Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWWP272109 (15)AGENCY USE ONLY ' Agency Reference #: Date Received:_ Circulated by: (local govt. or agency) ' JOINT AQUATIC RESOURCES PERMIT APPLICATION FORM (DARPA) (for use in Washington State) PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT IN BLACK INK ❑ I am applying for a Fish Habitat Enhancement Project per requirements of RCW 75.20.350. You must submit a copy 'of this completed JARPA application form, and the (Fish Habitat Enhancement JARPA Addition) to your local Government Planning Department and Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife Area Habitat Biologist on the same day. NOTE: LOCAL GOVERNMENTS — You must submit any comments on these projects to WDFW within 15 working day Based on the instructions provided. I am sending copies of this application to the following: (check all that apply) ❑ Local Government for shoreline: ❑ Substantial Development ❑ Conditional Use ❑ Variance ❑ Exemption ❑ Revision ❑ Floodplain Management ■ Critical Areas Ordinance ■ Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife for HPA (Submit 3 copies to WDFW Region) ■ Washington Department of Ecology for 401 Water Quality Certification Nationwide Permits (to Regional office -Federal Permit Unit) ❑ Washington Department of Natural Resources for Aquatic Resources Use Authorization Notification ■ Corps of Engineers for: ■ Section 404 ❑ Section 10 permit ❑ Coast Guard for Section 9 Bridge Permit ❑ US Fish & Wildlife Service or National Marine Fisheries Service for Endangered Species Act (ESA) Consultation ' SECTION A -Use for all permits covered by this application. Be sure to ALSO complete Section C (Signature Block) for all permit applications. 1 APPLICANT City of Renton MAILING ADDRESS 1055 S. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 WORK PHONE E-MAIL ADDRESS HOME PHONE F425430-7241 # 425-430-7279 jhobson@ci.renton.wa.us if an anent is actino for the aoolicant during the permit process, complete #2. 2. AUTHORIZED AGENT John Hobson MAILING ADDRESS 51" Floor, 1055 S. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 WORK PHONE E-MAIL ADDRESS HOME PHONE FAX # 425-430-7279 jhobson@ci.renton.wa.us 1 425-430-7241 3. RELATIONSHIP OF APPLICANT TO PROPERTY ❑ OWNER ❑ PURCHASER ❑ LESSEE ■ OTHER' City of Renton has Utility Easements across the properties 4 NAME. ADDRESS, AND PHONE NUMBER OF PROPERTY OWNER(S), IF OTHER THAN APPLICANT Christian R. Denzler: 1800 NE 201" St., Renton, WA 98056 phone 425-235-2850 Jeffrey B. & Charlyn Unbedacht: 2120 Jones Ave. NE, Renton, WA 98056 phone:425-228-0608 Richard & Lauralee Gordley: 2010 Jones Ave NE, Renton, WA 98056 phone:425-254-9814 5 LOCATION (STREET ADDRESS. INCLUDING CITY. COUNTY AND ZIP CODE, WHERE PROPOSED ACTIVITY EXISTS OR WILL OCCUR) This project will take place on the following three single family lots: 1800 NE 20" St., 2120 Jones Ave. NE, 2010 Jones Ave NE, Renton, King County, WA 98056 LOCAL GOVERNMENT WITH JURISDICTION (CITY OR COUNTY) City of Renton WATERBODY TRIBUTARY OF V,RIA Wetland Lake Washington 8 SECTION SECTION TOWNSHIP RANGE GOVERNMENT LOT SHORELINE DESIGNATION SE & NE 5 I 23N I SE W.M. None LATITUDE & LONGITUDE Lat Long ZONING DESIGNATION IF KNOWN 47°30'37•• 122°11'37" Single Family Residential TAX PARCEL NO DNR STREAM TYPE, IF KNOWN 3343903200;3343903203;3343903563 None 1 d I 11 6. DESCRIBE THE CURRENT USE OF THE PROPERTY, AND STRUCTURES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY IF ANY PORTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY IS ALREADY COMPLETED ON THIS PROPERTY, INDICATE MONTH AND YEAR OF COMPLETION All three properties are residential and each contain one single family residence. IS THE PROPERTY AGRICULTURAL LANDS ❑ YES ■ NO ARE YOU A USDA PROGRAM PARTICIPANT? ❑ YES ■ NO 7a. DESCRIBE THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION AND/OR FILL WORK FOR THE PROJECT THAT YOU WANT TO BUILD THAT NEEDS AQUATIC PERMITS. COMPLETE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS SHOULD BE PROVIDED FOR ALL WORK WATERWARD OF THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK OR LINE, INCLUDING TYPES OF EQUIPMENT TO BE USED. IF APPLYING FOR A SHORELINE PERMIT. DESCRIBE ALL WORK WITHIN AND BEYOND 200 FEET OF THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK. ATTACH A SEPARATE SHEET IF ADDITIONAL SPACE IS NEEDED The project proposes to remove an existing sanitary sewer liftstation and install approximately 1044 linear feet of 8" diameter sanitary sewer main line and 3 manholes. Approximately 776 linear feet of the proposed sanitary sewer line will be constructed through a Class-2 wetland. All of the manholes will be placed outside of the wetland and its 50 foot buffer. The method of constructiion will utilize a trackhoe for a standard pipeline dig and bury method. The sewer trench will be approximately 6 feet wide, vary in depth from 4 feet to 15.5 feet. Backfill material for the trench will consist of an imported gravel backfill material to a depth of 2.5 feet above the top of the pipe. The remaining backfill material will reuse the excavated native soils. 6 trench plugs made of control density fill will be installed along the pipe trench to prevent the "piping" of groundwater along the pipe zone. Surface restoration shall consist of hydroseeding the disturbed areas with a wetland vegetation seed mix. 7b. DESCRIBE THE PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSED WORK AND WHY YOU WANT OR NEED TO PERFORM IT AT THE SITE. PLEASE EXPLAIN ANY SPECIFIC NEEDS THAT HAVE INFLUENCED THE DESIGN. The purpose of the project is to eliminate the existing, aging Higate sanitary sewer lift station. Replacement of the lift station with a gravity sanitary sewer line will eliminate sewage overflows that may result from mechanical and/or electrical power failures within the lift station which could contaminate the wetland. The pipeline route was chosen to take advantage of the only possible gravity route to get from the existing lift station to existing downstream gravity sewers. 'c DESCRIBE THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO CHARACTERISTIC USES OF THE WATER BODY. THESE USES MAY INCLUDE FISH AND AQUATIC LIFE, WATER QUALITY. WATER SUPPLY, RECREATION, and AESTHETICS. IDENTIFY PROPOSED ACTIONS TO AVOID, MINIMIZE, AND MITIGATE DETRIMENTAL IMPACTS, AND PROVIDE PROPER PROTECTION OF FISH AND AQUATIC LIFE. ATTACH A SEPARATE SHEET IF ADDITIONAL SPACE IS NEEDED. The project will remove approximattely 638 cubic yards of native soil from the wetland and its 50 foot buffer and replace it with imported gravel backfill material. To minimize impacts, the gravel backfill will be limited to 2.5 feet above the top of the proposed sewer pipe and the remainder of the backfill will utilize the native soils. This will result in 1 foot to 12 feet of native soil over the pipe which will allow wetland plants to resume growth throughout the length of the proposed sewer. 6 trench plugs will be installed along the proposed sewer line to prevent the "piping" of groundwater along the trench backfill. Revegetation of the construction corridor with a wetland seed mixture will ensure that the area will not change aesthetically from the preconstruction condition. PREPARATION OF DRAWINGS: SEE SAMPLE DRAWINGS AND GUIDANCE FOR COMPLETING THE DRAWINGS. ONE SET OF ORIGINAL OR GOOD QUALITYREPRODUCIBLE DRAWINGS MUST BE ATTACHED. NOTE. APPLICANTS ARE ENCOURAGED TO SUBMIT PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PROJECT SITE, BUT THESE DO NOT SUBSTITUTE FOR DRAWINGS THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS AND COAST GUARD REQUIRE DRAWINGS ON 8-112 X 11 INCH SHEETS. LARGER DRAWINGS MAYBE REQUIRED BY OTHER AGENCIES. 8. WILL THE PROJECT BE CONSTRUCTED IN STAGES? ❑ YES ■ NO PROPOSED STARTING DATE: July 1, 2000 ESTIMATED DURATION OF ACTIVITY 60 working days 9 CHECK IF ANY STRUCTURES WILL BE PLACED ❑ WATERWARD OF THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK OR LINE FOR FRESH OR TIDAL WATERS. AND/OR ❑WATERWARD OF MEAN HIGH WATER LINE IN TIDAL WATERS 10 WILL FILL MATERIAL (ROCK, FILL, BULKHEAD. OR OTHER MATERIAL) BE PLACED ❑ WATERWARD OF THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK OR LINE FOR FRESH WATERS? IF YES. VOLUME (CUBIC YARDS) /AREA (ACRES) ❑ WATERWARD OF THE MEAN HIGHER HIGH WATER FOR TIDAL WATERS? IF YES. VOLUME (CUBIC YARDS) AREA (ACRES) DARPA, Revised 12/98, contact Ecology's Permit Assistance Center for latest version, 360/407-7037 Page 2 of 4 11. WILL MATERIAL BE PLACED IN WETLANDS? ■ YES ❑ NO IF YES A. IMPACTED AREA IN ACRES 0.36 Acres 8. HAS A DELINEATION BEEN COMPLETED? IF YES, PLEASE SUBMIT WITH APPLICATION. IN YES ❑ NO C HAS A WETLAND REPORT BEEN PREPARED? IF YES, PLEASE SUBMIT WITH APPLICATION ■ YES ❑ NO D TYPE AND COMPOSITION OF FILL MATERIAL (E.G.. SAND, ETC) Imported 1-114 minus crushed rock backflll E MATERIAL SOURCE: Approved Washington State Department of Transportation Gravel Pit F. LIST ALL SOIL SERIES (TYPE OF SOIL) LOCATED AT THE PROJECT SITE. 8 INDICATE IF THEY ARE ON THE COUNTY'S LIST OF HYDRIC SOILS. SOILS INFORMATION CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE (NRCS): Indianola Loamy Fine Sand (NO); Shalcar Muck (YES) 12. WILL PROPOSED ACTIVITY CAUSE FLOODING OR DRAINING OF WETLANDS? ❑ YES ■ NO IF YES. IMPACTED AREA IS _ ACRES. 13, WILL EXCAVATION OR DREDGING BE REQUIRED IN WATER OR WETLANDS? IN YES ONO IF YES A. VOLUME: 638 (CUBIC YARDS) /AREA 0.36 (ACRES) 8 COMPOSITION OF MATERIAL TO BE REMOVED. Indianola Loamy Fine Sand and Shalcar Muck C. DISPOSAL SITE FOR EXCAVATED MATERIAL: Disposal of excavated material will be the responslblitly of the Clty'S contractor in accordance with all Federal, State, County and Local laws. 0 METHOD OF DREDGING Trackhoe 14. HAS THE STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA) BEEN COMPLETED? WYES ❑ NO SEPA LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton SEPA DECISION. DNS. MDNS, EIS, ADOPTION, EXEMPTION DECISION DATE (END OF PERIOD). March 7, 2000 SUBMIT A COPY OF YOUR SEPA DECISION LETTER TO W )FW AS REQUIRED FOR A COMPLETE APPLICATION 15. LIST OTHER APPLICATIONS, APPROVALS, OR CERTIFICATIONS FROM OTHER FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL AGENCIES FOR ANY STRUCTURES, CONSTRUCTION, DISCHARGES. OR OTHER ACTIVITIES DESCRIBED IN THE APPLICATION (I.E., PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL, HEALTH DISTRICT APPROVAL, BUILDING PERMIT, SEPA REVIEW, FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION LICENSE (FERC), FOREST PRACTICES APPLICATION, ETC.) ALSO INDICATE WHETHER WORK HAS BEEN COMPLETED AND INDICATE ALL EXISTING WORK ON DRAWINGS. TYPE OF APPROVAL ISSUING AGENCY IDENTIFICATION DATE OF APPLICATION DATE APPROVED COMPLETED? NO EPA Review City of Renton LUA-99-088 Following Army Corp. March 7, 2000 Yes City of Renton Construction Permit City of Renton Following all Reviews Water Quality Certification Wash. Dept. of Ecology Pending Hydraulic Project Approval ash. Dept of Fish and Following SEPA Pending 16. HAS ANY AGENCY DENIED APPROVAL FOR THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED HEREIN OR FOR ANY ACTIVITY DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED HEREIN? ❑ YES ■ NO IF YES, EXPLAIN: C=r`TInAI R _ Ilea fnr Qhoreuna and Cnms of EnoinAP_rs Dermits only: 17. TOTAL COST OF PROJECT THIS MEANS THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE PROJECT, INCLUDING MATERIALS, LABOR, MACHINE RENTALS, ETC. $300,000 18. LOCAL GOVERNMENT WITH JURISDICTION City of Renton 19. FOR CORPS, COAST GUARD. AND DNR PERMITS, PROVIDE NAMES. ADDRESSES. AND TELEPHONE NUMBERS OF ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS. LESSEES, ETC.. PLEASE NOTE: SHORELINE MANAGEMENT COMPLIANCE MAY REQUIRE ADDITIONAL NOTICE —CONSULT YOUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT. NAME ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER Leona Core 1828 NE 20"" St, Renton, WA 98056 25-226-1593 Robert N. Cave 12518 SE 171" St, Bellevue, WA 98005 25-644-0121 Keith W., Debbie A. Brownfield 22021 SE 29"PI., Issaquah, WA 98027 25-392-9374 Lorraine Taylor 208 Jones Ave NE, Renton, WA 98056 25-226-4577 JARPA, Revised 12/98, contact Ecology's Permit Assistance Center for latest version, 360/407-7037 Page 3 of 4 ' SECTION C - This section MUST be completed for any permit covered by this application 1 0. APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE FOR A PERMIT OR PERMITS TO AUTHORIZE THE ACTIVITIES DESCRIBED HEREIN. I CERTIFY THAT I AM FAMILIAR WITH THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS APPLICATION, AND THAT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF, SUCH INFORMATION IS TRUE, COMPLETE, AND CCURATE. I FURTHER CERTIFY THAT I POSSESS THE AUTHORITY TO UNDERTAKE THE PROPOSED ACTIVITIES I HEREBY GRANT TO THE AGENCIES TO WHICH HIS APPLICATION IS MADE, THE RIGHT TO ENTER THE ABOVE -DESCRIBED LOCATION TO INSPECT THE PROPOSED. IN -PROGRESS OR COMPLETED WORK. I AGREE TO START WORK ONLY AFTE LL NECESSARY PERMITS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED SIGNATURE OR UT IZED AGENT ATE rOFAPP 3 8 ZD� I HEREBY OESI ATE TO ACT AS M AGENT IN MATTERS RELATED TO THIS APPLICATION FOR PERMIT(S). 1 UNDERSTAND THAT IF A FEDERAL PERMIT IS ISSUED, I MUST SIG THE PERMIT. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE SIGNATURE OF LANDOWNER (EXCEPT PUBLIC ENTITY LANDOWNERS, E G. DNR) DATE THIS APPLICATION MUST BE SIGNED BY THE APPLICANT AND THE AGENT. IF AN AUTHORIZED AGENT IS DESIGNATED '18 U S.0 §1001 provides that. Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact or makes any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry, shall be fined not more than $10.000 or imprisoned not more than 5 years or both. COMPLETED BY LOCAL OFFICIAL A. Nature of the existing shoreline. (Describe type of shoreline, such as marine, stream, lake, lagoon, marsh, bog, swamp, flood plain, floodway, delta; type of beach, such as accretion, erosion, high bank, low bank, or dike; material such as sand, gravel, mud, clay, rock, riprap; and extent and type of bulkheading, if any:) B. In the event that any of the proposed buildings or structures will exceed a height of thirty-five feet above the average grade level, indicate the approximate location of and number of residential units, existing and potential, that will have an obstructed view: C. If the application involves a conditional use or variance, set forth in full that portion of the master program which provides that the proposed use may be a conditional use, or, in the case of a variance, from which the variance is being sought: These Agencies are Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action employers. For special accommodation needs, please contact the appropriate agency in the instructions. JARPA, Revised 12/98. contact Ecology's Permit Assistance Center for latest version, 360/407-7037 Paste 4 of 4 I CITY OF RENTON DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply". Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT PROPOSALS: Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs), the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. r LI Higate Lift Station Elimination Environmental Checklist A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Higate Lift Station Elimination 2. Name of applicant: City of Renton - Wastewater Utility 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 1055 South Grady Way Contact: John Hobson - (425) 430-7279 Renton, WA 98055 4. Date checklist prepared: January 31, 2000 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable). Project will be bid in May, 2000 with construction beginning in July, 2000. Completion of construction is estimated for October, 2000. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. 20 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. A wetland delineation report was prepared by Entranco in December 1996 for this project. A follow-up site review and letter was provided on August 16, 1999 by Entranco to confirm that their 1996 is still valid (this letter is included). A geotechnical report was prepared by Golder and Associates dated January 12, 2000. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. None 10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. The project may require the following permits: Dept of Fish and Wildlife HPA, Army Corps of Engineers Section 404, Dept of Ecology Water Quality Certification. H:D0CS:96-527:DMC:ps -2- IHigate Lift Station Elimination Environmental Checklist 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the ' project and site. The Higate Lift Station Elimination project entails the installation of approximately 1044 linear feet of 8" diameter gravity sanitary sewer pipe and 3 manholes, the removal of the ' existing sewage lift station, asphalt patching and revegetation of disturbed areas. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise ' location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if ' reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The new gravity sewer will extend from a point in NE 201' St that is 5 feet west of the east property line of KC Tax Lot # 334390-3200 (1800 NE 20"' St), thence north approximately 612 linear feet through existing utility easements, thence west an offset distance of 7.5 feet ' south of the north line of KC Tax Lot # 334390-3203 (Lot 2 of REN-SP-60-87) for a distance of approximately 409 linear feet to an existing manhole in Jones Ave NE. The project will be located in the east 1/2 of Section 5, T23N, R5E. ' B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH ' a. General description of the site (circle one); flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other ' The site is the existing paved roadway, and flat single family residential lots. One of the residential lots is mostly undeveloped field. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope?) The steepest slope is approximately 1%. ' C. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any ' prime farmland. The project site contains Indianola loamy fine sands and Shalcar muck. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. ' None. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. This project will consist of excavation of a trench for purposes of installing an 8 inch sewer main and manholes. The trench will be backfilled with the native soils ' H:DOCS:96-527:DMC:ps -3- Higate Lift Station Elimination Environmental Checklist where suitable and imported select backfill where not suitable. No change in existing topography will result from this project. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Minor erosion may result during excavation and backfilling activities. Standard erosion control measures will minimize any impact from the minor erosion. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? There will be no additional pervious area as a result of this project. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: ' 2. AIR u The contractor will be required to use standard erosion control measures including but not limited to fabric in catch basins, hay bales, and silt fencing. a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. The only emissions that will result from this project will be from construction equipment such as track -hoes, loaders, dump trucks, rollers, etc. b. Are there any off -site sources of emission or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. None. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: All construction equipment will be required to meet state and federal requirements for emissions. 3. WATER a. Surface Water: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year- round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. There is a Category 2 wetland. The City will seek a modification per section "N" of City code 4-3-110 (Wetlands Regulations) to construct within the wetland. 2) WII the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Yes. Installation of sewer main will be within portions of the wetland and it's buffer. H.DOCS:96-527:DMC:ps -4- Higate Lift Station Elimination Environmental Checklist 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Approximately 638 cubic yards of imported trench backfill material will be used ' within the wetland and it's buffer. This imported backfill will replace an equal amount of native soil which will be removed from the site during construction. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. ' Yes. Temporary diversion of the existing drainage course and trench dewatering will occur during the construction. The original drainage course will be reinstated following installation of the proposed sewer. ' 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year flood plain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. None. b. Ground Water: ' 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. The project will require trench dewatering during excavation and pipe installation. Volume will depend on water table at the time of construction. ' 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of ' such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None. C. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters, If so, describe. None. 2) Could waste material enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. f.n IH:DOCS:96-527:DMC:ps -5- Higate Lift Station Elimination Environmental Checklist d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: None. 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: X deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs X grass _X _pasture _ crop or grain X wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? There will be a removal of approximately 12, 5"-8" diameter alders, 4, 18"-30" diameter alders, and native plants and grasses within the construction zone. The Construction zone will be reseeded with a wetland seed mixture following construction. C. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: The Construction zone will be reseeded with a wetland seed mixture following construction. 5. ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: (see next page) Unknown. The site is undeveloped and would be anticipated to serve as habitat for a variety of species common to the urban periphery. This may include raptors, songbirds, deer, racoons, and rodents among others. Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. H: DOCS:96-527: DMC:ps -6- Higate Lift Station Elimination Environmental Checklist 6. 7. C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain No. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None required. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. No energy will be required to operate the gravity sewer main. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. C. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: None. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. None. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None required. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? None. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. H:D DCS:96-527:DMC:ps -7- IHigate Lift Station Elimination Environmental Checklist Short term noise impacts will be only those from construction equipment such as track -hoes, loaders, generators, trucks, etc. H: DOCS:96-527: DMC: ps -8- Higate Lift Station Elimination Environmental Checklist 8 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Contractor will be required to meet all federal, state, and local noise level requirements. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The existing site is two single family residential lots and small portions of roadway. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. C. Describe any structures on the site. None. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Residential 8 DU/AC f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Residential single family g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Not applicable. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. The project site contains a wetland i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? None. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None required. H:DOCS:96-527:DMC:ps M Higate Lift Station Elimination Environmental Checklist 9. 10 11 I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: None required. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None required. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed. None. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None required. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? None. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None required. I H:DOCS:96-527:DMC:ps -1 0- Higate Lift Station Elimination Environmental Checklist 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? None. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. M C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None required. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. None. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None required. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The project will be constructed within a small portion of NE 201' St and Jones Ave NE. b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? No. Approximately 1000 feet east at the intersection of Aberdeen Ave NE and NE 20"' St. C. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? None. H:DOCS:96-527:DMC:ps -1 1- Higate Lift Station Elimination Environmental Checklist 15. 16. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private? Asphalt patching of NE 201' St. and Jones Ave NE will be required where the new pipeline connects into the existing manholes. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. None. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. None. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None required. UTILITIES a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other: cable b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. The project consists of the construction of an 8 inch sanitary sewer main that will be owned and operated by the City of Renton. H: DOCS:96-527: DMC : ps -12- Higate Lift Station Elimination Environmental Checklist C. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non -significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent: Name Printed: Vohn D. Hobson Date: January 31, 2000 H:DOCS:96-527:DMCTs -13- CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE t (MITIGATED) APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-99-088,ECF ' APPLICANT: City of Renton; Utilities Division (John Hobson) 'PROJECT NAME: Higate Lift Station Elimination DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: it with ae traivlitesewerlsystem the The/proj Dts'te consists of twoproposing existing City held theHigate sewer lift station and replace gravity easements totaling 30 feet in width (I 5-foot wide utility easement & overlying 30-foot wide construction easement), which cross three separate properties. The site is designated Residential — 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) on the City of ll utijity," is considered an Renton's Zoning Map. The ' Pf Oduse line w�l extenin the R-8 d north from f the site, as a aNE 20th Street for 646 feett,, then tuutright rnwestmitted e west at aright angle. zone. The new 8-inch gravity sewer The line is proposed to continue west for 440 feet where it will connect to an existing sanitary sewer manhole located in er manholes Jones Avenue NE. The project also includes the placement of four new sew disturbed areas (vegetation and asphalt). Approximately 814 linear feet of the proposed se line would be located within as well as the restoration of a Category 2 wetland and its 50-footWe�and bufferareas, thereby exempting n order to dlexpti g the wetland project from wetland regulations compensation requirements.allow ' the proposed activity in wetland and requirements. ' LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 1800 NE 20`h Street and 2010 & 2120 Jones Avenue NE LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Development Planning Section The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environmeas mitigation rmeasures Ibythe En ironmenStatement tallReview Committee is not under tuired under thhei authority of SCW ection Conditions were imposed 4-6-6 Renton Municipal Code. These conditions are necessary to mitigate environmental impacts identified during the environmental review process. must Appeals of the envoge her with hedetermination requi ed $75 0 applicat ontifee with Hear ng ExaminerMarch Ciy of RenOton,1055sSouth Gr filed in writing tog Renton Grady Way, Rennformatio98regarding55. p he appeal proc sExaminer s may be obtain db omlt hefR nton City C errk!s Off ce, (425) 430- Code Section 4-8- 11 B. Additions 6510. 