EPA 9IO/9-77-043B EPA-IO-WA-KING-SEA-WWTW-77
DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
SEPTEMBER 1977
METROPOLITAN SEATTLE
WEST POINT
VOLUME II
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
*^# U-S- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTEaiON AGENCY
«*PRC*fcc REGION X, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON
-------
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
FOR
METROPOLITAN SEATTLE
Volume II
West Point
Number: EPA 910/9-77-043 B
King County, Washington
Prepared jointly by:
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region X
Seattle, Washington 98101
Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle
Seattle, Washington
Washington State Department of Ecology
Olympia, Washington
With the Assistance of
James M. Montgomery, Consulting Engineers, Inc.
Pasadena, California/Boise, Idaho
)ubois
Regional Administrator
August 25. 1977
Date
-------
INTRODUCTION
A. Action Sponsor
The action sponsor is the Municipality of Metropolitan
Seattle (METRO) for purposes of compliance with the
State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA RCW 43.210) and the
Federal Environmental Protection Agency for the purposes
of compliance with the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA).
B. Lead Agency, Responsible Official and Contact Person
For NEPA Compliance
Lead Agency: Environmental Protection Agency,
Region X
1200 6th Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
Responsible Official: Donald P. DuBois
Regional Administrator
Contact Person: Roger K. Mochnick
Project Officer, Environmental
Evaluation Branch
For SEPA Compliance
Lead Agency: Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle
600 First Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98104
Responsible Official: Neil Peterson
Executive Director
Contact Person: Peter S. Machmo
Manager, Environmental Planning
Division
C. Authors and Contributors to Draft Environmental Impact
Statement
-------
Introduction
Participating Agencies: Environmental Protection Agency
Department of Ecology
Municipality of Metropolitan
Seattle
Advisory Agencies: City of Seattle
King County
Puget Sound Council of Governments
Consultants: James M. Montgomery, Consulting Engineers,
Inc. (Environmental Impact Statement)
Metropolitan Engineers (Facility Plan)
Human Resources Planning Institute (Socio-
economic studies)
D. Licenses and Permits Required to Implement Wastewater
Facilities Plan
Building, grading, complex source permit, shoreline
permit and other local governmental permits would be
required before implementing most of the alternatives
described herein. Eligibility for grant funding by EPA
and DOE would be determined after completion of the
Final Facility Plan and EIS.
E.. Location of EIS Background Data
Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle
Environmental Planning Division
SEPA Information Center
Room 404
600 First Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98104
F. Cost to Public for a Copy of the EIS
No charge while supply lasts.
G. Date of Issue of Draft EIS
This Draft Environmental Impact Statement was made
available to the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)
and the Public on September 23, 1977.
H. Final Due Date for Public and Agency Comments
The final date for submittal of public and agency comments
is November 11, 197*7. All comments should be sent to
Mr. Roger K. Mochnick, Environmental Evaluation Branch,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Sixth Avenue,
Seattle, WA 98101.
'• 'Hi
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Distribution List
Summary of EIS Contents
Description of the Proposal
Preface
I. CHAPTER I - BACKGROUND 1
Site Constraints and Issues 3
II. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 9
Physical Environment 9
Topography 9
Geology and Soils 14
Seismology 18
Climate 18
Water Resources 22
Biological Environment 24
Terrestrial Habitats 24
Aquatic Habitats 25
Natural Resources and Energy 32
The Human Environment 32
Land Use 32
Legal and Institutional 34
Agency and Neighborhood Goals 36
Economics and Costs 44
Social, Recreational and Cultural 45
Archaelogical and Historical 46
Health and Safety 48
Aesthetics and Nuisance 48
III. CHAPTER III - ALTERNATIVES AND IMPACTS 51
General 51
Development of Alternatives 52
Flow and Waste Reduction Measures 55
Beneficial Use of Reclaimed Water 58
Regional Alternatives 59
Alternative A - No Action 59
Alternative B - Metro Comprehensive Plan
(No Action Pursuant to PL 92-500) 59
Alternative C - Major Combined Sewer
Overflow Control 61
IV
-------
Table of Contents
Alternative D - Partial Combined Sewer
Overflow Control 61
Alternative E - Secondary 61
Alternative F - Secondary/Southern
Strategy 61
Alternative G - Secondary/West Point
Phaseout Option 62
Alternative H - Deconsolidation/
Reclamation 62
Alternative A - (No Action) 64
Service Area 64
Collection System 65
Wastewater Characteristics 65
Treatment Plant 68
Sludge Characteristics and Management 73
Primary Impacts 75
Mitigation Measures 85
Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 85
Alternative B - Metro Comprehensive Plan .
(No Action Pursuant to PL 92-500) 86
Service Area 86
Treatment Plant 86
Combined Sewer Overflows 86
Sludge 88
Impacts 88
Mitigation Measures 99
Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 101
Alternative C - Major Combined Sewer Overflow
Control 103
Service Area 103
Combined Sewer Overflow Control 103
Treatment Plant 103
Sludge 106
Impacts 107
Mitigation Measures 115
Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 116
Alternative D - Partial Combined Sewer
Overflow Control 119
Service Area 119
Treatment Plant 119
Combined Sewer Overflow Control 119
Sludge 120
Impacts 120
Mitigation Measures 131
Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 132
-------
Table of Contents
Alternative E - Secondary 133
Service Area 133
Treatment Plant 133
Combined Sewer Overflow Control 135
Sludge 135
Impacts 135
Mitigation Measures 145
Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 148
Alternative F - Secondary/Southern Strategy 150
Service Area 150
Treatment Plant 150
Combined Sewer Overflow Control 150
Sludge 151
Impacts 152
Mitigation Measures 162
Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 164
Alternative G - Secondary/West Point
Phaseout Option 166
Service Areas 166
Treatment Plant 166
Combined Sewer Overflows 168
Sludge 168
Impacts 168
Mitigation Measures 182
Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 183
Alternative H - Deconsolidation/Reclamation 186
Service Areas 186
Treatment Plant 186
Combined Sewer Overflows 186
Sludge 186
Impacts 187
Mitigation Measures 195
Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 197
Summary 199
Geology, Soils & Topography 199
Air Quality and Odors 200
Water Quality 202
Biology 204
Natural Resources and Energy 208
Human Environment 208
IV- CHAPTER IV - CITIZEN AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT 215
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A - ELEMENTS OF THE ENVIRONMENT A-l
APPENDIX B - REFERENCES B~l
VI
-------
Table of Contents
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1-1 Metro Treatment Plant Service Areas 2
1-2 Aerial View of West Point 4
1-3 Aerial View of West Point and Interbay
Sites 6
2-1 Topography: West Point Treatment Plant 10
2-2 Topographic Slope Cross Sections -
West Point - Interbay Area 12
2-3 Topography - Commodore Way Site 13
2-4 Topography - Golf Park Site 15
2-5 Geologic Constraints - West Point Site 16
2-6 West Point Aquatic Communities: Rock
and Cobble Tidelands 27
2-7 West Point Aquatic Communities: Sandy
Gravel Tideland 27
2-8 West Point Aquatic Communities: Muddy
Silt and Sand Tideland 28
2-9 Development Pattern - Magnolia/Interbay
Area 33
2-10 Zoning Pattern - Magnolia/Interbay Area 35
2-11 Discovery Park Master Plan 46
3-1 Metro 201 Facility Plan Service Area
Alternatives 60
3-2 Combined Sewer Overflow Locations 66
3-3 West Point Layout - Alternative B 87
3-4 West Point - Alternative B 97
3-5 Alternative C - Plant Layouts 105
3-6 Alternative C - West Point Repositioned
Digesters 106
3-7 West Point - Alternative C 117
3-8 Alternative E: West Point Treatment
Plant Layouts 134
3-9 West Point Alternative E 147
3-10 Alternative F - West Point Treatment
Plant Layout 151
3-11 West Point - Alternative F 163
3-12 Interbay Layouts 167
3-13 West Point - Alternative G 184
3-14 West Point - Alternative H 196
VII
-------
Table of Contents
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
2-1 West Point Treatment Plant Air
Pollutant Emissions 20
2-2 Summary of Pollutant Concentrations 21
3-1 Summary of Alternatives for 2005:
West Point Service Area 63
3-2 West Point Influent Metal Concentrations
for 1975 68
3-3 West Point Treatment Plant Effluent 70
3-4 Heavy Metals Discharge from Metro
Treatment Plants 71
3-5 Heavy Metals Removal Efficency 72
3-6 Combined Sewer Overflows Emptying
Into Marshlands 78
3-7 Annual CSO Pollutant Load -
Alternative C 104
3-8 Annual CSO Pollutant Load -
Alternative D 122
3-9 Annual CSO Pollutant Load Reduction-
Alternative F 154
vin
-------
DISTRIBUTION LIST
.Places of Public Availability
Public Libraries
Seattle Libraries
Main Branch
Montlake Branch
University Branch
West Seattle Branch
Magnolia Branch
Broadview Branch
Puget Sound Council of Government Library
King County Library
Main Branch
Richmond Beach Branch
Bellevue Branch
University of Washington Reference Library
Metro and EPA Public Information Centers
The Environmental Protection Agency
City of Seattle-Department of Community Development
Seattle Municipal Reference Library
Metro Library
King County Clerk of the Council
State of Washington—Office of Community Development
Federal Agencies
Council on Environmental Quality
U. S. Department of Agriculture
U. S. Department of Defense
U. S. Department of Interior
U. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare
U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
U. S. Department of Transportation
Federal Energy Office
National Marine Fisheries Service
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
Members of Congress
Warren G. Magnuson, U. S. Senate
Henry M. Jackson, U. S. Senate
John E. Cunningham, U. S. House of Representatives
Joel Pritchard, U. S. House of Representatives
State Agencies
Office of the Governor
Department of Ecology
Department of Fisheries
IX
-------
Distribution List
Department of Natural Resources
Department of Game
Department of Social and Health Services
Department of Commerce & Economic Development
The State Ecology Commission
State Parks and Recreation Commission
State Oceanographic Commission
State Utility and Transportation Commission
Local Agencies and Interested Groups
Metro Council Members
City of Seattle Agencies:
City Council Central Staff
Environmental Review Committee
Department of Community Development
Office of Policy Planning
Department of Parks and Recreation
Department of Engineering
Department of Public Works
Water Department
Port of Seattle, Director of Planning
County Agencies:
Administrator, King County
Seattle - King County Department of Health
Department of Budget & Program Planning
Department of Planning & Community Development
Department of Public Works
Puget Sound Council of Governments
Snohomish Metropolitan Municipal Corporation-King County
(SNOMET)
Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency
Chairperson, Citizen's Water Quality Advisory Committee
Chairperson, Metropolitan Sewer Advisory Committee
City of Renton
City of Edmonds
City of Lynwood
City of Black Diamond
Metro's component and contracted agencies
National Wildlife Federation
Friends of the Earth
Sierra Club
Audubon Society
Washington Environmental Council
Institute of Environmental Studies (University of Washington)
Ecotope Group
This Draft Environmental Impact Statement was made available to
the Council on Environmental Quality (CEO) and the public on
September 23, 1977.
x
-------
SUMMARY OF DRAFT EIS CONTENTS
The Draft EIS is summarized in terms of the proposal,
the alternatives considered, the direct and indirect impacts
on the environment, mitigation measures and mitigating
measures to eliminate adverse impacts.
The Proposal
Metropolitan Engineers, a consultant to the Municipality
of Metropolitan Seattle has prepared a Draft Facility Plan
for Puget Sound Plants to the year 2005. Alternatives in the
Draft Facility Plan are focused on facilities at West Point,
Alki, Carkeek Park, and Richmond Beach, but other sites within
these designated service areas have been considered as options,
The Metro plant at Renton is not included in the proposed
facilities, but effects of alternatives on Renton are des-
cribed since Renton is an integral part of the Metro system.
This Draft EIS summarizes the impacts of the alterna-
tives for the West Point plant and service area as well as
alternative sites in Interbay.
Regional Alternatives
The eight regional alternatives are summarized below,
particularly as they would affect the West Point Plant.
The Draft EIS analyzes the impacts of the eight regional
alternatives proposed in the Draft Facility Plan. Each
alternative is evaluated on a co-equal basis in the Draft;
no recommended alternative has been selected.
Regional alternatives were developed to address, in
various combinations, four polar issues: water quality,
site impacts, the law (PL 92-500) and costs. Components
considered in developing alternatives included service
area, collection system and transfer interceptors, treat-
ment process, plant site, treated wastewater discharge
location, combined sewer overflow control, and sludge
management. Interceptors to serve new growth areas were
not included.
XI
-------
Summary of Draft EIS Contents
Two of the alternatives (A and B) are "no action" alter-
natives required by SEPA and NEPA. Two of the alternatives
(C and D) address combined sewer overflows, a local water
quality problem. Four alternatives (E, F, G and H) provide
secondary treatment and other variable features. From the
eight regional alternatives, it is possible to derive
hybrid alternatives that select components from more than
one alternative and blend them into a new alternative, such
as secondary treatment plus combined sewer overflow control.
Alternative A - No Action
No capital expenditure would be made for expansion,
modification or upgrading of treatment plants and no con-
struction of new interceptors during the planning period
(until 2005). Alternative A is evaluated to meet SEPA
"no action" requirements.
West Point would continue to serve the existing sewered
population in the present service area. Primary treatment
for 104 mgd average dry weather flow/350 mgd peak would be
provided to wastewater prior to discharge to Puget Sound.
West Point would continue as the regional sludge processing
center. No new structures would be built at the plant site.
Alternative B - Metro Comprehensive Plan (No Action Pursuant
to PL 92-500)
Plant upgrading and transfer interceptor construction
would be done according to the Metro Comprehensive Plan.
Alternative B is evaluated as the "no action" alternative
pursuant to PL 92-500 and NEPA requirements and serves as
the baseline for other alternatives. Puget Sound plants
(West Point, Alki,Carkeek Park and Richmond Beach) would
be retained with primary treatment. Improved sludge manage-
ment and disinfection practices would be provided in Alter-
native B and all following alternatives. Four new transfer
interceptors and improvements to the Alki outfall would be
included.
In Alternative B, West Point would serve population
growth to 2005, but in a smaller designated Seattle area
than Alternative B. Primary treatment of 142 mgd average
350 mgd peak flow would be provided prior to discharge to
Puget Sound. Additional sludge digesters would be con-
structed to handle increased solids loads.
XII
-------
Summary of Draft EIS Contents
Alternative C - Major Combined Sewer Overflow Control
Major portions of combined sewer overflows would be con-
trolled by transfer from fresh to saltwater and/or treatment.
The existing Puget Sound Plants would be upgraded to provide
enhanced primary treatment by physical/chemical treatment of
solids during the summer. A new wet weather enhanced primary
treatment plant would be constructed in the lower Duwamish in-
dustrial area and the Alki plant would be abandoned, both in
1995.
At West Point, the plant would be upgraded to advanced
primary treatment by 1985. The service area would be reduced
relative to Alternative B, so average capacities of 139 mgd,
wet weather 350 mgd would be provided. Construction of two
new digesters, chemical storage and feed buildings, and filter
press would complete the minor site modifications. Sludge
from Richmond Beach, the new Duwamish plant and West Point
would be handled at West Point.
Alternative D - Partial Combined Sewer Overflow Control
Wet weather combined sewer overflows would be reduced to
Lake Washington, Lake Union and the West Seattle shoreline.
The four Puget Sound plants would be upgraded to enhanced pri-
mary treatment with chemical addition during the summer for
improved solids removal.
The West Point site modifications would be the same as in
Alternative C. Changes in service area would result in 129
mgd average/350 mgd peak flows.
Alternative E - Secondary
Secondary treatment would be added to the West Point,
Alki and Richmond Beach wastewater treatment plants by 1985.
The Carkeek Park plant would provide primary treatment for
wet weather flows only beginning in 1985; dry weather flows
would be pumped to West Point.
Serving the same population and service area as Alterna-
tive B, plus the addition of Carkeek Park dry weather flows,
the West Point Plant would provide secondary air activated
sludge treatment to 142 mgd average, 350 mgd peak flows.
Kill
-------
Summary of Draft EIS Contents
Sludge from West Point and Richmond Beach would be treated at
West Point. Additional facilities at the site would be second-
ary aeration tanks and clarifiers, and new digesters. Twelve
acres of shoreline fill would be required for this proposal.
Alternative F - Secondary/Southern Strategy
Secondary treatment would be provided at Richmond Beach
and West Point (with a reduced service area). A major new
secondary treatment facility would be constructed in the
Duwamish industrial area in 1985; the Alki plant would be
abandoned at that time. A new outfall off Alki Point would
be built for discharging effluent from the Duwamish (and
Renton) plants. The Carkeek Park plant would provide pri-
mary treatment for wet weather flow only beginning in 1985;
dry weather flows would be pumped to West Point.
The West Point secondary plant would treat 97 mgd average,
350 mgd peak flows. With this reduction in capacity relative
to Alternative B, the oxygen activated sludge secondary pro-
cess could be accommodated at the existing site with no
shoreline fill required.
Additional facilities would include secondary aeration
tanks and clarifiers, cryogenic (low temperature) oxygen
facilities and a filter press.
Alternative G - Secondary/West Point Phaseout Option
Secondary treatment would be provided at the Alki and
Richmond Beach plants. West Point would continue as a pri-
mary treatment plant for wet weather flows only, beginning
in 1985. A new secondary treatment plant in the Interbay
area (Commodore Way or Golf Park sites) would be constructed.
The Carkeek Park plant would provide primary treatment for
wet weather flows only beginning in 1985; dry weather flows
would be pumped to West Point.
The West Point plant would appear as it does under exist-
ing conditions for its function as a wet weather primary
treatment plant. The new Interbay plant would treat 150 mgd
average, 200 mgd peak flows by secondary treatment for dis-
charge through the West Point outfill in dry weather and
through a new Elliott Bay outfall in wet weather. Approxi-
mately 33 acres would be required in the Interbay area. The
proposed site is the Golf Park /Garbage Dump; Commodore Way
xiv
-------
Summary of Draft EIS Contents
is an optional site.
Alternative H - Deconsolidation/Reclamation
Secondary treatment would be provided at West Point,
Alki, Carkeek Park and Richmond Beach. Areas of growth
would be served by new inland plants with local effluent and
sludge re-use possible. Advanced waste treatment would be
provided at new North and South Lake Sammamish plants. A
new secondary plant at Kenmore would discharge treated efflu-
ent to Puget Sound.
The West Point plant would treat 121 mgd average, 350 mgd
peak flows by the secondary, air activated sludge process.
Twelve acres of shoreline fill would be required to accommo-
date new secondary aeration tanks, clarifiers and sludge
digesters.
Environmental Impacts
The primary (direct) and secondary (indirect) impacts of
each alternative are described by categories in the physical,
biological and human environments plus natural resources and
energy. A summary of the major effects of each alternative
is described below.
Alternative A (No Action)
Alternative A, which would continue sewerage service to
the present sewered population but provide no new service or
capital improvements, would have comparable impacts in 2005
as existing conditions. Combined sewer overflows would pro-
duce localized adverse impacts on inland surface waters
(Lake Washington, Portage Bay, Lake Union, Ship Canal) plus
at Elliott Bay and Alki Point. Pollutant discharge to Lake
Washington/Ship Canal from CSO's would have adverse impacts
on fisheries. In Puget Sound, the discharge of solids,
metals, toxicants and other materials would continue at pre-
sent rates. Although effects as measured to date from pre-
sent discharges have been very minor, the possibility of sub-
tle, long-term impacts must be considered.
The site iitroacts on regional parklands or residential
areas would continue. The West Point plant would continue
xv
-------
Summary of Draft EIS Contents
operating near Discovery Park and would continue to be visi-
ble from residences along the bluffs. Odor at these resi-
dences would not be a problem due to dispersal. Sludge
truck traffic would double.
The Alternative would not comply with PL 92-500. No
Shoreline Management Act permits would be needed.
Alternative B -(Metro Comprehensive Plan-No Action Pursuant
to PL 92-500)
Water quality impacts would increase under Alternative B
relative to existing conditions. CSO flow increases of 20 to
40 percent would present localized adverse water quality im-
pacts in the inland surface waters (Lake Washington and Ship
Canal) used by migratory fish. Construction of the second
Kenmore interceptor could possibly adversely affect salmon
spawning areas in a portion of Lake Washington. In Puget Sound,
discharge of primary effluent would add more materials than
presently that could adversely affect water quality, such
as solids, oxygen-demanding materials, bacteria, nutrients
and toxicants. Long-term impacts of this discharge are dif-
ficult to ascertain, based on limited data, but could be
detrimental to Puget Sound.
The site impacts would be approximately the same as in
Alternative A, since only minor improvements would be made
by adding digesters. Recreational uses at the adjacent West
Point beaches would be limited.
This alternative does not comply with the secondary
treatment requirements of PL 92-500, and is evaluated only
to comply with NEPA "no action" requirements and to recognize
Metro's present Comprehensive Plan.
Alternative C - (Major Combined Sewer Overflow Control)
This alternative would virtually eliminate CSO's to Lake
Washington, Lake Union, Portage Bay and the Ship Canal. Lo-
calized moderate to major benefits to migratory fish routes
and spawning areas would result. In Puget Sound, enhanced
primary treatment would result in a 20 percent reduction in
solids loads relative to Alternative B, but an increase over
existing conditions, so water quality improvements due to
Metro discharge are not anticipated therein.
xvi
-------
Summary of Draft EIS Contents
Because no substantial changes would be made at the
treatment plants, West Point, recreational uses near the site
and at Discovery Park would not be changed.
Alternative C does not comply with the PL 92-500 require-
ments for secondary treatment as currently written.
Alternative D - (Partial Combined Sewer Overflow Control)
Substantial decreases in CSO's to sensitive freshwaters
would result. Lake Washington, in particular, would benefit
in localized areas from CSO reductions of approximately 75
percent. This was judged as a moderate benefit to salmon
spawning areas. A fifty percent CSO decrease to the Ship
Canal should benefit migrating fish. Discharge to Puget
Sound would be approximately equivalent to Alternative C,
wherein water quality improvements were not anticipated due
to increases in wastewater flows and loads.
The West Point site would appear similar to its present
condition. As such, it would limit beach use and could be
visible to users of Discovery Park. Odors in nearby neigh-
borhoods would not be a problem since dispersal is adequate
and there are no residents in the immediate area. Sludge
truck trips through- the park would be seven trips per day
less than in Alternative B.
Alternative E - (Secondary)
Secondary treatment would reduce the solids loads (and
corresponding metals, oxygen-demanding materials, toxicants,
and other contaminants) to Puget Sound by approximately 75
percent compared to Alternative B. Although the exact im-
pacts of this reduction are not known, it appears to be
beneficial from the standpoint of subtle, long-term effects.
However, nutrients would probably increase in Puget Sound
which could affect the size of plankton blooms. In addition,
this alternative makes no change in CSO's, which could have
localized adverse effects on salmon spawning and beach areas
in Lake Washington, plus migratory fish routes in the Ship
Canal. Constructing the Kenmore parallel interceptor could
destroy salmon spawning areas in part of Lake Washington by
siltation.
xvn
-------
Summary of Draft EIS Contents
The site impacts would include 12 acres of shoreline fill
needed at West Point to accommodate the air activated sludge
aeration basin and clarifiers. A shoreline management permit
would be required and could be granted if there were no other
feasible alternative. Odors could increase at the site, but
covering the clarifiers would help alleviate impacts. Use
of the West Point beaches would be limited by the new facil-
ities, which could be viewed from Discovery Park.
Alternative F - (Secondary/Southern Strategy)
The discharge through the West Point outfall would re-
sult in over 80 percent reduction in solids loads from West
Point to Puget Sound, primarily because flow from the exist-
ing southern service area would be routed to the new Duwamish
plant and discharged through a new Alki outfall. Although
the extent of existing information makes it difficult to
quantify the benefit from water quality improvement, subtle
long-term improvements would be expected with the smaller
load of solids, BOD, toxicants, metals and others.
Alternative F would also reduce CSO's to inland waters
in the West Point service area by about 30 percent, a minor
improvement to fish spawning areas and migratory routes.
The site impacts at West Point would not be so extensive
as Alternative E, because the oxygen activated sludge treat-
ment facilities could be accommodated on the existing site.
The cryogenic facilities associated with oxygen production
would be tall and more visible than other structures when
viewed from off the site. Occasional noise could be associ-
ated with the oxygen facilities, which also would have more
potential risks than air activated sludge in being more ex-
plosive. Based on experience from similar facilities, this
risk appears to be negligible. The sludge truck traffic would
be half that of Alternative B.
Alternative G - (Secondary/West Point Phaseout Option)
The water quality impacts on Puget Sound from effluent
discharge would be similar to Alternative E because service
areas, flow and treatment processes would be the same. Some
impacts on Elliott Bay from the Interbay outfall could be
expected. Effects of CSO's on freshwater would also be the
same as in Alternative E. The construction of the Kenmore
xvin
-------
Summary of Draft EIS Contents
parallel would destroy some salmon spawning areas by silta-
tion. Site impacts at Interbay would be significant. If
the Golf Course site were used for the Interbay plants, lo-
cal residents would be affected by odors during construction
and operation and a recreational facility would be displaced,
The construction suitability at the Golf Course site is
questionable. If the optional Commodore Way site were
selected, approximately 60 businesses would be displaced,
with the transfer of 700-800 jobs.
At West Point, the site would appear as it does now.
Because it would be used as a wet weather only plant, sludge
truck trips would average less than one per day, the lowest
number of all alternatives.
Alternative H - (Deconsolidation/Reclamation)
Water quality and related biological benefits from CSO
reduction under Alternative H would be small; thus, local-
ized spawning or recreational areas along Lake Washington
and migratory fish routes through Lake Union would be af-
fected. Impacts on overall quality of Puget Sound would be
similar to other secondary alternatives, an anticipated but
not quantitative improvement.
Site impacts at West Point would be similar to Alterna-
tive E, since twelve acres of shoreline fill would be re-
quired. Impacts on beach use would be substantial. Odors
could increase at the site, but not to the extent that they
would be noticeable to the nearest residents. Sludge truck
traffic would be less than 5 trips per day.
Mitigation Measures
Some measures which could mitigate adverse impacts are
as follows:
1. Operating enhanced primary treatment year round
(Alternatives C and D).
2. Improving chlorination application systems
(Alternatives B, C, D).
3. Monitoring water quality, biology and currents
to obtain more information prior to constructing
new outfalls at Elliott Bay (Alternatives C,D & G)
xix
-------
Summary of Draft EIS Contents
4. Improved industrial pretreatment under pending, stricter
standards for West Point and/or Interbay service areas.
5. Investigation of transfer options other than the
Kenmore parallel (Alternatives B, E, G).
6. Options for landscaping and recreational facilities
at the West Point site, such as vegetation to
screen views of the plant from Discovery Park,
berm plantings to improve the aesthetics as viewed
from Puget Sound, removing the sludge lagoon on
the South Beach, and/or providing promenades
(Alternatives B, C, D, E, F, G, and H).
7. Further evaluation of measures to eliminate shore-
line fill, such as tall aeration basins or stacked
clarifiers (Alternative E and H).
Unavoidable Adverse Impacts
The remaining impacts on water quality, biology, socio-
economics, sites, costs, energy and natural resources that
could not be mitigated by the previously mentioned measures
under each alternative would be unavoidable adverse impacts,
xx
-------
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL
A. Name of the Proposal and Sponsors
This information is contained in the Introduction and
in the Summary of Draft EIS Contents
B. Location of the Project
The project location is described in Chapters I and III
of the Draft EIS.
C. Other Agencies File Numbers on Proposal
The reader is requested to contact Mr. Roger Mochnick
(EPA), Mr. John McDonnell (DOE), and Dr. Peter Machno
(Metro) for this information.
D. Identification of Construction Phasing and Future EIS
Requirements.
Chapter III contains this information.
E. Description of Physical and Engineering Aspects
of the Project
Projects are summarized in the Draft EIS and detailed
in the Draft Facility Plan.
F. Land Use Plans and Zoning Regulations
Chapter II of the Draft EIS describes existing and pro-
jected land use; Chapter III addresses whether the pro-
posal is consistent with these regulations.
xxi
-------
PREFACE
This Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) evaluates
the impacts of alternative wastewater facilities described in
the Draft Facility Plan developed for the Municipality of Met-
ropolitan Seattle (Metro). The alternatives include waste-
water treatment plants, transfer interceptor sewers, com-
bined sewer overflow control facilities and sludge handling
facilities that would be constructed and operated by Metro.
The major part of construction costs could be provided by
grants from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and
the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE).
The EIS has been prepared in response to federal and
state legislation plus local resolutions requiring that EPA,
DOE and Metro each fully consider the environmental impacts
and consequences of alternative projects prior to making a
final decision to proceed on a recommended project. The
respective responsibilities for the three agencies in the
EIS process were established for EPA in the National Environ-
mental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U. S. C. Sec. 4321, et seq.; for
DOE in the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)
Chapter 43.21C RCW; and for Metro in Metro Council Resolution
No. 2582.
In certain cases, significant environmental impacts could
result from the various wastewater facilities alternatives.
For example, alternatives for Metro's West Point, Alki and
Carkeek Park wastewater treatment plants may have signifi-
cant environmental impacts; similarly an evaluation of
facilities on a regional level indicated that some signifi-
cant impacts should be considered. Therefore, a decision
was made to prepare an EIS on these projects to comply with
both NEPA and SEPA requirements. Rather than preparing
separate EIS documents at the appropriate time, the three
agencies agreed to prepare a joint EIS for the regional
facilities alternatives, plus the West Point, Alki and Car-
keek Park alternatives. In addition to satisfying both NEPA
and SEPA with the joint EIS, the agencies also chose a pro-
cedure designed to eliminate delays and duplication of effort
as well as to facilitate desirable interchange among the ag-
encies and with the public during the early stages of the EIS
process.
In another case facilities would not cause significant
environmental impacts as defined in NEPA. Therefore, an
EIS pursuant to SEPA (which would also serve as an environ-
mental assessment) was prepared for the Richmond Beach site
and service area.
xxn
-------
Preface
For the total evaluation of the environmental impacts of
alternative facilities plans, the environmental analysis has
been organized as follows: Regional Analysis EIS (Volume I),
West Point Treatment Plant EIS (Volume II), Alki Treatment
Plant EIS (Volume II), Carkeek Park Treatment Plant EIS (Volume
II, Richmond Beach Treatment Plant EIS (pursuant to SEPA)
(Volume II). Each site-specific document (Volume II) is in-
tended to be read with the regional analysis (Volume I), with
each such pair constituting a complete EIS.
The production of this joint Draft EIS results from close
cooperation between EPA, DOE, and Metro. All three agencies
have been intimately involved with the review, analysis, sup-
plementation, and synthesis of materials furnished by inde-
pendent consultants hired to assist with the preparation of
the EIS. The City of Seattle, King County, and the Puget
Sound Council of Governments have also participated in meet-
ings and provided comments on preliminary draft materials to
ensure that local government concerns and regional land use
planning goals were incorporated in the EIS.
EPA regulations on "Preparation of Environmental Impact
Statements" (40 CFR Part 6; 40 FR, April 14, 1975), Council
on Environmental Quality Guidelines for the "Preparation of
Environmental Impact Statements" (40 CFR Part 1500; 38 FR
20550, August 1, 1973), and the EPA "Manual for Preparation
Works, Facilities Plans, and 208 Area-wide Treatment Manage-
ment Plans" (July 1974) have been used in preparation of the
EIS. Likewise, SEPA Guidelines, adopted by the State Council
on Environmental Quality and incorporated by Metropolitan
Council Resolution No. 2582, have been followed insofar as
they are consistent with federal requirements.
Some of the alternatives described in the Draft EIS's
and Draft Facility Plans include the provision for secondary
treatment at Metro facilities by 1985. The twenty year plan-
ning period is from 1985-2005. These 1985 dates are not con-
sistent with the current PL 92-500 requirement for Best Prac-
ticable Treatment including secondary treatment by 1983.
According to the facility planning engineers, the 1985 date
may be more realistic than 1983 due to delays in the Step I
planning process, and thus in the start dates for Step II
(design) and Step III (construction).
However, since the law currently requires Best Practi-
cable Treatment by 1983 the construction schedules will be
changed to reflect this. Due to time constraints it was not
possible to change the dates in the Draft Plans and EIS's.
The reader should note that any mention of secondary treat-
ment in 1985 will be changed to 1983 in the Final Plans and
EIS's. The twenty year planning period also changes to
1983-2003.
XXlll
-------
Preface
These changes may impact the analysis of alternatives in
several minor ways. First there is a potential for a slight
saving in costs, due to the decrease in inflation associated
with an earlier start date. However, the need for this
earlier start date compresses the design and construction
schedules causing an increase in these costs. The two fact-
ors, one a potential savings and one in increase in costs,
will probably negate one another.
The new planning period from 1983-2003 will cause popu-
lation projections and solids loading to decrease slightly.
This decrease, estimated at 2 percent, is well within current
sensitivity of the projections and should not have a notice-
able impact on the analysis.
All comments on this Draft EIS should be sent to the EPA
as the lead agency in the EIS process. Comments should be
addressed to Mr. Roger Mochnick, Environmental Evaluation
Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Sixth Avenue,
Seattle, Washington, 98101. The EPA will then distribute
copies of the comments to DOE, Metro and the EIS consultant.
Comments will be used by the three agencies in preparing the
Final EIS and in their decision-making processes.
It is believed that this process best enables the agen-
cies involved to fully assess and consider all significant
physical, economic, and social effects of their proposal,
and public input thereon, prior to any significant decision-
making step. For this reason, the agencies have not attempted
to bias the decision to be reached by recommending any one of
the eight alternatives prior to full completion of the EIS pro-
cess, including the public hearings. Rather, the attempt of
this document is to present the decision makers and the pub-
lic with as complete an analysis as possible of each of the
alternatives so that a fully informed decision can be made.
The remaining part of the decision-making process will
proceed under the following schedule:
October 25, 1977 Public hearings on Regional
Draft EIS
October 26, 1977 Public hearings on West Point
Draft EIS
November 1977 A preferred alternative is
recommended by Metro in con-
junction with EPA and DOE
February 1978 Final EIS is available
March 1978 Public hearings on Final EIS
April 1978 Metro Council decision
xxiv
-------
Preface
April 1978 DOE decision
April 1978 EPA decision
xxv
-------
CHAPTER I
BACKGROUND
The West Point wastewater treatment plant is one of five
Metro treatment plants that will be affected by the wastewater
management alternatives being considered in the 201 Facility
Plan. Figure 1-1 shows the treatment plants' location and the
service area tributary to each. This report,Volume II, pre-
sents the impacts of the eight treatment alternatives on the
West Point plant site and service areas. Impacts of the alter-
natives on the regional level and a background of the regional
issues are discussed in Volume I. Three other site documents,
Alki, Carkeek Park, and Richmond Beach are also included in
the Volume II series.
The West Point treatment plant serves much of Seattle's
more developed sections and includes approximately 59,000
acres of Lake Union, Elliott Bay, Southwest Lake Washington,
Northwest Lake Washington, and North Lake Sammamish subareas.
The service area includes also those additional areas which
are projected to be sewered by 2005. The collection system
conveys storm water as well as domestic and industrial waste-
waters. High flows are experienced at the plant during and
following storms depending on the duration and intensity of
the storm.
The primary treatment plant at West Point was constructed
during 1962-1966 at a capital cost of $12,900,000. Operations
began in 1966. It is the largest of the five Metro treatment
plants. The plant is designed for an average dry weather flow
of 125 million gallons per day (mgd) and a peak wet weather
flow of 350 mgd. Present average dry weather flow reaching
the plant ranges between 75 to 90 mgd which is within the
design limit; however, the peak wet weather flows are reported
to reach the design capacity of the plant. The final effluent
is discharged to Puget Sound through a submarine outfall which
terminates in a 600 foot long multi-port diffuser under 240
feet of water approximately 3,500 feet from shore. Sludge
produced at the other Metro treatment plants, except Alki, is
transferred to West Point where it is further digested and
dewatered before being hauled away to Cedar Hills landfill
-------
RENTON SERVICE AREA
WEST POINT SERVICE AREA
ALKI SERVICE AREA
CARKEEK PARK SERVICE AREA
RICHMOND BEACH SERVICE AREA
METRO WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
METRO STUDY AREA BOUNDARY
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARY
. ••; ,, . •
. i -.—U,- i. f •>
Metro Treatment Plant
Service Areas
-------
Background
and for recycling to the University of Washington's Pack For-
est Demonstration Project.
Metro owns approximately 80 acres of land at the West
Point site/ some of which is subtidal. At the present, the
plant occupies approximately 24 acres of the site. It is
staffed with 47 plant operations and maintenance personnel.
Operating cost is approximately $2.8 million/year. Traffic
generated by the plant operations amounts to 50 round trips
per day including 7.3 round trips/day for sludge trucks.
More detailed description of the service area and treat-
ment facility is included in Chapter III under the No Action
alternative.
SITE CONSTRAINTS AND ISSUES
The West Point treatment plant is located in an environ-
mentally sensitive area between a regional park and the waters
of Puget Sound. An aerial view of West Point is shown in
Figure 1-2. There are two historic sites and an unstable hill-
side near the plant. Expansion to secondary treatment as man-
dated by PL 92-500 would require creating by landfill or
purchasing from the park as much as 12 acres of land. The
shoreline fill (landfill) would require a shoreline management
permit, which could be difficult to obtain. Under the provi-
sions of the City of Seattle Shorelines Master Program, which
was adopted by the City Council and approved by DOE in June 1976,
much of West Point was designated as Conservancy Management
with the beach as Conservancy Natural. The program does not
prohibit but discourages future location of new sewage treat-
ment facilities and the expansion of the existing treatment
facility at West Point. Furthermore it provides that only
when no feasible alternative exists can a shoreline site be
considered for these purposes. Questions have been raised
over the definition of "feasible alternative" and whether
the federal law which requires expansion of the site and land-
fill under PL 92-500 may override local and state laws. These
issues, once resolved, will have a definite impact on the
selection of the alternatives for West Point.
Increased sludge quantities due to upgrading the treat-
ment to secondary and increased flows would increase sludge
hauling traffic and impair the aesthetics of Discovery Park
and Fort Lawton, important Seattle-King County natural and
cultural resources (see Appendix E, Regional Analysis).
Neither noise nor odors are major problems at West Point due
to prevailing winds and buffering zones which dispel poten-
-------
T3 3?
9. <
I -
§
*•_
o
-------
Background
tial nuisances. Odors are usually blown offshore or away
from residences which are not close to West Point.
Because the use of the West Point site is severely re-
stricted, other alternative sites to accommodate expansion
have been considered. Initially, eight alternative sites
were identified in the West Point service area, however, two
possible sites in the moderately industrial Interbay area were
finally selected for further study, Commodore Way and an old
garbage dump, now a golf course, Figure 1-3. Construction
at the Commodore Way site would involve displacing light
industry, an expensive proposition. The structures, whether
at Commodore Way or the Golf Park, would be aesthetically
offensive, and odors could be a problem as there is poor
air circulation at both areas. Furthermore, the substrate
at the Golf Park is judged to be structurally unsound and
would necessitate extensive excavation and foundation support.
The Golf Park site has been used for costs in the Draft
Facility Plan, but both are evaluated in the EIS.
The possibility of returning West Point to a natural beach
setting or at least mitigating site impacts by landscaping is
an important issue to the Park Board. Certain landscaping
measures and potential for ultimate phaseout have been consi-
dered in the facilities plan and may benefit Discovery Park.
At public workshops and community meetings concerning
West Point, a definite controversy arose over the future of
the West Point plant. Some people living in neighborhoods
near the plant favored relocation, or, at least, no expan-
sion. Other residents would prefer not to have two major
wastewater facilities (West Point and Interbay) nearby -
Commodore Way area residents would prefer keeping the plant
at its present location and expressed their concern for the
condemnation, relocation, and tax loss costs associated
with construction at Commodore Way, warning that odors from
either Interbay site would annoy residents of Magnolia,
Queen Anne, Ballard, and Phinney Ridge neighborhoods. The
importance of the tourist value of the fishing fleet to
Seattle's economy and the need to keep water quality in the
canal locks near Commodore Way high enough for salmon runs
were also pointed out.
Other issues that were raised relative to plant expansion/
relocation included the need for a social survey for Commo-
dore Way and Golf Park sites, competing uses of Discovery
Park, economic and recreational values of the fishing industry,
the number of people affected by plant location at alternative
sites, and the structural suitability of alternative sites.
-------
Figure 1-3
Aerial View of West Point and Interbay Sites
6
-------
Background
Recommendations for lessening the impact of the present
_plant on Discovery Park included removing the sludge lagoon,
landscaping and screening the facility, and processing Renton
sludge elsewhere.
City residents near West Point questioned the need to
treat sewage from newly developed areas at West Point and
expressed a preference for decentralization.Limited informa-
tion has been collected on the preference of residents of North
Lake Washington or other inland areas that could be used in
a decentralization alternative. Other items relating to
regional concerns that were expressed at the West Point meet-
ing included federal requirements for secondary treatment,
the relationship between 201 and 208 planning, mechanisms
for wastewater flow reduction, plant siting and sludge treat-
ment alternatives and shoreline access.
The Magnolia Community Club also drafted a comprehensive
letter to Metro setting forth numerous goals and criteria for
use in the evaluation of wastewater treatment plant expansion
proposals. Among the issues covered are impacts on gealogy,
water resources, air quality, energy and natural resources,
ecosystems, unique features, demography, economy, land use,
aesthetics, and community safety and infrastructure.
A public workshop was held in June 1977 which informed
citizens of the eight proposed alternatives and solicited their
comments on the site-specific impacts of each. Most of the
concerns centered around economic impacts at a possible Commo-
dore Way site. Summary of comments is shown in Chapter IV.
A public hearing on the Draft EIS alternatives as they
affect West Point and regional concerns is scheduled for the
Fall of 1977.
-------
-------
CHAPTER II
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The environmental characteristics of the West Point site
and proposed alternatives at Commodore Way and the Golf Park
are discussed in the following sections. The West Point ser-
vice area is described in Chapter II of the regional analysis
which is Volume I of this series and will not be repeated in
detail here.
Alternative sites to West Point in the Interbay Area
have been examined to allow the eventual phaseout of West
Point. The Golf Park site included in the Draft Facility
Plan and the optional Commodore Way site are described
herein.
For analytical purposes, the environmental setting is
subdivided into the physical, biological and human environ-
ments. It is clearly understood that the three overlap, but
this artificial division ensures a thorough analysis of
relevant impacts.
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
A description is offered in terms of the characteristics
of the topography, geology, soils and seismicity of the three
sites, the waters actually or potentially affected by treat-
ment facilities on those sites, and atmospheric character-
istics including climate and air quality.
Topography
The West Point treatment plant, the largest in the Metro
system, is situated on a flat triangle of land pointing due
west into Puget Sound. The site was prepared by the construc-
tion of a seawall and the deposition of a half million yards
of hydraulic fill over the soft surface soils. Ten years
later a sludge lagoon was constructed on the shoreline south
of the plant for research purposes. Topography is shown in
Figure 2-1.
-------
TOPOGRAPHY
x: :: 0" 15% SLOPE
WV 15-25% SLOPE
$m 25-40% SLOPE
MORE THAN 40% SLOPE
METRO FACILITY PLANNING FOR
t WEST POINT
N TREATMENT PLANT
SCALE:
Figure 2-1
West Point Topography
Environmental Setting
10
-------
Environmental Setting
Metro owns approximately 80 acres at West Point, of which
23 lie outside the seawall and are submerged at least part of
the time. Forty-four of the remaining 55 acres are considered
usable, excluding five acres of easements and the sludge
lagoon. Fill and subsequent use of the lagoon area for struc-
tures is questionable as this action would be in conflict with
the Shorelines Management Act. The structures necessary under
the eight alternatives were planned in such a way that the
sludge lagoon would not need to be used.
A U. S. Coast Guard lighthouse station is located on the
extreme tip of the point, adjacent to the West Point facility.
The low, flat windy point is separated from the adjacent
uplands by steep 200 ft bluffs. Access to the treatment
facility and the lighthouse is by a road down the west exposure
of the bluff. Some concern has been expressed that the con-
figuration of the sludge lagoon alters longshore sediment
transport through erosional and depositional conditions which
may develop north and south of the structure, respectively.
Dominant topographic features of the Magnolia/Interbay
area are the upland areas of Magnolia and Queen Anne Hill
and the Interbay Valley which runs north-south between these
uplands. The southern part of the Interbay Valley is bounded
by Elliott Bay; to the north is a saucer-like depression
drained by the Ship Canal. Magnolia itself is actually com-
posed of two hills with a north-south depression in the center.
Steep bluffs are found on its southern and western margins.
See Figure 2-2 for topographic cross-sections of the West
Point/Magnolia/Interbay area.
The Commodore Way site is generally flat with a gentle
slope toward the Ship Canal. As shown in Figure 2-3, the
Burlington-Northern railroad tracks lie in an artificial
depression running in a northwest-southeast direction at the
southwestern margin of the site. As indicated, the grade
increases markedly in a southwesterly direction toward Mag-
nolia just beyond the site boundary.
