Biological Assessment - cityofasotin.org · Biological Assessment Boat Launch & Jetty Restoration...

Biological Assessment

Boat Launch & Jetty Restoration Asotin, Washington

for Keller Associates, Inc.

November 10, 2017



for Keller Associates, Inc.

November 10, 2017

1101 South Fawcett Avenue, Suite 200 Tacoma, Washington 98402 253.383.4940



File No. 22335-001-00

November 10, 2017

Prepared for:

Keller Associates, Inc. 131 SW 5th Avenue, Suite A Meridian, Idaho 83642

Attention: Stillman Norton

Prepared by:

GeoEngineers, Inc. 1101 South Fawcett Avenue, Suite 200 Tacoma, Washington 98402 253.383.4940

David B. Conlin, MA, PWS Senior Biologist

John T. Monahan, MS, FP-C Associate

DBC:JTM:tln

Disclaimer: Any electronic form, facsimile or hard copy of the original document (email, text, table, and/or figure), if provided, and any attachments are only a copy of the original document. The original document is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official document of record.

November 10, 2017| Page i File No. 22335-001-00

Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 1

1.1. Project Background ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.2. Project Location and Setting ........................................................................................................ 1 1.3. Species and Habitat Summary..................................................................................................... 2

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................................... 3

2.1. Project Tasks ................................................................................................................................. 3 2.2. Construction Equipment and Materials ....................................................................................... 4 2.3. Interrelated and Interdependent Actions .................................................................................... 4 2.4. Project Timing and Minimization Measures ................................................................................ 4

3.0 PROJECT AND ACTION AREAS ......................................................................................................... 5

3.1. Project site ..................................................................................................................................... 6 3.2. Action Area .................................................................................................................................... 6

3.2.1. Operation of Construction Equipment .............................................................................. 6 3.2.1. Fish Removal, Exclusion, and Dewatering Activities ....................................................... 7 3.2.2. Construction-Related Noise .............................................................................................. 7 3.2.3. Habitat Alteration .............................................................................................................. 7 3.2.4. Water Quality ..................................................................................................................... 8

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE ............................................................................................................ 8

4.1. Previous and Ongoing Development within the Action Area ...................................................... 8 4.2. Aquatic and Riparian Habitat ....................................................................................................... 9

4.2.1. Channel and Bank Conditions .......................................................................................... 9 4.2.2. Water Quality ..................................................................................................................... 9 4.2.3. Riparian Conditions ........................................................................................................... 9

4.3. Terrestrial Habitat ....................................................................................................................... 10 4.4. Species Utilization of Habitats within the Action Area .............................................................. 10

4.4.1. Snake River Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) ........................................ 10 4.4.2. Snake River Sockeye (Oncorhynchus nerka) ................................................................. 10 4.4.3. Snake River Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) ............................................................ 10 4.4.1. Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus) ................................................................................ 11 4.4.2. Yellow-billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) ................................................................ 11 4.4.3. Spalding’s Catchfly (Silene spaldingii) ........................................................................... 11 4.4.4. Canada Lynx (Lynx canadensis) ..................................................................................... 11 4.4.5. Gray Wolf (Canis lupus) ................................................................................................... 12

5.0 ANALYSIS OF EFFECTS ON SPECIES AND HABITAT .................................................................... 12

5.1. Operation of Construction Equipment ....................................................................................... 12 5.2. Fish Removal, Exclusion, and Dewatering Activities ................................................................. 12 5.3. Construction-Related Noise........................................................................................................ 13 5.4. Habitat Alteration ........................................................................................................................ 13

5.4.1. Aquatic Habitat ................................................................................................................ 15 5.4.2. Banks and Riparian Areas .............................................................................................. 15 5.4.3. Summary of Habitat Effects on Listed Species ............................................................. 16

November 10, 2017| Page ii File No. 22335-001-00

5.4.4. Effects on Habitat Primary Constituent Elements ......................................................... 16 5.5. Impacts to Water Quality ............................................................................................................ 17

6.0 EFFECT DETERMINATIONS ........................................................................................................... 18

6.1. Chinook Salmon, Sockeye Salmon, Steelhead and Bull Trout ................................................. 19 6.2. Gray Wolves ................................................................................................................................. 20

7.0 ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT EVALUATION....................................................................................... 20

7.1. Designated EFH within the Action Area ..................................................................................... 20 7.2. Effects of the Proposed Action on EFH ...................................................................................... 21

8.0 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................... 21

9.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................. 22

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Vicinity Map Figure 2. Project Area Figure 3. Action Area

APPENDICES

Appendix A. 60 Percent Design Plans Appendix B. Official Species Lists

November 10, 2017| Page 1 File No. 22335-001-00

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The City of Asotin is proposing to modify, update and repair the existing small boat launch and associated marina adjacent to the Snake River in Asotin, Washington. The project will include reconfiguration of the bank, modifications to the inlet channel, creation of a hell inlet channel, removal of accumulated sediment, and construction of a replacement boat ramp, boat launch dock, and auxiliary dock with access ramp. The project will require a permit from the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) under their authority to administer Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act. Due to this federal nexus, the project is required to comply with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Management Act (MSA). The purpose of this Biological Assessment (BA) is to present a description of project effects and project-specific species and habitat information pertinent to the consultation process for ESA compliance. Additionally, to satisfy the requirements of the MSA, an Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) evaluation is included. Project design plans are included as Appendix A.

1.1. Project Background

The City of Asotin’s boat launch facility has been closed for the past 10 years due to excessive sedimentation occurring at the boat launch inlet. A large sandbar has formed at the inlet area limiting access to the marina. Preliminary hydrologic work has been performed by the USACE as part of the Lower Snake River Programmatic Sediment Management Plan. The City of Asotin requested Keller Associates (in coordination with GeoEngineers and Lidstone & Associates) to provide planning and design services on the existing boat launch, protective jetty, and float design necessary to restore functionality to the marina. Multiple design alternatives were investigated to restore the marina’s functionality, culminating in the City selecting an alternative that includes constructing a flow-through channel for the marina.

1.2. Project Location and Setting

The project site is located along the left bank of the Snake River, within Chief Looking Glass Park in the City of Asotin, Washington. The City of Asotin has 1,200 residents, is the county seat of Asotin County, and is part of a larger Metropolitan Statistical Area which includes Clarkston and Lewiston and contains over 60,000 people in composite. Chief Looking Glass Park, located just upstream (east) of Asotin Creek, is accessed from 1st Street (State Route 129) and is managed by the City (Figure 1). It is in Section 16, Township 10 North, Range 46 East of the Willamette Meridian. The site consists of a boat ramp, which is located in an off-channel embayment (“marina basin”) used for the staging and launching of watercraft. There is a large parking lot adjacent to the project site for truck and boat-trailer parking, as well as restrooms and a SCAT machine for cleaning boating waste receptacles.

The site is near the confluence with Asotin Creek, appears to have been developed on associated alluvial sediments, and is on an outside bend of the Snake River. Shoreline conditions at the project site have been altered to some extent. There is a small jetty comprised of fill and riprap extending approximately 60 feet riverward from the natural shoreline on the upstream side of the entrance channel. Other parts of the shoreline further upstream and downstream of the site are generally undeveloped, although some residential development comes very close to the riparian edge, and there is a second jetty of similar dimension approximately 700 feet further upstream. The opposite shore, which is in Idaho, is completely undeveloped directly across from the site.

Asotin is located in a predominantly agricultural setting within Water Resources Inventory Area (WRIA) 35 (Middle Snake) and Hydrologic Unit Code 17060103 (Lower Snake-Asotin). Other nearby communities


include Clarkston, Washington, and Lewiston, Idaho, approximately 6 miles to the north. Upstream of Asotin, the nearest major tributary of the Snake River is the Grande Ronde on the left bank approximately 20 miles south. Downstream, the Clearwater River is a right-bank tributary in Lewiston and, further beyond that, the Tucannon and Palouse Rivers are major tributaries of the Snake River before it joins the Columbia River as its largest tributary near Pasco, Washington. There are four dams on the Snake River downstream of the site—Ice Harbor, Lower Monumental, Little Goose, and Lower Granite—and four dams downstream of the Snake River on the Columbia—Bonneville, The Dalles, John Day, and McNary.

1.3. Species and Habitat Summary

The project Action Area was determined based on an analysis of proposed project effects on the environment (see Section 3.2). The action area extends radially 870 feet from the project site in the air, and up to 300 feet out into the river channel and downstream of the project site in underwater environments. Species lists obtained from the federal agencies (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS], 2017a; National Marine Fisheries Service [NMFS], 2016) were used as a starting point to evaluate species utilization and occurrence of habitat within the action area (see Section 4.0). The USFWS species list is included as Appendix B. According to WDFW SalmonScape, the following salmonids occur within the Snake River at the project location: Chinook salmon, sockeye salmon, steelhead trout, and bull trout. Based on this information, only the species and critical habitats listed in Table 1 below are addressed in this BA; no other listed species or designated critical habitats (DCHs) will be affected by project activities, therefore no other species are discussed in this document.

TABLE 1. LISTED SPECIES AND CRITICAL HABITAT ADDRESSED

Common Name Species Name Jurisdiction Federal Status Critical Habitat

Snake River fall-run or spring/summer-run Chinook salmon

Oncorhynchus tshawytscha NMFS Threatened1 Yes2

Snake River Sockeye salmon Oncorhynchus nerka NMFS Endangered3 Yes4

Snake River steelhead Oncorhynchus mykiss NMFS Threatened5 Yes6

Bull trout Salvelinus confluentus USFWS Threatened7 No8

Yellow-billed cuckoo Coccyzus americanus USFWS Threatened9 No10

Spalding’s catchfly Silene spaldingii USFWS Threatened11 No12

Canada lynx Lynx canadensis USFWS Threatened13 No14

Gray wolf Canis lupus USFWS Endangered15 No16

Notes: 1. 57 FR 23458 10. 79 FR 67154; critical habitat proposed, but not within the project Action Area. 2. 58 FR 68543 11. 66 FR 51598 3. 57 FR 212 12. Critical habitat has not been proposed or designated for this species. 5. 71 FR 834 13. 65 FR 16051 4. 70 FR 52630 14. 74 FR 8616; critical habitat has been designated but not within the project Action Area. 6. 70 FR 52630 15. 68 FR 15804 7. 64 FR 58909 16. Critical habitat has not been proposed or designated for this species. 8. Critical habitat has been designated but not within the project Action Area (70 FR 56212; USFWS 2017a). 9. 79 FR 59992


2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

To address the sediment buildup that the marina currently experiences, the proposed alternative would consist of constructing a flow-through channel on the upstream side of the marina. The upstream flow-through channel will be constructed as the wider channel with the existing channel being narrowed for the return channel to the river. The flow-through channel will allow water to flow through the marina to discourage material from settling by promoting higher water velocities.

The existing rock spur dike near the inlet will be removed to prevent additional sediment buildup outside of the marina that results from a back-eddy caused by the dike. Existing sediment buildup will be removed and bank revetment (consisting of stabilized rock slopes and rock liner) will be placed around the inlets and the center of the marina for slope stabilization and erosion prevention. Some reconfiguration of the bank will occur through excavation, fill and bank armoring. It is Lidstone & Associates’ opinion that this alternative should be considered the best solution to improve control of sedimentation in the marina.

The marina has been in place since 1974 and the site historically contained several docks, boat moorage, and a boat ramp. In addition to the channel modifications identified above, the existing boat ramp will be replaced and extended, and a replacement dock will also be installed, with a ramp connecting to the shore.

2.1. Project Tasks

The following are project tasks that are generally anticipated for this project. This list is not necessarily all-inclusive and may be modified as the project progresses through the design and construction phases.

■ Implement Sediment & Erosion Control

■ Clearing and Grubbing (Vegetation, etc.)

■ Fish Exclusion, Work Area Isolation, and Dewatering

■ Remove Existing Sediment (outside marina)

■ Remove Existing Rock Spur Dike

■ Create New Inlet Channel

■ Dredge Interior of Marina

■ Install Bank Revetment

■ Install Replacement Boat Ramp

■ Install Replacement Dock Infrastructure

■ Install New Marina Signage

It is anticipated that there will be approximately 20,425 cubic yards (CY) of sediment removal (within and outside of the marina), approximately 1,700 CY of rock removal (spur dike removal and new entrance creation), and approximately 1,300 CY of fill material for this project. These quantities are preliminary estimates and will be more accurately estimated later in the project’s development.


2.2. Construction Equipment and Materials

Excavators, backhoes, or clamshell buckets, and other necessary equipment will be used to remove the existing rock spur dike and to create a new channel opening for the marina. Other standard heavy equipment will be used as needed for removing material, hauling, placing new material, compacting, dredging, etc. During all construction for the site, proper erosion and sediment control will be implemented. The following equipment is anticipated to be used during project construction. This list is not exhaustive and may be modified by contractor and project team based on equipment availability or other unforeseen events that may occur.

Construction Equipment Construction Materials

Excavator Crushed Rock (Varying sizes)

Backhoe Structural Fill

Front-end Loader Rip Rap

Dump Trucks Erosion & Sediment Control

Crane Geotextiles

Skid-steer Native vegetation seeding

Compacting Equipment Dock & Marina Infrastructure

Dredging Equipment

2.3. Interrelated and Interdependent Actions

Interrelated actions are actions that are part of a larger action and depend on the larger action for justification (50 CFR 402.02). Interdependent actions are actions that have no independent utility apart from the proposed action (50 CFR 402.02). There are no interrelated or interdependent actions associated with this project.

2.4. Project Timing and Minimization Measures

Construction of the project will be timed to coincide with the approved in-water work window associated with USACE and WDFW permits. The USACE’s in-water work window for the Snake River is August 1 through 31, which is more restrictive than the listed WDFW work window of July 16 through September 15. Compliance with these work windows will reduce impacts to listed salmonids. Work within the adjacent uplands as defined by the ordinary high watermark (OHWM) is not limited by the in-water work window. Site preparation, mobilization to the site and specific construction activities that do not require in-water work may be conducted outside of the in-water work window.

In addition to the work windows listed above, construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) and temporary erosion and sediment control (TESC) measures will be utilized during the project to avoid impacts to ESA-listed species and DCH. The contractor will install TESC measures prior to project initiation. TESC measures will be inspected, maintained and augmented if necessary to prevent impacts to the river. After completion of the project, TESC controls will be removed from the area for offsite disposal. Other impact avoidance and minimization measures include:

■ The project will obtain and comply with conditions that will be outlined in the HPA permit issued for the project by WDFW and the Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit issued by the USACE.


