HomeMy WebLinkAboutSWP272879(1) ' BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
1
SR — 405: SR — 167 Interchange Modification
King County
OL 3478
' Prepared by
Brian Bigler
' Northwest Region
' September 2000
. Washington State
Department of Transportation
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) is proposing to improve safety
features and reduce traffic congestion for State Route (SR) 405 southbound collector distributor
traffic merging with traffic from SR 167, in the City of Renton, King County, Washington. The
project is located at SR 405 Mile Post (MP) 1.79 to 2.77, and MP 26.27 vicinity on SR 167;
Sections 19 of Township 23 North, Range 5 East. The project goal is to increase roadway
capacity to reduce heavy congestion, minimize operational problems and improve safety and
mobility through the SR 405/SR 167 interchange. The project will construct a flyover structure
from the existing southbound I-405 off-ramp to the southbound SR 167 on-ramp. In addition,
' this project will modify the existing southbound SR 405-to-northbound SR 167 ramp to
accommodate future widening of SR 405 for direct transit access projects.
' This project will create an additional 10013.1 ft2 (3052 m) of impervious surface. Stormwater
from 23169.3 ft2 (7062 mz), or 231 percent of the new impervious surface area, will be treated
and detained. A Dry Pond, biofiltration swales, and vegetative filter strip are the stormwater
treatment BMPs selected for this project.
Federally protected species possibly occurring in the project action area include: Bald eagle
' (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), Puget Sound/Coastal Distinct Population Segment (DPS) bull trout
(Salvelinus confluentus), and Puget Sound Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU) Chinook
salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha). Though not provided specific Endangered Species Act
' (ESA) protection, Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia ESU coho salmon (O. kisutch), a Candidate
species under the ESA, is also expected to occur in the project area. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service also list the following Species Of Concern that may occur in the project vicinity: long-
eared myotis (Myotis evotis), long-legged myotis (M.. volans), Pacific Townsend's big-eared bat
(Corynorhinus townsendii townsendii), Pacific lamprey (Entosphenus tridentata), and river
lamprey (Lampetra ayresi).
' There is no habitat to support bald eagles, chinook salmon, or bull trout, within the project area.
The project action area, however, includes Panther Creek, which may support coho salmon and
' bull trout. WSDOT has determined that this project may affect, but is not likely to adversely
affect bald eagles, chinook salmon or bull trout populations or individuals. This project will not
have a significant impact to coho salmon, and will not adversely affect any Species of Concern.
' This project will have no effect on Essential Fish Habitat. This report fulfills the requirements
under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act(ESA) of 1973, as amended.
1
' WINRA1010IG
SR—405: SR—167 Interchange Modification
September 2000 i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
' EXECUTIVE SUMMARY....................................................................................................................... I
TABLEOF CONTENTS..........................................................................................................................II
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION.......................................................................................................................I
1 PROJECT AREA.........................................................................................................................................2
Settin ................................................................................................................................2
Streams and drainage basins ..........................................................................................2
RollingHills Creek...........................................................................................................................2
LISTOF SPECIES......................................................................................................................................3
' THREATENED SPECIES........................................................................................................................4
' Bald Eagle.........................................................................................................................4
Puget Sound ESU Chinook Salmon ...............................................................................4
Puget Sound/Coastal Bull Trout.....................................................................................5
' CANDIDATE SPECIES............................................................................................................................7
Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia ESU Coho Salmon.......................................................7
' SPECIES OF CONCERN..........................................................................................................................8
Habitatrequirements.......................................................................................................8
' Long-eared Myotis...........................................................................................................................8
Long-legged Myotis..........................................................................................................................8
Townsend's Big Eared Bat...........................................................................................................8
' Pacific Lamprey................................................................................................................................9
RiverLamprey...................................................................................................................................9
Site Specific Information and project impacts............................................................10
' Long-eared Myotis,Long-legged Myotis, Townsend's Big Eared Bat......................10
Pacific Lamprey, River Lamprey.............................................................................................10
' ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT..............................................................................................................10
ANALYSIS OF EFFECTS.....................................................................................................................10
' Essential fish habitat......................................................................................................10
Stormwater Treatment..................................................................................................I 1
Direct and Indirect Effects............................................................................................I I
BaldEagle..........................................................................................................................................12
FishSpecies.......................................................................................................................................12
WIN#A1111IG
SR—405: SR— 167 Interchange Modification
September 2000 ii
' Best Management Practices........................................................................................................13
Interrelated and Interdependent Effects .....................................................................1)
BeneficialEffects............................................................................................................13
' Table of Contents (Continued)
' MANAGEMENT ACTIONS RELATED TO THE SPECIES.....................................................13
' Mitigation Policy............................................................................................................14
CONCLUSION...........................................................................................................................................14
' RECOMMENDATIONS.........................................................................................................................15
REFERENCES...........................................................................................................................................16
APPENDIX A: FIGURES AND TABLES........................................................................................18
' WIN 8 A405010
SR—405: SR— 167 Interchange Modification
September 2000 iii
1
1
INTRODUCTION
1 This report was prepared by the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) in
compliance with Section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). This Biological
Assessment (BA) evaluates the potential impacts to listed species resulting from a proposed
road safety project, and facilitates informal consultation between WSDOT, and the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS).
1 Conclusions are based on a comprehensive review of field data gathered at the site, published
references, and personal communications with jurisdictional authorities as cited.
WSDOT proposes to improve safety features and reduce traffic congestion for State Route
(SR) 405 southbound collector distributor traffic merging with traffic from SR 167, in the city
of Renton, King County, Washington. The project is located at SR 405 Mile Post (MP) 1.79
to 2.77, and MP 26.27 vicinity on SR 167; Sections 19 of Township 23 North, Range 5 East
(Figure 1). The project goal is to increase roadway capacity to reduce congestion, and
improve safety and mobility through the SR 405/SR 167 interchange. The project will
1 construct a flyover structure from the existing southbound I-405 off-ramp to the southbound
SR 167 on-ramp. In addition, this project will modify the existing southbound SR 405-to-
northbound SR 167 ramp to accommodate future widening of SR 405 for direct transit access
1 projects.
