HomeMy WebLinkAboutSWP2703049CITY OF RENTON
PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 22, 2002
TO: Ron Straka
FROM: Gary Schimek ly"
SUBJECT: Cedar River Gravel Study - Draft Phase 2 Report
I have completed my review of the above report and have the following comments. My review
focused on the following portions of the report:
• Section 2.2 Gravel Supply: Results
• Section 3.2 Effects of Morphology and Hydraulics on Gravel Distribution: Results
• Chapter 4 - Discussion
• Chapter 5 Restoration Needs and Strategies
Comments
1. In general, the report is very well written with substantial technical back-up and
documentation. The technical aspects of the report are clearly well done.
2. On page 18, it is noted that there are only a few river segments where lateral migration are
likely to occur. This short list includes the reach containing the Elliot Rearing and Spawning
Channel but does not include the reach containing the proposed location of the Royal Hills
Rearing and Spawning Channel. This further confirms the findings of our spawning channel
report.
3. The Landsburg Gravel Supplementation Project is located within River Segment Number 4.
This is a very steep, highly confined reach. Even though the reach is steep and confined, the
report clearly shows that there is ample gravel supply above the project site. Therefore the lack
of gravel is probably not due to lack of gravel but the reach hydraulics.
4. On page 46, it is noted that recent reports suggest that sockeye spawning is now proportionally
higher in the lower river and lower in the upper river, in contrast to historical reports.
5. On page 47, it is suggested that restoration activities (specifically levee removal or setback) to
improve the existing biological habitat should be focused on the more gradient river segments.
This include segments 10 (upstream) through 18 (downstream). Segment 18 is the reach from the
upstream end of the Elliot Rearing and Spawning Channel to the just upstream of the 2001
landslide. I believe the report finding are based on the pre -landslide hydraulic and topography. If
this is the case, I believe the findings need to take the new channel form into account because it is
my opinion that any additional restoration activity within Segment 18 is not warranted.
H:\FILE.SYS\SWA - Surface Water Section Administration\SWA I I- Interagency Cooperation\Memo - Gravel Study
Comments.doc\gms
6. On page 48 floodplain excavation is touted as a favorable restoration strategy. I concur with
this suggestion. However, on the following page Artificial Spawning Channels are not talked
about with similar zest. I believe there is more of a middle way approach combining floodplain
excavation and artificial spawning channel construction that would lead to cost effective,
favorable results.
7. Again on page 48, the Landsburg Gravel Project is pretty much noted an ill-conceived project
due to lack of information. I believe a longer discussion section is warranted if this is to be used
to convince anyone from WDFW to change their option about the project. I also believe the
amount added to the project should be compared to the total gravel supply from above the project
(which is about 5,000 cubic yards per year from River Segment Number 1) not the total supply
for the entire river. Finally, I will need to check the assumption that about 50% of the gravel we
add to the river is suitable for spawning habitat. We have the numbers based on three sieve tests
conducted by Golder. Upon recollection, I do believe it is about 50%.
H:\FILE.SYS\SWA - Surface Water Section Administration\SWA I I- Interagency Cooperation\Memo - Gravel Study
Comments.doc\gms
FY 2001 Budget Estimates
"planning and overhead costs
$/day
PM $600
Biologist $550
Biologist $500
Assistant PMs $400
Contract/repro
Cars
HH Coordination
Chiefs & Budgeting
Federal = $165,200
Nonfederal = $165,200
Each FCSA = $82,600
Potential Budgets:
days/week annual cost
2.5 $78,000
2 $57,200
2 $52,000
4 (2 ea) $83,200
$30,000
$ 5,000
$25,000
$330,400
$350,000 Federal, total $700,000 overall study
$790,000 Federal, total $1,580,000 overall study
$1,099,000 Federal, total $2,198,000 total study.
*IF we get $1,580,000 and Seattle is 1/2, would have $790,000
to apply to Sea FCSA items. Of this, $624,800 for technical
work.
Lake Washington GI Study
AGENDA
September 27, 2000
Lake Washington Ship Canal/ Locks/ Estuary
Introduction — Corps of Engineers
9:30 — 9:45
Overview of Budget and Schedule 9:45 — 10:45
• Study funds for FY2001 (Federal , Non -Federal)
• Expenditures for FY2000
• Funding needs for FY2001 (October — December)
• Needs for new FCSA signatures
• Need to add one year to study for 2001 technical studies — design in 2002
General Discussion of Potential Study Interest Areas
Locks Studies 10:45-11:45
Lunch 11:45 — 12:15
Ship Canal 12:15-1:15
Break 1:15-1:30
Estuary Studies 1:30-2:30
Summary 2:30-3:30
45
Jones & Stokes
September 12, 2001
Mr. Jeff Dillon
Seattle District
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 3755
Seattle, WA 98124-3755
SUBJECT: Cedar River Gravel Sampling Plan
Dear Jeff:
RECEI VE
SEp �
13 2001
C1TY OF r,
UTkf71'SVSQr N
Jones & Stokes, with Perkins Geosciences and Harper Houf Righellis, Inc., has developed the
attached sampling plan for collection of hydraulic and sediment data on the Cedar River. The
plan is intended to achieve the study objectives identified in our scope of work (SOW) and notice
to proceed initiated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) on August 9, 2001. This SOW
is not significantly different from that discussed by cooperating agencies at the June 21, 2001
meeting at the Corps' Seattle District office.
The plan is purposely brief, consisting of:
■ this transmittal letter;
■ Table 1. Reach Characterization and Summary of Sampling Locations;
■ 16 orthophoto map sheets illustrating existing flood study cross section locations, selected
and alternative cross sections for surface (pebble count) and subsurface sediment sampling,
and redd density data (redds/river mile) for chinook salmon and steelhead trout (courtesy of
Karl Burton, Seattle Public Utilities);
■ one annotated image of an aerial photo indicating proposed cross section locations upstream
of the Landsburg Diversion Dam; and
■ three field forms developed to aid in data collection.
We do have other data that helped us locate these preliminary sampling locations that is not
presented in this plan.
The plan is best evaluated after a review of the SOW, and through a comparison of Table 1 with
the individual map sheets. It should be noted that river mile (RM) markers on the map sheets are
older and not necessarily consistent with more recent RMs developed during King County and
11820 Northup Way, Suite E300 • Bellevue, WA 98005-1946 • tel. 425 822.1077 • fax 425 822.1079
www.jonesandstokes.com
Mr. Jeff Dillon
September 12, 2001
Page 2
City of Renton flood studies. However, the RMs in Table 1 reflect the more accurate flood study
distances. Sampling locations in the table are easily identified by the individual reaches or
segments shown on the maps.
Your prompt review is requested. Due to time constraints associated with spawning salmonids
and fall streamflows, we have started our field surveys. However, we are still able to respond to
your comments, which may generate improved methods or survey locations. Please try to
respond to me within 24 to 48 hours of receipt of this sampling plan. Please call me at
(425) 893-6433 in order to immediately clarify our methods and your concerns.
Sincerely,
U4 Ima
Michael D. Wolanek
Project Manager
:sn
cc: Rand Little, Seattle Public Utilities
Gary Schimek, City of Renton
Deb Lester, King County
0J010.01 003
11820 Northup Way, Suite E300 • Bellevue, WA 98005-1946 • tel. 425 822.1077 • fax 425 822.1079
www.jonesandstokes.com
CEN W S-EN-PL-ER
Scope of Work
Cedar River Gravel Study Phases 1 and 2
Field Characterization and Analysis of Cedar River Gravel
DACW67-00-D-1011 Delivery Order #10
1.0 Background. The Washington Department of Fisheries (now WA Dept of Fish &
Wildlife) conducted a survey of available sockeye spawning gravel habitat and
distribution in the late 1960s. These data serve as the basis for the current sockeye
escapement goal of 300,000 fish to the Cedar River. This survey was a primarily a visual
survey, with minimal bed sampling and was based on surveyor's expertise in
identification of suitable sockeye spawning habitat. It is not possible to replicate the
study.
Since the 1960's several observations of available spawning gravel on the Cedar River
have been made. These observations have lead researchers and fisheries managers to
suggest that current spawning gravels may be less abundant and/or less suitable than the
historical condition. Conversely, little research has been conducted to quantify whether
current gravels present in the river represent an adequate volume or composition to
support long-term salmonid spawning. The Lake Washington GI project, a multi -agency
project led by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, King County, City of Seattle and local
salmon recovery groups, has the opportunity and need, to initiate a study to evaluate
whether current Cedar River gravel conditions are capable of adequately sustaining long-
term salmonid spawning conditions. It is proposed that this project be conducted using a
phased approach. The approach considered for this multi -phased study has been
developed to provide sequential decision points between phases to help answer whether
the next study objective needs to be pursued. The following provides an overview of the
objectives and specific tasks necessary to complete the project.
2.0 Purpose. The purpose of the study described here is to evaluate the current
condition of spawning gravel in the Cedar River and if necessary, use a modeling
approach to identify the cause of any problems. These findings will then be used to
identify restoration needs for the river. A field inventory, measurements, sampling and
analytical modeling of gravel characteristics are critical to decision making on the need
and extent of future gravel and riverine restoration projects along the Cedar River. The
project will be conducted in three (3) phases. This statement of work covers only the first
2 phases as described below. Phase 3 would involve development of a HEC-6 model for
the Cedar River and would be implemented, if necessary, pending recommendations
developed in Phase 2.
The purpose of Phase 1 of the Cedar River Gravel Study is to take field measurements to
gather initial baseline data on gravel characteristics, and compile existing data. Together
with Phase 2, this phase will serve to evaluate whether and where a "gravel problem"
Cedar River Gravel Study July 18, 2001
Seattle District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
CENWS-EN-PL-ER
presently exists along the Cedar River on a reach basis. Sufficient field data would be
collected during Phase 1 to allow for modeling during Phases 2 and 3.
The purpose of Phase 2 is to combine data from Phase 1 with cross sections from the
King County and City of Renton HEC-RAS flood models for the Cedar River, in order to
calculate scour potential and discharges necessary to initiate movement of gravel through
an incipient motion particle size analysis at select locations along the river. Phase 2
would also include a quantitative evaluation of the current gravel supply and the impact
of the Landsburg diversion on size and quantity of sediments transported along the river.
This phase would determine whether lack of gravel in certain reaches is caused by
naturally occurring factors or changes created by man to channel morphology. Examples
may be reduction in side channel numbers and size, channel cross -sectional confinement
or disconnection from the flood plain by levees, changes in channel cross -sections or
slope, or a limited gravel supply.
3.0 Objectives and Scope
Phase 1- Objective and Scope: Field Data Collections. The objective of phase 1 is to
execute a field study approach as described under this scope of work to identify current
availability (location, size composition) of spawning gravel within the Cedar River (ie:
between Landsburg Dam and Lake Washington). Existing data (ie: gravel source
availability, fine sediment, spawning surveys) from other sources (ie: Seattle Public
Utilities, King County, etc.) will also be utilized. Fieldwork for this phase of the project
will be conducted between the low flow months of July and September 2001. The
following provides an overview of the specific tasks associated with this phase of the
project.
Phase 2- Objectives and Scope: HEC-RAS model, sediment transport capability at
cross -sections, and sediment supply. Phase 2 will be initiated in fall 2001 or after
approval by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Sponsors based on acceptance of Phase 1
results. Based on the results of Phase 2, recommendations will be made on how to best
deal with any identified gravel problems relating to fish on the Cedar River. Following
Phase 2, Phase 3 will be scoped and initiated only if the recommended projects require
HEC-6 sediment modeling.
4.0 CONTRACTOR SERVICES.
With the exception of Government -furnished property and services (Section 6.0), the
Contractor shall furnish all services, labor, materials, supplies, and equipment required to
conduct the tasks necessary to accomplish the work required under use of existing
information as provided by the government, county, cities, other project proponents,
current scientific literature, studies done under this scope of work, and existing
knowledge, analytical ability, professional judgment and involvement of contractors and
subcontractors. The Contractor shall complete the performance of the specific tasks
Cedar River Gravel Study July 18, 2001
Seattle District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
CENWS-EN-PL-ER
outlined below. All data, principles, and theories developed under this scope of work
shall be property of the Government of the United States.
5.0 STATEMENT OF DUTIES & RESPONSIBILITIES.
The work items covered in this proposal include participation in meetings, field work
directly related to gravel assessments, modeling efforts and documentation of results.
Specific work items are described below.
PHASE 1
Task 1. Initial Coordination and Study Plan Development.
Task 1.1 Aerial Photos. Contractor shall obtain and organize a current series of aerial
photos for use during planning exercises and as reference for geomorphologic analysis.
Several sets of historic aerial photos for use in Phase 2 will also be acquired at this time.
Aerial photos may be obtained through the Seattle District, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers or other suitable sources (e.g., King County, City of Seattle).
Task 1.2 Data Acquisition. Contractor will coordinate with staff involved with existing
Cedar River research efforts to obtain existing information and identify possible
cooperative data gathering opportunities. Contractor shall obtain existing cross-section
data, flood study maps, and existing data on fine sediment in the Cedar River. Reports of
any other studies identified during this time that link gravel quality to fish habitat will be
reviewed for application to the study. Contractor shall use this existing data, the
spawning count data acquired under Task 2, air photos and flood study maps to draft a
plan for additional gravel sampling and cross section surveys.
Task 1.3 Field Reconnaissance. Agency representatives and Contractor staff should
participate in a float trip to observe sites identified in the draft sampling plan above.
These sites should represent established cross -sections, known fine sediment sources and
depositional areas, areas of high historic spawning counts, and areas with existing
estimates of spawning habitat, as well as potential sites proposed for cross -sections,
surface and subsurface gravel sampling.
Task 2. Spawning Counts.
The Contractor shall work with WDFW, City of Seattle, King County, the tribes and
other agencies to obtain and compile available existing annual salmonid spawning survey
data for comparison to existing gravel distribution and characteristics. Data shall be
analyzed to determine historical trends in spawning between different reaches of the river.
Task 3. Develop Study Plan.
Contractor shall use the results of Tasks 1 and 2 including agency comments obtained
during the field reconnaissance in task 1 to develop a brief study plan. The objective of
the plan is to document the proposed locations for sampling gravel, surveying the
additional cross -sections and observing the effects of fine sediment on gravel quality.
The plan will consist of a short letter report; including a table referencing data collection
Cedar River Gravel Study July 18, 2001
Seattle District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
CENWS-EN-PL-ER
sites marked on the flood study maps. The study plan is to be reviewed by study
sponsors prior to initiation of fieldwork. Quick review will be provided to allow
fieldwork to be completed before most of the spawning season begins in mid -September.
Task 4. Cross Sections.
Contractor shall query all relevant cross sectional data from existing sources such as King
County and City of Seattle as well as any cross sections on file at the Corps of Engineers.
It is anticipated that a maximum of 10 additional cross sections may be added in the field
as part of this contract to support HEC-RAS modeling in Phase 2. Five of the additional
cross sections may be located above Landsburg Dam for modeling gravel supply and
transport rates into the study reach. The upstream cross -sections will be within
approximately 1 mile of the Dam. Cross-section surveys above Landsburg Dam will
include the floodplain as well as the main channel. Horizontal control on all new survey
points will not be necessary — approximate location of cross-section ends and channel
location with a GPS unit will suffice. Vertical control shall be taken at top of bank
bottom of bank, waters edge and with vertical accuracy to within 0.25 ft.
Task 5. Physical Gravel Sampling- Surface.
Contractor shall conduct surficial gravel counts along the length of the Cedar River from
approximately RM 22 (1 mile upstream of Landsburg Dam) to the mouth (RM 0.0) at
cross sections with appropriate morphology (e.g., riffles and pool tailouts), primarily
focusing on sites that contain spawnable gravels . Surficial gravel counts to determine
size distribution should follow methodologies outlined in Wolman, 1954 and Kondolf,
1997. The following characteristics should be recorded at each point count site: bankfull
width and estimated bankfull depth, habitat type, sketch showing approximate area of
potentially spawnable gravel and its location relative to the cross-section, and local water -
surface gradient.
A specific sampling approach will be developed during Task 1. It is anticipated that most
point counts will be located at or near cross -sections, in order to compare gravel size and
abundance with hydraulic and geomorphic characteristics. Sample sites will encompass
a range of channel confinement, gradient, and sediment supply situations. For budgeting
purposes, an average of one to two sample sites per river mile will be assumed, or about
30 sites total.