The Interbay garbage dump or Golf Park site was origin-
ally situated in an intertidal zone and was submerged during
high tides. City of Seattle street maps indicated that the
ground surface in 1899 was generally at elevation 104 (100 =
MSL). Easterly and northeasterly the site was located at
the toe of the west slope of Queen Anne Hill and was relatively
higher in elevation. Hetergeneous fill material was there-
after dumped at the site to about elevation 143 in the south
and elevation 165 in the north, varying from 40 feet to 50
feet above the original ground elevation and some 30 feet above
the present existing grade. Below the original ground surface,
alluvial sands, silts and some peat will be found at the site,
11
-------
West Point
Treatment
Plant
PUGET SOUND
SECTIONS
Commodore Way
Proposed Site
Garbage Dump
Proposed Site
T» WEST POINT
N TREATMENT PLANT
Figure 2-2
Topographic Cross Section
West Point — Interbay Area
(Including Proposed Treatment Sites)
12
(Metro, 1977)
-------
TOPOGRAPHY
SLOPES FROM 0 TO 5%
SLOPES FROM 6 TO 10%
SLOPES FROM 11 TO 20%
8S88& SLOPES FROM 21 TO 40%
SLOPES OVER 40%
yento FACILITY PLANNING FOR
COMMODORE WAY SITE
-------
Environmental Setting
and glacial deposits or overconsolidated material will pro-
bably be encountered at the toe of Queen Anne Hill. The
surface fill material was from all sources, ranging from
rubble to garbage and was dumped in place at random. Figure
2-4 shows this site.
Geology and Soils
Discussion of geology and soil conditions at specific
sites (existing and potential) within the West Point service
area follows.
West Point
The West Point site consists of alluvial material,
chiefly unconsolidated silt, sand and gravel fill with some
clay present. Much of this material was generated through
shoreline processes (wind, waves, and tidal action) reworking
glacial deposits eroded from the bluffs above. The steep
bluffs are considered unstable and there is evidence of
sliding and slumping at various locations. See Figure 2-5 for
geologic site constraints.
Large slide areas are particularly noticeable along the
cliffs facing Puget Sound. A pronounced example of sliding
is located along the south and west sides of Magnolia Bluff
extending from Smith Cove on the south to just south of West
Point. Within recent years, numerous slides have occurred in
the Perkins Lane West area and have caused damage to city water
pipes and utilities. Geological investigations indicate that
this area lies along a contact zone between two glacial
deposits. North of West Point toward Shilshole Bay, four
large slide areas are located. One, extending approximately
1,300 feet along the bluff and from 300 to 500 feet from the
toe, is centered above the portal of the north trunk sewer
tunnel.
The slide-prone nature of these bluffs limits eastward
expansion of the West Point facility. Cutting the bluffs
would remove support at their base, causing them to collapse.
Expansion into the water is by ordinances (Shorelines Manage-
ment Act) which control shoreline fill, except for emergencies.
Prior to placement of fill, part of this area accumulated as
a result of slide debris and gully erosional deposits, and
part was reworked by wave processes in the intertidal zone.
Sloughed materials from undercut bluffs were removed, redistri-
14
-------
TOPOGRAPHY
vttX SLOPES FROM 0 TO 5%
SiSB SLOPES FROM 6 TO 10%
JiiiJHH SLOPES FROM 11 TO 20%
m& SLOPES FROM 21 TO 40%
SLOPES OVER 40%
METRO FACILITY PLANNING FOR
GARBAGE DUMP SITE
^ WEST POINT
N TREATMENT PLANT
SCALE:
Figure 2-4
Topography Golf Park Site
15
-------
0>
CD
CD
g_
o
o
o
Q) Tl
3 1'
I
(B
CONSTRAINTS
GEOLOGICAL
SUITABLE
MARGINALLY
SUITABLE
Environmental Setting
-------
Environmental Setting
buted and redeposited by wave action, with the granular mater-
ials being deposited nearby and the fine materials carried
into the deeper portions of the Sound. The intertidal area
was generally covered up to two feet in thickness with dark
gray to blackish sand and gravel containing some shell frag-
ments. Underneath this surface zone were beach sands of
varying depth. Firm silts and clays were found in previous
borings to underlie the sands. These fine materials were
consolidated by the glacier of the latest Vashon glaciation.
Landslide zones are shown in the regional document as Figure
2-4.
During the placement of the on-site hydraulic fill,
the soft surface soils were not removed. Trees were cut off
but the stumps were left in place. Surface logs, if not
partially buried, were removed.
Since the West Point site has mixed soil conditions, it
is suggested that piling be considered as structural support.
An applicable foundation can be chosen when structure loca-
tions and specific soil information at these locations become
available (Metropolitan Engineers, 1977).
As it exists today, the south beach of West Point is a
broad shelf which varies from pure sand and sandy gravel in
the mid to upper intertidal zone to mud in the lower inter-
tidal. North Beach is narrower, steeper and consists of sandy
gravel, cobbles and a few large erratics. Both beaches have
bulkheads to protect onshore structures during high tide
conditions.
Commodore Way
The entire site is believed to have overconsolidated and
impervious clayey soils. These are classified as Pleistocene
Upper clay, predominantly laminated to massive clay and silt,
locally including sand, gravel and peat. These clayey soils
bear structures well if not disturbed or softened. Because
of their impervious characteristics, site drainage may be
necessary so that water not accumulate in deep foundation
excavations.
Golf Park
At the Golf Park site, between 40 and 50 feet of
heterogeneous fill has been dumped since 1899. Beneath the
original ground surface, which was once an intertidal zone,
17
-------
Environmental Setting
are alluvial sands, silts and some peat. To use this site
for treatment plant expansion, most surface fill would have
to be removed. In fill removal, consideration would have to
be given to control of odor and methane gas resulting from
years of unrestricted dumping.
Piling would be required for support of all structures.
Corrosion of steel pile is a problem due to acidic conditions
and because most of the natural deposits are from a seawater
environment. Consequently, prestressed reinforced concrete
pile would probably be necessary (Metropolitan Engineers, 1977)
Seismology
A high seismic risk potential occurs in fill, such as at
West Point and the Golf Park sites, as it is unstable and
transmits long-wave vibrations. The Magnolia area has exper-
ienced five intensity VII earthquakes (Modified Mercalli Scale)
in the last 133 years. Thus, one intensity VII earthquake
could be expected during the planning period. This makes fill
in the West Point-Magnolia a high risk foundation for struc-
tures. Rasmussen et al. (1974) have stated that "one should
not build at this location unless the structure is specifi-
cally designed to take into account substantial ground shaking
and possible soil failure".
The Commodore Way site is characterized by overconsoli-
dated impervious soils which tend to be poorly drained but
bear structures well. Buildings on these hard soils could
experience moderate amplification of long period vibrations
and greatest amplification of short period ground vibrations,
as experienced in West Seattle during the last large earth-
quake. Low rise buildings (less than seven stories), such as
treatment plants, which have a natural short vibration period
could be more susceptible to damage on such foundations.
Climate
The regional climate is described in the regional
analysis which is Volume I of this series.
Temperatures in the West Point area range from a mean of
40°F in winter to a mean of 80°F in the summer. The average
annual rainfall in the West Point service area of 40.12 inches
per year is typical of the Puget Sound region and is about
equal to the average of the Metro area. The total rainfall
for any given month may vary considerably from year to year.
18
-------
Environmental Setting
Air Quality
Air quality within the West Point service area is quite
variable. The industrialized Duwamish airshed is subject to
the most intensive pollutant loadings in the metropolitan
Seattle area. By contrast, the eastern portions of the service
area near Lake Sammamish contain relatively few major point
sources, and air quality problems tend to be the result of
regional air stagnation. Within the city proper, lowland
areas such as Interbay and Lake Union and the Duwamish valley
tend to act as sinks for air pollutants, particularly during
periods of limited air circulation such as occur in the autumn.
For a more complete discussion of regional air quality and
specific pollutant loadings in the Metro study area, refer
to Chapter II of the Regional Analysis (Volume I).
From an air quality standpoint, the site of the West
Point treatment plant itself is well-ventilated. Air that
approaches West Point has been traveling considerable dis-
tances over open water with little topographical restriction.
Odor complaints have never been received with regard to
the West Point facility. Only under calm conditions, which
occur about 10 percent of the time, could there be an odor
problem outside the plant and even then it would probably
only affect the lighthouse station and any people on the
public beach directly adjacent to the area south of the plant.
A subsidence inversion producing atmospheric stagnation can
concentrate plant emissions, but this is an infrequent occur-
rence. Mitigation measures for odor reduction at the present
facility include prechlorination, waste gas flaring and good
plant practices.
At the Golf Park and Commodore Way, there would be more
concentration of odor since these sites are not as well venti-
lated.
Since the air quality sampling network for Seattle is
only concentrated in problem areas, ambient air data at or
near West Point is virtually nonexistent. Dispersion is
excellent and any air pollutants emitted from the plant are
considered to be insignificant except under adverse meteoro-
logical conditions. A summary of existing concentrations for
the Interbay Valley is, however, given in Table 2-2.
A tabulation of present and projected air pollutant
emissions from West Point facility is found in Table 2-1.
19
-------
Environmental Setting
Table 2-1
West Point Treatment Plant Air Pollutant Emissions
Estimated by PSAPCA (tons/year)*
1976 2005
Particulate matter -- 12
Nitrogen oxides 85 180
Carbon monoxide 11 20
Hydrogen sulfide -- 4
Hydrocarbons 31 65
Source: Metropolitan Engineers, West Point Facility
Plan 1977.
* Emissions of the largest pollution source in each of these
categories are 100 to 1000 times as big.
20
-------
Environmental Setting
Table 2-2
Summary of Pollutant Concentrations
(Microqrams per Cubic Meter)
Sulfur Dioxide
From Outside Generated Within
Service Area Service Area
Interbay 156 260
PSAPCA Standard:
230 for 24-hour
average
Nitrogen Dioxide
Interbay 160 186
PSAPCA Standard:
100 for annual
average
Particulates
Interbay 90 136
PSAPCA Standard:
150 for 24-hour
average
Hy d ro c a rbon s
Interbay UKN 286
PSAPCA Standard:
160 for 3-hour
average
21
-------
Environmental Setting
Water Resources
Hydrographic Features
Two water bodies, Puget Sound and the Ship Canal, are
in proximity to the West Point Wastewater Facility.
The Ship Canal, used by migrating salmon, has been
classified as mesotrophic-eutrophic (highly fertile).
The dissolved oxygen concentration is low, especially in the
stratified lower depths of Lake Union during the summer.
Coliform bacteria levels exceed state standards, especially
at times of combined sewer overflows. Heavy metal concen-
trations in the Ship Canal sediments have increased in the
past 80 years. More detail of the Ship Canal is developed
in the Regional Document.
Puget Sound is a fjord-like estuary carved by glaciers
from an older river valley system. As part of Washingtpn's
inland seawater system, it lies south of the northern end of
Admiralty inlet and east of Deception Pass. Two million
people, one half of Washington's population, live along its
perimeter. Wastewater treatment outfalls discharge a total
to 150 mgd into this water. Puget Sound supports a large
salmon fishing fleet, international commerce, and much
recreational boating. Because of its large size, Puget Sound
has a moderating effect on Seattle's climate.
Water Quality and Currents
Puget Sound develops tide-induced currents illustrated
in a Puget Sound model basin (Lincoln and McGary, 1975).
Details are discussed in the Regional Analysis, Volume I,
Chapter II of the EIS series. Currents can affect effluent
dispersion, since the discharge from West Point is in the
lee of the land and the receiving water is either slow-moving
or involved in an eddy system which has been found to occasion-
ally convey the effluent to shore.
Density differences also affect effluent dispersal, as
the freshwater discharged from rivers stays above saltwater.
Wastewater, with a density intermediate between salt and
freshwater, is dispersed to the interface. Generally, the
fresh water moves predominately northward, and on incoming
tides the salt water flows southward. Thus, the wastewater
effluent at the interface between these two flows has less
net movement, and may stay in place for many tidal cycles.
22
-------
Environmental Setting
Studies of the wastewater effluent flows have been made
using Rhodamine B dye. At the discharge, this dye was diluted
by seawater to 1:140, and remained in discrete filaments and
patches. Upon arrival at some beaches north and south of
West Point where it was sampled on one occasion, it was diluted
twice more, to 1:250 (Bendiner & Ewart). Further studies to
determine the frequency and distribution of effluent are
planned by Metro.
More details on dilution and dispersal at West Point are
covered in Volume I, Regional Analysis.
Groundwater
Groundwater at West Point is not used for municipal
supply.
23
-------
Environmental Setting
BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
The habitats in and around the three treatment plant
sites include urban terrestrial, non-urban terrestrial,
forest, freshwater wetlands, marine intertidal, Lake Union/
Ship Canal and Puget Sound.
Terrestrial Habitats
Terrestrial habitats have been highly modified through
the human activities of clearing, development and replanting
into urbanized commercial, industrial and residential areas.
The shores of Puget Sound and the Ship Canal are examples.
As terrestrial wildlife correlate with vegetation diversity,
the richest fauna are found in the areas of natural vegeta-
tion which remain scattered through the area. A more detailed
description of terrestrial habitats is included in Chapter II
of the Regional Analysis.
The West Point treatment plant is located between the
lighthouse and Discovery Park. The grounds around the plant
are lawn covered, and the beaches to the north and south are
rocky and sandy. A meadow area lies adjacent to the plant to
the north. An abandoned sludge lagoon of about five acres is
located south of the plant across the access road. Bulkheads
provide protection from normal high tide conditions and per-
mit use of areas which would normally be under water at high
tide. The lawn provides only a limited terrestrial habitat;
however, the meadow area has grown over with tall grasses and
low shrubs providing habitat for ground nesting birds and
small mammals. It serves as a feeding area for forest nesting
birds. The meadow area also supports a floral community uni-
que to West Point and the north beach of Discovery Park.
Plants rare or unknown elsewhere in the park include Grindelia
integrefolia, Ambrosia chamissonis and Anthemis cotula. These
plants have been used in the interpretive programs at the
Park. The beach is an important area for marine invertebrates
and shorebirds. A variety of diving ducks, grebes, loons
and scoters feed in the neashore water.
The former sludge storage area supports a mix of grasses,
small shrubs and aquatic vegetation, which provides a limited
protective habitat for waterfowl. Restoration of the lagoon
to more natural conditions would increase the feeding area for
diving ducks and shorebirds, and invertebrates and marine
flora would in all probability soon repopulate the intertidal
zones of the restored beach. Another possibility would be to
breach the seawall, allowing seawater to circulate into the
24
-------
Environmental Setting
lagoon. This would result in a small yet highly productive
artificial salt marsh. Any alterations to the lagoon would
have to be weighed carefully in terms of environmental effects
and other projected uses of the West Point area.
The vegetation of Discovery Park reflects its use as a
military fort. Since the army has used the greater part of
the site at various times and in doing so did considerable
clearing, many of the tree groups are alders and willows,
which are among the first to reforest cleared land, but are
not long-lived. Very few evergreens exist on or near the
bluffs, and there appears little evidence of madronas, which
are characteristics of Magnolia Bluff. The Discovery Park
Master Plan calls for a planting program to reinforce and
restore the natural character of the setting.
Aquatic Habitats
Aquatic habitats are sensitive to waterborne pollutants
from treatment plant effluents, combined sewer overflows,
direct runoff, aerial fallout and the like and must be pro-
tected to meet the 1983 "fishable-swimmable goal" of Public
Law 92-500. Aquatic habitats of the Metro area are described
in some detail in the regional analysis; this document briefly
includes only those adjacent to or affected by existing and
proposed facilities in the West Point service area.
Lake Union-Ship Canal
The biology of Lake Union and the Ship Canal has been
changed significantly by industrialization along its shores,
by saltwater intrusion and by periodic dredging for naviga-
tional purposes. Some deep sediments are almost entirely
devoid of life and the physical-chemical water quality data
suggest the Lake Union waters are generally not suitable to
maintain a resident salmonid population due to oil spills,
boat sanitary wastes, combined sewer overflows and saltwater
intrusion. Resident fish are similar to those found in Lake
Washington and include yellow perch, peamouth, northern
squawfish, largemouth bass, black crappie and brown bullheads.
These species generally have less stringent environmental
requirements than do salmonids.
The most important biological aspect of the Ship Canal
is its use as a migration route for salmonids on their way to
spawning and rearing grounds in the Lake Washington drainage.
Over the 1966-1971 period, escapement of sockeye, coho and
25
-------
Environmental
chinook salmon averaged nearly 200,000 fish, a significant
portion of the salmon migration in eastern Puget Sound.
Estimated contribution of the Lake Washington drainage to
sport and commercial fisheries ranges from 110,000 to 500,000
salmon annually. The Department of Fisheries estimates that
by 1980 some 1,000,000 sockeye, 250,000 coho and 16,000
chinook will pass through the Chittenden Locks. A modern fish
ladder has recently been installed at the Locks to facilitate
migratory salmon as well as steelhead and searun cutthroat.
The University of Washington operates a research hatchery for
salmon and steelhead at Portage Bay- In addition to its
importance as a route for migrating adult fish, the Ship
Canal-Lake Union system is a critical area for juveniles
migrating from the Lake Washington system to Puget Sound.
Adequate water quality is essential if these juveniles are to
reach saltwater below the locks.
Puget Sound
The West Point outfall discharges an average of 75 to
90 mgd at a depth of 240 feet off West Point. The fate of the
effluent has been traced with dye as discussed in a previous
section of this document, and is subject to the effects of
tidal currents which break the plume into patches, some of
which are occasionally brought onto the beaches north and
south of West Point at a dilution twice that at the outfall
diffuser.
The waters off West Point support communities of marine
plants, invertebrates and fishes. The three most easily
identified intertidal and subtidal communities are shown in
Figures 2-6, 2-7, and 2-8. Sandy gravel tidelands are found
at Golden Gardens, and on the north side of West Point and at
Magnolia are muddy silt and sand communities. Rock and cobble
habitats are less common but occur near Meadow Point.
The intertidal. Surveys of intertidal macrofauna and
macroflora have been made every third year in spring since
1971. A significant difference in faunal diversity between
the north and south beaches is attributed to sediment and sub-
strate type, degree of wave action and physical factors. The
north beach, which had a greater diversity of organisms, also
had a greater variety of habitats. The sandy portion of north
beach, an unstable, uniform habitat, had the fewest species
of animals. The south beach, which is more uniform than the
north, has a compact sand and mud substrate inhabited pri-
marily by polychaete worms. In 1971 a hydrogen sulfide odor
was detected, associated with a groundwater seepage on the
26
-------
Environmental Setting
Rock and Cobbl« Tidelandi
High High Water
Purole Shore Crib
Broken-Back Shrimp
Common Fiih:
Rock Sole-
Cottids-Cabtzon
Pacific Salmon
Smalt
Cl.ngftsh
Stickleback
Pipe Fish
Sea
Urchm
Oungenesi /
Crab /
s Leather
White or Starfish
Orange
Sea Cucumber
Octopus
23
Figures 2-6 and 2-7
West Point aquatic communities
(McGreevy 1973)
Sandy Grave) Tideland
Rotting Tide Debrii
High High Water
Common Fish:
Pacific Salmon
Searun Trout
Shiner & Pile Perch
Sand Lances
Pipe Fish
Picklebdck
Gunnel
Poachers
Tidepool Sculpinj
Low Low Water
/
Red Rock or
Purple Shore Crab Horj^ Of
Butter Clami
Grey Shrimp
DungeneM Crab
27
-------
Environmental Setting
Muddy Silt & Sand Tideland
Rotting Tide Debru
High High Water
Sand Hoppers
Corrugated Worm
Common Fish:
Starry Flounder
Staghorn and Buffalo Sculpin
English 8r Sand Sole
Sea Perch
Longfin Smelt
Black Brant
Eel Grasi Isopods
Herring Eggs /
sion^Shrimn (^2> Low Low Water
Herring
Giant California
Sea Cucumber
Threespme
Stickleback
Figure 2-8
West Point aquatic communities
(McGreevy 1973)
28
-------
Environmental Setting
north beach. Septic tank seepage from Lawtonwood enters a
small creek which also empties onto the north beach. It has
also been suggested that the increase in species at the north
beach represents a natural re-population from the time of
raw sewage discharge in that area before 1965 (J. McDonnell,
1977).
The 1977 analysis of intertidal animals sampled in 1971,
1973 and 1975 indicated that the differences between the
north and south beach assemblages were due to substrate char-
acteristics, and that the study could show no measurable
effects of wastewater impact on the intertidal fauna. Impacts
may have occurred on more sensitive intertidal organisms,
such as algae and larval invertebrates or phytoplankton.
Stress effects from continued exposure to low levels of waste-
water (such as changes in behavior or reduced levels of repro-
duction) have not been examined.
There do appear to be differences in marine flora, how-
ever, reflected as minor modifications of community structure
at the beaches sampled. The various species of algae are
highly, yet differentially, sensitive to environmental
changes such as from sewage. Changes in growth and timing
and success of reproduction will favor certain species in the
intense competition with other species for space and light.
Such low-level, long-term and chronic effects are much more
difficult to assess, and may affect the intertidal as much in
the long run as a short-term major effect. It does appear
that flora at West Point are possibly being stressed to a
measurable degree, based on studies of more severe situations,
possibly by sewage (Thorn, et al., 1977), and for septic tank
seepage. There appear to be almost no CSO's to West Point's
south beach which is bordered by Discovery Park. Quantifica-
tion of the effect is not possible with present techniques.
Generally, an increase in both floral and faunal species
occurred over the four year period. "Although an increase in
species is generally associated with improved water conditions,
the presence of certain animals and algae which may be pollu-
tion-related (the green algae Ulva and Enteromorpha and the
worm Owenia) suggests that some intermediate level of pollu-
tion may still remain" (Staude et. al,., 1977). North of West
Point, this enrichment may be due to residuals from the old,
shallow North Trunk Sewer Outfall, the septic tank seepage
from Lawtonwood, and solids and effluent from the existing
outfall. More detailed information on intertidal biota at
West Point is included in Chapter II of the Regional Analysis.
Recreational shellfishing at West Point beaches is less
intensive than at Alki, probably as a result of more limited
access at West Point and Discovery Park policy which prohibits
29
-------
Environmental Setting
clam digging. Shellfish at West Point include hardshell clams,
geoducks and crabs. Apparently, mussels continue to be
occasionally taken on the north side of West Point where sep-
tic tank seepage and residuals from the North Trunk Outfall may
impact water quality- The Seattle-King County Health Depart-
ment has recommended that the mussels not be taken from this
site as cooking them long enough for safety makes them ined-
ible. Also, fecal coliform monitoring data for 1976 (Metro
Staff, 1976) show that none of the waters at West Point meet
state standards for commercial shellfish production. Heavy
metals are also somewhat higher in West Point intertidal organ-
isms than at a background station (Point No Point). United
States standards in fish and shellfish for mercury (500 ng Hg/g
wet weight), and the Canadian Standard for lead (2 mg Pb/g wet
weight) are met by West Point fish and clams. Levels of pesti-
cides and toxicants in these organisms are not well known.
Current disinfection practices at West Point not uncom-
monly result in high chlorine residuals in the effluent.
Total residual chlorine and the byproducts of disinfection,
chloramines, have been shown to be highly toxic to a range of
marine organisms at very low concentrations (Brungs, 1976).
Safe levels for West Point effluent residuals are not exceeded
on the average, but peaks occur not uncommonly that could re-
sult in high residuals in receiving waters (Stober et al.,
1977). At the same time, chlorine toxicity has not been
demonstrated in the field, so the actual effects of West
Point effluent are undetermined.
The effects of effluent and such residuals on biota at
the outfall have not been directly determined, but the biota
observed could represent more tolerant species. Chronic
effects on sensitive organisms may also occur, as salmon feed
inshore at certain life stages, and deep water fishes move in-
shore at night to feed. Miller (1976) has stated that "while
no direct cause and effect relationship can be demonstrated at
West Point, the evidence thus far suggests that the deep water
fish communities there may have been altered by the discharge
of wastewater from the Metro facility." Differences include
higher catch per haul, high abundance of ratfish, reduction
in diversity and evenness and the replacement of slender sole
by rex sole. Unlike slender sole, rex sole feed on benthic
infauna which may have increased due to alterations in envi-
ronment from the outfall, as suggested by studies of California
outfalls (SCCWRP, 1975; Smith, 1976).
Fish have been examined for the presence of diseases
which might be attributed to the wastewater effluent discharge
at West Point. In California, high incidences of tumorous sole
have been associated with sewage outfalls. The incidence of
skin tumors is higher in English sole at West Point than at
30
-------
Environmental Setting
other sites with the exception of the Duwamish. Increased
incidence of disease and parasitism may be a secondary effect
of fish congregating around the outfall, increasing contact
between them and with effluent. High incidences have also
been found elsewhere in Puget Sound, and other waters where
sewage pollution is not a problem, but fish may congregate in
these other areas as well for different reasons. Fin erosion,
thought to be induced by PCB's, was not evident at West Point.
This suggests that 1) West Point effluent is low in PCB's or
2) that solids containing PCB's are not accumulating in the
sediments. Effluent data apparently support the suggestion
that PCB's are low in West Point effluent.
Benthic studies have indicated that certain changes in
biota appear to be correlated with the characteristic posi-
tion of the West Point plume. Studies to determine the effect
of the West Point plume on phytoplankton productivity suggest
that the only significant longitudinal variation attributed
to the West Point outfall is a 15 to 20 percent increase in
the 1, 2, 3, 5 and 10-year extreme values at the stations
sampled a mile north and south of the outfall. Future nu-
trient loads to Puget Sound due to population growth could
increase this percentage with undetermined effects on the
biota of the Sound.
Sport fishing is a popular recreational activity in the
marine waters off the West Point service area. Various species
of salmon are highly prized. In 1974, nearly 70,000 salmon
were caught in the central basin between Richmond Beach and
Des Moines. This represented over 210,000 marine angler trips.
Many of these fish were caught in the waters of Elliott Bay,
the Duwamish Estuary and Shilshole Bay where salmon collect
before migrating up the Green/Duwamish River and Lake Washing-
ton systems. This fishery is a base for the sizable boating
and sport fishing industry which exists in the Metro area.
Although less valued than salmon, a wide variety of
bottom fishes are caught by sportfishermen off West Point.
These include rockfish, greenlings, flatfish, black cod,
lingcod and perch. Many of these are caught from fishing
piers along the Seattle waterfront. For more detailed dis-
cussion of the marine ecology of the Central Puget Sound
basin, refer to the Regional Analysis, Volume I of this series
or to the various Interim Study reports for the Municipality
of Metropolitan Seattle.
31
-------
Environmental Setting
NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENERGY
Natural resources and energy impacts are not analyzed
on a site-specific basis. Resources and energy consumption
occur on an interrelated basis at the five existing Metro
plants and potential new sites. Therefore, these considera-
tions and resource recycling are analyzed in the Regional
Environmental Impact Statement.
THE HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
Many facets of the human environment pertinent to the
West Point site are discussed and evaluated only in the
Regional EIS. This includes such categories as PSCOG Goals
and Policies and Transportation Patterns. Such topics can
only be analyzed on a regional basis by combining the four
main sites plus auxiliary sites (e.g. Ceder Hills and Pack
Forest sludge disposal site). This necessity to treat per-
tain topics on a regional basis stems from the interrelated-
ness of the plants and the trade-offs between alternatives.
Land Use
This description primarily concerns the Magnolia/ Inter-
bay, and Commodore Way areas, which are the most closely
associated with the West Point and Interbay sites. To a
minor degree, the West Point service area is also considered.
The West Point service area includes the Duwamish Valley
and Lake Union/Ship Canal areas and North Seattle, which are
principal industrial areas; and the central business district
of the City of Seattle.
With the exception of the Fort Lawton/Discovery Park
area, most of the Magnolia area is predominately residential.
The development pattern for the Magnolia/Interbay area is
shown as Figure 2-9- This neighborhood is white collar,
upper-middle income, stable and fairly well maintained.
No major changes are anticipated in the Magnolia area, other
than possible transfers of additional acreage to the City
of Seattle by the U.S. Army since the area is fully developed
with land uses and population relatively stable.
The Commodore Way area is an important business district
related to the seafood industry; large scale negative impacts
could result if this site is committed for a sewage treatment
32
-------
DEVELOPMENT
PATTERN
METRO FACILITY PLANNING FOR
-T WEST POINT
N TREATMENT PLANT
SCALE:
Environmental Setting
Figure 2-9
Development Pattern Magnolia/Interbay Area
33
-------
Environmental Setting
facility. Major industrial and commercial areas are adjacent
to Magnolia in the Interbay area and to the north between
Oilman Avenue West and the Ship Canal. Major industrial
and commercial areas are adjacent to Magnolia in the Interbay
area and to the north between Gilman Avenue West and the
Ship Canal. Major industrial facilities are in the area
including Piers 90 and 91, Burlington Northern's freight
yard, the Time Oil Distribution Center, Marine Design and
Construction Company (MARCO), and the Port of Seattle's
Fisherman's Terminal. Numerous commercial fishing services
are also located near Fisherman's Terminal.
The City of Seattle has a Shorelines Management Program
and is in charge of shorelines management as described in
the Washington Shorelines Management Act. Anyone wishing
to build a structure exceeding $1,000 in cost, or to alter
existing conditions within 200 feet of the shoreline area
must obtain a substantial development permit from the City
of Seattle. This permit would be required for use of the
Commodore Way site, and expansion of the West Point site -
both of which would be within 200 feet of shoreline areas.
The Seattle zoning for the Magnolia area is shown as
Figure 2-10. The West Point site and Discovery Park are
zoned single-family residence, medium-security zone (RS7200).
The area adjacent to West Point is conservancy natural.
Public utilities are allowed as a conditional use in this
zone when necessary.
Legal and Institutional
The legal and institutional elements considered include
shoreline management regulations, PL 92-500 and U.S. Army
Corps of Engineer permit regulations.
Tne City of Seattle Shorelines Management Program has
been previously described. These regulations would have
direct effect on activities within 200 feet of the existing
shoreline. While not necessarily prohibiting expansion
activities, the shorelines program could control certain
aspects of such expansion.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers would have to issue a
permit for any obstruction or alternation of a navigable
water, such as that possible at West Point. Various state and
federal agencies review any application for such a Corps per-
mit and permit actions must comply with NEPA and SEPA require-
ments. It is likely that shoreline fill or elimination of
the sludge lagoon at the West Point site would require a
Corps permit. While such a permit may be issued, the review
34
-------
PUGET SOUND
ZONING
SINGLE FAMILY RES.
DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL
EHIS MULTIPLE RES.
EM3 BUSINESS
GENERAL COMMERCIAL
I MANUFACTURING
METRO FACILITY PLANNING FOR
-------
Environmental Setting
and approval process may be lengthy, taking up to one year
for major projects. It should be determined if permits are
needed for alternate sites.
Agency and Neighborhood Goals
Agency goals are described in depth in the Regional
EIS. They include the following:
The Puget Sound Council of Governments has proposed
the Interim Regional Development Plan, which states:
"Goal
It is in the public interest to minimize
the costs of future growth by encouraging
new development within urbanized areas
where necessary investments in public
services have already been made."
In further expanding on this goal the following
policies are included in the proposed document.
"1. Existing public utilities, facilities
and services shall be used to their
fullest prior to expansion.
3. Encourage conservation efforts and the
maximum utilization of utilities and
services before increasing supply -
5. The pattern of development which produces
the least cost in new public utilities,
facilities and services shall be encouraged
within feasible limits.
7. Plans for public services shall be consis-
tent with regional growth policies and
local comprehensive plans and shall be
based upon: 1) Criteria for population
and employment distribution; 2) Policies
designed to limit demand, 3) Responsible
fiscal management."
Another goal of the PSCOG document related to natural
environment and amenities is the following.
36
-------
Environmental Setting
111. The natural beauty and liveability of this
region shall be a primary consideration in
the location, timing and quantity of growth.
a. Natural amenities identified as
important to the regions' character
and beauty shall be preserved or
sensitively developed as a second
choice.
b. Patterns of development which
minimize adverse impacts on these
amenities shall be encouraged.
17. Permanent structures designed for human
habitation, commerce, employment or public
assembly should not be located within high
risk zones, including 100 yr floodways,
earthquake zones, or active land slide zones.
25. Achievement or maintenance of water quality
standards as established by law is recog-
nized and supported."
City of Seattle
As part of its general review authority, the City of
Seattle would review the construction of a sewage treatment
plant, rehabilitation of sewer lines or extension of sewage
facilities through its Building Department. Two permits
are required from the Seattle Building Department for the
construction of facilities, including one which examines
general design and construction and a second concerning
filling and grading activities.
King County
In 1964 King County adopted a Comprehensive Plan.
Certain provisions of this plan relate to the Metro Facili-
ties Plan and are included as follows:
"Utilities Development Policies
Trunk utility lines should be installed in
advance or at the time of development in
accordance with the general plan for the
area. Local or service utility lines should
be installed as needed.
Where pollution^conditions now exist, all
possible steps should be taken to correct
such conditions."
37
-------
Environmental Setting
Goals for Seattle, a report prepared by the Citizens
of Seattle and adopted by the Mayor and the City Council:
"D. Goal: Water
The City should undertake all means reasonable and
feasible to insure water purity to meet health stan-
dards and protect the environment.
1. Undertake efforts to meet Federal Water Pollution
Control Act requirements by 1984.
a. It is the national goal that the discharge of
pollutants into the navigable waters be eliminated
by 1985.
b. It is the national goal that wherever attainable,
an interim goal of water quality which provides for
the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish,
and wildlife and provides for recreation in and on
the v/ater be achieved by July 1, 1983.
6. Insure clean water to protect wildlife, vegetation
and recreation areas."
Neighborhood goals for the Magnolia area have been best
described by the "Magnolia Community Club" which drafted a
paper entitled, "General Goals and Criteria." This has been
adopted by the Club Trustees and is summarized as follows
(Metro Engrs., 1977).
Landscaping should include green belts and
shielding. Avoid the "factory appearance."
No blockage of views. Do not deny access to
shoreline nor public enjoyment of it. Shoreline
alterations should be cautiously undertaken
and restored to original contours if feasible.
Consider undergrounding facilities. Consider
effects of leachate and runoff during construc-
tion. Examine wastewater reuse potential.
Effluent outfalls in saltwater are preferred
to those in fresh water. Odor control should
preclude external odor protection. Monitor
odors tightly. No air pollution increase.
Preferred locations would avoid odor and visual
impacts on substantial populations. Consider
reuse of sludge, centrate and effluent. Avoid
waste gas burners. Use methane. Consider
facilities impacts on wildlife and aquatic
populations. Consider effluent temperature
38
-------
Environmental Setting
impacts. Avoid displacement of commercial
activity. Plan with Discovery Park in mind.
Consider Interbay as a recreational area.
Remember site character of Interbay. Sludge
lagoon is undesirable. Avoid hazardous chemi-
cal use and assure safety. Protect sites from
vandalism or sabotage. Consider transportation
access. Keep topographic features of sites in
mind. Avoid adverse impacts on employment when
selecting a site. Minimize adverse construc-
tion impacts. Maintain close contact with the
community during design and construction. No
residential community should have to be affected
by two major wastewater facilities. Avoid dis-
ruption of neighborhood stability. Relative
cost-effectiveness of alternatives should be
important consideration. Long range and in-
direct costs should be considered. Relocation
of businesses should consider the possible water-
oriented nature of those businesses. Land use
goals established by the relevant governmental
institution should be considered. Availability
of sludge transportation modes should be con-
sidered. Site selection and facility design
should consider aesthetic impact on the sur-
rounding environment. Ambient noise levels
during construction and operation should, if
feasible, not increase. Waste gas burners
should not interfere with night time views of
residents. A facility constructed to improve
water quality should not be permitted to
pollute the air.
Much consideration must be given to the Commodore Way
site, which is currently an important business district
related to the seafood industry. Many of the businesses
in this area depend on each other for trade; their location
is a primary asset. This district has 60 industries. If
the Commodore Way site was condemned for a sewage treatment
facility, 700-800 jobs would be displaced, (personal communi-
cations with Samuel J. Green of Salmon Bay Improvement Assoc-
iation) .
The cost of purchasing the land in this site has been
estimated at $19.4 million (HRPI).
It has been estimated that the businesses which would be
displaced and/or relocated by a Commodore Way sewage treat-
ment plant will contribute 0.8 percent of the City's budget
and operations revenues, and 0.127 percent of Seattle's
property taxes through the year 2005. This would have a
present worth of $1,160,000 budget and operations revenue
and $1,840,000 property taxes through 2005 (HRPI).
39
-------
Environmental Setting
Fisherman's Terminal, which has approximately 400-500
fishing vessels, is contiguous with the considered Commodore
Way site. This is one of the largest fishing fleets in the
United States' Pacific Coast. Many of the businesses in the
Commodore Way area service these fishermen.
A petition signed by 1200 employers and employees
represented by the directly-affected area above, states in-
tense objection to the location of a sewage treatment facil-
ity at the Commodore Way site. The Salmon Bay Improvement
Association has been organized to oppose the use of Commodore
Way for a sewage treatment facility. Their view is summarized
as follows:
"There is intense concern and objec tions on the part of
the affected industrial community as reflected in peti-
tions and letters. Some 1,200 signatures of employers
and employees represent only the directly affected area.
At this writing, the Association has refrained from
introducing the petition to surrounding areas, such as
Magnolia, Queen Anne, Interbay and Ballard. Neverthe-
less, it is our opinion that a very substantial majority
of citizens in these communities would be irrevocably
opposed to the utilization of the 57 acres of West
Commodore Way for a sewage treatment facility.
The proposed sewage plant would virtually destroy a
highly developed business area with resulting increase
in unemployment.
The service and supply base for the Washington and Alaska
fishing fleets would be seriously diminished.
The cost of condemnation, removal and relocation, together
with very substantial tax revenue loss would place the
unjustified burden on all King County taxpayers.
The present development is highly compatible with the
marine environment, the developing waterfront parks
and the growing tourist movement through the area.
The cost of an odor-free, error-free facility must be
weighed and considered against the cost of a plant
located where natural factors would take care of safety
and environmental problems."
Many businesses have written letters of disapproval of
this location and prefer expansion of the West Point site,
with comments like the following:
40
-------
Environmental Setting
1. "To replace the existing plant, including the re-
location of our business and other businesses, would
be the largest waste of taxpayers' money this area
has ever seen.
The bureaucrats do not use any normal sense of logic
to keep their empires alive. They are disregarding
all cost to disrupt an irreplaceable community."
(Pride & Suther,-Inc.)
2. "The many industrial and business firms and their
several hundred employees uprooted by such an ill-
conceived plan would suffer irreparable financial
hardship. In all likelihood many of the businesses
would choose to go out of business rather than go
through the rigors of relocating. Many of the
workers would find it necessary to move their famil-
ies to stay with a relocating business and others
would necessarily seek other employment—possibly
in another neighborhood or city or even another state,
The costs to the taxpayers and the subsequent loss
of taxpaying property to proceed with condemnation
makes little economic sense when considering the
obvious route of expanding the West Point facilities.
Realizing there are a few very vocal groups objecting
to such an expansion as being damaging to Discovery
Park, I think we taxpayers must draw a line as to
what extent we will spend public money for the pre-
servation of esthetics! An economic and esthetic
balance must be struck and I say we do it here by
sharing the park." (Associated Engineers & Contrac-
tors)
3. "Our company serves both the commercial and pleasure
boat market in the marine field. Approximately five
years ago after exhaustive research we chose this
particular location to serve as a base of our oper-
ations. Our study showed the Commodore Way area
to be unique to our needs in that it enables us to
serve both the commercial and pleasure boat customer,
as well as industrial accounts from one location
that serves as a warehouse, sales and office facility,
The needs of our clientele require an almost imme-
diate proximity to them by a company such as ours.
We feel that the growth and expansion enjoyed by
this Company is proof that our decision was correct."
(Marland Enterprises Corp)
41
-------
Environmental Setting
4. "The damage to the Salmon Bay Terminal may be irre-
parable inasmuch as the commercial fishing industry
has for years been looking to the Interbay business
community for important services and supplies.
Several of the most important basic fishing equipment
supply firms are located in Interbay and in the event
that the Metro plan is adopted, these service and
supply firms would have to relocate, possibly outside
King County. The expense and risk of relocating all
of these firms would be enormous and permanent damage
to the Salmon Bay Terminal port facilities could be
the end result." (Anon Plarex Inc)
5. "This area has important suppliers to the fishing
industry and the fishing vessels. These suppliers
include: refrigeration companies, shipyards, marine
supply companies, instrument companies, fish proces-
sors, oil companies, repair shops and moorages.
Without the suppliers, many vessels would be forced
to leave Seattle.
Many of the offices of fish processors with plants
in Washington and Alaska are located in the Commodore
Way area. They are so located because of the proxi-
mity to their vessels at Fisherman's Terminal and the
availability of supplies and shipyards.
There is no other suitable location in Seattle for
companies mentioned above which would allow them to
properly service the fishing vessels." (Seattle
Marine & Fishing Supply Co)
6. "Whitney-Fidalgo Seafoods, located on the water side
of Commodore Way, directly opposite the proposed
sewer plant, is handling millions of pounds of fresh
and frozen salmon over our docks, in the ship canal,
and by truck. We have a four million pounds cold
storage, 100,000 pounds of sharp freezing and employ
50 people year round for this operation only.
We can hardly believe it possible that any individual
or group of individuals would have the temerity to
even suggest the use of Commodore Way site."
(Whitney-Fidalgo Seafoods)
Citizen opinion surveys were conducted by HRPI and
Gerhardt Research in the Magnolia region.
42
-------
Environmental Setting
When 377 randomly chosen citizens were asked, in a Ger-
hardt survey of adjacent areas, what environmental concerns
needed most attention, most responded that they could think
of none. Those who did have an environmental concern men-
tioned such things as park upkeep, heavy traffic on streets,
noise, or litter. Although a few mentioned water quality,
none directly pointed out any of the wastewater treatment
facilities as a most serious environmental problem.
Although most of the 377 persons interviewed knew of the
treatment facilities (about 89%), they concerned few (10%).
When asked if they would favor upgrading sewage treatment
facilities as required by the law, the majority said "yes"
(60%) . Most who opposed were concerned about cost, necess-
ity, or location of the facility. The highest number (42%)
felt that "cleaning up the environment" was the most impor-
tant compared to such local issues as the appearance of
Discovery Park (15%) or hiding of facility (6%). The general
concensus towards upgrading or expansion of the facilities
was cautious acceptance. One man saw it as a "necessary evil"
HRPI (Metro's socioeconomic consultant for the EIS) and
Metro's community involvement staff conducted informal meet-
ings which were attended by citizens of the Magnolia area
explicitly concerned about the water treatment facility. In
general, this group felt more strongly than those randomly
interviewed by Gerhardt Research, that West Point is not
well located. They felt that wastewater facilities should
not be adjacent to prime park land, but rather in industrial
regions. All groups were willing to put up with the facili-
ties, and felt that monetary constraints hindered relocation.
The question of expansion was debated both ways - people
seemed to either strongly favor it or strongly oppose it.
There was sentiment that if expansion occurred on the West
Point site, this facility's placement would be more per-
manent, and there would be less chance of later phasing out
the use of this prominent point in the future. At West
Point, residents also complained that the fence north of the
treatment facility was too close to the beach, so at high
tide people could not use this beach. There was also oppo-
sition to the sludge lagoon at West Point.
Most were unaffected by the sludge trucks, but some were
opposed to their noise on residential streets.
Most groups interviewed were supportive of "Metro's
effort to make treatment of waste overflow at 200 places in
the interceptor lines at least as high a priority as the
federal and state requirement of secondary treatment".
Those representing the West Point area said, "Seattle resi-
43
-------
Environmental Setting
dents would probably be willing to pay for 'some1 extra on
their sewer bill to alleviate this problem" (HRPI, 1976;
Clear Water Watch, 1976).
Economics and Costs
A major economic consideration relates to the possible
development of the Interbay (Commodore Way) site. This site
is an option but not the site evaluated for costs and other
feasibility, in Alternative G. This site currently is devel-
oped by 60 industries, many of which depend on their place-
ment at the Commodore Way site to establish their clientele
with close-by seafood-related businesses. If the Commodore
Way site was condemned for a sewage treatment facility,
700-800 jobs would be displaced. Many of these businesses
may not be able to relocate. The cost of purchasing the land
in this site has been estimated at $19.4 million (HRPI, 1976)
More details on the Commodore Way site are mentioned in the
Regional document under Alternative G, which considers this
site and in the West Point EIS (this document) under Environ-
mental Setting and Alternative G.
A description of how costs are determined is developed
in the Regional EIS. In summary, costs, whether existing
or proposed, include three components: capital cost, opera-
ting and maintenance costs, and total annual costs.
The capital costs include the initial expenditures for
construction of wastewater treatment plants, sewage collection
systems, effluent disposal methods, combined sewer overflow
facilities, sludge handling and disposal techniques, plus
the purchase of land and miscellaneous treatment-related
equipment. These capital costs typically are major expenses
that are made infrequently and that can be phased to suit
planning requirements. Because capital or construction costs
can require large sums of money at one time, they are often
financed by bonds or other types of loans that are paid back,
with interest, over a period of several years. The yearly
payment on the original capital cost debt is referred to as
the annual cost of capital or amortized cost.
Operation and maintenance costs include expenses such
as wages for labor, purchase of chemicals and power, and re-
placement or repair of equipment. These costs occur continu-
ally or at frequent intervals during the life of the project.
The total annual cost of wastewater facilities is the
sum of the annual payment on amortized capital and the annual
operation and maintenance costs. The payment of total annual
44
-------
Environmental Setting
costs can be achieved by various means, including charges
to persons who use the services.
Since user charges are determined regionally, they are
discussed in the Regional EIS.
Social, Recreational and Cultural
Discovery Park, located above the West Point wastewater
treatment facility, was acquired in 1972 from the Fort Lawton
Military Reservation for development as a major urban open
space park. The primary purpose of Discovery Park, as en-
visioned in the Master Plan for its development, is to pro-
vide an open space of quiet and tranquility for the citizens
of Seattle. Currently comprising close to four hundred (400)
acres it is anticipated that the City will acquire additional
Fort Lawton property by early 1977 bringing the total site
acreage of Discovery Park to about five hundred (500) acres.
