Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSWP272710(1) (2) �1�0 ME_ CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator March 5, 1997 Pete Smith HNTB 600 108th Avenue N.E. Suite 405 Bellevue,Washington 98004 Subject: Oakesdale Avenue S.W. —S.W. 16th Street to S.W. 31st Street Review of Draft Design Report, dated December 1996 Dear Mr. Smith: A review by City of Renton staff of the drainage design element of the subject draft report has resulted in the following comments: 1. The maximum catch basin spacing is 150 feet for roadway grades less than 1%, not 200 feet as the plans and report assumed. Revise the Drainage Plans between S.W. 27th and S.W. 19th to reflect a maximum catch basin spacing of 150 feet. No inlet calculations required.. - 2. According to Alan Black of HNTB, System C includes an outfal. pipe to Springbrook Creek only to provide a gravity drain to the pond so that the pond's dead storage volume may be emptied during maintenance activities. However, because of the wetland impacts of constructing an outfall pipe and maintenance access road to the creek, a gravity drain is not required. Redesign System C to outlet to the wetland. Also, editing of appropriate sections of the Draft EIS and Design Report to reflect this change will be required. I will coordinate this with HNTB.' Although an exception is being made for System C, other systems should include an outlet for gravity draining the dead storage volume. 3. Systems B, C, and DE must include biofiltration swales or the wetpond/wetvault volume and surface area must be oversized by at least a factor of 2 to compensate for eliminating the swales. HNTB calculations do not show that the factor of 2 was achieved. Calculations must be provided to confirm oversizing. 4. Storm drain systems upstream of the water quality/detention facility must not be below the level of the dead storage volume. If necessary, the design should consider the following options to keep the pipes free draining: A. shallower depths and slopes for pipes upstream of the facility (minimum one foot of cover allowed with ductile iron pipe, or reinforced concrete pipe appropriate to carry loads). B. reducing the elevation of the dead storage volume by deepening the facility or by providing a shallower, but wider dead storage volume. However, lowering the elevation of the dead storage volume may not be possible because the detention volume in all of the systems must be above the level of the 2-year flow in Springbrook Creek. Such is 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 ®This paper contains 50%recycled material.20%post consumer Pete Smith Page 2 HNTB March 5, 1997 Re: Oakesdale Avenue S.W.Review of Draft Design Report the case with System DE, leaving only option A above to come up with a design for a free draining system. 5. The calculations should include an explanation of how and why different tailwater conditions were modeled in the detention basin design. The calculations should include the Springbrook Creek modeling flow and elevation tables for reference purposes. 6. All of the calculations and other information generated in the process of reaching the recommended solution is useful to have in the file, but is not necessary to include in the Design Report. To keep the volume of Appendix E, Drainage Plan, to a minimum, I would like to discuss with you, as soon as convenient,the feasibility of: • including only the HEC2 model summary information, not all of the computer output • including only the final storm water design calculations, excluding any intermediate steps not necessary to demonstrate that the final design satisfies code requirements. For instance, System B includes several sets of hydrograph runs and detention basin design computer results,but only one set is needed to show the final design solution. 7. Numerous other comments on the text and drainage plans will be provided under separate cover. If you require further clarification or have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me. Sincerely, 66 Bob Mahn, Project Manager Transportation Systems Division c: Scott Woodbury HATRANS\PLNG\RI.M:jh OAK40.DOC • CITY OF RENTON PLANNINGBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: March 3, 1997 TO: Bob Mahn FROM: Scott Woodbury ci SUBJECT: COMMENTS TO THE OAKESDALE EXTENSION PROJECT DRAFT DESIGN REPORT Following are some of my comments regarding the above-referenced report. Additional comments are included within the text of the report. 1. Page 1,3rd para, last sent. The SW 16th Street bridge has a 60 foot clear span,not 64 feet. 2. Page 1,3rd para,first sent. The alignment also passes through the developed Benaroya site. 3. Page 2,2nd para. Winmar-Metro sold its property to Hunter Douglas. 4. Page 2, 3rd para. Springbrook Creek is a Class 2 stream south of SW Grady Way and a Class 1 stream north of SW Grady Way, according to the 1990 King County Sensitive Areas Map Folio. It is important to designate that the Class 2 designation is per King County as other agencies may have different designations. 5. Backwater analysis will need to be conducted in final design per KCSWDM and may reveal a need for slightly larger pipe sizes. 6. The calculations should include an explanation of how and why different tailwater conditions were modeled in the detention basin design. The calculations should include the Springbrook Creek modeling flow and elevation tables for reference purposes. 7. According to Alan Black of HNTB, System C includes an outfall pipe to Springbrook Creek only to provide a gravity drain to the pond so that the pond's dead storage volume may be emptied during maintenance activities. However, because of the wetland impacts of constructing an outfall pipe and maintenance access road to the creek, a gravity drain is not required and the pond should be redesigned to outlet to the wetland. According to the design report, an elevation of 11.0 at the outfall of System C is sufficient to achieve 2' of cover at the sag of the road. However, a cover of 1' is allowable if the proper pipe material is used,thus an outlet elevation of 12.0 would also work. Based on the contours shown on the plans, the outfall pipe for System C would only need to be 80' in length to allow the outlet to be set at elevation 12.0 and only 140' in length for the outlet to be set at an elevation of nearly 11.0. A swale could potentially be used in combination with an outfall pipe. Therefore, the detention/wetpond for System C could be designed to outfall to the surface of the adjacent wetland through a short outfall pipe/swale, thus avoiding the need for approximately 1200' of outfall pipe and access road through the wetlands in order to reach Springbrook Creek. ~ Comments to Oakesdale Design Report Page 2 Although an exception is being made for System C, other systems should include an outlet for gravity draining the dead storage volume, if possible. However, providing a gravity outlet for draining the dead storage volume for infrequent maintenance work is not as important as designing the conveyance system upstream of a water quality/detention facility so that it is above the level of the facility's dead storage. Both criteria should be achieved where possible. 8. Rather than compensate for the uncontrolled release from System F by oversizing the expensive detention vault facility of System D/E, I suggest that the compensation be accomplished at one or both of the open ponds for Systems B and C. Also, it is better if the compensation is made farther upstream on Springbrook Creek. However, oversizing the System B and C ponds may result in a need for slightly more additional wetland mitigation. 9. Systems B, C, and DE must include biofiltration swales or the wetpond/wetvault volume and surface area must be oversized by a least a factor of 2 to compensate for eliminating the swales. Oversizing System DE would eliminate the biofiltration Swale requirement for that system and remove the need to coordinate with the ESGRWP on the location and elevation of the bench on which the swale could be constructed. Calculations must be provided to confirm oversizing. 10. To keep the volume of the design report to a minimum you may wish to consider the following: • include only the HEC2 model summary information, not all of the computer output • include only the final storm water design calculations, excluding any intermediate steps not necessary to demonstrate that the final design satisfies code requirements. For instance, System B includes several sets of hydrograph runs and detention basin design computer results,but only one set is needed to show the final design solution. All of the calculations and other information generated in the process of reaching the recommended solution is useful to have in the file, but maybe not necessary to include in the design report. 11. The maximum catch basin spacing for roadway grades less than 1% is 150 feet, not 200 feet as the plans and report assumed. 12. Storm drain systems upstream of the water quality/detention facility must not be below the level of the dead storage volume. If necessary, the design should consider the following options to keep the pipes free draining: A. shallower depths and slopes for pipes upstream of the facility B. reducing the elevation of the dead storage volume by deepening the facility or by providing a shallower,but wider dead storage volume. However, lowering the elevation of the dead storage volume may not be possible because the detention volume in all of the systems must be above the level of the 2-year flow in Springbrook Creek. Such is the case with System DE, leaving only option A above to come up with a design for a free draining system. 13. The conveyance event should be used in modeling the effect of the 100-year tailwater of Springbrook Creek on the system design,not the storage event as the present calculations show. If you have any questions, please contact me at X-5547. U:1997:97-015:SW CITY OF RENTON PLANNINGBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: February 6, 1997 TO: Gregg Zimmerman FROM: Ron Olsen STAFF CONTACT: Ron Straka Scott Woodbury SUBJECT: ISSUES RELATED TO FILLING WETLANDS FOR PHASE 2 IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE OAKESDALE EXTENSION PROJECT(SW 27TH STREET TO SW 31ST STREET) This memo is in response to your request for information on the issues related to filling wetlands under the Phase 2 improvements for the Oakesdale Extension Project (SW 27th Street to SW 31st Street) in lieu of providing a bridged crossing of the wetland. 1. How much wetland area from SW 27th Street to the existing Oakesdale cul-de-sac near SW 31 st Street would have to be filled if the 5 lane Oakesdale Avenue was built through this area assuming the existing upland would be used as part of the road? Bob Mahn estimated that 1.3 acres of wetland would be filled if Oakesdale was built using the existing upland as part of the road. However, shifting the road to make use of the existing upland would result in the road being out of alignment with the existing Oakesdale Avenue to the south. Some length of the existing road to the south would then have to be reconstructed to make it align with the section of road through the wetland. The additional cost of reconstructing the existing road may negate any cost savings that would be realized by reducing the amount of wetland fill. A more detailed review of the cost impacts of reconstructing the existing road could not be developed in time for inclusion in this memo. The 1.3 acres of wetland fill could be reduced to 1.15 acres if a retaining wall was constructed along the east side of the road. The alignment currently being evaluated in the Oakesdale EIS lies east of the existing upland area and does not fall within the prism of the proposed road. The total wetland impact of the 68-foot roadway and 2H:1 V fill slopes, including 10 feet for bike lanes, is estimated to be 1.9 acres. This area could be reduced to 1.6 acres if retaining walls were used on both sides of the roadway. 2. What would the ACOE and the City wetland ordinance require for the wetland impact replacement ratio? The Oakesdale Extension preliminary draft EIS notes that the City's wetland ordinance requires a replacement ratio of 3 to 1 for impact to a category 1 wetland with a predominantly scrub-shrub vegetation community. Wetland Filling Issues Oakesdale Extension Phase 2 Page 2 The ACOE regulations do not include minimum replacement ratios. Instead, the ACOE determines replacement ratios on the case-by-case basis. It is our understanding that it is unusual for the ACOE to require a higher replacement ratio than is identified by the local agency. 3. What would the total area of wetland mitigation be required? As noted in item 1 above, the total area impacted is estimated to be within the range of 1.15 to 1.9 acres, depending upon if retaining walls are used or if the roadway is shifted to make use of the existing upland area. Using a 3:1 replacement ratio, the total area of wetland mitigation is within the range of 3.45 to 5.7 acres. 4. Is the capacity of the northern wetland mitigation banking site sufficient to accommodate the mitigation? The attached tables show that the northern wetland mitigation banking site has sufficient capacity to accommodate the mitigation. 5. What would the cost be for mitigation assuming the mitigation is accomplished in the northern wetland mitigation banking site? The cost of creating wetlands on the northern mitigation banking site is estimated at $150,000 per acre, not including engineering and permitting costs. The high cost is largely due to the significant amount of fill that would have to be excavated to establish a sufficient supply of water for the created wetlands. Assuming the 5.7 acres worst case scenario, the mitigation cost is estimated at$885,000. 6. What issues could prevent the City from filling these wetlands for the Oakesdale Extension project's Phase 2 improvements. Compensatory storage. Any floodplain volume displaced by the filling would have to be compensated by excavating an equivalent volume of material. This could likely be compensated by excavation on the mitigation banking site and by removal of the existing private road between SW 27th Street and the Oakesdale cul-de-sac at SW 31st Street if the alignment does not make use of the private road. ACOE alternatives analysis. ACOE regulations require that any mitigation be in the following order of preference: a. Avoid the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action. b. Minimizing impacts C. Compensating for the impacts by creating replacement wetlands or other appropriate mitigation method. Filling instead of bridging the wetland may be viewed as being in noncompliance because it does not avoid or minimize impacts as a bridge would. Metro sewer. Filling over or adjacent to Metro's existing 72" sanitary sewer main may cause settlement of the pipeline. Measures would be required to prevent impacts and would add to the cost of the fill option. Wetland Filling Issues Oakesdale Extension Phase 2 Page 3 7. What options does the City have to reduce the cost of the wetland fill option? The wetlands ordinance could be revised to give credit for enhancement of wetlands. This could be used to potentially reduce the replacement ratio below 3:1, but not lower than 1:1. The wetland ordinance replacement ratios could be revised downward to possibly a 2:1 replacement ratio. Some jurisdictions have lower replacement ratios than the current Renton ordinance. The wetland mitigation could be constructed before the impact occurs. If the mitigation proves to be successful,then a lower replacement ratio could be used. U:1997:97-011:SW cc: Bob Mahn Potentially Available Acreage on the Wetland Mitigation Banking Sites Existing Upland Existing Total Site Area Potentially Convertible Wetland to Wetland(acres) (acres) (acres) Site 1 12.19 18.78 30.97 Site 2 7.24 6.69 13.93 Total 19.43 25.47 44.90 Current Available Acreage- Mitigation Banking Site 1 Bank Participant Project Approx. Debit Balance Timing of Impact Initial Acreage 12.19 City of Renton 27th Street HOV Lane Widening After 2000 4.08a 8.11 Transportation Systems Division City of Renton Oakesdale Extension Project ? 5.70 2.41 Transportation Systems Phase 2 from SW 27th St to SW Division 31 st St(LUA-95-024,ECF) Glacier Park Wetlands Filled under RVMP-92- 1992 2.41 0.00 118 in accordance with Mitigation Banking Agreement (King Co. Recording No. 9206241805) Based on 4/28/92 memo from Lynn Guttmann to Larry Warren. Assumes 1.36 acres of wetland impact and a 3:1 mitigation ratio. bAssumes impact of 1.9 acres and 3:1 mitigation ratio. cA total of 4.11 acres of wetlands have been filled on six separate sites in accordance with the Mitigation Banking Agreement with Glacier Park. Using a 1:1 mitigation ratio, it is assumed that a portion(2.41 of the 4.11 acres) of the mitigation required for the Glacier Park impacts will be mitigated on Site 1. The balance of 1.70 acres will be mitigated on Site 2. dAssumes all upland on the site can be converted to wetland. However, more or less wetland may be created depending upon buffer width and location with respect to the property lines and whether mitigation bank site 1 is expanded to include the adjacent former P-1 Channel right-of-way. Current Available Acreage Mitigation Banking Sites Page 2 Current Available Acreage-Mitigation Banking Site 2 Bank Participant Project Approx. Debit Balance Timing of Impact Initial Acreage 7.24 Glacier Park Wetlands Filled under RVMP-92- 1993/1994 1.70a 5.54 118 in accordance with Mitigation Banking Agreement (King Co. Recording No. 9206241805) Benaroya SW 16th Street Technical Center 1996 0.40 5.14 (LUA-96-034,SA,SM) Glacier Park Wetlands yet to be filled in Unknown 1.22 3.92 accordance Mitigation Banking Agreement (King Co. Recording No. 9206241805) 'See footnote d in the table"Current Available Acreage-Mitigation Banking Site L" bBased on 0.40 acres of impact and a 1:1 mitigation ratio. 'Assumes a 1:1 mitigation ratio. Wetlands yet to be filled are designated on the City's Wetlands Inventory as W-18 (0.66 acres), W-51 (0.48 acres),and W-44 (0.08 acres). dPossible additional credits for future privately owned development projects for which wetland mitigation is required solely under the City's Wetlands Management Ordinance (no Corps of Engineers Section 404 permit is required). eAssumes all upland on the site can be converted to wetland. However, more or less wetland may be created depending upon buffer width and location with respect to the property lines and whether additional wetlands may be established on the upland area of the adjacent greenbelt along Springbrook Creek. U:65119:96-006A:SW b! N � - t �o t I /4-tre-f - CITY OF RENTON PLANNINGBUILDING PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: ©G' 6�-+r f 0T(o TO: SCo' f Wooc( y eye Sur-�,lze FROM: Doi Ala l r, k �Q✓ a�'!v S�y.s-�e s � ,vulok SUBJECT: Avenue. Jr — Su) /L �A 5`w 31,1- c &etiwt# pry Pr-a � S A f°a.c�cj 4v- yo"r Kev(e cad "f�e /c��-5`t�h 'r`E�ist /t��'Svc K��'�` V'c�v2 Se w T'� �� T ►� !� fi �t � ��::fs�'r.� 'atSd� ffruef .a�- /ou coo vd (i;7",- VevteW Q-e Pe-.r4lh en s 0 �sc ",Y C4v T s Y° o f or 0 �jo, a�, 4, D W av� 'ire eJ a ; ov�„t6er� l q1o, �I f 7-A-ait,k xpq �D*f lmmejJ24 4ei,%410*t e 5- NFU/ 6OA S/ 4 f p rh M i yG�l o /Y 2OI f�I/e s LI S ClF f/t Sure G�f/�C/S �un Us �,� (C,)> . CA^ 614SIj i ( � / � ,� r /� +\/ �. � _. �� �. � _ ��� � �\ � � !. ' `s l � ,� �� ��� _..— � � ��l c� c� r � 2-1 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Alternatives 2. Alternatives 2.1 Introduction The Oakesdale Avenue SW project would connect two existing sections of Oakesdale Avenue SW — north and south of the proposed project. The northern section presently ends on the south at SW 16th Street and extends north under I-405, intersecting SW Grady Way, and continuing to Monster Road and the regional arterial, Martin Luther King Junior Way (SR 900) via 68th Avenue South. SW 16th Street, an east-west arterial running south of and parallel to I-405, provides access to north-south arterials to the east of Oakesdale Avenue SW at Lind Avenue SW and East Valley Road SW To the west, S.W 16th Street connects to Monster Road, and to West Valley Highway (SR 181) in Tukwila via Jackson Avenue SW Grady Way provides access to 1-405 via interchanges at SR 167 (Rainier Avenue) and SR 181. Between Monster Road and SW 16th Street, Oakesdale Avenue SW has two lanes in each direction and a center median/turning lane. The existing SW 16th Street intersection is unsignalized. South of the proposed project, existing Oakesdale Avenue SW has two lanes in each direction and a center turn lane south to SW 43rd Street, an east-west arterial. The Oakesdale Avenue SW route continues south into the City of Kent as 80th Avenue South, a two-lane arterial. Oakesdale Avenue SW has an existing functional classification as a minor arterial from the north Renton City Limits to S.W 7th Street, and a principal arterial from SW 7th Street to SW 16th Street (City of Renton Comprehensive Plan, February 20, 1995, Figure 1-3). The existing section between SW 31st and SW 43rd Streets is presently classifies as a local access street. The Renton 20-year Arterial Plan (Comprehensive Plan Figure 1-10 and Table 1.4) proposes designation of both the King County and City of Renton sections of Oakesdale Ave��}}�� SW as principal arterials from SR 900 on the north to SW met 4 3 rd Street on the south. South of SW X, treet, Oakesdale Avenue SW would be designated as a collector arterial to SE 196th Street in the City of Kent. The Arterial Plan identifies the King County and Renton improvement of Oakesdale Avenue SW between SR 900 and Monster Road as a post-2015 project. The plan also identifies Renton and Tukwila construction of SW 27th Street extension west from Oakesdale Avenue to SR 181 and Strander Boulevard. One existing road, SW 27th Street, would intersect the proposed Oakesdale Avenue SW project. SW 27th Street runs between the Boeing Company Longacres Office Park property on the west and East Valley Road 1qn the east. The road ends appr ate at the Oakesdale Avenue SW corridor and is scheduled for ^roadway improvements includinia bg�-nassj connections to State Road 167. An intermediate intersection of OakesdaZ Avenue SW and SW 27th Street would benefit connections to the regional highway network. The Renton Valley is bounded by Interstate 405, SR 167 (Valley Freeway), SW 43rd Street, and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad. Traffic generators include commercial and industrial developments, and additional traffic demand can be expected from pass-through commuter trips. North south traffic circulation is currently limited to the north-south corridors of SR 167, E. Valley Road, and Lind Avenue SW, and a few local access streets. These roadway corridors exist on the east side of the _ valley requiring trips from the;,1.5 miles west the Renton Valley west of Lind Av ne e to travel east to one of these roadways for connectio e north or south. The Oakesdale Avenue SW-0roject would provide a continuous north-south corridor for trips generated in this western area as well as through Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/02/96 a � 2-2 City of Renton Alternatives Oakesdale Avenue SW connections. Since existing segments of Oakesdale Avenue SW are in good condition and have adequate geometry, work in this corridor is limited to that length necessary to complete the c ep M, cs�win !E 0v� `� Construction would be accomplished in two phases: Phase 1 from SW 16th Street to SW 27th Street; and Phase 2 from SW "Street to SW 3W Street. Phase 1 would provide a roadway extension through the Boeing Longacres site providing connections to the adjacent roadways. Phase 2 would connect Oakesdale Avenue SW corridor to the south across the City's wetland reserve and complete the Renton Valley north-south arterial network. 2.2 Alternatives Considered Recent and future development of the Boeing Longacres Park site will constitute a major traffic generator for the Oakesdale Avenue SW corridor. The Boeing Company has master planned improvements for a new office space to serve approximately 10,000 employees. An environmental impact statement for this master plan was issued by the City of Renton in August 1994. Employment on the Longacres Office park site would be in addition to the approximately 1,000 employees that will be located on the Boeing Customer Service Training Center site located on SW 16th Street west of Oakesdale Avenue SW at full development. Other existing or proposed development on the proposed Oakesdale Avenue SW corridor are the Benaroya Company office park on SW 16th Street southeast of Oakesdale Avenue SW, Winmar Company office/warehouse development proposed for a Springbrook Creek vicinity site south of SW 19th Street, and the existing Allpak site north of SW 27th Street. 2.2.1 No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, the Oakesdale Avenue SW corridor would not be developed. Future development of the Boeing Longacres Office Park and other properties with direct access to the Oakesdale corridor would require connections to both SW 16th Street near the existing Oakesdale Avenue SW intersection and to SW 27th Street. As private roads, the potential for through traffic connections to Renton Valley roads may be limited. Roadway system improvements assumed to be in place in the 2010 analysis year for transportation impacts are described in Section 3.9, "Transportation." 2.2.1.1 Transportation System Management(TSM)and Transportation Demand Management(TDM) Transportation system management has been accomplished through a series of related policy changes and legislation. Though a specific TSM alternative has not been developed as a part of this DEIS, the basis for traffic demands, lane configurations, traffic control, and funding were derived from these policies and ordinances. Without these measures in place, the proposed Oakesdale Avenue SW improvements would be larger and would involve proportionally larger impacts. Once the roadway corridor is in place, the City of Renton would be responsible for maintaining the traffic signals for optimum traffic progression through the area. The City of Renton's Comprehensive Master Plan identifies future development of the Renton Valley as well suited for transit and bicycle commuting. Services and park areas would cater to pedestrian activities and provide an environment to encourage alternatives to single-occupancy-vehicle (SOV) - modes of travel. Traffic projections have been developed with the assumption that this concept is implemented, and the ratio of SOV demands will be reduced by the design year. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/02/96 2-3 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Alternatives The City of Renton's Level of Service (LOS) Documentation (August 1994) establishes design criteria that uses a travel time assessment as its basis. The City's methods recognize that 2+ person occupancy (HOV) travel times have higher importance than SOV travel times. This City criteria is designated to assist in achievement of the goals set forth in the Comprehensive Plan and can be varied by the City, if necessary, in response to actual future development patterns. -Mm ransit benefits by this LOS policy through higher emphasis for improved travel times relative to the competing modes of travel. The City of Renton has adopted a Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Ordinance and a CTR Plan (February 1993). Employers are required to follow the ordinance when designing and implementing trip reduction plans. This is administered through the CTR Plan which established a joint agreement between the City and Metro to monitor and assist employers' compliance with the ordinance. This legislation is augmented by the State Commute Trip Reduction law which is intended to achieve reduced SOV trips for affect employers. The goals are 15% by 1995, 25% by 1997, and 35% by 1999 (Draft Comprehensive Plan, 1994). The City of Renton has also combined forces with Metro to develop Transportation Management Programs (TMP's) for new developments. These are incorporated into the SEPA agreements, though the City has considered implementation of an ordinance similar to the CTR ordinance. The Boeing Longacres Office Park DEIS includes mitigation payment and physical site-specific improvements for Transportation Demand Management (TDM) but also notes that a higher-level TDM program could be developed for the site. This would incorporate incentives for transit and ride sharing, disincentives for SOV commuting, and facilities to ensure compatibility with transit, rail, and pedestrian activities. 2.2.1.2 Transit Existing transit service within the study area is provided by the King County Division of Metropolitan Services (Metro). Three service categories are provided: fixed-route services; park-and-rides and their shuttles; and custom bus services. Each of these services are responsive to existing demands. Metro establishes park-and-ride service which are influenced by the parking facilities that are made available by the City of Renton. The City prepares an annual report that Metro uses to determine the fixed-route (local circulator) service needs in the region. Custom routes would also apply to this project since Boeing Company employees currently benefit from these special runs. Boeing currently provides two routes through this program which provides express service from park-and-ride lots to the various Boeing facilities on schedules that are consistent with the employee shifts. The large Longacres Park site developments will influence each of these services. A contiguous Oakesdale Avenue SW would allow more efficient routes to meet the demands. 2.2.2 Action Alternatives Project alternatives were developed to meet the project objectives of completing th section of Oakesdale Avenue SW between S.W 16th and 31st Streets. Alignments are based on past a current proposals — particularly the alignments developed for Valley Parkway SW in the early 1980' the Boeing Company's Longacres Office Park, and the Benaroya Company's development proposals 6 property south of SW 16th Street and east of Springbrook Creek. South of SW 27th Street, route selection is constrained by an extensive wetland area extending westward from Lind Avenue SW. Route options in the north portion of the study area are constrained by the existing route terminus at SW 16th Street and the existing Boeing Compan}� (}��ustomer Ser ices Traini Center/.(CS ) which is the first phase of -tixo 4 iee--pnrle- development,` Alignments aM consi rec�propertyW ndaries with a view of not developing alignments that would divide properties in such a way as to leave remaining portion undevelopable. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/02/96 r � 2-4 City of Renton Alternatives Oakesdale Avenue SW Project alignments are further constrained by functional classification, desired design speeds, and resulting minimum road curvature. Oakesdale Avenue S.W is classified as a principal arterial north of S.W 16th Street with a signed speed limit and design speed of 40 miles per hour. The Transportation Element of the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan designates Oakesdale Avenue SW between SW 7th and S.W Street as a principal arterial. Design criteria were set that would meet or exceed the minimum requirements for this class of roadway. For the alternatives, a design speed of 40 miles per hour is used with minimum radius of 450 feet. Based on anticipated traffic volumes, and to match existing roadways north and south of the project, four travel lanes and a center median or turning lane were assumed in a 90-foot wide right of way. Actual right-of- way width(s) and roadway cross sections (width and lane arrangement) would be determined later with development of design criteria for a more detailed analysis of the alternatives selected for further study. On the flat terrain of the project corridor, vertical alignment is determined by the need to match existing roadways or structures where it would be costly to revise the elevation, required clearance on structure crossing of water bodies, and minimal slopes required for stormwater drainage. Within t constraints described above, the four alignment alternatives shown on Figure 2.1 were develope o the west, alignments are constrained by existing and proposed drainage features and wetlands on the Boeing Company Longacres Office Park site. To the east, alignment selection is constrained by feasible Springbrook Creek crossing locations, and consideration of property boundaries west of Springbrook Creek. 2.2.3 Alternative A - Longacres Office Park Proposed This alignment is based on a proposal shown in the Longacres Office Park Master Plan. South of SW 16th Street, the alignment curves to the southwest across Benaroya Company property, crosses Springbrook Creek, and enters the Boeing Company Customer Service Training Center property. The alignment follows a section of CSTC circulation road which was located to provide a future alignment for Oakesdale Avenue SW, then curves to the southeast and leaves the CSTC area on a southerly bearing at the 19th Avenue SW alignment. The alignment continues south through vacant Boeing Company land proposed for office park development. After crossing the Seattle Water Department right-of-way, the gnm shifts east-efrte City of Renton property acquired for drainage purposes. South of SW 27th Street, the alignment crosses wetlands on oeing ong sand City of Renton property before connecting to existing Oakesdale Avenue SW at the SW 31st Street alignment(presently a cul-de-sac). �f:r4Yr 2.2.4 Alternative B - Valley Parkway SWJ(1981) or P-1 Channel The alignment follows the alignment of Valley Parkway SW that was developed in the early 1980's to conform to a proposal for a major north-south stormwater channel ("P-1 Channel") located between Springbrook Creek and Longacres Race Track. The full Valley Parkway SW route extended from SW 43rd Street to Martin Luther King Jr. Way (SR 900). Portions of the route have been built between Monster Road South and SW 16th Street, and Oakesdale Avenue SW between SW 31st Street and SW 43rd Street. The alignment between SW 16th and SW 31st Streets was proposed for a 70 to 80-foot wide right-of-way immediately east of the stormwater channel. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/02/96 Bena LI Pfop •d Y � lye �!toposed Wmmar E Qr. F_Iongacres �, E property Office Park x i x SW23rdSt ..,.4 3 t fe 9 i wV .E 1 - �•_ r� _. r 0 f cul-de-sac, mow. (SW 31st St) r A f �., 0 200 400 800 Feet 'J t ���„�� h•' ��' .ABrlatPh�ogra � -94' r � 2-6 City of Renton Altematives Oakesdale Avenue SW The Valley Parkway SW alignment would continue south-southeasterly from SW 16th Street c oss the southeast corner of the Boeing CSTC property. The alignment would turn almost due south, with its location about 235 feet east of the Longacres Office Park property line south of the CSTC. After w` proceeding south for approximately 1,000 feet, the road alignment curves to the west and then south (450-foot radii) to minimize impacts on the Allpak Container property on the north side of SW 27th Street. South of SW 27th Street, the road aliggmg shuts 200 feet to the west as it continues southward �Oj^. t- to.existing Oakesdale Avenue SW� 1 s cr_ ater.c u s_outh bu-fat the south--limits-of the-Boeing-1 angacres-propertyit-turns•tv-the-west-and.continuesvwestward-adjacent-to the Len 2.2.5 Alternative C - Eastern Longacres Office Park Alternative C is located between Alternatives A and B. The alignment passes througli the kCSTC -� wpe- ty 'mil�rl��o Alignment B. Then the alignment turns due south on the Longacres Office Park east�propertytne-for approximately 1,000 feet where the alignment curves west and south to join the Alternative A alignment approximately 300 feet north of SW 27th Street. Alignment Option C-1 was developed to reduce impacts to City-owned wetlands areas south of the former practice race track on the Boeing Longacres property. The alignment swings back to the southwest across the southern portion of the practice race track to join the Alternative A alignment before crossing the Seattle Water Department right-of-way. 2.2.6 Alternative D - Western Longacres Office Park This alignment places more of the proposed road within Longacres Office Park than Alternative A. The alignment passes through the CSTC property similarly to Alternative A, but the alignment heads further west before continuing south. The north-south section has been located to place it immediately to the east of the former Lonagacres race track — on the west side of the parking areas proposed in the Longacres Office Park Master Plan and east of wetlands located in the infield of the former race track. Two options for connecting to the existing south section of Oakesdale Avenue SW are shown. Option D- 1 picks up the Alternative A alignment approximately 300 feet north of the SW 27th Street intersection. Option D continues south across SW 27th Street and curves east and south Through a wetland are before joining existing Oakesdale Avenue SWA4- 5W 3•1 s 1L 5-7i eef, 2.3 Alternatives Considered but Rejected Jc6,4, _ -a4ove Appil 13 lfg3 awJ also off �l Preliminary alignmentsAwere presented at a public open house held onAMarch I& -1995Cduring the environmental process scoping period for this project, The following discussion presents reasons individual preliminary alternatives were dropped from further consideration in the environmental impact statement. 2.3.1 Alternative B Construction of a stormwater channel for Springbrook Creek flows tw4en .W 16th Street and S.W 43rd Street on the alignment designated as "P-1" is no longer and r co sideration. Instead, the City of Renton is pursuing options to improve flow in the existing ringbro Creek alignment. There is no City-owne�tge',,pwner channel alignment north of SW 23rd Street which de Ines the Alternative B location. Discussions i �oietteyproperty south of the Boeing CS Z and north of S.W 23rd Street indicated their objection to Alignment B which would bisect therproperty west of Springbrook Creek. - leaving little to develop. For these reasons, Alternative B was dropped from further consideration. 61w1-0 h�+�z W S new �lt�pis, �^ Preliminary DEIS � �Q Printed 10/02/96 9�U+fcm/ E �iR<��� � �> o� ✓1a� c 2-7 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Alternatives 2.3.2 Alternative D Alternative D was reviewed with the Boeing Company, the property owner most affected. That company's representatives advised that the Alternative D alignment could result in security and parking problems by separating offices from their parking areas with a high-volume roadway, rather than routing through traffic along the site perimeter as located in the Longacres Office Park master plan (Alternative A alignment). For these reasons, Alternative D was dropped from further consideration. 2.4 Alternatives Selected for Further Study Alternative A and C have been selected for further analysis in this environmental documentation for the Oakesdale Avenue SW project (Figure 2.2). These alignments were presented, along with the other preliminary alignments considered but rejected, at a public scoping meeting on March 16, 1995. Travel demands used for analysis of the operation of these alternatives incorporate regional and local transportation systems management, travel demand management, and transit system plan. The Boeing Company Longacres Office Park EIS sc;ihes.cpesif4e measures that vu -die-> e-reduce single occupant vehicle(SOV) demand. For project impact analysis, the lane arrangements shown in Figure 2.3 are used. Four travel lanes,, two in each direction are provided the full length of the project and match with existing roadway sections. Between SW 16th Street and SW 21th Streets, a center turn lane/median is provided. This 12-foot width allows the turning lanes at the intersections of SW 16th Street and SW 27th Street, and at other locations that may be approved in the future as abutting property is developed. South of SW 27th Street, the center turn-lane median is dropped allowing four travel lanes and two bicycle lanes on the structure/fill crossing wetlands. Five-foot wide bicycle lanes are also provided on the outside (right-hand) of the motor vehicle travel lanes the full project length. Between SW 16th Street and SW 19th Street, sidewalks are located immediately next to the curb's. Between SW 19th and SW 27th Streets, there are five-foot wide planting strips between sidewalks and curbs, except on the east side of the roadway for about 800 feet north of SW 27th Street where the sidewalk is next to the roadway in order to provide additional area for wetland impact mitigation. 2.4.1 No-Action Alternative The No-Action Alternative will be carried through this DEIS to provide a baseline point for comparison of Action Alternatives. If nmitigated impact are too great, the No-Action Alternative would be recommended. 'yoU A Uu w� 7o soh Tracs? /z.�q��' �-✓� SA�w �F /�//ma's � /a(r/ou /�r�,wJ3�Av�s Metw C�v�✓ 3� NT�c1L+tivl .�Oko. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/02/96 Henaroyaw^ prop . . ,�`�hoeing. �,° � �cM�fY��•��QQ _ t�' f' t- . '!x�� ,.. y.}vi!".\Y nY• � fi 3 ,M1� -f,V L ��-L.+a.-�;,q^�y.� ����;�} f�. nl. _ ,` tp i ft Winmar used pro rht a S1�2tl5tt ngacres t' r p a Office Park K : - ,. SW 23rd St LA Cc • Q I as N iY W. 0. y 1 w� �x 0.` 2W400 i 800 Feet_ � '' 2-9 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Alternatives ROADWAY&RIGHT OF WAY I 97 RIGHT OF WAY 5. 17I• S Mir SIDEWALK PLANT BIKE LANE LANE MEDIAN LANE LANE BIKE PLANT SIDEWALK STRIP LANE V LANE STRIP '-u 1N LAWL TYPICAL ROADWAY SECTION ROADWAY 6 RIGHT OF WAY 87 SIDEWALK BIKE LANE LANE **@W of L LANE LANE BIKE SIDEWALK LANE TV RJJ L A,- LANE GROUND Li Li Li Li Li Li PILES(TYR) NORTH BRIDGE TYPICAL SECTION ROADWAY&RIGHT OF WAY BIKE LANE LANE LANE LANE BIKE I SIDEWALK LANE LANE GROUND PILES PP.) SOUTH BRIDGE TYPICAL SECTION Figure 2.3 Typical Roadway and Bridge Cross Sections Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/02/96 2-10 City of Renton Alternatives Oakesdale Avenue SW 2.4.2 Alternative A This alternative's alignment passes directly through the eastern third of the proposed Longacres Office Park. It provides two signalized intersections at SW 27th Street and SW 16th Street. Additional intersections would be provided for access to abutting property. Exact locations of these accesses would be determined in the permitting and approval of abutting development. An approximately 400-foot long structure would cross Springbrook Creek and Boeing Company constructed wetlands in the SW 16th to SW 27th Street Phase 1 project segment. Project impact analyses are based on a 600-foot long structure in the Phase 2 SW 27th to SW 31st Street project segment. Stormwaterjwould be 6ollected at catch basins set against roadway curbs and conveyed in enclosed pipes to thr detentioi/aud treatment areas: an easement on or adjacent to the south property line of the oeing Customer Service Training Center between the Oakesdale Avenue SW alignment and Springbrook Creek; south of the Seattle Water Department transmission line and east of the Oakesdale Avenue SW alignment; and northeast of the proposed intersection of Oakesdale Avenue SW with SW 27th Street. All treated stormwater is discharged directly to Spriingbrook Creek or to wetlands tributary to Springbrook reek--_ Two Y+��e s"i&rA'S1w3- wai{ l7 G,4MOC 5'mM I ! z,el Gd✓vGy�j�yCt Skt„y�s� 4,tr (CCC1,04 54 yuclr9y rr*6 �th.r plkur tU disCA. �jP('E' G�� r10 1Typical right-of-way widr for the project isfeet. Total right-of-way required or this alternative isP,ovr g -&r 9.7 acres for construction of Phase 1 between SW 16th and SW 27th Streets, and 2.4 acres fors"5�tr^�• construction of Phase 2 between SW 27th and 31st Streets. An additional 0.6-acre is required for- F?< permanent easements along the Phase 1 portion of the project. 2.4.3 Alternative C �� tS � 5 /p 010 This alternative's alignment passes between the proposed Longacres Office Park and Winmar Inc.'s 4.A56 Ff,t property and through the west edge of the Benaroya Company property along the,bank of Springbrook Creek. It provides two signalized intersections at SW 27th Street and SW 1/6'th Street. Additional intersections would be provided for access to abutting property. Exact locations ¢f these accesses would be determined in the permitting and ap roval of abutting development. c5 direct access to properte ast y of Springbrook creek would be provide An approximately 540-foot long structure would crossing Springbrook Creek and Boeing Company constructed wetlands in the SW 16th to SW 27th Street Phase 1 project segment. Project impact analyses are based on a 600-foot long structure in the Phase 2 SW 27th to SW 31st Street project segment. • Stormwaternwould be collected at catch basins set against roadway curbs and conveyed in enclosed pipes a to fou etention/aid treatment areas: southeast of the intersection of Oakesdale Avenue SW at SW 16th Wf�"A Street; an easement adjacent to the east property line of the proposed Boeing Longacres Office Park between the former practice track and Springbrook Creek; south of the Seattle Water Department transmission line and east of the Oakesdale Avenue SW alignment; and northeast of the proposed intersection of Oakesdale Avenue SW with SW 27th Street.'All treated stormwater is discharged directly to Springbrook Creek or to wetlands tributary to Springbrooktreek—. S1,b4,,r,r(� u,,,id 1""4 to •�• , A adore Typical right-of-way width for the project is 90 feet. Total right-of-way required for this alternative is 10.2 acres for construction of Phase 1 between SW 16th and SW 27th Streets, and 2.4 acres for construction of Phase 2 between SW 27th and 31st Streets. An additional 0.3-acre is required for permanent easements along the Phase 1 portion of the project. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/02/96 3.2-1 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Noise 3.2 Noise 3.2.1 Introduction In conformance with the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA's) Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction Noise, and Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Noise Procedures, this section discusses the acoustical impacts of the proposed alternatives for the Oakesdale Avenue SW, from SW 16th Street to SW 31st Street, Renton, Washington. The noise analysis presents the existing acoustical environment, the future acoustical environment, and the impacts of the latter on existing and planned land uses. The determination of noise impact is in compliance with Title 23, Code of Federal Regulation (CFR), Part 772, and the WSDOT Procedure for Analysis and Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise. 3.2.2 Affected Environment 3.2.2.1 Noise Abatement Criteria The FHWA's Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC) and the WSDOT Noise Procedures were used in the analysis of the acoustic impact of the proposed action. The NAC, which is presented in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 23 Part 772, revised August, 1982, provides procedures for assessment of the acoustic impact of the proposed actions, and the determination of the need for abatement measures. The NAC is supplemented with the WSDOT Noise Abatement Procedures. The FHWA (NAC) for the various land uses are presented in Table 3.2-1. The noise level descriptor used is the equivalent sound level, Leq, defined as the steady state sound level which, in a stated time period (usually one hour) contains the same sound energy as the actual time-varying sound. The WSDOT Noise Procedures has defined the NAC "approach or exceed" criteria for Activity Category "B," Table 3.2-1, as being equal to or greater than 66 dBA Leq. A 10 decibel increase is considered substantial if the resulting level is greater than 55 dBA. A 5 decibel increase is considered substantial if the resulting level is greater than 62 dBA. The "approach or exceed" criteria for Activity Category "C" is equal to or greater than 71 dBA Leq. A 10 decibel increase is considered substantial if the resulting level is greater than 55. A 5 decibel increase is considered substantial if the resulting level is greater than 67 dBA. For Activity Category "E," the "approach or exceed" is defined as being equal or greater than 51 dBA. A 5 decibel increase is considered substantial if the resulting level is greater than 45 dBA. When the 66 dBA Leq criterion is exceeded or a substantial increase occurs, noise abatement procedures are to be reviewed for feasibility and reasonability. Feasibility refers to the physical restraints of constructing mitigation and is defined as follows: • Topography must be compatible with construction of the mitigation measure. • Provisions for future access,drainage, safety, and maintenance requirements must be possible. • The measure must be able to achieve a minimal reduction of 7 dBA for first row receivers. Reasonability is based on the following factors: • Resident's desires. • Time of development versus time of highway construction. • Age and type of existing development. • Project's contribution to area noise levels. • Difference between existing traffic noise levels and levels at design year. • Absolute noise levels. • Effects of mitigation on the environment. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/23/96 i 3.2-2 City of Renton ` Noise Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Table 3.2-1 Noise Abatement Criteria Hourly A-Weighted Sound Level-Decibels(dBA) Activity Category Leq (t Hr) Description of Activity Category/Land Uses A 57 dBA (Exterior) Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance and serve an important public need and where the preservation of those qualities is essential if the lands are to continue to serve their intended purpose. B 67 dBA (Exterior) Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sports areas, parks, residences, motels, hotels, schools, churches, libraries and hospitals. C 72 dBA (Exterior) Developed lands, properties or activities not included in Categories A or B above. D --- Undeveloped lands. E 52 dBA (Interior) Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms, schools, churches, libraries, hospitals and auditoriums. Source: Code of Federal Regulations,Title 23 Part 772,Revised August 1982. • Changing land use. • Cost/benefit ratio. Cost should not be the sole criteria for determining reasonableness. 3.2.2.2 Existing Noise Levels Ambient noise measurements were conducted on July 13, 1995 at four representative sites within the project study area. A ten to fifteen minute sample was taken at each site. The ten to fifteen minute Leq sound levels thus obtained are considered representative of 1-hour Leq noise levels. Traffic counts concurrent with the noise measurements were obtained at three of the four field sites. The data collected at the four sites are presented in Table 3.2-2. The locations of the field sites are shown on Figure 3.2-1 3.2.3 Impacts i 3.2.3.1 Comparison of Field Data and Modeled Traffic Counts The FHWA highway traffic noise prediction computer program, STAMINA 2.0/OPTIMA was used to model the noise level of the traffic counted during the field measurements at three of the monitoring sites. The fourth site (Site 4), had no adjacent street traffic. The following parameters were used in this model to calculate an hourly Leq at the monitoring sites. • Distance between roadway and receiver; • Relative elevations of roadway and receiver; • Hourly traffic volume in light-duty (two axles, four tires), medium-duty (two axles, six ties), and heavy-duty (three or more axles) vehicles; • Vehicle speed; • Roadway grade; Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/23/96 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Noise o� 6 p C� p, m dm SW Grad W a G e�RNer. to SW 16th St Boeing FS-2 \405 J o CSTC t Renton FS-4 _ `� 1a1 Proposed a w 1s Longacres o Office Park z o � ROW � I m U SW 27th St Q Tukwila I FS-1 LD t U O o. _m w m m 'o N 3 Y SW 34th St SW 41 st St 181 SW 43rd St tk FS-3 ...—. Kent © 0 1/4 1/2 1 +Field Site Miles Figure 3.2-1 Noise Measurement Field Sites Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/23/96 3.2-4 City of Renton Noise Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Table 3.2-2 Measured Existing Noise Levels(July 13, 1995) Traffic Data Field Start Dura- Meduim Heavy Speed Noise Level Site Site Description and Distance from Road Time tion Autos Trucks Trucks MPH (dBA Leq) 1 130'south of SW 27th Street,50'west of Lind 08:01 15 min. 144 12 14 35 65 Avenue SW 2 25'south of SW 16th Street,500'west of Raymond 08:32 15 min. 68 7 6 30 67 Avenue SW,Group Health Cooperative building 3 30'south of SW 43rd Street,Springbrook II Business 09:55 15 min. 408 20 34 35 71 Park,50'east of Business Park driveway 4 Undeveloped area within Boeing Company Property, 12:40 10 min. — 50 75'east of gravel access road,1,350'south of SW 16th Street Autos defined as 2-axle,4-tire;medium trucks as 2-axle,6-tire;heavy trucks as 3 or more axles. • Topographic features, including retaining walls and berms; • Noise source height of the vehicles: light-duty —0.0 feet; medium-duty —2.3 feet; and heavy-duty —8.0 feet. The measured and modeled values for the three modeled sites compare within one (1) decibel. This represents reasonable correlation since the human ear can barely distinguish a three decibel change in a natural setting. 3.2.3.2 Noise Impact Prediction The FHWA highway traffic noise prediction computer program, STAMINA 2.0/OPTIMA was also used to model existing, future no project and design year 2010 peak hour traffic noise levels within the study area. Design hour traffic volumes and vehicle mix were used in the analysis. The existing roadway and proposed alternative roadway alignments, were defined on 1-inch to 200-feet (1:2,400) mapping. The 1994 traffic data were used to define existing peak hour conditions. Future no action and design year 2010 peak hour traffic volumes used in the noise analysis are taken from traffic models prepared for this project (see Section 3.9, Transportation and Energy). The results of the modeling are presented in Table 3.2-3. The analysis indicates that after the completion of Phase 1, peak hour Leq noise levels at the proposed Oakesdale Avenue SW right of way and at Field Sites 1 and 3 would approach or exceed the 72 dBA Noise Abatement Criteria for commercial and industrial land use. Noise receivers along the proposed right of way and at Field Site 4 would also experience substantial increases in noise levels compared with the No Action condition. The completion of Phase 2 would create a slightly different traffic pattern in the area, which would cause the peak hour Leq noise levels to differ from Phase 1 levels by as much as 3 dBA. Noise levels at Field Sites 1, 2 and 3 would be equal to or less than the Phase 1 condition. At receivers along the proposed right of way, and at Field Site 4, Phase 2 noise levels would be 2 to 3 dBA higher than the Phase 1 condition. Peak hour noise levels along the proposed Oakesdale Avenue SW would not be affected by traffic noise from I-405 or SR 167. The proposed development area, bisected by the proposed project, will be exposed to peak hour Leq noise levels at the right-of-way that exceed the noise abatement criteria for residential and commercial land uses. With all receivers located along local streets and arterials with sidewalks and driveways, mitigation of the projected noise impacts are not reasonable or feasible. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/23/96 3.2-5 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Noisa Table 3.2-3 Existing and Future Leg Noise Levels, dBA 2010 Noise Levels, dBA Land Abatement 1994 Existing Build Build Field Site Use Criteria dBA No-Action Phase 1 Phase 2 1 Ind 72 69 71 71 (1) 70 (N) 2 Com 72 68 70 69 (N) 69 (N) 3 Com 72 76 77 77 (I) 76 (I) 4 Und 72 50 50 65 (1) 68 (I) ROW' Und 72 50 50 73 (1) 75 (1) N Does not exceeed abatement criteria. I Impact,exceeds abatement criteria. j 1 Right-of-way along proposed Oakesdale Avenue SW,either alignment alternative. 2 Res-Residential; Com-Commercial; Ind-Industria;l Und-Undeveloped i Building setback distances required to obtain 66 and 71 dBA Leq noise levels were developed for each construction phase and are shown in Table 3.2-4. This distances may assist local planning authorities in developing land use control over the remaining undeveloped lands along the proposed route in order to prevent future development of incompatible land use. The construction of Oakesdale Avenue SW would increase the design year noise level at the right-of-way from 50 to 73 dBA Leq for Phase 1 and from 50 to 75 dBA Leq for Phase 2. Since existing and future land use along the proposed right of way is office or industrial, building setbacks of 42 and 69 feet from the center of the inside lane would be required to remain within the noise abatement criteria for Phase 1 and 2, respectively. Table 3.2-4 Distance to 66 and 71 dBA Noise Contours 66 dBA 71 dBA Distance from Center Distance from Center Phase of Near Lane(feet) of Near Lane (feet) Phase 124 42 Phase 2 175 69 3.2.3.3 Construction Noise The major construction elements of this project are expected to be earth removal, hauling, grading, paving and bridge construction. General construction noise impacts, such as temporary speed interference for passersby and those individuals living or working near the project, can be expected particularly from paving operations and from the earth moving equipment during grading operations. Figure 3.2-2 shows some typical peak operating noise levels at a distance of 50 feet, grouping construction equipment according to mobility and operating characteristics. Considering the relatively short term nature of construction noise, impacts are not expected to be substantial. The ability of nearby structures — primarily new construction on the Boeing CSTC site — to attenuate exterior noises is believed to be sufficient to moderate the effects of intrusive construction noise. Based on the study completed, mitigation of noise impacts along the local streets and arterials in the project area do not appear to be reasonable or feasible. Mitigation of the noise impact for the operation Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/23/96 3.2-6 City of Renton Noise Oakesdale Avenue S.W. of Oakesdale Avenue SW is not reasonable; therefore, land use management in the siting of future development along the corridor would be more appropriate. Sound Level (dBA) at 50 Feet 60 70 80 90 100 110 Equipment Powered by Internal Combustion Engines Earth Moving Compactors (Rollers) Front Loaders Backhoes Tractors Scrapers, Graders Pavers Trucks Materials Handling Concrete Mixers Concrete Pumps I m Cranes (Movable) Cranes (Derrick) Stationary Pumps Generators Compressors Impact Equipment Pneumatic Wrenches Jack Hammers & Rock Drills Impact Pile Drivers (Peaks) Other Vibrator Saws Source: U.S. Report to the President and Congress on Noise,February 1972. Figure 3.2-2 Construction Equipment Noise Ranges Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/23/96 3.2-7 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Noise 3.2.4 Mitigation Noise mitigation of construction activities is governed by City of Renton ordinance (Title IV, City of Renton Building Regulations, Chapter 31, Section 33). Specific measures that will be required are: • Time restrictions on outdoor construction activities; • Maintenance of construction equipment sound control devices; • Temporary noise barriers around loud stationary equipment; • Use of electrically-powered equipment rather than pneumatically-driven machine when possible; and • Noise education program for operators of excavation equipment and haul trucks. 3.2.5 Impact Summary Significant noise impacts, mitigation measures and significant unavoidable adverse impacts are summarized in Table 3.2-7. Table 3.2-7 Noise-Summary of Significant Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Significant Unavoidable Significant Impacts Mitigation Measures Adverse Impacts Alternatives A and C Project would introduce Plan development of adjacent land to None vehicle noise into existing require building setbacks from undeveloped site roadway. Short term construction Implement mitigation measures None noise impacts on adjacent required by City code. developed properties No Action Alternative None. None. None. 3.2.6 References Environmental Procedures Manual, Chapter 3-1, Procedure for Analysis and Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise, Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, Washington, February 1995. William Bowlby, John Higgins and Jerry Regan. Noise Barrier Cost Reduction Procedure, STAMINA 2.0/OPTIMA: Users Manual. Federal High Administration, Demonstration Projects Division, Arlington, VA., March, 1983. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/23/96 3.2-8 City of Renton Noise Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/23/96 3.3-1 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Geology and Soils 3.3 Geology and Soils 3.3.1 Introduction The following description of existing topography, geology, and seismic hazards is summarized from the Geotechnical Predesign Technical Report. This report is reproduced as Appendix _ in Volume 2 of this EIS. Refer to the technical report for results of field exploration and laboratory testing programs, engineering analyses, and preliminary geotechnical design recommendations. 3.3.2 Affected Environment 3.3.2.1 Topography The project site is located in the Rento Valley area of the Citof Renton. On the eastern edge of the Duwamish Valley, this broad, flat alley is situated b tween highlands to the east and the Green/Duwamish River to the west. Th topography is relatively flat with slopes of less than two percent except in;tife steep channel banks. For t is reason, the City bf Renton's Critical Areas Maps indicate that the project area does not contain steep s opes or landslide hazard areas. Elevations range from 10 to 18 feet abo e mean sea level with a drop to feet at the flag of Springbrook Creek. Opry r, 1-6Vo 1'YL�) 'Jpu�i'L� �1�5 S w�.. �►S wl° w�'1'�155 "�. The majority of the proposed Oakesdall Avenue SW corridor lies within the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) mapped 100-year floodplain of Springbrook Creek. These FEMA Flood Insurance Maps, which include floodplain elevation and limits, have been developed to ensure that the structures are adequately protected against flooding FEtd*-is- reviewing the Grty=Of-Renton channel models that may-update these-maps- to-show-a lain- with k��s -lower etevati m-and-smaller-tirtfits-fhan curren FE MA-mapping. / 3.3.2.2 Geology F(& Ji�.,✓an r.�_ �i The geology of the valley is the result of large-scale downward folding of the contine tal crust followed by glacial activity, erosion, and river interactions. The Puget Sound basin is the result of the Juan de Fuca plate colliding with the North American plate which created a depression and a pathway for glacial ice advances south from British Columbia. The Puget Lobe of the Cordilleran Ice Sheet occupied the project area at least four times during recent ice ages of the Quaternary Period (approximately 10,000 to 1.8 million years ago). Project area ice thickness was 3,000 to 4,000 feet. The area received alluvial and lacustrine sediments deposited by runoff from the western slopes of the Cascades. The project area is underlain by a thick, complex sequence of glacial and interglacial sediments (Woodward-Clyde, 1995). The sediments in the Duwamish Valley contain mainly sand, silt, and clay deposited by the White and Green River before diversion of the White River to the south in 1906 (Mullineaux, 1965). The Duwamish sediments also include channel gravel and thin peat lenses at depth. The upper portion of the deposition is mostly clayey silt and fine sand with local deposits of peat and lower portions consist mostly of medium and course sand deposits to depths greater than 75 feet. Remnants of the White River are evident within the former Longacres race track, meandering across the proposed Oakesdale Avenue SW project site (even with the south end of the track), and joining the existing Springbrook Creek channel. Much of this channel has been filled during past Longacres Park site development. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/09/96 3.3-2 City of Renton Geology and Soils Oakesdale Avenue S.W. 3.3.2.3 Soils In addition to the geotechnical investigations conducted for the Oakesdale Avenue SW improvements, past utility and site development efforts have provided additional data on project area soils. Three relevant reports, and summary findings, are: • Metropolitan Engineers, 1967, for construction of the Metro 72-inch sanitary sewer. The characteristics of the subsurface consist primarily of alluvial deposits. The top 10 to 20 feet of soil consisted of loose fine sands and soft silt with organic matter. Beneath this surface deposit, the soils consist of a 15 to 20 feet of medium dense to dense fine to medium sand with some organics and occasional silt layers. Beneath these sands, soils consist of dense silty sand to sand and gravel with some silt. This layer varied in density from medium dense to dense and was found to contain occasional shell fragments. • GeoEngineers Inc., 1991, for Longacres Park site developments. The characteristics of the subsurface are over-bank flood deposits consisting of inter-layered silt, sandy silt, and silty sand with thickness ranging from 15 to 35 feet. Beneath these upper deposits, medium dense to dense sand was encountered with isolated thin deposits of gravely sand. Shell fragments were consistently observed at a depth of approximately 40 feet in the sand. Groundwater levels measured during the time of drilling and in peizometers were approximately 5 to 10 feet below the ground surface. • Golder Associates, Inc., 1992, for construction of the Metro 108-inch sanitary sewer. The characteristics of the subsurface are fill, which consisted of loose to compact fine sand to silty fine sand and some fine sandy silt with thickness about 5 feet. Beneath the fill, over-bank flood deposits consisting of silty sand, silt, and clayey silt were encountered to depths of 15 to 20 feet. Beneath the over-bank flood deposits, the White River Sands, which consisted of sand with little to some silt, were encountered. Groundwater levels measured at the time of drilling were 4 feet below ground surface near the south end of Alternative A, and decreased to 12 feet below ground surface near the north end. Woodward-Clyde Consultants conducted a field exploration program in the corridor in February 1995. The effort consisted of drilled borings at the twelve specific locations shown on Figure 3.3-1. Table 3.4-1 describes the general soils types encountered in the boring program. Findings were similar to the previous studies: upper layers of silts and silty sands underlain by medium dense to dense sands. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/09/96 w ; � { x,.�.++ 3 k a t ,�k.: `':�•.,.�1r!� gip:. ..R' — p. ?x..a hnx¢ B ya° Benaro ,. i Q =: prop 3 : .; CSTC F* sites 4_ im NR n k_!R pco artys' .tongum 'y 'OffiCe ftrk-. s > u a 4 .- ����__� •� _'• {i s r � s$.fax t ,y� - JLa C%l �" 3 I t C96 O cc a 20004400 800 Feet. Approximate boring locat{o ' apt zji AerialPAateg r94. 3.3-4 City of Renton Geology and Soils Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Table 3.4- 1 Corridor Subsurface Conditions Bore NoJ Date/ Depth to Silt/ Depth Alternative Groundwater Fill Depth Clayey Silt Black Sand Grey Sand 1 A and C 5.4-5.7' 7' 4-8'deep, 13- 16'deep, 36-40'deep, bottom 2/9/95 5'thick 20-27'thick with not reached 71.5' very soft clay in bottom 7' 2 A and C 2.5-3.5' 5' 4-8'deep, 13- 16'deep, 30-40'deep, bottom 2/9/95 11-12'thick 20-27'thick not reached 81.5' 3 A and C 11.2' 8' 8'deep, 16'deep, 2/8/95 8'thick bottom not reached 31.5' 4 A and C 7.5' 2-3' 3"deep, T deep, 37'deep, 2/7/95 4'thick 30'thick bottom not reached 41.5' 5 A and C 3.5-4' 3' 3'deep, 14'deep, 2/7/95 11'thick bottom not reached 41.5' 6 A 8.0' 2-3' Silty sand, 14'deep, 35'deep, 2/7/95 T deep, 11' 21' thick bottom not reached 46.5' thick 7 A 9' 5' Silty sand w/ 17'deep, 30'deep, 2/8/95 peat, 13'thick bottom not reached 51.5' 5'deep, 12' thick 8 A and C 11.7' 10, Loose coarse 20'deep, 50'deep, 2/6/95 sand, 30'thick bottom not reached 51.5 10'deep, 10'thick 9 C 14.0' 5' 5'deep, 14'deep, 35'deep, 2/6/95 9'thick 21'thick bottom not reached 46.5' 10 C 8.0' 3' 3'deep, 10'deep, 32'deep, 2/3/95 7'thick 22'thick bottom not reached 56.5' 11 C 9.9' 2' 2'deep, 15'deep, 35'deep, 2/2/95 13'thick 20'thick bottom not reached 51.5' 12 C 12.9' 1' 1'deep, 14'deep, 30'deep, 2/6/95 13'thick 16'thick bottom not reached 46.5' Fill is typically loose to medium-dense silty sand. Source: Woodward-Clyde,Geotechnical Predesign Report,Oakesdale Avenue Extension,prepared for HNTB,June 1995, Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/09/96 3.3-5 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Geology and Soils 3.3.2.4 Seismic Hazards The project area is located in a region subject to a moderate to high level of seismicity and seismic hazards. Identified seismic event sources are the Cascadia subduction zone and shallow crustal faults. The crustal faults could probably generate a large earthquake in the vicinity of the project site, but there is limited knowledge of their location. Subduction zone earthquakes are both interplate events which rupture the interface (megathrust) between the subducting Juan de Fuca plate and the overriding North American plate, and intraplate events within the Juan de Fuca plate. Three major earthquakes of magnitude 6 to 7 were reported in historical (written history) times in the Puget Sound region. These earthquakes occurred in 1946, 1949, and 1965 and caused considerable amount of damage to the region. The Puget Sound area experiences more than 1,000 earthquakes each year. Most of these earthquakes are of magnitude 2.9 or less and cause little damage. Earthquake magnitudes are generally represented by the Richter Scale. A magnitude 5 earthquake is refer to as "moderate," a magnitude 6 as "large," and a magnitude 7 as "major." The strongest intraplate earthquakes in recent historic time in the Puget Sound region occurred in 1949 in Olympia (magnitude 7.1) and 1965 in Seattle-Tacoma, about 10 miles south of Renton (magnitude 6.5). The most recent megathrust event was probably magnitude 9 in the year 1700. The most recent events in the Puget Sound region have been background crustal earthquakes. To adequately address the hazard from background seismicity, several approaches have been used in modern day analyses. The most comprehensive and appropriate technique has been that of probabilistic seismic hazard analysis. The series of U.S. Geological Survey seismic hazard maps are based on this type of analysis. Ground movements recorded at Seattle's nearest strong movement instruments had a peak horizontal acceleration of less than 0.10 g ("g" being the force exerted by gravity on a body at rest). Current U.S. Geological Survey seismic hazard maps (in the process of revision) show the Oakesdale Avenue SW project site has a 10 percent probability of peak horizontal accelerations in excess of 0.30 g in fifty years. This is the recommended design value to be used in preliminary design evaluations (Woodward-Clyde 1995). Seismic-induced ground shaking and liquefaction are the greatest seismic hazards. Ground shaking can weaken structures and cause their collapse. Liquefaction is a phenomenon related to pressure that can result in temporary loss of soil strength. Project area soils have a high potential for liquefaction during an earthquake as a result of the saturated, relatively loose, silty and sandy soils. Site soils are estimated to liquefy from the depth of groundwater to 40 to 60 feet below ground surface during an earthquake of 0.30 g horizontal acceleration. This may result in excessive settlement or loss of lateral support, overturning foundations, settlement of embankments, and permanent damage to retaining walls and bridge piers. 3.3.3 Impacts 3.3.3.1 No Action Alternative The No Action Alternative would not impact the topography, geology, and soils of the project area. 3.3.3.2 Alternatives A and C The project will be constructed in two phases. The Phase 1 segment is three-quarters of a mile between SW 16th and SW 27th Streets. Phase 2 is approximately one-quarter mile between SW 27th Street and the existing Oakesdale Avenue cul-de-sac at SW 31st Street to 27th Street. Alternatives A and C share the same Phase 2 alic_Tnment. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/09/96 3.3-6 City of Renton Geology and Soils Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Topography Site preparation would include filling and shallow excavation for roadway pavements, and excavation and filling activities for the drainage conveyance systems and stormwater detention system. Most of the roadway pavement would be on fill material and the remaining portion of the pavement would be supported by new bridge structures. The height of embankments will typically range from one to five feet and increase to 20 feet at bridge embankments. Table 3.3-2 compares excavation and fill quantities required for both alternatives. These estimates are preliminary and will be refined in final design. Table3.3-2 Excavation and Fill Quantities(Cubic Yards) Alternative Phase Excavation Fill A 1 7,800 19,140 2 0 5,700 Total 7,800 24,840 C 1 6,300 19,300 2 0 5,700 Total 6,300 25,000 Geology/Soil Excavation and clearing of the project site to construct the new roadway could result in wind and water erosion of the exposed soil. The extent of the erosion will depend on the weather and the time of the year. The existing silty native soils and fill on the project site have a low erosion hazard. Water erosion pi- hJ r wil-eeenr during the wetter months, and erosion by wind will occur during the dry months. The construction of roadway embankments would densify the underlying and adjacent soils. The magnitude of the densification is dependent on the height of the embankments and on the relative density of compressibility of the affected soils. One of the impacts to the adjacent soil with densification is the reduction in water infiltration rates in soils. Construction of this roadway would.introduce impervious surface to the project area, it would cause water to deliver at a faster rate to the surroundiTrg-pervious surfaces. If the infiltration rate of the pervious surface cannot sustain with the delivery rate of the water, the surface would become inundated. The inundation can have impacts such as flooding, erosion, and accretion unless the �y> bye engineering drainage features. Soil densification will also be accompanied by settlement. The anticipated settlements shown in Table 3.3-3 would be expected to occur two to four months after fill placement. An additional, secondary settlement of two to four inches can be expected over a 15 to 20-year period. This settlement will occur in areas that are directly influenced by the new forces bearing down on the existing soils. Areas most susceptible for settlement would be where existing utilities cross this area of influence. Differential settlement coul occur on adjacent utilities. One example of this is the parallel Metro sewer systems. The 72-inch sa itary sewer is under both Alternatives A and C embankments, but the parallel 108-inch sanitary sewer is outside the fill area. Differential settlement between the 72 and 108-inch pipes could cause leakage r failure where these systems are connected. The extent of this issue will be determined in final design nd mitigated as necessary. >�s r Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/09/96 3.3-7 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Geology and Soils Table 3.3-3 Anticipated Embankment Settlement Anticipated Alternative Location Settlement Comments A SW 16th to SW 19th Street 0.5 to 1.5 feet Due to embankments. (Phase 1) Assume replacement of existing fills. A and C SW 19 to SW 27 Street 1 to 2 feet Due to embankment (Phase 1) consolidation of soft silt/clayey silt. Assume maximum fill height of 5 feet. A and C SW 27th to SW 31 st Street 1.5 to 3 feet Due to consolidation of soft (Phase 2) clayey silt and silt layers f under embankments. Assume excavation/replacement of top two feet of surface soils. Source: Woodward-Clyde,Geotechnical Predesign Report,Oakesdale Avenue Extension,June 1995. Operation impacts include those caused by the indirect effects of the constructed project. Construction of the Oakesdale Avenue Southwest corridor would complete the connection for an important south- north arterial corridor in the City of Renton. This roadway improvement would induce developments adjacent to the corridor and will further introduce geological impacts to the area (for example, office parks, commercial and industrial facilities, and parking lots). 3.3.3.3 Seismic Hazards The soils within the Oakesdale Avenue corridor have high potential"Tor- .liquefaction during seismic events (earthquakes). With the exception of the gray sand deposits ate#, bpth the black and gray sand s are- deposits are loose to medium dense. In addition, these deposits -eTow the groundwater table and have a relatively low percentage of fine-grained material. These characteristics result in high liquefaction potential. Ground shaking and liquefaction during a seismic event would adversely affect rl the roadway embankments and structures in the project area. 3.3.4 Mitigation Mitigation measures described below should be implemented in accordance with ing County an City of Renton standards and regulations. Water and wind erosion The following measures will be considered in final design and preparation of construction documents (plans and specifications). Avoid clearing and grading during rainy season. Cover topsoil with plastic sheeting during construction. Replant the newly constructed earthen embankments, roadway shoulders, drainage channels by seeding with erosion control mixtures as soon as possible upon completion of construction. Construction access points should be stabilized to limit tracking of soils onto the existing roadways. Adjacent roadways should be cleaned on a daily basis. Limit stormwater runoff and sediment transportg<from expo areas by usinghsediment control such as silt fences, anchored str�w bales, and Preliminary6EIS <Cy�,/�tl Tam cle«n,� � P�- xw Sintedl0/09/96 3.3-8 City of Renton Geology and Soils Oakesdale Avenue S.W. temporary sedimentation ponds. Preserve a buffer zone adjacent to wetland and creek areas by not dis tD a band of existing vegetation whenever possible. II tk l5 ,�S�` Reduced ground water recharge due to consolidation of existing soils—�`' �f„��`��^a41 te, oe P�j{,,,o�s Enhance the absorptive capacity of the pervious surfaces by regrading, construction of detention ponds, introduction of special vegetation, and soil replacement. 