'PUBLICATION DATE: DATE OF DECISION: ' SIGNATURES: I G immer n, Ad mini: epartment of Planning/Bull 1 She her Adm istrato munity Services March 13, 2000 March 7, 2000 g/Public Works 7 � DA E 3 7 D TE Lee Wheeler, Fire Chief DATE, Renton Fire Department' r Ieresignature CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-99-088,ECF APPLICANT: City of Renton; Utilities Division (John Hobson) PROJECT NAME: Higate Lift Station Elimination DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The Utilities Division of the P/B/PW Department is proposing to eliminate the Higate sewer lift station and replace it with a gravity sewer system. The project site consists of two existing City held easements totaling 30 feet in width (15-foot wide utility easement & overlying 30- foot wide construction easement), which cross three separate properties. The site is designated Residential — 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) on the City of Renton's Zoning Map. The proposed use of the site, as a "small utility," is considered an outright permitted use in the R-8 zone. The new 8-inch gravity sewer line will extend north from NE 20th Street for 646 feet, then turn west at a right angle. The line is proposed to continue west for 440 feet where it will connect to an existing sanitary sewer manhole located in Jones Avenue NE. The project also includes the placement of four new sewer manholes as well as the restoration of disturbed areas (vegetation and asphalt). Approximately 814 linear feet of the proposed sewer line would be located within a Category 2 wetland and its 50-foot buffer. A modification to the wetland regulations has been requested in order to allow the proposed activity in wetland and wetland buffer areas, thereby exempting the project from wetland compensation requirements. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 1800 NE 201h Street and 2010 & 2120 Jones Avenue NE MITIGATION MEASURES: The applicant shall follow the recommendations contained within the Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Report for the Higate Sewer Project, dated January 12, 2000, prepared by Golder Associates. The applicant shall follow the conceptual mitigation recommendations contained within the Higate Sewage Lift Station Wetland Delineation Report, dated December 1996, prepared by Entranco, Inc. 1 G I CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department `ram Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator lcsse Tanner, Mayor March 7, 2000 John Hobson Utility Engineer, City of Renton Renton City Hall — 5" Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washington 98055 R E C IF I V E D y ry :;i= 6ENTON, ITII IT'S' SVS i EMS SUBJECT: MODIFICATION REQUEST FROM THE WETLAND REGULATIONS- HIGATE LIFT STATION, FILE NO. LUA-99-088, ECF Dear John: I have reviewed your request for a modification from the City's Wetland Management code for the Higate Lift Station project. The evaluation and decision follow. Summary of Request ' The Utilities Section of the Planning/Building/Public Works Department has requested a modification from the City's Wetland Regulations. The proposal is to revise the Higate Sewer System by eliminating the existing lift station and replacing it with a gravity flow ' system. The project would likely impact 13,350 square feet of high quality, Category 2 wetland area as well as 6,600 square feet of wetland buffer area. The proposal does not clearly fall within the allowed and regulated activities established by the Wetland 1 Regulations. Activities not listed are required to provide a wetland mitigation report and plan proposing compensation through the creation of new wetland areas at specified ratios. Section 4-3-11 ON allows the Administrator to grant modifications from the wetland regulations for individual cases. The Department Administrator shall first find that a ' specific reason makes the strict letter of this Code impractical, and that the minor modification is in conformity with the intent and purpose of this code, and that such modification: a. Will still meet the objectives of environmental protection, safety, function and maintainability intended by the Code requirements, based upon sound scientific ' judgment, b. Will not be injurious to other property(ies) in the vicinity; IC. Result in no net loss of wetland or buffer area and function and value from that approved in the original project plan; ' Documcnt2\cor 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 March 7, 2000 d. Will be made prior to detailed engineering and design, such as during site plan review, short plat, preliminary plat approval or the pre -application 1 phase of planned unit development; and e. Will be documented and entered as part of the official wetland permit file. ' Background A Wetland Delineation Report, dated December 1996, was prepared by Entranco, Inc. and submitted with the Higate Lift Station land use application. The report was ' accompanied with a letter, dated August 16, 1999, which states the report is still valid based on current site conditions. According to the report, the site contains a high quality, Category 2 wetland involving scrub -shrub vegetation delineated at up to 8 acres ' in size. The wetland is directly connected to the Higate Creek corridor and is fed by surrounding seeps in several locations. ' The proposed 8-inch sanitary sewer line would be installed by standard open trenching within a 30-foot wide construction and utility easement, which bisects three single family properties. The construction corridor would likely impact approximately 13,350 square ' feet of wetland area and approximately 6,600 square feet of wetland buffer area. RMC section 4-3-11 OK of the Wetland Regulations lists specified allowed and regulated ' activities within designated wetland areas and buffers. These activities are permitted provided disturbed areas are immediately restored. All other proposed activities are required to provide a wetland mitigation report and plan proposing compensation ' through the creation of new wetland areas at specified ratios. Although the project proposes to immediately restore all disturbed areas to pre-existing 1 conditions, including reseeding with a wetland seed mix, the proposed utility line installation is not clearly listed under the regulation's allowed activities. If not considered an allowed activity, the project would be required to create new wetland areas at a ratio of 2 times the area altered (approximately 26,700 square feet). The proposed utility line ' is, however, closely associated with an allowed activity. Therefore, a wetland modification request has been included with the application in order to establish this specific proposal as an allowed and regulated activity in the wetland area and buffer. According to the Wetland Report submitted with the application, the proposal is not anticipated to result in permanent impacts to the wetland. The report includes recommendations for temporary construction impacts resulting from the project, such as the establishment of clearing limit fencing, protection of trees, methods for cutting vegetation to encourage rapid regrowth, and keeping stockpile soils areas away from wetlands areas. In order to mitigate the short term impacts to the wetland area and ' buffer, staff has recommended the applicant comply with the conceptual mitigations contained within the wetland report as part of the Threshold Determination of Non - Significance — Mitigated. The City's issuance of a Threshold Determination for the project would be contingent upon the approval of the subject modification request. In the event the modification is ' not approved, a wetland mitigation report and plan would be required and a threshold determination would be recommended after the mitigation plan is reviewed. In addition to the approval of the modification, the project would be required to obtain approvals ' DocumcnO\cor March 7, 2000 Page 3 under separate permitting requirements for Department of Fish and Wildlife Hydraulic Project Approval Permit (HPA), Army Corp of Engineers Section 404 permit, and Department of Ecology Water Quality Certification. Analysis 1.) Will still meet the objectives of environmental protection, safety, function and maintainability intended by the Code requirements, based upon sound scientific judgment. Subsection K of the City's Wetland Regulations provides a list of allowed activities within wetland areas and buffers. The following is included as an allowed activity under the regulations: Normal and routine maintenance and repair of any existing public or private uses and facilities where no alteration of the wetland or additional fill materials will be placed. The use of heavy construction equipment shall be limited to utilities and public agencies that require this type of equipment for normal and routine maintenance and repair of existing utility or public structures and rights -of -way. In every case, wetland impacts shall be minimized and disturbed areas shall be restored during and immediately after the use of construction equipment (4-3- 110K1d). Essentially, the proposal is to perform modifications to an existing sanitary sewer 1 system. Similar to the proposed gravity line, the lift station is located within the boundary of a Category 2 wetland. The existing facility has reached the end of its service life. The replacement of the lift station with a gravity sewer line could 1 be considered maintenance to an existing public facility where it would otherwise not be able to provide adequate service. The proposal should, therefore, be included as an allowed activity under the provision listed above. L The intent of the Wetland Regulation's requirements for wetland replacement is to provide compensation when a project results in a permanent loss of wetland area. The subject sewer line proposal would only result in temporary construction impacts, which would be immediately mitigated through restoration measures. Therefore, the project would result in no net loss of wetland area. If the proposal is not considered an allowed and regulated activity within wetland areas and buffers, the project would be required to create approximately 26,700 square feet of new high quality, Category 2 wetland areas. It would be unduly burdensome to require the project to create additional wetland areas in order to offset temporary, not permanent, losses. It would be more appropriate to require the project to comply with the measures recommended in the submitted wetland report during site preparation and construction. Documcnt2kor March 7. 2000 Pa-c 4 2.) Will not be injurious to other property(ies) in the vicinity. The proposed activity would remain within established construction and utility easements. Temporary short-term impacts may result from the initial construction of the facility. However, the surrounding properties are anticipated to benefit from improved sanitary sewer system. 3.) Result in no net loss of wetland or buffer area and function and value from ' that approved in the original project plan. As stated under criterion number one, the project is not anticipated to result in permanent impacts to the wetland areas or buffers. Therefore, no net loss of wetland or buffer area and function and value would occur. 4.) Will be made prior to detailed engineering and design, such as during site plan review, short plat, preliminary plat approval or the pre -application phase of planned unit development. ' The modification request has been made prior to detailed engineering and design of the gravity sewer line. The final design shall incorporate all SEPA and regulatory agency requirements. 5.) Will be documented and entered as part of the official wetland permit file. The modification will be documented and entered as part of the official land use file for the project. Decision: 1 The wetland modification request to allow for the installation of the proposed 8-inch sanitary sewer line as an allowed and regulated activity under the Wetland Regulations is approved, with the conditions that the recommendations of the Wetland Report regarding limiting construction impacts are followed, and all disturbed areas within the wetland are immediately returned to pre- existing conditions. ' Sincerely, GreggZ merman, Administrator Planning/Building/Public Works Department cc: Jennifer Henning Lesley Nishihira I Ih)cumcnt2\cor • •4m HIGATE LIFE STATION ELIMINATION VICINITY MAP Cr Al F 1 =200' © ENTRANCO August 16, 1999 1 10900 NE 8TH STREET SUITE 300 BELLEVUE WASHINGTON 98004-4405 TELEPHONE 1 425 454 5600 ' TOLL FREE 800 454 5601 1 FAX 425 454 0220 ' INTERNET www.entranco.com 1 ARIZONA CALIFORNIA IDAHO OREGON UTAH WASHINGTON John Hobson City of Renton Wastewater Utility Division 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 AUG 1 r 1999 "ITY CF p:F',.I Tr, Re: Higate Sewage Lift Station Wetland Delineation Entranco Project No. 99133-60 Dear Mr. Hobson: This letter summarizes my review of a wetland delineation documented in the Higate Sewage Lift Station Elimination, Wetland Delineation Report prepared in December 1996 by Entranco (project no. 96038). The field analysis was completed in August 1996 and one 5- to 8-acre wetland was delineated. Because the wetland delineation was completed in late summer, wetland hydrology was assumed in some instances. Portions of the wetland in the project corridor were flagged; portions outside of the project corridor were visually estimated. On July 21, 1999, 1 reviewed the wetland delineation report and examined the project corridor. No flags from the 1996 delineation were observed. The wetland boundaries that I observed corresponded to the wetland boundaries mapped in the delineation report. Because I completed the review in the summer, I also had to assume wetland hydrology in some instances. I also agree with the classification of the wetland as a City of Renton, Category 2 wetland, because the wetland is a headwater wetland. If you have any questions concerning this project, please feel free to call me. Sincerely, ENT ANCO, INC. - 4- en rgent Senior Wetland Ecologist KWS:jc 1; I", 1. 