Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSWP273046(12)W p.9pW pip O p � W W N N4 O r W .04+°60 W C o+ 1001-11 a�°6° • 2��? ° ° 2NO6° 1, b b O60 •• tiw 6 O w 4114 C��� GVVP'27-3048 cn � � cn '- Cp 8� / / cJ SERIES 3000 SLUICE GATE CAST IRON MEDIUM DUTY • Cast Iron Standard Flangeback, Extended Flangeback or Spigotback Frame • Rectangular or Circular Openings • Rectangular, Ribbed Slide for Rising or • Non -Rising Stems • Finished Iron or Bronze Seat Faces • Galvanized or Optional Stainless Steel Structural Guide Rails and Fasteners • Adjustable Side Wedge Assemblies • Optional Adjustable Top and Bottom Wedge Assemblies (for gates wider than 24") • May be Thimble, Wall or Flange Mounted Waterman Series 3000 Sluice Gates have been de- signed to give maximum water control service, operating at seating heads up to 50 feet and unseating heads up to 20 feet. Gates have one-piece cast iron, standard flangeback, extended flangeback or spigotback frames. Slides (covers) have horizontal and vertical ribs, and cast side wedges. Fully adjustable, positive locking wedge blocks force the smoothly machined seats into a practical water tight closure (maximum clearance between faces:.004 inch). Adjustable top and bottom wedges augment the side wedges for unseating heads. Heavy galvanized structural steel guide angles and bolts are furnished as standard. Stainless steel guides and bolts are optional and recommended for corrosive water conditions. Bronze seat facings should be specified where the gate will not be operated for long periods of time or where salt water, industrial wastes or sewage will be handled. APPLICATIONS Q INDUSTRIES, INC. i> • Flood control projects • Industrial and municipal treatment plants • Drainage systems • Reservoirs • Fish hatcheries • Canal and irrigation systems Similar projects where operating conditions will be moderate and first cost is an important factor. 3 SERIES 3000 SLUICE GATE FEATURES: Gates with non -rising stems, flushbottom closures, self- contained frames and special downward opening mod- els are available. Side wedges are cast integrally with the cover. Wedge blocks are cast ductile iron. They easily adjust and are securely locked in position. Top and bottom wedges are provided to meet higher unseating heads, are bolted to the frame and slide, and are adjustable. A cast iron or bronze thrust nut is shipped with each gate and is threaded to fit the stem ordered with the gate. The thrust nut located in a reinforced pocket cast in the slide, is prevented from turning on the stem in rising stem model gates by set screws. (Pins or keys are optional.) Slides for non -rising stem gates are supplied with a nut pocket located so as to provide a full gate opening without allowing the stem to extend into the waterway. The thrust nut on these units is threaded to receive the gate stem and travels up or down, operating the slide, as the stem is rotated. Gates with a self-contained frame (yoke) and lift are available with rising or non -rising stems. Flushbottom seals can be provided (see page 6). Downward opening models, special material combinations and coatings are also available. QS-3000F WITH TOP WEDGES AND FLUSHBOTTOM SEAL SIDE WEDGE DETAIL (TYPICAL) PARTS LIST No. Name 1 Frame 2 Slide w/CasNn Wedge 3 Guide Rail 4 Wedge Spacer 5 Adjustable Wedge Blocks 6 Adjusting Screw w/Lock Nut 7 Wedge Bolts 8 Seat Facings v L 4INDUSTRIES, INC. SERIES 3000 SELF- CONTAINED SLUICE GATE - Galvanized or Stainless Steel Rails • Rising Stem or Non -rising Stem The Series 3000-Y Sluice Gate (Y indicates self-con- tained frame and yoke) can be furnished with any of the options noted for the standard units and includes ex- tended side rails, a structural steel yoke (headrail), stem, and lift. The thrust of operation is transferred directly to the yoke. Both rising stem (S-3000-RSY) and non -rising stem gates (S-3000 NRS-Y) are available. Standard units feature galvanized steel structural guide rails and fasteners. Stainless steel may be substituted as an extra cost item. Minimum frame heights for openings are provided unless extended heights are specified. Self-contained gates with rising stems can be installed where it is impractical to have independently mounted handwheel and pedestal lifts and can project above a headwall to give necessary operating clearance. Stems are cold finished steel with modified acme threads, secured to the slide (cover) with a thrust nut and operated by a cast bronze lift nut with suitable handwheel or geared crank lift. Stainless steel stems are optional. Self-contained gates with non -rising stems are similarto rising stem units, but have a cast bronze thrust nut threaded to match the stem threads which travel up and down (operating the slide) as the stem is rotated. Non - rising stems are stainless steel unless specified other- wise. The thrust of the stem is transferred directly to the yoke (headrail) through a flange and thrust collar. Ball or roller bearings should not be used at the thrust flange if they will be submerged. APPLICATION A non -rising stem gate is used where a standard Series 3000 gate is required, and where it is desirable not to have the stem rise into walk -ways, roads, or other obstructions. MODEL S-3000-NRS-Y (NON -RISING STEM) PARTS LIST No. Name No. Name 1 Frame 7 Stem 2 Cover 8 Lift 3 Wedge 9 Extension Stem 4 Thrust Nut 10 Stem Guide 5 Guide Rail 11 Floor Box 8 77 Headrail 12 Operating Nut Typical installation of S-3000-NRS-Y Gate with floor box, stem extension and coupling. INDUSTRIES, INC. 64 QS-3000 FLUSHBOTTOM SLUICE GATES • Maximum Flow • Flushing Action • Complete Drainage • Lowest Invert • Maximum Hydraulic Gradient • Fully Contained Neoprene Bottom Seal Use anywhere that an unimpeded flow, free of debris, is required. Use for maximum flow and minimum clear- ances in sewage disposal plants, filtration plants, drain- age projects, settling tanks, flood control, distribution systems, etc. Waterman Series 3000 Cast Iron Sluice Gates in both rising and non -rising stem models are available with flushbottom openings. A neoprene seal confined on three sides in the frame bottom compresses upon contact with the blunt bottom edge of the slide, providing a tight seal. When open, the flat plane across the bottom provides unobstructed high capacity flow and flushing action. The prefix "Q" indicates a flushbottom seal on your Waterman gate, i.e. - a "QS-3000-f" indicates a rectan- gular Sluice Gate with a flushbottom seal. e D .b:: r:�:94:n5 a..x9.o PROBLEM Vti V:Ja� PROBLEM INDUSTRIES. INC. �#s=m ,Gi01.111aAi QS-3000F tiY111 LoiILei ► SERIES 3000 SLUICE GATE i 8 �— GATE DIMENSIONS IN INCHES LL PARTS LIST No. Name 1 Standard Flangeback 1A Extended Flangeback 2 Cover 3 Thrust Nut 4 Wedge Assembly 5 Guide Rail 6 Bronze Seats (Optional) 7 Self -Contained Frame w/Lift (Optional) 8 Non -Rising Stem (Optional) NOTES: 1�. SC SERIES WITH CIRCULAR OPENING SHOWN; S SERIES HAS SQUARE OPENING Q OPTIONAL ITEMS 3 RECOMMENDED CLEARANCE TO ALLOW INSTALLATION OF ANCHOR BOLTS. 4. GEARED, CRANK TYPE LIFTS REQUIRED ON 54" AND LARGER GATES. 50 IF GROUT PAD MOUNTING IS USED, ADD GROUT THICKNESSTO DIMENSION. GATE SIZE A B C D E F H J K L M P LL PP 12 X 12 19 91/2 18 29 31/2 6'/2 30 41/A 15 8 5/8 5 11 8 14 X 14 203/4 103/8 21 33 11/2 8 34 41/4 15 71/2 5/8 41/2 101/2 7Y2 15 X 15 203/4 103/8 21 331/2 1'/2 8 34 41/4 15 71/2 5/8 4Y4 101/2 7'/2 16 X 16 231/4 11 % 21 35 2 8'/2 36 4Y4 15 8 3/4 51/4 11112 8'/z 18 X 18 24 12 22 38 6Y4 91/2 40 6 18 81/2 1/4 5'/z 12 9 20 X 20 261/4 133/a 29 42 1112 12 44 6 18 81/2 3/4 5112 12 9'/4 21 X 21 263/4 133/s 29 421/2 7Y2 12 44 6 18 81/2 3/4 51/2 12 9Y4 24 X 24 30 16 32 47 9 121/2 48 6 24 9 3/4 51/4 123/4 91/2 30 X 30 38 19 37 56 53/ 161/2 58 6 24 10 7/8 6 14 10 36 X 36 44 22 42 65 7 20 67 6 30 10 7/a 6'/4 141/z 10'/2 42 X 42 501/4 25'/a 453/4 74 8 23 76 NA NA 11112 1 7 151/2 11 48 X 48 57 281/2 471/4 83 5'/2 26 85 NA NA 12 1 73/4 16 11Y2 54 X 54 621/2 31'/4 1 64 93 15 291/2 95 NA NA 12/2 1 7Y2 161/2 11 '12 60 X 60 69 341/2 701/2 1 102 1 171/4 32 1 104 1 NA I NA 121/2 11/4 7 161/2 11 66 X 66 82 41 83 112 21 35 116 NA NA 131/2 1112 8Yz 17Yz 12Yz 72 X 72 81 40Yz 83 120 21 38 124 NA NA 13 1Yz 8 17 12 mEk�m= INDUSTRIES. INC 0 �- -' 7 TYPICAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR WATERMAN MODEL S-3000 SLUICE GATE The sluice gates shall be Waterman Model S-3000 or approved equal. General The gates shall be self-contained with yoke and bench stand operators; self-contained with either non -rising stem extension (NRE) or rising stem extensions (RSE); or gates with minimum height frames and separate stem guides and operators, in accordance with requirements of these specifications. Grooves shall be cast on the vertical sides of the cover to match guide angles. The cover shall have horizontal and vertical stiffening ribs to withstand a maximum seating head of 50 feet or specific gate design and configuration shall be noted in gate schedule or as shown on plans. Frame and Cover The frame and cover (slide) shall be cast iron with machined seating faces. The frame shall be flatback, spigot back, or flangeback configuration as specified. Grooves shall be cast on the vertical sides of the cover to match guide angles. The cover shall have horizontal and vertical stiffening ribs to withstand a maximum seating head of 50 feet or unseating head from 5 to 20 feet. For unseating head conditions greater than 5 feet, gates 24 inches wide or wider shall have adjustable bronze top and bottom wedges. The guide rails and head rails shall be minimum '/-inch thick galvanized steel, designed and built to withstand the total thrust of the gate slide due to water pressure and wedge action. There shall be adjustable cast ductile iron wedges located along side of gate as required to insure proper sealing. The wedges, located on the cover shall be integrally cast with the cover. The frame wedges shall be attached to the guide rails with two bolts. The wedges shall have smooth bearing surfaces and shall be adjustable to insure effective contact between gate seating surfaces. Flushbottom Closure When a flushbottom closure in specified, a resilient seal shall be attached to the frame so that it is flush with the invert. It shall be supported by a cast iron bracket which shall be bolted to machined pads provided on the frame. The seal shall be held in place by a stainless steel bar which shall be bolted through the seal to the bracket with stainless steel fasteners. The cover (slide) shall be shortened and provided with a smooth, rounded surface along the bottom to depress the seal. When unseating heads are to be acting on a flushbottom gate, top wedges shall be added, but bottom wedges will not be required. Sealing pressure shall be varied by adjusting side and top wedges. Stem The stems shall be cold finished steel of suitable length and ample strength for the intended service. The stem diameter shall be capable of withstanding twice the rated out put of the operator at 40 pound pull, and shall be supported such that the I/r ratio for the unsupported part of the stem shall not exceed 200. When a rising stem extension is used, the stem extension shall be supported such that a rigid installation shall be provided. Stem guides shall be spaced so that the I/r ratio of the stem does not exceed 200. Operators Manual operated lifting mechanisms shall be indicated on the plan drawings or specified in the gate schedule. Handwheel type lifts shall have threaded bronze lift nut to match stem. Threads shall be machine cut, acme type. An arrow shall be cast on the handwheel to indicate the direction of rotation to open the gate. A maximum effort of 40 pounds shall be required top operate the gate after it is unseated, based on the maximum specified operating head. Materials Frame, Cover (Slide), Handwheel - Cast Iron - ASTM A-126; Class B Rails and Yoke - Galvanized Structural Steel - ASTM A-36, Galvanized per ASTM-A-123 o INDUSTRIES, INC. G Stem - Leaded Cold Rolled Steel - CF Steel ASTM A-108 Gr. 121-14 Assembly Hardware and Fasteners - Galvanized per ASTM A-153 Paint - Manufacturer's Standard or as specified. Optional Items Include: Bronze Seating Faces Type 304 or 316 Stainless Steel Rails and Yokes Stainless Steel (Type 304 or 316) or Brass Stems Stainless Steel Assembly Hardware Structural Steel pipe (w/cast iron brackets) NRE & RSE Stem Extensions Total Galvanizing per ASTM-A-123 (Frame, Cover, Rails, Lift, Etc.) Special Paint Finish; Coal Tar Epoxy, Polyamide Epoxy, Etc. 1!1r1r, Lr�#(! TYPE 1 HANDWHEEL OPERATOR OR PARTS LIST No. Name 1 Lift Nut 2 Lift Collar 3 Handwheel 4 Set Screw 5 Thrust Bearing TYPICAL SPECIFICATION Type 1 Handwheel Operators shall have a cast bronze lift nut machined to accurately mate with the operating stem. Lift nut housing shall be machined to receive the lift nut and provide a smooth surface on which to take the thrust developed by the handwheel. The hand - wheel shall be marked with direction of opening and shall be of such diameter that handwheel pull shall not exceed 40 lb. on the rim. Handwheels shall be removable and shall be cast iron or fabricated steel. Protective stem covers may be mounted when re- quired by the specifications. i Benchstand Model M TYPE 1 HANDWHEEL OPERATOR j-A DIA. TYPE 1 DIMENSIONS in inches TYPE LIFT STEM DIA. A B C D E F G 1 S 7/8 10 & 12 33/4 11/4 1/2 23/4 25/32 51/2 1 M 1 12 & 15 41/4 11/2 1/2 31/2 21/2 67 1 L 11/8 15 & 18 5 11/2 5/8 33/4 23/4 7 1 X L 1 1/2 & 2 18, 24 ,& 30 6 11/4 3/4 5 31/2 9 HANDWHEEL LIFT CAPACITIES STEM DIAMETER LIFT PULL TORQUE Ibs. (ft-Ibs.) 1 1'A 11/4 11/2 2 25 10.4 715 1 S-10 40 16.7 1150 25 12.5 880 1 S-12 40 20 1410 1 M-12 25 12.5 770 40 20 1230 1 M-15 25 15.6 960 40 25 1535 25 15.6 940 IL-15 40 25 1510 25 18.7 1125 1 L-18 40 30 1800 25 18.7 1040 910 780 1 XL-18 40 30 1670 1450 1250 1XL-24 25 25 1375 1260 1210 1040 40 40 2200 2020 1930 1665 25 31.2 1720 1580 1510 1300 1XL-3C 40 50 2750 2530 2410 2080 40/25 = 1.6 25/40 = .625 ft� . M g =INDUSTRIES.INC TYPE 1 HANDWHEEL OPERATOR b-1/lb 7AA 35-9/16 29-1/2 13.25 � 1-3/B CAS1 J 4.75 12 t 4.75 �r 3i 4.75 J 4.75 TYPE 1 LIFT Cast Iron Pedestal 4-3/4 TYPE 1 LIFT Fabricated Steel Pedestal 6-9/L-F--n 36-3/16 14-5/4 MAX TYPE 1 LIFT Fabricated Offset Pedestal 35-9/lb 3/4 1-3/4 1-3/4 4 4 7 W� O h O) N 3 " ° ""8" 12 ' MAX) C) c> - > v (n n n l N _ .� • In O -a N W { p fn CD O » ' O (D { 4 co r fit - 1 y � 2"-0 MIN n�i 28" MAX 0 0 (D jj WLnD d 1 ° o !. 16" MAX (n(no ° D N 4"" MIN ool p Q ax (D `N �.: Zz7---_—_—_---_—_—_---_---- C)a •• O • T7 TO Q \ D 1 -iN 7 7 (D / - 7 \ 770 l O � as o ir 11m 00 v 7 7 (D 0 p l T. �' /' O O O 1 1 I 0 m N N O (!� -n 2 C 0 (n (D U n -1z O W a 1 7 '1 { - p (� 1 �1 (D 1 p -h (D 'a 0 7 + 37 l OiNO 0 �p< N (A-1Ol + Q 00ul (n z- 7 (D OOK OO + .-..--. O _. ZZ07 O - - + l O or 7 Q Q 0 UI DD O"00 N 10 nT+ O. or VI In O Q7 N { 0 30 m -1� N (Dl 7Ci a uo Q (n 'a x O' + 0 00 Q �c (n (n 0 -• 7 7 in (D 0 1 7 /aD -1 j 00 0(D 7Q+ _ CD (D OOF (D (D < <c ao zr:+ 'a 7 n n +v Q Q. o o V O m (D + m (D - 00m ran N N 7 + +(p j O m N 0 0 0 (n a W N •-• O a m z m N -• 7 1,fi1 O O -• a O W -9 --1 O D m (n O. + -O (n a O S (n 0-0 Q. j m 7•((DD 3000 �(n0a m tOM(D + a �N •-•Qa Q 7Q 3 m x0 V1+1 7 �0 070(D O (DO C-•+7 uN +(D00 1 -l+ + to 3(n m m+ OV 7- p07 ID Q. + Qm 1. 7(nOQ O + -• O O Q. 01 In O' Q. (D 0 D D� N :� 'n3 Ln (n Ov O 0 �C no. + Q O -. _,m Q(D 7 7 (n -h 7 O + (n (n (!) N y 7 1 `O + :O 0 1 0 :(n - (D (D -• j a Z 40 3£ 03(D-• 7 m -1(D �0 Q 7 -(+3_O Q -n'O (n 7C(nm v N Q7 -4, m CIS £ O Q• 7 ;aJ O I� �a70 0 N�no<< (D+ O£00 •(Q 03 ro ON 70-•Om m£+Q. -13m + -1 (D 77- —m 0'E. ON O- 7 m0 -77 �1 N 0 -O0� •U • OD 0 cV) u( 7 :o"+ ai i > 7 Q. 30 (1 + 0 (D 7 Q m (n - -• O (n - N m coo 3 0 :(n fD = { 7 0 LA N�(D (n (D 6t NT+ Na�07 -+ 00 �a +17 p O 1N(D0 m 77 ig D 6n < y r Ana N Q. ID mO m00W 10AmQ0 0' noa m �v�i�o .� O a� Z 7 l o x- o :- 0r U z 10 m O 7 O- C - -0 • i, + V 7 Z }.r N m I L# PIPE COVER FLOORSTAND OPERATING STEM STEM COUPLING STEM GUIDE GATE GUIDE TOP WEDGE SIDE WEDGE - THRUST NUT DISC BOTTOM WEDGE �i U=i=1 R0 OONEY HUNT )R BOLT 'HIMBLE FRAME ,PENING INVERT UNIVERSAL FRAME SEAT GUIDE IL FACING IDE R®®NEY HUNT The selfcontained gate differs from other gates in that it absorbs the operating load created during opening and closing. This is accomplished through the use of a yoke, a supporting member mounted on the top of the extended guides. The thrust required to operate the gate is transmitted by the yoke and guides directly to the gate. In the conventional gate installation the load is absorbed by the floor or structure above the gate. A self-contained gate has the same general features as a conventional gate. Its cast iron frame, disc and guides are identical except that the guides are extended to provide clearance for the sliding member in the open position. A cast iron or structural steel yoke is mounted on machined pads at the top of the guides. Opening thrusts are transferred through the yoke and guides to the gate. This arrangement eliminates the transmission of operating loads to the floor above. R0 ODNEY HUNT All Rodney Hunt sluice gates are available as self-contained gates with yokes and with rising or non -rising stems. The self-contained gate is useful where space above the gate installation, or the absence of structural supports, limits the use of a separate operating floorstand orbenchstand. Self-contained gates can be furnished with non -rising stems where there is inadequate clearance above the gate for a rising stem. Because the non - rising stem may be in the medium, it cannot be cleaned and lubricated and excessive wear of the thrust nut may result. For that reason, non -rising stems should be used onlywhen there is no alternative. Installation Variations This is a Rodney Hunt sluice gate with flush - bottom closure and side and top wedges. It is mounted on a type "F" wall thimble, the most widely used. Note that the hand -wheel operated floor -stand is mounted on a machined wall bracket. In this situation, a grout pad under the floor -stand is not necessary for true alignment. RODNEY H1JNT This 16" diameter gate, mounted on a flanged pipe extending from the wall, is a flange frame, side wedge, self-contained sluice gate using a nnn-ri-inn -tam A T-hnndla wranrh annnninn Waterman Industries Products Section Page I of I P� �YCTS SECTION LIFTS, STEMS & ACCESSORIES Type 3ED-12:1 Geared Operator • Manufactured from 3EN-4:1 Lift with a 3:1 Outboard Housing • Two -Speed Design Offers 12:1 and 4:1 Ratios I'Ac-n at`iteader To view PDF's downloac Adobe Acrobat 3ED-12:1 WA-ERNIAN INDUS-R ES. INC. P0. 80M 458. EXElER 4A8322' TO-L FREE. (SOC:331-0878 http://www.watermanusa.com/Overview.asp?nProductID=92 04/22/2003 Spawning Channel Excavation Quantities SWP 27-3046 Estimate taken from USACE plans rec'd 03 Dec 2003 Depth of Cut Bottom Width Top Width Volume Volume STA (ft) (ft) (ft) (cf) (cy) 0+00 0.0 12 0 - - 0+50 8.5 12 40 3,400 125.9 1+00 7.5 12 39 10,300 381.5 1+50 6.5 12 55 10,325 382.4 2+00 5.0 12 33 8,050 298.1 2+50 3.0 12 38 4,750 175.9 3+00 6.0 12 35 5,456 202.1 3+50 7.0 12 52 9,019 334.0 4+00 7.0 12 38 9,975 369.4 4+50 8.0 12 40 9,563 354.2 5+00 8.0 12 45 10,900 403.7 5+50 8.0 12 50 11,900 440.7 6+00 8.0 12 44 11,800 437.0 6+50 7.5 12 65 12,884 477.2 7+00 8.5 12 43 13,200 488.9 7+50 12.5 12 64 17,194 636.8 8+00 8.0 12 40 16,400 607.4 8+50 10.0 12 50 12,825 475.0 9+00 12.0 12 56 17,875 662.0 total 195,816 7252 CG I -&' �00 -4-00 s- o)- ►11,W06 35500 � __ G �_ J .1 �� V \� 0 w J Q U Cn O w (n U) O af Z � Q ® Y C..7 Z ( (n z o O `` - o uj W Wm � N N Nw >> > Ld % J M N Uw _ O � "7—� J Q p N ~ z z w New W¢ d m 11J W 1 LLJ LLJ� LLI w Z W ZOO � N J J cr 0 � o oo w� 2 ki wW U c� W z Q 'w a p� �O� W CL U \ �W z U j FO N 0 am0 U J w OJ W J ~ W li V) ¢ 0 } w �W W 41 iF- IZp� 11J O m� Z m m J p ¢ W ¢ 2 z _ No ow ro pLLj ro n W d' U� Y� Np �m En LLJN r LLI d N W ofW d a' � J z of Q N U) z¢ w En N OJ I p OU ¢ U O N J - ILO Q w O U _ 3 NT N (y�j l+1 wo a W 0 � W m W W 0 Z ¢UU))a0 } a-w U - O � z OUj cV ri a Sri Y O O () W W U p W O ix z O J LU W O Z w Z a.O p m 0 0 w S p OJ z d U W =Uz H U �i¢w W U)>- af .�. YO w N ¢ (YjV w w Wa M x U _ QO� UN� QW. �vWi�p ¢ a e z �o U-) a Ocnoz Z¢ H¢ U m O U N xui J m O M 7 n e 1� MLO Q w co Q I N n- TN 1 N r-- _— ")� (n O � W N M u) CD Z � ¢ ri TT Y 0� M •- O J U 5; x W W. m 04 .i W z (Wn L. N 00^ Q I x d 0- \ xw NU �O M�0 Uw W x - n m M N .. x �x0j i0 OO N U p p ^ 00 pJ LQr 7O• p O� ~ Z x x a V °0 xx � \x iJC)uNx n x M x \ 3 r) u'i anj O d WM v \_� I in ex \ i a JJW m �+ a L.L 1 N x M � m M \ `d a W �Ja I M a¢ a0 U N Z a = O co ai J Q W N LJ o O �n w p a _ o O o zo in N K) W Z wo wo s w _ 0 p a. �O m Q w O�(p �m¢icO Q H W H 9 M M d O0 uj M ~mJ H¢ ¢ p22 1 a)J UU M (n .� z w3¢¢ UW) 't � N x W W M From: Christian Munter To: NWS, Naher, Patrick W Date: 4/17/03 9:54AM Subject: RE: Spawning Channel Replacement Project Pat, Here's a detail for a gate I thought we could include for now. Chris Christian D. Munter, P.E. Surface Water Utility City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way - 5th Floor Renton WA 98055 Phone: 425-430-7205 Fax: 425-430-7241 cmunter@ci.renton.wa.us W mm� x N '�?m 'O nn�tOl DDT Lo w SSo ` rm� o mD1U -uOom� AO<� 0 1 m W Rrp D m v J a -jm-1 W v o = m Omani O m w N Z O �A--1 0 m o m N o T(n 0 r 1 N m N _ CAD 0D O { O I— r'8 C) D O p W I m \ (' re rc� m v m M x° m u I P3rre � -Dimr� mN D e I \ \ A I m W m m D T W x x d z C. C�O -CA °'y`C n O o x n�c�i rA x Co W v O p O N - o O O _C= x x x �I m < -0 mnv Nrx A mu)O Nx W �_ �i Va x m _r x �C! 0 C a x xN N D OC �m N m CO O ' m O _ NND 00 .Zl m x A fu0 r _ :m O N N a m W O _ N N in 70-0 D w m m x O -' z0� O p ra v N z g' rm N O > p 0 ; " m DAD N m w m m r<��rD - O N r r m f �i L7 { N 0 z 2 O 2 A m O ZOD m Z rZ O D D o O m 0 Zm O mRir z v m mzmo O v p O X N ? W N C O C Z A 0 A 0 — zm -DND O �D <Ap OX O;o 0 -0 N 2 r m z Or m� vD m m vl N moi m m.'O my �:il m -� aN m- N� �D .Zin c0 D 1_�=vOi rnD pm I mm in O r mm A z p N p D z fTl N ZmrC> O� AX mm _ Nm� �N Im mz pr m N � O z N _ Oro m0 2 m N C N o 2 z —_ � O v R. D O r � z Mzn m zF "3 iO fTl Svc � �m m m m + I j rn m r!'� m -r m � (n r S D z r j m �r m O(/) Ao p o � D boy o A� m z D p C) mmr� m op o r D _i fmC 2 Vc m m W< ONE z m K Z m m 0Fri >rm N z N z D N m — < C umiNO A 0 m tr- O ® N W v C com r A x rn N D G z (n �jI o rz m � n D r— Fri From: John Slaney To: Terrence Flatley Date: 4/11/03 7:49AM Subject: Metal Fabricators Here are a couple of names: 1. B & C Welding and Repairs / contact person would be Bob or Pam 3201 B St. S.E. Auburn, Wa. 98002 235-351-6805 This company fabricated the light poles for the beach. 2. Seidelhuber Iron and Bronze Works contact person Terry Seaman 8009 7th. Ave. So. Seattle, Wa. 98108 206-767-4321 This company did all the metal works at Coulon, including the metal works on the wooden bench's for the play ground and rest of the park. They both do good work. B & C seems to be cheaper and takes less time. VROJNET > DrChecks Page 1 of 17 Comment Report: All Comments For the Review & Comment phase of project NWS Cedar River Mitigation (sorted by Discipline , ID) Displaying 72 comments. Id Discipline DocType Spec Sheet Detail 580107 Civil Plans n/a C-3 n/a Need a typical section through the channel to show the typical bank configuration (this may already be shown on sheet L-1?). (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis usace.arm_ y.mil 206-764-6922. Revised 02-Jun-04. ) 1-0 Evaluation For Information Only L-1 is typical detail. Changed title of detail to "Typical Stream Channel Section" (01-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher@usace.arm)t.mil 206-764-6195) 1-1 Backcheck Recommendation Close Comment Closed without comment. (13-Jul-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis(@_usace.army.mil 206-764- 6922). 0 Current Comment Status: Comment Closed 580109 1 Civil Plans n/a C-3 n/a Suggest labeling the dotted line at the edge of the channel (maybe as the excavation limit?) (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Moved "top of bank" callout to more clearly identify that dashed line symbolizes top of bank. (01-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher@usace.army.mil 206-764-6195) 1-1 Backcheck Recommendation Close Comment Closed without comment. (13-Jul-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764- 6922). Current Comment Status: Comment Closed 771 580112 Civil Plans n/a C-3 and C-4 n/a Recommend showing the extent of the various areas of riprap on the plan view drawings (in addition to stating its extent by station on the detail views on C-6, C-7, & C-10). (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Called out extent of riprap at culvert outlet, dendrite, and bend in channel near outlet. (02- Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher@usace.army.mil 206-764-6195) 1-1 Backcheck Recommendation Close Comment Closed without comment. (13-Jul-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis(cb-usace.army. mi1 206-764- 6922). Current Comment Status: Comment Closed 580113 Civil Plans n/a C-4 n/a For dendrite, add "(see Plate C-7 for details)" to label. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army._mil 206-764-6922. ) 1-1 Evaluation Concurred Change made (01-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher(CDusace.army. mi1 206-764-6195) 1-1 Backcheck Recommendation Close Comment Closed without comment. (13-Jul-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis(6-usace.army.mil 206-764- 6922). 0 Current Comment Status: Comment Closed https://65.204.17.188/proj net/drehecks/version 1 /index.cfm?WORKFLOW=ReviewReport... 07/ 16/2004 PROJNET > DrChecks Page 2 of 17 580116 Civil Plans I n/a n/a Suggest adding a note explaining the purpose of the dendrite (as a spillway to fill channel before water crests intake structure) to distinguish it from the alcoves. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usac_e.army.mil 206-764-6922. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Added note 7 to plate C-4: "Dendrite is inteded to to serve as a spillway channel to allow for gradual filling of spawning channel in case of flooding of Cedar River" (01-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick. W.Naher@usace.army. mi1 206-764-6195) 1-1 Backcheck Recommendation Close Comment Closed without comment. (13-Jul-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis a�usace.army. mi1206-764- 6922). 0 Current Comment Status: Comment Closed 580130 1 Civil Plans n/a C-6 n/a Need to specify the finish slope (or a range of slopes) of the surface of the buried riprap section. The drawings indicates that it would be somewh,pSteeper than the 2:1 slope of the buried riprap. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace. rmy.mil 206-764-6922. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Added callout specifyi 2HAV slope (01-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher_@usa '.army.mil206-764-6195) 1-1 Backcheck Recommendation Close Comment Closed without comment. (13-Jul-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis(CD-usace.army.mil 206-764- 6922). Current Comment Status: Comment Closed 580137I Civil JI Plans n/a C-6 buried riprap section Specify minimum buried depth of riprap in relation to the finish slope (it looks like the maximum depth will be 12 feet). (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. Revised 02- Jun-04. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Modified callout to specify minimum cover of 2ft of native backfill over riprap (01-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher@usacearmy.mil 206-764-6195) 1-1 Backcheck Recommendation Close Comment Closed without comment. (13-Jul-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.arm_)t.mil 206-764- 6922). 0 Current Comment Status: Comment Closed 580140 Civil JE7 Plans n/a C-6 buried riprap section Specify that lower log has a rootwad and if the rootwad faces upstream or downstream (or if it doesn't make a difference). (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army. mi1206-764-6922. Revised 02-Jun-04. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Added note specifying Vconifer with rootwad facing u/s (02-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher(&usac rmyTmil206-764-6195) IF 1-1 Backcheck RecommeAdation Close Comment Closed without comment. (13-Jul-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764- 6922). 0 Current Comment Status: Comment Closed 580151 Civil j Plans n/a C-7 JIalcove section https:H65.204.17.188/projnet/drehecks/versionI /index.cfm?WORKFLOW=ReviewReport... 07/16/2004 PROJNET > DrChecks Page 3 of 17 Specify if rootwad faces upstream or downstream or if it doesn't make a difference. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Specified rootwads to ce u/s in alcove section (plate C-6) (02-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W._Naher@_u e.armImil206-764-6195) 1-1 Backcheck Recommendation Close Comment Closed without comment. (13-Jul-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis(CD, usace. army. mi 1206-764- 6922). 1 IlCurrent Comment Status: Comment Closed I 580152 Civil I Plans n/aI C-6 alcove section Specify if rootwad faces upstream or downstream or if it doesn't make a difference. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Modified note to specify rootwad facing u/s (02-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick. W. Nah_er@_usace. army. mi 1 206-764-6195) 1-1 Backcheck Recommendation Close Comment Closed without comment. (13-Jul-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army. mi1 206-764- 6922). 0 Current Comment Status: Comment Closed 580154 Civil Plans n/a C-7 dendrite profile State how long riprap extends along the left bank of the channel. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Specified riprap on left bank between sta. 7+00 and 7+70 (this also applies for riprap in channel bottom) (02-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher@_usace.army.mil 206-764-6195) 1-1 Backcheck Recommendation Close Comment Closed without comment. (13-Jul-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764- 6922). 0 Current Comment Status: Comment Closed 580156 Civil Plans n/a C-7 dendrite profile Is the surface of the riprap on the right side of the drawing really intended to be above grade of riverbank? (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Modified dendrite detail on plate C-7 to show riprap terminating below top of existing bank. (02-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher-Patrick.W.Naher@usace.army.mil 206-764-6195) 1-1 Backcheck Recommendation Close Comment Section now doesn't show existing ground surface. Probably not a big deal, but may be important to show if it will require substantial excavation. (13-Jul-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@us .arm .mil206-764-6922). 1 IlCurrent Comment Status: Comment Closed I 580162I Civil I Plans I n/a I C-3 & C-4 n/a Show LWD locations on the plan views. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis @ usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. ) 1-0 Evaluation Non -concurred Can use schedule to show locations (07-Jul-04 by Zachary Corum zachary.p.corum usace.army.mil206-764-6581) https://65.204.17.188/projnet/drehecks/version 1 /index. cfm?WORKFL OW=ReviewReport... 07/16/2004 PROJNET > DrChecks Page 4 of 17 1-1 Backcheck Recommendation Close Comment O.K. with revisions on C-9 that put LWD in locations that will not interfere with other project elements. (13-Jul-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922). I IlCurrent Comment Status: Comment Closed I 580164I Civil Plans n/aI C-9 Note 2 In the notes, LWD at Stn. 1+60 is the same as Alcove #1; at Stn. 2+75 is very close to Alcove #2; at Stn. 5+80 is very close to Alcove #4; at Stn. 7+10 is very close to dendrite; at Stn. 9+40 is inside the culvert. Need to reconcile these positions to make them consistent with other design elements. (Submitted 02- Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Deleted structure at sta 9+40 and shifted other locations to avoid impacting alcoves and dendrite (02-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher@usace.army.mil 206-764-6195) 1-1 Backcheck Recommendation Close Comment Closed without comment. (13-Jul-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis(CD-usace.army.mil 206-764- 6922). 0 Current Comment Status: Comment Closed 580167 Civil Plans n/a L-11 n/a Label on "Typical Stream Channel Planting Section" for right bank says bank slope will vary from 2:1 to 3:1, but Note 4 says channel side slopes will be 3:1. Need to reconcile. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. Revised 02-Jun-04. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Deleted note 4; intent is for slope to vary from 2:1 to 3:1 (01-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher@usace.army.mil 206-764-6195) 1-1 Backcheck Recommendation Close Comment Closed without comment. (13-Jul-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@_usace._army.mil 206-764- 6922). 0 Current Comment Status: Comment Closed 58016811 Civil Plans I n/a L-11 n/a Change "newely" to "newly" in Zone 2 and Zone 3 definitions (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.m 206-764-6922. Revised 02-Jun-04. ) 1-1 Evaluation Concurred Change made (01-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher@usace.army.mil 206-764-6195) 1-1 Backcheck Recommendation Close Comment Closed without comment. (13-Jul-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764- 6922). 0 Current Comment Status: Comment Closed 585315 11 Civil Plans n/a C-3 Notes Please add to Note 5.NEW GATE ON SPU ROW WILL REPLACE EXISTING GATE IN SAME LOCATION. 16 FT SWING GATE WILL BE PROVIDED BY SPU FOR THIS LOCATION FROM LAKE YOUNGS MAINTENANCE FACILITY, CONTACT TONY WHITE AT ANTHONY.WHITE@SEATTLE.GOV. ALSO PROVIDE 3 ECOLOGY BLOCKS AND BERMING ON EACH SIDE OF GATE TO PREVENT VEHICLE ENTRY. REMOVE EXISTING BOLLARDS EXCEPT FOR ONE TO ALLOW 18 INCH PEDESTRIAN ENTRY WAY. (Submitted 08-Jun-04 by Christian Munter cmunter@ci.renton.wa.us 425-430-7205. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Added language to note 5 on plate C-3 (01-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher@usace.army.mil 206-764-6195) Backcheck not conducted https://65.204.17.188/projnet/drehecks/version 1 /index.cfm?WORKFLOW=ReviewReport... 07/16/2004 PROJNET > DrChecks Page 5 of 17 ICurrent Comment Status: Comment Open 585316 Civil Plans n/a C-4 Notes On Note 5., Should we specify smooth -wall CPEP? (Submitted 08-Jun-04 by Christian Munter cmunter@_ci.renton.wa.us425-430-7205. ) 1-0 Evaluation Check and Resolve Did we agree to change this? (07-Jul-04 by Zachary Corum zachary.p.cor_um@usace.army_mil 206-764-6581) Backcheck not conducted Current Comment Status: Comment Open 585318I Civil 11 Pla I C-6 A/C-3 The Buried Riprap Section detail wasn't changed to reflect the new alignment. Since the channel doesn't have the dramatic bends, is the heavily armored riprap section required between station 0+20 and 1+20? (Submitted 08-Jun-04 by Christian Munter cmunter@ci.renton.wa.us 425-430-7205. ) 1-0 Evaluation For Information Only Buried riprap section's primary purpose is to protect utilities along access road in case of major, catastrophic flooding w/ secondary purpose being protection/stabilization of spawning channel bank at bend. Though sweep of channel in this location is now less dramatic, we prefer to retain the riprap section from the original design to ensure adequate protection of existing utilities. (02-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick. W.Naher@usace._army. _mi1 206-764-6195) Backcheck not conducted E=lCurrent Comment Status: Comment Open 585320 Civil J Plans n/a C-7 B/C-4 On the Dendrite Profile detail, should the riprap layer on the dendrite section be extended into the channel section? (Submitted 08-Jun-04 by Christian Munter cmunte_r@ci.renton.wa.us 425-430-7205. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Extended riprap layer across channel bottom (02-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W. Naher(@usace.army.mil 206-764-6195) Backcheck not conducted IlCurrent Comment Status: Comment Open 585322I Civil IPlans n/a I C-7 D/C-4 On the Channel Section at CPEP Culvert Outlet detail, please label the spawning gravel depth at 18". (Submitted 08-Jun-04 by Christian Munter cmunter@ci.renton.wa.us 425-430-7205. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Specified depth of spawning gravel as 18" (02-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W. Naher(o)usace.army_mil 206-764-6195) Backcheck not conducted IlCurrent Comment Status: Comment Open 585324 I Civil I Plans n/a C-10 C The steel access ladder should be coated or the material changed to prevent rusting.Please lavel the invert of the box culvert at the inlet. (Submitted 08-Jun-04 by Christian Munter cmunter@ci.rento_n.wa.us 425-430-7205. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Added note to require steel used in access ladder construction to be stainless or galvanized to resist corrosion. Leveled invert of box culvert with vault bottom. (02-Jul-04 by https://65.204.17.188/projnet/drehecks/version 1 /index.cfm?WORKFLOW=ReviewReport... 07/16/2004 PROJNET > DrChecks Page 6 of 17 �J Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher@usace.army.mil 206-764-6195) Backcheck not conducted 1 11Current Comment Status: Comment Open 585327I Civil Plans n/a C-11 P\ Please relocate the top three anchor bolts on the trash rack to allow placement of a fyke net between the trash rack and the culvert. Remove the center bolt and move the outside two to the corners. (Submitted 08-Jun-04 by Christian Munter cmunter@ci.renton.wa.us 425-430-7205. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Change made. Also modified note 3 on plate C-11 to specify spacing of 1.5" between culvert and trashrack. (06-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher@usace.army.mil 206-764- 6195) Backcheck not conducted Current Comment Status: Comment Open 587431I Civil IPlans n/a C-12 E/a Vault Ladder Detail: If the 4 FT Max supposed to indicate that the supports should be 4' on center? If so make the detail clear. (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough@usace.army.mil 206-764-3549. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Changed dimension to indicate ladder supports to be 4' max OC (02-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick. W. Naher@usace.arm)t. mil 206-764-6195) Backcheck not conducted Current Comment Status: Comment Open 587432 Civil Plans n/a C-7 I'Va Maintenance Road Section: Native Subgrade should point to the interface between existing and the fill. (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.goughCcDusace.army.mij 206-764-3549. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Modified callout to point to bottom of fill (02-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naorr(cDusace.army.mil 206-764-6195) Backcheck not conducted Current Comment Status: Comment Open 587433 IF Civil 11 Plans n/a C-7 Cn/a Channel Section at CPEP: Any concern that flows coming from the culvert might move the spawing gravel away from the outlet? If the flows aren't that great then why is there Riprap on the side slopes? (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough I.m.g_ough@usace.army.mil 206-764-3549. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred` Revised detail B on C-10 and D on C-7 to clarify scour hole construction. Some erosion of spawning gravel is OK as this will "nourish" d/s section of spawning channel. (06-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher@usace.arm)t.rril 206-764-6195) Backcheck not conducted Current Comment Status: Comment Open 587434I Civil I Plan I C-3 n/a New gravel road does not tie into the existing gravel road. Provide portion of road connecting the two - make sure Real Estate is available to build this. (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m. ou h@usace.army.mil 206-764-3549. ) 7-71 https://65.204.17.188/projnet/drehecks/version 1 /index.cfm?WORKFLOW=ReviewReport... 07/16/2004 PROJNET > DrChecks Page 7 of 17 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Extended gravel access road t existing access road. Sponsor and PM indicate that Real Estate is available to do this. (02-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher(Pusace.army.mil 206-764-6195) Backcheck not conducted I IlCurrent Comment Status: Comment Open I 587435I Civil I Plans n/a I C-3 n/a Section A indicates it goes across the entire channel, but detail on C-6 does not. Provide the rest of the section. (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough ji11 I.m.gough@usace.army.mil 206-764-3549. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Deleted section A cut through channel and replaced w/ callout to refer to detail on C-6 for left bank detail in this area (0+20 to 1+20) (02-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher@usace.army.mil 206-764-6195) EBackch6o not conducted Current Comment Status: Comment Open 587715 Civil Plans n/a C-9 n/a Table shows where woody debris is located. Coordinate this with the Alcove detail because 1+60 and 2+75 are both located at alcoves. Also, ther is no 9+40 so you can't put woody debris there. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Jill Gough ill l.m.gou_gh@usace.army.mil 206-764-3549. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Deleted woody debris structure at 9+40 and shifted locations of other structures to avoid alcoves and dendrite. Same comment was made by E. Lewis (# 580164) (02-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher@usace.army.mil 206-764-6195) Backcheck not conducted 1 11 Current Comment Status: Comment Open 587731 Civil Plans n/a C-3 and C-4 Ci/a If scour holes are going to be included at locations where woody debris is installed (B/C-9) then show on channel layout and include grading. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough@usace.army.mil 206-764-3549.) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Could include a couple concentric elipses to represent constructed scour holes. Quantity of excavation shouldnt exceed 1 cu yd/ scour hole. (07-Jul-04 by Zachary Corum zachary.p.corum@usace.army.mil 206-764-6581) Backcheckd6t conducted 1 11 Current C-omment Status: Comment Open 587810I Civil Plans n/a c-7 In/a Better define the 15' measurement at the bottom of Section B. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough@usace,army.mil 206-764-3549. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Mdified detail to clarify dendrite configuration (02-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher usace.army.mi1206-764-6195) Backcheck not conducted IlCurrent Comment Status: Comment Open 1587961 11 Civil 11 Plans IIn/a II' Ili-7 1 https://65.204.17.18 8/proj net/drehecks/version 1 /index.cfm?WORKFLOW=ReviewReport... 07/ 16/2004 ,PROJNET > DrChecks Page 8 of 17 Maintenance Road Section. Use of excavated materials (sand and gravel from channel excavation) will be difficult to compact. Need to use crushed gravel for road section. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Gregory Segal gregory.l.segal@usace.army.mil 206-764-3712. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Changed requirement for access road to 0.5" minus crushed rock (6" layer) (09-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher(a usace.army. mil 206-764-6195) Backcheck not conducted IlCurrent Comment Status: Comment Open 587966I Civil IPlans n/a111:�-7 General comment. Define "spawning Gravel". No specifications and/or gradation is indicated. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Gregory Segal gregory.l.segal@us_ace.army.mil 206-764-3712. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Added spawning Ovel size in note on plate C-7 (12-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick. W. N_a_herO�usace. arm. mil 206-764-6195) Backcheck not conducted Current Comment Status: Comment Open 587971 Civil Plans n/a ��-7 General comment. The subgrade soils are very permeable. This channel section does not seem to be lined with any materials that will retain water. Clarify and correct. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Gregory Segal gregory.l.segal@usace.army.mil 206-764-3712. ) 1-0 Evaluation For Information Only Design team recognizes this potential; however, the spawning channel will most likely mimic the hydraulic conditions in the adjacent river (i.e. water will seep into the channel through the bottom and slopes to varying degrees as water level in Cedar River fluctuates). Water loss through subgrade in spawning channel is therefore not anticipated to be a problem. (02-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher@usace.army.mil 206-764-6195) Backcheck not conducted I IlCurrent Comment Status: Comment Open I 587979 Civil Plans n/a T-7 Verify "designer" of sheet. Correct accordingly. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Gregory Segal gregory.l.segal@usace.army.rril 206-764-3712. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred /` Changed designer from "Gilbrough" to "Naher" on plates C-6 & C-7 (01-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher@usace.army.mil 206-764-6195) Backcheck not conducted I IlCurrent Comment Status: Comment Open I 587984 Civil Plans n/a IC-8 Intake -Section. Add specification for "GOGRID". (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Gregory Segal gregory.l.segal@usa_ce.a_r_my _mil 206-7W712. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Added note callin r soil wraps to be reinforced with biodegradable coir fabric or 0 -J approved equal. (ul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher@usace.army.mil 206-764-6195) Backcheck not conducted I IlCurrent Comment Status: Comment Open I https://65.204.17.188/projnet/drehecks/version/ /index. cfm?WORKFL OW=ReviewReport... 07/16/2004 PROJNET > DrChecks Page 9 of 17 588021I Civil I Plans I n/a C-8 1/a Intake -Section and Intake Elevation. The section shows multiple 12" lifts of geogrid and the Elevation shows two 12" lifts (per note). Clarify and correct. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Gregory Segal gregory.i.segal@us-a-ce.armv.mil 206-764-3712. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurr Changed intake ction detail to reflect requirement for 2 lifts of vegetated geogrid (06-Jul- 04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher@usace.army.mil 206-764-6195) Backcheck not conducted Current Comment Status: Comment Open 588803 Civil I Planning Report n/a I n/a In/a Paragraph 5. 2nd sentence, river mile is missing. Correct. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Gregory Segal gregory.l.segal@usace.army.mil 206-764-3712. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred RMs are listed in paragraphs 4 and 5. Some are still missing, but we intend to add them. (13-Jul-04 by Christopher Pollock Christopher.E._Poll_ock@nws02.usace.army.mil 206-764-6947) Backcheck not conducted 1 11Current Comment Status: Comment Open 588805 1 Civil Planning Report n/a n/a n/a Paragraph 10. Photos are not included in the memo. Add photos. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Gregory Segal gregory.l.segal@usace.army. mi1 206-764-3712. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred The photos will be added before the document is submitted. (13-Jul-04 by Christopher Pollock Christopher. E.P-ollock@nws02.usace.army.mil 206-764-6947) IlCurrent Comment Status: Comment Open 588868I Civil I Planning Report n/a n/a Cn/a Paragraph 14 e. Rewrite sentence to conform grammatically. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Gregory Segal gregory.l.segal@usace.armymil 206-764-3712. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Unclear exactly what sentence, you are referring to, but the report has been seriously revised. (13-Jul-04 by Christopher Pollock Christopher.E.Pollock(c�nws02.usace.army.miI 206- 764-6947) Backcheck not conducted Current Comment Status: Comment Open 588871I Civil Planning Report n/a I n/a n/a Paragraph 15. Clarify is this project a levee rehab? Where is the levee? Clarify and correct as applicable. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Gregory Segal gregory.l.segal@usace.army.mil 206--764-3712. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Noel and I have begun a serious revision of the Project Information Report (PIR). I will furnish the revised report with the revised drawings. (13-Jul-04 by Christopher Pollock Christophe_r._E. Pol lock(cDnws02. usace. army. mil 206-764-6947) Backcheck not conducted —� Current Comment Status: Comment Open https://65.204.17.188/proj net/drehecks/version 1 /index. cfm?WORKFL OW=ReviewReport... 07/ 16/2004 PROJNET > DrChecks Page 10 of 17 589607 Civil 11 Plans I n/a C-3 LNotes The following should be added to the plan set so the contractor is aware of additional potential costs:See SPU Construction Access Plan for requirements for steel plating and construction fencing to protect Renton and Seattle watermains.The DNR requires a performance bond in the amount of 125% of construction costs.For City of Renton insurance requirements, please call Chris Munter at 425-430- 7205.Please see the DOE's General Stormwater Permit for Construction Activity and Water Quality Certification and the WDFW HPA for temporary erosion and sediment control requirements. (Submitted 11-Jun-04 by Christian Munter cmunter@ci.renton.wa._us 425-430-7205. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Note added to plate C-1 (02-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher usace.army.mil 206-764- 6195) Backcheck not conducted 11Current Comment Status: Comment Open 580121I Environmental Plans n/a C-4 In/a 1 May want to consider re-routing the end of the gravel road further to the west, closer to the toe of the terrace) to avoid existing trees (disregard of t,r,,��s in this area are just as thick but aren't shown on the 206-764-6922. drawing). (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewisorvan.r.lewis@usace.armv._mil ) 1-0 Evaluation For Information Only Note 4 indicates that road may be shifted by Corps field personnel to avoid trees. Avoidance of trees is best done in the field since some of the trees may not be showing up in the plans. (01-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher@usace.army.mil 206-764-6195) 1-1 Backcheck Recommendation Close Comment Closed witho comment. (13-Ju1-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764- 6922). 0 Current Comment Status: Comment Closed 71 580142I Environmental Plans n/a C-6 Jalcove section Toppling the cottonwood against an existing tree might restrict downstream movement, but it probably won't prevent floating like the label states. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army. mi1 206-764-6922. Revised 02-Jun-04. ) 1-0 Evaluation For Information Only Since a lot of the tree will be out of water, flotation will be limited by the dead weight of the un-submerged portion of the tree that is bearing down on the rootball. If flotation occurs, the orientation of the rootball and tree are such that they would be pushed into the bank. Should the wood be floated up from its point of placement, the distance traveled is not likely to be great since the length of the tree and presence of branches will cause it to hang up on other obstructions in the channel and floodplain. (07-Jul-04 by Zachary Corum zachary. p.corum@usace.army, mil 206-764-6581) 1-1 Backcheck Recommendation Close Comment Closed without comment. (13-Jul-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army. mil 206-764- 6922). 0 Current Comment Status: Comment Closed 580146 Environmental Plans n/a C-6 lalcove plan view Are there suitable "toppling" trees at all alcove locations? If not, would trees be re -located from elsewhere? If there are multiple trees, will excess be removed, or all toppled into the channel? (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. Revised 02-Jun-04. ) 1-0 Evaluation For Information Only It is assumed that most but not all trees will be immediate to the alcove.. Some nearby trees may be stockpiled for placement at a later time in the alcove if a suitable tree is not available at time of alcove construction. (07-Jul-04 by Zachary Corum https://65.204.17.188/projnet/drehecks/version 1 /index.cfm?WORKFLOW=ReviewReport... 07/16/2004 PROJNET > DrChecks Page 11 of 17 J zachary.p.corum(c-Dusace.army.mil206-764-6581) 16922). Backcheck Recommendation Close CommentClosed without comment. (13-Jul-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764- I IlCurrent Comment Status: Comment Closed 580155 Environmental —Plans n/a C-7 �1/a Consider planting willows through riprap at dendrite and downstream of culvert outlet. (Submitted 02- Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evanx.lewis usace.army.m_il 206-764-6922. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Added requirement to plant willows through riprap at dendrite and culvert outlet (02-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher@usace.army.mil 206-764-6195) 1-1 Backcheck Recommendation Close Comment Closed without comment. (13-Jul-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764- 6922). 1 11current Comment Status: Comment Closed 580160 Environmental Plans n/a C-9 1n/a Probably don't need the footer log to support the rootballs or prevent bank erosion, which isn't necessarily an undesirable thing in the vicinity of the LWD. Removing logs parallel to channel would also prevent chance of their flotation dislodging the LWD that will be buried into the bank. Plus, work to anchor the toe logs would be unnecessary, too. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. Revised 02-Jun-04. ) 1-0 Evaluation Non -concurred The footer log supports the slope that the rootballs are anchored into. All wood is anchored, either by tiebacks or the weight of the overlying soil. (07-Jul-04 by Zachary Corum zachary.p.corum9Ace.arm .mi1206-764-6581) 1-1 Backcheck Recommendation Close Comment Closed without comment. (13-Jul-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis usace.army.mil 206-764- 6922). 0 Current Comment Status: Comment Closed 580166 Environmental Plans n/a C-11 [n/a May want to add a note stating that the trashrack must meet NMFS screening criteria. (Submitted 02-Jun- 04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. Revised 02-Jun-04. ) 1-0 Evaluation Check and Resolve Did we need to do this? (07-Jul-04 by Zachary Corum zacharyp.corumo-usace.army.mil 206- 764-6581) 1-1 Backcheck Recommendation Close Comment Probably not a big deal since it is a trashrack rather than a water intake screen. (13-Jul-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis a usace. army. mil 206-764-6922). 0 Current Comment Status: Comment Closed 587424 Environmental J Planning Report n/a n/a [n/a 14b Statements: Paragraph discusses how salmon spawn in mid -September to mid -November, but construction seems to be taking place all the way to the end of December. Is there restrictions for construction at the tie in points? Didn't see anything on the drawings stating access restrictions. (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough@usace.arm)t.mil 206-764-3549. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Noel and I have begun a serious revision of the Project Information Report (PIR). I will furnish the revised report with the revised drawings. (13-Jul-04 by Christopher Pollock haps://65.204.17.188/projnet/drehecks/version 1 /index. cfm?WORKFL OW=ReviewReport... 07/16/2004 PROJNET > DrChecks Page 12 of 17 Christopher.E.Pollock@nws02.usace.army.mil 206-764-6947) Backcheck not conducted Current Comment Status: Comment Open 587427I Environmental11 Plan I C-8 and C-10 Cn/a Both drawings show and Intake Section, but they differ. If there is only one Intake Structure then combine details. If you leave them both make sure they are identifcal - see where soils hit the grade hits the top of the pipe - one right at the end of the pipe and the other 2 feet back. (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough a)usace.army.mil 206-764-3549. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Modified detail C on plate C-10 to reflect 2ft separation between end of culvert and toe of fill. Added note on C-10 to refer to C-8 for additional detail of box culvert intake. (09-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Na_her@usace.army.mil 206-764-6195) Backcheck not conducted Current Comment Status: Comment Open 580136 1 Hydraulics 11 Plans n/a C-6 buried riprap section Need to make sure that the logs won't float. Will the anchors hold for years to ensure that bank protection stays in place? (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis(cDusace.army.mil 206-764- 6922. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Logs are subject to b uyant force, esp. before wood is saturated. Drag force is nil due to small velocities. All wood in typical details has been computed to be stable provided anchoring is constructed per plans. (07-Jul-04 by Zachary Corum zacharyp.corum@usace.army.mil 206-764-6581) 1-1 Backcheck Recommendation Close Comment Closed without comment. (13-Jul-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.arm_y.mil 206-764- 6922). 1 11Current Comment Status: Comment Closed I 580145I Hydraulics Plans n/a C-6 alcove section Need to consider flotation of log at toe of bank, which will likely require an anchor or a larger diameter piece. Also, specify if rootwad faces upstream or downstream or if it doesn't make a difference. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Stability calcs show deadman tieback anchor or burial of portion of wood needed. Size of anchor and burial amount will be shown in plans. (07-Jul-04 by Zachary Corum zachary.p.corum@usace.army.mil 206-764-6581) 1-1 Backcheck Recommendation Close Comment Closed without comment. (13-Jul-04 by Evan Lewis evan. r. lewis(cb-usace. army. m i 1206-764- 6922). 0 Current Comment Status: Comment Closed 580157I Hydraulics Plans n/a C-7 dendrite profile Suggest burying a toe of riprap at the riverbank end of the dendrite "spillway" to guard against potential future riverbank erosion. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Good idea. (07-Jul-04 by Zachary Corum zachary.p.corum(-)-usace.army.mil 206-764-6581) 1-1 Backcheck Recommendation Close Comment Closed without comment. (13-Jul-04 by Evan Lewis eyan.r.lewis@usace.army. mi1 206-764- https://65.204.17.188/projnet/drehecks/versionI /index.cfm?WORKFLOW=ReviewReport... 07/ 16/2004 PROJNET > DrChecks Page 13 of 17 6922). I IlCurrent Comment Status: Comment Closed I 580158 Hydraulics Plans I n/a C-7 dendrite profile The height of the step from the "spillway" into the channel should be as short as possible and specified on the drawings. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Modified detail to cli'fify step dimension of approximately 2' (55.4 to 57.5) (02-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick. W.Naher@usace.arm rT i1 206-764-6195) 1-1 Backcheck Recommendation Close Comment Closed without comment. (13-Jul-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis -usace.army. mil 206-764- 6922). 0 Current Comment Status: Comment Closed 580159 Hydraulics Plans n/a C-7 CJendrite & culvert outlet Suggest minimizing use of riprap by using soil lifts and plantings to stabilize upper portion of bank on the sides of dendrite, on the left bank of the channel opposite of dendrite, and downstream of the culvert outlet. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Will review flood elevations and try to limit riprap to areas likely to experience erosive flows. (07-Jul-04 by Zachary Corum zacha�.p.corum usace.army.mil 206-764-6581) 1-1 Backcheck Recommendation Close Comment Closed without comment. (13-Jul-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis(CD-usace.army.mil 206-764- 6922). 1 II Current Comment Status: Comment Closed I 595582 Hydraulics =1 Plans and Specs n/a n/a In/a General comment. Overall, the 95% design drawings show channel configuration and features similar to the previously published Draft H&H DDR (Seattle District 2002). 1 expect the hydraulic function of the completed project will be as described in the DDR, and will perform to the standards described there. Key features in the design drawings related to hydraulic function (especially the intake structure) are as described in the DDR. This review did not include a detailed analysis of the hydraulic design, and I did not check the exact functioning of the inlet structure (e.g., analysis of inlet / outlet control over a range of discharges). However, the design includes features that should provide adequate flow control in the channel. (Submitted 16-Jun-04 by Daniel Katz Daniel.M.Katz@nws02.usace.army.m(l (206) 764-3271. Revised 16-Jun-04. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Ok (07-Jul-04 by Zachary Corum zacharyp.corum@u_sace.arm mil 206-764-6581) Backcheck not conducted Current Comment Status: Comment Open 595800 Hydraulics Plans n/a 17 �n/a Control of water level and velocity in the spawning channel. The spawning channel appears to have adequate measures that should allow hydraulic conditions to fall within design criteria. In addition, the H&H DDR performed a sensitivity analysis that demonstrated that if the assumed roughness of the channel was not correct, the conditions could still be adjusted to fall within the design range. In the unlikely event that actual conditions do not fall within design parameters (or if design parameters change), then it may be necessary to add downstream or intermediate control structures in the spawning channel (such as removeable stoplogs) to achieve desired flow conditions. However, these features are not recommended for addition to the design at this time. (Submitted 16-Jun-04 by Daniel Katz Daniel. M.Katz@nws02.usace.army.mi1 (206) 764-3271. Revised 16-Jun-04. ) https://65.204.17.188/projnet/drehecks/versionI /index. cfm?WORKFL OW=ReviewReport... 07/16/2004 PROJNET > DrChecks Page 14 of 17 6922). 0 Current Comment Status: Comment Closed 587428I Landscape Architecture I Plans I L-2 n/a Callout on plan states no planting above culvert. Does this just apply to the 25.5' of culvert? There is a long stretch of culvert from the vault to the channel with trees directly above it. (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough(ED-usace.army.mil 206-764-3549. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Modified callout to specify no planting of trees above culverts and vault. Deleted tree symbology above these structures. (02-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W. NahelDusace.army.mil206-764-6195) Backcheck not conducted 1 11Current Comment Status: Comment Open 587430I Landscape Architecture Plans I n/a I L-1 and L-2 [n/a Some of the existing trees appear to not be half toned any longer - maybe they got copied into the file. If the symbol which is typical for deciduous is to be for new trees then add to legend, if not all the trees should look halftoned. (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough(a-)-usace.armmy.mil 206-764- 3549. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Half -toned existing trees and deleted those trees that will be removed during construction. (02-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher@usace.army.mil 206-764-6195) Backcheck not conducted IlCurrent Comment Status: Comment Open 587695I Landscape Architecture I Plans I n/a L-1 1n/a Coordinate with Civil Sheets about the irrigation hook ups. There is no tie in shown on Civil sheets as you indicate by call out on plan. The topo does show some existing waterline information, but nothing stating where the contractor should hook up to. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough@usace.army.mil 206-764-3549. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Changed note to require KTR to tie temporary line into existing 6" water line adjacent to gravel access road. Exact tie in location to be coordinated with City of Renton through Corps field representative (02-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W._Naher@usace.army.mil 206- 764-6195) https://65.204.17.188/proinet/drehecks/version 1 /index.cfm?WORKFLOW=ReviewReport... 07/16/2004 •PROJNET > DrChecks Page 15 of 17 Backcheck not conducted 11 current Comment Status: Comment Open 587734 Landscape Architecture Plans In/a L-1 1n/a From the description of Zone 4, it doesn't appear that areas with alcoves and dendrites will have any Zone 4 planting as these locations because they fall outside of the 30' from centerline. If this is not correct then note needs to be re -phrased. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m_gou h usace_army. mil 206-764-3549.) It 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Modified note 4 to speci that limit line at alcoves and dendrites shall extend 10' beyond top of slope. (09-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.NaherCDusace.army_mil 206-764-6195) Backcheck not conducted Current Comment Status: Comment Open 587735 Landscape Architecture I Plans n/a L-1 1n/a Temp. Watering Notes: Is this the Contractors responsibility because the last note says it is the City of Renton. Clarify who is watering,what and for how long. Who is removing the irrigation? (Submitted 10- Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough@usace.army.mil 206-764-3549. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Clarified temp. watering notes to specify that KTR has to install temp. watering system and operate for 12 months post project completion. City of Renton will then take over watering duties for another 12 months and remove the temp. irrigation system. (02-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher@usace.army.mil 206-764-6195) Backcheck not conducted Current Comment Status: Comment Open 587744 Landscape Architecture Plans n/a 1-1 1n/a How does the Typical Stream Channel Planting Section A work with the Buried Riprap Section shown on C-6 that occurs from 0+20 to 1+20? Coordinate. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough@usace.army.mil 206-764-3549. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Added note to detail "A" indicating that this detail represents "typical" stream section and doesn't apply at alcoves and dendrite. Deleted "planting" from detail title. (02-Jul-04 by Patrick Naher Patrick.W.Naher@usace.army.mil 206-764-6195) Backcheck not conducted Current Comment Status: Comment Open 587262 Project Management Planning Report n/a n/a 1n/a Project Classification (Paragraph 5): First sentence needs correction. Possibly just change "consisting" to "consist". Add River Mile number in to the second sentence. (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough@usace.army.mil 206-764-3549. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Project classification is now section 2.a. River mile for the new channel is known, but still need to get RM for original location, which will be ready before we submit to HQ. (13-Jul-04 by Christopher Pollock Christopher.E.Pol1ock@nws02.usace.army.mil 206-764-6947) I I Backcheck not conducted Current Comment Status: Comment Open 587275 Project Management Planning Report n/a n/a 1n/a Previous Work (Paragraph 7): This sentence doesn't really explain "previous work". Provide information https://65.204.17.188/projnet/drehecks/version 1 /index. cfm?WORKFL OW=ReviewReport... 07/16/2004 •PROJNET > DrChecks Page 16 of 17 that is relevant to this paragraph. (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.goughCa)usace.ar ny mil 206-764- 3549. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred The report has been significantly revised, and uses a different numbering format. Section 2.e now explains previous work done on the project. (13-Jul-04 by Christopher Pollock Christopher.E.Pollock@nws02.usace.army.mil 206-764-6947) Backcheck not conducted IlCurrent Comment Status: Comment Open 587386 Project Management Planning Report n/a n/a [n/a Disaster Incidents (para 9): Capitalize "H" for highway 169. (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough@usace.army.mil 206-764-3549. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Done, but that sentence is in paragraph 7 now. (13-Jul-04 by Christopher Pollock Christopher. E.Pollocka nws02.usace.army.m l 206-764-6947) Backcheck not conducted IlCurrent Comment Status: Comment Open 587392 Project Management Planning I n/a In/a Disaster Incidents (para 9): Would have liked to seen the enclosure 1 photos. Provide photos for report. If there is only one enclosure then it is not labeled Enclosure 1. If more than one enclosure make sure to label them correctly. (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough@usace.army. mi1 206-764-3549. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred Noel and I have begun a serious revision of the Project Information Report (PIR). I will furnish the revised report with the revised drawings. Noel has the photos, and we intend to include them before we submit to HQ. (13-Jul-04 by Christopher Pollock Christopher. E. Pollock@nws02. usace.arm y. mil 206-764-6947) Backcheck not conducted Current Comment Status: Comment Open 587397 Project Management 11 Planning Report n/a n/a 1n/a Disaster Incidents (para 9): Start third sentence with "Water backed up from the blockage flooded ...". It seems a little more clear then additional water. (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough@usace.army.mil 206-764-3549. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred That whole section of the report has been revised, and is now paragraph 6. But the sentence has been rewritten according to comment. (13-Jul-04 by Christopher Pollock Christopher.E.Pollock@nws02.usace army.mil 206-764-6947) Backcheck not conducted Current Comment Status: Comment Open 587404 Project Management 11 Planning R I n/a 1n/a Disaster Incidents (para 9) and several others: Go through document and make sure that fish names are either capitalized or not. All of the names seem to switch between capitalizing and not capitalizing. Check entire document for other instances where capitabilizing/not capitalizing might be in question. (i.e. Environmental assessment) (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough@usace.army.mil 206-764- 3549. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred I have gone through the document and and changed all fish names to not be capitalized, unless a heading or start of a sentence. You will notice that the detailed description of https://65.204.17.188/projnet/drehecks/versionI /index.cfm?WORKFLOW=Review Report... 07/16/2004 PROJNET > DrChecks Page 17 of 17 wildlife has been removed. (13-Jul-04 by Christopher Pollock u Christopher.E.Pollock@nws02.usace.grmy.mil 206-764-6947) Backcheck not conducted L�J Current Comment Status: Comment Open 587408 IF Project Management 11 Planning Report n/a n/a F/a There is no paragraph 13. Correct numbering structure. Economic Analysis is an "a."' and the following paragraph Distribution of Project Benefits is "c". (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough@usace.army.mil 206-764-3549. ) 1-0 Evaluation Concurred The report format has changed. The economic analysis is now paragraph 12. Distribution of benefits is part of that section. (13-Jul-04 by Christopher Pollock Christopher. E. Pollock@nws02. usace, army. mil 206-764-6947) Backcheck not conducted Current Comment Status: Comment Open Information in this report may be considered Sensitive But Unclassified (SBU). Please review USACE agency data for SBU handling guidelines. {Report Complete} https://65.204.17.188/projnet/drehecks/versionI /index.cfm?WORKFLOW=ReviewReport... 07/16/2004 PROJNET > DrChecks Page 1 of 9 Comment Report: All Comments For the Review & Comment phase of project NWS Cedar River Mitigation (sorted by Discipline , ID) Displaying 72 comments. Id Discipline 11 DocType Spec Sheet Detail 580107 Civil J Plans n/a C-3 n/a Need a typical section through the channel to show the typical bank configuration (this may already be shown on sheet L-1?). (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.ar_myTmil 206-764-6922. Revised 02-Jun-04.) 0 Evaluation not conducted 580109 Civil IPlans n/a C-3 n/a Suggest labeling the dotted line at the edge of the channel (maybe as the excavation limit?) (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922.) 0 Evaluation not conducted 5801 22 Civil I Plans n/a C-3 and C-4 n/a Recommend showing the extent of the various areas of riprap on the plan view drawings (in addition to stating its extent by station on the detail views on C-6, C-7, & C-1,A). (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army. rn i 1206-764-6922.) 0 Evaluation not conducted 580113 Civil Plans n/a C-4 I n/a For dendrite, add "(see Plate C-7 for details)" to label. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lew'is@usace.aEmy.mil 206-764-6922.) 0 Evaluation not conducted 580116 I Civil IPlans n/a C-4 n/a Suggest adding a note explaining the purpose of the dendrite (as a spillway to fill channel before water crests intake structure) to distinguish it from the alcoves. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922.) , 0 Evaluation not conducted 58013011 Civil Plans n/a C-6 n/a Need to specify the finish slope (or a range of slopes) of the surface of the buried riprap section. The drawings indicates that it would be somewhat steeper than the 2:1 slope of the buried riprap. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. ) 0 Evaluation not conducted 580137 Civil IPlans n/a C-6 buried riprap section Specify minimum buried depth of riprap in relation to the finish slope (it looks like the maximum depth will be 12 feet). (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. Revised 02- Jun-04.) kA I VL 0 Evaluation not conducted 580140 Civil Plans n/a C-6 J1 buried riprap section Specify that lower log has a rootwad and if the rootwad faces upstream or downstream (or if it doesn't make a difference). (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army. mi1 206-764-6922. Revised 02-Jun-04.) https://65.204.17.188/projnet/drehecks/versionI /index.cfm?WORKFLOW=ReviewReport... 06/28/2004 PROJNET > DrChecks Page 2 of 9 Evaluation not conducted 580151 11 Civil I Plans n/a C-7 alcove section Specify if rootwad faces upstream or downstream or if it doesn't make a difference. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922.) Evaluation not conducted 580152 11 Civil Plans n/a C-6 alcove section Specify if rootwad faces upstream or downstream or if it doesn't make a difference. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. ) Evaluation not conducted 580154 Civil Plans n/a I C-7 dendrite profile (State how long riprap extends along the left bank of the channel. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil206-764-6922.) Evaluation not conducted 580156 Civil Pla I C-7 dendrite profile Is the surface of the riprap on the right side of the drawing really intended to be above grade of riverbank? (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. ) 0 I Evaluation not conducted i,.�lkk 580162=1 Civil Plans n/a C-3 & C-4 n/a Show LWD locations on the plan views. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis(cD,usace.army. mi1 , 06-764-6922. ) Evaluation not conducted 580164 Civil Plans n/a C-9 JFNote 2 n the notes, LWD at Stn. 1+60 is the same as Alcove #1; at Stn. 2+75 is very close to Alcove #2; at Stn. 5+80 is very close to Alcove #4; at Stn. 7+10 is very close to dendrite; at Stn. 9+40 is inside the culvert. Need to reconcile these positions to make them consistent with other design elements. (Submitted 02- Jun-04 by Evan Lewis e_v_an-.r.l_ewis_ usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. ) Evaluation not conducted 580167 Civil Plans n/a L-1 Ir lin/a Label on "Typical Stream Channel Planting Section" for right bank says bank slope will vary from 2:1 to 3:1, but Note 4 says channel side slopes will be 3:1. Need to reconcile. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army. mi1 206-764-6922. Revised 02-Jun-04. ) ;,, Evaluation not conducted 580168 11 Civil 11Plans n/a L-14, n/a Change "newely" to "newly" in Zone 2 and Zone 3 definitions (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lew(is@usace,army.mil 206-764-6922. Revised 02-Jun-04. ) f', Evaluation not conducted 585315 11 Civil Plans IC-3 Notes Please add to Note 5.NEW GATE ON SPU ROW WILL REPLACE EXISTING GATE IN SAME LOCATION. 16 FT SWING GATE WILL BE PROVIDED BY SPU FOR THIS LOCATION FROM LAKE YOUNGS MAINTENANCE FACILITY, CONTACT TONY WHITE AT ANTH ONY.WHITE@SEATTLE.GOV. ALSO PROVIDE 3 ECOLOGY BLOCKS AND BERMING ON EACH SIDE OF GATE TO PREVENT VEHICLE https://65.204.17.188/proinet/drehecks/version 1 /index. c fm?WORKFL OW=ReviewReport... 06/28/2004 PROJNET > DrChecks Page 3 of 9 ENTRY. REMOVE EXISTING BOLLARDS EXCEPT FOR ONE TO ALLOW 18 INCH PEDESTRIAN ENTRY WAY. (Submitted 08-Jun-04 by Christian Munter cmunter@ci.renton.wa.us 425-430-7205. ) Evaluation not conducted 585316 Civil Plans n/a C-4 Notes EnNte 5., Should we specify smooth -wall CPEP? (Submitted 08-Jun-04 by Christian Munter er(a�ci,renton,wa_ us 425-430-7205.) ,_,, l'tk t �k Evaluation not conducted 585318 Civil 11 Plans n/a C-6 A/C-3 The Buried Riprap Section detail wasn't changed to reflect the new alignment. Since the channel doesn't have the dramatic bends, is the heavily armored riprap section required between station 0+20 and 1+20? (Submitted 08-Jun-04 by Christian Munter cmunter<�ci.renton.wa.us 425-430-7205. ) 0 I Evaluation not conducted A,`,d 585320 Civil Plans n/a C-7 B/C-4 —� On the Dendrite Profile detail, should the riprap layer on the dendrite section be extended into the channel section? (Submitted 08-Jun-04 by Christian Munter cmunter(cDci.renton.wa.us 425-430-7205. ) Evaluation not conducted %1k 0 585322 11 Civil Plans n/a C-7 D/C-4 On the Channel Section at CPEP Culvert Outlet detail, please label the spawning gravel depth at 18". (Submitted 08-Jun-04 by Christian Munter cmunter ci.renton.wa.us 425-430-7205. ) Evaluation not conducted 1 1_ - i 585324 Civil Plans n/a C-10 rC The steel access ladder should be coated or the material changed to prevent rusting.Please lavel the invert of the box culvert at the inlet. (Submitted 08-Jun-04 by Christian Munter cmunter@ci.renton.wa.us 425-430-7205. ) Evaluation not conducted 585327 Civil Plans n/a I C-11 JJA Please relocate the top three anchor bolts on the trash rack to allow placement of a fyke net between the trash rack and the culvert. Remove the center bolt and move the outside two to the corners. (Submitted 08-Jun-04 by Christian Munter cmunter@ci.renton.wa.us 425-430-7205. ) 0 Evaluation not conducted /­ If, 587431 Civil Plans n/a C-12 n/a Vault Ladder Detail: If the 4 FT Max supposed to indicate that the supports should be 4' on center? If so make the detail clear. (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough(@_usace.army.mil 206-764-3549. ) 0 Evaluation not conducted 587432 11 Civil Plans n/a C-7 n/a [Maintenance Road Section: Native Subgrade should point to the interface between existing and the fill. (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough *iill.m.gough@usace.army.mil 206-764-3549. ) 0 Evaluation not conducted 587433 Civil Plans I n/a C-7 n/a Channel Section at CPEP: Any concern that flows coming from the culvert might move the spawing https://65.204.17.188/projnet/drehecks/version l /index.cfrn?WORKFLOW=ReviewReport... 06/28/2004 PROJNET > DrChecks Page 4 of 9 gravel away from the outlet? If the flows aren't that great then why is there Riprap on the side slopes? (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough usace.army.mil 206-764-3549. ) 0 Evaluation not conducted i,.nLk r�i �- 587434 11 Civil Plans n/a C-3 n/a New gravel road does not tie into the existing gravel road. Provide portion of road connecting the two - make sure Real Estate is available to build this. (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gouu h@usace.army.mi1 206-764-3549. ) Evaluation not conducted 587435 11 Civil Plans n/a C-3 I n/a Section A indicates it goes across the entire channel, but detail on C-6 does not. Provide the rest of the section. (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jiltm.goug-_h_@usace.army mil 206-764-3549. ) 0 I Evaluation not conducted 587715 IF Civil 11Plans n/a C-9 n/a Table shows where woody debris is located. Coordinate this with the Alcove detail because 1+60 and 2+75 are both located at alcoves. Also, ther is no 9+40 so you can't put woody debris there. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough@usace.army.mil 206-764-3549. ) Evaluation not conducted 587731 11 Civil Plans n/a C-3 and C-4 n/a If scour holes are going to be included at locations where woody debris is installed (B/C-9) then show on channel layout and include grading. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.go4o@usace.army,mil 206-764-3549.) 11 Evaluation not conducted 587810I Civil IPlans n/a c-7 n/a 7-71 Better define the 15' measurement at the bottom of Section B. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough@usacg.army.mil 206-764-3549. ) 1b, J, - Evaluation not conducted 1587961 II Civil II Plans IIn/a II' IIC-7 I Maintenance Road Section. Use of excavated materials (sand and gravel from channel excavation) will be difficult to compact. Need to use crushed gravel for road section. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Gregory Segal gregory.l.segal@usace.army.mil 206-764-3712. ) IIEvaluation not conducted 58796 1 Civil Plans n/a11 C-7 General comment. Define "spawning Gravel". No specifications and/or gra%ion is indicated. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Gregory Segal gregory.l.segal@usace.army.mil 206-764-3712. Evaluation not conducted 1587971��]j Civil E Plans I n/a I C-7 General comment. The subgrade soils are very permeable. This channel section does not seem to be lined with any materials that will retain water. Clarify and correct. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Gregory Segal giggpry.l.sega-1-@usace.aTmy.mil 206-764-3712. ) 0 Evaluation not conducted ;,� 587979 11 Civil IPlans n/a C-7 https://65.204.17.188/projnet/drehecks/version 1 /index. cfm?WORKFL OW=ReviewReport... 06/28/2004 PROJNET > DrChecks Page 5 of 9 0 Evaluation not conducted 587984 Civil L Plans n/a C-8 Intake -Section. Add specification for "GEOGRID". (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Gregory Segal gregory.l.segal@usace.army.mil 206-764-3712. ) 0 Evaluation not conducted 588021 1 Civil Plans n/a C-8 n/a Intake -Section and Intake Elevation. The section shows multiple 12" lifts of geogrid and the Elevation shows two 12" lifts (per note). Clarify and correct. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Gregory Segal gregory.l.segal@usace.army.mil 206-764-3712.) �. 0 Evaluation not conducted ; 588803 Civil Planning Report n/a n/a n/a Paragraph 5. 2nd sentence, river mile is missing. Correct. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Gregory Segal gregory.l.segalCd-)usace.army.mil 206-764-3712. ) 11 Evaluation not conducted 588805 Civil Planning Report n/a n/a n/a Paragraph 10. Photos are not included in the memo. Add photos. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Gregory Segal gregory.l.segal@usace.army.mil 206-764-3712. ) Evaluation not conducted 588868 11 Civil Planning Report n/a n/a n/a Paragraph 14 e. Rewrite sentence to conform grammatically. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Gregory Segal gregory.1.segal@usace.army. mi1 206-764-3712. ) Evaluation not conducted 588871 11 Civil Planning Report n/a n/a n/a Paragraph 15. Clarify is this project a levee rehab? Where is the levee? Clarify and correct as applicable. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Gregory Segal gregory.l.segal@usace.army.mil 206-764-3712. ) 0 Evaluation not conducted 589607 J Civil Plans n/a C-3 Notes The following should be added to the plan set so the contractor is aware of additional potential costs:See SPU Construction Access Plan for requirements for steel plating and construction fencing to protect Renton and Seattle watermains.The DNR requires a performance bond in the amount of 125% of construction costs.For City of Renton insurance requirements, please call Chris Munter at 425-430- 7205.Please see the DOE's General Stormwater Permit for Construction Activity and Water Quality Certification and the WDFW HPA for temporary erosion and sediment control requirements. (Submitted 11-Jun-04 by Christian Munter cmunter@ci.renton.wa.us 425-430-7205. ) 0 Evaluation not conducted Ae4 �a C--k 580121 Environmental Plans n/a C-4 Fla May want to consider re-routing the end of the gravel road further to the west, closer to the toe of the terrace) to avoid existing trees (disregard of trees in this area are just as thick but aren't shown on the drawing). (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. ) 0 Evaluation not conducted i v z Il v A,,,s4-- 580142 Environmental Plans n/a C-6 lialcove section https://65.204.17.188/projnet/drehecks/versionI /index. c fm?WORKFL OW=ReviewReport... 06/28/2004 PROJNET > DrChecks Page 6 of 9 Toppling the cottonwood against an existing tree might restrict downstream movement, but it probably won't prevent floating like the label states. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. Revised 02-Jun-04. ) I I I Evaluation not conducted L-111 li c t 580146 11 Environmental Plans n/a C-6 lialcove plan view Are there suitable "toppling" trees at all alcove locations? If not, would trees be re -located from elsewhere? If there are multiple trees, will excess be removed, or all toppled into the channel? (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. Revised 02-Jun-04. ) Evaluation not conducted „K � n -,v,, 1 ,� •i.� �� 1�1 _ "J'. 580155 Environmental Plan I C-7 n/a Consider planting willows through riprap at dendrite and downstream of culvert outlet. (Submitted 02- Jun-04 by Evan Lewis e_v_an.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. ) 0 I Evaluation not conducted 580160 Environmental Plans 77]FK��]C-9 n/a Probably don't need the Tooter log to support the rootballs or prevent bank erosion, which isn't necessarily an undesirable thing in the vicinity of the LWD. Removing logs parallel to channel would also prevent chance of their flotation dislodging the LWD that will be buried into the bank. Plus, work to anchor the toe logs would be unnecessary, too. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. Revised 02-Jun-04. ) 0 Evaluation not conducted ; t c i• 580166 Environmental Plans n/a C-11 n/a F04 y want to add a note stating that the trashrack must meet NMFS screening criteria. (Submitted 02-Jun- by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. Revised 02-Jun-04. ) Evaluation not conducted 587424 Environmental Planning Report I n/a n/a 14b Statements: Paragraph discusses how salmon spawn in mid -September to mid -November, but construction seems to be taking place all the way to the end of December. Is there restrictions for construction at the tie in points? Didn't see anything on the drawings stating access restrictions. (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough ii11 I.n . ough@usace.army.mil 206-764-3549. ) 0 Evaluation not conducted 587427 Environmental Plans n/a C-8 and C-10 n/a Both drawings show and Intake Section, but they differ. If there is only one Intake Structure then combine details. If you leave them both make sure they are identifcal - see where soils hit the grade hits the top of the pipe - one right at the end of the pipe and the other 2 feet back. (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough@usace.a_rmy.mil 206-764-3549. ) Evaluation not conducted vti, �0 . r 580136 Hydraulics Plans I n/a C-6 buried riprap section Need to make sure that the logs won't float. Will the anchors hold for years to ensure that bank protection stays in place? (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army. mi1 206-764- 6922. ) II Evaluation not conducted �0c,>. L 580145 Hydraulics j Plans n/a C-6 lialcove section https://65.204.17.188/proj net/drehecks/version 1 /index.cfm?WORKFLOW=ReviewReport... 06/28/2004 PROJNET > DrChecks Page 7 of 9 Need to consider flotation of log at toe of bank, which will likely require an anchor or a larger diameter piece. Also, specify if rootwad faces upstream or downstream or if it doesn't make a difference. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. ) Evaluation not conducted (- 880157 Hydraulics Plans n/a C-7 dendrite profile Suggest burying a toe of riprap at the riverbank end of the dendrite "spillway" to guard against potential future riverbank erosion. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis@usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. ) Evaluation not conducted 580158 1 Hydraulics J I Plans n/a C-7 dendrite profile The height of the step from the "spillway" into the channel should be as short as possible and specified on the drawings. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. ) II Evaluation not conducted 4,, A � I -AA 580159 Hydraulics Plans n/a C-7 Fdendtrite & culvert Suggest minimizing use of riprap by using soil lifts and plantings to stabilize upper portion of bank on the sides of dendrite, on the left bank of the channel opposite of dendrite, and downstream of the culvert outlet. (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis evan.r.lewis usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. ) 0 Evaluation not conducted ' - . t csbc- 1595582=1 Hydraulics J1 Plans and Specs n/a n/a n/a General comment. Overall, the 95% design drawings show channel configuration and features similar to the previously published Draft H&H DDR (Seattle District 2002). 1 expect the hydraulic function of the completed project will be as described in the DDR, and will perform to the standards described there. Key features in the design drawings related to hydraulic function (especially the intake structure) are as described in the DDR. This review did not include a detailed analysis of the hydraulic design, and I did not check the exact functioning of the inlet structure (e.g., analysis of inlet / outlet control over a range of discharges). However, the design includes features that should provide adequate flow control in the channel. (Submitted 16-Jun-04 by Daniel Katz Daniel. M.Katz@nws02.usace.army. mi1 (206) 764-3271. Revised 16-Jun-04. ) Evaluation not conducted 595800 Hydraulics Plans 17 n/a Control of water level and velocity in the spawning channel. The spawning channel appears to have adequate measures that should allow hydraulic conditions to fall within design criteria. In addition, the H&H DDR performed a sensitivity analysis that demonstrated that if the assumed roughness of the channel was not correct, the conditions could still be adjusted to fall within the design range. In the unlikely event that actual conditions do not fall within design parameters (or if design parameters change), then it may be necessary to add downstream or intermediate control structures in the spawning channel (such as removeable stoplogs) to achieve desired flow conditions. However, these features are not recommended for addition to the design at this time. (Submitted 16-Jun-04 by Daniel Katz Daniel. M.Katz@nws02.usace.army.mi1 (206) 764-3271. Revised 16-Jun-04. ) Evaluation not conducted 580169 11 Landscape Architecture Plans n/a L-1 } n/a Suggest clarifying the 5th watering note to give a maximum duration that water line will be in place (i.e. no more than 2 years after construction completion). (Submitted 02-Jun-04 by Evan Lewis eva_n.r._I_ewis@-usace.army.mil 206-764-6922. Revised 02-Jun-04. ) 0 Evaluation not conducted w� https://65.204.17.188/projnet/drehecks/versionI /index. cfm?WORKFL OW=ReviewReport... 06/28/2004 PROJNET > DrChecks Page 8 of 9 587428 11 Landscape Architecture Plans II n/a 11 L-2 11 n/a Callout on plan states no planting above culvert. Does this just apply to the 25.5' of culvert? There is a long stretch of culvert from the vault to the channel with trees directly above it. (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough@usace.army.mil 206-764-3549. ) 1 11 Evaluation not conducted j4c i—L- t? L-,-h iv` Iz``-f� « `l C , t ..--e 587430 11 Landscape Architecture 11 Plans n/a L-1 and L-2 n/a Some of the existing trees appear to not be half toned any longer - maybe they got copied into the file. If the symbol which is typical for deciduous is to be for new trees then add to legend, if not all the trees should look halftoned. (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough mill. m.gough(cDus_ace.arm__y.mil 206-764- 3549. ) 0 Evaluation not conducted A 587695 11 Landscape Architecture Plans I n/a L-1 n/a Coordinate with Civil Sheets about the irrigation hook ups. There is no tie in shown on Civil sheets as you indicate by call out on plan. The topo does show some existing waterline information, but nothing stating where the contractor should hook up to. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough usace.army.mil 206-764-3549. ) II Evaluation not conducted Via.-6 1- / C kl�, 14 4!--41,,,., 1 587734 Landscape Architecture Plans n/a L-1 n/a From the description of Zone 4, it doesn't appear that areas with alcoves and dendrites will have any Zone 4 planting as these locations because they fall outside of the 30' from centerline. If this is not correct then note needs to be re -phrased. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough@usace.army.mil 206-764-3549. ) 0 I Evaluation not conducted ,h 587735 1 Landscape Architecture Plans I L-1 n/a Temp. Watering Notes: Is this the Contractors responsibility because the last note says it is the City of Renton. Clarify who is watering what and for how long. Who is removing the irrigation? (Submitted 10- Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough@usace.army.mil 206-764-3549. ) 0 Evaluation not conducted 587744 Landscape Architecture Plans n/a L-1 n/a [How does the Typical Stream Channel Planting Section A work with the Buried Riprap Section shown n C-6 that occurs from 0+20 to 1+20? Coordinate. (Submitted 10-Jun-04 by Jill Gough l.m.gough@usace.army.mil 206-764-3549. ) Evaluation not conducted c— 587262 11 Project Management Planning Report n/a n/a n/a Project Classification (Paragraph 5): First sentence needs correction. Possibly just change "consisting" to "consist". Add River Mile number in to the second sentence. (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough@usace.army.mil206-764-3549. ) 0 Evaluation not conducted 587275 11 Project Management Planning Report n/a n/a n/a Previous Work (Paragraph 7): This sentence doesn't really explain "previous work". Provide information that is relevant to this paragraph. (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough@usace.army.mil 206-764- 3549. ) 0 Evaluation not conducted https:H65.204.17.188/projnet/drehecks/versionI /index.cfm?WORKFLOW=ReviewReport... 06/28/2004 PROJNET > DrChecks Page 9 of 9 587386 11 Project Management I Planning Report I n/a n/a n/a Disaster Incidents (para 9): Capitalize "H" for highway 169. (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jilt.m.gough@usace.army.mil206-764-3549. ) 0 Evaluation not conducted 587392 Project Management 11 Planning Report n/a n/a n/a Disaster Incidents (para 9): Would have liked to seen the enclosure 1 photos. Provide photos for report. If there is only one enclosure then it is not labeled Enclosure 1. If more than one enclosure make sure to label them correctly. (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m. og uqh@usace.army.mil 206-764-3549. ) 0 I Evaluation not conducted 587397 11 Project Management 11 Planning Report n/a n/a n/a sasterIncidents (para 9): Start third sentence with "Water backed up from the blockage flooded ...". It emsa little more clear then additional water. (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough Fsem.gough@usace._a_rmy.mil 206-764-3549. ) Evaluation not conducted 587404 Project Management Planning Report n/a n/a n/a Disaster Incidents (para 9) and several others: Go through document and make sure that fish names are either capitalized or not. All of the names seem to switch between capitalizing and not capitalizing. Check entire document for other instances where capitabilizing/not capitalizing might be in question. (i.e. Environmental assessment) (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough@usace.army.mil 206-764- 3549. ) 0 Evaluation not conducted 587408 Project Management Planning Report n/a n/a n/a There is no paragraph 13. Correct numbering structure. Economic Analysis is an "a." and the following paragraph Distribution of Project Benefits is "c". (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill Gough jill.m.gough@usace.army.mil 206-764-3549. 