Task 6. Physical Gravel Sampling- Subsurface. Subsurface gravel sampling shall be
conducted to determine bedload size distribution, in support of Phase 2 analysis and
potential HEC-6 modeling in Phase 3. Subsurface samples shall be taken at appropriate
locations to supplement existing subsurface data taken in 1992 by King County, which
should be included in the report. At least one sample will be taken upstream from
Landsburg Dam to evaluate sediment size entering the study area. The samples will be
taken utilizing field expertise and involve a shovel for above -water samples and a bucket
sample if underwater samples are needed. Sample size shall be large enough to
adequately characterize grain size distribution in these coarse sediments (approximately
Cedar River Gravel Study July 18, 2001
Seattle District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
CENWS-EN-PL-ER
15 gallons based on King County's 1992 sampling program). It is anticipated that a
maximum of four samples shall be collected and wet -sieved in the field to determine size
distribution. Because these samples do not include the surface armor layer and are not
taken from spawning areas, they are not directly comparable with McNeil samples made
for the purpose of measuring fine sediment.
Task 7. Fine Sediments.
7.1 Review of existing reports. The Contractor shall review existing data on fine
sediments in the Cedar River. Based on existing studies, Contractor shall document
significant sources of fine sediment and tabulate results of any previous sediment work
where percent fines may have been described. These data should be compared to known
literature data on how percent fines in the gravels may impact salmonid redds, egg
survival and fry emergence (e.g. Kondolf, Assessing Salmonid Spawning Gravel Quality,
American Fisheries Society, January 2000). Based on a cursory look at some of the
available data, it is anticipated that these data will suggest that fine sediment is not
adversely impacting gravel quality except possibly near Lake Washington, where fines
naturally settle out due to the flat gradient.
7.2 McNeil Sampling. If the results of task 7.1 suggest fine sediments could be limiting
spawning success upstream from the City of Renton, McNeil sampling shall be conducted
at no more than 3 sites with potential spawning gravels. Several McNeil samples from
each site will be collected and analyzed using TFW protocols to determine percent fine
sediment in the gravels.
Task 8. Phase 1 Data Compilation and Analysis. The Contractor shall compile all
data collected except otherwise noted and provide a preliminary analysis of trends in
gravel abundance or size distribution based on location, average river gradient, channel
confinement, and other morphologic characteristics. Gravel distribution and size
characteristics shall be compared with WDFW spawning survey data. The role of
sediment supply will be evaluated on a qualitative basis based on existing information
and field observations of local sediment sources. Data submittals should be in MS Excel
97 format.
PHASE 2
Task 9. HEC-RAS modeling. Add new cross-section data to existing HEC-RAS models
and extend the models to include an additional one mile of river upstream of Landsburg
Dam. The new cross-section data collected during Phase 1 would be used for this
purpose. Run King County and City of Renton HEC-RAS models at several flows,
including bankfull discharge, and provide summary tables that present flow parameter
data that is relevant to sediment modeling such as average depth, velocity, shear stress,
energy slope, hydraulic radius and effective width.
Cedar River Gravel Study July 18, 2001
Seattle District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
CENWS-EN-PL-ER
Task 10. Gravel movement calculations. For cross -sections for which physical data
were collected during Phase 1, calculate bedload transport rate and the size of sediment
particles that would be mobile at bankfull discharge and other selected discharges.
Task 11. Evaluate sediment supply. Develop quantitative estimates of bedload
sediment supply from upstream, tributary channels, landslides, eroding bluffs, and
eroding banks. Evaluate changes in supply over the last century. Use sediment budget
approach, based on suspended sediment yields, watershed area, existing landslide
inventories, and (if feasible) bar accretion rates. Sediment -transport modeling of the
sediment influx from upstream of Landsburg will not be performed until Phase 3.
Task 12. Phase 2 Analysis. Evaluate downstream changes in sediment mobility due to
cross-section morphology and gradient changes for the bank full discharge. Correlate
gravel size and abundance with transport and supply, and determine the relative
importance of these factors in limiting gravel abundance. Cross-section and floodplain
characteristics shall be used to extrapolate and characterize relative gravel retention along
different sections of the river. Determine the cross-section and floodplain morphologies
that are most conducive to providing abundant spawning gravel.
6.0 ITEMS AND DATA TO BE FURNISHED BY THE GOVERNMENT.
The Contractor will be provided with any relevant information available (including
pertinent reference material cited above) in the project files. This information includes
background technical information. The Corps will also provide the following:
Golder Associates Inc. 2001. USACE Section 205 Cedar River Flood Damage
Reduction Project; 2000 salmonid spawner survey results for lower Cedar River and
Constructed Side Channels. Prepared for: City of Renton- Surface Water Utilities.
Renton Wa.
SAIC 1997. Sediment Characterization of lower Cedar River Renton, Washington.
Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District. Seattle, Wa. 16 pp.
Stober, Q.J. and A.H. Hamalainen. 1980. Cedar River Sockeye Salmon Production.
Project Completion Report. University of Washington Fisheries Research Institute.
Prepared for: Washington Department of Fisheries. Olympia, Washington. 59 pp.
USACE. 2000 Aerial Photographs of Cedar River (stereo paired)
7.0 SUBMITTALS.
The information obtained from the work under this SOW will be presented as two reports
in both a draft and final version. A summary report shall be developed at the end of
phase 1 activities and a second, more detailed report, completed after phase 2 activities.
The draft reports will be reviewed and commented upon by Seattle District. The Seattle
Cedar River Gravel Study July 18, 2001
Seattle District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
CENWS-EN-PL-ER
District will return their comments to the Contractor in the form of a single marked up
version of the draft submittal report, submitted to the Contractor with a letter from the
COR containing explanatory notes. The Contractor prepared final report will contain the
recommended changes from the Seattle District's review of the draft document and
relevant information omitted in the draft. Any conflicting Seattle District review
comments will be addressed within the District prior to returning the mark-up comments
to the Contractor. The Contractor is responsible for complete and correct work both in
the reports and data generated during the Scope of Work. The draft reports should be
complete in all aspects, with no typographical errors or missing data, with correct
grammar, and constitute a product the Contractor has edited and approved for submittal to
meet contractual requirements. A complete listing of sources consulted for each task
should be included. All pages and appendices should be numbered.
Reports should be submitted to:
Jeffrey F. Dillon
USAED- Seattle
P.O. Box 3755
Seattle, Washington 98124-3755
Phase 1. The product of Phase 1 will be a written summary report documenting the
methods and results of relevant field activities. Summary statistics and brief discussion
for results of tasks 24,5,6 and 7 shall be presented Cross-section survey and sediment
sample data for use in future HEC RAS and HEC-6 modeling will be provided in
spreadsheets on disk as well as hard copy. Draft deliverables will be due 75 days after
final surveys are conducted and cross-section survey data has been received by
Contractor, whichever date is later. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Sponsors
will have 14 days to comment on draft deliverables and return them to the Contractor.
The final deliverable shall be due 14 days after receipt of comments from the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers. The final deliverable will consist of three (3) bound and one (1)
unbound (4 total) copies of subject report. Deliverables will be due at the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Seattle District by 1600 hrs on specified date.
Phase 2. The product of Phase 2 will be a written report as well as documentation of the
development and results of HEC-RAS modeling efforts. The HEC-RAS model will rely
primarily on existing data supplemented by data gathered under Phase 1 activities. The
report should document a) flows and hydraulics at cross -sections, b) provide an estimate
of available sediment source material (sediment budget), (c) describe transport capacities
(reach by reach), and d) provide conclusions and recommendations. Draft deliverables
will be due 60 days after HEC-RAS modeling results are completed. Contractor will
develop and run the HEC-RAS model within 45 days from the initiation of Phase 2. The
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and sponsors will have 14 days to comment on draft
deliverables and return them to the Contractor. The final deliverable shall be due 14 days
Cedar River Gravel Study July 18, 2001
Seattle District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
CENWS-EN-PL-ER
after receipt of comments from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The final deliverable
will consist of three (3) bound and one (1) unbound (4 total) copies of subject report.
Deliverables will be due at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District by 1600
hrs on the date specified in the Contracting documents.
7.2 Final Reporting. The Contractor shall prepare a final report that integrates
Government -requested changes to the draft environmental restoration report. The final
report should satisfactorily respond to and incorporate the Corps review comments. The
Contractor shall submit 10 photocopies of the final report to the Corps.
8.0 OTHER REQUIREMENTS:
8.1 Responsibility for Field Work: The Contractor shall be responsible for all damages
to persons and property that occur as a result of the Contractor's fault or negligence in
connection with field work, and shall save and hold the Government free from all claims
and suits arising from such damages. All work performed in the field shall comply with
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Health and Safety Manual (EM 385-1-1).
8.2 Release of Data: All data, reports and materials relative to this Scope of Work are
the property of the Government and will not be released by the Contractor without prior
written approval of the Contracting Officer.
9.0 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS.
9.1 Project Manager. Promptly following award of the SOW, the Contractor shall
designate a project manager. The Project Manager is responsible for maintaining
coordination and execution of the contract. Changes in the designated project manager
can only be made upon prior approval of the COR. The project manager shall have the
experience and capability to be responsible for the supervision of work and overall
quality and serve as liaison between the Contractor and the COR for all work required
under this contract.
9.2 Contracting Officer's Representative (COR). The Contracting Officer (CO) for the
Government will designate a COR, who will provide the liaison, supply Government -
furnished data and services, and forward other necessary documents. Contract
interpretation and associated guidance and direction from the Government shall not be
official unless specifically authorized by the COR (or the CO). The COR will seek
timely progress of the work and its satisfactory completion. One or more authorized
technical representatives of the contracting officer may be designated to monitor
Contractor's performance, verify compliance with contract specifications, and provide
technical support to the COR.
9.3 Communications. For the duration of the contract the Contractor will be available
for phone contact by the Corps representative to discuss work status.
Cedar River Gravel Study July 18, 2001
Seattle District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
CENWS-EN-PL-ER
10.0 EXTRA SERVICES.
The Contractor is cautioned to take no guidance from any source during the course of the
work, which deviates from the requirements stated in this Scope of Work unless directed
by the Contracting Officer. The USACE technical manager shall be notified of any
guidance received by the Contractor that is not directed by the Contracting Officer.
11.0 PAYMENT FOR ROUTINE WORK.
Payments shall be made in accordance with the payments clause of the contract. A copy
of each payment voucher shall be submitted by the Contractor to the COR. Final
payment will be made upon submittal of all deliverables and return of Government -
furnished properties.
11.1 Billing Procedures. The Contractor shall furnish invoices (original) as required to
the Corps, in accordance with the progress schedule, evidencing performance of work
done under this contract. The Corps Technical POC will review the invoice and forward
acceptance to CEFC-AO-P. Invoices shall be submitted as follows:
(1) Original
USAED, Millington Finance Center
ATTN: CEFC-AO-P
Millington, Tennessee 38504-5005
Tel: 901-874-8672/901-874-8688
Fax: 901-874-8731
(2) Copy
Stephen G. Martin, Contracting Officer's Representative
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District
P.O. Box 3755
Seattle, Washington 98124-3755
Voice: 206-764-3631
Fax: 206 764-4470
E-Mail: Stephen.g.martin@usace.army.mil
12.0 SUBMITTAL SCHEDULE.
Cedar River Gravel Study July 18, 2001
Seattle District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
CENWS-EN-PL-ER
The Contractor shall furnish sufficient technical, supervisory, and administrative
personnel to ensure the execution of the work in accordance with the following schedule.
The Contractor shall keep the Seattle District COR fully advised concerning delays or
difficulties that may prohibit completion of any part of the work by the established dates.
The schedule is subject to adjustment by the Contracting Officer (CO), in writing, for
material delays on the part of the Government and conditions beyond the control of the
parties.
The overall period of service is 230 Calendar Days. The submittal schedule is shown
below (table 8). The Corps, following the issuance of the Notice to Proceed (NTP) will
coordinate to determine and schedule to specific corresponding calendar dates. These
dates will be documented in a letter to the Contractor from the COR
Table 8- Project Schedule
Activity
Deliverable
Calendar Days
after NTP
Calendar Date
(provided after
NTP)
Contract Award
NTP
Day 0
Coordination/Study Plan
Prep
Day 1-20
Study Plan Developed
Study Plan
Day 25
Acceptance of Study Plan
Day 26
Initiate Field Work
Day 27
End Field Work
Day 60
Phase 1 Analysis
Summary Rpt.
Day 90
HEC RAS Modeling
Day 110
Gravel Movement
Calculations
Day 125
Sediment supply evaluation
Day 130
Phase 2 Analysis
Day 145
Draft Study Report
Draft Report
Day 195
January 30, 2002
Corps/Agency Review
Day 210
Final Study Report
Final Report
Day 230
The Contractor shall keep the Seattle District COR fully advised concerning delays or
difficulties that may prohibit completion of any part of the work by the established dates.
The schedule is subject to adjustment by the Contracting Officer (CO), in writing, for
material delays on the part of the Government and conditions beyond the control of the
parties.
Cedar River Gravel Study July 18, 2001
Seattle District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
7-22-89 13,500' 12"
^ 5P89 7 74-232
■
Cedar River
Cross Section & Profile Leveling
Segment #ETCrew: 7� O Date
Site # of sites this segment
Weather Air Temp Water Temp
Cross Section #
Description
W f�7FIZ
7 �
Cedar River Pebble Count
Segment # Site # of sites this segment Cross Section #
Date Time Crew Weather
Description Air Tern
Pebble Count A
Water Temp.
Pebble Count B
% Cum. % Cum.
Tally Particle Size (mm) Distr. Distr. Tally Particle Size (mm) Distr. Distr.
Bedrock
VL Boulders
2049-4096
L Boulders
1025-2048
M Boulders
513-1024
S Boulders
385-512
S Boulders
257-384
L Cobbles
193-256
L Cobbles
129-192
S Cobbles
97-128
S Cobbles
65-96
VC Gravels
49-64
VC Gravels
3348
C Gravels
25-32
C Gravels
17-24
M Gravels
13-16
M Gravels
9-12
F Gravels
7-8
F Gravels
5-6
VF Gravels
34
Sand/Fines
1-2
Sand/Silt/Clay
>1
Bedrock
VL Boulders
2049-4096
L Boulders
1025-2048
M Boulders
513-1024
S Boulders
385-512
S Boulders
257-384
L Cobbles
193-256
L Cobbles
129-192
S Cobbles
97-128
S Cobbles
65-96
VC Gravels
49-64
VC Gravels
3348
C Gravels
25-32
C Gravels
17-24
M Gravels
13-16
M Gravels
9-12
F Gravels
7-8
F Gravels
5-6
VF Gravels
34
Sand/Fines
1-2
Sand/Silt/Clay
>1
Station: LBF RBF
Distance (x.x ft)
Depth (x.xx ft)
Active Depth (x.xx ft)
t ross-,jecuon magram t.caie: tisq =_it, vsq = it; UK
BF Width:
BF Depth:
Wet Width:
BF Confidence: H M L
BF Indicators:
Pebble Count C
Pebble Count D
% Cum. % Cum.
Tally Particle Size (mm) Distr. I Distr. Tally Particle Size (mm) I Distr. Distr.
Bedrock
VL Boulders
2049-4096
L Boulders
1025-2048
M Boulders
513-1024
S Boulders
385-512
S Boulders
257-384
L Cobbles
193-256
L Cobbles
129-192
S Cobbles
97-128
S Cobbles
65-96
VC Gravels
49-64
VC Gravels
33-48
C Gravels
25-32
C Gravels
17-24
M Gravels
13-16
M Gravels
9-12
F Gravels
7-8
F Gravels
5-6
VF Gravels
34
Sand/Fines
1-2
Sand/Silt/Clay
>1
Notes:
Bedrock
VL Boulders
2049-4096
L Boulders
1025-2048
M Boulders
513-1024
S Boulders
385-512
S Boulders
257-384
L Cobbles
193-256
L Cobbles
129-192
S Cobbles
97-128
S Cobbles
65-96
VC Gravels
49-64
VC Gravels
3348
C Gravels
25-32
C Gravels
17-24
M Gravels
13-16
M Gravels
9-12
F Gravels
7-8
F Gravels
5-6 .
VF Gravels
3-4
Sand/Fines
1-2
Sand/Silt/Clay
>1
Cedar River Gravel Study
Supplemental Data Form
Segment # Site #
Cross Section #
Parameter
Segment
SubSegment
Length
Gradient
Bed Morphology
Colluvial Step pool Pool -Riffle
Bedrock Plain bed Regime
Cascade Forced P-R Braided
Channel Pattern
Single Multiple Braided
Sinuosity Channel length (A)
Valley length (B)
Sinuosity (A/B)
Confinement W,o (A)
Wbf (B)
Ratio (A/B)
% levee length RB
LB
Stream Banks
Bank Height Typical
Max
Material Source
Dom/Subdom Size
% revetment length RB
LB
Mobility A. <25% <c.s.