1, 1. Wetland Delineation Report Higate Sewage Lift Station Elimination Renton, Washington Prepared for: AGRA Earth & Environmental and City of Renton December 1996 430 E N T R A N C O Wetland Delineation Report HIGATE SEWAGE LIFT STATION ELIMINATION Renton, Washington Prepared for AGRA Earth & Environmental 11335 NE 122nd Way, Suite 100 Kirkland, Washington 98034-6918 (206) 820-4669 and City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 (206) 277-6179 Prepared by ENTRANCO 10900 NE 8th Street, Suite 300 Bellevue, Washington 98004 (206) 454-5600 December 1996 CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 1 BACKGROUND 1 FIELD INVESTIGATION METHODOLOGY 1 FIELD INVESTIGATION 8 Field Data Results 10 Wetland Delineation Results 14 POTENTIAL WETLAND IMPACTS During Construction 14 During Operation 15 CONCEPTUAL MITIGATION 15 REFERENCES Published Documents 16 APPENDIX A - Wetland Map from Original Alignment B - Wetland Map from Surrounding Property C - Growing Season Table D - Completed Data Forms E - Earthen Trench Plug 960381 Report i Wetlands (1211819611 Ic I FIGURES Page 1. Project Vicinity 2 2. Proposed New Sewer Line Corridor 3 3. NWI Wetlands in the Project Area 4 4 City Inventory Wetlands in the Project Area 5 5. Wetland Delineation Map 9 TABLES Page 1. Plant Status and Chance of Growing in a Wetland 6 2. Soils in the Project Area 7 96038 1 Report i weuands (12>1&95) / Ic If I INTRODUCTION This wetlands investigation is for the proposed Higate Sewer Lift Station Elimination project, which is located in Section 5, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., and in the City of Renton (figure 1). The proposed new buried sewer line would be located in the northeastern quadrant of the intersection of Jones Avenue NE and NE 20th Street along a 15-foot-wide utility easement (figure 2). The investigation was performed to identify and to delineate the jurisdictional boundary of wetlands within 65 feet of the utility easement. BACKGROUND Two previous wetland studies have been conducted in the project vicinity. These studies were reviewed prior to conducting the current field investigation. The first study was prepared for the original alignment for proposed new sewer line (the original alignment was approximately 120 feet west of the current alignment along NE 20th Street). The results from this investigation indicated wetlands were along only the immediate creek channel and around the existing excavated pond (Appendix A, Phelps 1993). The second investigation was conducted for a private land owner who owns much of the property the proposed new sewer line will cross. The results from this investigation indicated that the wetlands extend across much of the creek valley (Appendix B, David Evans & Associates 1994). Maps from both the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetland Inventory (USFWS NWI) and the City of Renton also were examined to see if these government agencies had identified any wetlands as occurring in the project vicinity. The NWI map (USFWS 1988) indicates a seasonally flooded, palustrine (freshwater) scrub -shrub wetland (PSSC, Cowardin et al 1979) in the project area (figure 3). This site corresponds to the blueberry farm immediately south of NE 20th Street and the existing sewage lift station (which is to be eliminated). The City of Renton's wetland map (Renton 1992) indicates a wetland in the same area, but shows the wetland extending north of NE 20th Street (figure 4). ' FIELD INVESTIGATION METHODOLOGY ' The wetland investigation was conducted using the "Routine On -site Determination Method" described in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987), as modified (Corps 1991 and 1992). For t jurisdictional purposes, wetlands are defined by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (Federal Register 1982 and 1980) as: J 96038 � Repon / Wetlands (12118/96) : Ic (PENTON) 1562 1 10, 1$63 RENTON 1.7 Mf.� 1578 1 NW 0 SCALE 1:240W t 0 1 MILE g 0 1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 FEET c 1 .5 0 1 KILOMETER WASHINGTON h CONTOUR INTERVAL 25 FEET NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929 S QUADRANGLE LOCATION SewageHigate 1WetlandDelineation Figure 430 ENTRANCO Project Vicinity 1 e � �`� I LLJZL LJ ^ Z ry O 0 N ' Q 1 I I VA:. I ^� E(cEr•1EuT I 1 t U 1 z 1 I d _N84• Z9E 1 h 'lot 3 h • 1 O a 'SS lot 4 PW 1 I lot i2�ooi I ' ZI $ _ It all o f • o t, d P e�pc o N ti o Cv tc z S m • 1 a NE 20th Street Higate Sewage Lift Station - Wetland Delineation Report 1� ENTRANCO Figure Proposed New Sewer Line Corridor 1 ry MC i r I N __:z i IJ May � ITS:' _.� •i �; Iti I i'-�a '�`,�_ �l�`\ \�� �\ J o �, /�+ .,� •...: — ,•�G- > 1 ! -. �� \':.1 : R456C, .� \��? III I / `-� 1• f- --- - : � �; ��� tea! , . � ��-:1� • ., t ~�'�� ~ �. �y%7 / j �/ •.'� \ . Q NA kennpdale eman Poi. �., u �"�v'-�f_ \`�• —f . ��' PEMC�� it Ae- eCIS f�lyrsi I r�r�y- _Y- _ '. ` _• . -•t�' �! f��+-.yam- �• • jTtM '`•t-?:.i�t�_ M�t3•' _ I II ti�K ?�i'�' s.+.'� :: ��r y4t -'++-� �"� toy'ic+slr r,+• ;S, S 'tea•. Mf F�},y-cc .�Z m , • �•Ct'..-4'- �. ���' i,+ , ..r �.",,�1} {<_i�"i1'•'� ♦ � _ ` �, ,,�'� 1'� kyl �`'1S "iyr•�� -1 / '. m .UBHx ��a �•:. �`-�' ix•!a. .;tir.•`.ttcC •=1=,1.1� � .,, c�.i � "y',� � `• . 3 \ �•• `\\/^I f rN'u..F�L ti 1._rrarr•�.� m t•"`•T'U� ,r (j ./ ,�r �/` , Eyt' r \ ���rs _.5 "a�.3�rF:C a �_� t'�C;. ^ .. i�4•�prV't'"�t we •rPEMGx_1`i. •� .:a y� `.IFI'2� `'i'%'`_ `L. S+',_�r.�--ice }- Sx:F-_• t.:.w[" _— TON, 5z S O ID m Lift oStationWetlandDelineationReport 1 m Figure 3 E N T R A N C O NWI Wetlands in the Project Area .I .I N S I W � I i ' I Cn I 1u_ LJ f S — 9 L°-� Q. ,�0{- W - ' I y z I W 2 ` S -13 'GTON ' V ' S_a 7� 7 I W-23 6 S 10 - 17 I I I I W3K W1K W4K S26K c1ll W2K - S28K N.E:27TH STREET L W - Q 29 S-1 1 I NE 20th Street i i PROJECT LOCATION i-, n / S —18 a c _1 - S io IL 4 g FIGURE #3 a CITY OF RENTON WETLANDS m INVENTORY MAP O HAMMONO. COLLIER & WAO E - LIVINGSTONE ASSOCIATES. INC. P i O m m a HigateSewage Wetland Report Delineation 430 E N T R A N C O Figure 4 City Inventory Wetlands in the Project Area "Those 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 presence of the three essential wetland characteristics (i.e., wetland vegetation, soils, and hydrology) were examined by looking for positive indicators of each characteristic. Examination for wetland (hydrophytic) vegetation is done within different plant communities (i.e., communities that are composed of significantly different species of plants). Each plant community along the suspected wetland/non-wetland boundary is identified and described and a data point is selected in each different plant community. Plant species are identified around that data point for each different stratum (e.g., tree, sapling, shrub, and herb). The sampling area around the data point is a 30-foot radius for the tree stratum and a 5-foot radius for the sapling, shrub, and herb strata. Through visual estimating, the plants are given a percentage of coverage in each stratum sampling area. The dominant plants in each stratum are determined by selecting plants which have a coverage of 20 percent for each stratum. These plants are included on the list of dominant species. Plant species were identified using the Flora of the Pacific Northwest (Hitchcock and Cronquist 1973). Plants were further identified as to the estimated probability of their chance of occurring in wetland and non -wetland environments, based on the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands (Reed 1988a, 1988b, and 1993 and Corps 1994) as shown in table 1. Table 1 Plant Status and Chance of Growing in a Wetland Indicator Categories Symbol Estimated Probability Obligate Wetland OBL >99% Facultative Wetland FACW 67%-99% Facultative FAC 34%-66% Facultative Upland FACU 1 %-33% Obligate Upland UPL <1% The dominant species and their indicator category for all strata are combined together to determine if the identified dominant vegetation meets the criteria that wetland plants 960381 Report / Wetlands (12/18196) 1 1c 6 comprise most of the plant community. In general, the criteria to meet the wetland vegetation requirements occurs when the dominant plants that have an OBL, FACW, and/or FAC indicator (see table 1) account for more than 50 percent of the total list of dominant species. When this "greater than 50 percent' threshold occurs, the data point is said to have a positive presence of wetland vegetation. In addition to the percent coverage method, there are other indicators for identifying wetland vegetation. If the plants are observed to be growing under saturated or inundated conditions during the growing season, regardless of the indicator status, the plants should be considered as acting like wetland plants. Morphological, physiological, and reproductive adaptation, and evidence from technical literature also are used to determine if the plant is acting as wetland vegetation. If there is strong evidence of these other indicators, the plant community should be said to have a positive presence of wetland vegetation. Examination for wetland (hydric) soils starts by digging a pit at the data point and assessing the soil characteristics. Indicators for hydric soils include: (1) organic soils; (2) histic epipedons; (3) sulfidic materials; (4) aquic or peraquic moisture regimes; (5) direct observation of reducing soil conditions; (6) gleyed, low chroma, and low chroma/ mottled mineral soils; (7) soils on the local or national hydric soils list (note: care must be taken here so as not to include remnant hydric soils); (8) iron and manganese concretions; and (9) coarse textured or sandy hydric soils that have high organic matter content in the surface margin, dark vertical streaks of organic matter in subsurface horizons, or an organic pan (i.e., wet spodosol, an organic layer "floating" underground at the water table). Mineral soils were examined using the Munsell Soil Color Charts (Kollmorgen 1988) ' and the soil characteristics of the project area were reviewed with the Soil Survey King County, Washington and King County Area Hydric Soils List (USDA Soil Conservation Service 1973 and 1989) for hydric soil indicators (table 2 and Appendix B). Soils with ' a hydric inclusion are soils that, for mapping purposes and constraints, can have small patches of wetland soils (hydric soils) included in the soil area. Table 2 Soils in the Project Area Soil Hydric Sym. Soil Name Slope Hydric Inclusion Inc Indianola loamy fine sand 4-15% no no Sm Shalcar muck 0-1 % yes n/a 96038 / Report I Wetlands (I?II W96) � Ic Examination for wetland hydrology starts by visually scanning across the site and in the ' soil pit, to check for indicators of wetland hydrology. These primary field indicators, in descending order of reliability, include: (1) visual observation of inundation; (2) visual observation of soil saturation in the upper 12 inches; (3) water marks; (4) drift lines; (5) ' water -borne sediment deposits; and (6) wetland drainage patterns. Secondary field indicators include evidence of: (1) oxidized root channels (rhizospheres) associated with living roots and rhizomes in the upper 12 inches; (2) water stained leaves; (3) local ' soil survey data; and (4) FAC-neutral test (note: Corps approval is required to use this test). ' The manual further defines the jurisdictional timing and duration of inundation and soil saturation to meet the hydrology criteria. Non -tidal areas that have a duration of ' inundation and/or soil saturation greater or equal to 5 percent of the growing season may have wetland hydrology. Sites with 12.5 percent or greater duration of the growing season are considered to have a positive presence for wetland hydrology. ' The growing season is defined as surface temperatures greater than 28 degrees Fahrenheit, for at least 50 percent of the year. The growing season for the site was ' determined as being 253 days long based on the USDA Soil Conservation Service (now the Natural Resources Conservation Service) Soil Survey for King County Area, Washington (USDA SCS 1973) (Appendix C). The 5 and 12.5 percentages translate ' into roughly 13 and 32 days, respectively. FIELD INVESTIGATION The field investigation was conducted on August 7 and 8, 1996. The weather during ' the field investigation was sunny and hot. Since the field examination occurred during the driest time of the year, professional judgment was used in some cases, to determine the presence of wetland hydrology. Nine data points were located on the site to look for positive indicators of the three essential wetland characteristics: wetland (hydrophytic) vegetation, wetland (hydric) ' soils, and wetland hydrology. Data gathered was used to determine the boundary of the project wetland. These data points correspond to the soil pits (SP) and were numbered SP1 through SP9 on pink survey flagging. Cross ditches over the utility easement were also labeled and flagged with pink survey tape. The data points are shown on figure 5, the completed data forms are attached as Appendix D. Soils 1 colors were taken from wet samples unless noted otherwise. o %036 / Report / Wetlands (12719/96) / Ic 8 I 50' YkILAND PUFFLR I I I I I I I I I n I I I I 80 40 0 80 160 Sewer Construction Easement 10 WETLAND All 430 E N T R A N C O of tl 11F, w N G. - � ... . .......... ........ ............... . .... ..... ........... . ................. - ------ ------ - - -------- -- - ------- ----- --- ... o 441 s WETLAND 1w wf 1P [W]fi 4 4, ....... . ----------- - - --- ---------------­---------- - - dPO 001� Higate Creek 0 -UM 1W t W -00 1L t7 Pond _Z4 NON—WL -AND goo qWO 400 WEXAPID ARFA MUD FOR 4NCXE F,UtY "')Ij% q1( IP Wetland Buffer ISingle -Family Jones Avenue NE Residences If's Blueberry Farm Legend 0 0 SP-1 soil Pit C14 z Ui AA1-1 Wetland Flag __w Delineated Wetland Boundary qWW Approximate Wetland Boundary 50' Buffer Zone Figure 5 Wetland Delineation Map Field Data Results Data Point 1. The data point is located in roughly the mid -point along the north/south leg of the new sewer line corridor, and in a scrub -shrub plant community dominated by hardhack (Spiraea douglasil), lady fern (Athyrium filix-femina), giant horsetail (Equisetum telmateia), and Himalayan blackberry (Pubus procera). These plants together indicate the presence of hydrophytic vegetation. A soil pit (SP1) was dug to a depth of 12 inches to look for positive indicators of hydric soils and wetland hydrology. Although the soil was organic (a hydric soil indicator), the soil color was still examined. The soil was determined to be a 10YR 2/1 color throughout the core. With the organic soil, hydric soils were considered to be present. The soil pit was saturated to the surface and free standing water was 6 inches below the surface. The wetland hydrology characteristic was considered to be present. This data point was determined to be a wetland since all three essential wetland requirements were met. Data Point 2. The data point is located south of Data Point 1 up a small knoll, and is in a scrub -shrub plant community dominated by Himalayan blackberry, giant horsetail, and hedge bindweed (Convolvulus sepium). Although not listed as a wetland plant, the blackberry is known to be a vigorous grower in seasonally flooded wetlands. In this case, the blackberry was considered to be acting as a wetland plant, based on the shallow water table. The positive presence of hydrophytic vegetation was assumed. A soil pit (SP2) was dug to a depth of 15 inches to look for positive indicators of hydric soils and wetland hydrology. The soil was organic (a hydric soil indicator) in the upper 6 inches and mineral below this. The soil color was examined in the sandy mineral soil and was determined to be a 10YR 3/2 color. A strong sulfidic odor was also present in the soil. With the 6-inch organic soil layer (histic epipedon) over the saturated sandy soil, hydric soils were considered to be present. The soil pit was saturated at 12 inches and free standing water occurred 15 inches below the surface. The typical groundwater level was assumed to be much higher at the beginning of the growing season (March). The wetland hydrology characteristic was considered to be present. ' This data point was determined to be a wetland since all three essential wetland requirements were met. ' Data Point 3. The data point is located west of Data Point 1, up on a slight mound. The data point is in a plant community dominated by red alder (Alnus rubra), giant horsetail, and Himalayan blackberry. These plants together indicate the presence of ' hydrophytic vegetation. 