1) 0 Evaluation not conducted 587409 11 Project Management Planning Report n/a n/a n/a [Economic Analysis paragraph: Correct typos in sentence "if the funtion ..." (Submitted 09-Jun-04 by Jill ,Gough jill.m.gough@usace.army.mil 206-764-3549. ) 0 Evaluation not conducted l I Information in this report may be considered Sensitive But Unclassified (SBU). Please review USAGE agency data for SBU handling guidelines. {Report Complete} https://65.204.17.188/projnet/drehecks/versionI /index. cfm?WORKFL OW=ReviewReport... 06/28/2004 =A1 CI ft%4I N O 9 ''�IS'ScaB°8888"Ei888C81188 rrm o'v" •') �1 m o [` O ao tp rn rrl o z z m —i n r«a p ;K Z m Z�✓�. �t v• O tp CD g Z FE C7 v R� £ c lb pl z r� M GI' rn iG .vM �'r `a�o•q•gry,=ram_^F ��,•a2• r• i S'S!5'P' ram+ Jy, .I,Ike Ili, •A.,.u,�;l•. • ��5 ''; off' ^',e � 's14�• b w��`y?�N o� yy � Y ��" R;3S •�1 t- Vr• r. NIS•r. z. C J, 33 ..� G m m r r- l! 90 K. f4o .p k I go 10 8i -6 .J J J -" J -J -,\ `I 1 I ..' tjil S e O O O N 11't Q�j 1 EF b d -+ O �pW�y, bI+ + v Q N PIScp- r.�rn IT, �(^ •O T � a v � � P � m e mZ QO �m Z 1 y, 2 m X G� • �, m, to � N rtj m m 5p v III I r. r .. I I • I m M z O z amah al "04 imp �C;44 MI e� :*lot I �,� > 7n < 71 m ICI ,.�I v MA N) �� m< -� all Cn kno zo ;51A �88 $ �yy -,F�'� 3�y5d 5gi 8R 04 I � �f I I� 4 N o v � a � 0 s / I i its : I w MJ` mj► ul ha x N I RAFT R � l C � , < 0 o 0 O ' Z �o pax Z .. �. (� m R Z '0 2 m m m v 3SHA03 MOD a00M3'ON ! j 0 p m H O> r r C D z 2 2 2 2 2 X X O O > > r n try n > n > > 7 C, z < z z< I R� z z z z z__ m m r- r, r- ci c r r, 0 0 czi o 8 2 0 o m>> �' m f ram- = m m m p p > a N n A D> M o o v v z z z 2 z o -t F F c c Ln to N - r > , > p N > - Z Z p t•i N z N m = U1 m n x m N � N r to c -t c r r O m z � m > t r m m n m n C) E z i 1-Dy r iy, ( kj ` >%\ .! ' ��`r . »%``:3.:,:�*'' �,y�.,` k'A%?•'•��iR+3 . C,M1y'''S • ;tr'.•�; L>k; n Sir `•i' i i'�,..i.h ".s'" ':•'�,c. �. /t� ;wdve;?'sj. :;•�..`•:: `� '?y4: Zv jf t...•� ...Ii)..t, Yii: `% ( .y ...: •.. 't .r,�: '•h:>°'I.;F::.'frti. � m t ff •,i..` •!tj• /,Z}f)//!,{� �:.�:;y::� ��i•j y �>: $i,s i r = m i:�� 7 `'('• �:: fyt 0e ^R si'- {sy '3t1� >. (: N! '•✓' I!, "i i �vw�./. ::i:fi �•` 'Y...l i�..,A\rM�': .4:,,.'..'��:,t'><; 5.. >4, , f "a( �• '':•tii•�Q• '.�: �. ��: ' f wl V .......i.y l.',� .................. ' .;;` �,�`1, =i,Y S•" y`; r ��` � ,y, . o > "°;';lit `, " � "`�'` '<' •,:,: .:; ,/.••� �,�:,<:; F CS s t"r` r.K z N Z 0 m o ••• • _.!`;{,ice • 'f✓ yo :>y ... .. ...... p 'n 6 T O O -� Z � r C = N m D A z .tr1 >D (m- > _ W _ N � T ^� z � O"t z� -� a °z� a< z� c� — o� z a .J f r X. R1 a R a z s � O m � Z y m m € n r � < b z O m �a m y Q D o G� N Z n � x O - D z z n N O = z � ^R p z I Un d W N r J r 00 •cn yDcm N m m n "o z � rn r, m 0 mC TN a r oe r- xz �nno r m vv mg ymxn n i OD vm ��;� m z -xaim om OpmZ in o � N Or NN An�� W m ?< ma zxNN n z N �r--< Zm�m O rn m m > mm zZm m m nn zz m � o ym omR� o m z' .r� zm zHm y o D Nv po< N z jD oz- -+ m m S C mn m-ti p a �A DMy y m av mrnm r m CZj v • O Om O mNN D T y KOy O 0 O O- z n y m i 2 Ny N m m z 0 F- m c-) m m N -V o Z -D m mo n o o rn o z 0 y x x r r 0 < C m j o D D C.)0 D m v A C,Ln y m N I O O O y D 0 N Y Z 0 c A m D z -C r Y 4 z m a C, < v r < m 51< z Z m r n r, o m Rm<� r r 0 0 0 0 m m CD U-1 0 y O O n mn y0 z y-< 0 N A na y < Am r 1 m m O O > m am Kr �N co ;o: 0 r Z ?o m o -a 0 i cn � z m m D Ln -i 0 n r m > N p a n < iZ Z X O D v mm m F< C, �^ m �r f m� 0 m 00 g m zm r N a r m 0 c DEPTH IN FEET w N — O r.70 (A 20z y (A z m O fv< y 7 r a mom- f x x zoo In oW oap O N m� Nn r0 0 Ln in � W N — O -t�l w m rm' m m 31- N aC, m ya X< nm y r vw o� D � :<o a O IN rmo v0 OOZ yZ mr AK v i K y0 N y N 00 m a Cl r D D D X O D O p y< O �Nm O N mm r znrn mm o m (A, C) N 0 77 < 0 O CD Om O" O- CD 0S Z m �� O m vN D z v in C, o r =^ D n 0 z z O 0 r v p A m 0 N m 0 w Cl) O N c 0 2 m Z 0 w /rnW 'D / p N 0 W�`l a ill o a� Q m o C !A o m � � - N <�2�o A N z > 0 0 Z o o z �v p (=r+ c w 0 N �(► x J� z Z 51f m m li r � m o o0 D A O < m z r n r1 w Z 00-O 0tT O.N W r)N Nm V,- 0 o rrz• o -m o• 0zc m zz v) =mmm LA- ;X;p A 00 OZmC m O „-.1 -i NOmz m-ri ma0 -,( zL, zm�< rD- xo x Az� mrn <m nn oN-om <I ^ om n� oz �D+� D mz n�T ` zo �n m <=m0 mm �z� n �r F>Mo n y O <mm Nr0 r=� C, -,0 X o (n on o�v �> C, cn �=�o Z m n= z� ��w =i z nz>(m/, rz UX-1 W ON �CZ v C7 1f+m v �nr N coW 7J v'vi O it V T > czmm m \D ia1W -0z o v v r o mprm r �iu�'i o -0 o�m a7 Xm(')� co mDm Z O An0 x �r O= D („rO D Z �'PZ zm0Z N z CO D zNG"1 D O m� z a, m O M fm*1 �Nyr _N Nn-+ W Z m c N m> Z D z m m m C) zo x N<Nm D zA --I CO O co N Z m z m x= O m z om< co m X m 0 o m Z—w— nn 0 Ln V 4,12D mD D r m E 1.309,800 rn ~ o Z 4= o i m zr rn mN�� ,1 O co m N \� /'l-, r. N ♦ a W o ♦ ♦ ♦ O E 1.309.950 a V � n N lD W m rn w / 0. LA w O � w W w W w W W W W W W w W W w w w W w w W W W W W w w w w N N N N N N N N N N N N N z W In Vl(n(n(nln(n(n(naaaaaaa w w w w w w www WNNm 0D W OD-.1000)D)fA 0>O)0 O O ID OD-JQJ 0IWN-O(O OJ �10 V1a O�00D-.IWU7a WN-OHO GOWN-O�-.I�U1a WN-O N OJN..P) coNo> WW W Na 0 OWON0-0W--09- O O t��c�o�t�c>� c>c�n� 0 p O 0 0 0 0 0c�0 p 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0»0 0 0 p 0 0c�0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ...... 0 0 0 0 `G -+y�Yw�--a-Y. -+-ter -i -�i rt-�i-�i� -+'*.ter �-�+Y Y-�r�"0 N p 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 O o 0 0 o O p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p o p P 0 Op 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 D Do 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 E F E E F F F F F F££ E F F££££ F F f E F F F F f F F F F E£ f E££ F f E 000 000.000009000000000000010o00 0 0 0 0 O O o 0 O O 0 O 0 O O 0 0 aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaQ. ornmrnmrnrnmrn�� n�+(n n�rnrnm�rnrn�nrnrnmrnmrnmm�mrnm �^ rnrna m "-i -;�----. N• -D);�v ro(DO-01v. 00�000-000WN N(T (O iDOOO�O �D :O tO N �O00aO^,mW-�0000 wNOin -nO-4W 04 WWCoiP �OmOw-4 tn0w a0NwaOaO�NONip < � , O � E � O 7 P Z (D wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww z �d)V1d WN�Ol000o�0(nawN�t00>r0(~J1d WN-�O tO�WV)A 000 0 a N(n coact aN�0 a00DppMaOaalpd O onc->c,0 r, 00c�-,-)0-0-0- O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 j 7 j 7 j j 7 7 0 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 0 £££f0f0£EFfFf£f£FF££F££f£FFEfFf££F£ 000000000000 Q.0 00 00 0 00 0000000000000000000000000000000000000 aaanaa aaaaaaanaaaaaaaaaa aaaoapiaaa wwwNN;•+N W;JNN�-�N�NNr) �(D�NNNNN-,D t00 ID OD.- N OD�w A(•OjdOOp��NN(OWN�O(�n W O)w 0 a''�� Nn Co (.N,J,W HMO < 0 M i E 1.310.100+ E 1.310.2501 m x LA czi -i 70 m m 0 m N 0 0 z 0 Z z C m O Z D m a S5S' �o 4�ffX 's�$s s a^�Q s�F '99 m P rn � N N w J � v N z n 0 z s A C 4 m u ;A A e � v m z > o m O ~ z i 59 2 ~ N m O i Z A 'D ZE m u Ei o > r > N z z Z z z V V V V A A A A CJ A 0 V E 1,309,950 A mNy� O O �O0 m z ;rn O M N O O O DZ omnm c� m a ,c-� 310,10 ~ WI_I = O SOe n m Z 0z N Z-*N-- 0 0 _ NLE A w a a Q 0> A �O 83nl8 b4030 O E 1.310.400� A a A A A Ja la A A A A A A a A A A A ?. A A A A A A _a A a A A A a A A A a A AA A W W z O� O W- 4 M 01 A W N L.O S O N- W 1-n & W N N O� D O ^' 0 1 J 1 W N- p 0000000 0 0 0 I D OD O IDV W N -010 0 �iO0Om-JN�1 WODp Oi O.NC W CD d O;N O=dO W Qp NIV O�NepNN�d NO W O?N pDNO O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o O o -0 0 0- o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y Y O Y Y 0 N E E t E E i f£££ E f f££ E£ E p .0 E F£ F£ E E E f E E£ F f E F 0 0 o O o o o 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 0 0 00 °o o °o oo 0 0 o 0 00 0 o 0 0 o o 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 aCOLaaaaaaaaa a a a a aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa -0)O-q- OVNW ~VOwd N.N O V1 0 0,j� W N O NON W�W AmW W V�iO cow O�ADO�aOO W~01LnWN,,,-NANaap�w I I O £ f f 7 (D a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a A a a A a a a A a a a a a .a a a a a A a z J Nr NNN N O 000000000 U1 U1010000 0 V1 AA A AAA aA O �1001a W N-OID Oo -lOA W N-010Or0 VtA W N-OHO C�rO V1 W N- I O=pp Oo0N01 °100 =NNw00C°p{ilO t=l ,ap,w 001 a)�;OOwiN R,ONN W O O 2 rl O: Y -a Y Y Y 0 0 y 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 p O O 0 0 O p 0 0 0 Y Y y Y Y Y "' M -� Y „' Y -� y -� Y y y rt y E o o 0 o o j O 0 0 0 0 o o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 j O o 0 0 0 O pY Z; 0 (D 7 7 7 7 7 ] 7 7 7 7 7 7 J] 7 7 7 D 0 E E f E F£ E E f E F f££ E g E f E g E£ E E f F g££ E O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q. aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaannaaaaaaaaaaaaaa m N0p74mOo 1D O1D :O pp 00 1p m;0 1p ;p p pp P 101D P W W M„N TMP M N� W N tOON-O0 vOw Oo O O o 0 00) C)OD0 NO -100- _ ID UIO � UI BOO AN < - 10 N O X_ N z 0 -1 m m 0 m n 0 z O z C 0 m 0 r D m m c� I O z Z 4 wo s Z N z Z n c o }n o p D � n � m�m C m v F m m v > o n � 'n o 0 D n f o o < �- z y t^ T � m • Ln o > z m r1i o v+ r czi PI wiz 0 Xm m O �d pS, nm nx n N In N Z :S1 � O O D O y r 11 O1 �1�mD 17� n rnz`rnrn�� �� m v1 mz:_� m I V jWA �i W z Z Z vin v v I Z—► • r tL W O a D--1 W -t CO N K' =- Z �D O CIc- x AKs to m mr"nn mmn m o zv cmm�mr m Az> < z �zn z m -Dz >o- rntZi+Pz > ymr oN w mm�o-i o c D o m 0 P z o- ZO v m Tmc")OADZ �oocz m omm ctnz mX �N m to nz- > �' Gm m mz-4 G'I nor crz= nC) I Zt7zK� N pA D -Z o ro n c z? mm v o N mcn n o moo' D o p n n< m D omnm0 ro oxW o= z =mmm N N m=r^ X mK Z z Z r)rtZO N'tz� 1= Z m of rzm-� gym( Z r. m z m -1 p 1 z V Ln W C71 m E 1.309.800 E 1.309.950� E 1.310.100E E 1.310.250E E 1.310.400� a i z z z z I Z v � V A A A A 77ff m UI m CVJI E 1. 309. 957�1— —r ' 'i f CO; ::._....... ,......_,.. r._�._....._ m..................... ` .' �........6 l to ... .;...�!............ ..�i............. , €_7,!... .... au,�7;Y9X1; mz CD WiV Ow N;co .D i. iGo W;N AiN Rl D m 0 N 2 n ^ Z N s z "4 m v C N 0 A > � c o � ui Z Z oy n m �3n o o TO _ D QQ T c m c� O I* z D m r N � O ;n m z m 0 � a �— i—.Eat -®® 2l3,18 8V030 •r m n Wm(7 oo In m 00 O m• Ga m W y� WN A_< R' —2- z T D O m 0 Z c� z cTm In TD T y m r --I DIn F m to m m mr-0m 1 n O S -+ r ?1 () fn z O / n o �ocr�' OZ ^m m mvz ''oz CD = o D m D D Ncn Z r r Z O < m O G Z D-H y -, -1 -ym D 0 N N m N m r D Z r O� N D Z O z;�-n oz_cc� n O T m ; W D co T omr C N Z mx_ F N CA v; �< D z o � mo-i o i T am- -0,p m czcn �z 0' v�r =DmL n o (A -� or^= Dro Tz -+ czo n D DzDm" ^ ° 0(Ar m=D no =zm ,i rZM m 0OZD y C)< O= m D o-uZ mZm N W =R -0D^ D p Zyrm, A 0 DD Ci� V) m0 LAM0 c n Z A o -4 m — m m CA o� z c Z CD r n D < y mo z m 1 CA F, i z M m m m m m 9 3 3 3 3 3 m rD m m /D (D 7 7 7 7 7 D room-un-V -I1.O'D rooAmn"0 -i -ITV roomTnm m mm 01nn OOn1 mmm0lnn ODn-i Nmmo-1no 00no 7 to -a 77 710 -a 77 Do:.;a 77 O 0�0� 00 10 E 00 0�0� 00 (D n mm r m n (D (D r m.. n mm r mm No_++O CO-. �+ +C m0++; �D-Oi.Oe(.n OC r-0000 In cnnln a 00 7 Wp On�D p NO 71 Na Ono a Vlo 71 tnp tDC- N O� IO n O)W l0[W W U1� Ip�U1- a[ - N� O�Np 1 <,a c.n o 7_ Om � Ln m W ?YWa <� a w ?- wo O 0 iD 0 o ON O p) N O _ O N p ' O oo Z rt _ -.a tn7_ C f -l.v .v N� .v.z C N .v •v �l .mA '7' N'^I C Nor N'• .vim Z �, m'.0 p> ID CD (D -� cD�p W pN m-m,. NclIN W-N MMN A D� 0MO) ID 0) Drt TWO m°00 2 a• N Z N. In• O 0) 0)W .. co m .. cna aaW n 10 V 0) FO W N w w m w 0) w g ID m m N_10 M N �Ww W,�,I m a O 1a �00 �� 000 10 a�o �p Od) N 00� N 0Na mpm �0).4 mlm mn W- aIDW W m mW W0 cn r r Nm M m m m m m m m m m m 3 3 3 3 3 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 r OOA'On-O -i-y_0-V rO0A-vf1-v -DV rOommom ti-1'O-0 M m m 0- n n 0 0 n -I m m m 0 --Inn 0 0 n -I m m m 0--ion 0 0 0- 710-a 77 710 -a 7D 710 -a 77 'E00 0 00 01 00 m�� n mm _r r.1°N _n mm _r 5mOC n mm r �m-7i 7 1 rt-7r 7 7m (n-7+ 7 w- o0-I ME rOOcno IND--. 8T Ts r-P++O �, N;" n aC roaao v) a .0- + + 1 a o + + - m - + r , N u + + G. m - + + l 1 -In 1p + 010 71 Ot'D -nw ID 0)0 7 O)N On,n N 00 71 Oa n l0; N - ,Ii Ion �v mc� -y --49 O71 Q);� W tni 0(D i0 'm O - tD 7- i0N O m w a O a �l 0' D 'p 0 0Co 0 w m W 0 W �D Z D)7-- w - _ a7-- -4 - - N7_ c ,INN O.. �1 �1 C -.I��, a.. �� C-� w•• �- Z i A aaa as i t al,a as 1 A a�a as p m o O. ,rn O nN m N�Icn ~ l~J1 D 0 O~a a am D� a�a0%0~DW _V)tD yag'1 -JN 2 O i0nmi ON10 O �N� acn- t7 -in un pLn'n cn O N w N cD 01 a W p W N - OD a- a W LO W U. W pp wWW mWw - wOW mw0 In Owl_4 frlW_W m a 330 OD to ONm� 2-4-O2 00 N iD NON N- a m 0"-_� � -al� � O) LO m cn O a '1i a m a � O D) - Z ^I w W• - a0 O A m mm CD O O cn In N N �) •.) O O N m m m m m m m m m m f3D N (D(DN N 7 7 7 7 7 rOommn-u rOOAAn-u 1tiA� 00--1 mmmoloo 000-4 mmm0-Inn a n-i oo DOo-a moo m°"a oD mm r (DD�[ n (D (D r m.o.[ �. N D :3_ � n m m r •Y m w -I .y. -t m 1 y H 7 ID rovai�Do tnO oftmn�D OD ram-.10 P, eo 1 -4C ro 0 , '.0 O O+ �O IO m a-�.I, WC0 1 NO 7m NT, :-40 o• . 0 ?O aw0) W 7O.tea -1-a'DI 7_ w_�0 1 Z 0 O ---4- _w7�--C CA O � W..N ID rD Add Np W W N� Wlan� wa Dti. dNUI In �D Dy ID tAW wa x tD pm -I��N 01N- n SOD �dtp 0 �p N w a a � W m ID moo_ � ww 0w -4mNW 0a WOO OWa w- aW WD.W m WO O- D 0 a-NOONN2 N. 1 a z to w a 0) tp 'D • O a w L4 ; I 0 W m O- Ln ��0) Oo 01 L Ln 10 m -I 0 kn a W N > a O o O O O O o o 0 z m ti Ln v O O Omi a`DD w OOi x 0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 M ` � _0 N ! z r 4+00 Z n Z r m cn n m m o rn s+00 O O N � O 0 I0 z m 6+00 o Z Q r Q $ Z m 7+00 8+00 9+00 n d Z c r0< -o mm nA 10+0 A= -0o -_� D p 1 q M nx m \ mn za M< ma A � rC> ZZ m -�-DIC p::� D .< 11+0 -no -DM Z M no 2 S + O O DD Drm zz n'„ 11+4 � r- .n cn mn-I r m m 0 �Dn W A x A D _ Z < Z A Ar Zz m O Elevation A 1 v 0 -.1 m O I O O O - \ 1 � 1 � \ I I � 1 I 1 I • I 1 1 I I • I I I I 1 1 1 1 I I 1 I I I / I I I I I ' 1 I I 1 I I1 I M x I I In I I 1 I I I � 1 I I A 1 I p I I Z 1 I I C I I i I n I n I ' 1 I m I I I � I I ; I N I I I ' tr ' � I 1 1 1 I I I 1 I I ) I I i I I I I 1 I 1 1 I\ 1 1 () I 1 1 2 I ) 1 I z 1 / Z I m I \ I I I m 1 \ I I A I I I I I 1 I 1 I • I I ; I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I I i I I I 1 I 1 I I vl Lh M I I I o yr I w 4, I X > I \ I I 1 ; I 1 � I 1 I I 1 \ I I vim / ,Ir a \ h L J4 n ID D I I 1 1 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I I 1 I I 1 I I I \ I I I \ I I v+m I cnm -1 O Dtopcn 0) + 0 I lD � I I I W p I + p p I N \ 1 I D I U D 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 ; I I / I I I \ I I 1 \I I in m n I I I lD � I n II 1 + p a-- --- ,__Mc: -r--�---------y oD I �+< 1 1 y1 , w x II D Z 1 x 1 N -I II p I >r r 1 n m (I m I 1 -'I I I I + I I a II I Ln I 1 ----- I 1 I I I 1 I I I i I 1 I 1 I I z < >c M D- zr - 1 x < Inz O:M O -i D f'1 frT.l -I a _m -m )< + L D In a a p In co— _Ln o + X N ti n C r A R8 0 -i M C 'n O Z VN r m cAV,m in O > �1 0> nmCO ti L >, now = n T:� m Dm mm w > n r �• •4•ii� •O H•.e• �i•OOi00•i0 ��i�iii�i0•ii iii�i�i.•iii ••ii�i�iiii�i .,y� ;•0..0•.0; •0CD / - m u z 0 m m c)or m;oz> mm-om r=> r Co -u Zrm DN orx 'A �a mn ON O Z Z A N U 0 S p m x r 0 m m C> z N o umi v c ', r mC -+- m� w —j � mmn -4m m m n .n n m m > Z m m�' n n m v m r c c r c r O -i Omr z -I D m N O )> -0 2 cz m V m coo i„ZA m 00� 0m mDv = N > 0 m m� mA \ M \\\ <CO N n oA mD �z 0 to r w D -nm C cn m A -i -im > omo - zm X zzrn �0 aa �a IVrio= O mm om> %p D 0 rn --I�p -4 _ > n M + Z rNj = N m 0 D r orz r m m oa N �r n z Z s R o " z r Z a z 4 a o C N m < n m m o 0 Z Z�= > iC1e� Z K m M m rr"- o ° C) o o m+ � z Q v Z z D 9�B� H m O z �{ m z D r Nm ' O = z m 01 z ' r o a O' w , o n N rn m i D z O r m D o _--_ 114 m 00 Z o m n n _ m rn N m 1 � z 2 , r� x D � z r, n CO o z O O ' m D m r ;o0M mo <"c mz mm� Mcx7-1 00 m>m �0 z<m m71 a D V, m n mm -i N _D 0 z O 1 IA z 0 0 M m I W �B➢� RS m N r . m I �' 8 T X Q i rn ►SJ FA CA rn n O Z O - m z � A Z C Q M o N c n n c > o z Z� � r E - n '_•K11 C> 'rt`i O � " � o N O = a �f c po rt� N Z C m s o > z z > c ::D o = z c> m z v m Z v X m Z N LAW nr JEn zM O m C)-n 0 n m r 0 In n rn cX � N m D � f7 z mC.) 0 z z v m D m z vo or, (+m m 0 m a_ Z m Z Z (� viz m m n 0 N < ; -v< p -+D m O < c-) _ ILA N C D 0L v " o N i17 \ n n � x 0 Z r M m 0 w In m cx A V1 C D Z LO Z A m 0 0 > A n O < c m z r O om c X MLI m Z N O W rrn n z Anr N c� v+ a = OvAm _ o -A < O c a= x�o z v A D 'D W m Z � m r m �, N rn , , 1" I I A O O ZD rN I I O I m= I co I w m m 0 oD I a I TN Z O D-1 O ZA�Ow� m� Or �02 � c A n N i p r O O O a m T m= j 1 I m -4 �o I I N y o= 1 I 1 l r lT O X ��Q a m rn m v 2 a R v e "^ m z n ti O C C Z 3 c m P N n x n � zm a o z m 70 raj 0 ?tom Tll o 0 o m z g x= D � 8� �� m ? p .[ c Z p O nm r m m `�? oo o z �rcnO ' •1 N -nv -i m 0 C D -O-0<aD N r- N_ D -0 mmr A o Dmr-m m2 1 Dn <v < m aD- Dm 0 N or-�n0 m -i m zm o� �>< D D m i m r � m v v � m O 0 m OrIn NVf m 1 mz n0 mo D� Z 7< v R ., Nf7 0-L,2.'I \ '; N N I - N n rw 1 O I _ LAm— �"— C mm- z ODvr I m <� C_ Dn H C N m o2rti mDO;O m r A-U> MLA m "< Nm(N—= m ^+ ox. x CD 0 zaND Or.. r) r 7c n -Z- �o - D .Q vN COO: n m DCO -i t)r z ➢T 7«- (A-O -nmZ -i (AM N rti-a c r M> - -� mD —r mN -ozn O x mr --Iz v X0— na MOZ o -ifs D — -i m7< ZZO m c0m N 0r" m 10 >W-O -z comma, -N �vm cvc,) m a7—D C mZ(A 0 x0-4 1 N➢ O mZO z mvx Km D r- --I D nz x m �z D D m— z< --Irn 0W ;0D 00 O a R9 a m R o n z O s � z r y n q G1 0 p M n $ : z m m of O O ~ N O Z � n s - A o v z z ZE M � o n _ = z 0 "moo ,D z m 0 0 U) n A m m ^Z X =, CZ nrn iM Cm my r� D Zm rn� O 'v My aW r;c N v, ➢ - zd -i -1 ➢ y y MI�'y0 o xo z n T H om 0 or gn -C) m 0 ,ocnaNN- a:IE DO a,D—w 0. r\)0 �O OOOOOtn0Oo �v n n' iw mN 00 n� nx -i c o `� z" �c x m -In - Mm wr; rr 70 C000 Twtox Om CD 0 K H H cm com OOr NCI m o co>;o -nvZ y ux n �7'V,O >M-1 NO m 0 OMzD zcx A-nio wm x o nooy ➢cn o r o n0 r - v z = m zo� �ii z T v = j 1 D omr nKm rmo 0r= r z O mom z X"o 2 NG] w = w 0 m- rrnn n q Z n r r mo 10 -y OM m70 mr O O O 1 O C m� I; �➢ Am rz n_ O c r LA m A z Tn n z� =o 0> m O V, z on O n N W< my CD n a;D na m r r mo rrn N <- �n z I= z� ovrvv, mxozm c� on CCm:EmC g n 0A�nm co CC) a) zz m ra>zz IIIa I I o m rz�c Ayaom ZM:05M =00-i0 I I v�c,)�oo I xn-nz arn0 r- 0 -4 I � I ' i � I m- A 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I U1 m vn m< �n om -V V, na n co - mr rm 0 -1 nX 0 m z n _ a R9 2 ko 0) D 10 �? v x �D n N x = m N - r = � � � D x N O c r m 2 r m N C p Z n m C m m r Z v ell r < A O a mom (nt _C < r D D C z Z m m -HnLO ym fTi m N N N N c =v r- O? " xm zm G� O C D Z Zo _ N om mI 0 z m � o N C> r n m N a� d 0 N C, _. z 0 1� c-> n 0 m ao a ow X "x Cy r0 -+m m " NT D TN 0 " O p > Z rm r zm V, C> / x ! � O O(A = mm --Im m n " r rc Nr N 0o O < .� Z � D � M D m .i7 Y o m � O19 z C ` YC 4 " C Z o N C, x � c z I>§ �no o " Z o Tt Zi58F " xCAm D N O D z Z D m � N O N r 0;4 z N r c m c� D m m x n Z v ZE m m rm- (I� O O m D x m r 0 0 v r- am 0 v m O 00 X N Z O m O c z v N c A D m Z O 0 LA " n m r m D C ' n zvC r C m z- m Z-! ` O- Zy mI "c o� < m< rn A r C m —I C>Oo DOZ r < C N m =� mm CO �m n _mm ry �\ r N m ZN N O Z Z w D r � D D D m 2 z o 4` o" s N ..► m v 1 D �r- -+ c x� �m �co n m zn 00 o-1 "D rm m" <� m OZ �A < H -i n mm am _" rc Nr o< Zm a� �D N O � N Z n O x O C Z O N C m D m om" r- Ln r N mNN -1 U1 vv= 0 o:x xzv N.Z7 omv mDm N K D oz m;K m "—� �W m -+ xx �n x A Z 0 y 0 CA n r- m w P8a; �g T 2 R o p z o Z s � ~ n t7 Y C m T � m o - � � � � D O ~ o z x D � > � Z Z m w O = N r Z c� � o =�z (»1N 0 Z — Z D x • x 0 P nm 00 N m ror ror m mm mm O ox- 7 0m D O D -4 — x z�- .mom n Zoo =m7c O N OO r D D Z 0 IIzm Mm 0 N � r m m ED f 0 0 n Z M r c) C A I 0 r 7 N m N > m D r 0r r 0 m m m m O � � iF rn r m a CA X n v m N T X r m� Ao C O Z �- Z, (Z:,c m n"A r) D c � lit Mm X y N N 0 m mo r)m �m mz mN Z -1 D n A c n m zm o N TZ v y o o 0 8 CA �+ m w N — lop q�s...�^ g ".} ' ........ + ^ I : i 00 X ob z Z > i - N m -O v; T TM N N Np N Z y W N _ A M O< m Z= z O fm' X Z Z Z Z '� (A [") D r- Z y m A v 1� m m m m - (A N rA- ram- rm- .. n m 1 1 r J� a W N - Z v on D m m r r9 $ a D z 0n = � -a o r (;� w r-4 m > a Zy F r v D� C O o D _ '" r ZN D Zm r r o> v CD T o m -� y N o N z Z 59 O r O T z j1 Z= r m O r0 m0 zx ELA-M N zD Oo O T m n n m M m �% mrr- _ �1 Z O C� M z -n m I -� m Z D A A 0 2 �N OnON 7 0 r n m = N m �r c n A T oa NW �Z :c0. Z L c� pr^ a g ^ r — N Z �/i oZ Zo Zm m_Nm T D rM � Z ? o N/ rm D o mz mo C)z n V% z on m ^ M x N D O A z TO H D< AOAO z Z O r 2 n m 0- Z m ti0 m •--! ~ N OV -"'Z mA COS-0/Y r rzim m m v m A r N -im � NN NZN D 2N O 'O A r c m r =� 1x r- v rn 7 N < m cT/i z m i m F OP oc mZ oZr- m = mo L A v N n Zr m� m m m mm A Z �y o -No n m i� m i_ Y000 w AA o T _ m y m -! o r^x -1A x• im x -+o D i n m n = g -zi m ;D o�x V nmx x0 f r m m x D -i z " m m n N z o mm oT Nn ?pr zn z O ri r� n m m 'i m g0 mo mo 0 z 7c p D m n oD No mz v0 z0 o -o m Z rT n1 AO Viz A r m 0 c m m v !z o-i oz <T1 x D D Z N O A D A T. v xo mx z m y MU; m m m = m M n NA Z NN DT i on r n Z N �n > z N r m n -r c Z N A o m m o o m n -i M ►f ? m m o o w+ ; z m� ,3II O -i 6 m m o 11 A 4 r < m A 0 z= D mN fn' 7• r Z O D .A rm m Az -� i z v xm n r n Z n m n m Z •_-! Z r- D 0 m oD S� n --! -� ; z J �.� q < m n = m V m O x mr, N r r C O O Z rA M -UL) M M D o � m v 0 D A -4 En x r M M v v p m _ 1 � m � H O z W 4 N W $ > -�pp r f1 6 4 c my z A > n o 0 n o o ^�� T r n Q c� x n z m a n p m r ki � w _N _ z o z m r ? - a Z—"► O m v n N < .^w.. _o x D _ A -A vN <{ _A = D zN <X m D0 za A x� , -4m -n ti OO r. NX S CD x Oo n D 3 D < Z �' r xo m Z c-,o o Av = o-1 N m D v v" m m N N r• s .......... . �� O n M LA o = •• C fr,.". <m N A r' m r m i o z m z M� Z LA M vz 0-4 O n z � m N� rn D z r- r m OD fVT�I 0 D x N -i v z 0 c z v N C m m �v p� z n x r- x Czi nN rx �r x�v ozm ' z nA N n m s N D N p ��cvyz-m'� Zrvoo mmmoo I �O� f(mA f NN�o n N ' fn m O -..i Yn o # Y m N m n nD n N m < x fn' n Z N ¢ C m N -D = CO --Io O�X A A n- z MO Z otmom r Z x N m D o-+ mm A O S v _A A D r c 0 MN N z D Ol n o M M N m N m O A ?m r 0 M - - n M z -I M r I I m < 0 m A i0 m n � A D < > n X �p m Z a R$ i III LLO e5 om a3Na 8VU:lj z N � �) O c � C° O r n z z 0 Z 0 m z m n r n m n n W 0 m n = c j r o m O � N m 0 ® O o N m n o x � X N n 2 n r i O m Z o O ro 0>mczi o� N C r N : �T m \ = m C M, m -0 z")n mm > n --IC m m n r 0 m Z m m <o D ? z m N > D S N r r M M mm - N �y M m mm N N W N n O T 0 0 O o 0 O O co N m m Z—Dm — m z m ti O Z o � n C 4 o N $ n ;0c A c m A DPD Z m>�l R T o z o- r) , 0 -' CA gym' o F. 0 n f> m2+ is Z v o Z y Ac N Pr ^� 2 > 7 m p Z N no ZE m p N r > m w = u m rim N Z O S D 2 O < D (A > m C m O 2 C) a < > N _0 r O O N D (A > S '° N _0 m n O a n D n n� o� ZN On Z7m mN it -> r x pr 00 mn <� mK rW NC° ac Nr < Zj ^ NC- ar �'-' mn mn -i? fn �� mz Nr 0x mr >x z c my om oc m c z -n a z mm <m -m �0 OZ 1 C7 N 0p m �90 Z 0 D m2 > N N mz S C Oc m O rN r N p_i S_ m0 n r= D m 0Z C Nm "' { D Zm S C7N O C N n - r T N -4 C O C) i -�i VCi m n vCi � 1 r� m> mn 2 p- zD 7 C C ti n> T D r r �� OS r m Z n N -0Ln � c) A Z 7 C CD p z C 7 n C°> DS r N 2 c� m %VO O D m �_ N nO N � r n m0 D nN N � m m A— r- D N ;L1m n Z n() T� n NZ7 An O0 �c m- �c N >m TA z > p Z m mo Z m �� 2 > mn m� M TC m; Z7 �� c LA > N � Z � � r n Z O c N AZ < < O r Z NC r m n fz Z Z D .`O -1 N CC) m > 2 D m �7 � oa � "°Z r > OC �Z > m �7z -m Or �0 D -C- N m > 2-i <n m SD �C° z f'1 = > m m�7 W < �r -> p r 00 OZ m g� n r0 rTl r1j mD p :D� 2 A- C r r Sc > 2 �� m-1 C fN mD ZC 0� Am >� 2N o> n o .1� CC 0� r o r - C z > r r mD �T �N >- C n f� om N r> o> OD — 0 m z '<z — $ rr mra �m c mN o r > N c Z W �o n- a o� � my m a o { N �7 > S m > `i c -i > > N m > m 2 C N _ z ° N N N IV N N N N N N N N N N N N as C? i i t d) C) > 0 > 0 n 0 D C) n C) D 0 > 0 D n n 0 > C) D C) a C) D C) n C) > C) D S 2 \ N \ N \ N 2 71 n C D a 1x -� � x D r n r > r Z W 0r z W Z Z L1 C) a N a cn W Cn a w d a a a N N D N D N N n N a N N O O p O O O O O O O O p O O O O n 7 n n 0 0 t) n n n O O N S N S N 2 =r 2 N 2 N 2 � f g ZE * ZE G Z z Z z z z m O O n � T n m N c z r C7 T D m 'V n Z1 _0 > m N 2 n r O r O N 2 D N 2 a > A V > r O > S > m N c z N c z D S N c z N c z > A N 2 > N 2 a ~ 1 1 m m m m m N 2 N N 2 N 2 N 2 0 N N 1 N N N N N N m > n m > mm > O D> D O D o D mL > m D m D m a m O O cm o m cco \ O O O z z O O O O O Z Z0 z Z Z 2 0 z CA z Z 1 z Z Z IA Z 0 Z W W OD wW Ln O co 0N W _ Vt aD w co M r N 0 Cn d w OD 0)�D N W O to wW In O W O — — N Ul N A N w W d CD O W w N In 0 A W co N N c0 co CT m C. N m N O O W N N N O w p NO in cn to cn p NO O to O NO O O O N rn A 0 P n Z n i I N x 9 CENWS-EC-TB-HH MFR 21-Feb-03 SUBJECT: CEDAR SPAWNING CHANNEL DESIGN REVISIONS, DESIGN DOCUMENTATION AND CONSTRUCTION CONCERNS This memo documents the design modifications and addresses additional analyses performed since completion of the draft Hydrology and Hydraulics Design Documentation Report (August 20, 2002) and receipt of Technical Review comments from NHC (February 2003)(See Appendix B). Design Modifications and Additional Design Documentation 1) Despite surveys of water levels there is still uncertainty about how the water level compares between the proposed channel and the river. The February 181h subsurface exploration showed that river levels were about 0.5 ft higher than the groundwater table (GWT) along the proposed channel. The reason for this is uncertain. It may be due to a lag in the response of the GWT to river levels, or improper measuring, although the later appears unlikely given the consistent trends in measurement (water slope in holes and river were both in the downstream direction, water level in river was uniformly higher). The most significant impact of the investigations is that the side -slopes have been laid back to 2 on 1 from 1.5 on 1. The water levels in the river adjacent to the holes were input into the HEC-RAS hydraulic model of the river and spawning channel to see how closely the model represents river levels (Figure 1). The model does a god job of representing water levels in the river at the inlet (+/- 0.2 ft) but is at least 0.8 ft to as much as 1.6 ft lower than the measured water level downstream along the channel. The reason for this difference is that the river cross sections in this reach are interpolated from cross sections several hundred yards away. At low flow the interpolated cross sections don't reproduce the water level very well. Because the previous analysis used highwater marks during a moderate flood, the model was assumed to be acceptable and a channel profile was developed to ensure that water did not percolate into the GWT. Since the river was assumed to be lower during low flows, the design profile also appears lower. I have revised the design profile and submitted it to Civil Design. It is not important that it be incorporated into the planset immediately because it is still dependent on remaining uncertainties. Given the uncertainties about river levels I strongly recommend that we measure river levels at locations shown in Appendix A when flows approach 250 cfs or below. This will allow final verification of the inlet and outlet elevations, and stream slope before construction. The surveys show the GWT about 4-6 ft below ground. Our centerline excavation depths exceed 10 ft in places. It may not be possible to excavate to the profile depths shown in the plans due to bank caving in the wet. 2) Due to concerns over riverbed aggradation or downcutting addressed in previous meetings, the inlet culvert was enlarged to 4 ft x 4 ft and the invert lowered 6" below the streambed to El 55.70. Since normal low flow depths average 2 ft in this location, the Cedar Spawning Channel Final Design Documentation river thalweg can scour as much as 2 ft before the culvert would need to be re -set. If aggradation exceeds 1.5 ft, raising of the inlet culvert or dredging should be considered. 3) Figures 2-3 show typical depths and velocities during peak spawning conditions. Depths average between 0.75 and 1.0 ft for most of the channel until the channel meets the river. Here river backwater increases depths up to 2.5 ft. Velocities range from 0.4 ft/s at the mouth to 2.5 ft/s at the riffle just upstream of the mouth. Average channel velocities are between 1.2 and 1.6 ft/s for most of the channel length. Because only flow is increasing, Figures 5 and 6 from the draft report can be used to show that the increased flow from the larger culvert does not adversely impact stability of the channel (assuming uniform, non -turbulent conditions). The above figures are for the average roughness condition and don't reflect the impact of large amounts of channel irregularity or woody debris. 4) With the gate fully open, the flow to the channel is increased over the 3 ft x 3 ft culvert, as shown by the following table, but only when flows exceed 200 cfs. Flows are increased 30-40% during the peak spawning period by increasing the size of the inlet culvert. Figures 4-5 illustrate the changes in depth and velocity during low flow conditions. Spawning Period Flow in River Flow in Flow in % Change (cfs) Channel (4 ft x Channel (3 ft x 4 ft Box 3 ft Box Culvert) Culvert) Summer Lowest 100 6 6 0 Required Nonnal 150 7 7 0 Minimum (September 16-30) 90% Exceedence based 250 14 10 +40% on 57 years of record (Sept 1-March 1) Required Nonnal Low 440 19 14 +28% (Oct 8-Dec 301h Average) Required Nonnal High 470 20 14 +36% (Oct 8-Dec 301h Average) 5) The above table does not reflect the impact of large amounts of channel irregularity or woody debris. A check was made to see what the impact of one debris installation on the hydraulics. If large amounts of wood are placed in -channel, it is anticipated that LWD will disrupt flow and backwater the inlet system, reducing the available flow to the channel and promote siltation. 6) The following table shows how flows in the channel change in response to moderate flood events up to 5000-cfs, depending on culvert type. Obviously the larger opening increases flow. Similarly, the culvert discharge peaks out at flows nearing 3,000 cfs due to backwater. Z. Corum 2/21/2003 2 Cedar Spawning Channel Final Design Documentation Recurrence Interval Flood Flow Max Flow in Max Flow in % Change (yr) (cfs) Channel (4 ft Channel (3 ft x 3 ft x 4 ft Box Box Culvert, full Culvert, full open 50% EXCEED 1,000 27 23 (14)** 17% —1-YR 2,000 48 39 (18) 23% —2-YR 3,000 62 46 (21) 35% 4,000 65 46 (21) 41 % 5-YR * 5,000 66 46 (21) 43% * Channel overtopped by river above this discharge. ** Figure in parentheses = flow with 6" sluice gate opening 6) Large wood installations were analyzed for stability using buoyancy and drag computations with a factor of safety of 1.5 during the 100-year event. Logs are stabilized by embedding anchor members into the slopes. Fill heights on the trench were assumed to be 10 ft, with 2:1 side slopes. Granular fill was used as ballast. 7) The number of dendrites was reduced from two to one because the influence of backwater during high flows can defeat the dendrite/spillway concept at the lower end of the channel when flows exceed 2,000 cfs. A dendrite/spillway was added to the HEC- RAS model to determine the amount of flow that can be added to the spawning channel for flows ranging from 3,000 cfs up to the 5,000-cfs (5-year recurrence interval) flood. Overflows will reach 225 cfs at a flow of 5,000 cfs in the river. The maximum increase in flow depth in the spawning channel at the confluence of the dendrite is 0.5 ft during the 5-year event, but velocities are increased from 0.6 ft/s to 2.75 ft/s. Thus the dendrite will function to pre -flood the channel and increase velocities to limit siltation when flows exceed 3,000 cfs. For flows below 3,000 cfs some silt will temporarily deposit, however the flow rates during normal conditions will be sufficient to remove this silt. Beyond 5,000 cfs the river starts to access the floodplain and it becomes exceedingly difficult to estimate the amount of overflow to the channel with certainty. The dendrite and the bank of the channel opposite of dendrite will require armoring with riprap sufficient to prevent the river from overtaking the spawning channel during a major flood. I recommend locating an engineered logjam at the confluence to collect woody debris and to dissipate the energy of the flood. The buried riprap design in the plans should be sufficient to protect this reach. If the expense and work required to construct this dendrite are excessive, I still recommend constructing a limited riprap overflow weir to provide a controlled failure point. 8) Trees placed in alcoves should be anchored by placing the tree across the channel and bank such that they rest adjacent to live trees. The force of flowing water will push the tree downstream into the live tree and the rootball will dig into the stream bank. This anchoring system is not analyzed and is based on judgment. Z. Corum 2/21/2003 3 Cedar Spawning Channel Final Design Documentation Construction Info 1) The profile and bottom width of the channel in the plans represent the top of finished streambed (excluding pool sections). Consider over excavating up to 18 inches to place gravel if in -situ material doesn't meet WDFW specifications. 2) Consider the impact of the GWT on construction operations. Building the channel to the design depth will not be possible when the river is high. How and where will water be pumped? If GW is a problem at low river levels, then the channel may have sufficient GW to operate without a surface connection to the river. 3) The inlet headwall was modified to limit concrete pouring near the river. The headwall and wingwalls were replaced with a metal trash rack that flares out to catch the adjacent side slopes. 24" minus riprap is used to protect the inlet and limit turbulence (see plans). Two geogrid layers will be constructed on top of the culvert/riprap and vegetated. The trash rack is shop or field assembled and bolted to the flush end of the culvert. Consider non -corrosive materials. 4) Several suppliers offer pre -cast reinforced concrete box culverts. Copies of the drawings should be made available to ensure that the culvert will fit into the vault. 5) The sluice gate, Armtec Limited type "50-10" can be obtained locally from Beaver Inc, Bellevue WA, 425 398 6678 (Ask for Nick). Estimated price for delivery of all components is $5000. Check to see if they will field install. Waterman series 3000 sluice gate can be used as well. 6) The 96" diameter vault can be obtained from Shope Concrete products of Puyallup WA 253 848 1551 (Ask for Gary Patee). Estimated price for delivery of all components is $6,150. The vault needs to be watertight once assembled and pipes are fit. A truck and crane capable of lifting 10 tons is required for offload and placement of heaviest sections. 7) The 48" CMP was replaced with 48" CPEP to eliminate corrosion risk. 8) All drainage elements will have to have sharp protrusions sanded down or filled. 9) Using a layer of riprap on top of the placed logs will increase the factor of safety and reduce the need for logs along the toe for erosion protection. Rebar should be used to hold some members to anchor members (see plans). Duckbill anchors are capable resisting a force of 3000 lbs. These should be used to hold wood in place where noted in the plans. Pre -excavate scour holes 1.5-2.5 ft below structure to form pools. 11) Drive rebar through the hoop end of the duckbill anchor to secure the log. The commercially available anchors go for around $25/ea. Z. Corum 2/21 /2003 4 Cedar Spawning Channel Final Design Documentation 12) Alcoves should be excavated to place toppled trees with rootball attached (see detail in plans). It is likely that these trees will have to be limbed or topped to ensure safety to workers and to prevent unwanted damage to nearby areas. 10) Work closely with the hydraulic engineer and geotech engineer if there are questions about any of the above in the field. It is clear that the plans are a starting point and "field fitting" will be required. The plans are prepared with consideration for a wide range of flow conditions, however failure to install the drainage system properly may jeopardize the success of the project. Contingency Planning Construction planning should consider foregoing the inlet system if sustained GW pumping/flow rates during excavation exceed 3 cfs at or above the design streambed elevation. If this contingency is considered it may be more appropriate to excavate the channel before installing the inlet works. The inlet works trench can be partially excavated and backfilled with riprap to capture more groundwater. In this event someone will have to supply estimates of how much water the alternate system may be able to supply. This should only be considered in the event that GW is plentiful enough to remove fines that may deposit at the downstream end of the channel and all parties agree that it is an appropriate decision. REFERENCED FIGURES ON FOLLOWING PAGES ZPC Z. Corum 2/21/2003 Cedar Spawning Channel Final Design Documentation Cedar River - PL99 - Based on 2000 FIS Plan: 1 x 48 RCB high flow full open 2121/2003 Lapmd W S Feb 188t flow GmxM —LOB Left Levee Right Levee a OW S Feb 18U flow Man Channel Distance (h) Figure 1: Feb 18`h Water level vs. Modeled River and Channel Water Level Cedar River - PL99 - Based on 200D FIS Plan: 1x 48 RCB high flow full open 2f212003 Legend Vel CM SZ Od" Vel CM AVG CRITICAL W CM AVG LOW NORMAL Vel CM AVG MGM NORMAL v Main Churl Dielaroa (8) Figure 2: Velocities in Spawning Channel: Low -Flow to Normal Spawning Conditions 4x4 box, full open Z. Corum 2/21 /2003 6 Cedar Spawning Channel Final Design Documentation Cedar River- PL99 - Based on 2000 FIS Plan: 1x 48 RCB high now full open 2121Y2003 L.I Max CN Oplh AVG HIGH NORMAL Max CN Dpth AVG LOW NORMAL Max ON Dp6190%.—ad— Max CN Dpth AVG CRITICAL Max CN Dpdi Sunmar Crilical Main Channel Distance (k) Figure 3: Depths in Spawning Channel: Low -Flow to Normal Spawning Conditions, 4x4 box, full open Cedar River -PL99-Based on 2000 FIS Plan: 1)1X3856.15ES 91412D02 2)early O.5 202003 Spa Ag Ch In 200 400 600 Matra Channel Dislanca Ill) Le9and Val CMI 1-7 Oct Normal -1X36 56.15ES Val CMI 1-7 Oct Normal - early 0.5 Val Civil 16 -30 Sept Norm - 1X36 56.15ES Val ChM 16 .30 Sap Nam - early 0.5 1200 Figure 4: Compares spawning velocities at low flow for 4x4 RCB (full open) and 3x3 RCB (0.5 ft open). Note no change in channel hydraulics. Z. Corum 2/21 /2003 7 Cedar Spawning Channel Final Design Documentation Cedar River-PL09-Bawd on 2000 FIS Pkn: 1)1X3656.15ES Q 2002 2)65rIy O.5 2/8/2003 I�WrN My CN Oplh 1.7 Oct Nprm51 _ wy 0.5 My CM 01,T 1-7 Oct Nomul _ 1X36 50.16E6 Ma CN DpN 15 JO Spl Norm • x6y0.5 Mx CN DpM 15 -W Sop1 Nam-1X35 56.15ES Mrn ONnnM DIMnu Ifl) Figure 5: Compares spawning depths at low flow for 4x4 RCB (full open) and 30 RCB (0.5 ft open). Note no change in channel hydraulics. Z. Corum 2/21 /2003 8 Cedar Spawning Channel Final Design Documentation FIGURE 6: BANK STABLE GRAIN SIZE VS FLOW AND ROUGHNESS 8.00 7.00 z 6.00 ^�- 5.00 N z 4.00 C9 w J 3.00 N 2.00 1.00 0.00 NQ �� F�OPF�OP�� �-G 4o� �QP FLOW OF INTEREST i , 0.04-AVG ------0.04-MAX 0.12-AVG -----0.12-MAX - - -- � -_ i 4 Z. Corum 2/21/2003 9 Cedar Spawning Channel Final Design Documentation 5.00 4.50 4.00 3.50 z }� 3.00 N z 2.50 W 2.00 f- N 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 FIGURE 7: CHANNEL STABLE GRAIN SIZE VS DISCHARGE AND ROUGHNESS 90% Peak 1000 cfs 2-yr 5-yr 10-YR 50-YR 100-YR exceed low Spawning flow, 3-ft Flow 3-ft gate gate opening opening FLOW OF INTEREST Z. Corum 2/21/2003 10 Cedar Spawning Channel Final Design Documentation Appendix A RATING CURVES FOR RECOMMENDED MONITORING LOCATIONS 1) Use rod/level survey based on existing ground control network 2) Get USGS hourly flow data at the City of Renton from internet (data should be for 3 hours after survey) 3) Identify flow on rating curve 4) Plot water level on rating curve and note date Cedar River- PL99 - Based on 2000 FIS Plan: Ix 48 RCB high flow full open 2/21/2003 Copy CX 14--COE OVERBANK XS N Legend W.S. Elev 0 100 200 300 400 500 Q Total (cfs) Rating curve 50 ft upstream of Outlet of Spawning Channel (120 ft E/NE from SC 2) (approx Sta. 0+80) Z. Corum 2/21 /2003 11 Cedar Spawning Channel Final Design Documentation Cedar River - PL99 - Based on 2000 FIS Plan: tx 48 RCB high now full open 2/21/2003 Copy CX 14--COE OVERBANK XS L Legend W.S. Elev 0 100 200 300 400 500 Q Total (cfs) Rating curve 40 ft d/s from SC 3 and Sta 2+20 (Lower bore hole) z a� w vi Cedar River- PL99- Based on 2000 FIS Plan: 1x 48 RCB high flow full open 2/21/2003 Copy CX 15—COE OVERBANK XS H 0 100 200 300 400 500 Q Total (cfs) Legend W.S. Elev Rating curve near Sta 5+20, 20 ft d/s from SC 5 and (Middle bore hole) Cedar River - PL99 - Based on 2000 FIS Plan: 1 x 48 RCB high flow full open 212112003 COPY CX 17--COE OVERBANK XS A a� w vi Z. Legend W.S. Elev v 12 Q Total (cfs) Cedar Spawning Channel Final Design Documentation Rating curve at SC 7, Sta. 9+75, and 30 ft d/s from staff gage, just upstream of head of spawning channel I a� w 0 E Cedar River- PL99 -Based on 2000 FIS Plan: 1x 48 RCB high flow full open 2/21/2003 copy of 357.08 0 100 200 300 400 500 Q Total (cfs) Legend W.S. Elev Rating Curve at Inlet Culvert of Spawning Channel 70 ft u/s from SC 8 Z. Corum 2/21/2003 13 El El ❑ CA cn p W IV p � D D = o 00 27 cn (n n (n 0 - CD � m a n c 0 cn = 7 > > N CD C) C W � W 0CAD 7 O W N CD 0 �_ CCD W -0cm n' CD CO :3_..f 0 O CD 3 a) cn Q L CD W o fD CD m (Dco -- in 0.3cD 0 CD 03 3 y' Cl) CD�Qo 0 (n oO 0 cn ? �� O =N� CD 0 '0 a) c�3c—•c 0 0 O cn0 �•CD � 0 O� � Q O c`Op' p v N O 0. c 7 Q. � 3 n 3 C o m cm < a) a) N• Q _ J v CD Q �«cr CD CD <Fn(a W CD O -+ ? N y O W CD s v u,'— 3 m a*ntes:=0cn -+ �' CD w 0 �C O cn m fll CD CD Ym O" to 0 �.o < Q� C C o o 0 WCD O O 6 = (D r. c W m CD 3 3 ❑❑ W WC CD 0 Ccn CCD 0 � CD cm cn o cu , CD CD CD o 0- (D boa CD 0-0•O ' C WCD o CD W UT Q cn C) s 0 -3,O W C:.Z7 - -0 = <' O -0 3 0 co' CD CD (—D J� W O o �' CD O N= CD Q m ❑❑ ❑ 0 - �, W 3 a) 0 J W 0 . 3 tll Q �. n — C N _0 �^ v _ CD 7 O W N .c 3 �F CS N c) V) �' o CD C O cn CD =( O cn cn Q o O W n W �• �- O O W CD •0 a) cQ CD cn n D -, 4 CDR. co W Q CACD N O o - CD W m 3 rD CD `G 0 3 CD ;:w CD O � a) C: CD CD CD O O `z D , 0 0 . 0 3 3 m CDm 0 * CD = 10 CD 0 CD 0 Z n m 3 v m ;U � n' m m 3' z 0 cr m o� w Q0 ° w 0 0),n•�0m �+ C Q CL CD CD Q Cn CCDD C—D � 3 sN n� n �, CD C (� = Zj O 35 a T Q O O, Z o c "O + v n 0 ' CD °oos con �c<��0m�0tn W W • W W CD Q CWD fD c CD 3'cfl3c, W '� CD Q ° n 0 Q� W n) C CC) CD O'3. w'.QNco „ O ,� CD O o cn r. 3 Cp O`G CD CD Q O Cp O ctZ �_ N cn O W CD m .. C CD 0 ai CD � Q W. Cv CD C a C O cn CD � 0 < Q Q cn — p ° CCDD cn 0 vo m�c,g�c� CCD �� Qc"-o G) CD z CD -0 m_'� cn cn :m axe �N v CD CD cn o CL �CD v T CD m CD CD x CD _ W 1 W O 0 c C CD 0- CD --j CD CD c0 0 O a m W CD CD c x CD (D Cn U) v$ c CD : o in D = co m CD 0 77 77 rr -p O O I m O 0 CDCD 0. <. CnCD ( Cn =r Q -0 O C)- 0 (0CD C7 C Ln. CD Cf� X CD CD � fll O n CD i CD i v ii t ,A W N N � C) O CD (.�i' (� CD in cc) (D (n CD Cn CD10 -a CD W = - n a) CD ! W CD wo CCD N n 00 CD O= CD CD = O CD O 3 :3.+ 7 (O O :3.. a) j= (Q O ::3 CD WO 7 �CD CD (D CCD CD � CD W CD W W C W W W W LU W Cll W W N o =r N (D o .Zr N CD o (D 7 1 N Ni 7 N CL N W W CD 3<< p (n CD� n c = � O CL-0 -a -0 n C �OD(n 3 = O (n 0 0 W � 7c CD m N -a' CD n CDCD O -4 MflCD (n W v -p - CD NCT 07 CD —. � CL m0�m — O O , ? CD O O O�CD .7 r N c (Q a :3 O 7 (D(n 3=:3 cCD- : CD CD W Q� O W CD O- �a 0' 7 (n :: CD a(nc CD -0 W CL cn(C 3 O to (n T CD Cy W CD (c 0 CD =1CD W o 3 N W°� OCaDa NO coQo� CD3 n o -- CD CDp (D CD 0 CD � O n_' O� O n m a 3 Q W Q C) O W M. � a (O �, W Q (� O 7 0 CD CD M (n a O 7 �, (a O* O O W 3 00 1 I J O = O: N p 0 CD CD a CD `< (n a O (n(n v O O a �. En to c a (S ,,Cn ' 20 O (� g CL W m C J CD �p g 3' W m� •J o cu c O O 00 c< � ,� �' C CD v O n O X � ai O v CD 3 v (D = 0 3 3' m - � �. = CD o = o CD N 3 ' Q r. W CD O (0 (D N n -. W -I ,< JCD �•(onCD�m CJ a: CD = coi - -ocnCD "O O CD CD a M.3 = CD CD -a O N CD (n W = CD j N. �. (n (Wn O W r- 1 (C) D (n CD < c CD CD (L] CD O 7 O 1 A" CD c (D CD `Z 3 W� -_ (n J (D O �_ CD < 3 C W c C0 O(n �, c n (� CD _ C? .. -. CD 3 0 3 CND � (O (D ' J CQ `2 7 CT W (D Q 3 M. (a CD O O n J . C) to r O v O a < p CD n 3 ]- Q O (O CD = v W CD W (n 3 W W� 3. v c 0 (n - (Q C `< <� CD p C:D a- o O j j CD CD W a o Q C � CO—D vi o ° w c cn O CD o v 0 0 W (n - -O O o' CD 3' 3 O p .+ c 0 �' r. W v, Z) (n (n O W CD (� N• �� 0 3 CD CD K O � CD C W S CD v 3 CD 5 CD ? < CD a (n CD CD -0 N O u n OO W v o -(S -' D Wn(O S OW o ON "(C n O<(0 O CD n a Z O CD O (n (n CD C Z O Z O Z O D c (n 0 o D n� n - W 3 0 3 w = �_ -<<DCDN �f( D (D (n W W Cy N CD (D O 3 N l<D _ N (n a c� 3 O Cy < O O CD O to ;n O a v CD CD a a a N < (n N cD 3 a O < to ai (D (D a a to a O CCDD O CD N-0 CD O (D - C v CD cn CD -0 C f7 W � (n CD p a C cL CD ((n N CD 7 Q W CD 5- CD � O- O Cn N W O O0 �• c 0 n 7 (O 0 (=n CD O C<p (0 n d N CD 3 W-0 (o `< W CD : CD O c O 3 W r: CD 0 3 W O m j a � O Q -Op � 0 C1 W O W � Q CD (Wp (a O (fl N CD (Q 3 Y. N `< Cep c (D . < (D a _ Cc: > a O O CD < O `2_ O O cn (D CD 3 (n , to m W T > a � O f=rl N cn S W - a 0 7 (� 0-0 CD CD W 'WO 3 � - W O 'O (7 a CD � 7 "0 CD a CO O n CD ::r CD a cn CD O in O , A W N N O co Cp -1 O M (n (n (n 0 0 cn CD CD COD C0 CD OCDn CD n n n A n (D A CD A CD A :3-- CD O = 0 = 0 = = _ = = :3 00 1 A3°p CDCD0CD -, (n�rw oN cn No = ��p =0 = CD �QN° N O 0 0 CD 5'O C 3( CD -• CD 0 O Q co CD fv ,, v aU n C' O C A n CD -� CD < -�, cn 0 A � = � (O C<D CD CD A CD (D P. N A 3 - CDCDCA D SD SD vOi O 0 CD CD Cn Cn �' cn � CD = (D A A CD O 7 00 -° = O a < CD 0J O a) N -0 N O Cn n CD m ° a v o �CD� CD.CD ��'h - C7 v Sli O C L (n CD 0 O y A t0 CD A O Z a LD 0 �b7 CD C � N = O n 3 ^ O- CD CM. AD cn O CD -Np .. �2 (n CD Ui A CS N CD O 0 = O C1 CD p ° 0 3 iv (D M• �.�, 3 Cll -` O. vy o A �o� v ° C Q = tv (D = =CD � (n A Ov C� (n A _ • �� = _dC CD O � a a) ua CD CD CD CD 0) O A 0- CDJ CCD vp CD < •J ° (n v o CD 0m m En p 0' (7 CD C J to S CD CD OA CD O CD CT CD O (n _ = C a -+. O N° CO A CD `< � (O n O •G 3 C O CD 0_ 0 O a _ _ ? CD y to O O .+ CD 0- N O (D a CD "" N Cll CS G -° S « CD Cu (ND C,...D A O v ° M O a u = N(D A � O N -0x; .1) n N _ SDO0) CD O' C = a O CD O J 71 O CD o v - _. = -(0 3 O 0 C a a ._. (0 cn' J=' A :E CD �•= p Z= O 7' N N 0, N' O C CD a= v .C» _ CD CD .X« ^ p Q A (D ��_ O n a �N " O = C1 ± < O CD CD = fll A + O a O = a o�3�C°'53 A O � 0 Z O ZZ O O ZZ�=Q��Do=:��,<cmrnoCD=rCD O O O n CD Cn .0 0 -'xmc��om a Cn A '� O O (p iv (D v M. n CD CCDD 0 CD 3mcn (D a N as CD m a 0 a CD Q A 0 CD N =- r cna00 A A Cll _= Sv 0 =� a CD CAD C N 3°= A' � Q (p 0 v O v a • v o < �= sa CAD Q v (D Q CD 0 Q 0 3a)CD3N3 cD33r:=cD 7 CND A- a j N d A C) Q�ov O CD = CD N 0: n (n N A = o���.a J 3 Cv Cv 0 CD A r -i oCCD = Q sll = CD CD CD (n� 3 v3 �v n)m(o �g�CD-°aCD �x a° v �_ (� m v �CD °Mvv?� - .. CD v-, Cam .- " m �-� Q 3 CD O 7• CD v to < S N � v �_ (D < A v a CD Cv _A O O a) N -0' ° ,► (Q CD 0 = 00 N ° O O N CD CAD a (n < C A CDCD En O O (D ° (� vOi = o < -CAD < p O° Q) C3D O D (n a _ O a A ° O .� (D O (o _CD cn a v 1 CD N a) CD = _ ° (n C) N C) CO ONo V 0) CN7i in cn Cn U) cn Cn CDn Cn CD cn CD co CD n n n 0 0 0 0 p' O O O O O O O O (n U7 CJl Cn C31 CJl CJ1 U1 U1 W W W W W W W W W (s rn CD S cn 0- r- O 00 0-0 =T, (n�� 0 0 CD a) <(vC'O=-m �N � 0 D -E— 0 n 3 � a) CD (v � ° m � 0 = cn =3 CD(nCDv cn CL cn J � a) w CD m CD N � CC. O CD O O D O S = 07 O -° 0 'O CD J ^� ° O = - '< < CD = m CD in - v -a O" (n cn 30 m pl 0 s CD (n " O (D T. — COD (n S (CQ CD sli � CD CD Q — Q °c O °m (ll - CD < s CD 0- m �_ s scn m(o cn CD CD m �:'cn - fl°cQ3c as oo � o v m cuQcc���cnQ � CD �Fm 0�cp c p = c OvOc c cn = O. _ J v Cv N �` v CT (S COD `< � O—, O (D' C CD COD �a Q n�cn_ (n 0 (n CD < (D mn�i°a°� CD Cn m 3 .. (0v omm-0w0Q(nwC"L < 3 ° co °� m - _--„-o (n O o'(n Q in' (OD o m p � =o ��(Q 0 CD �_0 cn a o� 0 w m o `ni O = C m = CD a) °' � m e (n Q a) CCD r (n Sv m ° (n �! ° Q- Q O — O -w a O O Cll -0 to 1 * (n = 0 m Q 0- .-f N Q < Q OC 0 cn < (n CD cn CD 0= 0 0 0 (CAD d y C- < ,.O<< O N m= N CD C CCCp N = :3 3 Cp n (n < CD (o CD`cn � m 0- Q 0 CD C = c : a• cn (n O 'O O m.�< (aD i o Q c c m c v mOa N D O �n C = 7n' C c CC] CD CD D - _ �;--o cn 3 . C CD 0 0-CD voo vfD o am sv 3� 0 O =0r 3 ° cn m 7 O �CC O_ iv cn v= p 3 c CD .+ CD 3 :3-� O (n _ O O O O° S N CD v N CC O N cQ v N CD CD J O (O < CD �' � v C 3 Q CS S m X CD m (D = O D � o cn =r CD = a 0 3 O O N O m cn m CD Q m_0 J O _' (n 0 Cv ° N = fn CD -0 p 6 CD .► (n p p N j O c p m cn' o p C � - O cn z (U 0) O C O cn m �. CD O Q C O CO < (n CD CD cn O sll cD Z3 = Ol d 5 r ~ CD I (o ^: O E3 CD �. j S CD S Q t(D m cn c C o ° o m CD QNOj mo c ( (n CD A O =(n (O (n �l CD 5 0 0 c• m °Q(na>(vmCD0 m o r 0 0 0 3-0 "� 0� 0CD=7* •c27mO•l< -n—I � �7 p Cn ill�c� O 0 0 o o O 0 m cn ��o CD in �7 (O co 0 —Dv3cmcc*op��_�Q(v3m= cn (n v O 0 Co - < (n m c ° (n CD CO (v _ �� a Q a m c0 'r1=svr(n=(DCLCn -,cn sv=(v -0m= .. c c� 3c iv 0rT 30(n c =- ocr= �m3' ccna CD a) Q 0 =O pines rto -�,. _(v �N� ° sv c3 ° 0 G�� C� O j m _ Ncc D•= NCQ Q='CD �r.3 0 (n'D� O °i(� �Q= Qw p� o m O m m v— -ocm=�mcn oc C: CLOD ch CO ��° �< mm o0 _ o ° Cp coin v O 0 O O = = _ �' -0 � _ � CD CO CO �. O O � CD � 0 D cn = m`nm3o cn O c ���m (O O 0 p CD-^rnm N CD (n (CL cn :3 cn o Q Q m Q m G c 0 W N O Cl) OWD -4 CA cn •? CD CD CD (D CD (D CD (D CD CD � 7 7 7 7 : � °7 � co Cb co ti -4 V -I C) CA CA CD D CD CD 0 a m 0 7 0 -{ v m cn O 0 0 CT m� T% m (fl < 7 Z v O CD CD _' Cn m(n m (_n o 00 O 0 p j• v o r 0 O U 0 m �I � CA (° y m m N- 3 Q. m m o . 