Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReport 1CL
z
U "
z
0
m
Q
c�
N
O
CV
W
W
m
W
U
W
1
0
vs N �
f vclby Rve k
Lu
z
_o
,
—
O
�W �/
/
e N
41tA46w Ave N
U
Z
W
za`�,w
Oa c�wzo
ii
LU
1/
X
-aw HQ
JW
ww0
)��
LU
Li
=m0zatrwuai
�
U Uw 0 WEr
F-
Waov,u,aamm
awwaoaz
U U Q a O a
M<
y�y paM.4ve H
•
X73
W
r�� QU' 0
0
p
�!
z y°j /`� Vii
�� Mn Ave S
N
P 07 A, N ? /p
01.
5 m
a
MI,Aw3
MeinAo
N
z
S
�/.
ZT
�
H
J
VMS hues
WE—LIN
N
LI € ii
z
0
VA-N.-Ave3
:
ip
U
�+ 6wnen AeeS ® .,
gumen h.
L
W
a
J
z
z
�wMi
euioanP»
U¢ 3c
=
LU
w
U)
a a
Lown Aves � a
z�� U
wC- �
0z w
a
N $
0 LJO�um (n
op F-
ZLLiLu ,0
(L0 0
�,, pi
pJ0Z
zam
W ap Z
ung Q
Z>�m2
w l 7Q a- A
�-LL
z� Z Q� N
Qxmw
LL Z) j H J
Q2
5� H�
w~ m n�
z LC
d> T 0
z
m0� (0
Q Q
Oxa4,�NAp�p
�M0g<o`o
o W 0 N
PP0�oaN
Y 0 W d N
z o f�mO y j �Q 0
a a L Q N
O
UUr?E :3 , U
Lu irU:.
wzr,cnu
COU ov
CL
z
U "
z
0
m
Q
c�
N
O
CV
W
W
m
W
U
W
1
� �
vs N �
f vclby Rve k
z
_o
—
O
�W �/
/
e N
41tA46w Ave N
U
Z
W
Q�Q
ii
LU
AvCN
G.,d—A-N
ww0
)��
o
�
3 ti
y�y paM.4ve H
•
X73
A
p
�!
z y°j /`� Vii
�� Mn Ave S
N
P 07 A, N ? /p
01.
5 m
a
MI,Aw3
MeinAo
N
W4. h.nN a-�, �/
S
�/.
ZT
�
VMS hues
WE—LIN
LI € ii
VA-N.-Ave3
:
ip
�+ 6wnen AeeS ® .,
gumen h.
"?
�wMi
euioanP»
s
Seep uR'J6l
Lown Aves � a
u5
gFif
ai SmRhr.�s A
N $
«
ut
Eu'a
CL
z
U "
z
0
m
Q
c�
N
O
CV
W
W
m
W
U
W
W
z
_o
—
O
�W �/
/
J
�
U
Z
W
Q�Q
2
LU
❑Q�
mz
ww0
)��
o
�
nucxad �nnui6u3lx'ad dm NGIN3a iv A("O H1nos Ono
537lna3s A iv imoJ No1N3a Aa Ails '
6s096 uoa6uiyse/N'uoIuaa nedab uo{ge0 aani� JepaO
Els anuanylsLLL Lg66 S2}ON SWIMS ;09FOJd I
Scl 'fid '�Ul+e��W PE
{, { 133 MAAEJ�J %06
:
N9 a i�_! d h
it �-P49W
LLJ
>na r e aw -a AW'= vz _.z c�
t � ��b � �i � �Y � =�5 �a�F � Y a, _.- , ff
tz_
a
I >
rr
F
0
N
_-z g
gig
❑�i� �;P0
-�
°a
J: LL
U¢z
„aw
KHOm��.5�a
O.H ❑_
m
�a
� m€
euoyd aui5a71xafoid
65'086 uoj6u14sVM'uDIuaa
anuan s
3Sd 4 bL 12966
'Ad `AL{IueOaW
VM NOIN3L AVM AUVCO H1nO5;S L
830Ina35A IWMNQ0 NCI N 3a JO A 13
nedaa uo!geE) 3ania JepaD
-
suai}eui�i�ad �afoad 'Z
Sd PA
13S M31A3l1 %06
.SYN
'�•
Y3p� � ty � iW
�
L�
J
�- 8-
in
�g
w �.F Sid �"' o '! > u zo �� '!• LL
j5 L
62
Jf�
x FiN y v.
R-3 c3�
v== zN =�°o yy���� �_� .��� k sv _ 5�
�g, DEQ 3�c't h' F - L µ " :w > t:'a
ff �-
}s�
rJsa W;e5-
'c2€ <<. all
I=F - F
�k
0
v
L.
"n
a
cam"
�3 a
y
_--Ad -Ad VM'NO1N3a AVM AOMtl9 H1103 5501
S3 CIAN7S X11 VnhhO3 NC1N3a ja All7
neda uoj a �anj JEP83
6So96 uoIBuiusaM'uoIuaa zi 9 GJ 2i R 3
35 anuanV is k j � jg66 l �
Std 'Egd `X4lJu-O❑W PA -d sa�ig j�Lda� s
IDS AAAIA3�1 %08
o k�_
Lu
w w w wLLJ
w y{ I t SII
it
I + } I1
YZ'fE 8LlC}b{44 M I
i 1 r t5�'Ji3a¢¢JI I{ I�
1 i �`SZOI lilcld3a pN
I { 11
• .. I � , I I ���� I
, (I I
J 11. I { s�'•p�o�l#6Ni6�'A�al 1 I 7 ' ! ��. ,�� � �� i {'[ ( I i, ,r i, � r 1 r
1 4 ,
a�+� :rro�3� `N3
t (} } r { rr s} aAtpp LU
1 / S
1
If
i,
�c68�oErg666L1011,L
1
II } �p UJ
f i
I I I ri,ffttlllL.� :� I t , 'i 11 l{i ;j I1
,
"t 1
'
r
l I! i I I
>�} ,
I I r
,
sa +0 I fi�!6 Sk 1 I
i exfiQ o l
Irl jj a1"I 1
i 5 §51L1 �NaN {
j Bq B 5601 Itr Ja
iGZ A8�.i's 3. }
n6
a0 L �lyJLlr3b3i� '
Ld
i �+ I � C:}}1i! li � I f I, �s7S•-r -.r ., ,I �L� l��I I,,���'�� r�r��
euo4d auifi.:3l�al°�d
ie
VM'NO1N3Tl At'M AOdtI `J H1f105950.
A11KONVVoo NO1N3d dO AJ3
'
_
' -S371AN35
64086 uoafiulyseM'uaivay
jiedaa uoige� aanlj aepao
eb
�
\
as anuany is LLL LS66�
'fid 'A'41-1000"
3 -Cl sal! iiede a g
.
Sd P79
t.s
AS AA3IA3%06
't
+i
II
II
I
I
qd J-613 P0016
69026 U016u!qSBAA'UC;UqZl
3S enUOAV Is L Z L 2966
Sd 'Dd 'At4lJeO0LN P -A
- In
WI
il edaZj uolqeq JSA!a J2P90
NVId OSEU"C
b
w
L
U)
i�S AA�IA71� %
II
f
LL
jig
LL
j
"o
J,
23.
i�S AA�IA71� %
II
LL
jig
LL
j
euoydJaeulbu3loajwd VM'NO-N3N Ayl�M1 A`JVkl�H1�05 $SOL
- - sanlP.C3s xvNnNN°° NO11J,N AQ Alia
Meda uoi a rani �e a
65688 uol$uiyseM `uo4uaa ?J q `J 2i P
�S anu0nb4s[LL L566 'a C
sd 'Ad 'ALA4-0�LN PLI Spe}8❑ �S�l '� �1� d
l�]S nn�IinDd Moos
r
cn L a
�. Tl
W a,
LL
5.0
N q
w' Ww 4 <z=�•W
S U)
12
W
W x $
3J
} R
O w
LL t
D± 8
j�. .. ...... .�....... �. _... ., r be ...
pma`
t3ya: -fl- ERR
N
1,
J W
==xa
Lu Z °
;� Q Sao,
EL ff F-
;; i
a"o n13
U o�4 dd q J M,
7J r oraeEL 5
Ci
irk -M 6zm
poi
d' rwT OYwNgn �ooa' °g mom'` rc a �
'�$'�g pz � � g ° W
82`noq Bqw $ W �a ❑ w v,ww
W So �z7 dw°e�' o_]� U 4
w- W $off Ru }
U # w wog¢ Hr W a $ a i Q � ryd 98-g
� po
Z a oJo8 - wo z a zF, S ci h w w ❑ a $'� 8-' ,�°•p�s
J � m< �p �g Q uo °og go w ° w o 'a 3 Zi soap g�� a z
U a °� _ �z w� $����w �_ v7 $ ¢ ff $ i of o o i rc Q: <��3wrio
� a$Nz �; wz�w m� � �� ��� �L�3 �' y � w � Q d°
Z 'aa�g
;a_ w �1 '� x o -mom ❑; H' E w -
O
pW
9 z uz
x2o0
o U i T�ZuFggz ooU i<
ac w .2 RIP c
ag�
�-
in � �� ❑���� u u? n� �w� '"� z�sa � z k' � i �� w� a a a c � u � Q �I, o�oa
W.
euWd lW.d
VM'NCiA3 AMM AO"a:Hinos66u4
A71 INHOO NO143a �O A113
O i o
N v
�o N CC
C) 4T1 (A' (1L I
0 u'i N cc
o
Q C`7 0 'L (L
C :i1 N c0 d O
- ti
- - -"=iAN35
6sa96 UC;6ul45eAA'ualu8a
aleda�:j uo!geo JaAIZ{ iepaZ)
LO
1.:
IZ6'0L n
suoi�aas uaga� ' j
3Sanuany1S4111566
'mac! `A47-IeOOW
SO PLJ
0
13s M3In3H
O/bas
c n
n nl v o
r O as
o u c, as - C3_
N
n v
cn
6Z6'Ll
(t e M
�
I -
�
bLfi'9L
U:
L: 095 S t
J
i
it
sC Cco n n(li
C; Co i CJ fU
o
st
�f1
("7 M N CJ `L
m CL
�'
C) v' C
^7 C? CJ (ll (L
'.
J
Q
'II(1E,J
Li
J 1 (pJ
'�
+
(O
L7 '', o: I-
+
l O
U7 —
+
n
V) LO
+
J
U
n u)
Ln
o
n
000"0 _
o D00'0
000'0:. r
I
000-0 .L.............
=
!
o CID v' cu o
(") ^7 (11 N iU Q
0L bL-
n
I
a'
I
un
V V V
`r m m (U N
S N CO 7
, . ('] f_I (U ('
N 0 r O
M C] (u (LI [)1
-4 U
c r^ h N N
4, lD N (%] v' 00
rD N 00 c
`
0 tD N
. .. _.. .
91�"sl
I
7LzEL—
R
CJ
!
�Ir a m
LnA
oc
J O � CO
U LO
LO a7
000'0 000'G
L- ui In
G p O
LI n n
I V
Oj
10 01 W V
"1 I (1) N CJ
0 (0 N 20 d CJ
v rel; N :yn
- - o� cZ .....
O i o
N v
�o N CC
C) 4T1 (A' (1L I
0 u'i N cc
o
Q C`7 0 'L (L
C :i1 N c0 d O
- ti
--
tti9"�Z
LO
1.:
IZ6'0L n
0
11+
cn
L�
I ..
L')
U:
Ln
i
it
sC Cco n n(li
C; Co i CJ fU
o
st
�f1
("7 M N CJ `L
m CL
�'
C) v' C
^7 C? CJ (ll (L
aul4d aui6.3 P.(l d
vm,Noi N3N AHM A44�'J H1f 05 'P!
_ -
65086 uoa6uiysLm,uo;uab
53�I�tl35 AlIM1l1WNp�VO1M13ii 30 Alli
Jieda-�,j uoigeE:) Iani}d JepaO
3Sanua L LS66
`fid `ALII—Ua�e03"
spejaQ jieda� uoigLE) •g
Sd P:::]
�aul
Z
- o
J Ct �JI ~
x
m
O
iii
M6�
N- a�
k�z
Eli
LL
Mya�LL§V%a
-.WWW. -857
Z
U)
W
Q
Q
LU
Ir
Z
d
C13
a
c�
Tt
MA
(}
�aul
Z
m
M6�
k�z
Q
LU
Ir
Z
d
C13
a
c�
Tt
MA
(}
auDud )KOALJ3 POaWd VM'ND1NAH AVM AcmjD Hinog 5501
S331A243S A11NnVYLNOO ND1N32i d0 AIIO 9-i d3
65086 uo}6u146BAA `uo;u98 aieda�:{ uoigeE) aani-d JLRpa3
3g anuanyls6G6 L566
sd `13d `Au1j&z)ow p� �'`d saes aieda� 'S rye_
1�] S MA IPq�J %05
z� ¢z"'
' ' I'1
,"o maw i �.7
cc o
F_
O
U
N ++ J yO3 ,
"Y '=,' !
2 Z v m+�-
LU w W z a i w w {i ! it + I{ r ° i
o �i ci �n ¢ o� r ��4�z t �Y + I ♦' ti +.7, ) { {li+' 'Ni
o m � U m ❑ + W +
W W W W W
LU H F H F H H oro zjvg cwa°'l
Ir- cn m cn rn V) v, cA (0 (1) (f} z m_x
w_m r o i y j o
¢awawa >r= { o
in W r<>o mm
a(D D O !' r1
(+ 1 ,
2 1 ,) l
.A 1 7.'4b6I1=6J!47�DN
S'9��as�14 t j
r) i9Z 01 � l 3 1 N3
i 91 t xJ
LQ m
{� irZ4'I.gp+}6�f!6ul;53� i i
1 Di�'X) qui(4 N!
1 1 rr t m� I� r'L f j
} O +j 81V03� qN� o
I I! 13 iry I r'rlJJ,
- l � 1• i lyJ I I ,
�
✓Dv } r 1` r I f t y t } t J jr-777
w
U)
rrI ret { I ++!} 1 t
1 x%
I
{ / r
r
�y 1 '� � � � i I ' ' l f ; I + , I' ` ji' _. _ •�1 �. I 1 � t ' I f � t
�'.O
?7 4i ly
WiOfEZ(40
° 6g SB_' OL �Ujq
faePNUJ
��J'�
�J
} { r
C
1� r
jx
r���j
r�r1
rif
r i
( t i Iti t 1 Y rrrrrr
r �`�f1L
r rr } r r
>-r 717 -
IF
rr,
r rr
C -1S 1 t r i l r rr i
bo.
jj i 1
�1 lb sl, r.r..� 9 'EI L LL- u �bN( �r
`Y I 8 "8ZS 0 l 3I ) i I '. r rr , , � , } I W'!(=s�'!O i t
XzBV ai 1Szl�� W4 3d up �
1
0+ aj 3 1�IV1L5 I '.1.�
1 1 I r r-rr
r { ( rrrr
17f1' 1
rrr.h.r
j ? 1S IjY 1 i ii i rrr'7F {' ti I i t +'li W
C� - 7 S ��r iij}
R
auoud 18aUi6UD laafaad
VM'NOIN38 PeAA AOHNJ Hinos 4504
S33iA2i3S Al]NnKINOO NOIN32! do Allo
69086 Uo;6wySeAA `UOIUay
jieda� uoigeE) -1anr� 1epeo
��t
co
3SanuaAVIslLbLS66
'ted `Au1JU-00w
— 2 I SaIL'C�a
}•� � 9
SCA P�
13S MEI1/1EI�:1 %06
F
� O N
U )=
�
01. Z F o
OU�
� � w
Y �
m O O
+
O w U O
rp3Z U
i Q N
O�j�Y
2 U wU V^ Z
447 g
m F
m E Q 7
0
W 122
NLjz Wm
Z Y 0 N
W ¢Z¢ X
2 7 F p
P
eo
0 0
i'!i'l:i �Ilrl r
? {
l60J1i.gIC6 6u15uOo3
I
S$+t l pWVdl2 1003
�5
Ln(I,
LO r �
}6'L'L 4�
�6
l0£ r l o
R4'$VLI=Suiy}ON
s,<t' 1�' avis! Avjjs
�
W
F-
T
66'Ffi I
W
W
H
U)
auoyd Jaswf3u3 }oafoid
HM'NOlNMJ kvm kovd js Hinos 55'o6
P E,
63OEAd3S hliNf MOO NOlN3a dO AAEO
h
6 086 uo;Buiyse `uo�ua�
jieda� uojgeE) JOAI�j JePE)o
� Qq �
� �`
co
�Sanuan'dIS6L6 L566
`dd `�cu4JO00w
Sa}i� medal 9
Sd P�-❑
13S M33I❑ 3�1 %66
�`
N F
<Q O �
o
O
LVs
pR�,
Ij f7
k l �}
�
W im?
C7 w
U m D 4
J
L�
L.�!
Y �
ma�
wZ22 Z
,.—
G4
F �
pZ W
NY
2 U M�
pQ�Z
U..t
t�
W l zz
w�Uz wm
�ra"
ZY4f~l]
UJFm(�w
Z�r� O
V-
�4�C7 41N
O O
O O
L
R
L
r ljRj�
Rt1�li
■ili.
i.IR.N
Rit.q � 1
tIRMII:wII '
a.lil 1
�AF.7l/t YF �w
u.111 li
ISI�tiw
Mi1..
n�
owl -
0
l .liia�eal
Mil#ilw
: 'Ull i
iC1,01 �
,i,�FR.t 1
tww:'•�.t• �
tifilR.1
.#!l �r _-
lilltli
IM:W-1
lilil�'=t
ww #n
� r �p
MIS
.td1iM
,tr nt�-t
R■Yi N'.'
k. so !moi
�
liMiM1! ari
#i1#J PON
sl.i�t
#il#t• �
IM;IEIif � 1
lr,
1i ii1i� b
'I�tliMtill
�liwaw. sad
�Ii1RN�fM
l�lilt � .t
IHI■�i1.i
IiRfiMl
aucgd Jaaulau:1 r*wd
6co86 uo}6ulgseM 'uojua-�-j
-3S anuany Is LZ L966
Sd `fid 'At lPeOOV11 PA
VM'NOlN3L! AVM AQVUE) Hinds gru
SzIOIAH3S AllNnnvyoa NOlN36 3O A113
aieda�j uoigeE) JGAi'cl JePGO
suoijoaS uoigeE) •L
G o N Q co N cc t- G G LD N DO d-
r] N N rn r'7 c\ N Nn K) rl7 N N
o
�D
CL]
m
't
o I "
o
�LD
CU
CO
Zi-
lV
[)
m
CU
CU
cu
6Z6�L4
m
m
CU
c1d
o
(o
Ln
0o
It
o
o
� N
co
�
co
;d -
N 1'1�
r 7 N N [
J
cu
Z
CU
CD
Cn
0
o
-
r
C
Ln
i
000'0
- --
o
N
O
N . . . .. . . .. . . . ...
O
O
I
0
I
D
t
D
Cu
m
00
cu
d
CU C
l
D
tD
N
00
CLI
- -
0
n
ra
�d
� N
N
G
N
J
EnO
O
000'0 ..
o
I
0
I
Oz's L—
D
D
CU
00
(L
I
9
N
Op
r')
r'7
N
N
R
aN
N
�
C
I
r
-
cn
o
000'0
-
-bL�'2
L -
o
�D
CL]
m
't
o I "
o
�LD
CU
CO
Zi-
I
[)
m
CU
CU
cu
Ln
m
m
CU
c1d
o
(o
c�
0o
It
o
G
co
N
co
;d -
(U (U 9Z8 �Z
0
d �
P -Al,
s3�
1 nnDIA38 %
G co ' ' OQ-, G
O O r
6 g CU W
J
Q
Ln In U
— U7
CD
L C) II
CD
c�
I [\f J
Li
Ln . ... ... _...... .... +..-._ Ln in
o
000*0
0
000'0
Ln
o
000*0
0
000'0
C
�
L
Ln
I
Ln
C
I
o
Ln
CD
O
co
m
�J- GI
1 It
m
m
Rl
(U CLI
} O c0 N 00 1-j- O
, f rr) pl'� N N (\LO
CU
0
N
U-)
O
I
J
cn
('Ll,
0
cu
O
n
000'0
000*0
0
000'0
0
Ln
Ln
Ln
C
I
o
0
CD R" OD
1m m (u
CI o
-L �
�0 (U Cc "j -I
m m :L cu7f-m
o �O CL C3 1Y o I
� (L CLI cu
G N 03
It G G
Q0 N DO -j-
O co N CO d O
r7 r}
N 1'1�
r 7 N N [
cu
Z
CU
0
o
C
Ln
i
Ln
LZ6'9 L
N
O
N . . . .. . . .. . . . ...
O
O
a
Ire I + - Ln
J
C 000,0
LC7
Ln
0
0
C �10 CU CO IT o f C D CU CO � o I C �,n RJ CD 'j- C I C I'D CL m 73- o I
7j- Cn m C J aA CU -j" C) ('n ('� CU CU m ('n CU fU Cu (*) m CU CU CL
auoUd JaaulbuH loaiojd
65086 u0l6ulgseM `uolua8
3S anuany }s 4L G 1566
sd `Ad `A4�POOOIN P=l
HM NOLN32! AVM AC]H'6O HinOS 5901
S!JOIA6JS AlINnWWOO NOlNJ8 JO ALIO
jieda}j uoigee JaAi�j aepao
speja❑ aiada�j uoigeE) 'g
v u
W
O V
W
�x
o
a
z
p
J
�N
0000000000C%7 ma
0000000000^�,0��
w
z F — -
=
�
O V q 0 0 w 7 m
0
W
G
W z V O
W a w ©yw NfN o
OOOOCOOOOOOwp�
Y
>
Dno0000000!w
W � d
s4=
z
0
O
o
OOGOCOOCo^OL�oi
00000rLc 0 0 D C�2 000000 O Op Op p0
- =n] Qa uO
�Tt7i' Z7 TJ C 3C� � L3 O � C7 O C 0 0 0 0 a 0, ?
000000 X00 O G CM�PtGNs00000a Oaax00,a
a
U M
m w W d
a w" J x ¢ a
w
cooaoocac ob'o o o ao ooc °p ~a
0000000000 p a00()o 0 z�po ^pOGp0a`
g0�
o
H
z
sem-'
VI Q W C
0000000 00000 00 OC) pa 000 apt
a
aw
W000
reoQQaa0aQ�aa °a�o�aa�onaac aon�
00op0 0-0oo00000a0a000np
r 2 Z
Z
o
Y
G
°aaa�°n�pc
s may
2 0 x`
2 fit y O g O Y=
d
�p10,
a�,aoopbpo�°oco
tJ
oao
~mOA ¢ w
V
W J
W �d V ¢~
4
U ~ 4 O�Q� N �VCC V ✓Zi N
U
Q
�p W
atcNA
� �m m
W
�
N
a Q
W
N�
4
W N
o" MCl3
x
o�,�z
O Q m 0
❑
I IN
� � h
llf
CO
v u
W
O V
W
�x
a
z
J
�
w
z F — -
=
�
O V q 0 0 w 7 m
0
Q
G
W z V O
W a w ©yw NfN o
z s
Y
>
q
W � d
s4=
z
0
o 7 x:
V
o a
O a z
U M
m w W d
a w" J x ¢ a
w
rr
G O O a
W 2
O
sem-'
VI Q W C
M
w
r 2 Z
z W V� O ¢may Q a[7 OZ W
Z
o
Y
G
�•
2 0 x`
2 fit y O g O Y=
d
O w
m
"' �a�
tJ
x
~mOA ¢ w
V
W J
W �d V ¢~
4
U ~ 4 O�Q� N �VCC V ✓Zi N
U
O Q IX
�p W
I
oNQO
W
< pC
�
a Q
m O
a
N�
4
W N
N
a s
O N
LL
O UVi V ZZ. Z
mo
W
mx m �uriu w�¢ z w dV Q
W
� Cd5 � 4 dw d Ey 4 cry in � U cn in � tWi�
`' r'•
Q Z
V
z V)
p
Lr
� W
Q07)
Q
W
O
o aLLJ
LD
Y
U)J O
o
�d
p�
U
wO
wQ
o
a
OZ
N
cr)
W W 4
O Z? V
zw�na a
m
Q
CO
v u
W
zw
W
�x
a
z
vi
�
W
Gflo
Q
J
n w
z s
Y
>
�
W � d
s4=
Q
v u
zw
W
�x
a
z
Q
�
mC9
Gflo
Q
J
n w
z s
Y
�[ �z
f Q Z
� V
4
-n J
/
U)(
W
�x
a
z
o
�
x
Gflo
s,
J
n w
Y
>
�
H
z
0
1
V
o a
W V
-
U M
W
O
rr
G O O a
O
O
s`
M
w
it
x >
Z
o
Y
G
�•
�[ �z
f Q Z
� V
4
0
Y
V A
z
Q
/
U)(
W
�x
a
z
0
x
Cl)
s,
J
n w
Y
>
�
H
z
0
1
Z
Q
11j
W
zo
rr
J
O
O
s`
M
w
it
x >
Z
o
Y
�
I-
C �
d
W
tJ
x
yt
V
O
III
Li
U
I
W
W n
oDL-
n
N�
2
q�
O
w
yl
Q
W
C d
`' r'•
Q Z
V
z V)
p
Lr
Q07)
W
O
o aLLJ
LD
Y
U)J O
o
�d
p�
U
wO
u x
Cw
rl�
wcc
Co CL
OZ
N
0
Y
V A
z
J
/
U)(
W
�x
Cl)
J
w
>
IS-€
(I
z
0
1
11j
j
W
—
W
�
�
yt
V
O
III
L
I
o
O�
-
m
N�
IIID
Ca
auoyd Jaeul6u3108bJd VM'N01N3H Adm Aavzbo Hinos 9901
_ . S30IA2i3S A11Nf ADO NOiNE2J 30 AiI3
66086 UOI6ulu WA `uO}ua�J jiede�j uoigeE) J8Aiy aepao . 00
E3S anU9AVIs�L� )-666 S94ON SUD SIS 10afoad - 3 •u3
Sd 'fid ALI1jt--00W P=1
1
13S Mn 3 ins �1 %06
i I N J
j 11 IdI. U
iI Icj,ffI I t7 ! +r 3 Z ZYY 6
r l I { I/jr j� 11 `z o z w ;n ¢ x 3 0-.o L_ � o.
Q 1 1 f f i =ZJ 2O0 Y1 'l Y �n rrmX
{ Ij Qz o znzn owm o
aid 2 z 0�o �+ eco.!
!3 ! ! 1! Jm0 rnNQz o W n i3Ll
6 ?7
.-
IYr? WZ NZ NZNd NN2WU' _ .S
U' LLa O� aJZwM
U U
ffff ) 2 Z U -z F- aZ 2N Z
�0O h q{Zj�� Y ON JON N -q V>jS
w m �a 1^� `no 4nW� ply
f; s Q w who a =� = N z ��� 0=Z
UZF q
-�, 11I !, 'y �1 ❑ w�� z �mCoio o� c <w ar=,z
1 1 1 o mA N > z wpm = zr zr W0W .W
w n Z � OW Jzo in a
v c�� cns zW z4- o
W Lo �o= o m MUO q a �4 n m �r iv z�F n ao
,o �a o
co
!J ��z� o .. c� F .. } w zxo IX�ww z
1 z F c+ p p �Iz o 4 z a o w2 O�w�
I LL =IXK= o Z OwW2 U Oji 6'W mW J02 2��F d
❑❑ ppox v z�a� zn.Jo. S a y y �a=W QNB c�
W.xJwcauIX x Ow LLOZQ
OQm- w - a Kom �oui,
0 am KC
a
1 1
s
3
o}rrtrr� <
i S i Z w Z
{j))) y > O
w > w 0
t-- a_
Z
1 l ~ O
! ; I Z_
` O J p U Y U ti w'
Z Z
¢ U to W
`F II + r ` � o o x
4 o v U m U W tY
LU
J Fo � �' ISo�� � ,) Nm�z ❑ f I
---Z !
ui Ir -t 1 Z ! 1 i
1 ,fit y m - ¢ W
y
4
�� LU
]AV S73M
I t �
❑ _ ❑ w�°, Zm w ❑
E + I f ) a w
co ~ uiX LL o r=wD mW> oz 6 Li a
LLL,
zm < mx z� w a~5w ~ -< w�� } JY
VW ¢J w �❑Hw a W li C7¢� i Dp �l 2
j 11 cn w J w Jln a z J �w� z a
n j �,ij 0U,w w zm4wz ww Jo Sg °�za nom¢ ddw� �000 3w
+, J II ll 4' 7 HY= mm azD�W zo wzwzw wL-L Yw= u�jJz �'DD>O v.
1 1 I 7 �' UU~20m 2Umw ao raQxwm warn �Dm wJ0 11jo➢ m H[Y
�w� I �'', a 'OD D ¢��r=-w �❑ Uc�il�Va ow�z �z� VLLV vWaw oO
�Oi� 1 } t''laim =Z�Zm C7 c? ��F-❑V N�WD Hai C9Y� Z¢m� > p�
cx 1 Ww ° a-� z o�OZ� oJ5 iww zZm w�-a = 0a
(} (j _n Amo ❑ �v ❑ Z g ❑� wZ z v m� a
+ 4 li w w chw¢wW Zm wpa z w -w C7 vlx p rfi a z z ❑
0o 1 ) 1 I I� j 7C7 2DUi~� U ¢ w VO,=W �m W % H�� p> iw� 111 ❑❑
w f i y! aao oz ❑�w� �w w°ccz❑� m�Z �wD >DL :u 0, ww
,LL
v, ) } I }°r�l 7 ZNW wN Z¢�gm Q Oa wwa2zzQ r-4w=r aa7 dm= WFQ¢ mw�
�l� �X V K=¢pJ V tazzz-� zJ�z �+¢ rn �rnHw w°
LLJ+, !I} mJw ww W~ mcaa zio zowa�Z p❑Zw ~L woo w>Zs w �m
fit• t I z ! a¢m m� Z �❑wa- -z H�5tZ - � ,�¢ w❑ �ZD zca
11 F ! "• SJ' W J J O a¢ C1 W} F Q J w w d W J 9 J W U H WLou S ¢ a Q❑} = J w Z
I{ 1 l i{ J' J o� ¢ 4� W UI �2 ❑ U7 ~H -LL f�Z J LL C�7 J Z Il W Z ❑ Um U
Ilii Q s =w ❑�K-w Z wrnw w�❑wzd O�UOy w�0z mm❑ =0m¢ w mJZ
j On �jlj ! I C7 Lu
g ¢ w0 F- z. 2z_� a JCJ_i i0a�❑ ��w40 E!~l1>a wJui zwpZ 7 �af
V7J WZ_ U w'
�� as x=o = wwz J❑ w J� F3 cc m m0
ma Q O�OWH}' ww> a�0z0ELa �¢m~m �ZJn w�¢ oocmn� a
❑Z mz� f5ll7❑ Ow- LL, w wp¢ Z W, 84; It un �cvmZ a �ZU
{: 1 ( j i.— was ag ww> Z ¢� ��_ �❑ S m❑ a ww = wwo
+ �❑❑_¢ w ww w- �zw
+ S p Z W C7 W Z g m r1 J W Q J= w` m Z F [} w' J Z J°❑ J Z J r=jr ❑ H j W= Z X w a
2 zaw mz �W www CL a5�0 o-�a z� ���o Who
¢ T� acs ❑ D ° a- mw� zF �¢W� �g Zw6 a� o wD(r
DZ �x� F' °q¢ zJ�o w W� a kU)
�L O I j '. uiz D �LLz w~pul❑ D DO�w� UWw�I wp>Y zaJ ❑Yrn Oww
!� Z noZ 00� Z ��w- z Uff wmz[7¢❑ w��v=iw �wWO ¢ WW¢J W waw
I + t I 0 a m-mU� o a cs�Z a wJ w ❑
I J m H- O-' w' m ¢ W
Q m�-w w ❑ ¢ Q ❑ ❑4�Oa J1 -a W ZJ �J [/J° w �JHO-' w D� Q Ja is
k`l z❑z0 X03 w�cmi�aw 11 w xJ� n�m�r�-ird ?>�wo �¢�~ umi�� ❑(zJ 01 w v�
W0D0 Www ~ a Z <x u. a- ��~ ❑a w O Uw m rr ax
J- O-Zp.¢ rrwca � ¢ ¢ ¢y0 zQ W �Oj¢ ; m=�
U F z rq z U J z VS w m C7 - J w a = W w H J H a
z❑❑w oow JWm2zY Q O > O¢❑c=n�D =w'Z=m tarn J =" w L'
Li
¢mD�o Jaz r w zoz❑ mm rnmmZ J awW
i ,t }� ❑ 3w >w mix ❑ _¢ �0� OZa 0t-WZJ ��c�>3 ¢¢w ¢ -o www m x¢�
51 51 aLLq� a01- rn�d�W W ag �zzcoo a¢�w< VOKz w��} CZ 0 ¢ MW
is zz�o `�❑_ �w wx J _00 ,W¢rm° ��mx7 ]Jpw aW7D ��d a a zz�
PvE S i �J j i t' F` oaaL.° tam❑ H LLJo�~cc�W z�� zZ�O�� D�wwa ao0� W",o 00zz w2:w
w F-,��1P�5 Ir Z <cn<� yvm� Z USM U OLL� .O ZF ar �=�a ZW co 0 LU
Qw�w z��w ❑ ��U
Is. D o xwul g��zta = xwo x0J a�Ww= =mai w�zcc o�ww g oow
I o / ) jl } rQ, J�z~ wrra Q o0D0zw W x2 r000iu- ❑w>m- �Z,U� cc 0- Ua3w W w�Z
/ N I {! t � �! cN U U a U 0, W❑ > N 6 v u; ro ti m
� i
�
LL
it O ( ) 0 � ❑ D
N w w W
W r I z = o a Z J 'w LL ¢ o m ❑
wZ ZR zo w Q cc I Z a m
m moo- w o� C, W o map w Z w
{( i ` {� o a �� tea Z � W o w
}i / U) Z wz 2 W r z 0 ~¢ V z p 0> 0 Z ¢ 0 m
S f I z wx Q wg oma Z
j O O O�O � w�� = WOz z J
O F0 w D H=w U rw [t�Ca 2 pW ¢
+ ){ i w��q z �o� �= 0wa ~ 0, w ca
} i t 0 (fj a-Oo Rwwm U z� zoo av wd
i z C, moo - �� w Pz z Zw 0
` F ❑ Y m� w� z w ❑0w go z ❑ aw a ZZ
p ! 4 I ) W CL z❑N Z Zw0 wJ w❑w �2 ❑ a
w ° oJZ- a o ¢0z LL Ja �Z� w OF Z m
0aom Z U1w0 �¢� w ¢w Do
ty { 1 Z n/ wFHW z w SwF wO w>� J O
I i t 3 Z 0 LL W O a F z 1Z 0- H J z 3c I- z
F �"' a0� z o wmz Z��o a mp <-
L) u,�
W an ��°� �° CJD °4 egwZ rZn �� 3c� cO
�1Z 7 H J 02 W w
O .} j �l 3 �❑ O O OaJ UJ p W q� rn
5 i II i W� Z ¢0 U U- w, 0�
N� } ;, i 7 1 W z wa �oJ� ��w Arai wjmm z Yp tnm r0
s o �o ZXzqf rm-nz zZ- ED W �� mwi ° o= �� o
rr W �°�Ca z0 OH w0� U Z z9❑ w` �H ¢D Z
z O tY} rilHaOf OV Up ¢�° ww Op w wtr �Z =Z,
w U w a o (� wJ w = D I -a
lF Q ¢ a' w40.�z w� =z 0n�� �� Wwc� ❑ x,Q D� wx
{ f o w.. >��p w0 �- ❑�❑ ¢ >o �¢z z a� zo pw
I lI� r 1 V Z I: azwm w= �� z0" goo �❑0 ¢ ww �z <n
w �7 MDQ° m� oX gw0 Z w8
i I U W Cao H JU J¢� a J 3 UU mm
W ra Q JZ p❑z J J ZJ Ow'
XIL Hi W W ;= JF www L awO W QU a nD
I l(I I! I Irl ¢ Q
Z,� ❑ �� mH m -JwHS N a<c� wapZa LLd ° o 92 0z U
❑ZJ E o� Fez o
V 0 wzL) z O W ❑
F2 Z o� W_ a�anJ Wz z�� d� �a °W°
I ' I CSO U 7 Uy �U KU
Q �v _ t�azow zta w_Q 2Q� ~ icr ZoLU �Q Z� LU �a
{1 z m� ~ ww¢Z °� } wrw-jm� um r w� 00w "° �Z
I + i 's U =J EL Dr r Z x _
j a !{( W O J ❑mow w� n¢ JwZW Z wZ wZCf J ww �m �-
iwz 0
�� Z�d;x �w -0 ¢uwi0H Q WQ ��Ku ¢$ HOf 6� ¢0
ON ot,, ,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY D .a
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: December 21, 2015
TO: Todd Black, Capital Projects Coordinator
FROM: Kris Sorensen, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Receipt of Annual Mitigation Monitoring Report, Year 1
Cedar River Gabion Repair, LUA12-000290
This memorandum is to inform you that on December 7, 2015, the Planning Division
received the Year 1 annual monitoring report for the Cedar River Gabion Repair
mitigation project. The project appears to be meeting its established performance
standards and is considered in compliance. The annual monitoring occurred in fall of
2015 by Northwest Environmental Consulting LLC.
The report states that the site is meeting the plantings goals, that replacing dead willow
stakes will not increase the success of the site since many of the dead willows appear to
have drowned, and that no actions are recommended at this time.
The next monitoring report shall be provided in late 2016 for review. If you have any
questions, please contact Kris Sorensen at (425) 430-6593.
cc: Leslie Betlach, Parks, Planning and Natural Resources Director
File
]vlcedlplannirnglcurrent planninglwetlandslcedar river gabion repairty] report _ccdar river gabion_lrla 12-000290.docx
P
Cedar River Gabion Repair
Annual Plant Monitoring Report 2015
Prepared for
City of Renton
Parks Planning & Natural Resources
1055 S Grady Way
6th Floor
Renton, WA 98057
Prepared by
)1f Northwest
-jr Environmental Consulting, LLC
Northwest Environmental Consulting, LLC
3639 Palatine Avenue North
Seattle, WA 98103
206.234.2520
DECEMBER 2015
Cedar River Ga bion Repair — Aan ua1 P1a n t Monitoring Rep ort
December 2015
PROJECT OVERVIEW
The City of Renton has asked Northwest Environmental Consulting (NWTEC) to complete
monitoring for the Cedar River Gabion Basket Replacement Project. The project included
planting stakes of Hooker's willow (Salix 1"keriuna) within the replacement gabions, to
create some natural structure and overwater shading. The Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA)
for the project included a permit condition that the willow stakes maintain an 80% survival
rate for a period of three years.
See Appendix A for a vicinity map of the site. Appendix B contains photos of the monitored
gabion during the September 2015 site visit.
The project is located in the City of Renton within King County, Washington in Section 17,
Township 23N, and Range 5E. The gabion repair and willow plantings took place along the
riverfront along N Riverside Drive between the Logan Ave_ N Bridge and the Bronson Way
N Bridge.
MONITORING GOALS
The Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) for the gabion replacement project specified that the
willow stakes maintain an 80% survival rate for a period of three years.
METHODS
NNVEC performed the Year 1 survival monitoring on September 21, 2015. NXXEC biologists
walked the Cedar River Trail (the riverwahk running parallel to the river) and counted all
surviving willow plantings in three of the five sections that underwent gabion repair: the
downstream site (Site A), and two upstream sites (Sites D and E; see Vicinity flap in
Appendix A}_ Two additional areas of restored bank (Sites B and C) were adjacent to bridges
and were not planted_
N%VEC counted each willow stake present at Sites A, D and E, and noted whether they had
any new growth (live) or remained bare (dead).
RESULTS
The tally of willow stakes is presented in Table 1. Out of 213 total willow stakes, 167 showed
new growth above the level of the rock surface. This indicates a 78% survival rate, a few
percentage points short of the 80% survival goal for Year 1.
N%vvT:C noted that some willow stakes had sprouts originating below the surface of the rocks
and emerging far from the stake itself. On stakes where this was the only growth, the sprouts
could be mistaken as volunteer shoots and the stake itself could be erroneously counted in
the "dead" category. Thus, the "dead" willow stake tally may overestimate the number of
stakes that failed to sprout. it is likely the actual survival rate is higher than 78%, and likely
meets the Year 1 survival goal.
Page 2 of 3 11/ Northwest
-ar Favi,oe-me"wIConaa4ing,LLC
CedsrRlverGabion Repair—AnnualPlant.Wonitozing Report
December 2015
Site E showed the lowest survival percentage of all three sites. This is likely because many of
thcsc willows were planted low, and ended up beneath the waterline; these individual stakes
may have drowned due to the amount of time they remained inundated. The stakes higher
on the bank appear to have higher survivability (see Photo 3 in 'appendix B).
Table 1. Cedar River Gabions —Tally of Live and Dead Willow Stakes
Mitigation Area.:
Live Stakes° '
Dead. Stakes ,
survival''
Site A
104
9
91%
Site D
16
5
69°1
Site E
47
32
32%
Totals.
167
46
78%
RECOMMENDATIONS
The site is meeting the planting goals. Replacing a few willow stakes will not increase the
success of the site since many of the dead willows appear to have drowned. The willow
stakes were planted on a tight plant spacing and as they mature will become dense. Based on
monitoring results, Northwest Frnvironmental Consulting does not recommend any further
action at this time.
Page 3 of 3 )1{ Northwest
40 Fnviwrn"f.i1 Un;0Kng. J 1 C
Appendix A:
Vicinity Map - Cedar River Gabion Repair
1 / Northwest
-� Env�ronmemalC�nsult�ng.iLC
� M
n
1
W
ry
z
a
z
0
Q
~
Z
N
o
--
W
N
--j
>
Z o
r
NLU
J �
<
a
m
Q
z w
73
Z
W
co LL
Of o
U
�F
W
U
❑
UU�
0�
Z
7
CV
Q'.�
's
z ice]
Cn
a
1-
.a
C
ii
Wco
U_r x
r
x
W
2 W
Z J
a a
>U)
W Q
zZ W
Q
4
�LU CO
cn
Zd�`�r'tUJ
J�>0E-
QZQ�d
paoz
<7-
LU
r x
Z a°od
W U<
Z
Q
Z LL -2
LLI < 0Ci
WF-Z<p
Z
C3
�
�<
Z F- tip
J
U�F-'� - Lo
�V
�CO�? N
LU
��� �j
Qr�ZZ
Y
W
Z
020 ZUM
(l70�^
Z
Y`ZU ^
�Ur��N
oQ JUS
Ewa~~n
�NUyW
��g h�
C-)
l
O LO W Z Lo
Q
O
O N
L}U.-OfU
O T W a N
W a)lyU V
Z o W O
W Zco C)
M Q N
U)QrYU�
'W
LU
7T
W
W
LLLU2
n
W
ry
z
a
z
0
Q
~
Z
N
--
W
N
--j
>
Z o
oD
NLU
J �
<
a
m
Q
z w
73
Z
W
co LL
Of o
U
�F
W
U
❑
Cedar Rivcr Gabion Repair -3015 Site Photos
Appendix B;
Site Photos during 2015 Monitoring -
Cedar River Gabion Repair
llt Northwest
� Lnvarormental ConsuspEng,4LC;
Photo 1. Site A in September 2015
Photo 2. Site D in September 2015
1I! Northwest
arc grvirrp"�ngni�li=rn;i�iting,€.t.0
Cedar River Gabion Repair—20t.5 Site Photos
} f Northwest
mt' Fin�i�narnPretalCpn3uitEngLLC
U m= C- I � I c3 V C ;.j l .0 u i Y = t % O .,'j ? J. L, J
_F �' 5 C o y c°: V v =w vtj
CWdWG�C'�c�'C G sz C� ��},y�cu Zoo 'TSL, �—yV ^�-•i
%LEZo� epiy cmc q>v=�yW DeZ� L,���co=C�aa
o �z
F
� ' a.o o- �p `0 3 •� oG .7tc c �'��
a�f�� � c d� u d
71t
o
U� �Y � c3 p i ��
M
0
C) UM O � d
'o
oR.�o
a.
Cl)
° CLCL
•�'
O
i•+1
�c 03
3 � cu'°
v
o
cro�°,�
r4th
H
o
Q
cl� �
IM m
✓ �
GI} c�
a. °" p 61G
w .
>C
O w
tjD � ' GJ �
p
] O
z bp
U a] - cv U G U
7, ° 0 a� X
r
Ems,
��4 ^
`akiz
t1.
E
wt
n
aid
caaE-U -3 o p
H
M
0
CITY OF RENTOI.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 14, 2014
To: City Clerk's Office
From: Lisa M. Mcelrea
Subject: Land Use File Closeout
Please complete the following information to facilitate project closeout and indexing by the City
f larlr'c flffira
Project Name:
Cedar River Gabion Repair
LUA (file) Number;
LUA-12-000290
Cross -References:
AKA's:
Project Manager:
Vanessa Dolbee
Acceptance Date:
January 14, 2013
Applicant:
Todd Black, City of Renton
Owner:
Leslie Betlach, City of Renton - Community Services
Contact:
Brad Thiele, Northwest Environmental Consulting, LLC
PID Number:
n/a
ERC Determination:
DNS Date: October 28, 2013
Appeal Period Ends: November 15 2013
Administrative Decision:
Approved Date: November 4, 2013
Appeal Period Ends: November 18 2013
Public Hearing Date:
Date Appealed to HEX:
By Whom:
HEX Decision:
Date:
Appeal Period Ends:
Date Appealed to Council:
By Whom:
Council Decision:
Date:
Mylar Recording Number:
Project Description: The applicant has requested SEPA Environmental Review and a Shoreline
Exemption for the repair of 416
linear feet of damaged gabion bank protection structures at five
locations along a portion of the
Cedar River. The total area of work would be 2,432 square feet.
The project would be located
on the Cedar River waterfront trail near North Riverside Drive
between Logan Avenue North Bridge
and Bronson Way North Bridge.
Location:
Located along North Riverside Drive between the Logan Avenue
North Bridge and the Bronson Way North Bridge.
Comments:
ERC Determination Types: DNS - Determination of Nan-signiticance; uns-m - uerermination or
Non -Significance -Mitigated; DS - Determination of Significance.
City
PLAN REVIEW COMME1 (LUA12-000290
PLAN ADDRESS: APPLICATION DATE: 1 2/2012 01 2
DESCRIPTION: The applicant has requested SEPA Environmental Review and a Shoreline Exemption for the repair of 416 linear feet of damaged gabion
bank protection structures at five locations along a portion of the Cedar River. The total area of work would be 2,432 square feet. The
project would be located on the Cedar River waterfront trail near North Riverside Drive between Logan Avenue North Bridge and
Bronson Way North Bridge. The site is located in the Shoreline Isolated High Intensity overlay, Cedar River Reach B. Work would be
performed on the southwestern shoreline approximately 3 feet below the Ordinary High Water Mark. The site would be accessed via the
brick walkway. Three trees would require pruning however no trees are proposed to be removed. The project would result in minor
excavation of approximately 20 cubic yards of riprap.
Community Services Review Leslie Betlach Ph: 425-430-6619 email: LBetlach@rentonwa.gov
Recommendations: Repairs are necessary to maintain existing infrastructure and recreation access. Comments entered by
Stucker.
Reviewer Comments Leslie Betlach Ph: 425-430-6619 email: LBetlach@rentonwa.gov
Community Services Review Created On: 01/3012013
Comments entered by Stucker
Engineering Review Created On: 01117/2013
No comments from Plan Review. Approved as submitted, K3
January 14, 2014 Page 1 of 1
DEPARTMENT OF COIF 1UNITY AND city Of
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
PLANNING DIVISION
CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION
FROM SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT
DATE: November 04, 2013
PROJECT NUMBER: LUA12-000290
PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Gabion Repair
PROJECT MANAGER: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner
OWNER: Leslie Betlach, City of Renton - Community Services
1055 S Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057-3232
APPLICANT: Todd Black, City of Renton
1055 S Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
CONTACT: Brad Thiele, Northwest Environmental Consulting, LLC
3639 Palatine Ave N
Seattle, WA 98103
PROJECT LOCATION: Located along North Riverside Drive between the Logan Avenue North Bridge anj
the Bronson Way North Bridge.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant has requested SEPA Environmental Review and a Shoreline
Exemption for the repair of 416 linear feet of damaged gabion bank protection
structures at five locations along a portion of the Cedar River. The total area of
work would be 2,432 square feet. The project would be located on the Cedar
River waterfront trail near North Riverside Drive between Logan Avenue North
Bridge and Bronson Way North Bridge. The site is located in the Shoreline
Isolated High Intensity overlay, Cedar River Reach B. Work would be performed
on the southwestern shoreline approximately 3 feet below the Ordinary High
Water Mark. The site would be accessed via the brick walkway. Three trees
would require pruning however no trees are proposed to be removed. The projec
would result in minor excavation of approximately 20 cubic yards of riprap.
WATER BODY /WETLAND: Cedar River
An exemption from a Shoreline Management Substantial Development Permit is hereby Approved on the
proposed project in accordance with RMC 4-9-190C 'Exemptions from Permit System' and for the following
reasons:
Page 1 of 2
City of Renton Department of Community & ornic Development Certificate of Ex ion from Shoreline Substantial Development
Cedar River Gabion Repair LUA12-000290
Subsection 3: Maintenance and Repair: Normal maintenance or repair of existing structures or developments,
including damage by accident, fire or elements:
a. "Normal maintenance" includes those usual acts to prevent a decline, lapse, or cessation from a lawfully
established condition.
b. "Normal repair" means to restore a development to a state comparable to its original condition, including
but not limited to its size, shape, configuration, location and external appearance, within a reasonable period
after decay or partial destruction, except where repair causes substantial adverse effects to the shoreline
resource or environment.
c. Replacement of a structure or development may be authorized as repair where such replacement is the
common method of repair for the type of structure or development and the replacement structure or
development is comparable to the original structure or development including, but not limited to, its size,
shape, configuration, location and external appearance and the replacement does not cause substantial
adverse effects to shoreline resources or environment
The proposed development is Consistent or Inconsistent with:
Consistent Policies of the Shorline Management Act.
Not Applicable The guidelines of the Department of Ecology where no Master Program has been finally
approved or adapted by the Department.
Consistent The City of Renton Shoreline Master Program.
SIGNATURE & DATE OF DECISION:
F
C.E. "Chip" Vincent, CED Administrator
November 04, 2013
Date
The decision to Approved the Shoreline Exemption will become final if not appealed in writing together with
the required fee to: bearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 on or before
5:00 pm, on November 18, 2013. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from
the Renton City Clerk's office, Renton City Hall - 7th Floor, (425) 430-6510.
Attachments: Vicinity/Neighborhood Detail Map, 90% Review Set
cc: City of Renton Todd Black - Applicant
Lois May Smith - Party of Record
Northwest Environmental Consulting, LLC Brad Thiele - Contact
City of Renton - Community Services Leslie Betlach - Owner
Page 2 of 2
EL
Q
Z
U
,
id
vcM N
F-7 AwM1
p� .13 4
a
N 4
i
w
C
> �
W
U
ia.f
�z
i irb l:
ry0
4
W
a d J
w'
Pe*F eH..
Xbo Alla
N ..-,...
mow Qs W6
CO6[C
FI h41j
- -
r
�i
x
rFj
- ¢ w cn
Q
N
En
z
o
c�
Uw?
c
-
�uiwza�Luwuii
❑
%
Q
�
ry
wW°
CL
Au
^
Ww0xwzz
Lu ao
- � � wi ' -pmrett ptis
r,
' - Sw.Y ueSv� I,ppanA e5
N
q
w
>
omLUUJWa--
=
C} a a[7 H � mm[7
U)
r N f6 Q 46 UG A a7
Z
H
J
7
z
Z
O
U
L
1
Z
z N
Car
>
i
U}
E w
Z
L1
asa a
Q
Z
Lu
ZY�mO z
uI1--0 � Q
iyw��
w2¢¢O�
�ww�p
Zt-ZQ�N
<IMZ
Yma Z -
LL ..J
�Q,N•�~
MW
0ff
LU
Z2u7Zln
O� pQ (17
=UrD6N
ZwJIJ1ma
02a 4
wzl.22
wyZQ6rq
Z
�asu0�
A�~ZZsn
}0,wo�
7m
zo,.
�TPYZuj
MX Kc -
Q
UU 2C)Z! U
w.mO:
wZMW020v
w `1U�
EL
Q
Z
U
,
id
vcM N
F-7 AwM1
a
N 4
i
w
> �
W
U
ia.f
rye [•�'
4 4
i irb l:
Cen+rn AvlH � �_ i. _ `• `T ���e..