■ Fish exclusion, capture, and handling will be completed in accordance with USFWS protocol (USFWS, 2012).

■ Disturbance will be limited to those areas necessary for construction, which will be identified on-site plans and marked on the site before construction begins.

■ If at any time, as a result of project activities, fish are observed in distress, a fish kill occurs, or water quality problems develop (including equipment leaks or spills), immediate notification shall be made to the WDFW Area Biologist listed in the HPA.

■ Construction activities will be performed during daylight hours, which are expected to be from 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM Monday through Friday, and 9:00 AM to 8:00 PM Saturday.

■ Equipment staging and/or materials storage will be limited to non-vegetated surfaces, such as the existing parking lot, associated access roads, or adjacent cleared areas whenever possible. Minor vegetation removal and site preparation activities will be employed as necessary to maintain staging and materials storage sites.

■ A Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), including TESC measures will be fully implemented, in accordance with local permit requirements. Appropriate erosion control measures will be implemented at appropriate locations.

■ A Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan will be prepared, approved, and implemented by the contractor. The plan will be site-specific and cover the project scope of work.

■ SWPP and SPCC Plans will be monitored by a Certified Erosion Sediment Control Lead (CESCL) according to Ecology regulations.

■ Equipment used for this project shall be free of external petroleum-based products while the work is performed around the water. Equipment shall be checked daily for leaks, and any necessary repairs shall be completed prior to commencing work activities along or above the creek. Heavy equipment shall be washed free of deleterious material prior to commencement of work.

■ All debris resulting from construction shall be removed from the Project Area and prevented from entering the water.

■ Waste materials will be transported off-site for disposal in accordance with applicable regulations.

■ Work will be in compliance with all other applicable local, state and federal regulations and restrictions.

3.0 PROJECT AND ACTION AREAS

The project site includes all areas where construction activities will occur. The action area includes not only those areas where construction will occur, but also those areas outside of the construction area into which the effects of the project may extend. For example, noise created during construction or during ongoing operation of a facility may be heard in environments beyond the project site itself. Similarly, waterborne pollutants potentially introduced during construction could be carried off site to downstream aquatic environments, potentially increasing the size of the Action Area. The project site and Action Areas are described in the following sections.


3.1. Project Site

The project site is restricted to the actual site itself, which in this case consists of the entirety of the site parcels, including the work area that extends into the Snake River. Use of the term “project site” throughout this document refers to the site as such. The project site is illustrated on Figure 2 based on the conceptual design; please refer to Appendix A for a 60 percent design set as of August 2017.

3.2. Action Area

The action area is defined as “all areas to be affected directly or indirectly by the federal action and not merely the immediate area involved in the action” (50 CFR §402-02). The action area, therefore, includes the spatial extent of all direct, indirect, interrelated and interdependent effects of the project. The Action Area includes previously altered habitat areas, including aquatic habitat within the Snake River, the existing marina, and bank/riparian areas throughout the project site. Most of these areas have been previously altered as a result of prior development of the site. The Action Area is illustrated on Figure 3.

Project-specific effects that have been taken into account to define the action area for the project include:

■ operation of construction equipment;

■ fish removal, exclusion, and dewatering;

■ construction-related noise;

■ habitat alteration; and

■ impacts to water quality.

Each project effect will occur within a discrete zone of influence, which may differ for each effect. The overall Action Area is the geographic extent of all project effects, which is the combination of all zones of influence. It was determined that the portion of the Action Area above land and/or water surfaces extends approximately 870 feet in all directions from the project site. The part of the Action Area below water surfaces is less extensive and includes only the area where in-water work will be conducted and the water quality mixing zone, which includes the marina basin itself as well as extending into the Snake River approximately 300 feet outward and downstream from the project site. The overall Action Area therefore encompasses the zones of influence for all the project effects identified in the list above. Methods used to identify each zone of influence are discussed in the following sections. A description of the spatial extent of each zone of influence used to determine the overall action area follows.

3.2.1. Operation of Construction Equipment

During construction operations, equipment will operate in natural habitat areas potentially utilized by ESA-listed species. Species occupying the following habitat areas, if present, could be affected as a result of interaction with construction equipment and/or construction materials:

■ Snake River (below OHWM), including operation of dredging/excavation equipment (excavator/clamshell buckets), installation of temporary coffer dams (crane/excavator), and installation of bank revetments (crane/excavator).

■ Riparian Area (above OHWM), including construction access, vegetation clearing and grubbing, removal of earthen fill, placement of bank protection, etc.


Construction equipment has the potential to have direct effects on listed species occupying habitats in which the equipment will operate. The zone of influence for these effects is the entire work area within the Snake River channel, marina basin, and adjacent uplands, including the riparian fringe where construction access and associate work are proposed.

3.2.2. Fish Removal, Exclusion, and Dewatering Activities

Fish removal and exclusion, followed by dewatering a portion of the river and marina basin, will be necessary for construction of the project. A coffer dam will be installed to isolate the work area. The coffer dam is anticipated to be consist of a Portadam, water-filled bladder, or similar temporary structure. Sheet piles are not anticipated at this time. Fish removal will occur within enclosed areas and then the work area will be dewatered. Fish removal and handling will be completed in accordance with the USFWS (2012) protocol or other approved methods, subject to agency approval. The zone of influence related to fish removal and dewatering is restricted to the area within the coffer dam enclosures, including the footprint of the coffer dam itself.

3.2.3. Construction-Related Noise

The project will create in-air noise during construction activities. Underwater noise is not anticipated because the work area will be isolated and dewatered prior to in-water construction activities.

Construction-related in-air noise will be created as a result of the general operation of construction equipment. Project construction will require typical construction machinery as identified in Section 2.2. Simultaneous operation of multiple pieces of construction equipment may generate in-air noise as high as 91 decibels (dB) at 50 feet from the source (WSDOT, 2017). The project site is immediately adjacent to a large flowing river, and is surrounded by a combination of paved, vegetated and built areas with a substantial level of undeveloped vegetated ground, resulting in a “soft-site” condition that is anticipated to attenuate point-source construction noise at an approximate rate of 7.5 dBA per doubling of distance from the noise source (WSDOT, 2017). Ambient conditions at the project site are estimated to be approximately 60 dB based on light auto mobile traffic, the small-town setting, and surrounding environment which includes a park (relatively quiet). Based on equations developed by WSDOT (2017), noise analysis indicates that in-air noise generated by construction activity may exceed ambient conditions for up to approximately 870 feet surrounding the project site. The zone of influence for construction related noise is therefore centered at the project site and extends approximately 870 into the air hemispherical above land surfaces. This zone of influence does not affect underwater environments, which are not anticipated to be affected by construction noise since the in-water work areas will be isolated and dewatered prior to construction activities.

3.2.4. Habitat Alteration

Construction of the project will result in alteration of existing baseline habitat conditions both within the aquatic environment as well as adjacent riparian areas. The zone of influence for habitat alteration will be limited to the project footprint, as discussed below:

■ Aquatic Habitat Alteration. Habitat alteration within the aquatic area will be permanent. The existing aquatic habitat at the project site has been historically modified from its natural state as a result of development of the existing marina, including associated bank armoring, rock spurs, and the artificial embayment (marina basin) and connecting channel. The proposed project will modify the aquatic area


both on the river side of the existing bank as well as within the marina basin. The rock spur will be removed, sediment dredged, banks modified, and new channel created. Although these actions will also have indirect effects on habitat resulting from altered hydraulics, this effect is anticipated to be limited to the immediate project site and will not be of a magnitude to affect other adjacent aquatic habitats associated with the Snake River or Asotin Creek. Within the marina, the replacement boat ramp and dock will displace and/or be constructed over some existing aquatic substrate currently providing marginal habitat.

■ Riparian Habitat Alteration. Habitat alteration of adjacent riparian areas will include both permanent alteration and temporary degradation as a result of equipment access. During construction, riparian vegetation will be temporarily cleared and grubbed. At the conclusion of construction, all exposed soils will be revegetated with native riparian species suitable for the project location. Permanent alteration will result from reconfiguration of the bank, addition of bank armoring (above OHWM), and loss of upland/riparian bank area where the new channel is created, where the marina is excavated, and where the replacement boat ramp and dock are constructed. These effects are limited to the footprint of the project site where construction impacts are direct.

3.2.5. Water Quality

According to the State of Washington Water Quality Standards in Chapter 173-201A Washington Administrative Code (WAC), the allowable temporary mixing zone during and immediately after in-water activities in streams exceeding 100 cubic feet per second in flow volume (such as the Snake River) is 300 feet downstream from the activity. Compliance with these standards will be monitored during construction in accordance with Ecology guidelines as part of the Clean Water Act Section 401 permit approval. The zone of influence for water quality effects, therefore, is not anticipated to exceed a distance of 300 feet downstream of the location where in-water work will occur.

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE

The project site is located along the middle Snake River, a major tributary of the Columbia River. The Snake River flows generally north through the City of Asotin, and Chief Looking Glass Park contains an existing small boat marina on an artificial embayment excavated adjacent to the river. The sections below discuss the environmental baseline conditions of the site in more detail.

4.1. Previous and Ongoing Development within the Action Area

Much of the area surrounding the project site has been altered from its natural condition as a result of human activity. Shoreline development on the left bank of the Snake River, within the City of Asotin, has included residential development, construction of the existing marina, and bank armoring associated with road development. State Route (SR) 129 (First Street) is set back from the river bank approximately 200 to 600 feet from the shoreline through much of City; however, in some locations upstream and downstream of the project site, the highway directly abuts the Snake River. The right bank of the Snake River across from the project site remains mostly undeveloped and is protected to some degree as part of Hells Gate State Park. Downstream of the project site, the Snake River enters the Cities of Clarkston, Washington, on the left bank, and Lewiston, Idaho, on the right bank. Through these much larger cities, both banks of the river are more highly developed.


4.2. Aquatic and Riparian Habitat

According to the WDFW SalmonScape database (WDFW, 2017a), the Snake River provides documented migratory and/or rearing habitat for listed salmon species identified in Section 1.3, but does not provide spawning habitat for any of these species. Asotin Creek, which flows into the Snake River from the left bank approximately 800 feet downstream of the project site, may also provide rearing habitat for some salmonid species. The Snake River is also identified by the WDFW Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) database as providing habitat for a variety of waterfowl as well as white sturgeon and rainbow trout (WDFW, 2017b).

Many of the habitat limiting factors affecting salmonids in the middle Snake River are related to environmental or management factors that occur well beyond the limits of the Action Area. For example, tributary habitats, estuarine and ocean habitat, hydropower impacts and migration corridors, and fisheries management may impact these salmon stocks as they migrate through the lower Snake River, Columbia River, and oceanic environments (NOAA, 2016b). Environmental habitat limiting factors that may occur within the project Action Area include: channel simplification and bank armoring, water quality factors, and degradation of riparian conditions.

4.2.1. Channel and Bank Conditions

Within the immediate vicinity of the project site, there is ample evidence of past modifications to the channel and bank conditions. The existing marina has been excavated into the left bank of the river, creating an off-channel basin for launching small watercraft. The banks of the marina basin are abrupt and lined with angular rock in places. The entrance channel connecting the marina basin to the Snake River has become silted in through time. Just upstream of the entrance channel, there is a constructed rock spur that is armored with angular rock at the waterline. Approximately 700 feet upstream of the rock spur, there is another rock spur of similar construction.

4.2.2. Water Quality

The Snake River is identified in the Ecology 303(d) list (Ecology, 2016) as Category 5 (impaired) for pH, temperature, and dissolved oxygen.

4.2.3. Riparian Conditions

Riparian conditions within the Action Area are generally degraded. Development of Chief Looking Glass Park and the marina has displaced most existing native riparian vegetation, which has been replaced with mowed lawn areas, paved parking, a sports field, and the aforementioned bank modifications. There is an existing dirt maintenance access road along the west side of the marina basin, the parking area is immediately south of the basin, and mowed grass east of it. Although a narrow band of opportunistic vegetation consisting of small shrubs and weedy species has established in places along the bank, much of the shoreline is devoid of any vegetation beyond grass and low-growing weeds. In spite of the generally degraded riparian conditions at the project site, there is one area just west of the maintenance access road on the west side of the marina basin that features taller shrubs and small trees, providing the most significant riparian vegetation community within the Action Area. There is also some intact riparian vegetation on the opposite shore of the Snake River, and a narrow band along Asotin Creek, both of which are within the Action Area.


4.3. Terrestrial Habitat

Aside from the generally narrow bands of riparian vegetation described in the preceding section, most upland terrestrial habitat within the Action Area has been displaced by development associated with the City of Asotin and Chief Looking Glass Park. Beyond the Action Area, the bluffs on either side of the river remain partially undeveloped, and those on the Idaho side are part of Hells Gate State Park. These arid shrub-steppe lands provide habitat for deer, bighorn sheep, and wolves as well as smaller mammals, birds, reptiles, and insects including shrub-steppe obligate species. The WDFW PHS database (WDFW, 2017b) identifies documented habitat for the following species on the hills and bluffs surrounding the project site: gray wolf, mule deer, golden eagle, chukar, osprey, and peregrine falcon. Distribution of most of these species may partially overlap the Action Area; however, osprey and peregrine falcon are identified in the Hells Gate State Park on the opposite side of the river and beyond the Action Area.

4.4. Species Utilization of Habitats within the Action Area

ESA-listed species that are addressed in this BA are listed in Table 1 in Section 1.3. Utilization of the Action Area by these species is evaluated in the sections below, and is based in part upon documented geographic distribution of these species, as well as the environmental baseline conditions within the Action Area as described above.

4.4.1. Snake River Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)

The Snake River spring/summer-run and fall-run Chinook salmon ESUs include two stocks that enter the Columbia River and then migrate past four Columbia River dams and into the Snake River, passing four Snake River dams to reach Asotin, where they typically spawn in tributaries. Within the Action Area, the Snake River is identified as migratory and rearing habitat for Chinook salmon (WDFW, 2017a). In particular, shallow riverine habitats (less than 2 m) are likely to provide rearing habitat for sub-yearlings, and moderately shallow water (2 to 6 m) are likely to be utilized as rearing habitat for yearlings (Tiffan and Connor, 2012). The Snake River within the Action Area is designated as critical habitat for Chinook salmon.

