Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Report 1
CL 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 &| § ƒ§S 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