96038 1 Feoon / Wetlands (12/18196) 1 lc 10 A soil pit (SP3) was dug to a depth of 18 inches to look for positive indicators of hydric soils and wetland hydrology. The soil has an organic layer (a hydric soil indicator) in the top 12 inches and a mineral soil below. The silty textured mineral soil was determined to be a 10YR 3/1, with mottles of a 10YR 4/4 color. With the organic soil layer (histic epipedon) over the low chroma, silty mineral soil, hydric soils were considered to be present. No water or saturation was observed in the soil pit. But due to the proximity and shallow elevation change from the surrounding area determined to be a wetland, the soil pit would be expected to be saturated within 12 inches of the surface, at the beginning of the growing season, for a sufficient duration to meet the jurisdictional hydrology requirements. The wetland hydrology characteristic was assumed to be present. This data point was determined to be a wetland since all three essential wetland requirements were met. Data Point 4. The data point is in a disturbed plant community (i.e., front yard of a house and maintained as a lawn) just north of NE 20th Street, and is dominated by creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens), velvet grass (Holcus lanatus), horsetail (Equisetum sp., likely telmateia), and unidentifiable grasses (due to the mowing). These plants together indicate the presence of hydrophytic vegetation. A soil pit (SP4) was dug to a depth of 12 inches to look for positive indicators of hydric ' soils and wetland hydrology. Although the soil was organic throughout the core (a hydric soil indicator), the soil color was still examined. The soil was determined to be a 10YR 2/1 color in the upper 12 inches and 7.5YR 2/0 below that point in the core. With the organic soil, hydric soils were considered to be present. The soil pit was saturated to 4 inches from the surface and free standing water ' occurred 6 inches below the surface. The wetland hydrology characteristic was considered to be present. This data point was determined to be a wetland since all three essential wetland requirements were met. ' Data Point 5. The data point is located north of Data Point 1, next to a fallen and grown over barn. The data point is in a scrub -shrub plant community dominated by reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), giant horsetail, and Himalayan blackberry. ' These plants together indicate the presence of hydrophytic vegetation. A soil pit (SP5) was dug to a depth of 18 inches to look for positive indicators of hydric ' soils and wetland hydrology. Although the upper part of the soil was organic (a hydric soil indicator), the soil color was still examined for the mineral soil below. The soil was ' determined to be a 10YR 3/2 color (dry) in the sandy/mucky soil from 0 to 7 inches. From 7 to 14 inches, the sandy loamy soil was determined to be a 10YR 5/2 color with 96038 r Report r Wetlands (12/1&96) 1 lc 11 abundant mottles of both 7.5YR 4/4 and 7.5YR 5/6 colors. Below 14 inches, the soil was a 10YR 5/2 color with mainly 10YR 5/6 colored mottles. With the low chroma, mottled mineral soil, hydric soils were considered to be present. The soil pit was saturated to a depth of 14 inches below the surface, however, free standing water was not observed in the soil pit. Based on the depth of saturation (i.e., close to 12 inches below the surface) and time of year during the field investigation, the wetland hydrology characteristic was assumed to be present. This data point was determined to be a wetland since all three essential wetland requirements were met. Data Point 6. The data point is just upslope to the north of Data Point 5 and is in a scrub -shrub plant community dominated by Himalayan blackberry, which by itself, does not indicate the presence of hydrophytic vegetation. A soil pit (SP6) was dug to a depth of 24 inches to look for positive indicators of hydric soils and wetland hydrology. The sandy mineral soil was determined to be a 10YR 3/2 color, with no mottles, from 0 to 10 inches deep, 10YR 4/4 from 10 to 24 inches deep, and 10YR 5/4, with some slight soil discoloration noticeable. With no hydric indicators observed in the mineral soils, hydric soils were not considered to be present. No indicators of wetland hydrology was observed in the soil pit or surrounding area. The wetland hydrology characteristic was not considered to be present. This data point was determined not to be a wetland since none of the essential wetland requirements were met. Data Point 7. The data point is located on the northern portion of the project, along the east/west leg of the new sewer line corridor in a scrub -shrub plant community dominated by Himalayan blackberry, giant horsetail, hardhack, and red alder. These plants together indicate the presence of hydrophytic vegetation. A soil pit (SP7) was dug to a depth of 24 inches to look for positive indicators of hydric soils and wetland hydrology. The sandy mineral soil was determined to be a 10YR 3/1 (dry) color to 10 inches deep, and a 10YR 6/2 (dry) color, with abundant 7.5YR 4/6 mottles from 10 to 24 inches deep. With the low chroma, mottled mineral soil, hydric soils were considered to be present. ' No inundation or saturation was observed in the soil pit during the field investigation. However, based on the proximity and relative location in the topography to the creek, the site would likely have sufficient water during the beginning of the growing season to tmeet the hydrology criteria. With this in mind, the wetland hydrology characteristic was assumed to be present. This data point was determined to be a wetland since all three essential wetland requirements were met. 96038 / Repo(I / Wellands (12/18/96) 1 12 Data Point 8. The data point is located upslope from Data Point 7, and is in a scrub - shrub plant community dominated by Himalayan blackberry, salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), and red alder. These plants together indicate the presence of hydrophytic vegetation. A soil pit (SP8) was dug to a depth of 24 inches to look for positive indicators of hydric soils and wetland hydrology. All soil colors were determined using dry samples. The sandy mineral soil was determined to be a 10YR 2/1 color from 0 to 9 inches deep, 10YR 6/2.5, with very slight 10YR 5/6 mottles from 9 to 18 inches deep, and 10YR 6/2, with strong 10YR 4/6 mottles from 18 to 24 inches deep. Although slight, the mottling in the low chroma mineral soil appear sufficient to meet the wetland soils criteria. Hydric soils were considered to be present. No indicators of wetland hydrology were observed in the soil pit or surrounding area. Based on the proximity and higher elevation relative to the creek, the site would likely not have sufficient water during the beginning of the growing season to meet the hydrology criteria. The wetland hydrology characteristic was not considered to be present. This data point was determined not to be a wetland since only two of the essential wetland requirements were met. Data Point 9. The data point is located in the field (likely old pasture) north of the new sewer line corridor and west of the creek. The data point is in an emergent plant community dominated by reed canarygrass, giant horsetail, soft rush (Juncus effusus), creeping buttercup, and quackgrass (Agropyron repens). These plants together indicate the presence of hydrophytic vegetation. A soil pit (SP9) was dug to a depth of 18 inches to look for positive indicators of hydric soils and wetland hydrology. All soil colors were determined using dry samples. The sandy mineral soil was determined to be a 10YR 3/2 color, with no mottles, from 0 to 9 inches deep, and a 10YR 5/2 color, with both 10YR 5/6 and 7.5YR 4/4 colored mottles from 9 though 18 inches deep. With the mottled, low chroma mineral soil, hydric soils were considered to be present. No inundation or saturation was observed in the soil pit during the field investigation. ' However, based on the proximity and position in the landscape relative to the creek, the site would likely have sufficient water during the beginning of the growing season to ' meet the hydrology criteria. With this in mind, the wetland hydrology characteristic was assumed to be present. This data point was determined to be a wetland since all three essential wetland ' requirements were met. 960381 Repot / Wetlands (12/18/96) / Ic 13 Wetland Delineation Results The wetland was flagged with blue survey tape and marked as assessment area AA-1 through AA-12 with in the project corridor. The wetland boundary outside of the corridor was visually estimated. The wetland is directly connected to the creek corridor and is fed by surrounding seeps in several locations. The entire wetland is estimated to be roughly 5-8 acres in size. Though historically used as a pasture, and now overgrown with blackberry and red alder, the wetland would meet the criteria as a Category 2, High Quality Wetlands, since the site is a headwater wetland (Renton 1992b). Category 2 wetlands require a standard buffer of 50 feet. The disturbed portion of the wetland (i.e., residence next to NE 20th Street), would, by itself, meet the criteria as a Category 3, Lower Quality Wetlands. This is based on the presence of fill for the house and garages. Category 3 wetlands require a standard buffer of 25 feet. However, since this area is connected to the main portion of the wetland, this disturbed area also would be considered a Category 2 wetland with a 50- foot buffer. The creek would have a buffer of 25 feet. Any activity in the wetlands may require permits from federal, state and city resource agencies. These permits may include: Permit/Approval/Review Resource Agency Section 404, Nationwide Permit U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Water Quality Modification Washington State Department of Ecology Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife SEPA Review Wetland Permit City of Renton City of Renton POTENTIAL WETLAND IMPACTS ' Based on the most current plan set (11/1/95), the impacts to the wetland were estimated for activities during construction and during operation. Cumulative and secondary impacts are not addressed in this report, since the project details are not ' completed. Cumulative and secondary impacts, however, should be considered and included as part of the wetland mitigation plan preparation. ' During Construction ' Impacts during construction are those which may temporarily affect the wetland's vegetation, soils, and hydrology. The project utility corridor is 15 feet wide and the 96038 1 Rawl I Wetlands (12/18196) 1 )c 14 construction easement corridor is approximately 15 feet wide. Construction for the new sewer line would likely affect all the wetlands in these corridors. The 30-foot-wide construction corridor would impact roughly 13,350 square feet of wetlands. The construction also would impact 6,600 square feet of wetland buffer area. Material storage is expected to occur outside of the wetlands. ' During Operation Impacts during operation are those which may permanently affect the wetland's ' vegetation, soils, and hydrology. No permanent impacts are anticipated for the proposed project. I CONCEPTUAL MITIGATION ' As with impacts, mitigation can be for temporary impacts (construction) and permanent impacts (operation). Typically, temporary impacts to wetlands can be mitigated by restoring the site after construction. However, mitigation criteria set at the beginning of construction can minimize the impacts and aid in the wetlands recovery. Mitigation for temporary impacts, in no particular order, may include: • narrow the construction corridor to minimize the amounts of wetlands disturbed • protect large trees in the corridor and wetlands out of the corridor, with clearing limit fencing • cut the vegetation to leave short stems and roots for rapid regrowth • use log mats or geotech fabric and hogfuel to limit soil disruption • stockpile surplus soils away from wetlands • use earthen trench plugs periodically to avoid "piping" along new sewer line (refer to a typical detail in Appendix E). • maintain subsurface cross water flow, by using either a drainage blanket or pipes • discharge water pumped out of the construction trench to points outside of wetlands, possibly using the current sewer system, or do not drain the trench and "work in the wet" • construct only during dry weather and within the HPA fisheries window • separate and bypass flowing water in the ditches and creek from the construction trench 960381 Report 1 Wetlands (12/18196) 1 le 15 • reuse existing hydric soils and reshape the landscape to pre -construction conditions • revegetate the disturbed wetland and buffer with native plant species. • maintain and monitor the revegetated areas to assure adequate establishment of the native vegetation Mitigation for permanent impacts may need to follow the criteria in the Wetland Management Ordinance (Renton 1992b) to compensate for any permanent loss of wetlands. Mitigation can be creation of new wetlands from upland areas or restoration of degraded wetland areas. In case there were to be impacts to the wetlands, the Category 2, scrub -shrub wetlands permanently affected would need to be compensated at a 2:1 ratio. Wetland buffers permanently lost also would require mitigation. If needed, a potential mitigation site could be the reed canarygrass dominated wetland plant community along the new sewer line corridor. This site is located just north of the lot along NE 20th Street. Mitigation at this location could be in the form of a wetlands restoration effort. If permanent impacts were to occur, a mitigation report and plan would need to be created when specific impacts are determined. A mitigation report would contain the environmental goals and objectives, performance standards, wetland construction plans, monitoring plans, and a contingency plan for the mitigation effort. However, with no permanent impacts anticipated for the project, no creation mitigation for replacement wetlands is expected. ' REFERENCES Published Documents ' Adamus, Paul R., Ellis J. Clairain, R. Daniel Smith and Richard E. Young ' 1987 Wetland Evaluation Technique (WET); Volume II: Methodology, Operational Draft Technical Report Y-87 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. ' Cowardin, Lewis M., Virginia Carter, Francis C. Golet and Edward T. LaRoe 1979 Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. ' Prepared for the Office of Biological Services, Fish and Wildlife Services, U.S. Department of Interior, Washington DC, FWS/OBS-79/31. ' David Evans and Associates 1994 Wetland Delineation Letter. Prepared for private landowner. 