4.4.2. Snake River Sockeye (Oncorhynchus nerka)

The Snake River sockeye salmon ESU is listed as endangered and includes populations in: the Snake River Basin; residual sockeye in Redfish Lake, Idaho; as well as one artificial propagation hatchery program at Redfish Lake (70 FR 37160). As with other Snake River salmon, sockeye enter the Columbia River and must pass four dams before entering the Snake River. There are four more dams on the Snake River downstream of the Action Area. Within the Action Area, the Snake River is identified as documented habitat for sockeye salmon (WDFW, 2017a). The Snake River within the Action Area is also designated as critical habitat for sockeye salmon.

4.4.3. Snake River Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss)

The Snake River summer-run steelhead ESU includes a stock that enters the Columbia River during June to October, and then migrate past four Columbia River dams and into the Snake River passing an additional four dams to reach the Action Area, where they typically spawn in high-elevation tributaries that are typically warmer and drier on an annual basis than habitats utilized by other steelhead ESUs (NOAA, 2005). After entering the Snake River, steelhead hold over the winter and then spawn the following spring. Ocean-going juveniles remain in the basin for 1 to 2 years before outmigration (NOAA, 2005). Within the Action Area, the Snake River is identified as migratory habitat for steelhead; there is rearing and spawning habitat in Asotin


Creek adjacent to but outside of the Action Area (WDFW, 2017a). Adult steelhead may use deeper waters for migration and holding while juveniles would typically use shallow riverine habitats near the channel margin for rearing. The Snake River within the Action Area is designated as critical habitat for steelhead, as is Asotin Creek beyond the Action Area.

4.4.4. Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus)

Bull trout within the Action Area are part of the Lower Snake geographic region of the Mid-Columbia Recovery Unit (USFWS, 2015). Foraging, migration and overwintering (FMO) habitat for bull trout includes relatively large streams and mainstem rivers, including lakes or reservoirs, where subadult and adult migratory bull trout forage, migrate, mature, or overwinter. Stream temperatures in summer and early fall may limit occupancy of mainstem FMO habitat, during which times bull trout typically migrate into headwater streams. Within the Action Area, bull trout presence is documented in the Snake River, which provides FMO habitat for this species (WDFW, 2017a). There is no critical habitat for bull trout within the Action Area.

4.4.5. Yellow-billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus)

The Western DPS of yellow-billed cuckoo inhabits riparian zones with dense cottonwood and willow stands. Cuckoos generally prefer large tracts of riparian forest with dense understory. The western yellow-billed cuckoo nests almost exclusively in forested riparian stands of 50 acres or more and are extremely rare in Washington (78 FR 61633). The Action Area does not include suitable habitat for yellow-billed cuckoos; therefore, the project will have no effect on this species.

4.4.6. Spalding’s Catchfly (Silene spaldingii)

Spalding’s catchfly is a leafy, perennial plant in the pink family (Caryophyllaceae) that grows on mesic grassland prairies at low- to mid-elevations (USFWS, 2007). There are no records of this plant in Washington, although extant populations do occur in Wallowa County, Oregon, which is the county immediately south of Asotin County, Washington. The WDFW PHS database (WDFW, 2017b) and Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Natural Heritage Database (WDNR, 2017) do not identify this species at or in the vicinity of the project site. Furthermore, due to the previously altered conditions at the project site, which has been cleared, excavated, and developed in the past, it is highly unlikely that any rare native plants remain. Based on this information, the project will have no effect on this species.

4.4.7. Canada Lynx (Lynx canadensis)

Canada lynx also use a wide variety of habitat types though they are generally limited in the Pacific Northwest by prey availability (snowshoe hares), which are limited to early successional lodgepole pine forests (NatureServe, 2013). In Washington, the majority of Canada lynx occurrences were found above 4,100 feet elevation in Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir forests (71 FR 66007). Canada lynx are considered critically imperiled in the state of Washington (NatureServe, 2013), and PHS data does not record their presence in the action area (WDFW, 2017b). The Action Area does not contain habitat for this species due to the lack of suitable forested areas or snowshoe hare populations and the presence of human activities. Therefore, based on this information the project will have no effect on this species.


4.4.8. Gray Wolf (Canis lupus)

The PHS database (WDFW 2017b) indicates gray wolf occurrence at the township level for the area surrounding the project site. The nearest wolf pack identified by WDFW (2016) is the Tucannon pack, which occupies the area southwest of the project site, and has a minimum count of 5 wolves, including a successful breeding pair as of December 2015. Given the rather large range that wolves cover and the recent advancement of the wolf pack distribution and numbers in Washington State, it is not unexpected for them to be seen from time to time. Wolves have high resiliency to threats (Weaver et al., 1996). Wolves are also fairly tolerant of moderate amounts of human disturbance, even in the vicinity of active wolf dens (Thiel et al., 1998; Frame et al., 2007). However, the project setting is urban and there have been no reported sightings or media reports of wolves within the town. Given the information available on Washington State gray wolf distribution, behavior and the proposed project attributes, and the project setting, it is possible though unlikely that gray wolves could be present on the outer margins of the project Action Area.

5.0 ANALYSIS OF EFFECTS ON SPECIES AND HABITAT

This section provides analysis of the effects the project is likely to have on listed species identified in Section 1.3. Three of these species, yellow-billed cuckoo, Spalding’s catchfly, and Canada lynx are not expected to occur within the Action Area, as identified in Section 4.4 above; the project will have no effect on these three species. Effects of the project on the remaining species (Chinook salmon, sockeye salmon, steelhead, bull trout, and gray wolf) are evaluated in the following sections.

Direct effects of the project include all impacts directly associated with project implementation and construction activities as well as any disturbances that would occur very close to the time of construction. Indirect effects of the project are those that could result from the project, but occur later in time through an indirect mechanism. For this project, all anticipated effects will be direct.

5.1. Operation of Construction Equipment

As described in the “Action Area” section, construction equipment may operate within the river channel and along the banks (riparian area) during project construction. As documented in this BA, listed salmonids including Chinook salmon, sockeye salmon, steelhead and bull trout could be present within the Snake River channel. However, prior to construction, a coffer dam will be constructed, fish removed from the work area, and the work area will be dewatered. Therefore, the potential for direct interaction between construction equipment and listed fish species is exceedingly low and is considered discountable.

Gray wolf is the only terrestrial species that may occur in the Action Area. It is highly unlikely that gray wolf would enter a construction site within this urban setting during construction and be subject to interaction with construction equipment during work in upland and riparian habitats. This effect is also considered discountable.

5.2. Fish Removal, Exclusion, and Dewatering Activities

As stated in the preceding section, the work area will be isolated with a coffer dam, fish will be excluded and removed, and the work area will be dewatered. These actions may affect listed fish species that occupy the project work area during construction, but would not have any effect on terrestrial species (e.g., gray wolf). Fish removal and recovery activities will follow current WDFW or USFWS standards of practice to


minimize adverse effects on any individual fish captured and handled, as referenced in the project permit conditions. Fish recovered from the work area will be transported and released back to the Snake River outside of the work area immediately upon capture.

In-water work, including fish removal, will be restricted to the approved work window for fish protection. The approved work window listed by USACE for the project location is August 1 to August 31; the approved work window listed by WDFW for the project location is July 16 to September 15. Once all in-water work is completed, the coffer dam will be removed.

Because of the life history of listed salmonids present within the action area, which may remain in the Snake River at any time of year, it cannot be guaranteed that no listed individuals will be present during these activities. However, restricting in-water work, including fish removal, to the approved in-water work window will minimize the probability of encountering large numbers of listed salmonids during the project. Consequently, the impact of the project on listed species resulting from fish removal and exclusion is considered insignificant.

5.3. Construction-Related Noise

In-air construction noise may permeate terrestrial environments up to approximately 870 feet from the project area due to use of construction machinery that generates noise in excess of baseline conditions extending into the surrounding environment. There will be no underwater noise generated by the project, such as might result from pile driving or blasting. Furthermore, the work area will be isolated from the Snake River and dewatered for construction, further reducing the likelihood that any construction noise would extend into the aquatic environment. Therefore, there will be no effect of construction-related noise on fish species, but there could be an effect on gray wolves resulting from in-air noise. The occurrence of wolves within the Action Area during construction is considered extremely unlikely and therefore discountable.

5.4. Habitat Alteration

The project will modify nearshore shallow water habitat within the Snake River channel, the artificially constructed marina basin, bank conditions, riparian vegetation, and adjacent uplands as a result of the reconfiguration of the banks and inlet channels, construction of dock and boat ramp infrastructure, and removal of sediment. Habitat alteration will affect a number of different habitat types that exist in the baseline condition.

There is no spawning habitat within the project area. Habitat that may be altered as a result of the project is generally considered potential juvenile rearing habitat and may also occasionally provide holding and/or migratory habitat for adult salmonids. None of the habitat altered by the project is anticipated to be occupied by gray wolves or any other terrestrial species at any time. A summary of the types of habitat conversion that will occur as well as the amount of habitat that will be impacted, is provided in the table below. These effects are discussed in the sub-sections that follow.


TABLE 2. HABITAT IMPACT QUANTITIES

Action Explanation Impact Area

Excavation below OHW Existing sediment build-up will be removed; the existing bank will be re-shaped to improve hydraulics and intended design function.

31,300 SF

Conversion from shallow water (<2 m) to moderate-depth water (2 to 6m) habitat

Sediment removal and contouring will alter bathymetry

35,800 SF

Conversion from upland/riparian to aquatic habitat

The existing rock spur (river side) and peninsula (marina side) will be excavated and bank re-shaped to create the new entrance, resulting in some conversion of existing upland/riparian to aquatic habitat

11,900 SF

Conversion from aquatic to upland/riparian

To re-shape the bank and narrow the existing inlet, some existing aquatic area will be converted to upland/riparian bank through placement of fill

10,550 SF

New bank revetment New bank revetments consisting of riprap protection will prevent unwanted erosion and define the new bank.

872 LF

Displacement of riparian vegetated area

The replacement boat ramp, dock ramp, and placement of riprap bank protection above OHW will displace existing vegetated riparian areas

34,064 SF

Fill below OHW Riprap will be placed along existing and new banks as protection; the replacement boat ramp will require concrete fill replacing what is currently in place.

Riprap: 2,229 CY Concrete: 85 CY

Overwater coverage The new dock and boat ramp dock will be suspended above the water surface.

3,031 SF

Riparian restoration and enhancement

Bank areas will be revegetated with riparian species as feasible following completion of work

30,200 SF previously vegetated habitat impacted by construction (restoration) 10,550 SF previously unvegetated habitat (enhancement)

Notes: LF = linear feet SF = square feet

There will be no:

■ Conversion from shallow water (<2m) or moderate-depth water (2-6m) to deepwater (>6m) habitat.

■ Conversion from moderate-depth (2-6m) or deepwater (>6m) to shallow water (<2 m) habitat.

■ Conversion from deepwater (>6m) to moderate-depth water (2-6m) habitat.


5.4.1. Aquatic Habitat

Impacts to the habitats associated with the Snake River channel and Marina Basin include alteration of existing aquatic habitat, aquatic fill, and establishment of new aquatic habitat. These habitat effects will occur where the existing rock spur will be removed, sediment buildup will be removed, the existing inlet will be narrowed and deepened, and a new entrance channel will be created. As part of these actions, the banks will be re-shaped and armored, which is addressed separately in Section 5.4.2, below. Additional modifications will include development of infrastructure including a boat ramp, boat launch dock, and secondary dock.

Removal of the rock spur will not only alter hydraulic processes (which is the reason for its removal) but will also re-establish aquatic riverine habitat that was historically filled for its construction. The rock spur will be removed and excavated to elevation 737.0, resulting in re-establishment of shallow aquatic habitat. This represents an increase in available aquatic habitat for fish, offsetting other actions that may reduce aquatic habitat within the Marina Basin (see next section).

Sediment removal will effectively alter riverine habitat by making it less shallow and therefore converting some existing shallow water (<2 m depth) habitat to moderate-depth water (2 to 6 m depth) habitat. As with the actions in the river channel, sediment will be removed within the Marina Basin to an elevation of 737.0, resulting in an overall increase in moderate-depth water (2 to 6 m depth) habitat. Moderately shallow water in the 2 to 6 m depth range is more highly used by juvenile Chinook salmon in the Snake River system (Tiffan and Connor, 2012); therefore, this action may benefit Chinook salmon and other salmonid species during juvenile rearing and outmigration.

Reshaping the bank is necessary to ensure appropriate hydraulics to prevent sedimentation of the basin. Alterations to the bank line on the river side will result in both cut (conversion from upland to aquatic habitat) and fill (conversion from aquatic to upland habitat). Creation of the new entrance channel and narrowing and deepening the existing channel will also be accomplished through both cut (conversion from upland to aquatic habitat) and fill (conversion from aquatic to upland habitat). Overall, there is a higher net conversion from upland to aquatic habitat (11,900 SF) than there is conversion of aquatic to upland habitat (10,550 SF), resulting in an overall increase in aquatic habitat that may be used by salmonids.

The replacement boat ramp will be constructed of concrete and will necessitate a small amount of fill in the existing basin (Table 2), displacing some existing aquatic substrate. The boat launch dock and secondary dock will be floating structures.

5.4.2. Banks and Riparian Areas

Alterations along the riverbanks and to riparian habitat will include: vegetation removal for equipment access and staging, reshaping existing banks, maintenance and repair of existing bank revetments, installation of new bank revetments, grading to create the replacement boat ramp and path to the replacement dock, and subsequent restoration and enhancement of impacted riparian habitat.

Vegetation removed in bank/riparian areas is generally degraded and, in some places, completely lacking. Upon completion of the project, riparian areas impacted by construction will be restored using native seed mixes and plantings. A riparian planting plan will be developed as part of the design and submitted for permit approval with the Clean Water Act and Hydraulic Project Approval permit applications. Native plant communities, once they are established, are expected to provide greater levels of riparian function than


existing communities. Restoration will use fast-growing species that are anticipated to become established within as little as 1 to 2 years. However, there will still be a short-term loss of functions that riparian vegetation provides during and immediately after construction work.

Alterations to the banks of the Snake River will change the shape of the bankline and increase the stability of the banks as necessary to ensure hydraulic function of the project and to reduce unwanted sediment deposition in the inlet channels and marina basin. Much of the bank has already been altered and/or armored in the past. Proposed rock revetments may permanently displace riparian vegetation from the bank, however, and further degrade bank conditions at the site scale.

