Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA E97-0033 - UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD - BRIDGE REPLACEMENTUNION PACIFIC RAILROAD BRIDGE 173.4 REPLACE EXISTING TIMBER BRIDGE WITH REINFORCED CONCRETE BRIDGE BLACK RIVER & GREEN RIVER E97-0033 • r-cc,T -r-p A i t_. (,CN D--0 !Z _ex i Gi Y / 4,- 73a 1 D6- ��u Co tt i i y 1-i- l7 . - 11 • 2— Coo. y T VU-tc-70o�1 4).m P 7— 10. "f`S yt-• cam, IS -' 3. - o CTI F (—e zVtt cz U / - , � et :Lt-a�-d- % ` �— tare', GU ti -E41,1 t Gi JAR-P'A (fel,� r� 4001ir :47 e (210e4-4ustr4-01-E-ColecW 14(,)1ft" r A,,pa-cfz l g _ k oz -a. "4"a -'t- ?(a-14 V�ri/ tu->, rf - _t otc c & rc Z� , City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director June 22, 1998 Terry Bowen Boyle Engineering Co. 165 S. Union Blvd., Suite 200 Lakewood, Colorado 80228 Re: SEPA application for replacement of Union Pacific Railroad Bridge (L97-0033) Dear Mr. Bowen: In my last letter to you on March 9, 1998, I had indicated that if I did not hear from you by March 19, 1998 the file would be closed. You contacted me on or around March 26, 1998 to indicate that you had received the letter and were trying to compile the requested information from my October 21, 1997 letter. Since I have not received any follow-up, I have closed this file. If you chose to re -instate this application, there will be a new fee for the SEPA application as well as fees for the required Substantial Shoreline Development Permit. Sincerely, Michael Jenkins Assistant Planner 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director March 9, 1998 Terry Bowen Boyle Engineering 165 S. Union Blvd., Suite 200 Lakewood, CO 80228 Re: SEPA application for replacement of Union Pacific Railroad Bridge Dear Mr. Bowen: It has been over 3 months since my last letter concerning the status of your application. As I have not been provided with any of the information requested in my October 21, 1997 letter I will be closing this file in 10 days if I have not heard from you. Sincerely, le -12A GeAV^ Michael Jenkins Assistant Planner 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 • City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director December 31, 1997 Terry Bowen Boyle Engineering Corporation 165 S. Union Blvd., Suite 200 Lakewood, CO 80228 Re: SEPA checklist application for construction of a new bridge, near the confluence of the Black and Green Rivers (E97-0033) Dear Mr. Bowen: This letter is a follow-up to my October 21, 1997 letter indicating that your original application was incomplete. Please let us know what the status is concerning the submission of the outstanding items indicated in my earlier letter and when you anticipate that these items will be provided. Sincerely, Michael Jenkins. Assistant Planner 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 • King County Department of Parks and Recreation Luther Burbank Park 2040 84th Avenue S.E. Mercer Island, WA 98040 (206) 296-4232 (206) 296-8686 FAX October 22, 1997 Don Williams, Director Parks and Recreation Department City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 • RECEIVED NOV 04 1997 Re: Union Pacific Railroad Bridge Replacement - SEPA Review Dear Mr. )ilfiams: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT This letter is to respond to information provided to us by your Department on October 20, 1997. While normally such a project as a railroad bridge replacement would not be noteworthy, this particular one has some interest to us. In particular, in answer to question 12 a. of the Environmental Checklist the sponsor indicates that there are no recreational opportunities in the immediate vicinity. However, one hundred feet away is Fort Dent Park. While there may be no impact on the park, we should at least be assured that they recognize the park existence and that there would be no impacts on the park. In addition, there is another recreational opportunity that should not be overlooked that may be directly impacted by this project. In King County's adopted Regional Trail Plan, there is a trail identified as a connector between the Green River Trail and the Cedar River Trail known as the Black River Connector Trail. This follows a proposed route that takes it under this bridge as it leads into Fort Dent Park. The Union Pacific Railroad could assist in the completion of this project by a dedication of a trail easement under the bridge as part of this project or at least acknowledge it as a recreational opportunity. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project. If you have any questions, please contact Tom Eksten, Trails Coordinator, at (206) 296-7808. Sincerely, Barbara Wright Interim Administrator cc: Tom Eksten, Trails Coordinator, Program Development and Land Management • City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director NOTICE OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION October 21, 1997 Terry Bowen Boyle Engineering Corporation 165 S. Union Blvd., Suite 200 Lakewood, CO. 80228 RE: SEPA checklist application by Union Pacific Railroad for the construction of a bridge, near the confluence of the Black River and Green River, Tukwila, WA (E97-0033) Dear Mr. Bowen: Your SEPA checklist application, as referenced above, has been found to be incomplete. In order for this application to be determined as complete, the following must be submitted to the Department of Community Development: PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS A. Revised plans that show vertical datum per 1929 NGVD datum B. An City of Tukwila Flood Control Zone (FCZ) permit must be completed, with accompanying materials indicated on this application. C. A copy of the approved JARPA application must be submitted I have also included a copy of a memorandum from JoAnna Spencer of the Public Works Department (433-0179) detailing the scope of items that need additional information or further clarity. