Forum Index > Stewardship > Kiewit Marblemount Quarry - Just in case this slipped under the radar
Previous :: Next Topic  
Author Message
Anne Elk
BrontosaurusTheorist



Joined: 07 Sep 2018
Posts: 423 | TRs
Location: Seattle
Anne Elk
  Top

BrontosaurusTheorist
PostWed Apr 24, 2019 8:40 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Doppelganger wrote:
Researchers in this story propose that it could take 90-100 years to restore the Skagit as a salmon habitat. 100 years sounds like a number I saw in the Kiewit documents...

Snohomish County had  no trouble permitting a quarry in a kettle wetland where none had existed previously, and right next to the Stillaguamish.  Just sayin'.   shakehead.gif

--------------
"There are yahoos out there.  Itís why we canít have nice things."  - Tom Mahood
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Sculpin
Member
Member


Joined: 23 Apr 2015
Posts: 425 | TRs

Sculpin
  Top

Member
PostWed Apr 24, 2019 11:34 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
geyer wrote:
The hydrologic assessment goes more in-depth into Shuksan Greenschist and reasons why it is ideal for jetties

I read through it because I was curious but I was unable to determine why greenschist is ideal jetty rock.  They just say that it is and that there are no other sources.   confused.gif

Shuksan Greenschist is beautiful rock for landscaping.  I have seen it cut and sold as "greenstone."   Which makes me a bit suspicious.   huh.gif

--------------
Even my best friends, they don't know, that my job is turning lead into gold. When you hear that engine drone, I'm on the road again, and I'm searching for the philosopher's stone - Van Morrison
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Malachai Constant
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jan 2002
Posts: 13978 | TRs
Location: Back Again Like A Bad Penny
Malachai Constant
  Top

Member
PostWed Apr 24, 2019 12:19 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
I am pretty familiar with jetties in WA and OR and I can remember none built out of Shuksan greenschist. All that I have seen are made of Columbia basalt this includes those at the mouth of the Columbia, Nehelem, and Tillamook Bay. Same for rip rap used in an attempt to protect against beach erosion. haualed from Marblemount would probably be an order of magnitude more expensive. Does not makes sense to me, has the Corps approved of this?

--------------
"You do not laugh when you look at the mountains, or when you look at the sea." Lafcadio Hearn
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Doppelganger
Gorecrow



Joined: 09 Feb 2006
Posts: 1457 | TRs
Location: Pessimising
Doppelganger
  Top

Gorecrow
PostWed Apr 24, 2019 12:59 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Malachai Constant wrote:
I am pretty familiar with jetties in WA and OR and I can remember none built out of Shuksan greenschist. All that I have seen are made of Columbia basalt this includes those at the mouth of the Columbia, Nehelem, and Tillamook Bay. Same for rip rap used in an attempt to protect against beach erosion. haualed from Marblemount would probably be an order of magnitude more expensive. Does not makes sense to me, has the Corps approved of this?

I really can't say with any certainty whether the Kiewit study is accurate, but it is worded to suggest that the Shuksan Greenschist at the Marblemount location is a resilient material to the rigors of water weathering, making it their preferred option. I have no basis of comparison with previous Columbia jetty riprap to compare hardness/density/fracturing/etc, nor do I have the knowledge to say if rock of equivalent quality is readily available in multiple locations (possibly closer to the jetties to cut down transportation time and cost) or if this stuff really is the best fit.

One of the quotes of the Kiewit proposal from Geyer may even suggest that Kiewit only hypothesizes that the Shuksan Greenschist will meet their requirements: "The Shuksan Greenschist bedrock that occupies the eastern portion of the Project Area is hypothesized to essentially be an aquitard that restricts groundwater movement... For the scope of this project the Shuksan Greenschist bedrock is considered an aquitard and nearly impermeable."

'Hypothesized to essentially be' is not how you phrase things when you know what's going on. This would raise nothing but questions if I tried to use this phrase to justify my decisions, large or small. The dishes are hypothesized to essentially be done. That report is hypothesized to essentially be submitted. My rent is hypothesized to essentially be paid.

Edit: so the SEPA Checklist claims that there would be a maximum of 75 truckloads leaving the quarry daily, max of 50 flatbeds with full size riprap and 25 dump trucks of fill rock. However, the project home page itself claims that there would be up to 260 vehicle trips, but does not specify the comprisal of the 260 trips - is this only representing material hauls, how are 'vehicle trips' defined? Page 382 pf the public comments states that there are conflicting numbers in the SEPA checklist itself, where 260 daily trips are actually specified on page 26 of the SEPA checklist, in addition to the project homepage - this would conflict with the 75 maximum trips defined earlier in the SEPA checklist:

SEPA Checklist wrote:
ē Off-site hauling: The Proposed Project would have a maximum of 75 loaded trucks per day leaving
the site during full quarry operations. Up to 50 trips would be flatbed trucks hauling jetty stone.
Up to 25 trucks would be dump trucks hauling non-jetty stone rock material. These are maximum
values and it is anticipated that there will be periods where little to no hauling of materials occurs.
o Truck Loads: Trucks will be legal loads of up to 105,500 pounds. If loads exceed this
weight limit, appropriate permits will be obtained. Maximum over-load hauls would be
less than 10 percent of total hauls.
o Haul Routes: The haul route identified is via Rockport Cascade Road to Rockport and west
on SR-20 to I-5.