It is anticipated that all of the remaining Federal properties
within the larger Discovery Park area will be acquired for
park development by 1985.
The primary character of the Discovery Park site is that
of an urban open space park with meadowlands, forested areas,
thickets, and two (2) miles of beach front, all with magnifi-
cent vistas of the Puget Sound basin and the Olympics beyond.
Within the Discovery Park site it is proposed that at least
two (2) high intensity use areas will be developed as com-
patible features of the overall park plan. One of these
areas is the United Indians of All Tribes Cultural Center
located on a twenty (20) acre site in the northwest section
of the park. The other high intensity use area is the Fort
Lawton/Discovery Park Historic District occupying roughly
thirty-five (35) acres. Proposed development of Discovery
Park is shown in Figure 2-11 .
If the Commodore Way site were selected for a sewage
treatment plant, a distinct seafood-related business commun-
ity would be greatly disrupted.
1. "Commodore Way and Salmon Bay Terminals together
form a unique community composed of moorage and
business support facilities for the fishing industry,
facilities which are irreplaceable as far as alter-
native locations in Seattle are concerned. It is
clear that removal of this large industrial tax
community, just to be replaced elsewhere, is a
totally irresponsible scheme." (Vita Food Products,
Inc)
45
-------
LONG RANGE PLAN
MASTER PLAN REVISED
SCALE IN FEET
DAN KILEY& PARTNERS
•ITE AND LANDSCAPE COMULTAHTS
CMAMLOTTE, VERMONT
-------
Environmental Setting
2. "We are indeed proud of the fact that in late 1941
our company established a terminal facility in the
Commodore Way area, and that over the years we have
had a part in bringing new industry into this area
and thus assisting in developing a viable and healthy
business environment. We are now concerned with the
possibility that the Commodore Way-Interbay area
may be chosen as a site for a proposed sewer treat-
ment plant; in such event, our company would find
it extremely difficult to relocate our plant facili-
ties elsewhere" (Time Oil).
Archeological and Historical
"The West Point Treatment Plant site is currently occu-
pied by several existing Metro plant structures and, as such,
the area has already witnessed considerable surficial distur-
bance. Development in those portions of this site which
presently contain treatment facilities would not result in
any further adverse impacts to archaeological remains. It
would appear, however, that the North Beach portion of the
site has not been the focus of any extensive past develop-
ment. This coupled with the area's favorable environmental
circumstance for aboriginal exploitation leads us to the
following recommendation. Should any future development or
disturbance be anticipated in the North Beach area, we
would strongly suggest that the area be first examined by an
archaeologist to ensure that no archaeological resources
would be affected.
The Commodore Way alternative site is located within
an intensive band of development. Because of the nature
of current and past land use, it is highly unlikely that
any as yet unknown significant archeological remains would
still be intact. We therefore have to conclude that any
proposed development of this site would not result in adverse
archeological impacts.
The Garbage Dump Alternative Site is presently occupied
by the Interbay Golf Park. Several other structures are
situated in the southern part of the site. Importantly, most
of the area is built up from garbage land fill some 30 feet
above the adjacent grade. Again, because of past and present
land use in this immediate vicinity, we would anticipate no
adverse impacts to any significant archaeological sites."
(Jerry Jarmann, Director, Office of Public Archaeology,
University of Washington, 1976).
Recognized historical or cultural sites include the West
Point lighthouse, Fort Lawton, and the Hiram M. Chittenden
Locks. None of these should be affected by any of the alter-
natives. In addition, the North Beach portion of the site
47
-------
Environmental Setting
was filled when West Point was constructed (Metro ; 1977), so
no further adverse Impacts on archeological resources would
occur, contrary to the description above.
Health and Safety
Health and safety consideration relative to the Metro
Facility Plan include:
• Occupational safety
• Public health and safety related to the various
treatment facilities
• Existing health effects of combined sewer
overflows
• Sludge Handling
• Various construction areas such as the storage
and transport of explosive or caustic chemicals
The West Point occupational safety record is good
compared to national rates for sewage system workers and is
generally in compliance with all applicable regulations.
The public health and water quality implications of
sludge handling are described in the sludge management and
groundwater portions of the Regional EIS.
There may have occasionally been health risks from
eating the shellfish collected along the shoreline close to
the West Point outfall, which is described in the biological
section of this EIS.
Aesthetics and Nuisance
The West Point wastewater treatment facility has been
well designed for consideration of aesthetics. It lies low,
is clean, and is surrounded by grass; few odor complaints have
been filed. Visibility of the West Point facility from
Discovery Park is blocked by bluffs.
Installation of a facility at the Golf Park site
would be a nuisance. In excavation of the garbage which
accumulated for 20 years, it is feared that odorous sulfur
dioxide and methane gas would be released, and that when in
48
-------
Environmental Setting
operation, the facility would still release odors. The plant
would set in a valley which all local residents would look
down upon. A facility at Commodore Way would probably exert
similar nuisances after installation.
Installation of a facility at the Commodore Way site
would be a nuisance, as expressed by businessmen in the
adjacent areas.
1. "We have visitors by the hundreds—buyers of fish,
fishermen, businessmen, tourists, and friends look-
ing over this facility. If they should ask what's
across the street from our operation and we would
reply "a sewer plant", does anyone feel this would
be an asset for handling food products? The federal
government would probably prohibit the use of these
facilities for preparation of fish for human con-
sumption if the sewer was here." (Whitney-Fidalgo
Seafoods, Inc.)
2. "We have approximately 140 boats, and offer haul-out
facilities to commercial and pleasure boats. Our
moorage tenants express amazement and disbelief when
told of a possible sewage treatment plant next door
and are reluctant to remain, if they and their guests
must board their boats in the vicinity of a sewage
plant and the associated stigmas. Still more seri-
ous, a portion of our property is undeveloped and
RM zoned. A treatment plant on Commodore Way would
have a very negative impact upon the value of this
property." (Lockhaven Marina, Inc.)
Construction activities at West Point of any sort would
be expected to exert some degree of impact on the aesthetics,
and considerations are dealt with in great detail in the
Facility Plan (Metropolitan Engineers, 1977) and in the ap-
pendix to Task Report D-3 (Metropolitan Engineers, 1976).
Construction at the other two sites, likewise, would
be aesthetically displeasing. At Commodore Way, this ef-
fect would not stand out as much because of the existent
industrial character of the surrounding region.
49
-------
50
-------
CHAPTER III
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPACTS
In this chapter, the alternatives and their impacts are
discussed in detail. The impacts of each alternative, both
primary and secondary, on the physical, biological and human
environments are discussed after a brief description of the
alternative. Other issues related to each alternative such
as mitigating measures and unavoidable adverse impacts are
also discussed. A general statement of the Facility Plan
objectives and the major issues involved, description of the
methodologies in selection of alternatives/ and flow and
waste reduction measures are also discussed briefly below.
GENERAL
In order to assist in the selection of an environment-
ally sound and cost effective wastewater management alter-
native for Metro's Service Area and to encourage public in-
volvement in the selection process, the alternatives devel-
oped In the Draft Facility Plan (Metropolitan Engineers,
1977) are described briefly in this chapter and evaluated
in terms of environmental impacts and relation to the plan-
ning objectives of the study area. These objectives as
identified in the facilities plan include: (1) provision
of capacity to serve the wastewater needs of the area
through 2005; (2) protection and/or enhancement of receiv-
ing water quality; (3) adherence to the goals and/or legal
requirements of PL 92-500; (4) control of combined sewer
overflows and; (5) development of effluent and sludge reuse.
The environmental impacts of the alternatives discussed
in this chapter cover all of the elements of the environment
discussed in Chapter II. However, emphasis will be on the
following issues as related to West Point:
(1) The effects of alternative treatment processes (primary,
enhanced primary, and secondary) and combined sewer
overflow controls on water quality, aquatic ecosystems,
51
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
and public health;
(2) Social, economic, and public health effects of sludge
handling and disposal methods;
(3) The aesthetic, social and legal compatibility of the
alternatives with neighboring activities, land uses,
community goals, comprehensive plans, and special codes;
(4) The identification of any groups which might bear an
undue portion of the costs in relation to the benefits
they receive;
(5) The social and aesthetic benefits versus the economic
cost of moving the West Point facilities to Interbay.
(6) The effects of allowing greater public access along the
shoreline by moving the fence back along the north shore.
In addition to the discussion of the primary and second-
ary impacts of the alternatives, other issues pertaining to
each alternative such as unavoidable adverse impacts, meas-
ures that can be employed to mitigate the adverse impacts,
and irreversible and irretrievable commitment of resources
will be discussed for each alternative and compared to the
other alternatives.
DEVELOPMENT OF ALTERNATIVES
All the major issues addressed in the discussion of the
regional alternatives are pertinent in the selection of op-
tions available to the West Point treatment plant. Since
West Point is the largest Metro facility and functions as a
regional treatment center, regional issues include treatment
processes, combined sewer overflow control, and sludge handl-
ing and disposal. On the local level, access, noise, traffic,
visibility, odors, and the availability of land for expansion
dictated by the secondary treatment requirements are all sen-
sitive issues. Although the West Point plant was originally
located in an area buffered from residential uses by a mili-
tary base, the conversion of the base to park land and the
recently imposed restrictions on shoreline fill have restrict-
ed the available avenues for expansion.
The variation in service area tributary to West Point
treatment plant is a consideration which affects the size
of the plant, the site area required, and the frequency and
volume of combined sewer overflows. The North Lake Washing-
52
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
ton area, which is projected to develop by the year 2005, was
originally planned to discharge into the West Point collection
system under the comprehensive plan. Deleting it, partially
or totally, from the West Point service area would reduce
the requirement for future expansion for secondary treatment
at West Point and would reduce the combined sewer overflow.
Other options for reduction of the West Point service area
include the provision of a new treatment plant in the Duwam-
ish area. Enlargement of the West Point service area would
mainly result from the abandonment of Carkeek Park or Alki
and the transfer of these flows to West Point. Except for
the addition of some interceptors required due, to the dele-
tion or addition of certain service areas, the present col-
lection system pattern would be maintained.
Because of the constraints involved in expansion at
West Point, various alternative sites were identified for
phasing out the plant by the year 2005. The abandonment
of the West Point treatment plant in the near future was
considered not feasible and impractical for financial and
engineering reasons. The alternative sites for relocating
the plant were selected in the Interbay area. The selection
of the Interbay sites was made based, primarily, on access
to the existing North trunk sewer line and also on potential
availability and existing land uses. The number of sites in
Interbay was reduced to two: Commodore Way and Golf Park/
Garbage Dump. Both Interbay sites are subject to odor,
visibility, and traffic constraints, with the garbage dump
site being situated between two residential hillsides. Poor
air circulation in the Interbay Valley may make odors a prom-
inent concern. Construction at Commodore Way could involve
expensive condemnation proceedings and would remove a portion
of the community tax base.
The question of relocating West Point involves several
tradeoffs since not all objectives can be met with a single
alternative. For example, relocating (or at least not ex-
panding facilities) at West Point could allow greater recre-
ation use and better aesthetics at Discovery Park and the
beaches at West Point. At the same time, the construction
and operation of a new plant in Interbay would affect resi-
dents' land uses, odors, the tax base and other factors there.
The economic feasibility or advisability of relocating the
West Point treatment functions must also be considered. An
economic analysis of moving the West Point treatment plant
concluded that relocation is not justified because costs
(for destroying West Point, acquiring new land and construct-
ing comparable primary treatment facilities) would exceed
the benefits (to recreation), even with assumptions designed
to compare minimum possible costs with maximum possible bene-
fits (HRPI, 1976). If costs of providing transfer piping
53
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
to accommodate the plant siting change were added, the re'-
sults would be even less favorable for relocation.
Although the assumptions of the HRPI study have been
questioned, a conclusion that costs of constructing an en-
tire new facility at Interbay would be more than adding
secondary treatment to West Point seems reasonable.
Sludge handling options at West Point are the result of
a regional system approach. The options include the continu-
ation of the present practice whereby sludge from the other
Metro plants, except Alki, is processed at West Point, full
separation of sludge handling, or provision of a central
sludge handling facility at a location other than West Point.
Other issues to be considered are sludge transport methods,
ultimate disposal and potential reuse. The present sludge
management system was adopted in the Facility Plan as an
interim solution until further investigation is made regard-
ing the options cited above.
In selecting the treatment process options »three differ-
ent treatment objectives were considered: (1) maintaining
the existing level of primary treatment; (2) improving solids
removal by enhanced primary treatment; and (3) upgrading
treatment to the legally required secondary treatment
standards.
Interim studies indicated that there is a potential for
onshore current during the summer months which could bring
diluted effluent on or near shore. Since existing primary
treatment produces somewhat reduced solids removal perform-
ance during the summer months, it was determined that a pro-
gram focused on summertime solids removal with associated
removal of floatable, metals, viruses, and others could be
useful. Thus an enhanced primary treatment mode was devised
including optimization of existing treatment systems in the
wet season by pretreating supernatant (recycle streams) and
full physical/chemical alum treatment during summer months.
The selection of alum, rather than lime, was based on re-
sults from pilot plant studies in which lime was found to
be more expensive and less effective than alum.
For achieving secondary treatment standards, several
different processes were considered. These were physical-
chemical, tower trickling filters, rotating biological con-
tactors, activated bio-filters and air or oxygen activated
sludge. Single stage physical-chemical treatment did not
achieve required BOD removals. The only one which reliably
meets the combination requirement of 85 percent removal in
dry weather and 30 mg/1 for biochemical oxygen demand (BOD)
54
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
and suspended solids (SS) in wet weather without excessive
costs or the addition of an expensive second step in the pro-
cess is activated sludge. Second best for reliability and
cost are tower trickling filters followed by granular fil-
tration. Because tower trickling filters consume less land
area than activated sludge, they remain a sub-option under
some alternatives at West Point. However, a serious relia-
bility problem is associated with trickling filters.
In addition to the alternatives addressing the regional
and site issues, a no action alternative has been considered
as required by the Washington State Environmental Policy Act.
As a more realistic or modified no action alternative, the
continuation of the 1958 Metro Comprehensive Plan was con-
sidered as an alternative, allowing the comparison of pres-
ent policies and their impacts against the required action.
Although cost is an important constraint in evaluating
these alternatives, it is a regional, rather than a local,
issue. Due to the Metro uniform wastewater pricing policy,
the cost allocated to West Point residents does not reflect
the cost of West Point facilities alone, but is West Point's
share of the total cost of the regional wastewater manage-
ment system. Still, cost is more of concern here than else-
where because the West Point treatment plant is the largest
and most expensive component of the regional system. The
investment sunk in existing facilities, both treatment plant
and collection system, and the need to select alternatives
eligible for federal and state funding are important con-
siderations.
Flow and Waste Reduction Measures
Prior to the development of wastewater management alter-
natives and sizing of various transport and treatment systems
for projected future loading requirements, measures for po-
tential flow and waste reduction were investigated in the
facilities plan. Such measures, if found acceptable and
economical, could decrease system operations and maintenance
costs, extend the useful life of wastewater collection and
treatment facilities, and reduce the size and therefore the
costs of future facilities. Flow and waste reduction meas-
ures include the following major items: (1) domestic water
conservation techniques; (2) collection system rehabilitation
to reduce infiltration and inflow; and (3) industrial pre-
treatment of wastewater. Industrial waste reduction, in
both volume and strength, can also reduce loads on present
and future facilities and prevent the introduction of toxic
or undesirable pollutants into the wastewater stream where
55
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
they may disrupt treatment processes or contaminate either
the discharged effluent or the waste residuals.
Domestic Water Conservation
As discussed in the Regional Report, Volume I, the re-
duction in wastewater flows through adoption of domestic
water conservation and reuse measures, is insignificant in
a combined service system such as West Point with high rate
of infiltration/inflow. At West Point a 25 percent decrease
in domestic water use would only change the peak flow, on
which secondary clarifiers would be sized, by 3 percent. The
change would not affect design of the secondary aeration
tanks, since these are sized on peak solids loads, which
would not be affected by water conservation.
Infiltration and Inflow
Infiltration and inflow (I/I), which include seepage
into collection systems and storm drain flow, can add con-
siderably to the volume of the wastewater in a sewerage sys-
tem and hence increase the cost of wastewater transportation
and treatment. PL 92-500 (Title II, Section 201(g) (3)
(4)) requires applicants for treatment works grants to demon-
strate that sewer systems tributary to those treatment works
are not subject to excessive infiltration/inflow. Excessive
I/I is defined as the quantity of infiltration/inflow which
can be economically eliminated from a sewer system by rehab-
ilitation aS determined by economic analysis that compares
the costs for correcting the infiltration/inflow conditions
with the total costs for transportation and treatment of
the infiltration/inflow.
In compliance with the federal act, a detailed infiltra-
tion analysis (Metropolitan Engineers, 1977) was conducted
on sewerage systems tributary to the Metro West Point waste-
water treatment plant. The results showed that the system
infiltration varied from 25 mgd during the summer season to
a maximum of 90 mgd during the peak of the rainy season.
In comparison, the domestic and industrial/commercial waste-
water average daily flows are estimated at 34 and 22 mgd,
respectively. Thus, during dry weather in Seattle, infil-
tration .to the West Point plant constitutes 30 to 45 percent
of the minimum dry weather flow of 70 to 90 mgd; in wet
weather, infiltration/inflow contributes 55 to 85 percent
of the total peak 350 mgd flow. Inflow analysis was also
56
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
conducted consistent with EPA Program Guidance Memorandum 61
for those areas tributary to West Point and served by separate
sanitary sewers.
Although the infiltration to the overall collection sys-
tem is appreciable, it was concluded that it was not excess-
ive, that is, rehabilitation costs are higher than transport-
ation costs for modifying the collection system. The infil-
tration in Lake Forest Park collection system was found ex-
cessive, however, and infiltration can be reduced by 0.6 mgd
on a yearly average.
Inflow into the separate sewer systems was evaluated
under a separate study which determined the cost-effective-
ness of inflow control measures. Since roof drains connect-
ed to the sanitary sewers are a major source of inflow, the
City of Seattle and other agencies in the West Point service
area adopted building codes which prohibit new construction
from connecting roof drains to the collection system. Approxi-
mately 30 to 70 percent of the "roof drains" inflow is street
drainage, so not all inflow could be eliminated by roof drain
controls. Other measures that can be adopted to reduce future
I/I would be the provision of efficient storm water collection
facilities and sealed storm water transfer lines and ditches,
which will reduce the possibility of these waters entering
the sanitary sewer system. Points at which storm sewers and
surface drainage ditches cross sanitary sewers have been sources
of infiltration/inflow. Local ponding, in addition to being
a potential inflow source, causes upper groundwater tables
to become a potential infiltration source. Elimination of
these sources of I/I would reduce the flow reaching the
treatment facility, but not of the magnitude needed to pre-
vent combined sewer overflows.
Pretreatment
Treatment to remove or reduce pollutants at their source
before they enter the common sewerage system is known as pre-
treatment. It can reduce mass pollutant loadings on facili-
ties, and prevent the introduction of pollutants which might
disrupt the treatment process and contaminate the discharged
effluent or the waste residuals. Pretreatment efforts gen-
erally focus on industrial or commercial contributors.
Pretreatment requirements of industrial wastewater are
governed by federal, state, and local regulations and laws.
Industries discharging to Metro's collection systems or
directly to a body of water must comply with requirements
of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
57
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
permit which sets limitations on the concentration and amount
of pollutants discharged. Detailed information on the NPDES
permit and other regulations can be found in Chapter III of
the Regional EIS, Volume I, and the Facility Plan documents.
Most of the industrial waste generated in the Seattle
area is discharged to the West Point collection system. The
industries are diversified and include food processing, chemi-
cal production, and metal plating, among others. To assess
the contribution of industries to the pollutant loads and the
potential benefit of pretreatment, a rough metal calculation
was made of metal sources to the West Point treatment plant
influent from industrial sources, the water supply system
and urban runoff (Metropolitan Engineers, 1976). It was con-
cluded that except for lead, industries are the major sources
of heavy metals in wastewater in the West Point service area,
which is shown in Table 3-1. Although definitive requirements
by the EPA for pretreatment have not been finalized, the
merits of pretreatment for specific industries discharging
into Metro sewer system could be justified at West Point.
Metro presently has an industrial user charge system and
regulations for industries discharging to its system. More
stringent pretreatment requirements, however, alone or in
combination with secondary treatment would reduce the heavy
metal loads to Puget Sound. Sludge quality also would
improve by pretreatment and the potential for its re-use
could be enhanced.
Beneficial Use of Reclaimed Water
Title II, Section 201 (g)(1)B of PL 92-500 states that
applicants for treatment plant construction grants should
satisfactorily demonstrate that "the works proposed for
grant assistance will take into account and allow to the
extent practicable the application of technology at a later
date which will provide for the reclaiming or recycling of
water or otherwise eliminate the discharge of pollutants."
In order to assess the possibility of reclaimed water
re-use in the service area, the potential market sites for
re-use and the corresponding water quality must be defined.
The water quality and consequently the degree of treatment
required must comply with the policies and objectives of
local, state, federal and health agencies. At the present,
treated effluent from West Point is discharged to Puget Sound.
As was concluded in the Facility Plan, it is highly un-
likely any extensive water reclamation would be justifiable
in the Seattle metropolitan area, where abundant local sources
58
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
of high quality water offer much greater potential at a
markedly lower cost. This is particularly true in the
service area near West Point, which is already developed.
As it applies specifically to the West Point service
area, there are some industries with the potential for efflu-
ent re-use. The reclaimed water quality requirement for
these uses is expected to be that attained by secondary
treatment as a minimum.
REGIONAL ALTERNATIVES
Eight alternatives on the regional level are being con-
sidered and evaluated by the 201 Facility Plan. These alter-
natives differ in the degree to which issues such as cost,
water quality, and compliance with federal and local policies
and goals are addressed. The regional alternatives consist
of one no-action alternative, one alternative which con-
tinues unchanged the present comprehensive plan for the
study area, two which emphasize combined sewer overflow abate-
ment with minimal treatment upgrading, and four alternatives
which achieve secondary treatment with variations on combined
sewer overflow controls, site impacts and re-use options.
The secondary treatment alternatives E through H are the
only alternatives that comply with the secondary treatment
requirements of PL 92-500. The eight alternatives are des-
cribed below and shown in Figure 3-1.
Alternative A - No Action
No capital expenditure would be made for expansion,
modification or upgrading of treatment plants and no construc-
tion of new interceptors during the planning period (until
2005). Alternative A is evaluated to meet SEPA no action
requirements.
Alternative B - Metro Comprehensive Plan
(No Action Pursuant to PL 92-500)
Plant upgrading and transfer interceptor construction
would be done according to the Metro Comprehensive Plan.
Alternative B is evaluated as the no action alternative
pursuant to PL 92-500 and NEPA requirements and,as the Metro
Comprehensive Plan, serves as the baseline for other alterna-
tives. Puget Sound plants (West Point, Alki, Carkeek Park and
59
-------
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
(NO ACTION PURSUANT
TO PL 92 5001
JOR CSO CONTROL
ARTIALCSO CONTROL
n
WEST POINT
DUWAMISH ISTORMWATER)
DUWAMISH 1WASTEWATEH]
MM
NORTH LAKE WASHINGTW
IKE SAMMAMISH
Metro 301 Facility Plan
Service Arcs Allernalin
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Richmond Beach) would be retained with primary treatment.
Improved sludge management and disinfection practices would
be provided in Alternative B and all following alternatives.
Four new transfer interceptors and improvements to the Alki
outfall would be included.
Alternative C - Major Combined
Sewer Overflow Control
Major portions of combined sewer overflows would be
controlled by transfer from fresh to salt water and/or
treatment. The existing Puget Sound plants would be up-
graded to provide enhanced primary treatment by physical/
chemical treatment of solids during the summer. A new wet
weather enhanced primary treatment plant would be constructed
in the lower Duwamish industrial area and the Alki plant
would be abandoned, both in 1995. The Duwamish plant would
discharge through a new outfall to the Duwamish estuary.
Alternative D - Partial Combined
Sewer Overflow Control
Wet weather combined sewer overflows would be reduced
to Lake Washington, Lake Union and the West Seattle shore-
line and increased to Elliott Bay. The four Puget Sound
plants would be upgraded to enhanced primary treatment with
chemical addition during the summer for improved solids re-
moval .
Alternative E - Secondary
Secondary treatment would be added to the West Point,
Alki and Richmond Beach wastewater treatment plants by
1985. The Carkeek Park plant would provide primary treat-
ment for wet weather flows only beginning in 1985; dry
weather flows would be pumped to West Point. Carkeek could
be abandoned by 1995.
Alternative F - Secondary/Southern Strategy
Secondary treatment would be provided at Richmond
Beach and West Point (with a reduced service area). A major
new secondary treatment facility would be constructed in the
61
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Duwamish industrial area in 1985; the Alki plant would be
abandoned at that time. A new outfall off Alki Point would
be built for discharging effluent from the Duwamish (and
Renton) plants. The Carkeek Park plant would provide pri-
mary treatment for wet weather flow only beginning in 1985;
dry weather flows would be pumped to West Point. Carkeek
could be abandoned in 1995.
Alternative G - Secondary/West
Point Phaseout Option
Secondary treatment would be provided at the Alki and
Richmond Beach plants. West Point would continue as a
primary treatment plant for wet weather flows only, beginning
in 1985. A new secondary treatment plant in the Interbay
area (Commodore Way or Golf Park sites) would be constructed.
The Carkeek Park plant would provide primary treatment for
wet weather flows only beginning 1985; dry weather flow
would be pumped to West Point. Carkeek could be abandoned
in 1995.
Alternative H - Deconsolidation/Reclamation
Secondary treatment would be provided at West Point,
Alki, Carkeek Park and Richmond Beach. Areas of growth
would be served by new inland plants with local effluent
and- sludge re-use possible. Advanced waste treatment would
be provided at new North and South Lake Sammamish plants.
A new secondary plant at Kenmore would discharge treated
effluent to Puget Sound at Richmond Beach.
A summary of information pertaining to the West Point
treatment plant alternatives is presented in Table 3-1.
More details are described in the following sections on each
alternative.
62
-------
Table 3-1
SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES FOR 2005
-WEST POINT SERVICE AREA-
CTi
U>
Treatment
Capacity
(dry /wet) ,mgc
Treatment
Process
Date of
Treatment
Process
Modification
Sludge
Processing*
ALTERNATIVES
A
104/350
Primary
—
WP , CP ,
RB, R
B
142/350
Primary
—
WP,
CP,
RB,R
C
139/350
Enhanced
Primary
1985
WP,
RB,
D
D
129/350
E
145/350
Enhanced Secon-
Primary) dary
1985
WP,
RB
1985
WP
F
97/350
Secon-
dary
1985
WP,
RB
G
West Inter-
Point bay
0/350
Pri-
mary
1985
—
150/200
Secon-
dary
1985
I,
WP
H
121/350
Secon-
dary
1985
WP,
RB
*Indicates source of sludge processed at West Point or Interbay
(WP=West Point; RB=Richmond Beach; CP=Carkeek Park; R=Renton;
I=Interbay ; D=Duwamish)
rt
(D
H
3
to
rt
H-
<
(D
CO
(U
H
I
SO
O
rt
CO
-------
Alteratives and Impacts
ALTERNATIVE A (NO ACTION)
In the No Action Alternative, existing conditions would
be allowed to continue as they are. No Action is considered
here to satisfy a SEPA requirement. The alternative also
provides the public with the environmental implications of
not improving the existing wastewater management systems or
not increasing the sewered population in the service area
of the West Point plant.
The following sections describe the service area collec-
tion system, wastewater characteristics, flow characteristics,
treatment facility, and sludge management system under the
existing conditions, which would be the same as would occur
until 2005 under the No Action alternative for West Point.
Service Area
The West Point wastewater treatment plant serves a
population of 510,000 within a sewered tributary area of
approximately 59,000 acres. The same population and service
area would be served in 2005. The service area, shown in
Figure 3-1, is based on the Metro Comprehensive Plan for
sewage disposal adopted in 1958 and includes additional
areas, primarily in Snohomish County, which were originally
projected to be served. The service area is practically
bisected by the Lake Washington Ship Canal which connects
Lake Washington to Lake Union and Puget Sound. There are
numerous small lakes, two principal rivers, the Duwamish and
the Sammamish, and many creeks and streams within the
service area.
Except for about 14.5 square miles of the City which
fall within the Alki and Carkeek Park service areas,
Seattle is contained within the West Point service area.
In addition to Seattle, the area contains four incorporated
cities: Lynwood, Bothell, Lake Forest Park, and Montlake
Terrace.
In addition to the residential wastewater generated
from the service area, a large number of industries dis-
charge into the West Point collection system. The industries
are diversified and include food processing, metal plating,
chemical production, and others.
64
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Collection System
The West Point wastewater treatment plant serves
fifteen component entities of which six are sewer districts,
three are a combination of water and sewer districts, and
six are cities. The principal contributor of sewage is
the city of Seattle. The wastewater is locally collected
by the fifteen agencies and then discharged to Metro
interceptors for transmission to the West Point waste-
water treatment plant. The collection system is a partly
combined and partly separate sewer system.
The City of Seattle was originally designed as
combined sewer system, however, in the past ten years a
partial separation program to remove street drainage from
the sewer system has been adopted by the city. During wet
weather conditions, the high infiltration/inflow still
exceeds the capacity of both the local collection system
and Metro interceptors, resulting in overflows of combined
sewage throughout the city of Seattle. Figure 3-2 shows
the location of combined sewer overflows in the Metro area.
Overflows to Lake Washington, Portage Bay, Lake Union,
Ship Canal, Elliott Bay, and the Duwamish River are related
to the West Point service area.
To reduce the amount of and frequency of such combined
sewer overflows, some in-line storage is now utilized.
This is accomplished through the use of regulation stations
which allows the sewers to back up the flow and temporarily
store it until the peak flow due to the storm subsides.
The regulation stations and their operation is controlled
by a computer, CATAD, which also monitors the various
parameters necessary for control.
Wastewater Characteristics
The following sections describe briefly the waste-
water quantity and quality in the West Point area, the
existing treatment facility and its adequacy under the
present conditions.
The West Point treatment plant receives the sewage
flow from the major and central part of the Seattle
metropolitan area. As such, this flow is contributed to
by a large variety of industries as well as a residential
and commercial base. In addition, a large part of the
65
-------
Figure 3-2
Combined Sewer Overflow Locations
66
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
West Point tributary area is served by combined storm and
sanitary sewers, and consequently the volume of the flow,
pollutant concentrations, and loadings are greatly affected
by the rainfall patterns over the region. The system also
receives groundwater infiltration associated with a collec-
tion network as it begins to age and its pipes and manholes
crack and leak.
Flow Characteristics
Annual variation in flow received at West Point is
mostly dependent on the annual rainfall. The average dry
weather flow ranges from 75 to 90 mgd. For comparison,
this figure is considerably less than half the mean wet
weather flow experienced during the winter of 1973-74.
In that period, for the five months of November 1973 through
March 1974, the monthly flow varied from 156 mgd to 196
mgd, with a mean influent flow of 170 mgd.
During wet weather conditions the maximum flow to
West Point is restricted by the capacity of the north
interceptor, the influent sewer to the plant. Without
causing any substantial overflows upstream, the capacity
of the interceptor is limited to 350 mgd. Flows to the
plant, however, have been reported as high as 400 mgd. Such
high flow can only occur simultaneously with massive over-
flows.
The monthly average organic matter content as bio-
chemical oxygen demand (BOD) concentrations and loads
vary appreciably with the season and the rainfall duration
and intensity. During a typical summer, or average dry
weather flow, BOD concentration is about 160 mg/1, and a typi-
cal winter monthly average concentration is about 110 mg/1
with a mean for the year of about 135 mg/1. The BOD load-
ing to the plant on a monthly average basis is about 140,000
pounds per day in the winter and 90,000 pounds per day during
the summer. Peak loadings of up to 260,000 pounds per day
have been reported.
Similar to BOD loading, the suspended solids vary with
the weather conditions. A typical dry weather flow monthly
average for suspended solids concentration is about 240 mg/1;
in sustained wet weather the monthly concentration falls to
about 190 mg/1 with an annual mean of about 210 mg/1. In
terms of pounds per day, a normal winter monthly maximum
loading is about 260,000, and a normal dry weather flow
monthly minimum is approximately 150,000 pounds per day.
The annual average load is 213,000 pounds per day.
67
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
The concentration of metals in West Point influent
was monitored during the summer of 1975, for the months of
June through October. Metals investigated were zinc,
copper, nickel, chromium, lead, cadmium, and mercury.
Average concentrations and average maxima and minima are
shown in Table 3-2.
These samples represent an average metals concentration,
but do not reflect shock loads of up to 100 times the peak
concentrations that reach the plant at unknown frequencies,
particularly of mercury-
Table 3-2
West Point Influent Mital Concentrations For 1975
Metal
Zinc
Copper
Nickel
Chromium
Lead
Cadmium
Mercury
Average
(mg/1)
0.45
0.22
0.06
0.10
0.11
0.007
0.0005
Average
Minimum
(mg/1)
0.32
0.12
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.001
0.0001
Average
Maximum
(mg/1)
0.61
0.33
0.13
0.17
0.55
0.029
0.0190
Metals concentrations tend to follow a seasonal pattern,
being higher in summer during the period of lower plant
flows. Lead and mercury are exceptions to this general
behavior, showing fairly constant concentrations throughout
the year as shown by ongoing metals sampling.
Treatment Plant
The West Point treatment plant is located on a 24 acre
site at West Point adjacent to Discovery Park. The site is
part of approximately 80 acres owned by Metro of which
almost 39.5 acres lie on filled land. Access to the plant
is from the east entrance to Fort Lawton (Government Way).
The plant provides primary treatment by sedimentation
that removes approximately 65 percent of the incoming
suspended solids and 35 percent of the BOD. This results
in average concentration in the treated wastewater of 115
mg/1 BOD and 110 mg/1 suspended solids.
68
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Chlorinated effluent is discharged through a submarine
outfall that extends into Puget Sound to a depth of 240
feet. The outfall consists of a 3,000-foot pipe with a
600-foot diffuser section.
Plant Adequacy and Reliability
As discussed earlier, appreciable variation in in-
coming flow to the West Point treatment plant is experienced
due to the nature of the tributary collection,system and
its age. Such variation in flow has a significant effect
on the performance of the treatment plant and its efficiency
in removing the various pollutants in the wastewater.
During moderately dry summer months, the average dry weather
flow is in the order of 70 to 90 mgd which is within the
design flow of the plant, 125 mgd. However, during wet
weather monthly flows of over 150 mgd have been experienced
for extended periods, and flows as high as 400 mgd have
been reported reaching the plant. Under such high flows,
the primary sedimentation tank BOD and suspended solids
removal efficiency is reduced proportionally. Any decrease
in solids removal efficiency will also result in proportion-
ate decreases in the removal of heavy metals and other
pollutants.
The adequacy of the West Point treatment plant in terms
of heavy metals removal is shown in Table 3-3, which contains
the NPDES permit performance data for 1975. The violations
reported are highest for copper which violates the permit
limit on a weight basis almost daily. Violations were also
high for zinc, nickel, and chromium.
Table 3-4 presents the concentration and pounds of heavy
metal discharged from all Metro plants. Due to its size and
industrial waste content, the West Point effluent contributes
92 to 98 percent of the heavy metals discharged to Puget
Sound by Metro plants.
To assess the potential reduction of heavy metals
concentration in the effluent if secondary treatment was
provided at West Point, the present removal efficiency at
West Point is compared to removal efficiencies reported
at Renton. This is shown in Table 3-5. Removal efficien-
cies at both plants are within the range expected for the
degree of treatment provided at each plant. From the table
it can be seen that improved removal efficiencies are best
attained for copper, chromium, zinc and nickel.
69
-------
Table 3-3
West Point Treatment Plant Effluent
1975
Concentration Poundage
No. of
Parameter Except.
Cadmium
Daily 1
Monthly i
Chromium
Daily 15
Monthly 1
Copper
Daily 126
Monthly 12
Mercury
Daily 1
Monthly 0
Nickel
Daily 12
Monthly 5
Lead
Daily 1
Monthly 0
Zinc
Daily 38
Monthly 7
Permit
Limit Average
0.020
0.010
0.200
0.100
0.200
0.100
0.010
0.005
0.100
0.050
0.200
0.100
0.500
0.300
0.005
0.005
0.08
0.08
0.194
0.195
0.001
0.001
0.047
0.048
0.048
0.048
0.35
0.35
No. of Permit
Maximum Minimum Except. Limit Average Maximum Minimum
0.10
-------
Table 3-4
Heavy Metals Discharge
From Metro Treatment Plants
Cadmium
Ib/day
Chromium
mg/1
Ib/day
Copper
mg/1
Ib/day
Mercury
mg/1
Ib/day
Nickel
mg/1
Ib/day
Lead
mg/1
Ib/day
Zinc
mg/1
Ib/day
yearly
avg.
Dailv flow
mgd
West Point
Daily
Avg.
1975
.005
5.02
.08
72.35
.194
188.6
.001
.54
. 047
47.93
.048
55.01
.35
341.1
122.00
West
Point
10-29-75
.005
.04
.13
.0005
.06
.08
.33
Carkeek
Park
10-29-75
.004
.1
.01
.26
.08
2.1
.0007
.018
.02
.5
.07
1.84
.39
10.28
3.16
Richmond
Beach
10-29-75
.004
.055
.01
.136
.13
1.77
.0004
.005
.02
.27
.06
.82
.14
1.91
1.64
Alki
10-29-75
.004
.275
.01
.687
.04
2.75
.0002
.014
.06
4.12
.03
2.06
.09
6.18
8.24
Total
Ibs/day
__
5.40.
73.43
195.22
.58
52.82
59.73
359.47
135.04
Renton
daily
average
forl975
.004
.98
.011
'2.70
.03
7.86
.001
0.24
.017
4.17
.017
4.17
.065
15.94
29.40
rt
(D
fa
rt
H-
W
PJ
3
a.
H
3
o
rt
en
Except for West Point and Renton, pounds of heavy metals in the other treatment
plant effluents are based on composite sample analysis done on October 29,
1975. Pounds of heavy metals in Renton and West Point effluents are for the
year 1975.
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
For the period 1972 to 1974, BOD removal efficiency
at the West Point treatment plant has been reported to vary
between 33 to 45 percent while suspended solids removal
efficiency was between 56 to 70 percent. Primary treatment
generally removes between 25 to 40 percent of BOD and 50
to 65 percent of the suspended solids in the wastewater.
Table 3-5
Heavy Metals Removal Efficiency (Per Cent) For 1975
West Point Renton
(Primary (Secondary
Treatment) Treatment)
Cadmium 29 43
Chromium 23 84
Copper 11 95
Mercury
Nickel 20 58
Lead 56 66
Zinc 22 75
Odors at the West Point site were evaluated due to
their potential for impacts.
Odors are presently controlled by prechlorination and
postchlorination, by burning waste digester gas and by
good plant housekeeping. There have been no complaints
from the neighborhood about odors in the vicinity of West
Point. This is due to good odor dispersion and the fact
that there are no residences in the immediate vicinity of
West Point. During storms, flows in excess of plant
capacity usually overflow at combined sewer overflow points
to Lake Union or the Duwamish. Only infrequently do excess
flows bypass the plant to Puget Sound.
Information on chlorine residuals is important in
analysis of impacts on biology. Chlorine is applied to the
effluent on a residual-paced basis. The residual, however,
is measured a short distance downstream of the chlorine
feeding point and, while a]lowances for contact time are
made, does not reflect the actual chlorine residual before
discharging into Puget Sound. The chlorine contact time is
accomplished in the outfall for the most part since a chlorine
detention tank is not provided. Therefore the exact chlorine
dosage required to provide adequate disinfection, and the
extent of disinfection in terms of number of bacteria remain-
ing or residual chlorine cannot be determined. The chlorina-
72
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
tion facility is large enough to feed adequate dosages of
chlorine under normal high wet weather flows. Mixing is
also provided to prevent short circuiting and insure chlorine
contact with the wastewater effluent.
Since the plant provides primary treatment only, the
unit operations involved are rather simple to control and
operate and therefore can be considered reliable. Adequate
surveillance is also provided. The West Point treatment
plant is manned around the clock. Mechanical, electrical
and instrumentation maintenance crews are also available
to insure the proper operation of the equipment. Standby
power is available for all major equipment and for both
the influent and effluent pumping stations, thus maintain-
ing continuous operation of the plant.
Sludge Characteristics and Management
Metro's sludge processing and handling operations are
currently centralized at the West Point treatment plant.
All sludges generated at Renton, Richmond Beach, and
Carkeek Park treatment plants are transferred to the West
Point system. The digested sludge from Richmond Beach
and Carkeek Park are trucked to the Interbay pumping
station and are discharged into the north interceptor
which conveys the flow to the West Point treatment plant.
The Renton sludge, both raw and waste activated sludge,
is transfered undigested to the Elliott Bay interceptor
for transfer to West Point.
The West Point sludge captured in the primary sedi-
mentation tanks is digested and dewatered then trucked to
Cedar Hills for landfill disposal and to Pack Forest for
recycling. The Alki sludge is digested on site and trucked
directly to the Cedar Hills landfill site, thus bypassing
West Point.
The West Point sludge handling facility consists of 3
100-foot diameter heated anaerobic digesters. Sludge
gas is also used to power the plant boilers and to fuel
the influent and effluent pump engines. Methane gas in
excess of those requirements is flared. The digested
sludge is dewatered utilizing a centrifuge and/or vacuum
filter in the dewatering building. Sludge conditioning
by chemical addition is practiced prior to dewatering.
The sludge handling facility at West Point is not
adequate to handle the present sludge load. The digesters
volume is not sufficient, resulting in short detention
73
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
time and poor digestion of the sludge. Adequate dewater-
ing capability is not available either.
In 1975 the average daily digested sludge volumes at
West Point fluctuated between 200,000 to 340,000 gal/day
with an average of 261,000 gal/day. The tons/day of dry
solids ranged between 18 to 55 with an average of 34 tons/
day.
As discussed in the Regional EIS, Volume I, potential
re-use of sludge is primarily determined by its fertilizer
value and by the heavy metals and toxic compounds present in
the sludge that may have environmental and health adverse
impacts. For further information on the sludge characteris-
tics reference is made to Chapter III of Volume I.
74
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative A
Primary Impacts
Water Quality
Potential impacts of Alternative A would be on Puget
Sound water; other alternatives may impact the Ship Canal
or Lake Washington. A detailed discussion is given in
Chapter III of the Regional Analysis.
Puget Sound. The No Action Alternative would have
little or no impact on intertidal, nearshore or offshore
temperature, dissolved oxygen, salinity, or BOD. The
impacts of nutrients from West Point effluent and continued
CSO's on the intertidal near West Point, which is expected
to be subject to increased public use, would be substantial
because the nutrient load is large; extensive, because the
discharge from West Point influences the waters of Puget
Sound over a wide area; long-term, because the discharge
will continue through the planning period; and reversible.
Nutrients offshore from West Point are probably responsible
for 15-20 percent increases in extreme values for primary
productivity within a mile or so of the outfall. This
adverse effect is judged to be minor-to-moderate, limited in
extent; and long-term, because the discharge would continue
through the planning period. Suspended solids are not ex-
pected to have any impact offshore, except in reducing
light transmittance to a minor degree over a limited area.
Effluent quality would decline in the future as influent
begins to exceed solids handling capacity.
Although West Point beaches have edible shellfish and
access to them is expected to improve, the taking of speci-
mens from Discovery Park is prohibited. Nevertheless, the
microbiological quality of the nearshore waters is of con-
cern. While the water meet swimming standards, the State
standard for commercial shellfish is exceeded at all sites
monitored. The sources of bacteria have not been identi-
fied, but probably include urban runoff, sewer overflows
and municipal discharges. The adverse impact is considered
to be major, because public health could be jeopardized; not
limited to West Point beaches; long-term, because the dis-
charges (treatment plant effluent, CSO's and other sources)
would continue through the planning period; and reversible,
because improved disinfection could possibly alleviate
the problem. Nearshore microbiology effects would be minor,
but continuing.
Heavy metals near West Point can be from effluents,
75
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative A
sewer overflows, direct runoff, aerial fallout or dredge
spoils. The present adverse effect of heavy metals on the
intertidal is judged to be minor, because the concentrations
are not high; limited to West Point intertidal areas; long-
term, because the metals discharges will continue through
the planning period; and irreversible, because of the non-
degradable nature of the metals. The effect of effluents
and CSO's on offshore waters is unknown, but considered to
be negligible.
Toxicants and PCB's enter Puget Sound waters through
direct industrial discharges, municipal discharges, CSO's and
waters from the Duwamish. In addition, PCB's probably enter
the West Point area through dumping of Duwamish dredge spoils
off Fourmile Rock in Elliott Bay by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers. Direct industrial discharges include two
metal finishing industries discharging to the Sound who are
expected to tie in to the Metro system soon (Metro staff,
1976). Present levels of PCB's in effluent CSO's and receiv-
ing waters are not well known. The effect on West Point
waters is judged to be limited in extent; of long duration,
because CSO's and other discharges will continue through the
planning period; irreversible because of the non-degradable
nature of PCB's; and of undetermined magnitude. The concen^
tration of PCB's in discharges is expected to begin to
decline in 1978 with enforcement of the Toxic Substances Act,
but would remain an urban contaminant for sometime.
