No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA15-000185_MiscBiological Assessment Cedar River Maintenance Dredging Project Renton, Washington for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District On Behalf Of City of Renton December 9, 2014 GEOENGINEERS C) 1101 South Fawcett Avenue, Suite 200 Tacoma, Washington 98402 253.383.4940 RECEIVED MAR 2 3 2015 CITY OF RENTON PLANNING 01\l'ISION Biological Assessment Cedar River Maintenance Dredging Project Renton, Washington File No. 0693-073-00 December 9, 2014 Prepared for: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District Regulatory Branch, CENWS-OD-RG P.O. Box 3755 Seattle, WA 98124-3755 Attention: Suzanne L. Anderson, PhD, PWS On Behalf Of: City of Renton Pubic Works -Surface Water Utility 1055 South Grady Way-5'" Floor Renton, Washington 98057 Pre pa red by: GeoEngineers, Inc. 1101 South Fawcett Avenue, Suite 200 Tacoma, Washington 98402 253.383.4940 __ T).£ A. cJ. David B. Conlin, PWS DBC:JOC: lc:tt:lc allaghan, PWS iologist Disclaimer: Any electronic form, facsimile or hard copy of the original document (email, text, table. and/or figure), if provided, and any attachments are only a copy of the original document. The original document is stored byGeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official document of record. Copyright© 2014 byGeoEngineers. Inc. All rights reserved. GEOENGINEERS 1/J Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ...................................................................................... 2 2.1. Project Purpose and Objective ..................................................................................................... 2 2.2. Project Location ............................................................................................................................ 2 2.3. Project Description ........................................................................................................................ 2 2.3.1. Project Reaches ................................................................................................................. 4 2.3.2. Project Details ................................................................................................................... 4 2.4. Sequencing .................................................................................................................................. 12 2.4.1. June 1 through June 15, 2014 ....................................................................................... 12 2.4.2. June 15 through August 31, 2014 ................................................................................. 12 2.4.3. September 1 through September 15, 2014 ................................................................. 13 2.4.4. Fall 2014, Spring 2015 and Ongoing Work ................................................................... 13 2.5. Interdependent and Interrelated Actions .................................................................................. 13 2.6. Conservation Measures and Best Management Practices ...................................................... 14 2.6.1. General Measures ........................................................................................................... 14 2.6.2. Measures to Protect Water Quality ................................................................................. 15 2.6.3. In-Water Work .................................................................................................................. 16 3.0 PROJECT ACTION AREA .................................................................................................................... 17 3.1. Operation of Construction Equipment ....................................................................................... 17 3.2. Construction-Related Noise ........................................................................................................ 17 3.3. Habitat Alteration ........................................................................................................................ 20 3.3.1. Dredging ........................................................................................................................... 20 3.3.2. Channel Adjustment ........................................................................................................ 20 3.3.3. Equipment Access and Bank Stabilization .................................................................... 21 3.3.4. Riparian Plantings and Other Mitigation ........................................................................ 21 3.4. Impacts to Water Quality ............................................................................................................ 21 3.5. Action Area Summary ................................................................................................................. 22 4.0 SPECIES AND HABITAT INFORMATION ........................................................................................... 23 4.1. Occurrence of Listed Species in the Action Area ...................................................................... 24 4.1.1. Mammals ......................................................................................................................... 24 4.1.2. Birds ................................................................................................................................. 25 4.1.3. Plants ............................................................................................................................... 26 4.1.4. Fish ................................................................................................................................... 26 4.2. Occurrence of Critical Habitat in the Action Area ...................................................................... 27 4.2.1. Primary Constituent Elements of Chinook Salmon Critical Habitat... ........................... 27 4.2.2. Primary Constituent Elements of Bull Trout Critical Habitat.. ....................................... 28 4.2.3. Proposed Primary Constituent Elements of Steelhead Trout Critical Habitat ............. 29 4.3. Occurrence Summary ................................................................................................................. 29 GEoENGINEER~ December 9, 2014, Page i File No. 0693-073-00 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE ............................................................................................................ 30 5.1. Terrestrial Habitat ....................................................................................................................... 30 5.1.1. Topography ...................................................................................................................... 30 5.1.2. Vegetation ........................................................................................................................ 30 5.1.3. Suitable Habitat ............................................................................................................... 30 5.2. Freshwater Aquatic Habitat ........................................................................................................ 31 5.2.1. General Aquatic Conditions ............................................................................................ 31 5.2.2. Suitable Habitat ............................................................................................................... 31 6.0 ANALYSIS OF EFFECTS ON SPECIES AND HABITAT ...................................................................... 32 6.1. Operation of Construction Equipment ....................................................................................... 32 6.2. Construction-Related Noise ........................................................................................................ 33 6.3. Habitat Alteration ........................................................................................................................ 34 6.3.1. Effects to River Channel .................................................................................................. 34 6.3.2. Effects to Banks and Riparian Areas .............................................................................. 35 6.3.3. Habitat Summary ............................................................................................................. 35 6.4. Impacts to Water Quality ............................................................................................................ 37 6.5. Interrelated and Interdependent Actions .................................................................................. 38 6.6. Cumulative Effects ...................................................................................................................... 39 7.0 EFFECT DETERMINATIONS .............................................................................................................. 40 7.1. Chinook Salmon .......................................................................................................................... 40 7.2. Steelhead .................................................................................................................................... 42 7.3. Bull Trout ..................................................................................................................................... 43 8.0 ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT EVALUATION ......................................................................................... 44 8.1. Designated EFH within the Action Area .................................................................................... .44 8.2. Effects of the Proposed Action on EFH ...................................................................................... 45 9.0 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................................... 45 10.0 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................................... 45 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Vicinity Map Figure 2. Action Area Map APPENDICES Appendix A. JAR PA Sheets Appendix B. Elliot Spawning Channel Maintenance Plan Drawings Appendix C. Listed Species and Critical Habitat GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page ii File No. 0693 -073-00 1.0 INTRODUCTION The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) Lower Cedar River Section 205 Project (the project) is a Flood Hazard Reduction Project located in and along the lower 1.23 miles (2,000 meters) of the Cedar River in Renton, Washington (Figure 1). The project consists of an actively maintained (dredged) river channel, and system of levees and floodwalls that provide protection to the lower river and its extensive industrial and commercial development, including the Renton Municipal Airport and the Boeing Company facility. Following the most recent dredging operation performed in 1998 by USAGE, the river bed has continued to fill with native river sediment composed primarily of gravel as expected and identified during the original 1998 project permitting and design. Continued deposition in the river channel is expected to compromise the project flood protection system in the next two to three years, or sooner. Therefore, the City of Renton (the City), as the USAGE Section 205 Project local sponsor, has initiated the planning and preliminary design for maintenance dredging of the river and other necessary maintenance actions to obtain construction permits with sufficient time to maintain the 100-year flood protection benefits, as required by the Project Cooperative Agreement (PCA) between the City and USAGE. Maintenance dredging will take place within the limits and grades of previous dredging work as permitted within the original National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) (USAGE, 1997). The EIS evaluated five project alternatives in detail, including a no action alternative and four alternatives to provide 100-year flood protection. The alternatives evaluation examined various depths of dredging (4, 6 and 10 feet), configurations for levees/floodwalls and bridge modifications, dredge cycle frequencies, and levels of protection. Other alternatives were not evaluated in detail because they were determined not to be feasible and/or did not meet the project objectives. The selected alternative recommended dredging the existing channel to a minimum 4-foot depth relative to the 1995 bed profile and construction of levees and floodwalls to provide minimum protection against the 100-year recurrence interval flood event with at least 90 percent reliability. Periodic dredging every three years was anticipated to maintain the design level of protection, based on regular bed elevation surveys to determine the amount of bed aggradation. Selection of this design was based on the ability to provide the most effective level of protection while causing the least environmental impact to the river and riparian habitat. The project involves work within jurisdictional Waters of the U.S., as identified in the Clean Water Act, and therefore requires a federal permit and must also comply with the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Management Act (MSA). GeoEngineers, Inc. (GeoEngineers) was retained to prepare a Biological Assessment (BA) to satisfy the ESA Section 7 consultation requirements. This BA addresses potential project effects on threatened and endangered species and their critical habitat. An MSA Essential Fisheries Habitat (EFH) analysis is also included. Information on species listed under the ESA, and potentially present in the project area, was obtained from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) list for King County (USFWS, 2013a), the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) listing for Western Washington (NMFS, 2012), the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) priority habitat and species (PHS) maps (WDFW, 2013a), and the WDFW SalmonScape application (WDFW, 2013b). The project occurs in the Cedar River adjacent to Lake Washington, which are both known to provide habitat for threatened or endangered fish species. ESA-listed species and critical habitats are identified in Section 4 of this report. GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 1 File No. 0693-073-00 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION 2.:1.. Project Purpose and Objective The City of Renton is proposing to dredge accumulated sediment within the lower 1.23 miles of the Cedar River. This maintenance project is needed to maintain adequate flood conveyance in the Cedar River to protect adjacent properties, as required by the Project Cooperation Agreement (PCA) established between the City of Renton and the USACE in 1998 (USACE, 2004). Stream bank stabilization and outfall repairs directly related to the maintenance of the 205 flood control project are also proposed to manage the effects of erosion on adjacent flood control structures and facilities. Compensatory mitigation is also proposed to comply with regulatory requirements for species and habitat conservation. 2.2. Project Location The project is located in Renton, King County, Washington, extending from the mouth of the Cedar River at Lake Washington (laVlong coordinates 47.50048, -122.21589) upstream approximately 1.23 miles (6,500 feet) to the Williams Avenue Bridge (47.48433, -122.20664). It is within Sections 7, 17 and 18 of Township 23N, Range 05E, of the Willamette Meridian. Cedar River is within the Hydrological Unit Code (HUC) 17110012 (Lake Washington Watershed) and within Water Resources Inventory Area (WRIA) 8 (Cedar/Sammamish). A Vicinity Map is included as Figure 1. 2.3. Project Description Maintenance dredging will be performed to maintain the project flood protection benefits, as required in the PCA. The threshold for periodic maintenance dredging is based on ensuring flood protection against the 100-year recurrence interval event, with at least 90 percent reliability. As the bed approaches the specified allowable elevation (Allowable Average Channel Bed Profile per USACE, 2004), anywhere within the project, provisions are to be made for channel dredging to maintain the design level of protection. During maintenance dredging actions, the Cedar River channel within the project area will be excavated to a depth of approximately 4 feet on average below the "Allowable Average Channel Bed Profile" as defined in the PCA. A transition slope will gradually reduce the dredge cut from the designed dredged channel bottom at Logan Avenue upstream to Williams Avenue where it will meet the existing river bed level. The maximum transition slope will be approximately 0.63 percent. The proposed maintenance dredging action is similar in scope (depth and plan extents) to the USACE 205 project that was permitted in 1998, which also permitted periodic maintenance dredging. The project extents (width and depth of the dredge cut) along the river (North Boeing Bridge to Williams Avenue or Station 0+00 to 64+85) will be slightly smaller than the 205 project proposed and constructed in 1998. The dredge depth will strictly adhere to an average of~ feet (below allowable average channel bed profile) with a 1-foot overdepth allowance and will not exceed the depths permitted in the 1998 project. The total volume of dredged material is estimated to be approximately 125,000 cubic yards (cy) including contingency for sediment accumulation between the May 2013 channel survey and the conditions at the time of the proposed dredging in 2015 (average accumulation of 9,700 cy per year in project area). GeoENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 2 File No. 0693-073-00 The need for maintenance dredging at this time presents an opportunity to complete other needed repairs of the project, including bank stabilization and outfall repairs, to consolidate environmental permits and to enable completing this additional construction work while construction equipment and contractors are operating within the project limits. The Project includes the following proposed improvements: • Maintenance Dredging • • • • • • Mobilization and temporary access improvements Dredging to design depths Haul and disposal Protection of the environment and Best Management Practices (BMPs) Airport safety and traffic control Parks & Recreational use and safety • Bank Stabilization • • • Maintenance -minor restoration of portions of displaced rock on existing bank stabilization features during the dredging work. Repair -replacement and reconstruction of existing severely deteriorated and failing bank stabilization features at flood control I-walls and levees. New Stabilization -installation of new stabilization measures to ensure protection and structural stability of the flood control I-wall at approximate river mile (RM) 0.59 to 0.63 (Station [STA] 31 +16 to 33+00 [all stationing presented in this document is relative to the dredge centerline]). • Outfall Repairs • • • Excavation of buried outfalls as needed for repairs . Maintenance and replacement of existing backflow valves at outfalls . Minor repairs to damaged outfall pipes including shortening and lengthening pipe protrusions as needed in coordination with other project improvements. • Mitigation • • • • • • Vegetation plantings to improve riparian habitat in the lower river . Filling void space in riprap bank protection to reduce predator habitat. Lower reach gabion bank protection removal. Spawning channel maintenance and monitoring, including specific maintenance actions at the Elliot Channel as described below. Lighting impact reduction on City-owned property along the lower river . Wetland mitigation bank credits for minor wetland impacts . GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page3 File No. 0693-073-00 2.3.1. Project Reaches Project work is described relative to three reaches (Figure 2), where right bank refers to the east bank and left bank to the west bank. Improvements proposed in each reach are also summarized below: • Reach 1 -North Boeing Bridge (RM O; STA 0+00) upstream to South Boeing Bridge (RM 0.74; STA39+00). • • • Maintenance Dredging: entire reach at 4-foot average depth (plus 1-foot overdepth allowance) of cut with variable width. Bank Stabilization: • Maintenance, left bank; • Repair, left bank; • New, right bank. Outfall Repairs, left and right banks . • Reach 2 -South Boeing Bridge (RM 0. 7 4; STA 39+00) upstream to Logan Avenue Bridge (RM 1.06; STA 56+00). • • • Maintenance Dredging: entire reach at 4-foot average depth (plus 1-foot overdepth allowance) of cut with variable width. Bank Stabilization • Maintenance, left bank • Repair, left bank Outfall Repairs, left and right banks • Reach 3 -Logan Avenue Bridge (RM 1.06; STA 56+00) upstream to Williams Avenue Bridge (1.23; STA 64+85). • Maintenance Dredging: initially average 4-foot depth (plus 1-foot overdepth allowance) of cut transitioning to existing river bed elevation. • Bank Stab ii ization • Maintenance, right bank • Outfall repairs, left and right banks 2.3.2. Project Details The following sections describe the proposed actions in greater detail. Detail sheets prepared for the Joint Aquatic Resource Permit Application (JARPA) are included with this report as Appendix A. 2.3.2.1. MAINTENANCE DREDGING Maintenance dredging is needed to maintain the project flood protection benefits, as required in the PCA Operation & Maintenance Manual between the City of Renton and USAGE (USAGE, 2004). The threshold for periodic maintenance dredging is based on ensuring flood protection against the 100-year recurrence interval event, with at least 90 percent reliability. As the bed elevation approaches the specified allowable elevation (Allowable Average Channel Bed Profile per USAGE, 2004), anywhere within the project, provisions are to be made for channel dredging to maintain the design level of protection. GEO ENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 4 File No. 0693·073·00 During maintenance dredging actions, the Cedar River channel within the project area will be excavated to an average depth of 4 feet below the "Allowable Average Channel Bed Profile" as defined in the PCA. The maximum slope will be 0.63 percent. The transition slope area will extend from Logan Avenue upstream to Williams Avenue. The maximum transition area slope will also be approximately 0.63 percent. Transition slope will gradually reduce the dredge cut from the designed dredged channel bottom at Logan Avenue upstream to Williams Avenue where it will meet the existing river bed level. The proposed maintenance dredge action is similar in scope (depth and plan extents) to the original USAGE project that was assessed and permitted in 1998. The planned dredge widths will be slightly smaller than proposed and conducted in 1998. The dredge depth will strictly adhere to average depth of 4 feet (below allowable average channel bed profile) with a 1-foot over-depth allowance and will not exceed the depths permitted in the 1998 project. The total estimated volume of dredged material is estimated to be approximately 125,000 cy including contingency for sedimentation accumulation between the May 2013 survey and the conditions at the time of dredging in 2015 (average accumulation of 9,700 cy per year in project area). Width of the maintenance dredging will accommodate the changing channel width and will vary depending on location within the project area. The channel bottom cut will be 90 feet wide in Reach 1, narrowing in intervals along the project length to a 60-foot channel width at the upstream limit in Reach 3. Dredged width has been narrowed in certain locations, relative to the 1998 dredge, to prevent undermining of structures and river banks. Dredged side slopes will be 3H:1V unless otherwise required for local bank stabilization maintenance work or if required for geotechnical or structural stability of existing infrastructure (Bridges and I-walls). Floating Dredge For water-based dredging in Reach 1, it is expected that the type of equipment utilized will be an excavator or crawler crane mounted on a portable sectional barge (such as a flexi-float system). The sectional barge will be mobilized to the site by truck, assembled, and launched either at the existing boat ramp on the right bank or at another nearby left bank staging area. The barge and excavator system will be moved around the dredging work area using a small transportable tug boat suitable for use in shallow water environments. The barge would be secured to the riverbed prior to dredging using spuds placed in the riverbed or anchor lines. Dredged material will be removed from the river bottom using either an excavator digging bucket or clamshell bucket. The bucket will place the dredged material onto a material barge, which will be fitted with side boards and filter fabric or other appropriate BMPs to contain the dredged material and filter fines. Initial dewatering is accomplished while material is on the barge deck as excess water is filtered and returned to the river. After completion of material barge loading, the loaded barge would be transported by small tug to the material offload facility at two locations along the left bank of the project site. Offload areas will be located within areas which allow access from the adjacent uplands and limit impacts to existing functional riparian habitat and flood control infrastructure. Temporary construction unloading platforms will be required to unload dredged material frorn the barge, re-handle the material, and load into trucks or place in a small stockpile located in the adjacent uplands. The unloading platform will be composed of steel pile (vibratory driven sheet or pipe pile) or other similar temporary shoring method that can be fully removed after dredging activities (such as ecology blocks, rock, large polypropylene sacks filled with gravel, or similar). Natural gravel/cobble fill from dredging will be placed between the existing slope and temporary shoring system to maintain a platform suitable for excavators to unload the barge. The platform will be dissembled after completion of floating dredge operations and impacted areas (levees, vegetation) restored. The upland stockpile will be protected against erosion using standard BMPs. The access platforms will be located approximately at STAs 8+00, 14+00, and 16+50. GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 5 File No. 0693-073-00 Excavator Dredging work will also be conducted utilizing land-based equipment operated from temporary gravel berms and removable construction platforms located in the river channel below ordinary high water (OHW). Excavator dredge operation will consist of a combination of multiple tracked excavators, crawler cranes, front end loaders, bulldozers and dump trucks. This approach will require the land-based equipment to access the river channel from the uplands at designated locations near the bridges (South Boeing Bridge at RM 0. 7 4/STA 39+00, Logan Avenue at RM 1.06/STA 56+00). A total of 17 access points are anticipated to be required along the left bank of the project site with each being approximately 50 to 75 feet in length. Four access points along the right bank might be needed for the dredging and/or bank stabilization work. These will include the boat ramp at RM 0.14 (STA 7+60), the gabion replacement area at RM 0.42 (STA 22+25), adjacent to 6th Avenue at RM 0.6 (STA 31 +80), and on the north side of Logan Avenue bridge at RM 1.06 (STA 56+00). The boat ramp will also be used for launching work boats and survey vessels. The stadium parking lot access would only be used if absolutely necessary to complete right bank work between South Boeing and Logan Avenue Bridges. The work will be initiated within the upper reach between Logan and Williams Avenue Bridges. To initiate the work, a limited amount of imported temporary fill may be needed at the access point and berm at the toe of the access point. The temporary 448 will be stream bed-type material either taken from the floating dredge operation or from an approved offsite sand and gravel operation. Once excavation equipment is mobilized, additional bed material will be dredged and placed within the left bank side of the channel to create a temporary berm which has a top elevation above the water surface elevation anticipated during construction. The temporary berm will serve as a working platform for construction equipment. The temporary berm will be removed as the dredging work progresses in a downstream direction. Material removed from the channel and temporary berm will be loaded into trucks and transported to re-handling areas near the access points. Re-handling areas will be constructed using dredge material to provide a ramp and berm for equipment to transfer materials from the channel over the flood control structures (I-wall and Levee) into trucks located along the adjacent access roads (Airport and Frontage Road). 2.3.2.2. BANK STABILIZATION Bank stabilization work is proposed as an element of maintenance of the 205 Flood Control project. Bank stabilization is limited to those areas of the flood control project requiring stabilization (levees and floodwalls) based upon engineering analysis and design standards set for by USACE. The areas identified for bank stabilization are the maximum extents needed to identify the maximum amount of potential project disturbance. A smaller area may be constructed based on the conditions at the time of construction and available construction funding, therefore the minimization measures such as filling void spaces will be commensurate with the amount of bank stabilization. Bank stabilization for non-essential flood control project features are not proposed as part of this project. Bank stabilization work is oomposed of the following types of work: • Maintenance -Minor restoration of portions of displaced rock on existing bank stabilization features while access to the areas is provided during the dredging work. • Repair -Replacement and reconstruction of existing deteriorated and failing bank stabilization features. GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 6 File No. 0693,073-00 • New Stabilization -Installation of new stabilization measures to ensure protection of the flood control I-wall at approximate RM 0.59 to 0.63 (STA 31 +16 to 33+00). The bank in this reach has eroded since the 1998 dredge, which presents a risk to the structural stability of the I-wall, if not stabilized. The anticipated life expectancy of bank stabilization work that is completed is 20-30 years, after which time these elements may require replacement or additional maintenance. However, not all bank areas within the project limits require maintenance or repair at this time. It is anticipated that periodic review of the bank conditions will be completed with each dredge cycle to identify maintenance and repair actions needed. Furthermore, the riverine environment is dynamic and subject to unforeseeable natural phenomena including flood events that exceed the design criteria for features installed. The need for emergency repairs resulting from flood damage to bank work installed as part of the current proposal cannot be predicted. Multiple excavators and trucks will be used to construct the bank stabilization features. Imported rock and soil materials will be delivered to temporary work platforms by truck, re-handled and then placed using excavators. Bank stabilization work will be conducted in coordination with and at the same time as the maintenance dredging work as each reach of channel is completed. Slight differences in construction methods for the three types of proposed bank stabilization are summarized in the following sections. The table below summarizes the locations and need for bank stabilization based upon field inspection and engineering analysis. TABLE 1. PROPOSED BANK STABILIZATION AREAS Location Length Type Bank (feet) 19+50 to 22+00 250 Repair Left 22+00 to 24+00 200 Repair Left 31 +16 to 33+00 184 New Right 24+00 to 37 +00 300 Maintenance1 Left 37+00 to 45+50 850 Repair Left 45+50 to 55+85 1,035 Maintenance1 Left GeoENGINEER~ Need for Stablllzatlon Channel thalweg is located near toe of river bank. Minimal river bank material along toe of I-wall which threatens stability of the wall. Loss of toe rock material threatens stability of wall. Channel thalweg has historically migrated toward left bank at this location. Channel thalweg currently at toe of river bank. Minimal river bank material along toe of I-wall which threatens stability of the wall. Conduct maintenance work on rock toe while access for equipment to deliver and install materials is available during dredging. Loss of toe material behind concrete slab stabilization measures threatens stability of wall. Channel thalweg has historically migrated toward left bank at this location. Conduct periodic maintenance work on rock toe and displaced rock slopes while access for equipment to deliver and install materials is available. December 9, 2014 Page 7 File No. 0693-073-00 Location Length (feet) 55+24 to 57+92 268 250 Totals 1,300 184 Notes: Type Maintenance1 Malntenance1 Repair New Bank Right Need for Stablllzetlon Scour has occurred at the bridge and concrete block wall at Logan Ave, requiring minor maintenance of concrete block scour protection while access for equipment to deliver and install materials is available. 1 Maintenance locations represent general areas with spot maintenance as needed. Approximately 10 percent of the tota! existing bank armoring was identified as needing maintenance. The total for maintenance therefore represents only a subset of the lineal length of bank included in the maintenance areas. Maintenance Minor maintenance of existing bank stabilization features will be performed by removing damaged and displaced stones, Armorflex blocks, and reconstruction of small affected sections as needed to restore continuous protection from toe to top of slope along the project reach. The work will include importing some stones to fill gaps of displaced protection (stones and blocks), excavation, and demolition of short portions of existing bank. To the extent possible, existing slopes and geometries will be maintained and the footprint will not increase compared to existing conditions. Coast and Harbor Engineering has estimated that bank stabilization maintenance work will be required throughout approximately 10 percent of the area illustrated as 'Maintenance' on Figure 2. Upon completion of maintenance rock placement, native grave[/cobble (obtained from dredging work) will be placed on the slopes to fill voids in the rock where maintenance activities take place. This will reduce predator habitat and compensate for impacts related to bank stabilization maintenance. Repair In repair areas where the bank stabilization will be reconstructed or replaced, bank stabilization will be composed of angular rock placed at a 2H:1 V slope. The stabilization will be constructed as the temporary construction berm or platform is removed. First, the existing bank stabilization will be removed and unusable materials will be disposed of off-site. A suitable subgrade will be established using excavators. Geotextile fabric will then be placed on the excavated slope, and small bedding stone (quarry spalls) will then be placed on the geotextile fabric to secure it in place. Armor rock will then be placed and compacted to form a tight fitting mass of stone working to form the toe to the top of the slope. A narrow planting bench will be constructed at the top of the slope where space is available. Voids in the finished rock slope will be filled with native gravel/cobble materials below OHW. A soi[/gravel mixture will also be placed on top of the slope to provide appropriate planting areas for native herbaceous vegetation in the required vegetation free zone (VFZ) located within 15 feet of the floodwall and levee prism. The soil/gravel mixture will be primarily compcsed of native riverbed material from dredging operations, mixed with imported topsoil to promote plant establishment and growth. On the left bank, from RM 0.70 to 0.79 (STA 37+20 to 41 +90), a narrow habitaVplanting bench will be retained to provide suitable areas for establishment of inundation tolerant riparian vegetation such as willows or other species. Plantings will be located in conformance with guidelines for vegetation near federal levees and floodwalls (Engineers Technical Letter [ETL] 1110-2-571, Guidelines for Landscape Planting & Vegetation Management at Levees, Floodwalls, Embankment Dams, GeoENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 8 file No. 0693-073-00 and Appurtenant Structures, 2009; Seattle Variance, Public Law [PL] 84-99 Levee Vegetation Management Information Paper, 1995). New New bank stabilization will be constructed in a manner similar to the repair areas, except that removal of existing bank stabilization materials will not occur. New stabilization will occur on the right bank at the toe of the I-wall located at approximate RM 0.59 to 0.63 (STA 31 +16 to 33+00). The work area and construction extents have been refined to minimize impacts to adjacent mature trees that provide riparian cover and other habitat benefits. The work will occur from temporary construction platforms that span across the river from the left bank to allow access to the work area for both excavation and construction of the bank stabilization. Access from uplands at 6th Avenue will also be required. Platforms will be removed upon completion of the bank stabilization and dredging. 2.3.2.3. OUTFALL REPAIRS Numerous stormwater outfalls (both active and abandoned) are located within the project area and consist of various sizes and types including concrete, plastic, and corrugated metal. Of these outfalls, approximately 20 are fitted with backflow prevention devices (Tideflex® valves) to protect upland areas against flooding. As part of the work and in conjunction with dredging and bank stabilization, repair to damaged outfalls will occur. Because the river has continued to accumulate sediment, some existing outfalls are buried and may require local excavation to uncover, assess, and refit damaged backflow prevention valves and pipes. Maintenance of existing outfalls will include in-kind replacement of existing damaged or deteriorated systems including Tideflex® valves and sections of outfall pipe. Removal of accumulated sediment from active outfalls may be performed as needed. It is estimated that up to 27 outfalls may require some level of repair and maintenance. There will be no change in flow capacity to any of the repaired outfalls; therefore, there will be no effect to listed species or their critical habitat. Where active outfalls pass through bank stabilization (repair, maintenance, or new), modifications of the outfall location may be required by extending or cutting off outfall pipe to match proposed site conditions. Where damaged pipes penetrate through the existing floodwalls, replacement and refitting will occur. Abandoned exposed outfalls extending into the river will be cut off and disposed of offsite, as feasible, when encountered. BMPs will be implemented to isolate the repair areas and prevent pipe repair materials from entering the water during construction. Bank stabilization is not proposed at these locations except as specifically identified in the project drawings. 2.3.2.4. MITIGATION Project permits obtained for the 1998 dredge included extensive mitigation for the initial construction impacts and impacts associated with the future maintenance dredging for the life of the project, which was anticipated on a three-year dredge cycle. Mitigation for the Lower Cedar River Section 205 Project, including the resulting over-dredge and recurring maintenance dredging for the life of the project, has included the following: • 1998: Groundwater Side Channel (destroyed by Nisqually earthquake in 2001) • 1999: Maplewood Large Wood Debris Levee Project • 2000: Elliot Spawning Channel (damaged by floods in 2006 & 2009) GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 9 File No 0693-073-00 • 1999 -2000: Lower Cedar River riparian plantings • 2001 to 2011: Landsburg mitigation (annual gravel supplementation, except 2008) • 2010: Royal Hills Replacement Spawning Channel • 2012: Elliot Spawning Channel repaired The mitigation outlined above has included the following elements: • Construction of sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) spawning channels, and monitoring fish utilization. The original Groundwater Side Channel at Ron Regis Park was supplemented with the Elliot Spawning Channel to mitigate for one-time loss of redds resulting from the unanticipated over-dredge that occurred during project implementation in 1998. When the Groundwater Side Channel was destroyed in 2001, the Elliot Spawning Channel became the primary spawning side channel required to meet the project mitigation for cyclical dredging impacts. However, the Elliot Spawning Channel was damaged by floods over the following decade, resulting in the need to develop the Royal Hills Replacement Spawning Channel, and subsequent repair of the Elliot Spawning Channel as backup insurance against future unanticipated damages resulting from natural geomorphic processes. • Large woody debris (LWD) placement along an existing revetment at the Maplewood Golf Course (USAGE undated). • Riparian plantings, including vegetation monitoring, at the following locations: • Right bank from South Boeing bridge to mouth (approximately 4,850 LF) . • Left bank from Logan Ave to small aircraft hangars (approximately 3,800 LF) (USAGE, undated) . • Stockpiling dredged gravel for future use (USAGE undated) and placement of up to 1,000 CY of gravel per year for 10 to 15 years upstream at the Landsburgsite as a salmon spawning habitat enhancement measure (Unknown Author, 2000). Monitoring of the mitigation actions has occurred over a 15-year period since the 1998 dredging event (Integrated Aquatics, 2013). Monitoring includes: documenting sockeye spawning in both the lower river (the area affected by dredging) and the two spawning channels constructed as mitigation for project effects; documenting salmon fry outmigration; documenting salmon utilization of bank revetment habitat enhancement at the Maplewood Golf Course; vegetation monitoring for riparian plantings; and documenting salmon utilization of the gravel enhancement area (Landsburg). Additional mitigation has been designed to offset unavoidable impacts caused by the proposed upcoming dredge cycle and associated elements (see the project Mitigation Plan, GeoEngineers, 2014a). Proposed mitigation will include the following items: • Native Vegetation Plantings (On site). Native vegetation will be installed in riparian and channel fringe habitats where feasible based upon hydraulic conditions and within guidelines for vegetation along levees and floodwalls set by USAGE. Native vegetation will be installed in the following locations: all temporarily impacted riparian areas; along the left bank above Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in areas outside the VFZ; along vegetated benches along the left bank below OHWM; and in selected locations along the right bank that have been identified to benefit from additional plantings. GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 10 File No. 0693-073-00 • Filling Void Space In Riprap (On site). Interstitial spaces in all bank stabilization work areas proposed as part of the project (new, repair and maintenance) will be filled with native dredge material to reduce voids that may harbor predatory fish species and to provide suitable substrate for riparian plantings where appropriate. • Lower Reach Gabion Removal (On site). Gabions exist along the right bank within Reach 1 (downstream of South Boeing Bridge). Removal of the gabions and replacement with a soft bank bioengineered stabilization measure (composed of a rock toe, geogrid reinforced soil lifts and plantings), is proposed to improve nearshore habitat conditions and restore bank stabilization function. The proposed improvement work is located at RM 0.42 (STA 22+25). The work area for this mitigation element has been carefully defined to reduce impacts to adjacent mature trees in the riparian zone. • Spawning Channel Maintenance and Monitoring (Off site). The City will continue to maintain the existing Royal Hills Replacement Spawning Channel at approximately RM 3.5, as required by the original project 1997 EIS mitigation plan for the initial and future maintenance dredging. This will promote ongoing functional value and continue to compensate for impacts to spawning from the proposed maintenance project and future maintenance projects. The City also intends to conduct maintenance of the Elliot Spawning Channel at approximately RM 4.7 to promote continued use by salmon for spawning as well as off-channel rearing habitat to mitigate for measured channel adjustment impacts. Continued maintenance and operation beyond that point is voluntary and will continue unless ongoing excessive maintenance is required, it is frequently damaged, or significantly damaged in the future by floods resulting in a major or on-going need to repair or restore the channel. As part of the current project, the City has worked with WDFW and the MIT to identify the following actions that will be completed at the Elliot Spawning Channel (Appendix B): • • • • Reconfigure the boulders at the upstream end of the Elliot Channel porous levee intake structure to increase the quantity of water from the river into the channel. The feasibility of this concept needs to be assessed in terms of the hydraulic and geomorphic factors at the site to ensure the stability of the porous levee (intake structure) will not be structurally compromised by any of the maintenance work proposed and the desired outcome can be achieved. The feasibility study is currently underway and will be used to inform the maintenance activities implemented. Remove accumulated fine sediments on the river side of the porous levee intake structure . Remove the in-stream vegetation (primarily duck weed and filamentous algae), by hand pulling . Retain and maintain the native vegetation while removing invasive species on the channel banks and adjacent uplands along the entire length of the Elliot Channel. • Lighting Impacts Reduction (On site & Off site). The City will conduct an inventory of existing City-owned lights within the project area along the Cedar River including a 200 foot buffer on each side up to RM 2.1 upstream of 1-405. The inventory will provide data that can be used to develop the basis for a lighting study. The lighting study will identify City-owned lights that can be modified (direction, bulb type, shielding, removal, etc.) to reduce negative lighting impacts on the Cedar River habitat without compromising public safety. Study recommendations will be prioritized and implemented to the greatest extent feasible. • Scour Monitoring Study. A scour monitoring study utilizing scour chains with accelerometers is currently being implemented with the following goals: (1) to evaluate bed material disturbance depths prior to the 2015 dredging, thus defining baseline sediment transport conditions, and (2) to monitor the magnitude, extent, and rates of bed adjustment over the two spawning/high flow seasons following GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 11 FIie No. 0693-073-00 the 2015 dredging. The City has completed the permitting and contracting and the scour chains have been installed within the project reach for the 2014-2015 spawning and winter season. Installation of scour chains and accelerometers has been completed and permitted through a separate process. • Wetland Mitigation Bank Credits (Off site). The City plans to mitigate wetland impacts through use of mitigation bank credits at the Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank. The Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank instrument was approved in August 2006. The site was constructed in 2007-2008 and allows an alternative to on-site mitigation for private and public projects (City or WSDOT) with wetland impacts that require mitigation per City Code to achieve a no-net loss of wetland functions and values. On-site mitigation will be completed using the same equipment used for dredging, bank stabilization and other proposed work, including hand tools and manual labor as needed. Maintenance and monitoring of spawning channels will be continued in accordance with previous approvals, including the EIS for the project (USAGE, 1997). Wetland mitigation bank credits have already been established and no additional construction work is proposed at the wetland mitigation site as part of this project. Additional information regarding proposed mitigation is contained in the Cedar River Maintenance Dredging Project Mitigation Plan (GeoEngineers, 2014a). 2.4. Sequencing The project is proposed to be completed within one in-water work season. For this project, the in-water work window that has been discussed with regulatory agencies is June 15 through August 31. Equipment will be mobilized, staged and assembled prior to the start of the in-water work window to allow full use of the approved work window. Multiple dredging and shoreline stabilization activities will run concurrently to complete the proposed project in one season. The proposed sequencing of project activities will be as follows: 2.4.1. June 1 through June 15, 2014 • Mobilize barges, clamshell dredges, excavators and other equipment to the site. • Assemble barges in river without disturbing river bed. • Establish access points above OHW. 2.4.2. June 15 through August 31, 2014 • Install erosion control devices. • Begin dredging operations in the lower reach with approximately two clamshell dredges operated from barges. • Begin excavator dredging at the Williams Avenue Bridge and construct temporary berms. • Continue dredging from Williams Avenue Bridge to Logan Avenue Bridge from temporary berms working downstream. • Dredge from Logan Avenue Bridge downstream to south Boeing Bridge. • Conduct bank stabilization and outfall repair activities concurrently with dredging. GeoENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 12 FIie No. 0693-073-00 • Install temporary access platform within area downstream of South Boeing Bridge to access the right bank stabilization work. • Continue dredging from land and water based equipment. • Complete bank stabilization activities. • Remove temporary structures and berms and conduct other cleanup activities. • Demobilize equipment from the river. • Install native wetland and riparian vegetation. 2.4.3. September 1 through September 15, 2014 • De-mobilization from the site. • Site stabilization, erosion control and upland restoration. 2.4.4. Fall 2014, Spring 2015 and Ongoing Work • Restoration plantings in areas not anticipated to be subject to high flow scour (uplands affected by construction activities) -Fall 2014. • Invasive species removaljcontrol -Fall 2014, Spring 2015, and annually thereafter during 10-year monitoring period. • Riparian plantings in areas potentially subject to scour during high flows -Spring 2015. • Monitoring, plant maintenance and replacement -as needed during 10-year monitoring period. To complete construction within one season, both the floating dredge and excavator methods will be conducted simultaneously, which is anticipated to require two clamshell dredges and two excavators. However, the construction contractor may utilize additional or fewer pieces of equipment as conditions dictate. 2.5. Interdependent and Interrelated Actions Interrelated actions are those that are part of a larger action and depend on the larger action for their justification. Interdependent actions are those that have no independent utility apart from the action being considered. For the purposes of discussion, proposed bank stabilization work, outfall repairs and on-site mitigation actions (riparian plantings, gabion removal, and filling void spaces in riprap) are considered part of the proposed action. Off-site mitigation, on the other hand, may be classified as interdependent or interrelated. Two off-site mitigation spawning channels are currently in place to compensate for the previous dredging activities and routine maintenance dredging, such as the current proposal. The mitigation spawning channels consist of off-channel salmonid spawning and rearing habitat located approximately four miles upstream on the Cedar River (Figure 1). The City will continue to maintain these previously constructed spawning channels, within limits as described in Section 2.3.2.4, as approved in the original project EIS (USACE, 1997) to promote ongoing functional value. Maintenance actions, if needed, may be subject to independent Section 7 consultation if they deviate significantly from what was approved already in the EIS; GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 13 File No. 0693 073-00 potential impacts of future maintenance actions are not addressed in this BA. Specific maintenance actions currently proposed at the Elliot Spawning Channel are described in Section 2.3.2.4. The lighting impacts study and corresponding implementation of study recommendations will take place within the built environment and is not anticipated to have environmental effects beyond its purpose, which is to reduce the effects of artificial ambient light on native fish, including salmon ids. Therefore, no further analysis of the impact of this proposed element is necessary in this BA. The initial installation of scour chains and accelerometers associated with the Scour Monitoring Study has been completed and was permitted through a separate process. Wetland mitigation will be accomplished through allocation of existing wetland mitigation bank credits from the Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank site. This site has already been permitted and developed by the City, in cooperation with WSDOT, and no new construction activities are proposed as part of the planned action. 2.6. Conservation Measures and Best Management Practices Thefollowingsections include Conservation Measures and BMPs proposed to reduce environmental effects of the maintenance dredging project. 2.6.1. General Measures • A detailed Dredging and Dredged Material Handling Plan will be developed by the Contractor and submitted to the project engineer for review and approval prior to the start of construction. The Plan will include descriptions of project-specific work equipment, activities and approaches, and the corresponding BMPs and water quality protection measures that will be implemented for conformance with the permit requirements and conservation measures outlined herein. • Contractor and subcontractors will be required to attend a pre-dredge conference with the City and the regulatory agencies to discuss their work plan and conditions of the regulatory permits. • Construction entrance protection will be provided at each of the access locations in accordance with Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) Standard BMP #C105. • Catch basins within the vicinity of the work area will be protected with inserts in accordance with Ecology Standard BMP #C220. This will include areas that receive stormwater runoff from proposed access locations, re-handling sites, upland receiving sites and within the project area limits. • Street sweeper(s) will be required to be onsite for use on days when material or equipment is transported from the river channel work area onto the airport frontage road or City streets. The sweeper will be responsible for removing sand and gravel inadvertently transported onto the roadways. Water trucks will be available when needed for dust control. • Debris obtained from the excavation work will be removed from the project area and disposed of at an approved upland location. Large wood debris (wood greater than 1 foot in diameter and 15 feet long) will be placed back into the river at appropriate locations or along the nearby lake shoreline. • New bank stabilization and gabion removal elements have been refined to minimize impacts to mature trees within the riparian zone. GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 14 Ale No. 0693·073-00 2.6.2. Measures to Protect Water Quality • The Contractor will be responsible for the preparation of a Spill, Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) plan to be used for the duration of the project. The SPCC plan will be submitted to and approved by the project engineer prior to the commencement of any construction activities. A copy of the SPCC plan with any updates will be maintained at the work site by the Contractor. The SPCC plan will provide advanced planning for potential spill sources and hazardous materials (gasoline, oils, chemicals, etc.) that the Contractor may encounter or utilizes as part of conducting the work. The SPCC plan will outline roles and responsibilities, notifications, inspection, and response protocols. • Storm water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be prepared as required to meet applicable NPDES permit requirements. • Clean stormwater will be diverted away from excavation and stockpile areas, and BMPs compliant with applicable portions of the Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (Ecology, 2005), City of Renton, and the King County Surface Water Design Manual (KC DNR, 2009) will be installed/followed. • A water quality monitoring plan will be developed prior to the start of construction. The following BMPs will be followed during all construction efforts: • • • • • • Water quality standards and procedures that limit water quality impacts to a defined zone of compliance will be observed. All upland drainage will be collected through an effective system of berms, according to the Contractor's approved SWPPP; stormwater runoff will not interact with the excavated shoreline. Vegetable/biodegradable oil will be used in the hydraulic lines/systems of equipment used near/on the riverbank and within the river channel. Any discharge of oil, fuel, or chemicals into state waters is prohibited . Fuel hoses, oil drums, oil or fuel transfer valves and fittings, etc. shall be checked regularly for drips or leaks and shall be maintained and stored properly to prevent spills into state waters. Proper security shall also be maintained to prevent vandalism. Corrective actions will be taken in the event of any discharge of oil, fuel, or chemicals into the water, including: • In the event of a spill, containment and cleanup efforts will begin immediately and be completed as soon as possible, taking precedence over normal work. Cleanup will include proper disposal of any spilled material and used cleanup material. • The cause of the spill shall be assessed, and appropriate action shall be taken to prevent further incidents or environmental damage. • Spills and/or conditions resulting in distressed or dying fish shall be reported immediately to Ecology's Northwest Regional Spill Response Office at 206.649 7000 (a 24-hour phone number). Spills of oil or hazardous materials also shall be reported immediately to the National Response Center at 800.424.8802 and the Washington Emergency Management Division at 800.258.5990 or 800.0ILS.911. • Turbidity and other water quality parameters will be monitored to ensure construction activities are in compliance with Washington State Surface Water Quality Standards, or other conditions as specified in the Ecology Water Quality Certification (WQC). City and the Contractor will observe turbidity during GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 15 File No. 0693-073-00 dredging operations in order to ensure compliance with WQC requirements. Appropriate BMPs will be employed to minimize sediment loss and turbidity generation during dredging, re-handling, and dewatering. Monitoring results will be submitted weekly to Ecology. • Special in-channel excavation methods will be employed to ensure the protection of water quality. This will include preventative measures such as constructing the temporary berm sloping down away from the channel to facilitate drainage, dewatering of dredged material, and infiltration to reduce the volume of water returned directly into the river. • A floating debris boom will be installed across the Cedar River outlet to Lake Washington at two locations in an alternating pattern to allow passage of flow and aquatic organisms. A floating silt curtain will be utilized, if necessary, to meet water quality requirements based on the results of water quality monitoring work conducted throughout the duration of construction. • Upland soil disturbed by the project will be stabilized in accordance with standard BMPs as outlined in the Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington. A detailed Upland Erosion & Sediment Control Plan will be developed by the Contractor and submitted to the project engineer for review and approval prior to the start of construction. The Plan will include descriptions of project-specific work equipment, activities and approaches, and the corresponding BMPs and Water Quality Protection measures that will be implemented for conformance with the permit requirements and conservation measures outlined herein. 2.6.3. In-Water Work • In-water work is proposed to occur during the time period of June 15 to August 31. No in-water work will occur outside of the designated work window to be protective of juvenile and adult salmonid migration. • In-water dredging work would occur during daylight hours to protect aquatic organisms. Rehandling, loading, hauling and other work activities above the water surface would occur during daylight and non-daylight hours in accordance with local and state noise restriction ordinances. • Daily monitoring of the dredge prism through a combination of hydrographic surveying and electronic dredge positioning system techniques will ensure material removed will be limited to that shown on the plans. Dredging operations will be conducted in such a manner to limit disturbance to the minimum area required to complete the work. • Dredging operations will utilize equipment appropriate to the site conditions to minimize turbidity and other possible adverse impacts, including using as large a bucket as possible and minimizing dragging of the bucket on the bed. • For floating barge operations, the material barge will be managed such that the dredged sediment load does not exceed the capacity of the barge. Filter fabric or other appropriate BMPs will be placed over the barge scuppers to help filter suspended sediment from the return water prior to discharge back into the river. Sediment control measures will be maintained by the Contractor at all times, with any problems identified by the engineer repaired immediately by the Contractor. GeoENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 16 File No. 0693-073-00 3.0 PROJECT ACTION AREA The action area is defined as "all areas to be affected directly or indirectly by the federal action and not merely the immediate area involved in the action" (50 CFR §402-02). The action area, therefore, includes the spatial extent of all direct and indirect effects, as well as effects of interrelated and interdependent activities of the project. Project-specific effects that need to be taken into account to define the action area for the project include: • Operation of construction equipment (including in-water work); • Construction-related noise; • Habitat alteration; and • Impacts to water quality. Each of these effects will occur within discrete zones of influence, which may differ. The overall action area is the geographic extent of all project effects, which is the combination of all zones of influence. Figure 2 shows the overall action area for the project. Methods used to identify each zone of influence are discussed in the following sections. 3.1. Operation of Construction Equipment During construction operations, equipment will operate in natural habitat areas potentially utilized by ESA-listed species. Species occupying the following habitat areas, if present, could be affected as a result of interaction with construction equipment and/or construction materials: • Cedar River (below OHWM), including operation of dredging equipment (excavator/clamshell buckets), operation and anchoring of barges, construction of temporary construction unloading platforms (including potential vibratory driving of sheet or other pile types), construction of temporary construction berms and re-handling areas, bank work at the channel margin (including proposed bank stabilization and mitigation actions), outfall repairs, and spawning channel maintenance items such as reconfiguring boulders and removing accumulated sediments (other spawning channel maintenance items will be completed without the use of heavy equipment). • Riparian Area (above OHWM), including construction of access points, temporary unloading platforms, temporary construction berms and re-handling areas, and bank work. Construction equipment has the potential to have direct effects on listed species occupying habitats in which the equipment will operate. The zone of influence for these effects is the entire dredge reach within the Cedar River channel, which is from RM Oto RM 1.23, as well as within the riparian zone along both hanks of the river where construction access is proposed. 3.2. Construction-Related Noise The project will result in increased noise during daylight hours for the duration of the construction activity. There may be some auxiliary work that continues at night beyond daylight hours, such as truck-loading and hauling, but this would not include any work in or over water, or on the banks of the river. There will be an increase in noise from ambient conditions in the project vicinity during the operation of dredging machinery and support equipment. These activities will require the use of heavy machinery. Heavy machinery includes earth-moving equipment such as excavators, front end loaders, haul trucks and other equipment, potentially including a vibratory pile driver. GeoENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 17 File No. 0693-073-00 The loudest equipment that may be used during construction would be a vibratory pile driver. This equipment may generate noise both in the air above the water level, as well as underwater. Zones of influence for in-air and underwater noise are discussed separately in the following sections. 3.2.1. In-Air Noise According to the WSDOT Biological Assessment Manual (2013), the vibratory pile driver generates noise levels in the air up to 101 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from the equipment. Impact pile driving is not anticipated because sheet piles are temporary, will not bear vertical loads, and are therefore not expected to be proofed as part of this project. The project area is located adjacent to Renton Municipal Airport. The WSDOT BA Manual (2013) identifies jet takeoff to generate noise levels of up to 120 dBA at a distance of 200 feet and regular noise intrusions from traffic and aircraft overflights to generate noise levels between 45 and 72 dBA. This site is immediately adjacent to the airport and surrounded by heavy urban traffic; therefore, a relatively conservative noise level of 70 dBA was selected for ambient background noise at the site. Although there is a narrow riparian buffer (more significant on the east bank) and some grassy areas on both sides of the river, the project surroundings are generally dominated by buildings, paved surfaces, and water (Lake Washington), creating a "hard site'' (WSDOT, 2013). The standard in-air noise reduction factor for hard sites is 6 dBA per doubling of the distance from point-source construction noise (WSDOT, 2013). The following table identifies the distances as which the point-source construction noise will attenuate to ambient noise levels. TABLE 2. IN-AIR CONSTRUCTION NOISE ATTENUATION Distance from the Source (Feet) 50 100 200 400 800 1600 Note: Source; WSDOT 2013 GEOENGINEER~ Noise Attenuatton (-7.6 dBA) 101 dBA 95dBA 89dBA 83dBA 77dBA 71dBA Existing Background Sound 70dBA 70dBA 70dBA 70dBA 70dBA 70dBA December 9, 2014 Page 18 File No. 0693-073-00 As identified in the table above, project construction noise is anticipated to attenuate to ambient levels at a distance slightly more than 1,600 feet from the project area. To refine this estimate and predict the specific distance at which equipment noise levels fall below ambient noise levels, we used the following equation: Where, D = Distance to attenuation; Do = Reference distance (50 feet); N, = Construction noise level at reference distance (estimated to be 101 dBA); Nb= Ambient noise level (estimated to be 70 dBA); and ex = 20 for soft sites. According to this analysis, the distance at which construction equipment-related noise would attenuate to background conditions is 1,774 feet, or approximately 0.34 miles. Figure 2 includes the in-air noise extents of the proposed project within the overall project action area. 3.2.2. Underwater Noise The project may generate underwater noise during construction as a result of: vibratory installation of sheet piles that may be used during construction of temporary platforms for offloading dredge material (Reach 1); operation of small boats to position floating equipment (Reach 1); and operation of other equipment working below the water line at the time of construction (Reaches 1-3). Although use of sheet piles is not definite, it is included as a worst-case scenario for identifying the zone of influence for underwater noise generated in Reach 1. Operation of boats in Reach 1 would result in less extensive propagation of sound than vibratory pile driving. Operation of other dredge equipment (primarily excavators) in Reaches 1-3 would be localized to actual construction areas and will not permeate beyond the work area. (Although buckets of dredge equipment may operate within the water, engines and tracked components of excavators would not enter below the water line.) Ambient sound levels in larger slow-moving rivers, which are representative of typical conditions in the lower Cedar River near its mouth, are estimated at 135 decibels, expressed as a root mean square pressure level (dBRMs), according to a study by Laughlin (cited in WSDOT, 2013). Vibratory installation of sheet piles will likely generate underwater noise levels of approximately 160 dBRMs (lllinworth and Rodkin, 2007). A practical spreading loss model developed by WSDOT (2013) was used to estimate the distance underwater noise will permeate the riverine environment surrounding the location of pile driving. Using this model and the noise parameters specified above, vibratory pile driving noise is expected to attenuate to ambient conditions (135 dBRMS) at approximately 1,500 feet from locations where vibratory pile driving may take place. Construction platforms are proposed at approximate STAs 8+00, 14+00, and 16+50. Noise generated by pile driving would therefore extend within the river between these stations, downstream from STA 8+00 to the mouth of the Cedar River and out into Lake Washington approximately 700 feet, and upstream from STA 16+50 to STA 31 +50 (1,500 feet), which is below South Boeing Bridge approximately in line with N. 6th Ave. Underwater noise extending into Lake Washington would be directionally limited by the banks of the Cedar River and therefore expected to extend directly out into the lake and would not bend around to follow the shoreline (see Figure 2). Underwater noise may also be generated locally throughout GEOENGINEERu:;;7 December 9, 2014 Page 19 file No. 0693-07J.OO the remainder of the dredge area (Reaches 1-3), but is not expected to extend upstream of the dredge reach. 3.3. Habitat Alteration Habitat alteration will result from the proposed dredging activities as well as equipment access requirements, proposed bank stabilization, restoration and mitigation activities. The zone of influence of habitat alteration resulting from project activities includes: • The Cedar River channel, including: • • • RM O (STA 0+00) to RM 1.23 (STA 64+38), resulting from effects of dredging; RM 1.2 (STA 61 +00) up to RM 1.6 (STA 84+00), resulting from effects of some channel adjustment that may occur in the year following dredging; RM 4. 7 (approximately), resulting from reconfiguration of boulders, removal of accumulated sediment, and removal of aquatic vegetation at the Elliot Channel (Appendix B). • The riparian zone above OHW, including: • • • • portions of the left bank and associated riparian zone between RM 0.15 (STA 8+00) and RM 1.12 (STA 59+00), resulting from effects of equipment access and bank stabilization activities; a small area on the right bank between RM 0.59 (STA 31 +16) and RM 0.63 (STA 33+00) where new stabilization is proposed; Select locations along the right bank between RM 0.02 (STA 1+00) and RM 0.93 (STA 49+00) where additional mitigation plantings are proposed; and 100 feet of the right bank centered at RM 0.42 (STA 22+25) where existing gabion baskets will be removed and replaced with a bioengineered bank treatment. The effects of the project contributing to habitat alteration in these areas are explained in further detail in the following sections. 3.3.1. Dredging Dredging will alter the river bed within the entire project area to varying degrees. Habitat alteration from dredging will result from removal of substrate throughout the 1.23-mile dredge reach, and alteration of flow velocities and water depth in the lowest reach of the river, which is estimated to occur from RM 0.33 (STA 17 +50) to RM 0.64 (STA 34+00), resulting in an increase in lake-like conditions extending further upstream from the mouth of the river at Lake Washington than it currently does. Lacustrine conditions currently extend upstream from the mouth of the river to approximately RM 0.33 (STA 17+50). After dredging has been conducted, these conditions will exlend up lo RM 0.64 (STA 34+00). 3.3.2. Channel Adjustment Channel adjustment (head-@tting) that may occur in the year following dredging is anticipated to extend approximately 0.44 miles (2,300 feet) upstream from a pivot point that will occur within the transition zone. This effect is anticipated to be less dramatic than what was observed following the 1998 dredge due to engineering controls that will be in place to avoid over-dredging and adherence to the design slope within the transition zone. Substrate is anticipated to be mobilized within this zone during the first year following dredging resulting in degradation of 1 to 2 feet. This will occur from approximate RM 1.2 (STA 61 +00) up to RM 1.6 (STA 84+00), which is approximately at the Houser Way bridge. GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 20 File No. 0693-073-00 3.3.3. Equipment Access and Bank Stabilization Equipment access and bank stabilization activities will result in habitat alteration along the banks of the Cedar River, including those resulting from vegetation clearing, installation of rock and other structural materials, and revegetation. Bank stabilization is concentrated on the left bank including portions of the banks and associated riparian zone between RM 0.15 (STA8+00) and RM 1.12 (STA 59+00). A small area on the right bank will also be affected where new stabilization is proposed between RM 0.59 (STA 31 +16) and RM 0.63 (STA 33+00). Habitat alteration in these areas extends between 20 and 40 feet into the riparian zone above OHW. 3.3.4. Riparian Plantings and Other Mitigation Riparian plantings are proposed in all areas affected by equipment access and bank stabilization (see above). Additional mitigation plantings are proposed at select locations along the right bank between RM 0.02 (STA 1 +00) and RM 0.93 (STA 49+00). Gabion removal is another mitigation action that is proposed spanning 100 feet of bank centered at RM 0.42 (STA 22+25). The gabion removal area will be bioengineered and planted. The Elliot Channel will be maintained to improve its performance as a suitable spawning side channel for sockeye salmon. Maintenance actions are detailed in Section 2.3.2.4 and will result in improvements to off-channel habitat resulting from reconfiguration of the porous levee, removal of accumulated sediments on both sides of the porous levee intake structure, and removal of aquatic vegetation in the channel (see also Appendix B). 3.4. Impacts to Water Quality Cedar River and Lake Washington water quality will temporarily be affected by increased turbidity during construction activities. Other water quality parameters, such as elevated temperature, dissolved oxygen, or pollutant levels are not anticipated to be affected with proper implementation of BMPs. For example, the potential release of contaminants from construction equipment will be prevented through proper installation and maintenance of BMPs as part of an approved SPCC plan. Dredge material characterization has not revealed contaminants that could be re-suspended during dredging and potentially harm fish species (GeoEngineers, 2014b). Turbidity impacts to the river and lake will also be controlled to the extent feasible by implementing construction stormwater BMPs defined in a CSWPPP. However, it will not be possible to completely prevent elevated turbidity levels during construction. Estimated flow volume of the Cedar River during the construction period is between 150 and 300 cubic feet per second (cfs). Measured discharge ranged from less than 200 cfs to over 2,000 cfs during a 1-year period between November 2012 and November 2013, with the highest discharges measured in April 2013 (USGS, 2013). According to the State of Washington Water Quality Standards in Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 173-201A-200(1)(i), the standard allowable temporary area of mixing during and immediately after in-water construction activities is 300 feet downstream from the activity causing the turbidity for riverine waters with flows over 100 cfs, and is 150 feet for lakes. Due to the scale and extent of the proposed dredging project, which will involve multiple pieces of machinery operated simultaneously in different parts of the river, the 300-foot river mixing zone will not be sufficient; therefore, a custom mixing zone will be applied to this project. The custom mixing zone will be requested from Ecology in accordance with WAC 173-201A-410. The proposed point of compliance will be 300 feet into Lake Washington as measured from the North Boeing Bridge. The point of compliance is not proposed at 150 feet into the lake GEOENGINEER~ December9,2014 Page21 File No. 0693-073-00 because significant hydraulic flow from the river into the lake results in conditions at the mouth that are not representative of typical lacustrine environments. It is anticipated that water quality beyond the compliance point will remain within 5 nephelometric turbidity units (NTUs) over background if background levels are 50 NTUs or less, or less than a 10 percent increase in turbidity if background levels exceed 50 NTUs, in accordance with WAC 173-201A-200(1)(e) and Table 200(1)(e). Compliance with these standards will be monitored during construction as specified in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and 401 Water Quality Certification. The zone of influence for temporary construction impacts to water quality arising from elevated turbidity during work in and adjacent to the river is therefore estimated to be within the river channel for the 1.23-mile project reach and extending into Lake Washington approximately 300 feet. 3.5. Alteration of Food Webs or Predatory/Prey Dynamics The project is not likely to have measurable effects on prey availability for listed species. The potential impacts are limited to temporary relocation of populations of juvenile salmonids and/or benthic invertebrates within the dredge reach that are prey for salmonids. Listed species are not expected to be within the dredge reach during construction and therefore will not be impacted by the temporary relocation of prey. These prey species are expected to return to the dredge reach in similar numbers as existing once dredging is complete. 3.6. Action Area Summary The zones of influence for each project impact are summarized as follows: • Operation of construction equipment will be limited to the 1.23-mile dredge reach and adjacent banks where construction access and material re-handling are proposed, as well as in limited locations in the vicinity of the Elliot Spawning Side Channel (RM 4.7). • Project-related in-air noise will permeate the environment for up to 1,774 feet (0.34 miles) in the air surrounding the project site during project construction. • Project-related underwater noise will permeate the entire dredge reach (Reaches 1-3) and may extend up to 700 feet into Lake Washington in a direct line from the mouth of the Cedar River. • Habitat alteration will occur: within the river channel for the entire dredge reach from the mouth to RM 1.23 (STA 64+38), resulting from removal of substrate and associated benthic invertebrate communities which affects quality of rearing habitat but does not affect suitability for spawning; within the river channel between RM 0.33 (STA 17+50) to RM 0.64 (STA 34+00), resulting from changes to flow velocity and depth resulting in an increase in lacustrine conditions in the lower river; within the river channel between RM 1.2 (STA 61 +00) up to RM 1.6 (STA 84+00), resulting from potential channel adjustment following dredging; along portions of the left bank and associated riparian zone between RM 0.15 (STA 8+00) and RM 1.12 (STA 59+00), resulting from effects of equipment access and bank stabilization activities, and associated restoration; along a small area on the right bank between RM 0.59 (STA 31+16) and RM 0.63 (STA 33+00) where new stabilization is proposed; in select locations along the right bank between RM 0.02 (STA 1 +00) and RM 0.93 (STA 49+00) where additional mitigation plantings are proposed; along a 100-foot section of the right bank centered at RM 0.42 (STA 22+25) where existing gabion baskets will be removed and replaced with a bioengineered bank treatment; and at the Elliot Spawning Side Channel (RM 4.7) where select habitat improvements are proposed (Appendix B). GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 22 File No. 0693-073-00 • Temporary impacts to water quality from construction activities will occur within the river channel of the 1.23-mile dredge reach and will extend into Lake Washington approximately 300 feet. Any increase in turbidity resulting from post-project channel adjustment is anticipated to be within the normal range for high-flow events and will, therefore, not represent an increase over baseline conditions. • Potential impacts to salmon populations that could alter predator-prey relationships are highly unlikely and would be temporary and limited to the lower Cedar River within the dredge reach. The zones of influence corresponding to dredging activities, habitat alteration, water quality impacts, and potential alteration of predator-prey relationships are primarily contained within the zone of influence for project-related noise. Head-cutting upstream to Houser Way extends approximately 100 feet beyond the noise impact area. Therefore, the overall action area is represented by the extent of construction-related in-air noise, which is up to 1,774 feet (0.34 miles) from the site, and includes an additional approximately 100 feet of the Cedar River channel upstream of the in-air noise zone. The overall action area is shown on Figure 2. 4.0 SPECIES AND HABITAT INFORMATION We identified the possible presence of listed species and critical habitat in the general project vicinity by compiling data provided by the USFWS (2013a, 2014a), NMFS (2012), and WDFW (2013a). Official species lists are presented in Appendix C. NMFS identifies the Puget Sound Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and the Puget Sound Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU) of Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) as listed species (threatened) which are potentially present in tributaries of Puget Sound, including the Cedar River and its tributaries (NMFS, 2012). Critical habitat has been designated for Chinook salmon and has been proposed but not yet designated for steelhead. The USFWS provides species lists by county, which identify listed species potentially present in a given county. We used the USFWS list for King County. Table 3 below provides a summary of all listed species and designated critical habitat identified by these agencies to occur in King County. TABLE 3. ESA SPECIES AND CRITICAL HABITAT THAT MAY OCCUR IN KING COUNTY Common Name Specific Name Gray wolf Ganis lupus Canada lynx Lynx canadensis Grizzly bear Ursus arctos horribilis Marbled murrelet Brachyramphus marmoratus Northern spotted owl Strix occidentalis caurina Streaked horned lark Eremophi/a a/pestris strigata Yellow-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus americanus Oregon spotted frog Rana pretiosa Golden paintbrush Castilleja leviseota Chinook salmon Onoorhynchus tshawytsoha Steel head Onoorhynchus mykiss GEOENGINEER~ Status Endangered Threatened Threatened Threatened Threatened Threatened Threatened Threatened Threatened Threatened Threatened Jurisdiction Crltlcal Habitat Presence1 USFWS USFWS USFWS USFWS USFWS USFWS USFWS USFWS USFWS NMFS NMFS No No N/A Yes Yes Yes No No N/A Yes Proposed December 9, 2014 Page23 File No. 0693-073-00 Common Name Specific Name Bull trout Salvelinus confluentus Notes status Threatened Jurisdiction USFWS Crltlcal Habitat Presence• Yes 1. Critical habitat listings are as follows: Yes indicates that critical habitat occurs in King County, Washington, but does not necessarily indicate its presence within the action area; Proposed indicates that proposed critical habitat occurs in King County, Washington, but does not necessarily indicate its presence within the action area; No indicates that critical habitat for the species has been designated but it does not occur anywhere in King County; N/A indicates that critical habitat has not been designated or proposed for the species. 4.1. Occurrence of Listed Species in the Action Area Not all the species listed in Table 3 are likely to be present in the action area. The ESA status, habitat requirements and life histories of listed threatened, endangered and proposed species that may occur in the action area are summarized in Appendix C. Actual species utilization and potential for occurrence in the action area for each species included in Table 3 are discussed in more detail below. 4.1.1. Mammals 4.1.1.1. GRAY WOLF Gray wolves are wide ranging and will occupy a variety of habitat types with no apparent preference for one type or another. They tend to be present in areas with few roads, low human presence and abundant prey bases. A minimum of approximately 4,000 to 5,000 square miles of contiguous habitat with low road density may be required to support a viable population. Gray wolves are reported to be rare in Washington and they are considered critically imperiled (i.e., at very high risk of extinction because of extreme rarity, very steep declines or other factors) (NatureServe, 2013). Their range in the state of Washington is restricted to mountainous areas north of Interstate 90, with the edge of the nearest confirmed pack range (based on telemetry data from collared wolves) approximately 38 miles east of the project site (WDFW, 2013c). PHS data does not indicate their presence in the action area (WDFW, 2013a). The action area does not contain habitat for this species due to the lack of suitable forested areas and the presence of urban human activities. Therefore, gray wolves are not expected to occur in the action area. 4.1.1.2. CANADA LYNX Canada lynx also use a wide variety of habitat types though they are generally limited in the Pacific Northwest by prey availability (snowshoe hares), which are limited to early successional lodgepole pine forests (NatureServe, 2013). In Washington, the majority of Canada lynx occurrences were found above 4,100 feet elevation in Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir forests (71 FR 66007). Canada lynx are considered critically imperiled in the state of Washington (NatureServe, 2013), and PHS data does not record their presence in the action area (WDFW, 2013a). The action area does not contain habitat for this species due to the lack of suitable forested areas or snowshoe hare populations and the presence of urban human activities. Therefore, Canada lynx are not expected to occur in the action area. 4.1.1.3. GRIZZLY BEAR Grizzly bears also occupy a wide range of habitats, and their diet is general and opportunistic, varying through seasons. Prominent threats to grizzly bears include encroachment of their habitat by motorized vehicles and habitat fragmentation. Grizzly bears may be present in the North Cascades area of north-central Washington and in the Selkirk Mountains in northeastern Washington. The North Cascades population is estimated at less than 20 bears (USFWS, 2007). These mountainous areas are more than 70 miles away from the project site. The action area does not contain habitat for this species due to the GeoENGtNEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 24 File No. 0693-073-00 lack of suitable forested areas and the presence of urban human activities. Therefore, grizzly bears are not expected to occur in the action area. 4.1.2. Birds 4.1.2.1. MARBLED MURRELET Marbled murrelet foraging occurs in marine waters and nesting occurs in old growth and mature forests. The closest designated critical habitat for the marbled murrelet occurs approximately 25 miles east of the action area for the project (USFWS, 2013b). The action area does not contain habitat for this species due to the lack of marine foraging areas or old growth forest nesting areas. Therefore, marbled murrelets are not expected to occur in the action area. 4.1.2.2. NORTHERN SPOTTED OWL Northern spotted owls generally inhabit mature or old-growth forested habitats that contain complex structural characteristics. Typical habitat characteristics found in suitable habitat for spotted owls include: high canopy closure; a multi-layered, multi-species canopy dominated by large overstory trees; a high incidence of large trees with large cavities, broken tops and other indications of decadence; numerous large snags; heavy accumulations of logs and other woody debris on the forest floor; and considerable open space within and beneath the canopy (Thomas et al., 1990). The action area does not contain habitat for this species due to the lack of intact mature or old-growth forest areas. Therefore, spotted owls are not expected to occur in the action area. 4.1.2.3. STREAKED HORNED LARK This species typically utilizes open spaces dominated by grasses and other herbaceous vegetation, such as native prairies, coastal dunes, agricultural fields and other grass fields such as those found around airports (USFWS, 2014b). Although the Renton Municipal Airport is immediately adjacent to the site, it contains only mowed grass areas not including any areas of herbaceous native vegetation or native prairies that would be suitable for streaked horned larks. Because the Action Area does not include any native habitat types that would be suitable for streaked horned larks, and critical habitat does not occur near the project (USFWS, 2013b), streaked horned larks are not expected to occur within the Action Area. 4.1.2.4. YELLOW-BILLED CUCKOO The Western DPS of yellow-billed cuckoo inhabits riparian zones with dense cottonwood and willow stands. Cuckoos general prefer large tracts of riparian forest with dense understory. The western yellow-billed cuckoo nests almost exclusively in forested riparian stands of 50 acres or more and are extremely rare in Washington (78 FR 61633). The main portion of the action area associated with dredging includes riparian habitat containing willows, cottonwoods and understory shrubs. However, riparian habitats within the dredge reach are limited to small, narrow strips along the Cedar River. well under 50 acres in size, and surrounded by urban development. Riparian areas of suitable size for yellow-billed cuckoo occur east of 1-405 along the Cedar River, including in the vicinity of the Elliot Spawning Channel. However, proposed critical habitat does not occur within the Action Area (USFWS, 2013b) and there have been no sightings in this area. GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 25 File No. 0693-073-00 4.1.3. Amphibians 4.L3.1. OREGON SPOTTEO FROG According to the WDFW PHS maps there are no Oregon spotted frog sightings within the vicinity of the project (WDFW, 2013a). This species typically prefers marsh habitats in or adjacent to perennial waterbodies that have reliable water levels, are around 9 acres in size and have an absence of predators (USFWS 2014c). There is no native marsh habitat within the Action Area, and side channel wetland habitats associated with the Cedar River are smaller than 9 acres and contain fish populations that would result in heavy predation on frogs (including larval tadpoles and eggs). Proposed critical habitat for this species has not been identified in the Action Area (USFWS, 2013b). Because potential suitable habitat for Oregon spotted frogs is essentially absent in the Action Area, this species is not expected to occur. 4.1.4. Plants 4.1.4.1. GOLOEN PAINTBRUSH Golden paintbrush is rare and there are currently no known locations in King County (NatureServe, 2013). Historically, this species was found west of the Cascade Mountain range from southern British Columbia to central Oregon. The DNR's WNHP database (DNR, 2011) does not identify any known occurrences of this plant in the action area. Therefore, golden paintbrush is not expected to occur within the action area. 4.1.5. Fish 4.1.5.1. CHINOOK SALMON The Puget Sound ESU for Chinook salmon includes those stocks in tributaries of Puget Sound westward to the Elwha River. Spawning occurs in late summer and fall. The Cedar River is known to contain a native stock of Chinook salmon with wild reproduction (WDFW, 2002a). Chinook salmon spawning is documented in the project area; over 14 years of data collection by the City (2000-2013; unpublished data), only two Chinook redds have been observed in the reach below South Boeing Bridge, 3 redds between South Boeing Bridge and the upstream dredge limits (approximately at Williams Avenue bridge), and 3 redds in the reach between Williams Avenue and Houser Way that may be subject to channel adjustment following dredging. Data collected by Seattle Public Utilities, WDFW, and King County Department of Natural Resources (Burton et al., 2011) from 1999 to 2010 show similar results, with only 1 redd below RM 1, and 11 redds between RM 1 and 2. Rearing is documented downstream to the mouth of the river at Lake Washington (WDFW, 2013a; 2013b). Therefore, Chinook salmon are expected to occur in the Cedar River within the action area. 4.1.5.2. STEELHEAD The Puget Sound DPS of steelhead includes winter-and summer-run steelhead in the river basins of the Strait of Juan de Fuca, Puget Sound, and Hood Canal, Washington, bounded to the west by the Elhwa River and to the north by the Nooksack River and Dakota Creek, both of which are included in the DPS (71 FR 15666). The Cedar River is known to contain a native stock of winter steelhead trout with wild reproduction (WDFW, 2002b). The project reach of the Cedar River is documented as winter steel head rearing habitat (WDFW, 2013a; 2013b). However, steelhead are known not to spawn in the Cedar River below 1-405 (pers. comm., Aaron Bosworth, District Biologist, WDFW, June 23, 2014). Therefore, Puget Sound steelhead are expected to occur in the Cedar River within the action area. GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 26 File No. 0693-073-00 4.1.5.3. BULL TROUT Coastal/Puget Sound DPS bull trout occur within marine areas and freshwater streams of King County. Native bull trout are present in some reaches of the Cedar River and Lake Washington (WDFW, 2013a; 2013b), although in 20 years of data collection, WDFW has never caught one in their rotary screw trap in the lower river, within the project reach (Kiyohara, pers. comm.). Nonetheless, bull trout may occur in the Cedar River within the action area and are therefore addressed in this BA. 4.2. Occurrence of Critical Habitat in the Action Area The following critical habitat has been designated for the species and is present within the action area: • Chinook salmon, and • Bull trout. The following critical habitat has been designated or proposed for the species but is not present within the action area. Therefore, critical habitat for the following species will not be addressed in this BA: • Gray wolf, • Canada lynx, • Grizzly bear, • Marbled murrelet, • Northern spotted owl, • Streaked horned lark, • Yellow-billed cuckoo, and • Oregon spotted frog. The following proposed critical habitat is present within the action area: • Steelhead trout. Critical habitat has not been designated for the following species: • Golden paintbrush. 4.2.1. Primary Constituent Elements of Chinook Salmon Crltlcal Habitat Primary Constituent Elements (PCEs) for Chinook salmon (70 FR 52630) include: 1. Freshwater spawning sites with water quantity and quality conditions and substrate supporting spawning, incubation and larval development; 2. Freshwater rearing sites with water quantity and floodplain connectivity to form and maintain physical habitat conditions and support juvenile growth and mobility; water quality and forage supporting juvenile development; and natural cover such as shade, submerged and overhanging large wood, log jams and beaver dams, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, side channels and undercut banks; GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 27 File No. 0693·073-00 3. Freshwater migration corridors free of obstruction with water quantity and quality conditions and natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, side channels, and undercut banks supporting juvenile and adult mobility and survival; 4. Estuarine areas free of obstruction with water quality, water quantity and salinity conditions supporting juvenile and adult physiological transitions between fresh and saltwater; natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, and side channels; and juvenile and adult forage, including aquatic invertebrates and fishes, supporting growth and maturation; 5. Near-shore marine areas free of obstruction with water quality and quantity conditions and forage, including aquatic invertebrates and fishes, supporting growth and maturation; and natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, and side channels; and 6. Offshore marine areas with water quality conditions and forage, including aquatic invertebrates and fishes, supporting growth and maturation. The project action area includes freshwater specific PCEs (PCEs 1, 2 and 3) for Chinook salmon. The Cedar River within the action area supports spawning, rearing and migration for Chinook salmon and other salmonids, although Chinook spawning is naturally limited in this reach. The project site does not contain marine areas; therefore, PCEs 4, 5 and 6 are not present within the action area. 4.2.2. Primary Constituent Elements of Bull Trout Critical Habitat Lake Washington is designated as critical habitat for bull trout. The lower Cedar River, however, is not designated as bull trout critical habitat. Primary Constituent Elements (PCEs) for bull trout (75 FR 63898) include: 1. Springs, seeps, groundwater sources, and subsurface water connectivity (hyporehic flows) to contribute to water quality and quantity and provide thermal refugia; 2. Migratory habitats with minimal physical, biological, or water quality impediments between spawning, rearing, overwintering, and freshwater and marine foraging habitats, including, but not limited to permanent, partial, intermittent or seasonal barriers; 3. An abundant food base, including terrestrial organisms of riparian origin, aquatic macroinvertebrates, and forage fish; 4. Complex river, stream, lake, reservoir, and marine shoreline aquatic environments and processes with features such as large wood, side channels, pools, undercut banks and substrates, to provide a variety of depths, gradients, velocities, and structure; 5. Water temperatures ranging from 2 to 15 °C (36 to 59 ° F), with adequate thermal refugia available for temperatures at the upper end of this range. Specific temperatures within this range will vary depending on bull trout life-history stage and form; geography; elevation; diurnal and seasonal variation; shade, such as that provided by riparian habitat; and local groundwater influence; 6. Substrates of sufficient amount, size, and composition to ensure success of egg and embryo overwinter survival, fry emergence, and young-of-the-year and juvenile survival. A minimal amount (e.g., less than 12 percent) of fine substrate less than 0.85 mm (0.03 in.) in diameter and minimal embeddedness of these fines in larger substrates are characteristic of these conditions; GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 28 Flle No. 0693-073-00 7. A natural hydrograph, including peak, high, low, and base flows within historic and seasonal ranges or, if flows are controlled, they minimize departures from a natural hydrograph; 8. Sufficient water quality and quantity such that normal reproduction, growth, and survival are not inhibited; and 9. Few or no nonnative predatory (e.g., lake trout, walleye, northern pike, smallmouth bass; inbreeding (e.g., brook trout); or competitive (e.g., brown trout) species present. The portion of Lake Washington within the project action area includes several PCEs for bull trout. PCE 1 (springs, seeps, and groundwater sources) may be present along the shores of the lake, but not within the action area. The lake is a migratory corridor for bull trout (PCE 2) and contains aquatic invertebrates and limited riparian vegetation (PCE 3). There is limited habitat complexity within the action area, but some off-channel and side channel habitat representative of PCE 4 exists. Temperatures in Lake Washington vary by season and by depth. At any time of year, temperatures can be found within the appropriate range for bull trout below a depth of approximately 15 feet (King County, 2013), therefore the lake contains PCE 5. PCE 6 is not present in the action area because there is no spawning habitat for bull trout in the lower Cedar River. Lake Washington has incoming rivers and outgoing flows controlled by dams or locks; however, flows are regulated in a fashion similar to a natural hydrograph with higher flows in the fall through spring and lower flows during the more dry summer months. Therefore, the project area also contains PCE 7. PCE 8 (water quality and quantity) is present within Lake Washington. The lake contains both large and smallmouth bass, therefore PCE 9 is not present in Lake Washington. 4.2.3. Proposed Primary Constituent Elements of Steelhead Trout Critical Habitat Proposed PCEs for steel head trout (78 FR 2725) are discussed in this BA in the event that steel head critical habitat becomes designated during project consultation. These PCEs are the same as those listed for Chinook salmon in Section 4.2.1. The project action area includes freshwater-specific PCEs (PCEs 1, 2 and 3) for steel head trout. The Cedar River within the action area supports spawning, rearing and migration for steelhead, although spawning is naturally limited in this reach. The project site does not contain marine areas; therefore, PCEs 4, 5 and 6 are not present within the action area. 4.3. Occurrence Summary As described in Sections 4.1 and 4.2, some of the listed and proposed species and critical habitat that occur in King County are not expected to occur in the action area and are therefore not addressed in the remainder of this BA. The project will have no effect on the following species and critical habitat: • Gray wolf (including critical habitat) • Canada lynx (including critical habitat) • Grizzly bear (including critical habitat) • Marbled murrelet (including critical habitat) • Northern spotted owl (including critical habitat) • Streaked horned lark (including critical habitat) • Oregon spotted frog (including proposed critical habitat) • Golden paintbrush GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 29 File No. 0693·07J.OO Species that may occur in the action area and will be addressed in this BA are summarized in Table 4 below. TABLE 4. LISTED SPECIES THAT MAY OCCUR IN THE ACTION AREA Common Name Latin Name Status Jurisdiction Crltlcal Habitat Yellow-billed cuckoo Coccyzus americanus Threatened USFWS Proposed -not present Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Threatened NMFS Present Steel head Oncorhynchus mykiss Threatened NMFS Proposed -present Bull trout Salvelinus conf/uentus Threatened USFWS Present 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE The Cedar River Maintenance Dredging Project area is an approximately 1.23-mile reach located within the City of Renton. The project reach extends from the Williams Avenue South Bridge to the south, downstream to the mouth of the Cedar River at Lake Washington. Land use in the surrounding area includes commercial and industrial development as well as recreation areas along the margins of the river. 5.1. Terrestrial Habitat 5.1.1. Topography The upland topography in the project area is generally flat with steep slopes along the banks of the Cedar River. The banks are armored in most areas with rip rap and/or concrete and include slopes as steep as approximately a 1:1 ratio. 5.1.2. Vegetation Terrestrial habitat conditions within the project corridor are generally degraded and consist primarily of a narrow strip of riparian vegetation with high densities of invasive species. Vegetation within the project stretch of the Cedar River is generally limited to invasive species including Japanese knotweed (Po/ygonum cuspidatum), reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) and Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius) in the understory. Several native tree species are also located within the riparian zone including red alder (A/nus rubra), Pacific willow (Salix lucida ssp. lasiandra), Sitka willow (Salix sitchensis) and black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera ssp. trichocarpa). A waterfront park is located along the east bank of the Cedar River within the project area and contains managed lawn grasses, trees and shrubs. 5.1.3. Suitable Habitat The action area does not contain suitable habitat for listed mammal species due to the high level or urban development and the lack of forested areas. The off-site mitigation areas along the Cedar River contain cottonwood and willow trees and dense understory shrubs in areas. These riparian areas represent suitable habitat for western yellow-billed cuckoo; however, there are no proposed actions at these locations affecting potentially suitable habitat for terrestrial species other than maintenance of existing riparian vegetation at the Elliot Spawning Side Channel; therefore, evaluation of the effects of off-site mitigation actions on terrestrial species presented in this BA are brief. Other than the proposed work at the Elliot Spawning Channel, the rest of the Action Area only contains narrow strips of native and invasive GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 30 file No. 0693-073-00 riparian vegetation much smaller than the 50-acre stands. Larger stands of riparian vegetation are present at and adjacent to the Elliot Spawning Channel, which is considered suitable yellow-billed cuckoo habitat. 5.2. Freshwater Aquatic Habitat The Cedar River is a major tributary of Lake Washington providing approximately 57 percent of the flow into the lake. Cedar River is part of Washington State Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 8 - Cedar/Sammamish. The lower Cedar River basin contains 60 percent forested land cover, 29 percent low-to medium-density development and 0.9 percent high-density development. The project reach of the Cedar River was diverted from the Green/Duwamish River system into Lake Washington in 1912, which has resulted in the need for 64 percent of the river to have levees or revetments along at least one of the banks (Kerwin, 2001). 5.2.1. General Aquatic Conditions The project reach of the Cedar River is completely artificial and constrained by levees and revetments. The following channel history is based on the description presented in the project EIS (USAGE, 1997). The artificial channel was constructed in 1912 by Commercial Waterway District Number 2. Prior to 1912, the Cedar River flowed into the Black River and then into the Duwamish River and Elliot Bay. The diversion of the Cedar River into Lake Washington occurred at approximately the same time that the USAGE constructed the Lake Washington Ship Canal and lowered the Lake Washington surface water elevation by approximately 9 feet. Currently, the Cedar River flows into Lake Washington at the extreme southern end of the lake (Figure 1). The river within the project reach was regularly dredged between 1912 and the mid-1970s to reduce flooding. This reach is straight and channelized, with limited habitat complexity. The river banks in this area are armored with riprap and/or retaining walls. This portion of the river is not connected to floodplain habitat and does not contain off channel habitat. The low gradient of this portion of the river contributes to sediment loading (Kerwin, 2001). River substrate within the project area is primarily composed of gravel with cobbles, sand and a very small fraction of silt. The last dredging activities in this area were conducted in 1998 with a planned removal of approximately 4 feet of accumulated sediment deposition (although in practice more was removed than originally planned). Riparian conditions are also degraded within the project area. The Renton Municipal Airport is immediately adjacent to the project on the left (west) bank. The right (east) bank of the river contains a riverfront park with managed lawn grasses, trees and shrubs. Beyond the park is the Renton Boeing Facility. Development along the banks of the river has limited the riparian corridor to a small strip on either side of the river containing invasive and native plant species. Four bridges cross the Cedar River in the project reach, including: North Boeing Bridge (private), South Boeing Bridge (private), Logan Avenue (public) and Williams Avenue (public), which is near the upstream limit of the dredge reach. 5.2.2. Suitable Habitat Although this portion of the Cedar River is highly altered and degraded, the project reach is suitable habitat for anadromous salmon ids with documented use by Chinook salmon, steel head and bull trout. Within the action area, the Cedar River is primarily a migratory corridor and juvenile rearing habitat for Chinook salmon and steel head. There is very limited opportunity for spawning by these species. Although documented in GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page31 File No. 0693-073-00 Lake Washington and rarely in the Cedar River, bull trout have not been observed in the WDFW trap in the lower river during the past 20 years. 6.0ANALYSIS OF EFFECTS ON SPECIES AND HABITAT This section provides analysis of the effects the project is likely to have on Chinook salmon, steel head and bull trout within the action area. Direct effects include all impacts directly associated with project implementation and construction activities as well as any disturbances that would occur very close to the time of construction. Indirect effects are those that could result from the project, but occur later in time. For this project, direct effects include: construction-related noise, habitat alteration within and adjacent to the Cedar River, and construction-related impacts to water quality. The primary indirect effect of the project is related to upstream headcutting, which is expected to occur during the first high-flow season (fall/winter). Project-related direct and indirect effects on species and habitat are discussed in the following sections. 