5 ,,r Post-construction settlement of soils rk 1 ",^,1 ,r Use special construction sequences and procedures to minimize or control settlement. Consider the use if light-weight embankment material. Protect underground utilities from excessive differential settlement. Seismic Hazards Design of bridges should withstand low to moderate levels of ground shaking while remaining operational and resist structural failure during extreme seismic events. Protection will be limited to that required by Zone 3 Uniform Building Code standards. Larger events could occur. Reduce the likelihood of liquefaction by using ground densification techniques such as vibro-flotation, installation of stone columns, or dynamic compaction. 3.3.5 Impact Summary Significant impacts, mitigation measures and significant unavoidable adverse impacts geology and soils are summarized in Table 3.3-4. Table 3.3-4 Geology and Soils-Summary of Significant Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Significant Unavoidable Significant Impacts Mitigation Measures Adverse Impacts Alternatives A and C Water and wind erosion of soils. Avoidance of clearing and grading during Mitigation measures will not rainy season. completely stop water and Cover topsoil with plastic sheeting during wind erosion construction Replant newly constructed earthen embankments, roadway shoulders, drainage channels with erosion control seed mixtures as soon as possible. Stabilized Construction access points to limit tracking of soils on to the existing roadways Clean adjacent roadways daily. ei6,511111 i Limit stormwater runoff nd sediment transportgd from exposed reas by using sediment control such as sifflences, anchored straw bales, and temporary rn I o� np"'' '^tefviWAS sedimentation ponds. Preserve a buffer zone adjacent to wetland and creek areas. ,aoO/�S �Qi,►.,fi ;�j�r� Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/09/96 3.3-9 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Geology and Soils Significant Unavoidable Significant Impacts Mitigation Measures Adverse Impacts Alternative A will require about Test excavated materials for use as fill Use of fill material 19,140 and 5,700 cubic yards of material to reduce quantity of material resources. fill for Phase 1 and Phase 2, brought in from off-site. respectively. Alternative C will require about 19,300 and 5,700 cubic yards of fill for Phase 1 and Phase 2, respectively. Reduced ground water Enhance the absorptive capacity of the Exact existing conditions can i. � recharge due to consolidation of pervious surfaces by regrading, not be duplicated. existing soils construction of detention ponds, introduction of special vegetation, and I soil replacement Post-construction settlement of Use special construction sequences and Differential settlement of soils procedures. existing utilities will occur to , Use light weight embankment materials. a lesser degree. Hydraulicconditions in gravity lines may be altered. Seismic Hazards Structures may fail due to Design of bridges should withstand low Protection will be limited to GP seismic activity to moderate levels of ground shaking that required by Zone 3 and to resist structural failure during Uniform Building Code ,di ry extreme seismic events. standards. Larger events u Reduce the likelihood of liquefaction by could occurs S using ground densification techniques such as vibro-flotation, installation of stone columns, or dynamic compaction. No Action Alternative None None None 3.3.6 References GeoEngineers, Inc. 1991. Report of geotechnical engineering services, Boeing Longacres Park, Renton, WA. for Boeing Support Services. Bellevue, WA. Prepared for BE&C Engineers, Seattle, WA. Jones & Stokes Associates. 1991. Critical areas inventory - City of Renton wetlands and Stream corridors, Bellevue, WA. Prepared for City of Renton, Renton, WA. Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. 1994. Draft environmental impact statement for Longacres Office Park, Bellevue, WA. Prepared Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, Renton, WA. Kent, City of. April 1995. Draft environmental impact statement for South 196/200th Street, Orillia Road to 84th Avenue South. City of Kent, Department of Public Works. Woodward-Clyde. June 1995. Geotechnical Predesign Report Oakesdale Avenue Extension, Renton, WA. Prepared for HNTB, Bellevue, WA. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/09/96 C� er�l /+n��e�. 1� hSt,�� if vi4„Y,p�eF� 3.4-1 Draft Environmental Impact Statement AIS° Surface Water Quantity/Quality 3.4 Surface Water Quan i ua t /Qlity vte� �► u" �S ' Y y 3.4.1 Introduction--- --- ��� s u�r ti,iP,� �ur t'�e ✓l�oj.-,�,y 2 m�-r m �S fiG L-eeel _.a surface water quantity andquality/ fog" ►�c� s ma*agement-ift-the-project area. Tht K rig-CountyW7ater � n. Springbrook Creek has been the subject of/lwater qua)�ity stues -un.l l caa +acife rw4th-an-drug monitoring efforts Lhe-Ore}gct area--fie�t b%r w Y41 is the Black River Basin Water Quality Management Plan prepared for the City of Renton. The ere rCv,evre4 -former Longacres Racetrack property, land recently acquired and developed by The Boeing Company as 11a/1- (Boeing), has also been the subject of various relevant studies. ,This EIS section was prepared by reviewing and summarizing these requirements and previous stud es, arid by conducting supplemental i field work where necessary. SAS fv pe r all a4p��c4f'ot 19"rA/✓14@ j},Sye.rs �/4iulol 3.4.2 Affected Environment )escr !' ,iSecb,,, +- ArrC! el 01 �40 1yNAl,fy d/fcu�f,/��j, Q°y /ifs fGlk k ua+ YhsF fin': 'o� r v� F�: : ..l, GJ eye 13 P�Sq,., . C— Oakesdale Avenue SW improvements are contained within the ipnngbrook Creek tributary surea of the Green River watershed. The terrain is generally flat with wetland areas along much of the project length. The valley has been the subject of an ongoing Gran ,,,,` ^�A't� b Y J g -`L program to resolve flooding problems. In the 1950s, the United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service (SCS) fife" constructed a Green River levee system with flood gates at the Black River confluence. Though this /y>7�'�s prevented valley flooding from Green River backwater, flooding still occurred because flood water PrC,,,,EA5 could not be discharged. This condition was improved in the 1960s by two projects, the Howard Hanso �,,„"c,.x 5- Dam on the Green and the Black River Pump Station (BRPS). Additional flood protection was achieve �o through increased channel storage capacity from the BRPS to Grady Way and box culverts at the Grad 1110 ^O Way and Interstate 405 crossings. H-cubic feet-per-sec-and{cfs). I�ase�s yam :; arc ha<,P hPPn`C e� rr r�r t dau possibl. es �pX Jt( L (Ip �e__Spr+*•ahrnnk The existing valley still N includes large areas that are designated as s by the � Emergency Management Agency. «e✓a( C�VSpringbrook Creek has been the subject of various projects which have resulted in significant departure h from natural channel features. Trapezoidal channel widening, culverts, retaining walls, adjacent developments, and the influence of the BRPS combine to effectively stop any future meandering that would have naturally occurred in the valley. The section of channel from the BRPS to SW 16th Street has been engineered to act as a runoff storage area, and the City of Renton is continuing designs for further channel widening to extend the channel's storage capacity up to SW 43rd Street. T�rrc— kae4ar-stream---uses {including_navigatirm}--o-her-than'-storm`-tmTuff-mnv2yarrc -anrt-timited_.w-ildWe- habitat. p/ :it/C npT (Nlf hl^ a1N Gl9bt/1-er olofe.al.A qfe-- � 23r� f The Oakesdale corridor improvements / er. Thy nearesy.wgetll is more than one and a half miles from the site. There- ita,l affPrtc ``}Prc UPII r d ly. y, �j�n Sw �,e d"/5 W?rt wn f,,,e-3. floodinProblems, Springbrook Creek has experienced habitat-d�ra. $tjnn �R t►,A ,r;?am and in the wetland systems. Tfie`City cor pr.�hens ve plan iriZ�tudes monitors and controls to address the decline of wetland�d_-ether-'environ men tal resources in e-va14ev __,_Q�j sdale Avenue SW impr s were developed to minimize unmitigated impacts to this sensitive channel system. n ( ` A"( C-1)t�L Preliminary DEIS Atkiler 51c6e ,04,11 A t } �� Printed 10/17/96 PU Gt� 5 e_r1hVe Je, 3.4-2 City of Renton Surface Water Quantity/Quality / Oakesdale Avenue SW 3.4.2.1 Studies and Coordination Th/S e"A""Jie SCX'�10A �5`�`�es ate PreV",S +4,-c J r"� en,'r n Gt i'7 tf T �t3 j e, As described in Revised Code of Wl&ngton (RCW) 90.58, the State requires a permit for any "substantial development" within 200 feet of its shorelines. There are shorelines in the project area near Springbrook Creek. Substantial development permits are issued by the local jurisdictions and reviewed by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). In an effort to continue the SCS work that began in the 1950s, the City of Renton is developing current and future hydrology and hydraulic modeling for Springbrook Creek. This SCS effort involves several jurisdictions including the City of Kent, City of Tukwila, King County, the King County Drainage District No. 1, and the Green River Flood Control Zone District. The City of Renton is updating the East Side Green River Watershed (ESGRW) Plan to comply with the State Environmental Protection Act (SEPA) and to be consistent with current environmental concerns. This is an ongoing process which would require coordination between the Oakesdale Avenue SW design and the City of Renton through final design. The City of Renton's backwater profiles would be the basis for all designs concerning Springbrook Creek except for compensation of fill in the floodplain as discussed below. Springbrook Creek is designated as a Type 1 (streams with flows greater than 20 cubic feet per second) Shoreline north of SW 43rd Street. This normally requires a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit issued by the City of Renton, but the Ecology has the power to deny a permit that has been approved by the City (R.W. Beck, 1991). Both alternatives for Oakesdale Avenue SW propose new Springbrook Creek bridge crossings which therefore influence shorelines of the state. The City ha&-e©erc#iftated these Oakesdale Avenue SW improvements with Ecology. The Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife administers the Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) program for projects within or affecting the ordinary high water mark or waters of the state. This permit requires SEPA compliance. Both alternatives for Oakesdale Avenue SW propose new Springbrook Creek bridge crossings which would include construction within the ordinary high water channel area. The City these Oakesdale Avenue SW improvements with the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife.+—&v(l( i �!���•�ji��^ t`'`1 Section 404 of the Clean Water Act prohibits discharge of dredged and fill material into waters of the United States, including associated wetlands, without a permit jointly administrated by the Army Corps of Engineers Qthe EPA. Part of this permit process includes Water Quality Certification that state and federal water quality standards would not be violated, administered by the WSDOE. All the corridor alternatives would have to address the water quality impacts associated with any violation of water quality standards. As required by the Federal Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, all local jurisdictions have regulations regarding the construction, filling, grading, and alteration of 100-year floodplains. The City of Renton has adopted specific building code requirements that will apply to this project. Both corridor alternatives would affect floodplains. Personal contacts with the Renton Storm Water Utility (January 1995) has resulted in the use of two floodplain studies. The more conservative, adopted FEMA 100-year event floodplain would be used to compute compensatory floodplain storage requirements. Wetlands are another significant factor along the Oakesdale Avenue SW corridor. The Springbrook Creek basin includes many low lands and pooling areas which influence the corridor. Affected wetlands, impacts and mitigation measures are discussed in Section 3.5. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/17/96 eA-5 fo -A,' Savta /nsfeAd vF !W1?.r 3.4-3 13.4.2.2 nvironmen I Impact Statement '�� I'Al tj Surface Water Quantity/Quality f_ n1 I�g3 i� Surface W ter Quality Springbrook Creekwater q ity is cateind zed as poor due to low dissolved oxygen le els, high \ hi h'coliform, high turbidit hi h nutrient loading Metro 1988, 1989, 199 Sources temperatures, g g yS a ( upstream of the project site affect Springbrook Creek -` "-"-" "`� 9`��'�� d' rrc. The creek has been found to be contaminated with l metals in sediments and has low benthic invertebrate and fish populations (City of Renton Deft 1993). gpring. oo C k ws have exceptoll ygen le Cr -rb tal s efros ed d s cal o of ho o , n o o lei , Vr^ wN Table 3.4-1 State of Washington Water Quality Standards for Fresh Water and Springbrook Creek Water Quality i' Class A Parameter Standard Springbrook Creekb4 50 ti 5a/eCe Dissolved Oxygen (mg/1) -N,8 0 6.0 / 2.1 / 8.8 Temperature ( C) <�-o 11.8 / 4.0 / 19.0 Pu7r„� p Turbidity (NTUa over background) 5 16.6 / 6.7 / 44 w Fecal Coliform Bacteria 100 399 / 57 / 5,800 �u�'� V"'A41 h5 (geometric mean, organisms/100 ml) a Nephelometric Turbidity Units Source: WAC 173-201 b Median/Minimum/Maximum Conditions (Station 0317) Source:Metro 1990) Springbrook Creek frey//l1violate /Department of Ecology Class A water quality standards as shown in Table 3.4-1 Fecal coliform counts violated Ecology criteria in seven of the twelve samplesy Temperatures exceeded Ecology criteria once, ut cis solved oxygen violated the criteria eleven times out of twelve times. Base flow nutrient load ngpli gut stable where other streams in the Metro area have been _incrsi Springbrook Creek has the second highest areal ammonia and third highest total- phosphorus to 1 loading rates and the second and third highest total annual watershed rates, respectively, of the twenty streams calculated by Metro. Springbrook Creek has the lowest areal and the sixth lowest total annual watershed loading rate (Metro 1990) rhP'hi`h"�eyltr �,lifr.rm rnnnrc a rP nrnhahlylt�p • f °f o tiler afiity U1 atoTrrrbva r+aff F,arc ^r^bal i�w{� U Protl".' Vsm twrlo's'&A' caps Iv,1 N,v Se�lfun Sew �a G•,,t�cf; IVt,O W tl4t'yl f �S ����, 3• 11 .nl �r � GInnN� / /'ST �,,1rvtfl �rapP � 'A fi � 4hnr.�.l /s�t� 2.L1 f�s�i gfAif$ �0 u wCS f 4�us �,Pro-e r.� Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/17/96 3.4-4 City of Renton Surface Water Quantity/Quality Oakesdale Avenue SW Table 3.4-2 Springbrook Creek Baseflow Nutrient Loading Median for all Springbrook Parameter Basins Creek ►S Total Phosphorous (g/acre/day) 0.44 0.76 UJ (tons/yr) 1.04 4.59 Ammonia, NH3 (g/acre/day) 0.20 1.65 � (tons/yr) 0.68 9.96 jh dw+^� c kr Imo+ X Nitrate, NO3 (g/acre/day) 9.68 2.09 (V1"�� SN (tons/yr) 23.10 12.61 � � ¢ Source: Metro,1990. The creek provides a poor habitat for salmonids. Summer temperatures are fair, but dissolved oxygen, biotis index, and substrate suitability are poor. Overhanging bank vegetation provides most of the limited in-stream habitat(Metro 1990). High flow/wet weather monitoring found that Springbrook Creek solids, turbidity; .fecal coliforms, ammonia, and phosphorus:-Concentrations of zinc, copper, chromium, and /G ISM mercury exc ed EPA c -omatio criteria six, five, one, and one times out of six samples, respectively. o There is_ t rd decreasing total phosphorus in Springbrook Creek as seen in most other streams (� � irff t�Metro sample area tro 1990). Tab 3.4-3 Springbrook Creek Sediment,Metals concentration tt{ <e Metal (mg/kg) lr" P,JtVA Cadmium (C 0.62 �h13 S h0 4 Chromium (Cr) 23.4 Ce�Cr�L lt!/ Copper(Cu) 18.4 �evp Lead (Pb) / 11.2 , 1Q 1 Nickel (Ni) 18.8 �5 Zinc (Zn) , 85.4 Median particle size by weight=2000-4000 µ (Sediment at mouth of creek, Metro 1990) Jrt� 3.4.2.3 Existing Drainage FacilitiZ?istilng 'S SZc��on iS v�y (,,Ufevtal'C�, ��Gsn GiS� In �"r.LuAle iN^ IThere are both private and municipal storm sewer systems that influence the project area. proposed changes ensure that existing coy ' ' s a not significantly altered. f�S�ryy,5 �Y�Sr,illf tr. rt,a,n..F awe 4"41 44 so+.e )Ali)ca-*I An existing 48-inch culvert connects the wetlands W-13Sj and W-54b with W-12a (Wetlands Lakes w�N � Rivers & Streams City of Renton Map 14 May 1996). The Boeing Company's Longacres Office Park ,q,�d►fr'� ca.ticr�t :� gr site has encfl�o�ed drainage system with field inlets that convey runoff to Springbrook Creek. This FoS�ir� system includes one 12-inch pipe crossing at the south end of the old practice track and two 12-inch pipe 5 Si4 �o crossings at the north end. The Boeing Company's CSTC site has an open detention/treatment/wetland / L�r� system that conveys runoff to Springbrook Creek. This system includes a 48-inch culvert crossing, with a control weir at the inlet, that connects wetland W-13Nwith W-13Nd and a storm vault structure that ✓J 5wt controls outfall runoff to Springbrook Creek. S44-t,I �n^t- 1 Preliminary DEIS N -1 a �1 50� Printed 10/17/96 o mer.o� 3.4-5 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Surface Water Quantity/Quality The City of Renton has three storm sewer systems in the project area. One enclosed system outlets to wetland W-12a at the existing Oakesdale Avenue SW cul-de-sac (south end of the project). A SW 27th Street enclosed system begins at the future Oakesdale Avenue SW intersection and conveys runoff to the east. A SW 16th Street enclosed system outfalls into Springbrook Creek from the east. These public storm sewer systems are the only systems to be modified by the project. 3.4.3r Impacts ( j f �/ / lZkiSii•y v/AIn" A�Ahhe$ �/LUh� � !f S�' (�PCtG�a 3. 7 . 3, � 7'�v�S �Q�I 3.4.3.1 Surface Water Quantity 2 ��^ �� rN't w.�+A ' r- � t � y tiard�fy p� Via" (�h�,s e,l�M,n.t„� Ms(c Ci IA ! ; d The flat topography and the moderately slow pe�neabi itynof the project area suggest that localize See, Feb surface drainage would be a major design consideration. Introducing impervious surfaces has the impact f jerfelaa of increasing the runoff rate relative to that of the existing conditions. Possible effects include sharper, A di-e higher peak storm discharges that are sustained for longer periods of time, causing or worsening 17-- fe,i flooding-related impacts such as channel erosiop, damage to structures, etc. Wk&k 46o,ir 5F4X4(>c 10 afc 4r ('tct` P%6Pased sySl aj how / e4red /�.�l,6&At (1461a 'eet downs 'ern i Future development of the project corridor will convert most of the affected area into impervious areaS5 ? ow with reduced time of concentration. Table 3.4-4 summarizes impervious surface impacts for bothivu,� ,r 4CIr Alternatives A and C. Storm sewer systems will collect all impervious areas including sidewalks,Lip roadways, and a grass strip behind the curb in some areas. Fill slopes outside the sidewalk will become grass slopes with storm runoff flowing to adjacent properties r 72c4 (,ems.,- �✓�IS- L,Irk &e Table 3.4-4 Total Surface Impacts Comparison (Acres) (�&^I�4„cc oA Existing Conditions Build Alternatives E5 � Sa� Drainage Change in �tx �-00- System Impervious Pervious Total Impervious Pervious Total Impervious /� /`41c�nr Alternative A 3.80 9.38 13.18 11.36 1.82 13.18 7.56 /ye j Alternative C 2.45 10.76 13.21 10.34 2.87 13.21 7.89 Owne--S (,v10 (-(,t'i 0 f, -� Impacts include those caused by the indirect effects of the constructed project. Improvements to the Oakesdale Avenue SW corridor would contribute to the overall development of the project area bye/ovldi� rthe missing transportation link necessary for development of the adjacent properties. evelopment would further increase the conversion of absorptive ground to impervious surfaces. Gnn vG�(�,. Springbrook Creek and off-channel storage volume has a direct influence on theAattenuation of surface water runoff through the valley. Storage loss could result in higher peak runoff rates and more flooding, b - Preliminary estimates of fill quantities within the FEMA 100-year floodplam are compared in Table 3.4-5. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/17/96 3.4-6 City of Renton Surface Water Quantity/Quality Oakesdale Avenue SW Table 3.4-5 100-Year FEMA Floodplain Storage Impact (Cubic Yards of Displacement) Action Volume Loss Alternative A 160 p� Alternative C 4,160 S No Action Alternative 0 ,� ��l�Prol v� Extreme rrood conditions are also tftodifications to sub-drainage areas. When storm sewer capacity to convey the flood waters is exceeded, the overland flow becomes important in conveying the j excess flows toward the downstream system. Oakesdale Avenue SW would be built on low t embankments which would alter these existing sheet flow patterns. This fill could restrict the overland flows or alter the existing pattern toward an alternate. owr d Each of the alternatives would require tw bridge crossings. The south bridge is planned to reducej,� wetland impacts to the City of Rentonlwetland reserve. This bridge would be independent of Springbrook Creek flow conditions. Standing water is common in this location, but Springbprook Creek wnegligible out-of-bank flo rates and headlosses are at the south bridge. , ,f " h1C The north bridge would cross the Boeing constructed wetlands and Springbrook Creek. Bridge type Dr-E�uvJS alternative studies indicate that for either Alternative A or Alternative C, bridge piers (columns) would be located within the normal high water mark. Bridge piers would not be parallel to channel flow/ �i o�„OX43 because of the crossing angle of the roadways. This would result in increased constriction to channel flows and a potential effect on floodwater elevation upstream of the bridges. Lao 601� wst, n Ce il"��. G f The City of Renton's ceeti rig ESGRJW - � identified' Springbrook Creek channe improvements in the area of the north bridgc'c rossings Tb_ ld_co �-- ' w. K cr j, i that the channel improvements will be in place hen either. Alternativ,e A or Alternative C are constructed. Prelimina calculations show that t e 100 eayre uencwaC c surface elevation is � . rY Y q y/1 Q . impacted by an increase of 0.1 feet. Flow veIocitie ujn r theJ�ridge �may be sufficient t ca e our w -WCTC b c r G 2 7'� /J /l � �d ow bin o u gel h N w��Ai7 L6I1 S1 n P.t,n� . d tIZ�. �r II rye i � 5 ten�// _LI- / l eS W IU S�r?W �fi 7�Q �"Rnn�� aby Ctil�G✓ f/ale u� (�Lis�i /UW 3.4.3.2 Surface Water Quality �'p CL l h 4. , The Oakesdale Avenue SW pavement areas will be subject to collection of v<ar4e+�s sus, metals, and oils associated with vehicular uses. Specific impacts are discussed under the Impacts of Construction and Impacts of Operation sections. 3.4.3.3 Impacts of Construction Temporary impacts would occur on the waterways and hydrological systems during construction of the Oakesdale Avenue SW improvements. Existing drainage structures or flow pattern could be significantly altered by the contractor's operations. Constructing the roadway would require careful staging of earthwork, utilities, and pavements to ensure that the waterways are protected from temporary impacts. Within the floodway, excavation volumes must equal or exceed fill volumes at all times. Existing sheet /l01' �/tee fi{,�S �t Sti,Mrr�P/: ye SF��f► Preliminary DEIS ALM. Printed 10/17/96 Gd 3.4-7 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Surface Water Quantity/Quality 6 1.n 01 s JIB flow patterns of adjacent properties should not be obstructed or imps, d in any way. Modification of �' existing storm sewer and culvert features should be staged to minimi a �tp stream impacts. Bridge construction would have the most direct influence on the existing waterways. Temporary stream diversion is preferable during construction of bridge structures in Springbrook Creek but may not be W' r5(0y" (A feasible due to the steep slopes and private runoff control structures on one side. �tcl in�° Increased sediment loads in runoff would be the principal change in water quality Cused by construction. Constructing the roadway would include sign sediment and erosion contro4ractices 0;r l designed to limit the amount of sediment that leaves a construction site. T rP j 50- gix-factarg'— - Use SW.,M • A:moti nd erosive forc precipitation; G� • Susceptibility o soil type erosion; �e5 ¢S • Steepness terrain; Zconsidering e and length of slope to areceiving water; or vegetatio or other soil cover-,andnt and osion controls used (WDQE 1990).Be fa ors, the effects sediment has o\n,�yater quality can be deter ed. Bec a�et-been.deter-ru�i�d,--xh�axn�t-e�-pr�;s-ipitat;^�.r-*h�..e.* �aceu]d-error du . The types of soils in the proposed corridor are mainly loose fine sands and soft silt with organic matter. The moderately erodible soils combined with the flat terrain, and erosion control devices indicate the sedimentation of waterways would be relatively important. The roadway corridor is extremely flat (slopes mostly under 1 percent) with a few steeper areas. This flat terrain would greatly reduce the potential for erosion except on the graded slopes of the roadway, which normally slope between 33 and 25 percent. Generally, the distances to receiving waters ��would be short, therebyincreasing the amount of sediment entering Springbrook Creek and its wetlands. Grading and construction of the roadways would require many kinds of heavy equipment. The use of this equipment makes minor spills and other leaks likely during construction. The most critical areas of concern would be refueling, storage, and maintenance locations. Fuel spills have the greatest potential for contaminating surface water because fuel would be stored and used on-site in large quantities. Equipment storage and maintenance areas could also potentially contaminate the site. Small leaks and spills in these areas tend to accumulate and contaminate surface runoff. On the construction site, fertilizer might also adversely affect water quality. Fertilizers would be used when ground covers are placed and landscaped plants are established. Commonly, lime is placed on the ground before the ground cover is planted. Some landscaping may also be heavily fertilized where soils are poor to promote the growth of the plants mAd 3.4.3.4 Impacts of Operation Gav� !►'S Swh�w lS ors c�>�cc�tJ'. Increased impervious area would also impact subsurface hydrology and reduce groundwater recharge. This would occur through two mechanisms: new impervious areas would replace existing gravel and � ��/vt pn ground cover and roadway embankment would consoli supporting soilsWow 15 �4;s ncyw��„e /PYY l ? Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/17/96 J-0_ C.. a( re'nef d'S w11,5ed• 3.4-8 City of Renton v Surface Water Quantity/Quality Oakesdale Avenue SW The flat topography and the moderately slow permeability of the project area suggest that localized 1 surface drainage would be a major design consideration. Introducing imperious surfaces to a particular 3 area has the impact of increasing the runoff rate relative to that of the existing conditions. If the water delivery rate exceeds the water infiltration rate of the adjacent pervious surfaces, that surface becomes inundated. Flooding, erosion, and accretion (ground build-up) would be the result. Even if inundation is r provided for (i.e. runoff is controlled by engineered drainage features), water that would normally be v absorbed into the ground is conveyed away from the affected area.. Increased impervious area would increase storm runoff quantities and peak flow rates. Possible effects include accelerated runoff flow rates which are known to cause sharper, higher peak storm discharges. If I\ this is not mitigated, the cumulative impact of urbanization would eventually result in higher peaks in the channel begin to promote channel erosion. The channel equilibrium would be offset as peak conditions increase in magnitude and frequency. Operational impacts include those caused by the indirect effects of the constructed project. Improvements to the Oakesdale Avenue SW corridor would contribute to the overall development of the project area by proving the missing transportation link necessary for development of the adjacent properties. Project-induced development can be expected to be most pronounced within the Boeing Longacres Site. Development construction (e.g. commercial and industrial facilities, residences, and parking lots) would further increase the conversion of absorptive ground to impervious surfaces. OA�c.}dALk ib)-_wt- a-,) .`/c dwe �lyn.e_ ii wouG� 53),,�twc met would increase impervious surfaces resulting in more storm runoff and a potential for increased sediment, nutrient loads, and contaminants reaching Springbrook Creek. Increased impervious area would also impact subsurface hydrology and r reduce gro/un�lwate�r recharge. Increased sediment-l-oads in runoff would be the princip l chfiv t rr quality. Construction of this .project, would temporarily increase erosion aid-s ' ntation in surface water systems. The relative �rJn amount f erosion and sedimentatianr caused by the project can be determined by examining the six factors: am nt soil erodibility; steepness of terrain; distance to receiving water; type of cover; and.ecos' co ols. 'r h-G S& Overall, the project conditions couKevas duce some erosion problems in Springbrook Creek. Alternative A would be located in the same val Alternative C with the same predominant soils (loose fine sands �A�r and soft silt with organic matter) in the top 10 to 20 feet which have moderate to high erosion potential. The terrain is virtually flat throughout the valley and mostly under 1 percent slope. The distance from erosion sources to receiving waters would be highly variable. Both alternatives would cross Springbrook 0VQf Creek once, and the alignments pass adjacent to wetlands along a significant portion of their length. Grading and construction close to waterways and wetlands can create sedimentation problems. Relatively small sedimentation impacts at each location could result in cumulative impacts to streams in the project region. Construction spills could contaminate the waterways. Refueling and fuel storage areas would be bermed, and contractors would prepare a spill prevention, control, and countermeasures plan. Both these activities would help prevent contamination from spills of fuels and other materials. Other procedures such as control of runoff from high use areas, and proper handling measures would also be used. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/17/96 c ; 3.4-9 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Surface Water Quantity/Quality /h ay The City of Renton maintenance practicetirSclude winter sanding. The two bridge sites would have the greatest need and therefore the greatest in4pact to the outlet features. �f There is potential for warmer storm sewer reaching Springbrook Creek. This is a result of storm runoff detention in ponds without adequate shading features. a'4 Foy, Griul� oG.:u� Accidental hazardous material spills eeiy-on the Oakesdale Avenue SW corridor. Interstate 5, Interstate 405, and State Road 167 woul /rema�n as the primary transportation corridors for the re ion. --�4-ans/./t►- �l,�cleg Land development along the corridor does not involve hazardous materials. Existing fuel tank acilities ye at Lind Avenue SW and SW 27th street a expected to make use of the Oakesdale Avenue SW corridor. «� 3.4.3.5 Existing Drainage Facilities Each alternative influences the existing drainage patterns and systems differently. Alternative AOr I This alternative would ivide the roadway co dor drainage into six separate cl� drainage yste46 �s, a) 6SY6 designated A through F (discharge-dKpoints illustrated in Figure 3.4-1). These systems will have the P,,V.h d is w+sfior �e following conflicts with the existing utilities.Alrll j�4► �e City of Renton drainage features are modified. An existing Oakesdale Avenue SW roadway V) t0( drainage system, which extends north from SW 34th Street, would be relocated 4+6 rzstricted, -co . Impact would occur in Phase 2. The upstream inlets of the pA6 SW 27th Street drainage system would be removed .ipth the Phase 1 nstruction of the Oakesdale 0 �e ®� Avenue SW Intersection. Though some flo s with t�h U,lJ�'t s� f` � g s �w4f� e exrstin js rats age area of the 40 ►�5a SW 27th Street system will be permanently reduced. The new outfall would outlet under SVV�2�7t1iStreet to wetland F crossing gas, water, and electrical utilities and passin over a sanitary sewer. Phase 1 construction will also reduce areas contributing to the SW 16th Str t storm sewer. Flows from S SW 16th Street would be collected in a new system. d rvv- B U' QuJhuv 01 {1e ;,�r��LGt«r Private drainage systems betwzenV 2Zth Street and SSW 16th Street w uld also be codified. Their c v a o S 4 rh, u+ Z-�� sa �w se i ,/ primary influence Wu d b 8 ver �n o existing Longacres 'ar`isc s�f'e dr'amage%'rotTg'h new, separate l �,e outfalls to Springbrook Creek. The new impervious area replaces gravel and grassy areas and would S G have shorter conveyance times and increased peak discharge to the creek. Two shallow area inlets n Ld �t currently drain the former stables area (recently cleared for development) on the west side of Alignment �xP�� . A. These two pipes will be combined into one pipe to outfall into the old practice track ditch. If these U� pipe are operating at the time of construction, this would divert flows from the low area which would be modified for the System C outlet pipe. Storm sewers will cross over a 48-inch culvert that serves the CSTC constructed wetland/detention facility. This culvert would force a short segment of storm sewer doar trunkline to less than 2 feet clear below the pavement. Two 12-inch culverts cross the Oakesdale Avenue �r6in SW corridor 2,200 feet north of SW 27th Street and would conflict with the proposed storm sewer if they by SN are still active. To the north of Springbrook Creek,TOesdale Avenue SW drainage system wouldcollect runoff from an area that would have the grea hydrologic conditions. This existingBenaroya Company land is undeveloped and consisrees with underbrush and long trave101t times due to pooling and no defined outlet Swal Existing off-site sheet flow fromundeveloped land to the east could potentially be ie embankment will alter the existing overland route to the creek. � deAof us r-4 s�o✓,� Sy, pe,,,g a�dreg fe�. PreliminaryDOS °� �klt54 Print�e"d�10/17i96 Moir.. 5�c1'GrslI J ►wa✓+� Yv, S9" G��� dllO J 49Y1V{yy G��SS PrGi/1 :MIA 1�')'( Clot �l�ir.�� . WI/t GSo sfii�meat 4, Zelr w�u A 0�) fojW.> e IV41t. 13 +North Bridgeslte n Sprin)broac Cree '= r r u-E Wet Vail a ah ;ry Y ' •N`°i,' i @ \ { c*'tifY•/a11 to; ?`Biofiitration swa4 Sprtagbrook �•" . �Zd" €'�. s � - .��'-- ' ,- •ter - 4 System C WegOetention CombiiatiortPond'with. Pipe Outfall t0 < •" t �' -��, �• r ,4 Spriogbroolc.Crcf Channel` ,i s. N sydem B'Weviletention f Combination.Pond with ! � tlWMI to Wetland"40 u J t ce System k H 1116filtratloa Swale ' 'f with OWall to Wetland 206,400 800IPeet i,� ``aft �. z ,.Anlal,Photog 84 aLL+c�i.i" y H •� 3.4-11 Draft Environmental Impact Statement ,Q x(- r'�urface Water Quantity/Quality Alternative C ��V�'/ `��� W Ie/fy Drainage designs for this alternative are Anerally the same as for Alternative A. These proposed storm h° f sewer systems would have the same impacts to City of Renton storm sewer systems and to private systems south of the old practice track. �l e � S �o)w) `k Since most of the new roadway is on embankment, the alternative's diagonal path a tie practice f 5 track would stop existing ditch flow patterns. Oakesdale Avenue SW features would impact the existing ° the inner drainage ditch and 36-inch culvert of tlba-jol c cam. ince these old practice track I r features are to be filled by ma ne Boeing site improvemeff6, impact assessments in this area p 4 based on Summer 1996 co ditions and are subject to ongiag site imprawgments. No significant impact � is anticipated as SysteQ,diverts existing flows upstream to a new outfall on Springbrook Creek just +l°Il- l�• north of the 36-inch culvertl(near the SW 21st Street alignment).The constructed wetland to the north of L 6,41 SW 19th Street would be bridged by the same structure that would cross)Springbrook Creek. The 1 l y'� wetland is not impacted by this alternative. �erc f c0isu 4sS i00% Cl/ f dog' 1 N No-Action Alternative Syta ) , The No-Action Alternative would not affect the existing drainage systems. JJ 3.4.4 Mitigation 3 .4.1 Surface Water Quanti /990 �(c CS W9 G S aC�oy�eel �'�y oS w * aJ as ��c , The i C-QuntK SurfaceWater Design Manual has been incdrporat into�the_City'of Renr6n�fdinance -I",O'e� -- and is very specific on-the-,.issue__of stormwater-retention/detention systems. Oakesdale Avenue SW �„*f improvements are designed tosatisfy King County standard treatment facilities. However, the City of, I y,ee A-Irsr. ut Reonis-open to innovative equivalent stream protection ds. Design phase coordination with the City of Renton ES&RYf=pre-,Fam has been identified as the most cost effective means to mitigate backwater impacts in Springbrook Creek and also to minimize land acquisition for storm water rruunoff trea ent. A D.1 o t iil�,te�6e 1�1 water Su ace elevati d;lrinA t}�e t JHt /v r� �iu✓fh fjiidu� ��Nld Q rt^i►rraf � ,, �g✓F,ci��if/•ag /n 1Ae 100 year frequency storm event ee-the pn b rook channel im roveme s. his coordinated design couldwoid leeft hannel widening, lining or other mitigatation measures. e u, fie Additional project ene its resul Kom the combined use of the proposed Springbrook Creek channel �'y4 ��ow bench. By locating biofiltration swales on this bench, land acquisition l�ra&4begn minimized. he On-site flows would be conveyed to existing wetland areas or directly to Springbrook Creek. Storm runoff treatment and peak runoff control would be provided through storage pond, vault, oc wetpond/4„J1u" facilities_.. Land would be set aside and maintained as City of Renton stormwater treatment easements. Su a Le ,.-Existing bands of native growth vegetation would be preserved as a buffer adjacent to wetlands;streams, -and rivers, whenever possible, to mitigate the erosion potential. Impacts to surface drainage and infiltration and groundwater that are caused by the conversion of large areas of absorptive surface soils to impervious paved surfaces may be mitigated by enhancing the absorptive capacity of the remaining unpaved ground. Mitigating measures can include regrading, construction of detention basins, introduction of special vegetation, and soil replacement. AA540�c�eo,5l SorPTi+C ce�yc{dl. r �°" ya � �f" Lo U� eA" orb L,, �IS� ° ,� t � S' �S k�,�'Ole �� r (Aso C Preliminary DEIS AYJI T J-UJ 1 t a Printed 10/17/96 C&r-Of" �Q 'S S a;�t' MHUILIMM •. .. �r Blofiltraati et �s • 1 � d w CS v air'x:.a xa,� I Biofi ou"31677 E in . ; ,�., `• Sgstem P Wet/Detentioe .: -' , s«; "�'!�.s � . Combieatioq'Poodwith - -.SfI23ii St„ , Pipe OWall to U Spnngbrook Creek Channel."".,.,. 1 C N SpIddN•Wet deation Combination Pond with .� OntN to Wetland r M, A System l F `.IA BidiltrationSwale 1 ` with OdWI to Wetland r �df Q 200 A{o` o- 80o Et►etr k —rev. 1.77 r V -�A 3 s� cdS / Or < 3.4-13 raft Environmental Impact Statement %p �/ ,&cl Surface Water Quantity/Quality �,Impacts to closed depressions, as expected at Wetland D, must be mitigated as specified by the ,,' KCSWDM. Additional grading would reconstruct the existing stage/storage relationship of any closed - depression. Some of this effort could be combined with mitigation of impacts to wetlands; see Section Vr a5 5. I Ain Oud�St76 , c" `� ��e��u►�.v �r�g / � v; � 1 v �'loodplai�6 storage losses,(associated with fill to the FEMA 100-year �y, must be mitigated/ J through compensatory excavation within the Springbrook Creek channel drainage basin./any �n�r®yfi•,�e i., o li / �' �arte. croa�► rs t{' f' /i 13 .4.4.2 Surface Water Qua t1' weutd cam.' M C..*f JC i4l.s�r-ew,,,,, F'l0"d1- s. J W ,The County Surface Water Design Manual has been incorporated into the City of'Renton Ordin and is very spec ' the issue of stormwater treatment rn sures,---Oa�ss aTe Avenue SW o-to ,improvements are designed to salts ' start ar treatment facilities. Hoyvever, the City of R4V l tiRenton i; apeta irrrtovative equivalent stream protection met ds-- rk S Ut� k"q/r Con oply fin 1&,W/ 57t-oe ,,4i✓ to " �GrUS 4 GP�h++� Gv�ury Clyct�i�, �i�'q�sy.a✓' The EPA has issued rules regarding the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). Stones ��'�These regulations include control of stormwater discharges from jurisdictions with populations over z �� .100,000. The City of Renton has applied for a NPDES municipal stormwater permit for all point ',discharge locations in the city. When issued, it is likely that this permit would control runoff from all �/Pi je,41,j, Xp Cr *4s7aAn NPDES stormwater management permit for construction ley ` activities would be prepared for the project since more than two hectares (five acres) of land would be S u/'e la..- e disturbed. Construction practices and devices would be employed to mitigate the increased potential for �niti ,erosion and sediment transport. These may include scheduling earthwork activities to avoid the rainy season, limiting topsoil exposure, and using sediment control devices such as silt fences, straw bales, and At temporary sedimentation ponds. Newly constructed earthen embankments, roadway shoulders, drainage /CcS' O"" cp channels, and graded areas would be revegetated by seeding with erosion control mixtures. Alternative A U�y Alternative A does not include any mitigation measures beyond those discussed above. Refer to Figure 3.4-1 for surface water quantity and quality mitigation measures anticipated for Alternative A. Alternative C Flows from this southeast corner of the practice track eet4d be diverted along the east edge of the new 7S ,R alignment north to combine with flows from the existing 36-inch culvert. y economic solution to-the impact to adjacent.property without..signi-ficant--impact4,G-the-&pr-irtgbrteo*-,creek syttettt Refer to Figure 3.4-2 for surface water quantity and quality mitigation measures anticipated for Alternative C. No Action Alternative Mitigation would not be required under the No Action Alternative. 3.4.4.3 Construction Erosion can be minimized by limiting construction to the dry months of summer. Ground cover would be removed during clearing, grading, and some stages of construction, but the cleared areas would be mulched and seeded (or some other temporary cover would be employed) as soon as construction grading is completed on each section of roadway. This practice reduces the acreage of bare soil exposed at any one time during construction. Sediment and erosion controls might also include silt fences, straw bales, Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/17/96 3.4-14 City of Renton Surface Water Quantity/Quality Oakesdale Avenue SW brush barriers, gravel filter berms, inlet protection, sediment traps, sediment basins mulching, matting, plastic covers, vegetative buffers, topsoil preservation, surface roughening, terracing, swales, riprap, and gabions. Properly installed and maintained sediment and erosion control practices can sesly reduce sedimentation in receiving waters (Ecology 1990). ,r e�4c,4rue!/t, Refueling and fuel storage areas would Weed to contain any possible spills. Construction contractors would be required to prepare anill prevention, control, and countermeasures plan to prevent contamination from spills of fuels and other materials on-site. Equipment storage and maintenance areas would be part of sedimentation control design, and runoff would be diverted to a sedimentation pond, where some pollutants would be removed. However, the most effective strategy is to prevent spill and leaks. The ground cover would be bare soil during construction, but would be mulched and seeded as soon as F�' grading was complete. Standard sediment and erosion controls would be used during construction, thereby greatly reducing the amount of suspended sediment in runoff entering waterways. To avoid extensive sedimentation impacts, sediment and erosion controls would have to be particularly rigorous around stream crossings and near wetlands. fcc ' Additional measure would be in place tc surface waters from fertilizers. Single application techniques of ground covers, such as hydroseeding, reduce fertilizer runoff and would be used wherever possible. Where heavy applications are necessary, fertilizers would be applied in phases over several months, or slow-release fertilization chemicals and techniques would be used. These techniques reduce potential nutrient impacts to receiving waters. 3.4.4.4 Operation Sediment loads from winter sanding of bridge crossings are expected to settle in the receiving detention pond or wetland. Deicing salts and chemicals are not typically used by the City. Pesticide use would be avoided. t 3.4.5 Impact Summary Significant impacts, mitigation measures and significant unavoidable adverse impacts for surface water quantity and quality are summarized in Table 3.4-6. _t 71 W4,ter 'vr ,� Kt GI V_ICE y -*'Oe y'Z' ®H Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/17/96 have- (-Owp tc+4 l o ul°w' 4 ���� IueM 3.4-15 Draft Environmental Impact Statement 4A„ 414�-S Surface Water Quantity/Quality Table 3.4-6 Water Quantity/Quality-Summary Of Significant Impacts, Mitigation Measures and Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Significant Unavoidable Significant Impacts Mitigation Measures Adverse Impacts WATER QUANTITY Alternative A Filling 7.1 acres of roadway Provide compensatory flood C nsolidation of grbund- corridor to bring elevations storage (R) u� reducej'grouirdwate� above the FEMA 100-year Comply with Renton's Flood fpchargd. floodway for a net flood storage loss of 160 cubic yards Hazard Zone Ordinance (R) (City of Renton study results Include location of 100-year have not been adopted by floodway on roadway plans(R). FEMA to date) Determine runoff characteristics of Urban Modified Soils on-site (0) Include location of floodplain anti flobdwaybn roadway Plans(R)y Determine runoff characteristics ,of Urban Modified Soils on-site ` efv. (0) Increased storm runoff due to Design drainage system to Some loss of infiltration to addition of 7.6 acres to 3.8 provide control of runoff quantity groundwater due to e existing acres of impervious during all phases of corridor increased impervious area ¢ surface. development(R) nv Consolidation of underlying Use special fill materials to Some impact to progression �► �p� �'" soils reduce consolidation (0) ar*d-recbmige of ground water Increased storm runoff volume Retain storm runoff volume to S me-�torrn sf:werpiPes due to increased impervious match that of existing 2-, 10-, and ouo/remiain�lood*d y_ surfaces 100-year runoff conditions for agl Ater from the rekenf ion closed depressions (R) r;nd Negligible change of pooled water surface elevation. Fill within existing closed Grading for reconstruction of Some time to re-establish A depressions the existing stage/storage plant community in newly 'rh 15 V relationship graded area (decreased if �rod'r (*-Aj topsoils are saved from fill Lp iuj^ site). flC��eSSr'". Placement of bridge Channel improvements for zero Potential trap for floating U column/pier in 100-year flow increase in water surface debris. stream channel. elevations. Alternative C Add 7.9 acres to 2.5 existing Similar to Alternative A Similar to Alternative A acres of impervious surface. Filling of 4,200 cubic yards within FEMA 100-year floodway. No Action Alternative None None None Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/17/96 3.4-16 City of Renton Surface Water Quantity/Quality Oakesdale Avenue SW Significant Unavoidable Significant Impacts Mitigation Measures Adverse Impacts WATER QUALITY Alternative A Potential for increased Prepare an erosion/ Percentage of nutrients and sediment, nutrient loads, and sedimentation control plan for metals from the site would contaminants reaching construction work(R) enter receiving water Springbrook Creek Comply with surface water quality protection requirements of Mining, Excavation,and Grading Ordinance(R) Obtain a baseline general NPDES Permit from Ecology(R) Include biofiltration Swales(R) Construct wet vaults and two- stage wet ponds where required by the King County Special Requirements (R) Construct oil/water separator features where required by the King County Special Requirements (R) Monitor stormwater events and function of detention system. (0) Establish a water quality and sediment monitoring program. (0) Install aeration system in lake/detention system (0) Prepare water quality operation and maintenance plan for completed facilities(0) Potential for warmer storm Provide landscaping to reduce None sewer reaching Springbrook warming of stormwater(0) Creek Alternative C Similar to proposed action Similar to proposed action Similar to proposed action No Action Alternative None None None R Required mitigation. O Optional mitigation. 3.4.6 References Cin, of Rewon. Oakesdale Avenue SW, SW I6th to SW 31 st Street, Jurisdictional Wetland Determination. Prepared by Shapiro & Associates Inc. in association with HNTB Corporation for Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/17/96 3.4-17 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Surface Water Quantity/®ualKy the City of Renton Planning/Building/Public Works Department. Review Draft Final, December 20, 1995. City of Renton, Wetlands Lakes Rivers & Streams, City of Renton Map 14 May 1996 Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Lon-acres Office Park, Volume I & II. Prepared by Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. for Boeing Commercial Airplane Group. August, 1994 Wetlands, Lakes, Rivers & Streams, Map. Prepared by City of Renton Planning/Building/Public Works Department. 14 May, 1996 Geo Engineers. 1991. Report of Geotechnical Engineering Services, Boeing Longacres ark. January 23. Bellevue, WA. Prepared for BE&C Engineers. Seattle, WA. and for Boeing Support Services. Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. 1991. Water Quality Monitoring and Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Black River Water Quality Management Plan. October 10. Seattle, WA. Prepared for R.W. Beck and Associates and City of Renton, Department of Public Works. Renton, WA. Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. 1991a. Wetland Inventory Work Plan for the East Side Green River Watershed Management Plan/ Black River Water Quality Management Plan. September 12. Renton, WA. Prepared for the City of Renton, Planning/Building/Public Works. Renton, WA. . 1991b. Critical Area Inventory. June. Prepared in association with R.W. Beck and Associates. Seattle, WA. Prepared for City of Renton, Planning/Building/Public Work. Renton, WA. Northwest Hydraulic Consultants Inc. East Side Green River Watershed Ir1id1Analysis.in -4 , WA. Prepared for R.W. Beck and City of Renton._Dg�ef Ptibti�s. Renton, WA. ___-- l�l�o _ fGSr l�t�c �f'Cc,., /c r��fi �wfa✓ShaA �i� e�Qii' ���d��,ul�c �„aly5"�' R.W. Beck a 19-94-S. Current Conditions Document fer base Aide-diver dFatrli� ��rs�'*� rrera Gensuitants, s. Seattle, WA. Prepared for City of Renton, . Renton, WA. ��� Shapiro and Associates, Inc. 1992. Environmental Report for the South Interceptor Parallel: Phases 1B and II. August. Seattle, WA. Prepared for Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle (Metro). Seattle, WA Shannon & Wilson, Inc. 1992. Preliminary Wetland Delineation Van Woerden Avenue Southwest or Raymond Avenue SW October. Seattle, WA. Prepared for Winmar Company, Inc. Seattle, WA. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/17/96 3.5-1 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Wetlands 3.5 Wetlands 3.5.1 Introduction The presence and extent of wetlands on the Boeing Company's Longacres property (former Longacres Racetrack site) have been examined under two development proposals: the Customer Services Training Center and Longacres Office Park. For the purposes of evaluating the Oakesdale Avenue SW roadway alternatives, existing information on wetlands within the Boeing Company's property was determined to be sufficient. Thus, the portion of the roadway project area within the Boeing Company's property has not been re-delineated. When the Oakesdale Avenue SW roadway project reaches the permitting stage for the selected alternative, it is possible that new onsite delineations will be required within The Boeing Company's property. This is because much of the existing wetland information is based on delineations that were conducted and field verified by the Corps in 1991 and 1992. For permitting purposes, the Corps allows previous delineations to be used for a period of 5 years after the field verification had been i conducted. The City of Renton will accept wetland delineations for a period of 2 years. Therefore, when the project reaches the permitting stage, it is possible that the existing information may no longer be accepted. For those portions of the roadway project area lying outside The Boeing Company's property, onsite wetland delineations were conducted. /ne bui a Asa fc�.Jti,f� GGfivi fl P Wetland Authority /n Gve,L14,dS tAn�.,L,�, )C/e4„ G+Aeez Activities that would be carried out in wetlands afire cepla edr eoth�y t' e federal government and local jurisdictions. The following paragraphs describe how this authority over wetlands is organized. Pursuant to the Clean Water Act and through the Section 404 permitting process, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) has been given the responsibility and authority to regulate the discharge of dredged or fill materials into waters and adjacent wetlands of the United States (Federal Register, 1986). The following definition is used by the Corps and other federal agencies for administering the Section 404 permit program (Federal Register, 1980, 1982): Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances, do support a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. In addition, the City of Renton has the responsibility and authority to regulate development activities in wetlands and their buffers in accordance with the City of Renton Wetlands Management Ordinance No. 4346(City of Renton, 1992a). The City of Renton uses the following definition of wetlands: Those lands transitional between terrestrial and aquatic systems that are inundated or saturated by ground or surface water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support and, under normal circumstances, do support a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. It should be noted that the City of Renton does not regulate drainage ditches as wetlands, under their wetlands ordinance, but the Corps does regulate drainage ditches as wetlands if they meet the wetland criteria. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/17/96 3.5-2 City of Renton Wetlands Oakesdale Avenue S.W. 3.5.2 Affected Environment As noted above, a portion of the roadway project study area previously has been investigated for the presence and extent of wetlands as part of two separate development proposals for The Boeing Company's Longacres property. Delineations for these two development proposals (the Customer Services Training Center and Longacres Office Park) were conducted between 1991 and 1995. Since the time of the original investigation on the Customer Service Training Center(CSTC) site, the site has been altered and a wetland mitigation project has been constructed. Reports that describe the wetland mitigation were reviewed, and summaries of the results are presented in this section. 3.5.2.1 Methods Both the Corps and the City of Renton require that site-specific wetland investigations be conducted using methods outlined in jurisdictional wetland delineation manuals. The Corps requires use of the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environment#1 La�ora� 159gg7), referred to as the 1987 Manual, to determine the presence and extent of wetlands!*} e City of entah requireduse of the Federal Manual for Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands (Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation, 1989), commonly referred to as the Unified Federal Method or 1989 Manual, to determine the presence and extent of wetlands.Nine fLar 4f, 1;euj Uses /9&T7 The wetland studies listed above for the Longacres property were done using both of these manuals. As noted above, those portions of the roadway project area examined for wetlands under previous studies were not re-delineated. Those portions of the roadway project study area not previously investigated for the presence and extent of wetlands were investigated by Shapiro and Associates, Inc. in January of 1995, using both the 1987 and 1989 manuals. 3.5.2.2 Site-Specific Investigation A Comprehensive Onsite Determination Method, as described in the 1987 Manual, and an Intermediate- level Onsite Determination Method, as described in the 1989 Manual, were used for this and the former wetland investigations, to determine wetland boundaries in the Oakesdale Avenue SW roadway study area. Using these methods, vegetation, soils, and hydrology parameters were examined for wetland characteristics. Customer Services�7rainigg Center Sit G y, t ppti ' 7a l9 s l A we an te4`fl�eation was cond'uc�ed on The Boeing Company's CSTC site by Shapiro and Associates, Inc. i 199Siwetland areas comprising 6.32 acres of wetland were delineated within the site. Since that time, the site has been altered for development of the CSTC and an associated wetland mitigation project. Three wetland areas have been constructed on the site, including a small lake, a riverine ;l�l >`o corridor, and a wetland "delta." Figure 3.5-1 shows the current wetland layout on the site. Together the 1,e (Rjele) constructed wetlands comprise 14.99 acres. Of these wetland areas, only the riverine corridor and the Des Flo 3•S wetland "delta" lie within the roadway project area. In addition, an existing wetland is present within the stream floodplain, as depicted in Figure 3.5-1 The existing wetland also lies within the roadway project area. We u,e h°j Preliminary DEIS 116/e 1 S Printed 10/17/96 C'/fS 41, /0a/f v 0 M m _..._..__.— _....._...._ I ; 0 ..._. a-'• ... __• •.. ��-,__.._._... ....... .II III'1_- _ t h r'•, , � 1 Existing Wedonds � 1 ! CUSTOMER SERVICES II II TRAIN`CNG S C)NTER \\ 'III II ..II __I1._�l.—_II(-'l (Zll._Jl� _ � .! `� .n•. i v.{) � - + ; '~ - _ 'ram y�w �•i `. ! � 1 is Mtn } ""y-w�,C\w' \�/ w,•w +L L A A• - • . \` w w • • A A •_ .•. w .A•w - - - _ • w. CD _ w w w. (1 Constructed Wedonds NOTE: This map Is for odentallon purposes only. LEGEND � 3 FIGURF�3 � 2t Wetland(open water) WETLANDS CONSTRUCTED ON Not to Scale 4 .n Wetland THE CSTC SITE n S I-I A P IoR 0• H� OAKESDALE AVENUE SW W CD CL CJ7 � N W 3.5-4 k W �, ,S City of Renton Wetlands Oakesdale Avenue S.W. f , Longacres Office Park Site A wetland delineation was conducted on site of the Longacres Office Park by Shapiro and Asso ates, 1 Inc. in 1991. Numerous wetlands were dell ne`at thin the former racetrack area. These wetla ds lie )a+'� outside the roadway project area and are not discussed he Two wetlands were delineated un er the 1987 Manual that do lie within the roadway project area. The wetlands, which are shown in Figure, 3.5-2 include an area of interconnected ditches and swales that are p allel to the inside perimet r of the �'S5 alS° former practice track, and an area at the south end of the site. The ity of Renton does not egulate t 'L drainage ditches as wetlands; therefore, the area of interconnected ditc es and swales is not a wetlandfPj NV*rC1J under City of Renton jurisdiction (Ordinance 4346 Section 4-3 - ,� edandfunder Corps�Yt"'re 1 jurisdiction, however *XJ l� S �. t i . kO �� ohs �•� � `��� n'p� (,a- Iktjs �� tinYl wouP �� ebllk� 0S pa•� h nRPE1 f� �, eP �,eh 1 �. / to Let5 j January 1995 Wetland Reline on �rac c �, ( ill ��o��, tr i Wetland delineations were conducted in January 1995 on the porttons oath roadway project area that I were not investigated under the previously discussed studies. These area for the most part, border property owned by The Boeing Company I,'6nd consist of undeveloped land. The delineations were conducted within 100 feet of the centerli for the two roadway alternatives being considered. All the wetlands delineated extend beyond the 00-foot-wide swath that was investigated. In August 1996, a reconnaissance-level investigation w onducted to determine the approximate location of the wetland edge between Wetland C and Wetlan D. A total of six wetland areas were delineated and are located on Figure 3.5-3. Of the six wetlands delineated, four correspond to wetlands shown on the City of Renton's Long Range Planning: Wetlands, rJ Lakes, Rivers, and Streams map (City of Renton, 1992b). Wetlands A and C are not shown on the map. A�.vKP� Wetland D corresponds to Wetland 16 (also referred to as the Allpak site wetland); Wetland E and F c01 correspond to Wetland 12 (also referred to as the Renton wetland); and Wetland G corresponds to Wetland 13C. The City of Renton has not performed a formal rating of its wetlands; however Wetland 12 (the Renton wetland) is qualitatively described as being of significance and of high quality. �^�G,rf�'� ''r' 1 The northernmost area investigated_in January 1995 lies directly south of the southern terminus of nit l�ti� {• Oakesdale Avenue SW and is thdeveloped,,land, lying between Springbrook Creek on the southwest and the Benaroya Company property orm Group Health) on the east.3.5.3 Impacts 3.5.3.1 Impacts of Construction Construction of the extension of Oakesdale Avenue SW would involve clearing, grading, filling, and paving. In addition, two bridges would be constructed as part of the new roadway for both Alternatives A and C. These bridges are in the early design phase and their designs are subject to modification. As currently proposed, a bridge would be constructed over Springbrook Creek and would continue over The Boeing Company's Customer Services Training Center (CSTC) wetland mitigation site at the north end of the project alignments bridge would be approximately 400 feet long with a proposed width of 82 feet.,1A second bridge would span the large wetland at the south end of the roadway project. It would be <~ approximately 600 feet long with a proposed width of 70 feet. Construction of these bridges would require placement of fill for the approaches. Preliminary DEIS I � a�S�° "�Eit i':� � lc �� Q ^t '�°t, Printed 10/17/96 3.5-5 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Wetlands Lj _ 1 m co El 0 I - --- -------- - ____ _ _____ _- __=__' ___ _ _ _ J _ __ _ - - - f--------- _ __ __ __ ________— ---__ S I -5 _______ ------''------------ --- I --------------- - I --- - ---------- —--------- -------------- -u - 1 u ls--2 FIGURE,K LEGEND Wetland Nolbw" WETLANDS WITHIN ROADWAY PROJECT AREA -•• — Drainage Ditch ON THE LONGACRES PARK SITE S H A P I R O OAKESDALE AVENUE SW I1/9 Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/17/96 3.5-6 City of Renton Wetlands Oakesdale Avenue S.W. �%,: �Qos 5 ?r —S.W.I6th St. 3 CSTC Site • CN • / I L—s.w.l9ih s<. I9-4 o i �- SPA I, �i a' 3 I ✓1°� ( ' y"# ZI 0 Al ` �,,,,F 0*-, m; o G,�1 ate ?' [ S.W.with St. F 3 o ! v NOTE:Wetland locations are approximate. 8 3 FIGURE, LEGEND: 0 1� 800 Flagged Wetland Edges WETLANDS DELINEATED �..Fee( MR.— Wetlands Extend Outward IN JANUARY 1995 ® Reconnaisance Level Investigation(6/96) S H A P I R O OAKESDALE AVENUE SW -�+wr Preliminary DEIS /9 rT ���� Printed 10/17/96 3.5-7 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Wetlands Retaining walls are proposed as part of the roadway design for both alternative alignments. At least three separate sections of retaining wall construction are proposed to minimize roadway fill adjacent to wetlands along Alternative A, and at least two sections are proposed along Alternative C. Stormwater facilities also would be constructed as part of the roadway project. For Alternative A, six `'r`I stormwater facilities are roposed, and for Alternative C, five facilities are proposed. Eaeh of the farilities wouldater quality treatment f� L-_F:,._ . . ....,.s or A/r '� h.s on� --dete-liftell VendG� ,.�,. After receiving water quality S wb "z' 0/„S eak stormwater runoff- es-a�would be treatment, stormwater would be discharged to wetlands or Springbrook Creek. Section 3.4 provides O `�"� �� additional information on the stormwater facilities and project effects on surface water quantity and quality. At the south end of the project area, an existing paved elevated access road runs parallel to the proposed roadway alignment. This access road would be removed during construction of the new alignment. i The Oakesdale Avenue SW project is proposed for construction in two phase. Phase I will be a three- quarter mile segment between SW 16th and SW 27th Streets. Phase 2 would extend Oakesdale between S.W 27th Street and the existing cul-de-sac at SW 31st Street — a distance of about one-quarter mile. Wetland areas E, F, and G would be directly affected only by Phase 2 construction. Alternative A Construction of the roadway along the Alternative A alignment, including bridges and stormwater treatment facilities, would require that some wetland area be filled. Loss of this wetland area would adversely impact wetland functions, including loss of wildlife habitat, fragmentation and degradation of remaining habitat, and proportional reductions in other associated biological and physical wetland functions. Construction of the two bridges would limit impacts by minimizing filling in wetlands. The bridges would create some shading impacts, however. The northern bridge would create minimal shading. Less than one-third acre of the CSTC wetland would be shaded by the northern bridge, and less than one-tenth acre (2,000 square feet) of the wetland adjacent to Springbrook Creek would be shaded. Shading effects would be greater at the southern bridge where approximately eight-tenths acre of Wetland F would be shaded. Shading of wetland areas could change the vegetation community as more shade-tolerant species eventually become established. It is possible that shading could diminish the amount of sunlight reaching the wetland to the point where no vegetation grows. Table 3.5-1 presents the amount of wetland area that would be filled or shaded in each wetland for Alternative A. they The City of Renton classifies wetlands into the following categories: Category 1 (Very High Quality), Category 2 (High Quality), and Category 3 (Lower Quality). Table 3.5-1 presents the classification of the wetlands in the / project area. �.City- Rt wiake file�rr , �'' t of wetland-classifimtions. The City of Renton uses these classifications to determine buffer widths and wetland replacement ratios. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/17/96 3.5-8 City of Renton Wetlands Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Table 3.5-1 Preliminary Calculation of Wetland Area Filled or Shaded for Construction of Roadway Alternative A Alternative C Renton Area Filled Area Shaded Area Filled Area Shaded Wetland Area Classification (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) �� G Phase 1 Construction be CSTC 3 0.000 0.290 0.000 0.421 Adjacent to j���\(,�►' Springbrook 3 0.000 0.043 0.000 0.090 r Creek A 3 0.000 0.000 0.123 0.000 C 3 0.085 0.000 0.500 0.000 i D 3 0.219 0.000 0.240 0.000 Phase 1 Sub-Total 0.304 0.333 0.863 0.511 Phase 2 Construction E/F 1 0.700 0.820 0.700 0.820 Total 1.004 1.153 1.563 1.331 Wetland buffer requirements for each of the wetland categories are as follows: Category 1, 100-foot buffer; Category 2, 50-foot buffer; and Category 3, 25-foot buffer. Some wetland buffer encroachment would occur as a result of roadway construction. Fill within the buffer area of Wetlands C, D, E, and the CSTC wetland would occur, and some shading of the CSTC wetland buffer and the buffer of the wetland adjacent to Springbrook Creek would occur. Approximately one-third acre of buffer would be filled, and approximately one-half acre of buffer would be shaded. These figures are estimates based on preliminary drawings,,and-- -be re-evaluated in the,field once the alignment has been- staked-for.. -onstruction•. In addition to wetland filling and shading, construction of the roadway could result in a number of less direct impacts. Clearing and grading activities uroted--ire--: ��^�r�nr��vrh cnictitac�-•a€-�#e 1 rteadway P-Pej have the potential to introduce sediments into adjacent wetlands that could temporarily increase turbidity and total suspended solids. Because erosion and sediment controls would be in place during construction, impacts from erosion are not expected to be significant. The potential for erosion and sedimentation impacts likely would be greatest during removal of the existing paved access roadway, which would occur along the length of the zputh marsh wetland d Wetland G. e �o-&k-s +o ra It 3,L- 2, d.�f ti,hk fo4r ^A/5� or �{ ,aN �, a .e. �ti�s is fi► ¢ emu, Approximatel cres of new impervious surface area wou d e created as a rs`ult o roadway n�J construction. Stormwater runoff generated from the newly created impervious surface area would be syure ,y,E,• routed to stormwater facilities. After receiving water quality treatment, stormwater would be discharged . to wetlands or to Springbrook Creek. Wetlands would be affected by stormwater runoff facilities in several ways. Wetlands C, D, and t e wetl ad acent to Sprmgbrook-C-re- ould be reconfigure F�f out kU r��r slightly by construction of water quality treatm t facilities immediately adjacent to, or partially wit ri,., ��15f �rr�the wetlands. Wetlands would receive an i reased amount of treated runoff. WetlandX - lt►^�nQ,w w could be affected slight because a portion f stormwater runoff that would have flowed to �ould be intercepted by the�ed stormwat r facilities. Such changes could modify wetland hydrology(resulting in shifts i d vegetation communities to more or less flood-tolerant species), habitat Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/17/96 _ C,�,� f w,,,l (s 4L�► 5�'� ��' ham'' � c`' f� Glso h ' ��•► uy use �F �� . ._.... .. . ......... ............. ... . .................................:............,................... ..... ... ........... ,r 3.5-9 Draft Environmental Impact Statement 4 t! c5 Wetlands types, habitat quality, and habitat use by a ociated wildlife. Because the facilities would be designed to retain and sT�1* release treated runoff, changes to hydrology are not expected to be significant. Moreover, these changes likely would occur slowly over a period of years as vegetation responds to any slight modifications in hydrologic regime. 41- /ad Q 4-k h, ou-f l,?e Un�,h.ns, COO// /< J�4vc 44 dtfflet G•�S�PKrfe� I,,rNI 7 Alternative C S�c... sr�,, ?�� Sc/ w,Gl �.,..d,,y �utl� Q� i,�. 1e../J. Chi a.J� -Af - d�f��,. fo w 1/" o The Alternative C alignment is the same as thel'Alternative A algnment�trom SW 27th Street southward,d, o-J 1A41 9 and wetland impacts are identical for each alternative for that portion of the roadway. North of SW 27th Street, impacts would be similar, but areas of fill and shading would be slightly different. There would 0h7 �O be slightly more wetland area affected by filling and shading under Alternative C. For Alternative A, their dnd"a-ye total area of wetland affected by filling and shading would be 2.157 acres, and for Alternative C, the total/5 �- 0 4re area would be 2.894 acres. Table 3.5-1 presents the areas of each wetland that would be affected. 49em A slightly greater amount of buffer area would be filled or shaded under Alternative C than under f 0l` Alternative A. � As with Alternative A, erosion and sediment impacts could occur from construction of the Alternative C alignment. Wetlands A and C would be more susceptible to erosion impacts under Alternative C because construction would occur closer to them. t 3.6 The amount of newly created impervious surface under Alternative C would be approximate 8 cres, slightly more than under Alternative A. Stormwater facilities would be designed to treat water quality and then discharge it to wetlands or Springbrook Creek. The location and design of stormwater facilities G,)?/ Afr L would be very similar �1114dpr Alternative $2 Impacts on Wetland C would be slightly greater because the area of Wetland C reconfigured for a treatment pond would be slightly larger. 3.5.4 Conceptual Mitigation °r ys�, S k S Because of the linear nature of the project, not all wetland anebuffer impacts can be avoided. Irrr acts on wetlands and their buffers would be minimized, however, through a number of roadway design features and through the use of best management practices during construction. Roadway design features include reducing roadway fill within wetlands and buffers through the use of retaining walls, of WWI"A. construction of bridges to avoid filling within wetlands (although the bridges produce shading effects), ( 06 Sec and construction of stormwater facilities that would protect water quality,rJ Gentro( �y,�` ', �err�,•n �n i During construction of the roadway, best management practices would be used to avoid or reduce erosio and sedimentation impacts. These practices would include timing construction to occur during the drier times of the yea�Aand implementing erosion and sedimentation control plans. �� Removal of the existing paved access roadway is proposed as part of the roadway project. This would enlarge the south marsh/Wetland G area, which, in the long-term, would benefit the wetland. For those areas where wetland and buffer impacts cannot be avoided, compensatory mitigation would be required. The City of Renton has requirements for replacement of wetlands. These replacement ratios are based on the wetland category and vegetation community and are presented in Table 3.5-2. Compensatory mitigation may be permitted by the City following review and approval of da4;4. man compensatory mitigation plans. The City of Renton requires "development of a plan that provides for land acquisition, construction, maintenance, and monitoring of replacement wetlands that create as nearly as possible the wetland being replaced in terms of acreage, function, geographic location, Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/17/96 �¢1 3.5-10 �H City of Renton Wetlands Oakesdale Avenue S.W. q and setting and that are equal to or larger than the original wetlan s" (City of Renton, 1992 . In some instances the City will decrease the ratio for replacement wetlands. In the case of an emergent Category 3 wetland, the ratio may be decreased to 1.0 times the area altered, provided that the wetland has been successfully replaced prior to its filling and that the replacement has been successfully established for 12 months. Table 3.5-2 City of Renton Wetland Replacement Requirements Wetland Category Vegetation Type Wetlands Replacement Ratio Category 1 Forested 6 times the area altered Scrub-shrub 3 times the area altered Emergent 2 times the area altered Category 2 Forested 3 times the area altered Scrub-shrub 2 times the area altered Emergent 1.5 times the area altered Category 3 Forested 1.5 times the area altered Scrub-shrub 1.5 times the area altered Emergent 1.5 times the area altered Source:City of Renton, 19926A Amman rrrnative to wetland replacement, the City of Renton may allow restoration of exivdng_di&tuFbed %1)S wetlands locateTwittTin tlie_drainage basin of the wetlands.-that-waufd--be-"fined by construction of theP,,ha,cC,,g r project. Restoration must include restoringg lost .hydrologic, water quality, and biologic functions. Thely,,t reQdo�af��n ratios for restoration wetlands are the same as those for replacemeat_�v_etlands. KnGi'bnCt°�,Pr-mil' �Itowea� fer ot-d1n*1zae. Table 3.5-3 summarizes the required replacement er-restate areas for mitigating wetland impacts. �� dlscurf These numbers Mctlands sed on the wetland replacement ratios from Table 3.5-2 and the preliminary estimates of of areas. Final wetland replacement requirements would be �� approved by the City of Renton based on final project designs. As indicated in Table 3.5-3, for Alternative A, approximately 3.24 acres of wetland would have to be replaced to compensate for wetlands that would be filled for both construction phases, and approximately 4.34 acres would have to be replaced under Alternative C. ay -allow rPctnratio of Pxisbing-disturhed._wetlands. Wetland mitigation compensates for those wetland values that are lost as a result of developme t. (I Because of this goal, mitigation should occur in the vicinity where wetland values are lost, preferablyy n etl the same watershed. In addition, creation of new wetland area adjacent to an existing wetland is often , more beneficial than creation of an isolated wetland, particularly when the newly created wetland area is relatively small. There are several opportunities for wetland mitigation within the project area that could compensate for the documented wetland loss. The large in the eastern portion of the project area (located between the proposed roadway pub-�E ildA• alignment and Wetlands C and D as hor Figure 3.5-3) offers a number of opportunities for wetland h'►'�'`J Jhe ps e,�me%des upland and wetland portions:m ther�w eland portion l generally of low value and doinated by non-native herbaceous species. Wetland 'I!t Ap ould include expansion of the existing wetlands, where feasible, by removing soil and fill to a point where wetland hydrology would be maintained. Nativre} species of trees and shrubs and herbaceous species could then be Preliminary DEIS \ .