B. 25-75% <c.s.
Q. >75% <c.s.
Bank Erosion
Local, forced, obstruct.
Qutside bends
Intermittent
Extensive 1 x
Qontinuously 2x
Ravel
Fine Sediment
Pools Local, obstruct, slack
Patches + local
Widespread accum.
Riffles Local, sheltered loc.
Strands dnstr obstruct.
Over most of bed
Thin draping Ig. clasts
Cobble None <15%
Embeddedness 15-35% >35%
Supplemental data form 8/27/2001
Cedar River Gravel Study
Supplemental Data Form Page 2
Parameter
Segment
SubSegment
Gravel Bars
Type
None
Point
Multiple
Lateral
Medial
Forced
Width (ft)
Maximum (A)
Average
Wbf (B)
Max. in ch. w.
Active?
Bare
Veg Established
Encroach
Habitat
Unit R, G. P
Subunit(s)
Gross Spawn Area
% Usable
ASA
Other
Fish Observed (Spp., size)
(No.)
(No.)
Gradient Profile
Station
P1 =
P2 =
P3 =
Up
Down
Up
Down
Up
Down
Distance (x.x)
Elevation (x.xx)
Depth (x.xx)
W.S. (x.xx)
Gradient
Avg Gradient
Photo Log Prints Slides Digital
Lookmq
Roll
Frame
U. D, L, R
Note
Supplemental data form 8/27/2001
Table 1. Reach characterization and summary of sampling locations
Reach Descriptions
Channel Characteristics
Existing Sediment Data
Proposed Data Collection
Reach
Average 10-yr
flood
Average
SWM RM
Approx Point
Point Bar
ScourAnalysis
Low Lateral
Additional
Cross
Altern-
Subsurface
Reach #
From
To RM:
Length
g
Description
p
Gradient
Local Sediment Source
(1992
Bar Surface
Subsurface
Pebble Counts,
Pool Tailout
Bar/Bench
Submerged
Cross
Section
ative
Additional
Gravel
RM:
(RM)
Confinement
(�°)
study)
(RM)
(RM)
JSA (RM)
USFWS (RM)
(RM)
Forebay Bar
Sections
Pebble
Pebble
Pebble Counts
Sampling
Ratio ft/ft
( )
Counts
Count XS
1
22.63
23.11
0.52
above Landsburg pool
?
-23.56 -23.29
-23.56
find 2 sites on pt
-23.13
-23.29
bars
-23.13
2
23.11
22.71
0.40
Landsburg pool
?
3 small samples
-22.96 -22.76
-22.96
(Interfluve)
-22.76
3
22.71
22.15
0.56
Between diversion dam and water
?
none
pipeline
4
22.15
21.00
1.15
steep, tightly confined
0.66
none except mitigation gravel
no bars to
gravel
-21.3
21.610
21.748
bar
sample
augmentation
-21.3
21.893
(Golder)
5
21.00
19.09
1.91
confined w/ sediment sources
0.59
tall gravel cliff, Walsh Lake
19.9
20.75
20.42
20.493
20.701
ditch
19.6
20.42
19.865
20.128
Walsh Cr
19.987
6
19.09
18.00
1.09
tight bends w/ sediment sources
0.67
gravel cliffs, Rock Creek
17.95
18.65
18.50
18.546
18.905
Rock Cr
18.117
7
18.00
16.59
1.41
Upper Dorre Don (variable
0.50
minor (till/clay cliffs)
16.80
17.33
17.33
17.592
17.488
confinement)
17.047
16.589
8
16.59
15.61
0.98
Lower Dorre Don (unconfined)
0.56
none
15.30
15.70
15.70
16.159
Side Channel
15.765
9
15.61
14.75
0.86
Maple Valley confined, steeper
0.72
none
no bars to
15.312
14.906
14.757? lateral
sample
14.757
bench
10
14.75
14.00
0.75
Peterson Cr. (flatter, variable
0.46
1990/1996 landslides, cliffs,
no bars to
14.575
-14.6
Peterson Cr
confinement)
Peterson Cr.
sample?
11
14.00
12.17
1.83
bends, levees, variable confinement
0.44
Taylor Creek
13.10
13.4 (or 14.2)?
-13.24
-13.95
14.012
Taylor Cr
13.25? lateral
check photos;
-13.24
-13.15
bench btw XS,
13.4 unconfined
12.666
unconfined
12
12.17
11.67
0.50
Lion's Club unconfined, flat
0.34
1996 landslide, cliffs
11.50
11.68
11.68
12.0, 12.1
12.105
13
11.67
11.11
0.57
Cedar Grove leveed but floods
0.38
none
11.20
11.30
no - too sandy
-11.3?
11.592
-11.37
14
11.11
10.30
0.81
unconfined bends, 1990 avulsion,
0.37
none
10.942
10.36 big new
10.865 v low pt
LWD jams
10.865
pt bar
bar
10.36 new pt
bar
15
10.30
9.62
0.68
mod. confined BR bends, flatter
0.33
none
no bars to
10.011
9.903
sample
16
9.62
6.67
2.95
Jones Road mostly confined
0.43
mid-80s Lake McDonald gully
8.9
9.37
7.5
8.15
9.252 8.193
8.354
7.4
7.5
6.9
7.75
7.395
6.8
6.9
17
6.67
5.25
1.42
Elliott Br (flatter, confined)
0.38
none
5.90
6.00
6.00
5.5 or 5.8 (2
6.216 5.566
5.853 5.469
spots)
18
5.25
4.80
0.45
2001 Landslide
.44 pre-LS
2001+B8 landslide
4.80
4.90
no
none
19
4.80
4.6
0.20
unconfined, side channels
?
minor cliff erosion
4.40
4.6?
4.6?
4.8
-4.7
20
4.6
3.1
1.50
Maplewood, mostly confined
?
minor cliff erosion, huge 1987
4.00
4.00
no
4.5
-4.38 -3.55
-4.46 -3.80
slide
-3.73
21
3.1
1.7
1.40
confined, even flatter
0.32?
Ginger Cr (300A)
2.20
2.25
2.25
2.156
-2.82
-1.88
2.038
1.947
1.843
22
1.7
0.0
1.70
Renton channel
0.29?
none
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.616
none
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.526
0.55
0.55
0.55
1.417
0.27
0.27
0.27
1.324
1.279
1.246
Reach Sampling Overview.xls Reaches, Sediment 9/12/01 page 1
Yq,TM .•7 •�..>,�' r �4� ..�i� !�4sr.�i'', i.,'t� -S'-'+•w'-'�1' jM''1 .r- +A l�y+li_.
Oil—
�► +. k r a , r t w�°' 6 . red +* M�..
46
r.?.ow•w.+fie . �a ,K J1
. r ^ : . • - i!, y. yam', ' ,. - -•w a .. 1 - N
�. • fed�,r •:`.�- •1 .• _ •. \ •�► f; L• ♦' ��
♦ t-R' • .."'' ..'' . 1' .� •C•- '� •\, Via•\. ° . a. at T
R f ',• #' ��` f!►• ih =i, yr �+,r ?
"�'► •wy +• .!'
A�. ^ , ,,,4 ^ Ate, • '� `" '' ' 71 •�y�"" . -• t �* `
r .
��.^r i•,a%' S- !;'i`� •�.I';.,5 ''��_ y.tr. .. \. ♦..3�.♦ s♦, `f711�C r,
-04
�* r' ? *, + 'fr' � fir' ..r.y��%��- .`t 1 . T�• � ,� 1
f"o�rJ•a ` ,, •r , �•.,--�,.a `\•. .M.P.y,•.: .' a T :J �T'� _- .+ • 'b^'`.
♦ , . t» w'' ''.�,
t.. �.,, *i �� ram. �, s• �'� r�' �,,
'Y"� �' . y �� � � • .. v�t� - - _rw _w,' r.. ` �.� t;. _ry.,,,•Y�1f• f��s._ ..��' ,.M - `' , w , z •� - �•a "� - i �' ; .. ' f'1 � •
T'+'- ' .aA. . � n �`.` �-�•�\-e. 'y� '♦ i t�'tt!�e !�"'t'�'Iq`yr� .At, 1•�ii.. - i *, r.1' . /.- r ' 'Y� { : 1 a • Y' ,
} U+�"r�Rt� '?a. . r�': �t� �♦ f \ti .�� ::�, :.�� +L f. _, `' • r. *-' ^M, ,.� - -r., i ,. '•fi •,sy
•, •.;�•� ice' � � - � � r"�G.'; '1r�-' ,,�y lift\' `t• �''�"� ��., .. - ,++•" ���•f, . ' _ q;. �: f''; `, ir,, �.
' +�• • . : �►� i"� _ �,. d- t�."ter � �, �' �,�•� t- ' � .. Y��. • :{0 +°F • �f�' , f�y1� '.•�t . T� .'. ..
,•. .. f,. `'• �l�+�}•.��'•. �t -` '23,.1 J' C' '�' Y, w '�-.• •4 ..1'� ,Y{�'l� -a.. .', �N� a� '�. r. r _
- _ ♦ "\ �ttRNy rali'•.It'. ■yt "IJ' �r' / � ,t •y•� �.� ,, ,� r 'ry�, �.r •� • _ ..
.%'•• .�* ��! ♦�.-`: t f � ;�"y '4' - .4 to . . • +.'• \' wA.y , I' � � r,`f .R �t � . ��y,. . i`, •• >. r',�: � � ti �•�� i\
Ik
.•. ; at. _ a 'tv,�.t+. '� �• l• r,� _ .'.n .1 y�'`r' •�� f M�•r r ti/ �' - {-' •�, , a , .-�'�,
` a�, ��.• .. • • � r _t .`1 . v.., �•a rl i .� � � ...✓t t. •! �••, � .•`:� ';'.i - :i. �(��/jtI�".�
_ ��. �► �.yV ~i ° • j. -. ,'- i •-. r :` ,.�ti �� .,�• ��•� `' `haii�+`.Z.;4�i. �-�..r � •�•a,� �T��"'..•-".,��
,•a \��'4r �" w «'. .�. w' w ♦- .t Yam- Y .�# .. (� L `. ••', w'+.b�'"' �,�r ',. :�� ��•�
•*• $ L. •J' •� ^. w' t "°_ ._., .a ,• •.• •.,a ♦ �' . 1f. 4V. _ �►tt , °ry' Y . t- t'y. '•{
'�; A�•1♦,• �_ A. t, eta 4ie .y .^.•'' `C.I+, t3 ~�.1 y-
j r y� ;J► 1r
a- �`♦' �• `.Z..�, 'ib�M'• l'a'r, `y �t s\`1•�4 -� f 1,-•4♦�r `aw r • '} ,X `-
C,. \ �� - •.. `� .tt\ • i.�1. .. T i•'•`!R ''...a` -li ,r►�' r.1��� 'o'''� ,..'`_'"•t•,,•w .'' OC
(�r],,.� .i;J •i. ' � •• •� 1 '` � r• r1.�i- - , � •� � '.y .�'`�t.-•t.�'� a�., , i• ,H!•' ♦.3 'r a �'�� r�' l 1 •, � f. �. i J�f tY'••. _
!�Y 1•y. t 7.'t - \.+.1 " 1•�•e� /•.T �, \' :in .� `.•y `1 tiR, 1+ • Jl, .1.. rf ./ •'• j^ .
^i: f. ..ra�.;�F: `,� ` 7►. •\ ,e •! •, Yifi.' `•T`l,a-S,
'w�. • ..• is ..t '` ,.r A �•�' •! �\., 1-• �►4\. Y'• : ,. T ;..
'•i'i�• I' t.i 7►il.l. °1�i "- ^ 1`Y w� Ile*
• ' • • . �-AYn • • r\I r � w ,ate , ', TIC- 1 � � � \ • �. y J ,, �` /.. 1 _ �•t - , w 1
�1 ` 'a �'. ��. W•, a �•, .# `h \.T,r p!:. p'M-C ` P �•'falw � �•,ya R.t•�y"��.�� � �4 _ �- _ ay ^f.
T ,j 1� , •.r ,,,. • , u'ti'r ''a': t!a \ �'J�t' - :r` - ' 1M "�, t. \ �., '. `s !• -" Y-,� y' _r - ` . ,'i �� .
j.
`j•�. ` i "•, �` fit' +t;" �• !•Ji w�� w .,l►i.''�r./.�'.•-;•+ 1 j �� `�, .!'r
♦ p ��.. Me
1I.� t r,A �, �w r. \ `1�« +a �.s �y. .+. r `p y�i fV x.' - f'�a ►irtlw► i�11'Y
w• t. Y r �)•'�.• , �,1_�^1+ ,��►•• �`- !•'Rw 'i�',�4y''�Y.►�r�+r-;i"•.rr'
�' ,. i • -• 1. r ` , .p lVS" '� ,�.� � �► w.♦i !�' •' •_ ....r. A". ' ,.y,r�f►`'. -.'r
. f �Y''.1 r �„i" .♦. r.. , -;a .{P� .�}. . r—y.�Iti�'�' 7 °� �'_• • ♦1"Y,.� _. �(' .I � - .. 2r - �!!��i - r1,
1 ' �1� - �• 1' a •{` •_ ti C•.._ Y•�% fiPC .�• f "7`3�, �` a ._, i��'�r�r",� ••t. •� i, .. •�'�.'r•�i�, x
. a `, r w `� •• .•,^ �•r� 7M� wl� f,1� ��'t# • + ♦,�►i •`��♦`�'�, !, `� T` ; -"y�'0, r '0
• . .:, Z � . ' � .. { • .. r ! „ _ � y„ , �J � \o t � ..y �,1 !'Y•. 1 ! /},{ ' jc t,r a : � ` ' 1► • •. •w +'�••M.
• �F ! a' °'�.J'' ')•.w• i� • .�- f `.••r'7l`i., .""la+. 1�. Fes, SFr \i'' ♦ },`';i�•. •�•,/"Y-.
h �• ` f ^ � 't, ; r .h ; . . -Ir t j V..% ♦ a �a".•. aY `Y.. f �mo:. L t `*.t �d '' y It+ ^R y �� •A►
r AO
^
camC. � rt •,�� per
* •
�.'"• -o"= at� _ A * !�i•,x -?► e . ,, ' ,
,
4 ro, 7 • ' ..r ,'1 ,t "i,\ ia�i .L•'4' ,.. • �.•�. f' i -• ri�`11 ' -•1. ryY ? - ee -
I JI"r• • } _ ,�' +,; 4a• �'N`r� ` �t.r,•y� ,,•Y..;-, �, `
• `• • Ilr r h \ f[b r t F' t '• -LM�'� .. w .J� . "V . _ M ` i '+ • t v. "H� • �; ,
1 •Ia rL) +'+..+ _ `+I C •. '1k♦?r ..�♦'' •j•.,i*_ \ x .•` ♦ f -•� .. ✓��• ;t_ ..
• r ► " � +•- � .Jr ♦ C .atr'' • ''--a. ' �,.• ,. ; ti , • b ... " �•- . ,,,• # if' .. l•'r'' - �. ' r'- � F � f � ,fr r �' — w
®
0.0 - 4.0
0
Steelhead are outlined.
100 Year Floodplain
- Existing Sediment Data Q
®
4.0 - 6.0
Chinook are hatched.
