Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.

No preview available

The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutRS_Trestle Narrative, lake study, and plans Project Narrative City of Renton Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park Trestle Bridge Replacement Submitted to: City of Renton Community Services Renton, Washington On Behalf of Applicant: City of Renton, Parks Planning & Natural Resources Division Renton, Washington January 2021 Submitted by WSP USA 33301 Ninth Avenue South, Suite 300 Federal Way, Washington 30900024.000 Project Narrative WSP USA, 30900024.000 City of Renton Gene Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement January 2021 Renton, Washington Page i of ii PROJECT NARRATIVE CITY OF RENTON GENE COULON PARK TRESTLE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE 1.0 SHORELINE NARRATIVE ............................................................................................... 1 1.1 Proposed Action .................................................................................................. 2 1.1.1 Bridge Removal ....................................................................................... 2 1.1.2 Piles .......................................................................................................... 2 1.1.3 Abutments ................................................................................................ 3 1.1.4 New Bridge Placement ............................................................................ 3 1.2 Basis for Exemption Request............................................................................. 4 1.3 SEPA Exemption Request .................................................................................. 5 1.4 Duration of Activities .......................................................................................... 5 1.5 Additional Site Information ................................................................................. 6 1.5.1 Special Site Features ............................................................................... 6 1.5.2 Soil Type and Drainage Conditions ....................................................... 6 1.5.3 Project Cost.............................................................................................. 6 1.5.4 Fill and Excavation .................................................................................. 6 1.5.5 Trees ......................................................................................................... 6 1.5.6 Ordinary High Water Mark Work Distance/Shoreline ........................... 6 1.5.7 Project Height .......................................................................................... 7 2.0 LAKE STUDY NARRATIVE ............................................................................................. 7 2.1 Project Area Environmental Classification ....................................................... 7 2.2 Vegetative Cover ................................................................................................. 7 2.3 Ecological Function ............................................................................................ 8 2.4 Fish and Wildlife .................................................................................................. 8 2.4.1 Mammals .................................................................................................. 8 2.4.2 Birds ......................................................................................................... 9 2.4.3 Amphibians and Reptiles ........................................................................ 9 2.4.4 Fish ......................................................................................................... 10 2.5 Measures to Protect Trees and Vegetation ..................................................... 10 2.6 No Net Loss of Ecological Function ................................................................ 10 3.0 HABITAT DATA REPORT ............................................................................................. 11 3.1 Habitat Diversity ................................................................................................ 11 3.2 Migration Corridors ........................................................................................... 11 3.3 Species and Cover Types ................................................................................. 11 3.4 Identification of Disturbed Areas ..................................................................... 12 3.5 Existing Habitat Values and Functions ........................................................... 12 3.5.1 Temperature ........................................................................................... 12 3.5.2 Water Quality.......................................................................................... 12 3.5.3 Vegetative Conditions ........................................................................... 12 3.5.4 Temporary Impacts to Wetland Buffers ............................................... 13 3.5.5 Habitat Values and Functions .............................................................. 13 Project Narrative WSP USA, 30900024.000 City of Renton Gene Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement January 2021 Renton, Washington Page ii of ii 3.6 Habitat Alterations and Impacts and Proposed Habitat Management Program .............................................................................................................. 14 3.6.1 Habitat Enhancement ............................................................................ 14 4.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................ 14 5.0 LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................. 16 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Required Permits .......................................................................................................... 1 Table 2. Project Impact Summary ............................................................................................. 4 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A – Figures (Sheets 1 to 8) Appendix B – RAP Planting Plan Appendix C – Wetland Report (WSP 2020) Appendix D – Geotechnical Report Appendix E – Photographs Project Narrative WSP USA, 30900024.000 City of Renton Gene Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement January 2021 Renton, Washington Page 1 of 16 PROJECT NARRATIVE CITY OF RENTON GENE COULON PARK TRESTLE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 1.0 SHORELINE NARRATIVE The City of Renton (City) Parks Planning & Natural Resources Division proposes replacement of an existing timber trestle pedestrian bridge over Lake Washington within Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park (Park) in Renton, Washington (see Appendix A, Sheets 1 through 8). The existing pedestrian timber trestle is comprised of timber abutments, timber decking, pedestrian handrails, and timber piles (see Appendix A, Sheet 3). A condition assessment of the timber trestle in 2017 found deterioration and timber trestle repairs were required. During 2018 repairs of the timber trestle, additional timber piles were observed to have severe deterioration. With approximately 40% of the piles requiring replacement it was determined that the existing timber trestle bridge required replacement with a new bridge. The proposed actions will involve work below the ordinary high-water mark (OHWM) of Lake Washington, which will require a Section 404 permit (Nationwide Permit [NWP] 3) from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The USACE will serve as the lead agency in this consultation. The project likely qualifies for the Restoration and Permitting (RAP) programmatic for an expedited Endangered Species Act (ESA) consultation. A planting plan was developed as part of the RAP application and is included as Appendix B. The planting plan includes two trees and three shrubs to be planted adjacent to the shoreline approximately 150 feet north of the project bridge. All permits required for this project are listed below in Table 1. The purpose of this project narrative is to meet the requirements set forth under Renton Municipal Code (RMC) 4-8-120C (Submittal Requirements – Specific to Application Type: Land Use Applications). The project includes replacement in kind of an existing structure and is therefore exempt from requiring a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and exempt from requiring a Critical Areas Permit under RMC 4-3-050C. Table 1. Required Permits Permit Agency Section 10 - NWP 3 – Maintenance and Repair USACE 401 Water Quality Certification – (programmatic, included under NWP 3) Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) Hydraulic Project Approval Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Endangered Species Act (ESA) – Programmatic Consultation via RAP U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries (NOAA Fisheries) SEPA and Shoreline Exemption City of Renton Project Narrative WSP USA, 30900024.000 City of Renton Gene Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement January 2021 Renton, Washington Page 2 of 16 Permit Agency Critical Areas Exemption City of Renton Land Use Permit City of Renton United State Coast Guard (USCG) Bridge Permit USCG 1.1 PROPOSED ACTION The purpose of the project is to replace an existing timber trestle with a new single- span steel bridge that includes concrete abutments and grated decking (see Appendix A, Sheets 1 through 8). The project site is located in Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park in Renton, Washington. A condition assessment of the existing timber trestle, performed in 2017, found deterioration and that timber trestle repairs were required. During the repairs of the timber trestle in 2018, additional timber piles were observed to have severe deterioration. With approximately 40% of the piles requiring replacement it was determined that the existing timber trestle required replacement with a new bridge. The new bridge will be a single-span steel bridge, with pile supported concrete abutments. This new bridge is designed to accommodate park maintenance vehicles, which is consistent with the existing bridges current use, and conform to the Americans with Disabilities Act accessibility guidelines. The new steel bridge will be conducted primarily within the existing bridges footprint and will have less overwater coverage. This project will result in removal of 58 creosote treated piles and the replacement of 899 square-feet of solid overwater coverage with grated decking. Additional details of project components are described below. 1.1.1 Bridge Removal The existing bridge measures 105 feet 2 inches from the back of the north abutment to the back of the south abutment (see Appendix A, Sheet 3). The 12.5-foot-wide timber deck bridge will be removed primarily by a barge-mounted crane. Removed material will be placed either in an upland staging area or on a barge and transported to an appropriate facility for upland disposal. A total of 1,325 square feet of timber decking will be removed and disposed of at an upland facility. Of the 1,325-square- foot total, 1,198 square feet is over water. A total of eight creosote-treated timber pile caps and an existing utility water lines underneath the bridge will be removed. The existing water line will be replaced in kind. The extents of water line removal are shown on Sheet 5. 1.1.2 Piles Following the removal of the timber bridge superstructure, a total of 58 timber piles ranging from 12 inches to 16 inches in diameter will be removed using a vibratory hammer. Of the 58 piles to be removed, 48 piles are from the bridge structure and 10 are derelict piles located near each of the bridge abutments. The timber piles were Project Narrative WSP USA, 30900024.000 City of Renton Gene Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement January 2021 Renton, Washington Page 3 of 16 installed prior to 1981. Because of their age, piles may break during removal leaving pile stubs lodged in sediment. If pile stubs cannot be removed by vibratory methods, piles will be cut 1 foot below mudline using commercial divers and a saw. The timber superstructure, including timber decking and beams, will be removed by a barge- mounted crane. Piles will be disposed of at an approved upland facility. Six new 18-inch steel pipe piles will be installed at the north and south faces of the bridge to provide structure for the concrete abutments (see Appendix A, Sheet 7). The six new steel piles will be installed upland of the OHWM using a vibratory hammer. 1.1.3 Abutments The existing timber abutments will be removed and replaced with pile supported concrete abutments (see Appendix A, Sheet 7). Approximately 13.5 cubic yards of material will be excavated around the abutment area to accommodate placement of the new concrete abutments. Each of the concrete abutments will be cast-in-place concrete, cast in the dry, and measure 14 feet long by 4 feet wide and 5 feet deep (at the highest section). Existing shore protection will be temporarily removed to accommodate placement of the new concrete abutments, then placed back as required within the existing footprint. Abutment placement, material removal, and riprap placement/removal will occur shoreward of the OHWM (see Appendix A, Sheets 3, 7, and 8). 1.1.4 New Bridge Placement The new 12-foot-3-inch-wide bridge is composed of concrete walkways at the northern and southern portions of the bridge, with grated decking in between the concrete walkways. The new clear span bridge is composed of concrete-covered steel girders with fascia panels and new railing (see Appendix A, Sheet 7). The new bridge length is 105 feet 8 inches measured from the back of the north abutment to the back of the south abutment. A 60-square-foot overlook located on the west side of the bridge will provide views of Lake Washington (see Appendix A, Sheet 7). The new bridge measures 1,367 square feet total, and 1,189 square feet of this total is located over water. Of the 1,189 square feet, a total of 899 square feet will be grated galvanized steel decking. The grated decking will have a minimum of 50 percent openings. Table 2 summarizes project impacts. Project Narrative WSP USA, 30900024.000 City of Renton Gene Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement January 2021 Renton, Washington Page 4 of 16 Table 2. Project Impact Summary Component Existing Timber Trestle Bridge New Grated Decking Bridge with Overlook Total Bridge Footprint 1,366 sf 1,367 sf Grated Total Bridge Area 0 sf 899 sf Bridge Overwater Coverage (from OHW to OHW mark EL18.0) 1,193 sf 1,189 sf Number of Piles* 58 6 Grated Overwater Coverage (from OHW to OHW mark EL18.0) 0 sf 899 sf Solid Overwater Coverage (from OHW to OHW mark EL18.0) 1,193 sf 290 sf * Piles vary between 12-inch and 16-inch-diameter timber piles. 1.2 BASIS FOR EXEMPTION REQUEST The Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 90.58.140(2) requires that substantial developments obtain a permit prior to undertaking activity on lands subject to the Shoreline Management Act. RCW 90.58.030(3)(e) states that normal maintenance or repair of existing structures or developments—including damage by accident, fire, or elements—is not considered a substantial development for the purposes of the chapter. The proposed maintenance and repairs meet criteria for exemption from a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (SSDP) under RMC Section 4-9-190C.3. Furthermore, Washington Administrative Code 173-27-040(2)(b) states that normal maintenance or repair of existing structures or developments, including damage by accident, fire, or the elements, is exempt from the requirement to obtain an SSDP. "Normal maintenance" includes those usual acts to prevent a decline, lapse, or cessation from a lawfully established condition. "Normal repair" means to restore a development to a state comparable to its original condition, including but not limited to, its size, shape, configuration, location, and external appearance within a reasonable period after decay or partial destruction, except where the repair causes substantial adverse effects to the shoreline resource or environment. Replacement of a structure or development may be authorized as repair where such replacement is the common method of repair for the type of structure or development; the replacement structure or development is comparable to the original structure or development, including but not limited to, its size, shape, configuration, location, and external appearance; and the replacement does not cause substantial adverse effects to shoreline resources or environment. The proposed project is consistent with the conditions above because: • The project is intended to prevent a decline in the condition of a lawfully established structure. Project Narrative WSP USA, 30900024.000 City of Renton Gene Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement January 2021 Renton, Washington Page 5 of 16 • The project is intended to restore a development to a state comparable to its original condition, including but not limited to its size, shape, configuration, location, and external appearance. • The project will not result in or cause substantial adverse effects to shoreline resources or environment. • An abbreviated biological evaluation was prepared to comply with Section 7 of the ESA. No effects are anticipated to federally listed species or designated or proposed critical habitat, and the project will not result in adverse impacts to the environment. 1.3 SEPA EXEMPTION REQUEST In the list of activities exempted from SEPA threshold determinations, WAC 197-11- 800(3) – states that: Repair, remodeling and maintenance activities. States that the following activities shall be categorically exempt: The repair, remodeling, maintenance, or minor alteration of existing private or public structures, facilities or equipment, including utilities, recreation, and transportation facilities involving no material expansions or changes in use beyond that previously existing; except that, where undertaken wholly or in part on lands covered by water, only minor repair or replacement of structures may be exempt (examples include repair or replacement of piling, ramps, floats, or mooring buoys, or minor repair, alteration, or maintenance of docks). The following maintenance activities shall not be considered exempt under this subsection: (a) Dredging of over fifty cubic yards of material; (b) Reconstruction or maintenance of groins and similar shoreline protection structures; (c) Replacement of utility cables that must be buried under the surface of the bedlands; or (d) Repair/rebuilding of major dams, dikes, and reservoirs shall also not be considered exempt under this subsection. The project as described in Section 1.1 of this report is consistent with the requirements for the repair, remodeling and maintenance exemption. SEPA review and threshold determination is therefore not required for the proposed project. 1.4 DURATION OF ACTIVITIES The proposed action will be conducted during the WDFW and USACE-approved in- water work window for waters of Lake Washington each year between November 16 and December 31, and between July 16 and July 31. In-water construction is expected to start November 16, 2021. Project Narrative WSP USA, 30900024.000 City of Renton Gene Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement January 2021 Renton, Washington Page 6 of 16 1.5 ADDITIONAL SITE INFORMATION The purpose of this section is to provide the remaining Project Narrative information listed in the City of Renton’s Submittal Requirements – Shoreline Exemption document (City of Renton 2018). 1.5.1 Special Site Features The bridge spans a portion of Lake Washington close to the southeastern portion of the lake. A small marshy inlet is located east of the bridge. The inlet is an extension of Lake Washington. Two Category IV wetlands, Wetland A and Wetland B, are located north and south, respectively, of the inlet. Sources of hydrology for both wetlands are independent from the adjacent Lake Washington and likely come from direct precipitation, overland flow from adjacent uplands, and a seasonally high water table. Wetlands are described in detail in the wetland delineation report (WSP 2020) provided as Appendix C. 1.5.2 Soil Type and Drainage Conditions The Natural Resources Conservations Service Web Soil Survey mapper lists the soils to the immediate north and south of the bridge as Type UR – Urban land. A detailed geotechnical report for this project is included as Appendix D. The south abutment encountered more gravelly soil than the north abutment where hard clays were found in the bearing stratum below minus 6 feet. Topography slopes towards Lake Washington and drainage at the project site goes directly to the lake. No pollution generating surfaces are located within the project area. 1.5.3 Project Cost The approximate construction cost and fair market value of the proposed project is $1,200,000.00. 1.5.4 Fill and Excavation No new fill or permanent excavation is proposed below the OHWM of Lake Washington. Existing riprap will be temporarily removed during construction and replaced upon completion. The project will result in the permanent removal of 58 timber piles, 48 from the bridge superstructure and 10 derelict piles located to the west of the bridge. 1.5.5 Trees No trees will be removed as a result of the proposed project. Two trees will be planted within the shoreline 150 feet north of the project bridge as part of the RAP application. The planting plan is included as Appendix B. 1.5.6 Ordinary High Water Mark Work Distance/Shoreline The shoreline at the project area has been hardened with concrete riprap blocks. Riprap within the OHWM (both above and below the OHWM) will be temporarily removed to accommodate the placement of the new concrete abutments. Riprap will be placed back within its original footprint. Project Narrative WSP USA, 30900024.000 City of Renton Gene Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement January 2021 Renton, Washington Page 7 of 16 1.5.7 Project Height The replacement bridge will be approximately equal to the existing bridge in height. The proposed project does not exceed 35 feet above the average grade level threshold. 2.0 LAKE STUDY NARRATIVE The proposed maintenance and repairs meet criteria for exemption from an SSDP under the City’s Shoreline Master Program (SMP) provided that a lake study is prepared by the applicant for the City in accordance with RMC Section 4-8-120D.19 (Stream or Lake Study, Standard). The following section has been prepared to meet this requirement. 2.1 PROJECT AREA ENVIRONMENTAL CLASSIFICATION Lake Washington is a designated shoreline of statewide significance as defined in RMC 4-11. According to the City of Renton’s Sensitive Areas Maps, the Lake Washington shoreline along the project site within the Park is classified as “Shoreline – Urban Conservancy” (City of Renton 2020). 2.2 VEGETATIVE COVER A habitat survey of the site was conducted by two WSP environmental scientists on April 9, 2020, to assess vegetative cover and to perform the OHWM delineation. Photos were taken to document existing vegetative cover and are included in Appendix E. The Park spans 51.3 acres of land and water. The project area is located in the northeast portion of the Park and consists of a pile-supported timber trestle bridge that provides public access to that area of the Park. The Park, as developed, exists mostly in a natural state except for the project’s timber trestle bridge and dinghy moorage located near the south portion of the Park. A paved trail extends from the Park’s parking area and turnaround located near the southern boundary of the Park and extends north to the project bridge and then to a zigzag-shaped timber bridge and a timber pier. The parcel to the east is owned by BNSF Railway that runs north-south adjacent to the Park. The concrete footings that remain in place to the east of the bridge are remnants of the railway system. The pedestrian bridge spans a portion of the lake close to the shoreline, at a small inlet immediately east of the bridge. The inlet is an extension of the lake with two small wetlands extending north and south of the inlet. Vegetation along the shoreline within the project area consists of a mixture of native and ornamental plant and tree species. The overstory comprises western red cedar (Thuja plicata), western larch (Larix occidentalis), western flowering dogwood (Cornus nuttali), bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), red alder (Alnus rubra), Scouler’s willow (Salix scouleriana), and western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla). Western hemlock is located between the railroad and concrete footings to the east of the bridge. Western red cedars are located near the southeastern portion of the project site, and individual larch trees line the pedestrian trail. There are several Pacific willows located within the wetlands to the east of the bridge. Project Narrative WSP USA, 30900024.000 City of Renton Gene Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement January 2021 Renton, Washington Page 8 of 16 The understory consists of salal (Gaultheria shallon), black huckleberry (Vaccinium membranaceum), ocean spray (Holodiscus discolor), creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens), common horsetail (Equisetum arvense), reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), rushes (Juncaceae spp.), privet honeysuckle (Lonicera pileata), skunk cabbage (Lysichiton americanus), Douglas spirea (Spiraea douglasii) and cattails (Typhaceae spp.). The invasive species yellow iris (Iris pseudacorus), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), curly dock (Rumex crispus), and reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) were observed to the immediate southeast of the pedestrian bridge. 2.3 ECOLOGICAL FUNCTION Shoreline habitats have important ecological functions other than providing habitat for fish and wildlife. Shorelines are flooding areas where channel movement and other hydrological systems occur, as well as important aesthetic and recreational locations for the public. The shoreline along the project site is designated as “Urban Conservancy.” According to the City of Renton’s SMP, the objective of this designation is to “…protect, conserve, restore, and manage existing areas with ecological functions of open space, floodplain, and other sensitive lands where they exist in urban and developed settings, while allowing compatible uses.” These areas include shorelines with high scenic value that retain important ecological functions. The primary ecological functions provided by shoreline habitat within the project area include the following: • Nesting and foraging habitat for birds and small mammals • Input of terrestrial insects from overhanging vegetation • Input of organic matter from falling leaves or branches • Limited erosion control • Water temperature maintenance 2.4 FISH AND WILDLIFE This section addresses fish and wildlife species that may use Lake Washington near the project site. The Biological Evaluation prepared for this project (WSP 2020) documents the ESA-listed species and critical habitat known to occur, or with the potential to occur, within the project area. 2.4.1 Mammals One mammal, the North American beaver (Castor Canadensis), was observed south of the project site during the April 9, 2020, site visit. No other mammals or mammal sign were observed during the site visit. Given the level of development within the project vicinity, other mammals that are likely to occur within the project area may include small mammals, such as river otters, muskrats, opossums, moles, raccoons, voles, squirrels, mice, and rats. ESA-listed mammals known to occur within King County include gray wolf (Canius lupus) and North American Wolverine (Gulo gulo luscus) (USFWS 2020); however, there are no known occurrences of these species Project Narrative WSP USA, 30900024.000 City of Renton Gene Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement January 2021 Renton, Washington Page 9 of 16 within the project vicinity according to the WDFW’s Priority Habitat and Species list (WDFW 2020). 