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMENTS: A. A Substantial Shoreline Development Permit, with accompanying application materials, must be submitted and determined to be complete. A copy is enclosed 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 4313665 • • October 21, 1997 Terry Bowen Re: SEPA checklist application - Union Pacific Railroad Bridge Page Two Upon receipt of these items, the City will re -review them for completeness and will mail you written notification of completeness or incompleteness within 14 days. Your application will expire if we do not receive the additional information within ninety days of the date of this letter unless an extension is granted pursuant to Section 18.105.070(E). If you have any questions, my telephone number is (206) 431-3685. Sincerely, Michael Jenkins Assistant Planner cc: Reviewing city departments c:\msoffice...SEPA\9733 incm.doc 4OCT.21.1997 11:08AM KC.PARK,CULT&NAT RES NO.825 P.2/3 • • King County Department of Parks and Recreation Luther Burbank Park 2040 84th Avenue S.E. Mercer Island, WA 98010 (206) 296-4232 (206) 296-8686 FAX October 20, 1997 Michael Jenkins, Planner VIA: Don Williams, Director Parks and Recreation Department City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 Re: Union Pacific Railroad Bridge Replacement - SEPA Review Dear Mr. Jenkins: This letter is to respond to information provided to us by the Tukwila Parks Department on 10/20/97. While normally such a project as a railroad bridge replacement would not be noteworthy, this particular one has some interest to us. In particular, in answer to question 12 a, of the Environmental Checklist the sponsor indicates that there are no recreational opportunities in the immediate vicinity. However, one hundred feet away is Fort Dent Park. While there may be no impact on the park, we should at least be assured that they recognize the parks existence and that there would be no impacts on the park. In addition, there is another recreational opportunity that should not be overlooked that may be directly impacted by this project. In King county's adopted Regional Trail Plan there is a trail identified as a connector between the Green River Trail and the Cedar River Trail known as the Black River Connector Trail. This follows a proposed route that takes it under this bridge as it leads into Fort Dent Park. The Union Pacific Railroad could assist in the completion of this project by a dedication of a trail, easement under the bridge as part of this project or at least acknowledge it as a recreational opportunity. OCT.21.1997 11:08RM KC. PARK, CULT°MAT RES • • NO.825 P.3/3 Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project. If you have any questions, please call Inc at (206) 296-7808. Sincerely, Tom Eksten Trails Coordinator cc: Barbara Wright, Interim Administrator, Program. Development and Land Management Jesse Tanner, Mayor CITIOF RENTON Community Services Sam Chastain, Administrator Via Facsimile (Original Via U.S. Mail) October 14, 1997. Don Williams, Director Parks & Recreation Department City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila WA 98188 Re: Union Pacific Railroad Bridge Replacement Environmental Review Comments Dear Don: This letter is a follow-up to the information faxed to me last week regarding the Union Pacific Bridge Replacement project. In particular, I would like to respond to question a, under Recreation (specifically, "What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?) Response The proposed ,bridge replacement is located in the vicinity of Renton's Springbrook Valley Trail and Tukwila's Interurban Trail. Future plans for these trail systems include connecting these two trails for a regional trail system. As part of the bridge replacement, provisions for connecting these two trail systems need to be included with a dedicated trail easement. I also discussed this connection with Sharon Claussen of King County. She has requested a copy of this letter and she will forward it to Tom Eksten of King County for input. If you have any questions please call me at (425) 277-5549. Sincerely, Leslie A. Betlach Parks Director LAB / dlf cc: Sam Chastain, Community Services Administrator Terry Higashiyama, Recreation Director Sharon Claussen, King County 97-529DF.DOC RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA OCT 2 0 1997. . PERMIT CENTER 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 ® This paper contains 50% recycled material, 20% post consumer • • MEMORANDUM DATE: October 13, 1997 TO: Michael Jenkins, Planning FROM: Joanna Spencer, Public Works RE: Public Works Comments SEPA - E97-0033 Replacement of Union Pacific Railroad Bridge CC: N/A The following are Public Works review comments: 1. Applicant shall clarify why the proposed bridge is shorter than the existing bridge. 2. Figure 3 plan received with SEPA application is different from the same plan Department of Community Development received by mail on August 4, 1997 as part of the letter addressed to the US Army Corps of Engineers and the Department of Fisheries. If this plan was revised, it should have a revision block describing the revision so that all agencies will be reviewing the same plan. 3. What is the vertical datum on Figures 2 and 3? Public Works requires NGVD 1929 datum. This shall be identified on the plan. A Public Works Flood Control Zone permit will be required. All the elevations listed on plan Figure 3 shall be identified on the bridge section. Six feet (6') of freeboard above the 100 year flood elevation is required. The 100 year base flood elevation shall also be shown on the plan. 4. Show the location of the lowest land elevation within the project area on the plan. 5. Show lowest bridge member elevation in accordance with the Green River Hydraulics Analysis and the Black River Hydraulics Analysis. Include information on King County Water and Land Resources Division pump station operation. 6. For coordination and other agency review, applicant shall contact the following parties: Ron Stroke City of Renton, WA (425) 235-2500 . • Andy Levesque King County Surface Water Management 700 5th Avenue #2200 Seattle, WA (206) 296-6519 Green River Flood District Local Tribal Agencies 6. A Shoreline Permit from the City of Tukwila will be required 7. Submit a copy of the JARPA Application as listed in item 10, page 3, of the SEPA Application 8. What does the abbreviation "WSEL" on Figure 3 stand for? Give an explanation of "Normal WSEL = 3.8." 9. Submit cross sections shown on Figure 2. 10. Identify any Land Altering activities. Quantities of cut and fill associated with this project shall also be specified. 11. Item B.1.e lists a fill quantity of approximately five cubic yards (5 CY). Identify proposed location of fill placement on the plans. 12. If the Black River flows under the bridge (per item 2, page 6 of the SEPA Application), item 3 is incorrect. Are the old wood piles being removed and new piles being placed to support the concrete bridge? 13) Attached are FIRM map panel numbers 53033C0976F and 53033C0957F. Please forward these maps to the applicants with the Flood Control Permit packet. 