6.1. Operation of Construction Equipment As described in the "Action Area" section, construction equipment may operate within the river channel and along the banks (riparian area) during project construction. Yellow-billed cuckoo is the only species that could occupy riparian habitats above the OHW within the action area. However, the occurrence of this species is extremely unlikely. Furthermore, work at the Elliot Spawning Channel will be conducted from existing developed access roads or by hand, and will not affect suitable habitat for this species. Therefore, operation of construction equipment will have no effect on listed terrestrial species. As documented in this BA, listed salmon ids including Chinook salmon, steelhead and potentially bull trout, could be present within the Cedar River channel. Interaction with construction equipment operating below the OHW level, and/or with construction materials being manipulated by this equipment, could have direct effects on these species, if they occur in the river during construction. In-water construction will be primarily limited to the approved in-water work window, although a work window extension has been requested to enable construction to be completed within a single construction season. The approved work window listed by USACE for the project location is July 1 to August 31; the extension is requested for two additional weeks at the beginning of the work window, resulting in a work window from June 15 to August 31. The work window restriction is expected to reduce the likelihood and/or quantity of listed species that would occur in the river during construction, but there is still some potential for these species to be within the action area during construction. Individual fish, if present, could be harassed or harmed by the operation of equipment in the water during construction. Juvenile steelhead are the most likely species to be affected by the project, because they can be present at any time of year. Returning Chinook adults could also be present during their upstream migration in the latter portion of the work window. Bull trout are extremely rare in the dredge reach, as documented at the WDFW trap. Therefore, the potential for operation of construction equipment to affect bull trout is considered discountable. Based on this information, operation of construction equipment may affect listed fish species present in the action area, but is not expected to have effects on designated or proposed critical habitat. Because presence of Chinook salmon and steelhead in the dredge reach during construction cannot be ruled out, interactions between individuals of these species and construction equipment operating in the GeoENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 32 File No. 0693-073-00 water is anticipated to be likely to adversely affect these species. However, the chance of occurrence of bull trout is considered discountable, and therefore, interaction between this species and construction equipment operating in the water is anticipated to be not likely to adversely affect this species. 6.2. Construction-Related Noise In-air construction noise may permeate terrestrial environments up to approximately 0.34 miles from the project area due to use of construction machinery that generates noise in excess of baseline conditions extending into the surrounding environment. Yellow-billed cuckoo is the only species that could occupy riparian habitats above the OHW within the action area. However, the occurrence of this species is extremely unlikely and therefore discountable. Work at the Elliot Spawning Channel will be conducted from existing developed access roads or by hand, and will not affect suitable habitat for this species. However, work may involve noise-producing equipment, such as vactor trucks, other heavy trucks, and/or construction machinery such as a crane or excavator. Therefore, in-air construction-related noise may affect yellow-billed cuckoo should they occur, but is not likely to adversely affect them due to very low probability of occurrence, which renders the effect discountable. Underwater construction noise may permeate aquatic habitats within the entire dredge reach and extending up to 700 feet into the Lake Washington. Since pile driving noise may be detectible within riverine and lake environments, it is necessary to incorporate species-specific thresholds for injury and/or disturbance to evaluate the impact this may have on fish. Vibratory pile driving is known to not generate sound pressure waveforms capable of causing fish mortality or injury, though disturbance is still possible (WSDOT, 2013). The same practical spreading loss model described in Section 3.2.1 was used to estimate the distance between the location of pile driving and fish exposure to disturbance-level noise conditions. The model is able to provide an estimate of the distance at which pile driving noise would fall below a noise exposure threshold value developed by NMFS for disturbance to salmonids (Fisheries Hydroacoustic Working Group 2008; Hastings, 2002). This analysis is based on the initial noise level of approximately 160 dB for vibratory pile driving of steel sheet piles (lllinworth and Rodkin, 2007) and does not vary with ambient conditions in the riverine environment. Using these methods, modeling results indicate that vibratory pile driving may cause disturbance to individual salmonids for up to 150 feet from potential locations of pile driving, which are at ST As 8+00, 14+00 and 16+50. Consequently, pile driving noise levels high enough to cause disturbance to fish is limited to the following ranges within Reach 1: STAs 6+50 to 9+50, 12+50 to 15+50, and 15+00 to 18+00. Disturbance-level noise will not extend into Lake Washington. In addition to the ranges described above for pile driving, presence of other dredging equipment (boats and excavators) working within the entire dredge reach (Reaches 1-3) could also create disturbance that would cause fish to avoid the area or otherwise alter their behavior. Noise generated by vibratory pile driving or operation of other equipment would not be expected to result in direct mortality offish occupying the dredge reach. Furthermore, effects of underwater noise on listed fish will be minimized by conducting all in-water work during the approved window established for this project. Although the in-water work window and methods of construction have been carefully crafted to reduce the chance of adverse effects on listed fish, disturbance and/or alteration of behavior cannot be ruled out. Migratory corridors, which are a primary constituent element of designated critical habitat, will likely be affected. Therefore, construction-related noise may adversely affect listed fish species and/or designated critical habitat. GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page33 file No. D693-073-00 6.3. Habitat Alteration Habitat alteration will occur in a number of locations both within the Cedar River channel, and along its banks, including the associated riparian area. These effects are discussed separately below. 6.3.1. Effects to River Channel Habitat effects on the river channel will result from substrate removal, an increase in lake-like conditions, natural channel adjustment following dredging, and maintenance actions at the Elliot Spawning Side Channel. Habitat alteration within the river channel will affect the entire dredge reach due to removal of substrate and associated organic material during dredging. Removal of this material will have a temporary effect on habitat conditions primarily resulting from removal of benthic macroinvertebrates, a primary food source for salmon and trout in the river. However, the planned removal of up to 5 feet (4 feet planned, plus 1 foot of over-dredge allowance) of riverbed substrate will not have a long-term effect on habitat conditions because the same type, size and quality of substrate will be newly exposed at the bed surface as currently occurs, and recolonization by benthic macroinvertebrate communities is anticipated to be rapid and therefore effects on listed species and critical habitat are insignificant. Dredging will also increase the amount of the lower Cedar River that experiences "lake effect", where water velocities are decreased and depth is increased. The lake effect currently extends upstream from the mouth of the river to approximately RM 0.33 (STA 17+50). After dredging has been conducted, the lake effect will extend up to RM 0.64. Habitat will therefore be altered within this range, affecting 0.31 lineal miles (1,637 lineal feet) of aquatic habitat. This is less than the 2,300 lineal feet anticipated by the USACE during approval of the 1998 dredge. Within the lake effect reach, suitable salmon id spawning habitat will be reduced and conditions may favor predatory fish species. However, there is no spawning habitat for listed species in the lake effect reach. Natural channel adjustment that may occur in the year following dredging is anticipated to affect approximately 0.44 miles (2,300 feet) of salmonid spawning habitat upstream from the transition zone. This effect is anticipated to be less dramatic than what was observed following the 1998 dredge due to engineering controls that will be in place to avoid over-dredging and adherence to the design slope within the transition zone. Hydraulic and sediment transport modeling conducted by the City's hydraulic consultant suggests the upstream extent of channel adjustment to be Houser Way rather than 1-405 as believed following the 1998 dredge. Based on modeling conducted using historical flow data, channel adjustment will be limited to the first year under a variety of flow conditions that could occur. Substrate in the affected reach may be mobilized to a greater extent than naturally occurs during high flows in the first year following dredging, resulting in degradation of 1 to 2 feet. The depth of degradation is expected to be greatest (up to 2 feet) in the transition zone and immediately above, tapering to lesser depths higher up the river. The timing of channel adjustment depends on the hydrograph for the year following dredging, which cannot be predicted. However, because Chinook salmon spawn in the fall and high flows are anticipated from October through April (USACE, 1997), there is a possibility that Chinook redds established in the channel adjustment reach would be scoured and destroyed as a result of channel adjustment in the year following dredging. It is less likely this would affect steelhead because they spawn in the spring and the affected reach is not documented as spawning habitat for this species. The effect of channel adjustment on Chinook redds is only anticipated to occur in the first year following dredging; following initial channel adjustment, ongoing sediment transport processes are expected within the natural range for this system. This effect is therefore considered insignificant with regard to impacts to critical habitat. GeoENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 34 File No. 0693-073·00 Effects of habitat alteration at the Elliot Spawning Side Channel resulting from its maintenance are anticipated to be either beneficial or insignificant to listed fish species in the Cedar River. 6.3.2. Effects to Banks and Riparian Areas Alterations along the riverbanks will include vegetation removal for equipment access and staging. maintenance and repair of existing bank stabilization features, installation of new bank stabilization features, restoration of equipment access and bank stabilization areas, additional riparian mitigation plantings, and the gabion removal. Vegetation removed in equipment access and staging areas on the left bank is primarily invasive. These areas will be restored using native seed mixes and shrub plantings, in accordance with levee and airport restrictions, following completion of construction. Native communities, once they are established, are expected to provide greater levels of riparian function than existing communities. Restoration will use fast-growing species that are anticipated to become established within as little as one to two years. However, there will still be a short-term loss of functions that riparian vegetation provides during and immediately after construction work. Alterations to the banks of the Cedar River will increase the stability of the banks and provide additional native riparian vegetation due to incorporation of bioengineered bank elements and opportunities for increasing riparian plantings relative to baseline conditions. Proposed plantings have been specified to ensure compliance with USAGE regulations for vegetation on and around the constructed flood control levees and walls. Bank stabilization will include the installation of a riprap toe along the banks of the river in several areas. The interstitial spaces between the riprap will be filled with dredge materials to reduce hiding opportunities for predatory fish and provide suitable substrate for the growth of riparian vegetation. The majority of this work is maintenance or repair of existing armoring (see Table 1). A small amount of new bank stabilization is proposed which is fully offset by removal of an existing gabion basket and replacement with a bioengineered feature as mitigation. Therefore, the net effects of bank work are expected to be beneficial with regard to habitat conditions relative to baseline conditions. Increasing riparian vegetation at the banks will create overwater shading and increase invertebrate habitat along the margins of the river. These effects will improve habitat quality and quantity as well as increase food sources for salmonids. Reduction of predator habitat will also provide beneficial effects to salmonids. Effects of riparian vegetation maintenance at the Elliot Spawning Side Channel, which could be suitable for yellow-billed cuckoo, are not anticipated to have any effect on yellow-billed cuckoos, even if they did occupy the stand (which is highly unlikely), nor on habitat quality for this species. Riparian vegetation enhancement would be entirely beneficial to the yellow-billed cuckoo, as well as listed fish species that may occupy adjacent aquatic habitat. 6.3.3. Summary of Habitat Effects on Listed Species In summary, habitat alteration has the potential to have both short-and long-term impacts to habitat for listed fish species that occur within the Cedar River. Short-term temporary impacts such as removal of substrate and associated benthic invertebrates, and potential scour of redds in the upper project reach (above Logan Avenue) and extending upstream to Houser Way are considered insignificant. Short-term loss of riparian vegetation cover is also insignificant and replacement with native communities that exceed baseline conditions will result in long-term beneficial effects. Bank work that is proposed will also result in beneficial effects relative to baseline conditions because most work is maintenance or repair of existing armoring that will be bioengineered to improve habitat conditions overall. Loss of spawning habitat due to GEOENGINEERu::;i December 9, 2014 Page 35 FIie No. 0693-073-00 an increase in lacustrine conditions in the lowest reach of the river (below South Boeing Bridge) is unlikely to affect listed species because use of this reach for spawning is extremely rare and therefore discountable; potential increase in predatory habitat is considered insignificant. Effects of maintenance actions proposed at the Elliot Spawning Side Channel will be beneficial or insignificant. Therefore, although habitat alteration may affect yellow-billed cuckoo and listed fish species and designated critical habitat, these effects are not likely to adversely affect designated critical habitat for these species. 6.3.4. Effects on Primary Constituent Elements As described in the preceding sections, project actions will have the following effects on physical features comprising Chinook, steelhead and/or bull trout critical habitat: • substrate removal, including associated organism and organic detritus; • an increase in lake-like conditions; • natural channel adjustment following dredging; • alteration of bank conditions; • removal of riparian vegetation, much of it invasive, for the purpose of equipment access and bank stabilization activities; and • establishment of native riparian vegetation (seeding and plantings). The Cedar River within the action area supports spawning, rearing and migration for Chinook salmon and steelhead, although spawning habitat for both these species is naturally limited in the affected reaches primarily due to the mass spawning of sockeye salmon. Key attributes of these PCEs include appropriate water quality and quantity, substrate (for spawning), physical habitat configuration attributes (e.g., pool and riffle habitats, large woody debris, boulders, bank conditions, water depth, etc.), and riparian cover. The portion of Lake Washington within the project action area includes several PCEs for bull trout, including providing a migratory corridor for bull trout that contains aquatic invertebrates, limited riparian vegetation, limited habitat complexity (including off-channel and side channel habitat), appropriate water quality and quantity, and an appropriate prey base. Based on the anticipated project effects and the PCEs that have been identified within the project area, the following effects on designated critical habitat are anticipated: • Water quality may be temporarily degraded during construction but is anticipated to return to normal background levels upon completion of dredging. With appropriate BMPs in place and adherence to the approved in-waler work window for fish protection during the course of a single season. the effect on water quality is expected to be limited, remain within the normal range that occurs in this river system during times of high stream discharge, and is therefore considered insignificant. Water quantity parameters will not be affected. • Although substrate will be removed from the river during dredging and sediments will be redistributed during channel adjustment, the surface substrate left behind after these events will be equally suitable for spawning by Chinook salmon or steel head, to the limited extent they may use affected habitat areas. Use of affected reaches by Chinook salmon and steelhead for spawning is extremely limited and therefore this effect is both insignificant and discountable. GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 36 File No. 0693·073-00 • Benthic organisms and organic detritus that is removed may result in short-term impacts to food webs resulting in an insignificant decrease in available prey resources for fish within the affected reach. These effects would be expected to return to pre-dredge conditions within a year of dredging as a result of natural recolonization from upstream population sources. • Bed elevation lowering that results from dredging and contributes to an increase in lake-like conditions will not displace spawning habitat for listed species, but may reduce the quality of migration corridors for Chinook salmon and steelhead due to an increase in predator advantage in the affected habitat. This same effect may be beneficial to adult bull trout, which are fish predators. • Alteration of bank conditions will be generally beneficial relative to the existing baseline because bank work primarily consists of repair and maintenance of existing armoring that will be retrofitted with bio- engineered designs, with very limited new bank armoring that will also be bio-engineered, and some compensatory removal of bank armoring (gabion basket). • Riparian conditions will be temporarily degraded as a result of clearing for equipment access and bank work. Cleared areas will be restored by seeding and planting native species. Additional riparian plantings are also proposed above and beyond the affected areas as part of the mitigation plan. Therefore, although the short-term degradation of riparian cover cannot be denied, the long-term effects on riparian conditions are expected to be beneficial, which will result in a long-term improvement to fish habitat. • Other physical habitat attributes in the Cedar River-such as pool/riffle habitats, large woody debris, boulders, side channel and floodplain habitats-are already generally degraded within the project area and will be unaffected by the proposed dredging. Based on the preceding analysis, the project may affect and is likely to adversely affect designated critical habitat for Chinook salmon and steelhead. The project may affect but is not likely to adversely affect designated critical habitat for bull trout. 6.4. Impacts to Water Quality Water quality impacts that will occur in the Cedar River and Lake Washington during construction are anticipated to be limited to elevated turbidity due to re-suspension of sediments during dredging. The project will comply with the custom mixing zone requirements of the Ecology WQC. Water quality is expected to return to baseline conditions immediately following completion of construction. Increased turbidity is anticipated to affect the entire project reach and extend up to 300 feet into Lake Washington over the course of the construction season. In-water construction work will be limited to the approved in-water work window for the project. In addition, the linear length of the Cedar River channel subject to active dredging and number of simultaneous dredging work zones will be limited. Consequently, although the entire dredge reach will be affected at some point during construction, the amount of area subject to increased turbidity from construction at any given point in time will be a fraction of the project reach. These measures are intended to limit the extent of water quality effects and to ensure fish that may potentially occur in the river during construction have available refuge in areas unaffected by active dredging. GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 37 Flle No. 0693-073-00 Adhering to the in-water work window will reduce the quantities of listed fish that are likely to occur in the project area and therefore could be affected by turbidity. Limitations on the extent of construction activities conducted simultaneously will further limit the potential to impact listed fish. However, it is not possible to completely eliminate the possibility of some listed fish occurring in the river during dredging. Juvenile steelhead are the most likely species to be affected by the project, because they can be present at anytime of year. Returning Chinook adults could also be present during their upstream migration in the latter portion of the work window. Bull trout are extremely rare in the dredge reach, as documented at the WDFW trap. Therefore, the potential for increased turbidity to affect bull trout is considered discountable. Increased turbidity will affect habitat reaches designated and/or proposed as critical habitat for listed fish species. The project reach includes freshwater spawning, rearing and migratory corridor habitat, although spawning is limited to the upstream portion of the project reach for Chinook salmon and steelhead (there is no bull trout spawning habitat in the dredge reach). As described above, the extent of turbidity impacts during construction will be limited by reducing the length of channel and number of work zones affected at any given point in time. This will ensure that adequate refuge exists within the river during construction, for utilization by fish during rearing and migratory life history phases. In-water construction work will not be conducted during the spawning season for any listed species. Therefore, effects of turbidity on critical habitat are considered insignificant and discountable. In conclusion, increased turbidity may affect these three listed fish species, and is likely to adversely affect Chinook salmon and steelhead, but is not likely to adversely affect bull trout. These effects will be temporary. Increase turbidity may affect designated or proposed critical habitat for listed fish species, but is not likely to adversely affect, and will not adversely modify, critical habitat 6.5. Food Web Dynamics and Prey Resources Most effects of the project will be limited to impacts directly associated with construction, which will be minimized through appropriate BMPs including but not limited to an approved in-water work window for fish protection specific to this project. Other effects of the project that may persist beyond the construction window include: channel adjustment; loss of limited spawning habitat for sockeye salmon within the dredge reach; temporal loss of riparian vegetation in areas that will be cleared for construction and then restored, which could reduce allocthonous inputs that may provide direct prey sources or support other prey resources; removal of benthic invertebrates associated with the channel substrate, and subsequent re population of invertebrate populations; an increase in habitat favorable to predators below South Boeing Bridge; and an increase in sockeye spawning habitat and juvenile rearing habitat for other species in the mitigation side channels. Juvenile sockeye salmon, Chinook salmon, and steelhead are typical prey resources for bull trout, which are rare or absent in the project reach. The project is not expected to result in a direct alteration of prey fish populations as a result of construction activities. The dredge reach and upstream channel adjustment reach do not constitute primary spawning habitats for Chinook salmon or steelhead. However, sockeye spawning habitat is substantial within these reaches. Loss of sockeye salmon spawning habitat in the reach below South Boeing Bridge and/or destruction of established sockeye redds due to channel adjustment in the first year following dredging may have a short-term impact on the juvenile sockeye population in the years immediately following dredging. This potential impact is offset by complementary actions to maintain and restore constructed spawning side channel habitat that is currently providing alternate spawning locations for sockeye salmon and improved juvenile rearing habitat for other salmonid GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 38 File No. 0693-073-00 species that will persist for the long-term beyond the first couple of years post-dredging. The net tradeoff between impacted sockeye spawning habitat and supplemental sockeye spawning habitat in the spawning channels is expected to offset effects of the dredging on the juvenile sockeye population in the lower Cedar River. Improved predatory habitat below South Boeing Bridge will be minimized by filling void spaces in riprap as part of the project, but may nonetheless provide bull trout with a predator advantage that may be especially beneficial to this species during lean years, if bull trout enter the Cedar River from Lake Washington (WDFW data indicates this species is generally absent or rare in the dredge reach; see Section 4.1.4.3). Therefore, although the project may affect bull trout through alteration of food webs and prey populations, this effect is anticipated to be insignificant and is not likely to adversely affect this species. Other listed species, such as Chinook salmon and steelhead do not typically prey on other fish while in freshwater, instead relying on aquatic invertebrates. Because the project is in the lowest reach of the Cedar River, with ample source populations of benthic invertebrates immediately upstream that would be transported naturally into the dredge reach, recolonization of substrate by benthic invertebrates is anticipated to be rapid. Loss of riparian habitat will be very limited, occurring primarily in areas dominated by invasive vegetation, and will be restored following project completion. Therefore, although the project also may affect Chinook salmon and steel head through alteration of food webs and prey populations, this effect is anticipated to be insignificant and is not likely to adversely affect these species. 6.6. Interrelated and Interdependent Actions The effects of interrelated and interdependent actions, which are limited to offsite mitigation actions, including previously constructed spawning channels and the wetland mitigation bank, will be entirely beneficial and/or may be insignificant in some cases. The spawning channels were constructed to compensate for the previous dredging activities and routine maintenance dredging, such as the current proposal, as well as unanticipated over-dredging that resulted from project implementation in 1998, which is not expected to recur. The mitigation areas consist of off-channel salmon id spawning and rearing habitat located upstream on the Cedar River. Creation of the spawning channels has resulted in an increase by approximately 2,679 lineal feet of new spawning and rearing habitat within the Cedar River. Maintenance actions proposed at the Elliot Spawning Side Channel will improve aquatic off-channel habitat conditions that may be utilized by juvenile steelhead and Chinook salmon, although primary utilization is by sockeye salmon, which are not a listed species. The 130-acre Springbrook Creek wetland mitigation bank includes wetland creation, restoration and enhancement, resulting in improved flood storage capacity and water quality in Springbrook Creek, and benefitting fish and wildlife habitat in the creek and adjacent wetland areas (WSDOT, 2014). This wetland mitigation bank currently has sufficient credits available to offset wetland impacts of this project. These off-site mitigation sites have already been constructed; therefore, with the exception of limited maintenance work proposed at the Elliot Spawning Side Channel, no new construction impacts will occur at the mitigation sites. 6. 7. Cumulative Effects No cumulative effects have been identified for this project. The City is unaware of any other planned actions that would affect salmon populations in the Cedar River. GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 39 File No. 0693·073·00 7.0 EFFECT DETERMINATIONS Based on the project effects presented in Section 6.0, we have made effect determinations for each listed species and designated or proposed critical habitat that may occur in the action area. Effects determinations take into account all of the possible project effects; our determinations are summarized in Table 5 and discussed below. TABLE 5. EFFECT DETERMINATIONS FOR LISTED AND PROPOSED SPECIES Common Name Federal Status Effect Determination Effect Determination for Species for Crltlcal Habitat Yellow-billed cuckoo Threatened NLM NAM (NE-provisional) Chinook salmon Threatened LTAA LTAA Steel head trout Threatened NAM LTAA (LTAA-provisional) Bull trout Threatened NLTAA NLTAA Notes: NLTAA = Not Likely to Adversely Affect; LTM = Likely to Adversely Affect; NAM = Not Adversely Modify (for proposed critical habitat). 7.1. Yellow-Billed Cuckoo The project may affect yellow-billed cuckoo because: • Construction activities will occur at the Elliot Spawning Channel, which is proximal to suitable habitat for the species. • Construction activities at the Elliot Spawning Channel will include use of noise-producing machinery that could potentially disturb yellow-billed cuckoos if they occur in this habitat. However, the project is not llkely to adversely affect yellow-billed cuckoo because: • Potential occurrence of this species is based on presumed historical distribution, there have been no recent sightings, and the occurrence of this species in the Action Area is therefore extremely unlikely, and is considered discountable. • The only suitable habitat for this species within the action area is around the Elliot Spawning Channel; there are no suitable stands of riparian vegetation large enough to support this species in the lower Cedar River below 1-405. • Work at the Elliot Spawning Channel will be conducted from existing developed access roads or by hand, and will not affect suitable habitat for this species, except potentially beneficial effects resulting from invasive species removal and vegetation enhancement. The project would not adversely modify proposed critical habitat for yellow-billed cuckoo because: • Proposed critical habitat for yellow-billed cuckoo does not occur in the Action Area. • The only potential effects of the project on suitable habitat for yellow-billed cuckoo are beneficial, as a result of riparian vegetation maintenance around the Elliot Spawning Channel. GeoENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 40 File No. 0693-073-00 If proposed critical habitat for yellow-billed cuckoo is designated prior to completion of this project, a provisional effect determination for critical habitat is provided. The project will have no effect on proposed yellow-billed cuckoo critical habitat because: • Proposed critical habitat for yellow-billed cuckoo does not occur in the Action Area. 7.2. Chinook Salmon The project may affect Chinook salmon because: • Suitable habitat for Chinook salmon is present in the Cedar River within the action area, and this species has been documented in the river. • Construction equipment will operate within suitable habitat for Chinook salmon. • Underwater noise will be generated within suitable habitat at levels that could cause disturbance and alter behavior. • Project construction activities will alter habitat and generate turbidity within and adjacent to the Cedar River. • Channel adjustment is anticipated to affect limited suitable spawning habitat for Chinook salmon. The project is likely to adversely affect Chinook salmon because: • The project will be constructed during an extended in-water work window, during which period limited numbers of Chinook salmon are likely to be present in the river. • Construction equipment will operate within the water in potentially occupied habitat. • Elevated noise levels could cause Chinook to avoid suitable habitat or alter their normal behaviors. • Dredging activities will result in temporary water quality impacts (sediment releases/elevated turbidity) in the Cedar River and Lake Washington, which may affect Chinook salmon directly. The project may affect designated critical habitat for Chinook salmon because: • The project action area includes PCEs 1, 2 and 3 for Chinook salmon. • Project activities will alter habitat within and adjacent to the Cedar River. • Chinook spawning habitat (PCE 1) is present in the project reach as well as upstream in areas potentially affected by channel adjustment. • Access and bank stabilization activities will remove overhanging riparian vegetation which provides shade and cover for juvenile Chinook salmon (PCE 2). • The project will result in temporary water quality impacts (sediment releases) in the Cedar River and Lake Washington, which constitute migratory corridors (PCE 3). • Elevated noise levels will be generated within migratory corridor habitat (PCE 3). • The project will create 6.4 acres of additional lake effect area. which benefits predators of Chinook fry. This cyclical effect of recurrent dredging was anticipated for and consulted upon during development of the original Section 205 project documentation. • Channel adjustment will result in head-cutting, scour and potential short-term increases in turbidity. GeoENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page41 File No. 0693-073-00 • Removal of benthic invertebrates and organic detritus in the sediment that will be dredged could impact food web dynamics and therefore alter prey resources for Chinook salmon. The project is likely to adversely affect designated critical habitat for Chinook salmon because: • The project will have long-term impacts on predator habitat in the lowest reach of the river below South Boeing Bridge, where bed lowering will result in an increase in lake-like conditions. These conditions favor predators of Chinook fry resulting in temporary degradation of the migratory corridor for this species. This effect will diminish as the channel fills back in, reducing the extent of lake-like conditions over time after dredging. • Although riparian areas affected by the project will be restored following construction, and supplemental riparian plantings are proposed in areas not affected by construction, the temporal loss of riparian cover cannot be avoided. 7.3. Steelhead The project may affect steel head because: • Suitable habitat for steel head is present in the Cedar River within the action area, and this species has been documented in the river. • Construction equipment will operate within suitable habitat for steelhead. • Underwater noise will be generated within suitable habitat at levels that could cause disturbance and alter behavior. • Project construction activities will alter habitat and generate turbidity within and adjacent to the Cedar River. • Channel adjustment could affect limited suitable spawning habitat for steelhead. The project is likely to adversely affect steelhead trout because: • The project will be constructed during an extended in-water work window, during which period steelhead are likely to be present in the river. • Construction equipment will operate within the water in potentially occupied habitat. • Elevated noise levels could cause steel head to avoid suitable habitat or alter their normal behaviors. • Dredging activities will result in temporary water quality impacts (sediment releases/elevated turbidity) in the Cedar River and Lake Washington, which may affect steelhead directly. The project would not adversely modify proposed critical habitat for steel head trout because: • Despite short-term and long-term project impacts to spawning habitat, riparian vegetation and water quality, impacts will not appreciably diminish the value for conservation of the species over the long-term because of the habitat mitigation that has been or will be implemented for the project (GeoEngineers, 2014a). • • Constructed spawning habitat offsets loss of redds in the dredge reach and channel adjustment reach, as documented in the Mitigation Plan for the project. Onsite riparian plantings will offset loss of riparian cover due to development of equipment access points and bank stabilization activities. GeoENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 42 File No. 0693·073-00 • Removal of gabion baskets, filling of interstitial spaces in bank protection rock and reduction of artificial lighting will reduce effects of predation on juvenile steelhead and offset increases in lacustrine habitat that tends to favor predators. • Impacts to water quality will be limited to the actual construction period. If proposed steelhead critical habitat is designated prior to completion of this project, a provisional effect determination for critical habitat is provided. The project may affect proposed steelhead critical habitat because: • The project action area includes PCEs 1, 2 and 3 for steelhead. • Project activities will alter habitat within and adjacent to the Cedar River. • Access and bank stabilization activities will remove overhanging riparian vegetation (PCE 2) which provides shade and cover for juvenile steelhead. • The project will result in temporary water quality impacts (sediment releases) in the Cedar River and Lake Washington, which constitute migratory corridors (PCE 3). • Elevated noise levels will be generated within migratory corridor habitat (PCE 3). • The project will create 6.4 acres of additional lake effect area, which benefits predators of steelhead fry. This cyclical effect of recurrent dredging was anticipated for and consulted upon during development of the original Section 205 project documentation. • Channel adjustment will result in head-cutting, scour and potential short-term increases in turbidity. • Removal of benthic invertebrates and organic detritus in the sediment that will be dredged could impact food web dynamics and therefore alter prey resources for steelhead. The project is likely to adversely affect proposed steel head critical habitat because: • The project will have impacts on predator habitat in the lowest reach of the river below South Boeing Bridge, where bed lowering will result in an increase in lake-like conditions. These conditions favor predators of steel head fry resulting in temporary degradation of the migratory corridor for this species. This effect is expected to diminish with time post-dredging as the river re-deposits sediment thereby reducing the extent of lake-like conditions. • Although riparian areas affected by the project will be restored following construction, and supplemental riparian plantings are proposed in areas not affected by construction, the temporal loss of riparian cover cannot be avoided. 7 .4. Bull Trout The project may affect bull trout because: • Suitable habitat for bull trout exists in the Cedar River within the project action area. • Construction equipment will operate within suitable habitat for bull trout. • Underwater noise will be generated within suitable habitat at levels that could cause disturbance and alter behavior. • Project construction activities will alter habitat and generate turbidity within and adjacent to the Cedar River. GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 43 File No 0693-07J.OO The project is not likely to adversely affect bull trout because: • The chance of occurrence of bull trout is considered discountable, and therefore, operation of construction equipment in the water, alteration of habitat, construction-related elevated turbidity, and channel adjustment are not anticipated to impact this species. The project may affect designated critical habitat for bull trout because: • Lake Washington is designated as critical habitat for bull trout. • Dredging will result in temporary water quality impacts (sediment releases) into Lake Washington (PCE 8). • The prey base for bull trout originating in the Cedar River could be affected as a result of project impacts to spawning habitat for sockeye salmon and other species. The project is not likely to adversely affect designated critical habitat for bull trout because: • Impacts to PCE 8 are considered insignificant and discountable: • • Although sediment laden waters will enter Lake Washington, the extent of increased turbidity will be localized around the mouth of the Cedar River, and is considered insignificant. Water quality monitoring will be conducted during construction and BMPs such as silt curtains will be used to reduce water quality impacts to a level that is considered discountable. Water quality monitoring will ensure compliance with a Section 401 Water Quality Certification permit. • Project impacts to habitat, when combined with project-related environmental mitigation and habitat enhancements, are not expected to affect populations of fish species that may be prey base for bull trout, and are therefore discountable. 8.0 ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT EVALUATION The Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act, as amended by the Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996 (Public Law, 104-267), includes a mandate that NMFS must identify EFH for federally managed marine fish, and federal agencies must consult with NMFS on activities that may adversely affect EFH. The Pacific Fisheries Management Council has designated EFH for the Pacific salmon fishery, and federally managed groundfish and coastal pelagic fisheries. The objective of the EFH assessment is to describe potential adverse effects to designated EFH for federally managed fisheries species within the proposed action area. It also describes conservation measures proposed to avoid, minimize, or otherwise offset potential adverse effects to designated EFH resulting from the proposed action. 8.1. Designated EFH within the Action Area There is no habitat for coastal pelagic or groundfish species within the action area. The Pacific salmon fishery management unit includes Chinook salmon, coho salmon (0. kisutch), and pink salmon (0. gorbuscha). Pacific salmon designated EFH includes all streams, lakes, ponds, wetlands, and other water bodies currently or historically accessible to salmon in Washington State, except above impassable barriers. Estuarine and marine areas extend from the nearshore and tidal submerged environments within Washington territorial waters out to the full extent of the exclusive economic zone offshore (PFMC, 1999). Therefore, the Cedar River is designated EFH for Pacific salmon. GEoENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page44 File No. 0693·07J.OO 8.2. Effects of the Proposed Action on EFH As stated in the BA analysis above, the project will alter habitat within and adjacent to the Cedar River. Project impacts will include removal of suitable spawning substrate and associated benthic invertebrates within the Cedar River, removal of riparian vegetation, and temporary impacts to water quality. These impacts directly affect salmon EFH as well as habitat which support salmon prey. Although the substrate exposed by the dredging will be of similar composition as that removed, and proposed project-specific mitigation is anticipated to offset impacts to fish habitat, the appropriate effect determination for Pacific salmon EFH is may adversely affect. 9.0 CONCLUSIONS The Cedar River Section 205 Maintenance Dredging Project will involve removal of accumulated sediments from the Cedar River channel as well as removal of riparian vegetation in river access and bank stabilization areas. The project will require the use of heavy machinery including excavators and potentially a vibratory pile driver. Project impacts will include construction noise, direct impacts to river and riparian habitat, and impacts to water quality. However, the project has been carefully designed to minimize these effects and mitigation has been identified to offset unavoidable impacts as described in this report. The action area for the project was defined as the sum of extents of all project effects on the environment and comprised a 1,774-foot radius around the project site. The action area was largely dictated by the extent that noise associated with vibratory pile driving could permeate the environment. The extent of aquatic impacts has been delineated to occur in the Cedar River from the 1-405 bridge downstream to Lake Washington, extending up to 300 feet into the Lake. It was determined that fish species are the only ESA-listed species that may be present in the action area for the project, including Chinook salmon, steelhead and bull trout. The project was determined to be likely to adversely affect (LAA) Puget Sound ESU Chinook salmon and Puget Sound DPS steel head trout. The project is not likely to adversely affect (NLAA) yellow-billed cuckoo and Coastal/Puget Sound DPS bull trout. The project was determined to be likely to adversely affect (LAA) designated critical habitat for Chinook salmon. The project was determined to not adversely modify (NAM) proposed critical habitat for both yellow-billed cuckoo and steel head, with provisional effect determinations of no effect (NE) for yellow-billed cuckoo critical habitat and likely to adversely affect (LAA) for steelhead critical habitat, should they be designated prior to completion of the project. Also, the project was determined to be not likely to adversely affect (NLAA) bull trout critical habitat. Additionally, the project may adversely affect EFH for Pacific salmon. 10.0 REFERENCES 61 FR 26255-26320 1996. 50 CFR Part 17. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Designation of Critical Habitat for the Marbled Murrelet; Final Rule. Federal Register, Vol. 62, No. 102. 70 FR 52630-52853. 2005. 50 CFR Part 226. Endangered and Threatened Species; Designation of Critical Habitat for 12 Evolutionary Significant Units of West Coast Salmon and Steel head in Washington, Oregon and Idaho. Federal Register, Vol. 70, No. 170. GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 45 File No. 0693·073·00 71 FR 66007-66061. 50 CFR Part 17. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for the Contiguous United States Distinct Population Segment of the Canada Lynx; Final Rule. Federal Register, Vol. 71, No. 217. 2006. 71 FR 15666-15680. 50 CFR Part 223. Listing Endangered and Threatened Species and Designating Critical Habitat, 12-Month Finding on Petition to List Puget Sound Steel head as an Endangered or Threatened Species under the Endangered Species Act; Proposed Rule; Petition Finding. Federal Register, Vol. 71, No. 60. 2006. 73 FR 47325-47522. 2008. 50 CFR Part 17. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised Designation of Critical Habitat for the Northern Spotted Owl; Final Rule. Federal Register, Vol. 73, No. 157. 75 FR 63897-64070. 2010. 50 CFR Part 17. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised Designation of Critical Habitat for Bull Trout in the Coterminous United States; Final Rule. Federal Register, Vol. 75, No. 200. 78 FR 2726-2796. 2013. 50 CFR Part 226. Endangered and Threatened Species; Designation of Critical Habitat for Lower Columbia River Coho Salmon and Puget Sound Steelhead; Proposed Rule. Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 9. January 14, 2013. 78 FR 61622-61666. 2013. 50 CFR Part 17. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed Threatened Status for the Western Distinct Population Segment of the Yellow-billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus); Proposed Rule. Federal Register, Vol. 78 No. 192. October 3, 2013. Burton, K., A. Bosworth, and H. Berge. 2011. Cedar River Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) Redd and Carcass Surveys: Annual Report, 2010 Return Year. Seattle Public Utilities, August 2011. GeoEngineers, Inc. 2014a. Mitigation Plan -Final Report, Cedar River Maintenance Dredging Project, Renton, Washington. Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District, on behalf of City of Renton, December 4, 2014. GeoEngineers File No. 0693-073-00. GeoEngineers, Inc. 2014b. Dredge Material Characterization Report; Lower Cedar River Section 205 Flood Hazard Reduction Project, Renton, Washington. Prepared for Dredged Material Management Office on behalf of City of Renton, December 3, 2014. GeoEngineers File No. 0693-073-00. lllinworth & Rodkin. 2007. Compendium of Pile Driving Sound Data. Prepared for The California Department of Transportation. Available at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/bio/files/pile_driving_snd_comp9_27 _07.pdf Kerwin, J., 2001. Salmon and Steel head Habitat Limiting Factors Report for the Cedar -Sammamish Basin (Water Resource Inventory Area 8). Washington Conservation Commission. Olympia, WA. King County. 2013. King County Lake Monitoring Buoys. Updated November 14, 2013. Available at: https://green. kin gcou nty.gov /la ke-buoy/h istorica I Profi I es.as px GeoENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 46 File Na. 0693-073-00 NatureServe. 2013. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http;//www.natureserve.org/explorer. (Accessed: October 15, 2013). National Marine Fisheries Service. 2012. Status of ESA Listings and Critical Habitat Designations for West Coast Salmon & Steelhead. NMFS, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce. Updated October 31, 2012. Available at: http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/protected species/species list/species lists.html. Thomas, J., E. Forsman, J. Lint, E. Mes low, B. Noon, and J. Verner. 1990. A conservation strategy for the Northern Spotted Owl. lnteragency scientific committee to address the conservation of the Northern Spotted Owl. Portland, OR. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1997. Final Detailed Project Report and Environmental Impact Statement, Cedar River Section 205, Renton, Washington. June 1997. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. Grizzly Bear Recovery. Available at http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/mammals/grizzlv/ .. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2013a. Listed and Proposed Endangered and Threatened Species and Critical Habitat; Candidate Species; and Species of Concern in King County as Prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Western Washington Fish and Wildlife Office. Revised September 3, 2013. Available at: http://www.fws.gov/wafwo/speciesmap new.html. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2013b. Critical Habitat Portal: Online Mapper and Spatial Data Distribution. Available at http://criticalhabitat.fws.gov/. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2014a. List of Threatened and Endangered Species that May Occur in Your Proposed Project Location, and/or May Be Affected By Your Proposed Project. Consultation Tracking Number: 01EWFW00-2015-SLl-0155. December 05, 2014. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2014b. Species Fact Sheet: Streaked Horned Lark (Eremophila alpestris strigata). Washington Fish and Wildlife Office. Available at: http;//www.fws.gov/ wafwo/ s pecies/Fact%20sh eets/strea ked horned la rkfi n a I. pdf United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2014c. Species Fact Sheet: Oregon Spotted Frog (Rana pretiosa). Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office. Available at: http://www. fws .gov/ o rego nfwo/S pee i es/Da ta/0 rego nS potted Frog/ Washington Administrative Code. 2003. 173-201A: Water Quality Standards For Surface Waters OfThe State Of Washington. Washington State Department of Ecology, RCW 90.48. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2002a. Lake Washington -Cedar Chinook. Available at: http://wdfw.wa.gov/webmaps/salmonscape/sasi/full stock rpts/1144.pdf. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2002b. Lake Washington Winter Steelhead. Available at: http://wdfw.wa.gov/webmaps/salmonscape/sasi/full stock rpts/6154.pdf. GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 47 File No. 0693·073-00 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2013a. Priority Habitat and Species Map in the Vicinity of T23R05E Sections 7, 17 and 18. October 16, 2013. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2013b. SalmonScape Application, Version 4.0. Available at http://wdfw.wa.gov/mapping/salmonscape/index.html. (Accessed November 14, 2013.) Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2013c. Gray Wolf Conservation and Management: Wolf Packs in Washington, Pack Statistics (as of March 2013). Available at http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/gray wolf/packs/. (Accessed November 14, 2013.) Washington State Department of Natural Resources. 2011. Washington Natural Heritage Program GIS Database. Updated November 4, 2011. Washington State Department of Transportation. 2013. Biological Assessment Preparation for Transportation Projects: Advanced Training Manual. Available at http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/ Environment/Biology/BA/default.htm, revised February and March 2013. Washington State Department of Transportation. 2014. 1-405 -Springbrook Creek Wetland & Habitat Mitigation Bank -Complete June 2009. http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/i405/springbrook/. Williams, R. W., R. M. Laramie, and J. J. Ames. 1975. A Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmon Utilization, Volume 1: Puget Sound Region. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (Formerly Washington Department of Fisheries), November 1975. GEOENGINEER~ December 9, 2014 Page 48 File No. 0693·073·00 ,, ,· Downstream Lim it of Lighting Impacts Study (mouth) . J-•1 ·,· p .. ,; n ........... " ... Jiqicn ·.~ i : ' .. ' Project Reach - \h. \ '·~ •• ~.o· ~ "· \ ~ / Ren Io n .•,11._1~ F,':"'."I .; . ,, > ) /., I , • :l!: ~ ., _ .. "' ', ·, L..1-..I Ro:nt o n lll~lll,,nd , S<;il<l~ / '. • f.l OL't'J lilHl f , ••• fl• J J ..... '· • ~ I .. \~ \ -" fl :/JV .:c :; ~"'"' ft GI.,, /~\),' 'C >< E ... ... N H 0 M : :' < .,. r -Downstream Limit of Scour Monitoring Study (RM 1 .2 3) ·/ f'•· I ',. .:. l cri f •• ,, r u (.ol•I . o~.S . :• '. ,: .. ~---------~-j , ... oa,•P. llo0'11J LN'•J • 1-:~ !11 l..r:tn.ll P.11 -.:;·,-., ' •• 1,11.'; Upstream Limits of Lighting Impacts and Scour Monitoring Studies (RM 2.1) -;;-., Springbroo k Creek Wetland Mitigation Bank \-..... ~ M.,;t:°.;J (".,,1 .. , Ki;nt Roya l Hills Replacement Spa wni ng Channel (2010) t' ,,L• ·,. Landsburg V,1le1 . ~ \ ' ~· Groundwater Side Channel (1998) ;'~ ~------'" N W.E s --. r " l.'.\.1 ,, I Service Layer Credits: Sources: Esri , HERE, Delorme, TomTom, lntermap, increment P Corp ., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS , NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kad as ter NL. O rdnance S ur.1ey , Es ri Jap an , METI , Esri Ch ina (Ho ng Kong ), swisstopo, Mapmylndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community 4,000 0 4 ,000 X :;c ti <3 12 0 M Sources: Esri , HERE , Delorme, USGS, lntermap, increment P Corp., NRCAN, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri (Tha iland). TomTom , t ao contn Mapmylndia , © OpenStree M ·b utors, and Feet '-----'"-...:..::::.._...:..."--...._ ______ ...;::t.;1 the GIS User Community Project Location and I Notes: •. 1. The locations of all featu res shown are approximate. Off-Site Mitigation Areas lil 2. This drawing is for info rmation purposes. It is intended to assist in £ showing features discussed in an attached document. Ge0Engineers1 Inc. -g can not guarantee the accuracy and content o f e lectronic files. The master ~ file is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc . and w ill ser.,e as the officia l record of i this commu nication o. 3. It is unlawful to copy or reproduce al l or any part thereof, whethe r for personal use or resa le , w ithout permission. 0 ;:: Data Sources: ESRI Data & Maps j Projection : NAD 1983 HA RN StatePlane Washington North FIPS 4601 Feet Cedar River Maintenance Dredge Project Renton , Washington GEoENGINEERS C} Figure 1 v ~ .; i al 0 gi rj :,: ~ er a. "' ~ Data Source: aeria l image and street laye rs from ESRI . Legend ~ Cedar River ,, ··,. __ ,, Elliot Channel ~ Location of Proposed Work 0 Action Area Projection: NAO 1983 HARN StatePlane Washington North FIPS 4601 Feet Notes: 1. The locations of all features shown are approximate. 2 . This drawing is for info rmation pu rposes. It is intended to assist in show ing features discussed in an attached document. GeoEngineers, Inc cannot g ua rantee the accuracy and content of electronic files. The mas ter file is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official reco rd of this communication . 3.000 s 0 Feet Action Area Map 3,000 Cedar River Maintenance Dredging Project Renton, Washington GEOENGINEERS C) Figure 2 .i:: 1ii a. L_ _____________ ___'.::::===================='.:======::::::::'...: APPENDIX A JARPA Sheets \ ' , OKANOGAN PROJECT VICINITY I \ti£.NATCHEE i' '· ,.1·: COL'\/MBIA RIVER CRESCENT BAR E~~;BURG \ J_ WASHINGTON KEY MAP LAKE WASHINGTON LOCATION MAP D 1000 2000 SCALE IN FEET ' I \ ''. COI..Vlll.E ? ·, . \ ·-._. . _J PURPOSE· MAI NTENANCE OF SEC TI ON 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUC TION PRO JECT I LOCATI ON· 47' 29' 37.00"N, 122 ' 12· 48.02"W ADJACE NT PROPERT Y OWN ERS: DATUM: NAV088 CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING 1. CITY OF RENTO N 5. REN TON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AU THORITY 3 . REN TO N FACILI TIES 6 . WASHI NGTON DNR I AN D OPERATIONS CTR 7 . LEI, YK 4. CON DOM INIU MS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMEN TS WILLIAMS AVE) 9. HE ITM AN -BODEN, S 10. AMBROSE. K VICINITY MAP APPLICA TI ON BY: CITY OF RE N TO N S7, 17, 18 T23N R5E DRAWING INDEX 1. VIC INITY MAP 2. SITE KEY MAP 3 . PLAN/PROFILE (STA 0 +00-8+0 0 ) 4. PLAN/PROFILE (STA 8+00-16+00) 5 . PLAN/PROFILE (STA 16+00-24+00) 6 . PLAN/PROFILE (STA 24+00-32+00) 7 . PLAN/PR OFILE (STA 32+00-40+00) 8 . PLAN/PROFILE (STA 40+00-48+00) 9 . PLAN/PROFILE (STA 48 +00-56+00) 10 . PL AN PROFILE (STA 56+00-64+00 ) 11. DREDGING SECTIONS 12. BANK STA BILI ZATION SECTI ONS 13 . BANK STAB ILIZA TI ON SECTI ONS 14. OU TFA LL REPA IR DETAI LS 15. TE MPORARY CONSTRUC TI ON ACC ESS PL AN 16. TE MPORARY CONSTRUC TI ON ACCESS PL AN 17. MITIGA TI ON/PLANTING PLAN (STA 0 +00-8+00) 18. MITIGATI ON/PLANTING PLAN (STA 8 +00-1 6+0 0) 19. MI TIGATI ON/PLANTING PLAN (STA 16+00-24+00) 20. MITIGATION/PLANTING PL AN (STA 2 4+00-32+00) 21. MITIGATION /PLANTIN G PLAN (STA 32+00-40+00) 22. MITI GATION/PLANTING PLAN (STA 4 0+00-48+00) 23. MITI GATION/PLANTING PLAN (STA 48+00-56+00) 24 . MITI GA TION/PLANTING PLAN (STA 56+00-64+00) 2 5 . PLAN TI NG SECTIONS 26 . PLANTING SECTIONS 27. PLANT LI ST 1 28. PLANT LI ST 2 29. PLANTING DETAILS PROPOSED: MAINTE NAN CE DREDGING , REPA IR EXISTI NG BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STA BILIZ ATIO N ANO OUTFALL REPA IRS REFER ENCE N UMBER: ill;_ CEDAR RIVER AL RENTON ~ KING SHEET OF 29 STATE: WA SHI NGTON .D.A.IE.;_ 6 / 2 4 / 1 4 LEGEND •-•··•··•··•·-· HAUL ROUTE ---DREDGING CE NTERLIINE ----PROPER TY LINE PURPO SE· MAIN TE NANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOO D I HAZARD REDU CT ION PROJECT LOCATI ON: 47· 29' 37.00"N. 122· 12· 48.02"W ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS· DATUM ; NAVD88 1. CITY OF RE NTON 5. REN TO N HOUSIN G 2. THE BOE ING COMPANY AUTHORITY 3. RENTON FACILI TIES 6 . WA SH IN GTON DN R I AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 8 . F & K IN VESTEMENTS WI LLIAM S AVE) 9. HEITMAN -BODEN, S 10. AMBROSE, K TH E B OEIN G COMPAN Y SITE KEY MAP 0 400 800 SCALE IN FEET CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING SITE KEY MAP APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RE NTON ) ~ N 8 TH ST PROPOSED: MAIN TE NANCE DREDG ING. REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS REFEREN CE NUMBER: .Lt,L CEDAR RI VER AT: RENTON COUNT Y: KI NG SHEET 2 OF 29 .s.IAIE.;_ WASHINGTON .PA.IE;_ 6/24/14 ,. ,,,,,,..,,5 ~ 0 O C ~O:l>:::0-iOj;:> ;:o 0 0ZITII:::j()-1 c5o~rri-< i5 ~oooro 0 -1~ ·· (!l~~Z~TJ-0.P.I:C l>Z;:oTJZ:;:o;:o-.Jp)> rij~~b 0 ~ii~~! '-'UlOrO--! 0.0:Urri z::::;o~ ·oz ~virii:C -< l,.i;!Jl> ui Ul"'IJ ...Jmz n l> o0 0 n ;rj z ~ ocrri ~<.OOJ-..JOl-< UT~ l~ ~ p· . . . . ~~(/1 :l>ITlr~;t,-::U N ~ ~s~~Gi~St ....:~::::r ;:o:s;: II-i NO 0 o:i,,:::<::~zoo o ·fflZ ()lz_ 0 :::ozJ:>.i,.nN J°'ll~ -i:::;Ic!~-io ::,,::gU: ~-<~ ~ B (J1 ~M o ~ z i ~ z::s;: z z :l> o ~~ ;:o G) ;§ 8 ---< 00 u, "' s:: )> z { .-.. -I ;,, w -u m () ~ ~ r z m =' )> )> CJ §1 0 z zJ> ~+~ O:n O;n m:D "OQ CJ----< I < ~ODTI :nm ~+r m:n ~om CJ z O C) ---< ._, 0 -z z C) u, I I" I" " I ~ 0::, .. ~z ---< "0 .. r'l r1l c,, Z 0 ---< ,, A O ,0 oz z ozrrr:;::: TJ G'l 2;J Cr'l::'5)> " < =;r::-:(/)z "' ~ ;:o ~~gM .. rzc:i5;: ;:oArnz riU1:t:-o -o-i zrri ~~ ~)>AO ;;a~(.11:::0 Vl,-..... HTJ Nl>-o .?>~Q "' " ::::!CZ ONCO " ,. z»· " u, ,. ='" _,,. I ~z z~~ .i,. ~ o-;;,,: " z " ,. ~ '-',' EAST LEVEE STATI0/\1NG ~ 2 EXISTING RIPRAP ---24"¢ KING COUNTY METRO SEWER LINE 0 0-+ . N , WOOD BULKHEAD =--·- / . ' . /~---- -----------------------=-- PARK ACCESS RO CITY BOAT RAMP -~--==--~:::;~=-;:;--~------,c:coi,rssrirnatuJCc:ii11-oN AccEss "') 2~ g O 0 I CEDAR RIVER TRAIL PARK J ~ ~ ~----"' g + ~ --!~-OH'H -----;-Ot C',<W ---OHW / APPROXIMATE EXISTING-~---···\ ·:::::::-:-i -. ---_J_ --_j =>" cc = - WA DNR PROPERTY ~·-oHw---<,Hw---c++W----"""-'"----"-. __ :5i..,----C,,,W --ZA "~ ---< 0 z ""''"_,::_--""" --_.,-l)!t' .. - bl-L I = 7 t:J , -. .,..,., --fa.-,.,,n --s:,.. ,,.._::;:_. CtiW -_.:::~ ; 2 " 8+00 § I -! 121-'l.CHANNEL T I / -0+50{ ~ 0+00 /1+00 2+00 gts -/-I-----1---- t; 6_ 6+00 ,::i 3+00 4+00 5+00 7+00 w "' §; ------1------1-- f-START OF DREDGING STA 0+00 ~ CEDAR RIVER ---1------1-- t; 6_ E.0. CHANNEL --I--- o I 2 TRANSITION TO EXISTING GRADE (BENEATH BRIDGE)-=t-=======:::i::::=====::::::::====c::::=====±===:r:=======::=:::;:::;i: C~r\ ~iFR ~~~~~~n.::,f---~-~-"·"""cc.-=cc-=cc,.,cc'.'~CC. Cll<W "'" ~Hf-.......... oii, .......... -'"<~ ..... -flt<~ ............... ..'.,~ 20 --C+<W -~HW OHW -__ Q"Wr __ C>HW __ :_::;, 20• ·_-_-_-ffi-.-----.-... -------t+,L PROPERTY -..,5 a~ "'5 :s -~ ., __ .,_.,._., __ ., __ .,_., __ •-~ ., __ ., ........ __ ., .,__ n c;~~---- / ~EVEE STATIONING _______ a o r:1-, o o --0 0 l!:!!J. -0 0 ------...t:+-'-FRON T AGE RD ..... + •··• _., -----•-........... _ + :_ + ;!: __ _ __ _ --------V Lil "" .... _.,. .. _"" ., __ ., _., m •--• "" .,. __ ., __ , •··• _ .,_ • ""'" .,. _., "' "' EXISTING RIPRAP PROTECTION CONSTRUCTION ACCESS 25 ...I I B.O. BRIDGE EL +24.73' I TT""""""TT '-'' APPROXIMATE EXISTING WOOD BULKHEAD PLAN 25 20 z '3 D w ~o Do ~o oo"' ._+~ -o-Ct:: •• ~ ~ ~ _j 0 50 100 SCALE IN FEET 'iZ LAKE WA HIGH WATER EL +18.60' 'iZ LAKE WA LOW WATER EL +16.75' 20 w "' ~ AREA TO BE DREDGED mmw -< 15 "'- §; 15 -< /~--~--~----------------------------------------~t--------"'->-rn, ~ z >- ~ z ~-.. 1.-" ...... SLOPE=O% g 10 -< > w ~ w 0 10 <= 3' w ~ w -------------------------------1---------- B O DREDGE CUT EL +11 56' TRANSITION TO EXISTING GRADE (BENEATH BRIDGE) t' OVERDREDGE ALLOWANCE 5 NOTE OHW ELEVATION VARIES. SEE PLANS A\'D SECTIONS 0 0 o+oo 1+00 2+00 LEGEND -------PROPERTv LINE §j CATCH BASIN ---------MAJOR CONTOUR >--OUTFALL MINOR CONTOUR 6" > TREE --Ol<W ---CHH --OHW ~ CONSTRUCTION ACCESS ., __ ., __ ., __ ., __ ., __ ., __ ., __ ., HAUL ROUTE 3+00 HORIZ. 0 VERT. 0 KING COUNTY METRO SEWER LINE 5 T.0. PIPE EL +0.50' 4+00 5+00 6+00 7+00 8+00 °~ -_'-1 PROFILE -Cl) 50 100 5 10 g z SCALE IN FEET ill m ,. '"Nc">I ~c ~8~~19>~ -o c:5o~fTl-< ;r,.ooomo ·· .. ~~;:gzg..,, -f'-IS::: Z::oTJZ:::o -...J:i,.;t,, ~~~bciSi""O~~z 5t0Qrn-1 w:::oM z::300 ·oz (Jl(J)fTlS::z '-":::o:i,. (Jl C/l -U :--JrriZ n > ooo ii Z ::i:;OcfTl -< zz'oo __.<D(X)'-JO'I u, -::::f..,, 9· .. ' . !-:i;::;~(11 ~~..,,M~£:~ ~ "1J ~ ~~:::~1f:1i ;c:;_2~ u:,z_ ;,;:~:22 2 ~ """~N _fTl I Z --1--l:r: c ~-lo Am~ o-<o :s:: o 01 8(/) z C .. N, ""Tl fTl---l o ~ z ~ r .z~ ~ ~ > g "' 0 v,Z uJ s::: )> z t --I 2!~-u mo \;)>r zm =! )> )>o 'iio::,z z)> m+~ O:c "O:c m n O Q :C :!..!.."Tl 0< 00>_ :cm ~+r m:c ~ 8 m 8 b......... -z ~ 1§~1" "' z --l ~ :::0 ('"J •• fTl fTl ,. Z 0 ::,::: d :t> 0 -Z ;::o ..,, ~ ~ N ~ '° ::::or~ ~I~ ~"' " > N V, ,. I ~z .. "' d z z 0 ~ QZfTlS:::: CfTlX;t> ::;j:::Ev:iz ;t> w::::!---l r;t,.Zrn 'z0~ ;:uAroz c;:J~~~ ~;t>;''\:, :::0!;!;!(/):::0 UJC--!fTl N>O >i:!?0 :::fez ONC> Z;>" >=''° z~c;:J 0-> '5 J ,, / EAST LEVEE :.1: --". I, STATIO:-..IING 0 0 + <O g -/- :!' I 11 ,-----:-\ 1111 EXISTING GABION \_ g ,','+ g BASKETS \ ~ -- 2', EXISTING RIPRAP PROTECTION\ -EXISTl~G WOOD-~ .... --Q~W '10 '-~• ---oo, ---~,_8,U;-;;:~;=C-_,,,-. -oo• ,o--oo•--- 15 16 JJJU CEDAR RIVER TRAIL PARK " ~ _[ 't. CHANNEL 8+00 9+00 10+00 11+00 12+00 C> -+------+------+----+------+-- " ,, ~ CEDAR RIVER " " ~ o_ -PARK ACCESS RD - 0 0 +· N· N --"*'~ ~·-: 13+00 ·g··- ~ --8 -/- ;!, . '-· ..,,. 0· ,-gll~ +- 'i2. WETLAND A TECTION AP PRO '~EXISTING RIPR r EXISTING WOOD ---£ULKHE~~°""~ '\; _ --OH '•o,'li( --20><•• ---0111, ---"1" ----a11)'1~ 'O 14+00 15+00 16+00 --+-----+----+---- START 0.1625% SLOPE STA 16+00 ,,., ___ ,£,:,;,'.,'.,_'.;J" -oo•---m,--,,o, . 10 -m,--oo, -~oo•--,,, -Ye,,---,,. ___ ,,. __ _ -C<-<W---c,,w---,;,aw--{><W --OH~ ---01,w o«w -'!'--<:><W -- -,,,., ~ I ' I I / I I ?~. 25 20 8 /0 0 0 O O O ~OJ 6 + @ + + / ri/+-+ + o od. " o O ~ o --.. ·-•-·•--•--• -•-~---c .. -•~•-FRONTAGE RD• •~•----•--•--•--•--• -•--•-~ -•--•--•--•-•--•--•--• .2 .. -•--•--•--,/.... .. ~ .. •--.. ·-•--....... :f!: .. -•--•--•--•--•--•-.. •-~= CONSTRUCTION ACCESS WEST LEVEE STATIONING APPROXIMATE EXISTING WOOD BULKHEAD 0 PLAN 5_0 SCALE IN FEET 100 .., EXISTING RIPRAP PROTECTION CONSTRUCTION ACCESS (50' WIDE, TYP.) w '-'o zo « . IO '-'o~ +ITT w~ . o-::::: 25 20 <O <O 11s LEXISTING GRADE if_ j'.:: ...J '-'"' w 1 1\REA TO BE DREDGED sz LAKE WA LOW WATER EL +1675' ,,,,.._ ------------------- ,,,,. '~---------------------------------------------§! 15 3 ~ ~ g F10 ~ ".J w 5 0 NOTE OHW ELEVATION VAR ES, SEE PLANS AND SECTIONS 8+00 9+00 LEGEND --c-~·---o,,~-- MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CCNTOUR OHW •--•--•--•--•--•--•----HAUL ROUTE ~ CONSTRUCTION AC::~ESS 10+00 eJ CATCH BASIN >---OUTFALL 6" > TREE C 'N'ETLANOS 11+00 SLOPE=O% 8.0. DREDGE CUT EL +11.56' 12+00 13+00 PROFILE HORIZ. 0 50 100 VERT. 0 5 10 SCALE IN FEET 14+00 15+00 16+00 ~ ~ 1§ 10 F 5 ;a w ~ w o 1 _((,J .::::l oi -I ~ z HJ ,. "'"'" 5 ~ ::!EO;t,,Al---l("')~~ ;;o rozrriI=i ::::! czoZJTl-<fTIO Ul ~8odcc 0 2 ;2; r'.1 Ul~~z~..,, -1>,I:i,: ...._ ~;;o..,,Z:::o -...J;t,,:t-_....c :=-:i> l'T1 'N-~::::: ::::!r/''z ---u N:i>::i ..._,VJ or-G--! ;::o tOAlrr, z:::;o§--l ·oz fJIUlri~ -< lol;;o> U1 (l)"U .....ifTlz ~ ~ ~8:g~ -< z z'no ~(O(X)-...JO'.I u, ;::o. ::::1..,, p· . . . . !-".1 N§U! >"I"T'Jr::f:r>-:::0 N ~ ~~ri:,.-[!]~~'.i _:;g:::l 2i~,c-<e,i5C,i N.2~ .,..,. Az z p JTI uiz_ '"-'2=' --, -1>-01'0 f'11 2 ---l---lIC~---lo ca~ o-<0 ;;;:: o 01 ;,:;§lll z c·· ~ ..,, fTlni O o:[l Z :\,: ,--~~ ~ ?; ~ g ~z o vi s::: )> )> .-.. z ~~-u rilo ~::!; ~m ~CJ>Z Z~ "/6',j ~:o no:O :0 ~~~ ~rii ""~r m:o ;;: om o '.; 0 (;) 0....... -z z (;) ru ru §' EAST LEVEE STATIONING -coNSTRUCTION ACCESS :~--.. L -~8-----'-,! . Li.."cc_l__l_ I ___ JU~-~I __ 0 I I I ·• •. I I ·• -~-·. ' I I · .• ' ' I L · -. ___ + ------_ g -----___ o 'LU~~'· -~ I I I i f. ·. • :11 0 0 + 0 0 + n n ~ ~ : to N N 2;; _.,..,,, 0 0 + m N '0 ~-, o _,/;; / n: ~ REMOVE BULKHEAD TRAIL PARK a ;;; ND B ~ 25 .,:g _:"·= ~ -~l,"· --ow• -- -·:_::,___ / . Ill EXISTING WOOD CEDAR RIVER -aa'fl' __ -CH¥-----~_-~-_ -<'»<~-1: Ql,W-_ _ _ --, ·, _ . 00.. -~aw,~--,.11,---0<n• --,-~:-O«w--~ L ljXISTING ----?o.,w --_ ··:itt.,- 16+00 _[ 't_ CHANNEL 17+00 18+00 -----+----+-- START 0.1625% SLOPE STA 16+00 \6 r t:.O. CHANNEL --a,w--D11w- 19+00 -~- /;; 6_ ... rn o. ·,s 23+00 20+00 \1 2 1+00 H~ 22+00 --+----·-~--~~----+---- ~ CEDAR RIVER 0 START OF TRANSITION TO 80' WIDTH BOTIOM STA 24+00 ffim[~~~~j g + N N --~---~~~--~ ! 1 . -··• •-·•·•--~ STA 23+90 c~;~;~-~~~;~-.. :;c~-; ;t--~~-;s-;-:ctR/P/Ap--~~;-AREA T~o~~T:~:~:~~D ACCESS I ...... ---.. ___ .... -........ ,. ... -•· 25 20 (50' WIDE, TYP.) PROTECTION ---AND BANK REPAIR MAINTENANCE AREA 10u "' A~PRQXIMATE EXISTING _J I Q SQ rn~ w 0o zo ~g{O "+~ wlD,..: o-:-:~ <C"' . "'~~ "~ w WOOD BULKHEAD SCALE IN FEET EXISTING FLOOOWALL WEST LEVEE STATIONING :fi 24+00 sz LAKE WA HIGH WATER EL +18.60' sz LAKE WA LOW WATER EL + 16. 75' ----\../ EXISTING GRA~E ~----------, _I\ / ------/.,........_ __ __,, / ______ _.. ----- ;; " El ;; " as ~ 25 20 00 f 15 ~ 15 3 -------------------------- ~11"1" Fli O ;--:-1 •• ~z ---l ;:< ~ ~ u, Z O ~ )> A O " ~~z~ N "' (0 :::o I?? ~~ m" '-,. N~ ,-I ~z ,. " b z t;: SLOPE=0.1625% ~ I 10 <C ~ > d -B.O.:EDGE~U~~ARIES-~ ----1~ Ov£RDREDGE~LLOWANCE--~ OZM?;: CJTIX;t,, :;:j:EUlz >"rngj=;j r:=~0~ ;::o;i:::roz 1"'1(/);t,,o ""11---lZl"'l .!"::r:,.AO ;::o~(/):::0 Ul~:;!8 }>i::J::19 ::jcz ONC> z;,.· ~,, ::t>QfTl Zzc> 0-)> a; 5 NOTE OHW ELEVATION VARIES, SEE PLANS AND SECIONS 0 L.JL__J____J_..J.__[_..L__J__..L__j__..L__L_.J__j__.J__J__.J__j__.J__J__L_....L_L__J____jL__J____J_..J.____J_..J.__l_..L__J__..L__LJ 16+uu ---20+00 21+00 22+00 23+00 24+00 17+00 19+00 18+00 LEGEND MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR --u•w---oow--OHW "'--.. --.. --.. --.. --.......... HAUL ROUTE J>--TlDEFLEX >--OUFALL D mfil!lll . . ~ ~ WETLANDS "REPAIR" BANK STABILIZATION "MAINTENANCE" BANK STABILIZATION PROFILE HORIZ. 0 50 100 VERT. 0 5 10 SCALE IN FEET MITIGATION ~ CONSTRUCTION ACCESS 6" > TREE e) CATCH BASIN t;: 6 10 F <C ~ w 5 o 1 _!:3 _:::j oil i m ,. "'"'c"l;I ~ LO ,o :E O l>-:::0--1(') }> :t>-"1J rozfT1I:::;o o c5o~rri--<!;2z g:i ~oo~~o--t-· ·· (/)~~ fT1..,,"1J .... :r::s:: :,.~:::o..,,z::u:::i:i-..J:i,.:r,. ri'i~~~0S2~~~z -VJ0CncjS3co.:::oM z--10z-1 Oz (Jl{llri,:S:: -< '-";;o> (J1 0(/1~ 0 6~~ 3:1 z :focfTI -< ~z'no ~coOl-..JO'I u,;;o· ::::!..,, p· .... !-?N§(/) ~~..,,M~~Pl ~-u~ gi:iJ"':sgc;J',i ,;2g O;..:;,:;:;,;:zO§ P ·rri Z (!)z_ c-..;::i;:i .f>-ol'.J -(Tll z --1--l:r: !):1--10 ;,;:~ri'i §-<g .. R (Jl olll • ..,, rr-r--1 o l'.,"!z:E , z\2 z z :r,. o :nS2 ::0 0 < 8 vi !!:: )> ,. ---z ~~-u iilo £:1>£: Zm g ~ z ~ ~ ':! + ,:;-() ::Il ··o::Dm " 0 o o::Il --< I < ~ c., Tl ::D m " "' r m ::D r::+m o z O c;) b O _ z....., z "'ij"E ~ g :-;11:-:- c:i z -< "' n .. r'l fT1 m Z 0 --< )> 0 ::'.':: § ;;o ~ z "' 0 - N iii co ;;o l?:i ~~ "' " -----,. N V, -,.I '::::;.Z ... "' ci z c;) ~ OZfT1S:: CJTJ~:i,. ::;:j::EVlz :t>rogrtj F~05; ;:u;:i:;roz ~~~~ ~J>-7\:, ::0 OJ (/J ;:u u,F--1rri ~~~ --<rz ciNG'l Z)>" --<,u l>-Qrr, Zz-u 0-,. '" -2Jaw - 25 20 "' ----- EAST LEVEE STATIONING 8 .,. ;:,: 2~ 0 0 + ~ ~ I CEDAR RIVER I TRAIL PARK --- 8 .,. ifs START OF TRANSITION TO 80' WlDTH BOTTOM STA 24+00 ------PAF?k ACctss RD - 8 .,. /fj ---- 0 0 + "' n ~ EXISTING WATER LINE CONSTRUCTION NEW STABILIZATION STA 31+16 0 0 ~ I I : / 4 / .;// / '< 4 / '·''. ~-f j_ . < 0 . ~. -100,,w ----"tll,.,_-.:: -0,11, ---llf,lli: - --..., I 10 -,OHW -· --(><w '-. --Ctiw " -~ .:_ __ "''w ___ ~0><;: ~N__D01 ,?~ ~~~ .. SITI_ON "~T!, _2~:~o _: _0,11, __ -CW1w ,- ;; "' as u, ::,_ _[_ ti CHANNEL 2s+.Zio 26+00 21+00 1_8 2a+oo -----+-----+------+--- ... 0 q ~ CEDAR RIVER \0 ... 0 o_ MAINTENANCE AREA EXISTING FLOODWALL '° " ~ .• N N ~ • • •-•~ FRONTAGE RD ... ro -•--•-/# CONSTRUCTION ACCESS ND BANK MAINTENANCE (50' WIDE, TYP.) 20 -o-<w ---,- rn I 29+aa Jo+oo / .31+00 .12+00 --+----_---+-----j--+-----1r--.--r E.0. CHANNEL .,: I? 18 ·•--•--...... APPROXIMATE EXISTING WOOD BULKHEAD WEST LEVEE STATIONING 4 .. ...... ---·~· ·g ~ -0 o Jo + + r N ~ ~ CONSTRUCTION ACCESS -- AND BANK MAINTENANCE 25 0 PLAN 5.0 1QO ? LAKE WA HIGH WATER EL +18.6' SCALE IN FEf)jSTING GRADE\ ___/', '? LAKE WA LOW WATER EL +16.75' ___ \ --------,---20 --~~-r~---------------------~--------~--------------------V ~ t:~-~~=~--===--:=-~~--:=-=---=--:=-=---=--==-=---=--==-~S~LO=P~E~-=0~-1~6=2~5,:=---=--==-=i--==-=---=--===---==-==--:=-=---=--:=-=---=--=~ ~ 15 ~ [ ----"° '"'"' '"' T .. ''"'·-·"·-F 10 "' "' §! 15 _! ~ ~ 5 " "j w 5 NOTE OHW ELEVATION VAR ES, SEE PLANS AND SECilONS 10 ~ > "j w 5 o~~~-~-~~-~-~~-~-~~-~-~~-~-~~-~-~~~~-~-~~-~-~~-~-~~-~-~~~ 00 O ~ 24+00 25+00 26+00 27+00 28+00 29+00 30+00 31 +00 32-' LEGEND MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR --CHW---O><W--OHW •--•--•--•--•--•--•--• HAUL ROUTE [>---TIDEFLEX >---OUTFALL D m ~ ~ WETLANDS "NEW" BANK STABILIZATION "MAINTENANCE" BANK STABILIZATION CONSTRUCTION ACCESS HORIZ. 0 VERT. 0 PRORLE 50 5 SCALE IN FEET 100 10 6" > TREE ej CATCH BASIN _,::j ~ 00 ;j c., z :ll 81 .. ~Nc';,;I ~ L ,0 ,:f()J>,::0-10> :r,. -0 F~S~~~~o ~ -O --, Z z rr, :t>ooorno--,·· ·· ~~~zg-ri-0-l'>I.S::: z ::o ""Tl Z::o ::o -...i:r,. J>- :>CJ:> ::t>-0rri o 'N- ~:i:-!0 Z-ON'.P-~ '-'Vl ~~gd ~ ~ei~ ~Vlrr,s::z ~ t.,:;u> u,OUl~ 068~ ~ Z ::a: Ocf'T1 -< ~ Z 0 o Q©~:-JOl !.llJl:....6-ri . ·· NZ(.11 ),,I""Tlr::E;t,,::O N....,~ S::!:.'J !:.'J:.t,.CfTI 'v-1 ~~:~:ci~I ".~§/ Vlz-~::oz> .P.ON .(Tl I 2 -!~:r: OJ-lo corii o-<0 o U1 AoUl z c·· ~ "Tl ~-1 o !l! ::f r z!;i2 z z :i,. o0 -rn ::o o < u,Z 0 vi s:: )> >,....., z ,, Cl) -I ~~i='l mo n z m i ~ ~ ~~ "l+~ O;n ·· o :n m s 9 0 0~ ~8"11 :nm ~ r m :n ~ 6 m 8 d O _ z '-' z ~1f';F ~z -I~ :::0 () .. rr, fT1 ~ zo Ad}>- 0 -Z ;u '1 ?i 2:! N <o I~~ a, " "> N v, "I ~z " C, d z ;;i ::0 l!i C) ~ ozrr,~ Cl"'1X:=,. -!::Euiz ;;rn::::1-1 rl:>Zm ;~~i rr, VJ :t> () -0--,Zl""'I ~:i,.AO ::0 C!l Ul::O Ulr-1r<1 N:t>o l>g/Q ::::!CZ ONC, Zl>' ='" >o~ Zz,a o-> Sj I j EXISTING WATER LINE LINE ~ CONSTRUCTION ACCESS ff, EXISTING OVERHEAD POWER l t; I-EXISTING FLOOOWALL ~ r NEW STABILIZATION EAST LEVEE STATIONING 0 EXISTING BURIED DUCT BANK EXISTING RIPRAP -:Y !.~· ':;A 33+00 3c j , -0 ·+ ~ .,. 17? \ _...--3~ 0 0 + .,. .,. 0 + V, .,. EXISTING WETLAND C 0 0 + 3C-._ <o ~ r ABANDONED SEWER LINE :o " --OHW---oHW ---OHW ---otow-V, c'IWI--c,aw---c,-aw-l';_~--• w I , 't-32+00 ---~- 34+00 35+00 36+00 37+00 _f_'t. CHANNEL --+---+----t-----t-- . r E.0. CHANNEL 13 ;s ~/CEDAR RIVER STA 37+10, 19 ' " •-•--•-•+•-.. -•--.. -- ----0 0 0 0 + + N n n ,., CONSTRUCTION ACCESS AND BANK MAINTENANCE 25 IJAINTENANCE AREA WEST LEVEE STATIONING 2C '.i'S ~FRONTAGE ~·-';;~ 0 0 + 0 "' + ~ ;:'; CONSTRUCTION ACCESS AND BANK REPAIR AREA MAINTENANCE (50' WIDE, TYP.) EXISTING FLOODWALL PLAN 0 50 :v LAKE WA HIGH WATER EL +18.6' ~o g + ~ .,. " 0 o_ " 0 "- 38+00 --t-- 0 0 + ~ -11-00~---o~w 39+00 a, g ,Zv1 •C,0 • C a,~ ,a I 6 " ~ '. / I ~ •-•·-•o.,. -•----•--•--•-· I ~o + " n CONSTRUCTION ACCESS ANO BANK REPAIR EXISTING CONCRETE SLABS BRIDGE EL +25.0' ~ 0 0 + 0 V, --oow ---oow'-2( 0 40+00 ---+--- EXISTING WETLAND D 25 20 J -SCALE IN FEET ""'"" '" 0 '""" \ ---~-~~~:~~~~~IT~~~~~~-------------------------------------,, 20 "' "' §2 ro' "' §2 ot: 15 SLOPE=0.1625% ~ -----------------1------------------------I 15 3 l{ 8.0. DREDGE CUT ~ 10 1' OVERDREDGE ALLOWANCE > ".I w 5 NOTE OHW ELEVATION VARIES, SEE PLANS ANO SECTIONS ABANDONED SEWER LINE EL -9.3' EXISTING DUCT BANK/ o~~~-~-~-~-~~-~-~-~-~~--<,--~-~-~~-~-~-~-~~-~-~-~~~~-~-~-~~~~-~- 32+00 33+00 LEGEND MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR --e><w---OHw--OHW ., __ ., __ ., __ ., __ ., __ ., __ ., __ ., HAUL ROUTE [>----TIDEFLEX >---ou-:-F ALL = m . . ~ - 34+00 35-tOO 36+00 WETLANDS PROFILE "REPAIRn BANK STABILIZATION HORIZ. 0 50 "MAINTENANCE" BANK STABILIZATION VERT. 0 5 SCALE IN FEET "NEWn BANK P777::J CONSTRUCTION ACCESS STABILIZATION ~ 37+00 38+00 39+00 40+00 100 10 6" > TREE ej CATCH BASIN r ~ z 10 ~ -< > w cJ 5 0 ~ _,;;:j a; ~ c., z ~ ~0:.,.::o-1n~> ;:g ,. 0rn,--i';I ~ F~6~~~~o 55 -o -t Zz rr, J> o ooro 0 -t .. ·· ~~~zg...,,-0-f>.IS:::: z ::0..., z ::0 ::u -...J)> ;t> J>C::,.J>orriO 'Nz ~S::=:!Q Z"'ON)>-t '-'f/JOC::n(jjj"?.:::Orr, ,.....,z::::10 2 --1 Oz (.n(/)fT'I:-!'. -<Vl:,J)> (Jl (/)"J ;--Jri,Z n .:t> o ooo ~ Z ::E ocrri -< ~z'no ~(OC(I-..JO'l (J1;::a· =:!...,, ~· . . . . ~ N~(/l i:~...,,M~E:~ ~-oFl ~~:::~~~I N_I!§ lllZ-A:¥i~Z ~ ..,.~N _rrl I z -t-tI C OJ-to ;:,:;;rni"ii o-<0 :,:: o 01 8Vl Z c ·· N• ...,, rri-t o ~ z ::E r _z!2 ~ ~ J> 8 ~ 0 v,Z o, vi 0, s::: :r> > ,...... z " en --! ;,, --f -u m o ~:r>r zm -< :r> :r> 0 §lBz z:r> <::+~ ():D --o :D m Q 9 0 0 ~ ~i!i;TI :Dm ~ r m :D ~ 6 m 8 b O _ z....., z 0 ~~~F ~ OU c, -~~ o, Z 0 -< ,. "'0"' ~ z z ::0 ozm,::: " -CrrlX;t> N iii ::;:j=Ev.iz ~ ;::o :'9 ;t> IJJ::::1-t r;t,-ZfTI ;~~~ ~~~~ J°I"' ~)>AO ,. ,! ::Oi::i::J(/):;iJ iii iii l.llc-,r.,, N:<>O )>i::i::)~ 0, " =:!cz ON<O ' > z,-- N v, >""' ,_ I ~~ z~[8 o-> ,. -< a; 0 z ~ EXISTING WETLAND D & E g + :;; EAST LEVEE STATIONING 0 EXISTING WETLAND F & 0 0 0 + 0 + ~ 0 " ~ + -L'O ,p .n i ,(') START TRANSITION TO 70' WIDTH BOTTOM STA 41+00 START TRANSITION TO 60' 0 0 + ~ ~ " -END TRANSITION STA 42+00 WIDTH BOTTOM STA 45+50 'i', + ':?, Jo --c';'W ---OH~ ----oH,/- 2 ~ _ ·:·-~ -.k--oe~ . _ 2.5 _ E~o .. TRA~2'~?~. __'.?TA _ _'.1-6+50-1;>11'1 2D20Li"l -·-,-;..~o,;.w---·a,,~--<tffl---QH~ . ,;9 1 -----V, ? 48+00 --- V, "' q 4.3+00 ,);") --j---_f_ It_ CHANNEL '44+00 45+00 47+00 ---+--'?:-t--- ,.,.,.,,,,,,,,,:,:gg,,,,-w ,,·,,,,,r,,,,,,,,1 :~~~~ :J>QOQO~~~~~ '0 i~~0 a0 ' :,C 0 "-0~~~= ~'-""- D •·-•·-•·•-.......... 0 ......... __ ., __ +--~"--- " CONSTRUCTIOI\; ACCESS AND BANK ~EPAIR ~ "' E.0. CHANNEL -+----+-- q ~CEOARIWER !lligo:;;g~i;.g~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~::o::,'~o~::<>::o::<>_::~::o::o~o::o ~v~"ll"'n ~°'"n"ii-~~ ?:, - EXISTING '° EXISTING RIPRAP CONSTRUCTION ACCESS AND BANK REPAIR (50' WlDE, TYP.) 25 Bt,NK STABILIZATION REPAIR PLAN EXISTING 0 50 100 SCALE IN FEET 20 GRADE\ ---------------------------------------------~---------~----~---- ;;, ~ Sl,_OPE-=-0.1625% --------------------31s t;: z· 0 __________ [ ____ _ BOTTOM OF DREDGE CUT 1' 01/ERDREDGE ALLOWANCE F 10 -< > w C: 5 NOTE OHW ELEVATION VARTS, SEE PLANS AND SECTIONS 42+00 40+00 41+00 0 --48+00 47+00 4.3+00 44+00 45+00 46+00 LEGEND MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR --Cl<w---<><w--OHW .. --•--•--•--•--•--•--• HAUL ROUTE [>--TlDEFLEX >--OU "7""" ALL CJ !lllllilll . . ~ ~ WETLANDS "REPAIR" BANK STABILIZATION "MAINTENANCC BANK STABILIZATION CONSTRUCTION ACCESS PROFILE HORIZ. 0 50 100 VERT. 0 5 10 SCALE IN FEET 6" > TREE §j CATCH BASIN 25 20 ;;, ro §' 15 3 ~ ~ z D 10 F -< > w ~ w 5 o I_~ _<:l al j ~ " z z 0 F ;c V, \ 00+19 t;; 00+09 "' w 00+6£ 00+)?<; ~:',' ' ' ' .1 I t. I ; I ' ,;, !. ''j· ' :f I ' ' ' ' ' ' ' 0 ' '-".' 'N t ' \ \ \ \t PURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD I HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT LOCATION: 47' 29' 37.00"N, 122' 12' 48.02"W ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: DATUM: NAVPBB 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR I AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI. YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 ~: ~E~KA~~~EJcif~,E~TS WILLIAMS AVE) 10. AMBROSE, K ' (8BOt\VN) U 'NOLiliA313 87, 17, 18 T23N R5E I i 0+9£ ! V • OO+oS' 1/ r w v,U v,Z w-< ~ uz . uie 1 <ez j z <( oo+st ~~ I •/ u"' ' i? ~ ~rn V, zo oz us: 0 N 90'1:'H+ 1 \ oo·oo+9£ :v1s " ~,~3N~N~>~H~o=3o~,~a~o~-~/'"'--• I 0 0 0 1 I I I I I I L ) I / I / I \ I I I I I I I /I : w I I ,, I I ~ I " I ~ \ ~ I ~ I IN I X I ~ w I u I 1 1 ~ I I I / I \ I w " 0 w ~ 0 \ I ;; I I \ I \ I , I I i I / I ) I I I I I I : I I I I I I : I I I w I g I I ~ V) : I ~ l'.3~ I \ ~ ~~ : , I 2 o i-------" ~ ~ / I "'"' 0 0 0 + ~ "' 0 0 + "' "' 0 0 ;J: "' 0 0 + ~ "' 0 0 + N "' 0 0 + "' 0 0 + :ii I I ~1 ~~ ( I ~ ~~ ~ L,-.C_L.u. 1 '-'-~~~-'...L~Li_L~Li~~~-'~ 'l' "' 0 N N ~ s "' 0 (BBGA'vN) l.:i 'N011V/\3T3 ~ LL o 0 "' IE 0 ! ' CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION. NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS PLAN/PROFILE (STA 48+00-56+00) APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON REFERENCE NllMBER: lli.;_ CEDAR RIVER AT: RENTON ~ KING SHEET 9 OF 29 fil8.IE;__ WASHINGTON DATE, 6/24/14 1 '·'· '\ (880:\VN) U 'NDl1VA3l3 0 87, 17, 18 T23N R5E I it j I~ "' ' -. ' l . ' ""' Z© I 13 r--,: i 8~ I iS i I ~;:: ! w l/) . I I Fs+,9 I / :oo+£9 /~-I . . ' / \\ \\ \\ \:,. ',, ,Tl ·13 ,;g· £+;,g :vis 8NISI03c1 ,..:10 ON3 ' / '<, / ', / ',>· ,•' / ', ' ',/ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 N g + ... © 0 0 + " m 0 0 + w _J a: 0 a: IL 0 S' S' r w w u. 0 '" ~ "' w ~ <C u "' 0 0 g ti i5 + ~ N W © Jo.o· 1 Jo.a' ~-· 0 0 S' I I (i' N © N ,c "' "' 0 w I > I'. ' ' I i --K I; il ~ w z z <C I u "" I !t a: I~ gt~ 6 <{ © Cl ,~ it~ I ,~ it I ! ' . _, .. r i ' I . ' ' 0 ' I · oo+zg I PURPOSE· MAINTENANCE OF SECTlON 205 FLOOD I HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT I OCATIQN: 4T 29' 37.00"N, 122· 12' 48.02"W ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: DATUM: NAVQ88 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 1 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6 WASHINGTON DNR 4 ~~~Dg~~:10~~N(S55CTR ~: ~E~ \K INVESTEMENTS · 9. HEl™AN-BODEN, S WILLIAMS AVE) 10. AMBROSE, K ""' z~ WC, F ':!" "'"' wz X :Q ~o w~ ~" "'"' !ii in t "Q "'i' z "-~ 0 F u ~ / t C, / I" 0 w z / 0 u ~ w w ~I~ u. " w ~ "' u "' 0 /\.,.·' "' z w 0 0 ro I z <C i" w I ,/" 0G " /" w 0 <C "' '-' " z F "' x w / ( ................ , '. ' ' 90"8[+ 13 oo·oo+g,; :vis CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING PLAN/PROFILE (STA 56+00-64+00) APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I \ I I I ) I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I I / C I I I I I I I I I I " I "' ~ I ~ \ ~ l I I I I I I I I I 0 0 + "' z ~ "' vs ~ "' <C <C w w ~ u C, z 0 -< " w 0 '-' ~ 0 ~ w -< "' w 0 '-' 0 0 w m "' 0 "' '!' 0 ro u. u ~ u I C, <C 0 " 0 0 ~1 z + 0 0 F m u c; X I" w "' w ~ z w u. 0 I" w u 0 A I~ 0 "' 0 + "' '-'" ~ z -< w ro " wZ ~ uo ,_ "' ZF -<-< ~ 0 ZN "' z ~~ w <C 0. ~ z ro 0 0 ~ ~i 0 "' w + 0. " ""' " '" I D~ ' ' I "' "' "' " C, I I z 0Q 12 0 ,,, 0 ~ I I I I C, ~ ii:~ ""' z 0 0 z ;!: Cl u 0 u "'z "' "' ' I zO 0 0 w , / r I '- I ' ' b / 1 I I oz F<C <Cv, !!!I ~ ~ 0 3'w z Iw ov, 0 <C z " " w _J 0 0 + © '" ~ ~ ~ (ggmvN} 1..:1 'NOl1Vi\3T3 "' PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS REFERENCE NUMBER: lli.:... CEDAR RIVER " I 0 AL RENTON .c.Ql.llIT):'.; KI NG SHEET 1 D OF 29 .s.IA.IE;_ WASHINGTON llll.!E;_ 6/24/14 ci ~ ~ C, <C I -35 <O ~ 30 5 25 e-20 C. z 15 0 F 10 :; 5 d 0 0+00 -40 <O ~ 35 5 30 e-25 C. · 20 g 15 :; 10 "J w 5 0+00 ~ 35 §e 30 « ~ 25 c- c. 20 t 15 F :'.; 10 "J w 5 o+oo -40 <O ~ 35 130 e-25 C. z 20 8 15 :; "J 10 87, 17, 18 T23N R5E EXISTING CONCRETE FLOODWALL / BANK STABILIZATION (REPAIR) ,_.,~ SZ OHW EL +19.3' "'-"'-----1-·--...;__--.._ ·-.. ~ Ii CHAN:XEL DREDGING EXISTING BOTTOM I _/ OHW EL +19.7' sz / ~ ' ~/ T----__.. I -~\J------"'=>'r r 1' OVERDREDGE ALLOWANCE _J 0+25 0+50 1 ~~~-.'\ 45' -----· ----45' 0+75 1+00 DISTANCE, FT TYPICAL SECTION DREDGING 90 FT WIDE (STA 20+00) 1+25 1+50 1+75 EXISTING CONCRETE FLOODWALL / BANK STABILIZATlON (MAINTENANCE) BANK STABILIZATION (NEW) --. -DREDGING ~ CHANNEL /_EXISTING BOTTOM c!f:1t;~--!., SZ OHW EL +20 o· ~ I cO~H~W~EL"-'+-'-19,=8_' _;SZ"'- .'-'V&, / ·~ -----~--------_, 0+25 3f-f:1v _________ '_____________ :>'i\·-1\J >----40' -+---+----40' ---~ o+so o+ 75 1+00 1' OVERDREDGE ALLOWANCE DISTANCE, FT TYPICAL SECTION EXISTING CONCRETE FLOODWALL DREDGING 80 FT WIDE (STA 32+00) 1+25 1+50 1+75 sz /-,--- 0+25 ,__ ___ 35'1-------35' --~-1 0+50 0+75 1' OVERDREDGE ALLOWANCE EXISTING CONCRETE FLOODWALL 1+00 DISTANCE, FT TYPICAL SECTION DREDGING 70 FT WIDE (STA 45+00) 1+25 1+50 1+75 BANK STABILIZATION iEXISTING BOTTOM L(MAINTENANCE) It_ CHAN /DREDGING .,...------,---_~. ---i::.·r!:'.. v OHW EL +25 8 , I OHW EL +27 5' 'v / "'i." ~ --i------ 13, J1-y~v-==:=-=-:=_=-:-_, _ _=-:=________ :i'r'-.\''4 f---30' __ __, ___ 30' f---1 35 -<O 30 ~ 25 « 3 20 c-c. 15 z 10 0 F « 5 > w ~ 0 w 2+00 20 z 15 0 F « 10 > w ~ 5 w 2+00 35 ~ 30 §e s: 25 3 20 t 15 z 0 F 10 « > 5 w ~ 2+00 w 40 -"' 35 ~ 30 g 25 c-c. 20 · 5 15 F « 10 > w 5 '--------'------'------'------'-----+--'------'-----~'-----~ 5 d 0+00 0+25 0+50 PURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD I HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT I OCATION· 47" 29' 37.00"N, 122· 12' 48.02"W ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: DATUM: NAYP88 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR 14 ~~~DgPERATION(S 5CTR ~: fE~ 'it INVESTEMENTS . MINIUMS 5 9. HE1Th1AN-B0DEN. S WILLIAMS AVE) 10. AMBROSE, K 0+75 1+00 DISTANCE, FT 1+25 1+50 1+75 2+00 1' OVEROREDGE ALLOWANCE TYPICAL SECTION DREDGING 60 FT WIDE (STA 55+00) CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING DREDGING SECTIONS APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON 0 15 30 SCALE IN FEET PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS REFERENCE NUMBER: lli_;_ CEDAR RIVER AT: RENTON COUNTY: KING SHEET 11 OF 29 STATE: WASHINGTON DATE, 6/24/14 ... UNc'i';I ~ ~ " ~8~~1Qf)~ -u E5o~r11:;!~; :t> oooroo--1 ·· ·· ~ ~ ~zg'l "'O -.,..I;:: z ::O'i z :::0 :::0 -...J ;t,,;i,. l>C'.l>:t>0rriO "N- ~;::--lQ Z"'ON;t>~ '-'1./l ocn--t ~ <D.::OfTI .......... z::::1og--1 Oz u, 1./l fTl s::: -< (.,.j ;,J :r,. U, (!)""""Cl :-JmZ ~ ~ ~ g~~ -< ~z'no o~OJ:-J?' !-11 Cf .... 6.,, . ·· NZl./l ~~.,,M~~~ ~-uR 'llii"'C::'f''<";i "2~ 0:i,.A:;:,;;zOg ;t,, ·rn 1./lz-0;::o ..,._(')N _ff'J I z --l~I 9J--lo A~j$j g-<3 ~ 8 (.J1 0(/) • .,, rr,;:.j o ~ ~ r ~;:: ~ ~ ~ 8 m o u,Z vi CJ :t> z s::: 7' :t> )> ~ z " -I " C: m o 0 )> CJ Zm =' 0 r :t> 0 z m N z :t> " ~ () :0 0 m :o =, -< o-0 z :0 < ~ mm " CJ) 8 :0 m z m ~ 0 () z -I z 0 C) z CJ) ~il"f" ~ mz --l --l :::0 (") .. rr, rr1 ~ zo N ~ )> A O ,0 o-z ozm::a::::: ~ z " Cf'T'IX;t,-" - N ca :;pEuiz w :::0 1?? :t>-w::::!-1 r;t,,Zrtl ;~~i r,(/) J>(') "'0---1Zf'T1 I~~ E'.:)>AO :::o~Ul::O UlC-HT'I N>O ;t,,~9 "' " ::Jez ON<O " )> z ,.. NV> )> ='" -" I ~z 2 om z-o ..,. ~ O· )> Si z ~ §2 30 25 g, 20 ~ ~ Ii F 15 " w cl 10 5 35 30 '" ro §; _g, 25 ~ ~ v' OHW EL 19.8' NAV088 f DREDGE AREA -------------- au''' a,,,_ ----: 8.0. DREDGE CUT EL VARIES (EL+14.1' SHO!MII) ---------------------------------1------~ 1' 01/ERDREDGE ALLOWANCE NOTE: TEMPORARv CONSTRUCTION PLATFORM TO RIGHT BANK NOT SHOW~. 160 15' VEGETATION FREE ZONE (VFZ) EXCAVATE AND BACKFILL W/OREDGED MATERIAL 170 180 190 DISTANCE, FT TYPICAL SECTION NEW RIGHT BANK STABILIZATION STA 30+60 TO 33+00 0 5 10 SCALE IN FEET PLANTING BENCH (VARIES), SEE NOTE 1 TOP DRESS WITH TOPSOIL AND HYSROSEED IN VFZ SLABS TO BE REMOVED INTERSTITIAL SPACE FILL EL +19 Q' 200 14' 15' VEGETATION FREE ZONE , (VFZ) T.O. CONCRETE FLOODWALL EL. VARIES (EL. 30.6' SHOWN) I TOP DRESS WITH TOPSOIL----...._ 3' AND HYSROSEED IN 1/FZ I INTERSTITlAL SPACE FILL I 210 1' ARMOR STONE NEW BEDDING STONE 220 30 25 '" "' §' '~ "t le ~ w ~ w I z V> 0 _J 15 F w " w > ~ w V> ~ 10 5 230 35 30 w '" "' §' 25 g ~ ~ z 0 20 F z 0 i== 20 EXISTING CONCRETE sz OHW EL 23 4' NA\/088 I DREDGE AREA -----~---r-==-----------------~ --_/ " ".I w 15 10 NOTE BEDDING STONE ARMOR STONE (VOIDS FILLED 1NITH GRAVEL AND COBBLE) 70 80 1. GRAVEL PLANTING BENCH ONLY PROPOSED AT LOCATIONS SHO'WN ON PLANS, NOT THROUGHOUT. _·.··:~~~;~~~)~;',:,..,,, 8.0. DREDGE CUT EL. VARIES (El+15.6' SHOWN) \_ ~EXCAVATE AND GEO TEXTILE FABRIC 90 100 DISTANCE, FT TYPICAL SECTION LEFT BANK REPAIR STABILIZATION STA 19+50 TO 23+90 STA 37+10 TO 45+46 0 5 10 SCALE IN FEET 110 120 130 15 10 140 " ".I w ' (/) _ ...... _-:j ~ 00 -I ~ z :JJ ffi ... "'"'~,., ~ ~~)>~~~)> )> ~ p=OZfTII::::j O r z oZITl-< (/) >"8odroo~ · !":1 ~ ~ ~Z~"TJ .P..IS::: l> ~ ::o"TJZ;;o -....ll>;t- ri9 ~ ~be)~ "1J ~~~ ..._,,u;ococ~~::ofTl --.Z:::!Oz---l Oz {J1 (/) fTl s::: -< (,.I :::0 )> u, VJ"U ;--ifTlz o )> oo 0 o ;rj z ::E ocrri -< ~z'Oo ~<.OCO-..JO'l (J1 :::0 • :::!..,, ~-.... ~Ngv, ~~-ii::;,~~R( ~iJ8 ~~R>--~:2::i ;::;255 Op,::,::~-0 00 -~z Ulz-z::;~z > ...,nN f'llZ ---J---l:r:c!?J---lo co~ o-<0 ~ o ui ;,\3V1zc··11., r,i---l o ~ z ~ r z~ z z l> o • rr, ::0 CJ§ 8 <nZ 00 ui "' ~ z s:: 7' )> ,. Cl) z :g -I -I ::s :x> mo '< OJ Zm g r :x> o '" N z:x> " )> () :D " =I m:D '< 0 0 - 'ii z :D ~ "' cn m:D >' m o b () C) z =I z 0 C) z Cl) ~il"i"' q ~ fTl z Sti ---l ---l ::0 (') fT1 •• fTl fTl z ~ Z O 0 ~ ---l )> fTl . O § ~ ::0 Z OZIT13':: "TJ G) a:! C CfTI~)> N ri1 S::: ::;j:::E~z <D ::o :::o ~~zrri .. 'z,;,~ ::oAroz ~ ~~iR ~ ~!;I;'(/)~ •-HS Nl>O J:>~0 ::!cz en~ §~-0 ~(/) ::::t::o .;:,. I ::t>-orri .....__ Z Zz"'IJ ~ C) 0-)> ..r,. ---l ;;ij 0 z 35 30 " ro §; T.O CONCRETE FLOODWALL EL. VARIES (EL. 34.8' SHOWN) FILL INTERSTITIAL SPACE W/GRAVEL/SOIL 35 i CHANNEL 30 " ro w r~ ~ a: ~ w w I "" ~ 20 ~ w ~ le > ".J "" w MAINTENANCE WORK, INSTALL NEW ROCK TO RESTORE SLOPE sz OHW EL 24.9' NAVD88 1 DREDGE AREA EXISTING ROCK TOE -_ -_ --1-_ f-____ _ ------I ---I ~.tt:111-8.0. DREDGE CUT EL VARIES (EL+17.1' SHOWN) §; 25 5 t;: z 0 20 F ;; w C: 15 10 30 25 " ro §; 3 20 t;: 1§ F 15 ';. ".J w 10 5 100 110 120 130 DISTANCE, FT TYPICAL SECTION LEFT BANK MAINTENANCE STABILIZATION STA 23+90 TO 37+10 STA 45+46 TO 55+85 0 5 10 140 ' --------r-- 1' OVERDREDGE 150 ---]-------- ALLOWANCE 15 160 10 170 GEOGRIO A SCALE IN FEET lhRAPPED cNa°M~ft FABRIC RE TED SOIL MOVE EXISTING GABIONS STREAMBED GRAVE ~APPED -ssz,.....~O~H~W'_tJELL_J2~1JOt'--'"~e!":I L/COBBLE 1.0' THICK ---, 30 "''"00 ,~,~ --· -r' . ---~ --- NAVD88 DREDGE AREA EXISTING NATIVE GRAVEL '- -_ ----~ GRADE TOE 8ENCH~\:,'- 0, ... BO OR ---"' ~,-.... ~=a --. --' '"''· .. ··'""'' + 2.5' SHOVvN ~'r\·."\"-1 -0 ~ t / '~ L-~;~~,~/· -------------l,. 10 EXCAVATE AND BACKFILL W/NATIVE COBBLE GRAVEL OVERDREDGE ALLOWANCE 20 30 40 DISTANCE, FT TYPICAL SECTION GABION REMOVAL MITIGATION STA 21+70 TO 22+86 0 5 10 SCALE IN FEET ROCK TOE 5" THICK STREAMBED GRAVEL BASE 50 FABRIC 60 70 80 20 g, t;: 15 g ';. ".a w 10 5 CD 1; ~ 00 jj (,) z ~ EXISTING CIP CONCRETE WALL (TO REMAIN) REPAIR EXISTING TIDEFLEX VALVE S7, 17, 18 T23N R5E sz OHW EL +24.6' ' .. ' / DREDGE AREA / EXISTING RIVERBED REPAIR ARMORFLEX / EXCAVATION, SEE NOTE 1\-.-------____. ------------------ 0· y 'J; / ,~ /'\_ _../'");.,..,.., /:,, GEOTEXTILE FABRIC c:;?V B.O. DREDGE CUT EL VARIES DETAIL -- ARMORFLEX WITH OUTFALL 1.0' OVERDREDGE [ EXISTING BANK REPLACEMENT TIDEFLEX VALVE -·= _ . _[E~S:G ~PRA~ OHW EL VARIES J /;~~-~i--:, ' -~ -, -- ",' j\ ' ' ' ' ' ' I i ( I ' ' ' ' ' PIPE DIAMETER, SEE TABLE (THIS SHEET) 0 2 4 SCALE IN FEET -----._/EXISTING "- EXCAVATION, SEE NOTE 1 TYPICAL DETAIL OUTFALL wm, TIDEFLEX 0 2 4 SCALE IN FEET RIVERBED OUTFALL PIPE LOCATION TABLE LEGEND PVC -POLYVINYL CHLORIDE C -CONCRETE DI -DUCTILE IRON CM -CORRUGATED METAL NOTES BANK LEFT LEFT LEFT LEFT LEFT LEFT LEFT LEFT LEFT LEFT LEtT LEFT RIGHT RIGHT RIGHT RIGHT RIGHT RIGHT 1. EXCAVATE LOCALIZED AREA TO TEMPORARILY ACCESS TIDEFLEX VAL VE AND ARMOR FLEX FOR REPAIR WORK AND BACKFILL W/GRAVEL TO PREDISTURBANCE CONDITIONS. RIGHT RIGHT PURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD I HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT I OCATION: 47' 29' 37.00~N, 122" 12' 48.02"W ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: DATUM: NAVD88 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR I AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI. YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 ~: ~E;,.:A~~tci'cif~.E~TS WILLIAMS AVE) 10. AMBROSE, K CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING OUTFALL REPAIR DETAILS APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON LEVEE PIPE MATERIAL DIAMETER (IN) STATIONING 5+50 PVC 12 12+85 C 18 14+85 C 16 18+50 C 12 22+90 C 4 23+70 PVC 12 25+00 PVC 12 31+00 PVC 12 31+05 C 12 36+75 C 18 48+00 PVC 12 55+00 DI 24 28+85 PVC 8 41+55 DI 24 48+60 CM 12 53+00 PVC 8 59+70 C 24 64+00 PVC 12 68+00 CMP 12 69+00 UNKNOWN 18 PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS REFERENCE NlH,IBfR: ill;_ CEDAR RIVER AI;_ RENTON .c.Q.l.!tlD'.;_ KING .filAIE;_ WASHINGTON SHEET 14 OF 29 DATE: 6/24/14 -" cm~>, ~ ~~):>~~~)>~ ~ rOZfTII::::j ::l ci5o~(Tl-<z§ l/l :t>ooo 00 o ·· ·· ~~~Z~TJ _,..I,:: z ::o-riZ.:::o -..J}>):> ~C>:t-Grr1 "Nz fT1:;;::: ---l Q z I'.))> ---l -......,,U1Qr0---l <D:::Om z300 ·oz 'ij;'Vlr,-,~z ~:::o~ (J]Olll)> oQ8o ;rj Z :le. Ocf'T'I -< 2 z'Oo Q<D~:"l!="l ~:::o:...5..,., . NZVI :.r,.:i::-rir:1::.,.:::0 N.....,R S:::[2] i:'.J:i-crr1 • "-1 ~~:~'"~~I ;;;_~ ~ UlZ-:;::,:;522z~..,.~N .f'l1Z -t---l:r: 9J---lo ;,:::rn~ o-<0 ,:: o u, 8(/) z c·· ~ ..,., rri----1 o !:!l :E r :z~ ~ ~ ):> g ~ 0 ~z ul ~ > ""O :g 0 ?; ~ :IJ ~ () ~ 6 () :IJ ~ m-< "' Cf.I () S co 0 -< ""O z o r co ; ~ :il ~ z C: !;/ () -I 0 z ~1~12' ~ z --l ~ :::0 () .. l'l fT1 ~ zo ~ ---< > ~ 0 " o-z -,, z " " - N ~ ~I~ "' >' "> N~ -" I " -~z " " ci z /;; ::o I~ ~ z rrl () Zm ~o z~ ~ :IJ 0~ :IJ m § :IJ z C) I OZfT13: Cf'TIX)> --1::=e:viz ;i m::j--, r)>ZJ'TI rzG)5; ::uArnz rr, (/) )> () -u ---lzrri ~l>;,:::o ::0 g::, U):::0 Vlr--,fTI N:t-o >ITTC> ::JEZ ONC> Z>" )> ::J :::0 zO~ o-z:> Si ~ ~ 0 ~ 35 30 °' w 25 §; .,: ~ t 20 z 0 fC .,: ~ 15 w 10 5 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ACCESS EXISTING WEST LEVE (TO BE EXCAVATED) EXISTING GRADE ll_ LEVEE TYPICAL PLAN BARGE ACCESS a 6 12 SCALE IN FEET EXISTING WEST LEVEE (TO BE EXCAVATED) (TO BE RESTORED) / (TO BE RESTORED) L ;:APPROX. LOCATION OF ORIGINAL LEVEE -----/77/"T/ . ,,. U"-'(7((£;///5:???;7;.,??; _·. --.._ ----_,, . '. ~' H,,v.. ... .. . ...... ...... )l ,-4~ · • · . . · ·· · MATERIAL '-s. / SLOPE <ft· 11,, - 8H: 1V -\_ EMBANKMENT :: 24 ,, RIPRAP ,: - 10 20 30 " " R BULKHEAD : : EXISTING TIMB'rrn REMAIN) i ! 40 J.L 50 DISTANCE, FT TYPICAL SECTION BARGE ACCESS NOTES 0 6 12 1. TEMPORARY BULKHEAD TO BE MINIMUM LENGTH NEEDED BUT NOT LONGER THAN 50' ALONG BANK. SCALE IN FEET TEMPORARY BACKFILL USING DREDGED GRAVEL MATERIAL OR IMPORTED CLEAN ROCK/GRAVEL TEMPORARY BULKHEAD (STEEL PILE WALL) ~ CEDAR RIVER WATTLE, ALL SIDES AND FRONT TEMPORARY BACKFILL USING DREDGED GRAVEL MATERIAL OR CLEAN IMPORTED ROCK/GRAVEL WATTLE TEMPORARY BULKHEAD (SHEETPILE HP OR PIPE PILING) ¥ OHW EL VARIES CONTRACTOR BARGE ----------------------------¥-LAKE WA 1GH-WATEI 18.6' 35 30 °' 25 ~ > .,: ~ 20 t .,. 0 F .,: 15 ~ ~ -------------- DREDGE AREA 60 70 80 90 10 5 100 w -~ .:::l 00 i m 0 V, v n (B8GIIVN) LI 'NOllv'A313 0 V, 0 n N N in I N cc I in z 0 I "' F V, 0 w "' => I ir §; f" .,: .,: V, I > z z ~ "' 0 0 I 0 .. ~ ~ N <C I 0~ ~ CD wW ~ ~ g! "' I => w m ~6 ~ "' I ~ w a:: ' I" w n_ '-' I o 0 z u i7l i'.= .,: V, to, >-X z"' w -.,: ~"' ~o On_ "' " >-w oc ~ .,: w oc ~~ .: I" ~ w z z .,: I u 0 n (B8CJAVN) lJ .,: "' I I I I 0 a, ~ w I" V, / 0 N 'NOUv'A:313 I I I I I I i1 I u I ~ I 3' I 3 I ,I_ I I I I I I I I e- l "'" "'"' "E' oc~ w4' a,~ n_ >-oc"' .,: oc ocO ose Q. " w ~ ~ 2 0 w 0 V, ~ '" w " z .,: ~ V, 00 ;' 0 N 0 0 ~~ " ~ ij oo UJ.,: 0) ~ w ...J 11s <I'. ~ Q~ ~g 0 PURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING I HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT LOCATION: 47' 29' 37.00"N, 122" 12' 48.02"W ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: DATUM: NAVDBB 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2 THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 3 RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR I AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 g: ~lTMKA~~1Jcif~.E~TS WILLIAMS AVE) 10. AMBROSE, K TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ACCESS PLAN APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON ~ w w '" ca; w ~ .,: 0 V, 87, 17, 18 T23N RSE PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS REFERENCE NUMBER· J1:t.. CEDAR RIVER AL RENTON COUNTY: KING SHEET 16 OF 29 STATE: WASHINGTON MJL.. 6/24/14 f8Zz . I< ::,:::ro[ri ~ _(_ i · I : i >· --~: ,~~!--~ _=_== " I . -~ -~ ~ j/J ~ ENHANCE EXISTING RIPRAP ~' , ~/ ,_ / ;,--'-------::-~-~ ~ ,- PROTECTION 'MTH 'NILLOW STAKE _: ------" ' . . , ___ --'---)_ -'~ -1 , ,PLANTINGS ABOVE ANO BELO~c""WM · J~,_r--~ ,,:i:-_-_ ·I (,\ \ '· l : ', -- . Ff ,"~"'-{,;"' cc ~i,..,.,_:5,a_.,,: a •{:"~',c.,_-_ _;:;,;;fi,i,j~_i-;.;i::} J:.-f'!':\::;i'K :' cc c ~:;= ;1 ~ -~• t -;§ -~ I ,/._ ~ {/) -~'----' ' - --~ ~ ·, -·._ ~ DNR -PRoPE~~~~~::-~ G')fTI ' ' b z it 0~ o 0~ z ,~ ~:;: ;u 1-0+50 < -" I'" ·,,. 'P-j-"' -I (D ~, .. ' . 0 1.-"'..:v:::....____ I =0,. . '" 5 0 0 0 ii' '" I 0+00 . -12 -~-,'_ _ :·_, ~ .:, .. --: .,/ 1 +00 _ 2+00 12 --. \,J 3+00 4-+00 5+00 -- ,. '-' '' . -- o_ 6+00 7+00 8+00 s:: -l 0 ,, )> -u ~ -l ~ CJ) - " -i O ~ )> z ~ 0 --"' + ""'D : 8 ~ ~ I Z 0 (X) ::! ~ + z "'0 0 " 0 b '-' z ""'D r )> z ~ § f'; I"" "ip;::g;· _. Z O 0 " ~ ,, o 25 ~;uz -,, Z :::0 C "' -;:: N iii a, <c, "'~ c' ~ I~ rn " '-,, N u, -t ~ _z ,. "' b z s:: )> z ril () Zm )> 0 z )> () :Il m :D 0< :D m m :D 8 z 0 ; OZl'Tl:S:: C(Tl~)> --1::E(l)z ;;wgrtj r=~0~ ::U::,:::OJZ ~~~~ ::!':)>AO :::orov,:::o {/)E:;!t3 ~Q;IQ ::!CZ ONC> z»· ~,, )>()JTJ Zz-u 0-,, as --,11 --' --· .. -· -.-:~ ---_--+----cc-.-. ---tc-=------~ - ~ CEDAR RIVER -~----~----~-- -· J :r ~ ~ ,I ,. u, o_ =-'- _:._~'> _,,_::_-I -,,, c~:;:f:E~~J~~RTY~.,.:'!~~_:,,;_:_::_~w ''_';_~~~-;c,,_~-c--l__~::-~:;c~$-~~.,:,J" -·~·-----;_~c,_:_~. ~-~ ~---c ~~;.6~i s~o ~--. g g ··--· o -·c_o __ -------~--s~~- q . -,! + ~ 0 .g O O / \ N n + + C& -0---0. I '--~~ ,0 j; it , - NOTE OHW ELEVATION VARIES, SEE PLANS AND SECTIONS LE<lEN) --cew---OI<~-- PROPERTY LINE ~AJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR OHW 6'" > TREE §] CATCH BASIN I>--TIDEFLEX >--OUTI'ALL WETLANDS PLAN 0 50 100 SCALE IN FEET NOTE 1. ALL RIPARIAN (SHRUB WITH SEED AND SHRUB WITH TREE) AREAS SHALL RECEIVE GRAVEL SOIL MIX 2. PLANTINGS IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE AIRPORT: 2.1. THE MITIGATION PLAN \\JILL BE REVIEWED BY THE RENTON AIRPORT MANAGEMENT TO ENSURE AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION IS USED. 2.2. VEGETATION ON THE LEFT BANK WILL CONFORM TO TI-,E 'WSDOT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AIRPORT PLANTINGS WSDOT A\llATlON STORMWAlER DESIGN MANUAL M 3041.00, DEC. 2008ll 2.3. THESE PLANTS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED ON THE PLANT LIST. SEE SHEET 27 AND 28. 2.4-. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION 0+00 AND 29+00 AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE 'NlLL NOT INCLUDE TREES DUE TO SIGHT LINE ISSUES. 2.5. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION 29+00 AND 59+00 AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE 'NlLL INCLUDE TREES. 2.6. TREES WILL NOT BE INCLUDED 40 FEET ABOVE AND BELOW THE SOUTH BOEING BRIDGE. MTJQATION/ PLANTNQ L.EGeO ~ ~ ~ ~EAOOW SEED SHRUB ANO TREE OR SHRUB ONLY v.tTH SEED RESTORATION AS NOT[I) _!'!3 _;:j oil g z ~ " UNC"' "I ~ :E () )>:::0---lO > :r,. r:=~6~~~ --o ---l z kooom 0 -, .. ,. (.fl~~Z~""TJ ""1J -1'-I:S:: )>g~;i~~ 0 --J~:i:: ~:s;:::::fQ Z"UNl>z ---(.()orn---l :::o m:::ortj z:300 ·oz ';;Vlrri:;;::Z ~ 01;:o:l> u,0(/)~ 6fT1~ :iJ z ::;:: o~rri -< z 'o ~t.000-..Jrn U1S:]- 2 ::!~ p· .... l'./l ~o ·· NZ(.() )>I"'T1r:::fl>:::O N fT1 3::i:::] C'.J)>CfTl ,""IJO ~~R>-~:r~ ~~g o,-"~2 ooi N.a,z IM~~ ~~:~~~~ Aro[,'j ~ ~ ~ i3 U1 8rr1 0 'LJ. z ::E, ~ rris:: Z Z )> 0 .z~ :::o c-.. < g ~~ "' ~ s::: s::: --t :t> ,. ~ z ~ @ --t ril () 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~oo--z:t> "'+-u O:o "or m "9:t> 0:0 ~ ..... z < o a, :::l :o m ~+z m:o ~ g" 8 ~ '--' ~ ""O z ~ " z ~il"I-" ~c~:?q ~z ~ ~ :::0 () rr1 •. fT1 fT1 z ~ Z O G co ---l )> f'T1 AO ,0 0 -Z Z "T1 z ::0 C C) < :s:: N ~ CD w "'~ ~I~ "' " '--,. N~ -" I ~z " " cl z '" ; OZf'T'I:;:: Cr12::;:r,. ---l::i:UJZ ;irogrtj :=~C)~ :;o::>::mz ca::'.l~g ~)>;,::;o :::om (.11 :::o V\:~8 r;:~9 ~,z ONp Z> >"" z~ca o-> a; , I :;/_> o· -_-_ 0 - +-ro 0 o_ + ' ,·:1 111 ·-' ,;;,·--~'+ I s i 1111 -----o ""j_'_IJJ 0 ·-+- N-- o· --- o-+ ,;\ ' 1.-{';/"c_~c c ~1 :~~·-J..,kL ~ ,,, ,..__ 'O ---~ . c-,l M • I~ . -. . ~- + .-i '' I' \ . ' ' . ' - -,_.- ,----- --------RESTORE 'Mll-l NATI\.'£---~ SHRUBS AND TREES SET BACK FROM EX. VEGETATION -' ON BANK. ~t/:-r:-~-'.:~-_., ·:~ ;·;;:.. --•• ,'i?'-· ,~~<;::-l~..:-, \-!1 ""'""'=""'""'"'"-"-"'°""~-~-~"""---:---""'\-,, I '-... ~ __ ;0 ",• "',"'-·" -,C'"' • :_ • ~• C .-___ .,.. •~~a• ·c .. '7~ RESTORE PRE\IIOUS BANK REPAIR WORK-:-!._____ ----1E -t·· ,_ WITH WILLOW ST AKE PLANTINGS -' , u, 9+oo 10+00 -11+00---------------!~~oo o_·----13+~0-----__ 1_4_~_00 -+-----~--=-,s--~ . .::--=--=-~-~-~-, -~ --+--------t="'----~ ----+::---~:-.-+-=a ,, --.,, __ ::c, ____ ~ CEDAR RIVER ~ 15 --..,',1 ___ 15 -:..=::.::::-..:.__;_ I • ,·r 8+00 15+00 16+00 --~'"> ,-_../ ,.__,•, ---z *'--C::~.~· ~ 15 __ -"':-:--':::..::::.::__n.:~-~-::..:.:--::-.-:-.:.-::::':c-.:...-, __ ·~~--,.---~-- [~f~ Ite:~ . R-~E·S=T'O--R_E~:W_/_c,c_~~C:cc~~:~~:-:;'"' _ C ~~~ :~~~ ~-"~ ~~;~?~, ~~'°~:·~~'"l:::'~_;ri~%~ ------";~-SH-:... -R_U~B~Wl-~TH-~S0EE ___ D-:..._;-: -.,. -e.,:-~., o -------1 : € ... ¥$ .. D fi. ~-..·•:, ·-~~-'. --MEADOW SEED -o -_g~ ca --g ro _ \ ~O) 6 ;!:: ~------~--, ~--------~ .... j/re=s'( \ f::.ll~E.. RESTORE W/ NOTE OHW ELEVATION VARES. SEE PLANS ANO SECTIONS L..EQEN) PROPERTY LINE MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR --e«w---oHw--QHW 6" > TREE §] CATCH BASIN [>---11DEF1.EX >--OUTFALL -~,-----------------------------'f-•-~=-~-4~------MEADOW SEED \IE1I.AN0S 0 PLAN 50 SCALE IN FEET 1QO NOTE 1. ALL RIPARIAN (SHRUB WITH SEED ANO SHRUB WITH TREE) AREAS SHALL RECEIVE GRAVEL SOIL MIX 2. PLANTINGS IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE AIRPORT: 2.1. THE MITIGATION PLAN WILL BE REVIEWED BY THE RENTON AIRPORT MANAGEMENT TO ENSURE AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION IS USED. 2.2. VEGETATION ON THE LEFT BANK WlLL CONFORM TO THE 'WSDOT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AIRPORT PLANTINGS WSDOT AVIATION STORMWATER DESIGN MANUAL M 3041.00. DEC. 2008" 2.3. THESE PLANTS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED ON THE PLANT LIST. SEE SHEET 27 AND 28. 2.4. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION o+oo AND 29+00 AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WILL NOT INCLUDE TREES DUE TO SIGHT LINE ISSUES. 2.5. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION 29+00 AND 59+00 AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WILL INCLUDE TREES. 2.6. TREES WILL NOT BE INCLUDED 40 FEET ABOVE AND BELOW THE SOUTH BOEING BRIDGE. ~llON/ Pl..ANTN3 L..EQEN) ~ ~ MEADOW SEED SHRUB AND TREE OR SHRUB ONLY 111TH SEED RESTORA 110N AS NO"TED -~ .'1 ~ 00 i ffi ~ ~!'-":-'" I ~ ~8~~:i!Q E~o~fTl~ ~ 0 O§E~O (11~;:i;: ~TJ ..l>I;::: >~~;~~ ":~~ ri,:s::::::JQ z N>~ -vi ~~gb ~el~ U,l/lfri;:::z-< ~:::o > u, (IJ"'O --J fTl z ~ ~ 8~~ -< z'0 o o~~:--i!=fl ~ -g., ~ITJr::E:t,.::U 8 z ~ S:rtJ ~;p.Cl'TJ • ""IJ () ~~R>-~:i!~ ~E5g o,-A:;(zooi ·e,z 1,4zz ~~z t;~N I < o-<I . o ArnGJ Z g , ~ V, 8rri O ~ l ~ ~~ ~ ~ :i,. 8 ·z o '"vi ~ :3 ~ C) )> ,. ---)> z :g CJ) -I -I C -I -m o \; )> 0 g ....a. z Zm z c» --)> 0 rn + "'U z )> "'or () :IJ Q O )> m :IJ ::/ I :3 o-0 I\) :IJ < ~ .i:,. mm ,, + z S2 0 C) 0 :IJ ~o C) 0 '-' z "'U z r C) )> z ~11:;rc i:1 ~ ~ ~ ~ --, :::on~ ~ •• fTl fTl z ~ Z DO o (0 --, ;p. fTl .. AO ;, oz z z ozrri;::: TJ C) 22 C CfTl~;p. N ~ 63 :;:j::E~z (0 :::o rr, ;;,.rnzrtj ~ F~0~ ;:uAcoz fTl(/) ;t>() -o_,zrri ~~ ~>Ao ;:u~{/J::0 {!Jr--,rri N:t>c:i :i,.~£1 m ,; :::!CZ ONC> ..... ,. zv N v, :t>-:::!;:u _,. I '" z~~ ~" o. ,. ... ~ ,; 0 z lLL.::'._J_I I g ---+ 11~=-~~lfl'~11 12, 0 ' I ' J .. .. -I I ', I -I '~~ _.-i-0i"L..:.....::.::::__ __ ,_ ,·-BRUSH LAYERING SEE =o -~ .-·· o--------~ © N I _' '/ ' --( ·· 1 . .0.1 - .. ;: RESTORE Wl"TH N.ATIVE --- SHRUBS AND TREES SET BACK FROM EX. VEGETATION ON BANK ---;t -·~ ---.. r': IN ··.-,, l __ -" ~ - \ I 0 0 + m ...J---<-·N . SECTION : > ,-;:'-;_ 1----. 7 ~, +' -~ __ .o ·--25 \. ___ .~u-.:c·~--:-~_- 16+00 17+00 18+00 19+00 ' C • 0~..__. ,~ 1' o. 20+00 ---,:1 21+00 23+00 . -16 24+00 --~ --~~-,--;:-:-~ ~ ---.-_--~-.:::.1..1> ,, --:-,-~. ~-· -. -\--~· -~ --~--/---"'-·· -- cc· -~ _CE[)AR RIVER_ ;c; ,, EL ;c; ,, as V, ~ ---:"J;;f~:.~?,S '=:~~!~:! :~ ""'=~,~-: =,~-:=:-.,Jf4;g"!:S-,i161~iif.,,:~--"~~~23,;~;i"~&· . 0 ..:::.)~·<·-:~~:?}~ ~ . ~ 0 g rg \g --..,=~~"'""· ~-~ " f~fu~~;} -------~ .;'.':~-~}<:,:·~·'.>·-.:::· ~ '.=.: ~ 6 ~ ' ~ <D • . r--. ';: f ~ N RESTORE \\'llH -----~_::-!MEADOW SEED -· NOTE OHW ELEVATION VARIES, SEE PLANS AND SEC"10NS LEOEN) --1)11~---~HW-- MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR OHW 6• > TREE ej CATCH BASIN [>--TIOEFLEX >--OUTF AU. v.£11.ANDS PLAN 0 50 100 SCALE IN FEET I NOTE MEADOW SEED ON AREAS WHERE BANK STABILIZATION MAINTI:NANCE OCCURS, TYP. 1. ALL RIPARIAN (SHRUB WITH SEED AND SHRUB WITH TREE) AREAS SHALL RECEIVE GRAVEL SOIL MIX 2. PLANTINGS IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE AIRPORT: 2.1. THE MITIGATION PLAN WILL BE REVIEWED BY THE RENTON AIRPORT MANAGEMENT TO ENSURE AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION IS USED. 2.2. VEGETATION ON THE LEFT BANK WILL CONFORM TO THE 'WSDOT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AIRPORT PLANTINGS WSDOT AVIATION STORMWATER DESIGN MANUAL M 3041.00, DEC. 2008" 2.3. THESE PLANTS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED ON THE PLANT LIST. SEE SHEET 27 AND 28. 2.4. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION o+oo AND 29+00 AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WILL NOT INCLUDE TREES DUE TO SIGHT LINE ISSUES. 2.5. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION 29+00 AND 59+00 AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WILL INCLUDE TREES. 2.6. TREES WILL NOT BE INCLUDED 40 FEET ABOVE AND BELOW THE SOUTH BOEING BRIDGE. ~TION/ PL.ANfflG LEOEN) ~ ~ MEADOW SEED SHRUB ANO TREE OR SHRUB ONLY I\HH SEED RESTORATION AS NOTED _(S .-:l ciS i ~ ,. ;,,Ne->! ~ ~(')}>;:,;J---J(l}>:l> ~ f=OZfTlI:::j o rZCJZfTl-< (.I) ~a ---l z r,i :;:~~~~Q---l··" Ul-(Tl fTl "1J 4>-I:;: ..... ~;:u"TJZ:::o:::O "-'>> _....C:l>:l>qrr, "N- ~::;::::::IQ z N:l>z .._,.VJo•n-, ;;o <.O:::urtj ..-..z~O~ ---l ·oz ~U)c:J~ -< ~~~ () ::t> C:i.:J o ;;ij Z ocfTl -< 'n .Z::jQ ..... ~Ul )>I-rir::e;r,.::o' ~ fTl :;:rri fTl:r,cfTl .---un ai:::jl<:>·-1.f}:i!Z _.;;o.::::! ~~A~;:!;061 t0.2g (Jlz_ ~;:oz :r--f>.~ ["II~ ---l~:r:---l!='O---l~ Ato~ g g .. ~ u, 8;:;:: 0 !:2 ~· ~ rri:;: Z Z l> 0 .:Z~ ;u 0 < 8 u, ul s::: s::: -I )> C> - > '""' )> ~ ~~-1 mo ~)>~ Zm ~~--~~ ':l+gf1 ~:JJ " )> :JJ :!c:,z o< 'a I\J -I fll ~ oo+Z O 'ioc,,... ~ 0 ,., §? ....... "'1J z ~ C> z ~1~1" " " .. fTl fTl N ZO 0 ~> A O >, o-z ~ z "' 0 - N ;,; ~ " ~~ rn ,e '-,. N U> ~~ .. " cl z ~ OZfTl,:::: CfTl~~ ---l='i:(.l)z ~rog;:;:: I?? F?f0~ ;:uAOJz ~~~~ ~;r,.AO :::occ (/) ;:u ui;=--, fTl ~~9 g~~ z,-· ~,, PQfTl Zz-u O· > a; ~- < > " ci U> - -----RESTOR;-v.,Tf-1 INVASIVE _ \ ·+,, ~ SPECIES CONlROL AND ,o~ S-L::_'o . ------\\1LLOW -~~ _'='._~~~N~ of-,·-. _ · o~--. 0 --.... •. , -/-i ·'( -:....~ _-_--_ -· ----··o -.--::-::.,_\ ' ':/'-' ' ,· -r<1 _-. ---/-"),: -j I':::(> ~. --~-;fj~ -/ <1, , 26+00 _ , ??+OO -18--28+00 ... " 0 RESTORE WITI·l MEADOW SEED ~ _1 I I - < ---------+--~-.:.-+.=-=:...---·---+-- > " ci u, ~ CEDAR RIVER -'" - -• . .. " o. -~ _/r-32+00 ----. -. I -~---. -18 - t14~l~~.--::-c:-~ NOlE OHW ELEVATION VARIES, SEE PLANS AND SECTIONS L..EGEN) MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR OHW -5• > TREE §I CATCH BASIN t>---llDEFlEX >--OUTFALL • ---1~~6'~~"2.,;;?(lry.-,.:..;,~~~~~_:_-~-_i,Wi' /!f1_ o [,E,"-~' ·.;:.~~RESTORE WlTH s ~ ~ ~~ SHRUB AND r:;--~ rJ ' S~ED----. RESTORE WlTH --~- 0 '+ i'i' ~ i w N~N RESTORE WITH MEADOW SEED MEADOW SEED ON AREAS WHERE BANK STABILIZATION MAINTENANCE OCCURS, TYP. l\£TLANDS Q PLAN 50 SCALE IN FEET ~o MEADOW SEED ~ I: I"\~ j NOlE RESTORE 1MTH MEADOW SEED 1. ALL RIPARIAN (SHRUB WITH SEED AND SHRUB Vi'ITH TREE) AREAS SHALL RECEIVE GRAVEL SOIL MIX 2. PLANTINGS IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE AIRPORT: 2.1. THE MITIGATION PLAN Vi'ILL BE REVIEWED BY THE RENTON AIRPORT MANAGEMENT TO ENSURE AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION IS USED 2.2. VEGETATION ON THE LEFT BANK WILL CONFORM TO THE 'WSDOT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AIRPORT PLANTINGS WSDOT AVIATION STORMWATER DESIGN MANUAL M 3041.00, DEC. 2008" 2.3. THESE PLANTS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED ON THE PLANT UST. SEE SHEET 27 AND 28. 2.4. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION 0+00 AND 29+00 AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WILL NOT INCLUDE TREES DUE TO SIGHT LINE ISSUES. 2.5. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION 29+00 ANO 59+00 AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WILL INCLUDE TREES. 2.6. TREES Vi'ILL NOT BE INCLUDED 40 FEET ABOVE AND BELOW THE SOUTH BOEING BRIDGE. 1111QA110N/ PI...ANTNl l..EGEbt> ~ ~ MEADOW SEED SHRUB AND lREE OR SHRUB ONLY WllH SEED RESTORATION AS NOlEO _gi _,:;:j al § ill m f>-WN,-"~; 0 ::;:n:t>::o o ,=oz~:i'""" ~ caozlTI:::;! =I ~~~~~o ~ .. -fTI fTl""T] :r,. £ :::o--.-iz:::o r, ~ ~~0~ -...,VJ ocn--1 ____ z-,oO Ul Vlri'i:;:::Z /J1 (") VI ""IJ ,I " -< -,.I;:: "ii=:;~ "'" z IC:_~~ ~~~ I. g;2r;: z'oo 9~?1:-J~ ~ ~g""T] l>I...,.,r::E:>::O ~z~ :;=::[!] C'J)>CJ'Tl ,"t)<l IJJ-1~· l/J:i!Z ~::O=I i'l;x,(<ocii "'.2 ~ ~Zz ~,:QZ ..f>.~N .. I< --,~I ?J-lo Arn[;) ~ g .. ;3 Ul 8M o ff"! z i ~ fTIS::: Z ZJ:> 0 ~~ :::0 0 < g VH rn " s::: s::: =i )> 0 -"""')> z ii Cl) --t --t ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ =' (.,) z )> 0 ~I\)--zl> '!! + ""U~ 0 :0 ·· o m C, 0 :0 ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ,,+z o "oO O cl O _ z ....... -u z ~ 0 z " I" I" F ~ I O -l ·· fTI C .. ~z -I:::;! :::0 (") .. (Tl (T'J N Z 0 ~ ~" AO CO ~ z z :::0 OZfTl:S::: " -CrriX)> N /ii ~"'~zl ~ "' :r,. rn ::::i--, r:t,.Zrrl ~~:~ qi~~~ ~~ ;!::.t,.AO :::022 (.11 ;;<J (Jlr-HTJ N:.t>o "°''"' ~"' =IEZ ONG> "" z»· N '° "=J;u _,. I ~z z~qJ ... '1 0-" 0 "' z I j e I l Q ':/ .. O· 0 "-L :.\". RESTORE wm-l INVASIVE SPECIES CONTROL ANO 'MLLOW STAKE PLANTINGS ~ RESTORE Y-ATH RIP ARIAN SHRUBS, TREES AND WILLOW 13:..,~~--_-_..,=_-~J l ,,:,; l = I f;~"1r~frl . -~1--c . C'° = ~-c~=:~:-_,,..,.~--:.~l!~~~~-~~i-;;~e-~ ~'.~~}tf ~¥i~::: ~ f / \ SECTION B 111TH ~ r L Cltc"CTr.otc" \HTU / TREES 40' ZONE ON EITI-lER SIDE OF --. SOUTI-l BOEING BRIDGE RESTORED WITH SHRUB AND SEED ONLY 35+00 36+00 37+00 ··_: +-----f--DEVELOP-P~..;- CEDAR RIVER BENCHES TREE ·, ') . I -- 32+00 ' ,N' ~:::: .. /•9 _ '0----1----... .::: ) ----. . ----,-\'c . -',8 ----. . .. , " ~-c _ -"~~--=~'""~ :s.. .:;:-~.:..-=.~Co, :TORE WITH RUB AND ' ' AND SHRUB g ..,.,......--f-;1,---- n L TREE ~· I I\~"" ~ ::STORE 111TH KiSTORE WITI-l MEADOW SEED "' MEADOW SEED NOTE OHW ELEVATION VARl::S, MEADOW SEED ON AREAS WHERE BANK STABILIZATION MAINTNENANCE OCCURS, TYP. PLAN a so 100 SCALE IN FEET RESTORE WITH ___ ,,-- MEADOW SEED NOTE 1. ALL RIPARIAN (SHRUB WITH SEED AND SHRUB WlTH TREE) AREAS SHALL RECEIVE GRAVEL SOIL MIX 2. PLANTINGS IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE AIRPORT: 2.1. THE MITIGATION PLAN WILL BE REVlEWED BY THE RENTON AIRPORT MANAGEMENT TO ENSURE AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION IS USED. 2.2. VEGETATION ON THE LEFT BANK WILL CONFORM TO THE 'WSDOT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AIRPORT PLANTINGS WSDOT AVIATION STORMWATER DESIGN MANUAL M 3041.00, DEC. 2008" 2.3. THESE PLANTS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED ON THE PLANT LIST. SEE SHEET 27 AND 28. 2.4. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION o+oo AND 29+00 AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WILL NOT INCLUDE TREES DUE TO SIGHT LINE ISSUES. SEE PLANS AND SECTIONS LEGEtO 2.5. THE LEFT BANK BETV'l'EEN STATION 29+00 AND 59+00 AIRPORT I Cl) APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WILL INCLUDE TREES. ....... 2.6. TREES WILL NOT BE INCLUDED 40 FEET ABOVE AND BELOW THE - SOUTH BOEING BRIDGE. _:;::j ---------MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR --Ww--·OIi'~ OHW s• > TREE §I CATCH BASIN I>--11DEFl.£X r--OOlFALL v.ETLANDS MOOATION/ PI..ANTNl LEGEtO fil'ii~i ~ MEADOW SEED SHRUB AND TREE OR SHRUB ONLY 'MTH SEED RESTORATION AS NOTED al i ~ ,. ,,,,_,,..,,, ~ " ;;;o>:::o;i!nl>J>. lJ F~a~r'l~ ::J ::;:o ---l z ,;-:::OOOIJJo ·· ·· (l)~;:gz~..,, ..,._I~ ):,.~:::0"112:::0 ~>==-~~~b0~ lJ N~Z ----ui ~S8d ::o (O.eJ ~ ~U)rii3::z :t (.,j:::o > <.n 0 Ul~ :--if'Tlz ~ z ~ g~~ ..... <.!lOl'-"Ol --<Ul~_z"g~ 9· -· · · D; ..... o >""I"Tlr~)>:::0" ~ZfA 3::!:::! CJ::i,.Crrl ,lJO §g~R>~ '.:21:S N~g O>;:,;~zoo -<=-z ~Zz .:;i::::22~.;,.~N • I< -1:::;t:r :)l---10 AOJ~ § ~~R Ul 8;:.l o s.az :E.' ~ fTIS:: Z Z p, 0 .zfTI ::o G:i < O Z O 0 UH rn "' O> s::: -I s::: "'"'~ ~ ~ CJ) -I ~--1--1 m0 ~:t>O Zm ~ 8~ ~ 0 rn + ""O () :t> "'or :IJ SO:t> m:IJ -<'~o-~& :nrfil ,,+z m:n !i o O 0 ~ 0 0 § ........ -0 -r z :t> 0 z ~ ~ ;-;11:-:- ~ z "'I" I" lz --! :t :::0 0 .. rr1 fTI z N Z on N --! l>-(Tl 0 ~ § :::0 Z TJ z :::0 C " -" N ~ W ~ "'~ ~ I~ "'"' '-p ~ u, -" I '--~z " " d z "' ~ ozrri;;:: Cr'l~}> -,::s=viz ~IJJ:j-1 r:.,.Zrrl rzC"l~ :::oAmz f'T1Ul:t>O lJ--lZfTl !'_::i,.;:,;o :::02;!{/]:::0 Vl,----lfTl NJ>-o »rnco ::::!EZ ~~$) :i,.::::!