3 p� (n o.. 3 0 r: CD 7 — m° cn CD a) • m Q_ C ,•x 0 a m m m— C° C CD Q) (D v— (D COn v 3- O O ! C CD y° C O 0-° a c •-« 0 m o C a CD C cn' 3 = n� y mCD Cn 0 p m - ° 0 cn 0 c Cll O Q (� -. m O O N m 3 cn O y y sli m `< p 3 a Sy v m m m �, y C,—D y y CD ° � O < CD CD m �, O C 7 '—'• O Q p cL y CD Z' cn p �. O y •p m O O O a E. 0 Cn C d CD O p 3 , O CD °. (Q o ° � O r: o s CO Cz0 CD c a0 -CD C-' 0ymv,-�.Q-c-Dv� cL o 'm oX °�'vCL m y �w 3 o c 53�0o 0- �� m °°3�.�3 cn �m oCD m0 v = o m < 0-gyma�Qa(o'�CD mo.< (onCD�' 0 °(n?nm<<3.0 ='OCQ.� 0)vcyi� ccnoZx-3-C =< (a 0 cn p� y 0 ;7- S p r,; =" C� 3 — =; C cn m O C) ° _ - U. 3 N ? cn� v_ n 3 C � O C G _ S C � 3 0 0 C C y O 7-" 3 7 0 m Q CD 3 ? v S Er Er 0 O CL J= `G Oc C:�` 7 CD cn `< � C1 CD •0 CD CD N (D (D C1 o O —� � � CD O N v N — � . y m m CD cn' .« 0 y— CD CD y ni =' « a m N CD c CD � C L O E Cn m m o C1 C1 < Cn y p m C aD CD Zr o ° O� C: (CD CD o y ("CD -0 v (LSD CCD N ,� ° m ° �� oo m, m N �� m w Q N � sv fOn 3 3 'ol< •< � c y. 3 a m ° ° r. �- �o CD< mcn Q O n CD N CL n' j Q cn — cn,-. C•3 v y 7.m p n' 7 '*CD .G a (� m o C N. C C) cn yr.cn m y O m - CD m O y CD "O rr y <3O'CD (n cn CD J cr .« m y y_ 0 sm m �0� c° m o -• 0 0 6 O n 3 3 U cn S 3 0 (D 7' m m p m 0 m Q� 3 fl: j d a v v w �. j 5 m C O O y m v< c>' 0 vcD 3 (D cOn CD -0 CD 0 O �' 0 C O- v a p 0 r. CD 7 0 �' n O j C m n O `< y- ' 6 N N' C1 a a p y CO m a< y. M. m -< v CD (n CD (� m m ch = m O a C1CD a 0 Cr �. C 7 < 7 ° 0 y m m v C c Q m0 j v n< W y O v cD O�* y CD r- CD N m S (D l<� cn n n. 0 7 CD CD CD m 2 m �,x��mm 0c� c cn o •c(n m0 CD l< nCL 0 O< c m 3:?a> :3, ° N MCD Dom ° m 0 3.0 n n. ° 0 c 3 p � m m C 0 o y sli N c c N. 3 y a� m CD O 3 v CD ° � 0 0 m a' n .G m CD vi m- O C L ? m CD C CCD C—D y 3 0 0 (OD -* n m j cn y -, v y �- (D y y m C �, -, c y m � m 3 m o O (p < m r r* _ C1 .-.• m y X � '_. O CD ° m y_. O O m t2 0 O O S CD cn > N o d -i �° a CD' 7 C CD a E. C m ' m m �• O m CM = m y O y y S 7 m S . ` w O m(n C) iD < (n O Q CD C L o Q. N O y� y =b a 0 0 Cn p O O cn CD 0- 0 m C1 CZ "O N N 7 o n N m CD CAD CD 3 3 Q m O Cr ° ? 3. 3 5 :3 CD O C- CD 01 cn - O cn (mn CD C O (D ccDD v O ° N n a -. t0 =3cn (Q m Cl) CD l< CD — v cD y 0 a C L Q 3� C 7 r CD a 3 m C O CD N (D 70c CD CD 3 c CD cD m O i O < � ml< 3' p 0 - =3 0 0 is m a m o � N 3 =0 v- a �' m o 0 Q Q �. ,� a 0 c corn y x (n CD y crmC (n-cr3 0 m x 7 Xy 3 C m o-mC_ Cn 0 m x M -' -cr3 3 C CD y D a (0 D cc D cc CDv' < CD m ° CL a0 0 a ^ l< 3 < C 0. �p o a r: ,° =- - � m CD CD ° y a a j y y .--: m a `< Q m O m 0 y C1 7 y cn N c- �G a m p� 0(n O cn CD O C m m O co CD O CD m- C O m 0 0 CT C o r n n 0 0 O m 0 0 6 C o o 0c Cn — m v a CD CD 7' 0 y y C C m* Q ma N< m 7• y, 0 m v cn c CD a� a a cn = �•� C m cD 0 CD a.o•� C N o < m .+; m n.o O o =m m 0 Q -0 0° S a 0° v m 0 CD 5D Cr o cOn Q 1 Cll (p C L m r C 0 N CD' y Q CD' y Q 0 = _ Cn CilEO O C 00V 0) Cn A C nD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD n n n 0 0 j j O O O _0 O O O . Do 4 (p V 00 00 00 00 co co P W CA Cn A A W O p o 3 c� o N O: p �c CD 3 X,�v cn v o° v O 0- CD r' Q (D 00 °° m - CD (D O a v n v — 3 Cli CD CD 7- CD CD 3 CO -7 7" CD 3' CD v O Q n 7 7 -2. (D CD C CQ X 3 CD N J 0 O zr CD n N CD CD p O �. _ c CD v N v j' CD O O CD (� J CD 0) CD cn 3 Q 3 N °G `< O Cr 0 3- 3 G 3 7 c O =r CL O v m ate ° Q3 0 o a � ca-o a- 00 CD CD cn L ? O -O C m� p� 0 m C CD --q D 0 a Cn 0 cn ° n T. -O .� v 0 N 0 Cll N Cu 0_ � w w C n � 3 . cn D -p 7 O CD N 3 _ c0 J CD n CJ (Q p O CD n v 7 n CD CD N T in (p 7 CD 7< O (D w cn N O CD -• (n O O 7C n r. O 3. m a a0 nCD O _- �`�3 CD °°gym 0cnnama 0c a CD CD a J CD in N O y (D N' N O O O - p�j S 7 CD cn O Cu C C1 O O- N n O CD CD — y c a) N a n CD S CD _ 9�' n' 003 CD cn 0"°CDDcn � a 07 C CD /4 'C zT m CD cn 0_ aV CD a n 0 ° CD 7CL � ° 1 _°3y_CD c �• a 0 CD � C c Sv O CD cn CD CD o ° a �_ — Cn O < 3 O O O ° �.. O x a) CD CZ 3. N CD ZrCL CD 7 Q O N -• CD ° (O n cD 0O v -h CD p CD N cn CD c Cn •J N -, v CD 7r'' CD CD O O v cn CD a CD a 3 � Cn CD _,; < O, cn _ c Cr< to a p c Cp C CL .� a � acn v `� ° �' O 0 sv �'�0- A s� �o cn CD CD cn -, Cr C CD N N 0 NO cn v CD (" cn CD= `� � o C ,� 00 CQ o Q s X O p 03 J 7 _ CD CD -O a O CD OZ o o s 5 3 c 0 CD 0 o cn Z can c O Z ° 11 Ln. < 0 3 v CD 0< < p Z ° 0 a 2 ° Omm o o w 0 ac v �� � D° � o° .0 r CD cn ° c � 0m �m o� 2n ° v o O 0 m� 0 c_° * a0 cn m o O o O _ < �. mCD �,a<ODCDXCD CD a c:m c-Q- -0CD ° x'' N mcn!'cnU) :E30 �cfl °vM * v� N m� xo» �Daa� o �� �Om �`<°v,�NCDgn°oOCL �' �'D0 c o 0 ° Cs CD cD °'o`��v°°Q0cc0 n N' m y T. C j, < v CD 11 CD 33°m O (p — a- a° 0 a (n O °c f� cn O m (D O 7 v � N CD A j- cn CD 0- 0) CD N CD O CCDD 0 n CO CD O f� v v= (fl CD Q iv o cc o. � N p =r ? � p �• m CD cn m O- o �• CD - CD ° rn w ._n x- CD CD a — v :E CO CL CD o �_ v 7. � cn 0 7" CQ N• cn CS y q• n N CD N CD 3 C: a Cl) cn 6 0 Q 3 Q- � ' cpn S O O a C) — CD (n N _ O c Cc cn _ cn HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULICS DESIGN DOCUMENTATION REPORT -DRAFT CEDAR RIVER REPLACEMENT OVERDREDGE MITIGATION SPAWNING CHANNEL ROLLING HILLS SITE A Cedar River - PL99 - Based on 2000 FIS Plan: Stab Analysis: 0.5fi, low n, 10 rnod Q Legend wa a— w—t G Ground eenk Sb Ground Levee PREPARED FOR CITY OF RENTON, WA PREPARED BY SEATTLE DISTRICT USACE HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULICS SECTION AUGUST 2002 Cedar River Spawning Channel Replacement Hydraulics & Hydrology Design Report --Draft TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Purpose...................................................................................................... 2.0 Project description......................................................................................... 3.0 Background................................................................................................. 3.1 Restoration Goals and Concepts................................................................ 3.2 Site Selection...................................................................................... 3.3 Design Criteria..................................................................................... 4.0 Hydrologic Analysis..................................................................................... 4.1 Data................................................................................................ 4.2 Methodology...................................................................................... 4.3 Results.............................................................................................. 5.0 Hydraulic Analysis......................................................................................... 5.1 Channel Inlet Selection.......................................................... ............... 5.2 Hydraulic Modeling............................................................................... 5.3 Results............................................................................................. 5.3.1 Channel Inlet Selection...............................................................6 5.3.2 Hydraulic Analysis....................................................................6 5.3.3 Sensitivity Check.....................................................................9 6.0 Geomorphic Analysis..................................................................................... 6.1 Data and Methodology........................................................................... 6.2 Results............................................................................................. 7.0 Stability Analysis........................................................................................ 11 7.1 Data and Methodology.......................................................................... 11 7.2 Results............................................................................................ 12 8.0 Hydraulic Design........................................................................................ 15 8.1 Inlet............................................................................................... 15 8.2 Channel........................................................................................... 15 8.3 Riprap.............................................................................................. 15 8.4 Large Woody Debris............................................................................ 15 8.5 Dendrites......................................................................................... 1 8.6 Bank Stabilization............................................................................... 1 8.7 Other Design Considerations..................................................................16 8.7.1 Right of way and Utilities...........................................................16 8.7.2 Geotechnical......................................................................... 16 8.7.3 Site/Civil.............................................................................. 17 8.7.4 Public Access........................................................................ 17 8.7.5 Monitoring............................................................................17 LIST OF FIGURES Figure l: Spawning Channel Inlet Low -Moderate Flow Rating Curve for Varying Roughness and GateOpenings................................................................................................ Figure 2: Spawning Channel Inlet Flood Flow Rating Curve for Varying Roughness...............7 Figure 3: Bank Stable Grain Size vs Flow and Roughness.............................................13 Figure 4: Channel Stable Grain Size vs Flow and Roughness..........................................14 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Channel Spawning -Flow Hydraulic Parameters................................................8 Table 2: Channel Flood -Flow Hydraulic Parameters.....................................................9 Cedar River Spawning Channel Replacement Hydraulics & Hydrology Design Report --Draft 1.0 Purpose This document reports the results of the hydrologic and hydraulic analysis for the Cedar River PL99 project to replace the Overdredge Mitigation Channel destroyed in the February 2001 earthquake. This work item is outlined in the Hydrologic Engineering Management Plan (HEMP) dated 10 December 2001. 2.0 Project description The project is located in the floodplain of the Cedar River between River Mile (RM) 3.3 and 3.6, within the city limit of Renton WA. The project is a proposed replacement of the spawning and rearing habitat destroyed during the February 2001 earthquake. That channel was constructed as mitigation for the Cedar 205 dredging project. The project involves constructing a culvert diversion and a channel on a high -flow bench that is protected from annual flooding. The intake and channel are designed to maximize spawning area, while minimizing the site footprint. Generally the channel is designed to be stable over the range of expected flows. Where risk allows, portions of the channel will be allowed to naturally conform to the flow regime. Large Woody Debris (LWD) will be incorporated to increase bank stability and to provide habitat complexity. The intake system is designed to take a varying quantity of flow from the Cedar over the entire range of expected flows. Site constraints include a steep valley wall with episodic geotechnical instability, buried utility lines at the downstream end, public and private right-of-ways, and local public resistance to the proposed project. Site amenities include a morphologically stable reach, native gravel -cobble substrate, flood protection, readily available large wood, and restricted public access. 3.0 Background 3.1 Restoration Goals and Concepts The goal of the project is to provide spawning and rearing habitat for Sockeye salmon, and secondarily to improve spawning and rearing habitat for Coho, Chinook and other salmonids. A pool -riffle side channel with a river fed intake was selected as the preferred concept. The riffles will encourage sockeye spawning, the pools, Chinook. Based on resource agency comments the ratio of pools to riffles should not exceed 1:4. Because the Elliot channel produced favorable spawning conditions, it was used as a partial design template. Visits to other Cedar side channels indicate that over -steepened side slopes are a source for shade, gravel, and woody debris. And with constructed side channels, it was found that a predictable, controlled water source was used with success in similar river basins in British Columbia (Canada Department of Fisheries and Oceans). This led to pursuit of a structural intake system, but a softer channel. It was a project goal to include over steepened banks into the project design where feasible, and to accept that the constructed channel will evolve in time in response to regular fish use and flood flows. The large volume of available woody debris will limit migration of the channel in response to flood flows. It was also recognized that critical facilities must be protected from flooding and erosion. Seattle District USACE 8/20/2002 Cedar River Spawning Channel Replacement Hydraulics & Hydrology Design Report --Draft 3.2 Site Selection Two sites were considered for the channel replacement project. The Rolling Hills Site, on the left bank at RM 3.3-3.6 was the primary site, the existing Elliot Channel at the Maplewild golf course was the alternate site. The site constraints and benefits governed the scope and scale of the project at each site. The Rolling Hills site and the Elliot channel were compared with respect to improvements in riparian habitat, cost, maintenance, flood damage risk, and social -economic impacts. The Rolling hills site was selected as superior, largely because the river is geomorphically more stable, and the flood risk is lower. It is believed that the damage to the Rolling Hills site in the long run will be less severe, and thus the fry survival rate will be greater. Citizen input added the soft constraint of limiting the clearing of the cottonwood canopy forest and locating the maintenance path to the landward side of the channel. 3.3 Design Criteria Project team members and resource agency specialists worked together to establish the design criteria for the project. The design criteria were used to size an inlet and channel to provide average and minimum spawning conditions comparable to the Elliot Channel (average stream bed slope 0.3%. depth between 0.5-1 ft, velocities 0.7-3.3 ft/s). Additionally it was recommended that the pool riffle ratio not exceed 1:4, that channel dendrites be added to safely flood the channel during large floods, that large woody debris be incorporated into the design without anchoring. Rock and other structural features should be limited to where necessary. It was desired to evaluate the performance of the design over a range of flows that represented the rearing and spawning windows. 4.0 Hydrologic Analysis The concern for this project is to provide adequate flow in the spawning and rearing channel during the time period when the channel is in use. The operational time frame for this channel is from inid-October through May, although the project is intended to operate year-round. The design also considered use by early spawners (late summer to mid -October). Hydrologic investigations completed for previous Cedar projects and the 2000 Cedar River Habitat Conservation Plan were used to determine the low flow, design flow and flood flow conditions. 4.1 Data The Instream Flow Agreement (IFA) for the Cedar River Watershed Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) has been finalized. The IFA set minimum flow levels in the Cedar River measured below Landsburg Dam (USGS 12117500). These were adjusted to reflect the expected minimum flow levels at Renton. As part of the 1999 Additional Mitigation Channel Design ("Elliot Channel"), simulated weekly streamflow values at Renton (USGS 12119000) using data from water years 1929 to 1992, and incorporating the constraints proposed in the IFA, were used to define a low flow duration curve. The duration curve values for incremental flows between Landsburg and Renton were taken Seattle District USACE 8/20/2002 Cedar River Spawning Channel Replacement Hydraulics & Hydrology Design Report --Draft from the HCP technical appendices. Flood flow data was obtained from previous USACE work on the Cedar and from the 2000 FEMA FIS for the City of Renton. 4.2 Methodology It was assumed that there was a negligible incremental inflow to the Cedar River between the site of the proposed spawning channel and the gage at Renton. The minimum flow requirements are valid for the flow just below Landsburg. It was necessary to determine the flow at Renton that corresponds to the minimum flow levels imposed at Landsburg. A partial -duration frequency analysis for low flows, consistent with ER-1110-2-1450 and EM 1110-2-1415, was conducted to develop the weekly low -flow duration curve for Cedar River at Renton. Once the weekly low flow duration curve was established for Renton, the incremental duration curve for flows between Landsburg and Renton was subtracted from the low - flow duration curve at Renton. This is an estimate of the low flow duration curve at Landsburg. For the Elliot Channel the design low flow was taken as the flow at Renton that had the same percent of time exceeded as the normal minimum instream flow requirement at Landsburg. With the HCP in place, the weekly high normal, low normal, and critical low flows are defined. Although the Elliot results are applicable, it was felt that they captured too broad a time scale to define early spawning and other low flows of interest. Thus for the Rolling Hills site, the actual weekly minimum HCP flows at Renton were used directly to establish the operating range at low flow. In highwater years, the project will generally experience flows higher than the low flows used for design. 4.3 Results From the Elliot Channel Analysis: For the period 15 October to 02 June, the normal minimum instream flow requirement at Landsburg is 250 cfs with a 98.8 percent of time exceeded. This corresponds to a flow at Renton of approximately 300 cfs. This value was considered the lower limit of design flows for the hydraulic analysis at Elliot Levee. From HCP (2000) (used for study): Early Sockeye Spawning (9 Sept-7 Oct): 138-273 cfs, weighted average 152 cfs, critical annual minimum flow — 100 cfs Peak Sockeye Spawning (8 Oct- 30 Dec): 365-540 cfs, average "low normal' flow 440cfs, average "high normal' flow 468 cfs, critical minimum flow 243 cfs. From FEMA FIS (2000) (used for stud)) 10 yr: 5,834 cfs, 50 yr: 9,708 cfs, 100-yr: 11,450 cfs, 500-yr: 15,830 cfs From USACE (1995) (2 5-y1 used for study only): 2-yr: 3,200 cfs, 5-yr: 4,900 cfs, 10-yr: 6,175 cfs, 20-yr: 7,900 cfs, 50 yr: 10,100 cfs: 12,000 cfs, 500-yr: 22,000 cfs. Seattle District USACE 8/20/2002 Cedar River Spawning Channel Replacement Hydraulics & Hydrology Design Report --Draft 5.0 Hydraulic Analysis The hydraulic analysis section of this report includes discussions of the channel inlet system selection, hydraulic modeling, geomorphic analysis, and stability analysis. Methods, Data and Results are presented. 5.1 Channel Inlet Selection NHC Inc. was retained to provide preliminary design alternatives for the inlet system, based on their expertise with similar projects. Three alternatives were presented: A rock berm, a logjam, and a culvert intake. Project team members evaluated the alternatives and selected the culvert as the most appropriate system because head losses and ground disturbance needed to be minimized, and specific hydraulic conditions were required that could be reliably met by a culvert. This system was refined as needed to better match the topography and other project constraints. Guidance was supplied by Canada Department of Fisheries and Oceans experts who have used similar structures successfully. As stated previously it was preferred to have a reliable and controlled source of flow to the channel to meet spawning goals. It was determined that the culvert option, although more complex to design and construct, offered, the most reliable source of flow, with the least head loss, and least ground disturbance. Additionally the culvert gate allows for dewatering during maintenance and flushing of fines. 5.2 Hydraulic Modeling A backwater analysis was required to design the inlet system to create the desired hydraulic conditions, and to analyze the stability of in -channel features (substrate on bed and banks, LWD). A HEC-RAS model developed for the 2000 FEMA FIS was modified for this study. This model was calibrated to a moderately high flow. Additional calibration data were gathered and incorporated into the model as part of this study. The HEC-RAS model included the main river channel, the spawning channel, and the inlet and outlet works. Flooding impacts were analyzed. Manning's n values typically increase for a given reach for lower flows due to the larger influence of the channel's roughness elements. The channel roughness coefficients were increased to, on average, 0.055 in the channel and 0.120 on the overbank. This is about a 20 percent increase in roughness over the original calibration done for the FIS. The roughness values used in the recalibrated file are consistent with documented values for stony channels at lower stages. The previously calibrated model was checked for accuracy by comparing the computed water surface elevations to the surveyed water elevations between RM 3.3 and 3.6 during discharges of 2000 cfs in April 2002. The model reproduced the surveyed elevations to within 4 tenths of a foot at the inlet during this relatively high discharge, although some sections downstream of the inlet did not match the surveyed water surface as closely. Seattle District USACE 8/20/2002 Cedar River Spawning Channel Replacement Hydraulics & Hydrology Design Report --Draft All elevations in this document are reported using NAVD 88 vertical control. New model cross sections were added to the main -stem between RM 3.3 and 3.6. These cross sections were a combination of interpolated channel data for the main -stem Cedar, and recent ground survey of the floodplain where the proposed channel will be located. No new river cross -sections were taken. The channel is very stable, with little observable deposition or scour (Perkins Geosciences, 2002). Thus it is unlikely that the FEMA cross-section geometry has changed significantly. Given the uncertainties inherent in every computer model, two staff gages were installed at the proposed inlet locations to monitor conditions during low flow to verify the hydraulic model and design before construction begins. 5.3 Results 5.3.1 Channel Inlet Selection Careful consideration was given to the inlet selection. The options were a culvert, log jam, and rock berm inlet. The rock berm was ruled out as environmentally and hydraulically infeasible. Although the logjam inlet reflects successful natural analogs, the required ground disturbance, limited life span, and extra risk were viewed as negatives. A project at this site demands a reliable source of flow and protection against erosion of the steep hillside. It is difficult to reliably quantify the hydraulics of the log inlet, although there is substantial evidence of their success in nature. The need for meeting spawning goals makes a reliable and flexible water source attractive. The concern over hillside erosion caused by the river overtaking the channel (unlikely but possible) makes the culvert inlet attractive because there are over a hundred feet of land separating the inlet from the channel. A benefit of the culvert in this stable reach is that most of the materials will last for decades baring maintenance, although metal components will require corrosion control or occasional replacement. A "natural" inlet will degrade with time, requiring eventual replacement of the rotting trees. Limitations of the culvert are construction effort and cost, and use of a non-native materials. The worst -case scenario for the culvert is if the river severely degrades or aggrades (unlikely but possible). In this case the river would have to be re -graded (i.e. boulder riffle), or the culverts and headwall would have to be reset. The culvert intake design consists of a 3 ft by 3 ft concrete box culvert with a concrete headwall and wing -walls, and a metal trash rack. A control gate would be mounted on the downstream end where the box culvert enters a vault. The vault is located approximately 170 ft upstream of the head of the spawning channel. A 4 ft diameter corrugated metal (outlet) or HDPE culvert would connect the vault to the spawning channel. The inlet culvert, manhole, and headwall will be precast, the wingwalls, cast - in -place. Alternately two 24-inch parallel metal pipe culverts could be used in lieu of the box culvert, but they offer less of an operating range and are more difficult to maintain. Seattle District USACE 8/20/2002 Cedar River Spawning Channel Replacement Hydraulics & Hydrology Design Report --Draft (Note: the culvert headwall is tentatively being redesigned. Riprap and quarry spalls will be used in lieu of a concrete headwall and wingwalls. Woody debris will be incorporated if feasible.) 5.3.2 Hydraulic Analysis Low flow and high flow rating curves were developed for the site and are illustrated in Figures 1 and 2. Roughness values were varied from 0.04 to 0.12 to capture a reasonable range of expected hydraulic conditions. In Figure 1, only two gate settings are shown, the maximum opening (3 ft) and the minimum opening (0.5 ft). This gives the operating envelope for the channel for flows not exceeding 5,000 cfs in the river. It is important to point out that the gate opening to gate discharge relationship is not linear, that is, a ten percent increase in the gate opening does not result in a ten percent increase in flow. It is expected that the City will field test the channel and gate to develop as -built rating curves. When main river discharges exceed 5,000 cfs (5-10-year frequency), the high - flow bench where the channel would be constructed begins to overtop. Discharge would increase easily by a factor of ten if the channel were flooded. Thus the gate setting is irrelevant because the proportion of flow from the inlet is small relative the proportion from the river overtopping the channel banks. This is reflected in Figure 2, where the rating curve at high flow depends only on the amount of roughness in the spawning channel. The large difference in spawning channel discharge for different roughness values occurs because discharge is inversely proportional to roughness, and because the flooded channel area is large. Armored swales will be constructed to intercept overbank flow and flood the channel before banks are eroded by overbank flows. Additionally, the control structure for the inlet system would be located out of the 100-year floodplain. Flood elevations during the 100-year event could be reduced by as much as 1.0 ft, attributable to the conveyance added by the new channel. If large amounts of LWD are added to the channel, the conveyance benefit will be negligible. Seattle District USACE 8/20/2002 Cedar River Spawning Channel Replacement Hydraulics & Hydrology Design Report --Draft Figure 1 Spawning Channel Inlet Low -Moderate Flow Rating Curve 60 for Varying Roughness and Gate Openings - Gate opening 0.5 ft, Ch n = 50 -- 0.04 r- "`y ~� Gate opening 3.0 ft, Ch n = 40 Channel Overtops, 0.04 H Culvert Flow Insignificant Gate opening f] 30 0.5 ft, Ch n =0.12 - - - --- Gate opening I 20 3.0 ft, Ch n = 3 0.12 R- a N 10 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 Main River Discharge, cfs Figure 2 Spawning Channel inlet 1800 Flood Flow Rating Curve for Varying Roughness 1600 H 1400 `u ai L 1200 k V !1 i° 1000 d Q 800 C .0 U c 600 400 �r � --�Gate opening 3.0 ft, Ch n = 0.04 200 —Gate opening 3.0 ft, Ch n = 0.12 0 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 11000 12000 Main River Discharge, cfs Seattle District USACE 8/20/2002 7 Cedar River Spawning Channel Replacement Hydraulics & Hydrology Design Report --Draft For all analyses it is assumed that no flow is lost in the channel, that the gate on the inlet culvert is fully open, and that debris does not obstruct flow upstream or downstream of the inlet. The gate can be closed to optimize the hydraulic conditions in the spawning channel over a range of flows. The figure below compares the effect of a fully open and partially open (6-in) gate on discharge to the spawning channel. The figures and tables below describe hydraulic conditions expected throughout the channel over a range of spawning and flood flows, assuming the channel roughness and inlet configuration described above. Table: 1 CHANNEL SPAWNING -FLOW HYDRAULIC PARAMETERS Spawning Period Minimum Flow in Max Flow in Range of Depth Range of Velocity River based on Channel (Average) (Average) Cedar HCP (Flow at 6" gate opening) Summer Lowest 97 6 (5) 0.3-1.7 (0.6) 0.3-1.6 (1.0) Q 16-22 Septt� 150 7 (6) 0.4-1.7 (0.7) 0.3-1.5 (1.1) 1-7 Octl� 270 10 (8) 0.6-2.0 (0.9) 0.3-1.5 (1.2) "90%Exceed" 300 11 (8) 0.7-2.1 (0.9) 0.3-1.5 (1.2) Peak Critical 240 10 (7) 0.6-1.9 (0.8) 0.3-1.6 (1.2) Peak Low Normal 440 14 (9) 0.8-2.5 (1.1) 0.3-1.6 (1.3) Peak High 470 14 (10) 0.9-2.6 (1.1) 0.3-1.6 (1.3) Normal I/ Normal minimum during early spawning period From the Table 1, it is clear that the proposed channel will meet all the design criteria during normal low flow conditions. Compared to the existing condition of the Elliot channel, flow depths and velocities should be somewhat greater, due to the greater flow capacity of the inlet. The bracketed discharges in the Max Flow column represent the discharge to the channel if the culvert gate was closed to 6 inches. The corresponding hydraulic parameters can be estimated by comparing with similar full -open discharges. Despite the 80% reduction in the culvert opening, flows are cut only 30% during peak spawning conditions. During high flows, as shown in the following table, the discharge reduction is more significant. However, during high flow events that don't overtop the channel, backwater will significantly increase depths and reduce velocities in the charm el resulting in deposition of suspended fines. As the backwater recedes, shear stress on the bed should clean most if not all of the deposited fines. However, the more the culvert gate is open, the more effective the silt transport and removal. If desired, field-testing could be conducted to determine the best gate setting to balance fish hydraulics, habitat, and sediment management. Seattle District USACE 8/20/2002 Cedar River Spawning Channel Replacement Hydraulics & Hydrology Design Report --Draft Table 2: CHANNEL FLOOD -FLOW HYDRAULIC PARAMETERS Spawning Period Minimum Flow vlax Flow in Channel Range of Depth (Average) Range of Velocity in River Flow at 6" gate (Average) >pening) 50% EXCEED 1,000 22.5 (14) 1.1-4.0 (1.8) 0.2-2.3 (1.3) —1-YR 2,000 39 (18) 2.0-5.9 (3.2) 0.2-2.9 (1.1) —2-YR 3,000 46 (21) 3.3-7.4 (4.7) 0.1-2.4 (0.7) 4,000 46 (21) 4.6-8.9 (6.0) 0.1-1.9 (0.5) 5-YR * 5,000 46 (21) 5.7-9.8 (7.0) 0.1-1.6 (0.4) 10-YR * 5,800 790 (NA) 5.5-6.2 (5.9) 2.7-6.2 (4.1) 50-YR 9,700 1500 (NA) 9.0-11.2 (9.9) 3.0-7.0 (4.5) 100-YR 11,450 1790 (NA) 10.3-12.3 (11.2) 3.1-6.3 (4.4) * Cedar River overtops into spawning channel between 5 and 10-year events 5.3.3 Sensitivity Check Because the above parameters were based on a single assumed channel n-value, a sensitivity test was performed on the 90% exceedence flow and the 50-year flood flow. Low flow n-values were adjusted +/- 50% (.034-.068) and the model was re -run. The average channel depth ranged from 0.8 ft to 1.1 ft (- +/- 15%) and the average velocity ranged from 1.0-1.5 ft/s (+/- 20%). Even within this range of error, the hydraulic design criteria are met, showing that the channel and inlet configuration are robust. The high flow channel n-values were adjusted upwards by 67% (0.06 to 0.10) to capture energy losses from flow resisting LWD blockages. With the increased roughness, the average channel depth ranged from 11 ft to 12 ft (- + 15% of average) and the average velocity ranged from 2 - 4 ft/s (— - 38% of average). Thus woody debris that increases hydraulic roughness should dissipate some of the erosive energy. This analysis does not incorporate the pool riffle sequences and LWD structures that will be constructed. This means that the as -built depths and velocities will be more variable than those shown here. 6.0 Geomorphic Analysis 6.1 Data and Methodology Sue Perkins of Perkins GeoSciences was retained to provide an assessment of both the Elliot channel and the Rolling Hills site. Her assessment of the Rolling Hills Site is contained below. USACE staff inspected the site on several occasions, during high and low flow. USACE observations follow Ms. Perkins' results. 6.2 Results The following are excerpted from Sue Perkins Geomorphic assessment for the Rolling Hills Site: Seattle District USACE 8/20/2002 Cedar River Spawning Channel Replacement Hydraulics & Hydrology Design Report --Draft The spawning channel should be kept far from the valley wall to minimize the risk of burial in the event of a landslide, and to reduce the very low risk of river migration to a position next to the valley wall where it could destabilize it. • Drainage from roads, storm drains, and houses should be routed away from the potentially unstable slope above the project site. • The inlet design should account for potential future degradation, perhaps with a permeable inlet such as a log jam that would allow flow to enter over a range of depths. More information could be gained about recent rates of bed degradation by comparing survey data from the new King County flood study with the 1980s FEMA flood study, if any of the cross-section pairs are located close enough for comparison. If the only water source is at the upstream end, sand is likely to drop out in the lower half of the channel due to the lower gradients and backwater flooding conditions. Unless permeability is such that groundwater would add a significant amount of flow, a second inlet halfway down the channel may be needed to provide additional flow to keep fine sediments moving through. There is a good example of this upstream at the Maplewood spawning channel, where a natural side channel enters partway downstream. During our site visit this month, the constructed spawning channel's bed was covered with sand upstream from the side channel, but was clean gravel downstream of the added water source. As with any channel with a controlled inlet, there may not be enough flow to scour the gravels and keep them clean over the years. If there were enough flow to scour the gravels, then there would be no way for new gravel to move into the channel to replace the gravel moved downstream. In addition, future downcutting of the river could potentially reduce flow in the channel. The need for repeated maintenance, design modifications and repairs should be anticipated throughout the life of the project. Were it not for the increased risk of landslides that would occur if the river were to undercut the valley wall, I would advocate an uncontrolled channel opening and allowing the river to shape the new channel as it wished. Over time, this would Provide r-, ore i umerous r^aintenance-free side channels that provide 9.. variety of habitat functions in addition to spawning gravels. This still may be the best option given the potential long-term maintenance and sediment problems alluded to above. With this approach, the money spent on inlet construction would instead be spent to reinforce the outer boundary of the desired channel migration zone. Other than excavating a proto-channel and seeding it with LWD, minimal engineering of the side channel would be needed since the river would do the engineering for you. Given the low risk of channel migration at this site, the use of hard bank armoring can probably be limited to the approaches to the inlet, a controlled overflow area partway down the channel, and the downstream outlet (where it is essential to end the spawning channel before it encounters Seattle's water pipeline). I concur with many of Cygnia Freeland's suggestions (1/18/02 memo, Dept of Ecology) to construct a channel with as many natural characteristics as possible. These could include an engineered log jam at the inlet through which water flows, steeper bank angles similar to those occurring along the river, an excavated floodplain along one bank, and Seattle District USACE 8/20/2002 10 Cedar River Spawning Channel Replacement Hydraulics & Hydrology Design Report --Draft clusters of logs with rootwads that are large enough to stay in the channel without anchoring. Site visits show that the preferred inlet location is about 150-ft upstream of a riffle in a straight, slower, deeper reach. The cobble bank is steep and armored by small alder trees. The inlet is proposed just downstream of a vegetated boulder and submerged woody debris. The velocity shadow and scour hole of this feature results in the settling of some sand, however the bed is visibly dominated by gravel and cobble. This bank feature should be retained to ensure the scouring function. A gravel bar appears to be located towards the middle of the river, just outside the proposed inlet. It is unknown if this would limit flow to the inlet during minimum discharge conditions. If necessary, woody debris or boulders could be placed to scour deposited gravels away from the inlet, or to raise the water surface if degradation occurs. An alternate location downstream is just upstream of the aforementioned riffle. Flow is swift and shallower. The bed is course, dominated by cobbles with few visible fines. At low flow it is uncertain if depths will be sufficient to sustain flow to the channel. Stability of the riffle is critical for the success of this alternate location. Erosion of the riffle could cut off flow to the inlet. Without in -river grade control work, the inlet invert would have to be re -set to match the new grade. At this time two staff gages have been installed, one at each of the two inlet locations described above. If the results of the monitoring indicate that the alternate location is superior, the inlet design will be modified to match that location. 7.0 Stability Analysis: 7.1 Data and Methodology The stability of placed gravel, in -situ soil, and large woody debris were analyzed in several ways. The hydraulic models were used to compute variables necessary for the stability calculations. Design charts were used to compare the stability of bed and bank soil and erosion control materials with respect to the shear stress and velocity. A critical shear bank stability analysis was used to determine the stable natural bank side -slope. A formal incipient motion analysis was undertaken to determine the grain size that would first be transported given specific hydraulic forces. The above were combined to identify where erosion protection is necessary. The stability of placed wood was not rigorously analyzed. Buoyant forces were computed to determine required ballast for bank revetments incorporating logs. Hydraulic forces acting on logs subject to flow were not rigorously determined because in -channel logs will be embedded in banks, and sized and grouped together where possible to resist hydraulic forces en masse. In -field hydraulic calculations can be performed to check these designs if required. As logs decay, some installations will become unstable. Bank vegetation should be well established by then, and in -water logs should still provide cover and structure. Seattle District USACE 8/20/2002 11 Cedar River Spawning Channel Replacement Hydraulics & Hydrology Design Report --Draft The maintenance commitment will be largely determined by the stability of the placed gravel. Some bank erosion will occur during major floods and in reaches of the channel that are designed to conform to the flow regime and recruit gravel. Gravel nourishment stations should be located during construction to allow for convenient and effective gravel placement. 7.2 Results The results of the critical shear analyses are shown in Figure 2-4. For a given roughness value, the average condition is shown, along with the maximum. The average condition represents the conditions to expect in the majority of the channel. The maximum is generally much greater than the average, and typically occurs at one of two locations — during high flows, at the culvert outlet, during low flows, where the channel rejoins the river. The maximum should be considered an upper range for typical conditions, however larger grain sizes will be mobilized at channel bends, riffles, around LWD during high flows, and by spawning. The results also compare the effect of an inlet culvert gate opening of 3-ft (max. open) versus 6-inches (min. open). The results show that the large majority of the design gravel specification is stable during spawning flows and over a wide range of higher flows and channel roughness conditions. Also, increasing roughness tends to decrease discharge, increase the friction slope, and thus increase the size of particle that can just be moved by the flow. Effective roughening of the channel will occur at low flows, especially in riffle sections, because the influence of the grain size on roughness increases inversely with depth of flow. At higher flows and depths, roughness is supplied by in -channel LWD and overhanging vegetation. Closure of the gate reduces discharge and increases the stability of the bed and bank materials. The banks are generally less stable than the bed due to the additional gravitational force exerted on the bank material. As shown in Figure 3, the computed stable bank size ranges from 0.1-in to 6.8-in, with an average of about 0.8-in. As shown in Figure 4, the stable grain sizes on the bed range from 0.1-in during the 5-year flood backwater condition to 4.5-in at the outlet of the channel during the 10-year event, with an average of about 0.5-in. Overtopping floods (10-year and greater) are predicted to be much more erosive. Gravel and cobbles finer than 2.5 inches on the bed and 4.0-in on the banks may be eroded. This will result in armoring of some portions of the streambed, and bank scour where not sufficiently protected. Although the model predicts that increases in roughness will increase the stable grain size, this is only generally true. Around roughness features such as logjams, sediment movement will be restricted and finer particles will deposit. Periodic gravel nourishment will be required to replenish gravel mobilized from high flows and spawning activity, especially following an overtopping flood. Normally stable vegetated side -slopes should withstand erosive forces during large floods that fill the channel in a controlled manner. Otherwise, uncontrolled overtopping will severely erode Seattle District USACE 8/20/2002 12 Cedar River Spawning Channel Replacement Hydraulics & Hydrology Design Report --Draft the channel banks. Over- steepened sections will erode over time and in response to flows to a more stable configuration. This erosion will supply gravel to downstream reaches. Imported streambed material should be well graded, and include rounded cobbles up to 5-inches. If more than 30% of the material is finer than 0.5 inch, frequent gravel nourishment may be necessary. FIGURE 3: BANK STABLE GRAIN SIZE VS FLOW AND ROUGHNESS 8.00s H 7.00 °�Baz✓ �� F"fie. $ d? 6.00� K 0.04-AVG a ...... 0.04 �. Z ...................0.12-AVG LU N 5.00 '' ..... 0.12-MAX �W Qa g 4.00 LU J m s�: 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 90% PEAK 1000 cfs 2-yr 5-yr 10-YR 50-YR 100-YR exceed low SPAWNING flow,3 FT FLOM FT GATE GATE OPENING OPENING FLOW OF INTEREST Seattle District USACE 8/20/2002 13 Cedar River Spawning Channel Replacement Hydraulics & Hydrology Design Report --Draft 5.00 4.50 4.00 3.50 z w 3.00 N N z_ 2.50 (7 w J Q 2.00 H 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 FIGURE4: CHANNEL STABLE GRAIN SIZE VS DISCHARGE AND ROUGHNESS 0.04-AVG .......0.04-MAX 0.12-AVG •-••0.12-MAX ON � � � 111 g 9 M 90% exceed Peak 1000 cfS 2-yr 5-yr 10-YR 50-YR 100-YF low flow, 3- Spawning ft gate Flow 3-ft opening gate opening FLOW OIL 114-f6kES1 Seattle District USACE 8/20/2002 14 Cedar River Spawning Channel Replacement Hydraulics & Hydrology Design Report --Draft 8.0 Hydraulic Design 8.1 Inlet To provide the necessary flow to the spawning channel at the design low flow, the invert of the 3 ft x 3 ft concrete box inlet culvert should be at elevation 56.17 ft (NAVD88) at the inlet and 56.00 ft at the outlet. The invert of the 4 ft diameter outlet culvert should be 56.0 ft at the inlet and 55.50 ft at the outlet. Invert of the vault should be 54.0. The invert of the headwall apron should be 55.65. The wingwalls should be 45 degrees from the culvert centerline. The protruding end of the outlet culvert should be mitered to the vault wall. (Note: The inlet headwall has been tentatively redesigned as follows: The inlet will be protected by a riprap headwall. The box culvert end will be cut off to a 1.5 to 1 side -slope to match the riprap headwall slope. A gravel filter will be placed around the culvert end protected by the riprap headwall to reduce the void -space and prevent the piping of fines. The culvert end will be underlain by 2.0 ft of riprap for scour protection.). 8.2 Channel The channel bottom at the upstream end should be 55.0 ft elevation at the downstream confluence the invert would match the invert of the river channel (52.5 ft) The excavated channel depth varies from 14 ft at the upstream end to 4 ft or less at the downstream end. The channel geometry that met the design criteria was a trapezoidal channel, approximately 900 feet in length, with a 10.0 ft bottom width, 1.0-1.5H: 1V side slopes, and an average bed slope of 0.003 ft/ft (0.3%). The design spawning channel roughness coefficient was 0.045, corresponding to a typical gravel bed channel at low stages. At high flow, the LWD will begin to block flow and increase hydraulic roughness (assume at least a factor of two greater during full effect). 8.3 Riprap In order to protect critical infrastructure during large floods, a 3-ft thick, Class 3-4 riprap blanket should be placed at slopes no steeper than L5 H: i V. See plans for placement locations and details. 8.4 Large Woody Debris LWD is a desired restoration project component because it provides both habitat and hydraulic function. Analogs for use of LWD at this site are newly formed side channels where erosion topples trees into the channel and the rootball and trunk armor the cut bank, and the tree spans the channel, and alternately, lays downstream parallel to flow. Wood anchored as shown in the plans should withstand a moderate to severe overtopping flood. Severe floods will both transport some wood not securely anchored from the site and undermine and recruit new trees on site. Until waterlogged, the large tree sizes at the site may require ballast to resist the buoyant and drag forces exerted by the flow. By leaving large rootballs intact, the additional frictional resistance will counteract the hydraulic forces on the log. If the cumulative backwater effects of LWD Seattle District USACE 8/20/2002 15 Cedar River Spawning Channel Replacement Hydraulics & Hydrology Design Report --Draft is significant, the hydraulic forces on the channel, banks, and other LWD pieces will decrease. If necessary, ballast can be provided by burying the majority (2/3 of length) of a log in the bank, anchoring the log to other logs, placing large boulders on top of the logs, and anchoring the log to the earthen slope with a dumbbell driven through the log into the bank. LWD may be difficult to place in some portions of the channel, due to the large size of the members, excavation depths exceeding 10 ft, and limited access. Most cottonwood not permanently inundated will begin to rot after a 7-10 year period. This interval should allow the native bank vegetation and side -slopes to mature. LWD in the channel and pools could be replaced as needed. 