A total of 872 LF of new bank revetment will be installed, consisting of riprap, which will displace 30,081 SF of riparian area. An additional 3,983 SF of riparian area will be displaced by portions of the boat ramp and dock landward of the OHW. All other riparian areas impacted by construction will be revegetated (30,200 SF), and an additional 10,550 SF of previously unvegetated habitat will enhanced and provide new riparian function not currently being provided.

5.4.3. Summary of Habitat Effects on Listed Species

In summary, habitat alteration has the potential to have both short- and long-term impacts to habitat for listed fish species that occur within the Snake River. Short-term temporary impacts such as impacts resulting from construction access, clearing, and grading will be restored following completion of the project and are, therefore, considered insignificant. Permanent loss of riparian and bank areas is limited and generally occurs in areas that have already been historically altered via clearing and/or armoring. The Marina Basin itself is manmade and not considered a natural feature of the Snake River. Some of these manmade/altered areas are now vegetated with weedy species; however, overall they provide very little ecological value and these impacts are therefore also considered insignificant. The project also includes a net increase in aquatic habitat as a result of removal of historic fill (the spur dike) and creation of the new entrance channel as well as a potential slight improvement to aquatic habitat function with regards to juvenile salmonids as a result of sediment removal, which results in moderate-depth water (2 to 6 m) that is preferential by rearing salmonids. Consequently, these actions are considered beneficial to listed salmonids that may occur in the river. Finally, there will be installation of replacement docks that will result in over-water coverage not currently present (though historically present); based on the small area that will be affected (3,031 SF), the location of these docks in an artificial embayment created as a Marina Basin, and the historical use of the site for the same purpose with similar features, these effects are also considered insignificant.

5.4.4. Effects on Habitat Primary Constituent Elements

As described in the preceding sections, project actions will have the following effects on physical features comprising Chinook salmon, sockeye salmon, steelhead and/or bull trout critical habitat:

■ substrate removal, including associated organisms and organic detritus;

■ increased water depth in the marina basin and nearshore riverine habitats;

■ alteration of bank conditions;

■ cut and fill and associated conversion between aquatic and upland habitat types;

■ installation of replacement overwater structures;


■ alteration of hydrology and hydraulic conditions;

■ removal of riparian vegetation, much of it currently degraded, for the purpose of equipment access and bank construction activities; and

■ establishment of native riparian vegetation (seeding and plantings).

The Snake River within the Action Area supports rearing and migration for Chinook salmon, sockeye salmon, steelhead, and bull trout. The Action Area does not support spawning for these species. Key attributes of the Primary Constituent Elements (PCEs) of fish habitat include appropriate water quality and quantity, physical habitat configuration attributes (e.g., shallow water rearing habitat, large woody debris, boulders, bank conditions, water depth, etc.), and riparian cover.

Based on the anticipated project effects and the PCEs present within the project area, the following effects on designated critical habitat are anticipated:

■ Water quality may be temporarily degraded during construction but is anticipated to return to normal background levels upon completion of the project. With appropriate BMPs in place and adherence to the approved in-water work window for fish protection during the course of a single season, the effect on water quality is expected to be limited, remain within the normal range that occurs in this river system during times of high stream discharge, and is therefore considered insignificant. Water quantity parameters will not be affected.

■ Although substrate will be removed from the river during excavation of built-up sediments, the surface substrate left behind after excavation will be of similar quality and type as that removed, resulting in no net change to substrate conditions. Use of affected habitat by salmonids as rearing habitat will likewise be unaffected and this effect is therefore both insignificant and discountable.

■ Bed elevation lowering that results from excavation of built-up sediment may alter the characteristics of shallow water rearing habitat. This effect is minor and therefore considered insignificant, or potentially even beneficial, as described in the preceding section.

■ Bank armoring is consistent with the historic development and use of the site as a Marina. Existing bank conditions are degraded. Therefore, additional degradation of riparian habitat and other bank functions associated with armoring is considered insignificant.

■ Riparian conditions will be temporarily degraded as a result of clearing for equipment access and bank work. Cleared areas will be restored by seeding and planting native species. There will also be some riparian restoration in the area newly created where the existing inlet is narrowed, which will compensate for other impacts. Therefore, although the short-term degradation of riparian cover cannot be avoided, the long-term effects on riparian conditions are expected to be insignificant.

■ Other physical habitat attributes in the Snake River—such as large woody debris, boulders, side channel and floodplain habitats—are already generally degraded within the project area and will be unaffected by the proposed project.

5.5. Impacts to Water Quality

Water quality impacts that will occur in the Snake River during construction are anticipated to be limited to elevated turbidity due to re-suspension of sediments during work area isolation (coffer dam) and dewatering, and potentially again following removal of the coffer dam. The project will comply with the


mixing zone requirements of the Ecology Section 401 Clean Water Act Water Quality Certification, which specify a 300-foot mixing zone for this project site. Water quality is expected to return to baseline conditions immediately following completion of construction.

Increased turbidity is anticipated to affect the project area and extend up to 300 feet out into the Snake River as well as downstream from the construction limits. In-water construction work will be limited to the approved in-water work window for the project. These measures are intended to limit the extent of water quality effects to fish that may potentially occur in the river during construction have. Therefore, the effects of increased turbidity on listed fish within 300 feet of the work area is considered insignificant.

Increased turbidity may also affect designated critical habitat for Chinook salmon, sockeye salmon, and steelhead. The project reach includes freshwater rearing and migratory habitat and does not include spawning habitat. As described above, the extent of turbidity impacts during construction will be limited in duration and extent, thereby reducing the effects of turbidity or sedimentation on critical habitat to an insignificant level.

6.0 EFFECT DETERMINATIONS

Based on the project effects presented in Section 3.2, we have made effect determinations for each listed species and designated critical habitat that may occur in the Action Area. For yellow-billed cuckoo, Spalding’s catchfly, and Canada lynx are not anticipated to occur in the Action Area at any time; no effect determinations are explained in Section 4.4 and are not discussed further below. Effects determinations for other species take into account all of the possible project effects as evaluated in Section 5.0; our determinations are summarized in Table 3 and discussed below.

TABLE 3. EFFECT DETERMINATIONS FOR LISTED AND PROPOSED SPECIES

Common Name Federal Status Effect Determination for Species

Effect Determination for Critical Habitat

Chinook salmon Threatened NLAA NLAA

Sockeye salmon Endangered NLAA NLAA

Steelhead trout Threatened NLAA NLAA

Bull trout Threatened NLAA --

Yellow-billed cuckoo Threatened NE --

Spalding’s catchfly Threatened NE --

Canada lynx Threatened NE --

Gray wolf Endangered NLAA --

Notes: NLTAA = Not Likely to Adversely Affect NE = No Effect.


6.1. Chinook Salmon, Sockeye Salmon, Steelhead and Bull Trout

The project may affect Chinook salmon, sockeye salmon, steelhead, and bull trout because:

■ Suitable habitat for these species is present in the Snake River within the Action Area, and these species have been documented in the river.

■ Construction equipment will operate within suitable habitat for all four fish species.

■ Work area isolation, fish exclusion and removal, and dewatering will affect habitat potentially occupied by these species.

■ Project construction activities will alter aquatic and riparian habitats and generate turbidity within and adjacent to the Snake River.

The project is not likely to adversely affect (NLAA) Chinook salmon, sockeye salmon, steelhead, and bull trout because:

■ Work area isolation will be completed during an approved in-water work window prior to construction below the OHWM. The potential for direct interaction between construction equipment and listed fish species is exceedingly low and is considered discountable, and the impact of the project on listed species resulting from fish removal and exclusion is considered insignificant.

■ The project will not generate underwater/aquatic noise above ambient baseline levels.

■ As discussed in detail in Section 5.4, the net effects on aquatic, bank and riparian habitats will generally be discountable or insignificant, and in some cases, may even be beneficial. The project includes a net increase in aquatic habitat, which is considered beneficial. Riparian habitat that will be affected is generally degraded and will be restored with native species that are anticipated to provide improved riparian functions, offsetting temporal impacts. Loss of riparian area as a result of armoring and other improvements will be offset with restoration in other areas. The net effects on riparian habitat are therefore considered insignificant. Installation of docks and other structures within the marina embayment are also considered insignificant.

■ Water quality may be temporarily degraded during construction, particularly during installation and removal of the temporary coffer dam. This effect will be limited in duration (temporary), will be restricted to the standard mixing zone for water quality effects, and will take place during the approved in-water work window. Therefore, the projects effects on water quality are considered insignificant.

The project may affect designated critical habitat for Chinook salmon, sockeye salmon, and steelhead because:

■ The project action area includes PCEs 2 and 3 for salmon and steelhead.

■ Project activities will alter habitat within and adjacent to the Snake River.

■ Construction access and bank stabilization activities will remove overhanging riparian vegetation which provides shade and cover for juvenile salmon and steelhead (PCE 2).

■ The project may potentially result in temporary water quality impacts (sediment releases) in the Snake River, which constitutes a migratory corridor for salmon and steelhead (PCE 3).


The project is NLAA designated critical habitat for Chinook salmon, sockeye salmon, and steelhead because:

■ There will be no long-term impact on juvenile rearing habitat availability or quality.

■ The long-term effects on riparian conditions are expected to be insignificant.

■ Project effects on water quality are temporary, short-term, limited in extent/scale, and therefore considered insignificant.

■ PCEs 2 and 3 for salmon and steelhead are not anticipated to become degraded relative to the current baseline.

6.2. Gray Wolves

The project may affect gray wolves because:

■ Project construction will necessitate operation of construction equipment adjacent to potentially occupied habitat for gray wolves.

■ Construction-related noise could extend beyond the project site and into potentially occupied habitat for gray wolves.

The project is NLAA gray wolves because:

■ Operation of construction equipment will be limited to an area where gray wolves are extremely unlikely to occur based on known wolf distribution and the highly urban setting; the chance of construction equipment interacting with wolves is therefore considered discountable.

■ Construction-related noise that permeates the surrounding environment will primarily affect developed areas in an urban setting. The Action Area extends a limited distance into undeveloped riparian areas around the mouth of Asotin Creek as well as onto the steep slopes west of the project site. Due to the persistent presence of other human activity in the project vicinity and adjacent to potentially occupied habitat for gray wolves, the impact of construction noise is considered insignificant.

7.0 ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT EVALUATION

The Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act, as amended by the Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996 (Public Law, 104-267), includes a mandate that NMFS must identify EFH for federally managed marine fish, and federal agencies must consult with NMFS on activities that may adversely affect EFH. The Pacific Fisheries Management Council has designated EFH for the Pacific salmon fishery, and federally managed groundfish and coastal pelagic fisheries. The objective of the EFH assessment is to describe potential adverse effects to designated EFH for federally managed fisheries species within the proposed Action Area. It also describes conservation measures proposed to avoid, minimize, or otherwise offset potential adverse effects to designated EFH resulting from the proposed action.

7.1. Designated EFH within the Action Area

There is no habitat for coastal pelagic or groundfish species within the Action Area. The Pacific salmon fishery management unit includes Chinook salmon, coho salmon (O. kisutch), and pink salmon


(O. gorbuscha). Pacific salmon designated EFH includes all streams, lakes, ponds, wetlands, and other water bodies currently or historically accessible to salmon in Washington State, except above impassable barriers. Estuarine and marine areas extend from the nearshore and tidal submerged environments within Washington territorial waters out to the full extent of the exclusive economic zone offshore (PFMC, 1999). Therefore, the Snake River is designated EFH for Pacific salmon. There are no marine or estuarine areas within the Action Area. Of the Pacific salmon species managed under the MSA, only Chinook salmon occur within the Action Area; coho salmon and pink salmon are not present.

7.2. Effects of the Proposed Action on EFH

As stated in the BA analysis above, the project will alter habitat within and adjacent to the Snake River. Project impacts will include removal of accumulated sediments, removal of riparian vegetation, and temporary impacts to water quality. These impacts may directly affect salmon EFH as well as habitat which support salmon prey. However, riparian and aquatic habitat conditions after project completion are anticipated to provide a similar level of habitat function as the current baseline condition, which is already degraded locally at the site. Therefore, the appropriate effect determination for Pacific salmon EFH is no adverse effect.

8.0 CONCLUSIONS

The Boat Launch and Jetty Restoration Project will involve reconstruction of the existing marina basin and banks, removal of accumulated sediments, and construction of a replacement boat ramp, boat launch dock, and auxiliary dock. To complete this work, removal of riparian vegetation will be necessary as well. The project will require the use of heavy machinery including excavators and other typical construction equipment. Project impacts to the environment may include: operation of construction equipment; work area isolation, fish exclusion, fish removal, and dewatering; elevated construction-related noise levels; alteration of riverine and riparian habitats; and temporary impacts to water quality. However, the project has been carefully designed to minimize these effects and restoration of all impacted riparian areas is proposed.

The Action Area for the project was defined as the sum of extents of all project effects on the environment and comprised an 870-foot radius around the project site in the air and up to 300-foot radius around the work area extending outward and downstream within the Snake River. The Action Area was largely dictated by the extent that noise associated with construction equipment could permeate the environment as well as temporary impacts to water quality within the approved mixing zone. Four ESA-listed fish species were identified as potentially occurring within the Action Area, including Chinook salmon, sockeye salmon, steelhead and bull trout. One ESA-listed terrestrial species, gray wolf, may also occur within the Action Area. The project will have no effect on other ESA-listed species because they are not anticipated to occur within the Action Area at any time.

Based on the effects analyses presented in this BA, the project is NLAA Snake River Chinook salmon, sockeye salmon, steelhead, bull trout, and gray wolves. The project is also NLAA designated critical habitat for Chinook salmon, sockeye salmon and steelhead. Additionally, the project will have no adverse effect on EFH for Pacific salmon.


9.0 REFERENCES

57 FR 212-213. 1992. 50 CFR Part 17. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing of the Snake River Sockeye Salmon as an Endangered Species. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. Federal Register, Vol. 57, No 2, January 3, 1992.

57 FR 23458. 1992. 50 CFR Part 227. Endangered and Threatened Species; Threatened Status for Snake River Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon, Threatened Status for Snake River Fall Chinook Salmon. Federal Register, Vol. 57, No. 107. June 3, 1992.

58 FR 68543-68554. 1993. 50 CFR Part 226. Designated Critical Habitat; Snake River Sockeye Salmon, Snake River Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon, and Snake River Fall Chinook Salmon. Federal Register, Vol. 58, No. 247. December 28, 1993.