2.4.2 Birds A great blue heron (Ardea herodias) and dark-eyed juncos (Junco hyemalis) were observed during the April 9, 2020 site visit. The recently restored Bird Island, located approximately 0.4 mile to the southwest of the project site, provides habitat for birds and wildlife in the immediate surrounding area. The following bird species may occur within the project vicinity: American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), gulls (Larus spp.), and European starling (Sturnus vulgaris) (Amec Foster Wheeler and BergerABAM 2017). Other bird species common to the Puget Sound lowlands may nest or forage within the project vicinity. These include, but are not limited to, the common raven (Corvus corax), hermit thrush (Catharus guttatus), American goldfinch (Carduelis tristis), fox sparrow (Passerella iliaca), Northern flicker (Colaptes auratus), Cedar waxwing (Bombycilla cedrorum), evening grosbeak (Coccothraustes vespertinus), brown creeper (Certhia americana), and marsh wren (Cistothorus palustris) (Richter and Azous 1997). 2.4.3 Amphibians and Reptiles No amphibians were observed during the site visit; however, it is likely that amphibian species (Anurans) found in Lake Washington use the areas within the vicinity of the pedestrian bridge. One species of freshwater turtle, likely red eared slider turtle (Trachemys scripta elegans) was observed swimming near the bridge. The project site is located approximately 0.9 mile northeast of the mouth of the Cedar River. Amphibian and reptile studies conducted within the lower Cedar River identified the following species that could occur within the vicinity of the project site. The following amphibian species have been documented in the lower Cedar River (Richter and Anzous 1997). • Ensatina (salamander) (Ensatina eschscholtzii) • Long-toed salamander (Ambystoma macrodactylus) • Northwestern salamander (Ambystoma gracile) • Pacific tree frog (Pseudoacris regilla) • Red-legged frog (Rana aurora) • Western red-backed salamander (Plethodon vehiculum) The following reptile species have been documented in the lower Cedar River (Richter and Anzous 1997). • Common garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis) • Northern alligator lizard (Elgaria coerulea) • Northwestern garter snake (Thamnophis ordinoides) • Painted turtle (Chrysemys picta) • Rubber boa (Charina bottae) • Slider (Trachemys scripta) Project Narrative WSP USA, 30900024.000 City of Renton Gene Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement January 2021 Renton, Washington Page 10 of 16 • Western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis) • Western terrestrial garter snake (Thamnophis elegans) 2.4.4 Fish Lake Washington provides habitat for several fish species, including five salmonid species: • Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) • Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) • Bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) • Sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) • Coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) Non-anadromous forms of winter steelhead (rainbow trout) may also occur in Lake Washington. Resident rainbow trout spend their entire life in the Lake Washington system. The resident rainbow trout population has historically been sustained with hatchery plants because of unsuccessful reproduction in the watershed area. However, releases of hatchery rainbow trout have been all but eliminated. Non-anadromous coastal cutthroat trout occur in the Lake Washington system and are much more abundant than the anadromous form (Amec Foster Wheeler and BergerABAM 2017). Other fish species that may be present within the project area include sculpins (Cottus spp.), the northern pike minnow (Ptychocheilus oregonensis), peamouth (Mylocheilus caurinus), and longfin smelt (Spirinchus thaleichthys) (Weitkamp et al. 2000; Wydoski and Whitney 2003). 2.5 MEASURES TO PROTECT TREES AND VEGETATION No direct or indirect impacts to trees or vegetation within the project site will occur as a result of the proposed project; therefore, no measures to protect vegetation or trees have been incorporated into the work plan. The contractor will employ typical BMPs for working near trees and vegetation during all construction activities. 2.6 NO NET LOSS OF ECOLOGICAL FUNCTION The project area within Lake Washington is designated as an Urban Conservancy shoreline type and is protected by the SMP and the Shoreline Management Act. As shown in Table 1, the project will result in the removal of 58 creosote-treated piles from the project site, and the replaced bridge will result in a decrease in solid overwater coverage due to the use of grated decking. The grated decking on the new bridge will have a minimum of 50 percent openings. This minimal increase in bridge square footage combined with the replacement of timber decking with grated decking and the removal of 61 square feet of creosote- treated piles will result in a net benefit to the aquatic environment. The aquatic environment provides water quality and ecological functions for fish rearing, spawning, migration, and foraging. These ecological functions will be improved by the removal of 61 square feet of creosote-treated piles that will improve ecological functions. Removal of the timber deck bridge will improve sunlight penetration, Project Narrative WSP USA, 30900024.000 City of Renton Gene Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement January 2021 Renton, Washington Page 11 of 16 improving aquatic plant growth and food chain ecosystem functions. Therefore, construction of the proposed project will result in no net loss of shoreline ecological functions as described in RMC 4-3-090D2. 3.0 HABITAT DATA REPORT This section comprises the Habitat Data Report, in accordance with RMC 4-8-120C and is intended to document site-specific habitat and ecological function information. 3.1 HABITAT DIVERSITY Habitat diversity along the south Lake Washington shoreline adjacent to the trestle bridge project site consists of a mixture of native and ornamental plant and tree species. Nearshore shallow-water habitat is relatively flat, with a substrate consisting of organically-enriched, fine-grained sediments. Aquatic habitat transitions to terrestrial habitat via an armored shoreline consisting of riprap. The shoreline of Lake Washington has been altered from its natural condition and portions of the shoreline are hardened with riprap. Pile-supported structures, like bridges and docks, are common along the shoreline. 3.2 MIGRATION CORRIDORS There are five salmonid species that use Lake Washington as a migration corridor: • Chinook salmon • Coho salmon • Sockeye salmon • Steelhead and rainbow trout • Coastal cutthroat trout Two of the above species, Puget Sound Chinook salmon and Puget Sound steelhead trout, are listed as threatened under the ESA. Bull trout, an ESA-listed species, may be present in Lake Washington but are unlikely to use the project area as a migration corridor. Spawning and rearing activities have not been observed, and there are no known spawning populations in Lake Washington outside of the upper Cedar River (NOAA Fisheries and USFWS 2008). 3.3 SPECIES AND COVER TYPES The lack of riparian vegetation along the project area adjacent to the south Lake Washington shoreline and the highly developed shoreline bordering the project area to the north and south severely limit habitat availability and use by multiple plant and animal species. Typical plant and animal assemblages and associations that would be expected along the riparian corridor of an undeveloped or undisturbed lake shoreline are, for the most part, absent along the Lake Washington shoreline adjacent to the project site. A query of the Washington State Department of Natural Resources’ (DNR) Natural Heritage Program online database (http://www.dnr.wa.gov/ Project Narrative WSP USA, 30900024.000 City of Renton Gene Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement January 2021 Renton, Washington Page 12 of 16 ResearchScience/HowTo/ConservationRestoration/Pages/ amp_nh_data_order.aspx) did not identify any plant or terrestrial animal species of special concern in the vicinity of the project site. Critical wildlife species occurring at the project site include those salmonids identified in section 2.4.4 above. 3.4 IDENTIFICATION OF DISTURBED AREAS The south Lake Washington shoreline along the entire length of project area (with the exception of the DNR shoreline restoration site) is highly developed and disturbed. 3.5 EXISTING HABITAT VALUES AND FUNCTIONS The urbanization of Lake Washington has historically altered the shoreline in general and at the project site, according to the City of Seattle’s Shoreline Characterization Report (City of Seattle 2010). The Lake Washington shoreline adjacent to the project site has limited habitat value and is low functioning. The following habitat parameters are discussed in the sections below. • Temperature • Water quality • Vegetative conditions of the Lake banks and the riparian zone 3.5.1 Temperature King County data indicate surficial temperatures in Lake Washington near the project site may exceed the optimal salmon habitat temperature threshold, 16 degrees C, from July to October. Water temperatures in Lake Washington also exceed bull trout spawning and rearing criterion of 12 degrees C during the summer months (King County 2017). 3.5.2 Water Quality No site-specific water quality data were found for the project site; however, water quality monitoring has been conducted in south Lake Washington by Ecology. Washington State’s Water Quality Assessment (303[d] and 305[b] Report) (Ecology, 2016) identified exceedances of water quality standards for bacteria in Lake Washington waters off the City of Renton and extending along a portion of the shoreline where the proposed project will be constructed. 3.5.3 Vegetative Conditions Vegetation along the shoreline within the project area consists of a mixture of native and ornamental plant and tree species. The overstory comprises western red, western larch, western flowering dogwood, bigleaf maple, red alder, Scouler’s willow, and western hemlock. Western hemlock is located between the railroad and concrete footings to the east of the bridge. Western red cedars are located near the southeastern portion of the project site, and individual larch trees line the pedestrian trail. There are several Pacific willows located within the wetlands to the east of the bridge. Understory consists of salal, black huckleberry, ocean spray, creeping buttercup, common horsetail, rushes, privet honeysuckle, skunk cabbage, Douglas spirea, and cattails. The invasive species yellow iris, Himalayan blackberry, curly dock, and reed canarygrass were observed to the immediate southeast of the pedestrian bridge. Project Narrative WSP USA, 30900024.000 City of Renton Gene Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement January 2021 Renton, Washington Page 13 of 16 3.5.4 Mitigation for Temporary Impacts to Wetland Buffers The project will result in temporary impacts to wetland buffers during construction of the replacement bridge. After construction is completed, the project site will be restored to its original condition. The project will not result in any impacts, permanent or temporary, to the two Category IV wetlands (Wetland A and Wetland B). The project will only temporarily impact the 50 foot buffers extending from the limits of Wetland A and B. The full wetland delineation report is provided as Appendix C. The following project aspects will result in temporary impacts to wetland buffers. The sections below also address how those impacts will be mitigated by restoring the project site to its original condition upon project completion. Abutments The existing timber abutments will be removed and replaced with pile supported concrete abutments (see Appendix A, Sheet 7). Approximately 13.5 cubic yards of material will be excavated around the abutment area to accommodate placement of the new concrete abutments. Each of the concrete abutments will be cast-in-place concrete, cast in the dry, and measure 14 feet long by 4 feet wide and 5 feet deep (at the highest section). Existing shore protection will be temporarily removed to accommodate placement of the new concrete abutments, then placed back as required within the existing footprint. The Section 401 Water Quality Certification will likely require the monitoring of turbidity within adjacent waters of Lake Washington during placement of rip rap. Rip rap replacement and removal will not result in the removal of shoreline vegetation. Abutment replacement will not increase the footprint of the bridge. Water Lines Water lines will be temporarily re-routed over a corner of Wetland A and both wetland buffers adjacent to the project site. A 120 linear foot 8-inch waterline will be removed from underneath the existing bridge and will be re-routed above ground with a 215 linear foot 8-inch waterline to the east of the bridge around the inlet to supply water to the Park during construction (Appendix A, Sheets 5 and 6). The waterline will be elevated above ground and placed on temporary hand-placed thrust blocks. No excavation will be required in the wetlands or their associated buffers. Once construction is complete, the lines will be re-routed back to their original position underneath the bridge and the contractor will remove the thrust blocks. 3.5.5 Habitat Values and Functions A qualitative assessment of the south Lake Washington shoreline adjacent to the project site indicates that it provides low habitat value and function due primarily to the lack of riparian vegetation, surrounding land uses, and low habitat complexity. Project Narrative WSP USA, 30900024.000 City of Renton Gene Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement January 2021 Renton, Washington Page 14 of 16 3.6 HABITAT ALTERATIONS AND IMPACTS AND PROPOSED HABITAT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM No direct or indirect impacts to trees or vegetation within the project site will occur because of the proposed project; therefore, no measures to protect vegetation or trees have been incorporated into the work plan. Construction of the proposed project will result in no net loss of shoreline ecological functions. 3.6.1 Habitat Enhancement The project proposes the replacement of an existing timber-decked bridge with a bridge with grated decking to improve sunlight penetration, thus improving aquatic plant growth and food chain ecosystem functions. The project does not propose the removal of any trees and will result in no net loss of shoreline ecological functions as described above. Thus, no mitigation is proposed as a result of this project. 4.0 REFERENCES Amec Foster Wheeler and BergerABAM. 2017. Standard Lake Study Narrative and Habitat Data Report. Apron R Infrastructure Maintenance and Repair Project. Renton, Washington. Prepared for The Boeing Company. September 2017. City of Renton. 2020. Maps of Your Community. Accessed at http://rp.rentonwa.gov/HTML5Public/Index.HTML?viewer=CORMaps Accessed on 30 June 2020. City of Renton. 2018. Submittal Requirements – Shoreline Exemption. Department of Community and Economic Development. Planning Division. Revised March 2018. City of Seattle. 2010. Shoreline Characterization Report. January 2010. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (NOAA Fisheries and USFWS). 2008. Endangered Species Act –Section 7 Consultation Biological Opinion and Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat Consultation. The I-405 Tukwila to Renton Improvement Project (I-5 to SR 169 – Phase 2) Lower Cedar River, Cedar River Sixth Field HUC: 171100120106, 171100120302, King County, Washington. NOAA-Fisheries and USFWS, Lacey, Washington, https://pcts.nmfs.noaa.gov/pls/pctspub/sxn7.pcts_upload.download?p_file=F1 3441/200704219_405_trip_03-03-2008.pdf . Richter, K.O., and A.L. Azous. 1997. Amphibian distribution, abundance, and habitat use. In: Azous, A.L., and Horner, R.R. (eds.), Wetlands and Urbanization – Implications for the Future, Final Report. Puget Sound Wetlands and Stormwater Management Research Program, Washington State Department of Project Narrative WSP USA, 30900024.000 City of Renton Gene Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement January 2021 Renton, Washington Page 15 of 16 Ecology, Olympia, King County Water and Land Resources Division, Seattle, Washington, and University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2019. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Trust Resources List, Endangered Species Act Species List. http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. April 13, 2020. Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 2020. Priority Habitats and Species List—PHS on the Web. http://wdfw.wa.gov/mapping/phs/. Accessed April 14, 2020. Weitkamp, D.E., G.T. Ruggerone, L. Sacha, J. Howell, and B. Bachen. 2000. Factors Affecting Chinook Populations – Background Report. City of Seattle, Seattle, Washington. WSP. 2020. Biological Evaluation. Coulon Memorial Beach Park Trestle Bridge Replacement. Prepared for the City of Renton, Parks Planning and Natural Resources. Renton, Washington. July 2020. Wydoski, R.S., and R. Whitney. 2003. Inland Fishes of Washington. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland, and University of Washington Press, Seattle. Project Narrative WSP USA, 30900024.000 City of Renton Gene Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement January 2021 Renton, Washington Page 16 of 16 5.0 LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS Ecology Washington State Department of Ecology ESA Endangered Species Act LWD large woody debris MHHW mean higher high water MLLW mean lower low water MMPA Marine Mammal Protection Act NE no effect NOAA Fisheries National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries Service NWP Nationwide Permit OHWM ordinary high water mark PHS Priority Habitat and Species RCW Revised Code of Washington RMC Renton Municipal Code SMP Shoreline Management Program SSDP Shoreline Substantial Development Permit USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service WDFW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife APPENDIX A SHEETS 1-8 GENE COULON MEMORIAL BEACH PARK TRESTLE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CITY OF RENTON RENTON, WASHINGTON TACOMA SEATTLE EVERETT BELLINGHAM CANADA OREGON OLYMPIA PACIFIC OCEAN RENTON AREA MAP SCALE: NTS PROJECT LOCATION RENTON CITY COUNCIL: RANDY CORMAN RYAN McIRVIN VALERIE O'HALLORAN RUTH PÉREZ KIM-KHÁNH VĂN ED PRINCE ANGELINA BENEDETTI CITY OF RENTON: LESLIE BETLACH, PARKS PLANNING & NATURAL RESOURCES DIRECTOR ALAN J. WYATT, CAPITAL PROJECTS MANAGER MAYOR: ARMONDO PAVONE PROJECT LOCATION VICINITY MAP SCALE: NTS RENTON CITY OF Last Saved by: USGN675479 on: Jan 20, 2021 9:58 AM File: R:\USFDW100\Project\2020\30900024\000\CADD\Dwgs\Shoreline Exemption\01_SHT01.dwgCopyright © WSP USA Inc. All Rights Reserved.WSP USA Inc. Suite 300 Federal Way, WA 98003-2600 TEL: (206) 431-2300 FAX: (206) 431-2250 33301 9th Avenue South LAKE W A S H I N G T O N B L V D N GENE COULON MEMORIAL BEACH PARK PUBLIC DOCKS APPROXIMATE SHORELINE PARK TRAILS 405 HOUSERWAY NJONES AVE NE HIGH AVE NE N 20TH ST ACCESS R O A D ACCESS R O A D SOUTHPORTDR. NNE SUNSETBLVDCOVER SHEET GENE COULON MEMORIAL BEACH PARK SHORELINE EXEMPTIONTRESTLE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 405 405 BOAT LAUNCH SOUTHPORT DR NNE SUNSET BLVDLAKE W A S H I N G T O N B L V D N HOUSER WAY NN 20TH ST JONES AVE NE HIGH AVE NE IVARS SEAFOOD BAR GENE COULON MEMORIAL BEACH PARK PUBLIC DOCKS RAILROAD TRACKS, TYP ACCESS R O A D ACCESS R O A D ACCESS ROAD PROJECT LOCATION, SEE . CONTRACTOR LAYDOWN AREA LAKE WASHINGTON APPROXIMATE SHORELINE PARK TRAILS SITE ACCESS PLAN SCALE: 1 C-4 RENTON SAILING CLUB PARKING AREAS PARKING AREAS PARCEL 0523059010 PARCEL 0523059010 PARCEL 0523059003 PARCEL BOUNDARY, TYP (HALF SIZE)1" = 300' feet 3001501500 scale CALL 48 HOURS BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-424-5555 RENTON CITY OF Last Saved by: USGN675479 on: Aug 28, 2020 10:36 AM File: R:\USFDW100\Project\2020\30900024\000\CADD\Dwgs\Shoreline Exemption\01_SHT02.dwgCopyright © WSP USA Inc. All Rights Reserved.WSP USA Inc. Suite 300 Federal Way, WA 98003-2600 TEL: (206) 431-2300 FAX: (206) 431-2250 33301 9th Avenue South PLAN - SITE ACCESS GENE COULON MEMORIAL BEACH PARK SHORELINE EXEMPTIONTRESTLE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 105'-2" BACK TO BACK OF ABUTMENTS TIMBER PILE TO BE REMOVED, TYP SITE PLAN - EXISTING TIMBER TRESTLE TO BE REPLACED1 G-3 SCALE: 1" = 8' feet 16880 scale 8x14 TIMBER PILE CAP TO BE REMOVED, TYP W W OHP SHORE PROTECTION, TYP HANDRAIL TO BE REMOVED & REPLACED PEDESTRIAN ACP TRAIL CHAIN LINE FENCE 16'-0"±LAKE WASHINGTON WETLAND A WETLAND B BUFFER WETLAND A BUFFER PEDESTRIAN ACP TRAIL WETLAND B 12'-6"DERELICT TIMBER PILE TO BE REMOVED, TYP LEGEND JUNCTION BOX LIGHT POLE UTILITY POLE TREES WATER LINE ORDINARY HIGH WATER LINE OVERHEAD POWER LINE HANDRAIL CONC FOOTING, TYP LEGEND 1.TIMBER TRESTLE BRIDGE FOOT PRINT 1, 366 SQ FEET 2.TIMBER TRESTLE OVERWATER COVERAGE, 1,193 SQ FT. TIMBER ABUTMENT TO BE REMOVED & REPLACED, TYP 4x12 TIMBER DECKING TO BE REMOVED RENTON CITY OF Last Saved by: USGN675479 on: Aug 31, 2020 10:20 AM File: R:\USFDW100\Project\2020\30900024\000\CADD\Dwgs\Shoreline Exemption\01_SHT03.dwgCopyright © WSP USA Inc. All Rights Reserved.WSP USA Inc. Suite 300 Federal Way, WA 98003-2600 TEL: (206) 431-2300 FAX: (206) 431-2250 33301 9th Avenue South SITE PLAN - EXISTING TIMBER TRESTLE BRIDGE GENE COULON MEMORIAL BEACH PARK SHORELINE EXEMPTIONTRESTLE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT NOTES: PLAN - SUGGESTED PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC CONTROL SCALE: NTS RENTON CITY OF Last Saved by: ---- on: Jan 20, 2021 1:36 PM File: R:\USFDW100\Project\2020\30900024\000\CADD\Dwgs\Shoreline Exemption\01_SHT04.dwgCopyright © WSP USA Inc. All Rights Reserved.WSP USA Inc. Suite 300 Federal Way, WA 98003-2600 TEL: (206) 431-2300 FAX: (206) 431-2250 33301 9th Avenue South PEDESTRIAN CONTROL PLAN GENE COULON MEMORIAL BEACH PARK SHORELINE EXEMPTIONTRESTLE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT W W W W W W W EXIST 8" DI WL WWWTEMP 8" WLTESTING DETAIL TR W W W W W W W EXIST 8" DI WL WWWTEMP 8" WLTR FINAL CONNECTION DETAIL DETAIL - CONNECTION TO WATER MAIN WITH TAPPING TEE & VALVE1 -SCALE: NTS TAPPING TEE (MJxFL) TAPPING GATE VALVE (FLxMJ) TEMPORARY PLUG (MJ) W/ 2-INCH TAP & 2-INCH BLOW-OFF ASSEMBLY CONCRETE BLOCKING 8'±VERTICAL CROSS (MJxFL) FOR POLYPIGGING 1-BLIND FLANGE ON TOP WITH 2" TAP & 2" PLUG 1-BLING FLANGE ON BOTTOM 1-PLUG (MJ) W/ 2" TAP & 2" BLOW-OFF TEMPORARY BLOCK AFTER ALL CLEAINING BY POLYPIG, PRESSURE TESTING AND DISINFECTION, REMOVE TEMPORARY BLOCK & BLOW-OFF & CONNECTO TO VALVUE WITH DI SLEEVE (MJ) & DI SPOOLS NOTES: 1.TAPPING TEES SHALL BE MADE OF CAST IRON, DUCTILE IRON OR EPOXY COATED STEEL. BOLTS AND NUTS SHALL BE COR-TEN. ALL TEES AND VALVES SHALL BE WATER TESTED BEFORE TAP. 2.WET-TAPPING OF EXISTING CITY OF RENTON WATER MAINS WILL BE DONE BY SPEER TAP OR SUPERIOR TAPPING INC. 3.CONTRACTOR SHALL POTHOLE AND VERIFY THE HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL ALIGNMENT OF EXISTING LINE OR STUB AND SHALL START LAYING THE NEW LIND AT THE SAME HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL ALIGNMENT OF THE EXISTING STUB. X X X X X X X X X X X X X X OHW OHWOHWOHW W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W PLAN - TEMPORARY WATER UTILITY RELOCATION SCALE: 1"=2'-0" W W W X W OHP //////WWWWWWW W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W /////////////////////////////////////////////// TR TR TR TR W W W W W W NORTH RESTROOM LEGEND EXIST JUNCTION BOX EXIST LIGHT POLE EXIST ULITITY POLE EXIST TREES EXIST FENCE EXIST 8"Ø WATER MAIN DEMO EXIST WATER LINE TEMPORARY 8"Ø WATER LINE ORDINARY HIGH WATER LINE BEND W/ CONCRETE THRUST BLOCK EXIST 8"Ø CI 45° VERT BEND (MJ x MJ) TEMPORARY CAP/PLUG BEND FITTING GATE VALVE 42 LF TEMP 8" WL215 LF TEMP 8" WL TR SEE 1 - SEE CAP END OF EXIST 8" DI PIPE CAP END OF EXIST 8" DI PIPE EXIST PEDESTRIAN ACP TRAIL EXIST TIMBER TRESTLE TO BE REMOVED 120 LF 8" DI PIPE TO BE REMOVED 1 - EXIST PEDESTRIAN ACP TRAIL EXIST CONC FOOTING, TYP WETLAND A BUFFER WETLAND B BUFFER RENTON CITY OF Last Saved by: USGN675479 on: Jan 21, 2021 1:18 PM File: R:\USFDW100\Project\2020\30900024\000\CADD\Dwgs\Shoreline Exemption\01_SHT05.dwgCopyright © WSP USA Inc. All Rights Reserved.WSP USA Inc. Suite 300 Federal Way, WA 98003-2600 TEL: (206) 431-2300 FAX: (206) 431-2250 33301 9th Avenue South PLAN - TEMPORARY WATERLINE GENE COULON MEMORIAL BEACH PARK SHORELINE EXEMPTIONTRESTLE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT DETAIL - WATER MAIN CONNECTION1 -SCALE: NTS TESTING DETAIL FINAL CONNECTION DETAIL W W WEXIST 8" DI WL 10'± W W W 8" DI WL EXISTING TEE, CAP OR PLUG, DO NOT DISTURB BLOCKING VERTICAL CROSS (MJxFJ) FOR POLYPIGGING 1-BLIND FLANGE ON TOP WITH 2" TAP & 2" PLUG 1-BLIND FLANGE ON BOTTOM 1-PLUG (MJ) W/ 2" TAP & 2" BLOW-OFF TEMP BLOCKING W W W 8" DI WL W W W EXIST 8" DI WL AFTER TESTING, CLEANING BY POLYPIG AND DISNIFECTION, REMOVE TEMP BLOCKING & BLOW-OFF & CONNECTTO EXISTING WATER LING WITH SLEEVE (MJ) AND DI SPOOLS X X X X X X X X X X X X X X OHW OHWOHWOHW PLAN - TEMPORARY WATER UTILITY RELOCATION SCALE: 1"=2'-0" W W W X W OHP //////WWWWWWW W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W WTR TR TR TR W W W W W W NORTH RESTROOM TR EXIST PEDESTRIAN ACP TRAIL EXIST PEDESTRIAN ACP TRAIL EXIST CONC FOOTING, TYP LEGEND EXIST JUNCTION BOX EXIST LIGHT POLE EXIST ULITITY POLE EXIST TREES EXIST FENCE EXIST 8"Ø WATER MAIN REMOVE TEMPORARY WATER LINE 8" DI WATER LINE ORDINARY HIGH WATER LINE BEND W/ CONCRETE THRUST BLOCK EXIST 8"Ø CI 45° VERT BEND (MJ x MJ) TEMPORARY CAP/PLUG BEND FITTING GATE VALVE W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////TR CLOSE VALVE, INSTALL PLUG/CAP & CONC THRUST BLOCK COMPLETELY REMOVE ALL TEMP THRUST BLOCKS, TYP CLOSE VALVE, INSTALL PLUG/CAP & CONC THRUST BLOCK TR W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W 215 LF 8" DI WL BRIDGE GIRDER, TYP CONCRETE ABUTMENT, TYP FLEXIBLE EXPANSION JOINT AT ABUTMENT WATER MAIN CONNECTION, SEE 1 - FLEXIBLE EXPANSION JOINT AT ABUTMENT WATER MAIN CONNECTION, SEE 1 - WETLAND A BUFFER WETLAND B BUFFER RENTON CITY OF Last Saved by: USGN675479 on: Jan 20, 2021 9:34 AM File: R:\USFDW100\Project\2020\30900024\000\CADD\Dwgs\Shoreline Exemption\01_SHT06.dwgCopyright © WSP USA Inc. All Rights Reserved.WSP USA Inc. Suite 300 Federal Way, WA 98003-2600 TEL: (206) 431-2300 FAX: (206) 431-2250 33301 9th Avenue South PLAN - WATER UTLITIES GENE COULON MEMORIAL BEACH PARK SHORELINE EXEMPTIONTRESTLE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 105'-8" BACK TO BACK OF ABUTMENTS PLAN - REPLACEMENT BRIDGE1 -SCALE: ELEVATION - REPLACEMENT BRIDGE2 -SCALE: 1" = 5' feet 10550 scale 1" = 5' feet 10550 scale 101'-9"℄ ABUTMENT 2 ℄ ABUTMENT 1 2 - GRATED DECKING OVERLOOK EXIST LIGHT POLE TO REMAIN 10'-0"BETWEEN RAILINGACP PEDESTRIAN TRAIL, TYP RAILING, TYP 90'-1" GRATED DECKING WETLAND A BUFFER WETLAND B BUFFER EXIST SHORE PROTECTION12'-3"4'-4 1/2"8'-3 1/4"4'-4 1/2"4'-4 1/2"EL 24.3' OHW 18'± EXIST ML @ FACE OF BRIDGE ACP PATH OVERLOOK STEEL PIPE PILE, TYP REPLACE EXIST SHORE PROTECTION W/ IN PREVIOUS FOOTPRINT, TYP GIRDER W/ FACIA PANELS RAILING CONC OVER GIRDER CONC ABUTMENT, TYP 3'-0"ACP TRAIL, TYP EL 24.3' STEEL GIRDER W/CONC OVERLAY STEEL GIRDER LEGEND 1.TOTAL PROPOSED BRIDGE FOOTPRINT 1.367 SQ FT. 2.PROPOSED BRIDGE OVER WATER COVERAGE 1,189 SQ FT. 3.GRATED OVER WATER COVERAGE 899 SQ FT. 4.UPLAND REGARDING, PAVING & LANDSCAPING 600 SQ FT. EXIST PEDESTRIAN ACP TRAIL, TYP CONC ABUTMENT, TYP REPLACE EXIST SHORE PROTECTION W/IN EXIST FOOTPRINT RENTON CITY OF Last Saved by: USGN675479 on: Aug 28, 2020 10:42 AM File: R:\USFDW100\Project\2020\30900024\000\CADD\Dwgs\Shoreline Exemption\01_SHT07.dwgCopyright © WSP USA Inc. All Rights Reserved.WSP USA Inc. Suite 300 Federal Way, WA 98003-2600 TEL: (206) 431-2300 FAX: (206) 431-2250 33301 9th Avenue South BRIDGE PLAN & ELEVATION GENE COULON MEMORIAL BEACH PARK SHORELINE EXEMPTIONTRESTLE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT OHWOHWOHWOHW9 0 ° ℄ PILES WP2 PLAN1 -SCALE: ℄ BRIDGE ℄ PILES A -5'-4 1/2"5'-4 1/2"℄ ABUTMENT 2 ℄ ABUTMENT 1 5'-4 1/2"5'-4 1/2"90°PROPOSED BRIDGE OUTLINE EXIST RIP-RAPLAKE WASHINGTON STEEL PIPE PILE, TYP 1" = 5' feet 10550 scale 105'-8" BACK TO BACK OF ABUTMENT WP1 18"Ø PILE, TYP CONC BACKWALL 7'-0"7'-0" CONC GIRDER STOP, TYP ℄BEARING ℄BRIDGE & BEARING 5'-4 1/2"5'-4 1/2" SECTIONB -SCALE: SECTIONA -SCALE: ℄BEARING B - BLOWOUT FOR WL 1/2" = 1'-0" feet 4220 scale 1/2" = 1'-0" feet 4220 scale 18"Ø PILE OPTIONAL CJ ℄ PILE EL 23.7 CONC BACKWALL BRIDGE BEARING GROUT PAD CONC PILE CAP GRAVEL BACK FILL FOR WALLS 2'-2 1/2"1'-9"3'-8 1/2"2'-0"1'-11 1/2" OHW 18'± ACP PATH 1'-11 1/2" 3" BASE COURSE 5.0% RENTON CITY OF Last Saved by: USGN675479 on: Aug 28, 2020 10:37 AM File: R:\USFDW100\Project\2020\30900024\000\CADD\Dwgs\Shoreline Exemption\01_SHT08.dwgCopyright © WSP USA Inc. All Rights Reserved.WSP USA Inc. Suite 300 Federal Way, WA 98003-2600 TEL: (206) 431-2300 FAX: (206) 431-2250 33301 9th Avenue South FOUNDATION PLAN AND SECTIONS GENE COULON MEMORIAL BEACH PARK SHORELINE EXEMPTIONTRESTLE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT APPENDIX B RAP PLANTING PLAN VICINITY MAPSCALE: N.T.S.PROJECT LOCATIONLAKE WASHINGTONRAILROADTRACKS, TYPRENTON SAILING CLUBN 20TH S TNE SUNSET BLVDHIGH AVE NESOUTH P O R T D R N LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD NHOUSER WAY NACCESS ROADACCESS ROADJONES AVE NEWETLANDS405GENE COULONMEMORIAL BEACH PARKLast Saved by: USDW675573 on: Dec 24, 2020 11:50 AM File: R:\USFDW100\Project\2020\30900024\000\CADD\Dwgs\Tribal\02_SHT01.dwgCopyright © WSP USA Inc. All Rights Reserved.SHEET:OF 3 GENE COULON PARK TRESTLE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 1201 Lake Washington Blvd. N Renton, WA 98056 AT: CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON WATER BODY: LAKE WASHINGTON USACE REFERENCE: # NWS-2020-872 COUNTY: KING DATE: January 13, 2021CITY OF RENTON PARKS PLANNING AND NATURAL RESOURCES PROPOSED PROJECT: REPLACEMENT OF PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE OVER LAKE WASHINGTON IN RENTON, WA REFERENCE #: APPLICANT: CITY OF RENTON, PARKS DIVISION ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: (SEE APPLICATION) LAT = 47.5109777 N LONG = 122.20361111 W PARCEL # 052305-9010 1 VICINITY MAP SHEET 1 LAKE WASHINGTONPROPOSED BRIDGEAPPROX. 