Rolling Hills Creek flows along the toe-of-slope for the southbound I-405 to northbound SR
167 off-ramp. The creek is not known to support salmonid species (Schneider, personal
communication 2000), though there are no known barriers to entry. Thirteen black
cottonwood and poplar trees are to be removed from the North East interchange quadrant to
' accommodate a retaining wall at the top of slope above Rolling Hills Creek.
Prior to the preparation of this BA, the USFWS, North Pacific Coast Region, and the
' Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Priority Habitats and Species
Program were requested to research documented species occurrences within the project area.
Data from WDFW and the Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) were
' investigated using ArcView GIS as well. Species under the jurisdiction of NMFS were
investigated at the NMFS (1999) website.
Possible species occurrences were evaluated by the described data searches, published
documents regarding the habitat needs of the identified species, interviewing local
jurisdictional stakeholders, and by on-site investigation of the project area. The project area
' use by protected species and the possible impacts of the construction on habitat and food
sources were evaluated for each identified species.
' PROJECT DESCRIPTION
WSDOT proposes to improve safety features and reduce traffic congestion for SR 405
southbound collector distributor traffic merging with traffic from SR 167, in the city of
Renton, Washington(Figure 2). Specifically,the project will:
' WINIIA10501G
SR—405: SR—167 Interchange Modification
September 2000 1
1
' 1. Construct a flyover structure from the existing southbound SR 405 — SR 167 on-ramp.
2. Realign the southbound SR 405 to northbound SR 167 ramp to accommodate future direct
' transit access projects.
3. Relocate interchange illumination systems.
The southbound SR 405 to northbound SR 167 ramp will be realigned to accommodate
future widening of SR 405 for direct access improvement projects. This project will
' provide access to southbound SR 167, which is the primary north/south arterial through
Renton, Kent, and Auburn. The proposed flyover ramp will eliminate the combined
collector/distributor lane on westbound SR 405, which services both the off-ramp for
' southbound SR 167 and the on-ramp for northbound SR 167. The flyover ramp will include
a new bridge that will span existing SR 167. This new alignment will require the existing
grade to be raised in order to coincide with the proposed bridge. Retaining walls will be
' used for bridge approach embankments to support the necessary fill (WSDOT 1999).
Thirteen decorative cottonwood and poplar trees will be removed to accommodate the
retaining walls.
' The purpose of the bridge is to increase roadway capacity to reduce heavy congestion,
minimize operational problems, and improve safety and mobility through the SR 405/SR
' 167 interchange. The current situation exceeds capacity and causes several miles of backup
on southbound SR 405 most days, resulting in unsafe conditions. This location was
identified as a High Accident Location in the 1998 High Accident Location Review.
' PROJECT AREA
SETTING
The proposed project is located in the Puget Sound Basin, described as predominantly mid-
latitude, west coast marine type with a dry season. The site lies within the city of Renton, in
King County, WA within Section 19 of Township 23 North, Range 5 East (Figure 1). In the
project vicinity, SR 405 is (in each direction) a two-lane concrete roadway, classified as an
' Urban Interstate in King County, and is 26 feet wide with asphalt shoulders eight feet wide
(SHL 1999). SR 167 is (in each direction) a two-lane asphalt roadway, classified as an Urban
' Principal-Arterial, and is 24 feet wide with asphalt shoulders ten feet wide.
A WSDOT Biologist conducted a site investigation for streams and other sensitive areas on
September 5, 2000. The construction of the SR 405/SR 167 interchange has extensively
' modified and simplified the habitat.
STREAMS AND DRAINAGE BASINS
' Rolling Hills Creek
Fill material and road surfaces have raised the ground surface well above the surrounding
' topography, and has interrupted the natural functions of Rolling Hills Creek (Figures 2-3).
There are no known comprehensive examinations for fish presence in Rolling Hills Creek,
WIN I A11501G
SR—405: SR— 167 Interchange Modification
September 2000 2
and no protected species are assumed present. Rolling Hills Creek enters the project site from
the east and flows through a straight channel with banks cut at approximately a vertical slope
' (Figure 3). The stream passes under the interchange through a 48-inch concrete culvert
approximately 1500 ft, and ultimately joins Panther Creek. Within the project vicinity,
Rolling Hills Creek is a Type 3 water(DNR 1999). The stream is highly channelized with no
logs, rocks, or other obstructions to flow. The substrate is primarily gravel with minor
components of larger cobbles. NMFS Habitat Pathways within Rolling Hills Creek are At
Risk, or Not Properly Functioning (Table 1). Habitat Pathways that are not properly
functioning include Sediment, Chemical Contamination/Nutrients, Large Woody Debris, Off-
channel Habitat, Streambank Condition, and Flood Plain Connectivity. The riparian zone in
the project vicinity is limited, and vegetated with Himalayan blackberry, reed canarygrass,
soft rush, black cottonwood and poplar trees, some shrubs, and grasses (Figure 3). The creek
supports no emergent or submerged vascular plants in the project vicinity.
Soils are characterized as Urban Land: soil that has been modified by disturbance of the
natural layers with additions to accommodate industrial or residential development (USDA
1973).
LIST OF SPECIES
The USFWS (1999), WDFW (1999), and NMFS (1999) provide lists of federal- and state-
listed species occurring within the project area. The potential for listed species occurrence
' was evaluated by a site evaluation within a one-mile radius of the project. The level of project
area use and the possible impacts to habitat and food sources were evaluated for each
identified species.