W
0.
Pe*F eH..
Xbo Alla
N ..-,...
.. PMYivfM i- S
FI h41j
- -
- - - //� Ve•. �..2 � Maes Are:
-V Nese Ay
l
Q
N
En
z
o
c�
Uw?
�
ry
`? 'r _yam a LwwMSArl5 Tu
-
W_
❑
%
)
ULLI
�
ry
wW°
M
W
Au
b�pc7
- � � wi ' -pmrett ptis
r,
' - Sw.Y ueSv� I,ppanA e5
N
All
EL
Q
Z
U
,
id
N
W
w
W
U
ia.f
0
W
W
Z
l
Q
N
En
z
o
c�
Uw?
�
ry
<
z
=
W_
❑
U)
Q�
)
ULLI
�
ry
wW°
M
W
a
Bu b,�d, le euifiu37�Iad
BS096 Uo16un{sOAA'uc4uOZ1
BS COUBAYIsLLI LS66
Sd '3d 'A41Je0aW pig
VM'NvdN3N AVAA 40b nH1 Mbol
SR:)1 N7Sk NfIWWO] NCLN3`J 90/J7
J1eda8 UOige!D aOnit] YO POO
S@ION SUORE4S 1091oad '
®'f
61!
VOR
R 9
mw
Rog
Rep
P
FQ
zn°LL�
KFQ
HT
xleg
C
a
zi. 69 h
C
= s
i j
e
W ; m ¢
2
3d
P h - o
Z6
Z �9Y3 966 Z
O Fp O
G
i
M
U go F g�� U
U
g�x
U) °_ u~a
Z 6 www Z
Gw=2
F3 S
U r U
Y
W
$
6
61!
VOR
R 9
mw
Rog
Rep
P
FQ
zn°LL�
KFQ
HT
z
04
A -M
zi. 69 h
C
� z
e
W ; m ¢
2
3d
P h - o
Z6
Z �9Y3 966 Z
O Fp O
G
=d ff
M
U go F g�� U
U
g�x
U) °_ u~a
Z 6 www Z
Gw=2
F3 S
U r U
°iHwfS'
13S AA31n321 %06
C
A
q
cn r�
' LU
E
gffa
�5u 0
&t�0
gwt�
RE
CO"
EP�2
ff
g J r o
0
�F °
w 1
° Uj i U go
F p HE- � i�g u
Z ' g,w_ Via$ Q do°
W iti� ° fY d aR
w
aNb g uu.j,� uti yg� Y
W gO6 p IIw p5
> � L <
@5° qE 4
W°6 0 �z oS i
¢ a m n H _ Id
wjOo �G �ff U g gsE ffg°
OB !- g&5o F m� 6 �gff
U ax #
ff n
� �€�
woyd ueeubu3l�efad »A'N41�3a AtlM h41/d41{lno5 ssvt
+ '- • —= E " "'^ "^ 5331^83S "NRMDO NOlN3L JO 1313
65086 uoy6uiyseM'uoIuaa a!edad uo!geE) aan!'d Xpao
as anuanyIs6L1 0566
Sd `Ad 'A4)4e:DO" P�g
las nn�Iin3a %06
Ir o Q
R
�e g5prc7
w
,cam
Q
€
4 -
ME 14R
-
4EG€ sto S !! I� h" p R '} � E� ix h. b
k" �9a
eAi8 ge r
N.HIMIg14
E
a W.
H
�-
V
°
.t
�
9 _ 6" A egg c W RE q: w
ska p=i, ix $ � i€ §�o ;fix us y € � �� ^ 1 3
Epi s $; p -
�E n z � � dos �g je� � 1-c
��s �3�� P. °AW S yI 7� r g
nis
All
le
IM d
"x
w$9�p �� sera a��[t�F€�yy - —
AIB E
i g
EA
o�
auoyd JRe'vi6u3 �efad
69086`uoi6uNSE!Wuo}uaa
Dg anuanyjs�) L LSS6
Sd 'j3d '/CU3jeZ30W P3
alips
i9-
f
Th
w
F -
co
W'NO1N3d AVM ACV C Hlh08 95flL
5371At38 J-UNMHC-o NO1N3N j0"
jieda+,j uolgeE) JaAN Jepao
NV-ld 0531, 'E
0
ootE
u
fli
0
w
cn
r"
` Y• i]
13S AADIA38 0 C
r' U
evwd ueeu�Oc.'3 we!�d
ggQgg uo;8u1yseM'ua;uaa
9S anuanV;s 4L! LS66
Sd '79d 'AuYe0aiN P--3
uj
uL1
O
LL
LL
LU
Itf
R S%+A kR k�Ck
Ud 'F36
W,Noiu3 AVM AOV2v HIAOU 3so�
S30"BS UNnmNoo wimmi 3o A,Jo
neda,tj uoigeU.1ans�j Jep90
a a
{SlJ1�IOW Mi
13S RUIN I %06
k
S
Vol
Lu 9ILIL z z
o ;O $ F p = x m
w PHI W a gt
ERE
��wa
?SFE �g g-
un
Eke n
_
p
W a
;I"-�' Z W K� O Z p m 4
V �K ¢ OEC UUU �3=T �� W
7
z 10
Z
tag
g
w� op
ds
W 6 A n o 0 4 C7 _ 4 D o e a __ a f n-t� 4 V
W 3: 1fflk� g
cn
a Na} 85. NPP
° ga
N
yj %pg. Nva
U F p� F
y MNP
U) Pu F a po i --j �C
qq
�
�ff
K
z w
P
5
Z �
�
Q ?�
§
Vol
Lu 9ILIL z z
o ;O $ F p = x m
w PHI W a gt
ERE
��wa
?SFE �g g-
un
Eke n
_
p
W a
;I"-�' Z W K� O Z p m 4
V �K ¢ OEC UUU �3=T �� W
7
z 10
Z
tag
g
w� op
ds
W 6 A n o 0 4 C7 _ 4 D o e a __ a f n-t� 4 V
W 3: 1fflk� g
cn
a Na} 85. NPP
° ga
N
yj %pg. Nva
U F p� F
y MNP
U) Pu F a po i --j �C
.u.4d ...16ua—I.d
VM'NO1N33! AWAOb'bOH DOSS L
zr ^''"'
fi�pB6 uolBwuseM'uolliaa
¢
¢ $ m
S3OIhy3S Ai1NIIWW0� N01N3Y dokuo
3iedaa uoig2S.Iania dePDO
RS OnuanyasGLI L566
'Bd 'Ay7PnOOW
wa
-d sal.S !ieda
Sd PA
t i
i, L
$N
R a
co
Z:
o
lit
1EIS MIUA�I�l °1
¢
¢ $ m
v n
^L 4
ue rc
wa
�� i w
i-
t i
i, L
g
$N
R a
1EIS MIUA�I�l °1
6
'•,'a
I�FF
ie
!
'gym
-WR I�[
E
6
�.
_ m a�
<G �G}\P)
]-ci S 4ed a�j g
2�� mwL96e
scl'2a iL44A eoa_ P73
&| §
ĤS MIIAAWl OB
p -
�)\
|\.■��
-
§a■■a§|
\
�
I I L I%5 �
\ «
j
\\
_
�
{
_1 Kt
D
�
Lij
±�
Ik AV
�
�
°w
.9 01 Le
%
s
�
euwd s�sv; wlyd
65086 uo{6uiyseM'uo{uaa
3S anuany {SW I L966
Sd 'fid `AulpeonW P=l
i
b 'NCLWB f AW AOVd 10 V.MO5 ML
5301nY3S A1INAMWOP NO1N3:J �P Al!P
rnedey u0igeE) J9nI8 J0PUD m
suailoas ualgeE) -1
13S M31A3Ri ,�/a06
i
LZ
Sl I
!n
I
i
095-5
G
0
LO
0
0 0
I
f
_
L
cu I N i qj°
4_
o o
cu cu bL 'E l ; ,
in i — u7 -� -.-I --
V)
p la 7
0 000' 0 00 0
LO L7 L7
b O O
I I I
o 10 N m v =I o 10 N cc d1 0 0 N co of
O O N mO 0 10 N O - N cc d0
d ll7 1) _X)._
X). C-4 NI] 7 n n NN 7 r7 r'} N N NLj
`4
O
�N
li ]
� I o
I �
cn _ fi . 117
0`00'0
f
O
o I0 N W V of 0 N w v I o I0 N co �* of
4 c0 N m d 0 0 [c N 0p d 0
d r•7 r^7 N N 4 in d N7 r7 N N c
lti9'£Z N
o
N
� 1
0
a
L7
L
cn 0 0•Q I o
LO
I o
i
Hn'
N
N
L7
0
LO
O
In
I
O
n
o Ip ru C7 It n i 0 � N Cn d n i o tip N m It o f
LZ
Sl I
>n
O
LO
0
0
0 0
f
_
L
I
N
N
L7
0
LO
O
In
I
O
n
o Ip ru C7 It n i 0 � N Cn d n i o tip N m It o f
Buoy �Baui6u3 F'a�a2 VM NO:NSN Aw Acvev NSnmS S
S33W.432 AdNnAKOO NO1N38 i0 kdI;
65025 uw6uiysem,uoivad jieda�j ugge!D uaA!8 1epaD
gs a nuoAv is L 2 t L966
Sc! '3d 'Ak4IJ2�7iN P� slieja© aieda� uoigeC) 'g
�fl-��
9
F
A
E5
w
w
e -
(1)
LJ
`1
¢
F
W
J
iZ
W
Ir
z
Q
m
Q
CD
0
LL!
0.
(I
a
O
C)
a
oGGoaoaGo°a- �� U
111
000aaopapac�-a
0
)0 00000 Qo j 0
OOOOOOpO 00 q0 Q
a0a0°F°�^iP o c.. coo p°P-00-
0,00,
D
0�ea °° oo �.°
x000000000000 ° O
aao�'
Pp pp°ac a°a_a0 JS'
0000 °Q°paopO Pa°pa0q ap k W
wo
°°°°�°o0a00oo° o oo°OPo°p0O 2
O"o o OpoOpP°a pDp O°O y,W!��
^
a a°GOpp aaP PY Bn ¢
°0
o°a°OwBoi. �rh L1J
A
E5
w
w
e -
(1)
LJ
`1
¢
F
W
J
iZ
W
Ir
z
Q
m
Q
CD
0
LL!
0.
(I
a
O
C)
Vanessa Dolbee
From: Todd Black
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 2:25 PM
To: Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: FW: PW 1752 renton gabion baskets under 1817
Would have been great if she could have signed it, but the email return address should work. Let me know.
Todd
From: Kaplan, Alysha (MIL) jmailto:Alysha.Kaplan@mil.wa.gov]
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 1.53 PM
To: Todd Black
Subject: RE: PW 1752 renton gabion baskets under 1817
I have read the SPIF and the REC for this PW and there is no LWD requirement.
. ........ ..
From: Todd Black (mailto:TBlack Rentonwa. ov]
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2013 11:36 AM
To: Kaplan, Alysha (MIL)
Suhject: FW: PW 1752 renton gabion baskets under 1817
Importance: High
Hi Alysha,
A short request. We are sending out the SEPA to complete its review, and would like to have a short, definitive response
from you re. this gabion project not needing LWD. If you look at your last email response of 1/23/13, it's not as clear as
our Planning Division would like it.
Thanks. If you have a question, please let me know.
Todd
From: Vanessa Dolbee
Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 4:16 PM
To: Todd Black
Subject: FW: PW 1752 renton gabion baskets under 1817
Todd,
I have the e-mail from you below addressing the reference for LWD requirement for the Gabion Project. However, this
e-mail chain is quite messy and the response from Alysha is challenging to understand. Would it be possible for her to
send a second e-mail that clearly identifies your project is not required to install LWD? I would like to make this an
exhibit of the SEPA report. If not I can use the e-mail you send previously.
Thank you.
Vanessa Dolbee
CED, x7314
1
From: Todd Black
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 3:30 PM
To: Vanessa Dolbee; Leslie A Betlach
Subject: FW: PW 1752 renton gabion baskets under 1817
99
From: Kaplan, Alysha (MIL)[mailto:Alysha.Kaplan(@miLwa.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 3:09 PM
To: Todd Black
Cc: Deborah Needham; Clark, Anthony B (MIL)
Subject: FW: PW 1752 renton gabion baskets under 1817
Hi Todd,
Here is FEMA's response regarding the Section 106.
As for the SPIF, apparently, FEMA consulted on both the gabion basket project and another King County project from a
different disaster because they are in the same general area. Since we added the new LF, they are redoing some stuff.
Hopefully I will get an answer back Friday. That's the best I can do today. Let me know if you need anything else.
Alysha
From: King, Susan Fmailto:Susan. Kin 2 fema.dhs. ov]
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 2:27 PM
To: Kaplan, Alysha (MIL); Kerschke, William
Cc: Daggett, Anna; Urbas, Gary (MIL); Eberlein, Mark; Kerschke, William
Subject: RE: PW 1752 renton gabion baskets under 1817
Alysha,
As promised
There was no cultural resources report or consultation because the work was deemed to be replacement rather than an
extension of existing structures, and therefore not disturbing previously undisturbed ground. Therefore for SHPO it fell
within this allowance, of the previously executed NHPA Section 106 Programmatic Agreement, dated 2004 and
amended 2007:
"Ground disturbing activities related to the repair, replacement, or hardening of any
footings, abutments, foundations, retaining walls, other slope stabilization systems (e.g.,
gabion baskets), and utilities (including sewer, water, storm drains, electrical, gas,
communication, leach lines, and septic tanks), provided the excavation will not disturb
more soil than was previously disturbed. This Allowance refers to archaeological review.
This Allowance also applies to historic structures review of the aforementioned facilities
if the repairs are in kind."
Sm4a.w Ki"
FEMA Environmental Specialist
(425) 487-4582
(425) 420-5061
2
From: Kaplan, Alysha (MIL) fma.ilto:Alysha.Kaplan@mil.wa.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 9:15 AM
To: Kerschke, William
Cc: Daggett, Anna; King, Susan; Urbas, Gary (MIL)
Subject: PW 1752 renton gabion baskets under 1817
Hey Bill,
In addition to what we discussed earlier regarding the messed up SPIF, was there a cultural resources report or SHPO
concurrence for this PW?
From: Todd Black fmailto:TBlack(aRentonwa.gov]
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2013 4:11 PM
To: Kaplan, Alysha (MIL)
Subject: FW: NWS -2013-0038 Renton Community Services (Cedar River Gabion Repair) (UNCLASSIFIED)
Hi Alysha,
Two emails in one afternoon! Our consultant forwarded the SEPA to the Corps (he has a good working relationship w/
Suzanne) and got this response.
We don't have a cultural resources survey for this portion of the river. I'm assuming it will be required, and if so, we'll
need to contract it out. I'd like to get your approval for the additional expenditure (within our project budget, of course)
prior to hiring a consultant.
Thanks!
Todd
From: Brad Thiele rmailto:brad{a northwest-environmental.com]
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2013 8:46 AM
To: Todd Black
Subject: Fwd: NWS -2013-0038 Renton Community Services (Cedar River Gabion Repair) (UNCLASSIFIED)
Good Morning Todd,
I spoke with Suzanne and she will be getting the letter to us by the end of the week. It sounds like pretty
standard things she is looking for, so we should be able to answer all her questions. There is one issue I am not
sure about. Was a cultural resource report completed or a letter from SHPO received that says we will have no
impact on cultural resources?
I'll start a drafting responses to the Suquamish questions.
Brad
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Anderson, Suzanne NWS" <Suzanne.L.Anderson @ usace.army.m_ il>
Date: January 11, 2013 4:04:53 PM PST
To: "brad@northwest-environmental.com" <brad@northwest-environmental.com>
Subject: NWS -2013-0038 Renton Community Services (Cedar River Gabion Repair)
(UNCLASSIFIED)
3
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
Hi Brad,
I just wanted to let you know that we have received your client's application for a Department of the Army (DA) permit
to replace a total of 416 linear feet of damaged gabions in the Cedar River at Renton, Washington. We have assigned
the project the reference number NWS -2013-0038. Please cite the reference number in any correspondence with us
concerning this project. I will be the project manager processing this application. I am still working on my initial review
of the application, but I have determined that it is incomplete. I will be sending you a letter outlining the additional
information that is required to complete the application.
In the meantime, I have received a comment and question from the Suquamish Tribe about the project.
1. Gabion baskets are not the best alternative in a marine or freshwater environment, especially those filled with angular
rock.
2. Did rock spill into the river when the existing baskets were damaged?
Please provide a response to the Suquamish comment and question to me within 15 days. Information about why
gabions were chosen for bank stabilization rather than some other method would be helpful.
Thank you,
Suzanne
Suzanne Anderson, PhD, PWS
Project Manager
Seattle District Regulatory Branch
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Mail Address: P.O. Box 3755
Seattle, WA 98124-3577
Building Location: 4735 East Marginal Way South
Seattle, WA 98134-3708
Phone: 206-764-3708
Fax: 206-764-6602
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
4
..-Mwowwo [a fDCPARTMENT OE COMMUNITY City of
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE (DNS)
PROJECT NUMBER: LUA12-000290, ECF, SME
APPLICANT: Todd Black, City of Renton Community Services
PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Gabion Repair
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant has requested SEPA Environmental Review and a
Shoreline Exemption for the repair of 416 linear feet of damaged gabion bank protection structures at five
locations along a portion of the Cedar River.
PROJECT LOCATION:
Cedar River Trail between Logan Ave N Bridge and Bronson Way Bridge
LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton
Environmental Review Committee
Department of Community & Economic Development
The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee has determined that it does not have a probable significant
adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW
43.21C.030(2)(c). This Determination of Non -Significance is issued under WAC 197-11-340. Because other agencies of
jurisdiction may be involved, the lead agency will not act on this proposal for fourteen (14) days.
Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on November 15, 2013.
Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South
Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by RMC 4-8-110 and more information may be
obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510.
PUBLICATION DATE:
DATE OF DECISION:
November 1, 2013
October 28, 2013
SIGNATURES:
1
Gregg Zimm r n, dministrator Datd Mar Peterson, Administrator Da e
Public Works Drtment Fire & Emergency Services
Terry Higashiyama, Administrator
Community Services Department
101,z=o IIS e= 0.%� % 4
Date C.E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator
Department of Community &
Economic Development
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY D Cityaf
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT F.
DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE (DNS)
ADVISORY NOTES
PROJECT NUMBER: LUA12-000290, ECF, SME
APPLICANT: Todd Black, City of Renton Community Services
PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Gabion Repair
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant has requested SEPA Environmental Review
and a Shoreline Exemption for the repair of 416 linear feet of damaged gabion bank protection
structures at five locations along a portion of the Cedar River.
PROJECT LOCATION: Cedar River Trail between Logan Ave N Bridge and Bronson
Way Bridge
LEAD AGENCY: The City of Renton
Department of Community & Economic Development
Planning Division
ADIVISORY NOTES:
The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the
administrative land use action. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are
not subject to the appeal process for the land use actions.
Planning:
RMC section 4-4-030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division.
2. Commercial, multi -family, new single family and other nonresidential construction activities
shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00)
p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between
nine o'clock (9:00) a.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays.
ERC Advisory Notes Page 1 of 1
_-city of,
Denis Law
�_ of
Mayor
F ILr
October 31, 2013
Washington State
Department of Ecology
Environmental Review Section
PO Box 47703
Olympia, WA 98504-7703
Department of Community and Economic Development
C.E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator
Subject: ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA).THRESHOLD -DETERMINATION
Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination for the following
project reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on October 28, 2013:
SEPA DETERMINATION: Determination of Non -Significance (DNS)
PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Gabion Repair
PROJECT NUMBER: LUA#12-000290, ECF, SME
Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00
p.m. on November 15, 2013, together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner,
City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are
governed by RMC 4-8-110 and information regarding the appeal process may be
obtained from the City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510.
Please refer to the enclosed Notice of Environmental Determination for complete
details. If you have questions, please call me at (425) 430-7314.
For the Environmental Review Committee,
Vanessa Dolbee
Senior Planner
Enclosure
cc King County Wastewater Treatment Division Ramin Pazooki, WSDOT, NW Region
Boyd Powers, Department of Natural Resources Larry Fisher, WDFW
Karen Walter, Fisheries, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Duwamish Tribal Office
Melissa Calvert, Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program Us Army Corp. of Engineers
Gretchen Kaehler, Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation
Renton City Hall 0 1055 South Grady Way 0 Renton, Washington 98057 + rentonwa.gov
1 City of
OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE (DNS)
POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION
PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Gabion Repair
PROJECT NUMBER: LUA12-00290, ECF, SME
LOCATION: Located along North Riverside Drive between the Logan Avenue North Bridge and the
Bronson Way North Bridge.
DESCRIPTION: The applicant has requested SEPA Environmental Review and a Shoreline Exemption
for the repair of 416 linear feet of damaged gablon bank protection structures at five locations along a portion of the
Cedar River. The total area of work would be 2,432 square feet. The project would be located on the Cedar River
waterfront trail near North Riverside Drive between Logan Avenue North Bridge and Bronson Way North Bridge. The
site is located in the Shoreline Isolated High Intensity overlay, Cedar River Reach B. Work would be performed on the
southwestern shoreline approximately 3 feet below the Ordinary High Water Mark. The site would be accessed vla
the brick walkway. Three trees would require pruning however no trees are proposed to be removed. The project
would result in minor excavation of approximately 20 cubic yards of riprap.
THE C7Y OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED
ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT.
Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on November
15, 2013, together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way,
Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of RMC 4-8-110 and Information
regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510.
IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION 15 APPEALED, A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE SET AND ALL PARTIES
NOTIFIED.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AT (425) 430-7200.
DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION
PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION.
City afr-
n -NOTICE
--aaaaa-Baliallilligaigg
OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (DNS)
P05TED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS CMF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION
PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Gablon Repair
PROJECT NUMBER: LUASS-00290, ECF, SME
LOCATION; Located along North Rivenlda DHve between the Logan Avenue North Bridge and the
11-naan Way North Bddge.
DOCRIPTIpry; The agplk nt has r,q-A.d SEPA Emrlranmotal R-1—and a 3hara11ne Exemption
for the repel' of 416II e r feet of damaged pblon bank proteetlon m Ores at five location; along a portion of the
Cedar River: the ectal area of work would be 1,433 square feet. The proj.oe weld be looted on the Cedar River
Waterfront troll rear North fth,*&de Drive beheeen Lown Avenue North Rridga erre Brorsmn War North "gar The
site is located In the shoniine Isolated High Intensity wedgy, Cedar River Reach B. Warp w i,i ha performed an the
southwestern ahereRne approaimataiv 3 feet t.1— the Ordinary Nigh Water Mack. The site would be accessed via
the brick walkway. Three tree; y ld raquire pruning ho—var no beer are proposed to be removed. The protect
..Id rasa" in minor novation of approxIm Iy2a cubk yards of dpmp.
THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW CONtMfiTEE (ERC) HA5 OETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED
ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT.
Appeals of the enviranmantiO determination must be riled In writing an or before S:DO p.m, on November
15, 3017, together with the required fee with: Hearing Eeamlaer, CRY of Ntrstenr 1055 South Grady Way,
Renton. WA 98057. Appeals to the Eeaminer are governed by City of RMC 4-6-310 and Informatlon
regarding the appeal protea may be obtained from the Renton Gly Clerk's OfR , 1425) 4301510,
IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION IS APPEALED, A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE SET AND ALL PARTIES
NOTIFIED.
FOR FURTHER ONTACTTHF CITY O{DEPARTMENT OFOmmuN17Y INFORMATION,
DEVELOPMENTT425j 4AD�790
DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION
PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION.
CERTIFICATION
I, elf IY G &'Ajhereby certify that copies of the above document
were posted ins conspicuous places or nearby thedescribed propertyon
Date: l Signed:17
--
STATE OF WASHINGTON }
55
COUNTY OF KING
certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that
signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the
uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument.
Dated:
Notary Public in and for the State of Washington
Notary (Print):
My appointment expires:
m.M : ..........
€$ S E i.§& t�{:.:_
��...... "" �.:.....:'rfd"xrr»- € IFE€I€�E I • ^. €i g ��j '.?HEP€F€FtPitl-0.{:{IttiE...<E..F.=:......�.......��i71€E�: .<.....
r.E,€`:'e[,.E€n..< ...,...._ E.<[.
...�am.kE6€
� ""'x®:�
t E�E€i ie"-" a er'.. �.................. e F _T__••. F.:.:::.:.:::..YI F €€E..
:':.:::.::.::::¢:.:.._ e:::'---�;..."'..' �{
::'.'.�'.::€I::l�l€E€ .............{iFia :[«............�..........EE I§ 6....................P',.EY € sf ... ....,...,..,,EF�EE€ K 6:E::'..«:.".: � €€
�..n�„,_ -. , .. LE ; ,1,� <.:...........E�E€€�=,<ac
<................... .€LEL€L€EEI€€E ,... ....— - .. .. ..a I E ,:€f4a3f€<;,.E♦.. _
....Ea :" 'I..
C(1YEi'ntiLP '.� k: 1 S� "" J:l[kk i - I - ,:L :1�1 14'7 ,.S "i4cii"„�,a,.,
�..� ..::...L _°... _ i-"°sf:;gai €aF^.s?ea:.�"'�..%;-;.-c>"-:
:?� ....... �,�€� , - .. _'... k q
£4 " €L` $ „ Ei ,s �r•€#itia:=::.........€_'diiitrilFrFa=iis"-
mm:'.e €f€[,iE€iE:?i:i::::::•.:: :.lc'E€€€{€ f �...1���c {i
l%iEi€€E€€€Ei€i€i"€"::::StattFt�.. s.: 'iia „ ...,.. ...�. :,. E....; ^.::"... i' :h .«..........moi, €.E�:E �e€�€§P'��t{':il'.=«:;.isE�t€€E,Li;a€it=.;•.:-_.......�__�__:��.5 ^. � l�l� .h-..-:.^
On the 31st day of October, 2013, 1 deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing
Notice of ERC Determination documents. This information was sent to:
Agencies
See Attached
�(Signature of Sender): MV A6(w- 0L+; i + '+,
STATE OF WASHINGTON
SS
COUNTY OF KING ) N +e� 1 �z
s-Z9.1
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Lisa McElrea 6,
signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the and purposes
mentioned in the instrument.
Dated:
Notary (Print):
My appointment expires:
ry Public in and for the State of Washington
a (A' c-/
Cedar River Gabion Repair
LUA12-00290, ECF, SME
template - affidavit of service by mailing
AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING
(ERC DETERMINATIONS)
Dept. of Ecology **
WDFW - Larry Fisher"
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept.
Environmental Review Section
1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201
Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer
PO Box 47703
Issaquah, WA 98027
39015-172 nd Avenue SE
Olympia, WA 98504-7703
Auburn, WA 98092
WSDOT Northwest Region *
Duwamish Tribal Office *
Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program
Attn: Ramin Pazooki
4717 W Marginal Way SW
Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert
King Area Dev. Serv., MS -240
Seattle, WA 98106-1514
39015172 nd Avenue SE
PO Box 330310
Auburn, WA 98092-9763
Seattle, WA 98133-9710
US Army Corp. of Engineers *
KC Wastewater Treatment Division *
Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation*
Seattle District Office
Environmental Planning Supervisor
Attn: Gretchen Kaehler
Attn: SEPA Reviewer
Ms. Shirley Marroquin
PO Box 48343
PO Box C-3755
201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050
Olympia, WA 98504-8343
Seattle, WA 98124
Seattle, WA 98104-3855
Boyd Powers *
Depart. of Natural Resources
PO Box 47015
Olympia, WA 98504-7015
KC Dev. & Environmental Serv.
City of Newcastle
City of Kent
Attn: SEPA Section
Attn: Steve Roberge
Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP
900 Oakesdale Ave. SW
Director of Community Development
Acting Community Dev. Director
Renton, WA 98055-1219
13020 Newcastle Way
220 Fourth Avenue South
Newcastle, WA 98059
Kent, WA 98032-5895
Metro Transit
Puget Sound Energy
City of Tukwila
Senior Environmental Planner
Municipal Liaison Manager
Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official
Gary Kriedt
Joe Jainga
6200 Southcenter Blvd.
201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431
PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-01W
Tukwila, WA 98188
Seattle, WA 98104-3856
Bellevue, WA 98009-0868
Seattle Public Utilities
Real Estate Services
Attn: SEPA Coordinator
700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900
PO Box 34018
Seattle, WA 98124-401$
*Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities
will need to be sent a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, and the Notice of
Application.
"Department of Ecology is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice to
the following email address: sepaunit@ecy.wa.gov
template - affidavit of service by mailing
Denis Law - - City of,
Mayor-IL w
000October 17, 2013
Department of Community and Economic Development
C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator
Brad Thiele
Northwest Environmental Consulting, LLC
3639 Palatine Avenue N
Seattle, WA 98103
SUBJECT: "Off Hold" Notice
Cedar River Gabion Repair, LUA12-400290, ECF.
Dear Mr. Thiele:
Thank you for submitting the additional materials. Your project has been taken off hold and
the City will continue review of the Cedar River Gabion Repair project, at your request.
The project has been rescheduled for ERC on October 28, 2013. If you. have. any questions,
please contact me at (425) 430-7314.
Sincerely,
Vanessa Dolbee
Senior Planner
cc: Todd Black -City of Renton / Applicant
Lois May Smith/ Party(les) of Record
Renton City Hall 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washingtan 981357. rentonwa.gov
Denis Law Cit
yor
bctober 30, 2013 Department of Community and Economic Development
C.E. "Chi p"Vin cent, Administrator
Brad Thiele
Northwest Environmental Consulting, LL.C'
3639 PalatineAve
•N
Seattle, WA 98103
SUBJECT:
ENVIRONMENTAL THRESHOLD (SEPA) DETERMINATION
Cedar River Gabian Repair, LUA12=000290, ECF; SME
Dear Mr. Thiele:
This letter is written on behalf of the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) to advise
you that they. have completed their review of the subject project and have issued a
threshold Determination of Non=Significance. Please refere to the.enclosed_ERC Report
and. Decision for. more details.
Appeals of the erivironrb.6rital determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00
p.m. on November 15, 2013, together, with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner,,.
City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton; VITA 98057.. Appeals to the Examiner are
governed by RMC 4-8-110 and more information regarding the aAPeal process may be
obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510:
If the Environmental Determination is appealed, a public hearing date will be set and all
parties notified. If you have any questions or desire clarification of the above, please
call me at (425) 430-7314.. .
F.or the Environmental Review Committee,
Vanessa Dolbee
Senior Planner
Enclosure
cc, Todd Black/City of Renton / Applicant
Lois May Smith / Party(ies) of Record
Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton,Washington 98057 . rentonwa.gov
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY Aryof
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT �e i
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
MEETING AGENDA
TO: Gregg Zimmerman, Public Works Administrator
Terry Higashiyama, Community Services Administrator
Mark Peterson, Fire & Emergency Services Administrator
C.E. "Chip" Vincent, CED Administrator
FROM: Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager
MEETING DATE: Monday, October 28, 2013
TIME: 3:00 p.m.
LOCATION: Sixth Floor Conference Room #620
THE FOLLOWING IS A CONSENT AGENDA
Cedar River Gabion Repair (Dolbee)
LUA12-000290, ECF, SME
Location: Cedar River Trail between Logan Ave. N Bridge and Bronson Way Bridge. description: The
applicant has requested SEPA Environmental Review and a Shoreline Exemption for the repair of 416
linear feet of damaged gabion bank protection structures at five locations along a portion of the Cedar
River. The total area of work would be 2,475 square feet. The project would be located on the Cedar
River waterfront trail near North Riverside Drive between Logan Avenue North Bridge and Bronson Way
North Bridge. The site is located in the Shoreline Isolated High Intensity overlay, Cedar River Reach B.
Work would be performed on the southwestern shoreline approximately 3 feet below the Ordinary High
Water Mark. The site would be accessed via the brick walkway. Three trees would require pruning
however no trees are proposed to be removed. The project would result in minor excavation of
approximately 20 cubic yards of riprap.
cc: D. Law, Mayor
J. Covington, Chief Administrative Officer
D. Jacobson, Deputy PW Administrator —Transportation
C. Long, Economic Development Director
N. Watts, Development Services Director
L. Warren, City Attorney 11
Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner
D. Pargas, Assistant Fire Marshal
J. Medzegian, Council
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUI....' cry°f
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT
ERC MEETING DATE.
October 28, 2013
Project Name:
Cedar River Gabion Repair
Project- Number:
LUA12-000290, ECF, SME
Project Manager.,
Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner
Owner.
City of Renton, 1055 S. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057
Applicant:
Todd Black, City of Renton Community Services, 1055 S. Grady Way, Renton,
WA 98057
Contact:
Brad Thiele, Northwest Environmental Consulting, LLC., 3639 Palatine Ave. N,
Seattle, WA 98103
Project Location:
Cedar River Trail between Logan Ave. N Bridge and Bronson Way Bridge
Project Summary:
The applicant has requested SEPA Environmental Review and a Shoreline
Exemption for the repair of 416 linear feet of damaged gabion bank protection
structures at five locations along a portion of the Cedar River. The total area of
work would be 2,432 square feet. The project would be located on the Cedar
River waterfront trail near North Riverside Drive between Logan Avenue North
Bridge and Bronson Way North Bridge. The site is located in the Shoreline
Isolated High Intensity overlay, Cedar River Reach B. Work would be performed
on the southwestern shoreline approximately 3 feet below the Ordinary High
Water Mark. The site would be accessed via the brick walkway. Three trees
would require pruning however no trees are proposed to be removed. The
project would result in minor excavation of approximately 20 cubic yards of
riprap.
Exist. Bldg. Area SF:
N/A Proposed New Bldg. Area (footprint): N/A
Proposed New Bldg. Area (gross): N/A
Site Area:
2,432 SF Total Building Area GSF: N/A
STAFF
Staff Recommends that the Environmental Review Committee issue a
RECOMMENDATION:
Determination of Non -Significance (DNS).
UN,
O
' 5 .-
#`
s
Project Location Map
ERC ReportU-OW290.docx
City of Renton Department of Community & omit Development nvironmental Review Committee Report
CEDAR RIVER GABION REPAIR LUA12-000290, ECF SME
Report of October 28, 2013 Page 2 of 6
PART ONE: PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ BACKGROUND
The applicant has requested SEPA Environmental Review and a Shoreline Exemption for the repair of 416
linear feet of damaged gabion bank protection structures at five locations along a portion of the Cedar
River. The total area of work would be 2,432 square feet and result in less than 20 cubic yards of grading.
The subject site is located on the southwestern shoreline of the Cedar River on the Cedar River waterfront
trail near North Riverside Drive between Logan Avenue North Bridge and Bronson Way North Bridge. The
site is located in the Shoreline Isolated High Intensity overlay, Cedar River Reach B and is zoned both R-8
and R-10. Work would be performed approximately 3 feet below the Ordinary High Water Mark.
The site is currently City park property and consists of a brick walkway, vegetation, and benches. The
existing shoreline is armored with gabions and the proposed project is designed to restore the site to pre -
damage conditions. In order to complete the repair task the damaged gabions themselves would be
removed, using small equipment deployed from the brick walkway. Once removed, the slopes would be
graded and compacted to prepare for the new materials. New fabric would be laid, a crushed rock based
and new gabion mattress would be put in place, filled with rock and tied closed. Live willow stakes would
be placed 36 inches apart in the gabion to re -vegetate the shoreline. The area of work would be isolated
using inflatable cofferdams or another approved method to work below the OHWM of the river.
The site would be accessed via the brick walkway, which is wide enough to accommodate small vehicles
and small equipment.
Three trees would require pruning however no trees are proposed to be removed. The project would
result in minor excavation of approximately 20 cubic yards of riprap.
PART TWO: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
In compliance with RCW 43.21C.240, the following environmental (SEPA) review addresses only those
project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and
environmental regulations.
A. Environmental Threshold Recommendation
Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible
Officials:
Issue a DNS with a 14 -day Appeal Period.
B. Mitigation Measures
1. No Mitigation Proposed
C. Exhibits
Exhibit 1
Neighborhood Map
Exhibit 2
Project Stations Notes
Exhibit 3
Repair Sites A — C
Exhibit 4
Repair Sites D — E
ERC Report12-000290.docx
City of Renton Department of Community & -L.-noetic Development _nvironmenta! Review Committee Report
CEDAR RIVER GASION REPAIR LUA12-000290, ECF, SME
Report of October 28, 2013 Page 3 of 6
Exhibit 5 Gabion Sections
Exhibit 6 Gabion Repair Details
Exhibit 7 Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Comments
Exhibit 8 Response to Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Comments
Exhibit 9 NWP 3 approval from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Exhibit 10 E-mail from Alysha Kaplan, Regional Public Assistance Supervisor for FEMA
D. Environmental Impacts
The Proposal was circulated and reviewed by various City Departments and Divisions to determine
whether the applicant has adequately identified and addressed environmental impacts anticipated to
occur in conjunction with the proposed development. Staff reviewers have identified that the proposal
is likely to have the following probable impacts:
1. Water
a. Wetland, Streams, Lakes
Impacts: The proposed gabion repair project is funded by FEMA as a result of damage caused by
flood water and debris in 2008. The flood damaged 290 feet of Cedar River gabion basket
embankment and the brick pedestrian trail. It has been estimated in the Specific Project
Information File (SPIF) that a total of 96 18 -inch x 36 -inch baskets failed and need to be replaced.
All the rock that has fallen out of the failed gabions into the river that can be retrieved would be
reused to rebuild the gabions. If the work cannot be competed when the river is low enough for
the project area to be dry cofferdams would be utilized to isolate the work area from the river.
Following the repair work the embankment would be planted with native plants.
The SPIF identifies the following Best Management Practices (BMP's) would be utilized:
• Bank protection work would be restricted to work necessary to repair the existing failing
gabions. .
• All angular rock which has fallen into the river from the existing gabions would be retrieved
and reused.
• Bank protection materials would be clean, angular rock, and would be installed to withstand
a 100 -year peak flow.
• Bank protection materials would not cause any appreciable increase in backwater
elevations or channel -wide scour and would be aligned to cause the least effect on the
hydraulic of the stream.
• Disturbance of the streambed and bank and their associated vegetation would be limited to
that necessary to preform the project and would be restored to pre -project or improved
habitat configuration.
• All waste materials would be disposed above the limits of the floodwater in an approved
upland disposal site.
Overall the above mentioned BMP's in combination with the planting of the willow stakes to re -
vegetate the shoreline area is anticipated to result in no net loss of ecological function of the Cedar
River.
Comments were received from the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, Fisheries Division, on January 29,
2013. These comments addressed concerns related to the continued impact of the gabion baskets
ERC Reportl2-000290_ door
Co of Renton Deportment of Community & �,onomic Development nvironmen tol Review Committee Report
CEDAR RIVER GASION REPAIR LVA12-000290, ECF, SME
Report of October 28, 2013 Page 4 of 6
and trail on salmon habitat and lighting in the lower Cedar River. In addition, these comments
suggested a survival monitoring plan for the proposed willow stakes, removal of invasive plants
from the shoreline area and the addition of small rocks to the larger size rock used in the gabion
construction. The full comments can be found in Exhibit 7. The City provided a response letter
addressing the concerns and request by the Muckleshoot Tribe in Exhibit 8.
Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required
Nexus: N/A
b., Storm Water
Impacts: The proposed project is located within the floodway and 100 -year flood plain of the Cedar
River, as much of the construction is below the OHWM. The applicant completed a Hydrology
Engineering report prepared by Ed McCarthy, P.E., PS, dated December 18, 2012. The report
analyzed the effect of the Gabion Repairs on the base flood elevation of the Cedar River. The
report concludes that the gabion repairs replace what is currently along the banks and would not
create any impacts on flood elevations.
Additional hydraulic modeling was conducted to analysis the effects of the increased channel
roughness due to the proposed willow plantings. The proposal includes willow plantings at three of
the five sites at elevations between 26 and 28 MSL. Following the roughness analysis the model
predicted a rise in the 100 -year flood elevation of up to 0.08 foot resulting from the increased
channel roughness of the willow plantings. The small increase in the flood profile propagates
upstream to river station 211.2.
Overall the report concludes that the increase in flood elevation is small and it is not unusual for
bank stabilization projects to have a small effect on flood profiles, especially when habitat
components such as the willow plantings are added. Such an increase could be realized with the
gabions in their damaged condition because limbs and debris can build up on the exposed baskets
and create a backwater. The report further concludes that stable river banks is a necessary
condition to provide flood protection to the community and the engineer recommends that the
current gabion repair design be implemented.
Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation needed.
Nexus: N/A
2. Wildlife
Impacts: The subject project is located in the Cedar River, which is a part of the Lake
Washington/Sammamish Water Resource Inventory Area 8 (WRIA S). The habitat quality has been
degraded in a good portion of the lower Cedar River because the river has been channelized with
rock -armored revetments and levees to provide flood control. Due to the projects location in the
Cedar River, and the presence of listed species and designated critical habitat the applicant
completed a Programmatic Biological Assessment with Washington State, as required when
projects are funded through the Specific Project Information File (SPIF) for FEMA.. The SPIF is a
part of the informal consultation process with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and/or National
Marine Fisheries Service for projects with potential to affect federally protected species and
habitats.
The Biological Assessment has indicated that both Bull trout, coastal/Puget Sound IRU (Bull trout)
and Chinook salmon, Puget Sound ESU (Chinook) are both threatened species in the project area.
ERC Report12-000290. docx
City of Renton Department of Community & Ec_omic Development vironmental Review Committee Report
CEDAR RIVER GABION REPAIR LUA12-000290, ECF, SMF
Report of October 28, 2013 Page 5 of 6
In addition the report has indicated that the project reach also include critical habitat for Chinook
and essential fish habitat for Chinook, Coho and Pink Salmon. The following information was
provided in the Biological Assessment related to each individual species:
Chinook Salmon: The action area is located in the section of the Cedar River where known juvenile
rearing occurs. The Cedar River is designated critical habitat for fall Chinook.
Steelhead (winter): Winter Steelhead have been documented in the Cedar River and are a native
stock sustained by wild production. Winter steelhead spawn in the mainstem Cedar River from
January through mid-June with peak spawning from mid-April to May. Steelhead return to the
ocean after spawning. Critical habitat for Puget Sound steelhead has not best designated in the
action area.
Bull trout: Adults and subadult bull trout have been observed infrequently in the Cedar River and
Lake Washington, but no spawning or juvenile rearing areas have been documented.
The Biological Assessment identifies direct and indirect impacts to the listed species and designated
essential fish habitat (EFH). The report concludes that if listed species are present in the area they
may show behavioral effects such as avoidance, reduced feeding, gill flaring, stress and/or delayed
or accelerated movements in response to high turbidity levels. It is also noted that construction -
related turbidity would not preclude migration of listed fish species through the action area.
Indirect effects identified in the Biological Assessment included potential impacts to the listed
species food based and habitat due to the replacement of the rock armoring. Due to the potential
for lower food availability, listed fish species may experience lower growth and survival rates. To
reduce effects, the applicant has proposed to plant willow stakes along the repaired gabion wall.
The Biological Assessment states that the installation of willow stakes would help provide future
habitat for terrestrial insects. The report also includes discussion about the addition of Large
Woody Debris (LWD). However, it should be noted that the SPIF analysis included both the subject
project and another project located in King County. This is pursuant to Alysha Kaplan, Regional
Public Assistance Supervisor (Exhibit 10). As such, the references to LWD in the SPIF are not
applicable to the subject project.
Moreover the Biological Assessment concluded that the project "may affect, not likely to adversely
affect" Chinook salmon, steelhead and bull trout and the project "may affect, not likely to
adversely affect" designated critical habitat for Chinook salmon; and finally "Will not adversely
affect EFH" for Chinook, coho and pink salmon.
In addition, to the provided Biological Assessment, the project was required to receive a
Nationwide Permit (NWP) 3 from the Department of the U.S. Army, CORPS of Engineers. On
October 9, 2013 this approval was received (Exhibit 9)_ The NWP 3 requires that specific terms and
conditions be followed along with the following two special conditions. The special conditions are
summarized below:
a. The applicant must implement and amide by the Endangered Species Act Section 7 informal
consultation requirements and/or agreements in their entirety. Failure to comply with the ESA
Section 7 informal consultation requirements and/or agreements constitutes non-compliance
with the ESA and your U.S. Army corps of Engineers permit.
b. In order to protect the listed threatened and endangered species in the project area the
applicant may conduct the authorized activities in the work window as agreed to and
documented in writing through consultation by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National
Marine Fisheries Service.
FRC Report12-000290.docx
City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development _nvironmentof Review Committee Report
CEDAR RIVER GABION REPAIR LUA12-000290, ECF, SME
Report of October 28, 2013 Page 6 of 6
Based on the conclusions of "may affect, not likely to adversely affect" and the approval of and
conditions associated with the NWP 3, no further mitigation would be required for the project to
reduce impacts on critical habitat and listed species.
Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required
Nexus: N/A
E. Comments of Reviewing Departments
The proposal has been circulated to City Department and Division Reviewers. Where applicable, their
comments have been incorporated into the text of this report and/or "Advisory Notes to Applicant."
Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File and may be attached to this
report.
The Environmental Determination decision will become final if the decision is not appealed within the
14 -day appeal period (RCW 43.21.C.075(3); WAC 197-11-680).
Environmental Determination Appeal Process: Appeals of the environmental determination must be
filed in writing together with the required fee to: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady
Way, Renton, WA 98057, on or before 5.00 p.m. on November 15, 2013. RMC 4-8-110 governs appeals to
the Hearing Examiner and additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the
City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall — 7t}' Floor, (425) 430-6510.
ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT
The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the administrative
land use action. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the
appeal process for the lana use actions.
Planning:
1. RMC section 4-4-030.0.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday
. unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division.
2. Commercial, multi -family, new single family and other nonresidential construction activities shall
be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday
through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00)
a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays.
ERC Report12-000290.docx
LEGEND 1z
Repair Site
3 d : m
j
IT
6 ')V 1\
3 y.
MO.
S Tobin
s
Neighborhood Map
Cedar River Gabion Repair
Renton, Washington
DF
r N 2nd St
P
C
200
Feet DATE; 12118/12
m
X
W
a✓Wd. ie aui6u34�eid 'dM'N oiN3N A'oM AffdN°Hlll']S ES➢:
+ -.-..r -.+... 53 �Ihd:5 I11Hf1WiY°3 M°1W3tl j°k:.17
ssoas uo�6wysaM uo�uaa aieded uoigeF) 4enid JepaO
9g anumvisLLL LS66 SGION suolle;S;Oafoad -
Sd 'fid `ALJYs0aW RA
K lis AA31A3d %06
F 01
0
a p5 4W 6 C:
Ulma
�¢
g` Yah g R N Q
G i a X ER Y -I
19
r I r jLit
Ig R
o
d
O n 3 a m
+
M z W d w L7
x V m V W ¢
LiJ
go
` m 4 �
J ^
Lu
3Atl STi3M I r
fie
_
Wp rA g Kgob! Q d���°�i�a Fak W I�3yg �g
ur� am C7 a to F i a``K owi;SW d�
._.� =1
u� ¢
01:wasLu
�a¢ ddigFW OO�y6GbbkCgS im`o
LL ¢ �$CZ0
tS ams
' ¢W 914 M, Q Wzg Wz�x� i �$� � m � Q
I o Q oo H96w3 Q `"� w T EMU
b }
Ran I
fl, l
+L Ia� K gzoi ff $ gw
Lu 0 M 0 ?g
+ Q o
_ F-
M Z: W
W
cif l € ff LL 5 ego gag
Q j m p ¢ e- w+I "d yOwi
Lu a gg S 6t.
�
LD 1'5
I x a gg 2
I 1 f yoy 20 _w %F q 6 &F Z F€F ° FF FiFg sppt
I zLM d VF pR 2 V6 W
Ljj Z:
�F
a d F i a$ Wq Q01
v
H
x
W
vm'Wo1 n Ab'MAawD funds SCOL
GROM35 k-JWIWWOo No1N9N �O Jy'o
65066 uo;6uiySLM'uoVa�l nada uo!geg aan[�j 1epaC)
�g anuany45LLl L966
Sd '3d '/lLlJeO-LV P:3-ta! s��fS J��da� 5
z gj s;
o �
a g PEI ho
vEl
-EIS AA31AIM %Oa
4 g o
'L, is;,
8 m U
v- w Y
11
2¢
Lu
w
j
I r
w
Go
q Clj
N
F
Wp23 t
F i F
OM 0 6
vEl
-EIS AA31AIM %Oa
LIJ
9
SM
i�
LIJ
quay eu6u3 s�faa
69096 uOIBuf4s2AA'uo4u2a
3g aouany;SLLl L966
Sd 'Fgd 'A4u-c:)Z:)Vv A3
NM'NOL"b AYMAVd'd`JHLn Ms
=IA FR{,1MMMCO NO.WMi JO "D
aieda,d uopeE) Janice JepaZ)
D -c] saj!S j eda}j -g
13S AA/ ]I 3H %06
W
W
m
x
W
Fwd �+���.a:�fad vnn'raoivae a�mn aava�iunos ssoi
�.-----:: -:."--"•-= s��:na3s,wnnrrwo�Nanaa do ul�
6soae uo�fiviyseM'uo}uaa a!edaa ua!geD jan!a aepao \
33 anuany }s4ZL LS66
suo[oas uolge
sd 'ted fLlYeoaw P13� 'L
i3S MEIIA3�1 �oa6
0
C)1�
m P tP N m 4 O cD N m v O w N co 't -
CA N d NS n N N rio *- 17 V] N N I I *t 19 r"] N N
N
a
6Z6' l
0
I-
I
0
i
Ifi
�� II
i
o \D N m I o �o N m v O I m 1p N m v l Q �0 N W v CD 1
O O N m "a to N m � p O to N m O 0 N m v O
n I'i N N ¢ w) -" Ci d n f) N N cin It I') rl N N C14n
N
Dz� -
o �aN m v 1
v m m N N
O LO N m v
761
i � -IL "t, �
o In Cu m v
6
J
o
N
09 I*s
00a"D
L
�bL6"8l
ru
N
Ln
V)
r
o
I
J
�� II
i
o \D N m I o �o N m v O I m 1p N m v l Q �0 N W v CD 1
O O N m "a to N m � p O to N m O 0 N m v O
n I'i N N ¢ w) -" Ci d n f) N N cin It I') rl N N C14n
N
Dz� -
o �aN m v 1
v m m N N
O LO N m v
761
i � -IL "t, �
o In Cu m v
6
O
—
o
N
"SL
i
I
�bL6"8l
ru
N
Ln
V)
r
o
I
J
N
N
In
p
�
l
Lnor
(f7
0())'0
o
p
p•p
o
u
0
In
0
1
�� II
i
o \D N m I o �o N m v O I m 1p N m v l Q �0 N W v CD 1
O O N m "a to N m � p O to N m O 0 N m v O
n I'i N N ¢ w) -" Ci d n f) N N cin It I') rl N N C14n
N
Dz� -
o �aN m v 1
v m m N N
O LO N m v
761
i � -IL "t, �
o In Cu m v
6
O
—
tib
"SL
i
I
�bL6"8l
Q
Ln
r
N
i
N
N
In
�
0())'0
�� II
i
o \D N m I o �o N m v O I m 1p N m v l Q �0 N W v CD 1
O O N m "a to N m � p O to N m O 0 N m v O
n I'i N N ¢ w) -" Ci d n f) N N cin It I') rl N N C14n
N
Dz� -
o �aN m v 1
v m m N N
O LO N m v
761
i � -IL "t, �
o In Cu m v
N
nr
(n
0
U7
0
>n
I
0
o I0 N m v I o sp N (A v o I
v co M N Ll! v m m N N CLI
O(o N m � O O w NCO v O t0 N m v O
If n 11 n .S lt., - -bo � I" 7 I'] N Ni -IF r7 n N N
l49'£Z N
I o
N
e
� o
R �
I �
J a1
0 D'D c
I
O
I
6
O
—
tib
"SL
i
I
Q
Ln
N
nr
(n
0
U7
0
>n
I
0
o I0 N m v I o sp N (A v o I
v co M N Ll! v m m N N CLI
O(o N m � O O w NCO v O t0 N m v O
If n 11 n .S lt., - -bo � I" 7 I'] N Ni -IF r7 n N N
l49'£Z N
I o
N
e
� o
R �
I �
J a1
0 D'D c
I
O
I
6
O
—
To
i
—
o ID N co v o I C7 0 N m v o 1 0 'p N m v o I I
v m m N ru N v (* (n N N N v ('7 RN III m J (v
M,
L�L
1M
Wu
2
x
W
e.+oyd wSu�l�afo�d
69096 u076ui48eM'UDIuaa
F3g arnuanV as LLL L966
Sd 'Dd 'Au)-+e0�)VM p�El
vM'h'R! N3L hbMAVt'tl9 Hlf1Os SS61
s3ol"Bs AlI-M1mwoo mmud so Allo
nedaa UO!geE) lama JepQD
spejaQ medal uoigeo 'g
D.
m
U0
2 -
U)
w
U3
w
Of
a_
LLJ
a
z
0
m
c�
z
0
Q
w
❑
TWA
�
o
Qi
oaQOQ oO'SJ
8
>QoQa000ao�-o
oo QaQQ
LUpdp
(--
.0
]040pQaaQa �p
0004040.^a0 �3
_ 0
D.
m
U0
2 -
U)
w
U3
w
Of
a_
LLJ
a
z
0
m
c�
z
0
Q
w
❑
TWA
a0pp Opp Q 6
Qi
mcrb
�.