-;,;,i zOqj o-:2=> Si RESTORE WITI-l RIPARIAN SHRUBS, TREES ANO Wll..1..0W STAKE PLANTINGS RESTORE WITH RIPARIAN SHRUBS, TREES AND WILLOW STAKE PLANTINGS ~ 0 0 + 0 m 0 0 + --:ii 0 0 0 0 + o 0 + ~ O 0 g + :;; '6 + ':i', ' . N I.I) + + , ! I Jo ..._ ,0,., u, -v -~--~ -}_:, ._ ·.' I() ·--------·-- .------" ·.c,-:c~~-~'.C.c',~~~1::~!.c~ -c--~r:_~-c:;~:..~-- -19 -----..._ I t;: C --,-~---, --\ v' 42+00 -i. :.~1 r--__ r ·~ o_ 4J+oo 1, 0 ----c:-,\ --44+oo 4S+oo -~~·-----+-----t-~ '" '" 46+00 ·.:. --r-' - 47+.00 -\6_ 48+00 --+--·------\---. v' --OIi'~ - '-RESTORE wrn, MEADOW SEED t:!QI!;_ OHW ELEVATION VARl::S, SEE PLANS AND SECTIONS L,EQEN:) MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR OHW 6• > lREE ej CATCH BASIN [>--TIDEFlEX >--OUTFALL 27 0 ~ CEDAR RIVER-- = 20 o. " -<-i_; - ''<•~f-ciffc"~"";."aJy";cc;.£~~:ri:,?23'.c;;~ 0 0 0 \ 'i' ,,,----------+-O 0 ,", ;!; ;!:~ + + \\£Tl.ANDS + RESTORE WITH MEADOW SEED 0 PLAN 50 SCALE IN FEET 100 ... NOTE RESTORE WITH MEADOW SEED RESTORE WITH MEADOW SEED MEADOW SEED ON AREAS WHERE BANK STABILIZATION OCCURS, TYP . 1. ALL RIPARIAN (SHRUB WITH SEED AND SHRUB WITH TREE) AREAS SHALL RECEIVE GRAVEL SOIL MIX 2. PLANTINGS IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE AIRPORT: 2.1. THE MITIGATION PLAN WILL BE REVlEW'ED BY THE RENTON AIRPORT MANAGEMENT TO ENSURE AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION IS USED. 2.2. VEGETATION ON THE LEFT BANK WILL CONFORM TO THE "WSDOT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AIRPORT PLANTINGS WSDOT AVIATION STORMWATER DESIGN MANUAL M 3041.00, DEC. 2008ll 2.3. THESE PLANTS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED ON THE PLANT LIST. SEE SHEET 27 AND 28. 2.4. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION 0+00 AND 29+00 AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE VvlLL NOT INCLUDE TREES DUE TO SIGHT LINE ISSUES. 2.5. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION 29+00 AND 59+00 AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WlLL INCLUDE TREES. 2.6. TREES WILL NOT BE INCLUDED 40 FEET ABOVE AND BELOW THE SOUTH BOEING BRIDGE. ~TION/ Pl..AN1Nl IFQEN? ~ ~ ~ MEADOW SEED OR L.Av.N SEED AS NO'TED SHRUB ANO TREE OR SHRUB ONLY YUH SEED RESTORATION AS NOTED -~ .-:l 00 i ~ .. "'Ne" ,,I ~ ;1;0:J>:::0---lO)>)> "1J r O ZfTlI=i c5o~rr1-< z :>aooro 0 ---1 .. •• ~~~Z~"TJ -f>.IS:: ...._ ~ :::oTJZ::o '-' ::.-l> ,...Cl>)>G')(Tl "N- ~::;::::::JQ Z-UNl>~ '-'Ul orn--1 '° :::o rri 2 :300 ·oz ~v1fTl::;::Z 01;:o)>, U, U)""U '-'rriZ 0 l> o0 0 o ~ z :eocfTl ~lD(D....JO) -<(/1: jg~ 9···· ·l'./l~o ·· NZ Lil )>I"TJr:EJ>-:::0 N fTl ::;::rri fTl_:i..crri .--u o ~~:;~~~i "-~ ~ ~z-03:'!Z)>.J>,(lN • ~ --1--IIc~---lo Acbc:J ~-<~ ~ R u, 8;:;:1 0 (,!! z :e' ~ fTl::;:: Z Z l> 0 .zfTl :::o G"J < o Z O 0 (/)(A 0'.1 s::: -I s::: -)> 0 -t")> z ~~--1 -I ~)>0 ~() ~&~ )>el ".!+-u z)> ··orO:o "o J> m '<J,z; 0::0 <ii 0) ;:j ::0 ~ /:i+z m:o z O O 8 cl 0 z .._. ""U -r z )> 0 z ~ ;-;,1:-:-q "'il>lz"' ~z ~ =< :::0 (l fTl •. fTl fTl z N zon {,J ---l )> fTl 025~:::oz '1 z :;o C C, -;:: ;; CD "' C, ;~ " w ~~ 0, " " ,, N u, _,.. I " -~z ,. C, g ~ OZfTl::;:: CfTlX,:t> =;f:E:uiz l>rogj=;j :=?f0~ :;oAcoz fTl(.l)l>O ---U---1ZITl !::)>AO :::OQ;!UJ:::0 (/)1---lfTl Nl>O > rn c, .::!CZ ONC> z,-· ,, "'"' z~~ 0-,, a; g -~ RESTORE WITH RIPARIAN SHRUBS, TREES AND WILLOW STAKE PLANTINGS 0 0 g "' ~ < '6· 'c;,K 'b '\ ·m ·- lfl ·-· ---"" J;" ~--.,,,. l() --.: ____ ,::._- --;o g +-. .o w g + ;;,. '6 ~ \ " RESTORE LA'iil -..--. w~ 0 ~v;,_iv ._,3 4B+oo _ --~~-_-1$ ---+--•0s"'""--:· 0 ----~~"-. . • . ----'9+oo ,,--"•~---------· ------:-C-:C-~~ c [ ::-;~c;;;" 0 0 ,,5,-;,$f ~7i,c,i}}c -• ' ' ,,,"":~-C ::56(7 -_ .h~ c ,,.oo '" 00 "'" 0 '" 00 o, ' "<C<c";:_ -CEoi.a ilVER ----~ --""P -----+,i'· ,a, ·'=" --~------:::;:• ""-'<C¥>,~_;;,;,.,,""'~'e ;-~-;,t-;,',fff>-,SS •~"'"' ·-__ __....------.-Q~~ \ ~ " ---------------~ ---------~ I ,, -•. -,~--+ ~ NOTE RESTORE 'MTH MEADOW SEED OHW ELEVATION VARl'.::S, SEE PLANS AND SECTIONS L..EGEtl) MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR OHW 6" > TREE e) CATCH BASIN t)--TIDEFl.EX >-OUlFALL ~~ ~ 8 \ '; RESTORE WITH ~ ~ + SHRUB AND SEED \1,£llANDS If) ~ RESTORE WITH ---- MEADOW SEED 0 PLAN 50 SCALE IN FEET ~o NOlE 1. ALL RIPARIAN (SHRUB WITH SEED AND SHRUB WITH TREE) AREAS SHALL RECEIVE GRAVEL SOIL MIX 2 PLANTINGS IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE AIRPORT 2.1. THE MITIGATION PLAN WILL BE RE\l'lEWED BY THE RENTON AIRPORT MANAGEMENT TO ENSURE AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION IS USED. 2.2. VEGETATION ON THE LEFT BANK WILL CONFORM TO THE 'WSDOT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AIRPORT PLANTINGS WSDOT A\llATlON STORMWATER DESIGN MANUAL M 3041.00, DEC. 2008" 2.3. THESE PLANTS HAVE BEEN IDENTlFIED ON THE PLANT LIST. SEE SHEET 27 AND 28. 2.4. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION 0+00 AND 29+00 AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WILL NOT INCLUDE TREES DUE TO SIGHT LINE ISSUES. 2.5. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION 29+00 AND 59+00 AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WILL INCLUDE TREES. 2.6. TREES WILL NOT BE INCLUDED 40 FEET ABOVE AND BELOW THE SOUTH BOEING BRIDGE. tEJQAllON/ PI...ANffiG L..EGEtl) ~·)i,:;j ~ MEADOW SEED SHRUB AND TREE OR SHRUB ONLY V.,lH SEED RESTORATION AS NOlED _(!3 _:::l ~ Cl) g z ffi ,-~N~>-1 ~ ~~>~~n~> -ul LOGAN AVE BRIDGE j=OZrrlI:'.j _ c5o~ri-< >ooorno ·· ·· ~~~Z~-ri _,...I~ Z;:o..,.,Z;::o '-J:t,,:t, ~~~f)G)~ ~~z 3(/)oEo...., ~::uM z--<oo---l oz -z;;,(/)~~z-< ~:::o~ ,:_nnVl> oJTlo 3:1 z ogl"l -< 'n .z:::l~ r· ;::;~ui ;t>I"T'IO::E:l>:::O N"lJ~ =s;:rri f"l;t-Crrl • ---l rn:'.:jRo--vi:tZ ....,, ;:o - '"""ol'" Ul~-::,<:?i~Z ~ t;~N ["'I z ---l~I . ---l 0 I~ O o o U1 AOJ(/)Zc··~..,., g...., o !:2 -:i_ r fTI~ Z Z :i, 0 ?~ :::0 0 8 u, ui --- ~ I '- >-~~ ~ )> z :i: Cl) -I -I C: -I -m o \; )> 0 g 0, z Zm z Ol --)> 0 ~ + ""'[] z )> ·· or () :::0 SO)> m :::o -< I Z o-0 0) -I :::0 < ~ .j>. -mm oa+Z !i O C) 0 :::0 I / / 60 C) z ....... -u z r )> C) z I ~18j~f ~ fTl C .. O '" z " --l?'~hi VJ N ZO -f>. ---l > .. "'0"' 0 Z Z Z OZJT13:: -., G) ~ CIT\~;?- N iii sl"";z I ~ <O :::o :i-cozrtj F~0~ OHW ELEVATlON VARIES, ;:o7'roz SEE PLANS AND SECTIONS ~ ~ ~~~~ ~~(/)~ C--1JT1 N>-0 lfQfM? .. >~Q m ,e ::Jez ONC> ---------MAJOR CONTOUR " >-z,-· Nu, ,_=Joa MINOR CONTOUR ,-I ~z z~!:8 --OHw---c,.~--CfiW ,. :1 0->- 0 55 s• > TREE e] CATCH BASIN z f;--TIDEFL£X >--OUTFALL .~ ..• ·~·~ - --J-~,-. l~ 2 5 =-=-----=- --,~, 62+00 63+00 64+00 0 . ----+---·---+---·· ---+-- ~ . 59+oo ~?_+~o .. . -51+00 .. ;:_ I -c-+-.-----+-----+--- ~ CEDAR RIVER 6_ ~) -. ~=--~ ~t"""-'""' .cc-_~tl~"~!'~'\~-=c~~:--=-=-i,;l',;~~= ~-".t"_;::=~~?-~cc-.,_'"\"--= "'::~~~--:'"f J?J ~ WETLANDS " -~ L___. .,. RESTORE WITH TREE AND -+-----N ~ + "' ~ SHRUB PLANTINGS 0 g + N ~ LA 'NN WITH POTENTIAL IRRIGATION PLAN 5.0 SCALE IN FEET NOTE 100 0 0 ,!; ~ 1. ALL RIPARIAN (SHRUB WITH SEED AND SHRUB WITH TREE) AREAS SHALL RECEIVE GRAVEL SOIL MIX 2. PLANTINGS IN RELATIONSHIP TO lliE AIRPORT: 2.1. THE MITIGATION PLAN Will BE REVlEWED BY THE RENTON AIRPORT MANAGEMENT TO ENSURE AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION IS USED. 2.2. VEGETATION ON THE LEFT BANK WILL CONFORM TO THE "WSDOT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AIRPORT PLANTINGS WSDOT AVIATION STORMWATER DESIGN MANUAL M 3041.00, DEC. 2008" 2.3. THESE PLANTS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED ON THE PLANT LIST. SEE SHEET 27 AND 28 2.4. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION 0+00 AND 29+00 AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WILL NOT INCLUDE TREES DUE TO SIGHT LINE ISSUES. APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WILL INCLUDE TREES. " 2.5. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION 29+00 AND 59+00 AIRPORT I (/) 2.6. TREES WILL NOT BE INCLUDED 40 FEET ABOVE AND BELOW THE :_. SOUTH BOEING BRIDGE. _ ...... t,fTJQAJ]ON/ PLANTNl !BHP co § ~ ' . ~ MEADOW SEED SHRUB AND lREE OR SHRUB ONLY WITH SEED RESTORATION AS NOTED m !'-<-Ne'>! ~ ::fO;t>:::0----IO;j;l> "U p=ozrr1I::::jo 0 c50~:r1-< z (/) ~056~~0--I·· .. 1./l~fTl rrl """'1 "U ..,._I :a;:: )>~::o"""'lz::o:::o....J)>)> rii~~bG)~ o ~~z '-'(.l)Orn----1 :;o c.o::oM z::::;o§t ·oz '§(/)~~ -< ::'J~~ n J> o0 0 n ;rj z oc[T[ -< "n _z:::!~ ~~UI l>I"'Tlr~)>;:o· ~ rrl ,::rri fTl:i,crri .-on rn=iR'.;-VJ:i!Z ~;;o:::! 8~:;,::~~odi N-~~ g]Zz G)~z )> .J>,()N "1<d:!r fl>----lo AOJ~z§ .. ;3°' 8M o !:!! i ~ rrl:a;:: Z Z ;p. 0 ~';2 :;o r.;)< g UH V> s:: :?>- "U -,. r z ~ :t>-rilo " z z m ~ -I :?>-0 §' z z :?>- rn C) () :0 -< oo m :o s m o < -< o :om \1 -I m :o Rs O 8 "i z §' (/) z ~1~fz "'n .. r, fT1 N ZO U1 Ad J:> 0 -z ;:o ...,, ~ 2!l N w ~~ m ,s ,> NV> _.. I ~z ..,.. ~ z ;;i :::o I?? C) ~ OZfTl=!:: CfTlX)> :;:pEuiz l>ro::::l--1 r)>ZfTI rzc,~ :::0A1JJz fTl(/J :r-o --u ....... zrr1 !::t,.AO :::oo;i::i(/):::0 UJC----11"'1 N>O ;,.rnc, .::!CZ ON<O z;,.· ,.='"' z~l7J O• > Si '5 30 "' w §/ 3 25 t;: z 0 F 20 < ~ w 15 10 cJ le ~ 15' VEGETATION FREE ZONE (Vl'Z) 1-TOP DRESS Wl TH TOPSOIL AND H'rDROSEED IN Vl'Z BEDDING STONE ARMOR STONE (VOIDS FILLED WITH GR.t., v£L AND COBBLE) 70 80 RIPARIAN BENCH PLANTING BENCH 'MOTH VARIES I TREES ~----SHRUBS ~----PLACE GRAVEL/ SOIL MIX ON BENCH +19.0' ,---APPROXIMAlE SUMMER WAlER EL+18.6' DREDGE AREA 8.0. DREDGE CUT EL VARIES (EL+15.6' SHOWN) L ----1' OVEROREDGE ALLOWANCE J FABRIC 90 100 DISTANCE, FT 110 120 130 SECTION A: SECTION AT RIPARIAN BENCH WITH TREES AND SHRUBS Q_ical SCALE: 1" = 10' 35 30 25 20 15 10 15' VEGETATlON FREE ZONE 10' (VFZ) 3' TOP DRESS WITH TOPSOIL AND HYDROSEED IN VFZ ~ w (VARIES) ~I I EXISTING CONCRETE SLABS TO BE REMOVED 3C:ODING STONE 70 ,. 80 -----LIVE STAKE PLANTING - 'MU.OW AND REDTWIG DOGWOOD SPECIES ~----•GRAVEL/ SOIL MIX 0 5 10 SCALE IN FEET 'Q OHW EL 23.4' NAl/088 ,--APPROXIMATE SUMMER WATER El.+18.6' --r.11.~-.. ......_ ......_ FABRIC -...._----ARMOR STONE (VOIDS FILLED WllH GRAVEL AND COBBLE) ~- 90 100 DISTANCE, FT 110 8.0. DREDGE CUT EL. VARIES (EL+15.6' SHOWN) 1' OVERDREDGE ALLOWANCE] 120 130 SECTION B: SECTION AT BENCH WITH LIVESTAKE PLANTING (t ical SCALE: 1" = 10' 0 5 10 SCALE IN FEET 35 30 "' w §/ 25 3 ~ ~ z 0 20 ~ 15 10 140 A 35 30 w ro §/ 25 3 ~ ~ z 0 20 ~ 15 10 140 B ".a w w ~ w -~ _::::i 5 i ~ (BBGASN) lJ 'NOLi\i/\313 0 V, 0 V, s "' " N N 0 a, I s I w ~ w \. w ::.:::: ~ /r I~~ <( V, " I-w c.,f:Jo~x ~ ~~~~:i 0 en « ~ u ~t--of}j::::! V, "'z o w ::S~<gc.n > 0 "' I ~::i~i~ z _J « I rn ::io::jc:,<e " I u ~~~g~ 0 z " ,= m z V, I « x ~ <( w 0 I "' Cl z 0 0::: w rn " w « w >-le I!! V, « <( "'m 0 _J LU -!'; "' ic « :c "' ,<.DC> en ::::, 0::: ~ co ~ :c w ou I-., z « $ ~ V> ~ ~ 0 " ~~ :c z ,= "' « u 00 V> '-'"' -W x « " z "'<L w '"w "<L 0~ w 04'. w w« > z"' "" 0 "'ill co " ~u 0 w " z "' "'!'I 0 "' > ,= <( "' <) « " §2 w xz u 0::: " « W'-._ z 0 " w z " « <( " z " 0 ,= 0 a.. "' ~ " ~ X « ~ w 0::: w w " 0 " 0 N !;i: I w "' 0 0 I "' 1, !'I z I~ ~ 0 "' 1: le: I-u w i:J . ~ I s w ~ o::1/civ,I en :::, <>: • I c:, c.n~ t,l I ) ~~ I u ~ ~.... o o.-I II <+ wl/w+ ~_J o::: c., ..J I z = xw o j 13w I o~ « I 0 ~ 8: j ot:J I b w a..; 0~ I ...J < Ill> I t3 0 "' 0 :" s "' w " N N en (f) (88GAYN) lJ 'NOll't/\313 PURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD I HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT LOCATION: 47" 29' 37.00"N, 122· 12' 48.orw ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS· DATUM: NAVP88 CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 3. RENTON F AGILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR I AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMENTS WILLIAMS AVE) 9. HEITMAN -BODEN, S 10. AMBROSE, K PLANTING SECTIONS APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON 87, 17, 18 T23N ASE PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS REFERENCE NUMBER: ill.;_ CEDAR RIVER AL RENTON ~ KING SHEET 26 OF 29 SIA.IE.;_ WASHINGTON QAfE;_ 6/24/14 ------------------~ u~-I ~ ~8~~:tQ ::.,. §5 CONIFER TREES E5o~r'l~ ; SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING ~oo~~o v,,;c;ls ~~ I ~IS: z:::o,--,z:::o -.Jl>l> ~~~~0~ ~~z PCC PINUS CONTORTA CONTORTA SHORE PINE 5GAL CONTAINER AS SHOViJN .!::'-Vl oEncj :::o <0_:::o rii ----------- ,......~~~z j r... o~ PM PSEUDOTSUGA MENZESI\ DOUGLAS FIR SGAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN Ul "'Cl -.J:::oz u,nvi::.,. ~ · rrio --, z 8~rri TP THUJA PLICATA WESTERN RED CEDAR SGAL CONTAINER AS SHOVVN :::o -< ~ z"" o ~(OC()'-.,JO'l tn:::o· ::::f,.., p· . . . . t,:\ ;::5~Ul DECIDUOUS TREES l>I"'Tlr;:E:>:::O N-0~ ~~R-C!J)>Crrl ':::o::::f !',""i '2' SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING Vl~-A~,:QZ )> .,t:,,.~N !'l z ---1---1I ~---10 1 ~ o-<o o (Jl AGm ACER GLABRUM DOUGLAS MAPLE SGAL CONTAINER AS SHOVJN ArnVl Z C • N. "'T'J 8ni o ~ =2· r ~~ ~ ~ :> g Fl FRAXINUS LAT!FOLIA OREGON ASH 5GAL CONTAINER AS SHOVwN -z 0 V, ui MF "MALUS FUSCA PACIFIC CRABAPPLE SGAL CONTAINER AS SHOVv'N SL SALIX LUCIDA PACIFIC WILLOW SGAL CONTAINER AS SHOVv'N s:: SHRUBS l> }> "1l ~ -u r SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING -u r l> n () }> ~ z AA "AMELANCHIER ALNIFOUA SERVICEBERRY 1 GAL CONTAINER 6'0.C. =i m 0 l> z 0 '" r z l> cs "CORNUS STOLONIFERA REDOSIER DOGWOOD LIVESTAKE --6'0C -< ~ () :a Q m HD *HOLODISCUS DISCOLOR OCEANSPRAY 1 GAL CONTAINER 6'0C ~ :a -< CJ) 0 < 0 ::r: LI 'LONICERA INVOLUCRATA TWINBERRY 1 GAL CONTAINER 6'0.C. ~ :a m ~ m m :a CONTAINER 6'0C. '" m PN PHYSOCARPUS CAPITATUS PACIFIC NINEBARK 1 GAL z 0 ~ -l 0 C) z ~ RS *RISES SANGUINEUM RED FLOWERING CURRANT 1 GAL CONTAINER 6'0C z C) RN ROSA NL, TKANA NOOTKA ROSE 1 GAL CONTAINER 6'0C. RP ROSA PISOCARPA CLUSTERED WlLD ROSE 1 GAL CONTAINER 6'0.C. RSS "RUBUS SPECTABILIS SALMONBERRY 1 GAL CONTAINER 6'0C ~11';1" q ~ ss SALIX SCOULERIANA SCOULER'S WILLOW LIVEST AKE --8' 0 C ~ '" -u ---l ---l ::0 0 ~ .. rrl rrl z N ZOO *GAUL THERIA SHALLON SALAL 1 GAL CONTAINER 3' O.C '"-I ---l::., rrl • AO~ oz z z ozrri3:: Tl 0 ~ C CfTl;:,:<;::., MA *MAHONIA AQUIFOLIUM TALL OREGON-GRAPE 1 GAL CONTAINER 6'0.C. N ;;=i iji :;:j::E~z <D :::CJ ~ j!':IIIZM *SYMPHORICARPOS ALBUS SNOWBERRY 1 GAL CONTAINER 3' QC .. ,~0~ ;;oAwz -~~~~ ATHYRIUM FILIX-FEMINA LADY FERN 1 GAL CONTAINER 3' O.C. (/) ~~ :!:;i,-7'0 .'-I ::o~(/J::0 NOTE .:::l (!Jr--trri N)>O >'"" 1. " INDICATED SPECIES ARE ANTICIPATED TO BE RESTRICTED FROM A PORTION OF THE OBJECT AREA DUE TO POTENTIAL FOR W1LDL1FE ~ m >' ::::tEZ ATIRACTION IN PROXIMITY TO THE AIRPORT. SOME OF THE OTHER SPECIES MAY ALSO BE RESTRICTED AS DETERMINED BY AIRPORT co ONC> '---}> z:,,-AUTHORITIES. RESTRICTED AREAS WILL BE IDENTIFIED PRIOR TO FINAL DESIGN. ~ "' V, ;i,.g~ ~I ':::;-Z Zz-U 2. THE MITIGATION PLAN WILL BE REVIEWED BY THE RENTON AIRPORT MANAGEMENT TO INSURE AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION IS USED. c., ~ " 0-}> z 0 'o ~ z 3. VEGETATION ON THE LEFT BANK WILL CONFORM TO THE 'WSDOT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AIRPORT PLANTINGS WSDOT AVlATION STORMWATER DESIGN MANUAL M 3041.00, DEC. 2008" ;§ 0 )>::U:_tQ )> )> "lJ _,. ~N-~ ~ :=~6StfTl::;! 0 ~i5odro 0 z ~ ·· Vl ~~Z~""TJ "lJ -f>.I;':: ..._ ~ ;:o"T'IZ:::o ;:u ...J>J:>-.,,.. c ;i:,.:l>0rr1 "N- i'i9;::::::!Q Z"lJN:l>=i -VlocncJ ::a w.:::ofTl ..-.z::::10 2 --, Oz 8:(/)81~ -<~~~ n l> oOon ;dz ~oc(Tl -'<00)-...J(Jl --<u, zig~ ~-. . . . ..... ~(/) l>I"T'Jr:;E:t,,:::O ~ fTI S::fTI fTl)>CfTl ,""lJ (") ~~~:-~:.t~ N~6 Ol>::<::;:ii-oo -c.... z !?lZz t5~z~.,t:,.RN -I< d~Ic?J-io Aro~ Z g ~ ~ U1 8;:;:i O ~ z i ~ fTl3: Z Z J> 0 .:ZfTl ;:u 0 < 0 Z O 0 UH rn V, s::: l> ""'D -)> r z " l> ril () " C: n ~ Zm )> =' l> 0 0 r z l> z "' 00 () :0 -< -I m :o Q ~ en 0< -< ffi :o m 0 ~ m :o "' m 0 ~ z -I 0 ~ 0 N> z z 0 ~;~1~~ ; fTl .. .,., ~ ~ ~ "' "'n ~ .. fTI fTl z N ZOO OJ --, )> fTl .. AO"' oz. z z ozrri:;::: ..,, 0 ::U C CfTl X )> N ~ ffi :;:j=:!:'~z <D :::o fTl l>rozr,i :?? :=P0z z ,. :::oAwz ril(f))>o "'0--,ZfTl ~~ ~>;,:::o ;:u!!!u;:;o (./1,--,r,1 N>o > CD c, m ,; :::!CZ ON" '-)> Z)>" N V, ,_=fou _,. I ~z zg[8 ... '1 O• )> 0 Sj z SEED MIX 1 (\/JET MEADOW) -APPLY AT A RATE OF 112 LBS/ 1000 SQ.FT COUNT SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME 15% CAREX OBNUPTA SLOUGH SEDGE 25% JUNCUS ENSIFOLIUS I BULRUSH 5% *FESTUCA RUBRA RUBRA VAR, MOLETA RED FESCUE MOLETA 10% SCIRPUS WICROPCARPUS SMALL FRUITED BULRUSH 15% GL YCERIA GRANDIS REED MANNAGRASS 15% AGROSTIS EXARATA SPIKE BENTGRASS 15% HORDEUM BRANCHYANTHERUM MEADOW BARLEY SEED MIX2 (UPLAND MEADC'N) APPLY AT A RATE OF 4 LBS/ 1000 SQ. FT COUNT SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME 10% •AGROPYRON RIPARIUM STREAM BANK WHEATGRA5S 20% BROMUS CARINATUS I CALIFORNIA BROME 10% DESCHAMP SIA TUFTED HA1RGRASS CAESPITCSA 30% EL YMUS GL.AUCUS BLUE Vv1LORYE 30% 'FESTUCA RUBRA RUBRA NATIVE RED FESCUE SEED MIX 3 (lAVv'N) APPLY A7 A RATE OF 8 LBS/ 1000 SO. FT COUNT SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME 70% 3 WAY TURF TYPE PERENNIAL RYE 15% CREEPING RED FESCUE 15% CHEWING FESCUE ~ 1. ~ INDICATED SPECIES ARE ANTICIPATED TO BE RESTRICTED FROM A PORTION OF THE OBJECT AREA DUE TO POTENTIAL FOR WILDLIFE ATTRACTION IN ::>RQXIMITY TO THE AIRPORT. SOME OF THE OTHER SPECIES MAY ALSO BE RESTRICTED AS DETERMINED BY AIRPORT AUTHORITIES. RESTRICTED AREAS WILL BE IDENTIFIED PRIOR TO FINAL DESIGN. 2. THE MITIGATION PLAN WILL BE REVIEWED BY THE RENTON AIRPORT MANAGEMENT TO ENSURE AIRPORT APPROv£D VEGETATION IS USED. 3. v£GETAT10N ON THE LEFT BANK VvlLL CONFORM TO THE 'WSDOT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AIRPORT PLANTINGS WSDOT AVIATION STORMWATER D:::SIGN MANUAL M 3041.00, DEC. 2008" ~ -~ :::l co i NJ , .. -----1 w ~I Tn --111 Ill= ,j --=111=111=1 :"w \ II,' 11 111 111 11 ," 1 11 ," \ ] ! 11 111 111 11i'11 11i'11 11i'11r ij§ I 111 111 111 111= in ,1 "' 111 11i' 11 11i' 11 11i' 11 111~ ~~ ~·I:, 11" ', 11" ', 11" '''I 'I ii' 11rn1 11rn1 11rn= _ Ill - = Ill= I I i1 11 11 i1 11 111~ -111 Ill I 111i'11 11i1 11 f 0 z x ~ 0 " "' i;11111 i' llr " ~ w ~ > 0(0 ;cl -111 Ill= o,z"' 111i1 11 111~ ~~ :::! "=> 0 e-" "' PURPOSE· MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD I HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT I QCA]QN· 47' 29' 37.00"N, 122' 12' 48.02nW ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: DATUM: NAVQB8 1. CITY OF RENTON 5 RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR I AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMENTS WILLIAMS AVE) 9. HEITMAN -BODEN, S 10. AMBROSE, K _J ~ ~ u1 < ~ ~o " 0 ;Ji,'l f-Zz w w " '""'" ~o Oo Cl Ow e-w OCI w wO ~"' a, w ><'. >-w Oz I <( ~"' CL C: " ~ . I:, f-wz ~~ ~"' e--::; z e--(J) we-'< e-CL~ ~"' ..J a. u:i w"' "' w CL W <{ II we-"' => ::; "w e-e-wo > oxc,c 0~ "'::; " => ::J "w" ·O => z ri"I "'z I c,c ~~ e-w "~ w u z U) Z> 5 >-ti 5 :3 ~ :5 w "0 ::; ;§ "' " z~ o..:!: CL ,? o. ,., " ~M CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING PLANTING DETAILS APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON 87, 17, 18 T23N R5E _J < f-w Cl ~ (9 0 z e= z ::s 0.. en ::::, c:: "' z I " (J) z :5 Cl z CL <( ~ 0 "' w w w 0 c:: in f->-~ o' " " "' PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS REFERENCE NUMBER: .llit_ CEDAR RIVER AL RENTON £Q..!1tllX;_ KING SHEET 29 OF 29 STATE: WASHINGTON llliIL 6/24/14 ----- -_/~ ·-~.· .. ,"'--, .. ') -- / ) 'I --. .___ / ' / / ". - I I ( ' .- ( . ~'. . . . .... ', \ APPENDIX B Elliot Spawning Channel Maintenance Plan Drawings ,. . .._ / i • / ; i / \ ' \ ( l / ' ! \ \ \ --. . .---'·· ; I -• I / c~. ~ • ~ ~ t l ' .l f ' e ~ t ! ~ ~ ' ,; " • ; J • ' 8 ' ~ ~ g ~ "' 2 .f !,. ~ ;; ~ w > f ~ ~ " "' ~ ' ~ ~ U) I • i • l f I i I ~ i i j f J ~ I I i C I l ! I ,. -·.,:._. ··:1"'' ··_-J." "''~1!,,~ a\\ s-,~it Jv '&'~\<;,"°' ',''y:'. / V ~ ~~ti,"' ··:· -<:;.-~_· 8 NO Ei B .• ,/~\i..~() > / .. ,,.-,,7:< . -,,,. j ·:_,./ ·B· / /( B ., RE\/lSION 3' DATE I APPR ·-;,~ ·---~ .... B ~ S. '-icCAS~EY B J",a2Q' ·--~..,,---- HCIIIZ'"""'-'""'1...,,.IH1 ® B' LEGEND ;R CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Dept 0 ~ SCALE IN F'EET 20' 4-0' B B ~ .,,. 1, l ·'t, . ii' ~ ~ <f\ \ ~ ·"" ,.., ,i,ec~VJooo c;oc, co\l"s" B \ ELLIOT SPAWNING CHANNEL MAINTENANCE CHANNEL MAINTENANCE PLAN DEC. J. 2014 """' F-1 ~ t is . g t j f ~ t I ~ ~ < / ~ s .. • 0 • i t~ i f f I • ~ e ~ 0 i i ! ~ w ~ ~ 0 [ ! ! I 0 " j 0 ~ l ' l s ~ e ' ' ~ p § ei • ~ ~ :ii 0 ~ 0 ~· i_ ~ q q % £ 0 ~ </' ¢ .;:.'<I ,,_,":J ":)'<) ~,,,, ~' c,.:;;: ' ~~ ~ B >~ . ' B B -~ ' '~ ., B 8 -,(-~~<{! IJl'fc.~~t~i )0 NO. 8. B REVISION Rn<M:IIH>WO<El 'o'[GETAJ'IOH 11'1" HAND B B . 8 w-;.ecf.tlooo 50\.f couRS" ~ S McCASKEY 1"=20' 3' DATE I APPR ~ SCALE IN FEIT 0 20· +()' CEDARRJVER ' ,...___ '-----.; ~o~~ ._· __ ... ~--~----. ·-·- s/·· -'='.:ti"";;..,,"'J, .. , ® ;R LEGEND 'k1C, CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Publi<: Works Dept. B J ~--F-~ ,...___ RE-ESIMJsH COl.l.£CTIOH POOL 8 ELLIOT SPAWNING CHANNEL MAINTENANCE CHANNEL MAINTENANCE PLAN lJEC. J, 2014 --- F--2 2 -_?_ --/ ,,.r. / ' ) / / / ' I ; ' i ) ,/ / / / ( - / / / ,, (' t / I '. \ \ '· ', . .- / "" \ ' I APPENDIXC Listed Species and Critical Habitat ' \ I !~ ' LISTED AND PROPOSED ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES AND CRITICAL HABITAT; CANDIDATE SPECIES; AND SPECIES OF CONCERN IN KING COUNTY AS PREPARED BY THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE WASHINGTON FISH AND WILDLIFE OFFICE (Revised September 3, 2013) LISTED Bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis) Gray wolf (Canis lupus) Grizzly bear (Ursus arctos = U. a. horribilis) Marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus) Northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) Major concerns that should be addressed in your Biological Assessment of project impacts to listed animal species include: 1. Level of use of the project area by listed species. 2. Effect of the project on listed species' primary food stocks, prey species, and foraging areas in all areas influenced by the project. 3. Impacts from project activities and implementation (e.g., increased noise levels, increased human activity and/or access, loss or degradation of habitat) that may result in disturbance to listed species and/or their avoidance of the project area. Castilleja Jevisecta (golden paintbrush) [historic] Major concerns that should be addressed in your Biological Assessment of project impacts to listed plant species include: 1. Distribution of taxon in project vicinity. 2. Disturbance (trampling, uprooting, collecting, etc.) of individual plants and loss of habitat. 1. Changes in hydrology where !axon is found. DESIGNATED Critical habitat for bull trout Critical habitat for the marbled murrelet Critical habitat for the northern spotted owl PROPOSED North American wolverine (Gu/o gulo Juteus) -contiguous U.S. DPS Oregon spotted frog (Rana pretiosa) [historical] CANDIDATE Fisher (Maries pennanti) -West Coast DPS Yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) Pinus albicaulis (whitebark pine) SPECIES OF CONCERN Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) Belier's ground beetle (Agonum be/Jeri) Cascades frog (Rana cascadae) Hatch's click beetle (Eanus hatchi) Larch Mountain salamander (Plethodon larselli) Long-eared myotis (Myotis evotis) Long-legged myotis (Myotis volans) Northern goshawk (Accipiter gentilis) Northern sea otter (Enhydra Jutris kenyoni) Northwestern pond turtle (Emys (= C/emmys) marmorata marmorata) Olive-sided flycatcher (Contopus cooperi) Pacific lamprey (Lampetra tridentata) Pacific Townsend's big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii townsendii) Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) River lamprey (Lampetra ayresi) Tailed frog (Ascaphus truei) Valley silverspot (Speyeria zerene bremeri) Western toad (Bufo boreas) Aster curlus (white-top aster) Botrychium peduncu/osum (stalked moonwort) Cimicifuga elata (tall bugbane) Status of ESA Listings & Critical Habitat Designations for West Coast Salmon & Steel head PUGET SOUND DOMAIN • Puget Sound Chinook (T) [FCH 912/05) • Hood C anal Summer C hum (T) [FCH 91210 5) • Ozette Lake Sockeye (T ) [FCH 912105] • Puge t Sound Steelhead (T ) [CH u nder dev.; ANPR 1/10111] WILLAMETTE/LOWER C OLUMBIA D OMAIN • Columbia River Chum (T) [FCH 9/2/05] • Lowe r Columbia Rive r Coho (T ) [C H Under dev.; ANPR 1110111] • Lower Columbia River Chinook (T) [FCH 912 105) • Lower Columbi a Ri ver Steelhead (T ) (F CH 912/05] • Upper W illamette River Chi nook (T) [FCH 9/2/05] • Upper Willamette River Steel head (T) [FC H 9/2/05] O REGON COAST D OMAIN • Oregon Coast Coho (T ) [FCH 2/11 /08] S OUTHERN O REGON/N ORTHERN C ALIFOR NIA COAST D OMAIN • Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast Coho (T) [FCH 5/5/99) N ORTH -CENTRAL C A LI FORNIA COAST D OMAI N • Central California Coast Coho (E) [FCH 5/5/99] • Cal ifornia Coasta l Chi nook (T ) [FCH 9/2/0&j • Northern California Steelhead (T) [FCH 912/05) • Central Cal ifo rnia Coast Steelhead (T) [FCH 9/2/05) S OUTH-CENTRAL.1SOU THE RN C ALIFORNIA C OAS T D OMAIN • South-Central California Coast Steelhead (T ) (FCH 9/2105) • Southern California Coast Steel head (E) [FCH 9/2/05) 0 100 200 Mil es • Sacramento River Winter Chinook (E) [FCH 6/16/93] • Central Valley Spring Chinook (T) [FCH 9/2105] • Cent ra l Valley Steelhead (T) [FCH 9/2105) • I NTERIOR COLUMBIA D OMAI N • Snake River Sockeye (E) [F CH 12128193) • Snake River Fall Chinook (T) (FC H 12/28/93] • Snake River Spring/Summer Chi nook (T) [FCH 12/28/93; 1012519 9) • Sna ke River Steelhead (T) [F CH 9/2/05] • Upper Columbia River Spring Chinook (E ) [FCH 9/2/05] • Upper Col umbia River Steelhead (T ) [FCH 9/2/05] • M iddle Columbia River Steel head (T) [FCH 9/2/05) 1 I ------- CRITICAL H ABITAT RULES CITED • 6/16/93 (58 FR 33 212) Final CHD for Sa cramento River W inter-ru n Chinook • 12/28/93 (58 FR 68543) Final CHD for Snake R iver Chinook and Sockeye • 5/5/99 (64 FR 24049) Fina l C H D for Centra l CA Coa st and SONCC C oho • 10125199 (64FR5 7399) Revised CHD for Snake River Spring/Summer C hinoo k • 9/2/05 (70 FR 52630) Final CHD for 12 ESUs of Sal mon and Steelhead • 2111 /08 (73 FR 7816) Final CHD for Oregon Coast Coho • 1/10/11 (76 FR 1392) Advance Notice of Proposed R ul emaki ng; CHDs for Lower Columbia Coho and Puget Sound Steelhead LE GEND (E) Endangered (T) Th reate ned (FCH) Final C r iti cal H abi tat Designated ~ Doma in Overlap Updated 10-31-12 z.:;;;..~i:_, .. ,i . . i,..,.,~,. ' ,~," Provided by: United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Project name: Cedar River Dredging Project Official Species List Washington Fish and Wildlife Office 510 DESMOND DRIVE SE, SUITE 102 LACEY, WA 98503 (360) 753-9440_ http ://\Y\V\V. fws.gov /wafwo/ Consultation Tracking Number: OIEWFW00-2015-SLI-Ol 55 Project Type: Dredge / Excavation Project Description: Dredge lower 1.23 miles of Cedar River; indirect effects and habitat mitigation extending upstream as far as RM 4. 7. http://ccos.fws.gov/ipac, 12/05/2014 I 0:49 AM 1 "' '" <-.,.<.i~ ,•' , ~ ", United States Department oflnterior ! l 4 Fish and Wildlife Service •'"", ;; -•--· Project name: Cedar River Dredging Project Project Location Map: I..J/ie Washington ~ l • >,: • z I .. w 1 The i l<1nj,ir,,;i z • > ,. .. < NE '4#1 St Mapewood Pori< EutR@'nton -Hi_d'llanm -SE 121th i '! ci Fort IP C\:-nl · Park sw-1r.tti:S1 Project Coordinates: MULTIPOL YGON (((-122.21094 47.4870131, -122.2051099 47.4836526, - 122.2051095 47.4836524, -122.1999622 47.4805215, -122.1944751 47.4791309, -122.1913885 47.4793627, -122.1913805 47.4793617, -122.1913736 47.4793577, -122.1903436 47.4784295, - 122.19034 47.4784251, -122.1894856 47.4770393, -122.1850309 47.4756483, -122.1830127 47.4767349, -122.1830029 47.4767373, -122.1793637 47.4766909, -122.1793538 47.4766881, - 122.1766072 47.4750637, -122.1766053 47.4750624, -122.1738635 47.4729776, -122.1709856 47.4727923, -122.1709839 47.4727921, -122.167894 47.472328, -122.1678871 47.4723255, - 122.1678814 47.4723208, -122.1678779 47.4723142, -122.1673629 47.4706897, -122.1673622 47.4706865, -122.1668489 47.4671191, -122.1642523 47.4660163, -122.1615545 47.465618, - 122.160669 47.4668211, -122.1606679 47.4668224, -122.1589856 47.4687429, -122.1589826 47.4687457, -122.1568913 47.4703045, -122.1568857 47.4703074, -122.1544824 47.4711197, - 122.1544765 47.4711208, -122.1521076 47.4711846, -122.1521008 47.4711836, -122.1520948 47.4711803, -122.1520902 47.4711752, -122.1515433 47.4703031, -122.1496663 47.4691496, - 122.1474429 47.4697277, -122.1474406 47.4697281, -122.1448657 47.4700762, -122.1448569 http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 12/05/2014 10:49 AM 2 .; C, 4 . Fish and Wildlife Service £'.:,;:~ ~ United States Department of Interior " •. ' · . Project name: Cedar River Dredging Project 47.4700755, -122.1421591 47.4692156, -122.142133147.4692552, -122.1421276 47.4692608, - 122.1421203 47.4692638, -122.1421125 47.4692638, -122.1421052 47.4692608, -122.1419335 47.4691447, -122.141928 47.4691392, -122.141925147.469132, -122.141925147.4691243, - 122.141928 47.4691171, -122.1419624 47.4690649, -122.1419679 47.4690593, -122.1419751 47.4690563, -122.1419829 47.4690563, -122.141990147.4690592, -122.1419957 47.4690647, - 122.1419987 47.4690719, -122.1419987 47.4690797, -122.1419958 47.4690869, -122.1419723 47.4691226, -122.1421108 47.4692163, -122.142134 47.4691809, -122.142140147.4691749, - 122.1421482 47.4691721, -122.1421568 47.4691728, -122.1448648 47.470036, -122.147434 47.4696886, -122.1496645 47.4691087, -122.1496725 47.4691083, -122.14968 47.4691111, - 122.1515683 47.4702715, -122.1515747 47.4702779, -122.152118 47.4711443, -122.1544725 47.4710809, -122.1568699 47.4702706, -122.158957 47.4687149, -122.1606373 47.4667967, - 122.1615294 47.4655846, -122.1615346 47.4655797, -122.1615412 47.465577, -122.1615484 47.4655767, -122.1642607 47.4659771, -122.1642656 47.4659785, -122.1668749 47.4670867, - 122.1668806 47.4670904, -122.1668848 47.4670958, -122.1668869 47.4671023, -122.1674016 47.4706792, -122.1679123 47.4722903, -122.170989 47.4727524, -122.1738721 47.472938, - 122.1738829 47.4729421, -122.1766286 47.4750299, -122.1793696 47.476651, -122.1829983 47.4766972, -122.1850193 47.4756091, -122.1850269 47.4756068, -122.1850348 47.4756076, - 122.1895047 47.4770033, -122.189511 47.4770066, -122.1895157 47.4770119, -122.1903725 47.4784017, -122.191394 47.4793222, -122.1944754 47.4790908, -122.1944818 47.4790913, - 122.1999749 47.4804835, -122.1999804 47.4804858, -122.205130147.4836181, -122.2109664 47.4869821, -122.2109718 47.4869866, -122.2109752 47.4869927, -122.21561 47.4999833, - 122.2156112 47.499991, -122.2156093 47.4999986, -122.2156046 47.5000048, -122.2155979 47.5000088, -122.2155902 47.50001, -122.2155826 47.5000081, -122.2155764 47.5000034, - 122.2155724 47.4999967, -122.21094 47.4870131))) Project Counties: King, WA http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 12/05/2014 I 0:49 AM 3 United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Project name: Cedar River Dredging Project Endangered Species Act Species List There are a total of 11 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on your species list. Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species list because a project could affect downstream species. Critical habitats listed under the Has Critical Habitat column may or may not lie within your project area. See the Critical habitats within your project area section further below for critical habitat that lies within your project. Please contact the designated FWS office if you have questions. Amphibians Status Has Critical Habitat Oregon Spotted frog (Rana pretiosa) Threatened Proposed Birds Marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus) Population: CA, OR, WA Northern Spotted owl (Strix occidenlalis caurina) Population: Entire Streaked Homed lark (Eremophila alpestris strigata) Yellow-Billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) Population: Western U.S. DPS Conifers and Cycads Whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis) Fishes Bull Trout (.~alvelinus confluentus) Threatened Final designated Threatened Fin al designated Threatened Final designated Threatened Proposed Candidate Threatened Final designated http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 12/05/2014 10:49 AM 4 Condition(s) United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Project name: Cedar River Dredging Project Population: U.S.A., conterminous, lower 48 states Flowering Plants Golden Paintbrush (Castilleja Threatened levisecta) Mammals Canada Lynx (Lynx canadensis) Threatened Population: (Contiguous lJ.S. DPS) Gray wolf (Canis lupus) Endangered Population: U.S.A.: All of AL, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL GA, KS, KY, LA, MA, MD, ME, MO, MS, NC, NE, NH, NJ, NV, NY, OK, PA, RI, SC, TN. VA. VT and WV: those portions of AZ, NM, and TX not included in an experimental population; and portions of IA, IN, IL. ND, OH. OR. SD, UT, and WA. Mexico. Grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) Threatened Population: lower 48 States, except where listed as an experimental population or dclisted http://ecodws.gov/ipac, 12/05/2014 J0:49 AM 5 ~,i.~>IT c,· ~ .... t.;.,..:..""'-\ ; ~ . . ""-i'l(t, l ,i'~ United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Project name: Cedar River Dredging Project Critical habitats that lie within your project area There are no critical habitats within your project area. http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 12/05/2014 10:49 AM 6 March 18, 2015 Prepared for: City of Renton Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washington 98057 Attention: Vanessa Dolbee On behalf of: City of Renton GEoENGINEERs C} 1101 South Fawcett Avenue, Suite 200 Tacoma, Washington 98402 253.383.4940 RECEIVED MAR 2 3 2015 CITY OF RENTON ~LANNING DIVISION Public Works -Surface Water Utility 1055 South Grady Way, Fifth Floor Renton, Washington 98057 Subject: State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Permitting Summary Cedar River Maintenance Dredging Project Renton, Washington File No. 0693-073-00 INTRODUCTION The City of Renton is proposing to perform maintenance dredging of accumulated sediment within the lower 1.23 miles of the Cedar River. This maintenance project is needed to maintain adequate flood conveyance in the Cedar River to protect adjacent properties as required by the Project Cooperation Agreement with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) associated with the initial construction of the Lower Cedar River Section 205 Flood Hazard Reduction Project in 1998. This section of the river was last dredged in 1998 by the USAGE, following the preparation and approval of a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the project, which was adopted by the City of Renton to satisfy the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA, City of Renton File No. LUA-97-192,SP,SM). The NEPA EIS evaluated alternatives, including required future maintenance dredging, and identified mitigation actions that were implemented for all initial and future maintenance dredging impacts. Maintenance dredging was originally anticipated to be needed every three years, which was used to establish project mitigation actions. However, maintenance dredging has not needed to be performed for nearly 17 years, even though the mitigation was based upon a more frequent impacts associated with maintenance dredging needing to be completed once every three years. Stream bank improvements directly related to the maintenance of the 205 flood control project are also proposed to manage the effects of erosion on adjacent flood control structures and facilities. The City of Renton Department of Public Works-Surface Water Utility is requesting the City's Environmental Review Committee to concur that the original NEPA EIS, which the City adopted to comply with SEPA is also adequate for satisfying SEPA for the work proposed for the Cedar River Maintenance Dredging Project. City of Renton March 18, 2015 Page 2 GeoEngineers, Inc. (GeoEngineers) has prepared this SEPA letter in support of the Cedar River Maintenance Dredging Project, which is proposed by the City of Renton Department of Public Works -Surface Water Utility. The purpose of this letter is to summarize the original USAGE Section 205 Dredging Project, identify the NEPA and SEPA approval processes used for the original project in 1998, and to identify consistencies and differences between the original project and the current proposal. GeoEngineers has prepared this summary under sub-contract to Coast & Harbor Engineering (CHE) to provide environmental permitting support for the project to the City of Renton. Project Location The project is located in Renton, King County, Washington, extending from the mouth of the Cedar River at Lake Washington (lat/long. coordinates 47.50048, -122.21589) upstream approximately 6,500 feet to the Williams Street Bridge (47.48433, -122.20664). It is within Sections 7, 17 and 18 of Township 23N, Range 05E, of the Willamette Meridian. The Cedar River is within the Hydrological Unit Code (HUC) 17110012 (Lake Washington Watershed)1 and within Water Resources Inventory Area (WRIA) 8 (Cedar/Sammamish)2. Purpose • Maintenance dredging for existing Lower Cedar River Section 205 Flood Hazard Reduction Project as required per the USAGE Project Cooperation Agreement and project O&M manual to maintain the flood protection benefits of the federally constructed flood control project. • Continuation of 1998 permitted project. 1998 DREDGE PROJECT Project Description and Background The Cedar River Section 205 Flood Reduction Project is a USAGE project implemented in 1998. This project included dredging the channel to remove up to four feet of sediment deposition (estimated 125,000 cubic yards [CY]) below the 1995 bed elevation (the permitted elevation depth per the approved NEPA EIS document) in the lower river between the Logan Avenue North Bridge and the mouth of the river, with a gradual sloping transition reach upstream of Logan Avenue North, to match the existing channel elevation at the Williams Avenue North Bridge and to reduce headcutting. The purpose of this Section 205 project was flood protection of existing industrial development on either side of the river and City of Renton Municipal Airport facilities on the left (west) bank. The project also included the following elements: future periodic maintenance dredging anticipated every three years; construction offload walls, levees and a low berm; bank armoring (riprap) along tlie left bank; modifications to the South Boeing Bridge, including burying utilities and placement of rock/concrete below ordinary high water (OHW); and compensatory 1 Environmental Protection Agency. 2013. Surf Your Watershed. http://cfpub.epa.gov(surf//ocate/index.cfm. 2 Washington Department of Ecology. 2013. Washington Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) Maps. http:1 /www ecy wa gov/services/gis/maps/wria/wria.htm. File No. 0693-073-00 GEoENGINEERS CJ ', City of Renton March 18, 2015 Page 3 mitigation to offset impacts to fisheries and associated habitat resources. A grade control structure at the upper limit of the project was evaluated and approved during the NEPA process.3 Previous Mitigation The 1998 project permits required extensive mitigation for the initial construction impacts and impacts associated with the anticipated future maintenance dredging. Mitigation for the Lower Cedar River Section 205 Project, including the resulting excessive dredging and recurring maintenance dredging for the life of the project, has included the following. • 1998: Groundwater Side Channel (destroyed by Nisqually earthquake in 2001) • 1999: Maplewood Large Woody Debris Levee Project • 2000: Elliot Spawning Side Channel (1998 Corps over-dredging mitigation) • 1999-2000: Lower Cedar River riparian plantings • 2001 to 2011: Landsburg mitigation (annual gravel supplementation, except 2008) • 2010: Royal Hills Replacement Spawning Channel (replaced Groundwater Side Channel) • 2012: Elliot Spawning Channel flood damage repaired The mitigation outlined above has included the following elements. • Spawning Channels. The USAGE in coordination with the City has constructed several sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) spawning channels as mitigation for impacts from the 1998 dredging project and cyclical maintenance dredging, and provided monitoring of fish utilization within the project reach and the constructed spawning channels. The original Groundwater Side Channel constructed in 1998 at Ron Regis Park was supplemented with the Elliot Spawning Channel in 2000 to mitigate for the one- time loss of redds resulting from the unanticipated channel adjustment upstream of the project possibly exacerbated by the excessive dredging that occurred during project implementation in 1998. The Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) permit from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) included a provision requiring 10 years of performance monitoring and maintenance for the Elliot Spawning Channel. When the Groundwater Side Channel was destroyed in 2001, the Elliot Spawning Channel had been constructed and was providing mitigation necessary for the channel adjustment and excessive dredging. The Elliot Spawning Channel fulfilled its necessary mitigation needs for channel adjustment in the second year following construction, and continued to provide other project mitigation in the absence of the Groundwater Channel as required by the 1997 project EIS, until the Royal Hills channel was constructed in 2010. The Elliot Spawning Channel has been damaged by floods and natural channel migration that has reduced flows and caused deposition affine sediments, reducing the porosity of the porous levee resulting in decreased flows into the channel. The channel was reconstructed in 2012, but has been subject to additional sedimentation due to insufficient flow problems caused by changes in the Cedar River location that provides flow to the Elliot Channel. 3 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1997. Final Detailed Project Report and Environmental Impact Statement, Cedar River Section 205, Renton, Washington. June 1997. GEoENGINEERS CJ File !\o. 0693-073 00 City of Renton March 18, 201.5 Page 4 • Large Woody Debris. Large woody debris (LWD) and bioengineered revetment placement along an existing revetment at the Maplewood Golf Course. • Riparian Plantings. Riparian plantings, including vegetation monitoring, at the following locations: • Right bank from South Boeing Bridge to mouth (approximately 4,850 LF). • Left bank from Logan Avenue to small aircraft hangars (approximately 3,800 LF). • Gravel Supplementation. Stockpiling dredged gravel for future use and placement of up to 1,000 CY of gravel per year for 10 to 15 years upstream at the Landsburg site as a salmon spawning habitat enhancement measure. NEPA and SEPA Processes The USAGE 1998 project was a federal project authorized under Section 205 of the federal Flood Control Act. The USAGE led the NEPA process, ensuring compliance with various environmental regulations in effect at the time, and developing a NEPA Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), which analyzed several project alternatives, including the preferred alternative that was implemented in 1998. The EIS was previously prepared and approved and included analysis for continued maintenance dredging needed to maintain the flood protection benefits of the project, which is the current proposal. SEPA requirements were fulfilled by the City of Renton through adoption of the existing NEPA environmental documentation for the entire project (Final EIS)4 • Since the current maintenance dredging proposal was analyzed and approved in the original NEPA action, which was adopted by the City for SEPA, we have identified the minor changes in the project and environment that have occurred since 1998. PROPOSED PROJECT Proposed Action The proposed action is maintenance of the 1998 USAGE Lower Cedar River Section 205 Flood Hazard Reduction Project originally implemented in 1998. At the time of preparation and approval of the EIS for the 1998 project, maintenance dredging was anticipated to be needed every three years 5 . Maintenance of levees and floodwalls, and bank stabilization are also proposed as part of the maintenance project. The design and extent of the current proposal is consistent with the original project. The current maintenance work will take advantage of current technologies and methods that differ from the original project, which will reduce overall environmental impacts. For example, more focused dredging methods will be used to reduce deviation from the approved design. A complete detailed project description is included in the Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application (JARPA), which is included as Appendix A to this letter. The maintenance dredging depth will be approximately four feet, which is consistent with the USAGE 205 project permitted dredge design depth of four feet below the 1995 bed elevation (the permitted elevation 4 City of Renton Planning/Building/Public Works. December 30, 1997. Cedar River Section 205 Project. Memorandum to ERC from Mark R. Pywell and Ross Hathaway. 5 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1997. Final Detailed Project Report and Environmental Impact Statement, Cedar River Section 205, Renton, Washington. June 1997, GEOENGINEERS C} File No. 0693-073-00 . • City of Renton March 18, 2015 Page 5 depth per the approved NEPA EIS document). The dredge width will be variable to match channel variations along the length of the project, and will be designed to avoid impacts to stability of the river bank, including existing bank protection features. The channel slope will match the 1998 USAGE design, except within the transition area. The transition slope between Logan Avenue and Williams Avenue will be 0.63 percent. Bank stabilization maintenance and repair are also proposed, with limited new armoring. Most of this work will be on the left bank adjacent to the airport, with limited repair and new armoring (184 feet) on the right bank near the existing floodwall downstream of the South Boeing Bridge. Approximately 10 percent of the 2,510 feet of existing bank stabilization on the left bank will be maintained and an additional 1,275 feet will be repaired (replaced). Stabilization on the left bank will consist of a rock toe with bioengineered upper slope, as allowed within the USAGE levee vegetation requirements, and the interstitial spaces of the rock toe will be filled with stream gravel and cobble dredge material. The maintenance and repair of the previously installed bank stabilization is needed to prevent bank erosion and protect the structural integrity of the floodwalls that provide flood protection during, and following, the maintenance dredging activity. Proposed Mitigation Mitigation has been designed to offset unavoidable impacts caused by the proposed project. Proposed mitigation will include the following items. • Native Vegetation Plantings (on site). Native vegetation will be installed in riparian and channel fringe habitats where feasible, based upon hydraulic conditions and within guidelines for vegetation along levees and floodwalls set by USAGE. Native vegetation will be installed in the following locations: all temporarily impacted riparian areas; along the left bank above Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in areas outside the Vegetation Free Zone (VFZ); along vegetated benches along the left bank below OHWM; and in selected locations along the right bank that have been identified to benefit from additional plantings. • FIiiing Void Space In Rlprap (on site). Interstitial spaces in all bank stabilization work areas proposed as part of the project (new, repair and maintenance) will be filled with native dredge material to reduce voids that may harbor predatory fish species and to provide suitable substrate for riparian plantings where appropriate. • Lower Reach Gabion Removal (on site). Gabion bank protection currently exists along the right bank within Reach 1 (downstream of South Boeing Bridge). Removal of the gabions and replacement with bioengineered bank stabilization measures (composed of a rock toe, geogrid reinforced soil lifts and plantings), is proposed to improve nearshore habitat conditions and restore bank stabilization function. The proposed improvement work is located near channel STA 22+25 and is 100 LF long. • Spawning Channel Maintenance and Monitoring (off site). • The City will continue to maintain the existing Royal Hills Replacement Spawning Channel at approximately River Mile (RM) 3.5, as required by the original project 1997 EIS mitigation plan for the initial and future maintenance dredging. This will promote ongoing functional value and continue to compensate for impacts to spawning from the proposed maintenance project and future maintenance projects. • The City also intends to conduct maintenance of the Elliot Spawning Channel at approximately RM 4.7 to promote continued use by salmon for spawning as well as off-channel spawning and rearing habitat to mitigate for measured channel adjustment impacts. Continued maintenance and GEOENGINEERS C) File /1.o. 0693-D'/3 00 City of Renton March 18, 2015 Page 6 operation beyond that point is voluntary and will continue unless ongoing excessive maintenance is required, it is frequently damaged, or significantly damaged in the future by floods resulting in a major or on-going need to repair or restore the channel. Specific maintenance actions that have been discussed with WDFW and the MIT are included in the proposed project action, as described more fully in the Mitigation Work Plan section of this document. • Lighting Impacts Reduction (on site and off site). The City will conduct an inventory of existing City-owned lights within the project area along the Cedar River including a 200-foot buffer on each side up to RM 2.1 upstream of 1-405. The inventory will provide data that can be used to develop the basis for a lighting study. The lighting study will identify City-owned lights that can be modified (direction, bulb type, shielding, removal, etc.) to reduce negative lighting impacts on the Cedar River habitat without compromising public safety. Study recommendations will be prioritized and implemented to the greatest extent feasible. • Scour Monitoring Study. A scour monitoring study utilizing scour chains with accelerometers is currently being implemented with the following goals: 1) to evaluate bed material disturbance depths prior to the 2015 dredging, thus defining baseline sediment transport conditions, and 2) to monitor the magnitude, extent, and rates of bed adjustment over the two spawning/high flow seasons following the 2015 dredging. The City has completed the permitting and contracting, and the scour chains have been installed within the project reach for the 2014-2015 spawning and winter season. • Wetland Mitigation Bank Credits (off site). The City plans to mitigate wetland impacts through use of mitigation bank credits at the Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank. The Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank instrument was approved in August 2006. The site was constructed in 2007-2008 and allows an alternative to onsite mitigation for private and public projects (City or WSDOT) with wetland impacts that require mitigation per City Code to achieve a no-net loss of wetland functions and values. This wetland mitigation bank currently has sufficient credits available to offset wetland impacts of this project. Project Elements Consistent with Prior Approval The following proposed project elements are consistent with the original environmental documentation prepared for the project, including the Final EIS and SEPA approval by way of adoption. • Maintenance action associated with existing project • Project location and extent • Depth of dredging • Dredging methods and equipment types • Equipment access locations and material handling areas • Amount of material to be removed • Inclusion of bank stabilization elements to prevent erosion • Repair of existing stormwater outfalls • Spawning channel maintenance as mitigation for dredge impacts • Riparian plantings as mitigation for dredge impacts GEoENGINEERS CJ file No. 0693 073 00 : • '• City of Renton March 18, 2015 Page 7 • In-water work window for protection of aquatic life (June 15 -August 31) Project Changes from Prior Approval • Advancements in dredging technologies, which will improve the accuracy of dredging activities, and promote adherence to the approved dredge design. This will reduce the environmental impact of the project. • Disposal and possible reuse of dredge spoils. This will have no net effect on the environmental impact of the project, except as a beneficial effect where spoils will be reused on site to fill void spaces, reduce predatory fish habitat, and create habitaVplanting benches. • Extent and locations of riparian plantings. This will have a beneficial net environmental impact because more extensive riparian plantings are proposed. • Listing of Puget Sound steelhead under the federal Endangered Species Act since the time of the previous dredge. The impact of dredging on this species is generally consistent with the impact to Chinook salmon, which was evaluated as part of the 1998 project. Therefore, environmental impacts will be consistent with previously prepared environmental documentation. • Wetland impacts of 0.062 acres, which are proposed to be mitigated through purchase of Bank Credits. Mitigation will adequately offset project impacts, resulting in no net environmental impact. • Additional mitigation elements, including filling void spaces in riprap, removal of a section of existing gabion basket, and lighting impacts reduction. These mitigation elements will have a beneficial environmental impact. SUMMARY AND CLOSURE The proposed Cedar River maintenance dredge project is proposed as part of the requirements of the 1998 Army Corps of Engineers Lower Cedar River Section 205 Flood Hazard Reduction Project. The proposed maintenance activities were identified in the original 1997 NEPA EIS for the project and were addressed in the regulatory approvals and mitigation planningforthe 1998 dredge. The City has developed the proposed maintenance project based on the original approved designs of the 1998 project. The scope of the project remains the same, but the shoreline impacts from the left bank will be significantly reduced. At this time, the USAGE has not made a decision on how they intend to fulfill NEPA obligations for the proposed maintenance project. The USAGE has preliminarily indicated that they will not require a new EIS or supplement to the original EIS. They will likely prepare an addendum or Environmental Assessment (EA) related to the items that were not covered in the original Section 205 dredge project EIS as outlined in this letter. The information presented in this letter is intended to assist the City with the SEPA process by re- affirming the original NEPA/SEPA decision and identifying changes in the project and environment that are outlined above. These changes are minor and are a result of advancements in technology, necessary maintenance of flood structures, and additional mitigation voluntarily provided by the City. The changes are, therefore, not expected to create significant environmental impacts outside of what was analyzed in the original NEPA/SEPA documentation for the project. GEoENGINEERS ti) File No. 0693-073-00 City of Renton March 18, 2015 Page 8 Thank you for choosing GeoEngineers to continue to support the City with environmental permitting for this important flood control maintenance project. If you have any questions about the information presented herein, please contact Joe Callaghan at 253.383.4940. Sincerely, GeoEngineers, Inc. J~~s Associate Environmental Scientist DBC"OC:ab Attachments: Appendix A. Complete JARPA Package cc: Shane Phillips, PE Coast & Harbor Engineering/Hatch Mott MacDonald ___ 0~ b c.,l_ David 8. Conlin, PWS Biologist/Project Manager Disclaimer: Any electronic form, facsimile or hard copy of the original document{email, text, table, and/or figure), if provided, and any attachments are only a copy of the original document. The original document is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official document of record. GEOENGINEERS CJ file No. 0693-073--00 • •' APPENDIX A Complete JARPA Package Gc179901 WASHINGTON STATE Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application (JARPA) Form 1,2 nl'1II ~ US Anny Corpa of Englneera ·• Seattle Oislrict USE BLACK OR BLUE INK TO ENTER ANSWERS IN THE WHITE SPACES BELOW. Part 1-Project Identification ·-------------------------------------' AGENCY USE ONLY Date received: Agency reference#: Tax Parcel #(s): ---------- 1. Project Name (A name for your project that you create. Examples: Smith's Dock or Seabrook Lane Development) (bftlQ] Cedar River Maintenance Dredging Project Part 2-Applicant The person and/or organization responsible for the project. (bftlQ] 2a. Name (Last, First, Middle) Straka, Ronald J. (PE), Surface Water Utility Engineering Supervisor 2b. Organization (If applicable) City of Renton 2c. Mailing Address (Street or PO Box) 1055 S. Grady Way 2d. City, State, Zip Renton, Washington 98057 2e. Phone (1) 2f. Phone (2) 2a. Fax 2h. E-mail ( 425 ) 430-7248 ( ) ( 425 ) 430-7241 rstraka@rentonwa.gov 1Additional forms may be required for the following permits: • If your project may qualify for Department of the Army authorization through a Regional General Permit (RGP), contact the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for application information (206) 764-3495. • If your project might affect species listed under the Endangered Species Act, you will need to fill out a Specific Project Information Form (SPIF) or prepare a Biological Evaluation. Forms can be found at http://www.nws.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/Requ!atory/Permi!Guidebook/EndangeredSpecles.aspx. • Not all cities and counties accept the JARPA for their local Shoreline permits. If you need a Shoreline permit, contact the appropriate city or county government to make sure they accept the JARPA 2To access an online JARPA form with [help} screens, go to http://www.epermittinq.wa.gov/site/a lias resou rcecenter/jarpa jarpa form/9984/jarpa form. aspx. For other help, contact the Governor's Office of Regulatory Assistance at 1-800-917-0043 or help@ora.wa.gov. JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 1 of 20 Part 3-Authorized Agent or Contact Person authorized to represent the applicant about the project. (Note: Authorized agent(s) must sign 11 b of this application.) ~ 3a. Name (Last, First, Middle) Callaghan, Joseph 0. (PWS) 3b. Organization (If applicable) GeoEngineers, Inc. 3c. Mailing Address (Street or PO Box) 1101 South Fawcett Avenue, Suite 200 3d. City, State, Zip Tacoma, Washington 98402 3e. Phone (1) 3f. Phone (2) 3a. Fax 3h. E-mail ( 253 ) 383-4940 ( ) ( 253 ) 383-4923 jcallaghan@geoengineers.com Part 4-Property Owner(s) Contact information for people or organizations owning the property(ies) where the project will occur. Consider both upland and aquatic ownership because the upland owners may not own the adjacent aquatic land. ~ ~ Same as applicant. (Skip to Part 5.) ~ Repair or maintenance activities on existing rights-of-way or easements. (Skip to Part 5.) D There are multiple upland property owners. Complete the section below and fill out JARPA Attachment A for each additional property owner. ~ Your project is on Department of Natural Resources (DNR)-managed aquatic lands. If you don't know, contact the DNR at (360) 902-1100 to determine aquatic land ownership. If yes, complete JARPA Attachment E to apply for the Aquatic Use Authorization. 4a. Name (Last. First, Middle) . 4b. Organization (If applicable) 4c. Mailing Address (Street or PO Box) 4d. City, State, Zip 4e. Phone (1) 4f. Phone C2) 4g. Fax 4h. E-mail ( ) ( ) ( ) JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 2 of 20 Part 5-Project Location(s) Identifying information about the property or properties where the project will occur. ~ D There are multiple project locations (e.g. linear projects). Complete the section below and use JARPA Attachment B for each additional project location. Sa. Indicate the type of ownership of the property. (Check all that apply.) ~ D Private D Federal [8J Publicly owned (state, county, city, special districts like schools, ports, etc.) D Tribal [8J Department of Natural Resources (DNR) -managed aquatic lands (Complete JARPA Attachment E) Sb. Street Address (Cannot be a PO Box. If there is no address, provide other location information in 5p.) ~ N/A Sc. City, State, Zip (If the project is not in a city or town, provide the name of the nearest city or town.) ~ Renton, Washington 98057 Sd. County ~ King Se. Provide the section, township, and range for the project location. ~ Y. Section Section Township Range NW 17 23N 05E NE 18 23N 05E SE, NE 7 23N 05E Sf. Provide the latitude and longitude of the project location. ~ • Example: 47.03922 N lat./ -122.89142 W long. (Use decimal degrees -NAO 83) Upstream project limit: (Williams Ave Bridge): 47.484361 N lat. /-122.206477 W long. Downstream project limit: (North Boeing Bridge): 47.50048 N lat. /-122.21589 W long. Sg. List the tax parcel number(s) for the project location. ~ • The local county assessor's office can provide this information . 072305-HYDR, 182305-HYDR, 172305-HYDR Sh. Contact information for all adjoining property owners. (If you need more space, use JARPA Attachment C.) ~ See Attachment C. Si. List all wetlands on or adjacent to the project location. ~ River conditions have been altered as a result of channel construction, levee construction, bank armoring and other structures. The channel is generally linear without meanders and the bank of the river is defined by levees, flood walls, and riprap. However, several riverine wetlands (vegetated sand and gravel bars) that have formed since the last dredge in 1998 have been identified in shallow areas below the OHWM of the Cedar River within the project reach. One additional depressional wetland has been identified within the floodplain but is above the OHWM. • Wetland A: Category Ill, Riverine, 3,404 square feet, east bank approximately 1,300 feet upstream from Lake Washington. • Wetland B: Category Ill, Depressional, 1,834 square feet, east bank approximately 2,300 feet upstream from Lake Washington. JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 3 of 20 • Wetland C: Category Ill, Riverine, 1,719 square feet, east bank approximately 80 feet downstream from the South Boeing Bridge. • Wetland D: Category IV, Riverine, 1,915 square feet, west bank just upstream from the South Boeing Bridge. • Wetland E: Category IV, Riverine, 795 square feet, west bank just upstream from the South Boeing Bridge . • Wetland F: Category Ill, Riverine, 1,618 square feet, east bank roughly parallel to the Renton Stadium track. • Wetland G: Category Ill, Riverine, 476 square feet, east bank roughly parallel to the Renton Stadium track . Sj. List all waterbodies (other than wetlands) on or adjacent to the project location. ~ Cedar River is the dominant river feature and the downstream outlet is Lake Washington. Sk. Is any part of the project area within a 100-year floodplain? ~ [81 Yes 0No D Don't know 51. Briefly describe the vegetation and habitat conditions on the property. ~ Vegetation below the OHWM is generally limited to riverine wetland areas at the channel margin, which are dominated by reed canarygrass with some yellowflag iris. Riparian vegetation includes Japanese knotweed, Himalayan blackberry, Scotch broom, tansy, butterfly bush, field bindweed, English ivy, native willows, bigleaf maple, red alder, and horsetails. Much of the riparian buffer on the east bank (river right) is affected by park landscaping including mowed grass and the native shrubs including Nootka rose, black twinberry, Oregon grape, Pacific ninebark and other species. The river within the project reach has levees and floodwalls on both sides for flood protection. Banks have been armored with a flood wall, riprap, concrete rubble, and/or gabion baskets. Much of the armoring is currently failing. Riverbed sediment consists primarily of cobbles, gravels and with a small fraction of finer materials (sand and silt). Sm. Describe how the property is currently used. ~ Cedar River is a dredged channel that has been actively maintained for the last century as a flood control facility to reduce the effects of flooding on adjacent properties including the Renton Municipal Airport, The Boeing Company 737 production facilities, and a public park. The river is frequented by salmon, trout, and a wide variety of birds and other wildlife. Extensive park facilities, including a paved pedestrian pathway, are present on the east bank (river right) within the project reach, as well as on the west bank (river left) between the Logan Ave and Williams St bridges. These facilities provide opportunity for nature enjoyment by the general public. There is also a boat launch within the project reach for use by non-motorized watercraft only. Sn. Describe how the adjacent properties are currently used. ~ Adjacent properties include the Renton Municipal Airport, public park lands, Boeing facilities, two apartmenUcondominium buildings, Renton Senior Center, retail restaurant, and a small industrial business. So. Describe the structures (above and below ground) on the property, including their purpose(s) and current condition. ~ Bank stabilization consisting of riprap, concrete rubble, timber bulkheads, and gabion baskets exists along much of the shoreline. The property also includes flood control levees and concrete floodwalls on either side of the river, a total of four bridges over the river, and a public trail. A portion of the public trail composed of concrete and bricks is located immediately adjacent to the river. The downstream two bridges (North and South Boeing Bridges) connect Boeing facilities with the airport, are not accessible to the public, and are maintained by Boeing. The upstream two bridges are public street bridges for Logan Ave and Williams St. Numerous outfalls discharge from both sides into the river at or near the shoreline. Sewer, water and other utilities (e.g., compressed air) are buried under the river bed in multiple locations within the project area. Overhead power lines cross the river between North and South Boeing Bridges, and at Logan Ave. JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 4 of 20 5p. Provide driving directions from the closest highway to the project location, and attach a map. ~ From the interchange between 1-405 and SR-167 in Renton, travel north on SR-167/Rainer Ave S 1.2 miles to Airport Way. Turn right (east) onto Airport Way, which curves and becomes Logan Ave N after 0.4 miles. In less than 200 feet, Logan Ave N crosses the Cedar River near the upstream limit of the project (the upper end of the project is at the Williams Ave S bridge, approximately 1,000 feet upstream to the southeast). The lower reach of the project is accessible from E Perimeter Road on the west bank, which branches from Logan Ave S at the southwest end of the Logan bridge, as well as from Nishiwaki Lane on the east bank, which can be accessed from N. 5th Street approximately 0.5 miles further north on Logan Ave. Part 6-Project Description 6a. Briefly summarize the overall project. You can provide more detail in 6b. ~ Maintenance dredging will be performed to maintain the project flood protection benefits, as required in the Project Cooperation Agreement (PCA) Operation & Maintenance Manual between the City of Renton and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE 2004). The threshold for periodic maintenance dredging is based on ensuring flood protection against the 100-year recurrence interval event, with at least 90 percent reliability. As the bed approaches the specified allowable elevation (Allowable Average Channel Bed Profile per USAGE 2004), anywhere within the project, provisions are to be made for channel dredging to maintain the design level of protection. During maintenance dredging actions, the Cedar River channel within the project area will be excavated to a depth of approximately 4 feet on average below the "Allowable Average Channel Bed Profile" as defined in the PCA. The transition slope area will extend from Logan Ave. upstream to Williams Avenue. The maximum transition area slope will be approximately 0.63%. Transition slope will gradually reduce the dredge cut from the designed dredged channel bottom at Logan Avenue upstream to Williams Avenue where it will meet the existing river bed level. The proposed maintenance dredge action is similar in scope (depth and plan extents) to the Corps of Engineers 205 project that was permitted in 1998, which also included maintenance dredging. The project extents (width and depth of the dredge cut) along the river (North Boeing Bridge to Williams Avenue, or Station 0+00 to 64+85) will be slightly smaller than the 205 project proposed and constructed in 1998 (dredging will actually terminate downstream of Williams Avenue, at Station 64+37.65). The dredge depth will strictly adhere to the average depth of 4 feet (below allowable average channel bed profile) with a 1-ft over- dredge allowance and will not exceed the depths permitted in the 1998 project. The total volume of dredged material is estimated to be approximately 125,000 cu yds including contingency for sediment accumulation between the May 2013 channel survey and the conditions at the time of the proposed dredging in 2015 (average accumulation of 9,700 cy per year in project area). For discussion purposes, the river is segmented into three reaches: 1. North Boeing Bridge to South Boeing Bridge (Stations 0+00 to 39+00) 2. South Boeing Bridge to Logan Ave. (Stations 39+00 to 56+00) 3. Logan Ave. to W1ll1ams Ave. (Stations 56+00 to 64+85) Width of the maintenance dredging will vary depending on location within the project area. The channel bottom cut will be 90 feet wide at the north in Reach 1, narrowing in intervals along the project length to 60 feet channel width at the upstream limit in Reach 3. Dredge widths have been narrowed relative to the 1998 dredge to prevent undermining of existing flood control structures and river banks. Dredged side slopes will be 3H:1V unless otherwise required for local bank stabilization maintenance work or if required for geotechnical or structural stability of existing infrastructure (Bridges and I-Walls). Bank stabilization work is proposed as an element of maintenance of the USAGE 205 Flood Control project. Bank stabilization is limited to those areas of the flood control project requiring stabilization (levees and floodwalls) based upon engineering analysis and design standards set forth by USAGE. Bank stabilization for non-essential flood control project features are not proposed as part of this project. Bank stabilization work is composed of the following types of work: JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 5 of 20 • Maintenance -Minor restoration of portions of displaced rock on existing bank stabilization features while access to the areas is provided during the dredging work • Repair -Replacement and reconstruction of existing deteriorated and failing bank stabilization features • New Stabilization -Installation of new stabilization measures to ensure protection of flood control I-Walls and levees Numerous stormwater outfalls (both active and abandoned) are located within the project area and consist of various sizes and types including concrete, plastic, and corrugated metal. Of these outfalls, approximately 20 are fitted with backflow prevention devices (tideflex valves) to protect upland areas against river flooding. As part of the work and in conjunction with dredging and bank stabilization, repair to damaged outfalls will occur. Because the river has continued to accumulate sediment some existing outfalls are buried and may require local excavation to uncover, assess, and refit damaged backflow prevention valves and pipes. Maintenance of existing outfalls will included in-kind replacement of existing damaged or deteriorated systems including tideflex valves and sections of outfall pipe. Removal of accumulated sediment from active outfalls may be performed as needed. It is estimated that up to 30 outfalls may require some level of repair and maintenance, but this number will not be known until during construction. Where active outfalls pass through bank stabilization (repair, maintenance, or new) modifications of the outfall location may be required by extending or cutting off outfall pipe to match proposed site conditions. Damaged pipes that penetrate through the existing floodwalls will require replacement and refitting as necessary. Abandoned exposed outfalls extending into the river will be cut-off and disposed of offsite, as feasible, when encountered. Due to the accumulation of sediments along the lower reach of the river, the exact number of damaged and exposed outfalls will not be known until construction begins. 6b. Describe the purpose of the project and why you want or need to perform it. l!:lml The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Lower Cedar River Section 205 Project (the project) is a Flood Hazard Reduction Project located in and along the lower 1.23 miles (2000 m) of the Cedar River in Renton, Washington. The project consists of an actively maintained (dredged) river channel, and system of levees and floodwalls that provide protection to the lower river and its extensive industrial and commercial development, including the Renton Municipal Airport and the Boeing Company facility. Following the most recent dredging operation performed in 1998 by USACE, the river bed has continued to fill with native river sediment composed primarily of gravel as expected and identified as part of the original 1998 project permitting and design. Continued deposition in the river channel is expected to reduce the level of flood protection below the required 100-year flood recurrence event of the project flood protection system in the next two to three years, or sooner. Therefore, the City has initiated the planning and preliminary design for maintenance dredging of the river and other necessary maintenance actions to obtain construction permits with sufficient time to maintain the 100-year flood protection, as required by the Project Cooperative Agreement (PCA) between the City and USACE. Maintenance dredging will take place within the limits and grades of previous dredging work as permitted within the original National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Sc. Indicate the project category. (Check all that apply) l!Jml D Commercial D Residential D Institutional D Transportation D Recreational IS] Maintenance D Environmental Enhancement 6d. Indicate the major elements of your project. (Check all that apply) [help] D Aquaculture D Culvert D Float D Retaining Wall IS] Bank Stabilization D Dam/Weir D Floating Home (upland) D Boat House IS] Dike / Levee I Jetty D Geotechnical Survey 0Road D Boat Launch D Ditch D Land Clearing JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 6 of 20 D Boat Lift D Bridge D Bulkhead D Buoy D Channel Modification D Other: D Dock/ Pier [g] Dredging D Fence D Ferry Terminal D Fishway LJ Marina / Moorage D Mining [g] Outfall Structure D Piling/Dolphin D Raft D Scientific Measurement Device D Stairs D Stormwater facility D Swimming Pool D Utility Line Se. Describe how you plan to construct each project element checked in 6d. Include specific construction methods and equipment to be used. lt:!fill2l • Identify where each element will occur in relation to the nearest waterbody. • Indicate which activities are within the 100-year floodplain. The project includes the following three primary elements: (1) Maintenance Dredging; (2) Bank Stabilization; and (3) Outfall Repairs. These are described in detail below. Maintenance Dredging Maintenance dredging work for the flood control project will be conducted utilizing a combination of land- based (excavator method) and water-based (floating dredge method) mechanical dredging equipment. Land- based dredging operations will occur from temporary in-channel gravel berms and from floating equipment, depending on the location of dredging and water levels present at the time of construction. Dredging work will be conducted to the lines and grades as shown on the plans. The extent of dredging will be monitored by GPS positioning equipment and visible stakes as necessary to verify that the dredging work stays within the planned limits. The approach to conducting the work will be to focus the majority of work activities (including access) along the left bank for the entire project reach. The right bank uplands and riverbank contains significantly more infrastructure (levee, floodwalls, park, trails, roads and public access) and habitat (native riparian vegetation) than along the left bank. Access points on the right bank will be limited, but some are required to construct bank stabilization improvements, mitigation features, and launch water-based equipment. These access points have been identified in areas of existing or proposed disturbance (including at the boat ramp [near Sta. 7+60], at the gabion replacement area [Sta. 22+25], at 61h Street [Sta. 31+80), and on the north side of Logan Avenue [Sta. 56+00]) to reduce impacts to existing riparian vegetation. Floating Dredge For water-based dredging, it is expected that the type of equipment utilized will be an excavator or crawler crane mounted on a portable sectional barge (such as a flexi-float system). The sectional barge will be mobilized to the site by truck, assembled, and launched either at the existing boat ramp on the right bank or at another nearby left bank staging area. The barge and excavator system will be moved around the dredging work area using a small transportable tug boat suitable for use in shallow water environments. The barge will · be ,;ecured to the riverbed prior to dredging using spuds in the riverbed or anchor lines in the river. Dredged material will be removed from the river bottom using either an excavator digging bucket or clamshell bucket The bucket will place the dredged material onto a material barge, which will be fitted with side boards and filter fabric to contain the dredged material and filter fine materials. Initial dewatering is accomplished while material is on the barge deck as excess water is filtered and returned to the river. After completion of material barge loading, the loaded barge will be transported by small tug to the material offload facility which will be at up to two locations along the left bank of the project site. Offload areas will be located within areas which allow access from the adjacent uplands and limit impacts to existing riparian habitat and flood control infrastructure. Temporary construction of an unloading platform will be required to unload dredged material from the barge, re-handle the material, and load into trucks or place in a small stockpile located in the adjacent uplands. The unloading platform will be composed of steel pile (vibratory driven sheetpile, pipe pile) or other similar temporary shoring method that can be fullv removed after dredaina activities (such as ecolonv blocks, rock, JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 7 of 20 large polypropylene sacks filled with soil/gravel, or similar). Native riverbed material consisting of dredged gravel and cobbles will be placed between the existing slope and steel pile to maintain a platform suitable for excavators to unload the barge. The platform will be disassembled after completion of floating dredge operations and impacted areas (levees, vegetation) restored, which may require minor earthwork. The upland stockpile will be protected against erosion using standard BMPs as identified in the Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control {TESC) Plan. The access platforms will be located along the left bank at approximately Sta. 8+50, 14+50, and 17+00. Excavator Dredge Dredging work will also be conducted utilizing land-based equipment operated from temporary gravel berms and removable construction platforms located in the river channel below Ordinary High Water. Excavator dredge operation will consist of a combination of multiple tracked excavators, crawler cranes, front end loaders, bulldozers and dump trucks. This approach will require the land-based equipment to access the river channel from the uplands at designated locations near the bridges (South Boeing Bridge Sta. 39+00, Logan Avenue Sta. 56+00). A total of 17 access points are anticipated to be required along the left bank of the project site with each being approximately 50 to 75 ft in length. Four access points along the right bank might be needed for the dredging and or bank stabilization work. These will include disturbed areas located at the boat ramp (near Sta. 7+60), at the gab ion replacement area (Sta. 22+25), at 61" Street (Sta. 31 +80), and on the north side of Logan Avenue (Sta. 56+00). The boat ramp may also be used for launching work boats and survey vessels. The stadium parking lot access will only be used if absolutely necessary to complete right bank work between South Boeing and Logan Avenue Bridges. The work will be initiated within the upper reach between Logan and Williams Avenue Bridges. The excavator method will require the use of native dredged gravel and cobble material to build a temporary working platform or berm/bench which has a top elevation above the anticipated river water level. To initiate the work, a limited amount of imported temporary fill may be needed at the access point and berm at the toe of the access point. The temporary berm will be stream bed type material similar in size and character to the existing channel substrate either taken from the floating dredge operation or from an approved offsite sand and gravel operation. Once excavation equipment is mobilized into the river channel, bed material will be dredged and placed within the left bank side of the channel to create a temporary berm to serve as a working platform for construction equipment. Temporary berm will be constructed of material excavated from the bed material located immediately adjacent to berm area as well as material removed from Reach 1 area if needed to start the berm feature. The temporary berm will be removed as the dredging work progresses in a downstream direction. Material removed from the channel and temporary berm will be loaded into trucks and transported to rehandling areas at access points. Rehandling areas will be constructed using dredge material to provide a ramp and bench for equipment to transfer materials from the channel side over the flood control structures (I-Wall and Levee) into trucks located along the adjacent access roads (Airport and Frontage Road). Rehandling areas will be removed after completion of dredge operations and impacted areas (levees, vegetation) restored, which may require minor earthwork. Bank Stabilization Multiple excavators and trucks will be used to construct the bank stabilization features. Imported rock and soil materials will be delivered to temporary work platforms by truck, rehandled and then placed using excavators. Bank stabilization work will be conducted in coordination with and at the same time as the maintenance dredging work as each reach of channel is completed. Slight differences in construction methods for the three types of proposed bank stabilization are summarized below. Maintenance Minor maintenance of existing bank stabilization features will be performed by removing damaged and displaced stones, Armorflex blocks, and reconstruction of small affected sections as needed to restore continuous bank protection, from toe to top of slope, along the project. The work will include importing some stones to fill gaps of displaced materials (stones and blocks), excavation, and demolition of short portions of existing bank. To the extent possible, existing slopes and geometries will be maintained and the overall footprint will not be increased compared to existing conditions. Upon completion of maintenance rock placement, native gravel/cobble (obtained from maintenance dredging work) will be placed on the slopes to fill voids in the bank protection where maintenance activities take place. JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 8 of20 ,,"., Repair In repair areas where the bank stabilization will be reconstructed or replaced, bank stabilization will be composed of angular rock placed at a 2H:1V slope. The stabilization will be constructed as the temporary construction berm or platform is removed. The existing bank stabilization will be removed and disposed offsite. A suitable subgrade will be established using excavators. Geotextile fabric will then be placed on the excavated slope, and small bedding stone (quarry spalls) will then be placed on the geotextile fabric to secure it in place. Armor rock will then be placed and compacted to form a tight fitting mass of stone working form the toe to the top of the slope. A narrow bench at the top of the slope will be constructed where space is available. Voids in the finished rock slope will be filled with native gravel/cobble dredge materials. A soil/gravel mixture will also be placed on top of the rock in the vegetation free zone (within 15 feet of the floodwall and levee prism) for establishment of native herbaceous vegetation. The mixture will be primarily composed of native riverbed material from dredging operations, mixed with imported topsoil to promote plant establishment and growth. On the left bank, from Station 37+15 to Station 41+90, a narrow habitat/planting bench will be retained to provide suitable areas for establishment of inundation tolerant riparian vegetation such as willows or other appropriate species. Plantings will be located such that they are in conformance with guidelines for vegetation near federal levees and floodwalls (ETL 1110-2-571, Guidelines for Landscape :>Planting & Vegetation Management at Levees, Floodwalls, Embankment Dams, and Appurtenant Structures, · ·.2009; Seattle Variance, PL 84-99 Levee Vegetation Management Information Paper, 1995). New <Bank erosion has occurred along the toe of the floodwall that was constructed by the USAGE without any '·bank stabilization measures. The design team identified one location where the erosion is a risk to the -~.uctural stability of the floodwall. New bank stabilization will be constructed at this location in a manner · similar to the Repair areas, except that removal of existing bank stabilization will not occur. The new bank · Sliabilization will be limited to 240 linear feet along the right bank of the river near station 30+66. For new stabilization on the right bank, temporary construction platforms may span across the river from the left bank :tc a How access to the work area for both excavation and construction of the bank stabilization. This will limit ~iparian impacts and protect the existing floodwall (I-wall). Access from uplands at 6'h Street will also be required. Platforms will be removed upon completion of the bank stabilization and dredging and the area will be restored to pre-disturbance contours. Outfall Repairs .Numerous stormwater outfalls (both active and abandoned) are located within the project area and consist of ~irarious sizes and types including concrete, plastic, and corrugated metal. Of these outfalls, approximately 20 ·-are fitted with backflow prevention devices (tideflex valves) to protect upland areas against flooding. "As part of the work and in conjunction with dredging and bank stabilization, maintenance and repair to damaged outfalls will occur. Because the river has continued to accumulate sediment some existing outfalls are buried and may require local excavation to uncover, assess, and refit damaged backflow prevention valves and pipes. · Maintenance of existing outfalls will included in-kind replacement of existing damaged or deteriorated systems including tideflex valves and sections of outfall pipe. Removal of accumulated sediment from active outfalls may be performed as needed. It is estimated that up to 30 outfalls may require some level of repair and maintenance. Where active outfalls pass through bank stabilization (repair, maintenance, or new) modifications of the outfall location may be required by extending or cutting off outfall pipe to match proposed site conditions. Where pipe penetrations through the existing floodwalls are damaged, pipe replacement and refitting will occur. Abandoned exposed outfalls extending into the river will be cut-off and disposed of offsite, as feasible, when encountered. BMPs will be implemented to isolate the repair areas prevent pipe repair materials from entering the water durin construction. JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 9 of 20 6f. What are the anticipated start and end dates for project construction? (Month/Year) Uill!ll] • If the project will be constructed in phases or stages, use JARPA Attachment D to list the start and end dates of each phase or stage. Dredging activities will be conducted during: Start date: June 15 2015 End date: August 31, 2015 D See JARPA Attachment D 6g. Fair market value of the project, including materials, labor, machine rentals, etc. Uill!ll] $7,800,000 6h. Will any portion of the project receive federal funding? Uill!ll] • If yes, list each agency providing funds . 0Yes r8:] No D Don't know Part 7-Wetlands: Impacts and Mitigation r8J Check here if there are wetlands or wetland buffers on or adjacent to the project area. (If there are none, skip to Part 8.) Uill!ll] 7a. Describe how the project has been designed to avoid and minimize adverse impacts to wetlands. Uill!ll] D Not applicable .. . Wetlands within the project area consist of seasonally vegetated sand and gravel bars in shallow areas below .. OHWM and one depressional wetland within the floodplain, but above the OHWM. Where possible, the dredge prism has been designed to avoid riverine wetlands. Only two of the seven wetlands identified in the . project area will be impacted by the dredging operation. The two wetlands that will be impacted (dredged) consist of vegetated gravel bars that are transient in nature and contain sparse vegetation on a seasonal basis. These two wetlands (Wetlands D & E) are located near the left bank of the river upstream of South ' Boeina bridae. 7b. Will the project impact wetlands? Uill!ll] r8:] Yes DNo D Don't know . 7c. Will the project impact wetland buffers? Uill!ll] ' , r8:] Yes 0No D Don't know - 7d. Has a wetland delineation report been prepared? Uill!ll] • If Yes, submit the report, including data sheets, with the JARPA package . r8:1 Yes D 7e. Have the wetlands been rated using the Western Washington or Eastern Washington Wetland Rating System? Uill!ll] • If Yes, submit the wetland rating forms and figures with the JARPA package . r8:] Yes DNo D Don't know 7f. Have you prepared a mitigation plan to compensate for any adverse impacts to wetlands? Uill!ll] • If Yes, submit the plan with the JARPA package and answer 7g . • If No, or Not applicable, explain below why a mitigation plan should not be required . r8:] Yes 0No D Not applicable See attached Mitigation Plan. JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 10 of 20 ~· -- 7g. Summarize what the mitigation plan is meant to accomplish, and describe how a watershed approach was used to design the plan. l!l§]Q] Wetlands that will be impacted are transient features consisting of seasonally vegetated gravel bars that shift in extent and location through time. It is anticipated that similar features will develop after dredging. Impact to wetlands are therefore considered temporary. Nonetheless, mitigation is proposed for impacts to these small areas at standard ratios. Mitigation for impacts to vegetated gravel bars that have developed within the channel since the previous dredge will be mitigated through use of wetland and habitat mitigation bank credits at the Springbrook Creek site. The Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank instrument was approved in August 2006. The site was constructed in 2007-2008 as an alternative to on-site mitigation for private and public projects (City or WSDOT) with wetland impacts that require mitigation per City Code to achieve a no-net loss of wetland functions and values. 7h. Use the table below to list the type and rating of each wetland impacted, the extent and duration of the impact, and the type and amount of mitigation proposed. Or if you are submitting a mitigation plan with a similar table, you can state (below) where we can find this information in the plan. l!l§]Q] Activity (fill, Wetlan Wetland type Impact Proposed Wetland Duration of mitigation drain, excavate, d and rating area (sq. impact3 mitigation area (sq. ft. flood, etc.) Name' category2 ft.) type• or acres) Dredge and fill D Riverine; IV 1,915SF Temporary See 7g 2,872.5 SF (construction (construction (1.5:1 ratio) benches, bank benches); stabilization, and Permanent (bank planting stabilization and substrate) olantino substrate) Dredge and fill E Riverine; IV 795 SF Temporary See 7g 1,192.5 SF ( construction (construction (1.5:1 ratio) benches and benches); planting Permanent (planting substrate) substrate) 1 If no official name for the wetland exists, create a unique name (such as uwetland 1 "). The name should be consistent with other project documents, such as a wetland delineation report. 2 Ecology wetland category based on current Western Washington or Eastern Washington Wetland Rating System. Provide the wetland rating forms with the JARPA package. 3 Indicate the days, months or years the wetland will be measurably impacted by the activity. Enter "permanent" if applicable. 4 Creation (C), Re-establishment/Rehabilitation (R), Enhancement (E), Preservation (P), Mitigation Bank/In-lieu fee (B) Page number(s) for similar information in the mitigation plan, if available: see i;1ages 17 and 28 7i. For all filling activities identified in 7h, describe the source and nature of the fill material, the amount in cubic yards that will be used, and how and where it will be placed into the wetland. rhelol Temporary wetland fill in the amount of approximately (510 CY) will result from construction of the temporary berms for land-based dredging. This fill will include native excavated sandy gravel/cobble material and may also include a limited amount of imported sandy gravel/cobblefill. Permanent fill in the amount of 2 CY will result from bank stabilization repair. This fill will include geotextile fabric, small bedding stone (quarry spalls), and armor rock. Voids in the rock will be filled with native gravel cobble and then a soil/gravel mixture will be placed at the final grade to provide a substrate for native riparian vegetation plantings. Total fill associated with planting substrate that will be placed into the wetlands amounts to approximately 50 CY. 7j. For all excavating activities identified in 7h, describe the excavation method, type and amount of material in cubic yards you will remove, and where the material will be disposed. l!l§]Q] Dredging work that will affect wetlands will be completed using an excavator, as described in Section 6e. The total estimated volume of dredged material that will be removed from the project area is estimated at less than 125,000 CY. A very small fraction of this will be removed from within the wetlands, as outlined in Table 7h. Management of dredged material will be based on the results of physical (grain size) and chemical (results of sediment sampling and analysis plan) characteristics. The proposed dredge material reuse and disposal locations include the following: JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 11 of20 • Onsite beneficial reuse • Filling interstitial void space of onsite rock stabilization structures. • Retention of habitaUplanting bench features • Offsite Upland reuse -transportation to offsite location for beneficial re-use by others. • Upland landfill if deemed to not be suitable for beneficial upland reuse. Characterization of dredged materials proposed for both in-water and upland reuse will be conducted through a U.S. Army Corps approved sediment sampling and analysis plan (SAP), which will be developed and executed in accordance with the Dredge Material Management Program (DMMP) protocol. The SAP will include a description for vibracoring within the lower reach (where feasible) and grab sampling in the remainder of the project areas for sampling of dredge material taken from identified dredged material management units, conventional and chemical analysis of samples, and follow-up biological testing if determined to be required. Physical testing will consist of sieve analysis to determine suitability for beneficial onsite in-channel reuse and for reuse offsite in upland areas. The results of the material characterization will be used for evaluation of all proposed reuse and disposal options. Re-handling of dredge material will occur at the designated re-handling areas for loading and trucking to a City approved upland facility. Part 8-Waterbodies (other than wetlands): Impacts and Mitigation In Part 8, "waterbodies" refers to non-wetland waterbodies. (See Part 7 for information related to wetlands.) ~ ~ Check here if there are waterbodies on or adjacent to the project area. (If there are none, skip to Part 9.) Sa. Describe how the project is designed to avoid and minimize adverse impacts to the aquatic environment. ~ D Not applicable JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 12 of 20 Avoidance • Wetlands. The dredge prism has been designed to avoid impacts to most wetland areas identified in the project area. • Native Riparian Vegetation. No new equipment access points are proposed on the right bank, where native vegetation is present. Equipment will access the river from the left bank, where invasive vegetation is dominant, or from existing access points on the right bank that do not require vegetation removal. Bank protection work will be completed without removing mature native trees, if present, where feasible. • Bank Conditions. No new steel wire gabion structures are proposed for bank stabilization. Minimization • Riparian Vegetation Removal. Impacts associated with equipment access points and proposed bank work that require removal of invasive vegetation (native vegetation will generally not be removed, except for a few small native trees that will be removed from the left bank at access points) will be minimized by re-planting affected areas with native vegetative to the extent allowed by the USACE vegetation management standards (USACE Technical Letter No. 1110-2-571, April 10, 2009, "Guidelines for Landscape Planting and Vegetation Management at Levees, Floodwalls, Embankment Dams, and Appurtenant Structures" applies to left bank vegetation, and USACE Seattle District Information Paper PL 84-99, February 28, 1995, "Levee Vegetation Management" applies to the right bank vegetation). • Spawning Habitat. The project has been designed to minimize impacts to spawning areas to the maximum extent practical within constraints of project objectives. The dredge prism has been designed to result in similar flow depth and velocity characteristics as the existing pre-project condition in dense spawning areas, including the sub-reaches between Williams and Logan Avenue bridges and between Logan Avenue and South Boeing Bridges. The only sub-reach that is anticipated to be affected by alteration of flow depth and velocity is downstream of the South Boeing Bridge, which will have increased depth and reduced velocity due to the increased effect of backwater from Lake Washington. However, spawning in this reach occurs sporadically and in much lower densities than the other two reaches further upstream, and is generally limited to the channel margins. The dredge prism minimizes impacts to the channel margins and it is anticipated that some limited spawning may continue to occur in the lower reach and should increase with time following the dredge. • Channel Adjustment. Transition slope augmentation (roughened channel/grade control) was considered with the goal of improving channel stability and minimizing upstream impacts to redds during the first year after construction as a result of channel adjustment. However, it was determined that construction and risk associated with grade control outweighed the potential benefits. Allowing the channel to adjust naturally without grade control in the transition slope has been identified by the design team and regulatory agencies as the preferred option to minimize adverse impacts to in-stream habitat. • Predator Habitat. The effects of bank improvements on predator habitat will be minimized by infilling void spaces with dredged material to reduce predator habitat. Bank improvements include maintenance of existing rip rap, repair of failing bank protection with new riprap, and installation of new riprap in areas previously vulnerable to erosion. • Bank Conditions. The effects of bank improvements on fish habitat conditions will be minimized by planting native vegetation where allowed by the Corps levee standards. • Construction BMPs/Sediment and Erosion Control. Equipment used for dredging or on/near water will be checked regularly to ensure no fluids are leaking. BMP's will be employed to prevent construction stormwater runoff from the uplands into the river. Work windows (June 15 through August 31) will be enforced to reduce the presence of migrating salmon. JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 13 of 20 Sb. Will your project impact a waterbody or the area around a waterbody? [!m!Q] C8] Yes 0No Sc. Have you prepared a mitigation plan to compensate for the project's adverse impacts to non-wetland waterbod ies? (!m!Q] • If Yes, submit the plan with the JARPA package and answer 8d . • If No, or Not applicable, explain below why a mitigation plan should not be required . C8] Yes 0No 0 Not applicable Sd. Summarize what the mitigation plan is meant to accomplish. Describe how a watershed approach was used to design the plan. • If you already completed 7g you do not need to restate your answer here. [!m!Q] Detailed descriptions of proposed mitigation activities are included in the project Mitigation Plan and have been incorporated into the project design. The following mitigation activities are proposed to compensate for project impacts: • Vegetation Plantings. Native vegetation will be installed in riparian and channel fringe habitats where feasible based upon hydraulic conditions and within guidelines for vegetation along levees and floodwalls set by USAGE. Vegetation plantings include the following: • Temporarily Impacted Riparian Areas. Equipment access points and bank stabilization work areas that lack vegetation after construction is complete will be restored by installing native grass and low growing herbaceous vegetation within the Vegetation Free Zone (VFZ), and native shrub vegetation in locations outside the VFZ. • Left Bank Above OHWM. The project team has identified areas along the left bank, above the OHWM, that are suitable for additional native riparian plantings based on the applicable VFZ. These areas will be cleared of invasive species prior to planting as needed. • Vegetated Benches Below OHWM. The project has been designed to accommodate gradually sloped benches along/near the left bank in select locations. These benches are located below the OHWM at the channel fringe and are expected to be subject to water level fluctuations within the range acceptable for appropriate plantings. The vegetated benches will resemble naturally occurring vegetated gravel bars similar to those that currently occur in some locations within the Cedar River. • Filling Void Space in Riprap. Interstitial spaces in all bank stabilization areas, proposed as part of the project (new, repair and maintenance), will be filled with native dredge material to reduce voids that may harbor predatory fish species and to provide suitable substrate for riparian plantings where appropriate. • Lower Reach Gabion Replacement. Gabions exist along the right bank within Reach 1 (downstream of South Boeing Bridge). Gabions were initially installed in 1976 to provide protection of the river bank but their condition has deteriorated. Removal of the gabions and replacement with a soft bank bioengineered stabilization measure (composed of a rock toe, geogrid reinforced soil lifts and plantings), is proposed to improve nearshore habitat conditions and restore bank stabilization function. The proposed improvement work is located near channel Station 22+25. Spawning Channel Maintenance and Monitoring. The City will continue to maintain the existing Royal Hills Replacement Spawning Channel at approximately River Mile 3.5, as required by the original project 1997 EIS mitigation plan for the initial and future maintenance dredging. This will promote ongoing functional value and continue to compensate for impacts to spawning from the proposed maintenance project and future maintenance projects. The City will also continue to maintain the existing Elliot Spawning Channel at approximately River Mile 4. 7 unless it is frequently damaged, or significantly damaged in the future by floods resultino in a maier or on-going need to repair or restore the JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 14 of 20 channel. The City will consult with the local habitat mangers prior to any decision to discontinue maintenance or to not to repair/restore the Elliot Spawning Channel due to flood damages. • Lighting Impacts Reduction. The City will conduct a study to inventory existing City owned lights in the project area and along the Cedar River up to 1-405. The study will identify City owned lights that can be modified (direction, bulb type, shielding, removal, etc.) to reduce negative lighting impacts on the Cedar River habitat without compromising public safety. Se. Summarize impact(s) to each waterbody in the table below. l!J.filQI Activity (clear, Waterbody Impact Duration of Amount of Area (linear ft.) dredge, fill, pile name1 location 2 impact3 material (cubic of waterbody drive, etc.) yards) to be directly affected placed in or removed from waterbody Dredge Cedar In-Channel Bweeks Approximately Approximately River 125,000 CY 6,43B LF removed Temporary Cedar In-Channel B weeks 55,000 CY Approximately Construction River 6,43B LF Berms Bank Stabilization Cedar In-Channel Permanent 740CY Approximately (maintenance) River 10% of 2,510, or 250 LF Bank Stabilization Cedar In-Channel Permanent B,630 CY Approximately (repair) River 1,275 LF Bank Stabilization Cedar In-Channel Permanent 1,470 CY Approximately (new) River 240 LF 1 If no official name for the waterbody exists, create a unique name (such as "Stream 1") The name should be consistent with other documents provided. 2 Indicate whether the impact will occur in or adjacent to the waterbody. If adjacent, provide the distance between the impact and the waterbody and indicate whether the impact will occur within the 1 OO~year flood plain. 3 Indicate the davs, months or vears the waterbodv will be measurably impacted by the work. Enter "permanent" if armlicable. Sf. For all activities identified in Be, describe the source and nature of the fill material, amount (in cubic yards) you will use, and how and where it will be placed into the waterbody. l!J.filQI Teme_ora[Y_ Construction Berms See 6e for description of construction methods and Be for fill volumes. Fill material for the temporary construction berms will include excavated gravel material from the channel and may also include a limited amount of imported gravel/cobblefill. Bank Stabilization Methods See 6e for description of construction methods and Se for fill volumes. This fill will include geotextile fabric, small bedding stone (quarry spalls), and armor rock. Voids in the rock will be filled with native gravel cobble and then a soil/gravel mixture will be placed at the final grade to provide a substrate for native riparian veoetation olantings. Sg. For all excavating or dredging activities identified in Be, describe the method for excavating or dredging, type and amount of material you will remove, and where the material will be disposed. l!J.filQI See 6e for description of construction methods, Be for excavation volumes, and 7j for disposal methods. JARPA Revision 2012. 1 Page 15 of 20 Part 9-Additional Information Any additional information you can provide helps the reviewer(s) understand your project. Complete as much of this section as you can. It is ok if you cannot answer a question. 9a. If you have already worked with any government agencies on this project, list them below. U:m!Jll Agency Name Contact Name Phone Most Recent Date of Contact USAGE Suzanne Anderson (206) 764-3708 12/19/13 NOAA Fisheries Randy Mc lntosh (360) 534-9309 11/13/13 WDFW Larry Fisher (425) 313-5683 11/13/13 City of Renton Vanessa Dolbee (425) 430-7314 11/13/13 Muckleshoot Indian Holy Coccoli (253) 876-3360 11/13/13 Tribe Eric Warner (253) 876-3125 9b. Are any of the wetlands or waterbodies identified in Part 7 or Part 8 of this JARPA on the Washington Department of Ecology's 303( d) List? U:m!Jll • If Yes, list the parameter(s) below . • If you don't know, use Washington Department of Ecology's Water Quality Assessment tools at: httg://www.ecy.wa.gov/grog ramslwg/303dl. ~Yes 0No Cedar River is listed as Category 5 for temperature, bacteria and dissolved oxygen within the project reach. It is listed as Category 2 for pH. Sediment data was unavailable on the Ecology website at the time of preparation of this application due to data quality issues. 9c. What U.S. Geological Survey Hydrological Unit Code (HUC) is the project in? [lm!Q] • Go to httg:llcfgub.ega.govlsurfllocatelindex.cfm to help identify the HUC . 17110012 -Lake Washington Watershed 9d. What Water Resource Inventory Area Number (WRIA #) is the project in? [lm!Q] • Go to httg:/lwww.ecy.wa.gov/services/gislmags/wrialwria.htm to find the WRIA # . WRIA 8 -Cedar/Sammamish 9e. Will the in-water construction work comply with the State of Washington water quality standards for turbidity? U:m!Jll • Go to httg:l/www.ecy.wa.gov/grograms/wglswgslcriteria.html for the standards . ~Yes 0No D Not applicable 9f. If the project is within the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act, what is the local shoreline environment designation? U:m!Jll • If you don't know, contact the local planning department. • For more information, go to: httg:/lwww.ecy.wa.gov/grograms/sealsmallaws rules/173-261211 designations. htm I. D Rural D Urban D Natural D Aquatic D Conservancy ~ Other High lntensit~ JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 16 of2D 9g. What is the Washington Department of Natural Resources Water Type? [ha[Q] • Go to httg://www.dnr.wa.gov/BusinessPermitsfTogics/ForestPracticesAgglications/Pages 'fg watert~ging.asgx for the Forest Practices Water Typing System. [8J Shoreline D Fish D Non-Fish Perennial D Non-Fish Seasonal 9h. Will this project be designed to meet the Washington Department of Ecology's most current stormwater manual?~ • If No, provide the name of the manual your project is designed to meet. [8J Yes D No Sediment and erosion control will be done in accordance with the 2009 King County Stormwater Design Manual, which is an eguivalent manual to Ecology's. Name of manual: 2009 King County Stormwater Design Manual 9i. Does the project site have known contaminated sediment? ~ • If Yes, please describe below . 0Yes [8J No 9j. If you know what the property was used for in the past, describe below. ~ The channel is of artificial origin and now conveys the Cedar River from its natural channel into Lake Washington (it formerly flowed into the Black River and Duwamish River). The channel is a constructed channel that has been dredged regularly over the past century to maintain adequate flood flow conveyance. Adiacent orooerties are used orimarilv for industrial ooerations and oublic park access. 9k. Has a cultural resource (archaeological) survey been performed on the project area? ~ • If Yes, attach it to your JARPA package . [8J Yes 0No 91. Name each species listed under the federal Endangered Species Act that occurs in the vicinity of the project area or might be affected by the proposed work. ~ Puget Sound Chinook salmon, Puget Sound steelhead and Coastal/Puget Sound bull trout occur in the Cedar River. 9m. Name each species or habitat on the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife's Priority Habitats and Species List that might be affected by the proposed work. ~ In addition to the fish species listed above, coho and sockeye salmon, and coastal resident cutthroat trout occur in the Cedar River. Part 10-SEPA Compliance and Permits Use the resources and checklist below to identify the permits you are applying for. • Online Project Questionnaire at htto:1/aoos.ecy.wa.gov/ooas/. • Governor's Office of Regulatory Assistance at (800) 917-0043 or help@ora.wa.gov. • For a list of addresses to send your JARPA to, click on agency addresses for comoleted JARPA. JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 17 of 20 1 Oa. Compliance with the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). (Check all that apply.) l!:!fill2l • For more information about SEPA, go to www.eci.wa.gov/programs/sea/sepa/e-review.html. D A copy of the SEPA determination or letter of exemption is included with this application. 