Federal and state sources indicate that the following species may occur in the project action
area:
' Common Name Latin Name Status
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Threatened
Puget Sound/Coastal Distinct Population Segment(DPS)Bull Trout
' Salvelinus confluentus Threatened
Puget Sound Evolutionarily Significant Unit(ESU) Chinook Salmon
Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Threatened
' Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia ESU Coho Salmon
Oncorhynchus kisutch Candidate
Long-eared myotis Myotis evotis Species of Concern
Long-legged myotis M. volans Species of Concern
Pacific Townsend's big-eared bat Corynorhinus townsendii Species of Concern
Pacific lamprey Entosphenus tridentata Species of Concern
River lamprey Lampetra ayresi Species of Concern
' WINR A4050IG
SR—405: SR—167 Interchange Modification
September 2000 3
' THREATENED SPECIES
BALD EAGLE
Life History
' The occurrence of bald eagles in King County and the project area has been documented since
pre-settlement times (Stalmaster 1987). Eagle populations have decreased within the region
because of hunting and the widespread use of DDT, but their numbers have rebounded since
the early 1970's.
' Bald eagles are both residents in, and migrants through, King County where populations are
usually highest in January as birds that had moved north to feed in late summer return to the
region. Bald eagles breed in mid- to late winter, usually returning to one of several nests
located within an established nesting territory (Stalmaster 1987). Bald eagles usually nest
within one mile of open water and their home range can extend up to eight miles. Eggs laid in
March or April will hatch within one and a half months, and the young eagles fledge in mid-
summer(August).
Habitat Requirements
Bald eagles generally perch, roost, and build nests in mature trees near water bodies where
they spot prey while soaring or from perches (Ehrlich et al. 1988). Stalmaster (1987) reports
that over 50 percent of an eagle's diet comes from fish, 25 percent from other birds, and 15
' percent from mammals, although eagles will also feed on carrion (Stokes and Stokes 1989).
Site Specific Information
' The availability of foraging or roosting opportunities for bald eagles in the immediate project
area is limited due to the lack of suitable trees or platforms, and the noise and human activity
' levels associated with SR 405 and SR 167.
There are no bald eagle nests within one mile of the project site, though wintering bald eagles
' may occur near the project from about October 31 through March 31.
PUGET SOUND ESU CHINOOK SALMON
' Life History
Chinook are found from southern California(Ventura River) to Point Hope, Alaska (Wydoski
and Whitney 1979). The Puget Sound ESU Chinook salmon was listed as a threatened species
on March 16, 1999. The ESU includes "all naturally spawned populations of chinook salmon
from rivers and streams flowing into Puget Sound including the Straits of Juan De Fuca from
' the Elwha River, eastward, including rivers and streams flowing in Hood Canal, South
Sound, North Sound and the Strait of Georgia" (NMFS 1999).
' Chinook are divided into three races: spring, summer, and fall, chinook. These races are
defined by the timing of their spawning runs and, to some extent, their length of rearing time
' WINIIA4010IG
SR—405: SR— 167 Interchange Modification
September 2000 4
' in freshwater as juveniles. Spring chinook ascend the rivers between March and May and
begin spawning from July through September. Summer chinook ascend the rivers usually
between June-July and begin spawning in August. Fall chinook migrate up the streams in
August and September and commence spawning in September and October.
Habitat Requirements
Critical Habitat: Designated on February 16, 2000, Critical Habitat for this ESU is designated
as marine, estuarine and river reaches accessible to listed chinook salmon in Puget Sound
(NMFS 1999), including the project vicinity. Also included are adjacent riparian zones.
' Spawning most often occurs in mainstem rivers and larger streams where adequate substrate is
located. Depending on water temperature, incubation takes between 90-150 days with fry
emergence occurring in March and April. Fall chinook juveniles usually feed for a short time
before migrating to the ocean, while spring chinook juveniles rear in freshwater for one year
or more.
The timing for adult chinook to return to their natal streams each season is based on their race,
' but spawning usually occurs when water temperatures reach 42°F to 57°F (5.5°- 13.9°C).
Optimum chinook salmon spawning habitat consists of clean spawning gravel, cool water in
summer and fall, and holding pools for prespawning adults (Marshall et al., 1996). Minimum
water depth is 9.4 inches; water velocity must range between 1 to 3 ft/sec; and substrate
should be gravel ranging in size from 0.5 to 4.0 inches (Adams and Whyte, 1990; Payne and
Copes, 1988). The average area of a chinook redd is 35-55 ftZ (10.7-16.7 m2) with a
recommended available area of up to 216 ft2 (65.8 m2) per spawning pair (Reiser and Bjornn
1979). These numbers indicate the importance of large spawning areas containing cobble-
sized substrate (up to four inches in diameter).
Site Specific Information
Rolling Hills Creek does not provide habitat suitable for chinook salmon at any life stage.
PUGET SOUND/COASTAL BULL TROUT'
' Life History
' Bull trout may express either resident or migratory life-history forms. Migratory fish may be
adfluvial (lake-dwelling), fluvial (river dwelling), or anadromous (ocean dwelling). There is
little information on the relationship between migratory and non-migratory forms, although it
is likely that historical populations may have consisted of resident and migratory forms. All
life forms can be long lived (10+ years). Resident fish spend their entire life cycle in low
1 Dolly Varden are a closely related species similar in appearance to bull trout that occasionally inhabit the
same habitat. Due to the lack of easily distinguishable differences between the two species, all populations
that have previously been classified as Dolly Varden are considered bull trout by USFWS until shown
' otherwise through genetic analysis or other procedures. While this document refers only to bull trout, it
should be understood that this classification currently includes Dolly Varden.
' WIN RAlO50IG
SR—405: SR— 167 Interchange Modification
September 2000 5
' order stream systems exhibiting little or no seasonal migrations. Fluvial fish migrate
downstream to feed in larger rivers, and are considerably larger than resident fish due to the
increased food production in higher order rivers. Adfluvial fish are similar to fluvial fish, but
migrate downstream to take up residence in a lacustrine environment. In the NW Region,
there are adfluvial bull trout populations found in Baker Lake, Chester Morse Lake, and above
the Gorge Dam on the Skagit River(WDFW 1998).