500 Year Floodplain
Proposed Sub -Surface N
®
6.0 - 8.0
Sediment Sampling 250 0 250 500 750 Feet
®
8.1-10.0
King County Cross Section
�
Pebble Counts at
Existing Cross Sections
Kin County Managed ��—
g g
50 0 50 100 Meters
®
> 10.0
18
City of Renton Cross Section
Alternative Cross Section
Flood Facilities
for Pebble Counts
Proposed Segment Breaks Scale: V = 500'
Cedar River Gravel Study
Sheet 1 of 16
RR Jones & Stokes
. a.'j+ Iv" :. ir' c.- r .: •. ♦_ t ' _' .•y.; : { i `' i go ., .,r.. r� ..0 `� Yt.. ' J+' I �. �.,-. -�jbw'♦ �'♦i•,.,• «' • ^ R► '*.-.. ..a _ J ' y- +x+•
., •• �} rs ' f f .'J •� 7♦• i �r •_%'.'• s �• ' t !" _ �t•y► `1� �'�'"♦•.• •' ,• r . r'1 �,. .J. �_ Ar i r ji-
Mi� yc y� �_,t P� � y. r7' � � L D ( ► • i . I►{ • r� T �;i.e C1
:0% -1+ - W. > r }
�r K *r ��'� .ip I %, •✓ �,�� t► r !` )ti t� t t • k ?f�.• r f tt• i ► �D [. ��C� ;
r7v'. t �"' r t.,�s rr� •' �w r y~ t .. 1�� ° r •_�!._.x
14
y +El�!�f . t��L/��- • J . } •�: \ j•Sa ,r�`� `��`r�`�`l'♦�.. 1 }1-� '�•._�t.. �f•� ✓".►� , •mot• J•r•� •,"'��i`f t'i �C •ti• -
• '• r,, •• - t - f /. •-+� _
jo
t. • ~ it i'�.' •, s r: rfl'' f� rn.-': !, .i ,. 1.1K.` ^I 'r ♦r,• ►'_ ♦r-
:� • R' r• ►^ F w .! f. ~mot F r .1v Y C +.� j .�i' �+ ^A w J` ♦ Y! _ r .� . •t' +{�'�y �°'
�(i. • ♦ �- - .�' M, i �\ ♦-� :'" /R`" ' ' + •� �" T� ♦1 r• i •♦ '+vim, j� �' .
• R �• Ilk 'l, ; ;}',; r����� �► 1 itI t ll. • iF' ! / ., i, tr .s� _.T MI *? r(
• �� ~ r•, .M. ` `' .-, • • i► _ _�• ` r �f. �� - f\ ti a'� r 4%' or 4 '_ S .�, - . V r • _ - - - ' t �.�,, 'i`: ►' v� .f',•y �• �' r ,
1f l' ..r •. "�O h �r r. {A � ♦• t �� •• � r
`„ ,I �.x +,- .ram r � --^t �r �•.; r yrh �: '! r � ` �♦ ,
C �� y•�-• ^ r �* ij., . r rSr. ' ♦ ♦ * . + - ` ♦ , .!!Ir t �. . h^•f" . ,y _t +r r .� .. • • - Mi+ •p" I '• , i. i r' •� , '
N' �� •:r�•-��• ` ,' . �ti• •.l a� :�•`.~' , f''•';} al�•`r �-• ram' ,,,_ �. ~' - "p•!' -•(�}�... C FYf • J'_�t• \
•r 'r �'ii.. `` _r ' - ` ♦'T '� ♦ -i • } •! i r '• rr. " .. • - ',..' 1' ,7' r " lr r'l�." r �• rr •n. i- f• /�':, a ,•
�~ ��►. -V, ,-* �_ i - �'' c �'� / ! �• i' '--fa� • • • •'�, �. .. _ ♦ -� ' .r �(�_ , f'., I• _ I••w♦ 'I •js 7'�I. •r. •• - C '✓ •`' •
v i�i7� r U� �r /r.A• �7�!�lr�` f r •/' Y .•.I �: ` f + a Q+r JMa �w -d'� �' i t i ► ar?' J''.»:r �.ti,1�!
t r• �' �� ,•. � pp K ' F � � • � r t r� � 1� 1� �( •^, � � � (^F-.'F r f J ; `..,. A - � r '1 � � t, ► .
C Miry - 7" ..`A• .. �1 •� - -'�• r' I>}• �- r.r ^ • ♦ r.l•. I ♦'- a r}n"f•'!
11, + - � .�1M/� ✓• 1� w' R r"�� '��- •y '* !`i�i` r, � "� i Tom_. } .'- '.t r+J� - ►` i
rr y�•,• •+r - Y.�•�j�' �• ? �k.� ,••. w' •y' ' rr'L�nf�yt►..'.� a�•''" .f'►• �t �t .- .d• - t. ,7r �f ►f n • r%r''a` r' ♦ �• "• w,, I!�(r� r ,►•
r � ��: ij�" ' -�. 'y l �, y; . r • : y�f�riln _ : j. f ► . /,11I v r7 � ,tlt' �M'" t! i Ft \ J . r x« , r ^ �T •./� • ♦, y a I'4' ; ° _ !r' M , q (
! Iqy� A ~�1' .r K- 'A• ►•+• - '►!' .r'. t r _ • ' s> �r `a3 ` • ,..^�y�•r M rM1P"' b4• t lid a,'.�" ..i' �^ti-.►. �1-NAM / �♦ \�.
y, •, `? • I l,�-"�, br „�/-.},a-j,.,. ,t,., �f '•► L}•` }•Ir .l n
1r4.w, .s/��,.�:!+1'�^�,.� �, ✓ r !r. f." * • !�� tiJ!���• ��f �. },r t,. .t.s - - .t•-'•.��.. � - �'�i(• '" r• r' C r! {'..Fi��►:sr~� "FF f. - ►1� 1
//�+�.r r or,J•' �' 1 „p �y_r- IG.Y r• 1►t' �n .� ^.''�.: .�. .'+'-+ ; •!, rr •f_I► ►' �'` s. :t t'r ,,* `' 'I
�. �,i i � ;� •M*. !•� ,: � rr.�� !!!!_ r� r •. � ►� �� � � _ 11 � �'• �, }l ��J V�IN�� � ♦ � � , , Y ' �;�' ♦ -r � `t' / � rr!.��f� �T �'♦I+� �^�!Rr. '�•I-0' .. _ _ . ,3 tom.! f J • rf f • ;.. r,r•t { �� `. , r J
: . ' /'* + r y_ i % 4 . '- ,ate w• A'" . �R '~' ~ r ..I'' i ` 1► , ►�' ' q
a J"r. * — j►,: Ft �� `• r�j��if`f Ii' e • ri e� , (, Ir� f"' » 'r' T11�.�`�*�' _ -r- y:f't'Lr�♦».:} } } r�.♦ I
+ rti•r-, r.�l� ► !J .•• 't �N S'r •'' .,t'J�`. R 1 r \�.• •-_ ✓'' ��' �� ."'. Y►P• ✓"'.ICM `�'� •..����'�
�,,� �,,a,•r c� _ T-'� •'.; M� j'1t r r �. . ,�'Y .�l y.�; _','��►r•. ,/r •l. r .jfJ' kt= r.r •�,y �.; ✓► • +.
r;- % '1fM rr � r J ! VO � .T ,.f �. r c k� '.L'� ai' .I• � I•, •' 1N I r �.L! j�
•� . I�� ti ;1 =►-`e, ,/►.w.. '? ► r /4 r' ► M, ♦..It Y� r1•[ tE. \ T f rY�-. 'r1 `�,,�jj�;.•� 1•=..'�•. •�'t•�•/•►^-��,M• '�"1. ^•y .• !~''-`''♦►••- H ^?* 'r '^•� 4\ `
Sr ! ♦K fi ', •�� .•I4 , f y ' F.• �'' r• 1�? r r * f. 4 h►, �r 1 , ♦ , ♦ U \\ t ►. -`i',� 4 J . �.•' . ^ _ _ Y`Tt I'•� a� T. '- �,• �ry 1. - r • • �• •� C
♦. .� r•1►, _. 'Jr^\., .JJ1II� ,, I• .•.T t. •rr ,``' 1. f.._• }t>f. '* ►• _ h .�•,:♦ ,,, fir•: '! J '�i r . r- ^ (4f~Ilr'�* t
•R ! Fr.. n' w'�fyrrt• «t ' r �-� ,; ItC T.... !'� �•. syrF ,�' ,f ~•�`r ♦. t.� ��-•
►r ' ` ti i' ^�.• v. M�'� ►*lam,!' �'.� t'►., _L. l� X•'. 'd 't :� M `��
' ,; • �%♦ ♦ r . , - r ; K ,`;'v; -! • r '� - '( �, f i "1> ♦ f.~' ~+- "• 4lowti •� �. l.. /`. *w �. 1 �r ~ « -°"' , y r► tr
' .•�"')y,�. �� �• ^f� '.~•�1 '. r' t. tf�r r { ' .. • � . \� •.•�(I.,\ r y � t � •►+ � t�'r !', }., ` •' '�i- - A ._
�, f •7 ,4 •I •1-• N' -r+ 7. ... I �.-.: •' ,1M`� r'h 1 r� ''� .. •'�i !"'y~. R',.:" y►•I�^'.K ►♦"-""i.y.�l�. •� t.rt- �•I►\��`•�rg. ' »r ,• ��►I ". Y.� j
'y�.Y 1I,. ► .. ` •; :/.. �;t `,,, t,•�. - i C� l`��} t. ,r �,n�'rM ~ ♦'�'. •f •�' 1r •�A •�• •r •,` • ; 1
� � ��' J �, ^�. ' ►� �„tr^`..; . ��A ,}'� yv !. �'��, i ! ,� r�, � r� /�1► tiro f t aYK�•-. ���. +�•t� 4 .•kr 1 ► a% a '� �Z �
?, yt f i.. +J`. , • J l'♦YF ! i1�• c. `"•,Ti 1\ .1 ,, - f �y,(l� ��:.1 {;rf# '!, i_ X f ' • - • ~ n - . +r .c` . 9 -
t`'. �•. .�� �•,}�-�.� n. _ ,' it •� - •- {t .`, a .rJ., •, ,.� --✓.." �,�.•� V • *t�.
♦r: 1�' 1' �', .•Cr l'J• • \"• • • i • .t, , y. `rr� �/.�. :!-',i` n ♦
"��K~'.� ► y.A �' Mom' '► •v ►r� a mot. a
AFC ,,r , ♦-1- ► - F r.'� • j�. . �f.'k., f y-; .� �• Otor
�� � �t . er �'i11� . >.. -► �/r , ,� \ � t r A �'1. �. • '. r •P _ i i• i'e. lr .� ts �,t'•!(: t � - � • •
�4�' Y ,� � !. \� Z:r: �' � ,/�I ... • �, l+..r,s'' '�♦ � �� »� Y ,}� fir" •-�.t7st' �' +•--r� •' ,a�rM,. �'�::R�"► l`�r.. t i
,r+�,t ,� t. ! �� �"A� �. .�, �.r+"_ y. ' -' ..1• -... �� �. �♦ �+.+, Kr. " a�h�'�. .� •_ �.� .A._ f•l%�►„ •� � ,•1�,' ••••� <,.ril` � ;.r �;'.
r ♦ TC t �� .�� r.•�,-.�;�••. - a jl _ . 'ti►Y"�r. �.I• ._ 1'r"�+.�,...7 :nw `'��. M,a.�.. 'Xr` • t .V 1 t . ( �. �,''�r .t i
o. T�17a i' i d +w. �.�,,,yyl�'�., - .'T Y- - .' Y• •� •�.•. ♦.r♦ •� ?►�,'1►•:w�.• /'. �• �.�� r. �, �. .; • t 'R t1. •♦, r
�� _��>f`l;�"t.- �.+ _•..%*,,lA/►� w/ 4C;� w • -+`w t?:..w^�1. •r ►�� 't?►, _ ^ r`a� `fir '�',' .' �r I ,,.
+ . f ! w ; i • tr!' ,r ► »! �•M R h d, ;tom .fit 1" I j ♦ j *a 1
P . ,� 1�'� �`r�t'� r'f''�-, r'� ai { t �^• �� y .. • „r, 'd �' ^ t - .'c'�.y ` •:.r ••rI' 1" -�d/' "►�/�" „' r' ♦ � ♦" , r � • , ♦Nr\ \ ' � :-
le
�..n� `�T t._1�D'',..,.(" 'Cth Ji►► n.',�,� .a ��1 L• ! r '}..b .. - e. �...•r�ir� .-.'.`_. r •• •�';v..r T� . • 1••.r
! :pit`' �., �`.✓-'.. r, ��►rr+ ? ` ! 1 � �• . ♦ ti.� _ •_ 'M� r �►`f+K,/;� .. ,. '' � i" -. r' ,�S F ,`
yr• ♦ ��. J w�. %+ ` �! 1:' ► ►' ► r �I1+►r , , I
•f. ►•: r t�,^l•.a 4 yq.!'r A•! / '7r� i' y
t w * t �* J4� .•� �'�} h;}w� '�-st�.,�•r(.r - r :s if i:.` !. ✓, f to C
i'^ �`►` .r i. ;�tc;1�! �1 !t= �' "��" r!rJ�► ,�r1tlr. _ •\` �" ^.:.A + 1,�►.a•.. M:. :' `�^�' ��•��sf -�.. •:.r.'6'►N J, "l,Y`'�.?..-•` ' .! ' J `,»r ;, '
�. '*;••- \�•v'~\ .'�1� _,f M': ,n' lam'' !'i• f'' "� r 'r r�� •f �'
i„• � ��*/• '.� ` . r '•mow^, � �,.� 1R }�r1.r�,ih'r� 'fPr,,: F. ►» 1., i �.'rtlr �D r•
'r f .,�' ' • ' r... +�41& '- :11µ�y�" ►' M i ♦ �f. 1 ^Y� .:�. � ' w r:- / .c: I
,; .,,• r,i l+'• ., �4M t -ar:,{. - No
OF
'. �jl",.7_" �ssf' }�'. ' t-•! g '�^'•�'♦' ..`'{"� t'v Y �: ► • .C.�'C. t : •'` r
_ . V 7.Y ,�.•,•,}'.�.�"- r �" a' •a.rr� '/.•y'Y A �.'t _ '1.�?'M''i+ /'Ir ►'- I'' . "c �• Q :.
r _•;r ••.♦M'-.�11y� ._ ��j'�••'. {. �.-�i` '1F;M��c +rSr \ •1or
� �`,�•C.1✓"d _h .� •.�' `T yI �♦. ♦,-'� •I� •'`' ,.7 r.",.
.� � f �% ��w � - t ,. `i! +- r h.. �`�•�L♦x art{•� -r 'A � C' .• �!�••►' �;r►� � . - .' •. ?. � .• N• t.
r' � •f ' � �,, err, i�i � '�' .�F�F` � ff��rh.i' � ��� .�•R.:� ''r•.. r � •' � .• C .
1, f �, ~Ir�� ►. R.t:y�' ° ��,�' +Iwti;\:1r�Cty,a�♦"�`�hr.� «'- X ► M,�'�` r'� r.elf•
- '/. n . ,•}Irri \''" 41 �► T•���yt*~ •! _. ► D�i{r Y , rfisl: •�r ', 1 . ,^\ .','. ii: tJ.N.•.j..���
•� l• . is ...�\�► � i, �" � t_ -- t
0.0 - 4.0
Q
Steelhead are outlined.
100 Year Floodplain
A Existing Sediment Data Cedar River Gravel Study
®
®
4.0 - 6.0
6.0 - 8.0
Chinook are hatched.
500 Year Floodplain
—
A Proposed Sub -Surface N
Sediment Sampling 250 0 250 500 750 Feet Sheet 2 of16
®
8.1 - 10.0
King County Cross Section
Pebble Counts at
Existing Cross Sections
'-
King County Managed 50 0 50 100 Meters
®
> 10.0
ISCity
of Renton Cross Section
Alternative Cross Section
Flood Facilities `i�S55l J011eS & Stokes
for Pebble Counts
Proposed Segment Breaks Scale: 1 = 500'
.{^y^�Nsr '� ��••,��;s ��f°F7•� �'y��•r T .�r • , �' '�!'' '" F��T- -: " 'a�'h��i, '�•�` �' ,rj c 't.` � • � � - - -- . * •. � � .— I• �• it'r�i/- ,�`'_�..�, li "j ', : `'r,�►'" .✓ .. c r*,�a'. � -
'yi ^ 1 � 1 +� � ��,t ya1 . •'G'' �t 1'�[1Y i�# � ��!i: � .�,�1\. -� �, ''�'a`- � � • - • � � ►{ _'v �.- 'ta � ,I rJ � � M ' • � � �'!• • . �' � : ��'�,`.'{�`�,r �;r �� � �1¢�
LUTt! + •i ,' ✓ •� ♦••_ 'tea r ♦ vj
j I i f r -s.a y • �-. 'i' ' 1 • r �R 4 f . IL
rr
IF 14V
,,,' t�. � `•}• T • .�'x _ _ _ r r►l G't. I .r ��� �{'�' i1..is• �rV � , � • \ ' . . + � r
�• J `� > �• h �a>, , -/ 'r" ♦ r T ,',,r .i7'•-T y Ise.?.. �; Ay F �,/ �w�
� � � .� 1 J i rj •� � • • e • � -4 �,�► ��� r[ '�1 • ' 1� r V ` � ri,y r •t \�• ... '' _) it 00,'
:.l ;�•• /� • t ,r a . \ +' r ♦� A �•'(.t" / Ri 'r '*f - O4''�. l I�f ol�r r - .+ *L■Ml w.•. �w. .t f�
..4 .ry : j•
A >c ti � ^- + '' i � �s 1 • > s' : •� " ��'! ��', . ! n .• �'� --r��+ �, � � � �. � ' / ►r > r. � .�.. ,,•..�` ,.f .[t .�' JJJ'''a
f�„1, - �' '• - -t 1
-1 •,'" I+' '1�.+f 1 r�� �:7 •1L� , •. ,r a t1 +�i y\ ` MK R -I. r► �' AL
j At
J e �•i" •.. r/► s �/ ,y1K� �_ r ► _ �r ZZIr^5..' :l! I drC,�'
_ �r _ � ill' �� �• � � �,.