Proposal Homepage wrote:
According to the SEPA checklist, the project could generate up to a total of 260 daily vehicle trips, including truck trips. The proposed haul route is identified as Rockport Cascade Road to Rockport, West on SR-20 to I-5. The mining special use application indicates that the proposed project would occur in following 4 steps:

Another observation from the SEPA Checklist. Section 12.a (Recreation) poses a question about any recreational opportunities in the area, formal or informal. Kiewit's response to this question is that Pressentin Park (on the north side of the river) is the closest, however O'brien-Riggs State Park is immediately adjacent to the proposal area. State Park designation on the Skagit County site and a State Park building on the property is good enough for me, OSRSI zoning or not.

SEPA Checklist Section 12.a wrote:
What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?
The Skagit River is a popular fly fish destination. There is a public fly-fishing area approximately
1.1 miles northeast of the site. The North Cascades National Park Wilderness Visitor Center is
located approximately two miles directly north. There are no sanctioned parks and recreation
areas in the immediate vicinity of the project site. Pressentin Park is the closest park,
approximately 0.8-mile northeast of the project site. There is a parcel zoned OSRSI
approximately 250 feet northwest of P45543. To our knowledge, there is a State Park building
on that site, but it is not an officially-designated recreation area.

And finally, the public comments have been released (671 pages! sorry everyone, $ is king). Buried in there of particular interest are comments from:
  • Lynn Best, Chief Environmental Officer, Seattle City Light
  • Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe
  • Cascadian Home Farm/General Mills
https://www.skagitcounty.net/PlanningAndPermit/Documents/MarblemountQuarry/032919%20All%20received.pdf?ver=2

It's really a shame to consider that after receiving these comments, the maximum effort put forth by Kiewit was likely just someone copy/pasting the text into a single PDF.  mad.gif  rant.gif  mad.gif
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Anne Elk
BrontosaurusTheorist



Joined: 07 Sep 2018
Posts: 423 | TRs
Location: Seattle
Anne Elk
  Top

BrontosaurusTheorist
PostWed Apr 24, 2019 2:54 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Could someone say exactly what phase this project is in re the regulatory process - ie, the SEPA review?  Because it seems to me that any of the discrepancies that Doppelganger noted above are "actionable", and could require changes and re-writes which would delay the permit.  Such activity ultimately didn't help SCA down in Snohomish County, but it did win a few mitigations, which was better than nothing.  In the case of this quarry, enough delays would be enough to quash the project, since the COE is on a deadline.  Anyone up there raise $$ for an enviro attorney, consultants, etc?  The way the quarry co is operating, it wouldn't surprise me if their first move was a request for a "determination of non-significance".

--------------
"There are yahoos out there.  Itís why we canít have nice things."  - Tom Mahood
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Doppelganger
Gorecrow



Joined: 09 Feb 2006
Posts: 1457 | TRs
Location: Pessimising
Doppelganger
  Top

Gorecrow
PostWed Apr 24, 2019 3:16 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Anne Elk wrote:
Anyone up there raise $$ for an enviro attorney, consultants, etc?† The way the quarry co is operating, it wouldn't surprise me if their first move was a request for a "determination of non-significance".

Recurring themes in the public comments are requests for delays, additional studies, EIC, etc.

I'm still looking for any answers to who pays for transportation of the material. So far, it's only mentioned in the Kiewit documents that the material will be transported, but Kiewit does not specify A) what the expected cost of transportation would be or B) who is expected to bear that cost.

Marblemount, WA to Ilwaco, WA = 298 miles, give or take
Cost per mile for operating a commercial truck - there are a wide range of factors that can affect the cost per mile. It looks like the current cost per mile can range between $1.50 and $3.00+. Let's go with the lowest estimates, one way trips.

$447 bucks per trip @ $1.50 per mile.

$22,350 per day, let's just assume that only the 50 flatbeds will be making daily trips.  Beyond the cost, the thought of 50 flatbeds hauling rock literally across the state on a daily basis indefinitely should be laughable. Should be frown.gif
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Anne Elk
BrontosaurusTheorist



Joined: 07 Sep 2018
Posts: 423 | TRs
Location: Seattle
Anne Elk
  Top

BrontosaurusTheorist
PostWed Apr 24, 2019 5:13 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Doppelganger wrote:
I'm still looking for any answers to who pays for transportation of the material.

If the quarry co. is hauling the material with their own trucks, presumably that was figured into the cost of the bid.  What isn't often figured is the impact on the immediate surrounding area, what's referred to as "concurrency issues".  One of the big points of dissention over the big quarry in Granite Falls was the number of truck trips/day with only one way out: ie, the Mt. Loop Hwy, over the 2 lane narrow bridge over the Stilly and then right through downtown.  Ultimately that didn't stop the project, but I believe the town now has a bypass route that it didn't have before, which (partly) helps.

--------------
"There are yahoos out there.  Itís why we canít have nice things."  - Tom Mahood
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
  Display:     All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Forum Index > Stewardship > Kiewit Marblemount Quarry - Just in case this slipped under the radar
  Happy Birthday newdawnfades, sconey!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
   Use Disclaimer Powered by phpBB Privacy Policy