The anadromous life form has a relatively complex life history. Upstream and downstream
' migration timing can vary considerably. Smolts will typically move out to Puget Sound as
early as late February but usually in April, May and early June, spending the remaining spring
and summer months in the marine environment. They will then return to the lower mainstem
' rivers to begin their spawning migration in the late summer of that same year(Kraemer 1994).
Adult bull trout spawn in the upper portion of watersheds and, in most cases, define the upper
' limit of anadromous use in a watershed. Large adults have been documented over 120 river
miles (193 km) inland at an elevation of over 3200 feet (975 m) (Kraemer 1994). Spawning
in the north Puget Sound drainages has been observed as early as August and as late as
' November. Females will deposit anywhere from a few hundred to 5,000 eggs in their redds,
depending on their size. The embryos incubate until spring; the surviving fry emerge from
redds in April-May.
' Habitat requirements
Habitat requirements of bull trout include cool waters of lakes or pools in streams sheltered by
' organic debris and clean cobble substrate. Spawning habitat consists of gravel or small cobble
in upper reaches of clear streams in areas of flat gradient. Fry inhabit shallow, slow,
backwater and side channels. Temperature may be the most influencing factor affecting bull
' trout distribution. Water temperatures in excess of 59°F (15°C) are thought to limit bull trout
distribution (WDFW 1998). Bull trout spawning is more dependent on temperature than time
' of year; stream temperatures must drop below 46°F (8°C) for spawning to commence. If
stream temperatures rise above 46°F once spawning has started, spawning activities will
usually slow or stop (Kraemer 1994).
' Site Specific Information
Low stream temperatures and clean substrates are essential features of bull trout habitat. This
species is most commonly associated with pristine or only slightly disturbed basins (USFWS
1998). The occurrence of bull trout in the Duwamish River is equivocal (WDFW 1998), and
no reproducing bull trout populations have been documented in Panther Creek or Rolling
' Hills Creek. Nonetheless, there are no known physical barriers that would preclude bull trout
from these drainages.
' WIN 11 A10101G
SR—405: SR— 167 Interchange Modification
September 2000 6
CANDIDATE SPECIES
' PUGET SOUND/STRAIT OF GEORGIA ESU COHO SALMON
Life History
' Coho salmon occur in most major river basins around the Pacific Rim from central California
to Korea and northern Hokkaido, Japan (WDFW 1994). Adult coho salmon spawn in
' freshwater streams in the late fall and early winter. Spawning generally occurs between
October and February in water temperatures between 40°-49°F (4.4°-9.4°C). The young
hatch in about eight weeks, and remain in the gravel for another four weeks. Juvenile coho
' rear in freshwater for a year to 18 months, and smolts migrate to the ocean in the spring of
their second year. Most male coho, and all female coho, spend from 16 to 20 months rearing
in the ocean and return to spawn in fresh water as three-year old adults.
Natural coho populations in the Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia ESU have been heavily influ-
enced by hatchery introductions and harvests focused on exploiting hatchery augmented
' stocks.
Habitat Requirements
' Coho salmon are found in a broader diversity of habitats than any other anadromous
salmonid. Much like the cutthroat trout (O. clarki), it manages to survive in the most unlikely
of surroundings (urban/suburban ditchlines, chemically-impacted farmland creeks, etc.).
Although they have a relatively high threshold to habitat degradation, coho salmon numbers
continue to decline.
Coho generally spawn in the tributaries and headwater streams of large rivers, preferably in
areas with low water velocities and small-sized gravel. Coho spawning habitat can vary
between sites, but coho will generally seek out areas with a substrate size between 0.5-4
inches in diameter. Spawning areas usually consist of shallow riffles/glides with a velocity up
to 3 ft/sec (Reiser and Bjornn 1979). The average area of a coho redd is 30 square feet, with a
recommended area of 126 ft2 per spawning pair. Redds are usually located near Large Woody
' Debris (LWD)or overhead cover to provide hiding and holding areas.
Coho spend up to two years rearing in freshwater. This dependence on the freshwater
' environment puts coho at a great risk from habitat degradation. Ideal habitats for rearing
juveniles should provide protective cover as LWD, boulders, deep pools, overhanging
vegetation, and undercut banks. Summer water temperatures should not exceed 65°F.
' During the winter, coho seek out the refuge of off-channel habitat (wall-based channels,
oxbows, side channels, etc.) to protect them from the high flows in the mainstem rivers
(Everest and Chapman 1972).
' Site Specific Information
There are no known comprehensive examinations for fish presence in Rolling Hills Creek.
According to WDFW (1994), Panther Creek, which receives Rolling Hills Creek flow, may
' WMI A40101G
SR—405: SR—167 Interchange Modification
September 2000 7
' provide habitat for Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia ESU coho salmon. Though there are no
physical barriers to preclude immigration, there are no documented occurrences of coho
' salmon in Rolling Hills Creek.
SPECIES OF CONCERN
1
HABITAT REQUIREMENTS
' Long-eared Myotis
The long-eared myotis is found from southwest Canada throughout the western states south to
northeast Arizona and northwest New Mexico (Hill 1998). The species occupies a wide
' variety of habitats from sea level to 9600 ft (2930m) predominately in coniferous-forested
regions, but where suitable roosting sites are available, this species is also found in semiarid
shrublands, sage, chaparral, and even agricultural areas.
They are insectivorous, feeding near trees or over water, and they have the ability to capture
airborne insects as well as to glean prey from vegetation or the ground. They feed heavily on
small moths as well as flies, spiders, beetles, and other insects. The type of echolocation they
use when hunting makes them well adapted to hunting in forested habitats.