8.5 Dendrites Dendritic channels should be constructed at two locations shown in the plans to provide additional rearing and spawning area and to provide a predictable overtopping mechanism for the channel during flood events. The dendrite will consist of a swale armored with a 2-ft thick riprap blanket that extends from the river's edge to the spawning channel. The dendrite will be backfilled with spawning gravel and LWD will be located at the confluence with the channel. During high flows, water will preferentially flow down the dendrite to the spawning channel, supplying gravel, and flooding it before overtopping flows can erode the rim of the channel. 8.6 Bank Stabilization Side -slopes excavated to 1.5 H:1 V are computed to be stable under high flow conditions, however, experience shows that unless the slopes are re -vegetated or armored, the slopes will erode where flow impinges on the bank. Fortunately vegetative growth is robust on site. Native topsoil and vegetation will be conserved and replaced to aid re -vegetation. LWD is readily available to provide temporary stabilization of excavated slopes, especially at the toe. 8.7 Other Design Considerations There are several important considerations that relate to the H&H aspects of the project. These are briefly addressed below. 8.7.1 Right of way and Utilities Access to the site for maintenance needs to be secured by the City. Buried utilities need protection should the river overtake the constructed channel. See the plans for buried riprap details. 8.7.2 Geotechnical The steep hillside south of the project must be protected from becoming unstable during construction and from river migration following construction.. Additional investigations are required to ensure that the project will not de -stabilize the hillside and jeopardize the channel and properties above. The contribution of groundwater is assumed nil. If a reliable groundwater source is found, the inlet may be scaled back or eliminated. The Seattle District USACE 8/20/2002 16 Cedar River Spawning Channel Replacement Hydraulics & Hydrology Design Report --Draft underlying soil appears to consist of gravels and cobbles. Thus importing spawning gravel may not be necessary. The likelihood of seepage into the groundwater table has not been determined, nor the availability of groundwater to supplement the surface intake. 8.7.3 Site/Civil Wasting excess material close to the project site will create a significant cost and time savings. This will allow for more effort to construct the complicated features of the restoration project such as geogrid walls and LWD structures. The extra care in these areas should improve the long-term success of the project. 8.7.4 Public Access A more natural ("messy") channel configuration with steeper side -slopes, higher excavation depths, and large amounts of in -stream woody debris may discourage poaching and vandalism by limiting access to and restricting movement within the channel. Tamper proof trash -racks and manhole covers are necessary to protect public safety and prevent vandalism of the control works. 8.7.5 Monitoring It is recommended that the City periodically monitor channel cross sections to record the changes in the channel geometry. This will allow a means of tracking the gravel transport rates, effectiveness of gravel nourishment, success of re -vegetation, assessing general channel stability, impacts of inlet operations, impacts of LWD, and impacts of overtopping floods. Seattle District USACE 8/20/2002 17 Spawning Channel Replacement Project SWP 27-3046 Excavation Quantities X-Section Depth Top Width Bot. Width Area Vol Vol Waste Stockpile STA ft ft ft SF cf CY CY CY 0 5.67 10 10 56.67 20 10.33 32 10 217.00 2736.67 101.36 47.41 40 13.00 40 10 325.00 5420.00 200.74 59.26 60 13.00 42 10 338.00 6630.00 245.56 62.22 80 12.33 51 10 376.17 7141.67 264.51 75.56 100 11.67 48 10 338.33 7145.00 264.63 71.11 120 11.67 45 10 320.83 6591.67 244.14 66.67 140 11.67 50 10 350.00 6708.33 248.46 74.07 160 11.67 52 10 361.67 7116.67 263.58 77.04 180 11.67 65 10 437.50 7991.67 295.99 96.30 200 11.00 60 10 385.00 8225.00 304.63 88.89 220 9.67 65 10 362.50 7475.00 276.85 96.30 240 9.00 65 10 337.50 7000.00 259.26 96.30 260 8.33 72 10 341.67 6791.67 251.54 106.67 280 8.33 60 10 291.67 6333.33 234.57 88.89 300 8.33 55 10 270.83 5625.00 208.33 81.48 320 8.33 60 10 291.67 5625.00 208.33 88.89 340 11.67 68 10 455.00 7466.67 276.54 100.74 360 11.67 60 10 408.33 8633.33 319.75 88.89 380 11.00 58 10 374.00 7823.33 289.75 85.93 400 11.67 55 10 379.17 7531.67 278.95 81.48 420 12.33 56 10 407.00 7861.67 291.17 82.96 440 12.33 55 10 400.83 8078.33 299.20 81.48 460 13.00 60 10 455.00 8558.33 316.98 88.89 480 13.00 60 10 455.00 9100.00 337.04 88.89 500 13.00 60 10 455.00 9100.00 337.04 88.89 520 14.33 60 10 501.67 9566.67 354.32 88.89 540 13.67 50 10 410.00 9116.67 337.65 74.07 560 13.67 56 10 451.00 8610.00 318.89 82.96 580 14.33 60 10 501.67 9526.67 352.84 88.89 600 15.00 60 10 525.00 10266.67 380.25 88.89 620 15.00 60 10 525.00 10500.00 388.89 88.89 640 14.33 65 10 537.50 10625.00 393.52 96.30 660 13.67 55 10 444.17 9816.67 363.58 81.48 680 14.33 50 10 430.00 8741.67 323.77 74.07 700 15.67 55 10 509.17 9391.67 347.84 81.48 720 15.67 86 10 752.00 12611.67 467.10 127.41 740 15.00 50 10 450.00 12020.00 445.19 74.07 760 17.67 46 10 494.67 9446.67 349.88 68.15 780 17.67 56 10 583.00 10776.67 399.14 82.96 800 15.00 50 10 450.00 10330.00 382.59 74.07 820 13.00 50 10 390.00 8400.00 311.11 74.07 840 14.33 50 10 430.00 8200.00 303.70 74.07 860 15.00 50 10 450.00 8800.00 325.93 74.07 880 15.67 50 10 470.00 9200.00 340.74 74.07 900 16.33 55 10 530.83 10008.33 370.68 81.48 920 17.00 60 10 595.00 11258.33 416.98 88.89 940 17.67 62 10 636.00 12310.00 455.93 91.85 960 18.33 45 10 504.17 11401.67 422.28 66.67 980 19.00 6 6 114.00 6181.67 228.95 8.89 1000 19.00 6 6 114.00 2280.00 84.44 8.89 1020 19.00 6 6 114.00 2280.00 84.44 8.89 1040 19.00 6 6 114.00 2280.00 84.44 8.89 1060 19.00 6 6 114.00 2280.00 84.44 8.89 1080 19.00 6 6 114.00 2280.00 84.44 8.89 1100 18.33 6 6 110.00 2240.00 82.96 8.89 1120 18.33 6 6 110.00 2200.00 81.48 8.89 1140 5.00 6 6 30.00 1400.00 51.85 8.89 Total 16,039 4,043 11,996 1) What flows do you expect through this channel. Will this be enough to form pools? 2) What is the size of the inlet structure? How do propose to keep the inlet from clogging with silt? 3) Eliminate toe rock and log footers to allow some erosion, which will form good chinook habitat. 4) What pool/riffle/run spacing do you propose? 5) Vary stream wetted width to form more natural pool/riffle complexes 6) Slope geogrids the opposite direction to provide rearing and prevent stranding. 7) Build some complex logjams in the upper section to provide rearing habitat and reduce predation. 8) Make alcoves 9) Culvert outlet works — bury the tree and leave the rootwads exposed 10) I don't like the high maintenance inlet system. 11) Pool forming LWD clusters — reverse the logs and the logs with rootwads so the logs are buried and the logs with rootwads are placed under them. 12) Cross -sections — reduce slope where possible to provide juvenile rearing. 13) Retain branches and root mats on all trees if possible. 1� iti I �IyfdfaUK Cf)f-tSUllaflIS RIC. .. ......... . .............. ... ... ..... .. ... .. . ........ . ...... . ......... ,qo 441 r 1 ice, � SP�r,Jn1IN& C.�/RnIN�L ' f pop yvil-Aul:c c"onsz"llants of"Y. ie ell —too, o ?hYs't.sl hydraulic, ltoi consultants inn. � J Y i a;;: %''lla,sL ' '.L:il�KS`Y r4/3i iY?M t.'/}ixQl*iQ__.L v ( � t tcRfldr'.s .Gb1lYZ6 �lrtarlg�j YaiJ�Es !fl 5+¢ss�rs'G SYISNt�: AU fo k i JI Corum, Zachary P NWS From: Ed Zapel [EZapel@nhc-sea.comj Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 10:15 AM To: Corum, Zachary P Cc: Deering, Michael K; Noel Gilbrough Subject: Cedar River spawning channel design Section H.jpg Channel Plan us.jpg Channel Plan ds.jpg Typical Sections.jpg Zach, attached are a few sketches of the spawning channel layout with sections. We've shown a couple of alternative typical cross sections for two different types of channels. We intend to do more with the channel profile and incorporate more features into the channel design through the end of this week and into next week. ETZ (See attached file: Section H.jpg)(See attached file: Channel Plan us.jpg)(See attached file: Channel Plan ds.jpg)(See attached file: Typical Sections Jpg) northwest hydraulic consultants inc. DATE /Z Zo BY a I cHK CLIENT F / ^� JOB No. SUBJECT ? �a✓ Af, U l! �1�-y/J/' { U !Qj9YE2 �'I�CN� lJO AH,9Q of 1dlil 14LT $ T Ir- b-�bf eb 4c� Sei�--1 7 Pi4�4i!�I ,k �lt'1 4, L $k.vid &k Z.e e-/,:i4k;�Aav� tjL-C- CAA r -_ �' � ^G -'ice. �_ . v d! - - - -------------------- -- I© (n Q L- O � W L — — ' N D O cn i II s_ � H Q z 0 w .J Lu UO V)z 1- F O uj wpoa` z IO' — UJ (.D O Z zo 3a W QL-V N z _ O>N O ir z avlomi g-j-j Q p �-w)>o- - LLI WNUJQoE N Z�WWWW 2�-Qz=zz W NSZ L, OX x == U W>-=SU�UU W aZuj (�22000U uj NZ —N MVIAU� zz W W N N V N zz N w p J Ld zZ 001 F O Z Q a O C� N 1- a U W W = W W < c> Z Ln H- (A o ui 0O a u w z zda > a ¢ Q a m J CA W (� F W a x N ZO 3 Z d p w � J rLE ag Q N 0 um -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- O_ LY ~ Z N ~ F N = Ln � O Z a a y 0 3 ~ Cy N V N _ W J (� W S J O N W Z z N U U V) Cza WZi O N W 3 X , O U o � O, a X H d Z M W Q t- Q 0 r y 0 W w Q Q > Y N DLn S U LU F N Z z ix O z 17 O m Lat = U I 1 v _____; ____ faC f IWn 0! , I m N �m iQ J W z , 1 I 1 I I 3 1 1 N Z I I I I I .__________ ----- _____ ___ LNL U 1 ______ i ;00� LJ__L ____ Oai6 JI I _____; ____ IMI % 1 1 N I m ml I I « ___ St... m I 5 I m I I N O H ' I_____' _ '6i N m I n w O 1 ml I ml ____' �'---- ` oa l« / I I I ml_____ __•__ oa l6 1 L____ 0a1 •_, , : _ , N1 1 I « N.�+ I �I OII I OI I I l" lL U u O LI z 0H I 1 I 1 00�0owN 1 00.o S R00+0 R S R00-0 Y S R O J wl/on113-1WA/13 wlton113 (. w140n113 -14-13 W wlton113 Z r J ------- �------ /LK Z LL n ¢ z - CX SMS I I I I I --__-� -_-- -----� r W w , 1 I I I I m ____ C[-i � N m I I I ¢ W ______ ----------- I I 1 I I I I m I I I 1 I w I 1 I I --__J___ _L_-__ I 1 I W` I I N I I I I I I I 1 - � o ---- ----- ml i I I 6 O L L J L Oa S Z y YY L: Y 1 I N I ' ' ..Iwo a Iwo aow oao U V) R Y S R (n N w14On113 w140n113 wlLDn113 uol3on.13 O loe _______________ fai _____- _�____ 12-9 02-1 u I I I I I I I I I ' L____ _____ ____ _____ ___ ' I I I ____J___ _Lr___ Oai J L J Ld Wi I - I Z �I I I 1 1■ 6 ml � � � ml I I 1 1 1 I � 5 mi m� I - I-- - ---- ---- ---- --- s W ____J_ ___1 ____ oal� o,_____1 ____i_____�_ o'_____�____ i _ OO.1N •O i _i ____ as IN $L M X ai a1 ai a� F >•: �55S«y oao I i .0 i i i oao Li i 8 R S E S R 8 R Y E 9 R S C S R 8 R II E S R sd Y� i w 1{0n113—11on113 W,I.A.13 wllon*13 i=- � Qf5 n �6y�� x .yyoa3- = ill's - e=fig h _ - i S t F.9 ■ ° f i °° ,� i 3 >- LD a W a U z N �= 1 I 1 � W . 1— ■ N ,3 f I . , • � 4 I I a m U ---------- \ 0 V) 2 \§6 § \ §kI § \ \ 0 } \ \ { n 3CL \§0 o k 2 § q § § .rl� |C'j § & �0 ) W U .- Z M W 7 Z< Q � ^ Y1, :EC 7 y L, ' VILI W Utj U� ,/ II I I Z f oW (1 • i 03- zOoO wd L) Q w r m z J N0O 1 �P 1 } J 0 Z _u K w �O 2 O m W= 'aOO rinZ J Z r J W�5eO r M z a = o< w w J WOW > O .CO.< OWOON Q 0- wt X-S. 2r mwrtn V,J?N wwi- n.o J FSWfW.. wJ<Oo OOP ny !:-z 20U a vri� UWe4 raOW oowz-j0� QWto 6.aWWa LMZO 0KNCSa U' >ZJU 0 Zr a00w KJr�WO aWs UOQU wNO�- z0[ozlnrm a UQ} mONQ� FO-Wm0 aww ffi,-Z r=o w J F.rw a WOU O-%2J yyJO W wS jQ dO JK }JWO� KVf3r OQmW U rOJJ OOmmQ2 o;IyOU)z—ui OzO0z Z�( ZaQ'3Jm=;�NNJ ONW ZI/a�WJO WOJ 0 ZS OOOVQ WZ�� <} ZrwWZ 3wOO� 0��LnWWpWa_00 I. - 'no w V0>0C10 itmoo Wffi K(5OW JJ SZz JKQ—m 0 0 oazaw 000 -it > z =raa C4OJac)w riwUU -io CLoao i Z O U r W U Z � N K O N Q J 3 Q Y N U VI W a O yy d1 W O Z r a =1 vriZ(D O U O z } O u W z O J N G W W 3 Q J O x Z LL obF uj 2 Z uxi O IA H WC.Q F- Q M 0C im U c �p > Q K 'A b � Q O � � r O S big N s M� \ i J O JJ W K Z O V K �O W CS.7H 00 S 41 �r wz U0SOct J J OIrN� Y O Z S F�V UQU JWJ o?Q O w !�w r wq zTw I 00 O MI Ln@Ln@LnCDLD � I` CD CD Ln LC) mot' @ Ln Ln N Ln N CD .1 Ull I i,,LDl 511111111 1111 il tm�u Ln I ln@LncD nBLn r` r` CD CO Ln Ln 'j- O � O r- LC')@Ln@Ln@Ln � CD CD Ln Ln IT hillimillimilinillimil LD '��11=1111�1111�11 In @ lP 61 Ln @ LC) Ln @ Ln @ Ln @ n � r` CD CD Ln Ln �Y LL/ -.J1J1 ME Wu\� �1IIIIIIIAIIIIIIIIAIIIAII!_ '; Ln @ Ln @ Ln @ Ln r` r` CD CD Ln Ln Il" CDLnCDLn@Ln I-- CD CD Ln Ln v CD Ln Nip _yLLlI�1LL)l�lLLiu+u� CD CO Ln LP V' @ Ln Ln N 19LnnLnCDLf)CD n CO r� r� CD CO Ln Ln d ,11=111111=�1111=11� � @Ln@LnmLn r` CD CD Ln Ln v LnCDLn@ cD CD Ln Ln @ Ln Ln N Ln ti N I Ln in@Ln@ CD CO Ln Ln @Ln@Ln@Ln@Ln CO r� r` CD CD Ln Ln d' CD nCDLn(S)Ln@Ln co r` r\ CD CD Ln Ln d- @LnCDLn@Ln@Ln cor`L\CDCDLnLnd- nLn@LnnLn67Ln cor-r`CDCDLnLnv Ln N Ln I @ Ln Ln N @ LD N I Ln @ Ln Ln N @ Ln N @ Ln Ln@Ln@Ln@Ln I,- r- CD CD Ln Ln d' @ Ln ilklgJ �1IIIIIIIIIAIAIIIIIIIAIIlI LnCD nCDLn@Ln r` r_ CD CD Ln Ln Ln@InCD n@Ln ��CDCDLnn l- @ Ln �llnllAllIAIAAAIAmA \� Ln@Ln@Ln@Ln r` r` CD CD Ln LD LnCDLn@Ln@ r` I\ � CD Ln Ln Ln ril �. Ln@LnCD LC) n r- co CD Ln Ln Ln@Ln@Ln@ CDCDLnLn �AIIII�IIAAIrtIA_ Ln@LnC LnC9 r, r- CD CD Ln Ln Ln@Ln@Ln@Ln r" r` CD CD Ln Ln �t illilillillilid CD tftmtn tP ME MMMM INI��� INSLINllAA ScilA z LnmLnl9Lnn n CDCDLOLnd' Ln@Ln@Ln@Ln r` CD CD Ln Ln rt @ Ln rl, rl q-..A �5. I1�AI�AMIAAIAAAIA_ LnCDLn@Ln@Ln CD Ln Ln V CDLnCDLncDLn@Ln m r` r` CD CD Ln Ln v Ln@LoEDLnmLn Lbin@LnSLn@Ln I- I-- CD CD Ln Ln 'r I co I-- I- cc cD Ln Ln v HiTillillillin Ln Ln N @ Ln N I @ Ln I Ln@LnczD ncD n CDLn@Ln@LnC9Ln r- r` CD CD Ln Ln V go r- r` co, co Ln Ln d' Ln N I @ Ln I r 0 Ln N i @ Ln 1 Ln@Ln@ r\ r` CD CD LI) LC) N Ln N I @ Ln I Ln @ Ln @ r` r, co W Ln@Ln@Ln@ r` r- CD CD Ln Ln T) W J Q N N I O y U W U C � N ~ W N � N (J N W O N K W 0 r- LC')@Ln@Ln@Ln � CD CD Ln Ln IT hillimillimilinillimil LD '��11=1111�1111�11 In @ lP 61 Ln @ LC) Ln @ Ln @ Ln @ n � r` CD CD Ln Ln �Y LL/ -.J1J1 ME Wu\� �1IIIIIIIAIIIIIIIIAIIIAII!_ '; Ln @ Ln @ Ln @ Ln r` r` CD CD Ln Ln Il" CDLnCDLn@Ln I-- CD CD Ln Ln v CD Ln Nip _yLLlI�1LL)l�lLLiu+u� CD CO Ln LP V' @ Ln Ln N 19LnnLnCDLf)CD n CO r� r� CD CO Ln Ln d ,11=111111=�1111=11� � @Ln@LnmLn r` CD CD Ln Ln v LnCDLn@ cD CD Ln Ln @ Ln Ln N Ln ti N I Ln in@Ln@ CD CO Ln Ln @Ln@Ln@Ln@Ln CO r� r` CD CD Ln Ln d' CD nCDLn(S)Ln@Ln co r` r\ CD CD Ln Ln d- @LnCDLn@Ln@Ln cor`L\CDCDLnLnd- nLn@LnnLn67Ln cor-r`CDCDLnLnv Ln N Ln I @ Ln Ln N @ LD N I Ln @ Ln Ln N @ Ln N @ Ln Ln@Ln@Ln@Ln I,- r- CD CD Ln Ln d' @ Ln ilklgJ �1IIIIIIIIIAIAIIIIIIIAIIlI LnCD nCDLn@Ln r` r_ CD CD Ln Ln Ln@InCD n@Ln ��CDCDLnn l- @ Ln �llnllAllIAIAAAIAmA \� Ln@Ln@Ln@Ln r` r` CD CD Ln LD LnCDLn@Ln@ r` I\ � CD Ln Ln Ln ril �. Ln@LnCD LC) n r- co CD Ln Ln Ln@Ln@Ln@ CDCDLnLn �AIIII�IIAAIrtIA_ Ln@LnC LnC9 r, r- CD CD Ln Ln Ln@Ln@Ln@Ln r" r` CD CD Ln Ln �t illilillillilid CD tftmtn tP ME MMMM INI��� INSLINllAA ScilA z LnmLnl9Lnn n CDCDLOLnd' Ln@Ln@Ln@Ln r` CD CD Ln Ln rt @ Ln rl, rl q-..A �5. I1�AI�AMIAAIAAAIA_ LnCDLn@Ln@Ln CD Ln Ln V CDLnCDLncDLn@Ln m r` r` CD CD Ln Ln v Ln@LoEDLnmLn Lbin@LnSLn@Ln I- I-- CD CD Ln Ln 'r I co I-- I- cc cD Ln Ln v HiTillillillin Ln Ln N @ Ln N I @ Ln I Ln@LnczD ncD n CDLn@Ln@LnC9Ln r- r` CD CD Ln Ln V go r- r` co, co Ln Ln d' Ln N I @ Ln I r 0 Ln N i @ Ln 1 Ln@Ln@ r\ r` CD CD LI) LC) N Ln N I @ Ln I Ln @ Ln @ r` r, co W Ln@Ln@Ln@ r` r- CD CD Ln Ln T) W J Q N N I O y U W U C � N ~ W N � N (J N W O N K W 0 Z F U '-^ Z z U U O W w Q O N N w 'DO U r O W a w U r w M p } O :E Z " u V Z 4 ce w < a Q w = � j U U d S m J W �Z Z Q 8 n.- m � V m LO 0Z _ 00 w J W ~ J Q UA m 0� m m M F�011 6-0-" 0 0 v N 0 N I � ............... 1.... .... i.... ....}.. �Al.. •N•x' ... ..1.... ....1.... ..1.... .... i.... .. .i.... ... s Q N LL ge � pia Ly a a N E 0 pay _ K W O 0 d IL co aR c¢ _h a i2 a} t` I3 a 2 a�i Io I4 i> 'S a s z 3 I C� 5�} { a Q: a a t+l ILa 9. ry .� ♦ h m n m w .m � n .w R 'n i� '� n N N A n 'n 'ri ."i '� n ei �• R n $: Cedar River Side -Channel Replacement Project Photograph series showing Water Utility Spawning Channel, Maplewood Fish Ladder, and King County Levee. 1 i •�� \` ' � �` �,,' ' 4!1. Y A' � 1 4 'M�% •�` s, r yq-� 11`_+� i','.ha�, y.3..• �-j�' � '---._�"�'"`+_,.,,`µ � �K{'� F •. +c� _•b. ,� S t�s'� �y �.�#�., , `f .....�` ,J � '• '� ._ -J.-- a � I ,' � ,.fix Orr 40 0 1p- Detailed Directory Listing - k. http://www.ci.seattle.wa.us/directory/detail.asp?ID=37527 r ZOV,I W A Detailed Directory Listing Name: Phone Number Fax Number: Mailstop: Location: Street Address: City, State, Zip Department: Section: Gray, Warren Sandy 425-430-0866 425-255-0803 13-10-01 Lake Youngs Xmt HQ 18015 SE Lake Youngs Rd Renton, WA 98058 Seattle Public Utilities Transmission - Lake Youngs & Tolt Return to Directory Search Page Home Living Business Visiting Mayor Council Police Fire Jobs News ents�raffic baps Weather �►ty-direc A o�u�Fee�c bac�Search 5Wr <- R g � ,� • .E asue. S'� 5,���y L %�� f;gV��')k CP \y .5pu Real RioPe(-Cca C,(0 � , Fm LQ" l�h1 LOr" *- D i f-e LAO( i s C- 4e iSsv�- s a 1 of 1 4/11/2002 10:11 AM Detailed Directory Listing http://www.ci.seattle.wa.us/directory/detaii.asp?ID=59832 Detailed Directory Listing Name: Phone Number Fax Number: Mailstop: Location: Street Address: Room/Floor: City, State, Zip Department: Section: Gambill, Robert 206-684-5969 206-615-1215 13-10-01 Central Building 810 3rd Ave Suite 300 Seattle, WA 98104 Seattle Public Utilities Real Estate Services Return to Directory Search Page Home Living Business Visiting Mayor Council Police Fire Jobs News— Events raffic Maps ea er i y direcTory A o�uf—Fee- bac�Search 1 of 1 4/11/2002 10:27 AM m hEl � --0 b CD ID ry `�. CD V O td CD (D Uq w (-'� -+ 9 O p •� p, �y y r p + nC UQ O p fD Uj C OCD CD ("D 0r+ CD Uq CD' .7 n ID CD C-D- ° o � crc b U 7d w rr CD '� CD p CD cD Uq p O 0 o P CD O p W D * CD �:3 UQ 7y CD CD C Z : i CD fD r -' (? .r� NO O Po � O cn �17 O CD CT (CD cn O r+ h-j Z 0 O O CD p (D CD UQ CD CD J O O CT fD � (n� N 1p CD w C1 , N ( (� P CD (Dis +' Z (D U4 rn a. o PO 'Cc� c o ti o S cn (y�� (DD U� UQ � Q' (D w w fD 0- w CD o 0-o co 0 w o R� O a ,� U(D C (D n N J w a O UQ h CD C C L UQ .T r� h CD m D C) En m -J M r -U mm �H 0� 0�3 m m N --4 Z G =_ o H mz x 0 0 w m N �c"0 mm N m z D N � N to m ul �]o 0 CD 0 rt a o 0 CD � � O C� fJ4 O N < CD CD CD w hCND �' (D �a h o (D CL `b CD n c � w h• C7 ¢' CD O �t O cr 0 p \,o �M7 v CD + CDCD a' ED O tT. ti Q � w 'b o' o � cr4 o s�j rtia ,, s v. o-, -• i- � 5 o o fc'' 5( 2- o o s N n h N N CD CD O CD aL CDCD p CDrt n ti U4 cD O UQ �r O ChD UQ i r+ " p. 0 t 0 C`D � C1. C O O p O' O CAD ilrt ' a o a (0 W �� gyp+'N O � ~~+ �S. h a O ~ `C C1 a r+ `� r+ O G C1 Q (�➢ CD UQ � CD o f o CD O tcl CD `�° o- o �' r+ o to:, W, CD OCD �+' d cD co cD ti G C~D + ,C N NP `D Q`' �*o u4 GQa oR . a o a' CID.w Q. � s 0 ft4 0�' �C CD UQ uo v, v0, O �, �' O CD �' co Co rD' CD h N o G Q W O. C O p O C (D d N � Q- r+ Co N n CD � v R O p r+ rr ¢ CD Uo O< a CP `� cD O cD C P, rt c� a CD N CD OOCC71 -' �CD CN U) p .P O R, 0 CD rn CD Id 0 O-�co Cp 1r 0 P (IQ � O OO o p Ca. 0 CD O Ca O ' O a ChDt CD �1. �sJ C~D CD r+ `d n i' o < GQ r+ r rn C r C) inn' O CD < CD CAD V, CL � v O n ,'may < B UQ G O rn G02. G Oa' 0 'i CD C-D CD Q- (D pi w O ,y CD CD (gyp `+ :2r En � W w 0 CD C CD CD O 0O � � " CD O N Cn CD G n . CD CD Or CD -I o u4 O~ N C L M `CDD O Y Q' Ln h- � 0 CD 0 U2 o S. CD 0 CD w CD cD 10 ' CD Q (Cp n O C o N. n D d N CD < N o CD P. v,OO d�.t J v� ,s � • o o � ss. o w P V O C h O O N N m O � � �1 CD CD ~ CD CD r�+ C � h � R a. + wtl CD O o c C. ri �� �, �' o x & cono o � wua a� oCD O d °° CD 1> �� O i C� C Er 00 PO �J O CnD Co C N : � O ° W 8 _ ¢ En O C7 C� m 4m 9] Iyol��4% tdtj0 xZ�7d o�w OCD CD 0 a w �, �� CD o CD 00 ° ar ° w O. -' d �p C UQ pp N `C p- N L CCD O� �. o oz00 CD O `C O '+ N CD O w a A. c� w -r- —0 cO 0 O rt UQ C(D Oy Cate. N �dP..� r+ A � � r+ o ox� a v' `` W p� \O O G UQ + w a �' `C CD C G c(D UQ O �J CD 00 wcocl v, CD 00 cn o'uj 000 7j �mao ° O � a r N CD C/) uj U) C o CD d o � 4� CD � CD CD rn o o ti C) a� a � � �D En CD O 0 00 cn H p , 'zl 00 -A 110 lh A _p M o w ° CD o o cr a, � rn cn rj -P h P. o� 0� oo0ooEn a CD ode ' C) o w fv N V00i J W Opa A R ELI N C/A CD • c� (D td �o o o o aacn C�CD o 0 � d 't3 CD O M v,• a c�. C CD w 0 to rn N 9 ao m a m -7, m zz z mo m .. m m v r o m '^ mo zz X N Ln z V Z m F z v m -1 Z fA �x m 'a rn � r � n z O N 1 m r 0 3> y C. � O Z o 0 N " o x a — z 0 0 0 C a �' A n nK m n m0-< o O >Nz o X 1 m O Z K O N Z Zm SR m = g2z0 c "'�ZYL -oobi mrn �^ rr- fT1 2 A N r to n m 1 D r m 7v 0 m m Z 0 rntnawN_ �m M t�c�c�xxc� v oa > m xxx<xo z�z�Nm c rmrr�N D = v mZy��nm x avo��� �'co"' fr/1��N�ZO O Z V' 0jn M. Z0 O r� t�x z ov -1NX 1 O --4 (AM m 0 0 A m v 3:01 PO al wl Nl 1a N D -- m Z D m O r -t m m O / m m0 No m M N / N 3 m N 0 mm / n m N / m om 3 N z W t El-otim El-.tI— Elwatt- x S o S a owa I 1 I, I r 0 Two ____-____ I 1 I I I s s a a x s a.m I I 1 1 I 1� �m u ' i 9 I I � I 1 I 1 I I r I 1 ' 1 1 --------------------------- Et—tloa x s a a owo i rn p I I I I 1 I I Ir g Im I I E I max Ion El ... ti. z 143 s a a x s s a s x s _____ __________r____�v 1 I im I I I 1 I I I m I I 1 1 El—tim �m I I I • I I 1 1 i I I El—tl- S _.j--4 I ss I I I -- I I I Elmotlm two ________ r____� i I , I� I r Z I I 1 I 1 1 a I I 1 i I I I �A AI I'M A I- to z OZM O m "� r o m Z M m N e m n O •1 N p i ti to D ,�i m — z c� m =i �z � 0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14� 00 ma U m �m m Z D 0 m 0 m� m m -v r 0 om m mo 0 z N;N Vl ' C) m � N / m 0 m 0 D 3 N � m Z m c I m z � v r NI N Z w a IV0 Pi a)r)(A mm CAM zo om I It cum f7-11 Or aX 1m� Z=I wmm �� -n / 1 x1a zvx po r m z ro 1 tnm ZO -qz oT� roar m nw wz L'm o 10 �n m -_-I A o 03. 00 j tncw tnm zm m o; zA =m �z o< 0o cm z or � x A 0 r 00 m a N m -m c� Z z Z m O m� m r 0 m m m <2 O t7 N "a s N .. m N p t9 n m a � N z D m N S ll 2 D CNn Da 3. O-1-N NO Z x' 1' In. OOr' -<�Z' O Z—_- Zfl mD Omr D V1Dn -� zz�1 1<ro m ?12 mo -+; oaa tnmmx mmo- Ln m of rtn xo rzx 1tnv� �rm� ^' tf to mp tnJ,m wva�' N o N i• q Dtn mczi W-M- 1y =ate C] Z m M o p 1 x O n vm Imo tn�am 1rc-o <z m�mxotDnovo �oy�x�w Dxm zsv i EZ=omml-tnivm rnx my x a1� zo �m goo w'tm mm x nr o 0' m morn oy1 wfz mm =vzi� zp mlrrn < x xo m z�m �0° + Op z c m imc o F-4 w 1m z �n z 1 !� o"w m z 1 z z m m I. C 4 m to E x D m g < y °� r a Z> y Z o m v v r a Z x LAD o Zm 47) z { z On Zvi r� z M z Z N n !A m m O ' m f r a to o 0 T p to 2 m > m z G7 1 r 1 0 rn t 0 m n ;e <$ 3 a„ fig;; - -a °so F g$8§ P O V • Drn !^ 0/ 0 ZT =v Dy z;v m r N D m Z D m O m� Z m v r =" o m m N0 � 3w zm IZO z m i c Z 0 n Z n m c € 2 H Z Z :0 x nil a O �' r- n =i n ," A H z c � �O 0 v rn 0 o Z N Z Z C.)si5 c n Z z r -i m y r`-- -4 Z n m �1 e a � -i N v m s H N o x m Ol — z C7 Z m �j N � NO Dill AN i ANN l ift IIIII Hill HIM HIM IIIIII 11111 IIIII IIIIII IIIIII IIIIII 91111„=11111.,1111111.,=111111„111111 : III 31111 Illlll 131111 11111 IIIIII„IIIIII„Illlll„Illlll„IIIIII HIMIIIIII IIIIII HIM IIII II IIIIII 1111I IIIIIII . IIII,II�I IRWIN IWYIVIIIVI 1WII�IIIW ������ 1�W�W I�WIIIVI IIIIII IIIIII IIIIII IIIIII IIIIII 111111 IIIIII ` III11I IIIIII llllll Illlll HIM„ R1111 911i111 I11i111 ., „ HIM 511111 Nllll U11111 01111 Illlll I11111 Illlll 111111 111111 .. I11111 111111 III:11 IIIIII 1111IIIII IN 1AIIIIII�'�I lllll I 111oil IIIIIIIIII! 1 ., .. AU1111-1ur.r. REM.. :: IW1W111Y IYYII'IYIIWi 11111V1� I 'IVII W 1I171 IIIIII IIIIIII �1ii111 IIIIII IIIIIII ?Illlll IIIIII IIIIII }IIIIII._ IIIIII IIIIII Illilll Illilll IIIIIII }IIIIII ., „ „ 00 5�1111 5�1111 ���'lll 5311111 a�lllll IIIIII IIIIII IIIIII IIIIII IIIIIII IIII IIIIIII IIIIIII cn 1�I�IIIAA,IIAI 1AIAI�AwIIAI 1IIIIII11! 3IIII,II 3IIII�I,I 1IIIIIIII ,. .. .. .- .. !Illil�171� _ " " Illi��li ;; �11111 �11111 �11111 lllllll IIIIIII .. IIIIIII IIIIIII Illilll III IIIIIIII IIIIIIII _, IIIIIII _ �1GII11 „ �111111., �1i11111.. �1i11111 ��11111 '�Illll :�311111 'llllll ��111111 IIIIIII_,IIIIIII_,IIIIIII„IIIIIIII.,IIIIIIII Illilll IIIIII IIIL'�1 I11`111 IIIIIII .. IIIIIII .. 111III�►I .. 1,I1III .. 11I111IIII .. 1II1,1,1,I11 I1111111 I1111111 I1111111 I1111111 I1111111 , � ail 11., �1i11111., }IIIIIII �1i11111 �1i11111 s�llllll IIIIIIII 4.3111111 llllllll }�111111 IIIIIIII _, 53111111 r�llllll IIIIIII lllllll :: 3IIIIIII IIIIII,IIIIII ., gl■llllll I,IIII,IIII� lllllll g1111►11 3llllll „ IIIII,IIIIIIII .. 1,IIAIIIIII�1 ;; II!II111II Ohio I��IIVWII IIIW�Vi� Ifilk IBM IIIIIII IIIIII IIIIII IIIIII IIIIII llllllll 111►111 llllll Illlll IIIIII IIIIII 1�II11., , ��IIII ., �3111111 IIIIIII �11111 I11111 511111 HIM s III lIII I'llIIIIII IIIIIII IIIIII IIIIII IIIIIII IIIIII IIIIIIIIII Iloilo,. IIIpI iI p I1111111.. IIIIIIIIAI! .. .. ANWho Who Who IIIIII IIIIII 111111 IIIIII IIIIII llllll llllll llllll . ?1i1111., IIIIIII „ IIIIIII „ }1Gtlll }�'lllll 511IIII 5Mill 211111 llllll I11111 111111 IIIIII IIIIII1I Il1llll 11111,111 - HIM11111111 IIIIII�1 1I,1111 111I1.111I1 mm 'IN] ■ 11 .0 w 00 N D �m z D m 0 m s m n z z m /l n3 s n D Z O cn mm m cn m --r-u .. Xr mD D Z 71 C7 O �:U�o O N l / — D z � Om CD D Z m 0 G7 m 0 Ti D z 77 D N �A (AO --Io fm o r-1 -no, z Q m o z N rn m' c� m D ` r yO m F ( D m O 0 m oor xzn a < <c r-UT rxa - Ormd) Z 0 0O ➢ o X r 2 Z m x m (Ac = � a pm <a T n �Nc m* In In i� O UT Zm n TDm T r- ➢ {m T>. m a a z m -4 m O rn C/)- -q r ogr Dr MOD 7zzp CO 0 mg �o U) (ten 5' 2'-6" 2' oox — - _ - - - N- r torn zo '+ rD- O o N -n m p rn > m o ZK m Z a-1 n n --I V1 x m m cn mD mZ rA L — — — — �o m C m � � W Z� Z 0 Dn o pJS f �D n D OD < �z mmm .�,.,., o m m > O m RAW S T� N O V) m m 0 D m D (N eS;7-4 I -*PI M oZ- O� �cnNm m oO D T -Un ➢r m � V) D O (7 OXK n ➢gym ai m � D � r C) Z ' n c N, �7 o w o- in m n m D°� f1 m O o o Z ; Z -a > v� Z �O� m o O O mm r D 8> "�Z m m x ^� v 0 o Z m a O c m z -4 z D Z p 'n W S Ff = <n zzz � 22 N \ —I Z m z v, n N Zcu om m� � �' om O m 0 0 n m m > — r z r� -I m c�PZ w ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- v Error Occurred While Processing Request Page 1 of 1 Property Profile Summary Report ACCOUNT INFORMATION Acct No: 212M59006D9 Parcel No. 2 23059006 Taxpayer: CI ON Mail Addr: 1055 S GRADY WAY RENTON WA 98055 Plat Name: Plat Lot: Plat Block: S/T/R: Qtr Section Prop Type: 21 /23/5 SE Residential ASSESSMENT AND TAX INFORMAT Levy Code: 2100 Tax Status: EXEMPT Roll Yr: 2001 New Cnstr: NO Land Val: $334,000.00 Impvs Val: $0.00 PARCEL INFORMATION Jurisdiction: RENTON Present Use: VACANT(SINGLE-FAMILY) Zoning: RC Lot Acres: </PLAINTEXT><PRE></PRE></Q></S></SAMP></SCRIPT></SELECT></SMALL></STRIKE></STRONG>< <UL></UL></VAR></WBR><XMP></XMP> <HR> <H3>Error Occurred While Processing Request</H3> <P> <TABLE border=l> <TBODY> <TR> <TD> <H4>Error Diagnostic Information</H4> <P> <P>An error occurred while evaluating the expression: <P><PRE>#NumberFormat(Evaluate(gLand.SQFTLOT/43560),"0.99")# </PRE> <P></P> <P></P>Error near line 183, column 6. <HR> <P>Invalid format mask <P> <P>The error occurred while processing an element with a general identifier of (#NumberFormat(Evaluate(gLand.SQFTLOT/43560),"0.99")#), occupying document position (183:5) to (183:56) in the template file C:\RENTONNET\WEB SITES\INTRANET\KCA\DISPLAY\DSP SUMMARY.CFM.</P> <P> — <P>Date/Time: 09/13/01 15:10:08<BR>Browser: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.01; Windows NT)<BR>Remote Address: 10.1.5.90<BR>Query String: fuseaction=displaysummary&amp;R=1 <P></P></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE> <P> <HR> </BODY></HTML> http://rentonnetlweb_siteslintranetlkcalindex.cfm?fuseaction=displaysummary&R=1 09/ 13/2001 Rentonnet Plat Index Search Page 1 of 1 Property Profile Summary Report ACCOUNT INFORMATION ASSESSMENT AND TAX INFORMATI Acct No: 212305904006 Levy Code: 2132 Parcel No: 21230 04D Tax Status: EXEMPT Taxpayer: CITY OF SEATTLE Roll Yr: 2001 Mail Addr: SPU/REAL PROP - WTR New Cnstr: NO 710 2ND AVE 10TH FLOOR Land Val: $47,000.00 SEATTLE WA 98104 Impvs Val: $0.00 PARCEL INFORMATION Plat Name: Jurisdiction: RENTON Plat Lot: Present Use: VACANT(SINGLE-FAMILY) Plat Block: Zoning: R-8 S/T/R: 21 / 23 / 5 Lot Acres: 6.76 Qtr Section: SE Lot SF: 294465 Prop Type: Residential Wtr Frt SF: 0 LEGAL DESCRIPTION 212305 40 MERCER ISLAND PIPE LN RM/ OVER SEC AS ESTAB BY ORD 84393 LESS C/M RGTS http://rentonnetlweb_siteslintranetlkcalindex. cfm?fuseaction=displaysummary&R= l 09/ 13/2001 Error Occurred While Processing Request Page 1 of 1 Property Profile Summary Report ACCOUNT INFORMATION Acct No: 212305906803 Parcel No: 21230 06$` Taxpayer: SHADOW HAWK LLC Mail Addr: 2001 S JONES BLVD #D LAS VEGAS NV 89146 89146 Plat Name: Plat Lot: Plat Block: S/T/R: Qtr Section: Prop Type: 21 /23/5 NE Commercial ASSESSMENT AND TAX INFORMAT Levy Code: 2100 Tax Status: TAXABLE Roll Yr: 2001 New Cnstr: NO Land Val: $1,100,000.00 Impvs Val: $0.00 PARCEL INFORMATION Jurisdiction: Present Use Zoning: Lot Acres: RENTON VACANT(M U LTI-FAMILY) R-14 </PLAINTEXT><PRE></PRE></Q></S></SAMP></SCRIPT></SELECT></SMALL></STRIKE></STRONG>< <UL></UL></VAR></WBR><XMP></XMP> <HR> <H3>Error Occurred While Processing Request</H3> <P> <TABLE border=l> <TBODY> <TR> <TD> <H4>Error Diagnostic Information</H4> <P> <P>An error occurred while evaluating the expression: <P><PRE>#NumberFormat(Evaluate(gLand.SQFTLOT/43560),"0.99")# </PRE> <P></P> <P></P>Error near line 183, column 6. <HR> <P>Invalid format mask <P> <P>The error occurred while processing an element with a general identifier of (#NumberFormat(Evaluate(gLand.SQFTLOT/43560),"0.99")#), occupying document position (183:5) to (183:56) in the template file C:\RENTONNET\WEB SITES\INTRANET\KCA\DISPLAY\DSP SUMMARY.CFM.</P> <P> <P>Date/Time: 09/13/01 15:11:50<BR>Browser: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.01; Windows NT)<BR>Remote Address: 10.1.5.90<BR>Query String: fuseaction=displaysummary&amp;R=1 <P></P></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE> <P> <HR> </BODY></HTML> http://rentonnetlweb_siteslintranet/kcalindex.cfm?fuseaction=displaysummary&R=1 09/ 13/2001 Error Occurred While Processing Request Page 1 of 1 Acct No: Parcel No Taxpayer: Mail Addr: Plat Name: Plat Lot: Plat Block: S/T/R: Qtr Section Prop Type: Property Profile Summary Report ACCOUNT INFORMATION 212305906902 21230 & 9069 CITY OF RENTON 1055 S GRADY WAY RENTON WA 98055 21 /23/5 NE Residential ASSESSMENT AND TAX INFORMAT Levy Code: 2100 Tax Status: EXEMPT Roll Yr: 2001 New Cnstr: NO Land Val: $56,000.00 Impvs Val: $0.00 PARCEL INFORMATION Jurisdiction: RENTON Present Use: VACANT(SINGLE-FAMILY) Zoning: RC Lot Acres: </PLAINTEXT><PRE></PRE></Q></S></SAMP></SCRIPT></SELECT></SMALL></STRIKE></STRONG>< <UL></UL></VAR></WBR><XMP></XMP> <HR> <H3>Error Occurred While Processing Request</H3> <P> <TABLE border=l> <TBODY> <TR> <TD> <H4>Error Diagnostic Information</H4> <P> <P>An error occurred while evaluating <P><PRE>#NumberFormat(Evaluate(gLand. </PRE> <P></P> <P></P>Error near line 183, column 6. <HR> the expression: SQFTLOT/43560),"0.99")# <P>Invalid format mask <P> <P>The error occurred while processing an element with a general identifier of (#NumberFormat(Evaluate(gLand.SQFTLOT/43560),"0.99")#), occupying document position (183:5) to (183:56) in the template file C:\RENTONNET\WEB SITES\INTRANET\KCA\DISPLAY\DSP SUMMARY.CFM.</P> <P> <P>Date/Time: 09/13/01 15:08:42<BR>Browser: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.01; Windows NT)<BR>Remote Address: 10.1.5.90<BR>Query String: fuseaction=displaysummary&amp;R=1 <P></P></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE> <P> <HR> </BODY></HTML> http://rentonnetlweb_siteslintranetlkcalindex. cfm?fuseaction=displaysummary&R=1 09/ 13/2001 Error Occurred While Processing Request Page 1 of 1 Acct No: Parcel No: Taxpayer: Mail Addr: Plat Name: Plat Lot: Plat Block: S/T/R: Qtr Section Prop Type: Property Profile Summary Report ACCOUNT INFORMATION 212305009 21230 CITY ORFNTON 1055 S GRADY WAY RENTON WA 98055 21 /23/5 SE Residential ASSESSMENT AND TAX INFORMAT Levy Code: 2100 Tax Status: EXEMPT Roll Yr: 2001 New Cnstr: NO Land Val: $113,000.00 Impvs Val: $0.00 PARCEL INFORMATION Jurisdiction: RENTON Present Use: VACANT(SINGLE-FAMILY) Zoning: RC Lot Acres: </PLAINTEXT><PRE></PRE></Q></S></SAMP></SCRIPT></SELECT></SMALL></STRIKE></STRONG>< <UL></UL></VAR></WBR><XMP></XMP> <HR> <H3>Error Occurred While Processing Request</H3> <P> <TABLE border=l> <TBODY> <TR> <TD> <H4>Error Diagnostic Information</H4> <P> <P>An error occurred while evaluating the expression: <P><PRE>#NumberFormat(Evaluate(gLand.SQFTLOT/43560),"0.99")# </PRE> <P></P> <P></P>Error near line 183, column 6. <HR> <P>Invalid format mask <P> <P>The error occurred while processing an element with a general identifier of (#NumberFormat(Evaluate(gLand.SQFTLOT/43560),"0.99")#), occupying document position (183:5) to (183:56) in the template file C:\RENTONNET\WEB SITES\INTRANET\KCA\DISPLAY\DSP SUMMARY.CFM.</P> <P> <P>Date/Time: 09/13/01 15:08:57<BR>Browser: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.01; Windows NT)<BR>Remote Address: 10.1.5.90<BR>Query String: fuseaction=displaysummary&amp;R=1 <P></P></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE> <P> <HR> </BODY></HTML> http://rentonnetlweb_sites/intranetlkcalindex.cfm?fuseaction=displaysummary&R=1 09/13/2001 Rentonnet Plat Index Search Page 1 of 1 Property Profile Summary Report ACCOUNT INFORMATION Acct No: 232305903204 Parcel No: 2323059032 Taxpayer: BRENDEN MARSHALL M Mail Addr: LOONEY WILLIAM A 18225 SE 128TH RENTON WA 98059 Plat Name: Plat Lot: Plat Block: S/T/R: 23 / 23 / 5 Qtr Section: NW Prop Type: Residential Excise Tax # Sale Date 1353072 12/17/1993 ASSESSMENT AND TAX INFORMATI Levy Code: 4399 Tax Status: TAXABLE Roll Yr: 2001 New Cnstr: NO Land Val: $38,000.00 Impvs Val: $0.00 PARCEL INFORMATION Jurisdiction: Present Use Zoning: Lot Acres: Lot SF: Wtr Frt SF: SALES RECORDS Sale Price $0.00 KING COUNTY VACANT(SINGLE-FAMILY) URSO 1.61 70131 0 Sale Instrument Warranty Deed LEGAL DESCRIPTION 232305 32 POR GL 9-BEG ON ELY LN OF CO RD WCH IS N 80-33-00 E 140.35 FT FRM W 1/4 COR SEC TH N 14-22-00 E http://rentonnetlweb_siteslintranetlkcalindex. cfm?fuseaction=displaysummary&R=1 08/28/2001 Rentonnet Plat Index Search Page 1 of 1 �2 Property Profile Summary Report ACCOUNT INFORMATION Acct No: 232305913203 Parcel No: 2323059132 Taxpayer: TATLEY JEFFREY Mail Addr: 15120 149TH AVE SE RENTON WA 98058 Plat Name: Plat Lot: Plat Block: S/T/R: Qtr Section Prop Type: Bedrooms Bath F3H: Fireplace: Stories: Units: Excise Tax # 1681800 1498553 848290 852328 23/23/5 NW Residential ASSESSMENT AND TAX INFORMATI Levy Code: 4399 Tax Status: TAXABLE Roll Yr: 2001 New Cnstr: NO Land Val: $63,000.00 Impvs Val: $48,000.00 PARCEL INFORMATION Jurisdiction: Present Use Zoning: Lot Acres: Lot SF: Wtr Frt SF: KING COUNTY SINGLE FAMILY(RES USE/ZON URSO 1.12 48787 0 RESIDENTIAL BUILDING 1 2 1st Flr SF: 820 Finish SF: 1140 1/0/0 2nd Flr SF: 0 Att Grg SF: 0 1 3+ Flr SF: 0 Deck SF: 0 2 Half Flr SF: 320 Fin Bsmt SF: 0 TEST BsmtGar SF: 0 Bsmt Tot SF: 0 SALES RECORDS Sale Date Sale Price 04/27/1999 $180,000.00 07/25/1996 $136,777.00 10/21 /1985 $0.00 11/15/1985 $50,000.00 Year Built: 1927 Bldg Grde: 6 LOW A Bldg Cond: VERY GOOD Sale Instrument Warranty Deed Statutory Warranty Deed Quit Claim Deed Warranty Deed LEGAL DESCRIPTION 232305 132 POR GL 9-BEG ON ELY LN OF CO RD WCH IS N 80-33-00 E 140.35 FT FIRM W 1/4 COR N 14-22-00 E ALG SD http://rentonnet/web_siteslintranet/kcalindex.cfm?fuseaction=displaysummary&R=1 08/28/2001 Rentonnet Plat Index Search Page 1 of 1 �3 Property Profile Summary Report ACCOUNT INFORMATION Acct No: 232305901000 Parcel No: 2323059010 Taxpayer: LEHMANN TYLER L Mail Addr: 15202 149TH AVE SE RENTON WA 98058 Plat Name: Plat Lot: Plat Block: S/T/R: 23 / 23 / 5 Qtr Section: SW Prop Type: Residential Bedrooms: 3 1st Flr SF: Bath F3H: 1/0/0 2nd Flr SF Fireplace: 0 Stories: 2 Units: TEST Excise Tax # 1042498 1054768 708116 1048204 1054769 1375637 1030730 1637147 3+ Flr SF Half Flr SF: BsmtGar SF Sale Date 01 /05/1989 01/05/1989 02/17/1983 02/23/1989 04/11 /1989 05/12/1994 08/31 /1988 09/03/1998 ASSESSMENT AND TAX INFORMATI Levy Code: 4399 Tax Status: TAXABLE Roll Yr: 2001 New Cnstr: NO Land Val: $67,000.00 Impvs Val: $124,000.00 PARCEL INFORMATION Jurisdiction: Present Use Zoning: Lot Acres: Lot SF: Wtr Frt SF: RESIDENTIAL BUILDING 1 KING COUNTY SINGLE FAMILY(RES USE/ZON URSO 1.41 61419 0 890 Finish SF: 1240 0 Att Grg SF: 0 0 Deck SF: 0 350 Fin Bsmt SF: 0 0 Bsmt Tot SF: 0 SALES RECORDS Sale Price $0.00 $0.00 $60,000.00 $0.00 $70,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $197,000.00 Year Built: 1918 Bldg Grde: 6 LOW A Bldg Cond: VERY GOOD Sale Instrument Quit Claim Deed Quit Claim Deed Real Estate Contract Quit Claim Deed Warranty Deed Quit Claim Deed Quit Claim Deed Warranty Deed LEGAL DESCRIPTION 232305 10 POR NW 1/4 OF SW 1/4 & OF GL 9 BEG W 1/4 COR SEC 23-23-05 TH S 16-00-30 E 216.6 FT TAP ON http://rentonnet/web_sites/intranet/kca/index.cfm?fuseaction=displaysummary&R=1 08/28/2001 Rentonnet Plat Index Search Page 1 of l Property Profile Summary Report ACCOUNT INFORMATION ASSESSMENT AND TAX INFORMATI Acct No: 232305907007 Levy Code: 4399 Parcel No: 2323059070 Tax Status: TAXABLE Taxpayer: HYNES ELSIE M Roll Yr: 2001 Mail Addr: 15214 149TH AVE SE New Cnstr: NO RENTON WA 98058 Land Val: $62,000.00 Impvs Val: $45,000.00 PARCEL INFORMATION Plat Name: Jurisdiction: KING COUNTY Plat Lot: Present Use: SINGLE FAMILY(RES USE/ZON Plat Block: Zoning: URSO S/T/R: 23 / 23 / 5 Lot Acres: 1.48 Qtr Section: SW Lot SF: 64468 Prop Type: Residential Wtr Frt SF: 0 RESIDENTIAL BUILDING 1 Bedrooms: 2 1 st Fir SF: 970 Finish SF: 970 Year Built: 1948 Bath F3H: 1/0/0 2nd Fir SF: 0 Att Grg SF: 340 Bldg Grde: 6 LOW A Fireplace: 1 3+ Fir SF: 0 Deck SF: 0 Bldg Cond: GOOD Stories: 1 Half Fir SF: 0 Fin Bsmt SF: 0 Units: TEST BsmtGar SF: 0 Bsmt Tot SF: 0 LEGAL DESCRIPTION 232305 70 POR NW 1/4 OF SW 1/4 - BEG W 1/4 COR SEC 23-23-05 TH S 16-00-30 E 216.63 FT TAP C/L OF JONES RD http://rentonnetlweb_siteslintranet/kcalindex.cfm?fuseaction=dlsplaysummary&R=1 08/28/2001 Rentonnet Plat Index Search Page 1 of 1 em Acct No: Parcel No: Taxpayer: Mail Addr: Plat Name: Plat Lot: Plat Block: S/T/R: Qtr Section Prop Type: Bedrooms Bath F3H: Fireplace: Stories: Units: Property Profile Summary Report ACCOUNT INFORMATION 232305912304 2323059123 CAWLEY BRENT 15247 150TH LN SE RENTON WA 98058 Excise Tax # 1690182 1690185 1205854 690180 23/23/5 NW Residential 3 1/0/1 1 1 TEST ASSESSMENT AND TAX INFORMATI Levy Code: 4399 Tax Status: TAXABLE Roll Yr: 2001 New Cnstr: NO Land Val: $126,000.00 Impvs Val: $97,000.00 PARCEL INFORMATION Jurisdiction: Present Use Zoning: Lot Acres: Lot SF: Wtr Frt SF: KING COUNTY SINGLE FAMILY(RES USE/ZON URSO 1.71 74487 135 RESIDENTIAL BUILDING 1 1st Fir SF: 1280 Finish SF: 1280 2nd Fir SF: 0 Att Grg SF: 340 3+ Fir SF: 0 Deck SF: 0 Half Fir SF: 0 Fin Bsmt SF: 0 BsmtGar SF: 0 Bsmt Tot SF: 0 SALES RECORDS Sale Date Sale Price 05/14/1999 $0.00 05/27/1999 $217, 000.00 08/13/1991 $188,500.00 09/13/1982 $0.00 Year Built: 1963 Bldg Grde: 7 AVERA Bldg Cond: AVERAG Sale Instrument Quit Claim Deed Statutory Warranty Deed Warranty Deed Quit Claim Deed LEGAL DESCRIPTION 232305 123 BEG AT W 1/4 COR OF SEC TH S 15-45-00 E 207.25 FT TH S 77-02-00 E 411.12 FT TH 155 FT http://rentonnet/web_siteslintranet/kcalindex.cfm?f iseaction=dlsplaysummary&R=1 08/28/2001 Rentonnet Plat Index Search Page 1 of 1 *6 Property Profile Summary Report ACCOUNT INFORMATION Acct No: 232305912700 Parcel No: 2323059127 Taxpayer: PENNER DELLA Mail Addr: 685 3RD ST NE E WENATCHEE WA 98802 Plat Name: Plat Lot: Plat Block: S/T/R: 23 / 23 / 5 Qtr Section: SW Prop Type: Residential ASSESSMENT AND TAX INFORMATI Levy Code: 4399 Tax Status: TAXABLE Roll Yr: 2001 New Cnstr: NO Land Val: $51,000.00 Impvs Val: $57,000.00 PARCEL INFORMATION Jurisdiction: Present Use Zoning: Lot Acres: Lot SF: Wtr Frt SF: RESIDENTIAL BUILDING 1 KING COUNTY SINGLE FAMILY(RES USE/ZON URSO 0.50 21840 0 Bedrooms: 3 1st Flr SF: 1080 Finish SF: 1080 Year Built: 1947 Bath F3H: 1/0/0 2nd Flr SF: 0 Att Grg SF: 220 Bldg Grde: 4 LOW Fireplace: 1 3+ Flr SF: 0 Deck SF: 0 Bldg Cond: AVERAG Stories: 1 Half Flr SF: 0 Fin Bsmt SF: 0 Units: TEST BsmtGar SF: 0 Bsmt Tot SF: 0 SALES RECORDS Excise Tax # Sale Date Sale Price Sale Instrument 1070960 07/07/1989 $0.00 Other - See Affidavit LEGAL DESCRIPTION 232305 127 BEG W 1/4 COR TH S 15-45-00 E 207.25 FT TH S 77-02-00 E 411.10 FT TH N 75 FT TO TPOB TH http://rentonnetlweb_siteslintranet/kcalindex.cfm?fuseaction=displaysummary&R=1 08/28/2001 Rentonnet Plat Index Search Page 1 of 1 Property Profile Summary Report ACCOUNT INFORMATION Acct No: 232305915802 Parcel No: 2323059158 Taxpayer: MIDDLETON JOHN Mail Addr: 15255 150TH LN SE RENTON WA 98058 Plat Name: Plat Lot: Plat Block: S/T/R: 23 / 23 / 5 Qtr Section: SW Prop Type: Residential Excise Tax # Sale Date 1070960 07/07/1989 1559448 08/05/1997 ASSESSMENT AND TAX INFORMATI Levy Code: 4399 Tax Status: TAXABLE Roll Yr: 2001 New Cnstr: NO Land Val: $16,000.00 Impvs Val: $0.00 PARCEL INFORMATION Jurisdiction: Present Use Zoning: Lot Acres: Lot SF: Wtr Frt SF: SALES RECORDS Sale Price $0.00 $0.00 KING COUNTY VACANT(SINGLE-FAMILY) URSO 0.22 9490 0 Sale Instrument Other - See Affidavit Quit Claim Deed LEGAL DESCRIPTION 232305 158 BAAP ON NLY MGN OF RR R/W S 15-47-00 E 207.25 FT & S 77-02-00 E ALG SD MGN http://rentonnetlweb_siteslintranetlkcalindex.cfm?fuseaction=dlsplaysummary&R=1 08/28/2001 YOUTH CAMP MASTER PLAN Renton Lions Club Club No. 1180-007649 21235 SE 184`' St. Maple Valley, WA 98038 (425) a7/ - 94 y� Property Location SE of the Junction between Cedar Grove Road & Hwy 169 in Maple Valley, WA Legal Description SW '/4 of the NW '/4 and the NW '/. of the SW '/4 of Sec. 33, 723N, R06E, WM, King County, WA 12.61 Acres Plan Prepared By King County Resource Professionals: Loy Jones, Forester Tom Beavers, Wildlife Biologist Anne Bikle, Watershed Steward Gino Lucchetti, Fisheries Biologist Klaus Richter; Wetlands Biologist Renton Lions Club Camp Committee Prepared June 30, 1998 5/06/1998 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page DESCRIPTION OF LANDOWNER OBJECTIVES 1 GENERAL PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 2 RESOURCE DESCRIPTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Category 1: Forest Health 3 Category 2: Timber and Wood Products 3 Category 3: Soils 4 Category 4: Water Quality, Riparian, and Wetland Areas 4 Category 5: Fish and Wildlife Habitat 5 Category 6: Threatened and Endangered Species and Cultural Resources 7 Category 7: Aesthetics and Recreation 8 MANAGEMENT TIMETABLE 9 SIGNATURE PAGE APPENDICES Appendix A — Maps and Photos Appendix B — Public Comments Appendix C — Annual Maintenance Activities DESCRIPTION OF LANDOWNER OBJECTIVES SHORT TERM OBJECTIVES 1. To continue using the camp for youth activities, such as Scouts, Renton and Maple Valley Parks Departments, and local school districts, and Lions Club events. 2. To provide a quality natural environment in which one could learn about the functioning of natural ecosystems and hydrologic functions. 3. Provide habitat for wildlife and fish that traditionally have used the site. 4. Improve the aesthetics and safety of the camp to enhance the quality of experience. 5. Evaluate possible ways to generate income from the camp for future management needs and Lions Club activities. 6. Improve the parking facilities to facilitate group use of the camp. LONG TERM OBJECTIVES 1. Construct and/or restore spawning habitat for salmon along the Cedar River. 2. Restore the current deciduous forest to one dominated by coniferous species. 3. Undertake management practices that will assist in quicker development of structure and biodiversity within the forest stand. 4. Develop a series of interpretive trails that will enhance the site as a natural classroom for youth activities. 5. To maintain and improve structures currently on the site so they retain functionality and blend with the environment. 6. Explore opportunities to increase usage by groups from local Park's departments and school districts. GENERAL PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Two of the three parcels that make up the current campsite started being used for this purpose in the 1940's. On May 9, 1960 these parcels were actually deeded to the Lions Club under a Deed of Trust with the provision that they be used only for the purpose of youth activities and Lions Club activities. In 1988 the third parcel of the property was donated with the same use restrictions. From the 1940's until the 1960's the property was primarily a primitive campsite with users providing tents for overnight use. In 1967 the Lions Club built 3 sleeping shelters that provide covered facilities for 36 people. In 1968 the Lions Club conducted a harvest of cottonwood on the property to provide for safety of campers. Subsequent planting of Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menzesii) and Western Red Cedar (Thuja plicata) occurred during the winter of 1968 and 1969. During 1970 a fire pit was built for the campers to use rather than having open fires on the site. An additional harvest of hardwoods was conducted in 1970, with further planting being undertaken in 1974. Further enhancement of the site was done in 1996 when' the Lions Club, in conjunction with King County, did stream enhancement work to improve the habitat for salmon in the stream running through the southwest corner of the property. This involved planting native vegetation along the banks, removing a culvert and replacing it with a footbridge, and eradicating Himalayan blackberry and Japanese knotweed along the stream channel. Access to the property is excellent and involves taking the Maple Valley Highway (Highway 169) south to Cedar Grove Road. Go left on Cedar Grove Road and then the first right onto Byres Road. Go about .3 miles and then turn left on SE 1841h Street where you continue to the gate of the camp. The road continues into a parking lot, and there are a couple tributary roads off the main road that provide access into the depth of the property. Topography on the site is relatively flat, although there are small swales and hummocks produced as a result of frequent flood events. Greater than 80% of the property is forested, with clear areas including a ball field, campsites, and several camp and picnic shelters. Surrounding land use is a combination of agricultural, primarily pastures, and residential. The property is bounded on the east and north sides by the Cedar River, and a small salmonid tributary runs through the southeast corner of the property. Elevation is around 300 feet above sea level. 