�r r� � I � f Printed 10/17/96 3.5-11 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Wetlands Table 3.5-3 Preliminary Weiland Replacement Acreages Wetland Wetland Area filled/shaded Area of Replacement Area Category (acres) Vegetation Type Wetlands (acres) Alternative A Phase 1 Construction CSTC 3 0.290 Mitigation wetland 0.44 Adjacent to 3 0.043 0.06 Springbrook Creek C 3 0.085 Emergent 0.13 D 3 0.219 Emergent/Scrub- 0.33 shrub Phase 1 Sub-Total 0.637 0.96 E/F 1 1.520 Emergent/Scrub- 2.28 shrub TOTAL 2.157 3.24 Alternative C Phase 1 Construction CSTC 3 0.421 Mitigation wetland 0.63 Adjacent to 3 0.090 0.14 Springbrook Creek A 3 0.123 Emergent 0.18 C 3 0.500 Emergent/Scrub- 0.75 shrub D 3 0.240 Emergent/Scrub- 0.36 shrub Phase 1 Sub-Total 1.374 2.06 E/F 1 1.520 Emergent/Scrub- 2.28 shrub TOTAL 2.894 4.34 planted. The primary consideration in any wetland creation project is the availability of groundwater and the maintenance of wetland hydrology. Prior to any mitigation design, detailed investigations of the�j f Groundwater hydrology should be conducted. " �nr,5'_r`� / In both Alternative A and Altemative C, approximately half of the wetland of ects are due to shadin�as opposed to filling of wetlands. Although shading often reduces the ability of a wetland to support roak&, 5� vegetation, other wetland functions, such as hydrologic capacity, may be unaffected. Depending upon cot,h.Fq at the outcome of discussions with the City and the Corps, some shading effects may be mitigated by mir, &R4m+4s4_ ,t efforts in adjacent wetland areas. �� y-�� '4a4- KS�orCi "" A mixture of vegetation types provides more valuable wildlife habitat than one vegetative class, such as tti111 the emergent wetlands in the armed-palsttme areas. An option for i � could Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/17/96 3.5-12 City of Renton Wetlands Oakesdale Avenue S.W. be minor earth moving to create pockets of open water and planting of trees and shrubs to provide a more diverse wetland community. A mixture of shrubs, trees, and emergents would provide a^ eland within greater wildlife habitat value and could substantially compensate for /the sh a€€eets. L, 3.5.5 Impact Summary Significant impacts, mitigation measures, and significant unavoidable adverse impacts for wetlands resources are summarized in Table 3.5-4 Table 3.5-4 Summary of Significant Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts for Wetlands Significant Unavoidable Significant Impacts Mitigation Measures Adverse Impacts Alternatives A and CJ., .y„ aid Potential temporary loss of wetland I Mitigate for loss of wetland as required None acreage and habitat values as a result of by City of Renton(R) filling and shading Explore potential of pre-mitigating by construction of wetland mitigation prior to filling for roadway embankments(0) No Action None None None (R) Required mitigation (0) Optional mitigation 3.5.6 References Clark, J.R., and J. Benforado, eds., 1981. Wetlands of Bottomland Hardwood Forests. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 401 pp. Environmental Laboratory, 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experimental Station, Vicksburg, Miss. Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation, 1989. Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service, Washington D.C. Cooperative technical publication. 138 pp. Federal Register, 1986. 33 CFR Parts 320 through 330, Regulatory Programs of the Corps of Engineers; Final Rule. Vol. 51, No. 219.00, pp. 4 1 206-4 1 259, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Federal Register, 1982. Title 33, Navigation and Navigable Waters; Chapter Il, Regulatory Programs of the Corps of Engineers, Vol. 47, No. 138, p. 31810, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Federal Register, 1980. 40 CFR Part 230: Section 404 (b) (1), Guidelines for Specification of Disposal Sites of Dredged or Filled Material. Vol. 45, No. 249, pp. 85352-85353, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/17/96 3.5-14 City of Renton Wetlands Oakesdale Avenue S.W. i Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/17/96 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Wetlands Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist, 1976. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press, Seattle. King County (Wash.), 1990a. Sensitive Areas Map Folio. Seattle King County (Wash.), 1990b. Sensitive Areas Ordinance (Ordinance No. 9614). Seattle. Munsell Color, 1988. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Kollmorgan Instruments Corporation, Baltimore, Maryland. Reed, P.B., Jr., 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: National Summary. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. Bio. Rpt. 88(24). 244 pp. Renton, City of, 1992a. Wetlands Management Ordinance No. 4346. Renton, Wash. Renton, City of, 1992b. Long Range Planning: Wetlands, Lakes, Rivers, and Streams. Renton, Wash. Shapiro and Associates, Inc., 1991a. Jurisdictional Wetland Determination for Longacres Park Phase 1 Project. Shapiro and Associates, Inc., 1991b. Jurisdicttonal Wetland Determination for Boeing-Longacres Project. Shapiro and Associates, Inc., 1992. City of Renton Jurisdictional Wetland Determination for Customer Services Training Center Project. Shapiro and Associates, Inc., 1992. Jurisdictional Wetland Determination for Customer Services Training Center Project. Shapiro and Associates, Inc., 1992. Boeing Customer Services Training Center Wetland Mitigation Plan. Shapiro and Associated, Inc., 1993. City of Renton Jurisdictional Wetland Determination for Longacres Off ee Park Project. Shapiro and Associates, Inc., 1995. Boeing Customer Services Training Center Wetland Mitigation Monitoring Report. U.S. Soil Conservation Service, 1973. Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington. U.S. Soil Conservation Service, 1975. Soil Taxonomy: A Basic System for Making and Interpreting Soil Surveys. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C., 754 pp. U.S. Soil Conservation Service, 1987. Hydric Soils of the United States. Prepared in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1988. National Wetlands Inventory, Renton, Washington Quadrangle. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/17/96 3.6-1 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Wildlife, Fisheries,and Vegetation 3.6 Wildlife, Fisheries, and Vegetation kxl�l 3.6.1 Introduction A number of natural resource studies have been conducted in conjunction with of er development proposals in the project area. The most extensive studies were those conducted on ve tation, wetlands, and wildlife for the former Longacres Racetrack property, land recently acquired and developed by The Boeing Company (Boeing). This EIS section was prepared by reviewing and summarizing these,previous studies, and conducting supplemental field work where necessary. 3.6.2 Affected Environment 3.6.2.1 Vegetation I Recent and historical land use has removed most of the natural vegetation of the project area. The western portions of the project area have been altered by the former Longacres racetrack and the recently completed Boeing Customer Service Training Center (CSTC). The portion of the project area between Springbrook Creek and the Boeing property is dominated by previously clued land, which is1 now fall0vy-pasttire. �Jc��1 t.�irl, Diu}5¢g , (usc�,re tnritPc tiSz h YA �n� The northern portion of the study area recently has been developed by Boeing with buildings, parking, landscaping, and a mitigated wetland. Demolition of existing structures recently has been completed in the southern half of the former Longacres racetrack. Because of the previous and current development by ttre� y, little vegetation is present in the western portion of the study area. The signific-,tnt vegetation communities of the project area are located between Springbrook Creek and the Boeing property, and within the wetland community located south of SW 27th Street. Several vegetation communities are located in the project area. These include wetlands (described in Section 3.5), upland fields, shrubland, an upland fore-Is es s. These vegetation associations are discussed in detail below. �f� r `rst�" HS to �vCr^� �15 or *n f 1 /Sofa 5 `dra 1 �o .aof uf�u w�N us�nj Ike 4e.n1 sou<1 rru��l. I / +C, G1So ln�C l� Gfr ovn4� w�irl�J5. For discussion of vegetation and wildlife resources, the project area- an beZided into several a ak prominent features (Figure 3.6-1): the Boeing mitigation wetland; the northern forest; the open fields n im area, the south uArsfi; and the southern forest. rU/ F The Boeing mitigation wetland consists of a series of open water wetlands and associated emergent and upland plantings. The site was designed to accommodate future extension of Oakesdale Avenue SW. The northern forest area is adjacent to the east side of Springbrook Creek in the extreme northeast portion of the project area. The dominant canopy species are red alder and black cottonwood. Some trees in this deciduous stand are about 80 feet tall. The understory includes salmonberry, salal, and some snowberry. on r, ✓o (,r�S54.1 V,LtI. A. �,, IA �a�it4r w� So.re S�iiai ♦ ira. N BIC LT J t The open fields area is primarilyn t (see Al ail5o Section 3.5, "Wetlands"). These f4U@V fields are the primary habitat feature of the northern half of the project area and are dominated by quackgrass, orchard-grass, tall fescue, and thistle. Wetland portions of the open fields habitat are dominated by a mixture of species, including creeping buttercup, quackgrass, foxtail, slough sedge, tufted hairgrass, aqd tall fescue/ q4 r­'I c aha/r itis S. N /-e �jw4 (i✓ .���-1' So("ah w�/4_'d �.� �.5��� ✓h1 ��'o�cft 5h,,,�w,� al�scn�>t��s 5 )�4� ho �a fh T a�cS /f p/irna/ Lve� 1., . Preliminary DEIS / / Printed 10/17/96 a ':.. rop < t . Boeing ' ' :sites »r Wetlow 1, s ———�— r yt�`"»r✓_ f t 1,�- s m p"h§ Fields � ]� pr, a �:•k r., f 1 r. opOSed 4k+� Win I ' property I Sill► •_ Longacres ` Office Park •' ►' l s s x� ;. 23rd St w^o Open Fields I ' gyp, ��, ,��y � � ,.( yr�'. ` •/,±, y. T'�' Iry ";.-Open Fields f r �i South / South c d Marsh L : LA, L Southern Forest [�' 1 C }� 0. 200.400 800 Feet '' •- —— ,� Vegetation association name .' ... r p:ti.•••.t:th' •b4r AeNai PhotogTPNy 9• 3.6-3 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Wildlife, Fisheries,and Vegetation 3.6.2.2 Wildlife Previous Studies Detailed wildlife studies over the course of three seasons were conducted on, and adjacent to, the former Longacres Racetrack to collect data for environmental analysis of any future development of the southern portion of the Boeing property (Shapiro, 1993). Data were collected by field observations and the use of small mammal traps. Data were collected in six different habitats: in the mowed infield of the racetrack; among the barns; in the fields and shrub habitat adjacent to Springbrook Creek; in the south rn ;,i t e southern forest; and in upland fields. The data represent a comprehensive overview of wildlife use of the project area. A list of the scientific and common names of mammal, birds, amphibians, and reptiles that were observed or are expected to inhabit the project area are listed in Appendix A to the "Wildlife, Vegetation, and Fisheries Technical Report." Mammals Table 3.6-1 indicates the mammals that were observed, trapped, or sign of these animals were observed in the project vicinity. Table 3.6-1 Mammal Species Observed or Detected in the Project Area Frequency/ Species Location Observation Type Coyote East of Practice Track Scat Deer mouse Forest grove 4 Springbrook Creek 5 South MaFeh `�1„� i 4 House mouse Open field 2 Source:Shapiro 1993 Though not detected during these field studies, other mammal species common to the Puget Sound region probably use the project area. The open fields and forested reaches provide suitable habitat for striped skunk, shrew mole, masked shrew, long-tailed weasel, Towsend's vole, raccoon, and opossum. The western portion of the project area provides little wildlife habitat. The structures of the former Longacres Racetrack provided habitat for introduced species such as house mouse and Norway rat. These structures recently have been demolished. Birds Surveys for birds were conducted on three occasions for each of three seasons in 1993 on May 3-5, August 10-12, and November 10-12. Fifteen-minute timed observations were conducted at each observation point. Table 2 in the "Wildlife , Vegetation, and Fisheries Technical Report" summarizes the collected bird data over a three season period. The 1993 Shapiro study found a distinct difference in wildlife use of the surveyed habitats. The developed areas of the racetrack and the mowed fields provide little habitat diversity. Consequently, wildlife use of these areas was low when compared to the less disturbed habitats of the fields adjacent to Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/17/96 3.6-4 City of Renton Wildlife, Fisheries,and Vegetation Oakesdale Avenue S.W. ,e,4 Springbrook Creek, the south �, and the south forest. The barns and associated buildings were standing at the time of the 1993 survey was conducted, but these buildings have since been demolished. The barns and other buildings provided habitat for introduced species that are tolerant of human activity including pigeons, European starlings, and house sparrows. In addition, Canada geese, mallard, wigeons, and gadwalls are commonly observed foraging on mowed grass areas. Marsh wren, mallard, red-winged blackbird, and song sparrow were species regularly observed in the south . Species commonly found in the south forest include black-capped chickadee, bushtit, song sparrow, and Bewick's wren. Habitat diversity of this wetland is reflected in the variety of bird species that utilize this area. A red-tailed hawk nest was located in the southern forest, about 150 feet south of the Boeing property boundary. The nest was not used by red-tailed hawks in 1993 but on a site visit during 1994 the nest was active. WDFW considers red-tailed hawks a"recreationally important species" with a high public profile that provides opportunities for human interaction that are valued by the public (Washington Department of Wildlife, 1991). Red-tailed hawks are protected under the Revised Code of Washington (RCW 77.16.120), which makes it unlawful to destroy or possess the nests or eggs of game birds or protected wildlife. A Red-Tailed Hawk Nest Site Management Plan was developed in anticipation of a Boeing site development in the southern portion of their property to reduce any potential adverse effects to nesting red-tail hawks. The management plan concluded that the proposed Boeing development would not affect the nest s te. Open fields, where red-tail hawks would forage, were available in the vicinity and trees would be p anted to buffer thenest from any future development. fio,"'er bc1levc 17eSr �Omv Threatened, Endangered,, or Sensitive Species IC-170 `'' ��w/ r��s/} fire , ThtS The Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service E!S (USFWS) were contacted for data on any federally listed threatened, endangered, or candidate species, or any state listed species that may occur in the project area. According to the WDFW Priority Habitat and Species (PHS) database no federally listed or proposed, or state listed species are present in the project vicinity. The PHS data identified the Black River heron rookery, located about three-quarter mile northwest from the Oakesdale Avenue SW and SW 16th Street intersection, as the closest known significant wildlife feature to the project area. This heron rookery is on the opposite side of 1-405 from the northern extent of the Oakesdale Avenue project. Great blue herons are listed as a monitor species by the state of Washington, which means WDFW is managing the species to prevent it from becoming endangered, threatened, or sensitive. Though there are no blue heron nesting sites in the immediate vicinity of the project, these birds have been observed using fields adjacent to Springbrook Creek and the South Mtf �„eflu F� USFWS indicates that wintering bald eagles may occur in the general vicinity of the project area between October 31 and March 31. No specific locations of concentrated use by bald eagles are cited. USFWS's database is accessed on a section, township, and range basis, and provides general use data, unless a specific focal point of wildlife use, such as a nest or roost, is known. Bald eagles may occasionally perch in forested portions of the project area but no roost sites are documented in the vicinity. During field studies conducted in the project area no bald eagles were sighted over a three season period (Shapiro, 1994). In the project vicinity Springbrook Creek is a s+mgg sh.waterway, a4e"t-6-te-84ee�- channel, with an adjacent growth of shrubs and small trees. The creek provides eagle feeding habitat because of its small size and lack of any substantial fisheries resources. �j�„j� rl Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/17/96 3.6-5 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Wildlife, Fisheries,and Vegetation Relative Value of Available Habitats Wildlife rely on vegetation for food and shelter, and cover from predators. Vegetation communities that contain few species or vegetation layers (forbs, shrubs, or trees) support a low diversity of wildlife. Vegetation communities that are more complex and contain a wide variety of plant species and vegetation layers can support a greater diversity in wildlife. In addition, larger habitat parcels can support greater numbers of wildlife than smaller parcels (Gavareski, 1976;Tilghman, 1987). Based on these general premises, there are differ ces tnYthe value of habitat of the project area that are confirmed by previous field studies. The south�it�SFi and southern forest are the habitats of greatest value in the project area. Together they contain several vegetation associations. A greater proportion of native bird species and a higher bird species diversity were observed in these habitats compared to other portions of the project area during previous field studies. v se G f ved AO_e( I The northern forest, between Springbrook Creek and the Group Health complex, and the associated riparian zone, is the second most valuable habitat in the project area. The presence of forbs, shrubs, and Frees trees combine to form a diverse vegetation community. This woodlot is relatively small, however, and is surrounded by development, which limits the amount of wildlife that it can support, r �k The least valuable habitat of the project area is the falloff p This area is dominated by few, and in G✓FR c some areas, Brie ass species. This lack of vegetation limits the types of wildlife the area can support. The 1 `" e 44ands do provide some habitat for amphibians and waterfowl, but compared to the sections of the study area with greater vegetation diversity, use of the grassland habitats by wildlife is low. The wetland mitigation constructed by Boeing, at the northern portion of the study area, provides some habitat for waterfowl such as gadwall, wigeon, and Canada geese. These species are readily adaptable to human-manipulated environments and graze on the grass surrounding these constructed wetlands. 3.6.2.3 Fisheries ���� The most recent and comprehensive fish d�a on the Springbrook Creek system was collected during 993 (Harza and Associates, 1994). Data collected during this study included habitat and fish population information. This report included a tom r he�n�s3e ur�marywf�r ,gn fis e� of k u,r$ RR� P� -`` Springbrook Creek is part of the son Cre,-k watershed. SpringbrookC Creekndraim U the easternaria-eental--penians of the watershed and flow the Black River. The Black Rive, � u the Green River !Q-f to form the Duwamish River, which flows into Puget Sound. Historical, an continuing commercial and residential development are adversely affecting the water quality of kc LASkm'}� Springbrook Creek. The increase in impervious surfaces also causes a drastic increase in runoff during , storm events. The effects to water quality and quantity severely reduce the quality of fish habitat in the watershed (Harza, 1994). 14kcCAA I Within the project vicinity Springbrook Creek forms a large meander and flows in a northwestern direction to the point where it flows under SW 16th Street. The creek then flows northward and under I- 401') W Grady Way,-and the Burlin "I Ilkracks. S ringbrook Creek is IsPN into the Black River alo,Sut ,� feet north oo. t �pstream of the project area Springbrook Creek�gjc ann lized and r b "eh he efeek has been-&veiie4*re r ftttrof the..curruu.-di:ainage. 5/000 Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/17/96 3.6-6 City of Renton Wildlife, Fisheries, and Vegetation Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Resident Fish /S A mix of native and introduced resident fish reside in Springbrook Creek watershed. hese include three spine stickleback, pumpkinseed sunfish, speckled dace, lamprey, rainbow trout, and culpin. La , ,peckled dace and pumkinseed sunfish are found in limited numbers (Harza, 199 ). Three-spine' stickleback and sculpins are more common species in the watershed. fish are more tolerant of low oxygen levels and stagnant water conditions of the low gradient featyfes of most of the watershed. etudies have found a greater diversity in fish species at the transition zones between the low gradient sections of the creek and the high gradient upstream sections that flow down the y&1=1ew'OK.4,115J,aS lraS 1' Rainbow trout found were limited to an area immediately downstream of u611t,�, Springbrook Creek trout farm, which is near Talbot Roa, t upstream of the project area. JZQ �" dU'�"9 ��c l-��r��. W�✓lc `�^ 5 thti,J 53rv� LjAVC 105-/ 41M Anadromous Fish Jol'ill 5,iv75. Anadromous fish that have been documented in Springbrook Creek include coho salmon, steelhead-tmK trout, and Dolly Varden (Jones and Stokes, 1991). No spawning by anadromous fish has been documented in the project area Further upstream in the watershed, in the foothill section of Mill Creek, adult salmon have been ob erved during the spawning season. From the historical records and observations of the current bitat conditions, Springbrook Creek in the project area is probably used only as a travel corridor, ro�rpstrearrrpartieesef t#etaatersltec�. At, 5,r;.�` Coho salmon are the most common anadromous fish using the watershed. WDFW had stocked 96,000 �` coho fingerlings in Mill Creek annually between 1981 and 1992. A reevaluation of the abilit of the `n��.-� habitat to support these fish was conducted by WDFW and the stocking numbers were su equently reduced to 50,000 per year (Baranski, C. 1994). The vast majority of adult coho salmon at migrate to Springbrook Creek are^returns from the WDFW releases. n Geer-,je d]< /llle'� These stocked fish, and any juveniles resulting from natural spawning in the watershed's upper reaches R eels a. use the streams in the watershed as rearing habitat. The survivability,of t es fisher h,--however.P-/h*iQ"'���/ )' rs- et ps�J a., Jai a The Springbrook Creek watershed is generally poor salmonid habitat e�e; 1lpoor water quality, poor n gcr�, v an owlni n feeding habitat because of low mwwoin vertebrate densities, and a lack of pools that can be used to escape high velocity flows from storm runoff (Harza, 1994�j. Section-3-:6Adescribes Springbrook Cre water quality.  �,y �h,J �S c1r t;,R- U S�I dqo ee rr f ll5fb� UySfi/rw�, ,m l�/4��vr ✓ AWw �`^IM M� �N��� I-�G Q�� FUr 1 S4/'IY�.�t� G/ Counts o7lanadromo�s fishlare conducted at the ladder on the Black River Pumping Station damApecies 5/,,-, of composition of fish are not determined, however. Data from the Black River Pumping Station fish ladder /9'y indicate that few anadromous salmonids enter the watershed. The number of salmonids entering the watershed between 1983 and 1992 ranged from 47 to 166 fish (Metro, 1990, City of Renton -lc yIe �rtment, 1993), a low number considering the size of the watershed. 3.6.3 Impacts 3.6.3.1 Impacts of Construction Construction of the extension of Oakesdale Avenue SW would involve clearing, grading, filling, and paving. In addition, two bridges would be constructed as part of the new roadway for both Alternatives A and C. These bridges are in the early design phase, and their designs are subject to modification. As currently proposed, a bridge would be constructed over Springbrook Creek and would continue over the CSTC wetland mitigation site at the north end of the project alignment. This bridge would be approximately 400 feet long with a proposed overall width of 82 feet. A second bridge would span the Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/17/96 3.6-7 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Wildlife, Fisheries,and Vegetati® large wetland at the south end of the roadway project. It would be approximately 600 feet long with a proposed width overall width of 70 feet. Construction of these bridges would require placement of fill for the approaches. Retaining walls are proposed as part of the roadway design for both alternative alignments. At least three separate sections of retaining wall construction are proposed to minimize roadway fill adjacent to wetlands along Alternative A, and at least two sections are proposed along Alternative C. Stormwater facilities also would be constructed as part of the roadway project. For Alternative Alignment A, six stormwater facilities are proposed; for Alternative C, five facilities are,,2roposed. Each of the facilities would include water C!�y�1,uality treatment features, which would consist of biofiltration W�f ona we+ �i�irf y gdalhan o e* f,</ ��r Ftn,aI swales er��. beak stormwater r no f rates also wou��be controlled. After g water quality treatment, stormwater would be discharged to wetlands or Springbrook Creek. Section<,3,5--43,q discusso$ project effects on surface water quantity and quality. anJ rx"�'�i�F�li��� ,Ped'44S At the south end of the project area, an existing paved elevated access road runs parallel to the proposed roadway alignment. This access road would be removed during construction of the new alignment. The effects of construction and operation of the proposed project can be divided into two primary categories: the direct effects of construction activity and the longer-term effects from the presence and use of the completed road project.� �eeifects are described for each of the prominent habitat features on the site: rthem forest;;south oeing wetland mitigation site, open field, and southern forest. Vegetation and Wildlife The primary effect on vegetation communities from construction is the direct removal of vegetation. This impact is similar for both alternatives, but varies in severity depending on the type and quantity of vegetation that would be affected. Loss of plant communities that offer limited habitat value, such as open field, result in less adverse effect than loss of more complex vegetation associations, such as mature forests, wetlands, and riparian zones. Table 3.6-2 shows the approximate amount of each vegetation community that would be lost as a result of each alternative. Estimates of habitat loss were calculated using the proposed road design specifications detailed in the design report (HNTB, 1996). Slight differences in impacts between Alternatives A and C would occur as a result of the different roadway alignment in the northern portion of the project area(Figure 3.6-1). /S` so��� of �-�r� � ? Re''a'ccl c,Flds •�d�+�'f , �S� Table 3.6-2 Estimated^Habitat Loss from Construction fi�IS a�,Nr cel h la � Acres Removed Habitat Community Alternative A Alternative C �J A,"Jde O.m 00:,%hr #�/d4. Boeing wetland mitigation site 0.0 0.0 �T Open field 2.8 5.6 /� Z 5,J`3csr di / South marstt�Pi%ice l 0.7 0.7 Ao /1orYt'r, (�-6[6't , / lib~��� ��/u P, Northern forest 1.6 1.9 Southern forest 2.4 2.4 u Total 7.5 10.6 ta ,srS 5� SA ,J 13.14 a� Ci..1c �l G�1 finals afe ry ����'er�*• Y V,�`Prelim nary D E I S ��r� �, yo � Printed 10P, �S a p er 3.6-8 City of Renton Wildlife, Fisheries,and Vegetation Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Construction of the roadway and associated bridges and stormwater treatment facilities along the Alternative A and C alignments would require the removal of 7.5 and 10.6 acres of vegetation, respectively. Loss of vegetation communities in the project area would result in a corresponding loss of wildlife. In addition, some wetlands would be affected by shading of the new roadway. These impacts are discussed inSection 3.5. // 1 The south marsfi and the southern forest provide the most efi uIle habitat for wildlife in the project area. Approximately 0.7 acre of wildlife habitat in the south nd approximately 2.4 acres of habitat in the southern forest would be lost as a result of construction of the proposed project under either alternative. This loss would further reduce the J�abitat available for those species dependent on wetland and forest habitats. The northern forest provides the secondmost valuable habitat for wildlife in the project area. ,5 Approximately 1.6 acres of this habitat would be lost as a result of construction of the proposed project (CLAck �fWN under Alternative A, and 1.9 acres under Alternative C. This forest parcel has been greatly fragmented n o from past development, and this increased loss of area would further reduce available wildlife habitat. As habitat parcels become more fragmented, the complement of wildlife species inhabiting them changes from more disturbance-sensitive species to those species more typical of urban environments (Shafer, 1990). Construction of the proposed project under the Alternative A alignment also would require removal of approximately 2.8 acres of open field habitat. Alternative C would remove 5.6 acres of open field habitat. Impacts on vegetation and wildlife communities associated with this habitat loss are relatively low. Open field habitats on the project site offer little wildlife habitat due to their low vegetative species diversity. These areas provide habitat for small mammals, birds, and reptiles which, in turn, provides some foraging opportunities for raptors and predatory mammals. In addition to impacts associated with road construction, construction of the two bridges would result in minor impacts on vegetation communities and wildlife habitat. Construction of the bridge approaches over Springbrook Creek and portions of the Boeing wetland mitigation site would require the placement of fill and would require a minimal amount of vegetation removal allc'nglthe banks of Springbrook Creek. The second bridge proposed for the project would span the south ii located at the southern end of the alignment. Placement of fill for construction of the bridge approaches would be required. Construction activities associated with development of either of the alternatives would result in some displacement of wildlife species. Highly mobile animals are able to move away from disturbances into nearby habitats. It is generally assumed that these habitats are at or near carrying capacity, however, and these animals would be required to compete for already limited resources. Less mobile animals, such as small mammals, amphibians, reptiles, young animals, and nesting birds, would most likely perish during construction. mUV'egnRr�fiS �3�5 PHISr feel � nor The new roadway could create a barrier to wildlife:.r�-r.,eel of OR ,.a Signific nt wildlife habitat that would be divided �Z fhe roadway includes the northern forest, the south ",. and the southern forest. The south mar h and southern forest are cur entry divided by a paved right-of-way. The new roadway would pose a larger obstacle for wildlife movements, however, because of its larger size and the addition of traffic flow. The roadway would not be a total barrier to movement because it would be slightly elevated. This would allow some wildlife associated with the wetland habitat, waterfowl for instance, to travel between the wetland parcels. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/17/96 (Y 00 3.6m9 Draft Environmental I act Statement Wildlife, Fisheries,and Vegetation Approximately 'p acre of wetland loss would occur as a result of filling and grading associated with construction f lternative A (see Section 3.5 for discussion of wetland impacts). A variety of small mammals and amphibians would be directly affected by this loss because they rely on these areas for foraging, breeding, and overwintering habitat. Because of their limited mobility, these animals would likely perish during construction activities. In addition to the habitat loss, road construction may cause temporary adverse effects to wildlife by disrupting feeding and nesting activities. Wildlife species that are not tolerant of human activity and noise associated with construction would avoid the vicinity during construction. This would be a minor and temporary effect. Aquatic Resources Stream bottom substrate is important as both a potential cover source for rearing coho salmon and juvenile salmon food production. The density of juvenile anadromous salmonids is typically regulated j by the abundance of food (Chapman, 1969). Previous studies have shown a marked decrease in salmonid food production when the substrate size decreases from rubble and gravel to sand and fine gravel. The lowest invertebrate production is associated with silt(Kimble and Wesche, 1975). Q.Pre-cA' The primary effect of the proposed project on aquatic resources would result from construction of a road"'r,'0 , crossing over Springbrook Creek. Both of the alternatives would cross Springbrook Creek within 300 of Ft`J 3, rS feet of SW 16th Street. Construction of the road and bridge would require removal of vegetation L a r adjacent to the creek, thereby exposing the topsoil. This would increase the potential of excess erosion and sedimentation adversely affecting Springbrook Creek. Excessive sedimentation into waterways covers the bottom substrate and makes it less suitable for benthic invertebrates, which are a primary food source for salmonids. Although Springbrook Creek in the project area does not provide�iluality salmonid h itat, construction in and around the creek could further degrade this aquatic habitat.precautionst be taken during construction _ aersts, reduce the potential for construction effects on the creek. ��n/e- '5� 1 �IMI�I Vd9fE The HP permit required by WDFW would requ��Aconstruction in the vicinity of the creek eeir Y yj between Jyl�-1 and September 15. In addition, a detailed erosion and sedimentation control plan must be prepared and implemented to prevent exposed soil or construction material from reaching the stream. 3.6.3.2 Impacts of Operation Operation of the proposed project could increase local development. Fragmentation of habitat, wildlife disturbance caused primarily by vehicular traffic, and other activities associated with increasing urbanization would result from any future development. No direct loss of vegetation communities or wildlife habitat is anticipated during the operational phase of the proposed project. A proportional increase in roadkill of wildlife is expected with any new roadway. Once the roadway and bridge are completed, the project would continue to effect aquatic resources of the creek. The road would increase stormwater runoff and non-point source pollution. Worn rubber from tires, lubricants, and fuel on the roadway would wash off the road from rain and possibly flow into Springbrook Creek. These impacts relative to existing effects from non-point source pollution are not �Nl�� Ih°et11%gt�lan/ Preliminary DEIS J Printed 10/17/96 3.6-10 City of Renton Wildlife, Fisheries,and Vegetation Oakesdale Avenue S.W. significant. Each incremental increase however, does cause adverse effects on water quality and aquatic resources. Potential adverse effects on aquatic resources can be reduced through road-design.and-sonsftttegon. Road features that-minimize stormwater runoff directly to surface waters should-be_inccuporwed. Routing'surfarce-water run-off-to--storm-sewem-is the usual engineering solution. _ Tbr-use_of-wisting drainage•-swales-can reduce the-amount o€-pellt Es reaching swfaee-waem-i-f-�er�is- �:-`---e 1w e ereeic. -et-4imc t -the etff "t tte"avoided. c�i�cel d�sJw�e �ddck f.re-)fq� 3.6.4 Mitigation Road construction should avoid significant forested areas, wetlands, and riparian areas, where possible. In addition, snags, brush piles, and downed trees should be left in forested and wetland areas if feasible Rol° to provide habitat for a variety of wildlife. Land clearing of woody vegetation, particularly in the��u'X I dO ,yr northern forest and the southern forest, should be avoided in early spring when most bird species ark, ,� E, nesting. In^ Construction equipment should be kept out of vegetated areas in the road corridor to avoid unnecessary habitat loss and to minimize soil compaction and erosion. p�B efi'°Y�.� Disturbed right-of-way in upland areasAsbeuM be re-seeded ith perennial grast immediately following construction and final grading to help reduce soil erosion a�rld colonization by non-native species. Native vegetation could be planted to provide cover and buffers along the road corridor. An erosion and sedimentation control plan spill prevention and countermeasures plan, and a construction waste handling plan would be implemented during construction. In addition,.$long-term would be implemented following construction. Such s=^wound minimize impacts on vegetation, wildlife, and fisheries resources in the project area /✓4.-Inct *T GO"C+I'. O4 S�fe/mwwA•C� d�lu/�i1,ts fo ftiGll�fic$ Adverse effects on aquatic resources of Springbrook Creek could be avoided by adhering to WDFW guidelines for construction near streams, implementing an erosion and sedimentation control plan, and planting native vegetation along the bank of Springbrook Creek in the vicinity of the proposed bridge. N � F,qh t/ S fl,I'„z� iti , 1�gn4i�g c�okld n�e�l ,4, .ion Fa,., f- IY L Operation of the proposed roadway under either alternative would disturb wildlife. Plantings of native trees along roadway edges in the southern portion of the project area could provide vegetative screening from automobile traffic. This could lessen the amount of wildlife disturbance in this portion of the project area. G1/Sc snit'►,ar�oh t^Ua l,,�iudo_ qs rl �ved�b'J3 o CA.I k' �9 1 ��• 3.6.5 Impact Summary cAse (n� J't �„(�ncc�,� e ,,,,y wed4 d, AS xii l fo)L. 4s /'y6tot Significant impacts, mitigation measures, and significant unavoidable adverse impacts for ildlife, rt �,j fisheries and vegetation impacts are summarized in Table 3.6-3. bu bG l A� C.�S«le� Sbme d e , c;� ,j�.�- `d1kJw7 14,,d5c4.()r1 lv#X lnd—mA , e,het -,J I,u ev✓ u��crS w►h lw,�Ili wk4 44 A„)S,,r,� & �e � wc/ s/e /a s�p�e SJ�S. 4s�I e b lam, � hf����� PreliminaryDElS�ou� r�N��� �G� r��S a/bl� Printed l0/17/96 m e,,,d')oti„po� a bore• Y .1 3.6-11 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Wildlife, Fisheries,and Vegetation Table 3.6-3 Summary of Significant Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts for Wildlife, Fisheries, and Vegetation Significant Unavoidable Significant Impacts Mitigation Measures Adverse Impacts Alternatives A and C jejo Gm Conversion of forest,field and mfir�h Use native vegetation types in the road Net loss of habitat. vegetation communities and loss of corridor. wildlife. Re-seed upland areas with perennial grass immediately following construction. �- o e4, nria^ of pl �2�Anf/o� 4 Creatio,47 f wild -barrier-be4a�ea Neae.!ep�esed r)d is wA Allow Creatioryfc3f�nri4dlifetiarrieFbetursea-epen �.ov4,A-,r space areeis.fo wl ld tl(c mo�e,� S°�< ,�rld,� :1LIC a.r E44er s f? P !h-c. road P°ts' Short term disturbance of wildlife during Avoid land clearing in forested areas None. construction. during nesting periods(early spring). �✓� Minimize habitat loss due to construction ��f5 equipment. g6�1 SSG Potential sedimentation of Springbrook Prepare and implement construction and None. tyrfh Creek during construction. erosion/sedimentation control plan. No Action None None None fj f&_441ee fib m"Sury ck AnwOFw IJPP port. f �uf `itl• 3.6.6 References v y�A,�!►� ckyICo Baranski, C. 1994. Fisheries Biologist, WDFW. Personal communication with J. Keany, Shapiro and Associates. fral�,� Scfwe� 5W 2,-74k SO Chapman, D. W., 1969. Food and space as regulators of salmonid populations in streams. Am. nat. 3?47 100:345-57. Th,t /S a)_&->e_ City of Renton, 1993. Black River Basin water quality management plan. Prepared by R. W. Beck and /,— 4 Associates, and Herrera Environmental Consultants in association with Jones and Stokes no aCA161N4 Associates, Inc. Renton, WA. Gavareski, C.A. 1976. "Relation of park size and vegetation to urban bird populations in Seattle, Washington." Condor 78:375-382. HNTB, 1996. Draft engineering specifications for the Oakesdale Avenue SW project. Harza and Associates, 199 '� Hirt, Comprehensive Fisheries Assessment of the Mill Creek, Garrison Creek, and Springbrook Systems. Jones and Stokes Associates, 1991. City of Renton critical areas inventory of wetlands and streams. Kimble, L. A. and T. A. Wesche, 1975. Relationship between selected physical parameters and benthic community structure in a small mountain stream. Umv. Wo., Laramie. Water resour. res. Inst. Series 55. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/17/96 3.6-12 City of Renton Wildlife, Fisheries,and Vegetation Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Metro, 1990. Quality of local lakes and streams 1988 - 1989 status report. Water Resources Section, Water Pollution Control Department. Seattle, WA. Metro, 1991. Quality of local lakes and streams 1989 - 1990 update. Water Resources Section, Water Pollution Control Department. Seattle, WA. Shafer, Craig L., 1990. Nature Reserves: Island Theory and Conservation Practice. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. Shapiro and Associates, Inc. 1993. Existing habitat conditions and wildlife study report for the Longacres office park project. Tilghman, N.G., 1987. "Characteristics of urban woodlands affecting breeding bird diversity and abundance". Landscape and Urban Planning. 14:481-495. s Washington Department of Wildlife, 1991. Management Recommendations for Washington's Priority t Habitats and Species. Eds. E. Rodrick and R. Milner. Olympia, Washington. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/17/96 3.7-1 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Land and Shoreline Use 3.7 Land and Shoreline Use 3.7.1 Introduction The Oakesdale Avenue SW project is located within the City of Renton. Neighboring jurisdictions which have the potential to be affected by changes in travel patterns caused by the project are the City of Tukwila to the west, the City of Kent to the south, and unincorporated King County to the north. Pending and adopted comprehensive land use and transportation plans for these jurisdictions were reviewed for project compliance and compatibility. 3.7.2 Affected Environment Figure 3.7-1 shows existing land use for the project area and the Oakesdale Avenue Southwest corridor from Martin Luther King Jr. Way (SR 900) at 68th Avenue South in unincorporated King County to 80th Avenue S. at S. 196th Street in Kent. This corridor, and area between the parallel north-south arterials of West Valley Highway to the west and Talbot Road to the east, is the project influence area for direct and t indirect land use impacts. The area includes portions of incorporated King County and the Cites of Renton, Tukwila, and Kent. Figure 3.7-2 shows existing zoning within the larger study area and Figure 3.7-3 shows City of Renton zoning designation along the Oakesdale Avenue SW corridor. Most of the land immediately adjacent to the corridors is vacant or in office and commercial use. There are no residential uses on the corridor. The closest residences are in Tukwila, on SW 158th Street east of West Valley Highway (SR 181). In the northerly section of the corridor between SW 16th Street and the S.W 19th Street alignment, the Boeing Company Customer Services Training Center (CSTC) opened in 1994 and consists of commercial office uses. On SW 16th Street east of Springbrook Creek, Group Health Cooperative formerly operated an office/warehouse facility. This property is currently owned by the Benaroya Company, which will re-develop the site for more intensive office and warehousing use. South of the CSTC property, the corridor is located on vacant land. Land generally west of the corridor is the former Longacres Park Racetrack site and is proposed for development of a 164-acre office park (an EIS for the office-park2&m3teFzpJaw was issued in 1994). Some industrial and manufacturing uses exist on the north side of SW 27th Str�afid to the east of the corridor. Areas south of SW 27th Street will remain open space or-vacant land as part of the City of Renton's wetland reserve lands. 3.7.2.1 Applicable Land Use Plans and Policies The proposed roadway corridor falls within the comprehensive planning area of City of Renton. Policies and regulations affecting the study area include the Land Use Element in the current City of Renton Comprehensive Plan (1995), zoning ordinances, other relevant ordinances, and the City of Renton Shoreline Master Program (1983, revised July 1985 and July 1990, and amended in 1993). Other related documents and sources used are City of Tukwila Draft Comprehensive Plan (1995), City of Tukwila Zoning Map, City of Kent Comprehensive Plan (1995), and King County Transportation Needs Report (1994/1995). Figure 3.7-4 depicts generalized comprehensive plan designations of the three cities and King County Growth Management Act Requirements Washington Growth Management Act (GMA), enacted in 1990, requires cities in rapidly growing areas to adopt Comprehensive Plans which include the following elements: land use, housing, capital facilities, utilities and transportation. All elements of the comprehensive plan must be consistent with each other and with state and county adopted planning goals. Regulations may also be implemented similarly through codes and ordinances. Since King County and its cities meet the growth criteria, there has been a significant effort to develop comprehensive plans and develop regulations in the region. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/21/96 3.7-2 City of Renton Land and Shoreline Use Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Specific information that must be included in the transportation element of comprehensive plans includes: land use assumptions used in estimating traffic, facilities and services needs, demand management strategies, financing, and intergovernmental coordination including an assessment of transportation plan impacts. City of Renton Comprehensive Plan The City of Renton adopted its Comprehensive Plan in February 1995, along with a revised zoning code. The City of Renton Land Use Element and Zoning Code serves as the basis for assessments of the proposed alternative impacts to land use. The goal of Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element is to provide a balanced multi-modal transportation system which will support land use patterns, and adequately serve existing and future residential and employment growth within the City. The Plan further states "an underlying objective of the Transportation Element is to coordinate land use and transportation planning." A final environmental impact statement was issued in January 1993 for the preliminary Transportation Element of Comprehensive Plan. Specific plan policies addressing transportation improvement are: • T-2 Transportation improvements should support land use plans. • T-4 Adequate transportation facilities and services should be in place at the time of occupancy. • T-5 Land use and transportation plans should be consistent so that transportation facilities are compatible with each other. Land use assumptions should be used in estimating travel demand. The proposed action would construct a new City of Renton arterial. The Transportation Element contains several policies addressing the arterial system: • T-8 Each street in the City should be assigned a functional classification based on factors including traffic volumes, type of service provided, land use, and preservation of existing neighborhoods. • T-13 Maximize traffic flow [people and goods] and accessibility on arterial roads while protecting local neighborhoods roads from increased traffic volumes. Project Corridor Zoning The project corridor land use zoning shown in Figure 3.7-3 is commercial office (CO) on the Boeing CSTC and proposed Longacres Office Park, and Benaroya Company properties, light industrial (IL) on the Winmar property, heavy industrial on the Allpak property and City-own property north of SW 27th Street, and resource conservation (RC) on the City-owned property south of SW 27th Street and the Boeing Longacres Office Park site. Zoning in Adjacent Areas Figure 3.7-2 shows zoning information for jurisdictions adjacent to the City of Renton. This zoning information will be used to assess the compatibility of proposed uses with existing or allowable uses. Table 3.7-1 shows the zoning designations within the project study area for the King County, and the cities of Renton, Tukwila, and Kent. City of Renton: The study area is within an area that is primarily zoned for commercial office, and industrial (light, medium, and heavy) development. The land west of Lind Avenue Southwest, between SW 27th Street and SW 30th Street, is zoned for resource conservation. Existing Oakesdale Avenue SW north of SW 16th Street serves areas zoned for medium industrial, commercial office and public utility uses (specifically King County Metro's sewage treatment plant). Existing Oakesdale Avenue SW between the SW 31st Street cul-de-sac and SW 43rd Street is zones for light and medium industrial use, Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/21/96 3.7-3 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Land and Shoreline Use o Seattle x �er'a„�. � r. �♦ '`Lake Wa�shtn,gton a1 fiFar*.aM - 'n S Boe� All 66♦ Fy S.a—gw St. q°'iy�, 1 t .^4 f =- NWay 9�a .�.•c `"Li?.a rO yL d w�q D s UI m m a a N N a m i < c; King a m m Renton N see County °'fw,q R Z ay 'rs S.144 SL •�P n m Tukwila ¢. S.160 St. :.> S 170 SL S.W.3411% SL 1 Z N m S.176 SL S r� > 't Rut r' 9 St. 1 ,ti 1 S.E.Pe4ovihky Rd. w N.E.180� a t!0 1 S.188th St N j < j 1122 SL S.E.190 St l N Kent � 1 S.E.192rW 3L Legend �h II.: r ♦, a��� a < S.E 200 SL _TS 0 Office King County 1 �.u+ •r., S.E.208 SL Mutt'am;ly Res;dantial 0 Single-Family ResidentialO .D rA B �• —— —— m S.212 SL S.212 St. e D Inoustrial/Manufacturing N e N m Commercial l_J Open Space/Vacant Agriculture Jurisdictional Boundaries ——— Study Area Boundary Generalized Existing Land Uses it Preininary DEIS Printed 10/21/96 3.7-4 City of Renton Land and Shoreline Use Oakesdale Avenue S.W. r- o Seattle vo = Lake Wa`Shrngton g Acc Boei qy S.Bangor St. s r•ra r•r.� x� !m� N an Ivey09Le T3 g�;v3 f, 12 m ' a D q1e m ... S rn g m m. ^ N y m m.7.w .';... Z D $ ti m 5 \ D comas King qe'r m Renton Z County �, o N.Airport Way n K S.3rd SL nS NntO 0 a S.144 St. S' Oak,, :1, are S.W.71h SL a q�• NI aY ro S� dY W Gf Tukwila 9y°' B ,N 9S� v t/1 S.180 St a ~ 1 S.23rd St m 3 0 S.170 SL y :0 O a 1 S.W.34th St. -+ D & g ° m m 9 m 178 SL T 6 5. S.1)e Sr `mD $ rn I S.E Pettmtsky Rd. - N.E.180 S.180 St S.W. S g.E•C 1 z 90 st 1 S.188th St ED 1 V C j < j S.192 y. S.E.19M� Legend CO m Kent S.E 192nd SL • 13 S.198 � Office Kin a Z m �R 1 rt-�ea� C as — ` S.E.200 9L" Multifamily Residential King County L_J Single-Family Residential 5 rn SL y i. SL IndustriaUManufacturing — Of Commercial S.212 St. S.212 St q 1 m Public Use " Agriculture —— Study Area Boundary Renton City Llmits Generalized Zoning Designations in Study Area Preliminary DEIS p1j. -3.? ,2 DPAF-r Printed 10/21/96 S Y • pAli� lip� 1: AlU coca„►w. e: Benaroya'7. �' : a ' ia Q s prop Pt yc+Y • r'r' lo '770CSTC elig sites 4: R+ � oposed a ; , i Winmar 6ngacres �s Office Park 'SIN 23rd St-' Lit"t �� •..-+---lip Y.� '.m ! �".'a"" Ai"'. Rt ����.�. vim::-,�...—,�,.4•�.,.,,.,,,y.. ��+�`_ �; �St Cm m HS. t go i CM , r Q ' 0 200'400 800 FBet t•� ABNmlplO0gro 9 :84: ' / Ad 3.7-6 City of Renton Land and Shoreline Use Oakesdale Avenue S.W. r o� Seattle *� 4 40 —� ' Lake Washington /a�1r/S/7 vi r r r"'r ♦ 1:t. �w a,. �.,, dy ss qq�� r N ..•pa..c ..`',�' ik.� .';• to soel P.cc .frl qy S.sangw St.� a%y' .' _•-7. IV Ira > s 9�a fn N m s • Z � $ 4 Z King qe < Renton to 90 y County R Z m '"�•• S N.Airport Way w.y S.3rtf St. S.144 SL D'S 91 O a• a ��a1e,9 S.W.7th SL n N °sue S,rt Gtas'I W aY Tukwila Sn CO S.W.ism SL '0 ,-D �•� `r7B ',q �D�n (P S.160 St. D to 1 M. v7 < S.23rd St Y m m' 3 S.170 St °/ a 1 D 2 9 m $ S.W.34th SL m n 1 D S.178 SL S.1j m w S.E.Pet—tsky Ad. @� 4 3.180 St S.W. S E G0 1 t N.E 180 S.1880,St g � i < 7 S.192 SL S.E Igo SL y H _ Kent 1 92nd St. ym S.1ges m K o King 3a < County .S E _ a ^ - S.E 200 St 1 m g King County O to - .. Zpe SL Do — Legend 77 2 SL s.212 SL + D Illy C�ri.o N N m Multifamily Residential 0 Single-Family Residential Industrial ® Commercial 0 Public/Quasi-Public/RecreatiorVGreenbeft ® Agriculture ——— Study Area Boundary Generalized Comprehensive Plan Designations 1A Pbv LAAo t)5E Preliminary DEIS 1�CIM" A-PO Q fdl� Printed 10/21/96 r 15 Nor /d a,6,61 ED •,- �E 3.7-7 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Land and Shoreline Use with an area of resource conservation land east of Oakesdale Avenue SW between SW 34th and 41st Streets. King County: the unincorporated are between Renton and Martin Luther King Way, along 68th Avenue S is zoned for single family residential use. City of Tukwila: The area west of the West Valley Highway (SR 181) is zoned mainly for light industry and regional retail zones. City of Kent: The land south of the study area is zoned for general commercial and industrial uses including industrial park, limited industrial, and general industrial districts. Table 3.7-1 Study Area Land Use Zoning Zoning Jurisidiction Designation Description King County R-24 Residential, 24 DU per acre O Office I Industrial Renton RC Resource Conservation RM-1 Residential Multi-Family Infill CA Commercial Arterial CO Commercial Office IH Industrial -Heavy IM Industrial - Medium IL Industrial - Light P-1 Public Use Tukwila R-A Agricultural C-2 Regional Retail M1 Light Industry Kent RA Residential Agricultural GC General Commercial M1 Industrial Park District M2 Limited Industrial District M3 General Industrial District Sources: Cities of Renton,Tukwila,and Kent Zoning Maps. King County Zoning Atlas (1995)HNTB,July 1995 Shoreline Master Program Under the Washington State Shoreline Management Act (1971), local governments have the primary responsibility for initiating the planning program and implementing its policies. Local governments must develop shoreline management plans and the required permits for all substantial developments proposed within shoreline jurisdictions. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/21/96 3.7-8 City of Renton Land and Shoreline Use Oakesdale Avenue S.W. The City of Renton adopted a Shoreline Management Program in 1983 which was later revised July 1985 and July 1990, and amended in 1993. Through this program, the City provides planning for and fosters all reasonable and appropriate uses to ensure that land developments promote and enhance the general public's best interests. Under the recent amendments to this Shoreline Management Program, the City has defined jurisdictional shoreline limits on Springbrook Creek from SW 43rd Street to the confluence with the Black River. These limits incorporate the full length of the proposed Oakesdale Avenue SW improvements. The shoreline potentially affected by the proposed action is designated as an Urban Environment e*sept-in the deTignftted wet lm swhiclrare-ctasstfietl a 12unse N-mcy Enuiraument. ma fo eliScr,ss �e%tic �csi�ry<.hon o�iSClepa�c ,. 3.7.3 Impacts 5c 4/5-0 Sr-Aw 'i, 3.i.G 3.7.3.1 Impacts of Construction Alternatives A and C Action alternatives were developed in conformance with the adopted land use and zoning plans of the City of Renton. The Oakesdale Avenue SW link between SW 16th Street and SW 27th Street (Phase 1) is in the 2010 Arterial Plan of the Transportation Element. All 2010 arterial improvements contained in the Arterial Plan are the arterial/freeway mitigation for the Land Use Element of the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. Along with the 2010 Transit Plan and HOV improvements, these arterial projects provide a transportation system that meets the City's 2010 level of service standard and will be concurrent with projected land use development. Further discussion of planned transportation improvements is provided in section 3.9 of this EIS. Construction of Phase 1 is contained in the City of Renton six-year facilities plan as Transportation Improvement Project No. 15, and currently budgeted at $6,577,000 of the $60 million six-year plan. The Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan provides discussion of the revenue sources that will fund the six-year plan projects. resiot-44rot The project will convert land to transportation right of way use, including area requiredA stormwater treatment and detention. Land acquired for wetland impact mitigation, either by enhaneeneat of an existing wetland or construction of new wetlands is anticipated to remain in existing open-space use— there is no anticipated acquisition of developed property for �tia�d mitigation purposes. Since the m 04 al e right-of-way acquisitions are undeveloped lands, there would be displacement of existing businesses. Table 3.7-2 shows estimated land acquisition from the Boeing Company, Benaroya Company, a. e f)4h4Lf--V.,9 k,S V ar 4gampany, and the use of City-owned property. This acquisition would impact these properties by reducing the developable area. Most of this acquisition would benefit these properties throughy h��r improved access. The Benaroya Company has building permits for the City of Renton for construction of office/warehouse builds on their site south of SW 16th Street and east of Springbrook Creek. Alternative ? A could be constructed without disturbing the proposed Benaroya project but Alternative C would Al require acquisition and removal of some of the proposed development. Vacant developable property adjacent to the Oakesdale Avenue SW alternatives would be providing the access required for property development. North of SW 27th Street, either of the two alternatives would provide direct access to the proposed Longacres Office Park. The Alternative A alignment would require 1.5 acres of right-of-way from the existing Boeing Customer Service Training Center. This property is in use as a drainage treatment and detention facility, and as wetland loss mitigation. Section 3.4 describes project effects on surface water and Section 3.5 describe project effects on wetlands. These action alternatives would allow the planned development office park and industrial land by provide direct local access and connections to other arterials and the regional freeway system. Phase l construction of either Alternative A or C between SW 16th and 27th Streets would cross "Urban Environment" and'S� nt" City of Renton Shoreline Master Program designation of Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/21/96 3.7-9 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Land and Shoreline Use Springbrook Creek at the north bridge crossing. In addition, Alternative C would cross a small shoreline ti area on a drainage channel on the Winmar property west of Springbrook Creek. Phase 2 construction of Alternative A and C would affect an "Urban Environment" designated area on the existing access road oN *h�S between SW 27th Street and Oakesdale Avenue SW on Boeing Company property and "Conservancy Environment" area in City-owned property immediately to the east. Construction within the designated '°'9�A�°�` • . shoreline of Spring Brook Creek and associated wetlands would require a substantial development permit 14-, des, issued by the City. /4 h ei e Table 3.7-2 Right-of-Way Requirements(Acres) Existing Owner Land Use Zoned Land Use Alternative A Alternative C Phase 1 I Benaroya Company vacant commercial office (OC) 0.5 1.8 Boeing CSTC office commercial office (OC) 1.5 0.8 to �' 0,1,9Eant light industrial (IL) 0.0 0.8 Boeing (Longacres vacant commercial office (OC) 3.6 2.3 Office Park) City of Renton vacant heavy industrial (IH) 3.9 4.4 Subtotal 9.5 10.1 Phase 2 Boeing (Longacres vacant commercial office (OC) 0.0 0.0 Office Park) City of Renton vacant resource conservation (RC) 2.4 2.4 Subtotal 2.4 2.4 Both Phases 11.9 12.5 Note: Right-of-way requirements are estimates based on preliminary design of roadways,structures,and stormwater facilities. Drainage and slope easements,and off-site requirements for wetland mitigation are not included in the these totals. No Action There would not be any direct construction impacts. Indirect impacts may result from private property owners requirements to provide private road access and circulation to compensate for the lack of an Oakesdale Avenue SW project, or to scale back development plans to levels that could be accommodated without the project and in compliance with Renton's plans and policies. 3.7.3.2 Impacts of Operation Alternatives A and C Either of the two action alternatives would provide local access to properties abutting and in the vicinity of the road, and increased circulation in the western portion of the Renton Valley. The local access provided by the facility would be required for planned development of the Lonagacres Office Park. There is no significant difference in local access function between the two location alternatives. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/21/96 3.7-10 City of Renton Land and Shoreline Use Oakesdale Avenue S.W. With the project, the accessibility and travel times to the adjacent developed and undeveloped parcels would be improved. The proposed project would allow development to occur at a higher level on the Lonagacres Office Park site (proposed for 10,000 employees at full development) than would likely be able to occur without it. This development would result in increase transportation and services demands on region. Daily traffic volumes would increase about 13 and 30 percent on Oakesdale Avenue north of Grady way for the Phase 1 and 2 construction, respectively. Through the adoption of comprehensive plans and zoning regulations that meet the requirements of the Growth Management Act, the affected jurisdictions would implement mitigation for potential induced growth impacts and the protection of sensitive areas such as wetlands Consistency with Plans,Policies, and Regulations The proposed Oakesdale Avenue SW connection has been a planned transportation improvement in the Renton Valley for more than fifteen years and is listed as one of the arterial improvements in Transportation Element of the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan (1995). The project is also recognized in the current King County transportation plan. This arterial improvement would be one of the mitigation measures for the land use and future developments in the study area. This project is consistent with City of Renton wetlands management policies. Mitigation would be required for filled or disturbed wetlands and the requirements would be determined during the permitting process. 3.7.3.3 No Action Under the No Action Alternative, the proposed Oakesdale Avenue SW would not be constructed. Development of commercial land west of Springbrook Creek between SW 16th and 31st Streets would require connections to existing arterials such as SW 16th Street to the north and Longacres Way to the west. The Boeing Longacres Office Park proposal for a 164-acre office park serving 10,000 employees at full development assumed construction of Oakesdale Avenue SW as an element of site access requirements. Under the No Action Alternative, road connections providing the same or similar access opportunities would be required to allow the Longacres Office Park development to proceed. The No Action alternative assumes that the _.Lop,.$.aacres Office Park trips would be connected through internal circulation roadways to SW 161 Sfree SSW 27th Street, and Longacres Way (South 158th r-r.JLA e h Street). Existing access points north an&'sit C$,W 16th Street and SW 27th Street) would provide significantly lower capacity connections to the adjacent transportation system. Possibly, connections through SW 27th Street would be developed as the pni ry access to adjacent transportation facilities Viand services. Land use in the area is predominantly ercial, light industrial, and transportation 1!S AI o` w �Jright-of-way (railroads, I-405 freeway, state highway, and local roads. � �4w�� �J Intersections are likely to operate poorly due to limited access`the adjacent roadways..-'Without theiSrlrs, `r oject, property between Spring_bf6ok C"feek aii the Longacres Office Park would be landlocked and (A J could not be developed unless other public access were provided, or an access easement was provided , throu h Boeing Company property_ ther pa�� rcers along tTie proposed Oakesdale right-of-way are either u*dgtt gmWe wetlands, or would access SW 27th Street or the existing segments of Oakesdale Avenue. fr)v6t,�e This ;in it -access-tb-the-- facili e_sacould result in congestion and adversely affect perceived &td , suitability for developme r land uses that depend on peak hour access to the site. Development sitesi1t could defer to alte7,a'e locations or be delayed until the congestion on the adjacent streets can be mitigated. Since t action alternative is an element of the current City of Renton Transportation Plan, this 540-1 the magnitude of Action impacts has not been studied or quantified. 4-¢eJS The City of Renton Land Use Element policies are to encourage development of offices and/or similar 0�051U,i light industri• uses for the site west of the proposed corridor. The No Action Alternative would impede OJ 1410L4+ �hR �ra� 2? � �nU�S� �(a�/C or 0)kev S�/F /f P Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/21/96 3.7-11 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Land and Shoreline Use the development of the Boeing Longacres Office Park and would result in site developments that compromise surrounding land uses in the long term. 3.7.4 Mitigation Measures Construction activities would be coordinated with adjacent property owners to develop construction sequences to minimize impacts on business operations. Street or lane closures and detours would be limited to locations where the corridor coincides with existing circulation roadways associated with the Boeing CSTC. Construction in shoreline areas will require a substantial development permit from the City of Renton. 3.7.5 Impact Summary Significant impacts, mitigation measures and significant unavoidable adverse impacts on land and shoreline uses are summarized in Table 3.7-3. Table 3.7-3 Summary of Significant Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts for Land and Shoreline Use Significant Unavoidable Significant Impacts Mitigation Measures Adverse Impacts Alternatives A and C Project will require roadway and bridge Prepare a substantial develop permit for None construction in shoreline construction(R) shoreline environments Potential short term construction impact Coordinate construction activities to None on adjacent properties minimize impacts on adjacent businesses No Action None None Non 3.7.6 References Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. 1994. Draft environmental impact statement for Longacres Office Park Boeing Commercial Airplane Group. Bellevue, WA. Prepared for City of Renton, Renton, WA. Kent, City of. April 1995. Comprehensive Plan. Kent, City of. April 1995. Draft environmental impact statement for South 196/200th Street, Orillia Road to 84th Avenue South. City of Kent, Department of Public Works. Renton, City of. Shorelines Master Program, 1983, revised 1985 and 1990. Renton, City of. Shorelines Master Program Amendments, 1993. Renton, City of. Shoreline Master Program, Springbrook Creek Shoreline Boundary Map,January 1994. Renton, City of. Comprehensive Plan, February 1995. Renton, City of. Zoning Map, February 1995. Tukwila, City of. April 1995. Draft Comprehensive Plan. Tukwila, City of. December 1994. Zoning Map. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/21/96 3.7-12 City of Renton Land and Shoreline Use Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Preliminary DEIS Printed 10/21/96 r 3.8-1 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Social Elements 3.8 Social Elements 3.8.1 Introduction The evaluation of social elements consists of neighborhood characteristics, regional and community growth, public services, and utilities. Information used for this evaluation was obtained through telephone interviews with several government agencies, private utilities and other organizations, and review of reports, maps, and aerial photos. 3.8.2 Affected Environment 3.8.2.1 Neighborhood Characteristics The project study area is characterized by office park and light industrial uses. With the exception of the area between SW 16th Street and SW 19th Street which has active office use, land abutting the ppop;&d Oakesdale Avenue SW corridor is vacant. See Section 3.7 for more detailed descriptions of existing and Tanned land use and zoning. P�?Se�.'r 1• p pt n,.. -c2p(IIIc {vr Ll ct AGcEs 2 vGd a� !' °� r o�te,k.l� "There is no residenr�az" it the immediate vicinity of the project area. The close residential ig or oods are the -unineerporated King County-gkiywce afea north of the ril project vicinity, and areas in Tukwila;west of Interurban Avenue and Wort I-405� ��•*� }'-c 1yt'b4- H4I ( s1ai Kn .ie.,.e o,��xa�(tf 1G�e f.i � 3.8 t .2.2 Regional and Community Growth t�� w�M jq�� N etc vf6=, � tot Population trends for Kin , Kitsap P1'erce and Snohomis Cou es and the four incorporated cities_in �r- W o ►ti •re rr� �� ng ounty thus �y area or the p�no2of 900 to 1995 are shown in Table 3.8-1. king County accoutiYs't'o a out . percent of the region's population, and grew at an average annual w4L'o's. rate of 1.4 percent. Among the region's four counties, the Snohomish County population grew at the fastest average annual rate — six percent — between 1990 and 1995. Kitsap and Pierce Countie populations grew at an average annual rates of 3.1 percent and 2.4 percent, respectively. Table 3.8-1 Study Area 1990 to 1995 Population 1990 1995 1990-1995 1990-1995 1990-1995 Jurisdiction Population Population Change % Change Annual Growth King County 1,507,305 1,613,600 106,295 7.1 1.4% Kent 37,960 44,620 6,660 17.5 3.3% Renton 41,888 44,890 3,002 7.2 1.4% Seattle 516,259 532,000 15,741 3.0 0.6% Tukwila 11,874 14,750 2,876 24.2 4.4% Kitsap County 189,731 220,600 30,869 16.3 3.1% Pierce County 586,203 660,900 74,697 12.7 2.4% Snohomish Co. 468,623 628,600 159,977 34.1 6.0% Source: Washington Office of Financial Management, Forecasting Division 1995. The project corridor study area is within Census Tract 259. Census Tract 259 is bounded approximately on the west by SR 181, on the east by SR 167, on the south by SW 43rd Street, and on the north by the Renton City limits. Table 3.8-2 shows estimated total housing units and population in housing units for Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/11/96 City of Renton lements Oakesdale Avenue S.W. i Census Tract 259 from 1992 to 1994. These units are-located in the northern onion of the_Census Tract: (see Section 3.7 for study area land use and zoning des ns . Table 3.8-2 Census Tract 259 Housing Units and Population, 1992-1994 ` 1992 1993 1994 Total Housing Units 130 126 124 Total Population in 200 197 191 Housing Units Sources: Puget Sound Regional Council, 1995 3.8.2.3 Public Services Ct� UKIUCVSt'►}r Sa11'e(�[' C. '1crtl'�/ is `��-wfr..l Educational Facilities 't"t{' ` �'` �ch Sw 6 r=��k,�/ No educational facilities are located in the immediateproject sJd area. The Renton School District's icy' High School is located on S 132nd StAt""''A?V1&oftthe rro`rec/t vicinity in unincorporated Kin R[ �_ g e� project Y rP g Count Renton School District buses occasionally use 68th Avenue S/Monster Road south of Martin k, uther King Junior Way (Deems, 1995 personal communication). . / t , tf'�, '`. SR 900) ��wt�J`'/�Kic�all 5�.LO( ' /ec lam(. rG,y Fare Protection and Emergency Medical Services sfi.ty 0 ^ a � J4.y( 'C jtLy 4— � r, VtG{.tw -- l f The proposed corridor is inside the City of Renton and under the jurisdiction of the City of Renton Fire <; 4 Department. The Renton Fire Department provides fire suppression, prevention, and emergency medical response services within the project study area. i Currently (1995), there are three fire stations within Renton with a total of 24 firefighters on duty. Station 11 is the main fire station and is located on Mill Avenue S across from Renton City Hall. This station serves the central part of the city. Station 12 is located on NE 9th Street in the Renton Highlands and serves the north and east portions of the city. Station 13 is located on Benson Road S near the Valley Medical Center in the Talbot Hill area and serves the south portion of the city. In addition to the three City of Renton fire stations, King County Fire District 25 Stations 16 and 17 also operate as part of the Renton fire protection system, serving the east portion of the city as well as portions of King County (Matthew, personal communication). Stations 11 and 13 are located closest to the Renton Valley (project site) and respond to calls generated within the project area. Presently, the Renton Fire Department response time to the project site and vicinity is approximately five to seven minutes (Matthew, 1995 personal communication). Renton's standard for response time to fire calls is five minutes or less. The response time is crucial for level of service because there is a direct relationship between how long a fire burns and the temperatures created by the fire. The response time standard for fire calls was established in the Renton Fire Department Master Plan (1987). Presently, Stations 11 and 12 are working at response call capacity and Station 13 is within the limits of its capacity (Matthew, 1995 personal communication). A new station is needed to respond to additional calls for service generated from new development in the Renton Valley and to improve the current substandard response times to the valley floor. There are two new fire stations and one fire station relocation planned in the next five years. Station 14 will be located in Renton Valley (project area), on the corner of SW 19th Street and Lind Avenue SW. This new fire station is scheduled to open in 1997. Another proposed station will be located in the Kennydale area and Station 12 will be relocated Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/11/96 3.8-3 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Social Elements westward from its current location to better serve the east Highlands and Sierra Heights (Matthew, 1995 personal communication). Total calls for service from 1992 toj1�94, broken down in fire and basic life support (BLS) categories, are shown in Table 3.8-3. In 1992, the Renton Fire Department responded to 5,552 calls for service. By i 1994, total service calls had increased to 7,275. The total annual growth rate of calls is about 14.5 percent with fire calls at 10.3 percent and BLS calls at 16.3 percent. Table 3.8-3 Renton Fire Department ��p ment Service Calls, 1992;1994 1992-1994 1992-1994 Type of Calls 1992 1993 1994 Change Annual Growth ' r Fire 1,747 2,185 2,125 21.6 10.3 Basic Life Support 3,805 4,778 5,150 35.3 16.3 Total 5,552 6,963 7,275 31.0 14.5 Source: City of Renton Fire Department The Valley Communications Center (Valley Com) located in Kent operates a "911" dispatching service for cities of Renton,Auburn, Kent, Tukwila, Pacific, and Algona, as well as several fire districts in south King County. Valley Com is a municipal corporation effort by a joint venture of the area cities that provides centralized dispatching of police and fire calls for the area cities (Matthew, 1995 personal communication). The City of Renton has mutual aid agreements with the Cities of Tukwila and Kent. Under these agreements, the Renton Fire Department can request additional response from the Tukwila and Kent Fire Departments through Valley Co m isppajchese King County Emerge y e tca Service (KCEMS) provides Advanced Life Support (ALS) services to the City of Renton. South King County is divided into two paramedic service areas, Westside and Eastside. The proJFir tudy area is within the South King County Eastside paramedic service area, which includes TukwilaDistrict 20, Renton, Fire District 40, Kent, Fire District 43, Auburn, Pacific, and Fire District 44. area is dispatched by Valley Com with exception of Fire District 44. The area is served for primary paramedic response by King County Medic One (Medic Units 5, 6 and 11). Westside area are dispatched by South County Communications Center. This area is served for primary paramedic response .nyyg County Medic One (Medic Units 4 and 8). ALS services are life support procedures, including defibrillation, emergency medications, and intubation. ALS are administered to the patient that have been stabilized by the Basic Life Support and typically arrive on the scene within eight to ten minutes after dispatch. About 25 to 30 percent of all calls for medical aid require ALS procedures and KCEMS response. The closest paramedic unit (Medic Unit 5) to the project at�ed at Valley Medical Center which is located at 400 S 43rd Street, approximately two miles f� the project site. Other paramedic units are stationed in Auburn, Kent, Highline, and Federal Way. The paramedic average response time to the project vicinity is approximately five to seven minutes (Hearne, 1995 personal communication). The standard for overall paramedic unit response time should average ten minutes or less. Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/11/96 City of Renton Social Elements Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Law Enforcement City of Renton Police Department provides law enforcement and traffic safety service to the project area. The police department has a total of 80 officers, 30 noncommissioned personnel (administrative staff,jail sergeants, parking patrol, etc.), and 32 volunteers. Based on Renton's 1995 population of 44,890, the current level of service of police department employees to population is 3.2 employees per 1,000 residents. The current level of service for officers is 1.8 officers per 1,000 residents. The number of officers is considered sufficient to meet the current demand for service; however, more police officers are needed to serve the increasing number of calls for service generated from city-wide growth (Bryant, 1995 personal comet nication). c a Its In C994,he Renton Police Department responded to 44,451 al for service which represent a 2.2 percent increase from 1992. Table 3.8-4 show the total number of Police Department calls for service from 1992 to 1994. The Renton Police Department average emergency response times are 3.4 minutes for 1995 and 3.5 minutes for 1994. The response time for non-priority calls averages about ten minutes. Although there is no minimum response time standard for police, the current average response times for calls in Renton are consider good (Bryant, 1995 personal communication). Table 3.8-4 City of Renton Police Department Calls for Service E 1992-1994 Annual 1992 1993 1994 Change(%) Change (5) 43,508 42,568 44,451 2.2 1.1 Source: City of Renton Police Department,1995 The street patrol officers are divided into two twelve-hour shifts, starting at 5:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. There is an overlap shift from 11:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. that covers the prime time of the day (Bryant, 1995 personal communication). There are six patrol districts within the City of Renton. District 1, which includes the project vicinity, incorporates the southwest portion of Renton, the Renton Shopping Center, the areas west of Talbot Road, and east of the west city limit. The department has one officer assigned to patrol the area of District 1. District 1 has the lowest number of calls for service among the six districts. This district consists mostly of commercial development, business parks, retail, and manufacturing. The Police Department, like the Fire Department, has mutual aid agreements with the Cities of Tukwila and Kent. Additional assistance will be provided by these cities' police departments if requested. The number of mutual aid requests is low and does not significantly affect the Police Department's level of service (Bryant, 1995 personal communication). 3.8.2.4 Utilities The utilities are based on those described in the Longacres Office Park Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Jones & Stokes Associates 1994), various design drawings provided by the City, and field surveys conducted in February and March, 1995. Only utilities crossings that could conflict with proposed project are described in this section. a r 4 Storm Sewer Z r.0 1�1'r ' r`� "P r`Gt r I k- `4c �* 44 There are>!(eeexistin& storm sewer systems that influence the project area (Figure 3.8-1). An existing 48-inch culvert connects the City of Renton-wetlands south of SW 27th Street (Shapiro and Associates, 1993 and 1995). The Boeing Company Longacres Office Park site includes drainage features that Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/11/96 (I"- L'41 3.8-5 Draft Environmental Impact Statemen Social Elements '�_~'.Fdire 5 G'i'+^''T.a...M f�4.G- �:•,;k�'°r- i�ai at r��d:'�"'''_b'�r.rt d-.wC ,-convey runoff in an easterly ion toward Springbrook Creek. These systems include 12-inch pipe /j ., Q, he former practice race track, and a 48-inch culvert erwcr 200 feet north of SW 19th Street. Th s culvert includes a control structure for Boeing CSTC wetland/dete�''ntron pon System * •wC�ly►n�s�re.�-s ' City of Renton storm sewer systems are located at SW 31st Street (existing Oakesdale Avenue SW cul- de-sac), at SW 27th Street, and at SW 16th Street where the system outfalls into Springbrook Creek from the east. Sanitary Sewer "01 A-j' --'t' X- �of�vL401, Metro has recently (1994) constructed a 108-inch d meter reliever trunk that parallels a 72-inch diameter trunk in the proposed Oakesdale Avenue SW r44-e k_ar orL b (Figure 3.8-2). Domestic Water Supply / d ?, !cl Y r` F� s y s 1 k C : vJ t�1(.,=4 t°►'��atc� l�G m� s-wt / p � There are two water supply features in the Oakesdale Avenue SW com or (1-/gure 3.i�-3). A Ci o Renton municipal 12-inch line failaws-jthec-H& from SW 27th Street to SW 16th Street. This 7�, � system includes fire hydrants and sere g c `SS djacent properties. The City of Seattle Water z r^Q�r;•L' Department maintains the 60-inch Cedar River Pipeline (No. 4) crossing the Oakesdale Avenue SW 1�'� `i f corridor south of the former practice race track. This water line is located in a 30-foot wide right-of-way � '� owned by the City of Seattle. Q,; ;� .;_} � ,; T�v Z��4 Power tyre �opo4 e Puget Power several lines in the project area (Figure 3.8-4). One 115 kilovolt (kV) line runs the length of the 4akesdale Avenue SW corridor and three lines cross it. One of these crosses with the Seattle Water Department 60-inch Cedar River water pipeline. The dtFier_woline3-cross, in the vicinity of the Washington Thoroughbred Breeders Association building north of SW 27th Street. S '` Lau 1 / Natural Gas and Fuel �,reV/iareteArmains ,e t ys Washington Natural Gas has_'_4fich buried in Oakesdale ven SW 27th Street, and SW 16th Street. Olympic e Line om any has a 12-inch diameter and 14-inch diameter buried fuel oil pipeline crossing the project corridor�iear the Seattle Water Department right of way,. Figure 3.8-5 locates these utilities. 3. fir';L,,v*6'�-r'J �° - t eta r.GG Sw &L 'tr, Telephone/Cable TV There are several abandoned or tempora lephone lirie� ong the proposed corridor, as well as an active buried line south of SW Street along the ast edge of Oakesdale Avenue SW. An underground cable TV line ses�the project corridor at the intersection with SW 16th Street. 3.8.3 Impacts w� 's //•,eS ��C ? .L w-'3V4 Ciwaic o� c. le 7-1/ 7v c cSle ? 3.8.3.1 No Action Alternative Art "ken, rare o C Neighborhood Characteristics The No Action Alternative would not have a direct effect on the residential area located south of Martin Luther King Jr. Way along 68th Avenue S (the continua i!5n of the Oakesdale Avenue SW corridor). __...._.._..._..__ z` 'rct:S :•ldc-a�r�;„ Gtaf kt.C.t,l�v:±.C..� N� Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/11/96 City of Renton Social Elements Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Regional and Communirowth Pr — � �r a�P f hout the constructiono1�Oakesdale Avenue S�, lessened property access could slow the rate of pment of vacant office and industrial land along the corridor. This could have an indirect effect on ; community growth, and a lesser effect on regional growth. Public Services Educational Facilities The No Action alternative would not affect educational facilities. Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services Under the No Action Alternative, the Renton Fire Department will have a new fire station located in the Renton Valley (project vicinity) to respond to calls for service from the area. But without construction of the new corridor connection, improved north-south public access through the west portion of the fire department service area would not be available. King County Emergency Medical Service (KCEMS) anticipate an increase in demand for ALS services in the south King County area including the Renton Valley. There is a plan for an additional full paramedic unit which will be stationed in north Kent to serve the Southeast King County area. This unit will be able to go into service before Fall 1996 (Hearne, 1995 personal communication). Without the proposed,ceiwido , the response time for emergency service to the project corridor could io&Fa se. Law Enforcement With the population of Renton projected to grow to over 4. ,000 by the yea 2001D the number of police department employees will have to increase to maintain the current level of service. It is also projected by the police department that with an increase in the general population would come an increase in the number of class 1, II, and III crimes and a related increase in the number of court cases and jail days and in the size of the average daily jail population. To maintain the current level of service for both the municipal court and the jail will require an increase in the staff at those facilities. �ah'f P"' ,.�!f:"iLdC y't? �°•o Cap!' i-e5- " o- off- curt ✓JVC- As more development occurs within th Rentoh Valley, there will be an .in ease m calls for service. Without the propose it the time for police emergency v e ieretr�e. Police patrols of the corridor will not be as efficient because of limited access to the office parks and industrial sites (no iew D„ through north-south roads west of Lind Avenue SW). Utilities There would be no direct effect on corridor utilities with the No Action Alternative. 3.8.3.2 Alternatives A and C Neighborhood Characteristics There is no impact to the community cohesion in the project vicinity witl�the proposednalternatives. The Phase 2 build alternatives would increase year 2010 daily traffic on Oakesdale Avenue SW north of SW Grady Way by about 15 percent compared to the No Action Alternative. Traffic on(68th Av� enue 9W, the residential arecould experience a similar increase. this amount ofincfe'a-5e—the--noise-i e) c a would,nott e detectab e� The Phase 1 build alternatives would increase traffic on Oakesdale r Avenue SW north of SW Grady Way by about one percent over the No Action Alternative. \\ 'Y�����1 l��P�N ,�� , '�• � ( ay- �-.....%.'.r %F i �-J���l 1�i✓N� i{��.1 ^'r`C Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/11/96 3.8-7 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Social Elements Regional nd Corf,Vnity Growth (� A.14-V,11461'" � p (� tf there will be no displacement ofn�taTnd;a�leq�!,Cthe r and us(binesses The proposed ,(Unde rridor connection would�alllow planned development of vaca corridor to occur. Public Services r ' Prr '"Z (G /r rdc!'wD�G`'p-,1e�"✓"" �Educational Facilities � sAC-- r� i � C� 4 �nderXth"e4luS�altemative, �..��a.the Renton School District's buses would not likely use the corridor as bus ���r��"�:*.ti ute because there is no residential community to serve in the project area. Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services _""',f , The Renton Fire Department will construct a new fire station in the Renton Valley to reduce the response time in calls for nrvice (elso discusse i No Action Alternative section) from the area. With the construction of t e new,corridor connection and the new fire station, the project area would be covered 'with response times as good as or better than the standards established by the City of Renton. CEMS anticipates an increase in demand for ALS services in Renton Valley. The planned additional { paramedic unit in north Kent to serve the South King County would have the new route available. nder the mutual aid agreements between City of Renton Fire Department and cities of Tukwila and Kent, the Renton Fire Department can request additional response from the Tukwila and Kent Fire Departments through Valley Com dispatchers. The emergency vehicles from both cities would utilize the proposed corridor to access to the site (Matthew, 1995 personal communication). Law Enforcement a r�2 D4 e?Sc��J As discussed and the No Action Alternative, with the substantial amount of development�ccurring within the Renton there will be increasing calls for police service. With theproposed``corridor g� P connection, the response time for police emergency would decrease in the corridor vicinity and patrols of t e area would be more efficient—more time patrolling properties and less time traveling between them. Utilities Storm Sewer vl w�zv 6e A- A-IleowAve5 Roadway and orm sewer construction would require adjustment of the Renton systems in SW 16th Street and in W 27th Street, and in D�akesdale Avenue SW south of SW 31st Street. Adjustment or relocation of drainage systems serving the Longacres Office Park property would also be required. The Alternative A crossing of Springbrook Creek on the Boeing CSTC property would require relocation o ,,,, $e!4* th drainage control struct re regulating the flow of storm water into Springbrook Creek. Sanitary Sewer s �Uolk PG�7�� pt?L-1e.( btvwlef/ Do ` Ki( "% - -_ «p"L`-;t v C CThe large Metro trunk sewers (72-inch and 108-inch)a enougho r on rc s wit oadway�1', / �» construction. SThere is a potential that new storm drain constructio may conflict with waterstops on the line use d.to interrupt the flow of groundwater through the gravel backfill. T.hA.�:�s��cces es to � jthe 72-inch and 108-inch lines tk" argil within the pml esed roadway and sidewalk construc ion �h,(yrd+d Phase 2 construction of the%bridge across the would be in close proximity to the exis ing 72-inch line. Consolidation ofymrarsh soils has t el to affect the sewer gradient. There are no other known potential conflicts with sanitary sewers 101 ;:, 1 � s c, f // ereA_Vt. rovill ccc�r Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/11✓/96�ro r.wd�L harm°^� s_.112 ar4A - I �_ tle kvc.3�-8— /1� 1n City of Renton ocial Elements 17 OaRgsdale Avenue S.W. Fill Water �� /aR w6tiZ ve f � A Z ? The Seattle Water Department 60-inch diam ive Pipeline would be located about four feet below the sub-base of the new Phase 1 roadwof enton new 12 h line is anticipated to be ���� saccommodated along tie,roadway corridor an an existing 12-in ine./arn�„� Power M -fug ems !,+ -f. �^' t. A r� 3F rt,;?"TC✓ Phase 1,construction would require relocation t Power 115 kV overhead lines for about 2,450%feet. ne 12 kVTe�would require adjupossible relocation of two anh tos and atransformer and p —;� --o < �'e:b[4/r ��'t �( �. iD �I �f��11V5 F 3.8.4 Mitigation �- Design of project storm drain facilities would be coordinated with the existing City of Renton systems and private systems. Alternative would rewire relocation of a drainage control structure on the Boein CSTC property.Q e& fu Ch�,f�-A 3• y !U. mo,e trn se sfin��+ �,p��v,l�,� �m t 4-OIAV� Yl Krg ����,,., b Geis -� The Oakesdale Avenue SW project would reset all affected accesses o the Metro 72-1 and 108-inch a �,.1- trunk sanitary sewers. Roadway storm sewers would be designed and built to avoid aff�ctee gro ter we,iC/5`>fo r2 f�1evv�a on�,,{{��he 108-i�.�.,,h��sewer. i�esi�rr-ef�badway fill and structures for Phase 2''sout`� of SW 27th ,Y- Street old onz�r'o�se"ttIement and other impacts that could affect the flow gradient or integrity of the ;i'tH 72-inch sewer. Special coordination and precautionary measures would be taken if pile driving is , ( allowed near the 72-inch sewer. Metro engineering staff would be included in the design process for the C-f.,dj eal" ,u-jt f�16 structure footings in the vicinity of this sewer. n I05rnrk actesSes- g�.. r� Overhead power would be adjusted or relocated in coordination with Puget Power and adjacent property i, e owners. = " ,r { Gt .'t c �4 pv l �3t 3.8.5 Impact Summary Significant social element impacts, mitigation measures and significant unavoidable adverse impacts are summarized in Table 3.8-5. Table 3.8-5 Social Elements-Summary of Significant Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Significant Unavoidable Significant Impacts Mitigation Measures Adverse Impacts A rnative�A eider T�Aa.fe,l fTJ�CaYWw O �I tnnle project would require Coordinate t6&ri-siaiaskthe rakwated None. relocation of overhead power power with Puget Power and affected tr��aa0gsmission lines. property owners(R). peke 4 would require Relocate drainage structure (R). relocation of the Boeing CSTC drainage system control structure. Phase 2 construction would Special coordination and precautionary None. place roadway fill and structure measures would be taken if pile driving close to an existing 72-inch is allowed near the 72-inch sewer. Metro Metro trunk sewer. engineering staff would be included in the design process for the structure _ footings in the vicinity of this sewer(R). No Action Alternative , �00 /t e- Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/11/96 3.8-9 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Social Elements Significant Unavoidable Significant Impacts Mitigation Measures Adverse Impacts None. None. None. (R) Required mitigation (0) Optional mitigation 3.8.6 References Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. 1994. Draft environmental impact statement for Longacres Office Park. Bellevue, WA. Prepared for Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, Renton, WA. Kent, City of. April 1995. Draft environmental impact statement for South 196/200th Street, Orillia Road to 84th Avenue South. City of Kent, Department of Public Works. King County Department of Public Health Emergency Medical Services Division. 1995. Emergency Medical Services Master Plan Update. Seattle, WA. J��' / /4n 6-e /s Renton, City of. November 1994. Draft Comprehensive Plan. Bryant, Penny. Crime prevention coordinator. City of Renton Police Department, Renton, WA. July 25, 1995 - telephone conversation. Hearne, Thomas. EMS planning and program development section manager. King County Emergency Medical Services, Seattle, WA. July 27, 1995 - telephone conversation. Lamphere, David. Washington State Office of Financial Management, Olympia, WA. July 24, 1995 - telephone conversation followed by facsimile of the information requested. Lin, Ta-Win. Puget Sound Regional Council, Seattle, WA. July 26, 1995 - telephone conversation followed by mailing of the information requested. Matthew, Jim. Deputy fire chief. City of Renton Fire Department, Renton, WA. July 25, 1995 - telephone conversation. Wright, Dolly. Receptionist. Group Health Corporation, Renton, WA. July 24, 1995 - telephone conversation. Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/15/96 I F • • 1 � � l I „ . r x zv vi►a�'e— r 2411:"RCP � Ben�aroy-a . proertyt r' - " •ram CSTC FT Constructed:VUetlan�. S.Wa 9thcS1 '* etention Ponds Cr t I � Winmar I ' m ' 1 N.12" CIVfr property .� • r ,_,y dot . •� u g i'proposed 36 CMP �SWf-1st st : :Longacres i .O 1 4Ty„'OfficePark <II.It' 24 RC,P .,�12" CMP -1 ........... O SW 23rd-Sig tTk444„__RCP u- k pAlllloa• r. t k. }+ _ .SW,,27th.St -' + is'. aaa•aaa•/t_1 a � r Q 24" CMP 48" CMP LEGEND' far O = O Drainage,Facilities H,_ 18" CMP CMP Corrugated MetaLPipe �111/ 12'� Out�et� RCP Reinforced Concrete Pipe a 5 lv, CLIIV t or,Pipe.... a - ...... ■• 'Drainage Ditch/Swale Cu + e � dam. Y N 0 ZO 0 $00 feet � t 1:cs " - D Aerial Photography 9-2t•94 _ t0 ,g u a.rrt � t � 1 1 � �,b. 'a� � .gyp. r s� ���•�,4r+=. ,�,o_....m•—.�.... =flay +e•+r �ci? 24 j LV R �"P �G.i Y�Y'f•rY��.��.t'' ,..�,.. ..'SSW�fitll..$t .�.., W, 0.10 ► s mt r : } 1 Benara(ra> = k oeu f y CSTC a t A^Esv NMI ti —S.W 1.9th-S.t qn • \ ,J' dl.P�p� \.` GY u7�� .Wismar. +rpr.. ..��y. .... .�..�..,,. 1; property _•'rlzg `.Proposed }a 1 -SW 2UVSt, 'Longacres i r li Ren ton'� L office Park 1 South Interceptor -4Metro RikWila _ � SW 23rd St-, k 1 � Interceptor�r�-�' " 11 Al llk 1 J i '! R 5q-' _74- ti 1 12" 1 1 1. LEGEND C Metro Sewer Line a iN with flow direction - - - - City of Renton Sewer with flow direction 0 200 400 800 feet ' Aerial Photography 9-21-94 •.•�..(O r ' • t , �'��''� r* •� 4 �`� as �e..i`"d � t ° ..� a: � t �� 1211 -r.: 6r'A'. r,asrrrrrr .z�a.. .u. SW=16th St", ?.} 1 .i" �^,�"ra,'.�'"f{ �;•` Q;'� $tt�nalo'yaR.' y ` BoelnJ + 41� r ' yr t-r _ CSTC � 11 ri. � ,a s' _SVJ 1.9th_St F property j:Proposed b SSW 21 st St 9 ,., . Lon acres ' City of $eattl@ Office Park Cedar River Pipehine N"o, 4 j. (30-Foot FeelO:wnership) W 23rd 8t 17 2^'"`"„•". `^.:Sam - Qss ^ter ...i' s'a srrr -+. t '}f—»� r ,> LEGEND rn Renton City Line a Seattle City Line p Fire Hydrant f Q.. , u 1 0 200 400 800 feet c 13 Y ma neaay N n t r .Q tttltttt. Aerial Photography 9-21$3 (O � '� �� ;lop ' SW 16thIt . *" �•I-f-ar711J,;;,; .,.a,�•n' ~ --- -f •t': P'SP+ a 4'i'• proPey v r ,Boein CSTC S 115kV Line ✓ tx t s Willmar, ? property -1 -'Proposed �, � SW 21stSt, .:.Longacres t; ' {'Office Park i i 'gam , •4 - . ._� �. '• SU'J 23rd Sf, PSP+L Leased 115kV Line` (Seattle City Light Owned. �. PSP+L Leased U 12kV Line Q. to LEGEND Power Line a 0 Primary Metering Point 0 2004 0 800 feet r Q ri Aerial Photography 9-21-04 (O / r Oat,4��� , s Gaay 9 .ma gton-Natur"Nowl� as. s m n� • 'e G Slfj--�fitfl a § Benxmya `�C'•d7 i �`x ...t ' . i T pro } Y .1"" _ «...: 3 y �� a t t'•�..fit_Y�,•,rid, ,�",�S"+i"t ♦lT' CSTC .—S.W:1.9th_St ` .. Winmau o ' € Nropety 'r i lProposed SSW 21st St t :Longacres >� , "Office Park SW23rt1St 01 - '" f - - - r. l:Petroleum Pipet�ie at 40 c g ' ` � _ .. `. .— �.. • r ._,ate v 4" Gas Main Washington.Natural Gas } a LEGEND. a Gas Lines 0 200 400 800 feet a r Aerial Photography 8-21-84 a0 4 .7 To: Sc jQ/� From: Abdoul Gaf - ) Sc. '7 (('.l Subject: Water Utility Review Comments of Draft EIS for Oakesdale Avenue SW. Please make the following revisions: Section 3-8-5 Water Supply The City of Renton provides domestic and fire protection water supply to the site and adjoining properties. The City of Renton has a 12-inch water line buried in Oakesdale Ave SW from SW 43rd Street to approximately 500 feet north of SW 31st Street. The 12-inch water line continues north from SW 27th Street to SW 16th Street through the Boeing/Longacres site. A 12-inch Renton water line is also present in SW 27th Street from Lind Avenue SW to approximately 500 feet west of Oakesdale Avenue SW. This system includes fire hydrants and service connections to adjacent properties. There is an existing standby water inter-tie between the City of Seattle 60-inch water line and the City of Renton 12-inch water line for emergency water supply. The City of Seattle Water Department owns, maintains and operates the 60-inch Cedar River Pipeline (No. 4) crossing the Oakesdale Avenue SW corridor south of the former practice track. The Seattle water line is located in a 30-foot wide right-of-way owned by the City of Seattle. 3.8.5 Impact Summary Table 3.8-5 Significant Impacts Mitigation Measures Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Alternatives A and C Alternative A would require the Relocate the existing 12-inch City None. relocation of the existing 12-inch of Renton waterline from SW 27th City of Renton waterline through Street to SW 16th Street and extend the new alignment of Oakesdale the existing 12-inch water line from Avenue SW to provide water SW 31st Street to SW 27th Street. service to adjoining properties from SW 27th Street to SW 16th Street. An extension of the existing 12- inch City of Renton water line would be required from the existing line north of SW 31st Street to SW 27th Street. Alternative C would require the Install a new 12-inch City of None. installation of a new 12-inch City Renton water line from SW 31st of Renton waterline from SW 31st Street to SW 16th Street. Street t SW 16th Street to provide water service to adjoining properties. oksdaleis 3.10-1 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Parks and Recreation 3.10 Parks and Recreation 3.10.1 Introduction Detailed parks and recreation facilities studies were carried out for the Longacres Office Park Draft Environmental Impact Statement, issued by the City of Renton in August 1994. The following discussion of affected environment is derived from that document, updated for 1996 conditions. The City of Renton is the primary provider of parks and recreation services for the Renton Parks and Recreation Planning Area. The Renton Parks and Recreation Planning Area is approximately 22 square miles. It includes the existing city limits of Renton (16.1 square miles) and areas within the influence of the City (Figure 3.10-1). The Renton Parks and Recreation Planning Area has 40 existing parks, open space areas, and specialized facilities totaling approximately 993 acres. (JC Draggoo & Associates 1992.) A summary of park and open space acreage within the planning area is shown in Table 3.10-1. The existing parks system includes traditional neighborhood parks, community parks, regional parks, linear parks, and open space. In addition, the parks system operates the Maplewood Golf Course, Renton Senior Center, Renton Community Center, and Carco Theater (JC Draggoo & Associates 1992). Figure 3.10-2, Southwest Planning Area, shows the existing and proposed parks, trails, open space, and recreation facilities in the vicinity of the project site. Table 3.10-1 lists the existing facilities within 1.5 miles of the project site. The existing population within the planning area is estimated to grow to 84,100 by the year 2000. This population estimate includes the City of Renton, population of 41,688, plus population estimates for outlying areas within the Renton Parks and Recreation Planning Area. JC Draggoo &Associates utilized data from the Puget Sound Regional Council and other sources to determine population estimates for the planning area. As of 1996, the Renton Parks and Recreation Planning Area has a total of XXX acres of park land and open space areas per 1,000 planning area residents; XX% of these lands is developed, and the remaining XX% is designated as open space or linear parks. The current City of Renton Comprehensive Park, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan was adopted on January 1993. The plan examines current and future recreation needs and service areas; inventoried the City's recreation facilities; made recommendations for upgrading park and recreation facilities and services in Renton; and established policies and directions for improving leisure services in Renton. The combined park land and open space standard established in the Comprehensive Park, Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan is 27.8 acres per 1,000 residents (JC Draggoo & Associates 1992). Based on this standard, the existing public facilities within the City of Renton are considered insufficient to meet present recreational demand. Specific recommendations for improving recreation opportunities in the Renton Valley (also known as the Green River Valley) include (JC Draggoo &Associates 1992): What 1 5 • a proposed 13 acre park anorail along Springbrook Creek • a proposed((ligBD trail pstem following the existing Cascade pipeline right-of-way ,4- - 0-,,!A , • a proposed 140-plus-acre wetland and passive recreation area W�P4c Is fti)s? Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/18/96 •. Affie ae�b NE 70.F' � •j i1�iY.�� IY'U ni r ON IR �s � '�'�.:•'; - .mow: :�'. � �,1 3.10-3 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Parks and Recreation Summary of Recommendations Existing Proposed Tyne Acres Sites Acres Sites Neighborhood 0.0 0 0.0 0 Community 0.0 0 0.0 0 Regional 0.0 0 0.0 0 Open Space 20.0 1 60.0 1 Linear 0.0 0 16.0 2 Specialized 0.0 0 30.0 1 41-bS. � 1 S • Project i •• .. 42-L t • Vicinity } TO 11 • • • ' S 43-L : 4-S • S T-22 i T-10 ;SOUTHWEST P f4 G AREA : t Figure 3.10-2 Southwest Planning Area Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/18/96 3.10-4 City of Renton Parks and Recreation Oakesdale Avenue S.W. • additional open space around the Black River Riparian Forest. Recreational facilities that are located within the project vicinity include: The Boeing Wetlands and Internal Trail System (private); Springbrook Creek Trail; the Renton Wetlands; and SW 16th Street bicycle lanes. Each is described below. Table 3.10-1 Existing Parks, Trails, Open Space, and Recreational Facilities within Walking Distance(approximately 1.5 miles)of the Project Site Site Size Facilities City of Renton T 7_12.­ r/4 1 Springbrook Creek Trail .5 ile major mixed use trail, wetlands Renton Wetlands 7 ygAr S�-E•n 145�cres open space wetlands Black Iver Fores �'p / 75 acres open space riparian forest, heron rookery,XJ,.� 114 A J �I.krev /.. r,,ter/-, Rentontommunity Crater 38,000 sf indoor activity facilities Cedar River Park 18.5 acre soccer and baseball field, picnic area, beach, swimming, river access, Carco Theatre Talbot Hill 2.5 acres open space, tennis courts, pickleball courts Lower Talbot Hill Park 4.5 acres open space wetlands and steep slopes Thomas Teasdale Park 10 acres multi-purpose field, basketball court, multi-use court Lake Street Park 0.3 acre open space wetlands and steep slopes Earlington Park 1.5 acres basketball court, playground, multi-use grass area, &k ,� and picnic area Si L'S yg' ac..c3 Q111'_ 5�sre1 wefl4_h- City of Tukwila Bicentennial Park 1.5 acres picnic area, log cabin, playground Christensen Greenbelt Park 10 acres mixed use trail Fort Dent Park 40 acres athletic fields, stadium, picnic area, playground Foster Golf Links 68 acres 18-hole golf course, pro-shop, restaurant Tukwila Park 7 acres picnic area, playground, tennis and basketball courts, view site gazebo Hazelnut Park 0.7 acre play area, picnic area, open space Crystal Springs Park 11 acres tennis courts, basketball courts, picnic area, restrooms City of Kent Springbrook Greenbelt s� 5 acres undeveloped open space Source: JC Draggoo&Associates 1992;City of Renton,Lonagacres Office Park DEIS, 1994. 3.10.2 Affected Environment The Boeing Complex Wetlands and Internal Trail System The wetland mitigation area at the Boeing Customer Service Training Center is comprised of gravel paths, wooden foot bridges, boardwalks, interpretive signage, and informal outdoor sitting areas. The Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/18/96 3.10-5 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Parks and Recreation wetland serves as a relief for employees from the work environment, as a place for noontime lunches, and a place for observing wildlife. The final installation of _. _P1_QW _.p.rpje,ct is still under�oin ?�`rOr b_ g�•Td�� construction. New native plantings are sttll in the mitia�hases of lanting. Interpretive displays provide . ter uF an educational forum about wetland environments. The area is crossed with wooden bridges which provide close wildlife observation. Two miles of bark and cinder-surfaced internal walking trail run throughout the wetland complex. This trail is integrated with the Springbrook Creek Trail (described below). Springbrook Creek Trail When the Springbrook Creek Trail is completed, it will be a 2.7 mile multi-purpose trail which will follow the course of Springbrook Creek from the Black River Riparian Forest, at the north end of Oakesdale Avenue SW, to SW 43rd Street. This trail is part of the City of Renton Comprehensive Park, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan. The developed portion of the Springbrook Creek Trail which crosses the project site was built by The Boeing Company. This 0.33 mile, 8-foot wide segment of pedestrian-only trail begins at the SW 16th Street-Oakesdale Avenue SW intersection and ends at approximately SW 19th Street. The trail alignment was developed to be integral with the Boeing raw Company internal trail system. C-�€ntly, from the end of.-.the developed..trail, users continue--on-tire 11* � ' „„A ew Thic r�irt rnact rontinnPS,� alnng__tjle.e�stM-�ge-�¢-th;e-$pejng �°� U,wl� nr rtv and Pnrjc nr �. nr� r lu s. �-L�th 4rraor .i,hirh ig tjl�crn�thern enL_of the._ . �TB w l / �V✓¢r r �1I4�6�-$}QC'"" s user-s--t --n_.pr-Q"ed-xo_.S�V�4�t;-turrring-east--to--the-start-ef..the_1-2-€oot wide multi-use-segment-ef �'"" PO QJ th"pringbrook Creek Trail. aHt d� n1Ai S��D� f/711/� P4JJ Renton Wetlands The City of Renton is in the process of acquiring several parcel n the valley wetlands south and east of]ti/ielY the future Boeing Company complex. T -cuffent arikffiftife acgUiisi ' 3s of these properties follows the 4caj+�,r<d recommendations set forth in the City's Compre ensive Park, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan. ��c t;or 4w�a Passive recreational opportunities exist for wetland and wildlife observation, viewpoints, and interpretive S� f trails. Currently, there are no active plans or fundi'n ,for development of these newly acquired parcels. A, fk4f- (.vrr/a Bicycle Lanes (or- P"� 2, Constructed by The Boeing Company as part of their development program for the Customer Service Training Center, the bicycle lanes along SW 16th Street are part of the City's trail master plan providing �„ � � the east-west connection to the City of Tukwila's Interurban Trail. /w,,1 H lufe 14;41 1-:211C c /C/n eS 3.10.3 Impacts i I/ �k ro,V41-u� . ym�4/,A,y 5-0 t6� 3.10.3.I Impacts of Construction 0.Ferr/ve +Z 4 Access to the Boeing Company wetlands and Springbrook Creek Trail would be closed to area users for the duration of construction of the road and bridge support between SW 16th and SW 19th Streets. No ordke connections would be available to trail users between SW 19th and SW 34th Streets due to the road construction. Those wishing to continue from SW 16th Street to the SW 34th Street trailhead would /i/,ef 46 have to travel along a detour route from the SW 16th Street bike lane to Lind Avenue SW and proceed w (LIB south to SW 34th Street. Should temporarily through access be constructed, construction activities, s (� noise, and dust would impair the recreational enjoyment of the area. Jm//QpkC5 J" Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/18/96 3.10-6 City of Renton Parks and Recreation Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Minimal impacts are expected for the existing bicycle lanes along SW l6th Street. Some short-term detouring around the construction of the new south approach roadway to the existing Oakesdale Avenue SW intersection with SW 16th Street would be required for either of the two alternative alignments. 3.10.3.2 Impacts of Operation Trails in the Boeing wetlands and along the Springbrook Creek Trail would pass under the constructed elevated roadway. This would reduce the amount of natural daylight to this portion of the trail and increase the noise level along Springbrook Creek Trail while traveling underneath the roadway. Vehicle travel on the Oakesdale Avenue SW roadway would increase noise levels on those sections of the Springbrook Creek Trail that are presently located at a distance from heavily-traveled roadways. No major impacts are anticipated. Cumulative Impacts I/`/G °`bb t't' ^ G No impacts are anticipated. O' lk iu fd,r� q 0 3.10.4 Mitigation ��k �Gaa�� Detours would be/provided for the segment of the Springbrook Cre Trail temporarily closed for roadway and bridge construction in the SW 16th to SW 19th Street area. Signage and detours would be provided where construction activities in the vicinity of the SW 16th Street intersection with Oakesdale Avenue SW affect SW 16th Street bicycle lanes. Bicycle lanes and sidewalks are planned for the Oakesdale Avenue SW extension. North-south trail connections would be improved for both recreational trail users and area commuters. 3.10.5 Impact Summary Table 3.10-2 Parks and Recreation-Summary of Significant Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Significant Unavoidable Significant Impacts Mitigation Measures Adverse Impacts Alternatives A and C Closure of a section of the Provide detour route around None Springbrook Creek Trail construction area (R) µt-gt 51�? during roadway and bridge construction Increase in noise to sections None proposed or feasible. Noise increase. of Springbrook Creek trail adjacent to new roadway. No Action Alternative None None None (R) Required mitigation. (0) Optional mitigation. Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/18/96 3.10-7 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Parks and Recreation 3.10.6 References City of Renton, Comprehensive Park, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan; June 1992, JC Draggoo & Associates. Renton Boeing Complex DEIS, August 1994. Memorandum on the East Side Green River Watershed Plan - Alternative Analysis Impacts to Recreation, Glenn Kost to Scott Woodbury, March 1996. i Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/18/96 3.10-8 City of Renton Parks and Recreation Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/18/96 r-11r, AG 3.11-1 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Visual Resources 3.11 Visual Resources 3.11.1 Introduction This section describes conditions, impacts, and mitigation measures for visual resources on the Oakesdale Avenue SW expansion project site. 3.11.1.1 Approach A visual assessment of the project vicinity was conducted and included field inspections and examination of photographs, design profiles, and reference materials. The visual assessment considered visual impacts on views to and from the proposed Oakesdale Avenue SW project site with special consideration to: • views from businesses, residences, trails, and streams • visibility of businesses from the proposed roadway • motorists' views of the roadway • preservation of views across the valley A qualitative and quantitative analysis was undertaken using a matrix rating system which was derived using established visual criteria as stated in the FHWA Field Guide (1981). The rating analysis evaluated the visual quality of each alternative by identifying the environmental factors which influence the aesthetic and physical characteristics of the project vicinity. Views to and from the proposed roadway also were compared to determine the level of impact each alternative would have on views in the project vicinity. The proposed roadway was rated for vividness, intactness, and unity. 3.11.1.2 Visual Resources The inventory and analysis of visual resources is composed of the following components: • Visual quality is the evaluation of the degree of quality (i.e. high or low) of a visual resource based upon the following criteria: — Vividness includes those features in a landscape which create a distinctive visual impression by having a high degree of contrast in line, form, color, and texture. — Intactness considers the level of man-made development and degree of encroachment. This factor can be present in urban and rural landscape and natural settings. — Unity is the degree to which all elements in a landscape form a coherent, harmonious visual unit. Unity considers man-made unity as well as overall unity. • Visual character is the description of visual pattern elements and pattern character in a landscape, utilizing the following designated terminology: — Pattern elements are form, line, color, and texture. — Pattern character is dominance, scale, diversity, and continuity. Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/18/96 3.11-2 City of Renton Visual Resources Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Visual impacts are evaluated by describing the degree of change in visual quality and character based upon comparisons of existing visual resources with the appearance of visual resources after project implementation. In addition, six important view points were photographed for inclusion in this discussion (Figures 3.1 1.2 through 3.11.7). They are intended to provide the reader with an understanding of the existing visual environment. A key to these viewpoints is provided in Figure 3.11.1. 3.11.1.3 Viewer Response "The receptivity of different viewer groups to the visual environment and its elements is not equal. This variable receptivity is viewer sensitivity and is strongly related to visual preference." (Federal Highway Administration, 1981.) The evaluation of visual resources must include the degree of interest of the observers. The designated term for this concept is "viewer sensitivity," which is defined by the following criteria: • Viewer activity is the activity a person is engaged in while seeing a visual resource. • Viewer awareness is the degree to which a viewer's receptivity is heightened by the immediate experience of visual resource characteristics. • Viewer exposure is the physical location of the viewer in relation to the visual resource, the number of people observing the resource, and the duration of their view. • Local values and goals are the expectations which influence the way in which a visual resource is valued or appreciated. These may be expressed in local land use codes, or they may be common to viewers in a particular region due to popular expectation for visual resources, such as views of water or mountains. 3.11.2 Affected Environment 3.11.2.1 Viewers This section identifies locations from which the site can be seen and describes the degree of sensitivity of the viewers in these locations. Existing visual resources and resource change after project implementation would be analyzed from locations where sensitivity is anticipated to be highest, based on the visual resources criteria as previously described. The selected locations are shown on Figure 3.11.1 as photopoints. The Boeing Company (Customer Services Training Center) Viewers are employees and employees-in-training of The Boeing Company. This building is designed with large banks of windows which provide elevated views to the northern portion of the proposed project site. Viewer sensitivity is high since the project alignment is sited parallel to, and within 300 feet of, the building. Foreground views are of the restored wetlands adjacent to Springbrook Creek. Middle and distant views are comprised of open valley grasses, office and commercial buildings, the foothills of Renton and Kent, and Mount Rainier to the south. Existing deciduous trees screen portions of SW 16th Street. Newly planted evergreen trees in Boeing's parking area will provide year-round screening as the trees mature. Although viewer activity inside of the building does not directly focus on the view outside, viewer awareness and exposure to the new roadway would be high. Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/18/96 3.11-3 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Visual Resources t OHig hoot I'a•dc,triu+ I i orl Renton # I' High School ul _ _I S. NO �1 E ingto Lt�ttt��a► P than .i S. AO — r 1 pace : f<.. net ookery r ck J W 40 River �\ `( 1B ar — - 1A ke tr _ 2B P k Z 0 T ila - z Ir: �A 161 P - ��t. w IA er - 1 Park 515 To bot H•I II m R ervo' P rk 'o n elson ca w..-._ Ulemechool 1 r _ o y 1 alley Wetlands =� ¢ } - k 1 , t` valley Medical Center URR RD Orillia ttr=►r ■T■ ' TON CORP __BDY— Figure 3.11.1 Viewpoint Locations Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/19/96 3.11-4 City of Renton Visual Resources Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Springbrook Creek Trail and The Boeing Company Internal Trail System Viewers using the Springbrook Creek Trail and Boeing wetlands complex and internal trail system have high viewer sensitivity. Currently, views focus on the wetlands and the surrounding natural environment. The multi-floored Customer Services Training Center building adjoins the trail system. When mature, recent landscape plantings will provide a visual buffer between the training center building and the trail user. From the viewer's depressed position in relation to the surroundings, views are limited to the adjacent Boeing building, the immediate area's trees, some utility lines, and the distant hilltops. (See Photopoint 2.) West Valley Highway (State Route 181) Auto commuters are the primary viewer group which view the project site from this location. User sensitivity, awareness, and exposure is low since the site is primarily obscured by a diverse collection of commercial buildings and vegetation. From this location,the site is only seen in short glimpses. A secondary group of viewers are guests at the hotels along the highway. Views from the hotel rooms are a mix of parking areas, existing landscaped and native vegetation areas, railroad tracks, treetops, and the east hills beyond. Their views of the project site are limited to glimpses between the existing Boeing complex and vegetation. Viewer sensitivity would be low. Lind Avenue Southwest and the Valley Freeway (State Route 167) Daily commuters are primary viewers from this location. Lind Avenue and SR 167 Freeway are located along the valley floor and run parallel to the proposed Oakesdale Avenue SW. Viewer sensitivity from this location is low. The viewer position is on grade with the project site and views are primarily obscured by existing vegetation. Other viewers include employees of the office parks located along Lind Avenue. Most of the buildings in this location have large banks of windows which incorporate views across the Green River Valley floor. Existing vegetation, significant trees, and tops of buildings in the valley comprise the view with a backdrop of the west hills obscuring the site. The project site becomes more visible from upper floors of the buildings. Viewer awareness would be low to moderate in sensitivity. Eastbound Interstate 405 Viewer sensitivity from this location is moderate to high. Interstate 405 is a major transportation corridor providing a diverse user group direct freeway access to Renton and Bellevue, and connecting to Interstate 5 to the west and Interstate 90 to the east. Traffic speed limits on this elevated roadway reach sixty miles-per-hour, though peak traffic times frequently slow traffic considerably providing commuters with an ample opportunity to view the site. Views of natural landmarks, such as Mount Rainier, Green River Valley, and surrounding hills raises scenic value and provides visual focal points (Photopoint IA). Travelers are able to view the entire valley floor. The proposed highway would be seen as a continuous, dynamic view. The view duration in the direction of the project site would be relatively short due to the perpendicular alignment of the project, existing trees, and the area's diverse urban, commercial growth. (See Photopoint 1B.) Westbound Interstate 405 Viewer sensitivity at this location is low. Sightlines are limited due to the elevated position of the roadway and four lanes of eastbound traffic. Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/18/96 3.11-5 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Visual Resources Talbot Road South at South 23rd Street Viewer sensitivity is moderate to high at this location. The user groups are primarily area residents viewing from their homes in the Talbot Hill and Victoria Park communities, and commuters traveling on Talbot Road. The project site lies perpendicular to the viewers, and is intermittently obscured by existing natural vegetation and commercial development within the valley. Visual quality is relatively high where the natural landscape still dominates the view of the urbanized valley. (See Photopoint 3.) Southwest 16th Street Viewer sensitivity from this location is low to moderate. The user group is primarily commuters from the area's commercial businesses. The project alignment would replace the view of the riverine vegetation along Springbrook Creek. Viewer awareness would be low due to the traffic congestion and the need for commuters to focus their attention on their immediate surroundings. West of the existing Oakesdale Avenue SW intersection, views from SW 16th Street are totally obscured by the existing Boeing Company complex. Views from east of the intersection are a mix of vacant open land, the Springbrook Creek riparian corridor vegetation, and commercial buildings. Views from the intersection are blocked by existing trees in the riparian corridor. Pedestrians using SW 16th Street would have moderate to high viewer sensitivity. View duration and awareness is greatest from locations near and east of the Oakesdale Avenue SW intersection. Southwest 27th Street Viewer sensitivity from this location is low due to the flat valley floor. Both near and middleground views are blocked by the surrounding existing vegetation. Low bridging over sensitive areas may raise the roadway slightly thereby becoming somewhat visible. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad Views of the proposed roadway would be from the trains passing through the region between Seattle and destinations south. The primary user group is a mix of commuters, railway employees working on the trains, and travelers who are riding the train as part of their vacation trip. Viewer sensitivity would be low because of the short duration and diversity of the view experience. The highly urbanized commercial land use within the valley reduces the viewer awareness of the roadway. Earlington Avenue and Langston Road The Earlington community sits directly north of the project site above Martin Luther King Way facing south toward the Green River Valley. The residents have both open and channeled views of the valley and the project site depending upon the viewer position. Pedestrians and vehicle operators in the area have a channeled, but direct. view of the project site through the neighborhood trees. Viewer sensitivity is moderate to high from this location. The view duration is indeterminate for residents, and studying the views from their home may often be a primary activity. (See Photopoint 4.) Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/18/96 PHOTOPOINT IA View southwest toward project site through Boeing property .r• ; P • • , SouthView 1 just West of Oakes/ale SouthView 1 N�iIJP t x=' ti PHOTOPOINT 2 View North toward Wetland from Boeing driveway r' T �y View West toward Boeing Company Customer Service Training Center from Wetland Trail/Springbrook Creek Trail ' v: , f I �pl't 1 t(•'' �„ '-+►i iArii l ..f ;�e+•- 7 "•y '�; �7 ' ` a1 l�`'� �, j t•.. i Awv . t 1 11 ' 1 11 PHOTOPOINT 4 View south from Earlington Ave. SW and Langston Road Earlington Neighborhood 3. �z.� 3.11-11 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Visual Resources 3.11.2.2 Visual Resources Figures 3.11.2 through 3.11.7 (Photopoints IA, 1B, 2A, 2B, 3, and 4, respectively) are photographs of views of the proposed project site taken in September 1996. The following description of existing views is therefore based on conditions at the time of the photographs. Existing View: Photopoints lA and 1B Photopoints IA and 1B show the site of the proposed roadway alignment to be visible to travelers heading eastbound on I-405. The total view experience from 1-405 begins just west of the West Valley Highway as the freeway gradually elevates to provide open views of the flat valley floor. (See Photopoint IA.) The viewshed is comprised of the Boeing office buildings, the large expanse of remnant open space left by the vacated Longacres site, the railroad, overhead utility lines, and prominent tree masses. The r iddleground view is comprised of distant commercial buildings and tree tops. The distant hills in the background, with Mount Rainier dominating the view on a clear day, make up the background view. The rows of mature poplar trees which parallel the proposed alignment are a prominent feature. Visual quality is high with vividness, intactness, and unity all rating high due to the cohesiveness of the valley floor image with the vegetative landscape dominating the view. Photopoint 1B shows the existing Boeing building, the adjacent parking lot, and the nearby trees which line Springbrook Creek. Traffic on SW 16th Street is highly visible. Visual diversity is moderately high and continuity is low since a variety of elements of equal dominance are seen at once. Foreground elements consist of traffic along SW 16th Street, roadway utility poles, the Boeing building and its parking lot, and the Springbrook Creek vegetation. Middle and background elements which contribute to visual diversity include commercial and industrial buildings further along SW 16th, open parking lots, and vacant properties with native vegetation and grasses. Light and Glare. Existing light is limited to area street lighting, parking lot and building security lighting, and sign illumination. Glare is negligible. Existing View: Photopoints 2A and 2B Photopoint 2 is from the Boeing Engineered Wetland Trail and Springbrook Creek Trail systems located just south of the SW 16th Street - Oakesdale Avenue SW intersection. Views are comprised of native vegetation, landscaped greenery, and water. Prominent foreground elements include the existing Boeing building to the west and 1-405 to the north. The newly-planted vegetation in the constructed wetland, together with the existing riparian vegetation of native trees and shrubs, provide visual relief from the surrounding urban environment. Middleground views beyond the wetlands are limited to buildings and tree tops. The surrounding hills and Mount Rainier make up the distant background views. Visual quality is high with low diversity and strong viewer awareness of the site's environmental characteristics. Light and Glare. Existing light is limited to the parking area and building security lighting. At the north end of the project site, vehicles moving south on Oakesdale Avenue SW and turning onto SW 16th Street produce direct headlight illumination toward the trailhead creating glare for trail users and wildlife. Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/18/96 3.11-12 City of Renton Visual Resources Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Existing View: Photopoint 3 Photopoint 3 is from the west-facing residential communities located along Talbot Road in the Renton hills. General views toward the project site area are open and relatively undeveloped in character. The project site is visible along the open grass areas bordered with the prominent poplar trees. The western slopes provides a backdrop for the view. Visual quality is moderate to high with moderate intactness and high unity. Visual diversity is moderate with trees and vegetation screening much of the buildings and zn development in the valley. Light and Glare. Existing light is limited to distant security lighting of the commercial and industrial buildings located throughout the valley floor. Existing View: Photopoint 4 Photopoint 4 is from the south-facing residential neighborhood of Earlington located above Martin Luther King Way. Views from the intersection of Earlington Avenue and Langston Road are channeled directly toward the project site. The entire length of the project site is visible. Residents viewing from their homes would have greater exposure to the views from the upper floor windows. The narrow view creates low visual diversity. Unity and intactness are relatively high because of the natural vegetation within the view corridor. The view of the project site is located in the distant background. Therefore, the overall visual impact of the proposed project would be moderate. Light and Glare. Similar to all other views. 3.11.3 Impacts 3.11.3.1 Significant Criteria This section uses the following criteria to determine impacts. The criteria are based upon the visual components identified in the previous section as important to the visual character and quality of the views. The degree of impact is evaluated through professional judgment and interpretation. An impact is considered significant if the project would: • reduce or eliminate views of distinctive natural features • reduce the quality of a view • significantly increase light and glare in the project vicinity • conflict with City of Renton land use policies regarding visual resources The photopoints and view descriptions are based on existing conditions. Future development in the area would contribute to the visual diversity of the Green existing Valley, thus minimizing the visual attractiveness of the roadway. Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/18/96 3.11-13 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Visual Resources 3.11.3.2 Impacts of Construction Photopoints IA and IB Prior to construction of the roadway project, the roadway right-of-way would be cleared of all structures and vegetation. Included in the vegetation removal are rows of existing, mature poplars which parallel the proposed road alignment. The exception to this clearing would be in the Boeing Engineered Wetlands and the Springbrook Creek Trail area, where clearing would be selective for access to and construction of bridge supports. After demolition of existing structures and vegetation, views of the valley floor would appear more open and flat. As construction of the roadway proceeds, construction activities would be seen and would increase the amount of visual diversity, thus reducing the unity and the quality of the view. However, impacts would be temporary and would decrease as successive stages of development occur. Photopoints 2A and 2B Construction impacts for Photopoint 2 would be significant. Views of the wetlands would be altered by the selective clearing of existing vegetation for construction access, construction of the bridge supports, and the roadway structure itself. Construction activities would probably close the area to public access completely for the duration of the project. Photopoint 3 Construction impacts would be moderate with activity visible from the Talbot community hillside. Photopoint 4 Construction impacts would be moderate due to the narrow view corridor and the location of the project site in the distant background. Light and Glare Light and glare within and adjacent to the site would increase from lighting for nighttime construction and headlights of construction vehicles and equipment. The increase in construction-related traffic on the adjoining roadways would also increase the amount of light and glare during nighttime construction. 3.11.3.3 Impacts of Operation Operation of the roadway would introduce frequent and continuous vehicular traffic into an area previously void of roadway traffic. Large trucks and trailers would use the roadway to access the various industrial businesses in the valley. The elevated sections of the roadway over the sensitive wetland areas would be visible from various locations in the valley. Views of the natural areas of the wetlands and Springbrook Creek would be blocked by those elevated sections. With the exception of moving traffic, visibility of the roadway itself would not be significant from the east or west direction. Existing trees and vegetation on the valley floor, together with the visual diversity of new developments in the area, would reduce the visual presence of the new roadway. On the other hand, vehicular traffic would become highly visible from all of the photopoints noted earlier, along with the street lighting fixtures, traffic signage, and signalization. Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/18/96 3.11-14 City of Renton Visual Resources Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Moving traffic would be a new element in the narrow views from the Earlington neighborhood (Photopoint 4). Visual quality, though, would only be moderately impacted because of the limited view corridor of the valley. The roadway and traffic would have greater visibility during the winter season when the deciduous trees lose their foliage. 3.11.3.4 Light and Glare The new roadway alignment would introduce street lighting and vehicle headlights in an area where light and glare was previously negligible or nonexistent. In winter when the trees and native vegetation lose their foliage, the roadway would be more visible and would reflect additional light. During certain times of the year and under certain weather conditions, glare from the vehicle headlights heading north may affect motorist traffic eastbound on I-405, and other adjoining streets. Photopoints IA and 1B would be most affected by the increased light and glare. Street lighting would result in nighttime views from the Boeing Customer Service Training Center extending over the roadway. The wetland area trail systems would receive spillover lighting from the street lighting as well as direct light and glare from the vehicular headlights. Photopoint 2 would be affected by the perpendicular alignment of the roadway to the view plane. Lights from oncoming vehicle headlights would shine directly on the eastbound traffic traveling on I-405. Although more distant, residents from the Earlington neighborhood (Photopoint 4) would see the lights from the same alignment as Photopoint 2. Vehicles with maladjusted headlamps may shine directly toward the hillside residents. 3.11.4 Cumulative Impacts The roadway would eliminate a substantial number of poplars in the area which would significantly alter the area's landscape character, as viewed from all directions. Vehicular traffic would increase over time as the roadway services new development moving into the area. 3.11.5 Mitigation To minimize the visual impacts of the new roadway, roadside landscape planting of trees and shrubs along the new alignment would be installed. This would buffer the views of traffic from the surrounding hills and from the nearby office and commercial buildings. Restoration of disturbed vegetation would be completed both within the wetland areas and along certain portions of the roadway. Light and Glare would also be minimized with the above-mentioned landscape plantings. In addition, the use of evergreen trees and shrubs would provide effective screening throughout the year. 3.11.6 Impact Summary Significant social element impacts, mitigation measures and significant unavoidable adverse impacts are summarized in Table 3.12-1. Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/18/96 3.11-15 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Visual Resources Table 3.11-1 Visual Quality-Summary of Significant Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Significant Unavoidable Significant Impacts Mitigation Measures Adverse Impacts Alternatives A and C Project construction would None create short-term impacts from clearing of mature trees and other vegetation. Both alternatives would place Landscaping along the roadway would None elevated roadway(on structure) buffer views of traffic from surrounding over low-lying wetlands, hillsides and nearby office and blocking some views across commercial buildings(R) these wetlands. Vehicular traffic,signing and lighting would be highly visible from areas with views of the project site. Traffic would introduce light and None glare into an area where it is negligible or non-existent. No Action Alternative None. None. None. (R) Required mitigation (0) Optional mitigation 3.11.7 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts No unavoidable adverse impacts have been identified. 3.11.8 References Federal Highway Administration 1981. Visual impact assessment for highway projects. Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/19/96 3.12-1 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Historic and Cultural Resources 3.12 Historic and Cultural Resources 3.12.1 Introduction The Draft Environmental Impact Statement prepared for the proposed Longacres Office Park included a detailed Cultural Resource Report covering an area that includes the proposed Oakesdale Avenue SW alignments. This section summarizes the findings of that report, on file at he City of Renton, which should be consulted for more detailed information. 3.12.2 Affected Environment 3.12.2.1 Historical Conditions Section 3.3, Soils and Geology, describes the geologic history of the lower Green River Valley. Until about 5,000 years ago, saltwater of Puget Sound filled the valley as far south as present day Kent. Eruptions of Mt. Rainier created mudflows which provided the material that gradually filled the lower valley. Due to the low gradient of the valley, the channel of the Green River migrated and seasonal flooding resulting in long periods of standing water. With the completion of the Lake Washington Ship the level of Lake Washington was lowered in 1917 �YWVashin�gtou. ,v �-w the Black Riv Cal e�s�l �d ����, =�c:--. r w4J d b akeIoodingAstdl..occurr th ect-area; .1, .h�a �, c �n.�t��3a e t X ? Ate ° �oj y t e construc`�ion o tie Howard Hanson Dam on the y '� ufDper Green River in 19g62c,.J JA 6/4:k IE,�a � � Ss ,�„^ e� Y 7aS�n r•, wry:'h 4J /"�r•E-fir' 5'1+t �c 'a ca#'?^'D, f�^ Iq-'L A former channel of the Green River crosses through the Longacres Office Park site.-the-pfewnt /ref Syn Gharrnel of Sp�i�g�r �r ek-.beta�cean S.I3..16th Street-to-approximately--the-SW-1.9th..Str=t.a4nment. The former Green River channel crosses the Oakesdale Avenue SW corridor in the vicinity of the former practice track drainage swale an acros the so) Ofield of the former race track (see Section 3.4,E �u tom; S7 �a.-: w , : a Surfache Wearer Quantity�Qu�ls ty an 'd b hauest o ���Vth Street In May of 1992, a 0.99-acre lake4fer h}�draulic tes��ng pe t «arP*" .I*�.n �- og^on t9 toeing Customer Service Training Center (CSTC) portion of the track infield. Excavation was monitored by archaeologists for the presence of cultural material. The excavation did not encounter any cultural material by found formerly stable surfaces pre-dating race track construction at 10 feet below the surface. The Black and Green Rivers provided prehistoric people and early settlers with eight species of migratory fishes including four species of salmon, steelhead and cutthroat trout, Pacific lamprey, and smelt as well as resident freshwater fishes. Elliot Bay provided sea mammals, saltwater fish, and shellfish. u 4"4 � 3.12.2.2 Ethnography S USA^" �'l CC"51Sortl The project site vicinity was ccupied by the Coast Salish people, specifically the Duwamish people. Native America village site from the historic period were located at the confluence of the Black ajid sr�r ih Green Rivers, about 1.5 kilometers northwest of Oakesdale Avenue SW at SW 16th Street anc�aUsite about 0.6 ,kilometers northeast of Lind Avenue SW at SW Grady Way. Winters were spent at chase I'kt Sack �c n villaggAcomposed of one to three large cedar plank houses while people dispersed to smaller temporary camps nearer resources in the springl fall and summer. O1 S Euroamerican settlement proceeded from the first land claims on Elliot Bay in 1845. By 1853, land claims has been filed along the White, Black, and Green Rivers The federal governm nt sought and OAC e fih 1�51-�+.t f ervh 10�5 entered into treaties with the tribes in the mid-1850's.n tlheset}' elrttorts and increas Euroamerican settlement pressure resulted in a Native American uprising in Washington Territory in 1855 and 1856. Following the suppression of the uprising, many Duwamish families moved to the Tulalip, Port Madison, Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/18/96 3.12-2 City of Renton Historic and Cultural Resources Oakesdale Avenue S.W. or Muckleshoot Reservations. One band is known to have remained on the Black River near the project areai��is known to have been and bgr Native American into the 20th centuryjer-came t.-ecess Fle- --' -Black-R-i_ver-to -Marshy areay\761V th project vtcinitynthpre,rpusyat beaver, and mink were trapped and food plants gathered. Agricultural workers, including ethnic Mexicans, Filipinos, and Japanese,established small temporary camps beginning in the 1870's and continuing through the 1950's. 3.12.2.3 History The earliest land claim which included most of the Longacres Office Park site was filed in 1.854:. The property was acquired by the Nelson family in 1881 and was used primarily for dairying. In 1933, a portion of the Nelson property was leased to Joseph Gottstein for the construction and operation of the Longacres Race Track. Except for a period during World War H, the race track operated continuously from 1933 through the 1992 racing season. In 1990, the Boeing Company purchased the property from Morrie and began planning for the development of an office park on the site. The first phase of tr' (0), y develop ha occurred on the north portion of the site with the construction of Customer Service Training] Center in 1 93 and 1994. The Washington State ffice of Archaeology and Historic Preservation ruled in 1993 that the Longacres �` Gt�rf- Park Racetrack was not eligible for inclusion on either the state or National Register of Historic Places. w , c,<S This ruling..wappealed, the National Park Service denied the appeal in September 1993. Most of the former race track structures were demolished by late 1995. 3.12.2.4 Archaeology The Longacres Office Park research did not identify known prehistoric or historic archeological site on the property. The report did note tw arhe ogical data recovery in stigations on the Black River, less than one mil �' a site, and the disco�f a shell midden, ten feet below the surface at a site on the Green River near I7495. While other investigations within a mile of the project site have not found new archeological sA&hese studies consistently assert a high potential for buried remains in the Lower Green River Valley. The potential exists for buried archaeological site as old as 5,000 years. More recent ethnographic and historic sites could be buried by sedimentation which occurred prior to the construction of the Howard Hanson Dam. 3.12.3 Impacts 3.12.3.1 No Action Cultural resources would not be affected since there would be no construction activities with the No Action Alternative. 3.12.3.2 Alternatives A and C Roadway, storm drainage system , and bridge construction would occur throughout the three-quarter mile Phase 1, and one-quarter mile Phase 2 project segments. Preliminary quantities of excavation and fill are summarized in Table 3.3-2 in the "Geology and Soils" section. Alternative A and C would add about 7.6 and 7.8 acres of impervious surface, respectively. These quantities would be refined during final design. Excavation activities would have the possibility of detecting previously unknown cultural sites. Operation of earth moving equipment has the potential to damage and/or shift the position of on-site artifacts. Because there are known prehistoric and historic sites in the project vicinity, the likelihood of detecting cultural artifacts is high and construction has the potential to have a significant adverse impact on cultural resources. Project operation would not significantly affect historic or cultural resources. Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/18/96 c ` 3.12-3 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Historic and Cultural Resources 3.12.4 Mitigation If archeological sites are discovered during construction, the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (OAHP) would be contacted. Construction would normally be stopped until the resource can be identified and retrieved. 3.12.5 Impact Summary Significant historic and cultural resources impacts, mitigation measures and significant unavoidable adverse impacts are summarized in Table 3.12-1. Table 3.12-1 Historic and Cultural Resources -Summary of Significant Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Significant Unavoidable Significant Impacts Mitigation Measures Adverse Impacts Alternatives A and C High potential of detecting If archaeological sites are None cultural artifacts durinq soil discovered, Chapter 27.53 RCW excavation. " troduce vehic a requires that the state OAHP be rioise into existing contacted (R) undeveloped site Stop work if sites are found and evaluate the need for further treatment (0) No Action Alternative None None None 3.12.6 References Jones and Stokes Associates, Inc. 1994. Longacres Office Park. Draft environmental impact statement. Volume I - Environmental impact statement text. August 22. (JSA 91-129) Bellevue, WA. Prepared for City of Renton Planning/Building/Public Works Department, Renton, WA. Jones and Stokes Associates, Inc. 1994. Cultural resources, The Boeing Company Longacres Office Park, Renton, WA. August 22. (JSA 91-129) Bellevue, WA. In association with Northwest Archaeological Associates, Inc. Bellevue, WA. Prepared for City of Renton Planning/Building/ Public Works Department, Renton, WA. Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/18/96 _ y 3.12-4 City of Renton Historic and Cultural Resources Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/18/96 f 3.13-1 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Hazardous Materials 3.13 Hazardous Materials 3.13.1 Introduction Environmental site assessment of properties was conducted along two proposed alignments alternatives (Woodward-Clyde, 1995). The objective of the environmental site assessment was to identify the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products on a property under conditions that indicate an existing release, a past release, or a material threat of a release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products into structures on the property into the ground, groundwater, or surface water of the property. 3.13.1.1 Site Reconnaissance Site reconnaissance included observing the project areas and walking portions of the areas and their borders. The purpose of the reconnaissance's was to observe surface conditions and current activities on the easement areas of the subject properties and adjoining areas. The site reconnaissance also included an inventory of potential contaminant sources on the basis of visual observations. 3.13.1.2 Records Review The purpose of records review was to assess the potential presence of hazardous substance contamination from past site practices and uses. Information was obtained from public agencies to assess whether current and past property usage within the study area may have created a potential for contamination of the property. The following agencies were contacted and their databases reviewed: • City of Renton Fire Marshall's Office • King County Building Permits - Environmental Section • Washington State Department of Ecology (WDOE) • United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) • King County Department of Health Services (EHS) 3.13.2 Affected Environment For the purposes of site assessments, the site was divided into three parts: City of Renton property, Winmar property, and Benaroya Company property (owned by Group Health Cooperative at the time of the field reconnaissance). Environmental site assessment of the Boeing Longacres property was not done since that property was the subject of a recent site reconnaissance. All the information pertaining to the Boeing Longacres property was obtained from the existing Longacres Office Park Draft EIS (Jones & Stokes, 1994) On the City of Renton property, some areas are covered with a thick growth of blackberries and could not be accessed for observation. Although there was evidence of recent past dumping of trash on the property such as treated poles, metal cans, scrap wood, and household garbage, there was no evidence of hazardous materials disposal or use. There were no observed sheens or discoloration on standing water, Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/20/96 3.13-2 City of Renton Hazardous Materials Oakesdale Avenue S.W. no signs of any stained soil or stressed vegetation in the area. The site is being used for recreational walking by the general public, several foot paths were observed. Although leaks have occurred in the petroleum pipeline (Olympic Pipeline Company) that crosses the subject property, there were no records found that indicate any effect on the easement property. On the Winmar property also, some of the areas were covered with thick growth of blackberries or other tall brush and could not be accessed for observation. No sheens or discoloration were observed on the water sampling in Springbrook Creek. No stained soil or stressed vegetation was observed. Sediment and surface water sampling conducted in Springbrook Creek at the Winmar property lines indicated no evidence of any significant contamination. Direct observation of the ground on the Benaroya Company property was not possible because of tall bushes and blackberries. The interior of the buildings was not observed, because the buildings lie outside of the reconnaissance area. According to Department of Ecology files, a 250-gallon undergrouind storage tank (UST) was removed in 1991 and was found to have leaked. The extent of ground water contamination was limited and it was found that groundwater flow (and plume migration) was toward the southeast, which is away from the proposed Oakesdale Avenue SW alignment. A ground treatment system has been operating in the area since 1992 for remediation of groundwater contamination from the UST release. There are nine recovery wells and observation wells located around the former tank location. None of the impacted wells are within 400 feet of the proposed alignments. Past problems with illegal, non-hazardous dumping in the form of trash (tires and other household type solid waste) in the area was curtailed by restricting vehicle access to the northwest end of the property. There was no evidence of any PCB-containing electrical equipment, or no mishandling or improper storage of hazardous substances was observed. In addition, during the site reconnaissance, one 50-gallon drum containing used oil, generated from the maintenance of pumps and motors, was located in the maintenance building. Agency records reviewed do not indicate the current use or storage of hazardous materials on the portions of the properties to be potentially acquired for Oakesdale Avenue SW right-of-way. There were no records of any permitted structures on the Winmar property or any buildings constructed on the Benaroya property prior to the current buildings. 3.13.3 Impacts 3.13.3.1 No Action There are no known areas of contamination in the project corridor that would require remediation. 3.13.3.2 Alternatives A and C Impacts of Operation Operation of the project alignment alternatives would not disturb any presently buried hazardous wastes. With the movement of vehicles on the roadway, there is a potential for the spill or leakage of fuel, lubricants and other hazardous fluids. These material could enter surface and groundwater through the project's storm drain system. Traffic accidents create a potential for the release of larger quantities of Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/20/96 r 3.13-3 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Hazardous Materials hazardous maerials, but the proposed roadway design speed and alignment, and the use of curbs should minimize this risk. Impacts of Construction In general, except for some past agricultural uses on portions of all of the subject properties, and the roadway and parking areas associated with the former racetrack on the Longacres property, little or no development of the proposed right-of-way property has occurred. There would be no removal or disturbance of known hazardous materials under either of the build alternatives. There is the potential for spills or leaks of hazardous materials such as fuels, lubricants, solvents, and paints during construction. These materials could enter the soil or surface water, and may leach into groundwater. i 3.13.4 Mitigation At the present time, there are no known hazardous waste sites. If disposal of contaminated material is required, studies would identify disposal procedures and necessary protection for construction workers, the environment, and nearby residents and workers. The project's storm drain system will incorporate features to remove oils and contaminated sediments before releasing roadway runoff into surface waters. Adherence to City of Renton regulations will minimize accidental release of hazardous materials during construction. 