' These bats roost singly or in small clusters in buildings, hollow trees, under tree bark, among
timber of unused railroad trestles, caves and mines, fissures in cliffs, and sink holes. Females
form small maternity colonies in early summer in buildings, hollow trees and under tree bark.
' Mating occurs in autumn and winter, but fertilization is delayed so that a single young is born
in late June or July. Nothing is known of the hibernating sites of this species.
' Long-legged Myotis
The long-legged myotis is the largest of the night bats in North America and ranges from
southeast Alaska and western Canada, to Baja and northern Mexico (Taylor 1999). It is
tolerant of cold temperatures and inhabits riparian areas, humid coastal, montane, and
subalpine coniferous forests, ponderosa pine and pinion juniper woodlands, and montane
shrub with willows. It occurs across most of its range at elevations from 200 ft (60m) to
' 12350 ft(3770m), but is most common from 6500 ft to 9850 ft(2000m to 3000m).
It is an opportunistic insectivore, emerging around dusk and feeding primarily on moths. It
' hunts over water, in forest clearings, among trees and above the forest canopy, but prefers the
edges of tree groves and cliff faces.
Nest and roost sites include abandoned buildings, the crevices of rocks and cliffs, fissures in
' the ground, and under the bark of trees. Mating takes place in August or September, before
going into hibernation in groups in mines and caves. Fertilization is delayed until Spring and
young are born in very large nursery colonies from May to August.
' Townsend's Big Eared Bat
The Townsend's big eared bat ranges throughout the Western United States, British
' Columbia, Vancouver Island, to the Southern Great Plains, Ozarks, and Appalachians. The
species attains a body length of 3.2 to 4.5 inches (83-113 mm), and has enormous ears (1 to
' WIN I A40101G
SR—405: SR— 167 Interchange Modification
September 2000 8
' 1.6 inches; 27-40 min). Optimum habitat is coastal forests to and grasslands. Elevations of
sea level to 3500 feet(1070 m), but lower elevations are preferred. This species prefers caves,
' old mines, and buildings as summer day roosts, and uses similar roosts at night.
Nursery colonies of a dozen to several hundred females occur in buildings, caves, and mines.
Females and young form tightly packed clusters that prevent heat loss and insure rapid
development of the young. If disturbed by humans a roosting site may be abandoned.
Breeding occurs from November to February, with a single young being born 50-100 days
' later. Males roost separate from females during the summer months.
These bats emerge an hour after dark. They are agile and capable of flying at low speeds to
feed on small moths and other small insects. They feed several times a night and return to a
' day roost at dawn. In August nursery colonies break up and individuals migrate to caves and
mines for hibernation. Hibernation lasts from September to May and causes severe weight
loss. Townsend big eared bats migrate 10-65 km between summer and winter habitats.
Pacific Lamprey
The Pacific lamprey is found in coastal streams from southern California to the Gulf of
' Alaska. In Washington, Pacific lamprey occur in most large coastal rivers and in the
Columbia, Snake and Yakima River systems. Adult Pacific lamprey parasitize fish in the
marine environment while the ammocoetes (larvae) are filter feeders that inhabit the fine silt
deposits in backwaters and quiet eddies of streams. Adults may reach a length of 30 inches
and weigh about one pound(Wydoski and Whitney 1979).
Adults return to coastal streams during June and July and spawning occurs in nests that are
formed as depressions in the small gravel of riffles. Both sexes participate in digging the
shallow nest that may be up to two feet in diameter. The mean number of eggs produced by a
' female is about 34,000 but can be as many as 106,000 for a 16-inch female; they invariably
die after spawning. Lamprey ammocoetes rear in the stream environment for up to six years
before migrating to the Pacific Ocean between March and July. Pacific lamprey apparently
travel great distances at sea. They can pass barriers like dams by slowly ascending the walls
by clinging with their sucker-like mouths (Wydoski and Whitney 1979).
' River Lamprey
River lamprey are found in coastal streams from northern California to northern British
Columbia and southeastern Alaska. No detailed distributional records are available for
' Washington, although the species probably occurs in most major rivers. The average adult
length is about 12 inches,with males being about an inch smaller than females.
' Few specifics are known about river lamprey biology. The species is known to migrate to sea,
parasitize fish, and return to fresh water to spawn after an unknown period. Vladykov and
Follett (1958) stated that river lamprey spawn in small streams in April and May. Nest
building is presumed to be similar to the Pacific lamprey, consisting of depressions dug in the
sand and gravel in riffles. Adults die after spawning, and ammocoetes hatch and remain in the
silt and sand in stream eddies until they reach an immature adult length of 4.6 inches (11.7
' cm) or more, whereupon they begin migration to the Pacific Ocean (Wydoski and Whitney
1979).
' WIN#A40501G
SR—405: SR— 167 Interchange Modification
September 2000 9
iSITE SPECIFIC INFORMATION AND PROJECT IMPACTS
Long-eared Myotis, Long-legged Myotis, Townsend's Big Eared Bat
iThese bats will not likely occur within the project vicinity due to the lack of suitable forested
habitat for them and their prey species. No habitat that could be used for roosting or
i hibernating by bats will be impacted. Overall, the project will not likely impact the foraging
habitat of these bat species.
Pacific Lamprey, River Lamprey
iThough there are no documented occurrences, lamprey species may occur in Rolling Hills
Creek or Panther Creek for spawning. BMP's will provide sufficient protection for Rolling
Hills Creek such that the project will not likely impact these lamprey species.
ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT
iThe Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act)
includes a mandate that NMFS must identify Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) for federally
i managed marine fish, and federal agencies must consult with NMFS on all activities, or
proposed activities, authorized, funded, or undertaken by the agency that may adversely affect
EFH. EFH is defined as "the waters and benthos necessary to a species spawning, breeding,
' feeding, or growth to maturity — its full life cycle" (PFMC, 1999). There are 83 marine
species managed by NMFS that are considered under EFH, including anadromous chinook
and coho salmon stocks in Washington, as well as pink salmon stocks of Puget Sound.
The Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC, 1999), with the concurrence of the
Secretary of Commerce, defines freshwater salmon EFH as "the aquatic component of
i streams, lakes,ponds, wetlands, and other water bodies currently or historically accessible to
salmon (except above certain impassable barriers) in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and
California identified by USGS hydrologic units."
ANALYSIS OF EFFECTS
ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT
Considering the information referenced in this report and project information provided in the
' construction drawings, the proposed project would have no effect on Rolling Hills Creek
Essential Fish Habitat.
' A"no effect"determination is warranted based on the following rationale:
1. There is no documented evidence of salmonid populations in Rolling Hills Creek.
2. No construction activity will occur within Rolling Hills Creek.
' 3. The proposed project will not alter any habitat element.
' WIN#A40501G
SR—405: SR—167 Interchange Modification
September 2" 10
i
STORMWATER TREATMENT
Stormwater from 231 percent of the new impervious surface area will be treated and detained.
This is based on the assumption that postproject net pollutant loading will not exceed the
preproject loading. Since stormwater BMPs are not 100 percent efficient, some amount of
' preexisting impervious surface area has to be treated to attain more than a no net increase in
pollutant loading. A minimum treatment level has been established at 140 percent of the new
impervious surface area to make up for BMP inefficiencies.
' This project will create an additional 10013.1 ft2 (3052 m2) of impervious surface. The
quantity BMP for this project is one dry pond, and the quality BMPs are a biofiltration
I swale and vegetative filter strip. The final design is treating for 7,062 m2, or 231 percent,
of the new impervious surface for quantity (detaining); and 7,062 m2, or 231 percent, of the
new impervious surface for quality. The proposed treatment BMPs will help prevent
increased erosion due to the accelerated highway runoff peaks created during the design 2, 10,
and 100-year storms, and help protect aquifers from contamination by untreated highway
runoff. The capacity of the detention pond, biofiltration swale, and filter strips included in
' the project will be sufficient to treat all new pavement added on this project, and will
retrofit some existing pavement as well.
' DIRECT AND INDIRECT EFFECTS
Direct effects occur at or very close to the time of the project. Examples could include
' construction noise disturbance, loss of habitat or sedimentation that results from
construction.
Proposed actions that may cause direct effects in the project area include:
t1) Clearing of 13 mature trees to accommodate a retaining wall.
Twenty-two poplar and black cottonwood trees are located in the interchange northeast
' quadrant, adjacent to the existing retaining wall, and at the top of the embankment between
Rolling Hills Creek and SR 405. The trees are arranged to follow the embankment contour,
and apparently planted as decoration during the interchange construction. All trees are within
WSDOT right of way and are from 37 to 45 feet from the stream. Thirteen of these trees, four
cottonwood and nine poplar between 14 and 36 inches dbh, will be removed to accommodate
a new retaining wall for the flyover. Four additional poplar trees will be trimmed to
accommodate the flyover ramp. The stumps of the removed trees must also be removed to
accommodate a firm base for the retaining wall. Removal of the stumps will involve grubbing
to the limit of the right of way.
' The removal of these trees will eliminate a potential source of allocthonous nutrients to
Rolling Hills Creek, though the impact is expected to be negligible based on the relatively
' short reach of stream involved, the lack of documented fish use, and the relatively minor
contribution to nutrient loading represented by these trees. In addition, within five years,
WSDOT will submit plans for expanding the interchange to include other flyover ramps, and
' the area where the trees will be removed will be further disturbed. For this reason, no
mitigation planting beyond seeding the area with grasses is proposed.
' WIN#A40101G
SR—405: SR—167 Interchange Modification
September 2000 11
' 2) Grading for roadway alignment and flyover installation.
Once the trees are removed or trimmed, all subsequent construction work will be
accomplished from the roadway and ramps. BMP's and a TESC Plan will provide sufficient
protection for Rolling Hills Creek such that the likelihood of project impact is discountable.
' 3) Construction-related sound broadcast to the air.
Construction-related noises will be temporary, and are not expected to impact any protected
species or habitat.
' Indirect effects are those that are caused by the action and are later in time, but still
reasonably certain to occur. Examples include changes to ecological systems such as
' predator/prey relationships, longer-term habitat changes, or anticipated changes in
human activities including changes in land use.
The proposed flyover installation will reduce the occurrence of accidents and aid in traffic
flow. The project will eliminate the need for vehicles both exiting SR 405 and entering SR
405 from having to merge past each other. The project will incorporate widening and
channelization in anticipation of future improvements to the interchange. Long-term changes
in traffic use or frequency are expected, but not because of the proposed flyover. Indirect
effects to protected species as a result of the flyover are discountable.
' Bald Eagle
Bald eagle foraging or roosting opportunities are limited due to the lack of suitable trees or
perches. Wintering bald eagles may fly over the project from about October 31 through
' March 31,though this likelihood is considered minimal due to the lack of available prey.
Bald eagles prefer fish in their diet, and there are no adverse impacts to fish anticipated
1 because of this project.
Small mammals are also prey for bald eagle and likely forage in some sections of the project
area. Clearing will result in the loss of thirteen trees in the intersection vicinities, but these
' areas do not provide optimum foraging habitat for bald eagles. Construction of the flyover
will entail grading land that is currently roadway, and is not foraging habitat for small
' mammals.
The potential for the project to directly or indirectly affect bald eagles is expected to be
discountable.
' Fish Species
The potential project direct and indirect effects on bull trout, chinook and coho salmon are
' similar and discussed jointly.
