock and annoyance due to flyrock, ground vibrations, air blast (noise), smoke, fumes, and dust. Flyrock Flyrock consists of pieces of rock that are propelled into the air by the force of the explosion during blasting operations. Flyrock may result in damage to private and public property located near the site. The damage could include structural damage, breakage of glass, and cutting of overhead utility lines. Flyrock may also result in minor to severe injuries or death of individuals struck by pieces of flying rock. Case histories and estimated throw distances for flyrock show that rocks may be thrown up to approximately 2,500 feet from the blast site for blasts using hole diameters in the range of 2 to 4 inches (Dowding, 1996). Since individual structures and utilities are not identified and described in the permit documents, it is not possible to identify specific properties that may be exposed to flyrock from the proposed blasting operation. Maps in the permit application show that the property on the east and south sides of the site are zoned residential. Properties to the west of the site are zoned industrial, and property to the north of the site is zoned open space and contains a gun range. It is assumed that there are residences located in the areas zoned as residential. In addition, people traveling through the area on public roads near and adjacent to the property boundaries could be exposed to a potential flyrock hazard. At this site, the hazard due to fly rock may be greater than at a construction ,site where blasting is done below a level ground surface such as a basement excavation. This is because there may be businesses and residences located directly in the line of sight from the proposed blasting area. The applicant has proposed to reduce the risk for flyrock from blasting operations through the use of proper stemming and blasting mats. The ability to control flyrock by these methods is largely dependent upon the proper implementation of a blasting plan that has been specifically designed to reduce the potential for the creation of flyrock. An overloaded pattern of holes can result in blasting mats being thrown off the shot and result in flyrock landing outside the property boundaries. In addition, unanticipated geologic conditions, such as a soft fractured rock in the toe of a bench can result in insufficient burden and result in the creation of flyrock. 21-1-08906-001.L2.DOGW P/EET 21-1-08906-001 i Ms. Carol Lumb City of Tukwila April 10, 2000 Page 5 SHANNON F&WILSON, INC. An alternative method for reducing the hazard to property due to flyrock would be to cover property that may be struck by flyrock. For example, plywood might be placed on windows that could receive a direct hit from a piece of rock. People can be protected from flyrock by preventing access to the blasting site and removing people from areas where flyrock may be thrown. Blasting Induced Ground Vibrations: The impacts of blast induced ground vibration include structural damage to nearby structures and utilities and annoyance to persons in the vicinity of the blasting operation. To reduce the potential for damage to nearby structures, blasts are designed to limit the maximum peak particle velocity produced by the ground vibrations at the nearest structure. This is most commonly achieved by limiting the weight of explosive detonated within 8 millisecond time intervals during the blast. In the geotechnical report by Milbor-Pita, Inc. (1999), it is stated that it is possible to design blasts so peak particle velocities are less than 2 inches per second at the nearest off-site structures. - The Office of Surface Mining (OSM) and the United States Bureau of Mines (USBM) have published guidelines for maximum peak particle velocities that if not exceeded will reduce the potential for structural damage. These limits are based on empirical studies and the intention of the limits are to reduce the potential for damage, consisting of cracks in walls and ceilings constructed of drywall or plaster on lath construction. The actual maximum peak particle velocity at which any particular structure can withstand without resulting in structural damage depends upon the type of construction, the condition of the structure, the grotind conditions, and other site specific factors. OSM regulations (30 CFR 715.19) provide for three methods to control blasting induced ground vibrations. Unless adopted by local governments, the OSM regulations only apply to surface coal mining operations. The USBM also provided recommendations for maximum blasting induced ground vibrations to reduce the potential for damage to nearby structures (Siskind, et al. 1980). In both the OSM and USBM guidelines, the maximum recommended peak particle velocity at the nearest structure is dependent on either predominant blast vibration frequency or distance to the nearest structure and ranges from 0.2 to 2 inches/second. The 2 -inch per second limitation is applicable only when the predominant frequency of blast vibrations are greater than 30 Hertz (OSM) or 40 Hertz (USBM). Without ground vibration monitoring, it is not possible to 21-1-08906-001. L2. DOC/WP/EET 21-1-08906-001 • Ms. Carol Lumb City of Tukwila April 10, 2000 Page 6 • SHANNON 6WILSON. INC. estimate the predominant frequency of blasting induced ground vibrations. Peak particle velocities greater than those recommended in the OSM and USBM guidelines could occur at off site structures if the blasts are designed to limit peak particle velocities to the proposed 2 inches per second at the nearest off-site structure. Blast induced vibrations can result in complaints by persons located near the blast site due to the annoyance caused by ground vibrations. Konya and Edwards (1990), present the following set of criteria for human response to ground vibrations: Response Particle Velocity (in./sec.) Noticeable 0.02 Troublesome 0.20 Severe 0.70 Since ground vibrations decay with distance, the above criteria indicate that ground vibrations that are troublesome or severe could be experienced by persons residing at residences beyond the distance where peak particle velocities are 2 inches per second or less. These criteria also indicate that complaints from individuals may occur even if blasts are designed to produce ground vibrations that do not exceed the OSM and USBM guidelines for structural damage. A likely response to blast vibrations may be complaints by nearby residents that the blasting is resultingin structural damage to their residence. Damage that consists of cracks in walls and ceilings may have many causes other than blasting induced ground vibrations. Residents may not notice pre-existing cracks until vibration and noise from nearby blasting operations induce residents to look for cracks in their homes. The documents do not include a description of how annoyance, claims of blasting induced damage or complaints from the affected public would be addressed. Air Blast Air blast is an atmospheric pressure wave consisting of both high frequency and low frequency sound. The high frequency sound can be audible, and the low frequency sound may be inaudible but experienced as a concussion. Explosive gasses venting to the atmosphere, stemming blowout, and displacement of the rock face generate air blast. Certain atmospheric conditions such as temperature inversions and wind may intensify air blast. 21-1-08906-001.L2.DOGWP/EET 21-1-08906-001 Ms. Carol Lumb City of Tukwila April 10, 2000 Page 7 • SHANNON 6WILSON. INC. Potential impacts from air blast may include structural damage and cracking of windows in nearby structures. Air blast can also result in an adverse response by persons, even if there is no structural damage. The effects of air blast experienced by a person in a residence may be confused with ground vibration and result in claims of blast induced damage. The OSM and the USBM have developed guidelines for levels of air blast that reduce the potential for structural damage, glass breakage, and annoyance. Typical construction blasting is unlikely to result in structural damage or cracking of windows if the blasts are also designed to keep the ground vibrations at nearby structures to less than the maximum recommended by the OSM and the USBM. The maximum air blast allowed by OSM (30 CFR 715.19) is 128 decibel (linear peak) at any structure located within 1 mile of the permit area where blasting is conducted. The documents do not specify that blasts will be designed so overpressure that exceed the OSM and USBM guidelines will not occur at the nearest off-site structure. The applicant proposes to control air blast by using proper amounts of hole stemming and blasting mats. While such - measures may reduce air blast due to blasting there are many other factors which have a significant effect on air blast other than stemming and depth of cover (mats). Significant variables also include, among many other factors, the weight of explosive detonated per delay and the amount of detonation cord exposed and detonated at the surface. In our opinion, a blasting plan that has been specifically designed to prevent air blast (overpressures) above levels recommended in OSM and USBM guidelines should be used to reduce the potential for structural damage and annoyance. Fumes and Smoke Detonation of commercial blasting agents results in the formation of fumes consisting principally of carbon dioxide gas, nitrogen gas, and water vapor. Lesser amounts of toxic gasses such as carbon monoxide and oxides of nitrogen can also be produced. In surface blasting,. the fumes are usually dissipated fairly quickly into the atmosphere so it is unlikely that gasses in a concentration toxic to persons near the site would be created. (ISEE, 1997) Blasting can also produce smoke. Smoke is a combination of water vapor and products of detonation and combustion. Excessive exposure to smoke can result in severe headaches resulting from the inhalation of small quantities of unreacted and partially reacted nitroglycerine (a component of some explosives) contained in the smoke. (ISEE, 1997) 21-1-08906-001.L2.DOGWP/EET 21-1-08906-001 1 Ms. Carol Lumb City of Tukwila April 10, 2000 Page 8 SHANNON &WILSON, INC. It is possible for fumes and smoke to be objectionable to some individuals near the proposed blasting area if produced in large enough quantities and under atmospheric conditions that allow the smoke and fumes to linger. Smoke and fumes produced by blasting can be reduced by proper selection of blasting agents and explosives, limiting the quantity of powder in the hole, and by adopting appropriate blasting methods and procedures. A discussion of the production of smoke and furnes by blasting is not contained in the documents. Other Considerations Whether or not the proposed blasting will annoy residents living close to the site may depend on the total number of blasts and the frequency at which the blasts occur. The documents do not include a typical blast pattem from which the number of blasts required to accomplish the project can be estimated. While a small number of blasts may be acceptable, tens to hundreds of blasts that occur on a weekly or daily basis may not be acceptable to residents living close to the project site. - In addition, the quantity of explosives and blasting agents brought onto the property for blasting is not provided nor can it be calculated from the information provided in the documents. The quantity of blasting materials transported and stored at the site may be of interest to local government agencies responsible for providing emergency services to the community. The documents do not include a description of how oversize material would be broken so it can be loaded into trucks or moved on the site with earthmoving equipment. Usually, oversized material is either stockpiled on site, broken with hydraulic breakers and other.equipment, or broken by secondary blasting methods. Secondary blasting is usually accomplished by detonating small charges placed in holes drilled into the oversized rocks. Secondary blasting, if not properly done, can increase the incidence of flyrock since the blasting can be relatively unconfined.. While it is possible to conduct blasting in urban areas so as to avoid the potential impacts listed above, accomplishing this requires the proper design and implementation of a blasting plan that has been specifically designed to reduce the potential for impacting neighboring structures and residents. Designing and implementing blasting procedures that provide adequate protection to adjacent properties and the public depends on the knowledge, experience, and the judgement of the blaster. 21-1-08906-001.L2. DOGWP/EET 21-1-08906-001 Ms. Carol Lumb City of Tukwila April 10, 2000 Page 9 • • SHANNON &WILSON, INC. Conclusions and Recommendations for Blasting Operations The information contained in the documents is insufficient for us to offer an opinion on the likelihood that the impacts we have listed above will occur. Specific information that we would require to offer an opinion would include typical blasting patterns, hole loading diagrams, the location of blasts, the number and location of delays, the location and description of the nearest structures and other site specific information. We could then use empirical formula to estimate ground vibrations and overpressure levels at the nearest off-site structures and check if these exceed levels provided in the OSM and USBM guidelines. It is difficult to evaluate quantitatively whether or not flyrock and fumes can be controlled to a degree that will result in the avoidance of the impacts we have listed. Measures to control flyrock are based on judgement, experience, and the proper implementation of a blast plan designed to control flyrock and fumes. Trial blasts to demonstrate that these impacts can be controlled would be required. The State of Washington and various agencies of the federal governments have laws and regulations that govern the storage, transportation, handling, and use of explosives and blasting agents. To our knowledge these laws and the City of Tukwila Ordinances neither specify limiting blasting -induced ground vibrations and overpressures off site nor require the monitoring of ground vibrations and overpressures. It is also our understanding that King County standards for blasting that incorporate OSM guidelines do not apply to this project. The State of Washington (WAC 296-52-493) regulates the use of explosives and blasting agents. Some of these regulations do require the protection of off-site private and public property from damage due to ground vibration and flyrock. They also require blasters to protect the public from flyrock. The Office of Surface Mining has issued regulations and permitting requirements for blasting operations at surface coal mines. They are contained in Title 30 of the Code of Federal Regulations. These regulations and permitting requirements were developed to protect the public from potential impacts of nearby blasting operations conducted at surface coal mines. Due to the frequency of the blasting operations and duration of the project, particularly if Alternative Two is selected, the rock excavation project in many aspects resembles a small mining or quarrying operation rather than a construction rock blasting project. It may be 21-1-08906-001.L2.DOGWP/EET 21-1-08906-001 • Ms. Carol Lumb City of Tukwila April 10, 2000 Page 10 • SHANNON iWILSON. INC. appropriate for the City of Tukwila to place conditions on the permits that are at least as restrictive as the OSM regulations. If the City of Tukwila does not believe the existing regulations and laws are adequate to protect the public and off-site property from potential impacts, we recommend that additional conditions be placed on the permit. These conditions may include the following: 1. The applicant should use mechanical methods to fragment and break rock to the greatest extent that is practical prior to using blasting methods. 2. The applicant should submit to the City for approval a comprehensive blasting plan that is prepared by a qualified blasting consultant or blaster with demonstrated blasting experience in urban areas. The demonstrated experience should include projects similar to the Tukwila Rock Pile Project. The comprehensive blasting plan should contain at a minimum the same information that is required by OSM for surface coal mining operations (30 CFR 780). 3. The applicant should conduct blasting operations such that the most restrictive of either the OSM or USBM recommendations for ground vibrations and overpressures are not exceeded at the nearest structures, unless site-specific studies indicate other recommendations for limiting ground vibrations, as appropriate. In addition, the applicant should have pre -blast and post -blast surveys of nearby structures performed by a qualified structural engineer to evaluate its effects/damage (if any) due to blasting operations. 4. The comprehensive blasting plan should include monitoring of ground vibrations and overpressures due to air blast at structures nearest the permit area and at other structures that mightbe particularly vulnerable to damage. 5. The blasting operations should be conducted in compliance with the OSM's permanent program performance standards for surface mining activities (30 CFR 816.62 through 816.68) to the extent that they do not conflict with other more restrictive conditions contained in the permit. 6. The comprehensive blasting plan should include measures that the applicant will take to reduce complaints about ground vibration, air blast, fumes, and flyrock, and how the applicant will address claims of blast induced damage. These measures should include public notification of blasting operations and preblast surveys of existing structures in the area around the site where ground vibrations and air blast may result in complaints. 7. Before blasting operations can be conducted on a routine basis, test blasts should be conducted to demonstrate that the blasting could be accomplished in a manner that does not 21-1-08906-001.L2.DOGWP/EET 21-1-08906-001 Ms. Carol Lumb City of Tukwila April 10, 2000 Page 11 • SHANNON 6WILSON. INC. adversely impact adjacent and nearby property and the public. Plans and procedures for the test blasts should be included in the comprehensive blasting plan. CONSTRUCTION RELATED NOISE AND DUST IMPACTS Mr. Carl Bloom of Environalysis, Inc., under subcontract to Shannon & Wilson Inc., reviewed the documents to evaluate the project with respect to construction related noise and dust impacts. The results of Mr. Bloom's evaluation are attached. Mr. Bloom concluded that the Tukwila Rock Pile Project has the potential to result in the exceedance of the City of Tukwila's Noise Ordinance. A more detailed analysis of the project's impacts on noise levels and mitigation measures needed to reduce those impacts is recommended. In his letter to Shannon & Wilson, Inc., Mr. Bloom stated that dust from construction and quarrying projects are generally not serious health hazards though they can present a nuisance to some people. It is not possible, given the general nature of the information provided in the documents, to make a specific evaluation concerning dust impacts on nearby residences. We appreciate the opportunity to assist the City of Tukwila in the evaluation of this project. If you have any questions concerning the potential impacts we have identified, please contact us. Sincerely, SHANNON & WILSON, INC. George T. Lightwood, P.E. Senior Principal Engineer GTL:TCK/gtl LIQ SIC 5 ?F 275' TONAL` S • i P E512.1c/00 0 Co Enclosures: The Tukwila Rock Pile Industrial Site Project, A Preliminary Look at Potential Noise Impacts Report prepared by Mr. Carl Bloom, Environalysis, Seattle, Washington. Letter from Mr. Carl Bloom, dated April 4, 2000 regarding Tukwila Rock Pile Industrial Site — Potential Dust Impacts. 21-1-08906-001.L2.DOC/W P/EET 21-1-08906-001 Ms. Carol Lumb City of Tukwila April 10, 2000 Page 12 • • REFERENCES SHANNON f4WILSON. INC. Atlas Powder Company, 1987, Explosives and Rock Blasting, Atlas Powder Company, Dallas, Texas. Dowding, C.H., 1996, Construction Vibrations, Prentice -Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey. IEEE, 1998, Blaster's Handbook, 17th edition, International Society of Explosives Engineers, Cleveland, Ohio. Konya, C.J. and E. J. Walter, 1990, Surface Blast Design, Prentice -Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. Milbor-Pita, Inc., 1999, letter to Allentown Associates regarding Rock Excavation Issues at the Tukwila "Rockpile" Site, S. 115th Street, Tukwila, WA., Seattle, Wash., June 15. Siskind, D.E., M.S. Stagg, J.W. Kopp, and C.H. Dowding, 1980, Structure Response and Damage Produced by Ground Vibration From Surface Mine Blasting, United States Bureau of Mines Report of Investigations 8507. 21 -1-08906-001.L2. DOC/W P/EET 21-1-08906-001 1 1 1 1 1 a e A A 1 • • The Tukwilla Rock Pile Industrial Site Project A Preliminary Look at Potential Noise Impacts Introduction: The Tukwilla Rock Pile Industrial Site Project will involve the removal of the western half of a hill located in Tukwilla, Washington. It covers approximately 25 acres and reaches a maximum height of 140 feet and is bordered on the south by the Duwamish River, on the east by railway tracks, on the north by electrical transmission lines and a firing range and on the west by South 112`h Street. The area to be removed and re-contoured covers approximately 5 acres. This report will identify the areas sensitive to noise impacts and the noise sources in the vicinity of the project. It will describe how the hill currently affects those noise sources and will provide a preliminary look at the project's potential impact upon the existing noise environment. Areas Sensitive to Noise Impacts The areas most sensitive to noise impacts are typically residential areas or commercial areas where people sleep (such as motels, hotels and hospitals). The maximum permissible sound levels set out in the City of Tukwila's Noise Ordinance recognize the varying sensitivity of different land uses to noise. In the general vicinity of the project, the residential areas are located on the eastern portion of the hill which the project proposed to re -configure and on the south _side of the Duwamish River. Noise Sources The project area is surrounded by a variety of noise sources: major highway arterials (East Marginal Way, I-5, SR599 and SR99), railway traffic (BN tracks), aircraft (King County Field and Sea -Tac Airport) and gunfire (police firing range). Environalysis took two short-term noise measurements to quantify noise levels in the vicinity of the project site. The locations of the noise measurement sites are identified in Figure 1.Table 1 summarizes the results of the noise measurements. Table 1. Noise Measurement Data in dBA. Location Maximum Minimum Leq Dominant Sounds SLM-1 64.6 46.7 51.5 Gunfire, aircraft, traffic SLM-2 76.5 53.6 64.1 Traffic, aircraft Notes: Leq is the decibel level of a constant sound having the same sound energy as the fluctuating levels measured over a period of time. The noise measurement site SLM-1 is on the crest of the hill at the west end of South 113th Street. This site has an unobstructed line -of -sight to the firing range, the BN railway tracks and to aircraft operations at King County Airport. Site SLM-2 is adjacent to South 115th Street and is dominated by traffic noise from East Marginal Way and SR99. Aircraft noise is apparent here PROPERTY UNE. TYPICA Figure 1. Project Site and Location of Noise Measurements 1 Iv 1 L........„,„____ . % \ \\ \ (_____Int-=*-q,,z, . '',. \%\ 1\111\��••�\,� S 1 \-,. ^ •.�, \' \\`I `\\\\\\t'. `11\\\ 1\ ,\•_ Ili 1 1, .!yv �;—��1 a\l�!,;,;v \\1 \\1\\ i $4 APHY SOURCE: WAU(ER d ASSOCIATES. MAP WAS COMPILED USING PHOTOGRAMMETRIC METHODS: EMU& R ONES UNOER VEGETATION COVER UNE ANO GROUNO THAT IS OBSCURED BY .S, VEGETATION OR SHADOWS. 00ES NOT MEET NATIONAL MAP ACCURACY STANOAROS. ?ti FIELD SURVEYS MAY BE REatIREO. 1 s<447 • • also. It is apparent that at the time of the noise measurements, traffic noise is a stronger source than either aircraft or gunfire. (Note that aircraft operations at Boeing Field may be much less than normal due to the SPEE labor dispute). The Effect of Existing Topography upon Noise That portion of the existing hill which is proposed to be removed affects noise transmission from several sources. The hill clearly serves as a barrier to the transmission of noise from the firing range and the railway tracks to residential areas lying south of the Duwamish River (and homes located on the south slopes of the hill on South 114`h and 115th Streets and 40`x' Avenue South. This hill can also serve to block the noise of aircraft as they takeoff to the east from Boeing Field. The hill only blocks the aircraft noise for a small portion of their takeoff climb—as soon as the aircraft reach a certain altitude (somewhere between 800' and 1500') their noise has a clear line -of -sight to these residential areas south of the Duwamish River. Residential areas on the ridge of the hill (the upper portions of 40`x' Avenue South and South 113`" Street) receive no buffering of Boeing Field takeoff noise or noise from the railway trucks or the firing range. Several significant noise sources are unaffected by the hill: traffic noise from SR599, SR99 and East Marginal Way and aircraft flying to the south of the project to and from Sea -Tac Airport. The Effect of the Project Upon Noise Long -Term Impacts Long-term noise impacts are those which result from changing the topography of the site. Re - contouring the hill as proposed for Alternative 1 of the proposal, represents the "worse case" in terms of reducing the barrier effects of topography upon noise. With Alternative 1, the residential areas south of the Duwamish River will be more exposed to noise from the firing range and the railway tracks. It is questionable whether the increase in noise from these sources will be audible (or measurable) over the fairly high noise levels currently experienced due to motor vehicle traffic. The short-term measurements shown in Table 1 would seem to indidate that the firing range and railway noise is much less loud than the traffic noise and would be inaudible if there were an unobstructed line -of -sight. There will be a small "window of opportunity" for eastbound aircraft takeoff noise to reach the residential areas south of the Duwamish. However, aircraft takeoff noise will represent a small proportion of any increased noise levels due to the speed at which aircraft will move during takeoff and climb up beyond the area where the existing hill could block that noise. Construction Impacts Due to the fact that re -contouring the hill will occupy several years, the term "construction impacts" is not quite applicable to this project. The city may decide to view the construction phase as a rock quarry subject to the maximum permissible noise levels set forth in the City of Figure 2. Areas •eutially Affected by Higher Noise Leis due to Project Firi g -ange, Area subject to increased noise from aircraft takeoffs at Boein Field r 3-1) TopoQuads Copyright '0 1999 DeLorme Yarmouth. ME 04096 Source Data: USGS I-1650 ft Scaly 1 : 16,000 Detail: 13.0 Datum: WGS84 • • Tukwilla Noise Ordinance instead of as a construction site which is exempt from permissible noise limits during daytime hours. Typical quarry noise sources include drilling, blasting, heavy equipment (such as front-end loaders and bulldozers) and the crushers and screens needed to process the aggregate. Major sources of quarry operations noise are the dump trucks used to haul the product. The most likely haul route for loaded trucks will be westbound on South 115`x', then northbound on East Marginal Way South. This report assumes that no processing would occur on-site—the only operations would be drilling, blasting and removal of the material for processing elsewhere. The residential areas on the hill will experience some increase in noise levels due to quarry operations, although the western portion of hill outside the project boundaries ,will provide a useful buffer and reduce impacts. Residential areas south of the Duwamish River will be directly exposed to the noise of quarry operations and truck traffic. Noise from the quarry operations may echo off of the cut face of the excavation towards this area also. Determining in detail whether these noise impacts will exceed the standards is beyond the scope of this report, however a basic calculation of the possible equipment and its noise impacts indicates the possibility of noise impacts reaching or exceeding the City's maximum permissible levels. Table 2 summarizes the calculation results. Table 2. Project Generated Noise Levels in dBA Noise Source Noise Level 50' from Source Noise Level South of Duwamish (500' away) Drilling 94 74 Front End Loader 75 55 Trucks (5 simultaneous) 70 50 Total Noise Level 94 74 - - Maximum Permissible Noise Levels For Residential Areas 60 dBA daytime/50 dBA night For Commercial areas 65 dBA For Industrial areas 70 dBA Notes: Reference noise levels at 50' from source are from data collected at Cadman Inc. operations in Monroe and Black Diamond. Conclusion The Tukwilla Rock Pile Project has the potential to cause exceedances of the City of Tukwila's Noise Ordinance. A more detailed analysis would be needed to determine this project's impacts on noise levels and the mitigation measures needed to reduce those impacts. Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter BI, #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Phone: 206-431-3670 Fax 206-431-3665 Fax To: �� U� From: Fax: L OCv e S' Oq 3 [� Date: City of Tukwila id(v (!1 i '2r1 Phone: Pages: Re: ), /1)(k 2 0 Urgent 0 For Review 0 Please Comment 0 Please Reply 0 Please Recycle •Comments: r 5 Q a�r� LJ� v pe -es- ; e -es : �j�.nn�n '' 11'Ison , l'arr�I w� (( �2 r'�cl L� a- w � �e.�� 1--1e-e_ r9 -Cr; ce '4 /, 0••• TRANSMISSION RESULT REPORT TUK ( R 11 '00 12:04PM) DCD/ THE FOLLOWING FILE(S) ERASED FILE FILE TYPE OPTION TEL NO. 064 TRANSMISSION 9* -2066250930 (AUTO) PAGE RESULT 116 E-1) ERRORS 1) HANG UP OR LINE FAIL 2) 3) NO ANSWER 4) NO FA ILE CONNECTION ••• TRANSMISSION RESULT REPORT ( 11 '00 12:11PM) TUK, DCD/P THE FOLLOWING FILE(S) ERASED FILE FILE TYPE OPTION 065 TRANSMISSION TEL NO. 9* -2066250930 (AUTO) PAGE RESULT 05 OK • ERRORS 1) HANG UP OR LINE FAIL 2) BUSY 3) NO ANSWER 4) NO FACSIMILE CONNECTIO From: Cart Mom To: George Ughtarod : Date: 4/4/1.4 Time: 14.57.42 1• ENVIRONALYSIS AIR. QUALITY AND NOISE CONSULTING April 4, 2000 George Lightwood Shannon & Wilson 400 North 34th Ave. Suite 100 Seattle, WA 98103 Re: Tukwila Rock Pile Industrial Site- Potential dust impacts Page 2 of 2 Dust impacts from the proposed industrial site will primarily come from the excavation of the hill and the trucking of rock and aggregate offsite. It is not possible to estimate impacts upon adjacent residences from dust because of the very generic information we currently have regarding the excavation process. Quarry or construction site dust is not a serious health hazard for most people but can present a nuisance and detract from one's enjoyment of their property. In general dust from construction site and/or quarries is adequately controlled by techniques such as: • maintaining a damp working area surface near the quarry's working face • keeping the aggregate moist so it is damp when loaded into trucks • installing a wheel wash at the truck exit location Most of -these suggestions are standard good practice for rock quarries and are part of the requirements the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency would impose upon the construction phase of this project. At this site it will be beneficial to begin excavating on the east side of the property working west in order to leave a ridge of the hill, for as long as possible, between the subject property and the residences on the other side of the Duwamish. The dust impacts can be more fully analyzed once more is known about the proposed excavation process. Yours truly, Carl Bloom 422 30thAvenueSeattle, WA 98122 (206) 329-4634 ENVIR@WOLFENET.COM TO: FROM: Steve Lancaste SUBJECT: Poverty Hill — February 18 letter from Georgina Kerr et!al DATE: February 25, 2000 TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Mayor Mullet INTER -OFFICE MEMO It seems to me that Ms. Kerr and the others are persuing some interesting ideas. While the proposed development of Poverty Hill must be considered by the City according to our development policies and regulations, I think we should be willing to talk with her group and others including the affected tribes, Land Conservancy and OAHP. I would expect that the property owners will be interested in these ideas only to the extent that they are able to achieve what they would consider a reasonable return on their investment. The most important question posed by the February 18 letter is, "Who would pay for it?" Perhaps an early meeting with the property owners and other interested parties could at least start to identify the possibilities. From DCD's standpoint as -a permitting agency, the best strategy for pursuing the best outcome is to ensure that all issues are thoroughly evaluated and understood. We are committed to - completing a thorough investigation of the cultural and archaeological aspects'of the site, as well as all of the impacts associated with the development. This will ensure that all relevant City policies and regulations are fully considered in any decisions about the site's future. Cc: John McFarland Jack Pace Poverty Hill 000225 February 18, 2000 Steve Mullet, Mayor City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 Dear Mayor Mullet: RECEIVED FEB 2 2 2000 COMMON TY DEVELOPMENT As you know, our neighborhood is very concerned about the future of the 10 -acre parcel of raw, land that adjoins Poverty Hill. We recently gathered more than 70 signatures protesting the application to permit blasting and removing the two hills on this parcel. From our research, we have learned that according to Indian legend, this site is sacred -- it's believed to be the spot where the world was created. This is documented in Chapter 2, p..16 to 21, of Salvatore Trento's book, Field Guide To Mysterious Places of the Pacific Coast. We're awaiting additional documentation of this information from David Beurge, a former historian for the Duwaroish Tribe. Also, Elizabeth Nesbitt, Curator of the Geology Division at the University of Washington's Burke Museum of Natural History and Culture, has visited this site many times, and has documented the existence of 42 -million -year-old fossils that prove that this land was once tropical (including shark's teeth and shells). Ms. Nesbitt was instrumental in arranging the filming of a `Bill Nye, The Science Guy" segment on this site. The segment included schoolchildren from a Tukwila middleschool class. In the segment,. Nesbitt describes the value of hands-on experience in teaching children more about their environment. We fully appreciate the rights of private landowners. However, we have many strong concerns about the effects of blasting, the removal of these hills and consequences for Poverty Hill and:the surrounding area, the cultural and scientific loss, and the many additional negative implications that would result from the development of this parcel. We're aware that the city is scrutinizing the application very closely and has already requested a list of more detailed information and facts from the applicant. City Planner Carol Lumb has been extremely helpful in explaining these details to us. Here's some of the facts we know about this parcel: ... Wallace Enterprises bought this parcel on May 2, 1988 for $800,000. It's currently assessed at $836,200. The taxes are $13,552.77 per year. ... The parcel is zoned light industrial. Our neighborhood protested an earlier attempt (prior to 1988) to develop this parcel. ... The parcel has been up for sale several times in the past several years. The bottom line is that we're very much interested in preserving this parcel for future generations. We've had very preliminary initial conversations with the Duwamish Tribe, the • • Land Conservancy of Seattle and King County, the Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation in Olympia, and others who are supportive of this effort. But we know our first step is to appeal to you for your guidance and support. Here's some of the questions we're asking: ... How can we best work together — the city, the owners, the neighborhoods, and all others -- to achieve the best outcome? ... Is there a precedent in Tukwila for a public/private partnership to preserve land? ... Would the owner be interested in a move to preserve it? - ... Who would be involved in this kind of venture? • ... Should it be a park? A land trust? A preserve? ... Who would pay for it? ... What's the best strategy? ... What's the next step? We see this venture as a very powerful and positive stake in securing Tukwila's future as a unique and caring community. We have no doubt that as years pass, this 'site will develop into more than we ever dreamed of. We're excited about doing what it takes to secure this community vision. We need your advice and await your response. Georgina Kerr - 3834 S. 116th St. Tukwila WA 98168 x4_74, Sharon Nakata Rosemary Unterseher 16000 39th Ave. S. 4110 S. 114th St. Tukwila WA 98168 Tukwila_WA 98168 p.s. After all,. Fremont can only claim to be the center of the universe -- but we're gathering the documented proof that this is the spot where the world was created. rCarol Lumb - Fwd: Re: U.S. COE & Tull Rock Pile 1 Page 11 From: Jill Mosqueda To: Carol Lumb Date: 2/16/00 12:43PM Subject: Fwd: Re: U.S. COE & Tukwila Rock Pile okay remove the comment thanks »> Carol Lumb 02/16/00 11:53AM »> ok, here is my reply to your reply to my forward.... the water would be additional discharge into an existing pipe. the Corps will be in the loop on this when we send out the SEPA, so they will have an opportunity to review and comment. »> Jill Mosqueda 02/16/00 10:44AM »> Is this water a new discharge into the river? whether the water comes from the wetland or from other areas on the site probably doesn't matter to the corps. I think the question for the core is..Do they care if there is additional discharge into the river. it might be better to ask the Tuk rock pile people to contact the corps rather than not contact them and find out later they should have. that is my take on it. »> Carol Lumb 02/16/00 09:01AM »> Jill: I checked with Gary on the issue of the Rock Pile folks needing to contact the Corps of Engineers on the issue of diverting some of the water from the wetland. I'm attaching his response. I need to get back to the applicant's consultant on whether they need to pursue the comment in the technical comments letter that says they need to contact the COE. I am going to tell the consultant to ignore the comment in our letter, unless you think otherwise. thanks. SEGMENT3 • HEIGHT '=18 FT. TWO STORIES SEGMENT 2 HEIGHT = 24 FT. . THREE. STORIES SEGMENT1 HEIGHT = 28 FT. THREE STORIES SFT.. TERRACED BUILDING REASON FOR THIS INTERPRETATION: 5 The existing definition of building height provides little instruction on how height should be determined on a sloping site. Since buildings will increasingly be developed on sloping infill, this interpretation will provide procedural guidance. JUSTIFICATION FOR THIS INTERPRETATION: The calculation method described in the interpretation is virtually the same as that in the Uniform Building Code handbook. This will'ensure consistency between the!Planning and Building Divisions, and will reduce misunderstandings with the applicanti n reviewing building heights. [Carol Lumb - Re: U.S. COE & Tukwila OCPile Page 1 From: Gary Schulz To: Carol Lumb Date: 2/15/00 5:56PM Subject: Re: U.S. COE & Tukwila Rock Pile Carol, To my knowledge, there is no Corps permit required for hydrological modifications in a wetland. Fill and dredging are the main regulatory issues. DOE reviews and permits water quality certification for a Corps wetland permit. I suppose you can ask them to call the Corps anyway. Since the wetland is a monculture canarygrass area, I'm not too concerned about reducing some of the runoff to it but I think our PW dept should condition it based on the design. Make Sense?? Gary »> Carol Lumb 02/14/00 03:27PM »> This is a little embarassing, but Gareth Roe was responding to a comment in the 11/17/99 technical comments letter we sent on this project. We told the applicant that the COE must be consulted on the plan to divert runoff from the closed depression to the Duwamish River. I can't find any comments I got from reviewers of this project that has these exact words. The closest is a comment from Jill saying that you should be consulted regarding the plan of the applicant to divert water from the wetland. So....if you agree with the direction we gave the applicant, then do you have a contact at the COE? Thanks. CC: Gary Schulz Gttai,4 42 -2. Ic).000 DI. 1J N 0 ` . /W,414 (-0 (? (,oQc.<.t -�✓ COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Initials Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor's review Council review 3-8-00 S.L. ITEM NO. RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION Meeting Date Action 2-22-99 Forwarded to Planning Commission. APPENDICES Meeting Date Attachments 3-13-00 Memo from Steve Lancaster dated 3-8-00 3-13-00 A- Draft Ordinance ITEM INFORMATION CAS Number: 99-016 Original Agenda Date: 2-22-99 Agenda Item Title: Amendments to the Sign Code (Title 19) revising sections dealing with Temporary Signage. Original Sponsor: Council X Admin. Planning Commission Timeline: Sponsor's Summary: CAP has forwarded this proposal with a recommendation of approval. Staff recommends forwarding to the City Council for a public hearing. Recommendations: Sponsor: Committee: Administration: CAP recommends approval of the revisions to code. Forward to COW. Cost Impact (if known): Fund Source (if known): RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION Meeting Date Action 2-22-99 Forwarded to Planning Commission. APPENDICES Meeting Date Attachments 3-13-00 Memo from Steve Lancaster dated 3-8-00 3-13-00 A- Draft Ordinance +RE LralE LISTING r.[AVI11 MINER L[w£ METRO T. 23 N.,R.4E W.M. STA." 3 HECT a OF 201117) 3 !O AT T1__E "MAW 2 T" ST. 10' tiesrEEL eatfP l E c:Tt OF SE41T. E 12" 457144 npESSVRr LINE METRO 51-QEtT 7 OF 12. S"EEr OF tZ_--) I S 115TH ST• _ _- M.X. A -P — , — run. 4 -I r1/21 9'.A1 A 11 C' L-1 iii VE R e. itt ti 0260Sz9 f 1J1?l1STQ 83M3S 31-111 id1 PROPERTY UNE, TYPICAL 154- 6 ht min Evergreen Treee 49 Hemlock 10 0.0. 499 Cedar 0 0 cox. (Cenv 0 0 o.o. 52-2 vr oal. Deciduous Trees CS) 17 VVOloW WAsh 19 Quaking Aspen 20a URBAN aivinomea AREA &Y ROw Note:1 i' /kill Trees along .1 i,/ , r are suhOd to • MI:cation upon i 0/ iiiill : devebrinent. ..•-• :1 1 OM... .••••,, ' --....„...... • •- ••• I•-...., I k, \ Ig 11\ •--. \ / 1! ; l. ! li , \1 •\(\„ ,• i\ •,/J'<,:,:,-.,-::.-7::,x::.\.y'i - ' ,,, v\I(I1-I Z/I-ii1 ii1. -;l':lcI/.I:i.- i:f11I ;\; e1/1i \1/1; I 1I,4• 1•1.' I \ 'A ..,1:1i/,/,'1,.Ir,-/ '7..i .0 ->..1 .i. -\.'.4i: I'‘ /,/i;.• .(•) •: 7, /- -11\;/,• l`/‘k/1i,%',I\0W1.' 4 .. I/ .... .,A4'{1..ii•:.,1,..4-)/1i,'1il..‘..;1.6' \T.1l.1,ki). ic'.y. i , ,.' - 7 i e.''(/‘i: -/• ,;;/f-./,..1•11‘ / ;;„_':, - /L;," ,';41:1.,.' :;/'-?7.,.:,-.75..f,.-.„.!.,.,.1;t':•.14 -,„•-1,.-.---;”,4-_..e...:-.....;._...%...':..;:.,..-._:7_:.....,,.i_.,.7.-':..'4.._,,-;/%7. :,..:-.,..r:4.-.--.,„.:.-.1._.:,\-:.-\;.'./•.2.\:;:'4.1..:.;:-.f•-.:•4:1N.7,1..-.,•,:1'_)--.71--"\--.7„S\„,!.1.3-'1\..i':.r-...‘*;-:.-7,„f_.-5..:1•..-\...:.:I:_Th.-,. :",fi::-::\\._i'•.;1.,.•.F..:.;•,.:i. -.1;/,?.:,.i::.M..'-_:-.::/..,.---,..._:i::r`:-,//. _/:.i--,::-__.l,_:I-m..( .t;;..•:;/-/-..:I:'-l”,„•%;:--F:,:.';,X'-..7.i:.-,_,1..” .. _-;1,.-:-.'•' - .I-...-..4.,-.:'=<.-_.(-`":*=;.,1-'•,---7.'.:..0-.,.,: 1.1i..7.1..--1.7--:--.-•.-.,•---,..:•:- '.-.,.,..---".,..:-.'.-.:..•i'.:,;..'/..,.'..:..-..,.;7,.:i(- .-:.. -•7.z7-:.. ,'.-.: -.,-:.. . .•:71': ;.-,.,`.' '.-.. \. \.‘" ..•-.'\-1..-.(-*-‘ --K.-.._:•—....A(-..•-..,.-/..-: ;s1' 1 .-..\ - _•,1tL..)...\-, ,..,V.".. ...< j...-s...•1i.:Y "1ts.,-,N-•),.i• .- -1 _ •i'"Isl'./1- l•-li:N-'s\,„l: 's• ‘,_ci.'. :..V, .,\..,\/.-..)‘\A-.I., -"x.V\..•.•\I1\.I ,::0'•\-Zk_•1-N-I.. :\.?''''\;!'11:"1V\ •\.\63....v.\.ii...`A\1`: ;,-'i\.\A\ ': k\so\-' \\i.s' -.;‘‘.sv ' .,•1l,\,',\..\t`.\\'\ v , \, r''. \‘VV‘\ \;.•:s-.,.\' ,-:. •\ *s ,;\'-' \ .:N\- :. '-..).,;,\:1 ,N,-'\,,i`.\'.,,A ss -,.\\-\0:. t`: \,.‘'• •\\,.:1- :‘.\ \ s !‘ ‘. •\ -L. •. '.. \,'\l• -,.i - l\'1 :_J\ \.-.7-i..V.:--l\-.: \.s\:,\,,•...::\ ,.,t.\:e--..\',.‘ -.ss:,7\‘\ .\ •\‘'\....,t •\Y..n.,i1I.,‘.,• .' . :' 1• .\..\<\. :' '!:1 ‘s..\ .'•1I:\:' 1 h:\ -,' ‘, s•\,‘. ..\\•.,1.\;,•,1\••\•.•‘•1i-•I\ \Z ,l\ 1..., '. ., \•11a,1 -t\„: .\\ ,\\\:" .'. 1‘\\ .10\\:.'\‘;i‘\.:\\1\..:I.).\\..•.•t ./ •\:, .VI: \./: \.,s i:.':.•,.1/„,\'\\.‘,.1!\.•1p.:..:.\.'.Th.‘t-.s. I./.\ Iil1.1-.,1:.1.i7.-' .i. 1-.,1..`;ji-..‘'..1..:111 '11'„ A.j1i:zii.. .1 :''- I1, N:l;,i.,1 I•.1 i. •_ ' •• ... 1..1 1 .'..N.i-. I. .•-- : 1•. .11')/ 1': • . \ : ' /H •1 \ i :- ,.'''. . , i.• ; ,1•!IiI ,I i !t 1ti[ - • , /7 „, -‘ i 1 / ff s ili 1 ,,\ , 1 , _\‘.: 1 •i/ r ///,// 1i f///Ifi)1:c\ \\s\`C.',11 ,"/ : • / r\'N\‘\\ \ ‘ c 1A:A\iH:fi" _\ 1 1I)Il I.l\:::ili k; ' 1/-\1 1L7:::!.1- : 1, / lI: ,\).Irt!\)11-1l A I ih )) .:17ir :(1v\-;1:Ivri "‘\.kIr,YC‘"-"'I1 i ( i \fll/,\ .v;.\•:'-";'1ii[ / i9/(/i I' 1 4,4)/(//,2?\,A.1*1\:\l\ -\\k\:i i /I . A4/ - -I I 1,/i ' t,,...1-\‘('\\\\i;kx\1 ///1 <: I.111k\\\\\ \ i // i 1• 1\, . ..i' 1! - -‘. -- : /Ph ........ ...... -......:._.:,----:-_,,,,,:s.......::: ./ L.1;1 • ii• 11 ,. , - ssil•---:*1. 1..) \\...\\ \\•.' i- \ 1\ \ 11' 11111' • 11 : . , i 111 ; li IN, \ .:0‘ \'''•„ -----------...--L.-----'... j C 16' 10 1 Vs„,,,,,\(\.,.. „1..`•(-'''4:'•( tfl ii; • 1 i i, 1,,\‘,:,. ' ....„, ..Z.7. ----- ---......___---77-- • i / \ ,,,t/p ..:.: :1,,..z..., ---....'% / ' i • k • / ; I , ; (-- l % ))‘••, `\. ' \...\,.,,`,,,,‘\,, \ 1 li 11 ii ill '' i I I •! : I - I . • ril , I 1 \_7:.....-.7.. _ .....7:7.7.-...,...,....-;../.1'. \i‘Iiil \s 2II; : )11 ) / %.\•,:•-•-•-:'-'2.----.:---:_-________----"..„,/ //-,.--,.” j ....ill il . i LI ..":1\t‘t. \'. \ \ \ \\•\ \ X\likl 1 I 1 . i I .,•••.\-Z-.. •-_, :-:::::::-.7..--....---=7----..:7-7-..;,-,/...- ,Ap., \ %\:..,,' \ ---7 1 \\ ‘ X • ' l i I i I I : l .-••=.--,--.......,-_,....,.."-•-•........,-•••••,..--.1./ ", I : i • 1 • 1 /t1 //i/ I \ \\.\\.. '' \ • i .../ • , • ts ) , \\ \ ..1. 1 //I rii i Iii If \ \ • ' \\ '' 641/:'WitillIbl1 1, ,.:%•\ - ..-...--------------•- -,,,-- , —/--,i 1.1 r\1'7‘A. i.:\\‘‘.‘N‘•‘,\:\‘.q.1\.\\''•\.‘\\ '1 -., 1.r.ri .•14 , 1! • TOPOGRAPHY SOURCE: WALKER & ASSOCIATES. MAP WAS COMPILED USING PHOTOGRAMMETR)C M DS: 9/23/98. CONTOUR LINES UNDER VEGETATION COVER LINE AND GROUND THAT IS OBSCURED BY BUILDINGS, VEGETATION OR SHADOWS, DOES NOT MEET NATIONAL MAP ACCURACY STANDARDS. ADDMONAL FIELD SURVEYS MAY BE REQUIRED. ) ri=d1188158J 0 40 80 James White Tukwila °Rock Pile" Industrial Site Master Plan dcx mom. Crane Company, In°. 6900 2nd Ave South Seattle, WA same Far 208/783/9976 Phone: 206/767/4787 • MARTIN SMITH REAL ESTATE SERVICES 1109 First Avenue Suke 500 Seattle, WA 98101-2988 Phone: 208/582/3300 John Spiess, MAI Project Manager R.W. Thorpe & Associates, Inc. Bedtb•Anehorasio•Denver . Are...11,6.11mhz. Project Iftralimmai 710HopOulren9 7058econclAwmus SomIlle Washington 11(104 To1=6208,1124.11 652 Elbrit plarsarerlasorn SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT VIAr11111•11111111111111•IMEM111=11111111.11•11110 370598 SHEET lin.0 SHORE LINE PLANTING PLAN 1111r1111111=111111111MIMMINNINIIIIIIIMIM • Milbor-Pita. ASSOCIATES, INC. December 17, 1999 SC -148R Allentown Associates 5900 2nd Avenue South Seattle, Washington 98108 Attn: Mr. James White Mr. Gareth Roe, R.W. Thorpe & Assoc. RE: Rock Excavation Issues Tukwila "Rock Pile" At your request we have prepared responses to points #1, 3, 4 and 9 raised in the November 17 letter from Ms. Carol Lumb, Associate Planner for the Department of Community Development (DCD), City of Tukwila. We had previously prepared a report (June 1999) on the geotechnical issues related to the excavation of hard rock from the hill known as the "rock pile" located to the east of E. Marginal Way S. and to the north of S. 115th Street in Tukwila. Several previous geotechnical reports and development plans/maps were consulted during both of our., efforts: • Shannon & Wilson, "Preliminary Evaluation of Rock Outcrop", 1988, • Shannon & Wilson, "Site Grading for Future Development", 1989, • Earth Consultants Inc., "Geotechnical Engineering Study of City Moving Site No. 3", 1992, • R.W. Thorpe & Assoc., "Industrial Site Master Plan Site Photos, 1998, • Walker & Assoc., "1-100, 2 -foot contour, topo map of site, 1998. All three independent geotechnical reports conclude that some of the rock on the site can be excavated by light mechanical means, another percentage will require heavy ripping and breaking, and the rest would normally require blasting. Excavating the latter class of rock could be accomplished by mechanical means, in our opinion, however such excavation would by very slow and costly. In any case, both the heavy mechanical and blast excavation procedures raise issues within the community that are expressed in the DCD letter. Question 1. The checklist presents two alternatives. The first alternative proposes to excavate 50,229 cubic yards of material and use 48,631 cu.yds. as fill on site. The second alternative would excavate 221,326 cu. yds. And export this material off-site. Do these represent phases in development of the site or Geotechnical, Tunnel and Environmental. Engineers 3080 125th .Avenue N.E. Phone (425) 869-5778 Bellevue, WA 98005 • • Fax (425) 861-0677. are they stand-alone alternatives? If they are separate alternatives, which one is the preferred alternative? Answer. The intention is to - perform the entire excavation and site preparation as one effort. Most of the initial excavated rock will be used as fill as part of the site preparation work, with the advantage that this will create a temporary storage area for rock produced later in the work. We estimate that the excavation will require approximately 12 months in a fairly low -intensity effort, very possibly executed in two six-month periods during consecutive fall -winter seasons. Excavation utilizing heavy mechanical and/or blasting techniques will be Tess bothersome during periods of fairly. constant rainfall and short daylight This occurs because the rain both muffles construction noise and reduces dust from the excavation operations. Furthermore, there are less outdoor activities in adjoining neighborhoods during the fall -winter period. Light excavation (ripping and'. blading of soil and soft rock) and placement of fill on the site may occur outside of this fall -winter period. The 12 -month excavation plan requires that an average of 900 cubic yards of material be moved each day. Excavation activities will be performed during daylight hours only, 7:30 to 17:00. We estimate that 1/3 of the total rock/soil can be excavated by light mechanical means (MEX-1 on the accompanying sketch; dozer ripping and blading). The remaining 2/3 will require heavy mechanical. (MEX-2; hydraulic breaker) or drill -and -blast excavation (BEX-1 and 2). We have assumed an equal amount of heavy mechanical and blast excavation. In effect, 1/3 of the total excavation will be light mechanical (MEX-1), 1/3 heavy mechanical (MEX-2), and the remaining 1/3 blasting (BEX-1 and 2). Most of the early production will. remain as fill on-site. At some point the 900 cy per. day (average) will be trucked off-site; this represents approximately 60 loads per day or approximately 7 per hour. The equipment spread for the bulk of the excavation (MEX-2 and BEX-1,2) will consist of a hydraulic drill or air track, a D-8 or -9 ripper dozer, a medium-size endloader and/or a track excavator. Question 3. Under Alternative 1, would the excavated material be processed on-site and then used for fill material? It appears that under Alternative 2 there would be no on-site processing. Please verify whether this is correct. Answer. No mechanical processing of the excavated material is planned. The rock mass characteristics and the blasting and heavy mechanical excavation (see Answer 4) are designed to produce relatively small rock size (< 18 inches) for ease in handling and use as site fill. Any over -size rock will be separated with the dozer and/or loader for later stockpiling. It is not our intention to produce fine rockfill or railroad ballast by screening or crushing on-site. Question 4. The Checklist should define. micro blasting, how it differs from regular blasting and also the heavy hydraulic breaking process. Regarding the blasting, please describe in more detail the amount of micro blasting anticipated (frequency of blasts over what period of time) versus the amount of heavy hydraulic breaking anticipated. What impacts to adjacent structures might occur and how will those impacts be addressed? The" references to King County standards for blasting should be removed, as the Citydoes not use County standards. Answer. _ We have not introduced the term "micro blasting" in our report, however we have referred to "controlled blasting" and "loosening blasts". Controlled blasting is the use of closely spaced blast holes using Tight, well - distributed charges, initiated in a sequence that limits the burden (thickness) of rock moved by the blast hole, resulting in a significant reduction of energy transmitted back to the finished excavation perimeter. Loosening blasts are designed to heave the jointed rock mass rather than significantly break it by limiting the amount of explosive and matching the speed of the explosive (velocity of detonation) to the sonic velocity of the rock mass. Both of these techniques require more closely spaced holes than regular production blasting in a quarry, and the resultant cost per cubic yard of material is. significantly higher. Production blasting in quarries routinely spaces blast holes on an 8 -foot to 12 - foot pattern, 30 feet deep, 50 -plus pounds of explosive per delay, with final burdens of 10 -plus feet, and often hundreds of holes per shot. The use of these Targe blasts produces large quantities of rock, along with high ground vibrations, air blast, and often some flyrock. Controlled blasting (within 200 feet of the property line, see accompanying sketch, BEX-1) in our plan reduces the hole spacing to 2.5 and.4 feet, depths to 15 feet or less, limits burdens to 4 feet, 4 to 8 pounds of explosive per delay (hole), and approximately 20 holes per shot. Our production blasts, to be used at distances greater than 200 feet from the property line, are likewise reduced in size. Both our controlled blasting and production blasting plans are designed to limit ground vibrations (peak particle velocity) to <1.0 inch per second and air blast overpressure to 120 decibels, both significantly below the Office of Surface Mining and King County requirements. Controlled blasts and loosening blasts are commonly used in structural excavations, notably for existing highway and railroad widening projects where ground vibrations, air blast, and flyrock from blasting are strictly controlled. We see the work at the site as more similar to structural excavation than quarrying. Our excavation plan anticipates developing benches that are lowered in 15 -foot increments. The use of 15 -foot benches limits the depth of drill holes and therefore the amount of explosive per hole and per delay to quantities" that limit ground vibrations to <1.0 inch per second, as previously mentioned. Excavation on the bench will be first attempted with a large ripper dozer (D-8 or D-9). Any hard spots would then be attacked with a Targe hydraulic breaker (6000 ft/lbs or larger). Any spots resistant to the breaker would be drilled and shot, with production blasts consisting of 20 or fewer holes and controlled/loosening blasts containing approximately 40 holes. Using 25 millisecond (MS) delays between holes and 40 to 80 MS. between rows, the entire shot would take between 2/3 to 1 second. A 20 -hole production shot (BEX-2) would produce approximately 500 cubic yards, and a 40 -hole controlled/loosening shot approximately 400 cubic yards. We estimate that only one shot per day will be required. We have previously mentioned that ground vibrations will be controlled by limiting the amount of explosive detonated per delay (one hole per delay). Generally accepted formulas and graphs were used to design the blasts. Site- specific charge -per -delay will be developed by monitoring trial blasts with a seismograph. Air blast calculations and controls will similarly be modified by analyzing site-specific data developed in trial blasts. Flyrock will be controlled by adequate stemming of blast holes (stemming equal to the burden) and cleaning of the rock surface to be blasted. Question 9. The Checklist must address the dust emissions that will occur as a result of the blasting and heavy hydraulic breaking. Answer. Heavy excavation during the fall -winter season has the advantage of working in the rain, which significantly reduces dust. Since the area of excavation on any given day will be quitesmall, approximately 1000 to 2000 square feet, it is possible to wet the area being subjected to heavy excavation on days when rain has not done so. Haul roads on the site will be wetted to keep down dust, as is normal practice on many construction sites'in order to protect diesel engines from dust -related damage. The blast -hole drilling .rig will be fitted with a dust suppression kit, a common requirement. REMARKS The following references have . been consulted in the preparation of these answers: 1) ROCK SLOPES: Design, Excavation, Stabilization, U.S. Department of .Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Publication No. FHWA-TS-89-045, 1989. 2). • BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND THEIR EFFECTS ON STRUCTURES, H.R. Nicholls, C.F. Johnson, and W.I. Duvall, U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines, Bulletin 656. BLASTING GUIDANCE MANUAL, M.F. Rosenthal and G.L. Morlock,U.S. Department of the Interior, Office of Surface Mining, 1987. 4) BLASTERS' HANDBOOK, Dupont Company, Explosives Products Division CLOSURE This report was authorized by, and has been prepared for the exclusive use of, Mobile Crane and its consultants. The observations and analyses refer only to the specific project for which the study was authorized. The scope of this work precludes its use as a guide to the design of this or any other project. The report was prepared by Mr. Gerry Millar and reviewed by Mr. Frank Pita. Milbor-Pita, Inc. Gerry Millar Frank W. Pita, P.E. Manager of Tunnel Services. President Task/Activity Loosening/Controlled Blasts (REX 1) Production Btasta t 3EX 2) Hole Spacing 2.5 to 4.0 feet 6.5 to 8.0 feet Burden 4.0 feet 6.0 to 7.0 feet Pounds per delay 4 to 8 lbs. 16 to 25 lbs. Depth of holes 15 feet 15 feet Powder factor 0.55 to 0.6 0.65 PPV 1.0 inch/second 1.0 inch/second Sound level 120 dB 120 dB i Notes that apply to both types of blasting, 1. Delays between hole to hole shall be 25 milli -second. 2_ Delays between row to row of drill holes shall be 40 to 60 milli -seconds. 3. Ignition shalt be non -electric. 4., Explosives shall be medium velocity (<14,000 feet per second) 5. Stemming shall equal burden. 6. Sub -drilling per hole shall be 2 to 3 feet max. Milbor-Pita, Inc Geotechnical, Tunnel & Environmental Consultants Tukwila Site Allentown Associates 5900 2M Ave. S. Seattle, WA 98108 Soil & Rock Excavation Blasting Specifications SC -148R Table 1 Soft sub rade medias eavy axle lo:. ds n r81' TTCI is investigating and testing potential soft-subgrade remedies under heavy axle loads. by Dingqing Li, senior engineer, TTCI, and Steve Chrismer, formerly of TTCI apid track geometry degradation can occur under heavy axle loads. Several proposed remedies for this deterioration have been evaluated on the Heavy Tonnage Loop at the Transportation Technology Center, Inc., Pueblo, Colo. A 700 -foot -long, soft-subgrade test track, installed in the HTL, provides a nominal track modulus of 2,000 -to -2,500 lb/in./in. This section is referred to as the low track modulus section. Extensive tests and investigations pro- vided valuable insights into the rapid track - geometry deterioration that occurred in the LTM section under 39 -ton heavy axle loads. With an 18 -inch granular layer con- struction, the surfacing cycles required to maintain an acceptable track geometry averaged only 15 mgt, ranging from about 60 mgt to less than one mgt. The variance was mainly due to the effects of water on the clay subgrade surface. To date, several remedy methods with GEOWEB®' have been used for correct- ing the soft-subgrade failure. These include an increased granular -layer thick- ness and reinforcement of granular layer. Use of a 27 -inch granular -layer thickness improved track performance, but did not prevent failure following a heavy rainfall. Use of the granular layer with GEOWEB (24 inches of total thickness) greatly improved track performance. In the Summer of 1999, upon comple- tion of the GEOWEB test, a hot -mix - asphalt underlayment was to be applied over the soft subgrade to measure its effectiveness under heavy axle loads. The investigations and tests of poten- tial soft-subgrade remedies under heavy axle loads are a cooperative effort between TTCI, a subsidiary of the Associ- ation of American Railroads; the Federal Railroad Administration; the railroad industry and various suppliers. Low track modulus tests Excessive subgrade deformation fre- quently causes rapid track geometry degradation, especially when a subgrade is made up of clayey soils, and heavy axle loads. It is important to realize that an effective remedy for track geometry devi- ations may largely depend on the source. of the deformation. For example, if excessive geometry degradation is due to soft subgrade sup- port, ballast tamping may not be the most effective remedy in the long term. To define soft-subgrade failures under heavy axle loads, the LTM: section was installed in 1991 by excavating a 700 -foot - long, 12 -foot -wide and five -foot -deep trench, which was then backfilled with buck- shot clay brought from Vicksburg, Miss. The average moisture content is approximately 33 percent (optimum mois- ture content is 23 percent). To prevent the loss of clay moisture over time, the sides and bottom of the clay sub - grade were lined with a plastic membrane. The clay subgrade has a low strength (i.e., 13 psi unconfined strength as an average), and the track (with 18 -inch bal- last and subballast) has a corresponding track modulus of 2,000 -to -2,500 lb/in.in. From 1991 to 1996, approximately 130 mgt was accumulated over the LTM sec- tion. Under 39 -ton axle loads, the LTM track with the early conventional con- struction (ballast and subballast) required frequent surfacing and three track rebuild- ings (or three phases) in order to maintain an acceptable track geometry for normal train operation. From Phase One to Phase Three, the track structures changed from 18 -inch granular -layer thickness (12 -inch ballast and six-inch subballast) to 27 -inch granu- lar layer (12 -inch ballast and 15 -inch sub - ballast), and to 18 -inch granular layer with a plastic membrane on top of the clay. The track cross sections used for those three different phases are illustrated in Figure 1 (a)(b). During the first and third phases (each having an accumulation of 40 to 60 mgt), the subgrade deformed and track geome- try deteriorated progressively in the early. The geosynthetic GEOWEB was Installed as. part of the soft-sub- grade-remedytesting program. . Notes: I. Estimate 1/3 excavation is MEX 1; 1/3 is MEX 2; & 1/3 is BEX 1 + BEX 2. 2. MEX is mechanical excavation. Equipment spread should be D-8/9 dozer, loader & hydraulic breaker.. • 'MEX I is Dozer Blading & Light Ripping. • MEX 2 Heavy Ripping & Hydraulic Breaking. 3. BEX is blasting excavation. Equipment spread should be hydraulic drills, D-819 dozer, loader. • BEX 1 isloosening/control blasts (from 100to 200' of property line). •. BEX 2 is controlled production blasts (more then 200' from property line). 4. For blasting details (ie: hole spacing, powder factor, etc.) see Table 1 Approx. Elevation 140 MEXI. ......... ..... ..... • MEX 2 & BEX 2 4 to Sfr MEX 2 & BEX 1 2 Approx. Elevation 28 Not to Scale 15' 0'0 100' Property Lino Milbor-Pita, Inc Geotechnical, Tunnel & Environmental Consultants Tukwila Site Allentown Associates 5900 2" Ave. S. Seattle, WA 98108 Soil & Rock Excavation Sketch Cross Section SC-141IR Figure I • MiIbor-Pita, Inc . Geotechnical Services Project Date • Bellevue, Washington PH/FAX (425) 869-5778 PH/FAX: ( 206) 706-8366 Contractor Boring No. Elevation Hole Size Inspector Sheet of WATER RECOVERY ROD CORE LOG DESCRIPTION LUGEON TESTS 5 10 15 20 60 7 APPENDIX B Peer Review of the Permit Application Shannon & Wilson, Inc. April 2000 • City of Tukwila Department of Community Development November 17, 1999, Mr. Gareth Roe, R.W. Thorpe and Associates 705 Second Avenue, Suite 710 Seattle, WA 98104 NOV 191999 R.W. THORPE & ASK. BY FACSIMILE RE: 'White Rock Pile: L99-0061, E99-0023 Dear Mr. Roe: John W: Rants, Mayor Steve Lancaster, Director v NOV 1 _� R.W, Ci�y Q RP A,,4C. Staff have had an opportunity to review the materials submitted for the proposed excavation of the White Rock Pile and have the following questions or issues that must be addressed. 1. The Checklist presents two alternatives. The first alternative proposes to excavate 50,229 cubic yards to material and use 48,631 cu. yds. to fill on site. The second alternative would excavate 221,326 cu. yds. and export this material off-site. Do these represent phases in development of the site or are they stand alone alternatives? If they are separate alternatives, which one is the preferred alternative? 2. There is not sufficient information presented in the Checklist for us to determine the land use actions that are needed. One critical information element missing from the Checklist is the time period over which the excavation would take place. The degree of impacts from the work is difficult to assess without knowing the time frame for the excavation work. 3. Under Alternative I, would the excavated material be processed on-site and then used for fill material? It appears that under Alternative 2 there would be no on-site processing. Please verify whether this is correct. 4. The Checklist should define micro blasting, how it differs from regular blasting and also the heavy hydraulic breaking process. Regarding the blasting, please describe in more detail the amount of micro blasting anticipated (frequency of blasts over what period of time) versus the amount of heavy hydraulic breaking anticipated. What impacts to adjacent structures might occur and how will those impacts be addressed? The references to King County standards for blasting should be removed, as the City does not use County standards. Mr. Gareth Roe R.W. Thorpe November 17, 1999 5. Tukwila's Noise Ordinance (TMC*$.22) is not addressed by the SEPA.Checklist. A copy is enclosed. The Checklist must be revised to address the maximum permissible sound levels in the City and whether the excavation would comply with the City's standards. Current noise levels in the area must be compared to anticipated noise levels both from the blasting and the heavy hydraulic breaking work and the noise from trucks and other equipment that will operate on the site. If any processing of the rock will occur, then noise from this equipment must also be addressed. 6. The hill currently functions as a noise barrier for neighborhoods on the south from noise generated by the gun range and the King County Airport. The Checklist should address the long-term and short-term impacts to the surrounding neighborhoods from the removal of the hill. 7. No detailed traffic information is provided on the number of trips anticipated from Alternative/Phase.1 and II. A traffic study must be provided that addresses this issue. 8. The Checklist does not provide information on any birds or animals that have been observed on or near the site. It can be assumed that an undeveloped, vegetated 10 - acre parcel would provide habitat to some birds and animals. 9. The Checklist must address the dust emissions that will occur as a result of the blasting and heavy hydraulic breaking. 10. The Pre -Application Checklist prepared by the Public Works Department indicates that a 42 -inch Metro sewer pipe runs north/south through the site and that there is also a Puget Sound Electric R.O.W. that runs through the property. The Checklist must address these and any other utilities that may be affected by the site excavation. 11. I did not receive an Affidavit of Posting for the Notice of Application. Please complete the enclosed Affidavit and return it to me for the files. 12. A landscape plan must be submitted for the trees to be planted in the shoreline to replace some of the trees removed from sensitive areas on the site. 13. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers must be consulted on the diversion of run-off from the closed depression to the Duwamish River. The proposal to excavate a site of this size in an urbanized'area could create probable significant adverse impacts. Please be aware that the environmental determination on this project could be a Determination of Significance. I may have comments on the project to pass on from the City's Urban Environmentalist. These will be passed along as soon as they are available. In addition, we will be requesting peer review from an engineering firm of the geotechnical materials submitted. q:\carol\White Rock Pile\rwthorpe.doc Mr. Gareth Roe R.W. Thorpe November 17, 1999 Any relevant comments, questions or issues from the peer review will also be conveyed to you. For the purposes of TMC 18.104.130 1., the 120 -day clock has been stopped while the information requested in this letter is provided. Please call me if you would like to set up a meeting to discuss any of the comments in this letter. I can be reached at 206-431- 3661. Sincerely, Camg Carol Lumb Associate Planner Enclosure TMC 8.22 cc: Jack Pace, Planning Manager Jim Morrow, Director, Public Works Department Jill Mosqueda, Associate Engineer Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist q:\carol\White Rock Pile\rwthorpe.doc 3 ,Final Scope of Work: Lone Star Mining Operation EIS - DOES, King County Washington Page 1 of 9 King County, Washington HOME NEWS DES Department of Development and Environmental Services SERVICES I. INTRODUCTION COMMENTS Final Scope of Work Maury Island Mining Operation Environmental Impact Statement SEARCH Std filo Optotton The King County Department of Development and Environmental Services (DDES) has issued a determination of significance under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) for Northwest Aggregate's Maury Island sand and gravel mining operation. A Scope of Work for the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required under SEPA; RCW Chapter 43.21C and WAC Chapter 197-11. This scope of work outlines the tasks that shall be completed by Jones & Stokes, the consulting firm selected by King County to prepare the Draft and Final EIS for the proposed Maury Island Lone Star Gravel mining operation (referred to subsequently as "the proposal"). Unless otherwise stated, work items stated in this scope of work as "will be completed" (or stated similarly) refer to work to be completed by Jones & Stokes and its subconsultants. This scope of work responds to the issues identified in the Determination of Significance issued by King County for the Proposal, as well as issues brought forth by concerned citizens. Subsequent review may result in modification to this scope as necessary to comply with SEPA and to address concerns of citizens and other parties of interest. II. SCOPING THE EIS Detailed scoping of the EIS included a three week review and comment period, and a scoping workshop held in the community. Citizen representatives were also included in interviews of prospective EIS consultants. II. PREPARATION OF THE EIS The EIS will be prepared generally in accordance with this scope of work and with the requirements of WAC 197-11-400 et seq. The analysis will assess environmental impacts likely to result from the mining the 235 acres Northwest Aggregate's Maury Island sand and gravel site. Mining operations would occur in approximately 32 acre phases. Up to 7.5 million tons of sand and gravel per year would be extracted from the site depending on market conditions. The total amount of sand and gravel on the site is estimated to be 85 million tons. Active mining operations would be confined to approximately 60 acres at any one time. Large contracts requiring barged material would require up four 10,000 ton barges per day, five days per week. No new permanent structures are proposed. The assessment of impacts and identification of significant unavoidable adverse impacts http://www.metrokc.gov/ddes/lusd/mim/mim scop.htm?x=17&y=8 11/9/99 • use the County's program materials, and ; • participate in Green Works promotional activities/advertising. • insert the "Tukwila Business Recycler" newsletter in King County's business recycling newsletter for distribution to Tukwila businesses; • involve County staff as appropriate in any workshops or recognition events. • publish an ad in the South King County Yellow Pages (along with King County and other jurisdictions). Deliverables: We will prepare at least one "Tukwila Business Recycler" insert, and other promotional/educational pieces as appropriate, including an ad in the South King County Yellow Pages (with assistance from King County and other jurisdictions). We are not yet sure which editions we will target for inserts. 4. Evaluation We plan to evaluate program activities by tracking the following: • number of firms assisted by the Tukwila Business Recycles program; • number of Green Works members (new/Distinguished/Partners) we assisted; • number (and source) of calls for assistance. We will try to measure progress by surveying garbage and recycling haulers to gain information about recycling/waste diversion rates in late 1999. Deliverables: We will prepare and submit quarterly progress and final evaluation reports. Evaluation activities and the time allocated to accomplish them are included in the Technical Assistance and Education/Promotion categories. 5. Implementation Schedule/Timeline We hope to begin technical assistance and education/promotional activities in the first quarter, 2000 and continue through the fourth quarter, 2000. 6. Program Reporting The City of Tukwila will submit quarterly reports to King County Solid Waste Division. These reports will include: 1) a narrative progress report which includes an update on each program or project approved in the scope of work; 2) copies of the materials created by the City for businesses, e.g. newsletter inserts; 3) a computer-generated chart which lists each business along with information about the business and the type of assistance as requested in the template provided by the County; and 4) a reimbursement request in a format provided by the County detailing and documenting the expenses incurred each quarter related to the Business Recycling City Optional Program. Final Scope of Work: Lone Star Mining Operation EIS - DDES, King County Washington Page 2 of 9 should assume compliance with all applicable King County, State and Federal codes and regulations. To the degree that information is available or can be reasonably obtained, the analysis should include an assessment of direct, indirect and cumulative impacts likely to result from the proposal. Clearly indicate which mitigation measures are proposed by the applicant, which are required and which are potential. Provide any required mitigation plans at a level of detail commensurate with the level of significance of specific impacts. Only those measures relevant to identified impacts should be discussed and any significant unavoidable adverse environmental impacts that would result from the proposal should be called out. III. PROPOSAL AND ALTERNATIVES A. PROPOSAL Describe the proposal, including the location, proposed uses (sand and gravel extraction, processing and transport), and construction timing. Provide a brief history and overview of applicable policies of the Growth Management Act, comprehensive plan of King County and the Vashon community plan. Also summarize and reference information, ordinances, and policies relating to the provision of resource extraction and mining. B. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSAL Discuss alternatives to the proposal, including: "no -action" and two alternative operational alternatives. Analyze how the alternatives accomplish the goals and objectives of the proposal. The analysis of alternatives should include a brief discussion of any alternatives that have been considered and discarded. IV. ELEMENTS OF THE ENVIRONMENT A. AIR Issues to be Analyzed: 1. Would fugitive dust or other airborne particulates generated from the project site drift to nearby residential areas, other adjacent properties and/or roads, or across Puget Sound? 2. For cumulative impacts, would project -generated air pollutants cause or contribute to a new violation of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards, increase the frequency or severity of an existing violation, or delay the timely attainment of a standard? 3. Would the project emit more than the threshold amount of criteria pollutant. Critical Assumptions, Methods, or Models to be Employed: Assumptions 1. Due to the rural nature of the site and the absence of any major pollution sources in the area, the existing air quality in the vicinity of the site is very good. The project area is within the PM10 attainment area. Barge shipments from the site would be based on market conditions. For larger projects, three to four 10,000 -ton barges could be loaded per day for transport. Barges would be transported by diesel -powered tug http://www.metrokc.gov/ddes/lusd/mim/mim_scop.htm?x=17&y=8 11/9/99 7. Budget Our budget reflects an expenditure of the entire $21,463 in COP funding allocated by King County. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE: Office/Operating Supplies 0 Other Services & Charges 20,078 Consultant Services (approx.. $20,078) EDUCATION/PROMOTION: Office/Operating Supplies Other Services & Charges Consultant Services ($900 est.) Newsletter Production ($600 est.) Yellow Pages Ad ($500 est.) 2,000 TOTAL $22,078 (Revised 9/7/99) 0 Final Scope of Work: Lone Star Mining Operation EIS - DDES, King County Washington Page 3 of 9 boats which emit pollutants such as nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons, sulfur dioxide, and carbon monoxide, but the vessels would be located at least 0.25 mile from neighboring properties and no significant impacts would be expected from this source. 2. On -island truck transport, estimated at approximately 10 haul trucks per day, would not increase under the proposal, and would also be a minor source of vehicle emissions. 3. Odors would not be a problem because the facility will not include odor -producing activities such as an asphalt hot mix plant. Methods: The air quality analysis for the Maury Island Gravel Mine project will consist of two sections: the Existing Conditions setting and the Impacts section. Each of these is discussed below. The Existing Conditions section of the analysis will: 1. Summarize the project area's topography and meteorology and describe their effects on local air quality, 2. Review existing air quality in the project area using ambient air quality monitoring data collected by the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency (PSAPCA), 3. Describe existing sources of air pollution in the project vicinity, and existing PSAPCA air quality rules, regulations, and policies affecting the project. The Impacts section will identify air quality significance criteria, discuss the methodology used to estimate air emissions, identify the air quality impacts that would result from the project and the mitigation measures needed to minimize those impacts. The following types of impacts will be evaluated: 1. Fugitive dust emissions will be generated by heavy equipment (e.g., dozers, graders, and trucks) used to remove trees, shrubs, and top soil from the mining area in preparation for sand and gravel extraction and during mining operations. 2. Haul trucks operating on paved and unpaved roads would be a minor source of fugitive dust and exhaust particulates. 3. Drop points along the conveyor would result in the generation of minor amounts of fugitive dust, as would emissions from stockpiled mined sand and gravel Emissions will be based on estimates provided by the project applicant or if unavailable from the project applicant, emissions will be calculated using EPA emission factors (AP -42, 1985 and 1995 versions) from similar projects. Emissions will be based on the project's estimated aggregate mining and processing capacity and estimated capacities for each project component. Ambient PM10 concentrations from stationary and area emission sources will be estimated using dispersion screening models recommended by the PSAPCA. Additional work may be added to this scope by King County if the preliminary screening model analysis indicates potentially significant air quality impacts, in which case more refined modeling may be appropriate such as EPA's industrial source complex short term 3 (ISCST3) model or the Fugitive Dust Model (FDM). Because of the data -intensive (and site-specific meteorological conditions) requirements of the ISCST3 and FDM, these are not appropriate for the initial screening evaluation of air quality impacts, and are not included in this scope of work. Modeling will be coordinated with the PSAPCA and will be designed to estimate maximum project -related concentrations at the closest sensitive receptors. http://www.metrokc.gov/ddes/lusd/mim/mim_scop.htm?x=17&y=8 11 /9/99 "Success is not a doorway; it's a stairway, and you have to climb it." Joan Lunden Final Scope of Work: Lone Star Mining Operation EIS - DDES, King County Washington Page 4 of 9 Mitigation measures will also be identified for all significant impacts. Mitigation measures will include measures proposed by the applicant and by the PSAPCA. Major Data Needs and Sources: Sources of information to be used for this analysis include: 1. Air Quality Assessment in Chapter III of the Expanded Environmental Checklist 2. Data and information included in EIS's for similar projects (e.g., Cadman High Rock Quarry, CSR Associated) 3. EPA Guidance such as "Guideline on Air Quality Models" 4. Discussions with appropriate staff at PSAPCA, EPA, and Ecology. B. WATER vlssues to be Analyzed : 1. Would the mining activity affect recharge of the aquifer system? 2. Would the mining activity impact adjacent groundwater wells being used by local residents? 3. Would the mining activity have any effect on the quality of the groundwater? 4. What is the potential for contamination of the shoreline area? 5. How would barge traffic affect Puget Sound water quality? 6. If the groundwater resource has the potential for being impacted both from a quantity and quality perspective, how will these impacts be mitigated? 7. What is the potential for ground water impacts from contaminated soils? 8. What is the potential for ground water impacts from heavy metal concentration associated with the proposed retention/detention pond? Critical Assumptions, Methods, or Models to be Employed: Existing information regarding the area geology and groundwater conditions will be used. This will include existing reports from the current mining operation, well records on file with the Department of Ecology, geologic information from the U.S. Geologic Service, and existing studies of the groundwater resource on Vashon and Maury Island. Existing site conditions will also be examined. Additional subsurface exploration to define the area geology and aquifer will not be conducted as part of this scope of work. King County may authorize an amendment to this scope should additional study prove warranted. The existing analysis did not identify the result of removing a Targe amount of material from over the aquifer. In many cases, such large-scale changes can alter groundwater pressure and flow rate and direction. To address this issue, (1) several of the existing wells in the area to obtain baseline data on water quality will be sampled, (2) aquifer conditions will be modeled to determine both the direction and rate of flow, and (3) water balance analysis will be conducted to determine affects on recharge and develop mitigation alternatives if required. C. PLANTS AND ANIMALS Issues to be Analyzed: 1. Would project activities, including barge traffic (e.g., prop wash from tugs), conveyor http://www. metrokc.gov/ddes/lusd/mim/mim_scop.htm?x=17&y=8 11 /9/99 "Success is not a doorway; it's a stairway, and you have to climb it." Joan Lunden Final Scope of Work: Lone Star Mining Operation EIS - DDES, King County Washington Page 5 of 9 belt spillage, or heavy equipment affect eelgrass, goeduck beds, salmon/trout, or other marine life? 2. Would the project adversely affect a plant or animal listed or proposed for listing under the Endangered Species Act (or any other species listed by the state, tribes, and/or King County as sensitive)? 3. Do the madrone stands on the site represent an important botanical resource and, if so, what would the loss of these stands imply in terms of (1) the intrinsic value of these on the site and (2) regional distribution of madrone? 4. How would the site be restored following mining? What types of plants and animals would use the site? Critical Assumptions, Methods, or Models to be Employed: Key assumptions are as follows: 1. No rare plant or wildlife surveys will be required. 2. The Expanded Environmental Checklist, Appendix C - Plant and Wildlife Assessment, will be sufficient to analyze impacts and compare alternatives. We will need only to verify and update information as necessary, but we will not need to conduct original data collection or research. However, additional analysis and agency consultation will be conducted to determine the effects of prop wash on eel grass beds as well as the significance of on-site madrones. Major Data Needs and Sources: 1. The Expanded Environmental Checklist, Appendix C - Plant and Wildlife Assessment; 2. A resubmittal for the most recent files from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife PHS database and the Washington Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage Database; 3. Field reconnaissance by a certified wildlife biologist; 4. Field inspection of madrones for health, general condition, and evidence of blight; 5. Inspection of marine habitats; and 6. Consultation with local arborists (e.g., City of Seattle and WSU extension agents) to determine significance of madrone stands on the site. 7. Consultation with biologists from the Washington department of Fish and Wildlife and botanists from the Washington department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage Program, D. NOISE Issues to be Analyzed: How much noise would be generated by the proposal and how would this affect nearby residents as well as cross sound residents. Critical Assumptions, Methods, or Models to be Employed: Potential sources of noise include: 1. Heavy equipment which is used to removed overburden material and ultimately the gravel; 2. Conveyance of the material to the stockpiling area either in the form of a fixed conveyor or trucks; http://www.metrokc.gov/ddes/lusd/mim/mim_scop.htm?x=17&y=8 11/9/99 access is not a doorway; it's a stairway, d you have to climb it." Joan Lunden Final Scope of Work: Lone Star Mining Operation EIS - DDES, King County Washington Page 6 of 9 3. Processing of the gravel which can include washing, crushing, and grading; 4. Loading of the processed gravel on to barges. Noise impacts are assessed by using source sound levels for anticipated equipment and standard acoustical noise modeling techniques to determine projected sound levels at noise sensitive uses. Source noise levels identified in the environmental checklist and noise analysis will be used to predict noise levels. Predicted project -related sound levels will then be compared to local noise standards and to the measured or modeled pre -project sound levels. If predicted noise impacts substantially exceed existing sound levels or if they exceed established local criteria, then noise impacts are identified. Mitigation measures to reduce anticipated noise impacts to an acceptable level are then evaluated where feasible. Major Data Needs and Sources: Major sources of information to be used for this section include the Environmental Noise Analysis and EISs for similar mining projects (e.g., Cadman High Rock Quarry and the CSR Associated Draft). E. TRANSPORTATION Issues to be Analyzed: 1. Evaluation of impact of barge traffic on other boat traffic on Puget Sound, including evaluation of the extent to which increased barge traffic would increase the risk of collisions and/or spills in Puget Sound. 2. Evaluation of impacts if material needs to be trucked onto ferries at ten trucks per day. Critical Assumptions, Methods, or Models to be Employed: Assumption that increased barging operations will be the primary transportation issue to be addressed in the EIS. Mainland trucking impacts will be evaluated at only a qualitative level, since future markets and routes are only speculative at this time. Also assume that the EIS for the third runway at Sea -Tac has sufficiently evaluated traffic impacts associated with that potential market. Traffic modeling and LOS predictions will not be necessary. Major Data Needs and Sources: Major data sources for this task will include the following: 1. Expanded Environmental Checklist, Appendix F - Vehicular Transportation Technical Memorandum, will provide the groundwork for most of our analysis; 2. Consultation with King County and Washington department of Transportation staff; and 3. Consultation and coordination with affected ports, maritime authorities, and shipping interests (as determined during scoping). F. RELATIONSHIP TO EXISTING PLANS Issues to be Analyzed: 1. Which applicable policies and regulations of the GMA, King County Comprehensive Plan, Washington State Surface Mining Regulations, Washington State Shoreline Management Act, King County Master Shoreline Program, Vashon Community Plan http://www.metrokc.gov/ddes/lusd/mim/mim_scop.htm?x=17&y=8 11/9/99 City of Tukwila L 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, Washington 98188 John W Rants, Mayor TO: Department Heads FROM: John McFarland RE: Preparation of Draft Ordinances DATE: Qctober 1, 1999 RECEIVED OCT 01 1999 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Recently we have been experiencing a series of "disconnects" with ordinances going before the Council. Information has either been left out or was inaccurately presented. This is an extremely busy time for us, so it is easy to see how these things can occur. Regardless, we have to do better. In an effort to eliminate a reoccurrence of this situation the following procedures are now in effect: • . Ordinances will have a primary staff sponsor (department head). • Draft ordinances will be reviewed and initialed by the sponsor. • Ordinances impacting departments outside of the sponsoring department will require review and initial by that outside department head. (Refer to Coordinating Draft Policy). • All ordinances will be forwarded to the City Attorney's Office for review as to form. • All ordinances will be then forwarded to the City Clerk for final review and production. • Any changes recommended during the review process will be coordinated with the staff sponsor. Ordinances that do not follow the above process will not be considered for submission to the Council, unless specifically requested by the sponsor and approved by this office. CF: Jane Cantu Lucy Lauterbach Phone: (206) 433-1800 • City Hall Fax: (206) 433-1833 Final Scope of Work: Lone Star Mining Operation EIS - DDES, King County Washington Page 7 of 9 and King County Zoning Code apply to the project site? 2. Does project proposal adhere to all applicable Federal, State and Local government policies and regulations? 