❑
D.
m
U0
2 -
U)
w
U3
w
Of
a_
LLJ
a
z
0
m
c�
z
0
Q
w
❑
TWA
Ms. Vanessa Dolbee
Senior Planner
MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE
Fisheries Division LND ����
39015 - 172"� Avenue SE • Auburn, Washington 98092-9763 � TRIBE
Phone: (253) 939-3311 • Fax: (253) 931-0752 5
January 29, 2013
Department of Community and Economic Development
City of Renton, City Hall, 6`h Floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
RE: Cedar River Gabion Replacement Project, LUA12, 000290, ECF, Notice of Application and
Proposed Determination of Non -Significance
Dear Ms. Dolbee:
Our Habitat Program staff reviewed the Determination of Non -Significance threshold determination,
environmental checklist, and plan sheets for the Cedar River Gabion Replacement project. Gabion work
is proposed at five sites along North Riverside Drive between Logan Avenue and Bronson Way North
Bridge. This project will replace 416 linear feet of damaged gabion baskets, brick pedestrian trail repairs,
and planting with willows. We recommend some project modifications to mitigate impacts to fish habitat
in the short term and a longer term approach to ameliorate the poor fish habitat conditions in this reach
over time.
Gabions typically provide poor or marginal fish habitat as abrasive or corrosive conditions can cut wire
baskets within a few years, and that wires can be hazardous (see page 6.9 in
haps.//dnrc.mt.gov,'Permits/StrearnPerinittingBook/chap6.pdf). Gabion baskets are subject to failure
when exposed to streambed scour flows, requiring require repair or replacement with some regularity.
When they fail, they can adversely affect fish habitat by adding angular rock to the stream channel that can
create beneficial habitat spaces for sculpin and other salmon predators. In addition, the broken metal
baskets can entrap adult salmon causing injury or mortality. In the course of a tagging study that included
some tags, our staff found dozens of live and dead adult salmon an arm's length from the bank inside
several failed gabion baskets in the lower Cedar project reach. These fish presumably were seeking hiding
cover or slow velocity resting places and were unable to complete their migration and spawning cycle in
the Cedar River. The gabions also create poor salmon habitat conditions in the lower Cedar River by
eliminating the complex natural stream bank habitats characterized by low-velocity areas, vegetation,
10
H
H
m
H
X
W
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program
Cedar River Gabion Replacement DNS comments
January 24, 2013
Page 2
pools, and undercut banks that are preferred by juvenile and adult salmon and reducing bank sources for
spawning gravel. The gabion baskets and walkway in the lower Cedar River also limit the riparian area
that might otherwise be revegetated with native trees and shrubs to help improve salmon habitat. Finally,
the gabion baskets filled with rock have, or can develop, voids that create preferred habitat for sculpin and
other salmon predators. (see hrtp://wdfw.wa.gov/publicatio'ns/00046,lwdfw00046.pd for a list of potential
impacts from bank protection methods).
To avoid and minimize these impacts, we recommend the following:
1. For the long term, the City should actively pursue funding, easements, and develop a plan to
relocate the Cedar River trail outside of the 100 year floodplain to avoid additional gabion repairs,
replacements and the continued impacts of the gabion baskets and hardened water -level trail on
salmon habitat in the lower Cedar River.
2. In the short term, the proposed gabion replacement should be constructed with smaller wire mesh
size/openings to keep the rock fill inside the basket; and should use a mix of small and larger sized
rock materials (preferably rounded rock) to eliminate voids that benefit salmon predators and that
entrap adult salmon. if the replaced gabion baskets with rounded rock fail, then at least the rock
material is more similar to the natural streambed substrate than angular rock.
The proposed live willows stakes to be planted every 36 inches in the gabion will provide some
mitigation value provided that large and hardy enough willow stakes are used. Survival should be
monitored for at least 5 years and willow stakes replaced as needed.
4. Additional shoreline improvements should be implemented including removing all invasive plants
from the project area; replacing emergent vegetation that is removed with native emergent
vegetation preferred by salmon.
5. The City Community Services and other relevant City departments should implement lighting
reduction actions (e.g. changing luminaries, height of fixtures, screening, shielding, taller riparian
plantings, and more) to reduce artificial light intensity along the lower Cedar River with a goal of
less than 0.1 lux as recommended in research on Cedar River sockeye salmon
(see htt:HwNvw.fws. ov/wafwo/fisheries/Publicati.ons/FP232. df). These actions are necessary to
reduce juvenile salmon outmigration impacts including increased delays and predation as a result
of light conditions at night in the lower Cedar River. The website htto://www_darksky.org may
serve as one resource for practical information about addressing public safety while reducing light
levels.
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program
Cedar River Gabion Replacement DNS comments
January 29, 2013
Page 3
Thank you for the opportunity to review this project. Please call me at {253} 876-3 116 if you have any
questions. We look forward to the City's written response to these comments.
Sincerely,, t
Karen Walter
Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader
Cc: Suzanne. Anderson, US Array Corps, Seattle District, Regulatory Branch
Bill Kerschke, FEMA Region X
Larry Fisher, WD.F W, Region 4
Todd Black, City of Renton Community Services
Denis Law
City of
Mayor}tel
March 19, 2013'`. Department bf.Community and. Economic development
C.E."Chip" Vincent; Administrator
Karen Walter '
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, Fisheries Division
39015 172"a Avenue'_5'E . CO
Auburn, WA 98092: F-
Cal
2013 COMMENTS
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO JANUARY 29, _
x
LUA12-000290; ECV W
Dear Ms. Walter.:
Thank you for taking the -time to comment on the subject SEPA application. Below ,
please;find a response to your comments provided in your lanua,ry.29,.2013 letter to.'the
City of Renton. Your comments are in italics and the responses are in plain text.
1. For the -long term, the City sh o uld- actively pursue funding, easements, and -
develop a'plan to relocate the Cedar River trai.loutside of the 100 year floodplain -
to avoid additional gabion repairs, replacements and the continued impacts of
the gabion baskets and hardened water -level trail on salmon habitat in. the lower _
Cedar River.
The adopted Parks, Recreation and Natural Areas Plan identifies long range plans
to reloeate.the Cedar River Trail outside of the 1.00 year flood'plain.' In addition,
'.this relocation is identified in the adapted City -Center Communit&an. The City
recognizes that repeated" floading:events are weakening the trail on the -right
bank -between Logan Avenue. North and Bronson•W'ay. North. Funding is the
largest hurdle to accomplish the goals currently identified in.the Parks,
Recreation and Natural Areas Plan and the City Center Pfan: Long term adopted
plans exist and as opportunities for-fU,nnding arise, the recom.mendatioris for trail'".
relocation induded.in th. ese'plans would be -considered.
2. In the short term, the proposed gabion replgcement should be -constructed with
smaller wire mesh siz%penr'ngs to keep' the rock fill inside: the basket; and
should use a,mix of -small and larger sized -rock materials (preferobly rounded
rock) to eliminate voids that benefit salmon predators and that entrap adult%
salmon. If the replaced gabibn baskets with rounded rock fail, then at least the
rock material is more similar to the natural stredmbed substrate than angular -
rock.
Renton City Hall • .1055 South Grady Way • Renton,washington 98057 • rentonwa.gDV
Karen Walter
Page 2 of 3
March 19, 2013.
The City reviewed .this option with their ca-nsultanfs; to fdentify feasibility for
con-struction"of the gabions The consulting Engineer on the subject project
•identified that the smaller mesh -size would impinge upon the willow trunks arid
would either strangle the.shrubs or cause the, mesh to break. We will research .
into Providing a heavy gauge gabian wire. However., for a revision.to be made. to'
the gab.ian,"we'w.ill heed to obtain permission from FEMA.'since this is,a change
to the.original gabion structure:
°The consulting Erigineer.also stated "l would avoid round. racks in the gabions:
It's important that the rocks interlock." Round rocks would roll on top of each
Other -and the gabio:ns would be sure t&fail."
3:' The proposed.live willows stakes `to -be planted every 3s inch"es ' the..gabion will,
provide some mitigation value provided that large and hardy enough willow
stakes -are used. Survival should be monitored for a0east 5 years and wdlovmi -
Stakes .rep laced. as needed.
Inserting willow stakes at the suggested spacing into the'gabions.during initial
construction is feasible, as the rocks can be added aroundthe stakes'. The City
wi€l'specify and require the installation of quality willow. stakes. keplacing.willow
stakes -after the rocksh'aVe settled would be impossible, as'there would no
longer be space ora 'method to make: the. insertion through the rocks without
disasse'm.b,ling the entire gabioR basket.' Due to the cost.and potential permit..'
time,associated with gabien disassembling, willow stake replacemes3t and gabion '
re -assembling, the City cannot commit to rQpEacing willow stakes.
.. 4. Additional shoreline improvements should.be implemented including reinoving all
invasiveplants from the project area; t'eplacing emergent vegetation' that is
removed with native eM&gent vegetation'preferred by$almon. .
The, invasive plants are growing out of the existing gabion baskets. ,Hand rernova I
of all,the,invasive plants to alsoinclud.e the -root systems would be impossible. In
addition, the.CiVs-patks maintenancepolicy is not.to use,herbicides close to ,x
water -bodies, unless through, app,rov'ed'agency projects to eradicate invasives
silch,as Knotweed.:
Invasive plantsAbat can"be removed in the area of construction within -the"
- project area will be removed as,a pact of this project, noting that trees and/or
shrubs growing,in the gabions that are providing shading will not be removed.
S, The City Community Services and other re'levant'Crty departments should-
irriplementlighting reduction dctionsle.g..ch'6nging lum.inaries,.height of fixtures,
screening, shielding, taller riparian plantings; and -rn-ore�-tolreduce artificial light
Ka ren Walter .
page 3of3
March,] 9;.2013
intensity along the lower CedarRiver with b gobl of less than 0. 1 lux as
recommended -in research on Cedar. River.sockeye salman.(see
httP f/www.fws.gov/.wafwo/fisheries/PublicatiOns/FP232.p.df). These actions are
necessary-to reduce juvenile salmon outrnigrati6 i impacts including increased-
delays and predation as qr result:of light conditions at night in. the Idwer'Cedat
River.- The website hap. 1www.darksky.org Tayserve as ane resource for
Practical information about addressing Publrc safety while redu'Ir•hwels.cirgl
The subject project does not involve any`lighting or impact an area that.is ;
currently lit; therefore amendments to, current'lighting in the vicinity of the..
project are not, proposed as part of the.'subject project..,.
Atthis time, the Gabidn"Repairproject is.`.'on hold'_' pursuantto`tbe applicant's request.
Th,isrequest is-a result .of :re=rinitiation of Section 7 Consultation with USFWS a,nd' NMFS. .
The outcome of the Sectiori-7 Consultation review-process May result in changes-to the.
proposed project which is u'riknowri at,this time: Therefore the. Iocal'SEPA-
EnViranmentai Review project is pending the outcome of the federal review process:
if you have any questions about the above comments orth.e project, please.feel free ta.,
contact me at (425)430-737.4:
Sincerely,
.Vanessa Dolbee,
Senior Planner
CC-..L Todd. Black, Capital Project Coordinator, City, of Renton'/ Applicant
Leslie Betlach, Parks Planning and Natura{ Resources Director
Brad Thiele / Northwest Environrientai Consulting,.LLC
Suzanne Anderson j USAC€ Project Manager
Alysha Kaplan, Regional.PA Supervisor
Regulatory Branch
Mr. Todd Black
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
SEATTLE DISTRICT, coRPS or ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 3755
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98124-3755
City of Renton Community Services
1055 South. Grady -Way
Renton, Washington 98057
Dear Mr. Black:
OCT 0 9 2013
Reference: NWS -2013 -003 8
Renton, City of (Cedar
River Gabion Repair)
We have reviewed your application to replace a total of 416 linear feet of gabion baskets to
maintain existing batik protection at five locations in the Cedar River at Renton, Washington.
Based on the information you provided to us, Nationwide Permit (NWP) 3, Maintenance
(Federal Register February 21, 2012, Vol. 77, No. 34), authorizes%your proposal as depicted on
the enclosed -drawings dated December 18, 2012.
In order for this authorization to be valid, you must ensure the work is performed in
accordance with the enclosed NWP 3, Terms and Conditions and the following special
conditions:
a. You must implement and abide by the Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section 7 informal
consultation requirements and/or agreements in their entirety. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) concurred with a finding of "may affect, not likely to adversely affecf' on
August 1, 2013 (USFWS Reference Number 13410-2010-1-0024-R001). The National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) concurred with a finding of "may affect, not likely to adversely
affect" on February 20, 2013 (NMFS Reference Number NWR 2009-5636). Both agencies will
be informed of this permit issuance. Failure to comply with the ESA Section 7 informal
consultation requirements and/or agreements constitutes non-compliance with the ESA and your
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit. The USFWS/NN1FS is the appropriate authority to
determine compliance with ESA.
b. In order to protect the listed threatened and endangered species in the project area, you
may conduct the authorized activities in the work window as agreed to and documented in
writing through consultation by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine
Fisheries Service (Services) in any year this permit is valid. If changes to the originally
11
H
H
2
X
W
-2 -
authorized work window are proposed, you must re -coordinate these changes with the Services
and receive written concurrence on the changes. Copies of the concurrencc(s) must be sent to
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory Branch, within 10 days of the date of the revised
concurrence.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). completed Section 7 Endangered
Species Act (ESA) consultation and Magnuson Stevens Act essential fish habitat consultation -
(EFH) for its involvement in the proposed activity [National Marine Fisheries Service reference
number NWR 2009-5636, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service reference number 13410-2014-1-0024-
R001 (collectively called the Services)]. We have determined the permit action is sufficiently
addressed in their consultation documents. By this letter we are advising you and the S arvices,
in accordance with 50 CFR 402.07 and 50 CFR 600.920(b), that FEMA has served as the lead
Federal agency for the ESA and EFH consultation responsibilities for the activity described
above. For the.purpose of this Department of the Army authorization, we have determined this
project will comply with the requirements .of these laws, provided that you comply with all of the
permit general and special conditions..
The authorized work complies with the Washington State Department of Ecology's
(Ecology) Water Quality Certification and the Coastal Zone Management Act requirements for
this NWP. No further coordination with Ecology is required.
We have enclosed a copy of the Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (JD) dated.
January 30, 2013, which is a written indication that wetlands and waterways within your project
area may be waters of the United States. Such waters will be treated as jurisdictional waters of
the U.S. for purposes of computation of impact area and compensatory mitigation requirements
associated with your permit application. If you believe the Preliminary JD is inaccurate, you
may request an Approved JD, which is an official determination regarding the presence or
absence of waters of the United States. If one is requested, please be aware that we may require
the submittal of additional information to complete an approved JD and work authorized in this
letter may not occur until the approved JD has been finalized.
Our verification of this NWP authorization is valid until March 18; 2017, unless the NWP is
modified, reissued, or revoked prior to that date, If the authorized work has not been completed
by that date and you have commenced or are under contract to commence this activity before
March 18, 2017, you will have until March 18, 2018, to complete the activity under the enclosed
terms and conditions of this NWP. Failure to comply with all terms and conditions of this NWP
verification invalidates this authorization and could result in a violation of Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act. You must also obtain all
local and State permits that apply to this project.
-3 -
Upon completing the authorized work, you must fill out and return the enclosed Certificate
of Compliance with Department of the Army Permit form. Thank you for your cooperation
during the permitting process. We are interested in your experience with our Regulatory
Program and encourage you to complete a customer service survey. form. This form and
information about our program is available on our website at www.nws.usace.amay.mil select
"Regulatory Branch, Permit Information" and then "Contact Us." .A copy of this letter without
enclosures will be furnished to Mr. Brad Thiele, Northwest Environmental Consulting, LLC,
3639 Palatine Avenue North, Seattle, Washington 981.03. If you have any questions, please
contact me at suz nr,e.l.anderson@usace.army.mil or (206) 764-3708.
Sincerely,
kaunne Anderson, Project Manager
Regulatory Branch
Enclosures
d- �d-d-�
=�xz=
C'4 - r- [.l N
.�JJJJ
�OL]p0
LL
J L. L_ L.. LL_
J—IJJ
O
u11���C�cD
-�0)lry(3)
<mC)dGJ
LJ Li LJ LJ L.!
J CO cn V) U7 Cf]
¢-t�4- -t-�.
zzzxz
V) (n V5 0 U7
N —,— CV N
J J J J J
� 160 0
11 J LL LL- LL LL
LLI J.JJJ
Of C:)CD
LL
w l l f l l
m C) a LL1
0 LL.i LLS Ld Lj Li!
F„ i r---
ifibi
L��L
ui
z
0
w �
L ° a 0
!1
uy U elf 0-
Z EL O m 0
< O 111 d < LULU
Z_ z W p w w Q
O m Lu 1- IL
Quj p U Z O ft� IL
O 1tyu
h- - tri Y O
MQ ❑
1- ❑❑ o O 0 m Q m N
Lu uQ3 cn Q m C,°O- U 9>a
leu ¢ a IL o ° ¢ LL
a Y 0 0 cry 6 Ll "' � x m �
o ¢LLw 0oa Ao D <
tq m S� C ¢3 w F U w 0 0 m
w Q Q Fl; LL QCq
LI, fL' Z
LLJ o w Q o z z zLil
C) L! p
v>; rKLLI 0E-zaw
wL'o •Lu it
F- ~ ¢ �m m CC'S m CO m r }
Cr> C9 ui w w Q 5i Ij, [4L i7 L) a w 63
Cl w y� J jz U W
Il Q H LQ w J J J O Q�
C) w
0) ElJ lJJ w w ZELED f S CO W J w
Q -E d � D' w !Y_ Q C7 K Z Z z a_ J W.
LL I- a_ U GL'
Cr r r r r r r r W
EE, -
0 3 w
C,CD
af
� a
m
WI
w 4
OO�kcb
1
x'000
o o r
000
000
000
a a {;
' ooa
O0o
TOO
0 0)
a
w
0
-�F
4 x
J �
w �
4 �
F- Q
3 �z
O U U U
� C;
Fm
a
W U
cn
LLJ
m
a
-
J
O
LJ
O
N
Fooc
.c�
a
=
a
ca
Q
�
Z
4
U UJ
m
CO
¢
4
U
,
M
d
C
0
= mx
ac
w
a
->
A.
•Y,
o :Y
U
LL
w
L�
J
Cfi
SZi.[
EE, -
0 3 w
C,CD
af
� a
m
WI
w 4
OO�kcb
1
x'000
o o r
000
000
000
a a {;
' ooa
O0o
TOO
0 0)
a
w
0
-�F
4 x
J �
w �
4 �
F- Q
3 �z
O U U U
� C;
Fm
a
W U
cn
LLJ
I
a
-
Fooc
F:-- L�
V) o
oa
zm
r � m
W m CD
L�
O C9
LLIZ
W
C(D S�2 4
Z 4 X
Er—LJ
m
L,—, 0
�LJ�¢
0
Lij
0
w❑
LL�
d<
4
V) 0
iQ C)
Q LL
(� Y
z LLf¢
(9 cc
z iz?
�..ana
F-❑atn
L4 () IDu
Q
LL
❑aw¢
z w W z z
<0) 0O
DCLaa¢
0-Oa0U
2tCw0O
an.rt-i -j
O
J 1 M
tut Q I-
li
�ILI
m0Q
C7µ1
U) Q
af Z>-- Q
LU cz3�
owg�R
0 xe ¢
L �Z000
m co
-j 0 (4 0
T O rj) `—
to
') rad
Cn CLf
Q w Q Lo m F
zJ
La<a;J
C) RZQto
�oD�aa>-
a
0z0z
�NTION'100-E PEST 3
of U9 fir® Tums and Conditions
Seattle District
Effective Date: June 15, 2012
A. Description of Authorized Activities
B. Corps National General Conditions for all NWl's
C. Corps Seattle District Regional General Conditions
D_ Corps Regional Specific Conditions for this NWP
E. State 401 Certification General Conditions
F. State 401 Certification Specific Conditions for this NWP
G. EPA 401 Certification General Conditions
I- EPA 401 Certification Specific Conditions for this NWP
I. Coastal Zone Management Consistency Response for this NWP
In addition to any special condition that may be required on a case-by-case basis by the District Engineer,
the following terms and conditions must be met, as applicable, for a Nationwide Permit authorization to be
valid in Washington_State_
A. DESCRIIaTION OF AUTHORIZED ACTIVrMS
3_ Maintenance. (a) The repair, rehabilitation, or replacement of any previously authorized, currently
serviceable structure, or fill, or of any currently serviceable structure or fill authorized by 33 CFR 330.3,
provided that the structure or fill is not to be put to uses differing from those uses specified or
contemplated for it in the original permit or the most recently authorized modification.. Minor deviations
in the stru'cture's configuration or filled area, including those due to changes in materials, construction
techniques, requirements of other regulatory agencies, or current construction codes or safety standards,.
that are necessary to make the repair, rehabilitation, or replacement are authorized. Any stream channel
modification is limited to'the minimum necessary for the repair, rehabilitation, or replacement of the
structure or fill; such modifications, including the removal of material from the stream channel, must be
immediately adjacent to the projector within the boundaries of the structure or fill. 'Phis NWP also
authorizes the repair, rehabilitation, or replacement of those structures or f lls destroyed or damaged by
storms, floods, fire or other discrete events, provided the repair, rehabilitation, or replacement is
commenced, or is under contract to commence, within two years of the date of their destruction or
damage. In cases of catastrophic events, such as hurricanes or tornadoes, this two --year limit may be
waived by the district engineer, provided the permittee can demonstrate funding, contract, or other similar
delays.
(b) This NWP also authorizes the removal of accumulated sediments and debris in the vicinity of
existing structures (e.g., bridges, culverted road crossings, water intake structures, etc.) and/or the
placement of new or additional riprap to protect the structure. The removal of sediment is limited to the
minimum necessary to restore the waterway in the vicinity of the structure to the approximate dimensions
that existed when the structure was built, but cannot extend farther than 200 feet in any direction from the
structure. This 200 foot limit does not apply to maintenance dredging to remove accuinulated sediments
blocking or restricting outfall and intake structures or to maintenance dredging toxemove accumulated
sediments from canals associated with outfall and intake structures. All dredged or excavated materials
must be deposited and retained in an area that has no waters of the United States unless otherwise
specifically approved by the district engineer under separate authorization_ The placement of new or
additional riprap must be the minimum necessary to protect the structure or to ensure the safety of the
structure. Any bank stabilization measures not directly associated with the structure will require a
separate authorization from the district engineer.
(c) This NWP also authorizes temporary structures, fills, and work necessary to conduct the
maintenance activity. Appropriate measures must be taken to maintain normal downstream flows and
minimize flooding to the maximum extent practicable, when temporary structures, work, and discharges,
including cofferdams, are necessary for construction activities, access fills, or dewatering of construction
sites_ Temporary fills trust consist of materials, and be placed in a mariner, that will not be eroded by
expected high flows. Temporary falls must be removed in their entirety and the affected areas returned to
pre-eanstruction elevations. The areas affected by temporary fills roust be revegetated, as appropriate.
(d) This NWP does not authorize maintenance dredging for the primary purpose of navigation.
This NWP does not authorize beach restoration. This NWP does not authorize new stream chamelization
or stream relocation prof eats. .
Notification: For activities authorized by paragraph (b) of this NWP, the permittee must submit a
pre -construction notification to the district engineer prior to commencing the activity (see general
condition 31). The pre -construction notification must include information regarding the original design
capacities and configurations of the ouifalls, intakes, small impoundments, and canals. (Sections 10 and
404)
Note: This NWP authorizes the repair, rehabilitation, or replacement of any previously authorized
structure or fill that does not qualify for the Clean Water Act Section 404(f) exemption for maintenance.
B. CORPS NA'T'IONAL GENERAL CONDMONS FOR ALL NWPs
Note: To qualify for NWP authorization, the prospective permittee must comply with the following
general conditions, as applicable, in addition to any regional or case -specific conditions imposed by the
division engineer or district engineer. Prospective permittees should contact the appropriate Corps district
office to determine if regional conditions have been,imposed on an NWP. Prospective permittees should
also contact the appropriate Corps district office to determine the status of Clean Water Act Section 401
water quality certification and/or Coastal Zone Management Act consistency fdr an NWP. Every person
who may wish to obtain permit authorization under one or more NWPs, or who is currently relying on an
existing or prior permit authorization under one or more NWPs, has been and is on notice that all of the
provisions of 33 CFR § 330.1 through 330.6 apply to every MW authorization. Note especially 33 CFR
§ 330.5 relating to the modification, suspension, or revocation of any NWP authorization.
1. Navigation. gation. (a) No activity may cause more than a minimal adverse effect on navigation.
(b) Any safety lights and signals prescribed by the U.S. Coast Guard, through regulations or
otherwise, must be installed and. maintained at the permittee's expense on authorized facilities is
navigable waters of the United States.
(c) The permittee understands and agrees that, if future operations by the United States require the
removal, relocation, or other alteration, of the structure or work Herein authorized, or if, in the opinion of
the Secretary of the Army or his authorized representative, said structure or work shall cause
unreasonable obstruction to the free navigation of the navigable waters, the permittee will be required,
upon due notice from the Corps of Engineers, to remove, relocate, or alter the structural work or
obstructions caused thereby, without expense to the United States. No claim shall be made against the
United States on account of any such removal or alteration.
2. Aquatic Life Movements. No activity may substantially disrupt the necessary life cycle movements of
those species of aquatic life indigenous to the waterbody, including those species that normally migrate
through the area., unless the activity`s primary purpose is to impound water_ All permanent and temporary
crossings of waterbodies shall be suitably culverted, bridged, or otherwise designed and constricted to
:maintain low flows to sustain the movement of those aquatic species.
2
3. Spawning Areas. Activities in spawning areas during spawning seasons must be avoided to the
maximma extent practicable. Activities that result in the physical destruction (e.g., through excavation,
fill, or downstream smothering by substantial turbidity) of an imporimat spawning area are not authorized.
4. Migratory Bird Breeding Areas. Activities in waters of the United States that serve as breeding areas
for migratory birds must be avoided to the maximum extent practicable.
S_ Shellfish Beds. No activity may occur in areas of concentrated shellfish populations, unless the activity
is directly related to a shellfish harvesting activity authorized by NWPs 4 and 48, or is a shellfish seeding
or habitat restoration activity authorized by NWP 27.
6. Suitable Material.. No activity may use unsuitable material (e.g., trash, debris, ear bodies, asphalt, etc.).
Material used for construction or discharged must be free from toxic pollutants in toxic amounts (see
Section 3 07 of the Clean Water Act).
7. 'Water Supply Intakes. No activity may occur in the proximity of a public water supply intake, except
where the activity is for the repair or improvement of public water supply intake structures or adjacent
bank stabilization..
8. Adverse Effects From Impoundments. If the activity creates an impoundment of water, adverse effects
to the aquatic system due to accelerating the passage of water, and/or restricting its flow must be
minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
9. Management of Water flows. To the maximum extent practicable, the pre -construction course,
condition, capacity, and location of open waters must be maintained for each activity, including stream
channelization and storm water management activities, except as provided below. The activity must be
constructed to withstand expected high flows. The activity must not restrict or impede the passage of
normal or high flows, unless the primary purpose of the activity is to impound water or manage high
flows. The activity may alter the pre -construction course, condition, capacity, and location of open waters
if it benefits the aquatic environment (e.g., stream restoration or relocation activities).
10. Fills Within 100 -Year Floodplain. The activity must comply with applicable FEMA approved state
or local floodplain management requirements.
11. Equiprmnt. Heavy equipment working in wetlands or mudflats roust be placed on mats, or other
measures must be taken to minimize soil disturbance_
12_ Soil Erosion and Sediment Controls. Appropriate soil erosion'and'sediment controls must be used and
maintained in effective operating condition during construction, and all exposed soil and other fills, as
well as any work below the ordinary high water mark or high tide line, must be permanently -stabilized at
the earliest practicable date. Permittees are encouraged to perform work Within waters of the United
States during periods of low -flow or no -flow.
13. Removal of Temporary Fills. Temporary fills must be removed ink their entirety and the affected areas
returned to pre�constmction elevations. The affected areas must be revegetated, as appropriate.
14. Proper Maintenance. Any authorized structure or fill shall be properly maintained, including
maintenance to ensure public safety and compliance with applicable NWP general conditions, as well as
any activity -specific conditions added by the district engineer to an NWP authorization.
15. Single and Complete Pro'ect_ The activity must be a single and complete project. The same NWP
cannot be used more than once for the same single and complete project.
16. Wild and Scenic Rivers. No activity may occur in a component of the National Wild and Scenic River
System, or in a river officially designated by Congress as a "study river" for possible inclusion in the
system while the river is in an official study status, unless the appropriate Federal agency with direct
management responsibility for such river, has determined in writing that the proposed activity will not
adversely affect the Wild and Scenic River designation or study status. Information on Wild and Scenic
Rivers may be obtained from the appropriate Federal land management agency responsible for the
designated Wild and Scenic River or study river (e.g., National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service, Bureau
of Land Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service).
17. Tribal Rights. No activity or its operation may impair reserved tribal rights, including, but not limited
to, reserved water rights and treaty fishing and hunting rights.
18. Endan erect S ecies. (a) No activity is autborized under any NWP which is likely to directly or
indirectly jeopardize the continued existence of a threatened or endangered species or a species proposed
for such designation, as identified under the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), or which will
directly or indirectly destroy or adversely modify the critical habitat of such species. No activity is
authorized under any NWP which "may affect" a listed species or critical habitat, unless Section 7
consultation addressing the effects of the proposed activity has been completed.
(b) Federal agencies should follow their own procedures for complying with the requirements of the
ESA. Federal permittees must provide the district engineer with the appropriate documentation to
demonstrate compliance with those requirements. The district engineer will review the documentation and
determine whether it is sufficient to address ESA compliance for the NWP activity, or whether additional
ESA consultation is necessary.
(c) Non-federal permittees must submit a pre-coastruction notification to the district engineer if any
listed species or. designated critical habitat might be affected or is in the vicinity of the project, or if the
project is located in designated critical habitat, and shall not begin work on the activity until notified by
the district engineer that the requirements of the ESA have been satisfied and that the activity is
authorized. For activities that might affect Federally -listed endangered or threatened species or designated
critical habitat, the pre -construction notification must include the name(s) of the endangered or threatened
species that might be affected by the proposed work or that utilize the designated critical, habitat that
might be affected by the proposed work. The district engineer will determine whether the proposed
activity "may affect" or will have "no effect" to listed species and designated critical habitat and will
notify the non -Federal applicant of the Corps' determination within 45 days of receipt of a complete pre -
construction notification. In cases where the non -Federal applicant has identified listed species or critical
habitat that might be affected or is in the vicinity of the project, and has so notified the Corps, the*
applicant shall not begin work until the Corps has provided notification the proposed activities will have
"no effect" on listed species or critical habitat, or until Section 7 consultation has been completed_ If the
non -Federal applicant has not heard back from the Corps within 45 days, the applicant must still wait for
notification from the Corps.
. (d) As a result of formal or informal consultation with the FWS or NMFS the district engineer may
add species-specific regional endangered species conditions to the NWPs.
(e) Authorization of an activity by a NWP does not authorize the "take" of a threatened or endangered
species as defined under the ESA. In the absence of separate authorization (e.g., an ESA Section 10
Permit, a Biological Opinion with "incidental take" provisions, etc.) from the U.S. FWS or the NMFS,
The Endangered Species Act prohibits any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to take a
listed species, where "take" means to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, vlound, kill, trap, capture, or
collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct. The word "harm" in the definition of "take" means
an act which actually kills or injures wildlife. Such an act may include significant habitat modification or
4
degradation where it actually kills or injures -wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral
patterns, including breeding, feeding or sheltering.
(f) Information on the location of threatened and endangered species and their critical habitat can be
obtained directly from the offices of the U.S. FWS and NWS or their world wide web pages at
http://www.fws.gov/ or http://www.fivs.gov/ipac and http://www,noaa.govlfiisheries.htlnl respectively_
19. Migratory Birds and Bald and Golden Eagles. The permittee is responsible for obtaining any "take"
permits required under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's regulations governing compliance with the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act or the Bald and. Golden Eagle Protection Act, The permittee should contact the
appropriate local office of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to determine if such "take" permits are
required for a particular activity.
20. Historic Properties. (a) Incases where the district engineer determines that the activity may affect
properties listed, or eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places, the activity is not
authorized, until the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NEPA) have
been. satisfied,
(b) Federal .permittees should follow their own procedures for complying with the requirements of
'Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act_ Federal permittees must provide the district
engineer with the appropriate documentation to demonstrate compliance with those requirements. The
district engineer will review the documentation and determine whether it is sufficient to address ,section
106 compliance for the NWP activity, or whether additional section 106 consultation is necessary -
(c) Nan -federal permittees must submit a pre -construction notification to the district engineer if the
authorized activity may have the potential to cause effects to any historic properties listed on, determined
to be eligible for listing on, or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places,
including previously unidentified properties. For such activities, the pre -construction .notification must
state which historic properties may be affected by the proposed work or include a vicinity map indicating
the location of the historic properties or the potential for the presence of historic properties. Assistance
regarding information on the location of or potential for the presence of historic resources can be sought
from the State Historic Preservation Officer or Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, as appropriate, and
the National Register of Historic Places (see 33 CFR 330.4(g)). When reviewing pre -construction
notifications, district engineers Will comply with the current procedures for addressing the requirements
of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. The district engineer shall make a reasonable
and good faith effort to carry out appropriate identification efforts, which may include background
research, consultation, oral history interviews, sample field investigation, and field survey. Based on the
information submitted and these efforts, the district engineer shall determine whether the proposed
activity has the potential to cause an effect on the historic properties. Where the non -Federal applicant has
identified historic properties on which the activity may have the potential to cause effects and so notified
the Corps; the tion -Federal applicant shall -not begin the activity until notified by the district engineer
either that the activity has no potential to cause effects or that consultation under Section 106 of the
NEPA has been completed.
(d) The district engineer will notify the prospective permittee within. 45 days of receipt of a complete
pre -construction notification whether NEPA Section. 106 consultation is required. Section 106
consultation is not required when the Corps determines that the activity does not have the potential to
cause effects on historic properties (see 36 CFR §800.3(a)). IfNHPA section 106 consultation is required
and will occur, the district engineer will notify the non -Federal applicant that he or she cannot begiri work
until Section 106 consultation is completed. If the non Federal applicant has not heard back from the
Corps within 45 days, the applicant must still wait for notification from the Corps.
(e) Prospective permittees should be aware that section 110k of the NEPA. (16 U.S.C. 470h -2(k))
prevents the Corps from granting a permit of other assistance to an applicant who, with intent to avoid the
requirements of Section 106 of the NEPA, has intentionally significantly adversely affected a historic
property to which the permit would relate, or having' legal power to prevent it, allowed such significant
adverse effect to occur, unless the Corps, after consultation with the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation (ACNP), determines that circumstances justify granting such assistance despite the adverse
effect created or permitted by the applicant. If circumstances justify granting the assistance, the Corps is
required to notify the ACI -1P and provide documentation specifying the circumstances, the degree of
damage to the integrity of any historic properties affected, and proposed mitigation. This documentation
must include any views obtained from the applicant, SHPO/TBPO, appropriate Indian tribes if the
undertaking occurs on or affects historic properties on tribal lands or affects properties of interest to those
tribes, and other parties known to have a legitimate interest in the impacts to the permitted activity on
historic properties.
21. Discovery of Previously Unknown Remains and Artifacts. If you discover any previously unknown
historic, cultural or archeological remains and artifacts while accomplishing the activity authorized by this
permit you must immediately notify the district engineer of what you have found, and to the maximum
extent practicable, avoid construction activities that may affect the remains and artifacts until the required
coordination has been completed. The district engineer will initiate the Federal, Ttibal and state
coordination required to determine if the items or remains warrant a recovery effort or if the site is
eligible for listing is the National register of Historic Places.
22. Designated Critical Resource Waters. Critical resource waters include, NOAA-managed marine
sanctuaries and marine monuments, and National Estuarine Research Reserves. The district engineer may
designate, after notice and opportunity for public comment, additional waters officially designated by a
state as having particular environmental or ecological significance, such as outstanding national resource
waters or state natural heritage sites. The district engineer may also designate additional critical resource
waters after notice and opportunity for public comment.
(a) Discharges of dredged' or fill material into waters of the United States are not authorized by NWPs
7, 12, 14, 16, 17, 21, 29, 31, 35, 39, 40, 42, 43, 44, 49, 50, 51, and 52 for any activity within, or directly
affecting, critical resource waters, including wetlands adjacent to such waters.
(b) For NWPs 3, S, 10, 13,"15, 18, 19, 22, 23, 25, 27, 28, 30, 33, 34, 36, 37, and 38, notification is
required in accordance with general condition 31, for any activity proposed in the designated criticai
resource waters including wetlands adjacent to those waters. The district engineer may authorize activities
under these NWPs only after it is determined that the impacts to the critical resource waters will be no
more than minimal.. `
23. Iylitiggtion. The district engineer will consider the following factors when determining appropriate and
practicable mitigation necessary to ensure that adverse effects on the aquatic environment are minimal:
(a) The activity must be designed and constructed to avoid and minimize adverse effects, both
temporary and permanent, to waters of the United States to the maximum extent practicable at the project
site (i.e_, on site).
(b) Mitigation in all its farms (avoiding, minimizing, rectifying, reducing, or compensating for
resource losses) will be required to the extent necessary to ensure that the adverse effects to the aquatic
environment are minimal.
(c) Compensatory mitigation at a minimum one-for-one ratio will be required for all wetland losses
that exceed 1110 -acre and require pre -construction notification, Curless the district engineer determines iii
writing that either some other form of mitigation would be more environmentally appropriate or the
adverse effects of the proposed activity are minimal, and provides a project -specific waiver of this
requirement. For wetland losses of 1110 -acre or less that require pre -construction notification, the district
engineer may determine on a case-by-case basis that compensatory mitigation is required to ensure that
the activity results in minimal adverse effects on the aquatic environment. Compensatory mitigation
projects provided to offset losses of aquatic resources must comply with the applicable provisions of 33
CFR part 332. (1) The prospective permittee is responsible for proposing an appropriate compensatory
mitigation option if compensatory mitigation is necessary to ensure that the activity results in minimal
adverse effects on the aquatic environment. (2) Since the Iikelihood of success is greater and the impacts
to potentially valuable uplands are reduced, wetland restoration should be the first compensatory
mitigation option considered. (3) If permittee -responsible mitigation is the proposed option,, the
prospective permittee is responsible for submitting a mitigation plan. A conceptual or detailed mitigation
plan may be used by the district engineer to make the decision on the NWT verification request, but a
final mitigation plan that addresses the applicable requirements of 33 CFR 332.4(c)(2) — (14) roust be
approved by the district engineer before the permittee begins work in waters of the United States, unless
the district engineer determines that prior approval of the final mitigation plan is not practicable or not
necessary to ensure timely completion of the required compensatory mitigation (see 33 CFR 332.3(k)(3)).
(4) If mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program credits are the proposed option, the mitigation plan only
needs to address the baseline conditions at the impact site and the number of credits to be provided.
(5) Compensatory mitigation requirements (e.g., resoiuce type and amount to be provided as
compensatory mitigation, site protection., ecological performance standards, monitoring requirements)
may be addressed through conditions added to the NWP authorization, instead of components of a
compensatory mitigation plan.
(d) For losses of streams or other open waters that require pre -construction notification, the district
engineer may require compensatory mitigation, such as stream rehabilitation, enhancement-
preservation, to ensure that the activity results in minimal adverse effects on the aquatic environment.
(e) Compensatory mitigation will not be used to increase the. acreage losses allowed by the acreage
limits of the NWPs. For example, if as NWP has an acreage limit of 112 -acre, it cannot be used to
authorize any project resulting in the Ioss of greater than 112 -acre of waters of the United States, even if
compensatory mitigation is provided that replaces or restores some of the lost waters. However,
compensatory mitigation can -and should be used, as necessary, to ensure that a project already meeting
the established acreage limits also satisfies the minimal impact requirement associated with the NWPs.
(f) Compensatory mitigation plans for projects in or near streams or other open waters will normally
include a requirement for the restoration or establishment, maintenance, and legal protection_ (e.g.,
conservation easements) of riparian areas next to open waters. In some cases, riparian areas may be the
only compensatory mitigation required. Riparian areas should consist of native species. The width of the
required riparian area will address documented water quality or aquatic habitat loss concerns. Normally,
the riparian area will be 25 to 50 feet wide on each side of the stream, but the district engineer may
require slightly wider riparian areas to address documented water quality or habitat loss concerns. if it is
not possible to establish a riparian area on both sides of a stream, or if the waterbody is a lake or coastal
waters, then restoring or establishing a riparian area along a single bank or shoreline may be sufficient.
Where both wetlands and open waters exist on the project site, the district engineer will determine the
appropriate compensatory mitigation (e.g., riparian areas and/or wetlands compensation) based on what is
best for the aquatic environment on a watershed basis. In cases where riparian areas are determined to be
the ;most appropriate form of compensatory mitigation, the district engineer may waive or reduce the
requirement to provide wetland compensatory mitigation for wetland losses.
(g) Permittees may propose the use of mitigation banks, in -lieu fee programs, or separate permittee -
responsible mitigation. For activities resulting in the loss of m.adne or estuarine resources, permittee -
responsible compensatory mitigation may be environmentally preferable if there are no mitigation banks
or in -lieu fee programs in the area that have marine or estuarine credits available for sale or transfer to the
permittee. For permittee -responsible ;mitigation, the special conditions of the NWP verification must
clearly indicate the party or parties responsible for the implementation and performance, of the
compensatory mitigation project, and, if'required, its long-term management.
(h) Where certain functions and services of waters of the United States are permanently adversely
affected, such as the conversion of a forested or scrub -shrub wetland to a herbaceous wetland in a
permanently maintained utility line right-of-way, mitigation may be required to reduce the adverse .effects
of the project to the minimal level.
7
24. Saf 2ly of Impoundment Structures. To erasure that all impoundment structures are safely designed,
the district engineer may require non -Federal applicants to demonstrate that the structures comply with
established state dam safety criteria or have been designed by qualified persons. The district engineer way
also require documentation that the design has been independently reviewed by similarly qualified
persons, and appropriate modifications made to ensure safety.
25. Water Quality. Where States and authorized Tribes, or EPA where applicable, have not previously
certified compliance of an NWP with CWA Section 401, individual 401 Water Quality Certification must
be obtained or waived (see 33 CFR 33 0.4(c)). The district engineer or State or Tribe may require
additional water quality management measures to ensure that the authorized activity does not result in
more than minimal degradation of water quality.
26. Coastal Zone Mani ement. in coastal states where an NWP has not previously received a state coastal
zone management consistency concurrence, an individual state coastal zone management consistency .
concurrence roust be obtained, or a presumption of concuprenoe must occur (see -33 -CFR-330.4(d)).- Tho
district eugineer or a State may require additional measures to ensure that the authorized activity. is
consistent with state coastal zone management requirements.
27. Regional and Case-By—Case Conditions. The activity roust comply with any regional conditions that
may have been added by the Division Engineer (see.33 CFR 330.4(c)) and with any case specific
conditions added by the Corps or by the state, Indian Tribe, or U.S. EPA in its section 401 Water Quality
Certification, or by the state in its Coastal Zone Management Act consistency determination.
28. Use of Multiple Nationwide Permits. The use of more than one NWP for a single and complete
project is prohibited, except when the acreage loss of waters of the United States authorized by the N\VPs
does not exceed the acreage limit of the NWP with the highest specified acreage lir>ait. For example, if a
road crossing over tidal waters is constructed under NWP 14, with associated bank stabilization
authorized by NWP 13, the maximum acreage loss of waters of the United States for the total project
cannot exceed 1/3 -acre.
29. Transfer of Nationwide Permit Verifications. If the permittee sells the property associated with a
nationwide permit verification, the permittee may transfer the nationwide permit verification to the new
owner by submitting a letter to the appropriate Corps district office to validate the transfer. A copy of the
nationwide permit verification must be attached to the letter, and the letter must contain the following
statement and sigrzatura:
"When the structures or woik authorized by this nationwide permit are still in existence at the time the
property is transferred, the terras and conditions of this nationwide permit, including any special
conditions, will continue to be binding on the new owner(s) of the property. To validate the transfer of
this nationwide permit and the associated liabilities associated with compliance with its terms and
conditions, have the transferee sign and date below."
(Transferee)
(Date)
3 0. Com liance Certification. Each permittee who receives an NWP verification letter from the Corps
must provide a signed certification documenting completion of the authorized activity and any required
compensatory mitigation. The success of any required permittee -responsible mitigation, including the
achievement of ecological performance standards, will be addressed separately by the district engineer.
The Corps will provide the permittee the certification document with. the NWP verification letter. The
certification document will include: (a) A statement that the authorized work was done in accordance with
the NWP authorization, including any general, regional, or activity -specific conditions; (b) A statement
that the implementation of any required compensatory mitigation was completed in accordance with the
permit conditions. If credits from a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program are used to satisfy the
compensatory mitigation requirements, the certification roust include the documentation required by 33
CFR 3323(1)(3) to confirm that the permittee secured the appropriate number and resource type of
credits; and (c) The signature of the permittee certifying the completion of the work and mitigation.
31. Pre -Construction Notification. (a) Timing. Where required by the terms of the NWP, the prospective
prmaittee must notify the district engineer by submitting a pre-constmetion notification (PCN) as early as
possible. The district engineer must determine if the PCN is complete within 30 calendar days of the date
of receipt and, if the PCN is determined to be incomplete, notify the prospective permittee within that 30
day period to request the additional information necessary to make the PCN complete. The request must
specify the information needed to make the PCN complete. As a general rule, district engineers will
request additional information necessary to make the PCN complete only once. However, if the
prospective permittee does not provide all of the requested information, than the district engineer will
notify the prospective permittee that the PCN is still incomplete and the PCN review process will not
commence. until all of the requested information has been received by the district engineer. The
prospective permittee shall not begin the activity until either. (1) He or she is notified in writing by the
district engineer that the activity may proceed under the NWP with any special conditions imposed by the
district or division engineer, or (2) 45 calendar days have passed from the district engineer's receipt of the
complete PCN and the prospective permittee has not received written notice from the district or division
engineer. However, if the permittee was required to notify the Corps pursuant to general condition 18 that
listed species or critical habitat might be affected or in the vicinity of the proj Oct, or to notify the Corps
pursuant to general condition 20 that the activity may have the potential to cause effects to historic
properties, the permittee cannot begin the activity until receiving written notification from the Corps that
there is "no effect" on listed species or "no potential to cause effects" on historic properties, or that any
consultation required under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (see 33 CFR 330.4(f)) and/or
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation (see 33 CFR 330.4(g)) has been completed.. Also, work
cannot begin under NWPs 21, 49, or 50 until the permittee has received written approval from the Corps.
If the proposed activity requires a written waiver to exceed specified limits of an NWP, the permittee -
way not begin the activity until the district engineer issues the waiver. If the district or division engineer
notifies the permittee in writing that an individual permit is required within 45 calendar days of receipt of
a complete PCN, the permittee cannot begin the activity until an individual permit has been. obtained.
Subsequently, the permittee's right to proceed under the NWP may be modified, suspended, or revoked
only in accordance with the procedure set forth in 33 CFR 330.5(d)(2).
(b) Contents of Pre -Construction Notification: The PCN must be in writing and include the following
information: (1) Name, address and telephone numbers of the prospective permittee; (2) Location of the
proposed project; (3) A description of the proposed project; the project's purpose; direct and indirect
adverse environmental effects the project would cause, including the anticipated amount of loss of water
of the United States expected to result from the NWP activity, in acres, linear feet, or other appropriate
unit of measure; any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits) used or intended to
be used to authorize any part of the proposed project or any related activity. The description should be
sufficiently detailed to allow the district engineer to determine that the adverse effects of the project will
be minimal and to determine the need for compensatory mitigation. Sketches should be provided when
necessary to show that the activity complies with the terms of the NWP. (Sketches usually clarify the
project and when provided results in a quicker decision. Sketches should contain suffieient detail to
provide an illustrative description of the proposed activity (e -g-, a conceptual plan), but do not need to be
detailed engineering plans); (4) The PCN must include a delineation of wetlands, other special aquatic
sites, and other waters, such as lakes and ponds, and perennial, intermittent, and ephemeral streams, on
the project site. Wetland delineations must be prepared in accordance with the current method required by
the Corps. The permittee may ask the Corps to delineate the special aquatic sites and other waters on the
project site, but there may be a delay ifthe-Corps does the delineation, especially if the project site is
large or contains many waters of the United States, Furthermore, the 45 day period will not start until the
delineation has been submitted to or completed by the Corps, as appropriate; (5) If the proposed activity
will result in the Ioss of -greater than 1 /I 0 -acre of watlauc s and a PCN is required, the prospective
permittee roust submit a statement describing how the mitigation requirement will be satisfied, or
explaining why the adverse effects are minimal and why compensatory mitigation should not be required
As an alternative, the prospective permittee may submit a conceptual or detailed mitigation plan. (6) if
any listed species or designated critical habitat might be affected oris in the vicinity of the prof ect, or if
the project is located in designated critical habitats for non -Federal applicants the PCN must include the
name(s) of those endangered or threatened species that might be affected by the proposed work or utilize
the designated critical habitat that may be affected by the proposed work. Federal applicants must provide
documentation demonsirating compliance with the Endangered Species Act-, and (7) For an activity -that
may affect a historic property listed on, determined to be eligible for listing on, or potentially eligible for
listing on, the National Register of Historic Places, for non -Federal applicaas the PCN must state which
historic property may -be affected -by theproposed work or-inelude a vicinity map intiicating the, Iocation
of the historic property, Federal applicants must provide documentation demonstrating compliance with
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act_
(c) Form of Pre -Construction Notification: The standard individual permit application form (Form
ENG 43 45) may be used, but the completed application form must clearly indicate that it is a PCN and
must include all of the information required in paragraphs (b)(1) through (7) of this general condition. A
letter contaizring the required information may also be used.
(d) Agg�ncy Coordination: (1) The district engineer will consider any comments from Federal and
state agencies concerning the proposed activity's compliance with the terms'and conditions of the NWPs
and the treed for mitigation to reduce the project's adverse environmental effects to a minimal level. (2)
For all NWP activities that require pre�oustruction notification and result in the loss of greater than 1/2 -
acre bf waters of the United States, for NWP 21, 29, 39, 40, 42, 43, 44, 50, 51, and 52 activities that
require pre -construction notification and will result in the loss of greater than 3 00 linear feet of
intermittent and ephemeral stream bed, and for all NWF 48 activities that require pre -construction
notification, the district engineer will immediately provide (e.g., via e-mail, facsimile transmission,
overnight mail, or other expeditious manner) a copy of the complete PCN to the appropriate Federal or
state offices (U.S. FWS, state natural resource or water quality agency, EPA, State Historic Preservation
Officer (SHPO) or Tribal historic Preservation Office (THPO), and, if appropriate, the NWS). With the
exception of NWP 3 7, these agencies will have 10 calendar days from the date the material is transmitted
to telephone or fax the district engineer notice that they intend to provide substantive, site_specific
comments. The comments roust explain why the agency believes the adverse effects will be more than
minimal. If so contacted by an agency, the district engineer will wait an additional 15 calendar days
before malting a decision on the pre -construction notification. The district engineer will fully consider
agency comments received within the specified time frame concerning the proposed activity's compliance
with the terms and conditions of the NWPs, including the need for mitigation to ensure the net adverse
environmental effects to the aquatic environment of the proposed activity are minimal. The district
engineer will provide no response to the resource agency, except as provided below. The district engineer
will indicate in the administrative record associated with each pre -construction notification that the
resource agencies' concerns were considered. For NWP 37, the emergency watershed protection and
rehabilitation activity may proceed immediately in cases where there is an unacceptable hazard to l ife or a
significant loss of property or economic hardship will occur. The district engineer will consider any
comments received to decide whether the NWP 37 authorization should be modified, suspended, or
revoked in accordance with the procedures at 33 CFR 330.5. (3) In cases of where the prospective
permittee is not a Federal agency, the district engineer will provide a response to NMFS within 30
calendar days of receipt of auy Essential Fish Habitat conservation recommendations, as required by
Section 305(b)(4)(B) of the Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. (4)
10
Applicants are encouraged to provide the Corps with either electronic files or multiple copies of pre -
construction notifications to expedite agency coordination.