Project construction will involve clearing trees, grubbing, and grading within 300 feet of
Rolling Hills Creek. There are no known comprehensive surveys of fish presence in Rolling
Hills Creek. A WSDOT biologist visited the site on August 31, 2000 and concluded that the
stream is highly channelized, the substrate is composed of nearly homogeneous materials that
' were likely introduced when the interchange was constructed, and that the stream provides
little or no habitat suitable for salmonid species. The lack of aquatic vegetation or other fish
' WIN I A101010
SR—405: SR— 167 Interchange Modification
September 2000 12
tspecies also suggests that the water quality may not meet standards that support salmonids.
From the project site, Rolling Hills Creek flows south under SR 405 through a 48-inch
' concrete pipe, emerging in the Panther Creek Wetland and eventually to Spring Brook Creek,
which is known to support coho salmon and cutthroat trout. There are no barriers to fish
passage, so it's very likely that both species (at least occasionally) inhabit Rolling Hills Creek.
Best Management Practices
Projects of this scope involve various types of heavy equipment and may involve multiple
construction crews to safely complete the project. Though not likely, accidents such as spills
of hazardous materials (typically green cement, fuel, or hydraulic fluid) or unanticipated
additional construction impacts could occur that could degrade runoff water quality.
With the treatment of stormwater from 231 percent of new impervious surface and the
application of BMP's, the construction and operation of the SR 405/SR 167 flyover is not
' expected to cause any detectable change in animal behavior.
INTERRELATED AND INTERDEPENDENT EFFECTS
An interrelated effect is part of the proposed action and depends on the proposed action for its
justification. An interdependent effect has no independent utility apart from the proposed
project. Effects of the project are analyzed together with the effects of other activities that are
interrelated to, or interdependent with,that project.
An interrelated effect is traffic control during construction that could lead to increased traffic
1 congestion and an increased potential for vehicle backups. However, alterations to the
established traffic flow are not expected to negatively impact habitat areas.
This project will include an interdependent effect due to the establishment of temporary
equipment storage and staging areas within the WSDOT right-of-way, and the potential for
accidental spills from construction machinery and vehicles. These areas will be established in
places that are not identified as wetlands or other known sensitive areas. No long-term effects
are anticipated because of temporary equipment storage and staging yards during project
construction.
iBENEFICIAL EFFECTS
USFWS and NMFS (1998) identify beneficial effects as actions that "are simultaneous
positive effects without any adverse effects." Rolling Hills Creek is currently assumed not to
provide sufficient habitat or water quality to support salmonids. Presumably, some portion of
the water quality problems for this stream result from stormwater runoff from the interchange.
1 The detention and treatment of 231 percent of new impervious surfaces will likely
permanently benefit runoff to Rolling Hills Creek, and other streams receiving water from that
1 source.
MANAGEMENT ACTIONS RELATED TO THE SPECIES
1
WIN I A40101G
SR—405: SR—167 Interchange Modification
September 2000 13
' MITIGATION POLICY
The Memorandum of Understanding (August 29, 1990) between the Washington Department
of Transportation, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife ensures "no net loss of
habitat or fish populations" because of transportation projects and maintenance work as
' outlined in WAC 220-110-020 (22). The elements of this MOU are listed below in order of
priority:
1) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking certain actions or parts of an action,
' and/or
2) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its
' implementation, and/or
3) Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected
' environment, and/or
4) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance
operations during the life of the action, and/or
' 5) Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or
environments, and/or
i6) Monitoring the impacts and taking appropriate corrective measures.
CONCLUSION
This project is proposed to alleviate the high accident rate for this portion of the SR 405/SR
' 167 interchange. Long-term changes in traffic patterns are anticipated, but these will occur
irrespective of this project. The proposed flyover will decrease traffic congestion but, as a
traffic control project, is not undertaken to increase the use of SR 405 or SR 167.
Since salmonid usage within the project area is limited or none, it is difficult for this
biological assessment to conclude the potential impacts that could result in a "take" of listed
' population segments. The removal of thirteen trees from the proximity of Rolling Hills Creek
is necessary to accommodate the flyover retaining wall, and the stumps must be removed to
firmly anchor the wall. Mitigation measures and BMPs are identified within this report to
maintain the current functioning condition of Rolling Hills Creek, and to avoid take when
possible. Considering field work, local expert opinion, and other documentation presented in
this biological assessment, it is believed that this project "May affect, but is not likely to
' adversely affect" bald eagles, bull trout, and chinook salmon habitat, populations, or
individuals. This project will not have a significant impact on Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia
ESU coho salmon, and will not adversely affect any Species of Concern.
WIN#A10501 G
SR—405: SR— 167 Interchange Modification
September 2000 14
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Mitigate for unavoidable impacts.
2. Select construction methods that have the least potential for environmental impacts.
1 3. Any slopes that are disrupted during construction should be replanted and returned to a
pre-construction condition.
4. Utilize sufficient BMP measures to assure control of pollutants, sediments, and erosion.
5. Conduct project construction staging outside critical areas, including buffers.
' 6. Notify the Northwest Environmental Services staff of unforeseen alterations to plans that
may affect critical areas.
WIN I A111501c
SR—405: SR— 167 Interchange Modification
September 2000 15
' REFERENCES
DNR. 1999. Washington Department of Natural Resources, Forest Practices Board. Proposed
Forests and Fish Emergency Rule. Part 1: Water Typing Rules. October 15, 1999.
Ehrlich, P.R., D.S. Dobkin, and D. Wheye. 1988. The Binder's Handbook: a Field Guide to
' the Natural History of North American Birds. Simon and Schuster Inc.,New York,
New York.
Everest, F.H. and D.W. Chapman. 1972. Habitat Selection and Spatial Interaction by
Juvenile Chinook Salmon and Steelhead Trout In Two Idaho Streams. J. Fish. Res.
Brd. Can. 29: 91-100.
' Hill D. 1998. Keen's Long-eared Bat Myotis keenii. Available at:
http://www.naturepark.com/keenbat.htm.