3. What land use changes would.occur directly or indirectly, to the project site and adjacent lands, as a result of the mining under the proposed project? Critical Assumptions, Methods, or Models to be Employed: Grading Permit on portions of the project site. The mining as currently permitted, and proposed, would be consistent with the mining Comprehensive Plan designation and the Mineral Resource zoning classifications of the site, and would be considered compatible with the plan designations and zoning classifications on adjoining properties. Major Data Needs and Sources: vReview of applicable data in Expanded Environmental Checklist and review of current applicable Vashon Community Plan policies and applicable zoning will be utilized. G. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Issues to be Analyzed: Will the mining activity generate dust -borne and water -borne heavy metals. If so, how much will be generated and how can it will it be mitigated to below the threshold of significance? Critical Assumptions, Methods, or Models to be Employed: Verification of facts presented in Appendix B - Potential Water Quality Impacts and Mitigation Report of the Expanded Environmental Checklist. Upon initial review, it appears that sampling and testing of representative soils is sufficient to present sound conclusions about risks to environmental health due to disturbance of top soil containing arsenic and other heavy metals. The county may authorize additional work if warranted by the results of this scope of work. Such work may include additional sampling and analysis to identify if the project would likely result in any violation of drinking water standards (WAC 246-290) or groundwaters (WAC 173-200-030) and, development of appropriate monitoring and mitigation to determine if impacts could be reduced below the established thresholds of significance. H. LIGHT AND GLARE Issues to be Analyzed: 1. Would these Tight sources and/or glare reach nearby homes, including the Gold Beach residential community to the northeast, Sandy Shores to the south, residences to the west, or off -shore views from the water? Critical Assumptions, Methods or Models to be Employed: Computerized simulations will not be utilized. One photo simulation would be used to portray light and glare. Analysis of lighting would be based on consideration of the placement and intensities of lighting, including various scenarios extended over the key phases of the project. http://www.metrokc.gov/cIdes/lusd/mirn/mim_scop.htm?x=17&y=8 11/9/99 Scott, Alexandra, 02:37 PM 10/04/19, Recycling Works Insert for the From: "Scott, Alexandra" <Alexandra.Scott@METROKC.GOV> To: Vikkivan@aol.com, rob.vanorsow@ci.federal-way.wa.us, PWRCO@isomedia.com, PEIseattle@aol.com, lknight@ci.renton.wa.us, Soraya@seatac.wa.gov, aboyce@ci.shoreline.wa.us, rfox@ci.tukwila.wa.us Subject: Recycling Works Insert for the Winter edition Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 14:37:58 -0700 Content -Length: 689 Dear COP Recycling Coordinators In Todd Carey's absence, I'm collecting names of cities that are planning to include an insert in the Winter newsletter. If so, let me know by next Tuesday, October 12. Also, if you have comments that you might have about this or future inserts, please email me them. If I have not heard from you by 10/12, I'll assume that you are not going to have an insert and will not be included. Thanks! Alexandra Scott Green Works Business Recycling Assistance (206) 296-8454 King County Solid Waste Division 201 S Jackson St #701 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 http://www.metrokc.gov/greenworks/ Printed for Tukwila Department of Community Development <tuk... 1 -Final Scope of Work: Lone Star Mining Operation EIS - DDES, King County Washington Page 8 of 9 Major Data Needs and Sources: Detailed information from the applicant regarding proposed lighting would be used. I. AESTHETICS Issues to be Analyzed: 1. Who will see the change in character of the natural landscape? 2. Will site disturbances be visible from any important view sites, including residences, public roadways or from across Puget Sound? 3. What measures will mitigate, or restore, the natural character of the viewshed during and following mining? Critical Assumptions, Methods or Models to be Employed: Up to three photographic simulations (SIMS) will be conducted. Major Data Needs and Sources: Current aerial oblique photography of the site will be obtained. In addition, photographs from the perspective of major view corridors on the ground will be utilized. J. RECREATION Issues to be Analyzed: 1. Which public and private recreational facilities currently serve the public on Vashon Island? 2. Would the project interfere with the public use and enjoyment of any formal or informal recreational sites in the area? 3. How would the proposed project affect the demand for, and availability of, informal and formal public recreational and shoreline uses in the project area? Critical Assumptions, Methods or Models to be Employed: The current use of the project site for hiking, shoreline access and other recreational purposes may be restricted compared to existing conditions. A brief recreational survey will be conducted . The survey results will be analyzed to determine the public's actual informal usage of the project site. Major Data Needs and Sources: Results of public scoping comments together with review of applicable data in the Expanded Environmental Checklist and review of current applicable Vashon Community Plan policies, Vashon-Maury Island Park District plan and policies, and consultation with affected parties and interests as determined during scoping. V. SCHEDULE http://www.metrokc.gov/cIdes/lusd/mim/mim_scop.htm?x=8&y=17 11/9/99 r- •••- • ,.-•• BASSEJTI ..1"1,1•1C•rf :.••:.•••e. /v. ,-0•1.• 06.1111•101 ••—•••. 'c,94 ••••• '0 (i) MECH. PLATFORM PARTIAL PLAN BLDG. C 0 MECH. PLATFORM PARTIAL PLAN BLDG. D JAI 11 595 PONT OBIT orl,gtt, 0,2 TO • - e WOMMATIM otted/o CASCADE VEW EMORY DOI •-• • Yo.,•••,, 5,11••• .••••••••••..••• ROOF PLAN MECH. PLATFORM 15LD55. C $ D A2.5 Final Scope of Work: Lone Star Mining Operation EIS - DDES, King County Washington Page 9 of 9 Final description of proposed action and alternatives November 1998 Issue Draft EIS February 1999 Issue Final EIS June 1999 Updated: March 8, 1999 King County 1 DDES Page 1 Lone Star Page 1 News 1 Services 1 Comments 1 Search Links to external sites do not constitute endorsements by King County. By visiting this and other King County web pages, you expressly agree to be bound by terms and conditions of the site. The details. http://www.metrokc.gov/ddes/lusd/mim/mim_scop.htm?x=8&y=17 11/9/99 1 n, liaiS& few 0 -a., b°1 °t)C11 0 MECH. PLATFORM PARTIAL PLAN BLDG C .. _ • C) MC—CH. PLATFORM PARTIAL PLAN BLDG. D • .1.111 I • 1193 •••st c•••• cow's% BASSETT! e 1030131,0_41= NO carom CASCADE 0 MEW SCHCCL ROOF PLAN MECH. PLATFORM ELO65. C A2.5 •Lone Star Mining Operation: Proposed Grading Permit - DDES, King County Washington Page 1 of 3 King County, Washington HOME NEWS Department of Development and Environmental Services Click on one of the links listed below for more information and citizen input on this project: M DEIS Comments Eelgrass Survey Draft EIS Meeting and Comments Scope of Work EIS Correspondence & Interest Arsenic Study Study by Landau Associates Terra Arsenic Study Aro JI fffinaile Many of the documents linked to this page are posted in Adobe Acrobat PDF file format. To view these documents you should install the latest Adobe Acrobat Reader, Version 4.0 . This software is FREE, and was chosen to retain the formatting of the original documents for users on diverse computer platforms. SERVICES COM M ENT S 450�ta�tioPt eV° SEARCH 1011 Lone Star Mining Operation: Proposed Grading Permit Revision King County is conducting a review of Northwest Aggregate's (aka Lone Star) proposal to update its existing Surface Mining Reclamation Permit and Grading Permit for their sand and gravel mining on Maury Island. The existing site is approximately 235 acres and is located in portions of sections 28 and 29, Township 22 north and Range 3 east, on the eastern edge of Maury Island along Admiralty Inlet (see figure 1). Sand and gravel mining operations have occurred on the site since the 1940s. Mining is currently permitted on the site under King County Grading permit No. 1128-714 and Washington State Department of Natural Resources Surface Mining Reclamation Permit No. 70- 010256. These permits allow mining on approximately 193 acres of the site. Approximately 40 acres have been disturbed by previous mining activities. The site contains a portable screening plant, dock and conveyor system. Current mining activities consist of occasional sand and gravel extraction for local uselAppioximate.ly i1[O1R000Le it ;ic arils per year_hi`a ltite"n atractetl:#;rom the site under-the,exst,nggrading permit. Expanded mining operations are proposed to include three primary components: 1) g,iio:UI"n"d p1eparration, 2) phased mining operations, and -3) reclamation. Ground preparation would include clearing vegetation prior to mining of each phase. Topsoil would be stockpiled for future reclamation. Mining operations would occur in six 32 acre phases (see figure 2). Up to 7.5 million tons of sand and gravel per year would be extracted from the site depending on market conditions. The total amount of sand and gravel on the site is estimated to be 85 million tons. Active mining operations would be confined to approximately 60 acres at any one time. Large contracts requiring http://www.metrokc.goviddes/lusd/mim_perm.htm 11/9/99 CITY OPTIONAL FUNDS GRANT NARRATIVE 2000 CITY OF TUKWILA A. Basic Information 1. City of Tukwila 2. Tukwila Business Recycles (Business Recycling Program) 3. Rebecca Fox, Associate Planner 4. City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 5. We will work with a consultant to carry out the grant's activities. 6. We anticipate spending the entire $22,078 allocated to the City of Tukwila. B. Proposed scope of work 1. History of Business Recycling Program -- Tukwila does not have a contract with any commercial garbage or recycling firm. Tukwila businesses may use either a state -certificated garbage hauler or an independent recycler to collect their recyclable materials. In addition, companies may self -haul to area buy-back centers or bring recyclables to the Bow Lake Transfer Station, located in Tukwila. Of nearly 1,800 businesses located in Tukwila, approximately 201 firms use recycling services offered by two state -certificated garbage companies. Many other firms use a range of other recycling companies and services, including self -hauling to the near -by Bow Lake Transfer Station or other recycling facilities, taking materials to drop boxes, utilizing specialized facilities or having employees take recyclables home for inclusion with residential curbside collection. Tukwila has conducted a business reycling program ("Tukwila Business Recycles") since late 1993. To date, the program consists of three primary elements: 1) providing technical assistance to businesses to help implement or expand waste prevention and recycling activities; 2) promoting waste prevention and recycling activities among businesses through press releases, newsletters, and/or special events, and; 3) evaluating program effectiveness by developing a monitoring program, tracking the commercial sector recycling rate and assessing the impact of program components. Accomplishments during the first 3 quarters of 1998 include: • providing assistance to approximately 15 businesses; • beginning planning for a promotional event; • producing a newsletter, distributed to approximately 1,800 Tukwila businesses; Lone Star Mining Operation: Proposed Grading Permit - DDES, King County Washington Page 2 of 3 barged material would require up to four 10,000 ton barges per day. No new permanent structures are proposed. Reclamation would occur as mining reserves in a given area are depleted, and would include slope stabilization and erosion control, final contouring and topsoil placement, and revegetation. SEPA & Citizen Involvement The King County Department of Development and Environmental Services determined (August 11, 1998) that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) before the permit application can be processed further. Jones & Stokes Associate, Inc. was selected as the EIS consultant in late September, 1998. The final scope for the EIS is available for review on this web site or from DDES. The Draft EIS was issued on July 21, 1999 which commenced a 60 -day public comment period. A public meeting on the DEIS was held at Chautauqua Elementary School on Vashon Island (9309 SW Cemetery Rd.), on Tuesday, September 14, 1999. Over 1600 people attended, making it one of the most well attended hearings on a DEIS ever in King County. In addition to the transcript of the DEIS hearing, we have received hundreds of comments in the form of letters, e-mails, and comment forms. Our next task is to review each comment and decide if additional analysis and changes to the EIS are necessary. All changes and responses to each comment will be included in the Final EIS. Because of the volume of comments received we do not know the publication date of the Final EIS. However, once a publication date is known, all parties -of -record will be mailed a notice of FEIS availability. We have posted the results of recent arsenic testing on the Lone Star, Maury Island site. Both the Landau and Agra reports assess ten split samples taken from the top two inches of soil. The Terra heavy metals study examined cadmium and lead in addition to arsenic, and was performed as part of the work for the environmental impact statement (EIS). The draft EIS will include a summary of the Terra study. How to Get Involved To become a party -of -record or request additional information you can e-mail us at: Gravel-pit.lonestar-maury-island@metrokc.gov http://www.metrokc.goviddes/lusd/mim_perm.htm 11/9/99 • applying for and receiving "Distinguished Business in the Green" designation for City of Tukwila offices; • Preparing copy for handout/promotional pieces to businesses 2. Goals The goals of the Tukwila Business Recycles program for 2000 will be to: 1) increase the program's visibility in the community; 2) increase awareness among businesses of the technical assistance,_ which the City offers; 3) expand the number of businesses who receive customized assistance as a result of increased promotion of the City's technical assistance program. We hope to assist at least 40 businesses throughout 2000. The purpose of these activities is to increase business recycling, waste prevention and resource conservation practices in order to make progress toward our overall goal of 65% waste reduction/diversion by 2000. 3. Activities Activities in 2000 will be similar to those undertaken in 1999. A. Technical Assistance We will continue to provide technical assistance to help firms with recycling and waste reduction/purchase of recycled products either by telephone, by mail or on site. We believe that specific recycling and waste reduction practices derive from an underlying "resource conservation" philosophy. We plan to express this resource conservation orientation in our technical assistance and educational/promotional activities. When appropriate, we will not only assist businesses with recycling, waste prevention and purchasing of recycled content goods, but also furnish information about conserving a range of resources used in typical business activities. The resource conservation information which we provide will be linked to the reduction of waste which ultimately goes reaches the landfill. Business Recycling and Waste Prevention Specialists (consultants to the City of Tukwila) are available to give on-call assistance to firms. We anticipate receiving additional calls since we plan to continue placing an ad in the South King County yellow pages, and will provide information about city -sponsored technical assistance through business license information. We also plan to target the most promising industries/groups such as (but not necessarily limited to) property managers and large -volume solid waste generators to offer City -initiated assistance in recycling, waste prevention, and procurement of recycled content products. We may also focus on assistance with specific industries or types of businesses. In addition to telephone, mail or on-site assistance, we may also hold technical assistance workshops or other special events to recognize outstanding business recycling programs and/or • • Lone Star Mining Operation: Proposed Grading Permit - DDES, King County Washington Page 3 of 3 You may also write to: Gordon Thomson EIS Project Manager Current Planning Section King County DDES 900 Oakesdale Ave., SW Renton, WA 98055- 1215 Updated: November 5, 1999 Fred White Grading Permit Administrator Site Development Services King County DDES 900 Oakesdale Ave., SW Renton, WA 98055-1215 King County 1 DDES Pagel News 1 Services 1 Comments 1 Search Links to external sites do not constitute endorsements by King County. By visiting this and other King County web pages, you expressly agree to be bound by terms and conditions of the site. The details. http://www.metrokc.gov/ddes/lusd/mim_perm.htm 11 /9/99 provide information to targeted industries, about selected materials, or about the overall benefits of recycling/waste prevention. If other opportunities arise, we would reserve the option taking advantage of them, and revising the workplan. We will provide timely, scheduled telephone follow-up for all businesses reached for technical assistance. We hope that providing businesses with technical assistance which includes resource conservation will enhance its usefulness to businesses and make them more receptive to the City of Tukwila's efforts. This will ultimately result in improved solid waste management behaviors and progress toward reaching waste diversion goals. We believe that the best means to provide technical assistance to businesses is to contact them directly and provide them with individualized information about recycling/waste prevention/recycled products. Companies which receive customized information and follow-up will have both the means and the motivation to change their solid waste behaviors by limiting waste, purchasing recycled -content goods and increasing recycling. These actions will move us toward our overall goal of 65% waste reduction by 2000. We will coordinate our technical assistance activities with the County's Business Recycling Program by working with any Tukwila business referred to the City by the County. We will participate in any industry- or topic -specific campaigns which the County implements. Deliverable: We hope to provide assistance to approximately 40 businesses from the sectors discussed above. B. Promotion/Education We plan to promote non-residential recycling and waste prevention by choosing from the most promising of several activities. This may include: 1) ads or press releases for local publications which promote business recycling, waste reduction and the City's technical assistance; 2) Tukwila - specific inserts for King County's Business Recycling Newsletter; and; 3) informational materials promoting non-residential recycling. We anticipate producing one or two inserts to King County's Business Recycling Newsletter. At this point, we do not know which editions we will choose. Promotional and educational activities may also include general information on resource conservation. We anticipate that slightly broadeoning our promotional message will enable more businesses to benefit from our technical assistance services. Providing information about the benefits of recycling, waste prevention, purchasing recycled products along with resource conservation will expand awareness of recycling/waste reduction among businesses. This will lead toward increased recycling and waste reduction activity among businesses, and assist Tukwila to achieve its waste diversion goals. We will coordinate our promotion/education activities with the County as follows: Sent by: AGI Technologies 425 646 9523; 11/09/99 5:09PM;JetFax #675;Page 2/,4 • • Northwest Archaeological Associates, Inca Cultural Resources Management Services 54161, 20th Avenue NW Seattle, WA 98107. Tel: (206) 781-1909 Fax: (206) 781-0154 Email: nwarch jjetcity.com October 27, 1999 TO: Bruce Tiffany AGI Technologies 11811 N.E. 1st Street, Suite 201 Bellevue, Washington 98005 -1-ECEngEril OCT zy189y AGI TECHNOLOGIES A CDM COMPANY RE: ADDENDUM to Results of Cultural Resources Monitoring for Becker. Trucking FROM: Janet Liddle Here is a copy of the letter report for the most recent monitoring. We also sent a copy to the SHPO. Thank you, 0u RECEIVED NOV 1 0 1999 COMMUNITY. DEVELOPMENT Sent by: AGI Technologies .I -- October October 25, 1999 425 646 9523; 11/09/99 5:09PM;JeLFax #675;Page 3/4 • • Northwest Archaeological Associates, Inc.. Cultural Resources Management Services 5418% 20th Avenue NW Seattle, WA 98107 Tel: (206) 781-1909 Fax: (206) 781-0154 Email: nwanh@Jetcity.com Bruce Tiffany AGI Technologies 11811 N.E. 1st Street, Suite 201 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Re: ADDENDUM to Results of Cultural Resources Monitoring for the Becker Trucking Site The Becker Trucking Facility is located approximately 600 feet west of the Duwamish River at 12677 East Marginal Way South, Seattle, in Section 10 of T. 23 N., R. 4 E., King County. (See. Figure 1 for project area map.) The site is a truck maintenance, fueling and dispatch facility, with two underground storage tanks containing diesel fuel and unleaded gas installed in 1975. In 1998, the discovery of petroleum -contaminated ground water and soil at Becker Trucking prompted the removal of the contaminated soil, along with the installation of a ground water extraction and treatment system. Northwest Archaeological Associates, Inc., was contacted to write a Cultural Resources Monitoring Plan (NWAA 1999). Background information on project description, geology, ethnography, history, archaeology, and monitoring procedures is included in that report. On September 4, 5, and 6, 1999, Deborah Scratch, an archaeologist from NWAA, monitored the removal of approximately 1,100 cubic yards of petroleum -contaminated soil from the property of Becker Trucking, Inc. (Miss 1999). On October 16 and 17, 1999, Deborah again monitored the removal of contaminated sediments from an additional pit and trench dug to the west of the previous excavations. The first morning Deborah observed the sediment removal (excavated with a backhoe) from an office through a telescope due to high vapor readings. In the afternoon, and the following half day she was allowed to observe the excavations directly. Excavation started on the eastem side and were dug 8-10 feet deep. The western part of the pit was excavated 3-4 feet below surface. North of the pit, a 20 X 5 foot trench was excavated three feet deep on the eastern side and 8-9 feet deep on the western side. Stratigraphic layers were similiar to those previously observed, and included various layers of fill, until nine feet below the surface. At nine feet below the surface is an organic matrix, with an abrupt and smooth boundary. This layer is a very dark brown/black organic layer with many fine small roots, and no gravels. It represents a buried surface and these sediments and those below it would be the most likely place to encounter a prehistoric site. This should be a consideration in the future if excavations are planned which would disturb this layer or below. Below this layer is a greenish gray clay which extended from 10-14 feet below the surface where the excavation was terminated. No cultural resources were located. We thank you for your effort to contribute to the identification of cultural resources in this region. anet Liddle Staff Archaeologist cc; R. Whitlam, SHPO ECEDVED. NOV 1 0 1999 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Sent by: AGI Technologies 425 646 9523; 11/09/99 5:10PMJeffax #675;Page 4/4 • 2 Figure 1. Project area (USGS Burien, WA, 7.6x15' Quad., 1983, metric). CITY OF TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT REVIEW COMMENTS Project Name: Tukwila Rock Pile South 115th E. Marginal Way South File #: E99-0023 SEPA L99-0061 Shoreline bate: 10/08/99 Reviewer: L. Jill Mosqueda, General Comments 1) The project boundary lines are inside the property lines. There are rights-of-way/easements inside the property boundaries. In addition, the SEPA says the sewer is Tukwila, but our maps show it as ValVue. The Applicant should show proof of contact with these following: a) ValVue Sewer b) Puget Sound Power and Light - ROW c) City of Seattle - Transmission line and Cedar River pipeline ROW d) Metro - 42" Water line that appears to run N/5, probably in the Puget Sound Power and Light ROW 2) The erosion control plan is one of the most thorough and well designed I have seen in my 5 years of plan review. Applicant expects the sediment retention pond shown in the erosion control plan will be a permanent part of the storm water plan. This pond will eventually become storm water detention pond. 3) The Applicant discusses noise from the blasting. In the section on noise [7.b.2) ], the Applicant does not include truck and heavy equipment noise. Should that be included? 241 6eostuk i 1" tv.A.Axmc btkauss -ko kau,a, a,•,IAJAcLiCi, p,c ktTh\ ---t-ie,LLo e vt t,k. fLouL Page 2 10/08/99 E99-0023 L99-0061 ISEPA Comments The streets are South 115th and 42nd Avenue South. There a several place,where the streets given are 'I " `"ua-card*. [3. Water a. Surface 1), 2), 5), and 8. Land and Shoreline Use h] 2. Air a. How will the Applicant control the dust? Are there air pollution limits which apply? There is some dust control comment on the temporary erosion and sediment control (TESC) plans. 3. C. 1. Gary Schultz should comment on diverting water from the wetland. Shoreline Comments I went through the King County Shoreline Management Regulations, Title 25. The only Public Works related issues for this project are the erosion prevention and surface water requirements in 25.16.030 C. and F. The submitted TESC plan meets these requirements. Q:/projects/tuk rock pile/Tukwila Rock sepa CITY OF TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 P 4h6ilig(206) 431-3670 AFFIDAVIT OF INSTALLATION AND POSTING OF PUBLIC INFORMATION SIGNS) State of Washington County of King City of Tukwila 11E COPY...._ :ITV nr T", • MAY 0 9.2000 PERMIT CENTER 1&RealY• iKoe. (Print Name) understand that Section 18.104.110 of the Tukwila Municipal Code requires me to post the property no later than fourteen (14) days following the issuance of the Notice. of Completeness. I certify that on 101 5 ic)9 the Public Notice Board(s) in accordance with Section .18.104.°11.0. and other applicable guidelines were posted on the property located at t 1Z15 E. t t44r114a1. W6c`eS. so as to be clearly seen from each right -of -way providing primary vehicular access • the property for application file number gq0)-00z3 4 Lop, 06cps SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this (Applicant Signature) day of � 19 NOTARY PUBLIC aid for the State of ashington residing at My commission expires on 3 Zoo -� City of Tukwila Department of Community Development NOTICE OF .COMPLETE :APPLICATION Dated September 22, 1999 Gareth Roe R.W. Thorpe and Associates, Inc. 705 Second Avenue Suite 710 Seattle, WA 98104 John W Rants, Mayor Steve Lancaster, Director • RE: White Industrial Site ("Rock Pile") Land Use Permit Applications: E99-0023 (SEPA Review) and L99-0061 (Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Review Dear Mr. Roe: Applications for your proposed excavation and stabilization located at 1-1215 East Marginal Way South (King Co. Tax Lot No. 102304-9057), have been found to be complete for the purpose of beginning substantive review.' Pursuant to our conversation on September 16, 1999, the application is modified to reflect that "Alternate 2 Concept" and "Alternate 1 Concept" are actually Phase 1 and a subsequent Phase 2 further grading (respectively). Alternative Concept 1 (Phase 2) is the proposed action, as it is the most extensive action. Substantive reviewwill begin and will very likely result in additional information requests to demonstrate consistency with City development standards.. Information requests will include, but not be limited to actual site surveys which are stamped by a professional surveyor, information on excavation characteristics in order to determine if this is a permitted use, and traffic generation. ' Several requirements for the shoreline permit such as surveyed site topography, surveyed banks and bank cross-sections, have been waived for. the purpose of a "completeness" determination in order to allow beginning the.public comment period. However, they will be required to complete substantive review. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 White Industrial Site ("Rock) Land Use -Permit Applications E99-0023 (SEPA) and L99-0061 (Shoreline Permit) Notice of Completeness Page 2 Within the next 14 days, you must install a notice board on the site, per instructions found in Attachment B - Public Information Signs, located in the application packet: A notice of application form will be laminated by the Department of Community Development. You will be notified when this is ready for you to pick up. After the form has been installed, please drop off a signed. Affidavit of Posting .to show proof that the notice board and proper notices have been installed. You will be responsible for removing the notice board from the site once your application has been approved and finalized, and when all public comment periods have terminated. The Alternative 1 Concept Rough Grading Plan should be used as the "Site Plan" on the board. This may be printed on the board or attached as a laminated plan. Please do not hesitate to contact me at (206) 431-3684 if you have any questions. Sincerel et`non Umetsu Associate Planner cc: Reviewing City Departments Q:199\Rock Pile\COMPLTS2.doc Cov( PC111( (?(Y(5 (oKS Y7( THE ESC FACILITIES ON INACTIVE SITES SHALL BE INSPECTED AND MAINTAINED A MINIMUM OF - ONCE A MONTH OR WITHIN FORTY—EIGHT (48) HOURS FOLLOWING A STORM EVENT. • 0.~ _ A.T NO TIME SHALL MORE THAN ONE (1) FOOT OF SEDIMENT BE .ALLOWED- TO ACCUMULATE WITHIN A CATCH BASIN. ALL CATCH BASINS_ AND CONVEYANCE LINES SHALL. BE CLEANED. PRIOR TO PAVING. . THE CLEANING OPERATION SHALL .NOT FLUSH SEDIMENT—LADEN WATER INTO THE DOWNSTREAM SYSTEM. 1. STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES AND ROADS SHALL BE, INSTALLED AT THE BEGINNING OF CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTAINED FOR THE. DURATION OF THE PROJECT. -ADDITIONAL MEASURES, SUCH AS WASH PADS, MAY BE REQUIRED TO ENSURE THAT ALL. PAVED AREAS ARE KEPT CLEAN FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. 2. ANY PERMANENT FLOW CONTROL. FACILITY USED AS A TEMPORARY SETTLING BASIN SHALL BE - MODIFIED WITH: -THE NECESSARY EROSION CONTROL MEASURES. AND SHALL PROVIDE ADEQUATE STORAGE CAPACITY. IF THE FACILITY IS TO FUNCTION ULTIMATELY AS AN INFILTRATION SYSTEM, THE TEMPORARY FACILITY MUST BE GRADED SO THAT THE BOTTOM AND SIDES ARE AT LEAST THREE FEET ABOVE THE FINAL GRADE OF THE _PERMANENT FACILITY. 3. WHERE STRAW MULCH FOR TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL IS REQUIRED, IT SHALL BE APPLIED AT A MINIMUM THICKNESS OF 2 TO 3 INCHES. 4. PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF THE WET SEASON (OCT. 1), ALL DISTRUBED AREAS SHALL BE REVIEWED TO IDENTIFY WHICH ONES CAN BE SEEDED IN PREPARATION FOR THE WINTER RAINS. DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE SEEDED WITHIN ONE WEEK OF THE BEGINNING OF THE WET SEASON. A SKETCH MAP OF THOSE AREAS TO BE SEEDED AND THOSE AREAS TO REMAIN UNCOVERED SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE DOES INSPECTOR. THE ODES INSPECTOR CAN REQUIRE SEEDING OF ADDITIONAL AREAS IN ORDER TO PROTECT SURFACE WATERS, ADJACENT PROPER TIES, OR DRAINAGE FACILITIES. 15 •DUST CONTROL IS REQUIRED WHEN WIND TRANSPORT OF SOIL .IS LIKELY TO CREATE A - TRAFFIC HAZARD, DISTURB NEIGHBORS, OR TRANSPORT SEDIMENT INTO WATER RESOURCE WATERS. SPRAYED WATER IS RECOMMENDED TO CONTROL DUST AND SHOULD BE APPLIED UNTIL SOIL IS WET, BUT RUNOFF SHOULD NOT BE GENERATED BY SPRAYING. IC MUD AND SEDIMENT TRACKED ON TO CITY OR COUNTY STREETS SHALL BE REMOVED WITH A STREET SWEEPER. NAL STABILIZATION -1\L-6,) PRIOR TO FINAL CONSTRUCTION APPROVAL, THE SITE SHALL BE STABILIZED TO PREVENT SEDIMENT—LADEN WATER FROM LEAVING THE__SITE AFTER PROJECT COMPLETION. ALL AREAS DISTURBED BY. CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE VEGETATED, COVERED WITH ROCK, OR OTHERWISE PERMANENTLY STABILIZED. . THE SEDIMENT POND AND CBs SHALL BE CLEANED OF SEDIMENT AND ALL BARE SOIL SHALL BE .HYDROSEEDED WITH AN APPROPRIATE HYDROSEED MIXTURE. SILT FENCING AND FILTER FABRIC AT THE SITE PERIMETER AND WITHIN THE SITE SHALL BE REMOVED ONCE VEGETA TION IS ESTABLISHED AND THE USE OF THE FILTER FENCING IS NO LONGER NEEDED. PERIMETER FENCING, AND VEHICLE BARRIERS OR LOCKING GATES SHALL BE IN PLACE TO PREVENT UN— AUTHORIZED USE OR DUMPING ON THE PROPERTY. 'THE SEDIMENT POND SHALL CONTINUE TO BE MONITORED AND MAINTAINED UNTIL SUCH TIME AS IT'S FUNCTION IS REPLACED BY OTHER STORM DRAINAGE/ WATER QUALITY FACILITIES - ASSOCIATED WITH DEVELOPMENT OF THIS SITE. RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA PERMIT CENTER CITY OFIUKWILA REC Departmenrgt Community Development AP 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 -- "EWE AUG 12 1999 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SEPA APPLICATION CHECKLIST 'ro FOR STAFF USE ILY CaLetct 0I Planner: &coon - \3m File Number: 6019 - OO Receipt Number: Cross-reference files: Lq9 aye Applicant notified of incomplete.application:(9-1619 - Lig cuel Applicantnotified of complete application: Notice ofapplication issued: A. NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: B. LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: (address and accessors parcel number(s)) a ►5 &A- LUa, 4 �ouk avt cc.Q 1 oa-3o44 - o 514 Quarter: Section: )D Township: 3 Range: (This information may be found on your tax statement) C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: D. APPLICANT: .. C.onTiiA C -T n E:. Cnar+i-K 20€) R,w . Thorr2 4- ,a es ADDRESS: '-1 o`J o'Z1'\D A /to Se6 q O i 0`T PHONE: - (�P �T J LP �' 361 SIGNATURE: DATE: 0 CITY OF :-UKVF ILA . _ _ -- RECERJED DepartmenWf Community. Development W 6300 Southcenter Boulevard,. Tukwila, WA 98188= AUG 12 1999 Telephone: (206) 431-3670 COMMUVe DEVF fP1=h1r ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (SEPA) APPLICATION To submit for SEPA review, provide the items listed above to the Planning Division at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Room 100. ❑ 8 copies of the completed and signed environmental checklist. You may use the City's pre-printed form or you may re -type the questions on your computer. If you choose to re -type the form into your computer, be sure to do so accurately. - Mistakes or omissions will increase the review time. ❑ 8 sets -of -ft -full-size plans needed to clearly describe the proposed action. ❑ One PMT set of plans reduced to 8.5" x 11". ❑ • Four copies_of supporting studies. ❑ One copy of the checklist application. ❑ One set of mailing labels for all properties 500' from the subject property. (See address label worksheet.) ❑ $325 filing fee. The checklist contains several pages of questions which you are asked to answer. It covers a comprehensive -set of topics. As a result, several of the questions may not apply to your project. If a particular question does not apply, simply write N/A undemeath. HOWEVER, be aware that many questions apply despite appearing not to. Care needs to be taken inreading and answering the questions to ensure the appropriate response is provided. It is important that accurate and clear information be provided. You may not know all of the answers. Answer each question_ to the best of your ability. If we find an answer to be -. insufficient, the City may contact you to ask for more information. Sometimes, after reviewing the checklist, the City will ask you provide additional studies or information. Commonly requested information includes traffic analysis, site topography, soils studies and tree surveys. Li e/egt'-,fr »ilk1As.f (b) It shall be unlawful for any person to cause or allow the installation or use of any device or use of any means designed to mask the emission of an air contaminant which causes detriment to health, safety or welfare of any person. SECTION 9.15 FUGITIVE DUST CONTROL MEASURES Adopted 03/13/68 (12) Revised 06/09/83 (536), 06/09/88 (621), 08/10/89 (644), 03/11/99 (882) (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to cause or allow visible emissions of fugitive dust unless reasonable precautions are employed to minimize the emissions. Reasonable precautions include, but are not limited to, the following: (1) The use of control equipment, enclosures, and wet (or chemical) suppression techniques, as practical, and curtailment during high winds; (2) Surfacing roadways and parking areas with asphalt, concrete, or gravel; (3) Treating temporary, low -traffic areas (e.g., construction sites) with water or chemical stabilizers, reducing vehicle speeds, constructing pavement or rip rap exit aprons, and cleaning vehicle undercarriages before they exit to prevent the track -out of mud or dirt onto paved public roadways; or (4) Covering or wetting truck loads or allowing adequate freeboard to prevent the escape of dust -bearing materials. (b) Compliance with the provisions of this section shall not relieve any person from the responsibility to comply with Section 9.11 of this regulation. SECTION 9.16 SPRAY -COATING OPERATIONS Adopted 06/13/91 (700) Revised 07/08/99 (886) (a) Applicability. This section applies to spray -coating operations at facilities subject to Article 5 (Registration), Article 6 (New Source Review), or Article 7 (Operating Permits) of this regulation, where a coating that protects or beautifies a surface is applied with spray -coating equipment. (b) Exemptions. The following activities are exempt from the provisions of Sections 9.16(c) and (d) of this regulation. Persons claiming any of the following spray -coating exemptions shall have the burden of demonstrating compliance with the claimed exemption. (1) Application of architectural or maintenance coatings to stationary structures (e.g., bridges, water towers, buildings, stationary machinery, or similar structures) ; (2) Aerospace coating operations subject to 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart GG. This includes all activities and materials listed in 40 CFR 63.741(0; Use of high-volume, low-pressure (HVLP) spray guns when: (3) 08/99 9-6 Regulation I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 e 1 1 1 1 • • :,: a »'•; ` ,,.,1°.��t 1 y+ 11 ``�.: yjjr 11[[ u kw 1.,1 S oreh 7 '` ,�: _ >Y� er T � r(3'. ✓K 'r +9'�° 1•� q ~ ',.• ,�� ,,, :. at' i .. de FArki,�a�tk �a� pp}} )by yj�p ,.g a �'{*G. �,i .., �' � C,'h s:d j '4rcl ie s t y �Sz 4 � t ¢h r��"rd PU a �I:aS �Y r � .'�"35,L,earym c< r `a �i r . t ,. -) t T C.S.i ?•L a}.1.,•u,.�.� .a„RAJ.Y�e`i.G^"„SkiS.i`v`�'tia:Y'i;�l YiiS+'§ .v Y•... @ ... .. �'*:U`i•T'Y' ilix- R,6 .• db t L ,U ' r i-!^ �!i., "�. .K.iM 1:." Expanded SEPA Cheklist Tukwila Preapplication # PRE99-014 Tukwila Project # August 1999 Prepared for: Mobile Crane Co., Inc Jim White & Martin Smith Real Estate Services John Spiers , e6 Prepared by: by R.W. Thorpe and Associates, Inc. 705 Second Avenue, Suite 710 Seattle, Washington 98104 wxf 206 / 624-6239 • ws� Milbor-Pita & Associates, Inc. Frank Pita 'Y::: 3080 125th Avenue NE f °� Bellevue, WA 98005 425/869-5778 0, DOWL Engineers, Inc. +;; Darren Simpson i 8320 154th Avenue NE Redmond, WA 98052 425/ 869-2670 r Hammond, Collier & Wade -Livingstone • Associates, Inc. Henry Bradley 4010 Stone Way N, Suite 300 Seattle, WA 98103 R 206/632-2664 rt =i. 4q� r." vA1' , 1808 Si •Y�,• : x d _n.... �t��y a3t r S .,�" r Q. yc f F bd . -:3.. p 5. ., h r k . 4 ` v -'( ti., >„ .„�—?^. q----- Tukwila Ilk Pile - Shoreline Substantial DSopment & Land Altering Permits Tukwila, Washington R. W. Thorpe & Associates Prepared For James White, Jr. Mobile Crane Co., Inc 5900 2nd Ave S Seattle, WA 98108 (206) 767-9975 Fax: (206) 763-9975 Prepared By R.W. Thorpe & Associates, Inc. 705 2nd Ave, Ste 710 Seattle, WA 98104 Contact: Gareth V. Roe, AICP (206) 624-6239 Fax: (206) 625-0930 email: planning@rwta.com Site Location The subject property is located on S 115th Street in the northwest corner of Section 10, Township 23 N, Range 4 E, W.M., in the City of Tukwila, Washington. Parcel Number: 102304-9057 Parcel Size: 477, 853 sq. ft. or 10.97 acres Legal Description: Seeattached legal description. Easements: None known. Existing Land Use: With the exception of a dilapidated mobile structure the property is currently vacant. Sewer District: City of Tukwila Water District: City of Tukwila Police: City of Tukwila Fire: City of Tukwila Phone: US West Electricity: Seattle City Light Cable: TCI Gas: No service Tukwila Rock Pile Tukwila, WA Fact Sheet 8/99 TUKWILA NW Section 10, Parcel # 102304- wnship,23.N, Range 4 E 57-0 AD VUo TfOcrcos Assocness9 • 0lll1l�JoSeffitle/Anchorage/Denver 'LandPlanscape Environmental 705 Second Avenue, Suite 710, Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 624-6239 ' Economics WHITE INDUST AL SITE Tukwila, Washington Vicinity Jap INS INN 11111 1 MI M S am M NM- N r I r NM 1 r- • • 1. , 1 -,?l :'.Y - t y ,\ I • , iy. J II t,,� ,J0,,,, , _ • \ d¢uml.Os Int 9ao11 Ya 08108 PICT. 2WAVA)e) MARTIN SMITH REAL ESTATE Sen4CeSS 1109 Finn Avenue 600 SmIDa, WA 98101.298e Phone: 206/8824300 '•. '' II 16a _ :1 w :: ; l per• - ^w11 •• 1 \ % le 9 ii •T- 'b 7:.:77-F1'" _I- �.- v \ \' or�� ti'. ju :s '..1 \� F r_s.11.�' l,\ • •• }}� ' tj1 :i"p:•& \ .1 '`,'• f �•.`, Gun Range 1 1000' r-' i' 'Radius` �'. ": \ .• f �' :� „' .LINE .r t r+ _ �� yn r V a -t _ _ - 9.-t Open Space I ,•�\ 1 (1 I ' — : �, '1' • , Ik . r i ,,_ '• i N IS. .-. TRA M- -‚ \ {' �. \ .� a •i �t� q c� `\P I `.F `.I Rail TrainVi I ...o.. a Yard j� I '% _ ' ''� .., . --.- ; RIG L 1 'N RIGHT OF WAY m'"-- ti -- ,. \ `i ct ''\ sv ,\ .. ``o .- ' ....- N` • \ ' . '< .. �,® _ ... ,fr' ii .. ... .0 � R.W. Thorpe & Associates, !no. •...... A» »...•e.... e°. er..',.rv�"'wi•e....'• 41°.== ,.,. : n•M. �•Iy � �1, � 9l AT It _.._t_•s-°., .. ".A. :�•i. '-,` rY) �f •. r;iA .. T _„• •..-.TM-POWERLINE RIGHT OF WAY .",,_ds�.•"^'�_+= `• .»%':.”`--• '- .. _. ..-1= - -•�: ,, `7F -. .9,-„, •,,� ti rY,.,/1 F, ... ( • • t1'}, `I- �'�... :;�:.:::. "�:' I.- .�. .--,.,jRall Train r Yard ,•\ . \ '. . Ng Industrial Jndustrial i ��> i•Truck Sales q e. �•�,., ' SUBJECT PROPERTY ts' `a a .••"..1:-.' y 9 '�'• ",/ •r '�'-541111:' �-�{ �1A •4 •/,".,.•i•i• ' " I ; 'r,r i,Single !!l,, `{. Fami' esidential '<;` 6� +;-i_ �', e. t --.1,..i. -•‘. ” •� e ...... t 't SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION TO CITY OF TIJCWILA ' Sit" $F� .r I + y ; I T7 T 1 1 r-�4u'7r.-.7,..77::•,...:. .... •••-2—__ .F.. _.—i+.:L•.--s--• • X. ^ .... .-4 ";T'. yl::`..'r'-�1'9�• • 'it',.. .e�,� • ,,1 i+ •••j. I i 'r - - }Mtti' i*.'?.• .._ ., ...� ; f - +M.F441 , v.r....-4 ..:01. a '`y. V. , . _ {1a •,•F. n •.µ1{��,rr • �• • •1 .: y,..�!,IlJ 7f .. �..MEM . _ ,iL...N11 !Ws!. • '-� Industrial t 9 , ;, ; m \ _: ~. Warehousing 5 :. '„- 0.:. r :: ®I� --F2'`". _ 4`i? +• 7! I �j9 {{ �a i moi. 1_tn i. � '�� ,I I , !:: .+I" �. 1. 'I%�I '•Iltl �—�� y ..n % ; � ,,5 G; i _ .f. ;4 --,.,...•-=,„_....• �.}�'-;-.-7,F-... . »•'•�'^lL . :� r: ”' hp• - 4 `` r^ -4 I I� ../ ',•III G'I 1 Ir�'..- ((� -.4- .ea�� —.«4 1 ' ��'t w 1 ,min • /,� �� , ue0 . �m�. MINIM= A..,.0.. ».viii .; ,,,... v.'+.. s, 1 ! ' :,}: ••••A• w , , `t� ! i "_- 3• .�r.". .( '. .x., ijrsr;rt&aci s - + i, VS �'e`r" I No Z :• '• \ ►�•"\i 9 11 r •f •ti i . o.: a. ; `^ r�i."L- I;.I . •',� ..- Ili II '' I 1 rc,. 71 �' . et ..•11 I I' ( I "li w •1I�; 4' ~.'ru' • A I t (: Ar •rte _ ,........4.4_,71..,-.A-- .. il`r _ _ '^ Ems. .. ��ME "" 370598 z�r .m .b .1-, -�5 wcn.w ` • ytls-�; i _• r.1 1 +l 1.::^ it �!• LOT. •OT•'t ,.� lAt}�1� t y -- J.�+ �. '. .+,Y-. �p =1T,.- • �';� I�ll•J'F-�—I ''./ N.i I 3 �i yep yr,,T`19' i.+e..� �. ...• ;� i�• O `.Y'YYf .;� ;.0.. I• •• '.Lrr,_..�•.. • '' �•_ se,,�e I. i' ' i • ._ .--.5:. .. '•'• --- _ - .neer t'i ., .... • • Tukwila Rock Pile - Land Altering & Shoreline Substantial Development Permits LEGAL DESCRIPTION R. W. Thorpe & Associates, Inc. King County Parcel Number: 102304-9057 The subject property is located in a portion of Government Lot 1 and & 2 straight 10-23-04 laying west of CD Hillman's Meadow Gardens Addition Division Number 3 and laying East of the City of Seattle Light 100 foot right of way center line defined as follows: Beginning at a point on the right bank of the Duwamish River Bridge South 55-05-30 East 1324 feet from the northwest corner of said Section 10 then North 04-41 West 274 feet point on a curve, then along 2 degree curve to the left thru curve arc 09-38 a distance of 482 feet to a point: Intersection with North line of the said Section 10 to the said point being 986 feet from the Northwest corner of said Section 10 and the terminus of said right of way center line less the portion for the City of Seattle Transmisssion line right of way defined as follows: Beginning at a point of intersection of the North line from the said Section 10 with the easterly margin of the City of Seattle Light right of way, then easterly along said North line 80235 feet, then South 6.10 feet, then Westerly along a straight line 788.36 feet to a point of intersection with the Easterly margin of the said City of Seattle Light right of way, then Northerly along the said easterly margin 78.08 feet to the point of beginning and less the portion of said Government Lot 2 defined, as follows: Commencing at the Southwest corner lot of Block 20 in CD Hillman's Meadow Garden Addition Division Number 3, then North to the point of beginning and less the Westerly 3 feet thereof abutting the Easterly margin of said City of Seattle Light right of way and less the portion within the right of way for S 115th Street -- per King County lot line adjustment Number 985024, Recording Number 851070346. Source: King County Assessor's Office Tukwila Rock Pile Legal Description Tukwila, WA March 1999 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FILE NO: FEE: RECEIPT: Purpose of Checklist: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. Instructions for Applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Government agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write do not know or does not apply. Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some. -questions ask about. governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Use of checklist for nonproject proposals: Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered does not apply. IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words project, applicant, and property or site should be read as proposal, proposer, and affected geographic area, respectively. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT • • A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Tukwila Rock Pile 2. Name of applicant: Jim White 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Applicant: Agent: Jim White R.W. Thorpe & Associates, Inc. c/o Mobile Crane Co., Inc. Contact: Robert W. Thorpe, AICP 5900 2nd Ave S 705 2nd Ave, Suite 710 Seattle, WA 98108 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 767-4767 (206) 624-6239 Fax: (206) 763-9975 Fax: (206) 625-0930 email: planning@rwta.com 4. Date checklist prepared: July 19. 1999 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Tukwila 6 Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Alternative One assumes minimal to no export of existing material due to a lack of sales opportunity to yield a Benched site. Alternative Two assumes a market for fill and a major export to yield a larger "Flat" area while leaving part of the rock pile. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. The site is being graded in anticipation of a potential light industrial park m the site. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. • Preliminary Evaluation of Rock Outcrop, Shannon & Wilson, Inc. February 25, 1988. • Geotechnical Engineering Study, Earth Consultants Inc. May 22,1992. 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 other applications pending governmental approval for other proposals are known to exist. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT • • Grading Permit • Shoreline Substantial Development 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. The applicant is pursuing approval of a grading permit. In the case of Alternative One the intent is to have on site balance between the cut and fill and in the case of Alternative Two to remove approximately 221,326 cubic yards of fill from the site. This grading will prepare the site for future light industrial development. The subject property is 10.96 acres in size and is currently vacant. Please see the attached Plans. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the City, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with the application related to this checklist. The subject property is located on S 115th St. in the northwest corner of Section 10, Township 23 N, Range 4 E, W.M. , in the City of Tukwila, Washington. Please see the attached Vicinity Map. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT. • B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other: The site is generally level around its north, south and west margins. Rising above this level of the Duwamish River Valley is an outcrop of rock about 110 feet high. The summit is approximately at elevation 130 feet. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The steepest slope is vertical. There are cuts from old quarrying, a former use, on the site's rock that are now vertical. Please see the attached slope analysis. c. What general types of soils are found cn the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. The rock was observed to consist of soft to moderately hard volcanic andesite, breccia, and sedimentary siltstone. The andesite is the harder rock and forms most of the outcrop (Shannon & Wilson, Earth Consultants). Rock testing was conducted which indicates that the andesite appears as massive rock of high quality, and representative core testing at 9,000 to 11,000 psi compresive strength. The breccia is only slightly less massive, testing at 8,000 psi (Milbor-Pita and Associates). The upper surface of the outcrop consists of loose, brown, weathered silty sand to sandy silt soil mixed with rock fragments. Sieve analyses performed on two samples of this material indicate the soil as classified as silty sand with gravel. Below the surficial loose silty sand soils, loose to medium dense, brown to gray -black, weathered rock with variable amounts of silty sand matrix was encountered. These soils continued until hard, light gray, unweathered rock prevented further progress. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. There are no indications of unstable soils on the subject property or in the immediate vicinity. The soil on the slopes appear quite stable as far as landsliding is concerned. The rock currently stands near vertical in many locations. Please see the attached Geotechnical Reports for more information. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. In the case of Alternative One on site balance of cut and fill is the intended result. The cut as a result of this alternative will be 50,229 cubic yards and the fill will be 48,631. In the case of Alternative Two 221,326 cubic yards of material will be exported off the site. Some of this material, as it is being removed would be used as a preload to consolidate the alluvial soils so construction on the EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT • • softer soil can occur without settlement being a major issue. After consolidation, the excess material shall be removed from the site. Micro blasting will be used during the grading process in both alternatives. The removal of the andesite and breccia could be accomplished by very heavy hydralic breaking, however small loosening blasts would greatly speed up the operation. Off site impacts will be minimized whenever possible. Limited controlled blasting produces fewer neighborly complaints than prolonged mechanical rock breakage with its accompanying high level of repetitive noise and dust. Calculations by Milbor-Pita and Associates . have shown that loosening blasts can be designed so they produce ground vibrations below the Office of Surface Mining limits at the nearest off site structures (peak particle velocity of 2 inches per second or less). All blasting will be conducted in accordance with the King County Development Standards for Mineral Extraction, Chapter 21A.22. If appropriate a pre -blast survey will be conducted on nearby structures and monitor the blasting with vibration measuring equipment. In addition, excavation resulting in no flyrock or objectionable airblast can be achieved by proper stemming of the holes and by placing blast mats over the blast area (Milbor-Pita and Associates Report). f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Erosion could occur on the site as a result of the grading. In order to minimize erosion, control measures will be employed during the . grading process. As the material being excavated is rock, and not soil, the amounts of erodable material will be decreased. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Currently about 60% of the site is covered with rock, which is an impermeable surface. After future development, it is anticipated that about 60% of the site will be covered with asphalt and building. h . Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, other impacts to the earth, i f any: Standard erosion control measures will be taken during construction. These will include measures outlined in Washington State Department of Ecology publications. It is anticipated that specific measures will include the use of silt fences, straw bale dams, detention basins and timing construction to coincide with dry weather as much as is practical. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (ie, dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. The site will generate vehicle emissions from trucks and construction equipment utilizing the proposed development. Proposed construction . and grading activities will also generate some temporary dust and diesel emissions. Alternative Two will generate considerably more truck trips than Alternative One. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 C 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT • • b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. There are no off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect this proposal. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, i f any: Short term emissions resulting from future grading and construction activities would be controlled through the use of common dust -suppression techniques. 3. Water a . Surface 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. The southern portion of the property, south of 15th Street is adjacent to the Duwamish River, a Type 1 Stream. There are Type 2 wetlands located on the northern portion of the property. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. The proposed grading of the Rock Pile occurs. within 200' of the Duwamish River, however 15th Street separates the river from the proposed construction area. 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. No fill or dredge material will be placed into/removed from any surface waters or wetlands. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. The proposal will not require any surface water withdrawals or diversions. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. The proposal area does not lie within the 100 year floodplain, although parts of the property south of 15th Street do lie within the floodplain. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. The proposal does not involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT • • 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 ground water will be withdrawn and no water will be discharged to the ground water as a result of this proposal. 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. No waste material will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources. c. Water Runoff (including storm water) 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. The following is a summary of the findings found in the "Erosion Control Report for Tukwila Rock Pile" completed by DOWL Engineers. Refer to this document for further information and clarification. The site currently discharges crossing the property lines to the north and south. The proposal is to adjust the natural discharge location for surface water runoff from the site. Site investigations by DOWL Engineers and Wetland Resources, Inc., concluded that the drainage which discharges across the north property line is contributory to a closed depression. Field investigations of this depression uncovered no piped outlet to this depression, and it appears stormwater infiltrates in this area. The proposal is to install an erosion control facility which will divert stormwater generated by this site south, which can be tight lined to an existing outfall pipe to the Duwamish River. This facility will divert approximately 6 acres of this site which discharges to the north in this closed depression. This facility meets SWDM requirements/standards by reducing the volume of water which enters this closed depression and thereby reduces the stage and duration of ponding occurring within this area, which is in agreement with the public interest, health and safety. The proposal will also offer environmental protection and maintainability, as it facilitates construction of one sedimentation pond rather than two. A single pond will be more easily monitored and maintained for the duration of construction. The pond is designed to discharge into a swale located within the southwest comer of the site, which will be easily accessed and observed from the South 115th Street right-of-way. We expect that having the discharge within a more visible portion of the site will promote a more pro -active maintenance program. No impact to the adjoining property is anticipated if this adjustment is approved. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT • The seasonal ponding within this area significantly affects the City of Seattle's ability to conduct monitoring and maintenance activities associated with the utilities in this corridor. We have reviewed City of Seattle aerial topography maps and estimate the closed depression to be approximately 55 acres. Our site makes up only approximately ten percent of the contributing area. As part of this work, Wetland Resources .Inc. evaluated the closed depression wetland. The off-site wetland is larger than one acre in size and is dominated by one class of vegetation. After discussions with the Wetland Resources, DOWL Engineers is of the opinion that their will be no measurable impact to the wetland hydrology if this site's water is diverted to the Duwamish River via a tight line storm drain system. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Waste materials, such as oil and anti -freeze from trucks or automobiles using the site, will not be allowed to enter ground water or surface runoff. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: None required as the amount of impervious surface area an site will not be increased as a result of the grading permit. 4. Plants a . Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: X deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other X shrubs _ grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, 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? Shrubs that have grown out of the rock pile will be removed as the rock pile is graded. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. No threatened or endangered plant species are known to be cr or near the site. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: No landscaping will be required in conjunction with the grading permit. Landscaping consistent with the City of Tukwila's industrial (I) zoning designation will be provided on the subject site in accordance with possible future development. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT • 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. Chinook Salmon, a recently federally listed endangered species, is found in the Dumwamish River. The Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Priority Species/ Habitat database was searched and no other were found on the site. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. The site is not a part of any know migration route. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None required. 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 i t will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Fuel for trucks, etc. used for grading and removal of the rock pile is the only type of energy that will be used as a result of this proposal. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. This project would not affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: None required. 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. No environmental health hazards would occur as a result of this proposal.. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. No special emergency services would be required. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None required. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example, traffic, equipment, operation, other)? EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT. • Automobile traffic from the adjacent roadways is the main source of background noise heard on the subject site. It is anticipated that this will not have an adverse impact on the proposed action. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Short term noises on the subject site resulting from blasting and grading activities will last for the duration of the proposed project from approximately 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. weekdays. Blasting will occur preliminary at the start of the construction activities. In general limited controlled blasting produces fewer neighborhood complaints than prolonged mechanical rock breakage with it's accompanying high level of repetitive noise and dust. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None required. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site consists of approximately ten and one-half acres of undeveloped property. The property is bounded by the Duwamish River on the south, and a City of Seattle transmissions line on the north. The property is bounded on the west by industrial and commercial land uses and on the east by residential areas, which would be aligned with extensions of 35th and 38th Avenues south, in Tukwila, Washington.. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. The site has not been used for agriculture. c. Describe any structures on the site. One dilapidated mobile structure is located on the western portion of the site which will be removed prior to any construction activity. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No structures will be demolished as a part of this proposal. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The City of Tukwila shows the subject site designated Manufacturing Industrial Center/Light Industrial (MIC/L) on its official Zoning Map dated November 1997. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The City of Tukwila shows the subject site designated Manufacturing Industrial Center/Light Industrial (MIC/L) on its Comprehensive Land Use Map. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? The current shoreline master program designation is urban. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an environmentally sensitive area? If so, specify. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 1 1 1 1 1 1 1E) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT S The southern part of the site, south of S 15th Street is within the 100 year floodplain. This area is outside of the proposed project area. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? No additional residences or jobs would be created through the grading process. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? The proposed project would not displace anyone. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None required. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The applicant and associated development/permit team has had meetings and conversations with City Staff to assure land use compatibility. The proposed use is consistent with the current zoning m the subject site and the subject application for a land altering permit is consistent with the City's criteria. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. No additional units will be provided. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. No units will be eliminated. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None required. 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? No structures are proposed during this grading phase. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Views onto and from the site would be substantially altered as the approximately 110' tall rock pile would be removed. c. Proposed measures to reduce aesthetic impacts, if any: None required in conjunction with the grading permit. 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? The proposal will not increase the levels of light or glare on or off the site. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT • b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Light or glare should not increase due to the removal of the rock pile. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? No off-site sources of light or glare are anticipated to affect the proposal. 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? • Duwamish Park • Rainier Golf Course & Country Club • Glen Acres Golf Club • Allentown P -Patch Park b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. The project proposal will not displace any existing recreational uses. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None required or proposed. 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. There are no places or objects listed on local preservation registers on or near the site. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. The geologic age of the rock outcrop on site is Miocene (a subset of the Tertiary period of the Cenozoic Era) dated to 40 to 50 million years ago. Two documents provided by the Department of Natural Resources, however, deemed the site to have no archaeological significance and thus any future construction on this project would not be harming a critical natural resource of the State. These documents are Geologic Time, Rocks, Fossils, and Minerals in Washington by the Department of Natural Resources, Division of Mines and Geology (no date) and Fossils of Washington by Vaughn E. Livingston, jr., 1959 (updated in 1972). c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None proposed. However, should any evidence of historic, archeological, scientific, or cultural importance be unearthed during construction of the proposed development, all construction activities would be placed on hold and the appropriate state or local agencies would be contacted. All of the rock outcrops will not be removed by this grading, so faces will still be available, if the property owner permits, for fossil collectors to have access. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT 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. S 115th Street nuns through the southern section of the site and serves a short driveway connecting to this street and serves as the primary access point to the northern part of the site. b. Is site currently served by public transit? distance to the nearest transit stop? Route # 124 runs along S 115th Street. Allentown, and Georgetown. Several vicinity. If not, what is the approximate This route serves Southcenter, other routes exist in the near c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Removal of the rock pile would not involve the creation of any new parking spaces. 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). The proposal will not require any new roads or streets. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. The project is not expected to use water, air, or rail transportation. f How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. Alternative One will produce daily trips from the workers grading the site. Alternative Two would create a large number of truck trips exporting fill material off of the site. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None required. 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. The project would not result in an increased need for public services. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, i f any. No required or proposed. 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. No utilities currently exist on site, but are located nearby for convenient hookups. The closest sanitary sewer is located at 115th St. and 42nd and the storm drain runs along 115th St. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT • • 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. No utilities are needed for the grading of the site. . SIGNATURE The above answers are understand that the lead Signature: true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I cy is relying on them to make its decision. Date Submitted: - EY(1 —) EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY IUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE • • Chapter 18.36 111ANUFACTURING/INDUSTRIAL CENTER — LIGHT (MIC/L) DISTRICT ections: .36.010 18.36.020 U36.030 36.040 18.36.050 1.36.060 Purpose. Permitted uses. Accessory uses. Conditional uses. Unclassified uses. Parking regulations. 8.36.010 Purpose. This district implements the Manufacturing Indus-. ial Center/Light Industrial Comprehensive Plan designation. It is intended to provide a major limployment area containing distributive light manufac- 'ng and industrial uses and other uses that support those industries. This district's uses and standards are tended to enhance the redevelopment of the uwamish Corridor. (Ord. 1758 §1(part), 1995) I 8.36.020 Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted outright within the Manufacturing Industrial Center/Light Industrial istrict, subject to compliance with all other applicable quirements of the Tukwila Municipal Code. 1. Adult entertainment establishments are ermitted, subject to the following location restrictions: a. No adult entertainment establishment all be allowed within the following distances from the following specified uses, areas or zones, whether Ich uses, areas or zones are located within or outside e City limits: (1) In or within 1,000 feet of any LDR, DR, HDR, MUO, 0, NCC, RC, RCM or TUC zone If DR, or any other residentially zoned property; (2) In or within 1/2 mile of: (a) Public or private school with Itrricula equivalent to elementary, junior or senior gh schools, or any facility owned or operated by such schools, and (b) Care centers, preschools, Iursery schools or other child care facilities; (3) In or within 1,000 feet of: (a) public park, trail, or public &creational facility; or (b) church, temple, synagogue or hapel, or (c) public library. b. the distances specified in TMC 18.36.020.1.a. shall be measured by following a straight lne from the nearest point of the property parcel upon hich the proposed use is to be located, to the nearest point of the parcel of property or land use district 1 boundary line from which the proposed land use is to be separated. c. No adult entertainment establishment shall be allowed to locate within 1,000 feet of an exist- ing adult entertainment establishment. The distance specified in this section shall be measured by following a straight line between the nearest points of public entry into each establishment; 2. Automotive services: a. gas, outside pumps allowed; b. washing; c. body and engine repair shops (enclosed within a building); 3. Beauty or barber shops; 4. Bicycle repair shops; 5. Brew pubs. 6. Bus stations; 7. Commercial laundries; 8. Computer software development and simi- lar uses; 9. Contractors storage yards; 10. Day care centers; 11. Financial: a. banking; b. mortgage; c. other services; 12. Heavy equipment repair and salvage; 13. High tech uses including research and development, light assembling, repair_ or storage of electronic equipment, instruments,or biotechnology with at least 35% office. 14. Hotels; 15. Industries involved with etching, film pro- cessing, lithography, printing, and publishing; 16. Laundries; a. self -serve; b. dry cleaning; c. tailor, dyeing; 17. Libraries, museums or art galleries (public); 18. Manufacturing, processing and/or assem- bling of electrical or mechanical equipment, vehicles and machines including, but not limited to, heavy and light machinery, tools, airplanes, boats or other trans- portation vehicles and equipment; 19. Manufacturing, processing and/or assem- bling previously prepared metals including, but not limited to, stamping, dyeing, shearing or punching of metal, engraving, galvanizing and hand -forging; 20. Manufacturing, processing and/or packag- ing of food, including but not limited to, baked goods, beverages (including fermenting and distilling), candy, canned or preserved foods, dairy products and by- products, frozen foods, instant foods and meats (provided that no slaughtering is permitted); 21. Manufacturing, processing and/or packag- ing pharmaceuticals and related products, such as cosmetics and drugs; Page 18-58 Printed October 7, 1998 22. Manufacturing, processing, and/or packag- ing ackaging previously prepared materials including, but not. limited to, bags, brooms, brushes, canvas, clay, cloth- ing, fur, furniture, glass, ink, paint, paper, plastics, rubber, tile, and wood; 23. Manufacturing, processing, assembling, packaging and/or repairing electronic, mechanical or precision instruments such as medical and dental equipment, photographic goods, measurement and control devices, and recording equipment; 24. Motels; 25. Offices (must be associated with another permitted use, e.g., administrative, offices for a manu- facturing company present within the MIC) 26. Outpatient, inpatient, and emergency med- ical and dental; 27. Parks, trails, picnic areas and playgrounds (public) but not including amusement parks, golf courses, or commercial recreation. 28. Public parking lots or garages for private passenger cars 29. Railroad tracks, (including lead, spur, load- ing or storage); 30. Recreation facilities (commercial - indoor) - athletic or health clubs; 31. Restaurants, including: a. drive-through; b. sit down; c. cocktail lounges in conjunction with a restaurant; 32. Sales and rental of heavy machinery and equipment subject to landscaping requirements of the Landscape, Recreation, Recycling/Solid Waste Space Requirements chapter of this title; 33. Salvage and wrecking operations which are entirely enclosed within a building; 34. Schools and studios for education or self improvement; 35. Storage (outdoor) of materials is permitted up to a height of 20 feet with a front yard setback of 25 feet, and to a height of 50 feet with a front yard setback of 100 feet; security required; 36. Storage (outdoor) of materials allowed to be manufactured or handled within facilities conforming to uses under this chapter; and screened pursuant to the Landscape, Recreation, . Recycling/Solid Waste Space Requirements chapter of this title; 37. Taverns, nightclubs; 38. Telephone exchanges; 39. Tow truck operations, subject to all addi- tional State and local regulations; 40. Truck terminals; 41. Warehouse storage and/or wholesale dis- tribution facilities. 42. Other uses not specifically listed in this Title, which the Director determines to be: • TITLE 18 - ZONING a. similar in nature to and compatible with other uses permitted outright within this district; and b. consistent with the stated purpose of this district;. and c. consistent with the policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan. (Ord. 1814 §2, 1997; Ord. 1774 §3, 1996; Ord 1758 §1(part), 1995) 18.36.030 Accessory uses. Uses and structures customarily appurtenant to a permitted use, and clearly incidental to such permitted use, are allowed within the Manufacturing Industrial Center/Light Industrial district, as follows: 1. Billiard or pool rooms; 2. Parking areas; 3. Recreational area and facilities for em- ployees; 4. Residences for security or maintenance personnel. (Ord. 1758 §1(part), 1995) 18.36.040 Conditional uses. The following uses may be allowed within the Manufacturing Industrial Center/Light Industrial district, subject to the requirements, procedures, and conditions established by the Conditional Use Permits chapter of this title. 1. Colleges and universities; 2. Electrical substations - distribution; 3. Fire and police stations; 4. Heavy metal processes such as smelting, blast furnaces, drop forging, or drop hammering; 5. Manufacturing, processing and/or assem- bling chemicals, light metals, plastics, solvents, soaps, wood, coal, glass, enamels, textiles, fabrics, plaster, agricultural products or animal products (no rendering or slaughtering) 6. Manufacturing, processing and/or assem- bling of previously manufactured metals, such as iron and steel fabrication; steel production by electric arc melting, argon oxygen refining, and consumable elec- trode melting; and similar heavy industrial uses; 7. Monorails, people movers, and other mass transit systems, such as park-and-ride lots; 8. Radios, television, microwave, cellular or observation stations and towers; 9. Recreation facilities (public) including, but not limited to, sports fields, community centers, and golf courses. 10. Retail sales of health and beauty aids, pre- scription drugs, food, hardware, notions, crafts and craft supplies, housewares, consumer electronics, photo equipment, and film processing, books, magazines, stationery, clothing, shoes, flowers, plants, pets, jewelry, gifts, recreation equipment and sporting goods, and similar items; limited to uses of a type and size that Printed October 7, 1998 Page 18-59 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE • clearly intend to serve other permitted uses and/or the employees of those uses; 11. Rock crushing, asphalt or concrete batching or mixing, stone cutting, brick manufacture, marble work, and the assembly of products from the above materials; (Ord. 1758 §1(part), 1995) 18.36.050 Unclassified uses. The following uses may be allowed within the Manufacturing Industrial Center/Light Industrial district, subject to the requirements, procedures and conditions established by the Unclassified Use Permits chapter of this title. 1. Airports, landing fields and heliports (except emergency sites); 2. Cement manufacturing; 3. Essential public facilities, except those specifically listed as a permitted, conditionally permitted or unclassified use in any of the districts established by this title. 4. Hydroelectric and private utility power generating plants; 5. Landfills and excavations which the responsible official, acting pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act, determines are significant environmental actions; 6. Railroad freight or classification yards; 7. Removal and processing ofsand, gravel, rock, peat, black soil, and other natural deposits together with associated structures; 8. Transfer stations (refuse and garbage) when operated by a public agency; 9. Transit centers (regional). ((Ord. 1758 §1(part), 1995) 18.36.060 On-site hazardous substances. No on-site hazardous substance processing and handling, or hazardous waste treatment and storage facilities shall be permitted, unless clearly incidental and secondary to a permitted use. On-site hazardous waste treatment and storage facilities shall be subject to the State siting criteria (RCW 70.105). (See TMC 21.08.) (Ord. 1758 §1(part), 1995) 18.36.070 Design review. Design review is required for new developments within 300 feet of residential districts or within 200 feet of the Green/Duwamish River. (Ord. 1758 §1(part), 1995) • 18.36.080 Qasic development standards. Development within the Manufacturing Industrial Center/Light Industrial district shall conform to the following listed and referenced standards: MIC/L BASIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Setbacks to yards, minimum • Front 20 feet • Second front 10 feet • Sides None • Sides, if adjacent to LDR, MDR, HDR — Istfloor 10 feet — 2nd floor 20 feet — 3rd floor 30 feet • Rear None • Rear, if adjacent to LDR, MDR, HDR — 1st floor 10 feet — 2nd floor 20 feet — 3rd floor 30 feet Height, maximum 4 stories or 45 feet Landscape requirements (minimum): See Landscape, Recreation, Recycling/ Solid Waste Space requirements chapter for further requirements • Fronts 5 feet • Sides None • Sides : if adjacent LDR, MDR, or HDR 15 feet • Rear None • Rear - if adjacent LDR, MDR, or HDR 15 feet Off Street Parking • Warehousing 1 per 2,000 sq. ft. usable floor area min. • Office 3 per 1,000 sq. ft. usable floor area min. • Manufacturing 1 per 1,000 sq. ft. usable floor area min. • Other Uses See TMC 18.56, Off-street Parking/Loading Regulations Performance Standards: Use, activity and operations within a structure or a site shall comply with (1) standards adopted by the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency for odor, dust, smoke and other airborne pollutants, (2) TMC 8.22, "Noise", and, (3) adopted State and Federal standards for water quality and hazardous materials. In addition, all development subject to the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act, RCW 43.21 C, shall be evaluated to determine whether adverse environmental impacts have been adequately mitigated. (Ord. 1758 §1(part), 1995) Page 18-60 E E t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Printed October 7, 1998 1 RECEIVED 'JUL 1 6 1999 R.W. THUKi't & ASSC Allentown Associates 5900 2nd Avenue South Seattle, Washington 98108 Attn: Mr. James White • M ilbor-Pita &SSOCIATES, INC. SC -148R 15Jun99 RE: Rock Excavation Issues at the Tukwila "Rock Pile" Site, S. 115th St., Tukwila, WA At your request we have studied the geotechnical issues related to the excavation of hard rock from the hill known as the "rock pile" located to the east of E. Marginal Way S. and to the north of S. 115th Street in Tukwila. Several previous geotechnical reports and development plans/maps were consulted during our study (Appendix C and D contain the geology/geotechnical reports): • Shannon & Wilson, "Preliminary Evaluation of Rock Outcrop", 1988, • Shannon & Wilson, "Site Grading for Future Development", 1989, • Earth Consultants Inc., "Geotechnical Engineering Study of City Moving Site No. 3", 1992, • R.W. Thorpe & Assoc., "Industrial Site Master Plan Site Photos, 1998, • Walker & Assoc., "1-100, 2 -foot contour, topographic map of site, 1998. The two principal rock engineering issues that are addressed in our report are the method(s) of excavating the rock in the hill, and the layout and stability of the rock slopes around the finished excavation. We should caution that both of these issues may be decided by non -geotechnical factors related to heavy excavation (noise, dust, etc. from blasting or hydraulic breakers), and permissible slopes in an urban, developed area. Authorization to proceed with this task was granted verbally by Mr. Jim White, P.E., site owner and is being performed according to our proposal that was faxed to your office. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Allentown Associates and their agents, for specific application to this project in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical / civil engineering practices. Rock Excavation - Discussion & Background Both of the previous geotechnical consultants identified the two main rock types occurring in the hill; which are a massive andesite (similar to basalt) and breccia, a welded pyroclastic rock. Smaller amounts of soft sedimentary rock (siltstone and sandstone) outcrops on the flanks of the hill and are of minimal importance to the Geotechnical, Tunnel and Environmental Engineers 3080 125t Ave NE Phone (425) 869-5778 Bellevue, WA 98005 Page 1 Fax (425) 861-0677 1 • • ' development of the property as a quarry. The siltstone is a soft rock and can be removed similar to dense glacial soils by earthmoving equipment. 1 Soft alluvial soils occur on the flat areas surrounding the hill, and these are important to site development because of their relatively poor foundation characteristics. These soft soil areas will need attention when the final design is known. The soils can be preloaded in order to densify the soils or they could be overexcavated and removed. These soft soils will not be discussed further in this report. 1 The 1988 Shannon & Wilson report concludes that the unweathered andesite can only be excavated by blasting, and that the breccias can be "moved with a dozer blade or by ripping". These conclusions were reached after a visual inspection of rock outcrops only since no sampling or testing of the rock was documented in the report. ' The 1992 Earth Consultants Inc. report filled in some of this information by excavating some test pits (without specifying the type and size of the excavator) to refusal, and by running several seismic refraction profiles across the lower (western) portion of the hill. ' Both of these techniques provide useful information on the excavation requirements for site development in the areas where they were performed. Earth Consultants Inc. concluded that below about 4 to 11 feet from the ground surface, the rock (unspecified ' whether andesite or breccia) is marginally rippable to non-rippable with a heavy-duty ripper mounted on a dozer. The size of dozer is not specified. Later in the report they state that removal "of the remaining unweathered, hard, high velocity rock without blasting could be accomplished using hydraulic breakers mounted on track hoes". Faced with certain inconsistencies in the previous appraisals of rock rippability, it was ' decided to drill several borings into the rock mass, and test the retrieved core for strength and suitability for quarry products. The core hole locations are shown on Figure 1 along with the test locations of the other known studies at the site. 1 A further advantage of the inspection of the samples from the core holes is that an appraisal of the influence of joints and fractures in the rock mass assists in assessing both ' rippability and slope stability of the finished excavated perimeter. Logs of the borings and photos of the cores are presented in Appendix A, laboratory test results of core samples in Appendix B. 1 Rock Testing Results The unweathered andesite appears as massive rock of high quality, and representative core tested at 9,000 to 11,000 psi_compressive strength, indicative of rock requiring blasting in a normal quarry or highway cut operation. The breccia is only slightly less massive, testing at 8,000 psi, again rock normally excavated by blasting in a production quarry setting (see Appendix B, Rock Testing). Both rock masses could be excavated by very heavy hydraulic breaking in our opinion, however small loosening blasts would greatly speed up the operation. 