District Engineer's Decision
1.3n reviewing the PCN for the proposed activity, the district engineer will determine whether the
activity authorized by the NWP will result in more than minimal individual or cumulative adverse
environmental effects or may be contrary to the public interest. For a linear project, this determination
will include an evaluation of the :individual crossings to determine whether they individually satisfy the
terms and conditions of the NWP(s), as well as the cumulative effects caused by all of the crossings
authorized by NWP. If an applicant requests a waiver of the 300 linear foot limit on impacts to
intermittent or ephemeral streams or of an otherwise applicable limit, as provided for in NWPs 13, 21, 29,
36, 39, 40, 42, 43, 44, 50, 51 or 52, the district engineer will only grant the waiver upon a written
determination that the NWP activity will result in minimal adverse effects. When making minimal effects
determinations the district engineer will consider the direct and indirect effects caused by the NAT
activity. The district engineer will also consider site specific factors, such as the environmental setting in
the vicinity of the NWP activity, the type of resource that will be affected by the NWP activity; the
functions provided by the aquatic resources that will be affected by the NWP activity, the degree or
magnitude to which the aquatic resources perform those functions, the extent that aquatic resource
functions will be lost as a result of the NWP activity (e.g., partial or complete loss), the duration of the
adverse effects (temporary or permanent), the importance of the aquatic resource functions to the region
(e.g_, watershed or ecoregion), and mitigation required by the district engineer. If an appropriate
functional assessment method is available and practicable to use, that assessment method may be used by
the district engineer to assist in the minimal adverse effects determination. The district engineer may add
case -specific special conditions to the NWP authorization. to address site specific environmental concerns.
2. If the proposed activity requires a PCN and will result in a loss of greater than 1110 -acre of
wetlands, the prospective permittee should submit a mitigation proposal with the PCN. Applicants may
also propose compensatory mitigation for projects with smaller impacts. The district engineer will
consider any proposed compensatory mitigation the applicant has included in the proposal in determining
whether the net adverse environmental effects to the aquatic environment of the proposed activity are
minimal. The compensatory mitigation proposal may be either conceptual or detailed, If the district
engineer determines that the activity complies with the terms and conditions of the NWP and that the
adverse effects on the aquatic environment are minimal, after considering mitigation, the district engineer
will notify the permittee and include any activity -specific conditions in the NWP verification the district
engineer deems necessary. Conditions for compensatory mitigation requirements must comply with the
appropriate provisions at 33 CFR 332.3(k). The district engineer must approve the fmal mitigation plan
before the permittee commences work in waters of the United States, unless the district engineer
determines that prior approval of the final mitigation plan is not practicable or not necessary to ensure
timely completion of the required compensatory mitigation. If the prospective permittee elects to submit a
compensatory mitigation plan with the PCN, the district engineer will expeditiously review the.proposed
compensatory mitigation plan. The district engineer must review the proposed compensatory mitigation
plain within 45 calendar days of receiving a complete PCN and determine whether the proposed mitigation
would ensure no more than minimal adverse effects on the aquatic environment_ if the net adverse effects
of the project on the aquatic environment (after consideration of the compensatory mitigation proposal)
are determined by the district engineer to be minimal, the district engineer will provide a fimely written
response to the applicant. The response will state that the project can proceed under the terms and
conditions of the NWP, including any activity -specific conditions added to the NWP authorization by the
district engineer.
3. If the district engineer determines that the adverse effects of the proposed work are more than
minimal, then the district engineer will notify the applicant either: (a) That the project does not. qualify for
11
authorization under the NWP and instruct the applicant on the procedures to seek authorization under an
individual permit; (b) that the project is authorized under the NWP subject to the applicant's submission
of a mitigation plan that would reduce the adverse effects on the aquatic environment to the minimal
level; or (e) that the project is authorized under the NWP with specific modifications or conditions.
Where the district engineer determines that mitigation is -required to ensure no more than minimal adverse
effects occur to the aquatic environment, the activity will be authorized within the 45 -day PCN period,
with activity -specific conditions that state the mitigation requirements. The authorization will include the
necessary conceptual or detailed mitigation or a requirement that the applicant submit a mitigation plan
that would reduce the adverse effects on the aquatic environment to the min irnal level. When mitigation is
required, no work in waters of the United Staten may occur until the district engineer has approved a
specific mitigation plan or has determined that prior approval of a final mitigation plan is not practicable
or not necessary to ensure timely completion of the required compensatory mitigation.
Further Information
1 _ District Engineers have authority to determine: if -an-activity complies with the terms and conditions of
an NWP.
2. NWPs do not obviate the need to obtain other federal, state, or local permits, approvals, or
authorizations required by law.
3. NWPs do not grant any property rights or exclusive privileges.
4. NWPs do not authorize any injury to the property or rights of others.
S. NWPs do not authorize interference with any existing or proposed Federal project.
C. CORPS SEATTLE DISTRICT REGIONAL GENERAL-CONDMONS
1. Aquatic Resources Ae uq iryg Special Protection. Activities resulting in a loss of waters of the United
States in a mature forested wetland, bog, bog -like wetland, aspen -dominated wetland, alkali wetland,
wetlands in a dural system along the Washington coast, vernal pools, camas prairie wetlands, estuarine
wetlands, and wetlands in coastal lagoons cannot be authorized by a NWP, except by the following
NWPs:
NWP 3 -- Maintenance
NWP 20 — Oil Spill Cleanup
NWP 32 — Completed Enforcement Actions
NWP 3 8 -- Cleanup of Hazardous and Toxic Waste
In order to use one of the above -referenced NWPs in any of the aquatic resources requiring special
protection, you must submit a pre -construction notification to the District Engineer in accordance with
Nationwide Permit General Condition 31 (Pre -Construction Notification) and obtain written approval
before commencing work.
2. Commencement BU. The following NWPs may not be used to authorize activities located in the
Commencement Bay Study Area (see Figure I at w,vw.nws.usace.army.mil, select Regulatory Permits
then Permit Guidebook, then Nationwide Pen -nits) requiring Department of the Army authorization:
NWP 12 — Utility Line Activities (substations)
NWP 13 —Bank Stabilization
NWP 14 —Linear Transportation Projects
NAT 23 — Approved Categorical Exclusions
NWP 29 — Residential Developments
NWT 39 — Commercial and Institutional Developments
NWP 40 — Agricultural Activities
12
NWP 41— Reshaping Existing Drainage bitches
NWP 42 -- Recreational Facilities
NWP 43 — Stormwater Management Facilities
3. Now Bank Stabilization Prohibition Areas in Tidal Waters of Puget Sound. Activities involving new
bank.stabilization in tidal waters in Water Resource Inventory Areas (WRIAs) 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12 (within
the specific area identified on Figure 2 at www. nws.usace.army.mil, select Regulatory Permits then
Permit Guidebook, then Nationwide Permits) cannot be authorized by a NWP.
4. Bank Stabilization. Any project including new or maintenance bank stabilization activities requires
pre -construction notification to the District Engineer in accordance with Nationwide Permit General
Condition 31 for Pre -Construction Notification. This requirement does not apply to maintenance work
exempt by 33 CFR 323.4 (a)(2). Each notification must also include the following information:
a. Need for the work, including the cause of the erosion and the threat posed to structures,
infrastructure, and/or public safety. The notification must also include a justification for the need to place
fill or structures waterward of the line of the Corps' jurisdiction (typically, the ordinary high water mark
or mean higher high water mark).
b. Current and expected post-proj ect sediment movement and deposition patteras in and near the
project area.. In tidal waters, describe the location and size of the nearest bluff sediment ,sources (feeder
bluffs) to the project area and current and expected post -project nearshore drift patterns in the project
area_
c. Current and expected post project habitat conditions, including the presence of fish, wildlife and
plant species, submerged aquatic vegetation, spawning habitat, and special aquatic sites (e.g_, vegetated
shallows, riffle and pool complexes, or mudflats) in the project area.
d. In rivers and streams, an assessment of the likely impact of the proposed work on upstream,
downstream and cross -stream properties (at a minimum the area assessed should extend from the nearest
upstream bend to the nearest downstream bend of the watercourse). Discuss the methodology used for
determining effects. The Corps reserves the right to request an increase in the reach assessment area to
fully address the relevant ecological reach and associated habitat.
e. For new bank stabilization activities in rivers and streams, describe the type and length of existing
bank stabilization within 300 feet up and downstream of the project area. In tidal areas, describe the type
and length of existing bank stabilization within 300 feet along the shoreline on both sides of the project
area.
f. Dernonstrate the proposed proj act incorporates the least environmentally damaging practicable
bank protection methods. These methods include, but are not limited to, the use of bioengineering,
biotwhnical design, root wads, large woody material, native plantings, and beach nourishment in certain
circumstances. If rock must be used due to site erosion conditions, explain how the bank stabilization
structure incorporates elements beneficial to fish. If the Corps determines you have not incorporated the
least environmentally damaging practicable bank protection methods and/or have not fully compensated
for impacts to aquatic resources, you must submit a compensatory mitigation plan to compensate for
impacts to aquatic resources.
g. A planting plan using native riparian plant species unless the applicant demonstrates a planting
plan is not appropriate or not practicable.
13
5. Crossings of Waters of the United. States. Any project including installing, replacing, or modifying
crossings of waters of the United States, such as culverts, requires pre -construction notification to the
District Engineer in accordance with Nationwide Permit General Condition 31 for Pre -Construction
Notification. This requirement does not apply to maintenance work exempt by 33 CFR 323.4 (a)(2)_
Each notification must also include the following information:
a. Need for the crossing.
b. Crossing design criteria and design methodology.
c. Rationale behind using the specific design method for the crossing.
6. Cultural Resources and Human Burials. Permittees must immediately stop work and notify the
District Engineer within 24 fours if, during the course of conducting authorized work, human burials,
cultural resources; or historic properties, as identified by the National Historic-PreservationAc% are
discovered. Failure to stop work in the area of discovery until the Corps can comply with the provisions
of 33 CFR 325 Appendix C, the National Historic Preservation Act, and other pertinent laws and
regulations could result in a violation of state and federal laws. Violators are subject to civil and criminal
penalties.
7. Essential Fish Habitat. An activity which may adversely affect essential fish habitat, as identified
under the Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA), may not be authorized
by NWP until essential fish habitat requirements have been met by the applicant and -the Corps. Non-
federal permittees shall notify the District Engineer if essential fish habitat may be affected by, or is in the
vicinity of, a proposed activity and shall not begin work until notified by the District Engineer that the
requirements of the essential fish habitat provisions of the MSA have been satisfied and the activity is
authorized. The notification must identify the type(s) of essential fish habitat (e.g., Pacific salmon,
groundfish, and/or coasial-pelagic species) managed by a Fishery Management Plan that may be affected.
Information about essential fish habitat is available at www.nwr.noaa.gov/.
8. Vegetation Protection and Restoration. Permittees must clearly mark all construction area boundaries
before beginning work. The removal of native vegetation in riparian areas and wetlands, and the removal
of submerged aquatic vegetation in estuarine and tidal areas must be avoided and minimized to the
maximum extent practicable. Areas subjeat to temporary vegetation removal shall be replanted with
appropriate native species by the end of the first planting season following the disturbance except as
waived by the District Engineer. If an aquaculture area is permitted to impact submerged aquatic
vegetation under NWP 48, the aquaculture area does not need to be replanted with submerged aquatic
vegetation.
9. Access. You must allow representatives of this office to inspect the authorized activity at any time
deemed necessary to ensure the work is being, or has been, accomplished in accordance with the terms
and conditions of your permit,
I.O. Contractor Notification of Permit Requirements. The permittee must provide a copy of fhe
nationwide permit verification- letter, conditions, and permit drawings to all contractors involved with the
authorized work, prior to the commencement of any work in waters of the U.S.
D. CORPS REGIONAL SPECIFIC CONDITIONS FOR THOS NW: NONE
E. STATE 401 CERTIFICATION GENERAL CONDITIONS:
14
1. For in -water construction activities. Individual 401 review is required for projects or activities
authorized. under NWPs that Will cause, or be likely to cause or contribute to an exceedence of a State
water quality standard (WAC 173-201A) or sediment management standard (WAC 173-204).
Note: State water quality standards are posted on Ecology's website:
h.ftp:11w",.ecy.rtagov/programsAvq/sings/. Click "Surface Mater Criteria "forfreshwaterand
marine water standards. Sediment management standards are posted on Ecology's website:
http://n,ivw.ecy.sra.gov/biblio/wacl73204.htm1. Information is also available by contacting
Ecology's Federal Permit staf.
2, Projects or Activities Discharging to Impaired Waters. Individual 401 review is required for
projects or activities authorized under NWPs if the project or activity will occur in a 303(d) listed
segment of a waterbody or upstream of a listed segment and may result in further exceedez►ces of the
specific listed parameter.
Note: To determine if your projector activity is in a 303 (d) listed segment of a waterbody, visit
Ecology's Water Quality Assessment webpage for maps and search tools,
http://wWryv.ecy.va.gov/prograi77s1wg1303d1200.81 Information is also available by contacting
Ecology's Federal Permit staff.
3. Notification. For projects or activities that will require Individual 401 review, applicants must
provide Ecology with the same documentation provided. to the Corps (as described in Corps
Nationwide Permit General Condition 31, Pre -Construction Notification), including, when applicable:
(a) ,A. description of the project, including site plans, project purpose, direct and indirect adverse
environmental effects the project would cause, and any other Department of the Army permits
used or intended to be used to authorize any part of the proposed projector any related activity.
(b) Delineation of special aquatic sites and other waters of the United States. Wetland delineations
must be prepared in accordance with the current method required by the Corps and shall include
Ecology's Wetland Rating form_ Wetland rating rorins are subject to review and verification by
Ecology staff.
Note: Wetland ratingforms are available on Ecology's Wetlands website:
http:/li+iviv.ecy.rt,agovlprograms/s eal,�i,eticu7ds/ratingsystems or by contacting Ecology's Federal
Permit staff.
(c) A statement describing horn the mitigation requirement will be satisfied. A conceptual or detailed
Titigation or restoration plan may be submitted,
Mitigation plans submitted for Ecology review and approval shall be based on the guidance
provided in Wetland Mitigation in Washington State, Parts 1 and 2 {Ecology Publications 406-06-
011a and #06-06-011b).
(d) Coastal Zone Management Program "Certification of Consistency" Form if the project is located
within a coastal county (Clallam, Grays Harbor, Island, Jefferson, King, Kitsap, Mason, Pacific,
Pierce, Sar; Juan, Skagit, Snohomish, Thurston, Wahkiakum, and Whatcom counties).
Note: CZMCertiftcation of Consistencyforms are available on Ecology's Federal Permit
website: pl'ogra7i7s/sea%fed pel'J1lltli77dex.ht7nl or by contactingEcology's
Federal Permit staff,
15
(e) .Other applicable requirements of Corps Nationwide Permit General Condition 31, Corps
Regional Conditions, or notification conditions of the applicable NWP.
Note: Ecology has 180 days from receipt of applicable documents noted above and a copy of the
final authorization letter from the Corps providing coverage for a proposed project or activity
under the NWP Program to issue a WQC and CZMconsistency determination response. �f more
than 180 days pass after Ecology's receipt of these documents, your requirement to obtain ars
individual WQC and CZMconsistency determination response becomes waived.
4. Aquatic resources requiriog special protection. Certain aquatic resources are unique, difficult -to -
replace components of the aquatic environment ixi Washington State. Activities'that would affect
these resources must be avoided to the greatest extent possible. Compensating for adverse impacts to
high value aquatic resources is typically difficult, prohibitively expensive, and may not be possible in
some landscape settings:
Individual 401 review is required for activities in or affecting the following aquatic resources (and Dot
prohibited by Regional Condition 1):
(a) Wetlands with special characteristics (as defined in the Washington State Wetland Rating Systems
for western and eastern Wasbin.gton, Ecology Publications 404-06-025 and #04-06-015):
• Estuarine wetlands
• Natural Heritage wetlands
• gags
* Old-growth and nature forested wetlands
• Wetlands in coastal lagoons
• Interdunal wetlands
• Vernal pools
• Alkali wetlands
(b) Fens, aspen -dominated wetlands, camas prairie wetlands, and marine water with eelgrass (Zostera
marina) beds (except for NWP 48).
(c) Category 1 wetlands
(d) Category II wetlands with a habitat score > 29 points. This State General Condition does not
apply to the following Nationwide Permits:
NWP 20 — Response Operations fox Oil and Hazardous Substances
NWP 32 -- Completed Enforcement Actions
5. Mitigation. For projects requiring Individual 401 review, adequate compensatory mitigation must
be provided for wetland and other 'water quality -related impacts of projects or activities authorized
under the NWP Program.
(a) Mitigation plans submitted for Ecologyreview and approval shall be based on the guidance
provided in Wetland Mitigation in Washington State, Parts 1 and 2 (Ecology Publications #06-06--
01 la and #06-06-01 lb) and shall, at a minimum, include the following:
121
i. A description of the measures taken to avoid and minimize impacts to wetlands and other
waters of the U.S.
ii. The nature of the proposed impacts (i.e., acreage ofwetlands and functions lost or degraded)
iii. The rationale for the mitigation site that was selected
iv. The goals and objectives of the compensatory mitigation project
v. How the mitigation project will be accomplished, including construction sequencing, best
management practices to protect water quality, proposed performance standards for measuring
success and the proposed buffer widths
vi. How it will be maintained and monitored to assess progress towards goals and objectives.
Monitoring will generally be required for a minimum of five years. For forested and scrub -
shrub wetlands, 10 years of monitoring will often be necessary.
vii. How the compensatory mitigation site will be legally protected for the long term.
Refer to Wetland Mitigation in Washington State — Part 2: Developing Mitigation Plans (Ecology
Publication. 406-06-01ib) for guidance on developing mitigation plans.
Ecology encourages the use of alternative mitigation approaches, including advance mitigation and other
programmatic approaches such as mitigation banks and programmatic mitigation areas at the local level.
If you are interested in proposing use of an alternative mitigation approach, consult with the appropriate
Ecology regional staff person, (see httpJ/www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/wetlaa&/contaots.htm)
Information on the state wetland mitigation banking program is available on Ecology's website:
http://wwv4r. ecy.wa. gov/programs/s ea/weti ands/tnitigation/baaicing/i n dex.html
6. Temporary Fills. Individual 401 review is required for any project or activity with temporary fill in
wetlands or other waters of the State for more than 90 days, unless the applicant has received written
approval from Ecology.
Note: This State General Condition does not apply to projects or activities authorized under NNP 33,
Temporary Construction, Access, and Dewatering
7. Stormwater discharge pollution prevention: All projects that involve land disturbance or
impervious surfaces must implement prevention or control measures to avoid discharge of pollutants
in stormwater runoff to waters of the state. For land disturbances during construction, the permittee
must obtain and implement permits where required and follow Ecology's current stormwater manual.
Note: Stormwaterpermit information &available atEcology's mater Quality website:
hap.11tini-9-v. ecy.wa.govlprograrnslu�glstarrrr�>>aterlirrdex. htnri< E'cology's Stormwater Management and
Design Manuals are available at:
http:Ilvmirki).ecy.iiia.govlprogramsA.t,glstorrana,aier/rrttnrrcipal/Strrrn-,trMan.htrril..Information is also
available by contacting Ecology's Federal Permit staff.
S. State Certification for PCNs not receiving 45 -day response. In the event the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers does not respond to a complete pre -construction notification within 45 days:, the applicant
must contact Ecology for Individual 401 review.
17
P. STATE 401 CERTfUJCATION SPECIFIC FOR THIS NWP:
Certified, subject to conditions. Permittee must meet Ecology 401 General Conditions. Individual 401
review is required, for projects or activities authorized under this NWP if:
I. The project or activities are below the OR-WM with new work being proposed outside the
original footprint.
2. The proposed project or activity increases the original footprint of the structure by more than
1/10 th acre in wetlands. Note 1: "Original footprint" refers to the configuration of the structure or
filled area within the last two years. Note 2: This may include causing surrounding wetlands to be
drained.
3. The project or activity includes adding a new structure, such as a weir, flap gateltide gate, or
culvert tothe site. - -
G. EPA 401 CERTIFICATION GENERAL CONDITIONS:
A. Any activities in the following types of wetlands and waters of the United States will need to apply
for an individual 401 certification: Mature forested wetlands, bogs, bog -like wetlands, wetlands in dunal
systems along the Washington coast, coastal lagoons, vernal pools, aspen -dominated wetlands, alkali
- wetlands, camas prairie wetlands, estuarine wetlands, including salt marshes, and marine waters with
eelgrass or .kelp beds.
B. A 401 certification determination is based on the project or activity meeting established turbidity
levels. The EPA will be using as guidance the state of Washington's water quality standards- [WAC 173-
201a] and sediment quality standards [WAC 173-204]. Projects or activities that are expected to exceed
these levels or that do exceed these levels will require an -individual 401 certification.
The water quality standards allow for short-term turbidity exceedances after all necessary Best
Management Practices have been implemented (e.g_, properly placed and maintained filter fences, hay
bales and/or other erosion control devices, adequate detention of runoff to prevent turbid water from
flowing off-site, providing a vegetated buffer between the activity and open water, etc.), and only up to
the following limits:
Wetted Stream Width at Discharge Point
Approximate Downstream Point for
Determmin Compliance
Up to 30 feet
50 feet
>30 to 100 feet
>100 feet to 200 feet
100 feet
200 feet
>200 feet
300 feet
LAKE, POND, RESERVOIR
Lesser of 100 feet or maximum surface
dimension
C. 401 certification of projects and activities under NWPs will use Washington State Department of
Ecology's most recent stormwater manual or an EPA approved equivalent manual as guidance in meeting
water quality standards.
D. For projects and activities requiring coverage under an NPDES permit, certification is based on
compliance with the requirements of that permit. Projects and activities not in compliance with NPDES
requirements will require individual 40 1 certification.
E. Individual 401 certification is required for projects or activities authorized under NVRs if the
project will discharge to a waterbody on the list of impaired waterbodics (the 303(d) List) and the
discharge may result in further exceedance of a specific parameter the waterbody is listed for. The EPA
shall make this determination on a case-by-case basis.
For projects or activities that will discharge to a 303(d) -listed waterbody that does not have an
approved Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) or an approved water quality management plan, the
applicant must provide documentation for EPA approval showing that the discharge will not result in
further exceedance of the listed contaminant or impairment.
For projects or activities that will discharge to a 303(d) -listed waterbody that does not have an
approved TMDL, the applicant must provide documentation for EPA approval showing that the discharge
is within the limits established in the TMDL. The current list of 303(d) -listed waterbodies in Washington
State will be consulted in making this determination and is available on Ecology's web site at:
vr,A,w-ecy.wa.gov/prograiiis/wq/303d/2012/index.html
The EPA may issue 401 certification for projects or activities that would result hi fiuther exceedance
or impairment if mitigation is provided that would result in a net decrease in listed contaminants or less
impairment in the waterbody_ This determination would be made during individual 401 certification
review.
F. For projects requiring individual 401 certification, applicants must provide the EPA with the same
documentation provided to the Corps, (as described in Corps' National General Condition 31, Pif,
Construction Notification), including, when applicable:
(a) A description of the project, including site plans, project purpose, direct and indirect adverse
environmental effects the project would cause, any other U.S. Department of the Army
permits used or intended to use to authorize any part of the proposed project or any related
activity.
(b) Delineation of special aquatic sites and other waters of the United States. Wetland
delineations must be prepared in accordance with the current method required by the Corps.
(c) A statement describing how the mitigation requirement will be satisfied. A conceptual or
detailed mitigation or restoration plan may be submitted_
(d) Other applicable requirements of Corps National General Condition. 31, Corps Regional
Conditions, or notification conditions of the applicable NWP.
A request for individual 401 certification- review is not oomplete until the EPA receives the
applicable documents noted above and the EPA has received a copy of the final authorization letter from
the Corps providing coverage for a proposed project or activity under the NWP Program.
G. No activity, including structures and work in navigable waters of the United States or discharges
of dredged or fill material, may consist of unsuitable material (e.g., trash, debris, car bodies, asphalt, etc.)
and material used for construction or discharged must be free from toxic pollutants in toxic amounts (see.
Section 307 of the Clean Water Act).
19
H_ An individual 401 certification is based on adequate compensatory mitigation being provided for
aquatic resource and other wafter quality -related impacts of projects or activities authorized under the
NWP Program.
A 401 certification is contingent upon written approval from the EPA of the compensatory
mitigation plan for projects and activities resulting in any of the following:
a impacts to any aquatic resources requiring special protection (as defined in EPA General
Condition A or Corps General Regional Condition 1)
O any impacts to tidal waters or non -tidal waters adjacent to tidal waters (applies to NWP 14)
a Or, any impacts to aquatic resources greater than '1d acre.
Compensatory mitigation plans submitted to the EPA shall be based on the Joint Agency guidance
provided in Wedand Mit gafiori in Washington ,State, Parts 1 and 2 (Ecology Publication -#06-06-011 a
and #06-06-011 b) and shall, at a minirnua), include the following.-
(1)
ollowing:
(1) A description of the measures taken to avoid and minimize impacts to wetlands and other
waters of the U.S.
(2) The nature of the proposed impacts (i.e., acreage of wetlands and functions lost or degraded)
(3) The rationale for the mitigation site that was selected
(4) The goals and objectives of the compensatory mitigation project
(5) How the mitigation project will be accomplished, including proposed performance standards.
for measuring success (including meeting planting success standard of 80 percent survival
ager five years), evidence for hydrology at the mitigation site, and the proposed buffer
widths,
(6) How it will be maintained and monitored to assess progress towards goals and objectives.
(7) Completion and submittal of an "as -built conditions report" upon completion of grading,
planting and hydrology establishment at the mitigation site;
(8) Completion and submittal of monitoring reports at years 3 and 5 showing the results of
monitoring for hydrology, vegetation types, and aerial cover of vegetation.
(9) For forested and scrub -shrub wetlands, 10 years of monitoring will often be necessary.
(10) Documentation of legal site protection mechanism (covenant or deed restriction) to show
how the compensatory mitigation site will be legally protected for the long-term.
I. An individual 401 certification is required for any activity where temporary fill will remain in
wetlands or other waterbodies for more than 90 days. The 90 day period begins when filling activity starts
in the wetland or other waterbody.'
J. An individual 401 is required for any proposed project or activity in waterbodies on the most
current list of the following Designated Critical Resource Waters (per Corps General Condition 22).
K. An individual 401 certification is required for any proposed project that would increase permanent,
above -grade fill within the 100 -year floodplain, (including the flooduray and the flood fringe).
[Note: The 100 -year floodplain is defined as those areas identified as Zones A, Al -30, AE, AH,
AO, A99, V, V 1.30, and VE on the most current Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood
Rate Insurance Maps, or areas identified as within the 100 -year floodplain on applicable. local
Flood Management Program maps_ The 100 -year flood is also known as the flood with a 100 -year
recurrence intmtal, or as the flood with an exceedance probability of 0.01.]
9C
H. EPA 401 CERTIFICATION SPECIFIC.CONDITIONS FOR THIS NW:
Partially denied without prejudice. Permittee must meet EPA 401 General Conditions. An individual401
certification is required for projects authorized under this NWP iP
1. The project or activity would extend beyond the original project footprint (either along the
shoreline or below MHHW or OF[W, or
2. Any activity requiring excavation or dredging in open water.
I. COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONSISTENCY RESPONSE FOR THIS NWP.
Concur, subject to the following condition: When iDdividual 401 review is triggered, a CZM Certificate
of Consistency form must be submitted for project located within the 15 doastal counties (See State
General 401 Condition 3 (Notification)}.
21
PRELRVENAR,Y JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT GOMPLEf16N DATE FOR PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DEFERMINATION
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PRELIMINARY JD:
Todd Black Clty of Renton Comm ngy Services,1055 S Grady Wax, Revlon, Washington 88057
t
C, DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Seattle Dlstric:f, Renton Community Services (Cedar River Gabion RejpaJr); NWS -2043-38
D. PROJECT LOCATION($)AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Slate: WA County: Kinq City: Renton
Center coordinates of site ([atllong In degree decimal format)_ Lat. 47.49391'N, Long, -12220548'W
Name of nearest wateriwdy: Cedar River
Name of any wafer bodies on the site, in the- review area, Ihal have been identified as Section 10 waters:
TWA:
Non -Tidal: .
identify (estimale) amount of wafers In the review area (if there are multiple sites, use the table instead):
Non-wetlandwalars(total forslte): linear feet1,90D and width (1t)116 or acres.
Stream Flow; RPW Flow path; Cedar Rive' outlets to Lake Washington which Is on the Corns' list of navigable waters
weeands: acres (inial for site),
Cowardal Class(es):
Sb
number
Latitude
Longue
Cowardin
Class
Estimated amount of aquatic
resource in review area
Class of aquafic resource
E- REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
JR Office (Desk) Determination. Date; 14Jcouary2043
❑ Field Determination. Date(s):
SUPPQRT7NG DATA. Data reviewed for preliminary JD (check ail that apply -checked Items should be included in case file and, where checked and
ne ested, appropriately reference sources below):
Maps, plans, plats or plat submltied by or an behalf of the appkantfconsultant: Cedar River Gallon Repair project drawings dated 18 December
L012 -
Q Data sheets preparaNsubdifed by or an behalf of the applicanticoncultani.
] Office ooncurs with data sheaWdelineatioa report.
Q Office does not concur with data sheets(delineabon report. Explain:
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
Ej Corps navigable waters' study: The proled reach Is immectiately uRftgm of the pgdon of the Cedar River Induded on the Come list of vavl able
waters ,
[] U.S. Geological Survey Hydrblogic Atlas:
] USGS NHD data. ❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUG maps.
❑ U.S, Geological Survey map(s). Gitte scale & quad name:
❑ USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
❑ National wetlands Inven€cry map(s). M naive:
El Staiaocal we$and inventory rnap(s): Ming County [NAP.
❑ FEMAlFIRM maps:
© 1130-year.er An Elevation Is; (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
El PhotographAerial (Name & Date):
❑ Photographs ❑ Other (Name & Date):
0 Previous detamrinatlon(s), File no., dale (and t ricrhgs) of response letter (determination and eoord[nation):
0 Other Information (please spedafy): Google Earth,
I . The corps of Engineers believes that There may be jurisdictional waters of the United States on the subject site, and the permit applicant or other affocled
Party who requested this preliminary Jp is hereby advised of his or her option to request and obtain an approved Jurisdictional determination (J D) for that site.
Nevertheless, the permit applicant or other person who requested this preliminary JD has declined to exercise the option to obtain an approved JD In this
instance and at this time.
2. In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an Individual permit, ora Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification
requiring 'pre-constructlon notiFrcation' (PCPs), or requests verMcation for a iron -reporting NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant has not
requested an approved JD for the acti Ry, the permit applicant is hereby made aware of the following; (1 ) the permit applicant has elected to seek a permit
authorization based on a preliminary JD, which does not make an official determination ❑fjurtsdictlona€ waters; (2) that the appliranf has the option to request
an approved JD before accepting the terms and candrtions Df the permit authorizallon, and that basing a permit authorization on an approved JD could
possibly result In Ins compensatory midgation being required or different spefJ21 conditions; (3) that The applicant has The rfghf to request an individual
permit rather than accepting the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorhtlon; (4) that fhe applicant can accept a permit .
authorization and thereby agree to comply with all the terns and mnddoas of that permit, Encluding whatever mitigation requirements the Corps has
determined to be necessary; (5) timet undertatdng any activity in reliance apon the subject permlt authori7Aon without requesting ami approved JD consOlutes
the applicant's acceptance of the use of the preliminary JD, but that ettherform of JD will be processed as soon as is practicable; (6) accepting a permit
authorization (e.g., signing a proffered Individual permit) ar undertaking arty activity in reliance on any form of Corps permit authortzatlon based on a
Preliminary JP constitutes agreement that all wetlands and other water bodles on the site affected in any way by that activity are jurisdictional waters of the
Uniad States, and precludes any challenge to such Jurisdiction bm any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement action, or in any administrative
appeal or in any Federal tour,; and M whether fheaOlmnt elects to use either an approved JD or a preliminary A), that JD win be processed as soon as
Is practicabla, Further, an approved JD, a proffered individual permit (and ala terms and conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be
administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 339, and that in any administrative appeal, jurlsdicflonal Issues can be raised (see 33 G.F.R.
331.5(a)(2)). If, duaDg that administrative appeal, it berames necessary to make an official determination whether CWA jurisdictlon exists ever a site, or to
Provide an official delineation of jurisdictional waters on the site, the Corps wilt provide an approved JD to accomplish that result, as soon as is pracdcabie.
This preliminary JD flnds that there `maybe° wafers of the tinned States on the subject project sits, and idenhFies all aquaec features on the site that could
be affeclad by the proposed activity, based on the information In this document.
1MPORTAW Nom The Information recorded an this form has not nernmril been verified by the COMS and should not be relied Upon for later
'urlsdictional determinafions
! "30Fjnt 203
Protect Manager pate
7 6,3
Preliminary JD pale
I Permlt appifcaat, brmdo w a lease; easerrrent oropt m hWBr, orfntt'iMd with identifiable and stWantlal legal interest in the prop
preerty; #his signature is not required for
ltminaryJDs am dated v it h eirtbmemarrtacu ms.
2'
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
of �ngEneers o Army Carps VV" DEPARTMENT OF 'THE ARMY PERMIT`
of .
seattb District is
Permit Number: NWS -2013-0038
Name of Pertnittee: Cit of Renton - Todd Black _
OCT 0 9 2013
Date of Issuance:
Upon completion of the activity authorized by this permit, please check the applicable boxes below, date
and sign this certification, and return it to the following address:
Department of the Army
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Seattle District, Regulatory Branch
Post Office Box 3755
Seattle, Washington 98124-3755
Please note that your permitted activity is subject to a compliance inspection by a U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers representative. I£ you fail to comply with the terms and conditions of your authorization, your
permit maybe subject to suspension, modification, or revocation.
Printed Name:
Date:
The work authorized by the above -referenced permit has been completed in accordance with. the
❑
terms and conditions of this permit.
Date work complete:
❑ Photographs and as -built drawings of the authorized work (OPTIONAL, unless required
as a Special Condition of the permit).
Printed Name:
Date:
If applicable, the mitigation required (e.g., construction and plantings) in the above -referenced
❑
permit has beery completed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit (not
including future monitoring).
Date work complete:
] Photographs and as -built drawings of the mitigation (OPTIONAL, unless required as a
Special Condition of the permit).
Printed Name:
Date:
Vanessa Delbee
From: Todd Black
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 3:30 PM
To: Vanessa Dolbee; Leslie A Betlach
Subject: FW: PW 1752 renton gabion baskets under 1817
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
FYI
From: Kaplan, Alysha (MIL)[mailto:Aiysha.Kaplan@mil.wa.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 3:09 PM
To: Todd Black
Cc: Deborah Needham,' Clark, Anthony B (MIL)
Subject: FW: PW 1752 renton gabion baskets under 1817
Hi Todd,
Here is FEMA's response regarding the Section 106.
D
H
H
CO
H
X
W
As for the SPIF, apparently, FEMA consulted on both the gabion basket project and another Bing County project from a
different disaster because they are in the same general area. Since we added the new LF, they are redoing some stuff.
Hopefully I will get an answer back Friday_ That's the best I can do today. Let me know if you need anything else.
Alysha
From: King, Susan mailto:Susan.Kin 2 fema.dhs. ov]
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 2:27 PM
To: Kaplan, Alysha (MIL); Kerschke, William
Cc: Daggett, Anna; Urbas, Gary (MIL); Eberlein, Mark; Kerschke, William
Subject: RE: PW 1752 renton gabion baskets under 1817
Alysha,
As promised
There was no cultural resources report or consultation because the work was deemed to be replacement rather than an
extension of existing structures, and therefore not disturbing previously undisturbed ground. Therefore for SHPO it fell
within this allowance, of the previously executed NHPA Section 106 Programmatic Agreement, dated 2004 and
amended 2007:
"Ground disturbing activities related to the repair, replacement, or hardening of any
footings, abutments, foundations, retaining walls, other slope stabilization systems (e.g.,
gabion baskets), and utilities (including sewer, water, storm drains, electrical, gas,
communication, leach lines, and septic tanks), provided the excavation will not disturb
more soil than was previously disturbed. This Allowance refers to archaeological review.
This Allowance also applies to historic structures review of the aforementioned facilities
if the repairs are in kind."
Vanessa Dolbee
From: Todd Black
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 5:16 PM
To: 'Kaplan, Alysha (MIL)'
Cc: Deborah Needham; Leslie A Betlach; Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: Cedar River Gabions - COE Authorization
Attachments: Gabions-COE Authorization.pdf
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Hi Alysha,
We received the attached authorization today from the COE. At this point, we will reactivate the SEPA, which was put on
hold last March. I'll keep in touch with progress on the SEPA as we receive information.
Todd
Tadd Blank, ASLA
Capital Project Coordinator I Parks Planning & Natural Resources
1055 S Grady Way 16th Floor I Renton, WA 98057
Phone: 425.430.6571 Fax: 425.430.6603 tblackC@rentonwa.gov
-
Regulatory Branch
Mr. Todd Black
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
SEATTLE DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 3755
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98124-3756
City of Renton Community Services
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, Washington 98057
Dear Mr. Black:
OCT 0 9 2013
Reference: NWS -2013-0038
Renton, City of (Cedar
River Gabion Repair)
We have reviewed your application to replace a total of 416 linear feet of gabion baskets to
maintain existing bank protection at five locations in the Cedar River at Renton, Washington.
Based on the information you provided to us, Nationwide Permit (NWP) 3, Maintenance
(Federal Register February 21, 2012, Vol. 77, No. 34), authorizes your proposal as depicted on
the enclosed drawings dated December 18, 2012.
In order for this authorization to be valid, you must ensure the work is performed in
accordance with the enclosed NWP 3, Terns and Conditions and the following special
conditions:
a. You must implement and abide by the Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section 7 informal
consultation requirements and/or agreements in their entirety. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) concurred with a finding of "may affect, not likely to adversely affect" on
August 1, 2013 (USFWS Reference Number 13410-2010-1-0024-R001). The National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) concurred with a finding of "may affect, not likely to adversely
affect" on February 20, 2013 (NMFS Reference Number NWR-2009-5636). Both agencies will
be informed of this permit issuance. Failure to comply with the ESA Section 7 informal
consultation requirements and/or agreements constitutes non-compliance with the ESA and your
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit. The USFWS/NMFS is the appropriate authority to
determine compliance with ESA.
b. In order to protect the listed threatened and endangered species in the project area, you
may conduct the authorized activities in the work window as agreed to and documented in
writing through consultation by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Maxine
Fisheries Service (Services) in any year this permit is valid. If changes to the originally
Regulatory Branch
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
SEATTLE DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 3755
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98124-3755
Mr. Todd Black
City of Renton Community Services
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, Washington 98057
Dear Mr. Black:
OCT 0 9 2013
Reference: NWS -2013-0038
Renton, City of (Cedar
River Gabion Repair)
We have reviewed your application to replace a total of 416 linear feet of gabion baskets to
maintain existing bank protection at five locations in the Cedar River at Renton, Washington.
Based on the information you provided to us, Nationwide Permit (NWP) 3, Maintenance
(Federal Register February 21, 2012, Vol. 77, No. 34), authorizes your proposal as depicted on
the enclosed drawings dated December 18, 2012.
In order for this authorization to be valid, you must ensure the work is performed in
accordance with the enclosed NWP 3, Terms and Conditions and the following special
conditions:
a. You must implement and abide by the Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section 7 informal
consultation requirements and/or agreements in their entirety. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) concurred with a finding of "may affect, not likely to adversely affect" on
August 1, 2013 (USFWS Reference Number 13410-2010-1-0024-R001). The National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) concurred with a finding of "may affect, not likely to adversely
affect" on February 20, 2013 (NMFS Reference Number NWR-20095636). Both agencies will
be informed of this permit issuance. Failure to comply with the ESA Section 7 informal
consultation requirements and/or agreements constitutes non-compliance with the ESA and your
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit. The USFWS/NMFS is the appropriate authority to
determine compliance with ESA.
b. In order to protect the listed threatened and endangered species in the project area, you
may conduct the authorized activities in the work window as agreed to and documented in
writing through consultation by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine
Fisheries Service (Services) in any year this permit is valid. If changes to the originally
-2 -
authorized work window are proposed, you must re -coordinate these changes with the Services
and receive written concurrence on the changes. Copies of the concurrence(s) must be sent to
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory Branch, within 10 days of the date of the revised
concurrence.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). completed Section 7 Endangered
Species Act (ESA) consultation and Magnuson Stevens Act essential fish habitat consultation
(EFH) for its involvement in the proposed activity [National Marine Fisheries Service reference
number NWR-2009-5636, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service reference number 13410-2010-1-0024-
R001 (collectively called the Services)]. We have determined the permit action is sufficiently
addressed in their consultation documents. By this letter we are advising you and the Services,
in accordance with 50 CFR 402.07 and 50 CFR 600.920(b), that FEMA has served as the lead
Federal agency for the ESA and EFH consultation responsibilities for the activity described
above. For the purpose of this Department of the Army authorization, we have determined this
proj ect will comply with the requirements of these laws, provided that you comply with all of the
permit general and special conditions.
The authorized work complies with the Washington State Department of Ecology's
(Ecology) Water Quality Certification and the Coastal Zone Management Act requirements for
this NWP. No further coordination with Ecology is required.
We have enclosed a copy of the Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (JD) dated
January 30, 2013, which is a written indication that wetlands and waterways within your project
area maybe waters of the United States. Such waters will be treated as jurisdictional waters of
the U.S. for purposes of computation of impact area and compensatory mitigation requirements
associated with your permit application. If you believe the Preliminary JD is inaccurate, you
may request an Approved JD, which is an official determination regarding the presence or
absence of waters of the United States. If one is requested, please be aware that we may require
the submittal of additional. information to complete an approved JD and work authorized in this
letter may not occur until the approved JD has been finalized.
Our verification of this NWP authorization is valid until March 18, 2017, unless the NWP is
modified, reissued, or revoked prior to that date. If the authorized work has not been completed
by that date and you have commenced or are under contract to commence this activity before
March 18, 2017, you will have until March 18, 2018, to complete the activity under the enclosed
terms and conditions of ibis NWP. Failure to comply with all terms and conditions of this NWP
verification invalidates this authorization and could result in a violation of Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act, You must also obtain all
local and State permits that apply to this project.
-3 -
Upon completing the authorized work, you must fill out and return the enclosed Certificate
of Compliance with Department of the Army Permit form. Thank you for your cooperation
during the permitting process. We are interested in your experience with our Regulatory
Program and encourage you to complete a customer service survey, form. This form and
information about our program is available on our website at www.nws.usace.army.mil select
"Regulatory Branch, Permit Information" and then "Contact CJ's." A copy of this letter without
enclosures will be furnished to Mr. Brad Thiele, Northwest Environmental Consulting, LLC,
3639 Palatine Avenue North, Seattle, Washington 98103. If you have any questions, please
contact me at suzanne.l,anderson@usace.artny.mil or (206) 764-3708.
Sincerely,
Janne Anderson, Project Manager
Regulatory Branch
Enclosures
0
Z
Z
L
Ur Y
¢N
cy
Lu
z w 0
�(A oL
cii
uj °,,
0
} 00
www
L
z
=
At
w
w 0�°,o¢"
�
a�hnQ�
�za�
Z
R��zz
U-!0
C)E
c�
z
2Lu L)o
rn:S
Z
Z
cy
rybou
LFo
zz
L
z
=
T
a�o�a
=
u -i
Z
c�
z
4
Lt.
Oz
C} `
sa
D
��
Or
J
LL.I
LUz
CV
>
OZ o
00
z
2
�
m
z
a
0k
iLl
rc)
m
z
o
°'Q
O
cl
L4 III
LJ
®
m�
W
z
LLJ
w�
a
Qz
2
E�
�a
z
0
z
0
c�
z
LUz
CV
>
OZ o
00
m
z
o
W
2
®
m�
W
wwo
LLI
E�
of
ww
�j
a�
d
Z
O ()
m�
4p
UJ Q
U
m
zuji
a`�?Q
ly 0
LL D(D4
z_
LL 0 J
J J J
[Q Q ?
LU
t � 7
Z Z
U O O
f ILCO
o in co in cn v)
tYl N — — N N
�F—nF—QH
t�a� O
(n
2Y
a
CL J LL LL LL
LLJ
J JJ
Lo 0 ED
� O
Lu 0) to
O
V I I I
_ QmC)OW
LijLJWWLd
Z P P P P P
w uncn0cocn
0 Vl U7 In (n V)
irl N< --.—NN
NQ J-1.-IJJ
Lr 00000
Vl
lr
a- 13 Lt- Li. LL. L_
W JLL_ CD to
J J J
0
rdm0, 0W,
H
qtr►ir►
uy
as ua
ui -A 0 LIAO
c�
� . [i LU m
U) C) a 0
u�o 0
C)
a SOC
O C N
U) 0- ¢0-
�CD
� OOC
Q 0 u3 a Q w 7z0
c c)� Ld >, m
z 7 Lo jj n d �wm< 00.,
0 m w � Q r
Q w p c} z t4 Z ¢ z
F O P :5 w to a i O F d 00
�- ❑ ❑ co 00,
o_ ° cn Q and cv �, O 0 ,, _ Q
LU z u� m❑ O H a¢o p Q o z Q J
2E CL w R C7 p z O Q z 0 z M� cc1ra % O Y
0. p ¢ w O
p SC O N C4 Z J W V)
U 0 LL w DC 00 pU ❑❑ U ❑ Q w� i f
z w O Q OLL f IL O z a w r_t W
Vy U O F- m U' C'J j w ¢ = w U .� OO
Z w ¢ � ¢ z z zO � cj w w � ;- Oa
w tn
w Cw7 m (4 10 O Q C 7 m w� vi W Fw�- LL, a •K. a ¢¢ r
X yt m ¢ CD 3; :.
a s "� (f 7 CW9 gulf ul wQ 2i< Q [7 o o o w a Y I. �0TQ
z H 7 7 j0 w� J� �� i¢ m n a 3 'c w a ��� �
Q !11 C7 Z z z z LL F- 0. U DK O L
6 of z m O p
cr CSF C`7 lf) t4 F� 0.i OT r r r r r r r e-
J --
XD 0 <
—Xg0Q
- 113 — m C.rJ
O�Lc�
�
,
CU
C]
� � Z
_ d
In Q
CnLd
U
Q O
00
000
000
j 000 ^
000 X
00 ,4 .
040 "
Oao `!
00
z
0
w
In
Q
C�
w
z
a
U -
o C�
CD
Z
J F- u O
ZZ 'L .� I ><o.
Q O ?-.- W C.1
Fn
U-) 0XLO
�w}U¢
[7 0 a C -D
I
Do
n
i
.o
M
T
J
CO
W
0
0
0)7a
0 zo�
o m0¢
w �z
Y tr}g�w
W
a
4 F-- z
m (ASF 'S
0(AI�
WLu
Lu
u3 , a
Q NJ
mQ—()�
CD
a�
r
a
�
nz
oaCCtf
u
co(/�
z ED
X
0
O
7
V `.
•y
CU
C]
� � Z
_ d
In Q
CnLd
U
Q O
00
000
000
j 000 ^
000 X
00 ,4 .
040 "
Oao `!
00
z
0
w
In
Q
C�
w
z
a
U -
o C�
CD
Z
J F- u O
ZZ 'L .� I ><o.
Q O ?-.- W C.1
Fn
U-) 0XLO
�w}U¢
[7 0 a C -D
I
Do
n
i
.o
M
T
J
CO
W
0
0
0)7a
0 zo�
o m0¢
w �z
Y tr}g�w
W
a
4 F-- z
m (ASF 'S
0(AI�
WLu
Lu
u3 , a
Q NJ
mQ—()�
NA'I`IQNWIDE PERMIT 3
Arany Carps
of Engineers Terms and Conditions
of D
Seattle District
Effective Date: Tune 15, 2012
A. Description of Authorized Activities
B. Corps National General Conditions for all NWPs
C. Corps Seattle District Regional General Conditions
D. Corps Regional Specific Conditions for this NWP
E. State 441 Certification General Conditions
F. State 401 Certification Specific Conditions for this NWP
G. EPA 401 Certification General Conditions
H. EPA 401 Certification Specific Conditions for this NWP
I. Coastal Zone Management Consistency Response for this NWP
lu addition to any special condition that may be required on a case-by-case basis by the District Engineer,
the following terms and conditions must be met, as applicable, for a Nationwide Permit authorization to be
valid in Washington. State.
A. DESCRIPTION OF AU'rHORIZED ACTIVITIES
3. Maintenance. (a) The repair, rehabilitation, or replacement .of any previously authorized, currently
serviceable structure, or fill, or of any currently serviceable structure or fill authorized by 33 CFR 330.3,
provided that the structure or fill is not to be put to uses differing from those uses specified or
contemplated for it in the original permit or the most recently authorized modification. Minor deviations
in the structure's configuration or filled area, including those due to changes in materials, construction
techniques, requirements of other regulatory agencies, or current construction codes or safety standards.
that are necessary to make the repair, rehabilitation, or replacement are authorized. Any stream channel
modification is limited to the minimum necessary for the repair, rehabilitation, or replacement of the
structure or fill; such modifications, including the removal of material from the stream channel, must be
immediately adjacent to the project or within the boundaries of the structure or fill. This NWP` also
authorizes the repair, rehabilitation, or replacement of those structures or fills destroyed or damaged by
storms, floods, fire or other discrete events, provided the repair, rehabilitation, or replacement is
commenced, or is under contract to commence, within two years of the date of their destruction or
damage. In cases of catastrophic events, such as hurricanes or tornadoes, this two-year limit may be
waived by the district engineer, provided the permittee can demonstrate fituding, contract, or other similar
delays.
(b) This NWP also authorizes the removal of accumulated sediments and debris in the vicinity of
existing structures (e.g., bridges, culverted road crossings, water intake structures, etc.) and/or the
placement of now or additional riprap to protect the structure. The removal of sediment is limited to the
minimum necessary to restore the waterway in the vicinity of the structure to the approximate dimensions
that existed when the structure was built, but cannot extend farther than 200 feet in any direction from the
structure. This 200 foot limit does not apply to maintenance dredging to remove accumulated sediments
blocking or restricting outfall and intake structures or to maintenance dredging to remove accumulated
sediments from canals associated with outfall and intake structures. All dredged or excavated materials
must be deposited and retained in an area that has no waters of the United States unless otherwise
specifically approved by the district engineer under separate authorization. The placement of new or
additional riprap must be the minimum necessary to protect the structure or to ensure the safety of the
structure. Any bank stabilization measures not directly associated with the structure will require a
separate authorization from the district engineer.
(c) This NWP also authorizes temporary structures, fills, and work necessary to conduct the
maintenance activity. Appropriate measures must be taken to maintain normal downstream flows and
minimize flooding to the maximum extent practicable, when temporary structures, work, and discharges,
including cofferdams, are necessary for construction activities, access fills, or dewatering of construction
sites. Temporary fills must consist of materials, and be placed in a manner, that will not be eroded by
expected high flows. Temporary fills must be removed in their entirety and the affected areas returned to
prc-construction elevations. The areas affected by temporary fills must be revegetated, as appropriate.
(d) This NWP does not authorize maintenance dredging for the primary purpose of navigation.
This NWP does not authorize beach restoration. This NWP does not authorize new stream chanmlization
or stream relocation projects.