3.13.5 Impact Summary Significant hazardous materials impacts, mitigation measures and significant unavoidable adverse impacts are summarized in Table 3.13-1. Table 3.12-1 Hazardous Materials-Summary of Significant Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Significant Unavoidable Significant Impacts Mitigation Measures Adverse Impacts Alternatives A and C Potential for spills and leaks J\ None of hazardous materials during construction and operation No Action Alternative None. None. None. 3.13.6 References Galster, R.W. and W.T. Laprade. 1991. Geology of Seattle, Washington, U.S.A. Bulletin, Association of Engineering Geologists. Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/20/96 S R 3.13-4 City of Renton Hazardous Materials Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. 1994. Earth Resources/Hazardous Materials, The Boeing Company Longacres Office Park, Renton, Washington. Technical Report. August 22, 1994. In association with AGI Technologies, Bellevue, WA. Prepared for City of Renton Planning/Building/Public Works, Renton, WA. Hart Crowser, Inc. 1991. Preliminary Environmental Assessment, GPC Property Sequence No. 968, Parcels 13 and 14, Renton, WA Landau Associates, Inc. 1990. Environmental Site Assessment, Broadacres property, Renton, WA. August, 1990. Edmonds, WA. Prepared for The Boeing Company, Seattle, WA. U.S. Geologic Survey. 1949. Renton, Washington 7.5 Minute Series Topographic Quadrangle, photorevised 1968 and 1973. Luzier, J.E. 1969. Geology and groundwater resources of southwestern King County, Washington. (Water Supply Bulletin No. 28) Washington Department of Water Resources, Olympia, WA. Personal Communications: Mr. Gary Betts, Group Health Cooperative, January 30, 1995 Mr. Tim Puryer, Winmar, February 6, 1995 Ms. Julie Bray, Renton Fire Department,March 1, 1995 Mr. Scott Woodbury, City of Renton Surface Water Utility, September 1995. �3L //(4ny 01 I,-Xts� re �Cr G1��r �/I Ll��� %'� ✓ Preliminary DEIS Printed 11/20/96 S� you G6v�tc��r . �o b M tz ----- Sub,lee o Aagullitoarcs lxdf�Sr—a�2�u�oI� L� T ar �1t -- proPas ed_pr+epl a¢eH,c,�f_ 7�rK�'�i��,e� cw�x�f? ��d-�lux,s'1LW`�--�J-�I.►'�fi—ct�S�ttgSLf�--�Msyl��.�S_��'��I,LS------ ----— ��K�,S c��G_UG�Gk►S�o.Gs--�k�l_�c�L...—�l�a_!�'M�ic��c�����eYCY�-1_-- - -u�a-�—r�a�7%/►�p�a�s-3�—��1�a�h__cc�k�c��a��c_ ag��-�3aid--,��P Q1 -- -------- _ _.r4 -�p� Ge µ. _5-�t1_/G- a - rw 3 t s--) Han i-,Tme"4s .0,0, C° 't� --- -- ---- ------_ _.�Gtr'tS-_.I 2cJ-,Cd._,l�itr°�D --T"I DVS . � �i-�1�► _ _-- 4.cke Iae-eel-v Ncf - - JQ�p�acc w a a�1: o 4- 1 (a(lawed I ��� � as�' r�3�K-J- �Kd �ic�urC �a�HeJ HrvzTc �c✓clo�rrt�rt� 2.H.d o4cv- hubtic- pv��.-E-s 40 - -- --yellow _ok -A-e-_a-lgaekec-&Lap -- . . - ��f1KotKP� ��a L S 4 I V�p tar 'f�. (�r- a1/6 C,.), K F `7 _ -- — - -- - --- A-��c_s_�'►±�pa�fr�_-����Loss a�ZJ�t-_ __ - -- -- - - - - aJeJ b y _ Pi ey�; -f c No.w QKd(ye T�-�-al =,»p�`+e� W��(aKJ �r►ca ��f� y 1 � - /, 67 � - 34z 4U _L _rcP-fat�wccwt-ka - d h p�Csckcde�i`1- - �-�-�,� Vim.�t_ c�►��-�--�G ��i�r - �r�l���r, p lt�,de+--a- Nov --C3��dJc -Cr�.•ss�s�► - --- - - - - --�---- —D ,.S 9 - - -- o-I SAP-ze4eJ 60o- faivf lea (4-11 (fokr�-y 7 - - -- --- —--- -----67�gja y-3_jiUP Gp�accMt�t7�-l�'a ._of'1,5_ �J -------- ---------�-���s _cam lv�c�•�d�p��++eKr�1,_?S_X_�� S) __�= - -- --- /'C.G�f aGGIKG��(���� X l►_� � __—L,�',S�lnc c - - 3.,oL�i�ta w e.K- - a47o/ al4ej d u4�' � - - - -- Ue-y"fIre,a a.r t���'�awG� Y!� la. tM , .G �(t.� _ltct _-�► GL ro vl c��� s��►�1��rm -4?A o u o .���s7�rn t' ti r-�s f �9 °v ll '�- s dw Q;) -7'1 - - GOP--1;):y� -�c�,�od- - ode �� '��140 c -40-2_ _ dxp- wm� /ar,Q nQgm- pa-;�5 pvl-e-- I I If -;)-4ka rcr Nb-/!�__ s�_-- --------- - ------ - -- - J F-7 p--,--------------------------------- - - - — - A-1 somas __. _akt LtdlVIdUa�__� �-)p�� .z1l-_4-e__key 44A'61--74v*-�4e��ps-a-��r+���s rSct rc. -- a -Ts let 4 e, 1 0551 e--jqk*%vek4-g6( / 4-1� - - -rasrt ae- _s On Av- G-A . off- -Ld r. !• vv --.�� �.���� /C-IAZ�e 47, 9-7 a� dot �cut G d /�' CITY OF RENTON PLANNINGBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: April 10, 1996 TO: Bob Mahn FROM: Scott Woodbury S� SUBJECT: OAKESDALE EXTENSION WETLANDS REPORT Thank you for a copy of the above-referenced project's wetlands report. Since I had reviewed the draft last April,we have completed an update of the City's wetlands inventory for the area in which your project lies. The draft Oakesdale report was used in the update. In the process of updating the inventory, it was brought to my attention by Lori Pitzer of Boeing that there is a wetland on the east boundary of the CSTC property along Springbrook Creek. As there is no mention in the Oakesdale report of this wetland,I have attached a copy of a map for you showing the location of the wetland. Because the Oakesdale project may have an impact on this wetland,I wanted to bring it to your attention. I only wish that I would have forwarded this information to you sooner so that it could have been incorporated into your report. However,I am surprised that Shapiro was not aware of this wetland. If you have any questions,please give me at call at X-5547 or come and see me. Thanks. CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: March 15, 1996 TO: Bob Mahn FROM: Scott Woodbury S SUBJECT: HNTB HYDRAULIC STUDY OF PROPOSED OAKESDALE AVENUE BRIDGE CROSSING Attached is the final letter from R.W. Beck, Inc., dated March 11, 1996, regarding their review of the above-referenced HNTB study. With regard to the R.W. Beck findings, I have the following comments: 1) Modifying the HNTB hydraulic analysis as suggested by R.W. Beck may affect bridge type selection. Using the analysis that has been done to date and the possible increases in head loss due to the model changes noted by R.W. Beck, I suggest your consultant perform a comparative analysis of the hydraulic impact of the various bridge types being considered. This would be an acceptable alternative to modifying the hydraulic model at this time. However, the suggested changes should be made during design to compute the hydraulic impact of the bridge and to determine appropriate mitigation. 2) Per city codes, any increase in upstream water surface elevations due to the proposed road crossing is to be mitigated. Concreting under the bridge as HNTB assumed is not a preferred method and I would question why go to the expense of bridging if most of the channel section below the bridge is to be covered with concrete anyway. From a cost perspective, a three- sided concrete box culvert would be a much less costly alternative and would still allow for a natural stream bottom under the structure. 3) 1 concur with R.W. Beck's suggestion to perform a scour analysis prior to finalizing the design alternative analysis. For the purpose of comparing bridge types, this could be a qualitative assessment of the probability of scour and alternative mitigation methods and costs. For example, longer spans allow piers to be located more toward the outside of the floodway where the potential for scour is reduced. More detailed analysis may be needed during design to ensure that measures are implemented to prevent scour, if necessary. 4) Another consideration potentially affecting the selection of the bridge type is how to accommodate relocating the existing trail on the west side of the channel so that it may pass under the proposed bridge. Piers skew to the channel will make it difficult to pass the trail under the bridge on the proposed channel's high flow bench. Also attached is a letter from NRCS, our federal sponsor for the East Side Green River Watershed Project, dated March 7, 1996, regarding the HNTB analysis and draft R.W. Beck review letter of the proposed Oakesdale Avenue bridge crossing. If you have any questions, please contact me at X- 5547. U:65025:96-019:SW attachment cc: Ron Straka Rod DenHerder United States Natural Renton Project Office Department of Resources 935 Powell Ave. S.W. Agriculture Conservation Renton, WA 98055 Service March 7, 1996 Scott Woodbury, P.E., Project Manager [OAR , City of Renton , 8 1996 200 Mill Avenue South C1 Renton, Washington 98055 E ngI r&urrrrg t pt Dear Scott: RE: ESGR-P-1 Channel Proposed Oakesdale Avenue Bridge at SW 16th Hydraulic Analysis I have reviewed the x-sections supplied by HNTB and R. W. Beck's hydraulic review comments of the proposed Oakesdale Avenue bridge crossing of Springbrook Creek just upstream of SW16th. It appears from the plan view and interpolating between x-sections Sta. 62+60 and Sta. 63+48 that the downstream end of the right bent intrudes into the flow path of normal winter flows. Because the pier is not parallel to the channel flow,this could cause scouring at the bridge piers and deposition of the sediments into the channel downstream of this area. Therefore, I would recommend that the bridge piers be built parallel to the flow in Springbrook Creek and/or moved out of the channel flow area of at least the 25 year frequency storm. If the piers location and/or alignment cannot be changed,then I concur with R. W. Beck that a rigorous analysis be undertaken of the potential for scour. Sincerely, /RoderickL. DenHerder Project Manager cc: William Erion,NRCS, Spokane SO Julian Meuer,NRCS, Spokane SO ftrscott.doc The Natural Resources Conservation Service, formerly the Soil Conservation Service, is an agency of the United States Department of Agriculture AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER March 11, 1996 Mr.Scott Woodbury,P.E. Project Manager Surface Water Utility City of Renton i 200 Mill Avenue South Renton,Washington 98055 Dear Scott: C _ iZVi4Y �J Subject: City of Renton-East Side Green River Watershed Project(ESGRWP) Review of HNTB Hydraulic Study of Proposed Oakesdale Avenue Bridge Crossing of Springbrook Creek In accordance with your request, we have reviewed the Hydraulic Impact Study for the New Bridge Crossing Over Springbrook Creek prepared by HNTB dated December 8, 1995. In completing the review,we received the following information: 1) HNTB letter report dated December 8,1995 2) HEC-2 models of the channel system. 3) Plots of the HEC-2 cross sections between S.W. 16th Street and S.W.27th Street. Our review entailed the following tasks: 1) Review HNTB letter report dated December 8,1995. 2) Review corresponding HEC-2 data files in terms of tailwater elevations, flows, cross sections,and bridge representation. 3) Consideration of any major implications of the HNTB study on the ESGRWP. In review of this information we offer the following comments: 1) The HNTB base HEC-2 model is taken from the HEC-2 model developed by Northwest Hydraulic Consultants (NHC) for the ESGRWP and was modified assuming the current ESGRWP Springbrook Creek Alternative 2 flood control improvements would be in place. The other HEC-2 models reflect the new Oakesdale Avenue bridge with the channel improvements with and without a concrete lined channel underneath the bridge. The model extends from the BRPS forebay to S.W.43rd Street. 12-OW18-10101-02OW101 o.\Giseburt/MSG097.doc 2101 Fourth Avenue,Suite 600 Seattle,WA 98121-2375 Phone(206)441-7500 Fax(206)441-4962 Mr. Scott Woodbury,P.E. March 11, 1996 Page 2 aim 2) HNTB's use of flows, beginning water surface elevation, and channel cross sections appears consistent with the ESGRWP Hydraulic Modeling of Flood Control Alternatives (October, 1995) for the Alternative 2 flood control improvement. It should be noted, however, that the selection of the preferred ESGRWP flood control alternative as well as our hydraulic modeling effort are ongoing and as such the final flows will likely be subject to some minor changes. As you know, we have made one change in the model (relating to the representation of SW 16th Street) and the flows at the forebay increased for the 100-year event by 30 cfs. We performed a quick sensitivity analysis in which we increased the flows into the forebay to 1,777 cfs (up from 1,747 cfs) for the base case and one of the bridge alternatives. At the higher flow rate, there was an increase in headloss just upstream of the bridge of 0.11 foot (compared to 0.07 foot at the lower flow rate)and no change further upstream(at SW 27th Street). 3) The HEC-2 representation of the Oakesdale Avenue crossing was reviewed. In terms of hydraulic modeling,the proposed Oakesdale Avenue bridge crossing is somewhat non-standard due to the skewed piers. HEC-2 provides two options for modeling bridge crossings: the normal bridge routine and the special bridge routine, both of which could be applied with varied assumptions due to the non-standard nature of the bridge. HNTB used the normal bridge routine to model the Oakesdale Avenue crossing. A disadvantage of using the normal bridge method is that it does not directly account for pier losses. In reviewing their representation using the normal bridge routine, we would suggest consideration of the following changes: a) The increase in expansion and contraction coefficients should cover sections 6200 through 6500, inclusive. This would account for the increased expansion and contraction losses that occur as the flow approaches and departs from the bridge crossing. Currently, the model increases these coefficients from Section 6260 through 6430 only. 12-00018-10101-02.01 3101 o:\Giseburt/MSGO97.doc Y Mr. Scott Woodbury,P.E. March 11, 1996 Page 3 IBM b) The effective flow area under the bridge should be decreased for cross sections 6260,6348,and 6430. The HNTB cross-sections were defined in a liberal nature. We would suggest a more conservative approach that disregards the full projected width of the pier for each of these sections. The piers have an area of influence both upstream and downstream where eddies will form and the flow will be turbulent. Because the normal bridge method calculates the headloss through the bridge based on net effective flow area and does not consider any special losses around bridge piers, reducing these effective areas is warranted. This change would likely result in greater simulated headloss as at the structure. As an alternative to making this suggested change,an analysis of the crossing could be done with the special bridge routine. Normally, the special bridge method would be the most applicable method for a bridge with piers because it directly accounts for pier losses. The special bridge method uses Yarnell's energy equation which is a semi-empirical equation based on hydraulic model data. One item to note,however, is that the special bridge method requires that the channel cross section be approximated as a trapezoid. This requires care by the modeler to determine a hydraulically equivalent trapezoid channel. c) The model HNTB received (NHC's) used an option that allowed the program to pick the most appropriate energy loss equation for each reach from one of three different energy loss methodologies based on flow conditions. This is the best way to model a water way if you are not comparing alternative systems. If you are comparing systems, this method may pick one equation for a reach for one alternative system and another equation for the same reach for another alternative system. Thus,you would not know if any changes in water surface elevation are due to the difference in the systems or the difference in the way energy loss was calculated. It is recommended that this option be removed and the option that is appropriate for the most reaches be used. 12-OW18-10101-0201 3101 o:\Giseburt/MSG097.doc Mr. Scott Woodbury,P.E. March 11, 1996 Page 4 4) We were not aware of whether HNTB was conducting a scour analysis of the bridge piers and abutments. The results of the scour analysis could be highly impacted by the skew of the piers. In addition, should the Oakesdale Avenue crossing precede improvement of the channel, extreme velocities are simulated in this area by FEQ which would be important to consider in the scour analysis. If a scour analysis has not been completed, we suggest performing one prior to finalizing the Oakesdale Avenue design alternative analysis. The results of the scour analysis, particularly if the Oakesdale Avenue crossing precedes the channel improvement,could affect the design approach. 5) We do not believe the Oakesdale Avenue crossing has any major implications on the ESGRWP. The HNTB results show that,while there is a simulated increase in water levels at and immediately upstream of the proposed Oakesdale Avenue crossing,this increase is reduced to zero increase at SW 27th Street. Based upon our working knowledge of the system, even if the headlosses due to the proposed Oakesdale Avenue crossing were somewhat higher (due to the modeling approach),say 0.2 feet,it would still have a negligible affect on water levels at SW 27th Street Please call me at 727-4607,if you have any questions. Sincerely, R.W.BECK,INC. �v V Michael S.Giseburt,P.E. Mary B.Weber Project Manager Project Engineer MSG/MBW/rhm 12-00018-10101-0201 3101 o:\GiseburVMSG097.doc CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: February 7, 1996 TO: Bob Mahn FROM: Scott Woodbury5� SUBJECT: HNTB HYDRAULIC STUDY OF PROPOSED OAKESDALE AVENUE BRIDGE CROSSING Attached is a draft letter from R.W. Beck regarding their review of the above-referenced HNTB study. Please review the letter and provide any comments you may have. The consultant will finalize the letter after incorporating any comments we may have. With regard to the R.W. Beck findings, I have the following comments: 1) Modifying the HNTB hydraulic analysis as suggested by R.W. Beck may affect bridge type selection. Using the analysis that has been done to date and the possible increases in head loss due to the model changes noted by R.W. Beck, I suggest your consultant perform a comparative analysis of the hydraulic impact of the various bridge types being considered. This would be an acceptable alternative to modifying the hydraulic model at this time. However, the suggested changes should be made during design to compute the hydraulic impact of the bridge and to determine appropriate mitigation. 2) Per city codes, any increase in upstream water surface elevations due to the proposed road crossing is to be mitigated. Concreting under the bridge as HNTB assumed is not an allowable method and I would question why go to the expense of bridging if most of the channel section below the bridge is to be covered with concrete anyway. From a cost perspective, a three-sided concrete box culvert would be a much less costly alternative and would still allow for a natural stream bottom under the structure. 3) 1 concur with R.W. Beck's suggestion to perform a scour analysis prior to finalizing the design alternative analysis. For the purpose of comparing bridge types, this could be a qualitative assessment of the probability of scour and alternative mitigation methods and costs. For example, longer spans allow piers to be located more toward the outside of the floodway where the potential for scour is reduced. More detailed analysis may be needed during design to ensure that measures are implemented to prevent scour, if necessary. 4) Another consideration potentially affecting the selection of the bridge type is how to accommodate relocating the existing trail on the west side of the channel so that it may pass under the proposed bridge. Piers skew to the channel will make it difficult to pass the trail under the bridge on the proposed channel's high flow bench. If you have any questions, or would like to meet to discuss the R.W. Beck letter, please contact me at X-5547. U:1996:96-009:SW attachment cc: Ron Straka Rod DenHerder January 29, 1996 Imm Mr.Scott Woodbury,P.E Project Manager Surface Water Utility City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton,Washington 98055 Dear Scott: Subject: City of Renton- East Side Green River Watershed Man-/9/ajce�(i-SG A -J P) Review of HNTB Hydraulic Study of Proposed Oakesdale Avenue Bridge Crossing of Springbrook Creek In accordance with your request,we have reviewed the Hydraulic Impact Study for the New Bridge Crossing Over Springbrook Creek prepared by HNTB dated December V, 1995. In completing the review,we received the following information: 8 1) HT JT'B letter report dated December 8,1995 2) HEC-2 models of the channel system. 3) Plots of the HEC-2 cross sections between S.W.16th Street and S.W.27th Street. Our review entailed the following tasks: 1) Review HNTB letter report dated December 8,1995. 2) Review corresponding HEC-2 data files in terms of tailwater elevations, flows, cross sections,and bridge representation. 3) Consideration of any major implications of the HNTB study on the ESGRW/ In review of this information we offer the following comments: 1) The HNTB base HEC-2 model is taken from the HEC-2 model developed by for the ESGRWP and was modified assuming the current ESGRWP Springbrook Creek Alternative 2 flood control improvements would be in place. The other HEC-2 models reflect the new Oakesdale Avenue bridge with and -h� jI4 tiJ without a concrete lined channel underneath the bridge. The model extends from the BRPS forebay to S.W.43rd Street. 12.00018-10101-02.01 3101 o:\giseburt/MSG097.doc 2101 Fourth Avenue,Suite 600 Seattle,WA 98121-2375 Phone(206)441-7500 Fax(206)441-4962 Mr. Scott Woodbury,P.E. January 29, 1996 Page 2 13M 2) HNTB's use of flows, beginning water surface elevation, and channel cross sections appears consistent with the ESGRWP Hydraulic Modeling of Flood Control Alternatives (October, 1995) for the Alternative 2 flood control improvement. It should be noted, however, that the selection of the preferred ESGRWP flood control alternative as well as our hydraulic modeling effort are ongoing and as such the final flows will likely be subject to some minor changes. As you know, we have made one change in the model (relating to the representation of SW 16th Street) and the flows at the forebay increased for the 100-year event by 30 cfs. We performed a quick sensitivity analysis in which we increased the flows into the forebay to 1,777 cfs (up from 1,747 cfs) for the base case and one of the bridge alternatives. At the higher flow rate, there was an increase in headloss just upstream of the bridge of 0.11 foot (compared to 0.07 foot at the lower flow rate)and no change further upstream(at SW 27th Street). 3) The HEC-2 representation of the Oakesdale Avenue crossing was reviewed. In terms of hydraulic modeling,the proposed Oakesdale Avenue bridge crossing is somewhat non-standard due to the skewed piers. IUC-2 provides two options for modeling bridge crossings: the normal bridge routine and the special bridge routine,both of which could be applied with varied assumptions due to the non- standard nature of the bridge. HNTB used the normal bridge routine to model the Oakesdale Avenue crossing. A disadvantage of using the normal bridge method is that it does not directly account for pier losses. In reviewing their representation using the normal bridge routine,we would suggest consideration of the following changes: a) The increase in expansion and contraction coefficients should cover sections 6200 through 6500, inclusive. This would account for the increased expansion and contraction losses that occur as the flow approaches and departs from the bridge crossing. Currently, the model increases these coefficients from Section 6260 through 6430 only. b) The effective flow area under the bridge should be decreased for cross sections 6260,6348,and 6430. The HNTB cross-sections were defined in a liberal nature. We would suggest a more conservative approach that disregards the full projected width of the pier for each of these sections. The piers have an area of influence both upstream and downstream 120001&10101-0201 3101 oA iseburt/MSG097.doc Mr. Scott Woodbury,P.E. January 29, 1996 Page 3 13M where eddies will form and the flow will be turbulent. Because the normal bridge method calculates the headloss through the bridge based on net effective flow area and does not consider any special losses around bridge piers, reducing these effective areas is warranted. This change would likely result in greater simulated headloss as at the structure. As an alternative to malting this suggested change, an analysis of the crossing could be done with the special bridge routine. Normally, the special bridge method would be the most applicable method for a bridge with piers because it directly accounts for pier losses. The special bridge method uses Yamell's energy equation which is a semi-empirical equation based on hydraulic model data. One item to note,however,is that the special bridge method requires that the channel cross section be approximated as a trapezoid. This requires care by the modeler to determine a hydraulically equivalent trapezoid channel. c) The model HNIB received (NHC's) used an option that allowed the program to pick the most appropriate energy loss equation for each reach from one of three different energy loss methodologies based on flow conditions. This is the best way to model a water way if you are not comparing alternative systems. If you are comparing systems, this method may pick one equation for a reach for one alternative system and another equation for the same reach for another alternative system. Thus,you would not know if any changes in water surface elevation are due to the difference in the systems or the difference in the way energy loss was calculated. It is recommended that this option be removed and the option that is appropriate for the most reaches be used. 4) We were not aware of whether HNTB was conducting a scour analysis of the bridge piers and abutments. The results of the scour analysis could be highly impacted by the skew of the piers. In addition, should the Oakesdale Avenue crossing precede improvement of the channel, extreme velocities are simulated in this area by FEQ which would be important to consider in the scour analysis. If a scour analysis has not been completed, we suggest performing one prior to finalizing the Oakesdale Avenue design alternative analysis. The results of the scour analysis, particularly if the Oakesdale Avenue crossing precedes the channel improvement,could affect the design approach. 12-"18-10101-0201 3101 oAgiseburt/MSG097.doc Mr. Scott Woodbury,P.E. January 29, 1996 1 Page 4 5) We do not believe the Oakesdale Avenue crossing has any major implications on the ESGRWPrii it The HNTB results show that, while there is a simulated increase in water levels at and immediately upstream of the proposed Oakesdale Avenue crossing, this increase is reduced to zero increase at SW 27th Street. Based upon our working knowledge of the system,even if the headlosses due to the proposed Oakesdale Avenue crossing were somewhat higher (due to the modeling approach),say 0.2 feet,it would still have a negligible affect on water levels at SW 27th Street. Please call me at 727-4607 if you have any questions. Sincerely, R.W.BECK,INC. Michael S.Giseburt,P.E. Mary B.Weber Project Manager Project Engineer MSG/MBW/lgh 12-M18-10101-0201 3101 o:\gigeb urt/MSG097.d oc CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: January 22, 1996 TO: Bob Mahn FROM: Scott Woodbury SUBJECT: REVIEW COMMENTS TO 11/21/95 DRAFT OF OAKESDALE WATERWAYS & HYDROLOGICAL SYSTEM TECHNICAL REPORT BY HNTB Section 2, Note 1. The project is located within the Black River Basin, also known as East Side Green River Watershed (ESGRW). The Black River Basin includes area within the jurisdictions of Renton, Kent, Tukwila, and King County and encompasses 24 square miles. Springbrook Creek, the main drainage channel in the basin, flows through the valley floor to the Black River Pump Station, where flows are pumped into the Black River channel. The confluence of the Green and Black Rivers forms the Duwamish River which empties into Elliot Bay and the Puget Sound. Section 2, Note 2. FEMA as the agency responsible for administering the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), conducts hydrologic and hydraulic analyses to determine flood risks in communities through the United States. These analyses are performed to FEMA guidelines and yield the flood risk information shown on the NFIP maps, such as the 100-year floodplain and floodway. The information on the NFIP maps is used by participating communities to design and adopt floodplain management measures. FEMA in turn makes flood insurance available to property owners within that community. Section 2, Note 3. The first Flood Insurance Study (FIS) performed for the city of Renton was issued in 1980. The hydrologic and hydraulic analyses on which the FIS was based was completed in July 1979 by Tudor Engineering. The FIS for the City of Renton was subsequently updated in 1989 using hydraulic analyses from June 1987 studies by CH2M Hill. For Springbrook Creek, CH2M Hill used hydrology from the prior FIS in the update. The revised areas included Springbrook Creek from the Black River Pump Station to SW 16th Street. The effective map and FIS for Renton were just recently reissued and are now dated May 16, 1995. No changes to the flood elevations were made in the 1995 update. The city's stormwater management regulations, which must be consistent with minimum FEMA requirements, are contained within Section 4-22, Storm and Surface Drainage, and Section 4-31-31, Flood Hazards, of the Renton City Code. Significant requirements in these sections include compensatory storage for fill within the floodplain, zero rise floodway, sizing of drainage systems, and clearance/hydraulic performance of road crossing structures. Flooding problems have historically occurred in the Black River Basin. Since the early 1960's, the city of Renton has worked with the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS, formerly Soil Conservation Service) under the ESGRW Project to reduce flooding hazards within the basin. Channel and structural improvements that have been completed with NRCS assistance include the Black River Pump Station (1972), the Black River Pump Station Storage Pond (1984), and the P-1 Channel from the pond to SW 16th Street (1987 and 1995). These works, combined with the construction of the Green River levee system in the 1960s and earlier and the completion of Howard Hanson dam in 1961, have significantly reduced the frequency and severity of flooding in the ESGRW. However, flooding problems continue to occur along the valley floor upstream of the improved reaches of Springbrook Creek due to high water levels in the creek created by a confined channel of very low gradient or because of restrictions at road culvert crossings. Other flooding problems occur because tributary drainage systems are adversely affected by the high water levels in the creek or because of the systems were inadequately sized. The most recent construction completed by the city and NRCS under the ESGRW Project was the SW Grady Way to SW 16th Street channel improvement project in the summer of 1995. With the assistance of NRCS, the city of Renton is in the process of updating the ESGRW Project plan to identify improvements for subsequent implementation which resolve existing flooding problems, prevent future flooding problems, and improve environmental resources in the Renton valley area of the ESGRW, primarily upstream of SW 16th Street. Revised alternatives are being prepared for review in an environmental impact statement in 1996. Implementation of the next phase of improvements is scheduled for 1997. Current ESGRW Project alternatives include channel improvements where the proposed Oakesdale roadway will cross Springbrook Creek. Coordination between the two projects will be on- going. Because of the need for up-to-date and accurate information upon which to base the design of the ESGRW Project and other flood reduction projects within the Black River Basin, the cities of Kent and Renton have developed new comprehensive watershed models of the entire basin. The hydrologic model selected by both Kent and Renton to determine flows is HSPF (Hydrologic Simulation Program - Fortran). For hydraulic analysis, the city of Kent used the steady state model HEC-2, while Renton used the complex, non-steady state model FEQ (Full Equations). This differs from the FEMA FIS studies which used the hydrologic model TR-20, and the hydraulic model HEC-2. Comparison of the FEQ and FEMA 100-year peak flows and water surface elevations along the lower reaches of Springbrook Creek near the project area shows significant differences between FEMA and FEQ simulated results. There are several reasons for the wide variances, the most significant being the addition of more pumps at the Black River Pump Station and the completion of ESGRW project channel improvements downstream of SW 16th Street. However, current FEMA flood flows and elevations must continue to be used in the regulation of new development within the floodplain until a map revision is performed. Where FEMA regulations do not apply, the city's modeling results may be used in project design to demonstrate compliance with the city's stormwater management requirements, such as the design of the drainage systems within the proposed Oakesdale roadway. Until a FEMA map revision is performed, adopted FEMA 100-year flood elevations are to be used to compute compensatory storage requirements. Under this requirement any fill/embankment volume within the FEMA floodplain would be equally compensated by excavation to ensure that there is no net loss of floo ay storage. Additionally, if any fill is placed within the floodway, it would also have to b demonstrated using FEMA flows and 4�re elevations that the fill/encroachment did not cause more than a 1.0 foot rise in upstream water elevations. The city's modeled flows and elevations would be the basis for all other designs concerning Springbrook Creek and for the Oakesdale drainage system design. The city is in the process of determining the preferred timing of a comprehensive FEMA map revision for Springbrook Creek. Because of the pending construction of ESGRW Project improvements in 1997 and upstream improvements planned or in progress in the city of Kent, the city may wish to delay a map revision request until these improvements are completed and can be included in the revision. Section 3.1.1. This section should include the following: • a description of the existing subbasin boundaries and drainage features adjacent to and within which the project lies, not just within the project alignment. This information should also be presented in a map. Much of this information can be found within the Boeing Longacres Office Park (LOP) EIS and reflects the LOP EIS no action alternative. Attached is an approximate boundary map of the subbasin within which the Oakesdale subareas A & B (M&N) lie. Note that the proposed city of Renton Wetland Mitigation Bank site 1 is located within this basin. Also note that the wetland which Oakesdale will cross is only minimally connected to Springbrook Creek with a 18" culvert, but that the ESGRW Project proposes to restore this hydraulic connection to allow for free movement of flood waters between the creek and the wetland. Combined with the removal of the existing access road connecting the existing SW 30th Street terminus of Oakesdale and SW 27th Street currently under consideration, there would then be unrestricted movement of floodwater between the creek and adjacent wetlands west of the creek to and including the LOP South Marsh. • a description of how subbasin boundaries and drainage features would be changed by the proposed actions of the LOP project. Two of the LOP action alternatives identify a master drainage plan that would direct all runoff to a pond/wetland detention system, part of which has already been constructed with the Boeing CSTC facility. The configuration of future drainage facilities under the remaining LOP action alternative is unknown and would be determined on a project-by-project basis. A map would be useful in presenting the proposed LOP project effect on subbasin boundaries and drainage features. The drainage features proposed by the LOP must be described as the impacts of the Oakesdale Extension project will be different if the LOP is implemented before Oakesdale or not. • a description of the existing Springbrook Creek channel over which the proposed project will be constructing a bridge. Note what the flows and elevations are for Springbrook Creek based on FEMA and the ESGRW Project analyses. Describe what is being considered in the ESGRW Project as far as improvements to Springbrook Creek in the vicinity of the bridge crossing. For a description of Springbrook Creek habitat and fisheries resources, see the LOP EIS (1994), the Black River Water Quality Management Plan (1993), or the HARZA fisheries report for Springbrook Creek (1995). A lot more could be written on the existing habitat of Springbrook Creek. Note: I crossed out much of what was written in this section because it was either repetitive of what was said in previous sections, or was inaccurate. The bottom of the live storage for all detention ponds must be above the elevation of the 2- year flow in Springbrook Creek when the detention pond system will outfall, as determined by the recent city modeling. Section 3.1.2. 1 crossed out much of what was written in this section because it would be repetitive with what was said in previous sections. In fact this section could be entirely combined with the previous section. Section 3.2. 1 suggest that at least some summary of the groundwater conclusions of the LOP EIS be restated in this report, otherwise no conclusions may be drawn as to how the proposed Oakesdale project may impact groundwater or how groundwater may impact the Oakesdale project. As you know, additional groundwater measurements have been made by Surface Water Utility staff at the Oakesdale monitoring wells. A bar chart of the measurement results-to-date is attached. Section 3.3. Although the other reports do not list SCS soil group numbers, these may be determined and listed in this report. Paragraph 2 in this section should be moved to Section 3.1.1 and expanded as discussed in the comments to Section 3.1.1 noted above. Therefore, I also suggest changing the section's title. I lined out the last sentence in Paragraph 3 because the only property east of the Oakesdale alignments for which there could be future development is the LOP site. For the LOP site, there are conceptual drainage plans for two of the LOP alternatives presented in the LOP EIS. Properties west of the Oakesdale alignments would likely drain directly to the creek. Depending upon how and when the LOP site is developed, Oakesdale may have to provide cross culverts to provide free drainage for the land west of the proposed alignments. It should be noted that the existing pervious and impervious area calculations are based on the conditions that existed on the LOP site before any demolition on the LOP site was done. Therefore, the former Longacres racetrack barns and other impervious facilities are included in the existing condition area calculations. Section 3.4.1. This section is repetitive of what was described in previous sections. As I suggested above, all surface water and flooding information (storm drains included) should be discussed comprehensively in Section 3.1.1. Section 4.1. Describe item-by-item how the project complies with the Core and Special Requirements of the 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual as adopted by the city. Cite 1990 King County Surface Water Manual requirements for bridge crossings over streams and how the project will comply with these requirements. Section 4.3.2. First paragraph after System F description. The water intercepted by Oakesdale from wetlands E and F is returned to those wetlands, either through System A or B. The water intercepted by Oakesdale from wetland D is diverted instead into wetlands E and F. Essentially the conclusions should be that more water is added/diverted to wetlands E and F and water is diverted away from wetland D. I assume the analysis of whether these actions are really impacts which must be mitigated will be determined by the wetlands consultant. I would think the most critical issue for wetlands E and F is what impact the bridge structure itself has. Section 4.3.2. Next to last paragraph. This paragraph is confusing with regard to the discussion regarding sheet flow. Will there be a new inlet pipe extended to the west at the new sag location in system C to collect the sheet flow from the west that is diverted to that point? Won't the roadway divert runoff that under existing condition enters wetland C? Sections 4 and 5. What about impacts to adjacent landowners caused by citing of drainage systems outside of the Oakesdale alignment? Any mitigation measures? Were piped detention systems considered rather than open ponds, with the pipes located within the road alignment? Why was a piped discharge pipe extending all the way to Springbrook Creek from System C and P selected? What about an open channel alternative? What about wetland impacts from the construction of the outfall system? It is my understanding that the wetland mapping did not include all of the area that the outfall will be extended through. Will not having that area mapped be a problem? Since the P-1 Channel right-of-way will not be used for a P-1 Channel, it is unfortunate that the alignment between SW 23rd Street and SW 27th Street will not be used to a greater extent for the roadway because of wetland impact concerns. I feel this way because the wetlands that would be avoided are low quality, provide limited function, and are isolated from Springbrook Creek. A license and/or easement from Drainage District No. 1 may be required for new outfalls or reconstruction of existing outfalls to Springbrook Creek. 6/244G4 C4(&S31VXf WoU_V A Lf- IJZ0"1 ( 1 A,O ;� AND t4Jv£Lh 144,J144 Cd'4 ry &_550„rt E ,•.A)-rb0,1� The large number of drainage facilities required for this project increases the maintenance tL4_V -511b''r'OFs responsibilities of the city and should be noted as an impact. F-A rp.c stagy,,,,, New cross culverts must be designed for future flows from upstream tributary areas. A r rim cAus}µme. Existing downstream systems affected by the project must be analyzed for adequate capacity U° goo using existing and post-project conditions. Any upgrading necessary would be the pe responsibility of the project. ��(�Fi 00 U:1 996:65025:96-002:SW cc: Ron Straka PLANNING/ BUILDING/ PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ti`SY O MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 v E$ Q UTILITY SYSTEMS DIVISION - 235-2631 NT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION - 235-2620 TO: DATE JOB NO. RE: f- SG A 033 1-7;; ATTN: GENTLEMEN: WE AREISENDING YOU ATTACHED ❑ UNDER SEPARATE COVER VIA THE FOLLOWING ITEMS: o SHOP DRAWINGS ❑ PRINTS ❑ REPRODUCIBLE PLANS ❑ SPECIFICATIONS ❑ COPY OF LETTER o COPIES DATE NUMBER DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS c,A-Gss THESE ARE TRANSMITTED AS CHECKED BELOW: ❑ FOR APPROVAL ❑ APPROVED AS SUBMITTED ❑ RESUBMIT COPIES FOR APPROVAL FOR YOUR USE ❑ APPROVED AS NOTED ❑ SUBMIT COPIES FOR DISTRIBUTION ❑ AS REQUESTED ❑ RETURNED FOR CORRECTIONS ❑ RETURN CORRECTED PRINTS ❑ FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ❑ ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US COPIES TO: 1,i SIGNED TITLE IF ENCLOSURES ARE NOT AS NOTED, KINDLY NOTIFY US AT ONCE Job No. - LETTER OF 15203PL014-- The NNTB Companies TRANSMITTAL Date O1/12/96 600108th.,Suite 405,Bellevue,wash.98004(206)455-3555 TO: Rah Ada SLp�^ W046Kk y/ RE: Oakesdale Avenue S.W. HEC-2 Model Sections 200 Mill Avenue So. Renton, WA 98055 WE ARE FORWARDING TO YOU: Estimates Proposals ❑ Reports Plans ® Prints Under separate cover via: Shop drawings Samples Specifications ❑ Copy of letter ❑ Change order NO.OF DRAWING NO. LAST DATED CODE DESCRIPTION COPIES 1 1- 6 of 6 23 Oct. 1995 - Channel model sections for Alternative 2 widening 1 1-2 of 2 23 Oct. 1995 - Channel model sections for Alternative 2 widening including the proposed Oakesdale Avenue bridge THESE ARE TRANSMITTED For approval ❑ Resubmit _ copies for review No exceptions taken(NE) ® For your use ❑ Submit copies for distribution Make corrections noted MCN) ® As requested Return corrected copies Amend and resubmit(AR) For review and comment PLEASE NOTE: Only those sections that changed are plotted for AL72APRl.dat O COPY TO: file %� By c� m LU Cz x L cc XSECT 5548 "I-405" HNT B Cor oration Springbrook Creek Channel Model Oakesdale Avenue Project, S.W. 16th Street to S.W.27th Street PLOTTINGHEC2 SECTIONS Scale: 1'= 50"Horiz., 1" = 10'Vert From Flle:ALT2ACAL.DAT (23 Oct. 1996) Sheet I of 6 LLJ rn co cn � � o LU ro r Q a c -J) 5393 HNTB Cor oration Springbrook Creek Channel Model Oakesdale Avenue Project, S.W. 16th Street to S.W.27th Street PLOTTINGHEC2 SECTIONS Scale: 1'= 50'Horiz, I" = 10'Vert 1 V11 I 1 -1 From File:ALT2ACAL.DAT 54,38 Q (23 Oct. 1996) Sheet 2 of 6 t LU Q� I Cr LU Q -� 5550 5 773 HNT B Corporation Springbrook Creek Channel Model Oakesdale Avenue Project, S.W. 16th Street to S.W.27th Street PL OTTINGHEC2 SECTIONS Scale: V= 50"Horiz„ I" = 10"Vert From File:ALT2ACAL.DAT (23 Oct. 1996) 5830 Sheet 3 of 6 5838 5898 HNT B Cor oration Springbrook Creek Channel Model Oakesdale Avenue Project, S.W. 16th Street to S.W.27th Street PLOTTINGHEC2 SECTIONS Scales 1'= 50'Horiz„ 1" = 10'Vert i 1 1 _1 1 1 i From FIIe:ALT2ACAL.DAT (23 Oct. 1996) 5938 Sheet 4 of 6 � cn �� ca U L z I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i l l l l l l l i l l 6200 - 60' DS of Oakesdal e crossing, 6260 - DS edge of bridge 6348 - US edge of right bent and DS edge of left bent 6430 - US edge of bridge HNT B Corporation Springbrook Creek Channel Model Oakesda/e Avenue Project, S.W. 16th Street to S.W.27th Street PLOTTINGHEC2 SECTIONS 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 Scale: 1'= 50'Horiz., 1" = 10'Vert From File:ALT2ACAL.DAT 6500 - 70' US of Oakesdale crossing !23 Oct. 1996J Sheet 5 of 6 I I I I I I I I I I I I l l i l l l l l f l l l l l 6958 ----------------*�\J ► I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ► ► 8408 HNT B Cor oroti on Springbrook Creek Channel Model Oakesdale Avenue Project, S.W. 16th Street to S.W.27th Street PLOTTINGHEC2 SECTIONS Scale: 1'= 50'Horiz., 1" = 10'Vert From File:ALT2ACAL.DAT (23 Oct. 1996) Sheet 6 of 6 rn E oT e.0 cn UJ .r; o :a- Cr -7A a c h- r i l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l 6200 - 60' DS of Oakesdale crossing, I I ► I I , I I I , , I , , , , , , , , I , , , , , HNT B Cor oroti on Springbrook Creek Channel Model 6260 - LDS edge of bridge Oakesdale Avenue Project, S.W. 16th Street to S.W.27th Street PLOTTINGHEC2 SECTIONS Scale: 1'= 50'Horiz„ 1" = 10'Vert From File:ALT2APRI.DAT (23 Oct. 1996) Sheet 1 of 2 E> LU cn P_ C 1 � 1 I d � r 6348 - US edge of right bent and DS edge of lef I bent HNT B Corporation 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 Springbrook Creek Channel Model Oakesdale Avenue Project, 6430 - US edge of bridge S.W. 16th Street to S.W.27th Street PLOTTINGHEC2 SECTIONS Scale: 1'= 50'Horiz., 1" = 10'Vert From File:ALT2APRI.DAT (23 Oct. 1996) Sheet 2 of 2 • `�,� Scar cvOo pg u9il December 20,1995 Mr.Scott Woodbury,P.E. Project Manager Surface Water Utility City of Renton 'evg; PU^5Z A Sk '1,n 2 2W Mill Avenue South Renton,Washington 98055 2—, F4Z Dear Scott; Subject: City of Renton- East Side Green River Watershed Plan Review of HNTB Hydraulic Study of Proposed Oakesdale Avenue Bridge Crossing of Sprnngbrook Creek In accordance with your request, we have estimated our effort to conduct a review of the Hydraulic Impact Study for the New Bridge Crossing over Spingbrook Creek prepared by I-RgM dated December 9, 1995. We understand our effort would be paid for out of our ESGRWP Task 2 contingency. We understand the effort to include the following tasks items. 1) Review HNTB letter report dated December 8,1995. 2) Review corresponding HEC-2 data file provided by City. The review would include l UVM's use of tailwater elevation,flows,cross sections (assuming the City can provide HNTB's hard copies of cross-sections that are to scale, otherwise we would spot check approximately four sections using data file information),and bridge representation. Fit, f'5lcs' 7-0 sW Z3/0( 4-0o AS C./IkU i /A ScAtA A io5s/'3Ut 3) Prepare a letter that comments about the Pr& technical analysis (assumptions used). The letter would also comment about any major implications of the NHTB study on the ESGRW Plan. We would prepare a draft letter for City review and incorporate City comments to a final letter. The estimate does not include a second review should our findings indicate technical revisions of the HNTB work We estimate our effort to be $950.00 (see attachment). The current amount of the contingency is$4,220,therefore,the contingency would be reduced to$3,270. File: 12-OW18-10101-0101/3001 o:\Giseburt/MSG091.doc 2101 Fourth Avenue,Suite 600 Seattle,WA 98121-2375 Phone(206)441-7500 Fax(206)441-4962 HOWARD NEEDLES TAMMEN &BERGENDOFF,INC. Goo lo8ibAmnue,N.E. ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS PLANNERS Suite405 Beilevue,Washington 98004 (206)455-3555 FAX(206)453-9179 December 8, 1995 ��b..1 City of Renton Surface Water Utility Planning/Building/Public Works Department 200 Mill Avenue South Renton,Washington 98055 "��*�� C3F ineeCop, Attention: Scott Woodbury Eng Reference: Oakesdale Avenue S.W. - SW 16th Street to SW 31st Street Consultant Agreement No. CAG 103-91 Work Order Authorization No. 4 Hydraulic Impact Study for New Bridge Crossing over Springbrook Creek Dear Scott: HNTB Corporation has completed the production of the design report level HEC-2 model to be applied for the referenced project. We are transmitting the following computer files with supporting calculations to show how we arrived at the model input. • ALT2ABAS.DAT was developed from the model that you reviewed in June 1995. Revisions relate to the addition of GR card points to define the Alternative 2 channel improvement and modification of QT card storm runoff data. • ALT2ACAL.DAT added cross sections locations associated with the Oakesdale Avenue S.W. bridge model sections. This model provides the base impact comparison output including any changes in calculated water surface due to the addition of channel model sections. • ALT2APRLDAT includes a Normal Bridge model of the Oakesdale Avenue S.W. crossing without channel improvements. • ALT2APR2.DAT includes a Normal Bridge model of the Oakesdale Avenue S.W. crossing with channel improvements limited to concrete lining under the bridge between the top of the low flow channel and the abutments. We have incorporated the proposed East Side Green River Watershed Plan Alternative 2 channel sections which were provided by Bob Mahn by transmittal dated October 13, 1995. Per my last conversation with you,these conditions are expected to exist at the time of the Oakesdale Avenue S.W. bridge construction. This earthen trapezoidal section with a low-flow pilot channel was incorporated into the model within to the planned limits between S.W. 16th Street and S.W. 23rd Street. The future flow rates account for future increases accompanying proposed removal of existing restrictions Scott Woodbury December 8, 1995 Page 2 upstream. By modeling these proposed channel conditions, HNTB has attempted to model the "existing"conditions that will be influenced by the Oakesdale Avenue S.W. project to the nearest extent possible. If the construction schedules change, further channel impact and mitigation design may be required to ensure that there is no impact to the Springbrook Creek floodway given conditions at the time of construction. The findings of the model show impacts to water elevation upstream from the bridge. Though this impact is mitigated by concrete lining as described above, more aesthetic mitigation options could be a point of coordination during final designs. Since both the channel and roadway improvement programs are headed by the City of Renton, mitigation options could take advantage of this condition. Please call if there are any questions or comments relating to the enclosed HEC-2 models. Sincerely, HOWARD NEEDLES TAMMEN & BERGENDOFF Alan D. Black ADB:la Enclosires cc: Bob Mahn, Project Manager File 15203-PL-014 1\15203\proj-manT51207b.doc HNTB Cmpmabon Momu, 96s0ur 50mMARY SPRINGBROOK CREEK MODEL OF FUTURE CONDITIONS DESIGN CHECK FOR NO IMPACT AT NEW OAKESDALE AVENUE BRIDGE CROSSING CALIBRATION ALT2APR1 ALT2APR2 f"�VN S 4/9 SECNO JCWSEL CWSEL DELTA CWSEL DELTA Y 58981 7.03 7.03 O.gO 7.03 0.00 �,� 58981 8.02 8.02 0,00 8.02 0.06 e[�� 5898 9.15 9.15 grog 9.15 0.00 ` (00 J`-EryV� Co),4J5YAN�` 58981 13.25 1325 0.00 13.25 0.00 5938 70g 7.g0 000 7.00 0.0g •' 5938 7.99 7.99 0,00 7.99 0.00 5938 9A2 9,121 0.00 9.121 0.00 5938 13.25 13.251 Grog 13.25 0.00 6038 7.12 7.121 0.00 7.12 0,00 6038 8.11 8.111 0.00 8.11 0.00 60381 9.24 9.24 g00 9.24 0.00 60381 13.26 13.261 0.00 13.26 0.00 62DOI 7.28 7.28 0.00 7.28 0.06 62001 8.30 8.30 0.00 8.30 0.00 62001 9.42 9.42 0.00 9A2 000 62DOI 13.28 13.28 0.00 13,28 0.00 62601 .3 .3 -0.01 L32 -00 6260 8.36 8.33 -0.03 8.33 -0.033 6MI 9.48 9.44 -0.04 9.44 -0,04 6260 13.29 13.28 -0.01 13.28 6348 T41 7.441 0.03 7.43 0.02 6348 8.44 8.51 0.07 8.49 0.05 6348 9.57 9.65 0.08 9.64 0.07 6348 1329 13.30 0.01 13.31 0.02 N� 6430 7.48 7.49 0.01 7.46 -0.02 6430 8.52 866 0.04 8.52 0.00 DTI. 643011 9.64 9.71 0.07 9.66 002 Q 6430 13.30 13.31 0.01 13.31 0.01 Q 6500 7.53 7,52 -0.01 7.48 -0.05 6500 8.58 8.59 0.01 8.54 404 6500 9.70 974 004 9.68 -0.02 6500 13.31 13.31 0.00 13.31 0.00 6958 7.84 763 -0.01 1 7.80 -0.04 6958 8.93 8.94 O.Dt 8.89 -0.04 69581 10.06 10.09 0.03 10.04 -0.02 69581 13.35 13.35 0.00 13.35 0.00 8408 8.68 8.68 0.00 8.66Eg 02 8408 9.90 9,91 001 9488 .028408 11.09 11.11 0.02 11.08 .016408 13.51 13.52 0.01 13.52 .01 9178 9.05 9.05 0.001 9.03 -0.02 9178 10.32 M32 0.001 10.30 -0.02 9178 11.52 1154 OmO2l 11.52 0.00 / �J 9175 13.59 13.60 0.011 1359 000 9338 9.12 9.12 o.00l 9.11 -0.01 9338 1040 10.41 0.01 10.39 -0.01 9338 11.63 11.65 0.02 1162 -0.01 9338 1361 13.61 0.00 13,61 0.00 98781 9,291 929 0.00 928 -0.01 98781 lOw6Ol 10.60 0.00 10.59 -0.01 98781 11.97 1 11.93 0.02 11.90 -0.01 9878 13.611 13,62 0A7 1361 0.00 9928 9.37 9.37 0.00 9.36 -0.01 9928 10.66 10,66 0.00 10.65 -0.01 9928 11.92 11.94 0.02 11.91 9928 1361 13.62 0.01 1361 0.00 9933 9.37 9.37 grog 9.36 -0.01 9933 10.66 10.67 0.01 10.65 -0.01 9933 11,90 11.92 0.02 11,89 -0,01 9933 13 61 13.61 0.00 13.61 0.00 9966 9.381 9.38 0.00 9.36 -0.02 9966 10671 10,67 0.00 10.66 -0.01 9966 11.931 11.95 0 02 11.92 -0.01 9966 13,621 1363 0.01 1163 0.01 9971 9.381 9.38 0.00 9.36 -0.02 9971 10.671 1068 0.01 10.66 -0.01 9971 1200. 1202. 0.02 11.99 -0.01 9971 1364 13,64 0.00 13.64 0,00 10011 9435 9.35 0.00 9.33 -0.02 1 D011 10.72 1072 0.00 10.70 -0 02 10011 12.31 12.33 0.02 12.30 -001 10011 13.69 1369 0.00 13,69 0.00 10376 10.08 10.07 -0,01 10.06 -0.02 t0 376 1137 12.55 0.00 11436 0.01 10376 1372 13.73 0.01 13 73 0.01 ��v..n;i'�gate� R1�.Gs� Mi�:9ate4) Page 1 Made by - -1,7. -i�;I e k Date 10 Z, 95 Job Number The ANTB Companies Checked by Date ForO. Sheet Number vl ` Backchecked by Date ✓�se.l Gr�y o� e n fph GI�GZ Mode �r�rn r-cJ1'- -FIN , NZz coifed �a F-u—mA5,5�•vA-r (Ma"A 95) F6TYAtC T ��red �� 4L7"ZA rsAs.p4T (_lode MDd t f f G,a j,-.-15 + )V O < <le I I e It/4 -9 e, T"o l l o G(�1ged Goer, v�l 2� C ' A1# xi) X4-�r 6-Jz liq va 5 f�o-I� a r� b�7l,rJ��h 5 W Z�J rd vee f fer F X of 1011919 5 (,?WgAed) C ____-. '�rr. Ga✓d 5 a c d_erl a�1e,aot o�, Gl1/p : Tor 4b5 Ltr jLe l �OCci�[G o,� g��5 ��e�wy I r►-Flow i 1 p s 35 ':�'W 2,-7t�, u/s 15 /5 �8 w 43 rd A/5 • V%[ I i ///) �e✓Vl A(t�/e Z I(Op lo.� 1 f/ '�O✓ ��ri-Y�f lurt �nJegcP �VC�nt r • U Sri.-� ,/�IT2✓I haT�c/e 2 ��p-1 rov, A)" �o. 2-;a� ova ZS-YCar Made by � � Date io 20 95 Job Number n Checked by Date j�3'Pc--o r The xNre Companies For �a k-�,d.►�e � � � Backchecked by Date Sheet Number 1///' ✓h� Ur FIN, y le- i No G{(A nI G.1!� O.oSo o v35 O'5o No C E/gill E X1 _L ag V;Ao rf-.ej lair 6� ✓TAje,A Go-15r5�a� _ w17�// �s�c�,9 ✓l�ode�i �o 4E!51-.Ot fed GQ! Gal Gf� /�o o� ✓�G�l/ P�}GGrtVcc'flo'^. �No 5 S(I38 9� t)lsee'4 -fit, of X`T 6a1�45 /� �l�e�//�l � o/r►rs To /h?i �►� porn? S_ e- Wire wAe�G Gcr rd5 wtir-Az- ✓14 Ott,Ff'�_J . �T vo�5 H e,w gJ-OVJ ra-1 ArS we�,rf, 6,a f c vl a'g-j �✓� fAe,- �0f J'O r ^� '7PiG7to0 r lid war�o�a ed r" 14A �_ b� �wtad e�j ----�---�i- '� ►oll, 10 G/ 61 �XrS�;nci Gig &'roi low yarn, Made by cis Date o Zo ?5 Job Number T h e H N T B Companies Checked by Date �l720lT'�G Sheet Number For61aP-e-,4a e, Backcheckedby Date 3 i.w l ii�es we.-e held Cx c-erf`` wee•-e, if w4 s \ Alf. 2A �rofi�e Mod�ll� IFvr F1 N. HzZ o g 8 Go fy o kzgn f Qp" . _ 7a�les w�►<<� ��.�� c�tlafe�. 5����� �r°Ja�co e-.s Gtf -te- �641(,d 6GN0 O, I r n ff, At--F2R13A56, VKr --,erVe,s as +Le, a I Oki c" ro(,44 60 Ads Oafs- d4Ir- Aye, b'-1-dq Ie" G✓o55r�. o , w Made by �� Date 20 9S Job Number The eNre Companies Checked by Date 15?A - l--4j Sheet Number For �a le, AV6, �ra u rc M Backchecked by Date lYlo•�) o� o o ��� �� . -F;,f 5.epf. i995 11"Gon�epivol Steadwil 414_ 5WI„ PgAF-r F rNAL A•,�, h G✓�-I�a'�r e,.�.s 0 ( J 1YQt/ IVY IrtOIA� �l I ,'jY,✓,e,,q 4 r1 �O I✓1ch `�j1�AMr�nr� pr2 /el�i C/OHS. ��V`LGV 1 Gm•M�,OSf7L° L<t�11`H—p�ac� �EGK Sy��� I Z5 WS�� ✓e4frg�fF� Cvti� , Ito.-JE✓ �fjye �� ► 5 : -13-fV&6 ZA ALTEF-NA'rlV& 4 5101. ' c• Grd�• ,4��Oo� PN / / ' !/ l -3 5 w� rYrIOA I- w Made by A V at Date io 23 5 Job Number The HNTB Companies Checked by Date ��7Zo3 � L-o For 0,4 -4 I v �L e Backchecked by Date Sheet Numberc) fL-P D pie, �j�/�l✓)Vl fi P ' ��y OT �n�v... G{'1�rNhG'T �/viJ rr�l/�vrrev�"1 Gtll�tr.lAl�VC z (�A 15 a n Il Q. 14.25 • fA r c u f\ n N n o n r !� �m O w 3�•5/ � fl T c L 11�1Tb^1 166NT 1 (474 16) = rS6 (48+ $6� = t 5.15 k 9,�z�5�1) - Z•36°I (Z84 23.7-7 C- -1,4rioAe A$t5TnhIT_ (56400) = 2r2•(o15- 0•o179 (I5) s w .._..... ...--------- -----. _ ..._. _ _ _. _ --- _ ----- _. RIM=18.9: SDMH G RIM;-17.45 - - ._: - -- _-- -- - - — -- - - 3 � \ _ SMH• (hC S f - _ '''-� °'>'� \ \ �,c>'• f , y-S1i�fT'FAE•rR0 ,, i SMH ? i RIM=21.74 r - r� �; RIM A, .72 f- LT _ N D ii t. R 82 '3 � 4 24 0 56 --- 2 2 . i s c 496.89 _ - - -- - - - ✓ FL00� CASE a ul-- WEIR` L� % fr RCP RAIIJ M / o � ! UJ EC BO 18 i At.0 � I Springbro k Sho I End Brig ROC _ �✓�/ / /' �, j� 4 (pCo 1 ` i 0pR CP / �• i i 'f�- Xx ' � I rn Z ZO <<-0 S h.,,.., CHECKING THE ALT2APRI.DAT INPUT FILE CITY OF RENTON SPRINGBROOK CREEK CHANNEL MODEL BASED ON THE C.O.R. CHANNEL ALT.2A NH 5 0.075 0.9 0.05 47.5 0.0351 74.5 0.05 123.2 0.075 NH 130 X1 5938 10 47.5 74.5 40 401 40 0 GR 0 15.8 0.9 15.9 37.5 3.7 47.5 3.7 55 1.2 GR 67 1.2 74.51 3.7 84.5 3.7 123.2 16.6 130 16.6 NC 0.1 0.3 X7 6038 10 47.5 74.51 100 100 100 GR 0 15.8 0.9 15.9 37.5 3.7 47.5 3.7 55 1.2 GR 67 1.2 74.5 3.7 84.5 3.7 123.2 16.6 130 16.6 6200 60'D ownstrea of the new Oak esdale c rossing NH 5 0.075 737 0.05 786.5 0.035 813.5 0.05 864 0.075 NH 900 X1 6200 25 786.5 813.5 162 1621 162 GR 700 18 18 18 737 16 23 16 745.6 14 23 16.75 25 45 % 1 p.CstiS , t-cl, _ C.07 764 7.87 t � 764.1 7.83 -s GR 774.5 4.37 20 774.6 4.33 € 776.5 3.7 786.51 3.7 75 . 794 1.2 .; GR 806 1.2 807.4 1.67 23.27 17 ' 807.5 1.71 23.27 14.5 813.5 3.7 23.27 13.2 5 � 818.9 3.7 23.27 12 F GR 819 3.7 23.27 3.7 0100, . 823.5 3.7 23.27 3.7 650 700 750 B00 850 900 950 838.91 8.83 23.27 8.83 8391 8.87 23.27 12 Page 1 Sh,..., 845.5 11.04 23.271 14.5 GR 845.6 11.08 23 17 853.9 13.84 22.56 16.3 854 13.88 22.56 13.88 864 17 22 17 900 17 17 17 NC 0.3 0.5 6260 Downst ream edge of the new Oak esdale c rossing NH 5 0.075 737 0.0351 786.5 0.0351 813.5 0.02 864 0.075 NH 900 X1 6260 60 60 60 BT -16 700 18 18 737 23 16 745.6 23 16.75 BT 807.5 23.27 14.5 813.5 23.27 13.2 818.9 23.27 12 BT 819 23.27 3.7 823.5 23.27 3.7 838.9 23.27 8.83 BT 839 23.27 12 845.5 23.27 14.5 845.E 23 17 BT P53 22.56 16.3 22.56 13.88 22 17 BT 17 17 NH 6 737 0.02 747.1 0.035 786.5 0.035 813.5 0.02 NH 864 900 X1 6348 21 786.5 813.5 88 88 88 700 18 18 18 737 16 23 16 745.6 14 23 14 747 13.53 23 13.53 25 747.1 13.49 23 16.75 776.51 3.7 786.5 3.7 zo 794 1.2 k 806 1.2 15 813.5 3.7 823.5 3.7 832.9 6.83 23.27 16 10 833 6.87 838.9 8.83 23.27 839 8.87 23.27 5 a ` 845.5 11.04 23.27 11.04 , 845.6 11.08 23 16.5 ,, . 853.9 13.84 22.56 16.3 650 700 750 800 850 900 950 854 13.88 22.56 13.88 864 17 22 17 900 17 17 17 Page 2 Sht GR GR GR 6430 Upstre am edge o f the n ew Oakes dale cro ssing NH 6 0.075 737 0.02 774.5 0.035 813.5 0.035 853.9 0.02 NH 864 0.075 900 X1 6430 17 786.5 813.5 82 82 82 700 18 18 18 737 16 23 16 7 a 764 7.87 23 7.87 25 Q � J 764.1 7.83 23 11.75 he y 774.5 4.37 231 14.25 ' 774.6 4.33 23 16.75 20 k, 776.5 3.7 23 16.75 786.5 3.7 23 16.75 15 794 1.2 23.05 16.8 806 1.2 23.1 16.9 813.51 3.7 10 823.5 3.7 853.9 13.84 22.56 16.3 5 �" 854 13.88 22.56 13.88 864 17 22 17 900 17 17 17 0 650 700 750 800 $50 900 950 GR 806 23.27 17 GR GR Page 3 MEETING MINUTES 15203-PL-014 The NNTE Companies i CITY OF RENTON OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. S.W.16TH TO S.W. 31ST STREET Meeting Date: November 28, 1995, 9:30 a.m. Location: City of Renton Subject: Wetlands Issues Coordination Consultant Agreement No, CAG 103-91 Work Order Authorization No. 4 Submitted by: Peter Smith,November 29, 1995 (Revised 12/14/95) Attended: Bob Mahn City of Renton 277-5545 Lenora Blauman City of Renton 277-6168 Scott Woodbury City of Renton 277-5547 Marc Boule Shapiro&Associates 624-9190 Jim Keany Shapiro &Associates 624-9190 Marcia West Osborn Pacific Group 448-7956 Peter Smith HNTB 455-3555 Rick Kittler HNTB 455-3555 1. Pete Smith opened the meeting with a description of the project alternatives and issues raised by the Corps of Engineers (COE) at the November 7, 1995 meeting. The statement was made that the Phase 1 section of the project, S.W 16th to S.W 27th Street,had both preliminary and EIS alternatives that would be sufficient for COE EIS review and later permitting. 2. Based on comments made by the COE, development of more alternatives for Phase 2 could be required. Specifically, an all-structure alternative and a higher bridge to reduce loss of light impacts. An all-fill option could also be considered. Marc Boule noted that the COE would evaluate project alternatives based on COE guidelines or policy of "cost-logistics-technology" feasibility. Pete Smith confirmed that the project to date had developed costs for only a single bridge length option which was that res by a balancing of the rea obtained fob O esdale Avenue.y the removal of sting lmpacts oncMetPo access to the sewer have ay(Metro sewer access road)with the new fill placement not yet been discussed with Metro. 3. Bob Mahn noted that the project budget limitation is the principal reason for not developing the Phase 2 concepts further. Permitting for wetland fill will not be sought since construction of Phase 2 is not planned for many years. The approach has been to disclose potential impacts of Phase 2 (as required by SEPA)but defer detailed analysis to a time closer to actual construction. This initiated a discussion of project segmentation issues—whether S.W. 27th Street could be presented as a logical project terminus, and, if so, should the proposed action only be the Phase 1 project rather than both phases. The City at present intends to include both project phases. Pete Smith said he would prepare an estimate of effort required to develop additional south bridge options at a level of detail sufficient to address COE"cost-logistics-technology"review. The City would than decide on the direction to proceed regarding the Phase 2 project. 4. Marc Boule said discussions were underway between Ecology and Boeing on potentially increasing water levels in the"South Marsh"to drown out canary grass and improve habitat. This would be done I\152031proj-man1mm51128b.dce Page 1 of 3 Primed 12/14/951:57 PM City of Renton Meeting Minutes Oakesdale Avenue S.W. November 28, 1995 by controlling the outflow through the 48-inch culvert under Longacres Parkway. Scott Woodbury said he thought the 48-inch pipe connecting the two wetlands was unobstructed and water levels were equalized between the two wetlands. The City would be concerned about loss of storage if the south marsh water levels were raised. The comment was made that the Longacres site will drain primarily to the north to the CSTC system. 5. The City will determine actual wetland replacement ratios for the Oakesdale project. For EIS analysis purposes, a ratio of 2:1 was discussed for replacement of project-filled wetlands. It was noted that it would be difficult later(in the permitting process)to mitigate to a lesser degree than discussed in the EIS—for example, for loss of light impacts or a 1.5:1 replacement ratio for category three wetlands. Scott Woodbury stated that under current City ordinance, wetland enhancement would not be accepted as mitigation for Category 1 and 2 wetland impacts—only wetland replacement would be acceptable. Scott read an ordinance paragraph which allows enhancement of Category 3 wetlands as mitigation. It could be possible to get a variance from ordinance requirements through the hearing examiner. 6. Pete Smith and Rick Kittler discussed project stormwater facilities. Two of the facilities impact the Category 3 wetland in City-owned property north of S.W. 27th and west of the Allpak property. These are stormwater detention/treatment ponds that would discharge treated stormwater into the wetland. The canary-grass wetland would be deepened to provide added storage and enhanced. The wetland would be hydraulically connected to the wetland south of S.W. 27th Street. There is a 25-foot buffer requirement which would extend the area of project impact, and decrease the area adjacent to the project available for wetland replacement/enhancement. The use of buffer averaging to the extent allowed by the ordinance may be desirable to address buffer impacts. 7. It was brought up that Boeing is having problems with the outlet pipe from the CSTC constructed wetland to Springbrook Creek and may need to replace or modify it. The Boeing landscape contractor has asked the City when the Oakesdale bridge would be built. The Oakesdale bridge requires relocation/replacement of the outlet control structure. Marc Boule noted that the outlet pipe is located where it is because it is the location of the Longacres Racetrack drainage outlet to Springbrook and it was easier to obtain a permit for modification of a pipe at an existing location than a permit for an new outfall location. The control structure could be moved to avoid conflict with the Oakesdale bridge while retaining the existing outfall location. 8. Pete Smith said there would be a conflict(inadequate headroom)with the Springbrook Creek trail and the Alternative A and C bridges. Scott Woodbury said that the proposed channel modification would provide a bench area(floodway)which could be constructed at an elevation to provide the required 8 feet of clearance to the bottom of the structure(16-foot elevation)for pedestrian use. 9. Project work flow and coordination was discussed. Pending resolution of the Phase 2 alternatives, work on the Phase 1 portion can proceed but technical reports cannot be completed until there is a decision on Phase 2. HNTB will provide design drawing prints to both Shapiro and Osborn Pacific, and CAD file to Osborn Pacific. HNTB already has Alignment A detention ponds located on the plan sheets. Alignment C detention ponds will be located on plan sheets before the sheets are sent. EIS exhibits will be at a lesser level of detail on photo or line drawing bases. Only Alternative A will be carried forward in the design report which will be issued after the DEIS is circulated. I:IUDpro-ma*=51128b.doc Page 2 of 3 Printed 12114/951:57 PM City of Renton Meeting Minutes Oakesdate Avenue S.W. November 28, 1995 10. Pete Smith discussed the project schedule. The working date for circulation of the DEIS is the last week of March. HNTB will provide a detailed schedule after a decision is made on the Phase 2 alternatives. 11. Marcia West asked-for available landscaping plans for the CSTC project. Rick Kittler said we would send the plans HNTB has. Action Items a) HNTB to estimate effort to develop concepts for Phase 2. This will be sent to the City. b) HNTB to provide design drawings to Shapiro and Osborn Pacific. Osborn Pacific to be provided CAD files as well. c) HNTB to provide Osborn Pacific with reference landscaping plans for the CSTC. HNTB will review project file for other reference drawing that may be useful to Osborn Pacific. The above,:assumed to'be a c rrect ecord of the significant items discussed A thI IOUWI Please notify HNTB if you have any questions,corrections,or additions. cc: Attendees Project Book 15203 correspondence file 1A15203"-manWm51128b.doc Page 3 of 3 Printed 12114/951:57 PM SENT,BY: 11-30-95 ; 10:55 HNTB BELLEVUE-i 206 277 4428;# 2/ 4 i MEETING MINUTES 15203*. _014 rbe HXTB GompAxies CITY OF RENTON OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. S.W. 16TH To S.W. 31ST STREET Meeting Date: November 28,1995, 9:30 a.m. Location: City of Renton i Subject: Wetlands Issues Coordination Consultant Agreement No. CAG 103-91 Work Order Authorization No- 4 Submitted by: Peter Smith, November 29, 1995 Attended: Bob Mahn City of Renton 277-5545 ; Lenora Blauman City of Renton 277-6168 Scott Woodbury City of Rcnton 277-5547 Marc Boule Shapiro&Associates 624-9190 Jim Keany Shapiro&Associates 624-9190 } Marcia West Osborn Pacific Group 448-7956 Peter Smith HNTB 455-3555 is Rick Kittler HNTB 455-3555 1. Pete Smith opened the meeting with a description of the project alternatives and issues raised by-O ,14� Corps of Engineers(COE)at the November 7, 1995 meeting. The statement was made that the Phase p5f-� 1 I section of the project, S.W 16th to S.W 27th Street, had both preliminary and EIS alternatives .hat ate- would be sufficient for COE EIS review and later permitting. cPS,��s 2. Rased on comments made by the COE, development of more alternatives for Phase 2 could be rg�ired_ Specifically, an all-structure alternative and a higher bridge to reduce loss of light impacts. An 1-fill 19a1Loption could also be considered. Marc Boule noted that the COE would evaluated project altcrr4 fives based o cgislated requirements f"cost-logistics-technology' feasibility_ Pete Smith confirme, 'that � 4- the project to date had developed costs for only a single bridge length option which was determiri d by a balancing of the area obtained by the removal of existing Longacres Parkway(Metro sewer aci II,ss road)with the new fill placement for Oakesdale Avenue. Impacts on Metro access to the sewer 6vc not yet been discussed with Metro. ; 3. Bob Mahn noted that the project budget limitation is the}principal reason for not developing the ff hase 2 concepts further. Permitting for wetland fill will not be sought since;construction of Phase 2 ii not planned for many years. The approach has been to disclose potential igip is of Yhasc 2 (as rcgI ed by SEPA) but defer detailed analysis to a time closer to actual This This initiated a discus ion of project segmentation issues—whether S.W. 27th Street could be presented as a logical pro} terminus, and, if so, should the;proposed action only be the Phase 1 project rather than both pha s. The City at present intends to include both project phases. Pete Smith said he would prepare an {' estimate of effort required to develop additional south bridge options at a level of detail sufficierrtd to address COE "cost-logistics-technology"ruvicw. The City would than decide on the direction to proceed regarding the Phase 2 project- 4. Marc Boule said discussions were underway between Ecology and Boeing on potentially increases water levels in the"South Marsh"to drown out canary grass and improve habitat. This would b :done 1162031pvi-mm1 nm51128a doc Page 1 of 3 Pnnted 11/3 9:53 AM 1 t City of Renton Meeting ures Oake_sda/e Avenue S.W_ November 2t1995 by controlling the outflow through the 48-inch culvert under Longacres Parkway. Scott Woodbury said he thought the 48-inch pipe connecting the two wetlands was unobstructed and water levels ere equalized between the two wetlands- The City would be concerned about loss of storage if the south marsh water levels were raised. The comment was made that the Longacres site will drain prirrlaly to the north to the CSTC system- 5. The City will determine actual wetland replacement ratios for the Oakesdale project. For EIS analysis purposes, a ratio of 2:1 was discussed for replacement of project-tilled wetlands. It was noted t it would be difficult later(in the permitting process)to mitigate to a lesser degree than discussed inthe EIS—for example, for loss of light impacts or a 1.5:1 replacement ratio for category three well ds. Scott Woodbury stated that under current City ordinance, wetland enhancement would not be accepted as mitt ion for Category 1 and 2 wetland impacts—only wetland r cement would be accep able. Sco rca ordinance paragraph which all enlu-mcement of Category 3 wetl s as mitigation. It could be possible to get a variance from&di6ance requirements through the hearing examiner. 6. Pete Smith and Rick Kittler discussed project stormwater facilities. Two of the facilities impact the Category 3 wetland in City-owned property north of S.W. 27th and west of the Allpak property. Thcse are stormwater detention/treatment ponds that would discharge treated stormwater into the wetland. The canary-grass wetland would be deepened to provide added storage and enhanced. The wetland would be hydraulically connected to the wetland south of S.W. 27th Street. There is a 25-foot buffer requirement which would extend the area of project impact, and decrease the area adjacent to the project available l _-floc wetland r�lacement/enhancemen/t. 'Tliz t4se al &.(-lei- one iMj t/tt ek¢e„,� a�"/aW�7r� �t' Ut r14 r)ige. shay j� dcSfiLa9� �v X�Xj 4�GS3 ba G/` /m�4Pff 7, it was brought up that Boeing is having problems with the outlet pipe from the CSTCructed wetland to Springbrook Creek and may need to replace or modify it. The Boe on c�tr asked the City when the Oakcsdale bridge would be built. The Oakesdalc bridge requires relocation/replac�mcnt of the outlet control structure. Marc Boule noted that the outlet pipe is located where it is because it is the location of the Longacres Racetrack drainage outlet to Springbrook and it was easier to obtain a It for modification of a pipe at an existing location than a permit for an new outfall location. The cotro structure could be moved to avoid conflict with the Oakscdale bridge while retaining the existing oudfdl location. 1 sog: s >�t, aS r 4. /'1 41C-4 fdo Sam�W f' s a Cet' /yam /�� o- _�t M GSY kee�o��y vo�u�J . 8- Pete Smite said there would be a conflict(inadequate headroom)with the rmgbronk Czteck trail and the Alternative A and C bridges. Scott Wood u said that c ro osed channel modificati n r. provide a bench area(floodwgay)whichjaJamA n' � r 9} n �� 8 feet of clearance to the bottom of the structure use,. 9. Project work flow and coordination was discussed. Pending resolution of the Phase 2 alternatives, work on tho Phaso 1 portion can proceed but technical reports cannot be completed until there is a decision on Phase 2. HNTR will provide design drawing prints to both Shapiro and Osborn Pacifip, and CAD file to Osborn Pacific. FINTB already has Alignment A detention ponds located on the plan sheets. Alignment C detention ponds will be located on plan sheets before the sheets are sent. EIS exhibits will be at a lesser level of detail on photo �9z dwing bases. Only Alternative A will be carried forward in the design report which will be r the DEIS is circulated. 1:115203tpru1-mawrnm6112Ea w Page 2 of 3 Printed I IJ 30M.9 53 AM City of Renton Meeting UMutes Oakesdale Avenue S_W. November 2$,;1995 e 10. Pcte Smith discussed the project schedule. The workir date( r circulation of the DEIS is the last week of March. HNTB will provide a detailed schedule a decision is made on the Phase 2 alternatives. 11. Marcia West asked for available landscaping plans for the CSTC project. Rick Kittler said we would send the plans HNTB has. Action Items a) HNTB to estimate effort to develop concepts for Phase 2. This will be sent to the City. b) HNTB to provide design drawings to Shapiro and Osborn Pacific. Osborn Pacific to be provided CAD tiles as well. c) HNTB to provide Osborn Pacific with reference landscaping plans for the CSTC. HNTB will review project file for other reference drawing that may be useful to Osborn Pacific. x' io"f° i94 �rdti€1 €' �r # & cc: Attendees Project Book 15203 correspondence file I � i i I I 1 11152aAyrq-mentmm51121se.doc Page 3 of 3 Printed 1WO/95 :57AM I I if OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. S.W. 16TH STREET TO S.W. 31 ST STREET Wetlands Issues Coordination Meeting Agenda November 28, 1995 1. Discuss Project Description. el . Language that Corps will favor. �1. Aspects that Corps will expect to see addressed. C ,EIS vs. Design Report consistency. 2. Consensus on concept and impacts. Establish/set structure lengths and profile. �. Review stormwater facilities proposed. G_ Establish assumptions for fill and loss-of-light replacement ratios. WoViv w. 6S9-l4,1t 5(4",60 Review"betterment"proposals to be carried forward. ..j6fu p'v'�wr W Aimb�­& v '5-t P- Confirm there are no other viable avoidance alternatives. � fl' /) c.+�Jr 3 09/p" u 'Lf 04� it3-iarc, 7,"1410fiti 3. Discuss/Establish sequence&requirements for work flow coordination. What drawings/information are needed for sub-consultant effort—by whom, when, what level of detail, CAD? Who determines extent of impacts? Who determines extent of mitigation? What figures/information are needed for EIS &Design Report chapters by whom, when, what level of detail, format? I:\15203\proj-man\ag51128a.doc Page 1 of 1 .. . ... - ,� . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. �-►1a .. L U -�1 r- :a .. .. .. .. .. .. .........:................ ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ....................................... . . . . . . . . . : . . :.... l.. . ; ,.' . .. :.mot.. .. sue:... ....: . .. .. .. , .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. �- .1 ...........1 ...........��..... ......:..ham...... . ... ....... - r. ._..:........ 't ...................:................... .. .. .. ...:... .. .... .. .. .. .. Zolown . ......`........�. ...:...T+ ..............Sdv..� . .�4�s��w,..:........ ... z .... .T�....€..r—�TE6. ....ft.Z� :.........:.........:......`r't'`� : kGS 9w.......: � �!.-....:.�. .. CF................................T....A !..........s..... ........"!j........ Lot �. . ... .41JN.... ... ... ... .�1.,. ... . ...... ... ... ... ... ... .. ... ... ... ................................. .. l . .... .... .... .... F .. .. .. ..................................................:......................................:....................................:....................................:.......................................:....................................:.................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... yy �1.1k; •-C4v F�?f1 J/�•'� �r Pr�Ct' 'f,�,r /.ti c'e��I`�I /���` b C-aa L,; i -4DO Rim '3 41 8091, )C- -- Co T4 W-D Rom,s; - w,V-14 t-Xv�s St, p ly COAT t-A4Z r" Full n /�C - I 9x�W)'0t,06-1 A r(g -/-o 70 3t `r - _1 . PA_-fusp t, oqVW,1.-_�vLYtie Aar r3C r! /ors R THE CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS flll s -$ FOURTH FLOOR 200 MILL AVENUE SOUTH RENTON, WASHINGTON 98055-2189 FAX: 235-2541 To:A LA-) 13LAC< Company: 1N� Phone: Fax: From: Scgri- We(j_o6u c, Company: Phone: 27-7 - 5-5y7 Fax: Date: 1411195 Pages including this cover page: 3 Comments: 77.41 Foo-off r..j - ; 2- - 7 fAR FuTugt (,4A.)v4Y14-.) c,O' w/ 2-5- �,EA 2 T'-u r u 1l/' IL I[ R it Itt- 9-It...11" -a--- a M-_#I Table 2 Summary of Peak Flows and Water Surface Elevations 2-Year Future Conveyance Event A!temative I-No Action Alternative 2(Option A) Alternative 2(Option B) Alternative 3(Option A) Altemative 3(Option B) Connecting Channel In-Place 2-Year Future Flow 2-Year Future Flow 2-Year Future Flow 2-Year Future Flow 2-Year Future Flow Roadway Top Elev. Location/Description Flow Elev Flow Elev Flow Elev Flow Elev, (cfs) (feet) (cfs) (feet) (cfs) (feet) (cfs) (feet) Panther Creek u/s of Wetland 62 62 62 62 62 Panther Creek South SR-167 Xing 0 31 0 31 Re-established Panther Creek 35 14.1 10 13.8 35 14.1 10 13.8 Crossing of SR-167 Re-established Panther Creek 56 11.1 37 9.5 55 8.7 37 9.8 DS of East Valley Highway Rolling Hills Creek at Renton 70 20.4 70 20.4 70 20.4 70 20.4 70 20.4 Shopping Center Culy.Outlet Rolling Hills u/s 132"culvert 70 16.59 69 16.6 69 16.6 69 16.6 69 16.6 PCW north outlet 45 14.67 40 14.1 40 13.8 40 14.1 40 13.8 Springbrook Creek BRPS outflow 726 853 3.9 835 3.9 754 3.8 763 3.8 728 3.8 854 4.4 843 4.4 764 4.3 773 4.3 Grady Way u/s 593 6.2 741 6.9 742 6.9 662 6.6 668 6.7 SW 16th Street 584 6.7 733 7.2 733 7.2 654 7 660 7 Confluence of North 60"SS 561 9.4 708 8.7 709 8.7 638 8.6 640 8.6 Confluence of P-9 526 10.4 657 9.4 660 9.4 597 9.7 598 9.7 SW 27th u/s 17.9 518 11.5 608 9.9 631 9.9 555 10.2 577 10.2 SW 34th u/s 14.9 564 12.9 575 11.1 561 11.1 534 11.2 534 11.4 Oaksdale d/s 17.1 567 13.5 575 12.3 575 12.3 576 12.4 576 12.5 Oaksdale u/s 17.1 527 14.3 535 12.6 525 12.6 524 12.4 524 12.5 SW 43rd d/s 22.9 525 14.65 530 13.6 530 13.5 530 13.3 530 13.4 SW 43rd u/s 22.9 525 14.9 530 13.8 530 13.8 530 13.7 530 13.7 ANSIX- RANAM- A BAB alum Table 3 Summary of Peak Flows and Water Surface Elevations 25-Year Future Conveyance Event Alternative I-No Action Alternative 2(Option A) Alternative 2(Op6on B) Alternative 3(Option A) Alternative 3(Option B) Connecting Channel In-Place 25-Year Fut.Flow 25-Year Fut.Flow 25-Year Fut.Flow 25-Year Fut.Flow 25-Year Fut.Flow Roadway Convevance Conveyance Conveyance Conveyance Conveyance Top Elev. Location/Description Flow Elev Flow Elev Flow Elev Flow Elev (cfs) (feet) (cfs) (feet) (cfs) (feet) (cfs) (feet) Panther Creek u/s of Wetland 96 95 95 96 95 Panther Creek South SR-167 Xing 0 38 0 38 Re-established Panther Creek 86 15.5 38 15.6 86 15.5 38 15.6 Crossing of SR-167 Re-established Panther Creek 113 12 66 10.9 114 12 66 11.5 DS of East Valley Highway Rolling Hills Creek at Renton 102 20.94 100 20.9 l0t 20.9 103 20.9 101 20.9 Shopping Center Culv.Outlet Rolling Hills u/s 132"culvert 102 17.02 100 17 101 17 103 17 101 17 PCW north outlet 82 16 66 15.5 68 15.6 66 15.5 69 15.6 Springbrook Creek BRPS outflow 1095 4.1 1219 4A 1231 4.1 1189 4.1 1181 4.1 BRPS Forebay Inflow 1095 4.6 1228 4.8 1230 4.8 1197 4.8 188 4.8 Grady Way u/s 959 7.2 1098 7.9 1083 7.8 1063 7.8 1052 7.8 SW 16th Street 951 7.8 1088 8.1 1074 8.1 1053 8 1043 8 Confluence of North 60"SS 933 11.1 1060 9.9 1047 9.9 1033 10 1021 10 Confluence of P-9 943 12.1 980 10.7 966 10.6 957 11.2 943 11.2 SW 27th u/s 17.9 831 14.26 883 11.2 918 11.2 858 11.7 893 11.7 SW 34th u/s 14.9 847 15.4 836 12.3 842 12.4 827 12.6 827 12.7 Oaksdale d/s 17.1 849 15.94 841 13.4 942 13.6 946 13.9 946 14 Oaksdale Ws 17.1 800 17.36 796 14.2 799 14.3 794 14 794 14 SW 43rd d/s 22.9 795 17.6 791 15.1 792 15.2 793 15 793 15 SW 43rd u/s 22.9 795 18.12 791 15.6 792 15.7 793 15.5 793 15.5 R CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: September 28, 1995 TO: Bob Mahn FROM: Scott Woodbury SJ) SUBJECT: EAST SIDE GREEN RIVER WATERSHED PLAN FLOW AND CROSS SECTION INFORMATION FOR CHANNEL WIDENING ALTERNATIVES Attached are copies of the following information: • cross section configuration for reach from SW 16th Street to SW 23rd Street for Alternative 2 (Alternative 1 is no action). This cross section assumes that the existing channel is, not deepened, but that the banks are cut back as shown with a shelf 2.5' above the bottom of the channel. • cross section configuration for reach from SW 16th Street to SW 23rd Street for Alternative 3. This cross section assumes that the existing channel is not deepened, but that the banks are cut back as shown with a shelf about 5.4' above the bottom of the channel at about the level of a 2-year flow. This section will require about 10' more right-of-way than the Alternative 2 section. • Table 1 - Summary of Peak Flows and Water Surface Elevations a. 100-year Future Conveyance Event (future condition refers to basin buildout). As is evidenced by comparison with the no action alternative, the removal of upstream restrictions causes the flows in the reach of Springbrook Creek where Oakesdale will cross the stream to increase significantly. The conveyance event assumes pumping is not restricted at the Black River Pump Station. b. 100-year Future Storage Event. The storage event assumes pumping is restricted at the Black River Pump Station by high flows on the Green River. The worst case in terms of water surface elevations occurs under this event as water is forced into storage upstream of the pump station. I appreciate your willingness to review the proposed Oakesdale bridge structure's hydraulic performance assuming the attached future channel improvements and flows. I look forward to continuing to work together on our respective projects. If you have any questions, please contact me at X-5547. U:65025:95-026:SW attachments 8/18/95 14:25 FAX 206 255 2541 RENT0'N P/B/PK z001/001 . �S L13 �443, 1 v 41", ly rz Te 23 w/ uNIFoA, r8 o 4To, 5 Sc.�o �a �,��caN� ,,►�T -z3-4 EN Cross-Section Plot 5938 WS: 2.16ft Crit.WS: 2d6ft EGL: 2.37ft Flow: 25cfs 20 FGS 015 e4e E40 .89e 875 B75 C 516) 15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . fS.123 a10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . r . . . . . . . . o L . > $ ' �7/ m -(7, 39 99> w v1 2.q 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Q,ts;61) 0 0 20 40 60 80 t00 120 t40 Horizontal Station ft Channel Bottom Overbonk Stations —— Computed W. S --- Critical W. S, ----- Energy Grade L'ne Nannhjs n Values Fe 56C-T 3 c / J Table 1 Summary of Peak Flows and Water Surface Elevations 100-Year Future Conveyance Event Alternative 1-No Action Alternative 2(Option 4A) Alternative 2(Option 4B) Alternative 3(Option 4A) Alternative 3(Option 4B) Connecting Channel In-Place 100-Yr Fut.Flow 100-Yr Fut.Flow 100-Yr Fut.Flow 100-Yr Fut.Flow 100-Yr Fut.Flow Roadway Conveyance Conveyance Conveyance Conveyance Conveyance Top Elev. Location/Description Flow Elev Flow Elev Flow Elev Flow Elev (cfs) (feet) (cfs) (feet) (cfs) (feet) (cfs) (feet) Panther Creek u/s of Wetland 170 165 165 167 167 Panther Creek South SR-167 Xing 0 38 0 38 Re-established Panther Creek 107 16.1 48 16.2 107 16.1 48 16.2 Crossing of SR-167 Re-established Panther Creek 159 12.7 103 12.0 163 12.6 104 12.3 DS of East Valley Highway Rolling Hills Creek at Renton Shopping Center Culv.Outlet 174 21.8 173 21.8 173 21.8 174 21.8 174 21.8 Rolling Hills u/s 132"culvert 174 17.8 173 17.7 173 17.7 173 17.7 173 17.7 PCW north outlet 98 17.0 87 16.1 86 16.1 88 16.1 87 16.1 Springbrook Creek BRPS outflow 1223 4.1 1700 4.72 1700 4.5 1593 4.35 1589 5.2 BRPS Forebay Inflow 1223 4.7 1747 5.4 1720 5.3 1595 5.2 1587 4.3 Grady Way u/s 1110 7.6 1498 8.8 1461 8.7 1389 8.5 1370 8.5 SW 16th Street 1106 8.2 1488 9.1 1452 9.0 1383 8.9 1363 8.8 Confluence of Notch 60"SS 1088 11.6 1441 11 1405 11.0 1347 10.9 1324 �10.9 Confluence of P-9 989 12.6 1344 11.9 1309 11.8 1254 12.2 1232 12.2 SW 27th u/s 17.9 989 15.6 1251 12.4 1303 12.4 1147 12.7 1190 12.7 SW 34th u/s 14.9 1219 16.1 1239 13.6 1239 13.6 1217 13.7 1219 13.8 Oaksdale d/s IT 1 1227 16.9 1239 15.1 1239 15.0 1256 15.6 1256 15.6 Oaksdale u/s 17.1 1167 17.9 1160 16.7 1160 16.7 1164 15.7 1165 15.7 SW 43rd d/s 22.9 1158 18.3 1148 17.4 1148 17.4 1155 16.8 1155 16.8 SW 43rd u/s 22.9 1158 19.5 1148 18.6 1148 18.6 1155 17.92 1155 18.0 Table 1 (Continued) Summary of Peak Flows and Water Surface Elevations 100-Year Future Storage Event Alternative 1-No Action Alternative 2(Option 4A) Alternative 2(Option 4B) Alternative 3(Option 4A) Alternative 3(Option 413) Connecting Channel In-Place 100-Yr Fut.Flow 100-Yr Fut.Flow 100-Yr Fut.Flow 100-Yr Fut.Flow 100-Yr Fut.Flow Roadway Storage Storage Storage Storage Storage Top Elev. Location/Description Flow Elev Flow Elev Flow Elev Flow Elev (cfs) (feet) (cfs) (feet) (cfs) feet (cfs) (feet) Panther Creek u/s of Wetland 92 92 92 93 87 Panther Creek South SR-167 Xing 0 34 0 33 Re-established Panther Creek 64 15 28 15 64 15 27 15 Crossing of SR-167 Re-established Panther Creek 99 20.89 94 13.4 59 13.1 95 13 59 12.9 DS of East Valley Highway Rolling Hills Creek at Renton 99 16.94 98 20.9 99 20.9 100 20.9 94 20.8 Shopping Center Culv.Outlet Rolling Hills u/s 132"culvert 98 16.9 98 16.9 99 16.9 94 16.9 PCW north outlet 69 15.6 54 15 54 15 53 15 53 15 Springbrook Creek BRPS outflow 1700 13 1700 13.1 1700 12.9 1700 12.7 1700 12.6 BRPS Forebay Inflow 1153 13 1216 13.1 1223 12.9 1207 12.7 1176 12.6 Grady Way u/s 1045 13 1087 13.2 1105 12.9 1079 12.7 1026 '12.7 SW 16th Street 960 13 1085 13.2 1090 12.9 1057 12.7 1011 12.7 Confluence of North 60"SS 898 13.14 1025 13.2 1024 13 986 12.8 941 12.7 Confluence of P-9 807 13.3 948 13.3 948 13.1 907 12.9 870 12.8 SW 27th u/s 17.9 775 14.3 866 13.4 900 13.1 810 13 851 12.9 SW 34th u/s 14.9 945 15.2 853 13.6 854 13.4 801 13.2 814 13.2 Oaksdale d/s 17.1 846 15.8 655 14 856 13.8 854 13.8 851 13.9 Oaksdale u/s 17.1 792 17.3 802 14.4 802 14.3 801 13.9 799 13.9 SW 43rd d/s 22.9 783 17.6 798 15.2 798 15.2 798 15 796 15 SW 43rd u/s 22.9 783 18 798 15.7 798 15.7 798 15.4 796 15.5 THE CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF EPA �::.....::. WORKS I P BL C IN U IN BU P L A NN G/ ILD G/ FOURTH FLOOR 200 MILL AVENUE SOUTH RENTON, WASHINGTON 98055-2189 FAX: 235-2541 To: 2GA"r- kA, &ALlGH Company: Phone: Fax: 3 y3 _ O 5-13 From: LA) 6(J" Company: Phone: Fax: Date: ��h � Pages including this cover page: Comments: �'ex-\5-/,j �?VuAfbAfivj (A P1 X4* 0 VIA h� oo (Z-LJn1�j rc!o-ao ��, .,� '?'� , .'L�'�t3. ij,i 1'. ��',{ id.�'.` ,,. � �� >• 'c«P:.,__ ���,+., s `. t ,'>.t- 'F� .' ... _ %' pyy r, t• ,� �fi 3 1 ,.,s./, y�+ u +A!'�:_i 'w ` �' Iry Lw{Tr k.. �► 1' .•�" �. j>. �:} ^ 4 -Qx'.> iq y,,. •t 3j ,,: -,�;L4 3' 4- `f rn„ta,sy 7;.' ! "'' :it g• .a 5.,�_ qi s , I ,(.ry•�:° ' t �' �, >•. TYa"r } F I I �I �, e :x� fi: , •� i;.tr - �[,!n,r, t"�'°.4 Qk .q @;'ui�r fiV D�e _' q4. ',,.4I 1 � n , �' Y 71 1 '7j7- r yy ti: t ! {' -.j n'yt th - •;1 ti �i w �'�b. _ s 4 + �5+� v 11 •j _... tF.". .� , i tq��: b��t'F� s�n �, �4 �n ,j• ,y'�,,'�3y�`e. SW 27TH SWEET •,\ ---.) Tfvh Y , '-4t'_ �j r d •4 writ,+/ �'.t{, � I�'`��,,� � ^,' � ',.�� (-�; ds� <, �'S. �i�, y1i' �s^tS3s�yi: ,��'+., �ral.�Zt _.. .(:... _ _ •, } x ��,. d^ � r �,f'j''.L ea7!�,'r�. �.:..,.�M,:.i�\..� .:::� ',:.�y.•. •'I ;` ,'' ly' irt'.��.-.:� , .af' :�;1"I�-�- ,.:,;M.: _, - Et- `� I m"r�a\ >.• ',`I,..� ..�:' '7 �.cY�1�` r�,r� ,!��.� � •! I ��" `�* + ,°D '� '' 1 "a If R ,r'"`,�o:_ { '7m , -r'�'C+• a, y,. / r , ,.•Y a'�; ,f'�J'*: �. � _ : I�' !�' ,:,,' ..Y �,1'�.;�I �. \.0 �t.' _�i^. 4 � :..,...<�( _ - k w'l t 1 /�js :y� �.tip' A l�: -:;'ta :;_ �= :7 ! 'F {s /; `"A* �� ,!'.,:<4l '[,114, x, �re}�4' � "'-. .'d , ;• 4- ^il- _ .r',�.< - � •<,' fsk 5_ , ., ;,, �-' ,•_'�I !�r "- - ♦ i�� (7 ;: 5 i�_$ q rtrr�-}rfY �;�i, �""'�:, :,..�'� .,,�, I 7 3`. r� � .�f�' �a .., yr } 1`f� •h DV+�a'C, °Y'y" L'�4+" �•-� 1° -:1 f'V" ' � ��q{•W �h..'u""1 � 111' ;x � ' {{�� .f �� ,� •�i .F� j - —1's �, 4'.»" X LF,, �. :" *� 'B., '',`� �k 'prr•' Y +4 ',�'- � 'A°� � P r Jy,�_ + �•�, �. (—Z .'R'"tim.. w"RJ ? `(`+i. :1:' r''9r,• b+I r.' qprl", �{ / •h-! r.-1, t.. �f idl `4•A.,` +'�:r. '•,•ia: 1:,1j `, "� 5�, + n' ""tf :.:+' 1.,i:..` ,. a ,, •- 1 •.l. •, -r i- j{_ j 6 �" ,/t`..n' tic ,�, M�`v t �f�+`;.r. J �"+ r. t ,! ,. :�,.wv �r "�a -,� P r�',:.r t ;;r, �� 'uri,.�i�� (.:.w 1Mo V , ,I �1F, I iY•,.` 7� �.n, t .. '� V ,,. %l` a'.�'' s -41 niJ(t 1 1 '1 '��• ,� f < �,1, � I'a � �;�-. .Yr•� - e _1 suety z. .�., r �.•� .:ice r:�•`- :D -��.,.. a.: '"�'� �' h.' t l� $rs yrp r r4 �7 i��� � .. ✓�� a �1 , r ray, �'- � -+. a t" V'i4W W Ve. '�, - � - 7 � r w�. � I � �;��'rt'Fa*��.5�"� `; � ar• _ .'wd D l�r, 1.M,�•R. R �I �!{ td','" �iM�.-Z i �T !I- L , -SW 41ST S7 p —1 £,Dey '�•.i r.' � ,Y ' rQ �.�ta+"' t) ,i'' I t< {' � ,M'w ° r'( I _..--._ —. .r.,..* 1 I Y 3.r� �„` § t :�•/ n .. YFy4cr. pi i g }� 'r!` �` 4s a tt'7 t---tn;• . •�� t't `� j' -'� .f r :. s., C7 Mill ,:' � {:i =t r f• �:�< �'�� i D 4 R�. ,{4f S5. .'1.., I°; _ i _ 4 t�. y -, Ov I ' ,�' Ea,,l - '2 .`. 'VI, 1 S'Mht i .rw•.w W ,:d ' 1 _ ... i ✓, �. _L 77 ta? �.I r� 44 " ' Ay ° ' ! �D. r._� ` F �` i) rs5 -rd �} i' s n . . .. .D M fT � (Ti FT 4�rti `" ;Ni�-,...,.....' ✓•:'..;� , r ({ ? 1 § ii '�, �!rt•",.zs4rw! I', • t d 4 --�_.... f i v``v'c1 � � t. .y t --•. t I.I t r�`,�� �y'�1'.• "" r 1 n �Y, ���'r,,,�, •._ �'l...f°'fin, ,} 1�f.�.,.^• �15nf1�.a�.' P°. .h =r �1 y.?. �' °I'^r b ..at S•( �• -.�S ��4�:� �i ,`°.S �s r !3'',�!•���� .i�++q`�' ��•dS�Ks a a'�'. p •� .� _ ,.'1� t'�� � `' �a' � t G •s e u 1 ,:sq r S rho xNtn:�`.[ ,yrN {q 4 - �4 .?. q�4^,yl'4;,� 1';lt R �•a r '!''/ � kW �, T..... lu :• y t7f'' 7z A ,s:.,+9 ti ri i '. '�11 (il>' _• �'�. "rrr al ,en °;'�� w. .':';S x�j'.�+ �; I. '`� Black River S 17 N Pump Station S 16c 8 S16b S16a C 40 Rolling Hills Tributary ao S14 S 10 P5 S15 S11 f 2 P4 S9a S10 Springbrook S9b Creek S9C Panther Creek Wetland S7a S S8 S5 P3 W 43rd A S 180th n P2 K S6 D Panther Lake I L P1 SCALE !, i Miles l 1 1/2 0 1 East Side Green River Watershed C northwest hydraulic consultants Y HSPF Sub—basins a Figure 2 2 G� d r` f e-it Fat c src- floy,,. 8oC,,& yewv qP1-,K ?o C4,oQAA 49 CC: S ter/ 5� PiS — 7A-L/C Asaur f f�N�tic,� iNa�Q� 1416,0 WAlri.iC w-,4/2 k f4�a5 40 �n�tK. /ri✓°/lww� fail LVSPa ,a�s� W LvG�t- lac a 141ur3. -- Pil.O v10--i c0m vill ^-,JU 4 S ULfS ,fir -%—d ,era OAi CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: June 21, 1995 TO: Bob Mahn FROM: Scott Woodbury SW SUBJECT: OAKESDALE AVENUE SW EXTENSION PROJECT HNTB BRIDGE CONCEPTUAL ALTERNATIVE STUDY Following are my comments regarding the above-referenced report dated June 2, 1995. General Comments The report did not discuss the effects that the East Side Green River Watershed Plan (ESGRWP) preliminary alternatives may have on the proposed bridges. I had provided you with a copy of the preliminary alternatives on May 9, 1995. The report also made no mention that the flows and hydraulic effects from the P-1 Diversion Channel will have to be considered for Bridge 1A/1C if that alternative continues to be included for evaluation through the planned ESGRWP environmental impact statement. Although verbally we have been told by staff of the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), our federal sponsor of the ESGRWP, that this alternative may be dropped, I cannot affirm this until we have official word. The report did not discuss the hydraulic effects of the piers at the crossing of Springbrook Creek, although we provided a hydraulic model (HEC-2) to HNTB for this purpose. For the hydraulic study: • the HEC-2 model output must show that the bridge has no effect (zero rise) on the upstream water surface profile or energy grade line; • the hydraulic report must assess whether scour at the bridge supports may be a problem and how it may be mitigated if necessary; • I suggest that the hydraulic modeling report be combined with the alternatives study report as an appendix; as you know I provided HNTB with a copy of the Monster Road Bridge hydraulic report as a sample of what has been done in other bridge hydraulic analysis reports; • copies of the digital files used in the hydraulic analysis must be provided with the hydraulic report for our use in reviewing the finding of the report. I have concerns with the proposed piers at the Springbrook Creek crossing being skew to the channel as discussed following: • The skew piers may make routing of the pedestrian trail under the bridge difficult. One scheme that has been discussed is including the trail on a shelf parallel to and adjacent to the channel, just above the level of the 2-year water surface elevation in Springbrook Creek. Skew piers may cut across this potential trail alignment, while piers parallel to the channel could be situated so as to accommodate a trail parallel to the channel. Without the trail Comments to HNTB June 2, 1995 Report = Page 2 being next to and parallel to the channel, it may be more difficult to achieve the necessary 8' vertical clearance for the trail and also maintain a berm between the channel and the adjacent Boeing property and wetland on the west. • Skew piers may induce greater potential for scour in the channel, especially if pier shafts are used. Pier columns, rather than pier shafts, may be more appropriate. Hydraulic analysis of the bridge should be used to assess what type and configuration of substructure is appropriate. • While the bottom of the bridge girders may provide the minimum three feet of clearance above the 100-year flood elevation, the six foot deep pier caps will extend into the flow. Since the pier caps are skew to the channel, the projected surface area of the pier caps perpendicular to the channel centerline is greater than for pier caps oriented parallel with the flow. What effect this may have on stream hydraulics needs to be discussed. • As you know we are in the process of alternatives modeling of hydraulic improvements (deepening and/or widening) to the Springbrook Creek corridor, which will probably lower the water surface profile at the proposed bridge crossing below existing conditions, but increase the flow velocity and quantity due to removal of upstream restrictions. Under these conditions, the skew piers may produce unacceptable head losses. I will be providing the findings of our hydraulic modeling to you as it becomes available so that we can coordinate how the proposed bridge and channel hydraulic improvements may be integrated. I expect detailed hydraulic modeling information to be available within the next month. You may wish to delay finalizing the report to incorporate this information. I suggest adding a summary table of the design 100-year flood flows and elevations in the text of this report or the hydraulic report, with a brief discussion of the storage and conveyance events. As you recall, the storage event refers to floods in which pumping rates at the Black River Pump Station must be reduced during high flows in the Green River in accordance with the Green River Basin Program Interlocal Agreement. This should help avoid confusion of the reader as why there are two different 100-year flood criteria and which of the criteria is controlling. For instance, bridge clearance is controlled by the storage event elevations, while both the storage and conveyance events are used to assess the hydraulic effects of the bridge. It seems that the alternative comparison matrix method summarized in Table 5 is very subjective and could be manipulated to yield whatever outcome is desired, rather than objectively assess what is the most favorable alternative based upon specific criteria. For instance, what prevents alternatives from having the same or similar rating? For example, cost for Bridge 1A & 1C Alternatives 2 and 3 are only $300,000 apart out of a total cost of greater than $4,000,000. It seems that the cost for these alternatives are so comparable that they may be assigned equal or similar weight, especially given there are considerable uncertainties within the cost estimates. Similar rational could be applied to the other criteria. There is also very little discussion to justify how the different ratings were assigned to each alternative. I suggest the report include a brief discussion, or reference to another document, to summarize how the alignments were selected. The reader in particular may question why the existing access road from SW 27th Street to SW 31st Street isn't being utilized for part of the proposed roadway to minimize impacts to the existing wetland or why it isn't being removed as mitigation for wetland impacts. Bridge 1AM C does not have to be elevated above the 100-year floodplain of Springbrook Creek, but must maintain a minimum of 1 foot above the wetland water elevations. We had discussed y Comments to HNTB June 2, 1995 Report Page 3 previously that this was 1-foot above the berm separating the Shapiro Wetland F from Springbrook Creek, or an elevation of 14.5 feet. However, because this is lower than FEMA elevations, additional compensatory storage will be required if the bridge is lowered further below the FEMA floodplain elevation of about 16.6 feet NGVD. Of course, if the P-1 Diversion Channel is built, the bridge would have to be elevated 3' above the design 100-year water surface, similar to what is required at the Springbrook crossing. Specific Comments See attached pages from the report with comments added in the text. Page 9, third paragraph. How will the structure impact the north bank of Springbrook Creek? More information is needed on this potential impact and how it may be mitigated. Page 14, Section 4.1.3. The falsework requirements seems to be similar for most of the alternatives (except for Alternative 1 and 2 of Bridge 1A/1C) and yet they were given a substantially different rating in Table 5. It also seems that falsework requirements would be also be partly accounted for in the cost estimates. Other contractibility issues may also be appropriate, such as coordination with the fisheries window for work within the stream, coordination with the planned channel improvements, transportation of the girders to and staging at the work site, and total construction time. Cost Estimates, Page 2 and 3 of 9. The $105/1-F cost for W74G to $170/1-F for W35DG seems to be an excessive difference. I suggest reconfirming this cost as it could swing the total cost in favor of the W35DG. Also, did the cost estimate for Bridge 1A/1C assume that the profile grade may be lower for the W35DG, with the resulting reduced substructure costs? Figures 3, 6, 8, and 10 show the 2-year and 100-year flows for Springbrook Creek. This is not appropriate because the creek does not flow under the bridge. However, the bridge is within the floodplain of the creek that results when the stream overtops its banks and the floodwaters are stored in the wetland. Finally, you had asked if the distance between inlets may be greater than 300 feet to avoid having to put drainage inlets on the structures. In this case we do not wish to make exception from the code, so drainage inlets should be provided on the structure to meet the city's inlet separation criteria as necessary. You had also asked whether piers may be located within the 100-year flood stage. This is appropriate provided there is no increase in the water surface profile or energy grade line with the piers. Locating the piers within the ordinary high water of the channel is also discouraged. Thank you for the opportunity to review the report. If you have any questions, please call me at X-5547. U:1995:95-005:SW attachments cc: Ron Straka City of Renton Conceptual Alternative Study Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Introduction 1 . Introduction This report contains information regarding the design of structures for the proposed Oakesdale Avenue S.W. extension from S.W. 16th Street to S.W. 31st Street within and adjacent to the proposed Boeing Company Longacres Office Park. (See Vicinity Map, Figure 1.) The purpose of this Conceptual Alternative Study is to provide documentation of the design parameters and constraints used for the selection of a structural concept. For the two alignment alternatives considered (See Project Area, Figure 2), three bridges and one retaining wall exist within this project. The conceptual design, and design constraints for each structure are presented within this report. In accordance with Work Order Authorization 4, Scope of Work Task D.5, three feasible structural alternatives have been selected from a wide range of structure types considered for each bridge site based upon their ability to meet the design objectives and minimize cost. This document is prepared in accordance with the "Guide for Conceptual Structural Work for Environmental Documents and Design Reports for WSDOT Bridges and Structures Office, March 1991." 2. Documentation Reference is made to the following documentation related to the design of bridge structures along the Oakesdale Avenue S.W. corridor: • Structural Design Criteria Reference Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Bridge Design Criteria. • Site Survey Site survey was conducted by INCA Engineers in 1992 and 1994 using direct field measurements. Survey data is provided as a digital terrain model in AutoCAD format. • Geotechnical A draft copy of the Geotechrucal Predesign Report for Phase I of the Oakesdale Avenue S.W. extension was prepared by Woodward-Clyde Consultants in April 1995. • Hydraulics ( �I kcG y�ZL) G,� �-Codf 1-7azAl.OS C/ltC `f- 3 31) Hydraulic design criteria is defined according to the City of Renton Stornr and Surface Water Drainage Ordinances . Flood plain elevations for stream crossings and wetlands were taken from the-Eav-Side Green Ri prepared by R. W. Beck. a^ • Utilities The approximate locations of the 108-inch and 72-inch sanitary sewer lines within the project limits are defined according to the surveyed location of man-holes defined on the project base map, as-built plans for the 108-inch diameter Metro South Interceptor - Parallel Phase I prepared by Sverdrup Corporation, dated February 1994, and as-built plans for Oakesdale Avenue S.W. prepared by Gardner Engineers, Dated November 1984. Bridge conduit entrance, junction boxes, and exit shall be coordinated with City of Renton Planning/Building/Public Works Department. 1:1152031bridgelstrap1 doc 1 REVISED DRAFT June 2, 1995 1 City of Renton Conceptual Alternative Study Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Structural Alternative Investigation I Table 3 Preferred Conceptual Alternative Bridge Structure Types Unit Cast Index Structural System ($/SF) I Environmental Impacts Feasibility Constructability Maintenance Alignment Alternative A& C-South Bridge 1.' Precast Prestressed Slab 90 short span/hi no.piers viable alternative no falsework required low 2. Cast-in-Place Slab 75 short span/hi no.piers viable alternative falsework required low 3.' W35DG Decked Bulb T PC Gir. 110 moderate span/piers viable alternative no falsework required low 4. W42G Prestressed Conic.Gir. 90 moderate span/piers viable alternative no falsework required low 5. W58G Prestressed Conc.Gir. 90 moderate span/piers viable alternative no falsework required low 6.' W74G Prestressed Conc.Gir. 90 long span/few piers viable alternative no falsework required low 7. Steel Plate Girder 140 long span/few piers viable alternative no falsework required periodic painting required. 8. Rolled Steel Section 140 moderate span/pier's viable alternative no falsework required periodic painting required. 9. Post-Tensioned Conc.Box Gir. 115 long span/few piers viable alternative falsework required fow 10. Fill with Culverts 28 max.loss of wetlands not permitted borrow site required low Alignment Alternative A-North Bridge v/a pe- �l Gr�ufi7ve �'� Se 1. Precast Prestressed Slab 90 short span/hi no.piers - -NG for curved Bridge. no falsework required low Ana. 4 ��,on.4e !9 All 2. Cast-in-Place Slab 75 short span/hi no.piers inadequate span falsework required • low /NS-r& 3. W35DG Decked Bulb T PC Gir- 110 moderate spardpiers NG for curved Bridge. no falsework required low 4.` W42G Prestressed Conc.Gir. 90 moderate span/piers inadequate span no falsework required low 5.` W58G Prestressed Conc.Gir. 90 moderate span/piers viable alternative no falsework required low 6. W74G Prestressed Conc.Gir. 90 long span/few piers viable alternative no falsework required low 7. Steel Plate Girder 140 long span/few piers viable alternative no falsework required periodic painting required. 8. Rolled Steel Section 140 moderate span/piers inadequate span no falsework required periodic painting required - R' Post-Tensioned Conc.Box Gir. 115 long span/few piers viable alternative falsework required low 10. Fill with Culverts 28 max.loss of wetlands not permitted borrow site required low Alignment Alternative C -North Bridge 1. Precast Prestressed Slab 90 short span/hi no.piers NG for curved Bridge. no falsework required low 2 Cast-in-Place Slab 75 short span/hi no.piers inadequate span falsework required low 3. W35DG Decked Bulb T PC Gir. 110 moderate span/piers NG for curved Bridge. no falsework required low 4.' W42G Prestressed Conc.Gir. 90 moderate span/piers inadequate span no falsework required low 5. W58G Prestressed Conc.Gir. 90 moderate span/piers viable alternative no falsework required low 6. W74G Prestressed Conc.Gir. 90 long span/few piers viable alternative no falsework required low 7. Steel Plate Girder 140 long span/few piers viable alternative no falsework required periodic painting required. 8. Rolled Steel Section 140 moderate span/piers inadequate span no falsework required periodic painting required R' Post-Tensioned Conc.Box Gir 115 long span/few piers viable alternative falsework required low 10. Fill with Culverts 28 max loss of wetlands not permittedj borrow site required low I\152031bndgelstrap1 doc 4 REVISED DRAFT June 2, 1995 City of Renton Conceptual Alternative Study Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Structural Alternative Investigation 3.2.2 Geotechnical Considerations Detailed geotechnical exploration and study have not yet been conducted specifically for the structures proposed within this report. Subsurface exploration consisted of twelve test borings along Alignments A and C. The location of test borings in the vicinity of proposed bridge sites are shown on the site data sheets included with this report. Following is a summary of the pertinent results presented within the Geotechnical Predesign Report prepared by Woodward-Clyde Consultants. Based on subsurface information obtained from exploratory excavation, bridge foundation subgrades in this region are typically silt/clayey silt underlain by black and gray sand deposits which are loose to medium dense. In general, based on grain-size, plasticity characteristics, and relative densities, the site soils have a high potential for liquefaction during a seismic event. Pile foundations supported at depth in the dense gray sand are recommended for the proposed bridge �I structures. This layer typically occurs at a depth of approximately 40 to 60 feet below the existing ground line. As indicated above, the site soils are expected to liquefy during the design earthquake. The consequences of liquefaction at the bridge foundation locations are reduced strength and lateral resistance of the foundation soils, and post-liquefaction settlement. As a result, the lateral capacity of the pile foundations will be reduced, and differential settlement between the approach roadways and the pile supported bridge decks could be expected. It is anticipated that settlement of embankment fills will occur due to compression essEmbaI Embankment fill consolihe dation foundation soils under the increased loading imposed from fill placement. compacted and placed in accordance with the recommendations prescribed by the soils engineer to avoid settlement of embankment fill under its own weight. 3.2.3 Hydraulics rZ Specific hydraulic concerns for the Boeing Company Longacres Office Park are addressed within the Storm and Surface Water Drainage Ordinance prepared by the City of Renton. This Conceptual Alternative Study addresses site specific concerns as they apply to impacts resulting from construction of the proposed alternatives. One perennial stream crossing, one man-made wetland,and three naturally-occurringwetlands exist within the limits of this project. The perennial stream, Springbrook Creek, is defined as a salmonoid stream, and (Kcswo►. will be crossed once by either Alignment Alternative A or C. D�s M au S u or b l417 � are determined based Bridge opening requirements as defined by Kin Coin Surface Water and the on hydraulic data for the,ordinary high wate e�(5C of XA 6.4 ' 100-year wAat5r s�utrfaccee elevations. Lateral clearance7Fh qu-r ents for stye m�cr�ossr- r bridge piers Ve-loca rdmary high water v Vertical clearance provided is defined as the distance from the bridge invert to the 100-year water surface. The minimum vertical clearance assigned to this project by City of Renton 3 above thewter surface Utility Systems Division, SurfaceWater Utilities the Group 00-yeaer et flood water 1s0urfacereflcovadtionaat wetland 1 elevation at stream crossings, and t �<- c ossmgjqpS. �vefiP/ 5-'4� �ltrar•n 0.4 1,,,&-11 I v ��cr re_- t5 d�CIAIf f { n 40 �•^�t i Water surface elevations and flow volumes at the proposed structures are provided on the bridge plan and elevations, and site data sheets for the 2-year and the 100-year events. Flood plain elevations for stream ,F rke, I prepared by R. W. PNpoTJ crossings and wetlands were taken from "Or l 16i /9S r /rye/ <trweil� Beck. J [ n c.rurv"j Ij�5eL GGl/n/�lun ��1 ��c,SWOM, 5 REVISED DRAFT June 2, 1995 1A15203\bridgewrapt-doc Conceptual Alternative Study City of Renton Structural Alternative Investigation Oakesdale Avenue S.W. 3.2.4 Utilities Conflict occurs due to the proximity of the proposed bridges to existing utility structures at two locations within this project. These include: (1) a 72-inch Metro sanitary sewer line that parallels Alignment Alternatives A and C at Bridge IA; and (2) a storm water detention vault at Alignment Alternative A igures 3 and 4 respectively. The specifics of each of these conflicts Station 47+50. See Site Data Sheets, F are discussed in Section 3-3. Traffic barriers shall be fitted with two, 2-inch diameter embedded conduits. I3.2.5 Environmental Impac ts The proposed alignment alternatives traverse both naturally occurring and man-made wetlands. These are m environmental sensitive areas that provide habitat for a number of species of plants and animals, as well I k setting for e developed to as an aesthetically pleasing parngites.pFinal structure type aand t shouldernatives b length shouldnotbe advanced to mrmmize the physical impacts to these final design until resource agency comments have been provided and addressed. 3.2.6 Other Applicable Criteria Additional criteria used for alternative evaluation in this report include traffic control strategy in the work zone to minimize the impacts of construction. 3.3 Bridge Structural Design Concepts ' Following are the results of the investigation of the selected structural alternatives listed in Table 3. 3.3.1 Alignment Alternatives A and C - South Bridge Common Features of Alternatives Following are features and concerns common to all of the proposed alternatives for the south bridge at Alignment Alternatives A and C. The bridge provides for the crossing of Wetland F in the southern portion of the project area as shown on the Project Area Map, Figure 2, and on Bridge IA Site Data Sheet, Figure 3. The 600-foot long structure curve th ot verti extends from Station 6+00 to Station 12+00. The bridge is located 90 feet 600 toed about the proposed straight alignment bearing NO10 02 56 E. The right of way width�I roadway centerline. All bridge structure alternatives are symmetrically centered on the proposed roadway centerline, and are contained within the right of way. The length of the bridge was set during consultations between TB and the City of Renton. The IN proposed location provides a minimum structure length based upon an estimation of allowable impact to Wetland F. The allowable impact was determined on the basis of the available area of land adjacent to the proposed alignment that could be converted to wetland to mitigate the loss of wetland which result from placement of embankment fill at this bridge site. Final bridge length will be determined on the basis of the wetland mitigation requirements as set forth by the resource agencies during the pre-application meeting the project. I Piers will be supported on pile foundations. It is expected that cofferdams will be required to accommodate construction of the cast-in-place pile caps. The caps can then be utilized as a deck to facilitate construction of the remaining portions of the intermediate piers. it, tog' An active 72-inch^Metro sanitary sewer line parallels Alignment Alternatives A and C offset approximately 35 feet left the roadway center line in the vicinity of Bridge Site IA. Interference between the sewer line �j aJ xl' �Cc''( rcyck�) Ie` / / REVISED DRAFT June 2, 1995 I:\152031bridg6strapl.doc 6 1 City of Renton Conceptual Alternative Study Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Structural Alternative Investigation Localized deviations from standard clearance criteria occur at all intermediate piers due to the depth of the full drop pier caps. Additional grading within the shadow of the structure will be required in the vicinity of Piers 2, 3, 6, and 7 so that the final ground line will clear the bottom of the girders at these locations. Nearly maximizing span length for this girder type permits pile caps at Springbrook Creek to be kept clear of the ordinary high water boundary. Allowing the pile caps to encroach upon this boundary will permit columns to be used in lieu of the proposed shafts. Details of this nature will be pursued during the next phase of this project, once a structure type has been selected,to obtain an economically efficient design that minimizes the complexity of construction details. \CIA r NS ,-,A ,S& AA cN„eZD to 41111 �L The estimated cost of the W58G prestressed concrete girder bridge is$3,190,000. k54"Ate-.y f-q Structure 2A-Alternative 3: Post-Tensioned Concrete Box Girder 5J(F J 50F.'-rs The proposed Alternative 3 structure is a four-span, continuous constant depth skewed cast-in-place post-w tensioned concrete box girder bridge. The approximate length of the bridge is 450 feet, with spans of 100, 125, 125, and 100 feet. The depth of the structure is approximately 5.0 feet. The plan and elevation are shown on Figure 16. The typical section is shown on Figure 17. The profile grade shown on plan and elevation sheet Figure 16 provides a minimum vertical clearance of 4.0 feet above the 100-year flood water surface elevation. The minimum of one foot of vertical clearance provided at the southern edge of the Boeing engineered wetland. Pile caps are set clear of the ordinary high water boundary at Springbrook Creek. The constant five-foot deep structure does provide adequate vertical clearance over the entire 100-year flood plain boundary for both the Boeing engineered wetland and Springbrook Creek. Grading within the shadow of the structure will be required in the vicinity of Piers 3 and 4 so that the final ground line will clear the bottom of the girders at these locations. The estimated cost of the post-tensioned concrete box girder bridge is $3,770,000. 3.3.3 Alignment Alternative C - North Bridge A preferred alignment for Oakesdale Avenue S.W. will be identified in the Final Environmental Impact Statement following alternatives analyses presented in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement scheduled to be issued in late 1995. Structural plan and elevation sheets have been prepared for Alignment Alternative A, which shares the same alignment as Alternative C for the south bridge (Bridge IA Site Data Sheet, Figure 3). Site information for the Alignment Alternative C north bridge is presented in Figure 5, Bridge 2C Site Data Sheet. If Alignment Alternative C is selected as the preferred alignment, structural i plan and elevation sheets will be prepared for inclusion within the Design Report. # Common Features of Alternatives Following are features and concerns common to all of the proposed alternatives for the north bridge at Alignment Alternative C. The bridge provides for the crossing of the eastern portion of the Boeing engineered wetland and Springbrook Creek in the northern portion of the project area as shown on the Project Area Map, Figure 2, and on site data sheet Figure 5. The structure extends from approximately Station 42+15 to Station 47+85. The bridge is located on both vertically and horizontally curved alignment. The length of the vertical curve is 400 feet, and the horizontal curve radius is 825 feet. The right of way width is 90 feet centered about the proposed roadway centerline. All bridge structure alternatives are symmetrically centered on the proposed roadway centerline and are contained within the right of way. 1\15203\bridgelstrap1 doc 11 REVISED DRAFT June 2, 1995 City of Renton Conceptual Alternative Study Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Conclusions and Recommendations I Table 4 Preliminary Comparative Bridge Costs Structural Alternative Structure Type Area (SF)" Cost" Bridge Site 1A and 1C Alternative 1 26-Inch P.C. Slab 43,600 $4,850,000 Alternative 2 W35DG Decked 45,780 $4,320,000 Bulb T P.C. Girder Alternative 3 W74G P.C. Girder 45,780 $4,010,000 Bridge Site 2A Alternative 1 W42G P.C. Girder 39,530 $3,510,000 Alternative 2 W58G P.C. Girder 37,920 $3,190,000 Alternative 3 Concrete Box 38,720 $3,770,000 Bridge Site 2C Alternative 1 W42G P.C. Girder 49,210 $4,210,000 Alternative 2 W58G P.C. Girder 48,400 $3,950,000 Alternative 3 Concrete Box 48,810 $4,740.000 Preferred Alternative TOTAL $7,200,000 Cost in bold face type indicates preferred alternative. Total preferred alternative cost is for Alignment A— Alignment C cost would be higher. Based on structure length from end of wing wall-to-end of wing wall, and slab width including that portion under the traffic barrier. (RE: WSDOT BDM 12.4-A1-2) Includes mobilization, engineering, and contingencies. Does not include ® taxes. 4 overlay have a propensity to develop extensive longitudinal cracks along the joint between the girder top flanges and therefore receive an unfavorable maintenance rating. OYJt,lt /3Mo6k g--8 -. 4.1.5 Aesthetics s? �i Aesthetic attributes considered are depth and elevation of superstructure, and mass of exposed substructure. 4.2 Weighted Comparison Matrix Evaluation criteria is weighted by prioritizing each criterion on a relative scale of importance based upon the project objectives. Each of the three structural alternatives is then rated on a relative comparison scale of one to three based on ability to satisfy each of the evaluation criteria. A quantitative rating value is then assigned to each alternative for each of the criterion by multiplying its relative rating by the weight of the criterion. Individual rating values are then summed for each alternative, and the alternative with the greatest number of points is chosen as the preferred structure type. I\152031brndgelstrapl doc 15 REVISED DRAFT June 2, 1995 City of Renton Conceptual Alternative Study Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Conclusions and Recommendations 4.3 Preferred Structural Alternatives 4.3.1 Alignment Alternatives A &C, South Bridge The recommended structural alternative for Alignment Alternatives A and C at the south bridge site is Alternative 3,W74G Prestressed Concrete Girder. `� (lhs Wt (mot,tom The primary evaluation criteria used to select this alternative are cost and tronmental i ts. The W74G prestressed concrete girder bridge is the least cost alternative. Dire mpacts t and F are minimized because of the reduced number of intermediate piers associated with this alternative, however,/J-tA l C-PY these benefits are partially offset by the embankment fill width at the approaches that results from the profile necessary to accommodate this structure type. 4.3.2 Alignment Alternative A North Bridge The recommended structural alternative for Alignment Alternative A at the north bridge site is Alternative 2, W58G Prestressed Concrete Girder. The primary evaluation criteria used to select this alternative are cost and environmental impacts. The W58G prestressed concrete girder bridge is the least cost alternative. Direct impacts to the Boeing engineered wetland are minimized because no ground-bearing falsework is required, and the number of intermediate piers is reduced with this prestressed concrete girder alternative. 4.3.3 Alignment Alternative C North Bridge The recommended structural alternative for Alignment Alternative C at the north bridge site is Alternative 2, W58G Prestressed Concrete Girder. The primary evaluation criteria used to select this alternative are cost and environmental impacts. The W58G prestressed concrete girder bridge is the least cost alternative. Direct impacts to the Boeing engineered wetland are minimized because no ground-bearing falsework is required, and the number of intermediate piers is reduced with this prestressed concrete girder alternative. I\15203\bndgelstrap1.doc 17 REVISED DRAFT June 2, 1995 SECTI 2 R.4 s: KINGS000NTY o f\0 DPLAI4-PER ti 800 INEEREDy ,y (TY OF RENT04 r '� 7 b:. ` .... .• _... RY' of i 'I 1 i• / s r , _ 1•= r 7 1 � •' 1 _ .. � r I•. � PROPOSED .+ e,.••`9 d I _ BRIDGE LOG TION 1 M R � Y` J• GN i= l Sri v J A 4 IG t OAKESD S R f /W`(� - r'� ST 15+61 PI J �'. J •���" _...-./:. �•.r SS I i t• {.4. _.• �' �?�,�PRINGSR00 PLAN SHOREUNR'g / SCALE: 1•-30I BOUNDARY — ° 1�i,!l !�* E Flo% R�'✓� A�' =K�� ' M� PRQ`lLr� ii. A+ REFERENCE ELfVATTON 0.00 — r ELEVATION EXISTING GROUND LINE'• 1 r NfCN WATER 00 1R M.R.1 yy 1 '+-AT RfC7IT SHOULDER EDGE- NORMAL ?� y 0. EL. 70 0- EL ISO�+rdNOC� 0=571 CFS ,!Jl5 0=918 CFS SOLE I-30'NORf7. !I"-JO"VERI. y E`^,�4� •� II �) w.3. i 6 Fr G,..,✓f.<adC.E 7 cc C,edLtAt . STA. 16+00111,61 2OaOO'VC ((�� �___. _ - - EL 2J.85 .'. +t �r !ft •+ tr ;F •�4'. 0.lOx -1.7bx F 1�i Y i NOTES' 10000'VC 1 d r <_ 7 t �' DLAAlITLOI'!'O OveL1 MOIIN1 HIGHWAY CLASSIFICATION. PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL P.V.I.STA.19+50 y PROFILE EL rz90 {" ftpmlKESDALE*A S OESfGNSPEED-10 BE LOADING 'AASHTO NS 20=44. BRIDG 2' ADT- i0 Bf PRONDED ,SITED,TA Nu S CGS- BY CITY OF REHTON _—-— E pROFfLf CRADf ANO PfNJT POfNI -_-__ Ar A LATER DATE —- -—-— — OR TWO-24K'AXLES AT 4 J CTR . �LOCATION LY'SOIL BORING -?.OS LT. d RT. • "rmr-�K x L�ge;bflti vssm±xxXAd.P e: 5/26/,y5,:wr 62C-SD CURVE DATA I LIMITS OF STRUCTURE I e " sHdNN 4xxx, "° ° 0F9�9 SUPERELEVATION DIAGRAM ...wJxxe�xxx PI STATION DEC TA RAOlUS TANGENT LENGTH X% STA.15+65.J7 J1'JS'I7'Ll. BI5.O0 7JJ.J6 151.8.7 ,. �.,,,rwt�zy,,.,;•, ~h�, ��'T{'" C� way l s ���`� -►-�.� ��J=�p �Esy � ��.�.r�-�,,.�. �}cCk,- /1rA-o art, 7-21 Ste+ 3/ s9-,`� W�c� r.., j /A /.�+ LTA rim /�t,i��•�.a /1�1 u�r-- 5 -,ns r O 9w5w�l Itr,, �t�✓�R l r 7-D LIB° I" C � kb* Op'IcE ro,sue I�r'�9 G✓/ CiTls�Cs /ou'y,c Nan ,4 w�u 5r.A J b.0 C.'Jv4e"Q+j LE ow drl �-c�✓f IC QM/l c.E 6A C��h`f' JUe/'-Ilf- 191 ,F( L(_ Z ------------ PI/ i � i ii r I e P"s Gvc.c%,,,.jg V uo &A-04 t 7-d0,4-r-J 41,k 'S PArf— /3./, M Lit �i //M✓,Ct ,E. /mil v/i !-�h lc-.-k w 7 y TrJ /6-�C fOA w-3 �� s -C�SSiv� ✓l//-«- f`'�. St��-a4T- �uwri/1�wC� ey $_ G05r iN FA- LI-F Lf 35- d� Oi o Lcrsc- �s�. ACC4v.-#- 7AAf 8u*6-!9 1A GAAO-4 Gi.oo t FjE� 7 a C�,�h�J,Mar� . �y C�6ae��. �t,T,��*•��vE s �11v /wtt 'aING 114Au6 64,91, rLAWr f&Y, 15 /Vor �-s IS✓�rro(, � z A� - - - - - - - - --- _ � ---- -- r --- ' - - - 1 - - --_ , i -- �,-�' - CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: June 15, 1995 TO: Bob Mahn FROM: Scott Woodbury .� SUBJECT: CONTACTS FOR HISTORY OF USES OF PROPERTIES ALONG OAKESDALE ALIGNMENT Three people I suggest as possible sources for a history of uses of properties along the Oakesdale alignment are: Bill Shields, Talasaea Consultants, 861-7550. Bill used to hunt in the valley when he was a kid. Larry Capillaro, Drainage District No. 1, 993-5559 (pager). To contact Larry call the pager number and key in your phone number. Larry will call you back. Larry grew up in the area and seems knowledgeable of its history. He now walks the Springbrook Creek corridor to ensure a clear channel for the district. Bob Burnett. Olympic Pipeline Company. 235-7767. Bob has worked for Olympic Pipeline for I believe 20 years. His office is just off of Lind Avenue at SW 23rd Street. CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: 5eef'f ood�uP-?rJ Sur-t'aeea �� �tt�e7�. FROM: // r SUBJECT: QaKGS zr'E �l/�kK ,5744) - 5W /(,j(14 - b 544 4424�legl t�- V'e 2va(ua-�-Gd © -"o" Cve�-� �ro�o�� ✓t� i� 1✓►�-�Nr c Gfi a 7�� �f� � S �t tt1 ��_ l06-yevt- /ooC! sfaye , U© � �Ave- �4lso� wdu�cj t,( r�u� P c'9V1 4-1� c.�t✓c�tt ���:i� ..� �plroP oSa� �? tr`d� �Yd t � W Z74, 54ve 64- c5 t t^.6u4d me,-;�n a deal o av e �V 2 0 t,,, �et dC o T' D D e t�°t � t • Than yore HOWARD NEEDLES TAMMEN S BERGENOOFF, INC. G(X)108tb Alt u,r,VE ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS PLANNERS Suite 405 Betlm w,WWbington M(X)4 (206)-t 55-3555 IAX(2(X,) i5,3-91-9 May 26, 1995 City of Renton Transportation Systems Division Planning/Building/Public Works Department 200 Mill Avenue South Renton,Washington 98055 Attention: Bob Mahn, Project Manager Reference: Oakesdale Avenue- SW 16th Street to SW 31st Street Consultant Agreement No. CAG 103-91 Work Order Authorization No. 4 Draft Conceptual Alternative Study Dear Bob: Enclosed for your use and review are three (3) copies of the Draft Conceptual Alternative Study. This report provides information necessary for preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement and the Design Report. Included with this submittal is a response to review comments sent to us on May 12, 1995. We recommend that preliminary design should not be advanced until comments have been received from resource agencies in regard to horizontal and vertical clearances, and wetland impacts. In reference to Work Order Authorization No. 4, Scope of Work Task D.5, a meeting should be scheduled between the City of Renton, HNTB, and the resource agencies to discuss comments before proceeding into preliminary design. Please call if there are any questions or comments. Sincerely, �"— REC.IF11 HOW EEDLES TAMMEN &BERGENDOFF, INC. 7rans�nrtUri� Peter W. Smith, A.I.C.P. PWS:MJA:fg Enclosures cc: File 15203-PL-014 ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS PLANNERS 600108th Avenue.N.E. Suite 405 Bellevue.Washington 98004 (206)455.3555 FAX(206)45.3.9179 May 25, 1995 Mr. Bob Mahn City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 RE: Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Consultant Agreement No. CAG 103-91 15203-PL-014 Work Order Authorization No. 4 Dear Bob: We have incorporated your review comments on the Conceptual Alternative Bridge Structure Types, received in your fax sent to us on May 12, 1995, into the Draft Conceptual Alternative Study. Your comments were addressed as follows: 1. HNT13 typically investigates a Decked Bulb T when the alignment is on a tangent because of the difficulties in manufacturing precast elements to fit a horizontal curve. An 825' radius has a middle ordinate of 1.5' Also the cost of a decked bulb T is usually greater than the cost of a standard prestressed girder as shown in the WSDOT square foot prices and the unit prices we received from Concrete Tech. A Decked Bulb T was added to the alternatives evaluated for Bridge IA but was not included in the alternatives for the curved bridge 2A or 2C. 2. We agree that a steel girder can be dropped from evaluation due to initial cost and future maintenance. In regard to the ordinary high water boundary, spans were adjusted so the W42G, a shallower girder, could be used and still have the piers out of the water. 3. Future widening of all the bridge types considered is feasible, so there is not a distinct advantage for any one bridge type based on future widening. Future widening was addressed in the text of the report. 4. A matrix was developed to evaluate alternatives based on the items identified. 5. Unit square foot costs were derived from the WSDOT Bridge Design Manual, which provides a single square foot cost for all standard prestressed girders. The reason for this is the shorter girders are less cost but have additional foundation cost. Costs were based on unit prices instead of square foot prices for the alternative study. 6. The profile was not revised based on the structure depth of each of the alternatives because at this conceptual level of design we felt it was not necessary to develop nine alternative profiles. The profile was set based on the deepest structure, and the impacts of changing the profile were The 11,\'TB („n,parries URiU.IlS:ALL XAM)KI A. \:AtIAN IA.\:A:BA I I IN R,ItIA.,A.11,n1'1 IN It 1.1 i G`. ,:!I, V i il.,Il\';!:VMI.,,I1.,.'\,nRI I.,A,!4\II.\? X i1F.\\'LR-11:1\1RilHD \I. i 1AR 11„Ru.l-i':u„r•:.1\ 1-V IVUTASAKII 11,1".IR\'I]f.l A, (I I" : I.\\•�:,.'.:! I111:::.nS:'.11:1.'.11.fl.\1116\I RF.!'.Ul.\II\KE:IPULIS,\t.\. \A',Ill III l.. !\ I IA':,IRK.NI.,1K LAI 111\I:1,I I'1 01..ORI..\\1111,I I.„\I,R I\', !+.!..F, ,I,+,`, V.R\I,!,.1! 01\Il \:.`iAi-I11,'X:\:I:\.\II'i.il..i1 LI.VI11:. Bob Mahn May 25, 1995 Page 2 addressed in the text of the report. When an alignment alternative and a structure type is selected,the profile will be adjusted to provide the optimum clearance. 7. Filling the south wetland was dropped from consideration. Each of these items are addressed in Conceptual Alternative Study Report. We look forward to discussing the bridge alternatives in greater detail with you after you have had a chance to review the report. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, HOWARD NEEDLES TAMMEN &BERGENDOFF Gerald L. Dorn Alan Black, Howard Needles Tammen & Bergendoff Oakesdale Avenue Extension Project-Hydraulic Impact Study; Page 2 SW 16th Street is in place. HEC-2 does not do as good a job as FEQ at modeling this transition. However, where the Oakesdale Extension will cross Springbrook Creek upstream of SW 16th Street, the HEC-2 model is appropriate for how you intend to use it, especially as you will be adding additional channel sections at the road crossing. • FEQ results at the confluence of the North 60" SS (SW 19th Street) are not directly comparable with HEC-2 output at cross section 8408 because they are at different locations. A section stationing of 7400 is more nearly comparable to the FEQ results at SW 19th Street. By interpolating between HEC-2 sections 6958 and 8408, FEQ is only 0.23' lower than HEC-2 for run 10 (future 100-year conveyance). I hope that this information is helpful. We are starting the process of FEQ hydraulic modeling of conveyance improvement alternatives along the Springbrook Creek channel that may affect the Oakesdale Extension crossing. I am keeping Bob Mahn, Oakesdale Extension Project Manager, informed of our progress and will provide him with more definitive information on what these improvements may be as soon as these become available. Our schedule is to complete the hydraulic modeling of alternatives within the month of July 1995. If you have any questions or would like more information, please contact me at (206) 277-5547. Sincerely, Scott Woodbury, P.E., Project Manager Surface Water Utility H:DOCS:95-497:SW:ps CC: Ron Straka Bob Mahn ;yR CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator June 7, 1995 Alan D. Black Howard Needles Tammen & Bergendoff 600 108th Avenue NE - STE 405 Bellevue, WA 98004 SUBJECT: OAKESDALE AVENUE EXTENSION PROJECT HYDRAULIC IMPACT STUDY FOR NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OVER SPRINGBROOK CREEK Dear Mr. Black: This letter is in response to your May 23, 1995 letter regarding your initial HEC-2 model results for the above-referenced project. I confirm that we expect the HEC-2 results to be different than that produced by the hydraulic model FEQ as documented in the R. W. Beck April 6, 1995 letter of FEQ results. This is because FEQ, as a non- steady state model, does a better job of simulating the complex hydraulics of the Springbrook Creek system, which includes pumping from the Black River Pump Station, backwater effects and reverse flow, and flood flow storage in the major wetlands in the valley. However, your HEC-2 results are within the expected range and your intent to use the HEC-2 model for backwater impact assessment and mitigation only is appropriate. Use of the FEQ results for,storm drainage system backwater analysis and bridge clearance calculations, and use of the official FEMA maps for determining flood storage impact is also consistent with what we discussed with you previously. With regard to your transmittal I also have the following comments: • 1 discussed your HEC-2 results at SW 16th Street with Larry Karpack of Northwest Hydraulic Consultants, who worked on the construction of the original HEC-2 model that we provided to you. It is important to note that while the HEC-2 model results at this location were suitable for the original intended purpose of creating f-tables for the hydrologic model, HSPF, the results at this location should not be relied upon for other uses. This is illustrated by comparison of HEC-2 and FEQ results from SW 16th Street downstream to SW Grady. Way. Along this reach, HEC-2 show a rise in the hydraulic grade line from SW 16th Street to SW Grady Way, while FEQ shows a decline. This is because at SW 16th Street the channel rapidly transitions from a narrow, confined channel to a wider, deeper improved channel, assuming that the connecting channel project presently under construction from SW Grady Way to 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton,Washington 98055 .:%, HOWARD NEEDLES TAMMEN &BERGENDOFF, INC. 600108tbAtenue,N-E. ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS PLANNERS Suite405 Bellevue,Wasbtngton 99004 (206)455-3555 May 23, 1995 FAX(206)453-9179 City of Renton Surface Water Utility Planning/Building/Public Works Department 200 Mill Avenue South Renton,Washington 98055 Attention: Scott Woodbury Reference: Oakesdale Avenue- SW 16th Street to SW 31st Street Consultant Agreement No. CAG 103-91 Work Order Authorization No. 4 Hydraulic Impact Study for New Bridge Crossing over Springbrook Creek Dear Scott: HNTB Corporation has completed the production of a base HEC-2 model to be applied for the referenced project. As I noted on the telephone,this new model is giving higher water surface elevations than those shown in the R.W. Beck"Transmittal of FEQ Production"letter dated April 6, 1995. The HEC-2 model was copied from the FUT-FIM.1-12I file that you provided. This model was changed to include QT-cards for twelve flow/backwater conditions. Flows and starting water surface elevations were taken from Table 2 of the R.W. Beck letter. All twelve conditions are included. 1. Current 2-year frequency 2. Current 10-year frequency. 3. Current 25-year frequency, Conveyance 4. Current 100-year frequency, Conveyance 5. Current 25-year frequency, Storage 6. Current 100-year frequency, Storage Runs 7 through 12 reflect the same series for the Future Flow Conditions. As you will see from our results,the HEC-2 model gives higher water surface elevations at most locations along Springbrook Creek. Only SW 16th Street water surfaces were lower. Please review the attached HEC-2 output to be sure that the deviation from FEQ output is within the range that was expected. We intend to use this HEC-2 model for backwater impact assessment and mitigation only. Since we will be checking for relative increases in water surface,this HEC-2 model is expected to yield conservative results. It should be noted that the storm sewer backwater analysis and the bridge clearance calculations will use the FEQ model results since it gives the most accurate output. Flood storage impact will still be based on official FEMA floodplain maps. Scott Woodbury May 23, 1995 Page 2 Thank you for your help with interpretation of details in the R. W. Beck letter. We look forward to receiving the Monster Road Bridge Hydraulic Impact Study which we will use as an example for our continued efforts. Please call if there are any questions or comments relating to the attached HEC-2 model. Sincerely, HOWARD NEEDLES TAMMEN &BERGENDOFF Alan D. Black ADB:la Attachment cc: Bob Mahn,Project Manager File 15203-PL-014 LA 15203\proj-manUt50523 A doc 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 1 THIS RUN EXECUTE(! Y95 11:09:53 www*wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww HEC-2 WATER SURFACE PROFILES Version 4.6.2; May 1991 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Future Conditions HEC-2 Model of Springbrook Creek between �R the BRPS and SW 43rd Street. Updated from calibration model S to remove the sheet piles at the Grady Way box culvert. p,J T,7(1 N Revise Grady Way Box to show cleaned opening configuration And add I-405 Bupass Channel powNSTrzeAtA FLOW CARDS FOR CUR & FUT CONDITIONS ADD PER R.W.B. LETTER USED TABLE 2. ASSUMED QT INSERT JUST OF LOCATION WHERE PEAK FLOWS WERE TABULATED. 0.1 ***Upstream Face of BRPS (CALLED BRPS INFLOW) 2300 ***Upstream end Of Forebay 3225 ***Downstream of SW 7th Street Bridge 4947 ***Downstream end of Grady Way Box 5348. ***I-405 5858. ***D/S SW 16th Street 5938. ***SCS 1 6958. ***SCS 2 8408. ***SCS 3 9178. ***SCS 4 P-9 junction 9338. ***SCS 5 98. ***SCS 6 992928. ***SCS 7 9966. ***SCS 8 Nj �L©W Rdt6 10011. ***SCS 9 10376. ***SCS 10 y 7 10421. ***SCS 11 D/S SW 27th Street /r 10535. *** SCS 12 U/S SW 27th Street 8 0 Y 10595. *** SCS 13 I J 11735. *** SCS 14 12775 *** SCS 15 12825 *** SCS 16 D/S SW 34th Street '� I co 12935 *** SCS 17 U/S SW 34th Street I 12985 *** SCS 18 C� ,� 25 yr. G�t Ovzt�pi 13935 *** SCS 19 14905 *** SCS 20 o�rac{'Pi 15275 *** SCS 21 D/S Side of Oaksdale Avenue J 15418 *** SCS 23 U/S side of Oakesdale Avenue 15468 *** SCS 24 16288 *** SCS 25 17158 *** SCS 26 17208 *** SCS 27 D/S side of SW 43rd Street T1 BASED ON EAST SIDE GREEN RIVER WATERSHED PLAN MODEL(FUT_FIN.h2i, FEB.95) T2 CHANGED QT CARDS AS NOTED ABOVE HNTB CORPORATION MAY 1995 T3 Springbrook Creek 2-YR CUR. FLOW .� 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 2 J1 ICHECK INa NINV IDIR STRT METRIC HVINS Q WSEL FQ 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.81 J2 NPROF IPLOT PRFVS XSECV XSECH FN ALLDC IBW CHNIM ITRACE 1 -1 J3 VARIABLE CODES FOR SUMMARY PRINTOUT 38 8 1 42 37 7 43 J5 LPRNT NUMSEC ********REQUESTED SECTION NUMBERS******** -10 J6 IHLEQ ICOPY SUBDIV STRTDS RMILE 1 QT 17 531 726 875 1049 311 734 QT 721 1017 1090 1220 465 1148 NC 0.10 0.10 0.035 0.1 0.3 X1 0.1 17 50.0 221.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 GR 26.00 0.0 24.00 16.0 22.00 25.0 20.00 30.0 18.00 33.0 GR 16.00 40.0 14.00 46.0 12.00 50.0 -8.50 52.0 -8.50 219.0 GR 12.00 221.0 14.00 230.0 16.00 235.0 18.00 241.0 20.00 245.0 GR 22.00 249.0 24.00 261.0 X1 170. 25 47.0 240.0 170.0 170.0 170.0 0.00 GR 16.00 0.0 14.00 5.0 12.00 9.0 10.00 33.0 8.00 39.0 GR 6.00 44.0 4.00 47.0 2.00 53.0 0.00 57.0 -2.00 63.0 GR -4.00 67.0 -4.75 68.0 -4.75 219.0 -4.00 220.0 -2.00 225.0 GR 0.00 230.0 2.00 234.0 4.00 240.0 6.00 246.0 8.00 253.0 GR 10.00 257.0 12.00 265.0 14.00 270.0 16.00 275.0 18.00 295.0 NH 5 0.1 88.0 0.035 367.0 0.1 520.0 0.035 619.0 0.1 NH 650.0 X1 225. 35 88.0 619.0 55.0 55.0 55.0 0.00 GR 16.00 0.0 14.00 40.0 12.00 48.0 10.00 70.0 8.00 76.0 GR 6.00 82.0 4.00 88.0 2.00 92.0 0.00 95.0 -2.00 105.0 GR -3.80 109.0 -3.75 260.0 -2.00 264.0 0.00 270.0 2.00 275.0 GR 4.00 367.0 6.00 370.0 8.00 375.0 10.00 380.0 12.00 385.0 GR 14.00 389.0 16.00 395.0 16.00 495.0 14.00 500.0 12.00 502.0 GR 10.00 505.0 8.00 510.0 6.00 515.0 4.00 520.0 4.00 619.0 GR 6.00 625.0 8.00 630.0 10.00 635.0 12.00 640.0 14.00 650.0 NC 0.1 0.1 0.035 X1 505. 18 171.0 616.0 280.0 280.0 280.0 0.00 GR 14.00 0.0 14.00 117.0 12.00 124.0 10.00 131.0 8.00 161.0 GR 6.00 166.0 4.00 171.0 2.00 176.0 0.00 185.0 0.00 194.0 GR 2.00 195.0 2.00 356.0 4.00 616.0 6.00 626.0 8.00 636.0 GR 10.00 646.0 12.00 656.0 14.00 666.0 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 3 X1 635. 20 55.0 250.0 130.0 130.0 130.0 0.00 GR 16.00 0.0 14.00 5.0 12.00 10.0 10.00 15.0 8.00 22.0 GR 8.00 45.0 6.00 50.0 4.00 55.0 2.00 60.0 0.00 70.0 GR 0.00 80.0 2.00 85.0 2.00 245.0 4.00 250.0 6.00 255.0 GR 8.00 260.0 10.00 268.0 12.00 273.0 14.00 279.0 16.00 285.0 NH 7 0.1 105.0 0.035 235.0 0.1 310.0 0.035 390.0 0.1 NH 431.0 0.035 532.0 0.1 580.0 X1 825. 43 105.0 532.0 190.0 190.0 190.0 0.00 GR 14.00 0.0 14.00 51.0 12.00 59.0 10.00 62.0 8.00 70.0 GR 8.00 92.0 6.00 99.0 4.00 105.0 2.00 109.0 0.00 118.0 GR 0.00 127.0 -2.00 130.0 0.00 140.0 2.00 145.0 2.00 195.0 GR 0.00 199.0 -2.00 202.0 -2.00 210.0 0.00 215.0 2.00 220.0 GR 2.00 225.0 4.00 235.0 4.00 310.0 2.00 318.0 2.00 330.0 GR 0.00 338.0 -2.00 340.0 -2.00 348.0 0.00 355.0 2.00 360.0 GR 2.00 375.0 4.00 390.0 4.00 431.0 2.00 438.0 2.00 530.0 GR 4.00 532.0 6.00 538.0 8.00 540.0 10.00 545.0 12.00 550.0 GR 14.00 560.0 16.00 565.0 18.00 580.0 NH 7 0.1 293.0 0.035 344.0 0.1 370.0 0.035 545.0 0.1 NH 557.0 0.035 656.0 0.1 705.0 X1 1035. 33 293.0 656.0 210.0 210.0 210.0 0.00 GR 14.00 0.0 14.00 230.0 12.00 237.0 10.00 243.0 8.00 253.0 GR 8.00 275.0 6.00 285.0 4.00 293.0 2.00 296.0 0.00 307.0 GR 0.00 317.0 2.00 325.0 2.00 333.0 4.00 344.0 4.00 370.0 GR 2.00 410.0 2.00 454.0 0.00 465.0 -2.00 480.0 -2.00 510.0 GR 0.00 521.0 2.00 540.0 4.00 545.0 4.00 557.0 2.00 570.0 GR 2.00 652.0 4.00 656.0 6.00 665.0 8.00 675.0 10.00 685.0 GR 12.00 690.0 14.00 695.0 16.00 705.0 NC 0.1 0.1 0.035 X1 1305. 20 82.0 252.0 270.0 270.0 270.0 0.00 GR 16.00 0.0 14.00 27.0 12.00 34.0 10.00 39.0 8.00 47.0 GR 8.00 67.0 6.00 75.0 4.00 82.0 2.00 87.0 0.00 92.0 GR 0.00 102.0 2.00 109.0 2.00 246.0 4.00 252.0 6.00 257.0 GR 8.00 264.0 10.00 270.0 12.00 273.0 14.00 282.0 16.00 302.0 NH 9 0.1 112.0 0.035 155.0 0.1 185.0 0.035 230.0 0.1 NH 320.0 0.035 345.0 0.1 378.0 0.035 545.0 0.1 660.0 X1 1615. 46 112.0 545.0 240.0 455.0 310.0 0.00 GR 16.00 0.0 16.00 50.0 14.00 55.0 12.00 65.0 10.00 69.0 GR 8.00 78.0 8.00 98.0 6.00 105.0 4.00 112.0 2.00 118.0 GR 0.00 125.0 0.00 133.0 2.00 140.0 2.00 150.0 4.00 155.0 GR 4.00 185.0 2.00 190.0 2.00 195.0 0.00 200.0 -2.00 205.0 GR -2.00 210.0 0.00 214.0 2.00 220.0 2.00 225.0 4.00 230.0 GR 4.00 320.0 2.00 328.0 2.00 335.0 4.00 345.0 4.00 378.0 GR 2.00 390.0 2.00 400.0 0.00 415.0 -2.00 420.0 -2.00 525.0 GR 0.00 530.0 2.00 535.0 4.00 545.0 6.00 552.0 8.00 568.0 GR 10.00 585.0 12.00 595.0 14.00 608.0 16.00 620.0 18.00 635.0 GR 20.00 660.0 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 4 NH 9 0.1 109.0 0.035 149.0 0.1 159.0 0.035 446.0 0.1 NH 481.0 0.035 531.0 0.1 736.0 0.035 931.0 0.1 991.0 X1 1715. 69 109.0 931.0 30.0 380.0 100.0 0.00 GR 16.00 0.0 16.00 49.0 14.00 51.0 12.00 60.0 10.00 66.0 GR 8.00 72.0 8.00 91.0 6.00 101.0 4.00 109.0 2.00 111.0 GR 0.00 119.0 0.00 129.0 2.00 136.0 2.00 141.0 4.00 149.0 GR 4.00 159.0 2.00 163.0 2.00 179.0 0.00 186.0 -2.00 196.0 GR -2.00 251.0 0.00 261.0 2.00 271.0 2.00 296.0 0.00 306.0 GR 2.00 319.0 2.00 406.0 0.00 411.0 2.00 426.0 2.00 441.0 GR 4.00 446.0 4.00 481.0 2.00 491.0 2.00 501.0 0.00 506.0 GR -2.00 510.0 -2.00 520.0 0.00 523.0 2.00 529.0 4.00 531.0 GR 6.00 536.0 8.00 537.0 10.00 541.0 12.00 546.0 14.00 551.0 GR 16.00 591.0 18.00 646.0 18.00 696.0 16.00 701.0 14.00 711.0 GR 12.00 716.0 10.00 721.0 8.00 726.0 6.00 731.0 4.00 736.0 GR 2.00 741.0 0.00 746.0 -2.00 751.0 -2.00 919.0 0.00 921.0 GR 2.00 926.0 4.00 931.0 6.00 939.0 8.00 941.0 10.00 950.0 GR 12.00 953.0 14.00 959.0 16.00 963.0 18.00 991.0 NC 0.1 0.1 0.035 X1 1835. 27 108.0 578.0 45.0 200.0 120.0 0.00 GR 16.00 0.0 16.00 45.0 14.00 50.0 12.00 58.0 10.00 62.0 GR 8.00 70.0 8.00 90.0 6.00 100.0 4.00 108.0 2.00 112.0 GR 0.00 118.0 0.00 129.0 2.00 134.0 2.00 540.0 0.00 545.0 GR -2.00 550.0 -2.00 568.0 0.00 570.0 2.00 575.0 4.00 578.0 GR 6.00 584.0 8.00 590.0 10.00 595.0 12.00 600.0 14.00 608.0 GR 16.00 615.0 18.00 840.0 X1 1950. 21 165.0 405.0 70.0 150.0 115.0 0.00 GR 16.00 0.0 16.00 100.0 14.00 110.0 12.00 115.0 10.00 120.0 GR 8.00 130.0 8.00 150.0 6.00 160.0 4.00 165.0 2.00 170.0 GR 0.00 180.0 0.00 190.0 2.00 195.0 2.00 400.0 4.00 405.0 GR 6.00 410.0 8.00 414.0 10.00 420.0 12.00 425.0 14.00 430.0 GR 16.00 500.0 NC 0.05 0.05 0.035 X1 2300. 10 58.0 130.0 310.0 420.0 350.0 0.00 GR 16.90 0.0 8.60 25.0 8.60 43.0 3.60 58.0 -0.40 70.0 GR -0.40 78.0 1.60 84.0 1.60 124.0 3.60 130.0 11.60 154.0 X1 2780. 10 58.0 130.0 540.0 410.0 480.0 0.00 GR 16.90 0.0 8.60 25.0 8.60 43.0 3.60 58.0 0.20 68.2 GR 0.20 79.8 1.60 84.0 1.60 124.0 3.60 130.0 11.60 154.0 X1 3225. 10 39.0 111.5 440.0 470.0 445.0 0.00 GR 12.20 0.0 9.20 6.0 9.20 24.0 3.80 39.0 0.30 50.0 GR 0.30 61.0 1.80 65.5 1.80 105.5 3.80 111.5 10.80 132.5 X1 3259. 34.0 34.0 34.0 0.00 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 5 x1 3309. 10 55.5 127.5 50.0 50.0 50.0 0.00 GR 18.80 0.0 8.80 22.5 8.80 40.5 3.80 55.5 0.30 66.0 GR 0.30 77.0 1.80 81.5 1.80 121.5 3.80 127.5 17.13 163.5 X1 4079. 10 55.5 127.5 750.0 790.0 770.0 0.00 GR 19.00 0.0 9.00 22.5 9.00 40.5 4.00 55.5 0.60 65.7 GR 0.60 77.6 2.00 81.5 2.00 121.5 4.00 127.5 17.33 163.5 x1 4544. 10 55.5 127.5 465.0 465.0 465.0 0.00 GR 19.00 0.0 9.00 22.5 9.00 40.5 4.00 55.5 1.90 61.8 GR 1.90 81.2 2.00 81.5 2.00 121.5 4.00 127.5 17.33 163.5 x1 4635. 91.0 91.0 91.0 0.00 x1 4660. 8 58.2 133.8 25.0 25.0 25.0 0.00 GR 19.00 0.0 9.00 30.0 9.00 45.0 4.60 58.2 2.60 64.2 GR 2.60 127.8 4.60 133.8 13.00 165.0 x1 4712. 52.0 52.0 52.0 0.00 X1 4774. 12 50.0 122.0 62.0 62.0 62.0 0.00 GR 16.00 0.0 8.33 23.0 8.33 35.0 3.33 50.0 1.33 56.0 GR 1.33 70.0 1.10 70.7 1.10 85.3 1.33 86.0 1.33 116.0 GR 3.33 122.0 16.00 160.0 X1 4838. 14 45.1 144.9 64.0 64.0 64.0 0.00 GR 16.00 0.0 16.00 45.0 2.00 45.1 2.00 67.0 2.00 71.5 GR 2.00 73.0 1.00 76.0 1.00 90.0 2.00 93.0 2.00 131.5 GR 2.00 136.0 2.00 144.9 16.00 145.0 16.00 225.0 NC 0.3 0.5 X1 4947. 10 45.1 108.9 109.0 109.0 109.0 0.00 GR 16.00 0.0 16.00 45.0 2.00 45.1 2.00 55.0 1.00 58.0 GR 1.00 72.0 2.00 75.0 2.00 108.9 16.00 109.0 16.00 189.0 NC 0.011 x1 4950. 30 45.1 108.9 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.00 X3 10 0.0 0.0 BT 26 0.0 18.0 16.0 45.0 18.0 16.0 45.1 18.0 2.00 BT 47.5 18.0 2.0 47.51 18.0 14.1 58.5 18.0 14.1 58.51 BT 18.0 1.0 59.5 18.0 1.0 59.51 18.0 14.1 70.5 18.0 BT 14.1 70.51 18.0 1.0 71.5 18.0 1.0 71.51 18.0 14.1 BT 82.5 18.0 14.1 82.51 18.0 2.0 83.5 18.0 2.0 83.51 BT 18.0 14.1 94.5 18.0 14.1 94.51 18.0 2.0 95.5 18.0 BT 2.0 95.51 18.0 14.1 106.5 18.0 14.1 106.51 18.0 2.0 BT 108.9 18.0 2.0 109.0 18.0 16.0 189.0 18.0 16.0 GR 16.00 0.0 16.00 45.0 2.00 45.1 2.00 47.5 2.0 47.51 GR 2.0 55.0 1.0 58.0 1.0 58.50 1.0 58.51 1.0 59.5 GR 1.0 59.51 1.0 70.5 1.0 70.51 1.00 71.5 1.0 71.51 GR 1.00 72.0 2.00 75.0 2.0 82.5 2.0 82.51 2.0 83.5 GR 2.0 83.51 2.00 94.5 2.0 94.51 2.0 95.5 2.0 95.51 GR 2.0 106.5 2.00 106.51 2.00 108.9 16.00 109.0 16.00 189.0 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 6 5050 CALLED GRADY WAY U/S aT 17 454 650 783 939 271 638 aT 585 901 955 1107 414 1042 X1 5050. 30 45.1 108.9 100.0 100.0 100.0 0.00 X3 10 0.0 0.0 BT 26 0.0 18.0 16.0 45.0 18.0 16.0 45.1 18.0 2.00 BT 47.5 18.0 2.0 47.51 18.0 14.1 58.5 18.0 14.1 58.51 BT 18.0 1.0 59.5 18.0 1.0 59.51 18.0 14.1 70.5 18.0 BT 14.1 70.51 18.0 1.0 71.5 18.0 1.0 71.51 18.0 14.1 BT 82.5 18.0 14.1 82.51 18.0 2.0 83.5 18.0 2.0 83.51 BT 18.0 14.1 94.5 18.0 14.1 94.51 18.0 2.0 95.5 18.0 BT 2.0 95.51 18.0 14.1 106.5 18.0 14.1 106.51 18.0 2.0 BT 108.9 18.0 2.0 109.0 18.0 16.0 189.0 18.0 16.0 GR 16.00 0.0 16.00 45.0 2.00 45.1 2.00 47.5 2.0 47.51 GR 2.0 55.0 1.0 58.0 1.0 58.50 1.0 58.51 1.0 59.5 GR 1.0 59.51 1.0 70.5 1.0 70.51 1.00 71.5 1.0 71.51 GR 1.00 72.0 2.00 75.0 2.0 82.5 2.0 82.51 2.0 83.5 GR 2.0 83.51 2.00 94.5 2.0 94.51 2.0 95.5 2.0 95.51 GR 2.0 106.5 2.00 106.51 2.00 108.9 16.00 109.0 16.00 189.0 X1 5100. 30 45.1 108.9 50.0 50.0 50.0 0.00 X3 10 0.0 0.0 BT 26 0.0 18.0 16.0 45.0 18.0 16.0 45.1 18.0 2.00 BT 47.5 18.0 2.0 47.51 18.0 14.1 58.5 18.0 14.1 58.51 BT 18.0 1.0 59.5 18.0 1.0 59.51 18.0 14.1 70.5 18.0 ST 14.1 70.51 18.0 1.0 71.5 18.0 1.0 71.51 18.0 14.1 BT 82.5 18.0 14.1 82.51 18.0 2.0 83.5 18.0 2.0 83.51 BT 18.0 14.1 94.5 18.0 14.1 94.51 18.0 2.0 95.5 18.0 BT 2.0 95.51 18.0 14.1 106.5 18.0 14.1 106.51 18.0 2.0 BT 108.9 18.0 2.0 109.0 18.0 16.0 189.0 18.0 16.0 GR 16.00 0.0 16.00 45.0 2.00 45.1 2.00 47.5 2.0 47.51 GR 2.0 55.0 1.0 58.0 1.0 58.50 1.0 58.51 1.0 59.5 GR 1.0 59.51 1.0 70.5 1.0 70.51 1.00 71.5 1.0 71.51 GR 1.00 72.0 2.00 75.0 2.0 82.5 2.0 82.51 2.0 83.5 GR 2.0 83.51 2.00 94.5 2.0 94.51 2.0 95.5 2.0 95.51 GR 2.0 106.5 2.00 106.51 2.00 108.9 16.00 109.0 16.00 189.0 X1 5143. 29 47.5 108.9 43.0 43.0 43.0 0.00 BT 26 0.0 18.0 16.0 45.0 18.0 16.0 45.1 18.0 2.00 BT 47.5 18.0 2.0 47.51 18.0 14.1 58.5 18.0 14.1 58.51 BT 18.0 1.0 59.5 18.0 1.0 59.51 18.0 14.1 70.5 18.0 BT 14.1 70.51 18.0 1.0 71.5 18.0 1.0 71.51 18.0 14.1 BT 82.5 18.0 14.1 82.51 18.0 2.0 83.5 18.0 2.0 83.51 BT 18.0 14.1 94.5 18.0 14.1 94.51 18.0 2.0 95.5 18.0 BT 2.0 95.51 18.0 14.1 106.5 18.0 14.1 106.51 18.0 2.0 BT 108.9 18.0 2.0 109.0 18.0 16.0 189.0 18.0 16.0 GR 18.00 0.0 18.00 45.0 2.00 45.1 2.00 47.5 2.0 47.51 GR 2.0 58.0 2.0 58.50 2.0 58.51 2.00 59.5 0.09 59.51 GR 0.09 70.5 2.0 70.51 2.00 71.5 2.0 71.51 2.00 72.0 GR 2.00 75.0 2.0 82.5 2.0 82.51 2.0 83.5 2.0 83.51 GR 2.0 94.5 2.0 94.51 2.0 95.5 2.0 95.51 2.0 106.5 GR 14.10 106.51 18.00 108.9 18.00 109.0 18.00 189.0 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 7 NC 0.05 0.05 0.035 0.1 0.3 X1 5268. 17 158.0 254.7 80.0 125.0 125.0 GR 19.90 0.0 17.40 72.2 14.90 133.8 11.90 140.4 6.20 158.0 GR -0.45 159.2 -0.45 173.1 0.25 182.0 3.40 183.5 5.00 187.6 GR 2.62 194.7 2.62 199.7 0.12 207.2 0.12 219.2 2.62 226.74 GR 2.62 254.7 14.00 254.8 X1 5348. 39 138.9 306.9 60.0 90.0 80.0 0.00 GR 26.00 0.0 24.20 11.0 15.90 34.2 15.30 40.5 30.00 40.5 GR 30.00 42.0 15.30 42.0 15.20 51.4 15.30 91.4 30.00 91.4 GR 30.00 92.9 15.30 92.9 14.90 123.4 30.00 123.4 30.00 124.9 GR 14.90 124.9 14.00 138.9 3.20 144.4 0.78 147.2 0.78 157.8 GR 1.88 171.5 3.08 174.0 5.40 174.8 30.00 174.8 30.00 176.3 GR 7.10 176.3 8.30 178.1 21.20 206.5 22.30 213.2 25.10 215.0 GR 24.50 226.6 24.50 247.0 2.12 247.1 2.12 259.0 0.12 259.1 GR 0.12 271.0 2.12 271.1 2.12 306.9 24.50 307.0 X1 5393. 39 112.5 306.9 45.0 45.0 45.0 0.00 GR 24.60 0.0 23.60 5.7 16.20 28.1 15.40 35.1 30.00 35.1 GR 30.00 36.6 15.40 36.6 15.20 44.3 14.60 85.0 30.00 85.0 GR 30.00 86.5 14.60 86.5 14.30 96.2 8.00 112.5 1.50 116.5 GR 30.00 116.5 30.00 118.0 1.50 118.0 0.49 123.0 2.10 131.6 GR 1.30 144.6 3.30 146.2 4.20 152.8 6.00 158.5 11.50 165.7 GR 12.00 167.8 30.00 167.8 30.00 169.3 12.00 169.3 23.00 189.1 GR 24.60 203.1 24.50 247.0 2.12 247.1 2.12 259.0 0.12 259.1 GR 0.12 271.0 2.12 271.1 2.12 306.9 24.50 307.0 X1 5438. 37 108.9 306.9 45.0 45.0 45.0 0.00 GR 22.50 0.0 21.50 4.8 16.20 18.5 15.70 36.6 30.00 36.6 GR 30.00 38.1 15.70 38.1 14.80 83.7 30.00 83.7 30.00 85.2 GR 14.80 85.2 14.50 108.9 4.20 117.0 30.00 117.0 30.00 118.5 GR 4.20 118.5 1.60 121.4 0.20 129.9 3.70 143.1 4.10 144.6 GR 5.70 152.5 6.00 165.6 11.40 167.8 30.00 167.8 30.00 169.3 GR 11.40 169.3 14.80 176.4 22.30 195.4 23.20 204.4 24.50 247.0 GR 2.12 247.1 2.12 259.0 0.12 259.1 0.12 271.0 2.12 271.1 GR 2.12 306.9 24.50 307.0 X1 5550. 18 91.3 201.3 116.0 24.0 40.0 GR 15.60 0.0 15.40 67.0 9.20 83.7 4.10 91.3 2.72 92.4 GR 0.32 96.7 0.32 103.1 0.80 110.3 2.70 114.1 5.70 119.6 GR 8.00 125.3 2.66 141.3 2.66 162.8 0.16 170.3 0.16 182.3 GR 2.66 189.8 2.66 201.3 15.60 201.4 X1 5773. 9 18.8 65.9 216.0 230.0 223.0 0.00 GR 12.00 0.0 2.62 18.8 2.62 28.0 0.12 35.5 0.12 47.5 GR 2.62 55.0 2.62 60.0 2.62 65.9 16.00 66.0 NC 0.3 0.5 X1 5830. 10 6 75 57 57 57 GR 16 0 6.73 0.1 4.73 6 2.73 12 2.73 40.5 GR 0.23 48 0.23 60 2.73 67.5 2.73 75 16.0 75.1 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 8 X1 5838. 8 0.1 60 8 8 8 X3 10 0.0 0.0 17.0 17.0 GR 16 0 2.74 0.1 2.74 28.5 0.24 36 .24 48 GR 2.74 55.5 2.74 60 16 60.1 SB 1.05 1.6 2.5 500 60.0 784.4 X1 5898. 8 .1 60 60.0 60.0 60.0 X2 1 15.0 17.0 X3 10 0.0 0.0 17.0 17.0 GR 16 0 2.74 0.1 2.74 28.5 0.24 36 .24 48 GR 2.74 55.5 2.74 60 16 60.1 QT 17 453 649 781 938 271 576 QT 574 894 948 1103 409 948 NH 5 0.075 9.0 0.050 47.0 0.035 72.0 0.050 82.0 0.075 NH 101.0 5938. ***SCS 1 (CALLED SW 16TH STREET) X1 5938. 10 53.0 72.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 0.00 X4 2 1.75 53.5 1.85 68.0 GR 15.80 0.0 16.30 9.0 12.60 20.0 9.40 47.0 5.00 53.0 GR 1.65 61.0 3.35 69.0 6.30 72.0 8.40 82.0 16.60 101.0 NC 0.1 0.3 X1 6038. 10 53.0 72.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 X4 2 1.75 53.5 1.85 68.0 GR 15.80 0.0 16.30 9.0 12.60 20.0 9.40 47.0 5.00 53.0 GR 1.65 61.0 3.35 69.0 6.30 72.0 8.40 82.0 16.60 101.0 NH 5 0.075 41.0 0.050 74.0 0.035 99.0 0.050 120.0 0.075 NH 151.0 X1 6958. 