Groundwaters. Groundwater levels are not expected to
affect existing structures or processes. The West Point
effluent, discharged to Puget Sound, cannot infiltrate
groundwater.
Air Quality and Odors
The only air quality impacts would be from odors, which
are minor, limited in extent and intermittent, but recurring
events. Aerosols and engine emissions are considered to
have negligible impacts at West Point.
Geology, Soils and Topography
No impacts are expected as there would be no construc-
tion. Earthquake damage potential would continue at present
levels, which is considered to be minor, limited in extent
and of short duration.
76
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative A
Any effects on shoreline sediment transport due to the
existing sludge lagoon on the south beach would continue.
Biology
More is known about the biota near West Point than at
any other shoreline site, largely as a result of the opening
of Discovery Park adjacent to West Point and the Puget Sound
Interim Studies (PSIS). The information is included in de-
tail in the Regional Analysis which is Volume I of this
series.
Under Alternative A, West Point effluent quality would
decline as loadings increased from growth in sewered areas.
At the same time, the volume and frequency of CSO's would
increase, continuing and increasing stresses on biota from
pathogens, solids, heavy metals, pesticides, oil and grease
and other contaminants. A detailed discussion of these
effects is given in the Regional Analysis.
Terrestrial habitats. The No Action Alternative is
expected to nave no impact on terrestrial habitats, such as
urban, non-urban, forest and meadow lowland in the service
area, as no construction is involved.
The West Point treatment facility is not judged to im-
pact the biota of terrestrial habitats. The impact of the
existing facility on the biota of Discovery Park is con-
sidered to be negligible.
Shoreline habitats. Marshland habitats are sensitive
and exposed to unknown but probably moderate intermittent
and recurring stresses, and may accumulate metals, pathogens,
and toxicants in biota which could have long term detrimental
effects on their behavior, physiology and reproduction.
Effects on salmon spawning areas result from siltation of
nests or from direct toxicity to the eggs and newly-hatched
fish.
There are no freshwater marshes adjacent to the facility,
with the exception of the sludge lagoon, which is man-made
and not considered in the impact analysis. Freshwater
marshes in the West Point service area occur in limited areas
along the southwestern shore of Lake Washington, and in the
Ship Canal in Union Bay and Portage Bay. All marshes except
perhaps that at South Andrews Bay are subject to direct com-
bined sewer overflows (Table 3-6 ) of various magnitudes.
77
-------
Table 3-6
Combined Sewer Overflows Emptying Into Marshlands
Overflow
Receiving Water
Volume (mil/qal/yr)
038
039
040
041
042
044
047
176
171
W041
018
021
139
138
140
Lake Washington
Lake Washington
Lake Washington
Lake Washington
Lake Washington
Lake Washington
Lake Washington
Lake Washington
Lake Washington
Duwamish Estuary
Union Bay
Union Bay
Portage Bay
Portage Bay
Portage Bay
3.1 Westmore Slough
3.1 Westmore Slough
3.1 Lakewood Bay
3.1 Lakewood Bay
3.1 Lakewood Bay
3.1 North Brighton
Beach
3.1 Ranier Slough/
Atlantic City Pk
3.1 Ranier Slough/
Atlantic City Pk
3.1 Ranier Slough/
Atlantic City Pk
2.4 Kellogg Island
3.6
3.2
Negligible
Negligible
Negligible
Source: McGreevy, 1973; Metropolitan Engineers, 1977
78
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative A
While most individual overflows are relatively small
in terms of annual volumes, they are frequent and numerous.
In addition, these flows empty into inlets and bays with
limited-to-poor mixing and dilution. Based on very limited
sampling data (Metro Staff, 1976), overflows contain pest-
icides, PCB's and metals, in addition to pathogens, solids
and BOD. As CSO's are intermittent but continuing events,
their effect on sensitive marshland fishes, birds and other
life could be moderate-to-major, adverse, and irreversible.
The intertidal. The north and south beaches near the
Metro West Point treatment facility are accessible to the
public. The PSIS dye studies have indicated that at West
Point intertidal and nearshore organisms are occasionally
exposed to effluent at a concentration about half that at the
diffuser, or 250:1. The frequency and distribution of this
event has not been determined. Changes in the intertidal
flora at West Point possibly attributable to effluent nutri-
ents have been described in Chapter II of this report.
Septic tank seepage in the north side of West Point and south
of Perkins Lane at Magnolia Bluff may contribute further
pollutants to the intertidal in the form of nitrates and
pathogens. No measurable effects have been found on inter-
tidal fauna, except as increased limpet growth at West Point.
This effect is judged to be adverse, of minor magnitude,
limited in extent to certain beaches, and reversible, but of
long duration.
Combined sewer overflows which could affect West Point
service area beaches occur at 11 points, including Elliott
Bay. Major overflows are 002 at the West Point treatment
plant, W027 at Denny Way and W028 and W029 in Elliott Bay.
Elliott Bay is included here as longshore water and sediment
movement is along the east side of Elliott Bay from the
Duwamish to West Point. Elliott Bay receives a total of 358
million gallons annually (Metropolitan Engineers, 1977).
Limited sampling of biota at the Denny Way overflow (Metro
staff, 1976) indicated a highly disturbed situation reflected
in low diversity and abundance of organisms. The Denny over-
flow itself met water quality criteria for receiving waters
(EPA, 1975) for all parameters except mercury; 0.0006 to
0.0016 mg/1 versus a criterion of 0.00005 mg/1. Copper and
zinc were generally two to three times higher in biota at
Denny Way as in sediments. Mercury was not measured at Denny
and metals levels in biota at other overflow points were not
examined.
As overflows generally contain metals and toxicants
which do not degrade and are bioconcentrated, the overflows
79
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative A
to Puget Sound may possibly have minor-to-moderate adverse
long-term effects, limited to certain intertidal areas and
generally long-term and irreversible as metals and toxicants
do not degrade.
Levels of trace metals in intertidal biota at outfall
and background areas were examined as part of the PSIS CSchell
et al. , 1977). Mercury in mussels and lead in all organisms
examined (a brown alga, a green alga, mussels and clams) were
higher at all outfall areas than at background areas (Point
No Point, Blake Island). Other trace heavy metals which
were higher at Metro outfall areas than at background areas
were cobalt in clams, zinc in clams and mussels, copper in
clams, chromium, selenium, and cerium in mussels. The U.S.
Food and Drug Administration mercury standards for shellfish
(0.5 ppm) and the Canadian Food and Drug Directorate lead
level of 2 ppm wet weight were not exceeded in any sample.
Standards for other metals have not been set.
Intertidal hardshell clams occur on the beach south of
West Point. Geoducks occur subtidally at approximately the
same location. State standards for fecal coliforms in shell-
fish waters were exceeded at all sites sampled in the study
area. Whether the coliforms are due to surfacing treatment
plant effluent, to sewer overflows, to septic tank seepage
or a combination of these has not been determined but the
latter two sources probably provide the steadiest inputs.
Shellfish are not monitored for coliforms in the study area
at present and Discovery Park policy prohibits clam-digging
on West Point beaches.
Puget Sound. The intertidal, nearshore subtidal, and
offshore bottom, free-swimming and planktonic organisms in
the study area are subject to effects of combined sewer over-
flows, treatment plant effluents, runoff, septic tank seepage,
boat wastes, dredge spoil dumps, and other pollutant sources.
The intertidal zone has been discussed previously.
Phytoplankton productivity is subject to effects of
naturally varying chemical and physical parameters. As a
result, it is almost impossible to detect the effects of
treatment plant effluent nutrients on the variation in algal
population size and growth rates in time and space. The
only significant longitudinal variation attributed to the
West Point outfall is a 15-20% increase in the 1, 2, 3, 5,
and 10 year extreme values for productivity at stations
within a mile of the outfall. As flows will continue, the
effect is judged to be adverse, moderate, reversible, limited
in extent and of long duration for phytoplankton. No effect
on zooplankton has been determined, perhaps due to sampling
80
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative A
problems. In the absence of any data, the effect is judged
to be unknown. Metals in plankton near outfall areas have
been compared to background areas (Point No Point) (Schell
et al., 1977) and to a dredge spoil disposal site off Four-
mile Rock in Elliott Bay. Filter-feeding zooplankton take
in particles of the size on which metals adsorb best. Zinc
and copper were significantly higher in plankton at the West
Point outfall areas than at the control station.
The distribution of some nearshore and offshore benthic
organisms (foraminifera, worms, clams, snails) appears to be
correlated with the typical plume position for West Point ef-
fluents, for which data are available, especially along the
150 foot contour. The existing effect is considered to be
adverse, moderate, limited in extent, long-term as flows con-
tinue, and reversible for nearshore and offshore areas.
Nearshore free-swimming (nektonic) forms include juven-
ile salmon, herring, and other commercial fishes that frequent
the outfall pipe or kelp areas in the daytime or at night.
These animals could be occasionally exposed to levels of
chlorine and perhaps to other constituents at higher than
"safe" levels in effluent.
The change in fish species composition at West Point,
discussed in Chapter II of the Regional Analysis (Volume I),
may reflect effluent-caused changes in benthic prey species
and/or habitat changes due to the outfall pipe itself.
Fishes around the West Point outfall may have a higher inci-
dence of disease from crowding or from exposure to pathogens
and/or toxicants. The cause of the slightly elevated inci-
dence of tumors in flatfish at West Point has not been identi-
fied, however. The overall effect is judged to be adverse
and major, but limited in extent, of long duration and proba-
bly reversible. While no data are available, it is possible
that offshore nektonic organisms may also be occasionally
affected by pathogens or toxicants if they swim into or
through effluent, or if they feed in nearshore areas at night.
Exposure to chlorine residuals is intermittent, however,
and while effluent toxicity has been demonstrated in the
laboratory, toxic effects have not been verified in the field.
Commercial and sport fisheries. There are a number of
important sport and commercial fisheries within and adjacent
to the West Point service area. Those which occur in areas
that could potentially be impacted by West Point treatment
plant effluent and/or sewer overflows are salmon (spawning
and rearing areas in Lake Washington; runs up Ship Canal;
sport fishing at Harbor Island, and in Elliott Bay); steelhead
81
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative A
(runs up the Ship Canal); and shrimp (fished in Elliott Bay
to Harbor Island and in Shilshole Bay at the mouth of the
Ship Canal). The Ship Canal is crucial for the migration
of juvenile salmonids. The potential for stress on or con-
tamination of these species is quite high. The magnitude
of the actual effect is unknown, but could be substantial.
The abnormal occurrence of salmon at the south end of Lake
Union is an example. The overall effect is considered to
be highly probable, adverse, moderate, reversible, extensive
and of long duration.
Freshwater environments. Freshwater environments in the
West Point service area which may be affected by facilities
planning include Lake Washington, Green Lake and Lake Union/
Ship Canal. These are important habitats for a variety of
organisms, including sport and commercial fishes.
1. Lake Washington. As described previously, Lake
Washington is subject to CSO's, a number of which discharge
into salmon spawning areas. Nevertheless, the lake is still
in the process of changing from a eutrophic to a meso-eutro-
phic or better state. Effects of CSO's in lake biota have
been examined at one point only (Metro staff, 1976). The
effects there were limited but striking - no macroscopic
organisms were found anywhere near the outfall. If it is
assumed that this is typical, the effect of such CSO's on
nearshore areas is judged to be highly probable, adverse,
limited to the western shore of the lake, and long term.
The impacts of metals, toxicants and nutrients in the over-
flows are judged to be irreversible as these tend to be re-
cycled in the lake. Effects on offshore lake biota of CSO's
are considered to be minor as CSO's tend to move along shore,
rather than into open waters.
2. Green Lake. The effect of two minor CSO's on biota
of Green Lake is considered to be very minor to negligible,
as other inputs dominate water quality.
3. Lake Union/Ship Canal. In general, the biota are
those characteristically tolerant of somewhat degraded water
quality. The impacts of CSO's on this water are unknown.
The Roanoke Street outfall sampled had no visible life any-
where near the outfall or near the effluent plume. Assuming
this effect is typical of the 35 overflows (381 mil gal/yr)
along the Lake Union/Ship Canal, the effects are potentially
major on limited areas near the outfalls. Inputs other than
CSO's may predominate, however, so CSO's are judged to have
moderate but extensive and long-term effect overall.
82
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative A
Rare or endangered species and sensitive habitats. No
listed endangered species are recorded from the study area.
Some plants or animals may be rare locally, however. Sensi-
tive habitats include salmon spawning and rearing areas, fish
migration routes, lake shallows, and waterfowl resting areas.
All but the last have been discussed previously.
Marine birds at West Point are generally winter residents
of the region, but the pigeon guillemot breeds at West Point.
These birds, which burrow in clay banks or crevices in cliffs,
produce only two chicks a year and are considered to be
"sensitive" (Salo, 1975). The effects on these and other
marine birds at this time are considered to be negligible.
Energy and Natural Resources
Natural resources and energy impacts are analyzed in
the Regional Environmental Impact Statement on an interrelated
basis between the five existing Metro plants and potential
new sites.
Human Environment
Alternative A, the No Action Alternative, is judged to
have a negative impact on "human environment" factors.
Land use. Since in Alternative A, there is no con-
strue tTon~7^there would be no change in land use at the exist-
ing treatment plant sites. Building permits would be un-
necessary, and no permit would be required under the Shore-
line Management Act.
The presence of the West Point wastewater facility con-
flicts in part with the natural setting of the park.
Agency goals. Many of the impacts related to agency
goals have been developed in the Regional EIS, including
those goals related to PL 92-500 compliance, and CSO con-
trol.
It is debated whether the position of the West Point
treatment facility enhances the goal of the Discovery Park
Master Plan that Discovery Park would provide an open space
of quiet and tranquility for the citizens of Seattle, and
whether the facility affects the objective stated in Goals
83
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative A
for Seattle that "natural amenities identified as important
to the region's character and beauty shall be preserved or
sensitively developed as a second choice." It may be use-
ful to point out, parenthetically, that the West Point
facility was constructed long before the Discovery Park
land was acquired from the Fort Lawton Military Reservation,
Employment and costs. Employment and cost impacts
are not analyzed on a site-specific basis. Rather, these
are analyzed in the Regional Environmental Impact Statement,
Resources and energy consumption occurs on an interrelated
basis at the five existing Metro plants and potential new
sites.
Social, recreational and cultural. Under Alternative
A, the West Point facility would remain in its present
location, keeping restrictions on the recreational use of
the West Point area. Because of the location of a fence, the
beach north of the facility cannot be used at high tide; the
sludge basin discourages use of the beach to the south of
the facility. However, site location at West Point keeps
the Interbay sites free from development.
This alternative does not comply with the wish of 60%
of the 377 Magnolia area people polled that secondary treat-
ment be implemented. This impact is considered adverse,
major, long-term, reversible and probable,
Archeological and historical. Since Alternative A
includes no construction, there would be no new impacts on
archeological and historical sites.
Health and safety. There may be health risks assoc-
iated with the consumption of shellfish due to the
continued discharge of primarily treated waste, as dis-
cussed in the biological section of the EIS.
An unlikely safety hazard is accidental leakage of
chemicals when they are in transport, or handled on site.
Although nearly every U. S. water and wastewater treatment
facility uses chemicals, there have been very few chemical-
related accidents.
The health and safety problems related to sludge trans-
port and disposal would be as improbable as for any other
trucks in transit.
84
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative A
Since there would be no construction, there would be no
risk to health or safety in this category -
Aesthetics and nuisance. The West Point wastewater
treatment facility is well designed for consideration of
aesthetics. It lies low, is clean, and is surrounded by
well-kept grass. Few odor complaints have been filed.
Visibility of the West Point facility from Discovery Park
is blocked by bluffs. Only 10% of 377 randomly selected
citizens of adjacent areas interviewed by Gerhardt Research
were opposed to the location of the West Point facility.
The placement of the facility would continue under Alternative
A. Although any wastewater treatment plant is a nuisance,
the impact at West Point has been minimized. These impacts
would be adverse, minor, long-term, local, reversible only
at great cost, and definitely would occur if Alternative A
is implemented in its present form.
The noise and traffic of sludge trucking is a minor
nuisance which did not seem to bother many people. Some
people did not even know which route the trucks traveled
(HRPI, 1976). This is expected to continue as present.
CSO's will be dealt with in the Regional EIS, and in
the water quality section of this document.
Legal and institutional. Legal and institutional
considerations have been developed in the Regional EIS. This
alternative does not meet the requirements of PL 92-500.
Permits for interceptor construction are explained in the
Regional EIS.
Mitigation Measures
Because of the no action definition of Alternative A,
no mitigation measures can be proposed.
Unavoidable Adverse Effects
All adverse impacts under Alternative A would be un-
avoidable. These would include impacts on water quality from
CSO discharge, related impacts on fish and public health,
continued use of plant sites in parks or residential areas,
and noncompliance with PL 92-500.
85
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
ALTERNATIVE B-METRO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
(NO ACTION PURSUANT TO PL 92-500)
Alternative B continues system upgrading in accordance
with the Metro Comprehensive Plan with maintenance of primary
treatment at West Point. Alternative B can be viewed as
no action with respect to Public Law 92-500 and maintains
service to existing residents and additional customers as
required.
Service Area
The existing West Point service area would be modified
as shown in Figure 3-1 by transferring the North Lake Sam-
mamish service area to Renton by the Redmond connection, and
transferring Val Vue from Renton. To serve increased flows
from the North Lake Washington areas would require construc-
tion of a parallel Kenmore interceptor (or other transfer
facility).
Treatment Plant
The West Point plant would provide primary treatment for
142 mgd dry weather and 350 mgd wet weather flows. The plant
has adequate primary capacity to serve 2005 non-storm flows
for the projected change in service area population. Primary
treatment and discharge to Puget Sound would continue.
Effluent quality would be 115 mg/1 BOD and 110 mg/1 SS.
Plant layout would be as shown in Figure 3-3 . New sludge
digesters would be added to handle additional loads from
Renton and the additional sewered population in the North
Lake Washington area.
Combined Sewer Overflows
The current program of maximizing existing inline storage
capacity for control of combined sewer overflows would be
continued with construction of a regulator station at Third
Avenue West. However, overflows of combined sewage would
increase in the Lake Union-Ship Canal area due to increased
flows from the northern West Point service area.
86
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative B
METRO - WEST POINT WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
Km i. »iti
i T !i "A *
FILTER PRESS BLDG.
Figure 3-3,
West Point Layout Alternative B
87
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative B
Sludge
West Point would remain the major solids processing
center for Metro. It would treat digested sludge from
Richmond Beach and Carkeek Park as well as sludge from
Renton. Sludge digestion and dewatering capacity would
be expanded to handle additional loadings. Dewatered
sludge would be trucked to the Cedar Hills landfill for
disposal and to Pack Forest for recycling research.
Impacts
The direct impacts projected under this alternative
through the year 2005 are described below. Secondary im-
pacts are discussed in the Regional EIS which is Volume I
of this series.
Geology, Soils and Topography
Alternative B would require excavation of some of the
filled area of West Point to allow construction of the
foundations for three new digesters. As the site is
covered by fill, which tends to be unstable, piling and
dewatering may be necessary for structural support. Poten-
tial earthquake damage to low structures on fill would be
minor, extensive and short-term. Erosion would also be a
minor, short-term problem of limited extent, as would changes
in topography and soil profile. Shoreline fill would not
be involved. Any effects on shoreline sediment transport
due to the sludge lagoon would continue. Not enough in-
formation is available at this time to evaluate the impact,
however.
The construction of the Kenmore parallel interceptor
would temporarily alter lake bottom and shoreline soil pro-
files and topography and increase nearshore erosion and de-
position.
Air Quality and Odors
The additional digesters would increase the potential
for odors at West Point. The effect is expected to be very
minor, limited in extent and intermittent but recurring,
as the site is well-ventilated. Particulates would increase
88
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative B
for a short period during construction, and could affect
a limited area to a minor extent. If dechlorination facili-
ties are provided at West Point, substantial amounts of
toxic sulfur dioxide gas will be required. Handling pro-
cedures required would be similar to those for chlorine.
During construction of the Kenmore parallel interceptor
particulates and engine emissions would locally increase
for a short time.
Water Quality
Alternative B would affect Puget Sound and Lake
Washington.
Puget Sound. Alternative B would be expected to hve
no impact on intertidal, nearshore or offshore temperature,
dissolved oxygen, salinity, or BOD. The adverse impact
of nutrients from the West Pont effluent and continued
CSO's on the intertidal near West Pont, which is expec-
ted to be subject to increased public use, could be moderate,
because the discharge is sizeable; long-term, because the
discharge will continue through the planning period; and
reversible. Nutrients offshore from West Point are probably
responsible for increases in extreme values for primary pro-
ductivity within a mile or so of the outfall. This adverse
effect is judged to be moderate, limited to water near West
Point; long-term, because the discharge would continue
through the planning period; and reversible. Suspended
solids may be reaching West Point beaches from effluent and
from overflows. This adverse impact is considered minor,
because the suspGnded solids load of receiving waters is not
greatly increased; long-term, because the discharge would
continue through the planning period; and reversible. Sus-
pended solids are not considered to have any impact off-
shore, except in reducing light transmittance to a minor,
limited extent for a short time. Eflluent quality would
decline in the future as influent begins to exceed solids
handling capacity.
Although West Point beaches have edible shellfish and
access to them is expected to improve, the taking of speci-
mens from Discovery Park is prohibited. Nevertheless, the
microbiological quality of the nearshore waters is of
concern. While the waters meet swimming standards, the State
standard for commercial shellfish is exceeded at all sites
monitored. This adverse impact is considered to be major,
because public health could be jeopardized; not limited to
West Point beaches; long-term , because the discharge would
89
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative B
continue through the planning period; and reversible, because
improved disinfection could probably alleviate the problem.
Nearshore microbiology effects would be minor, limited but
continuing.
Heavy metals near West Point can be from effluents,
sewer overflows, direct runoff, aerial fallout or dredge
spoils. The present adverse effect of heavy metals on the
intertidal is judged to be minor, because the concentrations
are not high; limited to West Point intertidal areas; long-
term, because the metals sources will continue through the
planning period; and irreversible, because of the nondegrad-
able nature of the metals.
The effect of effluents and CSO's on offshore waters is
unknown, but considered to be negligible. Toxicants and
PCB's enter Puget Sound waters through direct industrial dis-
charges, municipal discharges, CSO's and waters from the
Duwamish. In addition, PCB's probably enter the West Point
area through dumping of Duwamish dredge spoils off Fourmile
Rock in Elliott Bay by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Direct industrial discharges include two small metal finish-
ing industries discharging to the Sound who are expected to
tie into the Metro system soon (Metro Staff, 1977) . Present
levels of PCB's are not well known. The effect on West Point
waters is judged to be limited in extent; of long duration,
because CSO's and other discharges will continue through the
planning period; irreversible because of the non-degradable
nature of PCB's, and of undetermined magnitude. The con-
centration of PCB's in discharges is expected to decline
in 1978 with enforcement of the Toxic Substances Act.
Lake Washington. The construction of the Kenmore para-
llel in the West Point service area, along the northwestern
shore of Lake Washington, would affect the lake's water qual-
ity through increased turbidity and perhaps resuspension of
metals and other materials associated with lake sedement.
Te effect is described in more detail in the Regional Analy-
sis. The probable adverse effect on water quality is con-
sidered to be moderate, but highly limited in extent in the
lake, of short duration and reversible as particles resettle,
Groundwaters. Groundwater levels are not expected to
affect existing structures or processes. The West Point
effluent, discharged to Puget Sound, cannot infiltrate
groundwater.
90
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative B
Biology
Alternative B continues primary effluent discharge to
Puget Sound and adds digesters at the West Point site. Im-
pacts in adjacent Puget Sound shores and waters from CSO and
effluents increase moderately over levels in Alternative A.
CSO to freshwaters would also increase moderately, and Lake
Washington would be further disturbed by construction of the
Kenmore parallel interceptor.
Terrestrial habitats. Some minor, limited short-term
impacts due to digester construction could occur on terres-
trial animals. The removal of some non-urban terrestrial
habitat would have a minor, limited, but long-term adverse
effect. The impact of construction noise on this and on
forest habitat at Discovery Park would be negative, minor,
limited in extent, short-term, and reversible as the animals
would return to the area once construction is complete.
While the exact route of the Kenmore parallel intercep-
tor is undecided, it is certain that some temporary minor
disturbance of terrestrial habitats would occur due to noise
and physical disturbance due to construction activities.
The impact is expected to be minor, but extending 4000 feet
along the northwestern shore of Lake Washington. The effects
would be short-term (for the duration of construction plus a
short time afterwards) and reversible as the plants and ani-
mals could recolonize the area once construction is completed.
Shoreline habitat. The effects of Alternative B on
shoreline habitats would result from increased overflows to
Lake Washington and the Lake Union/Ship Canal, and from the
construction of the Kenmore Parallel interceptor. This pipe
could be laid along the northwest shore of Lake Washington
and underwater to Matthews Park should the lake line be the
chosen route.
The interceptor construction would cause turbidity, ac-
celerated erosion and siltation in nearshore waters and alter-
ation of benthic sediments, very possibly near salmon spawn-
ing areas. Benthic organisms and salmon eggs could be buried,
and aquatic plants affected by decreased light levels due to
turbidity. The effect could be major, but would be limited
in extent to nearshore areas along a part of Lake Washington,
and would be short -term and reversible as the biota (other
than salmon) readjust to new environment. Salmon would
probably not return to silted areas to spawn as the fish
require clean, well-aerated gravels.
91
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative B
Sewer overflows and their BOD and solids loads would
increase about 36% under Alternative B over present (A)
levels. It is assumed that loadings of oil, grease, metals
and toxicants would probably increase similarly. PCB's
would begin to decline after 1978, unless reservoirs of
these toxicants remain in the interceptors to be partially
flushed with each storm.
The increase in CSO's is judged to be moderate. The
poorly known effects of CSO's on freshwater biota (Metro
Staff 1976) are severe, but limited in extent. The projected
36% increase could probably increase the extent and severity
of the effect by a similar amount as more organisms would be
affected by the solids, BOD, metals, pesticides, toxicants,
oil and grease.
The intertidal. Alternative B would impact the West
Point intertidal through a 30% increase in flows and loads
by 2005 from West Point. Overflows to the Elliott Bay/West
Point area would continue at levels in Alternative .A
Surface tidal current patterns in Central Sound in -
dicate eddy systems forming north and south of West Point.
Dye studies at West Point indicate that intertidal and
nearshore organisms are occasionally exposed to effluent
at a concentration of about half that at the diffuser or
250:1. Effects found to date on intertidal organisms
which could be attributed to effluent are primarily on
the floral assemblage—algae and diatoms at West Point.
Limpets, among the main consumers of these plants, show
increased growth rates. The expected 30% increase in flows
from West Point, could have a concomitantly larger effect,
especially if industrial growth keeps pace with population
growth.
Major CSO's which occur to Elliott Bay and West Point
area beaches would continue at present levels. The effects
observed to date indicate severe adverse effects, which
appear to be limited in extent. Insofar as CSO's contain
non-degradable materials, (metals, toxicants) their effects
are irreversible. The effects of effluents, by contrast,
appear to be minor-to-moderate, adverse, and affect portions
of the shoreline of unknown magnitude. The parameters
which appear to be most involved are nutrients. It is recog-
nized that a number of other parameters in effluents which may
also be having effects have not been measured. As metals
are generally higher in intertidal biota near outfall areas
at this time, and flows and loads are expected to increase
in the future, metals could increase to levels approaching
U.S. and Canadian standards for mercury and lead. While
92
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative B
coliform bacteria have not been measured in intertidal shell-
fish, the overlying waters fail to meet State bacterial
standards. As edible shellfish are found near outfall sites
the potential effects on public health of metals and patho-
gens are a consideration. Clam digging is prohibited on the
south beach, but mussels are occasionally taken from the
north beach.
In summary, it is not known which affects the inter-
tidal community more overall - CSO's or effluents. Effluent
quality is generally fairly well known (except for toxicants
and trace elements), but its frequency of contact with the
intertidal is not. CSO quality, on the other hand, is
poorly known, but frequency of occurrence has been evaluated.
Puget Sound. The intertidal, nearshore subtidal, and
offshore bottom, free-swimming and planktonic organisms in
the study area would continue to be subject to effects of
combined sewer overflows at present levels, increased flows
and loads from treatment plant effluent, plus runoff, septic
tank seepage, boat wastes, dredge spoil dumps, and other
pollutant sources. The intertidal zone has been discussed
previously. The difference in effects between Alternatives
A and B are due primarily to increases in effluent flows.
The 1, 2, 3, 5 and 10 year phytoplankton productivity ex-
tremes appear to be 15 - 20% higher within a mile of West
Point. A 30% future increase in nutrients from that outfall
could be reflected in a similar increase in the percentage
and the area affected. No effect on zooplankton has been
determined, perhaps due to sampling problems. In the absence
of any data, the present effect is judged to be unknown and
future effects unpredictable. Metals would probably remain
higher in zooplankton near outfall areas than at background
areas, however (Schell et al.,1977).
The effects on the benthos identified in PSIS to 'be
correlated with the West Point plume position would continue
and perhaps increase. The adverse effect would continue to
be moderate-to-major but probably somewhat more extensive
with increased flows.
Nearshore free-swimming (nektonic) forms include juvenile
salmon, herring, and other commercial fish that frequent the
outfall pipe or kelp areas, in daytime or at night. These
animals could continue to be intermittently exposed to levels
of chlorine at higher than "safe" levels and perhaps to other
constituents in effluent.
The change in fish species composition at West Point,
discussed in Chapter II, may reflect effluent-caused changes
93
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative B
in benthic prey species and/or habitat changes due to the out-
fall pipe itself. The cause of the slightly elevated inci-
dence of tumors observed in flatfish at West Point has not
been identified. The overall effect is judged to be adverse,
major, but limited in extent, of long duration and probably
reversible.
While no data are available, it is possible that offshore
free-swimming organisms may also be occasionally affected by
chlorine, pathogens or toxicants if they swim into or through
effluent, or if they feed in nearshore areas at night.
Criteria for intermittent exposure of aquatic organisms
to total residual chlorine (TRC) are time-related. For mar-
ine organisms, a concentration of 0.02 mg/1 for 100 minutes
is a recommended threshold (Brungs, 1976; Mattice & Zittel,
1976).
Chlorine residuals were measured in effluent as part
of toxicants studies upstream of the outfall in the same
manner as normal monitoring at West Point. As the outfall
is used for chlorine contact, the laboratory data did not
necessarily reflect the actual residual at the diffuser.
Nevertheless, the measured residuals indicated that peaks
of 2 mg/1 or higher were not uncommon. The diffuser is
assumed to give a 100:1 dilution, such that levels of 0.02
mg/1 and greater are possible in the mixing zone in the
receiving waters. It seems possible, therefore, that
free-swimming organisms congregating at the outfall could
be exposed to higher than "safe" levels of chlorine during
slack water periods. No toxic effects have been verified
in the field, however.
The potential effect on these organisms is considered
to be adverse, minor, limited in extent, of short duration
and reversible, even with increased effluent flows and no im-
provement in chlorination practices.
Commercial and sport fisheries. There are a number of
important sport and commercial fisheries within and adjacent
to the West Point service area. Those which occur in areas
which could potentially be impacted by treatment plant efflu-
ent and/or sewer overflows are salmon (sn.?vning and rearing
areas in Lake Washington; runs up the flip Canal; sport
fishing in Elliott Bay;) steelhead (runs up the Ship" Canal);
and shrimp (fished in Elliott Bay to Harbor Island and in
Shilshole Bay at the mouth of the Ship Canal). The Ship
Canal is crucial for the migration of juvenile salmonids.
The potential for stress or contamination of these species
is high. The magnitude of the actual effect is unknown,
but could be substantial. The abnormal occurrence of salmon
94
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative B
at the south end of Lake Union is an example (Metro, 1976).
Under Alternative B, overflows to Union Bay and the Ship
Canal would increase by about 22%. The adverse impact could
become a major one, as this waterway is an important salmon
and steelhead run. The above effects could be extensive in
these waters; long-term, as several generations of fishes
could potentially be affected; and. reversible. As discussed
below, chinook salmon spawning areas could possibly be
silted over during construction of the Kenmore parallel
interceptor.
Freshwater environments. These are important habitats
for a variety of organisms, including sport and commercial
fishes.
1. Lake Washington. As described previously, Lake
Washington CSO's, a number of which discharge into salmon
spawning areas, would increase 36%. Effects of CSO's on
lake biota have been examined at one point only (Metro Staff
1976). The effects observed were limited but striking—no
macroscopic life was found anywhere near the outfall. With
increased overflows, the. effects, already major in unlimited
areas along the western shore, would become more extensive,
and would continue to be long-term and irreversible due to
metals and toxicants. Effects on offshore biota would prob-
ably continue to be minor, as CSO tend to move along shore
rather than into open waters.
The construction of the Kenmore parallel could cause
major, but limited and short-term (perhaps 15 months) in-
creases in turbidity and generally disrupt 4000 feet of the
shoreline and nearshore waters and biota of northwest Lake
Washington. Salmon spawning areas, which require clean
gravel, could possibly be silted over. Construction noise
would probably temporarily frighten off fish and wildlife.
The adverse effect is judged to be major but limited, short-
term and reversible. Offshore areas would receive lesser
effects. Mitigation measures are discussed in a subsequent
section of this chapter and further environmental analyses
of possible impacts would be conducted prior to construction.
2. Green Lake. The effect of very small increases in
two minor CSO's on biota of Green Lake is considered to be
negligible as other inputs dominate water quality.
3. Lake Union/Ship Canal. Sewer overflows to this
water could increase about 22%, placing further stress on
an already stressed biota. The impacts of CSO's on overall
95
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative B
water quality are unknown, however. The data available on
one overflow suggest that at limited areas near the outfalls
the effects are severe; no visible life anywhere near"the
outfall or the effluent plume. Assuming this effect is
typical of all overflows along the Canal, the effects of
increased flows would be major, limited in extent, though
less so than at present, long-term as CSO's could continue
and irreversible if they contain toxicants and metals as
seems likely.
Rare or endangered species and sensitive habitats. No
listed endangered species are recorded from the study area.
Sensitive habitats, which include salmon spawning and rear-
ing areas, fish migration routes, and lake shallows have
been discussed in previous sections. Waterfowl rest through-
out the service area, generally in winter. The "sensitive"
pigeon guillemot, however, nests in clifs at West Point but
would not be affected by Alternative B.
Energy and Natural Resources
Natural resources and energy impacts are analyzed in
the Regional Environmental Impact Statement on an interre-
lated basis between the five existing Metro plants and po-
tential new sites.
Human Environment
Alternative B, Metro Comprehensive Plan (No Action Pur-
suant to PL 92-500) , has a negative impact on some human en-
vironment factors and some positive impacts.
Land use. The only new construction which occurs under
Alternative B is of four new sludge digesters to the north-
east of the existing facility, as indicated in Figure 3-4.
This would not greatly increase the amount of land used, and
occurs in an area which has little impact. This is con-
sidered adverse, minor, long-term, local, reversible only
with financial outlay, and would definitely occur if Alter-
native B is implemented in its present form.
Agency goals. Many of the impacts related to agency
goals have been developed in the REgional EIS, including
those goals related to PL 92-500 compliance and CSO control,
96
-------
Figure 3-4
West Point -
Alternative B
ADDITIONAL DIGESTION
CAPACITY
I
If
CD
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative B
It is debated whether the position of the West Point
treatment facility enhances the goal of the Discovery Park
Master Plan that Discovery Park would provide an open space
of quiet and tranquility for the citizen's of Seattle; and
whether the facility, affects the objective stated in Goals
for Seattle that "natural amenities identified as important
to the region's character and beauty shall be preserved or
sensitively developed as a second choice." It may be useful
to point out parenthetically, that the West Point facility
was constructed long before the Discovery Park land was
acquired from the Fort Lawton Military Reservation.
Employment and costs. Employment and cost impacts
are not analyzed on a site-specific basis. Rather, these
are analyzed in the Regional Environmental Impact Statement.
Resources and energy consumption occurs on an interrelated
basis at the five existing Metro plants and potential new
sites.
Social, recreational and cultural. Under Alternative
B, the West Point facility would expand in its present
location, keeping restrictions on the recreational use of
the West Point area. Because of the location of a fence,
the beach north of the facility cannot be used at high
tide, although there is access to the area. The sludge
basin which discourages use of the beach to the south of
the facility would not be removed. However, site location
at West Point keeps the Interbay sites free from development.
This alternative does not comply with the wish of 60%
of the 377 Magnolia area people polled that secondary
treatment be implemented. This impact is considered ad-
verse, major, long-term, reversible, and probable.
Archeological and historical. Any archeological sites
which may have existed would have already been destroyed
by former construction. No historical sites are in the
affected areas.
Health and safety. There may be health risks associated
with the consumption of shellfish due to the continued
discharge of primarily treated waste, as discussed in the
biological section of the EIS.
An unlikely safety hazard is accidental leakage of
chemicals when they are in transport, or handled on site.
Although nearly every U.S. water and wastewater treatment
98
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative B
facility uses chemicals, there have been very few chemical-
related accidents.
The health and safety problems related to sludge trans-
port and disposal would be as improbable as for any other
trucks in transit.
Construction and safety risk would be as for any other
similar construction; with safety-conscious procedures there
should be a slight chance of accidents.
Aesthetics and nuisance. The West Point wastewater
treatment facility is well designed for consideration of
aesthetics. It lies low, is clean, and is surrounded by
well-kept grass. Few odor complaints have been filed. Visi-
bility of the West Point facility from Discovery Park is
blocked by bluffs. Only 10% of those interviewed by Gerhardt
Research were opposed to the location of the West Point
facility. The additional sludge digesters have been placed
such that they are not visible behind the bluff at Discovery
Park. These impacts would be adverse, minor, long-term, local,
reversible only at great cost, and definitely would occur
if Alternative B is implemented in its present form.
The noise and traffic of sludge trucking is a minor
nuisance which did not seem to bother many people. Some
were unaware of the route the trucks traveled (HRPI, 1976).
This is expected to continue as present.
CSO's will be dealt with in the Regional EIS, and
in the water quality section of this EIS.
Legal and institutional. Legal and institutional con-
siderations have been developed in the Regional EIS. This
alternative does not meet the requirements of PL 92-500.
Permits for interceptor construction are explained in the
Regional EIS.
Mitigation Measures
Several mitigation measures are suggested to aid in
the reduction of adverse impacts resulting from the imple-
mentation of this alternative.
While chlorine feed is residual paced at West Point,
the residual is measured a short distance downstream of the
chlorine feeding point and therefore does not reflect the
99
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative B
actual chlorine residual before discharging into Puget Sound.
Therefore the exact chlorine dosage required to provide
adequate disinfection and the extent of disinfection in
terms of the number of bacteria remaining or residual chlor-
ine cannot be determined. Installing a chlorine contact
tank would maximize the effectiveness of chlorination
treatment.
Pretreatment of industrial wastes could be provided
before sewage enters the West Point plant. If current
practices continue, this facility would occasionally
receive "slugs" of cadmium, mercury and arsenic.
Odor of the wastewater treatment facilities can con-
tinue to be mitigated, in part, by not allowing the primary
and secondary treatment systems to become anaerobic. It is
under anaerobic conditions that such noxious gases as
methane and sulfur dioxide are emitted.
The following measures could be taken to improve the
aesthetics and recreational usage of the West Point site:
The sludge lagoon could be removed and the beach re-
stored. This action would also eliminate any effects of
the structure on longshore sediment transport. The existing
access road south of the sedimentation tanks could be re-
routed and the existing parking lot removed to increase us-
able public space at the south beach. A large landscaped
earth-sludge berm approximately 20 feet high could be
located between public activities and the plant. Increased
planting along the entrance road would enhance visual screen-
ing. The berms can be developed as visual extensions of the
bluff. The remainder of the plant could be also surrounded
by landscaped earth-sludge berms; new digesters to the north
could be partially depressed and "buried" by berms. These
are shown in Figure 3-4.
Possible sludge truck traffic could be isolated along
the southeastern property line between the plant and bluff
to minimize visual and noise intrusion. The northern por-
tion of the Metro property could be developed in a manner
compatible with park objectives. Both a saltwater marsh fed
by a new channel through the existing seawall, and a fresh-
water marsh fed by existing streams from the bluff are
illustrated as possibilities; a range of other possibilities
and configurations is conceivable.
Public access along the entire shoreline could be main-
tained and enhanced. These landscaping measures are devel-
oped in more detail in the Facility Plan, Part 2.
100
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative B
The possible silting over of salmon spawning grounds
during the construction of the Kenmore parallel (Lake
Line Option) called for under this alternative could cause
impacts, both environmental and economical. Therefore it is
recommended that an evaluation study be made on the Force
Main Option to determine its possible impacts. Not enough
information is presently available to consider this option.
If the Lake Line is selected, the use of washed beach
gravel as backfill in the construction of the Kenmore
parallel could encourage salmon spawning, as in the construc-
tion of the North Mercer Island interceptor in 1970. Such
a measure would require the cooperation of both federal
and state agencies to be successful. Timing construction
to avoid salmon spawning or intra-gravel development periods
would limit construction to the months of March to September,
probably increasing construction costs. Further environ-
mental analyses would be conducted prior to construction.
Unavoidable Adverse Impacts
Under this alternative, the following adverse impacts
would be unavoidable.
Construction. Although construction activities can be
screened from public view, they will still be a temporary
nuisance.
Sludge trucking. Under current practices of disposing
sludge at remote sanitary landfill sites, there will
necessarily be sludge trucking.
Combined sewer overflows. This alternative does not take
adequate measures to control CSO's; they will still occur
in wet weather.
Primary effluent effect on water quality. This alternative
does not implement secondary treatment; the water degrada-
tion of Puget Sound would continue.
Non-compliance with PL 92-500. Public Law 92-500 requires
the installation of secondary treatment. This alternative
does not comply.
Land use. Land is required in all alternatives; the ques-
tion is: where will the impact occur?
101
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative B
Aesthetic nuisance of plant location. Wastewater treatment
facilities are a nuisance in all alternatives; the question
is: how can these nuisances be made smallest?
0 & M and capital costs. Construction of wastewater facili-
ties, interceptors, and CSO holding tanks is expensive. The
facilities must be operated and maintained.
Energy expenditures. Energy can in part be provided by
the methane produced in anaerobic digestion, but there is
still a large expenditure of energy which cannot be mitigated.
102
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
ALTERNATIVE C
MAJOR COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOW CONTROL
Alternative C is aimed at providing control of combined
sewer overflows. West Point would become an enhanced primary
treatment plant under this alternative.
Service Area
The West Point service area would be reduced by annexing
the eastern half of the North Lake Washington and North Lake
Sammamish service areas to Renton via North Creek-Hollywood
connection and sending Val Vue to Renton, as shown. The west
North Lake Washington area can be served by the existing
Kenmore interceptor by provision of an off-line storage
facility for intermittent peak storm-influenced flows. Pro-
vision of additional wet weather capacity in southern West
Point area accommodates abandonment of the Alki plant. During
non-storm flows Alki sewage is treated at West Point and
during storm flow at the Duwamish plant.
Combined Sewer Overflow Control
Overflows in the West Point service area to Lake Washing-
ton would be controlled to one overflow event every 10 years,
Lake Union-Ship Canal to one overflow event per year, and
overflows in the Duwamish and Elliott Bay to 10 overflows
per year. This is achieved by construction of both city and
Metro storage and transport capacity, and Metro treatment
capacity by construction of a 250 mgd wet weather plant in
the lower Duwamish. Projected annual pollutant load reduc-
tion by receiving waterbody is shown in Table 3-7. A new
outfall would be built at Interbay discharging up to 161 mgd
of combined sewer overflows to Elliott Bay. Three Metro
(Magnolia, Dexter, and Belvoir), and eight City of Seattle
holding tanks would be built in the West Point service area,
plus the Ballard parellel trunk and the North interceptor
parallel.
Treatment Plant
West Point would be upgraded to provide enhanced primary
treatment by chemical addition to improve settling in 1985.
Chemicals would only be added in the summer, improving BOD
103
-------
Table 3-7
Annual CSO Pollutant Load — Alternative C
Water Body
Location
Green Lake
Lake Washington
Montlake Cut
•
Portage Bay
Lake Union
Fremont Ship Canal
Salmon Bay
*
Elliott Bay
Duwamish River
Puget Sound (Alki)
Z
Approximate Overall
Percent Reduction
In West Point
Service Area
Baseline Alternative B
Volume
[mil gal)
--
22.4
228
56.6
254
358
251
5.46
1175.46
BOD
(ton)
--
5.58
59.3
14.1
63.3
89
62
1.36
294.64
Solids
(ton)
—
20.4
241
51.4
231
325
227
4.95
1100.75
0
0
Alternative C
Volume
(mil gal)
--
0.19
35.8
4.14
28.0
448
186
0.15
702.3
40
44
BOD
(ton)
--
0.05
8.91
1.03
7.0
112
46.5
0.04
175.5
40
44
Solids
(ton)
—
0.17
32.4
3.76
25.4
406
168
0.14
635.9
42
46
ti-
ro
H
> 3
|_ p;
rt ti-
ro H-
n <
3 ro
fa w
rt
P. pj
< 3
CD PJ
P)
n
rt
en
Source:
Engineers, 1977.
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative C
METRO - WEST POINT WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
•FILTER PRESS BLDa
EN HANGED PRIMARY
Figure 3-5
West Point Layout Alternative C
105
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative C
and solids loads to 75 and 30 mg/1 respectively- At other
times of the year, primary treatment would be used and pro-
duce effluent with 115 mg/1 BOD and 110 mg/1 solids.