Notification: For activities authorized by paragraph (b) of this NWP, the permittee must submit a
pre -construction notification to the district engineer prior to commencing the activity (see general
condition 31). The pre -construction notification must include information regarding the original design
capacities and configurations of the outfalls, intakes, small impoundments, and canals. (Sections 10 and
404)
Note: This NWP authorizes the repair, rehabilitation, or replacement of any previously authorized
structure or fill that does not qualify for the Clean Water Act Section 404(f) exemption for maintenance,
B. CORPS NATIONAL GENERAL CONDITIONS FOR ALL NWPs
Note: To qualify for NWP authorization, the prospective permittee must comply with the following
general conditions, as applicable, in addition to any regional or case -specific conditions imposed by the
division engineer or district engineer_ Prospective permittees should contact the appropriate Corps district
office to determine if regional conditions have been imposed on an NWP. Prospective permittees should
also contact the appropriate Corps district office to determine the status of Clean Water Act Section 401
water quality certification and/or Coastal Zone Management Act consistency for an NWP. Every person
who may wish to obtain permit authorization under one or more NV Ps, or who is currently relying on an
existing or prior permit authorization under one or more NWPs, has been and is on notice that all of the
provisions of 33 CFR § 330.1 through 330.6 apply to every NWP authorization. Note especially 33 CFR
§ 330.5 relating to the modification, suspension, or revocation of any NWP authorization.
1. Navigation. (a) No activity may cause more than a minimal adverse effect on navigation.
(b) Any safety lights and signals prescribed by the U.S. Coast Guard, through regulations or
otherwise, trust be installed and maintained at the permittee's expense on authorized facilities in
navigable waters of the United States.
(c) The permittee understands and agrees that, if future operations by the United States require the
removal, relocation, or other alteration, of the structure or work herein authorized, or if, in the opinion of
the Secretary of the Army or his authorized representative, said structure or work shall cause
unreasonable obstruction to the free navigation of the navigable waters, the permittee will be required,
upon due notice from the Corps of Engineers, to remove, relocate, or alter the structural work or
obstructions caused thereby, without expense to the United States. No claim shall be made against the
United States on account of any such removal or alteration.
2. Aquatic Life Movements. No activity may substantially disrupt the necessary Iife cycle movements of
those species of aquatic life indigenous to the waterbody, including those species that normally migrate
through the area, unless the activity's primary purpose is to impound water. All permanent and temporary
crossings ofwaterbodies shall be suitably culverted, bridged, or otherwise designed and constructed to
maintain low flows to sustain the movement of those aquatic species.
3. Spawning Areas. Activities in spawning areas during spawning seasons must be avoided to the
maximum extent practicable. Activities that result in the physical destruction (e.g., through excavation,
fill, or downstream smothering by substantial turbidity) of an important spawning area are not authorized.
4. Migratory Bird Breeding Areas. Activities in waters of the United States that serve as breeding areas
for migratory birds must be avoided to the maximum extent practicable.
5. Shellfish Beds. No activity may occur in areas of concentrated shellfish populations, unless the activity
is directly related to a shellfish harvesting activity authorized by NWPs 4 and 48, or is a shellfish seeding
or habitat restoration activity authorized by NAT 27.
6. Suitable Material. No activity may use unsuitable material (e.g., trash, debris, car bodies, asphalt, etc.).
Material used for construction or discharged must be free from toxic pollutants in toxic amounts (see
Section 307 of the Clean Water Act).
7. Water Supply Intakes. No activity may occur in the proximity of a public water supply intake, except
where the activity is for the repair or improvement of public water supply intake structures or adjacent
bank stabilization.
8. Adverse Effects From Impoundments. if the activity creates an impoundment of water, adverse effects
to the aquatic system due to accelerating the passage of water, and/or restricting its flow must be
minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
9. Management of Water Flows. To the maximum extent practicable, the pre-construction course,
condition, capacity, and location of open waters must be maintained for each activity, including stream
channelization and storm water management activities, except as provided below. The activity must be
constructed to withstand expected high flows. The activity must not restrict or impede the passage of
normal or high flows, unless the primary purpose of the activity is to impound water or manage high
flows. The activity may alter the pre-construction course, condition, capacity, and location of open waters
if it benefits the aquatic environment (e.g., stream restoration or relocation activities),
10. Fills Within 100-Year Floodplains. The activity must comply with applicable FEMA-approved state
or local floodplain management requirements.
11. Equipment. Heavy equipment working in wetlands or mudflats must be placed on mats, or other
measures must be taken to minimize soil disturbance.
12. Soil Erosion and Sediment Controls. Appropriate soil erosion and' sediment controls must be used and
maintained in effective operating condition during construction, and all exposed soil and other fills, as
well as any work below the ordinary high water mark or high tide line, must be permanently stabilized at
the earliest practicable date. Permittees are encouraged to perform work within waters of the United
States during periods of low-flow or no-flow.
13. Removal of Temporary Fills. Temporary fills must be removed ni their entirety and the affected areas
returned to pre-construction elevations. The affected areas must be revegetated, as appropriate.
14. Proper Maintenance. Any authorized structure or fill shall be properly maintained, including
maintenance to ensure public safety and compliance with applicable NWP general conditions, as well as
any activity-specific conditions added by the district engineer to an NWP authorization,
15. Single and Complete Project. The activity must be a single and complete project. The same NWP
cannot be used more than once for the same single and complete project.
16. Wild and Scenic Rivers. No activity may occur in a component of the National Wild and Scenic River
System, or in a river officially designated by Congress as a "study river" for possible inclusion in the
system while the river is in an official study status, unless the appropriate Federal agency with direct
management responsibility for such river, has determined in writing that the proposed activity will not
adversely affect the Wild and Scenic River designation or study status. information on Wild and Scenic
Rivers may be obtained from the appropriate Federal land management agency responsible for the
designated Wild and Scenic River or study river (e.g., National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service, Bureau
of Land Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service).
17. "Tribal Rights. No activity or its operation may impair reserved tribal rights, including, but not limited
to, reserved water rights and treaty fishing and hunting rights,
18. Endan, ercd Species. (a) No activity is authorized under any NWP which is likely to directly or
indirectly jeopardize the continued existence of a threatened or endangered species or a species proposed
for such designation, as identified under the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), or which will
directly or indirectly destroy or adversely modify the critical habitat of such species. No activity is
authorized under any NWP which "may affect" a listed species or critical habitat, unless Section 7
consultation addressing the effects of the proposed activity has been completed.
(b) Federal agencies should follow their own procedures for complying with the requirements of the
ESA. Federal permittees must provide the district engineer with the appropriate documentation to
demonstrate compliance with those requirements. The district engineer will review the documentation and
determine whether it is sufficient to address ESA compliance for the NWP activity, or whether additional
ESA consultation is necessary.
(c) Non-federal permittees must submit a pre -construction notification to the district engineer if any
listed species or designated critical habitat might be affected or is in the vicinity of the project, or if the
project is located in designated critical habitat, and shall not begin work on the activity until notified by
the district engineer that the requirements of the ESA have been satisfied and that the activity is
authorized. For activities that might affect Federally -listed endangered or threatened species or designated
critical habitat, the pre -construction notification must include the name(s) of the endangered or threatened
species that might be affected by the proposed work or that utilize the designated critical habitat that
might be affected by the proposed work. The district engineer will determine whether the proposed
activity "may affect" or will have "no effect" to listed species and designated critical habitat and will
notify the non -Federal applicant of the Corps' determination within 45 days of receipt of a complete pre -
construction notification. In cases where the non -Federal applicant has identified listed species or critical
habitat that might be affected or is in the vicinity of the project, and has so notified the Corps, the
applicant shall not begin work until the Corps has provided notification the proposed activities will have
"no effect" on listed species or critical habitat, or until Section 7 consultation bas been completed_ If the
non -Federal applicant has not heard back from the Corps within 45 days, the applicant must still wait for
notification from the Corps.
(d) As a result of formal or informal consultation with the FWS or NMFS the district engineer may
add species-specific regional endangered species conditions to the NWPs.
(e) Authorization of an activity by a NWP does not authorize the "take" of a threatened or endangered
species as defined under the ESA. In the absence of separate authorization (e.g., an ESA Section 10
Permit, a Biological Opinion with "incidental take" provisions, etc.) from the U.S. FWS or the NMFS,
The Endangered Species Act prohibits any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to take a
listed species, where "take" means to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or
collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct. The word "harm" in the definition of "take" means
an act which actually kills or injures wildlife. Such an act may include significant habitat modification or
degradation where it actually kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral
patterns, including breeding, feeding or sheltering.
(f) Information on the location of threatened and endangered species and their critical habitat can be
obtained directly from the offices of the U.S. FWS and NMFS or their world wide web pages at
http://www.fws.gov/ or hitp://www.Ays.gov/ipac and http://w«nvaloaa.gov/fisheries.htinl respectively.
19. Mi atony Birds and Bald and Golden Eagles. The permittee is responsible for obtaining any "take"
permits required under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's regulations governing compliance with the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act or the Bald and.Golden Eagle Protection Act. The permittee should contact the
appropriate local office of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to determine if such "take" permits are
required for a particular activity.
20. Historic Properties. (a) Incases where the district engineer determines that the activity may affect
properties Iisted, or eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places, the activity is not
authorized, until the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NEPA) have
been satisfied.
(b) Federal permittees should follow their own procedures for complying with the requirements of
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Federal permittees must provide the district
engineer with the appropriate documentation to demonstrate compliance with those requirements. The
district engineer- will review the documentation and determine whether it is sufficient to address section
106 compliance for the NWP activity, or whether additional section 106 consultation is necessary.
(c) Non-federal permittees must submit a pre -construction notification to the district engineer if the
authorized activity may have the potential to cause effects to any historic properties listed on, determined
to be eligible for listing on, or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places,
including previously unidentified properties. For such activities, the pre -construction notification must
state which historic properties may be affected by the proposed work or include a vicinity map indicating
the location of the historic properties or the potential for the presence of historic properties. Assistance
regarding information on the location of or potential for the presence of historic resources can be sought
from the State Historic Preservation Officer or Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, as appropriate, and
the ]National Register of Historic Places (see 33 CFR 330.4(8)). When reviewing pre -construction
notifications, district engineers will comply with the current procedures for addressing the requirements
of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. The district engineer shall make a reasonable
and good faith effort to carry out appropriate identification efforts, which may include background
research, consultation, oral history interviews, sample field investigation, and field survey. Based on the
information submitted and these efforts, the district engineer shall determine whether the proposed
activity has the potential to cause an effect on the historic properties. Where the non -Federal applicant has
identified historic properties on which the activity may have the potential to cause effects and so notified
the Corps, the non -Federal applicant shall not begin the activity until notified by the district engineer
either that the activity has no potential to cause effects or that consultation under Section 106 of the
NHPA has been completed.
(d) The district engineer will notify the prospective permittee within 45 days of receipt of a complete
pre -construction notification whether NHPA Section 106 consultation is required. Section 106
consultation is not required when the Corps determines that the activity does not have the potential to
cause effects on historic properties (see 36 CFR §800.3(a)). If NHPA section 106 consultation is required
and will occur, the district engineer will notify the non -Federal applicant that he or she cannot begin work
until Section 106 consultation is completed. If the non -Federal applicant has not heard back from the
Corps within 45 days, the applicant must still wait for notification from the Corps.
(e) Prospective permittees should be aware that section 110k of the NEPA (16 U.S.C. 470h -2(k))
prevents the Corps from granting a permit or other assistance to an applicant who, with intent to avoid the
requirements of Section 106 of the NEPA, has intentionally significantly adversely affected a historic
property to which the permit would relate, or having legal power to prevent it, allowed such significant
adverse effect to occur, unless the Corps, after consultation with. the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation (ACNP), determines that circumstances justify granting such assistance despite the adverse
effect created or permitted by the applicant. if circumstances justify granting the assistance, the Corps is
required to notify the ACHP and provide documentation specifying the circumstances, the degree of
damage to the integrity of any historic properties affected, and proposed mitigation. This documentation
must include any views obtained from the applicant, SHPO/THIO, appropriate Indian tribes if the
undertaking occurs on or affects historic properties on tribal lands or affects properties of interest to those
tribes, and other parties known to have a Iegitimate interest in the impacts to the permitted activity on
historic properties.
21. Discovery of Previously Unknown Remains and Artifacts. If you discover any previously unknown
historic, cultural or archeological remains and artifacts while accomplishing the activity authorized by this
permit, you must immediately notify the district engineer of what you have found, and to the maximum
extent practicable, avoid construction activities that may affect the remains and artifacts until the required
coordination has been completed. The district engineer will initiate the Federal, Tribal and state
coordination required to determine if the items or retrains warrant a recovery effort or if the site is
eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places.
22. Designated Critical Resource Waters, Critical resource waters include, NOAA-managed marine
sanctuaries and marine monuments, and National Estuarine Research Reserves. The district engineer may
designate, after notice and opportunity for public comment, additional waters officially designated by a
state as having particular environmental or ecological significance, such as outstanding national resource
waters or state natural heritage sites. The district engineer may also designate additional critical resource
waters after notice and opportunity for public comment.
(a) Discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States are not authorized by NWPs
7, 12, 14, 16, 17, 21, 29, 31, 35, 39, 40, 42, 43, 44, 49, 50, 51, and 52 for any activity within, or directly
affecting, critical resource waters, including wetlands adjacent to such waters.
(b) For NWPs 3, 8, 10, 13, 15, 18, 19, 22, 23, 25, 27, 28, 30, 33, 34, 36, 37, and 38, notification is
required in accordance with general condition 31, for any activity proposed in the designated critical
resource waters including wetlands adjacent to those waters. The district engineer may authorize activities
under these NWPs only after it is determined that the impacts to the critical resource waters will be no
more than minimal.
23. Mitigation. The district engineer will consider the following factors when determining appropriate and
practicable mitigation necessary to ensure that adverse effects on the aquatic environment are minimal:
(a) The activity must be designed and constructed to avoid and minimize adverse effects, both
temporary and permanent, to waters of the United States to the maximum extent practicable at the project
site (i.e., on site).
(b) Mitigation in all its forms (avoiding, minimizing, rectifying, reducing, or compensating for
resource losses) will be required to the extent necessary to ensure that the adverse effects to the aquatic
environment are minimal.
(c) Compensatory mitigation at a minimum one-for-one ratio will be required for all wetland losses
that exceed 1110 -acre and require pre -construction notification, unless the district engineer determines in
writing that either some other form of mitigation would be more environmentally appropriate or the
adverse effects of the proposed activity are minimal, and provides a project -specific waiver of this
requirement, For wetland losses of 1110 -acre or less that require pre -construction notification, the district
engineer may determine on a case -by -ease basis that compensatory mitigation is required to ensure that
the activity results in minimal adverse effects on the aquatic environment. Compensatory mitigation
projects provided to offset losses of aquatic resources must comply with the applicable provisions of 33
CFR part 332. (1) The prospective permittee is responsible for proposing an appropriate compensatory
mitigation option if compensatory mitigation is necessary to ensure that the activity results in minimal
adverse effects on the aquatic environment. (2) Since the likelihood of success is greater and the impacts
to potentially valuable uplands are reduced, wetland restoration should be the first compensatory
mitigation option considered. (3) If permittee -responsible mitigation is the proposed option, the
prospective permittee is responsible for submitting a mitigation plan. A conceptual or detailed mitigation
plan may be used by the district engineer to make the decision on the NWP verification request, but a
final mitigation plan that addresses the applicable requirements of 33 CFR 332.4(c)(2) — (14) must be
approved by the district engineer before the permittee begins work in waters of the United States, unless
the district engineer determines that prior approval of the final mitigation plan is not practicable or not
necessary to ensure timely completion of the required compensatory mitigation (see 33 CFR 332.3(k)(3)).
(4) If mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program credits are the proposed option, the mitigation plan only
needs to address the baseline conditions at the impact site and the number of credits to be provided.
(5) Compensatory mitigation requirements (e.g., resource type and amount to be provided as
compensatory mitigation, site protection, ecological performance standards, monitoring requirements)
may be addressed through conditions added to the NWP authorization, instead of components of a
compensatory mitigation plan.
(d) For losses of streams or other open waters that require pre -construction notification, the district
engineer may require compensatory mitigation, such as stream rehabilitation, enhancement, or
preservation, to ensure that the activity results in minimal adverse effects on the aquatic environment.
(e) Compensatory mitigation will not be used to increase the acreage losses allowed by the acreage
limits of the NWPs. For example, if an NWP has an acreage limit of 112 -acre, it cannot be used to
authorize any project resulting in the loss of greater than 112 -acre of waters of the United States, even if
compensatory mitigation is provided that replaces or restores some of the lost waters. However,
compensatory mitigation can and should be used, as necessary, to ensure that a project already meeting
the established acreage limits also satisfies the minimal impact requirement associated with the NWPs.
(f) Compensatory mitigation plans for projects in or near streams or other open waters will normally
include a requirement for the restoration or establishment, maintenance, and legal protection (e.g.,
conservation easements) of riparian areas next to open waters. In some cases, riparian areas may be the
only compensatory mitigation required. Riparian areas should consist of native species. The width of the
required riparian area will address documented water quality or aquatic habitat loss concerns. Normally,
the riparian area will be 25 to 50 feet wide on each side of the stream, but the district engineer may
require slightly wider riparian areas to address documented water quality or habitat loss concerns. If it is
not possible to establish a riparian area on both sides of a stream, or if the waterbody is a lake or coastal
waters, then restoring or establishing a riparian area along a single bank or shoreline may be sufficient.
Where both wetlands and open waters exist on the project site, the district engineer will determine the
appropriate compensatory mitigation (e.g., riparian areas and/or wetlands compensation) based on what is
best for the aquatic environment on a watershed basis. In cases where riparian areas are determined to be
the most appropriate form of compensatory mitigation, the district engineer may waive or reduce the
requirement to provide wetland compensatory mitigation for wetland losses.
(g) Permittees may propose the use of mitigation banks, in -lieu fee programs, or separate permittee,
responsible mitigation. For activities resulting in the loss of marine or estuarine resources, permittee -
responsible compensatory mitigation may be environmentally preferable if there are no mitigation banks
or in -lieu fee programs in the area that have marine or estuarine credits available for sale or transfer to the
permittee. For permittee -responsible mitigation, the special conditions of the NWP verification roust
clearly indicate the party or parties responsible for the implementation and performance of the
compensatory mitigation project, and, if required, its long-term management.
(h) Where certain functions and serviecs of waters of the United States are permanently adversely
affected, such as the conversion of a forested or scrub -shrub wetland to a herbaceous wetland in a
permanently maintained utility line right-of-way, mitigation may be required to reduce the adverse effects
of the project to the minimal level.
24. Safety of Impoundment Structures, To ensure that all impoundment structures are safely designed,
the district engineer may require non -Federal applicants to demonstrate that the structures comply with
established state dam safety criteria or have been designed by qualified persons. The district engineer may
also require documentation that the design has been independently reviewed by similarly qualified
persons, and appropriate modifications made to ensure safety.
25. Water Quality. Where States and authorized Tribes, or EPA where applicable, have not previously
certified compliance of an NWP with CWA Section 401, individual 401 Water Quality Certification must
be obtained or waived (see 33 CFR 330.4(c)). The district engineer or State or Tribe may require
additional water quality management measures to ensure that the authorized activity does not result in
more than minimal degradation of water quality.
26. Coastal Zone Management. In coastal states where an NWP has not previously received a state coastal
zone management consistency concurrence, an individual state coastal zone management consistency
concurrence must be obtained, or a presumption of concurrence must occur (see 33 CFR 330.4(d)). The
district engineer or a State may require additional measures to ensure that the authorized activity is
consistent with state coastal zone management requirements.
27. Regional and Case -]By -Case Conditions. The activity must comply with any regional conditions that
may have been added by the Division Engineer (see 33 CFR 330.4(e)) and with any case specific
conditions added by the Corps or by the state, Indian Tribe, or U.S. EPA in its section 401 Water Quality
Certification, or by the state in its Coastal Zone Management Act consistency determination.
28. Use of Multiple Nationwide Permits. The use of more than one NWP for a single and complete
project is prohibited, except when the acreage loss of waters of the United States authorized by the N4rVPs
does not exceed the acreage limit of the NWP with the highest specified acreage limit, For example, if a
road crossing over tidal waters is constructed under NWP 14, with associated bank stabilization
authorized by NWP 13, the maximum acreage loss of waters of the United States for the total project
cannot exceed 113 -acre.
29. Transfer of Nationwide Permit Verifications, If the permittee sells the property associated with a
nationwide permit verification, the permittee may transfer the nationwide permit verification to the new
owner by submitting a letter to the appropriate Corps district office to validate the transfer. A copy of the
nationwide permit verification must be attached to the letter, and the letter must contain the following
statement and signature:
"When the structures or work authorized by this nationwide permit are still in existence at the time the
property is transferred, the terms and conditions of this nationwide permit, including any special
conditions, will continue to be binding on the new owner(s) of the property. To validate the transfer of
this nationwide permit and the associated liabilities associated with compliance with its terms and
conditions, have the transferee sign and date below."
(Transferee)
(Date)
30. Compliance Certification. Each permittee who receives an NWP verification letter from the Corps
must provide a signed certification documenting completion of the authorized activity and any required
compensatory mitigation. The success of any required permittee -responsible mitigation, including the
achievement of ecological performance standards, will be addressed separately by the district engineer.
The Corps will provide the permittee the certification document with the NWP verification letter. The
certification document will include: (a) A statement that the authorized work was done in accordance with
the NWP authorization, including any general, regional, or activity -specific conditions; (b) A statement
that the implementation of any required compensatory mitigation was completed in accordance with the
permit conditions. If credits from a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program are used to satisfy the
compensatory mitigation requirements, the certification must include the documentation required by 33
CFR 3323(])(3) to confirm that the permittee secured the appropriate number and resource type of
credits; and (c) The signature of the permittee certifying the completion of the work and mitigation.
31. Pre -Construction Notification. (a) Timing. Where required by the terms of the NWP, the prospective
permittee must notify the district engineer by submitting a pre -construction notification (PCN) as early as
possible. The district engineer must determine if the PCN is complete within 30 calendar days of the date
of receipt and, if the PCN is determined to be incomplete, notify the prospective permittee within that 30
day period to request the additional information necessary to make the PCN complete. The request must
specify the information needed to make the PCN complete. As a general rule, district engineers will
request additional information necessary to make the PCN complete only once. However, if the
prospective permittee does not provide all of the requested information, then the district engineer will
notify the prospective permittee that the PCN is still incomplete and the PCN review process will not
commence until all of the requested information has been received by the district engineer. The
prospective permittee shall not begin the activity until either: (1) He or she is notified in writing by the
district engineer that the activity may proceed under the NWP with any special conditions imposed by the
district or division engineer; or (2) 45 calendar days have passed from the district engineer's receipt of the
complete PCN and the prospective peimittee has not received written notice from the district or division
engineer. However, if the permittee was required to notify the Corps pursuant to general condition 18 that
listed species or critical habitat might be affected or in the vicinity of the project, or to notify the Corps
pursuant to general condition 20 that the activity may have the potential to cause effects to historic
properties, the permittee cannot begin the activity until receiving written notification from the Corps that
there is "no effect" on listed species or "no potential to cause effects" on historic properties, or that any
consultation required under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (see 33 CFR 330.4(f)) and/or
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation (see 33 CFR 330.4(g)) has been completed. Also, work
cannot begin under N WPs 21, 49, or 50 until the permittee has received written approval from the Corps.
If the proposed activity requires a written waiver to exceed specified limits of an NWP, the permittee
may not begin the activity until the district engineer issues the waiver. if the district or division engineer
notifies the permittee in writing that an individual permit is required within 45 calendar days of receipt of
a complete PCN, the permittee cannot begin the activity until an individual permit bas been obtained.
Subsequently, the permittee's right to proceed under the NWP may be modified, suspended, or revoked
only in accordance with the procedure set forth in 33 CFR 330.5(d)(2).
(b) Contents of Pre -Construction Notification: The PCN must be in writing and include the following
information: (1) Name, address and telephone numbers of the prospective permittee; (2) Location of the
proposed project; (3) A description of the proposed project; the project's purpose; direct and indirect
adverse environmental effects the project would cause, including the anticipated amount of loss of water
of the United States expected to result from the NWP activity, in acres, linear feet, or other appropriate
unit of measure; any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permit(s) used or intended to
be used to authorize any part of the proposed project or any related activity. The description should be
sufficiently detailed to allow the district engineer. to determine that the adverse effects of the project will
be minimal and to determine the need for compensatory mitigation. Sketches should be provided when
necessary to show that the activity complies with the terms of the NWP. (Sketches usually clarify the
project and when provided results in a quicker decision. Sketches should contain sufficient detail to
provide an illustrative description of the proposed activity (e.g., a conceptual plan), but do not need to be
detailed engineering plans); (4) The PCN must include a delineation of wetlands, other special aquatic
sites, and other waters, such as lakes and ponds, and perennial, intermittent, and ephemeral streams, on
the project site. Wetland delineations must be prepared in accordance with the current method required by
the Corps. The permittee may ask the Corps to delineate the special aquatic sites and other waters on the
9
project site, but there may be a delay if the Corps does the delineation, especially if the project site is
large or contains many waters of the United States. Furthermore, the 45 day period will not start until the
delineation has been submitted to or completed by the Corps, as appropriate; (5) If the proposed activity
will result in the loss of -greater than i /I0 -acre of wetlands and a PCN is required, the prospective
permittee must submit a statement describing how the mitigation requirement will be satisfied, or
explaining why the adverse effects are minimal and why compensatory mitigation should not be required.
As an alternative, the prospective permittee may submit a conceptual or detailed mitigation plan. (6) If
any listed species or designated critical habitat might be affected or is in the vicinity of the project, or if
the project is located in designated critical habitat, for non -Fed era] applicants the PCN must include the
name(s) of those endangered or threatened species that might be affected by the proposed work or utilize
the designated critical habitat that may be affected by the proposed work. federal applicants must provide
documentation demonstrating compliance with the Endangered Species Act; and (7) For an activitythat
may affect a historic property listed on, determined to be eligible for Iisting on, or potentially eligible for
listing on, the National Register of Historic Places, for noir-Federal applicants the PCN must state which
historic property may be affected by the proposed work or include a vicinity map indicating the location
of the historic property. Federal applicants must provide documentation demonstrating compliance with
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.
(c) Form of Pre -Construction Notification: The standard individual permit application form (Form
ENG 4345) may be used, but the completed application form must clearly indicate that it is a PCN and
must include all of the information required in paragraphs (b)(1) through (7) of this general condition. A
letter containing the required information may also be used.
(d) Agency Coordination: (1) The district engineer will consider any comments from Federal and
state agencies concerning the proposed activity's compliance with the terms and conditions of the NWPs
and the need for mitigation to reduce the project's adverse environmental effects to a minimal level. (2)
For all NWP activities that require pre -construction notification and result in the loss of greater than 1/2 -
acre of waters of the United. States, for NWP 21, 29, 39, 40, 42, 43, 44, 50, 51, and 52 activities that
require pre -construction notification and will result in the loss of greater than 300 linear feet of
intermittent and ephemeral stream bed, and for all NWP 48 activities that require pre -construction
notification, the district engineer will immediately provide (e.g., via e-mail, facsimile transmission,
overnight mail, or other expeditious manner) a copy of the complete PCN to the appropriate Federal or
state offices (U.S. FWS, state natural resource or water quality agency, EPA, State Historic Preservation
Officer (SHPO) or Tribal Historic Preservation Office (THPO), and, if appropriate, the NMFS). With the
exception of NWP 37, these agencies will have 10 calendar days from the date the material is transmitted
to telephone or fax the district engineer notice that they intend to provide substantive, site-specific
comments. The comments must explain why the agency believes the adverse effects will be more than
minimal. If so contacted by an agency, the district engineer will wait an additional 1.5 calendar days
before making a decision on the pre -construction notification. The district engineer will fully consider
agency comments received within the specified time frame concerning the proposed activity's compliance
with the terms and conditions of the NWPs, including the need for mitigation to ensure the net adverse
environmental effects to the aquatic environment of the proposed activity are minimal. The district
engineer will provide no response to the resource agency, except as provided below, The district engineer
will indicate in the administrative record associated with each pre -construction notification that the
resource agencies' concerns were considered. For NWP 3 7, the emergency watershed protection and
rehabilitation activity may proceed immediately in cases where there is an unacceptable hazard to life or a
significant loss of property or economic hardship will occur. The district engineer will consider any
comments received to decide whether the NWP 37 authorization should be modified, suspended, or
revoked in accordance with the procedures at 33 CFR 330.5. (3) In cases of where the prospective
permittee is not a Federal agency, the district engineer will provide a response to NMFS within 30
calendar days of receipt of any Essential Fish Habitat conservation recommendations, as required by
Section 305(b)(4)(B) of the Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. (4)
10
Applicants are encouraged to provide the Corps with either electronic files or multiple copies of pre -
construction notifications to expedite agency coordination.
District Engineer's Decision
1. In reviewing the PCN for the proposed activity, the district engineer will determine whether the
activity authorized by the NWP will result in more than minimal individual or cumulative adverse
environmental effects or maybe contrary to the public interest. For a linear project, this determination
will include an evaluation of the individual crossings to determine whether they individually satisfy the
terms and conditions of the NW P(s), as well as the cumulative effects caused by all of the crossings
authorized by NWP. If an applicant requests a waiver of the 300 linear foot limit on impacts to
intermittent or ephemeral streams or of an otherwise applicable limit, as provided for in NWPs 13, 21, 29,
36, 39, 40, 42, 43, 44, 50, 51 or 52, the district engineer will only grant the waiver upon a written
determination that the NWP activity will result in minimal adverse effects. When making minimal effects
determinations the district engineer will consider the direct and indirect effects caused by the NWP
activity. The district engineer will also consider site specific factors, such as the environmental setting in
the vicinity of the NWP activity, the type of resource that will be affected by the NWP activity, the
functions provided by the aquatic resources that will be affected by the NWP activity, the degree or
magnitude to which the aquatic resources perform those functions, the extent that aquatic resource
functions will be lost as a result of the NWP activity (e.g., partial or complete loss), the duration of the
adverse effects (temporary or permanent), the importance of the aquatic resource functions to the region
(e.g., watershed or ecoregion), and mitigation required by the district engineer. If an appropriate
functional assessment method is available and practicable to use, that assessment method may be used by
the district engineer to assist in the minimal adverse effects determination. The district engineer may add
case -specific special conditions to the NWP authorization to address site -specie environmental concerns.
2. If the proposed activity requires a PCN and will result in a loss of greater than 1110 -acre of
wetlands, the prospective permittee should submit a mitigation proposal with the PCN. Applicants may
also propose compensatory mitigation for projects with smaller impacts. The district engineer will
consider any proposed compensatory mitigation the applicant has included in the proposal in determining
whether the net adverse environmental effects to the aquatic environment of the proposed activity are
minimal. The compensatory mitigation proposal may be either conceptual or detailed. If the district
engineer determines that the activity complies with the terms and conditions of the NWP and that the
adverse effects on the aquatic environment are minimal, after considering mitigation, the district engineer
will notify the pennittee and include any activity -specific conditions in the NWP verification the district
engineer deems necessary. Conditions for compensatory mitigation requirements must comply with the
appropriate provisions at 33 CFR 332.3(k). The district engineer must approve the final mitigation plan
before the permittee commences work in waters of the United States, unless the district engineer
determines that prior approval of the final mitigation plan is not practicable or not necessary to ensure
timely completion of the required compensatory mitigation. If the prospective permittee elects to submit a
compensatory mitigation plan with the PCN, the district engineer will expeditiously review the proposed
compensatory mitigation plan. The district engineer trust review the proposed compensatory mitigation
plan within 45 calendar days of receiving a complete PCN and determine whether the proposed mitigation
would ensure no more than minimal adverse effects on the aquatic environment. if the net adverse effects
of the project on the aquatic environment (after consideration of the compensatory mitigation proposal)
are detennined by the district engineer to be minimal, the district engineer will provide a timely written
response to the applicant. The response will state that the project can proceed under the terms and
conditions of the NWP, including any activity -specific conditions added to the NWP authorization by the
district engineer.
3. If the district engineer determines that the adverse effects of the proposed work are more than
minimal, then the district engineer will notify the applicant either: (a) That the project does not qualify for
11
authorization under the NWP and instruct the applicant on the procedures to seek authorization under an
individual permit; (b) that the project is authorized under the NWP subject to the applicant's submission
of a mitigation plan that would reduce the adverse effects on the aquatic environment to the minimal
level; or (c) that the project is authorized under the NWP with specific modifications or conditions.
Where the district engineer determines that mitigation is required to ensure no more than minimal adverse
effects occur to the aquatic environment, the activity will be authorized within the 4S -day PCN period,
with activity -specific conditions that state the mitigation requirements. The authorization will include the
necessary conceptual or detailed mitigation or a requirement that the applicant submit a mitigation plan
that would reduce the adverse effects on the aquatic environment to the minimal level. When mitigation is
required, no work in waters of the United States may occur until the district engineer has approved a
specific mitigation plana or has determined that prior approval of a final mitigation plan is not practicable
or not necessary to ensure timely completion of the required compensatory mitigation.
Further Information
1. District Engineers have authority to determine if an activity complies with the terms and conditions of
an NWP.
2. NWPs do not obviate the need to obtain other federal, state, or local permits, approvals, or
authorizations required by law.
3. NWPs do not grant any property rights or exclusive privileges.
4. NWPs do not authorize any injury to the property or rights of others.
S. NWPs do not authorize interference with any existing or proposed Federal project.
C. CORPS SEATTLE DISTRICT REGIONAL GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. Aquatic Resources Requiring Special Protection. Activities resulting in a loss of waters of the United
States in a mature forested wetland, bog, bag -like wetland, aspen -dominated wetland, alkali wetland,
wetlands in a dunal system along the Washington coast, vernal pools, camas prairie wetlands, estuarine
wetlands, and wetlands in coastal lagoons cannot be authorized by a NWP, except by the following
NWPs:
NWP 3 — Maintenance
NWP 20 — Oil Spill Cleanup
NWP 32 — Completed Enforcement Actions
NWP 3 8 — Cleanup of Hazardous and Toxic Waste
In order to use one of the above -referenced NWPs in any of the aquatic resources requiring special
protection, you must submit a pre -construction notification to the District Engineer in accordance with
Nationwide Permit General Condition 31 (Pre -Construction Notification) and obtain written approval
before commencing work.
2. Commencement Bay. The following NWPs may not be used to authorize activities Iocated in the
Commencement Bay Study Area (see Figure 1 at awvw.nws.usace.army.mil, select Regulatory Permits
then Permit Guidebook, then Nationwide Permits) requiring Department of the Array authorization:
NWP 12 — Utility Line Activities (substations)
NWP 13 —Bank Stabilization
NWP 14 —Linear Transportation Projects
NWP 23 — Approved Categorical Exclusions
NWT 29 ---Residential Developments
NWI' 39 — Commercial and Institutional Developments
NWT 40 — Agricultural Activities
12
NWP 41 -- Reshaping Existing Drainage Ditches
NWP 42 — Recreational Facilities
NWP 43 — Stormwater Management Facilities
3. New Bank Stabilization Prohibition Areas in Tidal Waters of Puget Sound. Activities involving new
bank stabilization in tidal waters in Water Resource Inventory Areas (WRIAs) S, 9, 10, 11, and 12 (within
the specific area identified on Figure 2 at www.nws.usace.arrny.tnil, select Regulatory Permits then
Permit Guidebook, then Nationwide Permits) cannot be authorized by a NWP.
4. Bank Stabilization. Any project including new or maintenance bank stabilization activities requires
pre -construction notification to the District Engineer in accordance with Nationwide Permit General
Condition 31 for Pre -Construction Notification. This requirement does not apply to maintenance work
exempt by 33 CFR 323.4 (a)(2). Each notification must also include the following information:
a. Need for the work, including the cause of the erosion and the threat posed to structures,
infrastructure, and/or public safety. The notification must also include a justification for the need to place
fill or structures waterward of the line of the Corps' jurisdiction (typically, the ordinary high water mark
or mean higher high water .mark).
b. Current and expected post -project sediment movement and deposition patterns in and near the
project area. In tidal waters, describe the location and size of the nearest bluff sediment sources (feeder
bluffs) to the project area and current and expected post -project nearshore drift patterns in the project
area.
c. Current and expected post -project habitat conditions, including the presence of fish, wildlife and
plant species, submerged aquatic vegetation, spawning habitat, and special aquatic sites (e.g., vegetated
shallows, riffle and pool complexes, or mudflats) in the project area.
d. In rivers and streams, an assessment of the likely impact of the proposed work on upstream,
downstream and cross -stream properties (at a minimum the area assessed should extend from the nearest
upstream bend to the nearest downstream bend of the watercourse). Discuss the methodology used for
determining effects. The Corps reserves the right to request an increase in the reach assessment area to
fully address the relevant ecological reach and associated habitat.
c. For new bank stabilization activities in rivers and streams, describe the type and length of existing
bank stabilization within 300 feet up and downstream of the project area. In tidal areas, describe the type
and length of existing bank stabilization within 300 feet along the shoreline on both sides of the project
area.
f. Demonstrate the proposed project incorporates the least environmentally damaging practicable
bank protection methods. These methods include, but are not limited to, the use of bioengineering,
biotechnical design, root wads, large woody material, native plantings, and beach nourishment in certain
circumstances. If rock must be used due to site erosion conditions, explain how the bank stabilization.
structure incorporates elements beneficial to fish. If the Corps determines you have not incorporated the
least environmentally damaging practicable bank protection methods and/or have not fully compensated
for impacts to aquatic resources, you must submit a compensatory mitigation plan to compensate for
impacts to aquatic resources.
g. A planting plan using native riparian plant species unless the applicant demonstrates a planting
plan is not appropriate or not practicable.
13
5. Crossings of Waters of the United Statcs. Any project including installing, replacing, or modifying
crossings of waters of the United States, such as culverts, requires pre -construction notification to the
District Engineer in accordance with Nationwide Permit General Condition 31 for Pre -Construction
Notification. This requirement does not apply to maintenance work exempt by 33 CFR 323.4 (a)(2).
Each notification must also include the following information:
a. Need for the crossing.
b. Crossing design criteria and design methodology.
c. Rationale behind using the specific design method for the crossing.
6. Cultural Resources and Human Burials. Permittees must immediately stop work and notify the
District Engineer within 24 hours if, during the course of conducting authorized work, human burials,
cultural resources, or historic properties, as identified by the National Historic Preservation Act, are
discovered. Failure to stop work in the area of discovery until the Corps can comply with the provisions
of 33 CFR 325 Appendix C, the National Historic Preservation Act, and other pertinent laws and
regulations could result in a violation of state and federal laws. Violators are subject to civil and criminal
penalties.
7. Essential Fish Habitat. An activity which may adversely affect essential fish habitat, as identified
under the Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and. Management Act (MSA), may not be authorized
by NNW until essential fish habitat requirements have been met by the applicant and the Corps. Non-
federal permittees shall notify the District Engineer if essential fish habitat may be affected by, or is in the
vicinity of, a proposed activity and shall not begin work until notified by the District Engineer that the
requirements of the essential fish habitat provisions of the MSA have been satisfied and the activity is
authorized. The notification must identify the type(s) of essential fish habitat (e.g., Pacific salmon,
groundfish, and/or coastal -pelagic species) managed by a Fishery Management Plan that may be affected.
Information about essential fish habitat is available at www.nwi-.noaa.gov/.
S. Vegetation Protection and Restoration. Permittees must clearly mark all construction area boundaries
before beginning work. The removal of native vegetation in riparian areas and wetlands, and the removal
of submerged aquatic vegetation in estuarine and tidal areas must be avoided and minimized to the
maximum extent practicable. Areas subject to temporary vegetation removal shall be replanted with
appropriate native species by the end of the first planting season following the disturbance except as
waived by the District Engineer. If an aquaculture area is permitted to impact submerged aquatic
vegetation under NWP 48, the aquaculture area does not need to be replanted with submerged aquatic
vegetation.
9. Access. You must allow representatives of this office to inspect the authorized activity at any time
deemed necessary to ensure the work is being, or has been, accomplished in accordance with the terms
and conditions of your permit.
10. Contractor Notification of Permit Requirements. The permittee must provide a copy of tho
nationwide permit verification letter, conditions, and permit drawings to all contractors involved with the
authorized work, prior to the commencement of any work in waters of the U.S.
D. CORPS REGIONAL SPECIFIC CONDITIONS FOR THIS NWP: NONE
E. STATE 401 CERTIFICATION GENERAL CONDITIONS:
14
1. For in -water construction activities. Individual 401 review is required for projects or activities
authorized under NWPs that will cause, or be likely to cause or contribute to an exceedenee of a State
water quality standard (WAC 173-201A) or sediment management standard ( WAC 173 -204) -
Note: State water duality standards are posted on Ecology's website:
http: //tisryv►v, ecy. }va.govlprogramsltivglvii,gsl Click "Surface Water Criteria". for freshwater and
marine water standards. Sediment management standards are posted on Ecology's website:
http://N7wtiv.ecy.ii,o.govlbiblio/u,fic173204.ht)nL Information is also available by contacting
Ecology's Federal Permit staff.
2. Projects or Activities Discharging to Impaired Waters. Individual 401 review is required for
projects or activities authorized under NWPs if the project or activity will occur in a 303(d) listed
segment of a waterbody or upstream of a listed segment and may result in further exceedences of the
specific listed paramcter.
Note: To determine if your project or activity is in a 303(4) listed segment of a waterbody, visit
Ecology's Water Quality Assessment webpage for reaps and search tools,
http:lli-vtivtiKecy.tia,a.gov/progr-ales/wq/303d/2008I. Information is also available by contacting
Ecology's Federal Permit staff.
3. Notification. For projects or activities that will require Individual 401 review, applicants must
provide Ecology with the same documentation provided to the Corps (as described in Corps
Nationwide Permit General Condition 31, Pre -Construction Notification), including, when applicable:
(a) A description of the project, including site plans, project purpose, direct and indirect adverse
environmental effects the project would cause, and any other Department of the Army permits
used or intended to be used to authorize any part of the proposed project or any related activity.
(b) Delineation of special aquatic sites and other waters of the United States. Wetland delineations
must be prepared in accordance with the current method required by the Corps and shall include
Ecology's Wetland Rating form. Wetland rating forms are subject to review and verification by
Ecology staff.
Note: Wetland rating forms are available on Ecology's Wetlands website:
http:/hs�sl�v.ecy.wa.gov/prog7-ams/seaArvetlands/ratingsystems or by contacting E cology's Federal
Permit staff
(c) A statement describing bow the mitigation requirement will be satisfied. A conceptual or detailed
mitigation or restoration plan may be submitted.
Mitigation plans submitted for Ecology review and approval shall be based on the guidance
provided in Wetland Mitigation in Washington State, Parts 1 and 2 (Ecology Publications #06-06-
011 a and #06-06-011b).
(d) Coastal Zone Management Program "Certification of Consistency" Form if the project: is located
within a coastal county (Clallam, Grays Harbor, Island, Jefferson, King, Kitsap, Mason, Pacific,
Pierce, San Juan, Skagit, Snohomish, Thurston, Wahkiakurn, and Whatcorn counties).
Note: CZMCertification of Consistency forms are available on Ecology's Federal Permit
website: http:l/ivivu,.ecy.yvo.gov/l)roga'aT)islsealfed perlitit/i)adex.htnrl or by contacting Ecology's
Federal Permit staff.
15
(e) .Other applicable requirements of Corps Nationwide Permit General Condition 31, Corps
Regional Conditions, or notification conditions of the applicable NWP.
Note: Ecology has 1130 days from receipt of applicable documents noted above and a copy of the
final authorization letter from the Corps providing coverage for a proposed project or activity
under the NWP Program to issue a WQC and C7_Mconsistency determination response. If more
than ISO days pass after Ecology's receipt of these documents, your requirement to obtain an
individual WQC and CZMconsislency determination response becomes waived
4. Aquatic resources requiring special protection. Certain aquatic resources are unique, difficult -to -
replace components of the aquatic environment in Washington State. Activities that would affect
these resources must be avoided to the greatest extent possible. Compensating for adverse impacts to
high value aquatic resources is typically difficult, prohibitively expensive, and may not be possible in
some landscape settings.
Individual 401 review is required for activities in or affecting the following aquatic resources (and not
prohibited by Regional Condition 1);
(a) Wetlands with special characteristics (as defined in the Washington State Wetland Rating Systems
for western and eastern Washington, Ecology Publications #04-06-025 and #04-06-015):
• Estuarine wetlands
• Natural Heritage wetlands
• Bogs
• Old-growth and mature forested wetlands
• Wetlands in coastal lagoons
• Interdunal wetlands
• Vernal pools
• Alkali wetlands
(b) rens, aspen -dominated wetlands, camas prairie wetlands, and 'marine water with eelgrass (Zostera
marina) beds (except for NWP 48).
(c) Category 1 wetlands
(d) Category 11 wetlands with a habitat score> 29 points. This State General Condition does not
apply to the following Nationwide Permits:
NWP 20 — Response Operations for Oil and Hazardous Substances
NWP 32 -- Completed Enforcement Actions
5. Mitigation. For projects requiring Individual 401 review, adequate compensatory mitigation must
be provided for wetland and other water quality -related impacts of projects or activities authorized
under the NWP Program.
(a) Mitigation plans submitted for Ecology review and approval shall be based on the guidance
provided in Wetland Mitigation in Washington State, Parts 1 and 2 (Ecology Publications #06-06
011a and #06-06-011b) and shall, at a minima n, include the following:
16
L A description of the measures taken to avoid and minimize impacts to wetlands and other
waters of the U.S.
ii. The nature of the proposed impacts (i.e., acreage of wetlands and functions lost or degraded)
iii. The rationale for the mitigation site that was selected
iv. The goals and objectives of the compensatory mitigation prgject
v. How the mitigation project will be accomplished, including construction sequencing, best
management practices to protect water quality, proposed performance standards for measuring
success and the proposed buffer widths
vi. How it will be maintained and monitored to assess progress towards goals and objectives.
Monitoring will generally be required for a minimum of five years. For forested and scrub -
shrub wetlands, 10 years of monitoring will often be necessary.
vii. How the compensatory mitigation site will be legally protected for the long term.
Refer to Wetland Mitigation in Washington State — Part 2: Developing Mitigation Plans (Ecology
Publication #06-06-01 lb) for guidance on developing mitigation plans.
Ecology encourages the use of alternative mitigation approaches, including advance mitigation and other
programmatic approaches such as mitigation banks and programmatic mitigation areas at the local level,
If you are interested in proposing use of an alternative mitigation approach, consult with the appropriate
Ecology regional staff person. (see bttp://www.ecy,wa.gov/programs/sea/wetlands/contacts.litm)
Information on the state wetland mitigation banking program is available on Ecology's website:
http://vv,,v",.ecy.wa,gov/programs/sea/wetlands/initigationtbanking/i ndex.html
6. Temporary Fills. Individual 401 review is required for any project or activity with temporary fill in
wetlands or other waters of the State for more than 90 days, unless the applicant has received written
approval from Ecology.
Note: This State General Condition does not apply to projects or activities authorized under NWP 33,
Temporary Construction, Access, and Dewatering
7. Stormwater discharge pollution prevention: All projects that involve land disturbance or
impervious surfaces must implement prevention or control measures to avoid discharge of pollutants
in stojmwater runoff to waters of the state. For land disturbances during construction, the permittee
must obtain and implement permits where required and follow Ecology's current stormwater manual.
Note: Storinwater permit information is available at Ecology's Water Quality website:
http:Iliv.i,iv.ecy.Wla.gol,Iprogramslii,q/stornttit,atel/iiidex.htirtl. Ecology's 5tormwater Management and
Design Manuals are available at:
http:lAi,wrv.ecy.ii,a.govlprogramslis,ql,rtorliaivaterinairlaicipol/StrllaivtrAlara.html. Information is also
available by contacting Ecology's Federal Permit staff.
8. State Certification for PCNs not receiving 45 -day response. in the event the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers does not respond to a complete pre -construction notification within 45 days, the applicant
must contact Ecology for Individual 401 review.
17
F. STATE 401 CERTIFICATION SPECIFIC CONDITIONS FOR THIS NWP:
Certified, subject to conditions. Permittee must meet Ecology 401 General Conditions. Individual 401
review is required -for projects or activities authorized under this NWP if.
1. The project or activities are below the OHWM with new work being proposed outside the
original footprint.
2. The proposed project or activity increases the original footprint of the structure by more than
1/10' acre in wetlands. Note 1. "Original footprint" refers to the configuration of the structure or
filled area within the last two years. Note 2: This may include causing surrounding wetlands to be
drained.
3. The project or activity includes adding a new structure, such as a weir, flap gate/tide gate, or
culvert to the site.
G. EPA 401 CERTIFICATION GENERAL CONDITIONS:
A. Any activities in the following types of wetlands and waters of the United States will need to apply
for an individual 401 certification: Mature forested wetlands, bogs, bog -like wetlands, wetlands in dunal
systems along the Washington coast, coastal lagoons, vernal pools, aspen -dominated wetlands, alkali
wetlands, camas prairie wetlands, estuarine wetlands, including salt marshes, and marine waters with
eelgrass or kelp beds.
B. A 401 certification determination is based on the project or activity meeting established turbidity
levels. The EPA will be using as guidance the state of Washington's water quality standards [WAC 173-
201a] and sediment quality standards [WAC 173-204]. Projects or activities that are expected to exceed
these levels or that do exceed these levels will require an individual 401 certification.
The water quality standards allow for short-term turbidity execedances after all necessary Best
Management Practices have been implemented (e.g., properly placed and maintained filter fences, hay
bales and/or other erosion control devices, adequate detention of runoff to prevent turbid water from
flowing off-site, providing a vegetated buffer between the activity and open water, etc.), and only up to
the following limits:
Wetted Stream Width at Discharge Point
Approximate Downstream Point for
Determining Compliance
Up to 30 feet
50 feet
>30 to 100 feet
100 feet
>100 feet to 200 feet
200 feet
>200 feet
300 feet
LAKE, POND, RESERVOIR
Lesser of 100 feet or maximum surface
dimension
C. 401 certification of projects and activities under NWPs will use Washington State Department of
Ecology's most recent stormwater manual or an EPA approved equivalent manual as guidance in meeting
water quality standards.
18
D. For projects and activities requiring coverage under an NPDES permit, certification is based an
compliance with the requirements of that permit. Projects and activities not in compliance with NPDES
requirements will require individual 401 certification.
E. Individual 401 certification is required for projects or activities authorized under N WPs if the
project will discharge to a waterbody on the list of unpaired waterbodies (the 303(d) List) and the
discharge may result in further exceedance of a specific parameter the waterbody is listed for. The EPA
shall make this determination on a case-by-case basis.
For projects or activities that will discharge to a 303(d) -listed waterbody that does not have an
approved Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) or an approved water quality management plan, the
applicant must provide documentation for EPA approval showing that the discharge will not result in
further exceedance of the, listed contaminant or impairment.
For projects or activities that will discharge to a 303(d) --listed waterbody that does not have an
approved TMDL, the applicant must provide documentation for EPA approval showing that the discharge
is within the limits established in the TMDL. The current list of 303(d) -listed waterbodies in Washington
State will be consulted in snaking this determination and is available on Ecology's web site at:
,A,%N,-tv.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wrq/303 d/2012/i ndex.lrtml
The EPA may issue 401 certification for projects or activities that would result in further exceedance
or impairment if mitigation is provided that would result in a net decrease in listed contaminants or less
impairment in the waterbody. This determination would be made during individual 401 certification
review.
F. For projects requiring individual 401 certification, applicants must provide the EPA with the same
documentation provided to the Corps, (as described in Corps' National General Condition 31, Pre -
Construction Notification), including, when applicable:
(a) A description of the project, including site plans, project purpose, direct and indirect adverse
environmental effects the project would cause, any other U.S. Department of the Army
permits used or intended to use to authorize any part of the proposed project or any related
activity.
(b) Delineation of special aquatic sites and other waters of the United States. Wetland
delineations must be prepared in accordance with the current method required by the Corps.
(c) A statement describing; how the mitigation requirement will be satisfied. A conceptual or
detailed mitigation or restoration plan may be submitted.
(d) Other applicable requirements of Corps National General Condition 31, Corps Regional
Conditions, or notification conditions of the applicable NWP.
A request for individual 401 certification- review is not complete until the EPA receives the
applicable documents noted above and the EPA has received a copy of the final authorization letter from
the Corps providing coverage for a proposed project or activity under the NWP Program.
G. No activity, including structures and work in navigable waters of the United States or discharges
of dredged or fill material, may consist of unsuitable material (e.g., trash, debris, car bodies, asphalt, etc.)
and material used for construction or discharged must be free from toxic pollutants in toxic amounts (see
Section 307 of the Clean Water Act).
19
H. An individual 401 certification is based on adequate compensatory mitigation being provided for
aquatic resource and other water quality -related impacts of projects or activities authorized under tho
NWP Program.
A 401 certification is contingent upon written approval from the EPA of the compensatory
mitigation plan for projects and activities resulting in any of the following:
• impacts to any aquatic resources requiring special protection (as defined in EPA General
Condition A or Corps General Regional Condition 1)
• any impacts to tidal waters or non -tidal waters adjacent to tidal waters (applies to NW 14)
• Or, any impacts to aquatic resources greater than'/4 acre.