1:2:J A SEPA determination is pending with _City of Renton (lead agency). The expected decision date is TBD D I am applying for a Fish Habitat Enhancement Exemption. (Check the box below in 10b.) l!:!filQ] D This project is exempt (choose type of exemption below). D Categorical Exemption. Under what section of the SEPA administrative code (WAC) is it exempt? D Other: D SEPA is pre-empted by federal law. 10b. Indicate the permits you are applying for. (Check all that apply.) l!:!fill2l LOCAL GOVERNMENT Local Government Shoreline permits: D Substantial Development D Conditional Use D Variance 1:2:J Shoreline Exemption Type (explain): This is a maintenance (;!roject. Other city/county permits: D Floodplain Development Permit D Critical Areas Ordinance STATE GOVERNMENT Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife: 1:2:J Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) D Fish Habitat Enhancement Exemption -Attach Exemption Form Effective July 10, 2012, you must submit a check for $150 to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, unless your project qualifies for an exemption or alternative payment method below. Do not send cash. Check the a(;!(;!ro(;!riate boxes: 0$150 check enclosed. (Check# ' Attach check made payable to Washington Department of Fish and Wildl~e. 1:2:J Charge to billing account under agreement with WDFW. (Agreement# 13-1069) D My project is exempt from the application fee. (Check appropriate exemption) D HPA processing is conducted by applicant-funded WDFW staff. (Agreement # ' D Mineral prospecting and mining. D Project occurs on farm and agricultural land. (Attach a copy of current land use classification recorded with the county auditor, or other proof of current land use.) D Project is a modification of an existing HPA originally applied for, prior to July 10, 2012. (HPA# ) JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 18 of20 Washington Department of Natural Resources: ~ Aquatic Use Authorization Complete JAR PA Attachment E and submit a check for $25 payable to the Washington Department of Natural Resources. Do not send cash. Washington Department of Ecology: ~ Section 401 Water Quality Certification FEDERAL GOVERNMENT United States Department of the Army permits (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers): ~ Section 404 (discharges into waters ofthe U.S.) D Section 10 (work in navigable waters) Note: The project is anticioated to aualifv for a Nationwide Permit 3 for Maintenance. United States Coast Guard permits: D Private Aids to Navigation (for non-bridge projects) JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 19 of 20 Part 11-Authorizing Signatures Signatures are required before submitting the JARPA package. The JARPA package includes the JARPA form, project plans, photos, etc. !hfilQ] 11 a. Applicant Signature (required) !hfilQ) I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief, the information provided in this application is true, complete, and accurate. I also certify that I have the authority to carry out the proposed activities, and I agree to start work only after I have received all necessary permits. I hereby auth1~e agent named in Part 3 of this application to act on my behalf in matters related to this application. (initial) · · By initialing here, I state that I have the authority to grant access to the property. I also give my consent to the permitting agenci'.'s en~n the property where the project is located to inspect the project site or any work related to the proJect. (initial) · ~ I Ronald J. Straka, P.E. · February 11, 2014 Applicant Printed Name Date 11 b. Authorized Agent Signature !hfilQ) I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief, the information provided in this application Is true, complete, and accurate. I also certify that I have the authority to carry out the proposed activities and I agree to start work only after all necessary permits have been Issued. Joseph 0. Callaghan February 11, 2014 Authorized Agent Printed Name Date 11 c. Property Owner Signature (if not applicant). !hfilQ] Not required if project is on existing rights-of-way or easements. I consent to the permitting agencies entering the property where the project is located to inspect the project site or any work. These Inspections shall occur at reasonable times and, if practical, with prior notice to the landowner. Property Owner Printed Name Property Owner Signature Date 18 U.S.C §1001 provides that: Whoever, In any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact or makes any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than 5 years or both. If you require this document In another format, contact the Governor's Office of Regulatory Assistance (ORA) at (800) 917-0043. People with hearing loss can call 711 for Washington Relay Service. People with a speech disability can call (877) 833.{1341. ORA cublication number: ENV-019-09 rev. 06-12 JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 20 of 20 WASHINGTON STATE Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application (JARPA) lbfilQJ r.liil'1II l,;Y us Army Corps o1 Englneen ·• Seatde Oislril::t P------------------------------------ AGE~CY USE ONLY Date received: Agency reference #: ' ' ' ' ' Attachment C: ' ' Contact information for adjoining property owners. [b§)_Q] Use this attachment only if you have more than four adjoining property owners. u se black or blue ink to enter answers in white soaces below. 1. Contact information for all adjoining property owners. [b§)_Q] Name Mailing Address Renton Housing Authority PO Box 2316 Renton, WA 98056 City of Renton 1055 S Grady Way Renton, Washington 98055 Unknown (No data) Unknown Ambrose KL 21 Logan Ave S . Renton, WA 98057 The Boeing Company PO Box 3707 M/C 20-00 Seattle, WA 98124 Renton School District 300 SW7'" St ~------ Renton, WA 98055 ---·-'"·- ~-T11n,~0L.Y:l.&l..•--________ --__ --___ ----, 1 TO BE C0:\1PLETED B'Y APPUCANT lilfilQ] Project Name: Cedar River Maintenance Dredging Project ·------------------------------------- Tax Parcel# (if known) 0007200213 1723059007, 1823059263, 1823059275, 1823059277, 7229300626, 0723059007, 0723059096 2539020000 7229300380 0723059001, 0723059046 0723059053,0723059085 If you require this document in another format, contact the Governor's Office of Regulatory Assistance (ORA) at (800) 917-0043. People with hearing loss can call 711 for Washington Relay Service. People with a speech disability can call (877) 833-6341. ORA publication number: ENV-022-09 rev. 06-12 JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 1 of 1 • WASHINGTON STATE 1\1111'.1 liiY US Army Corps QI EnglnNn ~- &rettte District Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application (JARPA) ~ Attachment E: Aquatic Use Authorization on Department of Natural Resources (DNR)-managed aquatic lands ~ AGENCY USE ONLY Date received: ; [Jfown D Application Fee Received; D Fee N/A D New Application; D Renewal Application Type/Prefix#: __ ; NaturE Use Code: LM Initials & BP#: RE Assets Finance BP#: New Application NnmhP, .. Complete this attachment and submit it with the completed JARPA form only if you are applying for an Aquatic Use Authorization with DNR. Call (360) 902-1100 or visit www.bit.ly/dnr aquatic lease for more information. • DNR recommends you discuss your proposal with a DNR land manager before applying for regulatory permits. Contact your regional land manager for more information on potential permit and survey requirements. You can find your regional land manager by calling (360) 902-1100 or going to http://www.dnrwa.gov/Publications/aqr land manager map.pd!. ~ • The applicant may not begin work on DNR-managed aquatic lands until DNR grants an Aquatic Use Authorization. • Include a $25 non-refundable application processing fee, payable to the "Washington Department of Natural Resources." (Contact your Land Manager to determine if and when you are required to pay this fee.)~ DNR may reject the application at any time prior to issuing the applicant an Aquatic Use Authorization. ~ 1. Applicant Name (Last, First, Middle) Straka, Ronald J. (PE) 2. Phone Number and Email ( 425) 430-7248; rstraka@rentonwa.gov 3. Which of the following applies to Applicant? Check one and, if applicable, attach the written authority-bylaws, power of attorney, etc. ~ D Corporation D Individual D Limited Partnership D Marital Community (Identify spouse): D General Partnership ~ Government Agency D Limited Liability Company D Other (Please Explain): Home State of Registration: JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 1 of 2 4. Washington UBI (Unified Business Identifier) number, if applicable: ~ N/A 5. Are you aware of any existing or previously expired Aquatic Use Authorizations at the project location? [81 Yes 0No D Don't know If Yes, Authorization number(s): 31-070471 6. Do you intend to sublease the property to someone else? 0Yes [8l No If Yes, contact your Land Manager to discuss subleasing. 7. If fill material was used previously on DNR-managed aquatic lands, describe below the type of fill material and the purpose for using it. ~ The previous lease authorized excavation and removal of sediment deposited naturally by the Cedar River; there has been no artificial fill at this location associated with the dredging project. Existing fill is present within the property but outside of the dredge prism. This fill includes bank revetments and bridge support structures (abutments and piers) for North Boeing Bridge, which is associated with Boeing and/or City of Renton Airport operations. I To be completed by DNR and a copy returned to the applicant. Signature for projects on DNR-managed aquatic lands: Applicant must obtain the signature of DNR Aquatics District Manager OR Assistant Division Manager if the project is located on DNR-managed aquatic lands. I, a designated representative of the Dept. of Natural Resources, am aware that the project is being proposed on Dept. of Natural Resources-managed aquatic lands and agree that the applicant or his/her representative may pursue the necessary regulatory permits. My signature does not authorize the use of DNR-managed aquatic lands for this project. Printed Name Signature Dept. of Natural Resources Dept. of Natural Resources Date District Manager or Assistant Division Manager District Manager or Assistant Division Manager If you require this document in another format, contact the Governor's Office for Regulatory Innovation and Assistance (ORIA) at (800) 917-0043. People with hearing loss can call 711 for Washington Relay Service. People with a speech disability can call (877) 833-6341. ORIA Publication ENV-049-12 rev. 08/2013 JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 2 of 2 LEGEND -·---HA UL ROUTE ---OREOGlNG CENTERLJINE ----PROPERTY LINE PU RPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SEC TION 205 FLOOD H AZ ARD REO UCTI ON PROJECT LOCATION: 47" 29' 37.00"N, 122 · 12· 48 .0 2"W ADJACENT PROPERTY OWN ERS · DATUM· NAVD88 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RE NTON HOUS ING 2. TH E BOEING COM P ANY A UTH ORITY 3. REN TON FAC ILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR AN D OPERATIONS CTR 7 . LEI, YK 4. CON DOMINI UMS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMENTS WILLIAMS AVE) 9 H EITMAN-BODEN , S 10. AMBROSE, K TH E BOEING COMPANY SITE KEY MAP 400 800 SCALE IN FEET CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING SITE KEY MAP APPLICA TION BY: CITY OF RENTON S7, 17, 18 T23N R5E - N 8TH ST . : • r.·; r ... . r · . PR OPO SEO: MAINTENAN CE DREDGI NG. REPA IR EXISTI NG BANK STABILIZATION. NEW BANK STABILIZATI ON AND OU TFA LL REPAIRS REFER EN CE N UMBER l.N.;_ CEDAR RIVER AL RENTON .c.Q.U1il.'!'.; K I N G SHEET 2 OF 29 STATE: WASH IN GTON .P.6.IE;_ 2/3/14 [, .. \ ( '· /"' ( '-I '· j l '--... (-~ OKANOGAN , I / / \ '< . ' \ r'--", • ~~OMEROY PASCO f ,, -..1, ·./' _J I j WASHINGTON KEY MAP LAKE WASHINGTON LOCATION MAP 1000 2000 SC ALE IN FEET PURPO SE: MAIN TENANC E OF SECTI ON 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTI ON PROJECT LO CA TION: 47 ' 29' 3 7.00"N, 122· 12· 48.0 2"W ADJACENT PR OPERTY OWNER S· DATUM· NAVD88 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2 THE BOE ING COMPANY A UTHOR ITY 3. RENTON FACI LITIES 6. WA SHINGTON DN R AND OPERATIONS CTR 7 . LE I, YK 4. CONDOMINI UMS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMENTS WILLIAMS AVE) 9. HEITMAN-BODEN, S 10. AMBROSE , K CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING VICINITY MAP APPLICATI ON BY: CI TY OF RENTON S7, 17, 18 T23N RSE DRAWING INDEX 1. VICIN ITY MAP 2 . SITE KEY MAP 3. PLAN/PROFILE (STA 0+00-8+00 ) 4. PLAN/PROFI LE (STA 8+00-1 6+00) 5 . PLAN/PROFI LE (STA 16+0 0-24+00) 6. PLAN/PROFI LE (STA 24+00 -32+00) 7. PLAN/PROFILE (STA 32+00-40+00) 8. PLAN/PROFILE (STA 40+00-48+00) 9 . PLAN/PROFILE (STA 48+00 -56+00) 10. PLAN PROFI LE (STA 56+00-64+00) 11. DREDGING SECTIONS 12. BANK STABILIZATION SECTIONS 13. BANK STABILIZATION SECTIONS 14. OUTFALL REPAIR DETAILS 15. TEMPORARY CONSTR UCTI ON ACCESS PLAN 16. TEMPORARY CONS TRUCTI ON ACCESS PLAN 17. MITI GATION/PLANTIN G PLAN (STA 0+00-8+00) 18. MITIGATION/PLANTING PLAN (STA 8+0 0-16+00 ) 19 . MITIGATION/PLAN TING PLAN (STA 16+00-24+00) 20. MITIGA TION/PLANTING PLAN (STA 24+00-32+00) 21. MITIGA TION/PLANTING PLAN (STA 3 2+00-40+00) 22. MITIGATION/PLAN TI NG PLAN (STA 40+00-48+00) 23. MITIGATION/PLAN TI NG PLAN (STA 48+00-56+00) 24. MITIGA TION /PLAN TI NG PLAN (STA 56+00-64+00) 25. PLAN TI NG SECTI ONS 26. PLAN TI NG SECTIONS 27. PLANT LI ST 1 28. PLANT LIST 2 29. PLANTING DETAILS PROPOSED: MAINTENAN CE DREDGIN G, REPA IR EXISTI NG BANK STABILIZATION , NEW BANK STABILIZATI ON AND OUTFALL REPA IRS REFERENCE NUMBER I..N.;_ CEDAR RIVER t.l;_ RENTON COUNTY: KING SH EET OF 29 STATE: WAS HINGTON MIL_ 2/3/14 ' ·.oo+LL - ' ; ' ,1, ,/ ';/ ;'1' ' :, ' ' ,, ,_ I ~+ I i ' i }, , I I oo+i;r I '\ "' z z 0 r= ~ V, w !'a' w ~ >--"' « w i \ \ l : -~ ,8 ' + ' © I 45.0' PURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT LOCATION: 47" 29' 37.00"N, 122· 12' 48.02"W AP,IACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: DATUM: NAVDBB 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMENTS WILLIAMS AVE) 9. HEITMAN-BODEN, S 10. AMBROSE. K I t r ' I I I \ : ~ \ ,, ' / <,,r' \ ~ L \ I \ I ) 1 / I I I \ l" ci i \ z,, ;a I II u, _, or '"' ', ' r I I 45.Q'l • OO+L ~ z 0 r= u => lo "' z 8 -~ ~ ., N + ~ w w " 0 cc w 0 <D "' N 0 N (880AVN) U 'NOU.Vi\313 s 8 " 0 w "' D w <D I I I I I I I I I I I « I l;! I ~ 0 0 0 I " 'i' ale w j g•;n r ·13 oo·oo+o :vis 9Nl903~0 ..:lO HJV1S D N I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I { I ) ' r , C ) I / I I I I I I I I I w " 0 w "' 0 "' !'a' 0 I f-----l 0 + ~ w >-- 3 :,: 0 w "' 0 0 cri g 0 "' <D ic « w z w e w D « "' " "' z r= "' x w s z 0 r= in z « g: (9BOA'vN) l..:l 'NOl1VA313 S7, 17, 18 T23N R5E 0 "' 0 0 0 + "' 0 0 + ~ 0 0 + © 8 + "' 0 0 ;\: 0 0 ;!; 0 0 + N 8 + 8 + 0 0 ~ 0 0 a: 0 O"' IE 0 N i§ I 0 0 I I l'.l w u u « z 0 E; => ~ z 0 u CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS PLAN/PROFILE (STA o+oo-a+oo) APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON REFERENCE NUMBER: ~ CEDAR RIVER AT: RENTON £Qutru::;_ SHEET 3 KING OF 29 WASHINGTON 2/3/14 ' 'I ' ' 'I I I ' ' ;I ,I ' : I \I I :1 ' ,, I', I I I \ I I_,_'' \). \,, '' ·--i --: PllRPOSE· MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT I OCATION: 47' 29' 37.00ttN, 122' 12' 48.02"W AQ,JACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: PAJIJM· NAVD88 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMENTS WILLIAMS AVE) 9. HEITMAN-BODEN, S 10. AMBROSE, K (880Av'N) 1..:1 'NOllv'A313 0 87, 17, 18 T23N ASE 9 1;nL ·13 oo·oo+9 l :v1s 38Nv'HJ 30\1'~8 g 0 "' ::: u u <{ z 0 F u => i" "' 8 .,; + I \ \ I I I I I I l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I \ \ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ -<e I F ~ f ~ + w " 0 w "' 0 ci ru "' 0 0 0 + "' 0 0 + "' 0 0 + .. 0 0 + n 0 0 + N g + g + 0 0 0 ;/; 0 0 0 '" "' 0 I 0 I I ' I "' '" ::: => 0 0 0 "' <{ ~ ts I E => i" "' z I 8 "' N 0 N 0 (880AVN) l.:l 'NOll\f/\313 0 I !~ CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING PLAN/PROFILE (STA 8t00-16tOO) APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS REFERENCE NUMBER: .Lti... CEDAR RIVER AI;_ RENTON COUNTY: KING SHEET 4 OF 29 WASHINGTON 2/3/14 ' " ' (880/\VN) U 'NOl1VA3T3 "' D 87, 17, 18 T23N R5E l. ~ I I I t ,, ,, , µV:,:A~R~IE'iS.-'~oo,="-..1) "' N D N "' D \\ ' o'o+r£ , , I , , , , , ' < ' ' I I ' ' I I I I ' I ' I ' oo+v~ z D F u ~ .'\ '" ', z ' s3 ' -i )', ,: i I 1 · ' '. I I. 00'+6£' , I <D , 'I ·00./ zZ ·~~' El~ z 0 as -< " ·I~ l~\ __ ·I ,,(.,. ,1"-...1 1, I __ ') 1 .'. 'I I ~ !, -I I I I 00+6l --, --, --J I J, -, ' ' ) 6o+gz, ," ' ' ' ' I , ,· ' . I ,:---. ' I \' ' I ·~ \.· \:\ '. '."' t< L_I·, '-' ~/ z ,· - ~--OQ+gz ' -<--' ' >--' "' w--,, ~---w .-:-·--i ~ I-·~---; ~~ w I-' ' I I I I ,, {' i'' j ~ J ' ' i ,, ' ' ' ' f. ', l, \· .·11· " !"· ., PURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT I QCATIQN: 47' 29' 37.00"N, 122' 12' 48.02"W ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: DATUM: NAVD88 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 3 RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 8. F & K INI/ESTEMENTS WILLIAMS AVE) 9. HEITh1AN-BODEN, S 10. AMBROSE, K I I ,' \ 0 I I I I I I \ \ I / ~ f I I I I I I I I I /1 w I o I ~ \ I I I I '-' \ ~ I I;; / " \ w \ \ ,, \ \ I \ I I I I I "' I 'C I © I + \ d I I I I I I I ~ I w I ;a I ~r Id I I I I I I I I I I I I 9S"LL ·13 00 ·00+9 t :y 1S 3:JN'vH'J 301;1'~:J \ D N I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ w >--c, u t, D w "' 0 ci <D w u z ~ ~ .,: w " 0 w "' 0 "' \ea 0 ~I 0 D 0 ;t N D D + n N D D + N N 0 0 + ;; 0 0 + 0 N 0 0 + ~ g + "' 0 0 ' ,_ g + © "' 0 " ,C I "'0 ; ' ; ' (890/\\;IN) l..:l 'NOIH'/131:3 CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING PLAN/PROFILE (STA 16t00-24tOO) APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION ANO OUTFALL REPAIRS REFERENCE NUMBER: l!i;_ CEDAR RIVER AT: RENTON COUNTY: KING SHEET 5 OF 29 WASHINGTON 2/3/14 X w c' w 0 F 1 ,. <,N," ,.I 0 ~("'))>:;:,:;:l:i!(") ~ > r: ~a~fTl~ ~ i:0 --1 Zz 3: ooom 0 --1 .. ~ U1 ~;::;:z~.,, -0 ~IS:: > ~;;o;z:::o ;:u '-l)>)> i'ii~~a0~~~~z ._.,UlQC('"\j ~ <D_:::Ortj .,...._z::::10 2 --1 Oz (}'IVl('TIB: -< vl;:u)> °'nvi~ :--ifTlz --1 z oo 0 o ;:o -< ;:f ocf11 ..... <DO.,-...JO, (}'I~ .;Z·~ ~ ?· . . . . Ql ..... o •• Nzr.n ~~.,,Ei~~~ ~"U~ '°ow;:'::,Sf''i'~i ,:;26 > ;:,;;zoo> ·fTlz ~zz c:i~z -l .f>. o N -cbrii d~6 ~ ~--l5: ;,:::g(I) z c·· N. "TJ rri;;:l o S,-2 z :;f r Zs:;: Z Z )> 0 " fTl XI 0 < 0 v,Z 0 vi s::: )> ,,. ,...... z ~ ~ "ll ril () El>~ ~m gl\Jz z~ ~t~ O:o ·· o :o m S?o o:o ~HTI :o~ ~ ,~ r m :o RI+ m 0 ~ g (;) ~ ._.. z (;) ~~f';fz i "'z ~ "'" •• fTl (Tl ~ zo ~ ,,. O@ ~ ;:u Z OZfTl!!:: -., G1 !!! C CfTl~> N r=;i ~ :;:j':!::~z <D ;:o rr, :i:.rozftj ~ F~0~ ;::o;,:::rnz qi~~~ I~~ ~>::,::;:o ;:o~(/J;>J Vlr--1fTl Nl>O :,.am ::::IEZ N ,S ONO " ,,. z:,.- "'"' ,,.='"' "'" z~~ -z .. " 0-,. cl " z ~ I~;!/ • iE I ___,,.,,.·--..... _ ,..-EAST LEVEE _ST~TIO~IN~r~ ,,. / -', '--/ CONSTRUCTION ACCESS -----0 --.,_ _______ _ /:', --= ..:.--:--1------8 --'-PA,f?k -------EXISTING I ~ . ,~· 17/'_j_,_ \ / \ \ ~ 0 --- 1 \ ·ll.' 0 . :.t:. ··,, -~----,') . J ·.\ .. ~-----Access R --. ____ -__ STA 30+66 ,;~---:;:-,i __ _,, .. _ _ c,c,fA1~ tliiKR____ ., _ ---/-: ):i--~--~~~:J?:---~-;----f::--~-r-- , ', : : =r._ START OF TRANSITION TO 80' 'MOTH BOITOM STA 24+00 _-__ ---_-::::-=---_-_---n'. -::20~4..~;.;,=~-~---~-~~~~§~~i-~~Sl_l29N s~-25+0~ J~='J'.\_~~~:~~~·~:&'~~-~~-~-':,--~~~dli,~i~~ 25 20 , , -----.:: -~~ -t 'l.---C::--~<=-LI ~'t. CHANNEL ----\_;:~---, .. \ ' " . - . 0_ 1 ,_i 26+_0_0_"--,._ ____ J.?.+~·:..=--7.B·----28+00 ___ -~--= --+----4==,; ---1---~-:_ <7: ~ CEDAR RIVER ,. _, 79 __ ,----d I ~~--29+00 --------~0+00 31+00 32+00 -- =--::-+-----:.:cci=-,-----+:----;r':! _Jt= _ ...:."-J 1./>o '-----E O CHANNEL --,c-, ___ ,.. i 7 ,.-,o..., _ o _ .... ___ 1?-f . ,~----'-18--- --o_ -., ____ ..... _ ---------,-----.... --~--= / o. • ~ .---·<;> "' / ~ N ._,.._/' CONSTRUCTION ACCESS NO BANK MAINTENANCE PLAN APPROXIMATE EXISTING WOOD BULKHEAD WEST LEVEE STATIONING 0 50 190 0 CONSTRUCTION ACCESS j i -- AND BANK MAINTENANCE 25 sz LAKE WA HIGH WATER EL +18.6' SCALE IN FWisTING GRADE\ 20 __/, ;; LAKE WA LOW WATER EL +16.75' __ \ ---------,---- ---~-~~------------~--------~----------------------------~ !~ ™'-I 1 ~15 \ ~ a.o. DREDGE cur Lr oVERDREDGE ALLOWANCE z 0 " ro §! 15 3 t;: z 0 i= 10 ~ w ~ w 5 NOTE OHW ELEVATION VARIES, 0 t SJEE P~ANS IAND ISECTl~NS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I j 24+00 25+00 26+00 27+00 28+00 29+00 30+00 31+00 32+00 LEGEND --(ffW---Q,!W-- MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR OHW ---•--•--•--•--• HAUL ROUTE i>--TIDEFLEX >---OUTFALL ~ ~ -~ ~ WETLANDS "NEW" BANK STABILIZATION "MAINTENANCE" BANK STABILIZATION CONSTRUCTION ACCESS PROFILE HORIZ. 0 50 100 VERT. 0 5 10 SCALE IN FEET 6" > TREE ej CATCH BASIN 10 ~ 5 0 ~ CJ w -~ _::j ~ i ffi !'-yl!'J;-" ~, ;,, ~ "' ::i: 0 J>;;l]--1(") J> > -u rozfTlI::jO:::l 0 ,--zozri-<rio (/1 -o --1 z z fTl >ooomo--1·· ·· ~~~z~...,... """() .,t:.I:.::: z ::O"TIZ:;;o :::0 ...J :i:,, :i:,, ~~~f:;0~ ~ ~~z 5(/loCn--i 1;J u:i_;;oM --.5'iR1~~ ~ l,J 0~ (J1 (/l-U .....i:::Oz (Jln ;i,-0080 ~ ~ ~o.~m __.<DCO...JOl {Jll;J-2 :::l~ o· . . . . !-'.l N~(/] l:~...,...M!E:Ai ~-uR ~~~--~:r~ N~g 0,-A,izos/1 ·:,,z VlZ-0:!! --1 .P,.ON !11 I 2 --1--II PJ--lo rnri9 o-<0 o 01 :::>::o(/1 Z C ·· N, ""Tl ~--1 0 !'.:,-2 ~ ' z~ z z > o -rr, :::0 0 < 8 v,Z ul :s::: )> ,. ,...... z ~ (/) -l ;,, ;i;! -o m o 0 r z m g(..)l> :r>o zNZ zl> ~+',j O:c ·· o :c m "'9 O o ~ ~BTI :cm ~ r m :c ~6 m 8 6 O _ z ._, z ~11~12' ~z --1 ~ ;:o 0 .. fTl [Tl ...J Z O () -, ,. ~ 0:3~:::oz "TJ z ::ti C " -" " ~ I~~ " " ...... ,. "' v> -...._I ~z ... " cl z ili w "'~ "' 0 ~ ozrri:s::: err,~> --1 ::E (/] z: -;rn :::j-, r-::.,.Zrrl 'zG:i~ :::iJACIJz r,(!lJ:>o -u..-.Jzr, ~J:>:::>::o :::O(!!(ll:::0 Ul,----lr'l N>'"o J>',!;IQ =lrz ONCJ z»· =lco »o~ Zz~ 0-,. Sj I j EXISTING WATER LINE V; EXISTING OVERHEAD POWER LINE ~ w CONSTRUCTION ACCESS Ji! ,, EXISTING FLOODWALL >' 'r· NEW STABILIZATION o · g EXISTING WETLAND C : STA 33+00 ~ j;·~ o ;r. I O -¢ '<I" g 0 ~ . ../-.Q -.t . -, -+ + · ~,'~~~"~~:L!~1;5r"~~~~~d,;:~'.~~ EAST LEVEE STATIONING EXISTING BURIED DUCT BANK EXISTING RIPRAP . ' , ___ ,..,. __ ,.._ p I I • ,t=,2+00 __ :_ ~c:'.'· -.,..~ 34+00--. ,--'_,.:1 35+-00 36+00 37+00 .,._ ~~---,--:/;, ~ CHANNEL 79. t, I -'+ o_ 38+00 =--~-----... _ "-=i'---' ------t------t-- . . . -~ //"CEDAR RIVER S-CA 37+10,--19.-·1p· ----i;: '\~ J~ --.._...,-'-........./ / \ q 5=.---./ --- ---, . r E.O. CHANNEL ·18 Q g + m .. .::.~~-=--b ' lr-.--·rr, ~39+00 ',Z(/) I I ad~§ COI ;--·g L-::-1..._~ [Tl -- ------- 7' I ~•-•-•o .. --------, r ~o ----0 0 + N n CONSTRUCTION ACCESS + REPAIR AREA CONSTRUCTION ACCESS EXISTING RIPRAP AND BANK REPAIR ~ 0 0 c-._6. ; ~ ; '" ::--'. ·'::.-~~"=--~•2C 40+00 ~ '\\ ... ,,,.. ~ .....+--~-= r EXISTING ---1-.... VvETLAND D. CONSTRUCTION ACCESS AND BANK MAINTENANCE 25 AND BANK MAINTENANCE EXISTING FLOODWALL .J JJ ~ SECURITY GATE EXISTING CONCRETE SLABS PLAN 8.0. BRIDGE EL +25.0' 25 '? LAKE WA HIGH WATER EL +lS.6 . 0 5.0 100 20 i _J~-~~~E-W~~O:~~TE~~~:~7~--------~C~L~: FEET EXISTING GRADE\ ~ ~ ______________ ..\----------------., 20 < 15 6 SLOPE=0.1625% ~ 10 8.0. DRE 1-----------------------1 ------115 f-----u.. ------------- OGE CUT ~ L, ci 1 OVERDREDGE ALLOWANCE 5 NOTE OHW ELEVATION VARl:::S, SEE PLANS AND SECTIONS ABANDONED SEVvER LINE EL -9.3' EXISTING DUCT BANK / 'l-u+OO o~~-~~-~-~-~~~~-~-~-~~~--i,-~-~-~~~~-~-~-~~~~-~-~-~~~~-~-~-~~~~-:- 33+00 34+00 35+00 36+00 J7+QQ J8+QQ 39+QQ rn' 32+uu LEGEND --OHW---OHW-- MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR C:JNTOUR OHW --•---.. ---•--•-• HAUL ROUTE [>--TIDEFLEX >--OUTFALL [TI WETLANDS "REPAIR" BANK STABILIZATION HORIZ. 0 PROFILE 50 ~ -"MAINTENANCE" BANK VERT. 0 5 STABILIZATION SCALE IN FEET "NEW" BANK P'777J CONSTRUCTION ACCESS STABILIZATION ~ 100 10 6" > TREE §j CATCH BASIN 10 5 0 ;;, "' ~ < i'. ~ ~ z 0 >" < > w cJ ~ -_'-J -00 ~ c., z :JI HI I I \t 30.0'' 30.0··. ' w .. D '-' z F "' x w oo+;; 1 , ' oo+zs ) " PURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT I OCATION· 47" 29' 37.00"N, 122" 12' 48.02"W AQ,JACfNT PROPERTY OWNERS: QAJUM: NAVD88 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY .3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMENTS WILLIAMS AVE) 9. HEITMAN-BODEN, S 10. AMBROSE, K ' ' ·f:;. I ' I ' ' ,,, I ~- / ( I (t.l8GA'vN) 1..:1 'NOllVA313 87, 17, 18 T23N ASE l ! QO+lV 11 \\ oo+ov ~ t l "' 0 N N I I I I I I I I I I I I I \ I I I I I I I I I ~\ ~ I ~ I '-' I i1 I F I ~ \ WO I o I ~ ~ r-I ~ w I "'zil I:" I :::l ~ o ~ I ~ <C ll1 ~ \ 0 tn <C } 0 t:3 &; l ~ 8 I c.,-<{ 0 i ~ 5 f X E I w co I lo I ~ I 8 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I \ \ 0 N I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I ;; I i : I I I I I I I I I I I I '-1-~-1 I I I I I I I I I I "' (880/\VN) 1..:1 'NOl1VA313 "' 0 "' 0 0 + 00 .. 8 + ~ 8 + ~ .. 0 0 + "' .. 0 0 ! g s 0 0 N i----= ~ ~ I CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS PLAN/PROFILE (STA 40t00-48tOO) APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON REFERENCE NUMBER: ltt_ CEDAR RIVER AT: RENTON ~ KING SHEET 8 OF 29 .5..IA.IE;_ WASHINGTON DA TE: 2/3/14 A v; v; w u u « z 0 F u => f' v; a u ao+~9 I I 00+1..9 I I I I \ I I 1' , ' ,11 1,,1\ , ,11 00+191 l I ,1 00+09 : I ' , 00+6~ · I ' ' ' '' ,,·' oo+g~ I ' -, ·,1 ,1, I I \ ' ,' /, '1, / ,' ,;, I I I' ,,1, ,I 11, ,),,,t,'; ,,: I,, ,I'''/ :,/ '1· I /1,' . 1(: /):/ ,, '·: , , PllRPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT I QCA]QN· 47" 29' 37.00"N, 122" 12' 48.02nW ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: DATUM: NAV088 1. CITY OF RENTON 5 RENTON HOUSING 2. TI-lE BOEING COMPANY AUTI-lORITY 3. RENTON F AGILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMENTS WILLIAMS AVE) 9. HEITMAN-BODEN, S 10. AMBROSE, K (880/\VN) l.:l 'NOLl\fi\313 S7, 17, 18 T23N R5E "' 0 N N "' 0 90'8L+ 1 oo·oo+gi:; :vis I 13NN\fHJ 30\f~~ I ( I I I ( I 0 0 + "' "' ' i a F u => f' '" z 0 u OOH:£ i ! ! I w v,U v,Z w« uz '-'le "z z" o:, F '-'"' c,Z ~"' ,m V, zo oz us: 0 0 0 ' ) ( I / I I I I I I I I I I I I I ( I I I I ( I ~ w I a' I "' I " ( :, I ~ I x I w I I I I I \ ( I I I I ~ I "' I 0 II I ~ I I I I I ~ => 0 w " 0 w "' 0 0 m \ I \ I , I I , I / I ) I I I ( I : I I I tJ I z I I ~ I I ~ I I w I g r I ~ (/"/ I I ~ 05 I ~ Ldi= I I O i:2~ I -:.... ;!: v:, I zo J ~~ I "'" g + "' "' 0 0 ;j: "' 0 0 + N "' 0 0 + :;; 0 0 + 55 0 0 + m I l!:!I ~ ~ I Q o \ z ~~ ~ LLL_l__L1Ll_l_-1L1LJ_L_L_l_L_L_J_J_LJ_L_J__l_L_L_ ',' "' 0 "' 0 N N (88G\VN) l.:I 'NOllVJ\31:3 ~ 0 0 a: 0 0"' lE 0 ~ " " I « 0 I I I I I I CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING SANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS PLAN/PROFILE (STA 48t00-56tOO) APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON REFERENCE NUMBER: ill;_ CEDAR RIVER AT: RENTON ~ KING SHEET 9 OF 29 STATE: WASHINGTON DATE, 2/3/14 X w c' w 0 F l 'I ',, '1 ,, } 1·1 ,(' I , , 0 0 + v w f 0 0 ;\ w ~o.o· 1 30.0·· I I ' I ~t I I I PURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT LOCATION: 47" 29' 37.00"N, 122" 12' 48.02°W ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: PATIJM: NAV088 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMENTS WILLIAMS AYE) 9. HE11MAN-B0DEN, S 10. AMBROSE, K ,,,, \ (880A\fN) l.:l 'N01l"IA313 S7, 17, 18 T23N ASE ',\ \,, \\ ',:,, \ cu '13 s9' £+t9 :vis 8 NID03~ .:10 ON3 ', '<, / ,/ '. / ',),' ,' \ / ', \ ',/ / I I I I I I ) I I I I I I ,'L----'---'-----------1 I I I I I I 0 I 0 0 0 + " ,0 I I I w I-w w w iE le ~ "' " 0 w I a: ~ « D.. {) I "' 0 0 + 0 0 0 0 I I (I N <O N ,c "' "' 0 ~ I ~I~ 0 "' I-;et:J .. ~ z "' 0 le~ F u " / -!;-C, / I" 0 (I].-' :> ,,.../ ~ , u I-w I!' " w ~ « u "' "' z w 0 0 rn I z « i:' w I ~" o" v /" w 0 « "' C> C> z F "' " w / < "' N CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING PLAN/PROFILE (STA 56t00-64tOO) APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON I I I \ I I ) I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I I / " \ I I I I I I I I I I ~\ ~ l .:I I ~\ 1- 3 tJ 0 w "' 0 ci w u ~ 0 ~ ~ « w C> 0 w "' 0 I "' ~ 0 I )----1 I I I I I 0 0 + <D 0 0 + 0 w 0 0 + m "' g + :g w z ::, \ I I I I I \ \ \ 0 N 0 (880/\'vN) L:l 'NOll'v/\313 PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS REFERENCE Nl1M8ER llt.. CEDAR RIVER AT: RENTON COUNTY: KING SHEET 10 OF 29 .sIA1E;_ WASHINGTON MIE;_ 2/3/14 S7, 17, 18 T23N ASE -35 "' ~ 30 " 25 ~ >-20 ~ z 15 0 10 i= " > 5 w ~ w 0 0+00 -40 "' ~ 35 "30 ~ >-25 ~ ~ ~: :; 10 ci 5 0+00 'ig 35 °< 30 " ~ 25 t 20 z 15 0 " -< 10 > w 5 ~ w 0+00 -40 "' ~ 35 > EXISTlNG CONCRETE FLOOOWALL / BANK STABILIZATION (REPAIR) (,' XDREDGING 't'.. CHANNEL _/EXISTING BOTTOM ::::-,-.....,. sz OHW EL +19.3' ! OHW EL +19.7' ~ / ,,,_~--1-----T----~~/ ' I; iv r---r--45' -------1-------45' ------=-'§0"--~ 1' OVERDREDGE ALLOWANCE _J 0+25 0+50 0+75 1+00 DISTANCE, FT TYPICAL SECTION DREDGING 90 FT WIDE (STA 20+00) 1+25 1+50 1+75 EXISTING CONCRETE FLOODWALL BANK STABILIZATlON (MAINTENANCE) BANK STABILIZATION (NEW) ---/_EXISTING BOTTOM SZ OHW ~L ~O~ ~EDGING~ CHANNEL --OHW E~ +19 8' '? 0+25 0+25 ~JV ---------'-------------~-' e-----40' ---1-----1------40' ___ _, o+so o+ 75 1+00 1+25 1+50 1' OVERDREDGE ALLOWANCE DISTANCE, FT TYPICAL SECTION DREDGING 80 FT WIDE (STA 32+00) EXISTING CONCRETE FLOODWALL CONCRETE SLABS, TO BE REMOVED DREDGING BANK STABILIZATION (REPAIR) 'l CHAN EXISTING BOTTOM SZ o::. :4~ _ -l--~ -0~ ~ +22.9 sz :1v ------'-----------:,r\-'\J e-----35' 1----1----35' ----1 0+50 0+75 1' OVERDREDGE ALLOWANCE EXISTING CONCRETE FLOODWALL 1+00 DISTANCE, FT TYPICAL SECTION DREDGING 70 FT WIDE (STA 45+00) 1+25 1+50 1+75 1+75 " 30 b _____ _Jj~ ~ BANK STABILIZATION iEXISTING BOTTOM (MAINTENANCE) 'l CHAN /DREDGING ,,---..-.-.--;----__,... ? o:_ E~+: 8~ -_ 1 _ :W~L--=-27 s· ~ / / >-25 ~ § 20 := 15 ;: w 10 ~ ~ ' ~-~ Iv ---------------1 --- C.--30' ----"---30' 35 -"' 30 ~ 25 " ~ 20 t;:: 15 z 10 0 i= " 5 > w ~ 0 w 2+00 40 -"' 35 ~ > 30" ~ 25 >- ~ 20 z 15 g 10 :"; ci 5 2+00 35 ~ 30 °< -< 25 ~ >-20 ~ 15 z 0 i= 10 -< > 5 w ~ 2+00 w 40 -"' 35 ~ 301 25 >- ~ 20 · i's 15 I " 10 ~ w 5 L._ _____ _L_ _____ _L_ _____ _L_ _____ _L_ ___ ---l-_ _L_ _____ _L_ _____ L.______ 5 w 0+00 0+25 0+50 0+75 1+00 1+25 1+50 1+75 2+00 PURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT LOCATION: 47• 29' 37.00"N, 122· 12· 48.orw ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: QA TUM: NA VD88 1. CITY OF RENTON 5 RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMENTS WILLIAMS AVE) 9. HE1Th1AN-8DDEN, S 1 D. AMBROSE, K DISTANCE, FT 1' OYERDREDGE ALLOWANCE TYPICAL SECTION DREDGING 60 FT WIDE (STA 55+00) CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING DREDGING SECTIONS APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON 0 15 30 SCALE IN FEET PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS REFERENCE NUMBER: ill;_ CEDAR RIVER AT: RENTON COUNTY: KING SHEET 11 OF 29 _$.I_AE;_ WASHINGTON DATE, 2/3/14 ,. ,,,,,,.. /; i 2' ~ "' ~g~~~g )> ~ E5o~fTl-< ~ >oooroo · .. ti~~Z~"TJ .f>.I3:: >~;:o~Z~ '-.!~.!": <c>c,0z N>z .!:!r'.;; gEn(j w.eJ ;;:j ,-.2 :::!~z ---l 01 ~ u, l/)(Tl-u --< -..,1:::oz u,n(/)> oo8n ;rj z ::eoc(Tl -< Zz'Oo -'({)0:,-...JO') (J1 ~ -:::1 .. 0 . 0~~(.IJ )>I"T'Jr::f>:::O ~"'U~ S::::fTI !:!:!:r,.Cf'Tl --' ro-R>-(f):i!Z _.;:o_, »i<A-<"'odi N.2~ ~~-X~:;:!!Z l> ~~N _fTl I Z --,--,I ~-lo ;:<:;~~ ~-<g .. ~ (J1 V, ' ~ fi::rrl O ~ :E 5 .z~ ~ CJ~ 8 v,Z u1 CD ~ s:::: z ;,,:; ~ > ~ ?.:i ,, ,, C: m o 0 > CD Zm =' 0 r ~o z a, N t5 ~ -< ~ m :::o " 0 :::0 ::! 0 0 z :::0 ili ~ "' (/) m :::o "' 8 z m d ~ z z ~ " (/) ~~f';F ~ "'z --< "'0 •. fTl f'Tl -zo N --<> "'0"' ~ ~ z ~ z g~~! N ~ :;:j:E~'z m :::o :::o ~~zrrl .. rzGJ~ ;;oArnz qi~~~ I~~ _!"::x,.7'0 :::o~(.IJ;:o (llr-Hri N>o >"'" :::!CZ N ,S ONC> "> Z>" "'"' >='"' ""' zO~ -z o?,,. ,. " --< s; 0 z 30 25 '° "' ~ 3 20 ~ ~ z g 15 ~ ':'.i w 10 5 35 30 '° ro ~ 3 25 ~ ~ z 0 ~ 20 > w --< w DREDGE AREA 14' 15' VEGETATION FREE ZONE (VFZ) T.O. CONCRETE FLOOOWALL EL (EL 30.6' SHOWN) I VARIES TOP DRESS 'MTH TOPSOIL AND HYSROSEED IN VFZ 3'--i---1 I 3' INTERSTITIAL SPACE FILL I V -S '":' ,.-o~ -----/---~"' ~\_,....,. \..NEW BEDDING STONE -~ S<C ------------<===-= .,~,., 6.0. DREDGE CUT EL VARIES (EL+14.1' SHOWN) ------------------1--------< w --< § w I u, cJ le 160 15' VEGE-ATION FREE ZONE (VFZ) 1' OVERDREDGE ALLOWANCE EXCAVATE AND BACKFILL W/DREDGED MATERIAL 170 180 190 DISTANCE, FT TYPICAL SECTION NEW RIGHT BANK STABILIZATION STA .:m+so TO 33+00 0 5 10 SCALE IN FEET PLANTING BENCH (VARIES), SEE NOTE 1 TOP DRESS WITH TOPSOIL AND HYSROSEED IN VFZ EXISTING CONCRETE SLABS TO BE REMOVED INTERSTITIAL SPACE FILL 200 210 220 AREA 30 25 '° "' ~ ,~ ., lo ~ w ~ w I . u, is ....1 15 F w < le > u, ':'.i 10 5 230 35 30 w i ~ 25 3 ~ ~ z 0 20 ,= 15 ~ w --< w 15 u, ARMOR STONE (VOIDS FILLED WITH GRAVEL AND COBBLE) ,. -------------]-- ,· 01/ERDREDGE ALLOWANCE ' 10 70 80 NOTE 1. GRAVEL PLANTING BENCH ONLY PROPOSED AT LOCATIONS SHOWN ON PLANS, NOT THROUGHOUT. 90 100 110 DISTANCE, FT TYPICAL SECTION LEFT BANK REPAIR STABIUZATION STA 19+50 TO 23+90 STA 37+10 TO 45+46 0 5 10 SCALE IN FEET 120 130 10 140 _gi .'-'i al i HI S7, 17, 18 T23N RSE (99(1WN) 1' 'NOl!Y/\313 (990,WN) 1, 'NOllv'/\313 ,,., 0 ,,., 0 ,,., 0 0 ,,., 0 ,,., 0 n n N N n N N ,0 0 0 C: "' I I I I I I I ., I I I w I oc I I /11 ., w I ~ '-' 0 0 0 w I u ;" ~ oc I I z 0 ., I " ~ 0 I ::I "' I I ., z ., _, I w rn I w I z '-' '-' u I 0 I z I w z " ., I "' F "' I I I 0 V, I ., u "' 0 x "-_._ '!! w 0 "' I "' w 0 I I '-i 0 I 0 w CD iii :, I w ., ,0 w ,0 ;:: c' ocw ~ H0 I ~ "' V,., ., "'m z 0 u I 0 u_, 0 " "' ,,., a, -w z "> " I "' 0 >-., N w F oc " _, I ., ., w > N z z2 § 0 " I _j O roou; 2 ~ 18 s I w ., -,0 0 1-Flnrt;t '-'+ I >->-u_, >-FN >-:, u... () wnll) w rr:o "-0, N w u w ~ wW <>oo Cc m v, w w _,o I w g ~co z >->-:'.o ou en ., >-" ., ,; ,; 0 zow ,,., oc I" " z > 0 ,0 w I w -., _J I"~" w ., ; 0~ w 0 "' :;; <( _, 0~ >-:, + _, >-0 z ;J;;t ., ""-V, w_ <{ "' I oo 4Ns:t u 0:, _, _, 0 OCN u 0 V, " =' '!! V, u ~ :, <{ ., zO z <{ 0 <D .,u \z <{ >-"' I "'>->-F ,o·t _, ::i::.:::w z V, V, 0 o" "' I uoc V, 0 B " ., _w x ., " V, "'u"-z I m "'"-w "'w " 0 00 F ""-~ o_, _, 3:"c,::~ V, >-Q<{ w "' I "-ti\¥ > z rn ~3-w x w 0 <{ § ., w 0 _, :, 0 "' zwoc I:-: " w w<> n " -,zo "' " "' " z_,>-~ I " ~ _J t3 "' >F w zioc "' <{ I cl <{ ~ oc w u :::i:(l)o " xz u ., :::?~I-<{ w" z v,-"-z " I 3' <{ '"i V, z " "'o _, 0 F 0 ~ 175 ., V, _, 1i _, F x ., _j. F _, w I w ,0 V, 0 w w _, " "' " 0 w " I 0 N _,n >-I w <{ ,; "' " _j 0 0 0W _, I "' o-_, "' s C: ~ 0 Cc I" .,______J w er i u ., I z 0 0 0 w I drfi 2 u S' er <C ci w I >-"' c' " :, " 0 u- w I w+ "' '-' _, 3lldl33HS T331S 0 fa w I "' "' I Ow tj ~ m> ,,., 0 ,,., 0 "' 0 0 ,,., 0 "' 0 ,,., n n N N n N N (980/\\IN) l..:l 'NOllV/1313 (880AVN) l.:l 'NOL1VA3T3 PURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD CEDAR RIVER E'.RQPQ;iEQ: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, I OCATIQN: 47' 29' 37.00"N, 122" 12' 48.02"W MAINTENANCE DREDGING NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: [!ATUM: NAVD88 OUTFALL REPAIRS ,. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 8:EEEB:ENCE t::JUME!EB: 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 1l:L CEDAR RIVER 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR BANK STABILIZATION SECTIONS AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK AT: RENTON 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMENTS COUNTY: KING .s.IA.IE;_ WASHINGTON WILLIAMS AVE) 9. HEITMAN-BODEN, S 2/3/14 10. AMBROSE, K APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON SHEET 13 OF 29 QA.IL EXISTING CIP CONCRETIE WALL (TO RWAIN)\ I S7, 17, 18 T23N R5E REPAIR EXISTING TIDEFLEX VALVE \ sz OHW EL +24.8' 8.0. DREDGE CUT J_ El VARIES DETAIL L_1.0' OVERDREOGE ARMORFLEX WITH OUTFALL 0 2 4 SCALE IN FEET LEXIS11NG BANK REPLACEMENT TIDEFLEX VALV)- '--\;~. ' __ [EXISTING RIPR; OHW EL VARl:S <, 1-7 ~-:--, -:,, - ,1 __ /. ··<}. i. ~ -,.. ~I 1 /////////1 /1 /11 /1 /1 I I /I////////////////////// JI 1!!//I/III/Jll/!//I/J Ill l/!/II////////II/I/JJ /JJ////////1/I/II/I/IIJ/ i._pJPE DIAMETER, SEE TABLE (THIS SHEET) EXCAVATION, SEE NOTE 1_/ TYPICAL DETAIL OUTFALL WITH TIDEFLEX 0 2 4 SCALE IN FEET . 4'.~.-:t· :. -- RIVERBED OUTFALL PIPE LOCATION TABLE LEGEND PVC -POLYVINYL CHLORIDE C -CONCRETE DI -DUCTILE IRON CM -CORRUGATED METAL NOTES BANK LEFT LEFT LEFT LEFT LEFT LEFT LEFT LEFT LEFT LEFT i...ffT LEFT RIGHT RIGHT RIGHT RIGHT RIGHT RIGHT 1. EXCAVATE LOCALIZED AREA TO TEMPORARILY ACCESS TIDEFLEX VALVE ANO ARMOR FLEX FOR REPAIR WORK AND BACKFILL W/GRAVEL TO PREDISTURBANCE CONDITIONS. RIGHT RIGHT PURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT I OCATION· 4T 29' 37.00"N, 122· 12' 48.02"W ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: DATUM: NAVQBB 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 B. F & K INVESTEMENTS WILLIAMS AVE) 9. HEITMAN-BODEN, S 10. AMBROSE, K CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING OUTFALL REPAIR DETAILS APPLICA TlON BY: CITY OF RENTON LEVEE PIPE MATERIAL DIAMETER (IN) STATIONING 5+50 PVC 12 12+85 C 18 14+85 C 18 18+50 C 12 22+90 C 4 23+70 PVC 12 25+00 PVC 12 31+00 PVC 12 31+05 C 12 36+75 C 18 48+00 p1/C 12 55+00 DI 24 28+85 PVC 8 41+55 DI 24 48+60 CM 12 53+00 PVC 8 59+70 C 24 64+00 PVC 12 68+00 CMP 12 69+00 UNKNOWN 18 EBOEQSEQ· MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION ANO OUTFALL REPAIRS BEFERENCE NUMBER: ill.;_ CEDAR RIVER AL RENTON £Q.I.LtiIL KING SHEET 14 OF 29 .filAIE.;_ WASHINGTON OATIE, 2/3/14 ~ ,,,,,,.. )> I ; 0 ~ "' ::;g~~:tQ;=;> "1J [= z ozrr1::::' -o --, z l>ooomo ·· ·· ~~~Zif1"T'J ~I:;': Z:;u"T'l:z'.:;u:::U '-.l)>)> ::t>C>)>G')rr, 'N- ~3:::::lQ Z°1JN)>~ ....... (.()~S8ci~"°·E5z ~Vif;j~z-< ~::o~ u,() > c/'lo ;rj z :::;;: o~fTI -< z z'no c:=;!D?J:-,J!=f' ~:;u~g"T'J .. l'-:lz(f) )>-I-rir:;;;)>;:u N..,.,~ :s::rr1 CJ;p.crri • "-1 ~~R>-~:t::i N~O Q)>A,iz0',!1 ·a,Z (.()z_ G')~ --, -f>-ON ['11 z --,-,IC :lJ--io roP1 o-<0 ~ o u, ::,;;:8tn z C .. ~ "T'J fTl-f o ~ z ~ r .z~ i ~ )> 8 ~ 0 ~z ul "' rrl s:: ~ ~ ~ )> :c \2 () )> 6 () ::D z m-< ~ ffi () " 0 :! -a z ~ )> or~ ~z C cl () z ::I 0 z ~ I" I)> lz ~ g :-:11:-:- ~ z -I::::' ::u ("J •• [Tl f'Tl ~ zo ~ -< )> 0 2';;: ~ ::::a ~ z "' 0 - N ia ~ "' ~I~ N ,S '-.. )> ~~ '-.. I ~z 0 -< 0 z s:: )> z rrl () Zm )> 0 z )> () ::D m ::D o< ::D m 8 ::D z 0 ~ ozrri;: crriX:i, -1::Eviz ;rngr,1 r=~G")~ :::oArnz [Tl(.()):>() ""O_,zrri ~>Ao :::0~1./l:::O Vl,-.... ff'l NJ:>o )>0,0 ::::!EZ ONCO Z)>" )>,g~ Zz,a 0-)> a, 35 30 "' ro 25 "' ~ iS t;:: 20 z 0 F ~ c:'; 15 cj 10 <i. LEVEE ,---EXISTING GRADE EXISTING WEST LEVEE (TO BE EXCAVATED) TYPICAL PLAN BARGE ACCESS 0 6 12 SCALE IN FEET EXISTING WEST LEVEE (TO BE EXCAVATED) (TO BE RESTORED) 11 (TO BE RESTORED) ~ ;:APPROX LOCATION OF ORIGINAL LEVEE . -crz::zozzz~ :? ~!1--~·-\J ,-10H 1V /cl:/?:2-~~ 'v Btl: 1V ·~ ~EMBANKMENT MATERIAL 24" RIPRAP "'·A">'· . EXISTING TIMBER BULKHEAD , I -~-c:...3- (TO REMAIN) I: I! I! -J/.-- TEMPORARY BACKFILL USING DREDGED GRAVEL MATERIAL TEMPORARY BULKHEAD (STEEL PILE WALL) ~ CEDAR RIVER TEMPORARY BACKFILL USING DREDGED GRAVEL MATERIAL TEMPORARY BULKHEAD (SHEETPILE HP OR PIPE PILING) y OHW EL VARIES ----¥-b1\~~:~ 18.6' ----------- DREDGE AREA 35 30 ro 25 ro ~ "' iS 20 t;: z 0 F "' 15 ~ 10 ~ w 5 5 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 NOTES 1. TEMPORARY BULKHEAD TO BE MINIMUM LENGTH NEEDED BUT NOT LONGER THAN 100'. DISTANCE, FT TYPICAL SECTION BARGE ACCESS 0 6 12 SCALE IN FEET _gJ _:::j oil i ~ (89GA'vN) l.::l 'NOll'vA:313 S7, 17, 18 T23N R5E 0 "' 0 "' 0 ;" s ., " " N N "' ~ I \ 0 ~ I z I • • ~ \ < z I b, 0 • 00 N I I ci < I I I I I I I I ~ 0 I w ~ u z < I • ~ I I w u 8 I " 0 I " 0 I ~ ~ 0 I ~ I I I I I I I 0 zu, ~ T "' s~ >->-0" w ~ w"' I:' w u (/)~ w ;; z ~~ ;o ".J V, "' 00 O's' u ., ~g V, " ~ 0 < • ~ 0 w < 0 :' ~ _j 0 w >-z z ,; oCH • QZI 0 I.CU ~ ~ >- w W'5'0C < "o's' u ~ ic5 El: a. ,-a. F°'W ~~ < 2 0f0 w ~il5 ffi le>-oz" 0-li 0. 00 w• :::l~ w 22 0 « Fie u "" v,g...J < . z WO .~ < ·~ ~~~ g~ z ~ t:'i WU>w s ' < 0. (f)z1- ~ < ~~ Wo~ ~ " ~~ :3:u;::;: w W<.00 " ~. "'zw u iii;:0 z 0 0 ~ ~ =,f;l u ~ 0 00c,c 0 "' 0 I 0 0 ~ ~~~ a.~o Cl) WFZ u =,"' 5 Z X oww U<DOC 0 "' 0 "' 0 ;" s z ., " " N N (880A'vN) l.::l 'NOl1'1'A313 EURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD CEDAR RIVER EBQEQ~f;c~· MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, LOCATION: 47" 29' 37.00"N, 122" 12' 48.02"W MAINTENANCE DREDGING NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND ~Q.J~CEIH EBQPEB::D'. QWNER~: QAil,JM: ~AVQ66 OUTfALL REPAIRS 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING BEEEBENCE: NllME!EB: 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ill;_ CEDAR RI\/ER 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, 'fK fr RENTON 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMENTS ACCESS PLAN COUNTY: KING STATE: WASHINGTON WILLIAMS AVE} 9. HEIThlAN-BODEN, S 10. AMBROSE, K APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON SHEET 16 OF 29 = 2/3/14 oo+Ll · I" 1: I I I ., ' .'• ' ! ( ,, ' 00+9 45.0' I 45.0', 00+£ I 0 t a: 0 ~ + m I I a: < ';. 0 w DO+t 0 0 I () ,_ 0 t~ 0 + v N w ~I I:' 0 " m ':J <: 0 00+£ V, 0 0 0 + ~ I ~+ j •···· I .,.a,_, '~ t ---:::..... __ PURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT LOCATION: 47" 29' 37.00»N. 122' 12' 48.02"W ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS· PATlJM: NAVP88 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 6. F & K INVESTEMENTS WILLIAMS AVE) 9. HEITMAN -BODEN, S 1 D. AMBROSE, K :oo+z: ' " ' . I / _/ I./" ioo=f.o-...__ ' ' CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING MITIGATION/ PLANTING PLAN csrA o+oo-s+oo) APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON S7, 17, 18 T23N R5E PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS REFERENCE NUMBER: ill.;_ CEDAR RIVER A.I;_ RENTON COUNTY: KING SHEET 17 OF 29 SIA.IE.;_ WASHINGTON MIL 2/3/14 ' OD+ S/ 0 'i'-l-~-.1,--1 ~ ' C o0+£~--~ ~ i · \ / ; I I ,I : 1 t.:..~ I \ \ ~Oo+~z 1', 'I ' 'I ' ' ;1 1' ' I ' : I ,, ! I " I /_ - '' / /' ' , 11' 1 JI: '' '' '' '' ' I ' / \ \ / ' ·~~-( _, :...') I I 45:o• I ' :, o+ 01 + N/ -, ' ' ' I I ' I I I 0 0 + I ~+ PURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT I OCATIQN: 47" 29' 37.00HN, 122" 12' 48.02"W ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: DATUM: NAVQB8 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMENTS WlLLIAMS AYE) 9. HEITMAN -BODEN, S 1 O. AMBROSE, K ' 45.0' ', _,, ' ' ' I I I ;\ \ ' " ' 'I '' ,, ,, '' oo+i~ I ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' IOO+m I I I , I ~~51· w., ' "'o, ~01 "'"' ,ww ;O::::E ' 0 S' >-w w ~I ~ 0 " "' w ~ < u "' 0 CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING MITTGATION/ PLANTING PLAN (STA 8t00-16tOO) APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON S7, 17, 18 T23N R5E I j!,tl ! le,= 1:1"" ~ l!c~ [Is~~ ., ~ mmo ::,::,z "'"' " iliili~ Im~ f PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS REFERENCE NUMBER: ill;_ CEDAR RIVER AI;_ RENTON ~ KING SHEET 18 OF 29 WASHINGTON 2/3/14 ,I I ' ·I l. I ' ' ' ' [c I ~j ' _ oo+gz:1 • I .,~ =1:· '~ -,, I C) I OO+gz I .,,·_., ', ' '· ' ' ,, --k \ ! .,, J .J. :!' 1. ,' .11·,. VARIES VARIES a: !!{ a:' a: ' W. I (3 I rt) ; -:i ) '.I it 0 0 +--.----'-- ~ 0 oo+oz ,, e-w w ~I ~ 0 ,; ~ w ~ ~ u ~ 0 00+6l oo+9L OO+LL PURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT LOCATION: 47" 29' 37.00"N, 122· 12' 48.D2NW ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: DATUM: NAVD88 CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMENTS WILLIAMS AVE) 9. HEITh1AN -BODEN, S 1 0. AMBROSE, K MITIGATION/ PLANTING PLAN (ST A 16t00-24tOO) APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON S7, 17, 18 T23N R5E I '°iii !IE" uJ< L,J~ ; ~L,J~ ;t O 0: o a:ia:io ~ ii!ii!Z ~ !l! iliili!/1 ;~~ ~I PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS REFERENCE NUMBER: ill.;_ CEDAR RIVER & RENTON ~ KING SHEET 19 OF 29 STATE· WASHINGTON D.A.IE;_ 2/3/14 f I: I :( I ! r \ ,, PURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT l OCA]ON: 47" 29' 37.00"N, 122" 12' 48.0z''W ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: QAJUM: NAVP8B 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 3. RENTON F ACILlllES 6. WASHINGTON DNR AND OPERA TlONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 8. F & K INYESTEMENTS WILLIAMS AVE) 9 10 ._ HEITMAN -BODEN. S AMBROSE, K I OO+l£ ~I 0 ;' >-w ~I w ~ 0 " " w ~ <{ V "' 0 CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING MITIGATION/ PLANTING PLAN (STA 24t00-32tOO) APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON S7, 17, 18 T23N RSE Fi!5 !I,, 1:1< ; ~~ 3' el II! I;! o mmo ~ iiliilz ~ " iliili~ ~!~ PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING. REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS REFERENCE NUMBER: lli;_ CEDAR RIVER AT: RENTON ~ KING SHEET 20 OF 29 filIE;_ WASHINGTON = 2/0/14 oo+6t 00+8t , I ·t':: ) '/ oo+Lt \ oo+st ' ,, PURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT LOCATION: 4T 29' 37.00"N, 122' 12' 48.02"W ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: DATUM: NAVD88 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. T'rlE BOEING COMPANY AUT'rlORITY 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMENTS WILLIAMS AVE} 9. HEITMAN -BODEN, S 10. AMBROSE. K ~I i!ci;l ;;w V, w,. "'o :::'~ ~w "'" 0 s >-w ~I~ w ~ ~ w ~ " V V, 0 OO+Z[ CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING MmGATION/ PLANTING PLAN (STA 32t00-40tOO) APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON S7, 17, 18 T23N ASE PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS REFERENCE NUMBER: _l_N__;_ CEDAR RIVER ft RENTON ~ KING SHEET 21 OF 29 STATE. WASHINGTON QAIL 2/3/14 f ', . n~, ,~:/ oo+L~·, · ''' '' cl ' '' h ,,, 00+1>9 (1,1 oo+rs oo+z:r; OOH£ PliRPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT I QCATJQN: 47" 29' 37.00"N, 122· 12' 48.0Z"W ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: DATUM: NAVPBB 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMENTS WILLIAMS AVE) 9. HEITMAN -BODEN, S 10. AMBROSE, K ~I 0 :c:' >- OO+tt w ~I w "- )it 0 " "' w ~ ' ~ .. ' < ,. () ~: "' \: ·i 0 . ' Fo "' OO+£t lie~ ., "' w,_ °'o i,'o l:].:i 0:::,; CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING MmGATION/ PLANTING PLAN (STA 40t00-48tOO) APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON 87, 17, 18 T23N RSE 0: 0: z "' ~~ !/1 ~ z 1/)Q Zz "' l,J f-i;; ~ ~ ~~ ~"' zO " ~ 1 oz i!i [ID F< ::I! :I <o, I ~1~~ I ~ ffl 2 "w l!c 0 rw ova " F ;,l \ .' PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS REFERENCE NllMBER: !.ti.. CEDAR RIVER A.I;_ RENTON ~ KING SHEET 22 OF 29 STATE: WASHINGTON MJL. 2/3/14 I \ ' cio""09 ,' '' ' ' ' , ' ,, ·11·, ' 00+19 00+09 , ' 00+6,; 1 ' , ' ' ' ' ',, ;$; ; '' ' ' ' I' "i, , ·,1 g , , ''' ' ' I '' '' '/,· . h b. ' ! I ' f 11. ' l ' '' , . . ' _I:,, PURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT LOCATION: 47" 29' 37.00"N, 122" 12' 48-02"W ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: DATUM: NAVD88 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMENTS WILLIAMS AVE) 9. HEITMAN -BODEN, S 10. AMBROSE, K N oo+z:i; I 00+1s D :' ~I~ D j!:f;l ,. ill ~~ g~ ~w "'" '"" w w ~ " w ~ " " V, CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING MITIGATION/ PLANTING PLAN (STA 48+00-56+00) APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON 87, 17, 18 T23N ASE V, z u;o lol != cr::u ; .,w >"' zO oz F" "if> ~1~~ i i>w Iw OV> PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS REFERENCE NUMBER: 11t.. CEDAR RIVER AT: RENTON .QQl.1!iit_ Kl N G SHEET 2.3 OF 29 STATE: WASHINGTON PATE, 2/3/14 ' ' ' ' ' " ' \ I It Jo.a' 1 3o.o' , I cc 'I~ ~'+ ~ o, <( w, 0 {' I ~ :.:'?('\'_- 0 0 + ~ "' Z:6+£9 ~I ~ -< ,= z 5 0. 0 oo+z:9 joZ ~ ;.:S ~ le~ w ~I~ w :s~ Cc ~ ~ -< '-' V, 0 / fl ';! -<~ zO -< ,e '-" ro 0 ~ PURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT l QCA]QN: 47" 29' 37.00"N, 122" 12' 48.02~W ADJACENT PROPERTY O'#NERS: PATIJM: NAV088 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMENTS WILLIAMS AVE) 9. HEITMAN -BODEN, S 10. AMBROSE, K / CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING MITIGATION/ PLANTING PLAN (STA 56t00-64t00) APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON S7, 17, 18 T23N RSE I jo i5 ! 3' ,= l:l"' ~ ~~ 25;~ "' ~ mmo iiiz ~ iliili~ ~~ . " " z V, ~ ::, ~ ~ z g u;o i5 1,J r-z m ~ 0 oc~ Ii u ~ i5 "'V, [lj zO "' ~1 oz ~ '5 F-< -< V, ~Ii~ I ' l:l ~ , ~c i ~ 1 I (--'.: PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS REFERENCE NUMBER: ill;_ CEDAR RIVER .AL RENTON .CQ.l..Ltilt;_ Kl NG SHEET 24 OF 29 SIAIE.;_ WASHINGTON Jl!l.lL 2/3/14 _. ,m-I ~ . . . ' og C ::enl>::o:ro'.i;::i> ;:g f=~6~\..,~~o ~ j;O -, Zz fTI ;;:;:oooroo .. ·· (/'J~~Z~"Tl -0 -f>.I:S:: )>~::o;;z::o -...l>J> r?i~~Q0~ ~~z '---""Vl ocn-, u:i::::o ;;:\ z--10~ ·oz ~Vl[;j~ -<:j~~ n l> Oon ::rj z ocrrt -< 'o .z::::!~ __.§!VJ :J>-I..,.,r~:i,.;:o· r3 fTI s:::rri fTlpcr>1 .--uG rn:::;R>--Ul:i'.z __.::tl::::! i'l;~,;~odi ~.~§1 k'1Zz G"J,:2z l> .;.,.nN -I< (j~I !=0--to ArnGJzg .. 2u, §~ 0 ~ Z i ~ fTI~ Z Z l> 0 _zfTI ;:o 0 < o Z 0 u, u1 ""Cl )> ~ ~ ~ c:: n z > " ::I 0 z z rn C) -< 0 CJ) =i m -< () 0 ~ 6 ~ ~ z -, z 0 z CJ) ~1f';<fz -I::::' ::0 0 .. fTI fTl ~ zo "' -, )> 0 ?S ~ ::::a ~ z ~ NG)~ ~ ~ ~~ ~" " )> ~ u, '._I :; z " d z ~ z ril () Zm )> 0 z )> () :IJ m :IJ 0< :IJ m m :IJ 8 z C) ; OZfTl:1:: Cf'T'IX:=,- -i::Eviz ~rog;:.-1 r::~G)~ ;:oAroz rrl(/))>(") -u-,zrri ;::l>;,:::o ::o~Ul::O Ulr-u11 N:r-o ,,.rnc, :::!EZ ON0 z»· :t>::::!::o z0[8 o.zl> 'ii i ~ 35 30 3 25 ~ ~ g ~ 20 w -, w -, w i" 15' VEGETATlON FREE ZONE 3' (VFZ) r TOP DRESS wrn-1 l TOPSOIL ANO HYSROSEED IN 1/FZ RIPARIAN BENCH PLANTING BENCH WIDTI-1 VARIES ~----TREES ~----SHRUBS ~---PLACE GRAVEL/ SOIL MIX ON BENCH ,-----PLANTING +19.0' SZ OHW EL 23.4' NAVD88 ,---APPROXIMATE SUMMER WATER EL+18.6' DREDGE AREA 8.0. DREDGE CUT EL VARIES (EL+15.6' SHOWN) u, BE0DIN8 STONE 15 -~GEOTEXTILE FABRIC L..,_ _____________________________ _ 1' OVERDREDGE ALLOWANCE J 10 ARMOR STONE (VOIDS FILLED WITH GP.i.,VEL AND COBBLE) 70 ,· 80 90 100 DISTANCE, FT 110 120 130 SECTION A: SECTION AT RIPARIAN BENCH WITH TREES AND SHRUBS (tvQical SCALE: 1" = 10' 0 5 35 30 25 20 -, w 15' VEGETATION FREE ZONE 10' (V 0 Z) TOP DRESS WITH TOPSOIL ANO HYSROSEED IN VFZ (VARIES) ,,-----ILIVE STAKE PLANTING - Vv'ILLOW ANO REOTWTG DOGWOOD SPECIES ~----GRAVEL/ SOIL MIX SCALE IN FEET 'Q OHW EL 23.4' NA\/088 ~APPROXIMATE SUMMER WATER EL.+18.6' INTERSTITIAL SPACE FILL -- :J1;,-.. ----8.0. DREDGE CUT EL. VARIES (EL+15.6' SHOVfN) 10 15 ~I I EXISTING CONCC::ETE SLABS TO BE ~EMOYED BEDDING STONE "-----ARMOR STONE {VOIDS FlLLED L..,_ 1' OVERDREDGE ALLOWANCEJ 10 70 80 90 WITI--l GRAVEL AND COBBLE) 100 DISTANCE, FT 110 SECTION B: SECTION AT BENCH WITH LIVESTAKE PLANTING (t SCALE: 1" = 10' 120 130 ical 0 5 10 SCALE IN FEET 140 35 30 ., 00 ~ 25 3 ~ ~ z 0 20 F 15 10 140 A 35 30 ., ~ 25 3 t;: g 20 F o< d 15 10 ~ w -, w , en ...... ~ ;-.I ;;; g z :II fll 0 "' "' N (880/\'v'N) 1..:1 'NOLllt/\313 "' "' ------------------:,; I. (<{. ~: ::::>\ 1,> I ; \'.· .• •.·.·.·.···.·.· ..• •·•·•·.·.•.·.·• .. ·•· •. · .. · "' I z e6 I C> z F "' x w 0 "' 0 " '-' 0 bi "' N I I I ro ro " ., z 0 " -. \""'-I t .J<· I l-. I I ~ ~ I I g I I '-' z F "' x w 0 N I (99<1WN) 1.:l 'NOLllt/\313 PURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT LOCATION: 47" 29' 37.DO"N, 122" 12' 48.02~W ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: DATUM: NAVD88 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMENTS WILLIAMS AVE) 9. HEITMAN -BODEN, S 10. AMBROSE, K "' ~ ~ ui 0 " "'z 0 "' 0 N 0 ;:, "' 0 w ~ i=: en w > ::J 0 z <( (!) z 0:::: w ; :r: en ::, 0:::: cc :r: l-s: :r: 0 z w cc z <( 0:::: <( 0.. 0:::: !;i: z 0 b w en "' 0 0 0 ";;" Z= 0 ..... -w I-...J 0<( w (.) en U) CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING PLANTING SECTIONS APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON S7, 17, 18 T23N ASE PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS REFERENCE NUMBER: lli.;_ CEDAR RIVER .AL.. RENTON .c.wt!.It. KING SHEET 26 OF 29 STATE: WASHINGTON MIE;_ 2/3/14 ~ ~N~;I ~ ::Ee(') )>:::IJ:i!(") ~ .l> ~ CONIFER TREES rozrri =i o c:5o~fTl-<z Pooo 00 ol-! ·· ·· SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING ti~~z~"T'Ji::2 ~I:;-:: .l>~!;;~~~ ~~~ PCL PINUS C:)NTORTA 'LATIFOLIA' LODGEPOLE PINE 5GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN < :;-::-1n z,:, r-v>-3(.11 or=o--1 ~ <.0_::::o M z=!OO Oz ---(/) s::ZR t,J )> PM PSEUDOTSUGA MENZESII DOUGLAS FIR 5GAL CONTAINER ASSHOVVN ~ Ch) :-J~Z o .l> lo 0 o -, z ocfTl ;:o -< z'no TP THUJA PLICATA \NESTERN RED CEDAR SGAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN o~~;-J~ ~~-g-1 · .. Nz(.I) DECIDUOUS TREES ;t.I-rir,:;::)>-;;o N"'O~ S::C'JR-C'J:i:-cM ·::0-1 1,;,,i,r,, SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING Vl~-:,:;~~z~6)~N .["'I z -1-1:r: C . -I 0 1 rii o-<0 o u, A~VJZc··N,"TJ AGm ACER G:_ABRUM DOUGLAS MAPLE SGAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN o----J o !:!:! z::;:: r rr,~ z z l> 0 -2 ~ ;u 0 S 8 FL FRAXIN\JS LATIFOLIA OREGON ASH SGAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN ~--, °' ~ MF MALLIS FUSCA PACIFIC CRABAPPLE 5GAL CONTAINER ASSHO~ SL SALIX LUCIOA PACIFIC WILLOW 5 GAL CONTAINER ASSHO~ s::: SHRUBS )> )> ""U z ~ r ~ -I SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING C: )> m o 0 )> z Zm AA AMELANCHIER ALNIFOLIA SERVICE BERRY 1 GAL CONTAINER " -I 6' O.C. 0 )> 0 z rn r z )> cs CORNUS STOLONIFERA REDOSIER DOGWOOD L!VESTAKE .. 6'0C. " ~ () :0 C, m :o HD HOLODISCUS DISCOLOR OCEAN SPRAY 1 GAL CONTAINER 6'0.C. :! Cl) o-0 :t :0 < LI LONICERA INVOLUCRATA T\VINBERRY 1 GAL CONTAINER 6'0.C. ~ ~ m mm ~ ~ 0 :0 PN PHYSOCARPUS CAPITATUS PACIFIC N1NEBARK 1 GAL CONTAINER 6'0C. z --, 0 C) z ~ RS RISES SANGUINEUM z RED FLOI/VERING CURRANT 1 GAL CONTAINER 6'0.C. C) RN ROSA NUTKANA NOOTKA ROSE 1 GAL CONTAINER 6'0.C. - RP I ROSA PISOCARPA CLUSTERED VVILO ROSE 1 GAL CONTAINER 6'0C I <:'181~1" ~ ; RSS i RUBUS SPECTABIL!S SALMONBERRY 1 GAL CONTAINER 6'0.C fT1 C .. "Tl 0 I SALIX SCOULERIANA fT1 z g "1J ss SCOULER'S WILLOW LIVESTAKE -8'0.C. -I::' ;:IJ 0 .. fTI fT1 z - N Z O ~ GAUL THERIA SHALLON SALAL 1 GAL CONTAINER 3'0.C. ..... -I~ .. AO 00 0 Z Z ~ 0ZfT1:;": "Tl 0 22 CfTI~)> MA MAHON IA AQUIFOLIUM TALL OREGON-GRAPE 1 GAL CONTAINER 6' O.C. N ~ g :;:j~~Z (D ;o ;:a i!:=rozrrj .. r~G'.l~ SYMPHORICARPOS ALBUS SNO\NBERRY 1 GAL CONTAINER 3'0C ;;oAwz -~~~~ ATHYRIUM FILIX-FEMINA LADY FERN 1 GAL CONTAINER 3'0.C. Cl) ~~ ~)>;,;;o -" cs~~~ -N:t-o ·" ,, °' 0 -N ,S ::JFZ 00 0N0 '---,, Z)>" NOTES jj ~~ :t-6~ '---I ~z Zz~ 1. IN PROXIMITY OF THE AIRPORT RUNWAY USE ONLY c., ~., 0-)> AIRPORT APPROVED NATIVE PLANTS. z --, " 0 :II z 01 m ;, v'Nc' I ; ~8~~:i!Q )> E5o~fTI~ ~ooom 0 .. ·· Vl~~z~"T'J .P..I.S:: )>~~;~~ '!~~ ~;:::::IQ z N)>z -......,,v;orn--1 IO::Urtj z:::JoO ·oz -;;UlfTI.S::Z (,J::O)> (.J1 {IJ-U ....JfTlZ S ~ Oo~ ;;o -< o,?5 9:e!=D:-J~ ~ ~g~ ,_,z<n )>I"'Tlr::E>::O t0 fTl ;;::~ C'.J)>Cl'TI ."lJ0 rn--1R-· w:i!z ...... ::u ::::! e:~A~~o6i N.~~ ?iiZz 02::!z )> .i,. (") N -I< (f~I 9J-io AOJSi Z ~ .. i3 OJ 8n1 0 !£! i ~ fTl.s:: Z z :r,. 0 ~S2 ;;o 0 8 o,--; "' s::: SEED MIX 1 (v.iET MEADOW) -APPLY AT A RATE OF 1/2 LBS/ 1000 SQ.FT COUNT SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME 15% CAREX OBNUPTA SLOUGH SEDGE 25% JUNCUS ENS1FOUUS BULRUSH 5% FESTUCA RUBRA RUBRA VAR MOLETA RED FESCUE MOLETA 10% I SCIRPUS M:CROPCARPUS SMALL FRUITED BULRUSH 15% GLYCERIA GRANDI$ REED MANNAGRASS 15% AGROSTIS EXARATA SPIKE BENTGRASS 15% HORDUM BRANCHYANTHERUM MEADOW BARLEY ""'U )> J I SEED MIX 2 (UPLAND MEADOW) APPLY AT A RATE OF 4 LBSI 1000 SQ. FT t r z ~ ......_ --f I I COUNT SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME " .,.,.. mo ,. z z =' -I m I I 10% AGRoPvRoN RIPARIUM srREAMBANK ~ )> 0 WHEATGRASS '" r z:t> :-,:( CJ) () :IJ I I 20% BROMUS CARINATUS CALIFORNIA BROME " -I m -:0 =< en O -I I 10% I oescHAMPSIA TUFTED HAIRGRAss O I < CAESPITOSA ~ m :om ~ m m :o 1 1 30% 1 EL vMus GL.Aucus BLUE WILDRYE 'a -I 0 ~ I\) Q I I 30% I FESTUCA RUBRA RUBRA I NATIVE RED FESCUE z C) I SEED MIX 3 (LAV>JN)APPLY Ji.TA RATE OF 8 LBS/ 1000 SQ. FT. "'i~F '° I ~ .... q ~ ~ --; '° '° " ~ •. fTl fTl z N Z O (") co -I )> fTl o~'i::oz OZfTl.S:: 'Tl z ::o C CfTlX)> c, -SC ::;:1::ewz N ,\, <D w ;;o ~ ~rogM r)>G)Z z ,. ::0;,,::CIIZ ':;]~~~ ~~ ~~;:>:;CJ :::OQ;!Ul ;:a UlC-HT1 N>O ,. <D" COUNT SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME 70% 3 WAY TURF TYPE PERENNIAL RYE 15% CREEPING RED FESCUE 15% CHEVVING FESCUE N~ ::!cz ONO ",. z,-· ~"' ,. =' '° ,I ~z z~':;J .. C, O• > --; jj 0 z ~ .!:!l .:::3 cil i NI 0 z x :::, 0 ~ " " ~ w ~ > 0(0 11 ~ v,z " cl a.~ "~ ::!a: ;c u 0 >- "' >- PURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTlON PROJECT I QCA]QN: 47" 29' 37.00"N, 122" 12' 48.02"W ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: DATUM: NA\ID88 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. TI-lE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 3. RENTON F AGILITIES 5. WASHINGTON DNR AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMENTS WILLIAMS AVE) 9. HEITMAN -BODEN, S 10. AMBROSE, K ...J ::j ~w ~o ~ "0 ~~ Zz w" HO w ~o Oo 0 Ow >-w 0: I w wD "'w ~"' Y'. >-w Oz I ~ ~"' a.~ u ~ 5~ I ::, wz ~~ >-->-- (/) 0 w >-" :::, ~ " a ...J C..lj) >->- a. " ~ i:: "' w 0 ~~ L1i w >-" :::, ~ " 6~ ::! " wo s OX 0: U:::, ...J u w" ·O :Oz z rj"I "'z I 0: " ->-w u~ "' e' W()zOO Z> s >-b s :s ~ 5w " 0 :, ! " u Z::'!: O..::'!: a. "! 0, ;, " ~M CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING PLANTING DETAILS APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON w 0 11 " I "' 2 ~ 87, 17, 18 T23N RSE ...J <( f-w 0 ~ (') 0 z ., F 15 z :::i 0.. m :::J Cl'. " ci I <:z (/) >--z~ :3 ~ 0 z a. "' ~ \I <( 0"' w "'o w :g >-Cl'. -" "'o f->--~ " ~~ u cc "' a. PRQPQSEQ: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATlON AND OUTFALL REPAIRS REFERENCE NUMBER: J..tt.. CEDAR RIVER AT: RENTON ~ KING SHEET 29 OF 29 ~ WASHINGTON ll!\IE;_ 2/3/14 Mitigation Plan -Final Report Cedar River Maintenance Dredging Project Renton, Washington for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District On Behalf Of City of Renton December 4, 2014 GEOENGINEERS ti] 1101 South Fawcett Avenue, Suite 200 Tacoma, Washington 98402 253.383.4940 GEOENGINEERS CJ RECEIVED MA.R 2 3 2015 CITY OF RENTON PLANNING DIVISION Mitigation Plan -Final Report Cedar River Maintenance Dredging Project Renton, Washington File No. 0693-073-00 December 4, 2014 Pre pa red for: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District Regulatory Branch, CENWS-OD-RG P.O. Box 3755 Seattle, Washington 98124-3755 Attention: Suzanne Anderson, PhD, PWS On Behalf Of: City of Renton Public Works -Surface Water Utility 1055 South Grady Way -5th Floor Renton, Washington 98057 Prepared by: GeoEngineers, Inc. 1101 South Fawcett Avenue, Suite 200 Tacoma, Washington _iS:Qb c.L David B. Conlin, MA, PWS Project Biologist JOC:DC:lc Disclaimer: Any electronic form, facsimile or hard copy of the original document (email, text, table, and/or figure}, if provided, and any attachments are only a copy of the original document. The original document is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official document of record. Copyright© 2014 by GeoEngineers, Inc. All rights reserved. Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 1 Project Description ................................................................................................................................. 2 Project Reaches .............................................................................................................................. 2 Project Details ................................................................................................................................. 3 BASELINE INFORMATION ............................................................................................................................ 9 Location .................................................................................................................................................. 9 Aquatic Resources ................................................................................................................................. 9 Historic and Current Land Use .............................................................................................................. 9 1998 Flood Control Project Description ...................................................................................... 10 Previous Mitigation ....................................................................................................................... 11 Existing Functions ................................................................................................................................ 13 MITIGATION GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ...................................................................................................... 14 Impact Site ........................................................................................................................................... 15 Impact Site Functions ................................................................................................................... 15 Riparian Vegetation Removal ....................................................................................................... 15 Bank Armoring ............................................................................................................................... 16 Channel Adjustment ..................................................................................................................... 17 Altered Flow Characteristics ......................................................................................................... 18 Wetland Impacts ........................................................................................................................... 20 Im pact Sum ma ry ........................................................................................................................... 20 Mitigation .............................................................................................................................................. 22 Mitigation Strategy ........................................................................................................................ 27 Mitigation Sequencing .................................................................................................................. 27 City of Renton Bank Stabilization Requirements ........................................................................ 29 MITIGATION SITE SELECTION AND JUSTIFICATION ................................................................................. 29 MITIGATION WORK PLAN ........................................................................................................................... 30 Vegetation Planting .............................................................................................................................. 30 Timing of Plantings ........................................................................................................................ 31 Site Preparation ............................................................................................................................ 32 Soft Bank Bio-engineering, Gabion Removal, and Filling Void Spaces ............................................. 32 Spawning Channel Maintenance and Monitoring .............................................................................. 32 Lighting Impacts Reduction ................................................................................................................. 33 Scour Monitoring Study ....................................................................................................................... 34 Wetland Mitigation Bank Credits ........................................................................................................ 34 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS .................................................................................................................... 35 Vegetation ............................................................................................................................................ 35 Spawning Channels ............................................................................................................................. 36 GEO ENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page i File No. 0693·073·00 SITE PROTECTION AND MAINTENANCE ................................................................................................... 37 Site Protection ...................................................................................................................................... 37 Maintenance ........................................................................................................................................ 37 Re-seeding or Re-planting ............................................................................................................ 37 Irrigation ........................................................................................................................................ 37 Invasive Species Control ............................................................................................................... 38 Fertilizing ....................................................................................................................................... 38 MONITORING PLAN ..................................................................................................................................... 38 Spawning Channels ............................................................................................................................. 38 Monitoring Methods and Data Collection .................................................................................... 39 Reporting ....................................................................................................................................... 39 Riparian Plantings ................................................................................................................................ 39 Data Collection .............................................................................................................................. 40 As-Built Documentation ................................................................................................................ 40 Monitoring Methods ...................................................................................................................... 40 Reporting ....................................................................................................................................... 41 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN ............................................................................................................... 41 FINANCIAL ASSURANCES .......................................................................................................................... 42 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................................... 42 LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................................................................... 43 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................................. 43 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Project Location and Off-Site Mitigation Areas Figure 2. Existing Habitat Conditions . Figure 3. Proposed Project Impacts Figure 4. Proposed On-Site Mitigation Actions APPENDICES Appendix A. JAR PA Drawings Appendix B. Cedar River Wetland and Stream Report Appendix C. Spawning Data Tables and Analyses Appendix D. Bank Use Plan Appendix E. Responses to Public Comments Appendix F. Elliot Spawning Channel Maintenance Plan Drawings GEOENGINEER~ December 4. 2014 Page ii File No. 0693-073-00 INTRODUCTION The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) Lower Cedar River Section 205 Project (the project) is a Flood Hazard Reduction Project located in and along the lower 1.23 miles (2,000 meters) of the Cedar River in Renton, Washington (Figure 1). The project consists of an actively maintained (dredged) river channel, and system of levees and floodwalls that provide protection to the lower river and its extensive industrial and commercial development, including the Renton Municipal Airport and The Boeing Company 737 production facility. Following the most recent dredging operation performed in 1998 by USAGE, the river bed has continued to fill with native river sediment, composed primarily of gravel. This aggradation was expected and identified during the original 1998 project permitting and design. Continued deposition in the river channel is expected to compromise the project flood protection system in the next two to three years, or sooner. Therefore, the City of Renton (the City), as the USAGE Section 205 Project local sponsor, has initiated the planning and preliminary design for maintenance dredging of the river and other necessary maintenance actions to obtain construction permits with sufficient time to maintain the 100-year flood protection benefits, as required by the Operation and Maintenance Manual (O&M Manual) between the City and USAGE. Maintenance dredging will take place within the limits and grades of previous dredging work as permitted within the original National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) (USAGE, 1997). The proposed maintenance dredging will result in impacts to the project area including; riparian vegetation removal, bank armoring, altered flow characteristics, channel adjustment and wetland impacts. These impacts were anticipated during approval of long-term cyclical dredging beginning in 1998, as documented in the EIS and compensatory mitigation plan developed at that time (USAGE, undated), with the following exception: wetlands were not previously documented within the project area. This mitigation plan addresses compensatory mitigation that is supplemental to the original mitigation implemented for the 1998 dredge project, which was approved as long-term mitigation for cyclical dredging operations, as requested by regulatory agencies during federal and state permitting processes for the current proposal. The following mitigation was previously implemented in fulfillment of permit requirements for the 1998 dredge: construction of a groundwater sockeye salmon spawning and rearing channel, bioengineering of an existing revetment with large woody debris (LWD), riparian plantings, and gravel supplementation. In addition, the Elliot Spawning/Rearing Side Channel was permitted and constructed in 2000 to mitigate for unanticipated channel adjustment impacts associated with the Corps over dredging in 1998 and the potential one-time loss of 1,800 sockeye salmon redds. Previously implemented mitigation elements are detailed in the Historic and Current Land Use sub-section of the Baseline Information section in this report. This mitigation plan also describes avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures proposed to offset impacts of the current proposal. Proposed project mitigation will include: invasive species management, native vegetation plantings, filling void space in riprap, lower reach gabion removal, spawning channel maintenance and monitoring, lighting impacts reduction, a scour monitoring study, and acquisition of wetland mitigation bank credits. The format of this document specifically follows regulatory guidance required by the USAGE (2010a). Geo ENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 1 File No. 0693·07J.OO Project Description The Project includes the following proposed improvements: • Maintenance Dredging • Mobilization and temporary access improvements. • Dredging to design depths. • Temporary stockpiling, haul and disposal of dredged materials. • Protection of the environment and Best Management Practices (BMPs). • Airport safety and traffic control. • Parks & Recreational use and safety. • Bank Stabilization • Maintenance -minor restoration of portions of displaced rock on existing bank stabilization features during the dredging work. • Repair -replacement and reconstruction of existing severely deteriorated and failing bank stabilization features at flood control I-walls and levees. • New Stabilization -installation of new stabilization measures to ensure protection and structural stability of the flood control I-wall at approximate river mile (RM) 0.59 to 0.63 (station [STA] 31 +16 to 33+00 on the right bank [all stationing presented in this document is relative to the dredge centerline]). • Outfall Repairs • Excavation of buried outfalls as needed for inspection and necessary repairs. • Maintenance and replacement of existing backflow valves at outfalls. • Minor repairs to damaged outfall pipes including shortening or lengthening pipe protrusions without an increase in pipe size or discharge rates as needed in coordination with other project improvements. • Mitigation • Removal and control of invasive plant species. • Vegetation plantings to improve riparian habitat in the lower river. • Filling void space in rip rap bank protection to reduce predator habitat. • Lower reach gabion bank protection removal and replacement with bioengineered bank protection features. • Spawning channel maintenance and monitoring. • Lighting impact reduction on City-owned property within a 200-foot buffer along the lower river. • Wetland mitigation bank credits for minor wetland impacts. Project Reaches Project work is described relative to three reaches (Figure 2), where right bank refers to the east bank and left bank to the west bank. Improvements proposed in each reach are also summarized below: GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 2 File No. 0693-D73-00 • Reach 1 -North Boeing Bridge (RM O; STA 0+00) upstream to South Boeing Bridge (RM 0.74; STA 39+00) • • • Maintenance Dredging: entire reach at 4-foot average depth (plus 1-foot overdepth allowance) of cut with variable width. Bank Stabilization • Maintenance, left bank. • Repair, left bank. • New, right bank. Outfall Repairs, left and right banks • Reach 2 -South Boeing Bridge (RM 0.74; STA 39+00) upstream to Logan Avenue Bridge (RM 1.06; STA 56+00) • • • Maintenance Dredging: entire reach at 4-foot average depth (plus 1-foot over-depth allowance) of cut with variable width. Bank Stabilization • Maintenance, left bank. • Repair, left bank. Outfall Repairs, left and right banks • Reach 3 -Logan Avenue Bridge (RM 1.06; STA 56+00) upstream to Williams Avenue Bridge (1.23; STA 64+85) • Maintenance Dredging: initially average 4-foot depth (plus 1-foot over-depth allowance) of cut transitioning to existing river bed elevation at the upstream limit of the reach. • Bank Stabilization • Maintenance, right bank • Outfall repairs, right bank Project Details The following sections describe the proposed actions in greater detail. Detail sheets prepared for the Joint Aquatic Resource Permit Application (JAR PA) are included with this report as Appendix A. MAINTENANCE DREDGING Maintenance dredging is needed to maintain the project flood protection benefits, as required in the Project Cooperation Agreement (PCA), executed between the Corps and City in 1998, and the project O&M Manual between the City of Renton and USACE (USACE, 2004). The threshold for periodic maintenance dredging is based on ensuring flood protection against the 100-year recurrence interval event, with at least 90 percent reliability. As the bed elevation approaches the specified allowable elevation (Allowable Average Channel Bed Profile per USACE, 2004), anywhere within the project, provisions are to be made for channel maintenance dredging to maintain the design level of protection. During maintenance dredging actions, the Cedar River channel within the project area will be excavated to an average depth of 4 feet below the "Allowable Average Channel Bed Profile" as defined in the O&M Manual. The maximum slope will be 0.63 percent within the transition slope area which extends GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 3 File No. 0693-073-00 from Logan Avenue upstream to Williams Avenue. Transition zone slope will gradually reduce the dredge cut from the designed dredged channel bottom at Logan Avenue upstream to Williams Avenue where it will transition into the existing river stream bed level. The proposed maintenance dredge action is similar in scope (depth and plan extents) to the original USAGE project that was assessed and permitted in 1998, which also included maintenance dredging. The planned dredge widths will be slightly smaller than proposed and conducted in 1998. The dredge depth will strictly adhere to an average depth of 4 feet (below allowable average channel bed profile) with a 1-foot over-depth allowance and will not exceed the depths permitted in the 1998 project. The total estimated volume of dredged material is estimated to be approximately 125,000 CY including contingency for sedimentation accumulation between the May 2013 survey and the conditions at the time of dredging in 2015 (average accumulation of 9,700 CY per year in project area). Width of the maintenance dredging will accommodate the variable channel width and will vary depending on location within the project area. The channel bottom cut will be 90 feet wide in Reach 1, narrowing in intervals along the project length to a 60-foot channel width at the upstream limit in Reach 3. Dredged width has been narrowed further in certain locations, relative to the 1998 dredge, to prevent undermining of structures and river banks and to avoid wetland impacts. Dredged side slopes will be 3H:1V unless otherwise required for local bank stabilization maintenance work or if required for geotechnical or structural stability of existing infrastructure (Bridges and I-walls). Floating Dredge For water-based dredging in Reach 1, it is expected that the type of equipment utilized will be an excavator or crawler crane mounted on a portable sectional barge (such as a flexi-float system). The sectional barge will be mobilized to the site by truck, assembled, and launched at one of the left bank offloading platforms. The barge and excavator system will be moved around the dredging work area using a small transportable tug boat suitable for use in shallow water environments. The barge would be secured to the riverbed prior to dredging using spuds placed in the riverbed or anchor lines. Dredged material will be removed from the river bottom using either an excavator digging bucket or clamshell bucket. The bucket will place the dredged material onto a material barge, which will be fitted with side boards and filter fabric to contain the dredged material and filter fines. Initial dewatering is accomplished while material is on the barge deck as excess water is filtered and returned to the river. After completion of material barge loading, the loaded barge would be transported by small tug to material offload facilities at three locations along the left bank of the project site. Offload areas will be located within areas which allow access from the adjacent uplands and limit impacts to existing functional riparian habitat and flood control infrastructure. Temporary construction platforms will be required to access the river and offload dredged material from the barge, re-handle the material, and load the dredge material into trucks or place it temporarily in a small stockpile located in the adjacent uplands. The platforms will be composed of steel pile (vibratory driven sheet or pipe pile) or other similar temporary shoring method (such as ecology blocks, rock, large polypropylene sacks filled with gravel, or similar) that can be fully removed after dredging activities. Natural gravel/cobble fill from dredging will be placed between the existing slope and temporary shoring system to construct a platform suitable for excavators to unload the barge. The platform will be dissembled and completely removed after completion of floating dredge operations and impacted areas (levees, vegetation) restored. The upland stockpile, if necessary, will be protected against erosion using standard BMPs. GEOENGINEER~ The offloading platforms will be located approximately at December 4, 2014 Page4 File No. 0693-073-00 STAs 8+00, 14+00, and 16+50. Floating dredge work will be initiated from one of the offloading platforms, from which the float will be lowered into the river with a crane, and then an excavator can drive onto the float. Excavator Dredging work will also be conducted utilizing land-based equipment operated from temporary gravel berms and removable construction platforms located in the river channel below ordinary high water (OHW). Excavator dredge operations will consist of a combination of multiple tracked excavators, crawler cranes, front end loaders, bulldozers and dump trucks. This approach will require the land-based equipment to access the river channel from the uplands at designated locations near the bridges (South Boeing Bridge at RM 0.74/STA 39+00, Logan Avenue at RM 1.06/STA 56+00). A total of 17 access points are anticipated to be required along the left bank of the project site with each being approximately 50 to 75 feet in length. Four access points along the right bank might be needed for the dredging and/or bank stabilization work. These will include the boat ramp at RM 0.14 (near STA 7+60), the gabion replacement area at RM 0.42 (STA 22+25), adjacent to 6th Avenue at RM 0.6 (STA 31 +80), and on the north side of Logan Avenue bridge at RM 1.06 (STA 56+00). The boat ramp will also be used for launching work boats and survey vessels. The stadium parking lot access would only be used if absolutely necessary to complete right bank work between South Boeing and Logan Avenue Bridges. The work will be initiated within the upper reach between Logan and Williams Avenue Bridges. The excavator method will require the use of excavated native gravel material from the dredge operation to build a temporary working platform or berm/bench which has a top elevation above the water surface elevation anticipated during construction. To initiate the work, a limited amount of imported temporary fill may be needed at the access point and berm at the toe of the access point. The temporary berm will be stream bed-type material either taken from the floating dredge operation or from an approved offsite sand and gravel operation. Once excavation equipment is mobilized, additional bed material will be dredged and placed within the left bank side of the channel to create a temporary berm that will serve as a working platform for construction equipment. The temporary berm will be constructed of material excavated from the bed material located immediately adjacent to berm area as well as material removed from Reach 1 area if needed to start the berm feature. The temporary berm will be removed as the dredging work progresses in a downstream direction. Material removed from the channel and temporary berm will be loaded into trucks and transported to re-handling areas near the access points. Re-handling areas will be constructed using dredge material to provide a ramp and bench for equipment to transfer materials from the channel over the flood control structures (I-wall and Levee) into trucks located along the adjacent access roads (Airport and Frontage Road). BANK STABILIZATION Bank stabilization work is proposed as an element of maintenance of the USAGE 205 Flood Control project. Bank stabilization is limited to those areas of the flood control project requiring stabilization (levees and floodwalls) based upon engineering analysis and design standards set forth by USAGE. The areas identified for bank stabilization are the maximum extents needed to identify the maximum amount of potential project disturbance. A smaller area may be constructed based on the conditions at the time of construction and available construction funding, therefore the minimization measures such as filling void spaces will be commensurate with the amount of bank stabilization. Bank stabilization for non-essential flood control project features are not proposed as part of this project. Bank stabilization work is composed of the following types of work: GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 5 File Nu. 0693-073-00 • Maintenance -Minor restoration of portions of displaced rock on existing bank stabilization features while access to the areas is provided during the dredging work. • Repair -Replacement and reconstruction of existing deteriorated and failing bank stabilization features. • New Stabilization -Installation of new stabilization measures to ensure protection of the right-bank flood control I-wall at approximate RM 0.59 to 0.63 (STA 31+16 to 33+00). The bank in this reach has eroded since the 1998 dredge, which presents a risk to the structural stability of the I-wall, if not stabilized. Multiple excavators and trucks will be used to construct the bank stabilization features. Imported rock and soil materials from an approved source will be delivered to temporary work platforms by truck, re-handled and then placed using excavators. Bank stabilization work will be conducted in coordination with and at the same time as the maintenance dredging work as each reach of the channel is completed. Slight differences in construction methods for the three types of proposed bank stabilization are summarized in the following sections. The table below summarizes the locations and need for bank stabilization based upon field inspection and engineering analysis. See also Figure 3 for a plan view illustrating these locations. TABLE 1. PROPOSED BANK STABILIZATION AREAS Location 19+50 to 22+00 22+00 to 24+00 31 +16 to 33+00 24+00 to 37+00 37+00 to 45+50 Length (feet) 250 200 184 300 850 45+50 to 55+85 1,035 GEOENGINEER~ Type Repair Repair New Bank Left Need for stablllzatlon1 Channel thalweg is located near toe of river bank. Minimal river bank material along toe of I-wall which threatens stability of the wall. Loss of toe rock material threatens stability of wall. Left Channel thalweg has historically migrated toward left bank at this location. Channel thalweg currently at toe of river bank. Minimal Right river bank material along toe of I-wall which threatens stability of the wall. Maintenance' Left Conduct maintenance work on rock toe while access for equipment to deliver and install materials is available during dredging. Repair Left Maintenance' Left Loss of toe material behind concrete slab stabilization measures threatens stability of wall. Channel thalweg has historically migrated toward left bank at this location. Conduct periodic maintenance work on rock toe and displaced rock slopes while access for equipment to deliver and install materials is available. December 4, 2014 Page 6 File No. 0693-073-00 Location Length (feet) Type Bank Need for Stabilization• Scour has occurred at the bridge and concrete block wall 55+24 to 57+92 268 Maintenance 2 Right at Logan Ave., requiring minor maintenance of concrete blocks (Armorflex) scour protection while access for equipment to deliver and install materials is available. 250 Malntenance2 Totals 1,300 Repair 184 New Notes: 1 Inspection and recommendations provided by Coast & Harbor Engineering. 2 Maintenance locations represent general areas with spot maintenance as needed. Approximately 10 percent of the total existing bank armoring was identified as needing maintenance. The total for maintenance therefore represents only a subset of the lineal length of bank included in the maintenance areas. Maintenance Minor maintenance of existing bank stabilization features will be performed by removing damaged and displaced stones, concrete blocks (Armorflex), and reconstruction of small affected sections as needed to restore continuous protection from toe to top of slope along the project reach. The work will include importing some stones to fill gaps of displaced protection (stones and blocks), excavation, and demolition of short portions of existing bank. To the extent possible, existing slopes and geometries will be maintained and the footprint will not increase compared to existing conditions. It is estimated that bank stabilization maintenance work will be required throughout approximately 10 percent of the area illustrated as 'Maintenance' on Figure 3. Upon completion of maintenance rock placement, native graveljcobble (obtained from dredging work) will be placed on the slopes to fill voids in the rock where maintenance activities take place. This will reduce predator habitat and compensate for impacts related to bank stabilization maintenance. Repair In repair areas where the bank stabilization will be reconstructed or replaced, bank stabilization will be composed of angular rock placed at a 2H:1V slope. The stabilization will be constructed as the temporary construction berm or platform is removed in conjunction with progression of dredging activities. First, the existing bank stabilization will be removed, sorted and unusable materials will be disposed offsite. A suitable subgrade will be established using excavators. Geotextile fabric will then be placed on the excavated slope, and small bedding stone (quarry spalls) will then be placed on the geotextile fabric to secure it in place. Armor rock will then be placed and compacted to form a tight fitting mass of stone working to form the toe to the top of the slope. A narrow planting bench will be constructed where space is available between the streambank toe and the top of the dredge cut slope. Voids in the finished rock slope will be filled with native gravel/cobble materials below OHW. A soil/gravel mixture will also be placed on top of the slope to provide appropriate planting areas for native herbaceous vegetation in the required vegetation free zone (VFZ) located within 15 feet of the floodwall and levee prism. The soil/gravel mixture will be primarily composed of native riverbed material from dredging operations, mixed with imported topsoil to promote plant establishment and growth. On the left bank, from RM 0.70 to 0.79 (STA 37+20 to 41 +90), a narrow habitaVplanting bench will be retained to provide suitable areas for establishment of inundation-tolerant riparian vegetation, such as willows or other species. Plantings will be located in conformance with guidelines for vegetation near federal levees and flood walls GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 7 File No. 0693-073-00 (Engineers Technical Letter [ETL] 1110-2-571, Guidelines for Landscape Planting & Vegetation Management at Levees, Floodwalls, Embankment Dams, and Appurtenant Structures, 2009; Seattle Variance, Public Law [PL] 84-99 Levee Vegetation Management Information Paper, 1995), as well as Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) vegetation restrictions imposed as a result of proximity to the airport. New Bank erosion has occurred along the toe of the floodwall that was constructed by the USAGE without any bank stabilization. The design team identified one location where erosion presents a risk to the structural stability of the floodwall. New bank stabilization will be constructed at this location in a manner similar to the repair areas, except that removal of existing bank stabilization materials will not occur. New stabilization will occur on the right bank at the toe of the I-wall located at RM 0.59 to 0.63 (STA 31 +16 to 33+00). The limits of this new work have been minimized to the extent feasible, which has resulted in avoiding the need to remove any mature trees from the riparian fringe. The work will occur from temporary construction platforms that span across the river from the left bank to allow access to the work area for both excavation and construction of the bank stabilization. Access from uplands at 6th Street will also be required. Temporary access platforms will be removed upon completion of the bank stabilization and dredging. OUTFALL REPAIRS Numerous stormwater outfalls (both active and abandoned) are located within the project area and consist of various sizes and types including concrete, plastic, and corrugated metal. Of these outfalls, approximately 20 are fitted with backflow prevention devices (Tideflex® valves) to protect upland areas against flooding. As part of the work and in conjunction with dredging and bank stabilization, repair to damaged outfalls will occur. Because the river has continued to accumulate sediment some existing outfalls are buried and may require local excavation to uncover, assess, and refit damaged backflow prevention valves and pipes. Maintenance of existing outfalls will include in-kind replacement of existing damaged or deteriorated systems including Tideflex® valves and sections of outfall pipe. Removal of accumulated sediment from active outfalls will be performed as needed. It is estimated that up to 27 outfalls may require some level of repair and maintenance. Where active outfalls pass through bank stabilization (repair, maintenance, or new), minor modifications of the outfall location may be required by extending or cutting off outfall pipe to match proposed site conditions. Where damaged pipes penetrate through the existing floodwalls, replacement and refitting will occur. Abandoned exposed outfalls extending into the river will be cut off, plugged and disposed of offsite, as feasible, when encountered. BMPs will be implemented to isolate the repair areas and prevent pipe repair materials from entering the water during construction. Bank stabilization is not proposed at these locations except as specifically identified in the project drawings. GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 8 File No. 0693-073·00 BASELINE INFORMATION Location The site is located on the Cedar River at the south end of Lake Washington in Renton, Washington within Township 23 North, Range 5 East, Sections 7, 17 and 18. The project is within Water Resources Inventory Area (WRIA) 8 (Cedar/Sammamish) and Hydrologic Unit Code (HUCJ 17110012 (Lake Washington). The Williams Avenue South Bridge is the upstream (southern) limit of the site, and the mouth of the Cedar River at Lake Washington is the downstream (northern) site boundary. Renton Municipal Airport is located west of the site and The Boeing Company 737 production facility is located east of the site. A linear park corridor owned and operated by the City is located along the east bank of the site between the river and Boeing. Several other commercial/industrial developments are also present adjacent to the project area. The project location is shown on Figure 1 and baseline conditions within the project reach are shown on Figure 2. Aquatic Resources Wetland, stream and riparian habitat features have been documented throughout the project reach (Cedar River Wetland and Stream Report, GeoEngineers, 2013; included as Appendix 8). In general, wetland, river and riparian habitats are currently degraded and beneficial functions are compromised. Within the project reach, the Cedar River is a constructed channel that historically has required continuous maintenance and dredging of the bed elevation to ensure flood protection. The river is channelized through the project reach and the banks are armored in numerous areas with riprap, concrete, and/or wood retaining walls. Vegetation along this stretch of the Cedar River is generally limited to invasive species including Japanese knotweed (Polygonum cuspidatum), reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) and Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius) in the understory. Several native tree species are also located within the riparian zone including red alder (A/nus rubra), Pacific willow (Salix lucida ssp. lasiandra), Sitka willow (Salix sitchensis) and black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera ssp. trichocarpa). The native vegetation communities are dominant along the right bank of the river within the park. GeoEngineers (2013) identified and delineated seven wetlands within the project area (Figure 2), which directly abut the Cedar River. Wetlands A, 8, C, F and Gare located on the east (right) bank of the river, while Wetlands D and E are located on a gravel bar along the west (left) bank. These wetlands are characterized as palustrine seasonally flooded wetlands (Cowardin et al., 1979). Wetlands D and E contain emergent vegetation, Wetlands A and Care scrub/shrub-dominated and Wetlands 8, F and Gare forested. For additional details regarding aquatic resource classification, please refer to the wetland and stream delineation report (GeoEngineers, 2013). Historic and Current Land Use The project reach of the Cedar River is artificially constructed. The following channel history is based on the description presented in the project EIS (USAGE, 1997). The artificial channel was constructed in 1912 by Commercial Waterway District Number 2. Prior to 1912, the Cedar River flowed into the Black River and then into the Duwamish River and Elliot Bay. The diversion of the Cedar River into Lake Washington occurred at approximately the same time that the USAGE constructed the GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 9 File No. 0693-073·00 Lake Washington Ship Canal and lowered the Lake Washington surface water elevation by approximately 9 feet. The river currently flows into the extreme southern end of Lake Washington. The Cedar River channel has been periodically dredged by the Waterway District (until 1956) and subsequently by the City of Renton (1956, 1976, 1986, and 1998). The river delta in Lake Washington (immediately north of the North Boeing Bridge) was dredged in 1993. Prior to 1998, maintenance dredging typically lowered the channel bottom to approximately 10 feet lower than the current condition. Dredging has not occurred since 1998. Sediment is readily deposited in the project reach because the gradient is low and water velocities are reduced in this area due to the backwater effects of Lake Washington. Rates of bedload yield from the basin, and subsequent deposition in the project reach, can fluctuate greatly in any given year. Periodic dredging of gravel and sediment has been employed in the past to maintain flow conveyance through this reach in order to avert flood damages to the regionally significant economic investments in the vicinity. Gravel and sediment removal was last performed in 1998, and simultaneously levees and floodwalls were constructed along both the right and left banks of the river to provide 100-year flood protection to the area. 1998 Flood Control Project Description The 1998 gravel and sediment removal and structural improvement project, entitled the Lower Cedar River Section 205 Flood Hazard Reduction Project (known as the Lower Cedar 205 Project), was constructed and funded through an inter-local agreement among the City of Renton, USAGE, King County, and the Washington State Legislature. The Cedar River Section 205 Flood Control Project is located along the lower Cedar River from Williams Avenue (River Mile 1.23) to the mouth of the river at Lake Washington. The project, as described in the Final EIS (June 1997) included dredging of the existing channel to a depth of approximately 4 feet below the 1995 bed profile; construction of levees and floodwalls, to provide minimum protection against the 100-year recurrence interval event with at least 90 percent reliability Gust prior to re-dredging); and periodic maintenance dredging (as frequent as every three years) to maintain the design level of protection. Periodic maintenance dredging by the City is also a requirement in the USAGE O&M Manual for the project to maintain the flood protection benefits of the federally constructed project. Maintenance dredging intervals are to be based on regular bed elevation surveys to determine the amount of aggradation since the previous dredge cycle. Therefore, ongoing maintenance dredging was included in the EIS and permit application for an indefinite period (preferably for the project life of 100 years) and was determined to be a requirement for the project reach. The dredging work was last conducted during the summer of 1998. Immediately after each dredge cycle, the project reach was designed to provide up to a 200-year recurrence interval flood protection, which would decline until the channel aggrades to the maximum allowable bed elevation providing 100-year recurrence interval flood protection with 90 percent reliability. Analysis and permitting conducted for the 1998 dredging work indicated the channel would require periodic maintenance dredging of approximately 170,000 CY every three years to maintain the project objective of providing 100 year flood control in the City of Renton. The 1998 dredging work was planned to excavate to a depth of four feet below the 1995 streambed profile from the North Boeing Bridge upstream to RM 1.0 (Logan Avenue Bridge). The dredge depth was then to be tapered up to meet the existing gradient upstream at Williams Avenue Bridge. The total volume of sediment planned to be dredged was estimated to be 158,000 CY (USAGE, 1997). GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 10 File No. 0693-073-00 Dredging was conducted utilizing excavators and dump trucks operating from within the river channel on temporary construction berms built from dredge materials. Some over-dredging occurred during the 1998 project and therefore additional compensatory mitigation was required and completed in the form of the Elliot Spawning/Rearing Channel to mitigate for channel adjustment upstream of the project during the winter following the dredging activities. Dredge materials were disposed of temporarily at an upland site owned by City of Renton, approximately two miles upstream of the project near the left bank, west of the Cedar River Trail south of 1-405 (the NARCO site). The dredged materials were sold from the site over an approximate three-year duration with a small amount of material reused as gravel supplementation upstream at Landsburg. The USAGE levee and floodwall project was constructed in 1999 upon completion of the 1998 dredging work. The City of Renton, as the local project sponsor, was required to sign a Project Cooperation Agreement (PCA) committing to ongoing maintenance (including maintenance dredging) to ensure long-term flood protection of the project. Each year, a detailed sediment study of the lower Cedar River is conducted to ensure that the allowable bed elevation is not reached, and hydraulic modeling is performed to predict sediment capacity associated with gravel removal maintenance intervals. The 2012 Annual Sediment Report (Northwest Hydraulic Consultants, 2013) concluded the 25,800 CY of remaining storage below the allowable bed level will fill in two to three years, assuming an average annual infill rate of 9,700 CY. If the river experiences another "above average" flood season like 2007 or 2011, it may be effectively full sooner. Previous Mitigation In addition to the maintenance responsibilities, 1998 project permits required extensive mitigation for the initial construction impacts and impacts associated with the anticipated future maintenance dredging. Mitigation for the Lower Cedar River Section 205 Project, including the resulting excessive dredging and recurring maintenance dredging for the life of the project, has included the following (see Figure 1): • 1998: Groundwater Side Channel (destroyed by Nisqually earthquake in 2001) • 1999: Maplewood Large Woody Debris Levee Project • 2000: Elliot Spawning Side Channel (damaged by floods in 2006 & 2009) • 1999-2000: Lower Cedar River riparian plantings • 2001 to 2011: Landsburg mitigation (annual gravel supplementation, except 2008) • 2010: Royal Hills Replacement Spawning Channel • 2012: Elliot Spawning Channel flood damage repaired The mitigation outlined above has included the following elements: • Spawning Channels: The Corps in coordination with the City has constructed several sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) spawning channels as mitigation for impacts from the 1998 dredging project and cyclical maintenance dredging, and provided monitoring of fish utilization within the project reach and the constructed spawning channels. The original Groundwater Side Channel constructed in 1998 at Ron Regis Park was supplemented with the Elliot Spawning Channel in 2000 to mitigate for the one-time loss of redds resulting from the unanticipated channel adjustment upstream of the project possibly exacerbated by the excessive dredging that occurred during project implementation GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2D14 Page 11 File No. 0693-073-00 in 1998. The Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) permit from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) included a provision requiring 10 years of performance monitoring and maintenance for the Elliot spawning channel. When the Groundwater Side Channel was destroyed in 2001, the Elliot Spawning Channel had been constructed and was providing mitigation necessary for the channel adjustment and excessive dredging. The Elliot Spawning Channel fulfilled its necessary mitigation needs for channel adjustment in the second year following construction and continued to provide other project mitigation in the absence of the Groundwater Channel as required by the 1997 project EIS, until the Royal Hills channel was constructed in 2010. The Elliot Spawning Channel has been damaged by floods and natural channel migration that has reduced flows and caused deposition of fine sediments reducing the porosity of the porous levee resulting in decreased flows into the channel. The channel was reconstructed in 2012, but has been subject to additional sedimentation due to insufficient flow problems caused by changes in Cedar River location that provides flow to the Elliot Channel. • Large Woody Debris: Large woody debris (LWD) and bioengineered revetment placement along an existing revetment at the Maplewood Golf Course. • Riparian Plantings: Riparian plantings, including vegetation monitoring, at the following locations: • Right bank from South Boeing Bridge to mouth (approximately 4,850 LF). • Left bank from Logan Ave to small aircraft hangars (approximately 3,800 LF). • Gravel Supplementation: Stockpiling dredged gravel for future use and placement of up to 1,000 CY of gravel per year for 10 to 15 years upstream at the Landsburg site as a salmon spawning habitat enhancement measure. Mitigation monitoring of the actions has occurred over a 15-year period since the 1998 dredging event. Monitoring conducted annually during this period includes: documenting sockeye spawning in both the lower river (the area affected by dredging) and the two spawning channels constructed as mitigation for project effects. Monitoring activities conducted for shorter durations during the 15-year period includes; documenting salmon fry outmigration (Elliot Channel); documenting salmon utilization of bank revetment habitat enhancement at the Maplewood Golf Course; vegetation monitoring for riparian plantings; and documenting salmon utilization of the gravel enhancement area (Landsburg). In 2012, the USAGE removed riparian vegetation from the left bank where it threatened the integrity of the flood wall between Logan Avenue North and South Boeing Bridge (USAGE, 2012). Vegetation that was removed included 220 trees as well as all shrub vegetation within 15 feet of the I-wall. Most of this vegetation was installed at the site as part of the left bank mitigation plantings outlined above and/or had colonized the site naturally, much of the shrub layer consisted of Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), an invasive species. Mitigation for removal of vegetation by the USAGE was accomplished by planting willow (Sa/ix spp.) stakes in a nearby area on the opposite bank, as well as planting trees in offsite upstream locations along the banks of the Cedar River and Elliot Spawning Channel (USAGE, 2012). The USAGE in coordination with the City is currently developing a levee vegetation variance for the project right bank levee. The vegetation variance would include the removal of additional trees from the right bank levee area, within the City Park, where they conflict with current USAGE levee vegetation standards. Conceptual mitigation proposed by the Corps includes replacement tree plantings in areas where they will GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 12 file No. 0693-073-00 not conflict with vegetation management standards. Vegetation plantings that are part of the mitigation plan proposed in this document to offset the dredging project have been coordinated with the mitigation plantings proposed by the USACE to ensure these mitigation actions are complementary. At the time of preparation of this mitigation plan, neither the permitting, removal of trees, nor the proposed mitigation, has been completed by the USACE. The left bank is generally dominated by invasive species throughout the project reach. Vegetation plantings on the right bank have been generally more successful; however, invasive species have colonized much of the understory somewhat compromising riparian function and mitigation planting success. Monitoring of sockeye spawning conducted by Integrated Aquatics, Golder Associates, and Jones & Stokes since the previous dredge has demonstrated that utilization of the main channel (including upstream at Landsburg) and constructed spawning channels has resulted in a net increase in number of salmon redds and consequent fry production relative to pre-dredge conditions. The main channel and constructed side channels continue to provide salmon spawning habitat. Existing Functions River processes have been historically altered as a result of the initial channel construction in the early 1900s, historic dredging, levee construction, bank armoring and other structures. The lower segment of the Cedar River is a constructed channel that has been actively maintained for the last century as a flood control facility to reduce the effects of flooding on adjacent properties including the Renton Municipal Airport, The Boeing Company 737 production facilities, and a public park. Historically, the Cedar River flowed into the Black River and drained into Elliot Bay by way of the Duwamish River. The current channel was originally constructed in 1912 and was periodically dredged to approximately 10 feet below the current channel grade until the 1980s. The City ceased periodic dredging of the channel in the 1980s because of difficulties obtaining permits due to new environmental regulations, channel access and cost issues (USACE, 1997). The channel remained un-dredged from the early 1980s until 1998. The channel is generally trapezoidal and linear without meanders and the bank of the river is defined by levees, flood walls, and riprap. There are wooden bulkhead structures along much of the shoreline, as well as bank armoring consisting of riprap and gabion baskets. The project reach includes flood control levees and I-walls on either side of the river, a total of four bridges over the river, and an adjacent public trail. A portion of the public trail is located immediately adjacent to the river with concrete and gabion baskets defining the ordinary high water mark (OHWM). The downstream two bridges (North and South Boeing Bridges) connect the Boeing facilities with the airport and are not accessible to the public. The upstream two bridges are public street bridges for Logan Avenue North and Williams Avenue North. Numerous stormwater outfalls discharge from both sides into the river at or near the shoreline. The river is utilized by a number of fish species including salmon, and a wide variety of birds and other wildlife. The lower river is the primary spawning area for longfin smelt in the Lake Washington system (USACE, 1997). Extensive park facilities, including a paved pedestrian pathway, are present on the right bank within the project reach, as well as on the left bank between the Logan Avenue North and Williams Avenue North bridges. These facilities provide opportunity for nature enjoyment by the general public. There is also a boat launch within the project reach, for use by non-motorized watercraft only, and fishing is a popular activity. GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 13 File No. 0693-073-00 Vegetation below the OHWM is generally limited to riverine wetland areas that have formed since the previous dredge at the channel margins, which are dominated by reed canarygrass (Pha/aris arundinacea) with some yellowflag iris (iris pseudacorus) (GeoEngineers, 2013). Riparian vegetation present on the streambanks includes Japanese knotweed (Fallopia japonica), Himalayan blackberry, Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius), tansy (Senecio jacobaea), butterfly bush (Buddleia davidii), field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis), English ivy (Hedera helix), native willows, bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), red alder (A/nus rubra), and horsetails (Equisetum arvense). Much of the riparian buffer on the right bank is affected by park landscaping including mowed grasses and maintained native shrubs including Nootka rose (Rosa nutkana), black twinberry (Lonicera involucrata), Oregon grape (Mahonia aquifolium), Pacific ninebark (Physocarpus capitatus) and other species. The river within the project reach has levees or floodwalls on both sides. Banks have been armored with a flood wall, wooden bulkheads, riprap, and/or gabion baskets. Much of the armoring is currently failing. The streambed within the project reach generally consists of gravel and sand with some cobbles. Several riverine wetlands (vegetated sand and gravel bars) that have formed since the last dredge have been identified in shallow areas below the OHWM of the Cedar River within the project reach (GeoEngineers, 2013). One additional depressional wetland has been identified within the floodplain, but above the OHWM. The Cedar River is listed on the Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) 303(d) list as Category 5 for temperature, bacteria and dissolved oxygen within the project reach. Category 5 ratings indicate the waterbody exceeds pollution standards and is considered impaired. It is listed as Category 2 for pH, indicating the river is a Water of Concern for this parameter (Ecology, 2013). MITIGATION GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The goal of the mitigation plan is to provide adequate mitigation to compensate for the cumulative effects of the project. This may require supplementing mitigation actions previously implemented for the project. To achieve this goal, the following objectives were developed: • Accurately characterize impacts of the proposed project based on monitoring data and observations gathered since the previous dredge, as well as current hydrologic and sediment transport modeling results. • Describe impacts of the current proposal in the context of impacts previously anticipated and mitigated for during the original EIS process. • Evaluate effectiveness of the previous mitigation and identify appropriate additional mitigation to compensate for unanticipated impacts and/or impacts demonstrated through monitoring to not have been fully mitigated through previous actions. • Propose limited additional mitigation, if necessary, to achieve the above objective and is feasible with in the scope of the proposed work. The following section provides a detailed breakdown of impacts that are anticipated to result from the current proposal. GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 14 me No. 0693-073·00 Impact Site This section identifies the impacts to habitat functions that will result from the project. Potential impacts that will be avoided or eliminated through minimization measures are not included here, but are discussed in the Mitigation Sequencing section of this report. Impact Site Functions This section describes the impacts anticipated to result from the project and includes a brief explanation of the ecological effects that may result and may be subject to mitigation requirements. The following types of impacts are anticipated to result from the project: • Riparian Vegetation Removal. Some riparian vegetation will be removed during construction in association with equipment access locations during dredging and new, maintenance and repair of existing bank stabilization work. Removal of riparian vegetation can have ecological effects on fish habitat including a reduction in cover, Joss of allochthonous organic inputs, and alteration of bank processes. • Bank Armoring. Banks within the project reach have been armored with timber bulkheads, rock revetments, concrete slabs, and gabions. Much of the existing bank armoring is failing and the project design team identified those areas critical to stability of the flood control project and other critical infrastructure within the project limits. To address areas where bank protection is failing or never installed and is now needed, the project proposes repair, maintenance and some limited new bank protection. Bank protection will require placement and/or replacement of rock above and below the OHWM, which has the potential to reduce habitat quality and favor predatory fish species. • Channel Adjustment. The project is anticipated to result in channel adjustment ("headcutting") due to the change in bed profile (lowering) in the first year resulting from the maintenance dredging. Channel adjustment has the potential to damage spawning salmon redds constructed in the Cedar River channel area immediately upstream of the project. • Altered Flow Characteristics. Alterations to water depths and/or flow velocity have the potential to preclude spawning in the affected reach and result in habitat conditions favoring predatory fish species. • Wetland Impacts. Dredging will result in removal of some existing wetland habitat below OHWM where two vegetated areas occur on a gravel bar near South Boeing Bridge. Details regarding the ecological effects of each impact are provided in the sections that follow. These impacts/effects are quantified where feasible. Riparian Vegetation Removal Removal of riparian vegetation may be required at equipment access points and where bank stabilization work is proposed. A general vegetation inventory was completed during the data collection phase of project design (see Figure 2). Most of the vegetation along the left bank is invasive, consisting of Himalayan blackberry, Scotch broom, Japanese knotweed and reed canarygrass. There is a larger component of native vegetation present on the right bank, including willow and alder trees and native shrub plantings. However, many areas on the right bank also contain an understory of invasive vegetation, primarily reed canarygrass and Japanese knotweed, with some Himalayan blackberry. GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 15 File No. 0693-073-00 With the exception of a short stretch of new bank stabilization proposed adjacent to the right bank I-wall, most equipment access and bank work will be on the left bank where riparian vegetation is dominated by invasive species and vegetation on the right bank will be mostly unaffected. Although much of the right bank is characterized by a thin band of native vegetation, the vegetation adjacent to the proposed right bank stabilization work is also dominated by invasive species, particularly Japanese knotweed. Equipment access is proposed at sixteen locations along the left bank and four locations along the right bank (see Figure 3). In general, more access points are needed in locations that will be dredged using the temporary berm method than in those areas dredged using the floating clamshell method. Equipment access points will result in removal of approximately 55,730 square feet (SF) of primarily invasive riparian vegetation in total. Bank stabilization activities (including proposed new, repair and maintenance work) will result in the removal of approximately 9,224 SF of additional vegetation along the left bank and 2,560 SF along the right bank. Vegetation will be removed immediately above and below the OHWM throughout these areas in order to stabilize the bank. Existing vegetation is predominantly invasive, with the exception of a few alder trees below OHWM on the left bank downstream of Logan Avenue, few scattered alder and willows downstream of South Boeing Bridge on the left bank, and few shrubs that persist within the matrix of Japanese knotweed at the location of the proposed new right bank stabilization. Bank Armoring Nearly the entire left bank has been previously armored and approximately 50 percent of the right bank contains armoring (see Figure 3). The project design team conducted an assessment of the condition of the banks throughout the project reach to identify those areas needing maintenance, repair or new bank stabilization that is critical for the protection of existing flood control project infrastructure. For the purposes of this assessment, the following terms were defined: "maintenance" is needed in those areas with existing bank armoring (generally riprap) suitable for the protection of the infrastructure that had minor deterioration over time since it was installed; "repair" is needed in those areas with existing bank armoring that is sub-par and not suitable for protection of infrastructure, which would be removed and replaced; and "new" bank stabilization is needed in those areas where bank armoring had not been previously installed to our knowledge. The results of this assessment identified approximately 2,510 LF of existing rock bank protection, of which approximately 10 percent (250 LF) was identified to require maintenance, approximately 1,275 LF of existing protection needing repair (removal and replacement), and approximately 184 LF of new protection. Existing and proposed bank armoring reduces habitat value for native fish species because it reduces overhanging vegetation and creates a hard surface that eliminates natural bank heterogeneity that can result in scour and other process that contribute to habitat complexity. Bank protection elements may also contribute to a predator advantage due to void spaces in riprap where predatory fish species (for example, sculpins) may hide and ambush prey (for example, juvenile salmonids) as they swim by. Because most of the bank protection work proposed for the project is maintenance or repair of existing revetments, impacts of the proposed project associated with bank armoring are generally limited to new protection on the right bank in the amount of 184 LF. GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 16 File No. 0693·073·00 Channel Adjustment Channel adjustment following implementation of the proposed dredge cut has the potential to destroy salmon redds constructed in the river bed between the time of the dredging and the onset of high seasonal flows the following winter. Channel adjustment was observed in the first winter following the 1998 dredge which was assumed to be the result of overdredging by the USACE. Channel adjustment manifested as the river bed headcut upstream from Williams Avenue to 1-405 during the late fall and winter of 1998 -1999. The 1998 dredge cut design anticipated and addressed channel adjustment by proposing grade control weirs in the transition reach, which was intended to arrest channel adjustment, and by constructing a gently sloping transition. However, although the 1998 design was approved, construction did not include installation of the weirs for unknown reasons. Compounding this, the overdredging by the USACE resulted in a steeper transition reach than what had been designed and approved, likely increasing the magnitude (depth) and extent of the channel adjustment. A gradually sloped (0.63 percent) transition reach is proposed as part of the project design to reduce the magnitude (depth) and extent of this effect. The sloped transition reach design for the proposed maintenance dredge is the same as was designed for the 1998 dredge. Three alternative designs within the transition reach were evaluated: Alternative 1 did not include grade control features within the transition reach in favor of allowing natural channel adjustment; Alternative 2A included installation of a constructed riffle by augmenting the channel bed with cobble and small boulders; Alternative 2B included installation of buried weirs. Alternatives 2A and 2B were both intended to reduce the magnitude (depth) and extent of channel adjustment at increased cost. Both alternatives introduce increased risk and the displacement of prime sockeye spawning habitat with constructed elements. Hydraulic and bed evolution models were developed to evaluate the impact of channel adjustment under each alternative. After pre-consultation between stakeholders, including the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, WDFW, USACE, National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), design consulting team, and City of Renton, Alternative 1 (natural channel adjustment) was selected as the preferred alternative, due to the lower risk of failure and potential ecological impacts (lost spawning habitat, potential fish passage barrier development and future maintenance needs) that would be associated with failure of the other alternatives. The natural channel adjustment alternative will result in an overall reduction in long-term impacts to spawning habitat (both the constructed riffle and buried weir options would result in long-term displacement of spawning habitat) in spite of the unrestrained channel adjustment anticipated to occur without grade control. Based on the model results, natural channel adjustment is anticipated to occur within the transition reach and extend upstream approximately 2,300 feet, as far as the Houser Way bridge (the "adjustment reach"). Based on model results, the "pivot point" between upstream degradation and downstream aggradation occurs within the transition reach at approximate STA 60+00 (Northwest Hydraulic Consultants, 2014). Degradation averaging up to approximately 1 to 2 feet deep is anticipated within the adjustment reach, and aggradation averaging up to approximately 1 to 2 feet may extend approximately 2,300 feet downstream, within the dredge reach. Channel adjustment upstream is anticipated to be limited to the first year following the dredge (short-term temporary effect), as documented through channel monitoring following the 1998 dredge. The table below outlines the estimated future one-time loss of redds and salmon fry production as a result of channel adjustment, based on historical redd count data. This impact is limited to the first spawning season following the dredge; once the initial channel adjustment occurs, which is anticipated to initiate during the first seasonal high flows and may continue into winter or spring following the dredge GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 17 File ND 0693-073-00 depending on hydrological conditions. The channel adjustment is anticipated to occur during average seasonal high flows (less than 1.01-year recurrence interval; Northwest Hydraulic Consultants, 2014) based on sediment transport modeling, so there are no ongoing impacts to salmon redds anticipated over the long-term. TABLE 2. ESTIMATED SHORT-TERM LOSS OF FRY PRODUCTION FROM CHANNEL ADJUSTMENT Reach Average Annual Maximum Annual 2012Redd Estimated 2012 Redd Count• Redd Count• Count• Fry Production• Logan to Williams Ave.' 434 1,099 (1996) 725 409,492 Williams Ave. to 819 1,911 (2002) 974 550,131 Houser Way/1-405 4 Totals 1,253 3,010 1,699 959,623 Notes: 1. See redd data from 1994 through 2013 in Appendix C, Table C-1. 