2 RESOURCE DESCRIPTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RESOURCE CATEGORY 1: FOREST HEALTH Resource Description: Generally speaking, the majority of the trees on the property are in good health, although there is some damage that occurred from the 1996-97 snow and ice storm. The major health issues deal with stand composition, structure, and biodiversity. Over 90% of the stand consist of deciduous species, with Black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa) being the most common. Red Alder (Alnus rubra) and Big Leaf Maple (Acer macrophyllum) are the other hardwood components. Less than 10% consists of conifer species with Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menzesit) being the primary species. Some conifer reproduction is becoming established and consists primarily of Western Red Cedar (Thuja plicata) and Western Hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla). There are less than 1 tree per acre providing enough height for resting trees to be used by raptors, with the majority of the stand being smaller hardwoods and replanted conifers. From a hydrological perspective, reintroduction of conifer species would assist in shading for water and introduction of vegetative matter to the duff layer. Additionally, this will encourage increased diversity in wildlife using the site, plus ultimately result in a source of coarse woody debris for both the Cedar River and forest floor. An additional concern to forest health is the proliferation of Japanese knotweed (Polygonum cuspidatum) and Robert geranium (Geranium robertianum) that has become established as a result of being introduced to the site during a flood. Recommended Treatment: The reintroduction of conifer species into the stand should continue. In areas where there are significant hummocks, Douglas fir or Western Red Cedar could be planted. If planting Douglas fir, it would be necessary to do some clearing of the overstory . to provide enough light for seedling growth. In the lower areas, Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis) could be planted since it is a species that does not mind a high water table. Control and ultimately eradication of any non-native invasive species such as the Japanese knotweed and Robert geranium should be undertaken. Resource Category 2: Timber and Wood Products Resource Description: The forest was originally logged in the early 1900's, again in 1968 with an emphasis on removing hardwoods for safety concerns, and then a final harvest in 1974. As stated above, current composition of the stand is greater than 90% low quality hardwoods with the remaining percentage being young Douglas fir that was planted in 1968-69 and some in 1974. Black cottonwood, which is the most prevalent hardwood species ranges in diameter from 6-36 inches. While there are only a few larger than 24 inches, they are the ones with the most commercial value for peeler products. Even at that, the values of these trees are greater for roost and nest trees for birds. The remainder of the hardwood would only be considered pulp material at the current time, which has very little value in today's market. Douglas fir on the site is still too young to be any significant value for wood products. The understory consists of Salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), Elderberry (Sambucus racemosa ssp. pubens), Vine Maple (Acer circinatum), Huckleberry (Vaccinium parvifolium), Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia), and Sword fern . (Polystichum munitum). There is also a significant amount of Japanese knotweed that has become established on the site. Recommended Treatment: For those areas where Douglas fir is to be reestablished, there should be removal of the hardwood overstory in small patches to allow sunlight to the seedling. Where Western Red Cedar is to be planted, retention of the overstory is necessary to provide seedlings the necessary shade. Sitka spruce is also moderately shade tolerant and can be planted within the current stand without extensive tree removal. Since the site objectives primarily deal with recreation and habitat, it is recommended that forest management activities be focused on restoration, biodiversity, and stand structure instead of wood products. There may be some opportunity over the long term to obtain financial returns during forest management activities, this should be a secondary objective at best. Resource Category 3: Soils Resource Description: The King County Soil Survey indicates that the property is divided into two different soil types. Roughly 70% of the site consists of Riverwash (0-5% slope) which consists of long narrow areas of sand, gravel and stone. This is indicative of the property location in the Cedar River flood plain and the result is a soil type subject to alteration by severe erosion and deposition caused by flooding. The remaining 30% of area is made up of Puyallup fine sandy loam (0-3% slope) and is the location of the current coniferous vegetation, parking lot, and ball field. This soil type is typically found on natural levees in valley bottoms and normally has a water table at a depth of four to five feet. It is much more conducive to forest growth with Douglas fir, Western red cedar, Bigleaf maple, and Red alder being commonly found. Ground cover is sufficient at this time to cover the soils, except for on trails and roads. The major erosion potential is as a direct result of flooding caused by the Cedar River. Recommended Treatment: Eradication of non-native invasive plant species is very important in maintaining the health of the natural understory vegetation that keeps the soil in place during most flood events and for maintaining natural levels of biological diversity. A program of removing and controlling Japanese knotweed would allow the native plants to become reestablished, thus erosion potential would be reduced. Any areas that are cleared during construction should be revegetated prior to the rainy season. Paths and roads should be covered with gravel to reduce the amount of soil lost during flood events. Resource Category 4: Water Quality, Riparian, and Wetland Areas Resource Description: The site lies adjacent to the Cedar River and includes about 1500 linear feet of river frontage. The condition of the river, the riverbank and associated riparian area in the site vicinity is generally in good to very good condition. The northern valley wall (across the river from the Lions Camp) is very steep throughout this reach. A portion of the northern valley wall sloughed off during early January -February 1996 and an unconsolidated mixture of sand, gravel, and cobbles was deposited in the river. Periodic sloughing such as this is a typical and important process for Pacific Northwest rivers as it replenishes spawning gravel and delivers large woody debris to channels. The river continues to transport these sediments downstream and excellent spawning and rearing habitat has formed at the base of the slide. Although the riparian (riverside) vegetation is generally lacking in conifers, it nevertheless provides important functions including providing detritus for algae and aquatic insect production, shade for temperature control, terrestrial insects important as food for fish, and woody debris (albeit of lesser quality than coniferous -based material) for instream cover. The lower end of the "Byers Curve" revetment (along the left bank, facing downstream) is located partially on Lions Club property and partially on the adjoining upstream piece of private property. A revetment is a section of riverbank that has been artificial hardenened (typically with large, angular rock) but not elevated. In this case, placement of rock and rip -rap has armored the bank and helped to reduce, but not entirely prevent bank erosion. The Byers revetment has also resulted in displacing riverside trees and shrubs. During past flooding events the revetment has helped to keep most, but not all, floodwaters within the main channel of the river. In approximately the last 30 years, the Lions Club Youth Camp has experienced the most significant flooding in 1975, 1990, and 1996. Another important water feature within the Youth Camp is the perennial (year-round) groundwater -fed stream located between the ball fields and the parking area/main entrance road. The stream was created in the mid-1970's, when an upstream landowner constructed two large ponds. In doing so, an artesian source of water was struck and the stream was constructed as a drainage for the water. It has maintained perennial water flow since then. In 1996 and 1997 a short reach of the stream received a variety of enhancements which included the removal of culverts and replacement with a footbridge; removal of blackberry and knotweed and replacement with native plants; and the removal of silt and addition of spawning gravel. To formalize parking spaces and prevent cars from parking too close to the stream a low fence was installed along a portion of the stream. Recommended Treatment: To enhance the habitat value and stability of riparian areas the following actions should be undertaken: • conifer trees should be underplanted in forested riparian areas currently lacking in coniferous understory; • large woody debris on the forest floor should be increased by allowing some of the existing trees to fall and decay naturally; and • Non-native and invasive species should be eradicated. These actions should be done in concert with the possible construction of a side -channel situated between the river and the groundwater fed stream, and with other related site objectives. In addition limited maintenance actions, primarily weeding and mulching of planted areas, should continue for the restoration project area along the groundwater -fed channel. Also, the Youth Camp caretaker should be well versed on streamside maintenance tips. Resource Category 5: Fish and Wildlife Habitat Resource Description: Aquatic Habitat The river provides significant spawning and rearing habitat for Chinook, sockeye, and coho salmon and steelhead and cutthroat trout. Additional fish species common to this reach of the river include mountain whitefish, largescale sucker, brook lamprey, and sculpins. Despite its small size, the small groundwater fed stream is a significant producer of sockeye and coho salmon and cutthroat trout due to its stable spawning gravel and stable flow. Necessary for all of these fish is a structurally diverse complex array of habitats, including areas for spawning and rearing. High quality habitat is formed by substrates dominated by clean, stable gravel for spawning and insect production, large woody debris and boulders for hiding cover and bank and bed stability, and vigorous native riparian vegetation dominated by coniferous trees for overhead shade, temperature control, detritus inputs, and terrestrial insect fallout. Terrestrial Habitats The site is a characteristic low elevation Puget Lowland alluvial flat characterized by reoccurring flooding with its deposits of silt and nutrients. This influence is especially severe on site because of increased upstream erosion from land clearing and development. Only two (shrub layer and canopy) of three (ground layer) layers are found on the site because flooding has effectively eliminated organic soils, litter, downed branches and large woody debris. In addition flooding has significantly simplified the understory community by eliminating typical upland understory herbs (e.g., saxifrages, composits, etc.) and shrubs (salmonberry, cranberries). This has resulted in allowing only snowberry to dominate areas away from the river and the invasive and aggressive Japanese knotweed to dominate large pockets of the site adjacent to the river. Moreover, the young tree stage is characterized by sparsely distributed vine maple and alder. The canopy consists mainly of medium and large -sized black cottonwood. The site was striking in that a herb layer and tall shrub layer was absent. We saw shrub cover of snowberry and/or knotweed and then wide spacing of mostly black cottonwood trunks suggesting that ground cover and even the shrub layers are periodically swept away or killed. This unique plant community significantly limits a permanent terrestrial wildlife community. Terrestrial Species Although many species may be visitors to the site because of its proximity to the river and small stream few may be expected to be seasonal or permanent residents. Four medium-sized furbearing aquatic mammals most likely visit the site because of the proximity to the river and its contiguous riparian corridor to more favorable habitats. These include obligate aquatic species including beaver, mink, and otter and the facultative riparian species the raccoon. The latter species are often associated with riparian areas but often survive well in uplands. Of these furbearers direct, but old, sign of beaver feeding was observed. Most likely the beavers live within the banks in more secluded reaches of the river. Inland, the absence of organic soils, leaf litter and larger plant debris precludes colonization by bacteria, fungi and other decomposers, severely limits nutrient cycling and minimized populations of insects, annelids, mollusks and other invertebrates. It is these invertebrates that provide the biomass for a vertebrate food chain including amphibians, reptiles, birds and small mammals and larger wildlife including avian raptors and mammalian predators. Grasses, forbs and a diversity of shrubs that also are missing from this site also enhance wildlife species. These vegetation communities are especially important to grazers and seedeaters. Because of these habitat limitations the species richness and abundance may be limited. Only canopy wildlife inhabitants may be expected to permanently occupy the site. Passerines and woodpeckers also appear limited by reduced habitat structure. For example, dead trees that harbor insects that are fed upon by flycatchers, swallows and woodpeckers are unavailable. Consequently, holes made by woodpeckers are missing, consequently cavity -nesting birds are also absent. Recommended Treatment: For Fish Underplant native conifers and eradicate non-native plants in all riparian areas. Avoid disturbance of banks and streambeds. Where feasible in the groundwater -fed channel, remove silt and muck and replace with spawning gravel. If future investigation warrants, construct a side channel in a remnant river channel between the river and the groundwater -fed stream. Where it can be done safely, increase coniferous LWD in the river and groundwater channel and the forested riparian areas of both habitats. Avoid use of pesticides and herbicides near any watercourse. Do not disturb spawning fish or walk in streams after spawning. Do not remove fish carcasses; they are vital for food for fish and wildlife and provide nutrients for plant and future fish productivity. Wildlife There are specific limitations to enhancing this site for wildlife because of the dynamic nature of the river and associated with periodic flooding. Moreover, habitat enhancement and management for furbearers must occur on a regional basis making it difficult to provide site -specific recommendations. Beavers prefer to feed on the inner bark or cambium layer of deciduous species, which on the site could include alder, black cottonwood and willow. During summer they feed on burreed, yellow pond lily, arrowhead and other herbaceous vegetation found in backwaters and wetlands. Providing small, low -gradient, slow moving stream bordered by thin -barked trees such as willow, red -alder and vines maple would encourage beavers as well as other aquatic species. Moreover, providing shallow pools and wetlands in which the herbaceous species mentioned above are commonly found could further encourage beavers to reinhabit the site. Often opening the canopy and providing sunlight increases productivity of herbaceous vegetation and trees. River otter and mink prefer riparian habitats relatively undisturbed by human activities. Nevertheless providing them with fish and small vertebrate mammals may encourage them to use the site. Unfortunately, if a management goal is to provide salmonids habitat, these species could be harmful to rearing fish. Immediate and short-term enhancement can be accomplished by: More permanent and possibly long-term enhancement may be accomplished through a concerted planting effort to encourage additional vegetation structure and diversity on the site. We suggest augmenting existing vegetation with Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia) and Bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum) both flood -plain species tolerant of silt enrichment and nutrient deposits. Nevertheless, more shade -tolerant trees may need to be planted. Planting should be irregular and chosen to mimic natural distributions. Clumps can be grown and thinned at later times if necessary. Uneven -aged management in which large mature trees remain but younger and middle aged trees are encouraged may provide greater structure for wildlife. For Amphibians and Reptiles Provide uninterrupted access to cover and breeding areas if they exist. Set aside or provide sunny, open areas. Strategically, place boulder/rock piles in sunny areas for basking, cover etc. Provide depressions in both forests and fields that can fill with water in spring to provide critical breeding habitat. Check local drainage patterns for strategic locations of potential natural ponds. Fish and amphibian habitat don't always mix. Consequently you need some shallow, fish -free areas if you want to encourage amphibians. For Birds Help existing high quality, strategically located native conifers to become mature healthy cover trees. Increase native deciduous tree diversity that focuses on species and age composition. Provide multi -layered, native plant communities. For small mammals Provide some wet grassland and meadow habitat for deer mice, voles, shrew etc. These then provide food for barn owls, harriers, etc. Grass meadows also supply insects for swallows. This should be done along the open field areas of the camp rather than along the stream banks. Provide large deadwood (fallen logs, stumps brush piles) in riparian and upland landscapes. May need to fasten to ground to avoid loss during high floods for those riparian areas subject to frequent flooding. Construct several rock/boulder piles in groups of three. You can use clean construction waste such as cement blocks, etc since the square shapes of concrete and cement structure are more conducive to creating adequate crevices for habitat use. Large, irregular shaped boulders would provide a more aesthetic appeal and provide the same purpose. For Both Avian and Terrestrial species Start an aggressive Japanese knotweed control program. Similarly, control Himalayan blackberry and the invasive Robert's geranium. Provide some non-moving standing water either as small wetlands, depressions or as artificial pools and tubs. Bring in leaf litter and other organic material. Possibly start in small, localized areas. Establish a more complex herb and shrub layer. Suggest plantings of salvaged Northwest species. Suggest honeysuckle, salmonbenry, ash, hazelnut, red elder and other specific species that provide food and cover for wildlife. Lists are available. Provide structures that can be constructed by the organization. These include perches, nesting devices (shelves, platforms, baskets, boxes etc.). For example, nest boxes may improve swallow and woodpecker use of the area. Bat boxes could help roosting bats. Resource Category 6: Threatened and Endangered Species and Cultural Resources Resource Description: Puget Sound Chinook salmon have been recently (February 1998) proposed for listing as threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). The final decision for listing will not be made until early 1999, at the earliest. If Puget Sound Chinook are listed, then Cedar River chinook are expected to be included as genetic studies indicate that they are untainted by past hatchery stocking. Chinook salmon are oriented toward large rivers and exhibit the most diverse life history traits of any salmon species in the Cedar River. They are especially adapted to spawning in large clean gravel and cobble substrates found in the swifter portions of the river channels. Large deep pools and logjams are especially favored by adult chinook as holding areas prior to spawning. Because they enter rivers and hold in large pools in late August when water levels are low and stream temperatures are high, they are especially susceptible to poachers and stress from human disturbance. Chinook juveniles, which rear for 3 months to as much as a year in fresh water, are highly associated with LWD accumulations and the mouths of side channels and backwater areas. Other potential candidates for ESA listing (probably 2 to 5 years in the future) include steelhead trout coho salmon. A check with Washington's Department of Natural Resources database suggests there is no listed non -vascular (e.g., fungi, liverworts) or vascular plants on the site nor are any listed species noted nearby. A comparison of the site location and characteristics to range maps and habitat features of listed invertebrates and vertebrates also suggests the absence of any listed species. There are no Federal threatened, endangered or sensitive plant or animal species known to exist on the property. However, bald eagles winter in the vicinity. This site offers potential wintering, perching and foraging areas. The bald eagle is designated as threatened by federal and state governments. Recommended Treatment: Avoid artificial bank hardening of the river edge, as these actions tend to reduce habitat diversity. Instead, to achieve stability goals, promote the establishment of large mature coniferous forests along the river's edge and accumulation of LWD in the river channel and along the river margins. If future investigations warrant, construct the proposed side channel and attempt to make channel outlet conditions favorable for chinook juvenile rearing by adding LWD. The known absence of any listed terrestrial species indicates no special constraints or regulatory or managerial habitat protection or enhancement measures are required for the site. However, Cottonwoods greater than 20 inch diameter should be retained within 250 feet of the river. Conifers greater than 24 inch diameter are also important to promote within this area. Since cottonwoods have a relatively short life span, recruitment trees should also be promoted. Resource CateLyory 7: Aesthetics and Recreation Resource Description: The site is used primarily as a recreation facility for youth groups. As a result, it contains 8 buildings that consist of 3 sleeping huts, a pavilion, a pump house, a storage room, a restroom building, and a trailer home. The buildings are in good condition with some minor improvements needed. The site also contains 3 campsites used for tent camping. A major fire pit was built to accommodate large groups. Horseshoe pits and a softball diamond provides active recreation facilities. The softball diamond serves primarily as a mixed -use open space. There is a small parking lot on one end of the property and a number of trails and access roads are throughout the property. Additionally, there are short brick walls on either side of an entry gate to limit access during periods the camp is not in use. Recommended Treatment: The sleeping shelters need some repair which include new foundation footings, new steps and rails, and a ramp to make one shelter handicapped accessible. The roofs also should be cleaned of moss, and possibly new roofing attached. The restrooms have just received new stools, urinals, and sinks, but are still in need of stall dividers. Outside lighting is also needed in front of restrooms, and around parking lot. The parking lot needs to be expanded to accommodate additional parking. A smooth surface pathway should be constructed between parking lot, restrooms, and pavilion to provide easy wheelchair access. To enhance the educational aspects of the site for users, an interpretive trail could be built in the northern portion of the property after the construction of the fish habitat improvements. The campsites should be enlarged and new tent pads constructed. The tent pads should be constructed of small pea gravel (to allow water to drain) and should be of a size to accommodate large tents. The fire pit needs brickwork to repair minor damage. The trailer home is generally in good condition. The roof needs to be repaired or possibly a new roof constructed over the top of the whole trailer. A storage shed needs to be constructed close to trailer for use by caretaker. The air-conditioning unit should be reattached for summer use, as the trailer is not shaded from the sun. MANAGEMENT TIMETABLE First Year Upgrade caretaker housing Upgrade garbage bunker Begin control of invasive plant species Start location, design and costing of salmon habitat ponds Complete outside lighting for restrooms and parking area Identify specific areas within improved portion of site to release and/or plant conifers Develop handicap accessibility plan Second Year Pursue funding for salmon habitat ponds Plant conifers in improved portion of site Continue control of invasive plant species (planting of native species) Prepare site map locating additional parking, campsites and interpretive trail Develop standards for natural campsites Identify specific locations for wildlife habitat improvements Begin implementation of handicap accessibility plan Years 3 = 5 Construction of salmon habitat ponds Construction of additional parking, campsites and interpretive trail Develop Eagle Projects for wildlife habitat improvement projects Construction of interpretive trail Plant conifers and other hardwood species in undeveloped site Plant native shrubs and understory in undeveloped site Identify and promote on -site recruitment trees for snags and large woody debris Resource Section 7 Resource Section 7 Resource Sections 1, 3, 4, 5, & 6 Resource Section 5 Resource Section 7 Resource Section 1, 5, 7 Resource Section 7 Resource Section 5 ` Resource Section 1, 5, 7 Resource Section 1, 3, 4, 5, & 6 Resource Section 7 Resource Section 7 Resource Section 5 Resource Section 7 Resource Section 5 Resource Section 7 Resource Section 5 Resource Section 7 Resource Section 1, 5, 7 Resource Section 1, 5, 7 Resource Section 1, 5, 7 9 Begin introduction of large woody debris to forest floor Upgrade and repair current camp shelters Years 6 and Beyond Continue planting to encourage forest structure and diversity Develop and implement maintenance plan for entire facility Continue recruitment of snags and large woody debris in forested area Resource Section 1, 5, 7 Resource Section 1, 5, 7 All sections Resource Section 1, 5, 7 FOREST STEWARDSHIP PLAN SIGNATURE PAGE (Attach this page to the plan.) PLAN PREPARED BY (Primary author, if more than one): Signature Print Name Title Agency/Company Address Phone Date Plan Preparer Is: ❑ Private Natural Resource Professional ❑ Agency Representative ❑ Landowner Who Completed Coached Stewardship Planning Course ❑ Landowner Who Is a Natural Resource Professional List other professionals, and their affiliations, who contributed to this plan. If this was a "Coached Plan" list natural resource professionals who serve as "coaches." LANDOWNER SIGNATURE: The contents of this plan are acceptable to me/us. I/we intend to manage this property in a manner consistent with the objectives of the Forest Stewardship Program and to implement this plan to the best of my/our ability. Landowner signature(s) Date Print Landowner Name(s) APPROVAL SIGNATURE: I have reviewed this plan and approve it as meeting the standards for a Forest Stewardship Plan. Signature of Designated Service Representative Date Print Name of Designated Service Representative Title Agency Address Phone Appendix A Maps and Photos t ,��!� �d C1'�► i�� l� f��`k irk' ► 4 tn* l� p;wry F. ,k. �► 1 r �vi►.+�^ii�i► !►�ii�/�� �� i►. ,�L•RY 4�� 9►��" fig tpn�ltl����'� � �'tl��,}►, PARKING BRfONc . LOT +r BALL / 1 FIELD 2 RA POLES I I u�X1L 4l RY a PARKM i O PROPE" LINE/FENCE LINE POND 0 Y. : H 'As. g5 ss 'a9 3 � yap egK[ . 5 � 5 Appendix B Public Comments Camp Advisory Committee Meeting - March 30, 1998 1. Visitors from the scout groups using the camp submitted their ideas and suggestions toward improving facilities at the camp. This was a result of our reviewing improvements and changes while working on the enhancement of the salmon habitat with King Co. Land and Water Resources Department. Suggestions follow. -pave walkways around pavilion -erect four foot high windbreaker partitions around pavilion -use crushed rock around camp sites and on trails -have a more defined camp area - 200 feet from the water -erect a second pavilion -provide more parking -more storage space -more eagle scout projects -kitchen usage - use screens to separate kitchen area from dining area to minimize distractions and disruptions during instructional sessions -provide and improve drinking water and hot water usage -access by ramp and asphalt walkway -restrooms - girls stalls need improvement -get more scouts involved in projects, i.e., we provide materials and scouts supply manpower -improve nature trails, i.e., develop 4-10 x 10 tent pads, larger assembly areas; a total of 8 camp sites -possible link up with county owned Cedar River Trail with hiking trail into camp -able to wade the river -- Committee concern: who has liability? -payphone at camp -repair firepit -user fee - (Seattle has Training Session Fees) -joint fund raising activities by Lions and Scouts - Car wash, etc. -Saturday .rentals to other groups are okay, but scouts would like to be contacted with sufficent lead time (normal Fri/Sat. usage, scouts are out by Sat. noon) Appendix C Annual Maintenance Activities ANNUAL STEWARDSHIP FOR LIONS CLUB STREAM (DRAFT) FALL (Sep't., Oct., Nov.) • replace dead or dying plants or plant additional plants • allow fallen leaves to remain as mulch and return nutrients to soil and plants; rake out of pathways to base of trees or shrubs if desired • leave fish carcasses in stream (if dragged out of stream, simply place back into stream) WINTER (Dec., Jan., Feb.) • still good time to replace dead or dying plants or plant additional plants, add mulch • continue to allow fish carcass decomposition in stream SPRING (Mar., April, May) • OK to plant through mid -April • hand weed planted areas once a month (try to avoid weed whacker; it can easily damage the plantings) • prune shrubs, trees (please, no "topping")to desired shape or to delineate existing pathways • lay wood chips or coarse mulch along pathways to direct people SUMMER (June, July, Aug.) • continue hand weeding once a month • water new plantings (those plantings that are 2 years old or less) once or twice a month beginning in late June PoNO REHYCH LWHS CLUE VOU7H Pi%RK ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION of the RENTON LIONS FOUNDATION The undersigned, being over the age of eighteen and acting as incorporator of a corporation under the State of Washington Non -Profit Corporation Act, RCW 24.03, adopts in duplicate the following articles of incorporation. ARTICLE I The name of the corporation shall be the Renton Lions Foundation. ARTICLE II This corporation's duration shall be perpetual. ARTICLE III The purpose or purposes for which the corporation is organized are: Section 1. A. To act as the charitable arm of the Renton Lions Club. B. To create and foster a spirit of understanding among the peoples of the world. C. To take an active interest in the civic, cultural, social, and moral welfare of the community. D. To unite members in the bonds of friendship, good fellowship, and mutual understanding. E. To encourage service minded persons to serve their community without personal financial reward. Section 2. In general, to carry on any other lawful business whatsoever in connection with the foregoing which is calculated, directly or indirectly, to promote the objects of the corporation. Section 3. To engage in and carry on any lawful business or trade and exercise all powers granted to a corporation formed under the State of Washington Non -Profit Corporation Act, RCW 24.03, including any amendments thereto or successor statue that may hereinafter be enacted. ARTICLE IV This corporation reserves the right to amend, alter, change or repeal any provisions contained in its Articles of Incorporation in any manner now or hereafter prescribed or permitted by statute. ARTICLE V The permanent mailing address of this corporation shall be: Renton Lions Foundation PO BOX 554 Renton, WA 98057-0554 ARTICLE VI The number of directors constituting the initial Board of Directors, and the names and addresses of the persons who are to serve as initial directors are: Name JoAnn Biladeau Willi,5 Wurdeman Diane Dobson Homer Venishnick Marsha Buranich Ray L. Peretti Robert Minkler Mike Sloan Robert Dinning Kevin Kunnanz Jerry Broderhausen Peter Newing Rosemary Richert Lowell Vaughn Address 14619-164th PL. SE, Renton, WA 98059 18928-33rd Ave. So., Seattle, WA 98188 306 No. Riverside Dr., Renton,' WA 98055 518 South 17th St., Renton, WA 98055 4558-1 lth Ave. So., Seattle, WA 98108 22217-129th PL. SE, Kent, WA 98031 1701 Kennewick NE, Renton, WA 98056 PO BOX 1432, Renton, WA 98057 2115-123rd SE, Bellevue, WA 98005 2033 Dayton Dr. SE, Renton, WA 98055 17036-136th PL. SE, Renton, WA 98058 6802 Lake Wash. Blvd. SE, Newcastle, WA 98056 3715-120th Ave. SE, Bellevue, WA 98006 1006 North 35th St., Renton, WA 98056 BYLAWS OF THE RENTON LIONS FOUNDATION ARTICLE I. Purpose and Objects The purpose and objects of this foundation shall be: 1. To act as the charitable arm of the Renton Lions Club. 2. To create and foster a spirit of understanding among the peoples of the world. 3. To take an active interest in the civic, cultural, social, and moral welfare of the community. 4. To encourage service minded persons to serve their community without personal financial reward. ARTICLE II. Officers Section A. The officers of this foundation shall be the same as the officers of the Renton Lions Club. Section B. The Board of Directors of this foundation, here after referred to as the Board, shall be the same as the Board of the Renton Lions Club. Section C. No person may occupy more than one (1) office on this foundation. ARTICLE III. General Responsibilities of the Board. Section A. Funds. The Board shall generally direct the affairs of the foundation and shall have the sole power to authorize expenditures of foundation funds. The funds of said foundation consist of all funds raised by the Renton Lions Club to satisfy some community or public need and shall be used for those purposes. Section B. A budget will be developed by the incoming President and/or Treasurer, considered by the Board in July, submitted to the membership of the Renton Lions Club at a regular meeting for consideration, and adopted no later than August 31. The Board will be guided in its actions by the budget and must approve all new sources of revenue and expenditures not approved in the budget document. Section C. Meetings. Regular or special meetings of the Board shall be held at such time and place as may be decided from time to time upon call of the President or other Board member or by the majority vote of the Board. Section D. Quorum. The quorum number shall be eight (8) Board members. If a quorum is not present at any regular or specially called meeting, the members present may elect to continue the meeting till such time as a quorum is present or conduct the regular business of the meeting and have the minutes submitted to the next regular membership meeting of the Renton Lions Club for approval. ARTICLE IV. Duties of the Officers Section A. The duties of all officers and directors of this foundation shall be to oversee all income and expenditures of this foundation. ARTICLE V. Meetings. Section A. The meeting schedule for this foundation shall be as called by the President or other Board member or by the majority vote of the Board. Section B. A majority of the active members in good standing shall constitute a quorum at any meeting of this foundation. ARTICLE VI. Annual Meeting. Section A. The annual meeting of the foundation shall be held in April of each year. At this time new officers shall be elected and any changes to these bylaws shall be approved. ARTICLE VII. Membership. Section A. Membership in the Renton Lions Foundation is limited to Renton Lions Club members. ARTICLE VIII. Fees and Dues. Section A. There are no fees or dues for membership in this foundation. ARTICLE IX. Election of Officers and Directors Section A. The election of officers and directors for this foundation shall be held in April of each year. Section B. All officers shall be elected annually and shall take office on July 1, following their election and shall hold office for one(1) year. Section C. Should a vacancy occur on the Board, the vacancy shall be filled for the unexpired term by a vote of the remaining members of the Board. ARTICLE X. Committees Section A. A standing committee shall be such as may be designated from time to time by the Board or the President. Section B. All standing committees shall consist of at least three (3) members, exclusive of the President, who shall be an ex-officio member of each committee. ARTICLE XI. Funding requests. Section A. All requests for funding must come from a Renton Lions Club standing committee and/or its Board of Directors. ARTICLE XII. Rules of Order Section A. In the absence of rules in these Bylaws, the proceedings shall be conducted in accordance with Robert's Rules of Order. ARTICLE XIII. Amendments. Section A. These Bylaws may be altered or amended at any regular meeting by a three-fourddis vote of all members present, provided no amendment shall be put to a vote unless written notice thereof shall be mailed or given to each member at least one week previous to the meeting. ARTICLE XIV. The charter officers of this corporation are as follows: JoAnn Biladeau President Willis Wurdeman 1st Vice President Diane Dobson 2nd Vice President Homer Venishnick 3rd Vice President Marsha Buranich Secretary Ray L. Peretti Treasurer Robert Minkler Tail Twister Mike Sloan Lion Tamer Robert Dinning Membership Director Kevin Kunnanz Past President Jerry Broderhausen Director Peter Newing Director Rosemary Richert Director Lowell Vaughn Director Lion's Club Stream Enhancement A Proposal Submitted to: Lions Club Renton, Washington Prepared by: David Burger Mid -Sound Fisheries Enhancement Group c% Seattle Aquarium, Pier 59, Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 386-4308 phone; (206) 386- 4328 fax and Emily Greenberg King County Surface Water Management 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2200, Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 296-8034 phone; (206) 296-8033 fax April 1996 Lion's Club Stream Enhancement Proposal Background Lion's Club Stream is a spring water fed tributary to the Cedar River. The stream originates in two constructed ponds near SE 188th and Byers Road, Renton and then flows west past the Lion's Club property and then into the Cedar River (left bank at River We 11.5). The stream and ponds are used extensively by sockeye salmon for spawning. They lay their eggs throughout this system wherever there are patches of clean gravel. Project Goals The project proposal is to enhance and increase the spawning habitat for sockeye salmon in the Lion's Club Stream (Figure 1). Sockeye are one of the highest priority fish in the Cedar River basin, along with steelhead trout, for state and tribal fish managers. The adult sockeye are attracted to the stream to spawn because of the abundant spring water, which furnishes a constant temperature to the developing eggs. The stream's location also provides an area less likely to be exposed to scouring flood velocities than in the main Cedar River. Project Methods Sockeye spawning habitat can be enhanced and increased in this unique system with relatively little effort by planting native vegetation along the stream buffer. Buffers of mature and diverse vegetation can help protect water quality, provide a food source for the aquatic organisms, and provide shade and cover. In addition, we propose to replace the back driveway crossing and its undersized culverts with a footbridge.. Removal of this driveway would aid passage of migrating adult salmon. The footbridge could be designed to allow convenient viewing and/or educational interpretation of the spawning salmon. Lion's Club Stream can also be enhanced by three instream modifications. The area of available clean gravel can be increased by importing gravel into the stream channel. Additionally, existing gravel which is buried under sediments can be made available to the spawning fish by adding logs to the channel. The logs would be placed to create roughness in the channel which would prevent silt and sediments from settling, or the logs would be placed to trap the sediment before it reaches the spawning gravel (Figure 2). Alternatively, silt could be removed from the spawnable gravel using a modified suction dredge. These three instream proposals would have to be carefully designed based on site conditions and in cooperation with other state and local agencies. Page 1 Lion's Club Stream Enhancement Proposal t i oJure Co�►ce����.{ Slce�c� �, f la s uc-�� re 40 s�AuDn� (>MOe s . T4.Dr),2!, grrwvd Page 3 Lion's Club Stream Enhancement Proposal April 1996 • Discuss project proposal with landowners. Modify and clarify as needed. • Site visit to Lion's Club Channel with design team. • Submit environmental checklist for project site (State Environmental Protection Act - SEPA) May 1996 • Confirm budget needs • Design and sketch project including current conditions; log placements; planting design; engineering detail for culvert removal; footbridge design • Design project monitoring and maintenance needs • Permit application • Hydraulic Project Approval permit from Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife • Clearing and Grading permit from King County Department of Development and Environmental Services • Temporary Water Quality Modification from Washington State Department of Ecology June 1996 Construction Scheduling • Volunteer participation • Conservation corps participation • Grading needs for culvert removal • Press release July 1996 Phase I Construction Replace culvert with footbridge Place habitat gravel and logs in channel Complete Phase.I as-builts October 1996 Phase II Construction • Plant buffer vegetation • Complete Phase II as-builts Winter 1996 • Monitor success of instream structures • Monitor fish use Summer 1997 • Water buffer plantings Page 5 4/16/96 Notre for Steve Dobson, Lion's Club: These notes arc intendod only as informal its in response to aoverai ofY q+ . As I mentioned on the phone„ AptU 16, 19%, every Que0oA a wsp geamatce mom questions. 1Nopefuny you can tense my oonunents as a brief guide for your group as you diverse Your opportunities to enhance your piny. HAW WOald the propoxed eahadeemeat work in the s'MM hAW affected and/or beta affeded by the past flood? Any changes to the channel sirucwm (addition of logs or gravel) Wotmld take into considcxetion the nood of the channel to convoy flood Waters. The addition ofplaats along the alum would have slowed down the silt laden water bore it rcadmod the channel and would have seduce the amount of silt that entered the dAnUd However, this bonefit of plants mroquirm3s many ycan for tho plantU to matures MOS(ltkaly. if the proJcct had gone in last year, the prgjoct would have neither affoolod or have been greatly affcted by the flood. What is the possibility of dlggiag a pond amend Chal ud in the fonzted sectk►a of the properly? An excavated pond and Side channel would probably hero good habitat value for a variety of animate including sockeye salmon' off -channel Vawa149 habitat is Faro and valuable is the OAar Rim. This is Why the Lien's pub Stream is so productive, On the other bald an excavated pond and 94 channel would probably have limited value as nood- oontrol. The area would most likely fin with water as it is dug, and have limited capacity to absorb additional flood water. It l!1j maybe provide relief font a medium died flood, but not from large floods. I assume, medium sized floods an not really the concern. If you want to pursmmo creating a pond and side chxnrmel W would have to approach it as habitat �t and recognize that it may take at kw two years to eon 4AY With all the studies dial are heeded forpainitting, Digging or filling (including building brims or structures) In a 1 a1'yearlloodpktin is regulated by the Federal govarnmont as well as the County (urn -rise ordinance). This jr primarily because any change W flood itorage will affect propor(y owners upstream or downslrram of a projcd, Additionally. ANY cleariWgrading/ ftoS , in a sencitivo anon (which is a 100-year floodplain) is r*Ued by King C7m*'& Sensitive Arc" ordin=t This goon on and on.... Essentially, everyone Roods to be aware that atrytldng that may inaem flooding on neolbor•c land requires some sore of analysis or survey. What is the possibility of building a berm (of earth or rock) to protect the mobile hotae? Again% any work in the floc Ldn, that affects Where the 100-yc"fl od waters can go, requiems an auelysW sutvey and permits f} m the County. One of the Mgtn n=mtc for permiltod work would be ft, WMMM M stoner W Crated for the area removed from the floodplain by the berm. This is the same regulation that oversees oonshuction of buildings in the floodpWn, This work isn't prohibited. just regulated. The first quostion that needs to W detormincd is exactly where ie 1he limit of the 100--year floodpWn. Sony, I don't have this map yet. tW is the posAblity of firing the rock revetment aloes the Cedar River? it is my uudmtanding that this revetment' which was placed for pt+gajon Control not flood control, was hdtialiy in the 1990 flood. Tom Bean. KC SWM, assessed the damaged and federal MAA tends weer available to fix the revetment (eontirrnod), Ken Krank, KC SWM, drew up a plan and this plan was rejected by the Lien's Club (uncpntlrmed). It is my andotstanding the revewent suffixed damage again this year. I believe federal money has not been Sip W for. - - - ffi .^ram«-+� ,T ,�.. Ronald Straka - Feasibility � an. oc DRAFT FEASIBLITY PHASE PLAN FOR SPAWNING CHANNEL REPLACEMENT A. Ron Reeis Parks Site #1 and Madsen Creek Overflow Channel 1. Groundwater Abundance and Substrate Type a. 2 to 3 test holes installed per site along centerline alignment b. Examine substrate during installation c. Each hole measured for water surface relative to river — 5 �. r� J fn -b 7LP-- d. Each hole subsequently pumped for minimum of 30 minutes e. Each hole measured for water surface every 5 min during testing and 30 min after Z f. Continued monitoring after test on weekly basis ? Oo vi-e- (vim 0- g. Estimate lowest groundwater level during fish utilization 2. Water Quality a. Obtain samples and test for DO and total gas at each test hole Z I, @ CA.-t- �vk ►^�^�� 3. Flood Levels � � slw,+G/ /G a. Estimate flood impacts for 2-, 10-, 50-, and 100-yr events. Y�J ✓`0j °L }0 4. River Levels and Entrance Conditions a. Determine typical range of river elevations at entrance between Sep and Dec b. Determine the extent of entrance modifications that would be required 5. Flows a. Estimate groundwater flow rates for various excavation depths an hannel lengths cM s � -" A", et, B. Additional work for Madsen Creek Overflow Channel 1. Madsen Creek Hydrology and Hydraulics a. Review information from King County i� b. Determine potential impact of flood flows and sediment 2. King County Wastewater Division Project a. Review restoration project b. Determine impact on existing hydrology ap(d hydraulics C. Extension of Elliot Channel 1. Existing Fish Utilization a. Review monitoring data from UW to determine existing current usage 2. Flushing b. Develop conceptual plan for flushing channel via Elliot Side -Channel overflow l./ LM p o o G o a> a) a O O cd p ,> cl a>«i B 3 ci Nw,>G. c� O U ti N � H ew c aCIS C* cn CD a�EC my. T 4. 0 cz —. O .� ^p 6 � p nU. > cd� C L3. cn^� czo•0 W.,4,.., •O 3Loa 3 o v, ,.[ .°c �i cn p C2 p U c U a y U �+ p �..1 Y U to U G1 to pro a.=0 Cd y G tvi y p ° > cn ° O C G x V Y R o sue, U a o U3 y cn p y= �_n y a;U p^a oG 17, U 3 cs .G L x G" CU O 6. �00 G�poG�-0o z G•p� � GO F o6p, U) "C"s �1♦ O L �--� CCS Ct E CP O o a N w w m G V a �l-UO~o °I�zl�� J • �3�o � G 0 6a 'W a.c" :. u G G �d W.J cutw —' 0 G G -2 off nnc.4 o� '^ "�+ +..N ... H u - "nN r. 6 �4 N G un n n n �. �+ I� D7 M T R m 1� r A A A ti Y•) t� Y'1 N � � 1A U'1 In IA .O �O 1� !� IIl R m � ti to 0 �n O y c .� C A C c 7 c N K C 0 •` a E c pi 1.) C a t >,V- �O Q m m (J U U 4. S i i i f� O d C Q: N to t/>1 Fes• )�- h0-• N .. . 4 cL- 4 E.:n 2 m ti .000P -m d o > s x x 'o c c E t7 N N Vf as � E H H —o N Ln to f w J %c .O - %o 1 .O )R in mm Npp.O 1I1 Oa 2 m T m O. O. m .>. OOy .O 0.2 N _co a Cc E E'e o�drM 2.. b oLn S 00 i n e D m 0 0 1� m 1� m m a d L o c y ar-�pc9i o,co � g D_ ..0 C & s W'W0%M;z )m O.A O� mY1 DO�O�I� m0. �D G�Dm�l�ti�mmO. OD a�O� W � cd °� a � w > 0 " (U .0 C."U 3 ram % �i U1 y C 1.4 W. :3 o o• w O � s4 j . a y d a, �O y u 0 > cd. W+U�ycu in �aa4_ .G W O a, > cd a Cd cd .� -O W.�o.G•..Cd�3 Oo �y o•° �°zkO ao y ma,o cd o L V4.pOi) wp to 000 cd p w w =Cr W toU�.a0a cl) cn to ' y��cO � Cd 0 cu C C7 U a cd OC's cd cd b0 a O IU B 61 s. C t. ad O' +� ..0. a) - cd — a) a) a, u N y •p �°,N +' N cd .0 � "t U U �_y p^ U O O bC4 3 °" s0, C] cd b r_ cis.0 3 a, 3 v� G — c 3 Uz�3 3cz C) 14to 9 u En > id C7CIS U _; yr. y o O'= C O •- C C z d w'o�-.X O y y ... C 'o to as a) 'S z w a� --; O 3 O U O a G .�. y M as p; O y O cd y X O i. w p m p 0 a Cfsr. p •tz y O .O p 0. cd •U � z � cd y y $� .� R.. C O � 5 � 0 V ^O r. wp y y .0 o O V a 0 w>� 4.. cn 0. G U U �•3 'V C cd r, o�.� O U 's: 0 y to z O c. c'i ooC to ` C� y O .0 U U a3, U C CL 3- ° .yC Ld3 oco ° CO OV'- s 0 F—U- r cd O It —FW � O 04 0 a,Oy cd c3wa, CU 0 wfx cdvC Ca y0 G O O U U s, •cd > G y C 'C3 .�'" cu c. G > Co m cd CIS 4 y a, s. -0 to cd oo;-- cn U o y .cd CU w U a 0 t0. � U U U 3 W ,a to cu w Cd Cdd O O U m ., z"G°a, CZcd °CdC CS4� 3 'r o >cdciu°q ycd 3.>o� 0>ay .Cc cda' v 'c o"o U fin, o cc aCi pU C 0 0, W G bUp Z cz 4. CZ a) .r O to y y' C 3 U ! . >) . , y 0 y .-. cn cz E"wCd°�'�cwdF asx=:a�ivoo°: o°�F z a C W z Z P Z 0 a,m aG r 00 tow0o.c s. C 0 U) C O 0 y o r�i, cd > W cd w3 CO o M C 0. to �Cd � o a) C U cd U cd w p o,�.