Compensatory mitigation plans submitted to the EPA shall be based on the Joint Agency guidance
provided in Wetland Mitigation in Washington State, Parts I and 2 (Ecology Publication #06-06-011a
and #06-06-011b) and shall, at a minimum, include the following:
(1) A description of the measures taken to avoid and minimize impacts to wetlands and other
waters of the U.S.
(2) The nature of the proposed impacts (i.e., acreage of wetlands and functions lost or degraded)
(3) The rationale for the mitigation site that was selected
(4) The goals and objectives of the compensatory mitigation project
(5) How the mitigation project will be accomplished, including proposed performance standards.
for measuring success (including meeting planting success standard of 80 percent survival
after five years), evidence for hydrology at the rrritigation site, and the proposed buffer
widths;
(6) How it will be maintained and monitored to assess progress towards goals and objectives.
(7) Completion and submittal of an "as -built conditions report" upon completion of grading,
planting and hydrology establishment at the mitigation site;
(8) Completion and submittal of monitoring reports at years 3 and 5 showing the results of
monitoring for hydrology, vegetation types, and aerial cover of vegetation.
(9) For forested and scrub -shrub wetlands, 10 years of monitoring will often be necessary.
(10) Documentation of legal site protection mechanism (covenant or deed restriction) to show
how the compensatory mitigation site will be legally protected for the long-term.
I. An individual 401 certification is required for any activity where temporary fill will remain in
wetlands or other waterbodies for more than 90 days. The 90 day period begins when filling activity starts
in the wetland or other waterbody.
J. An individual 401 is required for any proposed project or activity in waterbodies on the most
current list of the following Designated Critical Resource Waters (per Corps General Condition 22).
K. An individual 401 certification is required for any proposed project that would increase permanent,
above -grade fill within the 100 -year floodplain (including the floodway and the flood fringe).
[Note. The 100 -year floodplain is defined as those areas identified as Zones A, Al -30, AE, All,
AO, A99, V, V 1-30, and VE on the most current Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood
Rate Insurance Maps, or areas identified as within the 100 -year floodplain on applicable local
Flood Management Program maps. The 100 -year flood is also known as the flood with a 100 -year
recurrence interval, or as the flood with an exceedance probability of 0.01.1
20
H. EPA 401 CERTIFICATION SPECIFIC. CONDITIONS FOR THIS NWP:
Partially denied without prejudice. Permittee must meet EPA 401 General Conditions. An individual 401
certification is required for projects authorized under this NWP if,
1. The project or activity would extend beyond the original project footprint (either along the
shoreline or below MHl'IW or ()HWM), or
2. Any activity requiring excavation or dredging in open water.
I. COASTAL, ZONE MANAGEMENT CONSISTENCY RESPONSE FOR THIS NWP:
Concur, subject to the following condition: When individual 401 review is triggered, a CZM Certificate
of Consistency form must be submitted for project located within the 15 coastal counties (See State
General 401 Condition 3 (Notification)).
21
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION -" lr` '`,p,
A• REPORT' COMPLETION DATE FOR PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL. DETERMINATIION (JD)r�pont13 _4 201
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PRELIMINARY JD:
Todd B1ack,Clty of Renton Communes Services 1055 S Gra0y Way, Rent❑n, Washington 98057
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER, Seattle District Renton Communit Services fCodar River Gabion Repal NWS -2013-38
D, PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State: WA County: KiRcn City: Renton
Center coordinates of site (latdong in degree decimal format}: tat. 47.03911N, Long, -J22,205413 W
Name of nearestwaterbody: Cedar River
Name of any water bodies oo the site, In the review area, that have been identified as SwAlon 10 waters:
Tidal:
Non -Tidal:
Identify (estimate) amount of waters In the review area (i€ there are multiple sites, use the table instead):
Non -wetland waters (total for site): linear feet 1.800 and width (ft) 116 ar acres.
Stream Flow: RPW Flow path: Cedar Nver outlets to Lake Washington which is on the Corns' list of navigable waters
Wetlands: acres (total for site).
Cowardin Class(es):
Site
number
Latitude
Longitude
Cowardin
Class
Estimated amount of aquatic
resource in review area
Class of aquatic resource
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHI=CK ALL THAT APPLY):
�{ Office (Desk) Determination. Date: 14 January 2013
[] Field Determination. Date(s):
SUPPORTING DATA. Data raviowed for preliminary JD (check at[ that apply - checked items should be included In caso file and, where checked and
m uested, appropriately reference sources below);
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicanifconsultant: Cedar River Gabion Repair project drawings dated 18 December
2012,
❑ Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
❑ Office concurs with data sheetsldelineallon report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/deltneaflon report. Explain;
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
Corps navigable waters' study: The p1ject reach Is immediately upstream of the portion of the Cedar River Included on the Corps' list of navl able
waters .
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHO data, ❑ USGS a and 12 digit HUC maps.
❑ U.S. Geological Survey map(s), Cite scale & quad name:
❑ USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
State/Local weland Inventory map(s): King County iMAP.
❑ FEMAiFIRM reaps;
❑ 1001 year Flood lain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
El photographs; 6 Aerial (Name & Date);
❑ Photographs; ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Provious determination(s), File no., date (and findings) of response letter (determination and coordination);
® Other information (please specify): Goggle Earth.
1. The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional waters of the United States on the subject site, and the permit applicant or other affected
party who requested this prellminary JD is hereby advised of his or her option to request and obtain an approved Jurisdictional determination (JD) for that site.
Nevertheless, the permit applicant or other person who requested this prelfrminary JD has declined to exercise the option to obtain an approved JD In this
instance and at this time.
2. in any circumsiance where a permit applicant obtains an Individual permit, or a Natlanwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification
requiring `pre-eonstmctlon notification' (PCN), or requests verification for a non -reporting NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant has not
requested an approved JD for tha activity, the permit applioant is hereby made aware of the following; (1) the permit app€tcanl has elected to seek a permit
authorizalion based on a preliminary JD, which does not make an official determinatlon of Jurisdictional waters; (2) that the applicant has the option to request
an approved JD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and that basing a permit authorization on an approved JD could
possibly result In less compensatory mitigation being required or different special Conditions; (3) that the applicant has the right to request an individual
permit rather than accepting the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorizaflon; (4) that the applicant Can accept a permit
authorization and thereby agree to comply with all the terms and conditions of that permlt, Including whatever mitigation requ}roments the Corps has
determined to be necessary; (5) that undertaking any activily In reliance upon the subject permit authorization without requesting an approved JD constitutes
the appllcanfs acceptance of the use of the preliminary. JD, but that either form of JD vrill be processed as soon as is practicable; (6) accepting a permit
authorization (e,g,, signing a proffered individual permit) or undertaking any activity In reliance on any farm of Corps permit authorization based on a
preliminary JD constitutes agreement that all wetlands and other water bodies on the site affected in any way by that activity are jurisdictional waters of the
United States, and precludes any challenge to such Jurlsdlction in any administrative or Judlclal compliance or enforcement action, or In any administrative
appeal or In any Federal court; and (7) whether the -appllcant elects to use either an approved JD or a preliminary JD, that JD will be processed as soon as
Is practicable, Further, an approved JD, a proffered Individual permit (and all terms and conditions contained therdn), or individual permit denlal can be
administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331, and that In any administrative appeal, jurisdictional issues can be raised (see 33 C.F.R.
331,5(a)(2)), If, during that administrative appeal, It becomes necessary to make an offldal delerminallon whether CWA jurisdiction exists over a site, or to
provide an official dellneation of jurisdictional waters on the site, the Carps will provide an approved JD to accornplish that result, as soon as is practicable.
This preliminary JD finds that there °maybe"waters of the Untied States on the subject project site, and identifies all aquatic features on the site that could
be affected by the proposed actfvliy, based on the Information in this document,
1M ORTANT NOTE; The Information recd ded on this form has not necessadIX beenverdied by the CoLps and should not be relied upon for later
urlsdictional determinations
4-1 11`---� --20o
Project Manager Date
Preliminary JD pale
Permit applicant, landownor, a lease, easement oroplon holderr or incrMdual with identifiable End substantial legal interest in the property; this sbnature Is not required for
prellminary JDs associated with entorcament actions,
.�✓ ,onra a
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
Army corps
of Engineers WITH DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT
of �
Seattle District 'OK+
Permit Number: NWS -2013-0038
Name of Permittee: City of Renton - Todd Black
OCT 0 9 2013
Date of .Issuance:
Upon completion of the activity authorized by this permit, please check the applicable boxes below, date
and sign this certification, and return it to the following address:
Department of the Army
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Seattle District, Regulatory Branch
Post Office Box 3755
Seattle, Washington 98124-3755
Please note that your permitted activity is subject to a compliance inspection by a U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers representative. If you fail to comply with the terms and conditions of your authorization, your
permit may be subject to suspension, modification, or revocation.
Printed Name:
Signature:
Date:
The work authorized by the above -referenced permit has been completed in accordance with the
❑
terms and conditions of this permit.
Date work complete:
❑ Photographs and as -built drawings of the authorized work (OPTIONAL, unless required
as a Special Condition of the permit).
Printed Name:
Signature:
Date:
If applicable, the mitigation required (e.g., construction and plantings) in the above -referenced
❑
permit has been completed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit (not
including fixture monitoring).
Date work complete:
❑ Photographs and as -built drawings of the mitigation (OPTIONAL, unless required as a
Special Condition of the permit).
Printed Name:
Signature:
Date:
X F"r
Denis Law
City o ; t
Mayor _.; k_
�J.
March 19, 2013 Department of Community and Economic Development
C.E. "Chi p"Vi n cent, Administrator
Karen Walter
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, Fisheries Division
39015 - 172nd Avenue SE
Auburn, WA 98092
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO JANUARY 29, 2013 COMMENTS
LUA12-000290; ECF
Dear Ms. Walter:
Thank you for taking the time to comment on the subject SEPA application. Below
please find a response to your comments provided in your January 29, 2013 letter to the
City of Renton. Your comments are in italics and the responses are in plain text.
1. For the long term, the City should actively pursue funding, easements, and
develop a plan to relocate the Cedar River trail outside of the 100 year floodplain.
to avoid additional gabion repairs, replacements and the continued impacts of
the gabion baskets and hardened water -level trail on salmon habitat in the lower
Cedor River.
The adopted Parks, Recreation and Natural Areas Plan identifies long range plans
to relocate the Cedar River Trail outside of the 100 year floodplain. In addition,
this relocation is identified in the adopted City Center Community Plan. The City
recognizes that repeated flooding events are weakening the trail on the right
bank between Logan Avenue North and Bronson Way North. Funding is the
largest hurdle to accomplish the goals currently identified in the Parks,
Recreation and Natural Areas Plan and the City Center Plan. Long term adopted
plans exist and as opportunities for funding arise, the recommendations for trail
relocation included in these plans would be considered.
2. In the short term, the proposed gabion replacement should be constructed with
smaller wire mesh size%penings to keep the rack fill inside the basket; and
should use a mix of small and larger sized rock materials (preferably rounded
rock) to eliminate voids that benefit salmon predators and that entrap adult
salmon. if the replaced gabion baskets with rounded rock fail, then at least the
rock material is more similar to the natural streambed substrate than angular
rock.
Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov
Karen Walter
Page 2 of 3
March 19, 2013
The City reviewed this option with their consultants, to identify feasibility for
construction of the gabions. The consulting Engineer on the subject project
identified that the smaller mesh size would impinge upon the willow trunks and
would either strangle the shrubs or cause the mesh to break. We will research
into providing a heavy gauge gabion wire. However, for a revision to be made to
the gabion, we will need to obtain permission from FEMA, since this is,a change
to the original gabion structure.
The consulting Engineer also stated "I would avoid round rocks in the gabions:
It's important that the rocks interlock. Round rocks would roll on top of each
other and the gabions would be sure to fail."
3. The proposed live willows stakes to be planted every 36 inches in the gabion will
provide some mitigation value provided that large and hardy enough willow
stakes are used. Survival should be monitored for at least 5 years and willow .
stakes replaced as needed.
Inserting willow stakes at the suggested spacing into the gabions during initial
construction is feasible, as the rocks can be added around the stakes. The City
will specify and require the installation of quality willow.stakes. Replacing willow
stakes after the rocks have settled would be impossible, as there would no
longer be space or a method to make the insertion through the rocks without
disassembling the entire gabion basket. Due to the cost and potential permit.
time,associated with gabion disassembling, willow stake replacement and gabion
re -assembling, the City cannot commit to replacing willow stakes.
4. Additional shoreline improvements should.be implemented including removing all
invasive plants from the project area, replacing emergent vegetation that is
removed with native emergent vegetation preferred by salmon.
The invasive plants are growing out of the.existing gabion baskets. Hand removal
of all the invasive plants to also include the root systems would be impossible. In
addition, the City's parks maintenance policy is not to use herbicides close to
water bodies, unless through approved agency projects to eradicate invasives
such as Knotweed.
Invasive plants that can be removed in the area of construction within the
project area will be removed as,a part of this project, noting that trees and/or
shrubs growing.in the gabions that are providing shading will not be removed.
S. The City Community Services and other relevant City departments should
implement lighting reduction actions-(e.g. changing luminaries, height of fixtures,
screening, shielding, taller riparian plantings, and more) to reduce artificial light
4 Pao
Karen Walter
Page 3 of 3
March 19, 2413
intensity along the lower Cedar River with a goal of less than a. 1 lux as
recommended in research on Cedar River sockeye salmon .(see
http://www.fws.gov/wafwo/fisheries/Publicationsl P232.pdf). These actions are
necessary to reduce juvenile salmon outmigration impacts including increased
delays and predation as a result of light conditions at night in the lower Cedar
River. The website http://www.darksky.org may serve as one resource for
practical information about addressing public safety while reducing light levels.
The subject project does not involve any lighting or impact an area that is
currently lit; therefore amendments to current lighting in the vicinity_ of the
project are not proposed as part of the subject project.
At this time, the Gabion.Repair project is "on hold" pursuant to the applicant's request.
This request is a result of re-initiation of Section 7 Consultation with USFWS and NMFS.
The outcome of the Section 7 Consultation review process may result in changes to the
proposed project which is unknown at this time. Therefore the local SEPA
Environmental Review project is pending the outcome of the federal review process.
If you have any questions about the above comments or the project, please feel free to
contact me at (425)430-7314.
Sincerely,
Vanessa Dolbee
Senior Planner
cc: Todd Black, Capital Project Coordinator, City of Renton / Applicant
Leslie Betlach, Parks Planning and Natural Resources Director
Brad Thiele /Northwest Environmental Consulting, LLC
Suzanne Anderson / USACE Project Manager
Alysha Kaplan, Regional PA Supervisor
Denis Law
CItY
Mayor. lE��
API j� r
February 18, 2013 Department of Community and Economic Development
C:E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator
Brad Thiele
Northwest Environmental Consulting, LLC
3639 Palatine Avenue N
Seattle, WA 98103
SUBJECT: "On Hold" Notice
Cedar River Gabion Repair, LUA12-000290, ECF
Dear Mr. Thiele:
The Planning Division of the City of Renton accepted the above master application for
review on January 14, 2013. During our review, the applicant requested the project be
placed on hold in a February 13, 2013 e-mail (enclosed).
At this time, your project has been placed "on hold". At which time, you decide to
resume processing the subject application, notify the Department of Community and
Economic Development and we will resume reviewing the subject application. Please
contact me at (425) 430-7314if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Vanessa Dolbee
Senior Planner
Enclosure— Feb. 13, 2013 e-mail
cc: Todd Black- City of Renton /Applicant
Lois May Smith / Party(ies) of Record
Renton City Hall . 1055 south Gradyway . Renton, Washington 98057 •. rentonwa.gov
f ti
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Todd Black
Sent:
Wednesday, February 13, 2013 3:52 PM
To:
Vanessa Dolbee
Cc:
Leslie A Betlach
Subject:
Cedar River Gabion Repair, LUA12-000290, ECF
Hi Vanessa,
Parks Planning and Natural Resources would like to request a hold on the above noted 5EPA application. We will notify
you when the application will be requested to be taken off of hold.
If you have any questions, please let me know. Thank you.
Regards,
Todd
Todd Black, ASLA
Capital Project Coordinator I Parks Planning & Natural Resources
1055 5 Grady Way 16th Floor I Renton, WA 98057
Phone: 425.430.6571 1 Fax: 425.430.6603 1 tblackPrentonwa.gov
r t ..1 1
^fir 7 f ` r 7 �, cc
Ms. Vanessa Dolbee
Senior Planner
MUCKLESHDOT INDIAN TRIBE
Fisheries Division
39015-172 nd Avenue SE • Auburn, Washington 98092-9763
Phone: (253) 939-3311 • Fax: (253) 931-0752
January 29, 2013
Department of Community and Economic Development
City of Renton, City Hall, 6t" Floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
City Of Renton
F'1annr119 Division
JAN 31 2111j
Uft,eo
RE: Cedar River Gabion Replacement Project, LUA12, 000290, ECF, Notice of Application and
Proposed Determination of Non -Significance
Dear Ms. Dolbee:
Our Habitat Program staff reviewed the Determination of Non -Significance threshold determination,
environmental checklist, and plan sheets for the Cedar River Gabion Replacement project. Gabion work
is proposed at five sites along North Riverside Drive between Logan Avenue and Bronson Way North
Bridge. This project will replace 416 linear feet of damaged gabion baskets, brick pedestrian trail repairs,
and planting with willows. We recommend some project modifications to mitigate impacts to fish habitat
in the short term and a longer term approach to ameliorate the poor fish habitat conditions in this reach
over time.
Gabions typically provide poor or marginal fish habitat as abrasive or corrosive conditions can cut wire
baskets within a few years, and that wires can be hazardous (see page 6.9 in
https:i/dnre.mt,L,ov/Perinits/Streain.Per.mittingBook/chap6.pdf). Gabion baskets are subject to failure
when exposed to streambed scour flows, requiring require repair or replacement with some regularity.
When they fail, they can adversely affect fish habitat by adding angular rock to the stream channel that can
create beneficial habitat spaces for sculpin and other salmon predators. In addition, the broken metal
baskets can entrap adult salmon causing injury or mortality. In the course of a tagging study that included
sonic tags, our staff found dozens of live and dead adult salmon an arm's length from the bank inside
several failed gabion baskets in the lower Cedar project reach. These fish presumably were seeking hiding
cover or slow velocity resting places and were unable to complete their migration and spawning cycle in
the Cedar River. The gabions also create poor salmon habitat conditions in the lower Cedar River by
eliminating the complex natural stream bank habitats characterized by low-velocity areas, vegetation,
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program
Cedar River Gabion Replacement DNS comments
January 29, 2013
Page 2
pools, and undercut banks that are preferred by juvenile and adult salmon and reducing bank sources for
spawning gravel. The gabion baskets and walkway in the lower Cedar River also limit the riparian area
that might otherwise be revegetated with native trees and shrubs to help improve salmon habitat. Finally,
the gabion baskets filled with rock have, or can develop, voids that create preferred habitat for sculpin and
other salmon predators. (see http:/,IwdfNv.wa.gov/ptiblicatiolis/00046/wdf'w00046.pdl for a list of potential
impacts from bank protection methods).
To avoid and minimize these impacts, we recommend the following,
1. For the long term, the City should actively pursue funding, easements, and develop a plan to
relocate the Cedar River trail outside of the 100 year floodplain to avoid additional gabion repairs,
replacements and the continued impacts of the gabion baskets and hardened water -level trail on
salmon habitat in the lower Cedar River.
2. In the short term, the proposed gabion replacement should be constructed with smaller wire mesh
size/openings to keep the rock fill inside the basket; and should use a mix of small and larger sized
rock materials (preferably rounded rock) to eliminate voids that benefit salmon predators and that
entrap adult salmon. If the replaced gabion baskets with rounded rock fail, then at least the rock
material is more similar to the natural streambed substrate than angular rock.
The proposed live willows stakes to be planted every 36 inches in the gabion will provide some
mitigation value provided that large and hardy enough willow stakes are used. Survival should be
monitored for at least 5 years and willow stakes replaced as needed.
4. Additional shoreline improvements should be implemented including removing all invasive plants
from the project area; replacing emergent vegetation that is removed with native emergent
vegetation preferred by salmon.
The City Community Services and other relevant City departments should implement lighting
reduction actions (e.g. changing luminaries, height of fixtures, screening, shielding, taller riparian
plantings, and more) to reduce artificial light intensity along the lower Cedar River with a goal of
less than 0.1 lux as recommended in research on Cedar River sockeye salmon
(see http://www.f'ws.�?ov/wafwo/fisliei-ies/.Publications/FP232.pdt), These actions are necessary to
reduce juvenile salmon outmigration impacts including increased delays and predation as a result
of light conditions at night in the lower Cedar River. The website http://www,darksky.or may
serve as one resource for practical information about addressing public safety while reducing light
levels.
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program
Cedar River Gabion Replacement DNS comments
January 29, 2013
Page 3
Thank you for the opportunity to review= this project. Please call me at (253) 876-3116 if you have any
questions. We look forward to the City's written response to these comments.
Sincerely,
Karen Walter
Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader
Cc: Suzanne Anderson, US Army Corps, Seattle District, Regulatory Branch
Bill Kerschke, FEMA Region X
Larry Fisher, WDFW, Region 4
Todd Black, City of Renton Community Services
City mon Department of Community & Econom velopment
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
ldffi
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:
COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 29, 2013
APPLICATION NO: LUA12-000240, ECF
DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 15, 2013
APPLICANT: Todd Black - City of Renton
PROJECT MANAGER: Vanessa Dolbee
PROJECT TITLE: Cedar River Gabion Repair
PROJECT REVIEWER: Kayren Kittrick
SITE AREA: 2,432 square feet
EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): N/A
LOCATION: Located along North Riverside Drive between the
Logan Avenue North Bridge and the Bronson Way North Bridge.
PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested SEPA Environmental Review and a Shoreline Exemption for the repair of 416
linear feet of damaged gabion bank protection structures at five locations along a portion of the Cedar River. The total area of
work would be 2,475 square feet. The project would be located on the Cedar River waterfront trail near North Riverside Drive
between Logan Avenue North Bridge and Bronson Way North Bridge. The site is located in the Shoreline Isolated High Intensity
overlay, Cedar River Reach B. Work would be performed on the southwestern shoreline approximately 3 feet below the Ordinary
High Water Mark. The site would be accessed via the brick walkway. Three trees would require pruning however no trees are
proposed to be removed. The project would result in minor excavation of approximately 20 cubic yards of riprap_
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable Mare
Environment Minor Malar information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth
Air
Woter
Plants
Lond/Shoreline Use
Animals
Environmental Health
Energy/
Noturol Resources
B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS
C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS
Vement of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major information
Impacts impacts Necessary
Housing
Aesthetics
Li h Glare
Recreation
utilities
Trans ortation
Public Services
Historic/Cultural
Preservation
Airport Environment
10, 000 Feet
14, 000 Feet
We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact
or areas where additional infor ion is needed to roperly assess this proposal.
Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date
City ntan Department of Community & Econom velopment
ENViRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: r 1°'
COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 29, 2013
APPLICATION NO: LUA12-000290, ECF
DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 15, 2413
APPLICANT: Todd Black - City of Renton
PROJECT MANAGER: Vanessa Dolbee
PROJECT TITLE: Cedar River Gabion Repair
PROJECT REVIEWER: Kayren Kittrick
SITE AREA: 2,432 square feet
EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): N/A
LOCATION: Located along North Riverside Drive between the
Logan Avenue North Bridge and the Bronson Way North Bridge_
PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A
SUMMARY of PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested SEPA Environmental Review and a Shoreline Exemption for the repair of 416
linear feet of damaged gabion bank protection structures at five locations along a portion of the Cedar River. The total area of
work would be 2,475 square feet. The project would be located on the Cedar River waterfront trail near North Riverside Drive
between Logan Avenue North Bridge and Bronson Way North Bridge. The site is located in the Shoreline Isolated High Intensity
overlay, Cedar River Reach B. Work would be performed on the southwestern shoreline approximately 3 feet below the Ordinary
High Water Mark. The site would be accessed via the brick walkway. Three trees would require pruning however no trees are
proposed to be removed. The project would result in minor excavation of approximately 20 cubic yards of riprap.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth
Air
Water
Plants
Land/Shoreline Use
Animals
Environmental Heolth
Energy/
NuturolResources
B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS
C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS
/7 e2 a -C
Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Housing
Aesthetics
Li ht/G1are
Recreation
Utilities
Transportation
Public Services
Historic/Cultural
Preservation
Airport Environment
10,000 Feet
14,000 Feet
We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and hove identified areas of probable impact
or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal.
Signature of Director or Authorized Representative
Date
City nton Department of Community & Econom velopment
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:F NO&
COMMENTS DUE. JANUARY 29, 2013
APPLICATION NO: LUA12-000290, ECF
DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 15, 2013
APPLICANT: Todd Black - City of Renton
PROJECT MANAGER: Vanessa Dolbee
PROJECT TITLE: Cedar River Gabion Repair
PROJECT REVIEWER: Kayren Kittrick
SITE AREA: 2,432 square feet
EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): N/A
LOCATION: Located along North Riverside Drive between the
Logan Avenue North Bridge and the Bronson Way North Bridge.
PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested SEPA Environmental Review and a Shoreline Exemption for the repair of 416
linear feet of damaged gabion bank protection structures at five locations along a portion of the Cedar River. The total area of
work would be 2,475 square feet. The project would be located on the Cedar River waterfront trail near North Riverside Drive
between Logan Avenue North Bridge and Bronson Way North Bridge. The site is located in the Shoreline Isolated High Intensity
overlay, Cedar River Reach B. Work would be performed on the southwestern shoreline approximately 3 feet below the Ordinary
High Water Mark. The site would be accessed via the brick walkway. Three trees would require pruning however no trees are
proposed to be removed. The project would result in minor excavation of approximately 20 cubic yards of riprap_
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS
Element of the
Environment
Probable Probable Mare
Minor Major information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth
Air
Water
Plants
Land/Shoreline Use
Animals
Environmental Health
Energy/
Natural Resources
S. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS
C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS
We have reviewed this applicaWn-with
or areas where additional information is
r
Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Housin
Aesthetics
Li ht/Glare
Recreation
Utilities
Transportation
Public Services
Historic/Cultural
Preservation
Airport Environment
10, 00O Feet
IQ, 000 Feet
alar attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact
!d to properly assess this proposal.
Signature of [director or Authorized Representative
1_
Date I
City nton Department of Community & Econom velopment
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: �.j 'Svcs
COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 29, 2013
APPLICATION NO, LUA12-000290, ECF
DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 15, 2013
APPLICANT: Todd Black - City of Renton
PROJECT MANAGER: Vanessa Dolbee
PROJECT TITLE: Cedar River Gabion Repair
PROJECT REVIEWER: Kayren Kittrick
SITE AREA: 2,432 square feet
EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): N/A J t
LOCATION: Located along North Riverside Drive between the
PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A
Logan Avenue North Bridge and the Bronson Way North Bridge.
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested SEPA Environmental Review and a Shoreline Exemption for the repair of 416
linear feet of damaged gabion bank protection structures at five locations along a portion of the Cedar River. The total area of
work would be 2,475 square feet. The project would be located on the Cedar River waterfront trail near North Riverside Drive
between Logan Avenue North Bridge and Bronson Way North Bridge. The site is located in the Shoreline Isolated High Intensity
overlay, Cedar River Reach B. Work would be performed on the southwestern shoreline approximately 3 feet below the Ordinary
High Water Mark. The site would be accessed via the brick walkway. Three trees would require pruning however no trees are
proposed to be removed. The project would result in minor excavation of approximately 20 cubic yards of riprap.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts impacts Necessary
Earth
Air
Water
Plants
Land/Shoreline Use
Animofs
Environmental Health
Energy/
Natural Resources
Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Housing
Aesthetics
Light/Glare
Recreation
Utilities
Trans ortotion
Public Services
Historic/Cultural
Preservation
Airport Environment
10,000 Feet
14,0100 Feet
B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS
C_
C. <CODE -RELATED COMMENTS
•, Clot- d Z-0 �L� %I
We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact
or areas where Additional information is needed to properly ossess this proposal.
of Director or Authorized Representative
Date
City of on Department of Community & Economic I lopment
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:P
kw knyi V
COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 29, 2013
APPLICATION NO: LUA12-000290, ECF
DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 15, 2013
APPLICANT: Todd Black - City of Renton
PROJECT MANAGER: Vanessa Dolbee
PROJECT TITLE: Cedar River Gablon Repair
PROJECT REVIEWER: Kayren Kittrick
SITE AREA: 2,432 square feet
EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): N/A
LOCATION: Located along North Riverside Drive between the
Logan Avenue North Bridge and the Bronson Way North Bridge.
PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested SEPA Environmental Review and a Shoreline Exemption for the repair of 416
linear feet of damaged gabion bank protection structures at five locations along a portion of the Cedar River. The total area of
work would be 2,475 square feet. The project would be located on the Cedar River waterfront trail near North Riverside Drive
between Logan Avenue North Bridge and Bronson Way North Bridge. The site is located in the Shoreline Isolated High Intensity
overlay, Cedar River Reach B. Work would be performed on the southwestern shoreline approximately 3 feet below the Ordinary
High Water Mark. The site would be accessed via the brick walkway. Three trees would require pruning however no trees are
proposed to be removed. The project would result in minor excavation of approximately 20 cubic yards of riprap.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth
Air
Water
Plants
Land/Shoreline Use
Animals
Environmental Health
Energy/
Natural Resources
B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS
Q ° `t
C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS
N
Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Miner Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Housing
Aesthetics
Light/Glare
Recreation
Utilities
Transportation
Public Services
Historic/Cultural
Preservation
Airport Environment
10, Doo feet
14, DOo Feet
We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact
or areas where additional ipformation is needed to property assess this proposal.
of Director or Authorized Representative
i (0
Dat
City of Rt„ton Department of Community & Economic D—elopment
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: ��
COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 29, 2013
APPLICATION NO: LUA12-000290, ECF
DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 15, 2013
APPLICANT: Todd Black - City of Renton
PROJECT MANAGER: Vanessa Dolbee
PROJECT TITLE: Cedar River Gabion Repair
PROJECT REVIEWER: Kayren Kittrick
SITE AREA: 2,432 square feet
EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): N/A
LOCATION: Located along North Riverside Drive between the
Logan Avenue North Bridge and the Bronson Way North Bridge.
PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A
SUMMARY of PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested SEPA Environmental Review and a Shoreline Exemption for the repair of 416
linear feet of damaged gabion bank protection structures at five locations along a portion of the Cedar River. The total area of
work would be 2,475 square feet. The project would be located on the Cedar River waterfront trail near North Riverside Drive
between Logan Avenue North Bridge and Bronson Way North Bridge_ The site is located in the Shoreline Isolated High Intensity
overlay, Cedar River Reach B. Work would be performed on the southwestern shoreline approximately 3 feet below the Ordinary
High Water Mark. The site would be accessed via the brick walkway_ Three trees would require pruning however no trees are
proposed to be removed. The project would result in minor excavation of approximately 20 cubic yards of riprap.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code} COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth
Air
Water
Plants
Lond/Shoreline Use
Animals
Environmental Health
Energy/
Natural Resources
t�oow,
e. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS
C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS
h Quik�
Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Housing
Aesthetics
Light/Glare
Recreation
Utilities
Transportation
Public Services
Historic/Cultural
Preservation
Airport Environment
10,000 Feet
14, 00O Feet
We hove reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we hove expertise and hove identified areas of probable impact
or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. `
Sign to of Director or Authorized Representative Da
City of ....ton Department of Community & t=conomic D_ __lopment
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: F1 Yr—
COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 29, 2013
APPLICATION NO: LUA12-000290, ECF
DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 15, 2013
APPLICANT: Todd Black - City of Renton
PROJECT MANAGER: Vanessa Dolbee
PROJECT TITLE: Cedar River Gabion Repair
PROJECT REVIEWER: Kayren Kittrick
SITE AREA= 2,432 square feet
EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): N/A
LOCATION: Located along North Riverside Drive between the
Logan Avenue North Bridge and the Bronson Way North Bridge.
PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested SEPA Environmental Review and a Shoreline Exemption for the repair of 416
linear feet of damaged gabion bank protection structures at five locations along a portion of the Cedar River. The total area of
work would be 2,475 square feet. The project would be located on the Cedar River waterfront trail near North Riverside Drive
between Logan Avenue North Bridge and Bronson Way North Bridge. The site is located in the Shoreline Isolated High Intensity
overlay, Cedar River Reach B. Work would be performed on the southwestern shoreline approximately 3 feet below the ordinary
High Water Mark. The site would be accessed via the brick walkway_ Three trees would require pruning however no trees are
proposed to be removed. The project would result in minor excavation of approximately 20 cubic yards of riprap.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information
impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth
Air
Water
Plants
Land/Shoreline Use
Animals
Environmental Health
Energy/
Natural Resources
B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS
Y`C
f'
C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS
Element of the
Environment
Probable Probable
Minor Major
Impacts impacts
More
Information
Necessary
Housing
Aesthetics
Li htlGlore
Recreation
utilities
Transportation
Public Services
Historic/Cultural
Preservation
Airport Environment
10, 000 Feet
14, 000 Feet
Lk//"�
We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we hove expertise and have identified areas of probable impact
or areas where additional information is needed to
properly a Bess this proposal. /
Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date
NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF
NON -SIGNIFICANCE (DNS)
A Masts Appllutlnn has been4led sntlerupted wlthth' Department of CommunHy 8 Ernnomlc Oaelopllle ret
(gD)–Planning Di,41Im of the CNy of Renton. This fo%owtng brlefly d-41s.s the appllpllan and the neceuary
public Apprmnis.
DATE OF NOTICE OF APPL=19N: January 15. 7013
LAND USE NUMBER: LUA12-DOD29U. ECF
pRaJECT NAMEI Cedar River Gabion Repak
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applkaat has requested SERA Environmental Review and a Shoreline
Evemplbn tar the repair d 416 linear feet ar damaged glb;on bank p,Ote lqn structures at Rae iocatlons'Img a
portion ar the Ceder River. The total area of work would be 2,475 square het. The prei,a would be mated on the
Cedar River waterfront trail near Nanh RI erslde Delve between Logen Avanut Noah Bridge and Bronson Way North
Bridge. The she N looted in the 5harellnt ISGIet.d High Intensity ovedaY, Cedar River Peach B. Work w. d be
performed on the -.0—tern shoreilne approximately 3 het blow Me Ordinary High Water E.
The site —uld
be accessed Wa the brick walkway. Three trees would require pruning however no trees are proposed to be removed.
Thr prole, would result as minor eauvatlan of'pproalmatety 20 -bit yards of dpnp.
PROJECT LOCATION: Located along North Riverside Dna. between the Logan Avenue North Brtdee
and the Bronson Way North WIV
CWTJONAL DETERMINATION DF NONSIGNIFICANCE (DNS): As the Li �d A enry, the City of Renton has determined
that sl rieunt e.1—mental Imparts are unlilu, y w rcsuit from the ed project. Therefore, as permmed under
the RLW 43.210.170, Me 'fly of Renton u uslllg the OptlOnal DNS p,pce to gine noHee that a DNS is likety to be
t. . single orntranlInt period. Tb,.
s for tta, project -d
gr
Iwill be noo omme t period hobo -is, the kswance�of the Threshold Deteren
mhaUonof Non-SxgniE ante (ONsI. A 14-d"
appeal period will follow the Issuance of the DNS,
PERMITAPPUCATION DATE: December 21. 1012
NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPUCATION: January 14, 2013
AppUCART/PROJEc1 CONTACT PERSON: �p
6'a ^eN ue trrte. WA 98 0m Fminandt@nort'nw LLC, 3639 P.latine
Avesalt
envlronmendi.mm
Perm R.Iiaw Requested: Em,hO tmardal (SEPA) R'vl"
M
Othm Parmlti which may be inquired; Hydm dla projectApp,oV t and Building Pertnit
RsuuiNtea Studies: BlomglGl Assesamimt
location where appil.doa may
M nsl.wed: Depanmam of Community m Emnomic Dtw IrIpment lCED)–R MinnlWA
Dh iabn, Slath Floor Aemm� CRY Hall. 1055 Sovth Grady Way.
98057
pUwC HEARING: N/A
proposed project complete this
If you would Ilk. to be made a Party of rewrtl [o naive Further InNrmadon on this
to,, and return to: City of Renton, CEO– Planning D"lon,1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 91057.
Name)Flla No.: Cedar Riser Gabi.n PepalrfLUA12-006290, ECF
NAME:
City/staterllp:
MAILING ADPRF55:
TELEPHONE NOa
CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW:
ionl ng/Land Usa: The It. is designated Residential Single Family (RSFj and Resldental
Medi -.lnad lRMD)onthe CltyrFRmtan Comprehensive land ULl Map'nd
Resldentlal - SU IR -10) and Residenliak - 8 {R-8) or. the City's 2onhtg Map.
Environmental DoeumentS that
Eyaluata the Proposed Profen: Envhan-1.1(SEPA) Checklist
Pewlopmmt RK.I 'I—
Used For Prolact Mitlgation: The protect will be sub}ea or the DW, SEPAardia@, R, RMC 4-9-07D and cther
ap pliable Cn des and regulatlonf as dpp,opn.k..
Comments on tits above appllcutlon must be submitted In wtRing to Vanessa Dolls—, Senior Planner, CED - punning
Dlytamn, 1055 Swth Grady Way, Renton, WA 91057, by 500 PM on January 29, 2013, IF You have questions about
this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and race" addltioe•I notifiratian by all, contact the PralecL
Manager. Anyone who submits written Commems w1li automatialty become a party of retard and will be nm1ficd of
any decblon on thh pralett
CONTACT PERSON: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner; Tell (425) 430-7314; Eml:
v d o l b e e@Drentanwa.gov
PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTTF1CATION
t
-AL1EhP OFCURefion
CERTIFICATION
I, hereby certify that copies of the above document
were posted in conspicuous places or nearby the d ribed property on
Ory/,�)Date: Signed:
STATE OF WASHINGTON
SS
COUNTY OF KING
certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that
signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the
uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument.
Dated: yls i 20i�
Notary Publidin and for the State of Washington
Notary (Print): k l� - Greer Ir
My appointment expires: Irs 2,�-
CITY OF RENTON
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - PLANNING DIVISION
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING
On the 15th day of January, 2013, 1 deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing
Notice of Application, Site Plan documents. This information was sent to:
Name
Representing
Agencies
See Attached
300' Surrounding Property Owners
See Attached
(Signature of Sender):; I-``""�"'��k����i
_�• ORAQ �f'�i
`hNN\N1lk
STATE OF WASHINGTON ) _l►1 ,R�-h�p�
SS 5 ru A ra;
COUNTY OF KING ) : cri ; A
i •1 % (iBy,�t'
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy M. Tucker 1/1// k29.1'� 0�;
signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act f•6r1; W;;6 .ag'rposes
mentioned in the instrument. II���11��""`�
Dated: {.� cZC� l �j -�-t G
r` Notary Pub6c in and
Notary (Print): 6A '-
My appointment expires:
Project Name: Cedar River Gabion Repair
Project Number: LUA12-000290, ECF
template - affidavit of service by mailing
the State of Washington
AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING
(ERC DETERMINATIONS)
Dept, of Ecology **
WDFW - Larry Fisher*
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept.
Environmental Review Section
1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201
Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer
PO Box 47703
Issaquah, WA 98027
39015 — 1720d Avenue SE
Olympia, WA 98504-7703
Auburn, WA 98092
WSOOT Northwest Region *
Duwamish Tribal Office *
Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program
Attn: Ramin Pazooki
4717 W Marginal Way SW
Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert
King Area Dev. Serv., MS -240
Seattle, WA 98106-1514
39015 172nd Avenue SE
PO Box 330310
Auburn, WA 98092-9763
Seattle, WA 98133-9710
US Army Corp. of Engineers *
KC Wastewater Treatment Division *
Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation*
Seattle District Office
Environmental Planning Supervisor
Attm Gretchen Kaehler
Attn: SEPA Reviewer
Ms. Shirley Marroquin
PO Box 48343
PO Box C-3755
201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050
Olympia, WA 98504-8343
Seattle, WA 98124
Seattle, WA 98104-3855
Boyd Powers *
Depart. of Natural Resources
PO Box 47015
Olympia, WA 98504-7015
KC Dev. & Environmental Serv.
City of Newcastle
City of Kent
Attn: SEPA Section
Attn: Steve Roberge
Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP
900 Oakesdale Ave. SW
Director of Community Development
Acting Community Dev. Director
Renton, WA 98055-1219
13020 Newcastle Way
220 Fourth Avenue South
Newcastle, WA 98059
Kent, WA 98032-5895
Metro Transit
Puget Sound Energy
City of Tukwila
Senior Environmental Planner
Municipal Liaison Manager
Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official
Gary Kriedt
Joe Jainga
6200 Southcenter Blvd.
201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431
PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-01W
Tukwila, WA 98188
Seattle, WA 98104-3856
Bellevue, WA 98009-0868
Seattle Public Utilities
Real Estate Services
Attn: SEPA Coordinator
700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900
PO Box 34018
Seattle, WA 98124-4018
*Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS', the marked agencies and cities
will need to be sent a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, and the Notice of
Application.
**Department of Ecology is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice to
the following email address: sepaunit@ecy.wa.gov
template - affidavit of service by mailing
AMBROSE K L
21 LOGAN AVE S
RENTON , WA 98057
BATES JOAN B
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #206
RENTON , WA 98055
BROULETTE KYLE J+AKANE YAMA
1008 N RIVERSIDE DR
RENTON , WA 98057
BUCK DOUGLAS M+CLAUDIA J
904 N RIVERSIDE DR
RENTON , WA 98055
CAMPAU STEVEN G+DIANE M BRI
55 WILLIAMS AVE S UNIT 202
RENTON , WA 98057
CHASE FLOYD
2200 ABERDEEN AVE NE
RENTON , WA 98056
CHRISTOPHERSON SARAH
822 N RIVERSIDE DR
RENTON , WA 98055
CLARK DONALD T
10207 SE 237TH ST
KENT, WA 98031
DALY SHAWN M+DEBORAH A
BABCOCK STEFANI D+BABCOCK
55 WILLIAMS AVE S UNIT 409
RENTON , WA 98055
BRADFORD DEAN KENT
1000 S 2ND ST
RENTON , WA 98055
BROWN MARY
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #304
RENTON , WA 98057
BUENO CARLOS E+SHANNON
PO BOX 1148
RENTON , WA 98057
CEDAR RIVER COURT
201 27TH AVE SE #A-200
PUYALLUP , WA 98374
CHEN GUO YUAN
5210 NE 8TH PL
RENTON , WA 98059
CITY OF RENTON
1055 S GRADY WAY
RENTON , WA 98055
COBY G LEESA
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #106
RENTON , WA 98057
DAWSON JAMES D+RENEE E
3700 PARK AVE N 10838 LAKERIDGE DR S
RENTON , WA 98056 SEATTLE, WA 98178
DOBSON WYMAN K+DOBSON VICKI DOLLEMAN RICHARD
BARNETT MARK
ATTN: CHAO NANCY
9500 ROOSEVELT WAY NE ##100
SEATTLE, WA 98115
BRAGG FLORENCE E
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #203
RENTON , WA 98057
BRUSH RYAN L
108 PELLY AVE N
RENTON , WA 98055
BURNETT LLC
CIO JEANNE BOYCE JONES
24124 135TH AVE SE
KENT, WA 98042
CEDAR RIVER COURT APTS
LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
201 27TH AVE SE #A-200
PUYALLUP , WA 98374
CHENEY BEN L+ALICE M
104 PELLY AVE N
RENTON , WA 98055
CLARK C DOLORES
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #201
RENTON , WA 98055
CRABTREE JAMES W+KATHLEEN M
115 WELLS AVE NORTH
RENTON , WA 98055
DOBSON WYMAN K
821 N 1 ST ST
RENTON , WA 98055
ELLINGSON MARY ANN
821 N 1ST ST 55 WILLIAMS AVE S #401 55 WILLIAMS AVE S #406
RENTON , WA 98055 RENTON , WA 98055 RENTON , WA 98057
F & K INVESTMENTS LLC
FACILITIES & OPERATION CTR
FERRIS KINNEY W+PEGGIMAE C
OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIR
13810 152ND AVE SE
300 SW 7TH ST
921 N 1ST ST
RENTON , WA 98059
RENTON , WA 98055
RENTON , WA 98055
FISCHER RICHARD J
FRASIER CHRISTINE
GANNON J K +L E LIVING TRST
SEVERYNS WILLIAM
C/O GANNON JACK K+LOIS E TRS
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #101
PO BOX 836
22925 SE 292ND PL
RENTON , WA 98055
RENTON , WA 98057
BLACK DIAMOND, WA 98010
GARRICK JENNIE LATAINE
GIULIANI JOHN R JR
GOLDEN JASON+NORA
55 WILLIAMS AVE S UNIT 301
812 N 1ST ST
801 N 2ND ST
RENTON , WA 98057
RENTON , WA 98055
RENTON , WA 98057
GOOBY PEARL
GRAHAM DEAN & KERRI
HARGROVE JOHN P
CEDAR RIVER PROPERTIES LLC
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #303
16410 SE 143RD PL
105 WELLS AVE N
RENTON , WA 98057
RENTON , WA 98059
RENTON' , WA 98055
HEITMAN-BODEN SANDRA
HINTON ROLAND
HOBART JEAN G
50 LOGAN AVE S
108 WELLS AVE N
100 WILLIAMS AVE N
RENTON , WA 98055
RENTON , WA 98057
RENTON , WA 98057
HORI JAY T+MICHAEL+EMMONS C
JANNSEN GAILE F
JAVELLI FRANCA
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #208
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #109
55 WILLIAMS•AVE S #103
RENTON , WA 98057
RENTON , WA 98055
RENTON , WA 98055
JENSEN PAUL S+KATHLEEN
JO BITNEY HOLDINGS LLC
JOHNSON JAMES G
112 FELLY AVE N
4063 WILLIAMS AVE N
4258 SW SUNSET DRIVE
RENTON , WA 98055
RENTON , WA 98056
LAKE OSWEGO , OR 97034
JOHNSON PATRICIA M
JOHNSON SONJA
KNICKERBOCKER GLEN M+SANDRA
209 WILLIAMS AVE N
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #306
PO BOX 571
RENTON , WA 98055
RENTON , WA 98057
PALMER, AK 99648
KNICKERBOCKER SANDRA
LAUCK MARION L
LAVILLE JENNY M
PO BOX 571
904 NORTH 1ST ST
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #309
PALMER, AK 99645
RENTON , WA 98055
RENTON , WA 98057
LE VIENNA T
LEATHLEY LEONARD T
LEI YING KIET+MENG LIAN
PO BOX 1915
809 N 2ND ST
1911 19TH AVE S
RENTON , WA 98057
RENTON , WA 98055
SEATTLE, WA 98144
LEROY HARRY K+DEBRA J LITTLE IVONA LYONS JACK A+LEOTA M
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #307
RENTON, WA 98055
MANGUBAT ALINDRINA ANTONIO
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #405
RENTON, WA 98057
MCKINNEY LOUISE J+SAMUEL B
7817 S SUNNYCREST RD
SEATTLE, WA 98178
MERRILL GARDENS
CIO PROPERTY TAX COUNSELORS
PO BOX 3525
MCKINNEY , TX 75070
MVH-RENTON PROPERTIES LLC
7711 31 ST AVE NE
SEATTLE, WA 98115
NGUYEN ALEXANDER H+MARY
104 WELLS AVE S
RENTON, WA 98055
NIELSON CLAYTON W
2127 38TH AVE E
SEATTLE, WA 98112
ORGILL PETER D
915 N 1ST ST
RENTON, WA 98055
PEARSON MARILYN B
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #204
RENTON, WA 98055
POPE BRUCE G+CATHERINE A
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #305
RENTON, WA 98057
MCDANIELS NOREEN K
55 WILLIAMS AVE S UNIT 404
RENTON, WA 98057
MCWILLIAMS DONALD E+DORIS L
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #302
RENTON, WA 98055
MORRISON JACK
15002 135TH AVE SE
RENTON, WA 98058
MCDONAGH KIMBERLY
909 N 13T ST
RENTON, WA 98055
MEDZEGIAN JAMES V+JOANNE M
11204 RAINIER AVE S
SEATTLE, WA 98178
MOYNIHAN DAVID L+SUSAN K
112 WELLS AVE N 104 WELLS AVE N
RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98057
NEAR CHARLES+KIMBERLEY SAMP NEWMAN JON+LINDA
903 N 1ST ST
RENTON, WA 98057
NGUYEN DUY
12345 SE 181ST ST
RENTON, WA 98058
NOSSUM SHERRIL Y
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #110
RENTON, WA 98057
PACIFIC NORTHWEST REGIONAL
25120 PACIFIC HWY S #200
KENT, WA 98032
PERETTI RAY L
PO BOX 796
RENTON, WA 98057
RENTON CITY OF
8070 LANGSTON RD S
SEATTLE , WA 98178
NGUYEN JOSEPH T
322 SENECA PL NW
RENTON, WA 98057
OHARRA MICHAEL E
94 WILLIAMS AVE S
RENTON, WA 98056
PANTANO MARIANNE
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #107
RENTON, WA 98055
PETERSON MARY MICHELLE
835 N 1ST ST
RENTON, WA 98055
RENTON HISTORICAL SOCIETY
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #105 1055 S GRADY WAY 235 MILL AVE S
RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055
RENTON HOUSING AUTHORITY
PO BOX 2316
RENTON , WA 98056
ROBERTS RICK+LISA
118 WELLS AVE S
RENTON , WA 98055
RYAN MARY PATRICIA
123 MAIN AVE S
RENTTN , WA 98057
SALVATION ARMY
PO BOX 9219
SEATTLE, WA 98109
SHANTLEY HARRY B+TERESITA L
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #108
RENTON , WA 98055
SORENSON SOREN ROBERT
P O BOX 895
RENTON , WA 98057
ST LUKES EPISCOPAL CHURCH
99 WELLS AVE S
RENTON , WA 98055
THOMASON DEBRA LEAH
104 MAIN AVE S
RENTON , WA 98057
TOKER EREZ+NANCY
5310 NE 4TH CT
RENTTN , WA 98059
VANDERSANDEN GARY M
REPP WILBUR L
PO BOX 5532
KENT, WA 98064
ROGERSON TERESA
119 S MAIN ST #112
RENTON , WA 98057
RYAN MAXWELL H
123 MAIN AVE S
RENTON , WA 98057
SANTOS RENATO L+PAZ C
1815 LAKE YOUNGS WAY SE
RENTON , WA 98058
SIMPSON CRAIG L+MARGARET LY
111 WELLS AVE N
RENTON , WA 98055
SOSIK JAMES A JR+JENNIFER L
119 MAIN AVE S
RENTON , WA 98055
STARKOVICH BEVERLY J
810 N RIVERSIDE
RENTON , WA 98055
TIEU ANN N
830 N RIVERSIDE DR
RENTON , WA 98055
TONKIN PATRICIA E
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #104
RENTON , WA 98055
VISCHER BALDWIN & DANA
RIVERVIEW APARTMENTS
CIO GRAN INC
1016 2ND AVE W
SEATTLE, WA 98119
ROMEO MARIA L
4314 POWELL PL S
SEATTLE , WA 98108
RYAN MICHAEL J
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #408
RENTON , WA 98057
SEVERANCE SHANNON R+RUTHIE
817 N 1ST ST
RENTON , WA 98087
SMITH LOIS MAY
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #407
RENTON , WA 98057
ST LUKES EPISCOPAL CH RENTO
99 WELLS AVE S
RENTON , WA 98055
SYTH BONITA L
8550 E SPEEDWAY BLVD #271
TUCSON, AZ 85710
TIONNSCNADH LLC
1346 BELLEVUE WAY SE
BELLEVUE , WA 98004
TRACY DAVID+TURPEN GARY
108 WELLS AVE S
RENTON , WA 98057
WAH TAI LIMITED LIABILITY C
55 WILLIAMS AVE S UNIT 102 260 RIDGE DR PO BOX 3543
RENTON , WA 98057 PORT TOWNSEND , WA 98368 RENTON , WA 98056
WATERFRONT HABITATIONS LLC WELSH JUDITH A WIDMER MARK A+ANNE
4727 E BELL RD #45-125
PHOENIX, AZ 85032
WIEST HELEN
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #205
RENTON , WA 98057
YOUNG SIMON
181 LA MESA AVE
ENCINITAS , CA 92024
VANDERSANDEN GARY M
55 WILLIAMS AVE S UNIT 102
RENTON , WA 98057
CLARK C DOLORES
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #201
RENTON , WA 98055
CLARK DONALD T
10207 SE 237TH ST
KENT, WA 98031
SOSIK JAMES A JR+JENNIFER L
119 MAIN AVE S
RENTON , WA 98055
REPP WILBUR L
PO BOX 5532
KENT, WA 98064
SANTOS RENATO L+PAZ C
101 PARK AVE N
RENTON , WA 98057
WILSON JOAN MARY
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #402
RENTON , WA 98057
ZIMMERMAN JAMES V+THERESA A
813 N FIRST ST
RENTON , WA 98055
JAVELLI FRANCA
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #103
RENTON , WA 98055
SMITH LOIS MAY
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #407
RENTON , WA 98057
PERETTI RAY L
PO BOX 796
RENTON , WA 98057
LYONS JACK A+LEOTA M
15002 135TH AVE SE
RENTON , WA 98058
NIELSON CLAYTON W
801 N 1 ST ST
RENTON , WA 98055
YOUNG PHILLIP I
1214 MOLEHU DR
HONOLULU, HI 96818
HORI JAY T+MICHAEL+EMMONS C
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #208
RENTON , WA 98057
JANNSEN GAILE F
55 WILLIAMS AVE S #109
RENTON , WA 98055
BABCOCK STEFANI D+BABCOCK
55 WILLIAMS AVE S UNIT 409
RENTON , WA 98055
CAMPAU STEVEN G+DIANE M BRI
55 WILLIAMS AVE S UNIT 202
RENTON , WA 98057
ROGERSON TERESA
119 S MAIN ST #112
RENTON , WA 98057
PERETTI RAY L
PO BOX 796
RENTON , WA 98057
BROULETTE KYLE J+AKANE YAMA
1008 N RIVERSIDE DR
RENTON , WA 98057
WELSH JUDITH A
1815 LAKE YOUNGS WAY SE 2127 38TH AVE E 101 PARK AVE N
RENTON , WA 98058 SEATTLE, WA 98112 RENTON , WA 98057
RENTON HISTORICAL SOCIETY
SYTH BONITA L
LE VIENNA T
235 MILL AVE S
8550 E SPEEDWAY BLVD #271
PO BOX 1915
RENTON, WA 98055
TUCSON, AZ 85710
RENTON, WA 98057
LE VIENNA T
JENSEN PAUL S+KATHLEEN
NGUYEN DUY
PO BOX 1915
112 PELLY AVE N
12345 SE 181ST ST
RENTON, WA 98057
RENTON, WA 98055
RENTON, WA 98058
BRUSH RYAN L
CHENEY BEN L+ALICE M
CHEN GUO YUAN
108 PELLY AVE N
104 PELLY AVE N
5210 NE 8TH PL
RENTON, WA 98055
RENTON, WA 98055
RENTON, WA 98059
CITY OF RENTON
CITY OF RENTON
YOUNG SIMON
1055 S GRADY WAY
1055 S GRADY WAY
181 LA MESA AVE
RENTON, WA 98057
RENTON, WA 98057
ENCINITAS , CA 92024
MVH-RENTON PROPERTIES LLC
MVH-RENTON PROPERTIES LLC
MVH-RENTON PROPERTIES LLC
7711 31 ST AVE NE
7711 31 ST AVE NE
7711 31 ST AVE NE
SEATTLE, WA 98115
SEATTLE, WA 98115
SEATTLE, WA 98115
MORRISON JACK
HINTON ROLAND
MOYNIHAN DAVID L+SUSAN K
112 WELLS AVE N
108 WELLS AVE N
104 WELLS AVE N
RENTON, WA 98055
RENTON, WA 98057
RENTON, WA 98057
LAUCK MARION L
CHASE FLOYD
JOHNSON PATRICIA M
904 NORTH 1ST ST
2200 ABERDEEN AVE NE
209 WILLIAMS AVE N
RENTON, WA 98055
RENTON, WA 98056
RENTON, WA 98055
SORENSON SOREN ROBERT
TOKER EREZ+NANCY
HARGROVE JOHN P
P O BOX 895
5310 NE 4TH CT
105 WELLS AVE N
RENTON, WA 98057
RENTON, WA 98059
RENTON, WA 98055
SIMPSON CRAIG L+MARGARET LY
CRABTREE JAMES W+KATHLEEN M
GIULIANI JOHN RJR
111 WELLS AVE N
115 WELLS AVE NORTH
812 N 1ST ST
RENTON, WA 98055
RENTON, WA 98055
RENTON, WA 98055
DALY SHAWN M+DEBORAH A
DALY SHAWN M+DEBORAH A
LEATHLEY LEONARD T
3700 PARK AVE N
3700 PARK AVE N
809 N 2ND ST
RENTON, WA 98056
RENTON, WA 98056
RENTON, WA 98055
GOLDEN JASON+NORA
AMBROSE K L
FRASIER CHRISTINE
SEVERYNS WILLIAM
801 N 2ND ST
21 LOGAN AVE S
PO BOX 836
RENTON, WA 98057
RENTON, WA 98057
RENTON, WA 98057
FRASIER CHRISTINE
FRASIER CHRISTINE
FRASIER CHRISTINE
SEVERYNS WILLIAM
SEVERYNS WILLIAM
SEVERYNS WILLIAM
PO BOX 836
PO BOX 836
PO BOX 836
RENTON, WA 98057
RENTON, WA 98057
RENTON, WA 98057
HEITMAN-BODEN SANDRA
RENTON CITY OF
F & K INVESTMENTS LLC
50 LOGAN AVE S
1055 S GRADY WAY
13810 152ND AVE SE
RENTON, WA 98055
RENTON, WA 98055
RENTON, WA 98059
LEI YING KIET+MENG LIAN
RENTON CITY OF
CEDAR RIVER COURT APTS
LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
1911 19TH AVE S
1055 S GRADY WAY
201 27TH AVE SE #A-200
SEATTLE, WA 98144
RENTON, WA 98055
PUYALLUP , WA 98374
CEDAR RIVER COURT
CITY OF RENTON
BRADFORD DEAN KENT
201 27TH AVE SE #A-200
1118 STH AVE
1000 S 2ND ST
PUYALLUP , WA 98374
SEATTLE , WA 98101
RENTON, WA 98055
BARNETT MARK
CEDAR RIVER COURT APTS
VISCHER BALDWIN & DANA
ATTN: CHAO NANCY
LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
9500 ROOSEVELT WAY NE #100
201 27TH AVE SE #A-200
260 RIDGE DR
SEATTLE, WA 98115
PUYALLUP , WA 98374
PORT TOWNSEND , WA 98368
RENTON CITY OF
1055 S GRADY WAY
RENTON, WA 98055
Denis Law
I O
Mayor r 1 A - -
Department of Community and Economic Development
January 14, 2013 C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator
Brad Thiele
Northwest Environmental Consulting, LLC
3639 Palatine Avenue N
Seattle, WA 98103
Subject: Notice of Complete Application
Cedar River Gabion Repair, LLJA12-000290, ECF
Dear Mr. Thiele:
The Planning Division of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application
is complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, is accepted for review.
