Study of Cultural & Spiritual Values Associated with Future Alternatives for Capitol Lake Basin January 5, 2009 Prepared by AHBL, Inc., for the Department of General Administration AHBL, Inc ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS State of Washington Staff Donovan Gray, Historic Preservation Planner, State Capitol Campus Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Nathaniel Jones, Senior Planning and Asset Manager, Department of General Administration Capitol Lake Adaptive Management Plan (CLAMP) Advisory Committee Neil McClanahan, CLAMP Chair, City of Tumwater Joe Hyer, City of Olympia Martin Casey, Department of General Administration George Barner, Port of Olympia Jeff Dickison, Squaxin Island Tribe Richard Blinn, Thurston County Water and Waste Management Department Sally Toteff, Washington State Department of Ecology Michele Culver, Washington State Department of Fish & Wildlife Todd Welker, Washington State Department of Natural Resources Consultant Team AHBL Inc., Prime Consultant Julia Walton, AICP, Principal‐in‐Charge Betsy Geller, Project Manager and Primary Author Irene Tang Sparck, AICP, Project Planner and Contributing Author Allan Ainsworth, Ph.D., Anthropology Subconsultant Cover Photo: The USS Constitution sailing out of Deschutes River Basin, c. 1933 Source: Unknown 2 January 5, 2009 Study of Cultural & Spiritual Values Associated with Future Alternatives for Capitol Lake Basin Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................. 5 I. Introduction .......................................................................................................... 15 A. Purpose ............................................................................................................. 15 B. Study Limitations .......................................................................................... 15 C. History and Context of Capitol Lake Basin ......................................... 16 D. Capitol Lake Adaptive Management Plan ........................................... 18 E. Methodology and Assumptions ............................................................... 19 II. Identification of Values ................................................................................... 23 A. Existing Data Summary .............................................................................. 23 B. Interview Summaries .................................................................................. 26 C. Values ................................................................................................................. 36 D. Value Diagrams .............................................................................................. 43 III. Alternatives ........................................................................................................ 55 A. Actions included in the Alternatives ..................................................... 55 B. Outcomes of the Alternatives ................................................................... 57 IV. Impacts ................................................................................................................. 61 Alternative 1: Status Quo Lake ..................................................................... 65 Alternative 2: Managed Lake ........................................................................ 69 Alternative 3: Estuary ...................................................................................... 73 Alternative 4: Dual Basin Estuary ............................................................... 77 V. Conclusions .......................................................................................................... 81 Appendices ................................................................................................................ 83 A. Interview Questions B. Interview Transcripts C. Responses from Members of the Capitol Campus Design Advisory Committee D. List of Events Regularly Held at Capitol Lake E. Public Comments January 5, 2009 3 AHBL, Inc List of Figures Figure 1: Values Array………………………………………….…....... 45 Figure 2: Values and Value Holders……………………….……... 51 Figure 3: Common Themes in Values……...…….…….………... 53 List of Tables Table i: Values Overview……………………………………….……. 9 Table ii: Summary of Impacts of All Alternatives………...... 11 Table 1: Outcomes of Alternatives………………….………..…... 59 Table 2: Impact Categories…………………………….……………. 62 Table 3: Impacts of Alternative 1…………………….………....... 67 Table 4: Impacts of Alternative 2…………………….………....... 71 Table 5: Impacts of Alternative 3……………………….………… 75 Table 6: Impacts of Alternative 4…………………………...…….. 79 Table 7: Summary of Impacts of All Alternatives…….…….. 83 4 January 5, 2009 Study of Cultural & Spiritual Values Associated with Future Alternatives for Capitol Lake Basin EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Purpose This report is one of a series of studies commissioned by the Washington State Department of General Administration (GA) in “… revealing the relation to the future of the Capitol Lake basin in Olympia, based on function of the the direction of the Capitol Lake Adaptive Management Plan watershed and the non­ (CLAMP) Steering Committee. The Committee is currently reviewing static nature of this the impacts of four alternatives for the long‐term future of the Lake ecosystem can be the basin. As a method for comparing the alternatives, the Committee focus of a statement of established fifteen analysis categories, and is preparing reports on ecosystem management the e ffects of alternatives on the categories. The categories are: and values as we move into this challenging • Long‐term capital and operating costs • Sediment century. This is a • Water access to the Port of Olympia timely discussion and it • Boat moorage along Percival Landing is possible to have both • Flooding in downtown Olympia the aesthetic and the • State water quality standards for dissolved oxygen, nitrogen, ecological function if and phosphorus there is willingness to • Fish and wildlife habitat address both. This can • Year‐round fish passage not be an either/or • Invasive species situation. This will • Ecosystem health require leadership and • Public recreation a valuing of both the • Public roadways and transportation connections • Utility infrastructure iconic cultural roots • Regional economy and the ecological • Cultural and spiritual values (present study) function.” – Barbara Swift, Capitol Completed CLAMP studies that address these categories can be Campus Design Advisory found online at: http://www.ga.wa.gov/CLAMP/index.html. Committee The purpose of this report is to identify the cultural and spiritual values associated with the Lake basin, and to assess potential impacts to those values from the four alternatives for the Lake basin’s future. This values study brings that which people value and care about into the decision‐making process, cataloguing beliefs and ideas held by a variety of stakeholders. The values studied are not economic values, but rather feelings and beliefs that relate to the sense of place imparted by the Deschutes River and Capitol Lake basin. Further, this study is not an inventory or analysis of historic or cultural resources, not is it an analysis of aesthetic impacts. This cultural and spiritual values study does not address aesthetics except insofar as they relate to the Capitol Campus architectural and landscape plans of Wilder & White and the Olmsted Brothers, in January 5, 2009 5 AHBL, Inc relation to identified cultural and spiritual values. Additionally, recreation is addressed only as a formative element in shaping cultural values. Analysis of recreation in other contexts is included in the Net Social and Economic Benefit Analysis, which can be found online at the link listed above. (See page 15 in Chapter I of the study for further discussion of the study’s purpose and limitations.) The goal of the project is a reasonable, defensible catalog and assessment of potential impacts which provides fair and equal consideration of identified values. The study did not attempt to identify mitigation measures for those impacts. It is expected that appropriate mitigation would be defined at a later stage in the decision‐making process. Chapter I of the study contains a complete discussion of project background, purpose and limitations. Capitol Lake, which is located at the mouth of the Deschutes River adjacent to downtown Olympia, was created in 1951 with construction of the 5th Avenue Dam; prior to that, the Lake basin had been an estuary with mud flats visible during low tides. The creation of the Lake responded to a variety of ideas, including the 1911 Wilder & White plan for the Capitol Campus, which proposed the creation of a pond to reflect the domed Legislative Building and the Temple of Justice in a portion of the Lake basin, and pre‐1951 conditions of the mud flats which had been degraded by urbanization. The dam increased siltation of the Lake, eliminating natural flushing and turnover of the water, and contributing to the growth of algae and noxious weeds. Over time, the Lake’s water quality and habitat conditions have diminished. Alternatives As discussed above, the State is now considering four alternatives for the basin, including two alternatives to restore the estuary (the estuary alternative; and the dual‐basin estuary alternative, which would create a saltwater reflecting pond adjacent to the estuary); a managed lake option which would involve periodic dredging of the existing freshwater