2 • CITY O TUKW/LA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431-3670 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (SEPA) APPLICATION To submit for SEPA review, provide the items listed above to the Planning Division at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Room 100. 6 copies of the completed and signed environmental checklis+ 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. sets of the fji(s e plans ne ed to clearly describe the proposed action. RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA rNGINEER�.ti ❑ One set of plans reduced to 8.5" x 11". DENNER SEP 2 4 1997 RFrFIVFn ❑ Four copies of supporting studies. PERMIT CENTER 41."(; 1 1 1997 1,71 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. COMPLETING THE CHECKLIST 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 underneath. HOWEVER, be aware that many questions apply despite appearing not to. Care needs to be taken in reading 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. CITY OF TUKWILA 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Telephone: (206) 431.3670 ADDRESS LABEL REQUIREMENTS The City of Tukwila requires that neighboring residents, businesses and property owners be notified of certain types of pending applications in order to encourage citizen participation in the land use process. Applicants are therefore required to submit the following materials: • Mailing labels listing the owners of record for all property within 500 feet of the boundaries (not the center) of the applicant's site (2 sets or 3 sets if SEPA review is required). • Mailing; :abels listing the residents or businesses of any property within 500 feet of the -property if they are different from the land owners (2 sets or 3 sets if SEPA review is required). • One copy of an assessor's map(s) showing the boundaries of the subject property and the 500 foot radius. Property owner names and addresses can be obtained from the King County Department of Assessment located on the 7th floor of the King County Administration Building, Room 700, 500 Fourth Avenue, Seattle. To compile the information required: • Obtain the assessor's map(s) which contain(s) your property and all neighboring properties within 500 feet (See example diagram). You may use the maps on file in the Assessor's Office or purchase a set from the King County Department of Public Works Map Counter on the 9th floor of the Administration Building. Purchased maps must be ordered several hours in advance of the time you would like fo pick them up. • After securing the assessor's maps, obtain a "Real Estate Inquiry Batch Request Sheet" from the Department of Assessment. On this form provide the tax account number for each affectedproperty as shown on the assessor's map(s) and submit the completed form to the Department of Assessment with the appropriate fee. Applicants can request that the information be printed in mailing label form or on standard paper. To obtain occupants/resident/business names and addresses, consult the Kroll maps located in the Tukwila Department of Community Development and then visit the site to determine resident names and unit numbers. The information on the mailing labels may refer to "Resident" or "Tenant", with the proper mailing address, if the specific name is unknown. CITY OF IIKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431-3670 RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA SEP 241997 PERMIT CENTER SEPA APPLICATION CHECKLIST FOR STAFF USE;ONLY' Planner: File Number: 0 47 .00 j Receipt Number: Cross-reference files: p a 7.dah' 's ............... Applicant notified of incomplete application: Applicant notified :of'complete application: Notice ofapplication issued: A. NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Replacement of Union Pacific Railroad Bridge 173.41 B. LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: (address and accessors parcel number(s)) Located over the Black River just upstream of the Green River in Tukwila, Washington. Quarter: Section: Township: Range: (This information may be found on your tax statement) • C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Replacement of an existing 173.3' timber railroad bridge with a 160' reinforced concrete bridge. D. APPLICANT: NAME: Terry Bowen of Boyle Engineering Corporation; Agent for Union Pacific Railroa ADDRESS: 165 S. Union Blvd. Suite 200 Lakewood, Colorado 80228 PHONE: (303) 987-3443 SIGNATURE: PA. B -04-c, DATE: )9 55d- it47 • 1 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 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. Instruction for Applicants: This environmental checklist .asks you to describe some basic information about your proposaL.. The City uses 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. Inmost 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 City staff 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. Attached any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The City 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: Nonproject proposals refer to actions which are different or broader than a single site specific development project, such as plans, policies and programs. 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 read as "proposal", "proposer", and "affected geographic area", respectively. • ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 411 ControNo. Epic File No. Fee $ 325 Receipt No. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Replacement of Bridge 173.41 2. Name of applicant: BOYLE ENGINEERING CORPORATION , Agent for Union Pacific Railroad 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Terry Bowen, 165 S. Union Blvd., Suite 200, Lakewood, Colorado 80228 (303) 987-3443 4. Date checklist prepared: 8/28/97 5. Agency requesting Checklist: City of Tukwila 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): When all permits are approved. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. N/A 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. None known 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. None known -2- • • 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal. Dept. of Fisheries - HPA JARPA Department of Ecology - Modification 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. Section E requires a complete description of the objectives and alternatives of your proposal and should not be summarized here. Replace existing 173.3' timb;:. bridge with a 160' reinforced concrete bridge 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applica- tions related to this checklist. Union P$ a GLeeu River in Tukwila Washington 13. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive? Unknown -3- 410 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Evaluation for Agency Use Only B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other embankment b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent Slope)?Track embankment - 50M (2A0V) c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultral Juils, specify them and note any prime farmland. sandy clay d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. None e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quanti- ties of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Minimal fill required at each abutment. (Approx. 5 cuyd) Use local borrow f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. The existing channel slope will not be modified. Grass areas disturbed by construction equipment will be revegetated. g• About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Minimal (less than 10%) replace one bridge with another. -4- Evaluation for Agency Use Only h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Grassed areas disturbed by construction equipment will be revegetated. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Construction equipment only for the duration of the project. (Crane, dozer, backhoe). b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: 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 Black River flows under the midge_ Tt flown into the Green River. -5- 1 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Yes - The Black River will flow under the bridge. 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. There will be no fill or dredged.maxe.riaplaced in or removed from the Black River. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quan- tities, if known. No 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. Yes 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. None -6- Evaluation for Agency Use Only • • b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quan- tities, if known. No 2) Describe waste materials that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sour- ces, 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. Jd/A 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. Existing runoff patterns will be maintained. Runoff from the bridge will flow to the ground and then to the Black River. -7- Evaluation for Agency Use Only Evaluation for Agency Use Only 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: None needed. 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: _ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other X shrubs g 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? Vegetation disturbed by construction equipment will be replaced. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. No known endangered species. -8- • d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: None 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: biros: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: None observed mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: None Observed fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: None observed b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. No known endangered species. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Not known d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Leave site in its existin condition. -9- Evaluation for Agency Use Only • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solor) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. No specific energy needs b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: None 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. No change trom existing 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environ- mental health hazards, if any: None -10- • • b. Noise Evaluation for Agency Use Only 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Noise will not affect project. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short- term or a long-term basis (for example: traf- fic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Short term: Equipment to dismantle the bridge and to construct new bridge. Long -Term: No change from exiating 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Rail transportation. Adjacent properties are industrial and manufacturing. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Not known. c. Describe any structures on the site. Rail tracks. Existing_ 173.3 foot timber bridge -11- • • d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Yes - existing bridge e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Not known f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Not known g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Not known h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Not known i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?Ap continuous worker at the site j• Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: N/A 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is com- patible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: N/A -12- Evaluation for Agency Use Only • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing? N/A b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eli- minated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: N/A 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The track itself b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? No change from existing c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None -13- • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? None b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None 12. Recreation a. What designed and informal recreational oppor- tunities are in the immediate vicinity? None b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: N/A -14- • • 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation Evaluation for Agency Use Only a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or pro- posed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next tothe site? If so, generally describe. Not known b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: N/A 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed accss to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. N/A b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? N/A