It is tentatively scheduled for consideration by the Environmental Review Committee on
February 4, 2013. Prior to that review, you will be notified if any additional information
is required to continue processing your application.
Please contact me at.(425) 430-7314 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Vanessa Dolbee
Senior Planner
cc: Todd Black - City of Renton / Applicant
Renton City Hall . 1055 South Gradyway - Renton, Washington 98057 . rentonwa.gov. .
City of Renton ...
LAND USE PERMIT
MASTER APPLICATION ;
I PROPERTY OWNER(S)
NAME: City of Renton
ADDRESS: 1055 S. Grady Way
CITY: Renton
Zip: 98057
TELEPHONE NUMBER: ( 42 5) 430-6571
I. APPLICANT (if other than owner)
NAME: Todd Black
City of Renton
COMPANY (if applicable):
Community Services
ADDRESS:
CITY: ZIP:
TELEPHONE NUMBER -
CONTACT PERSON
NAME: Brad Thiele
Northwest Environmental
COMPANY (if applicable), Consulting, LLC
ADDRESS: 3639 Palatine Ave. N
CITY: Seattle
ZIP: 98103
TELEPHONE NUMBER AND EMAIL ADDRESS:
(206) 234-2520
BradCnorthwest-environmental.com
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME:
Cedar River((��GabioLnpp'Repair
N RiversjSeSD)riveTbetween Logan
Ave. N Bridge and Bronson Way
Bridge. 98057
See attached DARPA drawings.
KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S):
182305-7277, 172305-9098, 172305 H
172305-UNKN
EXISTING LANDUSE(S): Riverfront walkway,
PROPOSED LAND USE(S):
Same
EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION:
Residential Medium/SF Density
PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION
(if applicable) N/A
EXISTING ZONING:
R10 and R8
PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): N/A
SITE AREA (in square feet):
2,432 square feet.
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO BE
DEDICATED: N/A
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS:
N/A
PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET
ACME (if applicable) N/A
NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable)
N/A
NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable):
N/A
H:\CED\Data\Forms-7emplates�Sdf-Help Handouts\Planning\MasterApplication.doc -1-
11
PROJECT INFORMAL
NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable):
N/A
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS (if applicable): N/A
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): N/A
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS (if applicable)- N/A
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): N/A
NET FLOOR AREA ON NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if
applicable): N/A
NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW
PROJECT (if applicable): N/A
PROJECT VALUE:
IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF
ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE
SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable):
❑ AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA ONE
❑ AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA TWO
a FLOOD HAZARD AREA 2, 4 3 2 sq, ft.
❑ GEOLOGIC HAZARD sq. ft.
51 HABITAT CONSERVATION 2, 4 3 2 sq. ft.
U SHORELINE STREAMS & LAKES 2, 4; 2 sq. ft.
❑ WETLANDS sq. ft.
ILEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
(Attach legal descI
ription on separate sheet with the following information included)
SITUATE IN THE QUARTER OF SECTION 17 , TOWNSHIP 23N, RANGE 5E , IN THE CITY
-OF RENTON,-KING-GOUNTY, WASHINGTON
AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP
I, (Print Name/s)7:OP2 P. P�LAC.K-- , declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the Slate of
Washington that 1 am please check one) the current owner of the property involved in this application or ✓the authorized
representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein
contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Signatue o Owner/Representative Date
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
Signature of Owner/Representative Date
COUNTY OF KING ) l 1
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that
signed this instrument and acknowledge It to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the
uses and purpose mentioned in the instrument. `\ r_.,
V"',
Dated - blic i ,9nd for the State of ington
(tlotarr (Print): Cti
My#} Nj nt expires: ! 1 r 1
H;\CED\Data\Forms-Templates\Setf-Help Handouts\planning\MasterApplication.doc .7-
PLANNING DIVISION
WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS
Calculations t
I Construction Mitigation Description 2 AND 4 I I I 1
Density Worksheet 4
Drainage Report 2
Environmental Checklist 4
IExisting Easements (Recorded Copy) 4 I I I 1
Floor Plans 3 AND 4
-v (Grading Plan, Conceptual
Habitat Data Report 4
Irrigation Plano
Landscape Plan, Conceptuah
I Legal Description 4 I I I I amlprbpoyed I lri er"I?
Master Application Form 4
Neighborhood Detail Map 4
Pian Reductions (PMTS) 4
This requirement may be waived by. 1 f
1. Property Services� I 1?1304E;�AME:
2. Public Works Plan Review
3. Building DATE: �l
4. Planning UEC 1(i+
H:10EOlaatalForms7emplateslSelf-Help Handoutswlanninglwaiv "rte f i "r 1E, L 06109
PLANNING DIVISION
WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS
✓3
I f 3
..rr:;.-',x i �A�yt.�ul1t3
I'
yK�
I� 14
6{iI ■l��liMI T'+��n
'r{oiyFIk
i{
�I�],
'�':
/pSppLy 114i{1
II
I.
j L�moI^� �Ir,,{;.
LryJ- IWr aI
l v l•�u �pIJ�
',iu ;
k, �i
' 3= ,1I �c�+p}1 'rf�Y��N, jZ
�3 S.ka�;'l.,F�SJr GFGa,
is FF,ij��y7�,{'
'qY1"I1RY�.!
'.II,.+t¢kcj �"
r.i,�iK:,.I i Ffig1
l €.F%d"rS x dDJ I. :1+Lj'. �..1
1'!Y1F.
V
Yp '.wei�l
Ar l,
��i
IhMl`�i,�_:�'
i,..
511 Y 1.
hS]'
3
j
;t� d�
I
_li�EM:;.R
+�{]1,
-'j,
i4!h'}
144,. l�=!QiE. r3id � aJ
�
AIFEd...
'9i i'�:^t.."�i.rr : 5k
Plat Name Reservation 4
�'N:II�
1''tl I�
« �ra -" �Ei ` iFl I, tlh a''11 I
P1eap[cai;lo,ieek[nTli
i, 'bk�iG:
1� A.
k,J k.,:l H ... +i. -S ii..M1 :. ,e...1'^°,..
Public Works Approval Letter 2
s d`r
jy..�a� �
"�J F i r.-!!€:
�:;'. ONI
�:�y I�'
Reil b��k atrb ► pCan A3 E" i u ,n r N i
�.�_Im Y.§„ i I -., :l i:tl, li 31 .1 ...s. .,111 -,
6:i, a IKtiIF 7*i
174''It :. •1
;,
i...i .i I I
1l ,I„ I .;
Screening Detail 4
.,jr :l}ly 11 '- ><.
Gle -..y. 1�1 ! �:.t1'{
uI �''�.I[,y5 1aK 4€r.L•I
11 i'ci it I,r�N�l 't �IY�4 s�l�.�.w�Ef'� §.y(8[ t•5n'f,_.
I� rl{
NXW!
�,�Gi'�IV_�"l+l�rt$1!•I£'.�5b�li)KIkY�K�,r;rr�::'14k.
G.4y* llf�:. 4.1�
Stream or Lake Study, Standard 4
1
LakeitUd ire tolIcy
77—
N NTS �1M11 f. SII
II
; i
A; i # it E1 J l .
Sireamd% a I,pP rjx� `4 :+'4r',,I:<.y�s r4:.i..:'s�
}I:c
:4.,;J crwf i
JE. <•ryp�4 tkl'.'., .: i�..vi y
,E
Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan 4
I
�I- 1
K 3
I
n�
'1� "1
-I
5.:;.�.'�y.l �r
Title Report or Plat Certificate 4
+ k lak:"!,a:y d §91r 11 [.a'I`; r z Trt5 €I I III
rf I+. 4
=u k.li
Tpograghy;MalI a z.t;Ik'1 ^ I,.i:I
h w
Traffic Study 2
C��lari�i`� Alan ' j'Y 4,����F1'71fi ('P^
jS V "Fj`[�• �e1'
� " J�i�t�J��
'r C' f�ii$ �+R
Tr�eit� g!)='��rjc!
3t IS.t
171 I'E
}
Urban Design Regulations Analysis4
S14 Ti I 1 My -Ii `^Yi k I} -ra i
par' Gehe
M14 -b - 4 i I F�
k i 'f•
k 4i
ll�,a
iJf.lttesl aGe gl;
aK .4E .t .ak , I.e1 t.l.,
:. ..J,
n
1�, ' , I•
Wetlands' Mitigation Plan, Final4l
1
11wV:.. t�as:M8:11t1 at�;wi an''Pr�lim�nry
Fl
t 'd
# I ::� ��I
{ ; •
a , ,
Pr
Wetlands Report/Delineation 4
,,r y_{
W;ireless
f3k 11 lit,
Applicant Agreement Statement 2 AND 3
Inventory of Existing Sites'2AND3
Lease Agreement, Draft 2 AND 3
Map of Existing Site Conditions 2 AND 3
Map of View Area z AND 3
Photosimulations 2 AND a
This requirement may be waived by:
1. Property Services
2. Public Works Plan Review
3. Building
4. Planning
PROJECT NAME: L WV Li
�] f
DATE:
H-10EDTata\Forms-TemplateslSelf-Help Handoutsxplanningiwaiverofaubmittalregs.xls 06109
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM )1r Northwest
Environmental Ccnsultinq, LLC
TO: City of Renton Community Services
.,�itoig
FROM: Kristin Noreen, Northwest Environmental Consulting, LLC
DATE: October 15, 2012 DEC •2 1
SUBJECT: Project Description Narrative
PROJECT: Cedar River Gabion RepairL�rI ( D
This narrative is designed to fulfill the requirement for a Project Narrative for SEPA submittal for
the Cedar River Gabion Repair Project. The four repair sites are located on the Cedar River
waterfront in Renton, along North Riverside Drive, between the Logan Avenue North Bridge and
the Bronson Way North Bridge, See attached DARPA drawings for a vicinity map and the project in
regard to the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWNL .
The project will require SEPA review, a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, and a Hydraulic
Project Approval from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW).
The area is zoned Residential, with parts of the site falling under R-10 medium density, and parts
zoned R-8, single-family residential. The site is currently City park land within a residential
neighborhood comprising small apartment buildings and single-family homes. Across the river there
are mixed uses, with businesses and apartment buildings. The site contains a public walkway where
local park users can walk along the tiverfront.
The Cedar River runs through the site, a Shoreline of the State. Bank slopes can reach 45 degrees for
a distance of up to 8 feet. There are no wetlands. Soils consist of compact sand and gravel. The
river provides site drainage.
The project is a repair involving replacement of failed gabion baskets, to preserve existing use of the
property. The project will replace up to 416 lineal feet of gabion baskets at 5 sites totaling about 275
square yards (2,475 sq. ft.) of area.
The work areas will be isolated using inflatable cofferdams or other approved method. The river will
flow past the cofferdams; the isolated areas are small and will not affect overall channel flow.
Vegetation will be cleared from the damaged gabion baskets and then the baskets themselves will be
removed, using small equipment deployed from the brick walkway. Existing riprap (angular rock)
and geotextile fabric backing will be removed and placed in a stockpile location. The toes of the
gabion repair areas will be excavated and new base gabions installed. The slopes will then be graded
and compacted in preparation for the new materials. New fabric will be laid, a crushed rock base laid
on top of the fabric, and the new gabion mattress will be laid in place, filled with rock, and tied
closed. Live willow stakes will be placed 36 inches apart in the gabion. Controlled density fill (CDF)
will be pumped between the curb and gabion to prevent potential scour under flood conditions. The
site will be cleaned up and the flow barriers and erosion control devices removed.
The site will be accessed via public streets and the existing brick walkways, which are wide enough to
accommodate small vehicles and small equipment. Three trees will need to be pruned on an access
Page t
ramp to allow access of small equipment. The pruning will be coordinated with Renton Parks
maintenance staff. The total estimated construction cost is approximately $100,000.
Minor excavation (less than 20 cy) may be performed to provide a flat surface for the replacement
gabions. Up to 20 cy of riprap obtained from a commercial source will be used to fill the gabions.
To the extent possible, rock from the existing gabions and nearshore waters will be used to fill the
replacement baskets.
Emergent vegetation that has established in the gabion baskets will be removed before construction
begins. Deciduous trees near Site D may need to be pruned by Parks maintenance crews in order to
provide access to the site.
Work will be performed on the southwestern shoreline of the Cedar River, at and down to 3 feet
below the OHWM. The existing shoreline is armored with gabions and the project is designed to
restore the site to pre -damage conditions. Dewatering of the area will be done if necessary, using
inflatable cofferdams or other approved methods, to prevent sedimentation during construction.
Page 2 Northwest
Environmental Consulting, LLC
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
TO: City of Renton Community Services
Northwest
Environmental Consulting, LLC
FROM: Kristin Noreen, Northwest Environmental Consulting, LLC
DATE: October 15, 2012
SUBJECT: Construction Mitigation Narrative
PROJECT: Cedar River Gabion Repair
This narrative is designed to fulfill the requirement for a Construction Mitigation Narrative for SEPA
submittal for the Cedar River Gabion Repair Project.
Construction is proposed for late summer 2013 when the river level is lowest, Construction will
occur during the hours permitted in the City's noise ordinance for construction in residential areas,
7:00 AM to 8:00 PM. Actual construction will probably conclude by 5:00 PM daily. The site will be
accessed via cross streets and the existing brick walkway, which is wide enough to accommodate
small vehicles and can be reached via a service vehicle access under the Logan Ave. N Bridge.
Dust impacts will be minimal, as the river bank soil will be moist. if dust is a problem during
excavation, the area will be sprayed with water. Traffic and transportation impacts will be minimal;
most nearby roads will not be blocked during construction. North Riverside Drive txYill probably be
used as a staging area, so half the road may be blocked temporarily. Erosion will be minimized by
using inflatable cofferdams or other approved methods so work can be performed in the dry.
No special construction hours will be needed. A). Traffic control will be needed for staging, access to
ramp, and possibly lowering equip/material off of Williams Ave. Bridge to the riverside walkway
below. A Traffic Control Plan will be prepared by the contractor and reviewed by the City prior to
construction.
W=
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM )El Northwest
W Environmental Consulting,U.0
TO: City of Renton Community Services
FROM: Kristin Noreen, Northwest Environmental Consulting, LLC
DATE: October 15, 2012 LAG
SUBJECT: Tree Cutting (Pruning) Narrative
PROJECT: Cedar River Gabion Repair�1V� r
3�
This purpose of this narrative is to fulfill the requirement for a tree removal narrative, as requested
by the City in lieu of a Tree Cutring/Land Clearing Plan. The City required a narrative be completed
instead of a Tree Cutting/Land Clearing (Tree inventory) Plan because no trees will be removed as a
result of the project.
No trees will be removed to construct the project. The site may require equipment access via a ramp
from Wells Avenue to the river walk between Sites B and C. The ramp is narrow and up to 3 trees
along the path may require pruning. The work will be coordinated with the City of Renton Parks
maintenance staff if pruning is required.
Page 1
WAC 197-11-960 Environmental checklist.
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Purpose of checklist:
The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to
consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact
statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality
of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency
identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and
to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required.
Instructions for applicants:
This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal.
Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal
are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise
information known, or give the best description you can.
You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you
should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire
experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not
know" or "does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later.
Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations.
Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you.
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time
or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its
environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers
or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse
impact.
Use of checklist far nonproject proposals:
Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply."
IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D).
For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or
site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively.
A. BACKGROUND
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable:
Cedar River Gabion Repair
2. Name of applicant,
Todd Black, City of Renton Community Services
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
425-430-6571
4. Date checklist prepared:
July 17, 1012
5. Agency requesting checklist:
City of Renton
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
July - August 2013
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this
proposal? If yes, explain.
None.
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly
related to this proposal.
Joint Aquatic Resources Permitting Application (DARPA), July 2012
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly
affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain.
No other applications are pending for any related proposals.
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known.
Shoreline permit exemption, City of Renton
Hydraulic Project Approval, WDFW
Nationwide 3 permit, Corps
11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project
and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your
proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to
include additional specific information on project description.)
Up to five areas along the riverfront need repair of the gabion bank armoring. Existing gabion baskets will
be replaced. The work site will be isolated from the river and dewatered before work begins. See Sheet 1 of
4 and Sheet 2 of 4.
Vegetation will be cleared from the damaged gabion baskets and then the baskets themselves will be
removed, using small equipment deployed from the brick walkway. Existing riprap and geotextile fabric
backing will be removed and placed in a stockpile location. The toes of the gabion repair areas will be
excavated and new base gabions installed. The slopes will then be graded and compacted in preparation for
the new materials. New fabric will be laid, a crushed rock base laid on top of the fabric, and the new gabion
2
mattress will be laid in place, filled with rock, and tied closed. Live willow stakes will be placed 36 inches
apart in the gabion. Riprap from the damaged gabions will be re -used for the repairs as practicable. All other
debris will be removed from the site and recycled or disposed. Controlled density fill (CDF) will be pumped
between the curb and gabion_ The site will be cleaned up and the flow barriers and erosion control devices
removed
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of
your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a
proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal
description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit
any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with
any permit applications related to this checklist.
The project will be performed at up to 5 sites along the Cedar Riverfront, which parallels N Riverside Drive
between the Logan Ave. N Bridge and the Bronson Way N Bridge. See Sheet 1 of 4 for a location reap.
The project area is within the City of Renton, in King County, in Section 17, Township 23N, Range 5E
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Earth
a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous,
other.
Riverfront with a steeply sloping armored bank rising up to a flat walkway.
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?
The site is developed. All steep slopes are mechanically stabilized along the river. The
riverbank has slopes of 45% in areas.
c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat,
muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime
farmland.
Soils on site are compact sand and gravel covered by stabilized rip rap.
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so,
describe.
There are no indications of unstable soils in the vicinity. According to the City of Renton's
LandInfo mapping application, the area is a seismic soil liquefaction zone.
e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading
proposed. Indicate source of fill.
The bank will be graded after the gabion is removed, before it is replaced to prepare for the
new gabion. Minor excavation at the toe of the slope will provide a flat surface for the
square toe gabions. Up to 25 cubic yards of new riprap may be required; this will be
obtained from a local quarry. Steps will be taken to use existing angular rock including
rock that was released from the existing gabions when possible.
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally
describe.
Erosion could occur; however, erosion control measures are expected to prevent erosion
during construction. The site will be stabilized when the project is complete.
g_ About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project
construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?
No new impervious surface will be introduced.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any:
• Inflatable flow barriers, sand bags wrapped in plastic, or other approved method
will be used to dewater and isolate the work area and prevent sediments from
sloughing into the river.
• The walkway paralleling the project site will be swept at least once daily during
construction
• A spill containment kit and TESC supplies will be kept on site.
• Stockpile areas will be covered at night and in rainy weather.
• The existing brick walkways will be used for construction access.
FOR AGENCY
USE ONLY
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
2. Air
a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile,
odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If
any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known.
Minor dust from excavation and rock placement; normal emissions from construction
equipment_
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so,
generally describe.
There are no known off-site sources of emissions that would affect this project.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any:
Construction equipment will be turned off rather than left idling when not in use. If there
is visible dust, disturbed soil will be sprayed with water.
3. Water
a. Surface:
1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-
round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and
provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into.
The site is on the bank of the Cedar River. The river flows into Lake Washington about 2
miles downstream from the site.
2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described
waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans.
The entire project will take place within 200 feet of the river bank. Plans are attached.
3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from
surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate
the source of fill material.
No dredging will be done. A small amount of soil may be removed from the bank during
the prepping process. There will be minor excavation at the toe of the slope. Up to 20 cy
of new riprap may be placed at the site; this would come from a local quarry. The existing
gabion rock will be reused.
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general
description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
No surface water will be withdrawn. Sandbags or other approved methods will isolate the
work area from the river flow; the river channel is more than wide enough to accommodate
the flow around the isolated areas.
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan.
The 100 -year floodplain extends part of the way up the river bank.
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so,
describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.
No waste materials will be discharged to surface waters.
FOR AGENCY
USE ONLY
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
b. Ground:
1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give
general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
No ground water will be withdrawn or discharged.
2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or
other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following
chemicals... ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of
such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals
or humans the system(s) are expected to serve.
No waste material will be discharged to the ground.
c. Water runoff (including stormwater):
1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and
disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water
flow into other waters? If so, describe.
No changes to runoff will occur from the project. Water from the river walk will continue
to sheet flow into the river.
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe
There is no potential for waste materials to enter ground or surface water.
d_ Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if
any:
The project takes place within the river banks; therefore, no water runoff impacts are
anticipated from the completed project and no control measures are proposed. During
construction, material stockpiles will be covered when not in use.
4. Plants
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:
X deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
X shrubs
X grass
pasture
crop or grain
wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other
water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other
other types of vegetation
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
Emergent vegetation that has established in the gabion baskets will be removed before
construction begins. Deciduous trees near Site D may need to be pruned in order to
provide access to the site.
FOR AGENCY
USE ONLY
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
FOR AGENCY
USE ONLY
c_ List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
No threatened or endangered plant species are known to be on or near the site.
d_ Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance
vegetation on the site, if any:
Live willow stakes will be planted in the new gabion as shown on Sheet 4 of 4.
5. Animals
a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known
to be on or near the site:
X birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other:
X mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:
X fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other:
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
The Cedar River is used by Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), steclhcad (Q.
mykiss) and bull trout (Salvelinus confiuentus).
c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.
The Cedar River is used by anadramous fish to migrate between natal streams and the
Puget Sound. The area is also within the Pacific Flyway, a major migration corridor for
migratory birds.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any,
The project will be done within the approved work window to avoid impacts to migrating
juvenile salmonids, July 1 to August 31. Erosion control measures will minimize
sedimentation impacts to fish using the river.
fi. Energy and natural resources
a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet
the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating,
manufacturing, etc.
The completed project will not use energy.
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so,
generally describe.
The project is at ground level and will not affect the potential use of solar energy by
adjacent properties.
c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal?
List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any:
No additional energy needs are anticipated, therefore no control measures are proposed.
7. Environmental health
a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk
of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this
proposal? If so, describe.
There are no known environmental health hazards associated with this proposal.
7
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
1) Describe special emergency services that might be required.
No special emergency services will be required.
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any:
No environmental health hazards are anticipated; therefore no control measures are
proposed.
b. Noise
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic,
equipment, operation, other)?
The area is an urban riverfront and traffic noise is normal. There are no nearby sources of
noise that would affect the project.
2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a
short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indi-
cate what hours noise would come from the site.
There will be short-term construction noise from equipment engines and rock placement.
The noise will not be significantly higher than ambient levels. No impact equipment will
be used_
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:
No noise impacts are anticipated; therefore, no control measures are proposed. The project
will be constructed during regular daytime business hours.
8. Land and shoreline use
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
Adjacent properties form a residential neighborhood. Arterial roads are bridged across the
river. Some light industrial area exists close to the arterial roads.
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe.
The site has not been used for agriculture.
c. Describe any structures on the site.
The riverfront includes a brick walkway with occasional stairs.
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
No structures will be demolished.
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
R10 (10 units/acre) Sites, A, C and D; RS (8 units/acre) Site B
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
Residential Medium Density, Sites A and D; Residential Single Family Sites B and C.
g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site?
Shoreline High Intensity, Sites A and B; Shoreline Isolated High Intensity, Sites B and C.
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so,
specify.
The site is aquatic wildlife habitat and a seismic soil liquefaction zone.
FOR AGENCY
USE ONLY
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
FOR AGENCY
USE ONLY
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
No one will reside or work in the completed project.
j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
No one will be displaced by the project.
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, it any:
No displacement impacts are anticipated; therefore, no avoidance measures are proposed.
Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land
uses and plans, if any:
Because this is a repair and maintenance project to an existing facility, no project review
measures are proposed.
9. Housing
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, mid-
dle, or low-income housing.
No housing units will be provided.
b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high,
middle, or low-income housing.
No housing units will be eliminated.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:
No housing impacts are anticipated; therefore, no control measures are proposed.
10. Aesthetics
a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is
the principal exterior building material(s) proposed?
No above -ground structures are proposed. The gabion baskets are at grade level.
b_ What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
No views will be altered or obstructed.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:
No aesthetic impacts are anticipated; therefore, no control measures are proposed.
11. Light and glare
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly
occur?
The project will not produce light or glare.
b_ Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views?
The project will not produce light or glare.
c_ What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
There are no known sources of light or glare that could affect this proposal.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any:
No light and glare impacts are anticipated; therefore, no control measures are proposed.
G�
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
12. Recreation
FOR AGENCY
USE ONLY
a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?
There is a brick walkway next to the river that provides a walking trail for local residents.
Liberty Park lies to the southeast.
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe.
The project will not displace any existing recreational uses.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation op-
portunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:
The path may be closed during construction. Construction is expected to be brief and is
necessary to protect the brick walkway, parts of the path will remain open during
construction. No recreational impacts are anticipated once construction is complete;
therefore no control measures are proposed.
13. Historic and cultural preservation
a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preser-
vation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe.
About 1,000 feet south of the southeastern corner of the site, the Renton Fire Station and
the Renton Substation of the Snoqualmie Falls Power Company lie on opposite sites of
South 3rd Street.
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or
cultural importance known to be on or next to the site.
There are no known cultural resources on or adjacent to the site.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any:
The project will not affect the nearest cultural resources. No impacts to cultural or historic
resources are anticipated; therefore, no control measures are proposed.
14. Transportation
a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to
the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.
The site is served by Riverside Drive. The nearest arterials are Bronson Way and Logan
Avenue. I-405 is the nearest major highway. See Sheet 1 of 4 for map.
b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the
nearest transit stop?
The site is served by public transit.
c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the
project eliminate?
The project will neither add nor eliminate parking spaces.
d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or
streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or
private).
The proposal will not require any new roads or improvements.
10
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transporta-
tion? If so, generally describe.
The project will not use water, rail, or air transportation. There is a railroad about half a
mile east of the site.
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If
known, indicate when peak volumes would occur.
The project will not generate any vehicle trips. Construction traffic will be minimal.
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any:
No transportation impacts are anticipated; therefore, no control measures are
proposed. Traffic and transportation impacts will be minimal; most nearby roads will not
be blocked during construction. North Riverside Drive will probably be used as a staging
area, so half the road may be blocked temporarily. Traffic control will be needed for
staging, access to ramp, and possibly lowering equip/material off of Williams Ave. Bridge
to the riverside walkway below. A Traffic Control Plan will be prepared by the contractor
and reviewed by the City prior to construction.
15. Public services
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example- fire pro-
tection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe.
The project will not result in an increased need for public services.
b_ Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any.
No public service impacts are anticipated; therefore, no control measures are proposed.
16. Utilities
a_ Circle utilities currently available at the site: leckrioit , natural gas, water, refuse sere
is- , telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other.
The riverfront walkway is served by night lighting and trash collection.
b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service,
and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might
be needed.
No utility provisions are proposed.
C. SIGNATURE
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that
the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision.
Signature. ,.
Date Submitted: /Z110 •1Z_�
11
FOR AGENCY
USE ONLY
ED MCCARTHY, P.E., PS
Hydrology • Hydraulics • Engineering
December 18, 2012
Mr. Todd Black, Capital Project Coordinator
City of Renton - Parks Planning & Natural Resources
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
Re: Cedar River Gabion Repair
Effect of Gabion Repairs on Base Flood Elevation
Dear Mr. Black:
9957 171 AVENUE SE
RENTON, WA 98059
(425) 271-5734
DEC'. 2 1 2412
This letter summarizes the results of the hydraulic assessment that I conducted to
evaluate the effects of the proposed gabion repairs in the Lower Cedar River on base
flood elevations in the river. Gabions will be repaired at 5 locations between Logan
Avenue and Bronson Way. A total of 416 lineal feet of damaged gabions will be repaired.
Two of the repair sites are adjacent to bridge abutments and will not be planted with
willows because we do not want to cause additional hydraulic losses at these locations.
The other three repair sites will be planted with willow cuttings. Over time, as these
planting mature, the roughness of the channel will increase along the bank.
The gabion repairs in of themselves replace what is currently along the banks and will
not create any impacts on flood elevations. The hydraulic modeling described below was
conducted to assess the hydraulic effects of increased channel roughness due to the
willow plantings.
Hydraulic Modeling
I used the FEMA steady-state HEC -RAS model for the river that was used in developing
the Cedar River 2006 Flood Insurance Study. The FEMA model currently represents the
bank roughness in the project areas with a Manning's roughness coefficient (n -value) of
0.045, which is representative of a rock -lined channel with some brush. I assumed an n -
value of 0.055 (a higher n -value means a channel with greater roughness) for a narrow
band representative of the gabions with willows. The willows will be planted between
elevations 26 and 28 at repair sites A, D, and E. These site locations correspond to HEC -
RAS river stations 115.3, 13 8.9, and 141.8, respectively. The FEMA. model did not have
cross section at river stations 115.3 and 13 8.9, so I added sections by interpolation for
both the existing and repaired scenarios.
Mr. Todd Black
Page 2
December 18, 2012
Modeling Results
The model predicted a rise in the 100 -year flood elevation of up to 0.08 foot resulting
from the increased channel roughness of the willow plantings. A small increase in the
flood profile propagates upstream to river station 211.2.
Predicted water surface elevations are shown in Attachment A. The flood profiles of the
river reach where the repairs are located are shown in Attachment B for both the existing
and repaired scenarios. Cross sections at repair sites A, D, and E are shown in
Attachment C. The higher roughness coefficient of 0.055, that represents the willow
plantings, can be noted for each section.
Summary and Recommendations
The predicted increases in flood elevations are small. It is not unusual for bank
stabilization projects to have a small effect of flood profiles, especially when a habitat
component such as the willow plantings is added. Such an increase could be realized with
the gabions in their damaged condition because limbs and debris can build up on the
exposed baskets and create a backwater. Having stable riverbanks is a necessary
condition to provide flood protection to the community. I recommend that the current
gabion repair design be adopted.
Sincerely,
/
5 1ST 4^Si�Ls
Edward J. McCarthy, Ph.D., P.E.
Attachment A. HEC -RAS Results
HEC -RAS River: Cedar River Reach: Cedar -Lower Profile: 100 -yr
Reach
River 5ta
Profile
Plan
0 Total i Min Ch EI
W.S. Elev
Cdt W.S-
E.G. Elea
E.G. Slope
Vol Chnl
Flow Area
Top Width
Froude# Chl
- .
__ .- -
- ._ ..-�
100 -yr
100 -yr
- (crs)- It (n) ---
(f --
-(n) --
-- (rt) -
(") ---
(ws) -
iift)-
-M)
999.78
999.64
Cedar -Lower
275
100 -yr
Gabions
11830.00 40.04
54.16
48.79
55,39,
0.001480
8.90
1350.69
125.22
0,461
Cedar -Lower
275
(100 -yr
Highern
11630.00 40.04!
54.16
40.79
55.39
0.001480
8.90
1350.71
125.22
-6 4,
Cedar -Lower
274,85
150.95
150.97
0.52
0.52
Bridge'
153.1
j 1 00 -yr
Gablons
12000,00
27.67',
39.87
35.02
411.971
0.001141
8.50
i
151.70
0.44
Cedar -Lower
242.2
100.Yr
Gablons
11830.100
3647
48.73
35.02
Cedar -Lower
274.7
100 -yr
Gabions
11830.00, 40.00
54.09
Cedar -Laxer
55.33
0.001495
0.93
1346.46
125.14
0,46,
Cedar -Lower
274.7
100 -yr
Highern
11830.00, -00.00
54.09
0.68
55.33
0.001495
0.93
1346.48
125.14
O.d6:
Cedar -Lower
165
100 -yr
Higher n
I
28.16
42.34
42.62
G.G00434
5.53
2431.73
291.27
0,28.
I
CedarvLtrwer
Cedar -Lower
260.7
260.7
100 -yr
100 -yr
Gablons
Higher in
11830.00
11830.00.
38,07
38.07
51.29
51.29
0.11
53.671
53.67
0,003088
0.003087
12.44
12.44
999.78
999.64
111.01
111.01
069
0.69
10G -yr
Highern
12000,00
26.04
1
41.74
35.40 42.65
0.000753
7.98
1671-103
139.05
0.31
1442.60
1449.90
134.48
134.74
i
Cedar -Lower
Cedar -Lower
25D.6
250.6
100 -yr
Y
1 00- r
G 9 ions
li hern
11830.00
11830.00,
37.82
37.82
50.77
50.77
1
_ 52-14
52.14
0001755 -
0.001754
_ _ _ _ 9.41
9.41
1275.40
_ _
1275,52
150.95
150.97
0.52
0.52
Cedar -Lower
153.1
j 1 00 -yr
Gablons
12000,00
27.67',
39.87
35.02
411.971
0.001141
8.50
1491.10
151.70
0.44
Cedar -Lower
242.2
100.Yr
Gablons
11830.100
3647
48.73
35.02
51.04
0 0029$1
1225
991.77
109.72',
0.68
Cedar -Laxer
242.2
t0o-yr
, Higher n
11830.00'
36.47
48.73
51.04
0.002979
12.25
992,02
109.72
0.68
Cedar4_awer
231.4
100 -yr
Gablons
11830.00
35.36,
4B.25
27.231
49.56
0.001529
9,23
1316,91
135.52.
0.50
Cedar -Lower
231.4
100 -yr
Higher
11830.00'
35-36
40,25
27.23
49.56
0001527
9,23
1317,33
13ii
0.50
149.071
145.95
0.43
0.46
Cedar -Lower 147.4 100yr Gabions 12000.00. 27.01,
Cedar -Lower
147.4
100- r
Higher in
12000.00
27.01
39.30
34.45
40.52'1
0.001224
8.94'.
Cedar -Loner
2201
100-yrGabions
12000.00
31.271
46.62
43.27
46.50
0.0020?5
11.16
1179,41
126.82
0.58
Cedar-Lawer
220.7
100 -yr
1Higher n
12000.60,
31.27.
46.62
43.27
48.51
0.002021
11.15
1190.16
126.85;
0.58
Cedar -Lower
211.2
100 -yr
!Gabions
12000.00
32.63'
45.08
42.06
47.35
0.0024001
12.16
1047.22
196.40
0.63
Cedar -Lower
211.2
103 -yr
j Higher n
12000.60
32.63
45.09
42.06
47.36
0.0023921
12.14
1048.43.
199.51
0.63
I
141.8
I+
Gabions
1200000
26.62
38.08
39.41
0.0014fi4
9.49'
Cedar -Lover
204.7
100 -yr
Gabions
12000.00,
32.58
44.12
41.63
46.52
0.002778
12.48
1015.91
14472
0.67
Cedar -Lower
204.7
100 -yr
Higher n
12000.00
32.58-
44.15
41.63
46.53
0.002760,
12.46
1018.021
144.90
0.66
Cedar -Lower
192.3
1,100 -yr
1011 -yr
IGabions
I Higher n
12000.00.
12000.00
31.53-
31.53
43,39
43.43
39.53
39.53
44.66
44.71
0.001840;
0.001813 j
9.18
9.24
151588
1528.03
30357 _
306.54
0.50
0.50
Cedar -Lower 192.3
Cedar -Lower
Cedi ower
184.6
184.6
1100 -yr Gabions
100 -yr Higher
12000.00
12000.00,
30.32:
30.32
43,13
43.18
38.44
38.44
44.18
44.22
0.001139
0.001120
8-51
8.46
1907-16
1925.39
390.68
393.03
0.44
C.43
Codar-Lawer
179.5
100. r
Gablons
12000.00
28.80
42.61
43.75
0.001138
8.61
1547.79
168.87
0.44
Cedar -Lower
179-5
100 -yr
Higher
12000.00
_28.80
4266
- -_
4379
0.001122 -
8.57
1556.09
169.10
0.44
Cedar -Lower
169.3
'',100 -yr
Gabions
12000.001
27.93
42.07
36.69
43.15
0.001037
8.75
1843.97
29G.M1
0.42
Cedar -tower
169.3
100 -yr
Higher
12000.00
27.93
42-13
36.69
43.20
0.001016
8.69
1860.39
256.99
0.41
Cedar -Lower
165.6
1011 -yr
Gabions
12000.00
28.16.
42.37
35.09
42.841
0.000432
5.79
2416.34
291.15
0.28
Cedar -Lower
165.6
-100 -yr
Higher in
12000.00
28.16
42.42
35.09
42.90
0.000425
5.76
2433.27
291.79
02$
Cedar -Lower
165.3
Bridge
Cedar -Lower
165
X100 -yr
Gabions
1200,100.
28.16
42.28
42.77
0.000442
5.66
2414.97
290.71
028
Cedar -Lower
165
100 -yr
Higher n
12000,00
28.16
42.34
42.62
G.G00434
5.53
2431.73
291.27
0,28.
Cedar -Lower
160.8
-10 r
Gablons
12000.00
26.64
41.68
35.40 42.60
0.11
6.02
1662.16
139.05
0.37
Cedar -Lower
160.8
10G -yr
Highern
12000,00
26.04
1
41.74
35.40 42.65
0.000753
7.98
1671-103
139.05
0.31
1442.60
1449.90
134.48
134.74
i
Cedar -Lower
160.3
Bridge
Cedar -Lower _
Cedar -Lower
_ 159.7
159.7
100 -yr
100 -yr
Gablons _
Higher n
12000.00 _
12000,00
____26.26
26.26
40.24
40.29
41,41
41.46
0.001116
0.001100
8.81
8.77
1442.60
1449.90
134.48
134.74
0.44
0.43
i
Cedar -Lower
153.1
j 1 00 -yr
Gablons
12000,00
27.67',
39.87
35.02
411.971
0.001141
8.50
1491.10
151.70
0.44
CedaM1Lower
153.1
1100 -yr
Higher r
12000.00
27.671
39.94
35.02
4L02'
0.001120
B.45
1500.59
151.95
0.43
Cedar -Lewey
151.3
Bridge
Cedar -Laver
149.5
1100 -yr
Gablons
12000.00
27.231
39.54
40.61
0.001155
B.411
1511.25
148.791
0.44
Cedar -Lower
149.5
100 -yr
Highern
1200000
27.23
39.61
39.22
34.45
- 40.67
40.45
0.001131
0.001250
6.36
9.00,
1521.61
1379.93
149.071
145.95
0.43
0.46
Cedar -Lower 147.4 100yr Gabions 12000.00. 27.01,
Cedar -Lower
147.4
100- r
Higher in
12000.00
27.01
39.30
34.45
40.52'1
0.001224
8.94'.
1309.50
146.10
0.45
Cedar -Lower
Cedar -Lower
146.7
146
__ _ _ _
1 O&Y,
Gabions
Bridge
1 12006.00-
26.861
38.33
34.33
39.76
_
0.001571
9.64
120060
143.21'
051
Cedar -Lower
146
100-
Hi her n
12000.00
26.86
38.40
34.33
39.81
0.001538
9.58
1289.38
143.50'
4.50
Cedar -Lower
141.8
1
Gabions
1200000
26.62
38.08
39.41
0.0014fi4
9.49'
1367.84
132,74
0.50
HEC -RAS River: Cedar River Reach: Cedar -Lower Profile: 100 -yr (Continued)
Reach
I River Sta
ProFle
Plan
O Total
Mln Ch EI
W.S. Elev
Crit W.S.
EG. Elev
E.G. Slope
Vel Chn!
Flow Area
Top Wldth
Fronde # Chl
_
(c5)
(ft)
(fty(ft)
(R
(%ft) I
(sq R)
(h)
Caft'LAwW
141.6
r1
fttw n
I 12"
26.62]
38.18
39.45
0.001572
_MIS)
9.42
1376.60
132.88
049
Ce91Loner
sae gar,
1 ...
_ Ga6ion6
12p00A0.
26.33 37,90
'
-`
39.16
0.0073821
925
1425.15
142.29
0.48
C04Taror
136.94T
1 OU -yr
n
42000,00,
26.35
-
37.95
39.19
0.0015x5
9,18
1431.48
142.45
0.48
Cedar -Laver
134.1
100 -yr
Gabions
12000.00
25.88,
37.66
38.78
0.401251
8.85!
1617.31
225.65
0,46
Cedar -Lower
134.1
1100 -yr _.,,---Higher
n
12000.00
25.88
37.67
- 38.79
0.001247
8,841
1620.03
226.81
0.46
Cedar -Lower
132.8
IMyr
Gabions
12000.00
25.70
37.59
33.31
38.69
0.001168
8.70
1555.97
170.61
0.45'
Cedar -Carer
132.8
100 -yr
Higher n
12000.00
25.70!
37.60
33.91
38.70
0.0011631
8.70
1557.97
170.86
0.45
Cedar -Lower
132.3
-
Bridge
Cedar -Lower
i 131.8
1100 -yr
Gabions
1_2000,00
25.56
3581!
32.78
37.36
0.00198410.26
1270.57
137.00
Cedar -Lower
131.8
100•yr
Highern
12000.00
25.56
35.82'
32.78
37.37
_
0.001976
13.25
1271.90
137.00
_0.57
0.57
Cedar -Lower
127.9
j100 -yr
j Gabions
12000.00
_ 24.97;
35.3432.36
36.94
0.002048
10.43
1250.47
149.33
0.57
Cedar -Lower
127.9
100•
Higher
12000.00
24.97;
35.35,
32.36
36.95
0.002039
10.41
1252.22
149.x2
0.57
Cedar -Lower
124.5
100- >T
Gabians
12000.00 'I
2x.69,
35.13
I
31.90,
36.54
0.001801
9.77
1340.89
..
148.94
0.54
Cedar -Lower
124.5
1 00 -yr
Higher
-12000.00
24.69.
35.14
31.90
36.550,001793
9.76
1342.98
148.95
0.54
-- --
Cedar -Lower
124.1
Cedar o-vver
123.7
Lao -yr
Gablons _
12000.00,
24.63!
34.51
0.002353
10.81
1226.08
149-58
G.61
Cedar -Lower
123.7
70 y
Higher
12000.00'
24.63-
34.53
_ _36.23!
36.241
0.002330
10.78
1230.05
149.58
0.61
Cede) Lorxi
11&,%y
1
12000.00
24.7
33.89
35.19
0.001847
9.55
1474.54
255.61
0.54
Cede Lowe►
115563`
11
I Mrn ._
12000.01
24.07.
33.89
35,20
0.001920
9.55
1476.19
25562
0.54
Cedar -Lower
111.6
100-yr�
;Gabions
i
12000.00-
_23.82
33.95
30.64
34.76
0.001180
7.79
1623.99
295.07
0.44
Cedar -Lower
111.6
100 -yr
:Highern
12000.00;
23.82
_
33.95
30.64
34.76
0.001180
7.79
1823.99,
295.071
044
Cedar -Lower
109.5
100 -yr _
Gabions
12000.00,
23.28
33.77
29.56
34.63
0.001137
7.82
1755-99
194.11
0.43
Cedar{ower
_ 109.5
100 -yr
Higher n
12000.00 '
23.281
_
33.77
29.56
34.63
3.001137
_7_.82
1755.99
-
194.11
0.43
Cedar -Lover
108.3
Bridge)
-
--
Cedar -Lower
107.1
100 -yr
Gabions
12300.00
22.83
33.55
28.83
34.25
O.OW903'
7.06
2002.04
250.86
0.39
Cedar -Lower
107.1
100 -yr
Highern
120OLW
22.83
33.55
28.83
34.25
O.00D903
7.06
2002.04
250.86
0-38
Cedar -Lower
106.3
100 -yr
Gabions
12000.00
22.78
33.17
29.44
34.15
0.001434
8.56
166858
185.85
0.41
Cedar -Lower
106.3 _
1100 -yr
Highern
120MOO
22,78
33.17
29.44
34.15
0.001434
8.56
_
1666,58
_
185.85
0.47
Cetlar-Lower
100.2
100 -yr
Gablons
_ 12000,00
22.36
32.13
29.84
33.56
0.002169
10.12'
1329.50
176-02
0,58,
Cedar -Lower
100.2
tpp-
Higher
12000.00
22.38
32-13
29.84
33.56
0.002169
10.12•
1329.50
176.02
0.58!
Cedar -Lower
90.2
100 -yr
Gabians
12000.00'
_21.53
31.00
28.48
32.41
0.002099
9.70
1310.05
171.97
657
1310.05
171.71
1157
Cedar -Lower
84.2
106 -yr_
Gabions
12000.00
20.93,
X00
27.53
31.56
0.002324
10.14
1242.62
155.71
-
0.60
Cedar -Lower
84.2 ,-
100 -yr
Higher
12000.00
20-91
30.00
_
27.53
31.56
0.002324
_ 10.14
1242.62
155.71
0.60
Cedar -Lower
80.4
11 OG -yr
Gablons
_ 12000.00,
20.63•
29.76
27.00
_31.14
0.002107
9.48
1291.91
158.45
0.56
Cedar -Lower
80.4
'100 -yr_
Higher
12000.00
20.63
29.76
_ 27.00
31.141
0.002107
9.48
1291.91
158AS
_
0.56
Cedar -Lower
77.7
100 -yr
IGabio
12000.00
20.45
29.57
26.85
30.89'
0.001998
9.28
1339.10
169.30
0.55
Cedar -Laver
77.7
100 -yr
Higher n
12000.00
20.45
29.57
2685
30,89
0.001998
9.28
1339.10
169.30
17.55
Cedar -Lower
75.9
100.yr
Gabions
12000.00,
20.22
29.55
26.25
30,64'
0.001600
8.38
1453.21
166.66
0.49
Cedar -Lower
75.9
100 -yr
Higher n
12000.017
20.22
29.55
26.25
30.64
6001600
8.36
1453.21
166.66
0.49
.Cedar -Lower
74.8
100 -yr.