9 41.0 120.0 920.0 920.0 920.0 0.00 X4 2 1.60 74.7 1.50 95.0 GR 15.20 0.0 14.70 41.0 7.00 71.0 3.90 74.0 1.20 88.0 GR 2.90 99.0 7.20 104.0 15.10 120.0 15.40 151.0 QT 17 449 646 777 934 269 570 QT 565 889 942 1094 404 934 NH 5 0.075 400.0 0.050 476.0 0.035 488.0 0.050 546.0 0.990 NH 1630. 8408. ***SCS 3 (CALLED CONFLUENCE OF NORTH 60"SS) X1 8408. 21 414.0 546.0 1450.0 1450.0 1450.0 0.00 X3 10 14.90 14.00 X4 2 2.20 477.0 2.00 486.0 GR 18.00 0.0 12.00 100.0 12.00 120.0 16.00 170.0 16.00 260.0 GR 13.20 400.0 14.90 414.0 13.80 430.0 12.80 439.0 4.90 476.0 GR 1.40 483.0 4.90 488.0 7.90 500.0 10.10 516.0 14.70 536.0 GR 16.90 546.0 16.00 970.0 14.00 1020.0 12.00 1040.0 11.50 1600.0 GR 18.00 1630.0 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 9 NH 5 0.075 710.0 0.050 880.0 0.035 905.0 0.050 946.0 0.075 NH 1540. X1 9178. 22 847.0 1190.0 770.0 770.0 770.0 0.00 X3 10 X4 2 2.70 882.0 1.60 904.5 GR 16.00 0.0 14.00 140.0 12.00 240.0 14.00 680.0 14.00 690.0 GR 14.00 695.0 10.00 710.0 11.30 810.0 11.60 847.0 9.40 865.0 GR 7.40 880.0 1.20 892.0 4.80 905.0 11.70 920.0 15.00 932.0 GR 15.30 946.0 16.00 990.0 16.00 1190.0 14.00 1450.0 12.00 1460.0 GR 11.50 1530.0 17.50 1540.0 QT 17 395 574 686 823 234 503 QT 523 809 843 990 361 809 NH 5 0.075 890.0 0.050 1295.0 0.035 1319.0 0.050 1379.0 0.075 NH 2280. 9338. ***SCS 5 (CALLED CONFLUENCE OF P-9) X1 9338. 16 1230.0 1332.0 160.0 160.0 160.0 0.00 X3 10 X4 2 2.20 1298.0 2.70 1317.0 GR 16.00 0.0 14.00 140.0 12.00 240.0 10.00 690.0 10.00 890.0 GR 11.70 1230.0 11.40 1265.0 9.10 1282.0 7.30 1295.0 1.60 1307.0 GR 5.60 1319.0 11.90 1332.0 11.40 1379.0 12.00 2060.0 12.00 2265.0 GR 18.00 2280.0 NH 5 0.075 110.0 0.050 189.0 0.035 212.0 0.050 259.0 0.075 NH 775. X1 9878. 14 110.0 259.0 540.0 540.0 540.0 0.00 X3 10 X4 2 0.50 190.0 1.00 209.5 GR 18.00 0.0 16.00 20.0 16.00 110.0 10.90 170.0 8.20 188.0 GR 5.40 189.0 0.00 202.0 4.50 212.0 7.50 213.0 10.30 226.0 GR 12.30 249.0 12.40 259.0 12.00 760.0 18.00 775.0 NC 0.3 0.5 NH 5 0.075 120.0 0.050 185.1 0.035 213.9 0.050 219.0 0.075 NH 760. X1 9928. 13 120.0 214.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 0.00 X3 10 0.0 0.0 GR 18.00 0.0 16.00 20.0 15.50 60.0 16.00 120.0 13.00 180.0 GR 13.00 185.0 1.00 185.1 0.00 199.5 1.00 213.9 13.00 214.0 GR 13.00 219.0 12.00 730.0 18.00 760.0 NH 5 0.075 120.0 0.035 185.1 0.014 213.9 0.035 219.0 0.075 NH 760. X1 9933. 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.00 BT 13 0.0 18.0 18.0 20.0 16.0 16.0 60.0 15.5 15.5 BT 120.0 16.0 16.0 180.0 13.0 13.0 185.0 13.0 11.0 185.1 BT 13.0 11.0 199.5 13.0 11.0 213.9 13.0 11.0 214.0 13.0 BT 13.0 219.0 13.0 13.0 730.0 12.0 12.0 760.0 18.0 18.0 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 10 X1 9966. 33.0 33.0 33.0 0.00 X2 1 X3 10 NH 5 0.075 120.0 0.050 185.1 0.035 213.9 0.050 219.0 0.075 NH 760. X1 9971. 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.00 X3 10 0.0 0.0 NH 5 0.075 550.0 0.050 576.0 0.035 595.0 0.050 640.0 0.075 NH 1090. X1 10011. 14 550.0 640.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 0.00 X3 10 X4 2 2.30 578.0 1.00 593.0 GR 18.00 0.0 14.50 20.0 14.00 490.0 15.50 550.0 10.90 565.0 GR 7.80 576.0 0.00 584.0 4.30 595.0 8.20 596.0 10.20 614.0 GR 10.30 640.0 10.50 1020.0 12.00 1040.0 18.00 1090.0 NC 0.1 0.3 NH 5 0.075 390.0 0.050 476.0 0.035 497.0 0.050 556.0 0.075 NH 795. X1 10376. 15 440.0 516.0 410.0 410.0 410.0 0.00 X3 10 X4 2 0.50 478.0 0.00 495.0 GR 18.00 0.0 15.00 20.0 16.00 390.0 16.10 440.0 14.30 452.0 GR 7.60 475.0 4.50 476.0 0.00 487.0 4.80 497.0 7.80 498.0 GR 10.20 516.0 10.20 556.0 10.00 750.0 12.00 770.0 18.00 795.0 NC 0.3 0.5 NH 5 0.075 430.0 0.050 476.0 0.035 497.0 0.050 556.0 0.075 NH 795. X1 10421. 17 476.0 497.0 45.0 45.0 45.0 0.00 X3 10 0.0 0.0 17.9 17.9 GR 18.00 0.0 16.00 230.0 15.50 430.0 16.10 440.0 14.30 452.0 GR 7.60 475.0 4.50 476.0 0.50 477.0 0.00 487.0 0.00 496.0 GR 4.80 497.0 7.80 498.0 10.20 516.0 10.20 556.0 10.00 750.0 GR 12.00 770.0 18.00 795.0 SC 2.024 0.5 2.63 0 8.69 0 114.0 2.2 3.60 3.50 aT 17 385 571 681 827 227 492 QT 516 812 831 994 351 776 NH 5 0.075 2210.0 0.050 2266.0 0.035 2292.0 0.050 2326.0 0.075 NH 3210. 10535. *** SCS 12 U/S SW 27th Street (CALLED SW 27TH U/S) X1 10535. 26 2266.0 2326.0 114.0 114.0 114.0 0.00 X2 2 17.9 X3 10 0.0 0.0 17.9 17.9 BT 3 0.0 17.9 0.0 2290.0 17.9 0.0 3210.0 17.9 0.0 GR 20.00 0.0 18.00 130.0 16.00 420.0 15.00 445.0 15.00 1810.0 GR 12.00 1835.0 12.00 2210.0 12.20 2230.0 9.60 2256.0 7.40 2265.0 GR 5.70 2266.0 0.20 2268.0 0.20 2279.0 1.00 2290.0 5.20 2292.0 GR 7.60 2293.0 9.50 2308.0 11.00 2326.0 11.00 2356.0 10.00 2410.0 GR 9.50 2510.0 10.00 2730.0 9.50 2770.0 10.00 3130.0 16.00 3150.0 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 11 GR 18.50 3210.0 NH 5 0.075 2120.0 0.050 2341.0 0.035 2367.0 0.050 2383.0 0.075 NH 3320. X1 10595. 25 2305.0 2401.0 60.0 60.0 60.0 0.00 X3 10 GR 20.00 0.0 18.00 130.0 16.00 420.0 15.00 485.0 15.00 1900.0 GR 12.00 1920.0 10.50 2120.0 12.20 2305.0 9.60 2331.0 7.40 2340.0 GR 5.70 2341.0 0.20 2343.0 0.20 2354.0 1.00 2365.0 5.20 2367.0 GR 7.60 2368.0 9.50 2383.0 11.00 2401.0 11.00 2431.0 12.00 2720.0 GR 11.00 3000.0 10.00 3180.0 10.00 3270.0 18.00 3290.0 19.00 3320.0 NC 0.1 0.3 NH 5 0.075 2120.0 0.050 2341.0 0.035 2367.0 0.050 2383.0 0.075 NH 3320. X1 11595. 25 2305.0 2401.0 1000.0 1000.0 1000.0 0.00 X3 10 GR 20.00 0.0 18.00 130.0 16.00 420.0 15.00 485.0 15.00 1900.0 GR 12.00 1920.0 10.50 2120.0 12.20 2305.0 9.60 2331.0 7.40 2340.0 GR 5.70 2341.0 0.20 2343.0 0.20 2354.0 1.00 2365.0 5.20 2367.0 GR 7.60 2368.0 9.50 2383.0 11.00 2401.0 11.00 2431.0 12.00 2720.0 GR 11.00 3000.0 10.00 3180.0 10.00 3270.0 18.00 3290.0 19.00 3320.0 NH 5 0.075 1720.0 0.050 1793.0 0.035 1823.0 0.050 1854.0 0.075 NH 2800. X1 11735. 19 1757.0 1854.0 140.0 140.0 140.0 0.00 X3 10 GR 18.50 0.0 18.00 60.0 16.50 480.0 15.00 620.0 17.00 1290.0 GR 15.50 1720.0 15.50 1757.0 12.00 1775.0 7.60 1793.0 4.00 1795.0 GR 3.50 1809.0 3.70 1818.0 7.20 1823.0 10.60 1842.0 14.30 1854.0 GR 14.90 1874.0 16.50 2310.0 16.50 2750.0 19.00 2800.0 NH 5 0.075 2270.0 0.050 2376.0 0.035 2402.0 0.050 2445.0 0.075 NH 3370. X1 12775. 18 2270.0 2445.0 1040.0 1040.0 1040.0 0.00 X3 10 GR 19.50 0.0 16.50 1040.0 15.50 1130.0 17.00 2100.0 16.00 2270.0 GR 14.40 2335.0 12.80 2359.0 8.50 2375.0 5.40 2376.0 4.60 2388.0 GR 5.80 2402.0 7.80 2403.0 12.30 2421.0 15.30 2437.0 15.30 2445.0 GR 17.00 2780.0 16.50 3320.0 19.00 3370.0 NC 0.3 0.5 NH 5 0.075 1948.0 0.050 1972.0 0.035 2016.0 0.050 2058.0 0.075 NH 2970. X1 12825. 19 1948.0 2016.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 0.00 X3 10 0.0 0.0 15.0 15.0 GR 19.50 0.0 16.50 470.0 16.50 650.0 17.00 1320.0 16.00 1890.0 GR 14.40 1948.0 12.80 1972.0 8.50 1979.0 5.00 1989.0 4.60 2001.0 GR 5.80 2015.0 7.80 2016.0 12.30 2034.0 15.30 2050.0 15.30 2058.0 GR 17.00 2300.0 16.50 2700.0 16.50 2920.0 19.00 2970.0 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 12 SC 4.024 0.5 2.63 0 6.0 0 110.0 2.2 4.70 4.40 aT 17 340 560 641 887 195 491 OT 565 841 845 1225 309 852 NH 5 0.075 1645.0 0.050 1674.0 0.035 1725.0 0.050 1756.0 0.075 NH 2680. 12935 *** SCS 17 U/S SW 34th Street (CALLED SW 34TH U/S) X1 12935. 17 1645.0 1756.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 0.00 X2 2 15.0 X3 10 0.0 0.0 15.1 15.1 X4 2 4.50 1695.0 4.60 1720.0 BT 9 0. 18.0 0.0 1100.0 17.0 0.0 1594. 15.48 0.0 BT 1644.0 15.1 0.0 1694.0 14.9 0.0 1744.0 14.94 0.0 1794.0 BT 15.2 0.0 1944.0 16.2 0.0 2630.0 16.50 0.0 GR 18.00 0.0 16.50 350.0 17.00 1110.0 16.00 1590.0 14.00 1625.0 GR 16.40 1645.0 14.70 1674.0 4.20 1676.0 4.20 1694.0 4.20 1710.0 GR 5.60 1725.0 7.60 1726.0 15.90 1756.0 16.00 1781.0 16.00 2550.0 GR 16.50 2630.0 19.00 2680.0 NH 5 0.075 2065.0 0.050 2115.0 0.035 2145.0 0.050 2201.0 0.075 NH 3110. X1 12985. 17 2065.0 2201.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 0.00 X3 10 X4 2 4.50 2115.0 4.60 2140.0 GR 20.00 0.0 19.00 200.0 16.50 670.0 16.50 1120.0 16.00 2020.0 GR 16.40 2065.0 14.70 2094.0 7.90 2113.0 5.70 2114.0 4.20 2130.0 GR 5.60 2145.0 7.60 2146.0 15.90 2176.0 16.00 2201.0 16.50 2500.0 GR 16.50 3060.0 19.00 3110.0 NC 0.1 0.3 NH 5 0.075 1410.0 0.050 1595.0 0.035 1631.0 0.050 1655.0 0.075 NH 1668. X1 13935. 16 1555.0 1651.0 950.0 950.0 950.0 0.00 X3 10 X4 2 5.50 1598.0 5.20 1620.0 GR 20.00 0.0 19.50 130.0 18.00 460.0 18.00 960.0 16.50 1410.0 GR 18.10 1555.0 18.10 1573.0 7.60 1595.0 6.10 1596.0 4.70 1610.0 GR 7.40 1624.0 9.30 1631.0 11.00 1633.0 19.10 1651.0 20.10 1655.0 GR 20.50 1668.0 NH 5 0.075 2000.0 0.050 2020.0 0.035 2062.0 0.050 2117.0 0.990 NH 4020. X1 14905. 12 2020.0 2062.0 960.0 960.0 960.0 0.00 X3 10 GR 18.50 0.0 17.50 2000.0 16.30 2020.0 8.10 2027.0 5.00 2028.0 GR 4.40 2039.0 5.20 2046.0 6.60 2048.0 16.40 2062.0 16.80 2117.0 GR 17.50 4000.0 18.5 4020.0 NC 0.3 0.5 NH 5 0.075 2000.0 0.050 2020.0 0.035 2062.0 0.050 2117.0 0.990 NH 4020. 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 13 X1 14945. 40.0 40.0 40.0 0.00 X3 10 0.0 0.0 16.0 16.0 SB 1.05 1.6 2.5 20.0 2.0 278.1 0.84 4.8 4.8 NH 5 0.075 2000.0 0.050 2020.0 0.035 2062.0 0.050 2117.0 0.990 NH 4020. X1 14955. 10.0 10.0 10.0 0.00 X2 1 15.0 17.0 X3 10 0.0 0.0 17.0 17.0 BT 3 2000.0 17.5 0.0 2010.0 17.0 0.0 2117.0 17.0 0.0 NH 5 0.075 535.0 0.050 541.0 0.035 565.0 0.050 576.0 0.075 NH 620. X1 14995. 15 510.0 576.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 0.00 GR 21.50 0.0 16.70 510.0 16.50 525.0 11.80 535.0 10.70 541.0 GR 8.40 543.0 7.90 546.0 5.00 547.0 4.30 554.0 4.80 561.0 GR 7.20 563.0 9.60 565.0 15.70 576.0 18.10 610.0 19.00 620.0 NC 0.1 0.3 NH 5 0.075 535.0 0.050 541.0 0.035 565.0 0.050 576.0 0.075 NH 620. X1 15225. 15 510.0 576.0 230.0 230.0 230.0 0.00 GR 21.50 0.0 16.70 510.0 16.50 525.0 11.80 535.0 10.70 541.0 GR 8.40 543.0 7.90 546.0 5.00 547.0 4.30 554.0 4.80 561.0 GR 7.20 563.0 9.60 565.0 15.70 576.0 18.10 610.0 19.00 620.0 OT 17 340 563 644 891 195 489 OT 562 843 849 1230 311 855 NC 0.3 0.5 NH 5 0.075 525.0 0.050 543.0 0.035 563.0 0.050 576.0 0.075 NH 620. 15275 *** SCS 21 D/S Side of Oaksdale Avenue X1 15275. 15 525.0 576.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 0.00 X3 10 0.0 0.0 17.1 17.1 GR 21.50 0.0 16.70 510.0 16.50 525.0 11.80 535.0 10.70 541.0 GR 8.40 543.0 7.90 546.0 5.00 547.0 4.30 554.0 4.80 561.0 GR 7.20 563.0 9.60 565.0 15.70 576.0 18.10 610.0 19.00 620.0 Sc 4.024 0.5 2.63 0 6.0 0 143.0 2.2 5.40 5.39 OT 17 323 526 603 833 183 463 OT 524 786 797 1172 292 799 NH 5 0.075 523.0 0.050 554.0 0.035 578.0 0.050 590.0 0.990 NH 2655. 15418 *** SCS 23 U/S side of Oakesdale Avenue X1 15418. 13 523.0 590.0 143.0 143.0 143.0 0.00 X2 2 17.1 X3 10 0.0 0.0 17.1 17.1 X4 2 5.50 556.0 5.00 577.0 BT 3 510.0 17.1 0.0 554.0 17.1 0.0 614.0 17.1 0.0 GR 21.50 0.0 20.20 510.0 20.10 523.0 14.30 533.0 13.20 542.0 GR 8.00 554.0 4.70 568.0 8.40 578.0 13.20 590.0 16.90 597.0 GR 17.40 614.0 18.00 2605.0 19.00 2655.0 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 14 NH 5 0.075 1030.0 0.050 1124.0 0.035 1148.0 0.050 1184.0 0.990 NH 3340. X1 15468. 17 1093.0 1184.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 0.00 X4 2 5.50 1126.0 5.00 1147.0 GR 22.00 0.0 21.00 250.0 21.00 520.0 20.00 1010.0 20.20 1030.0 GR 20.20 1080.0 20.10 1093.0 14.30 1103.0 13.20 1112.0 8.00 1124.0 GR 4.70 1138.0 8.40 1148.0 13.20 1160.0 16.90 1167.0 17.40 1184.0 GR 18.00 3290.0 19.00 3340.0 NC 0.1 0.3 NH 4 0.050 73.0 0.035 96.0 0.050 150.0 0.075 960.0 X1 16288. 10 50.0 118.0 860.0 860.0 860.0 0.00 X3 10 X4 2 5.80 73.5 6.00 95.0 GR 26.50 0.0 15.80 50.0 12.60 65.0 8.80 73.0 5.50 84.0 GR 8.20 96.0 17.90 118.0 17.30 150.0 20.00 360.0 20.00 960.0 NH 5 0.075 60.0 0.050 546.0 0.035 572.0 0.050 662.0 0.075 NH 1540. X1 17158. 13 528.0 598.0 870.0 870.0 870.0 0.00 X4 2 6.00 550.0 5.80 570.0 GR 29.50 0.0 22.00 60.0 21.60 495.0 21.50 506.0 16.30 519.0 GR 15.40 528.0 8.70 546.0 5.70 556.0 8.30 572.0 17.10 598.0 GR 18.40 662.0 20.00 1480.0 20.50 1540.0 QT 17 320 524 601 829 181 459 QT 523 781 794 1159 290 794 NC 0.3 0.5 NH 5 0.075 60.0 0.050 546.0 0.035 572.0 0.050 662.0 0.075 NH 1540. 17208 *** SCS 27 D/S side of SW 43rd Street X1 17208. 50.0 50.0 50.0 0.00 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 15 IHLEQ = 1. THEREFORE FRICTION LOSS (HL) IS CALCULATED AS A FUNCTION OF PROFILE TYPE, WHICH CAN VARY FROM REACH TO REACH. SEE DOCUMENTATION FOR DETAILS. 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 16 T1 BASED ON EAST SIDE GREEN RIVER WATERSHED PLAN MODEL(FUT_FIN.H2I, FEB.95) T2 CHANGED QT CARDS AS NOTED ABOVE HNTB CORPORATION MAY 1995 T3 SPRINGBROOK CREEK 10-YR CUR. FLOW J1 ICHECK INQ NINV IDIR STRT METRIC HVINS Q WSEL FQ -10 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.84 J2 NPROF IPLOT PRFVS XSECV XSECH FN ALLDC IBW CHNIM ITRACE 2 -1 IHLEQ = 1. THEREFORE FRICTION LOSS (HL) IS CALCULATED AS A FUNCTION OF PROFILE TYPE, WHICH CAN VARY FROM REACH TO REACH. SEE DOCUMENTATION FOR DETAILS. 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 17 T1 BASED ON EAST SIDE GREEN RIVER WATERSHED PLAN MODEL(FUT_F1N.H2I, FEB.95) T2 CHANGED QT CARDS AS NOTED ABOVE HNTB CORPORATION MAY 1995 T3 SPRINGBROOK CREEK 25-YR CUR. FLOW (CONVEYANCE) J1 ICHECK INQ NINV IDIR STRT METRIC HVINS Q WSEL FQ -10 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.87 J2 NPROF IPLOT PRFVS XSECV XSECH FN ALLDC IBW CHNIM ITRACE 3 -1 IHLEQ = 1. THEREFORE FRICTION LOSS (HL) IS CALCULATED AS A FUNCTION OF PROFILE TYPE, WHICH CAN VARY FROM REACH TO REACH. SEE DOCUMENTATION FOR DETAILS. 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 18 T1 BASED ON EAST SIDE GREEN RIVER WATERSHED PLAN MODEL(FUT_FIN.H2I, FEB.95) T2 CHANGED QT CARDS AS NOTED ABOVE HNTB CORPORATION MAY 1995 T3 SPRINGBROOK CREEK 100-YR CUR. FLOW (CONVEYANCE) J1 ICHECK iNQ NINV IDIR STRT METRIC HVINS Q WSEL FQ -10 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.05 J2 NPROF IPLOT PRFVS XSECV XSECH FN ALLDC IBW CHNIM ITRACE 4 -1 IHLEQ = 1. THEREFORE FRICTION LOSS (HL) IS CALCULATED AS A FUNCTION OF PROFILE TYPE, WHICH CAN VARY FROM REACH TO REACH. SEE DOCUMENTATION FOR DETAILS. 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 19 T1 BASED ON EAST SIDE GREEN RIVER WATERSHED PLAN MODEL(FUT_FIN.H2I, FEB.95) T2 CHANGED QT CARDS AS NOTED ABOVE HNTB CORPORATION MAY 1995 T3 SPRINGBROOK CREEK 25-YR CUR. FLOW (STORAGE) J1 ICHECK INQ NINV IDIR STRT METRIC HVINS Q WSEL FQ -10 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.44 J2 NPROF IPLOT PRFVS XSECV XSECH FN ALLDC IBW CHNIM ITRACE 5 -1 IHLEQ = 1. THEREFORE FRICTION LOSS (HL) IS CALCULATED AS A FUNCTION OF PROFILE TYPE, WHICH CAN VARY FROM REACH TO REACH. SEE DOCUMENTATION FOR DETAILS. 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 20 T1 BASED ON EAST SIDE GREEN RIVER WATERSHED PLAN MODEL(FUT_FIN.H21, FEB.95) T2 CHANGED QT CARDS AS NOTED ABOVE HNTB CORPORATION MAY 1995 T3 SPRINGBROOK CREEK 100-YR CUR. FLOW (STORAGE) J1 ICHECK INQ NINV IDIR STRT METRIC HVINS Q WSEL FQ -10 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 8.37 J2 NPROF IPLOT PRFVS XSECV XSECH FN ALLDC IBW CHNIM ITRACE 6 -1 IHLEQ = 1. THEREFORE FRICTION LOSS (HL) IS CALCULATED AS A FUNCTION OF PROFILE TYPE, WHICH CAN VARY FROM REACH TO REACH. SEE DOCUMENTATION FOR DETAILS. 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 21 T1 BASED ON EAST SIDE GREEN RIVER WATERSHED PLAN MODEL(FUT_FIN.H2I, FEB.95) T2 CHANGED QT CARDS AS NOTED ABOVE HNTB CORPORATION MAY 1995 T3 SPRINGBROOK CREEK 2-YR FUT. FLOW J1 ICHECK INQ NINV IDIR STRT METRIC HVINS Q WSEL FQ -10 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.84 J2 NPROF IPLOT PRFVS XSECV XSECH FN ALLDC IBW CHNIM ITRACE 7 -1 IHLEQ = 1. THEREFORE FRICTION LOSS (HL) IS CALCULATED AS A FUNCTION OF PROFILE TYPE, WHICH CAN VARY FROM REACH TO REACH. SEE DOCUMENTATION FOR DETAILS. 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 22 T1 BASED ON EAST SIDE GREEN RIVER WATERSHED PLAN MODEL(FUT_FIN.H21, FEB.95) T2 CHANGED QT CARDS AS NOTED ABOVE HNTB CORPORATION MAY 1995 T3 SPRINGBROOK CREEK 10-YR FUT. FLOW J1 ICHECK INQ NINV IDIR STRT METRIC HVINS Q WSEL FQ -10 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.04 J2 NPROF IPLOT PRFVS XSECV XSECH FN ALLDC IBW CHNIM ITRACE 8 -1 IHLEQ = 1. THEREFORE FRICTION LOSS (HL) 1S CALCULATED AS A FUNCTION OF PROFILE TYPE, WHICH CAN VARY FROM REACH TO REACH. SEE DOCUMENTATION FOR DETAILS. 22MAY95 11.09:53 PAGE 23 T1 BASED ON EAST SIDE GREEN RIVER WATERSHED PLAN MODEL(FUT_FIN.H2I, FEB.95) T2 CHANGED QT CARDS AS NOTED ABOVE HNTB CORPORATION MAY 1995 T3 SPRINGBROOK CREEK 25-YR FUT. FLOW (CONVEYANCE) J1 ICHECK INQ NINV IDIR STRT METRIC HVINS Q WSEL FQ -10 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.06 J2 NPROF IPLOT PRFVS XSECV XSECH FN ALLDC IBW CHNIM ITRACE 9 -1 1HLEQ = 1. THEREFORE FRICTION LOSS (HL) IS CALCULATED AS A FUNCTION OF PROFILE TYPE, WHICH CAN VARY FROM REACH TO REACH. SEE DOCUMENTATION FOR DETAILS. 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 24 T1 BASED ON EAST SIDE GREEN RIVER WATERSHED PLAN MODEL(FUT_FIN.H2I, FEB.95) T2 CHANGED QT CARDS AS NOTED ABOVE HNTB CORPORATION MAY 1995 T3 SPRINGBROOK CREEK 100-YR FUT. FLOW (CONVEYANCE) J1 ICHECK INQ NINV IDIR STRT METRIC HVINS Q WSEL FQ -10 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.09 J2 NPROF IPLOT PRFVS XSECV XSECH FN ALLDC IBW CHNIM ITRACE 10 -1 IHLEQ = 1. THEREFORE FRICTION LOSS (HL) IS CALCULATED AS A FUNCTION OF PROFILE TYPE, WHICH CAN VARY FROM REACH TO REACH. SEE DOCUMENTATION FOR DETAILS. 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 25 T1 BASED ON EAST SIDE GREEN RIVER WATERSHED PLAN MODEL(FUT_FIN.H2I, FEB.95) T2 CHANGED QT CARDS AS NOTED ABOVE HNTB CORPORATION MAY 1995 T3 SPRINGBROOK CREEK 25-YR FUT. FLOW (STORAGE) J1 ICHECK INQ NINV IDIR STRT METRIC HVINS Q WSEL FQ -10 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.64 J2 NPROF IPLOT PRFVS XSECV XSECH FN ALLDC IBW CHNIM ITRACE 11 -1 IHLEQ = 1. THEREFORE FRICTION LOSS (HL) IS CALCULATED AS A FUNCTION OF PROFILE TYPE, WHICH CAN VARY FROM REACH TO REACH. SEE DOCUMENTATION FOR DETAILS. 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 26 T1 BASED ON EAST SIDE GREEN RIVER WATERSHED PLAN MODEL(FUT_FIN.H2I, FEB.95) T2 CHANGED QT CARDS AS NOTED ABOVE HNTB CORPORATION MAY 1995 T3 SPRINGBROOK CREEK 100-YR FUT. FLOW (STORAGE) J1 ICHECK 1NQ NINV IDIR STRT METRIC HVINS Q WSEL FQ -10 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.96 J2 NPROF IPLOT PRFVS XSECV XSECH FN ALLDC IBW CHNIM ITRACE 12 -1 IHLEQ = 1. THEREFORE FRICTION LOSS (HL) IS CALCULATED AS A FUNCTION OF PROFILE TYPE, WHICH CAN VARY FROM REACH TO REACH. SEE DOCUMENTATION FOR DETAILS. 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 27 THIS RUN EXECUTED 22MAY95 11:10:24 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww HEC-2 WATER SURFACE PROFILES Version 4.6.2; May 1991 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww NOTE- ASTERISK (*) AT LEFT OF CROSS-SECTION NUMBER INDICATES MESSAGE IN SUMMARY OF ERRORS LIST Springbrook Creek SUMMARY PRINTOUT SECNO DEPTH CWSEL ELMIN TWA VOL G �j(�QS Iyl��ovJ .100 12.31 3.81 -8.50 .00 .00 531.00 GW56L get GN J1 P11z9 .100 12.34 3.84 -8.50 .00 .00 726.00 a a�v�g� �l l/�cF fiu�►�2 Z .100 12.37 3.87 8.50 .00 .00 875.00 �6ick clnec��A, .100 12.55 4.05 -8.50 .00 .00 1049.00 .100 12.94 4.44 -8.50 .00 .00 311.00 .100 16.87 8.37 -8.50 .00 .00 734.00 .100 12.34 3.84 -8.50 .00 .00 721.00 / .100 12.54 4.04 -8.50 .00 .00 1017.00 V .100 12.56 4.06 -8.50 .00 .00 1090.00 .100 12.59 4.09 -8.50 .00 .00 1220.00 .100 14.14 5.64 -8.50 .00 .00 465.00 .100 21.46 12.96 -8.50 .00 .00 1148.00 * 170.000 8.56 3.81 -4.75 .70 6.88 531.00 * 170.000 8.59 3.84 -4.75 .71 6.90 726.00 * 170.000 8.62 3.87 -4.75 .71 6.92 875.00 * 170.000 8.80 4.05 -4.75 .71 7.05 1049.00 * 170.000 9.19 4.44 -4.75 .71 7.33 311.00 170.000 13.12 8.37 -4.75 .75 10.20 734.00 * 170.000 8.59 3.84 -4.75 .71 6.90 721.00 * 170.000 8.79 4.04 -4.75 .71 7.04 1017.00 * 170.000 8.81 4.06 -4.75 .71 7.06 1090.00 * 170.000 8.84 4.09 -4.75 .71 7.08 1220.00 * 170.000 10.39 5.64 -4.75 .72 8.19 465.00 170.000 17.71 12.96 -4.75 .85 13.86 1148.00 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 28 SEND DEPTH CWSEL ELMIN TWA VOL Q 225.000 7.61 3.81 -3.80 1.00 8.67 531.00 225.000 7.64 3.84 -3.80 1.00 8.70 726.00 225.000 7.67 3.87 -3.80 1.00 8.73 875.00 225.000 7.85 4.05 -3.80 1.07 8.91 1049.00 225.000 8.24 4.44 -3.80 1.08 9.33 311.00 225.000 12.17 8.37 -3.80 1.16 13.71 734.00 225.000 7.64 3.84 -3.80 1.00 8.70 721.00 225.000 7.84 4.04 -3.80 1.07 8.90 1017.00 225.000 7.86 4.06 -3.80 1.07 8.92 1090.00 225.000 7.89 4.09 -3.80 1.07 8.96 1220.00 225.000 9.44 5.64 -3.80 1.10 10.63 465.00 225.000 16.76 12.96 -3.80 1.33 19.36 1148.00 * 505.000 3.85 3.85 .00 3.23 14.98 531.00 * 505.000 3.90 3.90 .00 3.26 15.11 726.00 * 505.000 3.95 3.95 .00 3.28 15.23 875.00 * 505.000 4.13 4.13 .00 3.72 15.85 1049.00 * 505.000 4.44 4.44 .00 3.75 17.19 311.00 * 505.000 8.37 8.37 .00 4.07 32.51 734.00 * 505.000 3.90 3.90 .00 3.26 15.11 721.00 * 505.000 4.12 4.12 .00 3.72 15.81 1017.00 * 505.000 4.14 4.14 .00 3.72 15.89 1090.00 * 505.000 4.18 4.18 .00 3.72 16.02 1220.00 * 505.000 5.64 5.64 .00 3.84 21.74 465.00 505.000 12.96 12.96 .00 4.63 52.48 1148.00 635.000 3.88 3.88 .00 4.15 16.43 531.00 635.000 3.96 3.96 .00 4.19 16.62 726.00 635.000 4.02 4.02 .00 4.23 16.80 875.00 635.000 4.20 4.20 .00 4.68 17.58 1049.00 635.000 4.45 4.45 .00 4.71 19.21 311.00 * 635.000 8.37 8.37 .00 5.15 38.47 734.00 635.000 3.95 3.95 .00 4.19 16.62 721.00 635.000 4.18 4.18 .00 4.68 17.53 1017.00 635.000 4.21 4.21 .00 4.68 17.64 1090.00 635.000 4.27 4.27 .00 4.68 17.81 1220.00 * 635.000 5.64 5.64 .00 4.82 24.93 465.00 * 635.000 12.96 12.96 .00 5.83 63.73 1148.00 * 825.000 5.93 3.93 -2.00 5.25 18.95 531.00 * 825.000 6.04 4.04 -2.00 5.55 19.26 726.00 * 825.000 6.13 4.13 -2.00 5.59 19.55 875.00 * 825.000 6.33 4.33 -2.00 6.04 20.59 1049.00 * 825.000 6.46 4.46 -2.00 6.08 22.44 311.00 * 825.000 10.38 8.38 -2.00 6.70 47.27 734.00 * 825.000 6.04 4.04 -2.00 5.55 19.25 721.00 * 825.000 6.31 4.31 -2.00 6.04 20.51 1017.00 * 825.000 6.35 4.35 -2.00 6.04 20.68 1090.00 * 825.000 6.43 4.43 -2.00 6.05 20.94 1220.00 * 825.000 7.65 5.65 -2.00 6.22 29.81 465.00 * 825.000 14.96 12.96 -2.00 7.51 79.95 1148.00 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 29 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL ELMIN TWA VOL 0 1035.000 5.94 3.94 -2.00 6.78 22.78 531.00 1035.000 6.06 4.06 -2.00 7.46 23.27 726.00 1035.000 6.17 4.17 -2.00 7.50 23.75 875.00 1035.000 6.37 4.37 -2.00 7.96 25.17 1049.00 1035.000 6.46 4.46 -2.00 8.00 27.24 311.00 1035.000 10.38 8.38 -2.00 8.87 59.89 734.00 1035.000 6.06 4.06 -2.00 7.45 23.26 721.00 1035.000 6.34 4.34 -2.00 7.95 25.05 1017.00 1035.000 6.39 4.39 -2.00 7.96 25.30 1090.00 1035.000 6.47 4.47 -2.00 7.97 25.72 1220.00 1035.000 7.65 5.65 -2.00 8.18 36.92 465.00 1035.000 14.96 12.96 -2.00 9.82 102.86 1148.00 * 1305.000 3.99 3.99 .00 8.30 26.45 531.00 * 1305.000 4.14 4.14 .00 9.11 27.14 726.00 * 1305.000 4.25 4.25 .00 9.16 27.79 875.00 * 1305.000 4.46 4.46 .00 9.63 29.55 1049.00 * 1305.000 4.47 4.47 .00 9.67 31.73 311.00 * 1305.000 8.38 8.38 .00 10.87 71.35 734.00 * 1305.000 4.14 4.14 .00 9.11 27.13 721.00 * 1305.000 4.43 4.43 .00 9.62 29.39 1017.00 * 1305.000 4.49 4.49 .00 9.63 29.73 1090.00 * 1305.000 4.58 4.58 .00 9.64 30.29 1220.00 * 1305.000 5.66 5.66 .00 9.90 43.44 465.00 * 1305.000 12.96 12.96 .00 12.00 123.96 1148.00 * 1615.000 6.04 4.04 -2.00 10.45 31.55 531.00 * 1615.000 6.21 4.21 -2.00 11.27 32.60 726.00 * 1615.000 6.35 4.35 -2.00 11.32 33.54 875.00 * 1615.000 6.58 4.58 -2.00 11.80 35.77 1049.00 * 1615.000 6.48 4.48 -2.00 11.84 37.81 311.00 * 1615.000 10.38 8.38 -2.00 13.42 86.41 734.00 * 1615.000 6.21 4.21 -2.00 11.27 32.58 721.00 * 1615.000 6.55 4.55 -2.00 11.79 35.55 1017.00 * 1615.000 6.61 4.61 -2.00 11.80 36.02 1090.00 * 1615.000 6.72 4.72 -2.00 11.82 36.82 1220.00 * 1615.000 7.67 5.67 -2.00 12.13 52.12 465.00 * 1615.000 14.97 12.97 -2.00 14.86 151.43 1148.00 * 1715.000 6.04 4.04 -2.00 11.66 35.40 531.00 * 1715.000 6.22 4.22 -2.00 12.48 36.66 726.00 * 1715.000 6.36 4.36 -2.00 12.54 37.77 875.00 * 1715.000 6.59 4.59 -2.00 13.03 40.28 1049.00 * 1715.000 6.48 4.48 -2.00 13.06 42.19 311.00 * 1715.000 10.38 8.38 -2.00 14.83 95.90 734.00 * 1715.000 6.22 4.22 -2.00 12.48 36.63 721.00 * 1715.000 6.56 4.56 -2.00 13.02 40.02 1017.00 * 1715.000 6.62 4.62 -2.00 13.03 40.58 1090.00 * 1715.000 6.74 4.74 -2.00 13.06 41.51 1220.00 * 1715.000 7.67 5.67 -2.00 13.41 57.98 465.00 * 1715.000 14.97 12.97 -2.00 16.50 167.98 1148.00 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 30 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL ELMIN TWA VOL Q * 1835.000 6.04 4.04 -2.00 13.16 40.05 531.00 * 1835.000 6.22 4.22 -2.00 13.98 41.57 726.00 * 1835.000 6.36 4.36 -2.00 14.05 42.89 875.00 * 1835.000 6.59 4.59 -2.00 14.54 45.74 1049.00 * 1835.000 6.48 4.48 -2.00 14.57 47.49 311.00 * 1835.000 10.38 8.38 -2.00 16.45 107.29 734.00 * 1835.000 6.21 4.21 -2.00 13.98 41.53 721.00 * 1835.000 6.56 4.56 -2.00 14.53 45.44 1017.00 * 1835.000 6.62 4.62 -2.00 14.55 46.09 1090.00 * 1835.000 6.74 4.74 -2.00 14.57 47.20 1220.00 * 1835.000 7.67 5.67 -2.00 14.95 65.10 465.00 * 1835.000 14.97 12.97 -2.00 18.22 187.03 1148.00 * 1950.000 4.05 4.05 .00 14.09 42.17 531.00 * 1950.000 4.23 4.23 .00 14.92 43.85 726.00 * 1950.000 4.37 4.37 .00 14.99 45.31 875.00 * 1950.000 4.59 4.59 .00 15.49 48.37 1049.00 * 1950.000 4.48 4.48 .00 15.52 50.02 311.00 * 1950.000 8.38 8.38 .00 17.49 113.64 734.00 * 1950.000 4.22 4.22 .00 14.92 43.82 721.00 * 1950.000 4.56 4.56 .00 15.48 48.05 1017.00 * 1950.000 4.63 4.63 .00 15.49 48.76 1090.00 * 1950.000 4.74 4.74 .00 15.52 49.98 1220.00 * 1950.000 5.67 5.67 .00 15.91 68.76 465.00 * 1950.000 12.97 12.97 .00 19.33 198.29 1148.00 * 2300.000 4.55 4.15 -.40 15.36 45.05 531.00 * 2300.000 4.76 4.36 -.40 16.20 46.97 726.00 * 2300.000 4.92 4.52 -.40 16.27 48.61 875.00 * 2300.000 5.14 4.74 -.40 16.78 51.96 1049.00 * 2300.000 4.89 4.49 -.40 16.80 53.42 311.00 * 2300.000 8.78 8.38 -.40 19.04 122.45 734.00 * 2300.000 4.75 4.35 -.40 16.20 46.92 721.00 * 2300.000 5.10 4.70 -.40 16.77 51.60 1017.00 * 2300.000 5.17 4.77 -.40 16.79 52.40 1090.00 * 2300.000 5.29 4.89 -.40 16.82 53.76 1220.00 * 2300.000 6.07 5.67 -.40 17.25 73.72 465.00 * 2300.000 13.36 12.96 -.40 21.16 215.05 1148.00 2780.000 4.37 4.57 .20 16.20 47.40 531.00 2780.000 4.75 4.95 .20 17.06 49.57 726.00 2780.000 5.02 5.22 .20 17.15 51.40 875.00 2780.000 5.33 5.53 .20 17.67 54.99 1049.00 2780.000 4.41 4.61 .20 17.66 55.94 311.00 2780.000 8.21 8.41 .20 20.15 128.74 734.00 2780.000 4.74 4.94 .20 17.06 49.52 721.00 2780.000 5.28 5.48 .20 17.66 54.59 1017.00 * 2780.000 5.40 5.60 .20 17.69 55.48 1090.00 * 2780.000 5.60 5.80 .20 17.73 56.98 1220.00 2780.000 5.56 5.76 .20 18.18 77.27 465.00 2780.000 12.77 12.97 .20 22.75 228.04 1148.00 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 31 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL ELMIN TWA VOL Q 3225.000 4.57 4.87 .30 17.01 49.77 531.00 3225.000 5.02 5.32 .30 17.89 52.28 726.00 3225.000 5.34 5.64 .30 17.99 54.35 875.00 3225.000 5.69 5.99 .30 18.54 58.23 1049.00 3225.000 4.41 4.71 .30 18.46 58.26 311.00 3225.000 8.15 8.45 .30 21.18 134.50 734.00 3225.000 5.01 5.31 .30 17.89 52.22 721.00 3225.000 5.63 5.93 .30 18.52 57.78 1017.00 3225.000 5.77 6.07 .30 18.56 58.78 1090.00 3225.000 6.00 6.30 .30 18.61 60.47 1220.00 3225.000 5.54 5.84 .30 19.05 80.54 465.00 3225.000 12.69 12.99 .30 24.16 239.78 1148.00 3259.000 4.59 4.89 .30 17.07 49.96 531.00 3259.000 5.05 5.35 .30 17.95 52.49 726.00 3259.000 5.37 5.67 .30 18.06 54.59 875.00 3259.000 5.72 6.02 .30 18.61 58.49 1049.00 3259.000 4.42 4.72 .30 18.52 58.43 311.00 3259.000 8.16 8.46 .30 21.26 134.94 734.00 3259.000 5.04 5.34 .30 17.95 52.44 721.00 3259.000 5.66 5.96 .30 18.59 58.03 1017.00 3259.000 5.80 6.10 .30 18.62 59.04 1090.00 3259.000 6.03 6.33 .30 18.68 60.75 1220.00 3259.000 5.54 5.84 .30 19.12 80.79 465.00 3259.000 12.69 12.99 .30 24.26 240.65 1148.00 3309.000 4.62 4.92 .30 17.16 50.23 531.00 3309.000 5.08 5.38 .30 18.05 52.81 726.00 3309.000 5.41 5.71 .30 18.15 54.94 875.00 3309.000 5.77 6.07 .30 18.70 58.87 1049.00 3309.000 4.43 4.73 .30 18.61 58.69 311.00 3309.000 8.16 8.46 .30 21.37 135.57 734.00 3309.000 5.07 5.37 .30 18.04 52.75 721.00 3309.000 5.71 6.01 .30 18.69 58.41 1017.00 3309.000 5.84 6.14 .30 18.72 59.43 1090.00 3309.000 6.08 6.38 .30 18.78 61.16 1220.00 3309.000 5.55 5.85 .30 19.21 81.15 465.00 3309.000 12.69 12.99 .30 24.42 241.94 1148.00 4079.000 4.74 5.34 .60 18.55 54.61 531.00 4079.000 5.27 5.87 .60 19.49 57.90 726.00 4079.000 5.64 6.24 .60 19.64 60.53 875.00 4079.000 6.04 6.64 .60 20.22 65.04 1049.00 4079.000 4.32 4.92 .60 19.97 62.65 311.00 4079.000 7.93 8.53 .60 23.11 145.22 734.00 4079.000 5.26 5.86 .60 19.49 57.82 721.00 4079.000 5.97 6.57 .60 20.20 64.48 1017.00 4079.000 6.13 6.73 .60 20.25 65.72 1090.00 4079.000 6.40 7.00 .60 20.33 67.84 1220.00 4079.000 5.40 6.00 i60 20.69 86.67 465.00 4079.000 12.42 13.02 .60 26.87 261.60 1148.00 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 32 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL ELMIN TWA VOL Q 4544.000 3.66 5.56 1.90 19.41 57.33 531.00 4544.000 4.23 6.13 1.90 20.38 61.10 726.00 4544.000 4.62 6.52 1.90 20.55 64.07 875.00 4544.000 5.04 6.94 1.90 21.16 68.96 1049.00 4544.000 3.15 5.05 1.90 20.80 64.98 311.00 4544.000 6.68 8.58 1.90 24.15 150.89 734.00 4544.000 4.22 6.12 1.90 20.38 61.01 721.00 4544.000 4.96 6.86 1.90 21.14 68.33 1017.00 4544.000 5.13 7.03 1.90 21.19 69.73 1090.00 4544.000 5.41 7.31 1.90 21.29 72.11 1220.00 4544.000 4.20 6.10 1.90 21.58 89.91 465.00 4544.000 11.13 13.03 1.90 28.34 273.26 1148.00 4635.000 3.71 5.61 1.90 19.58 57.86 531.00 4635.000 4.28 6.18 1.90 20.56 61.73 726.00 4635.000 4.67 6.57 1.90 20.73 64.77 875.00 4635.000 5.09 6.99 1.90 21.35 69.74 1049.00 4635.000 3.18 5.08 1.90 20.96 65.43 311.00 4635.000 6.69 8.59 1.90 24.36 151.98 734.00 4635.000 4.27 6.17 1.90 20.55 61.64 721.00 4635.000 5.02 6.92 1.90 21.32 69.09 1017.00 4635.000 5.19 7.09 1.90 21.38 70.52 1090.00 4635.000 5.47 7.37 1.90 21.48 72.96 1220.00 4635.000 4.22 6.12 1.90 21.76 90.54 465.00 4635.000 11.14 13.04 1.90 28.63 275.52 1148.00 4660.000 3.01 5.61 2.60 19.63 58.00 531.00 4660.000 3.58 6.18 2.60 20.61 61.89 726.00 4660.000 3.97 6.57 2.60 20.78 64.96 875.00 4660.000 4.39 6.99 2.60 21.40 69.94 1049.00 4660.000 2.48 5.08 2.60 21.01 65.54 311.00 4660.000 5.99 8.59 2.60 24.41 152.27 734.00 4660.000 3.57 6.17 2.60 20.60 61.80 721.00 4660.000 4.32 6.92 2.60 21.37 69.29 1017.00 4660.000 4.49 7.09 2.60 21.43 70.73 1090.00 4660.000 4.77 7.37 2.60 21.54 73.18 1220.00 4660.000 3.52 6.12 2.60 21.81 90.70 465.00 4660.000 10.44 13.04 2.60 28.71 276.14 1148.00 4712.000 3.05 5.65 2.60 19.72 58.26 531.00 4712.000 3.63 6.23 2.60 20.71 62.22 726.00 4712.000 4.02 6.62 2.60 20.89 65.32 875.00 4712.000 4.44 7.04 2.60 21.51 70.35 1049.00 4712.000 2.51 5.11 2.60 21.10 65.75 311.00 4712.000 5.99 8.59 2.60 24.54 152.86 734.00 4712.000 3.61 6.21 2.60 20.71 62.12 721.00 4712.000 4.37 6.97 2.60 21.48 69.69 1017.00 4712.000 4.53 7.13 2.60 21.54 71.15 1090.00 4712.000 4.81 7.41 2.60 21.65 73.63 1220.00 4712.000 3.54 6.14 2.60 21.91 91.01 465.00 4712.000 10.44 13.04 2.60 28.89 277.43 1148.00 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 33 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL ELMIN TWA VOL Q * 4774.000 4.63 5.73 1.10 19.85 58.65 531.00 * 4774.000 5.21 6.31 1.10 20.84 62.68 726.00 * 4774.000 5.61 6.71 1.10 21.02 65.83 875.00 * 4774.000 6.04 7.14 1.10 21.64 70.91 1049.00 * 4774.000 4.05 5.15 1.10 21.22 66.07 311.00 4774.000 7.51 8.61 1.10 24.69 153.64 734.00 * 4774.000 5.20 6.30 1.10 20.83 62.58 721.00 * 4774.000 5.96 7.06 1.10 21.61 70.25 1017.00 * 4774.000 6.13 7.23 1.10 21.68 71.73 1090.00 * 4774.000 6.42 7.52 1.10 21.79 74.25 1220.00 * 4774.000 5.08 6.18 1.10 22.04 91.46 465.00 4774.000 11.94 13.04 1.10 29.10 279.03 1148.00 4838.000 4.76 5.76 1.00 19.98 59.18 531.00 4838.000 5.35 6.35 1.00 20.98 63.28 726.00 4838.000 5.76 6.76 1.00 21.16 66.49 875.00 4838.000 6.19 7.19 1.00 21.78 71.64 1049.00 4838.000 4.17 5.17 1.00 21.35 66.52 311.00 4838.000 7.63 8.63 1.00 24.85 154.58 734.00 4838.000 5.34 6.34 1.00 20.97 63.19 721.00 4838.000 6.12 7.12 1.00 21.76 70.97 1017.00 4838.000 6.29 7.29 1.00 21.82 72.47 1090.00 4838.000 6.58 7.58 1.00 21.93 75.03 1220.00 4838.000 5.20 6.20 1.00 22.17 92.05 465.00 4838.000 12.05 13.05 1.00 29.27 280.71 1148.00 * 4947.000 4.76 5.76 1.00 20.19 59.99 531.00 * 4947.000 5.36 6.36 1.00 21.18 64.22 726.00 * 4947.000 5.76 6.76 1.00 21.36 67.51 875.00 * 4947.000 6.19 7.19 1.00 21.99 72.74 1049.00 * 4947.000 4.17 5.17 1.00 21.56 67.21 311.00 * 4947.000 7.62 8.62 1.00 25.06 155.98 734.00 * 4947.000 5.34 6.34 1.00 21.18 64.12 721.00 * 4947.000 6.11 7.11 1.00 21.96 72.06 1017.00 * 4947.000 6.28 7.28 1.00 22.03 73.59 1090.00 * 4947.000 6.57 7.57 1.00 22.14 76.22 1220.00 * 4947.000 5.20 6.20 1.00 22.38 92.95 465.00 * 4947.000 12.04 13.04 1.00 29.48 283.02 1148.00 * 4950.000 4.75 5.75 1.00 20.19 60.01 531.00 * 4950.000 5.34 6.34 1.00 21.19 64.24 726.00 * 4950.000 5.74 6.74 1.00 21.37 67.53 875.00 * 4950.000 6.16 7.16 1.00 21.99 72.77 1049.00 * 4950.000 4.17 5.17 1.00 21.56 67.23 311.00 * 4950.000 7.62 8.62 1.00 25.06 156.01 734.00 * 4950.000 5.33 6.33 1.00 21.18 64.14 721.00 * 4950.000 6.09 7.09 1.00 21.97 72.08 1017.00 * 4950.000 6.26 7.26 1.00 22.03 73.61 1090.00 * 4950.000 6.54 7.54 1.00 22.14 76.24 1220.00 * 4950.000 5.19 6.19 1.00 22.38 92.97 465.00 * 4950.000 12.04 13.04 1.00 29.48 283.07 1148.00 22MAY95 11:09:53 1 PAGE 34 T&U e,2- SECNO DEPTH CWSEL ELMIN TWA VOL Q �a�� U.1�v1 O/S -U,,v /�, 5050.000 4.79 5.79 1.00 20.34 60.52 454.00 5.7 -O.o 5 5050.000 5.38 6.38 1.00 21.33 64.82 650.00 (-5 0•0 5050.000 5.79 6.79 1.00 21.51 68.16 783.00 (o.?3 - D.06 5050.000 6.22 7.22 1.00 22.14 73.46 939.00 .($ 0.0 l� 5050.000 4.18 5.18 1.00 21.71 67.66 271.00 q .C)o - o•Z8 5050.000 7.64 8.64 1.00 25.21 156.88 638.00 g.g 2. 5050.000 5.39 6.39 1.00 21.33 64.72 585.00 (y2,4 p. 1 5 5050.000 6.15 7.15 1.00 22.11 72.76 901.00 -l. o 5050.000 6.33 7.33 1.00 22.18 74.32 955.00 5050.000 6.61 7.61 1.00 22.29 76.98 1107.00 p,o 3 5050.000 5.21 6.21 1.00 22.53 93.53 414.00 Go. 1 3 5050.000 12.05 13.05 1.00 29.63 284.50 1042.00 O. OCo 5100.000 4.79 5.79 1.00 20.41 60.77 454.00 5100.000 5.38 6.38 1.00 21.41 65.12 650.00 5100.000 5.79 6.79 1.00 21.59 68.48 783.00 5100.000 6.23 7.23 1.00 22.21 73.81 939.00 5100.000 4.18 5.18 1.00 21.78 67.88 271.00 5100.000 7.64 8.64 1.00 25.28 157.32 638.00 5100.000 5.39 6.39 1.00 21.40 65.02 585.00 5100.000 6.15 7.15 1.00 22.19 73.10 901.00 5100.000 6.33 7.33 1.00 22.25 74.67 955.00 5100.000 6.61 7.61 1.00 22.36 77.35 1107.00 5100.000 5.21 6.21 1.00 22.60 93.82 414.00 5100.000 12.05 13.05 1.00 29.70 285.21 1042.00 5143.000 5.71 5.80 .09 20.47 61.00 454.00 5143.000 6.30 6.39 .09 21.47 65.37 650.00 5143.000 6.71 6.80 .09 21.65 68.76 783.00 5143.000 7.15 7.24 .09 22.28 74.11 939.00 5143.000 5.10 5.19 .09 21.84 68.07 271.00 5143.000 8.55 8.64 .09 25.34 157.70 638.00 5143.000 6.31 6.40 .09 21.46 65.27 585.00 5143.000 7.07 7.16 .09 22.25 73.40 901.00 5143.000 7.25 7.34 .09 22.31 74.98 955.00 5143.000 7.53 7.62 .09 22.42 77.67 1107.00 5143.000 6.13 6.22 .09 22.67 94.06 414.00 5143.000 12.96 13.05 .09 29.77 285.83 1042.00 * 5268.000 6.30 5.85 -.45 20.70 61.92 454.00 * 5268.000 6.92 6.47 -.45 21.69 66.43 650.00 * 5268.000 7.35 6.90 -.45 21.88 69.91 783.00 * 5268.000 7.81 7.36 -.45 22.50 75.36 939.00 * 5268.000 5.66 5.21 -.45 22.07 68.86 271.00 * 5268.000 9.12 8.67 -.45 25.57 159.25 638.00 * 5268.000 6.91 6.46 -.45 21.69 66.33 585.00 * 5268.000 7.73 7.28 -.45 22.48 74.63 901.00 * 5268.000 7.91 7.46 -.45 22.54 76.25 955.00 * 5268.000 8.22 7.77 -.45 22.65 79.01 1107.00 * 5268.000 6.70 6.25 -.45 22.89 95.07 414.00 * 5268.000 13.53 13.08 -.45 30.01 288.40 1042.00 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 35 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL ELMIN TWA VOL Q 5348.000 5.74 5.86 .12 20.87 62.66 454.00 5348.000 6.36 6.48 .12 21.87 67.27 650.00 5348.000 6.79 6.91 .12 22.05 70.83 783.00 5348.000 7.25 7.37 .12 22.68 76.35 939.00 5348.000 5.10 5.22 .12 22.24 69.48 271.00 5348.000 8.56 8.68 .12 25.76 160.48 638.00 5348.000 6.35 6.47 .12 21.86 67.17 585.00 5348.000 7.17 7.29 .12 22.65 75.61 901.00 5348.000 7.35 7.47 .12 22.72 77.27 955.00 5348.000 7.66 7.78 .12 22.83 80.08 1107.00 5348.000 6.14 6.26 .12 23.06 95.88 414.00 5348.000 12.97 13.09 .12 30.21 290.48 1042.00 5393.000 5.75 5.87 .12 20.97 63.06 454.00 5393.000 6.37 6.49 .12 21.97 67.74 650.00 5393.000 6.80 6.92 .12 22.15 71.34 783.00 5393.000 7.27 7.39 .12 22.78 76.91 939.00 5393.000 5.10 5.22 .12 22.34 69.82 271.00 5393.000 8.56 8.68 .12 25.86 161.17 638.00 5393.000 6.36 6.48 .12 21.96 67.64 585.00 5393.000 7.19 7.31 .12 22.75 76.16 901.00 5393.000 7.37 7.49 .12 22.82 77.83 955.00 5393.000 7.68 7.80 .12 22.93 80.68 1107.00 5393.000 6.14 6.26 .12 23.17 96.32 414.00 5393.000 12.97 13.09 .12 30.33 291.67 1042.00 5438.000 5.75 5.87 .12 21.08 63.45 454.00 5438.000 6.38 6.50 .12 22.08 68.20 650.00 5438.000 6.81 6.93 .12 22.26 71.85 783.00 5438.000 7.28 7.40 .12 22.90 77.47 939.00 5438.000 5.11 5.23 .12 22.44 70.15 271.00 5438.000 8.56 8.68 .12 25.98 161.88 638.00 5438.000 6.37 6.49 .12 22.07 68.10 585.00 5438.000 7.19 7.31 .12 22.87 76.71 901.00 5438.000 7.38 7.50 .12 22.93 78.40 955.00 5438.000 7.69 7.81 .12 23.05 81.29 1107.00 5438.000 6.14 6.26 .12 23.27 96.76 414.00 5438.000 12.97 13.09 .12 30.46 292.91 1042.00 5550.000 5.72 5.88 .16 21.17 63.79 454.00 5550.000 6.35 6.51 .16 22.18 68.60 650.00 5550.000 6.78 6.94 .16 22.37 72.30 783.00 5550.000 7.25 7.41 .16 23.00 77.97 939.00 5550.000 5.07 5.23 .16 22.53 70.44 271.00 5550.000 8.52 8.68 .16 26.09 162.51 638.00 5550.000 6.33 6.49 .16 22.18 68.50 585.00 5550.000 7.16 7.32 .16 22.97 77.20 901.00 5550.000 7.35 7.51 .16 23.04 78.92 955.00 5550.000 7.66 7.82 .16 23.15 81.83 1107.00 5550.000 6.11 6.27 .16 23.38 97.14 414.00 5550.000 12.93 13.09 .16 30.59 294.07 1042.00 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 36 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL ELMIN TWA VOL 0 * 5773.000 5.78 5.90 .12 21.57 65.32 454.00 * 5773.000 6.40 6.52 .12 22.59 70.38 650.00 * 5773.000 6.83 6.95 .12 22.79 74.25 783.00 * 5773.000 7.28 7.40 .12 23.43 80.12 939.00 * 5773.000 5.13 5.25 .12 22.91 71.70 271.00 * 5773.000 8.56 8.68 .12 26.54 165.23 638.00 * 5773.000 6.38 6.50 .12 22.58 70.27 585.00 * 5773.000 7.20 7.32 .12 23.40 79.32 901.00 * 5773.000 7.38 7.50 .12 23.47 81.11 955.00 * 5773.000 7.69 7.81 .12 23.59 84.16 1107.00 * 5773.000 6.16 6.28 .12 23.78 98.82 414.00 * 5773.000 12.96 13.08 .12 31.09 298.87 1042.00 5830.000 5.72 5.95 .23 21.65 65.63 454.00 5830.000 6.37 6.60 .23 22.68 70.75 650.00 5830.000 6.82 7.05 .23 22.87 74.65 783.00 5830.000 7.29 7.52 .23 23.52 80.56 939.00 5830.000 5.04 5.27 .23 22.99 71.96 271.00 5830.000 8.48 8.71 .23 26.62 165.78 638.00 5830.000 6.34 6.57 .23 22.67 70.63 585.00 5830.000 7.20 7.43 .23 23.49 79.76 901.00 5830.000 7.39 7.62 .23 23.56 81.56 955.00 5830.000 7.72 7.95 .23 23.68 84.64 1107.00 5830.000 6.08 6.31 .23 23.86 99.16 414.00 5830.000 12.87 13.10 .23 31.18 299.82 1042.00 5838.000 5.71 5.95 .24 21.66 65.68 454.00 5838.000 6.36 6.60 .24 22.69 70.80 650.00 5838.000 6.80 7.04 .24 22.88 74.71 783.00 5838.000 7.27 7.51 .24 23.53 80.63 939.00 5838.000 5.03 5.27 .24 23.00 72.00 271.00 5838.000 8.47 8.71 .24 26.64 165.86 638.00 5838.000 6.33 6.57 .24 22.68 70.69 585.00 5838.000 7.19 7.43 .24 23.50 79.82 901.00 5838.000 7.37 7.61 .24 23.57 81.63 955.00 5838.000 7.70 7.94 .24 23.69 84.71 1107.00 5838.000 6.07 6.31 .24 23.88 99.21 414.00 5838.000 12.86 13.10 .24 31.19 299.95 1042.00 5898.000 5.73 5.97 .24 21.75 66.01 454.00 5898.000 6.38 6.62 .24 22.77 71.19 650.00 5898.000 6.82 7.06 .24 22.97 75.14 783.00 5898.000 7.30 7.54 .24 23.61 81.09 939.00 5898.000 5.05 5.29 .24 23.08 72.28 271.00 5898.000 8.47 8.71 .24 26.72 166.42 638.00 5898.000 6.35 6.59 .24 22.76 71.07 585.00 5898.000 7.21 7.45 .24 23.58 80.28 901.00 5898.000 7.40 7.64 .24 23.65 82.10 955.00 5898.000 7.73 7.97 .24 23.78 85.21 1107.00 5898.000 6.08 6.32 .24 23.96 99.57 414.00 5898.000 12.86 13.10 .24 31.27 300.87 1042.00 No 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 37 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL ELMIN TWA VOL Q * 5938.000 4.11 5.76 1.65 21.78 66.15 453.00 (o.�{� O.1A * 5938.000 4.63 6.28 1.65 22.81 71.35 649.00 * 5938.000 4.98 6.63 1.65 23.00 75.32 781.00 * 5938.000 5.33 6.98 1.65 23.65 81.29 938.00 ?.9 3 o 9 5 * 5938.000 3.55 5.20 1.65 23.12 72.40 271.00 )i-&I 0 --I * 5938.000 6.96 8.61 1.65 26.76 166.67 576.00 D•01 * 5938.000 4.68 6.33 1.65 22.80 71.23 574.00 9 0•6� * 5938.000 5.29 6.94 1.65 23.62 80.47 894.00 7,0 2 0.$6 * 5938.000 5.45 7.10 1.65 23.69 82.30 948.00 7•0`5 0.85 * 5938.000 5.63 7.28 1.65 23.82 85.42 1103.00 8.3( ( .0 3 * 5938.000 4.53 6.18 1.65 23.99 99.73 409.00 (o.2-7 0.09 * 5938.000 11.41 13.06 1.65 31.33 301.35 948.00 i3 0.OCa 6038.000 4.83 6.48 1.65 21.83 66.32 453.00 * 6038.000 5.65 7.30 1.65 22.86 71.56 649.00 * 6038.000 6.17 7.82 1.65 23.07 75.55 781.00 * 6038.000 6.75 8.40 1.65 23.72 81.55 938.00 6038.000 3.95 5.60 1.65 23.16 72.53 271.00 6038.000 7.10 8.75 1.65 26.84 167.00 576.00 6038.000 5.43 7.08 1.65 22.85 71.43 574.00 * 6038.000 6.60 8.25 1.65 23.69 80.72 894.00 * 6038.000 6.79 8.44 1.65 23.76 82.57 948.00 * 6038.000 7.36 9.01 1.65 23.89 85.71 1103.00 6038.000 4.94 6.59 1.65 24.04 99.91 409.00 6038.000 11.44 13.09 1.65 31.51 302.22 948.00 * 6958.000 6.76 7.96 1.20 22.47 69.13 453.00 * 6958.000 7.97 9.17 1.20 23.63 75.11 649.00 * 6958.000 8.67 9.87 1.20 23.91 79.60 781.00 * 6958.000 9.41 10.61 1.20 24.64 86.21 938.00 * 6958.000 5.37 6.57 1.20 23.70 74.65 271.00 * 6958.000 8.45 9.65 1.20 27.72 171.27 576.00 * 6958.000 7.57 8.77 1.20 23.58 74.74 574.00 * 6958.000 9.21 10.41 1.20 24.59 85.22 894.00 * 6958.000 9.45 10.65 1.20 24.69 87.26 948.00 * 6958.000 10.10 11.30 1.20 24.88 91.00 1103.00 * 6958.000 6.60 7.80 1.20 24.68 102.68 409.00 C �(lueHoe o� Nortj.�u55 6958.000 12.30 13.50 1.20 33.04 311.38 948.00 * 8408.000 7.99 9.39 1.40 24.03 75.16 449.00 O,76 - 8408.000 9.23 10.63 1.40 25.53 83.29 646.00 o-q7 8408.000 9.92 11.32 1.40 25.99 89.16 777.00 8408.000 10.65 12.05 1.40 26.91 97.35 934.00 Imo• �/1 _ 1• � �1 * 8408.000 6.44 7.84 1.40 24.86 78.68 269.00 7�7.3 3 - 0.51 8408.000 9.26 10.66 1.40 29.68 179.85 570.00 8408.000 8.80 10.20 1.40 25.38 82.14 565.00 8408.000 10.45 11.85 1.40 26.80 95.92 889.00 10.7+ - 0•�0 7 8408.000 10.69 12.09 1.40 26.96 98.50 942.00 .115 - I . + 1 8408.000 11.33 12.73 1.40 27.31 103.77 1094.00 + k , SI - 1. l� * 8408.000 7.73 9.13 1.40 26.18 108.37 404.00 e,z5,2 _ I.ZZ 8408.000 12.60 14.00 1.40 35.98 328.52 -9,�.00 13, lA- - O.ao 93Z - O.$Co 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 38 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL ELMIN TWA VOL Q * 9178.000 8.74 9.94 1.20 25.02 78.96 449.00 * 9178.000 10.00 11.20 1.20 26.75 88.47 646.00 * 9178.000 10.63 11.83 1.20 28.57 96.40 777.00 * 9178.000 11.29 12.49 1.20 30.77 106.68 934.00 * 9178.000 7.09 8.29 1.20 25.54 81.16 269.00 * 9178.000 9.91 11.11 1.20 30.89 185.00 570.00 * 9178.000 9.56 10.76 1.20 26.53 86.82 565.00 * 9178.000 11.11 12.31 1.20 30.21 104.58 889.00 * 9178.000 11.33 12.53 1.20 30.92 107.98 942.00 * 9178.000 11.92 13.12 1.20 32.77 116.06 1094.00 * 9178.000 8.45 9.65 1.20 27.11 111.91 404.00 G o ��veh ce aF of * 9178.000 12.94 14.14 1.20 43.98 347.95 934.00 9338.000 8.41 10.01 1.60 25.22 79.84 395.00 9338.000 9.68 11.28 1.60 27.00 89.63 574.00 to•7O _ 0,58 * 9338.000 10.31 11.91 1.60 32.08 100.39 686.00 1 ( . 1 0,&o * 9338.000 10.95 12.55 1.60 35.20 113.37 823.00 p.(00 9338.000 6.74 8.34 1.60 25.68 81.76 234.00 g Z 9 _ P,p 5 9338.000 9.58 11.18 1.60 31.13 186.14 503.00 lo.4% 9338.000 9.23 10.83 1.60 26.76 87.87 523.00 10.3 3 * 9338.000 10.78 12.38 1.60 34.52 110.50 809.00 * 9338.000 10.99 12.59 1.60 35.37 114.84 843.00 * 9338.000 11.56 13.16 1.60 37.57 125.59 990.00 Z•`�7 9338.000 8.11 9.71 1.60 27.30 112.73 361.00 * 9338.000 12.55 14.15 1.60 49.38 362.57 809.00 6): 3 * 9878.000 10.12 10.12 .00 25.86 82.80 395.00 * 9878.000 11.41 11.41 .00 27.86 93.55 574.00 9878.000 11.96 11.96 .00 43.11 113.01 686.00 * 9878.000 12.57 12.57 .00 51.72 135.54 823.00 * 9878.000 8.43 8.43 .00 26.10 83.83 234.00 * 9878.000 11.28 11.28 .00 31.98 189.95 503.00 * 9878.000 10.97 10.97 .00 27.53 91.42 523.00 * 9878.000 12.41 12.41 .00 50.97 129.80 809.00 * 9878.000 12.61 12.61 .00 51.91 137.61 843.00 * 9878.000 13.18 13.18 .00 54.34 157.90 990.00 * 9878.000 9.82 9.82 .00 27.89 115.50 361.00 * 9878.000 14.16 14.16 .00 66.58 411.63 809.00 9928.000 10.13 10.13 .00 25.90 83.10 395.00 9928.000 11.42 11.42 .00 27.92 93.92 574.00 9928.000 11.96 11.96 .00 43.18 113.42 686.00 9928.000 12.57 12.57 .00 52.08 136.09 823.00 9928.000 8.45 8.45 .00 26.13 84.07 234.00 9928.000 11.29 11.29 .00 32.03 190.32 503.00 9928.000 10.98 10.98 .00 27.59 91.76 523.00 9928.000 12.40 12.40 .00 51.34 130.30 809.00 9928.000 12.60 12.60 .00 52.27 138.18 843.00 * 9928.000 13.17 13.17 .00 55.02 158.88 990.00 9928.000 9.83 9.83 .00 27.94 115.80 361.00 * 9928.000 14.16 14.16 .00 67.28 413.28 809.00 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 39 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL ELMIN TWA VOL Q * 9933.000 10.13 10.13 .00 25.90 83.14 395.00 9933.000 11.42 11.42 .00 27.93 93.96 574.00 9933.000 11.96 11.96 .00 43.18 113.45 686.00 9933.000 12.56 12.56 .00 52.10 136.14 823.00 * 9933.000 8.45 8.45 .00 26.14 84.09 234.00 9933.000 11.29 11.29 .00 32.04 190.35 503.00 * 9933.000 10.98 10.98 .00 27.59 91.80 523.00 9933.000 12.40 12.40 .00 51.35 130.34 809.00 9933.000 12.59 12.59 .00 52.29 138.22 843.00 9933.000 13.16 13.16 .00 55.08 158.96 990.00 * 9933.000 9.83 9.83 .00 27.94 115.83 361.00 9933.000 14.16 14.16 .00 67.34 413.43 809.00 9966.000 10.14 10.14 .00 25.93 83.35 395.00 9966.000 11.43 11.43 .00 27.95 94.19 574.00 9966.000 11.97 11.97 .00 43.21 113.68 686.00 9966.000 12.57 12.57 .00 52.24 136.40 823.00 9966.000 8.45 8.45 .00 26.16 84.27 234.00 9966.000 11.29 11.29 .00 32.06 190.58 503.00 9966.000 10.98 10.98 .00 27.61 92.03 523.00 9966.000 12.41 12.41 .00 51.45 130.58 809.00 9966.000 12.60 12.60 .00 52.43 138.49 843.00 9966.000 13.19 13.19 .00 55.51 159.45 990.00 9966.000 9.83 9.83 .00 27.96 116.03 361.00 9966.000 14.16 14.16 .00 67.78 414.35 809.00 * 9971.000 10.14 10.14 .00 25.93 83.38 395.00 9971.000 11.43 11.43 .00 27.95 94.22 574.00 9971.000 11.98 11.98 .00 43.21 113.72 686.00 9971.000 12.61 12.61 .00 52.24 136.43 823.00 * 9971.000 8.45 8.45 .00 26.16 84.29 234.00 9971.000 11.30 11.30 .00 32.06 190.62 503.00 * 9971.000 10.98 10.98 .00 27.61 92.06 523.00 9971.000 12.44 12.44 .00 51.45 130.62 809.00 9971.000 12.64 12.64 .00 52.44 138.53 843.00 9971.000 13.22 13.22 .00 55.57 159.53 990.00 * 9971.000 9.83 9.83 .00 27.97 116.06 361.00 9971.000 14.17 14.17 .00 67.85 414.50 809.00 * 10011.000 10.13 10.13 .00 25.96 83.60 395.00 10011.000 11.48 11.48 .00 28.18 94.69 574.00 10011.000 12.06 12.06 .00 43.44 114.33 686.00 * 10011.000 12.71 12.71 .00 52.48 137.19 823.00 * 10011.000 8.44 8.44 .00 26.19 84.46 234.00 10011.000 11.33 11.33 .00 32.29 191.06 503.00 * 10011.000 11.00 11.00 .00 27.84 92.42 523.00 10011.000 12.54 12.54 .00 51.69 131.34 809.00 * 10011.000 12.76 12.76 .00 52.67 139.29 843.00 * 10011.000 13.32 13.32 .00 56.05 160.61 990.00 * 10011.000 9.83 9.83 .00 28.00 116.27 361.00 * 10011.000 14.19 14.19 .00 68.35 416.02 809.00 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 40 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL ELMIN TWA VOL Q * 10376.000 10.34 10.34 .00 27.53 85.94 395.00 10376.000 11.59 11.59 .00 31.83 101.21 574.00 10376.000 12.14 12.14 .00 47.16 122.94 686.00 10376.000 12.77 12.77 .00 56.25 148.22 823.00 10376.000 8.56 8.56 .00 26.45 85.93 234.00 10376.000 11.43 11.43 .00 35.91 197.03 503.00 * 10376.000 11.16 11.16 .00 31.42 97.27 523.00 10376.000 12.61 12.61 .00 55.45 141.74 809.00 10376.000 12.82 12.82 .00 56.46 150.48 843.00 10376.000 13.37 13.37 .00 59.89 173.91 990.00 10376.000 10.03 10.03 .00 28.42 118.23 361.00 10376.000 14.20 14.20 .00 72.26 432.62 809.00 * 10421.000 10.34 10.34 .00 27.69 86.21 395.00 10421.000 11.56 11.56 .00 31.99 101.68 574.00 10421.000 12.10 12.10 .00 47.34 123.50 686.00 10421.000 12.71 12.71 .00 56.43 148.89 823.00 * 10421.000 8.56 8.56 .00 26.48 86.11 234.00 10421.000 11.41 11.41 .00 36.08 197.47 503.00 10421.000 11.15 11.15 .00 31.59 97.67 523.00 10421.000 12.55 12.55 .00 55.63 142.38 809.00 10421.000 12.75 12.75 .00 56.63 151.16 843.00 * 10421.000 13.28 13.28 .00 60.06 174.69 990.00 �W Z-NA v/S * 10421.000 10.03 10.03 .00 28.46 118.46 361.00 * 10421.000 14.15 14.15 .00 72.44 433.55 809.00 E V. 10535.000 10.60 10.80 .20 27.79 86.88 385.00 10•Z G * 10535.000 12.12 12.32 .20 32.10 102.51 571.00 11 •`j-7 P 3 * 10535.000 12.48 12.68 .20 47.44 124.37 681.00 IZ * 10535.000 14.10 14.30 .20 56.53 149.91 827.00 14 , IG DO.III 10535.000 8.69 8.89 .20 26.56 86.63 227.00 * 10535.000 11.81 12.01 .20 36.19 198.28 492.00 t 8 8 * 10535.000 11.62 11.82 .20 31.69 98.45 516.00 1 o 3 7 - * 10535.000 13.89 14.09 .20 55.73 143.38 812.00 l• 43 - .3 9 * 10535.000 14.22 14.42 .20 56.74 152.19 831.00 1 3 9 7 - 1 * 10535.000 15.40 15.60 .20 60.17 175.82 994.00 1 4 10535.000 10.25 10.45 .20 28.55 119.11 351.00 t 5.Gz- O• o Z * 10535.000 15.50 15.70 .20 72.55 434.71 776.00 q.qG _ O. 4 9 * 10595.000 10.61 10.81 .20 27.89 87.33 385.00 10595.000 12.16 12.36 .20 33.08 104.15 571.00 * 10595.000 12.53 12.73 .20 48.42 126.37 681.00 * 10595.000 14.16 14.36 .20 57.52 153.50 827.00 * 10595.000 8.70 8.90 .20 26.61 86.94 227.00 10595.000 11.84 12.04 .20 36.90 199.40 492.00 10595.000 11.65 11.85 .20 32.34 99.45 516.00 * 10595.000 13.94 14.14 .20 56.72 146.76 812.00 * 10595.000 14.28 14.48 .20 57.73 155.90 831.00 * 10595.000 15.45 15.65 .20 62.17 181.36 994.00 * 10595.000 10.27 10.47 .20 28.64 119.52 351.00 * 10595.000 15.53 15.73 .20 74.55 440.41 776.00 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 41 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL ELMIN TWA VOL a 11595.000 10.83 11.03 .20 33.38 97.51 385.00 11595.000 12.22 12.42 .20 64.27 150.55 571.00 11595.000 12.57 12.77 .20 79.69 183.93 681.00 11595.000 14.17 14.37 .20 89.13 261.62 827.00 11595.000 8.81 9.01 .20 27.65 92.19 227.00 11595.000 11.92 12.12 .20 59.14 229.07 492.00 11595.000 11.77 11.97 .20 53.33 125.37 516.00 11595.000 13.95 14.15 .20 88.28 248.16 812.00 11595.000 14.29 14.49 .20 89.35 267.80 831.00 11595.000 15.46 15.66 .20 127.41 352.21 994.00 11595.000 10.48 10.68 .20 30.35 126.93 351.00 11595.000 15.54 15.74 .20 139.91 616.39 776.00 11735.000 7.54 11.04 3.50 34.12 98.83 385.00 * 11735.000 8.92 12.42 3.50 66.57 154.46 571.00 * 11735.000 9.27 12.77 3.50 82.00 188.65 681.00 * 11735.000 10.86 14.36 3.50 91.49 270.06 827.00 * 11735.000 5.53 9.03 3.50 27.79 92.82 227.00 * 11735.000 8.63 12.13 3.50 60.82 231.77 492.00 * 11735.000 8.47 11.97 3.50 54.96 127.81 516.00 * 11735.000 10.65 14.15 3.50 90.63 256.09 812.00 * 11735.000 10.98 14.48 3.50 91.73 276.51 831.00 * 11735.000 12.15 15.65 3.50 133.07 365.55 994.00 11735.000 7.21 10.71 3.50 30.58 127.87 351.00 * 11735.000 12.23 15.73 3.50 145.71 630.18 776.00 12775.000 6.82 11.42 4.60 35.53 104.66 385.00 12775.000 8.19 12.79 4.60 68.24 162.40 571.00 12775.000 8.64 13.24 4.60 83.81 197.27 681.00 * 12775.000 10.14 14.74 4.60 93.95 281.90 827.00 12775.000 4.87 9.47 4.60 28.80 96.24 227.00 12775.000 7.86 12.46 4.60 62.42 239.20 492.00 12775.000 7.76 12.36 4.60 56.54 135.03 516.00 * 12775.000 9.93 14.53 4.60 92.93 267.42 812.00 * 12775.000 10.25 14.85 4.60 94.30 288.64 831.00 * 12775.000 11.37 15.97 4.60 144.89 383.88 994.00 12775.000 6.48 11.08 4.60 31.92 133.23 351.00 * 12775.000 11.33 15.93 4.60 158.38 649.07 776.00 * 12825.000 6.84 11.44 4.60 35.58 104.91 385.00 * 12825.000 8.21 12.81 4.60 68.30 162.74 571.00 * 12825.000 8.65 13.25 4.60 83.88 197.63 681.00 * 12825.000 10.14 14.74 4.60 94.05 282.39 827.00 * 12825.000 4.91 9.51 4.60 28.84 96.40 227.00 * 12825.000 7.87 12.47 4.60 62.48 239.51 492.00 * 12825.000 7.78 12.38 4.60 56.60 135.34 516.00 * 12825.000 9.94 14.54 4.60 93.03 267.90 812.00 * 12825.000 10.25 14.85 4.60 94.41 289.14 831.00 * 12825.000 11.38 15.98 4.60 145.22 384.68 994.00 * 12825.000 6.51 11.11 4.60 31.97 133.47 351.00 * 12825.000 11.33 15.93 4.60 158.70 649.85 776.00 22MAY95 11:09:53 �Q (PAGE 42 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL ELMIN TWA VOL Q * 12935.000 7.69 11.89 4.20 35.72 105.71 340.00 (o.� * 12935.000 9.61 13.81 4.20 68.45 163.79 560.00 _ * 12935.000 10.49 14.69 4.20 84.04 198.80 641.00 12935.000 11.50 15.70 4.20 94.32 283.83 887.00 * 12935.000 5.48 9.68 4.20 28.97 96.93 195.00 9.31 - 0•3* 12935.000 9.01 13.21 4.20 62.62 240.49 491.00 (2.55 * 12935.000 8.99 13.19 4.20 56.75 136.31 565.00 IZ.61 - C) $6, * 12935.000 11.41 15.61 4.20 93.29 269.30 841.00 15.3 0 - o-3 8 12935.000 11.50 15.70 4.20 94.67 290.59 845.00 15.35 - 0.29 12935.000 11.99 16.19 4.20 146.91 386.80 1225.00 t6•o S - D.3z * 12935.000 7.28 11.48 4.20 32.11 134.22 309.00 o_(2l - I� 12935.000 11.83 16.03 4.20 160.25 651.76 852.00 (5.(�1 - O•a"l * 12985.000 7.69 11.89 4.20 35.79 106.12 340.00 * 12985.000 9.61 13.81 4.20 68.54 164.34 560.00 * 12985.000 10.48 14.68 4.20 84.13 199.43 641.00 * 12985.000 11.50 15.70 4.20 94.46 284.58 887.00 * 12985.000 5.48 9.68 4.20 29.03 97.19 195.00 * 12985.000 9.01 13.21 4.20 62.70 240.99 491.00 * 12985.000 8.99 13.19 4.20 56.83 136.82 565.00 * 12985.000 11.41 15.61 4.20 93.42 270.04 841.00 * 12985.000 11.50 15.70 4.20 94.81 291.34 845.00 * 12985.000 11.99 16.19 4.20 147.66 387.73 1225.00 * 12985.000 7.28 11.48 4.20 32.18 134.60 309.00 * 12985.000 11.83 16.03 4.20 160.89 652.58 852.00 13935.000 7.34 12.04 4.70 36.99 112.02 340.00 13935.000 9.27 13.97 4.70 69.95 172.76 560.00 13935.000 10.13 14.83 4.70 85.65 209.12 641.00 13935.000 11.21 15.91 4.70 96.25 295.99 887.00 13935.000 5.16 9.86 4.70 29.97 100.75 195.00 13935.000 8.67 13.37 4.70 64.05 248.58 491.00 13935.000 8.70 13.40 4.70 58.17 144.41 565.00 13935.000 11.11 15.81 4.70 95.20 281.29 841.00 13935.000 11.19 15.89 4.70 96.61 302.74 845.00 13935.000 11.86 16.56 4.70 151.12 400.37 1225.00 13935.000 6.93 11.63 4.70 33.32 140.02 309.00 13935.000 11.53 16.23 4.70 163.25 664.61 852.00 14905.000 7.82 12.22 4.40 37.89 116.74 340.00 14905.000 9.77 14.17 4.40 71.00 179.38 560.00 14905.000 10.62 15.02 4.40 86.76 216.66 641.00 14905.000 11.74 16.14 4.40 97.44 304.79 887.00 14905.000 5.68 10.08 4.40 30.74 103.68 195.00 14905.000 9.17 13.57 4.40 65.05 254.59 491.00 14905.000 9.26 13.66 4.40 59.18 150.47 565.00 14905.000 11.62 16.02 4.40 96.38 289.96 841.00 14905.000 11.70 16.10 4.40 97.79 311.50 845.00 14905.000 12.50 16.90 4.40 155.95 410.36 1225.00 14905.000 7.42 11.82 4.40 34.20 144.39 309.00 14905.000 12.02 16.42 4.40 164.51 673.78 852.00 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 43 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL ELMIN TWA VOL Q 14945.000 7.83 12.23 4.40 37.92 116.91 340.00 14945.000 9.78 14.18 4.40 71.03 179.61 560.00 14945.000 10.63 15.03 4.40 86.80 216.92 641.00 14945.000 11.75 16.15 4.40 97.48 305.09 887.00 14945.000 5.69 10.09 4.40 30.76 103.79 195.00 14945.000 9.18 13.58 4.40 65.09 254.80 491.00 14945.000 9.28 13.68 4.40 59.21 150.68 565.00 14945.000 11.64 16.04 4.40 96.41 290.25 841.00 14945.000 11.71 16.11 4.40 97.83 311.80 845.00 14945.000 12.52 16.92 4.40 156.31 410.72 1225.00 14945.000 7.43 11.83 4.40 34.23 144.55 309.00 14945.000 12.03 16.43 4.40 164.56 674.09 852.00 14955.000 7.83 12.23 4.40 37.93 116.95 340.00 14955.000 9.79 14.19 4.40 71.04 179.67 560.00 14955.000 10.68 15.08 4.40 86.80 216.99 641.00 14955.000 11.90 16.30 4.40 97.49 305.17 887.00 14955.000 5.69 10.09 4.40 30.77 103.82 195.00 14955.000 9.19 13.59 4.40 65.10 254.85 491.00 14955.000 9.28 13.68 4.40 59.22 150.73 565.00 14955.000 11.76 16.16 4.40 96.42 290.33 841.00 14955.000 11.84 16.24 4.40 97.84 311.88 845.00 14955.000 12.79 17.19 4.40 156.50 410.83 1225.00 14955.000 7.43 11.83 4.40 34.24 144.58 309.00 14955.000 12.17 16.57 4.40 164.57 674.17 852.00 * 14995.000 7.94 12.24 4.30 37.96 117.11 340.00 * 14995.000 9.90 14.20 4.30 71.08 179.89 560.00 * 14995.000 10.80 15.10 4.30 86.84 217.25 641.00 * 14995.000 12.02 16.32 4.30 97.53 305.48 887.00 14995.000 5.80 10.10 4.30 30.79 103.92 195.00 * 14995.000 9.30 13.60 4.30 65.13 255.05 491.00 * 14995.000 9.40 13.70 4.30 59.26 150.94 565.00 * 14995.000 11.88 16.18 4.30 96.47 290.63 841.00 * 14995.000 11.97 16.27 4.30 97.88 312.19 845.00 * 14995.000 12.94 17.24 4.30 157.09 411.31 1225.00 * 14995.000 7.54 11.84 4.30 34.27 144.73 309.00 * 14995.000 12.29 16.59 4.30 164.62 674.50 852.00 15225.000 8.06 12.36 4.30 38.15 117.98 340.00 15225.000 10.05 14.35 4.30 71.31 181.18 560.00 15225.000 10.93 15.23 4.30 87.09 218.75 641.00 15225.000 12.18 16.48 4.30 97.85 307.32 887.00 15225.000 5.91 10.21 4.30 30.92 104.45 195.00 15225.000 9.44 13.74 4.30 65.35 256.21 491.00 15225.000 9.58 13.88 4.30 59.48 152.12 565.00 15225.000 12.03 16.33 4.30 96.78 292.43 841.00 15225.000 12.11 16.41 4.30 98.20 314.01 845.00 15225.000 13.24 17.54 4.30 157.96 413.71 1225.00 15225.000 7.66 11.96 4.30 34.45 145.53 309.00 15225.000 12.48 16.78 4.30 165.04 676.44 852.00 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 44 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL ELMIN TWA VOL D 15275.000 8.09 12.39 4.30 38.19 118.18 340.00 �1.(0 15275.000 10.07 14.37 4.30 71.36 181.47 563.00 1 0.78 i3 7 _ 0 �1 15275.000 10.95 15.25 4.30 '87.15 219.08 644.00 15275.000 12.21 16.51 4.30 97.92 307.72 891.00 15275.000 5.93 10.23 4.30 30.95 104.57 195.00 10.00 15275.000 9.47 13.77 4.30 65.40 256.46 489.00 1 y,,)4 0 83 15275.000 9.62 13.92 4.30 59.53 152.38 562.00 '3.q-p - 0.5 2 15275.000 12.06 16.36 4.30 96.84 292.82 843.00 (G2,g(o _ o y o 15275.000 12.14 16.44 4.30 98.26 314.41 849.00 115.9e1' 15275.000 13.27 17.57 4.30 158.17 414.27 1230.00 1(o,ao) 15275.000 7.69 11.99 4.30 34.49 145.71 311.00 11 .Z 9 - 0.10 * 15275.000 12.51 16.81 4.30 165.12 676.87 855.00 l5•"7-7 1.04 U �L'e <o`ale �-/:s * 15418.000 8.07 12.77 4.70 38.33 118.83 323.00 $' O �0 * 15418.000 10.76 15.46 4.70 71.53 182.49 526.00 0 _ S* 15418.000 11.99 16.69 4.70 87.33 220.29 603.00 16 00 - D. * 15418.000 13.16 17.86 4.70 100.66 309.79 833.00 17 a 0 - 0 4ro 15418.000 5.66 10.36 4.70 31.05 104.96 183.00 1-7-0. 5 - �. r * 15418.000 9.88 14.58 4.70 65.56 257.36 463.00 13.58 _ 1.00 * 15418.000 10.29 14.99 4.70 59.69 153.33 524.00 1Q,21 0.7$ * 15418.000 13.04 17.74 4.70 98.90 294.59 786.00 7.3(0 O * 15418.000 13.09 17.79 4.70 100.61 316.29 797.00 1 * 15418.000 14.02 18.72 4.70 161.94 419.46 1172.00 i '0'� * 15418.000 7.60 12.30 4.70 34.62 146.30 292.00 11 .4 ) 0.$I * 15418.000 13.24 17.94 4.70 168.28 679.18 799.00 15468.000 8.08 12.78 4.70 38.38 119.10 323.00 15468.000 10.77 15.47 4.70 71.60 182.93 526.00 15468.000 11.99 16.69 4.70 87.40 220.82 603.00 15468.000 13.18 17.88 4.70 102.61 310.86 833.00 15468.000 5.67 10.37 4.70 31.08 105.12 183.00 15468.000 9.89 14.59 4.70 65.63 257.74 463.00 15468.000 10.30 15.00 4.70 59.76 153.73 524.00 15468.000 13.05 17.75 4.70 100.36 295.45 786.00 15468.000 13.10 17.80 4.70 102.26 317.23 797.00 15468.000 14.05 18.75 4.70 164.44 422.63 1172.00 15468.000 7.61 12.31 4.70 34.67 146.55 292.00 15468.000 13.25 17.95 4.70 170.52 680.40 799.00 16288.000 7.48 12.98 5.50 39.26 123.46 323.00 16288.000 10.14 15.64 5.50 72.84 190.16 526.00 16288.000 11.32 16.82 5.50 88.76 229.61 603.00 16288.000 12.54 18.04 5.50 121.75 325.81 833.00 16288.000 5.12 10.62 5.50 31.74 107.65 183.00 16288.000 9.29 14.79 5.50 66.78 263.94 463.00 16288.000 9.71 15.21 5.50 60.95 160.42 524.00 16288.000 12.41 17.91 5.50 115.02 308.26 786.00 16288.000 12.46 17.96 5.50 118.74 330.84 797.00 16288.000 13.45 18.95 5.50 188.86 458.01 1172.00 16288.000 7.02 12.52 5.50 35.50 150.51 292.00 16288.000 12.60 18.10 5.50 192.20 696.80 799.00 mm�� ff 22MAY95 11:09:53 PAGE 45 SECNO DEPTH CWSEL ELMIN TWA VOL 0 17158.000 7.49 13.19 5.70 40.22 128.02 323.00 17158.000 10.11 15.81 5.70 74.16 197.70 526.00 17158.000 11.25 16.95 5.70 90.27 238.79 603.00 17158.000 12.48 18.18 5.70 124.79 337.54 833.00 17158.000 5.18 10.88 5.70 32.46 110.25 183.00 17158.000 9.28 14.98 5.70 67.96 270.43 463,00 17158.000 9.71 15.41 5.70 62.19 167.43 524.00 17158.000 12.34 18.04 5.70 117.88 319.58 786.00 17158.000 12.39 18.09 5.70 121.67 342.31 797.00 17158.000 13.42 19.12 5.70 196.47 474.31 1172.00 17158.000 7.04 12.74 5.70 36.40 154.63 292.00 43�A I� 17158.000 12.52 18.22 5.70 195.30 708.67 799.00 A 17208.000 7.51 13.21 5.70 40.28 128.30 320.00 IZ• 48 17208.000 10.11 15.81 5.70 74.24 198.16 524.00 ik-J7 - O 8 4 17208.000 11.26 16.96 5.70 90.36 239.36 601.00 (&-S7 17208.000 12.49 18.19 5.70 124.95 338.26 829.00 1 7. 9 -o •S o 17208.000 5.19 10.89 5.70 32.51 110.41 181.00 A 9 o O o 17208.000 9.29 14.99 5.70 68.03 270.83 459.00 17208.000 9.72 15.42 5.70 62.27 167.86 523.00 O S O.07 17208.000 12.35 18.05 5.70 118.03 320.28 781.00 ( S 0'7-7 17208.000 12.40 18.10 5.70 121.82 343.01 794.00 (7' S8 O.4 7 17208.000 13.43 19.13 5.70 197.06 475.34 1159.00 ( -7 Z - 0.40 3 17208.000 7.05 12.75 5.70 36.46 154.89 290.00 0. 4 0,-7 9 17208.000 12.53 18.23 5.70 195.46 709.39 794.00 -; g 0• Go Y PLANNING/ BUILDING/ PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 v E4 0 UTILITY SYSTEMS DIVISION - 235-2631 NT 0 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION - 235-2620 TO: DATE: JOB NO.: RE: ATTN: GENTLEMEN: WE ARE SENDING YOU ❑ ATTACHED ❑ UNDER SEPARATE COVER VIA THE FOLLOWING ITEMS: ❑ SHOP DRAWINGS o PRINTS ❑ REPRODUCIBLE PLANS ❑ SPECIFICATIONS ❑ COPY OF LETTER ❑ COPIES DATE NUMBER DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS THESE ARE TRANSMITTED AS CHECKED BELOW: ❑ FOR APPROVAL o APPROVED AS SUBMITTED o RESUBMIT COPIES FOR APPROVAL ❑ FOR YOUR USE ❑ APPROVED AS NOTED ❑ SUBMIT COPIES FOR DISTRIBUTION ❑ AS REQUESTED o RETURNED FOR CORRECTIONS ❑ RETURN CORRECTED PRINTS ❑ FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ❑ ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US COPIES TO: SIGNED TITLE IF ENCLOSURES ARE NOT AS NOTED, KINDLY NOTIFY US AT ONCE SENT BY: 5- 2-95 ; 16:06 HNTB BE1_.1_.EVUE-i 206 277 4428;# 6/ 6 ORAIN (TYP) ,JO�l ��\, wMH yyal ie" RCP C` \� \' E AI - - - ovEl-' ----'--- w .�E.a. CST\ I r`. 5 MH RIM-17.5wv WMH LL VV VV LB \ oV WEIR zz 4Er ,SP \ �` Aa5`_�\ � — f DRAFT Y \` 'i' S70RM WOOD- ----- LT FALL PUS Z' `r\ ` ,\ ICYi, "-- `�6: ICVOD i .. � -- __ tis� RiOGF,•� .} }ups i l VLV .-� ti 1 I 1 �,� � I � _� O�J _y � �, �` � �, .,\\ f — oMIDc�A z o 9F i \�o��^► �t�n^ a rsD ffF w 8. �!'' '' r' m 4 /. J rCA 12 •m •_. -..-.-.-}T.- y - = it so Y 14s t le RWL . 1 ( _ior SQ= r.SD s.�2's2_,. "a say i rCr" 2*sa-� z z�., - �. K - Ix _ B i z E � urvrcxTIarroucrewtK ppz r _+YSe - _ _ _..- 1 FND CONCUP Z o - - _--_ P; :., -:x:w_._ --- Ttv I S CAP J -_�� $D. _ -- fY _.... .:.. t.'r�S'_ BRASS t - -- - -�.Ti[.C.52 its ,- ..� ,._. "• - -_-- ..__.-�;.. __. T.�._._.__� � _ -_- __ __... g w as a: 2'...__ r"- - _ i- r u 10R' NEMI 5- SE.. o SEW. O -- — _ - _ - - -- _ sz�^r FUTJRE 1011f METRO SXt SEW (er 01NE J gJP1. (BY Tf�R I ."- ..\ R r E23 pp ,- - _ i lit T L 4'{4 - a _ c '. - fi \ 1t tip 8B rrri >- C _ Z `' C1 i Aim O O __--� _ j Mm L y v� :v m i EM&106 f' ab p. ((-- V``\` ffU IC�T p �v O .Zm! !•� = l Z U)._O j = 4 m i 117 T.+' TREES & BRUSH Na NNC � Oz j - m J0 5G 100 200 m - SCALE - crass IN FEET WE A[ L_ hIFTAI REVISIONS --- ��i No, DATE RENMKS BY APR DESIGNED RIK R Y 0 l 15203 I N P -_ B NUMBER LAN G U DRAB �„� � .� PLANNING/BUILDING/� ILDING/ OAKESDALE AVENUE SOUTHWEST ARCHRECTS ENGINEERS PLANNERS CHECKED * 8 w PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT southwest 16th Street to southwest 31st street CAD FILE SHEETkDWC APPROVED MUNICIPAL BUILDING ROADWAY PLAN N T REN ON, AVENUE ON TH 98 STA. 43+f10 TO 52+85 SHEET 4 OF 4 DATE �' RENiON, WISHINGTON 96055 Alternative A NO. CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: May 2, 1995 TO: Bob Mahn FROM: Scott Woodbury W SUBJECT: OAKESDALE AVENUE EXTENSION GEOTECHNICAL PREDESIGN REPORT REVIEW COMMENTS I have briefly reviewed the above-referenced report only with regard to how the information may affect the Utilities Division and if additional clarification is needed to identify the impacts. I did not review the technical discussions and recommendations for the planned roadway and structural improvements in any detail and have no comments on these areas. My comments follow: • I suggest that the datum on which the elevations of existing or proposed improvements are based be cited in the report. • In section 6.5.3, Construction Impacts on Existing Structures, it was recommended that the potential for differential settlement effects on the Metro sewer lines from the new construction be given consideration. What about other utilities crossing an alignment, such as the City of Seattle's Cedar River Pipeline No. 4, the City water lines in an alignment, and the Olympic Pipeline gas lines? What would the magnitude of the increased loading and differential settlement be and what considerations should be taken to mitigate? • I suggest that the report include more information on the recommended dewatering methods. Are well points recommended and at what spacing? How much water is expected to be withdrawn? Thank you for a copy of the report. The information on subsurface conditions is useful, in particular the piezometer readings. I understand that the piezometers will continue to be monitored through final design. If this is true, then I would appreciate copies of the piezometer data as they become available. Thank you again. cc: Ron Straka CITY OF RENTON `n Planning/Building/.Public Works Department Earl Clymer,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator April 26, 1995 Roderick L. DenHerder Natural Resources Conservation Service Renton Project Office 935 Powell Avenue S.W. Renton, WA 98055 RE: Oakesdale Avenue Extension/LUA-95-024, ECF Dear Mr. DenHerder: This is to acknowledge receipt of your comments on the scope of issues to be addressed in the Environmental Impact Statement for the Oakesdale Avenue Extension project. I want to assure you that there will continue to be close coordination between the Oakesdale Avenue project and the work on the East Side Green River Watershed project. Any impacts that the Oakesdale Avenue project might have on the ESGR project will be discussed in the EIS and considered in the final location of the Oakesdale Avenue extension. Also, the EIS will examine the impacts of the road crossing on Springbrook Creek and the additional surface water runoff into Springbrook Creek. If you have any additional concerns or questions regarding the Oakesdale Avenue Extension Project, please do not hesitate to call me at 277-5545. Sincerely,,^ /rl4L-"— Bob Mahn Project Manager c: Scott Woodbury, ESGR Project Manager, Stormwater Utility, City of Renton B:HL�I5,LUA95 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 eThis paper contains 50%recycled material,25%post consumer CITY OF RENTON PLANNINGBUILDING PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: A p-J !S, TO: 5c-64 (ADO 6Ltvy _ FROM: as� MaAyt SUBJECT: Qake-sd ajea 4ve vcue SW -,5uJ «-ft 5* S w 314 s-4 � a C�� - t�lrr o t tf r�c� �6�t c►� t S Z' E-Q/'y �p R a v e- r ee 9S', x cm 77 V N - 71 CD 004 LL LL a LL a ,s (44 c - i E WlS •1s NJ .kof i, e o _l a y--- CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: April 11, 1995 TO: Bob Mahn FROM: Scott Woodbury�l J SUBJECT: OAKESDALE AVENUE EXTENSION PROJECT COMMENTS TO WOODWARD-CLYDE SITE ASSESSMENT AND SHAPIRO WETLANDS REPORTS Following are my comments regarding the above-referenced reports. Woodward-Clyde Site Assessment Dated March 1995 General Comments I suggest that the report include a glossary. The reader should not have to search through the entire report to try to find what an acronym means. I could not find what some of the acronyms meant, such as ERNS and TRIS in Table 2. I quickly scanned through the VISTA data sheets and identified two unmappable sites (listed below) that actually are mappable. You may wish to review these data sheets for others that could be mapped. Specific Comments Page 4, Site Improvements, City of Renton property. The Olympic pipelines cross the City property somewhat north of SW 27th St. This should be meantioned here and a reference made to the Boeing EIS for a map of the Olympic pipeline location. Page 7, first paragraph. It is unclear if the former parking lots were on the City property or Boeing property. Was the dumping on Boeing property instead of the City's? Page 7, last paragraph. The sampling referenced by Tim Puryer was probably the Surface Water Utility's Black River Water Quality Management Plan (BRWQMP). This report should be cited in the report. I have copies of the BRWQMP I could loan if needed. Page 12, fourth paragraph. I would appreciate copies of the Ecology files regarding the LUST on Group Health's property if possible. I find it hard to believe that the groundwater flow was toward the southeast before the leaking USTs were discovered. It is possible that the groundwater withdrawals for the remediation effort may have changed the groundwater flow pattern that was likely directed toward the creek before the remediation withdrawals were started. 04/1 1/95 Page 2 . Tables 2 and 4. Is Table 2 for facilities up to 1/2 mile and Table 4 for facilities from 1/2 to 1 mile. Both are titled as a summary of records, but the purpose of providing two separate tables is unclear to me. I suggested that this be clarified. Also footnote "a" referenced in the title of Table 4 was not included. Page 12 of VISTA unmappable sites. Black River Corporate Park/Tract A is within 1 mile and is mappable, but was not listed in the summary tables. Page 19 of VISTA unmappable sites. P-1 Pump Station is within 1 mile and is mappable, but was not listed in the summary tables. Shapiro Wetlands Report Dated March 1995 General Comments The report was done using the 1987 and 1989 manuals. This is because the Corps uses the 1987 and the City uses the 1989 manual consistent with Ecology's model ordinance. However, attached is a notice from Ecology that says the state now will be using the 1987 manual instead of the 1989. It is possible that the City wetlands ordinance will therefore be revised to be consistent with the change and we may only need deal with one manual, at least until Ecology adopts use of a new manual. Wetland delineations are valid only two years per the City's Wetlands Management Ordinance. Corps delineation confirmations are valid only for three years. Both may be extended, but should be investigated for how the confirmation deadlines may relate to your project schedule and extensions may accordingly if necessary. I suggest that Shapiro include a discussion regarding delineation expirations. While Shapiro only field delineated in the Oakesdale corridor, Shapiro could use existing wetlands inventory maps, aerial photographs, and topography maps to draw some conclusions as to how far outward the wetlands may extend from the Oakesdale corridor. The report figures could then clearly identify what the total area of the wetland likely is, what was field delineated, and what was approximated from a windshield or paper survey. Specific Comments Figure 4. The easterly of the three wetland areas only should be shown or the two areas west of it ME'�„*'-.. labeled as non-regulated stormwater management facilities. Allpak also has a stormwater management AM t-r «NV- facility near Shapiro wetland C which should also not be shown as a regulated wetland if Shapiro expands the wetlands mapping as I suggested in the third general comment above. Page 14, Section B. I suggest the report note whether or not the wetland was shown on the City's inventory map and if so what its inventory designation is. Figure 6. I suggest that the approximate parcel boundaries be included in this figure. Page 16, next to last paragraph. The 1980 Corps topography shows a breach in the berm separating Shapiro wetlands E and F. I suggest that Shapiro field verify this. The report also should note that a culvert (48" CMP) through the road connects wetlands F and G. Page 17, fourth paragraph. Hydrology in Wetland F (E and G also since they are interconnected) is not supplied by regional groundwater. Wetlands E, F, and G are part of a drainage area (300 acres +/-) separated from Springbrook Creek by a berm that must overflow before runoff can reach the creek. Therefore, water collects in the wetland and leaves only by infiltration, evaporation, 04/1 1/95 Page 3 transporation, or overflow of the berm. Since 3/94 we have been monitoring water levels in several valley wetlands using crest stage gages and have not recorded any overflow of the berm. Attached is a copy of the crest stage gage monitoring records for stations 6 and 7. Station 6 is located west of the berm and reflected water levels in Shapiro wetlands E, F, and G. Station 7 is located on the Springbrook Creek side of the berm and shows much lower wetland water elevations than station 6 (4 feet difference). Furthermore the piezometer readings taken by Woodward-Clyde show the groundwater elevation below Shapiro wetlands E, F, and G to be between 11.6 (BWC-1) and 9.4 (BWC-2) feet NGVD as measured on 3/21/95. This is below the water levels measured in crest stage gage 6. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. I would appreciate a final copy of these reports and the Woodward-Clyde soils report when available for our use in the East Side Green River Watershed Plan project. If you have any questions, please call me at X-5547. cc: Ron Straka�m attachments +. United States Natural Renton Project Office Department of Resources 935 Powell Ave. S.W. Agriculture Conservation Renton, WA 98055 Service March 27, 1995 Lenora Blauman, Project Manager Development Planning Section City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 Dear Ms. Blauman: RE: Oakesdale Avenue Extension/LUA-95-024,ECF In response to the request for comments on the scope of issues to be addressed in the Environmental Impact Statement for the Oakesdale Avenue Extension we have a specific concern that we feel should be considered. Our concern is that the location of Oakesdale Avenue may seriously impact proposed work on the East Side Green River Watershed Project,which includes Springbrook Creek and proposed flood control channels. The final location of the Oakesdale Avenue extension should not restrict options for future channel locations on the ESGR Project. In addition, the impacts of the road crossing of Springbrook Creek and the additional stormwater runoff into Springbrook Creek should be addressed. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the scoping of this project. Sincerely, -- Roderick L. DenHerder Project Manager CC. Julian Meuer, State Engineer,NRCS, Spokane SO Joe Henry, District Conservationist,NRCS, Renton FO Scott Woodbury, Project Manager, Stormwater Utility, City of Renton The Natural Resources Conservation Service, formerly the Soil Conservation Service, is an agency of the United States Department of Agriculture AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER King Conservation District 935 Powell Ave. SW- Renton, WA 98055-(206) 226-4867 �r 1If i� ��IA,R Gc March 23 , 1995 Lenora Blauman, Project Manager r Development Planning Section City of Renton Municipal Bldg. 200 Mill Avenue So . Renton, WA. 98055 Dear Ms . Blauman: In response to your request for comments and scoping for the Oaksdale Avenue Southwest proposal we have a concern we feel needs to be seriously considered in the Environmental Impact Statement . Our concern is that the road location be determined in conjunction with the optimum location of the Eastside Green River P-1 Flood Control Channel . This includes road crossings of the channel and Springbrook Creek and also stormwater runoff draining into the Creek. By not seriously considering the ultimate P-1 channel location the channel may be seriously compromised and could ultimately be more expensive and/or less effective than desired. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to comment at this early stage and look forward to reviewing progress . Sincerely, Jack Davis District Manager CONSERVATION•DEVELOPMENT•SELF-GOVERNMENT s'CATg o� 4 £ O .a x d� y02` dy o y lase a STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY P.O. Box 47600 Olympia, Washington 98504-7600 • (206)407-6000 • TDD Only(Hearing Impaired) ('206) 407-6006 March 24 , 1995 Mr. Robert Mahn City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue S Renton WA 98055 Dear Mr. Mahn: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the determination of significance for construction of Oakesdale Avenue SW (LUA-95- 024 ,ECF) . We reviewed the scoping notice and have the following concerns. .Coverage under the General Baseline Storm Water Permit is required for construction sites greater than five acres. If you have any questions, please call Mr. John Drabek with the Water Quality Program at (206) 649-7293 . Since ely, M. Vernice Sant e Environmental Review Section MVS: 95-1560 cc: John Drabek, NWRO Janet Thompson, NWRO RECEIVED Transportailon Systems Div. -480^- CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: March 29, 1995 TO: Bob Mahn FROM: Scott Woodbury5i,&J SUBJECT: HEC2 HYDRAULIC MODEL INPUT FILES FOR ANALYSIS OF THE OAKESDALE AVENUE SW CROSSING OF SPRINGBROOK CREEK Attached are copies of the current and future condition land use HEC2 input files for your consultant's use in modeling the proposed Oakesdale Avenue S.W. crossing of Springbrook Creek near SW 16th Street. The input files assume that the SW 16th Street to SW Grady P-1 Channel improvement scheduled for construction this summer is in place. A summary of the current and future condition flows and elevations for the Springbrook Creek system will hopefully be available next week. I will provide you a copy of the information when it becomes available. Also, according to the consultant, the January 3, 1995 project schedule provided to you earlier is still applicable. When and if it is updated I will be sure to provide you a copy. If you have any questions, please call me at X-5547. Thank you. MAR-03-'95 FRI 09:57 ID:WSDOT FLR S DIST 1 TEL NO:206-440-4805 1#677 P01 p�,od Fax Note 7672 ® N��,p�as 3 TodaYs Dam 3//1'f.tans To ... ... s. SCe44 Jjooc1 be,,' V From Company T Oept.Charge la�tlon t� if» Telephone 7I Fax! Telephone Cortut+enffi ❑Destroy ❑RMn EJ fix x pileup Dispasi on: Vc),— l-✓ S. Scott Woodbury 3/3J95 Surface Water Utility Per our conversation on March 1, 1995, we would like to have the following information on East long acre site: W 3/4s /I 1215,:,=)53 Piezometer readings (locations to be shown on plan) ST D V'ps- PSSL'-1O Soil Wetland define tiontion cations to be shown on plan) TP � l ` T� Survey.data (contour map, etc.) �� lea c � n O( -`Jt"q PL� Biology Report (�%�'s� �, l T°JS Please send us any information available on the site as soon as possible. K, CJ6 fuc /r� CIA- ,4-1A, w4/,J fkl g ;lU[-o rJ Ln� 1,- � r 14� Sincerely Mike ASkarian /TAJ,i Attached; CX, Lj i4 j HOWARD NEEDLES TAMMEN S BERGENOOFF, INC. (WX)1tMtbAt—,w,v.e. ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS PLANNERS Suit, 105 ikii w,, W<abiutiian 98W I, (206)-155-_3555 PAA(206)4 5.1 9179 MEETING MINUTES Meeting Date: January 26, 1995 Location: City of Renton Subject: Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Drainage Meeting Consultant Agreement No. CAG 103-91 15203-PL-014 Work Order Authorization No. 4 Submitted by: Richard I. Kittler, January 30, 1995 Attended: Bob Mahn, City of Renton .7- Ronald Straka, City of Rentont Scott Woodbury, City of Renton Neil Watts, City of Renton Richard Kittler, HNTB Alan Black, HNTB The meeting opened with a review of the Oakesdale Ave. project and HNTB's concurrent tasks of preparing an EIS on two alignments and a Preliminary Design Report on the preferred alignment. It was noted that there are two land owners influencing alternatives on the project, Boeing and Winmar. In two or three weeks, the City anticipates publishing the Final Alternatives Analysis Report which designates the two alignments to study for the EIS and the preferred alignment. Field investigation has just begun with the recent agreement for right-of-entry. Wetland delineation is underway within the corridor of the two alignments using the 1987 and 1989 methods required by the Corps and by the City of Renton respectively. It was suggested that the EIS include the Corps jurisdictional determination of the wetlands that may be impacted by the project. Discussions continued as outlined by the attached agenda. • The East Side Green River Watershed Plan is a comprehensive watershed planning effort that will be underway through late 1997. The schedule is dependent on the City of Kent efforts influencing the upper reaches of the watershed. When the City of Renton commences their work, the work plan will be consistent with, but 5 to 6 weeks behind, the existing schedule. By late March, the City will provide 2, 10, 25, and 100-year design storm elevations at selected locations from their FEQ model updated to incorporate proposed downstream channel improvements between S.W. 16th St. and S.W. Grady Way scheduled for construction this summer and refined hydrologic characteristics (per the City of Kent's plan). The City can then provide HNTB with HEC2 computer files for impact assessment at the new bridge crossing. This new bridge crossing will need to be coordinated as work progresses on the roadway design. The City model has been used to justify design aspects other than compensatory storage and building elevations on the Boeing site that would have otherwise been controlled by the higher (less accurate) FEMA 100-year floodplain elevation. The Oakesdale Ave. bridge clearance issue was discussed and it is our understanding I:k152034xq-man1mm40i26a doc 1 Pnnted 2/6/95 4:24 PM Meeting Minutes January 26, 1995 that HNTB can use the current channel model results and allow the bridge clearance to be a minimum of three feet above the 100-year design storm backwater for future condition flows. One of the factors influencing this decision was the existence of culvert crossings upstream that would preclude large woody debris in the project area. • Current thinking on the P-1 diversion channel alternative is that high construction costs, wetland impacts, and lower peak runoff flow rates will combine to defeat preference for this alternative in favor of improvements to the existing Springbrook Creek channel. The City will pursue an early judgment on this issue. This parcel could be used for a wetland reconstruction/stormwater treatment/compensatory storage area if the plans for the P-1 diversion channel are dropped. • The attached drainage criteria was reviewed with general agreement but with the following comments: 0 HNTB should be sure to consider the backwater condition that will be prevalent at this site. Where the criteria notes that uniform flow or Manning's Equation analyses should be performed, it should be understood that this may not be the controlling condition for storm sewer sizing and biofiltration swales and that backwater analysis is to be performed. 0 Item 2 of the Pipe Systems will not apply to this project. 0 A minimum of 2' clearance between storm sewer pipes and the pavement section is not a firm rule. If less clearance is needed, check pipe strengths and exclude inadequate materials as appropriate. 0 There is distinct difference between "biofiltration swales" and "water quality swales." Biofiltration swale can convey the 100-year design storm and generally augment wetponds or wetvaults. Water quality swales are an alternative to the preferred wetpond or wetvault and flows greater than the 2-year design peak must be conveyed in a separate system. It is anticipated that wetponds or equivalent will be required for this site since there is a total of 8.9 acres of impervious area proposed. • Drainage easement widths were discussed according to King County guidelines which seemed consistent with City practice (i.e., 15' for storm sewers up to 60" dia. or channel top with plus 10'). • Clarification to code requirements involved the following common practices by the City. 0 The storm sewer 25-year design storm backwater is performed using the 25-year water surface in the receiving channel. 0 There is distinct difference between "biofiltration swales" and "water quality swales." In the case of this project, wetponds/wetvaults and coalescing plate oil/water separation are required by code, but there is precedence for code modification or variance if an equivalent system is used (i.e., expert verification that proposed oversized pond and plantings will provide oil/water separation). EIS should note requirements but add "or equal" to cover these other possibilities. 0 The storm sewer system should be designed to convey any runoff area which presently contributes to the proposed corridor. Any future development of this area will be required to limit their developed site 10-year design storm runoff to that of the existing conditions. The roadway's drainage system must account for larger storm events (25 and 100-year h152034Yq-manbnm40126a.doc 2 Printed 216/95 424 PM Meeting Minutes January 26, 1995 design storms) which must consider developed conditions that will drain into the site drainage system. The Boeing site has an existing independent system and most other adjacent lands flow away and will not require consideration beyond the 90' roadway corridor. Only the Group Health property to the east between Springbrook Creek and SW 16th Street is suspect. 0 The City's erosion/sedimentation control requirements may be incorporated with the mapping required for the NPDES Industrial Stormwater Discharge Permit to allow one set of drawings for two needs. 0 Minimum grade at the gutter may be 0.5%. Inlet spacing is commonly 200' for 1.0% grades and closer spacing is used on flatter less efficient slopes, but 300 feet of gutter flow is used as an absolute maximum distance between inlets on grade. 0 The City requires use of the FEMA 100-year water profile as a basis for floodplain storage assessments. • Calculations and drainage boundary information may be available from the City. Mr. Mahn will investigate the Transportation Systems Division records since the projects predate the Surface Water Utility. • SW 19th Street is subject to confirmation by the land owner, Boeing, and Winmar who will be using the corridor to access their property. If a storm sewer easement is required, HNTB should identify the easement width and alignment and forward it to Mr. Mahn to facilitate the City's coordination with the land owners. • Other discussions: There is some question whether the removal of Boeing's south access road and 48" culvert will occur as part of the project. A schematic plan of drainage on Alternative A-1 was used as a point of discussion. Five outfall locations were discussed; SW 16th St. trunk line east of Springbrook Creek, a new 15' wide storm sewer easement in SW 19th St., outfall to Springbrook Creek on City land acquired for the west-to-east P-1 Channel corridor, outfall to the City wetland reserve from just north of SW 27th St., and combination with an existing Oakesdale Ave. system and outfall to the City wetland reserve (from the south). Probable conflicts with existing utilities dictate many of these storm sewer outfall locations. It may be advantageous to investigate alternate drainage schemes to give options in the negotiations with the land owners. One suggestion was for HNTB to look at conveyance of runoff through biofiltration swales in the green area between the curb and sidewalk. Though this may require additional right-of-way width, it may allow reduced easement needs for outfalls and/or stormwater treatment areas. HNTB Action Items • Set geometry for C-1 alignment and provide working drawing. • Add line entry with significant ESGRWP schedule dates into Oakesdale schedule. 1A152030q-man1mm40126a doc 3 Printed 26%4:36 PM Meeting Minutes January 26, 1995 City of Renton Action Items • Provide 2, 10, 25, and 100 year design storm elevations at selected locations for Springbrook Creek for current and future conditions. • Find out if there exists any drainage design data for S.W. 16th Street and for Oakesdale Avenue south of S.W. 31st Street. • Find out if there exists any wetland delineation survey data for the City's corridor parcels purchased from Glacier Park. • Inform HNTB on whether proposed P-l/ P-9 corridor parcels will be available for Oakesdale project use. The above is assumed to be a correct record of the significant items discussed at this meeting. Please notify HNTB if you have any questions, corrections, or additions. cc: Bob Mahn, City of Renton Peter Smith, HNTB Jerry Dorn, HNTB Alan Black, HNTB file L\152030oj-men4nm40126e.doc 4 Nnted 2/6/95 4:36 N MEETING MINUTES Meeting late: January 26, 1995 Location: City of Renton Subject: Gakestlale Avenue S.W. Drainage Meeting Consuitant agreement No. CAG 103-91 15203-PL-014 Work Order Authorization No. 4 Submitted by: Richard L Kistler, January 30, 1995 Attended: Bob Mahn, City of Renton Ronald Straka, City of Menton Scott Woodbury, City of Renton DN�e�iyl�,W�at�tts�,y�C�itty ofy�7 Renton Richard Kittle ,S NTB Alan Black,HNTB The meeting opened with a review of the Oakesdale Ave. prajcct and HN'TB's concurrent tasks of preparing an EIS on two alignmetrts and a Preliminary Design Report on the preferred alignment. It was noted that there are two land owners influencing alternatives on the project, Boeing and Winmar. In two or three weeks, the City anticipates publishing the Final Alternatives Analysis Report which designates the two alignments to study for the EIS and the preferred alignment. Field investigation has just begun with the recent agreement for right-of-entr 119g1 —e ha/J rc�uifol �� Wetland delineation is underway within the corridor of the two alignments!1 s tic saased by£it lards 4(Wing4989 guidelines)-and-4hat-of ` Gni ._the COrps,(nsing4917--g�5). iB Will BBE li1SQ1��e�-iS6IIC B4ItEb t12i8 OJCet-will rCf�tl3rll }'1 3rI�IVtdilal permit,---but jurisdictional-determiaatfott'q=dO saes-pan-the--ualidity..of-EIS-reports-that-failed-to H, tit J In 1"A' fk--matwl-cops " JN.,f c r �ti-41g �✓ r:.. �ay Se r/- Discussions continued as outlined by the attached agenda. ��ooM�rC�Gnfl v� WA�PfSh°� F�Gnn,� e��pr1 A The East Side Green Ri Watershed Plan is a by that wUl be underway through late 1Z The schedule is dependent on the City of Kent efforts influencing the upper reaches o�_tl a watershed. When the City of Renton commences their work, the work planU be consistent with,but 3-4 weeks behind kthe existin s c ,,, late March, the City will provide 2, 10, 25, and 100- ; , year design storm from their FEo model updated to incorporate proposed downstream channel improvements between S.W. 16th St_ and S.W. Grady Way scheduled for construction this summer and refined hydrologic characteristics (per the City of Kent's plan). The City can then provide HNTB with HEC2 computer files for impact assessment at the new bridge crossing. This new bridge crossing will need to be coordinated as justify ty aspects on the Boeing stproFesses on the roadway of rat wauic is e abeen chniroII e�5p. TheI by mg�er'��l�n accu to FEMA design floodplain elevation. The Oakesdale Ave.bridge clearance issued was discussed and it is our understanding that HNTB can use the current channel model results and,al"t1)e bridge_clearance tom a minimum of three feet above the 100-yrar design storm backwater i' `mare culvert crossings upstream itiii woirlcl�pre�Iude"n`� large woody debris in the project area .1,Vas�" a Current thinking an the P-lAchannci alternative is that high construction costs, wetland impacts, and lower peak runoff flow rates will combine to defeat preference for this alternative in favor of improvements to the t175 prof mnvrm1ot26�.doc 1 Printed 1!M511.02AM Meeting Minutes + December 2, 1994 testing Springbrook Creels channel. The City will pursue an early judgment on this issue. This parcel could be used for a.wetland ruction/stormwater treatment I compensatory storage area if the plans for the P- lAcah nnel are dropped. lvUS, * The attached drainage criteria was reviewed with general agreement/but with the following Comments: 0 ITD�ITB should be sure to consider the backwater condition t `Xwill be prevalent at ibis site. Where the criteria notes that unifbrtn flow or Manning's Equation analyses should be performed, it should be understood that this may not be the controlling condition for storm sewer sizing and biofiltration swales y f �a' i�A c-�C�...i�.l-Cl Gi;•ry S,� /S /„ 0 Item.2 of the pipe Systems will not apply to this project. 0 A uti im—um of 2' clearance between storm,Seaver pipes and the pavement section is not a firm rule. If less clearance is needed,check pipe staertgths and zrxclude inadequate materials as appropriate. 0 Tl» is distinct difference between"biofiltration swalee' and`water quality swales." Biofiltration Swale can convey the 100-year design storm and generally augment wetponds or wetvaults. Water quality swales ,arc an alternative to the preferred wetpond or Ymttvault and flows greater than the 2- year design peak must be conveyed in a separate system. It is anticipated tha'twrtponds or equivalent will be required for this sit»since there is a total of 3.9 acres of impervious area proposed. Drainage easement widths were discussed according to King County guidelines which seemed consistent with City practice(i.e. 15' for storm sewers up to 60" dia. or channel top with plus 10'). Clarification to code requirements involved the following common practices by the City. 0 The storm sewer 25-year design storm backwater is performed using the 25-year water surface in the receiving channel. 0 Where is distinct difference between"biofiltration swales" and'water quality swales." In the case of this project, wetpondslwetvaults and coalescing plate oil/water separation are required by code, but there is precedence for code modification or variance if an equivalent system is used (i.e. expert verification that proposed oversized pond and plantings will provide oillwater separation). BIS should note requirements but add"or equal" to cover these other possibilities. 0 The storm sewer system should be designed to convey any runoff area which presently contributes to the proposed corridor. Any future development of this area will be required to limit their developed site 10- year design storm runoff to that of the existing conditions. The roadways drainage system must account for largq stormevents (25 and 100-year design storms)which must consider developed conditions that will a site drainage system. The Boeing site has an existing independent system and most other adjacent lands flow away and will not require consideration beyond the 90' roadway corridor. Only the Group Health property to the east between Springbrook Creek and SW 16th Street is suspect /VPDaS �rorin S�rmPsd .rii '� �r 0 The City's NPRES requirements may be incorporated with the mapping required for theA Industrial Stormwater Discharge Permit to allow one set of drawings for two needs. 0 Minimum grade at the gutter may be 0.5%. Inlet spacing is cornmonly 200' for 1.00/6 grades and closer spacing is used on flatter less efficient slopes, but 300 feet of gutter flow is used as an absolute maximum distance between inlets on grade. 0 The City requires use of the (iffieW FENIA 100-year water profile as a basis for floodplain storage assessments. * Calculations and drainage boundary information may be available from the City. Mr. ;Mahn WO investigate the Transportation Systems Division records since the projects predate the Surface Water utility. 1A15203�pokmwonn i28ndm 2 PrintedV30K9510:51AM Meeting Minutes December 2, 1994 a SW 19th Street is subject to confirmawm by the land owner, Boeing, and Winmar who will be using the corridor to accm their property. tfr a storm sewer easement is required, HNM should identify the eascmeut width and alignment and forward it to fir. li bahn to faeiEtaxe the City's coordination with the land owners. 4 Othcr discussions: There is some question whether they removal of Boeing's south access road and 48" culvert wild occur as part of the Irqjx- A,schematic plan of drainage on Alternative A-1 was used as a point of discussion. Five outfall locations were tsc rased; SW I6th St. trunk line easK of Springbmok Creek, a new 13' wide storm sewers easenent in SW 19t1~ St, outfall to Sptingbrook Creek on City land acquired for the west-to-east P-1 Channel corridor, outfall to the City wetland reserve from just north of SW 27th St,, and combination with an existing Oakesdale .Ave. system and outfall to the City wetland reserve (from the south). Probable conflicts with existing utilities dictate many of these storm sewer outfall locations. It may be advantageous to investigate alternate drainage schemes to give options in the negotiations with the land owners. One suggestion was for H N'IB to look at conveyance of runoff through biofiltration swales in the green area between the curb and sidewalk Though this may require additional right-of-way width, it may allow reduced easement needs for oudKIs and/or stormwaier treatment areas. BNTB Action Items a .Set geometry for C-1 alignment and provide working drawing. • Add line entry with significant ESGR schedule dates into Oakesdale schedule. City of Renton Action Items • Provide 2, 10, 25, and 100 year design stone baclRvater files for Springbrook Creek for current and future conditions. • Investigate and provide existing drainage design data for S.W. 16th Street and for Oakesdale Avenue south of S.W. 31st Street. �nveroKMcw-�� ass�s.ewf" s Investigate and provide existing^ data for City's parcels purchased from Glacier Park. • Inform HNTB on whether proposed P-1 I P-9 corridor parcels will be available for Oakesdale project use. The above is assumed to be a correct record of the signifcant items discussed at this meeting. Please notify HNTB if you have any questions, corrections, or additions. cc: Bob Mahn, City of Renton Peter gmith, HNTB Jerry Dorn,HNTB .Alan Black,HNTB file 3 Prrtad IraoM 10.51 AM omcC5 fkv if-/ __= Wil- L/,� Vl NI U! coo ki/Nv P�� R4 Ll�o �� IoR �it S �I-R t,aS,FO ?z n �cva C4 C4 r � aJJ ,A�-'�slJ �a✓� I . Gi L'� .o •<f 46) fvzjr SVO PP r6 �v✓� (rl Cep • CITY OF RENTON PLANNINGBUILDING PUBLIC WORKS A EMORA.NDUM DATE: TO: R O h S+v a.Gc d )1Je. t UJ;21f,c FROM: bv6 `a�%A SUBJECT: 0a(cesJa16 AVe. 5W A_Veri_-� — .m e e4-I Co Am AGENDA ITEMS' , Update status of East Side Green River Watershed Flan What%the current schedule, status of planning document preferred attematives, and issues influencing these? P-1 High Plow Diversion channel. Can we use ccmdor for storage and biofiltration? �ftat is the timetable for and new channel models effecting) the taiiwater condition for storm sewer designs? Will 25-year design storm channel conditions be provided? Who will include the new Oakesdale bridge crossing into the East Side Green River Watershed Plan HEC2 models to confirm mitigated backwater impacts? • Confirm drainage Criteria as shown on attachment. Drainage easement widths for detention pond (15' min. from top of bank?) and utility corridors (10' each side of pipe?) Need clarification on code requirenments.- I� What is the design storm event in channel to applied for the 2/5-year backwater assessment of the pipe system ..10-year? year?,` ZVO_ Is it the City's practice to provide water quality swales with secondary system to take flowrates greater than the 2-year design storm? Refer to Special Requirement 45 -Water Quality Swale" Item (2).Zi,?,v5,S SY Is there a provision for the storm sewer trunkline to accept some part of future development of adjacent properties regardless of existing condition (i.e. allowance for 100' commercial development each side)? Will some part of Boeing's new development be allowed to connect to the Oakesdale Ave. trunkline? '; ,A7,, Wv-ex, Need calculations and drainage boundaries applied to adjacent existing storm sewer systems: Oakesdale Ave. S.W., S.W. 31st. Street to existing outfall at north side of cul-de-sac. Should we add treatment for this system since we must reconstruct the outfall? Gakesdale Ave. S.W_/ S.W. 16th Street intersection to outfall into east bank of Springbrook Creek. Ether crossing private systems will not be needed (will remain separate). Is there a public easement for the S.W. 19th Street construction in this project? Will this be acceptable as a storm sewer outtall and treatment corridor. SEV Icy' 1-24-55 : 4:41PM HNTB BELLEVUE— 206 277 4428;# 2/ 3 DESIGN CRITERIA, PER CITY OF RENT ON, STORM AND SURFACE WATER DRAINAGE ORDINANCE UETENTION FACILMES' 1. Core Requirement* 1. Discharge at natural location will be accommodated through direct outfail to � Spnngbrook Creel. 2. Core Requirement#2: Off--site analysis is not applicable to this site since the design will be based on stream analysis by others. Tail water conditions will be provided by the City of Denton. r 3. store Requirement# 3; Runoff Control are based on pre-development conditions that occur with the existing approved drainage system as Hated in the hoeing EIS The peak runoff is compared using the -gear, 10-year, and 100-year 24-hour duration design storms. A safety factor of 30% will be added to the 2-year and 10-year design storage volume. 4 Detention ponds with length to width ratios of 2-1 or greater are the most desirable for detention facilities, Detention tanks or vaults will be used only where required site conditions preclude detention ponds. Infiltration pond are not feasible due to the high water table anticipated at the site 5 Core Requirement# 3 notes that plate oiUwater separation may be included with the detention facility to alleviate need for olUwater features throughout the system outfalling to the facility_ Coalescing plate oil/water separation is mandated by Special Requirement #6 for threshold discharge areas with 5 acres or more impervious area having more than 2,500 vpd traffic demands. 6, Special Requirement# S. Special crater quality controls, wetponds or wetvaults are required for any systern with greater than 1 acre of imperious contributing area. This requires a three cell, 4 to 7 foot deep, permanent pool facility as defined by section 4.6.2 of the 'King County Surface Water (Design Manual. Water quality {biofiltrationj swetes may be used when a wetpond is not feasible. CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS-. Core Requirement # 4i Defines conveyance systems and related guidelines for sizing, composition, bridges, pump systems, autfalls, oillwater separation, and drainage easements. Zone 1 .and .Zone 2 Aquifer Recharge and/or Protection Areas do not occur within the project limits. City of Renton code amendments to the King County Surface Water (design Manual only apply to these Aquifer Protection Areas and therefore will not apply to this Oakesdale Boulevard project. PIPE SYSTEMS-. 7 17 1. From Core Regluire"rit# 4, the pipe system shall convey and contain at least the 25-year design storm using u rm flow analysis method. The 25-year and 100-year design storms shall be used for backwater analyses. The 100-year design event analysis may include both subsurface and overland (calculated as channel)flows. � 2. if the upstream end of a pipe system receives flows from an open channel (natural or man-made), the trunkline shall convey the 25-year design storm as in culvert designs. 3. The minimum lateral pipe size is 12"set at least 2 feet(clear) below the street grade_ VO4 - CULVERTS_ tx 1. From Core Requirement * 4, the culverts shall convey the 25-year design storm using standard WSDOT Hydraulic Manual methods and meet the designated headwater requirements. The culvert may convey the 100-year design storm under surcharged conditions. v 2. For culverts 18' diameter or less, the 25-year Design storm headwater shall not exceed 2 times the pipe diameter_ For culverts larger than 18" diameter, the 25-year design storm headwater shall not exceed 1.5 times the pipe diameter or arch rise. The resulting headwater shall not be less than 0.5 feet lower than the pavement subgrade. ,SE-)7 pX; 1-24-95 ; 4:42PNii ; HNTP BELL_EVIJE- 206 277 4428;K 3/ 3 I � v t - WATER OU AL.ITY SWALES (BI®FILTRATION): 1. From Core Requirement# 3, Runoff Con I, 4iofiltration will use the 2-year 24-hour duration design storm event sized to treat the allowable release rate if located done stream from the ,storage facility or \\ -- sized for,proposed conditions if used for conveyance on the site y� 2. From Core Requirement # 4, then drainage ditches or channels shall convey at least .the-25-year �r� R,� design storm, with a freeboard of 0 5 feet calculated using Manning's "uation.<di�step bacl vuafer, ethod, or standard step backwater method. Drainage ditches or channels shall also convey the 100- ,C,l ar design storm without overtopping. 3. Special Requirement#5 defines additional design criteria. Flow of 2-year runoff must be designed for y a maximum design depth of 0.25 foot and a maximum velocity of 1.5 foot per second, designed using r a 'Manning'"s "n' of 0.35. having minimum of 31 side slopes; and providing a minimum of 1 foot of freeboard. Flows greater than the peak runoff from 2-year 24-hour design storm must enter a v separate conveyance system to the point of discharge. There should be provisions to use this separate conveyance system to ac—nommodate taking the Swale off-line for maintenance and repair. The length of swale shall be 200 feet for each 5 acres of impervious area subject to vehicular traffic. NPDES REQUIREMENTS: Core Requirement#5 states that all engineering plans involving construction of new or modifying existing drainage facilities shall include an erosion/sedimentation control plan for construction phase work. I Stabilize all construction access points. 2. Delineate sensitive area tracts and set backs. Op, 3. Prepare construction plans showing erosion/sediment protection features to be installed prior to each ,phase. 4. Include plan to limit drainage to areas to be cleared. 5. Design settlement or filtration features. 8. Direct revegitation of disturbed areas to occur ASAP following grading. MAINTENANCE.AND OPERATION: The proposed drainage facilities will be completely independent of the existing Boeing property drainage systems. This will be accomplished through new drainage easements and water treatment areas between the roadway corridor to the outfall point. CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/ BUILDING/ PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: October 22, 1993 TO: Lenora Blauman Scott Woodbury Mike Katterman Bill Hutsinpiller Gary Gotti FROM: Bob Mahn 604- SUBJECT: Oakesdale Avenue SW Project Preliminary Alternatives Study Report Transmitted herewith is a report to document the alternative roadway alignments considered for the subject project and selection of those to be studied further as part of the environmental review process. As a member of the Design Team at the time the alternatives were being discussed, a copy is being provided for your information. If you have any questions, or if there are any corrections or additions which should be addressed, please call me at x 5545. Enclsoure / T�;�S�� ,�atcr<s fef��t ��cn� fieS' Uliyh,.ors a,� C �ul� / I ti A g f�! C �t rrlawn .J1l t"1p n - G � •^cl ✓ �,,!" 'u�l � �-OYt s/ E. ti , , A Ifyn r►W�1L`s oh 2,6 /�iti3 ol��ru, J C:RLM/OAKS/jb or �arcea es��r►� 5 ✓� P-1 /.Y rvveeoll y CITY OF RENTON OAKESDALE AVENUE SOUTHWEST SOUTHWEST 16TH STREET TO SOUTHWEST 31ST STREET Alternatives Analysis Preliminary Alternatives Study Report September 1993 HOWARD NEEDLES TAMMEN & BERGENDOFF 600 - 108th Avenue Northeast, Suite 405 Bellevue, WA 98004 OAKESDALE AVENUE SOUTHWEST ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS PRELIMINARY ALTERNATIVES PRELIMINARY ALTERNATIVES INTRODUCTION A set of one-line diagram alternatives has been prepared by the design consultant (HNTB) to present alignment options to connect Oakesdale Avenue Southwest between its existing termini on the north at Southwest 16th Street and on the south at approximately Southwest 31st Street. Alignments are based on past and current proposals—particularly the alignments developed for Valley Parkway S.W. and the pending proposal for The Boeing Company's Longacres Office Park. South of Southwest 27th Street, route selection is constrained by an extensive wetland area extending westward from Lind Avenue Southwest. Route options in the north portion of the study area are constrained by the existing route terminus at Southwest 16th Street and The Boeing Company Customer Service Training Center (CSTC), now under construction. For the one-line diagram alternatives, a design speed of about 40-45 mph is used with minimum radii of 450 feet. The width of the one-line diagrams is not intended to depict anticipated right-of-way or roadway width. Actual right-of-way width(s) and roadway cross sections (width and lane arrange- ment) will be determined later with development of design criteria for a more detailed analysis of the alternative alignments selected for further study. ALTERNATIVES Within the constraints described above, HNTB prepared four one-line diagrams depicting a range of possible alignments for the project. These alternatives are described as follows and shown on the attached map dated March 26, 1993. Alternative A - Longacres Office Park Proposed This alignment is based on a proposal shown in the Longacres Office Park Master Plan. South of Southwest 16th Street, the alignment curves to the southwest, crosses Springbrook Creek, and enters the CSTC development. The alignment coincides with a section of CSTC circulation road, then curves to the southeast and leaves the CSTC area on a southerly bearing. The alignment continues south, crosses Southwest 27th Street, and extends south to the southern limits of the Boeing Long- acres property. Between the CSTC development and Southwest 27th Street, the new roadway would provide driveway access to building services roads and parking lots located to the east and west. At the Boeing property southern limit, the alignment shifts 45 feet to the east in order to meet existing Oakesdale Avenue Southwest. Alternative B - Valley Parkway S.W. 1981) or P-1 Channel The alignment of Valley Par ay S.W. was developed in the early 1980's to conform to a proposal for a major north-south channel ("P-1 Channel") located between Springbrook Creek and Longacres. The full Valley Parkway S.W. route extended from S.W. 43rd Street to Martin Luther King Jr. Way (SR 900). Two sections of the route have been built: between Monster Road South and miscivil\s15203\reports\prelim5.w51 1 September 1993 OAKESDALE AVENUE SOUTHWEST ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS PRELINIINARY ALTERNATIVES S.W. 16th Street; and Oakesdale Avenue S.W. between S.W. 31st Street and S.W 43rd Street. The alignment between S.W. 16th and S.W. 31st Streets was proposed for a 70 to 80-foot wide right-of- way immediately east of the channel. �w r �� Q-\ c-L- .I Wt'L Lj� " o TfYJ f"-X f I /�� �Gm n / Sc-� tF sc,ff_.,, The Valley Parkway S.W. alignment would continue south-southeasterly from Southwest 16th Street across the southeast corner of the Boeing CSTC property. The alignment would then turn to almost due south, with its location about 235 feet east of the Longacres Office Park property line south of the CSTC. After proceeding south for approximately 1,000 feet, the road alignment curves to the west and then south (450-foot radii) to minimize impacts on the Alpac Container property on the north side of Southwest 27th Street. South of Southwest 27th Street, the road alignment shifts 200 feet to the west as it continues southward to existing Oakesdale Avenue Southwest. The proposed r channel also continues south but at the south limits of the Boeing Longacres property it Z turns to the west and continues westward adjacent to the Longacres south property line. Alternative C - Eastern Longacres Office Park Alternative C is located between Alternatives A and B. The alignment passes through the CSTC property similarly to Alignment B. Then the alignment turns due south on the Longacres Office Park east property line for approximately 1,000 feet where the alignment curves west and south to join the Alternative A alignment approximately 300 feet north of Southwest 27th Street. Alternative D - Western Longacres Office Park This alignment places more of the proposed road within Longacres Office Park than Alternative A. The alignment passes through the CSTC property similarly to Alternative A, but the alignment heads further west before continuing south. The north-south section has been located to place.it immediate- ly to the east of the existing race track—on the west side of the parking areas proposed in the Longacres Office Park Master Plan. Two options for connecting to the existing south section of Oakesdale Avenue are shown. Option D-1 picks up the Alternative A alignment approximately 300 feet north of the Southwest 27th Street intersection. Option D-2 continues south across Southwest 27th Street and curves east and south through a wetland area before joining existing Oakesdale Avenue Southwest. EVALUATION PROCESS The four alternative alignment one-line diagrams were presented in a meeting with the City of Renton design team on March 18, 1993 for review and comment. The City of Renton team agreed that the four alternatives depicted a range of reasonable road alignments. The team also requested that City- owned wetlands and other wetlands in the project vicinity be incorporated onto the alternatives display (map). The City of Renton Surface Water Utility representative to the design team, in a subsequent memorandum dated March 25, 1993, indicated that full stormwater channel improvements (P-1 Channel), as originally proposed, were under review but requested that the Oakesdale project not preclude this flood control alternative. Also, Surface Water Utility requested that Alternative B not be referred to as the P-1 Channel alternative. The four alternative alignments, with Design Team recommendations incorporated, were presented in a meeting with Boeing representatives on March 26, 1993 for review and comment. Boeing misciviAs15203\reports\prelim5.w51 2 September 1993 OAKESDALE AVENUE SOUTHWEST ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS PRELIMINARY ALTERNATIVES representatives advised that Alternative D could result in security and parking problems. The City of Renton decided to eliminate Alternative D from further consideration and present the remaining three alternatives (A, B, and C) at a public open house. (See attached map dated April 13, 1993.) A newsletter was distributed to businesses and residents within and adjacent to the project corridor and to other interested individuals. A public open house was held at the Valley Medical Center on April 13, 1993 to describe the proposed project and solicit comment on the three alternative align- ments. In reponse to the alignments presented at the public meeting, Winmar Inc. representatives sent comments dated May 10, 1993 indicating their preference for Alternative C and suggested Alternative B be dropped. Winmar further recommended revising the Alternative C alignment based on a wetland delineation done within their property in 1992. Surface Water Utility staff, in a discussion with the Oakesdale project manager, commented that the portion of Alternative C alignment crossing the proposed P-1 and P-9 channels south of the Winmar property was undesirable. The City of Renton decided to investigate a change to Alternative C that would eliminate two channel crossings and lessen encroachment on City property possibly needed for future channel work. This revision was presented as C-1. (See attached map dated June 18, 1993.) The C-1 revision proposes a southwesterly alignment that is similar to Alternative C; however, this alignment would cross Boeing property to the north of Alternative C. A Boeing representative, in a meeting to review the feasibility of the C-1 revision, advised that the portion of their property where the proposed C-1 alignment would cross had recently been designated as the only viable location for an electrical substation to serve the future Longacres Office Park development. The Boeing representative also indicated shifting the C-1 alignment further to the north to avoid the substation would severely impact a proposed parking area. The City's Surface Water Utility, in a memorandum dated July 28, 1993 indicated the Utility and the U.S. Soil Con rvation ervice su port min ernat' A ' nm t B from further consider- atio long as the Oakesdale Project did not preclude other flood control proposals. RECOMMENDATIONS Alternative Alignments A and C have been selected for further analysis in the design report and GaK(a &6 n^ . environmental documentation phases of the Oakesdale Avenue Southwest project. 1111113. Nhhf`'.R 2 C40"dIl r I 6 j /,n, Iles, Alternative Alignment B was dropped from further consideration because: 5cS hGs ti lnao�s! the StS g1i5�►�4,fi. ■ The City's Storm Water Utility and the U.S. Soil Conservation Service have indicated T" �6 rti-r is Qns��� support eliminatin Alternative Ali nment B sit is high y t e y stormwater channel nr improvements (P-1 Channel) will not be located or designed as previously proposed. geld 16 t#Ar�se 1 advvc ■ Winmar Inc. does not support Alternative Alignment B because of the negative impact on the development potential of their property. Alternative Alignment C will not be revised at this time to reflect the C-1 alignment modification. This modification may be reconsidered during further alignment development when impacts of Alternative Alignment C on wetlands and stormwater channel improvements can be identified in more detail. misciviRs15203\reports\prelim5.w51 3 September 1993 OAKESDALE AVENUE SOUTHWEST ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS PRELIMINARY ALTERNATIVES APPENDIX Map showing Alternative Alignments A, B, C, and D dated March 26, 1993 Map showing Alternative Alignments A, B, and C dated April 13, 1993 Map showing Alignment Revision C-1 dated June 18, 1993 Design Team Meeting Minutes, March 18, 1993 Boeing Representative Meeting Minutes, March 26, 1993 Winmar Inc. letter, May 10, 1993 City of Renton Surface Water Utility memoranda, March 25, 1993 and July 28, 1993 miscivil\s15203\reports\prelim5.w51 4 September 1993 IU U 00 , IL4•JJ , Lill ILL IJLLLLUL GVV Gt 1 ZZGa.r iTr Gr z HOWARO NEEDLES TAMMEN 6 BERMENDOFF ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS PLANNERS MEETING MINUTES Meeting Date_ March 18, 1993 Location: City of Renton Subject: Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Alternatives Analysis Design Team Meeting Project No. 22 15203-PL-013 Consultant Agreement No. CAG 103-91 Work Order Authorization No. 3 Submitted by: Pete Smith, April 8, 1993 Attended: See attached list Bob Mahn opened the meeting with an introduction to the project. Bob said a public open house has been scheduled for Tuesday. April 13, at Valley Medical Center from 4:30 to 7:30 p.m. Lenora Blauman, the City's environmental manager, said there will be a declaration of significance for this project. Bob Mahn should submit a memo to her to begin this process. HNTB is in the process of updating the project base maps to reflect the construction of Boeing's customer service training center (CSTC). Regarding the Boeing Longacres Office Park, Lenora said final technical reports are being completed and a programmatic EIS should be issued in 6-9 months. Pete Smith presented the project alteratives as shown on an 1" = 200' aerial photo base map, and described in a handout. He noted the relationship of Alternative A to the Longacres Office Park master plan, and the basis of Alternative B on the 1981 Valley Parkway next to the proposed P-1 channel. AIternative D was describer) as having come out of an earlier meeting where it was thought placing the arterial closer to proposed office park buildings could improve transit access to these buildings. Alternative C was developed to provide direct access to land between the Boeing property and Springbrook Creek. This land was owned by the Austin Co., but has been subsequently sold. The need for access via Oakesdale to this property needs to be evaluated with the new owners_ The status of the P-1 channel and valley drainage plan was discussed. Scott Woodbury said the R.W. Beck hydrology studies are being updated for the 199 1-92 water years. Alternatives being considered are no Springbrook channel improvements north of S.W. 27th Street, modified culverts and bridges without channel realignment, and a high flow diversion channel between S.W. 43rd Street and about S.W. 23rd Street (P-9 channel location). JGYI lll Meeting Minutes March 18, 1993 Page 2 Gary Gotti, hire Department, said he thought the P-9 channel location might be shown incorrectly as it had at one time been located on the S.W. 19th Street alignment. Scott will check into this. Parks Dept. briefly discussed the Springbrook trail plan and asked that it be shown on the Oakesdale project exhibits. (Subsequent discussion with Parks Department after this meeting resulted in a decision not to show the trail plan on the exhibits.) HNTB was instructed to revise the 1" — 200' aerial base map to show known City-owned weLlands, and other known wetlands in the project vicinity. The Design Team agreed that the four alternatives represented a range of reasonable alignments. The above is assumed to be a correct record of the significant items discussed at this meeting. Please notify HNTB if you have any questions, corrections, or additions. cc: file Printed Octubm 6,1995 I lmistivlll�15 Z031Dro1-m cnVn estnof s.w51 MEETING SIGN-UP SHEET Project: 0,4 kF S DA�L9 Av F— SW Date: Subject: DeSJ90, 1 ea[IK lee- 'flkq / — Drscuss�oH o -� Project Manager: L3 o b �' i a �t h Phone #: Z 7?-S:5-1 S Name Affiliation/Representing Phone # B o b slsMT DI v S54 S yz Z� Sc o r W OaOg J l'-y SrJ RF�� Way I vTu.�T 1 5S`Y7 1�i► J l� �_ �� nn �Q � 2 ��ri�G"i � /C� T � PC �s/eb/wrv/�i�q SENT BY: 10- 6-93 ; 14:36 ; HNTB BELLEVUE- 206 277 4428;# 4/ 4 HOWARC NEECLES TAMMEN 6 BERGENCDFF ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS PLANNERS MEETING MINUTES Meeting Date: March 26, 1993 Location: City of Renton Subject: Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Alternatives Analysis w/Boeing Company Representatives Project No. 22 15203-PL-013 Consultant Agreement No. CAG 103-91 Work Order Authorization No. 3 Submitted by: Pete Smith, April 8, 1993 Attended: Bob Mahn, Renton Lenora Blauman, Renton Sandra Meyer, Renton Andrew Clapham, Boeing Jim Coulter, Sverdrup Bob Wicklein, Boeing Pete Smith, HNTB Lori Pitzer, Boeing Michael Davenny, Boeing Bob Mahn and Pete Smith presented the project and four preliminary alternatives (one-line diagrams} as displayed on a 1" = 200' aerial photo base map. Pete Smith said Alternative A is based on the Longacres Office Park master plan_ Bob Mahn said Alternative D was developed as a result of comments made at a Boeing Longacres Site Transportation Committee Meeting where it was thought the alignment could provide better transit access and could reduce the area needed for circulation roads. Bob Mahn said Alternative C was developed to provide access to property owned by the Austin Co. This property has subsequently been sold to Wimmar. Comment received from Boeing representatives was that Alternative D could result in security problems by placing a through public road directly next to the office buildings. Also, all of the parking would be placed on one side of the arterial resulting in employees and visitors having to cross a wide and potentially busy arterial. A comment was made that the alignment of Alternative A should be coordinated with the location of the future Metro 108" trunk sewer. Based on Boeing input, Alternative D, which is almost entirely on Boeing property, will be dropped form further consideration. Alternative B is to be renamed as "Valley Parkway S.W. (1981)" per a request by the City's Surface Water Utility. The above is assumed to be a correct record of the significant items discussed at this meeting. Please notify HNTB if you have any questions, corrections, or additions. cc: file :vnlsclvp1s16203\prol manlmnntnove w61 Plbtted Octobm 9,1993 152 0-3 QEDNLRECZ- COMPAN Y , INC .May 10 , 1993 1993 } Ms . Sandra L. Meyer D O U Transportation Planning Manager City of Renton %� ;' 1993 700 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 'T RE : Oakesdale Right-of-Way Alignment Dear Ms . Meyer: I understand Bob Mahn is still on vacation; as such, I hope it is appropriate to address our comments on the HNTB Alignment Study, dated April 13 , 1993 , to your attention. It appears the Study does not have a complete understanding of the Category 3 wetlands present on our site; therefore, I am enclosing a copy of our Preliminary Wetland Delineation (October 1992) as prepared by Shannon & Wilson, Inc. . As you review this Report, the area of greatest significance to the Oakesdale Alignment will be the southwest corner of our site, which is a 4 . 2 acre portion of a larger wetland area (see Figure 2 . of the Report) . The following will address key issues of each of the proposed HNTB alignment alternatives . A. Longacres Office Park Proposed This alignment would leave the Winmar parcel landlocked; therefore, any analyses of this Alignment should include development of S.W. 19th Street to the Winmar property line. If the road is built on this plan, the Boeing Campus will be bisected by a 40 MPH arterial and, as such, will create an unnecessary risk to employees as they cross Oakesdale from the East Campus buildings to the West Campus buildings . Also, this Alignment appears to provide the least desirable line of sight conditions for entering the major intersection at S .W. 16th Street . B . Valley Parkway S .W. (1981) This Alignment assumes that Springbrook Creek will be filled in and moved into the P-1 Channel . Because of 'CO FIFTH AVE%UE.SUITE 2500 GATE''OJAY TG'.^:ER.SEATTLE.AA 9 5101-502 6 I2C61 223-15OU °AX 2=-65 REPLY TO.PO.BOX 21545,SEAT TLE.WA 98111-3545 Page Two the new designation of Springbrook as a water of the state, we believe it will not be possible to fill the existing Springbrook Channel and, without filling the existing channel, this Alignment of Oakesdale would render the western half of our site undevelopable, therefore, we request this Alignment be discontinued from further consideration. C. Eastern Longacres Office Park This is our preferred Alignment . We believe this Alignment most closely reflects the intent of the City of Renton' s original street plans; also, this is the only Alignment which provides the access necessary to ensure successful development of our site . Alignment C, as currently proposed, will impact a significant amount of known and probable wetland areas, but the wetland impacts of this Alignment can nearly be eliminated by moving the eastern-most section of the Alignment west by 45' , and by turning the Alignment west at a more northerly point (see Alignment C-1 on the HNTB analysis, attached) . Winmar would like C-1 added to the proposed Alignment routes to be studied. Winmar believes a combination of C and C-1 Alignments provides the best access to all of the areas landowners, while at the same time providing the best and safest Alignments for the regional transportation needs of the greater valley area. I would like to meet with the City of Renton Oakesdale team to further explain the C-1 Alignment and provide any additional information you may need. My availability is very flexible and I can also be reached at 223-6292 . Sincerely, WINMAR COMP INC. Timoth A. ryear Assistant Vice President TAP/ap oakesdle . slm CC : Bob Mahn, w/enc Peter W. Smith/HNTB, w/enc John Keegan, Davis Wright Tremaine cc � �IV F ' A PILA.R 2 G 1993 CITY OF RENTON AUG o 1993 r MEMORANDUM HNTB-SEATTLE DATE: March 25, 1993 TO: Bob Mahn FROM: Scott Woodbury SS'J SUBJECT: OAKESDALE AVENUE SW EXTENSION MARCH 18, 1993 DESIGN TEAM MEETING COMMENTS As requested I submit the following comment in regard to the above project. A concern I have with the Alternatives Analysis presented by HNTB at the meeting was with Alternative B - P-1 Channel. The P-1 alignment described by HNTB was a portion of a system of channel improvements identified in a watershed plan completed in the early 1980's by the Soil Conversation Service (SCS). However, the need for the full channel improvements as described in the SCS Plan has not been confirmed, but the Oakesdale project should not preclude that particular flood control alternative. A solution would be to rename Alternative B without reference to the P-1 Channel. However, in the alternative description it can be mentioned that the alignment could coincide with a regional flood control project. We hope to be able to give you a more definitive answer this summer on the scope of proposed flood control alternatives in the valley so that the Oakesdale project can be planned without impacting future flood control projects. It is important that our two divisions work closely together on our projects to ensure that they are well coordinated. Thank you for the opportunity to work with you on this project as a design team member. If you have any questions, please call me at X-5547. C:DOCS:93-289:SSW:ps CC: Grego Zimmerman Ronald J.Straka /(`Zv3 dr CITY OF RENTON i �? 1993 MEMORANDUM F rEATTLE DATE: July 28, 1993 TO: Bob Mahn FROM: Scott Woodbury Sw SUBJECT: OAKESDALE AVENUE SW ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS ALIGNMENT B - VALLEY PARKWAY SW (1981) This memorandum is in response to your request for more information on the-East Side Green River Watershed (ESGRW) Plan flood control altematives analysis, which in my March 25, 1993 memorandum I had indicate that we hoped to be able to provide this summer. However, since our flood control alternatives analysis has been delayed until fall you requested we consider whether the Oakesdale Alignment B associated with the original P-1 channel alignment could be eliminated from the Oakesdale alternative analysis. We have reviewed your request within the Surface Water Utility and with the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) and have determined that your Department may eliminate Oakesdale Alignment B. However we request that each of your remaining alternatives include consideration of potential and existing P-1 channel alignments in terms of cost, right-of-way acquisition, bridge/culvert crossing requirements, and other impacts. Attached is a letter from SCS regarding evaluation of the Oakesdale alternatives with consideration for the original ESGRW P-1 channel alignment. We wish to continue to coordinate with you regarding our respective projects and alternatives analyses. We will provide more detailed information about P-1 channel alternatives as it becomes available. If you have any questions, please call me at X-5547. Thank you. cc: Ron Straka Rod Den Herder CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: March 25, 1993 TO: Bob Mahn FROM: Scott Woodbury SSLJ SUBJECT: OAKESDALE AVENUE SW EXTENSION MARCH 18, 1993 DESIGN TEAM MEETING COMMENTS As requested I submit the following comment in regard to the above project. A concern I have with the Alternatives Analysis presented by HNTB at the meeting was with Alternative B - P-1 Channel. The P-1 alignment described by HNTB was a portion of a system of channel improvements identified in a watershed plan completed in the early 1980's by the Soil Conversation Service (SCS). However, the need for the full channel improvements as described in the SCS Plan has not been confirmed, but the Oakesdale project should not preclude that particular flood control alternative. A solution would be to rename Alternative B without reference to the P-1 Channel. However, in the alternative description it can be mentioned that the alignment could coincide with a regional flood control project. We hope to be able to give you a more definitive answer this summer on the scope of proposed flood control alternatives in the valley so that the Oakesdale project can be planned without impacting future flood control projects. It is important that our two divisions work closely together on our projects to ensure that they are well coordinated. Thank you for the opportunity to work with you on this project as a design team member. If you have any questions, please call me at X-5547. C:D0CS:93-289:SSW:pS CC: Gregg Zimmerman Ronald J.Straka City of Renton OAKESDALE AVENUE SOUTHWEST ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS Work Order Authorization No. 3 Task C One-Line Diagrams Presentation to City of Renton Design Team March 18, 1993 HOWARD NEEDLES TAMMEN & BERGENDOFF 600 - 108th Avenue Northeast Bellevue, WA 98004 r - OAKESDALE AVENUE SOUTHWEST ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS ONE-LINE DIAGRAMS ONE-LINE DIAGRAM ALTERNATIVES INTRODUCTION A set of one-line diagram alternatives has been prepared to present alignment options to connect Oakesdale Avenue Southwest between its existing termini on the north at Southwest 16th Street and on the south at approximately Southwest 31st Street. Alignments are based on past and current proposals—particularly the alignments developed for the P-1 Channel project and the pending proposal for the Boeing Company's Longacres Office Park (Preliminary Draft EIS, February 5, 1993). South of Southwest 27th Street, route selection is constrained by an extensive wetland area extending westward from Lind Avenue Southwest. Route options in the north portion of the study area are constrained by the existing route terminus at Southwest 16th Street and the Boeing Company Customer Service Training Center (CSTC), now under construction. For the preliminary route selection, a design speed of about 40-45 mph is used with minimum radii of 600 feet. A nominal right-of-way width of 90 feet is assumed. An ultimate five-lane cross section would be built. An interim cross section of three lanes could be constructed if adequate level of service is maintained for the phased development of Longacres Office Park. ALTERNATIVES Alternative A - Longacres'Office Park Proposed This is the alignment shown in the Longacres Office Park Preliminary Draft EIS (PDEIS). South of Southwest 16th Street, the alignment curves to the southwest, crosses Springbrook Creek, and enters the CSTC development. The alignment would replace some CSTC circulation roadway and have a driveway access(es) to CSTC parking. The alignment curves the southeast and leaves the CSTC area on a southerly bearing. The roadway would provide driveway access to building services roads and parking lots located to the east and west for about 1,700 feet. After crossing the Seattle Water Department water transmission line (60" Bow Lake line) 30-foot wide easement, the alignment centerline is located directly on east property line of the Boeing property. In order to connect to the existing Oakesdale Avenue Southwest, the new alignment must shift 45 feet to the east from the Boeing property line to the center of the Oakesdale Avenue Southwest 90-foot right-of-way. Alternative B - P-1 Channel Proposed plans for the P-1 Channel have located a north-south arterial immediately to the east of the channel. The channel, with a 70 to 80-foot bottom width and 3:1 side slopes, is proposed for a 200- foot wide right-of-way. Plans developed in the early 1980s located the arterial in a 70 to 80-foot wide right-of-way. The P-1 Channel, as proposed, would replace the Springbrook Creek channel north of Southwest 43rd Street. An east-west channel (P-9) in a 150-foot right-of-way immediately south of the Seattle Water Department easement was also proposed to carry drainage from storage areas east of SR 167 to the P-1 channel. The P-1 Channel road alignment would continue south-southeasterly from Southwest 16th Street across the southeast corner of the Boeing CSTC property. The alignment would turn to almost due south, with its centerline about 235 feet east of the Longacres Office Park property line south of the CSTC. After crossing the Seattle Water Department easement, the road alignment (in an 80-foot wide right-of-way) and P-1 channel turn sharply to the west and then south (450-foot roadway centerline radii) to minimize impacts on the Alpac Container property on the north side of Southwest misciviRs15203\reports\oneline.wk1 1 Printed March 18, 1993 OAKESDALE AVENUE SOUTHWEST ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS ONE-LINE DIAGRAMS 27th Street. North of Southwest 27th Street, the west side of the P-1 channel right-of-way is on the Longacres Office Park east property line. South of Southwest 27th Street, the P-1 channel turns to the west and continues westward with the north right-of-way line 80 feet south of the Longacres Office Park property. South of Southwest 27th Street, the centerline of the arterial shifts 200 feet to the west and continues southward to existing Oakesdale Avenue Southwest where it connects with a five-foot centerline offset. Alternative C - Western Longacres Office Park This alignment places more of the southern section (south of the Seattle Water Department easement) within Longacres Office Park than Alternative A. The alignment passes through the CSTC property similarly to Alternative A, but the alignment heads further west before continuing south. The north- south section has been located to place it immediately to the east of the existing race track—on the west side of the parking areas east of the lake as shown on the Longacres Office Park Proposed Action. Two connections options to the existing south section of Oakesdale Avenue are shown. Option C-1 picks up the Alternative A alignment at the north approach to the Southwest 27th Street intersection. Option C-2 continues south across Southwest 27th Street and curves east and south through a wetland area before joining the Alternative A alignment. Alternative D - Eastern Longacres Office Park Alternative D is located between Alternatives A and B, on the Longacres Office Park east property line between the CSTC property and the Seattle Water Department easement. South of the easement, the alignment curves west and south to join the Alternative A alignment north of Southwest 27th Street. miscivil\s15203\reports\oneline.wk1 2 Printed March 18, 1993 CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/ BUILDING/ PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: March 5, 1993 TO: Gregg Zimmerman, Utility Systems Division Don Erickson, Development & Planning Section FROM: Bob Mahn, Transportation Systems 641- SUBJECT: OAKESDALE AVENUE SW EXTENSION DESIGN TEAM I am requesting that you or your representative participate on the design team being formed to guide the development of this project's design, as well as environmental document. The consultant hired for the pre-design phase is beginning work on development of alternative alignments for the new roadway between SW 16th Street and SW 31st Street. The consultant will be discussing the alternative alignments at the initial meeting of the design team to be held on Thursday, March 18, 1991, from 1:30 to 3:00 PM in the first floor conference room of the Municipal Building. Attendance by you or your representative will be appreciated. I am enclosing a copy of the Oakesdale Avenue SW Project Proposal for your information prior to the design team meeting. If you have any questions, please call Bob Mahn at extension 5545. Enclosure RI M2/OAK2/ww/jb OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. S.W. 16th STREET to S.W. 31 st STREET PROJECT PROPOSAL Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Lynn Guttmann, Administrator Prepared By: Transportation Systems Division Mel Wilson, Manager Harold Adams, Transportation Engineer $06 /1�18�ti Project Manager: Fier June, 1991 TABLE OF CONTENTS OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. S.W. 16th Street to S.W. 31st Street Project Objective Page Number I. Project Background 1 II. Project Description 1 A. Existing Conditions 1 B. Scope of Work 1 C. Design Elements 2 D. Special Design Considerations 2 E. Right-of-Way 3 F. Environmental Documents 3 G. Permits 3 H. Value Engineering 3 I. Preliminary Cost Estimate 3 J. Funding Sources 3 K. Project Scheduling 4 III. Involvement/Participation 4 A. Community 4 B. Agencies 4 C. Private Utilities 4 IV. Staffing 4 A. Project Management 4 B. Design 4 C. In-House Reviews 4 V. Management Acceptance 5 OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. PROJECT OBJECTIVE The purpose of this project is to construct a new 1 mile missing segment of Oakesdale Avenue S.W. between S.W. 16th Street and S.W. 31st Street. The project will improve access into and through the Renton Valley. (See attached Project Location.) I. Project Background For this project the Renton Valley is defined as a 1200 acre area of land suitable for development with boundaries south of I-405, east of the Burlington Northern Railroad, north of S.W. 43rd Street, and west of SR 167. The City Planning Department estimates that as of April 1991, 43% of the land is currently vacant, 4000 people are employed in the area, and over 12,000 people are projected to be employed in the area by the year 2010. These figures do not reflect the Boeing development of the Longacres site. Oakesdale Avenue S.W. is projected to be a regional principal arterial relieving congestion on SR 900 and SR 167. In August of 1989 the City submitted an application to the Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) for funding of Oakesdale Avenue S.W. from S.W. 16th Street to S.W. 28th Street. In February 1991, the South County Transportation Benefit District (SCATBD) continued to list Oakesdale Avenue S.W. improvements as a group 1 priority ranked as a corridor project. With the planned development of the Longacres site by Boeing, the City is accelerating plans for Oakesdale Avenue S.W. improvements. In the first week of May 1991 the City submitted an updated Prospectus to the TIB for Oakesdale Avenue S.W. from S.W. 16th Street to S.W. 31st Street which reflected an increase in the scope of the project due to the Longacres development. In May of 1991 the City selected the consulting firm of HNTB to coordinate and design the Oakesdale Avenue S.W. improvements. H. Project Description A. Existing Conditions Oakesdale Avenue S.W. from S.W. 7th Street to S.W. 16th Street and from S.W. 31st Street to S.W. 43rd Street are multi lane arterials built to current standards. This project will construct the missing section of Oakesdale Avenue S.W. from S.W. 16th Street to S.W. 31st Street which currently is unimproved and has wetlands. B. Scope of Work This project will construct approximately 1 mile of new roadway for Oakesdale Avenue S.W. from the existing intersection of Oakesdale Avenue S.W. and S.W. 16th Street to the intersection of Oakesdale Avenue S.W. and S.W. 31st Street, thus completing the unimproved section of an important north-south principal arterial on the west side of the Renton Valley. The project includes the construction of a new principal arterial with a separate left turn lane at signalized intersections and a two way left turn lane or landscaped median in between signalized intersections. Multi-model solutions such as High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes, Transit stops, etc. will be investigated. The design of the project will be split into two phases. The first phase will include preparation of a route and design report and preparation of environmental documents. The second phase will include final design, and P.S.& E. Page 1 C. Design Elements 1. Pavement removals. 2. Excavation and embankment (including investigation and removal or preloading of unsuitable soils). 3. Roadway base and pavement thickness needs. 4. Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, curb ramps, and driveways. 5. Drainage facilities and conveyance system. 6. Street lighting. 7. Traffic signalization. 8. Pavement markings, channelization, and signing. 9. Landscaping and erosion control. 10. Bridge structures, and retaining walls. 11. Bus stop signing, curb markings, and bus shelters. 12. Adjustments to existing abutting features. 13. Adjustments of existing utilities. D. Special Design Considerations 1. Prepare a community involvement plan and attend community meetings. 2. Utilizing aerial mapping and field survey, develop base maps to a scale of 1"= 20' for final design and P.S. & E. For route and design studies reduce the base maps to 1"= 40' with 1 foot contours. 3. Coordinate with Boeing and their consultants, the City and their EIS and P-1 Channel Flood Control Project consultants, and pertinent local, State, and Federal agencies. 4. Coordinate with existing and proposed utilities (particularly METRO'S existing and proposed sewer lines, Seattle water lines, and Olympic Pipeline) in the project area and determine needed adjustments / relocations and design impacts on the Oakesdale project. Coordinate with the City's proposed sewer line along Oakesdale Avenue and proposed City water line upgrade in the project area. 5. Review and understand existing analysis, reports, and plans related to the Boeing development, other Valley developments, flood control and water quality, P-1 Channel Flood Control Project and related wetlands. 6. Conduct a wetland assessment and analysis, and develop mitigation recommendations including protection during construction. 7. Conduct soils investigation and analysis for determining roadway base design, pavement thickness and structural foundation recommendations. 8. Review and understand existing and proposed traffic volumes for the area and with information provided by the City, Boeing and their consultants, and the City's Valley Transportation Consultant, develop projected traffic volumes, verify the number and type of lanes needed, and determine signal needs. 9. Investigate structural roadway options and costs for crossing the P-1 Channel and Springbrook Creek, and for mitigating wetland impacts. 10. Prepare a preliminary Right of Way assessment in enough detail to use for alternate alignment costs. 11. Prepare alternative alignments and profiles. 12. Investigate alternative alignments in enough detail to prepare preliminary cost estimates for the following needs: roadway base, roadway pavement and thickness, utility adjustments, drainage and water quality, street lighting, traffic signals, channelization, signing, landscaping, and Right of Way. 13. Prepare an environmental, engineering and cost (including Right of Way) analysis of the alternate alignments. 14. Prepare a Route/Design Report that includes pertinent data, alternate alignments and profiles, cost estimates, evaluations and recommendation of preferred alignment with reasons why. 15. Prepare environmental documents for the preferred alignment. 16. Provide data for and answer questions of a Value Engineering Team. Page 2 17. Determine the roadway drainage facilities and conveyance system for the preferred alignment to include storm water analysis and addressing water quality, both in accordance with City of Renton Storm and Surface Water Drainage Ordinance. 18. Develop a landscape and erosion control plan for the preferred alignment, coordinating with the Boeing development, the P-1 Channel Project and wetlands requirements. 19. Prepare final design for all roadway elements for the preferred plan. 20. Prepare a detailed Right of Way appraisal for the preferred plan. 21. Assist the City as necessary in procurement of funding and permits for this project, including meetings with City, State, Federal, and Local Agencies. E. Right-of-Way Right of Way acquisition will be needed for this project. F. Environmental Documents An Environmental Impact Statement will be required. This project will involve new construction crossing wetland areas. Portions of the EIS can be developed in conjunction with the EIS for Boeing's proposed development at Longacres. G. Permits Permits anticipated at this time are: Corps of Engineers Permit, Section 404 Permit, Nationwide Permits as detailed in 33 CFR 330, Natural Resource Coordinating Committee Permit, Washington State Dept. of Fisheries and Game, DOE Permit, Flood Control Zone Permit, Waste Discharge Permit, Short Term Modification Permit, Water Pollution Control Plan. H. Value En ing eering Because of the cost and complexity of this project Value Engineering is required. I. Preliminary Cost Estimate The preliminary cost estimate for this project is $13,750,000, which includes administration, design, and construction. Preconstruction Engineering and Administration $1,530,000 Right of Way Acquisition and Administration $2,500,000 Contract Fee $9,000,000 Construction Control and Administration $ 720,000 J. Funding Sources The funding will come from the following sources: General Fund $ 100,000 Mitigation In-Hand $ 800,000 Grants Proposed (TIA) $4,406,600 Mitigation/LID Proposed $8,443,400 Page 3 K. Project Scheduling The current schedule calls for the following: Pre-construction: From 3rd quarter 1992 thru 4th quarter 1993 Right of Way From 3rd quarter 1994 thru 4th quarter 1993 Construction: From 1st quarter 1996r thru 4th quarter 1997. M. Involvement/Participation A. Community Because the project is located in an existing industrial area and goes through wetlands, active involvement by the community will most likely be centered around the transportation and environmental issues of the project. B. Agencies State, Federal, and King County funding and regulatory agencies will be involved and identified during the early stages of the project. METRO and the City of Tukwila will participate in the design and construction of elements that affect their respective agencies. C. Private Utilities All affected private utilities, such as: Puget Power, U.S. West, Washington Natural Gas, etc. will be coordinated with during design. IV. Staffing A. Project Management Fob M2�h The project manager will be Mir from the Transportation Systems Division of the Planning/Building/Public Works Department. B. Design The design and community involvement will be done by a consultant team headed by HNTB. The first phase of design by the consultant team will include preparation of a route and design report, and environmental documents. Assuming available funding the final design and P.S. & E. will follow. C. In-house Reviews Other Departments and Planning/Building/Public Works Divisions will be involved during reviews. Page 4 Q� C N o o._. .�. �o < < < I OR O $iO1TGGi vLLncE it / v+ > o < pp ar ST M., N A 4 <> < e > < @ 61 GE lsu� 14 Bw IqA,7T e m saa � a < J A J W 23d 8T ST L PROJECT LIMITS c e s25� sa tru.sr s+ ru. rr � s ru.s'r < s+ i S.a ar < o fl aw 33, < > > ` >w s+u.ar °a trz-sr rra-d W Q , BE w9kA n y/� a{ J O � a IaaU. > Ilu r s ,ar,r sr CITY OF RENTON DAKESDALE AVENUE SV SV 16TH STREET TO SV 31ST STREET V. MANAGEMENT ACCEPTANCE AND COMMITMENT Project: Oakesdale Avenue S.W. - S.W. 16th Street to S.W. 31st Street The following signatures indicate acceptance of and commitment to the project specifications, schedule and budget as outlined in this project proposal. Project Manager Date Ja 7- 31 - g/ Transportation Engineer Date Transportation Systems Division Manager Date �--La� g - 1s"-'T Atility LDivision Manager Date Maintenance Services Division Manager Date % �'/2G / 11 Planni lding/Public Works Dept. Administrator Date 77 , Development Planning / Longacres Project Manager Date Page 5 CITY OF RENTON OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. CONSULTANT TEAM MATRIX PRIME CONSULTING FIRM ENTRANCO ALPHA ENGINEERS PERMIT ENGINEERING,INC KRAMER,CHIN&MAYO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT R.W.BECK&ASSOCIATES WETLANDS ANALYSIS&MITIGATION B-12 ASSOC.&OSBORNE PACIFIC ADOLFSON&ASSOCIATES SHAPIRO&ASSOC. TRANSPORTATION PLANNING J MITIGATION FEES BRUCE ALLEN COMPANY TRANSPO TRANSPO CML ENGINEERING TUDOR TRAFFIC ENGINEERING PSI METRO TUDOR&TRANSPO TRANSPO STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING TUDOR SOILS ENGINEERING HONG WEST&ASSOCIATES SHANNON&WILSON SHANNON&WILSON SHANNON&WILSON HYDROLOGIC/HYDRAULICS R.W.BECK&ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE OSBORNE PACIFIC OSBORNE PACIFIC NAKANO-DENNIS �R SURVEY/MAPPING - HORTON DENNIS&ASSOC. COMMUNITY/LOCAL AGENCY INVOLVEMENT NRF TRIANGLE ASSOCIATES NRF PRIME CONSULTING FIRM KPFF ABKJ CH2M HILL DELEUW CATHER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES PARAMETRIX,INC NBBJ GROUP WETLANDS ANALYSIS&MITIGATION ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES PARAMETRIX,INC HART CROWSER,INC TRANSPORTATION PLANNING/MITIGATION FEES T P&E TRANSPO CIVIL ENGINEERING TRAFFIC ENGINEERING T P&E TRANSPO STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING SOILS ENGINEERING HONG WEST&ASSOCIATES GEOENGINEERS,INC HART CROWSER,INC HYDROLOGIC/HYDRAULICS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE HOUGH BECK AND BAIRD OSBORNE PAGFIC BOATENG&ASSOCIATES SURVEY/MAPPING BUSH,ROED&HITCHINGS HORTON DENNIS&ASSOC. MERIDITH,INC COMMUNITY/LOCAL AGENCY INVOLVEMENT ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES NBBJ GROUP PRIME CONSULTING FIRM OBEC CONSULTING ENGINEERS ABAM HNTB ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SHELDON&ASSOCIATES SHAPIRO&ASSOCIATES WETLANDS ANALYSIS&MITIGATION SHELDON&ASSOCIATES SHAPIRO&ASSOCIATES TRANSPORTATION PLANNING/MITIGATKN FEES TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS GVIL ENGINEERING H.W.LOCHNER TRAFFIC ENGINEERING H.W.LOCHNER STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING SOILS ENGINEERING APPLIED GEOTECHNOLOGY WOODWARD-CLYDE HYDROLOGIC/HYDRAULICS - H.W.LOCHNER INCA ENGINEERS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ROBERT PERRON ASSOCIATES OSBORNE PACIFIC GROUP SURVEY/MAPPING INCA ENGINEERS COMMUNITY/LOCAL AGENCY INVOLVEMENT t CITY OF RENTON PRESENTATION APPRAISAL RATING FORM FOR OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. APPLICANT: ���T REVIEWER: A."y DATE: 0- 10 EACH 1. KNOWLEDGE OF PROJECT&AREA (Demostrated Knowledge of Project Scope & Project Area) 2. PROJECT MANAGER ASSIGNED TO PROJECT (Experience, Knowledge,Abilities, etc) 3. KEY PERSONNEL ASSIGNED TO PROJECT (See Disciplines Required Below) 4. PRESENT WORKLOAD /ABILITY TO MEET SCHEDULE c� (Any Conflict Between Renton/ Consultants/ Developers) 5. PRESENTATION PERFORMANCE TOTAL 3(p DISIPLINES REQUIRED COMMENTS A. Environmental Impact Statement B. Wetlands Analysis & Mitigation C. Transportation Planning / Mitigation Fees �, � .�.�.GrG a D. Civil Engineering E. Traffic Engineering F. Structural engineering G. Soils engineering H. Hydrologic/ Hydraulics o� - r4 '+ ... � <<�,�a►a� ���� �(, � I. Landscape Architecture ss J. Survey/ Mapping K. Community/ Local Agency Involvement GENERAL COMMENTS: / Lr f,�u` yb mid tc-c ot. r Gt W k t ,c-14- cV o-4 Agzg� t±; </ CITY OF RENTON PRESENTATION APPRAISAL RATING FORM FOR OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. APPLICANT: REVIEWER: �yN STi7�q-�4- DATE: r i 0- 10 EACH 1. KNOWLEDGE OF PROJECT&AREA171 (Demostrated Knowledge of Project Scope & Project Area) 2. PROJECT MANAGER ASSIGNED TO PROJECT (Experience, Knowledge,Abilities, etc) 3. KEY PERSONNEL ASSIGNED TO PROJECT (See Disciplines Required Below) 4. PRESENT WORKLOAD /ABILITY TO MEET SCHEDULE (Any Conflict Between Renton/Consultants/ Developers) 5. PRESENTATION PERFORMANCEFe TOTAL F475 DISIPLINES REQUIRED COMMENTS A. Environmental Impact Statement B. Wetlands Analysis & Mitigation o �� C. Transportation Planning / Mitigation Fees D. Civil Engineering 6� E. Traffic Engineering g F. Structural engineering �a�y G. Soils engineering H. Hydrologic/ Hydraulics G�� — I� (Q�YwI L.. rc �K�� ovd,b us L I. Landscape Architecture J. Survey/ Mapping mow/ K. Community/Local Agency Involvement GENERAL COMMENTS: a iC, v �c XL Q va S cr¢-a CITY OF RENTON PRESENTATION APPRAISAL RATING FORM FOR OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. APPLICANT: ,�17A1�F�� COttsl REVIEWER: � `si-�r4Y—r4 DATE: 5-- /-T-9/ 0- 10 EACH 1. KNOWLEDGE OF PROJECT&AREA y (Demostrated Knowledge of Project Scope & Project Area) 2. PROJECT MANAGER ASSIGNED TO PROJECT 0 (Experience, Knowledge, Abilities, etc) 3. KEY PERSONNEL ASSIGNED TO PROJECT (See Disciplines Required Below) 4. PRESENT WORKLOAD /ABILITY TO MEET SCHEDULE (Any Conflict Between Renton/ Consultants/ Developers) 5. PRESENTATION PERFORMANCE TOTAL DISIPLINES REQUIRED COMMENTS A. Environmental Impact Statement CAJ ,, o� ,qvQ.,L- � B. Wetlands Analysis & Mitigations �"^�►r C. Transportation Planning / Mitigation Fees �„�� D. Civil Engineering y E. Traffic Engineering F. Structural engineering G. Soils engineering o 0 H. Hydrologic/ Hydraulics I. Landscape Architecture J. Survey/ Mapping K. Community/ Local Agency Involvement GENERAL COMMENTS: n,r�VWco� � �( ✓ GA I ✓� '<� c� n ` arc�vJ i-. / r v - 4i�t f.�rtC�.r k6iy ��1.t fr.(��c srs 4,4 40h lb �- �,,yh -t-�// //wJw-��.-�•S c ..� c..�/S-o �,^�U�� r �,� Q rot-a�{d vim+v� `I'� 't-�.,. .A. Ctrt 9 u l�r� S t L r fl i� f�Z , yAl V� 't. 15.. �M.k►g-.A* w�-�slT _.— n ii2 j� 1 -L -+_ia.S_. ____.._—._.._._..— �—_____.��.�t�i..t�d�__W�R.{Y��_��_�c�-�C+� W�c�ti�.�_.�G'A� lad�...r..�av�r_.__�•f..• -•. b<TT- jI - ;� wj- 1 if tl j __sue �i ii �7✓tsw u.�l__ {-Hq 'a�.r�� '� .______ _ _ qj 1 if Ij ._—.__.—.___.___—. —_—_ _.._.__..._._.._._..._..._..._..._.._..__._...._..._._. bt I 1 II I f Is