For Groveland Park, Mercer Island, King County, Washington
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Exhibit F CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR GROVELAND PARK, MERCER ISLAND, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON February 5, 2016 SWCA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS SEATTLE, WASHINGTON CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR GROVELAND PARK, MERCER ISLAND, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Report Prepared for Robert W. Droll, Landscape Architect PS 4405 7th Avenue SE Lacey, WA 98503 By Brandy A. Rinck February 5, 2016 Project No. 34197 Report No. 16-55 CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION – NOT FOR GENERAL DISTRIBUTION SWCA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS 221 1st Ave W, Suite 205 Seattle, Washington 98119 CULTURAL RESOURCES REPORT COVER SHEET Author: Rinck, Brandy A. Title of Report: Cultural Resources Assessment for Groveland Park, Mercer Island, King County, Washington Date of Report: February 5, 2016 County(ies): King Section: 24 Township: 24 N Range: 4E Quad: Seattle South Acres: 1.4 PDF of report submitted (REQUIRED) Yes Historic Property Export Files submitted? Yes No Archaeological Site(s)/Isolate(s) Found or Amended? Yes No TCP(s) found? Yes No Replace a draft? Yes No Satisfy a DAHP Archaeological Excavation Permit requirement? Yes # No Were Human Remains Found? Yes DAHP Case # No SWCA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR GROVELAND PARK, MERCER ISLAND, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Mercer Island Parks and Recreation proposes a new pier surrounding the existing swimming area at Groveland Park on Mercer Island in King County, Washington (Figure 1). On behalf of Mercer Island, Landscape Architect Robert Droll retained SWCA Environmental Consultants (SWCA) to conduct a cultural resources assessment for the project. This cultural resources assessment report details the natural and cultural setting of the project area and presents the methods and results of field survey. No significant cultural materials were identified in the heavily disturbed project area during the assessment. A. PROJECT INFORMATION 1. Proposed project activities and elements: Mercer Island Parks and Recreation proposes to replace two existing piers that currently delineate the Groveland Park swim area with one new fixed pier (Figure 2). An Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) lift will be added to the new pier. A floating breakwater will be installed in the water, and the sandy bottom of the swim area will slowly transition to lake bed. The project will affect approximately 360 feet (110 m) of shoreline. Shoreline restoration is proposed for portions of the pocket beach outside the swim area. Upland project elements include adding theater steps to access the beach and turf terrace to the current grassy areas near the existing restroom. The maximum depth of ground disturbance associated with these project elements is currently unknown. A portion of the new pier will overlap the footprint of the southernmost old pier. 2. Regulatory Context: The pier replacement project is subject to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA), as amended, because it will require a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The NHPA requires federal agencies to identify and assess the effects of their undertaking on historic properties. Historic properties are those that are listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and may include buildings or other structures, archaeological sites, and traditional cultural properties. To qualify for listing in the NRHP, a district, site, structure, building, or object must generally be 50 years of age, possess integrity of physical characteristics, and meet at least one of four criteria of significance (36 CFR 60.4) at the national, state, or local level. The USACE has its own regulations for meeting its responsibilities under the NHPA (33 CFR 325, Appendix C). Sites that are important enough to protect or to mitigate are termed “designated historic properties” by the USACE. A designated historic property is listed in or is eligible for listing in the NRHP by meeting the same criteria discussed above. A purpose of this report is to advise the USACE of the potential for the project to affect designated historic properties and recommend additional investigation as warranted. In addition, a State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) checklist will be filed for the project, which requires a Shoreline Permit and other permits from the Washington State Department of Ecology. The project may also receive funding from the Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office. Other relevant Washington state laws address archaeological sites and Native American burials. The Archaeological Sites and Resources Act [RCW 27.53] prohibits knowingly excavating