Chemical treatment would require adding chemical storage
and feeding facilities, as shown in Figure 3-5. Otherwise,
the plant would look much the same as it does now.
Discharge to Puget Sound would continue through the
existing outfall.
Sludge
Renton sludge would be removed from West Point and
treated at Renton. Richmond Beach digested sludge would be
trucked to West Point and Duwamish sludge would be sent to
West Point via the Elliott Bay interceptor after each storm.
New sludge digesters, shown in Figures 3-5 and 3-6, would
be needed to handle the added solids loads from enhanced pri-
mary treatment. Sludge would be hauled away to Cedar Hills for
landfill disposal and to Pack Forest for recycling research.
METRO - WEST POINT WA5TEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
FIGURE 3-6
Alternative C
West Point
Repositioned
Digesters
106
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative C
Impacts
The direct impacts projected under this alternative
through the year 2005 are described below- Secondary impacts
are discussed in the Regional ElS which is Volume I of this
series.
Geology, Soils and Topography
Under Alternative C, two digesters would be built at
West Point. Excavation would be required of some of the
filled area of West Point to allow construction of the foun-
dations for these new digesters. As the site is covered by
fill, which tends to be unstable, piling and dewatering may
be necessary for structural support. Potential earthquake
damage to low structures on fill would be minor, extensive
and short-term. Erosion would also be a minor, short-term
problem of limited extent, as would changes in topography
and soil profile. Shoreline fill would not be involved.
The impacts of holding tank construction are discussed
in the Regional ElS.
Any impacts in longshore sediment transport due to the
configuration of the sludge lagoon would continue. Present
information is insufficient to evaluate effects at this time,
Air Quality and Odors
Upgrading the West Point plant to enhanced primary
treatment would slightly increase the potential for odors
escaping. Odor problems at West Point would continue to be
minor, limited in extent, and intermittent. Control of CSO's
would reduce the frequency of CSO-derived odors. The benefits
of CSO control and the impacts of holding tank construction
are discussed more fully in the Regional ElS.
107
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative C
Water Quality
Alternative C includes enhanced primary treatment of
West Point effluent, achieving a 20% decrease in BOD and
solids, but a 25% increase in CSO flows and loads to Elliott
Bay through a new outfall from Interbay. CSO's to Lake Wash-
ington would be reduced 99%, to the Ship Canal/Lake Union by
about 84% (93% to Lake Union alone) as shown in Table 3-7 by
transfer to Interbay.
Puget Sound. Nutrient loads would increase slightly
due to the new CSO at Interbay of about 90 million gallons
annually- Effluent nutrient impacts would remain at Alter-
native B levels as phosphate is never limiting in the Sound
and nitrogen would not be effectively removed by the chemical
precipitation process. Suspended solids would decrease over-
all, as the load removed from West Point effluent is 35 times
larger than the increase due to the new CSO outfall at Inter-
bay.
Alum precipitation would assist removal of pathogens
and other microorganisms, but the burden of disinfection
will remain with chlorine, which could be more effective
if solids are reduced and disinfection practices are improved.
Some improvement in microbiological quality could result from
enhanced primary treatment. At the same time, a large new
CSO outfall discharging about 90 million gallons per year
at a depth of 50 feet some 1200 feet from shore would prob-
ably degrade microbiological water quality as the effluent
surfaced along the north shore of Elliott Bay. In winter,
winds tend to hold surface waters against the shore, and
mixing is slow. Longshore current driven by wet weather
Duwamish outflow and by tides could carry the flow westward
toward West Point. Microbiological quality of these waters
would receive intermittent negative impacts of unknown
but probably substantial magnitudes, of long duration as
overflows would continue from year-to-year and reversible.
The overflow would also add a new metals, toxicants, oil
and grease source to Elliott Bay and possibly to the area
south of West Point. Heavy metals loads would decrease from
West Point due to improved treatment, but other metal sources
would not be affected. Offshore, metals removals are not
likely to affect water quality, but could affect sediments
and their reservoir of metals near outfalls. Toxicants
attached to particulates would also be affected by chemical
108
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative C
treatment. PCB's, which are probably from overflows, Duwa-
mish outflow and dredge spoils, would probably not be reduced,
except indirectly as a result of enforcement of the Toxic
Substances Act.
Lake Washington. CSO's to Lake Washington would be re-
duced 99%, resulting in a moderate improvement in the quality
of nearshore waters of the lake. Loads of nutrients, solids,
BOD, pathogens, oil and grease, metals and toxicants would
be greatly reduced. Occasional health risks from coliform
levels exceeding state bathing standards would probably be
similarly reduced. Loads to the lake are small relative to
CSO's to other water bodies (Table 3- 7 ), but Lake Washing-
ton is considered to be sensitive , and CSO's are frequent.
Lake Union/Ship Canal. CSO's would be reduced by about
84% to this system, with 93% reduction in flows to Lake
Union alone. As the overflows to these waters are presently
24 times larger than to Lake Washington, and the latte^ is
orders of magnitude larger than the Ship Canal/Lake Union
system, this is considered to be a moderate-to-major benefit,
extensive in this water system, of long duration and revers-
ible in reducing BOD solids, nutrients, turbidity, oil and
grease, metals, toxicants and pathogens loads.
Green Lake. Even with some CSO control the benefit to
this small lake would be negligible, as other inputs deter-
mine water quality.
Groundwater. Groundwater levels could have a minor,
limited but long-term adverse impact if dewatering is
necessary at the construction site.
Biology
Alternative C calls for discharge of primary effluent
treated with alum to precipitate solids. Effluent discharged
to Elliott Bay from a new overflow outfall could move along
shore to West Point. Its impact on West Point areas is
judged to be unknown at present. Two digesters would be
built at West Point. Major CSO control would relieve pres-
sures on biota in Lake Washington, Lake Union/Ship Canal and
near West Point. Effluent flows at West Point would be
essentially the same as in Alternative B, but BOD and solids
would be reduced 20% below baseline levels.
109
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative C
Terrestrial habitats. The effect on terrestrial habi-
tats at West Point is assumed to be minor, limited in extent
but of long duration as the exact site for the digesters is
not known at this time. The impact of construction noise
on this and forest habitat at Discovery Park would be nega-
tive but nimor, limited in extent and short-term as animals
frightened away by noise would return to the area once
construction is complete. Effects on terrestrial habitats
of holding tank construction are discussed in the Regional
EIS.
Shoreline habitats. Overflows would be reduced 99% to
Lake Washington and 84% to Lake Union/Ship Canal relative to
Alternative B levels. Loadings of solids, BOD, pathogens,
metals, ammonia, nutrients and toxicants would be greatly
reduced. The benefit to the shoreline areas of Lake Wash-
ington and the Ship Canal would probably be moderate and
long-term. The effects of former inputs of metals and toxi-
cants are irreversible, but loadings of these chemicals
would stabilize.
The intertidal. Elements of Alternative C affecting
the intertidal area are a reduction in CSO's at West Point,
and a minor (25%) increase at Elliott Bay and upgrading of
effluents to enhanced primary treatment levels in summer.
Limited data available (at Denny Way) on effects of CSO to
saltwaters indicate adverse effects are moderate-to-severe,
limited in extent, of long duration and probably irreversible
for metals and toxicants.
Upgrading to enhanced primary treatment allows for some
reduction in BOD, solids, metals and phosphates loads. The
levels of nitrates would be as at present, however, and it
is these nutrients that can become limiting in the Sound.
As effluent from West Point enters the intertidal occasional-
ly, the potential enrichment effect of effluents would con-
tinue.
At the same time, CSO's could enter the intertidal along
the north shore of Elliott Bay and West Point's south beach
in wet weather, due to water circulation driven by Duwamish
outflow and tides, and to the shallow discharge depth of the
overflow (50 feet). The possible effect, based on limited
existing data (Metro Staff, 1976) , could be a major decrease
in the kinds and numbers of organisms in the outfall plume's
path, limited in extent, but of long duration as flows would
be intermittent but continuing. The effects on the organisms'
environment due to metals and toxicants in the overflow would
be irreversible.
110
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative C
Since chlorination facilities at West Point would be as
presently operated, overchlorination and underchlorination
could probably continue. Underchlorination could maintain
fecal coliform levels in excess of state shellfish standards,
and overchlorination could produce chlorine residues poten-
tially toxic to intertidal organisms. In wet weather, a new
large overflow could substantially increase pathogen levels
in the intertidal and nearshore waters from the outflow
point to West Point, especially on an ebb tide.
Puget Sound. Effects on nearshore and offshore waters
from Alternative C would be from effluent flows and slightly
reduced loads, the effects of one new outfall on Elliott Bay,
and continuation of chlorination practices. Nutrient loads
from effluent would continue at baseline levels, but would
increase from the Interbay CSO outfall such that potential
over-enrichment problems could continue or increase at West
Point.
Offshore phytoplankton and zooplankton would continue
to be affected by nutrients and metals in dispersing efflu-
ent plumes, such that productivity extremes would continue
to be affected.
The distribution of some nearshore and offshore benthic
organisms, which does appear to be correlated with the typi-
cal plume position for West Point effluent, would be main-
tained. Advanced primary removes solids and BOD so the over-
all loads would be 20% lower than Alternative B.
Offshore and nearshore free-swimming organisms may
continue to be occasionally affected if they swim into or
through an effluent patch, or if they feed in nearshore areas
at night. The effect is considered to be minor, limited in
extent to plume areas and of short duration; exposure is
intermittent.
The composition, diversity and abundance of fishes off
West Point would probably change little as overall loads to
the Sound through the outfalls would decrease slightly (about
20%). The incidence of tumorous flatfish at West Point, to
the extent the effluent and perhaps the pipe itself are in-
volved, would probably not change. The effect is considered
to remain adverse, major, limited in extent to outfall areas,
of long duration and probably reversible.
A new outfall would also be constructed at the north
side of Elliott Bay, carrying combined sewer overflows from
the Lake Washington and Ship Canal areas. The annual flow
is expected to be about 90 million gallons per year, dis-
111
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative C
charged 1200 feet offshore at a depth of 50 feet just west
of Terminal 91 (see Figure 3-7 ). Elliott Bay is a poorly-
flushed deep basin in which winter winds tend to hold surface
waters against the waterfront and mixing is slow. The efflu-
ent could be carried to the West Point area, in keeping with
prevailing currents driven by Duwamish outflow and tides.
The impacts of a large new combined sewer effluent point
source on nearshore organisms are unknown, but could be
similar to those at overflows samples (Metro Staff, 1976):
adverse, major but limited in extent, long-term and irrever-
sible for metals and toxicants.
Commercial and sport fisheries. Reducing sewer over-
flows to Lake Washington, Lake Union/Ship Canal would improve
the quality of these waters important as migration, spawning
and rearing areas to migrating salmonids. The benefit is
considered to be moderate, extensive in the waters, and
long-term for fish populations. At the same time, Elliott
Bay would receive 25% more CSO's plus up to 250 mgd of wet
weather effluent (primary treated). The adverse effect on
the Elliott Bay-Duwamish Green River fish runs and resident
fish populations is unknown. The effect would be limited
in Elliott Bay, and of long duration and reversible except
for metals and toxicants.
Freshwater environments. CSQ. control under Alternative
C would be a moderate benefit to freshwater environments. No
Kenmore parallel is planned under this alternative.
1. Lake Washington. An almost complete (99%) reduc-
tion of CSO to this lake would mean a moderate long-term
benefit to limited areas of the western shore of the lake,
including salmon spawning areas and perhaps bathing beaches
which record high bacterial counts after a storm overflow.
Offshore organisms which are probably affected less by over-
flows would in turn be benefited less by CSO control. Metals
and. toxicants already in the lake would continue to affect
the shoreline biota, however.
2. Green Lake. The benefit of CSO control would prob-
ably be minor-to-negligible as other inputs dominate the
lake's conditions.
3. Lake Union/Ship Canal. The magnitude of the impacts
of overflows on the biota in this water are unknown. How
much of the observed problems can be attributed to overflows
has not been determined. A reduction would clearly be a
benefit, but of undeterminable magnitude. As this water is
112
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative C
an important salmonid migration route, major overflow reduc-
tions of 84% are considered to have a moderate positive im-
pact, extensive in the water body and of long duration.
Rare and endangered species. No impact is expected
as no listed endangered species are recorded from the study
area. Sensitive habitats, which include salmon spawning and
rearing areas, fish migration routes, waterfowl resting
areas and lake shallows have been discussed in previous sec-
tions .
Natural Resources and Energy
Natural resources and energy impacts are analyzed in
the Regional EIS on an interrelated basis between the five
existing Metro plants and potential new sites.
Human Environment
Alternative C has a negative impact on some human
environment factors, and some positive impacts.
Land use. The only new construction at West Point which
occurs under Alternative C is of two new chemical feed tanks
to the northeast of the existing facility, as indicated in
Figure 3-7. This would not greatly increase the amount of
land used, and occurs in an area on which construction would
have little impact. This is considered adverse, minor, long-
term, local, reversible and definite.
Agency goals. Many of the impacts related to agency
goals have been developed in the Regional EIS, including
those goals related to PL 92-500 compliance and CSO control.
It is debated whether the position of the West Point
treatment facility enhances the goal of the Discovery Park
Master Plan that Discovery Park would provide an open space
of quiet and tranquility for the citizens of Seattle; and
whether the facility affects the objective stated in Goals
for Seattle that "natural amenities identified as important
to the region's character and beauty shall be preserved or
sensitively developed as a second choice." It may be useful
to point out parenthetically that the West Point facility
was constructed long before the Discovery Park land was ac-
quired from the Fort Lawton Military Reservation.
113
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative C
Employment and costs. Employment and cost impacts are
not analyzed in the Regional EIS.
Social, recreational, and cultural^. Under Alternative
C, the West Point facility would expand in its present loca-
tion, keeping restrictions on the recreational use of the
West Point area. Because of the location of a fence, the
beach north of the facility cannot be used at high tide.
The sludge basin discourages use of the beach to the south
of the facility- Site location at West Point keeps the
Interbay site free from development.
This alternative does not comply with the wish of 60%
of the 377 Magnolia area people polled that secondary treat-
ment be implemented. This impact is considered adverse,
major, long-term, reversible, and probable.
Archeological and historical. Any archeological sites
which may have existed would have already been destroyed
by former construction. No historical sites are in the
affected area.
Health and safety. There may be health risks associated
with the consumption of shellfish due to the continued dis-
charge of primarily treated waste, as discussed in the
biological section of the EIS.
An unlikely safety hazard is accidental leakage of
chemicals when they are in transport or handled on site.
Although nearly every U. S. water and wastewater treatment
facility uses chemicals, there have been very few chemical-
related accidents.
The health and safety problems related to sludge trans-
port and disposal would be as probable as for any other trucks
in transit.
Construction safety risk would be as for any other simi-
lar construction - with safety-conscious procedures there
should be only a slight chance of accidents.
Aesthetics and nuisance. The West Point wastewater
treatment facility is well designed with respect to aesthetics
It lies low, is clean, and is surrounded by well-kept grass.
Few odor complaints have been filed. Visibility of the West
Point facility from Discovery Park is blocked by bluffs.
Only 10% of 377 persons interviewed by Gerhardt Research
114
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative C
were opposed to the location of the West Point facility.
The additional sludge digesters have been placed such that
they are not visible behind the bluff at Discovery Park.
These impacts would be adverse, minor, long-term, local,
reversible at great cost, and definite.
The noise and traffic of sludge trucking is a minor
nuisance which did not seem to bother many people. Some
people were unaware of the route the trucks traveled (HRPI,
1976). This is expected to continue as present.
CSO's have been dealt with in the Regional EIS and in
the water quality section of this EIS.
Legal and institutional. Legal and institutional con-
siderations have been developed in the Regional EIS. This
alternative does not meet the requirements of PL 92-500.
Permits for interceptor construction are explained in the
Regional EIS.
Mitigation Measures
Several mitigation measures are suggested to aid in the
reduction of adverse impacts resulting from the implementa-
tion of this alternative.
While chlorine feed is residual paced at West Point,
the residual is measured a short distance downstream of the
chlorine feeding point and, therefore, does not reflect the
actual concentrations before discharging into Puget Sound.
Therefore, the exact chlorine dosage required to provide
adequate disinfection and the extent of disinfection cannot
be determined. Installing a chlorine contact tank would
maximize the effectiveness of chlorination treatment.
Pretreatment of industrial wastes could be provided
before sewage enters the West Point plant. If current prac-
tices continue, this facility would occasionally receive
slugs of cadmium, mercury and arsenic.
Odor of the wastewater treatment facilities can continue
to be mitigated, in part, by not allowing the primary and
secondary treatment systems to become anaerobic. It is under
anaerobic conditions that such noxious gases as methane and
sulfur dioxide are emitted.
The sludge lagoon could be removed and the beach re-
stored. This action would also eliminate any effects of the
115
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative C
structure on longshore sediment transport. The existing
access road south of the sedimentation tanks could be re-
routed and the existing parking lot removed to increase
usable public space at the south beach. A large landscaped
earth-sludge berm approximately 20 feet high could be loca-
ted between public activities and the plant. Increased
planting along the entrance road would enhance visual screen-
ing. The berms can be developed as visual extensions of the
bluff. The remainder of the plant could be also surrounded
by landscaped earth-sludge berms; new digesters to the north
could be partially depressed and "buried" by berms. These
are shown in Figure 3-7.
Possible sludge truck traffic could be isolated along
the southeastern property line between the plant and bluff
to minimize visual and noise intrusion. The northern portion
of the Metro property could be developed in a manner compati-
ble with park objectives. Both a saltwater marsh fed by a
new channel through the existing seawall, and a freshwater
marsh fed by existing streams from the bluff are illustrated
as possibilities; a range of other possibilities and con-
figurations is conceivable.
Public access along the entire shoreline could be main-
tained and enhanced. These landscaping measures are devel-
oped in more detail in the Draft Facility Plan.
Under this alternative, a mitigation measure for con-
trolling solid and metal loads in effluent water would be
to use the enhanced primary treatment of alum year round,
rather than just in the summer.
The potential effects of a large new CSO outfall to
poorly-flushed Elliott Bay could be mitigated by pre-construc-
tion analysis of existing sediments, current patterns and
velocities, water quality and biota.
Unavoidable Adverse Impacts
Under this alternative, the following adverse impacts
would be unavoidable.
Construction. Although construction activities can be
screened from public view, they will wtill be a temporary
nuisance.
116
-------
West Point
Alternative C
EXISTING PLANT PLUS
SEASONAL CHEMICAL FEED
^ WEST POINT
N TREATMENT PLANT
o 200 400H 277
rt
(D
rt rt
fD H-
h <
3 (D
(1) CO
rt
H- PJ
< 3
(D &
n
I
ft)
o
rt
en
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative C
Sludge trucking. Under current practices of disposing
sludge at remote sanitary landfill sites, there will neces-
sarily be sludge trucking.
Primary effluent effect on water quality. This alter-
native does not implement secondary treatment; the water
degradation of Puget Sound would continue.
Noncompliance with PL 92-500. Public Law 92-500 requires
the installation of secondary treatment. This alternative
does not comply.
Land use. Land is required in all alternatives; the
question is: where will the impact occur?
Aesthetic nuisance of plant location. Wastewater treat-
ment facilities are a nuisance in all alternatives; the
question is: how can these nuisances be made smallest?
Operation and maintenance and capital costs. Construc-
tion of wastewater facilities, interceptors, and CSO holding
tanks is expensive. The facilities must be operated and
maintained.
Energy expenditures. Energy can in part be provided
by the methane produced in anaerobic digestion, but there is
still a large expenditure of energy which cannot be mitigated.
118
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
ALTERNATIVE D
Alternative D emphasizes abatement of combined sewer
overflows to the areas identified as the most sensitive to
overflow effects, namely, Lake Washington and Lake Union.
Service Area
The West Point service area, shown in Figure 3-1, would
be reduced relative to Alternative B and identical to Alter-
native C for dry weather flows. Wet weather flows from the
Duwamish area would also be routed to West Point. Part of
the North Lake Washington and all of the North Lake Sammamish
flow would be transferred to Renton. Overall, the dry weather
flow would be 139 mgd, with 350 mgd in wet weather.
Treatment Plant
The West Point plant would provide enhanced primary
treatment for summer flows, beginning in 1985 and primary
treatment for wet weather flows, as in Alternative C. The
plant would look as in Alternative C (Figure 3-5).
Effluent quality of 75 mg/1 BOD and 30 mg/1 solids would be
discharged to Puget Sound in summer, and 115 mg/1 BOD plus
110 mg/1 solids in winter.
Combined Sewer Overflow Control
By provision of both Metro and city holding and trans-
port facilities, overflows to Lake Washington would be
controlled to one event per year, and in Lake Union to 10
events per year. No control of other overflow beyond exist-
ing CATAD is provided in this alternative. Projected annual
pollutant load reduction by receiving waterbody of this
alternative are discussed under impacts.
Combined sewer overflow control facilities are phased
through 1991, priority being given to Lake Washington. Three
Metro and 17 City of Seattle holding tanks would be built in
the West Point service area plus four City of Seattle pump
stations, one Metro pump station and the Metro North inter-
ceptor parallel with a new outfall to Elliott Bay.
119
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative D
Sludge
Solids handling facilities would be expanded as neces-
sary for the chemical solids from enhanced primary treatment.
Renton sludge would be treated at Renton. Richmond Beach
sludge would be dewatered at West Point.
Dewatered sludge from West Point would be trucked to
Cedar Hills landfill for disposal and to Pack Forest for
recycling research.
Impacts
Geology, Soils and Topography
Under Alternative D two digesters would be built at West
Point to allow construction of the foundations for these new
digesters. As the site is covered by fill, which tends to
be unstable, piling and dewatering may be necessary for
structural support. Potential earthquake damage to low
structures on fill would be minor, extensive and short-term.
Erosion would also be a minor, short-term problem of limited
extent, as would changes in topography and soil profile.
Shoreline fill would not be involved.
/
The impacts of holding tank construction are discussed
in the Regional EIS.
Any impacts on longshore sediment transport due to the
sludge lagoon would continue. Present information is insuf-
ficient to evaluate effects at this time.
Air Quality and Odors
Upgrading the West Point plant to enhanced primary
treatment would slightly increase the potential for odors
escaping. Odor problems at West Point would continue to be
minor, limited in extent, and intermittent. Control of CSO's
would reduce the frequency of CSO-derived odors. The bene-
fits of CSO control and the impacts of holding tank con-
struction are discussed more fully in the Regional EIS.
120
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative D
Water Quality
Alternative D includes enhanced primary treatment of
West Point effluent, achieving a 25% decrease in BOD and
solids, but a 21% increase in CSO flows and loads to Elliott
Bay through a new outfall from Interbay- CSO's to Lake
Washington would be reduced 83%, to the Ship Canal/Lake Union
by about 50% (61% to Lake Union alone), as shown in Table 3-8,
by transfer to Interbay.
Puget Sound. Nutrient loads would increase slightly
due to the new CSO at Interbay of about 75 million gallons
annually. Effluent nutrient impacts would remain at
Alternative B levels as phosphate is never limiting in the
Sound and nitrogen would not be effectively removed by the
chemical precipitation process. Suspended solids would
decrease overall, as the load removed from West Point efflu-
ent is 75 times larger than the increase due to the new CSO
outfall at Interbay.
Alum precipitation would assist removal of pathogens
and other microorganisms, but the burden of disinfection
will remain with chlorine, which could be more effective if
solids are reduced and disinfection practices are improved.
Some improvement in microbiological quality could result
from enhanced primary treatment. At the same time, a large
new CSO outfall discharging about 75 million gallons per
year at a depth of 50 feet some 1200 feet from shore would
probably degrade microbiological water quality as the
effluent^ surfaced along the 'north shore of Elliott Bay- In
winter, winds tend to hold surface waters against the shore,
and mixing is slow. Longshore currents driven by wet weather
Duwamish outflow and by tides could carry the flow westward
toward West Point. Microbiological quality of these waters
would receive intermittent negative impacts of unknown but
probably substantial magnitudes, of long duration as over-
flows would continue from year-to-year, and reversible.
The overflow would also add a new metals, toxicants,
oil, and grease source to Elliott Bay and possibly to the
area south of West Point. Heavy metals loads would decrease
from West Point due to improved treatment, but other metal
sources would not be affected. Offshore, metals removals
are not likely to affect water quality, but could affect
sediments and their reservoir of metals near outfalls.
Toxicants attached to particulates would also be affected by
chemical treatment. PCB's, which are probably from overflows,
Duwamish outflow and dredge spoils, would probably not be
reduced, except indirectly as a result of enforcement of the
121
-------
Table 3-8
Annual CSO Pollutant Load — Alternative D
Water Body
Location
Baseline Alternative B
Volume BOD Solids
(mil gal) (tons) (tons)
* Green Lake
* Lake Washington 22.4
* Portage Bay/Montlake Cut 228
* Lake Union 56.6
* Ship Canal/Salmon Bay 254
* Elliott Bay 358
Duwamish River 251
Puget Sound (Alki) 5.46
Total
Approximate Overall
Service Area
1175.46
Alternative D
Volume BOD Solids
(mil gal) (tons) (tons)
5
59
14
63
89
62
1
.58
.3
.1
.3
.36
20.4
241
51.4
231
325
227
4.95
3.76
147
22.2
128
433
251
4.47
0
36
5
31
108
62
1
.94
.5
.52
.8
.11
3
133
20
116
392
227
4
.41
.1
.06
294.64 1100.75
989
16
246
17
896
19
* In West Point
Service Area
20
21
Source: Metropolitan Engineers, 1977
23
122
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative D
Toxic Substances Act.
Lake Washington. CSO's to Lake Washington would be re-
duced 83%,resulting in a moderate improvement in the quality
of nearshore waters of the lake. Loads of nutrients, solids,
BOD, pathogens, oil and grease,metals and toxicants would be
greatly reduced. Occasional health risks from coliform levels
exceeding state bathing standards would probably be similarly
reduced. Loads to the lake are small, relative to CSO's to
other water bodies (Table 3-8 ), but Lake Washington is con-
sidered to be sensitive and CSO's are frequent.
Lake Union/Ship Canal. CSO's would be reduced by about
50% to this system, with 61% reduction in flows to Lake Union
alone. As the overflows to these waters are 24 times larger
than to Lake Washington, and the latter is orders of magni-
tude larger than the Ship Canal/Lake Union system. This is
considered to be a moderate-to-major benefit, extensive in
this water system, of long duration and reversible in .reduc-
inc BOD solids, nutrients, turbidity, oil and grease, metals,
toxicants and pathogens loads.
Green Lake. Even with some CSO control the benefit to
this small lake would be negligible, as other inputs determine
water quality.
Groundwater. Groundwater levels could have a minor,
limited but long-term adverse impact if dewatering is necess-
ary at the construction site.
Biology
Alternative D calls for discharge of primary effluent
treated with alum to precipitate solids. Effluent discharged
to Elliott Bay from a new overflow outfall could move along
shore to West Point. Its impact on West Point areas is
unknown at present. Two digesters would be built at West
Point. Partial CSO control would help relieve pressures on
biota in Lake Washington, Lake Union/Ship Canal and near
West Point. Effluent flows at West Point would be essentially
the same as in Alternative B, but BOD and solids would be
reduced 25% below baseline levels.
123
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative D
Terrestrial habitats. The effect on terrestrial habitats
at West Point is assumed to be minor, limited in extent but
of long duration, as the exact site for the digesters is not
known at this time. The impact of construction noise on this
and forest habitat at Discovery Park would be negative but
minor, limited in extent and short-term as animals frightened
away by noise would return to the area once construction is
complete. Effects on terrestrial habitats of holding tank
construction are discussed in the Regional EIS.
Shoreline habitats. Overflows would be reduced 83% to
Lake Washington, about 50% to Lake Union/Ship Canal, from
Alternative B levels. Loadings of solids, BOD, pathogens,
metals, ammonia, nutrients and toxicants would be greatly
reduced. The benefit to the shoreline areas of Lake Washing-
ton and the Ship Canal would probably be moderate-to-major,
and long-term. The effects of former inputs of metals and
toxicants, are irreversible, but loading of these chemicals
would stabilize.
Marshes along the Ship Canal at Union Bay and Portage
Bay would receive about 40% less overflow loadings and flows,
a benefit considered to be moderate-to-minor. The magnitude
of the overall influence of CSO's on ecological communities
in this water are unknown. CSO control would probably be a
moderate-to-minor benefit to the biota of the immediate
overflow areas assuming the data on Roanoke (Metro Staff,
1976) are typical. The remaining overflows would continue
to have a negative, limited, long-term impact.
The intertidal. Elements of Alternative D affecting the
intertidal area are a reduction in CSO at West Point, minor
(21%) increase at Elliott Bay, and upgrading of effluents to
enhanced primary treatment levels. Limited data available
(at Denny Way) on effects of CSO to saltwaters indicate
adverse effects are moderate-to-major, limited in extent, of
long duration and probably irreversible for metals and
toxicants.
Upgrading to enhanced primary treatment allows for some
reduction in BOD, solids, metals, and phosphates loads in
effluent. The levels of nitrates would be as at present,
however, and it is these nutrients that can become limiting
in the Sound. As effluent from West Point enters the inter-
tidal occasionally, the potential enrichment effect of
effluents would continue.
124
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative D
Continued nutrient (nitrogen) loads would maintain
enrichment effects on intertidal algae and algae grazers.
Metals removal with enhanced primary treatment is somewhat,
but not consistently, better than with primary. Metals
levels at outfall areas would continue to be higher than at
background stations, especially as chemical precipitation
would be employed at the treatment facility only in summer.
Slugs of mercury, cadmium, and arsenic go through West Point
on occasion year-round.
At the same time, CSO's could enter the intertidal along
the north shore of Elliott Bay and perhaps West Point's
south beach in wet weather, due to water circulation driven
by Duwamish outflow, and tides and to the shallow discharge
depth of the overflow (50 feet). The possible effect, based
on limited existing data (Metro Staff, 1976) , could be a
major decrease in the kinds and numbers of organisms in the
outfall plume's path, limited in extent, but of long duration
as flows would be intermittent but continuing. The effects
on the organisms' environment due to metals and toxicants in
the overflow would be irreversible.
As chlorination facilities at West Point would be as
presently operated, overchlorination and underchlorination
could probably continue. Underchlorination could maintain
fecal coliform levels in excess of state shellfish standards,
and overchlorination could potentially produce chlorine
residues potentially toxic to intertidal organisms. In wet
weather, a new large overflow at Interbay could substantially
increase pathogen levels in the intertidal and nearshore
waters from the outflow point to West Point, especially on
an ebb tide.
Puget Sound. Effects on nearshore and offshore waters
from Alternative D would be from effluent flows and slightly
reduced loads, the effects of a new outfall on Elliott Bay
and continuation of chlorination practices. Nutrient loads
from effluent would continue at Alternative B levels but
would increase from the Interbay CSO outfall such that
potential over-enrichment problems could continue or increase
at West Point.
Offshore phytoplankton and zooplankton would continue
to be affected by nutrients and metals in dispersing effluent
plumes, such that productivity extremes would continue to be
affected.
The distribution of some nearshore and offshore benthic
organisms, which does appear to be correlated with the typi-
cal plume position for West Point effluent, would be main-
tained. Advanced primary removes solids and BOD, so the
overall loadings would be 25% lower than baseline (B).
125
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative D
Offshore and nearshore free-swimming organisms may con-
tinue to be occasionally affected if they swim into or through
an effluent patch, or if they feed in nearshore areas at
night. The effect is considered to be minor, limited in
extent to plume areas and of short duration, as exposure is
intermittent.
The composition, diversity and abundance of fishes off
West Point would probably change little as overall loads to
the Sound through the outfalls would decrease slightly (about
25%). The incidence of tumorous flatfish at West Point, to
the extent the effluent and perhaps the pipe itself are
involved, would probably not change. The effect is consid-
ered to remain adverse, major, limited in extent to outfall
areas, of long duration and probably reversible.
As discussed above, a new outfall at the north side of
Elliott Bay would carry combined sewer overflows from the
Lake Washington and Ship Canal areas. The annual flow is
expected to be over 75 million gallons per year, discharged
1200 feet offshore at a depth of 50 feet just west of
Terminal 91. Elliott Bay is a poorly-flushed deep basin in
which winter winds tend to hold surface waters against the
waterfront and mixing is slow. The effluent could be carried
to the West Point area, in keeping with prevailing currents
driven by Duwamish outflow and tides. The impacts of a large
new combined sewer effluent point source on nearshore organ-
isms are unknown, but could be similar to those at overflows
sampled (Metro Staff, 1976) : adverse, major but limited in
extent, long-term and irreversible for metals and toxicants.
Commercial and sport fisheries. Reducing sewer overflows
to Lake Washington, Lake Union/Ship Canal would improve the
quality of these waters important as migration, spawning and
rearing areas to salmonids. The benefit is considered to be
moderate-to-major, extensive in the waters, and long-term for
fish populations. At the same time, Elliott Bay would receive
21% more CSO's. The adverse effect on the Elliott Bay-
Duwamish/Green River fish runs and resident fish populations
could be substantial, as these animals may be stressed by
existing water quality conditions. The effect would be
limited in Elliott Bay, and of long duration and reversible
except for metals and toxicants.
Freshwater environments. CSO control under Alternative
D would be a moderate benefit to freshwater environments.
No Kenmore parallel is planned under this alternative.
126
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative D
1. Lake Washington. A major (83%) reduction of CSO
to this lake would mean a moderate long-term benefit to
limited areas of the western shore of the lake, including
salmon spawning areas and perhaps bathing beaches which
record high bacterial counts after a storm overflow. Off-
shore organisms which are probably affected less by overflows,
would in turn be benefited less by CSO control. Metals and
toxicants already in the lake would continue to affect the
shoreline biota, however.
2. Lake Union/Ship Canal. The magnitude of the impacts
of overflows on the biota in this water are unknown. How
much of the observed problems can be attributed to overflows
has not been determined but these small waters receive 24
times the CSO flows to Lake Washington. A reduction would
clearly be a benefit, but of undeterminable magnitude. As
this water is an important salmonid migration route, major
overflow reductions of about 50% are considered to have a
moderate positive impact, extensive in the water body and of
long duration.
Rare and endangered species. No impact is expected as
no listed endangered species are recorded from the study
area. Sensitive habitats have been discussed in previous
sections.
Natural Resources and Energy
Natural resources and energy impacts are analyzed in
the Regional EIS on an interrelated basis between the five
existing Metro plants and potential new sites.
Human Environment
Alternative D has a negative impact on some human
environment factors, and some positive impacts.
Land use. The only new construction which occurs under
Alternative D is of two chemical feed tanks to the northeast
of the existing facility, as indicated in Figure 3-7. This
would not greatly increase the amount of land used, and
occurs in an area which has little impact. This is consid-
ered adverse, minor, long-term, local, reversible and
127
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative D
definite. Impacts of holding tank construction are discussed
in the Regional EIS.
Agency goals. Impacts related to agency goals have been
developed in the Regional EIS, including those goals related
to PL 92-500 compliance and CSO control.
It is debated whether the position of the West Point
treatment facility enhances the goal of the Discovery Park
Master Plan that Discovery Park would provide an open space
of quiet and tranquility for the citizens of Seattle; and
whether this facility affects the objective stated in Goals
for Seattle that "natural amenities identified as important
to the region's character and beauty shall be preserved or
sensitively developed as a second choice." It may be useful
to point out parenthetically, that the West Point facility
was constructed long before the Discovery Park land was
acquired from the Fort Lawton Military Reservation.
Employment and costs. Employment and cost impacts are
analyzed in the Regional EIS.
Social, recreational and cultural. Under Alternative D,
the West Point facility would expand in its present location,
keeping restrictions on the recreational use of the West
Point area. Because of a fence, the beach north of the
facility cannot be used at high tide. The sludge basin
discourages use of the beach to the south of the facility.
Site location at West Point keeps the Interbay sites free
from development.
This alternative does not comply with the wish of 60%
of the 377 Magnolia area people polled that secondary treat-
ment be implemented. This impact is considered adverse,
major, long-term, reversible and probable.
Archeological and historical. Any archeological sites
which may have existed would have already been destroyed by
former construction. No historical sites are in the affected
areas.
Health and safety. There may be health risks associated
with the consumption of shellfish due to the continued dis-
charge of primarily treated waste, as discussed in the
biological section of the EIS.
128
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative D
An unlikely safety hazard is accidental leakage of
chemicals when they are in transport or handled on site.
Although nearly every U. S. water and wastewater treatment
facility uses chemicals, there have been very few chemical-
related accidents.
The health and safety problems related to sludge trans-
port and disposal would be as probable as for any other
trucks in transit.
Construction safety risk would be as for any other
similar construction; with safety-conscious procedures there
should be a slight chance of accidents.
Aesthetics and nuisance. The West Point wastewater
treatment facility is well designed for consideration of
aesthetics. It lies low, is clean, and is surrounded by
well-kept grass. Few odor complaints have been filed.
Visibility of the West Point facility from Discovery Park is
blocked by bluffs. Only 10% of 377 Magnolia area persons
interviewed by Gerhardt Research were opposed to the location
of the West Point facility. Additional sludge digesters
have been placed such that they are not visible from the
bluff at Discovery Park. These impacts would be adverse,
minor, long-term, local, reversible and definite.
The noise and traffic of sludge trucking is a minor
nuisance which did not seem to bother many people. Some
people were unaware of which route the trucks traveled
(HRPI, 1976). This is expected to continue as present.
CSO's were dealt with in the Regional EIS, and in the
water quality section of this EIS.
Legal and institutional. Legal and institutional con-
siderations have been developed in the Regional EIS. This
alternative does not meet the secondary treatment require-
ment of PL 92-500. Permits for interceptor construction are
explained in the Regional EIS.
Mitigation Measures
Several mitigation measures are suggested to aid in the
reduction of adverse impacts resulting from the implementa-
tion of this alternative.
129
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative D
While chlorine feed is residual paced at West Point,
the residual is measured a short distance downstream of the
chlorine feeding point and therefore does not reflect the
actual chlorine residual before discharging into Puget Sound.
Therefore the exact chlorine dosage required to provide
adequate disinfection and the extent of disinfection cannot
be determined. Installing a chlorine contact tank would
maximize the effectiveness of chlorination treatment.
Pretreatment of industrial wastes could be provided
before sewage enters the West Point plant. If current prac-
tices continue, this facility would occasionally receive
slugs of cadmium, mercury and arsenic.
Odor of the wastewater treatment facilities can continue
to be mitigated, in part, by not allowing the primary and
secondary treatment systems to become anaerobic. It is under
anaerobic conditions that such gases as methane and noxious-
sulfur dioxide are emitted.
The sludge lagoon could be removed and the beach re-
stored. This action would also eliminate any effects of the
structure on longshore sediment transport. The existing
access road south of the sedimentation tanks could be re-
routed and the existing parking lot removed to increase
usable public space at the south beach. A large landscaped
earth-sludge berm approximately 20 feet high could be located
between public activities and the plant. Increased planting
along the entrance road would enhance visual screening. The
berms can be developed as visual extensions of the bluff.
The remainder of the plant could be also surrounded by land-
scaped earth-sludge berms; new digesters to the north could
be partially depressed and "buried" by berms. These were
shown previously in Figure 3-7 (Alternative C).
Possible sludge truck traffic could be isolated along
the southeastern property line between the plant and bluff
to minimize visual and noise intrusion. The northern portion
of the Metro property could be developed in a manner compati-
ble with park objectives. Both a saltwater marsh fed by a
new channel through the existing seawall, and a freshwater
marsh fed by existing streams from the bluff are illustrated
as possibilities; a range of other possibilities and con-
figurations is conceivable.
Public access along the entire shoreline could be main-
tained and enhanced. These landscaping measures are devel-
oped in more detail in the Draft Facility Plan (Metropolitan
Engineers, 1977).
130
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative D
Under this alternative, a mitigation measure for con-
trolling solid and metal loads in effluent water would be
to use the enhanced primary treatment of alum year round,
rather than just in the summer.
The potential effects of a large new CSO outfall to
poorly-flushed Elliott Bay could be mitigated by precon-
struction analysis of existing sediments, current patterns
and velocities, water quality and biota.
Unavoidable Adverse Impacts
Under this alternative, the following adverse impacts
would be unavoidable.
Construction. Although construction activities can be
screened from public view, they will still be a temporary
nuisance.
Sludge trucking. Under current practices of disposing
sludge at remote sanitary landfill sites, there will neces-
sarily be sludge trucking.
Primary effluent effect on water quality. This alter-
native does not implement secondary treatment; the water
degradation of Puget Sound would continue.
Noncompliance with PL 92-500. Public Law 92-500
requires the installation of secondary treatment. This
alternative does not comply -
Land use. Land is required in all alternatives; the
question is:where will the impact occur.
Aesthetic nuisance of plant location. Wastewater treat-
ment facilities are a nuisance in all alternatives; the
question is: how can these nuisances be made smallest.
Operation and maintenance and capital costs. Construc-
tion of wastewater facilities, interceptors, and CSO holding
tanks is expensive. The facilities must be operated and
maintained.
131
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative D
Energy expenditures. Energy can in part .be provided by
the methane produced in anaerobic digestion, but there is
still a large expenditure of energy which cannot be
mitigated.
132
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
ALTERNATIVE E
SECONDARY
Alternative E would provide secondary treatment at West
Point and transfers the dry weather Carkeek Park flows to
West Point.
Service Area
The West Point plant would serve its present area and
pick up increased flows from growth in the North Lake Wash-
ington sewerage service subarea.
Service area modifications in addition to phasing out
Carkeek Park include annexing of the North Lake Sammamish
service area to Renton via the Redmond connection and
transferring Val Vue from Renton. To serve increased
North Lake Washington flows requires construction of the
Kenmore parallel interceptor. To transfer Carkeek flows
to West Point requires construction of the Carkeek-West
Point interceptor.
Treatment Plant
The plant would treat 142 mgd dry weather, 350 mgd wet
weather flows under this alternative and upgrade facilities
to secondary treatment by 1985.
The West Point major secondary treatment layout is
shown in Figure 3-8. New structures would include second-
ary aeration basins, clarifiers, a chlorine contact tank
and sulfonation building. Air activated sludge is proposed
in the Facility Plan. Alternate West Point secondary
facilities' other options include oxygen activated sludge
or tower trickling filters followed by granular media fil-
tration. All layouts involve shoreline fill, although less
fill is required if the tower trickling filter is construc-
ted. The secondary activated sludge process as proposed in
the Facility Plan would require 12 acres of shoreline fill.
In 1985, the Carkeek Park dry weather flows would be
transferred to West Point. Carkeek Park would treat only
storm flows. Carkeek could be abandoned in 1995 with the
completion of improvements to the City of Seattle storm
133
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative E
METRO - WEST POINT WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
SECONDARY CLARIFIER
•POWER BLDG
THICKENER
ILTER FTtESS BLDG.
ADMINISTRATION BLDG ADDITION
SECONDARY
(AIR ACTIVATED SLUDGE)
METRO - WEST POINT WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
SECONDARY
(TOWER TRICKLING FILTER)
Figure 3-8
West Point Layouts Alternative E
134
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative E
flow system.
Combined Sewer Overflow Control
Combined sewer overflow control is not a feature of
Alternative E. CSO's to Lake Washington, Lake Union, Ship
Canal, Portage Bay and Elliott Bay would remain approxi-
mately the same as in Alternative B.
The current program of maximizing available in-line
storage capacity for control of combined sewer overflows
would be continued by construction of the Montlake and
Third Avenue West regulator stations. Excessive infiltra-
tion/inflow would be removed from the Carkeek Park, City of
Seattle, and City of Lake Forest Park service areas.
Sludge
Additional sludge digestion would be provided at West
Point to handle the increased sludge production. Renton
sludge would be removed from West Point and treated else-
where. Richmond Beach digested sludge would be trucked to
West Point for dewatering, and dewatered sludge from West
Point trucked to Cedar Hills landfill for disposal and to
Park Forest for recycling.
Impacts
The direct impacts projected under this alternative to
the year 2005 are described below. Secondary impacts are
discussed in the Regional EIS which is Volume I of the series
Geology, Soils and Topography
Alternative E requires expansion of the West Point
facility, including shoreline fill. The installation of
activated sludge facilities for secondary wastewater treat-
ment would require a total of 54 acres, 12 of which would
be shoreline fill. Some construction may be at the base of
the unstable bluffs bordering the site to the east. Build-
ing at the base of the bluff could have potentially major
adverse effects from landslides. With retaining walls or
upland drainage and fill at the toe of the slope, the site
135
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative E
would probably be sufficiently stable to permit construction
at the base. The effect is judged to be minor as mitigated,
limited in extent and a long-term problem.
Earthquake damage is considered to be potential for
structures on fill in this area. Low structures, such as
those planned, would be susceptible to damage primarily from
differential settlement of soils caused by ground shaking.
It is assumed that structures would be designed to with-
stand such events. The impact could still be major, but
would be limited in extent and of short duration.
Erosion and deposition during construction could be
major but limited in extent and of short duration. Shore-
line fill could alter sand/sediment transport processes
along the north shore of West Point. The magnitude of the
effect depends on the duration of the construction period,
the design of the fill area, the amount and quality of the
fill, the depth of water at the fill site, tidal and weather
conditions and the type of existing nearshore sediments.
The fill would require some protection, such as riprap, to
prevent its being eroded away. With these precautions,
the erosion problem could be expected to be minor and
limited but of long duration.
Any effects on shoreline sediment transport due to the
sludge lagoon would continue. Not enough information is
available at this time to evaluate the impact, however.