10' OFFSETAPPROX. 25' OFFSETEXIST. LOGS AT SHORELINEEXIST. ASPHALT PATH EDGEEXIST. CONIFER~156' TO EDGE OF PLANTING AREAEXIST. BEACH ACCESSEXIST. WETLANDAPPROX. OHWMCULTIVATE PLANT PITSOUTSIDE OF TREE ROOTS~30'~30'PLANTING PLANSCALE: 1" = 20'OHPXfeet4020200scaleLEGENDEXIST JUNCTION BOXEXIST LIGHT POLEEXIST TREESWETLAND BUFFERAPPROXIMATE ORDINARYHIGH WATER MARKEXIST OVERHEAD POWER LINEEXIST CHAIN LINK FENCEEXIST SHORELINE ARMORYPLANT SCHEDULETREESCODEQTYBOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZEREMARKSPS1PICEA SITCHENSISSITKA SPRUCE5 GAL.SL1SALIX LUCIDAPACIFIC WILLOW5 GAL.STRAIGHT SINGLE STEMSHRUBSCODEQTYBOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZEAC3ACER CIRCINATUMVINE MAPLE5 GAL.3 CANES (MIN.)GENERAL LANDSCAPE NOTES:1.PLANTING AND MAINTENANCE SHALL CONFORM TO THEIMPLEMENTATION GUIDE FOR RESTORATION AND PERMITTINGFOR LAKE WASHINGTON AND LAKE SAMMAMISH, July 25, 2019.2.COORDINATE PLANTING LOCATIONS AND INSTALLATION WITHTHE CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL PROJECTS MANAGER WITH PARKSPLANNING & NATURAL RESOURCES AND THE CITY URBANFORESTER.3.CALL UTILITY LOCATE SERVICE 72 HOURS PRIOR TO PLANTINGINSTALLATION. EXERCISE CARE TO PROTECT UNDERGROUNDUTILITIES AND AVOID DISTURBING OR DAMAGING THEM IFPRESENT.4.EXAMINE FINISH SURFACE, GRADES, TOPSOIL QUALITY ANDDEPTH AND NOTIFY THE CITY OF RENTON REPRESENTATIVE OFANY CONDITIONS WHICH MAY BE HARMFUL TO PLANT GROWTH.5.SEE SHEET-03 FOR PLANTING DETAIL.S.6.TOP DRESS PLANT PITS WITH 3-INCH LAYER OF BARK MULCH.KEEP MULCH 2-3 INCHES FROM STEMS OR TRUNKS.7.LOOSELY WRAP WILLOW AND VINE MAPLES WITH BEAVERDETERRENT AS SHOWN ON THE DETAILS.8.EXISTING ONSITE IRRIGATION SYSTEM WILL BE USED FOR PLANTESTABLISHMENT.Last Saved by: USDW675573 on: Jan 13, 2021 11:28 AM File: R:\USFDW100\Project\2020\30900024\000\CADD\Dwgs\Tribal\02-SHT02.dwgCopyright © WSP USA Inc. All Rights Reserved.SHEET:OF 3 AT: CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON WATER BODY: LAKE WASHINGTON USACE REFERENCE: # NWS-2020-872 COUNTY: KING DATE: January 13, 2021 PROPOSED PROJECT: REPLACEMENT OF PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE OVER LAKE WASHINGTON IN RENTON, WA REFERENCE #: APPLICANT: CITY OF RENTON, PARKS DIVISION ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: (SEE APPLICATION) LAT = 47.5109777 N LONG = 122.20361111 W PARCEL # 052305-9010 GENE COULON PARK TRESTLE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 1201 Lake Washington Blvd. N Renton, WA 98056 CITY OF RENTON PARKS PLANNING AND NATURAL RESOURCES 2 PLANTING PLAN SHEET 2 Last Saved by: USDW675573 on: Jan 12, 2021 12:58 PM File: R:\USFDW100\Project\2020\30900024\000\CADD\Dwgs\Tribal\02_SHT03.dwgCopyright © WSP USA Inc. All Rights Reserved.SHEET:OF 3 AT: CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON WATER BODY: LAKE WASHINGTON USACE REFERENCE: # NWS-2020-872 COUNTY: KING DATE: January 13, 2021 PROPOSED PROJECT: REPLACEMENT OF PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE OVER LAKE WASHINGTON IN RENTON, WA REFERENCE #: APPLICANT: CITY OF RENTON, PARKS DIVISION ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: (SEE APPLICATION) LAT = 47.5109777 N LONG = 122.20361111 W PARCEL # 052305-9010 GENE COULON PARK TRESTLE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 1201 Lake Washington Blvd. N Renton, WA 98056 CITY OF RENTON PARKS PLANNING AND NATURAL RESOURCES 3 PLANTING DETAILS SHEET 3DO NOT CUT LEADER,PRUNE DAMAGED WOODPRIOR TO PLANTINGCROWN 1" ABOVE GRADE3 INCHES WOOD CHIPMULCHFIRMLY TAMP SOIL AROUNDROOT BALL SO ROOT BALLDOES NOT SHIFTNOTE:1.SCARIFY BOTTOM AND SIDESOF HOLE PRIOR TO PLANTING.2.TREE SHALL BE PLANTED SUCHTHAT THE TRUNK FLARE ISVISIBLE AT THE TOP OF THEROOT BALL. NO MULCH SHALLCOME IN CONTACT WITH THETREE TRUNK.MATCH TOP OF ROOT FLARETO EXISTING GRADEFINISHED GRADENATIVE EVERGREEN TREE PLANTING DETAILNTSPREPARED OR NATIVETOPSOIL2 X THE SIZEOF ROOT BALL13 INCHES WOODCHIP MULCHPLACE ROOT BALL ONUNEXCAVATED OR TAMPEDSOILFIRMLY TAMP SOILAROUND ROOT BALLSO ROOT BALLDOES NOT SHIFTTOP OF ROOTBALL SHALL BE 1"ABOVE SURROUNDING GRADEFINISHED GRADEPREPARED ORNATIVE TOPSOILNOTE:1.SCARIFY BOTTOM AND SIDESOF HOLE PRIOR TO PLANTING.2.EACH TREE SHALL BE PLANTEDSUCH THAT THE TRUNK FLAREIS VISIBLE AT THE TOP OF THEROOT BALL. NO MULCH SHALLCOME IN CONTACT WITH THETREE TRUNK.SCARIFY SIDES OFPLANTING PIT2X THE SIZEOF ROOT BALLNATIVE DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING DETAIL1" = 1'-0"BEAVER DETERRENT - LOOSELYWRAP WITH 3 FOOT HIGH,GREEN PVC COATED WELDEDWIRE MESH (1"x3" OPENING)AND MAINTAIN 6" CLEARANCEON ALL SIDES OF PLANT2P-PA-COU-02SET TOP OF POTTING SOIL 1"ABOVE FINISHED GRADEREMOVE CONTAINER FROMROOT BALL, ROUGHENROOTBALL TO LOOSEN ROOTS3" BARK MULCH DEPTHFINISHED GRADEPREPARED OR NATIVETOPSOILNATIVE ORCOMPACTED SOILNOTE:1.SCARIFY BOTTOM AND SIDESOF HOLE PRIOR TO PLANTING.2X THE WIDTHOF CONTAINERNTSFERTILIZER TABLETSNATIVE SHRUB PLANTING DETAILBEAVER DETERRENT - LOOSELYWRAP WITH 3 FOOT HIGH,GREEN PVC COATED WELDEDWIRE MESH (1"x3" OPENING)AND MAINTAIN 6" CLEARANCEON ALL SIDES OF PLANT3 APPENDIX C WETLAND REPORT (WSP 2020) Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park Trestle Bridge Replacement Wetlands and Waterbodies Delineation and Assessment Report Submitted to City of Renton Renton, Washington September 2020 Submitted by WSP USA 33301 Ninth Street South, Suite 300 Federal Way, Washington 30900024 Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park Trestle Bridge Replacement WSP USA, 30900024.000 Wetland Delineation and Assessment September 2020 King County, Washington Page iii of iii GENE COULON MEMORIAL BEACH PARK TRESTLE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT WETLANDS AND WATERBODIES DELINEATION AND ASSESSMENT KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1 2.0 METHODS ..................................................................................................................... 1 2.1 Wetland Delineation .......................................................................................... 1 2.2 Ordinary High Water Mark Determination ....................................................... 3 3.0 SITE CHARACTERISTICS ............................................................................................ 3 3.1 Precipitation and Hydrology ............................................................................ 4 3.2 Mapped Soils ..................................................................................................... 5 3.3 Mapped Wetlands ............................................................................................. 5 3.4 Vegetation ......................................................................................................... 6 4.0 WETLAND DESCRIPTIONS .......................................................................................... 7 4.1 Wetland A .......................................................................................................... 7 4.2 Wetland B .......................................................................................................... 8 5.0 ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK DESCRIPTION ........................................................ 8 6.0 REGULATORY REVIEW ............................................................................................... 8 6.1 Wetlands ............................................................................................................ 8 6.2 Waterbodies ...................................................................................................... 9 6.3 State and Federal Regulations ........................................................................10 7.0 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................10 8.0 REFERENCES ..............................................................................................................10 9.0 LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................12 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Precipitation Data for 14 Days Prior to June 5, 2020 Site Visit ............................... 4 Table 2. Identified Wetlands .................................................................................................... 7 Table 3. Summary of Wetland Classification, Rating, and Buffer Width .............................. 9 Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park Trestle Bridge Replacement WSP USA, 30900024.000 Wetland Delineation and Assessment September 2020 King County, Washington Page iii of iii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Vicinity Map Figure 2. Tax Lots Figure 3. NRCS Soils Figure 4. Topography Figure 5. NWI Wetlands Figure 6. Delineation Figure 7. Photo Sheet Figure 8. Photo Sheet LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A. Figures Appendix B. Data Sheets Appendix C. Wetland Rating Forms Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park Trestle Bridge Replacement WSP USA, 30900024.000 Wetland Delineation and Assessment September 2020 King County, Washington Page 3 of 12 1.0 INTRODUCTION The City of Renton (City) Parks Planning and Natural Resources Division proposes maintenance repairs of an existing pedestrian bridge over Lake Washington within Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park (Park) in Renton, Washington. As part of this investigation, the City must determine the limits of wetlands and waterbodies within the study area. Therefore, the City contracted with WSP USA to determine the existence of jurisdictional wetlands and waterbodies as defined and regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology), the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), and the City. The study area is located within King County. The property is developed with the Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park that spans 51.3 acres of land and water. The study area within the property is located in the northeast portion of the Park and consists of a pile- supported timber trestle bridge that provides public access to the north portion of the park. The study area is within tax parcel 052305-9010. (Figure 1 is a vicinity map, and Figure 2 shows the tax lots associated with the project; all of the figures are included as Appendix A.) Brandon Stimac and Grace Roberts, WSP environmental scientists, used the routine on- site wetland delineation method described below for the delineation and assessment. Two wetlands were identified within the study area, both north and south of the current bridge, and the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) of Lake Washington. 2.0 METHODS 2.1 WETLAND DELINEATION Guidance for determining wetland boundaries came from the 2010 Regional Supplement to the USACE Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0) (the regional supplement) (USACE 2010). According to the supplement, wetlands are defined as … areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. The regional supplement uses three parameters in making wetland determinations: hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology.  Hydrophytic vegetation consists of plants that, because of morphological, physiological, and/or reproductive adaptations, have the ability to grow, effectively compete, reproduce, and/or persist in anaerobic soil conditions.  Hydric soils are soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions.  Wetland hydrology is present when an area is inundated or the water table is within 12 inches of the surface for at least 14 consecutive days of the growing season at a Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park Trestle Bridge Replacement WSP USA, 30900024.000 Wetland Delineation and Assessment September 2020 King County, Washington Page 3 of 12 minimum frequency of 5 years in 10. The growing season is defined as the portion of the year when soil temperature at 12 inches below the soil surface is greater than biologic zero (5 degrees C). Except in atypical situations, as defined in the regional supplement, evidence of a minimum of one positive wetland indicator from each of the three parameters (hydrology, vegetation, and soil) must be found in order to make a positive wetland determination. In addition to the regional supplement, the scientists used the following information to develop a preliminary indication of where potential wetlands and waterbodies might exist and aid on-site data collection.  King County GIS Database iMap  Hydric Soils List (U.S. Department of Agriculture [USDA] Natural Resources Conservation Service [NRCS]) State Soil Data Access (SDA) H ydric Soils List (USDA-NRCS 2020a)  National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest Region 9 (Reed 1988)  National Wetland Plant List (Lichvar et al. 2016)  Preliminary Monthly Climate Data: Seattle-Tacoma (National Weather Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [NOAA])  Supplement to List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest Region 9 (Reed 1993)  U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Online Mapper (USFWS 2020)  Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington—Revised (Hruby 2014) (2014 rating system)  Web Soil Survey (USDA-NRCS 2020b)  Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1 (USACE 1987) On June 5, 2020, the two WSP wetland scientists conducted a field investigation in the study area to determine if wetlands were present. The scientists used the methodology discussed in the regional supplement, as well as technical guidance and documentation issued by the USACE and Ecology, to observe any visible wetland conditions. In this case, the scientists used the routine on-site wetland delineation method. They walked the entire site looking for visible indicators of wetland conditions. Once they had identified the general location of a wetland area, the scientists took paired data points in areas that represented the conditions of the uplands and wetlands. In general, each plot was chosen in a uniform topographic position that was representative of a single plant community. Paired points were generally located approximately 5 to 10 feet apart to minimize the margin of error. The scientists inspected the soils at each data point to a depth of 16 inches (or more, depending on conditions) to determine the presence or absence of hydric soil characteristics and/or wetland hydrology. Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park Trestle Bridge Replacement WSP USA, 30900024.000 Wetland Delineation and Assessment September 2020 King County, Washington Page 3 of 12 During the site visit, the scientists identified two wetlands within the study area. The on-site wetlands were classified according to the USFWS classification system (Cowardin et al. 1979) and the hydrogeomorphic (HGM) classification system (Adamus 2001) based on observations made in the field. In addition, the scientists recorded hydrologic conditions, soils, and vegetation at eight data points; they used a GPS unit to record the data point locations and wetland boundaries and excavated a soil pit in each data point. The wetlands in the study area are discussed in greater detail in section 4.0. 2.2 ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK DETERMINATION Guidance for the OHWM determination came from Determining the Ordinary High Water Mark for Shoreline Management Act Compliance in Washington State (Ecology 2016). The OHWM is defined as follows. … that mark…found by examining the bed and banks of a body of water and ascertaining where the presence and action of waters are so common and usual, and so long continued in all ordinary years, as to mark upon the soil a character distinct from that of the abutting upland, in respect to vegetation as that condition exists on June 1, 1971, as it may naturally change thereafter, or as it may change thereafter in accordance with permits issued by a local government or Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology); Provided that in any area where the OHWM cannot be found, ….. the OHWM adjoining fresh water shall be the line of mean higher water.1 During the June 2020 site visit, the WSP scientists marked the OHWM of an inlet of Lake Washington that extends under the existing trestle bridge within the study area. The scientists used a combination of field indicators (e.g., vegetation distribution, sediment lines on vegetation or other fixed objects, scour lines, etc.) to determine the OHWM and marked it in the field with blue flagging. 3.0 SITE CHARACTERISTICS The property is developed with the Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park that spans 51.3 acres of land and water. The study area within the property is located in the northeast portion of the Park and consists of a pile-supported timber trestle bridge that provides public access to the north portion of the park. The project parcel is developed consistently with park features, including a pedestrian trail, riprap slope, and lawn area. The project’s timber trestle bridge and dinghy moorage are located near the southern portion of the project parcel (Figures 1 and 2). Topographically, the north and south sides of the study area slope down to the trestle bridge and toward Lake Washington (Figure 4). The majority of the study area contains gentle rolling topography with some steep slopes. Most of the study area consists of undeveloped forest area, and the current trestle bridge. Vegetation species noted throughout the study area include black huckleberry (Vaccinium 1 Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 90.58.030(2)(b) and Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 173-22- 030(6) Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park Trestle Bridge Replacement WSP USA, 30900024.000 Wetland Delineation and Assessment September 2020 King County, Washington Page 3 of 12 membranaceum), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens), Pacific dogwood (Cornus nuttallii), Alaskan yellow cedar (Callitropsis nootkantensis), big-leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), trailing blackberry (Rubus ursinus), Oregon wintergreen (Gaultheria shallon), reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), rushes (Juncaceae spp.), Douglas spirea (Spiraea douglasii), cattails (Typhaceae spp.), western skunk cabbage (Lysichiton americanus), yellow iris (Iris pseudacorus), lady fern (Athyrium felix-femina), western common horsetail (Equisetum arvense), red alder (Alnus rubra), black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera), western red cedar (Thuja plicata), western larch (Larix occidentalis), and Scouler’s willow (Salix scouleriana), among other plant species. Lake Washington extends under the existing trestle bridge to form a small inlet. Steep slopes are present to the east of the inlet, and down to it. 3.1 PRECIPITATION AND HYDROLOGY The typical growing season for King County (Seattle-Tacoma Station) is 257 days, starting on March 19 and ending on December 1. According to the USACE wetland delineation manual, flooding, ponding, or saturation in the upper 12 inches of the soil profile for a period of at least 14 consecutive days during the growing season is indicative of wetland hydrology. Table 1 displays precipitation data for the 14 days prior to and including the site visit on June 5, 2020. The information comes from the National Weather Service station in Seattle, Washington (Seattle Weather Forecast Office), approximately 12.48 miles north of the study area. Table 1. Precipitation Data for 14 Days Prior to June 5, 2020 Site Visit Date Rain (inches) Date Rain (inches) May 22 0.00 May 30 0.18 May 23 0.00 May 31 0.00 May 24 0.11 June 1 Trace May 25 Trace June 2 0.00 May 26 0.00 June 3 0.00 May 27 0.00 June 4 0.00 May 28 0.00 June 5 0.01 May 29 1.14 Total: 1.44 Source: NOAA 2020 In addition to the daily rainfall total for the 14 days prior to the June 2020 site visit, the WSP wetland scientists reviewed historic precipitation data available on the NOAA website (NOAA 2020). That data shows the following.  For the two weeks preceding and through the site visit on June 5, 2020, a total of 1.44 inches of precipitation was observed.  During the entire month of June 2020 through the June 5, 2020 site visit, 0.01 inch of precipitation was observed, 0.37 inch below the historical normal of 0.38 inch. Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park Trestle Bridge Replacement WSP USA, 30900024.000 Wetland Delineation and Assessment September 2020 King County, Washington Page 3 of 12  As of June 5, 2020, the observed precipitation for the year 2020 was 21.28 inches, 3.46 inches above the historical normal of 17.82 inches. The site conditions were slightly drier than the historical normal at the time of the site visit but were considered appropriate for the wetland delineation. During the site investigation, the scientists documented the presence or absence of field indicators for wetland hydrology in each of the eight soil pits excavated in the data points. The data recorded included the depth of inundation, depth to water table, and/or soil saturation, when found, as well as primary and secondary indicators of wetland hydrology, including redoximorphic features along living roots, high water table, and saturation. Hydrologic inputs for the study area likely come from direct precipitation, overland flow from adjacent uplands, and a seasonally high water table. During the site visit, the presence of surface water and a high water table were the primary hydrology indicators. This is typical of depressional wetlands in the Pacific Northwest that experience high amounts of precipitation in the late fall, winter, and spring seasons. 3.2 MAPPED SOILS Review of the USDA-NRCS Web Soil Survey identifies the following soil mapping unit within the study area (Figure 3). The descriptions are excerpted from the King County Area soil survey (Snyder 1973). Urban land (Ur) – Urban land is soil that has been modified by disturbance of the natural layers with additions of fill material several feet thick to accommodate large industrial housing installations. The erosion hazard is slight to moderate. No capability or woodland classification. According to the state Soil Data Access (SDA) Hydric Soil List (USDA-NRCS 2020a), this soil is not listed as hydric in King County Area. The locations of the soil type within the study area was obtained from the USDA-NRCS Web Soil Survey (USDA-NRCS 2020b), and the hydric classification came from the SDA list of hydric soils (USDA-NRCS 2020a). The WSP scientists examined each soil pit for hydric soil indicators and recorded its soil profile and characteristics (matrix color, redoximorphic features, texture, and other features). Observations of soil conditions during the site visit were generally consistent with the map units described and identified in the USDA-NRCS soil survey. 3.3 MAPPED WETLANDS Review of the NWI online mapper identifies Lake Washington, but does not indicate and wetland habitats mapped within the study area (Figure 5). Similarly, King County’s iMap does not show the presence of any wetlands within the study area. During the site visit, no wetland characteristics were identified outside of what was delineated in the field. Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park Trestle Bridge Replacement WSP USA, 30900024.000 Wetland Delineation and Assessment September 2020 King County, Washington Page 3 of 12 3.4 VEGETATION Hydrophytic vegetation consists of plant species that have adapted to growing in periodically inundated or saturated substrates. Five basic groups of vegetation are recognized based on how frequently they occur in wetlands (Reed 1988 and 1993 and USACE 2016).2 From the wettest to the driest plant communities, the categories are obligate wetland (OBL), facultative wetland (FACW), facultative (FAC), facultative upland (FACU), and obligate upland (UPL) plants. Hydrophytic vegetation is present when more than 50 percent of the dominant species has an indicator status of OBL, FACW, and/or FAC. The WSP wetland scientists documented the visual percent cover of the dominant plant community species for key sample sites. Using the eight data points as centers of reference, the scientists investigated sample plots of varying proportions for dominant species of trees, shrubs, herbs, and woody vines. The composition and orientation of the plant communities within each sample plot determined its size and shape. Each plot was set up so that its boundaries included a representative cross section of the plant community within it. Estimating the percent of aerial cover of each species within each stratum determined the dominance of plant species. The scientists listed species from each stratum in descending order of percent cover and used the USACE’s 50-20 technique to determine the predominance of hydrophytic vegetation. Using this method, when the most abundant plant species are ranked in descending order of abundance and totaled, any species individually or together that account for more than 50 percent of the total cover, plus any additional individual species comprising 20 percent or more of the total cover, represent the dominant species. If more than 50 percent of the dominant species included by these criteria are FAC or wetter, the vegetation community is considered hydrophytic. A prevalence index is used as another method of evaluating the presence or absence of hydrophytic vegetation based on the relative dominance of species within each indicator status. Using the prevalence index, vegetation percentages within each designation (OBL, FACW, FAC, FACU, and UPL) are added together and are given a different multiplier. Once calculated, the total in the multiplied column is divided by the original percentage total before multiplying. If the number given is less than or equal to 3.0, the vegetation community is considered hydrophytic. If the number is greater than 3.0, the vegetation community is not considered hydrophytic. The vegetation within the wetland areas includes Pacific dogwood (Cornus nuttallii, FAC), Alaskan yellow cedar (Callitropsis nootkantensis, FACU), bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum, FACU), trailing blackberry (Rubus ursinus, FACU), Oregon wintergreen (Gaultheria shallon, FACU), western skunk cabbage (Lysichiton americanus, OBL), yellow iris (Iris pseudacorus, OBL), lady fern (Athyrium cyclosorum, FAC), western common horsetail (Equisetum arvense, FAC), red alder (Alnus rubra, FAC), black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera, FAC), western red cedar (Thuja plicata, FAC), 2 Plant nomenclature in this report follows Reed (1988 and 1993) and the USACE 2016 National Wetland Plant List. Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park Trestle Bridge Replacement WSP USA, 30900024.000 Wetland Delineation and Assessment September 2020 King County, Washington Page 3 of 12 western larch (Larix occidentalis, FACU), and Scouler’s willow (Salix scouleriana, FAC), among other plant species. 4.0 WETLAND DESCRIPTIONS WSP’s investigation of hydrology, soils, and vegetation identified two wetland features within the study area (Wetlands A and B). Appendix B contains eight wetland determination forms that show the data collected during the site visit. The numbers assigned to the data sheets correspond to the data points, which were numbered sequentially DP1 to DP8. The wetlands were rated using the revised wetland rating form that Ecology developed in 2014 (Appendix C). Both Wetland A and Wetland B received a Category IV rating with a score of 14 points. Figure 6 is an overview of the locations of the delineated wetlands within the study area, overlaid on an aerial image of the study area. Figures 7 and 8 consists of site photos taken during the field investigation. Table 2 summarizes the two identified wetlands, and Figure 6 shows their locations. Table 2. Identified Wetlands Wetland Wetland Classification Area of Wetland Within Study Area (acres) Cowardina HGMb Wetland Ratingc Wetland A PFO Depressional IV 0.13 Wetland B PFO Depressional IV 0.02 Source: Wetland Rating System for Western WA 2014 Notes: a Cowardin et al. (1979) or NWI class based on vegetation: PEM = palustrine emergent, PFO = freshwater forested, shrub wetland. b HGM classification according to Hruby (2014). c Wetland rating according to Hruby (2014). 4.1 WETLAND A Wetland A (0.13 acre) is in the northern area of the study area, north of the Lake Washington inlet that extends under the existing trestle bridge. This wetland is located in the southern portion of tax parcel 052305-9010. The wetland is entirely within the study area. This forested wetland includes plant species such as red alder, Scouler’s willow, Pacific dogwood, yellow iris, trailing blackberry, big-leaf maple, and common horsetail. Hydrology is supported by overland flow from adjacent uplands and roads, direct precipitation, and a seasonally high water table. Indicators of hydrology within Wetland A include surface water (A1), high water table (A2), and saturation (A3). Soils within Wetland A consist entirely of a very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) muck to a depth of 14 inches. This soil profile meets the criteria for the 2 cm Muck (A10) problematic hydric soil indicator. These soils meet the definition of a hydric soil but do not exhibit any hydric soil indicators. Hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology is present on site, and the wetland is located on a concave surface near Lake Washington. Wetland A was rated under the slope HGM classification and received a Category IV rating with a score of 14. Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park Trestle Bridge Replacement WSP USA, 30900024.000 Wetland Delineation and Assessment September 2020 King County, Washington Page 3 of 12 4.2 WETLAND B Wetland B (0.02 acre) is in the southern area of the study area, south of the Lake Washington inlet that extends under the existing trestle bridge. This wetland is located in the southern portion of tax parcel 052305-9010. The wetland is entirely within the study area. This emergent, scrub-shrub, forested wetland includes plant species such as red alder, black cottonwood, Scouler’s willow, common horsetail, yellow iris, Pacific dogwood, western red cedar, and Oregon wintergreen. Hydrology is supported by overland flow from adjacent uplands and roads, direct precipitation, and a seasonally high water table. Indicators of hydrology within Wetland B include surface water (A1), high water table (A2), and saturation (A3). Soils within Wetland B consist entirely of a very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) muck to a depth of 14 inches. This soil profile meets the criteria for the 2 cm Muck (A10) problematic hydric soil indicator. These soils meet the definition of a hydric soil but do not exhibit any hydric soil indicators. Hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology is present on site, and the wetland is located on a concave surface near Lake Washington. Wetland B was rated under the slope HGM classification and received a Category IV rating with a score of 14. 5.0 ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK DESCRIPTION The WSP scientists used a combination of field indicators to determine the OHWM of a portion of the eastern shore of Lake Washington, which extends under the existing trestle bridge as a small inlet. The OHWM was delineated in the field to the north and south of the bridge. The OHWM of Lake Washington within the study area was determined on June 5, 2020 by observing sediment bars, scour line, bank erosion/channel scour, top of bank, relic floodplain surface, overbank deposits, and/or drainage patterns as shown by flattened vegetation. Reed canarygrass, Scouler’s willow, and cattails are located along the OHWM. Figure 6 shows the location of the GPS-recorded OHWM. 6.0 REGULATORY REVIEW This section is an overview of regulatory requirements as they pertain to wetlands, streams, and habitat conservation areas identified within the study area that are located within the jurisdiction of King County. The project will be subject to Renton Municipal Code (RMC) Chapter 4-3-050, Critical Areas Regulations. 6.1 WETLANDS RMC 4-3-050 establishes protection for wetlands within the City of Renton, including the establishment of protective buffers associated with wetlands, and requires that proponents obtain certain permits or approvals for projects containing wetlands and/or their buffers. The ordinance requires the use of Ecology’s revised wetland rating system to determine a wetland’s category and its score for habitat, water quality, and hydrologic functions. Per guidance found in the 2014 rating system, Wetland A received a Category IV rating and Wetland B received a Category IV. Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park Trestle Bridge Replacement WSP USA, 30900024.000 Wetland Delineation and Assessment September 2020 King County, Washington Page 3 of 12 RMC 4-3-050G establishes the required buffer width for a wetland, and the width is determined by comparing the wetland rating category and the intensity of land uses proposed on a development site. Table 4-3-050G2, Critical Area Buffers and Structure Setbacks from Buffers, identifies unpaved trails, low-intensity open space (hiking, bird- watching, preservation of natural resources, etc.) and utility corridors without a maintenance road and little or no vegetation management as low intensity land uses; all other land uses are identified as high-intensity land uses. RMC Table 4-3-050G2 establishes buffer requirements to protect habitat functions in wetlands based on the habitat scores the wetlands receive and the land use intensity proposed within the development area. Both Wetland A and Wetland B received a Category IV rating and a score of 3 for habitat functions. At both wetland locations, the bridge maintenance and repairs would be considered a high-intensity land use. Based on RMC Table 4-3-050G2, Wetland A and Wetland B require a 50-foot buffer, as shown in Table 5, which shows the classification, rating, habitat score, and buffer width. Table 3. Summary of Wetland Classification, Rating, and Buffer Width Wetland HGM Wetland Rating Habitat Score Buffer Width Wetland A Depressional IV 3 50 Wetland B Depressional IV 3 50 Source: Wetland Rating System for Western W ashington, 2014 6.2 WATERBODIES The study area is located within the City’s jurisdiction and therefore, is subject to the City’s shoreline master program regulations (RMC 4-3-090), which provides protective measures with the goal of no net loss of ecological functions and processes in all development and use. According to RMC 4-3-090B, the Renton Shoreline Master Program applies to shorelines of the state, which include shorelines of statewide significance. Lake Washington is identified as a shoreline of statewide significance in RMC 4-3-090B1. Waters of the state include lakes, rivers, ponds, streams, inland waters, underground waters, salt waters, and all other surface waters and watercourses within the jurisdiction of the state of Washington, as classified in WAC 222-16-031 or its successor. The Washington State Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) indicates that Lake Washington is Type S (shoreline of the state, as defined in Revised Code of Washington 90.58.030) (WDNR 2020). According to RMC 4-3-090B, the stream buffer extends outward on the horizontal plane from the OHWM. Based on RMC 4-3-050G, a 115-foot stream buffer is designated for Lake Washington, because it is a WDNR Type S water, and shoreline of statewide significance. Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park Trestle Bridge Replacement WSP USA, 30900024.000 Wetland Delineation and Assessment September 2020 King County, Washington Page 3 of 12 6.3 STATE AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS In addition to County ordinances, the USACE and Ecology regulate jurisdictional wetlands and streams at the federal and state levels under Sections 404 and 401 of the Clean Water Act, respectively. On-site wetlands and waterbodies are considered jurisdictional waters based on U.S. Environmental Protection Agency/USACE guidance. Any direct impacts to the wetlands and waterbodies will require notifying the USACE, Ecology, and the WDFW to obtain the appropriate approvals. 7.0 CONCLUSIONS Activities within the identified wetlands and waterbodies are subject to regulation by the City, the WDFW, Ecology, and the USACE. Any impacts within the regulated wetlands and waterbodies would require a critical areas permit under the Shoreline Master Program from the City, a Section 401 water quality certification through Ecology, and a Section 404 permit through the USACE. Additionally any impacts to regulated waters (i.e., streams) would require a Hydraulic Permit Approval from WDFW. Any mitigation that would be required to compensate for wetland impacts would be determined during the permitting process. It should be noted that the wetlands and waterbodies identified and classified in this report were determined using the most appropriate field techniques and best professional judgment of the scientists. The City, Ecology, the WDFW, and the USACE have the final authority in the determination of the boundaries, categories, and jurisdictional status of wetlands under their respective jurisdictions. Therefore, WSP recommends submitting this delineation and assessment report to these agencies for their concurrence before beginning any development or planning activities that would affect the wetlands and waterbodies within the study area. 8.0 REFERENCES Adamus, P.R. 2001. Guidebook for Hydrogeomorphic (HGM)-based Assessment of Oregon Wetland and Riparian Sites: Statewide Classification and Profiles. Oregon Division of State Lands, Salem, OR. Accessed June 16, 2020 at: http://www.oregon.gov/dsl/WW/Documents/hydro_guide_class.pdf. King County. 2020. GIS Database iMap. Accessed June 15, 2020 at: https://www.kingcounty.gov/services/gis/Maps/imap.aspx. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC. Hruby, Thomas. 2014. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update (Publication #14-06-029). Olympia, WA: Washington State Department of Ecology. Lichvar, R.W., D.L. Banks, W.N. Kirchner, and N.C. Melvin. 2016. The National Wetland Plant List: 2016 Wetland Ratings. Phytoneuron 2016-30: 1-17. Published 28 April 2016. ISSN 2153 733X. Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park Trestle Bridge Replacement WSP USA, 30900024.000 Wetland Delineation and Assessment September 2020 King County, Washington Page 3 of 12 Snyder, D.E., G.S. Gale, and R.F.Pringle. 1973. Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington. USDA Soil Conservation Service-National Cooperative Soil Survey. Washington, DC. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2020. Preliminary Monthly Climate Data: Seattle-Tacoma. National Weather Service Forecast Office: Seattle, Washington. Accessed June 16, 2020 at: http://w2.weather.gov/climate/index.php?wfo=sew. Reed, P.B., Jr. 1993. Supplement to List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest Region 9. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Ecology Research Center. St. Petersburg, FL. Reed, P.B., Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest Region 9. Biological Report 88 (26.9). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Ecology Research Center, St. Petersburg, FL. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region. (Version 2.0). ERDC/EL TR-10-03. Vicksburg, MS. Revised October 2016. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2020a. State Soil Data Access (SDA) Hydric Soils List – Washington. Accessed June 16, 2020 at: https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcseprd1316619.html#top. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2020b. Web Soil Survey. Accessed June 16, 2020 at: https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx . U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2020. National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Wetlands Mapper. Accessed February 16, 2020 at: https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/Mapper.html. Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park Trestle Bridge Replacement WSP USA, 30900024.000 Wetland Delineation and Assessment September 2020 King County, Washington Page 3 of 12 9.0 LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS RMC Renton Municipal Code City, the Renton (agency) DNR Washington State Department of Natural Resources Ecology Washington State Department of Ecology FAC facultative wetland FACU facultative upland wetland FACW facultative wetland HGM hydrogeomorphic NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service NWI National Wetlands Inventory OBL obligate wetland RCW Revised Code of Washington SDA Soil Data Access UPL obligate upland wetland USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service WAC Washington Administrative Code WDFW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife APPENDIX A FIGURES Figure 1: Vicinity Map Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement 2550 Lake Washington Blvd. Renton, WA 98056 Water Body: Lake Washington County: King June 2020 Sheet 1 of 8 Applicant: City of Renton, Parks Division Datum: OHWM=TBD MLLW= 0.0 Lat: 47.51097778 N Long: -122.20361111 W Adjacent Property Owners: (See Application) Parcel No. 052305-9010 Section 05 Township 23N Range 05E Coulon ParkTrestle Bridge Replacement I 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 10.125 Miles La k e W a s h i n g t o n B l v d §¨¦405 Figure 2: Taxlots Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement 2550 Lake Washington Blvd. Renton, WA 98056 Water Body: Lake Washington County: King June 2020 Sheet 2 of 8 Applicant: City of Renton, Parks Division Datum: OHWM=TBD MLLW= 0.0 Lat: 47.51097778 N Long: -122.20361111 W Adjacent Property Owners: (See Application) Parcel No. 052305-9010 Section 05 Township 23N Range 05E Coulon ParkTrestle Bridge Replacement I 0 440 880 1,320 1,760220 Feet Legend Work Area Subject Parcel Renton Parcels La k e W a s h i n g t o n B l v d §¨¦405 Figure 3: NRCS Soils Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement 2550 Lake Washington Blvd. Renton, WA 98056 Water Body: Lake Washington County: King June 2020 Sheet 3 of 8 Applicant: City of Renton, Parks Division Datum: OHWM=TBD MLLW= 0.0 Lat: 47.51097778 N Long: -122.20361111 W Adjacent Property Owners: (See Application) Parcel No. 052305-9010 Section 05 Township 23N Range 05E Coulon ParkTrestle Bridge Replacement I 0 440 880 1,320 1,760220 Feet Legend Work Area Subject Parcel NRCS Map Unit Name Alderwood and Kitsap soils, very steep Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Arents, Alderwood material, 0 to 6 percent slopes Indianola loamy sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes Indianola loamy sand, 5 to 15 percent slopes Puyallup fine sandy loam Shalcar muck Urban land 574340377 06564467466624 5 675944474 2 6863695 8 27 26 2 5 24 221 9 2 8 232921 373 53018 80 79 78 76 21206160555 4 3 6 33323 1 7739381934 23232322178079 78 7675737 2 67675652514 9363 6 37 3535242322 171717 1717 1717 1 7 17 1 7 171717 17171 7 1717 1717 1717 17 17 17 1717 17 17 171717 17 17 17 Figure 4: Topography Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement 2550 Lake Washington Blvd. Renton, WA 98056 Water Body: Lake Washington County: King June 2020 Sheet 4 of 8 Applicant: City of Renton, Parks Division Datum: OHWM=TBD MLLW= 0.0 Lat: 47.51097778 N Long: -122.20361111 W Adjacent Property Owners: (See Application) Parcel No. 052305-9010 Section 05 Township 23N Range 05E Coulon ParkTrestle Bridge Replacement I 0 40 80 120 16020 Feet Legend Work Area Contours La k e W a s h i n g t o n B l v d §¨¦405 L1UBHh R5UBH PUBH Figure 5: NWI Wetlands Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement 2550 Lake Washington Blvd. Renton, WA 98056 Water Body: Lake Washington County: King June 2020 Sheet 5 of 8 Applicant: City of Renton, Parks Division Datum: OHWM=TBD MLLW= 0.0 Lat: 47.51097778 N Long: -122.20361111 W Adjacent Property Owners: (See Application) Parcel No. 052305-9010 Section 05 Township 23N Range 05E Coulon ParkTrestle Bridge Replacement I 0 440 880 1,320 1,760220 Feet Legend Work Area Subject ParcelNWI Wetland Type Lake ^_ ^_ !( !(!( !( !( !(!(SP-7 SP-5 SP-6 SP-8 SP-3 SP-4 SP-2 Lake Wash ing ton B lvd N L a k e W a s h i n g t o n Figure 6: Delineation Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement 2550 Lake Washington Blvd. Renton, WA 98056 Water Body: Lake Washington County: King June 2020 Sheet 6 of 8 Applicant: City of Renton, Parks Division Datum: OHWM=TBD MLLW= 0.0 Lat: 47.51097778 N Long: -122.20361111 W Adjacent Property Owners: (See Application) Parcel No. 052305-9010 Section 05 Township 23N Range 05E Coulon ParkTrestle Bridge Replacement I 0 25 50 75 10012.5 Feet Legend !(Upland Sample Point !(Wetland Sample Point ^_Outlet OHWM Wetlands Wetland A Category IV Depressional PEM/PSS/PFO Wetland B Category IV Depressional PEM/PSS/PFO Figure 7: Photosheet Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement 2550 Lake Washington Blvd. Renton, WA 98056 Water Body: Lake Washington County: King June 2020 Sheet 7 of 8 Applicant: City of Renton, Parks Division Datum: OHWM=TBD MLLW= 0.0 Lat: 47.51097778 N Long: -122.20361111 W Adjacent Property Owners: (See Application) Parcel No. 052305-9010 Section 05 Township 23N Range 05E Coulon ParkTrestle Bridge Replacement Photo 1: Wetland A, typical vegetation of yellow iris and skunk cabbage. Photo 2: Wetland A, view is to the south. Photo 3: Wetland A Photo 4: Wetland A, typical vegetation of yellow iris and horsetail Photo 5: Sample Plot 2 at Wetland A Photo 6: Drainage from the north into Wetland A Figure 8: Photosheet Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement 2550 Lake Washington Blvd. Renton, WA 98056 Water Body: Lake Washington County: King June 2020 Sheet 8 of 8 Applicant: City of Renton, Parks Division Datum: OHWM=TBD MLLW= 0.0 Lat: 47.51097778 N Long: -122.20361111 W Adjacent Property Owners: (See Application) Parcel No. 052305-9010 Section 05 Township 23N Range 05E Coulon ParkTrestle Bridge Replacement Photo 7: Wetland B, view is to the north Photo 8: Wetland A drainage Photo 9: Wetland A drainage Photo 10: Wetland B, typical vegetation Photo 12: Wetland B, typical vegetation APPENDIX B DATA SHEETS US Army Corps of Engineers (WSDOT Adapted Form)Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 Project/Site:City/County:Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point: Investigator(s):Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):Slope (%): Subregion (LRR):Lat:Long:Datum: Soil Map Unit Name:NWI Classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Remarks: Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size:) 1. (A) 2. 3. (B) 4. = Total Cover (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:) 2. 3.OBL species x 1 = 4.FACW species x 2 = 5.FAC species x 3 = = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size:)UPL species x 5 = 1.Column Totals: (A) (B) 4.Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5.1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 6.2 -Dominance Test is >50% 7.3 -Prevalence Index is ≤3.0¹ 8.4 - 9. 10.5 -Wetland Non-Vascular Plants¹ 11.Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation¹ (Explain) = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:) 2. Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Gene Coulon Beach Memorial Park Renton 6/5/2020 City of Renton Parks Washington DP-1 Urban Land upland SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Hydric Soil Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Brandon Stimac and Grace Roberts S5 T23N R5E Hillslope Convex 5 A NAD83HARN VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute % Cover Dom. Sp.? Relative % Cover Indicator Status30ft x 30ft Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:4Cornus nuttallii Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:8Callitropsis nootkatensis 30 Y 46.2 FAC 15 Y 23.1 FACU Populus balsamifera 20 Y 30.8 FAC 50.0%65 15ft x 15ft 1.Alnus rubra 5 Y 25.0 FAC Prevalence Index worksheet: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Cornus nuttallii 15 Y 75.0 FACU Total % Cover of:Multiply by: 0 0 20 47 188 5ft x 5ft 0 0 0 75 225 0 Prevalence Index = B/A =3.385 413 2.Ilex aquifolium 1 N 3.1 FACU Ranunculus repens 5 N 15.6 FAC 122 3.Equisetum arvense 15 Y Rubus ursinus 1 N 3.1 FACU Taraxacum officinale 10 Y 31.3 FACU 46.9 FAC Morphological Adaptations¹ (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 32 ¹Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.15ft x 15ft Hedera helix 5 Y 100.0 FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? 5 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 70 1. Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers (WSDOT Adapted Form)Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) ¹Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.²Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils³: Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present? Remarks: Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Depth (inches): Water Table Present?Depth (inches): Saturation Present?Depth (inches):Wetland Hydrology Present? (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: SOIL DP-1 Depth (inches) Matrix Redox Features Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type¹Loc²Texture Remarks Sandy Loam 4-12 10YR 6/2 100 0-4 10YR 2/1 100 Sandy Loam ³Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 4 Gravel 12 HYDROLOGY 6 Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) 2 cm Muck (A10) Red Parent Material (TF2) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Other (Explain in Remarks) Surface Water (A1) High Water Table (A2) Saturation (A3) Water Marks (B1) Sediment Deposits (B2) Drift Deposits (B3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Iron Deposits (B5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except Salt Crust (B11) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Other (Explain in Remarks) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, Drainage Patterns (B10) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Geomorphic Position (D2) Shallow Aquitard (D3) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers (WSDOT Adapted Form)Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 Project/Site:City/County:Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point: Investigator(s):Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):Slope (%): Subregion (LRR):Lat:Long:Datum: Soil Map Unit Name:NWI Classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Remarks: Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size:) 1. (A) 2. 3. (B) 4. = Total Cover (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:) 2. 3.OBL species x 1 = 4.FACW species x 2 = 5.FAC species x 3 = = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size:)UPL species x 5 = 1.Column Totals: (A) (B) 4.Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5.1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 6.2 -Dominance Test is >50% 7.3 -Prevalence Index is ≤3.0¹ 8.4 - 9. 10.5 -Wetland Non-Vascular Plants¹ 11.Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation¹ (Explain) = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:) 2. Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park Renton 6/5/2020 City of Renton Parks WA DP-2 Urban Land upland SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Hydric Soil Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Brandon Stimac; Grace Roberts S5 T23N R5E depression Concave 0 A NAD83HARN VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute % Cover Dom. Sp.? Relative % Cover Indicator Status30ft x 30ft Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:3Callitropsis nootkatensis Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:7Cornus nuttallii 10 N 15.4 FACU 40 Y 61.5 FAC Acer macrophyllum 15 Y 23.1 FACU 42.9%65 15ft x 15ft 1.Rubus ursinus 10 Y 22.2 FACU Prevalence Index worksheet: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Gaultheria shallon 20 Y 44.4 FACU Total % Cover of:Multiply by: Cornus nuttallii 15 Y 33.3 FACU 50 50 45 70 280 5ft x 5ft 0 0 0 60 180 0 Prevalence Index = B/A =2.833 510 2.Iris pseudacorus 30 Y 42.9 OBL Lysichiton americanus 20 Y 28.6 OBL 180 3.Athyrium cyclosorum 10 N Equisetum arvense 10 N 14.3 FAC 14.3 FAC Morphological Adaptations¹ (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 70 ¹Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.15ft x 15ft Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 30 1. Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers (WSDOT Adapted Form)Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) ¹Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.²Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils³: Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present? Remarks: Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Depth (inches): Water Table Present?Depth (inches): Saturation Present?Depth (inches):Wetland Hydrology Present? (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: SOIL DP-2 Depth (inches) Matrix Redox Features Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type¹Loc²Texture Remarks Muck0-8 10YR 3/2 100 ³Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Gravel 8 These soils meet the definition of hydric soil but do not exhibit ay hydric soil indicators. Hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology is present on site, and the wetland is located on a concave surface near Lake Washington. HYDROLOGY 0.5 Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) 2 cm Muck (A10) Red Parent Material (TF2) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Other (Explain in Remarks) Surface Water (A1) High Water Table (A2) Saturation (A3) Water Marks (B1) Sediment Deposits (B2) Drift Deposits (B3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Iron Deposits (B5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except Salt Crust (B11) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Other (Explain in Remarks) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, Drainage Patterns (B10) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Geomorphic Position (D2) Shallow Aquitard (D3) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers (WSDOT Adapted Form)Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 Project/Site:City/County:Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point: Investigator(s):Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):Slope (%): Subregion (LRR):Lat:Long:Datum: Soil Map Unit Name:NWI Classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Remarks: Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size:) 1. (A) 2. 