64 FR 58909-58933. 1999. 50 CFR Part 17. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Threatened Status for Bull Trout in the Coterminous United States. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. Federal Register, Vol. 64, No. 210. November 1, 1999.

65 FR 16051-16086. 2000. 50 CFR Part 17. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Threatened Status for the Contiguous U.S. Distinct Population Segment of the Canada Lynx and Related Rule. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. Federal Register, Vol. 65, No. 58. March 24, 2000.

66 FR 51598-51606. 2001. 50 CFR Part 17. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Rule to List Silene spaldingii (Spalding’s Catchfly) as Threatened. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. Federal Register, Vol. 66, No. 196. October 10, 2001.

68 FR 15804-15875. 2003. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Rule To Reclassify and Remove the Gray Wolf From the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife in Portions of the Conterminous United States; Establishment of Two Special Regulations for Threatened Gray Wolves. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. Federal Register, Vol. 68, No. 62. April 1, 2003.

70 FR 52630-52853. 2005. 50 CFR Part 226. Endangered and Threatened Species; Designation of Critical Habitat for 12 Evolutionary Significant Units of West Coast Salmon and Steelhead in Washington, Oregon and Idaho. Federal Register, Vol. 70, No. 170. September 2, 2005.

70 FR 56212-56311. 50 CFR Part 17. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Endangered and Threatened and Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for Bull Trout. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. Federal Register, Vol. 70, No. 185. 2005.

71 FR 834-862. 2006. 50 CFR Parts 223 and 224. Endangered and Threatened Species: Final Listing Determinations for 10 Distinct Population Segments of West Coast Steelhead; Final Rule. Federal Register, Vol. 71, No. 3. January 5, 2006.

74 FR 8616-8702. 50 CFR Part 17. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised Critical Habitat for the Contiguous United States Distinct Population Segment of the Canada Lynx. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. Federal Register, Vol. 73, No. 40. February 25, 2009.


79 FR 59992-60038. 2014. 50 CFR Part 17. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Threatened Status for the Western Distinct Population Segment of the Yellow-billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus); Final Rule. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. Federal Register, Vol. 79, No 192, October 3, 2014.

79 FR 48548-48652. 2014. 50 CFR Part 17. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for the Western Distinct Population Segment of the Yellow-Billed Cuckoo; Proposed Rule. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. Federal Register, Vol. 79, No 158, August 15, 2014.

Frame, P. F., H. D. Cluff, and D. S. Hik, 2007. Response of wolves to experimental disturbance at homesites. Journal of Wildlife Management 71:316-320.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2005. CHART Assessment for the Snake River Basin Steelhead ESU.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2016a. Status of ESA Listings & Critical Habitat Designations for West Coast Salmon & Steelhead. Updated July 2016.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2016b. Proposed ESA Recovery Plan for Snake River Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) & Snake River Steelhead (Onchorhynchus mykiss). West Coast Region, NOAA Fisheries. October 2016.

NatureServe, 2013. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available at <http://www.natureserve.org/explorer>.

Pacific Fishery Management Council, 1999, “Identification and Description of Essential Fish Habitat, Adverse Impacts, and Recommended Conservation Measures for Salmon,” Amendment 14 to the Pacific Coast Salmon Plan, http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/Salmon-Habitat/Salmon-EFH/upload/Amend14_AppA.pdf.

Thiel, R. P., S. Merril, and L. D. Mech, 1998. Tolerance by denning wolves, Canis lupus, to human disturbance. Canadian Field-Naturalist 112:340-342.

Tiffan, K.F. and W. P. Connor, 2012. Seasonal Use of Shallow Water Habitat in the Lower Snake River Reservoirs by Juvenile Fall Chinook Salmon. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla District, Western Fisheries Research Center.

Ullman, J.L., and M.E. Barber, 2009. Middle Snake Watershed Instream Habitat Assessment: WRIA 35.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 2007. Species Fact Sheet: Spalding’s catchfly, Silene spaldingii. Oregon Fish & Wildlife Office, Pacific Region, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Available at https://www.fws.gov/oregonfwo/Species/Data/SpaldingsCatchfly/. Last updated October 15, 2007.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 2015. Mid-Columbia Recovery Unit Implementation Plan for Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus). Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon.

http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/Salmon-Habitat/Salmon-EFH/upload/Amend14_AppA.pdf

http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/Salmon-Habitat/Salmon-EFH/upload/Amend14_AppA.pdf

https://www.fws.gov/oregonfwo/Species/Data/SpaldingsCatchfly/


United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 2017a. List of Threatened and Endangered Species That May Occur in Your Proposed Project Location, and/or May Be Affected by Your Proposed Project. Consultation Tracking Number 01EWFW00-2017-SLI-0586. Washington Fish & Wildlife Office, Lacey, WA. March 9, 2017.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 2012. Recommended Fish Exclusion, Capture, Handling, and Electroshocking Protocols and Standards. Prepared by Nancy Brennan-Dubbs, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington Fish and Wildlife Office, Lacey, Washington.

Washington Department of Natural Resources, 2017. Sections that Contain Natural Heritage Features, updated February 6, 2017. Available at http://www.dnr.wa.gov/Publications/amp_nh_trs.pdf.

Washington Department of Ecology, 2016. 303(d) List. Approved July 22, 2016. Available at http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/303d/.

Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife, 2016. Wolf Packs in Washington (as of December 2016). Gray Wolf Conservation and Management. Available at http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/ gray_wolf/packs/.

Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife, 2017a. SalmonScape Application, Version 4.0. Available at http://wdfw.wa.gov/mapping/salmonscape/. (Accessed March 8, 2017.)

Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife, 2017b. Priority Habitats and Species on the Web. Available at http://apps.wdfw.wa.gov/phsontheweb/. (Accessed March 8, 2017.)

Washington State Department of Transportation, 2017. Biological Assessment Preparation for Transportation Projects: Advanced Training Manual. Version 4-2017. http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/ Environment/Biology/BA/BAguidance.htm#manual.

Weaver, J.L., P.C. Paquet, and L.F. Ruggiero, 1996. Resilience and Conservation of Large Carnivores in the Rocky Mountains. Conservation Biology, Vol. 10, Issue 4. August 1996.

http://www.dnr.wa.gov/Publications/amp_nh_trs.pdf

http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/303d/

http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/%0bgray_wolf/packs/

http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/%0bgray_wolf/packs/

http://wdfw.wa.gov/mapping/salmonscape/

http://apps.wdfw.wa.gov/phsontheweb/

http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/%0bEnvironment/Biology/BA/BAguidance.htm#manual

http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/%0bEnvironment/Biology/BA/BAguidance.htm#manual

FIGU

RE

S

Washington

µ

SITE

Vicinity Map

Figure 1

Boat Launch and Jetty RestorationAsotin, Washington

WashingtonIdaho

Oregon

2,000 2,0000

Feet

Data Source: Mapbox Open Street Map, 2016

Notes:1. The locations of all features shown are approximate.2. This drawing is for information purposes. It is intended to assist in showing features discussed in an attached document. GeoEngineers, Inc. cannot guarantee the accuracy and content of electronic files. The master file is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official record of this communication.

Projection: NAD 1983 StatePlane Washington South FIPS 4602 Feet

P:\22

\223

3500

1\GIS

\223

3500

100_

F01_

Vicini

tyMap

.mxd

Date

Expo

rted:

06/2

9/17

by c

chelf

Idaho

50 0 50

Feet

Notes: 1. The locations of all features shown are approximate.2. This drawing is for information purposes. It is intendedto assist in showing features discussed in an attached document. GeoEngineers, Inc. cannot guarantee the accuracy and contentof electronic files. The master file is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc.and will serve as the official record of this communication.


LegendConstruction LimitsExcavation Limits

P:\22

\223

3500

1\GIS

\223

3500

100_

F02_

Projec

tArea

.mxd

Date

Expo

rted:

06/3

0/17

by c

chelf

Bank Revetment

Dock

Boat Ramp

Existing Parking Lot

Snake River

Bank Revetment

Bank Revetment

Create Narrow Opening for Return Channel and Remove Existing Sediment Buildup

Remove Spur Dike Remove Existing SedimentBuildup

Create Wide Feed Channel

Data Source: Aerial from ESRI, Construction information from Keller Associates µProject Area


Figure 2

300 0 300

Feet

Notes: 1. The locations of all features shown are approximate.2. This drawing is for information purposes. It is intendedto assist in showing features discussed in an attached document. GeoEngineers, Inc. cannot guarantee the accuracy and contentof electronic files. The master file is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc.and will serve as the official record of this communication.


LegendProject Limits/Area of Influence for Habitat AlterationArea of Influence for Water Quality EffectsArea of Influence for In-Air Noise

P:\22

\223

3500

1\GIS

\223

3500

100_

F03_

Actio

nArea

.mxd

Date

Expo

rted:

06/3

0/17

by c

chelf

Data Source: Aerial from ESRI, Construction information from Keller Associates µAction Area


Figure 3

300'

300'

870'

AP

PE

ND

ICE

S

APPENDIX A 60 Percent Design Plans

BELLINGHAM

SEATTLE

TACOMA

OLYMPIA

VANCOUVER

5

90

14

CLARKSTON

SPOKANE

YAKIMA

2

395

101

20

ASOTIN

A1

PROJECTLOCATION

N.T.S. A2 N.T.S.

COVER SHEET C-001

J:\2

1404

9-00

6 AS

OTI

N B

OAT

LAU

NC

H\C

_DES

N\_

CAD

\3_D

ESIG

N\D

_PLA

NS-

1\C

-001

.DW

GLA

ST S

AVED

: 8/1

4/20

17 1

2:57

PM

PRIN

TED

: 10/

23/2

017

2:04

PM

BOAT LAUNCH & JETTY RESTORATIONCITY OF ASOTIN,

WASHINGTON

CIVIL ENGINEERKELLER ASSOCIATES, INC.733 5TH ST, SUITE ACLARKSTON, WA 99403CONTACT: STILLMAN NORTON, PEPHONE: 509.295.6095EMAIL: [email protected]

OWNERCITY OF ASOTIN121 CLEVELAND STREETASOTIN, WA 99402CONTACT: BOB PORTLOCK, PUBLIC WORKSSUPERINTENDENTPHONE: 509.243.4411EMAIL: [email protected]

PROJECTAREA

NORTHWEST UTILITYNOTIFICATION CENTER

CHECKED:

APPROVED:DESIGNED:

PROJECT NO.

SHEET NO.NO. REVISIONS BY DATE

DRAWN:

BOAT LAUNCH & JETTY RESTORATION 214049-006This document or any part thereof in detail or design concept is the

personal property of Keller Associates, Inc. and shall not be copied in anyform without the written authorization of Keller Associates, Inc.

733 5th Street #AClarkston, WA 99403

(509) 295-6095VERIFY SCALE:Scales based on22"x34" prints.

PRELIMINARYNot For Construction

2 Inches

CITY OFASOTIN, WA

TO CLARKSTON SNAKE RIVER

1st STREET

AUGUST - 201760% DESIGN

HWY 129

2nd STREET

3rd STREET

NOTE:SEE SPECIFICATION 01120 FOR PLAN AND PROCEDURESFOR THE UNANTICIPATED DISCOVERY OF CULTURALRESOURCES AND/OR HUMAN SKELETAL REMAINS.

CLE

VELA

ND

ST

IC

IC

SL

SAN

MEADOR STREET

LIST OF DRAWINGS

C-001 - COVER SHEETC-002 - CIVIL SYMBOLS & LINE LEGENDC-100 - PROJECT OVERVIEW & DOCK LAYOUTC-101 - MARINA SITE & GRADING PLANC-102 - ACCESS SITE PLANC-103 - ACCESS SITE GRADING PLANC-301 - BOAT LAUNCH PLAN & PROFILEC-501 - DETAILSC-502 - HANDRAIL DETAILSC-503 - ADA BATHROOM IMPROVEMENTSE-101 - ELECTRICAL SITE PLANE-501 - ELECTRICAL DETAILS

X X X

OHP OHP

GI GI GI

TP-31

12''SS> 12''SS>

8''PI 8''PI 8''PI

8''W 8''W

10''SD> 10''SD>

CP #203

8''W

8''W 8''W

2''PI

8''PI

8''SS<8''SS<

18''SD< 15''SD<

12''SD<12''SD<

8''W 8''W

OO

# # # # # # #

8'' FIRE 8'' FIRE

4''SS<

XX

O O O

PS PS PS

R/W R/W

NG NG NG

UGP UGP

FO FO FO

T T T

CABLE CABLE

TR

TV

oooo

EG EG

8''PS< 8''PS<

C T

JT JT

UGP UGP

OHP OHP

TEL TEL

FO FO

T/D T/D

CABLE

TR

TV

T

<4''SS <4''SS

4''SS< 4''SS<

GM

GR

8''GI< 8''GI<

WC

( )

ROW ROW

P/L P/L

5

7 8

5 6

6

7

J

NG NG

NG NG

NG NG

PROPERTYSURVEY CONTROL POINT

SECTION LINES

PRESCRIPTIVE RIGHT OF WAY

PROJECT BOUNDARY

PROPERTY LINES

EASEMENT - UTILITY

EASEMENT - TEMPORARY

EASEMENT - SETBACK

EXISTING TOPOGRAPHYTOPOGRAPHIC CONTOUR

EDGE OF PAVEMENT

CURB & GUTTER, SIDEWALK & DROP INLET

FENCE (BARBED WIRE OR OTHER)

TEST PIT

EDGE OF GRAVEL

DEDICATED RIGHT OF WAY

DITCH FLOWLINE

FENCE (CHAINLINK)