c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? None None -15- • Evaluation for Agency Use Only d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). No e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Rail Transportation f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. Train schedule varies g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transpor- tation impacts, if any: No change from existing 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. No b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. N/A -16- • 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. __N/A 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 change from existing C. Signature The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: t 4. )t1.,re,„0,1'3 Date Submitted: PLEASE CONTINUE TO THE NEXT PAGE. -17- Evaluation for Agency Use Only • TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Evaluation for Agency Use Only D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not imple- mented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? No increase over present use Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: None 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, ani- mals, fish, or marine life? Reduce number of piers in the channel Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, ani- mals, fish, or marine life are: None -18- o • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? None Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resourses are: None 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? N/A Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: None 5. How would the'proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, inclduing whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? No impact -19- • Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts area: None How does the proposal conform to the Tukwila Shoreline Master Plan? Not known 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? No change from existing Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: None 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. Not known -20- Evaluation for Agency Use Only 0 • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 8. Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan? If so, what poli- cies of the Plan? Not known Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are: -21- TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT • Evaluation for Agency Use Only E. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR ALL PROJECT AND NON PROJECT PROPOSALS The .objectives and the alternative means of reaching the objectives for a proposal will be helpful in reviewing the aforegoing items of the Environmental Checklist. This information provides a general overall perspective of the proposed action in the context of the environmental infor- mation provided and the submitted plans, documents, suppor- tive information, studies, etc. 1. What are the objective(s) of the proposal? To replace an old timber bridge with a new concrete bridge 2. What are the alternative means of accomplishing these objectives? Use machines and equipment within the right-of-way 3. Please.compare the alternative means and indicate the preferred course of action: -22- • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 4. Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan? If so, what poli- cies of the Plan? Not known Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are• Project will be completed quickly to continue rail traffic. -23- 07/28/97 15:37 BOYLE ENGINEERING -> 2064313665 • BOYLE ENGINEERING CORPORATION 165 South Union Boulevard, Suite 200 Lakewood, Colorado 80228 NO.891 D01 TEL 303/987-3443 FAX 303/987.3908 T4, RArSco•-\ COMPANY/LOCATION: C 41 o 4'Tkkw: tq FAX NUMBER: (?.�b) 413r- 3665 FAX TRANSMITTAL FROM:RO V Gkrrto Waif DATE; 7 fir, 8 TIME: '1: 30 TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES: (including this sheet) /47 JOB NUMBER: ' tog TS` PLEASE DELIVER THESE PAGES TO THE INDIVIDUAL NAMED ABOVE. IF YOU HAVE DIFFICULTY RECEIVING THIS TRANSMISSION OR IF ANY PAGES ARE MISSING OR ILLEGIBLE, PLEASE CALL 303/987-3443 AND ASK TO SPEAK TO TRANSMITTED ARE THE FOLLOWING: TRANSMITTED AS CHECK BELOW: [ ] For Your Approval [ J As Requested For Your Use For Your Review and Comment [ ] Per Attached [ I REMARKS: 444, 401 ,. 173.(-(I. RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA JUL 281997 PERMIT CENTER 07/28/97 15:38 BOYLE ENGINEERING 4 2064313665 • • THE UNITED STATES 'DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS Seattle District, Regulatory Branch P.O. Box C-3755 Seattle, Washington 98124-2255 Attention: NPS -OP -RF DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE 22516 S.E. 64th P1. Suite 230, Bld. E. Issaquah, Washington 98027 .Attention: Phil Schneider DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT City of Tukwila 6300 S. Center Blvd. Suite 100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Attention: Kelcie Peterson NO. 891 D02 June 6, 1997 RECEIVED CITY OF. TUKWILA JUL 281997 PERMIT CENTER Bridee 173.41, Seattle Subdivision, Service Unit 15 - Columbia River As part of their ongoing maintenance program, the Union Pacific Railroad Company proposes to replace Bridge 173.41, Seattle Subdivision. The bridge is located on the Black River just upstream of the confluence with the Green River, approximately 1.0 miles northeast of the City of Tukwila in King County, Washington. The site is located in the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 14, Township 23 North, Range 4 East on the Renton, Washington 7.5 min. quadrangle map. The attached copies of Figures 1, 2, and 3 show the site location, the plan view, and an elevation view of the structure. The following information is included for your use: 1. The existing structure at Milepost 173.41 is an 11 -span,173.3-foot timber pile trestle ballast deck bridge. The proposed replacement structure is a 6 -span, 160 -foot concrete box girder bridge. Approximately 80 feet downstream, the BNSF Burlington Northern Railroad has a 214 feet steel girder bridge. 2. Bridge 173.41 is located in an urbanized area consisting of residential, commercial and industrial areas. The contributing drainage area at this bridge is estimated to be 15,550 07/28/97 15:38 BOYLE ENGINEERING i 2064313665 • Page 2 NO.891 1;103 June 6, 1997 acres. However, peak flows are regulated by a pump plant located upstream on the Black River, approximately 1000 feet north of Bridge 173.41. 