The construction of the Kenmore parallel interceptor
would temporarily alter lake bottom and shoreline soil pro-
files and topography and increase nearshore erosion and
siltation, as discussed in the Regional EIS.
The Carkeek-West Point interceptor would be laid in
the West Point service area from south of Meadow Point along
shore and finally across Salmon Bay. Construction would
temporarily alter shoreline sediment and topography and in-
crease nearshore erosion and siltation. The benthic sedi-
ment of Salmon Bay would be disturbed. The highly probable
impact is judged to be severe but limited in extent, of
short duration and reversible.
Air Quality and Odors
Emissions from construction of the secondary treatment
facilities would be minor, limited, and of short duration.
Dust raised during construction could be a major short-term
problem. There would be an increased potential for odors
136
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative E
escaping during the operation of the secondary treatment
plant because secondary treatment plants are larger and more
complex than primary plants, expose more water surface area
to the air and subject the water to more perturbation. The
odor problem is still considered to be minor, limited in ex-
tent, and intermittent, however. Various practical measures
can be employed to control treatment plant odors and are
discussed in the section on mitigation measures. Emissions
from increased sludge truck trips and employee vehicle traf-
fic are considered to be minor, limited in extent and of
short duration due to the good air circulation on and near
the site. Odors due to CSO's would increase as the system
became overloaded. During construction of the Kenmore
parallel and Carkeek-West Point interceptors, particulates
and engine emissions would locally increase for a short
time, as discussed in the Regional EIS.
Water Quality
Under Alternative E, secondary effluent would be dis-
charged from West Point. Secondary treatment would reduce
the discharge of BOD 81% and of suspended solids 75%. Dis-
charge of heavy metals, PCB's and pesticides will decrease
if these are associated with particulates. There would be
no CSO control. There would be no effect on Puget Sound
temperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen or BOD.
Puget Sound. Very minor reductions iri nutrients from
secondary treatment would be offset by continued contri-
butions from CSO's. The overall adverse impact at West
Point would continue to be moderate, because West Point
effluent is believed to increase levels of primary produc-
tivity; limited in extent; long-term, because the discharge
would continue through the planning period; and reversible.
Suspended solids loads at West Point would be reduced
74% due to secondary treatment, but CSO's would continue.
The net positive impact would be minor; limited to West
Point beaches; long-term, because the CSO's and discharge
would continue through the planning period; and, except
for metals and toxicants, reversible. CSO's would also
continue to degrade microbiological quality, but as CSO's
are relatively small near West Point, the overall adverse
impact is judged to be minor; limited on West Point beaches;
long-term, because CSO's are intermittent but continuing;
and reversible. Heavy metals removal efficiencies would be
substantially improved by secondary treatment, but metals
would still be released to the Sound from CSO's and other
sources not controllable by Metro wastewater facilities.
137
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative E
For toxic compounds, small improvements from secondary treat-
ment would be offset by continued CSO's. The overall adverse
effect would be minor, because the concentrations of toxi-
cants and metals in West Point discharge and CSO's are not
excessively high; limited to West Point beaches and near-
shore areas; long-term, because the discharges would contin-
ue through the planning period; and irreversible because of
the nondegradable character of these contaminants. With
the enforcement of the Toxic Substances.Act, the contribution
of PCB's from the Duwamish area should begin to decline in
1978-1979, although PCB's already accumulated in Duwamish
sediments will continue to exert adverse, toxic effects for
a long time.
Lake Washington. The construction of the Kenmore
parallel in the West Point service area, along the north-
western shore of Lake Washington, would affect the lake's
water quality through increased turbidity and perhaps re-
suspension of metals and other materials associated with
lake sediment. The effect is described in more detail in
the Regional EIS.
The probable adverse effect on water quality is consid-
ered to be moderate, but highly limited in extent in the
lake, of short duration and reversible as particles resettle.
Groundwater. Groundwater levels could have a minor,
limited but long-term negative impact if dewatering is neces-
sary at the construction site. West Point effluent, dis-
charged to Puget Sound, is incapable of infiltrating ground-
water .
Biology
The projected impacts due to implementation of Alterna-
tive E are described below in terms of terrestial habitats,
shoreline habitats, the intertidal, Puget Sound, commercial
and sport fisheries, freshwater environments, and rare or
endangered species.
Terrestrial habitats. The effect on terrestrial biota
at West Point and along Lake Washington would be from two
sources: construction noise, which although minor would be
of longer duration and greater magnitude than in previous
action alternatives, and removal of habitat, which would be
minor and limited but essentially permanent.
While the exact route of the Kenmore parallel inter-
ceptor is undecided, it is certain that some temporary minor
138
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative E
disturbance of terrestrial habitats would occur due to noise
and physical disturbance from construction activities. The
impact is expected to be minor, but extending 4000 feet
along the northwestern shore of Lake Washington. The ef-
fects would be short-term (for the duration of construction
plus a_short time afterwards) and reversible as the plants
and animals could recolonize the area once construction is
completed.
Shoreline habitats. In the absence of CSO control,
marshes and shorelines would continue to suffer adverse
effects of long duration from sediments, metals, pesticides,
and toxicants in the overflows (assuming the Madison Park
and Roanoke overflow data are typical). Plants and animals
may be directly affected by toxic materials or may concen-
trate them in their tissues to levels toxic to predators.
Salmon spawning areas, which require clean gravel, sand and
groundwater seepage could be silted over. Oil and grease
can coat skin, gills and other surfaces involved in oxygen
transfer. Solids, BOD and nutrients could have moderate-
to-major effects as well, but these would probably be short-
term in nature.
The Kenmore parallel interceptor would also have major
but limited and short-term negative impacts on the north-
west shore of Lake Washington. It is assumed that the
effects of the existing pipe have subsided and that the
installation of a second pipe means a new perturbation to
the system. The Kenmore parallel would locally destroy
shoreline communities and probably frighten water birds,
mammals and fishes away from the site during construction.
The turbidity resulting from excavation would reduce plant
activity and could possibly silt over salmon spawning areas.
It is expected, however, that the plants and animals, with
the possible exception of salmon, would re-establish them-
• selves in time. The re-establishment of any salmon spawning
areas affected would depend on how quickly the overlying
sediment was carried away. Mitigation measures are dis-
cussed in a subsequent portion of this section. Further
environmental analyses of possible impacts would be con-
ducted prior to construction.
The intertidal. Overflows to Puget Sound and Elliott
Bay would remain at present annual levels of 358 million
gallons. Treatment plant effluent, which reaches adjacent
beaches at least occasionally, would not increase in volume
over Alternative B levels, but solids and BOD and perhaps
metals and toxicants loads would be reduced 74% to 81%.
Nutrients, which appear to be implicated in increased
growth rates of intertidal plants at West Point, would
139
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative E
probably not be removed in significant amounts by secondary
treatment of effluent and would therefore continue to enter
Puget Sound at Alternative B levels. Bacterial and pathogen
inputs from CSO's would continue and it is impossible to
determine whether or not state bacterial standards for shell-
fish waters would be met.
The reduction in solids and BOD is considered to be a
minor limited benefit, as effects from these parameters have
not been demonstrated on the intertidal. Metals levels are
higher in biota near the outfall area than at background
stations, but are below existing standards. Toxicants
levels in effluents are unknown, but removals in secondary
treatment would be a positive effect. The benefit of metals
and toxicants removals would be long-term, no matter how
small.
It is not known which affects the intertidal community
more overall - CSO's or effluents. Effluent quality is
generally fairly well known (except for toxicants and trace
elements), but its frequency of contact with the intertidal
is not. CSO quality, on the other hand, is poorly known,
but frequency of occurrence has been evaluated.
Alternative E also includes a Carkeek-West Point inter-
ceptor along the shore of Puget Sound and crossing Salmon
Bay. Assuming the line would be underground, the disruption
of the shoreline and/or intertidal habitat would be severe
but temporary and limited. The substrate could be removed
and much turbidity generated, similar to the effects of the
Kenmore parallel on lake shores.
The intertidal north of West Point would be adversely
affected by the placement of shoreline fill. The fill
would cover an area formerly used as a raw sewage discharge
area and sludge bed. Impacts include local displacement of
benthic organisms and intertidal communities, and local loss
of habitat for nearshore organisms. The immediate effect is
judged to be adverse and major, but highly limited. Resi-
dent populations of benthic organisms would be permanently
displaced from a localized area. Most would recolonize the
area, attracted to the stable environment provided by the
riprap. Intertidal flora would thus be affected in a minor
way only, as they could reestablish on the rock. In time,
intertidal organisms would be generally benefited by the
improvement in effluent quality and the new habitat
available.
The overall impact on intertidal shellfish beds could
possibly be an improvement, as there are many more clams and
geoducks south of West Point than north, and those could
140
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative E
benefit from secondary treatment of effluent in terms of re-
duced solids loads. Some solids and fecal coliforms inputs
would continue, however. CSO pollutant contributions would
continue, but are generally smaller at West Point than at
other beaches in the Metro area. It cannot be determined
at present whether or not waters would then meet fecal coli-
form standards as other inputs are probably involved as well,
At the same time, clam digging is prohibited at West Point
by Discovery Park policy.
Puget Sound. Secondary treatment could mean improved
disinfection - better kill with half the chlorine. With
installation of a chlorine contact tank and dechlorination,
disinfection could be optimized and potential effluent
toxicity eliminated. BOD, solids, and probably metals and
toxicant loads would be significantly reduced. Nutrient
inputs would continue at baseline levels. CSO's to Puget
Sound waters would be as in baseline conditions (B).
Nearshore and offshore phytoplankton would continue to
be impacted by nutrients at present levels. The effect on
zooplankton is not determinable. Offshore free-swimming
and bottom dwelling organisms would be exposed to effluents
containing substantially less solids, metals and toxicants.
The apparent influence of the effluent plume on benthic
community composition would continue if due to nutrients;
if due to solids and organic matter, the effects could
decrease. The abundance of clams and worms at the 150 foot
contour could become less pronounced.
The composition of fish assemblages near the West Point
outfall may or may not change with secondary treatment.
Some fishes may be attracted to the organisms on the pipe
or to the pipe itself and would remain. Fishes which may be
attracted by prey species favored by effluent caused changes
in the.bottom or the water column may also remain, although
the waters and substrates would be affected less. Any
effect on fishes would probably be short-term as many of
these species are transient in this area. The slightly
elevated incidence of tumors on flatfish may or may not
change with secondary treatment of effluent as the cause
or causes of the occurrence is unknown.
The Carkeek-West Point interceptor would cross Salmon
Bay, which is critical for migratory fish species of the
Lake Washington drainage basin and supports many of the
marine species found in the Seattle area. The bay is also
a resting and feeding area for migratory water birds. Al-
terations in the water quality due to laying of the pipe
141
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative E
could increase migratory fish susceptibility to natural mor-
tality and predation for the period of construction.
Commercial and sport fisheries. Salmonid runs up the
Ship Canal through Lake Washington would continue to be
affected by baseline levels of CSO's. Spawning areas in
the lake could possibly be affected due to continued reduc-
tions in DO, overenrichment of nutrients and metals and
toxicants loads. There are no data on effects of CSO's on
Ship Canal water quality.
Juvenile fishes, including salmonids, which feed in near-
shore areas occasionally affected by effluent, would poten-
tially be benefited somewhat by the decrease in toxicants
and metals loadings which could otherwise build up in their
prey in time. The benefit is considered to be minor-to-
moderate, and long-term as effluent flows and CSO's would
continue.
The Carkeek-West Point interceptor would have a signifi-
cant but limited and short-term adverse impact on salmonid
migration during its construction through Salmon Bay. Con-
struction timing could theoretically mitigate this impact,
but at any given time of year some salmonid species are
migrating upstream or downstream. The Kenmore parallel
interceptor could affect Chinook salmon spawning areas in
northwest Lake Washington.
Freshwater environments. Alternative E's effects on
freshwaters are the result of increased CSO's to certain
waters, such as Lake Washington and Lake Union/Ship Canal.
1. Lake Washington. CSO's to Lake Washington would
be the same as in Alternative B. Loads of other parameters
- metals, toxicants, nutrients - are assumed to be the same.
The CSO volume to the lake would be about 1/20 that to the
Lake Union/Ship Canal which is a smaller body of water.
The effects on Lake Washington biota as a whole are probably
minor as the lake is so large. The adverse effects on near-
shore and shoreline life of CSO's and the construction of
the Kenmore parallel have been described previously.
2. Green Lake. This small eutrophic lake has had
pollution problems such as algae blooms which are probably
caused by nutrients entering via subsurface seepage. A
small increase in overflows to the lake would probably have
a negligible effect on fish and waterfowl as these other
142
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative E
inputs appear to dominate environmental conditions.
3. Lake Union/Ship Canal. Under Alternative E, these
waters would receive the same level of CSO's as in Alterna-
tive B. The contents of these overflows are assumed to be
similar to those found at Roanoke (Metro staff, 1976). The
Ship Canal/Lake Union are already stressed and are consid-
ered to be less sensitive than Lake Washington, but receive
20 times the overflow loads and volume. Biological life
would continue to be stressed and hampered by: 1) fine,
soft and polluted bottom mud resulting from years of raw
sewage and other pollutant discharges, 2) oil spills and
boat wastes as well as from CSO's (McGreevy, 1973). The
negative effects on the biota would be a continuation of
present impacts which are unknown, but probably moderate-to-
severe, extensive in the waterway, long-term and irreversi-
ble for metals and toxicants.
Rare and endangered species. No rare or endangered
species are recorded from the study area. Sensitive habi-
tats have been described previously. Wildfowl rest areas
and rare species are not expected to be affected. Pigeon
guillemots rest in the cliffs adjacent to the sludge lagoon
and would not be affected by expansion of the West Point
facility into the meadow area to the northeast.
Natural Resources and Energy
Natural resources and energy impacts are analyzed in
the Regional Environmental Impact Statement on an inter-
related basis between the five existing Metro plants and
potential new sites.
Human Environment
Alternative E has a negative impact on some human
environment factors, and some positive impacts.
Land use. Twelve acres of fill would be required to
the northeast of the present West Point facility to accommo-
date the air activated or trickling filter basins. This
fill would necessitate a permit from the Seattle Shorelines
Master Plan, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The
Master Plan discourages fill unless absolutely essential.
The impact of fill would be adverse, possibly major, local
143
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative E
long-term, reversible and definite.
Agency goals. Impacts related to agency goals have
been developed in the Regional EIS, including those goals
related to PL 92-500 compliance and CSO control.
It is debated whether expansion of the West Point treat-
ment facility enhances the goal of the Discovery Park Master
Plan that Discovery Park would "provide an open space of
quiet and tranquility for the citizens of Seattle"; and
whether this facility affects the objective stated in Goals
for Seattle that "natural amenities identified as important
to the region's character and beauty shall be preserved or
sensitively developed as a second choice."
Employment and costs. Employment and cost impacts are
analyzed in the Regional EIS.
Social, recreational, and cultural. The expansion to
the northeast of the facility would greatly limit the public
access to the northern beach. This is considered adverse,
minor, long-term, irreversible, local and definite.
This alternative complies with the wish of 60% of the
377 randomly selected Magnolia area people polled that
secondary treatment be implemented. This impact is con-
sidered favorable, major, long-term, irreversible, and
probable.
Archeological and historical. Any archeological sites
which may have existed would have already been destroyed by
former construction. No historical sites are in the affect-
ed areas.
Health and safety. There may be fewer health risks
associated with the consumption of shellfish due to the
discharge of secondary effluent rather than primary, as
discussed in the biological section of the EIS.
An unlikely safety hazard is accidental leakage of
chemicals when they are in transport or handled on site.
Although nearly every U.S. water and wastewater treatment
facility uses chemicals, there have been very few chemical-
related accidents.
The health and safety problems related to sludge trans-
144
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative E
port and disposal would be as probable as for any other
trucks in transit.
Construction safety risk would be as for any other
similar construction: with safety-conscious procedures
there should be a slight chance of accidents.
Aesthetics and nuisance. The West Point wastewater
treatment facility expansion would be well-designed for
consideration of aesthetics. It would lie low, be clean,
and be surrounded by well-kept grass and screening trees.
Few odor complaints have been filed but odors could increase
with secondary treatment. Visibility of the West Point
facility from Discovery Park would be blocked by bluffs.
Only 10% of 377 Magnolia area residents interviewed by
Gerhardt Research were opposed to the location of the West
Point facility- Although more were opposed to expansion,
it was cautiously accepted as a "necessary evil."
The additional activated sludge basins have been placed
such that they are not visible from behind the bluff at •
Discovery Park.
The tanks related to trickling filters, to the south
of the facility, would be more visible from bluffs above,
if this subalternative is adopted.
These aesthetic impacts would be adverse, minor, long-
term, local, reversible and definite.
The noise and traffic of sludge trucks is a minor
nuisance which did not seem to bother many people. Some
people were unaware of which route the trucks traveled
(HRPI, 1976). The sludge traffic is expected to approxi-
mately double under this alternative.
Legal and institutional. Legal and institutional con-
siderations have been developed in the Regional EIS. This
alternative meets the requirements of PL 92-500. Permits
for interceptor construction are explained in the Regional
EIS.
Mitigation Measures
Several mitigation measures are suggested to aid in the
reduction of adverse impacts resulting from the implementa-
tion of this alternative.
145
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative E
Pretreatment of industrial wastes could be provided
before sewage enters the West Point and Carkeek Park plant.
If current practices continue, these facilities would oc-
casionally receive slugs of cadmium, mercury and arsenic.
Odor of the wastewater treatment facilities can contin-
ue to be mitigated, in part, by not allowing the primary and
secondary treatment systems to become anaerobic. It is
under anaerobic conditions that such noxious gases as me-
thane and sulfur dioxide are emitted.
The possible silting over of salmon spawning grounds
during the construction of the Kenmore parallel (Lake Line
Option) called for under this alternative would cause im-
pacts, both environmental and economical. Therefore it is
recommended that an evaluation study be made on the Force
Main Option to determine its possible impacts. Not enough
information is presently available to consider this option.
If the Lake Line option is selected, the use of washed
beach gravel as backfill in the construction of the Kenmore
parallel interceptor could encourage salmon spawning, as in
the construction of the North Mercer Island interceptor in
1970. Such a measure, however, would require the cooper-
ation of both federal and state agencies to be successful.
Construction timed to avoid salmon spawning and intragravel
development would be limited to the months of March to
September, probably increasing construction costs. Further
environmental studies would be made before construction.
Further evaluation could be made of measures to elimin-
ate shoreline fill, such as tall aeration basins or stacked
clarifiers. Currently under this alternative, twelve acres
of fill would be necessary to accommodate low-lying second-
ary treatment facilities.
The sludge lagoon could be removed, the area south of
the existing digester could be kept open as a public activi-
ty area, and the access road and parking area could be re-
located. Removing the lagoon would also eliminate any
effects of the structure on longshore sediment transport.
The north beach area, including the new fill, could be
substantially covered with a flat, screen-roofed, tank
structure approximately 15 feet high, similar to the exist-
ing sedimentation tanks. Some possibility exists for cre-
ating a marsh habitat area between the tanks and bluffs
which would give some isolation from more active public
areas. These are indicated in Figure 3-9.
146
-------
West Point Alternative
E (Activated Sludge)
ACTIVATED
SLUDGE SECONDARY
TREATMENT
3
~S
§
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative E
A new seawall would be required. The seawall could be
designed to create some intertidal area by stepping since
the existing rocky intertidal area would be lost. The gen-
eral shape of the wall could be designed as an undulating
form as suggested in the site plan, (see Figure 3-9), rather
than the existing straight wall. Such a scheme requires
more fill but adds to the quantity and quality of public
activity space.
Landscape treatment options vary from establishment of
grass cover for erosion control (allowing natural succession
to occur), to planting of a dense cover/screen of native
shrubs and trees., Costs for these treatments vary substan-
tially and are covered in the section on estimated costs
of the Facility Plan.
Unavoidable Adverse Impacts
Under this alternative, the following adverse impacts
would be unavoidable.
Construction. Although construction activities can be
screened from public view, they will still be a temporary
nuisance and disrupt soils and topography.
Sludge trucking. Under current practices of disposing
sludge at remote sanitary landfill sites, there will neces-
sarily be sludge trucking.
Combined sewer overflows. This alternative does not
take adequate measures to control CSO's; they will still
occur in wet weather.
Land use. Land is required in all alternatives; the
question is: where will the impact occur?
Aesthetic nuisance of plant location. Wastewater treat-
ment facilities are a nuisance in all alternatives; the
question is: how can these nuisances be made smallest?
Operation and maintenance and capital costs. Construc-
tion of wastewater facilities, interceptors, and CSO holding
tanks is expensive. The facilities must be operated and
148
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative E
maintained.
Energy expenditures. Energy can in part be provided by
the methane produced in anaerobic digestion, but there is
still a large expenditure of energy which cannot be miti-
gated
Secondary effluent effect on water quality and biota.
Nutrient inputs would continue at baseline levels; remaining
solids, BOD and other loadings would continue to exert some
effect on water quality and biota.
149
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
ALTERNATIVE F
SECONDARY/SOUTHERN STRATEGY
Alternative F provides secondary treatment at West Point
and a new plant in the lower Duwamish serving the southern
West Point service area and Alki, thus allowing Alki to be
abandoned and flows to West Point reduced.
Service Area
Dry weather flows from Carkeek Park would be transferred
to West Point, but dry weather flows for the Duwamish area
would be served by a new plant to be constructed there.
Carkeek could be abandoned in 1995 with the completion of
improvements to the City of Seattle storm flow system.
East North Lake Washington and North Lake Sammamish
would be transferred to Renton via the North Creek-Hollywood
connection. As a result, West Point would treat 97 mgd dry
weather, 350 mgd wet weather flows, similar to current
conditions. Carkeek flows would be transferred to West
Point via the Carkeek-West Point interceptor.
Treatment Plant
West Point would be upgraded to secondary by 1985. The
plant layout for West Point is shown in Figure 3-10. The
reduced West Point service area, and therefore loading,
allows oxygen-activated sludge secondary treatment facilities
as proposed in the Facility Plan to be constructed on the
existing site with no shoreline fill. Air activated sludge
could be accommodated but would require larger aeration tank
area. A chlorine contact tank and sulfonation building
would be constructed.
Combined Sewer Overflow Control
CSO's to Lake Washington, Lake Union, Ship Canal, Por-
tage Bay and Elliott Bay would be reduced under this alter-
native (relative to Alternative B), corresponding with
decreases in the West Point service area and increased peak
capacity in southern areas. CSO's to fresh waters would be
reduced about 31%, to salt waters by 15%, or 21% overall.
150
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative F
The current program of maximizing available inline
storage capacity for control of combined sewer overflows
would be continued by construction of regulator stations at
Montlake and Third Avenue West.
Sludge
Renton sludge would be removed from West Point and
treated at Renton. Richmond Beach digested sludge would be
trucked to West Point for dewatering, and dewatered sludge
from West Point and Duwamish would be trucked to Cedar Hills
landfill for disposal or to Pack Forest for recycling
research.
METRO - WEST POINT WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
FILTER PRESS BLDG.
CRYOGENIC OXYGEN PLANT
- MAINTENANCE BLOO. ADDITION
- W AS THICKENER
- ADMINISTRATION BLDG. ADDITION
Figure 3-10
Alternative F
West Point Layout
151
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative F
Impacts
The direct impacts projected under this alternative
through the year 2005 are described below. Secondary impacts
are discussed in the Regional EIS which is Volume I of this
series.
Geology, Soils and Topography
Alternative F requires expansion of the West Point
facility, but no shoreline fill. The installation of oxygen
activated sludge facilities for secondary wastewater treat-
ment would require a total of 42.1 acres. Some construction
may be at the base of the unstable bluffs bordering the site
to the east. Building at the base of the bluff could have
potentially major adverse effects from landslides. With
retaining walls or upland drainage and fill at the toe of
the slope, the site would probably be sufficiently stable to
permit construction at the base. The effect is judged to be
minor as mitigated, limited in extent and a long-term
problem.
Earthquake damage is considered to be potential for low
structures such as those planned. These would be susceptible
to damage primarily from differential settlement of soils
caused by ground shaking. It is assumed that structures
would be designed to withstand such events, but damage could
still occur.
Erosion and deposition during construction could be
major but limited in extent, reversible, of short duration,
and quite possible in the rainy climate of Seattle. The
magnitude of the effect depends on the duration of the
construction period.
Any effects on shoreline sediment transport due to the
sludge lagoon would continue. Existing information is not
sufficient to evaluate the impacts at this time, however.
The Carkeek-West Point interceptor constructed along the
shore of Puget Sound from Meadow Point across Salmon Bay
would alter shoreline sediment and topography and increase
erosion and siltation and disturb benthic sediments. The
impact is expected to be severe, but limited in extent,
temporary and reversible.
152
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative F
Air Quality and Odors
Upgrading the West Point plant to secondary treatment
would increase the potential for odors escaping into the
surrounding area. Because secondary treatment plants are
larger and more complex than primary plants, expose more
water surface area to the air and subject the water to more
perturbation, there is a greater likelihood for odors being
released into the surrounding neighborhood from secondary
treatment plants.
Various practical measures can be employed, however, to
control treatment plant odors and are discussed in the sec-
tion on mitigation measures. The odor problems at West
Point would still be minor, of limited extent and intermit-
tent. Dust from construction could be a major, short-term
problem. Particulates and engine emissions would increase
along the shoreline affected by construction of the Carkeek-
West Point interceptor. The effect would be minor, tem-
porary and reversible.
Emissions from increased sludge truck trips and employee
vehicle traffic are considered to be minor, limited in
extent and of short duration due to the good air circulation
on and near the site. Odors due to CSO's would be reduced
by control of CSO's.
Water Quality
In Alternative F, secondary effluent would be discharged
from West Point. Flows to West Point would be reduced about
28%, suspended solids discharged 82% and BOD 87%. The
increased efficiency of solids removal could potentially
substantially improve the microbiological quality of the
effluent if disinfection practices are improved. Discharges
of heavy metals, PCB's and pesticides will decrease if these
are associated with particulates. There would be 21% CSO
control overall (15% decrease to Elliott Bay, 31% to Ship
Canal; see Table 3-9 ) over B levels.
Puget Sound. Nutrients loads from West Point effluent
would decrease 28%, and from CSO's about 15% (Elliott Bay)
from B levels. The probable benefit is considered to be
minor, long-term, limited in extent and reversible. Solids
and BOD loads would be reduced about 82 to 87% in effluent,
15% in CSO's from baseline (B) levels, for a general minor-
to-moderate long-term benefit to water quality. Metals and
153
-------
Ul
TABLE 3-9
Annual CSO Pollutant Load Reduction-Alternative F
Water Body
Location
Green Lake
Lake Washington
Portage Bay/Montlake Cut
Lake Union
Ship Canal/Salmon Bay
Elliott Bay
Duwamish River
Puget Sound (Alki)
TOTAL
Approximate Overall
Percent Reduction
To West Point
Service Area
Baseline Alternative B
Volume
(mil gal)
-
22.4
228
56.6
254
358
251
5.46
1175.46
BOD
(tons)
-
5.58
59.3
14.1
63.3
89
62
1.36
294.64
Solids
(tons)
-
20.4
241
51.4
231
325
227
4.95
1100.75
0
0
Alternative F
Volume
(mil gal)
-
15.4
188.8
38.9
175
304
256
0.15
978
17
21
BOD
(tons)
-
3.83
40.7
9.68
43.5
76
63.7
0.04
237
20
24
Solids
(tons)
-
14.0
166
35.3
158
275
232
0.14
880
20
25
MPJ
ft ft
(D H-
H <
3 fl>
0) ui
ft
P. pj
< 3
CD Da
O
rt
cn
Source: Metropolitan Engineers, 1977.
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative F
toxicants attached to solids would decrease proportionately.
With respect to microbiological quality, waters near
combined sewer overflows would continue to be adversely
affected. Whether or not state fecal coliform standards
would be met is unknown, but doubtful with only a 15% CSO
reduction. At West Point, secondary treatment would allow
for improved kill with less chlorine as disinfection prac-
tices are improved through use of a. chlorine contact tank.
Dechlorination would eliminate potential effluent toxicity.
Heavy metals removal efficiencies would be substantially
higher than for enhanced primary treatment, but metals would
still be released to the Sound from remaining CSO's and
other sources not controllable by Metro wastewater facilities,
For toxic compounds, improvements from secondary treatment
would be accompanied by continuing CSO's. The overall bene-
fit effect would be minor, because metals concentrations
are not excessively high in effluent; limited in extent;
long-term, because the discharge of toxic materials would
continue through the planning period; and irreversible
because of the non-degradable nature of the contaminants.
Although the contribution of PCB's from the Duwamish area is
expected to diminish in 1978-1979 with enforcement of the
Toxic Substances Act, PCB's already accumulated in Duwamish
sediments will continue to exert adverse effects for a long
time.
The construction of the Carkeek-West Point interceptor
could cause some localized, temporary turbidity along its
route.
Lake Washington. CSO's to the lake would be reduced
31% over B levels. The probable benefit to water quality
along shore is considered to be minor but long-term. Benefits
to offshore waters would probably be very minor-to-negligible.
Effects of F on microbiological quality are unknown, but
it is possible that occasional health risks with respect to
bathing could be reduced.
Lake Union/Ship Canal. CSO's would be reduced 31%
over B levels to this water system. As overflows constitute
a relatively larger portion of these than of Lake Washington
waters, the reduction could be considered a minor-to-moderate,
or larger, benefit to water quality than above.
Groundwater. Groundwater levels could have a minor,
limited but long-term negative impact if dewatering is
necessary at the construction site.
155
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative F
Biology
Under Alternative F, West Point effluent would receive
secondary treatment. Carkeek Park would become a wet weather
facility with dry weather flows transferred to West Point
through a new interceptor. Overflows to freshwaters would
be reduced about 31% below baseline (B) levels. Overflows
to Elliot Bay would be reduced 15%.
No shoreline fill would be required as expansion would
be to the area northeast of the present facility.
Terrestrial habitats. Construction in the meadow could
eliminate that habitat.In addition, construction at the
base of the unstable cliffs adjacent to the site could
threaten birds nesting in the cliffs. The impacts are con-
sidered to be adverse and moderate-to-major in severity, but
highly limited in extent. The effects are probably rever-
sible but could be of long duration if the plants and animals
affected recolonize slowly.
Shoreline habitats. CSO pollutants loads to Lake Wash-
ington and to Union Bay/Portage Bay marshes would be reduced
by a minor-to-moderate amount (31%) from baseline (B) levels
(Metropolitan Engineers, 1977).
With the reductions, loads and flows would be essentially
at present levels. The benefit relative to baseline (B) is
considered to be minor-to-moderate, fairly extensive in
these waters, and long term as CSO' s continue and metals and
toxicants loads would decrease.
The intertidal. Overflows to Puget Sound would be re-
duced - 15% to Elliot Bay. Effluent flows from West Point
would decrease by a minor-to-moderate amount (28%) but BOD
and solids loads would decrease 87% and 82% respectively.
Carkeek would be a wet weather plant by 1985. An interceptor
would connect the facility to West Point.
As effluent from the West Point outfall comes onshore
occasionally, a major reduction in loads from baseline levels
due to secondary treatment would be a benefit to the inter-
tidal. It is recognized that effluent has been found only
on one occasion at West Point, but it is likely that this is
a recurring phenomenon. The total effluent load to the inter-
tidal is unknown.
156
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative F
The reduction in overflows to the intertidal is judged
to be a minor benefit, limited in extent along the beaches,
but of long duration for solids, BOD, nutrients, metals,
and toxicants.
Overall, nutrient loads, from CSO's and effluents which
appear to have the most discernible effect on the intertidal,
would be reduced. Effects at West Point, where nutrients
would decrease 28% from B, would be minor. Further changes
in the diversity and abundance of intertidal plants and
animals would probably continue however as the pattern of
natural succession may have been affected by effluent and
other factors.
CSO control could reduce the fecal coliform bacterial
levels in shoreline waters. State standards for shellfish
waters might or might not be met and potential helth risks
to shellfish consumers be reduced. With the installation of
chlorine contact facilities, disinfection could be optimized
with half the chlorine. Dechlorination would eliminate
effluent toxicity due to chlorine residuals.
At the same time, Alternative F includes a Carkeek-
West Point interceptor along the shore of Puget Sound and
crossing Salmon Bay, the impacts of whose construction on
intertidal and shoreline habitats are expected to be major
and adverse, but highly limited in extent, temporary, and
reversible. The substrate would be removed and much tur-
bidity generated, locally destroying benthic communities and
reducing light levels for a limited period.
Puget Sound. As in the intertidal, the loads of BOD,
solids, metals and toxicants to nearshore and offshore waters
would be reduced.
Offshore phytoplankton would probably continue to be
affected by the lower level of nutrients.
Coliform bacteria levels in waters could decrease,
reducing health risk from consuming shellfish. Bacterial
and virus inputs to Puget Sound from overflows would also
be decreased. Whether strict state fecal coliform standards
would subsequently be met cannot be determined at this time.
The apparent influence of the West Point effluent plume
on benthic community composition would probably be continued
at West Point with flows continuing at present levels.
Effects of nutrients would be somewhat reduced (28% decrease)
as these are not removed significantly by secondary treatment,
Solids and BOD loads, however, would be substantially (87%
157
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative F
and 82%) decreased so the roles of these parameters in
maintaining observed patterns in animal distribution and
abundance could also be reduced.
The composition of fish assemblages near the outfalls
may or may not change with secondary treatment of effluents
as the attractions for particular species to the outfalls
have not been identified.
The slightly elevated incidence of tumorous flatfish
at West Point may or may not change with secondary treatment
of effluent, as the cause(s) of the phenomenon is unknown.
The Carkeek-West Point interceptor would cross Salmon
Bay, which is critical for migratory fish species of the
Lake Washington drainage basin and supports many of the
marine species found in the Seattle area. The bay is also
a resting and feeding area for migratory water birds.
Alterations in the water quality due to laying of the pipe
could increase migratory fish susceptibility to natural
mortality and predation for the period of construction.
Timing construction to minimize the effect would be diffi-
cult as at any given time of year, there are migrations
upstream or downstream by some salmonid species.
Commercial and sport fisheries. Salmonid runs up the
Ship Canal and through Lake Washington would experience
reductions in overflow BOD and solids loads and flows.
Impacts of these and other inputs, such as turbidity,
nutrients, metals and toxicants would be 31% lower than
Alternative B baseline levels.
Juvenile fishes including salmonids and bottom fish
feeding inshore in areas occasionally affected by effluents,
would probably benefit from the decrease in toxicants, and
metals loadings which otherwise could accumulate in their
prey. The beneficial impact could be minor-to-moderate,
limited in the central Sound and long term as effluent dis-
charge continues.
The construction of the Carkeek-West Point interceptor
could disrupt fish migration and freshwater-salt-water
transition areas in Salmon Bay through excavation of the
bottom, physical obstacles, noise, turbidity, and possibly
resuspension of toxic elements in the sediment. The result
could be increased fish mortality and predation. The ad-
verse impact is considered to be severe, but limited in
extent, of short duration and reversible.
158
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative F
Freshwater environments. Alternative F provides about
31% CSO control to freshwaters.
1. Lake Washington. CSO reduction would be minor-
to-moderate; 31% lower than Alternative B levels by 2005.
Moderate limited negative impacts would continue in water
along the western shore. Minor impacts could occur in "off-
shore waters, as overflows tend to move along shore rather
than into deeper waters immediately. Lake shore and shallows
biota would continue to be exposed to BOD, solids, sediments,
nutrients, metals, toxicants, pesticides, oil and grease
and pathogens.
2. Green Lake. The effect on the lake of continued
negligible overflows would probably be almost undetectable,
as other inputs dominate the environmental conditions of
this eutrophic, poorly-flushed lake. Waterfowl and stocked
trout would probably not be affected.
3. Lake Union/Ship Canal. CSO flows and loads would
be about 31% lower than in B in 2005. The stress on the
biota of these waters could be essentially unchanged as the
overall effect of CSO's relative to other inputs is unknown.
Rare and endangered species and sensitive habitats.
No listed species are recorded from the study area. Locally
rare plant species in the meadow north of the West Point
facility (described in Chapter II of this report) would be
removed. The meadow area is considered to support a plant
community unique to West Point and the north beach of
Discovery Park and which has been used in Park programs.
Pidgeon guillemots nest in the cliffs adjacent to the exist-
ing sludge lagoon and would not be affected by expansion of
the West Point facility into the meadow area to the northeast,
Natural Resources and Energy
Natural resources and energy impacts are analyzed in
the Regional Environmental Impact Statement on an inter-
related basis between the five existing Metro plants and
potential new sites.
159
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative F
Human Environment
Alternative F would have the following impacts on the
human environment.
Land use. Fill is not required in this alternative as
oxygen activated sludge is used rather than air activated
sludge.
This alternative allows optional development of the
south beach for public use and a large area to the northeast
for possible park use. The undeveloped area in the north
beach could be developed as a marsh habitat. These are
optional features whose costs are not included in facilities
planning costs.
Agency goals. Many of the impacts related to agency
goals have been developed in the Regional EIS, including
those goals related to PL 92-500 compliance and CSO control.
It is debated whether expansion of the West Point treat-
ment facility enhances the goal of the Discovery Park Master
Plan that Discovery Park would "provide an open space of
quiet and tranquility for the citizens of Seattle"; and
whether this facility affects the objective stated in Goals
for Seattle that "natural amenities identified as important
to the region's character and beauty shall be preserved or
sensitively developed as a second choice."
Employment and costs. Employment and cost impacts are
analyzed in the Regional EIS.
Social, recreational and cultural. The south beach
and an undeveloped area northeast of the facility could be
accessible to the public. This impact is favorable, minor,
long-term, local, reversible and definite. It is questioned
however, how popular a beach would be adjacent to a waste-
water treatment facility.
This alternative complies with the wish of 60% of the
377 randomly selected Magnolia area people polled that
secondary treatment be implemented. This impact is consi-
dered favorable, major, long-term, reversible, and probable.
160
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative F
Archeological and historical. Any archeological sites
which may have existed would have already been destroyed by
former construction. No historical sites are in the affected
area.
Health and safety. There may be fewer health risks
associated with the consumption of shellfish due to the
discharge of secondary effluent rather than primary, as
discussed in the biological section of the EIS.
An unlikely safety hazard is accidental leakage of
chemicals when they are in transport or handled on site.
Although nearly every U.S. water and wastewater treatment
facility uses chemicals, there have been very few chemical-
related accidents.
The health and safety problems related to sludge trans-
port and disposal would be as probable as for any other
trucks in transit.
Construction safety risk would be as for any other
similar construction: with safety conscious procedures,
there should be a slight chance of accidents.
With the oxygen activated sludge method of secondary
treatment, oxygen is mixed into the activated sludge basin
for the respiratory functions of the microorganisms which
digest sewage. If this oxygen comes in contact with hydro-
carbons (e.g. gasoline) in the presence of a spark, there
could be an explosion. However, this situation should never
arise. Oxygen activated sludge facilities are designed to
provide continuous monitoring of hydrocarbon concentrations.
An alarm will sound far below dangerous hydrocarbon levels,
and oxygen would automatically be vented to bypass the acti-
vated sludge basin. The impact of an explosion could be
adverse, major, long-term, reversible, but would be highly
unlikely. Although oxygen activated sludge facilities are
used around the country, there have not yet been any inci-
dences of explosion.
Aesthetics and nuisance. The West Point wastewater
treatment facility expansion would be well-designed for
consideration of aesthetics. It would lie low, be clean,
and surrounded by well-kept grass and screening trees. Few
odor complaints have been filed, but odors may increase with
secondary treatment. Visibility of the West Point facility
from Discovery Park would be blocked by bluffs. Only 10%
of these 377 Magnolia residents interviewed by Gerhardt
Research were opposed to the location of the West Point
161
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative F
facility. Although more were opposed to expansion, it was
cautiously accepted as a "necessary evil".
The additional oxygen activated sludge basins have been
placed such that they are not visible from behind the bluffs
at Discovery Park.
These aesthetic impacts would be adverse, minor, long-
term, local, reversible and definite.
The noise and traffic of sludge trucking is a minor
nuisance which did not seem to bother many people. Some
people were unaware of which route the trucks traveled
(HRPI, 1976). The sludge traffic is expected to approximately
double under this alternative.
CSO's will be dealt with in the Regional EIS and in the
water quality section of this EIS.
Legal and institutional. Legal and institutional
considerations have been developed in the Regional EIS.
This alternative meets the requirements of PL 92-500.
Mitigation Measures
Several mitigation measures are suggested to aid in the
reduction of adverse impacts resulting from the implementa-
tion of this alternative.
Pretreatment of industrial wastes could be provided
before sewage enters the West Point plant. If current prac-
tices continue, this facility would occasionally receive
slugs of cadmium, mercury and arsenic. At Carkeek, identi-
fication of grease and metal sources and perhaps pretreat-
ment or changes in discharge permits could reduce levels of
these parameters to influent.
Odor of the wastewater treatment facilities can continue
to be mitigated, in part, by not allowing the primary and
secondary treatment systems to become anaerobic. It is
under anaerobic conditions that such noxious gases as methane
and sulfur dioxide are emitted.
Figure 3-11 indicates landscaping measures which could
be taken to improve the aesthetics and recreational value
of the West Point site under this alternative.
162
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternate F
OXYGEN ACTIVATED
SLUDGE SECONDARY
TREATMENT
T WEST POINT
N TREATMENT PLANT
0 200 4OOII
Figure 3-11
West Point Alternative F
163
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative F
This alternative allows development of the south beach
for public use, removal of the sludge lagoon, and a large
area to the northeast for possible park use. The undeveloped
area in the north beach could be developed as a marsh habitat.
Removal of the sludge lagoon would eliminate any effects of
that structure on longshore sediment transport.
Berms and native landscaping could be utilized to screen
the plant and create a natural edge. Retaining walls should
support berms and/or terracing in tight locations such as
the clarifier tanks against the seawall. Sludge truck
traffic, if required, would be held between the plant and
the bluffs.
Unavoidable Adverse Impacts
Under this alternative, the following adverse impacts
would be unavoidable.
Construction. Although construction activities can be
screened from public view, they will still be a temporary
nuisance.
Sludge trucking. Under current practices of disposing
sludge at remote sanitary landfill sites, there will neces-
sarily be sludge trucking.
Combined sewer overflows. This alternative does not
take adequate measures to control CSO's; they will still
occur in wet weather.
Land use. Land is required in all alternatives; the
question is: where will the impact occur.
Aesthetic nuisance of plant location. Wastewater treat-
ment facilities are a nuisance in all alternatives; the
question is: how can these nuisances be made smallest.
0 & M and capital costs. Construction of wastewater
facilities, interceptors, and CSO holding tanks is expensive,
The facilities must be operated and maintained.
164
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative F
Energy expenditures. Energy can in part be provided
by the methane produced in anaerobic digestion, but there
is still a large expenditure of energy which cannot be
mitigated.
Secondary effluent effect on water quality and biota,
Nutrient inputs to Puget Sound would continue at baseline
levels: remaining solids, BOD and other loadings would
continue to exert some effect on water quality.
165
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
ALTERNATIVE G
SECONDARY/WEST POINT PHASEOUT OPTION
Alternative G provides an option for phaseout of West
Point by construction of a new secondary treatment plant in
the Interbay area. Of the two alternative sites evaluated
incorporating public input, the Golf Park site has been
shown in the system layouts and costs. West Point would be
used as an intermittent wet weather treatment facility dur-
ing the planning period and phased out only if large flow
reductions were made.
Service Areas
The present service area of West Point would be reduced
in size and dry weather flows routed to Interbay.
The Interbay service area would remain the same as for
West Point in Alternatives B and E (Figure 3-1 ). North
Lake Sammamish would be transferred to Renton via the Red-
mond connection. Val Vue would be transferred to Interbay-
To serve increased north Lake Washington flows would require
construction of the Kenmore parallel interceptor. The Car-
keek Park area would also be served by Interbay in dry wea-
ther via the Carkeek-West Point interceptor. Carkeek could
be abandoned in 1995.
Treatment Plant
The new Interbay plant would provide secondary treat-
ment for 150 mgd average, 200 mgd peak flows beginning in
1985. West Point would be converted to a wet weather plant
only, providing primary treatment to 350 mgd peak flows.
The West Point site would appear as in Alternative A.
The proposed Interbay site is the Golf Park. Due to
public controversy on the optional Commodore Way site, both
sites are evaluated in this EIS. Layouts are shown in
Figure 3-12.
Effluent from the Interbay plant would meet 30 mg/1
BOD, 30 mg/1 solids standards. Primary treatment of storm-
166
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative G
METRO-COMMODORE WAY WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT (INTERBAY)
METRO-GOLF PARK WASTEWATER TREATMENT
PLANT (INTERBAY)
'••tow/1—|
•c.u.1""".- ^Cia™. K"°"s
Figure 3-12
Interbay Layouts
167
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative G
water at West Point would produce unknown effluent quality.
Chlorine contact channels and dechlorination facilities would
be constructed.
Wet weather flows from West Point and dry weather flows
from Interbay would be discharged to Puget Sound through the
existing West Point outfall. Wet weather flow from Interbay
would be discharged through a new outfall to Elliott Bay.
As an option, Interbay flows might be used for summer lock
flushing in the Ship Canal.
Combined Sewer Overflows
CSO's to Lake Washington, Lake Union, Ship Canal,
Portage Bay and Elliott Bay would be approximately as in
Alternative B due to wet weather treatment at West Point.
However, due to growth in the service areas, CSO's would
increase slightly over existing conditions.