2. Estimate is based on 2012 data and assumes 3,444 eggs per redd (Integrated Aquatics, 2013) and an average 16.4 percent egg-to-fry survival factor within the project reach {based on 1991-2012 data provided by WDFW/MIT). 3. Logan to Williams Ave. is within the project footprint and is identified as the utransition reach~ in which the 4-foot dredge will taper to meet the existing upstream bed elevation, and represents one of the reaches for which annual monitoring has been conducted by the City's consultant. The transition reach is included in this summary because the ~pivot point" between bed degradation and aggradation will occur within it at approximate STA 60+00, and it is conservatively estimated that redds throughout the reach may be affected by channel adjustment. 4. Williams Ave. to Houser Way/1-405 is upstream of the project footprint and is identified as the ~channel adjustment reach" that may be subject to bed degradation in the first year following dredging. Model results suggest that channel adjustment will extend up to Houser Way, which is very close to 1-405. Redd counts were conducted for the reach extending up to 1-405. Estimated 2012 fry production data forms the basis we propose for estimating the anticipated single-year impact to sockeye salmon redds that will result from channel adjustment following the proposed maintenance dredge. Fry production was estimated from observed redd counts conducted by a monitoring biologist and using Cedar River mainstem production averaged from data provided by WDFW/MIT (1991-2012). Using the 2012 data provides a reasonably conservative estimate for the following reasons: (1) loss of redds (and fry production) is not anticipated to be total throughout these reaches; (2) 2012 is recent data that is relatively representative of current baseline conditions (2013 redd counts were lower); (3) 2012 was an "average" or "typical" year with regard to run size and environmental conditions; (4) 2012 redd counts were slightly higher than the long-term average since data collection began, and were higher than the most recent 2013 data. Altered Flow Characteristics Altered flow characteristics, including increased water depth and reduced flow velocity, could affect native species by favoring predatory fish species and reducing available spawning habitat. Current hydraulic modeling data suggests that, during typical flow conditions, flow characteristics are likely to be affected (relative to current conditions) in the reach below South Boeing Bridge as a result of the lowered bed profile and a consequent increase in the distance up-river from the mouth that a lake backwater effect extends. This analysis generally confirms what was anticipated to result from the 4-foot dredge identified in the original planning of the project. During construction in 1998, the river was dredged deeper than planned, which resulted in a significant increase in the resulting Jake effect. The current project will include multiple safeguards including utilizing modern survey technologies to GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 18 FUe No. 0693·073·00 prevent over-dredging; therefore, the extent of alteration of flow characteristics will be less than what occurred in 1998. PREDATION Native fish predators, including prickly sculpin (Cotus asper) and torrent sculpin (C. rotheus), as well as non-native predators, such as largemouth and smallmouth bass, are present in Lake Washington and are favored in environments characterized by lacustrine rather than riverine conditions. Increased depth and reduced flow velocity in the reach below South Boeing Bridge may result in an increase in habitat favorable to these predatory fish, possibly resulting in increased mortality of juvenile salmonids as a result of predation. The portion of the channel that is anticipated to become more favorable to predatory fish varies seasonally and annually depending on water levels in both the Cedar River and Lake Washington. The current up-river extent of lacustrine conditions ranges seasonally depending on river flow and lake levels. Maximums of up-river extent are typically observed during the spring outmigration period (March to May) when river flow is declining and lake level rising, and the late summer period (September) when river flows are at a minimum. Under current conditions, computed maximums of up-river lacustran extent ranges from STA 10+00 to 25+00, with an average of approximately 17+50. Computed maximums of up-river lacustrine extent, under proposed dredge conditions, will range from STA 25+00 to 43+00, with an average of approximately 34+00, which is downstream of South Boeing Bridge. Therefore, the total amount of existing riverine habitat that may become more favorable to predatory fish, during maximum (extreme) spring and late summer periods, ranges from 1,500 to 1,800 LF, with an average of approximately 1,650 LF. The 1998 mitigation plan anticipated an increase by 2,300 LF. The current estimate, which is less than the 1998 estimate, is based on a comprehensive hydraulic model. The model incorporates recent detailed channel monitoring data since the previous dredge, the pool elevation of Lake Washington, river hydrology data over the past 27 years, existing bathymetry and river bed profile data, and comparison between the existing condition and proposed dredge prism. SPAWNING HABITAT Based on spawning data collected since the 1998 dredge, the reach below South Boeing Bridge (STA 39+00) currently supports limited spawning, which is concentrated along the margins of the channel upstream of STA 25+00. The dredge prism is centered on the channel; therefore, effects of the dredge on existing spawning habitat near the channel margin in this reach will be limited. Historical redd count data from 1994 to 2013 indicate this reach produced an average of 63 redds per year (see Appendix C, Table C-1). Omitting the 10 spawning seasons immediately following the 1998 dredge (1998-2007), which WDFW asserts is characterized by lower spawning as a result of dredge effects, raises the average to 95 redds per year. In contrast, the 10 years immediately following dredging (1998-2007) were characterized by an average of 30 redds per year. The difference between these two averages represents an estimated annual loss of redds in this reach resulting from the dredge, which is estimated to be 65 redds. Based on this estimate, an estimated 36,713 fry were lost annually in this reach due to long-term effects of dredging (assuming 3.444 eggs per redd [based on Cedar River sockeye broodstock data provided by WDFW; see also Integrated Aquatics, 2013; Foerster, 1968; Hamalainen, 1978; and Narita, 1978] and an average 16.4 percent egg-to-fry survival factor [average based on 1991-2012 data provided by WDFW/MIT]), which is the basis we will use for estimating the annual effects of dredging for this impact. GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2D14 Page 19 File No. 0693-073-00 The project is not anticipated to affect availability of spawnable habitat in the reaches between South Boeing Bridge and Logan Avenue, and between Logan and Williams Avenues, as a result of altered flow characteristics (however, see Channel Adjustment section below). Wetland Impacts A total of seven wetlands have been identified within the project area, of which all but one are located within the channel below the OHWM. Wetlands below OHWM may be affected by the dredge where dredging and associated activities result in removal of aquatic vegetation and soil/substrate. Vegetated gravel bars and channel fringe areas currently provide limited wetland functions. Permanent wetland impacts are proposed to be mitigated through allocation of bank credits, as discussed in this document and Appendix D (Bank Use Plan). Impacts to wetlands that are anticipated to result from the proposed dredge are limited to two small vegetated gravel bars (Wetlands D and E; Category 4) within the channel, near the left bank, just upstream of South Boeing Bridge, for a total impact of 2,710 SF, which equals 0.062 acres. All other wetlands, including channel fringe wetlands along the right bank and one depression al floodplain wetland above OHWM, will be avoided. Vegetated gravel bars have sparse opportunistic vegetation that becomes established seasonally as sediments are naturally redistributed and are transient in nature, limiting their ability to provide water quality and hydrologic functions. The most significant function they may provide is as aquatic habitat features attractive to ducks, other waterfowl, invertebrates and salmonids. Although these features are transient, develop seasonally on new river sediment deposits, and vary in spatial location and extent through time as a function of geomorphic processes, they technically are considered wetland features based on presence of hydrophytic vegetation, appropriate hydrology, and soil characteristics that are considered problematic according to the most recent wetland delineation guidance from the USAGE (2010b). Impact Summary Impacts resulting from the proposed project, as discussed in the preceding sections, are summarized in the following table. TABLE 3. SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS Impact Type Riparian Vegetation Removal Contributing Factors Equipment access to river, installation of bank revetments. GEOENGINEER~ Ecological Effects Reduction of cover and allochthonous nutrient inputs into the aquatic environment. This reduces habitat quality for fish and other species. Duration of Effect Short-term temporary: mitigation will include re-vegetation of cleared areas with fast-growing native species anticipated to establish a native vegetation zone in 2 to 3 years. Impact Quantity 67,514SF of vegetation removal. December 4, 2014 Page 20 Flle No. 0693-073-00 Impact Type Contributing Factors Ecological Effects Duration of Effect Impact Quantity Reduction of appropriate substrate for rooting of riparian Permanent: bank vegetation; reduces natural armoring will be Protection of critical sediment input rates from bank designed for the flood control erosion; limits ability of river to maximum functional 184 LF1 of Bank infrastructure where meander within floodplain; may life available using new bank Armoring existing bank armoring create artificial scour; may limit standard techniques stabilization. is failing or missing. habitat suitability for aquatic and will need to be species; may harbor predatory maintained as needed fish species. This reduces for the life of the habitat quality for fish and other project. species. Natural sediment Loss of salmon redds Short-term temporary: Estimated Channel redistribution due to constructed in the substrate no significant channel loss of Adjustment the steepened during the fall preceding adjustment is 959.623 fry channel profile channel adjustment (anticipated anticipated beyond the (one-time following dredging. during the first winter season). first year post-dredge. loss).2 1,650 LF of riverine Conversion of riverine habitat habitat areas to lake-type habitat, Long-term temporary: becoming Reduced bed resulting in habitat conditions the effects of the more suitable Altered Flow elevation due to that favor a different suite of proposed dredging are for predators. Characterist dredging, increased aquatic species; rapid S;ediment expected to result in Estimated deposition. This may reduce increased lake effect lcs backwater effect from habitat suitability for native fish when compared to loss of Lake Washington. species (including salmon current conditions for 36,713 fry' spawning habitat) and favor up to 10 years. per year due non-native predatory species. to loss of spawning habitat. Permanent: proposed Loss of vegetation cover for dredging impacts and 2,710 SF of Dredging, temporary aquatic species, nutrient inputs potential future vegetated Welland to the aquatic environment, and recurrent cyclical Impacts construction berms, ability to trap and remove dredging will result in gravel bar and bank work. wetland sediments and other pollutants permanent loss of habitat. from the water column. wetlands in the channel. Notes: 1. Only new bank stabilization is counted as a bank armoring impact because existing bank stabilization is already present in the maintenance and repair areas. 2 Estimate is based on difference between long-term average redd production omitting the 10 years post-dredging (1998-2007) less the average redd production during the 10 years post-dredging, which represents the loss of spawning opportunity due to dredging, and assumes 3,444 eggs per redd (Integrated Aquatics, 2013) and an average 16.4 percent egg-to-fry survival factor within the project reach (based on 1991-2012 data provided by WDFW/MIT). GeoENGINEER~ December4,2014 Page21 Fil€ No. 0693-073-00 Mitigation The same impacts from maintenance dredging were anticipated within the 1998 EIS prepared by the USAGE and previously mitigated for with a basis of maintenance dredging occurring on a 3-year recurrence frequency. The actual frequency has exceeded 16 years, indicative that the previous mitigation implemented was in excess of the impacts identified. The project will be required to comply with city, county, state and federal land use and environmental requirements, as applicable. The project will require at a minimum shoreline and wetland approvals from the City of Renton, an HPA permit from WDFW, SEPA and/or NEPA compliance, a Section 401 water quality permit from Ecology, a Section 404 permit from the USAGE for dredging, and Endangered Species Act consultation from NMFS and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Other environmental reviews, permits and/or approvals may also be required. Each of the local, state and federal agencies issuing permits/approvals, as well as other stakeholders including but not limited to the public, have the opportunity to request mitigation as conditions of permit approvals and/or as part of the public comment period during environmental reviews. This plan has been developed to satisfy all local, state and federal requirements for mitigation related to project impacts. The project team consulted with the MIT, WDFW, WDOE and USAGE during development of the mitigation concepts presented below. Responses to formal comments provided by the MIT, WDFW and WDOE are included in Appendix E. Mitigation has been designed to offset unavoidable impacts caused by the proposed project. Proposed mitigation will include the following items: • Native Vegetation Plantings (Onsite). Native vegetation will be installed in riparian and channel fringe habitats where feasible based upon hydraulic conditions and within guidelines for vegetation along levees and floodwalls set by USAGE. Native vegetation will be installed in the following locations: all temporarily impacted riparian areas; along the left bank above Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in areas outside the VFZ; along vegetated benches along the left bank below OHWM; and in selected locations along the right bank that have been identified to benefit from additional plantings. • Fllllng Vold Space In Rlprap (Onslte). Interstitial spaces in all bank stabilization work areas proposed as part of the project (new, repair and maintenance) will be filled with native dredge material to reduce voids that may harbor predatory fish species and to provide suitable substrate for riparian plantings where appropriate. • Lower Reach Gabion Removal (Onsite). Gabion bank protection currently exists along the right bank within Reach 1 (downstream of South Boeing Bridge). Removal of the gabions and replacement with bioengineered bank stabilization measures (composed of a rock toe, geogrid reinforced soil lifts and plantings), is proposed to improve nearshore habitat conditions and restore bank stabilization function. The proposed improvement work is located near channel STA 22+25 and is 100 lineal feet long. • Spawning Channel Maintenance and Monitoring (Offsite). • The City will continue to maintain the existing Royal Hills Replacement Spawning Channel at approximately River Mile 3.5, as required by the original project 1997 EIS mitigation plan for the initial and future maintenance dredging. This will promote ongoing functional value and continue to compensate for impacts to spawning from the proposed maintenance project and future maintenance projects. GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page22 File No. 0693-073-00 • The City also intends to conduct maintenance of the Elliot Spawning Channel at approximately River Mile 4.7 to promote continued use by salmon for spawning as well as off-channel spawning and rearing habitat to mitigate for measured channel adjustment impacts. Continued maintenance and operation beyond that point is voluntary and will continue unless ongoing excessive maintenance is required, it is frequently damaged, or significantly damaged in the future by floods resulting in a major or on-going need to repair or restore the channel. Specific maintenance actions that have been discussed with WDFW and the MIT are included in the proposed project action, as described more fully in the Mitigation Work Plan section of this document. • Lighting Impacts Reduction (Onslte & Offsite). The City will conduct an inventory of existing City-owned lights within the project area along the Cedar River including a 200 foot buffer on each side up to RM 2.1 upstream of 1-405. The inventory will provide data that can be used to develop the basis for a lighting study. The lighting study will identify City-owned lights that can be modified (direction, bulb type, shielding, removal, etc.) to reduce negative lighting impacts on the Cedar River habitat without compromising public safety. Study recommendations will be prioritized and implemented to the greatest extent feasible. • Scour Monitoring Study. A scour monitoring study utilizing scour chains with accelerometers is currently being implemented with the following goals: (1) to evaluate bed material disturbance depths prior to the 2015 dredging, thus defining baseline sediment transport conditions, and (2) to monitor the magnitude, extent, and rates of bed adjustment over the two spawning/high flow seasons following the 2015 dredging. The City has completed the permitting and contracting and the scour chains have been installed within the project reach for the 2014-2015 spawning and winter season. • Wetland Mitigation Bank Credits (Offsite). The City plans to mitigate wetland impacts through use of mitigation bank credits at the Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank. The Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank instrument was approved in August 2006. The site was constructed in 2007-2008 and allows an alternative to on-site mitigation for private and public projects (City or WSDOT) with wetland impacts that require mitigation per City Code to achieve a no-net loss of wetland functions and values. This wetland mitigation bank currently has sufficient credits available to offset wetland impacts of this project. The following table summarizes the mitigation proposed to offset each of the impacts identified in the previous section, and identifies the net functional effect of the mitigation. Proposed mitigation areas are shown on Figures 1 and 4 and additional project details are contained in the JARPA sheets included as Appendix A and illustrations in Appendix F. GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 23 file i'lo. 0693-073-DO TABLE 4. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED MITIGATION AND NET FUNCTIONAL EFFECTS Impacts Proposed Mitigation Ecologlcal Effect Quantity Action Quantity Restoration or enhancement of riparian Reduced riparian zone with native shrubs and/or trees 51,447 SF cover 1 from (including invasive species management) access and bank 67,514,SF Restoration or enhancement of riparian stabilization zone with native grass seed mix (including 60,823SF invasive species management) New: 184 LF of bioengineered treatment to new rock armoring New: 184 LF of Apply bioengineering treatments to new, Maintenance: 250 LF of Stabilized banks new rock maintained and repaired rock armoring bioengineered armoring bank (fill void spaces with topsoil amended treatment to maintained stabilization dredged material) existing armoring Repair: 1,275 LF of bioengineered treatment to repaired existing armoring Long-term 65 sockeye reduction in redds (36,713 Maintain Royal Hills Replacement 271 sockeye redds spawning habitat fry) average Spawning Channel as mitigation for (347,197 fry) annually3 due to lake per year' cyclical effects of dredging. effect GEOENGINEER~ Net Functlonal Effect Existing invasive vegetation disturbed by the project will be replaced with native vegetation. Restoration/enhancement plantings will result in a net increase of 44,756 SF of native riparian vegetation. The 184 LF of new armoring, which will include both rock (hard) armoring and soft bank (bioengineered) treatment, will be mitigated by adding bioengineered treatments to 1,525 LF of existing hard armoring that is being maintained or repaired. The Royal Hills Replacement Spawning Channel will fully mitigate the long-term loss of spawning habrtat due to the lake effect by providing an estimated excess of 310,484 fry, annually, as a result of additional redds and improved survival relative to anticipated impacts. December 4, 2014 Page 24 File No. 0693-073-00 Impacts Ecological Effect Quantity Temporary (1" year) loss of Estimated to salmon redds be 1,699 resulting from sockeye redds channel (959,623 fry)4 adjustment Lost wetland functions 2,710SF GEO ENGINEER~ Proposed Mitigation Action Quantity Maintain Elliot Spawning Channel until the mitigation needs are fulfilled; apply excess mitigation from Royal Hills Replacement Spawning Channel to the 439 sockeye redds extent that production exceeds mitigation (562.433 fry) annually' need related to lake effect; conduct scour monitoring study to document actual effects of channel adjustment following project implementation. See Appendix D -Bank Mitigation Bank Credits Use Plan Net Functional Effect The Elliot Channel by itself would replace lost redds in approximately four years after dredging. When increased survival of fry in spawning side channels is accounted for (37.2% versus 16.4%), the impact is fully mitigated in less than two years. Adding to this the excess fry production from the Royal Hills Spawning Channel, mitigation is fully achieved in just over one year of production. Therefore, all losses are anticipated to be fully mitigated before the next subsequent dredge cycle, and one-time maintenance of the Elliot Channel per dredge cycle should be sufficient to mitigate channel adjustment impacts. The scour monitoring study will assist in documenting actual impacts of the channel adjustment and will help evaluate adequacy of mitigation implemented in regard to actual project impacts. Net gain of wetland mitigation functions resulting from purchase of mitigation bank credits (Appendix D). December 4. 2014 Page 25 File No. 0693·073-00 Impacts Ecological Effect Increased predator habitat resulting from lake effect Notes: Quantity 1,650 LF Proposed Mitigation Action Quantity Salmon rearing and refugia habitat provided by the Royal Hills Replacement Spawning Channel Decreased predator habitat by filling void space in riprap armoring Removal of rock gabion Lighting impacts reduction study to minimize salmon fry predation 924 LF provided by the spawning channel 1,525 LF 100 LF 11,088 LF study area Net Functlonal Effect The spawning channel provides rearing and refugia habitat in excess of the amount affected by predation. Studies have demonstrated this habitat results in higher fry survival than occurs in the mainstem and is utilized by a variety of salmonid species. The Royal Hills Replacement Spawning Channel will be maintained for this purpose, contributing 924 LF of high-quality rearing and refugia habitat. 1,625 LF of void spaces along existing shoreline protection will be filled or removed to minimize predator habitat within and upstream of the new 1,650 LF of lake effect area. Additionally, the lighting effects study will be conducted throughout the entire project reach, and extend further upstream to RM 2.1 above 1-405, to identify lights that can be shielded or removed, which will identify opportunities to further reduce predation on salmon fry. 1 · Existing riparian vegetation to be removed primarily consists of invasive species (see Riparian Vegetation Removal section for additional details) 2 -Sixty-five redds is the estimated annual loss of redds for this reach based on the difference between historical redd counts omitting the first ten years post-dredging (1998-2007), and the redd counts observed during the first ten years post-dredging, based on the assumption that spawning numbers were suppressed during those ten years as a result of dredge effects (Appendix C, Table C-1). Fry production assumes 3,444 eggs per redd [Integrated Aquatics, 2013] and an average 16.4% survival factor from egg to fry within the project reach (WDFW/MIT data). 3 Estimate is based on average redd count for the Royal Hills Replacement Spawning Channel that was collected by the City's consultant (Appendix C, Table C-2), and assumes 3,444 eggs per redd and 37 .2% egg-to-fry survival in the mitigation spawning channels (Integrated Aquatics, 2013). The Channel has outperformed this average over the past two years. 4 · Estimate is based on 2012 data (Appendix C, Table C-1), which was a typical run-size year, and assumes 3,444 eggs per redd [Integrated Aquatics, 2013] and an average 16.4% survival factor from egg to fry within the project reach {WDFW/MIT data). Other species do not typically use this reach for spawning and are assumed to be functionally absent from the affected reach. 5 · Estimate is based on average redd count for the Elliot Channel collected by the City's consultant from 2000-2013 (Appendix C, Table C-2), and assumes 3,444 eggs per redd and 37.2% egg-to-fry survival in the mitigation spawning channels (Integrated Aquatics, 2013). Egg-to-fry survival is based on fry outmigration monitoring conducted during the spring over several years, which was compared to redd counts each year. GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 26 File Na. 0693-073-00 Mitigation Strategy Standard mitigation ratios have been established by state and federal agencies for project impacts to wetlands, making in-kind compensatory mitigation relatively straightforward. However, the same is not true for impacts to aquatic resources, riparian zones or terrestrial habitat types. In these cases, in-kind mitigation is not typically proposed and each mitigation plan must provide supporting rationale for the amount and type of mitigation proposed. The proposed project will result in impacts to wetlands, aquatic habitat, and riparian areas. Quantifying some of the impacts that may result presents challenges due to the uniqueness of this project, the complex history of the river channel both prior to and since the 205 project was implemented, the cyclical nature of dredging at this location, and the existing baseline condition which has been significantly altered. A project-specific mitigation strategy to address these challenges has been developed. The foundation of the strategy is to rely on: the impacts and mitigation established as part of the original 205 project implementation; extensive monitoring data collected before and since the 1998 dredge; and to incorporate mitigation sequencing into the proposed action. Mitigation sequencing, as described more fully in the next section, is intended to reduce the ecological impacts of the proposed action to the extent feasible and to result in a lower overall impact level than what occurred during the 1998 dredging. The proposed mitigation strategy builds upon this foundation as follows: first, identify anticipated project impacts in light of the current baseline and project history; then, assess the ecological effects of these impacts and quantify them to the extent feasible; finally, propose new mitigation with the purpose of addressing specific ecological effects of the project. It is not the intent to propose new mitigation for past actions, nor for those ecological impacts that are beyond the scope of the current project. Mitigation Sequencing The project is required to consider and document mitigation sequencing in order to satisfy regulatory requirements for reduction of impacts to natural resources. Mitigation sequencing includes avoidance of impacts as the first option, minimization of impacts that cannot be avoided, and compensation for those impacts that remain. The first two elements of mitigation sequencing, avoidance and minimization, are addressed in the design of the dredge project, as outlined below. The third element, compensation, is described in the Mitigation Work Plan section of this document. In general, mitigation sequencing has already occurred within the project reach. The same impacts from maintenance dredging were anticipated within the 1998 EIS prepared by the USAGE and previously mitigated for with a basis of maintenance dredging occurring on a 3-year recurrence frequency. The actual frequency has exceeded 16 years resulting in the avoidance and minimization of the project impacts previously identified related to the cyclical future maintenance dredging. AVOIDANCE • Wetlands. The dredge prism has been designed to avoid impacts to most wetland areas identified in the project area. Most of the wetlands are along the fringes of the river, so variations in the width of the dredge prism allow the project to avoid these wetland areas. The unavoidable wetland impacts are related to wetlands associated with gravel bars that extend into the center of the channel and have developed subsequent to the 1998 dredging. GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 27 Frie No. 0693-073-00 • Native Riparian Vegetation. No new equipment access points are proposed on the right bank, where established native vegetation is present. Equipment will access the river from the left bank, where invasive vegetation is dominant, or from existing access points on the right bank that do not require substantial vegetation removal. Bank protection work will be completed without removing mature native trees, to the greatest extent feasible. • Bank Conditions. Maintenance and repair of bank stabilization will occur within the existing footprint of the 1998 dredging project and will not increase impacts to aquatic habitat relative to baseline (existing) conditions. No new steel wire gabion structures are proposed for bank stabilization. MINIMIZATION • Riparian Vegetation Removal. Impacts associated with equipment access points and proposed bank work that requires removal of vegetation has been minimized to the greatest extent feasible. In general, vegetation that will be affected is invasive rather than native. This has included reduction of the work areas for both the proposed new bank stabilization and the proposed gabion removal area, both on the right bank, which have resulted in elimination of mature tree removals/impacts in these areas. Vegetation removal that cannot be avoided will be minimized by re-planting affected areas with native vegetative to the extent allowed by the USAGE ETL 1110-2-571 vegetation management standards, as well as FAA regulations for airport operations. • Spawning Habitat. The project has been designed to minimize impacts to spawning areas to the maximum extent practical within constraints of project objectives. The dredge prism has been designed to result in similar flow depth and velocity characteristics as the existing pre-project condition in dense spawning areas, including the sub-reaches between Williams and Logan Avenue bridges and between Logan Avenue and South Boeing bridges. The only sub-reach that is anticipated to be affected by alteration of flow depth and velocity is downstream of the South Boeing Bridge, which will have increased depth and reduced velocity due to backwater from Lake Washington. However, spawning in this reach occurs sporadically and in much lower densities than the other two reaches further upstream, and is generally limited to the channel margins. The dredge prism avoids the channel margins and it is anticipated that some limited spawning may continue to occur in the lower reach and should increase with time following the dredge as the stream bed aggrades. • Channel Adjustment. Transition slope augmentation (roughened channeljgrade control) was considered with the goal of improving channel stability and minimizing impacts to redds during the first year after construction as a result of channel adjustment. However, it was decided that the risk associated with this concept outweighed the potential benefits. Allowing the channel to adjust naturally without grade control in the transition slope has been identified by the design team and regulatory agencies as the preferred option to minimize adverse impacts to in-stream habitat. The impacts of channel adjustment will be reduced by designing a gradual transition slope at the upstream limit of dredging, and utilizing the latest construction technology to ensure that excessive dredging does not occur to minimize the magnitude (depth) and extent of channel adjustment. • Predator Habitat. The effects of bank improvements on predator habitat will be minimized by infilling void spaces in riprap with dredged material to reduce ambush predator habitat. • Bank Conditions. The effects of bank improvements on fish habitat conditions will be minimized by using soft bank treatments and planting native vegetation where allowed by USAGE standards and FAA guidelines. GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 28 File No. 0693-073-00 City of Renton Bank Stabilization Requirements In addition to the mitigation sequencing identified above, bank protection that will be installed as part of this project has been proposed in accordance with the following City of Renton sequencing requirements, as codified in RMC 4-3-090(F): • No action (allow the shoreline to retreat naturally), increase building setbacks, and relocate structures. • Flexible defense works constructed of natural materials including measures such as soft shore protection, bioengineering, including beach nourishment, protective berms, or vegetative stabilization. • Flexible defense works, as described above, with rigid works, as described below, constructed as a protective measure at the buffer line. • A combination of rigid works, as described below, and flexible defense works, as described above. • Rigid works constructed of artificial materials such as riprap or concrete. In general, bank stabilization proposed for the project will include "a combination of rigid works ... and flexible defense works." Rigid works are necessary for the protection of existing flood control infrastructure due to its critical function at the project location and the limited amount of lateral space between levees/I-walls and the river bank. Rigid works also reduce the footprint of necessary bank stabilization towards the riverbed. It is therefore not possible to follow a "no action" alternative or to install features that are entirely or primarily flexible in nature. However, as a minimization measure for the impacts of revetments on natural riverine processes and habitat functions, bioengineered flexible components will be incorporated into the design. The primary flexible component that will be incorporated into bank stabilization areas is to top dress the armoring with topsoil and then install native vegetation plantings where allowed by USAGE standards and FAA guidelines or grass within the VFZ. This will create river banks which are more natural in appearance and provide more beneficial habitat functions as compared to exposed riprap. MITIGATION SITE SELECTION AND JUSTIFICATION Mitigation is proposed within the original footprint of the Section 205 project, including on-site within the dredge reach (Figure 4), and extending upstream in the Cedar River corridor at the location of previously established spawning channels and to the upstream limits of the scour study and lighting study (Figure 1). Off-site wetland mitigation bank credits will be utilized due to spatial limitations within the project area for on-site wetland mitigation: the Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank is located west of the project (Figure 1). Existing spawning channels were previously constructed upstream of the project reach within the Cedar River corridor (see Figure 1 and historical summary in the Historic and Current Land Use subsection of the Baseline Information section in this report). The purpose of the spawning channels is to compensate for loss of salmon production due to alteration of riverine habitat resulting from the 1998 dredge and subsequent maintenance dredging. It was not possible to provide this function within the project reach due to the highly developed conditions surrounding the lower river. Spawning channels were therefore constructed upstream in a less developed portion of the watershed. Wetland impacts will GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 29 File No. 0693-073-00 also be mitigated offsite through allocation of wetland mitigation bank credits previously established by the City. On-site wetland mitigation is not practical due to the anticipated recurrent dredging that will take place within the project reach. All other mitigation elements will be conducted on-site within the project reach, including: native vegetation plantings, filling void spaces in riprap, gabion removal, lighting impacts reduction, and scour monitoring. However, the lighting and scour monitoring studies will also extend upstream of the project reach to RM 2.1 above 1-405. MITIGATION WORK PLAN Proposed mitigation elements were described under the Mitigation Goals and Objectives section of this report. Figures 1 and 4 show the proposed locations of mitigation elements designed to offset project impacts. Appendices A and F include a JARPA plan set and additional drawings that show these features in more detail; final construction drawings will be developed upon receipt of environmental perm its. The following sections provide additional details on the methods that will be employed to implement the proposed mitigation. Vegetation Planting At the request of reviewing agencies and other stakeholders, and in light of the existing degraded riparian baseline condition, maximizing opportunities for planting riparian vegetation is a primary component of newly proposed project mitigation. Native vegetation will be installed in riparian and channel fringe habitats where feasible based upon hydraulic conditions and within guidelines for vegetation along levees and floodwalls set by USAGE and FAA. It should be noted that vegetation planting in marginal habitats does present some risk of failure due to inadequate substrates in existing hardened bank areas, pervasive invasive species problems, and some plantings that will be in locations subject to naturally dynamic hydrogeomorphic processes, such as migration of the channel thalweg and increased hydraulic energy along the bank, with the potential to displace planted areas. Some of these risks are addressed through project design, proposed maintenance and monitoring, and adaptive management, as outlined in this report. However, not all risks can be controlled. Nevertheless, these plantings are proposed in an effort to maximize what little potential for native habitat exists in the project reach, and to provide as much riparian habitat as possible. Vegetation in riparian and aquatic habitats performs a variety of functions that contribute to habitat quality for fish and other aquatic organisms. Baseline vegetation conditions throughout much of the project area are already degraded and project construction activities and levee requirements are anticipated to result in further degradation of vegetation conditions. The planting plan outlined below has been designed to offset the losses that will result from the current project proposal, and may also rectify historic losses to some extent. A key component of our plan is to ensure that new vegetation plantings are in compliance with applicable restrictions at the project site so that they will not need to be removed prematurely. All plantings will comply with current levee requirements, including adherence to applicable VFZs, vegetation height restrictions associated with airport requirements where applicable, and be appropriate to the anticipated post dredge hydrologic conditions. We have also specified plantings that will be complementary to planting actions proposed by others, including the Boeing Company for work at the North Boeing Bridge, GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 30 File No. 0693-073-00 and a future conceptual-level proposal from the USACE for selective tree removal as part of the proposed levee vegetation variance being developed for the right bank levee. Plantings proposed to mitigate project impacts will be installed at the following locations: • Temporarily Impacted Riparian Areas. Equipment access points and bank stabilization work areas that lack vegetation after construction is complete will be restored by installing native grass and low growing herbaceous vegetation within the VFZ, and native shrub vegetation in locations outside the VFZ. A total of 60,823 SF of native grass/herbaceous community and 11,177 SF of native shrub and/or tree community will be established. These plantings are primarily along the left bank, with limited areas on the right bank associated with the new bank stabilization and gabion removal actions. • Constructed Vegetated Benches Below OHWM. The project has been designed to accommodate gradually sloped benches along/near the left bank in select locations. These benches are located below the OHWM at the channel fringe and are expected to be subject to water level and velocity fluctuations within the range acceptable for appropriate plantings. The vegetated benches will resemble naturally occurring vegetated gravel bars similar to those that currently occur in some locations within the Cedar River. These benches may be subject to natural channel migration and are therefore not anticipated to be permanent, but rather provide a temporal opportunity for riparian vegetation mitigation for the current dredge cycle. The project area is otherwise extremely limited with regard to planting opportunities for larger species (trees and shrubs) on the left bank. Benches were not part of the original 1998 project design. Vegetated gravel benches are proposed covering approximately 5,395 SF. • Right Bank Riparian Areas. Additional plantings are proposed in selected riparian areas along the right bank that have been identified by the project team, in consultation with regulatoiy agencies and the MIT, and within limitations imposed by current levee and floodwall standards. These plantings have been designed to be complementaiy to proposed plantings that are anticipated to be installed by the Boeing Company and USACE on the right bank. The proposed plantings, which will be comprised of native shrubs and willow stakes primarily, with some trees and meadow seed, will cover an estimated 34,875 SF. Conceptual planting areas are shown on the drawings included in Appendix A. A detailed planting plan will be developed for the project to fulfill this mitigation element. The planting plan will be prepared by a licensed landscape architect with appropriate experience developing native planting plans for riparian fringe environments. Plantings will be installed within one year following completion of the dredge project. All exposed soils and slopes will be temporarily stabilized if planting cannot be completed right away. Additional details regarding recommended planting methods will be incorporated into the final design drawings and specifications, as summarized in the following sections. Timing of Planttngs Timing of plant installation and construction sequencing will be critical to the success of plant survival. The planting schedule will be timed around the spring run-off and winter floods to allow the maximum length of growth period prior to flood events. GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page31 file No. 0693-073-00 Plant types and availability will dictate timing of plant installation: • Live stake and bare root plants typically are readily available and planted during the fall season. • Container plants can be planted year-round. • Seed installation will be during the growing season. Site Preparation Installation of robust and healthy plants with proper soil preparation and adequate irrigation will be the first priority. When appropriate, temporary erosion control measures may be required to stabilize areas prior to plant installation. These BMP measures may include coir logs, compost sock, compost blanket, erosion control fabric, and temporary erosion control seed, as necessary. An erosion control blanket shall be considered with seed and planted areas where fluctuation in water levels may require additional erosion control until the vegetation is established to protect the shoreline. Soft Bank Bio-engineering, Gabion Removal, and Filling Void Spaces Interstitial spaces in all bank stabilization work areas proposed as part of the project (new, repair and maintenance) will be filled with native dredge material to reduce voids that may harbor predatory fish species and to provide suitable substrate for riparian plantings where appropriate. An existing rock gabion will also be removed and replaced with a bio-engineered soft bank treatment. Void spaces in riprap may constitute prime habitat for predatory fish species to hide and ambush prey, including native fish. Predation may have significant impacts on survival rates of native salmonid fry, especially in environments with water levels and hydrologic conditions that have been artificially manipulated by humans, such as occurs in the lower Cedar River and in Lake Washington. Filling and/or removal of void spaces is proposed to mitigate the impacts of salmon predation by predatory species below OHWM and provide suitable substrate for native vegetation growth above and below OHWM. A total of 1,765 LF of newly installed, repaired and maintained bank revetments constructed of riprap will be treated in this manner. Once filling is complete, these areas will also be planted (see Native Vegetation Planting section). An additional 100 LF of rock gabion will be removed, replaced with a bio-engineered soft bank design, and planted. Design details are provided in the JARPA drawings prepared for the project (Appendix A). Spawning Channel Maintenance and Monitoring Dredging results in short-and long-term alterations to spawning habitat and reduces habitat availability in the lower mainstem of the Cedar River. Spawning channels have been demonstrated through extensive monitoring to adequately offset these losses. In accordance with the original USAGE project EIS, the City commits to maintain one spawning channel in a functional state as designed in order to provide adequate long-term mitigation for cyclical dredging and associated impacts. The City will continue to maintain the existing Royal Hills Replacement Spawning Channel at approximately RM 3.5, as required by the original project 1997 EIS mitigation plan for the initial and future maintenance dredging. This will promote ongoing functional value and continue to compensate for impacts to spawning from the proposed maintenance project and future maintenance projects. GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 32 File No. 0693-073-00 The City will also maintain the existing Elliot Spawning Channel at approximately RM 4.7 to mitigate the impacts from channel adjustment until the time the mitigation needs are fulfilled. Specific maintenance actions were identified for the Elliot Channel during a site visit with WDFW and the MIT, which will be included as part of the current proposed action. Maintenance actions at the Elliot Channel to be implemented as part of the proposed action are illustrated in Appendix F and include: • Reconfigure the boulders at the upstream end of the Elliot Channel porous levee intake structure to increase the quantity of water from the river into the channel. The feasibility of this concept needs to be assessed in terms of the hydraulic and geomorphic factors at the site to ensure the stability of the porous levee (intake structure) will not be structurally compromised by any of the maintenance work proposed and the desired outcome can be achieved. The feasibility study is currently underway and will be used to inform the maintenance activities implemented. • Remove accumulated fine sediments on the river side of the porous levee intake structure. • Remove the instream vegetation (primarily duck weed and filamentous algae), by hand pulling. • Retain and maintain the native vegetation while removing invasive species on the channel banks and adjacent uplands along the entire length of the Elliot Channel. The City will continue monitoring the two extant spawning channels that were previously constructed for mitigation of impacts from the 205 project (see Project History). The Royal Hills Replacement Spawning Channel currently provides spawning and off-channel rearing habitat offsetting losses identified in the USACE 1998 EIS resulting from original project construction, cyclical maintenance dredging operations and associated habitat alterations. The Elliot Rearing/Spawning Side Channel currently provides spawning and off-channel rearing habitat offsetting losses identified in the USACE 2000 EA resulting from unanticipated channel adjustment possibly exasperated by excessive dredging that occurred in 1998. Regular monitoring events will be conducted to evaluate current conditions in each spawning channel. Vegetation and habitat features will be monitored by sampling vegetation cover overhanging the channels, vegetation cover in the adjacent riparian buffer, and in-stream habitat elements. Hydrology will also be monitored to ensure appropriate hydrologic conditions for spawning and rearing habitat. Data collected during each monitoring event will be compared across years to ensure that there is no degradation of habitat conditions through time. Monitoring will also address potential problems that arise in the spawning channels as a result of sediment deposition, scour, transport of large woody debris, flooding, and/or other riverine processes. Maintenance actions will be triggered as a result of the monitoring data on an as-needed basis. If significant maintenance is required to re-build the channels, additional permitting may be required. Lighting Impacts Reduction The Muckleshoot Tribe has identified artificial lighting as a concern for sockeye salmon fry suNival in the lower reach. The USFWS and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) conducted a study on Lake Washington sockeye fry under varying levels of artificial light and found that predation of sockeye fry in a simulated stream channel increased from 5 percent under complete darkness to 45 percent at the highest light level tested (Tabor et al., 1998). Additional studies conducted by USFWS and USGS concluded that increased light intensity appears to decrease or stop sockeye fry out-migration, increasing susceptibility to predation (Tabor et al., 2004). The City will conduct a study to inventory existing City-owned lights along the Cedar River from the mouth at Lake Washington up to RM 2.1 above 1-405. The study will identify GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page33 FileNo 0693-073-00 City-owned lights that can be modified (direction, bulb type, shielding, removal, etc.) to reduce negative lighting impacts on the Cedar River habitat without compromising public safety. Scour Monitoring Study The purpose of the scour monitoring is twofold: (1) to evaluate bed material disturbance depths prior to the 2015 dredging, thus defining baseline sediment transport conditions (Phase 1); and (2) to monitor the magnitude, extent, and rates of anticipated bed adjustment over the two spawning/high flow seasons following the 2015 dredging (Phase 2). Monitoring would occur during two phases: the first in 2014, before the planned 2015 dredging, and the second during the following two fall spawning seasons in 2015 and 2016. The timing would primarily focus on monitoring through spawning and high flow seasons (September to April/May) to document the depth of bed mobilization and any change in bed morphology. The general extents of monitoring will be conducted from the upstream limit of the proposed dredge profile near the Williams Avenue Bridge at River Mile (RM) 1.23 and extend upstream past 1-405 to RM 2.1. Scour monitoring will be conducted using a combination of HOBO Pendant G accelerometers (e.g. Gendaszek et al, 2013), standard scour 'chain' monitors (e.g. Schuett-Hames et al, 1999), and detailed bathymetric surveys of bed surfaces. The accelerometers will be used to measure relative bed disturbance depths, as well as the temporal patterns of scour and fill. Multiple accelerometers will be installed on a single chain at varying depths to measure relative depth of disturbance; however, the total number per chain will depend on how deep the chain can be installed in the bed. The signal from each accelerometer will provide a continuous record from which the time and extent of scour and fill at that location can be determined. Standard scour chains will be used to measure the maximum bed disturbance depths and verify accelerometer readings. Each scour chain holds a continuous series of neutrally buoyant markers, which will float to the end of the scour chain upon scour to that depth in the bed. The number of markers that have been displaced along the scour chain provide a measure of the maximum scour at that location. Both scour chain and accelerometer apparatuses will be installed using manually driven pipe apparatus (e.g. Schuett-Hames et al, 1999; Klassen and Northcote, 1986). All of the scour monitoring equipment will be retrieved at the end of the monitoring season, at which time the accelerometers will be downloaded and the data analyzed. Detailed bathymetric surveys of the bed surface in the vicinity of scour monitoring equipment will be conducted at both the time of installation and retrieval. The detail bathmetric surveys can be compared to accurately map the localized changes in bedform. Wetland Mitigation Bank Credits Wetland mitigation bank credits are proposed to offset 2,710 SF (0.062 acres) of permanent impacts to category IV wetlands. A Bank Use Plan is included as Appendix D. The City partnered with Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) to create the wetland mitigation bank on an approximately 130-acre site adjacent to Springbrook Creek. The mitigation bank includes wetland creation, restoration and enhancement to provide an alternative to on-site mitigation for public and private projects. GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 34 FIie No. 0693-073-00 The mitigation bank improves flood storage capacity and water quality in Springbrook Creek, and improves fish and wildlife habitat in the creek and adjacent wetland areas (WSDOT, 2014), PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Performance standards for the mitigation are proposed following standards previously established for the 1998 dredge and subsequent mitigation actions. The following criteria have been designed to enable simple and effective evaluation of the success of the proposed mitigation during the monitoring and maintenance period (see Monitoring Plan section below). These performance criteria focus on establishing native riparian vegetation and maintaining effective spawning habitat in the spawning channels; other mitigation elements, such as filling of void spaces, removal of the rock gabion, the lighting study, and wetland mitigation bank credits are not subject to performance standards. The effectiveness of these elements will be demonstrated once construction is complete as part of an as-built record or, in the case of the wetland mitigation bank credits, are being monitored as part of an independent process. Vegetation Vegetation in planted areas above the OHW line shall conform to the following performance standards during the monitoring period. • Minimum 100 percent survival of planted native vegetation after the first year, and 80 percent thereafter. Survival of 100 percent of vegetation after the first year is unlikely to occur, but this criterion assures that any first-year mortality will be replaced in-kind as part of the maintenance of the site, and is consistent with recent guidance documents (Ecology/USACE/USEPA, 2006). Volunteer recruits of appropriate (native) species may be counted toward the survival rate to offset some mortality that may occur. Otherwise, if survival falls below this criterion, supplemental plantings may be required to bring the overall plant community into compliance based on the quantity originally planted. • Maximum 20 percent cover of noxious weeds (reed canarygrass, Himalayan blackberry, Japanese knotweed, and/or Scotch broom). Noxious weeds in excess of this amount should be removed from the vegetation planting areas promptly. However, the performance standards listed above will not apply to the right bank willow staking proposed between STA 1 +50 to STA 3+50 nor left bank planting benches constructed below the OHW. The right bank willow staking between STA 1 +50 to STA 3+50 is proposed to be planted in response to comments provided on-site by the MIT and WDFW. However, the project team does not expect high survival in this area due to difficulty of establishment as a result of substrate conditions on the bank, which is composed primarily of large rock and riprap. Therefore, maintenance and monitoring of this area will be at the discretion of the City. Planting benches established below the OHW level are suggested as an interim temporal mitigation strategy between dredge cycles to maximize opportunities for establishing trees and shrubs on the left bank (see conceptual drawings and species lists in Appendix A), for which opportunities are extremely limited in the dredge reach. These areas will be maintained and monitored in accordance with performance standards to the extent that natural riverine processes, such as channel or thalweg migration, do not affect the feasibility of doing so. GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page35 File No. 0693-073·00 Spawning Channels Performance of spawning channels will be evaluated primarily by demonstrating actual utilization by sockeye salmon as documented through monitoring activities. Spawning in these channels is anticipated to vary from year to year based on run size, hydrologic conditions, and other factors beyond the City's control. The City has monitored sockeye spawning within the spawning channels since their construction and has documented unaccountable variations in spawning use with empirical data (Table C-2). For the Elliot Channel, historical performance since 2000 has ranged from O to 1,348 redds, with an average of 439 redds. For the Royal Hills Spawning Channel, historical performance since 2010 has ranged from 103 to 478 redds, with an average of 271. Because of the variation in spawning use, realistic values for future performance are necessary to identify the mitigation provided by each channel and provide a standard by which performance can be gauged. The number of redds identified for the Elliot Channel is 439, which is the average redd count from 2000-2013, and represents the estimated mitigation credit proposed in Table 4, above. The number of redds identified for the Royal Hills Spawning Channel is 271 which is the calculated average over the monitoring period. This value is also used in Table 4, above, to estimate mitigation provided by the spawning channel. Spawning channel performance is to be evaluated based on these general ranges and the estimated values for mitigation provided as identified in Table 4. As shown in Table 4, reduction of spawning habitat is adequately offset by the Royal Hills Replacement Channel's redd and fry production in each year with excess mitigation produced. Loss of redds resulting from channel adjustment is anticipated to be offset in one to two years by the Elliot Channel, depending on spawning channel performance. When accounting for excess production provided by the Royal Hills Replacement Channel towards the channel adjustment impact, the addition of 115,787 fry produced annually decreases the time necessary to fully mitigate for the impact to just 1.5 years based on estimated performance and impacts. Actual mitigation success will be based on empirical monitoring (past and future) data to determine the numbers and any mitigation excess or deficit will be identified during planning of the next subsequent dredge event. In addition, the monitoring biologist will collect general qualitative notes regarding habitat adequacy to support salmon spawning. Examples of habitat conditions that will be noted, and may need to be corrected based on the monitoring biologist's expert opinion and/or input by regulatory agencies, include: • No or minimal areas of erosion or avulsions. • Adequate depth for fish passage and spawning during the spawning season. Note that historical monitoring data demonstrate that spawning peaks in the side channels later in the year (mid-November) than it does in the lower mainstem river, which should be taken into account. Furthermore, river hydrologic conditions that are outside of the normal range (drought or flood conditions) should also be considered. • Adequate depth for rearing year-round. Again, river hydrologic conditions that are outside of the normal range should be considered before proposing corrective actions. • Adequate quantity of gravel spawning substrate, limited fine sediments and limited embeddedness in spawnable portion of the channel, as determined by the monitoring biologist using qualitative methods (e.g., visual observations). • No or minimal loss, or adequate natural replacement, of large woody debris as compared to as-built records for channel construction in accordance with the original design. GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 36 File No. 0693·073-00 SITE PROTECTION AND MAINTENANCE Site Protection The areas where mitigation will occur are currently owned and maintained by the City of Renton. The City monitors activities within the project area and will not allow activities that would damage the mitigation areas. The City parks department also conducts routine monitoring in the publicly accessible areas which would identify vandalism or naturally caused damage. Portions of the site are fenced to exclude public access adjacent to the Renton Municipal Airport and will reduce the possibility of vandalism, although public access from the river is not limited. Maintenance The mitigation spawning channels may require routine maintenance, such as minor repairs to the control structures, removal of invasive or exotic species, removal of accumulated debris and refuse and re-planting of missing or dead vegetation. These activities will be conducted annually according to the findings of the mitigation monitoring or if a specific problem is identified throughout the year. The Adaptive Management Plan below identifies the contingency measures that may be required if significant damage occurs to the spawning channels. If contingencies are required in order to re-build or replace the channels, additional permitting may be required. Maintenance of mitigation bank wetlands is included in the Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank (WSDOT, 2014) and therefore, is not discussed in this report. Maintenance of native riparian vegetation installed along the Cedar River will be conducted as needed to meet the performance standards outlined in this report. This will include comprehensive invasive species control to be implemented. No maintenance is proposed for the bank stabilization areas. Bank stabilization areas were designed to address areas that will require maintenance or repair prior to the next dredging cycle. If maintenance of bank stabilizations areas is required prior to the next dredging event, these activities are expected to require additional permitting. Additional details regarding recommended plant maintenance that will be incorporated into the final design specifications are included in the following sections. Re,seeding or Re-planting Plant establishment, and maintenance will be defined in the contract documents and the Contractor is responsible for the wellbeing of plants. A minimum three-year maintenance period is recommended, though the USACE permit will ultimately define the maintenance and monitoring period. Fluctuation in water levels, or other factors, may affect establishment of planned seed and planting areas. Re-seeding and/or re-planting may be required as necessary during the maintenance period to provide adequate cover. Replace dead plants utilizing proper installation methods. Irrigation Irrigation will not be implemented unless absolutely necessary to meet the survival standards. If necessary, irrigation can be conducted by manually watering plants. GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page37 File No. 0693 073 00 Invasive Species Control Invasive species including blackberry, knotweed, ivy, reed canary grass, and purple loose strife, among others, have been identified along the project banks. These and other invasive plants tend to form monocultures, which threaten wildlife habitat and ecosystem complexity. In addition, invasive species such as knotweed make it impossible to establish native vegetation due to competition and shade under and adjacent to the infestations. Efforts should be made to limit the spread of all invasive species along the shore and in the park. It is important to remember that invasive species can be a problem in upland as well as lowland/wetland areas. Refer to the King County noxious weeds list for a summary of potentially noxious species. Initial clearing and grubbing of planned restoration areas with adequate removal of established invasive species will be critical to new planting areas becoming established. Once new restoration areas are planted, it will be critical to control and manage invasive species at the outset. The addition of a 3-inch bark mulch layer as a weed barrier and moisture retention agent will provide an additional level of weed control, effective for some species. Other weed barriers may be considered as an alternative if they are anticipated to provide more effective control of problematic species for the site, such as Himalayan blackberry and Japanese knotweed. Continued monitoring through the establishment period and consistent removal of invasive species will provide new plantings the opportunity to thrive. The use of herbicide and or pesticide may be required to provide further control of invasive species. Use of approved chemicals will only be at the approval of the owner. Fertilizing Use slow release fertilizer, such as Osmocote™, when fertilizing plants. Avoid the application of unnecessary nutrients. MONITORING PLAN The success of the restoration will be judged against the performance standards using a predefined monitoring protocol to evaluate conditions at the mitigation sites. Monitoring events will include an as-built review for riparian vegetation and annual monitoring events for both spawning channels and riparian vegetation plantings. Monitoring will be conducted by the City for the entire monitoring period, as required by the USAGE. Spawning Channels The City is currently monitoring the Royal Hills Replacement Spawning Channel and the Elliot Spawning Side-Channel. The City will continue to maintain the existing Royal Hills Replacement Spawning Channel, as required by the original project 1997 EIS mitigation plan for the initial and future maintenance dredging. This will promote ongoing functional value and continue to compensate for impacts to spawning from the proposed maintenance project and future maintenance projects. The City will also continue to maintain the existing Elliot Spawning Channel at approximately RM 4.7 to mitigate the impacts from channel adjustment until that time the mitigation needs are fulfilled. Specific maintenance actions were identified for the Elliot Channel during a site visit with WDFW and the MIT, GEoENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page38 File No. 0693-073-00 which are included as part of the current proposed action (Appendix F). Below is a summary of the monitoring protocol proposed by the City, which will be applied to both spawning channels in the future. Monitoring Methods and Data Collection The City proposes to monitor fish utilization and spawning success through direct observation of live fish and redds. Surveys will be conducted weekly during the spawning season, with flexibility to adjust monitoring to account for poor visibility (turbidity, high-intensity rainfall, etc.), and depending on run timing and utilization each year. Numerical data will be collected during each monitoring event and will be compared to the mitigation requirements identified in Table 4. Corrective actions, if warranted, will be recommended based on these data and professional judgment with regard to other environmental variables that may vary from year to year and could affect spawning numbers, such as run size and flow conditions. In addition to the numerical data provided by live fish and redd counts, the monitoring biologist will record general information regarding the following list of physical habitat parameters to assist in identifying corrective actions that could be undertaken by the City to improve utilization, if warranted: • Hydrology (flow levels and depths) • Condition of spawning substrate • Observations of large woody debris in the channel • Erosion, avulsions or other physical damage or defects Reporting An annual monitoring event a monitoring report will be prepared to document the spawning channel observations. The monitoring reports will include data as described in the previous Monitoring Methods section of this report. The data will be compared to the baseline monitoring conditions, previous years monitoring data and the performance standards set forth in this report. The report will be submitted to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers project manager for review and distribution to other stakeholders. Riparian Plantings Plant restoration areas will be evaluated annually for plant survival and overall health. Plants showing poor growth or signs of decline should be evaluated and proper remedies provided. Coppin and Richards (1990) offer the following advice for evaluating plant performance: Color is a widely used indicator but must be interpreted with care. Yellowing leaves indicate nutrient deficiency, particularly of nitrogen, which may be due to infertility in the soil. It can also be due to impaired functioning of the roots in absorbing nutrients, resulting from low pH, waterlogging, soil compaction, or disease. Brown and papery leaf edges indicate that the plant is suffering from drought, either directly through lack of soil moisture or through the inability of the roots to exploit a sufficiently large volume of soil. Competition from surrounding dense vegetation is also a frequent cause of drought stress. Dark green or sometimes reddish leaves associated with poor growth may indicate phosphate deficiency. In cold weather many plants take on a bluish or reddish tinge, which disappears when normal conditions return. GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2D14 Page39 FIie ND 0693-073-00 Data Collection Data will be collected during each monitoring event to compare the condition of the mitigation areas to the appropriate success criteria. Data collected during each monitoring event will include: • Cover of planted species • Cover of invasive species • Survival of planted species • Plant condition As-Built Documentation Immediately following plant installation, an as-built inventory of installed plants and documentation of post-construction conditions of disturbed areas affected by the proposed project will be conducted. A qualified monitoring biologist will inventory and document the species and quantity of plants installed within the restored areas of the site. Any pertinent observations regarding the restoration efforts at each location will be documented. A description of site conditions following restoration will be presented in an as-built report that will be submitted to the permitting agencies. The as-built report will include a synopsis of restoration activities, site photos and describe relevant deviations in the implementation of the Restoration Plan either during construction or by the monitoring biologist. Monitoring Methods To monitor the health and progress of the restored areas at the site, the monitoring biologist will annually collect quantitative vegetation data at representative monitoring locations through the duration of the monitoring period as established by the USAGE. Monitoring will be conducted as follows: • The monitoring biologist will establish belt transects in representative monitoring locations. The appropriate location, length and number of transects will be determined by the monitoring biologist during the as-built inventory. The locations of transects will be marked in the field using relatively permanent markers. Annual monitoring data will be collected at these transects through the duration of the monitoring period. • The general condition of installed plants along transects, such as observations of new growth and signs of stress or disease, will be documented. • Native and beneficial exotic volunteers will be included in the inventory and will offset losses of installed native plants. If plant survival falls below the threshold performance standard during the monitoring period, additional plantings will be recommended to be installed within the restored area. If noxious species coverage exceeds acceptable levels during the monitoring period, control measures will be undertaken to comply with project performance standards. • Wildlife recordings are to be made as general notes by the biologist during the monitoring events. Observations may include sighting of individual species, nests, burrows or other indicators. GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 40 File No. 0693-073-00 • Maintenance requirements such as trash removal and vandalism repair will also be noted. These observations will be included in the monitoring report. • Photographs will be taken during each monitoring event to document the progression of the site over the monitoring period. Reporting Upon completion of each monitoring event, a monitoring report will be prepared to document the vegetation observations. The monitoring reports will include data as described in the previous Monitoring Methods section of this report. The data will be compared to the baseline monitoring conditions, previous years monitoring data, and the performance standards set forth in this report. Monitoring results will be used to identify appropriate maintenance actions over each subsequent year, such as replacement plantings and invasive species removal, to ensure performance standards continue to be achieved (see Adaptive Management Plan, below}. The report will be submitted to the US Army Corps of Engineers' project manager for review and distribution to other stakeholders. ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN In the event that the mitigation areas do not meet the performance standards, adaptive management contingencies will be implemented by the City of Renton. Since wetland mitigation will be conducted at an approved wetland mitigation bank, the adaptive management plan developed for the bank will be applicable to the wetland mitigation credits allocated for this project. The adaptive management plan focuses on the measurable mitigation components, including riparian vegetation plantings and spawning channel performance. The riparian plantings have been coordinated with the Corps of Engineers vegetation standards at levees and unless those standards change, removal of installed vegetation will not be necessary. If, during monitoring of the installed vegetation, the performance standards are not met, the City will assess the cause of mortality and develop maintenance options to address the deficiencies. Maintenance options will include: removal of invasive species within the planting area, replacing dead individuals with more appropriate species and other potential maintenance activities such as soil amendments and/or watering. Maintenance of the spawning channels will be conducted as necessary according to existing conditions identified during annual monitoring. If the channels are significantly damaged in a flood or earthquake, the City will assess if re-construction in the same location is feasible or if an alternative option would be more appropriate. River processes will be assessed to identify potential risks such as channel avulsion, aggradation and hydraulic isolation related to re-construction or replacement of the spawning channel. These assessments will identify the appropriate location of a replacement channel, if needed. The replacement channel would be of similar length, size, and sediment distribution to provide adequate spawning for the target species. During the assessment of potential vegetation and spawning channel issues, the City will identify potential revisions to the performance standards if the planting area and/or the spawning channels are meeting the mitigation goals in unanticipated ways. The performance standards will be revised within the annual monitoring report and the City will inform the Corps project manager of the potential revisions. GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 41 File No. 0693-073-00 FINANCIAL ASSURANCES Financial assurances are not needed for the wetland mitigation, since credits will be purchased from an approved wetland mitigation bank. The credits will be purchased by the City prior to completion of the permit process; therefore, a performance bond for the construction and maintenance of wetland mitigation is not necessary. The other mitigation features, including riparian plantings, filling of void spaces, and gabion removal, will be conducted as part of the construction of the project and will be included in the bid package for the dredging. The dredging is required by the City as part of the Corps of Engineers agreement outlined in the Operations and Maintenance Manual. The City has encumbered funds to construct the project which includes necessary mitigation elements from the King County Flood Control District. CONCLUSION The proposed Cedar River Section 205 Maintenance Dredging Project will result in environmental impacts to the project area, including: riparian vegetation removal, bank armoring, altered flow characteristics, channel adjustment, and wetland impacts. These impacts related to maintenance dredging were identified and mitigated for during environmental review and planning for the original 205 project that occurred in 1998 and are included in the original environmental documents and mitigation plan. The mitigation for this proposed maintenance dredging will include maintaining the original mitigation features (two upstream spawning channels) and additional mitigation opportunities to improve habitat in the lower river. Impacts from riparian vegetation removal will be offset by native vegetation plantings and seeding. Impacts from bank armoring will be offset through a combination of hard and soft shore armoring to create more natural banks which function to protect existing flood control structures and removal of gabions on the right bank downstream of South Boeing Bridge. Impacts from altered flow characteristics will be offset in part by filling void spaces in the riprap with cobbles, gravel and soil, and in part through conducting a lighting impacts assessment to reduce predator advantages within and above the project reach. Impacts to sockeye salmon production resulting from loss of spawning habitat due to altered flow characteristics (long-term temporary impact) as well as channel adjustment (short-term temporary impact) will be offset through the maintenance of the constructed mitigation spawning channels that currently provide substantial sockeye salmon fry production and rearing for other salmonids. A scour monitoring study will also be conducted to document actual channel adjustment that occurs before and after the proposed dredge. Wetland impacts will be offset through the acquisition of wetland mitigation bank credits. Overall the goal of this mitigation plan is to provide "no net loss" of habitat functions in the lower Cedar River by maintaining the existing mitigation features that were identified and constructed as part of the original USAGE 205 flood project (1998), and providing additional mitigation to compensate for impacts not identified in the original project. Maintenance dredging of this USAGE 205 project was not needed in the timeline (3 years) that was assessed in the original environmental documents and mitigation plan. Since it has been more than 16 years since the last dredge cycle, the temporal loss of habitat functions and cumulative impacts that were identified for the 1998 project have been significantly reduced. The mitigation features identified in this report will continue to compensate for the loss of habitat function into the future, as well as subsequent maintenance dredging that will occur in the future. GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 42 File No. 0693-073-00 LIMITATIONS This report has been prepared for use by the City of Renton for the planned Cedar River Maintenance Dredge project in Renton, Washington. Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, GeoEngineers' services have been executed in accordance with generally accepted environmental science practices in this area at the time this report was prepared. No warranty or other conditions, expressed or implied, should be understood. Any electronic form, facsimile or hard copy of the original document (email, text, table, and/or figure), if provided, and any attachments are only a copy of the original document. The original document is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official document of record. REFERENCES Coward in, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. La Roe. 1979. Classification of Wetland and Deep Water Habitats of the United States. Performed for Office of Biological Services, Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. Foerster, R.E. 1968. The sockeye salmon, Oncorhynchus nerka. Bull. Fish. Res. Board Can. 162:422p. GeoEngineers, Inc. 2013. DRAFT Habitat Assessment Report: Wetlands and Stream/Riparian Habitats. Prepared for Coast and Harbor Engineering, July 12, 2013. Hamalainen, A.H. 1978. Effects of instream flow levels on sockeye salmon fry production in the Cedar River, Washington. Thesis (M.S.), University of Washington. Integrated Aquatics. 2011. Monitoring and Maintenance Plan for the Replacement Side-Channel. June 13,2011 Integrated Aquatics. 2013. Technical Memorandum: Comprehensive Summary of Cedar River Monitoring. June 4, 2013. Narita, Renold. 1978. Effects of discharge on sockeye salmon egg and alevin survival in the Cedar River, Washington. Thesis (M.S.), University of Washington. Northwest Hydraulic Consultants. 2013. Cedar River; 2012 Annual Sediment Report. Prepared for City of Renton, January 2013. Northwest Hydraulic Consultants. 2014. Transition Zone Analysis -Cedar River Gravel Removal Project. Memorandum to Shane Phillips, PE (Coast and Harbor Engineering) from Peter Brooks, PE, and Erik Rowland, PE. August 28, 2014. Quinn, T.P. 2005. The Behavior and Ecology of Pacific Salmon and Trout. University of Washington Press: American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, MD. Tabor, R.A., G. Brown, and V.T. Luiting. 1998. The effect of light intensity on predation of sockeye salmon fry by prickly sculpin and torrent sculpin. Miscellaneous report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Aquatic Resource Division, Lacey, Washington. GEOENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 43 File No. 0693-073-00 Tabor, RA, G. Brown, and V.T. Luiting. 2004. The effect of light intensity on sockeye salmon fry migratory behavior and predation by cottids in the Cedar River. Miscellaneous report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Aquatic Resource Division, Lacey, Washington. Unknown author. 2000. Biological Assessment: Cedar River Section 205 Flood Control Project Mitigation Sites. February 14, 2000. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Undated. Mitigation Plan, Cedar River Section 205 Flood Damage Reduction Project, Renton, Washington. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1997. Final Detailed Project Report and Environmental Impact Statement, Cedar River Section 205, Renton, Washington. June 1997. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2004. Cedar River at Renton Flood Damage Reduction Project Operation and Maintenance Manual. July 2004. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2010a. Components of a Mitigation Plan. Per Final Rule 33 CFR Parts 325 and 332 dated April 10, 2008. USAGE Seattle District. May 12, 2010. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2010b. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region, ed. J.S. Wakeley, R. W. Lichvar, and C.V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-10-3. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2012. Finding of No Significant Impact: 2012 Cedar River I-Type Floodwall Vegetation Removal, King County, Washington. October 2012. Washington State Department of Ecology. 2013. Washington State's Water Quality Assessment and 303(d) List. http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/303d/. Washington State Department of Ecology, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10. 2006. Wetland Mitgiation in Washington State - Part 2: Developing Mitigation Plans (Version 1). Publication #06-06-0llb. Olympia, WA. Washington State Department of Transportation. 2014. 1-405 -Springbrook Creek Wetland & Habitat Mitigation Bank -Complete June 2009. http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/i405/springbrook/. GeoENGINEER~ December 4, 2014 Page 44 File No. 0693-073-00 J • • •;t ~., \ . ,: "\:./.1,· .• < Proje ct Reach : 1\).., J I ) Downstream Limit of Light ing Impacts Study (mouth) '"' \ ·o.,,o' ~. Re nto n £ c 8 .., "' i;j ! E Q) i5 z ~ -;; :)l ·s; "' Cl'. a. "' ::;; .., X E "' ;, ',')"•, :.,· '\ ., ... P.'"f"I fl ),h.,n.~.,1 l 1'tiell l.i1~1, ... , \ .•. r I :,·~ ',. •cnl .. j ,• -Downstream Limit of Scour Monitoring lloanJ l "'fl,,J110:, r.1 lLtr-.11 Pj I Study (RM 1.23) • i-',, .. , .... .., H I I ,__ __ .__ ____ ....___...., Upstream Lim its of Light ing Impacts and Scour Monito ring Stud ies (RM 2.1) Springbrook Creek Wet land Mitigation Bank \·..4~r ,.1.,1 :~ (..-.. 1 .. , N l"l •J: .1 ~ l...f....-,,:.-cn ,..,,.,.-., f \ . ~ ,.•,il.J ) I ;z:, K e nt Roya l Hills Replacement Spawning Channel (2010) :ii -.u,.,. ' ~~ .... ._. /, ·,· ,.,.. r:. I ,v ,.t Re nt r-,n J \"" •.'. llo ~ll.rn.J , Grou nd water Side Channel ~, ... (_1_9_9_8_) ___ _.?":111 T9 l .• fl Of lll C<lil i .. t 1 1· 1 I ,;-f ..... ... ,,.._ -~ A ~l.11; ~>---------~-----:. ______________________________________ __, ~ g I X ! c5 1'i .... 0 Servi ce Layer Credits : Sources Esri , HERE, Del orme, TomTom , lntermap , increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAQ, NPS , NRCAN , GeoBase, IGN , Kadaster NL, Ordnance S urvey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong). swisstopo, Mapmylndia, © OpenStreetMap contr ibutors, and the GIS User Community Sources: Esri , HERE, Delorme, USGS, lntermap, increment P Corp , NRCAN, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri (Tha iland), To mTom , Mapmylndia , © OpenStree tMap contributors, and 4,000 N W.E s 0 Feet 1-_....;i ..... .a.,;;, _ _,_ _ __. ______ __::::;.,i the GIS User Community Project Location and 4 ,000 I Notes: •. 1. The locations of all features sh own a re approximate. Off-Site Mitigation Areas -~ 2 . Th is drawing is fo r infor mation purposes. It is intended to assist in showing features d isc ussed in an attached document. GeoEngineers, Inc . can not guarantee the accuracy and content of electronic files. The master fi le is stored by GeoEn gineers , Inc. and will serve as the officia l record of ~ this communication. a. 3. It is unlawful to copy or reproduce al l o r any part thereof, whethe r for pe rsonal use or resa le, without permission. Data Sources: E SRI Data & Maps Projection NAO 1963 HARN StatePlane Washing ton North FIPS 4 60 1 Feet Cedar River Maintenance Dredge Project Renton , Washington GEoENGINEERS CJ Figure 1 .., 0 N i:i :ll > " 0:: "C g ':'.:1 ~,, ,. ----.-.., -•• ·;,::, 'JI!' g b "' ~ 9 ~ Data Source : ~ Projection : NAO 1983 StatePla ne Wash ington North FI PS 4601 Feet (f) 9 Notes: ~ 1. The locations of all featu res show n are approximate. ~ 2. This drawing is for information pu rposes. It is intended ~ to assist in showing features discussed in an attach ed document. ~ GeoEngineers, Inc. cannot gua ra ntee the accuracy and content ~ of electronic fi les. T he master fi le is stored by GeoEngineers, I nc. ~ and w ill serve as the official record of t his communication. Riparian Vegetation Native Species Native Shr u b s ***** Native T rees O rd inary Hi g h Water Ma rk (O HW M) Invasive Species 11 1111111111111111,11 H im alayan Blackbe rry D omin a nt ----· Ja pa nese Knotweed D om ina nt Ree d Canaryg rass Dominant 4 50 0 ----, • • • • • • Mult iple S p ecies Co -domin a nt Fe et <$. ''$7 "' ;:i!. 450 Existing Hab itat Conditions Cedar River Ma i nten an ce Dred ge Proj ect Re nt on , Wa shin gton GEOENGINEERS C) F ig u re 2 ___ J J J Centerline and Stations ::::::::::::: Existing Lake Effect Area Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) ~ Anticipated Lake Effect Area 1l E •· ~· M 1:5 Proposed Dredge Prism Construction Access § ~--:..:....:9...:.!CT-:iz~!!llla~!t......J:JB!IZJ!. ~ Projection: NAO 1983 StatePlane \Nashington North FIPS 4601 Feet ::E l'i (/) 6 °' .. g "' i u Q) 0 a: .3 @ Notes: 1. The locations of all features shown a re app roximate. 2 . This drawing is for information p urposes. It is inten ded to assist in s howing featu res discussed in a n attached document. GeoEngineers, Inc. cannot g ua ra ntee the accu racy and content of electronic f iles The master file is stored by GeoE nginee rs, Inc. and will serve as the official record of this communication. Bank Stabilization New Repair Maintenance ~ I Data So urce Esri , Dig ita lGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed , USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping , Aerogrid , IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Commun ity. P roject detail s obtained from Co ast and Hrabor Eng ineering 20 14 <f~ 450 0 450 Feet Proposed Project Impacts Cedar River Maintenance Dredge Project Renton , Washington GEOENGINEERS C) Figure 3 N '<t ;, ~ "' §~ ~ -~•::a,3 C 'O ci X ::;; 1'i (/) 6 ~ Data Source: 0 bl Projection: NAO 19 83 StatePlane \Nashington North FIPS 4601 Feet iB 6 Notes ii 1. The locations of all features shown a re app roximate. ! 2. Th is drawing is for information p urposes. It is intended ~ to assist in s howin g features discussed in a n attached document. J,1 GeoEnginee rs, Inc. cannot guara ntee the accu racy and content ~ of electronic files . T he master file is stored by GeoEnginee rs, Inc. ;\i! and w ill serve as the offi ci al record of this com mu nication . Centerline and Stations Plantings proposed by Boeing in Restoration of construction -areas with shrub/tree plantings mitigation for North Boeing Bridge work ---.... Restoration of construction areas with native grass seed Proposed additional riparian plantings and willow stakes ~~. i: . 450 0 Feet 450 Proposed On-Site Mitigation Actions Cedar River Maintenance Dredge Project Renton, Washington GEOENGINEERS C) Figure 4 ' -,_ - ----.. / / _. / APPENDIX A JARPA Drawings ·, \ \ PROJECT VICINITY I WENATQ-IEE J REPUBLIC • OK ANOGAN \ '•, COlvtll.E ? \ . \ I.I : COL~B1A RIVER CRESCENT BAR .. [l1.ENS8URG .. COLUMB IA RIVER l ,. r--"-. ~~~CROY PASCO \ WASHINGTON KEY MAP LAKE WASHINGTON LOCATION MAP 0 1000 2000 SCALE I N FEET PURPOSE · MAIN TENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD HAZAR D REDUCTION PR OJECT !LOC ATION: 47" 29 ' 3 7.00 .. N, 122 · 12· 48.0 2"W ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS· DATUM· NAVD88 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPAN Y AUTH ORITY 3 RENTON FACILI TIES 6 . WASHI NGTON DNR I AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 8 . F & K INVESTEMEN TS WI LLIAMS AVE) 9. HEITMAN-BODEN, S 1 0. AMBROSE, K CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING VICINITY MAP APPLICATI ON BY: CITY OF RENTON S7, 17, 18 T23N R5E DRAWING INDEX 1. VICINITY MA P 2. SITE KEY MAP 3 . PLAN/PROFILE (STA 0+00-8+00) 4. PLAN/PROFILE (STA 8+00-16+00 ) 5. PLAN/PROFILE (STA 16+00 -24+00) 6. PLAN/PROFILE (STA 24+00 -32+00) 7. PL AN /PROFILE (STA 32+00 -40 +00) 8 . PLAN /PROFI LE (STA 4 0 +00 -48+00 ) 9. PLAN/PROFILE (STA 48+00-56+00) 10. PLAN PR OFI LE (STA 56+00-64+00) 11. DRED GING SEC TIONS 12. BANK STABI LI ZATI ON SECTIONS 13. BANK STABILI ZATION SECTIONS 14. OU TF ALL REPAIR DETA ILS 15. TEMPORARY CONSTR UCTION ACCESS PL AN 16. TEMPORARY CONSTR UCTION ACCESS PLAN 17. MITIGATIO N/PLAN TING PLAN (STA 0+00-8+00) 18. MITIGATION/PLANTING PLAN (STA 8 +00-16+00) 19. MITIGATION/PLAN TI NG PLAN (STA 16+00-2 4+00) 2 0. MITIGA TION/PLAN TI NG PL AN (STA 24+00-32+00) 21. MITIGATION/PLAN TING PLAN (STA 32+00-40+00 ) 22. MI TIGATION/PLANTING PLAN (STA 40+00-4 8 +0 0 ) 23. MITIGA TI ON/PLANTING PL AN (STA 48+00-56+00) 24. MI TIGA TION/PLANTING PL AN (STA 56+00-6 4+00) 25. PLANTI NG SEC TI ONS 26. PLANTING SECTIONS 27 . PLANT LI ST 1 28. PLANT LI ST 2 29. PLAN TIN G DE TAI LS PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DRED GING, REPAIR EXI STING BANK STAB ILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILI ZATION AND OU TF ALL RE PAIRS REFERENCE NUMBER · l.tL CEDA R RIVER AL. RENTON COUNTY: KING SHEET OF 29 STATE: WASHINGTON .D.A.JE.;_ 6 / 2 4 / 1 4 ·--HAUL ROUTE ---DREDGING CENTERLIINE ----PROPERTY LINE ............... VEGETATION CONSERVATION BUFFER ---UPLAND EXTENT SHORELINE BUFFER PUR POSE: MAINTENANC E OF SECTION 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT LOCATION: 47" 29' 37.00"N, 122· 12· 4 8.02"W ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS· DATUM· NAVD88 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY A UTHOR ITY 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASH INGTON DNR AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LE I, YK 4 . CONDOMINI UMS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMEN TS WILLIAMS AVE) 9. H EITIM AN-BODEN, S 10. AMBROSE, K SITE KEY MAP 0 4 00 800 SCALE IN FE ET CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING SITE KEY MAP APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING. REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZ ATI ON, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIR S REFERENCE NUMBER· ill.;_ CEDAR RIVER AL REN TON ~ KING SHEET 2 OF 29 S1AIL WASHINGTON .QA.TE;_ 10/6/14 REV 1 I -!-~t'J:-'Ej5 ~ CC, ;::EC"l:?,,;o--,r.,)>~ "U F~S~~~rno 0 -O --, Z Z >oooroo--1--·· ~~~Z~"TJ"U-t"-I!i: :i,.~::o;iz;u~"':f:j~ ~~g~~§~rg~~ '-' -oo:::ci ·oz ~ EAST LEVEE STATIONING 8~~~z~~;,:i~ Ulot/l)> OQ8o I ---1z:::;:qcrri / ;:o-< zzno-c , -24"0 KING COUNTY METRO SEWER LINE --------------- PARK ACCESS RD \ '. ----,---1, • CITY BOAT RAMP ·-g-f' r CONSTRUCTION ACCESS ~·~· __ :...:._.:._ __ ._ 2t-·:·g . g g () + ~ + + ~~~.r-· .. ,.: ___ ---------~ --.. -~ ~r.=-~ ~ ,_, ~ ----,,,..., \/ 7"\• -,. ~wcc-...im CJlS3-:=J..,, ,, i~:~i~~: ~~ ~ :: i ~ :-,a WA DNR .. PROPEJrl=~~~~:c;.:2}~~;£~-_c~~~---~~~?c,,'"'°~;~~~~~~;aw;--::~-·<>"2~S'~~;;;i~~~~~=:~' ~fz ~~:i:~~~~ ~rn --~ · • --' ,,_-------··--~ --·"" • w~ o-<0 3:: o U1 o w_ _ CEDAR RIVER TRAIL PARK ;,;;:8t/l Z ~ •• ~ ~ Z g /'-\ .-~v--• S2ftj ~ Z ~ ::E o ffg ,,.~ __ 1 '..._ '·'. '. ~.,;_'r If. CHANNEL . /;a "' "< 8 -• ' : --,2j_ • '"'::._--I ,..------ 12------~ \;II 3+00 4+00 /' · ·5+00 -=--=------tL"".: ----',-1-- 14--.. ,----1;;. _ _,..----.,-- 6+00 7+00 --I------1-- . ; 0 ' o ,r + ' r---.', -,· .L ' '-\- ,, J"'-""-i.-~ ; ,_ ........... _____ _ 8+00 --I---'l ' F;'tl~'' s",''.'}'r· -' ,c ''.~ ' ---- .::-::..J .-i5 '-::~~~ART OF DREDG~NG-;rA ~o •, ~ CEDAR RIVER .. co ~E.-o. CHANNEL_-::'.------------..., ------~.: ..... , __ --: __ -;.=!:,~----· g-'/ ·-. "':,J 2 TRANSITION _ .. ,,, <-~ s:: )> ; ,-.. ~ ', 'o o_ .-----... f c~;~:~:c"~~}°~R~Y~·~--~ -~J£'+~~~':'~::;,.;i~~~" · -:-;i: ~"'"~c. _ -_ .~ -. -- ~,---------~-------------~ •--•---•--•--•---•-§ FRONTAGE RD•-•§ __ ., __ •-•--•--=~~-§-@ .. -~ ~-- C) ---------. -~ N ~ L.fJ •--•-o,...·••----• (!) •-------. •-•-r--• ......... _--,.::..; I\ ··---': EXISTING RIPRAP ;;, Cf.I -u m o 12~r zm "' l> l>o l1 0 z zl> "!+,:; O:a ·· o :a m "0 o o:a ~d,TI :a~ ~+r m:a ~ 0 m o z O C) ~ '-' 0 -z z C) "il"I" ~ ~ g ;-:I .. q mz m ---l ::ti(") ::ti .. rr, rr, z c, Z 0 ~ ,. ,co~ ~ ~ z ::ti g~Q; N ~ =;j:E~~ <0 ;:o >wzrr, ~ F~o~ ::O:;:,;:OJZ ~'::l~~ ~I~ ::!"::J>,7'',;:J ::o~(/):;J'J Ulr---Jrr, Nl>-o ,-a";, :::!c:z m ,e ONC> '--,. z,-· "'u, l>-g~ _. I ~z Zz~ .. "l 0-,. 0 a; z / ~EVEE STATIONING PROTECTION CONSTRUCTION ACCESS 25 ...I I 8.0. BRIDGE EL +24.73' I w---,r "' z APPROXIMATE EXISTING WOOD BULKHEAD PLAN 20 "' "' <; " 15 ic, ~ Cit' ~ z ~ 10 " > w ~ w 5 " D w "'o Do ~o 00~ f--3~ ~~= u, u, w O 50 1QO SCALE IN FEET sz LAKE WA HIGH WATER EL + 18.60' sz LAKE WA LOW WATER EL +16.75' / AREA TO BE DREDGED /---~--~------------------------------------------' SLQl'.~-ox -'\ t ......... TRANSITION TO EXISTING GRADE (BENEATH BRIDGE) NOTE OHW ELEVAT10N VARIES, SEE PLANS AND SECTIONS B.O. DREDGE CUT EL +11.56' ___ l _________ _ 1' OVERDREDGE ALLOWANCE KING COUNTY METRO SEWER LINE T.O. PIPE EL +0.50' 25 20 ~ <; 15 _g_ ~ ~ 15 10 ~ cj 5 0 D 7+00 0~ 8+00 ~ ....... 3+00 4+00 5+00 o+oo 1+00 2+00 6+00 ~ LEGEND ...... ~ 0, -i I\) PROFILE HORIZ. 