�. - - C.. • / `• *t ; �.> r�� .+ • • 'Y . eir '• ♦• a �> if
f� �� . ,!' �' �r :�,�r - -`j' � !`" � � • L~ t r.• �:� ` J; fl '* 'F. �,�� i� y, R �'.�' -,� +•` _rH•.
l" ' p. �"' _ t. Y �.f /' .�- �•, ♦ '� '�, .f `!•� • •••+` f 7"• • `tF ri '� ~ 7�..• s ��,'► 1�Y�-•
"iRf. t'!I+a�':` ��, * } ��.✓ �? r /'•• ��. - M•' •'!`�i^ „' `J� l •�'� •� � � ti:;�, ' �-a�'�t . r�' � - it'4 �..�•�,
Vft
J'»1` , ���� �ta�i ��y ♦ • 1 *� 4 �- a �Z•►� a ;� • J►T
'� \ �_ �, f f .� �f• J: '�w ' r } t .R .4 � *► ►. , ^.o ;'� A • , , 1�t
F !� \i fjr "� -'t, _� � "(•t\��ii y� �..�. ♦ i c r i_,0 �Ari � w * ��ii^ a� /' •�
_ ' ... i�• . 7 [ . + �s T` • i ► '.a9�w•' �?�•1�,',� [ ♦ , >/ , 1 ♦ ^,• _ ` T' `• '• it
\ �1�� � 6,� "T �►.t`'�r � -'"� 1C.: �'y1.� v • � • _�"t � r ,••.- �'vt'♦ R • �- 'Q `^
� } " �j/• Mlle 1j,� -1 lA. . t::
�� lIN
C IK t. C",/�^�� t .f ► .rr st �� �t ,�{ ' b 1►�.°sw ` p r ,ail
/ ii-- •d ► • � • I i rIF
�' �!' , h �y►
e a - ,y er -
r + lt�*. 2'. + �r r.• �.�.+� w .�•S [a `� M r� 'L,' • f r 1
.: �;p : t N, 'iC'1: 4`•. r •"�► -a` Oy , 4 •� .,y '� +'i�*'"1-,tom, 1 •> "' t�
NVL
,iN^
Cr*40" f, PO �_ I, .
40
r M r- � � ►
*]]] p yyas,.... �..
!'.r • ��•'+f J y►f �,�+� �r � I �yy r.i>." , F T `► >� � +; � �� .A .. �. • r ,� .o. �.� .. •���•i..,•, �... ' T^ �w
L�'I ^,.. t`i '�• •-' '� ' >^ �, _ � •• •'a .'�• �► �r� r►; �� "`"- ��+• i' •�/ 'y�J►y-f' 2'"'�. fF' � � l ' �"`'�
wV
AF
-_
• .. .-. ..�+,� ,`•� �, -' .•'1�f.' � � � i . j , l a .-'�"� .4� \ �« l � .� ..1' ♦.+�� �„"".��• ,. ` d•-►, � � .
AIV
T�.•�'�• �� �1 '� .":�yt :�' e." '' ••+� x `�1�C �.'.�►,i�i , � t• .�,�` #e t � r '.v,, _ �,, 1 >�t
R' {� > '; r yl��.!'i• �T . 4+c�+ #• \ M!• '
0.0 - 4.0 Q Steelhead are outlined. 100 Year Floodplain A Existing Sediment Data
4.0 - 6.0 Cedar River Gravel Study
Chinook are hatched. 500 Year Floodplain A Proposed Sub -Surface N
® 6.0 - 8.0 Sediment Sampling 250 0 250 500 750 Feet
King County Cross Section Pebble Counts at Sheet 3 of 16
® 8.1 - 10.0 ExistingCross Sections King County Managed
City of Renton Cross Section 50 0 50 100 Meters 95�5 11
® > 10.0 Flood Facilities �
Alternative Cross Section Jones & Stokes
for Pebble Counts Proposed Segment Breaks Scale: V = 500'
^ �t�•r .;• ' �•. f' •�'-.l �• -.�,` i r� ,�j_ I. f +• ;vtf,r� . 1 � �„• i � ' ' O_ �'.• , • +� •P�r:- � i•�,' f. r..
�r L.1•iAr f• �?,, lr�i''� y� ,/� * �{.' �2• rI� •a 'r '.�.r' !�� .OP i`I_ . f '� .•s \ 1 _•` «
lad, r�-^• ' ,_ �� /�/ � 'f y1- �1a�� i �r •►•— a' r^ ".� 4 .J'�a a' �' - ^• 'a �� t •.1'.' • ' %
t J� i+ i '.d R' �� .1:,`- k` �' 9 ~ rd � . � r�'•r ..: - ,�IJ • •� • ,, i �, _ � y ��h e`: � ,� t
f•�� � f ,L �a1p�, r
r/' _•S'�•. ^.. • ra`:Y . n t ,r, - •',7 �I'���"�i _ f
i ► � .� ,� �. a- � + �, war-, . t1r"�h �'�..''�'(, . � • I� 7h ••• : ' ^ �. � � R-•� r ••yy q
�r'�S ♦ ` ��,,�I � T r� �'r �"� 4 �� � }Jr-�g. �, � �� . �'�; , w+• _ i F/_ � fit__ O ,� � , '
.'. � .i � �. ��.�� /'��'' ��� 1' '�. i e ar•Y• +7 �� f "� �. � �. ♦. , ,r•- � j•e _ .....- I' f O' � fp►; �` .�:�♦, :.1
i . 7► p�'�.`�,rl!,r'i f'a:♦ ?�.*
� , tom`' �• E�5`/Iy,. - f • ' p 1�
Vi
.rtj- •'^ A.1iw �►�•
ktf r Y G . trj. ell, If, � ' � G 1 � ► ! `rr �"h � r 1 1 .r •Ir � • �J *ice � rj w
j! erg'{
'Z ;t?►js tr *�.'• . / TAP"
j •ca, ,1 st p�!2 r ► �!, i1 •• f':. �•AQ�!'
opt
• 1! rr ,I #, t • * k �.�.tl� ^- jf r' �f ! . •. . '" `� M 4'� �r��� a .-1 -k i
, r •"" � ` •�. 1.Y�M � � M x'. �. re_. J ^'� t t�'ft•R.' Q/� * ..... 1 �' s�IAI `ft
4.• r , `. �� �•, ♦.''"�, • �� � }7���-, • r �+f
'�• t�J {•� ', Via. {�-'t • � TEA+-f�'��' C� `{ •�., � , • �F` •L �' i . �� � t ♦ �� �' �'�� �t t ' 1� '� .,� �- - ✓ - -r. t • f ti • ^ � �
..•�:!• Rr>!- ii.�� t[' ' f . ,•" may.
_,� I a .i< "'.!1'."'+►'-i'__ t • r .nt � '*\O �' 'v # ��. .i-�s.� 1R'{P•# r� +l � ' •r I'i .' ► " � �•' • .�'� .!,- z 'q«" }�����
•+' re " + .; • .r A r $ a'. ter. ,,,.... •.., , .J ♦ •. ' •"•T• ..,
r •� , t_.: t "' �- #(♦, r `; h r Y Y€: wr'%'` k it d •�f"d a ';1. �rfi•���. jib' '' ' " r►
J•'. f -,P-,. a �% - ,,, , +�i. ','. +, ti,.� , 'p �' �' •>��St` •ram r�:'`♦`r. .:'�''R1"�'G•_' ' "• �- �' ►•
,.,,• • w .r .. w. �' 1; ',t
` 1 aa�t• � �� .+; '�� �� � ,. ���►►Y,, � �*•1� f'�f r j' 4'{».���� ���^t,}��.�� �L k �y :�� �'.�••'t,�..��ra �`_,s~��'1' � ► �. "� 0 �
460 '.' ",� ,. ,1` h - T.. • `�'. M •, r ;;;''•�?,Y�11" ,fit
�•���'``'' • "' ''"'ti s�_�( :,.
S y t
99 11 1
%. 4.0 6.0
6.0 1
%. 11
1 1
w7e
r.:�f•f�• •' f f P r �`+!r '! *, •i,w.�.�tt� • ; •:`+ 'rF
•�'1,% d'!• ,� fLw},r L��' r�t,f ,'' d,.e • �r �.1.;.�t�}'����r. I�L45 �.R j..� , Rir�
ra •.. ► ti.,/?, • '�' `l \+..?. ' r' Y,�''.7t .. r !, C V ,T,1 _ D .. .-t^� ' A i�-���5 —!�r.{ r
r 1 •�� • : ~t' ` t L rr ` x'Jw►� + ► � .� � ' * tyiR�` . 4W
�. =1 .e �r1• ' •.<. 1� , •'' , ,r�ti L!'w r;•r�/ . ; ♦ Y• . r' �• aY ►aL. •' . -� '+
.,, .ti ? ,� �' '• ra,�•.i►. � iJ '•1. '�l L +'. .. ^p 'Y- :c�� ,-I' � .R � �i 1" ?. F � r - r �r . �• y' '�` -`"`� j ,Y ��1 � _ �� • � a �� �i~'n �'�''•
It
Ik
. � �/�, �✓ �� a.R�r �.s� r .f t, `�Y't/,. • ,* Z F T �''•t` r• ,��" � •n�. � ✓- jj"+ �� a~*•��' Z e#
a .+ i rIr . ' , i' _ t : , i�.' ` • ♦ • �. _ i ♦ �. . a. ±r l� 1 . '�' 1 1r w 1 •* 1 ..J
• �"' / `�•. .d•-fi - �[pMFt• r• '• �`• �(".��y , t! ♦ • rr •� x`x: `Hylr°: _ �%;""��. t^ �i'� �' N .0 •, ^.-•-.
Ajr
K r � f 1 ��•
a ,rS -''�,j,J` + O r. ! _ ,�i'• w • • 9 . J, ✓ •1. I - . '", , _ -_ .a
i - ., .� �•.. 'NIt�w► .i�t OJay. •!., mil' %INN
,� — 'i^, ' ` ii "p�. • ..^ ' •. .•�r L._ �j •7
It
Lor
A ,,, ' to t . �r •� 1ti +i r fit► '1 '
�;�t` � � �. M �j"��,,,�y^��' . ,�!' rL 1 i },.•._►� �. a r. JaIF � 4 .� -�"p�- yx' � + :♦ '�' �0,10
��. �� � �t . ��/�, 'T •r �
�:.t � �♦ � is �. • w ♦..�.��` � I•� �- �` 1' _N I y 'ta fit, °' ' �1,.1 J`.-li ! 'i .►?:C7 �MS, t :� :-'�[j�•''��,f `► '.
- � � r.' '•; � �N3.J' �f �? �.�� •ti�M t , • .�'tS �{ � �l�• ,�'� .} Y � ;�i � .► ' -.�_y�a d��� - ,{:. �-' •s. i .► .
V ro ?jj�L° ! t /1 M �• :.v ~ L 4( f, a.r i �!� iA .e . } 1! +�. �•��� . % �r
" !t, -r ..fi'�1 r. . �� •I ♦4 %1 't •�r^ f +'' 'r'rT. .Or�''r••_ ``��y - + a• _ T
r+r f `n•e.�'� Tt' ^ITI�'{, i y..r, 'I� `•_'.t1 !�,�}1, • t �T ati��,r. -� l�1`r.�y - �S •.r`
11 ��wi��tr`' �� •� sV ,r,• _ ►��t . • _ _ v ► .> '� -
Steelhead are outlined.
Chinook are hatched.
King County Cross Section
City of Renton Cross Section
0
100 Year Floodplain
500 Year Floodplain
0
Pebble Counts at
_�....
Existing Cross Sections
Alternative Cross Section
for Pebble Counts
71T� t;%, '40
Existing Sediment Data
Proposed Sub -Surface
Sediment Sampling
King County Managed
Flood Facilities
Proposed Segment Breaks
N
250 0 250 500 750 Feet
50 0 50 100 Meters
Scale: 1" = 500'
Cedar River Gravel Study
Sheet 4 of 16
MDR Jones & Stokes
.. ,��C`' .c_ • _. _�. „•s. �•.S' R.� � �� � _ il,y r! ,* '�v � � -- 4- . r •�,�(I:�t 1J)(1. •1 ►.'{ 'eq 1" ♦� � �,r f.
r = `y ~ . tiu� �'�� a: _�; �♦ s \ , `,� �� �T�r a t - - (. P t {tt 4' !►: ..�,., syl t '+1� t� +•�� ! ,•�°.t�i
Xi t� f . -} 1• y`� i .� ,.► s; t - ♦ �` ',1' �1• � � i�` • �' '"� . 1" - ! �' M � _ � `!� • •ram .,�• .
•��l;� r • ► ir' - j !r.� . s�R., f �y �w•' •t+'1'r �'r to IF,,M� t,
,� ' 't' ' �•1 �.11 1y�_�"'` .;. , � ��a FY,f � ..a'+ t��a,,;�';♦ �`�����. '�. � �'R •�� -
)I• «.y r� ` jr . 1!+ �► 1�!,-?*Ji�rt�V�r T� R a. r 1. )DI drtr IrA t*.1� to •. 1
7 t'y r • N. :.? _ �` r'► �^ •�M,,,. tl�� A�-t
rA;ie•.�f,..r(,-_i � t`�1 t!S4, jr+� a-' '`..�i '•► *. r`•r♦fi^~ A'�,'�j �` r�,r�C ti i k . �ii 1 I'r• ✓- r
' f ♦ A R ♦ a � . P � i• +�A4 �• � : _d t,•• i, \.� r �• r r ,. n�� ..fir. `-r •Y rt�•� ♦ • �� '•t •
it�.,��� �1jrr. ir* 2�' i ,�•�,� �[ t ��Rr'' /1 �•' I♦h " �. •.wWoo, ty4, ►i� rr Pr `, ef� �r 1 �1�i '
-.� � •► '�!` , �! � • � f r� r•� l� t, s�• � �E 1� • �' i r•• „/ Y� � � r '{t •• �'''�'ryi` � r p y�z '' � ♦ � � t • • ,► •P'� � , ,�' 1 7' .4 , r `�; �
�� �-�• :, i•a� �.� ��♦�`r• 4 t� .•r *�� ♦if �, .�� !►,l♦� � �.�,�• r r '�!'c� � >!',,.' y� °�ir�■*�.♦� ,' �tiR'i� � }'f�`+•i
•� ,'#• + ' �� + R r r ��,?,• � �' `i�r` .,f !- i'4: R ♦ t `�1, �, �1. ►, M'wl ,-r :- �•NM� ��>���� * .'-�'«'l..' �` M� '`
T r �-'�' r_, t ^ i ti�'.+.r . �►.. 1 t. • :.'!� - .yam ,� - , i x.• ♦ ,�..,. f t i .
•• j. � `� �! ���V+t� '�} �-ir>• ��� .i � � , ♦ •t�f �,ay,•:r►•`it� �+j�i ,r'�.L'�R, - �'�.7 � ..r_.-. i Y'���Jr,t�:' �„` r'I ���yr1� ++�J� .':� :.t'jJ�r� � �+t���' a ( fir•
ti' �, a�- • _� �' a 1; ,•.� - ♦�� �'• r 1•••• •.}• •l �i• .M.., • f _ Cr, ... .�:.`�'•`:%1` e.M►, ♦1'1f>_;/►
ark « i COP'
, +.. - :..�j' ►� K' I►' t fr.•!►^ 1' `�.� - r . I ` .af - f--a • ' +' • ' `- �•�_T"P r" ,�
♦ w �" - Y w ♦y t e j 7 R ` \ "♦ ) t • 1 Z��'�r. �` �� t iT r r �� •' r
_�". `�'-t•► ' '�: •�yvi Ait�►?Yw LK, / � yi �,\� �^�:� i .'•�,w r�-��l�R'�;•, '`N�''��'t:' • • .. ':� 1 !t'.- I
M / r •� J� t r , ♦,' .� r-Y 1! yr , s< r� i " r, �' • �r - r
If ". ♦ e. � i/ p' • ri Y r• !1� q �♦� '•t'i: �M1 � w r�.16 • i•' r I �t
�t ♦ ! ?.- e *• !v , '�. '♦ i. . Y`' I . •�.i �(.>� •�' �.' �1►11•r, 47
, �.a� ,►T 1�
r •� ��';�+, � ` �'�.`, �� ',►� .f °r� ,.N ��• '^.err�>t4• �• ra i let r•.,'''� r � ,ry,. M►�'��}•� r
;Ae
�. ��f^T + e i)79
��� �F� ,-t ,y �!• �Y ��55�♦r 4r°FYI.f �:�,�•�
r- • , s , ' •f Cr f i .