or SWCA Environmental Consultants 1 February 5, 2016 CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION NOT FOR GENERAL DISTRIBUTION 2 Cultural Resources Assessment for Groveland Park disturbing prehistoric and historic archaeological sites on public or private land. The Indian Graves and Records Act [RCW 27.44] prohibits knowingly destroying American Indian graves and provides that inadvertent disturbance through construction or other activities requires re-interment under supervision of the appropriate Indian tribe. This report aids the project in complying with federal and state laws and regulations by identifying historic properties and determining sensitivity for the inadvertent discovery of buried historic properties (archaeological sites), so that appropriate plans can be made to avoid or minimize damage to them. B. NATURAL AND CULTURAL SETTING 1. Geologic Setting The project is within the Puget Lowland, a geographic province that separates the Olympic Mountains from the Western Cascades. The present topography of the Puget Lowland is primarily the result of continental glaciers that extended south from what is now Canada during the Pleistocene (Booth et al. 2004). The most recent ice sheet advance occurred during the Vashon Stade of the Fraser glaciation, which reached Seattle around 17,400 calibrated years before the present (cal BP) (Booth et al. 2004; Dethier et al. 1995; Heusser 1973). The ice sheet extended as far south as Tenino before it retreated from the Puget Lowland by 16,400 cal BP (Troost and Booth 2008). Proglacial lakes formed behind the retreating ice front, connecting glacially carved meltwater channels. Hundreds of meters of unconsolidated till and outwash sediment were exposed on the newly deglaciated upland surfaces around the lakes (Alt and Hyndman 1994; Borden and Troost 2001; Dethier et al. 1995; Galster and Laprade 1991; Liesch et al. 1963; Porter and Swanson 1998; Troost and Stein 1995; Waitt and Thorson 1983; Yount et al. 1993). Lacustrine sediments were deposited in the lake bottoms. The project is on the shoreline of modern Lake Washington, which occupies one of the largest glacially carved troughs in the Puget Lowland. In some places, such as the project area, the ice carved the trough so deeply that old pre-Fraser glacial deposits are exposed in steep bluffs. Small creeks drain the glacial upland, forming small alluvial fans where they meet Lake Washington. A summary of the previous geotechnical borings completed for this project which encountered pre-Fraser glacial outwash, is in Attachment A (Levine and McCaughan 2015). Changing environmental conditions throughout the subsequent Holocene have affected the distribution of resources, suitability of particular landforms for human occupation, and archaeological site visibility and preservation (Dethier et al. 1995; Dragovich et al. 1994; Thorson 1989). For example, the surface elevation of water in what is now Lake Washington fluctuated in tandem with sea level in Puget Sound throughout the early Holocene because Lake Washington was then connected to the marine Duwamish embayment (Dragovich et al. 1994; Easterbrook 1993; Leopold 1982; Mullineaux 1970). Marine water drained from Lake Washington Bay, and the trough began to fill with freshwater by about 14,800 cal BP (Troost 2011). Rebound of the land from the weight of glacial ice was complete by 11,600 cal BP, causing the isolation of the north end of Lake Washington from the Puget Sound (Clague and James 2002; Thorson 1981, 1989). The south end of Lake Washington continued to be influenced by the Puget Sound until the Cedar River delta expanded across its outlet and completely separated Lake Washington from the rest of Puget Sound (Troost 2011). SWCA Environmental Consultants February 5, 2016 CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION NOT FOR GENERAL DISTRIBUTION Cultural Resources Assessment for Groveland Park 3 Evidence of relatively rapid fresh water inundation of the early and middle Holocene lakeshores is apparent from buried shorelines around Lake Washington (Thorson 1998). Heavy rainfall, drought, and tectonic activity may have also caused major fluctuations in lake levels during the middle to late Holocene (Chrzastowski 1983). Lake Washington shoreline inundation continued at a slower rate after sea level reached equilibrium in Puget Sound about 5,000 years ago. Construction of the Lake Washington Ship Canal in 1916 redirected the lake’s outflow from its south end near Renton to the west through Lake Union. The ship canal opening caused the level of Lake Washington to drop approximately 2.7 m (9 feet). The drop in lake level exposed several Native American camp sites and features along the lake’s shoreline, as well as most of the project area (Carter 1917; Thrush 2007). The drop in shoreline elevation also exacerbated erosion along the lakeshore. Adding to the complexity of the Lake Washington shoreline history is activity