9W38 / Repon / Wetlands (12/16/96) 1 pc 16 Environmental Laboratory 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (1987 Manual). Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Federal Register 1991 33 CFR Part 330: Nationwide Permit Program Regulations and Issue, Reissue, and Modify Nationwide Permits; Final Rule. Part III Department of Defense, Corps of Engineers, Department of the Army, Vol. 56, No. 226, US Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. November 22. 1982 Title 33: Navigation and Navigable Waters; Chapter II, Regulatory Programs Corps of Engineers., Vol. 47, No. 138, p. 31810, US Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 1980 40 CFR Part 230: Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines for Specification if Disposal Sites for Dredged or Fill Material, Vol. 45, No. 249, pp. 85352-85353, US Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Hitchcock, Leo C. and Arthur Cronquist 1973 Flora of the Pacific Northwest: An Illustrated Manual. University of Washington Press. 1990 edition. Kollmorgen Instruments Corporation 1988 Munsell Soil Color Charts. Baltimore, MD. Kunze, Linda M. 1987 Puget Trough Freshwater Wetlands, A summary of Biologically Significant Sites, Phase II: Southern Puget Trough Impounded Wetlands. Washington Natural Heritage Program. Prepared for the Washington State Department of Ecology. Phelps, Marilyn (Cascade Environmental Services) 1993 Wetland Delineation Report. Prepared for City of Renton. Puget Sound Water Quality Authority (PSWQA) 1994 Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan Reed, Porter B., Jr. 1993 1993 Supplement to the List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1988a National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: National Summary. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Report 88(24). 1988b National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Report 88(26.9). 960381 Report / Wellands (12/18196) / Ic 17 Renton, City of 1992 Critical Areas Inventory Maps. Prepared with assistance from Jones and Stokes, and R.W. Beck. 1992b Wetland Management Ordinance. Chapter 32. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ' 1988 Mercer Island Quadrangle, National Wetland Inventory. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) ' 1994 1993 Supplement to National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). March 31. ' 1992 Clarification and Interpretation of the 1987 Manual. Guidance memorandum. March 6. ' 1991 Questions & Answers on 1987 Corps of Engineers Manual. Guidance memorandum. October 7. 1990 Permit Requirements for Wetland Fill Projects. Information Paper. Seattle ' District. April 17. USDA Forest Service 1985 Management of Wildlife and Fish Habitats in Forests of Western Oregon and Washington, Part 1 - Chapter Narratives. Pacific Northwest Region. Published in cooperation with the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. USDA Soil Conservation Service 1989 King County Area Hydric Soil List. 1973 Soil Survey of King County Area Washington. Washington Natural Heritage Program (NHP) 1994 Endangered, threatened and sensitive vascular plants of Washington. Department of Natural Resources, Olympia. Washington State Department of Ecology 1993 Wetland Rating System. 960381 Feoort i Wetlands (12/19/96) / Ic 18 APPENDIX A Wetland Map from Original Alignment IF ro Z3 �. WETLAND #2 AREA ADJACENT TO EXISTING ' • „: '3 .�v � a1 F POND i ° 4 _-\iQ,].7. ♦ .I.J. .lAA—•--.�tea . dry, jy�as /101 +ar — „ -21 ' M • 2oa 2or°.' J 17,0 y 13fl 'jj61 2a nn + I 2++ �,3o 155 +a + Ir{[f +•ry +74 ,2a 2ef u I CL �3 i ' 23y1J� 2M O b fie+-,2 DAln S 1t° `�rJC"�, +u 2 i // �. a ' sz 0..s:�, ••� ��,_ 2 SCALE 1 = 80 FEET I n ' ZY2 1 Ja �{ 23{ �' J i `� 2a0 1 ` 273 L J1 2 Iv 1 4 ui a fell Zr 1 i Z� I L •' ha Lj � I "' LARGE PASTURE Lu I 2{a i , ' p WETLAND #3 SMALL DITCH TRIBUTARY TO �3 CREEK J2. Szs r•yuRs _ � ) I ]OS W 1 J20 sp}Ari � I WETLAND #1 II EAST BANK OF CREEK, o aoo NORTH OF I{, POHL RESIDENCE O > KAY RESIDENCE 3n ( �,., DR. KAY'S PROPERTY -32 1. .383 Sea f _ - N. E 20TH STREET a+'—JSL,;;-Sa. aa4.17 as a.}� IT�Liii FIGURE #4 r •23 ; ; .:. siSSr ' - •a PROJECT AREA SURVEY MAP EXISTING BERRY FARM ' H A M M O N D• COLLIER & WADE — LIVINGSTONE A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. APPENDIX B Wetland Map from Surrounding Property 9 �i 21 11 I`` \� Ir YD` �l AFL ��/ L� 1 ! _ �•1,1 i — , S , i I o " : �.t,e�/v�..J,�. •� Fs It oll „, 1; r r:_21All _ — iv»�/ !UL• �<J ;. ��,_ ter.. !, 1 ...—._ti. APPENDIX C Growing Season Table TABLE 10.—PROBABILITY OF FREEZING TDiPERATURES AFTER Probability in spring Station. Temperature 90 75 50 25 10 percent percent percent percent percent 0- Bothell 2 N. 32 Apr. 18 Apr. 30 May 13 ;hy 27 June 7 (elevation 100 feet) 28 Mar. 19 Mar. 30 Apr. 13 Apr. 27 May 8 24 Feb. 7 Feb. 21 Mar. 8 Mar. 21 Apr. 2 Cedar Lake 32 Mar. 21 Apr. 2 Apr. 15 Apr. 28 May 11 (elevation 1,560 feet) 28 Feb. 11 Mar. 1 Mar. 16 Mar. 30 Apr. ll 24 (L) Jan. 29 Feb. 14 Mar. 1 Mar. 15 Landsburg 32 Apr. 15 Apr. 27 May 10 May 24 June 4 (elevation 535 feet) 28 Mar. 4 Mar. 16 Mar. 29 Apr. 11 Anr. 24 2L Jan. 8 Feb. 4 Feb. 19 Mar. 5 Mar. 18 Monroe 2 WSW. 32 Mar. 21 Apr. 3 Apr. 16 Apr. 30 May 12 (elevation 120 feet) 28 Feb. 21 Mar. 5 Mar. 19 Apr. 1 Apr. 14 24 Jan. 28 Feb. 17 Mar. 6 Mar. 17 Seattle -Tacoma Airport 32 Mar. 15 Max. 27 Aur. 9 Apr. 23 May 4 ��lgvat� on �86 !eet)__ 28 Feb. 5 Feb. 23 Mar. 9 _ Mar. 23 _ Apr. 4_ 24 (1 ) Jan. 18 Feb. 9 Feb. 25 Mar. 9 Seattle University of Washington 32 Feb. 26 Mar. 10 Mar. 23 Apr. 6 Apr. 17 (elevation 113 feet) 28 (L) Jan. 10 Feb. 2 Feb. 17 Mar. 2 24 (L/) Jan. 17 Feb. 6 Feb. 19 Snoqualmie Falls 32 Apr. 11 Apr. 23 May 6 May 20 June 1 (elevation 430 feet) 28 Mar. 6 Mar. 18 Apr. 1 Apr. 14 Apr. 27 24 (L/) Feb. 8 Feb. 24 Mar. 10 Mar. 23 Vashon Island 32 Mar. 10 Mar. 23 Apr. 5 Apr. 18 May 1 (elevation 231 feet) 28 Jan. 14 Feb. 7 Feb. 23 Mar. 8 Mar. 21 24 (L/) (i/) Jan. 21 Feb. 9 Feb. 24 J Not reported. 1 90 SPECIFIED DATES IN SPRING AND BEFORE SPECIFIED DATES IN FALL Probability in fall Period between �5 50 75 90 last occurrence in spring and 10 percent percent first in fall percent percent percent Days Sept. 12 Sept. 23 Oct. 5 Oct. 17 Oct. 28 145 200 Oct. 7 Oct. 18 Oct. 30 Nov. 11 Nov. 22 �52 Oct. 22 Nov. 2 Nov. 15 Dec. 1 Oct. 10 Oct. 21 Nov. 2 Nov. 14 Nov. 25 201 251 Oct. 29 Nov. 9 Nov. 22 Dec. 10 Dec. 5 (�) Dec. 27 (J) 299 Nov. 13 Nov. 25 Sept. 21 Oct. 1 Oct. 14 Oct. 26 Nov. 6 6 157 229 Oct. 21 Nov. 1 Nov. 13 Nov. 25 Dec. 286 Nov. 7 Nov. 19 Dec. 2 Dec. 21 (i/) Sept. 30 Oct. 11 Oct. 25 Nov. 4 Nov. 15 19O 239 Oct. 22 Nov. 1 Nov. 13 Nov. 26 (�) 283 Nov. 2 Nov. 14 Nov. 27 Dec. 13 Oct. 10 Oct. 21 Nov. 2 Nov. 15 Nov. 25 207 Oct. 26 Nov. 5 Nov. 1 Dec. 2 Dec. 16 _ 253 _ —___— 3�5 Nov. 20 Dec. 5 (1) 1) 1) Oct. 26 Nov. 6 Nov. 18 Dec. 1 Dec'. 11 240 319 Nov. 21 Dec. 1 Dec. 18 ) {�) 348 Dec. 3 Dec. 19 Sept. 16 Sept. 27 Oct. 9 Oct. 21 Nov. 1 156 221 Oct. 16 Oct. 27 Nov. 8 Nov. 20 Dec. 1 281 Nov. 8 Nov. 19 Dec. 2 Dec. 19 (V) Oct. 15 Oct. 26 Nov. 7 Nov. 19 Nov. 30 216 289 Nov. 18 Nov. 24 Dec. 9 Dec. Dec31 (J) (�) {1) 344 Dec. 2 Dec. 16 31 T 1 468-266 0 - 77 - 45 91 APPENDIX D Completed Data Forms ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION - DATA FORM Project/Site: lica C'wner lnvestigator(s): 10 Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Is the site significantly & recently disturbed? (Atypical Situation) Is the area a potential Problem Area? (explain in final remarks) VEGETATION ' Dominant 'Plant Species I � Stratum Inndicator. i. U ' 3.JWCA6 L �-3 4., Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL. FACW or FAC (excluding FAG) % F, REMARKS: pl'Ob O d �� HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks) Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Aerial Photographs Other None 1987 MANUAL Sec: Date: ` Township. County: LlW� Ranger State: Washington r.Yes� No Plot ID: yYes (No) Transect ID: Yes � Community ID: ?, 50 6./t I ►�OyY hF!t ��ti 7. 8-= d Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? �� No Basis for determination: } e - wt.. PRIMARY Indicators Inundated Saturated in Upper 12' Water Marks Drift Lines Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands SECONDARY Indicators Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12' Water Stained Leaves Local Soil Survey Data FAC-Neutral Test Other (Explain in Remarks) Feld Observations Depth of Surface Water. IVA- (in.) Depth to Free Water in Pit:�(n.) Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes' No REMARKS: Basis for determination: SOILS Soils Mapped As: %\ GI I oryoia Taxonomy (Series and Phase): Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color finchesl jjgpmQ (Munsell Moist) Hydric Soil Indicators: _ Histosol Histic Epipedon _ SuRidic Odor _ Aquic Moisture Regime Hydric Soils Present? Ye Mottle Colors (Munsell Moist,' Drainage Class: Feld Observations Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No Reducing Conditions _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors — Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Concretions Listed on National Hydric Soils List High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils No REMARKS: Basis for determination: Ljw Gk V OVN WETLAND DETERMINATION Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? es, No INVESTIGATOR: Basis for determination: - 00 ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION - DATA FORM 1987 MANUAL Pro ite: _ plica C wner I - gator(s): _ Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? ' Is the site significantly & recently disturbed? (Atypical Situation) Is the area a potential Problem Area? (explain in final remarks) VEGETATION ' Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1. I r"` 4'S CGS - g� ['_ � 2. P-6-� 5 P.e�-) �'�, F C. 3. bvc, ' 4. 5. �1 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAG) (!�� % REMARKS: lJ\iD S 104,0- b d1M J t' Sec: `> Date: Township: 1' r County: 1' 1,'.1/ Range: State: Washington ,:Yes No Plot ID: { F Yes ;No" Transect ID: Yes NQ Community ID: L 15ominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator s. e I G�t_c Zvi-p-�-I� tea_ / ► ,=-� 7. f �co-�, Anazv rk•j llo14 -T— 8. sW It �4u 9s444 s. Gyix a k, u e, EA c G— I (,1S _ -� Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? I es No Basis for determination: 1 70, HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): PRIMARY Indicators SECONDARY Indicators Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Inundated Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12' Aerial Photographs Saturated in Upper 12' Water Stained Leaves Other Water Marks Local Soil Survey Data None Drift Lines FAC-Neutral Test Sediment Deposits Other (Explain in Remarks) Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Field Observations Depth of Surface Water. r� (in.) Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) Depth to Saturated Soil--2 (0n.) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No REMARKS: vet s o rf Basis for determination: ,� � � � 1 ��✓S � LV"t � ��� W�,.� �•ay-e � �c� oh '_ � SOILS ( Soils Mapped As: y� dlL�`o�A �Urt,�l,ti �hn� Drainage Class: Feld Observations Taxonomy (Series and Phase): Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No ' Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color . Mottle Colors Mottle (inches) Horinn (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) (Abundance/Co trast) Texture Concretions. Structure. etc. ' G _ �I �/ "� I. (� Z�I CX- -i-c,� wl n �G e, ,11" e, Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Reducing Conditions Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils �IS� Histic Epipedon Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Sulfidic Odor _ Concretions _ Listed on National Hydric Sails List _ Aquic Moisture Regime _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils W Hydric Soils Present? Ye No REMARKS: Qu+T Basis for determination:(, i�CIT1�� ' WETLAND DETERMINATION u Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes to � INVESTIGATOR: Basis for determination: ya�V-u �� IG vS, vt' ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION - DATA FORM Project/Site: f-r!(�t")T' Sec: Applicant/('wner: Township: 7 �N Investigator(s): -7 Range: Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? � No Is the site significantly & recently disturbed? (Atypical Situation) Yes Is the area a potential Problem Area? (explain in final remarks) Yes o VEGETATION Dominant Plant 1. Q: L,�� ISc o Fhaj 2.1.G -4-10— 1 M a , 3. - [V06Ct Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAG (excluding FAC-) REMARKS: taG v i'+a HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks) Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Aerial Photographs Other None -5 _% I 1987 MANUAL Date: County: State: Washington Plot ID: �1l� "? TransectlD: Community ID: ��� oecies Stratum Indicator Isail 8. 9. 