�� a-p°„s. � Idd� 0� aG,3 � a L7 a, ° O cd i ' cd v, F cd v a, �: C a, • G y W p a y y C w cd cd p cad M 0 y to 0 U U° pip >Cd O u Z. 6, UN 0 0 i. a, ,w w a>, a, cpn c C to 41 a m C a 'O p = w. a, 'u N y 'Z cd v, to o w � .M 3 � co co to s. � a, : U � .0 '�, 'C 3. p cd cdy4 ' O � �cu cdCFOw�ycn _ 'c.i .0 V g p W N N O y 0 y d Y o= o 'o a Y u c c i e) i •� a Q E E m 3 N o> q q c N 'm aci M i f Z m= CD 0- 0' o n a o a v a c •� v ° a E 3 CD3co c a; P o a a o a o Critiques of the Elliot Rearing and Spawning Channel for the Purpose of Design Guidance for the 205 Groundwater Replacement Channel Larry Fisher WDFW Area Habitat Biologist We have a concern here about installing LWD without anchoring. When a flood goes through there, there is likely to be a substantial impact on the LWD. Roger Tabor USFWS Originally, I felt the additional side channel habitat at the Elliot was a good idea in that it could increase chinook rearing habitat and provide some sockeye spawning area. I indicated that we should look at the existing lower channel and try to replicate those features in the new upper channel. The lower channel system had several channels with a variety of habitat types which included some deep pools with LWD that chinook used extensively for rearing. Sockeye were also observed to rear in the old side channel in large numbers. The basic idea was to leave the lower channel alone and built the upper channel to look like the lower channel. Afterwards, it became apparent that the lower channel needed to be dug out to get the proper gradient. The end result is that it was great for sockeye spawning but decreased the chinook rearing potential. Over time the channel may scour and some of the pools will be recreated but I doubtif there will be any net benefit for chinook from preexisting conditions. If a new side -channel is created you need to decide if chinook rearing is one of your objectives and if it is then some large deep pools (0.7-1.5 in deep) need to be created. Also keeping it away from some other existing side channel may be useful. Roger Peters USFWS We have several concerns regarding the modification of the natural side channel at the Elliott Park site of the Cedar River. The first concern is one of general restoration principles. The first rule of restoration (and mitigation) is to do no damage (or more damage) to the habitats that you are trying to restore. The previous side channel was a properly functioning habitat, which provided substantial rearing habitat for juvenile salmonids. These types of habitats are limited in the Cedar River basin, and therefore the risk of degrading such a habitat should have been weighed heavily. Our major concern regarding this project is that the original inlet of the side channel was left perched approximately 2 ft. above the "restored" side channel. This will (and has) resulted in head cutting up this original outlet. This outlet is about 300 ft. long. The slope from it's connecting point to the main stem Cedar River to the point where the head cut began in the winter of 2000 is 0.0056 ft/ft. The slope for the final 55 ft is 0.057 ft/ft. The final slope, if the head cut continues to the main stem will be 0.0156 ft/ft. Our concern is that this head cut will continue to the main stem and begin receiving more and more flow until the entire main channel shifts to this old side channel inlet. This would result in destruction of the side channel and likely the forested island that currently exists. This will also result in substantial sediment delivery to the Cedar River, which would then have to be transported downstream. This substantial sediment imbalance would result in significant redd scour and likely increased flood hazards. Our final concern is the method of placing LWD. Very few if any of the LWD structures were anchored. These structures will be very susceptible to failure at higher flows given the trapezoid shape of the channel. They also will be very unlikely to re -settle in the side channel once mobilized given the shape of the channel. In our opinion, the bole of the trees should have been buried in the bank or the channel bottom, with the rootwads protruding into the channel. This would result in a more stable structure that could have remained structurally sound during the higher flows that would induce scour pools to form. Cygnia Freeland Department of Ecology, NW Region 1) The Cedar River main stem appears to occupy an incised channel. Overbank flows occur during 10- year events or greater (per Gary), and like many streams in the Northwest, the Cedar River has been manipulated to occupy a relatively confined, single channel. It seems likely that channel incision of the main stem has caused the abandonment of the side channels on the project site. Have any studies been completed or initiated that examine the long-term trends of the Cedar River in this area? The long-term viability of the side channel restoration project may be at risk if the Cedar River is continuing to incise. 2) I have concerns about a restoration project that narrowly targets one fish species for one phase of its life cycle. A channel design with a more complex morphology would seem to provide multi -use habitat throughout the year instead of a mono -habitat during limited times of the year. 3) Gary informed me that this restoration project will probably be modeled after the Ron Regis side channel restoration site. The Ron Regis site appears to provide good spawning habitat for sockeye salmon - Alice and I saw many fish during our visit. However, I have some concerns about the design elements of the project. The "permeable culvert" seems to be doing a good job of providing adequate flow to the side channel, however riprap does not possess any kind of habitat value for salmonids; this area could have been stabilized, as well as made permeable, using a log structure. Gary informed me of the constraints for the Ron Regis project, but he also informed me of the greater flexibility that exists for the current project site. The only limitation in using a log structure in place of riprap is that of implementing a sound design (without using cable). Using a well -designed\ log structure (based on analog conditions) not only provides stabilization of the inlet, permeability for interflow, but also superior fish habitat. I hope there is enough flexibility in this project to draw on the rich community of geomorphologists that exist in this region for providing consultation on engineered log jams. Consistent with this request/hope, I gave Gary Schimek Tim Abbe's information because he is an individual within the scientific community who is well respected for his engineered log jams. The LWD placed near the inlet of the Ron Regis side channel and farther downstream could have possibly been better utilized. It was difficult to assess how the LWD provided a beneficial function beyond supplying minimal cover and shade. The LWD used in this project did not appear to be integrated into the morphology of the design channel, i.e. as elements of sculpted pool -riffle sequences in the channel bed. Nor was the woody debris interlocked in a manner promoting structural stability (without using cables). Unanticipated impacts may occur when significant overbank flows transport the unanchored logs downstream and deposit them at a constriction or against an obstruction. I mention these criticisms in the hope of maximizing the success of future restoration efforts by improving on previous designs. Gino Lucchetti King County Water and Land Resource Division I would say that the project got the basic idea of getting water flow in an old channel, but left out several elements that can make a huge difference in the long term performance of the channel. It is relatively easy to get the "gee whiz" effect of diverting flows and fish spawning in them. And at that, the channel has done well. But that's the easy part in a system like the cedar, with such good substrate, and a specie like sockeye that are easily and readily attracted to this type of off -channel habitat... it's a near -fool proof "build it and they will come" situation. I stress "near -fool proof' as there are still aspect of gradient, substrate, flow and connectivity that you can't take for granted and that were thought out in the basin plan long before the project was ultimately implemented for Renton's mitigation need. That being said, what wasn't done is the attention to natural structure that is important for both habitat and long term stability. Chiefly is lack of wood... but not just any wood or wood placed in unnatural angles and locations. First and foremost, the original concept called for a large logjam such as would accumulate and naturally stabilize the head of a side channel in a large river. These types of jams diffuse overflow water (not just harden the banks) as it tips into the side channel. They also provide much habitat value, and when surrounded by water they are alive with fish. Second, the entire channel needs much more large (and I mean truly large) wood placed in natural rates and places. Not necessarily big jams like what should be at the head (although some jams wouldn't hurt), rather many significant pieces placed to provide for hydraulic diffusion and habitat value. Third (not a wood concern), I would have rather seen the overflow built with large rounded river rock rather than the fractured rock. I understand why engineers do this, but frankly the same effect could have been achieved with very large glacial erratic sized river rock and wood. Since access is very good, the large machinery needed to move this could have been mobilized; I would still encourage you to remove as much of that fractured rock as possible and replace with a wood/river rock matrix. Fourth, I would take some of your dredged gravel from the lower cedar (or from wherever) and place a mound of it at the head end of the channel for sockeye to excavate into. Sockeye (like chum) love to get right up into the upwelling gravel and dig away. There is no cushion or berm of gravel for them to dig into at the head end. Fifth, better maintained and more riparian plantings. Sixth, either widen the notch into the lower overflow channel (where it goes out of the old pond) or place a big jam there as well and for the same reason as above. The above will help achieve a more natural and more productive channel. Some aren't just a good idea for habitat, however, they are also critical in ensuring the channel doesn't erode into your golf course!! There are natural analogs or examples of these even in the cedar. Eric Jeanes R2 Resource Consultants 1.) We did not really see that much difference between velocities as opposed to substrates when we looked at predation. The real issue is the type of substrate that you have in there (I think). The King County channel was a sorted gravel type and really held quite a few more sculpins than the USACE channel. I don't believe that you have enough gradient to work with down there to really make a difference in water velocities. On the other hand, you dont have enough room either to be creating all kinds of meanders. Sure it would be nice to put some meanders and different habitat types in there, but you are really looking at a spawning channel and because of the lack of other off channel habitat in the Cedar River, other species will most definitely use it. Case in point, the old USACE groundwater channel was used by all species of salmonids, just more frequently by sockeye. 2.) A less incised channel will cause more harm than good down there. You know how river levels vary on the Cedar R. I think a smooth bank profile will cause stranding issues as well as possibly cause your channel to wash away in a high flood event. There are some highly incised channels on the Green that are used by all kinds of fish (both spawning and rearing) and work very well because they are able to move freely in and out under numerous flow scenarios. 3.) I too think that juvenile salmonids prefer the more complex smaller woody debris. Roger and I refer to these as "vegetation mats", the problem is that this stuff usually generates after high flow events and collects on large woody debris or rootwads and the more of this you place in the channel, the slower the water velocities and the more sediment problems you will have in the channel. Obviously, much of the design characteristics depend on what you have available. I would suggest (if space and gradient permits) a channel that is designed as follows: 1.) The upstream section is one fairly incised single "spawning channel" that will really be used heavily by spawning adults and a little less by rearing fry. A single channel like this will probably convey fine sediments and always have an ample supply of good clean river gravels; 2.) The lower section(s) could then act as temporary refugia for the fry produced before they enter the Cedar and also be used by other species as temporary rearing habitat. This section could be design to incorporate some woody debris/rootwads/channel spanning timbers and have several small meanders and a less -incised channel, but not getting too carried away with any of these components. Given adequate gradient, the meanders will create some deeper holding water for juveniles, as well as for adults while they are spawning. It would be nice to be able to tap into BOTH an underground water supply (aka King County) AND use the hyporheic flow from the river via French drains (aka USACE channel). The only aspect of the old USACE channel that I did not like was that the water supply was inadequate at times (my thought anyway). This way you will always have a nice supply of water throughout both the early spawning and late rearing periods (the Cedar River seems low during late September and late June too me). There are a couple of side channels that are like this on the Green and they really kick out fish. This would really produce a gob of sockeye fry, but I do not know if it is feasible. Paul Conrecode Golder Associates Inc. 1.) To the extent possible, make better use of the floodplain area dedicated to side -channel construction by including a lot of channel meander. USFWS argument against this is that sockeye fry will survive outmigration better in a straight channel where velocity is greater and predation will be less. However, a channel with more meander will be better for coho and chinook. 2.) Consider a less -incised or less channelized form so that at higher flows water will spread out and create more habitat, especially for spawning. 3.) LWD placement in Elliot Rearing/Spawning Side -Channel does not create much pool area. Consider placement of LWD partway into channel, including extra excavation of a small area to help anchor the LWD. Also, we noticed juvenile salmonids tend to use (rear) around small woody debris (pole -sized trees with branches)that had fallen into the stream. Apparently, fish prefer a dense (complex, convoluted) bunch of branches or roots to a single large log. Problem is, these smaller woody debris pieces don't really form pools, and get blown out at higher flows. I suggest root wads to get the benefit of complexity, but with the mass to hold at higher flows. However, I also recognize that logs, etc. aren't made to specifications. 4.) Consider a more aggressive strategy to respond to invasive plants after the disturbance of the area by excavation. 5.) On the positive side, the flow stability of side -channels seems to work well for sockeye spawning and incubation. They move in during freshets for spawning, and our work (and other research) shows that the flow stability that is characteric of side -channels is good for incubation and emergence, too. (We already know that coho and chinook like the off -channel areas). 4 C 4b a 4 r, ice, ti4 • . ,;�� Maze -5 1 \".OAQ- AL- i J V-\ O,\ *6c s' i 1 'oJe,4- Ucvw�_ Sr A-� kvu,-� kawLc-S }-o a-e- c. d W cab l4 w.-d Ce,,- 1 L a,+ 0- Sim\qn .QR,-:)A-C1N-. Or �t- /a-� ✓ uti` krr2 n b� of eiv� D a [ • I D O 0 7 a v7 m DP 7 D P h N' O 7 �4 XN � D N CL ~ W Li T x X nLi N p X w N N In O N m n fN o n `—+ _< O ro a � C D C D w m x x P h \ P 7 a 7 m 7 I A � Q er c ; a P N V • N O ` •` a N H s L I II nn -A W N ~ Z I JL O Q Q ZS Q ro �N r+ 3 ti Ln --a n �o %+ rD o U, C Q � n 0 o Q m o r+- Q h Ul Ln Q ro S O O 1 Ul O + Ln T Ln �. ro ZY 3 Ul �' Q Q O i Ul Q ro 1 r0 1 —i y,0n o �, O Q O �+ • < 1 h r Q I� _.. I Ul ro_< �1�^ � m nom`` roV I h N q V 1 C ro 1 Y L I Q q Q 1 3 O ha :31 Ul c+ Q (o N 1 I^ m 1 V I I m Ln ` D D �o 1 zs o o n I Q C+- I ZS e I � V i n Q A I 1 10 I O 1 O h I O I 3 I h i ID I D ; O D C1 �7 TI L O i V ti TN�I N � IVCD �J N c 3 p /� U� } fp Q D a (� Q a D Ul ° " TT1 F---• \ N \ 'V I Q. S ^p• a l< < a` 3 Q Na er � rn h 0 .. a D �r/D D �o 3 -0.� LA h h N rF D 7 y T< 4�1 n0 ] D 7 ' V C+ X- Q o ox a h 'O h 0 u T ro 3 �+ f ry I- j L �� fi� i ►��I,c..�. w o c�.c. s w�-Q G, k s ' S v,,C� �,� _. `"�. �,�►,, r � ' � -.« ', �, � - r r� �• �c L" � 4 hS 4� `t� . �� ii � �` � � .� � �` *; }+ �� -+ram ` �4 '�� A. _ � � �,. w ` 4„� , � �, , ¢¢ .� ., , = a: e r � ,. '"^"' .: :. �.� G- r,: .�: - �, ,. -,.yh.�, _ ,- -'�-"' '°�� ._ �. �, . ... "� � �� .� r .. .. �_ � r+ -.err.'. .i:. y{..y„�, . „y,_.. shay M �`. �+. ''�,,,,`� ", e. a ..�... ,.r a.-,.. .x,-.... _ r...e- ... +rC-, "�'""" a ,. _ ,� f ,� .ry � C�`�t IJJa.e.Y,-... �(s-� �-- --- �. -�.. w �`�� T �` (, jw4 w \: 30 — o OC Fisheries and Oceans P6ches et Oceans Canada Canada Matthew P. Foy Biologist Biologiste Resource Restoration R6tablissement des ressources Habitat and Enhancement Br. Uhabitat et de la mise en valeur Lower Fraser River Cours inf6neur du Fraser 100 Annacis Parkway, Annacis Is. 100 Annacis Parkway, Ile Annacis New Westminster, B.C. V31M 6A2 New Westminster (C.-B.) V3M 6A2 Telephone: (604) 666-3678 Facsimile: (604) 666-6627 E-mail: foym@pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca Canada please mdl<e ler - r 1p (�en) COP' es a t' ink des � h OLA fit s; 9 y?it L e� M BY we>11a � y rry y I PO5" 1, r ��� •alit `� s( -' r r x : F y1 a ��,�: A..� ?�. fitxi� S�; 7 f'�,�• t+2� l ��� � a�s 1 S '1, 1��;4-�' � .f...�' S' a �4 P ���.'� a�� �`f. . � � '� � ���•��a�J'F,�, :T f � '� t 9���;,,, #��1R.'i'7 �w � S� %'A�'t�"t' ,`�� -I. ..'q <. .'Y� +�-�,e a `� �.sC fit`, y'1 �'�1 ^ f.•��� � ,� a ttL : R' `�� �• � S t i � :} �,.,;. iw y=}� tJ .! �s'l• i �°it • jy �,Z L> Y �� • h� ,,��, .fie �' 4 *- X w w• c `. ri-t• ,�t�y lJrf)�R��t�ii-v.� h � �'�3 � . ' r r '_. �iif"�.. �s.� � ��if�� '4i� Fyt� a 'Si q1 „l a i7 ~•�+. - l 1 f, i 3 �r �.c. • �. 17�d4, 1 i.?'Y,*7��..h.,4� �, Y`�.�� ,_ � - �.�' }'fii�'-rs � t er,�� Q��j °T�. � L 9, W� U ■ 0 -a U/ ■ n� W 00 G) CL W � Z3 U �c,Dm N C E L Q� O Z Qi U CO 4mJ "Ir f hT C-I ■ Plf ..... . . ... .... or n VA Lc) 1 � H 3 • � W .. Gary Schimek - FW. Q re Cedar River replacemerif channe Page From: "Gilbrough, Noel L NWS" <Noel.L.Gilbrough@NWS02.usace. army.mil> To: "Gary Schimek (E-mail)" <gschimek@ci.renton.wa.us> Date: 8/19/02 12:28PM Subject: FW: Q re Cedar River replacement channel Gary good news I think Noel -----Original Message ----- From: Matthew Longenbaugh [mailto:matthew.longenbaugh@noaa.gov] Sent: Monday, August 19, 2002 12:04 PM To: Director, Rustin A NWS Cc: Noel Gilbrough Subject: Q re Cedar River replacement channel Hi Rustin & Noel, i am reviewing the Cedar Side Channel Replacement Project and have a few Q. Overall looks OK and i think that we will likely be able to concur on NLAA because the timing when Chinook would not be in the lower Cedar. But first i need to better understand the proposal. Q1: how many large-diam trees would be removed for the project? <10, <30, <50? Given the general lack of large diam riparian trees in the lower Cedar, and the high ecological value of each one, and the time to grow functional trees, we need to keep the # removed to the absolute minimum. Q2: The Biological Assessment states, p 12, that "Construction work will occur outside of the NMFS closure period for in -water work, July 1 through August 31." 1 think you mean that in -water work would only occur during those two months. Right? Q3: A recent e-mail from Noel said that construction has been delayed to not start till 2003. Is that the latest plan? Q4: Re the July 1- Aug 31 work period, we have been told by King County staff (Gino Luchetti) that adult Chinook begin showing up at the mouth of the Cedar by the last week in Aug in some (rare?) years. And there may be a small number of juvenile chinook emigrating after July 1, according to WDFW trapping data. So efforts should be made to further minimize potential for adverse interaction with chinook juv or adults by (1) timing high -impact in -water work for July 15 thru Aug 23 if possible, and (2) do not request any extension before July 1 or after Aug 31. Note that a timing extension (i.e., before July 1 or after Aug 31) alone could result in a Formal consultation with NMFS, and thereby protract construction into another year perhaps. Q5: Please give me names of other resource staff involved in this project planning at Muckleshoot Tribes, WDFW, USFWS, City of Seattle, and King County. I want to confirm no outstanding issues with those groups. Gary Scheme = FW." re C& ar River replacement c annel 0 Q6: I need to better understand how the "overflow dendrites" are supposed to work. The Plan Drawings show 2, but i see no details of materials or elevation or capacity. The flood -relief -spillways that i have constructed on Sauk River side channels were designed to allow flood flows from the upper side channel to spill back into the river and thereby minimize flood scour in the lower side channel. Is that the case here? Q7: page 8 of the Drawings shows "Detail River Crossing (If Required)". Does this mean crossing the Cedar River? What equipment? How many crossings? When would that need be determined? Which agencies would also need to review the potential for crossing? Thanks for you asst with my Q, Matt L. 360-753-7761 ary chime ee y ear inns eeti6' page ,, . A From: "Gilbrough, Noel L NWS" <Noel.L.Gilbrough@NWS02.usace.army.mil> To: "Gary Schimek (E-mail)" <gschimek@ci.renton.wa.us> /vu-f Tw- Date: Thu, Jun 6, 2002 9:40 AM Subject: FW: Weekly Cedar Channel Meeting Gary Cod �i1✓e- I met with Wanda We need the deed and Title, for the lands the city owns If you get permission to dispose of material on the private lands adjacent to the property we need to know where and temporary access to those lands need to be obtained. The only alternative acceptable to the Corps is a permanent easement across the City Light Lands. We recommended that Renton work with Seattle to acquire this easement. The easement needs to include the easement language that we already provided. We need the assessors map that includes all the property from the City road to and including the project site. Noel > -----Original Message ----- > From: Gilbrough, Noel L NWS > Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 1:25 PM > To: Gary Schimek (E-mail); Corum, Zachary P NWS; Director, Rustin A NWS; > Caesar, Matthew J NWS; Gentry, Wanda F NWS; Lewis, Evan R NWS > Subject: Weekly Cedar Channel Meeting > Zack, Gary and I met at 10:30 in the Les No More Room > The following is status and actions that we will endeavor to do by > next Wed. > Real Estate > DNR Lands, The city will complete there review of the Condemnation > Issue and get it in Front of the City Attorney for his action. > FEE lands, Gary will get the deed for these lands and provide it to > us. > Private Lands Easement, Gary will continue to pursue this easement > and also check with them to see if we can use their land for material > disposal > Seattle Access Issue, We have received a Memo from Seattle Public > Utilities, Contingent on Wanda's approval we will prepare an E mail Gary Sc Imek FWN Weekly Cedar Channel Meeting age 2 > message back to Gary on our position on the Memo (attached). > <<Cedar River Seattle Letter.doc>> > Design Revisions > Contingent on receiving all Design Comments by the End of the week, > broken down into BA design comments and final design comments. The BA > comments will be completed by COB Tuesday and all the Design comments by > COB Friday, (I need to check with Matt on this) > BA > Out overnight by Wed COB > SEPA > Out by Wed > Wetland Issues > Noel need to check with Evan on his wetland memo and try and get > surveyed wetland map to Gary > Construction > Doug Weber will provide the draft construction protocols to Gary by > Wed > 401/Jarpa > Gary need to get with Rustin and get resolution on who is doing > what. CC: "Gentry, Wanda F NWS" <Wanda.F.Gentry@NWS02.usace.army.mil> Critiques of the Elliot Rearing and Spawning Channel for the Purpose of Design Guidance for the 205 Groundwater Replacement Channel Larry Fisher WDFW Area Habitat Biologist We have a concern here about installing LWD without anchoring. When a flood goes through there, there is likely to be a substantial impact on the LWD. Roger Tabor i JSFWS Originally, I felt the additional side channel habitat at the Elliot was a good idea in that it could increase chinook rearing habitat and provide some sockeye spawning area. I indicated that we should look at the existing lower channel and try to replicate those features in the new upper channel. The lower channel system had several channels with a variety of habitat types which included some deep pools with LWD that chinook used extensively for rearing. Sockeye were also observed to rear in the old side channel in large numbers. The basic idea was to leave the lower channel alone and built the upper channel to look like the lower channel. Afterwards, it became apparent that the lower channel needed to be dug out to get the proper gradient. The end result is that it was great for sockeye spawning but decreased the chinook rearing potential. Over time the channel may scour and some of the pools will be recreated but I doubtif there will be any net benefit for chinook from preexisting conditions. If a new side -channel is created you need to decide if chinook rearing is one of your objectives and if it is then some large deep pools (0.7-1.5 in deep) need to be created. Also keeping it away from some other existing side channel may be useful. Roger Peters USFWS We have several concerns regarding the modification of the natural side channel at the Elliott Park site of the Cedar River. The first concern is one of general restoration principles. The first rule of restoration (and mitigation) is to do no damage (or more damage) to the habitats that you are trying to restore. The previous side channel was a properly functioning habitat, which provided substantial rearing habitat for juvenile salmonids. These types of habitats are limited in the Cedar River basin, and therefore the risk of degrading such a habitat should have been weighed heavily. Our major concern regarding this project is that the original inlet of the side channel was left perched approximately 2 ft. above the "restored" side channel. This will (and has) resulted in head cutting up this original outlet. This outlet is about 300 ft. long. The slope from it's connecting point to the main stem Cedar River to the point where the head cut began in the winter of 2000 is 0.0056 ft/ft. The slope for the final 55 ft is 0.057 ft/ft. The final slope, if the head cut continues to the main stem will be 0.0156 ft/ft. Our concern is that this head cut will continue to the main stem and begin receiving more and more flow until the entire main channel shifts to this old side channel inlet. This would result in destruction of the side channel and likely the forested island that currently exists. This will also result in substantial sediment delivery to the Cedar River, which would then have to be transported downstream. This substantial sediment imbalance would result in significant redd scour and likely increased flood hazards. Our final concern is the method of placing LWD. Very few if any of the LWD structures were anchored. These structures will be very susceptible to failure at higher flows given the trapezoid shape of the channel. They also will be very unlikely to re -settle in the side channel once mobilized given the shape of the channel. In our opinion, the bole of the trees should have been buried in the bank or the channel bottom, with the rootwads protruding into the channel. This would result in a more stable structure that could have remained structurally sound during the higher flows that would induce scour pools to form. Cygnia Freeland Department of Ecology, NW Region 1) The Cedar River main stem appears to occupy an incised channel. Overbank flows occur during 10- year events or greater (per Gary), and like many streams in the Northwest, the Cedar River has been manipulated to occupy a relatively confined, single channel. It seems likely that channel incision of the main stem has caused the abandonment of the side channels on the project site. Have any studies been completed or initiated that examine the long-term trends of the Cedar River in this area? The long-term viability of the side channel restoration project may be at risk if the Cedar River is continuing to incise. 2) I have concerns about a restoration project that narrowly targets one fish species for one phase of its life cycle. A channel design with a more complex morphology would seem to provide multi -use habitat throughout the year instead of a mono -habitat during limited times of the year. 3) Gary informed me that this restoration project will probably be modeled after the Ron Regis side channel restoration site. The Ron Regis site appears to provide good spawning habitat for sockeye salmon - Alice and I saw many fish during our visit. However, I have some concerns about the design elements of the project. The "permeable culvert" seems to be doing a good job of providing adequate flow to the side channel, however riprap does not possess any kind of habitat value for salmonids; this area could have been stabilized, as well as made permeable, using a log structure. Gary informed me of the constraints for the Ron Regis project, but he also informed me of the greater flexibility that exists for the current project site. The only limitation in using a log structure in place of riprap is that of implementing a sound design (without using cable). Using a well -designed\ log structure (based on analog conditions) not only provides stabilization of the inlet, permeability for interflow, but also superior fish habitat. I hope there is enough flexibility in this project to draw on the rich community of geomorphologists that exist in this region for providing consultation on engineered log jams. Consistent with this request/hope, I gave Gary Schimek Tim Abbe's information because he is an individual within the scientific community who is well respected for his engineered log jams. The LWD placed near the inlet of the Ron Regis side channel and farther downstream could have possibly been better utilized. It was difficult to assess how the LWD provided a beneficial function beyond supplying minimal cover and shade. The LWD used in this project did not appear to be integrated into the morphology of the design channel, i.e. as elements of sculpted pool -riffle sequences in the channel bed. Nor was the woody debris interlocked in a manner promoting structural stability (without using cables). Unanticipated impacts may occur when significant overbank flows transport the unanchored logs downstream and deposit them at a constriction or against an obstruction. I mention these criticisms in the hope of maximizing the success of future restoration efforts by improving on previous designs. Gino Lucchetti King County Water and Land Resource Division I would say that the project got the basic idea of getting water flow in an old channel, but left out several elements that can make a huge difference in the long term performance of the channel. It is relatively easy to get the "gee whiz" effect of diverting flows and fish spawning in them. And at that, the channel has done well. But that's the easy part in a system like the cedar, with such good substrate, and a specie like sockeye that are easily and readily attracted to this type of off -channel habitat... it's a near -fool proof "build it and they will come" situation. I stress "near -fool proof' as there are still aspect of gradient, substrate, flow and connectivity that you can't take for granted and that were thought out in the basin plan long before the project was ultimately implemented for Renton's mitigation need. That being said, what wasn't done is the attention to natural structure that is important for both habitat and long term stability. Chiefly is lack of wood... but not just any wood or wood placed in unnatural angles and locations. First and foremost, the original concept called for a large logjam such as would accumulate and naturally stabilize the head of a side channel in a large river. These types of jams diffuse overflow water (not just harden the banks) as it tips into the side channel. They also provide much habitat value, and when surrounded by water they are alive with fish. Second, the entire channel needs much more large (and I mean truly large) wood placed in natural rates and places. Not necessarily big jams like what should be at the head (although some jams wouldn't hurt), rather many significant pieces placed to provide for hydraulic diffusion and habitat value. Third (not a wood concern), I would have rather seen the overflow built with large rounded river rock rather than the fractured rock. I understand why engineers do this, but frankly the same effect could have been achieved with very large glacial erratic sized river rock and wood. Since access is very good, the large machinery needed to move this could have been mobilized; I would still encourage you to remove as much of that fractured rock as possible and replace with a wood/river rock matrix. Fourth, I would take some of your dredged gravel from the lower cedar (or from wherever) and place a mound of it at the head end of the channel for sockeye to excavate into. Sockeye (like chum) love to get right up into the upwelling gravel and dig away. There is no cushion or berm of gravel for them to dig into at the head end. Fifth, better maintained and more riparian plantings. Sixth, either widen the notch into the lower overflow channel (where it goes out of the old pond) or place a big jam there as well and for the same reason as abbove. The above will help achieve a more natural and more productive channel. Some aren't just a good idea for S habitat, however, they are also critical in ensuring the channel doesn't erode into your golf course! ! There are natural analogs or examples of these even in the cedar. G}ct'S Co'A'AW ab0�} bo I ao(4 J 0�1 abov+ these. a, Ji-40d V,16 t k i 4 cm S: Cif rdI road e�4�"m t �'o Chid}' 6In/ Ghdhnti� t�� hi9h i'�OuJ ��US��hJ CZ) ew G� C3) +yew btfweeki ro� qhd riJ ' Eric Jeanes R2 Resource Consultants 1.) We did not really see that much difference between velocities as opposed to substrates when we looked at predation. The real issue is the type of substrate that you have in there (I think). The King County channel was a sorted gravel type and really held quite a few more sculpins than the USACE channel. I don't believe that you have enough gradient to work with down there to really make a difference in water velocities. On the other hand, you dont have enough room either to be creating all kinds of meanders. Sure it would be nice to put some meanders and different habitat types in there, but you are really looking at a spawning channel and because of the lack of other off channel habitat in the Cedar River, other species will most definitely use it. Case in point, the old USACE groundwater channel was used by all species of salmonids, just more frequently by sockeye. 2.) A less incised channel will cause more harm than good down there. You know how river levels vary on the Cedar R. I think a smooth bank profile will cause stranding issues as well as possibly cause your channel to wash away in a high flood event. There are some highly incised channels on the Green that are used by all kinds of fish (both spawning and rearing) and work very well because they are able to move freely in and out under numerous flow scenarios. 3.) I too think that juvenile salmonids prefer the more complex smaller woody debris. Roger and I refer to these as "vegetation mats", the problem is that this stuff usually generates after high flow events and collects on large woody debris or rootwads and the more of this you place in the channel, the slower the water velocities and the more sediment problems you will have in the channel. Obviously, much of the design characteristics depend on what you have available. I would suggest (if space and gradient permits) a channel that is designed as follows: 1.) The upstream section is one fairly incised single "spawning channel" that will really be used heavily by spawning adults and a little less by rearing fry. A single channel like this will probably convey fine sediments and always have an ample supply of good clean river gravels; 2.) The lower section(s) could then act as temporary refugia for the fry produced before they enter the Cedar and also be used by other species as temporary rearing habitat. This section could be design to incorporate some woody debris/rootwads/channel spanning timbers and have several small meanders and a less -incised channel, but not getting too carried away with any of these components. Given adequate gradient, the meanders will create some deeper holding water for juveniles, as well as for adults while they are spawning. It would be nice to be able to tap into BOTH an underground water supply (aka King County) AND use the hyporheic flow from the river via French drains (aka USACE channel). The only aspect of the old USACE channel that I did not like was that the water supply was inadequate at times (my thought anyway). This way you will always have a nice supply of water throughout both the early spawning and late rearing periods (the Cedar River seems low during late September and late June too me). There are a couple of side channels that are like this on the Green and they really kick out fish. This would really produce a gob of sockeye fry, but I do not know if it is feasible. Paul Conrecode Golder Associates Inc. 1.) To the extent possible, make better use of the floodplain area dedicated to side -channel construction by including a lot of channel meander. USFWS argument against this is that sockeye fry will survive outmigration better in a straight channel where velocity is greater and predation will be less. However, a channel with more meander will be better for coho and chinook. 2.) Consider a less -incised or less channelized form so that at higher flows water will spread out and create more habitat, especially for spawning. 3.) LWD placement in Elliot Rearing/Spawning Side -Channel does not create much pool area. Consider placement of LWD partway into channel, including extra excavation of a small area to help anchor the LWD. Also, we noticed juvenile salmonids tend to use (rear) around small woody debris (pole -sized trees with branches)that had fallen into the stream. Apparently, fish prefer a dense (complex, convoluted) bunch of branches or roots to a single large log. Problem is, these smaller woody debris pieces don't really form pools, and get blown out at higher flows. I suggest root wads to get the benefit of complexity, but with the mass to hold at higher flows. However, I also recognize that logs, etc. aren't made to specifications. 4.) Consider a more aggressive strategy to respond to invasive plants after the disturbance of the area by excavation. 5.) On the positive side, the flow stability of side -channels seems to work well for sockeye spawning and incubation. They move in during freshets for spawning, and our work (and other research) shows that the flow stability that is characteric of side -channels is good for incubation and emergence, too. (We already know that coho and chinook like the off -channel areas). bN?--.e 2" 7Z-- . CA >s 40 �G4 W40,;,::rw l`w- r t , _ vk 4 .4-13 �„ 7111 44,,� i J w D y� teals G�-� �Ali VA V �, -- oc C) C�Al 61 Gary Schimek - Meeting Summary - Spawning Channel Replacement Page 1 From: Gary Schimek To: Cowan, Larry; Detrick, Chris; Fisher, Larry; Freeland, Cygnia; Kelly, Alice; kirkpatrick, deeann; Levesque, Andy; Longenbaugh, Matthew; Lucchetti, Gino; Malcom, Rod; Perkins, Sue; robert c wissmar <wissmar@u.washington.edu>; Stagner, Gene; Tabor, Roger; Timm, Ray; Warner, Eric; Zapel, Ed Date: 1/11/02 8:06AM Subject: Meeting Summary - Spawning Channel Replacement Hi Folks - Attached is the meeting summary for the last Cedar River Spawning Channel Replacement project. If you were at the meeting, please review the attached summary for accuracy/clarity and provide any follow-up comments to me. If you were not able to attend the meeting, we would still appreciate your comments on the 10% design package as soon as possible. Regards. Gary M. Schimek City of Renton - Surface Water Utility Phone: (425) 430-7205 Fax: (425) 430-7241 CC: Ceaser, Matt; Corum, Zachary; Gilbrough, Noel; Leslie Betlach; Paron, Dean; Ronald Straka Adee 360_ 77 3- *fir - vh�e., 6,� c h 9 �"� 7 MEETING SUMMARY NOTES CEDAR RIVER SPAWNING CHANNEL REPLACEMENT PROJECT January 8, 2002 Participants: Larry Fisher (WDFW); Alice Kelly (DOE); Roger Tabor (USFWS); Noel Gilbrough, Evan Lewis, Dean Paron, Mike Min, Matt Ceasar, Zac Corum (USACE); Leslie Betlach, Ron Straka and Gary Schimek (City of Renton) Significant comments from the above referenced meeting are listed below by agency. A summary of action items follows the comments. WDFW Chris Dietrich submitted comments prior to the meeting (see Attachment No. 01). They were based on a review of the 10% plans. All of his comments were received favorably by the design team. However, more information is needed about the rock -toe (i.e. Comment No. 5) and the rock sill (i.e. Comment No. 6). Chris will supply drawings for these design items. 2. Larry Fisher suggested that Chris Dietrich (WDFW) is contacted for confirmation on optimal gravel sizes. Larry's other comments are listed below. 3. Pools may be maintained by placing LWD across about 1/3 of the channel bottom width. The remaining 2/3 of the LWD would be buried in the bank. 4. Use about 9 clusters of large woody debris within the channel. This is less then the number of clusters shown in the existing plans. 5. Do not use large clusters in riffle sections. As an alternative, lwd could be place somewhat parallel to the channel in riffle sections. Using rebar as anchoring to these LWD pieces would be acceptable. 6. Vegetation plans are needed. 7. Construction window will be June 15th to August 15th for any work that will include a connection to the Cedar River. All other work may be conducted at other times. USFWS 1. At an early life stage, Chinook will use the bank opposite where LWD is placed in the pools. With time, a scour hole will develop under and adjacent to the LWD. This scour hole will be used by Chinook at a later life stage. It may be best to create the scour hole during construction rather than wait for the scour hole to develop naturally. 2. Ricardi Pond on the Cedar River is a good example of backwater habitat. The creation of backwater habitat as part of this project would be beneficial to Chinook. Clean sand should be placed in this habitat. Edge habitat would also be important. 3. Pools should not be too deep. About 2-3 feet. QGA 1. Need to review wetland report. 2. If wetlands are impacted, mitigation will be required. Creating rearing habitat in lieu of an impacted wetland is not acceptable. 3. The USACE will need to obtain a Modification to Water Quality Standard for the project. This comment was in response to the Corps statement that it may not be possible to meet the state standards (i.e. 5 NTU above background) when connecting the side -channel to the main stem. The results of the turbity monitoring for the Elliot Channel and other project indicate that turbidity standards may be exceed for about 4 to 8 hours within about 100 feet downstream of the outlet. Renton Parks 1. Supports the use of the existing trail for maintenance, along with a new side -channel crossing. WDFW and DOE also support this proposed plan. USACE and Renton Surface Water U 1. At this time, an integrated bank stabilization system is proposed to protect the utility corridor located near the downstream end of the project. The integrated system would be composed of buried rip -rap, geogrid layers, LWD, and live plantings. All participants were in favor of this option. 2. A spillway section may be constructed between the inlet and outlet to concentrate the overflow at one location in the side -channel. The goal would be to fill the side -channel before overflow occurs along the entire length. In theory, this would reduce the potential scour of the banks and channel bottom during large flood events. All participants were in favor of this option. 3. A side -channel vehicle crossing was proposed at the downstream end of the project to provide access to an existing path for maintenance activity. The side -channel crossing would be constructed in lieu of creating a new maintenance path. All participants were in favor of this option. Summary of Action Items 1. USACE and Renton will conduct additional research to determine the typical pool/riffle ratio in natural side -channels similar to what we are proposing to build. At this time, based on WDFW comments, the goal is to have about 75% spawning area and 25% rearing area. 2. USACE and Renton will submit conceptual plans for about three intake structures to the design team within the next few weeks. One of the three structures will be incorporated into the next design submittal. The intake will be chosen based on a review of design team comments, contractibility, and required O&M. 3. USACE will begin preparation of the BA this month with the goal of submittal to NMFS by mid -February along with 30% plans. USACE will also pursue an individual meeting with NMFS to discuss the project with them directly before submittal of the BA. 4. USACE and Renton will request written or verbal comments from members of the design team that were not at this meeting including: Rod Malcom, Eric Warner, Bob Wissmar and Gino Lucchetti. 5. USACE will obtain construction drawing and specifications from Chris Dietrich. The drawings and specs will include: rock toe; rip -rap sill; and washed gravel. Attachment 1 Verbal Comments from Chris Dietrich, WDFW as transcribed by Noel Gilbrough, USACE 1. Chris is concerned over the design of the upstream intake and recommends that we look to Canada for examples of good intake designs. Most of the spawning channels that he is involved in are ground water fed. 2. Chris recommends looking at a hardened spillway section downstream for the upper end of the channel so we can control where the initial flooding enters the channel and not have it destroy our intake system. 3. Chris was concerned that the fish would only use the upper end of the Channel. Our monitoring of the Over dredge Mitigation Cannel show that fish used the whole channel for spawning with an upstream water source. 4. Chris recommends that we do not get a washed gravel source but include a fine sand segment, His experience is that the fish respond better to this that to clean gravel. He will work with us on the gravel source. he recommended 18 inches of gravel in the spawning areas 5. Chris recommends one layer of riprap on the edge of both banks for the full length of the project, This layer would be as deep as the spawning gravel and bedded in course cobbles on the bottom and back. The back slope would then start at the edge of the coble. 6. For the pool areas Chris recommended a riprap sill on the up and downstream edge with deep pools and wood, the pools should be 4 to 5 feet deep in the pool areas. Gary 3chimek - FW: my dra technical recommen anon Page 1 Of - From: "Gilbrough, Noel L NWS" <Noel.L.Gilbrough@NWS02.usace.army.mil> To: "Gary Schimek (E-mail)" <gschimek@ci.renton.wa.us> Date: Tue, Apr 16, 2002 4:40 PM Subject: FW: my draft technical recommendation Gary Info from Monte Kaiser, our Geo Engineer Noel -----Original Message ----- From: Kaiser, Monte E NWS Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 10:26 AM To: Gilbrough, Noel L NWS Subject: RE: my draft technical recommendation Noel, The Rolling Hills site should be the preferred site for a habitat project for the following reasons: 1. The Elliot site is currently being adversely affected by the existing slide that forced the river into the upstream groundwater fed side channel. This new flow pattern is depositing sediment in a new location across from the mouth of the Elliot channel which is forcing a higher river level and more flow through this channel than was designed for. This situation also increases the frequency of floods that will cause damage to the habitat features constructed for this site which in turn increases the maintenance work needed to maintain and restore this channel. 