3080 125" Ave NE Geotechnical, Tunnel and Environmental Engineers Phone (425) 869-5778 Bellevue, WA 98005 Page 2 Fax (425) 861-0677 1 1 • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Conclusions/Recommendations Rock Removal It is our experience that limited controlled blasting produces fewer neighborly complaints than prolonged mechanical rock breakage with its accompanying high level of repetitive noise and dust. We have performed the calculations and these loosening blasts can be designed so they produce ground vibrations below the Office of Surface Mining limits at the nearest offsite structures (peak particle velocity of 2 inches per second or less). In addition, excavation resulting in no flyrock or objectionable airblast can be achieved by proper stemming of the holes and by placing blast mats over the blast area. The latter considerations are almost surely a major concern given the proximity of residential and commercial dwellings, roads, a police firing range, and low-flying aircraft approaching Boeing Field. The seismic data from the Earth Consultants Inc. report combined with our appraisal of the rock core indicate that approximately 75% of the rock in the hill should be considered "heavy mechanical rock breakage", that is requiring the largest hydraulic breakers unless loosening blasts first break up the massive rock. A commercial quarry could not sustain the cost of purely mechanical breakage of this rock since the hourly rental and operational costs of large hydraulic breakers are almost certainly greater than the value of the produced rock products. Rock Use Options The results of the abrasion tests performed on sound, unweathered core indicate that much of the rock passes the Washington State Department of Transportation's criteria for suitable coarse concrete aggregate (9-03.1(3)B) and similar uses such as roadway base coarse or rockfill. As mentioned in previous reports, the quarried material would make excellent structural fill and pre -load fill in those areas of the property underlain by alluvial soils. You should not, however, count on significant quantities of riprap, rockery blocks, or high-quality crushed rock such as railroad ballast. Finished Cut Slope Stability Assuming that the only permanent rock slope left after developing the site parallels the eastern boundary of the property (S 02°17'29" W), it is our opinion that the preferred stable geotechnical slope layout is a near vertical slope angle (1/2H to 1V), with 10 -foot - wide benches about every 20 feet vertical (see Figure 2). The boundary slope could be offset either 50 feet or 100 feet from the property boundary. Proper sloping of the benches assists in controlling runoff and minor rockfalls that could adversely affect the planned structures. The predominant strike (grain) of the rock is normal to the boundary slope and very few shallow -dipping joints were observed in the core, a stable orientation in our opinion. Some localized defects in the rock mass (shear zones or easily eroded sandstone/siltstone beds) may require remedial treatment such as shotcrete and/or rock bolt support, but these will be very minor in extent. Figure 2 also shows quantity estimates of the rock and soil on the site to achieve the four cases drawn. These were calculated solely to obtain general quantity parameters for the Geotechnical, Tunnel and Environmental Engineers 3080 125th Ave NE Phone (425) 869-5778 Bellevue, WA 98005 Page 3 Fax (425) 861-0677 • 1 ,site de elopment. We understand that none of these may be the final configuration and / that local ordinances may govern the final permissible slope without reference to the I geotechnical stability of the slope, especially since the final slope parallels a residential neighborhood. I Review of County Ordinances Concerning Blasting The King County Development Standard for Mineral Extraction, Chapter 21A.22, notes the following major requirements for the operation of a quarry, regardless of the method I of excavation (see Appendix E for complete Regulations): • Grading Permit Required; Fences and Warning Signs. • Minimum Site Area is 10 acres; greater than 20 acres requires phased I extraction. • Property Line setback for structures used in processing material is 100 feet for UR and R zoned properties; 50 feet if structure is located on grade greater 1 than 50 feet below the grade of adjacent properties. • Property Line Setback is 20 feet for Offices, Equipment Storage Buildings, and Materials Stockpiles. I• Blasting is permitted if it is consistent with the methods specified in the Office of Surface Mining 1987 "Blasting Guidance Manual". This is an interesting I note, since the Blasting Guidance Manual only gives performance specifications and does not specify a method. • Blasting is only permitted during daylight hours at regular or predictable times I that are made available to residents within 1/2 mile of the site. • Reclamation Plan approved in accordance with RCW 78.44.090. I From a technical viewpoint, all of these requirements can be met by using the recommendations given above. ' Closure The analyses, conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based on ' our interpretation of subsurface conditions and assume that the information obtained from the exploratory borings and work by others is generally representative of subsurface conditions throughout the site. If subsurface conditions different from those encountered ' in the explorations and described herein appear to be present during construction, we should be advised at once, so that we can review these conditions and reconsider our recommendations. 1 1 1 Geotechnical, Tunnel and Environmental Engineers 3080 125'" Ave NE Phone (425) 869-5778 Bellevue, WA 98005 Page 4 Fax (425) 861-0677 1 • • If you have any questions, please contact either of us at our office. 1 Milbor-Pita, Inc. ' Patricia Reed Engineering Geologist 1 1 1 1 1 1 Geotechnical, Tunnel and Environmental Engineers 3080 125t Ave NE Bellevue, WA 98005 Page 5 Fax (425) 861-0677 1 Gerry iillar, R.G. Geologic/Tunnel Engineer cc> Frank W. Pita, P.E., P.G. Geotechnical Engineer Enclosures: Figures 1 & 2 Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E Site Plan & Cross Sections Bore Logs & Core Photos Laboratory Test Data Two Shannon & Wilson Reports Earth Consultant's Plan & Profiles of Seismic Data King County Development Standards - Mineral Extraction Phone (425) 869-5778 0 TP -3 1 ' Q TP -4 • TP -8 O MP -1 • C) 1 I 1 I I 1 I MIR 1 O TP -1 1 -- WEI APROXIMATE TOP OF BANK OF DUWAMISH RIVER - 20 -_ — ' SR -4 JI went 0 TP -6 , TP -7 , " , TP -9 O C( 00 • MP -2 :1. B' -80 - — 90 --'',l ,00 , 110 " , -�,-\•.,�.. 120—.. 1 100 \ 1 USC/GS M-8. \ `'* CONC MON 1 i • i \ l k It t \ SOUTH I 113TH 1 STREET r ___.. 'Q TP -11 �w`��� �- SOUTH 115TH STREET ---- MEM MEI __J EXCEPTION GENERAL NOTES: 1. TOPOGRAPHIC INFORM,.'ION DERIVED FROM SURLY DRAWING PREPARED BY HAMMGtdD, COWER & WADE -UVINGSTONE ASSOCIATES, INC. (AUGUST 1975). FOR MORE COMPLETE DATA SEE PLAT OF SURVEY (DRAWING NO. 75-19A). LEGEND: MP -X• ROCK CORING LOCATIONS (2) - MILBOR-PITA TP- X Q TEST PITS (11) - EARTH CONSULTANTS SR -X APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF ECI SEISMIC REFRACTION LINES - E.C. PROFILE UNE TYP, DRAWING NOT TO SCALE Milbor-Pita & Associates, Inc. Geotechnical, Tunnel & Geoenvironmental Consultants Drown Br E1 NELSON Dot, 7-8-99 Mocked By: F PITA 7-8-99 ALLENTOWN ASSOCIATES TUKWILA SITE TOPOGRAPHIC PLAN BORING, TEST PITS, AND SEISMIC REFRACTION LINES P°'°ct Me. SC148R I FIGURE 1 PROFILE A PROFILE B w PROFILE C A 140 120 z 100 0 80 ``' 60 40 20 B 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 Ct. • a J 0 CC CL CC w w CO La - CO 0 0 11) a A' i I 140 20' TYP U w w aL 03 m 8 CASE D CASE B TYP TYP CC w LwLa- La. CO CO ' I EXIS2TiN0 I . ■ , �. 1 ' CASE An ....4114 51 ■ 1 I 1 1-1 1 } I I 1 i EXISTING SG�20UANN -E 1 a. I '.r_j_ ---- ! i ; E� r I I 1 iSi I U' -GROUND' Slg2FACE ' i j ; 1 1 f. I ; i / i ! i I I 1 ' .__.. ... 1 I I 1 i I I ! .' i' ,_ 1 I 20' TYP U w w aL 03 m 8 CASE D CASE B TYP TYP CC w LwLa- La. CO CO 20' TYP C 100 80 0 60 40 20 -J a m Lai J 1... 0 GL a 120 100 80 60 40 20 B' 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 J ^1 a. ' I EXIS2TiN0 I SURFACE1 I 1 ' I 1"-- 11 1 1-1 1 } r .... - i -E 1 a. I '.r_j_ ---- ! i r i! I 1 iSi I U' -GROUND' Slg2FACE ' i j ; 1 1 f. ; i I .__.. ... 1 I I ! l ,_ 1 I 20' TYP C 100 80 0 60 40 20 -J a m Lai J 1... 0 GL a 120 100 80 60 40 20 B' 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 J ^1 a. 20' TYP 100 80' 60 40 20 GENERAL NOTE 1. ALL QUANTITY CALCULATIONS ARE BANK YARDAGE" (BYC) 2. ROCK REMOVED DOWN TO ELEVATION 100 IN BUFFER ZONES AND DOWN TO ELEVATION 20 IN THE REMAINDER OF THE SITE. 3. REFER TO TEXT FOR SPECIFIC CASE INFORMATION. GENERAL CASE DESCRIPTION IS AS FOLLOWS: CASE A 100' BUFFER, 2H TO 1V SLOPE CASE 8: 100' BUFFER, 20'V BY 10'H STEPS CASE G: 50' BUFFER, 2H TO 1V SLOPE CASE 0: 50' BUFFER, 20'V BY 10'H STEPS DRAWING NOT TO SCALE Milbor-Pita & Associates, Inc. Geotechnical, Tunnel & Geoenvironmental Consultants Drown By: EI NELSON Dote: 6-24-98 Omani By: F PITA Dow 6-24-98 ALLENTOWN ASSOCIATES TUI WILA SITE PROFILE CASES '°"`tHe' SC148R FIGURE 2 ' I EXIS2TiN0 SURFACE1 2oU D I 11 I } 1 ' 1 1 i I .__.. ,_ 1 20' TYP 100 80' 60 40 20 GENERAL NOTE 1. ALL QUANTITY CALCULATIONS ARE BANK YARDAGE" (BYC) 2. ROCK REMOVED DOWN TO ELEVATION 100 IN BUFFER ZONES AND DOWN TO ELEVATION 20 IN THE REMAINDER OF THE SITE. 3. REFER TO TEXT FOR SPECIFIC CASE INFORMATION. GENERAL CASE DESCRIPTION IS AS FOLLOWS: CASE A 100' BUFFER, 2H TO 1V SLOPE CASE 8: 100' BUFFER, 20'V BY 10'H STEPS CASE G: 50' BUFFER, 2H TO 1V SLOPE CASE 0: 50' BUFFER, 20'V BY 10'H STEPS DRAWING NOT TO SCALE Milbor-Pita & Associates, Inc. Geotechnical, Tunnel & Geoenvironmental Consultants Drown By: EI NELSON Dote: 6-24-98 Omani By: F PITA Dow 6-24-98 ALLENTOWN ASSOCIATES TUI WILA SITE PROFILE CASES '°"`tHe' SC148R FIGURE 2 1 1 • Milbor-Pita 1 i .. 1 1 APPENDIX A 1 Core Logs & Core Photos 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Geotechnical, Tunnel & Geoenvironmental Consultants 1 (`ASSOCIATES, INC 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • Laboratory • Test Results [tock Quality Designatio Weathering Zone Depth, Run Number Driller: Gregory Drilling, Tacoma, Washington Rig: CME 850 w/3 -wall corer MP Observer: Pat Reed Date Drilled: 10JUN99 Total Depth: 40 ft. Elevation: 60 ft. approx. Location: West Knoll, drilled vertically. Description Unconfined Compres- sion = 11,239 psi Undrained Shear = 5619 psi 0 0 20 45 65 55 86 100 IIa IIa IIa IIa lib Hb_ IIb/ III35 III 5 10 15 20 25 30 40 45 1 _- Poor quality, weathered ANDESITE with rock fragments. Very closely jointed. — — — — `. `4, _?.. Soft material or void. No recovery. Poor quality, weathered ANDESITE with rock fragments. Very closely jointed. — — — — = — — ' 3:--' " ''. CLAY with rock. Poor quality, weathered ANDESITE with rock \ fragments. Very closely jointed. Clay, 13-13.5 ft. Poor quality DACITE, pink. Closely jointed. Grades to moderately jointed; joints dip at 45 and 60 degrees. Clay, 16-16.5 ft. 4 - ; _ t_ Fair quality ANDESITE, purplish, moderately close joints, quartz vein filling, 2" black clay filling vein at23.5ft. Grades to black. 31-33 ft. brecciated/tuffaceous zone. -- = 5 == — .6;._r — 3 Very good quality ANDESITE, black, widely spaced joints. LABORATORY TEST SAMPLE — — .8": — — Total Depth: 40 ft. Boring backfilled with bento- nite to ground surface. No water encountered. — Milbor-Pita & Associates Geotechnical, Tunnel, and Environmental Consultants Allentown Associates Tukwila Site Tukwila, Washington Figure A-1 Boring Log, MP -1 Page 1 of 1 Job No. SC 148 R 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • • Laboratory Test Results ock Quality Designatio Weathering Zone Depth, Run Number Driller: Gregory Drilling, Tacoma, Washington Rig: CME 850 w/3 -wall corer MP Observer: Pat Reed Date Drilled: 11JUN99 Total Depth: 650 ft. Elevation: 74 ft. Approx. Location: North-East corner, adjacent to access road, drilled 60° from vertical, toward South. Description ` Poor quality,weathered ANDESITE with dacite — clasts. Very closely jointed. 5 — — Fair quality ANDESITE, with dacite clasts. Pla- 57 IIb ;? gioclase xtls, moderately closely jointed at 45°. — 10 —" :. 83 III — — ; :-r `- >�'3� Good quality ANDESITE, aphanitic, moderate n, n, with dacite clasts. gee 15 __ °.`. Good quality WELDED TUFF, pale green, with andesite and dacite clasts, widely jointed. 96 IIb '4'=`: @18 ft., fault gouge, unoxidized. 20 " ' 95 ITb — ss 80 IIb -'L 30 :., 83 lib LA Abrasion = 27.9% Unconfined Compres- 35 LABORATORY TEST SAMPLE sion = 7980 psi Undrained Shear = 83 IIb '8 3990 psi 40 95 IIb 45 80 Ilb/ III —_ . ;10 Grades to more brecciated. Milbor-Pita & Associates Allentown Associates Figure A-2 Geotechnical, Tunnel, and Tukwila Site Environmental Consultants Tukwila, Washington Boring Log, MP -2 Job No. SC 148 R Page 1 of 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • • Laboratory Test Results Rock Quality Designation Weathering Zone Depth, Run Number Driller: Gregory Drilling, Tacoma, Washington Rig: CME 850 w/3 -wall corer MP Observer: Pat Reed Date Drilled: 11JUN99 Total Depth: 650 ft. Elevation: 74 R. Location: North-East corner, adjacent to access road, drilled 60° from vertical, toward South. Description 90 IIa —: '.11°,-_:; Very good quality ANDESITE, widely spaced- - joints, at 60° dip. 55 — LA Abrasion = 23.4% LABORATORY TEST SAMPLE Unconfined Compres- sion = 9037 psi 57 ITh — — --- Undrained Shear = 4518 psi 60 83 IIb — '';13`! 65 — 70 Total Depth = 65 ft. Boring backfilled with bento- nite to ground surface. No water encountered. 75 80 — 85 90 —' 95 — Milbor-Pita & Associates Allentown Associates Figure A-2 Geotechnical, Tunnel, and Tukwila Site Environmental Consultants Tukwila, Washington Boring Log, ]VIP -2 Job No. SC 148 R Page 2 of 2 • Core Hole #1 Allentown Associates Site, Tukwila, WA Notes: P" ,11.41.$ • - • 41 Notes: Depth: 0 to 15' Depth: 15 to 24.5' Milbor-Pita, Inc. Geotechnical, Tunnel & Environmental Consultants • • Core Hole #1 Allentown Associates Site, Tukwila, WA • - "4--; • • • • Notes: Notes: Depth: 24.5 to 34.5' Depth: 34.5 to 40' NIilbor-Pita, Inc. Geotechnical, Tunnel & Environmental Consultants • Core Hole #2 Allentown Associates Site, Tukwila, WA Notes: .;-- • t," Notes: Depth: 0 to 10' Depth: 10 to 19' Milbor-Pita, Inc. Geotechnical, Tunnel & Environmental Consultants • Core Hole #2 Allentown Associates Site, Tukwila, WA Notes: Notes: Depth: 19 to 28.5' Depth: 28.5 to 38' Milbor-Pita, Inc. Geotechnical, Tunnel & Environmental Consultants • • Core Hole #2 Allentown Associates Site, Tukwila, WA Notes: Notes: Depth: 38 to 46.5' Depth: 46.5 to 55' Milbor-Pita, Inc. Geotechnical, Tunnel & Environmental Consultants • • Core Hole #2 Allentown Associates Site, Tukwila, WA Notes: Depth: 55 to 64.25' Milbor-Pita, Inc. Geotechnical, Tunnel & Environmental Consultants • Milbor-Pita &SSOCIATES, INC. APPENDIX B Laboratory Test Data Sheets Geotechnical, Tunnel & Geoenvironmental Consultants JUrI — — L./ cr 1'1 1 will_'' --r 1 , J. . 1 '-ir UO J. V O! / 1.- U L • • w AGRA Earth & Environmental FMGIMiIAIMO GiGBAL SOLUTIONS 1133S N.E. 122"' way, Suite 100 OiclI td. WA 9303A -691e Tel 14251920441M Fm 14/511171-3514 FACSIMILE COVER SKEET ITO: Frank Pits DATE: 30 June 1999 COMPANY: Milbor Pita PROJECT NO.: SC148R FAX NO.: 425-861-0677 FAX OPERATOR: SEA 'FROM: Mark Liebman NO. OF PAGES: 4 clrtco tiAtinq '.LretPr uhurrt} I Thi„ I., ly enty IntbhOed for the ^ddressee- Is rnoy carocin privileged or conlide'lisl info'-�slln. =Mr �ns.nhorizcd disciesuro is strictly prohibited. If you hove NOlWved Itre C/And�s!%� h, error. Please 'Marty u9 immediately (scheez% ro dust WO rryy Correct our Gsnsndsslcn. ?home Ilium) SwbLIop Nue wyurdi. 110(4 yOU. cluded, please find test results for rock core specimens. t I elected to do 3 unconfined compressions (1'm only charging you for two). the andesite / dacite samples were combined for the LA Abrasion test. est Results: A Abrasion ASTM C1 31 !ample Location $ample Dcicri?tiunahted % Loss B-2 35-36' Welded Tuff 27.9% 13-2 55-56' / 8-1 35-36' Andesite / barite 23.4% am out of the office today until approximately 3pm, Please call then if you have any questions regarding these results, Or leave me a message and I will call you back. 'Thanks, Mark 1 1 1 Providing Geotechnical, Environmental and Materials Testing Services in 57 Offices World Wide 66,02 Nnr AGRA ZRlv1 & ErtylrerTenrrl, ton (RAv1LC/9R) "Gds 9t•.5 '.S 1-112iHn 0_►IIF:M71 T?r —Sit .gun- U -yam c�5rt�cr I11 1oor-vita, Inc. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIa : Carr 66 , 0£ Nflf £0db - - 9 6 -rws T HietbM tlei�JH btib£ TEE SZb • 4.CM t5b.1 UM,/ UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST )rnpressive Stress, psi 3 4 rn 0 0 0 C 0 0 C ) 0 0 C • • 1. 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Axial Strain, %. SAMPLE NO.; 1 Unconfined strength, psi _ 7980 Undrained shear strength. psi 3990 Failure strain, % 0.5 Strain rate. %/min 0.07 —Water content. % 0.0 (Test density, pcf 132.0 Dry density,•pcf 132.0 (Saturation, Z 0-0 Void ratio 0.2767 Specimen diameter, in 2.36 Specimen height, in 4.65 height/diameter ratio 1.95 Description: WELDED TUFF r GSIE 2.7 Type- Core Frofwcl No. • 9-91-l295L-o pate: 6-29-99 Remarks: Client: MILBOR PITA Project; SC148R Loco t i on : 6-7. / 35-36' i.,./61-01:-::0 TI.i4 { c..tik- i No.: •AGRA Earth & Environmental tNGNK41NGazgu.saWTgMS g �...� 1 Jun -30-99 0503P Milbor-Pita, Inc_ 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 425 861 0677 P.04 • ,111101,100, ' UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST ...„,„,,. ---------------- _ • Compressive Stress, psi CA Cr> W N 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 C D 0 0 C C i, i i • •• : : . : :i " • • i. • : • : : : : :1 : : : • : , • : ; , i ! ! . . .. i : . • , .. ; , i , f . : : , : . : : ; • • i.• ; • • • . .; ... ,. • : : : : i i ; ; • i ; i : • : ! . , : : Fel .4 .„,rei-- • • : i: : : : : • , i 1 i i ! ; I i i i i . : • - . • 1 : ' ! : : • : • : : : : : : • -. • ; 1 ! i . . . . ; : : • : i. ..."1"' • 1 : : i i • • t : : i ' .. • . . ! : ; i • • : : C... 0 0 • 2 0..4 0 5 0 . 8 Axial Strain, % SAMPLE NO.: 1....,. Unconfined strength, psi 9037 Undrained shear st ren th, psi 4518 Failure strain % 0.6 Strain rate, X min 0.08 Watnr content. % 0.0 Wet densit , •of Dr denait . pcf Saturation, % 153.3 IIIEMICIIIMIIMIIIIIIIMIIIMIIMIIIIII 0.0 Void rot 0.0993 Specimn ediameter, in 2.35 11=1110 Specimen hei ht. in 4.92 Helohtidlometer ratio 2.07 Description: DACITE GS= 2.7 Type: Core Pro jtret Kg . : 9 -91W -17%46B-0 Date: 5-29-99 Remorks: Client: MILSOR PITA Project: so14en Location: S-2 / 55-58' °AGRA Earth & Environmental tiiorocomiS GLOW SOtuTtOmi 9:O1 66.02 mnr VOcl 9176 1 wrINE t.32=191 171:62—TMB—G-e _Jun-.5u-ww lumzur 111C.L.. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 lit:OT 66.0Z Nrir Egcl 9176 • 4:::PCA1 WV7e, • UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST 4 el A et " _ - Comp-ressive Stress, psi 0 0 0 C o 0 0 C 1 o 0 0 C ; ; • : i E E E E ; .- : : e , • ; • • - : : : • • . : • • ' ' i • • • ; t : : ; ; . . •:- ; : : : ! ! Rei I E. L. 4€ : i i - . i .... • ;: - • • : I - • : : ; • • ; ; : : • i i • : : : : • : • 4: ; i : i : ; • : 4 : 1 : : .. ; • . i i ; , . 1 : . • • i • ; • ', • , • • • i -../A. 0 . - • • • 2 0.4 Axial Strain, . . • 0.6 % _ 0 8 SAMPLE NO-: 1 Unconfinetrenoth, psi 11239 4>b19 f unacolned shear strength, psi Failure strain, % 0.5 Strain rate, X/min 0.08 . Wotme rnntpnt, X 0.0 Wet doneity, pcf 159.1 Oryden6-ity, pcf 159.1 Saturation, % 0.0 Void ratio 0.0595 Specimen diameter, in 2.38 Specimen heir:mt. 5.02 Heicipt/dlometer ratio 2.11 Description: ANDESITC GS= 2.7 Typp !. Core Projoet No. c 9-9-Z5-) Dote: 6-29-99 Rmarke: C)ient: M1LBOR PITA Project; SC148R Location: 8-1 / 35-36PlvOi::-5 ,-c-- Fig. No.: ----- 41AGRA Earth & Environmental iNGIMIRIN 0 soi.vrIONS GLoaaa. -- ... 1 -LLt 9b1 17t5—T8—Sp Milbor-Pita StSSOCIATES, INC. APPENDIX C Previous Site Geotechnical Reports by Shannon & Wilson, Inc. 25Feb88 (W-4914-01) 14Ju189 (W-4914-03) Geotechnical, Tunnel & Geoenvironmental Consultants CONSULTANT - J r William L Shannon, P.E. • SHANNON & WILSON, INC. Geotechnical Consultants Engineering and Applied Geosciences 111 1105 North 38th Street • P.O. Box C-30313 ! Seattle, WA 98103-8067 • (206) 632.8020 • Cable: GEOSAW February 25, 1988 W-4914-01 Western Bridge Co. 5900 2nd Avenue South Seattle, WA 98108 Attn: Mr. James White PRELIMINARY EVALUATION OF ROCK OUTCROP, SOUTH 113TH STREET, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON This letter presents our observations and conclusions regarding the commercial use of the property bounded by So. 112th and So. 115th Streets on the north and south sides and the extensions of 35th and 38th Avenues So. on the west and east. The site is located in the Allentown district. We understand that you are considering regrading'the site, which would I require the excavation of a high hill and the filling of the lower elevations on the site. The hill is composed primarily of bedrock. The purpose of our work was to evaluate the suitability of the site for commercial development and the suitability of the rock for on-site fill and for commercial sale. IThe site is generally level around its north, south and west margins. Rising above this level of the Duwamish River valley (elevation 19 to 20 feet) is an outcrop of rock about 110 feet high. I The summit is approximately elevation 130 feet. The rock outcrop has been used as a rock quarry in the past, as evidenced by the angular boulders around the margins of the hill and the drill holes in some of the rocks. The western half of the outcrop is at a lower elevation I(approximately elevation 50 to 70). The rock outcrop is of volcanic origin, at least part of which was extruded into water during the Miocene epoch about 40 to 50 million years ago. As such, it is composed of pillows of I andesite and basalt and other quite variable materials. The eastern portion of the hill is made of gray and purple -brown fine to coarse-grained feldspathic andesite. The pillow structures range from 1 -inch to several feet in diameter. The unconfined compressive strength of the rock is I quite variable, ranging from moderately hard to very soft. The outcrops of rock are highly weathered to depths of at least of 6 to 12 inches at the top of the outcrop and 8 to 10 feet on the north and lower margins of the hill. In a saddle between the two nobs of the hill the rock is fairly massive and has a high compressive strength. At the highest elevations of the hill the Irock is a moderately hard andesite with local areas of soft breccia ( angular and rounded pieces of harder rock in a softer matrix). On the north side of the hill the pillow structure is very pronounced and weathering is very deep, as discussed above. The western nob of the hill is I quite variable; about half of the western exposure is moderately hard andesite and the other half is a very soft, highly to completely weathered andesitic breccia. The breccia contains small pods of harder rock. 1 In our opinion, the hard, massive andesite would be suitable for crushed rack products, spalls and some selected rocks for riprap. The riprap would not be plentiful, because even many of Seattle • Everett • Spokane • Portland • Fairbanks • Anchorage • St. Louis Earl A. Sibley, P.E. Raymond P. Miller, P.E. George Yamane, P.E. Harvey W. Parker, P.E. Atef A. Aaam Chairman of the Board Senior Vice President Vice President Vice President Vice President Western Bridge Co. I. Attn: Mr. James White February 25, 1988 Page 2 1 1 1 i I I I 1 iSincerely, SHANNON & WILSON, INC. I • W -491401 the larger blasted rocks are seamy and weathered along joints. Excavation could only be performed by blasting. Charge placement and powder factors would need to be changed frequently based on the resistance of the drill bit because the rock quality is likely to change suddenly. The pillowed andesite is weathered quite deeply where exposed and tends to be weathered even deeper along the contacts between pillows. The quality of this rock would be highly variable. In the weathered rind this material would only be suitable for dry weather fill. As excavation extends deeper, crushed rock quality may be attainable, but spall and riprap quality is unlikely. This rock type can be dozed and ripped in the upper 5 to 10 feet, and perhaps deeper. Below that, blasting would be necessary. A hard core to some of the pillows was observed, so local resistance to breakage may be encountered. The andesitic breccia is essentially a soil, which contains a significant amount of fines. Although it contains gravel clasts, the matrix of sandy silt or silty sand would limit its use to dry weather fill. This material could be moved with a dozer blade or by ripping. Due to the nature of the deposition of these rocks the above described rock types are not neatly layered or areally arranged. Their location in the core of this hill is unpredictable. It appears that the present shape of the hill may reflect the frustration of the previous quarry operator, the poor quality rock is exposed because when the operators encountered it, they abandoned that area and move to rock of better quality. If it is desired to develop this former quarry site as a`rock quarry, drilling should be performed and the rock core tested for abrasion and degradation resistance. Sufficient drilling should be accomplished to develop a high enough level of confidence to approximate the percentage of commercial rock. In general, exposed rock surfaces would provide good bearing for structure foundations. The highly weathered material in the joints and seams of the rock may be soft and compressible, and may need to be removed from footing locations. The valley sediments on the lower portion of the site would probably not provide suitable bearing for structures, and preloading and/or pile foundations may be required. Exploratory borings will be required to determine the thickness and engineering properties of the soils overlying bedrock at this site. 1 1 ph . Boirum, P.E. William T. Laprade, C.E.G. Senior Principal Engineering Geologist Associate I 1 SHANNON & WILSON. INC. SHANNON & WILSON, IN• Geotechnical Consultants Engineering and Applied Geosciences 400 North 34th Street, Suite 100 • P.O. Box C-30313 • Seattle, WA 98103 • (206) 632.8020 • Cable: GEOSAW July 14, 1989 W-4914-03 Western Bridge Company — 5900 Second Avenue South Seattle, Washington 98108 Attn: Mr. Elmer White SITE GRADING FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, SOUTH 115TH STREET AND EAST MARGINAL WAY, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON We understand you are planning to excavate the existing 'rockpile' and use the excavated materia] as fill to raise and level the low portions of the site in preparation for future development. Our previous studies of the site indicate that the rock would be suitable for this purpose when crushed. Excavation slopes as steep as 1 vertical to 0.5 horizontal should be stable in the intact rock, although flatter slopes may be required in some areas. We recommend that rock slopes be evaluated during construction. Our previous explorations also indicated that portions of the site are underlain by relatively soft, compressible soils, predominantly silts and fine sands, but also including soft clay and peat. In order to prepare the site for the most economical future development, we recommend that all fill placed at the site be engineered fill, and that the site be preloaded with a surcharge to consolidate the compressible soils. Proper surcharging of the site could substantially reduce the need for pile support of future structures at the site. In order to minimize the cost of future development, we recommend that site grading include clearing surface organics from the site and placing and compacting the fill in controlled lifts. Each lift should be systematically compacted to at least 95 percent of its Modified Proctor maximum dry density. • Prior to placing fill, settlement plates should be installed across the site on an approximate 100 Seattle • Everett • Fairbanks • Anchorage • St Louis Earl A. Sibley. P.E Chairman of the Board President Raymond P Miller. P.E Sr. Vice President George Yamane, P.E. Harvey W. Parker. P.E Atef A. Azza^ Sr. Vice President Sr. Vice President Sr. Vice Preside'+: Herman H. (Tex) Drvebert, P.E. Thomas E. Kirkland, P.E. Gerry Millar. P.G Vice President Vice President Vice Presuoen: Attn: Mr. timer White Page 2 • • 1 foot grid. Each settlement plate should consist of a 2 x 2 -foot -square sheet with a 2- or 3 -inch diameter pipe fitting attached to the center of one side. The sheet should be placed flat on the 1 ground surface prior to fill placement and a steel pipe riser should be attached to the pipe Sitting. The initial elevation of the sheet should be determined by a level rod extended down ' through the pipe, and the fill should then be placed. The pipe should be extended as necessary so that the top of the pipe is accessible through the fill. The elevation of the sheet should be _ determined at regular intervals by survey measurement through the pipe. We will evaluate the data to determine the settlement characteristics, and determine when preloading is complete. iIn our opinion, stockpiled material can be used as surcharge fill, and can be moved about the site as consolidation is completed in a particular area. Careful measuremant of the position, ' distribution, height, and duration of loading of the surcharge fill, and timely and systematic measurement of the resulting settlements is necessary to document the preloading process. Without proper monitoring and documentation, much of the economic advantage in preloading the site would be lost, as predictions of the future behavior of the site under loads could not be accurately made. It is likely that pile support of even lightly loaded structures could not be ' avoided in areas underlain be compressible soils if preloading of the site is not properly documented. Depending on the nature of the structure, additional soil explorations will be required to 1 provide information for the design of facilities at the site. Some of the soils at the site, including portions of the crushed rock, may contain sufficient quantities of silt and clay to produce a cohesive mixture when wet. Such soils may become muddy and difficult or impossible to place and compact if their moisture content significantly 1 exceeds the optimum. The following recommendations are applicable if earthwork is to be accomplished in wet weather or in wet conditions: a. Earthwork should be accomplished in small sections to minimize exposure to wet weather. Excavation or the removal of unsuitable soil should be followed immediately by the placement and compaction of a suitable thickness (generally 8 inches or more) of clean granular fill. The size of construction equipment may have to be limited to prevent soil disturbance. In some instances, it may be necessary to excavate soils with a backhoe, Gradall, or equivalent to 1 SHANNON & WILSON INC 1 1 July 14, 1989 Attn: Mr. Elmer While Page 3 minimize subgrade disturbance caused by equipment traffic. W-4914-03 b. Fill material should consist of clean, granular soil, of which not more than 5 percent by dryweight passes the No. 200 mesh sieve, based on wet sieving the fraction passing the 3/4 - inch sieve. The fines should be non -plastic. c. The ground surface in the construction area should be sloped to promote the run-off of precipitation and to prevent ponding of water. d. No soil should be left uncompacted and exposed to moisture. A smooth -drum vibratory roller, or equivalent, should be used to seal the ground surface. e. Excavation and placement of structural fill material should be observed on a full-time basis by a Geotechnical engineer experienced in earthwork, to determipe that all work is being accomplished in accordance with the project specifications. The above recommendations for wet weather earthwork should be incorporated into the contract specifications. We will be pleased to provide geotechnical monitoring of site excavation and the placement and compaction of fill materials. In our opinion, measurement of site grades and elevations of the settlement plates should be accomplished by a licensed surveyor. We will also evaluate the settlement data and provide analyses and recommendations for distribution and removal of the surcharge loads. Sincerely, SHANNON & WILSON, INC. alph N! Boirum, P.E. Associate cc: Bob O'Connel, Bush Roed & Hitchings, Inc. SHANNON & WILSON. INC • Milbor-Pita `ASSOCIATES, INC APPENDIX D Plates 1 -4, Plan & Geologic Cross Sections Related to Rock Excavation Methods from Earth Consultants Inc. Report 20May92 (#5692) (Note; Report text not available) Geotechnical, Tunnel & Geoenvironmental Consultants •/TY OF SEATTLE 7RANSMISSION•ES A SR -1 - TP -4 .- 20 1 30 l 50 / �\ i60 ,TP -3 1- I 10 TP -5 , 4:3 TP -12 -■- I -.- TP-6 i / 70 �90 50 TP -7, -■ TP -9 , _� TP -1 TP -11 -! - J Swale - 20 A' S. 115th STREET Top of River Bank - DUWAMISH RIVER 30 40 iI00 90 / 90 70 CO f 50 ,Il TP -1 -o- SR -1 Not -To -Scale LEGEND Approximate Location of ECI Test Pit, Proj. No. E-5692, May 1992 Approximate Location of ECI Seismic Refraction Line, Proj. No. E-5692, May 1992 Proposed Building A A' Cross Section Line (See Plates 2 - 4) Reference: Sheet P-1 Preliminary Site Plan By Lance Mueller & Associates AIA Dated 3/3/92 Earth Consultants Inc. Iw%kW Ii1y,h win, 0.111,g19Is R Iilsirnx(rnr.J S. xlclt Test Pit Location Plan City Moving Site #3 Tukwila, Washington Proj No. 5692 Drwn. GLS Date May '92 Checked AM Date 5/20/92 Plate 1 A 75 50 - w 1 0 25 - Q w Sea Level 0- -25 - -25 - -50 - - North Property Line SR -1 50' PROPOSED BUILDING SR -3 F.F. Elev. = 31.0' TP -4 Fill_ TP -5 Weathered Rippable Soil & Rock (1,300 - 3,700 ft/sec) TP -8 SR -4 TP -10 45' %i//7/77777/j Alluvial Soil / Assumed Unweathered Rock Surface 21' Note: The stratification lines shown on this cross section represent the approx:rnate boundaries between soil types. The actual transitions may be either more gradual or more severe. They are based on our interpretation of the subsurface conditions encountered at the individual test pit and seismic refraction locations, and our judgement and experience. ECI cannot be responsible for the interpretation of this data by others. 5.5 Unwiathered Hard Rock • Non to Marginally Rippable with Dozer (7,700 - 10,500 ft/sec) Horizontal Scale onnoran- 0 25 50 Vertical Scale 0 South Property Line Existing Grade TP -11 25 50rt. • Alluvial Soil A' - 75 - 50 w -25 z - Sea Level 0 - -25 --50 Earth Consultants Inc. (inMr, h,,lcnl litghrrtc. (k•IhgWc A Emitt.runn;J tit Yirkta Pro) No. 5692 Drwn. GLS Date May '92 Cross Section A - A' City Moving Site #3 Tukwila, Washington Checked AM Date 5/20/92 Plate 2 ELEVATION (FEET) B 100 75 50 25 — Sea Level 0 — - North Property Line Existing Grade Weathered Rippable Rock TP -6 TP -7 Hard, Non Rippable Rock Gv. Assumed Unweathered Rock Surface Note: The stratification lines shown on this cross section represent the approximate boundaries between soil types. The actual transitions may be either more gradual or more severe. They are based on our interpretation of the subsurafce conditions encountered at the individual test pit and seismic refraction locations, and our judgement and experience. ECI cannot be responsible for the interpretation of this data by others. N TP -9 8' Proposed Slope Cut Horizontal Scale Mazer 0 25 50 0 Vertical Scale 100h. 25 50ft. South Property Line B' —100 — 75 50 — 25 ELEVATION (FEET) —Sea Level 0 Earth Consultants Inc. rt Iv Oral ENInerss. (;niiigisis A 1i1.M,l r, In t I Si hItL.t+ Cross Section B - B' City Moving Site #3 Tukwila, Washington Proj No. 5692 Drwn. GLS Date May '92 Checked AM Date 5/20/92 Plate 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 C 100 — 75 — w o 50 — >_ J 25 — Sea Level 0 — West Property Line Existing Grade TP -12 TP -2 PROPOSED BUILDING F:F. Elev. 31.0' Weathered Rippable Soil & Rock (1,300 - 3,700 ft/sec) SR -2 SR -2 13' Assumed Unweathered Rock Surface Note: The stratification lines shown on this cross section represent the approximate boundaries between soil types. The actual transitions may be either more gradual or more severe. They are based on our interpretation of the subsurface conditions encountered at the individual test pit and seismic refraction locations, and our judgement and experience. ECI canliot'be responsible for the interpretation of this data by others. TP -8 SR -3 SR -..3.,/- 4.5' i TP -7 3 /.. _ ••.:' Proposed Cut Slope Unweathered Hard Rock Non to Marginally Rippable with Dozer (7,700 - 10,500 ft/sec) -Horizontal Scale 25 50 Vertical Scale 100ft. 0 25 501t. Pro' No. 5692 Earth Consultants Inc. <:•entu.k:J 1v.µhxcrS. l R. i. Fads & En,*Mnrwia St41NlVS1 Drwn. GLS Date May X92 C' —100 — 75 — 50 — 25 ELEVATION (FEET) — Sea Level 0 Cross Section C - C' City Moving Site #3 Tukwila, Washington Checked AM Date : 5/20/92 Plate 4 • Milbor-Pita ('ASSOCIATES, INC. APPENDIX E King County Development Standards - Mineral Extraction Chapter 21A.22 (#21A.22.010 - 21A.22.060) Geotechnical, Tunnel & Geoenvironmental Consultants DEVEWPMENT STANDARDS - NINERJ.L EXTRACTION 21A.22.010 - 21A,22.080 Chapter 21A.32 DRVELona$T STANDARDS - MDIZU.L =TRACTION Sectional 2.A.22.010 Purpose. 21A.22.020 Exemptions. 21A.22.030 Grading permits required. 211.22.040 Nonconforming extractive operations. 211.22 050 Periodic review. 21A.21.060 Site design standards. 21A.22.070 Operating standards. 21A.22.050 Reclamation. 21A.23.090 Financial puazanteea. 21x..22.010 Purpose. The.Durposs of this chapter Se to establish (standards which minimize the impacts of extractive operations upon surrounding Properties by: A. Ensuring adequate review of operating aspects of extractive site8; R. Requiring project phasing on large sites to minimize environmental impacts C. Requiting minimum site areas 1args enough to provide Setbacks and mitigations necessary to protect environmental quality; and D. Requiring periodic review of extractive and processing operetions to ensure compliance with the most current operating standards. (Ord. 11157 i 20. 1993! Ord. 10870 f 439. 1893). 21b.22.020 Lue.-Dtions. The provisions of this ehepter shall not apply to ossa or activities specifically exempted in K.C.C. 16.82.050. (Ord. 10870 f 440, 1993). 21A.22.030 Grading permits required. Extractive operations shall only after 19auance of a grading permit. (Ord. 10870 5 aai. 1993). 21.A.23.040 37bneonforming extractive operation•. To the extent determined feasible by the county, nonconforming extractive operations shall be brought into conformance with the operating standards of K.C.C. 211.22.070. (Ord. 10870 i 442. 1993). commence 21A.22.950 Periodic review. Unless a more frequent review ie required by the county, periodic review of extractive and processing operations shall be provided as follower A. All extractive operations 9) 11 be subject to a review of development and operating etendarde at five year intervals; B. The periodic review shall be: 1. Conducted by the director or toning adjustor pursuant to the review proceee outlined in K.C.C. 21A.42.040 - .090.: and i. Used to determine that the site is operating consistent with the most current standards and to establish other conditions as necessary to mitigate identifiable environmental impacts. (Ord. 11157 $ 21, 1993: Ord. 20870 S 443. 1983). 211.32.080 site design standards. Except ea provided for nonconforming extractive operations in X.C.C. 21A.22.040, all extractive and processing operations eha11, at minimus COmply with the following standards; 21A-913 (Xing County 12-9S) 21A.22.060 - 21A.23.070 ZONING A. The minimum site area of an extractive operation shall be 10 acres. B. Extractive operations on sites larger than 20 acres shall occur in phooey to Minimize environmental impaete. The it of each phase 04'11 be determined during the review process; C. sentry shall be: 1. Provided in a manner which discourages, access to safety hazards which may arise on areae of the site where; a, active extracting, processing. stockpiling and loading of materials is oeeurringr b. any unstable slops or any elope exceeding a grade of 40 percent ie present, or c. eey settling pond or ocher scorn:warer facility ie present; 2. At least six feet In height above the grade measured at a point five feet from the outside of the fence, 3. Installed with lockable gates 4. No more than four inches from tee around to fence bottom; and 5. Reintained in good repair; D. warning end trespass signs advising of the extractive operation shall be placed on the perimeter of the site adjacent to AA, uR or R zones at intervals no greater than 200 feet along any unfenced portion of the site where the items noted in subsection C.1.a-c are present; E. Structural aetbecke from property lines shall be as follows 1. buildings -or atructuree used -in the processing of material's shall be no clover than; a. One hundred feet Che setback may be reduced to structures are proposed is 50 zoned property. or b. Twenty feet from to another extractive Elite, or c. Twenty feet from any public street. 2. Offices, scale facilities, equipment storage buildings and stockpiles shell, not be closer than 20 feat from any property line except when edjecent to another extractive site, F. No Clearing, grading or excavation, excluding that necessary for roadway or storm drainage facility conatruction, shall be permitted within 20 feet of any property lino except along any portion of the perimeter adjacent to another extractive operation provided that With activities may be pursuant to an approved reclamation plan, 0. Landscaping as requized pursuant to X.C.C. 21A.16 shall be provided along any portion 02 the site perimeter where disturbances .such es site elear1ng and gmling, or mineral extraction ar proceeeing is performed, except where adjacent to another extractive operation; end H. Lighting shall: 1. Be limited to that required for security, lighting of structures and equipment, and vehicle operations, and 2. Not direct glare onto surrounding properties. (Ord. 11621 1 67. 1994r 11157 8 22, 1993: Ord. 10870 5 444. 1993). et ell openings or entrances; from any (JR or R zoned properties except that 50 feet when the grade where such building or feet or greater below the grade of said VR or R any other Boned property,.exeept when edjeeent 21A.22.070 Operating standards. All operating standards shall by as' 'specified in X.C.C. 16.82 except; A. Noise levels produced by an extractive operation shall not exceed levels, specified by the Xing County Noiee Ordinance. B. blasting shall be COAducted: 1, Consistent with the methods specified in the Office of Surface Alining, 1987 sleeting Guidance Manuel, (Xing County 12-9S1 21A-914 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS - MINERAL EXTRACTION 21A.22.070 - 21A.22.090 1 • • 1 2. During daylight hours/ and 3. According to a time schedulo that: emergency; •• an4 features regular or predictable times. except in the case of an b. 18 provided to residents within One-half mile of the Site: C. Dust and smoke produced by extractive operations shall not substantially increase the existing levels of suspended particulates at the perimeter of the alto and shell be controlled by watering of the site and equipment or other ,methods specified by the county, D. The applicant shall provide for measures to prevent transport of rocks. dirt and mud from trucks onto public roadwsysr X. Traffic control measures such ea flagmen or warning signs as determined by the county shall be provided by the applicant during all hours of operation; and P. The applicant shall be responsible for cleaning of debris or repairing of damage to roadways caused by the operation, (Ord. 11621 S 68, 1994: 10870 0 445, 1993). 1111.22.090 Reclamation. A reclamation plan approved pursuant to the requirements of new 78.44.090 shell be submitted prier to the effective date of • rezone approval. (ord. 11157 3 23, 1993; Ord, 10870 8 446. 1991). 31A.22.990 Financial guarantees. Financial guarantees shall be required consistent with the provisions of Title 27A. (Ord. 12020 1 53, 1995: Ord. 11157 f 24, 1993: Ord. 10870 9 447, 1993). 1 1 1 1 1 1 ' 21A-915 (King County 12-95) 1 • • Re: White - Tukwila SEPA Answers Wed, Jun 9, 1999 10:35 AM Frown: <PITAFW@aol.com> To: planning@rwta.com Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998, 3:18 PM Subject: Re: White - Tukwila SEPA Answers Milbor - Pita, Inc. 3080 125th NE, Bellevue, WA 98005 Phone: 425 869-5778 Fax: 425 861-0677 E-MAIL: pitafw@aol.com WA MBE # D5M5012849 DATE: 27Jun98 EMAIL MEMO TO: Gareth, RW Thorp & Assoc. by email CC: Jim White by fax FROM: Frank Pita, Milbor-Pita, Inc. RE: Response to SEPA Email b. Steepest slope is vertical. There are cuts from old quarrying, a former use, on the site's rock that are now vertical. c. Over half the site is rock of volcanic origin and is an andesite, breccia and sedimentary siltstone. It rises 110 feet above the valley floor. The rock is hard but it has weak zones that will not allow the production of large durable rock. It could be used as general fill. The remainder of the site is valley river sediments that are typically weak in strength and prone to settlement. These alluvial deposits are a mixture of sand, silt and peat. This land is not prime agriculture land. d. The soil on the slopes appears quite stable as far a landsliding is concerned. The rock currently stands near vertical in many' locations. e. To develop the site; the rock needs to be removed from the site so a near level area is developed. Part of this material, as it is being removed could be used as a preload to consolidate the alluvial soils so construction on the softer soil can occur without settlement being a major issue. After consolidation, the excess material shall be removed from the site. The quantity of rock material to remove is between 325,000 bcy (bank cubic yards) to 443,000 bcy depending of the buffer width and cut slope allowed. I have generated four cases with quantities, the one that removes the least material is a 100 foot buffer and a 2H to 1V slope from the 100 foot contour line (the knob above this elevation is removed). The case that removes the most has a 50 foot buffer, the material above elevation 100 removed, and a benched cut slope that consists of a 20 foot vertical cut and a 10 foot horizontal bench. The benches can and should be re -vegetated. f. Little erosion will occur on the site. The material being excavated in rock, which is not soil and provides minor amounts of erodable material. g. Currently about 60% of the site is covered with rock, which is an impermeable surface. After development, at this time I would think about 60% of the site will be covered with asphalt and building. h. To prevent erosion impact, silt fences and detention basins shall be constructed during construct and into final design as needed. b. The siltstone on the site is known a fossil collecting area in geology guidebooks. However, the formation and the type of fossils are not unique to this site. There are other sites in King County. (Note; my geologist knew of this site and is checking on the., site at the DNR library on Monday or Tuesday of this week.) c. All of the rock outcrops will not be removed by this grading, so faces will still be available, if the property owner permits, for fossil collectors to have access. Page 1 of 2 1 I • To Garth....Rock pile quantities Wed, Jun 9, 1999 10:36 AM 1 From: <PITAFW@aol.com> To: planning@rwta.com Date: Wed, Aug 5, 1998, 3:53 PM II Subject: To Garth....Rock pile quantities 1 This is from a memo to Jim on 27Jun98 sorry, I thought you had gotten the quantities The soils around the rock are soft. We can either build the structure on the rock itself, after we remove most of it. In otherwords, locate the structure 'on the firm rock and put the parking lots on the soft ground. Or, we can use the rock as a pre -load on the soft soil areas before we remove it. This would allow more flexibility in what we could construct on the property. 1 For rock quantities, I have created four cases. I have used a 100 foot and a 50 foot buffer line and then on each I have cut the slope at a 2H to 1V and as benches which run 20 feet vertical and then step out 10 feet horizontal to the 11 bottom. The net is a 1/2 to 1V slope, but we can plant trees etc. on the benches. The rough quantities I have generated by using geometric shapes are as ' follows; Case Layout Bank cubic yards A 100' buffer, 2H to 1V cut slope 325,000 11 B 100' buffer, 20'V to 10' H bench cut 406,500 C 50' buffer, 2H to 1V cut slope 384,000 D 50' buffer, 20'V to 10' H bench cut"443,000 Note; These quantities are order of magnitude and should be re evaluated by a technician who specializes in this tvoe of work. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Page 1 of 1 1 • 4 Fossils Wed, Jun 9, 1999 10:35 AM 1 From: <PITAFW@aol.com> To: planning@rwta.com Date: Tue, Jul 14, 1998, 1:25 PM II Subject: Fossils 1 Milbor - Pita, Inc. 3080 125th NE, Bellevue, WA 98005 Phone: 425 869-5778 Fax: 425 861-0677 E-MAIL: pitafw@aol.com WA MBE # D5M5012849 DATE: 14Ju198 EMAIL MEMO TO: Gareth Roe, RW Thorp & Assoc. by email 1 CC: Jim White by fax FROM: Frank Pita, Milbor-Pita, Inc. RE: Comments/Input Regarding Fossils.at the Tukwila Site My geologist and I visited the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) offices in Olympia on 13Ju198 to evaluate the fossils at the Tukwila site. We visited 1 the Division of Mines and Geology and the DNR library. Our objective was to ascertain if the DNR viewed this site as a valuable or unique resource to the citizens of the State. 1 We obtained two documents related to fossils that the DNR provides to citizens who are interested in the State's fossil resources. These are; • GEOLOGIC TIME, ROCKS, FOSSILS, AND MINERALS IN WASHINGTON by the Department of Natural Resources, Division of Mines and Geology (no date): This package 11 is given out at the division's front desk when you ask for information of • fossil collecting.It is free. It has three pages that pertain to fossils,, which describe 12 locations statewide. The closest to our site is on 1 Bainbridge Island. • FOSSILS of WASHINGTON by Vaughn E. Livingston, Jr., 1959 (updated in 1972), Division of Mines and Geology Information Circular 33. This is an overview of Washington fossil site's that have a more prominent or representative nature. 1 The circular divides the State by geologic time. Both published geologic maps and the 25Feb88 report of the rock on the site by Shannon & Wilson, Inc. indicate that the geologic age of the rock onsite is Miocene (a subset of the Tertiary period of the Cenozoic Era). On page 27 of this document, a site in II the next section is referenced but not our site. The author of Fossils of Washington also states, "The best known collecting II areas are in eastern Washington, where the dry climate retards weathering of fossils exposed by erosion." CONCLUSION: Based on our investigation of this site, it appears that the two 1 available documents of the State do not reference the site in question. Also, it appears that other sources for this geologic age are available in the local area. Therefore, we are harming a critical natural resource of the State. In fact, through excavation, we may improve it. 1 Call if questionsE.. Frank (I have mailed copies to you Garth, Jim has them already. Note the one on auarry reclamation from the State.) 1 1 Page 1 of 1 NIBTime uni MIts � (yrsRecent AM ss of 1 CENOZOI C E R A OUARTERNARY PERIOD epoch i. a°' Man Saber-tooth tiger Modern horse / 1i Proboscldean , W 3 ` , �4ti; 2 '� = .0 '� --• > • Tllonolher• -�= Angiosperm Pleistocene41111mor epoch 10,000 -- TERTIARY PERIOD Pliocene epoch I,00O000 -- Miocene epoch lo,000000 - Oligocene epoch 25,000,000 - 40,000,000 Eocene epoch - Poleocene epoch 60,000,000 125,000,000 Rad."' Four load horse Frog IMESOZOIC ERA CRETACEOUS PERIOD % `fr Bony fish Toothed bird 41414Lifilli"' JURASSIC PERIOD - Dinosaur 1 iiii1 �0 TRIASSIC PERIOD:,�• 150,000000 - 180,000,000 Ammonite Ichthyosour _ Conifer 2 all a limits Q W U 0 O W J a 0 yrs. ucilleiorr life PERMIAN PERIOD PENNSYLVANIAN PERIOD MISSISSIPPIAN PERIOD DEVONIAN PERIOD leo,0oo000 205,000,000 - SILURIAN PERIOD ORDOVICIAN PERIOD CAMBRIAN PERIOD 255,000,000 - PR ECAMBRIAN ERA 315,000,000 - 350,000000 - 430,000000 - 510,000,000 Insect Amphibian Reptile Scale tree Goniotile Fish Coral Euryplerid to t• Cephalopod Seed fern Got. Brachiopod 3,000,000,000 Fossils ore rare and ore found only In youngest Precambrian rocks. Lite consisted of simplest animal forms and lour -order plants. MN• N UN MI U 11111 1 11111 1 S S 111111 111111 11111 I all ILLUSTRATIONS Page Plate 1. Map showing fossil localities described in this report 10 Figure 1. Common Cambrian trilobites from northeastern Wash- ington 11 2. Three views of the Cambrian brachiopod Kutorgina from northeastern Washington 12 3. Two views of a Cambrian archaeocyathid 13 4. Two common graptolites from northeastern Washington 14 5. Typical Paleozoic horn coral 16 6. Three views of the Carboniferous brachiopod Spirifer17 7. Common bryozoans from northeastern Washington 17 8. Fusulinid 18 9. Two common Cretaceous pelecypods from Sucia Island, San Juan County 20 10. Two common Cretaceous cephalopods from Sucia Island, San Juan County 20 .11 . Four common Tertiary pelecypods from western Wash- ington 22 12. Three common Tertiary gastropods from western Wash- ington 23 13. Scaphopod Dentalium from the Tertiary of western Washington 23 14. Cephalopod Aturia from the Tertiary of western Wash- ington 23 15. Three common foraminifera from the Tertiary of west- ern Washington 24 16. Leaves commonly found as fossils in Washington 25 17. Teeth of mastodon and mammoth 31 T . FOSSILS IN WASHINGTON By VAUGHN E. LIVINGSTON, JR. INTRODUCTION The quest for fossils can be a Fascinating one. 1t not only gives an indi- vidual an opportunity to relax in the great outdoors, but also can provide many enjoyable hours of indoor work, cleaning and identifying individual specimens. If collecting is approached with the proper perspective, the fossil hunter will also expand his knowledge of rocks and present-day animals and plants. Many years ago, people who found fossils thought them to be freaks of nature. Some individuals went so far as to suggest that they were put into the rocks by some evil supernatural being. Other people thought that they were the remains of animals that were killed during the great flood at the time of Noah. It wasn't until the late 1700's that someone discovered that fossils found in a certain bed or layer of rocks were characteristic of that bed and served to distinguish it from other beds. It was Further discovered that many of these char- acteristic fossils hod a wide distribution and could be found elsewhere in a con- tinuation of that same bed or layer of rock. The descriptions of animals and their geologic significance given in this report are short. The amateur Fossil hunter wanting more details should consult such books as "introduction to Historical Geology," by R. C. Moore, 1 Mlle M I M— r r S— .1931 FOREWORD To the amateur naturalist and to anyone who is interested in the mysteries of nature, fossils present challenges to the imagination that are not easily met. Fossil sea shells are often found imbedded in solid rock in such seemingly unlikely places as the high Cascade Mountains in Washington; fossil palm leaves are found in areas of temperate climate in Washington; and elephant and camel bones are found here, where these animals are now liv- ing only in zoos. What do these casts, molds, and preserved sea shells, im- prints of leaves, and animal bones mean in terms of the geologic history of the earth? These and related questions are answered by paleontologists, the geological specialists who interpret geologic history from the evidence provided by fossils. Their interpretations are made through discovery, careful study, and classification of the fossilized remains of plants and animals that lived in the geologic post. Although fossils are the subject of highly specialized studies by paleontologists, they also are interesting to many nonspecialists, beginning students, and amateurs, and it is for these persons that this report has been prepared. The more serious investigator will find use for the detailed reports on fossils in Washington that are cited in the lists of references. August 20, 1959 MARSHALL T. HUNTTING, Supervisor Division of Mines and Geology II lin Ma CONTEN S Foreword Introduction Geologic time Fossilization Unaltered hard parts Altered hard parts Molds and casts Other types of preservation Value of fossils Stratigraphic markers Ancient climate and environment indicators Classification of fossils Some fossil localities in Washington Fossils of the Paleozoic era Cambrian period References Ordovician period References Silurian period Devonian period References Carboniferous period Reference Permian period Reference Fossils of the Mesozoic era Triassic period Reference Jurassic period Cretaceous period References Fossils of the Cenozoic era�I Tertiary period 21 References 28 Quaternary period 29 References 31 Page III 1 4 5 5 6 6 7 8 8 c 11 it 11 13 14 15 15 15 16 16 18 18 19 19 19 19 19 20 Fossil collecting 31 Methods 31 Recording the location 32 Professional people to contact 32 Other books about fossils 34 III 1 111,- C._ 1 1 ROSELLINI, Governor ent of Conservation RL COE, Director INFORMATION CIRCULAR 1, MINES AND GEOLOGY T. HUNTTING, Supervisor M • O z 0 U oz 0 WASHINGTON 33, FOSSILS IN WASHINGTON Updating of information, page 23 I th The'area along Highway 9 (now Highway 12) in Grays Harbor 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 J E. LIVINGSTON, JR. County between the towns of Porter and Malone is no longer open for fossil hunting. It now (1972) has been posted with State of.Washington NO TRESPASSING signs.. Ell NS NM 11111 SIN 1111 11111 111111 11111 SIM INS 111111 11111 MIN 11111 blished by McGraw-Hill, New York; "General Zoology," by Tracy I. Storer, blished by McGraw-Hill, New York; and "An Illustrated Guide to Fossil Ilecting," by Richard Casanova, published by Naturegraph, San Martin, llfornie. A person who spends a few minutes studying these books will dis- ier them to be not only informative but entertaining as well. Merely glanc- at the pictures will improve one's understanding of fossils and their relation- p ' ilhistory of the earth. Fossil collectors should always keep in mind that the fossils that are and today ore evidence of once -living plants and animals. Because the pres- t can often be used as a key to the past, by studying present-day forms of (mals or plants it is possible to learn how ancient organisms of the same kinds ed. In order to better understand what a fossil is, a person should have a neral knowledge of its geologic age, mode of preservation, and what type of imal or plant it once was. . Geologic Time Geologists calculate that the most ancient rocks found at the surface of s earth are between 21 and 3 billion years old, according to radioactivity ting measurements. As there is no way of knowing how much time elapsed tween the origin of the earth and the formation of the oldest known rocks, a rt of the earth's history will always remain obscure. As can be seen in the ble on pages 2 and 3, geologists have divided geologic time into four main visions, called eras. The eras have been subdivided into periods, which in turn have been subdivided into epochs. The table also gives the approximate age of these eras, periods, and epochs. In order to visualize the vast amount of time represented by the geologic time scale, assume that one second of time equals one year of the earth's history. On this reduced time scale the average human life span is one minute, Christ was born about 33 minutes ago, and the earth hod its beginning a little over 100 years ago. We are familiar with the usage of Christ's birth date as a datum plane in reckoning historic time in years B. C. and A. D. In geologic time the datum plane is the base of the Cambrian period. The rocks that were formed during Cambrian time are the first to contain numerous fossils; rocks of Precambrian age are almost entirely devoid of fossils. Fossilization Fossils are the remains or traces of animals or plants that have been pre- served in rocks or other materials (such as ice or tar) of the earth's crust by nat- ural means. Two things are necessary in order that a fossil may be formed: (1) quick burial in materials such as mud, snow (later turned to ice), water, vol- canic ash, or tar, and (2) hard parts such as bones, teeth, or shell that can be preserved. Most fossils are preserved as unaltered hard parts of animals or plants, as altered hard parts, or as molds or casts. Unaltered hard parts. --Skeletal material or shell that has been preserved with no recognizable change from its original composition. Good examples of this type of preservation are exhibited by fossil clams and snails found. in Terti- ary formations of western Washington. 40111111111FAIIIII leo from its original composition. This alteration can take place in many ways, the most important of which are listed below. (a) (b). Carbonization. --The tissue of a plant or animal is transformed into a thin film of carbon. Good examples of this are the fossil leaves and other plant parts found in sandstones and shales near Wenatchee, Spokane, Cle Elum, and other localities. Petrifaction (petrification). --Material such as bone or wood is converted to stone by the filling in of voids or pores and by replacement of the original substance with a foreign material --most commonly, silica. A good example of this transformation is the petrified wood found in the Ginkgo Petrified Forest State Park, near Vantage in Kittitas County. (c) Permineralization.--In shells and skeletal structures that have a permeable nature (bone, mollusk shells, etc.), the pore space becomes filled with an inorganic material, commonly calcite or silica. There is no alter- ation of the original material. The fossil increases in weight and usually becomes more resistant to destructive forces. Examples of this kind of preservation are the fossil clams found in the sea bluffs west of the West Twin River in Clallam County. The original shell material has remained unchanged, but the cavity within the shell has become filled with silica. Molds and casts. --Any organic structure may leave an impression if it is pressed into, or is surrounded by, material that is capable of retaining the imprint. If the organic matter is later removed from its rock prison by solutions or other means, the remaining cavity or impression is a mold. If the mold be- comes filled with a mineral substance, the filling is a cast. 6 S r M I N M IIIIII found near Blue Lake in the Sun Lakes State Park, Grant County. Costs of worm borings and clam neck impressions are common in Tertiary shales of westi Washington. Some trees that were covered by molten lava were preserved. Howevi in most instances the wood was completely burned by the heat of the lava, let ing a mold in the solidified lava to show where the tree had been. An excell example of this is found in the lava tunnel in the NE* sec. 19, T. 7 N., R. E., on the south flanks of Mount St. Helens. Similar molds can be seen in thick pumice beds near the Ranger Station at Spirit Lake on the north of Mount St. Helens. Other types of preservation .--Some unusual cases of preservation hav been recorded. Woolly mammoths and rhinoceroses of the ice age have been found encased in glacial ice of northern Siberia and Alaska. Their preservat' was so complete that flesh, internal organs, and undigested food in the stoma were almost perfectly preserved. In at least one instance local tribesmen in r' Siberia were known to have eaten the flesh of one of these frozen prehistoric creatures with no ill effects. Insects -showing every detail of morphology anc color have been found in amber, which is the fossilized resin of con4b,.s tr Most fossils have been preserved simply by being covered with Fine sc iment in the sea. This method of fossilization does not prevent the bacterial decay of flesh or soft tissue, but the harder parts of the animal or plant may I well preserved. On land, the most favorable places for fossils to form is in lakes and swamps. Beautifully preserved leaf and insect remains are found it the fresh -water deposits of the Latah formation near Spokane. all I — VauT a of Foss' s 111111 IIIIII r-1111111— r — — — i i OM MI Classification of Fossils Stratigraphic markers. --By using fossils to date the layered rocks of the h's crust, geologists are able to determine the relationship of rocks in one 1 to those in another area. By noting the occurrence of certain "guide" ils or characteristic fossil sequences, geologists have been able to correlate to in Stevens County with strata of the same age in the Appalachian Moun- s, in England, the Alps, and other parts of the world. This method of correlation is particularly important to the petroleum IogiteHe looks for evidence that will tell him the age of the strata and n they were folded, faulted, or eroded. By recognizing in well cores'and ings fossils that are characteristic of a certain age, and by recording the th at which they occur in different wells, he is able to draw geologic maps cross sections that help him in hIs search for oil. Ancient climate and environment indicators. --By studying certain types Dssils it is often possible to determine the relationship of ancient lands and , migration routes of ancient animals, and the climatic conditions that may a r ., ed. For instance, fossil palm leaves found near Cle Elum indicate abou 50 millionY ears ago the climate in central Washington was subtropical •opical . For purposes of identification, fossils are classified into two large kingdoms --plant and animal. These in turn are successively subdivided into smaller and more restricted groups, finally ending with the individual. The subdivision of the animal kingdom can be illustrated as follows by the complete classifications of the domestic dog and of man: Kingdom Mimalia Animalia Phylum Chordata Chordata Class Mammalia Mammalia Order Carnivora Pr ima te,J' Family Canidae Hominidae Genus Canis Homo Species familiaris -sapiens Individual Fido John Doe e N M i- r r- 10 FOSSIL LOCATIONS DESCRIBED IN THIS REPORT W 4 -J a. N- N M N N NS- r SOME FOSSIL LOCALITIES IN WASHINGTON In Washington there are fossil localities representing almost every geologic period. Unfortunately for the collector, most of the localities for fossils of different ages are widely separated. Paleozoic fossils are most abun- dant in the northeastern part of the state, and Tertiary invertebrate fossils are found mostly in the western part. Vertebrate fossils have been found mostly in the central and southern part. Leaf fossils have the widest distribution in the state. They have been found from north of Winthrop, in Okanogan Coun' south to the Oregon border, and from Puget Sound to the Idaho border. • Fossils of the Paleozoic Era Cambrian period. --The Cambrian rocks derive their name from the Cambria (Latin for Wales) district of England, where they were first recognized, In Washington, Cambrian rocks are found in large areas in Stevens and northern Pend Oreille Counties. These rocks were deposited as sediments in an arm of B c FIGURE I.— Common Cambrian Trilobites from northeastern Washington. (A) Olenelus. (B) £!rondio. (C)Koolenlo All about twice natural site. eaprob xtefrom ernrniawarugh oda, Utah, Idaho, eastern Washington, and British Columbia to the Arctic The most abundant fossils found in Cambrian rocks are trilobites,: named their prominent three -lobed body Form.. They are an extinct marine animal FIGuttE 2.— Three views of the Cambrian brachiopod Kulorglna from northeastern Woshinpton. Natural size. ie phylum Arthropoda that looked very similar to the modern sow bug or pill . Figure 1 illustrates three common trilobites found in northeastern hington. Other fossils commonly found in Cambrian rocks are brachiopods (fig. 2) ie are bivalved marine animals that superficially resemble a clam. It is to distinguish between the two, however, as clam valves are equal or or images of each other and the brachiopod valves are unequal, one valve g(. 411,ntly shaped from the other. Some of the best trilobite and brachiopod fossil localities in Washington The quarries of the Lehigh Portland Cement Company one-half mile southeast of the town of Metaline Falls, Pend Oreille County. At the south end of the low ridge opposite Addy, Stevens County, on the west side of the Colville River in the SWi sec. 13, T. 33 N., R. 39 E. (The fossils are found in a very platy, thin -bedded S IIIIII N N .O . S .. M, I M. I W sandy argillite that crops out along the north side of the road, just a little over two-tenths of a mile south of the west end of the bridge over the Colville River at Addy.) Near the center of sec. 14, T. 33 N., R. 38 E., about four -tenths of a mile up the East Fork of Stranger Creek from where the road crosses it on Dunn Mountain, approximately 7 miles due west of Addy, Stevens County. FIGURE 3.— Two views of a Cambrian archoeoeyothld. Twice natural size. One of the most puzzling fossils of the Cambrian period is the orchae- ocyathid. These fossils resemble a sponge that has been turned to stone (fig. 3). Archaeocyathids can best be seen if the rock containing them is sawed and polished, They are among the oldest fossils found in Washington, being about 500 million years old. The best place to collect archaeocyathids is just past the Vista House road about 1 .3 miles north of the intersection of Main and 5th Streets in Colville, Stevens County. References McLaughlin, K. P., and Enbysk, B. B., 1950, Middle Cambrian trilobites from Pend Oreille County, Washington: Jour. Paleontology, v. 24, no. 4, p. 466-471. Moore, R. C., 1949, Introduction to historical geology: New York, McGraw- Hill, 582 p. 13 111111 11111 SIN NIS MI MI6 SIN 11111 MS MN En 11111 11111 Park, C. F., and Cannon, R. S., Jr., 1943, Geology and ore deposits of the Metaline quadrangle, Washington: U. S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 202, p. 17-19. Shimer, H. W., and Shrock, R. R., 1944, Index fossils of North America: New York, John Wiley & Sons, 837 p. Ordovician period. --The Ordovician period was named after an early Celtic tribe, the Ordovices, who inhabited a district in Wales. In Washington, Ordovician rocks are found in Pend Oreille and Stevens Counties. They were laid down In an arm of the sea that covered roughly the same area as the Cambrian sea. By far the most abundant fossils found in Ordovician rocks of Washington are the graptolites (fig. 4). These are 8 extinct colonial marine animals, the fossil remains of which are found mostly In black shales and slates. Generally the skeletons have been flattened, so that only the outlines of the animals can be seen. At first glance they may appear to be fossil leaves or grasses, but further study will show that they lack the vein systems of leaves. Some good Washington localities at which to collect graptolites are: FlsunE 4.— Two common graptolites from northeostern Washington. (A) Phyllogroplus. (B)01dymoproplus. Botn natural site. In road cuts along the King road two-tenths of a mile northwest of its junction with the McKern road east of Rice in Stevens County. In the west bank of the Pend Oreille River below the Pend Oreille mine, approximately 1 mile north of Metaline Falls, Pend Oreille County. v In the stream banks at the confluence of Slate Creek and the 'Pend Oreille River about 5 miles northeast of Metaline Falls, Pend Oreille County. In highway cuts for about 1 mile south of Ledbetter Lake, Pend Oreille County. References Park, C. F., and Cannon, R. S., Jr., 1943, Geology and ore deposillk the Metaline quadrangle, Washington: U. S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 202, p. 19-22. Ruedemann, Rudolf, 1947, Graptolites of North America: Geol. Soc. America Memoir 19, 652 p. Shimer, H. W., and Shrock, R. R., 1944, Index fossils of North America: New York, John Wiley & Sons, 837 p. Silurian period. --The name, Silurian, is derived from a tribe known as the Silures that inhabited western England and Wales. Rocks of Silurian age have been reported in Pend Oreille County near Metaline Falls; however, the validity of the report is questionable. If Silurian rocks are presets may be so closely associated with Ordovician and Devonian rocks thatrecog- nizing them would be difficult. Devonian period. --The name, Devonian, is derived from the County Devon in southwestern England. In Washington, Devonian rocks are found on both sides of the Cascade Mountains. In western Washington, Devonian seas covered the area now occupied by the San Juan Islands, and in eastern Washington they covered about the same area as had Cambrian and Ordovicia seas. V M V M S .um me The most common Devonian fossils are brachiopods and corals. Some f the fossil corals resemble those living today. Some resemble dead twigs nd others closely resemble the modern brain coral. One of the most common fossil corals is the horn coral (fig. 5), which Is now extinct. The soft parts of the coral were probably very simi- lar to those of the modern sea anemone and occupied the inside of the "cow -horn" -shaped skeleton. A good locality from which to collect Devonian fossils is at a lime- stone outcrop on the hillside in sec. FIGURE 5.— Typical Paleozoic horn coral. Natural size. 16, T. 40 N., R. 43 E., just north - vest of where the road crosses Fence Geek in Pend Oreille County. References Park, C. F. Jr., and Cannon, R. 5., Jr., 1943, Geology and ore deposits of the Metaline quadrangle, Washington: U. S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 202, p. 22, and geologic map in pocket. Shimer, H. W., and Shrock, R. R., 1944, Index fossils of North America: few York, John Wiley & Sons, 837 p. Carboniferous period. --The Carboniferous period was named for the abundant coal beds that are found in rocks of this age in England. In the United States, rocks that represent the same span of time have been divided • into the Mississippian and the Pennsylvanian periods. Up to the present time, studies of the Carboniferous rocks in Washington do not justify such a division. • 16 S SIM MIS Carerouls mmmound shinre 11111 brachiopods (fig. 6), corals, and bryozoans (fig. 7). The latter are small aquatic animals that live together in colonies called a zoarium. The zoarium may be an encrustation -on a shell or rock, it may look like a twig that has been systemat- ically punctured with pin holes (fig. 7A), or it may appear as a small fon or frond that has been perforated with pin holes (fig. 7B and 7C). The small holes are homes of the individual animals. FIGURE 6.— Three views of the Carboniferous brachiopod Spirifer. Natural size. Carboniferous fossils are found in the limestonerocks that crop out In the low hills between the towns of Springdale and Valley in Stevens County There are good collecting localities along the Jackel Road in sec. 19, T. 31 N R. 41 E., about nine -tenths of a mile north of the Jumpoff School and about A B C FIGURE 7.—Common bryozoans from northeoslern Washington. (A) Twig—like. Four times natural size. (8) Frond—like. One and one—holf times natural size. (C)Frond—like. Four times noturol size. 17 MI NB MI NS I MI N all seven -tenths of a mile south of the Stroven Road. The outcrops on the west side of the road are several hundred feet away from the road in a cultivated field. On the east side of the road Carboniferous fossils have been found in the old Kulzer clay pit. Reference Shimer, H. W., and Shrock, R. R., 1944, Index fossils of North America: New York, John Wiley & Sons, 837 p. Permian period. --The Permian period was named for the province of Perm, which is located on the west flanks of the Ural Mountains in Russia. In Washington, Permian rocks are found in the San Juan Islands, along the west slopes of the northern Cascade Mountains, and near Kettle Falls in Stevens County. A noun( 8.— Fusulinid. (A)Natural size. (8)Four times natural size showing the Internal structure as seen through a microscope. The most accessible collecting locality for Permian fossils is just north. of Kettle Falls in Stevens County. Gastropods (snails) andcorals are found in outcrops on the hill directly north of town. Other localities are at outcrops of limestone near the center of sec. 16, T. 36 N., R. 38 E., on the west side of and above the Vanasse Road, and in the W}SW1 sec. 10, T. 36 N., R. 38 E., on the hillside above the Vanasse Road. Good fusulinids (large extinct spindle -shaped protozoans that lived in shells) (fig. 8) can be found at the First two localities. Their shells are about a quarter of an inch to half an inch long and look somewhat like oversize, elongated kernels of wheat. Fusulinids to MI r i r I r MI N it OM NS 11 can be identified only by studying their internal structure with a microscope. In order to be examined properly, they must be cemented to a microscope slide and ground down so that they are thin enough for light to pass through: them. Reference Shimer, H. W., and Shrock, R. R., 1944, Index fossils of North America: New York, John Wiley & Sons, 837 p. Fossils of the Mesozoic Era Triassic period. --The Triassic period was named by a German g .is in 1834. He found that rocks of this age in Germany could be divided three units, therefore he gave the sequence the name,Trias. Rocks of this age are found in both eastern and western Washington. There are two fossil localities in Ferry County. One is on a hillside above and on the east side of the Kettle River, immediately north of White Creek, about 3.5 miles north of Curlew on Highway 4-A. The other location is on the east side of the road that goes into the headwaters area of Shasket Creek about 1.6 miles from its junction with Highway 4-A, and near the center of sec. 17, T. 40 N., R. 34 E. Fossil clams are common at both places. In western Washington the best locality is on Davidson Head at northwest side of San Juan Island San Juan County, where fossil clam3 Y an be found. Reference Shimer, H. W., and Shrock, R. R., 1944, Index fossils of North America: New York, John. Wiley & Sons, 837 p. Jurassic period. --The Jurassic period was named for the Jura Mountail in France and Switzerland, where rocks of this age are richly fossiliferous. Jurassic rocks may be fairly abundant in the northern Cascades of Washington; however, the only known Jurassic fossil localities are relatively inaccessible difficult to locate. NS I 111111 11111 NM M 1 1 N 8 There are two kinds of fossil cephalopods found on Sucia Island. One is a coiled type (fig. 10A) that looks somewhat like the pearly nautilus. The other is a straight variety (fig. 10B). _ — —•• A FIGURE 9.— Two common Cretaceous pelecypods from Suclo Island, Son Juon County. (A) Pinna. (8) Inoceromus. Both ore holt notural size. cretaceous period. --The name Cretaceous was derived from the Latin , u, which means chalk. The name was first applied to the extensive 'tions of chalk that form the white cliffs on both sides of the English Chan - It was during Cretaceous time and the Jurassic and Triassic periods that reat reptiles, the dinosaurs, roamed the world. Washington has Creta- ' rocks in the northern Cascades and in the San Juan Islands. By far the fossiliferous collecting locality is Sucia Island of the San Juan group. clams (fig. 9) and cephalopods (fig. 10) are numerous. A cephalopod is e of mollusk that has tentacles. Examples are the squid and the octopus. B FIGURE 10.— Two common Cretaceous cephalopods from Sucia Island, Son Juan County. (A) PAylloceras. (8) Boculltes. Both natural size. References McLellan, R. D., 1927, The geology of the San Juan Islands: University of Washington Pub. in Geology, v. 2, 185 p. Shimer, H. W., and Shrock, R. R., 1944, Index fossils of North America: New York, John Wiley & Sons, 837 p. Fossils of the Cenozoic Era Tertiary period. --The Tertiary period comprises all but a small fraction of the time that elapsed during the Cenozoic era, which began about 60 million years ago.. The name, Tertiary, was introduced during the eighteenth century to include the geologically young, relatively unconsolidated deposits that overlie older, more consolidated rocks, then called "Primary" and "Secondary." The Tertiary period was further subdivided into epochs (table on p. 2-3) through study of rocks in the Paris Basin of France. In Washington, Tertiary rocks cover the southern half of the state and a narrow band that projects north along the eastern edge of Puget Sound to- ward Canada. The only Tertiary rocks that were deposited as sediments in the sea are found west of the Cascade Range. Most of the rocks of the southern Cascades and the Columbia Plateau are volcanic in origin; that is, they either flowed from cracks in the earth's crust or were blown out of volcanoes. Rocks that were deposited in what were probably fresh -water embayments of the sea are found near Bellingham, Cle Elum, Wenatchee, Black Diamond, Morton, and Packwood. Tertiary lake deposits are found near Spokane and interbedded with the Columbia River basalt flows at various places in the Columbia Basin and in the Yakima Valley. 21 MINI r r- MINI i MINI r MINI MINI MINI r -r • i MINI r r r Tertiary marine fossils are the most abundant fossil type found in Washington. The most common forms are pelecypods (clams and oysters) (fig. 11), gastropods (snails and limpets) (fig. 12), and scaphopods (tooth shells) (fig. 13). Occasionally cephalopods (Fig. 14) are found, as well as other less common fossils. The localities where good collecting can be done are too numerous to be listed here; consequently, only a few of the better ones will be described. The reader is referred to the University of Washington publication, "Paleontology of the marine Tertiary formations of Oregon and Washington," by Charles E. Weaver (see references, p.28) for a very good list of Tertiary fossil localities in Washington. A 8 0 FIau.E 11.— Four common Tertiary pelecypods from western Washington. (A) Atllo. Natural size. (B) Solemyo. Natural size. (C)Venericardio. Half natural size. (0) Two views of Oslreo. One—third natural size: 72 A B FIGURE 12.— Three common Tertiary gastropods from western Washington. (A)Turrilello. Natural s (8) Polnices. Twice natural size. (C) Siphonolio. Natural size. One of the most accessible localities is in the bluffs along Highway 9 in Grays Harbor County between the towns of Porter and Malone and ext ing beyond them in either direction. In addition to pelecypods and gastro) collectors have found here fossils of echinoderms (sea lilies), foraminifera I FIGURE 13.— Scaphopod Denlollum from the Tertiary of western Washington. Two—thirds natural size. FIGURE 14.— Cephalopod 'Muria from the Terliory western Washington. Nolural size. II111111-cellillnoelallie mr nim_at 1i—shel�g. 11.111 crabs. The foraminifera are so small that a hand lens or strong reading k necessary to see the larger specimens. A microscope is the only means teing small varieties. The crabs are encased in hard round concretions A B C GURE 15.— Three common Foraminifera from the Tertiary of western Washington. (A) Oulnpueloculino. (0) Robulus. (C) Pleclofiondlculorlo. All about forty times natural size. look much like ancient cannon balls. Breaking open a concretion is cult, and the crab inside is likely to be damaged in the process. Another good collecting locality is along the banks of Olequa and rioter Creeks above and below their confluence at Vader in Lewis County. cypods and gastropods are very abundant here. `allam County a good locality Is along the bluffs that border the t of Juan de Fuca immediately west of the West Twin River. Here, ified pelecypods and gastropods are abundant. Many excellent fossil leaf localities are available to the amateur actor in Washington. It Is well to look for leaves in any block or platy 3, siltstone, or sandstone. These are the types of rock in which fossil es are most often found. Some of the leaves most commonly found as Is are shown in figure 16. A few of the more accessible localities are: IIIIII 11111111 nil Mlle MI — M I — w In the sandstones and shales along Chuckanut Drive, just south of Bellingham in Whatcom County. In black shales just south of the section line between secs. 27 and 34, T. 39 N., R. 6 E., on Primary State Highway No. 1, not quite .4 C t' D E FIGURE 16.— Leaves commonly found os fossils in Washington. (A) Sequoia. (8)Ginkgo. (C) Ouereus (ook), (0) Solis (willow). (E) Populus (Poplar). Natural size. 25 SON • 11111 11111 111111 11111 1.1 miles south of the Boulder Creek bridge, up the Nooksack River in Whatcom County. These shales contain large palm leaves. In the bank on the southwest side of the Wenatchee River in the NE NWI sec. 17, T. 24 N., R. 18 E., about 1.25 miles up the river from the Peshastin bridge. In shales and sandstone exposed in a road cut in the SW* sec. 22, T. 22 N., R. 20 E., a little more than four -tenths of a mile down the Squillchuck Canyon road from its intersection with the Pitcher Canyon road near Wenatchee. In sandstone and shale beds exposed along the old highway between Cashmere and Wenatchee, where the road breaks over the Sunny - slope hill in the NE}NE1 sec. 19, T. 23 N., R. 20 E., at the old roadside park. In shales and sandy shales exposed along Deep Creek, half a mile above its mouth, northwest of Spokane. In shales and sandy shales exposed in cuts of the Spokane, Portland & Seattle Railway and the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railway tracks in Spokane and west of Latah Creek. Fossil insects are also found in these cuts. In a shaly sandstone bank on the north side of Highway 1-R, four -tenths of a mile west of the Coal Bank bridge over the Toutle River, in sec. 19, T. 10 N., R. 1 E., in Cowlitz County. In shaly sandstone road cuts along Highway 1-Q a little less than 1.1 miles north of its intersection with Highway 1-R, in the SWI sec. 3, T. 10 N., R. 1 E., In Cowlitz County. In shales and sandstones exposedin a road cut above the Coweman River in the SJSWISE4 sec. 30, T. 8 N., R. 1 W., about seven - NB r— IN Nr NS En— all UN 111111 tenths of a mile from the end of the Allen Street Road, just east of Kelso, Cowlitz County. In shales and shaly sandstones at Steels Crossing, where the old Steel bridge over the Great Northern railroad was located, in the SN4 sec. 11, T. 23 N., R. 4 E., in King County. In a sandstone rock quarry in the SE1NE4SEi sec. 12, T. 14 N., R. 4 E. On the way from Elbe, the road is the first to the right (west) after passing the Mineral junction; or, on the way from Morton, the road is the first to the left (west) after pa • Carlson. This road extends west for about 1.1 mile's, were it forks. The left (south) fork leads to the quarry, on the south side of the road about two-tenths of a mile past the fork. The fossils at all these localities we Tertiary in age. There are man other localities in the state that are known to local people and have not bee recorded in the files of any organization. . Fossil bones are not nearly so abundant in Washington as are shells a leaves. Consequently, good collecting localities are not known. Bones are an indication of a type of life different from that which has been mentioned before; they represent vertebrate animals (animals that have backboo TI best known collecting areas are in eastern Washington, where the dry clima retards weathering of fossils exposed by erosion. Some of the best places to look for fossil bones of such animals as hipparion (ancestral horse), bison, oreodont (small pig -shaped grazing animal), camel, caribou, and various rodents are:, In the bedded silts, sands, and gravels along the east side of the Columbia. River north of Richland, especially near Ringold. In the silts and sands exposed along both sides of the Wenas Valley, Yakima County, especially in the SWI sec. 10 and the NE4 sec. 35, T. 14 N., R. 18 E. IIIIII MINI MIN Mill SIM MINI Ell Other possible areas are the sandstones and siltstones that compose the of Ahtanum Valley, the hills north of Naches, and the hill between lesnake Creek and Nile Creek up the Naches River, all in Yakima County, the sandstones and siltstones that are exposed in the hills north of Ellens- in Kittitas County. These rocks are all Tertiary in age. A very unusual vertebrate fossil was found in Washington in 1935 near north end of Blue Lake (in Sun Lakes State Park) in Grant County. Some is found a large cavity in a basalt flow and after crawling into it found itined numerous bone fragments. This find was reported, and later essiopaleontologists investigated the cavity and found, after making ter casts of the interior surface, that it was the mold of an ancient rhinoc- that had been buried bythe lava flow. References nt, R. Y., 1941, A John Day vertebrate fossil discovered in the Keeche- lus series near Tieton reservoir, Washington: Am. Jour. Sci., .v. 239, no. 8, p. 590-593. wlton, F. H., 1925, Flora of the Latah formation of Spokane, Washington and Coeur d'Alene, Idaho: U. S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 140-A, p. 17-82. arts, A. E., 1958, Geology and coal resources of the Toledo -Castle Rock ''strict, Cowlitz and Lewis Counties, Washington: U. S. Geol. ey Bull. 1062, 71 p. th, G. 0., 1903, Description of the Ellensburg quadrangle [Washington): U. S. Geol. Survey Geol. Atlas, Folio 86. , 1904, Description of the Mount Stuart quadrangle [Washing- ton] : U. S. Geol. Survey Geol. Atlas, Folio 106. th, G. 0., and Calkins, F. C. 1904, Description of the Snoqualmie quadrangle [Washington]: U. S. Geol. Survey Geol. Atlas, Folio 139. ]ver, C. E., 1942, Paleontology of the marine Tertiary formations of Ore- gon and Washington: University of Washington Pub. in Geology, v. 5, 803 p. • allirerriMerloallte nimpuaten r_earion ago by French and German geologists to unconsolidated materials --such as those deposited by streams, glaciers, and lakes --that covered the Tertiary rocks. Materials deposited in swamps, and windblown materials such as dune sands, also are included in this category. Compared to other geologic per- iods, Quaternary time is very short, dating back a mere million years or so. The outstanding feature of this period is that it was the time of the ice age. Vast ice sheets moved down from the north country into what is now the northern part of the United States. In Washington, lobes of the great Cor- dilleran glacier, which had its center in British Columbia, Canada, moved as far south as Spokane and Coulee City in the eastern part of the state and just south of Olympia in the western part. According to calculations made by U. 5. Geological Survey geologists, V this great ice field began to retreat about 14,000 years ago, leaving the area that it had covered mantled with a layer of glacial drift. Almost all Quaternary fossils found in Washington indicate a cold climate. The invertebrate animal forms are cold -water types and are usually found closely associated with glacial drift. The vertebrate fossils are mostly cold -weather forms such as woolly mammoth, bison, and caribou. Some good Quaternary fossil localities in Washington are: In the marl around Booher Lake, in secs. 3 and 10, T. 35 N., R. 26 E., about 4 miles north of Riverside on Highway 97 in Okanogan County. Snail shells are abundant here. 1/ Crandell, D. R., Mullineaux, D. R., and Waldron, H. H., 1958, Pleistocene sequence in southeastern part of the Puget Sound lowland, Washington: Am. Jour. Sci., v. 256, no. 6, p. 384-397. 29 NIB 1111111 MINI INN MI 1111111 MINI At a small lake on Orcas Island, at the NW.. cor. sec. 17, T. 36 N., R. 2 W., in San Juan County, where excellent clams and worm tube fossils are found. In the south side of the Chambers Creek valley at elevations of 30 feet and 110 feet, about 700 and 1,000 feet respectively from the mouth of Chambers Creek, just north of Steilacoom in Pierce County. Clams are found here. Fossil clams can be found at all the following locations in Whatcom County: In a road cut 2,008 feet north from the intersection of the Smith Road and the road that passes the Harmony School, in sec. 26, T. 39 N., R. 3 E., about 6 miles northeast of Bellingham. In a road cut just west of the intersection of the Van Wyck and Dewey roads, at the SE. cor. sec: 4;-T: 38 N.,- R. 3 E.,' about 3 miles northeast of Bellingham. In a road cut about seven -tenths of a mile west from the intersection of Birch Bay and Blaine -Ferndale roads, in sec. 31, T. 40 N., .. R. 1 E., about two-tenths of a mile east of Birch Bay: In a road cut five -tenths -of a mile northeast from the intersection of the Smith Road and Mount Baker Highway, in sec. 28,-.T. 39- N., R. 3 E., about six-tenthi of a mile -southwest of North Cedarville. In the high sea banks on Fish Point about seven -tenths of simile from the intersection of the Cagey and Lummi Bay roads, in iec. 19, T'. 38 N.; R. 2 E., on the `Luinmi Indian Reservation: • An unusual Quaternary fossil find was the skeleton of a small mastodon found near Port Angeles by a farmer excavating a reservoir. Mammoth and N r=- MI 1 M OM it A B FIGURE 17.