10. ae�� � � . Hytfrop �t ecgetation rF esent? e j No Basis for determination: �O % L- V��y i-aLLit 4��I'" L5i+' PRIMARY Indicators Inundated Saturated in Upper 12' Water Marks Drift Lines Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands SECONDARY Indicators Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12" Water Stained Leaves Local Soil Survey Data FAG -Neutral Test Other (Explain in Remarks) Feld Observations Depth of Surfaca Water.�_(in.) Depth to Free Water in Pit: �Z_f t l (in.) It Depth to Saturated Soil:(in.) ' Wetland Hydrology Present? No Basis for determination: nes n /�. 14,7 REMARKS: t 0 i n 5i2::t± dw_ -1p R�1 ' SOILS j _ t Soils Mapped As: 1 � 1a �(�1 a 0 hn the— Drainage Class: i Taxonomy (Series and Phase): Feld Observations Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No ' Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color . Mottle Colors Mottle Structure. etc. fin hes) Horizon fMunsell Moistl (Munsell Moist) (Abundance/Contras?) Texture Concretions ` J t Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Reducing Conditions — Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Histic Epipedonc Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors _ Suffidic Odor Concretions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List Aquic Moisture Regime _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils \ Hydric Soils Present? Yes No ; REMARKS: � 1..'1� o to Basis for determination: O t� f,11✓D A U "IJ I M� itl WETLAND DETERMINATION Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No INVESTIGATOR: Basis for determination: - ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION - DATA FORM 1987 MANUAL Project/Site: a Sec: %' Date: <Applicant%C'wner. h Township: County: Y Investigator(s): Range: State: Washington Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? ''es No Plot ID: 5�J �O Transect ID: Is the site significantly & recently disturbed? (Atypical Situation) Is the Problem Area? in final Yes "No� Yes Community ID: area a potential (explain remarks) %No VEGETATION Dominant Plant Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Soecies Stratum Indicator ' Species 6. ' 2. 7. 3. 8. ' 4. 9. 5. 10. Percent of Dominant Species that are Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? OBL, FACW or FAC (excludiing- FAG) G' % L Basis for determination: V1O REMARKS: t `e 'vta� No �'"� 6�^'1` - UI ae fie; Io HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Aerial Photographs Other None PRIMARY Indicators Inundated Saturated in Upper 12" Water Marks Drift Lines Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Yes 0. SECONDARY Indicators Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12" Water Stained Leaves Local Soil Survey Data FAC-Neutral Test Other (Explain in Remarks) . Field Observations h Depth of Surface Water. (in.) Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) Depth to Saturated Soil: > 4 (in.) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes NREMARKS: Basis for determination: ' SOILS Soils Mapped As �, a h nV CA loam a,, J Taxonomy (Series and Phase): Profile Description: Depth finches} HorizoB 0-10 z� Matrix Color fMunsell Moist) 3lZ o (�IkI � Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Histic Epipedon _ SuKidic Odor Aquic Moisture Regime Mottle Colors Mottle (Munsell Moistl (Abundance/Contrast) hl a r('- Il 1 II �pw,er S�;J�n} c1,�$ Lolorl�'�fOr1 Drainage Class: Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No Texture' Concretions. Structure, etc. �tjd LA\ OrC,'GV1 cc k-A a�� t, Reducing Conditions _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Concretions Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Hydric Soils Present? Yes No.,; REMARKS: Basis for determination: WO Wk WETLAND DETERMINATION Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No INVESTIGATOR: Basis for determination: n O � 1� ' ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION - DATA FORM 1967 MANUAL C Project/Site: Sec: Date: / / I(- ;ApplicanUCwner: J lw,, ,,�,� Township: 7 County: Investigator(s): Range: �� State: Washington ? G' Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? tYes No Plot ID: �J Is the site significantly & recently disturbed? (Atypical Situation) `Yes �NoTransect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? (explain in final remarks) es ;, Community ID: ✓r�- VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator P di r ' hcd s. C�-,�.V C,� l,seoiu�, r`• �':' �_ 2. fi�A r7 i�� CQn.Gt_ t'I�U� 7. 3.Cca= ' 4 9 5. 10. Percent of Dominant Species that are ' Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? tYes No OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAG) � % Basis for determination: 7SO° REMARKS:HovSL 1-,"t�Q ,.�n (�f- ��Y� HYDROLOGY _L ' _"'� .Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): PRIMARY Indicators SECONDARY Indicators Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Inundated Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12' ' Aerial Photographs Saturated in Upper 12' Water Stained Leaves Other Water Marks Local Soil Survey Data None Drift Lines FAC-Neutral Test Sediment Deposits Other (Explain in Remarks) ' Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Feld Observations II r II Depth of Surf aca Water. �' (in.) Depth to Free Water in Pit: > (in.) Depth to Saturated Soil:_ 1 °7(in•) ' Wetland Hydrology Present? 'Yes; No REMARKS: daY+ Basis for determination: 1 �C t�p�� tnwtw� �(PV C-76 } -I Sooiiils Mapped As: i r !'1 �► f C(vl o!r j Dt. I OU Drainage Class: Field Observations Taxonomy (Series and Phase): Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color . Mottle Colors Mottle ruches) �Q (Munsell Moistl (Munsell Moist) abundance/C&n rast) Texture, Concretions Swcture. etc. 0-7! " f a 3/2 011 a) 7-�41i I 5JZ the, l t n ,� a j� 2 �� a- �JiO Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol _ Histic Epipedon -C SuKidic Odor Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing Conditions _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List "x Concretions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Hydric Soils Present? (les No t REMARKS: Basis for determination:. �� t�V•t7NnCc - WI���'� _ WETLAND DETERMINATION Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? (Yes No INVESTIGATOR: Basis for determination: `' ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION - DATA FORM Project/Site: r- I r4jI Appiicantl('wner: Investigator(s): Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Is the site significantly & recently disturbed? (Atypical Situation) Is the area a potential Problem Area? (explain in final remarks) VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Stratum Inddiic�atto�r, � 2 Hd�C,us �Gt►'���u 3. �4 a. Y jj� -= 9. 10. 1987 MANUAL Sec: Date: Township: County: C i�✓�- Range: 77 State: Washington es- No Plot ID: Cy -es) No Transect ID: �S - 6 Community ID: Percent of Dominant Species that are Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? es No OBL. FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) % Basis for determination: y-)�ur � n lI S o� REMARKS:�Gl HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): PRIMARY Indicators SECONDARY Indicators Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Inundated Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12' Aerial Photographs K Saturated in Upper 12' Water Stained Leaves Other Water Marks Local Soil Survey Data None Drift Lines FAC-Neutral Test Sediment Deposits Other (Explain in Remarks) Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Feld Observations 1 I Depth of Surface Water. Nr (in.) Depth to Free Water in Pit: �Z (n.) Depth to Saturated Soil: 'r" (in.) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No REMARKS: 5-{z,.,_ iw+ �0 �J JrOa%a Basis for determination: L 'S Gt � u ✓ 4> t- oy1 - SOILS Soils Mapped As: 5k, Q cr, c, t- Drainage Class: Feld Observations Taxonomy (Series and Phase): Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No Profile Description: Depth finches) Horizon O— 1 >IZ Matrix Color . Mottle Colors Mottle (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) (Abundance/Contrast) 7.5 0 Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Reducing Conditions —Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Histic Epipedon _ SuHidic Odor Gieyed or Low Chroma Colors _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Concretions Listed on National Hydric Soils List Aquic Moisture Regime = High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Hydric Soils Present? one-s"No � REMARKS: P �1 � Basis for determination: L(2 WETLAND DETERMINATION INVESTIGATOR:'- Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? 1asis for determination: - 01-1 es No +ryee' ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION - DATA FORM Project�Site: i-I < I41icantfwner: r2-.!j1-,,4i--- Invesligator(s): M Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Is the site significantly & recently disturbed? (Atypical Situation) Is the area a potential Problem Area? (explain in final remarks) VEGETATION Dominant Plant SIo--ec--ies Stratum Indicator x 1. �1 � y,. A l(U.&a 7- 2- `C� . �e�Y%&a+e� 3. ' 4. S. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAG) Z� -: REMARKS: h +� F-77- HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): -� Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Aerial Photographs Other None 1987 MANUAL Sec: L�l Township: r) Range: k,_ Date: County: — State: Washington 6s No Yes � Yes (No) Plot ID: C� � 3 Transect ID: Community ID: /'j�55r,) c pomjr [Plat Species Stratum _Indicator 6. CoYLA C O n V,—+y 7. 01JAA1g c s� fOnk. _ N� 8rnV,\ VO 9. JOVirJU C� Q„P4. a CZ� 1 o.y 1 l.Lf^ Ail Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? es No 6-7_% Basis for determination: Qa1 U Y✓t� — �1� vJ/an PRIMARY Indicators SECONDARY Indicators Inundated Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12' Saturated in Upper 12' Water Stained Leaves Water Marks Local Soil Survey Data Drift Lines FAC-Neutral Test Sediment Deposits Other (Explain in Remarks) Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Feld Observations Depth of Surface Water•.(in.) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes � No Basis for determination: %-- t4, o (; Depth to Free Water in Pit: (, (in. REMARKS: ✓y 1 All l iA S rl hA vVCN%� W I I M Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) i.� ad,u C-11 bt� d1 mil' e-�,-wa A 11 _ems S t I _� SOILS Soils Mapped As: %G IL U ,, MU e,IC Drainage Class' Feld Observations Taxonomy (Series and Phase): Confine Mapped Type? Yes No Profile Description: Depth psi Horizon �t 71tit' Matrix Color (Munsell Moistl IW IL Z( 1C�123ft Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosoi ::3,�—Histic Epipedon _ Suhfidic Odor Aquic Moisture Regime .. .e Texture Concretions structure. etc. o".y Reducing Conditions ;: _ _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Concretions Listed on National Hydric Soils List High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Hydric Soils Present? kYes j No REMARKS: Basis for determination: ` Ow- Cil\v 0V\n4i - WETLAND DETERMINATION n Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Nei. No INVESTIGATOR: Basis for determination: G S ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION - DATA FORM ProjecVSite: rf ri � 7 Sec: S AQplicant/C'wner: C r ; q O=- Township: 2" , rJ Investigator(s): /tom 7 Range: ` Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? • tYes' No Is the site significantly & recently disturbed? (Atypical Situation) Yes No Is the area a potential Problem Area? (explain in final remarks) Yes o' VEGETATION Dominant Plant Soecies Stratum Indicator � 1. R 6S P �CG�-�e� �c� to o✓ _ r! t 3._�VOIVr .V" 5'�IU►" 4. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) REMARKS: HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks) Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Aerial Photographs Other None 1987 MANUAL Date: OL /q6 County: k�f /;J� - State: Washington Plot ID: C 1P Z- Transect ID: Community ID: � � nt Plant Species S tratum Indicator 7. Sib L-S u t v=a J--f- M Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? 08SNo % Basis for determination: PRIMARY Indicators SECONDARY Indicators Inundated Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12' Saturated in Upper 12' Water Stained Leaves Water Marks Local Soil Survey Data Drift Lines FAC-Neutral Test Sediment Deocsits Other (Explain in Remarks) Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Field Observations Depth of Surface Water. (in.) Depth to Free Water in Pit: ) (in.) Depth to Saturated Soil: — (in.) Wetland Hydrology Present? es No REMARKS: Basis for determination: a ' t � ui� fie_,• � Zl I rat SOILS �,-1 cj><a w o✓t Soils Mapped As: S�n G� C'L Taxonomy (Series and Phase): Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color finchesl won (Munsell Moist) 0—f� lo�(L�11 �2+ lad R 31� Hydric Soil Indicators: _ Histosol -J- Histic Epipedon —E— Sulfidic Odor Aquic Moisture Regime w" wrLy P�lt3 c tit Drainage Class: Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No Mottle Colors Mottle (Munsell Moist) (Abundance/Contrast) Texture Concretions. Structure. etc. L4u(-J L no a4e':�k-�X ISGICL So,' I s 1 tn11Lt 5� +,etc Reducing Conditions _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Concretions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Hydric Soils Present? Yes; No REMARKS: Basis for determination:`J� WETLAND DETERMINATION Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes Nc Basis for determination: 01I �-tiiI INVESTIGATOR:,- '� �- ?i tROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION - DATA FORM Sec - Project/ H, i 6, �" 7= sec: 5 QApplicant/C'wner: 07 �4 O - I �-:L f) ` GrJ Township: 2 N ' Inlv1esltigatlor(s): c ` ' Ran9e: S r- 0", Do Normal Clrcumstances exist on the site? (Yes ' No Is the site significantly & recently disturbed? (Atypical Situation) Yes (No; Is the area a potential Problem Area? (explain in final remarks) Yes ' VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1. SP1>�ae�t do,gal��. SIB 2. A shy ��, �I I t� _k FA 3. E9ut5ef-, ���' �cA A 4. RLAbus 5. 1987 MANUAL Date: 7 Iq 6 County. r4 State: Washington Plot ID: P Transect ID: Community ID: As�� Derrnar,t Plant Cncries Stratum Indicator 6.