3. (B) 4. = Total Cover (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:) 2. 3.OBL species x 1 = 4.FACW species x 2 = 5.FAC species x 3 = = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size:)UPL species x 5 = 1.Column Totals: (A) (B) 4.Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5.1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 6.2 -Dominance Test is >50% 7.3 -Prevalence Index is ≤3.0¹ 8.4 - 9. 10.5 -Wetland Non-Vascular Plants¹ 11.Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation¹ (Explain) = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:) 2. Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park Renton 6/5/2020 City of Renton Parks WA DP-3 Urban Land upland SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Hydric Soil Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Brandon Stimac; Grace Roberts S5 T23N R5E hillslope concave 5 A NAD83HARN VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute % Cover Dom. Sp.? Relative % Cover Indicator Status30ft x 30ft Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:4Larix occidentalis Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:7Cornus nuttallii 10 Y 20.0 FACU 30 Y 60.0 FACU Alnus rubra 10 Y 20.0 FAC 57.1%50 15ft x 15ft 1.Gaultheria shallon 80 Y 80.0 FACU Prevalence Index worksheet: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Alnus rubra 20 Y 20.0 FAC Total % Cover of:Multiply by: 0 0 100 120 480 5ft x 5ft 0 0 0 65 195 0 Prevalence Index = B/A =3.649 675 2.Athyrium cyclosorum 15 Y 42.9 FAC Equisetum arvense 20 Y 57.1 FAC 185 3. Morphological Adaptations¹ (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 35 ¹Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.15ft x 15ft Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 65 1. Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers (WSDOT Adapted Form)Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) ¹Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.²Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils³: Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present? Remarks: Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Depth (inches): Water Table Present?Depth (inches): Saturation Present?Depth (inches):Wetland Hydrology Present? (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: SOIL DP-3 Depth (inches) Matrix Redox Features Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type¹Loc²Texture Remarks Sandy Loam0-6 10YR 4/3 100 ³Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Rock 6 HYDROLOGY Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) 2 cm Muck (A10) Red Parent Material (TF2) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Other (Explain in Remarks) Surface Water (A1) High Water Table (A2) Saturation (A3) Water Marks (B1) Sediment Deposits (B2) Drift Deposits (B3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Iron Deposits (B5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except Salt Crust (B11) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Other (Explain in Remarks) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, Drainage Patterns (B10) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Geomorphic Position (D2) Shallow Aquitard (D3) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers (WSDOT Adapted Form)Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 Project/Site:City/County:Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point: Investigator(s):Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):Slope (%): Subregion (LRR):Lat:Long:Datum: Soil Map Unit Name:NWI Classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Remarks: Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size:) 1. (A) 2. 3. (B) 4. = Total Cover (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:) 2. 3.OBL species x 1 = 4.FACW species x 2 = 5.FAC species x 3 = = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size:)UPL species x 5 = 1.Column Totals: (A) (B) 4.Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5.1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 6.2 -Dominance Test is >50% 7.3 -Prevalence Index is ≤3.0¹ 8.4 - 9. 10.5 -Wetland Non-Vascular Plants¹ 11.Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation¹ (Explain) = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:) 2. Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park Renton 6/5/2020 City of Renton Parks WA DP-4 Urban Land upland SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Hydric Soil Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Brandon Stimac; Grace Roberts S5 T23N R5E depression Concave 0 A NAD83HARN VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute % Cover Dom. Sp.? Relative % Cover Indicator Status30ft x 30ft Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:4Callitropsis nootkatensis Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:5 20 Y 40.0 FAC Alnus rubra 30 Y 60.0 FAC 80.0%50 15ft x 15ft 1.Salix scouleriana 40 Y 57.1 FAC Prevalence Index worksheet: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Cornus nuttallii 30 Y 42.9 FACU Total % Cover of:Multiply by: 50 50 70 30 120 5ft x 5ft 0 0 0 100 300 0 Prevalence Index = B/A =2.611 470 2.Athyrium cyclosorum 10 N 16.7 FAC Iris pseudacorus 50 Y 83.3 OBL 180 3. Morphological Adaptations¹ (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 60 ¹Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.15ft x 15ft Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 40 1. Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers (WSDOT Adapted Form)Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) ¹Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.²Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils³: Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present? Remarks: Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Depth (inches): Water Table Present?Depth (inches): Saturation Present?Depth (inches):Wetland Hydrology Present? (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: SOIL DP-4 Depth (inches) Matrix Redox Features Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type¹Loc²Texture Remarks Muck0-6 10YR 2/1 100 ³Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Cobbly Gravel 6 These soils meet the definition of hydric soil but do not exhibit ay hydric soil indicators. Hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology is present on site, and the wetland is located on a concave surface near Lake Washington. HYDROLOGY 1 Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) 2 cm Muck (A10) Red Parent Material (TF2) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Other (Explain in Remarks) Surface Water (A1) High Water Table (A2) Saturation (A3) Water Marks (B1) Sediment Deposits (B2) Drift Deposits (B3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Iron Deposits (B5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except Salt Crust (B11) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Other (Explain in Remarks) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, Drainage Patterns (B10) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Geomorphic Position (D2) Shallow Aquitard (D3) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers (WSDOT Adapted Form)Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 Project/Site:City/County:Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point: Investigator(s):Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):Slope (%): Subregion (LRR):Lat:Long:Datum: Soil Map Unit Name:NWI Classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Remarks: Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size:) 1. (A) 2. 3. (B) 4. = Total Cover (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:) 2. 3.OBL species x 1 = 4.FACW species x 2 = 5.FAC species x 3 = = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size:)UPL species x 5 = 1.Column Totals: (A) (B) 4.Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5.1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 6.2 -Dominance Test is >50% 7.3 -Prevalence Index is ≤3.0¹ 8.4 - 9. 10.5 -Wetland Non-Vascular Plants¹ 11.Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation¹ (Explain) = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:) 2. Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Gene Coulon Beach Memorial Park Renton 6/5/2020 City of Renton Parks WA DP-5 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Hydric Soil Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Brandon Stimac; Grace Roberts S5 T23N R5E hillslope convex 5 VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute % Cover Dom. Sp.? Relative % Cover Indicator Status30ft x 30ft Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:4Larix occidentalis Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:6Alnus rubra 30 Y 33.3 FAC 20 Y 22.2 FACU Thuja plicata 20 Y 22.2 FAC 66.7%90 15ft x 15ft 1.Gaultheria shallon 50 Y 71.4 FACU Prevalence Index worksheet: Populus balsamifera 20 Y 22.2 FAC Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Salix scouleriana 10 N 14.3 FAC Total % Cover of:Multiply by: Salix lasiandra 10 N 14.3 FACW 0 0 70 70 280 5ft x 5ft 0 0 20 110 330 10 Prevalence Index = B/A =3.316 630 2. Equisetum arvense 30 Y 100.0 FAC 190 3. Morphological Adaptations¹ (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 30 ¹Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.15ft x 15ft Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 70 1. Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers (WSDOT Adapted Form)Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) ¹Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.²Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils³: Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present? Remarks: Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Depth (inches): Water Table Present?Depth (inches): Saturation Present?Depth (inches):Wetland Hydrology Present? (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: SOIL DP-5 Depth (inches) Matrix Redox Features Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type¹Loc²Texture Remarks Sandy Loam0-6 10YR 4/4 100 ³Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Cobbly Rock 6 HYDROLOGY Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) 2 cm Muck (A10) Red Parent Material (TF2) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Other (Explain in Remarks) Surface Water (A1) High Water Table (A2) Saturation (A3) Water Marks (B1) Sediment Deposits (B2) Drift Deposits (B3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Iron Deposits (B5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except Salt Crust (B11) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Other (Explain in Remarks) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, Drainage Patterns (B10) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Geomorphic Position (D2) Shallow Aquitard (D3) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers (WSDOT Adapted Form)Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 Project/Site:City/County:Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point: Investigator(s):Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):Slope (%): Subregion (LRR):Lat:Long:Datum: Soil Map Unit Name:NWI Classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Remarks: Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size:) 1. (A) 2. 3. (B) 4. = Total Cover (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:) 2. 3.OBL species x 1 = 4.FACW species x 2 = 5.FAC species x 3 = = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size:)UPL species x 5 = 1.Column Totals: (A) (B) 4.Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5.1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 6.2 -Dominance Test is >50% 7.3 -Prevalence Index is ≤3.0¹ 8.4 - 9. 10.5 -Wetland Non-Vascular Plants¹ 11.Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation¹ (Explain) = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:) 2. Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Gene Coulon Beach Memorial Park Renton 6/5/2020 City of Renton Parks WA DP-6 Urban Land upland SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Hydric Soil Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Brandon Stimac; Grace Roberts S5 T23N R5E depression convex 0 A NAD83HARN VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute % Cover Dom. Sp.? Relative % Cover Indicator Status30ft x 30ft Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:7Larix occidentalis Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:9Alnus rubra 30 Y 33.3 FAC 20 Y 22.2 FACU Thuja plicata 20 Y 22.2 FAC 77.8%90 15ft x 15ft 1.Salix lasiandra 30 Y 60.0 FACW Prevalence Index worksheet: Populus balsamifera 20 Y 22.2 FAC Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Salix scouleriana 10 Y 20.0 FAC Total % Cover of:Multiply by: Gaultheria shallon 10 Y 20.0 FACU 60 60 50 30 120 5ft x 5ft 0 0 60 100 300 30 Prevalence Index = B/A =2.455 540 2.Iris pseudacorus 60 Y 75.0 OBL Equisetum arvense 20 Y 25.0 FAC 220 3. Morphological Adaptations¹ (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 80 ¹Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.15ft x 15ft Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 20 1. Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers (WSDOT Adapted Form)Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) ¹Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.²Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils³: Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present? Remarks: Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Depth (inches): Water Table Present?Depth (inches): Saturation Present?Depth (inches):Wetland Hydrology Present? (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: SOIL DP-6 Depth (inches) Matrix Redox Features Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type¹Loc²Texture Remarks Muck0-6 10YR 2/1 100 ³Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Rock 6 These soils meet the definition of hydric soil but do not exhibit ay hydric soil indicators. Hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology is present on site, and the wetland is located on a concave surface near Lake Washington. HYDROLOGY Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) 2 cm Muck (A10) Red Parent Material (TF2) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Other (Explain in Remarks) Surface Water (A1) High Water Table (A2) Saturation (A3) Water Marks (B1) Sediment Deposits (B2) Drift Deposits (B3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Iron Deposits (B5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except Salt Crust (B11) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Other (Explain in Remarks) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, Drainage Patterns (B10) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Geomorphic Position (D2) Shallow Aquitard (D3) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers (WSDOT Adapted Form)Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 Project/Site:City/County:Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point: Investigator(s):Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):Slope (%): Subregion (LRR):Lat:Long:Datum: Soil Map Unit Name:NWI Classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Remarks: Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size:) 1. (A) 2. 3. (B) 4. = Total Cover (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:) 2. 3.OBL species x 1 = 4.FACW species x 2 = 5.FAC species x 3 = = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size:)UPL species x 5 = 1.Column Totals: (A) (B) 4.Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5.1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 6.2 -Dominance Test is >50% 7.3 -Prevalence Index is ≤3.0¹ 8.4 - 9. 10.5 -Wetland Non-Vascular Plants¹ 11.Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation¹ (Explain) = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:) 2. Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park Renton 6/5/2020 City of Renton Parks WA DP-7 Urban Land upland SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Hydric Soil Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Brandon Stimac; Grace Roberts S5 T23N R5E hillslope convex 5 Hillslope NAD83HARN VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute % Cover Dom. Sp.? Relative % Cover Indicator Status30ft x 30ft Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:7Populus balsamifera Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:10Salix lasiandra 15 Y 25.0 FACW 25 Y 41.7 FAC Thuja plicata 20 Y 33.3 FAC 70.0%60 15ft x 15ft 1.Larix occidentalis 10 Y 18.2 FACU Prevalence Index worksheet: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Salix lasiandra 20 Y 36.4 FACW Total % Cover of:Multiply by: Salix scouleriana 10 Y 18.2 FAC 0 0 55 40 160 5ft x 5ft 0 0 70 Acer macrophyllum 5 N 9.1 FACU 80 240 Cornus nuttallii 10 Y 18.2 FACU 35 Prevalence Index = B/A =3.032 470 2.Geranium robertianum 5 N 12.5 FACU Ilex aquifolium 10 Y 25.0 FACU 155 3.Equisetum arvense 15 Y Ranunculus repens 10 Y 25.0 FAC 37.5 FAC Morphological Adaptations¹ (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 40 ¹Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.15ft x 15ft Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 60 1. Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers (WSDOT Adapted Form)Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) ¹Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.²Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils³: Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present? Remarks: Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Depth (inches): Water Table Present?Depth (inches): Saturation Present?Depth (inches):Wetland Hydrology Present? (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: SOIL DP-7 Depth (inches) Matrix Redox Features Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type¹Loc²Texture Remarks 0-6 10YR 4/4 100 ³Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Rock 6 HYDROLOGY Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) 2 cm Muck (A10) Red Parent Material (TF2) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Other (Explain in Remarks) Surface Water (A1) High Water Table (A2) Saturation (A3) Water Marks (B1) Sediment Deposits (B2) Drift Deposits (B3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Iron Deposits (B5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except Salt Crust (B11) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Other (Explain in Remarks) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, Drainage Patterns (B10) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Geomorphic Position (D2) Shallow Aquitard (D3) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers (WSDOT Adapted Form)Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 Project/Site:City/County:Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point: Investigator(s):Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):Slope (%): Subregion (LRR):Lat:Long:Datum: Soil Map Unit Name:NWI Classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Remarks: Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size:) 1. (A) 2. 3. (B) 4. = Total Cover (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:) 2. 3.OBL species x 1 = 4.FACW species x 2 = 5.FAC species x 3 = = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size:)UPL species x 5 = 1.Column Totals: (A) (B) 4.Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5.1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 6.2 -Dominance Test is >50% 7.3 -Prevalence Index is ≤3.0¹ 8.4 - 9. 10.5 -Wetland Non-Vascular Plants¹ 11.Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation¹ (Explain) = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:) 2. Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Gene Coulon Beach Memorial Park Renton 6/5/2020 City of Renton Parks WA DP-8 Urban Land upland SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Hydric Soil Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Brandon Stimac; Grace Roberts S5 T23N R5E depression concave 0 A NAD83HARN VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. Absolute % Cover Dom. Sp.? Relative % Cover Indicator Status30ft x 30ft Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:6Populus balsamifera Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:7Thuja plicata 15 Y 25.0 FAC 25 Y 41.7 FAC Salix lasiandra 20 Y 33.3 FACW 85.7%60 15ft x 15ft 1.Salix scouleriana 20 Y 44.4 FAC Prevalence Index worksheet: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Cornus nuttallii 10 Y 22.2 FACU Total % Cover of:Multiply by: Salix lasiandra 15 Y 33.3 FACW 5 5 45 10 40 5ft x 5ft 0 0 70 140 420 35 Prevalence Index = B/A =2.816 535 2.Iris pseudacorus 5 N 5.9 OBL Equisetum arvense 70 Y 82.4 FAC 190 3.Ranunculus repens 10 N 11.8 FAC Morphological Adaptations¹ (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 85 ¹Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.15ft x 15ft Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 15 1. Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers (WSDOT Adapted Form)Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) ¹Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.²Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils³: Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present? Remarks: Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Depth (inches): Water Table Present?Depth (inches): Saturation Present?Depth (inches):Wetland Hydrology Present? (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: SOIL DP-8 Depth (inches) Matrix Redox Features Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type¹Loc²Texture Remarks 0-8 10YR 2/1 100 ³Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Rocks 8 These soils meet the definition of hydric soil but do not exhibit ay hydric soil indicators. Hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology is present on site, and the wetland is located on a concave surface near Lake Washington. HYDROLOGY 1 Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) 2 cm Muck (A10) Red Parent Material (TF2) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Other (Explain in Remarks) Surface Water (A1) High Water Table (A2) Saturation (A3) Water Marks (B1) Sediment Deposits (B2) Drift Deposits (B3) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Iron Deposits (B5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except Salt Crust (B11) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Other (Explain in Remarks) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, Drainage Patterns (B10) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Geomorphic Position (D2) Shallow Aquitard (D3) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No APPENDIX C WETLAND RATING FORMS Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 1 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 Score for each function based on three ratings (order of ratings is not important) 9 = H,H,H 8 = H,H,M 7 = H,H,L 7 = H,M,M 6 = H,M,L 6 = M,M,M 5 = H,L,L 5 = M,M,L 4 = M,L,L 3 = L,L,L RATING SUMMARY – Western Washington Name of wetland (or ID #): _________________________________ Date of site visit: _____ Rated by____________________________ Trained by Ecology?__ Yes ___No Date of training______ HGM Class used for rating_________________ Wetland has multiple HGM classes?___Y ____N NOTE: Form is not complete without the figures requested (figures can be combined). Source of base aerial photo/map ______________________________________ OVERALL WETLAND CATEGORY ____ (based on functions___ or special characteristics___) 1. Category of wetland based on FUNCTIONS _______Category I – Total score = 23 - 27 _______Category II – Total score = 20 - 22 _______Category III – Total score = 16 - 19 _______Category IV – Total score = 9 - 15 FUNCTION Improving Water Quality Hydrologic Habitat Circle the appropriate ratings Site Potential H M L H M L H M L Landscape Potential H M L H M L H M L Value H M L H M L H M L TOTAL Score Based on Ratings 2. Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland CHARACTERISTIC CATEGORY Estuarine I II Wetland of High Conservation Value I Bog I Mature Forest I Old Growth Forest I Coastal Lagoon I II Interdunal I II III IV None of the above Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 2 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 Maps and figures required to answer questions correctly for Western Washington Depressional Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes D 1.3, H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods D 1.4, H 1.2 Location of outlet (can be added to map of hydroperiods) D 1.1, D 4.1 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) D 2.2, D 5.2 Map of the contributing basin D 4.3, D 5.3 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) D 3.1, D 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) D 3.3 Riverine Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods H 1.2 Ponded depressions R 1.1 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) R 2.4 Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants R 1.2, R 4.2 Width of unit vs. width of stream (can be added to another figure) R 4.1 Map of the contributing basin R 2.2, R 2.3, R 5.2 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) R 3.1 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) R 3.2, R 3.3 Lake Fringe Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes L 1.1, L 4.1, H 1.1, H 1.4 Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants L 1.2 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) L 2.2 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) L 3.1, L 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) L 3.3 Slope Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods H 1.2 Plant cover of dense trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants S 1.3 Plant cover of dense, rigid trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants (can be added to figure above) S 4.1 Boundary of 150 ft buffer (can be added to another figure) S 2.1, S 5.1 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) S 3.1, S 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) S 3.3 2 2 2 2 2 1 3 3 Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 3 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 HGM Classification of Wetlands in Western Washington 1.Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides except during floods? NO – go to 2 YES – the wetland class is Tidal Fringe – go to 1.1 1.1 Is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? NO – Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) YES – Freshwater Tidal Fringe If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is an Estuarine wetland and is not scored. This method cannot be used to score functions for estuarine wetlands. 2.The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is the only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface water runoff are NOT sources of water to the unit. NO – go to 3 YES – The wetland class is Flats If your wetland can be classified as a Flats wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands. 3.Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? ___The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any plants on the surface at any time of the year) at least 20 ac (8 ha) in size; ___At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m). NO – go to 4 YES – The wetland class is Lake Fringe (Lacustrine Fringe) 4.Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? ____The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual), ____The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks, ____The water leaves the wetland without being impounded. NO – go to 5 YES – The wetland class is Slope NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than 1 ft deep). 5.Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? ____The unit is in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river, ____The overbank flooding occurs at least once every 2 years. For questions 1-7, the criteria described must apply to the entire unit being rated. If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply, and go to Question 8. Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 4 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 NO – go to 6 YES – The wetland class is Riverine NOTE: The Riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding 6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time during the year? This means that any outlet, if present, is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO – go to 7 YES – The wetland class is Depressional 7.Is the entire wetland unit located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding? The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. NO – go to 8 YES – The wetland class is Depressional 8.Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a Depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO BACK AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within the wetland unit being scored. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the HGM class listed in column 2 is less than 10% of the unit; classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area. HGM classes within the wetland unit being rated HGM class to use in rating Slope + Riverine Riverine Slope + Depressional Depressional Slope + Lake Fringe Lake Fringe Depressional + Riverine along stream within boundary of depression Depressional Depressional + Lake Fringe Depressional Riverine + Lake Fringe Riverine Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater wetland Treat as ESTUARINE If you are still unable to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or if you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 5 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 DEPRESSIONAL AND FLATS WETLANDS Water Quality Functions - Indicators that the site functions to improve water quality D 1.0. Does the site have the potential to improve water quality? D 1.1. Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland: Wetland is a depression or flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key) with no surface water leaving it (no outlet). points = 3 Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet. points = 2 Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet that is permanently flowing points = 1 Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch. points = 1 D 1.2. The soil 2 in below the surface (or duff layer) is true clay or true organic (use NRCS definitions).Yes = 4 No = 0 D 1.3. Characteristics and distribution of persistent plants (Emergent, Scrub-shrub, and/or Forested Cowardin classes): Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, plants > 95% of area points = 5 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, plants > ½ of area points = 3 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants > 1/10 of area points = 1 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants <1/10 of area points = 0 D 1.4. Characteristics of seasonal ponding or inundation : This is the area that is ponded for at least 2 months. See description in manual. Area seasonally ponded is > ½ total area of wetland points = 4 Area seasonally ponded is > ¼ total area of wetland points = 2 Area seasonally ponded is < ¼ total area of wetland points = 0 Total for D 1 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Site Potential If score is: 12-16 = H 6-11 = M 0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page D 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the water quality function of the site? D 2.1. Does the wetland unit receive stormwater discharges? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 2.2. Is > 10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate pollutants? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 2.3. Are there septic systems within 250 ft of the wetland? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 2.4. Are there other sources of pollutants coming into the wetland that are not listed in questions D 2.1 -D 2.3? Source_______________ Yes = 1 No = 0 Total for D 2 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 3 or 4 = H 1 or 2 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page D 3.0. Is the water quality improvement provided by the site valuable to society? D 3.1. Does the wetland discharge directly (i.e., within 1 mi) to a stream, river, lake, or marine water that is on the 303(d) list? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 3.2. Is the wetland in a basin or sub-basin where an aquatic resource is on the 303(d) list? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 3.3. Has the site been identified in a watershed or local plan as important for maintaining water quality (answer YES if there is a TMDL for the basin in which the unit is found)? Yes = 2 No = 0 Total for D 3 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Value If score is: 2-4 = H 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 6 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 DEPRESSIONAL AND FLATS WETLANDS Hydrologic Functions - Indicators that the site functions to reduce flooding and stream degradation D 4.0. Does the site have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? D 4.1. Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland: Wetland is a depression or flat depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) points = 4 Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outletpoints = 2 Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch points = 1 Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet that is permanently flowing points = 0 D 4.2. Depth of storage during wet periods: Estimate the height of ponding above the bottom of the outlet. For wetlands with no outlet, measure from the surface of permanent water or if dry, the deepest part. Marks of ponding are 3 ft or more above the surface or bottom of outlet points = 7 Marks of ponding between 2 ft to < 3 ft from surface or bottom of outlet points = 5 Marks are at least 0.5 ft to < 2 ft from surface or bottom of outlet points = 3 The wetland is a “headwater” wetland points = 3 Wetland is flat but has small depressions on the surface that trap water points = 1 Marks of ponding less than 0.5 ft (6 in) points = 0 D 4.3. Contribution of the wetland to storage in the watershed: Estimate the ratio of the area of upstream basin contributing surface water to the wetland to the area of the wetland unit itself. The area of the basin is less than 10 times the area of the unit points = 5 The area of the basin is 10 to 100 times the area of the unit points = 3 The area of the basin is more than 100 times the area of the unit points = 0 Entire wetland is in the Flats class points = 5 Total for D 4 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Site Potential If score is: 12-16 = H 6-11 = M 0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page D 5.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support hydrologic functions of the site? D 5.1. Does the wetland receive stormwater discharges? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 5.2. Is >10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate excess runoff? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 5.3. Is more than 25% of the contributing basin of the wetland covered with intensive human land uses (residential at >1 residence/ac, urban, commercial, agriculture, etc.)? Yes = 1 No = 0 Total for D 5 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 3 = H 1 or 2 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page D 6.0. Are the hydrologic functions provided by the site valuable to society? D 6.1. The unit is in a landscape that has flooding problems. Choose the description that best matches conditions around the wetland unit being rated. Do not add points. Choose the highest score if more than one condition is met . The wetland captures surface water that would otherwise flow down -gradient into areas where flooding has damaged human or natural resources (e.g., houses or salmon redds): Flooding occurs in a sub-basin that is immediately down-gradient of unit. points = 2 Surface flooding problems are in a sub-basin farther down-gradient. points = 1 Flooding from groundwater is an issue in the sub-basin. points = 1 The existing or potential outflow from the wetland is so constrained by human or natural conditions that the water stored by the wetland cannot reach areas that flood. Explain why _____________ points = 0 There are no problems with flooding downstream of the wetland. points = 0 D 6.2. Has the site been identified as important for flood storage or flood conveyance in a regional flood control plan? Yes = 2 No = 0 Total for D 6 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Value If score is: 2-4 = H 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 13 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes. HABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators that site functions to provide important habitat H 1.0. Does the site have the potential to provide habitat? H 1.1. Structure of plant community: Indicators are Cowardin classes and strata within the Forested class. Check the Cowardin plant classes in the wetland. Up to 10 patches may be combined for each class to meet the threshold of ¼ ac or more than 10% of the unit if it is smaller than 2.5 ac. Add the number of structures checked. ____Aquatic bed 4 structures or more: points = 4 ____Emergent 3 structures: points = 2 ____Scrub-shrub (areas where shrubs have > 30% cover) 2 structures: points = 1 ____Forested (areas where trees have > 30% cover) 1 structure: points = 0 If the unit has a Forested class, check if: ____The Forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-cover) that each cover 20% within the Forested polygon H 1.2. Hydroperiods Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or ¼ ac to count (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods). ____Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present: points = 3 ____Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types present: points = 2 ____Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present: points = 1 ____Saturated only 1 type present: points = 0 ____Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland ____Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland ____Lake Fringe wetland 2 points ____Freshwater tidal wetland 2 points H 1.3. Richness of plant species Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft 2. Different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold and you do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian milfoil, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian thistle If you counted: > 19 species points = 2 5 - 19 species points = 1 < 5 species points = 0 H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion among Cowardin plants classes (described in H 1.1), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, moderate, low, or none. If you have four or more plant classes or three classes and open water, the rating is always high. None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points All three diagrams in this row are HIGH = 3points Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 14 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 H 1.5. Special habitat features: Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points. ____Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 in diameter and 6 ft long). ____Standing snags (dbh > 4 in) within the wetland ____Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2 m) and/or overhanging plants extends at least 3.3 ft (1 m) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the wetland, for at least 33 ft (10 m) ____Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (> 30 degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet weathered where wood is exposed) ____At least ¼ ac of thin-stemmed persistent plants or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg-laying by amphibians) ____Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in every stratum of plants (see H 1.1 for list of strata) Total for H 1 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Site Potential If score is: 15-18 = H 7-14 = M 0-6 = L Record the rating on the first page H 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the habitat functions of the site? H 2.1. Accessible habitat (include only habitat that directly abuts wetland unit). Calculate: % undisturbed habitat +[(% moderate and low intensity land uses)/2] = _______% If total accessible habitat is: > 1/3 (33.3%) of 1 km Polygon points = 3 20-33% of 1 km Polygon points = 2 10-19% of 1 km Polygon points = 1 < 10% of 1 km Polygon points = 0 H 2.2. Undisturbed habitat in 1 km Polygon around the wetland. Calculate: % undisturbed habitat + [(% moderate and low intensity land uses)/2] = _______% Undisturbed habitat > 50% of Polygon points = 3 Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and in 1-3 patches points = 2 Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and > 3 patches points = 1 Undisturbed habitat < 10% of 1 km Polygon points = 0 H 2.3. Land use intensity in 1 km Polygon: If > 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity land use points = (- 2) ≤ 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity points = 0 Total for H 2 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 4-6 = H 1-3 = M < 1 = L Record the rating on the first page H 3.0. Is the habitat provided by the site valuable to society? H 3.1. Does the site provide habitat for species valued in laws, regulations, or policies? Choose only the highest score that applies to the wetland being rated. Site meets ANY of the following criteria: points = 2  It has 3 or more priority habitats within 100 m (see next page)  It provides habitat for Threatened or Endangered species (any plant or animal on the state or federal lists)  It is mapped as a location for an individual WDFW priority species  It is a Wetland of High Conservation Value as determined by the Department of Natural Resources  It has been categorized as an important habitat site in a local or regional comprehensive plan, in a Shoreline Master Plan, or in a watershed plan Site has 1 or 2 priority habitats (listed on next page) within 100 m points = 1 Site does not meet any of the criteria above points = 0 Rating of Value If score is: 2 = H 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 15 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 WDFW Priority Habitats Priority habitats listed by WDFW (see complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2008. Priority Habitat and Species List. Olympia, Washington. 177 pp. http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00165/wdfw00165.pdf or access the list from here: http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/phs/list/) Count how many of the following priority habitats are within 330 ft (100 m) of the wetland unit: NOTE: This question is independent of the land use between the wetland unit and the priority habitat.  Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 1 ac (0.4 ha).  Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report).  Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock.  Old-growth/Mature forests: Old-growth west of Cascade crest – Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi- layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha ) > 32 in (81 cm) dbh or > 200 years of age. Mature forests – Stands with average diameters exceeding 21 in (53 cm) dbh; crown cover may be less than 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth; 80-200 years old west of the Cascade crest.  Oregon White Oak: Woodland stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 158 – see web link above).  Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other.  Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non-forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or a wet prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161 – see web link above).  Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources.  Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore, and Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report – see web link on previous page).  Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock, ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human.  Cliffs: Greater than 25 ft (7.6 m) high and occurring below 5000 ft elevation.  Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.5 - 6.5 ft (0.15 - 2.0 m), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs.  Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of > 20 in (51 cm) in western Washington and are > 6.5 ft (2 m) in height. Priority logs are > 12 in (30 cm) in diameter at the largest end, and > 20 ft (6 m) long. Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list because they are addressed elsewhere. Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 16 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Wetland Type Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the category when the appropriate criteria are met. Category SC 1.0. Estuarine wetlands Does the wetland meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? The dominant water regime is tidal, Vegetated, and With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt Yes –Go to SC 1.1 No= Not an estuarine wetland SC 1.1. Is the wetland within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332 -30-151? Yes = Category I No - Go to SC 1.2 Cat. I SC 1.2. Is the wetland unit at least 1 ac in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions?  The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. (If non-native species are Spartina, see page 25)  At least ¾ of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un- mowed grassland.  The wetland has at least two of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. Yes = Category I No = Category II Cat. I Cat. II SC 2.0. Wetlands of High Conservation Value (WHCV) SC 2.1. Has the WA Department of Natural Resources updated their website to include the list of Wetlands of High Conservation Value? Yes – Go to SC 2.2 No – Go to SC 2.3 SC 2.2. Is the wetland listed on the WDNR database as a Wetland of High Conservation Value? Yes = Category I No = Not a WHCV SC 2.3. Is the wetland in a Section/Township/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? http://www1.dnr.wa.gov/nhp/refdesk/datasearch/wnhpwetlands.pdf Yes – Contact WNHP/WDNR and go to SC 2.4 No = Not a WHCV SC 2.4. Has WDNR identified the wetland within the S/T/R as a Wetland of High Conservation Value and listed it on their website? Yes = Category I No = Not a WHCV Cat. I SC 3.0. Bogs Does the wetland (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below. If you answer YES you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. SC 3.1. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soil horizons, either peats or mucks, that compose 16 in or more of the first 32 in of the soil profile? Yes – Go to SC 3.3 No – Go to SC 3.2 SC 3.2. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks, that are less than 16 in deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on top of a lake or pond? Yes – Go to SC 3.3 No = Is not a bog SC 3.3. Does an area with peats or mucks have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND at least a 30% cover of plant species listed in Table 4? Yes = Is a Category I bog No – Go to SC 3.4 NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory , you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16 in deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the plant species in Table 4 are present, the wetland is a bog. SC 3.4. Is an area with peats or mucks forested (> 30% cover) with Sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Engelmann spruce, or western white pine, AND any of the species (or combination of species) listed in Table 4 provide more than 30% of the cover under the canopy? Yes = Is a Category I bog No = Is not a bog Cat. I Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 17 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 SC 4.0. Forested Wetlands Does the wetland have at least 1 contiguous acre of forest that meets one of these criteria for the WA Department of Fish and Wildlife’s forests as priority habitats? If you answer YES you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. Old-growth forests (west of Cascade crest): Stands of at least two tree species, forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 in (81 cm) or more. Mature forests (west of the Cascade Crest): Stands where the largest trees are 80- 200 years old OR the species that make up the canopy have an average diameter (dbh) exceeding 21 in (53 cm). Yes = Category I No = Not a forested wetland for this section Cat. I SC 5.0. Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon? The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks  The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains ponded water that is saline or brackish (> 0.5 ppt) during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the bottom) Yes – Go to SC 5.1 No = Not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1. Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions?  The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing), and has less than 20% cover of aggressive, opportunistic plant species (see list of species on p. 100).  At least ¾ of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un -grazed or un- mowed grassland.  The wetland is larger than 1/10 ac (4350 ft2) Yes = Category I No = Category II Cat. I Cat. II SC 6.0. Interdunal Wetlands Is the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its habitat functions. In practical terms that means the following geographic areas:  Long Beach Peninsula: Lands west of SR 103  Grayland-Westport: Lands west of SR 105  Ocean Shores-Copalis: Lands west of SR 115 and SR 109 Yes – Go to SC 6.1 No = not an interdunal wetland for rating SC 6.1. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger and scores an 8 or 9 for the habitat functions on the form (rates H,H,H or H,H,M for the three aspects of function)? Yes = Category I No – Go to SC 6.2 SC 6.2. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is 1 ac or larger? Yes = Category II No – Go to SC 6.3 SC 6.3. Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 ac, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 ac? Yes = Category III No = Category IV Cat I Cat. II Cat. III Cat. IV Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics If you answered No for all types, enter “Not Applicable” on Summary Form Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 18 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 This page left blank intentionally Figure 1: Land Use Intensity Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement 2550 Lake Washington Blvd. Renton, WA 98056 Water Body: Lake Washington County: King June 2020 Sheet 1 of 2 Applicant: City of Renton, Parks Division Datum: OHWM=TBD MLLW= 0.0 Lat: 47.51097778 N Long: -122.20361111 W Adjacent Property Owners: (See Application) Parcel No. 052305-9010 Section 05 Township 23N Range 05E Coulon ParkTrestle Bridge Replacement I 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000250 Feet Legend Wetland A AccessibleHabitat 1 Km Buffer Land Use Intensity High Low to Medium Relatively Undisturbed Wetland A Figure 2: Cowardin Class and Hydroperiod Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement2550 Lake Washington Blvd. Renton, WA 98056 Water Body: Lake WashingtonCounty: King June 2020 Sheet 2 of 2 Applicant: City of Renton, Parks Division Datum: OHWM=TBD MLLW= 0.0 Lat: 47.51097778 N Long: -122.20361111 WAdjacent Property Owners: (See Application)Parcel No. 052305-9010Section 05 Township 23N Range 05E Coulon ParkTrestle Bridge Replacement I070140 210 28035Feet Legend 150ft Buffer Wetland A Contributing Basin Wetland ACowardin: ForestedHydroperiod: Permanently Flooded or Inundated Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 1 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 Score for each function based on three ratings (order of ratings is not important) 9 = H,H,H 8 = H,H,M 7 = H,H,L 7 = H,M,M 6 = H,M,L 6 = M,M,M 5 = H,L,L 5 = M,M,L 4 = M,L,L 3 = L,L,L RATING SUMMARY – Western Washington Name of wetland (or ID #): _________________________________ Date of site visit: _____ Rated by____________________________ Trained by Ecology?__ Yes ___No Date of training______ HGM Class used for rating_________________ Wetland has multiple HGM classes?___Y ____N NOTE: Form is not complete without the figures requested (figures can be combined). Source of base aerial photo/map ______________________________________ OVERALL WETLAND CATEGORY ____ (based on functions___ or special characteristics___) 1.Category of wetland based on FUNCTIONS _______Category I – Total score = 23 - 27 _______Category II – Total score = 20 - 22 _______Category III – Total score = 16 - 19 _______Category IV – Total score = 9 - 15 FUNCTION Improving Water Quality Hydrologic Habitat Circle the appropriate ratings Site Potential H M L H M L H M L Landscape Potential H M L H M L H M L Value H M L H M L H M L TOTAL Score Based on Ratings 2.Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland CHARACTERISTIC CATEGORY Estuarine I II Wetland of High Conservation Value I Bog I Mature Forest I Old Growth Forest I Coastal Lagoon I II Interdunal I II III IV None of the above Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 2 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 Maps and figures required to answer questions correctly for Western Washington Depressional Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes D 1.3, H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods D 1.4, H 1.2 Location of outlet (can be added to map of hydroperiods) D 1.1, D 4.1 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) D 2.2, D 5.2 Map of the contributing basin D 4.3, D 5.3 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) D 3.1, D 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) D 3.3 Riverine Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods H 1.2 Ponded depressions R 1.1 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) R 2.4 Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants R 1.2, R 4.2 Width of unit vs. width of stream (can be added to another figure) R 4.1 Map of the contributing basin R 2.2, R 2.3, R 5.2 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) R 3.1 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) R 3.2, R 3.3 Lake Fringe Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes L 1.1, L 4.1, H 1.1, H 1.4 Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants L 1.2 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) L 2.2 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) L 3.1, L 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) L 3.3 Slope Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods H 1.2 Plant cover of dense trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants S 1.3 Plant cover of dense, rigid trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants (can be added to figure above) S 4.1 Boundary of 150 ft buffer (can be added to another figure) S 2.1, S 5.1 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) S 3.1, S 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) S 3.3 2 2 2 2 2 1 33 Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 3 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 HGM Classification of Wetlands in Western Washington 1. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides except during floods? NO – go to 2 YES – the wetland class is Tidal Fringe – go to 1.1 1.1 Is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? NO – Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) YES – Freshwater Tidal Fringe If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is an Estuarine wetland and is not scored. This method cannot be used to score functions for estuarine wetlands. 2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is the only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface water runoff are NOT sources of water to the unit. NO – go to 3 YES – The wetland class is Flats If your wetland can be classified as a Flats wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? ___The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any plants on the surface at any time of the year) at least 20 ac (8 ha) in size; ___At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m). NO – go to 4 YES – The wetland class is Lake Fringe (Lacustrine Fringe) 4. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? ____The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual), ____The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks, ____The water leaves the wetland without being impounded. NO – go to 5 YES – The wetland class is Slope NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than 1 ft deep). 5. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? ____The unit is in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river, ____The overbank flooding occurs at least once every 2 years. For questions 1-7, the criteria described must apply to the entire unit being rated. If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply, and go to Question 8. Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 4 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 NO – go to 6 YES – The wetland class is Riverine NOTE: The Riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding 6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time during the year? This means that any outlet, if present, is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO – go to 7 YES – The wetland class is Depressional 7. Is the entire wetland unit located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding? The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. NO – go to 8 YES – The wetland class is Depressional 8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a Depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO BACK AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within the wetland unit being scored. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the HGM class listed in column 2 is less than 10% of the unit; classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area. HGM classes within the wetland unit being rated HGM class to use in rating Slope + Riverine Riverine Slope + Depressional Depressional Slope + Lake Fringe Lake Fringe Depressional + Riverine along stream within boundary of depression Depressional Depressional + Lake Fringe Depressional Riverine + Lake Fringe Riverine Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater wetland Treat as ESTUARINE If you are still unable to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or if you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 5 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 DEPRESSIONAL AND FLATS WETLANDS Water Quality Functions - Indicators that the site functions to improve water quality D 1.0. Does the site have the potential to improve water quality? D 1.1. Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland: Wetland is a depression or flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key) with no surface water leaving it (no outlet). points = 3 Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet. points = 2 Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet that is permanently flowing points = 1 Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch. points = 1 D 1.2. The soil 2 in below the surface (or duff layer) is true clay or true organic (use NRCS definitions).Yes = 4 No = 0 D 1.3. Characteristics and distribution of persistent plants (Emergent, Scrub-shrub, and/or Forested Cowardin classes): Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, plants > 95% of area points = 5 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, plants > ½ of area points = 3 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants > 1/10 of area points = 1 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants <1/10 of area points = 0 D 1.4. Characteristics of seasonal ponding or inundation : This is the area that is ponded for at least 2 months. See description in manual. Area seasonally ponded is > ½ total area of wetland points = 4 Area seasonally ponded is > ¼ total area of wetland points = 2 Area seasonally ponded is < ¼ total area of wetland points = 0 Total for D 1 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Site Potential If score is: 12-16 = H 6-11 = M 0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page D 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the water quality function of the site? D 2.1. Does the wetland unit receive stormwater discharges? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 2.2. Is > 10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate pollutants? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 2.3. Are there septic systems within 250 ft of the wetland? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 2.4. Are there other sources of pollutants coming into the wetland that are not listed in questions D 2.1 -D 2.3? Source_______________ Yes = 1 No = 0 Total for D 2 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 3 or 4 = H 1 or 2 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page D 3.0. Is the water quality improvement provided by the site valuable to society? D 3.1. Does the wetland discharge directly (i.e., within 1 mi) to a stream, river, lake, or marine water that is on the 303(d) list? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 3.2. Is the wetland in a basin or sub-basin where an aquatic resource is on the 303(d) list? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 3.3. Has the site been identified in a watershed or local plan as important for maintaining water quality (answer YES if there is a TMDL for the basin in which the unit is found)? Yes = 2 No = 0 Total for D 3 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Value If score is: 2-4 = H 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 6 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 DEPRESSIONAL AND FLATS WETLANDS Hydrologic Functions - Indicators that the site functions to reduce flooding and stream degradation D 4.0. Does the site have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? D 4.1. Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland: Wetland is a depression or flat depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) points = 4 Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outletpoints = 2 Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch points = 1 Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet that is permanently flowing points = 0 D 4.2. Depth of storage during wet periods: Estimate the height of ponding above the bottom of the outlet. For wetlands with no outlet, measure from the surface of permanent water or if dry, the deepest part. Marks of ponding are 3 ft or more above the surface or bottom of outlet points = 7 Marks of ponding between 2 ft to < 3 ft from surface or bottom of outlet points = 5 Marks are at least 0.5 ft to < 2 ft from surface or bottom of outlet points = 3 The wetland is a “headwater” wetland points = 3 Wetland is flat but has small depressions on the surface that trap water points = 1 Marks of ponding less than 0.5 ft (6 in) points = 0 D 4.3. Contribution of the wetland to storage in the watershed: Estimate the ratio of the area of upstream basin contributing surface water to the wetland to the area of the wetland unit itself. The area of the basin is less than 10 times the area of the unit points = 5 The area of the basin is 10 to 100 times the area of the unit points = 3 The area of the basin is more than 100 times the area of the unit points = 0 Entire wetland is in the Flats class points = 5 Total for D 4 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Site Potential If score is: 12-16 = H 6-11 = M 0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page D 5.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support hydrologic functions of the site? D 5.1. Does the wetland receive stormwater discharges? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 5.2. Is >10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate excess runoff? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 5.3. Is more than 25% of the contributing basin of the wetland covered with intensive human land uses (residential at >1 residence/ac, urban, commercial, agriculture, etc.)? Yes = 1 No = 0 Total for D 5 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 3 = H 1 or 2 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page D 6.0. Are the hydrologic functions provided by the site valuable to society? D 6.1. The unit is in a landscape that has flooding problems. Choose the description that best matches conditions around the wetland unit being rated. Do not add points. Choose the highest score if more than one condition is met . The wetland captures surface water that would otherwise flow down -gradient into areas where flooding has damaged human or natural resources (e.g., houses or salmon redds):  Flooding occurs in a sub-basin that is immediately down-gradient of unit. points = 2  Surface flooding problems are in a sub-basin farther down-gradient. points = 1 Flooding from groundwater is an issue in the sub-basin. points = 1 The existing or potential outflow from the wetland is so constrained by human or natural conditions that the water stored by the wetland cannot reach areas that flood. Explain why _____________ points = 0 There are no problems with flooding downstream of the wetland. points = 0 D 6.2. Has the site been identified as important for flood storage or flood conveyance in a regional flood control plan? Yes = 2 No = 0 Total for D 6 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Value If score is: 2-4 = H 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 13 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes. HABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators that site functions to provide important habitat H 1.0. Does the site have the potential to provide habitat? H 1.1. Structure of plant community: Indicators are Cowardin classes and strata within the Forested class. Check the Cowardin plant classes in the wetland. Up to 10 patches may be combined for each class to meet the threshold of ¼ ac or more than 10% of the unit if it is smaller than 2.5 ac. Add the number of structures checked. ____Aquatic bed 4 structures or more: points = 4 ____Emergent 3 structures: points = 2 ____Scrub-shrub (areas where shrubs have > 30% cover) 2 structures: points = 1 ____Forested (areas where trees have > 30% cover) 1 structure: points = 0 If the unit has a Forested class, check if: ____The Forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-cover) that each cover 20% within the Forested polygon H 1.2. Hydroperiods Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or ¼ ac to count (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods). ____Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present: points = 3 ____Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types present: points = 2 ____Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present: points = 1 ____Saturated only 1 type present: points = 0 ____Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland ____Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland ____Lake Fringe wetland 2 points ____Freshwater tidal wetland 2 points H 1.3. Richness of plant species Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft 2. Different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold and you do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian milfoil, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian thistle If you counted: > 19 species points = 2 5 - 19 species points = 1 < 5 species points = 0 H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion among Cowardin plants classes (described in H 1.1), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, moderate, low, or none. If you have four or more plant classes or three classes and open water, the rating is always high. None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points All three diagrams in this row are HIGH = 3points Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 14 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 H 1.5. Special habitat features: Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points. ____Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 in diameter and 6 ft long). ____Standing snags (dbh > 4 in) within the wetland ____Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2 m) and/or overhanging plants extends at least 3.3 ft (1 m) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the wetland, for at least 33 ft (10 m) ____Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (> 30 degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet weathered where wood is exposed) ____At least ¼ ac of thin-stemmed persistent plants or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg-laying by amphibians) ____Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in every stratum of plants (see H 1.1 for list of strata) Total for H 1 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Site Potential If score is: 15-18 = H 7-14 = M 0-6 = L Record the rating on the first page H 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the habitat functions of the site? H 2.1. Accessible habitat (include only habitat that directly abuts wetland unit). Calculate: % undisturbed habitat + [(% moderate and low intensity land uses)/2] = _______% If total accessible habitat is: > 1/3 (33.3%) of 1 km Polygon points = 3 20-33% of 1 km Polygon points = 2 10-19% of 1 km Polygon points = 1 < 10% of 1 km Polygon points = 0 H 2.2. Undisturbed habitat in 1 km Polygon around the wetland. Calculate: % undisturbed habitat + [(% moderate and low intensity land uses)/2] = _______% Undisturbed habitat > 50% of Polygon points = 3 Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and in 1-3 patches points = 2 Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and > 3 patches points = 1 Undisturbed habitat < 10% of 1 km Polygon points = 0 H 2.3. Land use intensity in 1 km Polygon: If > 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity land use points = (- 2) ≤ 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity points = 0 Total for H 2 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 4-6 = H 1-3 = M < 1 = L Record the rating on the first page H 3.0. Is the habitat provided by the site valuable to society? H 3.1. Does the site provide habitat for species valued in laws, regulations, or policies? Choose only the highest score that applies to the wetland being rated. Site meets ANY of the following criteria: points = 2  It has 3 or more priority habitats within 100 m (see next page)  It provides habitat for Threatened or Endangered species (any plant or animal on the state or federal lists)  It is mapped as a location for an individual WDFW priority species  It is a Wetland of High Conservation Value as determined by the Department of Natural Resources  It has been categorized as an important habitat site in a local or regional comprehensive plan, in a Shoreline Master Plan, or in a watershed plan Site has 1 or 2 priority habitats (listed on next page) within 100 m points = 1 Site does not meet any of the criteria above points = 0 Rating of Value If score is: 2 = H 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 15 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 WDFW Priority Habitats Priority habitats listed by WDFW (see complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2008. Priority Habitat and Species List. Olympia, Washington. 177 pp. http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00165/wdfw00165.pdf or access the list from here: http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/phs/list/) Count how many of the following priority habitats are within 330 ft (100 m) of the wetland unit: NOTE: This question is independent of the land use between the wetland unit and the priority habitat.  Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 1 ac (0.4 ha).  Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report).  Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock.  Old-growth/Mature forests: Old-growth west of Cascade crest – Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi- layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha ) > 32 in (81 cm) dbh or > 200 years of age. Mature forests – Stands with average diameters exceeding 21 in (53 cm) dbh; crown cover may be less than 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth; 80-200 years old west of the Cascade crest.  Oregon White Oak: Woodland stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 158 – see web link above).  Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other.  Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non-forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or a wet prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161 – see web link above).  Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources.  Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore, and Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report – see web link on previous page).  Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock, ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human.  Cliffs: Greater than 25 ft (7.6 m) high and occurring below 5000 ft elevation.  Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.5 - 6.5 ft (0.15 - 2.0 m), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs.  Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of > 20 in (51 cm) in western Washington and are > 6.5 ft (2 m) in height. Priority logs are > 12 in (30 cm) in diameter at the largest end, and > 20 ft (6 m) long. Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list because they are addressed elsewhere. Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 16 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Wetland Type Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the category when the appropriate criteria are met. Category SC 1.0. Estuarine wetlands Does the wetland meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands?  The dominant water regime is tidal,  Vegetated, and  With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt Yes –Go to SC 1.1 No= Not an estuarine wetland SC 1.1. Is the wetland within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332 -30-151? Yes = Category I No - Go to SC 1.2 Cat. I SC 1.2. Is the wetland unit at least 1 ac in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions?  The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. (If non-native species are Spartina, see page 25)  At least ¾ of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un- mowed grassland.  The wetland has at least two of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. Yes = Category I No = Category II Cat. I Cat. II SC 2.0. Wetlands of High Conservation Value (WHCV) SC 2.1. Has the WA Department of Natural Resources updated their website to include the list of Wetlands of High Conservation Value? Yes – Go to SC 2.2 No – Go to SC 2.3 SC 2.2. Is the wetland listed on the WDNR database as a Wetland of High Conservation Value? Yes = Category I No = Not a WHCV SC 2.3. Is the wetland in a Section/Township/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? http://www1.dnr.wa.gov/nhp/refdesk/datasearch/wnhpwetlands.pdf Yes – Contact WNHP/WDNR and go to SC 2.4 No = Not a WHCV SC 2.4. Has WDNR identified the wetland within the S/T/R as a Wetland of High Conservation Value and listed it on their website? Yes = Category I No = Not a WHCV Cat. I SC 3.0. Bogs Does the wetland (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below. If you answer YES you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. SC 3.1. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soil horizons, either peats or mucks, that compose 16 in or more of the first 32 in of the soil profile? Yes – Go to SC 3.3 No – Go to SC 3.2 SC 3.2. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks, that are less than 16 in deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on top of a lake or pond? Yes – Go to SC 3.3 No = Is not a bog SC 3.3. Does an area with peats or mucks have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND at least a 30% cover of plant species listed in Table 4? Yes = Is a Category I bog No – Go to SC 3.4 NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory , you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16 in deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the plant species in Table 4 are present, the wetland is a bog. SC 3.4. Is an area with peats or mucks forested (> 30% cover) with Sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Engelmann spruce, or western white pine, AND any of the species (or combination of species) listed in Table 4 provide more than 30% of the cover under the canopy? Yes = Is a Category I bog No = Is not a bog Cat. I Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 17 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 SC 4.0. Forested Wetlands Does the wetland have at least 1 contiguous acre of forest that meets one of these criteria for the WA Department of Fish and Wildlife’s forests as priority habitats? If you answer YES you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions.  Old-growth forests (west of Cascade crest): Stands of at least two tree species, forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 in (81 cm) or more.  Mature forests (west of the Cascade Crest): Stands where the largest trees are 80- 200 years old OR the species that make up the canopy have an average diameter (dbh) exceeding 21 in (53 cm). Yes = Category I No = Not a forested wetland for this section Cat. I SC 5.0. Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon?  The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks  The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains ponded water that is saline or brackish (> 0.5 ppt) during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the bottom) Yes – Go to SC 5.1 No = Not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1. Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions?  The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing), and has less than 20% cover of aggressive, opportunistic plant species (see list of species on p. 100).  At least ¾ of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un -grazed or un- mowed grassland.  The wetland is larger than 1/10 ac (4350 ft2) Yes = Category I No = Category II Cat. I Cat. II SC 6.0. Interdunal Wetlands Is the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its habitat functions. In practical terms that means the following geographic areas:  Long Beach Peninsula: Lands west of SR 103  Grayland-Westport: Lands west of SR 105  Ocean Shores-Copalis: Lands west of SR 115 and SR 109 Yes – Go to SC 6.1 No = not an interdunal wetland for rating SC 6.1. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger and scores an 8 or 9 for the habitat functions on the form (rates H,H,H or H,H,M for the three aspects of function)? Yes = Category I No – Go to SC 6.2 SC 6.2. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is 1 ac or larger? Yes = Category II No – Go to SC 6.3 SC 6.3. Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 ac, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 ac? Yes = Category III No = Category IV Cat I Cat. II Cat. III Cat. IV Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics If you answered No for all types, enter “Not Applicable” on Summary Form Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 18 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 This page left blank intentionally Figure 1: Land Use Intensity Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement 2550 Lake Washington Blvd. Renton, WA 98056 Water Body: Lake Washington County: King June 2020 Sheet 1 of 2 Applicant: City of Renton, Parks Division Datum: OHWM=TBD MLLW= 0.0 Lat: 47.51097778 N Long: -122.20361111 W Adjacent Property Owners: (See Application) Parcel No. 052305-9010 Section 05 Township 23N Range 05E Coulon ParkTrestle Bridge Replacement I 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000250 Feet Legend Wetland B AccessibleHabitat 1 Km Buffer Land Use Intensity High Low to Medium Relatively Undisturbed Wetland B Figure 2: Cowardin Class and Hydroperiod Coulon Park Trestle Bridge Replacement2550 Lake Washington Blvd. Renton, WA 98056 Water Body: Lake WashingtonCounty: King June 2020 Sheet 2 of 2 Applicant: City of Renton, Parks Division Datum: OHWM=TBD MLLW= 0.0 Lat: 47.51097778 N Long: -122.20361111 WAdjacent Property Owners: (See Application)Parcel No. 052305-9010Section 05 Township 23N Range 05E Coulon ParkTrestle Bridge Replacement I070140 210 28035Feet Legend 150ft Buffer Wetland B Contributing Basin Wetland BCowardin: ForestedHydroperiod: Permanently Flooded or Inundated APPENDIX D GEOTECHNICAL REPORT Geotechnical & Earthquake Engineering Consultants GEOTECHNICAL REPORT PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE REPLACEMENT GENE COULON MEMORIAL PARK Renton, Washington PROJECT NO. 20-046 January 20, 2021 Prepared for: City of Renton January 20, 2021 Project No. 20-046 20-046 Bridge Geotechnical Report 1.20.21 i PanGEO, Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS PROJECT DESCRIPTION ......................................................................................................... 1 SITE DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................... 1 GEOLOGY .................................................................................................................................... 2 FIELD EXPLORATIONS ........................................................................................................... 2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ................................................................................................... 2 SOILS ........................................................................................................................................... 3 GROUNDWATER ........................................................................................................................... 3 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................... 3 EARTHQUAKE FAULTING ............................................................................................................. 3 SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS .................................................................................................... 4 LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL .......................................................................................................... 4 STRUCTURE FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................... 4 Driven Pipe Piles .................................................................................................................... 4 Lateral Pile Resistance & Group Reduction Factors ............................................................. 5 ADDITIONAL SERVICES.......................................................................................................... 6 LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS ...................................................... 6 CLOSURE ...................................................................................................................................... 