— (A) Mostodon tooth. (B) Mammoth tooth. Both greatly reduced in size. • mastodon teeth (fig. 17) and tusks have been found In scattered localities in both eastern and western Washington. References Daugherty, R. D., 1956, Archaeology of the Lind Coulee site, Washingtc Proc. Am. Philosophical Soc., v. 100, no. 3, p. 267-276. Romer, A. 5., 1941, Man and the vertebrates Univ. Chicago Press,40.! Shimer, H. W., and Shrock, R. R., 1944, Index fossils of North Americc New York, John Wiley & Sons, 837 p. FOSSIL COLLECTING Methods • The most useful tool in collecting fossils is a miner's pick, or geol ogist's hammer. One end of this instrument has a flat head, and the other is either an elongated point or wedge. Other tools that can be of great v are: a chisel (for splitting rocks), a center punch (when trying to chip a fossil from solid rock, much energy is needed to drive a chisel into the ro, the chisel is hard to control, whereas a small center punch can be turned at various angles so that light taps are all that are needed to chip out the fossil), dental picks (for cleaning the fossils), and a small brush (for clea M M N M- - I r rossi:`s;. If a fossil is soft or very fragile, it is best to give it a coating of ✓ shellac before removal. The shellac should be diluted about half and with alcohol or paint thinner, so that the coating is thin. The shellac be carried in almost any bottle. The lid of the bottle should be pierced the brush inserted in the hole. The brush is held in place by wrapping g or rubber bands around the handle. If this method k used, the bristles always be in the shellac and will not dry out. The collector should sys have sacks or bags in which to transport the fossils. If the fossils are ile, wrapping them in wet paper and then putting them in a tin can is a s� •torymethod of carrying them. Recording the Location All too often, well-preserved fossils are found to be useless because location where they were found was not recorded. In order that the 11 may be of value scientifically, theexact location as to section, town- , and range should be given as well as the locationrelative to prominent imarks. The stratigraphic position should be given if possible ("2 feet re the basalt flow," "6 Feet below the sandstone -shale contact," etc.). type of rock in which the fossil was found should also be recorded, along tF.- date and the collector's name. The collector should scribe on the it a er which corresponds to the location number. TMs will prevent fossil From becoming lost, location -wise. The best way to do this is to ly a small smear of white enamel, which, when dry, can be written on ink. Professional People to Contact Amateur fossil collectors can be of service to professional geologists paleontologists by reporting new fossil Finds. People who are interested be contacted at the following addresses: ✓ - 1 NM N NM N- r- NM Department of Conservation Division of Mines and Geology 335 General Administration Building Olympia, Washington U. S. Geological Survey 4 Homewood Place Menlo Park, California U. S. Geological Survey South 157 Howard Street Spokane 4, Washington U. S. Geological Survey Denver Federal Center Denver 2, Colorado Department of Geology Washington State University Pullman, Washington Department of Geology University of Washington Seattle 5, Washington Department of Geology College of Puget Sound Tacoma 6, Washington Department of Science Western Washington College of Education Bellingham, Washington Department of Geography and Geology Eastern Washington College of Education Cheney, Washington Department of Science and Mathematics Central Washington College of Education Ellensburg, Washington Division of Basic Sciences Whitman College Walla Walla, Washington. 33 NIB 11111 NMI all INN MIN 11111 11111 1111 III. MIMI 1111 INS 111. MIN 11111 NM NMI , , „ . 7 :, OTHER BOOKS ABOUT FOSSILS HOW THE WORLD BEGAN. Edith Heal. Thomas S. Rockwell Co., Chicago, 1930. Tells of the beginning of life upon the earth. Suitable for use in advanced elementary grades and high school. THE STORY OF OUR ANCESTORS. May Edel. Little, Brown and Co., Boston, 1955. Gives a possib;e explanation as to how man became as he is. For junior high and high school ages. LIFE LONG AGO. CarroII Lake Fenton.! The John Day Co., New York, 1937. A good advanced book for children of grade and junior high school ages. STORIES READ FROM THE ROCKS. Bertha Morris Pcrker. Basic Science Education Series. Row, Peterson and Co., Evanston, III., 1942. Advanced grade and junior high school ages. ANIMALS OF YESTERDAY. Bertha Morris Parker. Basic Science Education Series. Row, Peterson and Co., Evanston, III., 1948. Advanced grade and junior high school ages. MILLIONS OF YEARS AGO: PREHISTORIC LIFE IN NORTH. AMERICA.: Edwin H. ',Tolbert. Thomas Y. Crowell Co., New York, 1958...:.. Awell-illustraied, interestingbook about fossi.I hunting for readers 10 to 14 years cid. THE FOSSIL BOOK, A RECORD OF PREHISTORIC LIFE. Carroll L. Fenton and Mildrec A. Fenton. Doubieday & Co., New York, 1958. A well -illustrated volume t!iat.high school students and adults will find useful as an encyclopedia of ancient life. LIFE OF THE PAST. G. G. Simpson. Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn., 1953. Gives a broad, easily understood, and interesting introduction to the study of fossils. PREHISTORIC ANIMALS. William E. Scheele. World Publishing Co.., Cleveland, Ohio, 1954. A well -illustrated book that will appeal to all ages. THE WORLD WE LIVE IN. Time, Inc. (distributed by Simon and Schuster, Inc., New York), 1955. An excellent general survey of the realm of nature, with two chapters devoted to prehistoric life. DINOSAUR BOOK. E. H. Colvert. American Museum of Natural History, New York, 1945. An excellent popularized summary of information about dinosaurs. For people of all age groups. 34 1 HANDBOOK OF PALEONTOLOGY FOR BEGINNERS AND AMATEURS. Winifred Goldring. New York State Museum, Albany, N. Y., 192 A summary of paleontology for adults. AN INTRODUCTION TO PALEONTOLOGY. A. Morley Davis. Thomas Murby and Co., London, 1947. A simplified discussion of the major fossil groups. MAN AND THE VULTEBRATES. A. S. Romer, Chicago, 1941. An illustrated introduction to living and fossil animals with backbon ANCIENT PLANTS AND THE WORLD THEY LIVED IN. H. N. Andrew: Comstock Publishing Co., Ithaca, N. Y., 1947. College level. PRINCIPLES OF INVERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY. R. R. ShrockTnd W H. Twenhofel. McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, 1953. College textbook. INVERTEBRATE FOSSILS. R. C. Moore, Cecil Lalicker, and A. Fischer. McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, 1953. College textbook. University of Chicago Pre: Best Management Practices for Reclaiming Surface Mines in Washington and Oregon IREGON DEPARTMENT OF GEOLOGY AND MINERAL INDUSTRIES lonald A Hull - State Geologist by David K. Norman, Peter J. Wampler, Allen H. Throop, E. Frank Schnitzer, and Jaretta M. Roloff WASHINGTON DIVISION OF GEOLOGY AND EARTH RESOURCES Open File Report 96-2 also released as OREGON DEPARTMENT OF GEOLOGY AND MINERAL INDUSTRIES Open -File Report 0-96-2 Revised Edition December 1997 WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF Natural Resources Jennifer M. Belcher -Commissioner of Public Lands 5.4 RECLAMATION TEC•QUES FOR. QUARRIES Figure 5.4. Topsoil placed on benches and on a fractured quarry floor will prepare the site for revegetation. Vibration Effects Under Various Conditions .. Pre -Blast Survey Use and Placement of Vibration -Measuring Equipment benches topsoil fractured quarry floor solidated materials. When the wave arrives at nearby structures, it can cause them to vibrate. Sound waves from the blast, transmitted through the air, are usually more detectable by humans, but it is the back and forth movement of the ground wave that causes the dam- age, not the accompanying sound. The amplitude and intensity of the ground wave are determined by the number of pounds of explo- sive detonated at one time. Most problems can be avoided when the amount of explosive is minimized and the blast is properly timed. Unconsolidated material will vibrate more strongly in response to the ground wave than will competent rock. All other factors being equal, the potential for vibration damage is greater if a structure is built on fill, sand, dirt, or other unconsolidated material than if it is built on compacted material or competent rock. The more competent the material, the less movement will occur. The way the structure is built can also have an effect on the kind and amount of damage. A structure with a concrete slab floor usu- ally develops more cracks than one with a perimeter foundation built on solid rock. In order to establish pre -blast conditions at nearby residences, a pre - blast survey should be performed by an outside specialist rather than by a member of the organization doing the blasting. Typically, after a blast has taken place, owners of nearby structures will find cracks, settlement, and displacement, all of which were pre-existing, but never noticed. All structures within any possible damage range must be thoroughly surveyed before any blasting is done. The importance of a pre -blast survey of all surrounding struc- tures cannot be overstated. The lack of a proper survey by a quali- fied specialist is an open invitation to lawsuits. Without a survey, the damage could be real or imagined, but an expensive lawsuit will be required to establish liability. The blast contractor should monitor the blasting with vibration - measuring equipment, but the equipment should be placed and the results read by a qualified independent third party. Monitoring BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 Wet/aPfd1e$oirces, /nG • Delineatcn i Mitigation / Restoration / Habitat Creation; Permit Assistance FAX TRANSMITTAL GATE: AF.20,199 TO: C.4,42.1.---r-iv-c= , 1'S5 9505 -19th Avenue SE Suite 106 Everett, Washington 98208 (425) 337;3174 Fax (425) 337-3045 FAX 206/Z25.0.930 FROM: Scorr B2.A M w TEL: 42533T.3174 WreT_AN7 RZE:CJR.''-45, INC. RE: 20GK t LE S i NJ --'SER G= P. -NS -E9 INCL„✓.'�G THIS S-1EET: 2 GARETH HERE I5 THE MAP DEPICTING THE APPROXIMATE OFF- rre `d✓ET;.AND LOCATION. 1 THE WETLAND IS LARGER THAN ONE ACRE iN S;ZE AND IS DOMINATED BY ONE CLAS§ CF VEGETATION.: WETLANDS WITH THESE. CHARAGTERIST:GS ARE CLASSIFIED AS TYPE 2 AND DESIGNATED SO FOOT PROT'CTNE SUFFERS IN THE CITY OF TUKWIt.A. • LET ME KNOW OF ANY COMMENTS OR CONCERNS. CORDIALLY, br• PROPERTY LINE, TYPI n • • Ikf 4 EXISTING TYPE 2 WETLAND. SEE NOTE THIS SHEET. WETLAND CONTINUES NORTH - ENTIRE WETLAND NOT SHOWN —50' WETLAND BUFFER C %2 6 Y I 1 N 0297'29• 95.80 I.' D ;I 1/l�lllllll�dh�lli'l,�!!�r�� !il•�`�✓ (illi;\; :,. tib �`\,• ,. 1\r3 �, WETLAND SOURCE: WETLAND RESOURCES, INC. I !/l THE WETLAND IS LARGER THAN ONE ACRE IN SIZE AND IS DOMINATED BY ONE CLASS OF VEGETATION. I 1 I, WETLANDS WITH THESE CHARACTERISTICS ARE CLASSIFIED AT TYPE 2 AND DESIGNATED j 50 FOOT PROTECTIVE BUFFERS IN THE CITY OF TUKWIL . TOPOGRAPHY SOURCE: WALKER & ASSOCIATES. MAP WAS COMPILED USING PHOTOGRAMMETRIC METHODS: 9/23/98. CONTOUR LINES UNDER VEGETATION COVER UNE AND GROUND THAT IS OBSCURED BY 1 BUILDINGS, VEGETATION OR SHADOWS, DOES NOT MEET NATIONAL MAP ACCURACY STANDARDS. ADDITIONAL FIELD SURVEYS MAY BE REQUIRED. tf� 'r \11`'1;' i\ \\111 Vear / l l , 1 I i •j • I .t \ ear---- 0. 40 80 James White Tukwila "Rock Pile" Industrial Site Master Pian c/o: Mobile Crane Company. Inc. 5900 2nd Ave South Seattle. WA 98108 Fax 206/763/9975 Phone: 206/767/4767 MARTIN SMITH REAL ESTATE SERVICES 1109 First Avenue Sults 500 Seattle, WA 98101-2988 Phone: 206/682/3300 John Spiers, MAI Project Manager R.W. Thorpe & Associates, Inc. Seattle • Androrepe - Denver Plarip 0 Landscape AAY4Ia d,e Fnreonmreal o EDononea Prided Mem{rment 710 Hoge Balding 705 Second Avenue Sea01e Waa0ington 913104 Telephone: 206.624.6239 Fax 206.625.0800 Nave: planninsansla.ccen ISSUED REVISIONS Ole. D•.aplbn RIBA JOS NO. 370598 SHEET - TITLE OFF-SITE WETLAND IDENTIFICATION SHEET SS/LA • 4 • • • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 EGr_sv=c 1 AUG 121499 1 1 DEVELOPMENT 1 11 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Erosion Control Report for Tukwila Rock Pile Prepared for: Mr. James White 5900 2nd Avenue South Seattle, WA 98108 Prepared by: A Division of DOWL. Incorporated 8320 154th Avenue NE • Redmond, WA 98052 Tele: (425) 869-2670 • FAX: (425) 869-2679 July 1999 This report has been prepared by the staff of DOWL Engineers under the direction of the undersigned professional engineer whose stamp and signature appears hereon. EXPIRES OCTOBER 14, 2000 S12046-01 Engineering • Surveying 0 Planning Table of Contents 1.0 Project Overview Figure 1: Vicinity Map Figure 2: Site Plan Figure 3: Aerial Photo Figure 4: TIR Worksheet 2.0 Conditions & Requirements Summary 3.0 Off-site Analysis 4.0 Flow Control & Water Quality Facility Analysis & Design 4.1 Existing Site Hydrology 4.2 Developed Site Hydrology (Preliminary) 4.3 Hydrologic Analysis (Preliminary) 4.4 Stormwater Facility Summary (Preliminary) 5.0 Conveyance System Analysis & Design 6.0 Special Reports & Studies 7.0 Other Permits 8.0 ESC Analysis & Design 8.1 Construction Sequence 8.2 Core Requirement No. 5 8.3 Temporary Sediment Pond Calculations 8.4 Inspection & Maintenance Program 9.0 Bond Quantities Worksheet 10.0 Operations & Maintenance Manual Appendix A: Drainage Calculations Off-site Closed Depression Basin Map (rear pocket) 1.0 Project Overview 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW The Tukwila Rock Pile project site is located on the north side of South 115t Street approximately 500 feet easterly of East Marginal Way. The site is approximately 10.37 acres in size located within the northwest quarter of Section 10, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, Willamette Meridian. The site is bounded on the west and north by a Seattle Utility and City Light tract; on. the east by a residential subdivision; and on the south by South 115t Street, which leaves a strip of the original parcel along the bank of the Duwamish River. The parcel is generally square with the exception of 100 square feet in the southeast quadrant of the site. The site is generally flat at elevation 22 along the north, west and south margins. There is a rock hillside evident within the center and easterly portion of the site rising approximately 100 feet above the site. We did not locate a King County Soils Survey for this area. Included as part of the application package are two geotechnical reports prepared for this site. The flat areas on site are generally fill type material, which overlay compressible soils, predominantly silts and fine sands, but also including soft clay and peat. (See Shannon & Wilson, Inc. letter report dated July 14, 1989). We understand that the southerly portion of the site was utilized as a staging area for the construction of King County Project No. 3160, Intraurban Bridge Replacement. The southerly portion of the site has crushed rock surfacing. The rock outcropping portion of the site is generally overlain by 2 to 4 feet of loose silty sand and rock with weathered rock below. We would anticipate that this site would be best represented by Soil Conservation Service hydrologic soil group C. As mentioned above, there have been two geotechnical reports prepared for this .project:. The focus of both reports was to determine the feasibility of removal of the rock outcropping by ripping or micro -blasting the rock. This report has been prepared to address the erosion and sedimentation control design associated with the site grading activity in accordance with City of Tukwila Municipal Code, Chapter 16.54 "Land Altering" Section 16.54.060(6) and referencing the King County Surface Water Design Manual (SWDM), as amended, as the standard. The report format has been prepared in accordance with Appendix D of the SWDM. In general, all proposed projects designed in accordance with the SWDM require an Erosion Sediment Control Report. A copy of this report, or as amended, shall be kept at the project site throughout all phases of construction. 1-1 •. nal cc = �, LL to ..f S AV S S AV S AV S AY 11185 A11 alis 11155 s ld AYSO11 o '^ f 0 *•o ti i z _ i �• . 1 _, sn S H .n u. S „'3: IN s z a■ s .. s AV AY OOWI AV 0050 ( _ 11109 o o^ "' fI1L5 00901 11165 'o; 11195 OOO I I!e: '+, S'. �^ -`1 _" Q '^ ,�II Ina( $ "' s •^ h c Y _ 11109 .. - 1' Y a, Hf9s SAV. ,ti‘�_ 1S l9 11165 �' tea, aVS ... n ^ 1 o $ AY S = N "e S 111(5 / tl •N11155�mw s Id 1519 /% AY 11109 , ' .� �� N. /�%,'"1,-' / OP / GOA /� 9,'''''. 1� ��' ` �•. . \ {' i', +• .•.. VS• 2 't:i` Y. �1 W : i i •,: �., . .�V W:s':;, ;: ``, .. 5 �' , �Q Ns 4 1 Imp,S O�J 4 I- air 1..:. AV N 00001 '^OOEO[:--' c .� vl � H j hr I� AY OaESN �p►o /Pro'/ (s ���1 . Nt8!( �. � �!II� / J` \ _/ y!� "•I� � S .i'!i 9\- S Wg S „- ` „ $ AY SAV 4 H1OS 11166 N18Y 1 . m In Cpe, s S Ar NIA. 910 w 3 W �u sAr o P I'1 I. Fes,_ ILST9...__. _ 1 v 1� ootol b7d. S H < Y HILI, S A' ' i --�.�. S ld ISIS AY t!!C"--""41.8:11-1''.5; ^ IZ �� - ,• �N / , =i�'�.. _ /�1 SS S - 1 1 SQS.S 51161. �/' "1 i // Ar x1Ua �i 5 Ma® `SZ ii 5�� xlos ue qd �Q `� 1% 4, Y • o s i� �7 .�a �.• . N $ e a lua► m s a Ys !`'S Ar( 119► I I • IUTN V n HlL6 -k�0. A ���� % � ii �s �� p� .\. ••: S®Ng / �{�����2 limn as INtr �6 ,r �Q..,4 s �• 1 "� xu. �,�f �. N. RU H1561{gods. �,��-S � 1A YUIRTIN 01126 Is 5'415nr 1st► abs Ia u 1110E � + ) v . • SiNZb J `` d /�,t^ ocKO AY ... S d, �• _ �z, �.� In .i~i ' 8MC► (./ / 2.4 s ,d , r,•°, �,� L.L-1 1110► ' : 1 i01 ' S J .Y ~ �:I 1-".1 Nyco - 4- i *:_4:, SCP AV 1511 0 `0 AV g " �u 9 ERblllPt H10bS AroS1/ y �� 5 I 1 .+ RGIIU`l oA.. IRE�/� ' :i1l AY Ix (i S ' ' - H1SE 1 fl 7 �l•�: ti 1 i ( ■ z c , S 112 v, in - - i -� C- ;: ' / • Ai.:". }: � 4y , H1B2 rt IC n �a1 r ...r; Z �1 liii ,P i- y°0 Ar •I�cEf o�n� I.�HS y... •rz•u ' S OOIEAV -,, 1. J ==o .- , OHZf ti O , H S r ISI, „ .q Z NUM Ills -�; .WI ? t1 yi .!., , '"- u, [ s�Po s Tl . t, 11182 .-----RD-- ..... ti � oozY 1 ,� _ f _ M H _�•- „<N ,vF'i n S .. ill 5 I_ „ �1-- . S13 ld 111112 f ...., �t01n 9SS 1 _ '`• Sld1119E 5ld/%iC 1p65 a°RN / Ar I!!Zf!;, - " .,• Y $ ”i J S �lA� :o, ' ■i MIIITAR S3 " S AY oaEz' s ' r, ONZ2' S C31 " ~ 1111114 1 1121C3 150 aacz S AY AV ,n ■ ' '� •::e ;?• ..S 1'• HiY. 00601 •:. t.:110Z Ip, 4 S AV s O b G �S m 1ST: zZZ -. , y d�o� S �v 13 S Ar 11181 n161 . : '� .is.�, .1 ' e. :e•!, : .0 9b3g3so 5 ' rY AY 11102 1 4 /l+}1° r J r .R: 'i; ;, 1„ J 0 0 a W W Z z W ® G 11111® 111111 ® ® 111111 ® 1111 ® ® ® 11111 • — 1111 EN NB NW 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M. "'• -.<r„,...:.d.. rte.=�.::r •cr.�..cr,:--'+r. .• ... _._ ._..'ar^.sa*u'.--00_00_ �. �.. � - __ _ ....�. 0000._. . i � -. -- .'ennr c ter•I:.J • -i•..._ 0000-._ 11. 1101s ••.070100110 .0• L 1.7. I.••s.o s. ,15711 ORADINO QUARRIES AND NOTES k -sr• .sew memo w I.L ewes • Amis... stow n1 .e.caner • e...L,.Maw .. e• sow •Ime..amoors .R 0.11000 1.0004 K •• P 61i.10O^urOO 011.01• 0100( IpIgM 01004 • 004•01 COMM ,fl, 0011•0 w •rl 0w•01 WALE N DUD waNry MAP TESC LEGEND SIM 0 1 1 1 1 1 PLAN LEGEND e mswmlc+ecla © mew•.w o.rTv O 1010001R• IONS • ROLM 000 O 1, MeV./ .a 0 1 WI CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE motor tr. awns WOK ... 0. •w La..... .1Mlatoey 01.3 wen L :..•OWL.T0a030•. 101 010 e,.f ▪ bit $0.7. 10/000( /13.1 IOULLIMOV Kb” 0 1113C 0YI L C.w10 .I 00 111-0.41A0110. YQY • SMUT/ 030•4001 0.10T¢ A Mr6 11 #O.Z Al 0w. 0. AM 400 •• OW dO t • MITI 0-00 Garb . we•C00. R ate 1.sd1 NO Ka Otrr• sew IN /w03.411 1.6n. • 0 100 CHO) 00 O OR • I. 0000 L R®MI I0 00•1101.0 MACMI. • KM,. OSISION COV00 10.41410 fmforOOMPOr •M awn, MOM 00 Mf L m OO 01.• iWK 04MM Met MOM .1..0001.110•1 �rtr0700. PAU awr IMO. w Rz w.. NW MN MA. 0..aTenn OR,MO V. COMMICI.• _ _ 0•••• t. _ilei f•Pt•t Mawrws1••*.w•�.Mie Damon P.6uO . •••• Guars s. m ..Ram CERTITICATION • 6CPUllg Ytlll FUCAYATH ..WMwe...a.D..I- Asa 6I -I :1 o e I 0:14 181 re et - KAM •1 aa+1 s roa •.c a: ylrr-n INLET �� C1 d2 111111 11111111 ® ® 111E1 ® ® ' - ® - 1000001 111111 -.. Figure 3 May 21, 1998, Walker and Associates The vegetation on site appears to be second or third growth deciduous trees. There are numerous trails or roadways. A significant portion of the existing site is bare gravel or earth. The proposed excavation plan will retain the easterly 50 feet of vegetation in an undisturbed state. 1-4 • • Figure 4 King County Building and Land Development Division TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET PART 1 PROJECT OWNER AND PROJECT ENGINEER Project Owner Mr. James White Address 5900 2nd Ave. S., Seattle, WA 98108 Phone 206-682-3300 (Contact: John Speirs) Project Engineer Darren Simpson Company DOWL Engineers Address Phone 8320 154th Ave. NE. Redmond. WA (425) 869-2670 PART 3 TYPE OF PERMIT APPLICATION ❑ Subdivision ❑ Short Subdivision • Grading ❑ Commercial © Other Land Alteration Page 1 of 2 PART 2 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION Project Name Tukwila Rock Pile Location NW % of Township 23 Range 4 Section 10 Project Size 9.0 AC (total 10.37 AC1 Upstream Drainage Basin Size N/A AC PART 4 OTHER PERMITS ❑ DOF/G HPA ❑ COE 404 ❑ DOE Dam Safety ❑ FEMA Floodplain ❑ COE Wetlands I7 Shoreline Management ❑ Rockery ❑ Structural Vaults El Other Geotech/Rock Eval./Stab. ❑ HPA PART 5 SITE COMMUNITY AND DRAINAGE BASIN Community Drainage Basin PART 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS © River O Stream Duwamish River ❑ Critical Stream Reach ❑ Depressions/Swales ❑ Lake ❑ Steep Slopes ❑ Lakeside/Erosion Hazard. ❑ Floodplain ❑ Wetlands ❑ Seeps/Springs ❑ High Groundwater Table ❑ Groundwater Recharge ❑ Other PART 7 SOILS Soil Type Slopes 0 Additional Sheets Attached Erosion Potential Erosion Velocities 1-5 1/90 • Page 2 of 2 King County Building and Land Development Division TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET PART 8 DEVELOPMENT LIMITATIONS REFERENCE 0 Ch. 4 -Downstream Analysis 0 0 0 Additional Sheets Attached LIMITATION/SITE CONSTRAINT PART 9 ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION D Sedimentation Facilities D Stabilized Construction Entrance D Perimeter Runoff Control D Clearing and Grading Restrictions D Cover Practices D Construction Sequence O Other MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS FOLLOWING CONSTRUCTION D Stabilize Exposed Surface D Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities D Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris D Ensure Operation of Permanent Facilities ❑ Flag Limits of NGPES ❑ Other PART 10 SURFACE WATER SYSTEM ❑ Grass Lined Channel D Pipe System D Open Channel ❑ Dry Pond ❑ Wet Pond ❑ Tank ❑ Vault ❑ Energy Dissapator ❑ Wetland ❑ Stream Brief Description of System Operation ❑ Infiltration ❑ Depression ❑ Flow Dispersal ❑ Waiver ❑ Regional Detention Method of Analysis SBUH W/KCRTS Compensation/Mitigation of Eliminated Site Storage Collection by surface flow to sediment pond — discharge to existing storm drain in South 115th Street by 12 -inch pipe. Facility Related Site Limitations Reference Facility 0 Additional Sheets Attached Limitation PART 11 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS (May require special structural review) ❑ Cast in Place Vault ❑ Retaining Wall ❑ Rockery >4' High ❑ Structural on Steep Slope 0 Other , ,PART 14. SIGNATURE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER PART 12 EASEMENTS/TRACTS ❑ Drainage Easement ❑ Access Easement ❑ Native Growth Protection ❑ Tract ❑ Other I or a civil engineer under my supervision have visited the site. Actual site conditions as observed were incorporated into this work sheet and the attachments. To the best of my knowledge the information provided here is accurate. / v Signed/dat 1-6 1/90 1 1 1 2.0 CONDITIONS & REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY King County Surface Water Design Manual Core Requirements: 1. Discharge at the Natural Location The site currently discharges crossing the property lines to the north and south. As part of this application,we are seeking an adjustment to the core requirement for discharge at the natural location. Briefly, the intent of this requirement is to prevent adverse impact to downstream property. The property to the north is owned by the City of Seattle and provides a utility corridor, which includes a major electrical transmission line and a 42 - inch steel water transmission line above ground. Site investigations by DOWL Engineers and the wetlands consultant, Wetland Resources, Inc., concluded that the drainage which discharges across the north property line is contributory to a closed depression. This closed depression creates ponding which was observed in February of this year. The seasonal ponding within this area significantly affects the City of Seattle's ability to conduct monitoring and maintenance activities associated with the utilities in this corridor. We have reviewed City of Seattle aerial topography maps and estimate the closed depression to be approximately 55 acres. Our site makes up only approximately ten percent of the contributing area. As part of this work, Wetland Resources Inc. evaluated the closed depression wetland. The off-site wetland is larger than one acre in size and is dominated by one class of vegetation. Wetlands with these characteristics are classified as Type 2 and designated 50 -foot protective buffers in the City of Tukwila. After discussions with the wetlands consultant, we. put forth the opinion which determined that there will be no measurable impact to the wetland hydrology if this site's water is diverted to the Duwamish River via a tight line storm drain system. Further discussions are warranted to explore the benefit of constructing a new discharge line to the Duwamish River at a lower depth to facilitate construction of a drain line to this utility corridor. This drain line could mitigate the ponding of water in this area, which was caused by the surrounding development of roads and buildings. This would allow the City of Seattle reasonable access to their utilities in the wet season. This discussion would be appropriate at the time of the site development application. A SWDM Requirements/Standards Adjustment Request is included in this section. 2. Downstream Analysis A downstream drainage analysis has been conducted. Nuisance flooding is evident within the closed depression basin north of this site. No erosion control problems were present within the site boundary. There are two 12 -inch storm drains which intercept flow from the site and from the pavement of South 115t Street which discharge directly to the Duwamish River. The pipes project beyond the slope and minor erosion has occurred below the pipe ends. 2-1 3. Runoff Control Runoff control is required because this project is at River Mile 6.9 (as measured on Flood Insurance Rate Map Panel 645 of 1725) and direct discharge exemption is granted below River Mile 6 (South Boeing Access Road) per SWDM, page 1-29. The Duwamish River within the project area is not classified as a "Receiving Body of Water" and is, therefore, not exempt from the detention requirements. KCRTS "Level 1" flow control is applicable to provide required on-site detention. 4. Conveyance Requirements All conveyance systems proposed conform to KCSWDM requirements. 5. Temporary Erosion & Sedimentation Control (TESC) TESC measures shown on the associated TESC Plans will be implemented prior to and maintained during grading activities conducted on this site. 6. Maintenance & Operation Maintenance recommendations within the erosion sediment control plan notes and construction sequence are sufficient for construction, maintenance and operations. If, upon completion of the grading activities, the site remains inactive, erosion control facilities should be inspected monthly during the rainy season and after any 24-hour storm event of 0.75 inches or greater. Maintenance of the facility will occur as needed or as directed by the City of Tukwila. 7. Financial Guarantees & Liability Drainage facilities restoration and site stabilization financial guarantees shall be required prior to permit issuance. 8. Water Quality This erosion sediment control plan sufficiently addresses water quality needs. King County Surface Water Design Manual Special Requirements: 1. Critical Drainage Area This site is not located within a critical drainage area. 2. Compliance with an Existing Master Drainage Plan None known. 2-2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3. Conditions requiring a Master Drainage Plan None known. 4. Adopted Basin or Community Plans No special requirements were made in the documents we researched. Emphasis on providing adequate detention facilities and construction -phase erosion and sedimentation control per current King County Standards is recommended. 5. Special Water Quality Controls None anticipated, further evaluation will occur during future site development processes. 6. Coalescing plate Oil/Water Separators None anticipated, further evaluation will occur during future site development processes. 7. Closed Depressions The northerly half of the subject site drains to a closed depression located north of the project. Field investigation uncovered no piped outlet to this depression, and it appears stormwater infiltrates in this area. At the end of this section is an application for an "Adjustment Request". The immediate request is to allow the proposed erosion control facility to divert stormwater generated by this site south, which can be tight lined to an existing outfall pipe to the Duwamish River. No impact to the adjoining property is anticipated if this adjustment is approved. 8. Use of Lakes, Wetlands or Closed Depressions for Runoff Control Not applicable. 9. Delineation of the 100 -year Flood Plain The project site is not within the 100 -year flood plain, except for a narrow margin (remainder piece) along the south side of South 115t Street, which will remain undisturbed during the anticipated erosion and sediment control and grading activities. The 100 -year flood elevation from FIRM indicated 100 -year water surface elevation within the Duwamish River at 9.5 feet at River Mile 6.8. The project site is at elevation —20 feet or greater. A copy of a portion of the King County sensitive areas folio map for this area, FIRM, and associated 100 -year flood profile are included in the appendix of this report. 2-3 10. Flood Protection Facilities for Type 1 and 2 Streams A Type 1 stream is located within 1/8 -mile of the subject property, however, no flood protection facilities are in place. Therefore, Special Requirement No. 10 does not apply. 11. Geotechnical Analysis and Report Construction on the project does fall within the threshold requiring a geotechnical analysis and one has been provided under separate cover. 12. Soils Analysis and Report Soils information has been provided under separate cover. SWDM Requirements/Standards Adjustment Request King County SWDM, Section 1.4 "Adjustment Process", requires the demonstration that an adjustment produces a compensating or comparable result that is in the public interest and meets the objectives of safety, function, appearance, environmental protection, and maintainability based on sound engineering judgement. By this adjustment, we are proposing to divert approximately 6 acres of this site which discharges to the north into a closed depression. The aerial topography mapping indicates the low elevation within closed depression is at or below 12 feet. The upper staging within the closed depression is at approximately 18 feet. The contributing drainage area to the basin is approximately 55 acres. In addition to the maintenance issues discussed within section 2.0, the City of Seattle operates a police gun range in this area, which is unusable during portions of the rainy season due to the ponding waters. Reducing the volume of water which enters this closed depression will reduce the stage and duration of ponding occurring within this area, which is in agreement with the public interest, health and safety. This adjustment also demonstrates environmental protection and maintainability, because it facilitates construction of one sedimentation pond rather than two. A single pond will be more easily monitored and maintained for the duration of construction. The pond is designed to discharge into a swale located within the southwest corner of the site, which will be easily accessed and observed from the South 115t Street right-of-way. We expect that having the discharge within a more visible portion of the site will promote a more pro -active maintenance program. Further discussions associated with the impact to the wetland will be put forth by the wetlands consultant for consideration in this adjustment application. 2-4 1 nag County Depart of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oak .`1e Avenue Southwest Fenton. WA 98055-L' 19 1 _,ES 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 • :SURFACE WATER. DESIGN MANUAL REQUIREMENTS / STANDARDS ADJUSTMENT REQUEST Project Name: TU -K W 1LA ROCK PI LC DDES File No. DDES Enginer/Planner Name: N ONE Project Address: 112.15 E145T 1`IAR6A NAL WAY Design Engineer. DAR.REN SI M p50 N Applicant MR. FAMES WHITE Signature: Date: Signature: Date: Engineering Firm Name: 'OOW1. £14(I1 NEE S Address: City, State, Zip: 69900 2NO AY so. Address: City, State, Zip: alto is -4i rit AVC. NL' fie: TrL.� Wk �S IOf INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT/DESIGN ENGINEER RED MDND,wA 98052 Please be sure to include all plans, sketches, photos, and maps which may assist in complete review and consideration of this adjustment request. Failure to provide all pertinent information may result in delayed processing or denial of your request. Please submit this request and all aoolicable fee to the Intake Counter at DDES, 900 Oakesdale Avenue Sotmwest, Renton, WA 98055-1219. For additional information, phone 296-6600. REFER TO SECTION 1.4 IN CHAPTER 1 OF THE SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL FOR ADJUSTMENTS DESCRIPTION OF ADJUSTMENT REQUEST: 0 Standard Plccrnplex 0 Experimental 0 Blanket 0 Pre -application APPLICABLE SECTION(S) OF STANDARDS: CORE, R6Gz11 1_ VISCHARGa TO NATURAL LOCATION JUSTIFICATION (see attachments, pages to _: ESC R PORT ( Z.1 ) 2,3) Z.y . • AUTHORIZATION SIGNATURES: DDES Director/Designee Determination: 0 Approval 0 Conditional Approval (see below) 0 Denial 0 DNR -WLR Approval Signed: Date: (Experimental & Blanket adjustments only) CCPIDrrICNS CF AFPRCNAL' 0 See attached memo dated: DDES, band Use Services Divsian EngineeMg Review Supervisor. Signed: Date: DOES, Bldg. Send. Div., Site Enair>eering & Ptamitg Supervisor. Signed: Date: ORIGINAL DOES Fe -White ( /COPIES TO: DNR -WLR Division -Pink/ f DDES rscedion-Canary(1 Applicant-Goldennx [ J Design -Engineer -Green ( / :.3O3 (rev. 86/97) 2-5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 3.0 OFF-SITE ANALYSIS Off-site drainage analyses were conducted on February 9, 1999 and on April 7, 1999. Weather had been rainy on the days prior to the February visit and intermittent showers during the April visit. Drainage from the northerly half of the site sheet flows to an interceptor ditch which has been constructed by someone to convey water easterly to the low lying area (closed depression). This work might have been initiated by the City of Seattle as part of their maintenance of the utility corridor. There was no indication of erosion potential or restrictions in this area. We walked the area and did not locate any evidence of a storm drain system which drains this area. Photos #1 and #2 document the ponding problems associated with the closed depression. No further evaluation of this drainage route was made. A potential solution to correct this ponding could be realized as part of future commercial development on the site. Specifically, the developer might be amenable to allowing the City of Seattle to construct a deep storm drain line along the westerly property line to drain this area. The southerly half of the site sheet flows in a southerly direction to the margin of South 115th Street. Drainage is intercepted with Type 1 catch basins and conveyed through 12 -inch pipe to outfalls discharging to the Duwamish River. The outfalls project from the embankment a few feet with minor erosion having occurred below within the splash area. (See Photos #3 and #4.) No further evaluation of this drainage route was made. King County and the City of Tukwila were contacted regarding drainage complaint investigations and no records were located. Based on the above downstream investigation and in consideration of the Adjustment Request, we believe the existing drainage system capacity is adequate and suggest measures to combine the outfalls to the Duwamish River may be appropriate as part of the frontage improvements associated with future development of the subject parcel. 3-1 11 i1 1 Photo #1: North Basin, February 9, 1999 Photo #2: North Basin, April 7, 1999 3-2 Photo #3: 12 -inch CMP Outfall to the Duwamish River Photo #4: 12 -inch Concrete Outfall to the Duwamish River 3-3 • • 4.0 FLOW CONTROL & WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS & DESIGN This report has been prepared to support the erosion sediment control design only. For the purposes of documentation, we have addressed existing and conceptual developed hydrology. This section of the report is preliminary and subject to significant further refinement. 4.1 Existing Site Hydrology The existing site is relatively level along the north, west, and south margins. The center and east side of the site is a rock cropping area which rises above the level area approximately 100 feet. The rock area is overlain with 2 to 4 feet of soils. Sparse vegetation and bare dirt make up about 40 percent and heavy vegetation with second growth deciduous trees comprise the remainder. The lower area contains grasses and berries with scattered deciduous trees. This area also includes a significant number of trails, dirt pathways, and gravel pads. The southerly 100 feet of the site adjoining the north side of South 115t Street is mostly crushed rock fill. It is our understanding that this gravel was placed by King County to develop a staging area for the construction of the near by bridge. The total area within the drainage basin area is approximately 9.0 acres. Based upon soils encountered, we are assuming a curve number associated with soil type C will be representative of runoff characteristics of this site. We have estimated the coverage area for existing conditions SCS Santa Barbra Unit Hydrograph as follows: Description ` % of Area Curve Number Weighted Curve Number - Gravel 15 89 13.35 Dirt & Rock 25 87 21.75 Second Growth 30 81 24.30 Meadow Pasture 30 85 25.5 Weighted Average: 84.90 Time of Concentration (Tc) for existing conditions has been calculated to be 17.7 minutes. For future KCRTS analysis, existing conditions have been segregated into appropriate land uses similar to the SBUH methodology. The gravel area is assumed to be impervious, the dirt and rock area is assumed to be till grass, second growth forest is till forest and meadow pasture is the same. The following table can be used for pre -developed site conditions for KCRTS analysis: Area Type Acres Till forest 2.7 Till pasture 2.7 Till grass 2.25 Impervious 1.35 Total Area: 9 acres 4-1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 4.2 Developed Site Hydrology (Preliminary) For temporary sediment pond design evaluation, we assumed 4.5 acres of gravel, CN=89, and 4.5 acres of rock, CN=98 for both. A Tc was assumed to be 8.0 minutes.. For future developed conditions, we assumed: 80% coverage, or 1.8 acres of landscape, CN=86, Tc=8.0; 7.2 acres impervious, CN=98, Tc=5.0. For future KCRTS analysis, we would assume 7.2 acres impervious and 1.8 acres till grass. 4.3 Hydrologic Analysis (Preliminary) Our analysis utilized Santa Barbra Urban Hydrograph (SBUH) methodology within the WaterWorksN software application. No further work is presented utilizing the KCRTS technology. The following table shows the peak flow rates calculated for SBUH Type 1A, 24-hour storm events. Storm Pre- development (cfs) TESCP Pond Inflow (cfs) Future Development (cfs) TESCP Pond Outflow (cfs) 6 -month 0.30 1.47 1.87 0.34 2 -year .. 1.11 2.76... ... 3.21.. 0.51.. .10 -year 2.43 - 4.47 4.93 0.67 100 -year 4.31 6.69 7.14 1.45 4.4 Stormwater Facility Summary (Preliminary) The above table shows that the 6 -month storm exceeds pre -developed release rates by a small amount. As the magnitude of the storm event increases, the sediment pond discharge decreases proportionally to the pre -developed flows. 4-2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 5.0 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS & DESIGN The sediment pond has a peak 100 -year discharge rate of 1.45 cfs. The most restrictive pipe within the proposed pond discharge line is a 12 -inch smooth wall at a slope of 0.007 ft/ft. The capacity of this proposed line is 2.98 cfs, which is sufficient to convey anticipated flows. 5-1 6.0 SPECIAL REPORTS & STUDIES The following reports have been prepared and are included with the submittal for a land alteration permit on the subject site: "Preliminary Evaluation of Rock Outcrop", 1988, Shannon & Wilson "Site Grading for Future Development", 1989, Shannon & Wilson "Geotechnical Engineering Study of City Moving Site No. 3", 1992, Earth Consultants, Inc. "Off-site Wetlands Identification", 4/26/99, Wetlands Resources, Inc. "Rock Excavation Issues at the Tukwila "Rock Pile" Site, S 115th Street, Tukwila, WA", June 1999, Milbor-Pita & Associates, Inc. 6-1 7.0 Other Permits 1 7.0 OTHER PERMITS We are not aware of any community basin plan which is applicable to this area. As part of this work, we would anticipate the following other permits may be applicable: Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Tukwila SEPA Environmental Checklist Tukwila Flood Control Zone Permit (per Flood Ord. #1462) Tukwila Storm Drainage Permit (per Ord. 1755) & SWDM Adjustment Tukwila Land Altering Permit (per Ord. 1591) Coastal Zone Management Certification (WA Dept. of Ecology) Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) (WA Dept. of Fish & Wildlife) Approval to Allow Temporary Exceedance of Water Quality Standards (WA Dept. of Ecology) National Pollutant, Discharge : Elimination _System _(NPDES)_Perriut (WA.,:Dept._. Ecology) (Nationwide Permit) (WA Dept. of Ecology) Haul Road Use Permit and Bond (King County) 7-1 • • 8.0 ESC Analysis & Design 8.0 ESC ANALYSIS & DESIGN Following are the Erosion Sediment Control (ESC) Report requirements as outlined in the King County SWDM, Appendix Sec D.5.1 p. D-41: In general all proposed projects require an ESC report, including the ESC plans and supporting information for ESC measures as specified in Section D.6 (p. D-47) (ESC plan requirements outlined) shall be prepared. A copy of this report shall be kept at the project site throughout all phases of construction. Specific items are as follows: 1. A detailed construction sequence. 2. A Technical Information Report (TIR) and ESC plan for King County in accordance with sec. 2.3.1 (Engineering Plan Specifications - defines TIR (Sec. 2.3.1.1 p. 2-8), Site Improvement Plan (Sec. 2.3.1.2 p. 2-17) and Esc Plan as detailed in (Sec. 2.3.1.3 p. 2- 24)) and 2.3.3. (this is not in DOWL KCSWDM). Incorporate any King County Comments necessary to comply with Core #5 of SWDM Section D.10.1, p. D-63. (basic requirement for TESCP). 3. Calculations to size the ESC facility. 4. Inspection and. Maintenance Program in accordance with Section D.5.4 (p. (Maintenance supervisor and inspection schedule). 5. Anticipated changes or additions necessary to ensure ESC measures perform in accordance with Core #5 and Sec D.4 (p. D-5) (Design and specification of TESCP measures) and D.5 (p. D-41) ( Implementation of the ESC requirements). 8.1 Construction Sequence 1. Before any construction activity, a pre -construction meeting must be held between the City of Tukwila, the applicant and the applicant's construction representative. 2. The individual responsible for installation and monitoring of TESC measures shall be designated at the pre -construction meeting. 3. Install stabilized construction entrance. 4. Install silt fence as shown on plan, along the exterior boundary. 5. Install off-site catch basin protection. 6. Construct equipment access roads through site. 8-1 7. Clear sediment pond areas. Excavate ponds and install outfall facilities. 8. Commence grading activities. 9. Maintain erosion control measures in accordance with King County erosion and sediment control standards and as directed by the City of Tukwila. 10. Utilize temporary cover practices to the extent possible. Stockpiled material shall be covered with plastic sheeting. 11. Interceptor swale routing shown on TESC plan has been located on wide terraces created by the grading activities. This assumes significant grading has occurred and is substantially complete. Update interceptor swale scheme as necessary to direct flow to the two main interceptor swales along the ridge line. 12. Continue grading activities to the west until final plan grades have been achieve. Continue monitoring and maintain TESC facilities. 8.2 Core Requirement No. 5 County guidelines recommend that all projects requiring engineered drainage plans provide erosion and sedimentation control to minimize the transport of sediment to drainage facilities, adjacent properties, and. water resources. As such, we have pet :the following sedimentation., control requirements from Section 1.2.5 as discussed below. 1. Clearing Limits - Only the area within the parcel boundary west of a 50 -foot -wide native growth protection area will be cleared. 2. Cover Measures - A note is included on the ESC plan addressing the County's cover measures requirements. 3. Perimeter Protection - Silt fence locations are shown on the erosion control plan. 4. Traffic Area Stabilization - Two construction entrances located at existing curb cuts are anticipated to provide ingress and egress to the site. 5. Sediment Retention - A sediment pond has been designed in accordance with the applicable design standards. 6. Surface Water Control - All surface water from grading areas on the subject property will be directed to the sediment pond to the extent possible. 8-2 7. Dust Control - Although severe dust transport is not anticipated, it shall be the contractor's responsibility to maintain dust control at all times. A note is provided on the erosion control plans. 8.3 Temporary Sediment Pond Calculations Sizing calculations have been prepared in accordance with King County SWDM, Appendix D Erosion and Sediment Control Standards, and are included in the appendix of this report 8.4 Inspection & Maintenance Program We anticipate that the City of Tukwila Construction Inspector will be the responsible agency representative for monitoring the contractor's implementation of the erosion control facilities for compliance with state and local regulations. The contractor or owner shall provide the name, address, and telephone number of the ESC supervisor who fill be responsible for the inspection, operation and maintenance of the on-site erosion control facilities. The City of Tukwila may require the applicant designated as ESC supervisor has demonstrated expertise in erosion and sediment control. This person will be responsible for preparation and documentation of inspection and maintenance reports, if required by the City's Construction Inspector. We recommend that the facility be monitored by the contractor on a daily basis during construction. During_periods of time where :no construction activity is occurring, we;_suggest�the_.:.. owner be responsible for monitoring . A once -a -month inspection during the dry season, weekly inspection during the rainy season, and a special inspection conducted whenever a 24-hour rainfall exceeds 0.50 inches are suggested as the minimum inspection requirements for this project. 8-3 1 • • 11 1 1 11 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9.0 Bond Quantities Worksheet 9.0 BOND QUANTffH S WORKSHEET A King County bond quantities worksheet follows. 9-1 MINI INN IMO OM NM MI SIM ON UN ale 111111 NMI IMO On 01210 MOM NIB Site Improvement Bond Quantity Worksheet King County Department of Development & Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 Protect Name: Tukwila Rock Pile Location: 11215 East Marginal Way (Fronting S. 115th Street) Clearing greater than or equal to 5000 board feet of timber? yes X no If yes, Forest Practice Permit Number: (RCW 76.09) Page 1 of 9 Date: SIERRA Project No.: SIERRA Activity. No.: Note: All prices include labor, equipment, materials, overhead and profit. Prices are from RS Means data adjusted for the Seattle area or from local sources if not included in the RS Means database. Unit prices updated 12/97 SBQWS_Tukwila Rock Pilel.xls Revision date: 7/13/99 SIN MN ® ® ® ® ® ® 1111111 ® a ® ® CO ® D '5 OM Site improvement Bond Quantity Worksheet w ERO IONI EQ! Ni > : O , S S ME T.O NTROL... Backfill & compaction -embankment P 4.89 t CY pp 6 fat 6 Check dams, 4" minus rock SWDM 5.4.6.3 $ 58.70 Each 5 2 587 Crushed surfacing 1 1/4" minus WSDOT 9-03.9(3) $ 74.30 CY Ditching $ 7.03 CY 100 1 703 Excavation -bulk $ 1.30 CY 2500 1 3250 Fence, silt SWDM 5.4.3.1 $ 1.20 LF 2000 1 2400 Fence, Temporary (NGPE) $ 1.20 LF 600 1 720 Hydroseeding SWDM 5.4.2.4 $ 0.51 SY Jute Mesh SWDM 5.4.2.2 $ 1.26 SY Mulch, by hand, straw, 3" deep SWDM 5.4.2.1 $ 1.75 SY Mulch, by machine, straw, 2" deep SWDM 5.4.2.1 $ 0.46 SY Piping, temporary, CPP, 6" $ 9.30 LF Piping, temporary, CPP, 8" $ 14.00 LF Piping, temporary, CPP, 12" $ 18.00 LF 80 1 1440 Plastic covering, 6mm thick, sandbagged SWDM 5.4.2.3 $ 2.00 SY Rip Rap, machine placed; slopes WSDOT 9-13.1(2) $ 33.98 CY Rock Construction Entrance, 50'x15'x1' SWDM 5.4.4.1 $ 1,273.34 Each Rock Construction Entrance, 100'x15'xl SWDM 5.4.4.1 $ 2,546.68 Each 2 2 10187 Sediment pond riser assembly SWDM 5.4.5.2 $ 1,695.11 Each 1 1 1695 Sediment trap, 5' high berm SWDM 5.4.5.1 $ 15.57 LF Sed. trap, 5' high, riprapped spillway berm section SWDM 5.4.5.1 $ 59.60 LF Seeding, by hand SWDM 5.4.2.4 $ 0.44 SY Sodding, 1" deep, level ground SWDM 5.4.2.5 $ 5.24 SY Sodding, 1" deep, sloped ground SWDM 5.4.2.5 $ 6.48 SY TESC Supervisor - Contractor Supplied $ 85.00 HR 1 40 3400 Water truck, dust control SWDM 5.4.7 $ 85.00 HR 1 20 1700 Survey - Construction Staking $ 105.00 Each 8 2 1680 Page 2 of 9 SBQWS Tukwila Rock Pilel.xls ESC SUBTOTAL: COLUMN: 27, 761.83 A Unit prices updated 12/97 Revision date: 7/13/99 • gile s In — — ePitroWthieirBoWeC,1 ti %Vch — — °is - ;drill Pn4e .,;tlrtrt QU f'rivats:::: Irryxaveineacs 1•ER bTre1Ta .: ;.;.. :;..., ..,; ;: .,:: ,� ,..: .. ...... ....,.: :.:. ,.., ,,...<...., .- .,,,.... i.,... .,., ......,. ,,..., ., ..,,..., ., .,,.,,,£•:,.: •.,•:. ,..,?,..,?.,3:,,,,,,,•:.,.:.,,,•::.:.,,.::.,taitar 122iY6:22;?10s?n,\sn, 2;,K: Backfill & Compaction- embankment 4.89 CY Backfill & Compaction- trench $ 7.42 CY Clear/Remove Brush, by hand $ 0.31 SY Clearing/Grubbing/Tree Removal $ 7,718.40 Acre 8 61747.2 Excavation - bulk $ 1.30 CY 120000 156000 Excavation - Trench $ 3.53 CY 100 353 Fencing, cedar, 6' high $ 16.13 LF Fencing, chain Zink, vinyl coated, 6' high $ 11.69 LF Fencing, chain link, gate, vinyl coated, 20' $ 1,105.92 Each Fencing, split rail, 3' high $ 10.54 LF Fill & compact - common barrow $ 19.63 CY Fill & compact - gravel base $ 22.16 CY Fill & compact - screened topsoil $ 32.91 CY Gabion, 12" deep, stone filled mesh $ 47.23 SY Gabion, 18" deep, stone filled mesh $ 65.09 SY Gabion, 36" deep, stone filled mesh $ 115.20 SY Grading, fine, by hand $ 1.76 SY Grading, fine, with grader $ 0.83 SY Monuments, 3' long $ 117.50 Each Sensitive Areas Sign $ 2.50 Each Sodding, 1" deep, sloped ground $ 6.49 SY Surveying, line & grade $ 685.44 Day Surveying, lot IocatioNlines $ 1,353.60 Acre Traffic control crew ( 2 naggers ) $ 74.07 HR Trail, 4" chipped wood • $ 6.60 SY Trail, 4" crushed cinder $ 7.24 SY Trail, 4" top course $ 7.12 SY Wall, retaining, concrete $ 38.40 SF Wall, rockery $ 8.25 SF Page 3of9 SUBTOTAL "KCC 27A authorizes only one bond reduction. S:PUBLIC\LUSD\LUIS\SBQWS Tukwila Rock Pilel.xls 218100.2 Unit prices updated 12/97 Revision date: 7/13/99 • OM MB OM ell MIN � IfilirroMn moll? ntiry�VorTcshe�ei� Me ME SW EIS MI AC Grinding, 4' wide machine < 1000sy :Und;Price .. $ 20.00 SY .....;Gest . ..:.. AC Grinding, 4' wide machine 1000-2000sy AC Grinding, 4' wide machine > 2000sy $ 5.00 SY $ 1.20 SY AC Removal/Disposal/Repair $ 35.77 SY Barricade, type I $ 26.11 LF Barricade, type III ( Permanent ) $ 39.17 LF Curb 8. Gutter, rolled $ 11.54 LF Curb 8, Gutter, vertical $ 8.43 LF Curb and Gutter, demolition and disposal $ 11.81 LF Curb, extruded asphalt $ 2.12 LF Curb, extruded concrete $ 2.23 LF Sawcut, asphalt, 3" depth $ 1.61 LF Sawcut, concrete, per 1" depth $ 1.47 LF Sealant, asphalt $ 0.86 LF Shoulder, AC, ( see AC road unit price ) SY Shoulder, gravel, 4" thick $ 6.55 SY Sidewalk, 4" thick $ 26.54 SY Sidewalk, 4" thick, demolition and disposal $ 24.11 SY Sidewalk, 5" thick $ 30.38 SY Sidewalk, 5" thick, demolition and disposal $ 30.13 SY Sign, handicap $ 74.16 Each Striping, per stall $ 5.06 Each Striping, thermoplastic, ( for crosswalk ) $ 2.07 SF Striping, 4" reflectorized line $ 0.22 LF Page 4 of 9 SUBTOTAL 'KCC 27A authorizes only one bond reduction. S:PUBLIC\LUSD\LUIS\SBQWSTukwila Rock Pilel .xls Unit prices updated 12/97 Revision date: 7/13/99 M ® ® ® ® _ irrofflihe4i?bATQuilin titYl`VoRither MEI QM NM MO '1.41112. RQ: D_SVRFi k....,2., gttr • For KCRS '93, (additional 2.5” base) add: $ 3.13 SY 'Qu'ant� Gomp34te tl } ,- ::i>'va„•.y,,. �;•rr}tx}•:Y,J•..'..Y;:,a };,,,},,;, ;..,xM1`x}xxx'x:"`x` 4.},:�w,x. ,,},hx {frixµx v: :�,� <',� .,tt?i► G!fbt<'58�;??; z?,,,,,,•.,,,,:.,,;zs#xxr,,^xxxz£ii<z:?iz;<:.x.::r:... x , , zx ��,..,�,,,:^w....,,,•.,,,,,3.,`xxA,.},,,xt':;z:'?:,x;4xxr,�z'�:,�ox AC Overlay, 1.5" AC $ 6.43 SY AC Overlay, 2" AC $ 7.61 SY AC Road, 2", 4" rock, First 2500 SY $ 14.99 SY AC Road, 2", 4" rock, Qty. over 2500SY $ 11.62 SY AC Road, 3", 4" rock, First 2500 SY $ 17.12 SY AC Road, 3", 4" rock, Qty. over 2500 SY $ 13.75 SY AC Road, 5", First 2500 SY $ 12.67 SY AC Road, 5", Qty. Over 2500 SY $ 12.12 SY AC Road, 6", First 2500 SY $ 14.57 SY AC Road, 6", Qty. Over 2500 SY $ 14.02 SY Asphalt Treated Base, 4" thick $ 8.01 SY Gravel Road, 4" rock, First 2500 SY $ 9.92 SY Gravel Road, 4" rock, Qty. over 2500 SY $ 6.55 SY PCC Road, 5", no base, over 2500 SY $ 18.70 SY PCC Road, 6", no base, over 2500 SY $ 19.02 SY Thickened Edge $ 5.99 LF Page 5 of 9 SUBTOTAL• *KCC 27A authorizes only one bond reduction. S:PUBLIC\LUSD\LUIS\SBQWSTukwila Rock Pilel.xls Unit prices updated 12/97 Revision date: 7/13/99 • ® Iii M ® 11111,-041,11 PR13o11RCi trflo}IThetr au: Unit Price Futl,rrePuplfc R d fmprovemat to D�ainage:�acitd#as .. Quant.:; PClvate rQvement5 du DRA1 AG CP 'j I►i EE..( P.. Co>7tie!tl:PEastic#?ipe Access Road, R/D $ Bollards - fixed Bollards - removable • (CBs include frame and lid) CB Type 1 CB Type IL CB Type II, 48" diameter for additional depth over 4' CB Type II, 54" diameter for additional depth over 4' CB Type II, 60" diameter for additional depth over 4' CB Type II, 72' diameter for additional depth over 4' Through -curb Inlet. Framework (Add) Cleanout, PVC, 4" Cleanout, PVC, 6" Cleanout, PVC, 8" Culvert, PVC, 4" Culvert, PVC, 6" Culvert, PVC, 8" Culvert, PVC, 12" Culvert, CMP, 8" Culvert, CMP, 12" Culvert, CMP, 15" Culvert, CMP, 18" Culvert, CMP, 24" Culvert, CMP, 30" Culvert, CMP, 36" Culvert, CMP, 48" Culvert, CMP, 60" Culvert, CMP, 72" Z .orE` lvafeat� .............. 14.56 SY iyerage o .4 c*c ver was assui siuiieipnitpr 'same; $ 209.34 Each $ 393.34 Each $ 1,093.60 Each $ 1,246.60 Each $ 1,768.32 Each $ 379.58 FT $ 1,906.56 Each $ 423.07 FT $ 2,044.80 Each $ 466.56 FT $ 2,793.60 Each $ 601.92 FT $ 318.34 Each $ 113.52 Each $ 152.09 Each $ 194.95 Each $ 7.51 LF $ 10.96 LF $ 11.59 LF $ 18.93 LF $ 15.00 LF $ 23.00 LF $ 28.46 IF $ 32.82 LF $ 46.37 LF $ 62.13 LF $ 97.49 LF $ 122.46 LF $ 204.74 LF $ 263.11 LF Page 6 of 9 SUBTOTAL 'KCC 27A authorizes only one bond reduction. Unit prices updated 12/97 S:PUBLIC\LUSD\LUIS\SBQWS_Tukwila Rock Pilel.xls Revision date: 7/13/99 ® ® OW NW 00 all gre Ir�roveme°nnon�c. Q�ntityIlo�rc�sheae�t s WE OW NW WW DRAINAGE CONI 1NU' . .... ............ ......... ............. .... Culvert, Concrete, 8" $ 18.28 ::alritt., LF dant ; :........,. 00' ,:f01 rrtp ovart*sa. ;t .rainagee`......1ess• . tZuant;> Culvert, Concrete, 12" $ 26.13 LF Culvert, Concrete, 15" $ 32.47 LF Culvert, Concrete, 18" $ 38.70 LF Culvert, Concrete, 24" $ 53.10 LF Culvert, Concrete, 30" $ 90.59 LF Culvert, Concrete, 36" $ 119.68 LF Culvert, Concrete, 42" $ 137.76 LF Culvert, Concrete, 48" $ 152.99 LF Culvert, CPP, 6" $ 9.30 LF Culvert, CPP, 8" $ 14.00 LF Culvert, CPP, 12" $ 18.00 LF 60 1080 Culvert, CPP, 15" $ 20.00 LF Culvert, CPP, 18" $ 24.00 LF Culvert, CPP, 24" $ 32.00 LF Culvert, CPP, 30" $ 42.00 LF Culvert, CPP, 36" $ 48.00 LF Ditching $ 7.03 CY Flow Dispersal Trench (1,436 base+) $ 22.60 LF French Drain (3' depth) $ 19.65 LF Geotextile, laid in trench, polypropylene $ 2.09 SY Infiltration pond testing $ 65.00 HR Mid -tank Access Riser, 48" dia, 6' deep $ 1,396.00 Each Pond Overflow Spillway $ 12.18 SY Restrictor/OiI Separator, 12" $ 908.86 Each Restrictor/OiI Separator, 15" $ 952.66 Each Restrictor/Oil Separator, 18" $ 996.66 Each Riprap, placed $ 33.98 CY Tank End Reducer (36" diameter) $ 870.00 Each Trash Rack, 12" $ 184.32 Each 184.32 Trash Rack, 15" $ 206.32 Each Trash Rack, 18" $ 233.82 Each Trash Rack, 21" $ 266.82 Each Page 7 of 9 SUBTOTAL "KCC 27A authorizes only one bond reduction. S:PUBLIC\LUSD\LUIS\SBQWS_Tukwila Rock Pilel.xls 1264.32 Unit prices updated 12/97 Revision date: 7/13/99 'O � S4& 1 l�roMe}1�o}�QQ�tit�VorTcshe� CM =I OM NM Min :Uit PI fARKJNG`LOT SURFACIN tfn • t utla 3'ubIia Road improvements IIi;4rainage.Fact,. dR du Cost - - .. ::,,:•; +:w.v:n . n...''. ..vv:. .....v.:vwn:•. .:. •. n:. }•w v.vn :v„x:vvw:: vw:wx?:, 2" AC, 2" top course rock & 4" borrow $ 13.77 SY 2" AC, 1.5" top course & 2.5" base course $ 14.99 SY 4" select borrow $ 3.96 SY 1.5" top course rock & 2.5" base course $ 9.92 SY y .� _ .�-----e _ } .v.. ,...... z +c:.. , ., i t> \:2 , , , ,�`, , : r ;. , , , . ,,, .: \ •: ,.`.1 .• ::,:2?2•\;n`t:• } • v}, } EA. EA. SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL (SUM ALL PAGES): 30% CONTINGENCY & MOBILIZATION: GRANDTOTAL: COLUMN: Page 8 of 9 "KCC 27A authorizes only one bond reduction. S:PUBLIC\LUSD\LUIS\SBQWS Tukwila Rock Pilel.xls B C 219364.52 65809.356 285174 D E Unit prices updated 12/97 Revision date: 7/13/99 • Ma ® N T ® ® .® I ® ® O IM ® =II® ® O CM NM Site Improvement Bond Quantity Worksheet VO 0 Original bond computations prepared by: Name: Darren A. Simpson Date: 7/13/99 PE Registration Number: Firm Name: DOWL Engineers 27856 Tel. #: 425 869 2670 Address: 8320 154th Avenue NE, Redmond, WA 98052 Stabilization/Erosion Sediment Control (ESC) Existing Right -of -Way Improvements Future Public Road Improvements & Drainage Facilities Private Improvements (A+B+C+D) =TOTAL (T) PERFORMANCE BOND AMOUNT SITE RESTORATION BOND (First $7,500 of bond shall be cash.) RIGHT-OF-WAY BOND TOTAL RIGHT-OF-WAY & SITE RESTORATION BOND" (First $7,500 of bond shall be cash.) PERFORMANCE BOND TOTAL AFTER BOND REDUCTION"' NAME OF PERSON PREPARING BOND REDUCTION: PERFORMANCE Column BOND* AMQUNT (A) $ 27,761.8 (B) $ (C) $ (D) $ 285,173.9 $ 312,935.7 Minimum bond amount is $1000. (A) $ 27,761.8 (8) $ (A+B) $ 27,761.8 (T -E) $ 312,935.7 PUBLIC ROAD IMPROVEMENTS & DRAINAGE FACILITIES MAINTENANCE/DEFECT BOND' AMOUNT (B+C) X 0.25 = $ 'NOTE: The word "bond" is used to represent any financial guarantee acceptable to King County. "NOTE: KCC 27A authorizes bonds to be combined when both are required. ***NOTE: Per KCC 27A, total bond amounts remaining after reduction shall not be less than 30% of the original amount. Page 9of9 S:PUBLIC\LUSD\LUIS\SBQWS_Tukwila Rock Pilel.xls Date: Unit prices updated 12/97 Revision date: 7/13/99 • • 10.0 Operations & Maintenance Manual 10.0 OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE MANUAL The storm drainage elements requiring maintenance attention include: temporary sediment control .. pond, storm drain catch basins, all storm conveyance lines and surface conveyance ditches. Following are general operations and maintenance guidelines applicable for the temporary erosion control measures. • KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SU•CE WATER DESIGN MANUAL KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR PRIVATELY MAINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILITIES � NCLUOaD Section No. Subiect ye Detention Ponds 2 Infiltration 3 Closed Detention Systems �L�---�- 4 Control Structure/ Flow Restrictor 5 Catch Basins �� ----� 6 Debris Barriers 7 Energy Dissipaters 8 Fencing; 9 Gates 10 Conveyance Systems 11 Grounds 12 Access Roads/ Easements 13 Water Quality Facilities A) Biofiltration Swale B) Filterstrips C) Wetponds D) Wetvaults E) Sand Filters F) Leaf Compost Filters G) Infiltration Ponds 14 Oil Control Facilities A) Oil/ Water Separators B) Catch Basin Inserts 10-2 9/1/98 • KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURRCE WATER DESIGN MANUAL APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATELY MAINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILITIES NO. 1 - DETENTION PONDS ir SL7;0 PeNDS Maintenance Component Defect Conditions When Maintenance Is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance Is Performed General Trash & Debris Poisonous Vegetation Pollution Unmowed Grass/ Ground Cover Rodent Holes Insects Tree Growth Side Slopes of Pond Erosion Storage Area Pond Dikes Emergency Overflow/Spillway Sediment Settlements Rock Missing Any trash and debris which exceed 1 cubic foot per 1,000 square feet (this is about equal to the amount of trash it would take to fill up one standard size office garbage can). In general, there should be no visual evidence of dumping. Any poisonous or nuisance vegetation which may constitute a hazard to County personnel or the public. Oil, gasoline, or other contaminants of one gallon or more or any amount found that could: 1) cause damage to plant, animal, or marine life; 2) constitute a fire hazard; or 3) be flushed downstream during rain storms. If facility is located in private residential area, mowing is needed when grass exceeds 18 inches in height. In other areas, the general policy is to make the pond site match adjacent . . ground cover and terrain as long as there is no interference with the function of the facility. Any evidence of rodent holes if facility is acting as a dam or berth, or any evidence of water piping through dam or berm via rodent holes. When insects such as wasps and homets interfere with maintenance activities. Tree growth does not allow maintenance access or interferes with maintenance activity (i.e., slope mowing, silt removal, vactoring, or equipment movements). If trees are not interfering with access, leave trees alone. Eroded damage over 2 inches deep where cause of damage is still present or where there is potential for continued erosion. Accumulated sediment that exceeds 10% of the designed pond depth. Any part of dike which has settled 4 inches lower than the design elevation. Only one layer of rock exists above native soil in area five square feet or larger, or any exposure of native soil at the top of out flow path of spillway. Rip -rap on inside slopes need not be replaced. Trash and debris cleared from site. No danger of poisonous vegetation where County personnel or the public might normally be. (Coordination with Seattle -King County Health Department) No contaminants present other than a surface film. (Coordination with Seattle/IGng County Health Department) When mowing is needed, grass/ground cover should be mowed to 2 inches in height. Mowing of selected higher use areas rather.than the entire slope: may be acceptable for some situations. Rodents destroyed and dam or berm repaired. (Coordination with Seattle/King County Health Department) Insects destroyed or removed from site. Trees do not hinder maintenance activities. Selectively cultivate trees such as alders for firewood. Slopes should be stabilized by using appropriate erosion control measure(s); e.g., rock reinforcement, planting of grass, compaction. Sediment cleaned out to designed pond shape and depth; pond reseeded if necessary to control erosion. Dike should be built back to the design elevation. Replace rocks to design standards. 1998 Surface Water Design Manual 10-3 9/1/98 • • APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATELY MAINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILITIES NO. 4 - CONTROL STRUCTURE/FLOW RESTRICTOR Maintenance Component Defect Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed General Cleanout Gate Orifice Plate Overflow Pipe Manhole Catch Basin Trash and Debris (Includes Sediment) Structural Damage Damaged or Missing Distance between debris build-up and bottom of orifice plate is Tess than 1-1/2 feet. Structure is not securely attached to manhole wall and outlet pipe structure should support at least 1,000 lbs of up or down pressure. Structure is not in upright position (allow up to 10% from plumb). Connections to outlet pipe are not watertight and show signs of rust. Any holes—other than designed holes—in the structure. Cleanout gate is not watertight or is missing. Gate cannot be moved up and down by one maintenance person. Chain leading to gate is missing or damaged. Gate is rusted over 50% of its surface area. Damaged or Missing .. Control device is not working properly due to. missing. out of place; or bent orifice plate. Obstructions Obstructions Any trash, debris, sediment, or vegetation blocking the plate. Any trash or debris blocking (or having the potential of blocking) the overflow pipe. See "Closed Detention Systems" Standards No. 3 See "Catch Basins" Standards No. 5 All trash and debris removed. Structure securely attached to wall and outlet pipe. Structure in correct position. Connections to outlet pipe are water tight structure repaired or replaced and works as designed. Structure has no holes other than designed holes. Gate is watertight and works as designed. Gate moves up and down easily and is watertight. Chain is in place and works as designed. Gate is repaired or replaced to meet design standards.. Plate is in place and works as designed. Plate is free of all obstructions and works as designed. Pipe is free of all obstructions and works as designed. See "Closed Detention Systems' Standards No. 3 See 'Catch Basins" Standards No. 5 9/1/98 10-4 1998 Surface Water Design Manual 411/APPENDIX A NTENANCE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATEL NTAINED DRAINAGE FACILITIES NO.5 - CATCH BASINS Maintenance Component Defect Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is performed General Trash & Debris (Includes Sediment) Trash or debris of more than 1/2 cubic foot which is located immediately in front of the catch basin opening or is blocking capacity of the basin by more than 10% Trash or debris (in the basin) that exceeds 1/3 the depth from the bottom of basin to invert the lowest pipe into or out of the basin. Trash or debris in any inlet or outlet pipe blocking more than 1/3 of its height. Dead animals or vegetation that could generate odors that could cause complaints or dangerous gases (e.g., methane). Deposits of garbage exceeding 1 cubic foot in volume Structure Damage to Comer of frame extends more than 3/4 inch past Frame and/or Top Slab curb face into the street (If applicable). Cracks in Basin Walls/ Bottom Sediment/ Misalignment Top slab has holes larger than 2 square inches or cracks wider than 1/4 inch (intent is to make sure all material is running into basin). Frame not sitting flush on top slab, i.e., separation of more than 3/4 inch of the frame from the top slab. Cracks wider than 1/2 inch and longer than 3 feet, any evidence of soil particles entering catch basin through cracks, or maintenance person judges that structure is unsound. Cracks wider than 1/2 inch and longer than 1 foot at the joint of any inlet/ outlet pipe or any evidence of soil particles entering catch basin through cracks. Basin has settled more than 1 inch or has rotated more than 2 inches out of alignment. No Trash or debris located immediately in front of catch basin opening. No trash or debris in the catch basin. Inlet and outlet pipes free of trash or debris. No dead animals or vegetation present within the catch basin. No condition present which would attract or support the breeding of insects or rodents. Frame is even with curb. Top slab is free of holes and cracks. Frame is sitting flush on top slab. Basin replaced or repaired to design standards. No cracks more than 1/4 inch wide at the joint of inlet/outlet pipe. Basin replaced or repaired to design standards. I1998 Surface Water Design Manual 10-5 9/1/98 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE STA ARDS FOR PRIVATELY MAINTAINED DRAIN GE FACILITIES NO. 5 - CATCH BASINS (CONTINUED) Maintenance Component Defect Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is performed Catch Basin Cover Ladder Metal Grates (If Applicable) Fire Hazard Vegetation Presence of chemicals such as natural gas, oil and gasoline. Vegetation growing across and blocking more than 10% of the basin opening. Vegetation growing in inlet/outlet pipe joints that is more than six inches tall and less than six inches apart. Pollution Nonflammable chemicals of more than 1/2 cubic foot per three feet of basin length. Cover Not in Place' Cover is missing or only partially in place. Any open catch basin requires maintenance. Locking Mechanism Mechanism cannot be opened by on maintenance Not Working person with proper tools. Bolts into frame have less than 1/2 inch of thread. Cover Difficult to One maintenance person cannot remove lid after Remove applying 80 lbs. of lift; intent is keep cover from sealing off access to maintenance. Ladder Rungs Unsafe Trash and Debris Damaged or Missing. Ladder is unsafe due to missing rungs, misalignment, rust, cracks, or sharp edges. Grate with opening wider than 7/8 inch. Trash and debris that is blocking more•than 20% of grate surface. Grate missing or broken member(s) of the grate. NO. 6 DEBRIS BARRIERS (E.G., TRASH RACKS) No flammable chemicals present. No vegetation blocking opening to basin. No vegetation or root growth present. No pollution present other than surface film. Catch basin cover is closed Mechanism opens with proper tools. Cover can be removed by one maintenance person. Ladder meets design standards and allows maintenance person safe access. Grate opening meets design standards. Grate free of trash and debris. =: Grate is in place and meets design standards. Maintenance Components Defect Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed. General Metal Trash and Debris Trash or debris that is plugging more than 20% of the openings in the barrier. Damaged/ Missing Bars are bent out of shape more than 3 inches. Bars. Bars are missing or entire barrier missing. Bars are loose and rust is causing 50% deterioration to any part of barrier. Barrier clear to receive capacity flow. Bars in place with no bends more than 3/4 inch. Bars in place according to design. Repair or replace barrier to design standards. 9/1/98 1998 Surface Water Design Manual 10-6 1 11 1 11 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 APPENDIX A flAINTENANCE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATEL AINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILITIES NO. 7 - ENERGY DISSIPATERS Maintenance Components Defect Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed. External: Rock Pad Missing or Moved Rock Dispersion Trench Pipe Plugged with Sediment Internal: Manhole/ Chamber Not Discharging Water Properly Perforations Plugged. Water Flows Out Top of "Distributor" Catch Basin. Receiving Area Over -Saturated Wom or Damaged Post. Baffles, Side of Chamber Other Defects Only one layer of rock exists above native soil in area five square feet or larger, or any exposure of native soil. Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20% of the design depth. Visual evidence of water discharging at concentrated points along trench (normal condition is a 'sheet flow' of water along trench). Intent is to prevent erosion damage. Over 1/2 of perforations in pipe are plugged with debris and sediment. Maintenance person observes water flowing out during any storm less than the design storm or its causing or appears likely to cause damage. Water in receiving area is causing or has potential of causing landslide problems. Structure dissipating flow deteriorates to 1/2 or original size or any concentrated wom spot exceeding one square foot which would make structure unsound. See "Catch Basins" Standard No. 5 Replace rocks to design standards. Pipe cleaned/ flushed so that it matches design. Trench must be redesigned or rebuilt to standards. Clean or replace perforated pipe. . Facility must be rebuilt or redesigned to standards. No danger of landslides. Replace structure to design standards. See 'Catch Basins" Standard No. 5 1 1998 Surface Water Design Manual 10-7 9/1/98 • • APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATELY MAINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILITIES NO. 8 - FENCING Maintenance Components Defect Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed General Wire Fences Missing or Broken Parts Erosion Damaged Parts Any defect in the fence that permits easy entry to a facility. Erosion more than 4 inches high and 12-18 inches wide permitting an opening under a fence. Post out of plumb more than 6 inches. Top rails bent more than 6 inches. Any part of fence (including post, top rails, and fabric) more than 1 foot out of design alignment. Missing or loose tension wire. Missing or loose barbed wire that is sagging more than 2-1/2 inches between posts. Extension am missing, broken, or bent out of shape more than 1 1/2 inches. Deteriorated Paint or Part or parts that have a rusting or scaling Protective Coating condition that has affected structural adequacy. Openings in Fabric NO. 9 - GATES Openings in fabric are such that an 8 -inch - diameter ball could fit through. Parts in place to provide adequate security. No opening under the fence that exceeds 4 inches in height. Post plumb to within 1-1/2 inches. Top rail free of bends greater than 1 inch. Fence is aligned and meets design standards. Tension wire in place and holding fabric. Barbed wire in place with less than 3/4 inch sag between post. Extension arm in place with no bends larger than 3/4 inch. Structurally adequate posts or parts with a uniform protective coating. No openings in fabric. Maintenance Component Defect Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed General Damaged or Missing Missing gate or locking devices. Members Openings in Fabric Broken or missing hinges such that gate cannot be easily opened and closed by a maintenance person. Gate is out of plumb more than 6 inches and more than 1 foot out of design alignment Missing stretcher bar, stretcher bands, and ties. See "Fencing" Standard No. 8 Gates and Locking devices in place. Hinges intact and lubed. Gate is working freely. Gate is aligned and vertical. Stretcher bar, bands and ties in place. See 'Fencing' Standard No. 8 9/1/98 10-8 1998 Surface Water Design Manual APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATELY AINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILITIES NO. 10 - CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS (PIPES & DITCHES) Maintenance Component Defect Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Pipes Open Ditches Catch Basins Debris Barriers (e.g., Trash Rack) Sediment & Debris Vegetation Damaged Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20% of the diameter of the pipe. Vegetation that reduces free movement of water through pipes. Protective coating is damaged; rust is causing more than 50% deterioration to any part of pipe. Any dent that decreases the cross section area of pipe by more than 20%. Trash & Debris Trash and debris exceeds 1 cubic foot per 1.000 square feet of ditch and slopes. Sediment Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20 % of the design depth. Vegetation Vegetation that reduces free movement of water through ditches. Erosion Damage to See "Ponds" Standard No. 1 Slopes Rock Lining Out of Place or Missing (If Applicable). 041 Maintenance person can see native soil beneath the rock lining. See "Catch Basins: Standard No. 5 See "Debris Barriers" Standard No.6. Pipe cleaned of all sediment and debris. All vegetation removed so water flows freely through pipes. Pipe repaired or replaced. Pipe repaired or replaced. Trash and debris cleared from ditches. Ditch cleaned/ flushed of all sediment and debris so that it matches design. Water flows freely through ditches. See "Ponds" Standard No. 1 Replace rocks to design standards. See "Catch Basins" Standard No. 5 See "Debris Barriers" Standard No. 6 Maintenance Component Defect Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected • n Maintenance is - -rformed General Weeds (Nonpoisonous) Safety Hazard Trash or Litter Trees and Shrubs Damaged Weeds growing in more than 20% of the landscaped area (trees and shrubs only). Any presence of poison ivy or other poisonous vegetation. Paper, cans, bottles, totaling more th within a landscaped area (trees 1,000 square feet. Limbs or parts of tre broken which aff foliage of th • Tre cubic foot rubs only) of shrubs that are split or more than 25% of the total e or shrub. r shrubs that have been blown down or ocked over. Trees or shrubs which are not adequately supported or are leaning over, causing exposure of the roots. Weeds - -sent in less than 5% of '" andscaped area. No poisonous vegetation present in landscaped area. Area clear of litter. Trees and shrubs with Tess than 5% of total foliage with split or broken limbs. Tree or shrub in place free of injury. Tree or shrub in place and adequately supported; remove any dead or diseased trees. 1998 Surface Water. Design Manual 9/1/98 10-9 1 • • 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 Appendix A Drainage Calculations DOWL ENGINEERS ENGINEERING SURVEYING PLANNING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Project. 0 ) t L—Pt r.Q pi Lt Client: Mr:TS CJ 14 tT ` Sheet _Let W.0#: Date: By: 17 *$ OH :-: 'SLp : PORP::5 � FAL e.... ��T#�# O :: .ze" A o - l PrRc=:Dty FRO M CAtI.C. G+I _ . ..... TZ; . -r . 0&) "T; (idit-i #-60- j:Art 1z i$ 1'! d: 8Y; 9 ... • RSA.._ . ' 1 -tet T.. PLO(,.) ..-..w 0;8 Ph n 9 : ACECS LIT :"(t) .... . f u cl *'t" Ns= OND 41-: (Ay4) . . 12. 1 TL 5itA (�� .:.:•1!{ .,. / to : >::..... CLOW F'r,.o. W 61Z o"N Kms- :13: r5-4) V. ba. a,7 • DDWL.ENGIM E EFTS ENGINEERING SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Project. Client• Tut�wi��► 1Z Q1 ZAKA.k.-2 Ca14lTt Sheet 2- of WO#: Date. By:d.PletS 26 -:Zo 0 c o:c4) : i414 jt : f 4AsS: Y Co 0:6:: I N.cfrCS Pre, t IZ,S et— ; Sr' ' Ti 06 NATES 02 OK 55c u t -r t ES_ "vc wwec) � 4 StJv -S Fog.- 'i'E:C -S IG • DOWL ENGINEERS ENGINEERING SURVEYING PLANNING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Project _17)KW LLA 1 21< P1 U ` Client• Sheet of WO#: Date. By: -S o�ev`"c.a dcouDi 77 SSvwf c :::8o%a::60° -447' 1.8::4 • o�l�4PtF Slzfuitt AA' Ltirk 0.3o 1. II 10 11eA (Z. 3 /D0 -WAIL z13 I ATertk TSG :I : :1.a:g. 7. : I :1:, $7 2, 7 3.2 1 :I:'4;9:3: 6,69 14: ::4 67: PG,,E r • 41 ENGINEERS DOWL ENGINEERING SURVEYING PLANNING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Project. Tt..) i I. A RD tele. pi uz:,•.7 CIlent Sheet W #: Date. BY: Sig 0 b o,s- . O8 166 .'• . . . ". . . .... ... : • .:. . . • •. . • . 3. 3 •. • . .... • ..1 19 " (AS tee Frz- POU0 Stistv.Jil, ON IN -4 2. 4813 •X• 4)3 0‘ X India atm. o K. DOWL ENGINEERS ENGINEERING SURVEYING PLANNING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Project. 77J1Au..) L. A Rdelc P/I-Ar Client: Sheet of W #: Date. By: Li :O 0•0 HY PAD widi-rett (.4kvexs sratvre=As: 1 seeX atej E0 ID 13 0 u&-141:16 0, 7 0- Y1 s- Pt 12. Col te. ,7 cf '/4 1JJ 1.45" :14"-=:0 04%1 -C-1Q :b:4/57 .. ..... • - • ..01C FoR1ZC»c cotoe . FLoc..) tva. 9= 0.7 Re.covtturivI7 Lulu.. Hoc,* a> 0/4 4INMEMI. 1 11 1 1 11 t 11 11 it 11 1 1 1 1 • • STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND BASIN A.:- 6 (Published by Table III -1.3 SCS Western Washington Runoff Curve Numbers SCS in 1982) Runoff curve numbers for selected agricultural, suburban and urban dor Type lA rainfall distribution, 24-hour storm duration. LAND USE DESCRIPTION CURVE NUMBERS BY HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP A B C D Cultivated land(1): winter condition 86 91 94 95 Mountain open areas: low growing brush & grasslands 74 82 m 92 Meadow or pasture: _ 65 78 89 Wood or forest land: undisturbed Wood or forest land: young second growth or brush Orchard: with cover crop 42 64 76 81 55 72 4310 86 81 88 92 94 Open spaces, lawns, parks, golf courses, cemeteries, landscaping. Good condition: grass cover on 75% of the area Fair condition: grass cover on 50-75% of the area 68 80 86 90 77 85 90 92 Gravel roads & parking lots: Dirt roads & parking lots: 76 8541:10 91 72 82 87 89 Impervious surfaces, pavement, roofs etc. Open water bodies: lakes, wetlands, ponds etc. 98 98 98 98 100,. 100. 100. 100 Single family residential(2): Dwelling Unit/Gross Acre %Impervious(3) 1.0 DU/GA 15 1.5 DU/GA 20 2.0 DU/GA 25 2.5 DU/GA 30 3.0 DU/GA 34 3.5 DU/GA 38 4.0 DU/GA 42 4.5 DU/GA 46 5.0 DU/GA 48 5.5 DU/GA 50 6.0 DU/GA 52 6.5 DU/GA 54 7.0 DU/GA 56 PUD's, condos, apartments, %impervious commercial businesses & must be industrial areas computed Separate curve number shall be selected for pervious & impervious portions of the site or basin (1) For a more detailed description of agricultural land use curve numbers refer to National Engineering Handbook, Sec. 4, Hydrology, Chapter 9, August 1972. (2) Assumes roof and driveway runoff is directed into street/storm system. (3) The remaining pervious areas (lawn) are considered to be in good condition for these curve numbers. III -1-12 FEBRUARY, 1992 SECTION 3.2 RUNOFF COMPUTA•AND ANALYSIS METHODS _ SNOHOMISH COUNTY KING COUNTY co^ CV N CO cV 2. 0 eV 0 0' f • /•�� N. ( i • N WESTERN KING COUNTY 2 -Year 24 -Hour Precipitation in Inches • 0 KING COUNT. PIERCL COUNTY a Miles 3.5 cyf- 6 -4401J -H t.Z% 9/1/98 3-14 1998 Surface Water Design Manual 3.2.1 RATIONAL METHOD FIGURE 3.2.1.B 10 -YEAR 24-HOUR ISOPLLTVIALS s$OHu1sH COUNTT —�---UTY KING COUNTY 4.0 u?� .Q • • ,.; WESTERN KING COUNTY 10 -Year 24 -Hour Precipitation in Inches rtlNa COUNTY iilfCC COUNTY 0.) 4r2C "'• qL O • Maes �� O`4, 4.5 4.0. 1998 Surface Water Design Manual 3-15 9/1/98 11 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • • 3.2.1 RATIONAL METHOD FIGURE 3.2.1.D 100 -YEAR 24-HOUR ISOPLLTVIALS COUNTY COUNTY Q •s COUNTY /ie CC COUNT► WESTERN t KING COUNTY 100 -Year 24 -Hour Precipitation in Inches Ary te C4 0 2 4 Miles te - 6.5 6.0 5.5 43• 1998 Surface Water Design Manual 3-17 9/1/98 7/13/99 11:24:5. DOWL Engines TUKWILA ROCK PILE - D. SIMPSON SEDIMENT POND DESIGN AND CONCEPTUAL STORM DESIGN page 1 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: D0006 NAME: DEV 6 -MONTH SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 9.00 Acres RAINFALL TYPE • TYPE1A PRECIPITATION • 1.28 inches TIME INTERVAL • 10.00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: PEAK RATE: 1.87 BASIN ID: D002 SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • RAINFALL TYPE PRECIPITATION TIME INTERVAL 0.20 cfs VOL: BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERV AREA..: 1.80 Acres CN • 86.00 TC 8.00 min 0.69 Ac -ft TIME: 480 min NAME: DEV 2 -YEAR 9.00 Acres TYPE1A 2.00 inches 10.00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 PEAK RATE: 3.21 cfs VOL: BASIN ID: DO10 SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA... .. RAINFALL TYPE PRECIPITATION TIME INTERVAL BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERV AREA..: 1.80 Acres CN • 86.00 TC 8.00 min 1.19 Ac -ft TIME: 480 min NAME: DEV 9.00 Acres TYPE1A 2.90 inches 10.00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 PEAK RATE: 4.93 cfs VOL: BASIN ID: D100 SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • RAINFALL TYPE PRECIPITATION TIME INTERVAL ABSTRACTION PEAK RATE: 10 -YEAR BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERV AREA..: 1.80 Acres CN 86.00 TC 8.00 min 1.84 Ac -ft TIME: 480 min NAME: DEV 9.00 Acres TYPE1A 4.05 inches 10.00 min 100 -YEAR BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERV AREA..: 1.80 Acres CN • 86.00 TC 8.00 min. COEFF: 0.20 7.14 cfs VOL: 2.68 Ac -ft TIME: 480 min IMP 7.20 Acres 98.00 5.00 min IMP 7.20 Acres 98.00 5.00 min IMP 7.20 Acres 98.00 5.00 min IMP 7.20 Acres 98.00 5.00 min 1 1 11 11 11 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • • 7/13/99 11:24:5 am DOWL Engineers TUKWILA ROCK PILE - D. SIMPSON SEDIMENT POND DESIGN AND CONCEPTUAL STORM DESIGN page BASIN ID: P0006 SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 9.00 Acres RAINFALL TYPE • TYPE1A PRECIPITATION • 1.28 inches TIME INTERVAL 10.00 min BASIN SUMMARY NAME: PRE -DEV 6 -MONTH BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERV AREA..: 9.00 Acres CN 84.90 TC 17.70 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 TcReach - Sheet L: 180.00 ns:0.4000 p2yr: 2.00 TcReach - Shallow L: 180.00 ks:13.00 s:0.0880 TcReach - Shallow L: 110.00 ks:13.00 s:0.1630 TcReach - Shallow L: 310.00 ks:9.00 s:0.0200 PEAK RATE: 0.30 cfs VOL: 0.24 Ac -ft TIME: BASIN ID: P002 SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 9.00 Acres RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PRECIPITATION 2.00 inches TIME INTERVAL 10.00 min NAME: PRE -DEV 2 -YEAR ABSTRACTION COEFF: .0.20 TcReach - Sheet L: 180.00 TcReach - Shallow L: 180.00 TcReach - Shallow L: 110.00 TcReach - Shallow L: 310.00 PEAK RATE: 1.11 cfs VOL: s:0.4500 490 min BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERV AREA..: 9.00 Acres CN • 84.90 TC....: 17.70 min ns:0.4000 p2yr: 2.00 s:0.4500 ks:13.00 s:0.0880 ks:13.00 s:0.1630 ks:9.00 s:0.0200 0.59 Ac -ft TIME: BASIN ID: P010 NAME: PRE -DEV 10 -YEAR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 9.00 Acres RAINFALL TYPE • TYPE1A PRECIPITATION 2.90 inches TIME INTERVAL 10.00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 TcReach - Sheet L: 180.00 TcReach - Shallow L: 180.00 TcReach - Shallow L:. 110.00 TcReach - Shallow L: 310.00 PEAK RATE: 2.43 cfs VOL:. 480 min BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERV 9.00 Acres 84.90 • 17.70 min AREA..: CN • TC ns:0.4000 p2yr: 2. ks:13.00 s:0.0880 ks:13.00 s:0.1630 ks:9.00 s:0.0200 1.12 Ac -ft TIME: 00 s:0.4500 480 min IMP 0.00 Acres 98.00 5.00 min IMP 0.00 Acres 98.00 5.00 min. IMP 0.00 Acres 98.00 5.00 min • • 7/13/99 11:24:5 am DOWL Engineers TUKWILA.ROCK PILE - D. SIMPSON SEDIMENT POND DESIGN AND CONCEPTUAL STORM DESIGN A-- 0 - page 3 BASIN ID: P100 SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • .RAINFALL TYPE PRECIPITATION TIME INTERVAL ABSTRACTION COEFF: TcReach - Sheet L: TcReach - Shallow L: TcReach - Shallow L: TcReach - Shallow L: PEAK RATE: 4.31 cfs BASIN ID: T0006 SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA RAINFALL TYPE PRECIPITATION TIME INTERVAL • BASIN SUMMARY NAME: PRE -DEV 100 -YEAR 9.00 Acres TYPE1A 4.05 inches 10.00 min BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERV 9.00 Acres 84.90 17.70 min CN • TC 0.20 180.00 ns:0.4000 p2yr: 2. 180.00 ks:13.00 s:0.0880 110.00 ks:13.00 s:0.1630 310.00 ks:9.00 s:0.0200 VOL: 1.87 Ac -ft TIME: 00 s:0.4500 NAME: TESCP 6 -MONTH 9.00 Acres TYPE1A 1.28 inches 10.00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 PEAK RATE: 1.47 cfs VOL: BASIN ID: T002 SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 9.00 Acres RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PRECIPITATION 2.00 inches TIME INTERVAL • 10.00 min 480 min BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERV 4.50 Acres 89.00 • 8.00 min AREA..: CN • TC 0.58 Ac -ft TIME: NAME: TESCP ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 PEAK RATE: 2.76 cfs VOL: BASIN ID: TO10 SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA RAINFALL TYPE PRECIPITATION TIME INTERVAL 2 -YEAR 480 min BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERV AREA..: 4.50 Acres CN • 89.00 TC • 8.00 min 1.05 Ac -ft TIME: • 480 min NAME: TESCP 10 -YEAR 9.00 Acres TYPE1A 2.90 inches 10.00 •min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 PEAK RATE: 4.47 cfs BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERV 4.50 Acres 89.00 • 8.00 min AREA..: CN • TC .20 VOL: 1.68 Ac -ft TIME: 480 min IMP 0.00 Acres 98.00 5.00 min IMP 4.50 Acres 98.00 8.00 min IMP 4.50 Acres 98.00 8.00 min IMP 4.50 Acres 98.00 8.00 min • 7/13/99 11:24:5 am TUKWILA ROCK SEDIMENT POND DESIGN AND CONCEPTUAL STORM DESIGN • A.- 13 DOWL Engineers page 4 PILE - D. SIMPSON BASIN ID: T100 SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA RAINFALL TYPE PRECIPITATION TIME INTERVAL • • . • BASIN SUMMARY NAME: TESCP 100 -YEAR 9.00 Acres TYPE1A 4.05 inches 10.00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 PEAK RATE: 6.69 cfs VOL: BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs PERV AREA..: 4.50 Acres CN • 89.00 TC • 8.00 min 2.51 Ac -ft TIME: 480 min IMP 4.50 Acres 98.00 8.00 min • 7/13/99 11:24:5 am DOWL Engineers page TUKWILA ROCK PILE - D. SIMPSON SEDIMENT POND DESIGN AND CONCEPTUAL STORM DESIGN STORAGE STRUCTURE LIST TRAPEZOIDAL BASIN ID No. 001 Description: SEDIMENT POND DESIGN Length: 288.01 ft. Width: 38.00 ft. Side Slope 1: 3 Side Slope 3: 3 Side Slope 2: 3 Side Slope 4: 3 Infiltration Rate: 0.00 min/inch • 7/13/99 11:24:5 am DOWL Engineers TUKWILA ROCK PILE - D. SIMPSON SEDIMENT POND DESIGN AND CONCEPTUAL STORM DESIGN page 6 DISCHARGE STRUCTURE LIST COMBINATION DISCHARGE ID No. 001 Description: ORIFICE AND OVERFLOW RISER Structure: ORIFI Structure: Structure: OVER1 Structure: Structure: MULTIPLE ORIFICE ID No. ORIF1 Description: SEDIMENT POND Outlet Elev: 18.00 Elev: 18.00 ft Orifice Diameter: 4.0000 in. RISER DISCHARGE ID No. OVER1 Description: SEDIMENT POND OVERFLOW RISER Riser Diameter (in): 12.00 elev: 21.00 ft Weir Coefficient...: 9.739 height: 21.50 ft Orif Coefficient...: 3.782 increm: 0.10 ft • • �~ (61-- 7/13/99 11:24:7 11:24:7 am DOWL Engineers TUKWILA ROCK PILE - D. SIMPSON SEDIMENT POND DESIGN AND CONCEPTUAL STORM DESIGN page 7 LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> STORAGE DESCRIPTION > (cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id VOL (cf) 6 -MONTH 0.00 1.47 001 001 18.61 21 7064.72 cf 2 -YEAR 0.00 2.76 001 001 19.36 21 16715.59 cf 10 -YEAR 0.00 4.47 001 001 20.40 21 32138.23 cf 100 -YEAR 0.00 6.69 001 001 21.17 21 44844.02 cf • TTKIt Let rip.K Pu. A_11.. -G£'DI tmer PO ?JD G.EL "L - • EIENI c+' *... / ni'.wW"..AJai.n, NnY'YsN ri"�.`xh. :** 1 S.V'aS1M.MYw/�S'YY • : •.•N.hi ' '.,,yy+✓".44$^4S CSYn^,.Y 0.4$; S^..d�'YHw S.4 YR ,Y60.n,WYY:..1.6GN,OMA....... .4 A•.,Ed.:"W<Hw.t.,..YM,;a'.Y.LC4YV.O,XJMt.V.. Nw A„K,WrY .www.., •,,.".k, .rd..,• .., „Yam. ,f/N,, ...s.,. ,.... .. ,. ar .r• ;yacr,xr.*:a..eco��rr.rwoewr ...me.kk ..ona.Too..i.y.. ..ocyii•.oar.r..rrrr.:%..r.r .rw.r.:r..xw ..r. ...uwr.aov. .... .Z.