SIGN

WITNESS CORNER

CALCULATED POINT

SET 1/2" STEEL PIN W/CAP

SET 5/8" STEEL PIN W/CAP

FOUND 5/8" STEEL PIN

FOUND ALUMINUM CAP

FOUND BRASS CAP

FOUND 1/2" STEEL PIN

DATA OF RECORD

BENCHMARK

QUARTER SECTION - NOT FOUND

CENTER SECTION

SECTION CORNER - FOUND

EXISTING UTILITY WATERLINE & VALVE

SANITARY SEWER LINE & MANHOLE

STORM DRAIN LINE & MANHOLE

PRESSURE IRRIGATION & VALVE

GRAVITY IRRIGATION & MANHOLE

OVERHEAD POWER LINE & POWER POLE

SIGNAL POLE

LIGHT POLE

PROPOSED SITE 6" VERTICAL CURB, GUTTER, SIDEWALK & DROP INLET

6" REVERSE CURB & GUTTER

PROPOSED GRADINGTOPOGRAPHIC CONTOUR

RIDGELINE

DRAINAGE ARROW & SLOPE

SPOT ELEVATION

PROPOSED MISCELLANEOUS

CHAINLINK FENCE & GATE

FENCE

UNDERGROUND POWER LINE

NATURAL GAS LINE

FIBER OPTIC LINE

TELEPHONE LINE & RISER

CABLE LINE & RISER

CONSTRUCTION PHASE LIMITS

DEMOLITION/ABANDON

CLEARING AND GRUBBING

EDGE OF GRAVELPRESSURE SEWER LINE & VALVE VAULT

SANITARY SEWER SERVICE & CLEANOUT

SIGN

SWALE FLOWLINE

PROPOSED UTILITYFLANGED MECHANICAL JOINT

FITTING TYPES

BEND

REDUCING TEE

GATE VALVE

FIRE HYDRANT

BLOW-OFF VALVE

PRESSURE IRRIGATION, TEE & GATE VALVE

WATERLINE

PRESSURE IRRIGATION SERVICE

SANITARY SEWER & MANHOLE W/ VENTED LID

STORM DRAIN LINE, INLET & CATCH BASIN

STORM DRAIN LINE & MANHOLE W/ VENTED LID

SANITARY SEWER SERVICE & CAP

TEE

REDUCER

FLANGE TO MECHANICAL JOINT COUPLING

CROSS

CAP W/BLIND FLANGE

CHECK VALVE

BUTTERFLY VALVE

WATER SERVICE LINE & METER

FIRE LINE

MONITORING WELL

CABLE & TELEPHONE RISERS

JOINT TRENCH & DEVICE

PRESSURE SEWER & VALVE VAULT

SANITARY SEWER SERVICE & CLEANOUT

JOINT TRENCH IN PROFILE

GRAVITY IRRIGATION & STRUCTURE

JUNCTION BOX & DUCT BANK

RESTRAINED FITTING

LOCATION WIRE BOX

NON-FREEZE YARD HYDRANT

PROPOSED UTILITY (CONT.)

CABLE & TV RISER

FIBER OPTIC LINE & VAULT

NATURAL GAS LINE & METER

NATURAL GAS LINE & RISER

NATURAL GAS LINE & VALVE

UNDERGROUND POWER

OVERHEAD POWER & POLE

LIGHT POLE

TELEPHONE LINE & RISER

TELEPHONE DATA LINE

PROPOSED SITE (CONT.)

6" VERTICAL CUT CURB & GUTTER

6" REVERSE CUT CURB & GUTTER

IMBEDDED CURB

CONCRETE (AR-CONC)

ASPHALT (DOTS)

GRAVEL SECTION (GRAVEL)

GRAVEL SURFACE (AR-SAND)

LANDSCAPE ROCK (AGGREGATE)

A A A A A A A

BUILDING OR STRUCTURE

BUILDING OR STRUCTURE (SOLID)

EP EP EDGE OF PAVEMENT

BM-1

WM

EP EP

EG EG

CIVIL SYMBOLS & LINE LEGEND C-002

J:\2

1404

9-00

6 AS

OTI

N B

OAT

LAU

NC

H\C

_DES

N\_

CAD

\3_D

ESIG

N\D

_PLA

NS-

1\C

-002

.DW

G6/

9/20

17 2

:20

PM

NOTES:1. NOTIFY ENGINEER IF SYMBOL IS NOT IN LEGEND OR SYMBOL

DISCREPANCY IS FOUND.

2. THIS IS A GENERAL LIST OF SYMBOLS AND LINES, NOT ALL ARE USED ONTHIS PROJECT.

IC

IC

SL

SAN

CHECKED:

APPROVED:DESIGNED:

PROJECT NO.


DRAWN:






2 Inches

CITY OFASOTIN, WA

0XX GENERAL (SYMBOLS LEGEND, NOTES, KEY MAPS, ETC.)1XX SITE (TOPOGRAPHY, DEMOLITION, SITE LAYOUTS, ETC.)2XX GRADING (GRADING, DRAINAGE, EXCAVATION, ETC.)3XX ROADWAY (ROADWAY DESIGN, PLAN & PROFILES, ETC.)4XX UTILITY (PLAN VIEW, PLAN & PROFILES, ETC.)5XX PROJECT DETAILS6XX MISCELLANEOUS

DISCIPLINE DESIGNATORS

CIVIL SHEET TYPES

G GENERAL DRAWINGSV SURVEY DRAWINGSC CIVIL DRAWINGSS STRUCTURAL DRAWINGSA ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGSMP PLUMBING DRAWINGSMH HVAC DRAWINGSM MECHANICAL PROCESS DRAWINGSE ELECTRICAL DRAWINGSEI ELECTRICAL INSTRUMENTATION DRAWINGS

1. ---

2. ---

3. ---

GENERAL SHEET NOTES

SHEET KEYNOTES

09 ALUMINUM GANGWAY

10 8'x20' DOCK SECTIONS

11 SECURITY CURBING OR RAILING

12 TIE UP CLEATS, INSTALL TWO CLEATS EACHDOCK SECTION

13 ANCHORING SYSTEM

17 CONCRETE PAD; RE:XXXX

--

PROJECT OVERVIEW & DOCK LAYOUT C-100

J:\2

1404

9-00

6 AS

OTI

N B

OAT

LAU

NC

H\C

_DES

N\_

CAD

\3_D

ESIG

N\D

_PLA

NS-

1\C

-100

.DW

GLA

ST S

AVED

: 10/

23/2

017

11:1

0 AM

PRIN

TED

: 10/

23/2

017

2:05

PM

IC

IC

SL

SN

CHECKED:

APPROVED:DESIGNED:

PROJECT NO.


DRAWN:






2 Inches

CITY OFASOTIN, WA

EXISTING PARKING LOT

BOAT LAUNCH PLAN & PROFILE; RE: C-201

MARINA SITE & GRADING PLAN; RE: C-101

0 30 60

ACCESS SITE & GRADING PLAN; RE: C-102

SNAKE RIVER

NEW BOAT DOCKS

NEW BOAT DOCKS

NEW STRIPING

EXISTING BOAT LAUNCH

NEW BOAT DOCKS

ASPHALT PATH;RE: XXXX

ADA BATHROOMIMPROVEMENTS

PATIO OVERLOOK;RE: XXXX

1112

13

9

9

10

10 11 12

13

17

DESIGN CRITERIAMINIMUM WATER SURFACE ELEVATION = 738.00'

MAXIMUM WATER SURFACE ELEVATION = 750.00'

NEW GRASS ANDIRRIGATION

SYSTEM

(TYP)

10

1213

(TYP)

(TYP)

(TYP)

(TYP)

(TYP)

5'x40'

5'x40'

1. CONTRACTOR TO DISPOSED OF EXCAVATEDMATERIALS TO APPROPRIATE LOCATIONOFFSITE.

2. ---

3. ---

GENERAL SHEET NOTES

SHEET KEYNOTES01 BANK REVETMENT; RE: A4/C-501

02 DAYLIGHT CUT LINE

03 DAYLIGHT FILL LINE

04 BOTTOM OF EXCAVATION (CROSSHATCHEDAREA)

05

--

MARINA SITE & GRADING PLAN C-101

J:\2

1404

9-00

6 AS

OTI

N B

OAT

LAU

NC

H\C

_DES

N\_

CAD

\3_D

ESIG

N\D

_PLA

NS-

1\C

-101

.DW

GLA

ST S

AVED

: 8/1

8/20

17 7

:59

AMPR

INTE

D: 1

0/23

/201

7 2:

06 P

M

IC

IC

SL

SAN

CHECKED:

APPROVED:DESIGNED:

PROJECT NO.


DRAWN:






2 Inches

CITY OFASOTIN, WA

0 20 40

62.00'

40.00'

BOAT R

AMP

DOCK


EXCAVATE TO ELEV. 732.00

EXCAVATE TO ELEV. 732.00

01

01

01

02

03

TYP

TYP

03TYP

02TYP

04

04

SNAKE RIVER

DOCK

1. DISTURBED AREAS WITHOUT RIPRAP AND NOTUNDER WATER, TO BE SEEDED WITH A SEEDMIXTURE NATIVE TO THE AREA

2. ---

GENERAL SHEET NOTES

SHEET KEYNOTES03 PAVEMENT SECTION; RE: A3/C-501

04 THICKENED EDGE SIDEWALK; RE: B3/C-501

05 4" WHITE STRIPE

06 REMOVE ALL PAVEMENT AND EXISTING BOATRAMP NORTH OF SAWCUT LINE

07 OBLITERATE PAVEMENT MARKINGS

08 SAWCUT

09 5'x40' ALUMINUM GANGWAY BY EZ DOCK ORAPPROVED EQUAL. PROVIDE AND ASSEMBLEALL HARDWARE CONNECTORS REQUIRED ASRECOMMENDED BY MANUFACTURER

10 80" DOCK SECTIONS (80"Wx120"Lx15"D) BY EZDOCK OR APPROVED EQUAL. PROVIDE ANDASSEMBLE ALL HARDWARE CONNECTORSREQUIRED AS RECOMMENDED BYMANUFACTURE

11 SECURITY CURBING BY EZ DOCK ORAPPROVED EQUAL. ASSEMBLE AND INSTALLAROUND ENTIRE DOCK EXCEPT FOR AT THE 4'ALUMINUM GANGWAY CONNECTION

12 TIE UP CLEAT BY EZ DOCK OR APPROVEDEQUAL. INSTALL ONE CLEAT AT THE MIDPOINTOF EACH DOCK SECTION ON THE MARINA SIDE

13 ANCHORING SYSTEM BY EZ DOCK ORAPPROVED EQUAL. CONTRACTOR TO SUBMITON WHICH SYSTEM AND SPACING TO USE FORENGINEERS APPROVAL

14 LANDING

15 HANDRAIL; RE: C-502

16 PATIO OVERLOOK; RE: XXXX

--

ACCESS SITE PLAN C-102

J:\2

1404

9-00

6 AS

OTI

N B

OAT

LAU

NC

H\C

_DES

N\_

CAD

\3_D

ESIG

N\D

_PLA

NS-

1\C

-102

.DW

GLA

ST S

AVED

: 10/

23/2

017

2:01

PM

PRIN

TED

: 10/

23/2

017

2:06

PM

IC

IC

SL

SAN

CHECKED:

APPROVED:DESIGNED:

PROJECT NO.


DRAWN:






2 Inches

CITY OFASOTIN, WA

BOAT R

AMP

RE: C

-201


TYP

MARINA

0 10 20

03182.02'

03

06

0808

TYP

05 TYP

05 TYP

05TYP

12.00' 6.67' 12.00'

5.00'

5.00'

16.27'

50.00'

07

04

1011 12

13 TYP

14

15

15

16

09

7.39' 6.00' 6.00' 33.21'41.21'

20.0

0'

20.00'

15.00'

15.00

'

135°7.

50'

7.50

'

7.50

'

R10

0.00

'

3.00

'

5.00

'

45°

5.00'

178°

15

15

MAT

CH

LIN

ESE

E BE

LOW

MAT

CH

LIN

E SE

EAB

OVE

RIG

HT

35.98'

46.72' 123.71'

NO SURVEY BEYOND THIS LINE. LOCATION ANDLENGTH APPROXIMATE BASED ON AERIAL

0 20 40

04


2. ---

GENERAL SHEET NOTES

SHEET KEYNOTES01 MATCH EXISTING

02 DAYLIGHT CUT

03 DAYLIGHT FILL

--

ACCESS SITE GRADING PLAN C-103

J:\2

1404

9-00

6 AS

OTI

N B

OAT

LAU

NC

H\C

_DES

N\_

CAD

\3_D

ESIG

N\D

_PLA

NS-

1\C

-103

.DW

GLA

ST S

AVED

: 10/

23/2

017

1:43

PM

PRIN

TED

: 10/

23/2

017

2:07

PM

IC

IC

SL

SAN

CHECKED:

APPROVED:DESIGNED:

PROJECT NO.


DRAWN:






2 Inches

CITY OFASOTIN, WA

BOAT R

AMP

RE: C

-201


MARINA

0 10 20

02

03TYP

TYP MAT

CH

LIN

ESE

E BE

LOW

MAT

CH

LIN

E SE

EAB

OVE

RIG

HT

0 20 40

123.71'

NO SURVEY BEYOND THIS LINE. SET SIDEWALK0.42' ABOVE EXISTING SURFACE

730

740

750

760

770

730

740

750

760

770

0+60 1+00 2+00 3+00

EXISTING GRADEAT CL BOAT RAMP

BOTTOM EXCAVATEDTO ELEV. 732.00

NEW BOAT RAMPFINISH GRADE

-13.50% GB

STA:

2+6

1.32

ELEV

: 737

.00

HIGH PT STA: 1+23.73HIGH PT ELEV: 752.14

PVI STA:1+53.73PVI ELEV:751.53

K:5.24LVC:60.00

BVC

S: 1

+23.

73BV

CE:

752

.14

EVC

S: 1

+83.

73EV

CE:

747

.48

DOCK ABUTMENT;RE: A1/C-501

STA:1+70.83ELEV:748.75

STA:1+61.57ELEV:750.00

-2.06%

2:1

BOAT LAUNCH PLAN & PROFILE C-301

J:\2

1404

9-00

6 AS

OTI

N B

OAT

LAU

NC

H\C

_DES

N\_

CAD

\3_D

ESIG

N\D

_PLA

NS-

1\C

-301

.DW

GLA

ST S

AVED

: 8/1

4/20

17 1

2:49

PM

PRIN

TED

: 10/

23/2

017

2:08

PM

IC

IC

SL

SAN

CHECKED:

APPROVED:DESIGNED:

PROJECT NO.