Vol
fie►IFN
t'+11 1^ - r air j ��� . � � �� ,, .. � .� C. ,,,•-r• r
it
r � 6
ys °� ^r_1. i�� � t,' \ 1+r �' � ' a .. 1< • � � •, .' r ,•�� `a'♦+ � f .Jri.. ♦ ,_ _ '► ,,tJ� + ..�• r
�� •Ir►.•` ►�� _ttw .�.R art• '►'�� , !fit �•_1 + s. rn v. ,Yr': ti► r 1
• IC ;","���' •�*`i rr • i wo-o r- , ► i � .N ► rr R.-..' A-' .2► fr `•`fd !' ,� "� r , r 7 1
} f f .r /K • t .. �, a i ' A,t a: 7r �� r.� • �A��1ey
.,.��"••"�� �(,��t., • ,yam 'M ' ♦ Y7 4• •. ! ...ray, r1�'L,�4 C {' �" 4,.y ,e / �� •` t • - • F
�•• rR 1y� �1t ,� • ~y�lf - r`. ♦ #r r }� • A t r �. .t . i ' 1 s 7 r �. �' • i .1 /
4 :r �•♦• ♦ l • �`,� • ! . r N K �. E�i� "y • `►�; • v �Ityt� 11 n . r(7� 1' AIjr.
•'► • •�1 r1� 1I! -' • Y Kw. OL
�" (r • •%tI •� �' 1 -1',i' ; i' . rt r ,r �( e'1G r r
' • ti �r 'N r L H • L3 ►. `• ` ,` %Mw,
ue' k•w 4% v♦�tia•�yrlf "YAr l ,!«�T.` 1,'. r.ep'`," .e1i (f•••c ,,. r ,� ;1k •;�� .! ��t r: °,r �1;
r * ,r ♦ �,� P 1'IC •r . ; 1 -.r I •�' )y� �''yA��";r ,I ,,•y1� �� '�.• / ,
1� - (t/�''�'• ^ . r �'�i� •�,. 'rT �Ai r •"�' 9 ._,. t,4• .•/t.){ 1 .. �, I. 4..' ♦
� �' i t tr.' i 111r yy. f• r- ' ►y �✓••w� �r, u 'v. . '•. t •� W. ,. ; _ ^ flo,, �.�r +' {•c �. �e - ♦r-..[ Y r „�
y r}�' t � t'' }r � ♦ • �� .',T 1 J� �I a 7� ♦T t'' ♦ � • ,*, +A ,��` '� '�j/•..�r � r.' •t: ,r � �/I'�/i? r•• :�j :`.3. ✓. �. � /'Llry(.(jI(� � R• .�• w����__ r �+• .. I
'� ` I ' ! ♦ - ' ♦ r'.Mn f 1R`Y 1. 1. ;�' T y�l 4 ii' * , . i .0 IF w 'c
=X '. may! h.'/� •��Iy�' ., :r".��^•`` rP .' •,r .•j ��rL ♦ ; i. j �y
{ •�''+• i'!r �e i +�.. T +� 1 �'Y r' +r, '^• • �r11Q�t7 r•I7i'j`t'-. _w•� �y�.. '• .er:. r[ "I•r' w. r Ar` • YRRc. T 1 1_ . r 1'
I >r• ♦1': ► . }.1 • �,.Mt" •♦'I• ♦' !r t.•ti/r. .F d „•'r S,,Al.I
•'♦t om_.- A. w� �� w 4• j �t K' �A 1, ,. �.Y r r.� .7rf 0",
• , f i /fit , r' 7 r -
Q. r r �•'_ .n""or
•C Y r{, .'► '�.• i; •► r•_r•t;. r i. jy/�r �� i ,' �.� I�•1�,•L' r._. , �•1 It�. s�i••. �' /
1`-- • w T., �. . •`�. - i, ��l q Y:rT•• �:. I i_I,c" r•.t e '•� 1!v .. T1X' _� r,•; •. ` �' ° �'
�. e ' e ' � � �..•!�� , , • ... e �•�^ - 1 ,,,,R, . - „ i�• 9�.!',�,.- � �,, � ,�� �, y .F'', ?°r� �'� � -sch1c t• 1!�" ! • S
ff r may`• , • �.
�• ' l.. ^`�. � � � � � •.0 •; �' ."M � '' !♦.� , .� rr .`. rr'�f�J F ,SJ � � '�." .'.' t,'r ��.Y.j'I ,M �..j
• i + " lop
` +. r 1; r Y',+sv 1f a+ t /r •s !.jo
• R 'U"',a
1 �.• • �••► •°� .r1... `` '�P' ` • f' `�-t�� V, t , '1•� T tv� t . f.-r °•Lr �� ,t f�• . F�,-� a ;R. �� • r �, •1. «r, .^r I X
♦ � f t � �y� ,^, .'�,. - •7 .vr,. �l `. f -. � �, � � ar !�- _ � i . - fir; °'1n� � � 6.- `,fr;' � • �i�?' f; " `:psi• `, � .r�'-
C.
�-+ � �"A � ' - .� •N ./; • a � "�'f � . . � >^11 it ; v�>�+ f� ! t.1�� � '� r. '*, r - ' ct� r •+' a.�'` `♦� � � '� ✓ r ' rCt� � . �,� «II >M �
w *• r' or A., ��I ♦ :► "►mot' 'tI •%'''♦=` ' •r" �"fir ., � .� 'i'�.{, r r _�r t� f •,� fr.g„ r i nJC ' �i . ' -G,+� Y • .!�' �^'', * •M' t r �t , r
t•. ` I. f •W-;jpr a r ir, N • '� •" ♦� '. ,•� it--- T. _ I 3 e �. I iC .. L Iru J i{• . ► •r
•• ! tAVV,vl- VIA
Vr'
® 0.0 - 4.0 -Steelhead are outlined. L_,L•, 100 Year Floodplain A Existing Sediment Data
a"
Cedar River Gravel Study
® 4.0 - 6.0 %� Chinook are hatched. 0 500 Year Floodplain Proposed Sub -Surface N
® 6.0 - 8.0 Sediment Sampling 250 0 250 500 750 Sheet 5 of 16
King County Cross Section O Pebble Counts at King County Managed �-
® 8.1 - 10.0 Existing Cross Sections Flood Facilities 50 0 50 100 Meters
® � City of Renton Cross Section �55 :Jones &Stokes
> 10.0 Alternative Cross Section
for Pebble Counts Proposed Segment Breaks Scale: 1" = 500'
if
1. �,•' ,j �IVR y��•• t. :`c,1 • �♦%. �' �r'�.i +. �i ,r• ,�♦.�'/►,.. '1 r--, •ti ��r:. _r,%I'
`1 •, �T ♦►�rjtrY +' r.. �1•— C f .1+� r, yr 1 # '14 r' .ar »' . ti ! r►� .ear+ ti
••i f� rt' ~ v 4. c +��,,�, ,fa }i^ •den} t >� Y` i1 • �C°� d, `i r
�. - \- ��\' •. , 7 �� C p ,Q'r r '•"} .. �r�►� ' t 1•' •c A+Mr. - r F J'_ � � ..`" - {f• r�. ', '� `♦ t,•� ♦LV_ T C ► ! i` , .,A • ' .Y\_ .♦ �M•t) • ��,' e� . �' f c� %♦2 fi ' �„ ' i a,'• Y .� x •�. }•r� r' ` } k r l�[i �V,,7y,� ^- ••'• !•�r 7
7 f � 'f • y .. i' , r. +••• ?` _ •. � ` r r` • •'' "f •+ . , �� '`•.` iOKI;
' 7�S , C • � Tf � /,/�rA [, � ` �j .r'�' 1 Q.�•. �t � �V ' � . , � A4
•�► f ` . ��r •,. r„ ��� ' I + • - ` . "� ♦ .hP. iN,#:}�,:r'; / * Y i ; 'j C . r y � �f 1 r. � IQ � �i g y r l•`' r..
y ' ��� ��i ",•'rr�..�..! r' � y �, � _y,`r ~?."' � � � � -: `1�i. • - •, I% ry w-Aj, ,~ � ,� .'*� �• 7 .� ; ., , '1�� �:�.i�`1!° ' F / R ' ' � _f� Y r• ♦ j
�f �� ;, ! •_� ":"��-�,�. I r•P'r ` � � R � ,t�7A�:�`�•�'..5.'M*�'''' k' R,,• Z114
•1•��t, -
Y1t .�I.4r
,� r t � � � � ' �s . � . y..r . • "SSS .... �VVV••• `,. • '`r^ •o !" ?F ., »F; r • � • r ^ �,� ✓ }
^' ► ,i w w r r r►d, •' y. i �� ^ r. e • �f y ' ► •' w ,� + �' r • t ' '!�
7J, , s '� .� tw • iti * .:r P'r �.. r +. -o r. M .� t �.. it •{ ` 't ifr r. . .i F, ir. ?.'; Yr "
' • .�.t � `Ir r �` I. l~:%' ,rY r, rV. '.� 4 ,; .- : `.�i' � k, -. s-..� � � ,�.. ,� -`' � r•... y !" * ,. �' �••..•! •✓ � \�'r/ - ' �•, •.r� r�
yam• - • • �f �► .a•7� aw ,'...�. a .•. .< i• r �. . , .' s ' ..4. _
*� r •�' 7 t ��.1•�-, r+ .i + �� �,� } i1 . IV ' _,p. rt•. .1'r' .. 1 Q c `. �• \ � .' R. .t'�,� .' � `.�� r��
' ! < .. "� • ��t is is « rV° f J' , s c�= ► N�r . II
' ! • ♦ + •` ,�. f \ r• . r •K,• /' .+ r( F� N t fu
t ' '�I
'� ,r , ..yi •.r s'. r.. .`' : i, r � .,.' . _' �: r-'�,,+; E v � r \ .. it r r ' � � t � ; • = 4 k• ►',' �;
« 4444 Ir'
r.�rC' i,, ,,i11Ne "!.,r .� ,! r, ►ar���.R i.,:a _� ' _ �•", \, ,y� .�r+`' jt
4t i'.*, r .,� , .l��fll +'�►r .`� �" '� i► : •�i ; f it .l j
j ,�,rr j, ry✓.' _•:. r+ ±� i `' r+ �, rr \�.,., —ad.t`.•.+�r,rr f: F�1�.1t ,X* �"�* «
ie
t , � � f /► � • `, �' . ..''!'` l.f,� � '. ; + `K.,. � j► y� `'• ,t } .' ����•�^ ;�"' � Y,.. d F v ` fir. �.,' �'' r•. �"� • . '�- \l?',;.� � �•(\ , �\1r;.•�• �' y' tip• ' , �.,•� ("T y
J 1 i
It
j _� Irk '''!R ` r- >
'�'• �` •+ � � ><` ` i ,� � � � +.. f ,,• . , � 6 yii; i `�'����'•tti' � •. , •�f." - � .ter •�4 .r
i 1;'> r .r - ', i w �, ,7i ' R • i >
�♦' k d, �. + .� ► �y�. * _ r �•. yr� I'ar tr ♦ i +a+ +fit �'ii I • A.
tw '�` ` 1 r . J.f . F fir `�.. .- w ,F r.. • , �'T" •� It �>�• �A►l� • w• .:w.,� .,T . *.' f `.•'
`t �, . .1 a� 4 r1? � > �, '°!fit o �� X ' � . � .• w, i �+ i . � . t : " ,,-
y 064 S . Y w r t , rN . tl .' '`r "ae� fir. •I rrT � r *r " v - '
R ~�•r �c`rj►' �' • { ,t F� ;?. �� ` �r?1y�•�A+v' Kp �1�,� - r� t .w ♦ •t. •r.« _ I ` . _ •r t �}
'� �MMp►►� � .'�" � ems. !.! ,�' .� �, t t„ •`� •
f'ww �v` ^r` It t •Y c �` `'' v► r * F�+l'Iw
� ; ! �'�- _ i .. f ;•F
17
�" .' ' 1 t� 1 •'a ► '' ' r` r ,1<�► ! .:s� i1� fa `�.
wF' y 'Sr "iav '•+�. . !� •, r t • , rue
(11 r ., rM, ..� f • [7 . �• r r M ' - r .
to
r d' . + :► F i�•• J.� ! 11 ^ t! qrrp
�t :. r R',,t ��' , �!u► • "4, '� Y 4 �,♦"r ra.i� •t� ►
1'r%' � �' E py i ` a , . �,Y" � R - �, •• �' t lr,i' tie .,� '1 M �, ,.'e4 �, 'A - • _ �1 �w �' > � r . ., �. � j "' • `• /"w � - � . :... • �� t �.
• �`f' rt �� a �*�1.M ^a c r �i r: �t i(
7?40�.
41,
�. �. a p' * �� "�i � t r � •• •� N ! � � �Y� ^ � � • S � v ts.+ ' �I t
% �,a•t. !r.' .r �,♦ �' ��• _ f., .� _yyi� >, � �•♦� � , y-., ifs I � �' R� ;it - �.- ` r t �, f�'F.,,r 1� ��
D t � s<t ♦ 1, a r r f � j S _ � • .t' � � � ., ' t �� C � I � �'! Y r'✓•: s ,} •, �/ �'r '. d yi• j � • Q •ram .�i �I•
r r� > � t . ♦� ` � ;' � , >. � . �1. R�y '�' ,c+• . . � x '. a .T,I 1/ � �!/ ��, Irw r'u ie� 7 rM/1' � c .1� r .
.tV r."�»r•' y�_ �,� .�s Z � .+--. �, .,Fri �: 4"r. ` k. F F� R s. ••,�, �y l � x •
4f• i *♦
�e•/"' �.r � r1 -•°�'' �..� �* r3 ��.i•� �'rr`♦• '. �'.r � T ."'�c,�s\ ��r ``�.+'id�• � r if'I'��r► � •'�.'� � •�..°
0.0 - 4.0
Q
Steelhead are outlined.
100 Year Floodplain
A Existing Sediment Data
Q
Cedar River Gravel Study
®
4.0 6. 0
Chinook are hatched.
I�
500 Year Floodplain
Proposed Sub -Surface N
®
®
6.0 - 8.0
8.1 - 10.0
King County Cross Section
O
Pebble Counts at
Sediment Sampling 250 0 250 500 750 Feet
King County Managed - -
Sheet 6 of 16
®
> 10.0
�
City of Renton Cross Section
Existing Cross Sections
Alternative Cross Section
50 0 50 100 Meters
Flood Facilities
��
�5� Il. Jones & Stokes
for Pebble Counts
Proposed Segment Breaks Scale: V = 500'
► .. n'l llhr:.+t.J /.l '!t?.'(Lrd7Yls�1`�. .3� w S•. j• ''• �' w4. ;" r' -_ rl q. _ �1,
`N" � ':- ' .'. � '°�„ �Lr ''r j J� �1 � ', '� ' �� � r'• � � � 1, � .. T" .
Ink
jr
�; � r'y�yT . • ' ✓ r• s r '� 4 • ,w T r''T'^ , lY _ 1 Tr M' •'T ` ✓y�:,� . •-fi., 3�'• "41 j. � S
i ; ,1✓ A �, K r� * i ' y� a v, `• `T-,'�►1• : , �� { v •9 9 ^ iW- „� t�' W RM ice, t7 _ _ ♦♦♦ 1t ' . . 4
ow 1P
IF
10
,�.i +� � '!" � '/�F '*•l� �� � �Y t !. s°' .•""r ��• r r�•dl;: �'*T` � ,�� �r+.,` t �k��� � • n .
r ' � r �,� ,yx` `� j � n ^ • � y,, i Tip yy, ♦ 1 +k�1 �'4� �� w , Y�JfY �"� ;"' � �1 r`•� i
.rr �' jyjr��, � �p •i' .-,,,� ~1 �` '•r.% Pam•• 1 a} + W � �•�'( "�'.`,•�1' ( O }
�r a , '. ti F
r � 1 .