+.r. »rrr..rz.ra4ratS.,...nurrrnr:ZNme+,rur_ ,err.;n.rrr .,aer.w..:s6: �,.•.w : w.,... - N ..(-- - •• ...1 - - .N Wr.✓✓N N .wM.rf w,,,,,,rwCw W.v v✓..JN '-..V W.KvI .✓.wwlN w.. ....N.ai%wl.a.SN .:A: C.....ixONaA.4.re. w'y wY.n... ..Y.Wq...y..W' .J10Y .Y.'r• H �.ADY.VY.UX.v•tO'AOfnYwgfOWJFg•W�CY� rYiJ4.4.C.Y'Gl' YM1'.O'flnrwVA.Y.Y.vttJ'Wvw/2.rv'•/ • N.pr.C.rvP.J.Li.'.N�'a.ALYYIYpY.Y.I't0'.Cgn.IX.J00'.0 GY �.ill(i.�nlft0^C.rn/.Yr./t N.rYi.�' A✓ .. r. "r MLJ'✓rW.J•/r .Y..MCtii. ' vK..-. - ...YMb'r.J�"YeiZt M' /r JWO^'•N.rt"w.nY•CY•. M•' /.•K rV✓.Y/rM>YW..,::,.../....z.......... r'Y•Nr^'3J...W• r.N.✓%r0.:,...WC../yirr rM e.,;INrM'.0..„,i'!.J, r4'✓.,, .... Me.t:W. $YN!M�/!M4 rw.w• :.: sM.vwnn.r. _ • • /bY./'/,..• ......en^.LJ.I. .nt.V.eMSN'.vr%/..hJ1N./.N.G..**W..\'.....,*.q'.~irN:Jwrri,n,,. ZKV•ee! 'Y:J'V.V :!.,re1a•GSM;./n.••�.N..IY�^YNR.nYnrJV.'^.v�YS./'/•.•G^G�3'Y�^.... 'e,Vv e'..q'G.'v..�1G�1•C,,., !.. ...'..''..=. "�.�.'.^�J...�.; .. '^h•rw"•.0 .."«n..W. �•w: rtw i�va.mvnocruwrw•..H.w...�w, aw>ukw .rwrwii..r..w.nwrr.waw....cvr..v.w...w..rraiwavrWy,...rwbw ..r.wra...vmra•..„,w, r.:ii:.irow�..c wr .M�...C`.Y G4v.r ..A.A.. .'w.r..•'xn./.n..3 ' .Y..Mv.47.& vrn✓, 4',W.a n,/e.N. /4. ...N"./rn..r,r..' i.N".n✓..n •✓Nw.K, • ..N' v ".,,SCr..MA. `µr'. W.',/7'..@'/.M.N/,n•.M.n ..•......... ...n...... . . ;wJ¢"✓`.'�yr/r 35�.`�J...rXi✓J...✓.eLGVNy ..'r/Y..M"t"yi/Gnp X^•5` /.vwti�N 'M..✓...`(�c"YN.. ".`7M..'A✓.✓."�YYAiN.. .. •Sn;:;W/'w/r W4:;`./..✓YN•.;Ywr.4 '.Wn^r/... <:...N'.r//w/'�J7NM.i.(M.P.tr ere,Z. ,:nr.l /TY..N..'V..r.T"✓,YM�. ,'••/rr. :r a.wuma�.•:.*:"ncd -..a . &i::• .rr r.<..u�v..x... .w..e•...ca.r .m.r. ' r14.% .uw........r•.r...rx.r ..ro..r.✓..w:..v.o.G...myir.x.rw.xr..irww„.e6onrufe6'. 'NYN.WNVY.K•M4�AW �. '.. .rawc[.w.•.*Cfn o.w.•..+.7v..r.+rr..:w .wr wr..v.wr.ccwa.n• w.w ..nwn row ..rv.nw!w.rrw.w.rw.ncew+.:,:, wara.�ecovruou... f . • Menu f41: 61: to pbc ctitp . ati�3£'ss sZ 3 itl.0 tab : 1n5tlruct1an� S. 1 1 1 1 ROCK PILE Worksheet for Circular Channel Project Description Project File Worksheet Flow Element Method Solve For untitled.fm2 TUKWILA Circular Channel Manning's Formula Discharge Input Data Mannings Coefficient Channel Slope Depth Diameter 0.013 0.007000 ft/ft 1.00 ft 12.00 in Results Discharge Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Top•Width Critical Depth Percent Full Critical Slope Velocity Velocity Head Specific Energy Froude Number Maximum Discharge Full Flow Capacity FuII Flow Slope Flow is subcritical. 2.98. cfs 0.79 ft2 3.14 ft 0.3e-7 ft 0.74 ft 100.00 0.008683 ft/ft 3.80 ft/s 0.22 ft 1.22 ft 0.13e-3 3.21 cfs 2.98 cfs 0.007000 ft/ft (obtucAlc,Ace... (c, I+ Ckaak Pac' swkocsk-c. �161( rZQe 107/13/99 11:33:03 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury. CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 FlowMaster v5.13 Page 1 of 1 ROCK PILE Worksheet for Circular Channel Project Description Project File Worksheet Flow Element Method Solve For untitied.fm2 TUKWILA Circular Channel Manning's Formula Discharge Input Data Mannings Coefficient Channel Slope Depth Diameter 0.024 0.007000 ft/ft 1.00 ft 12.00 in Results Discharge Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Top Width Critical Depth Percent Full Critical Slope Velocity Velocity Head Specific Energy Froude Number Maximum Discharge Full Flow Capacity Full Flow Slope Flow is subcritical. 1.61 cfs 0.79 ft2 3.14 ft 0.3e-7 ft 0.54 ft 100.00 0.021713 ft/ft 2.06 ' ft/s 0.07 ft 1.07 ft 0.71e-4 1.74 cfs 1.61 cfs 0.007000 ft/ft W hllQ.t�awtc ditzci44iGlick > lSCFS WtA-2600101C.! 07/13/99 11:33:17 AM 12e -CP 1441..tertkcS Skm 46A -L (24 I FlowMaster v5.13 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 r Longfeiior • - Mercer Wan: EaA�R SIH GREzii c . 1 The boundaries of the sensitive areas dis- played on these maps are • approximate. Additional sensitive areas that have not been mapped may be present on a devel- opment , proposal site. Where differences occur between what is illustrated on these maps arid the site conditions, the actual pre- sence or absence on the site of the sensitive area - as defined in the Sensitive Area Ordinance - is the Legal control. 1i= iij Dos Morne I \ 9 /Y6: Lowe -Green River'. �I:I • Lit - g BrettRi t ~Creek•^t Numbered wetlands, except those with an "a•" or "b" designation are included in the King County Wetlands Inventory. The locations of wetlands designated "a" have been verified on the site by a variety of sources. Wetlands designated :'b" are map- ped in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National {Vet/ands Inventory, but their loca- tions have not been field verified. There may be gaps In the numbering se- quence within individual drainage basins. Wetlands tl. r r umirafilitii.M.01 J1111111111121111y47,., II innunao uniunn.71 4-7 M HMnMO IQ .. :1-,)_):i',' t,t;v-1111Zifli-;l3':..'1, - 7rgaliUtMII II 1 -111111111fielunbil e, t .: 111111111111111112„f A i . IMMO'...) , 1 t :. :1 i . t). r . Tarim_ '! , /. y i .,....„, .:.)•:::. • , . , L ilatVLIK.F5,-0....1= --:-,.. • :Eaus.t aznuinimEHEN• 11c,11- , nat.UM sz - a• ''rriLE: r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 N The boundaries of the sensitive areas dis• Played on these maps are approximate. Additional sensitive areas that have not been mapped may be Present on a devel. oprnent proposal site. Where differences occur between what it irdstrated on these maps and the site conditions, the actual pre- sence or absence on we site of the sensitive area as defined in the Sensitive Area Ordinance • is the legal control. -11 One. hundred -year floodralaIns extend be- yond those shown on maps. Flood In- surance Rate Macs do not always show the floodplain to the headwaters of streams. rtt•t.t. 100 -Year Floodplains A Streams and 100 - Year Floodplams • • t • • ' 1 •••• .1 C • Cs. tryr. Nliorr 11 1 11 1 1 1 1N MUM ' The boundaries of the sensitive areas dis- played on these maps are approximate. Additional sensitive areas that have not been mapped may be present on a devel- opment proposal site. Where differences occur between what is illustrated on these maps and the site conditions. the actual pre- sence or absence on the site of the sensitive area - as defined in the Sensitive Area Ordinance - is the legal control. • Ai.' 11 • 41{ 111, Erosion Hazard Areas '" 1.-ivW:4'..4-5;°- • s „- • 4. 4 . UHIN A 5-0 G.. _."1".•%, 111 1 11P1:71F. is,• immi i•C;;.". 7 1 7114 I !I I 1.7 , • t, I. f•t,/ , : • t•• • '1 i.o.u••• I , • ui, l5 • 1.7.174P77, 1,1 , *.1 fi•ryn liver 1 1 11 1 1 IN1 11 1 Sm. 'a I.• The boundaries of the sensitive areas dis- played on these maps are approximate. Additional sensitive areas that have not been mapped may be present on a devel- opment proposal site. Where differences occur between what is illustrated on these maps and the site conditions. the actual pre- sence or absence on the site of the sensitive arca • as defined in the Sensitive Area Ordinance • Is the legal control. aa 1—, 1ximum w Awe Ems 01(P ! suprountimum [ m ETEMILIW 11111111111111‘ 1 \ w ••I Landslide Hazard Areas !Wel 1.04tit 61.aIR,W.1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 mum a N The boundaries of the sensitive areas dis- played on these maps are aporoximate. Additional Sensitive areas that have not been mapped may be present on a devel- opment proposal site. Where differences occur between what is illustrated on these maps and the site conditions. the actual pre- sence or absence on the site of the sensitive area • as defined in the Sensitive Area Ordinance • is the legal control. See wet ands and landslide hazy d maps for aoditional potential seismic hazard areas. Wetlands and landslide areas are susceptible to failure during earthquakes. Other seismic hazard areas not shown On this map are shorelines underlain by lacustrine sediments; these are susceptible to liquefaction. =_J ...:5 ••5 •.• Seismic Hazard Areas p4!iC!1777 Ji:G• _ 4L5j�f:i�?v=� VETLAt JD F:ESLJRCE • Wet/a,,d)k'esoifrcez,/,xz. PAGE 01 Delinealcn i Mitigation / Restoration / Habitat Creation ; Permit Assistance FAX TRANSMITTAL DATE: APR:. 20, 1.0L-7•Sa TO: FROM: Scorr ERA RD \V -r AND RE.sG'JRCa9, !NC. RE: Tu1.\' ARocK ES N;jr EE Cr: PAGES NG -1„D THIS 5 -IEE1. 2 GARETH 9505 - 19th Avenue SE Suite 106 Everett, Washington 98208 (425) 3373174 Fax (425) 337;3045 FAX 206.525.d93O TEL` 4253341.3174 HERE I5 THE MAP DEPICTING THE APPROXIMATE OFF-SITE WETLAND LOCATION. THE WETLAND IS LARGER THAN ONE ACRE iN 512E AND IS DOMINATED BY ONE CLAS CF VEGETATION. WETLANDS WITH: THESE CHARACTgRI5TC5 ARE CLASSIFIED .AS,T'E 2 AND DESIGNATED SO FOOT PROTECTIVE BUFFERS IN THECITY OFfYIiKw LA, i � LET ME KNOW QF ANY COMMENTS OR CONCERNS. CORDIALLY, 04/2E119E9 0 7 : 4 25337 304 , . :P.EscuRcas I(Y..PULM VL. WI. it q10411 14.110 -qc1 OF &r TYflZ WEILA NIS ; •,1 • ! ; • ; ?LME t)o�: khi'LAJ tQec.s e. E. • ; Atrteivritrri I Fog. PLAKIdrAJG ?Llet)osEs tiounionits 6.4.2t L0041ab IAIVE if.AfiadPA.iAJ.Apa) ALZ)4L- Perfdllik4P14, • . , • i 1 • IT ir!3 c.LbsLiT , ALL Wixtohli:i 001480 41LY: lirrewas warn13 4 'IS' Of- :WE- 720Perl#1$ N 11 ZONE X • \ KING CO,.''17' INTERNL4` 'CIDG\ A;RPO r ZC1. CORPORATE LIMITS ZONE X CITY OF TUKWILA 530091 RM128 30TH AVENUE N, SOUTH V ZONE AE 1EX COUNTY PIRATED AREAS 0071 �_oTu STRLE DuTIH 117TH • !FIEF cn RM140 FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP PA EL 645 OF 1725 SOUTH 12tH STREET r,•i_ITARY a;AD • S JIH 9 ZONE A JOINS PANEL C950 26.4 .1 ABOVE MOUTH 6.6 1 6.8 7.0 7.2 7.4 7.6 20 10 10 20 Ce) LJ La- -J FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY 20P ' ; .' -1-4-•-•;-•:---4-• - NOTE: ,--,---•--±. ---4.-.1.-.14.4.14 PROFILE; REPRESENTS :ND'50P7YEAR-OREGUENCY -r-ririt 4.-1.___. -10;:5Ctz7-1, 00L- .... It, ; 1 - . , • :FLOODS_AS..13 d u LATE b At zo-stitA'--strx.rfi-A-14---so-61--15-4-EATJ L.: ''. • , -I t.. 1 .• I ; : ; • •i• . . . :;;;;; "111'11iimn, " 1 1 , . ! 1 I I 1:• 111, 13..g. ,,_.4, L ;[; lll ; i1 I ._. ...‘,._ _...!. 1 1.4 : ... al • i .1. ,1 ; i . ..„ • . ; -17-1-• . .., 1 1 1 1 I : ! : ; • 1 1:1) .1 7.17 ' ! , ; ' , 411.16 i 1 1 1 ; 1 • 1 L...;.-:.-1.-. U.1 • ' 1 ; ia“ L I T11-7 I 1 ; • . • ' : I : 1 . . . ; , : i•-• 7 771-7 -7-0 .. mil ......' 'i!ii ;;; I i• i •. , , ; . • • •L__L ' .: ! ;:r .1 : • .- 1,:,.,:•ct .. . .1111rct 1 ; ill; ;;. 111 • ,,1--; 2 , 1 i 1 . ! 1 : , , , . . . -r- - -7-7-1-if"-.- 1 w 1 , -7--, 1 ; • . . • . • , . • 111 : ; • = -i-• ; limp. r , , , ---t. -7 - r.- '.... - -- 7* •77 -7 -7-- • ., .;:,. ii • 1 ; : ;--r-7- • . . 1 r 1 ; . U.) 1 1 1 . . . . ...;.1 -7-1-1- I __!.... 1 1 1 -‘11.- .• . • . i 7 ; , , i 111.11 1 I I I . ; ; i_ ; • . L, 1 I • ; ; : • -•-•-7-t 7-7 ---t- - • • -- ••i--+ ‘..-1--4-- ' 1 !j 1 , , 1, , • 1 • Iii 11 . 1 •• • • • , ; _ , ; - - , . 1 1 I 11 111! lIsil . . . . I. . • 1 i i I : I I I I 1 1.. i i. ' /1 1 1 I I 1 I ' 1 4 : ' I i. "... ' . ;..,..: j..... 1 1 .1 ! i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ....Li I 1 1 t . i i I ! 1 .. .• 1 i I ; . • ' • ' ' , ! ; . 1 1 77! ! , , 1 1- I I 1II ,! --1 1..._!_ . . I 1 1- ! r l I ! . - ,-...; : : ' 1 • , ! 1 ; ! 1 , , '. i ; , 1 ! 1 ; 1 1 1 1 ! ; ' . : • : 1 • . . ; . , • . r --; ri i • 1 11 , • • • :,•••I7 • :.; 4--;--r- i ! 4---1,4-1 . I ; • 1 7. ••.-I- ; .1.'11 1 : : i , 1 '. : . ; • : • .- .- - - - --. - 1 : ' - • ; • ' • : . ' : : i ; . : : 1 : : ' 1 1 T 1 1 , . .., 1, ; I r-7 ' . ' i ; ! .: 1 ! ! 1 1 1 1 1 I; 1 ; , I : ; ! : ; . ' : ! ! I 1 1. i T.--- , 1 i t 1 i • ' • - • . . - • ! • • . , , , ; • 1 , • ' . - - , •,,,,, ,, ,, 1 1 1 4 • • • • . • .,„: •;.;,..4,1 i _4_ : : . ; 1 r: I1 , , •_;.' 1. , ; -77- , . 1 ! l 1i -- -..7- ' : ._ ; „„.• • - , i .;T111ti !-- -- .• -7- 1 7 - ' 1-- - 1- • ! , -, ' -- :- \-----7 ' • i i - ! ; ; 1 1 1 ! 1 , ; : 1 - . : : . ; : I : : ' ! 1 1 T7777 ! 1 • 1 . • . 1 i 1 ; , - • ,•. . . I i ! : , : : ; ' 1 t . . • : • , : . g i : • 1 , ' _L.... I ' ; 1 1 1 il • • - - -4- - . • :II; ;; " I 1 1 • • • • -7 1 1 . 1 ! ! ! !1,11. ; i . . •. ' ' I• 1 : 1 1 i , i !, ;; - I , . r : -• :, , ; • r . : , • • . - ...._ . . : . : . • . ; , , • - - ', •- • 4-7: , - - ---,-- :- 7---1- - ! , : , I --7-r---- . . : , ,. . . .. _... .. : , . . . 1 . I • : , , . . ; . , . . . . ' • 4 , - H-4 • . . . , . _ . . ;::.;,, 1,,,, 11. 1 . : , ; : , ; ; , ; , , . ; 1 . • . • , • ; • ; . , ..-77.7. "--,-7-----7--r-7-7 -7- ..-., . ; : ; , . I , ; _ 1 ' ' i ' 1 i , ' ! , , I • . . • • A ! ! --L. : ! •, - -1---.- -i- "-- -- H.4 ---',---'"-i-+- •-••1--: • • ; i • . . -1--:,4---1-L-+- ; . LEGEND .7 • - • - • . . . . • 7 ;- i • . * . . • ; ; . . : ; • : . , i ; 1 . • : , r , ; ; 500 - YEAR FLOOD • , . : •.---;-•-• ; , -- •-•---..----- , . • 100 - YEAR FLOOD • , • . . . . ; • 1 , ; . . . , . ; . ; ; . ; . , ; 50 - YEAR FLOOD -__.. : , .. • . ; , : • ; . . : ; : , . . . - 10 - YEAR FLOOD .-•i----•-•:-4-4----,-; ---± -•---- ----:--;--1--•--,-;,-;---1------...--t:;:--: - ._.._ . •___.• , . . -.-- 7"--t" . _......4._._•_._.__._ . . , . ;--t -7"-. • !--- 7' -!---.--t _...._._......._-___,__ 1- --,-1--.-. , --- r -T- I-- 7 STREAM BED CROSS SECTION LOCATION 26.4 .1 ABOVE MOUTH 6.6 1 6.8 7.0 7.2 7.4 7.6 20 10 10 20 Ce) LJ La- -J FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY 20P //' City of Tukwila Pre -Application Process MEETING ATTENDANCE RECORD City of Tukwila Department of Community Development - Building Division Phone: (206) 431-3670 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Pre -Application File Number PRE99-014 Project: TUKWILA ROCK PILE Meeting Date: 3-18-99 Time: 2:30 PM Site Address: 11215 EAST MARGINAL WYS Date Checklist Mailed: 3-31-99 By: BRENDA HOLT CITY STAFF PRESENT DEPARTMENTS PHONE #'s NAMES/TITLES X X 0 Building 431-3670 DUANE GRIFFIN, BUILDING OFFICIAL Fire 575-4404 Planning 431-3680 JACK PACE, PLANNING MANAGER Public Works 433-0179 Parks & Rec 433-1843 Police 433-1804 Environmental 431-3662 GARYSCHULZ ENVIRONMENTAL Permit Center 431-3670 BRENDA HOLT, PERMIT COORDINATOR Other: JOANNA SPENCER, DEVELOPMENT ENGINEER APPLICANT/REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT CONTACT Name: GARETH ROE, AICP Phone: 206-624-6239 PERSON Company/Title: RW THORPE AND ASSOCIATES INC Street Address: 705 SECOND AV, #710 City/State/Zip: SEATTLE, WA 98104 OTHERS Name: STEVE SPEIDEL Phone: 206-624-6239 PRESENT Company/Title: RW THORPE AND ASSOCIATES INC Street Address: 705 SECOND AV, #710 City/State/Zip: SEATTLE, WA 98104 Name: BOB SCHILDGEN Phone: 425-869-2670 Company/Title: DOWL ENGINEERS Street Address: 8320 157-11 AVE NE City/State/Zip: REDMOND, WA 98052 Name: Phone: Company/Title: Street Address: City/State/Zip: Name: Phone: Company/Title: Street Address: City/State/Zip: Name: Phone: Company/Title: Street Address: City/State/Zip: CITY 0.11UKWILA Department of Community Development Building Division - Permit Center 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Phone: (206)431-3670 Pre -Application Checklist The following comments are based on a preliminary review. Additional information may be needed. Other requirements/regulations may need to be met. ENVIRONMENTAL The site has slope areas that are 20 percent or greater in gradient. The topographic survey provided appears to be adequate for this project. Undeveloped slopes that are 20 percent and greater are treated as sensitive areas and will be subject to the Sensitive Areas Ordinance (SAO). These sensitive areas are referred to as Areas of Potential Geologic Instability and are addressed in the Ordinance under Section 18.45.080 E. of the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC). As part of project review a geotechnical investigation will be required to demonstrate the feasibility of the project and to determine adequate design for a retaining wall. In most situations, the geotechnical investigation will depend on the degree of development related to sensitive slope areas. On-site grading may affect slope stability and groundwater movement. 2) Sensitive slope areas that are cleared for development will be subject to the Tree Regulations ordinance (TMC Chapter 18.54). A required landscape plan will consist of tree retention and tree planting per the standards of the Ordinance. Tree replacement is required for those greater than 4 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH) except for black cottonwood trees. However, mature black cottonwood trees are regulated within 100 feet of the river. Only trees removed from sensitive area slopes and/or within the 200 -foot Shoreline Zone will be subject to the Tree Regulations. TMC Sections 18.54.080 and 18.54.130 provide some of the necessary criteria for the Tree Permit. Because the future use and development of this site is not known, the tree replacement requirement may be implemented along the river bank within the River and Low Impact Environments. Enhancement of the river habitat is very appropriate and would improve the existing conditions of this portion of the property. The recent ESA listing of the Chinook salmon could cause water quality comments to be issued from other agencies reviewing the project. Checklist prepared by (staff): Vdre\envllst.doc 3/11/99 Date: CITY G?ilrUKWILA Department of Community Development Building Division - Permit Center 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Phone: (206)431-3670 Pre -Application Checklist 0112 i; g?K43 4,141.al i.ia .464;caoe:04 Jain ' The following comments are based on a preliminary review. Additional information may be needed. Other requirements/regulations may need to be met. PLANNING DIVISION - Land Use Information 1. Comply with Tukwila Municipal Code (zoning, land use, sign regulations, etc.) 2. Obtain the following land use permits/approvals: ❑ 3. ❑ 4. ❑ 5. ❑ 6. ❑ 7. a 8. ❑ 9. ❑ 10. ❑ 11. ❑ 12. ❑❑LI❑®❑❑❑D Boundary Line Adjustment/Lot Consolidation Binding Site Improvement Plan Comprehensive Plan Amendment Conditional Use Permit Design Review (i-.1 , — r4 5bevol `'6) Design Review -Interurban Environmental (SEPA) Planned Mixed Use Development Planned Residential Development ❑ Rezone 3 Shoreline Management Permit(4)1:5Z Tree Permit Short Subdivision Sign(s) Subdivision � Unclassified UseC/Vl1 - dr'f"1T'� Variance Other: ❑ 0 Zoning designation: NIA L. L. Site located in sensitive area? Minimum setback requirements: Front: .1c' Side: Maximum Building Height: 617°°'ics / Minimum parking stalls required: PA ,s' Side: 0 r>!s✓ vAl;L I Yes ❑ No Rear: 0 fir,"6 s Agisl- Height exception area? ['Yes ❑ No Handicap stalls required: p/A No more than 30% of required parking stalls may be compact. No landscape overhangs into compact stalls are permitted, although no wheel stops prior to hitting the curb will be required. Minimum landscaping required: Front: 5 Side: 0 Side: 0 c/Rear: n- J 5 aurs1 t� 1,i k 6.2 .1 ' he>0 --10,tkitiqA Landscape plans must be stamped by a Washington State lice Ised landscape architect. All landscape areas require a landscape irrigation system (Utility Permit Required). Roof -top mechanical units, satellite dishes and similar structures must be properly screened. Provide elevations and construction details as part of building permit application submittal. Trash enclosures and storage areas must be screened to a minimum of 8' in height. Provide elevations and construction details as part of building permit application submittal. Building permit plans which deviate from that already approved by the Board of Architectural Review may require re-application for design review approval. Checklist prepared by (staff): Idrelplanlisl.doc 3/18/99 Date: V/V6a) hiadvA miuL vt%a - Uses CITY COUKWILA Department of Community Development Building Division - Permit Center 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Phone: (206)431-3670 Pre -Application Checklist The following comments are based on a preliminary review. Additional information may be needed. Other requirements/regulations may need to be met. PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT The Parks and Recreation Department has no comment on this proposal. Don Williams Parks and Recreation Director Checklist prepared by (staff): Date: drelprIlst.doc 3/11/99 t,• CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development Building Division - Permit Center 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Phone: (206)431-3670 Pre Application Checklist The following comments are based on a preliminary review. Additional information may be needed. Other requirements/regulations may need to be met. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ❑ 1. Apply for and obtain the following permits/approvals through the City's Permit Center: I7( ❑ Channelization/Striping/Signing ❑ Curb Cut/Access/Sidewalk ®. Land Altering ❑ Fire loop/Hydrant (main to vault) ❑ Flood Zone Control Ff Hauling (2,000 Bond, Cert of Ins) ❑ Landscape Irrigation ❑ Moving an Oversized Load ❑ Sanitary Side Sewer rJNyrr /5 1HE PRopp6`q SH oe-r T-�'M Et ❑ Other: usE — Dt e4T,ont ; Sewer Main Extension (private) Sewer Main Extension (public) w� Storm Drainage �P ld (private) �,u91o�bcel Water Main Extension private) wHic.+Eivo a Water Main Extension (public) 1.4.51 `T'Ne `°NN Water Meter (exempt) �R v gN. p_-.v��/NEE,e -DE nE Water Meter (permanent) v4)/43.3 -017f Water Meter (temporary) 2. Hauling Permit required prior to start of any hauling of material on public right-of-way ($2,000 bond, $1,000,000 certificate of insurance, route map and $25.00 permit fee required). 3. All applications and plan submittals must be complete in order to be accepted by the Permit Center for plan review. Use the Plan Submittal Checklist provided on the reverse of the application forms to verify that all the necessary materials and information has been supplied. 4. Water and sewer assessments may apply and will be determined during the utility plan review process. �ipvN"TSL Iiiviv 1 MFNT Retro ,91- 711E T,ii oFt3ioi..O' & PORN IT /hPPL-/c,►-r-7oN 5. Provide sidewalks per Ordinance Nos. 1158, 1217, and 1233, or obtain waiver. 600TECN 41fT-c.YS/5 R&'Q - Iry iJ"/f- PO>EN/7'tI- /MPPerwA,jj/ CENT PRI'PPP:'-/ES RI J�-+� 6. Provide Hydrological -Geotechnical any"l SLM t r WPY OF SHA-NNoN a t.,lnt,soh% 501L5 L04 ANO 401 -firsts 7. Provide erosion control plan as part of grading/fill permit application. Du 5r co A171Jo L Sr+I}u 13E ADDR/-S.SEA 8. Identify building elevation above 100 year flood elevation per FIRM maps (use NGVD datum and recognized benchmarks). ❑ 9. Provide a traffic analysis/trip generation study for: 111 10. Provide developers agreement for: ❑ 11. Provide the following easements and maintenance agreements: ❑ 12. Provide water/sewer availability letters or certificates from districts serving your development. /i-55Es5oe 15 /4/1-P _5/40/A6 .«A e, RI v,ER C / rY o/ 5177377Z.�' p/pE L,,i' 12.o. (.4) PLEASE Ga0R D/ va7 W%5E/9rrlc luTiLI Ty ,oEpr RT►p 4 O/ -.SS Wrtlpwfist.doc NO /101//dRSE EFFECT MILL OCCti/2, Dtte 7v VOUle PROpK7SAL. 3/11/99 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT `v, Pre -Application Checklist File No.: PRE99-014 •1 Page 2 of 2 111 13. Obtain King County Water and Land Resources Industrial Waste Program for a Wa:;te Discharge permit of approval (206-689-3000). 14. Complete Business Declaration (attached) and return to King County (self addressed and stamp provided). 15. Review the following City studies when designing your project and preparing your plan submittal: 16. imnbEa IA (HY 577204 I) PAI A MC, F/N s. //s-sr,v 4s 77.2 ae 14-6DiegsSEM. 17. SPEC/ t%Y YDS OF Gt t 7 /NI) ,GILL (IV you,e 1 -sJo /k TY Q /rV6 AND C,€055 --£Er6. AICe flN.( soILs//S- • �, j;i 18. U-il.,G')It N 0/5E 0/a.,UiN/,VC - S///I - Fl�[_1_f2G RA) Y ,cu rum U$F NEcos r7.2 €n 77/&.'L4(/./ ",e0.2ccsS 19. fl'AID /.5Su &HNCE ezc 7-/E (y,e.4& /'E,e /y TT 400E3 A)o 7' //41/-'‘. !w 4 PP,e. vu 4l rote /y -/vi- ,CL?Tcu , use 20. CoORA/NP-rg `J/TH PG16 ET .50u -AV) &LEG7/e – p„uz-;e s-sf-/aw 77/4 -r - P " S?oweasi-/,4 l2, O. W, `des ..Ipouyt. 2i/ 021. 0,00,204)4-7--E. mirk/ /&/A/4 Cama /V TY / -t CT/2(? ,EEGz.:'f2 s /f- 4.2 " marto S 1— P/ PF 771/ T UAvs Nis ri6044 u UH r yOu,e PR -OP.'S:R i / /41"") I2 memo 5Eh)j Fo,€.0 /i-e/)/,v oN6 THE 504477/ ENL t.5 i.c/2 P,2c f'.",4 T - JoatuAle pceI_ (k94)1l33- 0/7y 9 Best Management Practices for Reclaiming Surface Mines in Washington and Oregon OREGON DEPARTMENT OF GEOLOGY AND MINERAL INDUSTRIES Donald A Hull - State Geologist by David K. Norman, Peter J. Wampler, Allen H. Throop, E. Frank Schnitzer, and Jaretta M. Roloff WASHINGTON DIVISION.OF GEOLOGY AND EARTH RESOURCES Open File Report 96-2 also released as OREGON DEPARTMENT OF GEOLOGY AND MINERAL INDUSTRIES Open -File Report 0-96-2 Revised Edition December 1997 WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF Natural Resources Jennifer M. Belcher -Commissioner of Public Lands DISCLAIMER The thoughts and ideas expressed in this publication are intended to further research and discussion in this field. The State of Washington, Department of Natural Resources, and The State of Oregon, Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, make no express or implied warranty concerning the thoughts and ideas expressed herein, should they fail to work as planned if utilized. Further, The State of Washington, Department of Natural Resources, and The State of Oregon, Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, make no warranty that the thoughts and ideas expressed herein are adequate for the reader's purposes in general or for the reader's compliance with local, state, or federal laws concerning surface mining. Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the governments of Washington and Oregon. WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Jennifer M. Belcher—Commissioner of Public Lands DIVISION OF GEOLOGY AND EARTH RESOURCES Raymond Lasmanis—State Geologist J. Eric Schuster—Assistant State Geologist William S. Lingley, Jr.—Assistant State Geologist OREGON DEPARTMENT OF GEOLOGY AND MINERAL INDUSTRIES Donald A. Hull—State Geologist John D. Beaulieu—Deputy State Geologist This report is available from: Publications Washington Department of Natural Resources Division of Geology and Earth Resources P.O. Box 47007 Olympia, WA 98504-7007 Phone: 360-902-1450 Fax: 360-902-1785 or from: The Nature of the Northwest Information Center 800 NE Oregon Street # 5, Suite 177 Portland, OR 97232-2162 Phone: 503-872-2750 Fax: 503-731-4066 Front Cover: A reclaimed quarry in mountainous terrain. Naturally hazardous conditions (cliffs) are present in the immediate area. Chutes, spurs, scree slopes, and soil on the scree have created a natural appearance. Trees now grow on the slope where soil is lo- cated and complete the reclamation. The site will be used for for- estry in the future. Note the person midslope for scale. Photo by M. A. Shawver. La Printed on recycled paper Printed in the United States of America Contents CHAPTER 1. MAPS AS MANAGEMENT TOOLS Page INTRODUCTION 1.1 TYPES OF MAPS 1.1 MAP SIZES 1 1 BASIC ELEMENTS 1.2 Map scale 1.2 Graphic scales 1.2 North arrow 1.2 Explanation block 1 2 Title block 1 2 TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOURS 1.3 BOUNDARIES 1 3 Permit area boundary 1.3 Mining boundaries 1.3 Boundaries of cities and counties 1.3 Property lines 1.3 OTHER COMMON MAP ELEMENTS 1.4 Existing watercourses, ponds, and wetlands 1.4 Processing plant 1 4 Haul roads 1.4 Soil and overburden stockpiles 1.4 Product stockpiles and waste -rock dumps 1.4 Interim watercourses and ponds 1.4 Typical cross sections 1 5 SITE ACCESS MAP 1.5 PRE -MINING TOPOGRAPHIC MAP 1.6 RECLAMATION SEQUENCE MAP 1.7 FINAL RECLAMATION MAP 1.8 GEOLOGIC MAP 1 10 MAP UPDATES 1 10 REFERENCE 1 10 CHAPTER 2. STORM -WATER AND EROSION CONTROL Page INTRODUCTION 2 1 MAINTENANCE AND EMPLOYEE INVOLVEMENT 2.1 EROSION 2.2 STORM -WATER REGULATION 2 3 TURBIDITY AND SUSPENDED SEDIMENT 2.3 Turbidity 2 3 Suspended sediment 2 4 EROSION CONTROL 2 4 Controlling raindrop erosion 2.5 Controlling surface runoff 2.5 STORM -WATER DIVERSION 2 6 PASSIVE STORM -WATER CONTROL 2 6 SEDIMENT CONTROL ON THE MINE SITE 2 9 STORM -WATER AND EROSION -CONTROL STRUCTURES 2 12 Conveyance channels and ditches 2 12 Slash windrows and brush sediment barriers 2 12 Straw bales 2 13 Bio bags 2 14 Burlap bags filled with drain rock 2 15 Silt fences 2 15 Erosion -control blankets 2 15 Vegetation 2 16 Contour and diversion ditches 2 17 Rock and log check dams 2 18 Concrete check dams 219 Filter berm 2 19 Trench subdrains and French drains 2 20 Infiltration galleries and dry wells 2 20 Wheel washes 2 21 STORM -WATER SETTLING PONDS 2 21 Configuration, location, and size 2 22 Maintenance 2 24 Drainage 2 24 STORM -WATER TREATMENT 2 25 Land application 2 25 Flocculants 2 26 Water clarifiers 2 26 Oil separators 2 27 STREAM BUFFERS 2 27 STREAM DIVERSION 2 28 Perennial or permanent streams 2 28 Intermittent or ephemeral streams 2 28 REFERENCES CITED 2 29 CHAPTER 3. OPERATION AND RECLAMATION STRATEGIES Page INTRODUCTION 3.1 3.1 31 POST -MINING RECLAMATION INTERIM RECLAMATION CONCURRENT OR PROGRESSIVE RECLAMATION 3.2 SEGMENTAL RECLAMATION 3.3 MINING TO RECLAIM 3 4 SITE PREPARATION 3 4 Permit and disturbed area boundaries Permanent setbacks or buffers Reclamation setbacks 34 34 35 Setbacks to protect streams and flood plains 3 5 Conservation setbacks 3.6 Topsoil and overburden storage areas 3.6 VISUAL AND NOISE SCREENS 3.6 How noisy is it? 3 9 Noise -control methods 3.9 Visual screens 3 9 REMOVING VEGETATION Disposing of vegetation Transplanting vegetation 39 39 39 Using vegetation for habitat THE SOIL RESOURCE Soil development Soil fertility Soil types Soil inventories REMOVING AND STORING TOPSOIL AND SUBSOILS Live topsoiling Stripping and salvage Constructing storage piles WASTE AND OVERBURDEN DUMPS AND STOCKPILES Site selection Site preparation Dump and stockpile construction DUST CONTROL Controlling dust with water Controlling dust with chemicals REFERENCES v 3 10 3 10 3 11 3 11 3 12 3 12 3 13 3 13 3 14 3 15 3 15 3 15 3 15 3 16 3 17 3 17 3 17 3 17 CHAPTER 4. RESTORING LANDFORMS Page INTRODUCTION 4.1 SUBSEQUENT USE 4 1 SLOPE TYPES ....r: 4 2 CREATING SLOPES 4 2 REGRADING 4.4 ti REPLACING TOPSOIL AND SUBSOIL 4.5 AMENDING OR MANUFACTURING SOIL 4.6 Adding organic matter 4 6 Improving moisture -holding capacity 4.6 Improving drainage 4 6 Using fertilizers 4 7 RESTORING DRAINAGE 4.8 CREATING PONDS FOR WILDLIFE 4.8 In -water slopes 4 9 Special considerations near rivers 410 BUILDING HABITAT 4 11 Islands 4 11 Structures that enhance habitat 4 12 Off -channel ponds for salmon 4 13 Outlet channels 4 14 FORMING WETLANDS 4 15 Soils 4 15 Hydrology 4 15 Vegetation 4 15 REFERENCES 416 CHAPTER 5. RECLAMATION TECHNIQUES FOR QUARRIES Page HIGHWALL AND BENCH RECLAMATION 5.1 RECLAMATION BLASTING 5.2 Highwalls 5 2• Benches 5 3 MINIMIZING OFFSITE IMPACTS 5.3 Causes of damage 5.3 Vibration effects under various conditions 5.4 Pre -blast survey 5 4 Use and placement of vibration -measuring equipment 5.4 Blasting plans and logs 5.5 BACKFILLING 5 5 ,. Fill materials 5 5 Fill slopes 5.6 DRAINING PIT FLOORS 5.6 Blasting 5 6 Ripping 5.7 REFERENCES 5.7 CHAPTER 6. LANDSLIDES AND SLOPE FAILURES Page TYPES OF SLOPE FAILURES 6.1 Rockfalls 6.1 Slides 6 1 Earthflows 6.2 Slumps 6.2 Soil creep 6 2 Raveling 6 2 ANATOMY OF A LANDSLIDE 6.2 IDENTIFYING UNSTABLE SLOPE CONDITIONS 6.3 Tension cracks 6 3 Hummocky ground 6.4 Displaced and distorted trees 6.4 Springs and seeps 6 4 Scarps 6 4 Toe bulge 6 5 SURFACE DRAINAGE CONTROL IN UNSTABLE AREAS 6.5 SLOPE STABILIZATION 6 6 SLOPE FAILURES ABOVE THE MINE 6.7 REFERENCES 6.7 CHAPTER 7. REVEGETATION Page INTRODUCTION 7 1 SPECIAL PROBLEMS AT MINE SITES 7.2 SUCCESSFUL REVEGETATION STRATEGIES 73 CLASSES OF VEGETATION 7.4 Grasses 7 4 Forbs and shrubs 7.4 Trees 7.4 SELECTING PLANTS FOR A SITE 7.4 Grasses and legumes 7.5 Forbs and shrubs 7.5 Trees 7 6 SOWING SEEDS 7.6 Seed drills 7.7 Broadcast seeding 7.7 Hydroseeding 7 7 Seedbed preparation 7 7 Mulching 7.8 TRANSPLANTING 7 9 Planting times 7.9 Planting techniques 7.9 Tools required 7 11 PROPAGATING FROM CUTTINGS 7 11 Determining cutting length 7 11 Collecting cuttings 7 11 Storing cuttings 7 12 Planting cuttings 7 12 BIOTECHNICAL STABILIZATION 7 13 Brush layering 7 13 Contour wattling 7 15 RIPARIAN AND WETLAND AREAS 7 16 Ecological functions 7 16 Plant selection 7 16 AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY SUBSEQUENT USES 7 17 Topsoil 7 17 Factors to consider 7 17 REFERENCES 717 FIGURES Figure 1.1. Site access map 1.5 Figure 1.2. Pre -mining topographic map 1 6 Figure 1.3. Reclamation sequence map 17 Figure 1.4. Final reclamation map 19 Figure 1.5. Cross sections for the final reclamation plan 19 Figure 2.1. Diagram showing factors that affect the rateof erosion 2 2 Figure 2.2. Diagrammatic sketch showing the topography created by different types of erosion 2 3 Figure 2.3. Diagram of small, discontinuous terraces, berms, and furrows that can effectively slow runoff and decrease sediment transport 2.5 Figure 2.4. Diagram showing benching and terracing of unconsolidated material to control runoff 25 Figure 2.5. Diagram showing diversion of streams and overland flow around the mining site 2 6 Figure 2.6. Diagrams showing berms and ditches diverting runoff to a collection sump 2 6 Figure 2.7. Diagrammatic sketch of a water bar or cross -ditch 2 7 Figure 2.8. Profiles of elevated haul roads with drainage ditches on the sides 2 8 Figure 2.9. Sketch of a slope that allows water to drain toward the highwall 2 8 Figure 2.10. Map and cross section of storm -water control at an upland processing area 2 10 Figure 2.11. Map of a storm -water control system at a quarry site 2.11 Figure 2.12. Diagram of a rock -lined diversion ditch 2.12 Figure 2.13. Diagram of a slash windrow filter 2 13 Figure 2.14. Diagrammatic sketch of a brush sediment -barrier 2.13 r Figure 2.15. Diagrammatic sketch of a straw -bale sediment barrier 2 14 Figure 2.16. Diagrammatic sketch of a straw -bale barrier . with a gravel check dam 2.14 Figure 2.17. Diagram of a filter -fabric silt fence 2 15 Figure 2.18. Diagrammatic sketch showing erosion blanket installation 2.16 Figure 2.19. Diagrammatic sketch showing the effect of vegetation on storm -water runoff 2 17 Figure 2.20. Diagram of contour ditches 2.17 Figure 2.21. Diagram of a diversion ditch upslope from an overburden pile 2.18 viii Figure 2.22. Diagram of a rock check dam 2 18 Figure 2.23. Diagram of a log check dam 2.19 Figure 2.24. Diagram of a concrete check dam 2 19 Figure 2.25. Idealized filter -berm cross section 2.19 Figure 2.26. Diagram of a trench subdrain 2 20 Figure 2.27. Diagram of an infiltration gallery 2 20 Figure 2.28. Diagram of a wheel wash 2 21 Figure 2.29. Diagram of details of settling pond construction 2 22 Figure 2.30. Diagram of details of retention pond design 2 22 Figure 2.31. Diagrammatic sketch of a standpipe with an antiseep collar set through a berm 2.24 Figure 2.32. Diagram of a land application system for storm water 2.25 Figure 2.33. Diagram of two different types of oil/water separators 2.27 Figure 3.1. Diagram of a mine site showing center -outward excavation 3 1 Figure 3.2. Diagrammatic sketch showing concurrent and progressive extraction and reclamation of a shallow dry pit 3.2 Figure 3.3. Diagram of a segmental reclamation plan with four segments showing segment size and direction of working 3.3 Figure 3.4. Sketch showing buffer strips of native vegetation 3.5 Figure 3.5. Map showing visual and noise screening at a quarry site 3 6 Figure 3.6 Map showing visual and noise screening at a processing area 3 7 Figure 3.7. Graph of noise levels and human response for some common noise sources 3 8 Figure 3.8. Diagrammatic sketch of soil profile development over time 3.10 Figure 3.9. Diagrammatic sketch of the residual soil profile that develops over time on a bedrock surface 3.11 Figure 3.10. Diagram of topsoil handling in a four -segment mine 3.14 Figure 3.11.' Diagram of proper procedure for waste -dump construction 3.16 Figure 4.1. Diagrammatic sketch showing how the steepness of the final slope influences the intensity of proposed land use 4 1 Figure 4.2. Profile and plan view of common slope types 4 2 Figure 4.3. Sketch showing how to blend mine slopes with pre-existing terrain 4.3 Figure 4.4. Diagram showing common slope ratios 43 Figure 4.5. Sketch showing dozer tracking to reduce runoff 4 4 Figure 4.6. Plan views of pond shorelines 4 8 Figure 4.7. Plan view and cross section of a well-designed irregular wetland 4 9 Figure 4.8. Diagrammatic sketch showing how slope variations affect habitat 4.9 Figure 4.9. Diagrammatic sketches showing how islands can be developed in an undrained pit 4.10 Figure 4.10. Plan view and cross section of a reclaimed gravel pit 4.11 Figure 4.11. Plan view and cross section of horseshoe island construction 4.12 Figure 4.12. Sketch of a submerged tree crown, anchored top and bottom 4.12 Figure 4.13. Sketch of a submerged crib structure that provides habitat 4.13 Figure 4.14. Sketch of rock piles that provide homes for. small mammals 4 13 Figure 4.15. Sketch of typical nesting boxes 4.13 Figure 4.16. Sketch of a snag left as a nesting site for cavity -dwelling birds 4.14 Figure 5.1. Diagram showing reclamation blasting to create scree slopes 5.2 Figure 5.2. Sketch showing proper blasting of highwalls to leave rough surfaces that can provide nesting and perching habitat for birds 5.2 Figure 5.3. Diagram showing conceptual blasting patterns for obliterating quarry benches 53 Figure 5.4. Diagram showing topsoil placed on benches and on a fractured quarry floor to prepare a site for revegetation 5 4 Figure 5.5. Diagram showing quarry slopes that are backfilled and compacted so that the final slope is stable 53 Figure 5.6. Sketch of ripping or decompaction of pit floors with rippers mounted on heavy equipment. 5 6 Figure 6.1. Diagrammatic sketch of a rockfall. 6 1 Figure 6.2. Diagrammatic sketch of a complex slide called a slump-earthflow. 6 2 Figure 6.3. Diagrammatic sketch of soil creep. 6 3 Figure 6.4. Diagram of structural features of slumps and the effect of cutting and filling on the stability of short slopes. 6 4 Figure 6.5. Diagram of forces acting on slide masses and large stockpiles. 6 5 ` Y Figure 6.6. Diagram of toe, blanket, and chimney drains. 6 6 Figure 7.1. Diagrammatic sketch of sequence from pioneer to climax vegetation 7 1 Figure 7.2. Cross section of seed germination • 7 8 Figure 7.3. Diagram of the steps in transplanting bareroot or container plants 7 10 Figure 7.4. Diagram of transplanted seedlings on a slope 7.11 Figure 7.5. Diagram of steps in propagation by cuttings. 7.12 Figure 7.6. Diagram of brush layering in trenches 7.14 Figure 7.7. Diagram of brush layering of live plant materials on fill. 7.14 Figure 7.8. Diagram of wattle construction and placement 7.15 TABLES Table 3.1. Summary of noise measurements and projected noise levels in decibels 3 8 Table 4.1. Nitrogen and carbon content of common organic soil amendments. 4 7 Table 7.1. A partial listing of appropriate native plants suitable for erosion control and slope stabilization 7.19 Table 7.2. Plant selection guide for legumes, except for lupines— Species characteristics, adaptations, and seeding rates. 7.22 Table 7.3. Plant selection guide for lupines—Species characteristics, adaptations, and seeding rates. 7.23 Table 7.4. Plants for special -use situations. 7.24 Preface The term best management practices (BMPs) has generally been used to describe mechanical means of minimizing or eliminating water -quality problems. The BMPs presented here, however, apply as well to reclamation, planning, and specific methodologies to pro- mote an integrated approach to mining. The techniques and guid- ance provided in this manual should not be construed as rules or laws, but merely the most effective and economical reclamation and mining practices known to Oregon Department of Geology and Min- eral Industries (DOGAMI) and the Washington Department of Natu- ral Resources (DNR) at the present time. This manual provides information about planning the mine from start-up to final reclamation, incorporating water and erosion control during operation and reclamation, soil salvage and replace- ment, land shaping, and revegetation. This manual was compiled and written by DOGAMI and DNR to provide technical information and guidance to landowners, land - use planners, and mine operators. We urge miners to use this manual as a resource in developing an environmentally and financially sound mine. However, while this manual is a broad overview of mine reclamation and development and other BMPs, it is not a com- prehensive document, nor should it necessarily be considered the final word. Mining and reclamation will continue to evolve and im- prove. Locking in on technique or even just one BMP can be dan- gerous. Miners should consider the range of BMPs discussed here before selecting one to the exclusion of others. Reclamation of mines, especially large mines, is a complex multidisciplinary undertaking and goes far beyond this document. Trained professionals such as agronomists, biologists, engineers, geologists, hydrogeologists, landscape architects, planners, and soil scientists can be helpful in planning and completing a mining pro- ject. Implementation of BMPs is in everyone's best interest. For mine operators, using BMPs can result in more efficient and profit- able mining. For society, BMPs can mean cleaner, more usable, and aesthetically pleasing lands. Effective reclamation as the final BMP at a site can reduce water pollution and loss of topsoil, provide fish and wildlife habitat, and allow timber production, agriculture, and other uses to be re-established. Funding This project was partially funded by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency grant X000798-01-0 as means of transferring technical in- formation regarding mine regulation and environmental issues. The original grant was an agreement between Idaho, Oregon, and Wash- ington in 1993 and has been referred to as •the Tri-State agreement for mining. BMPs for mining already exist in Idaho and helped pro- vide the impetus for Oregon and Washington to generate this BMP guidance. Future Work This second edition of the Best Management Practices manual incor- porates the suggestions of many of our readers, including several new diagrams and topics. The manual continues to be a work in pro- gress, improving through field experience and the feedback we re- ceive from people using the manual. We would appreciate any com- ments, particularly on places where we have given too much or too little information. Comments should be directed to the authors. Acknowledgments The authors thank reviewers Garth Anderson, Rex Hapala, Bill Lingley, Mary Ann Shawver, and Dave Pierce of DNR; Gary Lynch and Ben Mundie of DOGAMI; Bob Raforth and Scott Morrison of the Washington State Department of Ecology; Brad Biggerstaff of GeoEngineers; Ron Savelieff of Cadman, Inc.; and Beth Norman of South Puget Sound Community College. Thoughtful review and ed- iting by Kitty Reed of DNR helped improve this document immeas- urably. Ken Thacker of the Bureau of Land Management made help- ful suggestions to upgrade Chapter 7. David K. Norman and Jaretta M. Roloff Washington Division of Geology and Earth Resources PO Box 47007 Olympia, WA 98504-7007 Phone: 360-902-1439 Fax: 360-902-1785 E-mail: dave.norman@wadnr.gov Peter J. Wampler, Allen H. Throop, and E. Frank Schnitzer Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries 1536 Queen Ave SE Albany, OR 97321 Phone: 503-967-2039 Fax: 503-967-2075 E-mail: peter.j.wampler@state.or.us xi i Maps as Management Tools INTRODUCTION Preparing accurate maps of the mining property and its surroundings is a key step in developing a surface mining operation. Maps allow geographic information to be summarized in a compact form. Their primary purpose is to describe geographic features and the spatial relations of these features. Maps benefit the operator by clearly de- fining the area in which mining is permitted, and they assist in long- range planning for both efficient use of the mine resource and timely reclamation. TYPES OF MAPS Surface mining regulations in both Washington and Oregon require that maps be submitted before mining permits are issued. To meet regulatory requirements, maps must provide sufficient detail to characterize the site. Types of maps that may be required for permit applications are: • A site access map showing the regional setting of the site and how to get there from the nearest town. • A pre -mining topographic map establishing the location and setting of the mine site as it exists before mining. • A geologic map giving a detailed description of the geologic setting and the type of deposit to be mined (required only if specifically requested). • A reclamation sequence map showing the borders and sequence of segments to be mined and reclaimed, including the directions in which soils will be moved during salvage and replacement, and the location of storage areas and other mine -related features. • A final reclamation map and at least two intersecting cross sections showing the mine site as it will appear after reclamation and revegetation. • A revegetation map showing the location and types of plants used for revegetation. (This may be combined with the final reclamation map if the information will not obscure contours.) MAP SIZES The map size preferred for review is 11 x 17 inches, which is easy to photocopy and store. If maps are small, they may be grouped on a single sheet of paper. If the maps submitted are larger than 11 x 17 inches or if they are in color, seven or more copies must be provided. The copies will be forwarded to other reviewing agencies. Because 11 x 17 inches is generally not practical for internal working purposes, draft and working copies may be larger. For ex- ample, some larger mines may require a scale of 1" = 200' or 1" = 400' and thus large sheets. Draft and working copies may be reduced on a photocopier for submission. Make sure the map scale reflects any reduction. Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 1.2 MAPS AS MANAGEMENT TOOLS BASIC ELEMENTS Basic elements required on every map are the: 1 map scale, both written out as a ratio and shown graphically as a bar or rake scale 1 north arrow 1 explanation block or legend 1 title block Map Scale Every map, regardless of the size of the site, should include a scale that indicates the relationship between the size of features on the map and the size of the same features on the ground. Most scales are represented by stating that 1 inch on the map represents a certain number of inches, feet, or miles on the ground. For example, 1" = 200' means that 1inch on the map represents 200 feet on the ground. The scale that best represents a site will depend on the detail required and the size of the site, and the level of detail depends on the size and complexity of the mine. A map of a 50 -acre rock quarry near a stream will normally require greater detail than a map of a 5 -acre upland gravel extraction site. For some proposals, it may be acceptable to give only an approximate scale. Site size 3-6 acres 10-20 acres 20-80 acres >80 acres Suggested Map scale not less than 1" = 50' not less than 1" = 100' not less than 1" = 200' not less than 1" = 400' Note: If the map is reduced or enlarged, make sure the verbal scale is adjusted as well. Maps without a scale will not be accepted. Graphic Scales Map scales shown graphically should also be included. They will remain accurate when the map is reduced or enlarged. Examples of a bar scale (left) and a rake scale (right) are shown below: 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 mi 0 0.5 1 mi ® i 1 North Arrow All maps must show true north. This is typically done by drawing a N N line oriented N—S with an arrow pointing north. The north arrow in conjunction with the scale allows the map to be properly oriented during field inspections and to be related to other maps. Examples of north arrows are shown on the left. Explanation Block The explanation block or legend defines all symbols and patterns used and may contain the scale: Title Block The title block should contain the following information: 1 title of map, 1 application or permit number, 1 name and address of applicant or permit holder(s), 1 signature of applicant or permit holder(s), 1 map or exhibit number, and 1 date map was drawn or revised. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 BOUNDARIES 1.3 TOPOGRAPHIC Topographic contours are lines on a map that connect points of CONTOURS equal elevation. For example, a 100 -foot contour line links all points that have an elevation of 100 feet. Although not required on all maps, contours are useful in determining the steepness of slopes and the location of watercourses. Contours are deemed adequate for mine permitting if they accurately reflect the conditions of the site. Generally, contour intervals should be between 5 and 20 feet. Typically, only large and/or complex sites require surveyed contour lines. Most applications for small sites can use a photocop- ied enlargement of a U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic map. Enlarging a USGS 7.5 -minute quadrangle (1" = 2,000') by 400 percent yields a map at a scale of 1" = 500'. Care must be taken to ensure that the scale of the enlargement is accurate. USGS maps are usually available at local hunting or sporting goods stores. They may also be ordered from the Washington De- partment of Natural Resources Photo and Map Sales (360-902- 1234), the Nature of the Northwest Information Center (503-731- 4444), or the U.S. Geological Survey (509-353-2524). BOUNDARIES Several types of boundaries may be required on maps: the permit area boundary, the mining area boundary (including present and fu- ture mining areas), and the property lines. The symbols for all should be included in the explanation block. This is the boundary within which mining is permitted. Any mining, processing, or activity related to mining taking place outside this area constitutes mining without a permit and may invoke closure and/or civil penalties. In some places, the permit boundary may be coincident with the property boundary. However, the permit bound- ary may cross property lines and can include property held by dif- ferent landowners. Once the boundary has been defined, changes to it typically require an amendment to the reclamation permit and may require land -use approval by the local jurisdiction. The permit boundary is commonly indicated on maps as a dashed or solid line. This line type and width should be distinguish- able from the property line boundary and should be clearly labeled as `permit boundary'. Mining boundaries show the areas to be mined or excavated. Several maps may be needed to show areas affected by short-term and long- term operations. Boundaries of Boundaries of cities, counties, and other municipalities must be Cities and Counties shown if they cross the map area. Tax lot maps from the county assessor's office are good sources of property line information. Property line locations are critical in de- termining setbacks to property lines and the likelihood of potential impacts to adjacent landowners. Permit Area Boundary Mining Boundaries Property Lines Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 1.4 MAPS AS MANAGEMENT TOOLS OTHER COMMON MAP ELEMENTS Existing Watercourses, Ponds, and Wetlands • Processing Plant Haul Roads Soil and Overburden Stockpiles Product Stockpiles and Waste -Rock Dumps Interim Watercourses and Ponds The property line boundary is typically shown on maps as a solid line. The property line type and width should be distinguish- able from the permit boundary line and should be clearly labeled. The letters 'PL' are commonly used to indicate a property line on maps, but this line and abbreviation must also be identified in the explanation block. The following map elements should be shown on one or more of the required maps. All streams, rivers, wetlands, and ponds on and adjacent to the site must be indicated on the map. Accurate location of these features allows reviewers to assess potential mining -related impacts and also aids the miner in the design of erosion and storm -water control sys- tems to protect water quality. Streams and rivers are represented by lines that are distinct from those used for haul roads, permit boundaries, and property lines. Ponds, wetlands, and lakes should be labeled and/or patterned to distinguish them from other mine features. Proper location of processing facilities makes good use of the topog- raphy for screening and noise control—for example, siting the fa- cilities in a low area. (See Visual and Noise Screens, p. 3.6.) The location of the processing facilities can be labeled or a symbol may be used. Most roads can be placed to avoid potential problems. Proper loca- tion, construction, and drainage of roads can minimize turbid water and slope -stability problems. (See Passive Storm Water Control, p. 2.6, and Figs. 2.7 and 2.8.) Roads can be shown as lines whose width or line type (dashed, etc.) distinguish them from property lines and permit boundaries. Soil should be preserved for reclamation. The reclamation sequence map must show where topsoil, subsoil, and overburden will be stored until they are reapplied during reclamation. Soil stockpiles can be indicated by drawing a line around the proposed location, adding a distinctive pattern, and labeling the area `topsoil', `sub- soil', or `overburden'. (See Removing and Storing Topsoil and Sub- soils, p. 3.13.) Stockpiles of usable rock and waste -rock dumps are generally indi- cated on maps by drawing a line around the proposed location, add- ing a distinctive pattern, and labeling the area `stockpile' or `waste dump'. Stability and potential erosion problems are criteria to be considered in selecting the location of a stockpile or dump. Site to- pography will influence these factors. (See Waste and Overburden Dumps and Stockpiles, p. 3.15.) Temporary watercourses and ponds, including settling ponds and drainage ditches to control storm -water runoff, should be distin- BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 SITE ACCESS MAP 1.5 HASTINGS FARWELL a0 RD Mead Whitworth College n Country Homes 70 0 To Spokane viTHORNE RD PROPOSED UNION ROAD QUARRY Spokane County EXPLANATION * quarry location taken from 1994.Washington Official State Highway Map MT SPOKANE PARK DR Harvey Rd RD QUARRY cc C) m • Union Rd PEONE RD 0 • 0.5 1.0 15 nil 1 In. =1 ml EXHIBIT NO.1 SITE ACCESS MAP Permit No. 34567 Creative Concrete 1420 N. Market Spokane, WA 99207 Drawn 3/18/95 il� 7I9�1� applicant's signature 206 co c A Figure 1.1. Site access map for the fictitious Union Road Quarry, taken from a highway map. Note verbal scale, bar scale, north arrow, and explanation and title blocks. (Not to scale; this map has been reduced to fit on the page.) guished from permanent natural features. They may be represented by a unique line or pattern. (See Storm -Water and Erosion -Control Structures, p. 2.12.) Typical A cross section or profile shows what the mining site would look Cross Sections like if a vertical slice were taken through it. The purpose is to show the slope of the original land surface and reclaimed land surface, the water level of ponds and wetlands, and the types and placement of vegetation. Cross sections are usually taken through the areas that will show the most information. It is generally best if a cross section is drawn so that the vertical and horizontal scales are the same. In some cases, the vertical scale can be exaggerated to accentuate topo- graphic features. SITE ACCESS MAP The site access map (Fig. 1.1) can be a copy or tracing of the perti- nent part of a road map that clearly shows how to get to the site from Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 1.6 MAPS AS MANAGEMENT TOOLS uuA 200ft 1In.e200ft Mr. Alfred Hopper N.2420 Chester Road Mead. WA 99004 permit and property boundary (395 acres) PL ALO Mr. and Mrs. Robert Levels N. 2219 Chester Road Mead, WA 99004 S.. abandoned El farmhouse 0 and barn ❑ Union Road reclarr Uon setback of ALO -woo at least 50 ft \_./ PL EXPLANATION - 200-- contour line infect upland vegetation A, permanent concrete monument for reference point - - permit and property boundary - PL- property line ALO adjacent landowner building Mr. and Mrs. Ken Ogawa E.17985 Metzger Road Mead, WA 99004 0 water well edge of excavation + stakes at excavation limit (steel pipe 15" In diameter), 4' above grade 111111 Northwest Railroad Washington Natural Gas pipeline —X— BPA prover Ilse and towers EXHIBIT N0. 2 PRE -MINING TOPOGRAPHIC MAP Permit No. 34567 Creative Concrete 1420 N. Market Spokane. WA 99207 Drawn 3/20/95 applicant's signature / / SPL ALO Mr. John Detwiler 02017 N. Chester Road bMead, WA 99004 residence PL 1--- o j] residence LI Miss Nettie Piper ALO E.18001 Union Road - Mead. WA 99004 Figure 1.2. Pre -mining topographic map for the quarry in Figure 1.1. Note existing buildings and vegetation, pre - mining contours, verbal scale, bar scale, north arrow, and explanation and title blocks. (Modified from Norman and Lingley, 1992. Not to scale; this map has been reduced to fit on the page.) the nearest town. The preferred size for this type of map is 81/2 x 11 inches. A site access map shows the regional setting of the site and includes nearby geographical features and public road access to the site. PRE -MINING The pre -mining topographic map establishes the location and setting TOPOGRAPHIC MAP of the mine site (Fig. 1.2). It must show the following features: ❑ Permit area plus an appropriate border on all sides to show important adjacent features. The size of the border depends on site topography, drainage, neighbors, etc. ❑ Elevations and contours, natural ground slopes, drainage patterns, and other topographic features ❑ Boundaries and names of counties and municipalities (if they cross the map area) ❑ Boundaries of property ownership adjacent to the mine ❑ Names and addresses of adjacent property owners ❑ Locations and names of any other nearby mines BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 RECLAMATION SEQUENCE MAP 1.7 ALO —P .— ALO PL OL K ALO permit and property boundary (58.5 1 roe) ,.,,,,,,u,u„u„n,uu,„,,,,,,,,,,�„i,nn,Inu,-,uunnu,n n„�n,una11n11,1uu,,jjj11, 1 U, ”1""" �----- �- --T----- ---� dfcch� _ •� I stock• y�yll , product , piles • crusher and ` sediment_ washing ponds Plat - • 6 (wet) �) 11111U11111111M1111111111111111C 1 haul road \ 4 5 111md II 1111111 wetland established for biofiltration water percolates from ground -level spreader 0 hp;,,,,,,1111,111111,,,,,,,,,,/,,,,,,,1{1111111,1111111111111,(111111111111(,1„��,����„�����„�,����,,, ,, 11��,���,�,�\1,.• reclamation setback of at least 50 ft Union Road PL upland vegetation permanent concrete monument permit and property boundary property line adjacent landowner edge of excavation stakes at excavation limit Northwest Railroad ALO —X— / 1 ALO residence F1-] PL U residence ALO EXPLANATION Washington Natural Gas pipeline BPA power line and towers segment border water table breached during mining phase and direction of mining direction of topsoil and overburden stripping and replacement for reclamation . 200 ft N l h.2.0oft 1111, 20' -high berm planted with grasses, legumes, and shore pine to screen o n (removed only r all mining Is complete) temporary drainage ditch; arrows show direction of flow C2 sediment pond wetland topsoil stockpile ALO EXHIBIT NO. 3 RECLAMATION SEQUENCE MAP . Permit No. 34567 Creative Concrete 1420 N. Market Spokane, WA 99207 Drawn 3/22/95 711, 7 L.L i/,_ applicant's signature Figure 1.3. Reclamation sequence map for the site in Figure 1.2. This map shows the location and sequence of segments to be mined according to the operating and reclamation plan (counterclockwise from the northeast, in this instance), as well as details of soil placement, screening, and drainage. This site is mined first as a dry site, but as mining proceeds into the southern segments, the water table is penetrated. (Modified from Norman and Lingley, 1992. Not to scale; this map has been reduced to fit on the page.) ❑ Locations and names (if any) of all roads, railroads, utility lines, or any other rights of way ❑ Locations and names (if any) of all streams and natural and artificial drainways on or adjacent to the mine site ❑ Locations and names of significant buildings, parks, and other artificial features ❑ Locations and names (if any) of all wells, lakes, springs, and existing wetlands on or adjacent to the mine site ❑ Boundaries of the areas that will be disturbed by mining. RECLAMATION The reclamation sequence map shows the details of the plan for min - SEQUENCE MAP ing and segmental reclamation (Fig. 1.3). It should cover the same area as the pre -mining topographic map and display the following information: ❑ Permit area plus an appropriate border on all sides ❑ Boundaries of the areas that will be disturbed by mining Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 1.8 MAPS AS MANAGEMENT TOOLS ❑ Locations of all permanent boundary markers ❑ Locations of proposed access roads to be built in conjunction with the surface mining operation ❑ Locations and types of setbacks and berms O Numbered segments and the direction and sequence of mining O Soil storage areas and sequence of stripping, storing, and replacement on mined segments ❑ Overburden storage areas and sequence of stripping, storing, and replacement of overburden on mined segments o Waste rock piles and how they will be reclaimed and stabilized ❑ Operation plant and processing areas ❑ Measures to be taken to protect adjacent surface resources, including prevention of slumping or landslides on adjacent lands ❑ Location and description of storm -water and erosion -control systems, including drainage facilities and settling ponds o Other pertinent features. FINAL On most sites that require a state reclamation permit (reclamation 'RECLAMATION plan), a description of the post -mining topography is usually suffi- MAP cient, but for complex sites, post -mining topographic maps should be prepared (Fig. 1.4). This is a topographic map of the site as it will look after final reclamation, usually presented in the form of post - mining contour lines or post -mining pit outlines. It must showall applicable data required in the narrative portion of the reclamation plan and details of the mine reclamation. The map should cover the same area as the pre -mining topographic map, at the same scale, and should display the following information: ❑ Permit area plus an appropriate border on all sides O Final elevations and contours, adjacent natural ground slopes, reclaimed drainage patterns, and other topographic features ❑ Locations and names (if any) of all roads, railroads, utility lines, or any other rights of way O Locations and names (if any) of all streams and drainages ❑ Locations and names (if any) of significant buildings, parks, and other structures, facilities, or features O Locations and names (if any) of all lakes, springs, and wetlands ❑ Location and depth of topsoil to be replaced ❑ Permanent drainage and water -control systems (with expanded view, if needed) O Area to be revegetated and proposed species ❑ At least two cross sections (generally at right angles), with horizontal and vertical scales the same, that show the original and final topography and the water table (Fig. 1.5) BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 FINAL RECLAMATION MAP 1.9 ALO -PL A— ALO = future office complex u$ oe K n Union Road ALO -1995 PL 2000 B' EXPLANATION original upland vegetation preserved 'A permanent concrete monument — — — permit and property boundary —PL— property line ALO adjacent landowner + stakes at excavation limit 4 11 H 1 Northwest Railroad 200 ft 1 n.=200 ft Washington Natural Gas pipeline —X— BPA prover line and towers final contours In feet runoff from reclaimed area flows Into lake open water shallow areas replanted with it wetland species PL• ALO Cheater Road remainder of / berm, vegetated with shore pine, left as %reen A'/ ALO n residence FPL- resIdence ecHI61T NO. 4 FINAL RECLAMATION MAP Permit No. 34567 Creative Concrete 1420 N. Market Spokane, WA 99207 Drawn 3/25/95 appiicarrt's signature Figure 1.4. Final reclamation map of the site in Figure 1.2, showing how it will appear after reclamation. The site will accommodate a small office complex and wildlife habitat when it has been reclaimed. Cross sections A—A' and B—B' are shown in Figure 1.5. (Modified from Norman and Lingley, 1992. Not to scale; this map has been reduced to fit on the page.) 6" of topsoil placed on slopes A shoreline e ---- original surface cpoo- cattails, sedges, rushes Island �s e� 006• en original vegetation 41 5 -ft fluctuation in water table cattails, � sedges, 6 i'• (10/ J7 ' rushes shoreline Island Island topsoil placed on slopes 200f 1111. = 200 ft EXHIBIT N0. 5 CR05S SECTIONS OF FINAL RECLAMATION MAP Permit No. 34567 Creative Concrete 1420 N. Market Spokane, WA 99207 Drawn 3/25/95 711 A? _» applicant's signature Figure 1.5. Cross sections for the final reclamation plan of the mine shown in Figure 1.4. The types and placement of vegetation and the slope of the pond banks are shown. (Modified from Norman and Lingley, 1992. Not to scale; this map has been reduced to fit on the page.) Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 1.10 MAPS AS MANAGEMENT TOOLS GEOLOGIC MAP MAP UPDATES REFERENCE ❑ Other information pertaining to the permit and required by statute or special conditions of the permit. In addition to the preceding four types of maps, a detailed descrip- tion of the geologic setting and the type of deposit to be mined is sometimes required in geologically complex areas and for certain industrial mineral or metal mines. Current aerial photos or updated maps may be required as mining progresses. Norman, D. K.; Lingley, W. S., Jr., 1992, Reclamation of sand and gravel mines: Washington Geology, v. 20, no. 3, p. 20-31. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 2 Storm -Water and Erosion Control INTRODUCTION Protecting water quality and preventing erosion are two important tasks mine operators must address. Federal legislation and increas- ing concern and scrutiny by state and local agencies and the public require that mine operators pay close attention to even small or tem- porary discharges of storm water. The quality of those discharges, particularly their turbidity, is a direct reflection of how sediment on the site is handled. Expensive solutions to water -quality problems can often be avoided by incorporating storm -water and erosion -con- trol techniques into the mine development plan. For most mine sites, a good storm -water control system can minimize or even eliminate storm -water discharge during the operation phase. When mining ceases, erosion control is still necessary but should rely on tech- niques that can function without maintenance. Controlling storm water and the erosion it causes requires inte- grated management starting at the top of the watershed above the mining area. No single action will produce permanently effective results. A good system has numerous individual components that must function separately but also respond as a unit during storms. The failure of one component can cause other components to fail and ultimately affect water quality. Furthermore, control practices are likely to change over the life of the operation. Good planning and constant maintenance are needed to keep the storm -water sys- tem working at peak efficiency. This chapter describes basic techniques that can be combined to make a comprehensive storm -water and erosion -control system. Specific techniques appropriate to a given site depend on climate, topography, and the erodibility of the material present. The follow- ing general guidelines are applicable everywhere: (lir Carefully plan the areas to be cleared in order to minimize disturbance. or Retain sediment by using erosion -control BMPs. (li' Interrupt the flow of surface water to reduce velocity. (i" Use revegetation and mulching to stabilize cleared areas as soon as practical. or Isolate fines produced during mining and processing. (lir Develop a plan for maintaining storm -water and erosion -control structures. Follow the plan, and modify it as necessary to address changing conditions. MAINTENANCE Although water quality is ultimately the operator's responsibility, AND EMPLOYEE maintenance of storm -water and erosion -control systems must be a INVOLVEMENT priority for management and involve all mine employees. Managers Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 2.2 STORM -WATER AND EROSION CONTROL should explain to staff why controlling storm water and erosion is so important. An effective program requires that everyone be on the lookout for seemingly insignificant situations that can snowball into major problems if not addressed in time. We encourage operators and their employees to experiment with improving their storm -water systems. Operators should not feel limited to the information provided in this document. Common sense and innovation, with an emphasis on early recognition and response to erosion and sediment -transport problems, are the key to effective storm -water control. EROSION The rate of erosion is affected by four main factors (Fig. 2.1): • climate, which determines how much rain and snow will fall on a site, • soil characteristics, which determine erodibility and infiltration rates, • topography or slope, which determines the velocity of runoff and the energy water will have to cause erosion, and • vegetation, which slows runoff and prevents erosion by holding soils in place. Each of these factors plays a role in determining which BMPs should be used to control erosion on a given site. Erosion begins when raindrops displace soil particles. Rain- drops may combine into sheets of water and flow over the surface (overland flow) to cause sheet erosion. Topography then concen- trates water to produce rill and gully erosion. When water from rills and gullies combines, larger erosive streams and channels form (Fig. 2.2). A single raindrop may move a splashed particle 2 feet vertically and 5 feet horizontally. The velocity of a raindrop is more than ten times higher than typical surface runoff velocities, which means that soil particles are more likely to be dislodged by raindrop impact than by surface runoff. Once the particles are mobilized, however, much less energy is required to keep them suspended or moving. Figure 2.1. The rate of ero- sion depends on climate, soil characteristics, topography or slope, and vegetation. TOPOGRAPHY OR SLOPE VEGETATION BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 Figure 2.2. Topography cre- ated by different typesof ero- sion. Raindrop erosion affects any bare surface. If the water does not infiltrate, raindrops combine into sheets of water (overland flow) to cause sheet erosion, and sheets further concentrate to produce rill and gully erosion. Water from rills and gullies then combines to form streams and channels. (Redrawn from Beckett, Jack- son, Raedere, Inc., 1975.) STORM -WATER REGULATION 2.3 STORM -WATER The Washington Department of Ecology (DOE) and the Oregon De - REGULATION partment of Environmental Quality (DEQ) regulate the discharge of storm water and waste water into public waters. The Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin (Washington State Department of Ecology, 1992) is a good source of 'best management practices' (BMPs) and is available from DOE. For many mine sites, DOE requires a Stormwater Pollution Preven- tion Plan (SWPPP). As part of the SWPPP, an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan is required with the general discharge permit. Mine sites in Oregon that discharge storm water ffsite need a De- partment of Environmental Quality (DEQ) storm -water permit, which can be obtained through DOGAMI-MLR. This typically re- quires the preparation of a storm -water plan to be submitted with the storm -water application. Sites that use water for processing and do not discharge water from the site must obtain a Water Pollution Con- trol Facility Permit (WPCF permit) from DOGAMI-MLR. Sites that use water to process aggregate and discharge water from the site should contact DEQ to obtain an individual WPCF permit. TURBIDITY AND Erosion results in stream water that has high turbidity and a large SUSPENDED sediment load. Turbid, sediment -laden water can adversely affect SEDIMENT frogs and toads, clams, bottom -dwelling insects, and the appearance of stream systems. High levels of turbidity can also interfere with the feeding habits of fish, especially juveniles, and clog gills. Set- tleable solids can cover spawning gravels and suffocate eggs. Turbidity Turbidity is a measure of the amount of light that can pass through water in a straight line. Turbidity is reported as Nephelometric Tur- Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 2.4 STORM -WATER AND EROSION CONTROL Suspended Sediment bidity Units (NTU). A high NTU value means that little light is transmitted through the water because it is absorbed or deflected by particles in the water. Suspended sediment is composed of settleable and nonsettleable sol- ids. Settleable solids (sand- and silt -size particles)' are heavier than water and will settle in calm water. Nonsettleable solids (clay -size particles) take a long time (or distance) to settle out of suspen- sion—in some cases, years—and are the chief cause of turbidity. 411 In Washington, turbidity must not be more than 5 NTU greater than the background turbidity when the background turbidity is 50 NTU or less, or there must not be more than a 10 percent increase in tur- bidity when the background turbidity is more than 50 NTU. There is no standard for suspended solids or settleable solids in the water - quality regulations. For example, in the sand and gravel general discharge permit, DOE is allowed by regulation to give a facility a 10:1 mixing zone to meet an effluent limit. DOE sets the end -of -pipe effluent limit at 50 NTU and assumes that the background level for turbidity in the receiving water is zero. With a 10:1 mixing zone, this should result in a 5 NTU final effluent quality at the end of the mixing zone. 111 In Oregon, all sites that have point -source discharges of storm water must have a storm -water discharge permit. As of January 1, 1998, storm -water discharge permits for mine sites will be administered by DOGAMI-MLR. The general storm -water permit contains perform- ance benchmarks for storm -water plans. Benchmarks have been set for pH, total suspended solids, and oil and grease. If benchmarks are exceeded, the plan must be modified to address the deficiency. Tur- bidity must be less than 10 percent above the background of the re- ceiving stream or river. EROSION Assuming that the general guidelines given on p. 2.1 are being fol - CONTROL lowed, the two most important things that can be done to minimize erosion, sedimentation, and turbidity are preventing raindrop ero- sion and slowing surface -water runoff velocities in the bare areas. Practices that reduce erosion can be classified as either short- or long-term, although considerable overlap exists between the two. All require maintenance to be effective. They are described in detail later in this chapter. Short-term erosion -control methods include: 1 mulching, 1 slash windrows, 1 straw bales, 1 filter fabric fences, 1 jute netting and/or mulch fabrics, 1 brush sediment barriers, and 1 plastic coverings. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 TERRACED SLOPE EROSION CONTROL 2.5 BERMED SLOPE _ FURROWED SLOPE Figure 2.3. Small, discontinuous terraces, berms, and furrows can effectively slow runoff and decrease sediment transport. The relief is exaggerated for illustrative purposes. (From Banks, 1981.) Long-term erosion -control methods include: 1 vegetation, 1 diversion ditches, 1 rock check dams, 1 rock -lined ditches, and 1 contours, berms, swales, and ditches. Controlling On flat ground, raindrop erosion is typically not a problem, but on Raindrop Erosion slopes, more soil is splashed downhill than uphill. Covering steep slopes with plastic sheeting or mulch and/or revegetating bare areas reduces the erosion caused by raindrop impact. Gravel placed on berms or other bare areas at the plant site can also significantly re- duce sediment movement during heavy rains. Controlling Runoff velocities can be controlled by retarding flow and/ or break - Surface Runoff ing up or minimizing slope length. Retarding flow on a slope can be accomplished with organic debris or geotextiles. Small, discontinu- ous terraces, berms, and furrows on the overburden cut above the mine or on reclaimed slopes can effectively slow runoff and de- crease sediment transport (Fig. 2.3). Benches cut in overburden or other unconsolidated material likely to erode should be sloped into the hillside and away from the center of the bench to allow drainage to either side (Fig. 2.4). For reclamation, benches and terraces should have shapes and dimensions that appear natural so they blend in with the landforms of the area. Other methods for reducing runoff velocities involve long-term structures incorporated into the drainage -ditch system. (See Storm - Water and Erosion -Control Structures, p. 2.12.) These structures should be used in the interior of the mine in conjunction with set - 30 -42" SIDE VIEW im-25' maximum —r FRONT VIEW 1-5% slope from the center of the bench toward the Sides Figure 2.4. Benching and terracing of unconsolidated material to control runoff. Benches cut in overburden or other material likely to erode should be sloped into the hillside (side view) and away from the center of the bench (1-5% slope or grade) to allow drainage to either side (front view). (Modified from Law, 1984. Copyright © 1984 by Van Nostrand Reinhold Company Inc. Used by permission of the publisher.) Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 2.6 STORM -WATER AND EROSION CONTROL STORM -WATER DIVERSION '% stream diverted around mine; ties back into original drainage below tling ponds. Using only one method is generally not successful. At- tempting to trap or control sediment in settling ponds may not work unless some sediments have been dispersed and trapped upslope of the final pond or discharge point. Long-term erosion -control methods are more cost-effective if properly planned and coordinated with mining activities. At many sites, short-term erosion control will be needed until long-term con- trols are established. Some methods, such as revegetation, can be effective in both the short and long terms. Conventional storm -water control methods tend to concentrate flows using ditches, berms, and ponds. The best strategy for storm - water control, however, is to divert storm water and overland flow around the mining site and back into the original drainage (Fig. 2.5). Keeping `clean' water separate from `dirty' water is the easiest way to minimize the amount of water that has to be treated or con- tained. To do this, mine operators must know where and how much water enters the mine site during storms of various sizes. Depending on the size of the operation, the type and duration of precipitation, the type of material being mined, and the topography, passive control of storm water may be all that is needed. If storm water cannot be diverted around the site, that water should be isolated from the storm water onsite to provide the best possible protection of surface waters. Passive storm -water control techniques rely on gravity to do their work. Their goal is to disperse storm water at numerous locations rather than to concentrate flows, which then have to be treated to remove sediment. Passive control structures working are typically nonengineered and can easily be face built at any mine site. They should be placed to prevent overland flow over any significant dis- tance. Small operations on permeable materials (such as sand and gravel, cinders, and pumice) and sites developed on flat or gently sloping terrain are good locations to use passive tech- niques. These techniques will also work on quarry sites where the rock is highly fractured and/or the size of the disturbance is fairly original course / of stream reclaimed course \ of stream when mining is finished working face Figure 2.5. The best strategy for storm -water control is to divert streams and overland flow around the mining site. Not to scale. PASSIVE STORM - WATER CONTROL runoff /control berm sump pit drainage ----- drainage t---- ditch pump or gravity feed to permeable, vegetated area land application dispersing water to numerous vegetated areas Figure 2.6. Berms and ditches divert runoff to a collection sump from which it can be dispersed into vegetated areas at numerous locations around the mine site. Not to scale. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 Figure 2.7. The water bar or cross -ditch intercepts, directs, and disperses surface -water flow off a road to stable sites on the downhill side of the road. 1, The cross -ditch is cut into the roadbed from the cut - bank or ditchline completely across the road surface, extending beyond the shoulder of the road. 2, Physical blockage of the the ditchline is re- quired to deflect water flow into the cross -ditch. 3, The cross -ditch should be placed at a minimum skew of 30° to the ditchline—greater on steep road gradients. 4, The exca- vated material is spread on the downhill grade of the road, creating a berm. 5, Water should always be dis- persed onto a stable slope with vege- tation or riprap protection. 6, The cross -ditch berm should dip to allow vehicle crossover without destroying the ditch. 7, The cross -ditch must be cut to the depth of the ditchline to prevent water ponding and to ensure drainage from the ditchline. 8, An al- ternative to creating a water bar is to place a French drain in essentially the same configuration. The water bar and the French drain are shown together here for purposes of illustra- tion. They would not normally be used so close together. (Modified from Chatwin and others, 1991.) PASSIVE STORM -WATER CONTROL 2.7 small. Passive techniques can and should be incorporated into de- signs for larger sites that require offsite discharge of storm water. At most sites, roads and processing areas are the biggest sources of sediment because equipment is constantly being moved across them. Good road design and limiting traffic movement to specific areas can minimize disturbance and therefore sediment production. The techniques suggested in the next few pages can reduce the amount of contaminated water that requires treatment prior to dis- charge offsite. Applying an appropriate combination of these tech- niques may eliminate offsite discharge of storm water altogether. (f' Construct berms and ditches to divert runoff away from natural drainages and slopes and into vegetated areas around the mine site. If possible, select vegetated areas on gentle slopes. Doing this at numerous locations is the key to success (Fig. 2.6). (OP' Construct closely spaced water bars (Fig. 2.7) on roads susceptible to erosion, for example, ungraveled roads, roads with steep grades, and roads on highly erodible soils. Very little maintenance is required if water bars are properly constructed, placed in correct locations, and closely spaced. Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 2.8 STORM -WATER AND EROSION CONTROL Figure 2.8. Profiles of ele- vated haul roads with drainage ditches on the sides to keep runoff from entering heavy traf- fic areas where it is more likely to pick up sediment. (Modified from U.S. Bureau of Land Man- agement, 1992.) Figure 2.9. Establish and maintain a slope that allows water to drain toward the high - wall to collect sediment and help form wetlands or to allow water to infiltrate (note infiltra- tion gallery) if the area must be drained. This practice is not recommended if oil and grease are present as potential ground- water contaminants. Discharge to ground water may require a permit. (See also Fig. 2.26.) natural ground surface CUT -SLOPE ROUNDING natural ground surface__4 top width ----- kc9o�olT - - o c� 2" crown of coarse, durable gravel FLAT -BOTTOM DITCH flat -bottom ditch 2" crown of coarse, durable gravel Wide water bars, also called rolling ditches, can perform the same function as conventional water bars while providing smoother passage for vehicles. or Use water bars on exploration roads above the mine cut or other roads that receive only occasional use. or Elevate frequently used roads (Fig. 2.8), such as haul roads, and other heavy traffic areas to keep runoff away from these areas where it is more likely to pick up sediment. (i' Make sure roads are well covered with durable, coarse rock of appropriate size. or To retain storm water on wide working benches during the winter, use temporary berms. Ar On the pit or quarry floor, establish and maintain a slope that allows turbid water to drain toward a low point where it can be collected in a pond or a sump to allow water to infiltrate (Fig. 2.9). This practice stops sediment -laden sheetwash from leaving the pit and may create beneficial wetlands after CROSS SECTION PLAN VIEW highwall bench sump highwall bench infiltration gallery sump with infiltration gallery BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES pit drainage Open File Report 96-2 SEDIMENT CONTROL ON THE MINE SITE 2.9 reclamation. However, this method is not recommended if oil and grease are present to contaminate ground water. (i' In both excavation and processing areas, develop and maintain places that will readily accept runoff and precipitation. For hard -rock sites, fracture the quarry floors and/or leave shot rock in place. For gravel and soft -rock quarries, rip and/or minimize areas compacted by heavy equipment. (o- When processing rock on the excavation floor, make sure adequate drainage is provided. Fines produced during processing will potentially decrease permeability and increase runoff. This will likely result in an increase in the amount of turbid water to be treated. Ar Use filter berms built of porous materials, such as sand and gravel or processed quarry rock that contains no 200 -mesh or smaller material, to remove sediments. (See p. 2.19.) (i' Use dry wells or infiltration galleries and horizontal subdrains to allow storm water to infiltrate into the ground rather than run off the site. (See p. 2.20 and 2.20.) (o' Regrade, reshape, revegetate, and otherwise protect areas that have the potential to produce runoff or sediment. (!' Minimize the disturbed area by maximizing the area reclaimed each fall. (i' Establish and maintain vegetated buffer strips between disturbed areas and any natural drainage. Silt fines may be incorporated into the soil in these areas. or Minimize the amount of water requiring treatment by isolating ground water from storm water. Sumps and trenches or shallow wells at the lowest point of the excavation can dewater the mine area prior to mining. In Washington, any process water to be discharged to ground is regulated by the Department of Ecology. This includes process water discharged to dry wells and drain fields. SEDIMENT If sediment gets into the water onsite, it can become an environ - CONTROL ON mental contaminant requiring treatment. Removing soil fines from THE MINE SITE water can be a difficult and costly process. The best approach is to isolate the source of the sediment. Passive storm -water controls can reduce or eliminate suspended fines before they reach the settling pond system. Undersize or reject fines may be a saleable aggregate product and, in some mines, may be an appropriate or necessary soil amendment for reclamation. (See Replacing Topsoil and Subsoil, p. 4.5.) Soils with sand as the dominant particle size are coarse-tex- tured, light, and easily erodible. Water soaks into these soils rapidly. Silts and clays make fine -textured, heavy soils that are slow to erode Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 2.10 STORM -WATER AND EROSION CONTROL Figure 2.10. Hypothetical storm - water control at an upland processing area. IG, infiltration gallery. Silt fence • surface • . * • . '; drain • settling pond • —� rock * check44 ;;- * dam a n,: \44 Z i * product 'surface �� stockpiles 1i drain • surface drain - A berm silt fence settling to land - pond application area crusher CR055 SECTION silt surface berm fence / drain infiltration galleries subdrain road A' road and slow to drain. Clay -rich soils commonly cause the greatest im- pacts on water quality because they contain fine particles that settle slowly, travel far, and remain in suspension for a long time in settling ponds. Soils dominated by the clay fraction may require sev- eral large settling ponds in series. Flocculants can help settle clay particles. (See Flocculants, p. 2.26.) One of the best methods for removing sediment from water is onsite land application. Turbid water is sent through dispersal sys- tems that allow it to slowly soak into vegetated areas. The potential downslope/downstream impacts of land application should be as- sessed before constructing this type of control. (See Land Applica- tion, p. 2.25.) For effective sediment control, operators need to determine both the dominant particle size of the source materials and the amount of precipitation and/or storm flow that can be anticipated. Particle -size analysis of soil, overburden, and reject fines produced from processing may be necessary at some sites to determine if they are likely to erode into the storm -water system. Ideally, repre- sentative storm -water runoff from the site or from a similar site (if BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 100 STORM -WATER AND EROSION -CONTROL STRUCTURES 2.11 permit 17ounda71 O to settling pond Figure 2.11. An example of a storm -water control system at a quarry site. Figure 3.5 shows visual and noise screening techniques at the same site. mining has not yet started) should be sampled to predict the size range of the suspended particles that may require treatment. The two basic methods of removing sediments are by filtering and by gravity separation. Filtering may be accomplished by using: 1 designed sand, gravel, or rock graded filters with appropriate size gradations and layers, 1 undisturbed soils or embankments, 1 filter fabrics, 1 infiltration galleries, 1 French or trench drains, and 1 dispersal (sheet flow) through vegetated areas. Gravity separation requires that water velocity be reduced to facilitate settling. Settling ponds or dispersal on flat terrain (as in land application) use gravity separation. In still water, a sand parti- cle (0.05-2 mm) will settle at rates of 1 foot/second to 1 foot/several minutes. A silt particle (0.05-0.002 mm) may take several minutes to 6 hours to settle 1 foot. Clay particles (<0.002 mm) can take from 1 day to several months to settle. Pond surface area, retention time, and the particles' settling velocity determine the effectiveness of a settling pond system. Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 2.12 STORM -WATER AND EROSION CONTROL STORM -WATER AND EROSION - CONTROL STRUCTURES Conveyance Channels and Ditches Slash Windrows and Brush Sediment Barriers Figure 2.12. Details of con- struction for a rock -lined diver- sion ditch. The techniques discussed above and the structures described below .can be organized in many different ways. The erosion/sedimentation controls at a site will likely change over time as the configuration of the site changes. Examples of storm -water control systems for an upland processing area and a quarry floor are shown in Figures 2.10 and 2.11, respectively. The profile shown in Figure 2.10 illustrates possible proper drainage techniques in a processing area. The loca- tion and choice of the various structures and techniques are site- specific. Channels and ditches are permanent, designed waterways shaped and lined with appropriate vegetation or structural material to safely convey runoff to a sediment pond, vegetated area, or drainage. The advantages of open channels are that they are generally inexpensive to construct, can be lined with vegetation, and make it easy to trace the water. One disadvantage of grass -lined channels is that they may, if improperly designed, erode during high flows and become a source of sediment themselves. The design of a channel or ditch cross section and lining is based primarily on the volume and velocity of flow expected in the channel. If flow is low and slow, grass channels are preferred to riprap or concrete lining. Although concrete channels are efficient and easy to maintain, they allow runoff to move so quickly that channel erosion and flooding can result downstream. Grass -lined or riprap channels (Fig'. 2.12) more closely duplicate a natural system. Riprap and grass -lined channels, if designed properly, also remove pollutants via biofiltration (removal of pollution by plants). Engi- neered channels are recommended when the discharge will be greater than 50 cubic feet per second. In addition to the primary design considerations of capacity and velocity, other important factors to consider when selecting a cross section and lining are land availability, compatibility with surround- ing environment, safety, maintenance requirements, and outlet con- ditions. Most mine sites have to be cleared of woody vegetation prior to min- ing. Slash windrows and brush barriers can be easily and inexpen- sively constructed with the vegetative debris. These are effective for filtering coarse sediment and reducing water velocity. floodway vegetated with grasses slope typically main channel lining should be selected to remain stable 10-year/24-hour flow capacity tOr 100 -year/ 24-hour flood rapacity BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 Figure 2.13. Details of construc- tion of a slash windrow filter. (Modi- fied from Idaho Department of Lands, 1992.) STORM -WATER AND EROSION -CONTROL STRUCTURES 2.13 road, waste dump, or soil stockpile slash windrow 1.5' -- minimum minimum log to support slash Slash windrows are constructed by piling brush, sticks, and branches into long rows below the area of concern. The windrow may be supported at the base by large logs or rocks (Fig. 2.13). Brush sediment barriers require somewhat more effort, plan- ning, and expense, but they are generally more effective than slash windrows. Brush sediment barriers are linear piles of slash, typi- cally wrapped in filter fabric or wire mesh. Construction details are provided in Figure 2.14. (E Slash windrows should be used below roads, overburden and soil stockpiles, and any other bare areas that have short, moderate to steep slopes. Or Brush sediment barriers are most effective on open slopes where flow is not concentrated; they can help prevent sheet flow and rill and gully erosion during heavy rains. Straw Bales Straw bales are a well-known temporary erosion -control method (Fig. 2.15). They are fairly cheap and readily available. However, they are frequently installed incorrectly, making them ineffective. brush from clearing and grubbing 4" x 4" trench to anchor filter fabric FRONT Figure 2.14. Details of brush sediment - barrier construction. The effectiveness of brush barriers is greatly increased when filter fabric is used. (Adapted from Idaho Depart- ment of Lands, 1992.) filter fabric FLOW trench backfilled and compacted filter fabric FLOW SECTION 5' minimum BACK fabric staked at 36" centers within trench compacted soil twine 3' minimum Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 2.14 STORM -WATER AND EROSION CONTROL wire- or nylon -bound bales placed on the contour EMBEDDING DETAIL Figure 2.15. Details of straw - bale sediment barrier construction. (Adapted from Idaho Department of Lands, 1992.) angle first stake toward previously laid bale two rebars, steel pickets, or 2 x 2" stakes 1.5-2' in ground ANCHORING DETAIL Simply placing straw bales on the ground surface without proper anchoring and trenching will provide only minimal erosion control. Proper ground preparation, placement, and staking are necessary to provide a stable sediment barrier. Straw bales also require frequent repair and replacement as they become clogged with sediment. Only certified weed -free straw should be used. Straw bales used in conjunction with a check dam or filter berm constructed of sand and gravel, as shown in Figure 2.16, provide a more effective erosion -control system that requires less mainte- nance and can handle larger volume flows. oe' Straw bales are most practical below disturbed areas where rill erosion occurs from sheet runoff. Nir' Straw bales may be used in minor swales and ditch lines where the drainage area is smaller than 2 acres and/or where effectiveness is required for less than 3 months. Bio Bags Bio bags are woven nylon net bags filled with bark chips. They are about the size of straw bales and can be used as an alternative to straw bales for erosion control. Bio bags are much lighter than straw Figure 2.16. Details of con- struction for a straw -bale bar- rier combined with a gravel check dam. (Adapted from Idaho Department of Lands, 1992.) FLOW 441*/*/1.w*1111.11,17144:rir:F;;i:7!f*:IiiitililiaTIOIA"111110 semi -pervious straw bales staked securely PLAN VIEW filter berm outlet— more pervious embankment of sand and gravel for spillway SECTION VIEW BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 Burlap Bags Filled with Drain Rock STORM -WATER AND EROSION -CONTROL STRUCTURES 2.15 bales; they must be staked down to keep' them in place. They are more permeable, but slow water sufficiently to cause sand, silt, and clay to drop out. They fit the contours of the land, avoiding the bridging problem of straw bales. They hold together better and can therefore be removed more easily when saturated. Wildlife won't tear them apart to eat them, and they, will not introduce grass and weed seeds to the site. Bio bags may not be as readily available as straw bales. Their unit price is comparable to that of straw bales, but because they are smaller, more units are needed per application, making them slightly more expensive. They are not as biodegradable as straw bales. Woven burlap bags filled with drain rock can be used as an alterna- tive to bio bags. They conform well to irregular ground and are eas- ily installed. They do not need to be staked down and are less prone to washing away than bio bags. They can easily be created using recycled burlap bags and the aggregate that is already present on most mine sites. Silt Fences A silt fence is made of filter fabric that allows water to pass through. Woven fabric is generally best. Depending on its pore size, filter fabric will trap different particle sizes. The fence is placed perpen- dicular to the flow direction and is held upright by stakes (Fig. 2.17). A more durable construction uses chicken wire and T - posts to support the fabric vertically. It is essential to bury the bottom of the filter fabric to prevent flow under or around the fence. Maintenance is required to keep the fence functioning properly. Rock check dams or other methods may beneeded to slow water enough to allow it to pass through the fence. Although silt fences are more complicated and expensive to install than straw bales, they provide better erosion control in some situ- ations, for example, in coastal climates where hay bales decay rap- idly or in locations that are difficult to access with vehicles. lir Silt fences should be used below disturbed areas where runoff may occur in the form of sheet and rill erosion. Erosion -Control Erosion -control blankets are made of a variety of artificial and natu- ral materials, including jute, coconut husk fibers, straw, synthetic Blankets Figure 2.17. Details of filter -fabric silt fence construction. excavated trench filled with gravel Open File Report 96-2 2.5' woven wire backing FLOW 1' CR055 SECTION gravel filter fabric steel or wood post BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 2.16 STORM -WATER AND EROSION CONTROL 1' spacing of staples• bury upper edge of matting • Figure 2.18. Erosion blanket installation. (Redrawn from Idaho Department of Lands, 1992.) p• 8" minimum limits of mulched area extend matting over sides and top of mulched area 1' spacing of staples 3' minimum overlap 4" minimum overlap �►'�,.j�_ 5' spacing of staples along each edge and center of netting 5' minimum fabrics, plastic, or combinations (Fig. 2.18). Applying erosion blan- kets over large areas can be prohibitively expensive. However, small applications in areas that are oversteepened and/or prone to erosion, in conjunction with cheaper methods such as hydro - mulching and/or hay mulch and netting, can be very effective. The effectiveness of jute netting and mulch fabrics is greatly reduced if rills and gullies form beneath these fabrics. Therefore, proper an- choring and ground preparation are essential. (E' Erosion -control blankets can be used on steep slopes where severe erosion -control problems are anticipated. Where water infiltration is not desirable, for example, on the surface of an active landslide, an impermeable erosion blanket may be appropriate. In this situation, special care must be taken to pro- vide a place where the energy the water has gained can dissipate, such as a slash windrow, brush sediment barrier, or rock blanket at the base of the slope. Vegetation Vegetation absorbs some of the energy of falling rain, hold soils in place, maintains the moisture -holding capacity of the soil, and re- duces surface flow velocities (Fig. 2.19). The most effective way to use vegetation is to leave it undisturbed to prevent erosion and reduce the speed of surface water flows. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 Figure 2.19. Effect of vege- tation .on storm -water runoff. (Modified from Washington State Department of Ecology, 1992.) Contour and Diversion Ditches Figure 2.20. Placement and construction of contour ditches. DITCH CR055 SECTION 2H:1V or flatter slope Open File Report 96-2 STORM -WATER AND EROSION -CONTROL STRUCTURES 2.17 / // //' i // / / vegetation absorbs the energy of falling rain i i i / vegetation slows runoff and acts -/ as a filter to catch sediment roots hold soil particles in place vegetation helps maintain the absnrntive capacity of the snil (*' If a new area must be cleared for mining, clear only the amount needed for expansion within one year. Ar" As an area is cleared of vegetation, save the sod or slash and stake it down across the cleared slopes to temporarily reduce storm -water runoff until the area is mined. (f' Replace topsoil and replant mined areas as soon as possible. (!" Revegetate overburden and topsoil stockpiles over the winter or when they will remain unused for more than six months. (Topsoil should not be replaced in this situation; see Interim Reclamation, p. 3.1.) Contour ditches are constructed along a line of approximately equal elevation across the slope (Fig. 2.20). Diversion ditches guide water around unstable areas to prevent both erosion and saturation with water (Fig. 2.21), reducing the likelihood of slope failure. Both types of ditches should have a 1 to 5 percent grade directed away from steep slopes to the appropriate drainage or vegetated areas. Ditch channels may need to be lined to prevent scouring and minimize sediment transport. When their slope is greater than 5 per - contour ditches Should slope 1-5% toward an approved discharge area to discharge area BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 2.18 STORM -WATER AND EROSION -CONTROL STRUCTURES Rock and Log Check Dams Figure 2.22. Details of rock check dam construction. cent, ditches are typically lined with rock. Where slope stability is of con- cern, impermeable liners may be used. Rock check dams, described below, should be placed in diver- sion and contour ditches at decreasing intervals as the slope increases. AV' Contour and diversion ditches should be used to direct surface runoff away from disturbed areas and prevent rills and gullies from forming. runoff runoff overburden stockpile CR055 SECTION diversion ditch /// Figure 2.21. A diversion ditch can be placed upslope from an overburden pile to pre- vent saturation of the pile. Check dams are typically constructed from coarse crushed rock rang- ing from about 2 to 4 inches in diameter, depending on the water ve- locities anticipated. A check dam can generally withstand higher ve- locity flows than a silt fence, and the integrity of the structure will not be affected if it is overtopped in a large storm event. The tops of check dams are lower than the channel margins so that water can spill over (instead of around the sides) during heavy storms (Fig. 2.22). The effectiveness of rock check dams for trapping sediment can be improved by applying filter fabric on the upstream side. The bot- tom of the fabric must be anchored by excavating a trench, applying the fabric, and then filling the trench with coarse rock. This struc- ture functions like a silt fence, but it is more durable. Choosing the proper size of filter fabric mesh is important to minimize clogging. 2-4" rock covered with filter fabric filter fabric FRONT VIEW open -graded rock PROFILE BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 STORM -WATER AND EROSION -CONTROL STRUCTURES 2.19 Figure 2.23. Details of log check dam construction. (From Washington, Department of Ecology, 1992.) FLOW PLAN VIEW Concrete Check Dams BACK VIEW The filter fabric must be replaced when it becomes clogged. Gabions (wire baskets filled with coarse rock) and filter fabric would func- tion in the same manner. Where they are readily available, logs can be used to construct check dams instead of rock (Fig. 2.23). (i' Check dams can be used to slow surface flow in ditches. (i' Check dams are a common means of establishing grade control in a drainage to minimize downcutting. Concrete check dams (Fig. 2.24) can be an effective long-term alternative to straw bales, bio bags, and rock -filled burlap bags. They can often be constructed from waste concrete that is cleaned out of mixer trucks, but time con- straints may prevent this. Concrete check dams are most appro- priate along ditches that are relatively permanent. Filter Berm A filter berm (Fig. 2.25) allows the passage of water but not soil particles. It can be constructed of sand and gravel or crushed and screened quarry rock free of 200 -mesh or smaller material. Using pit -run sand and gravel or quarry rock is not recommended because silt and clay will be present. In the ideal berm, fine sand, coarse sand, and gravel are placed sequentially from the upstream side to Figure 2.24. Waste concrete check dam. It should be a minimum of 4 inches thick; length and width vary to fit application. Figure 2.25. Idealized cross section of a filter berm showing details of construction. • angle of repose (-1.5H:1V) FLOW f -- coarse sand fine sand water Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 2.20 STORM -WATER AND EROSION -CONTROL STRUCTURES the downstream end of the berm. The sand may need periodic re- placement as it becomes clogged with sediment. Ar Filter berms should be used in channels with low flow. Trench Subdrains and The terms `trench s French Drains ground surface interchangeably. A crushed rock, © po 000(>0Q .00°0 D40 foo 00 0 pDo 4 gravel, or Qftii pea gravel Dpo oo0 ac), (O% passing 910 0D0 00D h ` a 200 -mesh 0 oo 0©O 00 bo E3Q sieve) d �p D0©o� 7� o ©04 aCtCIa° � re: ADDapa p D 40©©00 0 ©.0©©�F daoo 0© -aa o 0„v <3'0000v D Oa pO 0 oD000 0 o 00 d • 20 0 0b0 Oo 000°�°oo o0 o di©aooa . \\ �j0o p st:10--O- - • ©o©0. ti0p0ao Ea CiDO. cc 1-3" 6" minimum diameter perforated pipe with perforations down polyester geotextile filter cloth }12" Figure 2.26. Details of trench subdrain construction. Infiltration Galleries and Dry Wells ground surface ubdrain' and `French drain' are. sometimes used French drain is a ditch partially backfilled with loose, coarse rock to provide quick subsurface drainage and covered with a compacted clay cap. A trench subdrain is a ditch backfilled all the way to the top with loose, coarse rock, which allows water to enter more freely (Fig. 2.26). Both types of drains are designed to allow the movement of water while preventing or minimizing the movement of soil particles, and both require an outlet to remove water. Ei- ther can be improved by placing perforated pipe in the drain. (See also Figs. 3.11 and 6.6.) Several filtering methods can improve the long-term effectiveness of these drains. Early applications relied on open -graded aggregate free of 200 -mesh or smaller material, but this may eventually become clogged. Current prac- tice is to wrap the perforated pipe in filter fabric so that sediment is trapped on the surface of the fabric rather than in the pore spaces. Because maintenance may eventually be required for subdrains, placement of clean -outs along the pipes is recommended. cilr Drains are used for dewatering landslides and agricultural lands and stabilizing highway road cuts. cam' Drains are also well suited for storm - water control. Infiltration galleries (or dry wells) are similar to trench subdrains and French drains except that there is no direct outlet for the water that enters them. These drains are deeper than they are long. clean, coarse drain rock 1-3" in diameter rock fractured by intentionally blasting below grade width is site-specific Infiltration galleries are created by exca- vating a hole— the deeper the better—which is then backfilled with coarse rock (Fig. 2.27). Typically, the holes are dug to the maximum reach (z-20' of the backhoe used. If possible, water percolation should be improved by frac- turing the bottom of the hole. This may require drilling and shooting. Backfilling to the sur - Figure 2.27. Details of infiltration gallery construction. (See also Fig. 2.9.) BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 STORM -WATER SETTLING PONDS 2.21 face with coarse rock allows heavy equipment to pass safely over these structures, making them well suited for installation around a crusher or screening plant. Because.. there is no outlet for water, these galleries should be located where fines and storm water accu- mulate. Grading should direct storm -water runoff to them. The exact size and number of infiltration galleries needed is site specific. Maintenance is typically limited to periodic replacement of the fill with clean rock. (d' Infiltration galleries are best suited for quarry sites or areas where natural infiltration of storm water is minimal and the water table is low enough to allow drainage. They should be used alone only where grades prevent connection to a gravity -flow subdrain or where volumes of storm water are small. (f' Infiltration galleries should not be used if oil and grease are present to contaminate the ground water. Wheel Washes Tracking of mud and rocks onto roads can become a problem at many mine sites during the winter. A permanent wheel wash can be installed near the exit to wash excess dirt and mud off truck tires. A series of railroad rails spaced 2 to 8 inches apart can be used to shake loose rocks and dirt while the vehicle is driving through the wheel wash (Fig. 2.28). Make sure that water used to wash trucks is treated to remove solids and turbidity before being discharged from the site. Figure 2.28. Wheel washes can be used to keep mud and rocks from being tracked onto roads. Dirty water can be sent to a settling pond, or the wheel wash can be cleaned out with an excavator. railroad rails AirAle / Arl' Ar "7" Ar ill 4) , ./ / to settling pond System (or clean out ditch with excavator water level STORM -WATER Most mine operations cannot rely solely on passive storm -water SETTLING PONDS control methods and must employ settling ponds as an integral part of their storm -water system. These flat-bottomed excavations can range from small hand -dug sumps to ponds covering several acres. They slow water velocities enough to allow sediment to settle out of suspension. The number and size of ponds needed will depend on the site conditions. Construction of numerous ponds in the upper part of the drainage systems enhances effective trapping of sedi- ments. For example, upper quarry benches and floors can be bermed so that they function as sediment basins during the rainy season. Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 2.22 STORM-WAI tM AIVU trcvaiviv LvIv 1 rsvL Figure 2.29. Details of set- tling -pond construction. The excavation method on the left is preferred because it is less likely to fail and cause flooding than an constructed embank- ment (right). YE5 original topography - pond excavated below grade 2H:1V or flatter loose fill NO 2H:1V or flatter pond held by embankment Two types of ponds are commonly used—detention and reten- tion. Detention ponds reduce the velocity of storm water, allowing sediment to settle before it moves off-site. Retention ponds are large enough to accept all storm water without surface discharge. Ponds can be developed by building embankments or by exca- vating below grade. Excavated ponds are preferable because they are less likely to fail than embankments (Fig. 2.29). Embankments have to be carefully constructed using the same techniques that would be used for constructing waste and overburden dumps and stockpiles (see p. 3.15). Ideally, ponds should be situated at the bot- tom of a slope. Soil or geotextile liners may be required where sta- bility is a concern. Many ponds are designed for the life of the op- eration, whereas others are used for only a short time. (i' Settling ponds are the best method of gathering turbid water to allow sediment to settle out. 411 In Washington, water impoundments that contain more than 10 acre- feet of water must be approved by the Dam Safety Section of the Department of Ecology. isIn Oregon, water impoundments with dams more than 10 feet high or with a capacity of more than 9.2 acre-feet of water must be ap- proved by the Dam Safety Section of the Oregon Water Resources Department. Configuration, Storm -water detention ponds should be designed to maximize both Location, and Size velocity reduction and storage time. That is, storm water entering a pond should spread out and migrate as slowly as possible toward the discharge point. Baffles constructed across the pond (Fig. 2.30) can reduce flow rates. A good rule of thumb is that the flow path of the pond should be at least five times the length of the pond. The inlet and outlet should be located so as to minimize the velocity and maxi- mize the residence time. Figure 2.30. Details of de- tention pond design. The pond on the left, which maximizes the length of the flow path, is preferable to the pond on the right, which does not keep water in the pond long enough for optimum settling. MORE EFFECTIVE LE55 EFFECTIVE %inflow Path aaa. aft, outflow 1 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 STORM -WATER SETTLING PONDS 2.23 If ponds are to be placed in the lowest area of the watershed, several should be constructed in a series. This will enable the first pond to slow the high -velocity waters coming into it and allow sub- sequent ponds to settle out sediments more. effectively. For maxi- mum treatment effectiveness, ponds should be placed as close as possible to those areas most likely to contribute sediment, such as the pit floor, the processing plant, and other areas of heavy equip- ment activity. There are several widely used methods for determining the ap- propriate size of storm -water ponds for a given site. Most methods begin with estimating the size of the watershed and estimating run- off using infiltration rates. This information is then used to calculate the amount of runoff on the basis of annual precipitation or a storm event of a certain size. Observations of flow characteristics and lo- cations made near the mine during storm events can be invaluable in developing a good storm -water pond system. However, choosing an appropriate size for storm -water ponds can be difficult without site-specific information such as a storm hydrograph—a graph of the volume of water flowing past a certain point during a storm event. When hydrographic information is not available, theoretical calculations are used to estimate the flow vol- ume for a given storm event. The calculations quickly become com- plicated because storm intensity and duration can have a significant effect on the amount of runoff. Also important, but even more com- plicated, are determining the influence of road systems, vegetative cover, and amount of compaction on runoff volumes. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly Soil Conservation Service) has developed a simplified method for esti- mating storm -water runoff. This method can work well if the limi- tations are understood, and it yields a good starting point for deter- mining pond size. For more information, contact the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service. There are many resources for information on designing storm - water ponds. (See the list of references at the end of the chapter.) For determining spillway designs and diversion ditch liner specifi- cations, Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds (Soil Conservation Service, 1986) is a good resource. (f' For most mining situations, storm -water ponds should be designed to handle at least a 25-year/24-hour event or larger. In Washington, RCW 78.44 sets a standard for water control: "Di- version ditches, including but not limited to channels, flumes, tight - lines and retention ponds, shall be capable of carrying the peak flow at the mine site that has the probable recurrence frequency of once in 25 years as determined from data for the 25 -year, 24-hour precipi- tation event published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration." The data for 25 -year, 24-hour precipitation events can be found in Miller and others, 1973. Furthermore, if the site is Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 2.24 STORM -WATER AND EROSION CONTROL located in a watershed that is prone to erosion, heavy storms, and/or flooding, design specifications may require planning for a 100 -year storm event. Maintenance Settling ponds must be cleaned out regularly to remain effective. Spillways should be kept open and ready to receive overflow during large storms. Settling ponds should be constructed and placed so that onsite equipment can be used to maintain them. In some situ- ations, sediment can be pumped out of settling ponds as a slurry instead of being removed with heavy equipment. Regardless of the method of sediment removal, all sediment removed should be placed in a stable location so that it will not enter waterways. Drainage The method of releasing water from storm -water ponds can be criti- cal in determining their efficiency. Standpipes, spillways, and infil- tration are the most common release methods. Standpipes are vertical pipes rising from the bottom of the pond and connected to a gently sloping pipe that passes through the side of the pond to the discharge point (Fig. 2.31). Antiseep collars must be attached to the pipe where it passes through the dam or settling pond wall to prevent water from flowing along the outside of the pipe. A grate or screen should be placed over the standpipe intake to prevent debris from clogging it. Spillways are overflow channels that are part of the construc- tion of all water impoundments. For small settling ponds used inter- mittently and designed for low maintenance, spillways may handle all water discharged from the pond. Where water is recirculated to the processing plant or where discharge is through a standpipe or subdrain, a spillway allows overflow during extremely wet weather or when the primary .drain system becomes clogged. Spillways should be located in undisturbed material and not over the face of a constructed dam. If the spillway is placed on erod- ible material, it must be rock lined to limit erosion that would com- promise the safety of the dam. Figure 2.31. Section through a berm showing standpipe with antiseep collar. (Modified from U.S. Soil Conservation Service, 1982.) emergency spillway standpipe with grated intake antiseep collar support for cantilever outlet (optional) core fill BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 STORM -WATER TREATMENT 2.25 STORM -WATER In some places, additional treatment is required to reduce the turbid - TREATMENT ity of storm water prior to discharge to public waters. (See p. 2.3.) When storm water contains abundant clay -size particles too fine to settle using conventional pond treatment, land application is the treatment of choice. Alternative treatment methods include the ad- dition of flocculants or the use of water clarifiers. Land Application Land application involves sending storm water through dispersal systems that allow the turbid water to slowly soak into vegetated areas. Land application may be a feasible technique to handle all sediment -laden water, or it may just increase storm -water storage capacity. Some of the most common distribution systems are perfo- rated pipe laid across a slope, level spreaders, and sprinkler systems. Where large flat areas are available and water dispersal is not an issue, water can be discharged directly from the distributor pipe, eliminating the need for a perforated application pipe. Turbid water must not be allowed to enter wetlands or creeks. Perforated Pipe. Plastic pipe with holes drilled in it can disperse a fine spray of water over a large surface area (Fig. 2.32). This method works well if the pipes are laid along slope contours; pipes laid per- pendicular to slope contours develop excessive hydraulic head at the lower perforations, resulting in uneven distribution of water and in- creased erosion potential. Level Spreader. A level spreader is a trench excavated along the contour and filled with gravel or other permeable material that will allow turbid water to percolate into the ground. Level spreaders work best where the surrounding soil is fairly permeable. Sprinkler Systems. Sprinkler systems use commercially available sprinklers to apply storm water. Sprinkler systems work well where: • There is sufficient hydraulic head to distribute the storm water from sprinkler heads. CR055 SECTION standpipe distributor pipe application pipe the flatter the slope, the better Figure 2.32. Typical land ap- plication system for storm water using a perforated pipe laid along a slope contour as a deliv- ery system. The length of the distributor pipe is not to scale. The application area should be a reasonable distance from the pond in a stable vegetated area that can handle the extra water. PLAN VIEW downslope distributor PiPe ` A sump or sediment pond grated overflow intake over standpipe application pipe (horizontal perforated PVC) Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 2.26 STORM -WATER AND EROSION CONTROL • The storm water contains only fine clays that will not clog sprinkler heads. • There is sufficient vegetation to prevent erosion at the sprinkler heads. Land application systems generally cannot handle the surges in water volume during a large storm because the storms often occur in winter when the soils may already be saturated. Assuming that soils will always accept the storm water can be a serious error. A simple infiltration analysis can determine the capacity and infiltration rate of a site's soils. The design of a land application system should as- sume that soils are saturated and that existing or planted vegetation will filter sediments. Concentration of the outflows from a land ap- plication system should be avoided because it may cause soil ero- sion and create problems elsewhere. Flocculants Flocculants are most commonly used to clean storm -water dis- charges or water recycled from rock -washing operations. Proper use of chemical flocculants can reduce the size of settling ponds re- quired for a given site. Most flocculants are not toxic to aquatic or- ganisms and fish. However, the supplier or manufacturer and the state water quality agency should be asked about the environmental effects of the flocculant chosen. Most flocculants are composed of high-density (heavy) organic polymers with a strong positive charge. The positively charged par- ticles act like a magnet to attract negatively charged clay particles. The adsorption of clay onto the flocculant speeds settling of smaller and lighter clay particles. Alum is an inorganic flocculant that works in much the same way as the organic flocculants. Chemical flocculants are designed for use with specific types of clay. The key to using a chemical flocculant is maintaining the proper mixture of flocculant and pond water and thoroughly mixing and agitating the flocculant mixture in the pond, making sure not to overagitate. Flocculants are commonly diluted in a large container before they are added to the settling pond. At least two ponds should be used to remove suspended solids. The first pond should allow slow mixing of the flocculant and the water to be treated, with a retention time of 20 minutes. The second pond should ideally retain water for 3 to 8 hours. Alternatively, the flocculant mixture can be injected into the waste -water stream be- fore it enters the settling ponds. Ponds must be situated where they can easily be cleaned on a frequent basis. In Washington, a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the Department of Ecology is required if floc- culant -treated storm water is to be discharged offsite. Water Clarifiers Water clarifiers are a mechanical method of separating solids and water. They consist of a series of closely spaced inclined plates. A flocculant is injected to assist in separation. These systems are BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 Figure 2.33. Two different types of oil/water separators used to remove petroleum products from storm water. The inflow must be free of sediment or frequent cleaning out will be necessary. The top system uses a clean-out spigot to re- move the oil as it floats atop the water. The bottom system uses an absorbent pad to soak up the oil. Design specifications will depend on site conditions and storm -water volumes. petroleum products clean out STREAM BUFFERS 2.27 INFLOW �� (1 sediment pond petroleum products absorbant pad OUTFLOW ;;,;;!x%yy °, Y/3 INFLOW sediment portd widely used as a final treatment for sewage effluent prior to dis- charge. In some situations, it may be possible to rely on smaller storm- and process -water ponds if a waterclarifier is used. Due to their initial capital costs, however, clarifiers are not used exten- sively in the aggregate industry. Oil Separators Petroleum products can be removed from storm water through the use of oil/water separators. The precise layout and design is usually site-specific but two examples are depicted in Figure 2.33. Oil/water separators take advantage of the fact that oil floats on water. They collect the oil on the surface of the water while allowing the water to flow through. The oil collected can be removed by absorbent pads or skimmed with a bucket. Contaminated absorbent pads and water should be disposed of according to DEQ rules in Oregon and DOE rules for Washington. Keys to effective oil/water separators: • There must be sufficient surface area to allow the petroleum to remain on the surface. • The water velocity and volume must be low enough to prevent oil/water mixing or overspillage. • The majority of settleable solids must be removed from the storm -water stream before it reaches the oil/water separator or the separator will quickly become filled with sediment. STREAM BUFFERS Vegetated stream buffer zones (areas that will not be mined, dis- turbed, or developed) vary in width from site to site. (See Permanent Setbacks or Buffers, p. 3.4.) Factors usually considered in establish- ing buffers are the purpose of the buffer, the size of the stream, and the rate of meander of a stream. The primary reasons to establish and maintain buffers are to: Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 2.28 STORM -WATER AND EROSION CONTROL STREAM DIVERSION Perennial or Permanent Streams Intermittent or Ephemeral Streams • Preserve water quality in the stream by filtering sediments through a vegetated buffer. • Protect the existing stream or river channel. • Protect riparian habitat. • Minimize the potential for turbid water/sediment discharges into public waters. • Maintain tree cover over streams to moderate water temperature to insure fish survival. • Prevent stream capture or avulsion because of lateral migration of a river into a pit. • Protect the habitat of threatened or endangered riparian and aquatic species. Stream diversion can be beneficial to water quality and mine opera- tions by isolating public waters from the mine activity. To insure the long-term stability of landforms, a highly technical approach to stream diversion has been required at large open -pit mines in the western states where numerous sections of land are being affected. For aggregate sites in the Pacific Northwest where the scale is sig- nificantly smaller, a less technical approach is appropriate because typically only a small portion of the total watershed is being im- pacted. Streams can be classified as perennial or permanent (containing water all year round), intermittent (containing water only at certain times of the year), or ephemeral (containing water only when it rains). Technical discussions and research on classification of drain- ages, drainage density, and reconstruction techniques for reclaimed mine sites are ongoing and complex. IMPORTANT: Before diverting any perennial, ephemeral, or inter- mittent streams, check to see if a permit is needed. In Washington, contact the Departments of Ecology, Fish and Wild- life, and Natural Resources. In Oregon, contact the Departments of Environmental Quality, Fish and Wildlife, and Geology and Mineral Industries and the Division of State Lands. Diversion of perennial streams is beyond the scope of this manual and will not be covered. If a perennial stream must be diverted, the proper state and local agencies should be consulted. Diversion of intermittent or ephemeral streams is not as critical as for perennial streams but may still require permits. The basic rule of thumb is to replace existing drainages and drainage conditions. In some mines, segments of drainages may be significantly altered, particularly those located in an upland quarry site. The same channel BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 STREAM BUFFERS 2.29 carrying capacity, length, characteristics, and gradient as the origi- nal stream should be maintained in the diversion. On quarry sites after mining, channel length may be shortened if streams are directed over the highwall to enhance reclamation di- versity. Channel stability is not generally affected by steepening the gradient or shortening the channel if the channel foundation is hard rock. Decreasing channel length or increasing channel gradient on alluvial or colluvial materials should not be undertaken without thorough analysis. If the drainage diversion will be short term, a rock -lined diver- sion channel may be all that is needed. For diversions that will be in place for several years, the diverted stream should be shaded, habitat areas, such as pools and riffles, rootwads or logs (see Fig. 4.12), should be created, and vegetation should be used to stabilize the banks (see Biotechnical Stabilization, p. 7.13). REFERENCES Banks, P. T.; Nickel, R. B.; Blome, D. A., 1981, Reclamation and pollution con- trol—Planning guide for small sand and gravel mines: U.S. Bureau of Mines Minerals Research Contract Report, 143 p. Beckett, Jackson, Raedere, Inc., 1975, Michigan erosion and sedimentation con- trol guidebook: Michigan Bureau of Water Management, 108 p. Chatwin, S. C.; Howes, D. E.; Schwab, J. W.; Swanston, D. N., 1991, A guide for management of landslide -prone terrain in the Pacific Northwest: British Co- lumbia Ministry of Forests, 212 p. Idaho Department of Lands, 1992, Best management practices for mining in Idaho: Idaho Department of Lands, 1 v. Law, D. L., 1984, Mined -land rehabilitation: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 184 p. Miller, J. F.; Frederick, R. H.; Tracey, R. J., 1973, Precipitation -frequency atlas of the western United States—Vol. IX—Washington: U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Atlas 2, 43 p. Washington Department of Ecology, 1992, Stormwater management manual for the Puget Sound Basin—The technical manual: Washington Department of Ecology Publication 91-75, 1 v. U.S. Bureau of Land Management, 1992, Solid minerals reclamation hand- book—Noncoal leasable minerals, locatable minerals, salable minerals: U.S. Bureau of Land Management BLM Manual Handbook H-3042-1, 1 v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1976, Erosion and sediment con- trol—Surface mining in the eastern U.S.; Vol. 2, Design: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Technology Transfer Seminar Publication, 136 p. U.S. Soil Conservation Service, 1982, Ponds—Planning, design, construction: U.S. Soil Conservation Service Agriculture Handbook 590, 51 pages. U.S. Soil Conservation Service, 1986, Urban hydrology for small watersheds; 2nd ed.: U.S. Soil Conservation Service Engineering Division Technical Release 55,1v.■ Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 2.30 STORM -WATER AND EROSION CONTROL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 r INTRODUCTION vim as POST -MINING RECLAMATION Figure 3.1. For a mine site beginning a center -outward excavation, the preferred seg- mental reclamation method is not possible, and post -mining reclamation then becomes the method by default. INTERIM RECLAMATION Operation and Reclamation Strategies Four general strategies can be used in surface -mine reclamation. Some mines may use all four of these strategies: Post -mining reclamation — reclamation only after all resources have been depleted from the entire mine. Interim reclamation — temporary reclamation to stabilize disturbed areas. Concurrent (progressive or continuous) reclamation — reclamation as minerals are removed; overburden and soil are immediately replaced. Segmental reclamation — reclamation following depletion of minerals in a sector of the mine (Norman and Lingley, 1992). In Washington, the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) en- courages segmental reclamation wherever site conditions permit. In Oregon, segmental reclamation is considered a variant of concur- rent reclamation. The Department of Geology and Mineral Indus- tries (DOGAMI) encourages concurrent reclamation wherever pos- sible. Reclaiming after all resources have been depleted from the entire mine is generally discouraged by regulating agencies because it re- sults in large areas being left unreclaimed for long periods, but it may be necessary at many quarries and metal mines and at some sand and gravel deposits (Fig. 3.1). Advantage • Complete resource depletion is more easily attainable in some instances. Disadvantages • Stockpiled soils will have deteriorated during the mine's life and will not be as fertile as the soils in place. • Revegetation will probably be more expensive and take longer. • The site generates negative public opinion for a long period. • The land is not providing a beneficial use while unreclaimed. • No reclaimed segments are available as test plots for revegetation. • Bonding liability is very high. Interim reclamation is done seasonally to stabilize mined areas or stockpiles and to prevent erosion. If a mine is to remain inactive for more than 2 years or if a stockpile, excavated slope, or storage area needs rapid stabilization, it may be appropriate to temporarily re- claim it by doing earthwork and using fast-growing vegetation, such Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 3.2 RECLAMATION AND OPERATION STRATEGIES CONCURRENT OR PROGRESSIVE RECLAMATION Figure 3.2. Concurrent or progressive extraction and rec- lamation of a shallow dry pit. 1, removal of topsoil; 2, spreading topsoil on graded wastes; 3, loading of overburden; 4, hauling of overburden; 5, dumping of overburden; 6, loading of product; 7, hauling of product; 8, reclaimed land. (Modified from U.S. Bureau of Land Management, 1992.) as cereal grains or legumes that establish quickly, to stabilize the site. However, topsoil should not be moved for interim reclamation; significant amounts are lost each time topsoil is moved. (See The Soil Resource, p. 3.10.) Advantages r Soil viability is maintained. • Fewer storm -water control structures are needed because the erosion -prone area is vegetated. • Air and water quality are improved in the short term. • Sites that use interim reclamation are often easier to convert to final reclamation than those that do not. Disadvantages • Areas may be redisturbed as plans change. • Cost may be greater than when material is moved only once. Concurrent or progressive reclamation typically involves transport- ing material from the new mining area to the reclamation area in one circuit (Fig. 3.2). This is the method used in strip mining minerals such as coal where a small amount of mineral is mined compared to a large amount of overburden moved. Concurrent reclamation is viewed by the public as the preferred technique. However, progressively reclaiming land that overlies known mineral resources can be wasteful. Thin soils may render progressive reclamation impractical or impossible on some sites. It is also impractical for those operations that must blend different sand and gravel sizes from various parts of the mine site to achieve product specifications. Advantages • Soil is immediately moved to the reclamation area. • Soil and subsoil profile are more easily reproduced than in other types of reclamation. • Materials are moved only once. ta overburden removal in /�� .�� . 50' -high 'ert benches mineral bed 0 I` ak (about 70' f� y thick) fei /- r l BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 SEGMENTAL RECLAMATION Figure 3.3. A segmental rec- lamation plan with four seg- ments showing segment size and direction of working. CONCURRENT OR PROGRESSIVE RECLAMATION 3.3 • Disturbance at any given time is minimized. • Offsite impacts are minimized in any given area. • Mined land can be reclaimed earlier for agriculture or grazing. • Bond liability tends to be low. Disadvantages • Progressive reclamation is generally not feasible in quarries or deep gravel deposits. • Progressive reclamation typically does not work if the water table is above the excavation depth. In segmental reclamation, the mine is divided into segments with fairly uniform characteristics and the order of mining and reclaim- ing these segments is determined (Fig. 3.3). Prior to mining, soil in the first segment is stockpiled to minimize handling and protect the resource. After resource extraction from the first segment, its slopes are reshaped according to the reclamation plan. Soil is then stripped from the second segment and spread on the slopes of the first seg- ment. Revegetation of the floor of the first segment does not occur until the area is no longer needed for mineral processing or maneu- vering trucks. Immediately prior to replacing topsoil and planting, the pit floor is plowed or ripped because most plants cannot grow in soils that have been overcompacted by heavy machinery. Prompt planting in the correct season with grasses, legumes, and trees will quickly produce a coyer that reduces erosion, retains moisture, and moderates soil temperature. Segmental reclamation works best in homogenous deposits where aggregate mining proceeds in increments. Typical working cells or segments will be larger in heterogeneous deposits (for ex- ample, fluvial deposits) where blending minerals from many places in the mine may be required (Norman and Lingley, 1992). Advantages • Topsoil for most segments is handled only once and is not stored. This reduces reclamation cost and preserves soil quality. • Final slope angles and shapes can be established during excavation rather than as a separate operation. • Clay and silt, which are critical for retaining the moisture and nutrients essential for vegetation, are less likely to be washed away because they are immediately revegetated. • The potential for establishing a diverse self-sustaining soil/plant ecosystem is enhanced because revegetation of reclaimed segments will be monitored as mining continues. • Restoration of chemical, physical, and biological processes is less expensive when reclamation is started as soon as possible and spread over the life of the mine. Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 3.4 RECLAMATION AND OPERATION STRATEGIES • Reclamation is less expensive because it does not require mobilization of personnel or equipment for the sole purpose of reclamation. • Short-term environmental impacts are reduced. • Bonding liability at any given time is minimized. Disadvantages • Thin soils may render this technique impractical. • It is impractical for those operations that must blend different sand and gravel sizes from various parts of the mine site in order to achieve product specifications. • Poorly planned segmental reclamation may result in disturbing more land per unit of mineral produced. 411 By law (RCW 78.44) in Washington, a segment is defined as a 7 - acre area with more than 500 linear feet of working face. Larger segments must be approved by DNR in a segmental reclamation agreement. MINING TO Mining the slope to the final contours reduces reclamation costs by RECLAIM eliminating some of the earthwork necessary for final reclamation. This can result in reclamation being completed earlier, the perform- ance security being reduced, and operating costs being lower in the long run. SITE PREPARATION Before mining begins, steps must be taken to mark permit bounda- ries, setbacks, buffers, segments, and storage and processing areas. Setbacks, buffers, and storage areas should remain undisturbed until reclamation. Keeping equipment and stockpiled materials out of these areas will help preserve them. Flagging, fences, or monuments will alert operators to areas to be avoided. If vegetation is present on slopes that might be unstable if bare, then those plants should be protected. Activity near trees and shrubs should be kept outside the area below the longest branches (or drip line). Permit and Disturbed Permit boundaries and the limits of the area to be disturbed (permit Area Boundaries boundary minus setbacks and buffers) should be identified with clearly visible permanent markers. Markers should be maintained until the reclamation permit is terminated. Permanent setbacks or buffers are necessary at many mines (Fig. 3.4). They are lands (that may or may not have vegetation) that remain undisturbed during mining to provide habitat and/or visual and noise screening. 4111 In Washington, the minimum permanent setback for quarries (mines in consolidated deposits) permitted after June 30, 1993, is 30 feet. This area cannot be mined, and the material cannot be used for rec- lamation. Permanent setbacks are not required for gravel pits (un- consolidated deposits) but may still be useful if the mine has close Permanent Setbacks or Buffers BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 Figure 3.4. Buffer strips of native vegetation protect adja- cent land and water and visu- ally screen the operation. Note that the flags marking the limits of the disturbed area show em- ployees where to stop mining. (Modified from Green and oth- ers, 1992.) 111 Reclamation Setbacks Setbacks to Protect Streams and Flood Plains Open File Report 96-2 SITE PREPARATION 3.5 TOPSOIL STRIPPING BUFFER neighbors or adjacent scenic resources. However, setbacks may still be required by local government. In Oregon, mine setbacks are site-specific and designed to provide lateral support for adjacent lands. Setbacks for the purpose of mini- mizing conflicting land uses are determined by the local land -use authority. Reclamation setbacks are lands along the margins of surface mines that must be preserved to provide enough material to accomplish reclamation. If the cut -and -fill method will be used to restore slopes (rather than mining to a final slope), the reclamation setback from the property boundary (or permanent setback, where used) should be wide enough to ensure that sufficient material is available for recla- mation. In Washington, the width of the reclamation setback for pits (mines in unconsolidated deposits) permitted after June 30, 1993, must equal or exceed the maximum anticipated height of the adjacent working face. Note: A setback equal to the working face will provide only enough material for a 2:1 slope. To meet the standards of the law for slopes of between 2:1 and 3:1, a setback of 1.5 times the vertical height of the working face is required. Streams and flood plains are dynamic locations that frequently ex- perience dramatic changes during flooding. They are prone to dam- age by, and slow to fully recover from, improperly planned and exe- cuted mining operations. Mining in or near streams and flood plains requires greater care on the part of the operator and is subject to closer regulation than mining in less sensitive areas. In Washington, no mine, including haul roads, stockpiles, and equipment storage, may be located within 200 feet of or on the 100 - year flood plain of a stream that has a flow greater than 20 cubic feet BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 3.6 RECLAMATION AND OPERATION I HAI EtiltS per second unless a Shoreline Permit is issued by the local jurisdic- tion (Washington Department of Ecology, 1992). Wide setbacks may be necessary for stream and flood -plain stability to preserve riparian zones and to prevent breaching of the pit at a later date. The depth of excavation and pit size may be limited in these areas. inIn Oregon, mining is not explicitly prohibited on the 100 -year flood plain. Setbacks are site-specific to protect riparian areas and stream integrity. Depending on flood frequency, bank stability, and the po- tential for lateral migration of the river channel, wider setbacks may be required or depth of excavation may be limited. Conservation In special instances, setbacks that will not be mined or disturbed Setbacks may be necessary to protect unstable slopes, wildlife habitat, ripar- ian zones, wetlands, or other sensitive areas or to limit turbid water discharge from areas that will be disturbed. Prior to mining a segment, all available topsoil and overburden should be stockpiled in separate, stable storage areas for later use in reclamation or immediately moved to reclaim adjacent depleted seg- ments. Topsoil needed for reclamation cannot be sold, removed from the site or mixed with sterile soils. Topsoil and Overburden Storage Areas In Washington, topsoil should not be used to create screening berms required by local government because this may preclude its timely use for reclamation. VISUAL AND The value of visual and noise screens cannot be overstated. The ad - NOISE SCREENS age 'out of sight, out of mind' is particularly applicable to mine sites. The more the public can be screened from the unpleasant as- pects of mining, such as dust, noise, and an unsightly view, the less likely they are to aggressively oppose mining operations. . The following are some ways to reduce the noise and visual im- pacts of mining (Figs. 3.5 and 3.6): (t' Plan mine development to minimize offsite impacts. Figure 3.5. Visual and noise screening techniques used at a processing area. place tree and shrub screen as close as possible to crusher residences noise berm (should be planted with trees and shrubs) •• to etuarry or pit BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES product stockpiles as noise screens Open File Report 96-2 residences VISUAL AND NOISE SCREENS 3.7 visual and noise screen established before mining begins permit boundarTi sound and visual berm created with overburden optimal location for crusher Figure 3.6. Visual and noise s system at the same site. creening techniques used at a quarry site. Figure 2.11 shows the storm -water control (i' Use existing topography as a noise and visual screen. (f' Store overburden in berms along the site perimeter. Plant vegetation on them immediately to reduce noise. (!' Plant trees and other visual screens—the denser and wider the better—well ahead of the mining to give them time to establish before they are needed. (f' Plant tree barriers as close to the noise source as possible and between noise sources and the neighbors. (t' Plant trees that will quickly grow tall enough to screen the mine. Plant shrubs to fill in the gaps, particularly if the foliage is sparse on the lower parts of the trees. Use evergreens if the site will be operated year round. ir Reduce noise by placing loud stationary equipment, such as the crusher, in an excavated area below the surrounding terrain. or Surround the crusher with product stockpiles to reduce noise. or Enclose the crusher in a building. or Muffle the exhaust systems on trucks and other equipment. Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 3.8 RECLAMATION AND OPERATION STRATEGIES Figure 3.7. Noise levels and hu- man response for some common noise sources. (Modified from Barksdale, 1991.) Table 3.1. Summary of noise measurements and pro- jected noise levels in decibels (dBA) for common mining equipment (Barksdale, 1991) Sound source Carrier deck Jet operation Jet takeoff (200 feet) Discotheque Auto horn (3 feet) Riveting machine Jet takeoff (2000 feet) Shout (0.5 feet) New York subway station Heavy truck (50 feet) Pneumatic drill (50 feet) Freight train (50 feet) Freeway traffic (50 feet) Air conditioning unit (20 feet) Light auto traffic (50 feet) Living room Bedroom Library Soft whisper (15 feet) Broadcasting studio Decibels Response criteria 150 140 Painfully loud 130 Limit amplified speech 120 Maximum vocal effort 110 100 Very annoying 90 Hearing damage (8 hours continuous exposure) 80 Annoying 70, Telephone use difficult Intrusive 60 50 Quiet 40 30 20 Just audible 10 Threshold of hearing Very quiet 0 Noise source Measurements Projected noise levels 1,000 ft 2,000 ft 3,000 ft Primary and secondary crusher Hitachi 501 shovel, loading Euclid R-50 pit truck, loaded Caterpillar 988 loader 89 dBA at 100 ft 69.0 dBA 63.0 dBA 59.5 dBA 60.0 dBA 56.5 dBA 58.0 dBA 54.4 dBA 63.5 dBA 60.0 dBA 92 dBA at 50 ft 66.0 dBA 90 dBA at 50 ft 64.0 dBA 80 dBA at 300 ft 69.5 dBA BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 How Noisy Is It? REMOVING VEGETATION 3.9 lir Use screens coated withrubber in the crusher, and line dump trucks beds with rubber. Figure 3.7 summarizes the noise level, in decibels (dBA), from some common sources. Table 3.1 summarizes noise measurements for common mining equipment. Noise -Control Noise -control measures, such as berms and tree barriers, can reduce Methods the noise experienced by adjacent landowners by as much as 12 dBA, whereas earthen berms with vegetation can reduce noise up to 15 dBA, depending on the size and configuration of the berms, the type and density of vegetation, and the distance to the listener. Visual Screens The least expensive visual screen is the existing topography and vegetation on the site. Plan to leave large buffer zones of trees and vegetation between the mining site and nearby roads and buildings. Narrower buffer screens can be created with vegetation (preferably native evergreens), walls, fences, or berms, although they are gen- erally less effective than buffer zones, which rely on distance for their effectiveness. REMOVING In a well-planned operation, vegetation is removed from areas to be VEGETATION mined only as needed and is preserved when possible to screen the site and limit erosion that may result in turbid water discharge. Disposing of Grass and small shrubs can be incorporated into the topsoil stock - Vegetation pile, and larger material can be chipped and used as mulch or to add organic matter to the soil. Burial of large volumes of woody debris is permissible only in areas above the water table because anaerobic decomposition of woody debris produces nitrates, which can de- grade water quality. Vegetation should not be buried in areas where building construction is planned because the soil may settle as the vegetation decays. In Washington, a permit from the county health district is required for burial of more than 2,000 cubic yards of debris. If burning will take place, a burning permit may be necessary. NIIn Oregon, a permit from the Department of Environmental Quality is generally required for burial of debris and may be required for burning. Transplanting Bushes and small trees, together with some surrounding soil, can be Vegetation scooped up using backhoes or front-end loaders with tree spades and transplanted to mined -out segments or areas to be used as screens. (See p. 7.9.) This technique is a cost-effective means of quickly es- tablishing a natural appearance in reclaimed segments, introducing seed trees, and providing screening. These plants are already adapted to the area. Moving the soil along with the plant protects rootlets and microorganisms that are important to plant health. Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 3.10 RECLAMATION AND OPERATION STRATEGIES Using Vegetation for Habitat THE SOIL RESOURCE is Figure 3.8. Soil profile devel- opment over time. Organic mat- ter accumulates in the upper horizons, and the rate of accu- mulation is dependent on the type and amount of vegetation present. Clay and the by-prod- ucts of chemical leaching accu- mulate in the lower horizons. (Modified from THE NATURE AND PROPERTIES OF SOILS, 8/E by Brady, ©1974. Re- printed by permission of Pren- tice -Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ.) Additionally, the soil may contain seeds or shoots of other vegeta- tion, which may spread across nearby areas. Vegetation that cannot be transplanted live can be set aside (with leaves, needles, and roots intact) for future use as fish and wildlife habitat. Placed in ponds, it can provide shelter for small fish, and collected into piles, it can provide shelter for small animals. (See Structures That Enhance Habitat, p. 4.12.) Salvaged coarse woody material, such as logs, should be distributed across a regraded area at the rate of about 8 tons per acre. Soil is one of the most important components of successful reclama- tion. Without soil, vegetation cannot be established. A typical soil is composed of approximately 45 percent minerals (sand, silt, and clay particles), 5 percent organic matter, and 50 percent pore space for air and water. Organic matter, air, and water in a soil allow it to support a tremendous amount of animal and plant life, most of which is invisible to the naked eye. The word `topsoil' is often used to describe a broad range of soil types. It may refer to high-quality river -bottom loams suitable for intensive agriculture or to the top layer of the soil resource, gener- ally the most fertile slice. In Washington, topsoil is defined in the reclamation law [RCW 78.44] as the "naturally occurring upper part of a soil profile, includ- ing the soil horizon that is rich in humus and capable of supporting vegetation together with other sediments within four vertical feet of the ground surface". In Oregon, soil salvage requirements are determined on a site- specific basis. d J',A •fi forests—natural vegetation N'ti-� AA* .110" 81 i organic matter accumulation -,,- k�.it` ',1,t-, 407-i zone of maximum leaching So acs 'leaf2o,: t ....�r_,f .,,...`i --- a ‘'...4'7(// .h r x`-44 V••i• • ohm/e -so ._ . .1 ............ - Ba a e • • aoh/ . 40,:i A `mer 74;P/ Ji ..,-it, • Ce A �I ,J So/%�.- vis. '1a%, .1% .0 relatively unweathered bedrock Mi FRESH UNWEATHERED ROCK TIME BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES WELL- DEVELOPED SOIL Open File Report 96-2 Soil Development Figure 3.9. A diagrammatic sketch of the residual soil pro- file that develops over time on a bedrock surface. The thickness of the layers can vary widely within a mine site and between nearby sites. No scale is in- tended here. (Modified from THE NATURE AND PROPER- TIES OF SOILS, 8/E by Brady, ©1974. Reprinted by permis- sion of Prentice -Hall, Inc., Up- per Saddle River, NJ.) THE SOIL RESOURCE 3.1 1 Soils may be defined in terms of soil profile development (Fig. 3.8). Weathering creates chemical and physical changes in bedrock or other parent material. Over time, layers or soil horizons develop. A soil horizon is chemically and/or physically different from the soil horizons above or below. A soil horizon may be leached of certain minerals, or it may be altered by the deposition or formation of other minerals. Plants decay and contribute organic matter to the top of the soil profile (topsoil). This is where organic matter accumulates and the maximum leaching of minerals occurs. Water moving through the upper soil carries clay and dissolved minerals to deeper layers (sub- soil). The conceptual soil profile in Figure 3.9 shows the major hori- zons in a soil weathered from bedrock. Climate is the most influen- tial factor in soil formation because it determines the degree of weathering that occurs. Thin, poorly developed soils are common in PREFERRED SALVAGE ZONE POSSIBLE SALVAGE ZONE TOPSOIL SUBSOIL BEDROCK FI dark -colored organic layer; original plant material recognizable dark -colored organic layer; original r • .o o'• o plant material not recognizable dark -colored layer of mineral soil mixed with organic matter (zone of leaching) lighter colored transitional zone; higher organic matter content than lower horizons and more clay than upper horizons lighter colored zone of elevated clay content; clay is transported by water from above zone of least weathering; accumulation of leaching by-products Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 3.12 RECLAMATION AND OPERATION STRATEGIES arid areas, whereas thick, well-developed soils are common in wet- ter areas. Topsoil can be identified by its dark color and organic content. It also has a high water -retention capacity. Subsoils commonly con- tain fewer nutrients. Overburden is the material removed to allow access to the material that is being mined. At most aggregate opera- tions, overburden consists of clay and silt that is poorly drained. Examples include volcanic ash overlying basalt or decomposed rock that overlies an unweathered rock. Soil Fertility Soil fertility is created by the recycling of organic matter and the weathering of minerals. Soil systems continually produce and recy- cle organic matter through the vegetative cover they support. Organ- isms in soil convert organic matter (through decomposition) to a form plants can use. Decomposition of organic matter also produces fairly strong acids that can react with minerals in the soil to extract base cations such as Ca++, Mg++ and K+, which are essential for plant growth. Unweathered geologic materials and subsoils are typically less desirable as reclamation media for mined lands because they lack the organic matter and elevated concentrations of dissolved minerals found in more fertile soils. Soil Types Rocks weathering in place form residual soils. Eolian, alluvial, or colluvial soils form from weathering of materials deposited by wind, water, or gravity, respectively. Alluvial soils, although they are gen- erally young soils with poorly developed soil profiles, are typically fertile because they include silts and flood deposits containing abun- dant organic debris. Soil Inventories The Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS, formerly the Soil Conservation Service) is responsible for classifying, naming, and mapping the nation's soil resources. Traditionally the mapping focus has been on the agricultural suitability and fertility of soils. NRCS soil surveys also provide information about erosion hazards, flooding potential, soil stability, and suitability for various uses, in- cluding drain fields, road building, timber harvesting, and housing development, as well as information on suitable trees to plant and potential wildlife habitat and recreational development. For most areas, Order III soil surveys are available as published or unpublished maps on a countywide basis. Unpublished surveys may be available at the local NRCS office; published surveys should be available at the local library. Order III maps are at a scale of 1:20,000. Boundaries are field checked, but most of the mapping is done in the office from aerial photographs. In an Order III survey, soils are grouped into `associations' and `complexes' on the basis of genetic similarities. That is, if soils have the same parent material and have been subjected to the same soil - forming processes, they may be grouped together on an Order III BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 REMOVING AND STORING TOPSOIL AND SUBSOILS 3.13 Survey map, even though the depth of the individual soils in the group may be significantly different. For mine development and reclamation, it is important to know how much soil is present and where it is in the project area. Order I and Order II soil surveys can provide this information. They are commonly available for areas of intensive agricultural production and can be obtained from the NRCS, DOGAMI, or DNR. On-site soils investigations can be accomplished with a backhoe or a shovel and a hand auger. If the mine operator is doing the soil investigation, the NRCS, DOGAMI, or DNR should be contacted for information about soil types at the mine site and for recommen- dations on how to handle them. Understanding the approximate fer- tility level of each soil type and different soil horizons will contrib- ute to wise use of the resource. REMOVING AND Topsoil, subsoil, and overburden should be removed separately be - STORING TOPSOIL fore mining and retained for reclamation. Placing several inches of AND SUBSOILS soil with elevated organic matter over a lower quality subsoil mate- rial can make a dramatic difference in revegetation success. If ade- quate soils are not reserved to accomplish the approved reclamation plan, miners may need to import soil—often at considerable ex- pense. It is important to ensure that soil resources are protected and used to their maximum potential, because few mine operations can afford to import soils. The pore space in soil is essential for the proliferation of bacte- ria, fungi, algae, and soil -dwelling insects and worms. One gram of soil may contain as many as 3 billion soil bacteria. Consequently, soils must be properly handled and stored to protect both the pore spaces and soil organisms. Porosity, or structure, can be perma- nently damaged if soils are stripped when they are excessively wet or dry. This is a particular problem with clay -rich soils and loams. Stockpiling aggregate on top of a soil stockpile, compaction caused by the passage of heavy equipment, burial by overburden, or crea- tion of large soil stockpiles can destroy the dynamic qualities of a soil. Live Topsoiling 'Live topsoiling' means placing stripped soil directly onto an area that has been mined out or backfilled or on a reshaped surface for reclamation (Fig. 3.10). Soil should be spread with a minimum of equipment traffic to avoid compaction and protect pore spaces. Be- cause the soil contains viable seeds and the soil organisms are relo- cated to the same ecological niche, revegetation can occur within a short time (Munshower, 1994). 1111 In both Washington and Oregon, live topsoiling is recommended wherever possible. However, live topsoiling may not be practical, particularly in quarry operations where concurrent reclamation op- portunities are limited or where the soil contains noxious or unde- sirable weeds and the site is being reclaimed to cultivated cropland. Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 3.14 RECLAMATION AND OPERATION STRATEGIES Figure 3.10. Topsoil han- dling in a four -segment mine. Segment 1 is the first to be mined. Its topsoil is removed and stored just inside segment 4. When mining of segment 1 is finished, topsoil is taken from segment 2 and place directly on segment 1 (live topsoiling). The topsoil from segment 3 is placed on segment 2. The top- soil from segment 4 is placed on segment 3. When mining is completed, the stockpiled top- soil from segment 1 is used to reclaim segment 4. mining direction ACTIVE MINING AREA Stripping Before soils can be stripped and stockpiled, areas to be stripped and and Salvage storage areas should be marked. (See Fig. 1.3.) Equipment operators who are stripping soils by horizon or separating soils from subsoils should have enough information to identify and segregate topsoil, subsoil, and overburden. A color change is typically the most obvi- ous indicator of a change in soil horizons. Soil horizons that contain a fairly large amount of organic matter can generally be recognized in the field by their darker color and position at the top of the soil profile. Another technique is to identify stripping depths on survey stakes placed on 100 to 200 foot centers. It is best to move the soil only once. This also reduces operating costs. By law in Washington [RCW 78.44], topsoil needed for reclamation cannot be sold or mixed with sterile soil unless specific authority has been granted in the permit documents. Subsoils capable of support- ing vegetation must be salvaged to a depth of 4 feet and stored in a stable area if not immediately used for reclamation. MIIn. Oregon, subsoil salvage depth must be adequate to accomplish reclamation according to the approved plan. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 Constructing Storage Piles WASTE AND OVERBURDEN DUMPS AND STOCKPILES Site Selection Site Preparation WASTE AND OVERBURDEN DUMPS AND STOCKPILES 3.15 Choosing an appropriate method for storage pile construction is also important. Continually driving heavy equipment over the soil while constructing scraper -built or end -dump piles can permanently dam- age soil structure and reduce the pore space essential for micro- organisms. This type of construction should be avoided. Soil storage piles should be constructed to minimize size and compaction so soil organisms can `breathe'. Extensive experience and research have shown that the size of soil storage piles can sig- nificantly affect soil viability (Allen and Friese, 1992). Soil storage piles should be no more than 25 feet in height. Available plant ma- terial such as grasses, shrubs, and chipped tree limbs should be in- corporated into the piles. However, if large amounts of woody ma- terial are added, soil may become nitrogen deficient. Soil storage piles should be revegetated. They are good areas to do test seedings to prepare for final revegetation. To retain soil mi- crobes deep in the soil pile, it can be aerated by deep ripping, dis- cing, and tilling every 2 or 3 years. Recent research (Allen and Friese, 1992) has shown that soil microbes can be regenerated in sterile soils by spotting live soil throughout the area and by using inoculated trees and shrubs. Mi- crobes will spread to other areas in a relatively short time (weeks to a few months). Large amounts of overburden exist at many mine sites, and opera- tions frequently create large volumes of waste rock. Dumps and stockpiles are created to temporarily or permanently store both over- burden and unwanted material separated from the salable product on the site, for example, crusher scalpings, oversize material, and reject fines. During reclamation, overburden and waste can be used to cre- ate landscape diversity. It is important to plan the location of over- burden or waste piles so they can be used in reclamation. Dumps and stockpiles can result in landslides and increased sedi- ment load that may pollute nearby waters if they are not properly designed and maintained. Careful planning is necessary to ensure that dumps and stockpiles are placed in a geologically stable loca- tion, and that they can be revegetated successfully. Locations next to waterways or springs or seeps will probably not be acceptable. Ideally, from both construction and water -quality protection stand- points, these materials should be removed and placed only during dry periods. Storage sites for overburden and waste rock should be properly pre- pared. All vegetation, soil, and subsoil must be stripped from the site prior to dump construction. Any buried vegetation will rot; this soft material provides little resistance to sliding and increases the potential for downslope movement. Slash cleared from the stockpile area can be used below the stockpile to filter runoff. (See Slash Windrows and Brush Sediment Barriers, p. 2.12.) Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 3.16 RECLAMATION AND OPERATION STRATEGIES Figure 3.11. Proper proce- dures for waste dump construc- tion. Trees removed from the site are used to construct a slash windrow to filter runoff. A blanket drain (a French drain that covers a slope instead of being confined to a trench; see Trench Subdrains and French drains, p. 2.20 and Fig. 6.6.) is laid down first to prevent the buildup of water, and the dump itself is constructed of thin, compacted layers. Dump and Stockpile Construction diversion ditch soil storage berm slash windrow shaped crown overburden in compacted lifts Before overburden is stockpiled, all vegetation should be cleared, and the drainage for the pile must be prepared. Undrained and uncompacted fill dumped over vegetation without drainage is prone to mass wasting and landslides that waste topsoil. Soil placed over permanent waste piles will promote self-sustaining vegetation. (See Topsoil and Overburden Storage Areas, p. 3.6.) Large dumps and stockpiles or those located on steep ground should have diversion ditches constructed above them (Fig. 3.11B). (See Contour and Diversion Ditches, p. 2.17.) A blanket drain should be installed on any slopes where drainage problems are an- ticipated (Fig. 3.11C). (See also Trench Subdrains and French Drains, p. 2.20.) Stability is important, particularly for dumps that will become per- manent features. Both dumps and stockpiles should be constructed using thin, compacted layers (Fig. 3.11D). Before compaction, lay- ers may be as thin as 12 to 18 inches. When compacted by rubber tired equipment, they will result in a much more stable dump than one prepared by simply end -dumping or pushing with a bulldozer. Dumps and stockpiles on hillsides or filling ravines need a prop- erly constructed toe to key the pile into competent material. The toe should have a blanket drain to prevent the buildup of water. (See Fig. 6.6.) Dumps and stockpiles should be shaped to prevent water from ponding. The top should be sloped to direct runoff to a drainage system and to avoid critical areas, or it should be crowned to dis- perse runoff around the perimeter. The slopes of the dump or stock- pile should be constructed with appropriate runoff control struc- tures. The top and overall shape should be rounded off to blend into the natural topography. (See Slope Stabilization, p. 6.6.) Most final slopes should be between 2H:1V and 3H:1 V. Gener- ally, the flatter the slope, the more stable it will be and the easier to access for reclamation. Terraces should be constructed at 30 -foot BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 REFERENCES 3.17 intervals vertically, or other methods of slope shaping should be use to reduce water velocities. When shaping is complete, the dump or stockpile should be seeded and mulched to establish vegetation. DUST CONTROL Neighbors often complain about dust from mining operations. Dust is generated by the crusher, rock drills, and other mining equipment, and from disturbed areas, including haul roads and stockpiles. •In Washington, the Department of Ecology or the local air pollution control authority has review and permit authority over rock crush- ers, batch plants, fugitive dust emissions from mining operations, and haul roads. Contact these agencies for further information. irifIn Oregon, emissions from on-site processing require a permit from the Department of Environmental Quality. Controlling fugitive dust is usually a matter of frequent application of water or chemicals. Water trucks are typically used for conveying these liquids. However, sprinklers and irrigation pipe installed in the berms alongside haul roads can significantly decrease dust with- out the expense of using a water truck several times a day. Chemical dust suppressants, such as magnesium chloride, are appro- priate where water is in short supply. Most chemical dust suppres- sants require repeated application. There are numerous chemical dust suppressants designed for a variety of uses. The local and state water -quality agency can provide information about appropriate chemicals and how to apply them. Controlling Dust with Water Controlling Dust with Chemicals REFERENCES Allen, F. A.; Friese, C. F., 1992, Mycorrhizae and reclamation success—Impor- tance and measurement. In Chambers, J. C.; Wade, G. L., editors, Evaluating reclamation success—The ecological considerations—Based on a series of in- vited papers: U.S. Forest Service Northeastern Forest Experiment Station Gen- eral Technical Report NE 164, p. 17-25. Barksdale, R. D., editor, 1991, The aggregate handbook: National Stone Associa- tion [Washington, D.C.], 1 v. Brady, N. C., 1974, The nature and properties of soils; 8th ed.: Macmillan, 639 p. Green, J. E.; Van Egmond, T. D.; Wylie, Carolyn; Jones, Ian; Knapik, Len; Pater- son, L. R., 1992, A user guide to pit and quarry reclamation in Alberta: Alberta Land Conservation and Reclamation Council Reclamation Research Technical Advisory Committee, 137 p. Norman, D. K.; Lingley, W. S., Jr., 1992, Reclamation of sand and gravel mines: Washington Geology, v. 20, no. 3, p. 20-31. Munshower, F. F., 1994, Practical handbook of disturbed land revegetation: Lewis Publishers, 265 p. U.S. Bureau of Land Management, 1992, Solid minerals reclamation hand- book—Noncoal leasable minerals, locatable minerals, salable minerals: U.S. Bureau of Land Management BLM Manual Handbook H-3042-1, 1 v. Washington Department of Ecology, 1992, Stormwater management manual for the Puget Sound Basin–The technical manual: Washington Department of Ecology Publication 91-75, 1 v. ■ Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 3.18 RECLAMATION AND OPERATION STRATEGIES BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 Restoring Landforms INTRODUCTION Land shaping is an important but often underemphasized part of the reclamation process. Common objectives for land shaping include: 1 minimizing erosion, 1 reducing slope angles to provide stability for post -mining development, 1 contouring aesthetically pleasing landforms to blend with the surrounding area, forming shapes and slopes consistent with the subsequent use planned for the site (Fig. 4.1), 1 increasing revegetation success, and providing diverse wildlife and fish habitat. SUBSEQUENT USE Reclamation of a mine site, and thus its subsequent use, can be driven by high land values, zoning, and/or environmental protection and the state regulations that set minimum standards for reclamation• and water quality. In urban areas, high land values motivate miners to reclaim for intensive use. For example, in Portland, Oregon, gravel pits are typi- cally backfilled with construction waste and developed as building sites. Building sites can also be developed directly without back- filling. Government-owned sites where the water table is high often become parks with ponds. In rural areas, less intensive uses such as wildlife habitat, agriculture, or timber production can also be prof- itable. (See Agricultural and Forestry Subsequent Uses, p. 7.17.) Imagination and careful planning can yield a wide variety of landforms that make the site better for a specific use than it was prior to mining. For example, wetlands and fishing ponds can be created from rock quarries and gravel pits if proper water conditions exist. Many agricultural sites have been enhanced by selective gravel re- moval, making them easier to irrigate or till after gravel -rich knobs 0:0 slope 30:1 20:1. 10:1 7:1 4.1 21 1:1 ZONE OF HIGH-INTENSITY USE MODERATE - INTENSITY USE LOW - INTENSITY USE LIMITED - INTENSITY U5E Figure 4.1. The steepness of the final slope strongly influences the intensity of proposed land use for reclaimed mine sites. Fewer options are available on steeper slopes. (From Green and others, 1992.) Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 4.2 RESTORING LANDFORMS Figure 4.2. A, profile of com- mon slope types. B, plan view of different stockpile designs. Complex slopes are preferred. have been selectively removed from the fields. Mining can level ar- eas of hilly topography making them more suitable for agricultural or industrial uses. In eastern Oregon and Washington, many of the mine sites developed on rangeland are returned to their previous condition by revegetation, generally with native species. In Washington, RCW 78.44.031 identifies subsequent use as a cri- terion for guiding the reclamation scheme, while RCW 78.44.141 sets forth reclamation standards that must be met for various uses. MEIn Oregon, the subsequent use of the mined land must be compatible with the local comprehensive land -use plan. SLOPE TYPES Profiles of four basic slope types are shown in Figure 4.2. Convex slopes erode rapidly and yield the most sediment. Concave slopes are less affected by erosion and typically yield less sediment than convex slopes. The steepness of the slope is a major factor influenc- ing the amount of sediment production. Surface -water runoff veloci- ties are higher on longer, steeper slopes, and more soil particles are typically dislodged and transported. Sediment production on uni- form slopes is intermediate between concave and convex slopes. Long uniform slopes should be avoided because they can be se- verely eroded in a single storm event. oir Complex slopes generally produce the least sediment and are the most stable. Complex slopes are preferred for mine site reclamation. CREATING SLOPES Where the goal of reclamation is to restore natural slopes that blend with surrounding landforms, sinuous slopes that are curved in plan and section and irregular in profile should be created (Fig. 4.3). Ir- regular slopes will intercept more runoff and reduce its velocity, trap seeds, and speed revegetation. Rectilinear slopes should be avoided because they are prone to sheet erosion and gullying and because they look unnatural. Natural -looking topography can be achieved early on through a well-planned extraction operation and equipment operators who fully understand the post -mining use of the site. Sinuous slopes can be formed by mining to the prescribed angles (generally the most BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 Figure 4.3. A key element in restoring topography is creat- ing natural -looking slopes that blend with the surrounding landforms. Rectilinear slopes (top) are inappropriate for rec- lamation in unconsolidated materials. Slopes should be curved in plan and section and irregular in profile (bottom). (Redrawn from Green and oth- ers, 1992.) Figure 4.4. Slopes are ex- pressed as the ratio of horizon- tal run to vertical rise. This dia- gram shows the percent slope of several common ratios. (Re- drawn from Green and others, 1992.) Open File Report 96-2 CREATING SLOPES 4.3 inexpensive means of reclamation) or by using the cut -and -fill method, which requires a reclamation setback or material from over- burden stockpiles. (See Reclamation Setbacks, p. 3.5.) Backfilling to create appropriate slopes can be the most expensive reclamation technique when it is done after mining. A reclaimed site should consist entirely of stable slopes. A rule of thumb is that slopes are unstable if pioneer plants cannot establish themselves naturally, if the slopes ravel or show signs of soil creep and tension cracks, or if landsliding is noted. (See Identifying Un- stable Slope Conditions, p. 6.3.) In general, unconsolidated materi- als are stable and can sustain vegetation at slopes of 3 feet horizontal to 1 foot vertical (commonly expressed as 3H:1 V) (Fig. 4.4) (Nor- man and Lingley, 1992). For variety, a few locally steeper areas (1.5H:1 V to 2H:1 V) may be created (if stable), especially if they mimic locally steeper slopes nearby. However, steep slopes greatly increase the potential for ero- sion. Long, steep slopes produce more and faster runoff and allow less infiltration than a series of short, gentle slopes separated by Percent slope 1007. 337, 207. 10% Slope ratio (run to rise) 10 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 4.4 RESTORING LANDFORMS Figure 4.5. Dozer tracking can re- duce runoff and enhance revegeta- tion. Tracked equipment should be run up and down a slope, not across, to increase slope roughness. (Modi- fied from Law, 1984.) PRE-EXI5TING TERRAIN • Oe" °i . _ i� •. • • �.® - • Dozer tracks create • . ✓ j! j y /,G grooves perpendicular i `/ i� -'"•-• . to the direction of slope- • �j // 00" and help slow runoff.