DRAWN:






2 Inches

CITY OFASOTIN, WA

BOAT DOCK

SEE SHEET C-102


GENERAL SHEET NOTES

SHEET KEYNOTES03 PAVEMENT SECTION; RE: A3/C-501

05 4" WHITE STRIPE

06 REMOVE ALL PAVEMENT AND EXISTING BOATRAMP NORTH OF SAWCUT LINE

07 OBLITERATE PAVEMENT MARKINGS

08 SAWCUT

10 11 - 80" DOCK SECTION (80"Wx120"Lx15"D) BYEZ DOCK OR APPROVED EQUAL. PROVIDE ANDASSEMBLE ALL HARDWARE CONNECTORSREQUIRED AS RECOMMENDED BYMANUFACTURE

11 SECURITY CURBING BY EZ DOCK ORAPPROVED EQUAL. ASSEMBLE AND INSTALLAROUND ENTIRE DOCK

12 TIE UP CLEAT BY EZ DOCK OR APPROVEDEQUAL. INSTALL ONE CLEAT AT THE MIDPOINTOF EACH SIDE OF THE DOCK SECTION

13 ANCHORING SYSTEM BY EZ DOCK ORAPPROVED EQUAL TO DOCK ABUTMENT.

15 MATCH EXISTING GRADE

17 DOCK ABUTMENT; RE: A1/C-501

18 BOAT LAUNCH SECTION; RE: C1/C-501

--

GRAPHIC SCALE

HORIZ:

VERT:0 4 8

0 20 40

0305

05

05

06

07

07

08TYP

10

11 12

13

15

15

15

17

18

18

16.27'

40.6

7'

12.0

0'6.

67'

12.0

0'

121.32'

N.T.S. A4

UNDERLAYMENT(STONES OF WEIGHT W/10)

GEOTEXTILE

SPLASH APRON

ARMOR LAYER STONES (W)

TOE

21

NORMAL WATER LEVEL

4'

??

ELEV 737.00

0 1" 2"1-1/2" = 1'-0" A1

9'-3"

1'-3

"

6'-8

"

9'-3"

7'-0"3" CLEAR

#5 BARS @18" EACH WAY

#5 BARS @18" EACH WAY

4" C

LEAR

4" C

LEAR

FOR BOAT LAUNCH REINFORCEMENT;RE: BOAT LAUNCH SECTION C2/C-501

DOCK

ATTACH DOCK TO ABUTMENTPER MANUFACTURER

BOAT LAUNCH

BOAT LAUNCH

0 1' 2' 4'1/2" = 1'-0" B3

NOTES:1. BASE: 4 INCH COMPACTED DEPTH OF 3/4" AGGREGATE BASE

COMPACTED TO 95% OF STANDARD PROCTOR.2. WHERE SIDEWALK IS PLACED AGAINST BUILDING FOUNDATION

PLACE 1/2" EXPANSION JOINT MATERIAL ADJACENT TOFOUNDATION.

3. CONTINUOUS PLACEMENT PERFERRED, SCORE INTERVALS8-FEET MAXIMUM SPACING.

4. COMPACTED NATIVE MATERIAL TO 95% OF STANDARDPROCTOR.

5. SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONCRETE TYPE.

WIDTH, RE: SITE PLAN

4"4"

1% TO 2%

1'-0

"

6"

5"

CONCRETE

AGGREGATEBASE

COMPACTEDNATIVEMATERIAL

ASPHALT

N.T.S. A3

NOTES:1. NATIVE MATERIAL: COMPACTED TO 95% OF STANDARD

PROCTOR.2. SUBBASE: 12-INCHES COMPACTED DEPTH OF AGGREGATE

SUBBASE, COMPACTED TO 95% OF STANDARD PROCTOR.3. BASE: 6-INCHES COMPACTED DEPTH OF AGGREGATE BASE

COMPACTED TO 95% OF STANDARD PROCTOR.4. ASPHALT CONCRETE: 3" OF ASPHALT CONCRETE COMPACTED

TO 92%-95% OF MAXIMUM UNIT WEIGHT FROM THE HVEEM MIXDESIGN.

2.5" ASPHALT / CONCRETE

_" AGGREGATE BASE

_" AGGREGATE SUBBASE

NATIVE MATERIAL

N.T.S.C2

8" CAST-IN-PLACECONCRETE

6" OF AGGREGATE BASE

COMMON FILL MATERIAL

COMPACTED NATIVE GROUND

2.00'15.33' 15.33'

2.00'

ARMORED SLOPESWITH RIP RAP

TYPE1.5

1

11

3' TYP.TOP & BOTTOM

GEOTEXTILESEPARATION

FABRIC

#5@ 12" OC EW,CTR IN SLAB

3/4" DEEP 1-1/2" WIDEGROOVES @ 45° FROMCENTERLINE OF PLANK,SEE NOTE1

DOWNHILL

DETAILS C-501

J:\2

1404

9-00

6 AS

OTI

N B

OAT

LAU

NC

H\C

_DES

N\_

CAD

\3_D

ESIG

N\D

_PLA

NS-

1\C

-501

.DW

GLA

ST S

AVED

: 10/

23/2

017

1:50

PM

PRIN

TED

: 10/

23/2

017

2:09

PM

IC

IC

SL

SAN

CHECKED:

APPROVED:DESIGNED:

PROJECT NO.


DRAWN:






2 Inches

CITY OFASOTIN, WA

N.T.S.A1

GENERAL NOTES FOR ALL DETAILS:

1. HANDRAIL DETAILS ARE BASED ON UNITED STATES ACCESS BOARDSTANDARDS.

2. SELECT MATERIALS FROM TABLES. POSTS AND RAILS SHALL BE IDENTICALMATERIAL. STRUCTURAL STEEL TUBING SHALL CONFORM TO ASTMSPECIFICATION A500, GRADE B.

3. POSTS SHALL BE VERTICAL. THE TOP RAIL SHALL BE CONTINUOUS OVER AMINIMUM OF TWO POSTS.

4. ON STRUCTURE, THE RAILING SHALL CONFORM TO THE VERTICAL ALIGNMENTOF THE STRUCTURE. RAILS SHALL HAVE A SPLICE IN THE POST SPACEOCCURRING AT EXPANSION JOINTS.

5. ON GRADE, RAILS SHALL HAVE SPLICES AT INTERVALS NOT TO EXCEED 100'.6. HOT-DIP GALVANIZE ALL METAL PARTS AFTER FABRICATION.7. HANDRAIL HEIGHT (H) SHALL BE CONSTANT WITHIN A RUN.8. ALL CONCRETE SHALL BE COMMERCIAL GRADE CONCRETE.

SPLICE BAR (GRINDALL EDGES PRIOR ITGALVANIZING TOENSURE PROPER FIT)

1/4"-20x1/2"STAINLESS

STEEL MACHINESCREWS

SPLICE DETAIL

PLAN VIEW SIDE VIEW

ANCHOR PLATE FOR BOLT DOWN OPTION

6"

6"3"

1"

8"

3"1 1/2" 1 1/2"

2"2"

2"2"

5/8" DIA HOLE

3/16"

HANDRAILPOST

HANDRAILPOST

4"1

1/2"

1 1/

2"M

IN

1/4"

4" MIN

5/8" DIA DRAIN HOLETHROUGH ANCHOR PLATE

5/8" DIA DRAINHOLE THROUGHANCHOR PLATE

USE RESIN BONDING SYSTEMFROM ODOTS QPL (TYP)

1/2" ANCHOR BOLTWITH STD.

WASHER & SELFLOCKING NUT

(TYP)

WELD DETAILSFOR STEEL TUBING

2" 2" ℄ 1/2" DIA HOLESTHRU BOTTOMOF RAILS

1/2" DIA DRAINHOLE (TYP)

℄ 1/2" DIA HOLESTHRU POST G

G

℄ 1/2" DIA HOLESTHRU BOTTOM OFTOP RAIL ON POSTTOP RAIL

3/16"TYPTYP

TYP

MIDDLE ORBOTTOM RAIL

2" 2"

WELD DETAILSFOR STEEL PIPE

GTYP

GTYP


3/16"TYP


℄ 1/2" DIA HOLESTHRU BOTTOMOF RAILS

MIDDLE ORBOTTOM RAIL

℄ 1/2" DIA HOLESTHRU BOTTOM OFTOP RAIL ON POST

℄ 1/2" DIA HOLESTHRU POST

℄

℄

℄

STEEL PIPE POST & RAIL MEMBERS

NOM. DIA. SCH. O.D. I.D. O.D.1 1/4" 40 1.660" 1.380" 1 1/4"1 1/2" 10 1.900" 1.682" 1 1/2"40 1.900" 1.610"

SQUARE STRUCTURAL STEEL TUBING POST& RAIL MEMBERS

OUTSIDEDIMENSIONS WALL THICKNESS OUTSIDE

DIMENSIONS

1 1/2"x1 1/2" 1/8" 1"x1"3/16" 3/4"x3/4"

SIDE VIEW(ON STRUCTURE)

(SEE GENERAL NOTE 4)

FINISH GRADE SIDEWALK

BOLT DOWNOPTION4"

10'-0"

MAX

*H

*H 3

*H 3

*H 3

VARIES 6"MIN18" MAX

10'-0"

MAX

END POST

BOTTOM POST

TOP POST

LINE POST

SPLIICE

BOLT DOWN OPTION

LINE POST

THREE RAIL HANDRAIL

* H VARIES34" MIN38" MAX

MATERIAL TABLES

HANDRAIL DETAILS C-502

J:\2

1404

9-00

6 AS

OTI

N B

OAT

LAU

NC

H\C

_DES

N\_

CAD

\3_D

ESIG

N\D

_PLA

NS-

1\C

-502

.DW

GLA

ST S

AVED

: 8/4

/201

7 9:

53 A

MPR

INTE

D: 1

0/23

/201

7 2:

09 P

M

IC

---

---

SN

CHECKED:

APPROVED:DESIGNED:

PROJECT NO.


DRAWN:






2 Inches

CITY OFASOTIN, WA

0 2 41:2A1

03

17

4.00

'

03

17

02

02

4.00

'

06

05

05

02

02

06

05

05

07

07

07 07

0909

1010

11

12

11

12

13

13 13

13

14

14

15

13

13

13

1313 13

13 13

16 16

01

ADA BATHROOM IMPROVEMENTS C-503

J:\2

1404

9-00

6 AS

OTI

N B

OAT

LAU

NC

H\C

_DES

N\_

CAD

\3_D

ESIG

N\D

_PLA

NS-

1\C

-503

.DW

GLA

ST S

AVED

: 10/

25/2

017

7:34

AM

PRIN

TED

: 10/

25/2

017

7:36

AM

IC

SN

SL

SAN

CHECKED:

APPROVED:DESIGNED:

PROJECT NO.


DRAWN:






2 Inches

CITY OFASOTIN, WA

1. ---

2. ---

3. ---

GENERAL SHEET NOTES

SHEET KEYNOTES01 INSTALL NEW LIGHT SWITCH WITH OCCUPANCY SENSOR

SWITCH, REWIRE TO EXISTING LIGHTS

02 REPLACE FAUCETS WITH SENSOR SINK FAUCET

03 RE-HINGE AND INSTALL NEW DOOR TO OPEN INWARD

04 REMOVE EXISTING SWITCH AND CONDUCTORS, INSTALL ANEW STAINLESS STEEL BLANK COVER

05 REPLACE SINKS

06 REPLACE COUNTER TOP

07 NEW STAINLESS STEEL TOILET

08 TOILET PAPER DISPENSER TO REMAIN

09 NEW HANDICAP STALL AND DOOR

10 PAPER TOWEL DISPENSER TO REMAIN

11 REMOVE TILES AND EPOXY COAT CONCRETE FLOOR

12 RE-PAINT CEILING

13 NEW LIGHT

14 NEW STAINLESS STEEL URINAL

15 NEW METAL ROOFING

16 INSTALL NEW CEILING MOUNTED DUAL TECH OCCUPANCYSENSOR. CONNECT TO EXISTING LIGHTING CIRCUIT TOCONTROL NEW LIGHT FIXTURES

1. ELECTRICAL WORK ON THIS PROJECT SHALL BEPERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THENATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE AND ANY OTHERSTATE OR LOCAL CODE HAVING JURISDICTION.

2. CONDUIT RUNS ARE SHOWN IN APPROXIMATELOCATION. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFYLOCATIONS AND CONDITIONS PRIOR TOCONSTRUCTION.

3. ALL LIGHTING POLES SHALL BE GROUNDED ASREQUIRED BY THE NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE.

4. ALL CONDUITS SHALL BE BURIED A MINIMUM OF24” BELOW GRADE.

5. CABLE RUNS SHALL BE MARKED WITH REDPLASTIC MARKING TAPE INSTALLED IN THETRENCH ONE FOOT BELOW SURFACE.

6. PROVIDE UPDATED PANEL SCHEDULE FOREXISTING PANELS FOR WHICH CIRCUITS AREADDED OR REMOVED.

7. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY CONDITION OFEXISTING LIGHTING POLES FOR STRUCTURALDEFECTS AND CORROSION PRIOR TO REUSE. POLES WHICH DO NOT MEET MANUFACTURERSTRENGTH REQUIREMENTS FOR EPA RATINGSMUST BE REPLACED WITH NEW.

GENERAL SHEET NOTES

SHEET KEYNOTES01 EXISTING PANELBOARD IN RESTROOM FACILITY

02 EXISTING UNDERGROUND 1” CONDUIT WITH 2/C#8 WIRE FOR SITE LIGHTING

03 EXISTING LIGHT AND POLE TO REMAIN

04 EXISTING LIGHT POLE TO BE MODIFIED WITHNEW TWO ARM BULLHORN. PROVIDE NEWLIGHT FIXTURES AS INDICATED. CONTRACTORTO AIM LIGHTS TO OPTIMIZE LIGHTING LEVELS.SEE DETAIL. (REFERENCE DETAIL FOR TWO ARMBULLHORN)

05 NEW POLE BASE, POLE AND LIGHT FIXTURES ASINDICATED; RE: A1/E-501 AND A2/E-501

06 INTERCEPT EXISTING UNDERGROUND CONDUITAND INSTALL NEW PULL BOX WITH TRAFFICRATED LID. EXTEND EXISTING LIGHTINGCIRCUIT TO NEW SITE LIGHT LOCATION ASSHOWN

07 MODIFY EXISTING POLE FOR TWO NEW LIGHTFIXTURES MOUNTED AT 180°. PROVIDE NEWPOLE CAP AND MOUNTING HARDWARE FOR NEWLIGHT FIXTURE; RE: A4/E-501

--

ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN E-101

J:\2

1404

9-00

6 AS

OTI

N B

OAT

LAU

NC

H\C

_DES

N\_

CAD

\3_D

ESIG

N\D

_PLA

NS-

1\E-

101.