Kraemer, C. 1994. Some observations on the life history and behavior of the native char,
' Dolly Varden (Salvelinus malma) and bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) of the North
Puget Sound Region. WDW.
Marshall, D.B., M.W. Chilcote, and H. Weeks. 1996. Species at Risk: Sensitive, Threatened
and Endangered Vertebrates of Oregon. 2nd edition. Oregon Department of Fish and
Wildlife. Portland, Oregon.
NMFS. 1999. United States Department of the Interior,National Marine Fisheries Service,
' Northwest Region Habitat Conservation Division, Protected Resources web page:
http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/1salmon/salmesa/chinpug.htm. Updated March 1999.
Payne,N. F. and F. Copes. 1988. Wildlife and fisheries habitat improvement handbook. U.S.
For. Serv. Washington, D.C. 402 pp.
PFMC. 1999. Pacific Fishery Management Council. Appendix A: Description and
1 identification of essential fish habitat, adverse impacts and recommended conservation
measures for salmon. Amendment 14 to the Pacific Coast Salmon Plan. PFMC, 2130
SW Fifth Ave., Suite 224, Portland, OR 97201.Reiser, D.W. and T.C. Bjornn. 1979.
Habitat Requirements of Anadromous Salmonids. US Forest Service General
Technical Report DNW-96. Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station.
Portland, Oregon.
' Schneider, P. 2000. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Area Habitat Biologist.
Personal conversation with Brian Bigler. September 5, 2000.
Stalmaster M. V. 1987. The Bald Eagle. Universe Books. New York. 227 pages.
' Stokes D. and L. Stokes. 1989. A Guide to Bird Behavior, Volume III. Little, Brown, and
Company, Boston, Mass. 397 pages.
Taylor, J.A. 1999. Habitat selection of the long-legged myotis (Myotis volans) in a managed
landscape on the east-slopes of the Cascade range. M. Sc. Thesis. Michigan State
University, East Lansing, MI. Available at: http://www.msu.edu/—taylol 10/bats.html
USDA. 1973. US Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. Soil Survey of King
County, Washington.
USFWS and NMFS. 1998. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Oceanic and
atmospheric Administration. Commencement Bay Programmatic EIS,Volume I: Draft
EIS. NOAA, Seattle, WA.
WIN G A4010IG
SR—405: SR— 167 Interchange Modification
September 2000 16
USFWS. 1998. United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service. A
Framework to Assist in the Making of Endangered Species Act Determinations of
Effect for Individual or Grouped Actions at the Bull Trout Subpopulations Watershed
Scale (Draft). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
USFWS. 1999. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. Written
response to ESA inquiry. March 26, 1999 3 pp.
Vladykov, V. D., and W. I. Follett. 1958. Redescription of Lampetra ayersii (Gunther)of
western North America, a species of lamprey (Petromyzontidae) distinct from
' Lampetra fluviatilis (Linnaeus) of Europe. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 15(l):47-77.
WDFW. 1994. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington State Salmon and
Steelhead Stock Inventory. Appendix One -- Puget Sound Stocks,North Puget Sound
Volume. 371 pp.
WDFW. 1998. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington State Salmonid
Stock Inventory. Appendix-- Bull Trout and Dolly Varden. 437 pp.
WDFW. 1999. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Priority Habitats and Species
Database Search. March 22, 1999. 4 pp. +maps.
' WSDOT. 1999. Southbound I-405 to Southbound SR 167 Flyover Ramp. Wetland/Biology
Report. OL-3478. Washington Department of Transportation,Northwest Region,
Environmental Services. March, 1999.
' Wydoski, R.S. and R.R. Whitney. 1979. Inland Fishes of Washington. University of
Washington Press.
WIN S A4011IG
SR—405: SR—167 Interchange Modification
September 2000 17
1
I APPENDIX A: FIGURES AND TABLES
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
WIN#A1111IG
SR—405: SR— 167 Interchange Modification
September 2000 18
Figure 1. USGS quad vicinity map of the SR 405 and SR 167, flyover projects. The project
area is located in King County, Washington, within Township 23 North, Range 5 East,
' Section 19.
' WINIIA1010IG
SR—405: SR— 167 Interchange Modification
September 2000 19
' Figure 2. SR 405 / SR 167 flyover project, City of Renton, King County, Washington, within
Township 23 North, Range 5 East, Section 19.
WIN 11 A4010IG
SR—405: SR—167 Interchange Modification
September 2000 20
I kV A µ
At 14
Figure 3. Rolling Hills Creek in the vicinity of the SR 405/SR 167 interchange. The stream
reach is highly channelized with vertical embankments and limited habitat for
salmonids.
' WIN X A4050IG
SR—405: SR— 167 Interchange Modification
September 2000 21
Table 1. National Marine Fisheries Service Habitat Pathways for Flowing Hills Creek in the
vicinity of the SR 405/SR 167 interchange, Redmond, Washington.
PATHWAYS: ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE EFFECTS OF THE ACTION(S)
INDICATORS Properly Not Propr.
' Water Quality: At Risk Functioning Functioning
Restore Maintain Degrade
Temperature X X
Sediment X X
' Chem. Contam./Nut. X X
Habitat Access:
Physical Barriers N/A X
iHabitat Elements:
Substrate X X
' Large Woody Debris X X
Pool Frequency X X
' Pool Quality X X
Off-channel Habitat X
Refugia X X
Channel Cond.&Dyn:
' Width/Depth Ratio X X
Steambank Cond. X X
' Floodplain Connectivity X X
Flow/Hydrology:
' Peak/Base Flows X X
Drainage Network Increase X X
' Watershed Conditions
Road Dens.&Loc. N/A
' Disturbance X X
Riparian Reserves X X
' WIN M A4050IG
SR—405: SR— 167 Interchange Modification
September 2000 22
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i