• �j /� benches or terraces. New drainages or contour ditches should be es- tablished within the reclaimed area to contain the expected surface water runoff. Any water diverted during reclamation or land shaping should be directed to the drainage it occupied before mining to pre- vent drying up or flooding of areas downstream. This water should have approximately the same velocity, volume, and quality as the drainage it is entering. Some guidelines for slope shaping are: (i' Slopes steeper than 3H:1 V should be kept shorter than 75 feet by creating breaks in slope, such as irregular terraces, berms, or basins. (See Figs. 2.3 and 2.4.) (f' If the site is to be dry after mining, then pit floors should be graded to a slope of 2 to 5 percent to promote drainage. (o' Some mounds, hills, and depressions can be left on pit floors to vary the topography for subsequent use (Norman and Lingley, 1992). lir In the final grading, bulldozers or other tracked equipment should be run up and down a slope, not across it, to increase slope roughness (Fig. 4.5). (Older bulldozers are generally unable to back up sand and gravel slopes steeper than 3H:1 V.) (f' Final slopes should be revegetated immediately to minimize erosion. REGRADING After the land has been shaped, it should be regraded to produce a rough, irregular surface, particularly on slopes (Fig. 4.5). This en- sures that replaced soil is keyed into the substrate to slow erosion. Roads, pit floors, and stockpile areas should be ripped at close intervals to provide drainage prior to replacing the soil. Placing a BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 REPLACING TOPSOIL AND SUBSOIL 4.5 loose, friable soil over a compacted base does not increase soil mois- ture -holding capacity, drainage, or slope stability and will result in inadequate root development and penetration. A good rule of thumb is that ripper spacing should be less than or equal to the depth of ripping. REPLACING Understanding the soil resources of a site and the post -mining land TOPSOIL AND use will lead to effective site development, using the best manage - SUBSOIL ment practices for soil replacement. The type of vegetation planned for reclamation may dictate soil replacement depth. Deeper soils will be needed for agricultural production or establishing trees, par- ticularly for timber production. More important than the depth of the replaced soil is how replacement is done. Soils should not be com- pacted. The less equipment is run over soils, the better. The most skilled and experienced equipment operators should be used for soil replacement—their skill will pay off. Topsoil should be replaced on slopes as soon as possible after restoring topography. Soil horizons from stockpiles should be re- placed separately in the proper order for best use of the resource. After the topsoil is spread, it should be tilled to construct a proper seed bed. A minimum soil replacement depth of 12 inches of topsoil is recommended for reclamation for most post -mine uses. Upland sites may have soil depths, prior to mining, of 6 inches or less. On these sites, reject soil fines and rock fines produced during rock process- ing may be used to supplement pre-existing soil resources as a growth medium. Generally fines would be mixed with organic ma- terial and put in place before the topsoil is added. The minimum recommended soil depth for timber production is 4 feet over rock and 2 feet over gravel or soft overburden to estab- lish an effective rooting depth of 4 feet. Timber growth rates are generally directly related to the depth of the soil available. A common problem in reapplying topsoil and subsoil is spread- ing them too thickly initially so that little is left for remaining areas. If the volume of topsoil at the site is limited, its application should be restricted to low areas or excavated depressions that will con- serve soil, retain moisture, and catch wind-blown pioneer seeds. These low areas are also ideal sites for planting trees. Varied soil replacement depths mimic natural soil -forming processes and should be incorporated into reclamation strategies where possible. Thinner layers of soil on the upslope areas and thicker layers on the lower slopes may naturally encourage different vegetation types. These parts of the slopes should be planted differ- ently to encourage post -mining vegetation diversity. In Washington, topsoil is defined as the naturally occurring upper part of a soil profile, including the soil horizon that is rich in humus Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 4.6 RESTORING LANDFORMS and capable of supporting vegetation, together with other sediments within 4 vertical feet of the ground surface [RCW 78.44]. INIn Oregon, topsoil is not defined by law; however, sufficient soil must be retained onsite for reclamation. AMENDING OR Where little or no topsoil exists prior to mining, it may be necessary MANUFACTURING to amend or even manufacture soils. Amending soil can signifi- SOIL cantly reduce the time required for revegetation and performance security release. (See The Soil Resource, p. 3.10.) Reconstructed soils should have the same soil characteristic as topsoil. Soil characteristics that have the greatest effect on plant growth are the amount of organic matter, moisture -holding capacity, drainage, and available nutrients. Adding Organic matter improves both the fertility and physical condition of Organic Matter a soil. The chief problem with using subsoils for reclamation is usu- ally a lack of organic matter. Subsoils can be used in place of top- soils if they are combined with organic products, such as wood chips, paper sludge, rice hulls, mushroom compost, mint clippings, farm manure, processed municipal biosolids, straw, or native hay. In some instances, trading loads of rock for manure and straw from local dairies, farms, and ranches may be mutually beneficial. How- ever, weeds should not imported with the manure or straw. Knowing the quality of the hay can prevent this from happening. Quarry sites are generally developed where mineable rock is at or very near the surface. In these cases, reject fines, scalpings, or other fine-grained materials can be used to replace topsoil, provided they are amended with organic matter. Biosolids and some other soil amendments may not be appropri- ate at sites near sensitive aquifers or waterways. A solid waste permit from the local health district may be needed for application of biosolids, paper mill sludge, manure, etc. In Washing- ton, contact the Department of Ecology. In Oregon, contact the De- partment of Environmental Quality or the local health department. In the arid regions of the Pacific Northwest, the moisture -holding capacity of a soil is often the factor limiting planting success. A thick soil will hold more water than a thin one, and clay soils will hold more water than sandy soils. Moisture -holding capacity can be increased by adding large amounts clay or other fine-grained geo- logic material or by increasing the thickness of the subsoil. A mulch layer at the surface also helps conserve water by insulating the soil against evaporation. In areas that are not being developed as wetlands, soils that do not drain well can cause plants to rot. Adding organic matter, sand, or other coarse materials improves drainage by modifying the struc- via Improving Moisture -Holding Capacity Improving Drainage BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 Using Fertilizers AMENDING OR MANUFACTURING SOIL 4.7 tural characteristics of a soil. Adding lime or gypsum neutralizes acidic soils, which usually develop in wet areas. Natural Fertilizers. Adding organic matter can improve both the fertility and physical condition of a soil or fine-grained substitute. However, it may not provide any short-term fertility benefits and possibly no long-term benefits unless it is worked into the top 6 inches of soil. The smaller the particle size and the greater the surface area of the fertilizer, the faster it will be broken down by soil microbes. The natural range of carbon to nitrogen in soils is 8:1 to 15:1. Organic amendments that help reclaimed soil achieve this ratio pro- vide significant benefits. For example, amendments high in carbon and low in nitrogen, such as wood chips, may require additions of nitrogen -rich fertilizers (Table 4.1). This is because when an or- ganic amendment rich in carbon is added to the soil, all the nitrogen available to plants will be tied up by soil microbes trying to consume. the carbon. Soil microbes need nitrogen to consume the carbon and can preferentially absorb nitrogen before plant roots can use it. This means that there will be no nitrogen available to plants until the carbon: nitrogen ratio has dropped to 8:1-15:1. Therefore, adding amendments high in nitrogen will help plants grow under these con- ditions. Amendments in which carbon greatly exceeds nitrogen should be used sparingly. Table 4.1. Nitrogen and carbon content of common organic soil amendments. The natural range of carbon to nitrogen in soils is 8:1 to 15:1. Organic amendments that help reclaimed soil achieve this ratio provide significant benefits. (Modified from FERTILIZERS AND SOIL AMENDMENTS by Follett, Murphy, and Donahue, © 1981. Reprinted by permission of Prentice -Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ.) Material Organic Total Carbon: Carbon (C) Nitrogen (N) Nitrogen (%) (%) (C:N) Ratio Sewage sludge (dry weight basis) Aerobic 35 5.60 6:1 Anaerobic 30 1.90 16:1 Alfalfa hay 43 2.40 18:1 Grass clippings, fresh 43 2.20 20:1 Leaves, freshly fallen 20-80 .50-1.00 40:1-80:1 Peat moss 48 .83 58:1 Corncobs 47 .45 104:1 Red alder sawdust 50 .37 135:1 Paper, mostly newspaper 43 .26 172:1 Hardwood sawdust 50 .20 250:1 Douglas fir Old bark 59 .20 295:1 Sawdust 51 .07 728:1 Wheat straw 45 .12 375:1 Pine sawdust 51 .07 729:1 Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 4.8 RESTORING LANDFORMS Chemical Fertilizers. If a quick cover of vegetation is needed to provide erosion control or if the soil or manufactured soil substitute is of poor quality, applying a fertilizer is recommended. Organic matter should be added to achieve a long-term response before seed- ing directly into soil substitutes. Avoid applying fertilizers in areas where runoff into streams could occur. Some research shows that native plants do not respond well to chemical fertilization, and fertilizers are not generally needed for the long-term survival of these species. Fertilization tends to depress plant community diversity by indirectly decreasing desirable native plant populations such as warm season grasses and legumes. Fertil- izers tend to give a competitive advantage to opportunistic species such as annual grasses and herbaceous plants, many of which are weeds. RESTORING Where the pit or quarry is mined below the water table or surface DRAINAGE drainage collects on the mined property, productive ponds and wet- lands can be formed with careful water management. Where appropriate to the subsequent use, a pond creates addi- tional plant and habitat diversity, even though it may contain water only on a seasonal basis. Shallow process -water ponds, as well as low places on excavation floors and in stockpile areas at upland sites, can be developed as seasonal wetlands, even in arid areas east of the Cascades. Extraction ponds (ponds being mined for gravel) and some up- land rock pits with a permanent water source make ideal sites for constructing wetlands if the water table is shallow. Sediment from washing and screening rock can be deposited to form shallow deltas that, when combined with the permanent water supply, can easily be revegetated with wetlands species. CREATING PONDS Ponds for wildlife habitat should have irregular outlines (Fig. 4.6). FOR WILDLIFE The bottom of the pond should also be irregular so as to offer a variety of habitat possibilities for plants, bottom dwellers, and fish (Fig. 4.7). Both water deeper than 10 feet and benches and bars with water depths less than 2 feet should be provided. As a general rule, 25 percent of the pond should be less than 2 feet deep, 25 percent 2-6 feet deep, and 50 percent deeper than 10 feet. Water deeper than Figure 4.6. The shoreline of ponds used for wildlife habitat should be irregular and planted for cover with a mixture of open meadows and shrubs in the surrounding area. The shape of the pond on the left is better suited to supporting wildlife than that of the pond on the right. (Redrawn from Szafoni, 1982.) BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 TYPICAL PLAN VIEW not to scale , CREATING PONDS FOR WILDLIFE 4.9 CROSS SECT1ON not to scale Shore shallow water • •°..'o • •• •.a deep water 5-1o't 5't bench width varies Figure 4.7. Plan view and cross section of a well-designed irregular wetland or pond shoreline. Note the Targe areas of shallow water. Steep slopes along parts of the shore will discourage the growth of wetland plants and provide clear access to the pond. Bird nesting sites are provided. The trench discourages predators, but the shallow water offers sites for food for fish and cover plantings. Islands can be constructed from fill, unmined material, or sediments saved from digging the trench. 15 feet can provide a cool summer refuge for fish (Norman and Lingley, 1992). In -Water Slopes Slopes should be very gentle, 5H:1V or flatter, to allow develop- ment of wetland plant species (Fig. 4.8). In general, the more shal- low areas, the better. Slope variations will enhance the plant diver- sity in created wetlands. Figure 4.8. Slope variations will enhance the habitat diver- sity of created wetlands. To successfully establish wetland vegetation, seeds and trans- plants must be placed in sites with the correct water depth. (Modified from Green and oth- ers, 1992.) "I! 4,."1.,l if!1J I'' I Shallow marsh Upland zone water table -Wet meadow zone of fluctuation Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 4.1 o RESTORING LANDFORMS is Special Considerations Near Rivers Figure 4.9. Islands can be developed in undrained pits during operations. They start as peninsulas (1), which are then graded to provide the ap- propriate final shapes and slopes (2). Channels can then be dredged to separate the tips of the peninsulas from the mainland (3). Step 3 should not be undertaken until final water levels are known. (4) Final con- figuration of constructed island. (Redrawn from Michalski and others, 1987.) The most economical means of shaping final pond slopes is to create them as material is excavated (Fig. 4.9). In mines that are be- ing dewatered while operations proceed, resloping must be done be- fore allowing the pits to fill with water. Windward pond shores can be protected from wave erosion by placing boulders at the range of pond levels. In Washington, slopes in unconsolidated materials (sand, gravel, or soil) below the permanent water table should not be steeper than 1.5H:1 V. Slopes at the water/land interface should be between 2H:1V to 3H:1 V. Solid rock banks must be shaped so that a person can escape from the water in those places. Oregon statutes require a 3H:1 V slope to 6 feet below the low-water mark of a pond to provide a means of escape in the event that some- one were to fall in. Mining sand and gravel near a river can eliminate wetlands and fish and wildlife habitat, cause channelization of the river, and may even result in channel capture, if not planned properly. If mining is al- lowed by local jurisdictions, leaving ponds and depressions can re- place lost fish and wildlife habitat and wetlands. By locating mining sites in relatively stable areas of the flood plain and not excavating overly deep or large pits, reclamation of fish and wildlife habitat can be done without extensive engineering to ensure river stability. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 Figure 4.10. Plan view and cross section of a reclaimed gravel pit with pond shape that mimics a natural river system. Not to scale. (Modified from Woodward -Clyde, 1980.) old gravel pit BUILDING HABITAT 4.1 1 valley wall buffer outlet channel PIAN VIEW A marsh/lowland A, island - shallow area deep region Ali' ��� \ 1/ CROSS SECTION A desirable post -mining pond configuration for a gravel pit near a river is long, narrow, and moderately deep, with irregular islands and peninsulas. It should be connected to the river on the down- stream side (Fig. 4.10) (Woodward -Clyde, 1980) to mimic a natural river system on a flood plain. BUILDING HABITAT Subsoils, mine waste rock, construction fill, or boulders can be used to create rock reefs, islands, and other features to provide habitat. Islands Islands can be formed as part of the mining process or made after the basic mine shape is in place (Fig. 4.9). If the mine itself consists of individual cells separated by dikes, portions of the dikes can be removed to create post -mining peninsulas or islands for use as habi- tat. If the excavation is dewatered, silt and sand can be compacted or boulders can be placed on the floor of the excavation to create islands for bird and turtle loafing. Many small islands are better than a few large islands. They should range from 0.1 to 0.5 acres if they are meant to provide wa- terfowl nesting sites. Smaller islands may provide only resting sites, and larger islands may encourage predators to take up residence. Adequate separation of the island from the mainland, with water depths between them exceeding 30 inches, will discourage preda- tors. Soil, logs, and rocks should be placed on the island to enhance habitat diversity. Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 4.12 RESTORING LANDFORMS PLAN VIEW Figure 4.11. Plan view and cross section of a horseshoe island. (Redrawn from Michalski and others, 1987.) Direction of prevailing wind CR055 SECTION --� Structures That Enhance Habitat Irregular islands are better than round islands (Fig. 4.8). Horse- shoe -shaped islands are ideal for waterfowl (Fig. 4.11). The opening of the horseshoe should be in the lee of the prevailing wind to pro- vide shelter for young birds. The banks between the prongs of the horseshoe should be more gently sloped than the outer banks to in- crease the sheltering effect. To create cover for fish and habitat for aquatic insects, submerged and anchored tree crowns can be placed along steep banks (Fig. 4.12). Where possible, logs and stumps should be lashed together and anchored to form reefs (Fig. 4.13). These lashed materials can be either placed by helicopter or dragged into place by bulldozer. Root wads with soil attached also provide ideal cover (Cederholm and Scarlett, 1991; Cederholm and others, 1988). Depending on the plan's habitat objective, branches that stick out of the water may be removed to minimize roosting by predatory birds until a robust fishery is established. Alternatively, protruding branches and logs just breaking the surface may be left to provide sunning areas for turtles and other amphibians. Structures that can be constructed in or near ponds to enhance habitat for wildlife include: 1 trees, logs, and root wads lashed together, submerged, and anchored (Fig. 4.12), Figure 4.12. A submerged tree crown, anchored top and bottom, provides cover where the bank drops off steeply in some parts of the pit. (Modified from Michalski and others, 1987.) BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 Figure provide homes for small mam- mals. (From Green and others, 1992.) 4.14. Piles of rock Off -Channel Ponds for Salmon BUILDING HABITAT 4.13 • Figure 4.13. A submerged crib structure provides habitat for aquatic insects and cover for fish that feed on them. Rocks are used to anchor the crib in place. (Modi- fied from Michalski and others, 1987.) submerged crib structures (Fig. 4.13), 1 piles of angular rock (Fig. 4.14), 1 nesting boxes (Fig. 4.15), and 1 nesting poles and snags for osprey and cavity -dwelling birds (Fig. 4.16). Groups interested in wildlife or fish habitat enhancement, such as Ducks Unlimited or Trout Unlimited, the Boy Scouts (and similar groups), or schools, can be invited to help in en- hancing reclamation of a pond by con- structing nesting boxes, planting wil- lows, or other activities. U.S. Fish and Wildlife staff may provide technical assistance, and the agency may be a source of potential grants. Figure 4.15. Typical nesting boxes. At mine sites near rivers, off -channel ponds can be connected to the river by a stable outlet channel that allows access for fish (Fig. 4.10). The channel, excavated after mining, must be shown on the reclamation plan. Ponds like these can provide valuable habitat for salmon (Cederholm and Scarlett, 1991; Cederholm and others, 1988). The following questions should be addressed in selecting sites for creating off -channel salmon habitat: Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 4.14 RESTORING LANDFORMS Figure 4.16. Snags make good nesting sites for cavity - dwelling birds. (From DeGraaf and Shigo, 1985.) all Outlet Channels • Is the section of river or stream near a site used in any way by salmon? Is any part of the whole river or stream used for spawning, travel to spawning areas, or for rearing of fry? • Will the depth of excavation be compatible with final off -channel habitat (that is, not too deep for spawning, but deep enough to provide cold -water habitat)? • Is the potential mine site stable? Or is it prone to capture during floods and by lateral migration of the river? • Is the substrate of the excavation going to be suitable for the habitat desired? ■ Is there sufficient water circulation to provide oxygen and keep the water cool? ■ Can an outlet channel be connected to the river where it can be easily found by migrating fish? The Oregon or Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife should be consulted before undertaking any off -channel pond creation pro- ject. Outlet channels allow fish to enter and leave the off -channel ponds. They are integral parts of off -channel habitat and should mimic natural river sloughs whenever possible. In some situations, a weir is necessary to control the water level in the outlet channel and ponds. Outlet channels should join the river system where fish are likely to notice them—for example, near a pool or eddy where fish tend to rest. Riffles or fast water areas are less desirable outlet sites because fish may not find the outlet, and it may be left high and dry BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 FORMING WETLANDS 4.15 during low water. Joining an outlet channel to an existing tributary or slough instead of the river is a good strategy where feasible. FORMING Natural wetlands can be defined in terms of three broad environ - WETLANDS mental indicators: soils, hydrology, and vegetation. The viability of created wetlands can be enhanced by addressing these three ele- ments in the reclamation plan. Soils Soils are essential to vegetation, both above and below the water surface. In creating wetlands, pond banks and bottoms should be covered with at least 12 inches of fine materials that have a large clay component to help seal the bottom of the pond. In some places, process fines can be substituted for soils; however, they are less de- sirable than native soil because they are less fertile. Material rou- tinely removed from roadside ditches may be a good source of wet- land soil and vegetation if it is not contaminated with oil and grease. If any wetlands on the project are disturbed, that soil should be used in new wetland creation. In Washington, a solid waste permit from local jurisdictions may be necessary for disposing of material acquired from ditch cleaning. Hydrology A wetland must have water present at least seasonally. A common reclamation challenge at many mine sites is the seasonal fluctuation of the water table. The highly permeable nature of sand and gravel creates a situation where vegetation on pond banks is inundated dur- ing the wet season and high and dry during the summer. This results in a zone, similar to that found along reservoirs, in which upland and wetland plants will not readily grow. Here are some ways to reduce water fluctuation and the related adverse effects: Ar Seal the bottom of the pond and the downstream banks with clay -rich material. This can happen naturally over time, but it may take many years. lir Reduce bank slopes to 5H:1 V or flatter to allow a more gradual transition from the wetland to upland environment. ir Install a head -gate or weir at the outlet of the pond to retain water. or Anchor jute netting or some other organic mulch fabric over the bank slopes to capture fines and retain soil moisture. Vegetation Wetlands are characterized by many plant species that do not grow in upland areas. Most created wetlands in western Washington and Oregon will develop a wetland community on their own if condi- tions are hospitable and given enough time. Willows, cattails, and other wetland plants will often volunteer on the site in a year or two. To speed the reclamation process, however, suitable species can be obtained from nearby sources or purchased for planting. Propagating wetland species can be difficult and can, in some places, produce a plant community composed of only a few species, Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 4.16 RESTORING LANDFORMS that is, far less diverse than natural populations on undisturbed sites. The best way to establish a diverse community is to transplant soils and plants from an existing wetland, particularly one that is being eliminated by mining. Care must be taken when planting nursery stock to replicate as nearly as possible the plant community sur- rounding the site being reclaimed. REFERENCES Cederholm, C. J.; Scarlett, W. J., 1991, The beaded channel—A low-cost tech- nique for enhancing winter habitat of coho salmon. In Colt, John; White, R. J., editors, Fisheries Bioengineering Symposium: American Fisheries Society Symposium 10, p. 104-108. Cederholm, C. J.; Scarlett, W. J.; Peterson, N. P., 1988, Low-cost enhancement technique for winter habitat of juvenile coho salmon: North American Journal of Fisheries Management, v. 8, p. 438-441. DeGraaf, R. M.; Shigo, A. L., 1985, Managing cavity trees for wildlife in the Northeast: U.S. Forest Service Northeastern Forest Experiment Station Gen- eral Technical Report NE -101, 21 p. Follett, R. H.; Murphy, L. S.; Donahue, R. L., 1981, Fertilizers and soil amend- ments: Prentice -Hall, 557 p. Green, J. E.; Van Egmond, T. D.; Wylie, Carolyn; Jones, Ian; Knapik, Len; Pater- son, L. R., 1992, A user guide to pit and quarry reclamation in Alberta: Alberta Land Conservation and Reclamation Council Reclamation Research Technical Advisory Committee, 137 p. . Law, D. L., 1984, Mined -land rehabilitation: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 184 p. Michalski, M. F. P.; Gregory, D. R.; Usher, A. J., 1987, Rehabilitation of pits and quarries for fish and wildlife: Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Aggre- gate Resources Division, 59 p. Szafoni, R. E., 1982, Wildlife considerations in the development of riparian com- munities. In Svedarsky, W. D.; Crawford, R. D., editors, Wildlife values of gravel pits; Symposium proceedings: University of Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station Miscellaneous Publication 17-1982, p. 59-66. Woodward -Clyde Consultants, 1980,. Gravel removal studies in Arctic and subarctic floodplains in Alaska; Technical report: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv- ice FWS/OBS-80/08, 404 p. ■ BEST. MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 Reclamation Techniques for Quarries HIGHWALL Many quarry operations create benches and highwalls composed of AND BENCH solid rock. Shaping the tall rock faces and engineered benches cre- RECLAMATION ated during production blasting can be difficult. Vertical cliffs may be incorporated in the reclamation landscape if natural cliffs exist in the area of the mine. The extent and types of cliffs present should be shown on maps and cross-sections submitted in the permit applica- tion. Primary reclamation concerns for these areas are stability and aesthetics. Some post -production blasting may be necessary to break up linear features. The effects of blasting the highwall should be carefully considered when preparing both the operating and rec- lamation plans. If blasting is contemplated, seek the help of a quali- fied professional before proceeding. A poorly designed blasting plan can result in unsafe conditions that are difficult and expensive to fix. Public access and safety should also be addressed as part of the reclamation plan wherever steep cliffs are to be left. After mining, a bench or berm may be needed at the base or top of steep highwalls to catch falling rock. Placing a berm at the top of the quarry or a 10 -foot -high by 15 -foot -wide bench near the top will improve safety by discouraging access and reducing the likelihood of injury due to falling. Where adequate moisture is present (west of the Cascade Range), wide benches may be revegetated. Benches to be revege- tated should slope toward the highwall to trap moisture and soil. (See Fig. 2.4.) They should also slope gently to the side to promote drainage. Enough soil should be placed on the bench to support the proposed vegetation. West of the Cascades, trees planted on benches may eventually break up the line of the face, although it may take years before benches are screened from view, even in smaller quarries. Revege- tation may not be a viable reclamation technique in dry areas, larger quarries, and open pits unless combined with other methods dis- cussed in this chapter. In arid areas east of the Cascades, bench revegetation will probably not obscure linear features. Several methods of reclaiming quarry walls are effective in achieving stable slopes and preparing the site for the proposed sub- sequent land use. Excavated quarry slopes are generally more stable than fill slopes. However, once a material is blasted, it no longer considered consolidated and must be reclaimed to a shallower angle, depending on the nature of the rock. Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 5.2 RECLAMATION TECHNIQUES FOR QUARRIES Figure 5.1. Blasting at the holes shown in the left sketch can create scree slopes (right), which may then be stabilized by plantings. berm shot holes for blasting overburden or soil to be straight quarry face pushed onto scree slopes chute spur scree slope RECLAMATION Reclamation blasting is a fairly new technique. The amount of frac- BLASTING ture desired often differs from that for production blasting. Chutes, spurs, scree slopes, and rough cliff faces can be intentionally created by strategically placed blast holes (Fig. 5.1) (Norman, 1992; Coppin and Bradshaw, 1982). Because few people have the field experience necessary for this type of blasting, the use of a contractor familiar with this technique is recommended. Highwalls Selective blasting produces a natural appearance and stabilizes a site. Selective blasting can be used to modify benches, break up lin- ear features, and blend highwalls with their natural surroundings. Proper blasting of highwalls leaves rough surfaces that can provide nesting and perching habitat for birds (Fig. 5.2). However, the rough surface should be free of loose rock. Reclamation blasting that reduces the entire highwall to a scree or overburden slope is essentially a cut -and -fill method. This tech- nique can be used only where there is sufficient material remaining in a setback behind the quarry face to create the desired slope. Blast- ing for this purpose will not be possible if the operator has mined to the permit boundaries. The highwall profiles of Figure 5.3 show two conceptual blast- ing patterns for reclamation. In 5.3A, vertical holes are drilled across the bench floor. The outermost row of holes is only lightly charged to minimize flyrock and keep the blasted material on the slope. Most of the rock fracturing is done by the explosives in the Figure 5.2. Proper blasting of highwalls leaves rough sur- faces that can provide nesting and perching habitat for birds. (From Green and others, 1992.) BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 Figure 5.3. Conceptual blast- ing patterns for obliterating quarry benches. MINIMIZING OFFSITE IMPACTS 5.3 A. VERTICAL RECLAMATION BLASTING B. HORIZONTAL RECLAMATION BLASTING - stemming - charge sufficient width to allow access for drilling and blasting normal quarry bench height sufficient width to allow access for loading the blast holes 4 rows farther back from the face. The blasthole design of Figure 5.3B uses horizontal blast holes. PVC pipe can be inserted into the drilled holes to keep them open and serve as a water drain. The final pit configuration must allow for access to the drilled holes for loading with explosives. The final choice of blast pattern, delays, stemming depth, etc. depends upon the rock type, structural geology, blasting agent, and other highly variable conditions that cannot be addressed in this manual. Although this method can be less expensive than back- filling (Thorne, 1991; Petrunyak, 1986), the operator has only one chance to get it done right. Doing proper research and consulting appropriate experts before starting reclamation blasting cannot be stressed enough. After the blasting is completed, topsoil and overburden stored above the final slope can be pushed onto the blasted rubble to pro- mote revegetation. For quarries in which there are multiple benches, the final slope will approximate the overall slope of the benches. Proper setback must be accounted for from the lowermost bench to the uppermost one. Benches If selective blasting of benches is impractical or dangerous, other reclamation methods may be necessary, such as leaving wide benches that can be revegetated or pushing rock over the side of the pit to hide the benches (Fig. 5.4). MINIMIZING Minimizing offsite impacts from blasting is in the best interest of OFFSITE IMPACTS both neighboring landowners and mine operators. It can reduce liti- gation and negative publicity for a project. All blasting should be done by professionally trained and certified experts. Blasting tech- niques have improved dramatically since the days of black powder fuses and dynamite. Vibrations, noise, and fly rock can be greatly reduced when proper techniques are employed. Causes of Vibrations from the blast may damage nearby structures and resi- Damage dences. A blast creates a wave that travels through rock and uncon- Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 5.4 RECLAMATION TECHNIQUES FOR QUARRIES Figure 5.4. Topsoil placed on benches and on a fractured quarry floor will prepare the site for revegetation. Vibration Effects Under Various Conditions Pre -Blast Survey Use and Placement of Vibration -Measuring Equipment benches topsoil fractured quarry floor solidated materials. When the wave arrives at nearby structures, it can cause them to vibrate. Sound waves from the blast, transmitted through the air, are usually more detectable by humans, but it is the back and forth movement of the ground wave that causes the dam- age, not the accompanying sound: The amplitude and intensity of the ground wave are determined by the number of pounds of explo- sive detonated at one time. Most problems can be avoided when the amount of explosive is minimized and the blast is properly timed. Unconsolidated material will vibrate more strongly in response to the ground wave than will competent rock. All other factors being equal, the potential for vibration damage is greater if a structure is built on fill, sand, dirt, or other unconsolidated material than if it is built on compacted material or competent rock. The more competent the material, the less movement will occur. The way the structure is built can also have an effect on the kind and amount of damage. A structure with a concrete slab floor usu- ally develops more cracks than one with a perimeter foundation built on solid rock. In order to establish pre -blast conditions at nearby residences, a pre - blast survey should be performed by an outside specialist rather than by a member of the organization doing the blasting. Typically, after a blast has taken place, owners of nearby structures will find cracks, settlement, and displacement, all of which were pre-existing, but never noticed. All structures within any possible damage range must be thoroughly surveyed before any blasting is done. The importance of a pre -blast survey of all surrounding struc- tures cannot be overstated. The lack of a proper survey by a quali- fied specialist is an open invitation to lawsuits. Without a survey, the damage could be real or imagined, but an expensive lawsuit will be required to establish liability. The blast contractor should monitor the blasting with vibration - measuring equipment, but the equipment should be placed and the results read by a qualified independent third party. Monitoring BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 BACKFILLING 5.5 equipment that provides an immediate printout is generally better than equipment requiring post -blast data manipulation and interpre- tation because the results are available immediately and cannot be changed once recorded. Blasting Plans The mine operator should require a blasting plan and blasting logs. and Logs Blasting plans are prepared before the blast. Blasting logs are made on the site as each hole is primed, loaded, stemmed, wired, and con- nected to the circuit. Blasting logs must accurately describe the work on each hole and must be kept for 2 years after the work is completed in case they need to be referred to later. BACKFILLING Quarries located in populated areas should consider total or partial backfilling when it is economically feasible (Fig. 5.5). Advantages of backfilling include reducing slopes, increasing post -mining prop- erty values, and reducing safety hazards. (See Chapter 4.) In urban areas, many quarry sites are backfilled. If buildings or other struc- tural improvements are to be placed on top of the old excavation, the backfill material must be structurally sound and stable. Dumping fill material over the highwall can also help disguise the linear benches. If overburden or waste rock is strategically placed, backfilling may be done with a short push or haul. Fill Materials In some quarries, operators will decide to rebuild slopes after all rock is removed by: 1 concurrent backfilling using overburden mined elsewhere on the site, 1 bringing in fill material from construction projects offsite, and 1 retaining enough overburden or mine waste for resloping after completion of mining. Overburden should be stored where it can be readily and economi- cally moved into position during reclamation. Mining plans should take the backfill process into account. Operators need to be sure there is enough onsite material or identify a likely source. If fill is accepted from construction sites, a monitoring plan should be established by the operator to prevent disposing of Figure 5.5. Quarry slopes that are backfilled should be compacted so that the final slope is stable; a 3H:1V angle (with terraces, if it is long) gen- erally results in a stable slope. Topsoil should be spread over the compacted slope to make revegetation possible. Open File Report 96-2 terraces compacted compacted backfill material BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 5.6 RECLAMATION TECHNIQUES FOR QUARRIES Fill Slopes DRAINING PIT FLOORS hazardous or unapproved material on the site. Local permits from health departments may be necessary before importing fill. Stability and erosion control are primary concerns for slopes created by backfilling. Backfilled slopes may be prone to erosion and gully- ing if they are smooth, planar, and long. (See Creating Slopes, p. 4.2.) As slope length and steepness increase, runoff velocity and soil erosion also increase, and infiltration decreases. Careful loca- tion of drainages and water -control features enhances slope stability and revegetation potential (Banks and others, 1981; Washington De- partment of Ecology, 1992). (See Chapter 2.) Temporary protection of bare slopes from. rain or snow -melt runoff may be necessary if backfilling occurs over a long period and if establishing permanent vegetation must be delayed. Temporary protection can include covering the slope with plastic sheeting or mulches or matting and seeding with grasses. (See Chapter 2.) A final slope angle of 2H:1V to 3H:1V is recommended. The gentler the slope, the easier soil application will be and the more quickly vegetation will establish. Backfilled slopes may require compaction to ensure stability. If wetland creation is not part of the reclamation plan, pit floors can present special drainage problems. There are two basic ways to im- prove drainage in quarry floors: blasting and ripping. Blasting Impermeable pit floors of solid rock can be blasted to fracture the rock so that water can drain slowly from the site and roots can pene- trate (Fig. 5.4). The least expensive way to blast the pit floor is to Figure 5.6. Ripping or de - compaction of pit floors is typi- cally accomplished with rippers•. mounted on heavy equipment. -k_ 1,•• • BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 REFERENCES 5.7 drill an extra 10 feet on the last production shot and leave some of the fractured material in place. Ripping Ripping or decompaction is typically accomplished with rippers mounted on heavy equipment (Fig. 5.6). Rippers consist of a vertical shank or shanks that can shatter compacted or hard areas to depths of 7 feet. Before ripping or tilling compacted mine wastes or soils, at least one backhoe pit should be dug on the site to determine the thickness of the compacted zone, thus the depth of tilling. As a rule of thumb, ripper spacing should be less than the depth of ripping. If soil is replaced using equipment with rubber tires, discing, plowing, or shallow ripping may be necessary to loosen the soil to create seedbeds and suitable substrate for ground cover or trees. In locations where topsoil is minimal or absent and ripping is not possible, selective drilling and blasting may improve revegeta- tion success. A basalt quarry in Australia achieved 85 percent sur- vival of tree seedlings after four years by blasting 7 -foot -deep holes into the pit floor (Rock Products, 1995). This technique fractures the rock, provides a moisture trap where roots are able to penetrate, and, if ammonium nitrate explosives are used, may provide some residual nitrate to stimulate plant growth. REFERENCES Banks, P. T.; Nickel, R. B.; Biome, D. A., 1981, Reclamation and pollution con- trol—Planning guide for small sand and gravel mines: U.S. Bureau of Mines Minerals Research Contract Report, 143 p. Coppin, N. J.; Bradshaw, A. D., 1982, Quarry reclamation—The establishment of vegetation in quarries and open pit non-metal mines: Mining Journal Books [on behalf of the Mineral Industry Research Organization] [London], 112 p. Green, J. E.; Van Egmond, T. D.; Wylie, Carolyn; Jones, Ian; Knapik, Len; Pater- son, L. R., 1992, A user guide to pit & quarry reclamation in Alberta: Alberta Land Conservation and Reclamation Council Reclamation Research Technical Advisory Committee, 135 p. Norman, D. K., 1992, Reclamation of quarries: Washington Geology, v. 20, no. 4, p. 3-9. Petrunyak, Jim, 1986, Blast casting reduces cost of removing quarry overburden: Atlas Blasting News, v. 12, no. 4, p. 3. Rock Products, 1995, Drill, blast, and plant—Growing trees in rock: Rock Prod- ucts, v. 98, no. 8, p. 82. Thorne, Vincent, 1991, Reclaiming Feldspar Quarry: Atlas Blasting News, v. 17, no. 1, p. 11. Washington Department of Ecology, 1992, Stormwater management manual for the Puget Sound Basin: Washington Department of Ecology Publication #90- 73,1v.■ Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 5.8 RECLAMATION TECHNIQUES FOR QUARRIES BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 TYPES OF SLOPE FAILURES Landslides and Slope Failures Many upland mining sites are situated in terrain that has potentially unstable slopes or is already unstable. Construction of spoil dumps, stockpiles, and mine cuts can destabilize areas that were stable prior to mining. If mines are located in potentially unstable areas, such areas should be identified before mining, and the mine plan should be developed so as to minimize risk to the environment. Common mining -related causes of landsliding are: 1 removing the toe (support) of the slope, 1 saturation of unstable slopes due to poor water management (such as constructing a pond on a slope), 1 placing waste rock over vegetation on steep slopes causing failure as the vegetation rots, 1 adding weight to an unstable slope, and 1 placing weight (generally overburden) on an unstable area. Landslides do not recognize property lines. Conditions on adja- cent property may be `causing' the slide on the mine site, and slides occurring on the mine site may damage adjacent properties. If sta- bility is a concern or major faulting is encountered, a geotechnical consultant should be involved in mine planning. The movement of soil and rock under the influence of gravity is called mass movement or mass wasting. Rockfalls, slides, earthflows, slumps, soil creep, raveling, and (more commonly) combi- nations of flow types are all forms of mass movement that can occur at mine sites. Rockfalls Rockfalls travel most of the distance through the air (Fig. 6.1). Movement is extremely rapid and includes free fall, tumbling, and rolling of fragments of bedrock or soil. Rockfalls may occur in a mine as pressure is released on the free face. Slides Slides move along one or more zones of weakness. Movement along the fail- ure surface may be rotational, as in a slump, or translational along a more or less planar surface (Fig. 6.2). Live tree roots contribute to holding the soil together and help tie the upper soil horizon to the subsoil. Runoff and surface erosion, when combined with a decrease in tree -root tensile strength caused by stripping vegetation and soil, have contributed to many land - Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Figure 6.1. Rockfall on a steep or overhanging face. (Redrawn from Chatwin and others, 1991.) 6.2 LANDSLIDES AND SLOPE FAILURES Figure 6.2. A complex slide called a slump-earthflow. (Modified from Chatwin and others, 1991.) Earthflows Slumps Soil Creep Raveling ANATOMY OF A LANDSLIDE weathered bedrock, soil, etc. hummocky ground bowed tree slides by removing the slope support. Scars from debris slides (shal- low soil slips) may commonly be seen on steep slopes that have been stripped of vegetation. Removing the toes from steep slopes such as on talus, sand and gravel, or clay deposits can result in a landslide. Earthflows, composed of soil and rock, move slowly downslope as a viscous fluid. The amount and rate of movement vary according to the particle size and water content of the earthflow. Clay -rich zones are especially vulnerable to plastic flow when saturated. If enough water is present, the material can `liquefy', causing an earthflow. In a slump, the movement is rotational, producing a bowl -shaped failure surface. Slumps and slump-earthflows typically leave behind a steep scarp that is itself vulnerable to further slumping. Slumps also commonly occur in areas underlain by till and/or glacial lake deposits, both of which are vulnerable to failure when they are satu- rated. Soil creep is the very slow (inches per year) downslope movement of surface materials (Fig. 6.3). Raveling is downslope movement of particles and commonly occurs on sand and gravel slopes that are too steep. Reclaimed slopes of 2H:1V to 3H:1V usually do not ravel. Most landslides are combinations of several kinds of slope failure. The method of failure may be different in different parts of the slope. A landslide, in this case a slump-earthflow (Fig. 6.4), has the following parts (Varnes, 1978): BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 Figure 6.3. Conditions that lead to and indications of soil creep. (Modified from Chatwin and others, 1991.) IDENTIFYING UNSTABLE SLOPE CONDITIONS 6.3 weathered bedrock, soil, etc. displaced fenceline hummocky ground Main scarp — A steep surface separating the undisturbed ground from the slide mass, caused by the movement of slide material away from undisturbed ground. The projection of the scarp surface under the displaced material becomes the surface of the rupture. Minor scarp — A steep surface in the displaced material produced by differential movements within the sliding mass. Head — The upper part(s) of the slide material along the contact be- tween the displaced material and the main scarp. Toe — The lower margin of displaced material most distant from the main scarp. Crown — The material that is practically undisplaced and adjacent to the highest parts of the main scarp. IDENTIFYING Regardless of the cause, instability can often be identified in the UNSTABLE SLOPE field through careful observation. Tension cracks, hummocky to - CONDITIONS pography, springs and seeps, bowed trees, abrupt scarps, and toe bulges are all readily observable indicators. Tension Cracks Tension cracks, also known as transverse cracks, are openings that can extend deep below the ground surface (Fig. 6.4). Tension cracks near the crest of an embankment or hillside can indicate mass move- ment. However, cracks may occur anywhere on the slide. They are perpendicular to the direction of movement and are typically con- tinuous in a pattern across the width of the landslide. Tension cracks can fill with water, which lubricates the slide mass and may cause additional movement. Correction of slope failures must include pre- venting surface water from reaching tension cracks. Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 6.4 LANDSLIDES AND SLOPE FAILURES Figure 6.4. Structural fea- tures of slumps and the effect of cutting and filling on the sta- bility of short slopes. (Redrawn from Burroughs and others, 1976.) Hummocky Ground Displaced and Distorted Trees Springs and Seeps Scarps OBLIQUE VIEW STRUCTURAL FEATURES OF SLUMPS main scarp. #nsion scarp crack original slope soil surface angle minor original soil surface head " failure ♦�" surface CROSS SECTION HOW ROAD CONSTRUCTION AFFECTS THE POTENTIAL FOR SLUMPING road - " % potential failure surface CROSS SECTIONS • original center of gravity of soil block original soil surface --- road •X 'potential failure surface X center of gravity of soil block after cut or fill has been completed Hummocky ground can indicate past or active slide movement. A slide mass has an irregular, undulating surface (Figs. 6.2 and 6.3). Vegetation, particularly trees, records the downslope movement of soil. Trees may be uprooted and may lean in a variety of directions (jackstrawed trees) as their roots are broken or moved in a rapid slide movement (Fig. 6.5). Bowed tree trunks may indicate soil creep; trees attempt to remain upright as the soil moves slowly downslope (Figs. 6.2 and 6.3). Ground water that collects at the contact between permeable layers that overlie relatively impermeable layers or rock strata dipping with the slope can cause instability. Carefully investigate springs, seeps, and areas of lush vegetation. Alder, horsetail, devils club, cow parsnip, and skunk cabbage typically grow in wet sites. Fresh scarps are a clear sign of recent slope failure (Fig. 6.4). Older scarps may be covered by vegetation and hard to identify. The pres- ence of several scarps can indicate several active failure surfaces or movement downslope along a larger failure surface. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 Toe Bulge SURFACE DRAI NAGE CONTROL IN UNSTABLE AREAS SURFACE DRAINAGE CONTROL IN UNSTABLE AREAS 6.5 The toe of a slide commonly bulges out onto 'the more stable ground surface below the slide (Fig. 6.4). A toe bulge often gives the ap- pearance of a mud wave displacing trees and vegetation in its path. The bulged toe should be noted in the site inventory along with the other slide features to define the size of the failed area. Removing the toe may reactivate the slide mass. The quantity and distribution of water in a slope, whether it is a slide mass, overburden, or soil stockpile, greatly influences its stability. Water saturation builds up pore pressure, which causes an increase in downhill -directed forces (Fig. 6.5). This increases the weight (in- creases driving force) and particle lubrication (decreases resisting forces). Slope failure can occur when more water is present in the soil than the pore spaces can accommodate. If motion on a slide at the mine site responds directly to rainfall, surface drainage improvements may decrease slide activity. Control of surface drainage, by itself, is seldom sufficient to stop landslides, because rainfall from outside the site can eventually show up as ground water in the slide. Surface drainage improvements are typi- cally combined with other abatement techniques. (See Chapter 2.) When soils, subsoils, and geologic material are excavated, drainage paths through the pore spaces are disrupted. Therefore, drainage control may be needed for constructed permanent and tem- porary storage or disposal piles and reclaimed slopes that are created by backfilling. Listed below are techniques for improving slope drainage. (See Chapter 2 for specifics.) These techniques may not stop landsliding altogether, but they may prevent a slide from becoming worse: (i' To improve slope stability, lower the water table by providing more drainage. Adequate drainage prevents water saturation and the build up of pore pressure. increased lubrication Figure 6.5. Forces acting on slide masses and Targe stockpiles. A rep- resents a slide mass saturated with water. It has both low resisting force and high driving forces (weight). B represents a stabilized slope after the water table has been lowered or the water has been removed using drainage methods. resistive forces low driving forces high increased friction resistive forces high driving forces low weight decreased Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 6.6 LANDSLIDES AND SLOPE FAILURES 2H:1V toe drain and buttress Figure 6.6. Details of toe, blanket, and chimney drain construction shown in cross section. (See also p. 2.19.) SLOPE STABILIZATION chimney drain Nir Berms and ditches should be built above and along the unstable slope to intercept and divert overland flow. They should be lined or sealed to prevent infiltration. (1' Slopes adjacent to the slide mass should be graded to direct overland flow away from the slide area. (i' The area above a slide should be crowned or sloped so that surface water is directed away from the slide and graded so water does not pond. lib Where drainage must cross an unstable slope, using a pipe should be considered. mr' Avoid concentrating water on spoil dumps or natural slopes, thereby reducing their stability. Concentrated surface flows near slides should be handled in ditches lined with impermeable fabric, if necessary. (See Fig. 2.16.) (i' If a slide area is to be regraded, the regrading should not produce a depression in the slope that could pond or concentrate water. (i' If a slide is triggered, benches or cross -slope ditches should be used. They should be sloped and lined to move water away from the slide area. Nor As part of grading operations, any exposed tension cracks should be sealed and compacted to prevent infiltration, then seeded to prevent erosion. Toe, blanket, chimney, and other types of permanent drains (Fig. 6.6) can help prevent saturation of a constructed slope. The minimum thickness of an underdrain or rock blanket should be 3 feet, because fines will eventually migrate into this zone. The drains should be thick enough to keep running freely for a long time. In some cases, a geotextile liner should be used to insure that the integrity of the drain is not compromised by soil movement. Slope length and height may require construction of cross -slope drains to intercept runoff without creating gullies and erosion. Grad- ing to break up long slopes and creating berms, furrows, and terraces will compartmentalize the runoff. The more landscape diversity that BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 REFERENCES 6.7 is incorporated into the final grading, the less a site will need cross - slope drains to ensure stability. SLOPE FAILURES Overburden failures above mine cuts can be a problem if proper ABOVE THE MINE slope angles are not maintained above the rock face. If the contact between the overburden and the rock dips toward the highwall or open face and the overburden slope is near vertical or steep (1 V:1 H), a failure is likely. To prevent this from occurring, operators should make sure the overburden cut has a gentle slope and is well drained. REFERENCES Burroughs, E. R., Jr.; Chalfant, G. R.; Townsend, M. A., 1976, Slope stability in road construction—A guide to the construction of stable roads in western Ore- gon and northern California: U.S. Bureau of Land Management, 102 p. Chatwin, S. C.; Howes, D. E.; Schwab, J. W.; Swanston, D. N., 1991, A guide for management of landslide -prone terrain in the Pacific Northwest: British Co- lumbia Ministry of Forests Land Management Handbook 18, 212 p. Varves, D. J., 1978, Slope movement types and processes. In Schuster, R. L.; Krizek, R. J., editors, Landslides—Analysis and control: National Academy of Sciences Special Report 176, p. 11-33. ■ Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Revegetation INTRODUCTION Mines west of the Cascades in Washington and Oregon are fairly easy to reclaim because they typically have deeper soil horizons due to abundant precipitation. Mined areas east of the Cascades are more difficult to reclaim because soils are thinner, the region is drier, and temperatures are more extreme. Therefore, successful revegetation in the eastern part of the state is more dependent on proper plant selection, appropriate timing of planting, adequate fertilization, presence of organic matter in the soil, and irrigation. West of the Cascades, even though revegetation can be accom- plished without separately salvaging and replacing the soil because of the abundant moisture, species diversity will be limited until a soil horizon rebuilds, and this may take decades. Additionally, plant vigor may quickly decline after the first planting if ample amounts of organic matter are not provided or supplemental chemical fertil- izers are not added to initiate the cycle of plant growth, decomposi- tion, and nutrient recycling. Amounts of fertilizer should be based on site-specific needs determined by soil tests. (See Amending or Manufacturing Soil, p. 4.6.) Natural plant communities develop through a succession from pioneer species to climax species (Fig. 7.1). Pioneer species are ag- gressive and tend to grow rapidly to fill disturbed areas, whereas climax plant communities develop over longer periods and tend to be slower growing. Each phase in the plant succession prepares the ground for the next. Nitrogen -fixing legumes, shrubs, and trees may play a crucial role in soil reconstruction. It is tempting, particularly with trees, to plant. only climax spe- cies (for example, Douglas fir) even if the ground is not fully pre- pared. However, natural communities develop slowly in a succes- PIONEER Approximate stand age (years): 0 5 15 Estimated time (years) In each stand condition: f— 5 to 15 ► 4--10 to 20 —♦ *— 10 70 120 4---10 to 20---% �— 40 to 100 --IP. ♦— 500 —: Figure 7.1. Sequence from pioneer to climax vegetation for a Douglas fir forest after clear cutting. The same recov- ery process occurs naturally in mined areas. (From Brown, 1985.) open canopy — sapling, pole timber 30 closed canopy — sapling, pole and saw timber large saw timber over 21" in diameter at breast height) 200 old growth forest with dead and clown timber (2+ layers) CLIMAX 700 Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 7.2 REVEGETATION sion. Mimicking this progression during reclamation is impractical, but planning a phased succession for both ground cover and trees will establish a good climax mix (Norman and Lingley, 1992). Grasses may be appropriate as either quick pioneer soil builders under developing woodland or as climax species for rangeland. Pio- neer trees will act as fast-growing nurse trees for slowly maturing forest trees that find it difficult to establish in disturbed ground or in areas with no canopy. Revegetation is important because it: . 1 reduces erosion, 1 reduces storm -water runoff, 1 provides habitat and forage for animals, 1 reduces visual and noise impacts, 1 reduces reclamation liability, and 1 increases the value of property by returning it to agriculture, forestry, or other beneficial use. Note: While vegetation significantly reduces erosion, it cannot pre- vent slippage of a soil that is not stable due to improper placement techniques. For example, soil placed on steep slopes requires addi- tional stabilization techniques to ensure revegetation success. (See Chapter 6.) SPECIAL Plants need fertile soil, sunlight or protection from the sun, and PROBLEMS AT water to thrive. Mining often removes fertile soil. (Salvaging and MINE SITES replacing soil is discussed in The Soil Resource, p. 3.10.) Even in the best of conditions, plant growth cannot be guaranteed immedi- ately after mining. Mine sites generally offer harsh conditions that make it difficult to establish vegetation. Some common problems affecting revegetation are: 1 high surface temperature (especially on south -facing slopes), 1 steep slopes, 1 poor water retention, 1 lack of adequate soil, 1 erosion before seedlings establish, 1 only limited periods during the year suitable for seeding, 1 lack of water 1 poor conditions for germination, 1 slopes inaccessible to equipment, and 1 grazing impacts. By being aware of these potential problems, an operator can im- prove the quality of reclamation and save money by being successful on the first attempt. Revegetation early in the reclamation.process is critical because it may take several seasons to establish widespread BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 SUCCESSFUL REVEGETATION STRATEGIES 7.3 healthy vegetation. For example, by planning ahead and choosing appropriate techniques, an operator can place young trees in strate- gic locations to provide a significant visual screen within a few years. SUCCESSFUL Trial -and -error revegetation that relies on natural precipitation and REVEGETATION hardier natural pioneer species (such as alder) is generally less ex - STRATEGIES pensive, uses less labor, and is more effective than waiting until mining is complete to plant the entire site with commercial plants. Segmental mining results in fairly small areas on which to begin this process. Test plots can be used to determine which species will be successful. Areas in which plants fail to establish can be reseeded with more appropriate vegetation (Norman and Lingley, 1992). Steps to successful revegetation of mined land can be summa- rized as follows: (o' Plan before you start. Know in advance what has to be done, but allow for modification if necessary. (r' Strip and store the topsoil, subsoil, and overburden separately. Minimize handling and storage. (f' Strip a small area at a time. Strip only the area that can be revegetated within a reasonable time to minimize erosion. (i' Move soil materials under dry conditions (June—September). Wet soils are easily damaged. or Carefully calculate volumes of soils necessary for reclamation to ensure that sufficient amounts are retained. Mir Reclaim the mine in segments. Segmental reclamation allows for 'live topsoil' replacement, which often enhances revegetation. (i' Shape slopes for subsequent use. Slopes between 40H:1 V and 20H:1 V are desirable for agriculture purposes. For forestry, the slopes can be steeper. Oir Replace overburden (if any), subsoil, and topsoil in the correct sequence. (f' Eliminate compacted soil. Where compaction has occurred, rip the mine floor as deeply as possible before reapplication of stored overburden, subsoil, and topsoil. (t' Develop a post -reclamation management program. Choose plants that increase soil fertility and improve soil structure, such as deep-rooted nitrogen -fixing legumes, for the first plantings. Monitor progress and determine why plants did not thrive. (i' Get good advice from the experts. Take advantage of the expertise available in various government agencies and though local farmers. (t' Be patient. Successful revegetation may be a slow process taking several seasons or years. Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 7.4 REVEGETATION CLASSES OF Four basic classes of vegetation—grasses, forbs, shrubs, and trees— VEGETATION are important for reclamation. Forbs, which include legumes such as alfalfa, clover, and lupines, are any herbaceous plant that is not grass or grasslike. Forbs and shrubs have many similarities but differ in that shrubs have a woody stem. They will be considered together in this discussion. Many sites naturally support a mixture of two, three, or all four types of vegetation. Grasses Grasses are either perennial or annual. Annual grasses start from seed every year, whereas perennial grasses die back but start from the same root mass each year. Annual grasses green up and establish quickly, but put most of their energy into seed production. Perennial grasses put significant energy into root development and foliage; individual plants persist for many years. Grasses typically are shallow rooted (6 inches to 2 feet) but, because of their ability to provide complete ground cover, are effec- tive for erosion control. Grasses provide significant nutrition to both livestock and wildlife and provide cover for small animals and birds. Newly established grasses, freshly fertilized, are a favorite food for grazing animals. Therefore, such areas should be fenced for opti- mum revegetation success. Forbs and shrubs include everything from small wildflowers (forbs) to sagebrush plants (shrubs) that may reach 6 feet in height. They are nutritious and provide significant cover. Many plants of this class have a single taproot with a shallow fibrous root system around it. Although mature forbs and shrubs can establish significant root wads, they typically provide only minimal erosion protection for several years. Trees Trees are generally the slowest of the three classes to establish them- selves and mature. They typically have a deep, extensive root sys- tem. Evergreens or conifers (except larch) keep their leaves or nee- dles all year long. Deciduous trees lose their leaves every fall and, compared to conifers, grow faster and add leaf litter to the ground. SELECTING Wherever possible, native species should be used in revegetation. PLANTS FOR Native plants often out -compete introduced (exotic) species over A SITE time and are the most useful to wildlife, although some introduced species can out -compete some native species, especially in arid en- vironments. The vegetation surrounding a mine site can be used as a guide when selecting native species. Re-establishing native spe- cies can be greatly accelerated by using native seed mixes and lo- cally transplanted species. If sufficient preplanning is done, soil and native vegetation can be transferred from areas being stripped for new mining to areas in the final stage of reclamation. This approach is less expensive and often more successful than long-term soil storage. Soil hauled di- rectly from a new mining area to a reclamation area carries with it viable seeds of native vegetation that can rapidly establish on the Forbs and Shrubs BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 Grasses and Legumes SELECTING PLANTS FOR A SITE 7.5 reclaimed area. This typically reduces the need for added seed and plant material. Commercial sources typically sell native and non-native bare - root and container plant stock, as well as native grass seed mixtures. Bareroot stock should be planted during the winter and is typically less expensive than plants sold in containers. Generally, plants in containers have a better survival rate than bareroot plants. A plant - selection guide is given in Tables 7.1 through 7.4. The best source of native shrubs and trees is in or near the site to be revegetated. Avoid transplanting native species from an eleva- tion significantly higher or lower than the area in which they will be planted. Weeds (imported or local) can render reclamation ineffective. Local extension agents can provide lists of noxious weeds and sug- gest methods for their control. Information on plant availability and nurseries carrying suitable plants can be obtained from Hortus Northwest, PO Box 955, Canby, OR 97013, Phone: 503-570-0859, Fax: 503-399-6173. Grasses and legumes are very effective at stabilizing disturbed areas because of their extensive root systems. They also increase water infiltration, contribute organic matter to the soil, and, in the case of legumes, fix atmospheric nitrogen into the soil. In determining what mix of grasses and legumes is best for a given site, the climate, soil conditions, sun exposure, and objective of the seeding must be considered. The Oregon Department of Ge- ology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI), The Washington Depart- ment of Natural Resources (DNR), and the local Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) offices can provide valuable informa- tion about seed mixes that are suited to various site conditions. The Washington or Oregon Interagency Guide for Conservation and Forage Plantings is also a useful resource for determining seed mixes. Tables 7.1 through 7.4 contain descriptions of some of the most common grasses, legumes, and woody plants. Some grasses, such as annual rye, grow quickly, while others, such as many of the perennial bunch grasses or sod -formers, grow rather slowly. Cereal grains, the same as those cultivated for food, can be very effective in establishing a rapid vegetative cover that will still allow native species to establish. Cereal grains help protect against soil erosion because they possess 50 percent more below - ground biomass (roots) than grasses. The success of legume plantings can be greatly improved by treating the seeds with legume inoculant, available from many seed suppliers. Forbs and Shrubs Many forbs establish easily from seed and can be just as important as grasses and trees for reclamation. Some shrubs do well from seed, many do not. Bareroot plants, which can often be purchased inex- Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 7.6 REVEGETATION pensively and easily from nurseries, are an effective way to establish shrubs. Young plants in containers are generally easiest to establish but are the most expensive to purchase. Trees A variety of species suitable for revegetation projects are available in containers at nurseries. Tublings (plants grown in narrow, deep containers) may be useful on rocky areas and steep slopes. Bareroot transplants are successful for many species and are more economical to purchase than containerized plants. Nurseries can provide both tublings and bareroot stock. Native Plants for For the high desert areas of Washington and Oregon, a selection of Arid Regions the following species are recommended when native plants are specified in the reclamation plan: 1 basin big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata tridentata) 1 Wyoming big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata wyomingensis) 1 mountain sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata vayseyana) 1 fourwing saltbush (Atriplex canescens) 1 antelope bitterbrush (Pershia tridentata) 1 Lewis flax (Linium lewisii) 1 white yarrow (Achillea millefolium) 1 annual sunflower (Helianthus annuus) In the higher areas of eastern Washington and Oregon where sites will be reforested, the following seed mix of non -pervasive ex- otics has been used to control erosion and noxious weed invasion in the short term. These plants die out as long-term native plants take over from nearby natural areas when the sites are relatively small (less than 15 acres or long, narrow sites): Sheep fescue 4 pounds/acre Kentucky bluegrass 4 pounds/acre Dutch white clover 2 pounds/acre (the clover should be inoculated) SOWING SEEDS Grasses and cover crops such as legumes are relatively easy to es- tablish from seed. In most places, grass and legume seeds should be planted no deeper than 1/4 inch. For the best chance at revegetation success, topsoil should be spread between September 15 and Octo- ber 15. Seeding with grasses and legumes should be done within 3 days after final shaping (R. Shinbo, personal commun., 1995). How- ever, if proper conditions of soil moisture and temperature are pre- sent, revegetation can also be successful at other times of the year. Proper conditions for reclamation and revegetation exist between March 1 and November 1 for sites west of the Cascades in some years. During the winter, bare slopes should be protected with mulch or other erosion -control techniques until the next seeding period. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 SOWING SEEDS 7.7 Summer plantings should be avoided unless irrigation is planned. Fall plantings may be preferable in areas with long grow- ing seasons, winter rains, or summer drought; they allow plants to establish themselves over the winter. Optimal planting dates will vary slightly from year to year and with weather conditions. The local county extension service can provide information on planting dates. Seed Drills Seed drills are used extensively in agricultural applications where soil has been tilled and is free of rocks. Range drills are used in irregular terrain or on rocky soils. In arid areas with coarse-textured soils, improved success with drilling may be obtained by placing the seeds 1 inch deep. Range drills may be available for use from some federal agen- cies, such as the NRCS and the Bureau of Land Management. Agri- cultural seed drills are commonly not suited for reclamation seeding because of the rocky soil. Neither type of drill is suitable for the rough and steep terrain found on many mine sites. Seeds can be broadcast using many different methods. Spreading handfuls of seed by hand is quick and easy but produces incomplete coverage in many cases. The use of hand -operated mechanical spreaders is a far more effective way to spread adequate amounts of seed evenly. Hand -operated mechanical spreaders come in many different sizes and styles, but most are relatively cheap. In many cases, they can be rented from a local shop. Regardless of the method of broadcast, the seeds must be covered with mulch and/or soil to germinate successfully. Broadcast seeding in arid environ- ments should be followed by dragging a meadow or flex harrow (a bar or chains in rocky areas) over the seeded area to insure adequate seed/soil contact. Broadcast Seeding Hydroseeding Hydroseeding can effectively convey, in one application, seed, fer- tilizer, and mulch onto steep slopes and other areas inaccessible to other seeding equipment. The mulch blanket retains moisture; a tackifier or binder added to the hydromulch slurry can prevent it from eroding away. Revegetation success can often be increased by using a two-step hydromulching process in which seed, mulch, and fertilizer are applied with the first application. Then. the entire area is remulched with another application of mulch only. The two-step technique is especially useful in arid areas where the seed germinat- ing in the mulch may dry out before roots become established enough to provide water. Seedbed preparation establishes conditions conducive to seed ger- . mination and seedling growth. Seedbed preparation on mining sites is especially important because the heavy equipment commonly compacts the soil, which inhibits seed germination. In order for a seed to germinate and thrive, there must be contact between seed and soil, adequate moisture, and moderate soil temperature. The soil Seedbed Preparation Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 7.8 REVEGETATION Planting depth should not exceed k" Figure 7.2. Cross section of seed germination. must be loose enough to allow root penetration once the seed has germinated (Fig. 7.2). A soil or mulch covering of inch moderates temperature and prevents seed loss to birds. Mulching also con- serves the much-needed moisture for continued seedling develop- ment. Depressions, small pits, and irregularities in the seedbed can greatly enhance the ability of seeds to germinate and thrive. A sheepsfoot roller, land imprinter, or bulldozer can be used to create micro -depressions. Bulldozer tracks parallel to the contours can en- hance seed germination and reduce runoff (see Fig. 4.5). Mulching The primary purposes of mulch are to retain moisture, prevent ero- sion, and moderate soil temperature fluctuations. Among materials that can be used as mulch are: 1 hay or straw, 1 processed mint clippings, 1 wood chips, 1 grass clippings, and 1 wood fiber. Mulches can be applied with blowers, hydromulching equip- ment, or manually. Mulch may be anchored to prevent water or wind erosion by crimping it, adding tackifiers or binders, or by covering it with natural or synthetic netting. Hay or straw mulch can be anchored using a modified agricul- tural disc implement that crimps the hay into the soil. Logs and other woody debris, placed perpendicular to the slope in seeded areas, will help stabilize mulch and can provide valuable shade and microhabitat for the emerging seedlings. Using cattle to control erosion and enhance revegetation of tailings dams and waste rock dumps is now a relatively widespread activity in Arizona and Nevada. Judging by the success in these states, cattle can be a valuable reclamation alternative for some hard -to -reclaim sites in Washington and Oregon, especially those in arid areas with steep slopes. Carefully monitored and controlled cattle grazing can dramati- cally reduce wind and water erosion on slopes and accomplish many of the tasks required for successful revegetation. The hooves of the cattle compact and blend soil materials and, at the same time, create abundant depressions that catch moisture and prevent erosion. Cat- tle urine and excrement provide fertilizer that is generally well dis- tributed and mixed into the slope by grazing activity, and the mi- crobes in the manure are an important ingredient in building a healthy soil. In order for cattle to be used for reclamation, they must be re- stricted to relatively small areas using easily moveable fences, such Cattle as a Reclamation Tool BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 TRANSPLANTING 7.9 as an electric tape fence. Cattle must be moved from one area to another regularly to prevent overgrazing. Salt blocks, water, and feed must also be periodically moved to insure that the entire slope being treated is covered. A pilot project was started in Lake County, Oregon, in 1997. The results are not yet available. Contact DOGAMI-MLR for the latest information on this technique. TRANSPLANTING Transplanting is the technique used for relocating containerized stock, bareroot stock, or plants from elsewhere on site and planting them in another. Planting Times Containerized plants have an advantage over bareroot stock in that they can be successfully transplanted almost any time of year. How- ever, transplanting should not be done during the summer unless irrigation is provided. Trees and shrubs should be planted while they are dormant, gen- erally from November 1 through March 1. Bareroot stock and trans- plants are usually planted in the spring because the plants have to be dormant before they can be dug. Bareroot plants may not be shipped from the nursery until late fall or mid -winter. Spring planting may be appropriate for bareroot stock if the site is subject to frost heav- ing in the late fall or winter. Spring plantings should be done as soon as site conditions al- low. Typically plants should be placed in the ground just before or just after shrubs at the site break dormancy. That can be determined by looking at buds. Buds begin to swell when the plants are `break- ing' their dormant condition. Plants should be adequately acclimatized. This is particularly critical when the environment of the growing nursery or location is different from the planting site. Plants can be acclimatized by mov- ing them to the site before the planting date. Bareroot materials should be kept under refrigeration or the roots should be buried in a shallow trench and kept moist until planting. If moisture conservation is important, planting should be done im- mediately after digging the planting holes to reduce drying of the backfill. When transplanting, keep the majority of the root mass intact (Fig 7.3). Even if care is taken in transplanting, some roots will break. Often the damage is to the fine roots that are essential for providing nutrients and moisture. Pruning the above -ground stem(s) reduces evapotranspiration and increases the likelihood of survival by reducing the plant's demand for nutrients and moisture. It may be helpful to construct berms 2 to 6 inches high around the planting holes to concentrate rainfall and runoff. On sloping ground, leaving the berm open on the uphill side of a planting can be beneficial (Fig. 7.4). Planting Techniques Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 7.10 REVEGETATION Eight Steps in Tree Planting 1. Insert hoe 2. Loosen soil 3. Pull toward you 4. Insert tree 5. Cover roots 6. Cover to base 7. Pack soil with foot 8. Check planting Correct Planting Figure 7.3. Steps in transplanting bareroot or container plants. Mulch will help retain moisture. However, it must be anchored to prevent erosion by water or wind. Mulch is of little use on sites that flood since the mulch washes away. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 Figure 7.4. Transplanted seed- lings on a slope. Small berms on the downslope side of the planting holes help retain runoff. (Redrawn from Banks, 1981.) planting surface PROPAGATING FROM CUTTINGS 7.11 shaded from sun young seedling amended soil runoff collected in depression Tools Required Choice of planting tools will depend upon the revegetation plan, the size of plant materials, and planting conditions. Shovels, picks, pry bars, porthole diggers, hand or power augers, front-end loaders, or backhoes may be needed to develop the planting site. For gathering plant materials from the site, chainsaws, lopping and pruning shears, buck saws, mechanical tree spades, and backhoes or front-end load- ers are useful. Straw or hay for mulch for moisture retention, fencing and wire for plant protection, and cages and stakes for support may also be required. Fencing or cages are highly recommended if deer, beavers, or other plant `predators' are in the area. They appear to seek out recently established trees and shrubs. PROPAGATING The easiest and most economical method for propagation of some FROM CUTTINGS species of woody plants is the use of cuttings. Willows and cotton- woods are the two most common plants propagated from cuttings (Fig. 7.5). The best time to collect cuttings is while the plants are dormant, typically between November 1 and March 1. Cuttings taken near or at the planting site or from a similar elevation zone will have a good chance of surviving on the site. Determining Cuttings should be at least 3 feet long, but the length of the cutting Cutting Length depends on the planting depth required. At least two-thirds of the cutting length should be placed in the ground. The planting depth depends on the mid -summer water table and the potential for erosion in the planting area. Where erosion potential is high or the water table is deep, planting depth and cutting length should be increased. The above -ground stem should have at least three buds exposed. The minimum stem diameter for cuttings should be 3/4 inch. Healthy -looking plants should be used. Willows are particularly susceptible to willow bore—avoid plants with burls, lumps, or scabs surrounded by smooth bark. Several years of drought conditions or other plant stresses will diminish the reserves in the plant and may affect the survival rate. Transplant stock should be selected from wetter areas. Avoid suckers (the current year's growth) because they may not contain adequate stored energy reserves. Trim off all side Collecting Cuttings Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 7.12 REVEGETATION Storing Cuttings branches and remove the apical (top) bud; the apical bud draws too much energy and may affect survival. If cuttings need to be stored longer than several days, they should be kept in a cooler at 24° to 32°F. A mixture of 50 percent latex paint and 50 percent water can be used to mark and seal the top of the cuttings and reduce moisture loss. All cuttings should be soaked prior to planting for at least 24 hours to initiate root growth. At a minimum, the bottom third of the cutting should be submerged. The entire cutting may be soaked once the paint has dried. Rooting hor- mone added to the water may improve the survival rate. A diagonal cut should be made on the bottom for ease of planting and a straight cut on the top. Planting Cuttings can be placed either in the spring or fall, preferably when Cuttings Figure 7.5. Steps in propa- gation by cuttings. the plants are dormant. If cuttings are taken in the fall before A Cut branches 6-8' in length; remove • twigs and leaves. B Store cuttings in water until planted. Rooting hormore may be used to enhance root growth. C Use pry bar in a back and forth motion to make planting hole. H Remove branches and leaves. water table i BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES D 2 feet • • • • • • • • • • • • 2 feet Space plants 2' apart in a staggered pattern. Open File Report 96-2 PROPAGATING FROM CUTTINGS 7.13 dormancy, the leaves should be stripped. (A general rule of thumb is that cuttings should be taken in the late fall or early winter and that rooted plants should be taken in the spring.) Cuttings must be planted with the buds facing up. Be sure to keep track of which end of the cutting is the top—a cutting planted upside down is not likely to survive. For successful plantings, the following guidelines are sug- gested: 1 Select cutting stock from a nearby plant source. 1 Cut when plant is dormant (usually late fall or winter). 1 Use cutting of proper diameter and length. 1 Properly store and maintain the cuttings before planting. I Add root hormones to storage water. 1 Use good planting techniques. Optimum spacing of the cuttings will depend on the site and the purpose of the planting. To achieve good density, plant cuttings 2 feet apart in rows offset by 1 foot (Fig. 7.5D). Cuttings can be planted wiggling a pry bar or a piece of rebar back and forth to de- velop the planting hole (Fig. 7.5C). Critical factors are preventing damage to the bark and ensuring good contact between the cutting and the soil. Pack the soil around the cutting; air pockets around the cuttings will kill the roots. Driving the cutting directly into the ground with a hammer is not recommended because it causes the cutting to split. BIOTECHNICAL The term `biotechnical stabilization' refers to the use of plants to STABILIZATION revegetate and stabilize slopes and stream banks instead of engi- neered structures, such as gabions, retaining walls, or riprap. The planting techniques discussed above may also be used as compo- nents of a system where biotechnical methods are employed. Rock or other structures can be incorporated in the design where planting alone is not enough to stabilize an eroding bank. For a comprehen- sive review of this subject, the Soil Conservation Service Engineer- ing Field Book, Chapter 18, Soil Bioengineering for Upland Slope Protection and Erosion Reduction, is recommended. Brush Layering In brush layering, live woody plant materials, such as willow, cot- tonwood, and dogwood, are placed in layers on a slope to reinforce the soil and prevent shallow slope failures (Figs. 7.6 and 7.7). The layers also act as a. living fence to trap sediment and debris. Brush layering has been successfully used to repair partial fill -slope fail- ures, increase streambank stability, and enhance riparian vegetation. However, brush layering will not correct a deep unstable slope con- dition where mechanical methods of control are needed. If brush layering is used to stabilize an eroded bank, place a blanket of large rock from just above the ordinary high-water mark to just below the ordinary low-water mark. Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 7.14 REVEGETATION Figure 7.6. Details of brush layering in trenches. Start this process from the top down. (Modified from Bellevue Storm and Surface Water Utility, 1989.) Figure 7.7. Brush layering of live plant materials on succes- sive lifts of fill. Grading equip- ment can move and place the vegetation. (Modified from Bellevue Storm and Surface Water Utility, 1989.) ?LAN VIEW SECTION VIEW fill material live branches Starting at the top of a .slope, brush layering is installed by trenching along the contour and then placing the live plant materials prior to backfilling the trench (Fig. 7.6). It may be appropriate to mix species of brush in the trench. Generally the brush -layer branches should be 6 to 8 feet in length, but they can be longer. The number of contour trenches opened at any one time should be lim- ited to prevent destabilization of the slope. Trenches should be excavated so that three-fourths of the live plant material can be buried in the trench, leaving one-fourth of the plant above the ground surface. Once the materials are placed, the excavated soil is then pulled down into the trench to reshape the slope. Brush layering can also be used on fill slopes. In this situation, live plant materials can be placed on successive lifts of backfill. If this method is used, grading equipment can be used for hauling and live branches placed on successive lifts of fill BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 Figure 7.8. Wattle construc- tion and placement. Wattles are bundles of live plant mate- rial, 6-8 inches thick, tied with twine. The butt ends and the tops are alternated and tied to- gether, repeating this process until the necessary length is created. The bundles are then placed in shallow trenches along the contour and partially covered with soil so that about 10-20 percent of the bundle is exposed. (Modified from U.S. Soil Conservation Service, 1992.) Contour Wattling Open File Report 96-2 slightly exposed after installation protrudes 2-3" above bundle PROPAGATING FROM CUTTINGS 7.15 mulching between fascine rows moist backfill prepared trench CROSS SECTION OF CONTOUR WATTLING (not to scale) slope surface live fascine bundle live branches (alternate ends throughout) (2-3' spacing ng /. live stake between stakes) Note the root and leaf development of this bundle a year or two after installation bundle twine (6-8" in diameter) PLAN VIEW OF BUNDLE placing the vegetation (Fig. 7.7). Brush layering is less labor inten- sive than wattling. The first recognized use of contour wattling was in the 1930s. Wat- tling controls erosion by stabilizing surface soils, reducing erosive runoff velocities, increasing infiltration, and trapping sediments. It can be very effective in stabilizing gullies. The bundles are placed across the gully. Wattles are cigar -shaped bundles of live plant material, some- times called 'live fascines'. The bundles are 8 to 10 inches thick and are compressed by tying with twine. The butt ends and the tops of plants are alternated and tied together, repeating this process until the necessary length is created (Fig. 7.8). Wattles are placed in shallow trenches along the contour. On riparian sites, they can be placed diagonally to the water flow or wave action. After placement, the wattles are partially covered with soil so that approximately 10 to 20 percent of the bundle is exposed. Either live or dead stakes will secure the wattles on the slope. Woody plants that work well with this technique are willow, red -osier dogwood, and snowberry. Over time, the planted wattles may be crowded out by more dominant species. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 7.16 REVEGETATION RIPARIAN AND Riparian areas are those on or near thebanks of streams or other WETLAND AREAS bodies of water. They are the zone of direct interaction between ter- restrial and aquatic environments. Wetlands are areas that are per- manently wet or intermittently water covered. (See Forming Wet- lands, p. 4.14.) Vegetation in both areas requires water in the rooting zone on a permanent or seasonal basis. Classification of an area as riparian or wetland is based on factors such as vegetation type, sur- face and subsurface hydrology, topography, and ecosystem func- tion. Ecological Restoring or creating vegetated riparian areas or wetlands can: Functions Plant Selection 1 increase plant species diversity for habitat reconstruction, 1 enhance erosion control and stream bank and/or slope stabilization, 1 help to moderate water temperatures, 1 improve water quality by filtering sediments and other contaminants, 1 provide food for wildlife, 1 provide leaf litter for worms and insects, 1 slow floodwater, and 1 disperse floodwater. Alluvial mining operations or those with intermittent or peren- nial streams in the disturbed area should plan to revegetate wetlands and riparian areas. The woody and herbaceous vegetation that grows in the riparian zone is important in maintaining the health of streams, lakes, and wetlands. Knowing which riparian species are best suited for a particular planting technique is essential for successful revegetation. Species such as willow, cottonwood, and red -osier dogwood can be propa- gated by cuttings, while others, such as red alder, salmonberry, snowberry, thimbleberry, Douglas' spiraea, vine maple, and Pacific ninebark, can only be propagated by transplanting the root mass with the above -ground stem. Those species that have a fibrous, spreading root system can generally be propagated by root division. Planting riparian areas with native trees (cottonwoods, poplar, alders, willows, fir, pines, maples), grasses, legumes (lupine), and forbs can provide nesting cover and accelerate the restoration of pro- ductive habitat. Planting willow, poplar, and cottonwood cuttings is an effective method of building a root matrix and slowing erosion. (See Chapter 2.) In ponds, aquatic grasses, sedges, rushes, and tu- bers should be planted to provide cover and food for insects and fish. Generally, non-native species should be avoided unless rapid stabi- lization is required. Aggressive native species such as common cat- tail and Douglas' spiraea should be used cautiously, because they may crowd out other plants. To insure good growth and survival, species should be planted in environments they are adapted to. Some species are more tolerant of constant inundation than others. For example, big leaf maple and BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 REFERENCES 7.17 Oregon ash should be planted high enough up the bank so that the roots are above the water table. Table 7.1 is a plant selection guide listing plant growth characteristics, requirements, and planting con- ditions necessary for propagation. (For more information on wet- lands vegetation selection, see Vegetation, p. 4.15.) AGRICULTURAL Often the post -mining use calls for commercial agriculture or refor- AND FORESTRY estation. For those situations, the operator may want to plan recla- SUBSEQUENT USES mation with a professional forester or an extension service agent. The Oregon Departments of Forestry or Agriculture and the Wash- ington Department of Natural Resources are other good sources of information. Topsoil For a mine site to be reclaimed for agriculture or forestry, topsoil must be replaced. Operators who have not saved topsoil and subsoil for reclamation will generally not be able to use the site for agricul- ture or forestry because topsoil replacement would be too costly. Other conditions to avoid are excessively stony soils resulting from mixing soils and subsoils with the sand and gravel deposit, compacted pit floors, and inadequate treatment of applied topsoil and subsoil to ameliorate compaction problems. In addition, slopes steeper than 3H:1V will not be as productive for agriculture or for- estry. Segmental reclamation and live topsoiling increase the chances of productive agricultural and forestry land after mining. Detailed knowledge of the sand and gravel deposit is also necessary. The composition of the pit floor is an important component in develop- ing a reclamation plan. For example, if the pit floor is on imperme- able or compressible silty and clayey material, severe soil compact- ion will occur, soil drainage will be impeded, and a perched water table causing excessive wetness will result. From an agricultural standpoint, at least 8 inches of topsoil with suitable subsoils or a minimum of 3 feet of combined topsoil and subsoil overlying a zone saturated with water is needed for most plants during the growing season. Therefore mineral extraction should not occur below the water table. Knowledge of the hydro- logic conditions of the site is necessary for reclamation to be suc- cessful. Factors to Consider REFERENCES Banks, P. T.; Nickel, R. B.; Blome, D. A., 1981, Reclamation and pollution con- trol—Planning guide for small sand and gravel mines: U.S. Bureau of Mines Minerals Research Contract Report, 143 p. Bellevue Storm and Surface Water Utility, 1989, Bioengineering construction techniques: Bellevue Storm and Surface Water Utility, 15 p. Brown, E. R., editor, 1985, Management of wildlife and fish habitats in forests of western Oregon and Washington: U.S. Forest Service Pacific Northwest Re- gion, [R6-F&WL-192-1985], 2 v. Grassland West, 1994, Grassland West reclamation products catalog: Grassland West [Clarkston, Wash.], 24 p. Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 7.18 REVEGETATION Norman, D. K.; Lingley, W. S., Jr., 1992, Reclamation of sand and gravel mines: Washington Geology, v. 20, no. 3, p. 20-31. Myers Biodynamics Inc., 1993, Slope stabilization and erosion control using vegetation—A manual of practice for coastal property owners: Washington Department of Ecology Publication 93-30, 42 p. Rosentreter, Roger; Jorgensen, Ray, 1986, Restoring winter game ranges in south- ern Idaho: Idaho Bureau of Land Management Technical Bulletin 86-3, 26 p. Sherrets, H. D., 1987, Vegetation suitable for rehabilitating burned areas in south- ern Idaho: Idaho Bureau of Land Management Technical Bulletin 87-1, 13 p. Washington State Rangeland Committee, 1983, The Washington interagency guide for conservation and forage plantings: Washington State University Co- operative Extension, 70 p. U.S. Soil Conservation Service, 1992, Engineering field handbook; Chapter 18—Soil bioengineering for upland slope protection and erosion reduction: U.S. Soil Conservation Service, 53 p. ■ BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 Z-96 liodaa alld ued0 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Table 7.1. A partial listing of appropriate native plants suitable for erosion control and slope stabilization. Water requirements: dry—once established, tolerates dry soil conditions during the growing season; moist—requires moist soil throughout the growing season; wet—tolerates saturated soil year-round; usage—relative water uptake by plant. Light requirements: full sun—requires sun throughout the day; sun/shade—requires shade for about half the day; full shade—requires shade through- out the day. Rooting characteristics: fibrous—lacks a central root, root mass composed of fibrous lateral roots; tap—with a stout, central main root; shallow, moderate, or deep refers to relative rooting depth (influenced by soil and ground -water conditions). Planting: sizes given are those that are generally found in nurseries; other sizes may also be available. (Modified from Myers Biodynamics Inc., 1993, with additional data from Ken Thacker, Bureau of Land Management) Scientific name common name Form and habit Water requirements Light requirements Soil Rooting characteristics Planting Comments Acer circinatum vine maple deciduous shrub; may spread aggressively moist sun/shade full shade any soil; tolerates shallow flooding during the growing season moderate fibrous to 4' tall in containers; balled and burlapped plants to 10' tall Large specimens widely available; spreads by root and seed Achilles millefaliumdirect white yarrow perennial forb dry full sun any well drained soil fibrous seeding in fall or spring Aggressive once established Alnus rubra red alder deciduous tree; seeds prolifically on bare soil moist full sun any soil moderatelydeepbareroot fibrous seedlings up to 3' tall; larger plants in containers Fast grower in poor mineral soils; typical 40 -50 -yr lifespan; large limbs become brittle; provides food for birds Arctostaphylos uva-ursi kinnikinnick low -growing shrub; spreads to form dense evergreen carpet dry full sun any slightly acid soil shallow fibrous rooted plants in containers Widely available evergreen ground cover; tolerates salt spray Artemisia tridentata tridentata basin big sagebrush tall evergreen shrub dry full sun deep, well drained soil along drainages very deep fibrous with taproot direct seeding in fall; containerized stock in early spring Variable ecotypes Artemisia tridentata vayseyana mountain sagebrush evergreen shrub dry full sun deep, well drained, cool soils very deep fibrous containerized stock in early spring Variable ecotypes, variety `Hobble Creek' Artemisia tridentata wyomingensis Wyoming big sagebrush evergreen shrub dry full sun deep, well drained soil very deep fibrous with taproot containerized stock in early spring Variable ecotypes Atriplex canescens fourwing saltbush evergreen shrub dry full sun salt and alkaline tolerant deep fibrous cuttings or containerized stock in early spring Tolerant of grazing; nitrogen fixer Cornus stolonifera or Cornus sericea red -osier dogwood deciduous shrub; does not spread moist to wet full sun sun/shade any soil; tolerates shallow flooding during the growing season shallow fibrous rooted plants to 6' tall in containers; bareroot and cuttings 18-24" tall Produces bright red stems Elymus elymoides bottlebrUsh squirreltail perennial bunchgrass dry full sun well drained, disturbed sites deep fibrous direct seeding in fall or early spring Very drought tolerant Elymus lanceolatus streambank wheatgrass perennial sod former dry full sun well drained soils fibrous, spreading with rhizomes direct seeding in fall or earlyspring Variety `Sodar' Elymus trachycaulus slender wheatgrass perennial bunchgrass dry full sun well drained, cold soils deep fibrous direct seeding in fall or early spring Variety 'Primar' BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Z-96 poda>:l alld uedp Table 7.1. A partial listing of appropriate native plants suitable for erosion control and slope stabilization (continued) Scientific name common name Form and habit Water requirements Light requirements Soil Rooting characteristics planting Comments Gaulrheria shallop salal evergreen shrub; forms thickets by underground runners dry to moist sun/shade full shade any soil; tolerates shallow flooding during the growing season shallow fibrous rooted plants 4-12" tall Widely available; difficult to establish; slow growing; tolerates salt spray Helianthus annuus annual sunflower annual forb dry full sun any; prefers disturbed areas fibrous direct seeding in fall or spring Easily established; food value for birds r Holodiscus discolor ocean spray deciduous shrub; does not always spread aggressively dry to moist full sun sun/shade any soil; tolerates shallow flooding during the growing season moderate fibrous to 2' tall in containers; bareroot 6-12" tall Produces attractive sprays of creamy white flowers; will root spread Linium lewisii Lewis flax perennial forb dry full sun well drained; tolerant of rockyconditions deep fibrous direct seeding in fall orspring Variety 'Apgar' Lonicera involucrata black twinberry deciduous shrub; does not spread moist full sun any soil shallow fibrous to 6' tall in containers; bareroot 18-24" tall Produces yellow twin flowers and black twin berries; some success reported from cuttings Myrica californica wax myrtle evergreen shrub; does not spread dry to moist full sun sun/shade slightly acid soil with organic matter moderate fibrous rooted plants to 10' Tolerates salt spray; high wildlife usage Oemleria cerasiformisfull Indian plum deciduous shrub;,shallow forms open stands by underground runners moist sun to full shade any soil fibrous with underground runners to 4' in containers; bareroot 6-8' tall Male and female flowers are on separate plants; only female flowers produce the 'plums' Oryzopsis hymenoides Indian ricegrass perennial bunchgrass dry full sun well drained; prefers sandy soil deep fibrous direct seeding in fall or early spring Variety 'Nezpar'; very drought tolerant Pershia iridentata antelope bitterbrush perennial shrub dry moderately shade tolerant deep, well drained soil; best on coarse soils deep fibrous containerized stock in early spring Variable ecotypes; high forage value; nitrogen fixer Physocarpus capitatus Pacific ninebark deciduous shrub; does not spread moist full sun sun/shade any soil shallow fibrous to 6' tall in containers; bareroot 18-24" tall Produces masses of tiny white flowers that change to reddish seed clumps Populus trichocarpa northern black cottonwood deciduous tree; does not spread moist; usage high full sun any soil; tolerates shallow flooding during the growing season fibrous, shallow to deep and widespread to 10' tall in containers; cuttings 18-24"; whips 4' tall Fast grower in moist to saturated soils; also widely used for streambank stabilization; potential for wind throw Pseudoroegneria spicara bluebunch wheatgrass perennial bunchgrass dry full sun well drained soil deep fibrous direct seeding in fall or early spring Varieties `Secar' and `Goldar' Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas fir coniferous tree; does not spread dry to moist; usage moderate full sun any soil tap, modified tap; shallow to deep and widespread 12-18" bareroot seedlings; larger plants in containers Not good for slope stabilization; high root strength but typical shallow; can be planted in stands; good eagle and osprey perch and nest trees; potential for wind throw in thin or disturbed soils Rhamnus purshiana cascara, buckthorn deciduous tree/shrub; does not spread moist full sun any soil moderately deep tap to 6' tall in containers; bareroot 18-24" tall Shiny black berries are favored by cedar waxwings Ribes sanguineum red currant deciduous shrub; does not spread dry to moist full sun sun/shade any soil shallow fibrous (not extensive) to 4' tall in containers; bareroot to 18" tall Ornamental native; produces clusters of white to red flowers NOI1V1303A31:1 Z-96 podai{ gild ued° BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Table 7.1. A partial listing of appropriate native plants suitable for erosion control and slope stabilization (continued) Scientific name common name Form and habit Water requirements Light requirements Soil Rooting characteristics Planting Comments Rosa nutkana Nootka rose deciduous shrub; forms thickets by underground runners moist full sun any soil, prefers rich soils shallow fibrous (not extensive) rooted plants to 2' tall in containers; bareroot to 18" tall; cuttings 12-18" Thickets of stems create a formidable barrier; pink flowers followed by large red hips; tolerates salt spray Rubus parviflorus thimbleberry deciduous shrub; forms thickets by underground runners moist full sun sun/shade any soil shallow fibrous rooted plants in containers May be difficult to find in some native plant nurseries Rubus spectabilis salmonberry deciduous shrub; forms thickets by underground runners moist sun/shade full shade any soil shallow fibrous to 4' tall in containers; bareroot 6-8" tall; cuttings 18-24" Spreads quickly once established; berries provide food for a variety of songbirds Salix hookeriana Hooker willow deciduous shrub; does not spread moist to wet full sun any soil moderately deep fibrous to 6' tall in containers; bareroot and cuttings 18-24 " tall; whips 4'; whips not recommended Variety, 'Clatsop', has vigor, disease resistance, and attractive foliage; salt spray tolerant Salix lasiandra Pacific willow deciduous multi -stemmed tree; does not spread wet; usage high? full sun any soil; tolerates shallow flooding during the growing season fibrous, moderately deepflooded and widespread to 10' tall in containers; cuttings 18-24"; whips 4' Fast grower in saturated or shallowly areas; 25 -year lifespan; large limbs become brittle Salix scouleriana scouter willow deciduous tree/shrub; does not spread dry to moist; usage high? full sun any soil fibrous, moderately deep and widespread to 10' tall in containers; cuttings,18-24"; whips 4'; whips not recommended Of the willows listed here, this species tolerates the driest conditions Salix sitchensis Sitka willow deciduous tree or shrub; does not spread moist; usage high? full sun any soil fibrous, moderately deep and widespread to 10' tall in containers; cuttings 18-24"; whips 4'; whips not recommended Fast grower in moist to saturated soils; widely used for streambank stabilization Sambucus racemosa red elderberry deciduous shrub; does not spread moist full sun to full shade any soil shallow fibrous to 6' tall in containers; bareroot 18-24" tall Produces red nonedible berries; some success reported from woody cuttings Spiraea douglasiispreads Douglas' spiraea deciduous shrub; by seed and underground runners moist to wet full sun any soil; tolerates shallow flooding during the growing season shallow fibrous to 6' tall in containers; bareroot and cuttings 18-24" tall Spreads quickly and aggressively in most sites Symphoricarpus albus snowberry deciduous shrub; forms thickets by underground runners dry to moist full sun to full shade any soil; tolerates shallow flooding during the growing season shallow fibrous rooted plants to 24" tall; bareroot 6-18" tall Tolerates high winds and often grows on vegetated slopes overlooking salt water Vaccinium ovatum evergreen huckleberry evergreen shrub; does not spread dry to moist sun/shade full shade slightly acid shallow fibrous rooted plants to 2' tall in containers Attractive, but slow-growing; difficult to establish; tolerates salt spray native plant seed mixes annual and perennial and forb mixes grassp available dry to wet; usage medium to high ' species dependent • species dependent shallow fibrous seed; seeds of woody plants also available (success typically low); very slow to establish Avoid exotic commercial mixes; seed mixes typically used in conjunction with other types of plantings; typically short-term erosion control technique BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Z-96 podaa ally ued0 Table 7.2. Plant selection. guide for legumes, except for lupines—Species characteristics, adaptations, and seeding rates. (See Table 7.3 for lupines.) PLS, pure live seed. (Modified from Grassland West, 1994) Scientific name common name Adaptation Minimum precipitation (inches/year) Bloat/nonbloat PLS pounds/acre Seeds/pound Varieties Astragalus cicer cicer milkvetch best on medium to clayey textures 12 to 18 NB 20 to 25 145,000 Lutana, Monarch Coronilla veria crownvetch well -drained, most soil, neutral pH 20 to 25 B 15 to 20 110,000 Emerald, Penngift, Chemung Hedysarum boreale northern sweetvetch drought -tolerant native legume 12 NB 10 to 15 30,000 Timp Lotus corniculatus birdsfoot trefoil medium to clay soils 18 to 24 NB 4 to 6 418,000 • Dawn, Empire Medicago sativa alfalfa deep, well -drained soils, all textures I S to 18 B 8 to I S 210,000 Legacy, Cimarron, Vector, Angler, Cody Melilotus alba white sweetclover drought, saline, and alkaline tolerant 12 B 10 to 15 260,000 Melilotus officinalis yellow sweetclover wide range of soils 12 B 10 to 15 260,000 Madrid Onobrychis viciaefolia sainfoin deep, well -drained soils of all textures 15 to 18 NB 35 to 45 30,000 Eski, Remont, Renumex Trifolium fragiferum strawberry clover wet, saline and alkaline tolerant; shade 15 to 18 B 5 to 15 300,000 O'Connors, Salina, Fresa Trifolium hirtum rose clover warm winter ranges, green crop 15 to 20 B 20 140,000 Hykon Trifolium hybridum alsike clover heavy silt to clay soils, alkaline sites 18 to 20 B 6 to 8 680,000 Trifolium prutenre red clover heavy, fertile, well -drained soils 18 to 20 B 8 to 10 275,000 Kenland, Redland, Arlington, Mammoth Trifolium repens white dutch clover medium to clayey, shallow soils 18 to 20 B 2 to 6 850,000 Trifolium repens latum ladino clover medium to clayey, shallow soils 18 to 20 B 2 to 6 800,000 Vicia americana American vetch wide range of soils, best in meadows 18 to 20 NB 10 to 20 75,000 Vicia dasycarpa woolly pod vetch wide range of soils, best on rich loam 18 to 20 NB 35 to 40 100,000 Lana Vicia villosa hairy vetch wide range of soils, tolerates poor sandy sites 18 to 20 NB 25 to 35 20,000 NOLLV1303A38 Z-96 podaa alld uad0 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Table 7.3. Plant selection guide for lupines—Species characteristics, adaptations, and seeding rates. PLS, pure live seed. (Modified from Grassland West, 1994) Scientific name common name Adapted range Annual/ perennial Color Height (inches) Native/ introduced Seeding rate (PLS pounds/acre) Seeds/ pound Lupinus aipestris mountain lupine Rocky Mountains and western North America perennial blue 12 to 20 N 25 12,500 Lupinus arizonicus desert lupine southwest deserts annual blue 12 to 48 N 3 135,000 Lupinus caudatus tailcup lupine Rocky Mountains and western North America perennial blue 12 to 24 N 12 27,600 Lupinus densiflorus aureus golden lupine Pacific coast annual yellow 24 to 36 N 35 13,500 Lupinus perennis wild lupine throughout North America perennial purplish -blue 12 to 24 N 1 I 21,000 Lupinus sericeus silky lupine Rocky Mountains and western North America perennial blue 12 to 24 N 10 to 25 12,900 Lupinus succufentus arroyo lupine Pacific coast and northwestern North America annual bloc 24 to 28 N 20 15,600 Lupinus texensis Texas bluebonnet southcentral and southwestern North America annual blue and white 16 to 20 N 16 to 20 16,000 7.24 REVEGETATION Table 7.4. Plants for special -use situations. PLS, pure live seed. (Modified from Grassland West, 1994. Copyright ©1994 by Grassland West. Used by permission of the publisher) DROUGHT -TOLERANT BUNCHGRASSES Scientific name Common name Cool/warm season Minimum precip. (inJyr) Bunch/sod former Native/ introduced PLS lb/acre Planting dates Agropyron inerme beardless bluebunch wheatgrass C 8 B N 7 to 8 spring or fall Agropyron desertorum standard crested wheatgrass C 10 B I 6 to 8 spring or fall Agropyron elongarum tall wheatgrass C 8 B I 6 to 8 spring or fall Agropyron sibiricum Siberian wheatgrass C 6 B I 6 to 8 fall Agropyron spicatum bluebunch wheatgrass C 8 B N 6 to 8 spring or fall Bouteloua curtipendula sideoats grama W 8 B N 3 to 6 spring or fall Elymus cinereus Great Basin wildrye C 12 B N 9 spring or fall Elymus elymoides bottlebrush squirreltail C 6 B N 8 to 10 spring or fall Elymus junceus Russian wildrye C 12 B I 8 to 10 spring or fall Eragrostis curvulaW weeping lovegrass 16 B 1 2 April to August 15 Festuca longifolia hard fescue C 16 B 1 10 spring or fall Festuca ovina sheep fescue C 10 B N 10 spring or fall Oryzopsis hymenoides Indian ricegrass C 9 B N 6 to 8 spring or fall Poa nevadensis Nevada bluegrass C 10 B N 3 spring or fall Sporobolus cryptandrus sand dropseed W 10 B N 1 April to May 31 Stipa comata needle and thread C 10 B N 8 spring or fall DROUGHT -TOLERANT SOD -FORMING GRASSES Agropyron dasystachyum thickspike wheatgrass C 8 S N 6 to 8 spring or fall Agropyron riparium streambank wheatgrass C 8 S N 6 to 8 spring or fall Agropyron smithii . western wheatgrass C 10 S N 10 spring or fall Bouteloua gracilis blue grama W 12 S N 2 to 3 spring or fall Buchloe dactyloidesJune buffalograss W 12 S N 4 to 8 to August 15 Cynodon dactylon Bermuda grass W 10 S I 15 April to August Elytrigia intermedia intermedia intermediate wheatgrass C 14 S I 15 spring or fall Elytrigia intermedia trichophorum pubescent wheatgrass C 14 S I 10 to 12 fall Festuca rubra red fescue C 18 S I 10 spring or fall Poa compressa Canada bluegrass C 18 S I 1 to 2 spring or fall Schizachyrium scoparium little bluestem W 14 S N 3 to 4 spring or fall BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 TABLES 7.25 ACID -TOLERANT GRASSES Scientific name common name CooVwarm season Minimum precip. (in./yr) Bunch/sod former Native/ introduced PLS lb/acre Planting dates Agrostis alba redtop C 20 S I 1 spring or fall Agrostis palustris creeping bentgrass C 20 S I .5 to 1 spring or fall Agrostis tennis colonial bentgrass C 18 S I • 2 spring or fall Alopecurus arundinaceus creeping foxtail C 25 S I 3 to 4 spring or fall Alopecurus pratensis meadow foxtail C 25 B I 4 to 5 spring or fall Cynodon dacrylon Bermuda grass W 10 S 1 15 April to August Eragrostis curvula weeping lovegrass W 16 B I 2 spring or fall Festuca longifolia hard fescue C 16 B I 10 spring or fall Festuca rubra red fescue C 18 S I 10 spring or fall Festuca rubra, var. commutata Chewings fescue C 18 B I 4 to 5 spring or fall Lolium perenne perennial ryegrass C 12 B I 25 to 35 spring or fall Panicum virgatum switchgrass W 18 S N 5 to 8 June to August Poa compressa Canada bluegrass C 18 S I 1 to 2 spring or fall ALKALINE -TOLERANT GRASSES Agropyron desertorum standard crested wheatgrass C 10 B I 7 to 10 spring or fall Agropyron elongatum tall wheatgrass C 8 B I 6 to 20 spring Agropyron riparium streambank wheatgrass C 8 S N 6 to 8 spring or fall Agropyron smithii western wheatgrass C 10 S N 10 spring or fall Agropyron trachycaulum slender wheatgrass C 16 B N 6 to 8 fall Cynodon dacrylon Bermuda grass W 10 S , I 15 April to August Distichlis stricta inland saltgrass W 8 S N 10 June to August Elymus canadensis Canada wildrye C 12 B N 7 spring or fall Elymus cinereus Great Basin wildrye C 8 B N 9 spring or fall Elymus junceus Russian wildrye C 12 B I 8 to 10 fall Lolium perenne perennial ryegrass C 12 B I 25 to 35 spring or fall Puccinellia distans alkaligrass C 15 B N 2 to 3 spring or fall Sporobolus airoides alkali sacaton W 6 B N 2 to 3 July to October Open File Report 96-2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES 7.26 REVEGETATION GRASSES AND LEGUMES TOLERANT OF OCCASIONALLY SATURATED SOILS Scientific name Common name Cool/warm season Minimum precip. (inJyr) Bunch/sod former Native/ introduced PLS Ib/acre Planting dates Agrostis alba redtop C 20 S I 1 spring or fall Agrostis palustris creeping bentgrass C 20 S I .5 to 1 spring or fall Alopecurus arundinaceus creeping foxtail C 25 S I 3 to 4 spring or fall Alopecurus pratensis meadow foxtail C 25 B I 4 to 5 spring or fall Festuca elatior meadow fescue C 25 B I 6 spring or fall Lolium perenne perennial ryegrass C 12 B I 25 to 35 spring or fall Phalaris arundinacea reed canarygrass C 16 S N 5 to 10 spring or fall Poa trivialis Poa trivialis C 25 S I 4 spring or fall Trifolium hybridum alsike clover C 35 B H 6 to 8 spring COLD -TOLERANT GRASSES Deschampia caespirosa tufted hairgrass C 20 B N 1 to 2 spring or fall Elymus cinereas Great Basin wildrye C 12 B N 9 spring or fall Elymus elymoides bottlebrush squirreltail C 6 B N 8 to 10 spring or fall Festuca elatior meadow fescue C 25 B I 6 spring or fall Festuca longifolia hard fescue C 16 B I 10 spring or fall Festuca ovina sheep fescue C 10 B N 10 spring or fall Festuca rubra red fescue C 18 S I 10 spring or fall Festuca rubra, var. commutate Chewings fescue C 18 B I 4 to 5 spring or fall Poa alpinum alpine bluegrass C 20 B N 1 spring or fall Poa pratensis Kentucky bluegrass C 18 S N 2 to 3 spring or fall GRASSES PROVIDING TEMPORARY COVER (These grasses are generally planted in the spring for temporary cover. They should not be used for permanent revegetation.) Arrhenatherum elarius Hordeum vulgare Secale cereale tall oatgrass barley winter rye Avena sativa Lolium multiflorum Sorghum vulgare, var. sudanense oats annual ryegrass Sudangrass Bromus arvensis field brome BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECLAIMING SURFACE MINES Open File Report 96-2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS - MINERAL EXTRACTION 21A.22.010 - 21A.22.060 Sections: 21A.22.010 21A.22.020 21A.22.030 21A.22.040 21A.22.050 21A.22.060 21A.22.070 21A.22.080 21A.22.090 Chapter 21A.22 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS --MMINERAL- EXTRACTION Purpose. Exemptions. Grading permits required. Nonconforming extradtive operations. Periodic review. Site design standards. Operating standards. Reclamation. Financial guarantees. 21A.22.010 Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to establish standards which minimize the impacts of extractive operations upon surrounding properties by: A. Ensuring adequate review of operating aspects of extractive sites; B. Requiring project phasing on large sites to minimize environmental impacts; C. Requiring minimum site areas large enough to provide setbacks and mitigations necessary to protect environmental quality; and D. Requiring periodic review of extractive and processing operations to ensure compliance with the most current operating standards. (Ord. 11157 § 20, 1993: Ord. 10870 § 439, 1993). 21A.22.020 Exemptions. The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to uses or activities specifically exempted in K.C.C. 16.82.050. (Ord. 10870 § 440, 1993). 21A.22.030 Grading permits required. Extractive operations shall commence only after issuance of a grading permit. (Ord. 10870 § 441, 1993). 21A.22.040 Nonconforming extractive operations. To the extent determined feasible by the county, nonconforming extractive operations shall be brought into conformance with the operating standards of K.C.C. 21A.22.070. (Ord. 10870 § 442, 1993). 21A.22.050 Periodic review. Unless a more frequent review is required by the county, periodic review of extractive and processing operations shall be provided as follows: A. All extractive operations shall be subject to a review of development and operating standards at five year intervals; B. The periodic review shall be: 1. Conducted by the director or zoning adjustor pursuant to the review process outlined in K.C.C. 21A.42.040 - .090.; and 2. Used to determine that the site is operating consistent with the most current standards and to establish other conditions as necessary to mitigate identifiable environmental impacts. (Ord. 11157 § 21, 1993: Ord. 10870 § 443, 1993). 21A.22.060 Site design standards. Except as provided for nonconforming extractive operations in K.C.C. 21A.22.040, all extractive and processing operations shall at minimum comply with the following standards: 21A-913 (King_County 12-95) • • 21A.22.060 - 21A.22.070 ZONING A. The minimum site area of an extractive operation shall be 10 acres. B. Extractive operations on sites larger than 20 acres shall occur in phases to minimize environmental impacts. The size of each phase shall be determined during the review process; C. Fences shall be: 1. Provided in a manner which discourages access to safety hazards which may arise on areas of the site where: a. active extracting, processing, stockpiling and loading of materials is occurring; b. any unstable slope or any slope exceeding a grade of 40 percent is present; or c. any settling pond or other stormwater facility is present; five be 2. At least six feet in feet from the outside of the 3. Installed with lockable gates 4. No more than four inches from 5. Maintained in good repair; D. Warning and trespass signs advising of the extractive operation placed on the perimeter of the site adjacent to RA, UR or R zones at intervals no greater than 200 feet along any unfenced portion site where the items noted in subsection C.1.a-c are present; E. Structural setbacks from property lines shall be as follows: 1. Buildings or structures used in the processing of materials be no closer than: a. One hundred feet from any UR or R the setback may be reduced to 50 feet when the structures are proposed is 50 feet or greater zoned property, or b. Twenty feet from any other to another extractive site, or c. Twenty feet from any public street. 2. Offices, scale facilities, equipment stockpiles shall not be closer than 20 feet from any adjacent to another extractive site; F. No clearing, grading or excavation, excluding that necessary for roadway or storm drainage facility construction, shall be permitted within 20 feet of any property line except along any portion of the perimeter to another extractive operation provided that such activities may be to an approved reclamation plan; G. Landscaping as required pursuant to K.C.C. 21A.16 shall be along any portion of the site perimeter where disturbances such height fence; above the grade measured at all openings at a or entrances; the ground to fence bottom; and point shall of the zoned grade below properties where the grade such shall except that building or or of said UR R zoned property, except when adjacent storage buildings and property line except when adjacent pursuant p rovided as site clearing and grading, or mineral extraction or processing is performed, except where adjacent to another extractive operation; and H. Lighting shall: 1. Be limited to that required for security, lighting of structures and equipment, and vehicle operations; and 2. Not direct glare onto surrounding properties. (Ord. 11621 § 67, 1994: 11157 § 22, 1993: Ord. 10870 § 444, 1993). 21A.22.070 Operating standards. All operating standards shall be as specified in K.C.C. 16.82 except: A. Noise levels produced by an extractive operation shall not exceed levels specified by the King County Noise Ordinance. B. Blasting shall be conducted: 1. ,Consistent with the methods specified in the Office of Surface ,Mining, 1987 Blasting Guidance Manual; (King County 12-95) 21A-914 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS - MINERAL EXTRACTION 21A.22.070 - 21A.22.090 • i 2. During daylight hours; and 3. According to a time schedule that: a. features regular or predictable times, except in the case of an emergency; 'and b. is provided to residents within one-half mile of the site; C. Dust and smoke produced by extractive operations shall not substantially increase the existing levels of suspended particulates at the perimeter of the site and shall be controlled by watering of the site and equipment or other methods specified by the county; D. The applicant shall provide for measures to prevent transport of rocks, dirt and mud from trucks onto public roadways; E. Traffic control measures such as flagmen or warning signs as determined by the county shall be provided by the applicant during all hours of operation; and F. The applicant shall be responsible for cleaning of debris or repairing of damage to roadways caused by the operation. (Ord. 11621 § 68, 1994: 10870 § 445, 1993). 21A.22.080 Reclamation. A reclamation plan approved pursuant to the requirements of RCW 78.44.090 shall be submitted prior to the effective date of a rezone approval. (Ord. 11157 § 23, 1993: Ord. 10870 § 446, 1993). 21A.22.090 Financial guarantees. Financial guarantees shall be required consistent with the provisions of Title 27A. (Ord. 12020 § 53, 1995: Ord. 11157 § 24, 1993: Ord. 10870 § 447, 1993). 21A-915 (King County 12-95) The applicant has also submitted an erosion control plan that includes silt fencing, a sediment pond and an interceptor swale that connects to existing outfall to the Duwamish River. The time to complete the work is approximately one year; however, the time frame may be somewhat longer in order to complete the work during favorable wet weather. The applicant's geotechnical consultant suggests that the work be done in two six month periods that will coincide with the fall winter seasons. Proponent: R.W. Thorpe & Associates, Inc. for David White, property owner Location: 3800 S. 115 Street (Tax Parcel ID No. 1023049057) Approvals required: Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Surface Mine Land Reclamation Permit (DNR) General NPDES Stormwater Permit (DOE) Miscellaneous Public Works Permit for Land Altering, Hauling, and Storm Drainage. Tree Clearing Permit Lead Agency: City of Tukwila, Department of Community Development Relevance to Nonproject Environmental Impact Statement for the Tukwila Manufacturing Industrial Center A staff level administrative decision was made that the proposal does not qualify for a Planned Action. The proposal does not meet the initial qualification criteria because it is not a "permitted use" and , as proposed will have unmitigated impacts. Other Agencies of Jurisdiction: Department of Natural Resources Department of Ecology Public Input A Notice of Application was mailed to surrounding property owners and residents and posted on the site on October 20, 1999. Correspondence from eight people and a petition signed by 70 residents opposing the project on the basis of concern for structural damage to houses and roads, overall land instability, air pollution, noise pollution, and destruction of a visual landmark, a paleontological resource, and wildlife habitat were submitted. -2- Recommendation: Determination of Significance Documents considered in preparing SEPA report: Reference No. Title Author Date 1. Tukwila Fossils Elizabeth Nesbitt Research Paleontologist Burke State Museum 20 January 1995 2. Off -Site Wetlands Delineation and Typing Wetland Resources, Inc 26 April 1999 3. Rock Excavation Issues Milbor-Pita & Associates 15 June 1999 4. Erosion Control Report DOWL Engineers July 1999 5. SEPA Checklist R.W. Thorpe and Associates, Inc. August 1999 6. Request for Additional Information Letter City of Tukwila 17 November 2000 7. Peer Review of Tukwila Rock Pile Application Shannon & Wilson 10 April 2000 8. Response to November 17, 1999 Letter R.W. Thorpe and Associates, Inc. 9 May 2000 9. Revised SEPA Checklist R.W. Thorpe and Associates, Inc. 9 May 2000 10. Geotechnical Response to City Letter Milbor-Pita & Associates 17 December 1999 Submitted 9 May 2000 11. Response to Peer Review Milbor-Pita & Associates 24 April 2000 12. Vehicle Trip Generation Analysis Transportation Planning & Engineering PE 5 May 2000 13. Native American Cultural Articles The Weekly (1980) Waterman Files (no date) Ballard (1929) 9 May 2000 -3- Summary Findings on Primary Impacts Earth The site is mapped on the City's sensitive area maps as being both Class 1, where landslide potential is low and have slopes less than 20%. The site also includes Class 3 soils, where landslide potential is high and includes areas sloping between 20% and 40% and which are underlain by relatively impermeable soils or by bedrock and which also include all areas sloping more steeply than 40%. Within areas of potential geologic instability, the City requires a geotechnical analysis and recommendation for the need for and the width of any buffers necessary to achieve the goals of the Sensitive Areas Chapter. The State Department of Natural Resources defines a surface mine as "any area or areas where extraction of minerals results in more than three acres of disturbed areas or surface mine slopes greater than thirty feet high and steeper than 1 foot horizontal to 1 foot vertical. The definition of surface mining excludes excavations or grading used primarily for on-site construction, on-site road maintenance, or on-site landfill construction. Surface Mining Chapter (RCW 78.44.031) The rock outcrops, excluding the eastern buffer, comprise approximately 4.5 acres. DNR geologists say the application is likely to require a DNR reclamation permit especially in light of there being no application for actual construction on the site. According to Milbor-Pita, existing vertical rock faces show evidence of the site being previously quarried and that these vertical faces appear to be stable. The main rock types are andesite and breccia or what is referred to as Tukwila Formation. Smaller amounts of soft sedimentary rock outcrops occur on the flanks of the hill and alluvial soils occur on the flat areas surrounding the hill. Milbor-Pita reviewed previous site analysis conducted by Shannon and Wilson and Earth Consultants. Supplemental test pits were done, in addition to those conducted by Earth Consultants, and included two bores, which were used to evaluate: • the excavation requirements of the site, and • slope stability of the finished excavated perimeter. Milbor-Pita conclude that all the proposed excavation could be accomplished by mechanical means but such excavation will be very slow and costly and could create greater levels of noise and dust impacts on surrounding residents than blasting. They estimate that site excavation will be 1/3 light mechanical, 1/3 heavy mechanical and 1/3 blasting. Milbor-Pita states that excavated material will be of a size that is suitable for use as site fill. Any oversize rock will be separated by dozer and/or loader and stockpiled for removal to an off-site location. No dimensions or further discussion is given on the excavated material. -4- • • Of the two different types of blasting proposed, the loosening or controlled blasting is proposed in the area closest to the property edge that abuts residences. Within the 100 to 200 feet area west of the east property line, these loosening types of blasts are designed to heave the jointed rock mass rather than significantly break it. Heaving is accomplished by limiting the amount of explosive and matching the speed of the explosive to the sonic velocity of the rock mass. This requires closely spaced holes, which results in significantly higher costs per cubic yard of material. Production blasting will occur west of the 200 -foot setback from the east property line. The applicant describes a three-step excavation method. The benches will first be excavated with a large ripper dozer. Hard spots will then be attacked with a large hydraulic breaker. Any spots resistant to the breaker will be drilled and shot with blasts. The location will determine whether a production or controlling loosening blast will occur. In addition they state that blasting will average (emphasis added) one a day and will be limited to relatively small events, which in their experience significantly reduces complaints. The applicant proposes to create a new hill crest and rock face 100 feet west of the eastern boundary line. The plans submitted with the application are contradicted by the most recent drawing (Soil & Rock Excavation sketch Cross Section, no date) from the applicant's geotechnical consultant Milbor-Pita, that shows the 100 foot wide buffer from the eastern property line. The depth of the blast hole and subsequent excavation bench will be 15 feet deep by approximately 7.5 feet in distance resulting in a 75 foot high rock face. Shannon and Wilson, the peer reviewer, indicate that because a new rock face/slope is being created, its stability is uncertain. However because the proposed slope/rock face will be 100 feet from the east property line, it is unlikely that slope instability will result in disturbance off the property. Three types of impacts are possible from blasting: 1. Flyrock Milbor-Pita states that flyrock distances are dependent upon powder factors rather than hole diameters. They estimate flyrock potential of 100 feet and that this is somewhat irrelevant because they plan on controlling for any flyrock through proper stemming (packing of the drilled blast hole after the charge has been placed,) loading of the blast holes and through the use of blast mats. Flyrock impacts may also result when the sequence of blasts does not occur in the correct order. The applicant proposes to submit a Project Safety Plan that will provide a more detailed blast plan that controls for potential flyrock problems. -5- 2. Ground Vibrations There are two types of concerns associated with ground vibrations: structural damage and neighborhood complaints. The standard considered when evaluating potential impacts is maximum peak particle velocity (ppv, or intensity of the vibration) which is affected by the weight of explosives detonated within 8 millisecond time intervals during the blast. For background, the design of the blast loads creates ground vibrations that are measured on a seismometer, which can measure both the ppv and also the frequency of the ground vibration, measured in Hertz. The more closely spaced the wave created by the blast from peak to peak or the higher frequency of the vibration combined with a low ppv results in a lower impact to humans and structures. A high ppv combined with a wider spaced or lower frequency vibration results in a higher impact to humans and structures. The Office of Surface Mining (OSM) and the U.S. Bureau of Mines (USBM) have guidelines for maximum peak particle velocities that, if not exceeded, will limit the potential for structural damage. The agencies list a range of 0.2 to 2.0 inches per second of maximum velocities, which are tied to and dependent on either the predominant blast vibration frequency or the distance to the nearest structure. Milbor-Pita researched records that show the predominance of frequencies in the range of 10 to 100 Hertz when the ppv are less than 1.0 to 2.0 inches per second. Structural damage occurs at frequencies greater than 10 Hertz. The Milbor-Pita blast plan states that the maximum ppv achieved will be 1 inch per second. It is not clear if this is at all points around the property line. The Shannon and Wilson peer review cites a study showing complaints by persons located near a blast site. See below. The report does not mention the distance from the blast that the respondents are located but lists .20 as troublesome. Response Particle velocity (in.sec.) Noticeable .02 Troublesome .20 Severe .70 3. Air Blasts Air blast is an atmospheric pressure wave consisting of both high frequency and low frequency sound. The high frequency sound can be audible to people and the low frequency sound may be inaudible but experienced as concussion. According to Shannon and Wilson, the OSM limit air blasts to 128 decibels at any structure located within 1/2 mile of the permit area. Milbor-Pita calculates that their production blasting will result in a maximum air blast of 120 decibels during production blasts and 100 — 105 decibels during controlled blasting. It is not clear at what distance this measurement would occur. -6- 4. Fumes and Smoke See AIR below. In addition to the issues surrounding the blasting and mechanical removal of the rock are the issues of actual removal of the earth to other portions of the site and off site. The area of excavation on any given day will range from 1000 to 2000 square feet. The applicant has not clearly indicated if they are proposing an engineered fill and_preload. Shannon and Wilson state that the material excavated may not be suitable fill if the gradation of the rock is poor. That is, if the fill consists of a high percentage of boulder sized fragments with insufficient fines and smaller particles to fill between the voids of the larger rock fragments. Applicant states that they will monitor and be responsible for appropriate fill placement on site. Shannon & Wilson in a previous analysis recommended preloading the compressible soils on site, including clearing organics then placing and compacting the fill in controlled lifts. They recommended installation of settlement plates in 100 foot grids. The Erosion Control Plan and Report prepared by DOWL engineers states that work will start east and move west. This staging sequence requires greater description. Discussion is needed of how the site will be preloaded and filled in conjunction with the earth removal activities. Additional Analysis Needed/Potential Mitigation • Project Safety Plan including: ❖ fencing of unstable or sensitive slopes, extraction areas, etc. ❖ signage ❖ qualifications of blasting personnel • Revised Blast Plan that meets the more restrictive of the OSM and USBM guidelines/standards for surface mining activities. It should include: ❖ air blast calculations and controls analysis ❖ typical blast pattern and estimate of the number of blasts ❖ how blast holes will be stemmed and rock surface cleaned to control flyrock ❖ blast hole loading diagrams ❖ blast locations ❖ number and location of delays ❖ plans and procedures for conducting trial blasts ❖ description of trial blasts for control of flyrock and fumes ❖ quantity of explosives and blasting agents on the property at any time ❖ description of transportation, handling and use of explosives and blasting agents + traffic control • Public Notice Plan to all residents and business owners within %2 mile of site -7- • Pre and post Blast Structure Surveys that includes: ❖ location and description of nearest structures and other site specific information ❖ description of how complaints and damages will be handled • Trial blasts: Charge per delay (one hole per delay) monitored with a seismograph • Monitoring ❖ A registered professional engineer or geologist familiar and experienced with rock slope stability shall observe the excavation in order to identify geologic conditions including discontinuities in the rock that could result in rock slope instability that extends off the property and to recommend remedial measures to reduce slope instability ❖ ground vibrations and air blasts Air Detonation results in carbon dioxide gas, nitrogen gas and water vapor. Lesser amounts of carbon monoxide and oxides of nitrogen gases can also be produced. In addition to the gases and water vapor, blasting also produces smoke that is a combination of water vapor and products of detonation and combustion. Excessive exposure to smoke can result in severe headaches. Smoke and gas fumes can be reduced by properly selecting blasting agents and explosives, by limiting the quantity of powder in the hole and by adopting appropriate blasting methods and procedures. Milbor-Pita asserts that design of the limited individual blasts to small events minimizes the negative effects of smoke and fumes. Milbor-Pita states that in addition to the proper design of the blasts themselves, there are operational efforts that will limit air impacts. A Project Safety Plan would not permit personnel access to the blast site until smoke has cleared and the registered blaster in charge has inspected the site. There are a number of weather conditions that can positively effect the impacts from the project. On windy and or rainy days smoke and fumes dissipate very rapidly. Working during the wet season and/or wetting the excavation site will control dust. The applicant states that haul roads on the site will be wetted and the blast hole drilling rig will be fitted with a dust suppression kit. Enviroanalysis, a subconsultant on the peer review team, states that dust from construction is generally not a serious health hazard though it can present a nuisance to some people. The Puget Sound Clean Air Agency does not issue permits for the type of activity proposed because the applicant affirm that no rock crushers are to be used. The Agency does have control measures for fugitive dust that would be appropriate for the types of activity proposed and are included below. -8- • • Potential Mitigation • Project Safety Plan • Maintaining a damp working surface area near the quarry's working face • Keeping the aggregate moist when loaded into trucks • Treating traffic areas with water or chemical stabilizers, reducing vehicle speeds, constructing pavement or riprap exit aprons and installing a shell wash at the truck exit location to prevent the track -out of mud or dirt onto paved public streets. • Covering or wetting truck loads or allowing adequate freeboard to prevent the escape of dust bearing materials. • Curtailing activities during high wind. Water A Type 2 (greater than 1 acre/monoculture) isolated wetland exists on the City of Seattle property to the north. The wetland is unmapped on City Sensitive Area maps but is identified and described in a report by Wetland Resources. The wetland edge at its closest is within 35 feet of the northern boundary. A 50 foot buffer and a 15 foot commercial setback are required between the wetland boundary and any work on the subject site. The proposed erosion control plan and the grading plan do not show the required 15 foot setback from the 50 foot buffer. The wetland is located within a closed depression of approximately 55 acres. Six acres of the 10 acre subject site drains to the north into the closed depression. This storm water runoff area is approximately 10 % of the contributory area of the closed depression. During and following the proposed activities, the applicant proposes to route all site drainage through a sedimentation pond, through a biofiltration and detention swale to the Duwamish river through an existing City outfall and drainage system located in S. 115 St. Erosion/Sedimentation Control Notes state that facilities shall be inspected and maintained a minimum of once a month or within 48 hours following a storm event. Potential Mitigation • DOWL Engineers suggests that a storm event be defined as any 24-hour storm event of 0.75 inches or greater. • Maintenance and inspection records Plants The Existing Tree Study, (R.W. Thorpe; August 11, 1999) identifies trees types and their calipers within the sloped areas classified as sensitive areas per the Tukwila Zoning Code, Sensitive Areas Chapter (TMC 18.45.020E.) The area to be cleared does not exactly match the Milbor-Pita proposed finished grades. The number of trees to be removed and replanted is significant. The replacement plan shows the majority of the -9- • • 206 trees to be planted in the public right of way adjacent to the river. While replanting the riverbank is a good thing. Planting trees in this location of the public right of way is not acceptable to the City. The spacing and density of trees proposed would create a complete visual and physical barrier to the river from S. 115 Street. The proposed project will need to be revised to show how and if the applicant can plant the required number of trees outside of the right of way and above the ordinary high water mark of the river. Animals The applicant notes that typical urban wildlife, such as Bald Eagles, raccoons, possums, etc, may use the site. The Duwamish/Green River abuts property and is habitat for threatened Chinook salmon and possibly includes the presence of Bull Trout, which has been spotted in the river. The project will connect to an existing outfall to the Duwamish and the impacts are unknown. Environmental Health Noise Short term The applicant has characterized the proposal as a construction project to clear and grade the site for future development. As such, all noise generated on the site during daytime hours will be exempt from the City's noise standards. The Peer Review consultant raised the question of whether the proposal should be characterized as a construction operation or a quarry operation because of the length of time involved in clearing the site. If the proposal was classified as a quarry rather than a construction site, the consultant thinks that the proposal could exceed maximum permissible sound levels allowed by City ordinance. The equipment on site and the truck traffic moving the excavated material off site will be the primary noise source from the project. Excavation activities are proposed during daylight hours and only from 7:30 to 5:00 p.m. The area affected most adversely by noise will be the residential neighborhood south of the Duwamish River. This area receives a significant amount of noise due to the surrounding freeways, railroad, airport and firing range. The peer review consultant took a short term noise sample from the crest of the hill along the project's east property line and found the maximum noise level to be 76.5 dB (A.) and the minimum to be 53.6 dB(A) and the average to be 64.1 dB(A.) The sound measurements along S. 115 St. on the south side of the property were lower 64.6 dB(A) and 46.7 dB(A) with an average of 51.5. dB(A.) The City's standard for residential areas that receive noise from industrial areas is 60 dB(A.) This standard may be increased from 5dBA to 15 dBA depending on the type and duration of sound being generated. -10- • • Long Term The long term effects of the project will be that a natural noise barrier, the rock outcrop, will be eliminated and the residential neighborhood to the south of the site might experience increased Boeing Field aircraft noise and from the railroad and firing range noise. The City's Comprehensive Plan has a goal on Noise Abatement Goal 7.2 Residential neighborhoods protected from undue noise impacts, in order to ensure for all residents the continued use, enjoyment and value of their homes, public facilities and recreation and the outdoors. Soil Contamination A 1988 Shannon and Wilson Soil Report for Elmer White had six borings and 30 samples taken. Five had a noticeable petroleum odor with the odor becoming less strong with depth at the one boring. The lateral extent of the contamination was not explored. In its analysis for a previous project proposal, S& W recommended chemical testing and further evaluation. Because of the amount of mechanical equipment on site there is the potential for further spills and contamination. Are remedies for this prudent or required prior to filling the site? Land/Shoreline Uses A staff site visit revealed that the property currently provides storage for what appear to be construction materials. According to the geotechnical consultant the site has been quarried in the past. Fossil hunters have also used the site. In the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan, the site is designated as Manufacturing Industrial Center Light. The site is also zoned Manufacturing Industrial Center Light. The parcel is approximately 10.97 acres in size and is bisected on the south side by S. 115 Street. (A portion of the parcel, approximately 20 feet deep by 590 feet long exists between S. 115 St. and the river. Puget Sound Energy Right of Way on the west is being used for vehicle storage. The City of Seattle electric and water rights of way border on the north contains utility lines and pipes. Beyond the 200 foot wide right of way to the north is a City of Seattle Police Department firing range. To the west of the 100 foot wide Puget Sound Energy right of way is a commercial light industrial building. Single family homes in a Low Density Residential District abut the parcel on the east and continue south of the site along S. 115 St. and 42 Av. S. The applicant proposes razing a portion of Poverty Hill to create a relatively flat site that will be suitable for an office/warehouse building, which is a typical use of the MIC/L zone. -11- • • Housing Not applicable. Aesthetics No structure is proposed at this time. Views in the area will change with the removal of this valley visual landmark. Light/Glare The applicant has not proposed any lighting of the site during the grading project,. Recreation The Interurban/Green River Trail is across the river from the site. A neighborhood park, Duwamish Park is, located at 42 Av. S., approximately 2 blocks from the site. Historic/Cultural Preservation Documents exist that describe the importance of this site for Native American Indian culture as well as for paleontology research. For Native American Indians, more specifically Duwamish mythology, this outcrop along with several other nearby knolls in the Duwamish Valley, are incorporated into a story about climate and weather - the story of the battle between the North and South winds. The myth recounts the battle between northwind and stormwind ... explains the origin of the seasons and also provides the basis for rituals designed to alter the weather. Duwamish women carried baskets of water to wash the face of a rocky knoll at Riverton, called Grandmother of Stormwind, so she could exercise her power to bring rain and cause floods, and young boys swung specially made bull- roarers around their heads mimicking the sound made by Stormwind when he drove cold northwind from the land. These same myths tell of the collapse of a great ice dam on the Duwamish River near Allentown. (Bruerge, 1980.) The applicant contacted the Department of Natural Resources to verify the importance of the site for paleontological purposes. Two documents were referenced by the applicant as verification that the site is not significant geologically to the state: • Geologic Time, Rocks, Fossils, and Mineral in Washington, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Mines and Geology (no date) • Fossils of Washington, Vaughn E. Livington; Jr. (1972) Dave Norman, Geologist with the Department of Natural Resources, stated in a conversation with City of Tukwila staff that Washington State does not require the -12- • • protection of marine invertebrate and plant fossils, which are relatively abundant, and which are found on Tukwila Hill in the Tukwila Formation. He said that if a large vertebrate fossil is found then work should stop and DNR contacted. He also suggested that a paleontologist at the Burke Museum be contacted, as DNR does not have a paleontologist on staff. Elizabeth Nesbitt, a research paleontologist with the Burke Museum wrote a paper in 1995 regarding the Tukwila fossils. She explains that the fossils are 40 million -year-old clams, snails, coral and fish. Within the Puget Sound Area she states that only two exposures of these fossils are still accessible. The other site has been studied and does not have the value of the subject site. Ms. Nesbitt states that very little research has been conducted on these deposits and that there are similar fossils preserved in southwestern WA but this is the farthest north that animal fossils as old as 40 million years have been found. These fossils and rocks indicate that 40 million years ago this area was the western coast of the continent. And that the climate was very different — it was warm and subtropical. Three new species have been found on the site. There are goals and policies within the City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan that are relevant to the cultural and paleontological significance of the site. Goal 1.2 A heritage conserved and interpreted so that Tukwila's citizens can be aware of connections with the past. Policy 1.2.1 Identify sites and structures of historic importance. The Sensitive Areas Chapter of the Tukwila Zoning Code establishes standards for "Areas of Important Geological or Archaeological Evidence." It states: 1. "Development on a legal lot of record determined to have historic or prehistoric geological or archeological evidence shall be prohibited until that evidence has been studied or researched for any valuable information about our history. Removal or salvage of the evidence shall be done in accordance with RCW 27.53..." (Revised Code of Washington Archaeological Sites and Resources Chapter) 2. Once geologic or archaeological evidence or articles have been studied or researched, or the importance of the site is declared to be marginal or not of use to the scientific community, development shall be allowed on the site." -13- • • If salvage is the only option available and because of limited storage space, Ms. Nesbitt says that only a small amount of materials could be salvaged. She roughly estimated that if salvage could occur at the location and elevation where she knows there are significant fossils, then it will take one day with four people. Transportation Access to the site is via East Marginal Way S. to S. 115 Street, a collector arterial. Truck and other vehicle traffic will result in 168 one direction trips per day. During each of the am and p.m. peaks, there will be 26 one way trips. Tandem dump trucks hauling approximately 900 cubic yards of excavated material will account for 71% of the daily trips. The City Engineer considers this amount and the type of traffic to be significant for S. 115 Street and that a geotech study/analysis is needed to determine if the street can handle the heavy loads. Additional Analysis Needed/Potential Mitigation • Geotechnical analysis of street conditions on S. 115 Street • Traffic control measures such as flaggers or warning signs, as determined by the City Engineer, during all hours of operation. • Applicant responsibility for improving street to accommodate proposed traffic, cleaning of debris and repair of street damage. Public Services Police and fire protection services are the only anticipated services needed for this proposal. The applicant does not plan on storing explosives on site because they are available locally from suppliers. The Fire Department requests a plan outlining the transportation of the explosives. Utilities City of Tukwila Sanitary Sewer — 12" line City of Tukwila Storm Sewer City of Tukwila Water — 6" line Telecommunications Phone: US West Cable AT&T Electricity — Seattle City Light -14- • • Conclusions Overall The impacts from this proposal have not been sufficiently described to know if or how the project can be adequately mitigated. In addition, the applicant has not completed all of the research necessary to successfully conduct and accurately described the proposed project. There appears to be modification of the proposal since its initial submittal, which resulted due to the subsequent drafting of a preliminary blast plan. There is also the potential for significant noise impacts on a residential neighborhood and the loss of a portion of a significant paleontological and cultural site. Earth Milbor-Pita submitted additional details regarding blasting procedures that were not included in the peer review. A peer review of these details and more specific blast and fill details is needed to evaluate the applicant's proposal. The Erosion Control Plan does not match the most recent drawing submitted by the applicant's geotechnical consultant. Nor does the grading plan adequately describe the site preparation for a future light industrial building. The applicant's proposal is not clear on how excavated material will be placed on the site. They state that most of the initial excavated rock will be used as fill, as part of the site preparation work. However, an engineered fill is needed to support any future building that may be constructed on the site on top of fill material. Milbor-Pita states that all rock will meet required gradation for fill. The City needs to know how gradation will be tested and how fill will be placed on the site. Shannon and Wilson raise the issue of slope instability developing after excavation and that the owner should take remedial measures to prevent instability from impacting adjacent properties. How will instability be detected following the excavation project? A discussion what types of remedial measures might be needed is required of the applicant. Water The applicant's wetlands and civil engineering consultants, Wetland Resources and DOWL, have concluded that the diversion of all site drainage to the Duwamish River will not adversely impact the wetlands natural functions and value. The Erosion Control and Grading Plans do not show the minimum required setbacks from the wetland; therefore revised plans need to be submitted. Trees The applicant has not demonstrated how they can meet the revegetation requirement of the Tree Regulations Chapter of the Zoning Code. Environmental Health The applicant has not fully discussed the long term noise impacts from the proposal. The City's peer review indicated that impacts to the Duwamish neighborhood could be -15- • • significant because the hill that is proposed for removal currently acts as a noise barrier for the airport, railway tracks and firing range. The peer review recommends a more detailed analysis to evaluate the project's impacts on noise levels and potential mitigation. The applicant has not investigated the chemical contamination of the site and needs to discuss the evidence of contamination and remedies. Land/Shoreline Uses The proposed use of the site for an office/industrial use is in keeping with the Comprehensive Plan designation and zoning. Historic and Cultural The site, which is a portion of what is called Poverty Hill, makes up an important feature in Duwamish mythology. It is also important for paleontological purposes. Its destruction will remove a physical reference point for a culture. Salvage of fossils, which is required per City code, will allow the paleontological evidence to be studied and preserved albeit without it relevant geology. Recommendation Determination of Significance C:\mcb\rockpile\sepa-rpt.doc -16- INN j RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA PAY (I) nnn PROPERTY UNE, TYPICAL 154- � ht min Evergreen Trees 6Ni) 49 Herrdock 10' O.Q. Cedar 0 V 0.0. 1:i5) 54 Yew 09? 0.0. 52.2 vr oal. Deciduous Trees C:9 17 Willow WAsh 19 Quaking Aspen Note: Trees along property line are subject to reiocation upon development. 41111111 iiiiiIII1P,.. 1 n1.410 $4.0 1 -O:) / ita 1:;90 1 1111 :jijfttlith / 0i?,e7,7 1 ..44',. ....ei.;;;.; 1 noir,. 1ijiJi/0 A) o 1 e...=:„..., ..tc,..; 1 tittre 1 co,gto 1 I e; :•f,"t ig10.'.4 I I ter -V; I cil:1•1boc .:c. i cc •.7,--:.0 11 ' ,•,.....,,.., ..,1) .i.4, o „.,,,. o- 1112 - I N. c4, t0 IQ tip.4.., J..; •-. 0,1 / i e•e° ffl e. / eill; / Iiipo / I 200 URBAN EikiviRowEra AREA ar ROW • F t. • / • N \ 1 • • • -1 1/;-.-;-- I/ / „44. ts, (\'\\'\'\\ ,•• \ \\•--- ••.‘ \ • \ \\ • •/' • •7/' • 1! d • i \ \ • I \ -• • eir‘Lf4- • \ '•\ pIi! I \- \ 1(11)1 \WI 1• • ' I •••••' , i • , ;• ;4/ •• •sN.,\•—'s \ 1 \ • I / I \--\ •\\ • C *, • ; I • • • '.\\ ; ; • r ;e' ; ---•• *•.• s. •••"..s•') 1,1 • ••• , — , I •..i\.)\•i;\ i• t i\,,W,,, iI, ,s,N.• f •..•. .•/-"*......../:.,„•,......:,::.—,-,:,:„.„_-7-_.._:..„,,..;„.:.7„_,_—_-_.-_-_—.-7.•-_.._._...•„\.7;, I , ., I, ,— . _i. /-: •. ,\,.. A\N‘•..\,.•.A.;.\„•\.‘\A..‘,.,.v\.t,.,\"A,s,.•. \• ,•\ ,‘ • ‘•i c..•\ ,1 ,-,, z —, • \-f.., ,• s, ,\ \\ \\ .- ;‘.,.. , \ X , ' • • •"•• %-•-`400‘N\s••., •N • \ • 1/1•1 /7 \`\ \ ';\ • • •' v • ; "1/ —• • • • "--;:t- • • • '• ss\ •• \\ • .\'` • \ 1 k.'• • • . vs....\\•.;,\.\•• • \\, N'. • • \ I ll1llt. • • t 1 • • ! I • • • • '•\ • s Ns• '\\ • • • • \s s.. \\•;\ , V. ••• 20o; ' \ •.•• \ s.„ • ; \ CTE TOPOGRAPHY SOURCE: WALKER & ASSOCIATES. MAP WAS COMPILED USING PHOTOGRAMMETRIC MEH DS: 9/23,98. ONTOUR UNES UNDER VEGETATION COVER LINE AND GROUND THAT IS OBSCURED BY BUILDINGS, VEGEATION OR SHADOWS DOES NOT MEET NATIONAL MAP ACCURACY STANDARDS. ADDITIONAL FIELD SURVEYS MAY BE RQUIRED. ••; . • \ \ / -:-.-• .„1-1•1• •.,••• ‘\ ‘ „ \\.1, ‘ t \`\ , • 1 1.l 7 I,i .‘ \1/ ,‘ *1-I. • /,'. \•‘, 1 ) \ \\‘‘ ./,,\ •" :\:,1-s;\.-:.:1\‘:' ,‘•:,:ss.:ks.!..;‘.1:\;\\•,\\. \, I1 1 • 1I s 1 .: 111• ; I.1 \, \./l/'1.//\\ 1 ••I 1'1 • II 11 ) • ; • • . ‘ •; \ :•\ , ..• :•2 1 \A )(. \1s t Z t :•‘;) 4‘"))„` •\‘ \\: iC"3\\\1• ‘-\ 1111 1 11 - 1 :11 • \\\ .:;/\ -7;:it:1) -- -- 11 \12 \ 1 / \:, , ,:1 1\: \ \1: , . PE RmIT,Ignwp White Tukwila "Rock Pile" industrial Site Master Plan do: Mobile Crane Company, Inc. 6900 2nd Ave South Seattle, WA 98108 Fax 208/703/9976 Phone: 200/707/4707 MARTIN SMITH REAL ESTATE SERVICES 1109 First Avenue Suite 600 Seattle, WA 98101-2988 Phone: 206/882/3300 John Spiers, MAI Project Manager R.W. Thorpe & Associates, Inc. 8e•Hle• Anchorage • Omer ' PfreeaL.Landrepeo E.Alstereturek. Reject lhanagement 7060 71Hoge Deleting Second Avenue Sealeo Washington fiselee Teloshone: 2Ot.e24.66;23FaX 206)126.0930 E-Mait plaerirta.oaca SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 370598 SHEET 1THE SHORE LINE PLANTING PLAN MATED AA. 30 1110 4.01 L00011.1. 00 1909 1, 43,41 PLOT. 000 08 11.1 144.10 IP. 0 Kr. 1090 e§ 0 0 e OO 11 I 1) Tl _ IR 40 03 o { 9 N 11 •,1111,1�, 11//1//11/!1 a illi „ ///ill Il/I�i, S' 11/llli//1/0/011111 /////�////a1hilll X61 S 021• 7'29' • o N P P PANFPP P. N SI M• s g oQ a P a o A 3 to g 'tg- � q t a 11 ;Ili 8i !I iij11i! P 4 01 fliN 'A'g P q; N��piA alt l Q 1 ; 1I' o Y 33N311O3S NOLL31111LSNO0 TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN TUKWILA TUKWILA ROCK PILE SITE WASHINGTON A 2 L_ PREPARED Fp! MR. JAMES WHITE 5900 2ND AVENUE SOUTH SEATTLE. WA 98108 CONTACT: MR. JOHN SPEIRS (206) 682-3300 0 \ O I Q1o)I\1/I1 llllll IHI1l'Ib IIII!Iliillll' I \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \ 1� \\'‘\\\\\\\\\\\\1111\!\ j 11 IIIMIlt \\\'\\\\\\\\\\ll\il\ 1 III \ + \\\ \\\\\\\I\\I\\\ J NW 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M. I 1. - e 'at t 0 ® ® ® 0 0 •® 0 a 8 3 0 g d6 N 0 I N H 6 R 9 A O1v11.1on of OOWL. LLC 63201641H AVENUE NE. REDMOND. WA NOO2 TEL N20)8811.1870 FAX: µ2S) 88.2070 DDWL DATE BY a�,"+�%•-” :IFS ilreifg tesinEdmommumm DESIGNED MAN 1899 OAS 060901 NAR 1998 JRM CHECKED 61190 D DATE BY "•OL, Al h•• NOT FOR 00MSTRUC110N ALI9 0 ( 1999 0OWL ENGINEERS OSTORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION Z �' N. T.S FILER FABRIC FENCE 2'42'-11 CA MELDED MIRE FABRIC OR EQUAL A FILTER MATERIAL. WAFT 7000 OR EL70AL USE STARES OR MIRE RINGS TO ATTACH FABRIC TO MIRE `4"%.°V;/%.? %yak *41;>",�i,�o'''Z."%.".V5•'�:.�%``iA; � 60' OG (711.) 571. FENCE POSTS 70 3 PARED GRAYEt BURY FILTER FABRIC IN A GRAVEL -FAXED 7REN04 BUFFER O2 E EYeIIai FILTER FABRIC FENCE N. T.S. FILTER FABRIC FENCE GENERAL NOTES 4. INE NITER FABRIC SHALL BE PLRCHASED M A CONTINUOUS ROLL CUT TO TIE LENGTH OF 741E BARBER TO AVOID USE OF JON'S WEN JOINTS ARE NECESSARY, FILTER CLOTH 9441 BE SPLICED TOGETHER ONLY AT A SUPPORT F05T, WTH A MINIMUM 6' D1ERLAP, AND BOTH EN05 SECURELY FASTENED TO 049 POST. 2. 744E FILTER FABRIC FENCE 51411 BE METALLED TO FOLLOW THE CON70105 (WERE 5249919). THE FENCE POSTS 9141 BE SPACED A MAXIMUM OF 6 FEET APART ARI0 0RI4EN SECURELY INTO THE GROUND (MINIMUM OF JO INCHES). J. A TRENCH SHALL BE EXCAVATED. ROUGHLY 6 INCHES RIDE AND 12 INC1E5 DEEP. UP9.OPE AHO ADJACENT TO 114E WOOD POST TO ALLOW THE FILTER FABRIC TO BE BURIED. A MEN STANDARD STRENGTH FILTER FABRIC IS USED, A MIRE MESH SUPPORT FENCE 91ALL BE FASTENED SECURELY TO DHE UPAOPE 902 OF 774E POSTS USING HEAVY-UIUTY 4961E STARES AT LEAST 1 ANN LONG, TIE MIRES OR NO0 RINGS DE MRE DOLL EXTEND INTO THE TRENGI A IRMA. OF INCHES AN0 914(1 NOT 607010 ACE THAN JB MOVES ABOVE 714E 0110Nµ WIND SURFACE S DE STANDARD STRENGTH FILTER FAB9C SNAIL BE STAPLED OR MIRED TO DE FTN¢, M0 20 PENES 0 7772 FABRIC SHALL BE EXTENDS INTO I142 700404. 042 FABRIC 91AL1 NOT EXTEND MORE THAN J6 0701E5 ABOVE 114E ORIGINAL GROAN) SURFACE FARM FABRIC SHALL NOT BE STAPLED TO EASING TREES 6. OPEN EXTRA-57RENGRI FILTER FABRIC AND CLOSER POST SPARING ARE URD, LIE PRE MESH SUPPORT FENCE MAY BE EMANATED. IN SUCH A CASE TTIE FILTER FABRIC 15 STAPLED 0R MIRED DREC7LY TO 111E POSTS MTH ALL OTHER P901190145 0 STANDARD N07E5 APPLIING PE TRENCH 944(1 B5 BAODTLLED PON 3/4 RICH 4190702 DIAMETER 9A91E0 GRAVEL FILAR FABRIC FENCES 99411 BE REMOVED MT4EN THEY NAVE 50 0ED DIOR USEFUL PURPOSE BUT NOT BEFORE DE UPSLOP71 AREA HAS BEEN PERMANENTLY STABILIZED. e. 019R FABRIC FENCES 9.911 BE INSPECTED MMEOA7Y AFTER EACH RAINFALL AND AT LEAST DAILY WRING PRD ONCED RAINFALL ANY REQUIRED REPARS SHALL BE MADE 601E1'ATE1.2 O2 TEMP. GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE OO N.T.S. NW 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M. EMERGENCY OVERFLOW SPILLWAY N.T.S. 2 O INTERCEPTOR SWALE 0 2 N.T.S. 6' ROO( [NECK 06M 064040297877440420704640 ROCK CHECK DAM O N.T.S. (FR0904/5E0WrtNTIPW CONTROL PHASE) RISER PIE..27. 0 (PRWCPAL SP01WAT) LPG, AT TOP NON MA94 RAO( 72. DA OZEST EMERGENCY SP.LWAY ELEV. 22.00 PULYETH7IEHE CAP PROVIDE ADEp1A STRAPPING PERFORATED POLYETH11.0471 DRAINAGE TUBING. DIAMETER YIN. r URGER THAN DEWATERING OER7CE. TUBING SHALL COMPLY 87114 45714 F657 AND AA91T0 49291. 15' IRE DEWA TE*MO ORFICL. 5019000E 10 STEEL STUB MIN. DIAMETER I. CD 2X RISER DIA. ANL. ALTERNATIVELY. METAL STAKES AND MRE MAY BE USD) TO PREVENT FLOTATION SEDIMENT POND RISER DETAIL OO N.T.S. 6' MIN. MD1N ELzy- 2.100 6' NBINC 8292790NG DEVICE (SE9 DETAIL 6) 1761E-6AD.ED SILT FENCE, STAKED 14A1BALES *RAPPED *TN FARR FABRIC. OR EQUIVALENT DIVIDER AIERING ORII'CE 1.0 EYBANKIENT COMPACTED 95X PERVIOUS MATERIALS S104 A5 GRAVEL OR CERIN SAND SMALL NOT BE USED. p\W\\-\\\\\\\\�1\DOJ\moo - ARCS TO 2851I110 CONCRETE BASE CONVEYANCE (SEE DETAIL 6) MAINIENANCE STANDARDS 7 SEGMENT 94ALL BE REMOVED FROM TINE POND (WHEN IT READIES 1 F00T W DEPTH. 2 ANY DAMAGE r0 THE FOND EMBANKMENTS OR SLOPES DULL BE REPARED. 1 POND DIMENSIONS ARE 91011N CN THE RAN. SEDIMENT POND CROSS-SECTION N.T.S. EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL NOTES 7. APPROVAL OF THIS EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL (ESC) PLAN DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN APPROVAL OF PERMANENT ROAD OR DRAINAGE DESIGN (E.G. SIZE AND LOCATION OF ROADS, PIPES, RESTRICTORS, CHANNELS, RETENTION FACILITIES, UTILITIES ETC.). 2. THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THESE ESC PLANS AND THE CONSTRUCTION. MAINTENANCE. REPLACEMENT, AND UPGRADING OF 714E5E ESC FACILITIES I5 THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE APPLICANT/ESC SUPERVISOR UNTIL ALL CONSTRUCTION IS APPROVED. 1 1745 BOUNDARIES OF THE CLEARING LIMITS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN SHALL BE CLEARLY FLAGGED BY A CONTINUOUS LENGTH OF SURVEY TAPE (OR FENCING, IF REQUIRED) PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD, NO DISTURBANCE BEYOND 714E CLEARING LIMITS SHALL BE PERMITTED. THE CLEARING OMITS SHALL BE MAINTAINED BY THE APPLICANT/ESC SUPERVISOR FOR 711E DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION. • 4. THE ESC FACILITES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN MUST BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO OR IN CONJUNCTION 114TH ALL CLEARING AND GRADING SO AS TO ENSURE THAT THE TRANSPORT OF SEDIMENT TO SURFACE WATERS DRAINAGE SYSTEMS, AND ADJACENT PROPERTIES IS MINIMIZED. 5. THE ESC FACILITES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN ARE THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR ANTICIPATED SITE CONDITIONS DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD, THESE ESC FAGUTES SHALL BE UPGRADED AS NEEDED FOR UNEXPECTED 57DRM EVENTS AND MODIFIED TO ACCOUNT FOR CHANGING SITE CONDITIONS (EG, ADDITIONAL SUMP PUMPS. RELOCATION OF DITCHES AND SILT FENCES ETC.). 6. THE ESC FACILITES SHALL BE INSPECTED DAILY BY THE APPLICANT/ESC SUPERVISOR AND MAINTAINED TO ENSURE CONTINUED PROPER FUNCTIONING. WRITTEN RECORDS SHALL BE KEPT OF WEEK1.5 RENEWS OF THE ESC FACILITES DURING THE WET SEASON (OCT. 1 TO APRIL 30) AND OF MONTHLY REVIEWS DURING THE DRY SEASON (MAY 1 TO SEPT. 30). 7. ANY AREAS OF EXPOSED SOILS. INCLUDING ROADWAY EMBANKMENTS THAT WILL NOT BE DISTURBED FOR TWO DAYS 051211•10 THE NET SEASON OR SEVEN DAYS DURING THE DRY SEASON SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY STABILIZED WITH THE APPROVED ESC METHODS (EG, SEEDING, MULCHING, PLASTIC COVERING. ETC.). 8. ANY AREA NEEDING ESC MEASURES THAT DO NOT REQUIRE IMMEDIATE ATTENTION SHALL BE ADDRESSED WITHIN 5F7EEN (15) DAYS. 9. NE ESC FACILITIES ON INACTIVE SITES SHALL BE INSPECTED AND MAINTAINED A MINIMUM OF ONCE A MONTH OR WITHIN FORTY-EIGHT (48) HOURS FOLLOWING A STORM EVENT 10. AT NO TIME SHALL MORE THAN ONE (1) FOOT OF SEDIMENT BE ALLOWED 7O ACCUMULATE WITHIN A CA TCN BASIN. ALL CATCH BASINS AND CONVEYANCE. LINES SHALL BE CLEANED PRIOR TO PAVING. THE CLEANING OPERATION SHALL NOT FLUSH SEDIMENT -LADEN WATER INTO THE DOWNSTREAM SYSTEM. 71. STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES AND ROADS SHALL BE IN5TA/1ED AT THE BEGINNING OF CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTAINED FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. ADDITIONAL MEASURES SUCH A5 WASH PADS, MAY BE REQUIRED TO ENSURE THAT ALL PAVED AREAS ARE KEPT CLEAN FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. 12. ANY PERMANENT FLOW CONTROL FACILITY USED AS A TEMPORARY SETTLING BASIN SHALL BE MODIFIED WITH THE NECESSARY EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AND SHALL PROVIDE ADEQUATE STORAGE CAPACITY. IF 714E FACILITY /5 TO FUNCTION ULTIMATELY AS AN INFILTRATION SYSTEM, THE TEMPORARY FACILITY MUST BE GRADED SO TEAT THE BOTTOM AND SIDES ARE AT LEAST THREE FEET ABOVE THE FINAL GRADE OF THE PERMANENT FACILITY. 73. WHERE STRAW MULCH FOR TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL 15 REQUIRED. IT SHALL BE APPLIED AT A MINIMUM THICKNESS OF 2 TO 3 INCHES 14. PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF THE WET SEASON (OCT. 1), ALL D/5TRUBED AREAS SMALL BE REVIEWED TO 10ENTIFY NH/CH ONES CAN BE SEEDED IN PREPARATION FOR THE WINTER RAINS. DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE SEEDED WITHIN ONE WEEK OF THE BEGINNING OF THE NET SEASON. A SKETCH MAP OF THOSE AREAS TO BE SEEDED AND THOSE AREAS TO REMAIN UNCOVERED SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE ODES INSPECTOR. TIE ODES INSPECTOR CAN REQUIRE SEEDING OFADDITIONAL AREAS IN ORDER TO PROTECT SURFACE WATERS ADJACENT PROPERTIES OR DRAINAGE FACILITES 9 & 3< 49 0 8 BSE MR. JAMES WHITE T.E.S.C. DETAILS SCALE: 5CALE: A5 SHOWN F.B.: 512046 RLE NO.: 5217-38 SHEET 02052 PROPERTY LINE, TYPICA TOPOGRAPHY SOURCE: WALKER & ASSOCIATES. MAP WAS COMPILED USING PHOTOGRAMMETR C METH CONTOUR LINES UNDER VEGETATION COVER UNE AND GROUND THAT IS OBSCURED BY BUILDINGS, VEGETATION OR SHADOWS, DOES NOT MEET NATIONAL MAP ACCURACY STANDARDS. ADDn7ONAL FIELD SURVEYS MAY BE REQUIRED. 0 40 80 James White Tukwila "Rock Pile" ndustrial Site Master Plan c : Moeda Crane Company, Inc. 5900 2d Ave South Beanie, WA 98108 Fac 20817638975 Phone: 206/78710767 MARTIN SMITH REAL ESTATE SERVICES 1109 Fhst Avenue Suite 500 Seattle, WA 98101-2988 Phone: 206/88203300 John Splara, MAI Project Manager R.W. Thor & Associates, Inc.n eedae•Anchorage •Denver Planning 9pe AnithmAos Na Enene talo Swanks Plied Management Ifo Hage Bugging 70S Second Manua Seattle WaWnglon 98104 Telephone: 206.624.6299 Fu: 206.825.0030 E•Yd0 pletingO,et.Nn SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT= -"AN p LAND. ALTERING PERMIT TO CITY OF.TUKWILA SEAL NO.RVITA 370598 SHEET TIRE TOPOGRAPHY SKEETSS/LA 1 PROPERTY LINE, TYPICA James White Tukwila "Rock Pile" Industrial Site Master Plan do: Mobile Gane company, oro. 5900 2nd Ave South Seattle, WA 88109 Fax: 2081763/8975 Phone: 208/767/4787 MARTIN SMITH REAL ESTATE Services 1109 Fret Avenue Sufte 500 Seattle, WA 98101-2988 Phone: 208/882/3300 R.W. Thorpe & Associates, Inc. Seattle • Anchormen • Denver Planning 4 l.bsc-P Architecture Enviam.mr 0 Eecneneoa Refect Alseeornrh 710 Hoes ®Aen9 705 Ssmd Armee Beene Waae,oten 98104 Teeplgx.: 979.824.6709 Fax 208895.0830 EateO: rk Omtacan 'SHORELINE -- SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT BT,... Deo r em• 0M1:3 71120 ■■■8/11/99. ice■■■ ■ REVISIONS / TOPOGRAPHY SOURCE: WALKER & ASSOCIATES. MAP WAS COMPILED USING PHOTOGRAMM RIC METH CONTOUR LINES UNDER VEGETATION COVER UNE AND GROUND THAT IS OBSCURED BY BUILDINGS, VEGETATION OR SHADOWS, DOES NOT MEET NATIONAL MAP ACCURACY STANDARDS. ADDITIONAL FIELD SURVEYS MAY BE REQUIRED. DS: 9/23/98. 1 40 80 R A'OO 370598 BnEaT TtRa SLOPE ANALYSIS SS/LA 2 i SN- ZOO' URBAN) GNVOI,N�MENT .rA q fA til £O S 1 i GOT % I !TYP1AAL VFy,ETATrarJ GoutS-A. J uw�•. ti 6$$ -'. •rer_Is5 i SAS+ `n fr,\ '•� o r - c —r-�-_.- b@.to L, I �I} Id d / LeciSD: 51-m Fa 'GI (-GAF MAPS= MAD MADRONA DF Dou4LAs F12 Cor co/fowl u)oo D(LN aDo: BNeee4•aNa) j ®®®® ALT. 1 Appeox• c-f-eoktut4c, LtwIT LIN- ■�■ ALT. 2 APPRAtoc. cc-GARJ1,61 LIvn,T t-wr ( y l,. \____-%� ice-`: _ iJ `\ ' ','`•. `-� -,, dl` 0t / Ali ALT. A \,.,� LT. Z SAdE� a ) MO In — APPRox. M.H.W.M APPRox• EPGa of Loo' Si{CK/_ (—LA)E. Zon)E< ecoa of Zp%+SLopr_ ZONE_ See. 6t•cVe. ANAL.T5t5 SHT. ALTERNATIVE L Tree Removal Within 20% + Scope Zone: 82 ® 4"-8" cal.= 82 Required Replacements 24 ® 8"-12" cal.= 48 Required Replacements 1 @ 12"-14" cal.= 4 Required Replacements 134 Required Replacements Trees (100 Evergreen Trees 6' tall min 34 Deciduous Trees 2 12" cal. min) ATERNATIVE II Additional Tree Removal Within 20% + Scope Zone: 58 ® 4"-8" caL= 58 Required Replacements 7 ® 8".12" cal.= 14 Required Replacements 72 Required Additional Replacements Trees (54 Evergreen Trees 6' tall min. 18 Deciduous Trees 2 12 " cal. min.) :"----"40 80 James White Tukwila "Rock Pile" Industrial Site Master Plan 0/0: Mobile Crane Company, Inc. 5900 2nd Ave South Seattle, WA 98108 Fax: 206/763/9975 Phone: 206/76714767 MARTIN SMITH REAL ESTATE Services 1109 First Avenue • Suite 500 Seattle, WA 98101-2988 Phone: 208/682/3300 R.W. Thorpe & Associates, Inc. UMW • Anchorage • Denver Planing 0 Landscape Architecture Environmental 0 Economics 710 Hoge Bulldog 705 Second Avenue Seettle Washington 98104 Tdephone: 206.624.6239 • Fac 206.825.0830 E4Axe: plm o8 -o mla.mm SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT ---PERMIT AND LAND ALTERING PERMIT TO CITY OF TUKWILA SEAL ISSUED N. Description am,,App. 1D SUBMITTAL om SS 8111/99 • REVISIONS SHEET TnIE EXISTING TREE STUDY SHEET SS/LA 3 PROPERTY LINE, TYPIC 1 I ; • / E i 95.80' • \\\‘ WETLAND SOURCE: WETLAND RESOURCES, INC. ' THE WETLAND IS LARGER THAN ONE ACRE IN SIZE AND IS DOMINATED BY ONE CLASS OF VEGETATION. ri WETLANDS WITH THESE CHARACTERISTICS ARE CLASSIFIED AT TYPE 2 AND DESIGNATED 50 FOOT PROTECTIVE BUFFERS IN THE CITY OF TUKWILA. TOPOGRAPHY SOURCE: WALKER & ASSOCIATES. MAP WAS COMPILED USING PHOTOGRAMMETRIC METHODS: 9/23/98. CONTOUR LINES UNDER VEGETATION COVER UNE AND GROUND THAT IS OBSCURED BY BUILDINGS, VEGETATION OR SHADOWS, DOES NOT MEET NATIONAL MAP ACCURACY STANDARDS. ADDITIONAL FIELD SURVEYS MAY BE REQUIRED. 1 EXISTING TYPE 2 WETLAND. SEE NOTE THIS SHEET. WETLAND CONTINUES NORTH - ENTIRE WETLAND NOT SHOWN 50' WETLAND BUFFER 7 0 40 80 James White Tukwila "Rock Pile" Industrial Site Master Plan c/o: Mobile Gane Company, Inc. 5900 2nd Ave South Seattle, WA 98108 Fax 208/763/9975 Phone: 208/767/4767 MARTIN SMITH REAL ESTATE SERVICES 1109 First Avenue Suite 500 Seattle, WA 98101-2988 Phone: 206/682/3300 John Spiers, MAI Protect Manager R.W. Thorpe & Associates, Inc. 9.Wb • Anc,.r.ge - Denver 115,1515001-55,500P0A,e 05 EnNOnmmW 0 Emnamka 70_ M ag.nal- 710 Hog. BUBmne 705 Scowl Manua Surae Washington 98104 TalaDnm.: 208.624.6239 Fax 206.025.0800 BABB plarangerata.com SEAL ISSUED No. A JOB 370598 SHEET TRIP OFF-SITE WETLAND IDENTIFICATION SHEET SS/LA 4 100 YEAR FLOOD UNE 8 EXISTING TOP OF BANK PROPERTY LINE, TYPICAL cc 'ROW ElXISTINCZBUILDING 1000 sq. & Finished Fl • . r Elev. ,'!447 g t. 7,047) W Yt ll���hl,ai� � 4, „ A �\\ �1 - -,.l(((«( `lam; ��, ,,,� �1\ �\\.��1%�, 41 �� _ sir -��'�•<-•� �\ ..:���`� —"' •�v�att�1 teN \\‘' 10 Hsi nate 1 4I 11111111, istaimin Armflt 1" N7 N6 N5 4 3 N2 Ni PROPERTY UNE, TYPICAL CONTOUR 4.2 ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK ELEVATION 1 ELEVATION 1 ELEVATION EXISTING TOP OF BANK 40' RIVER ENVIRONMENT (40' FROM ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARp. 60' LOW IMPACT ENVIRONMENT (100' FROM ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK). TOPOGRAPHY SOURCE WAVER 8 ASSOCIATES MAP WAS COMPILED USING PH 100 YEAR R.CODUNE SOURCE KING COUNTY DEPT. OF ASSESSMENTS. PARCEL CHARACTERISTICS PARCEL NUMBER: 102304-9057-0 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 11215 E MARGINAL WAY S QUARTER: NW SECTION: 10, TOWNSHIP: 23, RANGE: 4 =7,===i 0 40 80 James White Tukwila "Rock Pile" ndustrial Site Master Plan ./D: Mobile Crane Campery, Inc 5900 2nd Ave South Seattle, WA 98109 Falc 208/763!9975 Phone: 206/787/4767 MARTIN SMITH REAL ESTATE SERVICES 1109 First Avenue Suite 500 Seattle, WA 98101-2988 Phone: 208882/3300 John Spiers, MAI Project Manager R.W.' Thorpe & Associates, Inc. Deme • Anchorage • Denver Syed Management 710 Hype DAMN 705 Second Avenue Seattle Washington 68104 Telephone: 206e24.6239 Far. 206825.0090 E4.98 plmadnoOrata.00m -:SHORELINE —SUBSTANTIAL- DEVELOPMENT PERMIT -- AND LAND ALTERING PERMIT TO CITY OF TUKWILA BEAL FIWTA Jos 370598 SHEET 77TE EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN REFERENCE SHEETS SS/LA 8 AND SS/LA 9 FOR SECTIONS SHEET SS/LA 5 PROPERTY LINE, TYPIC RMWATER AREA, L SHEET C1. in, r a TOPOGRAPHY SOURCE: WALKER & ASSOCIATES. MAP WAS COMPILED USING PHOTOGRAMMETRIC METHODS: 9/23/98. CONTOUR LINES UNDER VEGETATION COVER LINE AND GROUND THAT IS OBSCURED BY BUILDINGS, VEGETATION OR SHADOWS, DOES NOT MEET NATIONAL MAP ACCURACY STANDARDS. ADDITIONAL FIELD SURVEYS MAY BE REQUIRED. 40 80 James White Tukwila "Rock Pile" Industrial Site Master Plan c/o: Mobile Crane Company, Ira. 5800 2nd Ave South Seattle, WA 98108 Fax: 206/763/9975 Plane: 206/767/4767 MARTIN SMITH REAL ESTATE SERVICES 1109 First Avenue Suite 500 Seattle, WA 98101-2988 Phone: 208/682/3300 John Spiers, MAI Protect Manager R.W. Thorpe & Associates, Inc. amnia • Anchorage • Denser Marring o imago/Pe Amit W". BMomnentot o Emwnuo Protect Manegnad 710 Hoge euo®rp 705 Se0.1 Avenue Seattle Wesgraan 98106 Teleptnn,e: 206.626.6299 Fez 206.625.0990 E-Ma6 plmmegareAscvn LAND ALTERING PERMIT TO CITY OF TUKWILA SELL gO.RWTA 370598 6MEET TIna ALTERNATE 1 CONCEPT ROUGH GRADING PLAN SHEET SS/LA 6 PROPERTY UNE, TYPIC =j; . .• TCONTOUR OPOGRAPHY SOURCE: WALKER 8 ASSOCIATES. MAP WAS COMPILED USING PHOTOGRAMMETRIC METH BUILDINGS, VEGETAS TION OR'SHADER OWS, DOES NOT MEET NATIONCOVER LINE AND AL MAP THAT ACCURACY STANDARDS. ADDITIONAL FIELD SURVEYS MAY BE REQUIRED. 12" STORMWATER PIPE SIMILAR TO CIVIL SHEET C1. 0 \ EROSION CO ' OU I e STORMWA POND I SEE CIVIL .. LAN Cl I FOR A DESIGN SIMILAR . IN - IREMENTS. I CIVIL PLAN C2 II DETAILS. 95.80' DS: 9/23/98. 1 O e 40 so James White Tukwila "Rock Pile" Industrial Site Master Plan C/o: Molds Crane Company. Ina 5900 2nd Ave South Seattle, WA 98108 Fax 208/793J99T5 Phone: 208/787!4707 MARTIN SMITH REAL ESTATE SERVICES 1109 First Avenue Suite 500 Seattle, WA98101-2988 Phone: 206/682/3300 John Splens, MAI PrOJed Manager R.W. Thorpe & Associates, Inc. UM. • Aetlnram • omn.r /10 Hop Ming 705 El‘cond Annus S.e01. WaKven 9010. Telephone; =M12011230 F4 200.9?509e0 LAND ALTERING PERMIT TO CITY OF TUKWILA SEAL haSUED red REvhSIOHS MEET into ALTERNATE 2 CONCEPT ROUGH GRADING PLAN SS/LA 7 130' 120' 100' 80' 60' 40' 20' 140' 120' 100' 80' 60' 40' 20' 130' 120' 100' 80' 60' 40' 20' SECTION 4 SECTION 3 TYPICAL EXISTING GRAD DUWAMIS I RIVER. ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK 4.2 FT SECTION 2 THR AREA IS THF 21 CUM SI OPF FROM 50' BUFFET TO SECTION 1 UNE (PL), TYPICAL NOTE SECTION ONES ARE 50' ON CENTER, TYPICAL WITH SECTION 1,100' FROM EAST PROPERTY UNE r� In 1 D co SECTION 1 LOOKING WEST - THROUGH SITE, TYP. TOPOGRAPHY SOURCE: WALKER & ASSOCIATES C 1:1 oo= M O>m mZmJig 57, 130' 120' 100' 80' 60' 40' 20' 140' 120' 100' 80' 60' 40' 20' 130' 120' 100' 80' 60' 40' 20' 50' TO MEET & MATCH O CUT AND O FILL 50' UNDISTURBED BUFFER VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1•= 40' 11 EP v�. c 'P°L�13D r E 72 11 1111:1 *=mx,_=.1 >wa<mz Ispociico .ss) KO* • �mm 40' 20' 40' 20' 60' 40' 20' 80' so' 40' 20' 80' 60' 40' 20' 40' 20' 40' 20' SECTION 14 PL 1 1 PL R PL 1 I 1 80' ROW SECTION 13 40' 20' 40' 20' SECTION 12 SECTION 11 PL PL PL 1 1 1 60' ROW rI` SECTION 10 PL PL PL 1 1 I it, 6 ROW f I I TYPICAL EXISTING GRADE— .. — SECTION 9 DUWAMISH PL P'R. L RIVER 1 y SY ROW PROPEPtIY UNE (PL), TYPICAL PHASE 2, TYPICAL PHASE 1, TYPICAL 42 FT 1 1 SrRE T PHASE 2, TYPICAL PHASE 1, TYPICAL SECTION 8 LOOKING WEST THROUGH SITE, TYP. NOTE: SECTION UNES ARE 50' ON CENTER, TYPICAL WITH SECTION 1,100' FROM EAST PROPERTY UNE TnPOGRAPHr souRCE: wALKER a ASSOCIATES 60' 40' 20' 80' 60' 40' 20' 80' 60' 40' 20' VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL SCALE: V 43' 9 V 0 0) co C M -1 R$ rn likWOMME. �-- rrir�ll�n nRINIMW .V111111111111MSeir ,,,,,mail. EimiuNno r num mow rattumnitumw »nua►�i alalINVMMENT 'VMS -e".0 LIIIMIMIN :Ctirir"t"'"" Aigryz p /l// I Alra his /� at7� rir!�� umuu1.GLMILIENNIMMEN �✓,/,cr�iityl �► tn�tuuua yr beed-*JP7......VA-zaimixamauww. /.S:%%//////hytiiNVISS `` ,Ear,I 1106 Ear.i %/%///, .Jl,�'t\!\Ill '+. ze'�_�IfIl annaiii//oar. —� �. N1 i �iilibguiT INC r,anaairairia M� - Mz7 II 171111N1,Illll111th, .o. "" - N ' Ft1l11141I "Rittr immum �� `�arom.. 'N'