DW

GLA

ST S

AVED

: 10/

16/2

017

1:31

PM

PRIN

TED

: 10/

23/2

017

2:10

PM

IC

DNC

SL

SN

CHECKED:

APPROVED:DESIGNED:

PROJECT NO.


DRAWN:






2 Inches

CITY OFASOTIN, WA


0 30 60SNAKE RIVER

01

02

02

03

03

03

04

05

05

06

07

N.T.S. A1

2'-0

"

25'-0

"

5'-0

"18"

MIN

24"DIA

GRADE

(4) #4 VERT WITH 2" COVERPROVIDE 3000 PSI CONCRETE

LIGHT FIXTURE

4" SQUAREMETAL POLE

1/2" ANCHORBOLT (QTY=2)

#3 TIES @ 16" OC

FEEDERCONDUIT

N.T.S. A4

POLE

LIGHT FIXTURE

LIGHT FIXTURE

N.T.S. A2

POLE

LIGHT FIXTURE

N.T.S. A3

POLE

LIGHT FIXTURELIGHT FIXTURE

ELECTRICAL DETAILS E-501

J:\2

1404

9-00

6 AS

OTI

N B

OAT

LAU

NC

H\C

_DES

N\_

CAD

\3_D

ESIG

N\D

_PLA

NS-

1\E-

501.

DW

GLA

ST S

AVED

: 10/

16/2

017

1:30

PM

PRIN

TED

: 10/

23/2

017

2:10

PM

IC

DNC

SL

SAN

CHECKED:

APPROVED:DESIGNED:

PROJECT NO.


DRAWN:






2 Inches

CITY OFASOTIN, WA

APPENDIX B Official Species List

!

!

^

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

^

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

^

!

^

ColumbiaCo

lumbi a

Snake

Pocatello

SpokaneWenatchee

Walla WallaYakima

BoiseBend

Medford

Eugene

Salem

Astoria

Olympia

Bellingham

Redding

Sacramento

San Francisco

Santa CruzFresno

Santa Barbara

San Diego

Los Angeles

Seattle

Portland Salmon

CoosBay

Eureka

Desch

utes

W illa

mette

Rogue

Umpqua

Klamath

Tri nity

EelRussian

SacramentoSan Joaquin

Salinas

Santa Ana

Salmon

Snake

United StatesUni ted S tatesCanadaCanada

United StatesUni ted S tatesMexicoMexico

0 200Miles

O R E G O N

W A S H I N G T O N

I D A H O

C A L I F O R N I A

Status of ESA Listings &

Critical Habitat Designationsfor

West Coast Salmon & Steelhead

Updated July 2016

Recovery DomainPuget SoundInterior Columbia

Oregon Coast

North-Central California Coast

Central ValleyNorth-Central California Coast and Central Valley Overlap

So. OR / No. CA Coast and North-Central CA Coast OverlapSouthern OR / Northern CA Coast

Willamette / Lower Columbia and Interior Columbia OverlapWillamette / Lower Columbia

South-Central / Southern CA Coast

Evolutionarily Significant Unit / Distinct Population Segment

ESA Status

Date of ESA Listing

Date of CH Designation

Hood Canal Summer-run Chum Salmon T 3/25/1999 9/2/2005Ozette Lake Sockeye Salmon T 3/25/1999 9/2/2005Puget Sound Chinook Salmon T 3/24/1999 9/2/2005Puget Sound Steelhead T 5/11/2007 2/24/2016

Middle Columbia River Steelhead T 3/25/19991/5/2006 9/2/2005

Snake River Fall-run Chinook Salmon T 4/22/1992 12/28/1993Snake River Spring / Summer-run Chinook Salmon T 4/22/1992 10/25/1999

Snake River Sockeye Salmon E 11/20/1991 12/28/1993

Snake River Steelhead T 8/18/19971/5/2006 9/2/2005

Upper Columbia River Spring-run Chinook Salmon E 3/24/1999 9/2/2005

Upper Columbia River Steelhead T 8/18/19971/5/2006 9/2/2005

Columbia River Chum Salmon T 3/25/1999 9/2/2005Lower Columbia River Chinook Salmon T 3/24/1999 9/2/2005Lower Columbia River Coho Salmon T 6/28/2005 2/24/2016

Lower Columbia River Steelhead T 3/19/19981/5/2006 9/2/2005

Upper Willamette River Chinook Salmon T 3/24/1999 9/2/2005

Upper Willamette River Steelhead T 3/25/19991/5/2006 9/2/2005

Oregon Coast Coho Salmon T 2/11/2008 2/11/2008

Southern OR / Northern CA Coasts Coho Salmon T 5/6/1997 5/5/1999

California Coastal Chinook Salmon T 9/16/1999 9/2/2005

Central California Coast Coho Salmon E 10/31/1996 (T) 6/28/2005 (E)4/2/2012 (RE)

5/5/1999

Central California Coast Steelhead T 8/18/19971/5/2006 9/2/2005

Northern California Steelhead T 6/7/20001/5/2006 9/2/2005

California Central Valley Steelhead T 3/19/19981/5/2006 9/2/2005

Central Valley Spring-run Chinook Salmon T 9/16/1999 9/2/2005Sacramento River Winter-run Chinook Salmon E 11/5/1990 (T)

1/4/1994 (E) 6/16/1993

South-Central California Coast Steelhead T 8/18/19971/5/2006 9/2/2005

Southern California Steelhead E8/18/1997

5/1/2002 (RE)1/5/2006

9/2/2005

ESA = Endangered Species Act, CH = Critical Habitat, RE = Range ExtensionE = Endangered, T = Threatened,

Willamette / Lower Columbia Recovery Domain

Interior Columbia Recovery Domain

Puget Sound Recovery Domain

Oregon Coast Recovery Domain

North-Central California Coast Recovery Domain

Central Valley Recovery Domain

South-Central / Southern California Coast Recovery Domain

Southern Oregon / Northern California Coast Recovery Domain

Critical Habitat Rules Cited • 2/24/2016 (81 FR 9252) Final Critical Habitat Designation for Puget Sound Steelhead and Lower Columbia River Coho

Salmon • 2/11/2008 (73 FR 7816) Final Critical Habitat Designation for Oregon Coast Coho Salmon • 9/2/2005 (70 FR 52630) Final Critical Habitat Designation for 12 ESU's of Salmon and Steelhead in WA, OR, and ID • 9/2/2005 (70 FR 52488) Final Critical Habitat Designation for 7 ESU's of Salmon and Steelhead in CA • 10/25/1999 (64 FR 57399) Revised Critical Habitat Designation for Snake River Spring/Summer-run Chinook Salmon • 5/5/1999 (64 FR 24049) Final Critical Habitat Designation for Central CA Coast and Southern OR/Northern CA Coast Coho

Salmon • 12/28/1993 (58 FR 68543) Final Critical Habitat Designation for Snake River Chinook and Sockeye Salmon • 6/16/1993 (58 FR 33212) Final Critical Habitat Designation for Sacramento River Winter-run Chinook Salmon

ESA Listing Rules Cited • 4/2/2012 (77 FR 19552) Final Range Extension for Endangered Central California Coast Coho Salmon • 2/11/2008 (73 FR 7816) Final ESA Listing for Oregon Coast Coho Salmon • 5/11/2007 (72 FR 26722) Final ESA Listing for Puget Sound Steelhead • 1/5/2006 (71 FR 5248) Final Listing Determinations for 10 Distinct Population Segments of West Coast Steelhead • 6/28/2005 (70 FR 37160) Final ESA Listing for 16 ESU's of West Coast Salmon • 5/1/2002 (67 FR 21586) Range Extension for Endangered Steelhead in Southern California • 6/7/2000 (65 FR 36074) Final ESA Listing for Northern California Steelhead • 9/16/1999 (64 FR 50394) Final ESA Listing for Two Chinook Salmon ESUs in California • 3/25/1999 (64 FR 14508) Final ESA Listing for Hood River Canal Summer-run and Columbia River Chum Salmon • 3/25/1999 (64 FR 14517) Final ESA Listing for Middle Columbia River and Upper Willamette River Steelhead • 3/25/1999 (64 FR 14528) Final ESA Listing for Ozette Lake Sockeye Salmon • 3/24/1999 (64 FR 14308) Final ESA Listing for 4 ESU's of Chinook Salmon • 3/19/1998 (63 FR 13347) Final ESA Listing for Lower Columbia River and Central Valley Steelhead • 8/18/1997 (62 FR 43937) Final ESA Listing for 5 ESU's of Steelhead • 5/6/1997 (62 FR 24588) Final ESA Listing for Southern Oregon / Northern California Coast Coho Salmon • 10/31/1996 (61 FR 56138) Final ESA Listing for Central California Coast Coho Salmon • 1/4/1994 (59 FR 222) Final ESA Listing for Sacramento River Winter-run Chinook Salmon • 4/22/1992 (57 FR 14653) Final ESA Listing for Snake River Spring/summer-run and Snake River Fall Chinook Salmon • 11/20/1991 (56 FR 58619) Final ESA Listing for Snake River Sockeye Salmon • 11/5/1990 (55 FR 46515) Final ESA Listing for Sacramento River Winter-run Chinook Salmon

United States Department of the Interior

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICEWashington Fish and Wildlife Office

510 DESMOND DRIVE SE, SUITE 102LACEY, WA 98503

PHONE: (360)753-9440 FAX: (360)753-9405URL: www.fws.gov/wafwo/

Consultation Code: 01EWFW00-2017-SLI-0586 March 09, 2017Event Code: 01EWFW00-2017-E-00834Project Name: Asotin Small Boat Launch

Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed projectlocation, and/or may be affected by your proposed project

To Whom It May Concern:

The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, and proposed species, designatedand proposed critical habitat, and candidate species that may occur within the boundary of yourproposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. The species list fulfills therequirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of theEndangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution ofspecies, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. The species list iscurrently compiled at the county level. Additional information is available from the WashingtonDepartment of Fish and Wildlife, Priority Habitats and Species website:

or at our office website: http://wdfw.wa.gov/mapping/phs/. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of thehttp://www.fws.gov/wafwo/species_new.html

regulations implementing section 7 of the Act, the accuracy of this species list should beverified after 90 days. This verification can be completed formally or informally as desired. TheService recommends that verification be completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website atregular intervals during project planning and implementation for updates to species lists andinformation. An updated list may be requested through the ECOS-IPaC system by completingthe same process used to receive the enclosed list.

The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species andthe ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2)of the Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are requiredto utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened andendangered species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangeredspecies and/or designated critical habitat.

A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings havingsimilar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of thehuman environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a biologicalevaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether or not theproject may affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat.Recommended contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12.

If a Federal agency determines, based on the Biological Assessment or biological evaluation,that listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected by the proposed project, theagency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR 402. In addition, the Servicerecommends that candidate species, proposed species, and proposed critical habitat be addressedwithin the consultation. More information on the regulations and procedures for section 7consultation, including the role of permit or license applicants, can be found in the "EndangeredSpecies Consultation Handbook" at:http://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/TOC-GLOS.PDF

Please be aware that bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden EagleProtection Act (16 U.S.C. 668 et seq.). You may visit our website at

information on disturbance or take of the species andhttp://www.fws.gov/pacific/eagle/forinformation on how to get a permit and what current guidelines and regulations are. Someprojects affecting these species may require development of an eagle conservation plan: (

). Additionally, wind energy projectshttp://www.fws.gov/windenergy/eagle_guidance.htmlshould follow the wind energy guidelines ( ) for minimizinghttp://www.fws.gov/windenergy/impacts to migratory birds and bats.

Also be aware that all marine mammals are protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act(MMPA). The MMPA prohibits, with certain exceptions, the "take" of marine mammals in U.S.waters and by U.S. citizens on the high seas. The importation of marine mammals and marinemammal products into the U.S. is also prohibited. More information can be found on theMMPA website: .http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/laws/mmpa/

We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encouragesFederal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their projectplanning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number inthe header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your projectthat you submit to our office.

Related website:National Marine Fisheries Service: http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/protected_species/species_list/species_lists.html

Attachment

2

http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 03/09/2017 10:33 AM 1

Official Species List

Provided by: Washington Fish and Wildlife Office

510 DESMOND DRIVE SE, SUITE 102

LACEY, WA 98503

(360) 753-9440

http://www.fws.gov/wafwo/

Consultation Code: 01EWFW00-2017-SLI-0586Event Code: 01EWFW00-2017-E-00834 Project Type: SHORELINE USAGE FACILITIES / DEVELOPMENT Project Name: Asotin Small Boat LaunchProject Description: Reconfigure boat ramp and bay to accommodate small motorized vessels Please Note: The FWS office may have modified the Project Name and/or Project Description, so itmay be different from what was submitted in your previous request. If the Consultation Codematches, the FWS considers this to be the same project. Contact the office in the 'Provided by'section of your previous Official Species list if you have any questions or concerns.

United States Department of InteriorFish and Wildlife Service

Project name: Asotin Small Boat Launch


Project Location Map:

Project Coordinates: MULTIPOLYGON (((-117.05296397209169 46.342935626131215, -117.05372571945192 46.3419949862529, -117.05164432525636 46.34130616095906, -117.05090403556825 46.3422542193309, -117.05296397209169 46.342935626131215))) Project Counties: Asotin, WA




Endangered Species Act Species List

There are a total of 3 threatened or endangered species on your species list. Species on this list should be considered in

an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain

fish may appear on the species list because a project could affect downstream species. Critical habitats listed under the

Has Critical Habitat column may or may not lie within your project area. See the Critical habitats within your

project area section further below for critical habitat that lies within your project. Please contact the designated FWS

office if you have questions.

Birds Status Has Critical Habitat Condition(s)

Yellow-Billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus

americanus)

Population: Western U.S. DPS

Threatened Proposed

Fishes

Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus)

Population: U.S.A., conterminous, lower 48

states

Threatened Final designated

Flowering Plants

Spalding's Catchfly (Silene spaldingii)

Population: Wherever found

Threatened




Critical habitats that lie within your project areaThere are no critical habitats within your project area.



Have we delivered World Class Client Service?

Please let us know by visiting www.geoengineers.com/feedback.

Biological Assessment - cityofasotin.org · Biological Assessment Boat Launch & Jetty Restoration...

Documents

Transcript of Biological Assessment - cityofasotin.org · Biological Assessment Boat Launch & Jetty Restoration...