(Gabions
12000.00
20.09
29.39
26.26
30,54
0.001676
8.64
1427.13
166.58
3.51
Cedar -Lower
74.8
100 -yr
Higher
12600.00
20-09
_ 29.39
26.26
30.54
0.001676
8.64
_
1427.13
166.58
0.51
Cedar -Lower
70
Lot Strucl
j
Cedar -Lower
64.6
100 -yr
Gabions
12000.00
19.02,
28.10
2546
29.49
0.002159
9.51
130677-
169.72'
0.57
Cedar -Lower
64.6
' 100•yr
Higher n
12060.00
19.02
28-10
25.46
29.49
0.002159 ,
9-51
1306.77
169.72
0.57
Cedar -Lower
50
Let Struct
Cedar -Lower
46.9
100 -yr
Gabions
12030.00
17.74
_ 26_.37
23.88
27.64
0.001778
9.32
1399,32
190.29
0.56
Cedar -Lower
46.9
100 -yr
Highern
12000.00
17.74
26 .37'
23.89
27.64
0.001778
9.32
_
1399.32
190-29
0.56
HFC -RAS River; Cedar River ReachCedar-Lower Profile: 100 -yr fContnued)
Reach
River St.
Profile
Plan
0 Total
Min Ch EI
W.S. Elev
Crit W.S.
E.G. Elev
E.G. Slope '.
Vel Chnl
Flaw Area
Tap Width
Froude # Chl
()
(n)
(1)
Ott)
(n)
(fuft)
(ws)
(54 h)
{tt)
Cedar -Lower
40
LatStrucl
----....
..------------
-
----
Cedar -Lower
Cedar -Lower
31.7
31.7
100 -yr
100 -yr
Gablons
Higher
1200000
12000.00
16.84
16.84
25.36
25.36
22.83
22.83
26,41
26.41
0.001214
0.001214
8.50
8.50
1580,54
1560.54
240.36
240.36
0.521
0.52
Cedar -Lower
120
Lat StmCt
Cedar -Lower
19.2
100 -yr
Gabions
12000.00
15.36'
24.75
21.19
25,74
0.000813
8.11
1601.82
220.81
0.47
Cedar -Lower
19.2
100 -yr
Higher n
12000.00
15.36
24.75
21.19
25.74
0.000813
8.11
1601.82
220.61
0.47
Cedar -Lower
Cedar -Lower
10
3
100 -yr
Gabions
Lat Stn ct
12000.00
13.43
24.19
19.921
25.12
0.000618
7.92
1780.78
291.08
0.43
Cedar -Lower
3
100-r
Higher n
12000.00
13.43
24.19
19.42
25.12
0.000618
7.92
178078
291.08
043
Cedar -Lower
1.3
Bridge
I
Cedar -Lower
Cedar -Lower
0-1
0.1
100 -yr
1011 -yr
Gabions
Higher n
12000.00
12000.00
13,43'
13,43,
_ 18.64
18.64
18.64
18.64
20.99
20.99
0.004154
0.004154
12.351
12.35
990.34
990.34
220.07
220,07
0.98
0.98
Cedar -Lower
Cedar -Lower
0.08
0.08
100 -yr
190 -yr
Gabions
Higher n
12000.00
12000.00
7.93!
7.93-
17.60
17.60
19.21
19.21
0.002227
0.002227
10.18
10.18
1191.08
1191.08
211,50
2 11 .50
0.74
0.74
Cedar -Lower
Cedar -Lower
0.03
0.03
100-
100 -yr
Gabions
Higher n
12000.00
12000.00
13 56'.
73,56;
17.32
17.32
17.32
17.32
17.90
17.9
0 005562
0 0 05562
_ _ 6A9
6.09
1971.70
197170
2700.98
2700,98
_ _1.00
1.00
FEMA TD Nufnber: 1752 Project Title: Cedar River Gabion Baskets
. Specific. Project _Information File (SPIF)
Programmatic Biological Assessment (PBA,) with Washington State
FEMA Disaster Number: FEMA -171 8 -DR -WA
FEMA Project Number: 1752
Project Title: Cedar River Gabion Baskets
Activity Category (ies) from PISA: #6. Dewater & Water Diversion & # 9. Revetment Repair
Purpose: Using the SPIF for FEMA -funded projects in Washington State expedites funding disbursement.
Completion of this SPIF is part of the informal consultation process with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
and/or National Marine Fisheries Service for projects with potential to affect federally protected species
and habitats. This SPIF is designed to provide sufficient information in order to make a "not likely to
adversely affect" and/or "no adverse effect" determination(s) under FEMA's responsibility to comply with
Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and_the Magnuson -Stevens Fisheries Conservation
Management Act. The SPIF serves as a substitute for a biological assessment and allows eligible projects
to proceed under the condition that the appropriate conservation measures are implemented.
Use this SPIF to notify the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) of a proposed FEMA -funded .
project involving activities covered under the Programmatic Biological Assessment for fourteen Common
Activities, dated .Tune 29, 2009. This consultation agreement between the National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) considered Section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act (ESA) and the Magnuson -Stevens Fisheries Conservation Management Act Essential Fish
Habitat Consultation.
Eligibility for Programmatic Consultation (This seclion completed by FEMA)
This application:
❑ Meets all the requirements of this programmatic consultation
® Does not meet all of the requirements of this programmatic consultation, but PBA
IS applicable.* (su be miorexpianalim)
Signed: Date:
Name: Title:
• Sub -base native soils were exposed.
The following Information should be completed by the applicant
Washington State PBA File far FEMA Projects 1/20/2010
Page 1 of 26
752 11t'o Jct Tit1C: Cebu- River Gabion Baskets
rniniatic .Biological Agreeinent Identification.
'Location
PBA .
. CM
CM
Identification
Category
Ntimbers
1Numbe>r's.
(Use Proaeet LmLiolk Numbers
Prom the lncnLion intorpIHIN)Ik
Used
Not Used
ruble on nem pac)
1
6. Dewater
1, 2, 3, 4, 7,
ix & xx-
& Water
10, I55 19, i,
xxiii
Diversion
1l, 111, 1v, V,
9,
vi, vii, viii, X,
Revetmel(t
xi, xii, xiii,
Repair*
Civ
*Conservation measures taken front rTMA Progratrtmatic .Biological Assessment
for Fourteen Common Disaster Activities Jun,., 29, 2009 are included as Attachment
L
Vegetation within right of way structure was disturbed (ix). Project is located
mitside tnurrelet and northeraa spotted owl habitatarid priority sites and will have
no effect on the species. 1"herefore, General CM # xx — xxiii are not included.
Applicant Information
Applicant Name: City of Renton
Applicant Address: - 1055 S. Grndy Wny
Menton WA. 14507
Contact Person Name: Ms. Deborah Needham_ Contract email: slllec4lhninna ren omya. gov
Contact Telephone Number: 425-430-7027 ext.
Nance of Person Completing this SPIE: Cytitluia lCntttisen 'Fitle: ,Environnaen(n[ Speciiilist
Date: 10116/09
Project Information
Location:
Select one of the following categories,
Is the project located at a single site? ® Yes.
Dods lite project have multiple locations? ❑ Yes. How Wily?
Is (Ile project a jurisdictional -wide project such tis debris managcuten(?.❑ Yes. What is the Jurisdiction or
operational arca (lor example, Tacoma Railroad)? _
Washim,ton State PBA File foo• FEMA Protects 1/20/2010 Page 2 of 26 .
FEMA 1D Number: 1752 Project Title. Cedar River Gabion Baskets
D—Apia 0— fnllnwinn 1—finn infnrma4inn rnr Hip aiiPief-
Attach as Appendix A:
• USGS guadrangie map with scale and the location of the project(s) marked on the map.
Project Definition:
What is the commonly used name for the project? (For example, xyz Creek Culvert repair)
Cedar River Gabion Baskets
What was(were) the original structure(s) or facility(les)? Gabion Baskets along the Cedar River
What were the composition and/or size and/or dimensions of the original structure(s)? (For example, 8 -ft wide
by 4 -ft. long by 1 -ft. deep concrete weir, 18 -in CMP culvert, cic.) This project addresses gabion baskets along the
Cedar River in a stretch measuring 290 feet long x 3 feet wide x 3 feet high. Above the gabion
baskets located on the riverbank, there is a brick pedestrian trait.
Will (did) the proposed project stay within the footprint of the existing/original structure? ® Yes ❑ No
Damage Description:
Type of Facility Damaged; (embankment, abutments, fish iveirs, culverts, bridges, balls, etc,) Flood water and debris
damage 290 ft. of the Cedar River gabion_basket embankment and the brick pedestrian Trail located
between Bronson Way and Logan Ave. Bridges in the City of Renton.
Washington State PBA File for FEMA Projects 1/20/2010 Page 3 of 26
Location Number
Identifier
1
2
3
4
County
KING
Latitude, Longitude
47,48440 -
in decimal degrees
122.20634
If linear project:
Start latitude,
longitude
Ending latitude,
longitude
(in decimal degrees)
Street Address, if
Between
applicable
Bronson Way
and Logan
Avenue
City
Renton
Section
17
Township
23
Range
S
Hydraulic Unit
17110012
Code HUC
In Surface Water?
Yes 0 Na
Yes El No
Yes No
Yes No
If yes, Name of
Cedar River
Water body
Work Below
ordinary high
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ❑ No
water mark?
[f no, is Surface
Water within 200
❑ Yes ❑ No
F1 Yes El No
El Yes [I No
❑Yes ❑ No
feet of projee
Attach as Appendix A:
• USGS guadrangie map with scale and the location of the project(s) marked on the map.
Project Definition:
What is the commonly used name for the project? (For example, xyz Creek Culvert repair)
Cedar River Gabion Baskets
What was(were) the original structure(s) or facility(les)? Gabion Baskets along the Cedar River
What were the composition and/or size and/or dimensions of the original structure(s)? (For example, 8 -ft wide
by 4 -ft. long by 1 -ft. deep concrete weir, 18 -in CMP culvert, cic.) This project addresses gabion baskets along the
Cedar River in a stretch measuring 290 feet long x 3 feet wide x 3 feet high. Above the gabion
baskets located on the riverbank, there is a brick pedestrian trait.
Will (did) the proposed project stay within the footprint of the existing/original structure? ® Yes ❑ No
Damage Description:
Type of Facility Damaged; (embankment, abutments, fish iveirs, culverts, bridges, balls, etc,) Flood water and debris
damage 290 ft. of the Cedar River gabion_basket embankment and the brick pedestrian Trail located
between Bronson Way and Logan Ave. Bridges in the City of Renton.
Washington State PBA File for FEMA Projects 1/20/2010 Page 3 of 26
FEMA ID Number; 1752 Project Title: Cedar River Gabion Baskets
Describe the damages including type and extent of damages: Flood water and debris damaged the wire
mesh on the gab€on baskets and the ballast rocks were washed away. Approximately 1,800 SY of
brick sidewalk will be replaced.
Attack thefollowing information to this SPIF as Appendix B:
• Photograph(s) of damaged elements (jpg or .pdf file), if submitting electronically. (ldcally, 3001(13
or less. if greater, please compress the File.)
Project Description
Status:
Status of Project(s): ❑ Complete ❑ Not Complete, If started, % Complete: _� ® Not
Started
Ngmtive
Provide a detailed dbscription of the work to be accomplished including purpose, number and type of
structures to be installed, repaired or constructed; construction materials used (for example size, dimensions
and type of pilings (steel, wood, concrete), construction machinery (to be) used (for example, vibration or
impact pile driver) and anticipated construction techniques to be employed_
The purpose is to rebuild the Cedar River gabion basket embankment and brick pedestrian trail.
The project is relatively small and spread across four sites for a total of 290 feet. Access is limited to.
small equipment, It Is estimated that a total of 9618 -inch x 36 -inch baskets failed and need to be
replaced or 28 per site. All rock which has fallen out of the failed gabion into the river that can be
retrieved will be reused to rebuild the gabions. If work can't be done in the dry, a cofferdam will be
utilized to isolate the work area from the river. Pumps will be used to dewater the isolated work
area. Diverted water will be moved to an acceptable location so as to minimize erosion concerns.
The proposal includes the installation of geotextile fabric prior to reinstalling the gabion basket.
Following embankment repairs the walkway will be repaired and the embankment will be planted
with native plants. Project includes an on-site biologist for 10 days.
Please answer the following questions, if related to your proposed project: .
• Is (was) blasting included in the project? No. If so, when, how frequently? No.
• Is (was) stream diversion part of the project plan? Yes. If so, how? Temporary Cofterdams.
• Will (was) fish capture, handling or electro -shocking included in the project? No. If so, will
(were) USFWS/NMFS electro -shocking standards be followed? No.
• Are (were) the Integrated Streambank Bank Protection Guidelines (ISPG) followed? Yes.
• Were Anadromous Salmonid Passage Facility Design (Feb. 2008) requirements followed? No.
• What erosion BMPs will be (were) used (See Hydraulic Project Approval)? Yes.
The city of Renton is a member of the Regional Road Maintenance Program that requires specific
BMPs. Additional specific BMP relating to dewatering and selective demolition for this project will
also be included when the design specifications are finalized. The BMPs listed below are included in
the general maintenance HPA for the Cedar River gabion baskets:
a Bank protection work shall be restricted to work necessary to repair the existing
falling gabions.
o All angular rock which has fallen into the river from the existing gabions shall be
retrieved and reused in the repair work.
o Sank protection material shall"be clean, angular rock, and shall be installed to
withstand 100 -year peak flow.
o Bank protection material shall not construct the flow and cause any appreciable
increase (not to exceed 0.2 feet) in backwater elevation (calculated at the 100 foot
Washington State PBA File for FEMA Projects 1/20/2010 Page 4 of 26
FEMA ID Number: 1752 Project Title: Cedar River Gabion Baskets
flood) or channel -wide scour, and shall be aligned to cause the least effect on the
hydraulics of the stream.
o Disturbance of the streambed and banks and their associated vegetation shall be
limited to that necessary to perform the project. Affected streambed and bank
areas shall be restored to preproject or improved habitat configuration. Prior to
December 31 of the year of project installation, the disturbed areas of vegetation
shall be revegetated with native or other woody species approved by the WDFW
area habitat biologist (AHB) listed below. Vegetative cuttings shall be planted at a
maximum interval of three feet (on center). Plantings shall be maintained as
necessary for three years to ensure 8o percent or greater survival of each species or
a contingency species approved by the AGB.
o All waste material such as construction debris, silt excess dirt or overburden
resulting from this project shall be deposited above the limits of floodwater in an
approved upland disposal site. Extreme care shall be taken to see that no petroleum
products, hydraulic fluid, fresh cement, sediments, sediment -laden water, chemicals
or any other toxic or deleterious materials are allowed to enter or leach into the
stream.
Will (did the project include removal of, or disturbance to, riparian habitat? No. If so, how much?
NIA.
Will the project replace it structure that was a barrier to fish passage with a fish passable structure?
No.
You may attach additional pages, or, if completing this form by computer, expand the space below to
provide this information. Please indicate if the project is fish -passable as defined in NMFS 2008
guidelines, if appropriate. N/A .
Abaci as Appendix C':
Dates:
Project schematics or sketches showing repair/replacement design, i f available.
If work has been completed, photograph(s) of facility before, during and after construction is
complete. (elther .jpg or .pdf format, please, if submitting electronically) Please include the
project schematics and photographs.
Dates when the project(s) will belwas conducted.
Start Date: 711110 End Date: 8/15110
Dates when in -water work will be/was conducted, if different.-
Start
ifferent:
Start Date: End Date:
Describe water work time. ^ Hours, or Days, or Weeks.
Work Period in Day: !-lours Start Time End Time
If heavy equipment is used in the project:
Kind of equipment: (for example, backhoe, vacuum truck, etc.)
Backhoe, track hoe, dump truck, pickup truck.
Noise created above ambient levels? ❑ Yes E leo
Surrounding Environment:
E Riverine
❑Marine
Washington State PBA File for FEMA Projects,1/20/2010 Page 5 of 26
FEMA ID Number; 1752 Project Title. Cedar River Gabion Baskets
❑ Forest ❑Estuarine
❑ Old growth present ❑ Wetland
❑ Second growth present ❑ Agricultural
❑ Arid (Desert/steppe)
Do you propose to clear any area for temporary access? ❑ Yes 0 No
If yes, how much area? Give units (acres, square feet, etc.)
identify the location for the temporary access. (For example, W. Long.)
Is the area previously disturbed? ® Yes ❑ No
If so, how? (Examples: parking let, gravel road, road prism) This area is located in
downtown Renton. The river runs through the city of Renton. Gabion baskets line the
riverbank in tris area.
Washington State PBA File for FEMA Projects.1/20/2010 Page 6 of 26
Biological Information
indicate by checking the box if any of the following are present in the watershed of the project area. Unsure of any:
❑ Yes Z No, lfyes, which?
Endangered
❑ Upper Columbia River Spring -run Chinook (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)
❑ Snake River Sockeye (Oncorhynchus nerka)
❑ Upper Columbia River Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss)
Threatened
® Bull trout, Coastal/Puget Sound IRU (Salvelitrus conflueutus)
❑ Bull trout, Columbia River IRU (Salvelinus confluentus)
❑ Coho salmon, Lower Columbia River ESU (Q, kisrach)
❑ Chinook salmon, Lower Columbia River -ESU (Dncorhynchus lshawytscha)
® Chinook salmon, Puget Sound ESU (Oncorhynchus tshawylscha)
❑ Chinook salmon, Snake River Spring/Summer-run ESU (Oncorhynchus tshawylscha)
❑ Chinook salmon, Snake River Fall -run ESU (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)
❑ Chum salmon, Columbia River ESU (Oncorhynchus keta)
❑ Chum salmon, Hood Canal summer ESU (Oncorhynchus keta)
❑ Steelhead trout, Lower Columbia River ESU (Oncorhynchus mykiss)
❑ Steelhead trout, Middle Columbia River ESU (Oncorhynchus mykiss)
❑ Steelhead trout, Coastal/Puget Sound DFS (Oncorhynchus mykiss)
❑ Steelhead trout, Snake River ESU (Oncorhynchus mykiss)
Designated
❑ Critical habitat for CoastaUPuget Sound bull trout IRU
❑ Critical habitat for Columbia River bull trout IRU
❑ Critical habitat for Columbia River chum salmon ESU
❑ Critical habitat for Hood Canal summer chum salmon ESU
❑ Critical habitat for Lower Columbia River Chinook salmon ESU
❑ Critical habitat for Upper Columbia River Spring -run Chinook salmon ESU
❑ Critical habitat for Snake River Spring/Summer-run Chinook salmon ESU
❑ Critical habitat for Snake River Fall -run Chinook salmon ESU
® Critical habitat for Puget Sound Chinook salmon ESU
❑ Critical habitat for Lower Columbia River steelhead trout ESU
❑ Critical habitat for Upper Columbia River steelhead trout ESU
❑ Critical habitat for Middle Columbia River steelhead trout ESU
❑ Critical habitat for Snake River steelhead trout ESU
Lake Ozette sockeye salmon are not covered by this programmatic at this time,
Essential Fish Rabitat
® Chinook salmon
® Coho salmon
® Pink Salmon
Is the project in Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) as defined in the Magnuson -Stevens Act (SO CFR 600)7
® Yes ❑No
Biological Assessment for Cedar Ri rail Revelment Repair
Listed Non -Fish Species
Does work in this location have the potential to affect?
Marbled Murrelet present or potential to affect: ❑ Yes ® No
Marbled Murrelet Critical Habitat'. ❑ Yes ® No (See 61 FR 26255, May 24, 1996)
Northern Spotted Owl present or potential to affect: ❑ Yes ® No
Northern Spotted Owl Critical Habitat: ❑ Yes ® No (See 73FR 47325-47522, August 13, 2408)
Other Species: Name(s)
Other Critical Habitat:
Marine Mammals
Are marine mammals present in the project area? ❑ Yes ® No
Is the project in or likely to affect critical habitat for Marine Mammals? ❑ Yes [K No (See 71 FR 69054-
69070, November 29, 2006.)
Relationship to Other Permits, Applications Approvals
Has a Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application (JARPA) been submitted? ❑ Yes ® No.
7f yes, attach a copy.
.Has a Hydraulic Project Approval been issued for the project? ❑ Yes ® No. If yes, attach a copy.
Describe any contacts/correspondence with the US Army Corps of Engineers or Washington State
Department of Fish and Wildlife. Attach correspondence to SPIF.
Agency Nature of Contact Result Date
Was a biological assessment (BA) prepared for projects in this area/on this river system? ® Yes ❑ No If yes,
attach a copy of the BA, and any correspondence with US Fish and Wildlife Service and/or National Marine
Fisheries Service regarding it (including a request for concurtence letters and concurrence response letters).
River mile 6.5, Cedar River Trail Site 2 Revetment Repair BA is attached.
Biological Assessmettl liar Cet, iver'frnil Revelment Repair
Appendix A:
MAP
Bis)ingiesil Assessment for Cedar R frail Revetment Repair
Appemlix B:
Category G - Site No.IJ
—west from Branson Bridge
#1 -- Starting point
42- Damaged/ empty gabian basket
P3- Detachment from trail/ empty basket
10
r
I., fiver Trod Revctlr em 1(upuir
IL LIU:.r.l.� q•1un I;L:v r��^.:.GI rrra nr,-ri:c..
PHOTO SHEET
n?P11CANI Ch , ar RailLair
ms wo. oaa.s�;rs.na rw Rr:r rru �tcu�uui
s
'r5
1�
ra ,} ,
;--r
D OAV;nt RCl WlC',$V4tI 1TILr1: UN.AnOC1ACIt•CLr I,:r:iLJRF.'
IlU r'IU7:-If
1� %iu � ' ��Ww✓r Vr,'.
'''' • �"s',' r s , .4 ' �'F.
" "��!//iWKI
�
'moi,'. 1,`�i, �✓1' �C��ii � iii �� i AA ?�A9.��3�,' jl�.
+o '�w•�, "��"�``•�`}�:�u� Tera t � �
� t
{
Irfli�;i,r,kdil:vr7te7i1Sg5S1:�Lsa:nnprtvcli7n.r4.Iuhil:qu�ll .
r 1 `y 1 j lU 4 if 'AWRI,
- r I r }ks(-r ■+�J{W{.3 i'¢ ,ln 4 {vFri1�
'tt��.1y7
131l1SUi I MOUWE,CiLi. CI I 110 II:}%,wrJ WCK'Clir vici"IRVko
r p Et��ygjy5}y� 1pr ��� i
Np
iN
1.1
Biological Assessment for Cedar Ri... Trail Revetment Repair
Attachment 1
Conservation Measuresf'
FEMA PBA
CM
l
Schedule non -emergency activities & in -water work to abide by the approved work
windows for all relevant species.
CM
2
Work during dry or low -flow periods in freshwater & low tide in marine waters.
CM
3
Design repairs consistent with Washington State Aquatic Habitat Guidelines Program —
Integrated Streambank Protection Guidelines considering factors including;
Setting/Stream Reach Roughness Features Vegetation Diversity.
CM
4
Check with WDFW Biologist to determine whether or not fish are present or likely to be
present during the proposed in -water work. Select, implement, & monitor BMPs
appropriate for s ecies present.
CM
7
This action shall be covered for no more than once per structure, facility, stream reach,
or site during the 5 -year San of the PBA.
CM
10
All disturbed areas shall be protected from erosion using BMPs. Within the first
planting season, the banks, including riprap areas, shall be revegetated with native or
other approved woody species. Vegetative cuttings shall be planted at a maximum
interval of three feet (on center) & maintained as necessary for three years to ensure 80
percent survival.
Material
15
Riprap shall be clean and durable, flee from dirt, sand, clay and rock fines, and shalt be
installed to withstand the 104 year flow flood event.
Specific to
19
Divert flows and dcwater work area before beginning work using NMFS and/or
Project
USFWS Guidelines.
Types
SMP
i
Perform "Emergency Response Notifications" before initiating actions as a licable.
BMP
ii
Obtain all required local, state, tribal, and Federal permits and/or authorizations prior to
implementation of the pro2osed ro'ect and comply ermit and authorization conditions.
BMP
iii
Select, implemeht, monitor, and maintain BMPs to control erosion and sediment, reduce
spills and pollution, and provide habitat protection. BMPs must meet, at a minimum,
the WDOE 2005 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington.
h ://wwvv,ecy.wa.gov/promms/wq/stounwatertmanual.html
BMP
iv
Select, implement, monitor, and maintain BMPs consistent with Regional Road
Maintenance — Endangered Species Act — Program Guidelines.
BMP
v
No disposal of construction materials or debris can occur in a wetland or floodplain.
BMP
vi
No storage of construction materials or debris can occur in a wetland.
BMP
vii
No storage of construction materials or debris can occur in a floodplain during "Flood
Season" Check with local Floodplain Administrator for Flood Season).
BMP
viii
Limit work to re-disaster/desi limits/footprint.
Equipment
x
No staging (even temporarily) of construction materials, equipment, tools, buildings,
trailers, or restroom facilities within a wetland. No staging (even temporarily) of
construction materials, equipment, tools, buildings, trailers, or restroom facilities can
occur in a floodplain during "Flood Season" (Check with local Floodplain
Administrator for Flood Season).
Equipment
xi
Use biodegradable ve etable oil in 2quipment hydraulic systems.
Equipment
xii
Equipment shall be stationed on and operate from the top of the bank, bridge, or
roadway, or other existing access. No new access points wil l be created.
Machinery and equipment used during work shall be serviced, fueled, and maintained
on uplands to prevent contamination to surface waters. Fueling equipment and vehiclos
will be more than 200 feet away from waters of the state. Exceptions to this
Equipment
xiii
requirement are allowed for large cranes, pile drivers, and drill rigs if they cannot be
easily moved. Fueling areas shall be provided with adequate spill containment, The
PBA Determination Form will provide the site specific information if an exception to
the 200 foot buffer is to be implemented,
E ui ment I
xiv I
Equipment used fora project shall be free of externalpetroleum-based products while
12
._iverTrail Revetment Repair
king around the channel. Equipment shall be checked daily for leaks and any
-ssary repairs shall be completed prior to commencing work activities adjacent or.
r waterbodies.
Zy vegetation is removed, it will be replaced with native vegetation appropriate to
site upon the completion of the project. All replaced vegetation must have a
ranteed 100 percent survival within the first three years, and 80 percent survival
fin Five years.
13
Biological Assessment for Ccd 'er Trail Revetment Repair
Environmental Baseline/Status of the Species
The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife's (WDFW) Priority Habitats Database, the Washington
Department Natural Resources database, the Washington Lakes and River Inventory database, and the NMFS
Salmon Critical Habitat GIS data were used to identify important species and habitats in the area. Several salmon
and trout species are known to use the section of the Puyallup River in the action area. Chinook (Oncorhychus
tshawylscha), coho (O. kisulch), steelhead (O. mykiss), chum (O. keta), pink (O. gorbuscha), coastal cutthroat trout
(O. clarki Clark), and bull trout (Salvelinus confiuentus). The federally listed fish populations in this area are Puget
Sound (PS) Chinook, steelhead, and bull trout.
The project site is in the lower Cedar River watershed which is defined as that portion of the Cedar River
downstream of Cedar Falls. The Cedar River is part of the Lake Washington/Sammamish Water Resource
Inventory Area 8 (WRIA 8). In the past, major alterations have occurred in the Lake
Washington/Cedar/Sammamish basin. With construction of the Ship Canal and Locks, a new connection between
Lake Washington and Puget Sound was created. This changed the outlet of Lake Washington from the Black River
to the Ship Canal. Also, the Cedar River was re-routed into Lake Washington and (WRIA 2005, p. 14). With these
alterations, the Black River went dry and the Lake Washington/ Sammamish system was separated from its
historical drainage course to the Green/Duwamish River. The Cedar River originates in the Cascade Mountains and
now flows into the south end of Lake Washington. Habitat quality has been degraded in a good portion of the lower
Cedar River because the river has been channelized with rock -armored revetments and levees to provide flood
control (WRIA 2005, p. 16).
Chinook salm
Chinook salmon in the Cedar River ate part of the Puget Sound Evolutionary Significant Unit (ESU). Abundance
trends indicate that the Cedar River Chinook population is declining. Fall Chinook are known to use the lower
Cedar River for spawning, rearing, foraging, and migration. Spawning is adversely affected by scour -causing flows,
and rearing opportunities are limited by the lack of habitat complexity (e.g., pools and edge habitat) (WRIA 2005, p.
17). Adult Chinook return to the watershed between June and September and primarily use the mainstem Cedar
River below Landsburg Dam, RM 14-18 (WRIA 2005, p. 9). Spawning in the Cedar River, and in some of its
tributaries, occurs from mid-September to early November. After emerging from the gravel, juveniles migrate into
the south end of Lake Washington between February and June (WRIA 2005, p. 6). Chinook smolts typically move
through the Ship Canal and Hiram M. Chittenden Locks and enter saltwater between May and July (WRIA 2005, p.
6). The action area is located in the section of the Cedar River where known juvenile rearing occurs (WDFW 2003),
The Cedar River is designated critical habitat for fail Chinook.
Steelhead (winter)
The winter run of steelhead is the predominant run in Puget Sound. Winter steelhead have been documented in the
Cedar River and are a native stock sustained by wild production (WDFW 2002). Steep declines in the current
population status of winter steelhead in the Cedar River have occurred. Winter steelhead in Puget Sound usually
migrate to fresh water from December to April. Prior to spawning, maturing adults hold in pools or in side channels
to avoid high winter flows (NMFS 2005, p. 10). Winter steelhead spawn in the mainstem Cedar River from January
through mid-June with peak spawning from mid-April to May. Steelhead return to the ocean after spawning.
Critical habitat for Puget Sound steelhead has not been designated.
Bull trout
Bull trout have been documented in the Cedar River, but information on distribution and abundance is limited
(USFWS 2004, p. 129). Bull trout in the Cedar River are part of the Puget Sound Management Unit. The project
site is located in a section of the river that bull trout use for foraging, migration, and overwintering. Adults and
subadult bull trout have been observed infrequently in the Cedar River and Lake Washington, but no spawning or
juvenile rearing areas have been documented (USFWS 2004, p. 129). Spawning typically occurs from August to
November and fry emerge from early April through May. The majority of accessible habitat for spawning is at low
elevations and is not expected to have suitable cold water temperatures. Only a few tributaries that are fed by
coldwater springs may have suitable spawning habitat.
17
Biological Assessment for Cedar Ri aii Revetment Repair
Effects of the action on listed species and designated critical habitat
The rationale for species with a "no effect" determination is listed in Attachment B of this Biological Assessment.
The rationale for species and critical habitat that may be affected by the repair work are addressed in the following
sections.
Chinook salmon. steelhead, and bull trout
The completed project occurred between September 29 and October 3, 2008, when water levels were low. This
timing coincides with the period after spawning of fall Chinook salmon in mid-September and with the presence of
Chinook salmon juveniles (I to 3 years of age) rearing in the action area. Adult winter steelhead may have been
holding in the action area, but rearing steelhead juveniles have not been documented in this section of the Cedar
River. Migrating adult bull trout, moving upstream towards potential spawning areas in the upper reaches of the
watershed, may have been moving through and foraging in the action area.
Direct effects
Chinook, steelhead, and bull trout adults or juveniles that were present in the area may have show behavioral effects
such as avoidance, reduced feeding, gill flaring, stress, and/or delayed or accelerated movement in response to high
turbidity levels. Because there was no in -water work, turbidity levels from construction activities were minimal.
The construction activities coincided with the time of year when adult Chinook, steelhead, and bull trout were Iess
likely to be in the action area and the number of salmon eggs in the gravel would be minimal. Adult and juvenile
Chinook salmon and adult steelhead may have been present in the action area during construction activities;
however, there was no in -water work. Chinook salmon juveniles rearing within the action area may have been
temporarily displaced by vibrations from heavy equipment working on the revetment; however, measurable effects
to juvenile survival did not occur. Because the project site is located in the lower Cedar River, occurrence of adult
bull trout in the action area at this time of year was unlikely. Construction -related turbidity did not preclude
migration of listed fish species through the action area.
Indirect effects
Replacement of the rock armoring can cause indirect effects to salmon, steelhead, and bull trout via impacts to their
food base and the habitat. Because rock armoring does not provide the intricate habitat requirements necessary for
some aquatic macro -invertebrates and terrestrial organisms found in riparian vegetation, revetment repairs generally
result in a reduction of prey items for listed fish. Because of lower food availability, listed fish species may
experience lower growth and survival rates. Also, rock armoring limits lateral migration of the channel which can
reduce recruitment of large woody debris from the riparian areas. Removing or preventing mature woody riparian
vegetation from developing on the revetments results in degraded conditions by reducing shade, habitat for prey
species, and the development of complex instream habitat associated with recruitment of LWD. To reduce the
effects of the revetment repairs, willow stakes and riparian vegetation were planted along the revetment and LWD
added to provide future habitat for terrestrial insects and macro -invertebrates. Construction activities did not alter
the prey base from pre -flood conditions. Planting willows and adding LWD will help provide future habitat for
terrestrial insects. The indirect effects of construction activities to listed fish species via effects to prey species is
considered to be insignificant.
Effects Summary
May affect, not likely to adversely affect - Chinook salmon, steelhead, and bull trout
Critical habitat
Critical habitat is defined as the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species and which
may require special management considerations or protection. Primary Constituent Elements (PCEs) of these
essential features are identified for the designated critical habitat of each species. The Cedar River has designated
critical habitat for Puget Sound Chinook salmon.
Puget Sound Chinook Salmon Critical Habitat
18
Biological Assessment for Ced er Trail Revetment Repair
All of the revetment projects were located within designated Chinook salmon critical habitat. The final rule for
Chinook salmon critical habitat (70 FR 52630 [September 2, 2005]) identifies six PCEs essential for the
conservation of the species. The projects had the potential to affect the following PCEs of Chinook salmon critical
habitat:
PCE ## 1 -freshwater spawning siles with water quantity and quality conditions and substrate supporting spawning,
incubation, and larval development
Chinook salmon spawn in the mainstem Cedar River, but it is unknown if there is spawning or spawning substrates
at the project sites. Because there was no in -water work, turbidity at the project site would have been primarily any
sediments from the upper slope associated with the first rains atter project construction. Construction -related
turbidity at the site did not measurably impact overall water quality. Rock armoring of river banks can prevent the
natural development of channel features such as undercut banks and bank erosion that provides material for
spawning substrates. The rock revetment is an existing structure that was damaged by the flood and returned to pre -
flood conditions by repair work. The repair project did not measurably change water quantity or quality in the
action area from pre -flood conditions.
PCE #2 -freshwater rearing sites, and
PCE #3 - migration corridors free of obstruction and excessive predation with water quantity and quality conditions
and natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders,
side channels, and undercut banks that support juvenile development and juvenile and adult mobility and survival;
High turbidity levels during construction activities can temporarily displace rearing juveniles. Because no in -water
work occurred, did not reach levels that impeded use or precluded salmon from migrating through the area. Rock
armoring of river banks can prevent the natural development of complex stream channels with features such as
overhanging vegetation, large wood, side channels, and undercut banks that can provide natural cover for migrating
Chinook salmon and developing juveniles and provide rearing and holding sites. Construction activities did not
measurably change rearing sites or natural cover in the action area from pre -flood conditions. Planting willow
stakes and adding LWD along the repaired face of the revetment will help in the future to provide shade and
vegetation used by organisms that salmon feed on. Therefore, effects to this PCE from construction activities are
considered to be insignificant.
Effects Summary for critical habitat
May affect, not likely to adversely affect designated critical habitat for Chinook salmon.
Effects of the Action on EFH
The erosion caused by heavy rains and the flood flow of the Cedar River damaged the rock revetment. As described
in the MSA, the action area was located in designated EFH for Chinook, coho, and pink salmon. Effects of the
construction activities to EFH for salmon are similar to those described above for aquatic species and critical habitat.
During repair work, erosion and sediment control measures were in place to reduce adverse effects to designated
EFH. Increased turbidity from construction activities was minimal and did not measurably alter EFH in the long-
term. Planting willows and adding LWD along the revetments will help in the future to provide vegetation used by
organisms that salmon feed on.
Effects Summary for EFH
Will not adversely affect EFH for Chinook, coho and pink salmon
Cumulative Effects
There are no known future State, Tribal, local, or private actions that are reasonably certain to occur in the action
areas considered in this biological assessment. The project did not result in increased public use of the action area.
Conclusion and Determination
19
Biological Assessment for Cedar Riv it Revetment Repair
Construction activities occurred during low flows for the Cedar River, Effects from construction -related turbidity
did not measurably affect Chinook salmon, steelbead, or bull trout. The following conservation measures were used
to further decrease potential adverse impacts from project construction that affect listed species, their prey species,
or habitat. This includes but is not limited to the following measures:
1. An emergency Spill Response Plan was developed and on site.
2. Heavy equipment operated from the work platform.
3. Rock used for revetment repairs was cleaned prior to use.
4. Willow stakes were planted and LWD added along the revetment above the Ordinary High Water Mark_
5. The revetment repairs followed requirements for erosion control measures as outlined in the WDFW Hydraulic
Permit Approval and Best Management Practices.
Based on the above analysis, the conclusion for the effects of the completed project to Chinook salmon, steelhead, or
bull trout and to designated Chinook salmon critical habitat is "may effect, not likely to adversely affect". The
conclusion for effects of the proposed project to EFH is "will not adversely affect".
Literature Cited
NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 2005. Status Review Update for Puget Sound Steelhead. Seattle,
Washington.
NMFS. 2007. Salmon Critical Habitat GIS Data. <http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/Salmon-Habitat/Critical-Habitat/CH-
CIS-Data.cfrn>. Last updated on July I7, 2007.
USFWS (U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2004, Draft Recovery Plan for the Coastal -Puget Sound Distinct
Population Segment of Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluenlus) Volume I (of Il): Puget Sound Management
Unit. Portland, Oregon. 389 pp.
WDFW (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2002, Washington State Salmonid Stock Inventory — Bull
Trout/Dolly Varden. Olympia, Washington. hqp://wdfw.wa.govlfish/sasi. (Accessed July 10, 2009)
WDFW. 2003. Salmonscape, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife's interactive, computer mapping
system. Olympia, Washington. bnp:llwdf%v.wa.gov/jnappinpJsalmonscapelindex.html. (Accessed July 10,
2009)
WDFW. 2004. Washington Lakes and Rivers Information System GIS database. Olympia, Washington.
WDFW. 2005. Washington Priority Habitat and Species List and Geographical Information System data. Olympia,
Washington. <bAp://wdfw.wa.gov/hab/ h is >.
WRIA 8 Steering Committee and Forum. 2005. Final Lake Washington/Cedar/Sammamish Watershed (WRIA 8)
Chinook Salmon Conservation Plan Volume I (of 1I). July 2005. King County, Washington.
20
Biological Assessment for Ced cr Trail Revetment Repair
ATTACHMENT A:
Species lists
Part 1: USFWS species
LISTED AND PROPOSED ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES AND CRITICAL HABITAT;
CANDIDATE SPECIES; AND SPECIES OF CONCERN
IN KING COUNTY
AS PREPARED BY
THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
WESTERN WASHINGTON FISH AND WILDLIFE OFFICE
(Revised November 1, 2007)
LISTED
Buil trout (Salvelinus conjluentus)
Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis)
Gray wolf (Canis lupus)
Grizzly bear (Ursus arclos W U. a. horribilis)
Marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus)
Northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina)
Major concerns that should be addressed in your Biological Assessment of project impacts to listed species include:
1. Level of use of the project area by listed species.
2. Effect of the project on listed species' primary food stocks, prey species, and foraging areas in all
areas influenced by the project.
Impacts from project activities and implementation (e.g., increased noise levels, increased human
activity and/or access, loss or degradation of habitat) that may result in disturbance to listed
species and/or their avoidance of the project area.
Caslilleja levisecta (golden paintbrush) [historic]
Major concerns that should be addressed in your Biological Assessment of project impacts to listed plant species
include:
Distribution of taxon in project vicinity.
2. Disturbance (trampling, uprooting, collecting, etc.) of individual plants and loss of habitat.
Changes in hydrology where taxon is found.
DESIGNATED
Critical habitat for bull trout
Critical habitat for the marbled murreiet
Critical habitat for the northern spotted owl
PROPOSED
None
CANDIDATE
21
Biological Assessment for Cedar Riv iii Revetment Repair
Oregon spotted frog (Rana pretiosa)
Yellow -billed cuckoo (Cocgaus americanus)
SPECIES OF CONCERN
Bald eagle (Naliaeetus leucocephalus)
Seller's ground beetle (Agonum bellert)
California wolverine (Gulo gulo luteus)
Cascades frog (Rana cascadae)
Hatch's click beetle (Eanus hatchs)
Larch Mountain salamander (Plethodon larseth)
Long-eared myotis (Myotis evotis)
Long-legged myotis (Myosis volans)
Northern goshawk (Accipfter gentilis)
Northern sea otter (Enhydra lutris kenyont)
Northwestern pond turtle (Emys (= Clemmys) marmorata marmorata)
Olive -sided flycatcher (Contopus coopers)
Pacific lamprey (Lampetra tridentata)
Pacific Townsend=s big -eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii townsendh)
Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus)
River lamprey (Lampetra ayress)
Tailed frog (Ascaphus trues)
Valley silverspot (Speyeria zerene bremert)
Western toad (Bufo boreas)
Aster curtus (white -top aster)
Botrychium pedunculosum (stalked moonwort)
Cimicoga elata (tall bugbane)
Part 2: NO species
ESA -Listed Marine Mammals
Under the jurisdiction of NOAA Fisheries Service that may occur off
Washington & Oregon:
Southern Resident Killer Whale (E), Orcinus orca
Humpback Whale (E), Megaptera novaeangliae
Blue Whale (E), Balaenoptera musculus
Fin Whale (E), Balaenoptera physalus
Sei Whale (E), Baiaenoptera borealis
Sperm Whale (E), Physeter macrocephalus
Steller Sea Lion (T), Eumetopias jubatus
Under the jurisdiction of NOAA Fisheries Service that may occur in
Puget Sound:
Southern Resident Killer Whale (E), Orcinus arca
Humpback Whale (E), Megaptera novaeangliae
Steller Sea Lion (T), Eumetopias jubatus
(E) = Endangered
(T) = Threatened
ESA -Listed Marine Turtles
Under the jurisdiction of NOAA Fisheries Service that may occur off Washington & Oregon:
22
Biological Assessment for Ced ver `frail Revetment Repair
Leatherback Sea Turtle (E), Dermochelys coriacea
Loggerhead Sea Turtle (I'), Caretta caretta
Green Sea Turtle (E), Chelonia mydas
Olive Ridley Sea Turtle (E), Lepidoehelys olivacea
Sightings and strandings of these animals are very rare, and there are no breeding beaches in the Northwest Region.
Other ESA -Listed Species
Under the jurisdiction of NOAA Fisheries Service that may occur off Washington & Oregon:
Southern distinct population segment, or DPS, of North American green sturgeon (T), (Acipenser
Mesh-osfris), listed in the NOAH Fisheries Service Southwest Region
URL: http:fhvivw.nwr.noaa.gov/Species-Lists.cf n
Cage last updated: June 26, 2007
23
Biological Assessmem for Cedar Riv(. dil Revaniont Repair
ESA -Listed Fish Species
Endangered Species Act Status of West Coast Salmon & Sleelhead
I the ESA define a-specici- w =lude my d4s6%la Mjbd' oil scluxmi c! am' Tean ofvc-leL-3te fish x mldkfi. Fix F`2nfic wla=u NOAA
FiSbMt% Ser.lce CCUSI&:s 34 OlVI:j=Cdjnj`I'jiMAmz uml. er'F-SU.' a "sperms'- ander d:t ESA For Pacific \O-kk Filtimo St..mce
has doh"led distinct ",latim sepuvji,, (DPSs) fn comu&aLim a%"species w0ti 1k* FSA
24
Cnmrn
Species'
Endangered
FSA Lisling.44rrions
S
Sccicerx Salmon
6
I Qimlt L -,l;.
apirel
L2k& Ple.11231
N�xff1movued
S
tiv-
Sac. amino R15 I
Chi"nL-$oam=
Type tits
(0 W%-tuyt.elw)
10
SLz&.e RAver sp=g suavul -,w
t I
i Snake lum Fal: -run
12
lu-" S.—jrv"
13
l Lem el calu=bia RnTI
14
R:,"..
15
Sp-m.2-ILm
16
I C:Ilifixuo C, -w, -d
li
Cenuil auJ Lv,! FaEl-rm
I$
t:mw KLILMth-TiiLutv
19
Otegwj Cox"t
20
21
M;ddle Oltvnbia Rmft
12
Uppe7 COIL-tutna Pj-.-er uumm fall -run
Ya. R-o):Ia�ucd
24
Deschmes Rjv" ww=cfall4ua
Coh';I salaKa
216,
southNfl 131 eRmNorhem (Illf"luil
(0. kwfdl)
2-1M
Lc Cct,=bt3 R,.-.-ei
-8
O;ea*:a CCv.1
29
30
Pum S.=3 Starr of Genre 2
31 1
01:wpc Pmasnia
Ir Chum sahmn
32
Hoed Canal
(0 k -*a)
33
cclu)btl Pz%-m
34
PU.Tl S3MqJ %Wi dGeateia
L
M
Pacuk Cc al:
No I I'm 7 111 i:,,J
36
3?
UpM Cob4ub:3 Riv,4
sueuie3j,
38
Cmtt.il CAlifumi Caw
i9
S;,441 Ceallj] CA.,.m-Ata Coo
40
Snake Risxt Ekism
41
1=w Cchwibii %vet
.12
Cali'aaua Cental Valln-
43
4
Pivel
.14
Al-.ddle COII=b:3 PL',-Cj
45
Nw.dwin CahfxaLi
46
OLeF=Ccj'.%
=7
Sauffiwastl%'nhirr.,v
No: Mr,jr.,lud
r)E%-nwlc pmu.%Ijn
Yar n`&tA.um
Pum smid
• Maim
1150 I
KLi -.b M:mkiains I`Favirxt
(0.
Od&%vaT
'Yo.. r1laol'i u�i
I the ESA define a-specici- w =lude my d4s6%la Mjbd' oil scluxmi c! am' Tean ofvc-leL-3te fish x mldkfi. Fix F`2nfic wla=u NOAA
FiSbMt% Ser.lce CCUSI&:s 34 OlVI:j=Cdjnj`I'jiMAmz uml. er'F-SU.' a "sperms'- ander d:t ESA For Pacific \O-kk Filtimo St..mce
has doh"led distinct ",latim sepuvji,, (DPSs) fn comu&aLim a%"species w0ti 1k* FSA
24
FEMA ID Number: 1752 Project Title: Cedar River Gabion Baskets
ATTACHMENT B:
Rationale for "No Effect" Determinations for Listed Species and Critical Habitat
Listed Specieawithin the County:
Several listed species may be present in the County (USFWS) or Puget Sound (NMFS), according to the
agency websites. "No effect" determinations are proposed for the following species indicated to be in the
County.
Bull Trout Critical Habitat SFWS
X Critical habitat for this species does not occur in the action area.
Effect Determination: No effect.
Canada L (Lynx canadensis USF
This species does not occur in the county of the proposed action.
X I The species is not ex ected to be in the area during construction.
Effect Determination: No Effect.
Golden Paintbrush Caslelle'a levisecta(USFWS)
This species does not occur in the county of the proposed action.
X I The species is not in the action area.
Effect Determination: No effect.
Gray Wolf Canis lupus) USF
This species does not occur in the county of the pruposed action.
X
I The species is not ex ected to be in the area during construction.
Effect Determination: No Effect.
Grizzly Bear Ursus actos = U. a. horribilis USF
This species does not occur in the county of the proposed action.
X I The species is not expected to be in the area during construction.
Effect Determination: No Effect.
Marbled Murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoralus SFWS
X This species is not expected to be in the action area during construction.
Effect Determination: No effect.
Marbled Murrelet Critical Habitat (USFWS)
Critical habitat for this species does not occur in the county of the proposed action.
X I Critical habitat for this species does not occur in the action area.
Effect Determination: No Effect.
Northers Spotted Owl Stria occidentalis caurina(USFWS)
This species does not occur in the county of the proposed action.
X I This species is not expected to be in the action area during construction.
Effect Determination: No effect.
Northern Spotted Owl Critical Habitat (USFWS)
FxTCn
ical habitat for this species does not occur in the county of the proposed action.
ical habitat for this species does not occur in the action area.
Effect Determination: No Effect.
Hum back Whale (Mega
ptera novaean liae MFS
X This species does not occur in the action area.
The project is not expected to impact forage resources or habitat for this species -
ecies_Effect
Effect Determination: No Effect.
Leatherback Sea Turtle Dermochel s coriacea MFS
X This species does not occur in the action area.
Washington State PBA File for FEMA Projects 1/20/2010 Page 25 of 26
FEMA ID Number: 1752 Project Title: Cedar River Gabion Baskets
The project is not expected to impact forage resources or habitat for this species.
Effect Determination: No Effect.
ad Sea Turtle Caretta carelta MFSThis
ecies does not occur in the action area.
rx
The pmoject is not expected to impact forage resources or habitat for this species.
Effect Determination: No Effect.
Olive Rid!Sea Turtle Le idoche s olivacea MFS
X I This s ecies does not occur in the action area.
The project is not expected to impact fo a resources or habitat for this species.
ecies.Effect
-
Effect Determination: No Effect.
Southern Resident Killer Whale Orcinus orca MFS
X
This species does not occur in the action area.
The project is not expected to impact prey of this species
Effect Determination: No Effect.
Steller Sea Lion Eumeta ias 'u6atus MFS
X This species does not occur in the action area.
The ro'ect is not expected to impact forage resources or habitat for this species.
Effect Determination: No Effect.
2. Proposed Species and/or Proposed Critical Habitat within the County:
Proposed Puget Sound Steelhead Critical Habitat
X This critical habitat is not ex ected to be affected by the proposed action.
Effect Determination: Not likely to destroy or adversely modify.
3. Candidate Species within the County:
Present
Species
Yes
Oregon spotted frog (Rana pretiosa)
Yes
Yellow -billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus
Washington State PBA File for FEMA Projects 1/20/2010 Page 26 of 26
Snowden, Tim
From: Shirley_Burgdorf@fws.gov
Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 9:46 AM
To: Snowden, Tim
Cc: King, Susan; Snowden, Tim
Subject: RE: DR -1817 PW# 1752 Cedar River Gabion Baskets questions
Sorry I haven't got back to you. I've been out sick with a nasty cold since new years. Yuck!
But I'm back I I'll try to get you some answers at least by Monday.
Have a good weekend.
Shirley
Shirley Burgdorf
Fish & Wildlife Biologist
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
510 Desmond Dr. SE, Suite 102
Lacey, WA 98503
360/534.9340
FINANCE AND INFORMATION SERVICES
# ♦ DEPARTMENT
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: December 20, 2012 7 ;- nn
TO: Casaundra Commodore, Finance & Information Services
Department GEC 1 L:�'I
FROM: Todd Black, Capital Project Coordinator (x-6571)
SUBJECT: Re: INTERFUND TRANSFER REQUEST t iL,t L ��IJ
Instructions: Please note that failure to provide all digits will result in processing
delays. All Signatures and correct documentation must be included.
Please prepare the following inter -fund transfer:
Denartment Charmed:
Account Number
Project, function, task, sub -task
Description
Amount
Z09300.f291.0445.0141
316.332042.020.594.76.63.000
Cedar River Gabion Replacement
Permits
SEPA Environmental
Review
$1,000.00
Z09300.f291.0445.0141
316.3 32042.020.594.76.63.000
3% Technology Surcharge
$30.00
Total
1,030.00
Total
$1,030.00
*Charged DelRartment Authorization*.
APPROVAL SIGNATURE:
Printed Name Leslie A. Betlach, Parks Planning and Natural Resources Director Date —
CREDIT:
Account Number Project, function, task, sub -task
Description
Amount
000.000000.007.345.81.00.007 Cedar River Gabion Replacement
Permits
SEPA Environmental
Review
$1,000.00
503.000000.004.322.10.00.011
3% Technology Surcharge
$30.00
Total
1,030.00
Reason: To complete SEPA Environmental Review for Cedar River Gabion Replacement permits plus 3% Technology
Surcharge Fee.
Note: Documentation to support this transfer request must be attached and all signatures are required.
Cash Transler Form/Finance/bh Revised 01109
HAPARK&PKS Secretaryl2012 Files=2-099mb (IwOund Transfer TB)Aoc
RECEIPT EG00002009
BILLING CONTACT
City of Renton
1055 5 Grady Way
REFERENCE NUMBER FEE NAME
City of
_ ► � r J - F � �,.�L� I
TRANSACTION PAYMENT AMOUNT PAID
TYPE METHOD
LUA12-000290
PLAN - Environmental Review
Fee Payment
Interoffice Account
$1,000.00
Transfer
Technology Fee
Fee Payment
Interoffice Account
$30.00
Transfer
SUB TOTAL
$1,030.00
TOTAL $1,030.00
Printed On: December 21, 2012 Prepared By: Stacy Tucker Page 1 of 1