-iFv
..c r - n _ ^� i•. -� , . _y1'. -�' �� t
.�{`,� � j ~.. ,- � .� IR �n� Y !�i��' ,�r� �P �'fP4T.. f►ry, ` * � t�+i., 1 t � -� � ;1A
Ik
or
F"r I �►I a a. �► .. tr e1 , ., `�►r' tr4Wj i s ,� • 'x4 t, ,"
r< i y y•�:M .Jr `/y .y
�',�- r f •J,r R 1►,• r� .� �_. l K'�.�r :! 1 �l__ ���►'i•� r:`, - T'�•''e,
' �j tL,• �r;JR• t.. a' - F.•°Q.,��Y �iy. � t ArfZ � * . '�, . �I � r i� w..• 4SR' ,n+,ah• I r� a� «•�;.Y �� �o—�. `., � t � ���
Ir
4t It
+der _1 y a Y. 4 • j L
f' " 1110 . ' .F*.?_
^' '..'t•� sT or
. 77rr"," 'Jr ,• • *^ •� �•- ..• r o 4
tt *" Y, i . �t'S.'' tiAjw t
A { rOk
r "11
0
® 6.0 - 8.0
® 8.1 - 10.0
El > 10.0
'�• i• �,?�'�� • � �"���,�,� r � � _ s�f - � `i. �*-�' � _ .Sy � � t} ., �> fir, t . � •� � r;}' ,
� ''9 i• '•��', •yr� '• � � � ;�•~ ,�� �' r � r h �i d��s JR •I� 1'`J15�4.t..t � r'�`.�:�.'•1•'rA7�'��C�._
f
Steelhead are outlined. 100 Year Floodplain ♦ Existing Sediment Data Cedar River Gravel Study
Chinook are hatched. 0 500 Year Floodplain A Proposed Sub -Surface N
Sediment Sampling 250 0 250 500 �5o Feet Sheet 7 of 16
King County Cross Section O Pebble Counts at King County Managed
�._ Existing Cross Sections Flood Facilities 50 0 50 100 Meters
City of Renton Cross Section Alternative Cross Section Jones & StOkeS
for Pebble Counts Proposed Segment Breaks Scale: 1" = 500'
�Sz
IL
may• / r r k'. `
� � '� �,.• .i a, ! •� /', �,r' 'fir• l: !r �. ) � �''' �V'y s � w'�' .�'d'
/, ," •' ,!r , •J � ., �p . , a' 7'
1r (�� 1 it .J 5y,rr \ �„ Yft
��yf7j)/+ _ t -'•i 7'!! `In'
or
:- �► . , �—� rear• tee► ¢ ." ,,*,.. i ..r .'t - . 1-.,; #'~ �.
+j K
l ✓ A ..l y c .i ' $' !
1w
'� 't I • • P _ f . •fwp 'i TY.
y� Z r
t ry1 xd .
,
"C
j y,�' •, , s ;,` }ems , , r �.. ►, t °)`r �1O++ :. * ,#?�lr�y �' 4l " S lot,
"'K r
} .v`1 Av
"' •� fr'."y -r dfR '! t"y;Sy�•.t"j.
K '� • }>�� .. 'r :y - -. ". 1•�-�y ,1. :r, 1,.. •tii� Y,'�Y 1 •..
all -
VA I*x
t '.r w!iw •7- N i d ham', w a'1y ? 71. Sv1,T To
.11: •ti,'i t�N:
y _ +• r.7+'� ra r I F�,. w 'r1� fir.
�:• , ; '�►' pR-:+•.�.nj j��•� .V. � :�., r- yN. s; "a - . .,. ••K r A� `�- .>, * �' '
�'i'�� ►j�''t, �* •!� 'S . ! �il�7r _+fl✓ � �''{4L.', i r �'•r �` •':� ' F ��''�6r. ''' f+.'. '' : t� a`v %r T� +Y R`'
�a .Y * ,�rI±='S ,y.` •{ f'. '{' y`.1t, » ' i v. i '! ij, •-1�` ►ey
X r
AWN
;• 1 '* " `Z�Y< �>•-. '�•.� r Mr a � .,� A w�M , M _ .�,.,��►.r1•'F•. - i-,... -.. i'►: s4 _. ,C'� ri' .� _� � �
12
Awl
® 0.0 - 4.0 Q Steelhead are outlined. 100 Year Floodplain , Existing Sediment Data
Q Cedar River Gravel Study
® 4.0 - 6.0 Chinook are hatched. 500 Year Floodplain , Proposed Sub -Surface N
® 6.0 - 8.0 1 Sediment Sampling 250 0 250 500 750 Feet
King County Cross Section Pebble Counts at King County Managed -� Sheet 8 of 16
® 8.1 - 10.0 Existing Cross Sections 50 0 50 100 Meters
® City of Renton Cross Section -0- Flood Facilities
> 10.0 Alternative Cross Section
for Pebble Counts Proposed Segment Breaks scale: V = 500' Jones & Stokes
�.�, � - '� :�• ���7r � i7 �.;fir ..t...r�.� �7 .r' �n .�'; ..• � , ,f. . o •yYt. r'•7i �: 7s`kr/ ¢ :k;r\ i.,•,� ) g"m*.Ty
r ci..
• �i`� •'. ' � ,Y V %' ' r .",� ' , _ '� , - a •s7'�' ` t � ` ,''fit � a'r'�
s � [ �.�� . •K-.. �� n l -Yas,, � � , s J �.T �'� • 11 *'� r !, � r ' .' � ,, i y�' �,� ,IR`�t rye r
!T`�1 e" r1R , t� � t >� � ���' -'l �• � ! � � �` t�>'���ti � r � � ` r � 1� �� IS �, r•r � i d ,,, •��., T� � i ��
d , : h ✓ •� • � r� .. �, � . •M w ` � � i 'ir'r .r a �' .� t
�.� M �� e✓ ` a t. ✓1- r s .�` �•� .1 � j. u s1 4� .y'��,j",, t •i ,� �' � �' �ii�1 ��:
! ` + ` rlL •.yr {r ..w '� �'S•" �• -'•, f.• ~ ) 4 •�'c►�{TI _ AW
1 .� �' 77� � : ��� _e � ` r t. �. Ee ♦ y,.�ir ± ;• �! '�•��s ; 'y'.hf" N � r.�,Y:."��. �i '�,
Will not M deft
•���'. y rw � , �•;'- �,,h T � �• t' lam► r � �• . ,;<, u'�" y d• _ - �t i••t.
r M "�`� �ij'�k`+ 'i117tf L,• _ ''W . R6 r .Y •!• s, +� �i//jQ
,i , . •!c - ! g 1� 4-' 157.
S' �:" ' `i f r �, y♦ r . h,Y ?- \ v �' fit' y . , I . 'f4 •a. 1Y s
it
%
llr• , # Y r• �(1t- y! T ri4 ` J y ; `a ` y ' ,n' .' r, T r } ti
`-4A&r� `y � ;�f •s ar 7,:' .S'G .., jr_ ,a_ t s. '�•� .�i'•1M S• i. r ,
ii�r.� I!' � �':• : �., �' '. �,- - �rT3_ \r� 'Z -� j ♦ ��� .� ti { �rt . tq r . '`' r � ` � I
•> � , i� T�'i�`11�t. , � '� � .{� I. j •�A T• ♦ r � r S , ' it f. �, ` r rs +•, !!.
71
I' * L r ,• tr w�.r L 1 {, ,{ pT' ` 1 y ,I r,'^ ..1 tOF
� �•�.' , � �.�P,' r, r ' � � .. t � ,t' t� �1 �'' a • p � 'S �� f a � `a ♦ . f l��r -�.� NATKL t �: S - S 4 ♦♦
ti
����, •�'� • �� r atr , ,�� _ t S 1 � 'Y+, rl -�r1 .� ' ♦ '� :� `� •' r'' *'� v , 1'r �• .. e r
• , ji s _ * # ; r''1 �.a,� ' • . t ; ' '.°r }• ` f A'. y I •r t . •, ` ..,c.•
y t! T �'�.'°(1{_ r ,l�C.' ;,� •il� �t e ' �� j�•; (, � ri�r �� I � ' 4� r
fit,, t _ ♦
.t r'�� i '' `%' '� ` , r� ,. ``�� r Y� ��' •��yjy. ' ir�, � t >1• 1
�,. i �� .. � � , •�, t� _, �., �• '�,+� t' � '�, "� is 1 . • , ,, ;� ` • i G: ,� , � � ^ `
• � r
•rlip� +t
Ir '
' k 1 '�' •�. , `r• n i �,f �,:� S(r.4 1 .�. Vi " #M ,��"' '� j . `t M R jy� ;�� • 5 r M.
, • '�f .4 4 .�•. ��i' :t ♦ '1 f �4 `1 �,• _ J r rN-. Y1T ,�
Nil
S's;
.♦� � t .., .� � ) ' � ` 1� n ,0 ,•'•,� . r • n'tj .•/ a �� Ir. i 1 �� '
1f#`34��{ FY TX/t ►yr' \ \i l ��'j a ; L 1 _ r ?� i I ` . ;;�r' N r
, '' ' Ti1, ` Y. '?rlf k r y� , .�, �1 • , •�'¢" 'CMS 9 r.. , y�y, NX P ' 3•V.
�.,�,t t'.' •' v 'i 744 - . `'tT "t '� i t a... - { �"a t`f� b i .M + A e•a �a i, r- '� !r�' ♦_ .i' - �_ *. •i
:1' ✓I .. .' ' �t � �* � r,r. , g �� • ��tiyt r ^, �,v � .r ` � t -4, - � � r l
•f, . � 1�•'r a �' y t.'. � �,•, �� �" Lt . .i"y. '6c •�i' ? • i . " ',� I . � f l
T�y'�j ' + ,:� .. � t Y•Qw +�f4 w�� • r �" f r � ) ' � ` !� � � ,r �� •'S t�►.. 1i. ". '� . '^T•,• r. rl4, 1. r� I r r - .., 4.
wr
... • may'{,. y r. i �r!..�. �Fl. .� ' r'�tl ,�.[t yr i �'i.
s r
® 0.0 - 4.0 Q Steelhead are outlined. 100 Year Floodplain A Existing Sediment Data
Q Cedar River Gravel Stud
® 4.0 - 6.0 Chinook are hatched. 500 Year Floodplain Proposed Sub -Surface N i
® 6.0 - 8.0 Pebble Counts at Sediment Sampling 250 0 250 500 750 Feet Sheet 9 of 16
® 8.1 - 10.0 King County Cross Section g y g
Existing Cross Sections Kin Count Managed 50 0 50 100 Meters
Cityof Renton Cross Section 0_ Flood Facilities - - —
® > 10.0 Alternative Cross Section Jones & Stokes
for Pebble Counts Proposed Segment Breaks Scale: = 500
�4W' '' • 1 't
t.
to '��- !t C __ yrr .r 7 .� 1 ,� •�"••��
%N A )
r.� • , it f � `1ry'- v � - s J �i11' {�'7,•�i��,� /-v '�, 7)IXi«� la 1 „ .� - +�i�� .. •.,
' f - 1 , ,�3• , ; yr r
All
��1� � -•,r - r:' ��j��,�+.. :3: '{; , �,�. � .� '� r. <; ,■TAN' -? �t )''�`�`,�J`�.J� �" �+',
r ►'S "k �' � '++.-'-..r.. h �'� i r,� •tijs �.�.1' yti�'►�_., C-•1.* Y� '�r•. .
L �: M'KK
, I 1y — . ..V,�, - ► . d !t q
d. ��'" l; �%r(♦x��QQQ� } .M�.' 'T, 1 ��+ `.•�r � -) �F. � �I �Y• �' I- t,����j".a��p!-��T w � '.1 r/„ r ./
rl% ,!��1 t' ,�' 1i. *'�• T .�\ � . fly �� `� t ,"y �- ;i �1. "!, .�.' �� +.��;-^ Y •,lr_ �#^1' s�� � y. 1 .. /1,•++ �..[� ,� ,♦ � •��
it
t � }}}}a � " r r�� ��h , , j r ��i F V 1 "r i Y'• ate' 1S, .:('. �'�Y• -.7 � �' 1 •' � 1•
Z'r1p , 1•• l/ ` �1� 3'r;, �;�'y A'. �" L� ..1# •�� •�' � b ,``,. JrN �..a .,y
r r
`�y' �S 'rYiR ff x'�' `.f`'1, `} ..ram F� ''1y �Y ' • ��""11'"
+h •,~�'6r��•� � � 'i � - 4•r �' "'�,• �+. �,M�%��' Y � I $*.yam r •.Y �j� _ `. M jT !� `
4Y ` + ;'` "•�� � 1 Y � "� yr! a �,}F• � 77 ��Tj,{`D � � -
�Q• ' � �. -�� „ ?"�' f r ' `' � 'fir i ,'• 11, � ' t� b ''A•.._ � .. � y .� � ;�
Ir .r't ' y , r'LV r h �;r_71�,•.�tf;��..�,T�r •' r' 1 r . - •�i7 7 *1• �`T ti . n.. , 1 rl
�1`�,ri %?. , • �. � �, } • Air , fr � r�y'w•s�.�+� . �" ` . �. `� It � ` ...,. ' ,' i � ! �,
;� ' � ` • �• ` � . 7f • ,aft r r � t • � Mr' � *�J' t , , \ f �y � ' �j,7[ '.� i '„ � 1• '7 1 ;'1• it .AI
M•. �: ( • � 7 'i r �y SrT� ' � � '� s •♦ • 4� • ' n i �' T''�1►.��►f •��-.� •�I+ ` 'S `1.:;
}� �' : r'I •1% ! ,w•' • • ,� S i��ti ! . •i k• 1: 1F"A K `�►• ,M'. i
F y+ �t' .T. � `�- �r� ,Q+�'•1 sl�r ll'-r � � � `�.�,,� ; r � h "+'.. .' -1 �J � I .. �, r1�11
® 0.0 - 4.0 Q Steelhead are outlined. 100 Year Floodplain A Existing Sediment Data
Q Cedar River Gravel Stud
® 4.0 - 6.0 Chinook are hatched. 500 Year Floodplain , Proposed Sub -Surface N y
® 6.0 - 8.0 Sediment Sampling 250 0 250 500 75o Feet
® King County Cross Section Pebble Counts at Sheet 10 Of 16
8.1 - 10.0
Existing Cross Sections King County Managed 50 0 50 100 Meters
®Cityof Renton Cross Section Flood Facilities
> 10.0 Alternative Cross Section ' � Jones & Stores
for Pebble Counts Proposed Segment Breaks Scale: V = 500'
"► .. rtm•.. i !'.} •` .•F",� ♦ �1.. ' ' Y'' V i `� 1.M '•'Kw '. "•r'ir,�} S n-'7
� f����.�„ •,��ii � � '�tii�,r ''�' �?'� ti... �► Z e �a ".1 5 i ,��r t .,�','H,' ► � -�1� i1
• yi,� tr.F ,,f 11►. '[.et �'?'_ 1�. �k.�.�^-i.W .S 1'�' n>r .'p+" _ y. '�,�* - ,,
Y 4� fir{ i' �'i' y:,� ,r, f , •'' ai i~ f 7` t -� l 9 `/ r� 4 1
9r^'4„ �q`.'�J�I" j '+. .�,• :t► ,•e�i` 1I' -y,� ''T;;`-►''
�• Zfl 'i t. * t y'_ =rltii ^l �"R `W. ` ,�. •" - �'• s r , 'a• f .4 � 1� •'n, r,
�, ' � � � r.:4{.� ���.. l : P ' � • •. - tit � 7. ??_ t F :� y� .. �' 'r` _. r4
VNi ar
VZ, A
{ ti �. 4 to
��- ``.► .♦.` -- 7'' N S"� d', 'r Y z `, , '� • T' .. Y?.x^' M1Ik� ~' . f , • . _
IW
1'� �:1 . 'R, .� 1. a •.•c, yi, .` i 4 •y • t' " tr ''
Pin
got
'lo+<h.J ,dal♦ \ ') 1.�i -�' 1? '^' 'a' �. t.^ •.' ` ..7�.�)..�
t
N� I • � •' -0 'R•ti..'r' w.. , R^, 'r. �, '�r "tq� j, � Y;���' �v� Si ^..g''.W ..r►i �. .,Y � a'{j.�' • .�
�. �d�• `�°C.'•. �•� �t. :t = +� rr r: y
r•� ..may ��';f �' . w`,�,� ,,,I �M . 1'r� `i►..:c.r _ �.":1"►�►"•P•ffr-.y .. �y.�� ` �1� �'�.