Sludge
West Point wet weather sludge would be stored in di-
gesters during storms, then transferred to Interbay for di-
gestion where anaerobic digestion would be provided. De-
watered Interbay, West Point and Richmond Beach sludge would
be trucked to Cedar Hills landfill for disposal or to Pack
Forest for recycling research.
Impacts
The direct impacts projected under this alternative
through the year 2005 are described below. Secondary im-
pacts are discussed in the Regional EIS which is Volume I
of this series.
Geology, Soils and Topography
Alternative G calls for conversion of West Point to a
wet weather plant, with a new plant at Commodore Way or the
Golf Park. No shoreline fill would be required. Alterna-
tive G also includes construction of the Kenmore parallel
and a Carkeek-Interbay interceptor.
168
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative G
At West Point, no impacts are expected as there would
be no construction. Earthquake damage potential would con-
tinue at present levels, which are considered to be minor,
limited in extent and of short duration.
A treatment plant at Commodore Way would be on clay
soils well suited for construction, although drainage would
need to be provided to prevent water accumulation in the
deep foundation excavations. Low buildings such as proposed
in these hard soils could experience moderate amplification
of long period vibrations and greatest amplification of
short period vibrations. The Golf Park site would be on
fill, which is unstable, and subject to substantial seismic
hazard of differential settlement.
Erosion and deposition during construction could be
major, but limited and short-term problems. Changes in
topography and soil profile would be minor — beneficial
in the long run at West Point, and negligible at Commodore
Way and negative but minor at the Golf Park. The overall
effect is judged to be minor, limited, long-term and nega-
tive.
Any effects on shoreline sediment transport, erosion
and deposition due to the sludge lagoon would continue.
Information is not sufficient at this time to evaluate the
effects, however.
The construction of the Kenmore parallel interceptor
would temporarily alter lake bottom and shoreline soil pro-
files and topography and increase nearshore erosion and
siltation, as discussed in the Regional EIS.
The Carkeek-West Point interceptor would be laid in the
West Point service area from south of Meadow Point south
along shore and finally across Salmon Bay. Construction
would temporarily alter shoreline sediment and topography
and increase nearshore erosion and siltation. The benthic
sediment of Salmon Bay would be disturbed. The highly
probable impact is judged to be severe but limited in ex-
tent, of short duration and reversible.
The construction of the Interbay outfall to Elliott
Bay would cause major but highly limited and probably
temporary disruption of benthic sediments.
169
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative G
Air Quality and Odors
Conversion of the West Point plant to a wet weather only
facility in 1985 would substantially reduce the potential for
odor problems in this area. The operation of a new secondary
treatment plant at Interbay, an area of poor air circulation,
would create a potential for odor problems in this area.
Because secondary treatment plants are larger and more com-
plex than primary plants, expose more water surface area to
the air and subject the water to more perturbation, there is
a greater likelihood for odors being released into the sur-
rounding neighborhood from secondary treatment plants.
Various practical measures can be employed, however,
to control treatment plant odors and are discussed in the
section on mitigation measures.
The proposed facility would not add significantly to
the air pollution load already present, but the impact of
odors on the Interbay business community could be moderate,
because of the lack of a buffer zone; intermittent, but
continuing; and reversible.
The Golf Park lies over a, sanitary landfill many de-
cades old. Excavation required to build on this site would
cause major and extensive odor problems of short duration.
Gases released would probably include hydrogen sulfide and
methane. Health hazard would be mitigated by odor control
methods during construction, but the odors would not be
entirely contained.
Minor CSO control near West Point would reduce odors
from that source somewhat.
Construction of the Kenmore parallel interceptor and
the Carkeek-West Point interceptor would result in local-
ized minor increases in particulates and engine emissions.
The impacts are expected to be short-term and reversible.
Construction of the Interbay outfall to Elliott Bay
would locally increase particulates and engine emissions in
the Terminal 91 area.
170
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative G
Water Quality
Alternative G includes conversion of West Point to a
wet weather plant with a possiblity of long-term phaseout
dependent on CSO controls. A new secondary plant at
Interbay would discharge secondary dry weather effluent
into Puget Sound through the West Point outfall, to Elliott
Bay in wet weather, or to the Ship Canal in summer for lock-
age on an optional basis.
The volume and loads of CSO's would be essentially as
in baseline conditions (3% increase).
Puget Sound. The volume of effluent discharged off
West Point would not increase relative to the baseline alter-
native, but suspended solids would be reduced 72% and BOD
80%. The increased efficiency of solids removal could poten-
tially improve the microbiological quality of the effluent.
The discharge of heavy metals, PCB's and pesticides will
decrease if these are associated with particulates. There
would be no effect on Puget Sound temperature, salinity, dis-
solved oxygen, or BOD.
Very minor reductions in nutrients from secondary treat-
ment would be offset by essentially the same contributions
from CSO's. The overall adverse impact at West Point would
continue to be moderate; long-term, because the increased
discharge would continue through the planning period; limited
to waters near West Point; and reversible. Suspended solids
loads at West Point would be reduced due to secondary treat-
ment, but CSO's would increase by a negligible amount. The
positive impact would be minor, because the solids load of
receiving waters would not be greatly decreased; limited in
extent; long-term, because the discharge of solids would
continue through the planning period; and reversible. CSO's
would continue to degrade microbiological quality, but as
CSO's are relatively small near West Point, the overall ad-
verse impact is judged to be minor, limited in extent, long-
term and reversible.
Heavy metals removal efficiencies would be substantially
higher than for enhanced primary treatment, but metals would
still be released to the Sound from CSO's and other sources
not controllable by Metro wastewater facilities. For toxic
compounds, there would be some improvements from secondary
treatment, although CSO's would continue. The overall pos-
itive effect would be minor, because metals concentrations
171
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative G
would riot be excessively high; limited in extent; long-term,
because the discharge of toxic materials would continue
through the planning period; and irreversible because of the
non-degradable nature of the contaminants.
Although the contribution of PCB's from the Duwamish
area is expected to begin to diminish in 1978-1979 with
enforcement of the Toxic Substances Act, PCB's already ac-
cumulated in Duwamish sediments will continue to exert
adverse effects for some time.
The new outfall to Elliott Bay from the Interbay plant
would discharge as much as 200 mgd (309 cfs) of secondary
treated wet weather effluent through a 72-inch pipe with a
diffuser section extending 1200 feet offshore. Average dis-
charge depth would be 50 feet, and effluent quality is ex-
pected to be 20 mg/1 each BOD and suspended solids, and 200
MPN/100 ml total coliforms (Metropolitan Engineers, 1977).
Because of the expected flow rates and shallow discharge
depth, the effluent is expected to surface. The resulting
"boil" may or may not be visible, depending on its colpr and
turbidity relative to those of the receiving waters. Elliott
Bay tends to be turbid, especially in wet weather due to the
silt load in the Duwamish outflow.
The stated design initial dilution is 100:1. The length
of the diffuser necessary to achieve this dilution with ex-
pected flows and discharge depth (neglecting currents) would,
however, probably exceed the specifiec outfall length. The
writers conclude, therefore that it would be difficult to
achieve the desired effluent dilution.
Net circulation in the receiving waters is along shore
towards West Point, driven by outflow from the Duwamish,
rather than out into offshore waters of the bay. Tidal
currents appear not to be as strong as at West Point and the
bay is not well-flushed.
The effect of the effluent plume on water quality along
the shore of Elliott Bay from the discharge point to West
Point cannot be determined as information is presently in-
sufficient. Potential effects could be from total or fecal
coliforms, total residual chlorine, turbidity, and nutrients.
There is limited information on the present condition of the
waters and sediments. The plume could add new loadings of
BOD and solids.
The construction of the Carkeek-West Point interceptor
could cause temporarily increased turbidity in nearshore
waters of Puget Sound.
172
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative G
Lake Washington. The construction of the Kenmore
parallel interceptor in the West Point service area along the
northwest shore of Lake Washington would affect the lake's
water quality in the form of increased turbidity and perhaps
resuspension of metals and other materials associated with
lake sediment. The effect is described in more detail in
the Regional EIS. The probable advecse effect on water
quality is considered to be moderate but highly limited in
extent in the lake, of short duration and reversible as
particles resettle.
Ship Canal. The discharge of 145 mgd of secondary
effluent to the Ship Canal to control salt water intrusion
could moderately impair canal water quality. A more detailed
discussion is included in the Regional EIS.
Groundwater. Effects of groundwater levels on construc-
tion would be reduced as dewatering would not be required at
either Interbay site.
Biology
Alternative G would convert West Point to a wet weather
plant, with a new secondary plant at Interbay or Commodore
Way. Effluent from the new plant would discharge through
the existing West Point outfall most of the year. The new
plant would discharge through a new Elliott Bay outfall in
wet weather. The effluent is also being considered for use
as lockage in summer.
Several elements of Alternative G could affect the bio-
logy of the study area. CSO flows and loads to freshwaters
in 2005 would occur at essentially the same levels (3% differ-
ence) as in baseline Alternative B. Overflows to Elliott Bay
beaches would continue at baseline levels, and the bay would
receive up to 200 mgd of secondary treated wet weather efflu-
ent. A Kenmore parallel interceptor would be built along
4,000 feet of Lake Washington's northwest shore, and a
Carkeek-West Point interceptor along the connecting shore
of Puget Sound. Effluent flows at West Point would be ap-
roximately as in baseline levels (B), but solids and BOD
loads would be significantly reduced (72 and 80%) over base-
line (Alternative B) levels.
173
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative G
Terrestrial habitats. Eventual optional phaseout of the
West Point treatment facility would allow the present site
to return to more natural conditions suitable for wildlife
and vegetation. The benefit would be minor-to-moderate,
limited in extent but of long duration. A minor negative
impact would occur temporarily when the existing structures
are removed due to noise and dust from demolition.
Impacts on wildlife and vegetation from construction of
a treatment facility and outfall at either the Commodore Way
or the Golf Park site would be very minor as these are in
commercial-industrial areas which support little plant or
animal life.
While the exact route of the Kenmore parallel intercep-
tor is undecided, it is certain that some temporary minor
disturbance of terrestrial habitats would occur due to noise
and physical disturbance due to construction activities. The
impact is expected to be minor, but extending 4,000 feet along
the northwestern shore of Lake Washington. The effects would
be short-term (for the duration of construction plus a short
time afterwards) and reversible as the plants and animals
could recolonize the area once construction is completed.
Shoreline habitats. Sewer overflows to marshes in Lake
Washington and the Ship Canal would be essentially the same
as for baseline Alternative B. The impacts of G are there-
fore considered to be negligible relative to baseline condi-
tions for overflows.
The construction of the Kenmore parallel interceptor
would involve excavation, causing local increases in turb-
idity and limited destruction of shoreline habitat along the
northwest shore of Lake Washington. The noise and vibration
would frighten away fish and shoreline birds, mammals and
other vertebrates for the duration of construction. Salmon
spawning areas could be possibly silted over and turbidity
would reduce light levels available for plants. The adverse
impact of the construction is judged to be severe, but highly
temporary, limited in extent and reversible. Mitigation
measures are discussed in a subsequent section.
The intertidal. The Puget Sound intertidal would re-
ceive overflows at baseline (B) levels. Treatment plant
effluent flows and nutrient inputs at West Point would re-
main at baseline (B) levels, but solids and BOD loads would
be reduced 72% and 80% respectively below baseline levels.
174
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative G
West Point treatment plant effluent reaches shore on
occasion. The intertidal at West Point would continue to
be affected by nutrients (nitrates), which could maintain
what appears to be an overenrichment situation affecting
intertidal algae and grazers on them. The impact is consid-
ered to be adverse as plant diversity appears to have de-
creased; moderate in size as the increase in effluent nutri-
ents is moderate, limited in extent to beaches adjacent to
the outfalls, long-term where flows continue through the
planning period, and reversible.
Improved metals removal with secondary treatment of
effluents could possibly result in a decrease in metals
levels in intertidal clams and algae at West Point. As met-
als levels in biota meet standards for mercury (Hg) and lead
(Pb), the decrease is judged to be a minor but long-term ben-
efit to the beaches adjacent to the outfalls.
Pathogens would continue to reach the intertidal through
overflows at baseline levels although their numbers cottld be
reduced in effluents. Whether or not state fecal coliform
bacterial standards for shellfish waters would then be met
cannot be determined as the sources of bacteria and their
relative contributions have not been identified.
Alternative G also includes a Carkeek-West Point inter-
ceptor along the shore of Puget Sound and crossing Salmon
Bay. Assuming the line would be underground, the disruption
of the shoreline and/or intertidal habitats would be major
but temporary and limited. The substrate could be removed
and much turbidity generated, similar to the effects of the
Kenmore parallel on lake shores.
Puget Sound. Effluent flows would remain at baseline
levels relative to B at West Point. Total flows to the
Sound would be as at baseline levels, however. As solids and
BOD loads would be significantly reduced (80% and 72%) , met-
als and toxicants would also be reduced by an undetermined
amount. Nutrient removals would be insignificant.
The transfer of Carkeek flows to the West Point outfall
(after treatment at Golf Park or Commodore Way), increasing
flows at that point by an insignificant amount (3%) would
probably have a negligible effect on the increased algal
productivity extremes observed within a mile of the outfall.
The effect is considered to be adverse, negligible-to-minor,
limited in extent to the vicinity of the outfall, of long
duration as flows continue, and reversible.
175
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative G
The apparent effects of effluent plumes on the abund-
ance and distribution of benthic organisms seen at West
Point would continue. At West Point, any effects due to
solids and BOD would probably decrease; effects due to
nutrient inputs could increase. Dechlorination and chlorine
contact facilities would eliminate effluent toxicity poten-
tial.
Free-swimming life could continue to be abundant near
the outfalls and their plume dispersion areas. Fish could
continue to congregate near outfalls, attracted by the pipe
itself, by the life attached to it and/or by the effluent
or the effects it has on benthic prey species. The incidence
of tumors in flatfish at West Point may or may not be affect-
ed as the causal factors have not been identified. Fish
would, however, be exposed to lower levels of metals and
toxicants. This is considered to be a benefit though minor.
Alternative G includes a new outfall from the Interbay
secondary facility through which up to 200 mgd of secondary
treated wet weather effluent would be discharged at a depth
of 50 feet some 1200 feet offshore.
Before dilution the effluent is expected to contain 20
mg/1 each BOD and solids and 200 MPN total Coliforms/100 ml.
Because of the expected flow rates and shallow discharge
depth, the desired initial dilution would probably not be
attained, and the effluent would tend to surface. Thus
nearshore and intertidal organisms along the shore of
Elliott Bay and perhaps West Point South Beach (due to cir-
culation patterns in the bay) could be exposed to increased
coliforms, chlorine residuals, solids, and other parameters
to an unknown degree and with unknown frequency.
Commercial and sport fisheries. CSO's would continue
at baseline levels along the migratory fish run: Ship Canal-
Lake Washington. Similarly, CSO's to Elliott Bay would
continue at baseline levels, but up to 200 mgd of chlorin-
ated secondary wet weather effluent would be discharged from
Interbay. Chlorinated secondary effluent could also be dis-
charged to Ship Canal for lockage in summer from the Golf
Park or Commodore Way plant. The added nutrients in the low
DO, chlorinated wastewater, would probably have major adverse
effects on migratory (and other) fish species already stress-
ed by degraded water quality in the Ship Canal and in Elliott
Bay. Discharge to Shilshole Bay would not be a great im-
provement, as that water is not well mixed either.
176
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative G
Insofar as West Point effluent affects nearshore com-
mercial and sport fish at some stage in their lives, second-
ary treatment, in removing solids, metals and toxicants would
provide a benefit. This effect is judged to be minor-to-
moderate, somewhat limited in extent in the Central Sound,
and long-term.
The Carkeek-West Point interceptor would have a signif-
icant but limited and short-term adverse impact on salmonid
migration during its construction through Salmon Bay. Con-
struction timing could theoretically mitigate this impact,
but at any given time of year some salmonid species is
migrating upstream or downstream.
Construction of the Kenmore parallel interceptor could
possibly silt over salmon spawning areas along the northwest
shore of Lake Washington if construction is not limited to
the months of April through September. Further studies of
possible environmental impacts would be conducted before
construction.
Freshwater environments. The impacts on these waters
as in previous alternatives are primarily a function of over-
flow control. Under Alternative G, there would be no change
over baseline levels.
1. Lake Washington. Organisms would continue to be
affected by baseline levels of oil, grease, nutrients, path-
ogens, solids, metals and toxicants along the western lake
shore. The effects on biota of the construction of
the Kenmore parallel interceptor have been discussed prev-
iously.
2. Green Lake. With no change in overflow levels
from baseline, impacts of Alternative G on the biota of this
eutrophic lake would be negligible.
3. Lake Union/Ship Canal. CSO's would not be reduced,
and up to 145 mgd of secondary effluent could be discharged
to this water in summer for lockage. The effluent would
have to be chlorinated to protect public health. As dis-
cussed previously, the overall effect would be adverse and
major, as the chlorinated effluent would probably be toxic,
contain low levels of DO and substantial nutrient loads.
The existing stress on biota would probably be significantly
177
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative G
aggravated and increased fish mortality could result, which
could be an extensive and long-term impact on the size of
fish populations.
Rare and endangered species. No impacts are expected
as no listed species are recorded from the study area.
Sensitive habitats have been discussed previously. Unique
plants and pigeon guillemots would not be affected, as there
would be no expansion at West Point.
Natural Resources and Energy
Natural resources and energy impacts are analyzed in the
Regional Environmental Impact Statement on an interrelated
basis between the five existing Metro plants and potential
new sites.
Human Environment
Under Alternative G the same impacts as occur under
Alternative A would continue at West Point. In addition,
impacts would occur at the Interbay site.
Land use. There would be no change in land use since
in Alternative G, there is no construction at West Point.
The presence of the West Point wastewater facility
would continue to conflict in part with the natural setting
of the park.
In the Interbay region, many sites have been considered;
two have been looked at in detail for Alternative G: the
Commodore Way and the Golf Park sites. The site at Commodore
Way has already been developed as a distinct business dis-
trict predominantly related to the seafood industry; the Golf
Park site was a garbage dump, and now is used as a golf
course.
The impact of using either of these Interbay sites would
be in conflict with valuable development: as many as 60 bus-
inesses would be displaced if the Commodore Way site is used,
and the relocation of a golf course would be difficult in a
highly urbanized city.
178
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative G
Legal and institutional. These considerations are
developed in the Regional EIS. Alternative G complies with
PL 92-500.
Agency goals. Many of the impacts related to agency
goals have been developed in the Regional EIS, including
those goals related to PL 92-500 compliance, and CSO control.
It is debated whether the position of the West Point
treatment facility enhances the goal of the Discovery Park
Master Plan that Discovery Park would "provide an open space
of quiet and tranquility for the citizens of Seattle; and
whether the facility effects the objective stated in Goals
for Seattle that "natural amenities identified as important
to the region's character and beauty shall be preserved or
sensitively developed as a second choice." It may be useful
to point out, parenthetically, that the West Point facility
was constructed long before the Discovery Park land was
acquired from the Fort Lawton Military Reservation.
Development of the Interbay site does not satisfy the
goal of PSCOG of "encouraging conservation efforts and max-
imizing utilization of utilities and services before increas-
ing supply" when the fully built facility at West Point is
not used to full potential. However, this alternative does
make efforts to fulfill the PSCOG goal of "maintaining the
natural beauty and liveability of the region," at West Point
at least, by not expanding the facility at this site. It
does not fulfill the PSCOG goals of making "existing public
utilities, facilities and services be used to their fullest
prior to expansion," nor does it "consider employment distri-
bution," if the Commodore Way site is chosen (such an action
would transfer 700 to 800 jobs). Further, if the Commodore
Way site is chosen, by displacing as many as 60 businesses,
it would thwart the following objectives stated in Goals for
Seattle; "Encourage industries that more fully utilize
Seattle's resources . . .Help small local firms expand . . .
promote individualism inherent in intrepreneurship . . .
Ensure adequate consideration of the particular economic
interests of Seattle citizens in relation to their local
region." This is considered adverse, major, long-term,
reversible, and definitely would occur if Alternative G is
implemented in its present form.
Although the goal of the Discovery Park Master Plan
would be to "provide open space", even before the park was
conceived, this purpose was already infringed upon by the
placement of the West Point facility. Under this alternative,
179
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative G
that situation would not be alleviated. Expansion of the
West Point facility with only a slightly greater impact may
be more acceptable than encroachment on a new site.
Employment and costs. Employment and cost impacts are
analyzed in the Regional EIS.
It may be useful to note that if the Commodore Way site
is used, 700 to 800 jobs would be transferred.
Social, recreational and cultural. Under Alternative
G, the West Point facility would remain in its present loca-
tion, maintaining restrictions on the recreational use of
the West Point area. Because of the location of a fence, the
beach north of the facility cannot be used at high tide; the
sludge basin restricts access to the south beach.
If the Commodore Way site is committed to a wastewater
treatment facility, it would incise a major seafood process-
ing community, as discussed in Chapter II. The businessmen
in this community are concerned that the Commodore Way. site
is being considered. This impact is considered adverse,
major, long-term, moderately regional, irreversible, and
would definitely occur if the Commodore Way site is chosen.
Development of the Golf Park site would displace a
well-used municipal golf course, which would be difficult to
relocate in urbanized Seattle.
Further, local residents could consider it a social
stigma to have both the West Point and Interbay sewage
treatment plants in their neighborhood. These impacts are
considered adverse, major, long-term, irreversible and de-
finite.
This alternative complies with the wish of 60% of the
377 randomly selected Magnolia area people polled that secon-
dary treatment be implemented. This impact is considered
favorable, major, long-term, reversible and probable.
Archeological and historical. Since no construction
would occur at the West Point site, there would be no new
impact on archeological or historical sites at West Point.
Both Commodore Way and the Golf Park site have under-
gone much construction, reducing the chances that an intact
archeological site would be found in those areas. No recog-
nized historical places are on the Commodore Way or Golf Park
sites.
180
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative G
Health and safety. An unlikely safety hazard is accid-
ental leakage of chemicals while in transport or handled on
site. Although nearly every U.S. water and wastewater treat-
ment facility uses chemicals, there have been few accidents
involving chemicals.
The health and safety risks related to sludge transport
and disposal would be as probable as for any other trucks in
transit.
Construction risks to safety would be the same as for
other construction of a similar nature; they would be adverse,
minor, last only for the duration of construction, may be
reversible, and are unlikely.
Aesthetics and nuisance. The West Point wastewater
treatment facility is well designed for consideration of
aesthetics. It lies low, is clean, and is surrounded by
well-kept grass. Few odor complaints have been filed.
Visibility of the West Point facility from Discovery Park
is blocked by bluffs. Only 10% of the 377 randomly select-
ed Magnolia residents interviewed by Gerhardt Research were
opposed to the location of the West Point facility.
Placement of a wastewater facility at Commodore Way
would displace many; those remaining could object to the
presence of an adjacent wastewater facility. This would
place a stigma on those who vend fish, and would discourage
boating and harboring in this area (letters from Salmon Bay
Improvement Association). This impact is considered adverse,
major, long-term, irreversible, local, and probably would
occur.
The Golf Park site would be visible from local resid-
ences, and odor is also of potential concern. Before con-
struction, much of the garbage which has been collected for
twenty years would have to be excavated. During this process,
methane and noxious sulfur dioxide gases might be released.
These impacts are considered adverse, minor, short-term,
irreversible, local, and may occur.
The noise and traffic of sludge trucks is a minor nui-
sance which did not seem to be of great concern. Some people
polled were unaware of which route the trucks traveled (HRPI,
1976) . The sludge traffic is expected to approximately double
under this alternative.
181
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative G
CSO's will be discussed in the Regional EIS, and in the
water quality section of this EIS.
Mitigation Measures
Several mitigation measures are suggested to aid in the
reduction of adverse impacts resulting from the implementa-
tion of this alternative.
Pretreatment of industrial wastes could be provided
before sewage enters the West Point plant. If current prac-
tices continue, these facilities would occasionally receive
slugs of cadmium, mercury and arsenic.
Odor of the wastewater treatment facilities can continue
to be mitigated, in part, by not allowing the primary and
secondary treatment systems to become anaerobic. It is
under anaerobic conditions that such noxious gases as methane
and sulfur dioxide are emitted.
The possible silting over of salmon spawning grounds
during the construction of the Kenmore parallel (Lake Line
Option) called for under this alternative could cause impacts,
both environmental and economical. Therefore it is recom-
mended that an evaluation study be made on the Force Main
Option to determine its possible impacts. Not enough infor-
mation is presently available to consider this option.
If the Lake Line option is selected, the use of washed
gravel as backfill in the construction of the Kenmore paral-
lel interceptor could encourage salmon spawning, as in the
construction of the North Mercer Island interceptor in 1970.
Such a measure, however, would require the cooperation of
:>oth federal and state agencies to be successful. Timing
construction to avoid spawning and intragravel development
for salmon would limit construction to the months of March
to September, probably increasing construction costs. Fur-
ther environmental analyses would be conducted prior to con-
struction.
Interim development (or "undevelopment") of the West
Point site under the phase-out alternative might involve
sludge lagoon removal, creation of salt and possibly fresh-
water marsh areas in the north beach, relocation of security
fences to create more usable public areas, and interim land-
scaping improvements. Since the north seawall would have
to remain until the plant was removed, major improvements
might be concentrated in the south beach area. These are
182
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative G
indicated in Figure 3-13. Although funding sources are not
dealt with here, it is perhaps true to state that such im-
provements would probably not be covered under federal sec-
ondary treatment grants. More details of this are in the
Facility Plan. Removing the sludge lagoon would eliminate
any effects of the structure on longshore sediment transport,
erosion and deposition.
Under this alternative, the Interbay facility would have
a wet weather outfall into Elliott Bay. It would be useful
to monitor water quality, biology, and currents in this
area prior to construction to determine where best to
have the outfall discharge.
Unavoidable Adverse Impacts
Under this alternative, the following adverse impacts
would be unavoidable.
Construction. Although construction activities can
be screened from public view, they will still be a temporary
nuisance.
Sludge trucking. Under current practices of disposing
sludge at remote sanitary landfill sites, there will neces-
sarily be sludge trucking.
Combined sewer overflows. This alternative does not
take adequate measures to control CSO's; they will still
occur in wet weather.
Land use. Land is required in all alternatives; the
question is: where will the impact occur.
Aesthetic nuisance of plant location. Wastewater
treatment facilities are a nuisance in all alternatives; the
question is: how can these nuisances be made smallest.
Operation and maintenance and capital costs. Construc-
tion of wastewater facilities, interceptors, and CSO holding
tanks cost money. The facilities must be operated and
maintained.
183
-------
PUGET SOUND
EXISTING PLANT
f WEST POINT
N TREATMENT PLANT
0 200 400ft.
Figure 3-13
West Point Alternative G
184
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative G
Energy expenditures. Energy can in part be provided
by the methane produced in anaerobic digestion, but there
is still a large expenditure of energy which cannot be
mitigated.
Secondary effluent effect on water quality and biota.
Nutrient inputs to Puget Sound would continue at baseline
levels; remaining BOD, solids and other loads would con-
tinue to exert some effect on water quality.
185
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
ALTERNATIVE H
DECONSOLIDATION/RECLAMATION
Alternative H provides for growth in north and east ser-
vice areas by provision of new plants. Secondary treatment
would be provided at West Point.
Service Areas
The West Point service area would be reduced by the ser-
vice areas tributary to the Kenmore and Lake Sammamish plants.
Val Vue would be transferred to Renton.
Dry weather flows of 121 mgd and wet weather peak flows
of 350 mgd would be treated at West Point.
Treatment Plant
Activated sludge is the preferred treatment system for
upgrading to secondary treatment at West Point and nutrient
removal, filtration, carbon adsorption and ion exchange plus
secondary would be provided at Lake Sammamish plants. Second-
ary treatment by 1985 would require twelve acres of shoreline
fill at West Point, as in Alternative E (Figure 3-13). New
structures would include aeration tanks, secondary clarifiers,
chlorine contact and dechlorination facilities. Effluent with
a quality of 30 mg/1 BOD and SS would be discharged through the
existing West Point outfall. Details on the inland plants are
described in the Regional EIS (Volume I).
Combined Sewer Overflows
CSO's to the West Point service area would be reduced
slightly (about 15%) compared to Alternative B, due to re-
ductions in the West Point service area.
Sludge
Sludge from West Point and dewatered sludge from Rich-
mond Beach would be processed by anaerobic digestion, dewat-
ered and trucked to the Cedar Hills landfill for disposal
and to Pack Forest for recycling research.
186
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative H
Impacts
The direct impacts due to the implementation of this
alternative projected to the year 2005 are described in
this section. Secondary impacts are discussed in the
Regional EIS which is Volume I of this series.
Geology, Soils and Topography
Alternative H requires expansion of the West Point
facility, including shoreline fill. The installation of
activated sludge facilities for secondary wastewater treat-
ment would require a total of 54 acres, 12 of which would
be shoreline fill. Some construction may be at the base of
the unstable bluffs bordering the site to the east. Build-
ing at the base of the bluff could have potentially major
adverse effects from landslides. With retaining walls of
upland drainage and fill at the toe of the slope, the site
would probably be sufficiently stable to permit construction
at the base. The effect is judged to be minor as mitigated,
limited in extent and a long-term problem.
Earthquake damage is considered to be potential for
structures on fill in this area. Low structures, such as
those planned, would be susceptible to damage primarily from
differential settlement of soils caused by ground shaking.
It is assumed that structures would be designed to withstand
such events. The impact could still be major, but would be
limited in extent and of short duration.
Air Quality and Odors
Upgrading the West Point plant to secondary treatment
would increase the potential for odors escaping in this area.
Because secondary treatment plants are larger and more com-
plex than primary facilities, expose more water surface
area to the air and subject the water to more perturbation,
there is a greater likelihood for odors being released into
the surrounding neighborhood from secondary treatment plants.
Various practical measures can be employed, however, to con-
trol treatment plant odors and are discussed in the section
on mitigation measures. The impact from odors is judged to
be minor, limited in extent, and intermittent but continuing.
187
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative H
Dust from construction could be a major short-term problem.
Odors and aerosols from normal plant operation would be
slightly increased but limited, still minor and of short
duration. Emissions from increased sludge truck trips and
employee vehicle traffic are considered to be minor, limited
in extent and of short duration due to the good air circu-
lation on and near the site. Control of CSO's would reduce
the occurrence of CSO-derived odors.
Water Quality
Puget Sound. Under Alternative H, secondary effluent
would be discharged from West Point. Secondary treatment
would reduce the discharge of suspended solids 79% relative
to the baseline alternative and BOD 84%. The flow from West
Point would be reduced 15%. The increased efficiency of
solids removal and chlorine contact facilities could improve
microbiological quality of the effluent. Discharge of heavy
metals, PCB's and pesticides will decrease if these are
associated with particulates. There would be no effect'on
Puget Sound temperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen or BOD.
Overflows to freshwaters in the West Point service area
would decrease by 12% to 15%, to saltwaters not at all.
Very minor reductions in nutrients from secondary treat-
ment would be offset by continued contributions from CSO's
to salt waters. The overall adverse impact at West Point
would continue to be moderate; limited to waters near West
Point; long-term because the discharges would continue
through the planning period; and reversible.
CSO's would also continue to degrade microbiological
quality, but as CSO's are relatively small near West Point,
the overall adverse impact is judged to be minor, limited
in extent, long-term, and reversible. Heavy metals removal
efficiencies would be substantially higher than for enhanced
primary treatment, but metals would still be released to the
Sound from CSO's and other sources not controllable by Metro
wastewater facilities. For toxic compounds, small improve-
ments from secondary treatment would be offset by continued
CSO's. The overall positive effect would be minor, because
toxicant concentrations are not excessively high in efflu-
ent now; limited in extent; long-term, because the dis-
charges would continue through the planning period; and irre-
versible because of the non-degradable nature of the
contaminants.
188
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative H
Groundwater. Groundwater levels could have a minor,
limited but long-term negative impact if dewatering is neces-
sary at the construction site. The West Point effluent,
discharged to Puget Sound, is incapable of infiltrating
groundwater.
Biology
West Point would meet secondary treatment requirements.
Inland plants at North Lake Sammamish and South Lake Sam-
mamish would meet advanced treatment requirements and de-
crease flows to West Point. CSO could be at best slightly
reduced (12% to 15%). Shoreline fill would be required.
Terrestrial habitats. Major expansion at the West
Point site would require shoreline fill and construction in
the meadow northeast of the existing facility. The meadow,
now grown over with grasses and shrubs, provides a habitat
for ground nesting birds and small mammals. The meadow area
also supports a floral community unique to West Point and
the north beach of Discovery Park, including three species
of plants rare in this area. Expansion at the site would
remove this habitat permanently. The effect would be major,
adverse and irreversible, but highly limited in extent.
Shoreline habitats. Marshes at Lake Washington and the
Ship Canal would receive slightly reduced levels of overflow
loads and flows (15% and 12% respectively) compared to Al-
ternative B baseline levels. The benefit of Alternative H
is considered to be probably very minor; fairly extensive,
as most marshes are subject to overflows; and of long dur-
ation as overflows are continuing phenomena.
The intertidal. Overflows to the intertidal at Elliott
Bay would be at baseline levels (Alternative B) in Alterna-
tive H, which is judged to have no further impact from these
sources. As treatment plant effluent reaches beach areas
near the outfall at least occasionally, effluent volume
and quality is still a concern. Under Alternative H, flows
would be essentially the same as baseline levels. Nutrient
levels would also be the same, as these parameters (especi-
ally nitrates) are not removed in significant amounts by
secondary treatment. At West Point, loads of solids and
BOD, (and associated metals and toxicants) would be signi-
ficantly reduced by about 79% and 84% respectively. The
189
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative H
nutrient impact on the intertidal would be essentially as in
baseline levels.
A major reduction in metals in effluent could mean that
levels in clams and algae at West Point could decline to
background levels (Point No Point). As standards for metals
are not exceeded anywhere in the study area, however, the
benefit is considered to be minor-to-moderate, but possibly
extensive and certainly of long duration.
Bacterial levels in the intertidal waters exceed state
fecal coliform standards for shellfish waters. As CSO's
to salt waters would continue essentially at baseline flows
and loads, pathogen inputs would be at present levels. As
the sources and their relative contributions of the bacteria
have not been identified, it cannot be determined whether or
not coliform standards for shellfish waters would be met
under Alternative H. Shellfish consumption could continue
to represent a potential public health risk.
The intertidal north of West Point would be adversely
affected by the placement of shoreline fill. The fill would
cover an area formerly used as a raw sewage discharge area
and sludge bed. Impacts include local displacement of ben-
thic organisms and intertidal communities, and local loss
of habitat for nearshore organisms. The immediate effect
is judged to be adverse and major but highly limited. Resi-
dent populations of benthic organisms would be permanently
displaced from a localized area. Most would recolonize the
area, attracted to the stable environment provided by the
riprap. Intertidal flora would thus be affected in a minor
way only, as they could reestablish on the rock. In time,
intertidal organisms could be generally benefited by the
improvement in effluent quality, and the new habitat avail-
able.
Puget Sound. All facilities would have secondary
treatment.
Enhancing effects of nutrients on phytoplankton pro-
ductivity extremes would continue locally at baseline levels.
Levels of metals in plankton near West Point would probably
decrease, however: a minor benefit, limited in extent but
of long duration as those metals would no longer enter the
Puget Sound food web and be concentrated.
Effects on benthic community abundance and diversity in
the characteristic effluent plume location would continue
almost at present levels if due to nutrients, as loads would
decrease about 15%. If the effects are due to solids and
190
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative H
organic matter, they could decrease with the 79% and 84% re-
duction in those loads due to secondary treatment. The
abundance of clams and worms, which are suspension and/or
deposit feeders could become less pronounced at the 150 foot
contour. This possible effect is judged to be positive,
minor, somewhat limited in area and of long duration as
flows would continue.
The effect on free-swimming life of secondary treatment
of effluent is difficult to assess. Fish could continue to
be attracted to the outfall pipes and to the attached marine
life. Likewise, the slightly elevated incidence of tumorous
flatfish at West Point has not been explained. Whether or
not the frequency of occurrence would change due to improved
effluent treatment cannot be determined. Dechlorination,
however, would eliminate chlorine toxicity potential of
effluent.
Commercial and sport fisheries. Overflows to Lake
Washington and Ship Canal would decrease slightly (15% and
12% respectively), but the fish run could be severely af-
fected by discharge of effluent from the North Lake Sammam-
ish plant into the Sammamish River. The effluent from the
North Lake Sammamish plant would be designed to meet dis-
charge standards, but would probably be of a higher tempera-
ture than the river water in summer. The effect would be
to raise the river temperature by 1 to 2°F, which could be
significant, as the river is already at temperatures intol-
erable to summer fish migrations. The adverse effect on
fish populations could probably be major and extensive, and
cause a long term decrease in fish population size. The
effect is considered to be reversible.
Effects on saltwater nearshore areas where larval and
juvenile fish tend to congregate and feed would be as in
baseline conditions relative to CSO's as these inputs would
continue unabated. Effects of secondary treatment of efflu-
ent could mean reduced exposure of sensitive larval and
juvenile fishes and invertebrates (such as shrimp and crabs)
to metals and toxicants. These parameters are not known to
be a problem at present, however.
Freshwater environments. The impacts on these waters
as in previous alternatives are primarily a function of over-
flow control. Under Alternative H, there would be 12% to
15% control.
191
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative H
Lake Washington. With slight (15%) overflow abatement,
negative impacts on lake biota would be essentially as in
baseline conditions; moderate, limited in extent to the
western shore, of long duration as overflows continue and
irreversible for metals and toxicants.
Green Lake. Negligible overflows to Green Lake would
continue at baseline levels and have little effect as algae
blooms are thought to be caused by nutrients entering via
sub-surface seepage (McGreevy 1973) . Stocked trout and
waterfowl are not expected to be affected by overflows.
Lake Union/Ship Canal. Overflows to these waters would
decrease slightly (12%) over baseline levels. The improve-
ment would be very minor even at overflow points, and the
biota would continue to be those characteristically tolerant
of somewhat degraded water quality. The influence of CSO
on overall water quality is unknown.
Rare and endangered species. No impacts are expected
as no listed species are recorded from the study area.
Sensitive and unique habitats have been discussed previously.
Pigeon guillemots nest in the cliffs adjacent to the existing
sludge lagoon and would not be affected by expansion of the
West Point facility into the meadow to the northeast.
Natural Resources and Energy
Natural resources and energy impacts are analyzed in
the Regional EIS on an interrelated basis between the five
existing Metro plants and potential new sites.
Human Environment
Alternative H has a negative impact on some human en-
vironment factors and some positive impacts.
Land use. Twelve acres of fill would be required to
the northeast of the present West Point facility to accommo-
date the air activated or trickling basins. This fill
would necessitate a permit from the Seattle Shorelines
Master Plan, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The
192
-------
alternatives and Impacts
Alternative H
Master Plan discourages fill unless absolutely essential.
The impact of fill would be adverse, major, local, long-term,
reversible and definite.
Agency goals. Many of the impacts related to agency
goals have been developed in the Regional EIS, including
those goals related to PL 92-500 compliance and CSO control.
It is debated whether the expansion of the West Point
treatment facility enhances the goal of the Discovery Park
Master Plan that Discovery Park would "provide an open space
of quiet and tranquility for the citizens of Seattle"; and
whether the facility affects the objective stated in Goals
for Seattle that "natural amenities identified as important
to the region's character qnd beauty shall be preserved or
sensitively developed as a second choice."
Employment and costs. Employment and cost impacts are
analyzed in the Regional EIS.
Social, recreational and cultural. The expansion to
the northeast of the facility would greatly limit the public
access to the northern beach. This is considered adverse,
minor as the beach is submerged at high tide, long-term,
irreversible, local and definite.
This alternative complies with the wish of 60% of the
377 randomly selected Magnolia area people polled that se-
condary treatment be implemented. This impact is considered
favorable, major, long-term, irreversible, and probable.
Archeological and historical. Any archeological sites
which may have existed would have already been destroyed by
previous construction.
No historical sites are in the affected areas.
Health and safety. There may be fewer health risks
associated with the consumption of shellfish due to the
discharge of secondary effluent rather than primary, as
discussed in the biological section of the EIS.
An unlikely safety hazard is accidental leakage of
chemicals when they are in transport or handled on site.
Although nearly every U.S. water and wastewater treatment
facility uses chemicals, there have been very few chemical-
193
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative H
related accidents.
The health and safety problems related to sludge trans-
port and disposal would be as probable as for any other
trucks in transit.
Construction safety risk would be as for any other simi-
lar construction: with safety-conscious procedures there
should be only a slight chance of accidents.
Aesthetics and nuisance. The West Point wastewater
treatment facility expansion would be well designed for
consideration of aesthetics. It would lie low, be clean,
and be surrounded by well-kept grass and screening trees.
Few odor complaints have been filed, but odor problems
could arise with secondary treatment. Visibility of the
West Point facility from Discovery Park would be blocked by
bluffs. Only 10% of the 377 Magnolia residents interviewed
by Gerhardt Research were opposed to the location of the
West Point facility. Although more were opposed to expan-
sion, it was cautiously accepted as a "necessary evil."
The additional activated sludge basins would be placed
such that they are not visible behind the bluff at Discovery
Park. The tanks related to trickling filters, to the south
of the facility, would be more visible from bluffs above, if
this subalternative is adopted. These aesthetic impacts
would be adverse, minor, long-term, local, reversible and
definite.
The noise and traffic of sludge trucking is a minor
nuisance of small concern. Some people were unaware of
which route the trucks traveled (HRPI, 1976). The sludge
traffic is expected to approximately double under this
alternative.
CSO's will be dealt with in the Regional EIS, and in
the water quality section of this EIS.
Legal and institutional. Legal and institutional con-
siderations have been developed in the Regional EIS. This
alternative meets the requirements of PL 92-500. Permits
for interceptor construction are explained in the Regional
EIS.
194
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative H
Mitigation Measures
Several mitigation measures are suggested to aid in the
reduction of adverse impacts resulting from the implementa-
tion of this alternative.
Pretreatment of industrial wastes could be provided be-
fore sewage enters the West Point plant. If current prac-
tices continue, this facility would receive occasional slugs
of cadmium, mercury and arsenic.
Odor of the wastewater treatment facilities can con-
tinue to be mitigated, in part, by not allowing the primary
and secondary treatment systems to become anaerobic. It is
under anaerobic conditions that such noxious gases as me-
thane and sulfur dioxide are emitted.
Further evaluation could be made of measures to elimin-
ate shoreline fill, such as tall aeration basins or stacked
clarifiers. Currently under this alternative, twelve acres
of fill would be necessary to accommodate low-lying second-
ary treatment facilities.
The following measures could be taken to improve the
aesthetics and recreational usage of the West Point site,
under this alternative, which includes shoreline fill under
current plans:
The sludge lagoon could be removed, the area south of
the existing digester could be kept open as a public activi-
ty area, and the access road and parking area could be re-
located. Removal of the sludge lagoon would also eliminate
any impact of that structure on longshore sediment transport.
The north beach area, including the new fill, could be
substantially covered with a flat, screen-roofed, tank
structure approximately 15 feet high, similar to the existing
sedimentation tanks. Some possibility exists for creating
a marsh habitat area between the tanks and bluffs which
would give some isolation from more active public areas.
These are indicated in Figure 3-14.
A new seawall would be required. The seawall could be
designed to create some intertidal area by stepping since
the existing rocky intertidal area would be lost. The
general shape of the wall could be designed as an undulating
form as suggested in the site plan, (see Figure 3-14), rather
than the existing straight wall. Such a scheme requires
195
-------
West Point Alternative
H (Activated Sludge)
ACTIVATED
SLUDGE SECONDARY
TREATMENT
>
S
-3
3
T3
D)
S
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative H
more fill but adds to the quantity and quality of public
activity space.
Landscape treatment options vary from establishment of
grass cover for erosion control (allowing natural succession
to occur), to planting of a dense cover/screen of native
shrubs and trees. Costs for these treatments vary substan-
tially and are covered in the section on estimated costs of
the Draft Facility Plan.
Unavoidable Adverse Impacts
Under this alternative, the following adverse impacts
would be unavoidable.
Construction. Although construction activities can be
screened from public view, they will still be a temporary
nuisance.
Sludge trucking. Under current practices of disposing
sludge at remote sanitary landfill sites, there will neces-
sarily be sludge trucking.
Combined sewer overflows. This alternative does not
take adequate measures to control CSO's; they will still
occur in wet weather.
Land use. Land is required in all alternatives; the
question is:where will the impact occur?
Aesthetic nuisance of plant location. Wastewater treat-
ment facilities are a nuisance in all alternatives; the
question is: how can these nuisances be made smallest?
Operation and maintenance and capital costs. Construc-
tion of wastewater facilities, interceptors, and CSO holding
tanks is expensive. The facilities must be operated and
maintained.
Energy expenditures. Energy can in part be provided by
the methane produced in anaerobic digestion, but there is
still a large expenditure of energy which cannot be mitigated,
197
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Alternative H
Secondary effluent effects on water quality and biota.
Nutrient inputs from effluent would continue at slightly
reduced levels due to inland discharge; remaining BOD, solids
and other loads would continue to exert some effect on water
quality and biota.
198
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Summary
SUMMARY
Geology, Soils and Topography
Potential impacts at the West Point site are evaluated
with respect to slope and foundation stability, earthquake
damage risk, erosion and deposition, shoreline fill stability,
topography and soil profile. Construction waste and sludge
disposal problems are evaluated in the Regional EIS. Alterna-
tive G included evaluations of Interbay sites for the above
parameters.