0 50 100 -------PROPERTY LINE ~ CATCH BASIN ---------MAJOR CONTOUR )--OUTFALL G> z VERT. 0 5 10 MINOR CONTOUR 6" > TREE :D 0, m SCALE IN FEET --~n•---Cffll--OHW ~ CONSTRUCTION ACCESS •·-•-•-•-•-•-•-• HAUL ROUTE ' :1 PURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT I OCAT)QN: 47" 29' 37.00HN, 122" 12· 48.02"W ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: DATUM: NAVPBB 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4 CONDOMINIUMS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMENTS · 9. HEITMAN-BODEN, S WILLIAMS AVE) 10. AMBROSE, K ' ' ' ' I ,, I I I I I \ i '-oo+ni ,0 ' l ,I ' I I I I I I ' l ' . / l • l I ' l_ObHd ~ ' I D I oc I w I " I « I Sc I o I oc I ~ I I _i. IO?+OL! I ' I ' I I I I I I I I 00+6 I I ' "' N 0 N (880J\VN) 1..:1 'NOUVA313 s "' S~, 17, 18 T23N R5E I ~~~~~~~~=~~~~~~~ gi;'LL '13 oo·oo+gi:v1s 38N\fHJ 30\l'kJEJ r r 0 0 0 w " u "' "' + D w " D w "' W D D W "' <D "' C, le I I I I l I I l I I I I I I l I I I I I I I I \ \ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I c., < I (fl ~ !t! r ,§ u.. th: ~~~I!: !~ "~ g~ 4' VI I ~~ 0 0 + "' D 0 + "' 0 0 + " g + n 0 0 + N 0 0 + 0 0 6 I l!:!I ci ~ : ~ ~~ g I + ~~~~~~~~~~=~~~~~~~~J"' "' N "' 0 (BBOAVN) LI 'NOllVA313 0 0 0 0 0 ~I CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS PLAN/PROFILE (STA 8t00-16t00) APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON REFERENCE NUMBER· l.N..;_ CEDAR RIVER AT: RENTON COUNTY: KING SHEET 4 OF 29 WASHINGTON 10/6/14 REV 1 ;-C.N,-'pl ~ 0 ::EO>J'J:i:!()~l> ::0 i=~§~rr,3g :j;O ---l Zz ;;::oooro 0 ---l·· .. (l):;;::~z~...,"1J-f>.I'1!: >~:::o...,z::o::o-.J>> ri'j~;ibr;i~~~~z .......-u1orn--irrim::or:;l .--.B;~~§~~Oz g:(")Glj; -<;--1~~ oo<> ;cl ~ ::i: ocf'TI z z'oo p~!)):-.i~ ~~~g.,, ., NZ(/) ~~...,Ei~E:~ ~-u~ IJJ~R°-IJ)----lZ _.::o=! ~l>:,,::~;!;6di N.2§ VlZ-~::oz> .J>,.~ _rr, I z --1=iI c! 9'J--l~ ;,:::~~ §-<o;;::: o (JI Ol/l C ·· N. -., fTJ;:;:1 o £:!l z ~ r ?~ ~ ~ ~ g wz 0 vi s::: )> >~ z ii CJ) -I ~~ ~ ~ ~ o~l> l>o zoiz zl> '"+--o " 0 "1l :0 "o:o m:o =<~O O< '" ,I:,. ~ Rl m "'+ m :o ~o 8 ~o z....... - z C> 00 00 §/ . . { 'NETLAND 8 BUFFER EASTLEVEESTATIONING ___ ------------"-----------:--=..--:CONSTRUCTIONACCESS · ---·-· ------__ -- l~l(. 1 Ulf-11 1 --.:. I k~I ~~J_j ~1 ~ L 1111 ~I 0-~~~ _,--t ----, ___ /~,,·'::~----:~~ --;~ .:~ 1~=/N ,:;-~~-~='_,-•._.\; ~~-'·:~{'.) J1 ~----~--~;);:'t~~ ,> g ,.,,• ••' .,.~ .... ,, ' ., ' • / .._-----I i,. --·-REMOVE GABION _EXISTING "".s --_,,,. --'-... ---/--1 I _ -------_ -Vi'ETLANO 8 ---,,, <--------,--t I I ----, -.... -, i--r -L !8 -EXISTING WDoD CEDAR RIVER ..... _ .... _ ' r "'-"" 1 , : -BULKHEAD _ TRAIL PARK . . _ ,• , • . __ ---' _..----->.._ ~ ' ' -------• ~ -; :--I ---' • }~~~--:,~---:_~-----.J: '. --'--_.-. f-.-.. ~~:•\•-:),~;:~:,,:. \ -:_t -q111~--.......... ..:)_-r ...... .111i,.:::....----~=.::'g-~-:c~f-.-.-fllflll.'='-~~ t,..~--... ;=.D#--__;.-.;z-_...,....-_ j..,.;:...-,....,=~ ·.:;e_;=;-"5Pr_-~-.-·· ~--::20--·..::-_._.;;i..·.·-'o n A . ·oe--:-,i-_ _ . -__ _.,.,,, -----. -~ • r __ ,,_,. ------.... --.... ,,.c -....,_ •. --~ ; "'..._ ) /-,-f· / I _,. \ _ (1) 6"~ \ -, \ -,---1 --a :;: < .,.. ____ ,.--.... ~-(1) _,2-,_-..... _ .,.-.... l=-1_e-t...: ,, < __ ._,,____ --·v ,, , -, -I /]'" . ,,,.----0-...., .... 15' ,..; ,o;:;1,...,, ~ ., _[ Cf. CHANNEL' 16+00 ':-/,... 17+00 }?+00 ----+--,."'-+-- , ........ _ __ ,.---,ei--__ .,, . START 0.1625% SLOPE --STA 16+00 " I', --= -_QHW..-.----------.. -.:.·-:-= ----~-- 0 0 E.0. ' ',, 0 ~ 0 ~~-;t . rt~--++-- 19+00 ,..~ ;,;+--~ '• CONSTRUCTION ACCESS (50' WIDE, TYP.) EXISTING RIPRAP ~-i---+-+--~ 25 20 w "O zo -<c; o~~ w(D,....: ~~--: "'~~ ""'w PROTECTION APPROXIMATE EXISTING WOOD BULKHEAD WEST LEVEE STATIONING g LAKE WA HIGH WATER EL +18.60' g LAKE WA LOW WATER EL +16.75' ------------ ____ 2_9~00-------- 1 -_ 2H00·---------22+00 ........ 1 23+00 --~ -'--\ 24+00' ~ --:-:J---..-·\ ... __ 1 -, _,,,iB-.... .,...__ .,.-"'-..,. ..._~ .r.' ~1 vi /; ;-;../ ,:~ __ , . ..,._:::+-.==<-·-=!-"----\ _____ :~,---· ... "--- °-'"",/ ----~ CEDAR RIVES START OF TRANSITION. TO 80' C( iy, '-.. ------------------. WlDTH BOTIOM STA 24+00 0 n i<Jl1!ffi:······ ••••.· ~~~..!'"'2.D"<>"a (2) 8" AND 10" 0 0 + N N cl RD----AREA ~:=-~ .. :·1··~--~-~--~~~::=;9s~~~>~l~A~S~j~+3SC CONSTRUCTION ACCESS -•-•-•-•--·----•----•-•· .. -A·' PLAN 5D SCALE IN FEET -------\- AND BANK REPAIR MAINTENANCE AREA ~o EXISTING FLOODWALL EXISTING GRADE~----------_I\ /----, __ -.,,,---....... __ .,,, ,,...--___ _,.. 25 20 ro ro <; r~=-:--_____ J g, 15 t;: z "D "' 0 w I" 1'" !z ------------ SLOPE=0.1 t)_Z_5% ---1~ OVERDREDGE~LLOWANCE--- 15 3 ~ ~ IO -:I I:":'" ~ C. ~z -j:;t::un •• ['Tl fTl u, Z 0 ;,;;c/~ ~zz:::o (;) ~ N ~ ~I~ ~~ 0 ,. '..w mI ,-~z " " "'0 ~z < ::o I~ "D 0 iii " ozrri;;::: CfTIX:=,. --1~uiz ;\:i:i::J---f r:r,.ZfTl rzc-.i5; :::o:><:roz fTl(/J>n ---u---lzrri !'.:)>AO J'JQ:1(/);::o Vlr-;rr, ~~8 :;:Jez ~~0 >g~ Zz"D o. ,. a; 0 F 10 '; w ~ w 5 NOTE OHW ELEVATION VARIES, SEE PLANS AND SECTIONS 8.0. DREDGE CUT EL VARIES o~~-~~-~-~-~~-~-~-~-~~-~-~-~-~~-~-~-~-~~-~-~-~-~~-~-~-~-~~-~-~ 16+00 17+00 LEGEND --------- BUFFER ZONE MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR OHW •--•-•----• HAUL ROUTE t>--TIDEFLEX >--OUTFALL 18+00 19+00 20+00 21+00 22+00 23+00 24+00 D WETLANDS . PROFILE "REPAIR" BANK HORIZ. 0 50 100 ST ABILI ZA TION ~ "MAINTENANCE" BANK VERT. 0 5 10 STABILIZATION SCALE IN FEET ~ MITIGATION ~ CONSTRUCTION ACCESS 6ff > TREE §J CATCH BASIN z 0 10 F -< > d 5 01.~ _:;;j .,; i HJ " u~-11 ~ ::en )>:::0--H))> )> -ozrr1I- E5o~rri:::;tz ~oooroo ·· ·· ,,, s;: "'IJZO"TJ '" -(Tl fT1 )> ~ :::0 ""12:::0 ri'l~~~G)~ -U1g~Bb ,,-....VlrriS::2 ,-I,: '-!~~ ~,.z wou~ ·o~ ~~~ oo" oc~ 8: (")U)~ ,J ~ z'no ..... ~oo-....Jcn (Jl~ -:::!-., !=J . . . . _.a .. r,.:,Zl/l l>I"T'JO:::E;)>:::0 N fl1 S::!:!J !:!J;t>CJ'TI ,-,:,n ~~:~~~~! ~e: 6 o::=-:;,;;:zoo -~z ~Zz (,),:QZ>.p.oN .l<----i:tI ~----lo A~c:J ~ g .. B (J1 ~rtj O ~ :::e' ~ .z~ ~ ~ ~ g u,Z 0 0 :l:: )> ,. ...... z .,, en --t ;,, --t -u m o £l>£: ~m \,ll\Jz z~ ~t,j" ~:o .. 0 :0 "OQ 0:0 ~ I < ~ c., -n :o m ~I\Jr m:o ~+ m 8 c: 8 _ z....., z ~1§~1"' ~z --l :::;t :::on .• fT1 !"Tl m zo ~ ,. 0 ::3 ~ :::0 ~ z "' ~(;) ~ ~I~ -" 0,. ""' mI ~z .. " ~ "'0 ~z < C) "U ,, \l 0 "' m " OZfTIS:: Cr>l~)> ::;J=E~z >cazrtj F~G"l~ ;:oAroz I"'\,,)> 0 iJ--,ZfTI ~>Ao :::0!;!,1(/1:;:o l/l,-_HTJ ~~8 ::!CZ ONC, z:,.· )>:::!:::o z~ca 0-,. a, C\ ~ --------__ .,., ______ ,,.EAST LEVEE STATIONING _,,..,, ----~, ·-·,.._/,. ,.•-...• ------- 1·· ----0 -~:----0------:..---_ fs,r .... --.o a---' ·-.. _ .,_ , ,c:.J + -a -0 -, PARk - ..... 'I-' lf'l -+-~·'-Ace··---- ~--~\/ -----,,, ----~-.. ;;_~-------~~~-~~-~a , .... _ -·~WETLAND 8 _ CEDAR RIVER ----;'_'::"------ ·'-··--:...·-BUFFER ~-TRAIL PARK ·---~ Q:J:::)..:., ··.--,_ --o~ ----0 __ r---------:-15..:-__:-~-, ·. --------~ _..:, ---=-==-=,~:_:.:-:.--' i ---;-_,~J --:r~,---~ -~:0-:, jj/!,:ART ,CF,_ ~N~?!}J,--~(!.' \\1,DTH ,~0!:1:0,~ S~A 2~+;~~~i;~2-; :_-:~~~-=~~~~-=-;-=-~-==-----'"' -·a· . 30 ,..,,,,-,. ... --~-,,,,..,..,,..l ""= •''!'-?:---~?pEN_D~~-~~~~~T~~~ ~:',C--~~e,,~~~~r-'?~~~ ~~~~r-'.~~~~-:o:~~' EXISTING WATER LINE CONSTRUCTlON --- 1 ~Cf. CHANNEL --\--"'----,.._ r 19--r-- '._,;-;6+00_, ___ f-__ ]!+~~~--l_B·----28+00 __ ~-~~~-:3~~'!."~------,o+oo d 31+00 ~2+_00 -'----= --+-----+= ,;=---+--~-----""::-+-----=--1----·-----1----'~------...,, ~ t "-------~---· E.0. CHANNEL -,---.... ___ _..,. .. \ ] _ <"'t ~ --/ CEDAR FUVER ~-,.-,1:i .... ___ · ·--1;..... 3-----,_,~ __ _ ,..:__J -..__.....--~ -,:;:.-:::; o_ '----. ---------,-~--------.. -... -o.·· ..• 25 r.~, --ouu; .•-•--•~ '"ONTAGE RD-, ro + )' r--, N W ,.-, N ':: ........ /.._ __ ~ /'~CONSTRUCTION ACCESS ~ ·-•-AND BANK MAINTENANCE (50' WIDE, TYP .) MAINTENANCE AREA 0 sz LAKE WA HIGH WATER EL +18.6' PLAN 50 SCALE IN FEET 100 .. '-=------------ WEST LEVEE STATlONING CONSTRUCTION ACCESS AND BANK MAINTENANCE 20 __/ 'g LAKE WA LOW WATER EL +16 75' EXIST1NG GRADE~ -----------,,.,--- --~~-!~------~--------------~-------~------------------~ ro "' S: SI.OPE•0.1625% -< 15 ~ ------00 o«= ru, L _= =o~,o F 10 '; ".J w 5 NOTE OHW ELEVATION VARIES, 0 F S~E P~ANS 'AND ISECTI~NS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I j 24+00 25+00 26+00 27+00 28+00 29+00 30+00 31 +00 32+00 BUFFER ZONE MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR ---------OHW --------• HAUL ROUTE i)--TIDEFLEX )--OUTFALL ~ i:::::::,:, -~ ~ WETLANDS "NEW" BANK STABILIZATION "MAINTENANCE" BANK STABILIZATION PROFILE HORIZ. 0 50 100 VERT. 0 5 10 SCALE IN FEET CONSTRUCTlON ACCESS (~; 6n :> TREE e:J CATCH BASIN - 25 20 15 10 5 0 ii,' "' ',: -< ,s. r "- z 0 F -< > w ~ w _gi _a:::l al i HI -C UNc")>; ~ ~~)>JJ~O~ )> ~ F§ei~JT1~ ~ -o --1 z :r>-oooroo ·· ·· ~~;::;:z~--r,""CJ.f>I:i:: )> ~ JJTIZJJ JJ ~)>)> r'i; ~ ~b 0 s:! N~~ ---l/) § ~ 8 d ::o lO.~ ~ ui'(/Jt;j~z ':j:::u~ uio :r,.. • J'Tlr., ;rj z :;;,;; ggfTJ -< 2 z'oo o~~:--i~ ~JJ~g"T) ~I"TJr:fc:t,,::O ~~~ :s:'.fTJ !:!J:r,.CJT1 •., ~~~-~~~ ~~g R,,A;:izs,:~i ·a,z ,.,,z_ <;":,-.f>ON .1"'11Z --1---lic!~---lo ro;:;, o-<0 :i:::o (JI AQ(.IJ Z c ·· N. "TJ ~rrl o ~ z ::E. r z::1: z z )> o • (Tl :;o CJ< 8 (/)~ OJ s::: )> t@ ~ 2'~"1l mo 12 r z m ~~~ ~§2 "i+~ ()::D --o m 0 0 ::D ::D -IQ O < ~ B "Tl ::D m ~ rm::D ~6 m 8 ~8 z 0 "'lo I,, rz ~ ~ g ~ .. "' 0 mz ~ -I~~~ 0 "' m ---, Z 0 0 --, )> AO ,a 0 -z OZJT1S:: ~ z "' CJT1::,.s;)> 0 < --1::Evi- N m ;'.:\JJ::!~ ~ "' r>Zf'T'l :~:~ fTIUl:t>o ""CJ--1ZJT1 ~I~ :!:'.::r,.AO :::o~VlJJ Vlr--1111 N>o :i,,~Q :::!CZ -" ONC> 0 )> z ,,. '-. "' )> ='"' ffiI ,-zoi::a -z O~)> _,. 0 --, ,5 "'0 mz < I I ---. ,t=,2+00 __ ~ ~c-:_::: " ----. . r E.0. CHANNEL -18 0 0 + N n LINE g ;t WETLAND C BUFFER EAST LEVEE STATIONING-\XISTING BURIED DUCT BANK o EXISTING RIPRAP ~ . EXl~TING WETLA_NDO C \·_ .... : ................ er·· ...j-' a.········-~ 0 ., :..:--. -----_.I,..-+ -~ ., ,, -... ..... .... . •. 0 38+00 ,_ .----,--y;, <i_ CHANNEL \ ! ~ 34+00 ,---_, ... , 35+00 36+00 •·•. 37+00 i:::, lg._;, .' '-'-'+ ·... . • -•_=-1,___. ------t----.......---t------:-ct-----. ---,.-----u, .... "'" ____ ..,.-, ____ ••• STA 37+10 -----..... __ ·.,-~/CEDAR RIVER · '""';···--1~-'-······· ~--······························ {:: _ ___;-::.\ ... /· ------__ .: . g + m ., cir,rr_;_:_- ':};/J> .~ 1 • ~----rr, -:39+oo ·;z(/) l I -.:!100 "---r-7 w~ .~ ;;oI i--·g ~-::.li_ (Tl II -1r-·-•o•----.--, , ........ --o----- REPAIR AREA + "' n CONSTRUCTION ACCESS AND BANK REP AIR ~ g + r---o. , "' , ....l...t. ,_,_,, \\Cl .. ..:I' .,._,/ _____ \ \.c;.. .. l ...... 4o+oo ............. . ---~--=:-~ EXISTING 'WETLAND D. f CONSTRUCTION ACCESS AND BANK MAINTENANCE 25 EXISTING FLOOOWALL SECURITY GATE -1 EXISTING CONCRETE SLABS PLAN 8.0. BRIDGE EL +25.0' O 50 100 sz LAKE WA HIGH WATER EL +18.6' SCALE IN FEET EXISTING GRADE\ ~ ---3-"-~~-W~ LOW WAT: EL +1675"---------------------------\---------- 20 ~ SLOPE=0.1625% __ ~ __ ---- ; 15 ----------------1----------- ~ z· BO DREDGE CUT g 10 1' OVERDREDGE ALLOWANCE " "l EXISTING DUCT SANK/ w 5 0 NOTE OHW ELEVATION VARIES, SEE PLANS AND SECTIONS 32+00 33+00 LEGEND BUFFER ZONE ---------MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR ---------OHW •-------• HAUL ROUTE [>--TIDEFLEX >---OUTFALL ABANDONED SE\AIER LINE EL -9.3' 34+00 ~ WETLANDS t-:-:01 3s+oo 36+00 !l!l!l!l!l . . ~ - "REPAIR" BANK STABILIZATION "MAINTENANCE" BANK STABILIZATION PROFILE HORIZ. 0 50 VERT. 0 5 SCALE IN FEET "NEW" BANK P777J CONSTRUCTION ACCESS STABILIZATION ~ 37+00 38+00 100 10 6" > TREE e] CATCH BASIN 39+00 40+00 25 20 00 00 ~ 15 5 t;: z 0 10 ~ > ci 5 0~ .:::l -00 jj c., z :IJ 0, m I '-' z z 0 ~ V, w .. 0 \. I PURPOSE· MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT I OCA]QN: 47" 29' 37.00"N, 122' 12' 48.02"W AQJACENJ PROPERTY OWNERS: DATUM: NAV088 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 g_ ~E~A~~~EJcif~.E~TS WILLIAMS AVE) 10. AMBROSE, K I I I ~ 0 N N I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~\ ~ I <i2 I '-' I '.ii I F I ~ \ WO I o I I ti I I:' I ,,; I ':J I ., I ii I I 0 I I I I I I I I I I I \ r I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I V, 0 N N (BBCIAVN) 1.:1 'NOllVA313 I I I I I I I I I I i I I\ I I I I I I I I I I I w u ~ 0 j ., w '-' 0 w "' 0 ~ 0 I [__j I I I I I I I I I I ~ => u w '-' 0 w "' 0 ~ 0 § 0 <D ~ 0 (980/\.VN) 1.:1 'NOUVA313 S7, 17, 18 T23N R5E 0 0 0 + ~ 0 0 ;t .. 0 0 + * 0 0 ;/; .. 0 0 + : g 2 0 0 CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS PLAN/PROFILE (STA 40t00-48tOO) APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON REFERENCE NUMBER: J1t. CEDAR RIVER AL_ RENTON COUNTY: KING SHEET 8 OF 29 STATE: WASHINGTON M.IE.;_ 10/6/14 REV 1 " z z 0 F « ~ V, '. ( - ' 00+09 , 00+5S · • ( • ,, //,: . I,., ,',/ I . ..,:/ .. ' ' '·,! ·,1 I ' ·/1 11: , I : I, I I ,, I I 1 ~0 .1/ ,J /· '1 ';-, i '· . \' PURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT LOCATION: 47° 29' 37.00~N. 122' 12' 48.02"W ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: PAnJM: NAVP88 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMENTS 9. HE1Th1AN-B0DEN. S WILLIAMS AVE) 10. AMBROSE, K (88Q/\\/N) 1.:1 'NOll\ii\313 S7, 17, 18 T23N R5E "' 0 N N 0 90'8l+ l oo·oo+g~ :vis I I I I 0 0 + ~ 13NN\iHJ 30\/~~ I { r I 0 0 0 I ( C I ' I I i I I r I \ I I I I ' I I /I : w I I a' I " I I " ( g ' ~ I ~ I u:) I x I o [ w ( ' \ ~ I I I ( ' I : I : I I I \ I \ I / I i I I I ) I I I I I I l I ~ J 0 w " 0 w " 0 0 a, I I l's I z I I ~ ) I ~ I I w I g I I ~ VJ I I a:: in§ \ ~ WI-[ I o a::~ I -,... ;!: VJ J 5~ I F~ I «en "' 0 0 + "' "' 0 0 + ., "' 0 0 + n "' g + N "' g + :;; 0 0 + 0 "' I l!!I ~~ I O o \ 3= W 0 z Bbl + ~~~~I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "' 0 0 N N (880:\VN) 1.:1 'NOL1\/A3T3 0 CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS PLAN/PROFILE (STA 48+00-56+00) APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON REFERENCE NUMBER: .l.t::L.. CEDAR RIVER AT: RENTON COUNTY: KING SHEET 9 OF 29 .s.IAJL.. WASHINGTON MIL 6/24/14 ~ X •W ~ ~ "' 0 " "' ., « ow zOC ., ., ~ -,w " zO ., " "<D 0 ~ w ~ w ~ r '" ., w N I '' '' ) ,, \l:-1 <1 )' 'I I ,, I ,, .:t!_:'1 I I \l :-' ' fi ' ~ ' ,• ) . I. !' • [;, I :, I l \'\ ,, '·' ,, '\ '\ £'£Z '13 ,;9' £+t9 :vis ,·, <, 8 Nl~03~ ..:10 ON3 ' / / / / / ,. / z"r oza:: I ,' 1-uiO / z=ii!: :oo+£9 /,-~ ~ =i I .· "' ' / ~- ',' / ")·' ,' '\ / ', 0 '\ \./ '" z w 8 <D I :a' " w I < ; (JC~=<BOA=V,N)Tl"'T~,·rNrO~TV"'TA--i';:;r3rT""TrrorTS,7_,r17rT, 18 T23N RSE I I I I I I I l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I (I w 0 ., " " z F '" x w "' N I I I ' I I j I I I I I I I I I I \ I I I I I I I I I I I I I \ I I I I I I / < I I I I I I I I I I I ~\ ~ I i \ r => u w " 0 w "' 0 ci I I ~ I I I I I I I I I I I \ I \ 0 N "' (88(]!,.VN) LI 'NOllVJ\313 "' 0 0 + "' 8 + "' "' g + <D 0 0 6 "' 0 0 + m "' 0 0 + ro "' 8 ~ [I: 0 O"' IE w z :::J 0 N " 0 I 0 0 "' z ., <D PURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT I OCATION· 47" 29' 37.00"N, 122· 12' 48.0Z"W AQ,JACENJ PROPERTY OWNERS: QAJUM: NAVD88 CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTI-10RITY .3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4 CONDOMINIUMS (55 B. F & K INVESTEMENTS · 9. HEITMAN-BODEN, S WILLIAMS AVE) 10. AMBROSE, K PLAN/PROFILE (STA 56+00-64+00) APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON REFERENCE NUMBER: lli;_ CEDAR RIVER AL RENTON ~ KING SHEET 10 OF 29 .filA.IE;_ WASHINGTON DATE, 6/24/14 S7, 17, 18 T23N R5E -35 <O ~ 30 EXISTING CONCRETE FLOODWALL "' 25 3 ~ 20 ~ -/BANK STABILIZATION (REPAIR) , f-~---/.I __ '"'-... sz OHW EL +19.3 ,~~~r-1 't_ CHAN/-EL DREDGING EXISTING BOTTOM ! _/_ OHW EL +19.7' SZ .,...... /'~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ 5 ci 0 0+00 -40 <O :g 35 > "'30 3 ~ 25 ~ z 20 0 F 15 ~ "J 10 w 5 o+oo 83 35 §2 30 "' 3 25 t 20 z 15 0 F ~ 10 w 5 ~ w 0+00 -40 "' ~ 35 -< 30 3 ~ 25 ~ z 20 g 15 ~ w 10 ~ w 5 o+oo T----_,,.. ·. I -~-----• 1' OVERDREDGE ALLOWANCE _J I 5 :i:,'1--1'·' 45' -----J.. ~---45' ----04 0+25 0+25 0+25 0+25 0+50 0+75 1+00 DISTANCE, FT TYPICAL SECTION DREDGING 90 FT WIDE (STA 20+00) 1+25 >---~ 40' -+--->----40' -----< o+so o+ 75 1+00 1' OVEROREDGE ALLOWANCE DISTANCE, FT TYPICAL SECTION DREDGING 80 FT WIDE (STA 32+00) EXISTING CONCRETE FLOODWALL CONCRETE SLABS, TO BE REMOVED 1+25 1+50 1+50 BANK STABILIZATION (REPAIR) 17' ~DREDGING 1:. CHANNEL EXISTING BOTTOM ':_o: ~ :4 :_ _ -i-_ ~ _o~ ~ +22.9· ¥__ :1v ------• -----------:,\\··'\J i-----35' ,----,.~--35' ----1 0+50 0+75 1' OVERDREDGE ALLOWANCE EXISTING CONCRETE FLOODWALL 1+00 DISTANCE, FT TYPICAL SECTION DREDGING 70 FT WIDE (STA 45+00) 1+25 1+50 1+75 1+75 1+75 BANK STABILIZATION iEXISTING BOTTOM (MAINTENANCE) !t CHAN /DREDGING .,..--__.,..,. OHW EL +25 8' ! :~L_:27 5'::. / / ------+-" 3H:1v ----------'------:,r\·' -- 0+50 0+75 30' ----i---30' 1-----1 1+00 DISTANCE. FT TYPICAL SECTION DREDGING 60 FT WIDE (STA 55+00) 1+25 1+50 1' OVERDREDGE ALLOWANCE 1+75 0 15 SCALE IN FEET 35 -<O 30 ~ 25 "' 3 20 ~ ~ 15 z 10 0 F "' 5 > "I 0 w 2+00 40 -<O 35 :g > 30"' 3 25 ~ ~ 20 ~ 15 F ~ 10 ~ 5 w 2+00 35 j 30 §2 "' 25 3 20 t 15 z 0 F 10 "' > 5 w ~ 2+00 w 40 -<O 35 ~ > 30-< 3 25 ~ ~ 20 z 15 g "' 10 > "I 5 w 2+00 30 PURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT I OCA]QN: 47" 29' 37.00"N, 122· 12' 48.02"W ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: QATUM: NAVDBS CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISllNG BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REPAIRS 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. 11-,E BOEING COMPANY AUlliORITY 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMENTS WILLIAMS AVE) 9 HEITMAN-BODEN, S 10. AMBROSE K DREDGING SECTIONS APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON REFERENCE NUMBER: ill;_ CEDAR RIVER AI;_ RENTON COUNTY: KING SHEET 11 OF 29 STATE: WASHINGTON DATE: 5/28/14 REV 1 .. "'"~ii ::!::=()>::0:i!()l>> F~6~rn~ o -0 _, ~ooorno ·· (/] ;i:: ,:izo., I~ ~ ,.., b l!B zrn !:'J :i,.-;o;Jz;o r?i ~ ~QG~ , .. ,'{/) §t~8d ,,-... Vl rn:l::Z 8:oc.n~ ,I '.;, _,.IS: "1i('.j:!: ,,,.z ~~~ ~~~ I gg~ z zoo p!O?l:--1?> ~ ~g-., " z'" >I"T'fr~>::U t...;, rr1 :!::!:':! !:':!:>Cl'T'I •""Cl 0 ~~:~'£~~! ,;Jj§ (.llz_ i5::oz>_p.~ J'TI I Z --1=iI ?J--1~ :,,::c:o~ o-<0 o 01 §U> z c" ~ 'Tl rnrii o I!! ~ r _zhi ~ ~> g en Z 0 ui CD )> z s:: 7' )> > ~ z " -I " C )> m 0 " > CD Zm =< 0 r )> 0 z a, N z )> " ~ () :n Q m :n _, 0 -< o-0 z :n < " mm ~ (I) m 8 :n z m _, 0 ~ z z 0 C) z (I) ~1~F I mz -t--1::on •• rr1 f11 ~ zo " _, > AO~ ~ 2 z ;:o C §~~~ 0 -::;:r~ vi z "" ~ :t>m::::!rtj <D ::O::or:i,.Z ·· rzG':l~ AJACDz ~::'.l~g I~~ .:!"::i,.AO :::02;!<,n:;:o (.ll,_,r•1 N :.t-a >':B9 =,r z en ,; ONG"'.l "-.> z,-· " en =<~ a, I >om ~z z z" o. > .. "l a; ~a mZ < 30 25 " "' " 3 20 r ~ z 0 F 15 :; ~ 10 5 35 30 " "' 0 > « 25 "' r ~ z 14' 15' VEGETATION FREE ZONE , (VFZ) T.0. CONCRETE FLOODWALL EL. VARIES (EL. 30.6' SHOWN) I TOP DRESS l/oi'ITH TOPSOIL AND HYSROSEED IN VFZ I 3' INTERSTITIAL SPACE Fill I -------~ _o: ~1~· _:~s-----f DR:G~A:.A - ~,.\'-I. ~ '-ARMOR STONE 8.0. OREDGE CUT EL VARIES (El..+14.1' SHOWN) I ,---~//\.,,.,... '-NEW BEDDING STONE _________________________________ ] ______ _, NOTE TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION PLATFORM TO RIGHT BANK NOT SHOWN. 160 15' VEGETATION FREE ZONE (VFZ) 1' 0\/ERDREDGE ALLOWANCE EXCAVATE AND BACKFILL W/DREDGED MATERIAL 170 180 190 DISTANCE. FT lYPICAL SECTION NEW RIGHT BANK STABILIZATION ST A 30+60 TO 33+00 0 5 10 SCALE IN FEET PLANTING BENCH (VARIES), SEE NOTE 1 TOP DRESS WITI--l TOPSOIL AND HYSROSEED IN VFZ SLABS TO BE REMOVED INTERSTITIAL SPACE Fill El +19 Q' GEOTEXTILE FABRIC 200 210 220 30 25 " "' " '~ ., le r w ~ w I . ~ is ..J 15 F w <( I" > '" ".J 230 w 10 5 35 30 " "' " 25 3 ~ 20 <( > w _, ~! w EXISTING CONCRETE L sz OHW El 23 4' NAVOBB I DREDGE AREA Vii,'~:'::-" .c,.,:~~~~~~~~~,:----------------- .. ,., .. ;,:·-'·•·.;~ -~-~.,~.-:~ .. 1::ws:J:1.r--~1'."·f--~-~r-.r.~~ .,_,_ BO DREDGE CUT EL VARIES {El.+15 6' SHOWN) t;: is 20 F ~ w 15 10 NOTE BEDDING STONE ARMOR STONE (VOIDS FILLED W1TH GRAVEL ANO COBBLE) 70 80 1. GRAVEL PLANTING BENCH ONLY PROPOSED AT LOCATIONS SHO'NN ON PLANS, NOT THROUGHOUT. ·.J,/.';,'..,'" .. ,.,";·•.:·,.-;·;,..:, .. ;·_,.:,_;•;, ,~.;-.•,_ .. ..,. .• _p .. ,"'!1•. • • • • , \ '--EXCAVATE \_GEOTEXTILE FABRIC ~--------------------------1-- AND BACKFILL W/GRAVEL 1' 0\/ERDREDGE ALLOWANCE 90 100 DISTANCE, FT lYPICAL SECTION LEFT BANK REPAIR STABILIZATION STA 19+50 TO 23+90 STA 37+10 TO 45+46 0 5 10 SCALE IN FEET 110 120 130 15 10 140 ' CJ) .'-I ~ .'-I ~ co jj c., z :::0 f,/l ~ 0 "' ::En>;::o-HJ>> iJ f"-~~:-"ijl 2' F~6~~:;!~o ~ >8odroo~~ [';l ti:;:;:~z~"T'l-u.p.:r::;:: ~ :::u"T'lz:::u:::o ~'J>> :t>c>>0rr10 NZ <3:::--,n z-Utv>--, DU) ;sEncj S3 tc:.~m .-..Biffli"ez::;tt,.i ~ u, Vl"'tl -..J::::az 01 n > oo8n --, z ::E ocf11 :::c -< z •o -'tOCl.1-..JO'l 01~·z::::!~ 0 · · · · · VJ ...... o . " NZUJ >I"T'lr:;,::i,.:;:o t,.;,"'Cl~ 3::: ['.] R' ['J ;t> C f11 • ;:o ::::! '1:s'~~"'i~i ,;_2~ ~~-A~;:oZ~-r,.~N f11&~ {j~I g---18 AoGJ Z g .. ~ "Tl ~--, o ~ ::E r z~ Z Zl> g • rr, :::0 C) 0 ~z ul ~ z s::: 7' l> ,. ~ z " -i " C: m o 0 ,. CD Zm =! 0 r l> 0 z N z l> rn -< ~ () :0 0 m :o "' -< o-0 z :0 < ~ mm "' (/) 8 :0 m z m ~ 0 ~ z z 0 0 z (/) ~il~F ~ ~ ~ S3 "lJ -I~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 9 o~~:;ozozf11;:: "TJ G) ::::0 C CfTIX):> ~ s:::..., ::8: tnz N CD "T'I ::::I-, lO :::0 f11 l>COzrr, ?;I r::~0~ ;:oAmz rr1Ul>o I~ I~ ~~~: ;:o CD VJ ;:o VJ r' -HTl N>o >~9 =Jr z ~"' oN c;, " ,. z ,.. ~~ ~,,, a, I )>-(Jrr, "z Zz"D ~ " 0-,. " ~ ,j "'0 mZ < 35 30 oi" w §! 125 >- ~ z 0 F 20 :; w ~ w ~ §! 15 10 30 25 " 20 ~ t;: z § 15 :; "j w 10 5 TO. CONCRETE FLOODWALL EL. VARIES (EL. 34-.8' SHOWN) FILL INTERSTITIAL SPACE W/GRAVEL/SOIL MAINTENANCE WORK, INSTALL NEW ROCK TO RESTORE SLOPE .'le <f. CHANNEL I I OHW EL 24.9' NA\/088 ' I EXISTING ROCK TOE l f DREDGE AREA -------I ---- 1 100 110 ·11, 8.0. DREDGE CUT EL VARIES (EL+17.1' SHOWN) ~----------------------- 120 130 DISTANCE, FT TYPICAL SECTION LEFT BANK MAINTENANCE STABILIZATION STA 23+90 TO 37+10 ST A 45+ 46 TO 55+85 0 5 10 SCALE IN FEET 140 1' OVERDREDGE 150 160 rn=c M"'~---- GEOGRID AN WRAPPED ca°MPCOIR FABRIC REMOVE EXIS ACTED SOIL ND C TING GABIONS ' OIR FAB STREAMBED RIC WRAPPED SZ OHW EL 21 0· GRAVEL/COBBLE DREOGE ARE . NAVD88 ~ --A~ EXISTING GRADE NATI+i5 GRAVEL \. \._ __ ·--"\._ 1.0' THICK ----~ EBENCH~' ··-,!"" --··---. -' --•=""''a ---',-/ . ..,,. .. --~-" ---. ..--/ WN ,1-1·-'" --_ f,;_;,;,<.':q'' .. ·'.,'..:::?"7i:""'·· .. · ~:,, ;\·, . -,;-vt.«~·-·· ·~··,"'' 0 . .,,-~--.Y~.;.;%1 ·~ t /"-"°4 : ' + ,'. .. :·~-·.;</0· . / GEO TEXTILE FABRIC -------------l1. 10 EXCAVATE AND BACKFILL W/NATIVE COBBLE GRAVEL ~:5,~:~. ~~/ \ '-ROCK TOE OYERDREDGE ALLOWANCE 6" THICK STREAMBED GRAVEL BASE 20 30 40 DISTANCE, FT TYPICAL SECTION GABION REMOVAL MITIGATION STA 21+70 TO 22+86 0 5 10 SCALE IN FEET 50 60 --- 70 35 30 w w §! 25 f >- ~ 5 20 ~ "j w 15 10 170 80 30 25 oi" w §! 20 3 t;: z 0 15 ; "j w 10 5 en 1-"-I _;:::j -00 -I "' c.., z HJ EXISTING CIP CONCRETE WALL (TO REMAIN) REPAIR EXISTING T1DEFLEX VALVE S7, 17, 18 T23N R5E ... Sl OHW EL +24.8' ' .• / DREDGE AREA I: ~-.,,_ .,_.·..:-, "+ .--;-. ~. / EXISTING RIVERBED REPAIR ARMORFLEX _-.-:-:-i~ ~ r-;:-.. ~ ~ ------------"'"'"~ _= "O,S '\-; : ~\_~~--1::::::::t=:L·~~_:_:_·.:.· '.:·_:_cl _. ..... --·)._,..,..,;,,,,. GEOTEXTILE FABRIC c::;;iv 8.0. DREDGE CUT EL VARIES DETAIL ARMORFLEX WITH OUTFALL 1.0' OVERDREDGE D 2 4 SCALE IN FEET REPLACEMENT TIDEFLEX VALVE / EXISTING BANK -\~--; -{;EXISTING RIPR; OHW EL VARIES ' -\-> -, ~ -~ - \1 .J\1--,~ ,-I'" -'·---~---I -; ~--:-: :~~ -_ I I I ! ' ; ' ' ' ' ; ; ; ; ; ; ' !IIII/IJ/ll!!l!!//I l//lllll!I/I//////J; I I I I I I/// I I I!!// I I /J /iil!!IIIJ!!//;//II; I I I/ I I I I I I I I I/// JI/;/ I/JJlllll/////ll!I/J/ PIPE DIAMETER, SEE TABLE (THIS SHEET) - EXCAVATION, SEE NOTE 1 TYPICAL DETAIL OUTFALL WITH TIDEFLEX 0 2 4 SCALE IN FEET -- RIVERBED OUTFALL PIPE LOCATION TABLE LEGEND PVC -POL YV1NYL CHLORIDE C -CONCRETE DI -DUCTILE IRON CM -CORRUGATED METAL NOTES BANK LEFT LEFT LEFT LEFT LEFT LEFT LEFT LEFT LEFT LEFT LEFT LEFT RIGHT RIGHT RIGHT RIGHT RIGHT RIGHT 1. EXCAVATE LOCALJZED AREA TO TEMPORARILY ACCESS TIDEFLEX VALVE AND ARMOR FLEX FOR REPAIR WORK AND BACKFILL W/GRAVEL TO PREDISTURBANCE CONDITIONS. RIGHT RIGHT PURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT LOCATION: 47" 29' 37.00"N, 122" 12' 4B.02"W ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: PATIH.1: NAYD88 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMENTS WILLIAMS AVE) 9. HEITMAN-BODEN, S 10. AMBROSE K CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING OUTFALL REPAIR DETAILS APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON LEVEE PIPE MATERIAL DIAMETER (IN) STATIONING 5+50 PVC 12 12+85 C 18 14+85 C 18 18+50 C 12 22+90 C 4 23+70 PVC 12 25+00 PVC 12 31+00 PVC 12 31+05 C 12 36+75 C 18 48+00 PVC 12 55+00 DI 24 28+85 PVC 8 41+55 DI 24 48+60 CM 12 53+00 PVC 8 59+70 C 24 64+00 PVC 12 68+00 CMP 12 69+00 UNKNOWN 18 PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, NEW BANK STABILIZATION ANO OUTFALL REPAIRS REFERENCE NUMBER: lli.;_ CEDAR RIVER AI;_ RENTON ~ KING SHEET 14 OF 29 filAJL.. WASHINGTON DATE: 5/28/14 REV 1 ,. ~~:-" ~8~~:i!Q ~6o~rri~ 3::ooorn 0 vi~;iz~"TJ :i,. ?:'. ::0.,., z :u ~~~~(;)~ .._,(I) orn---l ,.....,z::JoO U1(1)rr,3::.Z Ul ("') l/l" ,1 ~ "" I ~ _,.I ,C °--Ji('.j~ ~,. z """M ·oz "'~,. :--Jrr,Z ooO ocm z'no ~wo:i-...iO'l u,p;i -::::! -ri 9· . ' ' . r--'·' ;;:;~I./) ~Ej"T'J6~~~ ~""CJ~ rn~R>-1./J--IZ ~ ::::0 ::::! ~l>A~~6bi N-~~ (.llz_ 0::oz > .P.O .fTl I Z --l~I o:i-1\:5 :;,;;rn~ o-<0 O 01 8(1) z C . N. ""Tl rriM o !.2 ~-, ~~ ~ ~ )> g v,Z 0 vi -I s:: m s:: )> ),; ~ z 2' )> ::Il ril () \; () )> Zm cl () ::Il )> 0 §1 -< z )> rn m () ~ ::Il ,; ~ Q 0 0 ::Il ~ ""U z or~ ::Il iti ~ )> m ::Il ~ z C 8 ci () z ::I z 0 C) z ---"'l"~F~ ~ ~ g .. "1J mz --l ---l ;;o 0 :-> rrl rr, ~ =i ~ .. AO :::0 z QZ(Tl!!: 0 Z z ;::o C crr,::,:,=:::r,. ..,, G) -:;:::: ,:r:;:;(/)z N r?i m J>.cogrtj <v ::u ~ F~0~ ;;oArnz [8~~~ ~~ ?,;1,;;~ )> V)~i8 ~ ~rz U1 :Sc ~~-0 -......_:i,. ---l;o N (.() >Qrr, Cl! I Zz-U ,z 0-:t>-~ 0 5:i _,. ~ ~o mZ < ~ r 0 "' ;;, 35 30 ~ 25 -< ~ r ~ 20 z 0 F -< fu 15 ~ w 10 5 ~ LEVEE TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ACCESS EXISTING WEST LEVEE (TO BE EXCAVATED) TYPICAL PLAN BARGE ACCESS 0 6 12 SCALE IN FEET EXISTING GRADE /_ (TO BE RESTORED) EXISTING WEST LEVEE (TO BE EXCAVATED) rAPPROX LOCATION OF ORIGINAL LEVEE I "'· (TO BE RESTORED) -~ <1-t .f>ti: 1 v_ ~: .. 1)1: __ .. _ -10H 1V lt.,- \_ ~EMBANKMENT MATERIAL "-"--..,_ 10 24" RIPRAP "-.. --ITT 20 30 EXISTING TIMBER BULKHEAD/ i "-.._ - (TO REMAIN) 40 --+- 50 DISTANCE, FT TYPICAL SECTION BARGE ACCESS NOTES 0 6 12 1. TEMPORARY BULKHEAD TO BE MINIMUM LENGTH NEEDED BUT NOT LONGER THAN 50' ALONG BANK. SCALE IN FEET TEMPORARY BACKFILL USING DREDGED GRAVEL MATERIAL OR IMPORTED CLEAN ROCK/GRAVEL TEMPORARY BULKHEAD (STEEL PILE WALL) ~ CEDAR RIVER WA ffiE, ALL SIDES ANO FRONT TEMPORARY BACKFILL USING DREDGED GRAVEL MATERIAL OR CLEAN IMPORTED ROCK/GRAVEL TEMPORARY BULKHEAD j/n WATlLE I I (SHEETPILE HP OR PIPE PILING) . / n 'y OHW EL VARIES -----------CONTRACTOR BARGE-------¥'-LAKE WA 1GR-WATE 18.6' 35 30 ;;, 25 ~ -< ~ 20 t;: t F -------------15 :';: ".J DREDGE AREA 60 70 80 90 10 5 100 w _gi _<::l co i 81 (880!\VN) 1..:1 'NOUV!\313 "' 0 "' 0 n n N N in I N 0 I >- in z 0 I <O F u, u <O " I w ~ "' I" « « u, I > z z '" b, 0 u I 0 .; >-~ N « I 0~ ~ "' ww ',' ~ g!" I " w "' ','5 ~ B~~ "' I 'le 00 2 al I () ~ != "' u, I c.., >-X z"' w =i ~ I 00 "' !le I I /;: le "' w"' ~~ al le ~ w z z « I u g ~ ~ (880A'v'N) 1.:1 'NOUV!\313 "' 0 I I I I I I n I u I z « I 3' 0 I ~ I ~ « I w I " I 0 w I QC I 0 QC I ',' I 0 ;._ 0 m 0 "' >-~ w 0 z "' >- V, 0 ,s " 0 N 0 ::: 0 0 z N Ot:l Ft! ou w"' (/)~ m __J ill <~ 0~ ~~ 0 PURPOSE: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT LOCATION· 4T 29' 37.00~N, 122· 12' 46.0Z~W AP,IACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: DATUM: NAVQ88 CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING >-w w ~ ~ ".I "' u u, 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK 4. CONDOMINIUMS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMENTS TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ACCESS PLAN WILLIAMS AVE) 9. HEITMAN-BODEN, S 10. AMBROSE K APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON 87, 17, 18 T23N R5E PROPOSED: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR EXISTING BANK STABILIZA TlON, NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND OUTFALL REP AIRS REFERENCE NUMBER: ill;_ CEDAR RIVER AI;_ RENTON COUNTY: KING SHEET 16 OF 29 .s..IA.IE;_ WASHINGTON Q.6..IL 5/28/14 REV 1 I I I I ,.:,,~:::; ~~ rozrriI:::jO c5o~rr1--< l>ooorno ·· ·· ~~~z~"T'I -1>-I:;::: Z;:,::i"T'IZ:::o -...J:r,,}> :?>C:r,.PG:l['TJ "NZ Bti6~o~ ~~M z~oo ;u ·oz u,'(.()rr,~z :;,j:::o~ ~ =<·· ~ l -0 D" --,_--__ -:t. \ N -o----r,·-o +, ENHANCE EXISTING RIPRAP r ,. ;!: / __,, __ PROTECTION Vv'ITH Vv'ILLOW STAKE ;·-.: __ ... 11 • ~ -- , PLANTINGS ABOVE AND BELOW OHJM.1 l , . ,.,~, --~ --Uln(.11::t-o8n iJ ~ :::co,?;r'1 ~::::!~ 0 ,, -o 0 + ·o 0 + ~ ----------<-:e ----:r-.;:--~--? I __ .., \-;-_ -------------·--- ::. ;/' ~-:r g + ~ ,"' -:,..··-<:_ - .. ~z(.() ·(• :t>I"T'll:f;?,,:::O NiJ~ -:f ·, iii~)2:>PGjC~ _:;:o::::! l> ~I ;°, '·-__ JJ~ :r:=t-t NOO .(fl,.,~---_ _. _.'f_..:_-__:_...:.-~~=~~ggl .f>,-R~ -~5;---wA 1 0NR--PRoP-rnTY·-';.;._~--'.,. __ -. ,- !'1 Z -t=iI-t~-to ~rr, I FCC r-.-- 1 ~ o-<o o ui o 1..u :;,:::ro(!l Z C ·· r--;, "T'I z (') ,.\ , ~~!~:" /'""~ #~·t-~ ~~~<-"-_ __;::;:_,., __ ;~.;, __ ... ;::--.. .. "'~-:c~~·:"'i-----§b:--"~r:"· 8-t O !l! :E ' 9 / ---/ fTl~ z z l> 0 n:: .-::z.rri ;i:;, 0 8 ID / l:;' -1 12-;:,· (/)~ -::-~o+,so i o+oo _ , ,,-, /i+Oo 2+00 3+oo 4+oo .. ___ , ' ~+oo s:::: s:::: .. -I~ o_ 6+00 '' 7+00 8+00 ----+-'--------+-'--------+-'--- t, ..,,.:_ --'-------_ _,' =i )> C) -,, )> z ~,.....-I --1() ~ oo -m 8~~ ~el §10-.. zl> 'j/ : --?---+-'--~ ----+-_ ------~-------~E-D_A_R -RIVER - 0 _ ·f ,;~}. ::;cfL~~":"">~,",c'•''"'')·· -C_C.~:-=•~''~:.~ ::·~·~-~-;_s~1_~.~::J';~ __ -_-=_~_-~_:_~_'~-~-:-~~·~;;~·;'-':; /\___ -~ w ~ a, + ""'O () :0 "'or m "O)> 0:0 ~ I Z < ~oo+--1 :om ~ -m :o ~ 0 z 0 "'oC>,... ~ ....... "' ~ ""'IJ z ~ C> z ~11~1" ~ -t~:::00 .. fTl fTl ~ zo " ~» AO~ o-z QZfTI:;::: ~z ~ NO~ CfTlX)> a1"~" I w ~ J>w-rtj '>~z 'Z » ;uAroz ca~~~ ~~ ~:i,,.AO :::o~(/):;,:J Vlr--irri N:r,.o "'"" m ,a :::!CZ ON0 '-,, z»· ~ u, l>:::!:::O _,,. I ~z z~~ .. " 0-p ~ a; 0 z lllQ]];_ OHW ELEVATION VARIES, SEE PLANS AND SECTIONS l..EOEN) -------PROPERTY LINE ---------MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR --OHW---u'"W--OHW 6" > TREE e] CATQ-1 BASIN [>--11DEFLEX >----OUTFALL 11£11..ANDS PLAN 0 50 100 SCALE IN FEET NOTE 1. ALL RIPARIAN (SHRUB W1TI---l SEED AND SHRUB WITH TREE) AREAS SHALL RECEIVE GRAVEL SOIL MIX 2. PLANTINGS IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE AIRPORT: 2.1. THE MITIGATION PLAN Vv'!LL BE REVIEWED BY THE RENTON AIRPORT MANAGEMENT TO ENSURE AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION IS USED. 2.2. VEGETATION ON THE LEFT BANK WILL CONFORM TO THE 'WSDOT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AIRPORT PLANTINGS WSDOT AVIATION STORMWATER DESIGN MANUAL M 3041.00, DEC. 2008" 2.3. THESE PLANTS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED ON THE PLANT LIST. SEE SHEET 27 AND 28. 2.4. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION 0+00 AND 29+00 AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WILL NOT INCLUDE TREES DUE TO SIGHT LINE ISSUES. 2.5. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION 29+00 AND 59+00 AIRPORT I U) APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WILL INCLUDE TREES. '-J 2.6. ~~~\~ ~6~1~gTB:16ci~.CLUOED 40 FEET ABOVE AND BELOW THE 5=l -MllQATION/ PLANTNl !B"flP co i ffi ~ . . ~ MEADOW SEED SHRUB AND lREE 00: SHRUB ONLY WllH SEED RESTORATION AS NOlED ,. !,,-t',l:-' ~ g ~~:t~ i= a o~r>i~ :'!::oooa:r 0 (ll~~Z~"TJ )>~::o...,z:::o rii~~~0~ '--'Vl ocn--1 _z::100 01 VlJ'Tl:i:;:Z u, ("') (1)-0 ,I le: -< I ; <-I,:: ~~~ ~,.z ~»--< -o~ "',,,. :--Jrr,Z I g~~ Z.0 o ..... ~0)-..,JO) (JI -::I "T'J 0 . . . . 0 ~I"TJr,:e:;r,-::::o Bz~ S::::fTJ (Tl)>C(T'l •"Ur., 0~~=::~~--1ozi N~g )> ;,;:zo ·i,;:;z ~Zz C")?:JZ l> .f:>. () N -I~ d~6 b-,5: ;::i:::co(JJ z C .. N 8;:;:1 o sn z i. ~ (Tl::1: Z Z J> 0 ,?"'.(Tl ::::o 0 < 0 Z 0 "'vi s::: =i ~ ,. C> -.,, ,...... )> z ;,, Cf.l -I -I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ zoo--)>o "' + ""CJ z )> "'o 0 s,O~ m::O ~..!.~ 0::0 ~ Ol ::0 iti ,, + z m §8C> 0::0 ~ .._.. " ""CJ -r z )> C) z ~i~F i:i m m --< ,, "' " m •• l'T1 JT1 z ..... Z O () co -t;t,-1"'1 0 25 ~:;oz "T'J z ::JJ C " -" ~ ;;; "' <O :;o ~ ~~ m " " ,. ~ u, <-I '::::: z ,. " b z I QZf"Tl3: Cl"Tl,::5)> =rJ::E<11z :r--rngM F~C1; :;;ciAo::Jz rfl(Jl)>o(") -o_,zri1 ~)>AO ::::o~{/J::O VJr-1r<1 N>o >~£! :::!CZ ONCO z»· )> :::!;o z~qj 0-,. a, -- ihl: + ,·~ ,: >('11 ---------·-----=-=-~cc-_--~--. -~----· "l . I, I l<i· ··3cUJ1~L;~~-lLLJ ....::.:_--. -<=~ -'l i (]~-ii~~:~~--1 0 + N--- _0-' '•j-\>~•\,\•,!~1 / • ----c . .C:CC,C._, __ ~;~? C t~t:;~i~c~,=~\~L~ • ! ... -::,.::-" .· f,· I 1 ,-.~"" -RESTORE WITH NATIVE----','· •Ii ( •' / . ;~~~:~~~:~, 8+00 RESTORE PREVIOUS BANK REPAIR WORK 1MTH 1MLLOW ST AKE PLANTINGS - 9+00 10+00 ---, ~-2s ---- ---,-_ --15-- -11+00-----12+00 -+------+-::-.. -::.,,,----cc:;-.::-.=-.. -~:, ----+---.::--v-c._--- --~,,---------Y\ _______ : 1r ---is __ ::_;; ____ ~ CEDAR RIVER -;_::::':.,,..;_---'------~--_--,s--.. :L--:_1s-....:::..:::.;:_; ___ -----.::_ i \, SHRUBS AND TREES SET _ -" BACK FROM EX. VEGETATION -----ON BANK . <:~---~ ~---~_\) -\..) ,•, ..c;i ~,, • \ )(. o,-:.ti! "_~~._¥, ~~c,f-., ---:.,IF"' ,.;{.,•..J'--\;,.: \ ••20 , ..... _-}_!Hf{...:~-~~~.~.;..tillw -, -~--:::·~<v ~,;~,,.-~; """~ ,7'-,_ ,--, ,- ~ --,1-- ~.. -13+00--,,.· 14+00 ""-1 16+00'' ,.~--~--:::-==.:-.. ::-+""·~' u, o, a ----·-----1-0-1 ---o O --- SHRUB 'MTH SEED 0 ---..... _ro~a, , ... 6 ----------;': N ::' j'B ) :'!'RESTORE W/ ---~ ~ ~ MEADOW SEED ' NOTE OHW ELEVATION VARIES, SEE PLANS AND SECTIONS L.EQEt,I) --C><lll---0-,\11-- PROPERTY LINE MAJOR CONTOOR MINOR CONTOUR OHW c'; 6" > lREE e] CATCH BASIN f>'...--TIDEFLEX )--OUTFALL WETI..ANDS 0 PLAN 50 SCALE IN FEET 100 .... NOTE 1. ALL RIPARIAN (SHRUB WITH SEED AND SHRUB W'ITH TREE) AREAS SHALL RECEIVE GRAVEL SOIL MIX 2. PLANTINGS IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE AIRPORT: 2.1. THE MITIGATION PLAN WILL BE RE\/IEWED BY THE RENTON AIRPORT MANAGEMENT TO ENSURE AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION IS USED. 2.2. VEGETATION ON THE LEFT BANK 'MLL CONFORM TO THE 'WSOOT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AIRPORT PLANTINGS WSDOT AVIATION STORMWATER DESIGN MANUAL M 3041.00, DEC. 2008" 2.3. THESE PLANTS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED ON THE PLANT LIST. SEE SHEET 27 ANO 28. 2.4. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION o+oo AND 29+00 AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WILL NOT INCLUDE TREES DUE TO SIGHT LINE ISSUES. 2.5. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION 29+00 AND 59+00 AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WILL INCLUDE TREES. 2.6. TREES 'MLL NOT BE INCLUDED 40 FEET ABOVE AND BELOW THE SOUTH BOEING BRIDGE. M11QA110N/ PI...ANTNQ lfQEM? ~ ~ ~ MEADOW SEED SHRUB AND '!REE OR SHRUB ONLY 'MlH SEED RESTIJRATION AS NOlED 0 + _rs _::::j al i ~ ... S,,Nc" t';I ~ LO " :::E(")'.J>:;>J--!(")'.:r>)> --.:J r=OZfTII::jO::::! O cao~fTl--< ~ ~ >oooai 0 --1-· ·· S::::s::;:-uzo.,, V)_ fTl fTI Z::>J"'T'JZ;:o ~C:r>>0rri rnS:: :::!0 z "-'V) ~~8d ,,.....Vlr,S:::Z 8: nUl~ -l"I;:: '!~~ N > z '° "~ ·o~ "'" > :-Jf"llZ ,I °' oao ocm 'O 9~?-J:-J?l 0p;i~g~ :r,.:i:,ir::e:J>:::cJQ ~z~ S::::12] CJ::r,.CfTI .--un Ul--!R"· VJ--!Z _.:U:::! i'F1>;~6~i "-~~ ~Zz C)~ -I -+'-(")r,..:i • I< i:f~I !))-lo AaJQ Z g .. ~ U1 8rrt O !,2 ::e:· ~ rr,:i:: Z Z :r,. 0 .:Zrri ;;a 0 < 0 z 0 V, ui 3:: 3:: 3 ,, ~ ~ ~ :g 0) --i C -I --f m () E >Oz m ~ai~ ~o a, + ""U () > "Or :0 "o> m:o "~~ 0< Si~-:om ,,+z m:o :. 0 0 8 60 z .._, "'lJ -r z > 0 z ~;j';r' '" mz --! ~ ~ ~ -zo '° ~ > A O " 'i/iz~; N m <O ::0 ?? ~~ m" '-,, N V, ,.:!.':. ~ _z ... 0 6 z ~ OZfTI:;': crri;:i:,;::., --!:::E(/)z ~rogrtj F~C"l~ ;uAwz [8~~~ ~l>Ao ~~~~ NJ>-o :r,.g;i9 clcz ONC, zv ,-='" z§!:il 0-,, " ILJ}lJLLg~l 111 1 1 • l_lJ:)_LL_I L_t,1111-,> I _;, -;----E ---\ ,J=-;_::~,-\ I ,-~ i I I I --BRUSH LAYERING SEE ---·g -o ,~ ---r~,,-c:r' -----. SECTION I m 1-·\ --2,_(_b~----- 1 ;,:,'7"--6·--:--./ -t'l:, I_ ~ • ----:-'-·N ---/ RESTORE WITI-i NATIVE-., ----SHRUBS AND TREES SET BACK FROM EX. VEGETATION ON BANK • '---I ' I ,•'"--..-s..---=="j'~ +_ ;;; -.., --- RESTORE LA'MIJ ~-25 -·c.....:: ·-"--: ~ 20~"-·•=\,""'.Pf!lr·_- 16+00-..:::., 17+00 18+00 19+00 ------1---_;_· --1-----c:-:+-- --· -,,r:,-. ' , . \6- '-16 .,t,. -..._ --15 "' 2]+00 2:4-tOO , " ---~0+00 --. -:·1 21 +00 ----1-~ ·-· _·_. _:_ -+--~· "._ :X-_:: --=-'-'----1-_; -· -- ~ CEC>AR RIVER t. o_ ;; " ai V, ;; ~ ai V, -~~~i~~~ ----~ MEADOW SEED _-c_ -'¢'fe.~i-::~-J;;.itt~~j-~j~~f..S .. 0 2.;r,>~:~·'' 0 0 ° ( 8 \. g 0 .• '! '.~--¥ ... -.• _,.:•-.... ,·.-::· 0 g O ~ + ' ti -------Zb .,. ' .•, .. ~·: ., rt i:J; ~ ~ N N ..... .,... RESTORE WITH NOTE OHW ELEVATION VARIES, SEE PLANS AND SECTIONS l,EClEN) MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR DHW QH~ --OHW 6" > TREE J>--11DEF1.£X e] CATCJi BASIN >--OUTFALL 'AETLANDS ............... MEADOW SEED _, I PLAN 0 50 100 MEADOW SEED ON AREAS 'M-IERE BANK STABIUZAllON SCALE IN FEET MAINlENANCE OCCURS, TIP. NOTE 1. ALL RIPARIAN (SHRUB WlTH SEED AND SHRUB WlTH TREE) AREAS SHALL RECEIVE GRAVEL SOIL MIX 2. PLANTINGS IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE AIRPORT: 2.1. THE MITIGATION PLAN WILL BE REI/IEWED BY THE RENTON AIRPORT MANAGEMENT TO ENSURE AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION IS USED. 2.2. VEGETATION ON THE LEFT BANK WILL CONFORM TO THE 'WSDOT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AIRPORT PLANTINGS WSDOT AI/IATION STORMWATER DESIGN MANUAL M ]041.00, DEC. 2008" 2.3. THESE PLANTS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED ON THE PLANT LIST. SEE SHEET 27 AND 28. 2.4. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION o+oo ANO 29+00 AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WILL NOT INCLUDE TREES DUE TO SIGHT LINE ISSUES 2.5. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION 29+00 AND 59+00 AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WILL INCLUDE TREES. 2.6. TREES WlLL NOT BE INCLUDED 40 FEET ABOVE ANO BELOW THE SOUTH BOEING BRIDGE. mJQATION/ PL.ANTHl lfQFN? ~ ~ MEADOW SEED SHRUB AND TREE OR SHRUB ONLY MTH SEED RESTORA llON AS NOTED .f!l .::::i ~ CD i ffi ~~le;::i,.I ~ i= ao~fTl~ f5;~~~~0 .... -fTl ffl..,, >~:;;o..,,Z:;,::i ~~~~(;)~ ......,VJ or'(')--l ...-..z~OO c..nVlfTl~z c..n () (11-0 ,I le -< _,.Ia:: --=~~ N»z m.~~ '.df:;J~ ~~~~ 9:0?1:-J?1 piF-~g..,, J>,I"'Tlr::EJ>,:::O ·· [jzgi ::;::~ C'.JJ>.CfTI •""00 ~~~~~~~i ,;_2~ ~z-022 2 )> .f,.8 N ·1~-l~I !))-10 ACIJ\;l ~ g .. 8 01 @M o !:!! ::e' ~ ~~ ~ ~ )> g • Z 0 "'ui ~ =l ~ C) )> ,. ....... )> z i~ci ~~ ~ ~E ~ ~ "'+-U ():JJ "'or m § 9 ~ o ~ " ~ -I Ff! gJ ,,+z 8 St O 0 do _ z'-'-U Z ~ C) z ~;l~f' ~ z ;:IJ () •• fTI fTl N ZO 0 -< ,. 0 z::;: ~ :::0 ~ z "' N 0 ;$. © "' ~~ m >' ",. N v, ,. I -::::-z ,. " c! z I OZfTI:;:: CfTl~> :;f:i:UJZ >rogrtj :=~,:;,~ :t,AOJz fTl UJ J>, () -0---,ZfTl ;t.>;:,:::o :::O!;Qcn:::o u,r--1fTl ~~8 ::::!cz ON0 z»· ,-='"' z~~ O• a, ,; --- --::-,-----::-:-----RESTQR;-iTl-1 INVASIVE ---~'-/ ,~_ SPECIES CONTROL AND / ----wiuow STAKE PLANTINGS ..,._ --j; ---0 -~\ RESTORE WllH MEADOW SEED ~ ~ ,.:, ----g ----=--;,~---=- .Z ( ·n1--~~~ , -',\ ¥ \ \ I :::::::,,, -~ ' --i... --. i::::--'"'"---~---.,,__o ~!~:'~---~~T;•· G ... ··• .. / ;; 24+00 ---~ -' "' as V, ,1 . j" , 26+00_"·---, _______ _??+00 -----·lB--. ____ 28+00 ___ -~ ~ ~~_--+--~--.+:·-:-··-----+-- r-19--" 29+00 < ,, "' as V, :,,~CEDAR RIVER 0 ri-----+:::::J s~ NOlE OHW ELEVA TlON VARIES, SEE PLANS AND SECTIONS L,EQEN;) RESTORE 'WllH MEADOW SEED MEADOW SEED ON AREAS 'M-IERE BANK STABILIZATION MAINTENANCE OCCURS, TYP. 0 PLAN 5.0 SCALE IN FEET 1~0 RESTORE W,TH ·11 R \ MEADOW SEED ----~-1=-=~si,;:;:;,r,---J1 ---,~o /0 cl ~ RESTORE 'MTH MEADOW SEED 1. ALL RIPARIAN (SHRUB 'NITH SEED AND SHRUB WITH TREE) AREAS SHALL RECEIVE GRAVEL SOIL MIX 2. PLANTINGS IN RELA Tl ON SHIP TO THE AIRPORT: 2.1. THE MITIGATION PLAN 'Mll BE REVJEWED BY THE RENTON AIRPORT MANAGEMENT TO ENSURE AIRPORT APPROVED VE GET A TlON IS USED. "' 2.2. VEGETATION ON THE LEFT BANK WlLL CONFORM TO THE 'WSDOT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AIRPORT PLANTINGS WSDOT AVIATION STORMWATER DESIGN MANUAL M 3041.00, DEC. 2008" 2.3. THESE PLANTS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED ON THE PLANT LIST. SEE SHEET 27 AND 28. 2.4. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION 0+00 AND 29+00 AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WlLL NOT INCLUDE TREES DUE TO SIGHT UNE ISSUES. 2.5. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION 29+00 AND 59+00 AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WILL INCLUDE TREES. 2.6. TREES WILL NOT BE INCLUDED 40 FEET ABOVE AND BELOW THE SOUTH BOEING BRIDGE. MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR OHW V!ETlANOS t.fOOAllON/ l'l...ANffiQ l.EGEtO (';· 5• > TREE §I CATCH BASIN i>--TIDEFLEJC >--OUlFAU. ~ ~ ~ MEADOW SEED SHRUB AND lREE OR SHRUB ONLY \\1TH SEED RESTORATION AS NOlEO _gi .'1 iii$ i m ~ (") :t>-::0-t(") ~ :t>--o zJT1I-0 .. "'",. /;I ~ E50:::;"'~ z ~ooomo-t ~ · l'./l~~z~...,, .i,.I:;::: ..._;?; ;;o"TJZ:::o ::u ---l::r> l> ,.,.c:J>:J>G)fTIO "N- <:;:::::::1Q Z"UN:J>z .!:!-VJoCO-t i;) <.O_:::ortj z::::100 -1 oz ~(l)fTIS::::Z-< (.,,1::0::r,. [Jl()VJ~ 06~~ 3:1 z ::E ocfTl -< Zz'no O~!'J.1:--J?l µ,Sti· g ... . !-'.I ..... zUl )>ITJl::E)>:;iJ 1::5 fTl ,:::fTl !:!J:i,.cfTI .-un ro:::jR'• lll:i!Z _.::O::! ~~:,:::~~obi N_~§ (l)z-0::oz P -+'-O _f"Tll~ cJ~:i:---l\'.'J-t8 ;,;:ro[ri z 2 .. ~ 01 8rri O ~ z -:IE. 0 ~ fTl:s:;: z Z )> 0 .:Z=~ ::0 0 < 8 ~u1 s:::: s:::: :::::i )> 0 -"""""')>Z ~ ~ -I rrl () £l>~ Zm ~~--~~ CD + ""'D () :n "'or m "0)> o:n ~ I Z < o~o--1 :nm ~ -m :n ~+ z 8 !i O 0 ~a § ......... iJ z ~ 0 ~r~F~ ~ fTl C .. "'TJ 0 fl'1 z rr, -u -t --l ::on Rl 0 --::: fTl fTI z (/J N zon 0 ..... --l :J> rr, •. AO~ 0 z Z Z QZ(TI;;::: "Tl 0 2i::i C CfTI::,:,;:,.. "' ;,; i'ii ,r•~z I co ::o fT1 ">wgrtj ?;J :=~05; :::oAroz ~ ~ ~~i~ 55~(/J~ :r,. (l)C-tfTl N>-0 . . J,-OJG"l ::::tr==z 01 ~ 0N0 "-> z)>· ~ ~ .l>::!:::o "-.. Z z§~ ~ ~ 0-~ 0 ~ z I j . I ,J;· . ,, ,' ,<: -• ' . l,L g ";"'--\j ·.-<i, ' + RESTORE WITH INVASIVE SPEaEs CONTROL AND WILLOW STAKE PLANTINGS OJ g 0 + + ITT --r----! .,t- ;-· _ l ·---,-f '"JC-..._-~ . --r ----_ }\--:_---:_-_-:.,~-,------~ ~-~'-= :.J,,--'-- --:: ---.:.w,,,-:,---;,..;.,;,_a,._\lli"'_..C---·-:;;·"""'-="'."-'--=: ~-::...·.,:,c.::-J!f'!-:;-~ • . • , VI ~ RESTORE WITH RIPARIAN SHRUBS, lREES AND WILLOW STAKE PLANTINGS rr4o·r g . i+ t:-0 /. '° ' ·-.-'. 40" ZONE ON EITHER SIDE OF I ' I 35+00 36+00 37+00 --:. SOUTH BOEING BRIDGE RESTORED WITI-l SHRUB AND ·;1.~00. ,· -:,;:, '~~~~:---1_9 -------+----- ,,_ --1><---. .----~.'o ----+--7',c-~-RESTORE WITH ~ > SHRUB AND 8 TREE ;:t """--RESfORE WITH n MEADOW SEED NOlE OHW ELEVAT10N VARIES, SEE PLANS AND SECTIONS l..EOEN) MEADOW SEED ON AREAS WHERE BANK STABILIZATION MAINlNENANCE OCCURS, T'rP. -+-----t---DEVROP-P;::;;J:;-- CEDAR RIVER BENCHES TREE ;,-. . ANO SHRUB -sEED ONLY L 0 g ---t-~ w----b 0 + • "' RESTORE 'MTH MEADOW SEED PLAN 0 50 100 SCALE IN FEET RESTORE WITH ___ ,,_. ~40•} MEADOW SEED NOlE 1. ALL RIPARIAN (SHRUB WITH SEED AND SHRUB WITI-1 TREE) AREAS SHALL RECEIVE GRAVEL SOIL MIX 2. PLANTINGS IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE AIRPORT: 2.1. THE MITIGATION PLAN WILL BE REVIEWED BY THE RENTON AIRPORT MANAGEMENT TO ENSURE AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION IS USED. 2.2. VEGETATION ON THE LEFT BANK WILL CONFORM TO THE 'WSDOT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AIRPORT PLANTINGS WSDOT AVIATION STORMWATER DESIGN MANUAL M 3041.00, DEC. 2008" 2.3. THESE PLANTS HAVE BEEN 1DENT1FIED ON THE PLANT LIST. SEE SHEET 27 AND 28. 2.4. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION 0+00 AND 29+00 AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WILL NOT INCLUDE TREES DUE TO SIGHT LINE ISSUES. 2.5. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION 29+00 AND 59+00 AIRPORT I (JJ APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WILL INCLUDE TREES. ....... 2.6. :~~ ~~~l~2Ta:i6~r.CLUDED 40 FEET ABOVE AND BELOW THE ~ ---------MAJOR CONTOUR t.111GA110N/ PI..ANTliG l..EOEN) 00 § MINOR CONTOUR --mw---CHW--OHW .. .· 6" > TREE ej CATCH BASIN [>-llDEFlEX >---OUlFAU. \\8LANDS ~ ~ ~ MEADOW SEED SHRUB AND TREE OR SHRUB ONLY \\11H SEED RESTORATION AS NOlID m ,.. ,.,,,. ""I ~ ;fg~~S:!Q )> )> Eao~rri::t - ~ooorn 0 ---f .... Vl;;:~z~"'TI ""Cl .J>,.X3: ;:i:.~::o..,,Z;:>J "-1>::r> rii~~~,.,~ ""Cl ~~z ---UJorn---f <.0::ortj z:joO ·oz -;::;;-Vlrii=s;:Z Vl;:ol> u, U)"lJ -..JrriZ (") > Goo ;rj z ~ ocm -< z •o :.Z:::1~ _o tv z U> )>I..,,r::::El>:::O N fT1 3:rrl i::!:!;:i:.CJ'TI •""Cl<, ~~:~~~~! "-~~ ~zz ~~z > .J>,.~N -I ri, d::t5 s::: ~---f);: ACD(ll Z C .. N 8;:.1 a ~ ::E.. ~ f'T'I;:: Z Z;t,. 0 ;Z~ ::0 G') < g U>~ U> s::: s::: 3 )> ,,......,~ z ~ ~ ::! ril () ~)>~ Zm ~8--~~ '!!+~ O:o ~8)> m:o "':3 0< a :om ~ z m :o ; 8 ° 8 z ........ """C -r z )> C) z ~;o~f ".i z "' " .. ("T'J l'TI tv Z 0 tv ~,,. AO"' o-z Tl~ ~,- tv ;:i ~ "' "' ~~ ~ " '-,,. ~~ _z .J>,. ~ z I ozrris: CJ"TlX)> ::;:J::::Eviz l>co:::J-1 r)>Zrrl rz<.J5; ;::oAroz fTll/l>o ""IJ--!Zl"'l ~:t-Ao ::0 !!!vi:::o Vlr---frri N>o ,,. "'" g~~ Z)>o" ,,. ='"' zo!:3 o:.Z:t,, ;;; RESTORE WITH RIPARIAN SHRUBS, TREES AND 'MLLOW STAKE PLANTINGS 0 0 c~:-f~ -;) _ .j/, \ '-'O' ____ '-. -----~~ ::~: • , 40+00 42+00 -~ 0 0 + N ITT 0 0 :3 •; -------- 0 0 0 0 + + ·. ____ Ji:(~-~~=----=-=-.:::-_:_")_~ ·-·1 }; i''-", ---1.:-·--·· --\ q 4J+oo ""'---'-\, 44+oo 4S+oo --.... ----1 c,-"---+------+--~ ---J---c-~ ~ -, q ~ CEDAR RIVER--_,, RESTORE WITH RIPARIAN SHRUBS, 'TREES ANO \\1LLOW STAKE PLANTINGS 0 0 + ~ ()~-.=f::J ,n ~ ------_ /\ : l~ __ :;?9~:~! -~--:;':'\_r;_::\: --~-=-~~--:~o-=-:::-~_,., ----- 46+00 -·-2--r'·-- 47+00 ..:--+-';c_- "' S:, 48+00 0 .:.-+--- \5 o. '• --<,--- , /\ L ~ - -~~~§:S~c~;,i#'1'"~~~~¥i'"#-" ~;; 0 0 ~-0 0 ~ 0~ DEVELOP PLANT~ 0 0 0 + + + + ~ BENCH WITH n .. ~ .. .. .. .. TREE AND SHRUB RESTORE W1TH RESTORE 'MTH MEADOW SEED N01E OHW ELEVATlON VARIES, SEE PLANS AND SECTIONS l...EGEN) ------MAJOR CONTOOR MINOR CONTOUR --OHw---c+<w--OHW ,, 6" > lREE ej CATCH BASIN i>--TIDEFL£X >--OUTFALL \\£Tl.ANDS RESTORE W1TH PLAN MEADOW SEED 0 50 100 SCALE IN FEET MEADOW SEED RESTORE 'MTH MEADOW SEED MEADOW SEED ON AREAS WHERE BANK STABILIZATION OCCURS, TYP. NOlE 1. ALL RIPARIAN (SHRUB WITH SEED AND SHRUB WITH TREE) AREAS SHALL RECEIVE GRAVEL SOIL MIX 2. PLANTINGS IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE AIRPORT: 2.1. THE MITIGATION PLAN WILL BE RE\/lEWED BY THE RENTON AIRPORT MANAGEMENT TO ENSURE AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION IS USED. 2.2. VEGETATION ON THE LEn BANK WILL CONFORM TO THE "WSOOT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AIRPORT PLANTINGS WSOOT AVIATION STORMWATER DESIGN MANUAL M 3041.00, DEC. 2008" 2.3. THESE PLANTS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED ON THE PLANT LIST. SEE SHEET 27 AND 28. 2.4. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION 0+00 AND 29+00 AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WILL NOT INCLUDE TREES DUE TO SIGHT LINE ISSUES. 2.5. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION 29+00 AND 59+00 AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE 'MLL INCLUDE TREES. 2.6. TREES IMLL NOT BE INCLUDED 40 FEET ABOVE AND BELOW THE SOUTH BOEING BRIDGE. YOOATION/ PI...AN1Nl lfQfH? ~ ~ MEADOW SEED OR LA\IN SEED AS NOlED SHRUB AND lREE OR SHRUB ONLY Will-I SEED RESTORATION AS NOTED -~ _::::'J $ g z ~ .. UN~ '"I ~ ~~>~~~~> ~ -ozrr,I-Eao~m:;! z - ~00~~0 .... Ul~;:;:: rr,"'Tl ~I:;::: >z::o-riz::o -...J>> ~~ ~f5G)St ~~~ .,__,,UJQrn---l O:O::Orr, ,....._z::JO~ ·oz u,Vlrri'!::: 0,1;:u)> u,nU"!j; :--irri~ ;i:I z ::E ggrr, ~o:oO'.)-....JOl --<(Jl z ;i'g ~ 9· .... Y.l;::j~C/l ~~,,[;!~Al ~"U~ ~~:~~~~!"-~~ (l)z_ q~z>-l'-(")N _rr, I~ cj:;!I ?J--lo Aro[;l Z § .. /3 u, 8rr1 0 ~ z l ;::J f'T1,i:: Z Z :> 0 ,:Z~ ::0 G) < 8 (/1 u1 O'.l ~ 13:: -)> C) -2a-)>z e' Cl) -I -I --1-mo £ )> 0 z ~&~ )>~ ".!+-u zl> ··orO:n "0)> m:n "Ji~ o-~O) :n< Ri+z mg) z o C) O cJ O C) z ....... "U -r z )> C) z ~;~f lq ~z ~ ""' ~ .. JT1 f'T1 - N ZO u ~> os!§e~lz ..,., G) ~ ~ iii w i;l ~~ "' " '---> N~ ,-I ~z .. " ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ QZf"TlS:: cm~)> -1::i:VJZ ~ai~rtj F~0~ ::o;,:::roz ca~~~ ~>Ao ::o~(.1)::0 (!)r-1m N>o '""'" :::!CZ ON0 z»· >::::!::o z~i::;:J 0-> s; RESTORE WITH RIPARIAN SHRUBS, TREES AND WILLOW STAKE PLANTINGS 0 0 _+ 0 0 ~d'~ q, '\ ";. < 'b• ::?=:--=" --~··---i 0 .0 6 _w g --+ --_ (D 'b ; C ,.-3C ~ . I '._ -- RESTORE L~~·j· --~~-~:.f*,--~,.,c .-· .. •"' c••oe..C'- . -~~~-,,,. -·_r·--~~ ('.': -·:;~~~~=::~~----~--~~:_.:;~y NOTE RESTORE WITH MEADOW SEED OHW ELEVATION VARIES, SEE PLANS AND SECTIONS L.EGEIO -------MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR -c,,~---QH'N--OHW , ··: 6" > TREE §) CATCH BASIN [>------TIDEFlEX >----OUlf"AU. ;!; ---r=----- ITT~~ •• ·,_, ui -------g ---0--0~ + \ 0 0 N +~~ +-------ITT RESTORE 111TH '.lr----,L._ YIEllANDS PLAN 0 5.0 1QO SCALE IN FEET ----Ri::o~~ :~ SEED "EADOW SEED ___ _,/ N01E 1. ALL RIPARIAN (SHRUB WITH SEED AND SHRUB WITH TREE) AREAS SHALL RECEIVE GRAVEL SOIL MIX 2. PLANTINGS IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE AIRPORT: 2.1. THE MITIGATION PLAN WILL BE REVIEWED BY THE RENTON AIRPORT MANAGEMENT TO ENSURE AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION IS USED. 2.2. VEGETATION ON THE LEFT BANK WILL CONFORM TO THE 'WSDOT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AIRPORT PLANTINGS WSDOT AVIATION STORMWATER DESIGN MANUAL M 3041.00, DEC. 2008y 2.3. THESE PLANTS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED ON THE PLANT LIST. SEE SHEET 27 AND 28. 2.4. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION 0+00 AND 29+00 AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WILL NOT INCLUDE TREES DUE TO SIGHT LINE ISSUES. 2.5. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION 29+00 AND 59+00 AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WILL INCLUDE TREES. 2.6. TREES WILL NOT BE INCLUDED 40 FEET ABOVE AND BELOW THE SOUTH BOEING BRIDGE MJ1QA110N/ PL..ANrtlG L.EGEIO ~ ~ MEADOW SEED SHRUB AND TREE OR SHRUB ONLY WllH SEED RESTORATION AS NOlED ~ _::::'J ffi g z ffi .. """,..e';I ~ .§8~~~Q ~ )> r:= zozfTl:::;t ~o --; Zz 3:ooorno ·· ·· Vl~;::;iz~"TJ .;,.:r:;::: >~:::o;z:::o -..J>;t,. ~~~Q0~ ~~z '--"(l)OC(')--;;:o ~:::ortj z::::100 Oz (nC/lfTl3:Z (..1:::0 )> llloC/li! btJ~ :rj z ocm --'<DCO-..JOl-< ?~Q o· · · · o ~I"TJr~;t,,:::tl ·· N,2 ~ 3:[!! !:'JJ;>CfTI •-UO ~~R>· ~~~ _. ~ g o,-A,f-ooi N.~z l.!lZ-~:::oz>.;,.~ f'll ~ (j~I--lp:i--;~ AtJJ[:8 Z g .. ~ u, 8M o <£J z ~· ~ rris:;: Z Z l> 0 .z~ :::o 0 < g ~u1 ~ 3 ~ )> ,.._ ~ ~ z ~ ~ -i -i ~ ~ 0 m o 6 01 Z Zm z 0) --~o ':!+""Cl z~ ~ 8 r () :0 :/ I ~ m :o 0 0) ~ o-:0 < ~ .i,,. mm cu+Z !i 8 " 8 :0 6 z '-' ""Cl z r " ~ z I ~1~F I "'z ~ "'" .. fTI fTI N ZO ... ~ )> " 0 ,, ~zz:::o ozm;:: I " -crri><:;t,, N < al""" .. I "' "' ,, >rn::::j--; '>Zl'T'I ;~:~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~:;,:;o DJ~~~ N>o >!:!!9 "' " ::::lCZ ONC, " )> z,-· N~ )> =',, _,. I ~z z~~ ~~ O• )> ,i z '- )/ N01E OHW ELEVATION VARIES, SEE PLANS AND SECTIONS lffiR'P ---------MAJOR CONTOUR MINOR CONTOUR --ww---,.,,, __ OHW -::::,5• > TREE §I CATCH BASIN I>-TIDEFlEX >---OU'IFAU. .Is .·· ....::_:J ... 5> ,_,,.., 77"--' --~-.h. ... ,,..... ~ _,, . !'! -1".:-'> ~c~:''-c 'g_ ; · 2;: •·_:.:;.'" QT11 •• ;--._...>.,_,.,' £ --»-•· . : '• ... 71;~,-. "" -,-,: ,,~;;..;; .t .. '· r , , . f -~ , .. • i ---~ c..i, J P 62+00 63+00 64+00 59+oo ~<2+_qo.--.. __ ----61+00·- .. -I -=1=-~--t-----+--0 -·-. ~c_ -I--~--~ ~,~ ~-~-c-, -: ~---'· ,·, ~ WEll.ANDS ~ CEDAR RIVER ::~c,~~~;c'c~~'-:~~%c'~,s'=~~~ . . RESTORE 1111H TR~•i --' ;' · \... --::. -.; ' -~--~-~-·/ :--,:_...__·: ', SHRUB PLANTINGS AND .) .. ••· -:. ... · AV 0 " g + N "' 0 0 + n "' N m ;!; "' LAWN WITH POTENTIAL lRRIGAllON PLAN 50 100 SCALE IN FEET MQIE_ 1. ALL RIPARIAN (SHRUB WITH SEED AND SHRUB WITH TREE) AREAS SHALL RECEIVE GRAVEL SOIL MIX 2. PLANTINGS IN RELATION SHIP TO THE AIRPORT: 2.1. 2.2 . 2.3. 2.4. 2.5. 2.6. THE MITIGATION PLAN WILL BE RE\IIEWED BY THE RENTON AIRPORT MANAGEMENT TO ENSURE AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION IS USED. VEGETATION ON THE LEFT BANK 'MLL CONFORM TO THE "WSOOT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AIRPORT PLANTINGS WSDOT AVlATION STORMWATER DESIGN MANUAL M 3041.00, DEC. 2008" THESE PLANTS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED ON THE PLANT LIST. SEE SHEET 27 AND 28. THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN STATION 0+00 AND 29+00 AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WILL NOT INCLUDE TREES DUE TO SIGHT LINE ISSUES. APPROVED VEGETATION ZONE WILL INCLUDE TREES. "'-,J THE LEFT BANK BETWEEN sTATioN 29+00 AND 59+oo AIRPORT I 00 TREES "WILL NOT BE INCLUDED 40 FEET ABOVE AND BELOW THE ~ SOUTH BOEING BRIDGE. -.....i W]QAJ]ON/ PLANTtJQ LEQEtl) iii i ffi ~ ~ ~ MEADOW SEED SHRUB AND TREE OR SHRUB ONLY 1111H SEED RESTORATION "5 NOTED ~~~;::~; ~ i= 6 o~rn~ ~~Sis§;go ~ .. -rr, fTl"TJ >~:::o-riz::o ~~~;G")~ '--'Ulorn-l ,.-.,z~oo u, Vlri'i;;,:::Z {.J) (') (/) ,J --, > ~ ';: -,.I,: ~~~ N>z ~~"" "Oz "'~" ;-,Jrr,Z I g~~ z'Oo ~IOCil-.JOl U1 • :::!"TJ 9· . . . . ~§£:Vl J>,I'T\r;::S;)>:::0 ~ fTl 5SSR-·[!)1iic~ _:l~ il';;-~~~cil "-2~ ~z; 0:::2Z>"'-r,.~N • I< ----l~I CD-lo Ao:r[:j g § .. R U1 8M o ~ z :::s;' ~ -~~ 55 ?; > 8 Z 0 "'uJ ""Cl > ~ ~ ~ C n z > ::! =l 0 z z '" C) -< n CJ) ::; m -< ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ z --, z 0 CJ) z ~~[Cif ~z -l ~:::ti(') •• (Tl fTl '-' Z 0 "' --, > 0 ::S ~ ;;o ~ z "' " -" iii ~ "' ~~ m ,; "> NU, -,. I ~z .. " ci z ~ z rri O ~m zO 0 ?o m :JJ ~~ m :JJ 0 C) z C) ~ ozrns::: Crrl~)>. --,=::(/)z ~ro:::1--t '>"'ZfTI r 2 0~ :::o;,:::roz ~~~~ :!::>Ao ::uro(/):::0 (/)F--1m -»o ~!;!!Q ::!CZ ON0 z,-· __,,, >"'QfTI Zz~ 0-> s; 35 30 " ~ 125 ~ ~ t f'.= 20 " > ':J w ~ ~ 15' VEGETATION FREE ZONE (VFZ) TOP DRESS WITH TOPSOIL AND HYOROSEED IN VFZ (VARIES) BEDDING STONE RIPARIAN BENCH PLANTING BENCH 11101H VARIES I TREES ,----~·SHRUBS ,-----PLACE GRAVEL/ SOIL MIX ON BENCH ,--APPROXIMATE SUMMER WATER EL.+18.6' DREDGE AREA 8.0. DREDGE CUT EL VARIES (El+1S.6' SHOWN) 35 30 " "' s! 25 3 ~ ~ z 0 20 f= '; ':J w 15 "' ARMOR STONE (VOIDS FILLED WITH GRAVEL AND COBBLE) 15 ~---------------------------] - 1' OVERDREDGE ALLOWANCE 10 70 BO 90 FABRIC 100 DISTANCE. FT 110 120 130 SECTION A: SECTION AT RIPARIAN BENCH WITH TREES AND SHRUBS (tvQ_ical SCALE: 1" = 10' o 5 35 30 25 15' VEGETATION FREE ZONE 10' 3' (VFZ) TOP DRESS wrn, TOPSOIL AND HYDROSEED IN VFZ (VARIES) ~----ILJ\.'£ STAKE PLANTING - WILLOW AND REDT'MG DOGWOOD SPECIES ,-----GRAVEL/ SOIL MIX :sz OHW EL 23.4' NA \/088 SCALE IN FEET ,---APPROXIMATE SUMMER WATER EL.+18.6' 10 20 -----..;:;;:.---------------- --- 10 140 35 30 i .. 25 ,< iS ~ ~ z 20@ ,< ':J w 15 cl ~I I EXISTING CONCRETE SLABS TO BE REMOVED 15 K~\~t~~;,.~-~-Ji.i:rc,-. ._ ~~.~~~>i:~~,...-r.i~.~~i~._-,,..-._ :::, 8.0. DREDGE CUT EL. VARIES (EL+15.6' SHOWN) I :J ._,. .... ~GEOTEXTILE FABRIC L------------------------------ 1' OVERDREDGE ALLOWANCE J BEDDING STONE 10 70 80 90 ARMOR STONE (VOIDS FILLED 'WITH GRAVEL AND COBBLE) 100 DISTANCE, FT 110 SECTION B: SECTION AT BENCH WITH LIVESTAKE PLANTING (t SCALE: 1" = 10' 120 130 ical o 5 10 SCALE IN FEET 10 140 B -~ _-::i al ;j ~ ~ ,. "'",.. "I ~ ;;g~Rl::r!Q):,, )> E~o~rr1~ it o ooro 0 .. .. U)~~Z~"Tl -t"IS::: >~:;o;z:;u --J>;t,, ri,~~QQ~ N~Z -U1oro-1 m::o;:;:l ........ z~O§ -oz (/1 (/l("Tl:l:: ul;:o > Ul(")Ul~ ~8fi ;d z ~ocf'T'I -'"(DOl-....JO'l -<{JI z ?~s;;: O·... . 0 ~I"T"Jr:f>Al ·· ~z~ S:::~ ~>Cl"'l .,:i<1 ~f:~~~~i ~~g ~Zz Q:;:QZ J> .f>oO N ~I~ cj::;!~ 6-l@ CDVl Z c •• N 8;:;:1 0 ~ -:l ~ Sl~ ~ ~ > 8 -Z 0 "'vi s::: ~ ""'D z )> ~ ril () " " C: () ~ ~m )> =' zO 0 z z () 5j a, C) -< m :o () CJ) =. m 0=< -< ~ :o m 0 ~ m :o "' 0 0 ;,; z ~ C) g z C) !i~F ~ -l ---l :::0 (") ~~8 " .. )> Cl'!::,::: 0 :::0 OZrrlS::: 0 Z z :;:o crri~::!:: .,, 0 < =rj::E~z " rr, >roz;:;:l ~ ::o ;:r;i F~0~ ::;;iAmz qj:'.l~~ ~>Ao ~~ :::Oo:, Ul :::0 01 E~8 ~~9 =lrz m ,a 0N_0 Z)> '--)> "'"' N v, >oe; .. "' Zz-,a '-Z 0-)> -" " .... 0 z ro ro 's 30 25 g 20 r ~ i§ i== 15 " w ~ w 10 5 GEOGRIO AND COIR FABRIC WRAPPED COMPACTED SOIL REMOVE EXISTING GABIONS GEOGRID AND COIR FABRIC v.iRAPPED STREAMBED GRAVEL/COBBLE WATER El.+18.6 '? OHW EL 21.0' NA\/088 APPROXIMATE SUMMERl EXISTING GRADE~- DREDGE AREA "s:. _\ _______ -~ ~ - -------_ -'t" ----------- 8.0. DREDGE CUT El. I -~ VARIES (EL +12.5• SHOWN'lt ___--:;'f\·.'. l r OVERDREDGE 10 20 EXCAVATE AND BACKFILL W/NATIVE COBBLE GRAVEL ALLOWANCE JD 40 DISTANCE. FT . '"-"'"'~ ,, ,· ,-- 1.0 THICK _ --:-~ :,;'<'.'. ·~~,---. y// -:w }' '"v\ 'i:'I':-..:,,. R_ GEOTEXTILE FABRIC "~----BRUSH LAYERING 6" THICK STREAMBED GRAVEL BASE 50 60 AND LIVE STAKES - WILLOW AND REDTWIG DOGWOOD SPECIES IN GRAVEL SOIL MIX 70 SECTION C: SECTION AT RIPARIAN BENCH WITH BRUSH LAYERING AND LIVE STAKE SCALE: 1" = 10' 0 5 SCALE IN FEET 30 25 :s 's 20 3 r ~ z 0 15 ! 10 5 80 -~ ~ .'-I ~ (X) -I "' G> z :0 01 m ------- ~ ~N~ ~, ~ ::E~>~~o i l> CONIFER TREES r' 0 ZITII=i r z oZl'l-< ~8odmo~ ~ ·· SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING ~~~z~..,., lJ .;,.:r::c;: ~;::o""TJZ:;o ::o ""!>> SHORE PINE l>c>>ol"'l~ NZ PCC PINUS CONTORT A CONTORT A 5GAL CONTAINER AS SHOIIVN <,:::::::tO z Nl> 5(/)oEncj :::o w.eF;:J ui'vj~~z ~ '>l;::o ~ PM PSEUDOTSUGA MENZESII DOUGLAS F!R SGAL CONTAINER AS SHO'li/N 01 (!]"'Cl :--,if'Tlz o P IC ooO -I z ::E ocf'T1 TP THUJAPLICATA WESTERN RED CEDAR 5GAL CONTAINER AS SHOYJN ::o -< tjZ.oo ~<DOJ..JOl 01::0· ::I-., 9· . . . . !,-0 N~(.11 DECIDUOUS TREES l>:r'1f:;;:E>::0 N-08 3::!2]!1:>_pCITI "::o::::! !<,C<!lrcs SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING (/)~-A~,:22 :;p. ~~N f'l z --1--1:r: !=X)--to 1 ;.;;_ o-<0 o 01 AGm ACER GLABRUM DOUGLAS MAPLE SGAL CONTA!NER AS SHOWN ::><:roU1Zc··~..,., §;:;:1 o !.:2 ~ r r'l3: z z > 0 FL FRAXINUS LATIFOLIA OREGON ASH SGAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN .:2-i;i ;::o C) < g '"ul MF "MALLIS FUSCA PACIFIC CRABAPPLE 5GAL CONTAINER ASSHOV\IN SL SALIX LUCIDA PACIF!C WILLOW SGAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN s::: SHRUBS :x> > ""U z "U r SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING "U rrl () C: :x> 0 ~ z Zm AA "AMELANCHIER ALNIFOLIA SERVICEBERRY 1 GAL CONTAINER 6' oc =' -I 0 :x> 0 z r cs REDOSIER DOGWOOD LIVESTAKE ro z :x> •coRNUS STOLONIFERA .. 6' O.C. "' ~ () :::0 C, m :o HD 'HOLODISCUS DISCOLOR OCEANSPRAY 1 GAL CONTAINER 6'0.C. :;i 0 ~ 0< LI 'LONICERA INVOLUCRATA lWINBERRY 1 GAL CONTAINER 6'0.C ~ :o m ,, m m :o m m PN PHYSOCARPUS CAPITATUS PACIFIC NINEBARK 1 GAL CONTAINER 6'0C z 8 ~ -I 0 z ...... RS "RIBES SANGUINEUM RED FLOWERING CURRANT 1 GAL CONTAINER 6'0.C. z 0 RN ROSA NUTKANA NOOTKA ROSE 1 GAL CONTAINER 6'0.C RP ROSA PISOCARPA CLUSTERED WILD ROSE 1 GAL CONTAINER 6' o.c RSS *RUBUS SPECTABILIS SALMON BERRY i GAL CONTAINER 6' O.C ~;l~F t;1 ; ss SALIX SCOULERIANA SCOULER'S WILLOW LIVEST AKE -8' O.C. m m -,, -!-!:::C,()~ ~ rr, (Tl z 1'v ZO() o *GAULTHERIA SHALLON SALAL 1 GAL CONTAINER 3' O.C --.J -! p (Tl .. o ~ ~ :;o ~ ozrri~ "MAHONIA AQUIFOLIUM TALL OREGON-GRAPE 6' O.C TJ 0 ~ =: Crrl~p MA 1 GAL CONTAINER < i :;:1~0z ~ S3 ;JJ ~rogM 'SYMPH0R1CARP0S ALBUS SNOWBERRY 1 GAL CONTAINER 3' o.c .. r~G"J5;: ;i::iAmz -rrlUl>'"O ATHYRIUM FILIX"FEMINA LADY FERN 1 GAL CONTAINER 3' O.C. en -o._.,zrri ·" ~~ ::r:,::p;:i:::O ;;o~U);JJ NOJE "::::j Ulr---,rr, N>'"o >""' 1 * INDICATED SPECIES ARE ANTICIPATED TO BE RESTRICTED FROM A POR110N OF THE OBJECT AREA DUE TO POTENTIAL FOR WILDLIFE ao ::::!EZ m,;; ON0 ATTRAC110N IN PROXIMITY TO THE AIRPORT. SOME OF THE OTHER SPECIES MAY ALSO BE RESTRICTED AS DETERMINED BY AIRPORT -----> Z>" AUTHORITIES. RESTRICTED AREAS WILL BE IDENTIFIED PRIOR TO FINAL DESIGN. -I ~ V, :r,g~ ~ _,. I ...__,, Zz-U 2. THE Ml11GATION PLAN WILL BE REVIEWED BY THE RENTON AIRPORT MANAGEMENT TO INSURE AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION IS USED. -" o. ~ z _,. ~ n 0 ::0 z 3. VEGETA110N ON THE LEFT BANK WILL CONFORM TO THE "WSDOT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AIRPORT PLANTINGS WSDOT A\/IATION STORMWATER DESIGN MANUAL M 3041.00, DEC. 2008" 01 m ~ ~~~ >I ~ "">~~"! > r=~a~fTI~ -0 -l Z >ooorno ·· ·· SEED MIX 1 (IA/ET MEADOVV) -APPLY AT A RATE OF 1/2 LBSI 1000 SQ.FT ~~;::;:z~"T'J ~I3:: Z::o"""t'IZ::U --.J:t>:t> >c>>GJrr1 "Nz ~5i6En~ ~55M COUNT SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME ---ti~~~ {,/ 0 5; l11 UJ-U -...J::oz 15% CAREX OBNUPTA SLOUGH SEDGE (.I](') > fq 08(") ii z :eocf'T'I -< ~z'0 o 25% JUNCUS ENSIFOUUS BULRUSH -'(00)-...J(,J <..n;o-:::!-ri 9· .... v.>N~(/J l>I"T'Jr::!:)>::0 N-U~ 5% "FESTUCA RUBRA RUBRA VAR. MOLETA RED FESCUE S::[!JR'[!J:t,,CfTI "::0-1 MOLETA "'''"f !' VlZ-~~zp-l'-ON 10% SCIRPUS MICROPCARPUS SMALL FRUITED pi z -l~I ~-lo BULRUSH I~ 0 o o (.n ;,;;~(I) Z c·· N, "T'J ortj o ~ z ~ r 15% GL YCERIA GRAN DIS REED MANNAGRASS f'Tls:; Z Z:i,. 0 _z~ ::o 0 8 "'ul 15% AGROST1S EXARATA SPIKE BENTGRASS 15% HORDEUM BRANCHYANTHERUM MEADOW BARLEY s:: "'U )> SEED MIX2 (UPLAND MEADOW) APPLY AT A RATE OF 4 LBS/ 1000 SQ. FT. > z .,, r .,, )> rtl O COUNT SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME C: n ~ ,. =' Zm 10% "AGROPYRON RIPARIUM S1REAMBANK 0 )> 0 z r WHEATGRASS a, ~ z )> ! -< 0 :0 20% BROMUS CARINATUS CALIFORNIA BROME n m :o " CJ) DESCHAMP SIA -< o::.:: 10% TUFTED HAIRGRASS 0 :c CAESPITOSA ~ m :o m "' m:o "' ~ 30% ELYMUS GLAUCUS BLUE WILDRYE z 8 b z I\J 30% "FESTUCA RUBRA RUBRA NATIVE RED FESCUE z " SEED MIX 3 (LAW?,IJ APPLY AT A RATE OF 8 LBS/ 1000 SQ. FT. ~i~f q I COUNT SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME "' "' ~ "' "'n"' I 70% 3 WAY TURF TYPE PERENNIAL RYE .. rrl rrl z ' N ZOO CD --I)> rri . "0"' 15% CREEPING RED FESCUE oz z z ozrri;:: -., C) a:! ~ Crrl~.l> N j$i CO :;:j:::!:(.l)z 15% CHEvVING FESCUE <D ;;o rri .l>co2rrJ ?:J F~C)5; ;uAroz -~~~~ rn ~~ ~.l>7'\::;, .'-I ::0!!1(1);;:o t:!IQIE. ~ (l)C---1rri .'-I N>D >"'" 1. * INDICATED SPECIES ARE ANTICIPATED TO BE RESTRICTED FROM A PORTION OF THE OBJECT AREA DUE TO POTENTIAL FOR WlLDLIFE ~ ::jcz m ,; ONC, ATTRACTION IN PROXIMITY TO THE AIRPORT. SOME OF THE OTHER SPECIES MAY ALSO BE RESTRICTED AS DETERMINED BY AIRPORT 00 " > Z>" AUTHORITIES. RESTRICTED AREAS VY'ILL BE IDENTIFIED PRIOR TO FINAL DESIGN. j;j N u, >"'"' ~I ::-z z0"' c., "'"~ o.z~ 2. THE MITIGATION PLAN WlLL BE REVIEWED BY THE RENTON AIRPORT MANAGEMENT TO ENSURE AIRPORT APPROVED VEGETATION IS USED. z a; z 3. VEGETATION ON THE LEFT BANK WlLL CONFORM TO THE 'WSDOT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AIRPORT PLANTINGS WSDOT AVIATION :II STORMWATER DESIGN MANUAL M 3041.00, DEC. 2008» 0, m S7, 17, 18 T23N ASE w 0 ~ (9 w > _J 0 ro <( " "' f- 0 LU ::, 0 ro ~ ~ C) ~ 0 z w e= s ., 15 z N :'S I ... ~ ~'" CL " _J ~ ~o <( "0 " " m f-Zz ro Cl'. ::) w" ... (9 0:: LU ~~ Do Cl . 0 Ow z " I O:I ~~ Cf) LU wD ~"' row z~ ~ '.'.:j ~ Oz I :5 ~ 0 u .,: w g,u:: ~ . I :, CL ,< z ~ f-il wz ... w => "' >--~u .,: < ... -:, z Cf) w ... ,..I " Cl'. o;ji 0 0 w ....J Q. (I) .,, ... CL ::, LU w z e; LU g ~~~ II w Cl'. Cl'. sg w "'0 LU 0 ::, > ...... w ... wo 0 ~~ e 0 :, 0 oXo: 0" "' :, U::, ~ 0:: 0 Cl'. :::J UW<i ·O => z "' 0 f-~ z "'z I Cl'. z " w r1°I .-w u~ ~i== (9 f: a: ~ > W0zv.l Z> 5 >-:, z I o' CL o c, ~~ b 5 :5 ~ sw :, ~ o:8 "' " "' "'z (9 ;\ z ~a.~ CL s,? 0, z Uc ~ i: :::!ii: ~" ~~ u: u, CL " => 0 >-... u "' ... E!.!BPO;;i,E: MAINTENANCE OF SECTION 205 FLOOD CEDAR RIVER EBQPOSEQ: MAINTENANCE DREDGING, REPAIR I I QCAIIQN: HAZARD REDUCTION PROJECT EXISTING BANK STABILIZATION, 47" 29' 37.0D~N. 122' 12' 48.02"W MAINTENANCE DREDGING NEW BANK STABILIZATION AND AQJACENI EROEEBIY QWblEBS· [;!ATUM: NAVDSB OUTFALL REPAIRS 1. CITY OF RENTON 5. RENTON HOUSING BE;FERENCE NUMBER: 2. THE BOEING COMPANY AUTHORITY PLANTING DETAILS lli;_ CEDAR RIVER 3. RENTON FACILITIES 6. WASHINGTON DNR 14 AND OPERATIONS CTR 7. LEI, YK AT: RENTON CONDOMINIUMS (55 8. F & K INVESTEMENTS COUNTY: KING ~ WASHINGTON WILLIAMS AVE) 9. HEITMAN -BODEN, S SHEET 29 OF 29 M.IE.;_ 6/24/14 10. AMBROSE, K APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON / \ / ___ j '·. / ' / / / / I '· ..... ---1 I I _,,.---- APPENDIX B Cedar River Wetland and Stream Report / / -/ (./ ( \<·""' / ' \ ) ' ' I ;' / />// .,-/ / /'/ . ///// / / / . ,.. /_/ / / / -_./ \ ,/_~----· /.,, -----, --~:·----~::\ ' ,;;v \" ' I I I ) ) 111 ////; \ i I , // / '\ /// / .. 1 \ 1/1/,/ ..., I )< / -/ -/ ...... I ; ' ( / / / / / ,/ l / /0 \ ' ( I '\ ' -I ( \ ( \ ---..... I . . I ( / Habitat Assessment Revised Report: Wetlands and Stream/Riparian Habitats Cedar River Maintenance Dredge Project Renton, Washington for Coast and Harbor Engineering September 13, 2013 Habitat Assessment Revised Report: Wetlands and Stream/Riparian Habitats Cedar River Maintenance Dredge Project Renton, Washington for Coast and Harbor Engineering September 13, 2013 GEOENGINEERS CJ 1101 South Fawcett Avenue, Suite 200 Tacoma, Washington 98402 253.383.4940 Habitat Assessment Revised Report: Wetlands and Stream/Riparian Habitats Cedar River Maintenance Dredge Project Renton, Washington Prepared for: Coast and Harbor Engineering 110 Main Street, Ste. 103 Edmonds, Washington 98020 Attention: Shane Phillips Prepared by: GeoEngineers, Inc. FIie No. 0693-073-00 September 13, 2013 1101 South Fawcett Avenue, Suite 200 Tacoma, Washington 98402 253.383.4940 \0). __ tr ~wa M. "'""" Associate SMM:JOC:lc Disclaimer: Any electronic form, facsimile or hard copy of the original document {email, text. table, and/or figure), if provided, and any attachments are only a copy of the original document. The original document is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official document of record. Copyright© 2013 by GeoEngineers. Inc. All rights reserved. GEOENGINEERS U Table of Contents INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................. 1 Project Location ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Reach Description .................................................................................................................................. 1 DATA REVIEW ................................................................................................................................................ 2 FIELD INVESTIGATION ................................................................................................................................... 3 Wetland Delineation .............................................................................................................................. 3 Stream and Riparian Habitat .............................................................................................................. 10 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................................ 12 LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................................................................... 13 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................................. 14 FIGURES Figure 1. Vicinity Map Figures 2 through 6. Wetland and River Detail Sheets APPENDICES Appendix A. National Wetland Inventory Map Appendix B. Soil Survey Map Appendix C. Sample Plot Data Forms Appendix D. Wetland Rating Forms GEOENGINEER~ September 13, 2013 : Page i File No. 0693-073-00 CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGE PROJECT Renton, Washington INTRODUCTION GeoEngineers, Inc. (GeoEngineers) was contracted by Coast and Harbor Engineering to perform a Wetland Assessment and Stream/Riparian Habitat Assessment at the Cedar River Maintenance Dredge Project site, located on the lower Cedar River in Renton, Washington. The City of Renton is proposing to dredge accumulated sediment within the lower 1.23 miles of the Cedar River. This maintenance project is needed to maintain adequate flood conveyance in the Cedar River to protect adjacent properties. This section of the river was last dredged in 1998 by the Corps of Engineers, but recent aggradation of the bed has caused a need to re-dredge the lower reach. Stream bank improvements may also be proposed as part of the project to manage the effects of erosion on adjacent structures and facilities. This revised report describes the wetland, stream and riparian conditions present within the project reach and has been prepared in accordance with City of Renton Municipal Code (RMC) 4-3-050 (Critical Areas Regulations), 4-3-090 (Shoreline Management Program) and 4-8-120 (Permit Submittal Requirements). This baseline report describes existing conditions and regulations applicable to wetlands and stream/riparian habitats, and is intended to be used as a basis for mitigation sequencing during project design and environmental permitting. Project Location The project reach is located on the Cedar River at the south end of Lake Washington in Renton, Washington within Township 23 North, Range 5 West, Sections 7 and 18. The Williams Avenue Bridge is the upstream (southern) limit of the reach and the mouth of the Cedar River at Lake Washington is the downstream (northern) reach boundary. This investigation was limited to the reach where dredging is proposed and did not extend further upstream in Cedar River or downstream in Lake Washington into adjacent habitats that could be indirectly affected by dredging. A Vicinity Map is included as Figure 1. Reach Description There are four bridges within the project reach, including (from upstream to downstream): Williams Avenue, Logan Avenue, South Boeing Bridge and North Boeing Bridge. Renton Municipal Airport is located west of the lower river (below Logan Avenue), Boeing facilities and a public park are located east of the lower river, and other commercial, industrial and residential developments are present above Logan Avenue. Within the project reach between river mile O and 1.23, the Cedar River is a constructed channel that historically has required continuous maintenance and dredging of the bed elevation to ensure flood protection. The river is channelized through the project reach and the banks are armored in numerous areas with riprap, concrete, and/or wood retaining walls. Vegetation along this stretch of the Cedar River is generally limited to invasive species including Japanese knotweed (Polygonum cuspidatum), reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) and Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius) in the understory. Several native tree species are also located within the riparian zone including red alder (A/nus rubra), Pacific willow (Salix /ucida ssp. /asiandra), Sitka willow (Salix sitchensis) and black cottonwood (Populus ba/samifera ssp. trichocarpa). The native vegetation communities are dominant along the right bank of the river within the park. Page 1 September 13, 2013 GeoEngineers, Inc. File No. 0693-073-00 CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGE PROJECT Renton, Washington DATA REVIEW Environmental maps of the project area were collected and reviewed as part of a paper inventory. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) online mapper (USFWS, 2013) shows a freshwater riverine wetland mapped within the banks of the Cedar River itself. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey shows urban land, 0 to 5 percent slopes, in and adjacent to the project reach (USDA-NRCS, 2013). An NWI map from USFWS is included as Appendix A and soil survey map from USDA-NRCS as Appendix B. The project reach is within the jurisdiction of the City's Shoreline Management Program (SMP; RMC 4-3-090(B)(2)(a)). Critical areas within the shoreline jurisdiction are generally regulated under the SMP rather than the Critical Areas Regulations, as referenced in the following sections. The shoreline environment classification throughout the project reach is "high intensity" (City of Renton, 2011). The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) completed vegetation surveys along both shorelines of the project reach in 2012 and 2013 (USAGE, 2012, 2013). The purpose of the 2012 survey was to evaluate the effects of planted vegetation on structural stability of the flood wall and to determine if a variance to the 15-foot vegetation free zone was appropriate at this location. This report documents invasive species (Himalayan blackberry and Japanese knotweed) and native trees/shrubs (willows, red alder and cottonwood) on the riverward side of the I-wall on the left bank of the Cedar River. A total of 220 trees, the vast majority of which are red alder, were identified within the vegetation free zone and were recommended for removal. Removal of these trees would leave 40 trees, all red alders, to provide riparian vegetation functions. The purpose of the 2013 study was to evaluate vegetation on the right bank in the vicinity of the levee, and to determine suitability of a vegetation variance in this area. Most of the trees in this area are planted landscape species including shore pine (Pinus contorta) and red maple (Acer rubrum). The report documented 5 trees recommended for removal, 188 trees that should be retained, and 153 trees warranting further evaluation. Most of the trees recommended to be retained are very near the river and provide riparian vegetation cover. Although wetland evaluation was not a goal of either assessment, both reports state there are no wetlands within the project reach. Additional information was obtained from the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Forest Practices Application Review System (FPARS) and WDFW SalmonScape mapping application (DNR, 2007; WDFW, 2013). Cedar River is a Shoreline of the State (DNR, 2007: Washington Administrative Code [WAC] 173-18-210). According to WDFW (2013), Cedar River supports fall Chinook salmon (Onchorynchus tshawytscha), coho salmon (0. kisutch), sockeye salmon (0. nerka), bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus), resident cutthroat trout (0. clarkii) and winter steelhead trout (0. mykiss) throughout the project reach. GEOENGINEER~ September 13, 2013 Page 2 flle No. 0693-073·00 CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGE PROJECT Renton, Washington FIELD INVESTIGATION Two GeoEngineers wetland scientists conducted a field investigation on June 3-5, 2013, to characterize and delineate wetland, stream and riparian habitat features throughout the project reach. A photographic record was collected during the field visit to document existing site conditions. Wetland Delineation The City's Critical Areas Regulations do not apply to wetlands within the jurisdiction of the City's SMP (RMC 4-3-090(D)(2)(d)). Wetland delineation was therefore conducted in accordance with guidelines presented in RMC 4-3-090(D)(2)(d), which references the use of Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Ecology, 1997). In addition, the USAGE Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (USAGE, 2010) were used. Potential wetland areas were evaluated based upon three parameters: (1) hydrophytic vegetation (USAGE, 2012), (2) hydric soils (USDA-NRCS, 2010), and (3) wetland hydrology (Ecology, 1997). The presence of all three parameters may result in a jurisdictional wetland. We established three formal data sample plots to document existing habitat and identify wetland boundaries. Sample plot data forms are included in Appendix C. GeoEngineers identified and delineated seven wetlands within the project area (Figures 2-6), which directly abut the Cedar River. Wetlands A, B, C, F and Gare located on the east (right) bank of the river, while Wetlands D and E are located on a gravel bar along the west (left) bank. The wetlands are characterized as a palustrine seasonally flooded wetlands (Cowardin et al., 1979). Wetlands D and E contain emergent vegetation, Wetlands A and C are scrub/shrub dominated and Wetlands B, F and G are forested. The delineated wetlands were rated using the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington (Hruby, 2008) as specified in the RMC. This rating system was used to evaluate and score water quality, hydrologic and habitat functions of the wetlands and assign the wetlands one of four wetland categories. Wetlands A, B, C, F and G are rated as Category Ill wetlands requiring 75-foot buffers, while Wetlands D and E are rated as Category IV wetlands requiring 50-foot buffers. These classifications and buffer widths are based on their wetland ratings, low scores for wildlife habitat function, and location within the jurisdiction of the SMP (RMC Table 4-3-090(D)(2)(d)(iv)(c)). The wetland rating forms are included in Appendix D. The following Tables (Tables 1 -7) below summarize the classifications, functions and features of the on-site wetlands observed during the field investigation. Page 3 September 13, 2013 GeoEngineers, Inc. File No. 0693-073 00 CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGE PROJECT Renton, Washington TABLE 1. WETLAND A Wetland A -Information Location WRIA Local Jurisdiction Rating Buffer Width Size Cowardin Class HGM Class Description Summary Vegetation Soils Hydrology Notes East bank, approximately 1,300 feet upstream from Lake Washington 8 -Cedar/Sammamish City of Renton Ill (41 points)' 75 feet2 3,404 square feet Palustrine Scrub/Shrub Seasonally Flooded Riverine Herbaceous: Reed Canary Grass (Phalaris arundinacea) fill.a!!!: N/ A Tree: Pacific Willow (Sa/ix lucida), Red Alder (A/nus rubra) N/A -soils were not investigated at this location Indicators: Proximity to riparian channel, saturation, high water table ~: Surface runoff, direct precipitation, overbank flooding Planted areas from previous mitigation still evident. Reed Canary Grass dominating large portions of the wetland area. Rating Functions Summary (41 points total) Water Quality Hydrologic Habitat Buffer Condition Notes: 12 points: due to high vegetation cover and proximity to sources of pollution. 16 points: due to high vegetation cover with a low width compared to the river and proximity to structures that could be damaged by flooding. 13 points: due to multiple vegetation classes and hydroperiods, habitat interspersion, and unpaved buffers. Very little wetland buffer exists. Wetland abuts the Cedar River to the west and the paved footpath and mowed-grass park associated with the Cedar River Trail exists to the east. 1 Wetland rating in accordance with Washington State Wetlands Rating System for Western Washington {Hruby, revised 2008). 2 RMC 4-3-090 based on rating designation as a Category Ill wetland within 200 feet of the designated Shoreline (Cedar River). Tl1e filial buffer widtl1 is subject to approvnl by the jurisdictional autl10rity. GEOENGINEER~ September 13, 2013 Page 4 File No. 0693·073-00 CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGE PROJECT Renton, Washington TABLE 2. WETLAND B Wetland B -Information Location WRIA Local Jurisdiction Rating Buffer Width Size Cowardin Class HGM Class Description Summary Vegetation Soils Hydrology Notes East bank, approximately 2300 feet upstream from Lake Washington 8 · Cedar/Sammamish City of Renton Ill (39 points)' 75 feet' 1,834 square feet Palustrine Forested Seasonally Flooded Depressional Herbaceous: N/ A Shrub: Himalayan Blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), Nootka Rose (Rosa nootkana), Black Twin berry (Lonicera involucrate) Tree: Pacific Willow (Salix /ucida), Red Alder (A/nus rubra) Meets the criteria for hydric soil indicator S5 -Sandy Redox. Indicators: Proximity to riparian channel, saturation. ~: Surface runoff, direct precipitation, overbank flooding. Wetland sits above OHW in depressional area adjacent to river, within floodplain Rating Functions Summary (39 points total) Water Quality Hydrologic Habitat Buffer Condition Notes: 18 points: due to high vegetation cover, seasonal ponding, and proximity to pollution sources. 10 points: due to a constricted, intermittently flowing outlet and the opportunity to reduce flooding. 11 points: due to single vegetation class, low habitat interspersion, and unpaved buffers. Very little wetland buffer exists. Wetland abuts the Cedar River to the west and the paved footpath and mowed-grass park associated with the Cedar River Trail exists to the east. 1 Wetland rating in accordance with Washington State Wetlands Rating System for Western Washington (Hruby, revised 2008). ? RMC 4 3 090 bc::scd en 12.ting dcs1g1mtio11 els u Cotcgo1y Ill wctlzind within 200 feet of the dcsignatccl Shoreline (Cedar River). The final buffer width is subject to approval by the jurisdictional authority. Page 5 September 13, 2013 GeoEngineers, Inc. File No. 0693-073·00 CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGE PROJECT Renton, Washington TABLE 3. WETLAND C Wetland C -Information Location WRIA Local Jurisdiction Rating Buffer Width Size Cowardin Class HGM Class Description Summary Vegetation Soils Hydrology Notes East bank, approximately 80 feet downstream of South Boeing bridge. 8 -Cedar/Sammamish City of Renton Ill (39 points)' 75 feet' 1,719 square feet Palustrine Scrub/Shrub Seasonally Flooded Riverine Herbaceous: Reed Canary Grass (Phalaris arundinacea) Shrub: Black Twinberry (Lonicera involucrate), Himalayan Blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), Japanese Knotweed (Polygonum cuspidatum), Nootka Rose (Rosa nootkana) Tree: N/A N/ A -soils were not investigated at this location Indicators: Proximity to riparian channel, saturation, high water table Source: Surface runoff, direct precipitation, overbank flooding Wetland consists of a narrow band of vegetation below OHW. Rating Functions Summary (39 points total) Water Quality Hydrologic Habitat Buffer Condition Notes: 12 points: due to high vegetation cover and proximity to sources of pollution. 16 points: due to high vegetation cover with a low width compared to the river and proximity to structures that could be damaged by flooding. 11 points: due to single vegetation class, low habitat interspersion, and unpaved buffers. Very little wetland buffer exists. Wetland abuts the Cedar River to the west and the paved footpath and mowed-grass park associated with the Cedar River Trail exists to the east. 1 Wetland rating in accordance with Washington State Wetlands Rating System for Western Washington (Hruby, revised 2008). :' RMC 4-3-090 based on rati11g designotion as a Category Ill wella1·1J within 200 feel of the designated Shoreline (Cedar River). The final buffer width is subject to approval by the jurisdictional authority. GEOENGINEER~ September 13, 2013 Page 6 File No. 0693-073-00 CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGE PROJECT Renton, Washington TABLE 4. WETLAND D Wetland D -Information Location WRIA Local Jurisdiction Rating Buffer Width Size Cowardin Class HGM Class Description Summary Vegetation Soils Hydrology Notes West bank, just upstream from South Boeing Bridge. 8 -Cedar/Sammamish City of Renton IV (28 points)1 50 feet' 1,915 square feet Palustrine Emergent Seasonally Flooded Riverine Herbaceous: Reed Canary Grass (Pha/aris arundinacea) Shrub: N/A Tree: N/A N/ A -soils were not investigated at this location Indicators: Proximity to riparian channel, saturation, high water table Source: direct precipitation, overbank flooding Wetland exists on in-channel vegetated bar Rating Functions Summary (28 points total) Water Quality Hydrologic Habitat 6 points: due to moderate vegetation cover and proximity to sources of pollution. 10 points: due to moderate vegetation cover with a low width compared to the river and proximity to structures and resources that could be damaged by flooding. 12 points: due to single vegetation class, low habitat interspersion, large woody debris, and unpaved buffers. Rating Functions Summary (28 points total) Buffer Condition Notes: Very little wetland buffer exists. Airport and E Perimeter road exist just off bank to west. 1 Wetland rating in accordance with Washington State Wetlands Rating System for Western Washington (Hruby, revised 2008). 2 RMC 4-3-090 based on rating designation as a Category IV wetland within 200 feet of the designated Shoreline (Cedar River). The final buffer width is subject to approval by the jurisdictional authority. Page 7 September 13, 2013 GeoEngineers, Inc. File No. 069J.07J.OO CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGE PROJECT Renton, Washington TABLE 5. WETLAND E Wetland E -Information Location WRIA Local Jurisdiction Rating Buffer Width Size Coward in Class HGM Class Description Summary Vegetation Soils Hydrology Notes West bank, just upstream from South Boeing Bridge 8 -Cedar/Sammamish City of Renton IV (28 points)' 50feet2 795 square feet Palustrine Emergent Seasonally Flooded Riverine Herbaceous: Reed Canary Grass (Phalaris arundinacea) Shrub: N/A Tree: N/A N/ A -soils were not investigated at this location Indicators: Proximity to riparian channel, saturation, high water table Source: direct precipitation, overbank flooding Wetland located on mid-channel vegetated bar Rating Functions Summary (28 points total) Water Quality Hydrologic Habitat Buffer Condition Notes: 6 points: due to moderate vegetation cover and proximity to sources of pollution. 10 points: due to moderate vegetation cover with a low width compared to the river and proximity to structures that could be damaged by flooding. 12 points: due to single vegetation class. low habitat interspersion, large woody debris, and unpaved buffers. Very little wetland buffer exists. Airport and E Perimeter road exist just off bank to west. 1 Wetland rating in accordance with Washington State Wetlands Rating System for Western Washington (Hruby, revised 2008). 2 RMC 4-3-090 based on rating designation as a Category IV wetland within 200 feet of the designated Shoreline (Cedar River). The final buffer width is subject to approval by the jurisdictional authority. GEOENGINEER~ September 13, 2013 Page 8 File No. 0693-073-00 CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGE PROJECT Renton, Washington TABLE 6. WETLAND F Wetland F -Information Location WRIA Local Jurisdiction Rating Buffer Width Size Cowardin Class HGM Class Description Summary Vegetation Soils Hydrology Notes East bank, roughly parallel to Renton Stadium track 8 -Cedar/Sammamish City of Renton Ill (39 points)' 75 feet' 1,618 square feet Palustrine Forested Seasonally Flooded Riverine Herbaceous: Reed Canary Grass (Pha/aris arundinacea), Soft Rush (Juncus effusus) Shrub: Sitka Willow (Salix sitchensis), Japanese Knotweed (Po/ygonum cuspidatum), Himalayan Blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) Tree: Pacific Willow (Salix lucida), N/A -soils were not investigated at this location Indicators: Proximity to riparian channel, saturation, high water table Source: Surface runoff, direct precipitation, overbank flooding Wetland consists of a narrow band of vegetation below OHW. Rating Functions Summary (39 points total) Water Quality Hydro logic Habitat Bulfer Condition Notes: 12 points: due to high vegetation cover and proximity to sources of pollution. 16 points: due to high vegetation cover with a low width compared to the river and proximity to structures that could be damaged by flooding. 11 points: due to single vegetation class, low habitat interspersion, and unpaved buffers. Very little wetland buffer exists. Wetland abuts the Cedar River to the west and the paved footpath and mowed-grass park associated with the Cedar River Trail exists to the east. 1 Wetland rating !n accordance with Washington State Wetlands Rating System for Western Washington {Hruby, revised 2008). "'RMC 4-3 090 based on rating designation 8S a Cato[;ory Ill wet!a11~J \•dhir1 200 fed of Hie dcsignalcd Shoreline {Cedar River). The final buffer width is subject to approval by the jurisdictional authority. Page 9 September 13, 2013 GeoEngineers, Inc. File No. 0693-073-00 CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGE PROJECT Renton, Washington TABLE 7. WETLAND G Wetland G-Information Location WRIA Local Jurisdiction Rating Buffer Width Size Cowardin Class HGM Class Description Summary Vegetation Soils Hydrology Notes East bank, roughly parallel to Renton Stadium track 8 -Cedar/Sammamish City of Renton Ill (41 points)' 75 feet2 4 76 square feet Palustrine Forested Seasonally Flooded Riverine Herbaceous: Reed Canary Grass (Phalaris arundinacea) ~: Himalayan Blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), Nootka Rose (Rosa nootkana), Black Twin berry (Lonicera lnvolucrate) I!u.: Pacific Willow (Salix lucida), Red Alder (A/nus rubra) Meets the criteria for hydric soil indicator S5 -Sandy Redox. Indicators: Proximity to riparian channel, saturation, high water table Source: Surface runoff, direct precipitation, overbank flooding. Wetland consists of a narrow band of vegetation below OHW. Rating Functions Summary (39 points total) Water Quality Hydro logic Habitat Buffer Condition Notes: 12 points: due to high vegetation cover and proximity to sources of pollution. 16 points: due to high vegetation cover with a low width compared to the river and proximity to structures that could be damaged by flooding. 11 points: due to single vegetation class, low habitat interspersion, and unpaved buffers. Very little wetland buffer exists. Wetland abuts the Cedar River to the west and the paved footpath and mowed-grass park associated with the Cedar River Trail exists to the east. 1 Wetland rating in accordance with Washington State Wetlands Rating System for Western Washington (Hruby, revised 2008). 2 RMC 4-3-090 based on rating designation as a Category Ill wetland within 200 feet of the designated Shoreline (Cedar Rive1 ). Tl1e fi11al buffer width is subji::ct to approval by U1e jurisdictional authority. Stream and Riparian Habitat The Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) is used to define the jurisdictional boundary of streams, Rivers and Shoreline Areas (RMC 4-3-090(8)(3), WAC 222-16-031), state Shoreline Management Act regulations (Revised Code of Washington [RCW] 90.58.030(2)(c)), and federal Clean Water Act (CWA) regulations (USAGE, 2005a). Methods used to delineate the OHWM in the field were consistent with local, state and federal protocols, including Regulatory Guidance Letter No. 05-05 (USAGE, 2005b) and the Washington State manual "Determining the Ordinary High Water Mark on Streams in Washington State" (Olson and Stockdale, 2010). GeoENGINEER~ September 13, 2013 Page 10 File Na. 0693-073-00 CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGE PROJECT Renton, Washington GeoEngineers placed flagging to mark the OHWM of the Cedar River throughout the project reach. This flagging was subsequently surveyed by other members of the project team for incorporation onto a project base map, which was used as the basis for Figures 2-6. According to RMC 4-3-050(L)(1)(a)(i), the Cedar River is considered a Class 1 stream because it is classified as a Shoreline of the State. Class 1 streams are not subject to Renton's Critical Areas Regulations, but are instead regulated under the SMP Regulations (RMC 4-3-050(B)(1)U)(iii); RMC 4-3-090(0)(2)(c)(iii)). The shoreline jurisdiction extends 200 feet from the OHWM, within which proposed uses and activities are subject to the SMP (RMC 4-3-090(B)(3)(a)). Within this jurisdictional area, the standard vegetation conservation buffer width is 100 feet from the OHWM (RMC 4-3-090(F)(1)(a)), within which vegetation "shall be managed to provide the maximum ecological functions feasible" (RMC 4-3-090(F)(1)(i)). The existing riparian buffer on the west (left) bank of the river currently consists of a thin band of tree, shrub and herbaceous vegetation between the river and the Renton Municipal Airport. Vegetation on the left bank is generally dominated by invasive species. The east (right) bank of the riparian buffer includes a similar band of vegetation, but with a higher proportion of native shrubs and additional maintained lawn and trees, which are managed as a riverside park. Beyond the park are Boeing's facilities and other commercial/industrial buildings. Vegetation along much of the shoreline is dominated by opportunistic fast-growing species including red alder, black cottonwood, Himalayan blackberry, willows, reed canarygrass, and Japanese knotweed. Native willows and other shrubs have been planted extensively along the east bank. Beyond the narrow riparian vegetation corridors, the landscape has been impacted by development of the airport and commercial facilities. Table 8, below, summarizes the results of our stream and riparian habitat assessment. Page 11 September 13, 2013 GeoEngineers, Inc. File No. 0693 073 00 CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGE PROJECT Renton, Washington TABLE 8. CEDAR RIVER General Information Location WRIA Local Jurisdiction Stream Type Regulatory Buffer Average Channel Width Flow Duration Habitat Information Documented Fish Use Connectivity Channel Description Riparian/Buffer Condition CONCLUSIONS East of Renton Municipal Airport, from the mouth at Lake Washington, upstream to the Williams Avenue South Bridge. 8-Cedar/Sammamish City of Renton Class 1-Shoreline 200 feet (shoreline jurisdiction) 100 feet (vegetation management buffer) 130 feet Perennial Fall Chinook salmon, Coho salmon, Sockeye salmon, bull trout, resident cutthroat trout and winter steel head trout Connected to Lake Washington and Puget Sound Broad riverbed in confined, created channel, limited channel complexity, primarily gravel substrate The riparian buffer has been displaced to a large extent by the Renton Municipal Airport, Boeing facilities, and other industrial, commercial and residential development. Existing vegetation is generally limited to native and invasive opportunistic species as well as planted shrubs. The Cedar River Maintenance Dredge Project is located within a created, channelized reach of the river with limited riparian habitat. There are seven wetlands identified within the project reach, located within and adjacent to the Cedar River OHWM. The Cedar River is managed as a Shoreline of the State in accordance with the City's SMP. Dredging for the purposes of flood control, when part of a publicly adopted flood control plan, is authorized under RMC 4-3-090(F)(3) of the SMP. Approval of the dredge project requires the applicant to demonstrate no net loss of ecological function (including adverse effects on aquatic species or fish migration) and no adverse impact on recreational areas or public recreation enjoyment. Adjacent bank protection is not allowed unless absolutely necessary. Bank disturbance to carry out the dredge must be minimized and restored. Bank protection, if demonstrated to be necessary, must include soft shore protection and bioengineering techniques as a first priority with rigid structures allowed only as absolutely necessary (RMC 4-3-090(F)(4)). Shoreline stabilization must not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions or adversely affect natural stream processes. In general, wetland, river and riparian habitats are currently degraded and beneficial functions are compromised. While this is the present condition, it is likely these degraded conditions have persisted since the original construction of this portion of the Cedar River channel and subsequent ongoing dredging over the past century. GEOENGINEER~ September 13, 2013 Page 12 me No. 0693-073·00 CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGE PROJECT Renton, Washington Table 3, below, summarizes the aquatic features present within the project reach. Project elements proposed landward of these regulated aquatic features (e.g., bank work and/or construction access points above OHWM and outside of wetland boundaries) but within regulatory critical area buffers will be required to comply with mitigation sequencing in accordance with the City's Critical Areas Code (RMC 4-3-050). Project elements proposed within critical area boundaries (e.g., dredging that will take place below OHWM and/or within wetlands) may require mitigation to offset project impacts and to demonstrate no net loss of ecological function. TABLE 3. CRITICAL AREAS SUMMARY Feature category/Type Buffer Requirements Wetland A Category Ill 75 ft. Wetland B Category Ill 75 ft. Wetland C Category Ill 75 ft. Wetland D Category IV 50 ft. Wetland E Category IV 50 ft. Wetland F Category 111 75 ft. Wetland G Category 111 75 ft. Cedar River Class 1-Shoreline 200 ft. (shoreline jurisdiction) 100 ft. (vegetation management buffer) Note: All buffer requirements referenced herein are specified in the SMP. LIMITATIONS GeoEngineers has prepared this Habitat Assessment Report in general accordance with the scope and limitations of our proposal. Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, our services have been executed in accordance with the generally accepted practices for wetland and stream delineation and assessment in this area at the time this report was prepared. No warranty or other conditions, express or implied, should be understood. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by Coast and Harbor Engineering, the City of Renton, authorized agents and regulatory agencies following the described methods and information available at the time of the work. No other party may rely on the product of our services unless we agree in advance to such reliance in writing. The information contained herein should not be applied for any purpose or project except the one originally contemplated. The applicant is advised to contact all appropriate regulatory agencies (local, state and federal) prior to design or construction of any development to obtain necessary permits and approvals. Page 13 September 13, 2013 GeoEngineers, Inc. File No. 0693-073-00 CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGE PROJECT Renton, Washington REFERENCES City of Renton. 2011. Shoreline Master Program Update. Available at http://rentonwa.gov/business/default.aspx?id=15508. Coward in, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. La Roe. 1979. Classification of Wetland and Deep Water Habitats of the United States. Performed for Office of Biological Services, Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. Hruby, T. 2008. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington -Revised. Washington State Department of Ecology, Publication #04-06-025, Olympia, Washington. Olson, P. and E. Stockdale. 2010. Determining the Ordinary High Water Mark on Streams in Washington State. Second Review Draft. Washington State Department of Ecology, Shorelands & Environmental Assistance Program, Lacey, Washington. Ecology Publication # 08-06-001. Renton, City of. Renton Municipal Code, Title 4-3-090 -Shoreline Master Program Regulations. Available at: http://www.codepublishing.com/wa/renton/ United States Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE). 2005a. Regulatory Guidance Letter 05-02: Expiration of Geographic Jurisdictional Determinations of Waters of the United States. Available at: http://www.usace.army.mil/Portals/2/docs/civilworks/RGLS/rg105-02.pdf United States Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE). 2005b. Regulatory Guidance Letter, No. 05-05: Ordinary High Water Mark Identification. Available at: http://www.usace.army.mil/Portals/2/docs/civilworks/RGLS/rg105-05.pdf United States Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE). 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region, ed. J.S. Wakeley, R. W. Lichvar, and C.V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-10-3. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE). 2012. Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Final Draft Ratings, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory. Available at: http://rsgisias.crrel.usace.army.mil/NWPL CRREL//docs/lists//Region/WMVC Region Draft %20Final.pdf United States Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE). 2012. Lower Cedar River Flood Control Project: I-Wall Vegetation Pre-Variance Report. USAGE, Seattle District. August 2012. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE). 2013. Lower Cedar River Flood Control Project: Right Bank Vegetation Pre-Variance Report. USAGE, Seattle District. February 2013. GEOENGINEER~ September 13, 2013 Page 14 FIie No. 0693-073-00 CEDAR RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGE PROJECT Renton, Washington United States Department of Agriculture -National Resource Conservation Service. 2013. Web Soil Survey. Available at: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/. United States Department of Agriculture -Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2010. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States. Version 7.0. L.M. Vasilas, G.W. Hurt, and C.V. Noble (eds.). USDA, NRCS, in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hyd ric Soi Is. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2013. Wetlands Mapper. Available at: http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/ Data/mapper.html. Washington Department of Ecology. 1997. Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. Publication #96-94. Olympia, Washington. Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2013. SalmonScape Application. Version 4.0. Available at: http://wdfw.wa.gov/mapping/salmonscape/. Washington State Department of Natural Resources. 2007. Forest Practices Application Review System (FPARS) Mapping Application. Available at: http://fortress.wa.gov/d n r /aa 1/fpa rs/viewer. htm. Page 15 September 13, 2013 GeoEngineers, Inc. File No. 0693-073-00 'tJ g i2 ~I ii "' ;I .... g ~ 0 >< ~ "' ~ g "' ~ ~ a: "G ~ .i::' 1ii Legend D Project Bounda ry LJ Deta il Sheets Data Sou rce: Imagery obtained from M icrosoft Bing Maps 2013. Projection: WGS 1984 Web Mercator A uxiliary S phere Notes : 1. T he locations of all features shown a re approximate. 2 . T his d rawing is for info rmation purposes. It is intended to assist in showing featu res discussed in an attached document. Geo Engi neers. Inc . cannot g uarantee t he accu racy and content of electronic files . The master fil e is stored by GeoEngineer s, Inc. a nd w ill serve as t he official record of th is communication . 1,000 ~~ '>, 8,- 'i.,,,.."...----.....,ir "' 16 7 0 ----Feet Vicinity Map 1,0 00 Cedar River Maintenance Dredge Project Renton , Washington GEoENGINEERS C) Figure 1 ---o...__ ______________________________________________________ _, 11 l--..:--------L __ !L_ __ ,L __ _JL..__L'.i!c.ffllllL _ _j__i_6d_~IT.l:~~...L-~~!l!~l..!!!.--~=======l E "' "' ('.) Sample Plots -Ordinary Hig h Water Mark (O HWM) U: § i'i '" I Wetlands Upland Exten t o f Shoreline Jurisdiction (200 ft .) i' Wetland Buffers (Z2J Vegetation Conservation Buffer (100 ft.) ,__ 0 § 0 )( ::;: Is (f) g ~ Data Source: Aerial Imagery obtained from Microsoft Bing Maps 2013. Projection: NAO 1983 HARN StatePlane Washingto n North FIPS 4601 Feet g Notes : ~"' 1. The locations of all features shown a re approx imate. .. 2. This d rawing is for information purposes. It is intended to ~ assist in showing features d iscussed in a n attached ·o document. Geo Eng ineers, Inc. cannot guarantee the ~ accuracy and content of elect ron ic files . The master file :1¥ is stored by GeoEngineers , Inc. and will serve as the official record o f this communication . .c 1ij 200 0 -----Feet Wetland and River Detail Sheet Cedar River Maintenance Dredge Project Renton , Washington GEOENGINEERS C) Figure 2 c....__ ________________________________________ ~ "'il f---------'-------".=...,'---'!...J.:.~-<--.l::.-""--"'-...a~--1.___.,-.,a,-=,U,L..LLJ...---I-E. ......... _L.--'-....L..:__i._;_:.;;::..:._; __ ~ E '-9 N Q Sample Plots --Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM ) ;1 Wetlands Upland Exte nt of Shoreline Jurisdi ction (200 ft.) Ei "' ;, Wetland Buffers (22] Vege tati o n Conservatio n Buffer (100 ft.) g I )( ~ Cl) Data Source: Aerial Imagery obtained from M icrosoft Bing Maps 2 0 13. ~ , , Projection: NAO 1983 HARN StatePlane Washington North FI PS 4601 Feet g Notes: ~--1. T he locations of all features shown a re approxim ate. 2 . T his drawing is for information purposes. It is intended to ts assist in showing features discussed in an attached -~ document. Geo Engi nee rs, Inc. cannot g uarantee the % accuracy and c.onten t of electronic files . The master file £1 is stored by GeoEngineers, I nc. and will serve as t he official record of this communication . 200 0 -----Feet Wetland and River Detail Sheet Cedar River Maintenance Dredge Project Renton, Washington GEOENGINEERS Q Figure 3 .i::' iii a. ~-------------------------------------~ :: i::i :Ji -~ 0: 0. " ::;; c ~ -$-Sample Plots -Ord inary High Water Mark (O HWM) @ Wetlands Upland Extent of Shoreline Jurisdict ion (200 ft.) ~ Wetland Buffers '22J Vege tatio n Conservation Buffer (100 ft .) Data Sou rce : Aerial Imagery o btained from Microsoft Bing Maps 20 13. Proje ction : NAO 1983 HARN StatePlane Wash ington North FIPS 4601 Feet Notes: 1. T he locatio ns of all feature s shown a re approximate . 2. This d raw ing is fo r info rmation purposes. It is intended to assist in showing features d iscussed in an attached document. Geo Eng ineers, Inc . cannot guarantee the accura cy and content of e lectron ic fi le s. The maste r fil e is sto red by GeoEnginee rs. Inc. and will serve as the official rec ord o f this comm unication . 200 0 -----Feet Wetland and River Detail Sheet Cedar River Maintenance Dredge Project Renton , Washington GEOENGINEERS C) Figure 4 '----------------------------------------------' .£ c 8 'O -$-Sample Pl ots --Ord inary High Water Mark (O HWM ) m Wetlands Upla nd Extent of Shoreline Ju risdiction (200 ft.) <:23 Wetland Buffers ~ Vegetation Conservation Buffer (100 ft .) 200 w.di. Data Source : Aerial Imagery obta ined from Microsoft Bing Maps 2013. Projection: NAD 1983 HARN StatePlane Wash ington North FIPS 4 60 1 Feet Notes: 1. The locations of all features shown are approximate. 2. This drawing is for information purposes. It is intended to ass ist in showing features discussed in an attached docu ment. GeoEngineers. Inc. cannot guara ntee the accuracy and content of electronic files. The master file is stored by GeoE ngineers, Inc. and will serve as the officia l record of this communica tion . 200 0 "?W" s -----Feet Wetland and River Detail Sheet Cedar River Maintenance Dredge Project Renton , Washington GEoENGINEER~ Figure 5 ~ c 8 "O (') 0 N lo D E 2 a. <I> (/) :: "O :ll ·s: <I> Cl'. a. "' ::; 'il E '-'? N Q u.. I I § .0 "' ~I g t-- 0 (') ~ >( ::; f< C/l i3 I 1'i t-- 0 (') "' i 13 <I> ·a ~ ~ "' .c 1ij 0.. -$-Sample P lots -Ordinary High Water Mark (OHW M ) @ Wetlands Upland Exte nt of Shoreline J urisdiction (200 ft .) ~ Wetland Buffers ~ Vegeta ti on Conservation Buffer (100 ft.) Data Source Aerial Imagery obtai ned from M icrosoft Bi ng Maps 20 13. Project ion : NAO 1983 HARN StatePlane Washington North FIPS 4601 Feet Notes: 1. The locations of all features shown a re approx imate. 2. This drawing is for info rmation purposes. It is intended to a ssist in showing features discussed in an attached document. Geo Engineers, Inc . ca n not guarantee the accuracy and con tent of electron ic files. The master file is stored by GeoE ngineers , Inc. and wi ll serve as the official record of th is communication . 200 0 -----Feet Wetland and River Detail Sheet Cedar Riv e r Maintenan ce Dredge Proje ct Rento n, Washington GEOENGINEER~ Figure 6 National Wetland APPENDIX A Inventory Map User Remarks: This map is for general reference o nly. The US F ish and Wildlife Service is not re s p onsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base da1a shown on this map. All wetlands related data should be used in accordance with the layer metadata fo und on the Wetlands Mapper web site. Cedar River Gravel Extraction Project Jul10,2013 Wetlands -F reshwater Emergent -Freshwater Forested/Shrub -Estuarine and Marine Deepwater C"1 E stuarine and Marine -Freshwater Pond -Lake -Riverine -Other Riparian ~~ Herbaceous C Forested/Shrub Riparian Status -Di gita l Data 47° 30' 13" 47' 28' 51 " 8 0 ~ 0 "' N "' 8 a, "' N "' N A Soil Map-King County A rea , Wash ington (Cedar River Gravel Extraction Project) 558900 559200 558600 558900 559200 Map Scale: 1 :12,000 if p rinted on A si ze (8.5" x 11 ') sheet. ---===------=====Me1ers 0 100 200 400 600 559500 559500 ----====-------======Feet 0 450 900 1,800 2 ,700 USDA Natu ra l Resources =--Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Coope rative Soil Survey 559800 559800 560100 560100 7/10/2013 Page 1 of 3 47• 30' 12" 47° 28' 50" ~ Soil Map-King County Area, Washington (Cedar River Gravel Extraction Project) MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest {AOI) Area of l!1terest (A01) Soils __j Soil Map Units Special Point Features ~J Blowout 181 Borrow Pit * Clay Spot • Closed Depression X Gravel P:t Gravelly Spot @ Landfill A Lava Flow ... Marsh or swamp ,R Mine or Quarry @) Miscellaneous Water ® Perenniai Water V Rock ou·crop + Saline Spot Sandy Spot ..... Severely Eroded Spot 0 Sinkhole p Slide or Slip " Sadie Sp::it = Spoil Area I) Stony Spot Natural Resources Conservation Service a) Very Stony Spot 't Wet Spot ,. Other Special Line Features '•a Gully Short Steep Slope ,,. ' Other Political Features • Cities Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation ....... Rails -Interstate Highways ~, US Routes Major Roads /V Local Roads Map Scale: 1 :12,000 if printed on A size (8.5" x 11 ") sheet. The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1 :24,000. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for accurate map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov Coordinate System: UTM Zone 1 ON NAD83 This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Survey Area Data: King County Area, Washington Version 7, Jul 2, 2012 Date(s) aerial images were photographed: 7/24/2006 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 7/10/2013 Page 2 of3 Soil Map-King County Area, Washington Map Unit Legend King County Area, Washington (WA633) Map Unit Symbol I Map Unit Name I Acres in AOI I USDA = AgC AgD Bee BeD !Ur_ w 1 Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes Beausite gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes I Beausite gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes Indianola loamy fine sand, 4 to 15 percent l_ slopes Urban land J_tt,ater __ --+ , Subtotals for Soil Survey Area Totals for Area of Interest Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 65.0 I 45.1 ! 27.7: 15.2 21.6 567.5 20.0 762.0 777.1 Cedar River Gravel Extraction Project Percent of AOI 8.4% 5.8% 3.6% 2.0% 2.8% 73.0% I 2.6% 98.1% I 100.0% 7/10/2013 Page 3 of3 ~-- / : ' / ... ' ! 1· . ' /-i ' / / . / / ··r -' \ / I / / / ' ) ,-.,_,/ \_ -~ . -" ' ' ,/ ---... _ -// / \ \ ,.. ' / / / -. ..... l \ \ ' ---( - ,/- ' \ ·-· ...: ( _____ ,. ,/' ' < \ \ ' \ ·- ( Sample Pl!-~PENDIX C ata Forms \ / ' • ' \ _) WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 0C::ec::d:::a;._r ""'"'"er'-------------City/County: City of Renton Sampling Date: 6/3/2013 Applicant/Owner: Coast and Harbor Engineering State:~W~A'-----Sampling Point:_S_P_-1 __ _ lnvestigator(s): J. Dadisman, D. Conlin Section/Township/Range: ===='-~=~--------S7/T23N/RSE Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): _H_i_lls_lo~p_e ________ Local Relief (concave. convex, none): Concave Slope (%Jc ~2"-5"-%'--- Subregion (LLR): A Lat: ------Long: _____ _ Datum: --------- Soil Map Unit Name: Urban Land NWI Classification: 0N::oc.nc:e ___________ _ Are cllmatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? [2J Yes D No (if no, explain in Remarks.) Me D Vegetation D Soil D Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "normal circumstances" present? [2J YesD No Are D Vegetation D Soil D Hydrology naturally problematic? (if needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? L:cJ Yes u No Is the sampled area within a Hydric Soil Present? 0 Yes R No 0 Yes D No Weltand Hydrology Present? 0 Yes No Wetland? Remarks: VEGETATION -Use scientific names of plants. Absolute% Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum Cover Species? Status Dominance Test Worksheet: l. Number of dominant Species 2. That are DBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (AJ 3. 4. Total Number of Dominant 0 = Total Cover Species Across All Strata: 2 (BJ Sapling/Shurb Stratum 1. Pacific Willow (Salix lucido) 5 yes FACW Percent of dominant Species 2. That are DBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/BJ 3. 4. Prevalence Index Worksheet: 5. Total% Cover of: Multiply by: 5 = Total Cover OBL Species xl= 0 Herb Stratum FACW Species x2= 0 1. Reed Cona""grass (Phaloris orundinoceo) 90 yes FACW FAC Species x3= 0 2. FACU Species x4= 0 3. UPL Species xS= 0 4. Column Totals: 0 (AJ 0 (BJ 5. 6. Prevalence Index= B/A = 7. 8. ; iyJrvi:,hytil Vce,d;:ition l1,di1...:i<.ms: 9. 0 1-Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 10. 0 2-Dominance Test is >50% ll. D 3 -Prevalence Index is :!>3.01 90 = Total Cover D 4 -Morphological Adaptations1 (provide supporting data in Woody Vine Stratum Remarks or on a separate sheet. L D 5 -Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 2. D Problem Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain) 0 = Total Cover 1 1ndicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum unless disturbed or problematic. Remarks: Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? 