s �+ * i.1� r % R' 1, 1�c A ✓ . �. t. Y .�i�s. - .► 1
a y" y. '� • �, . 1 �' • T ' •£• 1 _I�" '
"� ,•Y _ .•a+,--�r..T•s..,--. _ r w:
Ark
`7±. �a �l 7 ,� • • - `� • 1 ' f { 1r r l 'F '' ,• ,5, , 7 .,. ,�• ; ' ' t • J •Y
AI
Ilk
,� .� �„� t � rt+ 7�.�"T� -: 't x �• '� •���• -V{`.j a ,r �•,;��'>5 �+� �; ��' + 1. •" -. .:iq . i' � t t 'i" ♦''R'") t �. � i ,,: �, �; � >t a � .� �,... , •� .� '• a• !y, ! rrCi i � r. n '`r�1%' " ♦ • �",' 1 ��'�X"�
1� � ar_ �r1.' � r � 9 •^ t:� I}� Y�_�. �• A �..r. - .r\ A .1�'� -� i !. . �fr rJ '•.
fib•' fL-i4- aok
PV
711 Not", 7 • .I' ^a'' Y�'� v T' L�'�-jT'' i \ ` )l f . ,�. . ,�rM.�, ` .�.•�'yt '/� i i, . - i 1 , 'F#•
.. '�"' �'iya � " ` �••,,, .�? , �, ti �� i,�,+.y� •„ � .�1 a� � r J ..I�. � � A � wi
s•• ,-,r' , l� . �� r`. "' � ,��' �,� �, '.,,, �
0.0 - 4.0 Q Steelhead are outlined. 100 Year Floodplain A Existing Sediment Data
1..1 Cedar River Gravel ® Stud 4.0 - 6.0 Chinook are hatched. 500 Year Floodplain Proposed Sub -Surface N y
® 6.0 - 8.0 Sediment Sampling 250 0 250 500 750 Feet
King County Cross Section Pebble Counts at _ Sheet 11 of 16
® 8.1 - 10.0
Existing Cross Sections King County Managed 50 0 50 100 Meters
®Cityof Renton Cross Section Flood Facilities
> 10.0 Alternative Cross Section 555 i,;i Jones & Stokes
for Pebble Counts Proposed Segment Breaks Scale: 1" = 500'
,�-��y } • 5 ,I _r " • �"" " ,I+ i I*W ' 1 T,` �' !4 q�r(,�►' . �a� • 7.1 (rC"" fir' ' j a i "'. ' ``may �s
•�Z' 1��� � n.�, �:,r• 7� I � ti i ! j ;+ �• � �I! ��� � '■% y � tl� '�+rw`v'.' 'i..► . � �•T : a
fr
�. r• t �. ,Yr_j �j.�, '� I �1 , t fir` 0 •� {f :r 1`. , �J�: r�{ "1 t
.,'1 ��,r� • . , .'*• � lit ^r1 1 t� --, 1',i� :��.' • ti Iy � � tip' � •.
(v y ► r •, ,q!'�,-y'. is T.r" y.H�, •r' #��� ��,�-. '� ,} •1' h,� 11(y�y� ` '.4i�; }• \K,,+ •w t �!i K''�'r•,,'�!�' Y• ,��A� '!I
T �F� vM +t.l* ;�k� • J �. , u1• 9 t, + yam `5' }.. � * �� , J 1 r � 1 I_ ST or • Or
..�''{, 1I]r• r �` � i C �l7� rr �T`ib .. �'? '' �� �J•. t I s.•I 1 I 1
dM ^K. • �, vty' 1 F,40
r� 7. 1 ) ► :r' Y wI , 1l1 . w� ' 1 •' `,11 ��'°
` ) �� } _ • �`- 1 l ♦i-. . ,��,�
�.. '+►. A. ', ;`� `, ellr '.,.' fr; _ ♦ i i Ow
v�p'� •. ♦`M . rt .v -%n
Y I r •� y {I t, r r K ".�.,j y , r - * ; • i � , . , 411 V
I*R > � t tt ,y
RS'�K $ "'�.' ,•� XT, � �4 1 ', S' !, `,�. '� } �ia4*K r�•i �-. •:., r �, �1��.
41
r� r y '.1 era � � ;� , � i '�y� ;��h�' '3r I ,V, r i, r ji . ► >„ f R! ,r � `� �,� `�r •� • 4 •k' ! `
:.,,,,�. -•w t3 ems" ,� �>�� '�.' ♦��"
�. .Nty �i ' � ; �,� yh� r.fr,! r � •y. � ;ter J y • '�� �, , r' . y� t ���.� •h ��.'r „ - �i �!�, '��.
ram. { r 4,1,' .1 i � 1'' �. .ti j �, � :. i.' % • r �' -y� l' rL 'T '� s ,. � . i' '
CAV
�5'4•`•f �� a•� r.K i�•� /''.. ,^A•1 ,may. °•'��` #a^7.,, it 74 +' _ T i.�• �R `J �� 7 a lr"h, i,.r.
r e �^� y.: •r!iv _ •1 }' 'i �. it 1 �' }fir` t / w w r It
OwOW
S
` �• 1 ~ s;' :' Lx,' 1 L j�'i1:u w
' -',,,,I _ �'�•aY„ v � , �. ♦ �4-�. Y. :�� 'r �+ !�1 j�.�- +� �i-.• o rr'.. '� �� .� _i � �y .'. �`7��`t
{ '` " w Y ''•� Rai . �I ;�, •rs ....1 1�C. {.�;ti 'hV
r
/ �•,•� 1 - r a'T i �;J.^y1 �• .�' .t, •� ,7 ,�C.1.,, ti ��.��'✓M rI •y�I' �r���'�,
'� r.•''l1VVylr, y '{ + -•1 .�iJ. f,�'�y��. .'h. _ _ � . ; •'t i +'^ 4 q * S'ta � rr. A"�Ry � (' `r. �•
, •� ' i"�• r
•r� .� �+4�i i t• •*� "�� r it ,.ram
r, t K _ , +� '�� _ '�' � !��, .�, � i , � K i .., yr. 7� "•�
C\ a � . J4�.y.-•• A " r a'ir •c � ii � � � � � �_ 'J��.. � .: 1� � � �I. �I t
i
X t 1a .' 1►• ,i+ l.},�' L+ �� `' ,� 'a ? !. Ow •i w4.
13
�, � �� � ti, ��+', . � , �.c � li 7 � 1 )' it7;y . ',y ! M ,,•• �}� t� :� r. i,. �`a."'.: r�-� �, ••-�' � � ,r,
1. �. , .w' r :�- 1 \ f' _ 'y4 '.1 a •11 ,7 `� •h"�,. �• p,
AR 41.
� `r r •� � � �,. '�r '� 1.-• � ' `�"w.�: � .• ''-- J `' p ��` }� '���', _ �, / I 1 . 3 ... ... :� ,l,�, � 1. 1 Z � � � ] l � �kh: � '�,,�
r +�
y_ at: }\• _ �'� T� "f - .Kv ti. 'i, I I •' 1 ' --Y �p 1 11�^1,'k• Yi, •°Fyn
{� i "t A i 1 *rt' ` 1, 1 1 • ,,/ �'y7 . �t , \ ._ , _ ._"_ .Jw�4`}� w� h ., * '• / 7 7
,•+Y' ,'2f� ". '� ,y, -� � l '�'� 7 � 7 / � � vy {k •wn -'a• yi •�w� wN 1 �,� �� 7 7 � �•• ..w., � ��
tM,.�; ;�� F `i � 1• �,,, ` .., `� v: F, ♦r, t �; '� •T � '� �' i -b' [i,i- ( Y ,��t�tF � 1 � �;�.�r..•l�'r' c
' ' a • T .� F'� y r t .�'!�� i . ``a� ti 2 , r r —� 1,� , _ , �� 7 _ 1 `� , C
PT
.f
0.0 - 4.0 Q Steelhead are outlined. 100 Year Floodplain Existing Sediment Data
_ �.1 Cedar River Gravel Stud
® 4.0 - 6.0 %� Chinook are hatched. 500 Year Floodplain Proposed Sub -Surface N y
® 6.0 - 8.0 Sediment Sampling 250 0 250 500 750 Feet
Kin Count Cross Section O Pebble Counts at Sheet 12 of 16
® 8.1 - 10.0 g y Existing Cross Sections King County Managed 50 0 50 100 Meters
® > 10.0 City of Renton Cross Section Flood Facilities
Alternative Cross Section Jones & Stokes
for Pebble Counts Proposed Segment Breaks Scale: 1" = 500'
1 ; "7�► r4 ` .,�:.••r-.a ''K.IP J'r$. _ _;t 'a`� •; Ir .�'� •,.5��•, T1't'� Yt"�'1 �.�"�4T ` �? Zy 7,"•'�}
71
•r - ?: .r ♦ .gyp•. 7f `�
r
vae 'tom; may,, �r ' 1} +►j
— 40
'=� �•� � � I � ' � 'fix= � y
4
.,
S x
,7 `, ,1 + u:..' t "v r c � ^ ` � 'r � ��� �iyy• ���. *.� .�;". '� 1�1f i, � aflx!
S �, eti. ��. �'i �. ��•y •; .+�` � + •, ` 1 � :�, � ry 'r� �' '�,`T -7 ti; �, ♦ Q�J •�•••,+a•'. •�" A ., 4rk+�• 1 TrrT �•j'%'`. �,�t `� 4 � r��,J'}; ,
�� '~�. '"1 'M •x• � r•TM �. -t�•11 � *.• -, ',,, r�',�F�. �� �•�,.!'7��.%� yr;'. r � !X_,� .+` %1 .j '�.],� T'.�� `.tj , i • 1!'�•I��l; +y i
qO
7 � . `" - � r„ 11 1 1 rr�l �r .( � � r�~ r R . �l �' ))) • t y/ � ^ r• /i k
��'. �'1� 'F: �' �- `• •`� + ,�+V .: '1i•. ..yCF r. �>c �i.. � .�. :r • � l i...�' � `y� � � .IY; ! I
, y•.� •� .. *. 41 • 't, .. A. 1 '�;,.1f� •ti' .� r,• tip..
r n �
1 '��;'1hr �� � � �� � r ��` � w � � ��V4 ,: � � t � :'Y r w, . •� '� • + { ��I
•*.°' �� y'7 _ �'tal ,e�y-l�y'•��';1� \,'���r��'f Vic',. I � '�`y � � ♦•' ���i , At
r,F t � b 1 •�t • ly' }��.�';1 l `�; �. 1 1y r' �' �a.� ♦
y,
K• � i i / - f rRF
- l M+7i�a �4_ ', i �', 1 .� 't 'Tr �V ' Lt 1 11 T �.�#V►
YA
41
1`4••.. .. i "41. 4,%r i' •.' p �71 ,c.4ra
r,
NV, f��i4 t'' � {+ sir ti `'r ,t"+ 'r t ' �r r . ; •` i ��p�i
gS19 A1,5�
lip
If
OF
.����� ��MCr1/•fa+f a `y �.�'�. `fykja {'`ili+ `` r � .. � � ;P �*'vi�::l :1� '�6 ��' `'.1 , ,>.•� f y �ir p ,i t�y� •1 _�•, .'
low
lb
R� +4���. � L1 `,� 1'� ?�• ��' �� 1 x \h�'x7'�"t.�• � ' ^ .'' ''Y'it+_710A
• rQ'' , 4 , y f
IF
T _ _ gS'.iP t 1}'�'� . r �' :', P�` • ! 1, **- t4 fits + -'1
'.� �4 �� r � ti ti s t ; u 3 ~ � w + , , �'� � ',>�a�►t �' c4 iy +t . i � 1 1 �
frNh
® 0.0 - 4.0 Q Steelhead are outlined. 100 Year Floodplain A Existing Sediment Data
® 4.0 - b.o Q Cedar River Gravel Study
Chinook are hatched. 500 Year Floodplain Proposed Sub -Surface N
® 6.0 - 8.0 Sediment Sampling 250 0 250 500 750 Feet
IS King County Cross Section O Pebble Counts at - Sheet 13 of 16
® 8.1 - 10.0 Existing Cross Sections King County Managed 50 0 50 100 Meters
Cityof Renton Cross Section Flood Facilities
® > 10.0 � � Alternative Cross Section proposed Segment Breaks Scale: 1" = 500' Jones & Stokes
Pebble Counts
At
�tt
AA.
(
' 14
l•'% t ram'
.'ram � 7 �^•
.f r yi h ✓ Tl An ISi� 5. �� ,�" } ',r�4 x``i' h t
.� r� ,,r r 1ia�� t1t C �'�� � i � _11 I" �' m Y _ "� •x�,� �. �
_. _yi a .`,• � �,� r .. { - w� �'� ` , -T,, ��) l� it ,_ - � . �, •ay .� 'Lf,�? \ � � ')� ' � ~ '"�
Air —
Jim
77
NIP
WE C
sr of
® 0.0 - 4.0 Q Steelhead are outlined. k-;T�� 100 Year Floodplain Existing Sediment Data n
. � Cedar River Gravel Stud
® 4.0 - 6.0
Chinook are hatched. 500 Year Floodplain Proposed Sub -Surface N y
® 6.0 - 8.0 Sediment Sampling 250 0 250 500 750 Feet.
IS King County Cross Section Pebble Counts at Kin Managed -- Sheet 14 Of 16
® 8.1 - 10.0 Existing Cross Sections g County ged 50 0 50 100 Meters
®y of Cross Section G�555
> 10.0 � City Renton CStiFlood Facilities Alternative Cross Section JOrieS & StOkeS
for Pebble Counts Proposed Segment Breaks scale: 1" = 500'
i ram.. qF � b �••'�- ' _� rz ': �',• '' -% � 1 s_,. ,
AV—
IP
. N a� _ -�� , "l-r�a, l .` � ..f I 1 M� •\ � ,i .. jjj �'. r'T• I 1- .
lip
'rpm
.� f♦r ` .. , ^yCY i .0 it 1 ' J• ,_ a. al - - I •�11� - - ,IL
�•, `, • F -
•
or
am
b .. ,�' it I � ' \ • �: _. � � .`Sys,°' -I- - '� -
n � �� � ,�' \ V is �r •. .. - 1 ..• . ��r
! 4 "! . r.a.. : I I '.�. i _� }! .��• I On 4
1�!• � r�(�.h +. fit_ � '? a� .Ga+ � � II � �" , ' � / � i,• w,�• .`vU• _ Ri•_. �� � • J -1 ,_ '_• .� 1 j � .... .. . -
,j. t�,�•. � � �n .� .. - Z ". I, .• - � ` � • �•�;,... i- � .tom T`•- -�,
fit' ti Z , . , •a:. -- i } -r . - , y J _ �"' 1.
Ina
INA
:fr i ..�•�• '� '� -) i �' �,.
V.2 I f; '� .y `Oaf a _ • _ p I. u. ' ;1-
IlV
a•• --a- - 1��'r �. .� �.' •�.�-�� r ....a��=�"r'-- ., •�-� �� ( 4 !. �' ., 4
4j It
JL
r " t �''•• ly•'�,, Ti`g' � a rl �,I •" ��I + �- ' r �' 1 '� �• 1� r � �t �� ��
a ' � �. _ •.f u.. N.. nr. t �"!_p ��� }�� - _ __ _ _• •,� `� �� • r� •, r -� #I ... �" t I t; - 'v j,, �' ..i ", I_,� � _ � a �°�� r
!..
IV
a / 'Ills 4
T,• f i.�f J . l
lox
w
w
1 / 1
-
�. 1 . 1
. 1 1
%. //
1 1
Steelhead are outlined
Chinook are hatched.
King County Cross Section
City of Renton Cross Section
100 Year Floodplain
—J
500 Year Floodplain
OPebble
Counts at
-0•�
Existing Cross Sections
Alternative Cross Section
for Pebble Counts
♦ Existing Sediment Data
♦ Proposed Sub -Surface
Sediment Sampling
King County Managed
Flood Facilities
Proposed Segment Breaks
N
250 0 250 500 750 Feet
50 0 50 100 Meters
Scale: 11' = 500'
Cedar River Gravel Study
Sheet 16 of 16
60$ i Jones & Stokes