3. The proposed activity is a replacement of an existing structure and will have minimal. impacts on the local environment. The Railroad understands that the proposed construction activity may not require an individual permit from the Corps of Engineers as this project may be authorized by Nationwide Permit No. 3, Maintenance, as defined in Appendix A of 33 CFR 330. A set of color copy photos is provided to help with the USCOE review. 4. A Storm Drainage Permit from the City of Tukwila may be required for the replacement activity, which must also be compatible with the requirements of the Green River Management Agreement. Hydrologic and hydraulic information about the drainage structure at Milepost 173.41 is contained in the "Final Report, Hydrology and Hydraulics" revised June 1997. This information is submitted to address the requirements of the Storm Drainage Permit. The City of Tukwila will also be reviewing the proposed bridge construction for a Grade and Fill Permit. 5. The Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife is responsible for reviewing all construction plans for hydraulic projects in western Washington. A completed Hydraulic Project Application and appropriate supporting material are attached. Preliminary data and a set of color copy photos have previously been sent. Boyle Engineering Corporation is acting as the Union Pacific Railroad's representative in securing these permits. Please provide this office with the appropriate permits and instructions to allow the railroad to proceed with the proposed construction. Please issue all permits to the Union Pacific Railroad Company, Attn: Roger Boraas, and send them to Boyle Engineering. Corporation, 165 South Union Blvd., Suite 200, Lakewood, Colorado 80228. If you have any questions concerning this matter or require additional information, please contact Mr. Terry Bowen, Project Manager at (303) 987-3443. Please refer future contacts to Bridge 173.41 - Seattle Subdivision, Service Unit 15 - Columbia River. Thank you for your cooperation. Boyle Engineering Corporation Terry A. Bowen, P.E. Project Manager Copies to: Roger Boraas/UPRR DN•U20-104-44 da i *La: ,ter-il,e#,N4likkAte, fgrop--_,---71-0001----0440R41:1 ----"Api-- ' -- ----""ws----.A..i.- itiqp,4•„, ,, 4,11..„—Akor*,,' to" EB RAILROAD _ • L it L B 11 11 lig ' • lc , :12 • . Apt. a I • :761 •77:i ! • 477 Source: USGS 7.5 Minute Quadrangle RENTON, WASHINGTON Mapping, o- _oN QUADRANGLE LOCATION BOYLE CORIPOFIFIrion SITE LOCATION OF FIGURE 1 UPRR BRIDGE 173.41 TO GEORGETOWN BRIDGE 173.41 EXISTING 173.3 -FOOT TIMBER PILE TRESTLE BALLAST DECK BRIDGE UPRR R.O.W. LINE - SPRINT FIBER OPTIC CABLEFO MCI CABLE-4.- 49 ABLE-" 49 +00 FO BLDG. CONC. PIPELINE BASE AT&T FIBER OPTIC CABLE APPROX. L 180', 6 -SPAN B TO KENT BLDG. TION OF PROPOSED GIRDER BRIDGE �- BENCHMARK FOUND IRON ROD HDA 1873010198 10957180869158 EL.=31.55 POWER BOX - UPRR R.O.W. LINE B.M.: US COAST & GEODETIC MARKER NO. J384, 1959 AT TOP OF CURB, NW END OF ROAD BRIDGE JUST UPSTREAM OF UPRR BRIDGE NO. 173.41. EL.=32.17 SCALE: 1" =100' GREEN RIVER BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD 214 FT. STEEL GIRDER BNRR BRIDGE ON CONCRETE PIERS O SURVEYED CROSS SECTIONS ----0 INTERPOLATED CROSS SECTIONS • 204'L 2 LOCATION PLAN BRIDGE 173.41, SEATTLE SUBDIVISION FIGURE 2 1 35 30 25 20 15= 10= 05 PROPOSED 5 -SPAN 160' BOX GIRDER BRIDGE EXISTING AND PROPOSED TOP OF RAIL -� EXISTING BRIDGE EXISTING (SW) B.O.R.=32.81- T H NORN11-\i.. 00 - NORTHWEST TO GEORGETOWN DATUM: SW B.O.R. EL=32.81 NGVD SCALE: HORIZ. 1" =20' VERT. 1" =10' io 0) ifr EXISTING GROUND LINE (VIEW LOOKING NORTHEAST) EXISTING STRUCTURE: WSEL = 19.23 LOW CHORD EL (SW) = 29.38 INVERT EL = 0.08 TOP OF RAIL EL (SW)= 33.41 tfiz 32' SPAN (nP) 1 H H H lu SOUTHEAST TO KENT • PROPOSED STRUCTURE: WSEL = 19.23 LOW CHORD EL (SW) = 28.85 INVERT EL = 0.08 TOP OF RAIL EL (SW) = 33.41 2O4'L fi PROPOSED REPLACEMENT SECTION UPRR BRIDGE 173.41 SEATTLE SUBDIVISION FIGURE 3 J landmarks. The valley is a giant trough dug by the ice. As a part of the ancient Puget Sound, the trough was filled with seawater. Tukwila Hill and Bruinmer's Hill are two of many an- cient rocky hills re -excavated from the glacial drift. Appearing as hills in recent time, origi- nally they were part of a large island separated from the mainland by a long arm of the sea which reached far up into the Lake Washington basin. At the end of the last Ice Age Mount Rainier was about 2,000 feet higher. The land was bare and gray, but soon grasses and brush took hold, and as the climate warmed trees were reestablished. Soon the Cedar River built a delta in the eastern channel separating the Lake Washington basin from the rest of the salt water. Streams poured fresh water from the mountains into the basin, flushing out the remaining salt water, and Lake Washington was created. The lake grew deeper as the delta rose, and its outflow combined with the Cedar River to produce the Black River. About 3,000 years ago the summit of Mount Rainier collapsed during a major erup- tion. A tremendous avalanche of mud and shattered rock swept down the northern slope of the mountain and was funneled by the canyons of the White River and its west fork out onto the lowland, where it spread out over at least 125 square miles of land, creating the White River Valley. The cataclysmic mudslide filled the eastern portion of the ancient Puget Sound channel as far north as the present city of Kent. The avalanche deposit, known as the Osceola Mudflow, diverted the White River toward its outlet at Auburn. As the river cut a new channel through the mudflow and underly- ing glacial material, it built a delta fan atop the rubble already in the channel. Over time the sediments brought down by the river pushed out the sea and created a flat valley floor, giving it its present character. That closes the third chapter. The volcanic highland of the microcontinent and its folded margin, the Ice Age sediments exposed in the unstable valley walls, and the river floodplain shape the world we live in. THE FIRST PEOPLE n early historic times, the main village of the Duwamish stood in what is now Renton, but other villages lined the river banks from Elliott Bay all the way to Maple Valley. To the Duwamish people, the water- course made up of the Duwamish, Black and Cedar rivers was one river that they called the t- hw-duw, which meant something like "going inside," which is where it took people who paddled their