0 Yes D No SOIL Sampling Point· SP-1 Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 loc2 Texture Remarks 0-16 10YR 3/1 95 10YR 3/4 5 C M Sandy 1Type: (cc(oncentration, D=Depletlon, RM-Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: [Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3 : D Histisol (Al) 0 Sandy Redox (SS) D 2 cm Muck (AlO) D Histic Epipedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (56) D Red Parent Material (TF2) D Black Histic {A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA 1) D Very Shallow Dard Surface (TF12) D Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix {F2) D Other (Explain in Remarks) D Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) 0 Depleted Matrix {F3) D Thick Dark Surface (A12) 0 Redox Dark Surface (F6) "Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland 0 Sandy Mucky Mineral (Sl) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or Fi Sandy Gleyed Matrix (54) 0 Redox Depressions {F8) problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present}: Hr;, SoH Pceseat? Type: 0 Yes 0 No Depth {inches): Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) D Surface Water {Al) D Water-Stained Leaves (89) (except MLRA D Water-Stained Leaves (89) (MLRA 0 High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 0 Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Ccust (Bll) D Drainage Patterns (810) 0 Water Marks {Bl) D Aquatic Invertebrates (813) D Dry-Season Water Table (C2) 0 Sediment Deposits (B2) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) D Saturated Visible on Aerial Imagery {C9) D Drift Deposits (B3) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots {C3) D Geomorphic Position (D2) D Algal Mat or Crust (B4) 0 Presence of Reduction Iron (C4) D Shallow Aquitard (D3) 0 Iron Deposits (BS} D Recent Iron Reduction Tilled Soils (C6) 0 FAC-Neutral Test {DS) 0 Surface Soil Cracks (86) 0 Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl) (LRR A} 0 Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) 0 Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87) 0 Other {Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks {D7) n Soarselv Vegetated Concave Surface {B8) Field Observations: Wetland Hydrology Pn:.~ent? Surface Water Present? 0 Yes 0 No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? 0 Yes 0 No Depth (inches): 2 0 Yes 0 No Saturation Present? 0 Yes 0 No Depth (inches): 0 (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: -=C"e"d"-ar"R"';-'-ve:.;r _____________ City/County: Coast and Harbor Engineering City of Renton State: _W-"'A ___ _ Sampling Date: 6/3/2013 Sampling Point:-"S'-P-_,2'---Applicant/Owner: lnvestigator{s): J. Dadisman, D. Conlin Section/Township/Range: ~~~~------------S 7 /T 23N / RSE Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): 0H-";"lls:.;lo::Jp"e'---------Local Relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope(%): -=2-=-S'-'%'---- Subregion (LLRJ: A Lat: _____ _ Long: _____ _ Datum: ________ _ Soil Map Unit Name: Urban Land NWI Classification:0N.:;o:.;n;;ce'------------ Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? 0 Yes D No (if no, explain in Remarks.) Are D Vegetation D Soil D Hydrology signifiulntly disturbed? Are "normal circumstances" present? 0 YesD No Are D Vegetation D Soil D Hydrology naturally problematic? {if needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? ~ Yes LJ No ls the sampled area within a Hydric Soil Present? 0 Yes D No 0 Yes D No Weltand Hydrology Present? 0 Yes Fi No Wetland? Remarks: VEGETATION -Use scientific names of plants Absolute% Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum Cover Species? Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Red alder (Alnus rubra) 90 yes FAC Number of dominant Species 2. That are 0BL, FACW, or FAC: s (A) 3. 4. Total Number of Dominant 90 = Total Cover Species Across All Strata: 6 (B) Sapling/Shurb Stratum 1. Pacific willow (Salix lucido) s yes FACW Percent of dominant Species 2. Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) 10 yes FACU That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 83.33333333 (A/B) 3. Nootka rose (Rosa nootkana} s yes FAC 4. Twinberry (Lonlcera involucrate} s yes FAC Prevalence Index Worksheet: 5. Tota I % Cover of: Multiply bv: 2S = Total Cover OBLSpecies xl= 0 Herb Stratum FACW Species x2= 0 1. Reed Canarygross (Phalaris arundinaceo) 10 yes FACW FAC Species x3= 0 2. FACU Species x4= 0 3. UPL Species xS= 0 4. Column Totals: 0 IA) 0 (B) 5. 6. Prevalence Index= B/A = 7. 8. Hydr0pl1)·~ic \."egdatirn-, J1,d,cdlors. 9. D 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 10. 0 2 -Dominance Test is >50% 11. D 3 -Prevalence Index is !£3.0 1 10 = Total Cover D 4-Morphological Adaptations1 (provide supporting data in Woody Vine Stratum Remarks or on a separate sheet. 1. D 5 -Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 2. D Problem Hydrophytic Vegetation {Explain) 0 = Total Cover 1 1ndicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum unless disturbed or problematic. Remarks: Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? 0 Yes D No SOIL Sampling Point: SP-2 Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color {moist) % Type1 Loc 2 Texture Remarks 0-11 10YR 3/1 95 lOYR 4/3 5 C M Loamy Sand 11-14 10YR 3/1 100 Gravell:t Sand 14-16 10YR 4/1 75 10YR 4/6 25 C M Fine Sand 1Type: (=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM-Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3 : D Histisol (Al) 0 Sandy Redox (55) 0 2 cm Muck (A10) 0 Histic Epipedon (A2) D Stripped Matrix (56) D Red Parent Material (TF2) D Black Histic (A3) D Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA 1) 0 Very Shallow Oard Surface (TF12) D Hydrogen Sulfide (AA) D Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) D Other (Explain in Remarks) D Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) D Depleted Matrix (F3) D Thick Dark Surface (A12) D Redox Dark Surface (F6) ~Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland D Sandy Mucky Mineral (Sl) D Depleted Dark Surface (F7) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or Fl Sandy Gleyed Matrix (54) D Redox Depressions (F8] problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Hrr;c So;! Present? Type: 0 Yes D No Depth (inches): Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) D Surface Water (Al) D Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 0 Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 0 High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 48) 1, 2, 4A, and 48} 0 Saturation (A3) D Salt Crust (B11) D Drainage Patterns (B10) D Water Marks (Bl) O Aquatic Invertebrates {B13) D Dry-Season Water Table {C2) D Sediment Deposits (B2) D Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) B Saturated Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) 0 Drift Deposits (B3) B Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) D Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduction Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (D3) 0 Iron Deposits {BS) 0 Recent Iron Reduction Tilled Soils (C6) D FAC-Neutral Test (DS) D Surface Soil Cracks (86) D Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl) (LRR A) D Raised Ant Mounds {D6) (LRR A) 0 Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (07) n Sparselv Vegetated Concave Surface (BS) Field Observations: Wetland Hydrolo~y Present? Surface Water Present? D Yes 0 No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? 0 Yes D No Depth (inches): 2 0 Yes D No Saturation Present? 0 Yes D No Depth (inches): 0 (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data {stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: "C"e.:;da;;ar"R"'i"-ve:;r _____________ City/County: City of Renton Sampling Date: 6/3/2013 Applicant/Owner: Coast and Harbor Engineering State: 0 W~A ___ _ Sampling Point:~S~P-~3 __ _ lnvestigator{s): J. Dadisman, D. Conlin Section/Township/Range: =~~~-~~---------S18/T23N/RSE Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): _ H_i_lls_lo~p_e ________ Local Relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope(%), -=2-=-5-"% __ Subregion (LLR): A Lat: ------Long: _____ _ Datum: --------- Soil Map Unit Name: Urban Land NWI Classification:0N"o"n"e'------------ Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? [,i]Yes0No (if no, explain in Remarks.) Are D Vegetation D Soil D Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "normal circumstances" present? 0 YesO No Are D Vegetation D Soil D Hydrology naturally problematic? (if needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? EJ Yes l,'J No Is the sampled area within a Hydric Soil Present? Yes D No D Yes 0 No Weltand Hydrology Present? D Yes 0 No Wetland? Remarks: VEGETATION -Use scientific names of plants. Absolute% Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum Cover Species? Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Pacific willow (Salix /ucida) 60 ves FACW Number of dominant Species 2. That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (AJ 3. 4. Total Number of Dominant 60 = Total Cover Species Across All Strata; 4 (BJ Sapling/Shurb Stratum 1. Japanese Knotweed (Po/ygonum cuspidatum) 10 no FACU Percent of dominant Species 2. Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) 25 yes FACU That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2S (A/BJ 3. English Ivy (Hedero helix) 40 yes FACU 4. Prevalence Index Worksheet: 5. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 75 = Total Cover OBL Species xl= 0 Herb Stratum FACW Species 60 x2= 120 1. Robert's geranium (Geranium robertianum} 15 ves FACU FAC Species x3= 0 2. FACU Species 90 X 4 = 360 3. UPL Species xS= 0 4. Column Totals: 150 (AJ 480 (BJ 5. 6. Prevalence Index= B/A = 3.20 7. 8. I lvdropl,ytic Vegelolio,-, :,-,JicJlOi"~. 9. 0 1-Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 10. 0 2 -Dominance Test is >50% 11. D 3 -Prevalence Index is :;;3.0 1 15 = Total Cover D 4 -Morphological Adaptations1 (provide supporting data in Woody Vine Stratum Remarks or on a separate sheet. 1. D S -Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 2. D Problem HydrophyticVegetatlon (Explain) 0 = Total Cover 11ndicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum unless disturbed or problematic. Remarks: Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? D Yes 0 No SOIL Sampling Point· SP-3 Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color ( moist) % Type 1 loc2 Texture Remarks lType: (=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM-Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2 location: PL=Pore Linine:. M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: 0 Histisol (Al) 0 Sandy Redox (55) D 2 cm Muck (AlO) 0 Histic Epipedon (A2) D Stripped Matrix (56) D Red Parent Material (TF2) D Black Histic {A3) D Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA t) D Very Shallow Oard Surface {TF12) D Hydrogen Sulfide {A4) D loamy G!eyed Matrix {F2) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) D Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) D Depleted Matrix (F3) D Thick Dark Surface (A12) D Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3 lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland ~ Sandy Mucky Mineral (51) D Depleted Dark Surface (F7) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or Sandy Gleyed Matrix (54) D Redox Depressions (F8) problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Hr;c So;! Preseat? Type: D Yes D No Depth (inches): Remarks: Soil data was not taken given lack of a suitable location or wetland vegetation/hydrology. HYOROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators· Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators {2 or more required) D Surface Water (Al) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 0 Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 0 High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 0 Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (B11) O Drainage Patterns (B10) 0 Water Marks (Bl) O Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) D Dry-Season Water Table (C2) D Sediment Deposits (B2) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor {Cl) 0 Saturated Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) B Drift Deposits (B3) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (84) D Presence of Reduction Iron (C4) D Shallow Aquitard (D3) D Iron Deposits (BS) D Recent Iron Reduction Tilled Soils {CG) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (DS) 0 Surface Soil Cracks (B6) D Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl) (LRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR Al ~ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) D Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (BB) Field Observations: Wf'tland Hydrology Present? Surface Water Present? D Yes 0 No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? D Yes 0 No Depth (inches): D Yes 0 No Saturation Present? D Yes 0 No Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: ) / / / / / / \ ' ' i / '·· / / - / \ / ( - /' / \ ....... :. - I ,..-_.-· .. ---· ( / ( \. ~ ', ' ' '\ \ Wetland :::ENDIX D mg Forms / / -~\ __ ·. ' \ ' ' I ' '\. '" \ \ I I \. Wetland name or number: A WETLAND RATING FORM -WESTERN WASHINGTON Version 2 ~ Updated July 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users Updated Oct 2008 with the new WDFW definitions for priority habitats Name of wetland (if known): Wetland A Date of site visit: June 5 2013 Rated by: J. Dadisman Trained by Ecology? Yes x__ No ______ Date of training: 11/06 SEC: 7 TWNSHP: 23 North RNGE: 4 East Is S/T/R in Appendix D? Yes ______ No X Map of wetland unit: Figure _______ Estimated size _____ _ SUMMARY OF RA TING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland: ______ 11 _____ rn _..,x'-------- Category 1 -Score > 70 Category 11 -Score 51 -69 Category Ill -Score 30 -50 Category IV -Score < 30 Score for Water Quality Functions Score for Hydrologic Functions Score for Habitat Functions TOT AL Score for Functions 12 16 13 41 IV __ _ Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTCS of Wetland I _____ II _____ Does not apply -~X~--- Final Category (choose the "highest" category from above") III Summary of basic information about the wetland unit. Wetland Unit has Special Wetla9d HGM Class Characteristics used for Jlatin2 Estuarine Depression al Natural Heritage Wetland Riverine X Boe Lake-frinee Mature Forest Slope Old Growth Forest Flats Coastal Lagoon Freshwater Tidal Interdunal None of the above X Check if unit has multiple HOM classes present Wetland Rating Form-western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 1 of9 Wetland name or number: A SP!. Has the wetland unit been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed Threatened or Endangered animal or plant species (TIE species)? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. SP2. Has the wetland unit been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or Endangered animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, ""documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species are cate orized as Cate or I Natural Herita e Wetlands (see . 19 of data form). SP4. Does the wetland unit have a local significance in addition to its functions? For example, the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or in a local mana ement Ian as having s ecial si nificance. X X X X To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to determine the Hydrogeomorphic Class of the wetland being rated. The hydrogeornotphic classification groups wetlands in to 1hose 1hat functioo in similar ways. This simplifies the questions needed to answer how well the wetland functioo;, The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be daetmined using the key below. Seep. 24 fur more detailed instructions on classifying wetlands. Wetland is below the OHWM of Cedar River. Cedar River conlllins threatened and endangered fish species. Wetland Rating Fonn-,..-estern Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 2 of9 Wetland name or number: A Classification of Vegetated Wetlands for Western Washington If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply, and go to Question 8. I. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during floods)? ~o to 2 YES -the wetland class is Tidal Fringe "------ifyes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? YES -Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO -Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the.forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is a Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an Estuarine wetland Wetlands that were call estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the term "Estuarine' wetland is kept. Please note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed ( see p. ). 2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface water runoff are NOT sou~ater to the unit. NO -o to 3 YES -The wetland class is Flats If your wetland can e classified as a "Flats" wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the entire wetland meet both of the following criteria? ___ The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores ofa body of permanent open water (without any vegetation on the surface) where at least 20 acres (8ha) in size; ___ At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 (2 m)? NO -o to 4 YES -The wetland class is Lake-frin e (Lacustrine Frin e) 4. Does the entire wetlan meet all of the following criteria? ---The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual). ---The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks. ___ The water leaves the wetland without being impounded? NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these types of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow de ressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than I foot deep). NO -o to 5 YES -The wetland class is Slo e 5. Does the entire wetlan meet all of the following criteria? X __ The unit is in a valley or stream channel where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river. X __ The overbank flooding occurs at least once every two years. NOTE: The riverine unit can co depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding .. NO -o to 6 YES The wetland class is Riverine 6. ls the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time of the year. This means that any outlet, if present is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO -go to 7 YES -The wetland class is Depressional 7. Is the entire wetland located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding. The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. No -go to 8 YES -The wetland class is Depressional 8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a depressional wetland ha-; a zone of flooding along its sides. GO BACK AND IDENrnY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use forthe rating system if you have several HGM classes present within your wetland. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the class listed in column 2 is less than 10% of the unit, classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area. HGM Classes within the wetland unit beinfl rated HGM Class to Use in Ratinfl Slope + Riverine Riverine Slope + Depressional Depressional Slope + Lake-fringe Lake-fringe Depressional + Riverine along stream within boundarv Deoressional Depressional + Lake-fringe Depressional Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with special freshwater wetland characteristics If you are unable still to determme which of the above cntena apply to your wetland, or you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland Rating Form-western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 3 of9 Wetland name or number: A Rl R2 WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to improve water quality. Does the wetland have the potential to improve water quality? (see p.52) R 1.1 Area of surface depressions within the riverine wetland that can trap sediments during a flooding event: • Depressions cover> 3/4 area of wetland .............................................................................. points= 8 • Depressions cover> 1/2 area of wetland .............................................................................. points= 4 (If depressions> 1/2 of area of unit draw polygons on aerial photo or map) • Depressions present but cover< 1/2 area of wetland ............................................................ points= 2 • No de ressions resent........................................................................................................ oiots = 0 R 1.2 Characteristics of the vegetation in the unit (areas with >90% cover at person height): • Trees or shrubs> 2/3 area of the unit ................................................................................... points= 8 • Trees or shrubs> 1/3 area of the wetland ............................................................................. points= 6 • Ungrazed, herbaceous plants> 2/3 area of unit .................................................................... points= 6 • Ungrazed herbaceous plants> 1/3 area of unit ..................................................................... points= 3 • Trees, shrubs, and ungrazed herbaceous< 1/3 area of unit (wetland is grazed) .................... points= 0 Aerial hoto or ma showin ol ons of different ve etation t es Does the wetland have the opportunity to improve water quality? Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes or groundwater downgradient from the wetland. Note which of the following conditions provide the sources of pollutants. A unit may have pollutants coming from several sources, but any single source would qualify as opportunity. Grazing in the wetland or within 150 ft Untreated stormwater discharges to wetland Tilled fields or orchards within 150 ft. of wetland A stream or culvert discharges into wetland that drains developed areas, residential areas, farmed fields, roads, or clear-cut logging _x_ Residential, urban areas, golf courses are within 150 ft. of wetland The river or stream linked to the wetland has a contributing basin where human activities have raised levels of sediment, toxic compounds or nutrients in the river water above standards for water quality. Other---------------------------------~ NO multiplier is 1 HYDROLOGJC FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to reduce floodin and stream erosion. Figure_ 0 Figure __ 6 (seep. 53) Multiplier R 3 Does the wetland have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? (seep.54) R 3.1 R 3.2 Characteristics of the overbank storage the wetland provides: Estimate the average width of the wetland . perpendicular to the direction of the flow and the width of the stream or river channel (distance between Figure -- banks). Calculate the ratio: (average width of unit) I (average width of stream between banks). • If the ratio is more than 20 ................................................................................................... points= 9 • If the ratio is between 10 -20 .............................................................................................. points~ 6 l • If the ratio is 5-<10 ............................................................................................................. points ~ 4 • If the ratio is 1-<5 ............................................................................................................... points= 2 • If the ratio is< I .................................................................................................................. points= l Aerial hoto or ma showin avera e widths Characteristics of vegetation that slow down water velocities during floods: Treat large woody debris as . ''forest or shrub". Choose the points appropriate/or the best description. (polygons need to have >90° Figure cover at person height NOT Cowardin classes): • Forest or shrub for> 1/3 area OR herbaceous plants> 2/3 area ............................................ points= 7 • Forest or shrub for> 1/10 area OR herbaceous plants> I/3 area (vegetation short and sparse) .. points= 4 7 • Vegetation does not meet above criteria ............................................................................... points= 0 Aerial hoto or ma showin ol ons of different ve etation t es ---' __ ..., _______________________________ ...;..1;.:c;.:ld;.;.:il;.:'';.' .,:;;D;.:in;.:t,;;s;.:i;.:n;.:l;.:h.:,c;.:b;.:o;.:>;.:·e;.:s;.:';.:'b;.:o;.1;.:·';..;,' ~ " ----R 4 Does the wetland have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p.57) Answer YES if the wetland is in a location in the watershed where the flood storage, or reduction in water velocity, it provides helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive flows. Note which of the following conditions apply. _x_ There are human structures and activities downstream (roads, buildings, bridges, farms) that can be damaged by flooding. _x_ There are natural resources downstream (e.g. salmon redds) that can be damaged by flooding Multiplier Other -------------------------------- (Answer l\/0 if the major source of water to the wetland is controlled by a reservoir or the wetland is tidal fringe along the sides of a dike) 2 Yl!S multi lier is 2 + TOT AL -H drolo ic Functions Multi R4; then add score lo table on , 1 16 Comments: Wetland Rating Form -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 4 of9 Wetland name or number: A Hl HABITAT FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to provide important habitat. Does the wetland have the potential to provide habitat for many species? H 1.1 Vegetation structure (see P. 72): Check the types o.fvegetation classes present (as defined by Cowardin) -Size threshold for each class is 114 acre or more than 10% of the area if unit is smaller than 2.5 acres. __ Aquatic Bed _x__ Emergent plants __ Scrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have> 30% cover) x__ Forested (areas where trees have> 30% cover) Jfthe unit has a forested class check if: __ The forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground- cover) that each cover 20% within the forested polygon. Add the number of vegetation t}pes that qualify. I/you have: 4 structures or more ....... points = 4 2 structures.................... oints = I H 1.2 Hydro periods (seep. 73): Map of Cowardin vegetation classes 3 structures ................... points = 2 I structure .................... oints = 0 Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or 1/4 acre to count (see text/or descriptions o.fhydroperiods). Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present points= 3 Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 or more types present.. .... points= 2 Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present.. ................. points = I )( Saturated only I type present .................... points= 0 X Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland Lake-fringe wetland ................. = 2 points Freshwater tidal wetland .••...... = 2 points Map of hydroperiods H 1.3 Richness of Plant Species (seep. 75): Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft 2 (different patches of the same ~pecies can be combined to meet the size threshold) You do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian Alilfoil, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian Thistle. If you counted: > 19 species ...................... points= 2 · 5 -19 species .................... points = I List species below if you want to: < 5 species ........................ points= 0 H 1.4 Interspersion of Habitats (.seep. 76): Decided from the diagrams below whether interspersion between Cowardin vegetation ( described in H 1.1 ), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, low, or none. Figure __ 1 Figure __ 1 1 Note: If you have 4 or more classes Figure __ or 3 vegetation classes and H 1.5 open water, the rating is None ·-0 points Low "" l point Moderate-:... 2 poinls always "high". Use map of Cowardin classe Special Habitat Features (seep. 77): Check the habitat.feature!i that are pre!ient in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points you put into the next column. Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 in. diameter and 6 ft. long) Standing snags (diameter at the bottom> 4 inches) in the wetland Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft. (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least 3.3 ft. (Im) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the unit, for at least 33 ft. (!Om) Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (> 30 degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (ell! shrubs or trees that have not yet turned grey/brown) At least 1/4 acre ofthin~stemmed persistent vegetation or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg-laying by amphibians) Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in each stratum of plants .NOTE: The 20% stated in early printings of the manual on page 78 is an error. Add the oints in the column above Wetland Rating rorm -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) 1 0 Page 5 of9 Wetland name or number: A H2 Does the wetland have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? H 2.1 Buffers (see P. 80): Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland unit. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of "undisturbed". __ 100m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 95% of circumference. No structures are within the undisturbed part of buffer (relatively undisturbed also means no grazing, no landscaping, no daily human use) ............. points= 5 __ 100m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 50o/o circumference .................................................................................................... points= 4 __ 50m (170 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 95o/o circumference .................................................................................................... points= 4 __ 100m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 25% circumference .................................................................................................... points= 3 __ 50m (170 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water for> 50% circumference .............................................................................................. points= 3 If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above: ....X.... No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25m (80 ft) of wetland> 95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK .................................. points= 2 __ No paved areas of buildings within 50m of wetland for> 50% circumference. Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK ................................................................... points= 2 __ Heavy grazing in buffer ................................................................................................ points= 1 __ Vegetated buffers are< 2m wide (6.6 ft) for more than 95% circumference (e.g. tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland) ............................. points= 0 __ Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above .............................................................. points= 1 Arial photo showing buffers H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (seep. 81) H 2.2.1 ls the wetland part ofa relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 150 ft. wide, has at least a 30% cover of shrubs, forest or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (Dams in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads, paved roads, are considered breaks in the corridor). YES~ 4 points (go to H 2.3) NO~ go to H 2.2.2 H. 2.2.2 Is the wetland part ofa relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 50 ft. wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake- fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? YES~ 2 points (go to H 2.3) NO~ go to H 2.2.3 H. 2.2.3 ls the wetland: • Within 5 mi (8km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR • Within 3 miles of a large field or pasture(> 40 acres) OR • Within 1 mile of a lake greater than 20 acres? YES~ 1 point NO~ 0 points Comments: Wetland Rating Form-western Washington, version 2 (7/06) (only I soon =rbox) Figure_ 2 1 Page6of9 Wetland name or number: A H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW (see new and complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in the PHS report http://wdfw. wa.govlhablphslist.htm) Which of the following priority habitats are within 330ft (lOOm) of the wetland unit? NOTE: the connections do not have to be relatively undisturbed. __ Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.4 ha (I acre). __ Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PHSreportp. 152). __ Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock. __ Old-growth/Mature forests: (Old-gro"th west of Cascade crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 20 trees/ha (8 trees/acre)> 81 cm (32 in) dbh or> 200 years of age. (Mature forests) Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown cover may be less that l 00%; crown cover may be less that l 00%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth; 80 -200 years old west of the Cascade crest. __ Oregon white Oak: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 158). _ X _ Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. __ Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non-forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or a wet prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161). _X _Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources. __ Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore, and Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report: pp. 167-169 and glossary in Appendix A). __ Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock, ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human. __ Cliffs: Greater than 7.6 m (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft. __ Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 -2.0 m (0.5 -6.5 ft), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. __ Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of> 51 cm (20 in) in western Washington and are> 2 m (6.5 ft) in height. Priority logs are> 30 cm (12 in) in diameter at the largest end, and> 6 m (20 ft) long. If wetland has 3 or more priority habitats= 4 points If wetland has 2 priority habitats= 3 points lfwetland has 1 priority habitat= 1 point No habitats= 0 points Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in thi list. Nearbv wetlands are addressed in auestion H 2.4) H 2.4 Wetland Landscape: Choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits (seep. 84) • There are at lc:i.st 3 other wctlrinds within 1 /2 mile, and the connections betweC'n them are relatively undisturbed (light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with some boating, but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development .......... points = 5 • The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands within 1 /2 mile ..................................................................................................... points = 5 • There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile, BUT the connections between them are disturbed ............................................................................................................................. points= 3 • The wetland fringe on a Jake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands within 1/2 mile .................................................................................................................... points = 3 , There is at least 1 wetland within 1/2 mile ........................................................................... points = 2 3 3 • There are no wetlands within 1 /2 mile .................................................................................. ooints = 0 f-f-f----==~~~=====~=======================~~--.----· Add the scores from H2. I, H2.2, H2.3, H2.41 _ _? __ j TOTAL for HI from page 8 ! 4 l .----.a Add the points for H I and H 2; then record the result on p. I I 13 I H 2 TOTAL Score -opportunity for providing habitat • Total Score for Habitat Functions ----- Wetland Rating Form -,vestem Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 7 of9 Wetland name or number: A SCI SC2 SCJ CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below and circle the appropriate answers and Category. Wetland Type -Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the Category when the appropriate criteria are met. Estuarine wetlands? (see p.86) Does the wetland unit meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? __ The dominant water regime is tidal, __ Vegetated. and __ With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt. YES ~Goto SC 1.1 NO X SC I.I ls the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? YES ~ Category I NO~ go to SC 1.2 SC 1.2 ls the wetland at least I acre in size and meets at least two of the following conditions? YES ~ Category I NO ~ Category 11 --The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no dikinf, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. I the non-native Spartina s~,-are only species that cover more than 10% of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a ual rating (I/II). The area of Spartina would be rated a Category 11 while the relativel, undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a Category I. Do not, however, exclu e the area of Spartina in determining the size threshold of I acre. __ At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft. buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-mowed grassland __ The wetland has at least 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. Natural Heritage Wetlands (seep. 87) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage Program/DNR as either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species. SC 2.1 Is the wetland being rated in a Section/Township/Range that contains a natural heritage wetland? (This question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact WNHPIDNR.) S/T/R information from Appendix D or accessed from \VNHP/DNR web site X --- YES __ Contact WNHP/DNR (seep. 79) and go to SC 2.2 NOX __ SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as a site with state threatened or endangered plant species? YES ~ Category I NO X not a Heritage Wetland Bogs (seep. 87) Does the wetland (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below to identify if the wetland is a bog. If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its function. 1. Does the unit have organic soil horizons (i.e. layers of organic soil), either peats or mucks, that compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identify organic soils)? YES ~goto question 3 NO = go to question 2 2. Does the wetland have organic soils, either peats or mucks that are less than 16 inches deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or pond? YES = go to question 3 NO = is not a bog for purpose of rating 3. Does the unit have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present, consist of the "bog" species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more than 30% of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)? YES= Is a bog for purpose of rating NO ~ go to question 4 NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16" deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the "bog" plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog. 4. Is the unit forested(> 30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann's spruce, or western white pine. WITH any of the species (or combination of species) on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant component of the ground cover(> 30% coverage of the total shrub/herbaceous cover)? YES ~ Category I NO~ Is not a bog for purpose of rating Wetland Rating Form -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Cat. I Cat. I Cat. II Dual Rating 1/11 Cat I Cat. I Page 8 of9 Wetland name or number: A SC4 scs Forested Wetlands (see p. 90) Does the wetland have at least 1 acre of forest that meet one of these criteria for the Department of Fish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats? Jfyou answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its function. __ Old-growth forests: (west of Cascade Crest) Stands of at least two three species forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/acre (20 trees/hectare) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 inches (81 cm or more). NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. Two-hundred year old trees in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often slower. The DFW criterion is and "OR" so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter. __ Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80 -200 years old OR have an average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53 cm); crown cover may be less than 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth. YES = Category I NO = X not a forested wetland with special characteristics Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (<ee p. 91) Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria ofa wetland in a coastal lagoon? __ The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks. __ The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains surface water that is saline or brackish (> 0.5 ppt) during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the bottom.) YES= Go to SC 5.1 NO X __ not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1 Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions? __ The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation. grazing) and has less than 20% cover of invasive plant species (see list of invasive species on p. 74). __ At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a I 00 ft. buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazcd Cat. I or on-mowed grassland. Cat. I __ The wetland is larger than 1/10 acre (4350 square ft.) YES ~ Category I NO ~ Category II Cat. II Interdunal Wetlands (seep. 93) ls the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? YES= Go to SC 6.1 NO X __ not an interdunal wetland for rating I/you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. In practical terms that means the following geographic areas: • Long Beach Peninsula --lands west of SR 103 • Grayland-Westport--lands west of SR 105 • Ocean Shores-Copalis -lands west of SR 115 and SR I 09 SC 6.1 Is the wetland one acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is one acre or larger? YES -Category 11 NO ~goto SC 6.2 SC 6.2 Is the wetland between 0.1 and I acrei or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and I acre? YES -Category 111 Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics + Choose the "highest" rating if wetland fa/ls into several categories, and record on p. I. If you answered NO for all types enter "Not Applicable" on p. I Comments: Wetland Rating Fom1-wcstcrn Washington, version 2 (7/06) Cat. II Cat. III Page9of9 Wetland name or number: B WETLAND RATING FORM -WESTERN WASHINGTON Version 2 -Updated July 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users Updated Oct 2008 with the new WDFW definitions for priority habitats Name of wetland (if known): Wetland B Date of site visit: June 5 2013 Rated by: J. Dadisman _____ _ Trained by Ecology? Yes X No __ Date of training: 11/06 SEC: 7 TWNSHP: 23 North RNGE: 4 East Is S/T/R in Appendix D? Yes ______ No X Map of wetland unit: Figure _______ Estimated size _____ _ SUMMARY OF RATING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland: ! _____ _ II ____ ~ III ~X~---IV __ _ Category I ~ Score > 70 Category II ~ Score 51 -69 Category III ~ Score 30 -50 Category TV ~ Score < 3 0 Score for Water Quality Functions Score for Hydrologic Functions Score for Habitat Functions TOT AL Score for Functions 18 10 11 39 Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTCS of Wetland I _____ II _____ Does not apply _~X~--- Final Category (choose the "highest" category from above") III Summary of basic information about the wetland unit. Wetland Unit bas Special Wetlapd HGM Class Characteristics used for Ratilll! Estuarine Deoressional X Natural Herita2e Wetland Riverine B02 Lake-frin2e Mature Forest Slone Old Growth Forest Flats Coastal Laeoon Freshwater Tidal Interdunal None of the above X Check if unit has multiple X HGM classes oresent Wetland Rating Form -,vestern Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 1 of 10 Wetland name or number: B If you answer YES to any of the questions below you will the s ecial characteristics found in the wetland. SP!. Has the wetland unit been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed Threatened or Endangered animal or plant species (TIE species)? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. SP2. Has the wetland unit been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or Endangered animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species are cate orized as Cate or 1 Natural Herita e Wetlands (see . 19 of data form). SP4. Does the wetland unit have a local significance in addition to its functions? For example, the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or in a local mana ement Ian as havin s ecial si nificance. X X X X To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to determine the Hydrogeomorphic Class of the wetland being rated. The hydrogeomoiphic classification groups wetlands in to 1hose that fi.mction in similar ways. This simplifies 1he questions needed to answer how well the wetland fi.mctions. The Hydrogeomotphic Class ofa wetland can be detennined using 1he key below. Seep. 24 fur more detailed instructions on classifying wetlands. Wetland Rating Form-western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 2 of IO Wetland name or number: B Classification of Vegetated Wetlands for Western Washington If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply, and go to Question 8. 1. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during floods)? ~o to 2 YES -the wetland class is Tidal Fringe '------rfyes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? YES -Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO -Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) If your wetland can he classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. !fit is a Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an fatuarine wetland Wetlands that were call estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the term "Estuarine" wetland is kept. Please note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed (seep. ). 2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface water runoff are NOT sou~ater to the unit. NO -o to 3 YES -The wetland class is Flats lfyour wetland can e classified as a "Flats" wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the entire wetland meet both of the following criteria? ___ The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any vegetation on the surface) where at least 20 acres (8ha) in size; ---At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 (2 m)? NO -o to 4 YES -The wetland class is Lake-frin e (Lacustrine Frio e 4. Does the entire wetlan meet all of the following criteria? ___ The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual). ___ The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks. ___ The water leaves the wetland without being impounded? NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these types of wetlands except occasionally in very small and sha/Iow de ressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than I foot deep). NO -o to 5 YES -The wetland class is Slo e 5. Does the entire wetlan meet all of the following criteria? X __ The unit is in a valley or stream channel where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river. X __ The overbank flooding occurs at least once every two years. NOTE: The riverine unit can co ressions that are fl/led with water when the river is not flooding.. NO -o to 6 YES -he wetland class is Riverine 6. ls the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time of the year. This means that any outlet, if present i er than the interior of the wetland. NO -o to 7 YES -The wetland class is De ressional 7. ls the entire wetland located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding. The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. No -go to 8 YES -The wetland class is Depressional 8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base ofa slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a depressional wetland has a zone offloading along its sides. GO BACK AND JDEN"J IFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRJBED JN {)UESIIONS 1-7 APPLY JO DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within your wetland. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents l 0% or more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the class listed in column 2 is less than JO% of the unit, classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area. HGM Classes within the wetland unit beim, rated HGM Class to Use in Ratinu Slope + Riverine Riverine Slope + Depressional Depressional Slope + Lake-fringe Lake-fringe Depressional + Riverine along stream within boundarv Deoressional Depressional + Lake-fringe Depressional Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with special freshwater wetland characteristics If you are unable still to determme which of the above cntena apply to your wetland, or you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depression al for the rating. Wetland Rating Form-western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 3 of 10 Wetland name or number: B Dl WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to improve water quality. Does the wet1and have the potential to improve water quality? D 1.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland: • Unit is a depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) ........................................... points = 3 • Unit has an intermittently flowing, OR highly constricted, permanently flowing outlet ........ points= 2 • Unit has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet (permanently flou·ing) ....... points = 1 • Unit is a "flat" depression (Q.7 on key), or in the Flats class, with permanent surface outflow and no obvious natural outlet and/or outlet is a man-made ditch ........................... points = I 1 ditch is not ermanentl owin treat unit as "intermittent! owin " Provide hoto or drawin D 1.2 The soil 2 inches below the surface (or duff layer) is clay or organic (use NRCS definitions) YES oints = 4 NO oints = 0 D 1.3 Characteristics of persistent vegetation (emergent, shrub, and/or forest Cowardin class): • Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation>= 95% of area ............................................... points= 5 • Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation>= 1/2 ofarea ................................................. points = 3 • Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation>= 1/10 of area ............................................... points= 1 • Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation< 1/10 of area .................................................. points= 0 Ma of Cowardin ve etation classes D 1.4 Characteristics of seasonal ponding or inundation: This is t e area oft e wet and t at is ponded for at least 2 months, but dries out sometime during the year. Do not count the area that is permanently ponded. Estimate area as the average condition 5 out of JO years. • Area seasonally ponded is > I /2 total area of wetland .......................................................... points = 4 • Area seasonally ponded is> I /4 total area of wetland .......................................................... points= 2 • Area seasonally ponded is< 1/4 total area of wetland .......................................................... points= 0 Figure __ 2 0 Figure __ 3 Figure __ 4 l---1------------------------------------~M=a=-"o"-f-'H=::d.:.ro="•.:.ri,_,o,.,d,,s'-l. ___ _ Total for D I 9 1--+---------.:.;:.;:;.;.;,;;.;.;;..;;.. __________________ ;.;;;.;...;;.;;,;;;;.;..;;.;;.;,;;..;;.;;;;,;;.;;.;;;.;~~---- D2 • D3 Does the wetland have the opportnnity to improve water quality? Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes or groundwater downgradient from the wetland? Note which of the following conditions provide the sources of pollutants. A unit may have pollutants coming from several sources, but any single source would qualify as opportunity. Grazing in the wetland or within 150 ft Untreated storm water discharges to wetland Tilled fields or orchards within 150 ft. of wetland A stream or culvert discharges into wetland that drains developed areas, residential areas, farmed fields, roads, or clear-cut logging x__ Residential, urban areas, golf courses are within 150 ft. of wetland Wetland is fed by groundwater high in phosphorus or nitrogen Other ---------------------------------- YES multi lier is 2 NO multiplier is I TOTAL -Water ualit Functions Multi the score from D1 b D2· then add score to table on . I HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS-Indicators that wetland unit functions to reduce floodin and stream d ·on. Does the wetland have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? D 3.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland unit • Unit is a depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) ........................................... points= 4 • Unit has an intermittently flowing, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet ......... points= 2 • Unit is a "flat" depression (Q.7 on key) or in the Flats class, with permanent surface outflow and no obvious natural outlet and/or outlet is a man-made ditch ........................... points = 1 (If ditch is not permanently flowing treat unit as "intermittently flowing'') • Unit has an unconstricted or sli htl constricted surface outlet ermanentl owin ....... oints = 0 D 3.2 Depth of storage during wet periods. Estimate the height of ponding above the bottom of the outlet. For units with no outlet measure from the sw:face of permanent water or deepest part Of dry). • Marks of ponding are 3 ft. or more above the surface or bottom of the outlet ....................... points = 7 • The wetland is a "headwater" wetland .................................................................................. points = 5 • Marks of ponding between 2 ft. to < 3 ft. from surface or bottom of outlet. .......................... points = 5 • Marks are at least 0.5 ft. to < 2 ft. from surface or bottom of outlet.. .................................... points = 3 • Wetland is flat (yes to Q.2 or Q.7 on key)but has small depressions on the surface that trap water points = I • Marks of ondin less than 0.5 ft......................................................................................... ints = 0 D 3.3 Contribution of wetland unit to storage in the watershed: Estimate the ratio of the area of upstream basin contributing surface water to the wetland to the area of the wetland unit itself. • The area of the basin is less than 10 times the area of unit ................................................... points= 5 • The area of the basin is IO to 100 times the area of the unit ................................................. points= 3 • The area of the basin is more than 100 times the area of the unit.. ........................................ points= 0 (seep. 44) Multiplier 18 (see p.46) 2 0 3 1--~--~·~E~n~t~ir~e~u~n~it~i~s~i~n~t~h~e~F~L~A.:.T=S~c~la~s~s~.~··~··~··~··~···~··~··~··~··~··~··~··~··~··~··~··~··~··~··~··~··~··~··~··~··~··~··~··~···~··~··~··~··~··~··~··~··~··~··~··~··~··~··=o~in~t~s-=~5~---- Total for D 3 Add the oints in the boxes above 5 1--+---------.:.;:.;:;.;.;.;;.;.;;..;;.. __________________ ;.;,;;.;;.~-.;;.;.;;.;;,;,;;.;;,;;;;,;;.;;.;;;;.;~""---- D4 Does the wetland have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? Answer YES if the unit is in a location in the watershed where the flood storage, or reduction in water velocity, it provides helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive flows. Answer NO if the water corning into the wetland is controlled by a structure such as flood gate, tide ate fla valve reservoir etc. OR ou estimate that more than 90% of the water in the wetland is from Wetland Rating Form-western Washington, version 2 (7/06) (seep. 49) Multiplier Page 4 of IO Wetland name or number: B groundwater in areas where damaging groundwater flooding does not occur .. Vote which of the following indicators qf opportunity apply. --Wetland is in a headwater of a river or stream that has flooding problems. x_ Wetland drains to a river or stream that has flooding problems --Wetland has no outlet and impounds surface runoff water that might otherwise flow into a river or stream that has flooding problems --Other J. Y~S multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is I • TOTAL -Hvdrologic Functions Multiply the score from DJ bv D4; then add score to table on p. 1 IO Comments: Wetland Rating Form -\"v·cstem Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 5 of IO Wetland name or number: B Hl HABIT AT FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to provide important habitat. Does the wetland have the potential to provide habitat for many species? H 1.1 Vegetation structure (see P. 72): p· Check the types of vegetation classes present (as defined by Cou·ardin) -Size threshold for each class is tgure 114 acre or more than 10% of the area if unit is smaller than 2.5 acres. __ Aquatic Bed __ Emergent plants __ Scrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have> 30% cover) x__ Forested (areas where trees have> 30% cover) If the unit has a forested class check if: __ The forested class has 3 out of5 strata (canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground- cover) that each cover 20% within the forested polygon. Add the number of vegetation types that qualify. ![you have: 4 structures or more ....... points = 4 2 structures .................... oints = I Map of Cowardin vegetation classes 3 structures ................... points = 2 l structure .................... oints = 0 0 H 1.2 Hydroperiods (seep. 73): Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to Figure - cover more than 10% of the wetland or I/4 acre to count (see text for descriptions ofhydroperiods). __ Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present points= 3 x__ Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 or more types present ...... points = 2 Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present. .................. points = I Saturated only 1 type present .................... points = 0 X Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland Lake-fringe wetland ................. = 2 points Freshwater tidal wetland •..••.••. = 2 points Map of hydroperiods H 1.3 Richness of Plant Species (seep. 75): Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft 2 (different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold) You do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian lv/i!foil, reed canarygrass, purple looses/rife, Canadian Thistle. If you counted: > 19 species ...................... points = 2 5 -19 species .................... points= 1 List species below if you want to: < 5 species ........................ points = 0 H 1.4 Interspersion of Habitats (seep. 76): Decided from the diagrams below whether interspersion between Cowardin vegetation ( described in HI .I), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, low, or none. 1 1 o@@@ Note: If you have 4 or more classes Figure_ or 3 vegetation classes and open water, the rating is N~ Low=--1 point Moderate= .2 point£ always "high". Use map of Cowardin classe / [riparian braided ch.anncls] H 1.5 Special Habitat Features (seep. 77): Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of point you put into the next column. Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland(> 4 in. diameter and 6 ft. long) Standing snags (diameter at the bottom> 4 inches) in the wetland Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft. (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least 3.3 ft. (Im) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the unit, for at least 33 ft. (I Om) Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (> 30 degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet turned grey/brown) At least 1/4 acre of thin-stemmed persistent vegetation or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg-laying by amphibians) Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in each stratum of plants NOTE: The 20% stated in early printings of the manual on page 78 is an error. 0 0 Wetland Rating Fenn-western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 6 of 10 Wetland name or number: B H2 Does the wetland have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? H 2.1 Buffers (see P. 80): Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland unit. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of "undisturbed". __ 100m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 95% of circumference. No structures are \Vithin the undisturbed part of buffer (relatively undisturbed also means no grazing, no landscaping, no daily human use) ............. points= 5 __ 100m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 50% circumference .................................................................................................... points= 4 __ 50m ( 170 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 95°/o circumference .................................................................................................... points= 4 __ I OOm (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 25% circumference .................................................................................................... points= 3 __ 50m ( 170 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water for> 50o/o circumference .............................................................................................. points= 3 If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above: _K_ No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25m (80 ft) of wetland> 95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK .................................. points= 2 __ No paved areas of buildings within 50m of wetland for> 50% circumference. Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK ................................................................... points = 2 __ Heavy grazing in buffer ................................................................................................ points= 1 __ Vegetated buffers are< 2m wide (6.6 ft) for more than 95% circumference (e.g. tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland) ............................. points= 0 __ Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above .............................................................. points= 1 Arial photo showing buffers H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (seep. 81) H 2.2.1 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 150 ft. wide, has at least a 30% cover of shrubs, forest or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (Dams in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads, paved roads, are considered breaks in the corridor). YES= 4 points (go to H 2.3) NO~ go to H 2.2.2 H. 2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 50 ft. wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake- fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? YES = 2 points (go to H 2.3) NO= go to H 2.2.3 H. 2.2.3 ls the wetland: • Within 5 mi (8km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR • Within 3 miles ofa large field or pasture(> 40 acres) OR • Within 1 mile of a lake greater than 20 acres? YES= I point NO= 0 points Comments: (only I score ner box) Figure_ 2 t Wetland Rating Form -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 7 oflO Wetland name or number: B H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW (see new and complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in the PHS report http://wdfw.wa.gov/hab/phslist.htm) Which of the following priority habitats are within 330ft (I OOm) of the wetland unit? NOTE: the connections do not have to be relatively undisturbed __ Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.4 ha (I acre). __ Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 152). __ Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock. __ Old-growth/lVlature forests: (Old-growth west of Cascade crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, fanning a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 20 trees/ha (8 trees/acre)> 81 cm (32 in) dbh or> 200 years of age. (Mature forests) Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (2 l in) dbh; crown cover may be less that 100%; crown cover may be less that I 00%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth; 80 -200 years old west of the Cascade crest. __ Oregon white Oak: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (fall descriptions in WDFW P HS report p. 158). _X _Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. __ Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non-forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or a wet prairie (fall descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161). _ X _ Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources. __ Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore, and Puget Sound Nearshore. (fall descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report: pp. 167-169 and glossary in Appendix A). __ Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock, ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human. __ Cliffs: Greater than 7.6 m (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft. __ Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 -2.0 m (0.5 -6.5 ft), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. __ Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of> 51 cm (20 in) in western Washington and are> 2 m (6.5 ft) in height. Priority logs are> 30 cm (12 in) in diameter at the largest end, and> 6 m (20 ft) long. If wetland has 3 or more priority habitats = 4 points If wetland has 2 priority habitats= 3 points If wetland has 1 priority habitat= 1 point No habitats= 0 points Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in thi list. Nearby wetlands are addressed in question H 2. 4) H 2.4 Wetland Landscape: Choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits (seep. 84) • There arc al leasl 3 other vi,1<.:tlands \Vithiu 1/2 mile, aud tht.: connections bctvvecn them are relatively undisturbed (light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with some boating, but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development.. ........ points = 5 • The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands within 1/2 mile ..................................................................................................... points= 5 • There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile, BUT the connections between them are disturbed ............................................................................................................................. points= 3 • The wetland fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands within 1/2 mile .................................................................................................................... points ~ 3 • There is at least I wetland within 1/2 mile ........................................................................... points~ 2 3 3 • There are no wetlands within 1/2 mile .................................................................................. points = 0 ~-----------------------------------------;---- Add the scores from H2.I. 112.2. J-/2.3. 112.4 9 ~ ~-~---------------------------------------~----TOTAL/or II I from page 8, 2 ~-~---------------------------------------~----~ Add the points for H I and H 2; then record the result on p. I j 11 I H 2 TOT AL Score -opportunity for providing habitat • Total Score for Habitat Functions ----- Wetland Rating Form -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 8 of 10 \Vetland name or number: B SCl SC2 SC3 CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below and circle the appropriate answers and Category. Wetland Type -Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the Category when the appropriate criteria are met. Estuarine wetlands? (see p.86) Does the wetland unit meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? __ The dominant water regime is tidal, --Vegetated, and __ With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt. YES ~ Go to SC I.I NO X SC I.I Is the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? YES ~ Category I NO~ go to SC 1.2 SC 1.2 Is the wetland at least 1 acre in size and meets at least two of the following conditions? YES ~ Category I NO ~ Category II --The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. If the non-native Spartina spp,. are only species that cover more than I 0% of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual rating (1/11). The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a Category 1. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in determining the size threshold of I acre. --At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a I 00 ft. buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-mowed grassland --The wetland has at least 2 of the following features: or contiguous freshwater wetlands. tidal channels, depressions with open water, Natural Heritage Wetlands (seep. 87) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage Program/DNR as either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species. SC 2.1 ls the wetland being rated in a Section/Township/Range that contains a natural heritage wetland? (This question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact WNHP/DNR.) S/T/R information from Appendix D or accessed from WNHP/DNR web site X --- YES __ Contact WNHP/DNR (seep. 79) and go to SC 2.2 NO X -- SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as a site with state threatened or endangered plant species? YES ~ Category I NO X not a Heritage Wetland Bogs (.,ee p. 87) Does the wetland (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below to identify if the wetland is a bog. I/you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its function. I. Does the unit have organic soil horizons (i.e. layers of organic soil), either peats or mucks, that compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identify organic soils)? YES ~ go to question 3 NO = go to question 2 2. Does the wetland have organic soils, either peats or mucks that are less than 16 inches deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or pond? YES go to question 3 NO= is not a bog for purpose of rating 3. Does the unit have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present, consist of the "bog" species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more than 30% of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)? YES~ Is a bog for purpose of rating NO= go to question 4 NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16" deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the "bog" plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog. 4. ls the unit forested (> 30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann's spruce, or western white pine. \VITH any of the species (or combination of species) on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant component of the ground cover(> 30% coverage of the total shrub/herbaceous cover)? YES ~ Category I NO = Is not a bog for purpose of rating Cat. 1 Cat. I Cat. II Dual Rating 1/11 Cat I Cat. I Wetland Rating Form -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 9 of 10 Wetland name or number: B SC4 SC5 SC6 Forested Wetlands (seep. 90) Does the wetland have at least I acre of forest that meet one of these criteria for the Department offish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats? ff you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its function. __ Old-growth forests: (west of Cascade Crest) Stands of at least two three species forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/acre (20 trees/hectare) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 inches (81 cm or more). NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. Two-hundred year old trees in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often slower. The DFW criterion is and "'OR" so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter. __ Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80 -200 years old OR have an average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53 cm); crown cover may be less than 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth. YES -Category I NO -X not a forested wetland with special characteristics Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (seep. 91) Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria ofa wetland in a coastal lagoon? __ The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks. __ The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains surface water that is saline or brackish(> 0.5 ppt) during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the bottom.) YES -Go to SC 5.1 NO X_ not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1 Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions? __ The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing) and has less than 20% cover of invasive plant species (see list of invasive species on p. 74). __ At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft. buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-mowed grassland. __ The wetland is larger than 1/10 acre (4350 square ft.) YES -Category I NO -Category II Interdunal Wetlands (seep. 93) ls the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? YES -Go to SC 6.1 NO X_ not an interdunal wetland for rating I/you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. In practical terms that means the following geographic areas: • Long Beach Peninsula --lands west of SR 103 • Gray land-Westport --lands west of SR 105 • Ocean Shores-Copalis -lands west of SR 115 and SR 109 SC 6.1 Is the wetland one acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is one acre or larger? YES -Category II NO -go to SC 6.2 SC 6.2 Is the wetland between 0.1 and 1 acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and I acre? YES -Category Ill Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics + Choose the "highest" rating if wetland/alls into several categories, and record on p. 1. If you answered NO for all types enter "Not Applicable" on p. 1 Comments: Cat. I Cat. I Cat. II Cat. II Cat. III Wetland Rating Form-western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 10 of 10 Wetland name or number: C WETLAND RATING FORM -WESTERN WASHINGTON Version 2 -Updated July 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users Updated Oct 2008 with the new WDFW definitions for priority habitats Name of wetland (if known): Wetland C Date of site visit: June 5, 2013 Rated by: J. Dadisman Trained by Ecology? Yes x_ No _____ _ Date of training: I 1/06 SEC: 7 TWNSHP: 23 North RNGE: 4 East Is S/T/R in Appendix D? Yes ______ No X Map of wetland unit: Figure _______ Estimated size _____ _ SUMMARY OF RA TING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland: I ______ II ____ _ III -"""---- Category I ~ Score > 70 Category II ~ Score 51 -69 Category Ill ~ Score 30 -50 Category IV ~ Score < 30 Score for Water Quality functions Score for Hydrologic Functions Score for Habitat Functions TOTAL Score for functions 12 16 11 39 IV __ _ Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTCS of Wetland I ____ II ____ Docs not apply_..,)(.__ __ Final Category (choose the "highest" category from above") III Summary of basic information about the wetland unit. Wetland Unit has Special Wetland HGM Class Characteristics used for Ratln1> Estuarine Deoressional Natural Herita1>e Wetland Riverine )( Bog Lake-fringe Mature Forest Slone Old Growth Forest Flats Coastal La11:oon Freshwater Tidal lnterdunal None of the above )( Check if unit has multiple HGM classes present Wetland Rating Form -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 1 of9 Wetland name or number: C Does the wetland being rated meet any of the criteria below? If you answer YES to any of the questions below you will need to rotect the wetland accordin to the re ulations re ardin the s ecial characteristics found in the wetland. ;;,,.:;,:,;;,;;;;.;:.:,.,..,,,,.,,......,...--= cTa•1'. ~,!~i:· SP!. Has the wetland unit been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed Threatened or Endangered animal or plant species (TIE species)? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. SP2. Has the wetland unit been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or Endangered animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species are cate orized as Cate or l Natural Herita e Wetlands see . 19 of data form). SP4. Does the wetland unit have a local significance in addition to its functions? For example, the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or in a local management Ian as havin s ecial si nificance. X X X X To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to determine the Hydrogeomorphic Class of the wetland being rated. The hydrogeomoiphic clas.sificatimgrouµ; wetlands in to those that fimctim in similar ways. This simplifies 1he questims needed to answer how well 1he wetland fimctims. The Hydrogoomoiphic Class of a wetland can be determined using1he key below. Seep. 24 for more delailed instructims m classifying wetlands. Wetland is below1he OHWM of Cedar River. Cedar Rivercmtains lhrealened and endangered fish species. Wetland Rating Fonn -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 2 of9 Wetland name or number: C Classification of Vegetated Wetlands for Western Washington If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply, and go to Question 8. I. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during floods)? ~o to 2 YES -the wetland class is Tidal Fringe "------rryes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? YES -Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO -Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) ff your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the.forms for Riverine wetlands. !fit is a Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an Estuarine wetland Wetlands that were call estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the term "Estuarine" wetland is kept. Please note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed (see P· ). 2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface water runoff are NOT sou~ater to the unit. NO -o to 3 YES -The wetland class is Flats If your wetland can e classified as a "Flats" wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the entire wetland meet both of the following criteria? ___ The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores ofa body of permanent open water (without any vegetation on the surface) where at least 20 acres (Sha) in size; ___ At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 (2 m)? NO -o to 4 YES -The wetland class is Lake-frin e (Lacustrine Frin e) 4. Does the entire wetlan meet all of the following criteria? ___ The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual). ___ The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheettlow, or in a swale without distinct banks. ___ The water leaves the wetland without being impounded? NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these types of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow de ressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than I foot deep). NO -o to 5 YES -The wetland class is Slo e 5. Does the entire wetlan meet all of the following criteria? X __ The unit is in a valley or stream channel where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or nver. X __ The overbank flooding occurs at least once every two years. NOTE: The riverine unit can co · depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding.. NO -o to 6 YES The wetland class is Riverine 6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time of the year. This means that any outlet, if present is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO -go to 7 YES -The wetland class is Depressional 7. ls the entire wetland located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding. The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. No-go to 8 YES -The wetland class is Depressional 8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base ofa slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO HACK AND Jl)EN llFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLUGIC llliUlMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within your wetland. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the class listed in column 2 is less than IO% of the unit, classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area. HGM Classes within the wetland unit bein!! rated HGM Class to Use in Rati= Slone + Riverine Riverine Slone + Depressional Depressional Slooe + Lake-fringe Lake-fringe Denressional + Riverine along stream within boundary Depressional Depressional + Lake-fringe Deoressional Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with special freshwater wetland characteristics If you are unable still to dctermme which of the above cntena apply to your wetland, or you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland Rating Form -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 3 of9 Wetland name or number: C Rl R2 WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to improve water quality. Does the wetland have the potential to improve water quality? (see p.52) R 1.1 Area of surface depressions within the riverine wetland that can trap sediments during a flooding event: • Depressions cover> 3/4 area of wetland .............................................................................. points = 8 • Depressions cover> 1/2 area of wetland .............................................................................. points= 4 (If depressions> 1/2 of area of unit draw polygons on aerial photo or map) • Depressions present but cover< 1/2 area of wetland ............................................................ points= 2 • No de ressions resent ........................................................................................................ oiots = 0 R 1.2 Characteristics of the vegetation in the unit (areas with >90% cover at person height): • Trees or shrubs> 2/3 area of the unit ................................................................................... points= 8 • Trees or shrubs > I /3 area of the wetland ............................................................................. points ~ 6 • Ungrazed, herbaceous plants> 2/3 area of unit .................................................................... points= 6 • Ungrazed herbaceous plants> 1/3 area of unit ..................................................................... points= 3 • Trees, shrubs, and ungrazed herbaceous< 1/3 area of unit (wetland is grazed) .................... points= 0 Aerial hoto or ma showin ol ons of different ve etation t es Does the wetland have the opportunity to improve water quality? Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes or groundwater downgradient from the wetland. Jl./ote which of the following conditions provide the sources of pollutants. A unit may have pollutants coming from several sources, but any single source would qualify as opportunity. __ Grazing in the wetland or within 150 ft __ Untreated storm water discharges to wetland Tilled fields or orchards within 150 ft. of wetland A stream or culvert discharges into wetland that drains developed areas, residential areas, farmed fields, roads, or clear-cut logging _x_ Residential, urban areas, golf courses are within 150 ft. of wetland The river or stream linked to the wetland has a contributing basin where human activities have raised levels of sediment, toxic compounds or nutrients in the river water above standards for water quality. Other-----~~~~----------~-------------~ NO multi lier is I Figure_ 0 Figure_ 6 (seep. 53) Multiplier R 3 Does the wetland have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? (seep.54) R 3.1 R 3.2 Characteristics of the overbank storage the wetland provides: Estimate the average width of the wetland • perpendicular lo the direction ofthejloH' and the width of the stream or river channel (distance between Figure_ banks). Calculate the ratio: (average width of unit) I (average width of stream between banks). • If the ratio is more than 20 ................................................................................................... points= 9 • Jfthe ratio is between JO -20 .............................................................................................. points~ 6 • If the ratio is 5-< 10 ............................................................................................................. points ~ 4 • If the ratio is I -<5 ............................................................................................................... points ~ 2 1 • If the ratio is< I .................................................................................................................. points= I Aerial hoto or ma showin avera e widths Characteristics of vegetation that slow down water velocities during floods: Treat large woody debris as . ''forest or shrub". Choose the points appropriate for the best description. (polygons need to have >90° Figure cover at person height NOT Cowardin classes): • Forest or shrub for> 1/3 area OR herbaceous plants> 2/3 area ............................................ points= 7 • Forest or shrub for> 1/10 area OR herbaceous plants> 1/3 area (vegetation short and sparse) .. points= 4 • Vegetation does not meet above criteria ............................................................................... points = 0 7 Aerial hoto or ma showin ol ons of different ve etation t es --.i-- ~-~-----------------------------~A~d~d~1~h~e.JO~i~11~1,~1~11~1~h~e~h~o~x~e-~1~a~b~o~,,~,~--~- R 4 Does the wetland have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p.57) Answer YES if the wetland is in a location in the watershed where the flood storage, or reduction in water velocity, it provides helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive flows. Note which ofthe/01/011,ing conditions apply. _x_ There are human structures and activities downstream (roads, buildings, bridges, farms) that can be damaged by flooding. _x_ There are natural resources downstream (e.g. salmon redds) that can be damaged by flooding Multiplier Other ---,,--,-~~~~~-----c~~~---,----~----,-~,----~~~----,-~~~~~~---,-~----c~-,-- (Answer NO if the major source of water to the wetland is controlled by a reservoir or the wetland is Iida/ fringe along the sides of a dike) YES multi lier is 2 + TOT AL -H drolo ic Functions Comments: Multi Wetland Rating Form~ western Washington, version 2 (7/06) 2 R4; then add score to table on . I 16 Page 4 of9 Wetland name or number: C Hl HABITAT FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to provide important habitat. Does the wetland have the potential to provide habitat for many species? H I. I Vegetation structure (see P. 72): . Check the types of vegetation classes present (as defined by Cowardin) -Size threshold.for each class is Figure 1/4 acre or more than 10% of the area (/unit is smaller than 2.5 acres. H 1.2 H 1.3 __ Aquatic Bed _K__ Emergent plants __ Scrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have> 30% cover) __ Forested (areas where trees have> 30% cover) If the unit has a forested class check if: __ The forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy. sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground- cover) that each cover 20% within the forested polygon. Add the number of vegetation types that qualify. Jfyou have: 4 structures or more ....... points = 4 Map of Cowardin vegetation classes 3 structures ................... points = 2 2 structures .................... oints = 1 I structure .................... oints = 0 Hydroperiods (.~ee p. 73): Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. the water regime has to corer more than 10% of the wetland or 1/4 acre to count (see text for descriptions ofhydroperiods). Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present points= 3 Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 or more types present.. .... points= 2 Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present.. ................. points = 1 )( Saturated only I type present .................... points~ 0 X Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland Lake-fringe wetland ................. ~ 2 points Freshwater tidal wetland ......... = 2 points Map of hydroperiods Richness of Plant Species (seep. 75): Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft 2 (different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold) You do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian Afilfoil, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrif'e, Canadian Thistle. If you counted: > 19 species ...................... points= 2 5 -19 species .................... points~ I List species below if you want to: < 5 species ........................ points= 0 H 1.4 Interspersion of Habitats (seep. 76): Decided from the diagrams below whether interspersion between Coward in vegetation ( described in HI .1 ), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, low, or none. 0 Figure __ 1 1 Note: If you have 4 or more classes Figure __ or 3 vegetation classes and open water, the rating is None = 0 poinL,; Low "'-l point Modcrat:: -.2 poinL,; always ''high". Use map of Cowardin classe / [ riparian braided channels;] H 1.5 Special Habitat Features (seep. 77): Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points you put into the next column. Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 in. diameter and 6 ft. long) Standing snags (diameter at the bottom> 4 inches) in the wetland Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft. (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least 3.3 ft. (Im) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the unit, for at least 33 ft. (!Om) Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (> 30 degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or lrees that have not yet turned grey/brown) At least 1/4 acre of thin-stemmed persistent vegetation or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg-laying by amphibians) Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in each stratum of plants NOTF.: The 20% stated in early printings of the manual on page 78 is an error. 0 0 Wetland Rating Form -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 5 of9 Wetland name or number: C H2 Does the wetland have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? H 2.1 Buffers (see P. 80): Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland unit. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See text/or definition of "undisturbed". __ 100m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 95% of circumference. No structures are within the undisturbed part of buffer (relatively undisturbed also means no grazing, no landscaping, no daily human use) ............. points= 5 __ 100m (330 ft) ofrelatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 50o/o circumference .................................................................................................... points= 4 __ 50m ( l 70 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 95% circumference .................................................................................................... points= 4 __ 100m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 25% circumference .................................................................................................... points= 3 __ 50m ( 170 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water for> 50% circumference .............................................................................................. points = 3 If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above: _x_ No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25m (80 ft) of wetland> 95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK .................................. points= 2 __ No paved areas of buildings within 50m of wetland for> 50% circumference. Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK ................................................................... points= 2 __ Heavy grazing in buffer ................................................................................................ points= 1 __ Vegetated buffers are< 2m wide (6.6 ft) for more than 95% circumference (e.g. tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland) ............................. points= 0 __ Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above .............................................................. points= 1 Arial photo showing buffers H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (seep. 81) H 2.2.1 ls the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 150 ft. wide, has at least a 30% cover of shrubs, forest or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (Dams in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads, paved roads, are considered breaks in the corridor). YES= 4 points (go to H 2.3) NO= go to H 2.2.2 H. 2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 50 ft. wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake- fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? YES= 2 points (go to H 2.3) NO= go to H 2.2.3 H. 2.2.3 Is the wetland: , Within 5 mi (8km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR , Within 3 miles of a large field or pasture(> 40 acres) OR • Within 1 mile of a lake greater than 20 acres? YES= I point NO= 0 points Comments: Wetland Rating Form-western Washington, version 2 (7/06) (only I soon ner box) Figure_ 2 1 Page 6 of9 Wetland name or number: C H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW (see new and complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in the PHS report http://wdfw.wa.gov!hab/phslist.htm ) Which of the following priority habitats are within 330ft (100m) of the wetland unit? NOTE: the connections do not have to be relatively undisturbed. __ Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.4 ha (I acre). __ Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PHSreportp. 152). __ Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock. __ Old-growth/Mature forests: (Old-growth west of Cascade crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 20 trees/ha (8 trees/acre)> 81 cm (32 in) dbh or> 200 years of age. (Mature forests) Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown cover may be less that 100%; crown cover may be less that I 00%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth; 80 -200 years old west of the Cascade crest. __ Oregon white Oak: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFW !'HS report p. 158). _ X _ Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. __ Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non-forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or a wet prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161). _ X _Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources. __ Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore, and Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report: pp. 167-169 and glossary in Appendix A). __ Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock, ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human. __ Cliffs: Greater than 7 .6 m (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft. __ Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 -2.0 m (0.5 -6.5 ft), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. __ Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of> 51 cm (20 in) in western Washington and are> 2 m (6.5 ft) in height. Priority logs are> 30 cm (12 in) in diameter at the largest end, and> 6 m (20 ft) long. If wetland has 3 or more priority habitats= 4 points If wetland has 2 priority habitats= 3 points If wetland has 1 priority habitat= 1 point No habitats= 0 points Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in thi list. Nearbv wetlands are addressed in auestion H 2.4) H 2.4 Wetland Landscape: Choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits (seep. 84) • There nrc at least J other ,vctlm1ds \Vithin 1/2 mite, and the connection\ hchvccn them arc relatively undisturbed (light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with some boating, but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development.. ........ points ~ 5 • The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands within 1/2 mile ..................................................................................................... points= 5 • There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile, BUT the connections between them are disturbed ............................................................................................................................. points~ 3 • The wetland fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands within 1/2 mile .................................................................................................................... points~ 3 • There is at least I wetland within 1/2 mile ........................................................................... points = 2 3 3 , ---l-----·'---'T'-'h'-'e"'re'-"'ar,.,ec,n,oo:_w=et,,:lac,nc.:d"'s--'w"'i"'th::.:i.:cn...:lc_/2c:....cm.'..'.ic.:le::.: .. ::.: .. ::.: .. c.: .. :.:. ... :.:. .. ::.: .. ::.: .. ::.: .. c.: .. :.:. ... ::.: .. ::.: .. ::.: .. ::.: .. c.: .. :.:. ... ::.: .. ::.: .. ::.: .. c.: .. c.: .. :.:. ... ::.: .. ::.: .. ::.: .. c.: .. :.:. ... ::.: .. ::.: .. ::.: .. ::.: .. c.: .. :.:. ... ::.: .. ::.: .. ::.: .. ::.: .. .1: no:::.i::.:nc:ts'-~---"o-J. r-----· Add the scores/ram H2.1, H2.2, H2.3, H2.4 9 J ----1 T01Al for If I from page 8. 2 ,I, Add the points for H I and H 2; then record Ille result on p. 1 i-"'ir-I H 2 TOTAL Score -opportunity for providing habitat • Total Score for Habitat Functions ----- Wetland Rating Form -,vestem Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 7 of9 Wetland name or number: C SCl SC2 SC3 CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below and circle the appropriate answers and Category. Wetland Type -Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland Circle the Category when the appropriate criteria are met. Estuarine wetlands? (seep. 86) Does the wetland unit meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? --The dominant water regime is tidal, --Vegetated, and --With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt. YES ~ Go to SC I.I NO X SC I.I Is the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? YES ~ Category I NO ~ go to SC 1.2 SC 1.2 ls the wetland at least I acre in size and meets at least two of the following conditions? YES ~ Category I NO ~ Category II __ The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no dikin{' ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. I the non-native Spartina spp,. are only species that cover more than I 0% of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual rating (I/II). The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a Category I. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in determining the size threshold of 1 acre. --At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft. buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-mowed grassland The wetland has at least 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, --or contiguous freshwater wetlands. Natural Heritage Wetlands (seep. 87) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage Program/DNR as either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species. SC 2.1 ls the wetland being rated in a Section/Township/Range that contains a natural heritage wetland? (This question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact WNHPIDNR.) S/T/R information from Appendix D or accessed from WNHP/DNR web site X --- YES __ Contact WNHP/DNR (see p. 79) and go to SC 2.2 NO X --- SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as a site with state threatened or endangered plant species? YES ~ Category 1 NO X not a Heritage Wetland Bogs (seep. 87) Does the wetland (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below to identify if the wetland is a bog. I/you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on Its function. I. Does the unit have organic soil horizons (i.e. layers of organic soil), either peats or mucks, that compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identify organic soils)? YES ~ go to question 3 NO = go to question 2 2. Does the wetland have organic soils, either peats or mucks that are less than 16 inches deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or pond? YES ;-, go to question 3 NO = is not a bog for purpose of rating 3. Does the unit have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present, consist of the "bog" species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more than 30% of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)? YES ~ ls a bog for purpose of rating NO = go to question 4 NOTE: lf you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16" deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the "bog" plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog. 4. Is the unit forested(> 30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann's spruce, or western white pine. WITH any of the species (or combination of species) on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant component of the ground cover(> 30% coverage of the total shrub/herbaceous cover)? YES ~ Category I NO= Is not a bog for purpose of rating Wetland Rating Form -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Cat. I Cat. I Cat. II Dual Rating 1/11 Cat I Cat. I Page 8 of9 Wetland name or number: C SC4 SC5 Forested Wetlands (seep. 90) Does the wetland have at least I acre of forest that meet one of these criteria for the Department of Fish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats? !fyou answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its function. __ Old-growth forests: (west of Cascade Crest) Stands of at least two three species forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/acre (20 trees/hectare) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 inches (81 cm or more). NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. Two-hundred year old trees in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often slower. The DFW criterion is and "OR" so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter. __ Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80 -200 years old OR have an average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53 cm); crown cover may be less than 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth. YES= Category 1 NO = X not a forested wetland with special characteristics Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (seep. 91) Docs the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon? __ The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks. __ The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains surface water that is saline or brackish (> 0.5 ppt) during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the bottom.) YES~ Go to SC 5.1 NO X __ not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1 Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions? __ The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing) and has less than 20% cover of invasive plant species (see list of invasive species on p. 74 ). __ At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft. buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed Cat. I or un-mowed grassland. Cat. l __ The wetland is larger than 1/10 acre (4350 square ft.) YES~ Category I NO ~ Category II Cat. II SC6 lnterdunal Wetlands (seep. 93) Is the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? YES~ Go to SC 6.1 NO X __ not an interdunal wetland for rating If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. In practical terms that means the following geographic areas: , Long Beach Peninsula --lands west of SR 103 , Grayland-Westport --lands west of SR 105 , Ocean Shores-Copalis -lands west of SR 115 and SR I 09 SC 6. 1 Is the wetland one acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is one acre or larger? YES~ Category II NO ~goto SC 6.2 SC 6.2 Is the wetland between 0. t and 1 acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 acre? YES ~ Category Ill Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics + Choose the "highest" rating if wetland falls into several categories, and record on p. 1. If you answered NO for all types enter "Not Applicable" on p. 1 Comments: Wetland Rating Form -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Cat. II Cat. III Page 9 of9 Wetland name or number: D WETLAND RATING FORM -WESTERN WASHINGTON Version 2 -Updated July 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users Updated Oct 2008 with the new WDFW definitions for priority habitats Name of wetland (if known): Wetland D Date of site visit: June 5, 2013 Rated by: J. Dadisman Trained by Ecology? Yes x.__ No ______ Date of training: 11/06 SEC: 7 TWNSHP: 23 North RNGE: 4 East ls S/T/R in Appendix D? Yes ______ No K Map of wetland unit: Figure _______ Estimated size _____ _ SUMMARY OF RATING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland: I _____ II _____ Ill Category I ~ Score > 70 Category II ~ Score 51 -69 Category Ill ~ Score 30 -50 Category IV ~ Score < 30 Score for Water Quality Functions Score for Hydrologic Functions Score for Habitat Functions TOT AL Score for Functions Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTCS of Wetland -----II ____ _ Final Category (choose the "highest" category from above") Summary of basic information about the wetland unit. Wetland Unit bas Special Wetland HGM Class Characteristics used for Retina Estuarine Deoressional Natural Heritage Wetland Riverine X Boe Lake-frinee Mature Forest Slope Old Growth Forest Flats Coastal Laeoon Freshwater Tidal Interdunal None of the above X Check if unit has multiple HGM classes present Wetland Rating Form-·western \Vashington, version 2 (7/06) IV X 6 10 12 28 Does not apply X IV Pagel of9 Wetland name or number: D Does the wetland being rated meet any of the criteria below? If you answer YES to any of the questions below you will need to arding the s ecial characteristics found in the wetland . .,,..,,.====== SPl. Has the wetland unit been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed Threatened or Endangered animal or plant species (TIE species)? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. SP2. Has the wetland unit been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or Endangered animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species are cate •orized as Cate o I Natural Herita e Wetlands see . I 9 of data form). SP3. Does the wetland unit contain individuals of Priori s ecies listed b the WDFW or the state? SP4. Does the wetland unit have a local significance in addition to its functions? For example, the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or in a local mana ement Ian as havin s ecial si nificance. ;i~~~;[ X X X X To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to determine the Hydrogeomorphic Class of the wetland being rated. The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands in to those Iha! fimction in similar ways. This simplifies the questions needed to answer how well the wetland functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Classofa wetland can be dere!mined using the key below. Seep. 24 for more detailed instructioos on classifying wetlands. Wetland is below the OHWM of Cedar River. Cedar River contains threatened and endangered fish species. Wetland Rating Fonn -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 2 of9 Wetland name or number: D Classification of Vegetated Wetlands for Western Washington If the hydro logic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply, and go to Question 8. 1. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during floods)? ~o to 2 YES -the wetland class is Tidal Fringe '-----tfyes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? YES -Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO -Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is a Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an Estuarine wetland Wetlands that were call estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the tenn "Estuarine" wetland is kept. Please note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed (seep. ). 2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface water runoff are NOT sou~ater to the unit. NO -o to 3 YES -The wetland class is Flats If your wetland can e classified as a "Flats" wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the entire wetland meet both of the following criteria? ___ The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores ofa body ofpermancnt open water (without any vegetation on the surface) where at least 20 acres (8ha) in size; ___ At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 (2 m)? NO -o to 4 YES -The wetland class is Lake-frin e (Lacustrine Frin e) 4. Does the entire wetlan meet all of the following criteria? ___ The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual). ___ The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks. ___ The water leaves the wetland without being impounded? NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these types of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow de ressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 Ji diameter and less than 1 foot deep). NO -o to 5 YES -The wetland class is Slo e 5. Does the entire wetlan meet all of the following criteria? X __ The unit is in a valley or stream channel where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river. X __ The overbank flooding occurs at least once every two years. NOTE: The riverine unit can co · depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding .. NO -o to 6 YES The wetland class is Riverine 6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time of the year. This means that any outlet, if present is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO -go to 7 YES -The wetland class is Depressional 7. Is the entire wetland located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding. The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. No -go to 8 YES -The wetland class is Depressional 8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base ofa slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO BACK AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HY DROLOUIC REUIMES DESCRJBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFc:RENT AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within your wetland. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the class listed in column 2 is less than 10% of the unit, classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area. HGM Classes within the wetland unit beinr, rated HGM Class to Use in Ratinr, Slone + Riverine Riverine Slone + Denressional Denressional Slone+ Lake-frinoe Lake-frinoe Denressional + Riverine along stream within boundarv Denressional Denressional + Lake-frinQe Denressional Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with special freshwater wetland characteristics If you are unable still to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland Rating Form -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 3 of9 Wetland name or number: D WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS-Indicators that wetland functions to improve water quality. R 1 Does the wetland have the potential to improve water quality? (seep. 52) R 1.1 Area of surface depressions within the riverine wetland that can trap sediments during a flooding event: • Depressions cover> 3/4 area of wetland .............................................................................. points= 8 Figure_ ' fi'lJ!~j;;.~ii:;r ~i~r ":::. 0!r:~Jf~~~;"j;~iyg~·~~·~~·~~~i~i.pii~1~·-~·~·;;;~j;i ................. points= 4 0 • Depressions present but cover< 1/2 area of wetland ............................................................ points= 2 • No de ressions resent........................................................................................................ oints = 0 R 1.2 Characteristics of the vegetation in the unit (areas with >90% cover at person height): • Trees or shrubs> 2/3 area of the unit ................................................................................... points= 8 Figure - • Trees or shrubs> 1 /3 area of the wetland ............................................................................. points= 6 • Ungrazed, herbaceous plants> 2/3 area of unit .................................................................... points = 6 , Ungrazed herbaceous plants > 1/3 area of unit ..................................................................... points= 3 3 • Trees, shrubs, and ungrazed herbaceous < 1 /3 area of unit (wetland is grazed) .................... points = 0 Aerial hoto or ma showin ol ons of different ve etation t es R 2 Does the wetland have the opportunity to improve water quality? (seep. 53) Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes or groundwater downgradient from the wetland. Note which of the following conditions provide the sources of pollutants. A unit may have pollutants coming from several sources, but any single source would qualify as opportunity. __ Grazing in the wetland or within 150 ft Untreated stormwater discharges to wetland Tilled fields or orchards within 150 ft. of wetland A stream or culvert discharges into wetland that drains developed areas, residential areas, farmed fields, roads, or clear-cut logging _x_ Residential, urban areas, golf courses are within 150 ft. of wetland The river or stream linked to the wetland has a contributing basin where human activities have Multiplier raised levels of sediment, toxic compounds or nutrients in the river water above standards for water quality. 2 Other---------------------------------- NO multiplier is 1 R 3 Does the wetland have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? (seep.54) R 3.1 R 3.2 Characteristics of the overbank storage the wetland provides: Estimate the average width of the wetland . perpendicular to the direction of the flow and the width of the stream or river channel (distance between Figure banks). Calculate the ratio: (average width of unit) I (average ·width of stream between banks). , If the ratio is more than 20 ................................................................................................... points= 9 • If the ratio is between 10 -20 .............................................................................................. points= 6 , If the ratio is 5-<10 ............................................................................................................. points = 4 1 • If the ratio is 1-<5 ............................................................................................................... points= 2 , If the ratio is< I .................................................................................................................. points= I Aerial hoto or ma showin avera e widths Characteristics of vegetation that slow down water velocities during floods: Treat large woody debris as . ''forest or shrub". Choose the points appropriate for the best description. (polygons need to have > 90° Figure cover at person height NOT Cowardin classes): , Forest or shrub for> 1/3 area OR herbaceous plants> 2/3 area ............................................ points= 7 • Forest or shrub for> 1/10 area OR herbaceous plants> 1/3 area (vegetation short and sparse) .. points= 4 • Vegetation does not meet above criteria ............................................................................... points= 0 Aerial hoto or ma showin ol ons of different ve etation t es 4 --:r--~-1------------------------------.:.:.:;~~.;;..;.::.;;.~.:.:.;.;::;,~~;:..:::;.;;;~'1'---- R 4 Does the wetland have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p.57) Answer YES if the wetland is in a location in the watershed where the flood storage, or reduction in water velocity, it provides helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive flows. Note which of the following conditions apply. _x_ There are human structures and activities downstream (roads, buildings, bridges, farms) that can be damaged by flooding. ___x_ There are natural resources downstream (e.g. salmon redds) that can be damaged by flooding Multiplier Other -------------------------------- (Answer NO if the major source of water to the wetland is controlled by a reservoir or the wetland is tidal fringe along the sides of a dike) YU multi lier is 2 + TOT AL -H drolo ic Functions Comments: Multi Wetland Rating Form -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) R4; then add score to table on . 1 2 10 Page 4 of9 Wetland name or number: D Hl HABITAT FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to provide important habitat. Does the wetland have the potential to provide habitat for many species? H 1.1 Vegetation structure (.see P. 72): Check the types of vegetation classes present (as defined by Cowardin) -Size threshold.for each class is 114 acre or more than 10% of the area if unit is smaller than 2.5 acres. __ Aquatic Bed _x__ Emergent plants __ Scrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have> 30% cover) __ Forested (areas where trees have> 30% cover) Jfthe unit has a forested class check if: __ The forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, subRcanopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/groundR cover) that each cover 20% within the forested polygon. Add the number of vegetation types that qualify. ff you have: 4 structures or more ....... points = 4 2 structures .................... oints = 1 Map of Cowardin vegetation classes 3 structures ................... points= 2 I structure ...... .............. oints = 0 H 1.2 Hydroperiods (seep. 73): Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or 1/4 acre to count (see text/or descriptions ofhydroperiods). x__ Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present points= 3 Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 or more types present ...... points= 2 Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present ................... points = 1 Saturated only 1 type present .................... points= 0 X Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland Lake-fringe wetland ................. = 2 points Freshwater tidal wetland ......... = 2 points Map of hydroperiods H 1.3 Richness of Plant Species (seep. 75): Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft' (different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold) You do not have to name the species. Do not include £urasian Mi/foil, reed cana,ygrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian Thistle. If you counted: > 19 species ...................... points= 2 5 -l 9 species .................... points = I List species below if you want to: < 5 species ........................ points= 0 H l.4 Interspersion of Habitats (.seep. 76): Decided from the diagrams below whether interspersion between Cowardin vegetation (described in Hl.l), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, low, or none. Figure_ 0 Figure __ 1 1 Note: If you have 4 or more classes Figure __ or 3 vegetation classes and H 1.5 open water, the rating is None = 0 poinl:s Low~ I point Modcrat:: °'" 2 poinh always "high'". Use map of Cowardin classe {riparian braided chann::cls.J Special Habitat Features (seep. 77): Check the habitat.features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points you plll into the next column. x__ Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 in. diameter and 6 ft. long) Standing snags ( diameter at the bottom > 4 inches) in the wetland Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft. (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least 3.3 ft. (lm) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the unit, for at least 33 ft. (JOm) Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (> 30 degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet turned grey/brown) At least 1/4 acre of thin-stemmed persistent vegetation or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for eggRlaying by amphibians) Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in each stratum of plants ]VOTE: The 20% stated in early printings of the manual on page 78 is an error. Wetland Rating Form-western \Vashington, version 2 (7/06) 0 1 Page5of9 Wetland name or number: D H2 Does the wetland have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? H 2.1 Buffers (see P. 80): Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer a/wetland unit. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of "undisturbed". __ 100m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 95% of circumference. No structures are within the undisturbed part of buffer (relatively undisturbed also means no grazing, no landscaping, no daily human use) ............. points= 5 __ 1 OOm (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 50% circumference .................................................................................................... points= 4 __ 50m (170 ft) ofrelatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 95o/o circumference .................................................................................................... points= 4 __ 1 OOm (330 ft) ofrelatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 25o/o circumference .................................................................................................... points= 3 __ 50m (170 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water for> 50o/o circumference .............................................................................................. points= 3 If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above: _x_ No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25m (80 ft) of wetland> 95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK .................................. points= 2 __ No paved areas of buildings within 50m of wetland for> 50% circumference. Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK ................................................................... points= 2 __ Heavy grazing in buffer ................................................................................................ points= 1 __ Vegetated buffers are< 2m wide (6.6 ft) for more than 95% circumference (e.g. tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland) ............................. points= 0 __ Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above .............................................................. points= 1 Arial photo showing buffers H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (seep. 81) H 2.2.1 ls the wetland part ofa relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 150 ft. wide, has at least a 30% cover of shrubs, forest or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (Dams in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads, paved roads, are considered breaks in the corridor). YES~ 4 points (go to H 2.3) NO~ go to H 2.2.2 H. 2.2.2 Is the wetland part ofa relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 50 ft. wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake- fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? YES= 2 points (go to H 2.3) NO= go to H 2.2.3 H. 2.2.3 ls the wetland: • Within 5 mi (8km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR • Within 3 miles of a large field or pasture(> 40 acres) OR • Within 1 mile of a lake greater than 20 acres? YES= I point NO= 0 points Comments: Wetland Rating form -\Vestem Washington, version 2 (7/06) , (only 1 ,con oer boxl Figure_ 2 1 Page 6 of9 Wetland name or number: D H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW (see new and complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in the PHS report http://wdfw.wa.gov/hahlphslist.litm) Which of the following priority habitats are within 330ft (100m) of the wetland unit? NOTE: the connections do not have lo be relatively undisturbed. __ Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.4 ha (1 acre). __ Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (Juli descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 152). __ Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock. __ Old-growth/Mature forests: (Old-growth west of Cascade crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, fonning a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 20 trees/ha (8 trees/acre) > 81 cm (32 in) dbh or > 200 years of age. (Mature forests) Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown cover may be less that 100%; crown cover may be less that I 00%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth; 80 -200 years old west of the Cascade crest. __ Oregon white Oak: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 158). _ X _ Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. __ Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non-forested plant communities that can either take the fonn of a dry prairie or a wet prairie (Juli descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161). _X _Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources. __ Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore, and Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report: pp. 167-169 and glossary in Appendix A). __ Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock, ice, or other geological fonnations and is large enough to contain a human. __ Cliffs: Greater than 7 .6 m (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft. __ Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 -2.0 m (0.5 -6.5 ft), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. __ Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of> 51 cm (20 in) in western Washington and are> 2 m (6.5 ft) in height. Priority logs are> 30 cm (12 in) in diameter at the largest end, and> 6 m (20 ft) long. lf wetland has 3 or more priority habitats= 4 points If wetland has 2 priority habitats= 3 points If wetland has 1 priority habitat= 1 point No habitats= 0 points Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in thi list. Nearby wetlands are addressed in question H 2.4) H 2.4 Wetland Landscape: Choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits (seep. 84) • There arc at kast 3 otlirr wetlands within 1/2 mile, and the connections between them arc relatively undisturbed (light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with some boating, but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development. ......... points ~ 5 • The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands within 1/2 mile ..................................................................................................... points~ 5 • There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile, BUT the connections between them are disturbed ............................................................................................................................. points~ 3 • The wetland fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands within 1/2 mile .................................................................................................................... points ~ 3 • There is at least 1 wetland within 1/2 mile ........................................................................... points= 2 3 3 • There are no wetlands within 1/2 mile .................................................................................. ooints = 0 r-r---~==~~===~=~=======================~~,---- AddthescoresfromH2.J, H2.2, H2.3, H2.4 __ 3 9 __ J TOTAlforH Jfrompage8 l ~-~-------------------------------~--~-~~-~----~ Add the points for H I and H 2; then record the result on p. I I 12 I H 2 TOT AL Score -opportunity for providing habitat • Total Score for Habitat Functions ----- Wetland Rating Form-western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 7 of9 Wetland name or number: D SCl SC2 ,C3 CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below and circle the appropriate answers and Category. Wetland Type-Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the Category when the appropriate criteria are met. Estuarine wetlands? (see p.86) Does the wetland unit meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? --The dominant water regime is tidal, --Vegetated, and --With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt. YES ~Goto SC 1.1 NO X SC 1.1 Is the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? YES ~ Category I NO ~ go to SC 1.2 SC 1.2 Is the wetland at least 1 acre in size and meets at least two of the following conditions? YES ~ Category I NO~ Category II __ The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. Jfthe non-native Spartina spp,. are only species -- that cover more than 10% of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual rating (I/11). The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a Category I. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in determining the size threshold of 1 acre. At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a I 00 ft. buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-mowed grassland --The wetland has at least 2 of the following features: or contiguous freshwater wetlands. tidal channels, depressions with open water, Natural Herita~e Wetlands (seep. 87) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage Program/DNR as either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species. SC 2.1 ls the wetland being rated in a Section/Township/Range that contains a natural heritage wetland? (This question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact WNHPIDNR.) S/T/R information from Appendix D or accessed from WNHP/DNR web site X --- YES __ Contact WNHP/DNR (seep. 79) and go to SC 2.2 NOX __ SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as a site with state threatened or endangered plant species? YES ~ Category I NO X not a Heritage Wetland Bogs (seep. 87) Does the wetland (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below to identify if the wetland is a bog. I/you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its function. I. Does the unit have organic soil horizons (i.e. layers of organic soil), either peats or mucks, that compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identify organic soils)? YES = go to question 3 NO -go to question 2 2. Does the wetland have organic soils, either peats or mucks that are less than 16 inches deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or pond? YES =-go to question 3 NO -is not a bog for purpose of rating 3. Does the unit have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present, consist of the "'bog" species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more than 30% of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)? YES ~ ls a bog for purpose ofrating NO =goto question 4 NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16" deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the "bog" plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog. 4. Is the unit forested (> 30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann's spruce, or western white pine. WITH any of the species (or combination of species) on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant component of the ground cover(> 30% coverage of the total shrub/herbaceous cover)? YES ~ Category I NO = Is not a bog for purpose of rating Wetland Rating Form-western Washington, version 2 (7/06) ' Cat. 1 Cat. I Cat. II Dual Rating 1/11 Cat I Cat. I Page 8 of9 Wetland name or number: D SC4 scs Forested Wetlands (seep. 90) Does the wetland have at least 1 acre of forest that meet one of these criteria for the Department of Fish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats? Jfyou answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its function. __ Old-growth forests: (west of Cascade Crest) Stands of at least t\VO three species forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/acre (20 trees/hectare) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of32 inches (81 cm or more). NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. Two-hundred year old trees in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often slower. The DFW criterion is and "OR" so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter. __ Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80 -200 years old OR have an average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53 cm); crown cover may be less than I 00%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally Jess than that found in old-growth. YES ~ Category I NO ~ X not a forested wetland with special characteristics Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (seep. 91) Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon? __ The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks. __ The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains surface water that is saline or brackish (> 0.5 ppt) during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the bottom.) YES~ Go to SC 5.1 NO X __ not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1 Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions? __ The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing) and has less than 20% cover of invasive plant species (see list of invasive species on p. 74). __ At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft. buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed Cat. I or un-mowed grassland. Cat. I __ The wetland is larger than 1/10 acre (4350 square ft.) YES~ Category I NO ~ Category II Cat. II lnterdunal Wetlands (seep. 93) ls the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? YES= Go to SC 6.1 NO X __ not an interdunal wetland for rating I/you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its/unctions. In practical terms that means the following geographic areas: • Long Beach Peninsula --lands west of SR 103 , Grayland-Westport --lands west of SR I 05 , Ocean Shores-Copalis -lands west of SR 115 and SR 109 SC 6. t Is the wetland one acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is one acre or larger? YES -Category IJ NO ~goto SC 6.2 SC 6.2 ls the wetland between 0. I and 1 acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and I acre? YES -Category Ill Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics + Choose the "highest" rating if wetland falls into several categories, and record on p. /. Tfyou answered NO for all types enter "Not Applicable" on p. 1 Comments: Wetland Rating Form-western \Vashington, version 2 (7/06) Cat. II Cat. III Page 9 of9 Wetland name or number: E WETLAND RATING FORM -WESTERN WASHINGTON Version 2 -Updated July 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users Updated Oct 2008 with the new WDFW definitions for priority habitats Name of wetland (if known): Wetland E Date of site visit: June 5, 2013 Rated by: J. Dadisman Trained by Ecology? Yes x_ No ______ Date of training: 11/06 SEC: 7 TWNSHP: 23 North RNGE: 4 East Is S/TIR in Appendix D? Yes ______ No X Map of wetland unit: Figure _______ Estimated size _____ _ SUMMARY OF RATING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland: Category I ~ Score > 70 Category II ~ Score 51 -69 Category III ~ Score 30 -50 Category IV ~ Score < 30 11 _____ III Score for Water Quality Functions Score for Hydro logic Functions Score for Habitat Functions TOT AL Score for Functions Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTCS of Wetland I _____ II ____ _ Final Category (choose the "highest" category from above") Summary of basic information about the wetland unit. Wetland Unit has Special Wetland HGM Class Characteristics used for Ratinl! Estuarine Depression al Natural Heritaee Wetland Riverine X Bog Lake-frin!!e Mature Forest Slope Old Growth Forest Flats Coastal Lagoon Freshwater Tidal Interdunal None of the above X Check if unit has multiple HGM classes present Wetland Rating Form -\vestem Washington, version 2 (7/06) IVX 6 IO 12 28 Does not apply X IV Page I of9 Wetland name or number: E SP!. Has the wetland unit been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed Threatened or Endangered animal or plant species (TIE species)? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. SP2. Has the wetland unit been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or Endangered animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species are cate orized as Cate or I Natural Herita e Wetlands (see . 19 of data form). SP4. Does the wetland unit have a local significance in addition to its/unctions? For example, the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or in a local management Ian as havin s ecial si nificance. X X X X To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to determine the Hydrogeomorphic Class of the wetland being rated. The liydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands in to those Iha! function in similar ways. This simplifies 1he questions needed to answer howwell 1he wetland functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class ofa wetland can be determined using 1he key below. Seep. 24 for more detailed instructions on classifying wetlands. Wetland is below the OHWM of Cedar River. Cedar Rivercootains threatened and endangered fish species. Wetland Rating Form -\Vestem Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 2 of9 Wetland name or number: E Classification of Vegetated Wetlands for Western Washington If the hydro logic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply, and go to Question 8. 1. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during floods)? ~o to 2 YES -the wetland class is Tidal Fringe "------r{yes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? YES -Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO -Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) ff your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the.forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is a Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an Erituari11e wetland. Wetlands that were call estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the term "Estuarine" wetland is kept. Please note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed (seep. ). 2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface water runoff are NOT sou~ater to the unit. NO -o to 3 YES -The wetland class is Flats If your wetland can e classified as a "Flats" wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the entire wetland meet both of the following criteria? ---The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any vegetation on the surface) where at least 20 acres (8ha) in size; ---At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 (2 m)? NO -o to 4 YES -The wetland class is Lake-frin e (Lacustrine Frin e) 4. Does the entire wetlan meet all of the following criteria? ___ The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual). ___ The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetllow, or in a swale \>i1ithout distinct banks. ___ The water leaves the wetland without being impounded? NOTE: Sur.face water does not pond in these types of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow de ressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3.fi diameter and less than I foot deep). NO -o to 5 YES -The wetland class is Slo e 5. Does the entire wetlan meet all of the following criteria? X __ The unit is in a valley or stream channel where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river. X __ The overbank flooding occurs at least once every two years. NOTE: The riverine unit can co · depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding .. NO -oo to 6 YES The wetland class is Riverine 6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time of the year. This means that any outlet, if present is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO -go to 7 YES -The wetland class is Depressional 7. ls the entire wetland located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding. The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. No -go to 8 YES -The wetland class is Depressional 8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base ofa slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along it-, sides. GO l!ACKANIJ JIJEN lll·Y WHICH OJ-THE HYIJKOLOGJC REGIMES IJESCKlllLIJ JN ()UESTJONS J-7 APPLY TO IJJFFLKENT AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within your wetland. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more ofthe total area of the wetland w1it being rated. If the area of the class listed in column 2 is less than I 0% of the unit, classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area. HGM Classes within the wetland unit beine rated HGM Class to Use in Ratine Slope + Riverine Riverine Slope + Depressional Deoressional Slope+ Lake-fringe Lake-fringe Depressional + Riverine along stream within boundary Depressional Depressional + Lake-fringe Depressional Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with special freshwater wetland characteristics If you are unable stJil to determme which of the above cntena apply to your wetland, or you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland Rating Form -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page3 of9 Wetland name or number: E WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to improve water quality. R 1 Does the wetland have the potential to improve water quality? (see p.52) R 1.1 Area of surface depressions within the riverine wetland that can trap sediments during a flooding event: • Depressions cover> 3/4 area of wetland .............................................................................. points= 8 Figure -- • ?.1PJ:~sj~~~;;;;_t ti~r ~::a oJr:~::~~~;·j;~·i;;g·~-~~·~~-~~·;j~j·pb·~t·~··~·;·~~p)·············· ..... points= 4 0 • Depressions present but cover< 1/2 area of wetland ............................................................ points= 2 • No de ressions resent ........................................................................................................ oints = 0 R 1.2 Characteristics of the vegetation in the unit (areas with >90% cover at person height): • Trees or shrubs> 2/3 area of the unit ................................................................................... points = 8 Figure __ • Trees or shrubs> 113 area of the wetland ............................................................................. points -6 • Ungrazed, herbaceous plants> 2/3 area of unit .................................................................... points = 6 • Ungrazed herbaceous plants > 1/3 area of unit ..................................................................... points -3 3 • Trees, shrubs, and ungrazed herbaceous< 1 /3 area of unit (wetland is grazed) .................... points= 0 Aerial hoto or ma showin ol ons of different ve etation t es R 2 Does the wetland have the opportunity to improve water quality? (seep. 53) Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes or groundwater downgradient from the wetland. Note which of the following conditions provide the sources of pollutants. A unit may have pollutants coming from several sources, but any single source would qualify as opportunity. Grazing in the wetland or within 150 ft Untreated stormwater discharges to wetland Tilled fields or orchards within 150 ft. of wetland A stream or culvert discharges into wetland that drains developed areas, residential areas, farmed fields, roads, or clear-cut logging _x_ Residential, urban areas, golf courses are within 150 ft. of wetland The river or stream linked to the wetland has a contributing basin where human activities have Multiplier raised levels of sediment, toxic compounds or nutrients in the river water above standards for -q~i~. a Other NO multi lier is I R 3 Does the wetland have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? (seep.54) R 3.1 R 3.2 Characteristics of the overbank storage the wetland provides: Estimate the average width of the wetland . perpendicular lo the direction of the flow and the width of the stream or river channel (distance between Figure banks). Calculate the ratio: (average width of unit} I (average width of stream between banks). • If the ratio is more than 20 ................................................................................................... points= 9 , If the ratio is between IO -20 .............................................................................................. points -6 , If the ratio is 5-<10 ............................................................................................................. points -4 • If the ratio is 1-<5 ............................................................................................................... points= 2 1 • If the ratio is< 1 .................................................................................................................. points= 1 Aerial hoto or ma showin avera e widths Characteristics of vegetation that slow down water velocities during floods: Treat large ·woody debris as . ''forest or shrub". Choose the points appropriate for the best description. (polygons need to have >90° Figure cover at person height NOT Cowardin classes): • Forest or shrub for> 1/3 area OR herbaceous plants> 2/3 area ............................................ points= 7 • Forest or shrub for> 1/10 area OR herbaceous plants> 1/3 area (vegetation short and sparse) .. points= 4 • Vegetation does not meet above criteria ............................................................................... points= 0 Aerial hoto or ma showin ol ons of different ve etation t es 4 ---Add the Joint.\' in the boxes above :, 1--.... --------------------------------"=------=--------=----... -,.----R 4 Does the wetland have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p.57) Answer YES if the wetland is in a location in the watershed where the flood storage, or reduction in water velocity, it provides helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive flows. Note which of the following conditions apply. _x_ There are human structures and activities downstream (roads, buildings, bridges, farms) that can be damaged by flooding. ___x_ There are natural resources downstream (e.g. salmon redds) that can be damaged by flooding Multiplier Other (Answer NO if the major source of water to the wetland is controlled by a reservoir or the wetland is tidal fringe along the sides of a dike) YES multi lier is 2 + TOTAL -H drolo ic Functions Comments: Multi Wetland Rating Fonn-westem Washington, version 2 (7/06) R4; then add score to table on . I 2 10 Page 4 of9 Wetland name or number: E Hl HABITAT FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to provide important habitat. Does the wetland have the potential to provide habitat for many species? H 1.1 Vegetation structure (see P. 72): Check the types of vegetation classes present (as defined by Cowardin) -Size threshold for each class is Figure -- 1/4 acre or more than 10% of the area if unit is smaller than 2.5 acres. __ Aquatic Bed _x_ Emergent plants __ Scrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have> 30% cover) __ Forested (areas where trees have> 30% cover) If the unit has a forested class check if: __ The forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground- cover) that each cover 20% within the forested polygon. Add the number of vegetation types that qualify. if you have: Map of Cowardin vegetation classes 4 structures or more ....... points= 4 2 structures.................... oints = I 3 structures ................... points= 2 I structure .................. .. oints = 0 H 1.2 Hydroperiods (seep. 7 3): Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or 114 acre to count (see text/or descriptions ofhydroperiods). x__ Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present points = 3 Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 or more types present. ..... points = 2 Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present... ................ points = 1 Saturated only 1 type present .................... points = 0 X Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland Lake-fringe wetland ••.••.••.••.••.•• = 2 points Freshwater tidal wetland ......... = 2 points Map of hydroperiods H 1.3 Richness of Plant Species (seep. 75): Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft 2 (different patches of the same species can he combined to meet the size threshold) You do not have to name the species. Do not include F.urasian A1ilfoi/, reed canarygrass, purple loose strife. Canadian Thistle. If you counted: > 19 species ...................... points= 2 List species below if you want to: 5 -19 species .................... points = I < 5 species ........................ points= 0 H 1.4 Interspersion of Habitats (seep. 76): Decided from the diagrams below whether interspersion between Cowardin vegetation ( described in H 1.1 ), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, low, or none. 0 Figure __ 1 1 Note: If you have 4 or more classes Figure __ or 3 vegetation classes and H 1.5 open water, the rating is None = 0 point,; Low .::... I point Modr:-ratz '--::? poinl..!i always "high". Use map of Cowardin classe Special Habitat Features (seep. 77): Check the habitat.features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number o,fpoints you put into the next column. x__ Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland(> 4 in. diameter and 6 ft. long) Standing snags ( diameter at the bottom > 4 inches) in the wetland Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft. (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least 3.3 ft. (lm) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the unit, for at least 33 ft. (10m) Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (> 30 degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees thal have not yet turned grey/brown) At least 1/4 acre of thin-stemmed persistent vegetation or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated (.structures for egg-laying by amphibians) Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in each stratum of plants NOTF.: The 20% stated in early printings of the manual on page 78 is an error. 0 1 Wetland Rating Form-western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 5 of9 Wetland name or number: E H2 Does the wetland have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? H 2.1 Buffers (.<ee P. 80): Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland unit. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of "undisturbed". __ 100m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 95% of circumference. No structures are within the undisturbed part of buffer (relatively undisturbed also means no grazing, no landscaping, no daily human use) ............. points = 5 __ 100m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 50% circumference .................................................................................................... points = 4 __ 50m (170 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 95o/o circumference .................................................................................................... points= 4 __ 100m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 25o/o circumference .................................................................................................... points= 3 __ 50m (170 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water for> 50o/o circumference .............................................................................................. points= 3 If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above: _x_ No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25m (80 ft) of wetland> 95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK .................................. points= 2 __ No paved areas of buildings within 50m of wetland for> 50% circumference. Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK ................................................................... points= 2 __ Heavy grazing in buffer ................................................................................................ points= 1 __ Vegetated buffers are< 2m wide (6.6 ft) for more than 95% circumference (e.g. tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland) ............................. points= 0 __ Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above .............................................................. points= 1 Arial photo showing buffers H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (seep. 81) H 2.2.1 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 150 ft. wide, has at least a 30% cover of shrubs, forest or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (Dams in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads, paved roads, are considered breaks in the corridor). YES= 4 points (go to H 2.3) NO= go to H 2.2.2 H. 2.2.2 ls the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 50 ft. wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake- fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? YES= 2 points (go to H 2.3) NO= go to H 2.2.3 H. 2.2.3 Is the wetland: • Within 5 mi (8km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR • Within 3 miles ofa large field or pasture(> 40 acres) OR • Within I mile of a lake greater than 20 acres? YES= I point NO~ 0 points Comments: Wetland Rating Form -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) (only 1 score ner box) Figure_ 2 1 Page 6 of9 Wetland name or number: E H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW (see new and complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in the PHS report http://wdfw.wa.gov/1,ab/phs/ist.htm ) Which of the following priority habitats are within 330ft (100m) of the wetland unit? NOTE: the connections do not have to be relatively undisturbed. __ Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.4 ha (1 acre). __ Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 152). __ Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock. __ Old-growth/Mature forests: (Old-growth west of Cascade crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, fom1ing a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 20 trees/ha (8 trees/acre)> 81 cm (32 in) dbh or> 200 years of age. (Mature forests) Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown cover may be less that I 00%; crown cover may be less that I 00%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth; 80 -200 years old west of the Cascade crest. __ Oregon white Oak: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (ft,// descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 158). _ X _ Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. __ Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non-forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or a wet prairie (ft11/ descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161). _ X _ Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources. __ Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore, and Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report: pp. 167-169 and glossary in Appendix A). __ Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock, ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human. __ Cliffs: Greater than 7 .6 m (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft. __ Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 -2.0 m (0.5 -6.5 ft), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. __ Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of> 51 cm (20 in) in western Washington and are> 2 m (6.5 ft) in height. Priority logs are> 30 cm (12 in) in diameter at the largest end, and> 6 m (20 ft) long. If wetland has 3 or more priority habitats= 4 points If wetland has 2 priority habitats= 3 points If wetland has I priority habitat= I point No habitats= 0 points Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in thi list. Nearby wetlands are addressed in question H 2.4) H 2.4 Wetland Landscape: Choose the one description (!/the landscape around the wetland that best fits (seep. 84) • There arc a1 lca~t 1 other \Vctlm,ds w!thin 1/1 mile, ,md the connections bctwC'en them arc relatively undisturbed (light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with some boating, but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development .......... points~ 5 • The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands within 1/2 mile ..................................................................................................... points= 5 • There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile, BUT the connections between them are disturbed ............................................................................................................................. points= 3 • The wetland fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands within 112 mile .................................................................................................................... points~ 3 , There is at least I wetland within 1/2 mile ........................................................................... points~ 2 3 3 , ------J-----J-----''_:T..::h-=-er:.:e:..:a=r-=-e..::nc::o...:wc:..e:.:t..::la-cnc::d-=-s-'w'--'i"th"in"----'l'-'/2=--m=il=e'-' .. "-... :.:.··:.:.··:.:.··..::··..::··:.:.···:.:.··:.:.··..::··..::··:.:.··:.:.···:.:.··..::··..::··..::··:.:. .. :.:.···:.:.··..::··..::··..::··:.:.···:.:.··..::··..::··..::··..::··:.:.···:.:.··..::··..::··..::··:.:.··:.:.···CJ·mc:o:.:i..::nt:.cs_~-"-o...., r-----~ Add the scores from H2.l, H2.2, H2.3, H2.4 9 J TOTA I for HI from page 8 --3--l -----1 Add the points for H I and H 2; then record the result on p. 1 I 12 I H 2 TOTAL Score -opportunity for providing habitat • Total Score for Habitat Functions ----- Wetland Rating Form-western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 7 of9 Wetland name or number: E SCl SC2 SC3 CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below and circle the appropriate answers and Category. Wetland Type -Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the Category when the appropriate criteria are met. Estuarine wetlands? (seep. 86) Does the wetland unit meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? __ The dominant water regime is tidal, __ Vegetated, and __ With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt. YES ~ Go to SC I.I NO X SC I.I Is the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? YES ~ Category I NO ~ go to SC 1.2 SC 1.2 ls the wetland at least 1 acre in size and meets at least two of the following conditions? YES ~ Category I NO ~ Category II --The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. Jfthe non-native Spartina spp,. are only species that cover more than 10% of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual rating (1/11). The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a Category 1. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in determining the size threshold of I acre. --At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft. buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-rnowed grassland --The wetland has at least 2 of the following features: or contiguous freshwater wetlands. tidal channels, depressions with open water, Natural Heritage Wetlands (seep. 87) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage Prograrn/DNR as either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species. SC 2.1 Is the wetland being rated in a Section/Township/Range that contains a natural heritage wetland? (This question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact WNHPIDNR.) S/T/R information from Appendix D or accessed from WNHP/DNR web site X ___ YES __ Contact WNHP/DNR (seep. 79) and go to SC 2.2 NO X --- SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as a site with state threatened or endangered plant species? YES ~ Category I NO X not a Heritage Wetland Bogs (seep. 87) Does the wetland (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below to identify if the wetland is a bog. If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its Junction. 1. Does the unit have organic soil horizons (i.e. layers of organic soil), either peats or mucks, that compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identify organic soils)? YES = go to question 3 NO = go to question 2 2. Does the wetland have organic soils, either peats or mucks that are less than 16 inches deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or pond? YES ""' go to question 3 NO ~ is not a bog for purpose ofrating 3. Does the unit have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present, consist of the "bog" species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more than 30% of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)? YES ~ Is a bog for purpose ofrating NO= go to question 4 NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16" deep. If the pH is Jess than 5.0 and the "bog" plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog. 4. ls the unit forested(> 30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann's spruce, or western white pine. WITH any of the species (or combination of species) on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant component of the ground cover(> 30% coverage of the total shrub/herbaceous cover)? YES ~ Category I NO= Is not a bog for purpose of rating Wetland Rating Form -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Cat. 1 Cat. I Cat. II Dual Rating 1/11 Cat I Cat. I Page 8 of9 Wetland name or number: E SC4 SC5 SC6 Forested Wetlands (seep. 90) Does the wetland have at least 1 acre of forest that meet one of these criteria for the Department of Fish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats? If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its function. __ Old-growth forests: (west of Cascade Crest) Stands ofat least two three species forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/acre (20 trees/hectare) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of32 inches (81 cm or more). NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. Two-hundred year old trees in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often slower. The DFW criterion is and "OR" so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter. __ Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80 -200 years old OR have an average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53 cm); crown cover may be less than I 00%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth. YES= Category I NO = X not a forested wetland with special characteristics Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (seep. 91) Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria ofa wetland in a coastal lagoon? __ The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks. __ The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains surface water that is saline or brackish (> 0.5 ppt) during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the bottom.) YES -Go to SC 5.1 NO X __ not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1 Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions? __ The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing) and has Jess than 20% cover of invasive plant species (see list of invasive species on p. 74). __ At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a I 00 ft. buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-mowed grassland. __ The wetland is larger than 1/10 acre (4350 square ft.) YES -Category I NO -Category II Interdunal Wetlands (seep. 93) Is the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? YES -Go to SC 6.1 NO X __ not an interdunal wetland for rating If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland ba."ied on its functions. In practical terms that means the following geographic areas: • Long Beach Peninsula~-lands west of SR 103 • Grayland-Westport --lands west of SR !05 • Ocean Shores-Copalis -lands west of SR I 15 and SR 109 SC 6.1 Is the wetland one acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is one acre or larger? YES -Category II NO ~ go to SC 6.2 SC 6.2 ls the wetland between 0.1 and I acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 acre? YES ~ Category llI Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics • Choose the "highest" rating if wetland/alls into several categories, and record on p. I. If you answered NO for all types enter "Not Applicable" on p. 1 Comments: Wetland Rating Form -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Cat. I Cat. I Cat. II Cat. II Cat. lll Page 9 of9 Wetland name or number: F WETLAND RATING FORM -WESTERN WASHINGTON Version 2 -Updated July 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users Updated Oct 2008 with the new WDFW definitions for priority habitats Name of wetland (if known): Wetland F Date of site visit: June 5. 2013 Rated by: J. Dadisman Trained by Ecology? Yes x__ No ______ Date of training: 11/06 SEC: 7 TWNSHP: 23 North RNGE: 4 East Is S/T/R in Appendix D? Yes. ______ No X Map of wetland unit: Figure ______ _ Estimated size _____ _ SUMMARY OF RATING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland: ! ______ II ______ III ~X,__ __ _ Category I -Score > 70 Category II -Score 51 -69 Category III -Score 30 -50 Category IV -Score < 30 Score for Water Quality Functions Score for Hydrologic Functions Score for Habitat Functions TOT AL Score for Functions 12 16 11 39 IV __ _ Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTCS of Wetland II _____ Does not apply --"X,__ __ _ Final Category (choose the "highest" category from above") Summary of basic information about the wetland unit. Wetland Unit has Special Wetland HGM Class Characteristics used 'for Ratin<> Estuarine Deoressional Natural Heritave Wetland Riverine X Bo!! Lake-frin!!e Mature Forest Slone Old Growth Forest Flats Coastal La!!oon Freshwater Tidal Interdunal None of the above X Check if unit has multiple HGM classes present Wetland Rating Form-western Washington, version 2 (7/06) III Page I of9 Wetland name or number: F SP!. Has the wetland unit been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed Threatened or Endangered animal or plant species (TIE species)? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. SP2. Has the wetland unit been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or Endangered animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species are cate orized as Cate or l Natural Herita e Wetlands (see . 19 of data form. SP4. Does the wetland unit have a local significance in addition to itsfimctions? For example, the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or in a local mana ement Ian as having s ecial si nificance. X X X X To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to determine the Hydrogeomorphic Class of the wetland being rated. The hydrogeomorphic classificationgrouµs wetlands in to 1hose that fi.mctioo in similar way.;. This simplifies 1he questioos needed to answer how well 1he wetland fi.mctions. The Hydrogeomoq,hic Class ofa wetland can be detamined using 1he key below. Seep. 24 for more detailed instructioo.s on classifying wetlands. Wetland is belowlhe OHWM of Cedar River. Cedar River contains 1hreatenedand endangero:I fish species. Wetland Rating Form -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 2 of9 Wetland name or number: F Classification of Vegetated Wetlands for Western Washington If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply, and go to Question 8. 1. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during floods)? ~o to 2 YES -the wetland class is Tidal Fringe "------tfyes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? YES -Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO -Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. flit is a Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an Estuarine wetland Wetlands that were call estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the tenn "Estuarine" wetland is kept. Please note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed (seep. ). 2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface water runoff are NOT sou~ater to the unit. NO -o to 3 YES -The wetland class is Flats If your wetland can e classified as a "Flats" wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the entire wetland meet both of the following criteria? _____ The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any vegetation on the surface) where at least 20 acres (Sha) in size; ___ At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 (2 m)" NO -o to 4 YES -The wetland class is Lake-frin e (Lacustrine Frin e) 4. Does the entire wetlan meet all of the following criteria? ___ The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual). ___ The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheet-flow, or in a swale without distinct banks. ___ The water leaves the wetland without being impounded? NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these types of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow de ressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than I foot deep). NO -o to 5 YES -The wetland class is Slo e 5. Does the entire wetlan meet all of the following criteria? X __ The unit is in a valley or stream channel where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river. X __ The overbank flooding occurs at least once every two years. NOTE: The riverine unit can co · depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding .. NO -o to 6 YES The wetland class is Riverine 6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time of the year. This means that any outlet, if present is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO -go to 7 YES -The wetland class is Depressional 7. Is the entire wetland located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding. The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. No -go to 8 YES -The wetland class is Depressional 8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO BACK AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC RLGIMES DbSCRlHbD IN QUESTIONS 1-7 J\PPL Y TO DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within your wetland. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the class listed in column 2 is less than 10% of the unit, classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area. HGM Classes within the wetland unit beimz rated HGM Class ta Use in Rat/nr, Slope + Riverine Riverine Slope + Deoressional Deoressional Slope + Lake-fringe Lake-fringe Depressional + Riverine along stream within boundary Depressional Deoressional + Lake-fringe Deoressional Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with special freshwater wetland characteristics If you are unable still to determme which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland Rating Form~ ·western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 3 of9 Wetland name or number: F Rl R2 WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to improve water quality. Does the wetland have the potential to improve water quality? (seep. 52) R 1.1 Area of surface depressions within the riverine wetland that can trap sediments during a flooding event: • Depressions cover> 3/4 area of wetland .............................................................................. points= 8 • Depressions cover> 1/2 area of wetland .............................................................................. points= 4 (If depressions> 1/2 of area of unit draw polygons on aerial photo or map) • Depressions present but cover< 1/2 area of wetland ............................................................ points= 2 • No de ressions resent ........................................................................................................ oints = 0 R 1.2 Characteristics of the vegetation in the unit (areas with >90% cover at person height): • Trees or shrubs> 2/3 area of the unit. .................................................................................. points = 8 • Trees or shrubs> 1 /3 area of the wetland ............................................................................. points = 6 • Ungrazed, herbaceous plants> 2/3 area of unit .................................................................... points= 6 • Ungrazed herbaceous plants> 1/3 area of unit ..................................................................... points= 3 • Trees, shrubs, and ungrazed herbaceous< 1/3 area of unit (wetland is grazed) .................... points = 0 Aerial hoto or ma showin ol ons of different ve etation t es Does the wetland have the opportunity to improve water quality? Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes or groundwater downgradient from the wetland. Note which of the following conditions provide the sources of pollutants. A unit may have pollutants coming from several sources, but any single source would qualify as opportunity. __ Grazing in the wetland or within 150 ft Untreated stormwater discharges to wetland Tilled fields or orchards within 150 ft. of wetland A stream or culvert discharges into wetland that drains developed areas, residential areas, farmed fields, roads, or clear-cut logging _x_ Residential, urban areas, golf courses are within 150 ft. of wetland The river or stream linked to the wetland has a contributing basin where human activities have raised levels of sediment, toxic compounds or nutrients in the river water above standards for water quality. Other-------------------------------- YES NO multiplier is 1 (only 1 score per box) Figure_ 0 Figure_ 6 (seep. 53) Multiplier 2 + TOTAL-Water ualit Functions Multi the score from RI b R2· then add score lo table on . 1 HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to reduce floodin and stream erosion. R 3 Does the wetland have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p.54) R 3.1 R 3.2 Characteristics of the overbank storage the wetland provides: Estimate the average width of the wetland . perpendicular to the direction of the flow and the width of the stream or river channel (distance between Figure - banks). Calculate the ratio: (average width of unit) I (average width of stream between banks). • lfthe ratio is more than 20 ................................................................................................... points= 9 • If the ratio is between IO -20 .............................................................................................. points = 6 l • If the ratio is 5-<10 ............................................................................................................. points= 4 • If the ratio is I-<5 ............................................................................................................... points= 2 • If the ratio is < 1 .................................................................................................................. points= I Aerial hoto or ma showin avera e widths Characteristics of vegetation that slow down water velocities during floods: Treat large woody debris as . 'forest or shrub''. Choose the points appropriate/or the best description. (polygons need to have >90° Figure cover at person height NOT Cowardin classes): • Forest or shrub for> 1/3 area OR herbaceous plants> 2/3 area ............................................ points= 7 • Forest or shrub for> 1/10 area OR herbaceous plants> 1 /3 area (vegetation short and sparse) .. points = 4 7 • Vegetation does not meet above criteria ............................................................................... points= 0 Aerial hoto or ma showin ol ons of different ve etation t es --.!"'"-Add the Joints in the boxes abor(! lJ !---+--------------------------------=========--=--... ----R 4 Does the wetland have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p.57) Answer YES if the wetland is in a location in the watershed where the flood storage, or reduction in water velocity, it provides helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive flows. Note which of the following conditions apply. _x_ There are human structures and activities downstream (roads, buildings, bridges, farms) that can be damaged by flooding. ---1:;_ There are natural resources downstream (e.g. salmon redds) that can be damaged by flooding Multiplier Other -------------------------------- (Answer NO if the major source of water to the wetland is controlled by a reservoir or the wetland is tidal fringe along the sides of a dike) Yl!S multi lier is 2 • Multi R4; then atld score to table on . 1 16 Comments: Wetland Rating Fonn-westem Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 4 of9 Wetland name or number: F Hl HABITAT FUNCTIONS-Indicators that wetland functions to provide important habitat. Does the wetland have the potential to provide habitat for many species? HI.I H 1.2 Vegetation structure (see P. 72): F. Check the types ofvegetalion classes present (as defined by Cowardin) -Size threshold for each class is igure 114 acre or more than 10% of the area if unit is smaller than 2.5 acres. __ Aquatic Bed _K_ Emergent plants __ Scrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have> 30% cover) __ Forested (areas where trees have> 30% cover) If the unit has a forested class check if. __ The forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground- cover) that each cover 20% within the forested polygon. Add the number of vegetation types that qualify. I/you have: 4 structures or more ....... points= 4 2 structures.................... oints = 1 Hydroperiods (seep. 73): Map of Cowardin vegetation classes 3 structures ................... points= 2 I structure .................... oints = 0 Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiodJ) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or I /4 acre to count (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods). Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present points = 3 Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 or more types present. ..... points = 2 Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present.. ................. points = I -Y-Saturated only I type present .................... points= 0 X Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the \Vetland Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland Lake-fringe wetland .............•... = 2 points Freshwater tidal wetland ......... = 2 points Map of hydroperiods 0 Figure_ 1 H 1.3 Richness of Plant Species (seep. 75): Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least IO ft 2 (different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold) You do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian Mi/foil, reed canarygrass. purple loosestrife, Canadian Thistle. If you counted: > 19 species ...................... points = 2 5 -19 species .................... points= I List species below if you want to: < 5 species ........................ points= 0 1 H 1.4 Interspersion of Habitats (seep. 76): H 1.5 Decided from the diagrams below whether interspersion between Cowardin vegetation ( described in H 1.1 ), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, low, or none. Note: If you have 4 or more classes Figure __ or 3 vegetation classes and open water, the rating is None = 0 point." Low ~ I point Moderate-:..: 2 point:,; always "high". Use map of Cowardin classe l riparian braided channels.] Special Habitat Features (seep. 77): Check the habitat.features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points you put into the next column. Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 in. diameter and 6 ft. long) Standing snags (diameter at the bottom> 4 inches) in the wetland Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft. (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least 3.3 ft. (lm) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the unit, for at least 33 ft. (!Om) Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (> 30 degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet turned grey/brown) At least 1/4 acre of thin-stemmed persistent vegetation or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg-laying by amphibians) Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in each stratum of plants NOTE: The 20% stated in early printings of the manual on page 78 is an error. 0 0 Wetland Rating Form -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 5 of9 Wetland name or number: F H2 Does the wetland have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? H 2.1 Buffers (see P. 80): Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland unit. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of "undisturbed". __ I OOm (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 95% of circumference. No structures are within the undisturbed part of buffer (relatively undisturbed also means no grazing, no landscaping, no daily human use) ............. points = S __ 100m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 50% circumference .................................................................................................... points= 4 __ 50m (170 ft) ofrelatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 95o/o circumference .................................................................................................... points= 4 __ 100m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 25o/o circumference .................................................................................................... points= 3 __ 50m (170 ft) ofrelatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water for> 50o/o circumference .............................................................................................. points= 3 If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above: __x_ No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25m (80 ft) of wetland> 95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK .................................. points= 2 __ No paved areas of buildings within 50m of wetland for> 50% circumference. Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK ................................................................... points -2 __ Heavy grazing in buffer ................................................................................................ points -1 __ Vegetated buffers are< 2m wide (6.6 ft) for more than 95% circumference ( e.g. tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland) ............................. points -O __ Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above .............................................................. points= 1 Arial photo showing buffers H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (seep. 81) H 2.2.1 ls the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 150 ft. wide, has at least a 30% cover of shrubs, forest or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (Dams in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads, paved roads, are considered breaks in the corridor). YES -4 points (go to H 2.3) NO -go to H 2.2.2 H. 2.2.2 ls the wetland part ofa relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 50 ft. wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake- fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? YES -2 points (go to H 2.3) NO -go to H 2.2.3 H. 2.2.3 ls the wetland: • Within 5 mi (8km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR • Within 3 miles ofa large field or pasture(> 40 acres) OR • Within 1 mile of a lake greater than 20 acres? YES -I point NO~ O points Comments: Wetland Rating Form -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) {only I scon ner box) Figure_ 2 1 Page 6 of9 Wetland name or number: F H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW (see new and complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in the PHS report http://wdfw.wa.gov/hab/phs/ist.1/lm) Which of the following priority habitats are within 330ft (100m) of the wetland unit? NOTE: the connections do not have to be relatively undisturbed __ Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.4 ha (I acre). __ Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 152). __ Herbaceons Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock. __ Old-growth/Mature forests: (Old-growth west of Cascade crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 20 trees/ha (8 trees/acre)> 81 cm (32 in) dbh or> 200 years of age. (Mature forests) Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown cover may be less that 100%; crown cover may be less that 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth; 80 -200 years old west of the Cascade crest. __ Oregon white Oak: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 158). _X _ Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. __ Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non-forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or a wet prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161). _ X _ lnstream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources. __ Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore, and Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report: pp. 167-169 and glossary in Appendix A). __ Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock, ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human. __ Cliffs: Greater than 7.6 m (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft. __ Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 -2.0 m (0.5 -6.5 ft), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. __ Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of> 51 cm (20 in) in western Washington and are> 2 m (6.5 ft) in height. Priority logs are> 30 cm ( 12 in) in diameter at the largest end, and> 6 m (20 ft) long. If wetland has 3 or more priority habitats = 4 points If wetland has 2 priority habitats = 3 points If wetland has 1 priority habitat= 1 point No habitats= 0 points Note: All vegetated wetland, are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in thi list. Nearby wetlands are addressed in auestion H 2.4) H 2.4 Wetland Landscape: Choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits (seep. 84) • There are at least 1 other wethmds within l /2 mile, and the ..:onncctions between tlwm nrc relatively undisturbed (light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with some boating, but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development .......... points = 5 • The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands within 1/2 mile ..................................................................................................... points= 5 • There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1 /2 mile, BUT the connections between them are disturbed ............................................................................................................................. points= 3 • The wetland fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands within 1/2 mile .................................................................................................................... points = 3 • There is at least 1 wetland within 1/2 mile ........................................................................... points= 2 3 3 , -----J----J-----'"---'-T-"h"-er:.:ec:a::.r:::.e .::n:::.o.cwccecct.:.:la:::nc::d:::.s ..:.wc:.it:ch:.::i n::....:.I :.:/2:...m=i l:::.e::. .. ·:.::":.:: .. :.:: .. .:.: .. ::."::. .. ·:.::":.::".:.:".:.: .. .:.: .. :.::" ·:.:: .. :.:: .. .:.: .. .:.: .. .:.: .. :.:: .. ·:.:: .. .:.: .. .:.: .. .:.: .. .:.: .. :.:: .. ·:.:: .. .:.: .. .:.:'".:.: .. ::.· .. :.:: .. :.:: .. .:.: .. .:.: .. .:.: .. ::. .. ·:.:: .. c,· Dr.:•o'-'i._._nt,_,,s_=_0"----,1, r-----H 2 TOTAL Score -opportunity for providing habitat Add the scores from H2.I. H2.2. H2.3, I-l2.4 9 ~ ----TOTAL for H I from page 8 , 2 .-----1 Add the points for H I and H 2; then record the result on p. 11 11 I • Total Score for Habitat Functions ----- Wetland Rating Fonn -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 7 of9 Wetland name or number: F SCl SC2 SC3 CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below and circle the appropriate answers and Category. Wetland Type -Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the Category when the appropriate criteria are met. Estuarine wetlands? (seep. 86) Does the wetland unit meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? __ The dominant water regime is tidal, --Vegetated, and __ With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt. YES ~Goto SC I.I NO X SC 1.1 Is the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? YES ~ Category I NO ~goto SC 1.2 SC 1.2 Is the wetland at least I acre in size and meets at least two of the following conditions? YES ~ Category 1 NO ~ Category 11 --The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no dikinf, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. I the non-native Spartina spp,. are only species that cover more than 10% of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual rating (l/11). The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the relativei undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a Category I. Do not, however, exclu e the area of Spartina in determining the size threshold of 1 acre. --At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft. buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-mowed grassland The wetland has at least 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, --or contiguous freshwater wetlands. Natural Heritage Wetlands (seep. 87) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage Program/DNR as either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species. SC 2.l Is the wetland being rated in a Section/Township/Range that contains a natural heritage wetland? (This question is used to screen out most sites before you need lo contact Wll/HPIDNR.) S/T/R information from Appendix D or accessed from WNHP/DNR web site X --- YES __ Contact WNHP/DNR (seep. 79) and go to SC 2.2 NO X __ SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as a site with state threatened or endangered plant species? YES ~ Category 1 NO X not a Heritage Wetland Bogs (seep. 87) Does the wetland (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below to identify if the wetland is a bog. I/you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its function. I. Does the unit have organic soil horizons (i.e. layers of organic soil), either peats or mucks, that compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identify organic soils)? YES ~ go to question 3 NO = go to question 2 2. Does the wetland have organic soils, either peats or mucks that are less than 16 inches deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or pond? YES ::-:-go to question 3 NO ~ is not a bog for purpose of rating 3. Does the unit have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND other plants. if present, consist of the "bog" species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more than 30% of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)? YES -ls a bog for purpose of rating NO = go to question 4 NOTE: lfyou are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16" deep. lfthe pH is less than 5.0 and the "bog" plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog. 4. ls the unit forested (> 30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englernann's spruce, or western white pine. WITH any of the species (or combination of species) on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant component of the ground cover(> 30% coverage of the total shrub/herbaceous cover)? YES -Category I NO -Is not a bog for purpose of rating Wetland Rating Form -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Cat. 1 Cat. I Cat. II Dual Rating 1/11 Cat I Cat. I Page 8 of9 Wetland name or number: F SC4 SC5 Forested Wetlands (<ee p. 90) Does the wetland have at least 1 acre of forest that meet one of these criteria for the Department of Fish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats? !fyou answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its function. __ Old-growth forests: (west of Cascade Crest) Stands ofat least two three species forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/acre (20 trees/hectare) that arc at least 200 years ofage OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 inches (81 cm or more). NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. Two-hundred year old trees in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often slower. The DFW criterion is and "OR" so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter. __ Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80 -200 years old OR have an average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53 cm); crown cover may be less than 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth. YES = Category I NO = X not a forested wetland with special characteristics Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (seep. 91) Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon? __ The \\1 etland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks. __ The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains surface water that is saline or brackish(> 0.5 ppt) during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near lhe bolt om) YES -Go to SC 5.1 NO X __ not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1 Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions? __ The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing) and has less than 20% cover of invasive plant species (see list of invasive species on p. 74 ). __ At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft. buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed Cat. I or un-mowed grassland. Cat. I __ The wetland is larger than 1/10 acre (4350 square ft.) YES -Category I NO ~ Category II Cat. II SC6 lnterdunal Wetlands (seep. 93) Is the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? YES -Go to SC 6. I NO X __ not an interdunal wetland for rating If you answer yes J'Ou will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. In practical terms that means the following geographic areas: • Long Beach Peninsula --lands west of SR 103 • Grayland-Westport--lands west of SR 105 • Ocean Shores-Copalis -lands west of SR 115 and SR I 09 SC 6.1 ls the wetland one acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is one acre or larger? YES -Category II NO ~ go to SC 6.2 SC 6.2 ls the wetland between 0.1 and 1 acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 acre? YES ~ Category Ill Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics + Choose the ''highest" rating if wetland.falls inlo several categories, and record on p. I. If you answered NO for all types enter "Not Applicable" on p. I Comments: Wetland Rating Form -v,1estcrn Washington, version 2 (7/06) Cat. II Cat. III Page 9 of9 Wetland name or number: G WETLAND RATING FORM -WESTERN WASHINGTON Version 2 -Updated July 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users Updated Oct 2008 with the new WDFW definitions for priority habitats Name of wetland (if known): Wetland G Date of site visit: June 5, 2013 Rated by: J. Dadisman Trained by Ecology? Yes x_ No ______ Date of training: 11/06 SEC: 7 TWNSHP: 23 North RNGE: 4 East ls S/T/R in Appendix D? Yes ______ No X Map of wetland unit: Figure _______ Estimated size _____ _ SUMMARY OF RATING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland: I ______ II ______ III ~X~--- Category I -Score > 70 Category II -Score 51 -69 Category Ill -Score 30 -50 Category IV -Score < 30 Score for Water Quality Functions Score for Hydrologic Functions Score for Habitat Functions TOTAL Score for Functions 12 16 11 39 IV __ _ Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTCS of Wetland 11 _____ Does not apply -~X~--- Final Category (choose the "highest" category from above") III Summary of basic information about the wetland unit. Wetland Unit has Special Wetland HGM Class Characteristics used :for Ratiu1> Estuarine Deoressional Natural Heritai,e Wetland Riverine X Bog Lake-fringe Mature Forest Slone Old Growth Forest Flats Coastal Lai,oon Freshwater Tidal Interdunal None of the above X Check if unit has multiple HGM classes present Welland Rating Fonn -,,vestem Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page I of9 Wetland name or number: G If you answer YES to any of the questions below you will the s ecial characteristics found in the wetland. SP I. Has the wetland unit been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed Threatened or Endangered animal or plant species (TIE species)? For the purposes of this rating system. "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. SP2. Has the wetland unit been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or Endangered animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species are cate orized as Cate or I Natural Herita e Wetlands (see . 19 of data form). SP4. Does the wetland uni/ have a local significance in addition to its functions? For example, the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or in a local mana ement Ian as havin s ecial si nificance. X X X X To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to determine the Hydrogeomorphic Class of the wetland being rated. The hydrogeomrnphic classification groups wetlands in to those that fimction in similar ways. This simplifies 1he questions needed to answer how well 1he wetland functions. The Hydrogeomoiphic Class ofa wetland can be detennined using fue key below. Seep. 24 fir more de1lliled instructions on classifying wetlands. Wetland is below1he OHWM of Cedar River. Cedar River contains threatened and endangered fish species. Wetland Rating Form -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 2 of9 Wetland name or number: G Classification of Vegetated Wetlands for Western Washington If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply, and go to Question 8. I. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during floods)? ~o to 2 YES -the wetland class is Tidal Fringe ~yes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? YES -Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO -Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) ff your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetland,. If it is a Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an Estuarine wetland Wetlands that were call estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the term "Estuarine" wetland is kept. Please note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed (seep. ). 2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface water runoff are NOT sou~ater to the unit. NO -o to 3 YES -The wetland class is Flats If your wetland can e classified as a "Flats" wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the entire wetland meet both of the following criteria" ___ The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any vegetation on the surface) where at least 20 acres (8ha) in size; ___ At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 (2 m)? NO -o to 4 YES -The wetland class is Lake-frin e (Lacustrine Frio e 4. Does the entire wetlan meet all of the following criteria? ---The wetland is on a slope (.,lope can be very gradual). The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may --- flow subsurface, as sheet/low, or in a swale without distinct banks. ---The water leaves the wetland without being impounded? NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these types of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow de ressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than I foot deep). NO -o to 5 YES -The wetland class is Sia e 5. Does the entire wetlan meet all of the following criteria? X __ The unit is in a valley or stream channel where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river. X __ The overbank flooding occurs at least once every two years. NOTE: The riverine unit can co · depressions that arejl//ed with water when the river is not flooding .. NO -o to 6 YES The wetland class is Riverine 6. ls the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time of the year. This means that any outlet, if present is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO -go to 7 YES -The wetland class is Depression al 7. Is the entire wetland located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding. The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. No -go to 8 YES -The wetland class is Depressional 8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base ofa slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a depressional wetland has a zone offloading along its sides. GO BACK AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRJBED IN (.)UESJIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DllFERENT AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within your wetland. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the class listed in column 2 is less than 10% of the unit, classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area. HGM Classes within the wetland unit beinll rated HGM Class ta Use In Rat/nil Slooe + Riverine Riverine Slope + Depressional Depressional Slope + Lake-fringe Lake-fringe Deoressional + Riverine along stream within boundarv Deoressional Depressional + Lake-fringe Depressional Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with special freshwater wetland characteristics If you are unable still to determme which of the above cntena apply to your wetland, or you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland Rating Form -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 3 of9 Wetland name or number: G WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to improve water qnality. Rl Does the wetland have the potential to improve water quality? (see p.52) R I. I Area of surface depressions within the riverine wetland that can trap sediments during a flooding event: • Depressions cover> 3/4 area of wetland .............................................................................. points= 8 • Depressions cover > 1/2 area of wetland .............................................................................. points = 4 (If depressions> 1/2 of area of unit draw polygons on aerial photo or map) • Depressions present but cover< 1/2 area of wetland ............................................................ points = 2 • No de ressions resent ........................................................................................................ oints = 0 Figure_ 0 R 1.2 Characteristics of the vegetation in the unit (areas with >90% cover at person height): • Trees or shrubs> 2/3 area of the unit ................................................................................... points = 8 Figure - • Trees or shrubs> 1/3 area of the wetland ............................................................................. points= 6 • Ungrazed, herbaceous plants> 2/3 area of unit .................................................................... points= 6 • Un grazed herbaceous plants> 1 /3 area of unit ..................................................................... points = 3 6 • Trees, shrubs, and ungrazed herbaceous< 1/3 area of unit (wetland is grazed) .................... points = 0 Aerial hoto or ma showin ol ons of different ve etation t es R 2 Does the wetland have the opportunity to improve water quality? (seep. 53) Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes or groundwater downgradient from the wetland. Note which of the following conditions provide the sources of pollutants. A unit may have pollutants coming from several sources, but any single source would qualify as opportunity. Grazing in the wetland or within 150 ft Untreated stormwater discharges to wetland Tilled fields or orchards within 150 ft. of wetland A stream or culvert discharges into wetland that drains developed areas, residential areas, farmed fields, roads, or clear-cut logging _x_ Residential, urban areas, golf courses are within 150 ft. of wetland The river or stream linked to the wetland has a contributing basin where human activities have Multiplier raised levels of sediment, toxic compounds or nutrients in the river water above standards for water quality. 2 Other~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ NO multiplier is 1 + TOTAL-Water ualit Functions Multi the score from RI b R2· then add score to table on . 1 HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to reduce floodin and stream erosion. R 3 Does the wetland have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? · (seep.54) R 3.1 R 3.2 Characteristics of the overbank storage the wetland provides: Estimate the average width of the wetland . perpendicular to the direction of the flow and the width of the stream or river channel (distance between Figure banks). Calculate the ratio: (average ·width of unit) I (average width of stream between banks). • If the ratio is more than 20 ................................................................................................... points= 9 • If the ratio is between 10 -20 .............................................................................................. points = 6 l • If the ratio is 5-<IO ............................................................................................................. points = 4 • If the ratio is 1-<5 ............................................................................................................... points = 2 • If the ratio is< 1 .................................................................................................................. points= I Aerial hoto or ma showin avera e widths Characteristics of vegetation that slow down water velocities during floods: Treat large woody debris as . ''forest or shrub". Choose the points appropriate for the best description. (polygons need to have >90° Figure cover al person height NOT Cowardin classes): • Forest or shrub for> 1/3 area OR herbaceous plants> 2/3 area ............................................ points= 7 • Forest or shrub for> 1/10 area OR herbaceous plants> 1/3 area (vegetation short and sparse) .. points = 4 7 • Vegetation does not meet above criteria ............................................................................... points= 0 Aerial hoto or ma showin ol ons of different ve etation t es ---_,1dd the Joints in the boxes abore lJ .--+------------------------------------.._ __________________ ,,, ___ _ R 4 Does the wetland have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p.57) Comments: Answer YES if the wetland is in a location in the watershed where the flood storage, or reduction in water velocity, it provides helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive flows. Note which of the following conditions apply . ....x_ There are human structures and activities downstream (roads, buildings, bridges, farms) that can be damaged by flooding. _x_ There are natural resources downstream (e.g. salmon redds) that can be damaged by flooding Multiplier Other~.,..-~~~~~~~~~-,-~-,,~,--~~--.,,-,,.,..-~~~~~~~---,,--.,..-~ (Answer NO if the major source of water to the wetland is controlled by a reservoir or the ·wetland is tidal fringe along the sides of a dike) 2 YES multi lier is 2 Wetland Rating Form -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 4 of9 Wetland name or number: G Hl HABITAT FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to provide important habitat. Does the wetland have the potential to provide habitat for many species? H I.I Vegetation structure (see P. 72): Check the types of vegetation classes present (as defined by Cowardin) -Size threshold/or each class is 1/4 acre or more than 10% of the area if unit is smaller than 2.5 acres. __ Aquatic Bed _x_ Emergent plants __ Scrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have> 30% cover) __ Forested (areas where trees have> 30% cover) Jfthe unit has a forested class check if: __ The forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, mosslground- cover) that each cover 20% within the forested polygon. Add !he number ofvegelalion lypes Iha/ qualify. Jfyou have: 4 structures or more ....... points = 4 Map of Coward in vegetation classes 3 structures ................... points = 2 2 structures.................... oints = I I structure ..... ............... oints = 0 H 1.2 Hydroperiods (seep. 73): Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the 1,J1etland or J/4 acre to count (see text.for descriptions ofhydroperiods). Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present points = 3 Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 or more types present.. .... points = 2 Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present.. ................. points -I )( Saturated only 1 type present .................... points -0 X Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland Lake-fringe wetland ................. -2 points Freshwater tidal wetland ......... = 2 points Map of hydro periods H 1.3 Richness of Plant Species (seep. 75): Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft 2 (different pale hes qf !he same species can be combined to meet the size threshold) You do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian Mil.foil, reed canarygrass, purple /oosestrife, Canadian Thistle. lfyou counted: > 19 species ...................... points -2 List species below if you want to: 5 -19 species .................... points -I < 5 species ........................ points = 0 H 1.4 Interspersion of Habitats (seep. 76): Decided from the diagrams below whether interspersion between Cowardin vegetation (described in H 1.1 ), or the classes and unvegetated areas {can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, low, or none. Figure_ 0 Figure __ 1 1 Note: If you have 4 or more classes Figure __ or 3 vegetation classes and H 1.5 open water, the rating is None -0 poinl<; Low""' 1 poinr Modera!e ~ 2 point:-always "high". Use map of Cowardin classe lriparian braided channels] Special Habitat Features (seep. 77): Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points you put into the next column. Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 in. diameter and 6 ft. long) Standing snags (diameter at the bottom> 4 inches) in the wetland Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft. (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least 3.3 ft. (lm) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the unit, for at least 33 ft. (!Om) Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (> 30 degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet turned grey/brmvn) At least 1/4 acre of thin-stemmed persistent vegetation or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures.for egg-laying by amphibians) Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in each stratum of plants NOTE: The 20% stated in early printings of the manual on page 78 is an error. Wetland Rating Form -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) 0 0 Page 5 of9 Wetland name or number: G H2 Does the wetland have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? H 2.1 Buffers (see P. 80): Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland unit. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to he used in the rating. See text/or definition of "undisturbed". __ 1 OOm (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 95% of circumference. No structures are within the undisturbed part of buffer (relatively undisturbed also means no grazing, no landscaping, no daily human use) ............. points= 5 __ I OOm (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 50% circumference .................................................................................................... points= 4 __ 50m (170 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 95% circumference .................................................................................................... points= 4 __ 100m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 25% circumference .................................................................................................... points= 3 __ 50m ( 170 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water for> 50% circumference .............................................................................................. points= 3 If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above: _x_ No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25m (80 ft) of wetland> 95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK .................................. points= 2 __ No paved areas of buildings within 50m of wetland for> 50% circumference. Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK ................................................................... points= 2 __ Heavy grazing in buffer ................................................................................................ points= 1 __ Vegetated buffers are< 2m wide (6.6 ft) for more than 95% circumference (e.g. tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland) ............................. points= 0 __ Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above .............................................................. points= 1 Arial photo showing buffers H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (see p. 81) H 2.2.1 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor ( either riparian or upland) that is at least 150 ft. wide, has at least a 30% cover of shrubs, forest or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (Dams in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads, paved roads, are considered breaks in the corridor). YES = 4 points (go to H 2.3) NO= go to H 2.2.2 H. 2.2.2 ls the wetland part ofa relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 50 ft. wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake- fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? YES= 2 points (go to H 2.3) NO= go to H 2.2.3 H. 2.2.3 ls the wetland: • Within 5 mi (8km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR • Within 3 miles of a large field or pasture(> 40 acres) OR • Within 1 mile of a Jake greater than 20 acres? YES= I point NO= 0 points Comments: Wetland Rating Fonn -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) ( only 1 SCOTI =•boxl Figure_ 2 1 Page 6 of9 Wetland name or number: G H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW (see new and complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in the PHS report http://wdfw.wa.gov/hab/phslist.htm) Which of the following priority habitats are within 330ft (100m) of the wetland unit? NOTE: the connections do not have to be relatively undisturbed. __ Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.4 ha (1 acre). __ Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 152). __ Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock. __ Old-growth/Mature forests: (Old-growth west of Cascade crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 20 trees/ha (8 trees/acre)> 81 cm (32 in) dbh or> 200 years of age. (Mature forests) Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown cover may be less that 100%; crown cover may be less that 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth; 80 -200 years old west of the Cascade crest. __ Oregon white Oak: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 158). _X _Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. __ Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non-forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or a wet prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161). _X _Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources. __ Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore, and Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report: pp. 167-169 and glossary in Appendix A). __ Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock, ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human. __ Cliffs: Greater than 7.6 111 (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft. __ Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 -2.0 m (0.5 -6.5 ft), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. __ Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of> 51 cm (20 in) in western Washington and are> 2 111 (6.5 ft) in height. Priority logs are> 30 cm (12 in) in diameter at the largest end, and> 6 111 (20 ft) long. If wetland has 3 or more priority habitats = 4 points If wetland has 2 priority habitats= 3 points If wetland has 1 priority habitat= 1 point No habitats= 0 points Note: All vegetated wetland~ are by definition a priority hahitat but are not included in thi. list. Nearbv wetlands are addressed in auestion H 2.4) H 2.4 Wetland Landscape: Choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits (seep. 84) • There ,ire at knst .3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile. mid the connections between them arc relatively undisturbed (light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with some boating, but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development .......... points = 5 • The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands within J/2 mile ..................................................................................................... points= 5 • There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile, BUT the connections between them are disturbed ............................................................................................................................. points= 3 • The wetland fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands within 1/2 mile .................................................................................................................... points = 3 • There is at least 1 wetland within 1/2 mile ........................................................................... points= 2 3 3 • There are no wetlands within 1/2 mile .................................................................................. ooints = 0 f--f----~=~=~===~=~=======================~~---..----· AddthescoresfromH2.I. H2.2, H2.3, H2.4 __ 2 9 __ J TOTAL for HI from page 8 l ~-~--------------------------------~-~-~~-~----~ Add the points for H 1 and H 2; then record the result on p. I I 11 I -----------------------~----------------~------- H 2 TOTAL Score-opportunity for providing habitat • Total Score for Habitat Functions Wetland Rating Form -western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Page 7 of9 Wetland name or number: G SCI SC2 SC3 CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below and circle the appropriate answers and Category. Wetland Type -Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the Category when the appropriate criteria are met. Estuarine wetlands? (seep. 86) Does the wetland unit meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? --The dominant water regime is tidal, --Vegetated, and --With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt. YES ~ Go to SC I.I NO X SC I.I Is the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? YES ~ Category I NO ~ go to SC 1.2 SC 1.2 Is the wetland at least 1 acre in size and meets at least two of the following conditions? YES ~ Category I NO ~ Category II --The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no dikinf, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. I the non-native Spartina spp,. are only species that cover more than 10% of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual rating (I/JI). The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a Category 1. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in determining the size threshold of 1 acre. --At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft. buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-mowed grassland The wetland has at least 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, --or contiguous freshwater wetlands. Natural Heritage Wetlands (seep. 87) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage Program/DNR as either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species. SC 2.1 ls the wetland being rated in a Section/Township/Range that contains a natural heritage wetland? (This question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact WNHPIDNR.) S/T/R information from Appendix D or accessed from \VNHP/DNR web site X ___ YES __ Contact WNHP/DNR (see p. 79) and go to SC 2.2 NO X --- SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as a site with state threatened or endangered plant species? YES ~ Category I NO X not a Heritage Wetland Bogs (seep. 87) Does the wetland (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below to identify if the wetland is a bog. I/you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its Junction. I. Does the unit have organic soil horizons (i.e. layers of organic soil), either peats or mucks, that compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identify organic soils)? YES ~ go to question 3 NO = go to question 2 2. Does the wetland have organic soils, either peats or mucks that are less than 16 inches deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or pond? YES = go to question 3 NO = is not a bog for purpose of rating 3. Does the unit have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present, consist of the "bog" species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more than 30% of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)? YES ~ ls a bog for purpose of rating NO ~ go to question 4 NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16" deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the "bog" plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog. 4. Is the unit forested(> 30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann's spruce, or western white pine. WITH any of the species (or combination of species) on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant component of the ground cover(> 30% coverage of the total shrub/herbaceous cover)? YES ~ Category I NO ~ Is not a bog for purpose of rating Wetland Rating Form-western Washington, version 2 (7/06) Cat. 1 Cat. I Cat. II Dual Rating 1/11 Cat I Cat. I Page 8 of9 Wetland name or number: G SC4 SC5 Forested Wetlands (seep. 90) Does the wetland have at least 1 acre of forest that meet one of these criteria for the Department offish and Wildlife)s forests as priority habitats? !fyou answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its/unction. __ Old-growth forests: (west of Cascade Crest) Stands ofat least two three species forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/acre (20 trees/hectare) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of32 inches (81 cm or more). NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. Two-hundred year old trees in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often slower. The DFW criterion is and "OR" so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter. __ Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80 -200 years old OR have an average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53 cm); crown cover may be less than 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally Jess than that found in old-growth. YES= Category I NO= X not a forested wetland with special characteristics Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (seep. 91) Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon? __ The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks. __ The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains surface water that is saline or brackish (> 0.5 ppt) during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the bottom.) YES -Go to SC 5.1 NO X __ not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1 Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions? __ The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing) and has less than 20% cover of invasive plant species (see list of invasive species on p. 74). __ At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft. buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed Cat. I or un-mowed grassland. Cat. I __ The wetland is larger than 1/10 acre ( 4350 square ft.) YES -Category I NO ~ Category 11 Cat. II SC6 lnterdunal Wetlands (seep. 93) Is the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? YES -Go to SC 6.1 NO X __ not an interdunal wetland for rating If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its Junctions. In practical terms that means the following geographic areas: • Long Beach Peninsula·· lands west of SR l 03 • Gray land-Westport --lands west of SR l 05 • Ocean Shores-Copalis -lands west of SR 115 and SR l 09 SC 6. 1 Is the wetland one acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is one acre or larger? YES ~ Category 11 NO -go to SC 6.2 SC 6.2 Is the wetland between 0.1 and 1 acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and I acre? YES -Category lll Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics + Choose the ''highest" rating if wetland falls into several categories, and record on p. I. If you answered NO for all types enter "Not Applicable" on p. 1 Comments: Wetland Rating Form -,vcstem Washington, version 2 (7/06) Cat. II Cat. III Page 9 of9