2. The Elliot site has the potential for additional detrimental affects caused by new landslides. It is not a case of if, but rather when another slope failure will occur in this reach of the Cedar River. The Rolling Hills site has a very minor potential for a landslide to occur and any slide would come from the adjacent hillside which is far enough away from the proposed new channel alignment that it would have little or no affect on the project. 3. The Elliot site has a very limited area left to effectively create new habitat f h more area to create features. 4. The new flow regime of the Cedar River at the Elliot site poses a significant threat that the Cedar River could claim the side channel as a new main channel during a large flood event. 5. Siting a side channel at the Rolling Hills location will not adversely affect flood control and will actually increase conveyance at and upstream of the site by a small amount. Monte -----Original Message ----- From.- Gilbrough, Noel L NWS Sent: Monday, April 15, 2002 11:00 AM To: Kaiser, Monte E NWS GarySc imek - my dra tec rnca recommen atiori Page 2 t Subject: FW: my draft technical recommedation Monte need a couple of paragraphs comparing the geo issues dealing with the Overdraft mitigation Channel vs. the Rolling Hills site, ASAP Noel. -----Original Message ----- From: Gary Schimek[maiIto: GSchimek@ci.renton.wa.us] Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 2:59 PM To: Gilbrough, Noel L Subject: my draft technical recommedation FYI - At this time I concur with your recommendation that we choose the Rolling Hills site over the Elliot Side Channel. Having said that, I feel very strongly that the Elliot Side Channel would also be a suitable choice if the Rolling Hills site is not feasible because of citizen concerns or real estate issues. Point blank - The Elliot Side Channel site is, in my opinion, slightly more risky than the Rolling Hills Site. However, it is certainly not significantly more risky. My recommendation is based on the available geologic, geomorphologic and hydraulic data as well as various site investigations to determine ecologic impacts and benefits. Cheers. Lets talk more... Gary M. Schimek City of Renton - Surface Water Utility Phone: (425) 430-7205 Fax: (425) 430-7241 CC: "Director, Rustin A NWS" < Rustin.A. Director@nws02. usace. army.mil> � r would follow in Neuheisel's mold, cl t under siege ;ill defiant, A7 ig, has track 20B !r deal ,cts Airbus bid, )r aerial refueling ;kris Genna 3usiness Reporter got good news yesterday Force chose to negotiate many as 100 aerial refu- �cting a competing pro- eans Boeing and the Air e a deal for the military to lased on the 767 — a deal nore than $20 billion to )kesman for Boeing's 767 St. Louis, Mo., said those be finished by summer. !ws, recognizing that this p in a multistep process," >uts us where we should a1 weeks ago," he said, 1 Airbus and its parent, .tic Defense & Space Co., he Air Force for a chance ,gram. Airbus is based in See BOEING, AS Gary Kissel/Journal rner of Auburn's West Hill with rizes they will award at their nt to be held on their two -acre /ears, tomorrow will be their geed helps ►ne last time s, Auburn couple wn Easter tradition Mary Swift urnal Reporter it more than three decades, aster Bunny's right-hand SATURDAY ■ March 30, 2002 TODAY lax High 550 Low 370 Rain with sunbreaks. Details on back page Officials eye two Renton sites for spawning channel Gary Kissel/Journal Zac Corum, a hydrologic engineer with the Army Corps of Engineers, surveys an the one destroyed by last year's earthquake. Another choice, across the area along the Cedar River in Renton for a possible new salmon channel to replace Maplewood Golf Course, is stirring opposition because of environmental concerns. Second choice draws'neighbors'irell By Dean A. Radford Journal Reporter RENTON — One thing an earthquake can't shake loose is more time to get the permits necessary to replace a spawning channel destroyed in the Nisqually temblor a year ago. The channel was built years ago to replace spawning habitat that was lost to dredging of the Cedar River near Renton Municipal Airport. The quake on Feb. 28, 2001, triggered a massive mudslide that temporarily blocked the river until it could find another route — right through the spawn- ing channel. A second spawning channel that was built because the lower Cedar was overdredged wasn't damaged. Renton officials continue to monitor the slide but, so far, Once a final site is selected, perhaps within a month, the corps still must obtain permits from the federal and state governments. That process could take months. they say it poses no threat to residents downstream. Officials with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the city of Renton, the Muckleshoot Tribe and state agencies have nar- rowed the choice for a replace- ment channel from nine to two sites. Once a final site is selected, perhaps within a month, the corps still must obtain permits from the federal and state gov- ernments. That process could take months. The corps can begin con- struction once it gets permits. But the only window to con- nect the channel to the river is in July and August, when there are few, if any, fish migrating upstream. If the deadline is missed, work will have to wait until next year: "Our goal has been to get this done this summer so we can get it out there and produce fish," said Ron Straka, Renton's surface water utility engineering supervisor. Now, that goals seems more elusive. "Early in the year it was pos- sible," he said. "Now where we are, it's going to be tight. We need to make some rapid progress." One of the two options is to. . expand and enhance the spawn- ing channel that survived the mudslide. The other site is downstream across Highway 169 from the Maplewood Golf Course on land owned by the city of Renton. It's the contro- versial of the two sites. Specialists with the corps of engineers and the city of Renton Thursday were staking a likely alignment for the 900-foot-long channel. Noel Gilbrough, the corps' project manager, said the work doesn't necessarily mean the corps and Renton have chosen that location for the new channel. See CHANNEL, A4 incognito. ordinary consumption of TOMORROW INSIDE Officials select 'historic' theme rnible inclination for hop- _ 30, 2002 E kL STAFF TED: An Ifficer, >ort of a cash a a North the sus- zng. The ored the l to halt !r at least Officers nan and �stigation xult of a officer Said. The about 2 America zrn Way resident n police ,herokee morning 1 the 600 i Street ras found irking lot .es Gove n. A door ere dam- .-n police !red two partment block of outheast sher val- �crowave ke thefts y night. ng what before the man saw them, a King County sheriff's deputy was told. COVINGTON CREDIT FRAUD: The resident of a home in the 26600 block of Timberlane Drive Southeast was checking his bank account Wednesday and dis- covered somebody had used his credit card number to charge nearly $700 in pur- chases at Sam Goody music stores, Covington police said. KENT DOG SHOOTING: A woman found her small dog Thursday afternoon lying in her back yard with an injury to its left shoulder. A veterinarian told the woman the injury was caused by a BB gunshot. Police questioned .neighbors in the area — the 25300 block of 122nd Place Southeast — but no one had heard or seen anything, the police report stated. BOMB SCARE: Kent Junior High School, 620 Central Ave. N., was evacuated about 1:40 p.m. Tuesday when a man called in a bomb threat. He told a secretary there that "there's a bomb in your school," she relayed to police. Since the school day was almost over, the students were released to go home. Nothing was found during a search of the campus. ROBBERY: A man and woman stole 15 cartons of cig- arettes from Cigarettes Cheaper, 12920 Kent-Kangley Road, about noon Wednesday. The pair walked into the store SOUTH COUNTY HOME BURGLARY: Somebody kicked in the door of a home in the 11400 block of Southeast 182nd Street Monday and stole tools and a stereo, a King County Sheriff's Office report said. MAPLE LEY CAT BURGLAR: Somebody prowled a home in the 22500 block of Southeast 218th Street while the family slept early Tuesday morning. The homeowner said he was awakened by noises about 2 a.m. He got up and found lights turned, the front door open and items in the home moved. He didn't see anybody and nothing of value seemed to be missing, he told a King County sheriff's deputy. THEFT: A gas -powered leaf blower valued about $380 was stolen when a homeowner left it outside Wednesday after- noon by the garage of the home in the 27700 block of 217th Avenue Southeast, Maple Valley police reported. SUSPECTED DRUGS: After stopping a van with expired license tags on Maple Valley Highway and Wax Road about 4 p.m. Wednesday, a Maple Valley police officer found the driver was charged in two warrants with driving with a suspended license. The offi- cer also found suspected methamphetamine and a smoking pipe in the van. The 46-year-old Tacoma man was arrested. RENTON MAIL THEFTS: Checks and other mail recently stolen www.southcountyjournal.com Channel: Illegal activity could increase if access to Cedar River is improved CONTINUED FROM Al "We are refining the design of this channel," Gilbrough said. About $200,000 is avail- able for either project in the corps' budget. Spawning fish, mostly sock- eye and a few chinook and coho, would enter the channel downstream. They wouldn't leave again, dying after spawn- ing the next generation of their species. Two 24-inch pipelines would draw water into the 10- foot-wide channel. Wood debris and other natural veg- etation would cover the pipelines so they wouldn't be visible from across the river. Those residents on the other side of the river kept a wary eye on the survey work Thursday. Jan Fluter has lived on the Cedar River for about 21/2 years, just across from where the corps would build the channel. She's planning a commu- nity meeting in a couple of weeks where her neighbors likely will voice what she said is widespread opposition to the channel. The riverside residents look out on a pristine riparian for- est that hosts deer, beaver, eagles and herons. They worry construction will damage that fragile ecosystem, Fluter said, and scare away wildlife that's just returning. She figures about two- thirds of the trees will be lost on the old broad river bed that butts up against a steep cliff. "The wildlife has really flourished in the last few years with the growth of trees," she said. Standing in the likely path of the channel, Gilbrough pointed to a handful of small- er trees the corps would cut down to build the channel. The agency intends to save the larger trees, he said. "After this is built, they won't know it's here," he said of the neighbors. Perhaps more ominous is the potential that illegal human activity will increase if the channel is built and access to the river is improved. Fluter has seen residents from the low-income housing apartments on top of the hill poaching fish in the river, which is closed to fishing. Neighbors have called police after guns were fired at drink- ing parties. "There are people, not nice people, who are poaching and doing bad stuff with each other," Fluter said. Gilbrough is aware of the poaching problem and is con- sidering ways to minimize the illegal activity in the new chan- nel, where salmon are basi- cally sitting ducks. "If we can catch a couple people poaching salmon, we could probably throw the book at them," he said. Enforcement is the responsi- bility of the state Department of Fish and Wildlife. Both Fluter and Gilbrough agree on one potential prob- lem — how to get about 300 dump truck loads of material up a steep, but paved, access road leading up from the river. "I think it's possible," Gilbrough said. There's no room to leave dredge spoils along the river. Those same trucks would return with enough gravel to put about a foot of spawning habitat on the bottom of the channel, he said. Renton hasn't taken a posi- tion on either site, according to Straka, the Renton official. But he said the city will address the concerns of its local citizens. The permit process also gives residents plenty of opportunity to comment, he said. Dean Rad ford covers King County. He can be reached at dean. radford@sou thcoun t1dournal.com or 253-872- 6719. Seattle Public Utilities : section name http://www.cityofseattle.neVutil/EXEC/default.htm Management Team Chuck Clarke Director Ray Hoffman J. Paul Blake Nancy Ahern Nick Pealy Pat Colson Scott Haskins Tom Tanner Linda Moreno Debbie Broughton Strategic Policy Communications Resource Management Finance and Administration Customer Service Field Operations Engineering Services Executive Assistant Assistant to the Director ;CPU Home Contact Us Site Index Last Updated: 02/04/02 About Us 1 of 1 7/8/2002 1:20 PM .: a Scheme edar River annel ' Page1 at N From: "Gilbrough, Noel L NWS" <Noel.L.Gilbrough@NWS02.usace. army.mil> To: "Gary Schimek (E-mail)" <gschimek@ci.renton.wa.us>, "Weber, Douglas T NWS" <Douglas.T.Weber@NWS02. usace.army. mil> Date: Thu, Jun 13, 2002 4:27 PM Subject: Cedar River Channel Ok As I talked to Gary and Doug about I would continue the Weekly Meetings, I will be back on 2 July. Below I took last weeks memo and updated it in Blue. Our report card is not looking very good. Two big issues are we need to get the BA design to Rustin and Gary so they can complete the BA and jarpa. And we need to continue to support Gary in his effort to get an easement from the City of Seattle. Noel Status of Actions DNR Lands, The city still needs to complete there review of the Condemnation Issue and get it in Front of the City Attorney for his action. FEE lands, Gary will get the deed for these lands and provide it to o us. DONE Private Lands Easement, Gary will continue to pursue this easement and also check with them to see if we can use their land for material / disposal J Seattle Access Issue, We have received a Memo from Seattle Public Utilities, Contingent on Wanda's approval we will prepare an E mail message back to Gary on our position on the Memo (attached). Since this time Gary has requested some specific language from the Corps on our requirement for perpetual easements. We provided Gary some interim language and he will try and get the letter out to the city based on this. <<Cedar River Seattle Letter.doc>> Design Revisions Contingent on receiving all Design Comments by the End of the week, / broken down into BA design comments and final design comments. The BA comments will be completed by COB Tuesday and all the Design comments by COB Friday, (I need to check with Matt on this) I talked to matt and he was working hard on getting the BA comments incorporated and getting this design back out to Rustin and Gary. I was unable to get a hold of Matt on Thursday fora status on this, Doug and Gary should pursue this so we can get the jarpa and BA out. BA Out overnight by Wed COB, Did not happen, Matt Need to get BA drawings to Rustin Jar a, Same as above. P s-tFrA Qom, T,f[,6 Copy T. Gary Schimek Cedar River Channel Page 2 Out by Wed Wetland Issues Noel need to check with Evan on his wetland memo and try and get surveyed wetland map to Gary Done Construction Doug Weber will provide the draft construction protocols to Gary by Wed As far as I know this did not happen 401/Jarpa Gary need to get with Rustin and get resolution on who is doing what. needs to happen Soils Issues Matt would like some more soils info before we complete the final design. Gary, matt and Monte need to coordinate on this issue. have set up additional funding for this effort. CC: "Gentry, Wanda F NWS" <Wanda.F.Gentry@NWS02.usace.army.mil>, "Caesar, Matthew J NWS" <Matthew.J.Caesar@NWS02.usace.army. mil>, "Director, Rustin A NWS" <Rustin.A.Director@nws02.usace.army.mil>, "Corum, Zachary P NWS" <Zachary.P.Corum@nws02.usace.army.mil>, "Kaiser, Monte E NWS' <Monte. E. Kaiser@NWS02. usace.army. mil> So i 15 Q � 1, s� 9 - 1 I1--I' A�� OU Q u) 6;ve, _$SZ2 K Weber, Douglas T NWS PR C 4 llv al 5 From: Weber, Douglas T NWS Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 10:32 AM To: Gilbrough, Noel L NWS; 'Gary Schimek (E-mail)'; Director, Rustin A NWS; Corum, Zachary P NWS; Caesar, Matthew J NWS Cc: Gentry, Wanda F NWS; Komoroske, Paul E NWS Subject: RE: Weekly Cedar Channel Meeting Noel, Based on the assumption that the in -water work window ends August 15th, the drop dead date is June 28th. We need to have all necessary permits and real estate available by this date. The drop dead date for any construction calendar year is August 15th. If we don't make the August 15th deadline, I'll return the construction funds to HQ as required. -----Original Message ----- From: Gilbrough, Noel L NWS Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 3:29 PM To: Gary Schimek (E-mail); Director, Rustin A NWS; Corum, Zachary P NWS; Weber, Douglas T NWS; Caesar, Matthew J NWS Cc: Gentry, Wanda F NWS; Komoroske, Paul E NWS Subject: Weekly Cedar Channel Meeting Hi At today's meeting it was proposed that we meet weekly on Wednesdays at 10:30 from now till initiation of construction on this project, Of course next weeks meeting is currently scheduled on Thursday at 10:30 because of scheduling problems. The subjects or actions Items for next weeks meeting are: Check the current schedule and its logic and make sure I got it right The BA need to be ready to go out. This means getting the design from Matt C to Rustin this week in time for him to finalize his portion of the BA We will need a Real Estate update at each meeting Rusting Needs to look into the timing issues between the EA and the BA the SEPA needs to be out this week After the meeting Doug and I met with Paul Komoroske, Chief Emergency Ops, and briefed him on the outcome of the meeting. He recommended that Em Ops come up with a drop dead date for making construction within the Fish Window, an another drop dead date for construction this FY. This date would probably be the one when all off the necessary permits and Real Estate are available. Any questions give me a call. Noel �` �� !�- I � � � �� �S� Gary and Noel Cygnia Freeland's email (January 22) captured many of my key points eerily well, as if she had read my mind! She even reiterated my proposal to Gary that we look at some natural side channels to see how they compare to Renton's proposed constructed channel. We had a date set but had to put it off. The key here is recognizing that the proposed replacement channel represents a major shift from the former channel which was intended to resemble much more natural habitat to a design that looks like an old fashioned industrial spawning channel. This shift is problematic for a variety of reasons, many of which Cygnia mentioned. First, the shift from a groundwater -based flow source to a river intake is very problematic, because it relies on a high degree of engineering to achieve flow, water quality, substrate and stability characteristics. Such designs are costly to build and maintain and have many collateral impacts to the site's natural function. The channel's proposed location poses an even bigger problem because it is a short distance downstream from a large, active landslide that periodically dumps substantial amounts of silt and lacustrine clays into the river. The next time this occurs, it is unlikely that a simple settling pond will be effective at capturing the finer suspended material. In the wake of such events the proposed side channel's water supply would be impacted and a considerable amount of very expensive cleaning and ongoing maintenance would be required. In addition, if it could be shown that loss of incubating or rearing juvenile salmonids resulted from a flawed facility design, the inability of the facility to withstand landslide impacts could conceivably trigger collection of monetary compensatory damages or additional mitigation requirements by the State. Cygnia points out quite well the habitat elements that are commonly present in side channels that provide high quality habitat for juvenile salmonids, including a log jam at the river intake. However, a logjam will not filter out the turbidity and fines, which have the potential to reduce spawning substrate quality. Since the channel will be measured by its effectiveness for spawning, I suspect the City will be on the hook for periodic, expensive cleaning. Under natural conditions a ground water fed channel should not require much maintenance (fish will do considerable gravel cleaning on their own), and a side channel connected to the river can also clean itself by natural scouring action. However, this latter attribute is antithetical to the proposed purpose of the channel and presumably would not be encouraged. Second, channel construction will require extensive regrading of the steep road that accesses that area, or, more likely, construction of a river crossing as proposed. Both of these access options come with sets of costs and impacts and probably would trigger the need for some additional mitigation. Third, it appears that a significant amount of riparian forest and river edge habitat would have to be cleared and hardened in order to construct the channel, establish a river outlet, build a settling pond and harden and possibly elevate the bank into a levee to protect the facility from erosion and flooding. And the channel would also require diversion of water from the mainstem. At a time when we are trying to restore floodplain functions, riparian and river edge habitat, natural lateral channel mobility and a natural flow regime at as many locations as possible within the river corridor, the project goals (i.e., a set amount of sockeye production within an engineered spawning channel) are at odds with the larger ecological goals set forth for the river in the Lower Cedar River Basin Plan, the recent the WRIA 08 planning documents, and more general documents on habitat developed by the Services. In summary, could the channel be permitted in its currently proposed form? Possibly yes. But the bigger question is whether it's a wise thing to do. Because of location (just downstream from an active landslide) and design (direct river intake, a constructed channel protected behind a hardened riverbank), I believe there is a very high risk that it will not meet performance goals and have a high maintenance cost. It also appears to pose severe adverse impacts to natural river edge and riparian habitat functions. In short, it seems antithetical to the goals of habitat -based mitigation and to restoring the river. Frankly, I recommend that other less environmentally damaging design alternatives be considered. One of the main purposes of the HPA approval process is to give serious consideration to the environmental impacts and the probability of failure of a proposed project design. In addition, I think it is important to keep in perspective the goals of the original project that was eliminated by the landslide that necessitated converting the original off -channel habitat into mainstem habitat. I do not know when or how one can revisit mitigation goals in an HPA, but the nature of the project appears to have veered away from the original project goals, and on top of this are ESA concerns that were not present at the time the original mitigation requirements (for over -dredging) were set. It may be time to review the intent of the original goals and objectives of the mitigation to see if they still apply, or if there aren't some other habitat actions (perhaps a smaller GW channel in the existing swale and some additional work elsewhere) that would better address the original mitigation intent. Without doing so, I feel Renton is likely to construct yet another channel that will not or cannot meet the narrowly defined production -oriented mitigation goals of the HPA without high costs and high collateral impact to the river's natural habitat. The former is a concern for Renton; the latter is a concern for all involved in protecting and restoring habitat on the river. While I wouldn't rule it out, siting a channel on King County open space poses some larger issues, not the least of which would be concern over design, function and long term maintenance. As noted earlier, we would strongly prefer a project that would piggyback off of our first priority, which is to restore the floodplain by first removing flood -prone structures. Since this could take more time than is available to use the COE funds, another possibility is that Renton could make a commitment to fund future floodplain buyouts in order to get access to KC lands in the near term to replace the off -channel habitat lost due to the landslide. I do not know if this would be agreeable to KC, but it is certainly worth some serious discussion. Gino Lucchetti, Senior Ecologist King County Dept. of Natural Resources and Parks {GarySchimek -Spawning Channel Project Follow up From: Gary Schimek To: Gambill, Bob Date: 4/12/02 7:50AM Subject: Spawning Channel Project - Follow-up ■ .. Thanks for working with me over the phone yesterday. Below is a summary of our chat. Let me know if it works for you, or if I need to modify/add anything. 1. Gary will work with the City of Renton planning department to make contact with the owner of the parcel which houses the Kensington Crest Condominiums. The goal will be to obtain an construction and permanent easement for the spawning channel project and, in turn, to include City of Seattle on this easement for the pipeline if the Rolling Hills site is chosen. 2. Gary will contact Judith Noble to see if she, or others, would like to comment on the spawning channel project. 3. Gary will contact Andy White to meet in field and discuss pipeline location and loading limits. 4. Bob will assist the City of Renton to obtain construction and permanent access to the City of Seattle pipeline right of way if the Rolling Hills site is chosen. Seattle, Renton and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will meet to discuss the details if the Rolling Hills site is chosen. Gary M. Schimek City of Renton - Surface Water Utility Phone: (425) 430-7205 Fax: (425) 430-7241 6 • Renton Reporter • May 15, 2002 Neighbors oppose proposal to replace spawning channel Loss of trees a concern By OSCAR HALPERT Editor A mudslide caused by last year's Nisqually earthquake did more than displace several homeowners along the Cedar River near the Maple Valley Highway. The slide also upended a salmon spawning channel con- structed by the U.S. Army i Corps of Engineers in 2000. It was built with federal funds to replace spawning habitat dam- aged by the -Corps' over- ,dred�ing of the lower Cedar Riverin 1999. Spawning channels allow salmon a place to leave their eggs after swimming upstream. Renton has at least two of them: a small, groundwater -fed channel built to make up for damage caused to spawning beds when the city placed sewer and water lines along the river, and the Elliott channel, built near Ron Regis Park. The city, the Corps of Engineers and the Muckleshoot Tribe have been searching for a place to put a third channel to replace the one destroyed by the mudslide. After considering 10 sites, the coalition decided the best options would be either to up- ' grade the Elliott channel or build a new channel, which they refer to as the Rolling Hills site. That site, which would oc- copy 1,000 feet of city property, is just across state Route 169 ifrom the Maplewood Golf Course. Some residents, who live nearby, are upset that the city and Corps are pushing to build the channel near their homes. David Nelsonfflenton Reporter A mudslide damaged this spawning channel. "The loss of trees is our biggest concern," said Marilyn Whitley, whose house sits above the riverbank, across_ from a bank of trees that shade the river. She and other homeowners are skeptical about the city's claim that it will take only six weeks to build the channel. Plus, the homeowners worry that the channel will attract sightseers, who will leave garbage along the river bank. 'This would only add to its degradation, -not its better- ment," said Jan Flater, Whitley's neighbor. City and Corps officials say they. prefer the Rolling Hills site because it's less likely to be BE YOUR OWN BOSS.... Control hours! Increase Income! Full training. FREE info_ ,.Call or visit 888-601-4356 www.success4u4me.com seriously affected by flooding. A flood would require the channel to be rebuilt, a poten- tially expensive proposition in the flood -prone stretch of river occupied by the Elliott channel, said Lys Hornsby, the city's utility systems manager. She added the Corps would install a 150-foot buffer be- tween the river and the channel and once it's finished, the channel will be barely notice- able to residents living across the river. "We need to ensure that this site can last long-term," Ron Straka, the city's utility engi- neering supervisor, told a City Council committee May 2. Construction can't start on the project until appropriate state permits are secured, a process that could take months. Straka said the best time to con- nect the channel to the river is mid -June to mid -August. If per- mits aren't secured in time this year, the project will be done in 2003. Whitley and Flater say as much as a third of the trees across from their homes would be taken out to build the channel. Straka and his associ- ates in the water utilities depart- ment disagree. Straka said he'd be surprised if more than 5 per- cent of those trees are removed. The council would have to approve the proposal, but Whitley and Flater say they and several property owners near them are prepared to deliver a petition to the council to ask members to stop the construc- tion near their homes. Council members were plan- ning to visit both sites as the Renton Reporter went to press. Oscar Halpert can be reached at oscarhalpert@re- porternewspapers.com or (253) 437-6009. Concerns raised by Renton citizens (Janice Fluter, Maryline and Lee Whitley, and Judith Fillips) about Rolling Hills Site Concern: Increased human traffic in a conservation zone stresses wildlife, vegetation, and trails. Concern: The right-of-way will provide easy access for increased traffic. Concern: Inability of the City of Renton to limit motorized vehicle traffic within the Conservation Zone currently. Concern: In ability of the City of Renton and Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife to control fish and game poaching within the conservation zone currently. Concern: Illegal and dangerous activities taking place within the conservation zone such as gunshots, illegal fishing, ATV and pickup use on the trail, and unsupervised children playing in the river. Concern: Placing the channel will have a profound negative impact on the habitat for wildlife. Concern: The development at the top of the hill will cause erosion that will, in turn, result in landslides. Concern: The City does not have a good track record with the neighborhood based on the improvements with Maple Valley Highway, the water pipe that was to be put in above the river, the fish ladder that is fishless and an eyesore, a proposed fish weir, and the mitigation channel for the water pipeline. Concern: The Rolling Hills reach is currently an unspoiled, natural area and is directly across from a neighborhood. - ., Gary —Sc--'- ----k -Optimal Parking Location? (fvvd) Page 1 From: robert c wissmar <wissmar@u.washington.edu> To: <GSchimek@ci. renton.wa. us> Date: 4/10/02 9:48AM Subject: Optimal Parking Location? (fwd) Gary: I have requested a parking permit for you. Please park in lot to the east of the Fisheries Sci. Bldg. and next to Pacific St. Go to the Directors office and ask secretary for a permit in your name. Please try and get here before 11:30 am. The line for lunch gets very long after 11:30. Robert C. Wissmar, Professor UW - Fishery Sciences Building SCHOOL OF AQUATIC AND FISHERY SCIENCES 355020, University of Washington Seattle, WA 98195-5020 (206) 543-7467, FAX (206) 685-7471 wissmar@u.washington.edu http://www.fish.washington.edu/people/wissmar ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 07:57:16 -0700 From: Gary Schimek <GSchimek@ci.renton.wa.us> To: wissmar@u.washington.edu Subject: Optimal Parking Location? Bob - Where would your recommend that I park my vehicle? I am - thankfully - not used to being on campus with a car. Gary M. Schimek City of Renton - Surface Water Utility Phone: (425) 430-7205 Fax: (425) 430-7241 >>> robert c wissmar <wissmar@u.washington.edu> 04/09/02 11:00AM >>> Gary: How about Wed. between 11- 11:30 am? I have an excellent place for lunch. It's just next door and on Portage Bay. They open for lunch at 11:30 am. My office is Fisheries Sci. Bld. (room 322B) on Boat St. across from police station. Robert C. Wissmar, Professor UW - Fishery Sciences Building SCHOOL OF AQUATIC AND FISHERY SCIENCES 355020, University of Washington Seattle, WA 98195-5020 (206) 543-7467, FAX (206) 685-7471 wissmar@u.washington.edu http://www.fish.washington.edu/people/wissmar Gary Schimek Optimal Par ing Location? (fw age 2 1 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 10:45:16 -0700 From: Gary Schimek <GSchimek@ci.renton.wa.us> To: wissmar@u.washington.edu Subject: I'm healed... mostly. Bob - Are you available for coffee tomorrow at about 10:30 or Thursday about 1 or 1:30? Since I canceled our last try, I would stop by your office... Let me know. Gary M. Schimek City of Renton - Surface Water Utility Phone: (425) 430-7205 Fax: (425) 430-7241 >>> robert c wissmar <wissmar@u.washington.edu> 04/05/02 09:42AM >>> Thanks Gary. Hope you feel better. Robert C. Wissmar, Professor UW - Fishery Sciences Building SCHOOL OF AQUATIC AND FISHERY SCIENCES 355020, University of Washington Seattle, WA 98195-5020 (206) 543-7467, FAX (206) 685-7471 wissmar@u.washington.edu http://www.fish.washington.edu/people/wissmar ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 14:16:52 -0800 From: Gary Schimek <GSchimek@ci.renton.wa.us> To: wissmar@fish.washington.edu Subject: I need to postpone our chat.... need to postpone our chat tomorrow, as I have just scheduled a doctor's appointment. I am experiencing some fairly significant back pain these day, and need another acupuncture treatment session. I apologize for the last minute cancellation, but I thought that I would not need to see the doc tomorrow. Gary M. Schimek City of Renton - Surface Water Utility Phone: (425) 430-7205 Fax: (425) 430-7241 Gary Schimek-- Optimal Parking Location? (fwd) Page 3 CC: robert c wissmar <wissmar@u.washington.edu> Contact Information with Citizens 1. Phone and E-mail Correspondence Gary Schimek and Jan Fluter began talking about the project in November, 2001 when USACE survey crew was on site for the first time. Gary had previously talked with Jan Fluter in relation to the Cedar River Floodplain Mapping project. Phone and e-mail correspondence has continued from November until the present. 2. Field Visit In February, 2002, Gary Schimek coordinated and led field trip to Rolling Hills Site "A" and Elliot Side -Channel site with Jan Fluter and three other Renton citizens. 3. Cedar River Council Meetings Noel Gilbrough gave a status report on the Cedar River Side Channel Replacement project in October, 2001. Gary Schimek gave a status report on the project at the March, 2002 meeting. f Gilbrough, Noel L NWS From: Gilbrough, Noel L NWS Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 3:15 PM To: 'Gary Schimek' Subject: RE: FW: Weekly Cedar Channel Meeting Lets Talk -----Original Message ----- From: Gary Schimek [mailto:GSchimek@ci.renton.wa.us] Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 2:28 PM To: Gilbrough, Noel L Subject: RE: FW: Weekly Cedar Channel Meeting Noel - k Before I submit the letter to the City of Seattle, I would like two items per our earlier conversation. kVvL First, show me the document that requires the permanent easement. Again, I do not doubt Wanda but I need to see it for myself for future, and certain, explanation to others here at the City. / Second, I need a formal letter, preferably from the head of the real estate division, that a permanent easement is going to be required and the permits, as you and I talked about, will not suffice for this year's construction. Again, I and others, as local sponsors, would like to see these two items before we begin the, most likely, very long process with the City of Seattle. I hope you can see my reed for this request. If not, let's talk. I do not want this to be a big, confrontational issue. That is the last thing I want. Gary M. Schimek City of Renton - Surface Water Utility Phone: (425) 430-7205 Fax: (425) 430-7241 >>> "Gilbrough, Noel L NWS" <Noel.L.Gilbrough@NWS02.usace.army.mil> 06/06/02 12:44PM >>> Gary Renton needs to write the letter to Seattle requesting the permanent easement ASAP. The corps needs a permanent easement or Fee for all lands or access associated with this project. Give me a call. Noel -----Original Message ----- From: Gary Schimek [mailto:GSchimek@ci.renton.wa.us] Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 11:00 AM To: Gilbrough, Noel L Cc: Gentry, Wanda F Subject: Re: FW: Weekly Cedar Channel Meeting Noel, Wanda As I mentioned to Wanda (via e-mail) and Noel (in person) yesterday, I need to review the federal document/material that clearly states permanent easement (to access a project site) is required for a PL 84-99 project. Please forward this particular document to me as soon as possible. 1 Also, I am requesting a formal letter regarding your decision to require a permanent easement from the City of Seattle and the associated non -acceptance the other option we talked about, specifically, obtaining permits now for construction during 2002 and then working on the permanent easement. It would be best, for all involved, if this letter is signed by Wanda's supervisor. Please let me know if you have any problem with submitting the background document or letter. I will follow-up this e-mail with a phone call to Noel to make sure we have a mutual understanding of the current situation. Gary M. Schimek City of Renton - Surface Water Utility Phone: (425) 430-7205 Fax: (425) 430-7241 >>> "Gilbrough, Noel L NWS" <Noel.L.Gilbrough@NWS02.usace.army.mil> 06/06/02 09:39AM >>> Gary I met with Wanda We need the deed and Title, for the lands the city owns If you get permission to dispose of material on the private lands adjacent to the property we need to know where and temporary access to those lands need to be obtained. The only alternative acceptable to the Corps is a permanent easement across the City Light Lands. We recommended that Renton work with Seattle to acquire this easement. The easement needs to include the easement language that we already provided. We need the assessors map that includes all the property from the City road to and including the project site. Noel > -----Original Message----- • From: Gilbrough, Noel L NWS > Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 1:25 PM > To: Gary Schimek (E-mail); Corum, Zachary P NWS; Director, Rustin A NWS; > Caesar, Matthew J NWS; Gentry, Wanda F NWS; Lewis, Evan R NWS > Subject: Weekly Cedar Channel Meeting > Zack, Gary and I met at 10:30 in the Les No More Room > The following is status and actions that we will endeavor to do by > next Wed. �V > Real Estate �( > > DNR Lands, The city will complete there review of the Condemnation > Issue and get it in Front of the City Attorney for his action. > FEE lands, Gary will get the deed for these lands and provide it to 9pt� > us* �> Private Lands Easement, Gary will continue to pursue this easement �`> and also check with them to see if we can use their land for material JO„> disposal �� 2 > Seattle Access Issue, We have received a Memo from Seattle Public > utilities, Contingent on Wanda's approval we will prepare an E mail > message back to Gary on our position on the Memo (attached). <<Cedar River Seattle Letter.doc>> > Design Revisions > Contingent on receiving all Design Comments by the End of the week, > broken down into BA design comments and final design comments. The BA > comments will be completed by COB Tuesday and all the Design comments by > COB Friday, (I need to check with Matt on this) > BA f iC, IS v�1 LG > Out overnight by Wed COB ,- lies 1-5 � Fri nth > SEPA Ptah- > Out by Wed > BIb,j -6-4 V-AIvG > Wetland Issues > Noel need to check with Evan on his wetland memo and try and get > surveyed wetland map to Gary > Construction > Doug Weber will provide the draft construction protocols to Gary by > Wed > 401/Jarpa > Gary need to get with Rustin and get resolution on who is doing > what. O 5/-kt- MAP 6f Rea( E s4a-k s Perms•, is: M, E'dl J"- PA f Cv l -►v to t 1= csOuriu--s 6e^ ,54 7'kl l� GVG�i�f ✓%���,r4ev �9 -- Grimm ��- C��a/�,�j c�f� ���'� � cZwi ��Ial 9ay6s 7- — it/FlG /Gdrer✓ 1 rL�W�I�� 9144V elite 6iac/,•r Q�� is v�-�t @ 3-�. ••. .,-. aJ• jam. - �� .t�.r..� k,i, , 'o v mm 500 DATE AND TIME PLOTTED, l9-JUN-2002 10.34 DESIGN FILE- J,\CW\MS\HVORO\CEDAR RIVER\MSCMCGOA.OGN ------------------------------� N O C 7n m< O a qq jjF'. Axr,By B ��A s y a��•H N �•is.��y "yy�a 4�C•= J4 rn m v s ii s Z P WN- p�OPrC1 VIaWN� Om �M wN—,p Oo-�Of cnawN-- -� m �rrnnnr—<-w+inti r nZ Zsxxxn�.n��VO -Z,OOZZZ�����nm rZri�mi�rZZN V1 nf'f�rrZi FS F00 Al nxx� v C N N D > A 3Z D n s mr�.,r>NN VR- mZry777Z� 2 nfm"1N�.r o-I o1 NO n ZZ=CO Z rn V N n x ,q rn VZ1 n y mr r ZF 1 -, ooms m w� sr N � m m cn ■■■ m `D cQD LU v 5• DATE AND TIME PLOTTED, 19•JUN-2002 10940 DESIGN FILE. J.\CW\MS\HYDRO\CEDAR RIVER\MSCMCS0S.OGN ---••----•----------------------•--------------------•-_--"'----------------------------------------------------------•-------_------_---------------------------------------------------- n I o > a i d If L� —Z--► q N 6 r ma arNr, 4H ;m� r� �=R o rp'C 0oo � C > N > T N y y ma�Crry v>fWr^Zrm0 o prm.tOnZ N Q p y m �A m A. W - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - *- DATE AND TIME PLOTTED- 19•JUN•2002 10142 DESIGN FILE, J,\CW\MS\HYORO\CEDAR RIVER\MSCMCSOC.OGN --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CD I. H g s / I / j�4�i,�%//^ 70 -- l / / 0 ( N I � 4 z —Z—► Qi ~ m "0 0 m 0 N ZmZ Z f'f 0 g2 m- x� z-4o> cfOm 7� y if ffP r Y,r^zsc in r � gym= , r- r m A as IA ff-11 2 �zm O N W r +r rr'm m r a O o�0. F�s�oK z z r m W opNv+ mrmO V H m rn IN/ I C A m D Cf s a z a a N DATE ANO TIME PLOTTED- 19-JUN•Z002 11,16 DESION FILE. Ji\CW\MS\HYDRO\CEDAR RIVER\COPY (2) OF MSCMCS0S.OGN 10 . 9 g7l� gXgg�� 'A rn Yt mom* < D� -rn xb -HMOD Dram £ Q7D o r�p �A Sw ! ammo M zc:) N�o mc)r� -:,Zr— Z D-mo n M 1 DZn 5� XOZ D D NQ"7 A 9q't�a7 � N D O w A A W .�Y I Z0u 7c%=m F >rO— D-nm F�tug m>D zo a : +MCD i Q; �mm0 SQ ZO'"�� * 1 -Z > I r -cam rr- 5 Dom rzc-1 I >oo I mrZ DD =Xm-Im mx-<x r—>mmn Ocam D omoDa rncnZm-� ay DD0r0i-1� ds p>��N T m::O. D XO I >K: nO:0 ul�< DD CDr---Im nzmOl- zOr--m rnD;o n n(/1XC rm=n:� oo_7omm D mz rn D m m--qI- x_<0 nm0 m- mnm oD0 Fa Zr0 G�cnm Ac AF Z s to pn D m< D )__4 C71 L All 770 7r— A 7 jib 71 p MIN- A u N Z O (N n D r- m Z rn l 0 I X 0 �1 C X m 0 F rn DATE AND TIME PLOTTED, 19-JUN-2002 10,62 OESION FILE, J•\CW\MS\HYDRO\MSCM0000.0014 ________________________________________________________ n � A "COI nO> yip Z ZZ xZ v nn NZ n no / - n - m X Zp nmco / V1 - y�Cj Sn / O- Z I - y x �0 mzo / I �n I oil' O �n n• m• r• n�CZ1� �X pm Z --yn m0 r cO r N nn� ;V1 m DD1/1 O A S D D •Z Am AD ry9X l� �n D77 S Ap AV -� y ry b zC A =0 ln2 m Dn 00 O pz cy VN r-r a_ Om rvC+ Z 07 m0 Z D NW n ' mN O m 2 y g --q ZIz Om b '^mm rn +1 ym aT x rX No mr<,i m an pv .. A 'm < O mo Zm Ov AC m� v r A x0 O O n �� r <Z=G m rn O 0 c z r0•i z1 N N v m O < m m 'n p �m Mole �- cc� mz < n m yX rn-mll 0 ZD 0z0� / O � 0.0 71 m Cw n W Z of 0 / D y /r rn 10 zz O� I -1 2 y m I O n I �m� am in D 0 /ry r row \ \ - rev I \ I orn w �xLA nZ D \ i 7x z 0 czi0 �I� mo) ~- n nm� ZA� I I Z n Z rooz ogo1 � c mno I I I m2--4 :0>Mrn n n �% nE> I mDr > -a m 0 fin= I I A_ Z- I <qpm m - r _ - _--- - - - - -- — — — — — — — — — — — -- , 4 I I I ' I _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - w 60 Z —-— ——— _ — — — — — — — -——-------- FLOW I Din Z-D coo mr Z O r Z � r m :g r m ac)(A zing m m m mxa x D C) N (AI: -4 Z Acoo O n rm -0 O m T- C or O a C C) p x mn I �> rn D N m I r r0 my � O 0 y v C rmO r� mo y m r A H � rn ny a o� O_O v m N mN -0 0 vm J Zm X Z m m r O ,w C gj V, <VIO r 0 mrrq I \ mien a �r n ax ^vN+ y y b a m -+ < -n ca = N� O• A cmA o m mAm n r i �Nr D co z v xyn � N o � mz < m � A m y D DATE AND TIME PLOTTEOt 19-JUN-2002 11,07 OESIGN FILE. J,\CW\MS\HYDRO\CEDAR RIVER\MSCMCDOA,DGN ----`------------ '------------------------ ___.__._____.____-----------'^ _------------------------_--------------- n w a Oar m clot iNNm A < m �D O pis mW p D Zrz 5 4 � Ao D N CO �a �Z= AN C mX TA-4 N m ED A my 0rn <> -n 'O rnNQ — — — — — — — �mA m LA , ia C D OOX -- -- - -- rrr ro ��� zt7 N -Na a Z m(^ Om> -4m LAri o m z-+ an DO a 117 ^ m —� m m co -4 �$ D v D r= _X X 1 X 0 CA Z 'i1 m 0 C X v om . rm (n m --� -0 .. mr- mD D z r."n no O VI (A (N C-) — D z r— c�m OT N D Z G7 � oc z z $ ? m c N m }4� Q �5 � v > v r y O T p� � T t1 � s y y V � m 0 G") m O m D Z 7C n z D z z m r- M V I V I — 0 �D m r- rri Dry O m co mD\ O O %) D z O� — D —IfTI <=m m -v V) , o C O W ^ ,Z/ T W OD �—IZ i Z om Kr- rA INj rn 0 0> m m m rD- m Z a N n 4e x m 0-4 �nxi my - - - r> L-- -- mmx N -•, v c � zo <a r-;g ti ,Z m a .S n cn — 0�r Dr MOD , C) M0 m� x 0 (N V) m � .,. Z( I�oD C-) Q7 = I I" >*L D N � D OD DD< z < —I -+z m mrnm �r r�D m A -o N - -� r D r � O mg •a"4 •as;Pa ©■ ©I DATE AND TIME PLOTTEDI 19-JUN-2002 1007 OESION FILET J,\CW\MS\HYDRO\CEDAR RIVER\MSCMCSOD.OGN • _ _ ______ --------------------------------------------------- ______________y s ' I aUlVI0rim (lCDLTImUl I .AUlU1mm-II -9�-UlUImm�I-cu00mm-!-1 .4.00mm-IV U1G0mVlm U1mUlmVlm Ulmum(JMO UlmOmomo I I I CD ri Tm Tm Tm m '717mm m m m (J (J1 CV31 U1 U1 v UI CD CD m � m + 01 (NJ1 N U1 (NJ I N UI m m m m m N Ui N Ul N U1 N Ln N U1 m m m m m 0�( j v (n v un Ln g m m fit .A Ul LP 0) UlmUlmUl a UI Ul m 0) V .A Ul U1 Q) v v UlmUlmUlm UlmUlmUlm U1mUlmUlmUl UlmUlmUlmU1 �1(9 84•,� 2�U1Ulmm UlmUlmUlmLn dUlCnmmv-J UimUlm0M0 aLnLnMmvv Ulm UlmUtmUl laUlUlmm'1-4 UlmUlminmLn a(nLnMm_ly UlmUlm(nmV1 N'� m m $3 m m m m Ul `� ul �n v Ul _ D m cn m . cn m Ln sa m a3 rn N N Ul Nif I Ul IN r N m m m m rn Ul Ln VI Ul Ui O Z Ul m m m m m vi Ln > Ul Ul m m m m m m Z nmc`"nmc°'ilmcvrl m c'nmc0nmc°'n-4vl m v10Uv'imvlIli vl c-°nmc�'nmva'imcvn 0 + o ' 0 i $ O y A(n0mm-41'1 UnmomU oLn ' -b- LnLnmm-jIli Ulm)LnmVlmLn -c, ncnmm-jv (.nmomCnmul Acncnmmv� CnmUlmVlmV1 acn0mmv� U1mU1mVlmVl � m A. V m-=TmTm•' ®CDTmTmm I I I m ' I I I Ut Ul Ul r n m m Ul CTI m ( fl m m Qi N Ul N N N N Ui Ul N� m m m m 14 m 5U1U1 AL I (NJl Lyl (NJl < . a N m Ul m U1 0 (n v m ' n U1 UlU1 V UI 01 m m Ja Ul 0 m 0 V V U1mUlmUlmUl Ulmo(socDo A Ul Ul 0) V V 000GOCDO A Ul Ul Q7 v v �a Ul U107 0) V �! 1 UlmUlmUlmUl UImUImUl61Ul Rill oeu IN IN IN IN 1 1111111 I pill 1111 pill lillool DATE AND TIME PLOTTED4 19-JUN-2002 10,59 DESIGN FILE, Ji\CW\MS\HYDRO\CEDAR RIVER\MSCMCL08.04N ----------------------------- n I w I I s x / �J"�i?�,j�/ r 11 r x x y I � � I / 0 ° Ln r$ r ti m� I I So � �m 1 i0 I � I .0 ( QmQ� I 5� I a I am I .A r5$� i' ► v� v� E� i' Ao rnC �m N mm �mr a� gp„R `sa Z 0-d� u Ty mD s o rm sb''rm ZAp r L,w �x 'f C in N 4N rm �xn NC a_ i Q p —Z—ate► <rr- Z 0 N r s O 7O N r- ub q� Z� ro sy r Q biz +o _ z w � a z DATE AND TIME PLOTTED, 19-JUN-2002 11,06 DESIGN FILE, JI\CM\MS\HYDRO\CEDAR RIVER\MSCMCLOC.DGN ------------------------------------------"" ---------------- --------------� i I I 1 � I / a 1.4 gray aria eD�R a4g� 9 4;qm 71pe {rya ALI- i-lN U..j a% x'e E4 [a] 1 IS 6 ............................................................................................................................................................................................