canoes upstream from the bay. The people living beside it were known as the duw-AHBSH, "inside people," a name since anglicized to Duwamish. Other groups living along adjacent rivers were closely related. The Duwamish made their home in a very favorable natural environment. Near their confluence, the Black and White rivers flowed between natural levees built up from heavier riverborne sediments deposited during floods. Between these levees and the valley walls, the floodplain was swampy and covered with a dense growth of hardhack and willow thickets and bordered by gallery forests of alder, maple, cottonwood, and occasional groves of cedar, fir and yew. During floods, the marshy floodplain vegetation held water like a sponge, releasing it slowly through a maze of intersecting drainage channels. The highlands were mantled with towering coniferous forests broken here and there by swamps and luxurious, parklike meadows. It is estimated that about 300 people lived in the Tukwila area in the eighteenth century; probably no more than 2,000 lived along the length of the three river system, and not many more than double that throughout the entire Duwamish River watershed. 0 VILLAGES IN THE VALLEYS D n Tukwila, longhouses clustered at two locations: at sko-AHL-ko, meaning "confluence," where the Black and White rivers met, and further up the White River near the southern margin of a swamp west of the river XIII called bis -H00 -kid, "where there are swans." Longhouses consisted of a frame of uprights and rafters sheathed by split, adze -hewn cedar planks. If it were not burned accidentally or destroyed in some other way, a longhouse might last a generation, but by then rot and the buildup of vermin that normally accompanied prolonged human habitation generally drove the residents to build a new one a short distance away. Although the longhouse site might shift, evidence indicates that people settled in general areas for long periods of time. In 1981 archae- ologists excavated the floor of a longhouse on the Black River that had been occupied in the fourth century A.D. Artifacts recovered indicate the area near the confluence was rich enough to make its residents relatively wealthy and influ- ential over 1,000 years ago. It is believed that a village was located at the confluence on the point of land between the rivers. An 1862 land survey map shows a lake, named White Lake by the settlers, at this point, separated from the rivers by the levees. This was an intermittent feature produced by flood waters, and the village's two longhouses, each said to have measured 60 by 120 feet, probably stood on the levees or on high ground back from the lake somewhere within the present confines of Fort Dent Park. On the north side of the Black River, on a flat called t-ah-WEH-deech, "river duck," there were houses of undetermined size. West of the confluence, beneath the bluff presently rising above Interurban Ave., there were four medium-sized longhouses measuring 50 by 100 feet. The name of this house site is the anglicized version of the place name skah- LEELS, "bad looking," which referred to the muddy rocks in the river here. It is probable that not all of these house sites were inhabited at the same time, and the four longhouses at Skal-alius may represent the maximum number of longhouses that stood at the confluence site. South on the White River, two more longhouses measuring 60 by 120 feet stood beside the river at the head of the swamp that extended from S. 180th St. to Southcenter. Another longhouse may have stood on the river's xiv west bank at what is now Bicentennial Park. Each longhouse commonly sheltered several related families. Together they made a house group, a self-sufficient economic unit whose members shared food and other goods and who spent the winter months under a single roof. One or more house groups were united by kinship, residence and exogamy (marriage to partners from other house groups). This consti- tuted a winter village group. Exogamy broad- ened a group's economic base since the right to gather food at certain places was passed down through family lines and distributed through marital ties. A member of one winter village group who married into another retained the identification with his or her birth village, and when he or she died, the body was often trans- ported back to the home winter village burial ground. The fact that an Indian burial ground is remembered to have been located on the hill- side west of the confluence suggests that the house groups there made up a winter village group, but the lack of a burial site for the house groups at bis -H00 -kid suggests that they were affiliated with the major stuk-AHBSH winter village. THE YEAR BEGINS WITH SPRING or the people living at these locations, the year began in late February, when a chorus of frogs heralded the onset of a new season of life. Storytellers elaborated upon the lascivious adventures of Mink, who came ashore from his raft of snags and impregnated virtually anything that moved. As the fertile earth grew green, families prepared to leave the ,longhouses to harvest the product of his virility. In late winter a man who had the Father of Smelt for a supernatural ally would sing the fish upstream, where the people caught them in tube weirs woven from cedar. Steelhead trout also appeared in the rivers and were caught with spears and nets. Hunters left for the swamps to capture elk that came to browse on the brilliant blooming skunk cabbage, and parties of women LIFE ON THE DUWAMISH IN THE 1850s on �errit3 y lkin� C°��eOCo rt1 18D, \g53, �tioct ot s utl0nt P' °{ Match, 853 F it ve StRes (1 is 5th dal i I. atch, O. °{ Fir t,th K of the a that ° UMay�ata `° the �n Couoty act as e�»to thehous»fU S. tda-cewith be it tete C the CO S o. the tOtaete et at the t �amea peXo r * eac Wata e o , K• et he {ots-to- t .