Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge council to oppose long‑term Cumberland aggregate mine, cite truck traffic and water concerns
Summary
Public commenters urged the council to oppose or closely scrutinize a proposed Cumberland aggregate mine and asphalt plant, citing up to 298–668 heavy truck trips per day, 24/7 operations, and water use estimates of 175,000–250,000 gallons per day; speakers asked the city to review King County materials and noted the county comment deadline of Aug. 7.
Several residents used the council’s public‑comment period to urge careful review of a proposed Cumberland Aggregate Mine and related asphalt plant currently under County permitting.
Julius Stevens identified himself as a resident of unincorporated King County near Enumclaw and asked the council to read King County’s project materials. Stevens said the proposal contemplates 25–35 years of gravel extraction and estimated 298–668 heavy‑truck round trips per day, which he said would strain local roads and emergency services, and influence traffic patterns across communities including Auburn, Muckleshoot, Enumclaw and Covington. He also said the operation could run 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and quoted a water‑use estimate of 175,000–250,000 gallons per day.
Linda Stevens, another resident, urged the council to support preserving roughly 990 acres north of Cumberland (Lizard Mountain area), stressing recreation access, trail use and potential impacts to private wells if a large project moves forward. She said county and state entities had indicated potential interest in acquisition.
Speakers asked the council to consider submitting comments to King County; Julius Stevens noted the county’s public comment period remains open through Aug. 7. Councilors did not vote or take formal action during the meeting on the Cumberland matter; several commenters requested the city coordinate with King County and monitor permitting activity.
The comments raised specific local concerns—traffic, noise, water usage and long project duration—while asking the council to use its municipal channels to ensure the regional review fully accounts for community impacts.