All of the sites except Commodore Way are on fill, and
are thus subject to potential earthquake damage from differ-
ential compaction or seismic settlement, and ground shaking.
Commodore Way soils are stable, but also carry high potential
for seismic damage as they readily transmit vibrations to low
structures such as treatment plants. Seismic hazard risk is
considered to be the same for all alternatives and structures
would be designed accordingly.
There is some concern about the influence of the exist-
ing south beach sludge lagoon on shoreline sediment transport,
and localized erosional and depositional conditions which
may develop north and south of that structure respectively.
The lagoon would remain in its present form in all eight
alternatives as currently envisioned, so any existing impacts
would continue.
Those alternatives requiring the most construction would
have the greatest impacts on topography, soil profile, and
be affected most by slope and foundation stability. At the
West Point site, Alternatives E, F and H would have the
greatest impacts, in requiring expansion of the site to the
base of unstable cliffs, excavation of existing unstable
fill plus piling and dewatering of foundation soils. In
addition, Alternatives E and H only require the placement
of 12 acres of shoreline fill. The fill would be protected
by rock rip-rap from erosion, but could alter longshore
sediment transport.
Alternative G has the greatest overall earth impacts.
Extensive construction could be required at either Inter-
bay site. At Commodore Way dewatering could be required,
but no piling as soils are stable. At the Golf Park site,
piling would be required plus major excavation of existing
landfill materials with attendant changes in soil profile and
199
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Summary
topography. In addition, Alternative G includes the sub-
stantial impacts of constructing three major pipelines in the
West Point service area: the Kenmore parallel interceptor,
the Carkeek-Interbay connection and a major new Interbay out-
fall to Elliott Bay.
Alternative E has next largest impacts in having sub-
stantial effects on the West Point site (discussed previously)
and including the construction of two major transfer projects,
the Kenmore parallel and a Carkeek-West Point connection.
Of the other secondary treatment alternatives, H requires
shoreline fill but no transfer facilities; F requires no
shoreline fill but includes the Carkeek-West Point connection.
Alternatives B, C and D include the construction of new
digesters at West Point requiring excavation, piling of struc-
tures and dewatering. The impacts of these activities are
considered to be of approximately equal magnitude and duration.
Alternative B includes a Kenmore parallel interceptor, however.
Alternatives C and D include a new outfall to Elliott-Bay from
the Interbay area and a north interceptor parallel with a
mile-long tunnel under Queen Anne Hill. Thus, impacts of C
and D are considered to be greater than in B. Alternative A
includes no construction at all.
Impacts of holding tank construction for CSO control are
discussed in the Regional EIS.
Air Quality and Odors
Potential impacts at the three sites (West Point,
Commodore Way and Golf Park) were evaluated with respect
to odors, aerosols and pathogens, particulates and other
emissions including chlorine and engine emissions.
All of the alternatives including No Action involve the
handling of raw sewage and chlorine, and the use of diesel
and gas engines--in plant operations and/or transportation
and commuting. Alternative sites are included only in Al-
ternative G.
At the existing West Point site, odors have not been a
problem as the site is generally well-ventilated and odor
control techniques are routinely applied.
The risk of odor and aerosols at West Point increases
with higher levels of treatment as more air-water surfaces
are created and more water perturbation. Alternatives E,
200
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Summary
F and H which include secondary treatment facilities at
West Point thus carry the greatest odor potential at that
site. As these alternatives also require the most construc-
tion, they carry the greatest potential for temporary local
air quality degradation due to particulates (dust) and engine
emissions. Engine emissions would increase in the area for
the life of the facility due to a doubling of sludge truck
trips and an increase in employee trips. Because of the good
air circulation and mixing conditions at West Point, all of
the above are expected to have negligible impacts. Alterna-
tives C and D would require less construction for enhanced
primary treatment, result in fewer new water surfaces, and a
smaller increase in sludge truck and employee trips. The
impacts, again, are considered to be negligible. Alterna-
tives A and B would continue present conditions.
Under Alternative G, West Point's conversion by 1985 to
a wet weather facility would further reduce the potential
for odor and other emissions problems at that site. The
alternative sites proposed in G, however, are located in the
Interbay Valley which tends to restrict air circulation and
is characterized by poorer air quality than average for the
study area. The Commodore Way site is located in an indus-
trial area, and the new secondary treatment plant would not
add significantly to the overall existing air pollutant load.
The increment could impact neighboring businesses due to lack
of a buffer zone, however.
Construction on the Golf Park site would require excava-
tion of old sanitary landfill materials, and cause major and
extensive odor and air quality problems from hydrogen sulfide
and methane gases. A number of standard odor and emissions
control measures would be routinely applied at all sites,
but odors would not be entirely contained at the Golf Park
site.
Insofar as CSO's cause odors, Alternatives C, D, F and
H would provide reductions of respectively decreasing magni-
tudes at the Ship Canal and Lake Washington. Alternative F
decreases CSO's to Elliott Bay.
Overall, Alternative G with a facility at the Golf Park
site has the greatest potential for odors and air quality
degradation, followed by Alternative G with a Commodore Way
facility. Facilities at West Point are considered to have
negligible impacts with standard control measures.
201
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Summary
Water Quality
Water resources issues analyzed for the eight alterna-
tives include 1) changes in the quality of waters in the
West Point service area due to CSO control and/or from dis-
charge of secondary or enhanced primary effluent, 2) effects
of using secondary effluent for flushing of the Government
Locks, 3) effects of the construction of major transfer
facilities such as the Kenmore parallel interceptor and the
Carkeek-West Point connection. The effects of shoreline
fill on water quality were considered to be negligible. The
risk of accidental raw sewage spills due to system malfunc-
tion was judged to be the same for all alternatives, and
not evaluated. Metals and toxicants were assumed to be re-
moved in proportion to suspended solids in the alternatives.
Freshwaters
Lake Washington, and Ship Canal/Lake Union, freshwaters
in the West Point service area, are affected by CSO's con-
taining BOD, solids, silt, pathogens, oil, grease, metals,
toxicants and nutrients. The Ship Canal receives about 25
times as much as Lake Washington, and is a much smaller body of
water. Alternative C, Major CSO Control, would benefit these
waters most in achieving a 99% CSO reduction to Lake Washing-
ton and an 84% reduction to the Ship Canal/Lake Union (93%
reduction to Lake Union alone over baseline levels). Alterna-
tive D would result in an 83% reduction of CSO's to Lake
Washington and about 50% to the Ship Canal/Lake Union (61%
to Lake Union alone). Alternative F would also reduce CSO's,
not by construction of holding tanks as in C and D, but
through sizing of new facilities. Overflows in Alternatives
E and G to freshwaters would remain at baseline (B) levels,
i.e., no control. In addition, G includes optional secondary
effluent discharge to the Ship Canal, judged to have poten-
tially major adverse impacts. Implementation of Alternative
B, Metro Comprehensive Plan, would increase overflows to Lake
Washington 36 to 37% over present (A) levels, and to the
Ship Canal/Lake Washington by 28 to 36%. Only C and D reduce
CSO's to well below present (A) levels, and therefore repre-
sent an improvement. Clearly, Alternatives C and, to a lesser
extent, D are best for freshwaters of the West Point service
area. Alternative G, which could increase loads and flows
to the Ship Canal over baseline levels, is considered to have
the greatest potential negative impacts on freshwaters.
202
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Summary
Effects on Green Lake were assumed to be negligible for all
alternatives.
Saltwaters
Saltwaters considered in the West Point EIS include
those waters of the Sound off West Point, plus Elliott Bay.
Elliott Bay is subject to combined sewer overflow and pollut-
ants from sources not controllable by Metro (dredge spoil
dumps, aerial fallout, etc.), such that its quality is im-
paired at present.
Waters off West Point are subject to treatment plant
effluent which disperses in a characteristic fashion, primarily
due to tidal currents, and which comes up on beaches north
and south of West Point with unknown frequency. CSO's to
these waters are few and small, but waters from Elliott Bay
are carried along the south beach driven by Duwamish River
outflow. In addition, in Alternatives C and D, up to 161
mgd and 80 mgd of CSO's would be discharged to Elliott Bay,
respectively, through a major new shallow outfall at Inter-
bay. In Alternative G, up to 200 mgd secondary treated wet
weather affluent would be discharged at that site from a new
Interbay facility.
Loads and flows to Elliott Bay would decrease most in
Alternative F, although by only 15%. CSO loadings would
remain at baseline (B) levels in E, G and H. With the
transfer of overflows from freshwaters to saltwaters in
Alternatives C and D, CSO's to Elliott Bay would increase 25%
and 21% respectively. Alternative C also includes a new
primary wet weather outfall (up to 250 mgd) to Elliott Bay
from a new Duwamish facility, discussed in the Alki EIS.
Alternative G maintains CSO's to Elliott Bay at baseline
levels, but adds up to 200 mgd of secondary treated wet
weather effluent. Alternative C is considered to have the
greatest potential negative impacts on Elliott Bay, followed
by G and D. Alternative B would have the same level of CSO's
to Elliott Bay as A.
West Point waters would benefit most by secondary treat-
ment Alternative F, in which flows (and therefore nutrients, as
these" are not removed) are reduced 28%, solids 82% and BOD
87% over baseline (B) levels. Alternative H, with consolida-
tion of facilities and secondary treatment would result in
a 15% decrease in West Point flows, 79% in solids and 84% in
BOD.° In all of the other action alternatives—C, D, E and
203
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Summary
G—flows and nutrient loads would continue at B levels.
Alum addition in summer would reduce BOD and solids loads by
20% in C and 25% in D, however. Secondary treatment would
reduce solids 74% and BOD 81% in E, and 72% and 80% in G.
Alternative B (baseline) represents a 30% increase in loads
and flows over present levels (Alternative A and 1975). Only
the secondary alternatives, E, F, G and H, represent water
qualtiy improvements over present conditions.
In general, Alternative C is best for freshwaters, at
the expense of saltwater quality- Alternative F is best
for saltwaters and achieves minor CSO control to freshwaters.
With respect to microbiological quality, C and D are
best for freshwaters in reducing CSO's substantially. In
saltwaters, the picture is more complicated, as multiple
sources are probably involved and their relative contribu-
tions have not been determined. Alternative F would reduce
CSO's to Elliott Bay and reduce effluent flow to West Point
waters most. Greater solids removal, such as from secondary
treatment and to a lesser extent from alum addition, poten-
tially allows for the same or better levels of disinfection
with less chlorine (about half as much and two-thirds as
much, respectively). With improvement of current disinfec-
tion practices at West Point, this may be realized for the
secondary alternatives E, F, G and H in the provision of
chlorine contact facilities. Whether or not local waters
would cease to violate state fecal coliform standards for
shellfish waters under any alternative cannot be determined
at present.
Biology
The eight Alternatives were analyzed with respect to
their impacts on biologic systems, including terrestrial
habitats, shoreline habitats, the intertidal, Puget Sound,
commercial and sport fisheries, endangered species, and
freshwater environments including Lake Washington, Green
Lake and Lake Union/Ship Canal.
Terrestrial Habitats
The terrestrial habitat of interest is a meadow north
of the treatment plant in an area formerly used for sludge
disposal. Shrubs and grasses now provide a habitat for
ground nesting birds, and small mammals. Three plant species
found in the meadow are rare or unknown elsewhere in the
204
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Summary
Park and used in Discovery Park programs (Metropolitan
Engineers Task D3, 1976). This habitat would be eliminated
in Alternatives E, F and H with expansion of West Point for
secondary treatment.
Shoreline Habitat
Freshwater marshes which occur in Lake Washington and
in the Lake Union/Ship Canal are subject to combined sewer
overflows. Marshes are considered to be sensitive habitats
as they are highly productive, have limited dilution and
mixing properties and support a wide variety of birds,
mammals, fishes and other vertebrates. Sewer overflows
contain metals, pesticides, toxicants, BOD, solids and other
parameters that can stress biota in a variety of ways. The
marshes are benefited most by Alternative C, major CSO control,
which would reduce loads and flows by 99% to Lake Washington,
and 84% to the Ship Canal. Second best is D, Partial CSO
Control, which would reduce these overflows by 83% and .about
50% respectively- Alternative F, Southern Strategy, would
mean 31% reductions; Alternative H would reduce Lake Wash-
ington overflows by 15%, and those to the Ship Canal by 12%.
Alternatives E and G continued overflows to these waters at
baseline (B) levels. Baseline levels are higher than pre-
sent and Alternative A levels by 37% and 28-36% for these
areas.
The Intertidal
The West Point intertidal is subject to sewer overflows
inputs primarily from Elliott Bay and Magnolia. There is
also evidence of treatment plant effluent coming ashore at
West Point. The frequency and distribution of the events
are unknown. An apparent enrichment of algae at West Point
has been a suggested result. Also, fecal coliform bacterial
levels exceed state shellfish water standards at all sites
in the area. The source of bacteria has not been identified.
No effects of effluent have been suggested on intertidal
animals except grazers on algae which appear to show increas-
ed growth rates at West Point.
Overflows are small inputs relative to effluents; their
frequency is fairly well-known and quality poorly known. By
contrast, effluent quality is fairly well known and frequency
of impact in the intertidal unknown.
Overflows to the intertidal (Elliott Bay) would be
205
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Summary
slightly reduced (15%) by Alternative F, Secondary/Southern
Strategy, and slightly increased by Alternatives C and D.
CSO levels would continue at baseline levels for Alternatives
A, B, E, G and H.
Effects of solids and BOD, and associated metals and
toxicants, in effluent would be reduced by 60 to 85% below
baseline levels by secondary Alternatives E, F, G and H.
Enhanced primary treatment Alternatives C and D, reduce these
parameters by 20% below baseline B levels to present (A) and
1975 load levels. So C and D represent a nondegradation over
present levels, but E,F, G and H actually improve effluent
loads substantially. The best alternative for the intertidal
overall is F.
Shoreline fill in Alternatives E and H would have a
moderate but highly limited and short-term negative impact
on intertidal biota due to the placement of the fill and
removal of the existing seawall substrate. The ultimate
effect could be negligible or, even beneficial, however,
in that the new sea wall could support essentially the same
or more life forms in a fairly short time. As the fill would
cover an area formerly used as a raw sewage discharge area,
it cannot be said to be disturbing a pristine environment.
Puget Sound
This category includes the biota of nearshore and off-
shore waters, which are affected far less by sewer overflows
than by effluents as overflows tend to disperse along shore
rather than out into open waters. An increase of 15 to 20%
in the maximum size of algae blooms near West Point has been
attributed (possibly) to effluent nutrients. Nutrients would
decrease to the Sound at this point only in Alternatives F
(by 28%) and H (by 15%). Total nutrients loads to Puget
Sound would be essentially unchanged in all Alternatives but
F, however.
Apparent changes in the diversity, abundance and com-
position of bottom communities occur at West Point in the
typical effluent plume position and along the depth contour
at which effluent has neutral buoyancy. The effects on
animals are judged to be more related to solids and BOD
loads than nutrients, and so are possibly more affected by
effluent treatment levels. Thus secondary treatment Alter-
natives E, F, G and H would probably decrease in time the
magnitude of the effect seen. Alternatives C and D would
maintain it at present (1975) or A levels but would repre-
sent a decrease from baseline (B) levels. Higher metals
206
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Summary
levels in Puget Sound biota near the outfalls could be
similarly reduced more by E, F, G and H, as secondary treat-
ment removes more metals than enhanced primary treatment.
The cause(s) of the elevated incidence of tumorous
flatfish at West Point has not been identified. The presence
of the outfall pipe and/or its contents may be involved, but
to an unknown extent. As a result, the effects of the various
alternatives on disease incidence cannot be determined.
Chlorine feed rate is residual paced at West Point, but
peaks in residual chlorine are not uncommon. In addition the
residual is measured a short distance downstream of the
chlorine feeding point, and therefore, does not reflect the
actual chlorine residual before discharging into Puget Sound.
Control of chlorine residual could be achieved by the instal-
lation of a chlorine contact tank. These conditions would
continue under Alternatives A, B, C and D. Secondary treat-
ment Alternatives E, F, G and H include chlorine contact
facilities and thus allow for t-.he optimization of disinfection,
Overchlorination which is possible with current disinfection
practices can cause toxic residuals in effluent. Residuals
have been shown in the laboratory to occur at close to thres-
hold levels for chronic effects, but no toxic effects have
been observed in the field. Dechlorination, provided in
Alternatives E, F, G and H, would eliminate potential efflu-
ent toxicity due to residual chlorine.
Commercial and Sport Fisheries
Migratory fish runs up the Ship Canal through Lake
Washington would be benefited by Alternatives C and F that
reduce overflows most to these waters, by Alternative F,
which achieves 25-31% reductions, and to a lesser extent by
11-15% reductions under Alternative H.
Freshwater Environments
These are affected primarily by overflows, except in
B, E and G where construction of a Kenmore Parallel inter-
ceptor would temporarily disrupt the northwest shore of Lake
Washington.
CSO's to freshwaters would be reduced most by C and by
D, and by F to a more moderate extent. A slight decrease
would be achieved by H. Baseline (B) levels would continue
in E and G.
207
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Summary
Rare and Endangered Species and Sensitive Habitats
No listed rare or endangered species are recorded from
the study area. Critical or sensitive habitats, such as
salmon spawning and rearing areas, fish migration routes,
waterfowl areas and lake shallows were discussed in other
sections. CSO control generally benefited these most.
Pigeon guillemot nesting areas in unstable cliffs
adjacent to the facility would probably not be affected if
plant expansions (such as in E and H) tend to undercut the
cliffs as these birds nest in cliffs adjacent to the sludge
lagoon and expansion would be in the northeast meadow.
The meadow habitat with its three rare plant species
would be eliminated in Alternatives E, F, and H with expan-
sion of West Point for secondary treatment.
Natural Resources and Energy
Natural resources and energy impacts are analyzed in the
Regional Environmental Impact Statement on an inter-related
basis between the five existing Metro plants and potential
new sites.
Human Environment
A comparison of impacts on the human environment is
as follows:
Land Use
Alternatives A and G would not expand the West Point
facility. Alternative B would have four additional tanks for
digester capacity just northeast of the existing facility-
Alternatives C and D would have two additional tanks for
chemical feed just northeast of the existing facility. Alter-
natives E and H would have either air activated sludge or
tower trickling filters along the shoreline northeast of the
existing facility- This expansion would require 12 acres of
fill; the secondary addition would take up as much land space
as the primary facility now takes. In Alternative F, oxygen
activated sludge facilities would be installed. This would
208
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Summary
require no additional fill area, but would use up much of
the remaining available space to the northeast of the existing
facility. The order of impact on land, in increasing sequence,
would be Alternatives A and G, Alternative B, Alternatives
C and D, Alternative F, Alternatives E and H.
The expansion of the West Point facility will have an
impact on the land usage in this area, but it is felt that
the impact of adding on to the facility is not as great as
the impact of constructing the West Point facility at this
location in the first place.
It is questionable whether the public would want to use
a public beach which is so close to a wastewater treatment
facility, especially when the beach is currently adjacent to
a sludge lagoon.
Alternative G would implement a wastewater facility in
the Interbay area. Both the Commodore Way and Golf Park
sites are already developed. Sixty businesses would be dis-
placed if the Commodore Way site is used.
Legal and Institutional
These impacts are developed in the Regional EIS. Alter-
natives E, F, G and H comply with PL 92-500; Alternatives
A, B, C and D do not.
Agency Goals
Many of the impacts related to agency goals have been
developed in the Regional EIS, including those goals related
to PL 92-500 compliance and CSO control.
It is debated whether the position or expansion of the
West Point treatment facility enhances the goal of the Dis-
covery Park Master Plan that Discovery Park would provide
an "open space of quiet and tranquility for the citizens of
Seattle;" and whether the facility affects the objective
stated in Goals for Seattle that "natural amenities identi-
fied as important to the region's character and beauty shall
be preserved or sensitively developed as a second choice."
It may be useful to point out parenthetically, that the West
Point facility was constructed long before the Discovery
Park land was acquired from the Forth Lawton Military Reser-
vation.
209
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Summary
Under Alternative G, development of the Interbay site
does not satisfy the goal of PSCOG of "encouraging conserva-
tion efforts and maximizing utilization of utilities and ser-
vices before increasing supply", when the ful-ly built facility
at West Point is not used to full potential. However, this
alternative does make efforts to fulfill the PSCOG goal of
"Maintaining the natural beauty and liveability of the region,"
at West Point at least, by not expanding the facility at this
site. Nor does it fulfill the PSCOG goals of making "existing
public utilities, facilities and services be used to their
fullest prior to expansion," nor does it "consider employment
distribution," if the Commodore Way site is chosen (such an
action would displace 700 to 800 jobs). Further, if the Commo-
dore Way site is chosen, by displacing as many as 60 busi-
nesses, it would thwart the following objectives stated in
Goals for Seattle; "Encourage industries that more fully uti-
lize Seattle's resources . . . Help small local firms expand
. . . promote individualism inherent in entrepreneurship . . .
Ensure adequate consideration of the particular economic in-
terests of Seattle citizens in relation to their local region."
This is considered adverse, major, long-term, reversible, and
definitely would occur if Alternative G is implemented in its
present form.
Employment and Costs
Employment and cost impacts are analyzed in the Regional
EIS.
It may be useful to note that if the Commodore Way site
is used under Alternative G, 700 to 800 jobs would be dis-
placed.
Social, Recreational and Cultural
Under all of the alternatives, the West Point facility
would remain, or be expanded, in its present location, main-
taining restrictions on the recreational use of the West Point
site. These impacts are considered adverse, minor, long-term,
irreversible, local; and definite, increasing in impact with
the extent of land used.
If the Commodore Way site is condemned to a wastewater
treatment facility, it would incise a major seafood process-
ing community, as was discussed in Chapter II. This impact
is considered adverse, major, long-term, moderately regional,
irreversible, and would definitely occur if the Commodore
Way site is chosen.
210
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Summary
Development of the Golf Park site would displace a
well-used municipal golf course, which would be difficult to
relocate in urbanized Seattle.
Further, local residents would consider it a social
stigma to have both the West Point and Interbay sewage treat-
ment plants in their neighborhood. These impacts are con-
sidered adverse, minor, long-term, irreversible, and defin-
itely could occur if Alternative H is implemented.
Sixty percent of the Magnolia area residents would like
to implement secondary treatment (HRPI, 1976). Alternatives
A through D would not fulfill this desire; Alternatives E
through H would.
Archeological and Historical
In the West Point-Interbay area, no known archeological
sites would be affected; no recognized historical placets would
be impacted.
Health and Safety
Under Alternatives A through D, there may be health
risks related to eating shellfish which have been affected
by primarily treated effluent. Alternatives E through H may
alleviate this problem by implementing secondary treatment,
as described in the biological section of the EIS.
An unlikely safety hazard is accidental leakage of
chemicals when they are in transport or handled on site.
Although nearly every U.S. water and wastewater treatment
facility uses chemicals, there have been very few chemical-
related accidents.
The health and safety problems related to sludge trans-
port and disposal would be as probable as for any other trucks
in transit.
Construction risks to safety would be the same as for
other construction of a similar nature; they would be adverse,
minor, last only for the duration of construction, may be
reversible, and are unlikely.
The risks related to chemicals, sludge transport, and
construction would be proportional to their magnitude. In
these categories A and B would be least impactive, C and D
211
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Summary
next; E, F and H next; and Alternative G most impactive
because of major construction at the Interbay site.
Under Alternative F, with the oxygen activated sludge
method of secondary treatment, oxygen is mixed into the
activated sludge basin for the respiratory functions of the
microorganisms which digest sewage. If this oxygen comes
into contact with hydrocarbons (e.g. gasoline) in the presence
of a spark, there could be an explosion. However, this
situation should never arise. Oxygen activated sludge faci-
lities are designed to provide continuous monitoring of
hydrocarbon concentration. An alarm will sound far below
dangerous hydrocarbon levels, and oxygen would automatically
be vented to bypass the activated sludge basin. The impact
of an explosion could be adverse, major, long-term, reversi-
ble, but would be highly unlikely. Although oxygen activated
sludge facilities are used around the country, there have not
yet been any incidences of explosion.
Aesthetics and Nuisance
Under all alternatives (other than A and G) the West
Point wastewater treatment facility expansion could be well-
designed for consideration of aesthetics. It would lie low,
would be clean, and would be surrounded by well-kept grass
and screening trees. Few odor complaints would be expected.
Visibility of much of the West Point facility from Discovery
Park would be blocked by bluffs. Only 10% of 377 Magnolia
area residents polled interviewed by Gerhardt Research were
opposed to the location of the West Point facility.
The nuisance would increase with the magnitude of ex-
pansion, as in the social, recreational and cultural section
of this summary. Most expansion would occur to the northeast
of the existing facility, where it would be hidden from the
view of much of Discovery Park.
These aesthetic impacts would be adverse, minor, long-
term, local, and reversible and definite if Alternative F
is implemented.
Under Alternative G, placement of a wastewater facility
at Commodore Way would displace many businesses; those re-
maining might object to the presence of a wastewater facility
right next door. This would place a stigma on those who vend
fish and would discourage boating and harboring in this area
(letters from Salmon Bay Improvement Association). This
impact is considered adverse, major, long-term, irreversible,
local and probably would occur.
212
-------
Alternatives and Impacts
Summary
The Golf Park site would be visible from local residences,
and an odor is feared. Before construction, much of the
garbage which has been collected for twenty years would have
to be excavated. It is feared that during this process,
methane and noxious sulfur dioxide might be released.
These impacts are considered adverse, minor, short-term,
irreversible, local, and may occur.
Sludge trucking is a minor aesthetic nuisance. It seemed
to bother only a few of those interviewed (HRPI, 1976). Sludge
tracking would be approximately twice as much for Alternatives
E, F, G and H as for Alternatives A, B, C and D.
213
-------
214
-------
CHAPTER IV
CITIZEN AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT
The interaction between citizen and agency personnel
(and their consultants) in the West Point area to date has
included small group and informational meetings, community
meetings, contacts with business leaders, and communication
with organized neighborhood groups (particularly the Mag-
nolia Community Club).
The first series of contacts of the Clear Water Watch
program for the West Point facilities planning project were
made in the spring of 1976 by Human Resources Planning
Institute (HRPI), Metro's social and economic consultant.
Most of these contacts were in the Magnolia area and were
used to develop socioeconomic background and enumerate
community-generated issues regarding West Point treatment,
expansion and siting alternatives. Citizens contacted by
telephone or letter during March 1976 included representa-
tives of the Magnolia Community Club, Magnolia Commercial
Club, Magnolia-Queen Avenue Chapter of the League of Women
Voters, Magnolia Community Center Advisory, Magnolia Recrea-
tion Center Advisory, Magnolia Bluffers and other residents.
Shirtsleeve meetings included HRPI staff and seven Magnolia
residents. HRPI also organized a Magnolia focus group
session on April 21, 1976, which was attended by ten Magno-
lia representatives.
Other people have been contacted by HRPI in developing
socioeconomic information related specifically to West
Point alternatives. Regarding the West Point move feasi-
bility analysis, HRPI telephoned personnel at the Bureau
of Outdoor Recreation, Interagency for Outdoor Recreation,
Seattle Parks Department, Seattle Engineering Department-
Traffic Section, Discovery Park, and Dan Kiley & Partners
(Discovery Park master planners). The West Point move
cost-effectiveness study included telephone communications
with Rhine Demolition Contractor, Diex Adkinson (architects
and engineers), and the Seattle Street Maintenance group.
The first community meeting in the West Point area
215
-------
Citizen and Agency Involvement
was held May 24, 1976 at the Magnolia Recreation Hall. It was
attended by approximately 40 Magnolia citizens, Park Board
and Friends of Discovery Park members, plus a Metro Council
member, Metro staff, Metro facilities planning consultants
(Metropolitan Engineers), HRPI staff, and the chairperson
of the Citizens' Water Quality Advisory Committee (CWQAC).
The West Point treatment plant alternatives, "merit" alter-
natives, federal requirements and Metro's strategy were pre-
sented. Most of the concerns at that meeting related to the
desire of the majority of citizens attending the meeting to
avoid expansion on the West Point site. If expansion were
to be at another site, the attending citizens expressed a
preference for the Golf Park site over the Commodore Way
site, presumably because of the existing industrial tax base
there. Eliminating the plant if feasible or ameliorating
existing conditions were also discussed. Recommendations
for lessening the impact of the present plant on the park
included removing the sludge lagoon, landscaping and screen-
ing the facility, and processing Renton sludge elsewhere.
Other items relating to regional concerns that were expressed
at the meeting included federal requirements for secondary
treatment, the relationship between 201 and 208 planning,
mechanisms for wastewater flow reduction, plant siting and
sludge treatment alternatives and shoreline access. A more
complete analysis of the meeting was prepared by Metro
Community Involvement staff, was mailed to attending citizens,
and is available for inspection by other interested parties
at Metro.
The second community meeting in the West Point area
was held August 4, 1976 at St. Margaret's Catholic Church.
Attending were approximately 45 citizens of the Interbay
community plus representatives and interested personnel from
Metro staff, Metropolitan Engineers, and CWQAC. The Metro-
politan Engineers Facility Plan studies, including construc-
tion proposals, Metro Community Involvement plans and the
role of CWQAC in the Metro planning were presented. The
major issue of concern to the citizens was the possibility
of construction of an additional plant in Interbay which
the majority of those attending clearly opposed. The pre-
dominant view favored avoidance of building at the Commodore
Way or Golf Park sites and minimization of the impacts of
expansion on the existing West Point site. The West Point
site was favored based on comparison with the Interbay area's
population density and other socioeconomic traits, and im-
portance as a tax base. With respect to cost-effectiveness,
the census was that building at Interbay was wasteful of
funds as a site already existed at West Point.
Other items discussed included Discovery Park, its his-
torical uses and present use evaluation, and risk of
216
-------
Citizen and Agency Involvement
neighborhood hazards due to chemicals routinely used in
wastewater treatment. In addition, some doubt was expressed
concerning the sincerity of Metro's efforts to solicit and
incorporate public opinion in the facility planning. For
more detailed information on the August meeting, the reader
is referred to a Metro summary mailed to those in attendance
which is available for review at Metro.
A third community meeting was held on September 13,
1976 at the National Guard Armory to discuss an Interbay
treatment plant. Attending were approximately 85 Interbay
area citizens plus a Metro Council member, Metro staff, a
representative of the Metro facility planning consultant
(Metropolitan Engineers), HRPI staff and a member of the
Citizens Water Quality Advisory Committee. The Metro
strategy, federal requirements, "core" alternatives and West
Point treatment plant alternatives were presented. A major
concern at the meeting related to the desire of the majority
of citizens attending the meeting to avoid construction of a
major new treatment plant at Interbay. Impacts on Interbay
and its residents were discussed with respect to land (amount
required and acquisition methods), water quality (effects
of an outfall on Salmon Bay and salmon runs), air quality
(odors, chlorine and other gases, and restricted circulation
at Interbay), and social (effects of a treatment plant on
adjacent property values; impacts on nearby residents versus
on Discovery Park).
Other issues raised included ramifications for the Metro
service area of PL 92-500 and potential impacts of Metro's
resistance to its requirements, and impacts of the State
Shorelines Management Act and the Seattle Comprehensive plan
on West Point planning. Citizens attending were also con-
cerned about zoning and land use at targeted sites, and the
issue of regional versus local wastewater treatment, in-
cluding the reliability of a large facility and its suscep-
tibility to earthquakes or sabotage. Comments also addressed
the possibility of further alternative sites and the cost
effectiveness .of CSO control. Citizen participation oppor-
tunities and importance to the planning process were of
further concern, as was the process scheduling. More de-
tailed analysis of the meeting is contained in a summary
prepared by Metro that was mailed to those in attendance and
is available for review at Metro.
The fourth community meeting in the West Point area was
held November 17, 1976 at the Elaine Junior High School
Auditorium. Attending were approximately 85 citizens plus
representatives and interested personnel from Metro Council,
Metro staff, DOE, EPA, Metropolitan Engineers, John Morse
and Associates (Metro's architectural consultant), HRPI,
217
-------
Citizen and Agency Involvement
James M. Montgomery Consulting Engineers, Inc. (Metro's EIS
consultant), and CWQAC. Panel members discussed planning
alternatives ("no action", "legal", and "goal") and issues,
architectural alternatives and social impacts. The major
issue of concern to the citizens and business people was
the location of possible West Point expansion. In con-
trast to the first community meeting, the majority of atten-
dees who expressed a preference favored expansion at West
Point rather than at Commodore Way or Golf Park sites in the
Interbay area. The difference in preference appears to be
due to the fact that the first meeting was attended prima-
rily by homeowners who live near West Point and the fourth
meeting was attended by greater numbers of people with busi-
ness interests in the Interbay area.
In the six months from the first to the fourth public
meeting, the tide of opinion appeared to change, with
the increasingly persistent and vocal concern of residents
and businessmen of the Interbay area. Magnolia residents
appeared to focus more on site - specific issues at West
Point rather than on plant relocation.
Other issues that were raised at the fourth meeting
relative to plant expansion/relocation included economic
effects of condemnation and relocation, the need for a
social survey for the Commodore Way and Golf Park sites,
competing uses of Discovery Park, economic and recreational
values of the fishing industry, the number of people af-
fected by plant location at alternative sitesr and the struc-
tural suitability of alternative sites. Comments on system
or regional planning addressed the location and timing of
treatment plants, service area designations, sludge treatment
locations, selection process and definition of alternatives,
the applicability of federal secondary treatment regula-
tions for Puget Sound, and a concern for water quality.
Site-specific issues of odor were also mentioned at alter-
native sites. For more detailed information on the November
meeting, the reader is referred to the Metro summary that
was mailed to those in attendance and is available for re-
view at Metro.
Since the November 17, 1976 community meeting, Metro
staff have been in contact with other people regarding the
West Point alternatives. Typical of these contacts was a
telephone call from a Commodore Way businessman, who stressed
the economic importance of the Commodore Way area and re-
quested that businesses in that area be kept better informed
of the project, which Metro has taken steps to do.
Another example of citizen input is the February 10,
1977 letter from the Magnolia Community Club to Metro
218
-------
Citizen and Agency Involvement
regarding the club's general goals and criteria for evalua-
tion of various proposals for expansion of wastewater treat-
ment plants. The comprehensive set of goals and criteria
were developed to evaluate alternatives and impacts on
geology (views, aesthetics, shoreline access, shoreline
alterations), water resources (excavation runoff and lea-
chate, effluent re-use potential, outfall location, impacts
on biota), air quality (odor, dust, other air pollutants),
energy and natural resources (effluent and sludge re-use,
methane recovery), ecosystems (treatment plant impacts on
wildlife, effluent impacts on aquatic biota), unique fea-
tures (business activity, social and economic impacts, park
and recreational use, project compatibility with other land
uses), health and safety (hazardous chemicals, vandalism
or sabotage, dispersal by air or water), social and cultural
factors (employment, plant location, recreation), political
and institutional considerations (community advisory group,
distribution of wastewater facilities), demography (neigh-
borhood stability), economy (cost, cost-effectiveness, infla-
tion impacts, indirect costs, displacement costs, water
dependence of certain businesses), land use (compatibility
with Seattle Comprehensive Plan and 2000 Goals), environ-
mental quality and aesthetics (human and other impacts,
aesthetics, noise, lighting and glare, air and water qua*-
lity), and area planning and projected growth (compatibility),
These criteria have been considered in the facilities plan-
ning and have been used (in a modified form) in the EIS
evaluation.
A subsequent Clear Water Watch community workshop was
held on June 8 in the Conference Room of the Center House
at Seattle Center. Forty-nine citizens from the West Point
area attended this meeting, the purpose of which was to
assure that citizens' comments are included in the environ-
mental analysis of the eight wastewater treatment alterna-
tives. Although there was some discussion of the effects
of the West Point treatment plant on West Point beaches, the
primary issue of discussion was the economic repercussions
of locating a new plant in the Interbay area.
The Salmon Bay Improvement Association, representing
commercial interests in the Commodore Way area, presented
a petition asking Metro to seriously consider the economic
impact of building a sewage treatment plant in that area.
It was pointed out that Commodore Way is a service and sup-
ply area for a great portion of the Alaskan fishing fleet
and that there would be significant tax losses if this impor-
tant commercial property were purchased by Metro. Concern
was also expressed for the impacts of locating a sewage
treatment plant at the Commodore Way site on homes and
neighborhoods in the Magnolia area. The number of people
219
-------
Citizen a,nd Agency Involvement
which would be adversely affected by a Commodore Way plant
should be determined. Fear was also expressed for the odors
which would be released by excavating the Golf Park site
(previously a garbage dump). It was requested that Metro
consider the advantages of undergrounding whatever plant is
finally decided on for West Point/Interbay in order to con-
trol treatment plant odors. It was pointed out that efflu-
ent from an Interbay plant would harm Puget Sound just as
much as a West Point plant. The feasibility, costs, and
impacts of abandoning the West Point plant should be in-
cluded in the environmental analysis.
There was some discussion of the need to protect the
recreational value of West Point beaches. Opinions differed
as to whether or not there had ever been clamming at West
Point. Another concern expressed was about the impact on
fish and water quality from residual chlorine in the efflu-
ent. Questions were asked about the feasibility of reclaim-
ing West Point as a saltwater beach. It was suggested that
funds from the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation be used to fi-
nance restoration of West Point to park status, and it was
asked if Metro could use EPA money to enhance the shoreline
as a mitigation measure. One citizen explained that he
believes the historic lighthouse is now threatened by chang-
ing erosion/deposition patterns caused by Metro development
at West Point. Questions were asked regarding the feasi-
bility of reducing the West Point load, and the benefits
this could have on West Point beaches. It was also re-
quested that Metro investigate the costs of removing the
sludge lagoons. Other points raised included the social
obligation to obey the federal law requiring secondary treat-
ment, the advantages of locating a secondary plant at the
present West Point site, the high cost of purchasing/con-
struction at Commodore Way, and the need to develop a new
alternative maximizing CSO control and secondary treatment.
The need to investigate water reclamation/energy recovery
was mentioned as was the importance of not encouraging
growth. Among other concerns voiced were the needs to
treat industrial toxicants at the source, to allow West
Point to return to its native condition, and to investigate
lateral drift on South Beach. All items in the Magnolia
Community Club letter were again stressed, as were the legal
ramifications of the Seattle Shorelines Master Management
program. The relative monthly user charges in Alternatives
F & G were questioned, and Metro was requested to detail
the costs per component of each alternative so that sub-
combinations among alternatives could be compared. The wis-
dom of reviewing recent advances in waste treatment systems
in Europe and Japan was mentioned. An interesting comment
was made that Seattle should take advantage of the federal
funding for secondary treatment provided under PL 92-500 now.
220
-------
Citizen and Agency Involvement
If Seattle continued with primary treatment, but at some
time in the future realized the need to advance to secon-
dary, federal funds would probably not be available.
Another concern raised was the importance of preventing in-
terceptors installed to control CSO's from attracting or
stimulating new growth.
In another example of citizen involvement in the plan-
ning process, letters from businesses in the Commodore Way
area pledging support of the Salmon Bay Association were
forwarded to Metro. Most of these letters stress the impor-
tance of the Commodore Way enterprises to the fishing fleet
which docks in that area. It is pointed out that because of
the specialized nature of these businesses, there is no
other place in Seattle for them to relocate. The letters
express concern that if a particular firm is not directly
displaced, the odors from the new plant would make business
unprofitable. It is believed that if the fishing support
services were displaced, the fleet itself would leave
Seattle. The resulting loss in tax revenue, income, and
tourist attraction would be "disastrous" for Seattle, accord-
ing to many of the letters.
A formal public hearing on the West Point Draft EIS
is planned for the Fall of 1977. Comments will be incor-
porated into the Final EIS, for which one public hearing for
West Point and other alternatives within the Metro planning
area is scheduled for March, 1978.
It should be noted here that site-specific comments
to date from citizen and agency involvement on the West
Point or alternative facilities location have been consi-
dered in developing this Draft EIS (Volume II) for West
Point. All regional or system-wide issues have been
handled similarly in the Regional Draft EIS which is Volume
I of this series.
221
-------
APPENDIX A
ELEMENTS OF THE ENVIRONMENT
WAG 197-10-442 SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING CONTENTS
OF AN EIS ON A NON-PROJECT ACTION. (1) The requirements of
WAG 197-10-440 apply to the contents of a draft- EIS on a pro-
posal for a non-project action. Lead agencies, however, have
greater flexibility in their approach to achieving compliance
with the requirements of WAG 197-10-440 in writing an EIS for
non-project actions, because normally less specific details are
known about the proposal and any implementing projects, as well
as the anticipated impacts on the environment.
(2) The lead agency should be alert to the fact that it
is in the development and review of proposals for non-project
actions where the range of alternatives is typically more broad
than that of a proposal for a project action (which is often
narrowed to a specific location and design). The proposal
should be described in a manner which encourages consideration
of a number of alternative methods of accomplishing its
objective. For example, an objective of an agency's pro-
posal should be stated as "the facilitation of the movement
of people from point A to point B" rather than "the widening
of an urban arterial in order to accommodate additional pri-
vately-owned passenger vehicles."
WAG 197-10-444 LIST OF ELEMENTS OF THE ENVIRONMENT.
(1) Every EIS shall have appended to it a list of the elements
of the environment in subsection (2), (3) and (4) of this sec-
tion. The lead agency shall place "N/A" ("not applicable")
next to an item when the proposal, including its indirect
impacts, will not significantly affect the area (or subarea)
of the environment in question^ Items marked "N/A" need
not be mentioned in the body of' the EIS. Subsections (2) and
(3) of this section correspond in subject matter to the
questions contained in the environmental checklist used for
threshold determination, and the questions in the checklist
may be used to interpret this outline listing.
(2) ELEMENTS OF THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT.
(a) Earth.
(i) Geology.
(ii) Soils.
(iii) Topography.
(iv) Unique physical features.
(v) Erosion.
N/A (vi) Accretion/avulsion.
(b) Air.
(i) Air quality.
(ii) Odor.
(iii) Climate.
(c) Water.
N/A (i) Surface water movement.
(ii) Runoff/absorption.
A-l
-------
(iii) Floods.
(iv) Surface water quantity.
(v) Surface water quality.
N/A (vi) Ground water movement.
(vii) Ground water quantity.
N/A (viii) Ground water quality.
N/A (ix) Public water supplies.
(d) Flora.
(i) Numbers or diversity of species.
(ii) Unique species.
(iii) Barriers and/or corridors.
(iv) Agricultural crops.
(e) Fauna.
(i) Numbers or diversity of species.
(ii) Unique species.
(iii) Barriers and/or corridors.
(iv) Fish or wildlife habitat.
(f) Noise.
N/A (g) Light and glare.
(h) Land use.
(i) Natural resources.
(i) Rate of use.
(ii) Nonrenewable resources.
(j) Risk of explosion or hazardous emissions
(3) ELEMENTS OF THE HUMAN ENVIRONMENT.
(a) Population.
N/A (b) Housing.
(c) Transportation/circulation.
(ij Vehicular transportation generated.
N/A (ii) Parking facilities.
N/A (iii) Transportation systems.
N/A (iv) Movement/circulation of people or goods
N/A (v) Waterborne, rail and air traffic.
(vi) Traffic hazards.
(d) Public services.
N/A (i) Fire.
N/A (ii) Police.
N/A (iii) Schools.
(iv) Parks or other recreational facilities.
N/A (v) Maintenance.
(vi) Other governmental services.
(e) Energy.
(i) Amount required.
(ii) Source/availability.
A-2
-------
(f) Utilities.
(i) Energy.
N/A (ii) Communications.
N/A (iii) Water.
(iv) Sewer.
(v) Storm water.
(vi) Solid waste.
Human health (Not including mental health]_
(h) Aesthetics.
(i) Recreation.
(j) Archeological/historical .
(4) The following additional element shall be covered in
all EISs, either by being discussed or marked "N/A," but shall
not be considered part of the environment for other purposes:
N/A ^ Additional population characteristics.
(i) Distribution by age, sex and ethnic characteristics
of the residents in the geographical area affected by the en-
vironmental impacts of the proposal.
WAG 197-10-446 DRAFT EIS- -OPTIONAL ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS --
LIMITATION. Agencies in their guidelines may add to the list
in WAG 197-10-444 additional elements covering social, cultur-
al and/or economic issues. Such additional elements shall be-
come part of the environment for EIS purposes , and not other-
wise. The guidelines of the lead agency shall control the
content of the EIS, even though other agencies with jurisdic-
tion are involved in the proposal. No agency shall prescribe
additional material for an EIS beyond that which is required
or optionally allowed by WAG 197-10-440 and -444, or which is
added to the elements of the environment by the guidelines of
the lead agency pursuant to the authority in this section [see
WAG 197-10-440(14)] .
PUBLIC AWARENESS, HEARINGS AND CIRCULATION OF DRAFT EIS
WAG 197-10-450 PUBLIC AWARENESS OF AVAILABILITY OF DRAFT
EIS. (1)Upon publication of the draft EIS, the responsible
official shall list the proposal in the lead agency's "EIS
Available Register" maintained at the agency's SEPA public in-
formation center.
(2) The lead agency is encouraged, but not required, to
use any reasonable method calculated to inform the public of
the availability of the draft EIS and of the procedures for
requesting a public hearing. Examples of such methods are
publication of notice in a newspaper of general circulation in
the county, city or general geographic area where the proposal
is located; notifying private groups that are known to be in-
terested in a certain proposal; contacting news media personnel
and encouraging news coverage; and, placing notices in appro-
priate regional, neighborhood or ethnic periodicals.
A-3
-------
APPENDIX B
REFERENCES
See Regional Analysis EIS, Volume I, Appendix A for references.
B-l
------- |