• GeotGe SR;tth, Saetea that a {�tOts pace, hn sct S atAa Count ,tl the house `ncO onets and nvenea a ae\y ot6 0{ Oteg,o Cotnet`issactea: eatt\e, a" ,A. C k Det' y as ttan hefts\ative P' a pt• P ess w ��o�ed *o M Co\h ` {o\\ov'ingbustn be su M p\e, P at t to,wt xenN ve as bta� \e * Y\enty Be\\, l°t SttOb amue\M,p�li\so". WR` et,ioh Nod ass 'DaviahDct Da41co. •t P S a sioner and juror posts, others appointed to political office from the Duwamish were Bennett L. Johns, Constable, and John Holgate, Assessor. In the years following the foundation of King County, those pioneering the Duwamish Valley filled a number of county offices. Appointed in 1853, in 1854 Luther Collins was elected King County Commissioner. Jacob Maple, John Buckley, Henry Van Asselt, Louis V. Wyckoff, Timothy Grow, Joseph and Stephen Foster,. Charles e\, Brownell and William Gilliam served on the county grand and petit juries. The aay same year Collins was appointed the first King County Road District Super- visor, and Stephen Foster served as Deputy Sheriff for Sheriff Carson Boren. From 1855 through 1857 men from the Duwamish Valley were frequently elected to the presti- gious county commissioner post, the top office in the county: Cyrus Lewis, 1855-1856, Francis McNatt, 1857, and Henry Adams, 1860. In the 1850s county commissioners were paid at a rate of $6/day while serving at session. Fifteen cents a mile travel expenses were paid to elected county officials to attend sessions at the county seat. Nod as petto\,nMoss,Wm , ot, the {itst M°n a my Van Psse\t• aa, o meet opt to �taeted that the coot Si6't`ea' I,. T/i bins* P.Denvy Coco.oUssiottets * Duwamish Valley Settlers the counties north of the Columbia River and the Oregon Territory capital in Salem was too great to allow for good communication between the capital and the far-flung county seats. Thus, after the creation of the new counties agitation began for a separate territorial government to be created for the region north of the Columbia River. A convention was held at Monticello, near the mouth of the Cowlitz River on the Columbia, to petition Congress for the creation of a new territory to be called "Columbia." The seven delegates from King County were Luther M. Collins, Charles C. Terry, George N. McConahan, William Bell, John Low, Arthur Denny and Dr. David Maynard. The memorial was adopted on March 2, 1853, with the name changed from "Columbia," to "Washington." Of the 17 men making up the initial King County government, almost one-third were from the Duwamish. In addition to commis - MOX LA PUSH PRECINCT he year King County was established the entire county was a single precinct and all official activity took place in Seattle, the county seat. In 1854 additional precincts were established at Stuck, Auburn and Mox la Push (Fort Dent Park area). The pre- cinct name was the Chinook jargon name for the confluence of the Black and White rivers, Mox la Push ("two mouths"). The name arose from a natural phenomenon of the area. In the nineteenth century the Black River floodplain was sufficiently flat that during spring flood the pressure of the White River's waters reversed the 19 121 TUKWILA-COMMUNITY AT THE CROSSROADS current of the Black River, forcing it to empty into Lake Washington. Hence, the river had two mouths. Initially, the Mox la Push precinct did not have well-defined boundaries but included all the voters living on the Duwamish, Black and White rivers and environs. In May 7, 1860, the boundaries of Mox la Push were simply defined as the area lying between Luther Collins' northline and the northline of G. P. Bissel's land in the White River Valley, south of what became Orillia. In the records, the precinct name Mox la Push is variously spelled Moxlapush, Moxt La Busch, Mox lapuch, Mox le Push, and Mox lapush. For the first ten years the Mox la Push precinct polling place moved from cabin to cabin. Being situated at the confluence of the rivers, Joseph Foster's cabin was a convenient location and served as the official polling place for a number of years. Cyrus C. Lewis, Abraham Bryant and John Thomas, from the White River, served as the first election judges. Cyrus Lewis was appointed Justice of the Peace, a position he held for many years, and Abe Bryant was constable for the entire precinct district. The next year election judges were Henry Adams, Sam Grow, C. C. Lewis, and Abe Bryant. Voting again took place at Joseph Foster's, while neighbor Charles Brownell served as election clerk. In 1859 Mox la Push precinct was reconfirmed by the county commissioners and the polling place moved across the river from Foster's to L. V. Wyckoff s cabin. In May of 1860 voting took place at Ben Johns' house near the Lewis ferry landing. On May 8, 1865, the Mox la Push polling place was moved to the ferry landing which had recently been taken over by Joseph Steele. The Duwamish River Road crossed the river at the ferry landing, making it the crossroads of the valley and as such the most accessible location. Settlers typically traveled by water to the polling place. The main issues placed before the voters at this time were selection of officials and taxes. For example, in the election held on June 6, 20 1857, the following taxes were approved: 2 mill school tax, 3 mill county tax, 1 mill territorial tax. Road tax was 25 cents for each $100 of income, and $9 road tax on each person defined as "liable" to pay road tax. A taxpayer could perform road construction labor in lieu of paying cash. TRAVEL IN THE EARLY 1850S ntil the construction of the local railroad line in the 1870s, travel in the Duwamish and White river valleys was by water, Indian trail or the rugged roads built by the settlers. The rivers were the highway for traveling, shipping produce, and receiving mail and supplies. Almost all of the early exploration and travel was done via canoes paddled by hired Indian guides. The river valley settlers quickly adopted a special Indian type of canoe for their river travel, and everyone had at least one canoe which was very satisfactory for light loads or a few passengers. The rich river -bottom soil produced bumper crops that provided enough surplus to sell in the village of Seattle. To haul heavy loads a simple barge was improvised by firmly lashing poles laid across the hulls of two large canoes placed side by side. The cargo of potatoes, hay, butter, fruit or animal skins was secured to this platform. Hogs or other small livestock were not put on the platform but tied in the bottom of the canoe, and the slow careful trip down the river began. If a sudden storm blew in, the boatman had a hazardous time of it. Depending upon the starting point, the journey could take a few hours or more than a day. The trip had to be timed with the outgoing tide, since the mouth of the Duwamish was a muddy delta at low tide. In the late 1850s, enterprising Indians started. a canoe ferry service for the settlers, charging $1 a two -canoe barge load. Traveling around Puget Sound from Olym- pia to Victoria was possible on one of several small steamboats in operation from the early 1850s. The best known was the Eliza Anderson.