7 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................. 8 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Vicinity Map Figure 2 Site and Exploration Plan Figure 3 16” and 18” Steel Pipe Pile Capacities APPENDIX A: FIELD EXPLORATIONS January 20, 2021 Project No. 20-046 20-046 Bridge Geotechnical Report 1.20.21 PanGEO, Inc. 1 GEOTECHNICAL REPORT PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE REPLACEMENT GENE COULON MEMORIAL PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON PROJECT DESCRIPTION This report summarizes geotechnical recommendations for the replacement of the existing timber trestle pedestrian bridge at the north end of Gene Coulon Memorial Park in Renton, Washington (see Figure 1). The existing bridge is a part of a pedestrian walkway that goes north from the main portion of the park along the lake shoreline (see Figure 2). The existing timber pile supported bridge is approximately 100-foot long, 12 feet wide with steel railings and a treated timber deck. The structure is supported on 8 bents and each bent is supported on 6 timber piles. Because of significant degradation of the piles, the City will replace the existing bridge with a new, steel, single span structure. SITE DESCRIPTION Gene Coulon Memorial Park is located on an elongated strip of land at the southeast corner of Lake Washington, between a railroad right-of-way on the east and Lake Washington on the west. The relatively wide southern portion of the park includes a swimming beach, boat launch ramp, playground, restaurants, and paved parking. In contrast, the northern portion of the park, which contains the pedestrian bridge, is located on a relatively narrow strip of land (see Plates 1 and 2). In addition to providing pedestrian access, the bridge also provides access to City owned maintenance vehicles and emergency vehicles. Plate 1. Looking north at the trestle bridge which spans an inlet of Lake Washington. Plate 2. Looking north at the south abutment of the bridge. January 20, 2021 Project No. 20-046 20-046 Bridge Geotechnical Report 1.20.21 PanGEO, Inc. 2 GEOLOGY The subsurface geology along the southeastern shore of Lake Washington is not well mapped. The area lies within the U.S.G.S. 1:24,000 Mercer Island Quadrangle, and while the Mercer Island portion of the quadrangle is mapped in detail, the mapping does not extend to the eastern mainland shore. The Washington State Geologic Information Portal 1:100,000 scale map suggests that Gene Coulon Memorial Park is underlain by fill. This mapping is supported by the Geologic Map of the Renton Quadrangle (Mullineaux, 1965) though this map also shows a sliver of Cedar River alluvium along the east side of the lowland area. In general, we anticipate that the site is underlain by fill overlying lakebed sediments. FIELD EXPLORATIONS Subsurface conditions at the bridge site were explored with two borings (PG-1 and PG-2) that were drilled at the bridge abutments at the locations shown on Figure 2. The borings were drilled using a track mounted hollow stem auger drill rig owned and operated by Geologic Drill Partners of Bellevue, Washington. The drill was equipped with 6-inch outside diameter hollow stem augers. Soil samples were obtained at 2½-foot depth intervals in the top 10 feet, and at 5- foot intervals thereafter. Sampling was conducted in general accordance with Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampling methods (ASTM test method D-1586) in which the samples were obtained using a 2-inch outside diameter split-spoon sampler. The sampler was driven 18” into the soil using a 140-pound weight freely falling 30 inches. The number of blows required for each 6-inch increment of sampler penetration was recorded. The number of blows required to achieve the last 12 inches of sample penetration is defined as the SPT N-value. The N-value provides an empirical measure of the relative density of cohesionless soil, or the relative consistency of fine-grained soils. An engineering geologist from PanGEO was on site to coordinate field activities, monitor the auger advancement, and log the materials retrieved from the sampler. Logs of the borings are presented in Appendix A, and the underlying subsurface conditions are summarized below. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The soil conditions encountered in the site explorations are consistent with the anticipated geologic units as summarized below. January 20, 2021 Project No. 20-046 20-046 Bridge Geotechnical Report 1.20.21 PanGEO, Inc. 3 SOILS Unit 1 Fill: Material interpreted as fill was encountered in both borings from the ground surface to a depth of approximately 6 feet. The surficial fill consisted mainly of very loose, brown to gray, silty, fine to medium sand, with a trace of sub-angular gravel. Unit 2 Lake Deposits: Beneath the fill, the borings encountered a layer loose to medium dense, gray to dark brown, silty, fine to medium sand and sandy silt, with a trace of gravel. Some woody debris and other organic material were encountered in this stratum in PG-2. This unit extended to a depth of 19.5 feet in both borings. Unit 3 Alluvial Deposits: Alluvial soils consisting of medium dense, brown, fine to medium, sandy gravel, with a trace of silt were encountered below the lake deposits in both borings. The alluvial deposits were most likely sourced from the Cedar River. This unit extends to a depth of roughly 29.5 feet below the current surface grade. Unit 4 Pre-Fraser Deposits: The bearing layer at depth consists of hard and very dense strata that are interpreted as pre-Fraser beds. In PG-1, this unit consists of hard, gray to brown, clayey silt with a trace of sand. In PG-2, the pre-Fraser material consists of a 5-foot bed of hard or very dense, non-plastic to low plastic, sandy silt with gravel and a trace of clay. Below this bed is layer of very dense, gray, fine to medium sand, with a trace of gravel and silt. GROUNDWATER Groundwater at the site is controlled by the water surface in Lake Washington that typically fluctuates annually by 2 feet between about elevations 16.8 and 18.6 feet (NAVD 88). The groundwater levels observe in the borings were generally consistent with the lake level. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS EARTHQUAKE FAULTING Coulon Park lies south of the Seattle Fault Zone which extends easterly, just north of Mercer Island. The inferred southernmost strand of the Seattle Fault is located about 3 km north of Gene Coulon Memorial Park. In our opinion, fault rupture beneath the park is unlikely in a future earthquake. January 20, 2021 Project No. 20-046 20-046 Bridge Geotechnical Report 1.20.21 PanGEO, Inc. 4 SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS In accordance with AASHTO (2019) and the WSDOT Seismic Design Manual (WSDOT 2019), the following provides ground acceleration design parameters (% g) corresponding to an event having a 7 percent probability of exceedance in 1,000 years for the site which is underlain by Site Class D soils. AS SDS SD1 0.41 0.96 0.27 B/C Boundary 0.49 0.98 0.56 Site Class D LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL The upper 20 to 30 feet of soils encountered in the site borings are susceptible to liquefaction in the design earthquake as based on simplified screening contained in section 6.4.2 of the Geotechnical Design Manual (WSDOT, 2020). Consequently, the pedestrian bridge will require pile support and the seismic design of the bridge will need to consider reduced lateral support as a result of liquefaction. Due to the flat topography in the vicinity of the site, the potential for liquefaction-induced lateral spreading is low. STRUCTURE FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS Driven Pipe Piles We recommend supporting the pedestrian bridge on 16 or 18-inch diameter pipe piles that develop end bearing in the underlying very dense glacial soils at depths below 20 to 30 feet. Because the bearing stratum was encountered at different depths at the abutments, load capacity graphs were developed for closed end piles driven at each abutment as illustrated in Figure 3. Pile installations should be performed in accordance with Section 6-05 of the WSDOT Standard Specifications (WSDOT, 2019). The LRFD resistance factors recommended for design correspond to 0.55 and 1.0 for Strength and Extreme states. Piles should be driven to achieve required resistance in accordance with Article 6-05.3(12) of the WSDOT Standard Specifications. January 20, 2021 Project No. 20-046 20-046 Bridge Geotechnical Report 1.20.21 PanGEO, Inc. 5 Lateral Pile Resistance & Group Reduction Factors Recommended parameters for analysis of lateral pile resistance using the program LPILETM are presented below. Note that the soil layers are referenced to the general mudline elevation at the location of the reference piles. The reference elevations in the tables are the existing ground surface elevations. Using the parameters for the liquefied conditions in conjunction with the full seismic load from the design earthquake will result in an excessively conservative design as liquefaction typically develops near the end of the earthquake ground shaking where ground accelerations are well below the peak values. Accordingly, we suggest using the liquefied parameters with a seismic load corresponding to 25% of the peak load, unless otherwise specified in the code used for the facility design. Recommended p-y Curve Parameters Trestle Bridge (Borings B-1 & B-2) STATIC ANALYSIS Soil Layer Bottom Elev. (NAVD88) Soil Unit Soil Type (KSOIL) Effective Unit Weight of Soil Cohesion Axial Strain  Friction Angle  Modulus of Subgrade Reaction (ft.) (pci) (pcf) (psi) (psf) (deg) (pci) 1 18 Fill Sand 0.031 53 -- -- -- 29 10 2 4 Lake Deposits Sand 0.034 58 -- -- -- 30 30 3 20 Alluvium Sand 0.034 58 -- -- -- 33 60 4 50+ Glacial Sand 0.036 63 -- -- -- 38 115 LIQUEFIED ANALYSIS 1 18 Fill Sand 0.031 53 -- -- -- 7 5 2 4 Lake Deposits Sand 0.034 58 -- -- -- 7 10 3 20 Alluvium Sand 0.034 58 -- -- -- 10 16 4 50+ Glacial Sand 0.036 63 -- -- -- 38 115 Group Reduction Factors for Lateral Analyses Pile Spacing (1) Reduction Factor for Load Applied Parallel to Pile Row Reduction Factor for Load Applied Perpendicular to Pile Row(2) 5D 0.8 1.0 4D 0.65 0.9 3D 0.5 0.8 2.5D 0.4 0.7 (1) As a function of Pile diameter, D. (2) For a single row of piles, if two or more rows of piles are used, the reduction factors for load applied parallel to the pile row should be used. January 20, 2021 Project No. 20-046 20-046 Bridge Geotechnical Report 1.20.21 PanGEO, Inc. 6 ADDITIONAL SERVICES Construction support services, including review of pile driving submittals and field observation of pile installation, are beyond the scope of geotechnical design services under which this report was prepared. A supplemental scope and budget would be required for PanGEO to provide construction support services and is recommended to confirm that construction is consistent with the design and construction recommendations provided herein. LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS PanGEO, Inc. (PanGEO) prepared this report for WSP, and the City of Renton. The recommendations contained in this report are based on a site reconnaissance, a subsurface exploration program, review of existing, pertinent subsurface information, and our understanding of the project. Variations in soil conditions may exist between the locations of the explorations and the actual conditions underlying the site. The nature and extent of soil variations may not be evident until construction occurs. If any soil conditions are encountered at the site that are different from those described in this report, PanGEO should be immediately notified to review the applicability of the recommendations presented herein. Additionally, PanGEO should also be notified to review the applicability of these recommendations if there are any changes in the project scope. This report may be used only by the client and for the purposes stated, within a reasonable time from its issuance. Land use, site conditions (both off and on-site), or other factors including advances in our understanding of applied science, may change over time and could materially affect our findings. Therefore, this report should not be relied upon after 36 months from its issuance. PanGEO should be notified if the project is delayed by more than 36 months from the date of this report so that the applicability of the conclusions and recommendations presented herein may be evaluated considering the time lapse. Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, PanGEO engages in the practice of geotechnical engineering and endeavors to perform its services in accordance with generally accepted professional principles and practices at the time this report and/or its contents was prepared. No warranty, express or implied, is made. The scope of PanGEO’s work did not include environmental assessments or evaluations regarding the presence or absence of wetlands January 20, 2021 Project No. 20-046 20-046 Bridge Geotechnical Report 1.20.21 PanGEO, Inc. 7 or hazardous or toxic substances in the soil, surface water or groundwater at this site. PanGEO does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. PanGEO does not direct the contractor’s operations and cannot be held responsible for the safety of personnel other than our own on the site; the safety of others is the responsibility of the contractor. It is the client’s responsibility to see that all parties to this project, including the designer, contractor, subcontractors, etc., are made aware of this report in its entirety. The use of information contained in this report for bidding purposes shall be at the contractor’s sole option and risk. Any party other than the client who wishes to use this report shall notify PanGEO of such intended use and for permission to copy this report. Based on the intended use of the report, PanGEO may require that additional work be performed and that an updated report be reissued. Noncompliance with any of these requirements will release PanGEO from any liability resulting from the use this report. CLOSURE PanGEO is pleased to support the WSP design team and the City of Renton with geotechnical engineering recommendations. Please call any questions regarding this report. W Paul Grant, P.E. Principal Geotechnical Engineer January 20, 2021 Project No. 20-046 20-046 Bridge Geotechnical Report 1.20.21 PanGEO, Inc. 8 REFERENCES AASHTO, 2019. LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 7th edition, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Washington, D.C. WSDOT, 2020. Geotechnical Design Manual (GDM), M 46-03, Washington State Department of Transportation WSDOT, 2019. Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge and Municipal Construction, M 41-10, Washington State Department of Transportation FIGURES VICINITY MAP 20-046 1 Reference: ESRI ArcGIS Terrain Map Not to Scale PROJECT SITE Gene Coulon Park Bridge Replacement 1201 Lake Washington Boulevard North Renton, Washington Renton Figure No.Project No. Gene Coulon Park Bridge Replacement 1201 Lk Washington Blvd N Renton, Washington File.ppt 4/28/2020(10:12 AM) TEA20-046 2 SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN N PG-1 Legend: PanGEO Boring Approximate Scale 1”:40’ PG-2 Base Map From City of Renton GIS Figure No.Project No. Gene Coulon Park Bridge Replacement 1201 Lk Washington Blvd N Renton, Washington File.ppt 12/28/2020(10:12 AM) TEA20-046 16” & 18” Steel Pipe Pile Capacities 3 Notes 1.Open end piles may run 5 to 10 feet deeper for similar capacities. 2.All piles to be driven to minimum tip elevations of -5 feet (South Abutment) and -10 Feet (North Abutment) APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATIONS MOISTURE CONTENT 2-inch OD Split Spoon, SPT (140-lb. hammer, 30" drop) 3.25-inch OD Spilt Spoon (300-lb hammer, 30" drop) Non-standard penetration test (see boring log for details) Thin wall (Shelby) tube Grab Rock core Vane Shear Dusty, dry to the touch Damp but no visible water Visible free water Terms and Symbols for Boring and Test Pit Logs Density SILT / CLAY GRAVEL (<5% fines) GRAVEL (>12% fines) SAND (<5% fines) SAND (>12% fines) Liquid Limit < 50 Liquid Limit > 50 Breaks along defined planes Fracture planes that are polished or glossy Angular soil lumps that resist breakdown Soil that is broken and mixed Less than one per foot More than one per foot Angle between bedding plane and a planenormaltocoreaxis Very Loose Loose Med. Dense Dense Very Dense SPT N-values Approx. Undrained Shear Strength (psf) <4 4 to 10 10 to 30 30 to 50 >50 <2 2 to 4 4 to 8 8 to 15 15 to 30 >30 SPT N-values Units of material distinguished by color and/orcomposition frommaterial unitsabove andbelow Layers of soil typically 0.05 to 1mm thick, max. 1 cm Layer of soil that pinches out laterally Alternating layers of differing soil material Erratic, discontinuous deposit of limited extent Soil with uniform color and composition throughout Approx. Relative Density (%) Gravel Layered: Laminated: Lens: Interlayered: Pocket: Homogeneous: Highly Organic Soils #4 to #10 sieve (4.5 to 2.0 mm) #10 to #40 sieve (2.0 to 0.42 mm) #40 to #200 sieve (0.42 to 0.074 mm) 0.074 to 0.002 mm <0.002 mm UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP DESCRIPTIONS Notes: MONITORING WELL <15 15 - 35 35 - 65 65 - 85 85 - 100 GW GP GM GC SW SP SM SC ML CL OL MH CH OH PT TEST SYMBOLS 50%or more passing #200 sieve Groundwater Level at time of drilling (ATD)Static Groundwater Level Cement / Concrete Seal Bentonite grout / seal Silica sand backfill Slotted tip Slough <250 250 - 500 500 - 1000 1000 - 2000 2000 - 4000 >4000 RELATIVE DENSITY / CONSISTENCY Fissured: Slickensided: Blocky: Disrupted: Scattered: Numerous: BCN: COMPONENT DEFINITIONS Dry Moist Wet 1. Soil exploration logs contain material descriptions based on visual observation and field tests using a systemmodified from the Uniform Soil Classification System (USCS). Where necessary laboratory tests have beenconducted (as noted in the "Other Tests" column), unit descriptions may include a classification. Please refer to thediscussions in the report text for a more complete description of the subsurface conditions. 2. The graphic symbols given above are not inclusive of all symbols that may appear on the borehole logs.Other symbols may be used where field observations indicated mixed soil constituents or dual constituent materials. COMPONENT SIZE / SIEVE RANGE COMPONENT SIZE / SIEVE RANGE SYMBOLS Sample/In Situ test types and intervals Silt and Clay Consistency SAND / GRAVEL Very Soft Soft Med. Stiff Stiff Very Stiff Hard Phone: 206.262.0370 Bottom of BoringBoulder: Cobbles: Gravel Coarse Gravel: Fine Gravel: Sand Coarse Sand: Medium Sand: Fine Sand: Silt Clay > 12 inches 3 to 12 inches 3 to 3/4 inches 3/4 inches to #4 sieve Atterberg Limit Test Compaction Tests Consolidation Dry Density Direct Shear Fines Content Grain Size Permeability Pocket Penetrometer R-value Specific Gravity Torvane Triaxial Compression Unconfined Compression Sand 50% or more of the coarse fraction passing the #4 sieve. Use dual symbols (eg. SP-SM) for 5% to 12% fines. for In Situ and Laboratory Testslisted in "Other Tests" column. 50% or more of the coarse fraction retained on the #4 sieve. Use dual symbols (eg. GP-GM) for 5% to 12% fines. DESCRIPTIONS OF SOIL STRUCTURES Well-graded GRAVEL Poorly-graded GRAVEL Silty GRAVEL Clayey GRAVEL Well-graded SAND Poorly-graded SAND Silty SAND Clayey SAND SILT Lean CLAY Organic SILT or CLAY Elastic SILT Fat CLAY Organic SILT or CLAY PEAT ATT Comp Con DD DS %F GS Perm PP R SG TV TXC UCC Figure A-1 Approximately 3 inches of topsoil. Very loose, gray to brown, silty, fine to medium SAND, trace gravel (sub-angular); moist. [FILL]. Very loose, silty SAND, trace gravel (sub-angular); moist. Slight decrease in gravel content in sample S-2. Becomes wet at cap tip. Loose, gray, silty, fine SAND to fine sandy SILT, trace gravel, trace iron oxide staining; wet; slight decrease in sand content with depth. [LAKE DEPOSITS]. No recovery in sample S-3. Bentonite slurry added downhole to aid drilling. Loose, gray, silty fine SAND to fine sandy SILT, trace gravel, trace iron oxide staining; wet; slight decrease in sand content with depth. Loose, brown, silty fine SAND to fine sandy SILT, trace clay, trace iron oxide staining; wet. Medium dense, brown, fine to medium sandy GRAVEL, trace silt; wet. [ALLUVIUM]. Slight increase in sand content with depth in sample S-7. Hard, gray to brown, clayey SILT, trace sand, trace iron oxide staining; wet; non- to low-plastic, wavy laminations. [PRE-FRASIER DEPOSITS - UNDIFFERENTIATED - Qpf]. S-1 S-2 S-3 S-4 S-5 S-6 S-7 S-8 2 1 2 3 2 2 3 0 1 4 2 2 2 4 3 7 10 12 8 9 9 12 14 19 Remarks: Boring drilled using a Bobcat-mounted mini track drill rig. Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampler driven with a 140 lb. safety hammer. Hammer operated with a rope and cathead mechanism. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Figure A-2Other TestsSample No.Completion Depth: Date Borehole Started: Date Borehole Completed: Logged By: Drilling Company:Depth, (ft)Rose Wall Renovation, Gene Coulon Park 20-046 1201 Lake Washington Boulevard North, Renton, WA Northing: 47.511139, Easting: -122.203649 41.5ft 4/8/20 4/8/20 C. Venturino Geologic Drill Partners Sheet 1 of 2 Project: Job Number: Location: Coordinates:SymbolSample TypeBlows / 6 in.24.0ft HSA SPT Surface Elevation: Top of Casing Elev.: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: LOG OF TEST BORING PG-1 N-Value 0 Moisture LL 50 PL RQD Recovery 100 Hard, gray to brown, clayey SILT, trace sand, trace iron oxide staining; wet; non- to low-plastic, wavy laminations. (Continued) Slight increase in iron oxide staining in sample S-9. Trace amounts of gravel observed in sample S-10. Slight increase in clay content with depth. Boring terminated approximately 41.5 feet below ground surface. Groundwater observed at about 6.25 feet at the time of drilling. S-9 S-10 13 18 21 8 14 21 Remarks: Boring drilled using a Bobcat-mounted mini track drill rig. Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampler driven with a 140 lb. safety hammer. Hammer operated with a rope and cathead mechanism. 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Figure A-2Other TestsSample No.Completion Depth: Date Borehole Started: Date Borehole Completed: Logged By: Drilling Company:Depth, (ft)Rose Wall Renovation, Gene Coulon Park 20-046 1201 Lake Washington Boulevard North, Renton, WA Northing: 47.511139, Easting: -122.203649 41.5ft 4/8/20 4/8/20 C. Venturino Geologic Drill Partners Sheet 2 of 2 Project: Job Number: Location: Coordinates:SymbolSample TypeBlows / 6 in.24.0ft HSA SPT Surface Elevation: Top of Casing Elev.: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: LOG OF TEST BORING PG-1 N-Value 0 Moisture LL 50 PL RQD Recovery 100 Approximately 2.5 inches of asphalt pavement. Loose, brown to gray, silty fine to medium SAND, trace gravel; moist, occasional organics. [FILL]. Loose, brown to gray. Very loose, trace organic material (wood debris), trace iron oxide staining; wet; increase in silt content with depth. Loose, dark brown, silty fine to medium SAND, trace gravel, trace organic material (wood debris); wet. [LAKE DEPOSITS]. Wood debris in cap tip of sample S-3. Loose, dark brown, trace gravel, trace organic material (wood debris); wet. Bentonite slurry added downhole to aid drilling. Slight increase in gravel in sample S-5. Hard, gray, fine sandy SILT with gravel, trace clay, trace iron oxide staining; wet; non- to low-plastic. [PRE-FRASIER DEPOSITS - UNDIFFERENTIATED - Qpf]. Very dense, gray, fine to medium SAND, trace gravel, trace silt; wet; rock in cap tip may have inflated SPT blow count. Driller noted approximately 3 feet of heave. [PRE-FRASIER DEPOSITS - UNDIFFERENTIATED - Qpf]. No recovery in sample S-8. S-1 S-2 S-3 S-4 S-5 S-6 S-7 S-8 3 4 4 2 2 1 1 0 0 2 2 3 7 11 9 12 16 19 11 16 40 50/3 Remarks: Boring drilled using a Bobcat-mounted mini track drill rig. Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampler driven with a 140 lb. safety hammer. Hammer operated with a rope and cathead mechanism. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Figure A-3Other TestsSample No.Completion Depth: Date Borehole Started: Date Borehole Completed: Logged By: Drilling Company:Depth, (ft)Rose Wall Renovation, Gene Coulon Park 20-046 1201 Lake Washington Boulevard North, Renton, WA Northing: 47.510842, Easting: -122.203462 35.3ft 4/8/20 4/8/20 C. Venturino Geologic Drill Partners Sheet 1 of 2 Project: Job Number: Location: Coordinates:SymbolSample TypeBlows / 6 in.24.0ft HSA SPT Surface Elevation: Top of Casing Elev.: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: LOG OF TEST BORING PG-2 N-Value 0 Moisture LL 50 PL RQD Recovery 100 >> Very dense, gray, fine to medium SAND, trace gravel, trace silt; wet; rock in cap tip may have inflated SPT blow count. Driller noted approximately 3 feet of heave. (Continued) Driller noted approximately 6 feet of heave. Material in sample S-9 likely not representative of depth. Boring terminated approximately 35.25 feet below grade due to drilling refusal. Groundwater was encountered at about 6 feet at the time of drilling. S-9 50/3 Remarks: Boring drilled using a Bobcat-mounted mini track drill rig. Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampler driven with a 140 lb. safety hammer. Hammer operated with a rope and cathead mechanism. 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual. MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Figure A-3Other TestsSample No.Completion Depth: Date Borehole Started: Date Borehole Completed: Logged By: Drilling Company:Depth, (ft)Rose Wall Renovation, Gene Coulon Park 20-046 1201 Lake Washington Boulevard North, Renton, WA Northing: 47.510842, Easting: -122.203462 35.3ft 4/8/20 4/8/20 C. Venturino Geologic Drill Partners Sheet 2 of 2 Project: Job Number: Location: Coordinates:SymbolSample TypeBlows / 6 in.24.0ft HSA SPT Surface Elevation: Top of Casing Elev.: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: LOG OF TEST BORING PG-2 N-Value 0 Moisture LL 50 PL RQD Recovery 100 >> APPENDIX E PHOTOGRAPHS The diagram above is a key to the photographs listed on the next few pages. 1 2 3 4 4 5 6 19 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 18 (under bridge) 17 16 15 Figure 1. Typical vegetation near the southeast portion of the bridge. View is to the north. Figure 2. Typical vegetation community near the southeast portion of the bridge. View is to the south. Figure 3. Senesced emergent vegetation along the northern portion of the inlet. Figure 4. Red-eared slider turtle observed swimming near the bridge. Figure 5. Western Larch (Larix occidentalis) along shoreline. View is to the north. Figure 6. Scouler’s willow (Salix scouleriana) and senesced reed canary grass (Phalaris arundincea) and cattails (typhaceae .spp) along the edge of the northern inlet along Lake Washington. View is to the southwest. Figure 7. Potential wetland area north of the inlet with yellow water-flag (Iris pseudacorus) and Scouler’s willow (Salix scouleriana) along edges. Figure 8. Common horsetail located within south-east portion of project area. Figure 9. Curly dock (Rumex crispus), an invasive plant observed to the southeast of the bridge. Figure 10. Yellow water-flag along the northeast portion of the bridge and north of the inlet. Figure 11. Ornamental tree species located northeast of the bridge. Figure 12. View to the northeast. Figure 13. Vaccinium .spp and ornamental shrubs along riprap to the southwest of the bridge. Figure 14. Yellow iris (Iris pseudacorus) (center) with salal (Gaultheria shallon) near the southeast portion of the project site. View is to the south. Figure 15. Western hemlocks (Tsuga heterophylla), big leaf maples (Acer macrophyllum) and western red cedars (Thuja plicata) along the inlet shoreline. Figure 16. Vegetation community along the northeast portion of the project area. Figure 17. Typical condition of shoreline near the southern portion of the pedestrian bridge. Figure 18. Flag marking the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) on rip rap near southern bridge abutment. Figure 19. Flag noting faint debris line demarcating OHWM line.