�&IU5 7.l.o�n�lolulUS 52a�u�-. � �� Percent of Dominant Species that are Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? es No OBL, FACW or FAG (excluding FAC-) % Basis for determination: o� v�y , REMARKS: M J b. a►+a' is ad as �__5411 _ _;f& 7 2o J"�-s HYDROLOGY - _ —^ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): PRIMARY Indicators SECONDARY Indicators Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Inundated Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12' Aerial Photographs Saturated in Upper 12" Water Stained Leaves Other Water Marrs Local Soil Survey Data None Drift Lines FAC-Neutral Test Sediment Deposits Other (Explain in Remarks) Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Feld Observations Depth of Surface Water. �' >� (in.) tWetland Hydrology Present? e�en- No Basis for determination: Depth to Free Water in Pit: [a I f (in.) Depth to Saturated Soil: ✓ (in.) ' SOILS �� Soils Mapped As: G CCi V' ?Vt LA C Taxonomy (Series and Phase): Profile Description: Depth (inches, Horizo 0-1 -L Matrix Color (Munsell Moist, io`1(L 2�f REMARKS: u ��• •• •-�•' ••s WPA Drainage Class: Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No Texture Concretions Structure. etc, h'IULk dItr4l S��P�-��, Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Reducing Conditions _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils .S Histic Epipedon _ Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List '�C' SuKidic Odor _ Concretions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List Aquic Moisture Regime _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Hydric Soils Present? es No REMARKS: Basis for determination: WETLAND DETERMINATION �� . r Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? f Yes I No INVESTIGATOR: Basis for determination: J � Ckia 6A e4evo �� L APPENDIX E Earthen Trench Plug TRENCH PLUG WITH SELECTED Low PENWCA&E. NONOISPERSI&E CLAY AATERIAL (MIN. PLASTICITY INDEX OF lot COMPACTED TO 95Y RELATIVE COMPACTION. SEE MOTE 1. —] BACKFI L L AS REOW RED TRENCH 00rT014 6' urN.-j -}- -- S£E horE 3 iP. Tor Of TRENCH ��--- PIPE acc"NG NO rES: 1. TRENCH PLUG SHALL. BE KEYED INTO EACH SIDE AND BOTTOM OF TRENCH A MiNiuUM Of 6. 2. WHERE SulrA&E IMPERvl0U5 MATERIAL IS Nor AVAILABLE. LEAN Mix CONCRETE MAY BE SUBSTIruTEQ J. PROVIDE TRENCH PLUGS AT LOCATIONS ANO WERVALS SP. ECI FI ELT. EARTHEN TRENCH PLUG �� CITY OF RENTON HIGATE LIFT STATION ELIMINATION SOUTH 112 SECTION 5, SITE MAP N T S TOWNSHIP 23N, RANGE 5E 900 NTON ISSAQUAH RD INDEX TO DRAWINGS SHEET 1 VICINITY MAP & INDEX TO DRAWINGS SHEET 2 PLAN & PROFILE SHEET 3 PLAN & PROFILE SHEET 4 PLAN & PROFILE SHEET 5 DETAILS AND SECTIONS SHEET 6 DETAILS AND SECTIONS SHEET 2 NEW 8' SANITARY SEWER -----------------------------------� PAIL SHORT PLAT I I PROJECT LOCATION W Z r� W Q w Cn W 0I I CITY OF RENTON BENCH MARK RR SPIKE ON SE FACE OF POWER POLE 8' UP. SW INTERSECTION NE 20TH ST AND JONES AVE NE. SHEET 4 EL. 277.09 NE 20TH ST _ Ex. 8" SAN. SEW. Ex. Ex. FORCE MAIN F F SAI MONUMENT IN CASE EXISTING HIGATE SEWAGE PUMP STATION � I - BERRY FARM VICINITY MAP N.T.S. rn 0 CV o f 1f 04 i Z Q Z W W J Z LL 0 a Z Lu Q L7 z 0 I NOTE: NE 28TH ST SOUTH 112 SECTION 5 TWP 23N R 5E ALIGNMENT IS NOT CENTERED IN CASEMENT TO TO N MTER ANHOLE. FA IIHOAEE#C NNECT10HALL P ACED POF EASEMENT AS SHOWN. I I f I l THE NEW 8 SANITARY SEWER FROM THE EXISTING o z w I MANHOLE IN ,LONE$ AVE NE TO NEW MH MAY SKEW SUCH TLY ACROSS THE 15' WIDE UTITILITY EASEMENT BASSO UPON THE ACTUAL FIELD LOCATION eo j 4mi a- OF THE EXISTING MANHOLE. ESTABLISH A STRAIGHT ALIGNMENT TO MEET MH y1 WHICF SHALL BE I m 2 Im CENTERED IN THE 15'-WIDE UTILITY EASEMENT. rn W i _ m o w t W I TRACT 294 TAX LOT 3602 Ice 5 IL 24„ 77 N n Q I IE 244.52 INSTALL C CDF oQ m TRACT 283 n TAX LOT 3162 I Ci 0 s INSTALL � o , c I PROVIDE 15 LF 12" SO E TRNCH PLUG E n o E / 0 o p STA TRENCH PLUG 4 IE 243.77 z W UNDER NEW GRAVEL ACCESS ROAD. / Q o I 36" CEDAR - ^ O -7 B �2 p EXISTING 15' WIDE UTILITY } w p I o i2" DEED OR _ UR. -I Y - n BOREHOLE / EASEMENT AF rr I / CUT AND PATCH EXIST ; e PAVEMENT vl IY -- ,o, I I I { BH-2 J/ —�'- 1*`— / FURNISH AND INSTALL 35'_F 18• STEEL CASING BOREHOLE DECID BH-2 TREES J1 J 2<_ JEGD TS' J N 1 9 1. E 130391. 1 Zw CO '(�\ __ _ --- CONNECT TO EXISTING MH \_____ AND RECHANNEL I•' i__ —" _ o- 24" DECID, _�_ —� _ _ -" -- I -- 3+00 _ A-- {- • l _ _ N� ' S+W • o , BOREHOLE BH-1 \ JI( SE WER TUB _ 3 _ _______ \_---___ ___ 374 LF "PVC _____ _____________ ____.__ o _____________ ------- N NEW MANHOLEj t B------- 2aaa5----------------------------------- - GD 30 DECID. \ 15' PERMANENT D MH �REMOVE \ O o EASEMENT TREES--_--------- �\ TAX ----------- RIM 246.85 v, ;o I ________________ HOUSE LOT 18281 1n IF 237.D0 n w ----W 6' HI-------- _________ T IN',TALL 24 DECID. 30" ALDER REMOVE TREES M \; NEW 6' HIGH CHAIN LINK J CDF 1 30' TEMPORARY 'W n \ I FENCE SATE - 14' WIDE 1 REPLACE EXISTING B" c� '1h�1 TRENCH PLUS R TE FENCE POST CONSTRUC71ON PVC STUB I w ':� I SEE CITY OF RENTON >4 \ EASEMENT eGp f o I STANDARD PLAN /L003 I E� \ R \ o 6 — 3 - 30" LOT 2 z i I 44 7 I l DECID. _ I POHL SHORT PLAT OLD 9 ACT I p WETLAND BOUNDARY \ I OLD TRACT 2R4 \ MATCH LINE STA 5+60 SEE SHEET 3 N 89'19'41"E 610.06' NE 20TH ST PLAN SCALE I• - 20' .. 270 260 250 240 230 w z a � (N w Ory Z (j Z Q C U�+ C � O X Q ry 1 rx�cnvG 13". REPLACE EXISTING 8" PVC STUB 1+DO 2+00 U O U Z, a - EXISTING GRADE 1 17 35 LF 18" STEEL CASING ® 0.83 X PROFILE SCALE 1• - 20' H 1" - 10' V M 8" C900 PVC 3+00 4+00 NOTE: NEW 8 PVC SHALL BE INSTALLED THROUGH NEW 14" STEEL CASING. DRAFT 5+00 r, 1- w Li S 1n W W V1 Q tD + Q I - In Li Z J 2 U Q CITY OF RENTON BENCH MARK RR SPIKE ON SE FACE OF POWER POLE 8' UP. SW INTERSECTION NE 20TH ST AND JONES AVE NE. EL. 277.09 0 o SOUTH 112 SECTION 5 TWP 23N R 5E 7 TAX LOT 1828 0 0 (n I 04 uFffR HOUSE #3201 = POD 51 `" EXSTING 15' W1DE ; r ul INGRESS/EGRE55 I Tq% LOT 3202 REMOVE AND REPLACE EXISTING EASEMENT —''�� H SE /1824 FENCE WITHIN CONSTRUCTION N jII� z o Q ISO 6 0A / LIMITS, -- I Iuia / 4 / G R A S S LT-! I 'I G R A S S THIS EXISTING DITCH OR SWALE YID ' Q N IS APPROX. 8" TO 1' WIDE RESTORE LAWN AND LANDSCAPING IMPROVEMENT I I RESTORE DISTURBED SW LE WITH 70 PRECONSTRUCT'ON CONDITION. PROVIDE NEW HYDROSEEDING. INSTALL HAYBAIL 5 DR ARRN AAG W = I TOPSOIL AND SOD FOR ALL DISTURBED AREAS n an _ 24' PPLE OR DAMS AT 15' INTER VAlS vl f — _ J W INSTALL J 5 r Q DAMAGED BY CONSTRUCTION. FOR THIS PARCEL a CDF -/\ ONLY TO NORTH EDGE OF ROADWAY ON NE a Z TRENCH PLUG r Y 0 5 a 20TH AVE. K h 6 O d W I RE CA INSTALL 2- i2" 4 :w Y o 6 Q FEM DST I CDF o r / I 12` FiR 36":DECID / TRENCH PLUG ° DECO, I W ao Z O �y 1 /1 32" DEG D. 10 POPLARS o ho ,I S fREMOVE FENCE PO __________�50___/ - - PV T - \NEWrB SANITARY SEWER w Q - - —�— - — _.�-- -- -- — _ _ Q s.00 VDEC YED 7.00 - - - �� - —� 9 -9+0D- - I - -- ----- ---------Io:on----- ---------------------- -- f olol — ~ N 8 -------- 3 m BA N {__ 10' PERMANENT fi = W REMOVE / rr REMOVE I 20" DECiD. C I J J L EASEMENT o v I �I wi wl Z I / BOREHOLE FENCE POST 15' PERMANENT FENCE POST ° I EHOLE h - _ JBH-3 EASEMENT H-4 W �- ° - - - _ _ INSTALL____________________________________________________________________g.____ F ___________________________________________________ ______________________ CDF --- -- - -- - 3" ORNAMENTAL I c R R I 5 INSTALL HAYBAITREE TRENCH PLUGr{ H- B C TEMPORARY t 3D' TEMPORARY CHECK DAM CONSTRUCTION �� m Q 5 W CONSTRUCTION o > EASEMENT CONTRACTOR SHALL RESTORE DRAINAGE $WALES 5 m EASEMENT DEPTH, GRADE, AND ALIGNMENT TO THEIR RE'.PECTIVE o / POHL SHORT PLAT NOTE: PRECONSTRUCitON CONDITION. THIS WORK SHALL HYDROSEED ALL AREAS 'A �rTT� mz 1 c��II DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION GARAGE I IfV. 1 Gr Z n LOT 2 CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE AND BE INCIDENTAL TO SEWER MAIN CONSTRUCTION. TAX lOT }2DO WO. D 198, Q " DISPOSE OF DECAYED BARN. THIS DECK p ' ; / WORK SHALL BE INCIDENTAL TO I I HOUSE #1 Bd0 I 1 n SEWER MAIN CONSTRUCTION. 1 w a PLAN SCALE 1" •- 20' ' m JONES AVE NE P y C C 11 O 4 1 N a w 0 ' m Z 0 2W (V W W T- V-) 270 W W V) O c0 260 EXIST. GRADE ------------- 250 W Z J 230 6+00 7+00 280 I^I 270 a m � o N - < rV z a260 Q ; 1 ♦ N G � = w --- __--_ ---__._ 250 _ 612 LF 8' C900 PVC 0 0.85% =4 240 230 8+00 9+00 10+00 11 +00 CITY OF RENTON BENCH MARK PROFILE RR SPIKE ON SE FACE OF _ SCALE 1" : 20' H POWER POLE 8' UP. SW I" - 10' V INTERSECTION NE 20TH ST AND JONES AVE NE. EL 277.09 DRAFT (n O N I m m p a O J OJ J > ' DJ U - z a U) Ld n -- z g O, � 11J N 188877.74 E 1303565.23 ' 230 SOUTH 112 SECTION 5 TWP 23N R 5E TAX LOT 3200 TAX LOT 3202 HOUSE #1800 MATCH LINE STA 10+60 HOUSE #1824 SEE SHEET 3 Fr I I I I NEW MANHOLE 3 20" FIR POHI SHORT P T o I I I \ CONNECT EXIST. I a 1 � /-'� 1Z APPLE LOT 2 '^ ) I 8` PVC (W) TO DECID. }+ OLD TRACT 293 BCLj! ,I II I mod`, MANHOLE 2 - 8. O1p 1yp a I 2" ORNAMENTAL WETLAND °' Z - 18" WETLAND BUFFER ALDERS �t `J BOUNDARY OECID. - v CONNECT TO 2 - 6" BIRCH y EXISITNG MH CUT AND PATCH - TOE I _ EXISTING PAVEMENT 5 LOPE I TOE OF SLOPE & RECHANNEL I CONIC. 6' W ROCK WALL �7 T_ �4. p N 1 .49 E 20TH ST s+� z+oo 3+00 STf, 4 E 1 A 9.6t y�_ S B` S 3 S S PLUG ABANDONED LINE TO PUMP STA IN FM FM F � \ I CREZ� � DITCH _ _ \ CONC. VAULT I� 124" CONC. CULV ~ ROCKS PLU EX FORCEMAIN IE 248 A IE 249.03 XI T. MH 12` CONC PLUG INLET AND OUTLET OF EXIST. IE 2, .70 4 2 4` FORCEMAIN IN ACCORDANCE WITH MH �I REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING GUARD 12" C NC. CULV SECTION 7-17.3(4)6 OF WSDOT/AP WA I I��' RAIL AND FENCING. REMOVE STRUCTURES I 1991 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS. OUTLET ABANDON �I AND CULVERTS, RECHANNEL CREEK. INSTALL t OF FORCEMAIN LOCATED IN MANHOLE LIFT STRUCTURE ({I cl 6" PEA GRAVEL BOTTOM AND RIP RAP AT INTERSECTION OF JONES AVE. AND SEE SPECIFICATION + III = CREEK BANKS. THIS WORK SHALL BE INCLUDED 20TH STREET. THIS WORK SHALL BE SECTION 2-02.3(1) IN LUMP SUM PRICE BID FOR ABANDON EXIST. INCLUDED IN LUMP SUM PRICE BID FOR IE 247.64 PUMP STATION. ABANDON EXISTING PUMP STATION. IE 24815 2+00 OLD BERRY FARM TRACT 285 HOUSE J1733 PLAN SCALE 1' - 20' `t" z3�F —` 8" C900 PVC ® 0.40% ..---------- --- .---...- - --. - .... - -230.: - - - : REMOVE EXISTING 8" - - SEWER AND PROVIDE NEW 8" PVC AS SHOWN - --- - 3+00 PROFILE SCALE 1" - 20' H 4+00 3 0 � u 16' 12' .252 - EXISTING ROAD GRADE _ 252 - - RIP RAP LIGHT AND LOOSE -247 -SIDE SLOPES 247 6' THICK PEA GRAVEL BOTTOM 4 - 4' WIDE TRAPIZOIDAL BOTTOM CREEK SECTION @A)SCALE 1' - 5' H&V CITY OF RENTON BENCH MARK RR SPIKE ON SE FACE OF POWER POLE 8' UP. SW INTERSECTION NE 20TH ST AND JONES AVE NE. EL. 277.D9 I)R FT N Z O a Z. to Z J6W Z W In Q Z � a t W Q (.7 2 FOR PATCHING SEE DETAIL BACKFILL MATERIAL WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY Ml$ AS SHOWN IN DETAIL a0 8^ SANITARY SEWER PIPE BEDDING MATERIAL L 6- AS SPECIFIED IN 9-03.16 EXCAVATION OF UNSUITABLE SOIL AND BACKFILL OF FOUNDATION MATERIAL (IF NECESSARY) DEPTH AS APPROVED BY ENGINEER. MATERIAL SHALL MEET SECTION 9-03.9(1) BALLAST 1. ALL UNSUITABLE MATERIALS EXCAVATED FROM THE TRENCH SHALL BE REMOVED, HAULED AND DISPOSED. EXCAVATION SHALL BE REPLACED WITH FOUNDATION, BEDDING AND BACKFILL MATERIALS AS SHOWN IN TRENCH BACKFILL DETAIL AND COMPACTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SPECIFICATIONS. 2. ALL TRENCHES IN ARTERIAL STREET ROADWAY AREAS SHALL BE BACKFILLED AND PATCHED WITH TEMPORARY ASPHALT AT END OF EACH WORK DAY, SANITARY SEWER BACKFILL WITHIN RIGHT-OF-WAY DETAIL 2-A N.T.S. \ / TYPICAL NOTES: Z 1. THE TRENCH PLUGS SHALL EXTEND 7 FEET 0 BELOW THE BOTTOM OF THE SEWER yl PIPE TRENCH BY 3 FEET EITHER 510E OF > THE TRENCH, BY J FEET ABOVE THE ELEVATION OF THE CROWN OF THE PIPE. TRENCH PLUGS SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 3 FEET IN LENGTH. CONTROL DENSITY FILL TRENCH PLUG / 1 N. T.S. 2..3 z ILL MATERIAL SOILS OL DENSITY FILL BACKIILL MATERIAL NATIVF SOILS BACKFILL MATERIAL WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY IN DETAIL $ F6^ AS SHOWN m 8^ SANITARY SEWER PIPE BEDDING MATERIAL ^ L 6 AS SPECIFIED IN 9-03.16 EXCAVATION OF UNSUITABLE SOIL AND BACKFILL OF FOUNDATION MATERIAL (IF NECESSARY) DEPTH AS A-PROVEO BY ENGINEER, MATERIAL SHALL MEET SECTION 9-03.9(1) BALLAST 1. ALL UNSUITABLE MATERIALS EXCAVATED FROM THE TRENCH SHALL BE REMOVED, HAULED AND DISPOSED. EXCAVATION SHALL BE REPLACED WITH FOUNDATION, BEDDING AND BACKFILL MATERIALS AS SHOWN IN TRENCH BACKFILL DETAIL AND COMPACTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SPECIFICATIONS. 2. ALL TRENCHES IN ARTERIAL STREET ROADWAY AREAS SHALL BE BACKFILLED AND PATCHED WITH TEMPORARY ASPHALT AT END OF EACH WORK DAY. SANITARY SEWER BACKFILL WITHIN WETLAND DETAIL 2-B N.T.S. MIN. 4^ ASPHALT CONCRETE (2 LIFTS) t2" 6^ MINIMUM CRUSHED SURFACING TOP COURSE FINAL JOINT MUST BE SAW -CUT �� \\ SUBSEQUENT BACKFILL MATERIAL (NATIVE IF APPROVED BY ENGINEER) OR IMPORT PER SECTION 9-03.9(3) CRUSHED SURFACING BASE COURSE STREET PATCHING N.T.S. 4,5 1. ALL TRENCHES IN ROADWAY AREAS SHALL BE BACKFILLED AND PATCHED PER SPECIAL PROVISION 5-06.1 AT THE END OF EACH WORK DAY. THIS WORK SHALL BE INCIDENTAL TO ALL TRENCH RESTORATION WORK. 2. THE FINAL SAWCUT JOINT SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF (1) ONE FOOT BEYOND THE UNDISTURBED EDGE OF THE TRENCH. 3. ALL ASPHALT PATCH AREA OUTSIDE OF PAY LIMIT SHOWN SHALL BE CONSIDERED INCIDENTAL TO OTHER ITEMS OF WORK. 4, ALL TEMPORARY PATCHES ON TRENCHES SHALL BE PERMANENTLY PATCHED WITHIN (2) TWO WEEKS OF COMPLETION OF WORK WITHIN THE ROADWAY AREA UNLESS APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER. L • 1 1 CD CD N e� r4' I � z 0 f= RIP RAP APRON TO PREVENT Q FORMATION OF SCOUR HOLE z SECTION 0 J W Z w 4x4 POSTS r—STRAW BALES WIRED TO WIRE O Ln WIRE UPSTREAM I MESH FENCE & STAKED 2' Z OF POSTS FLOW INTO THE GROUND. I-- 1 = OOp Z O O 00 O�p � PLAN 4.7 o STRAW BALE CHECKS 5 C Q `8 N.T.S. �- z �� �w a' t'Y;YL I a� GENERAL NOTES 1. VERTICAL CONTROL DATUM BASED ON USC&GS. 2. UTILITY CROSSING LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS SHALL BE DETERMINED BY THE CONTRACTOR IN ADVANCE OF ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES. 3. EXISTING PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE TEMPORARILY RELOCATED AND PERMANENTLY REPLACED TO ACCOMODATE SERVICE CONSTRUCTION. x o €J 4. STATIONING SHOWN IS DEFINED BY THE CONTROL POINTS. 5. ALL MANHOLES SHALL HAVE LOCKING LIDS. a � 6. PROVIDE AS -BUILT INFORMATION SHOWNING ALL INVERT AND RIM ELEVATIONS. 7. INSTALL SEWER MAIN AND SERVICES A MINIMUM 2' FROM PARALLEL GAS LINES WHERE CONFLICT OCCURS. 8. ALL CEMENT CONCRETE DRIVEWAYS AND ALLEY APPROACHES SHALL BE 10- THICK. e 9. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE LOCATION AND ELEVATION OF ALL UTILITIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE RELOCATION WITH UTILITY OWNER IF REQUIRED. 10. THE MATERIAL PRESENTED ON THIS DRAWING IS FOR REFERENCE ONLY. SOME OF THE DETAILS OR INFORMATION PRESENTED ON THIS DRAWING MAY NOT BE REQUIRED AS PART OF THIS CONTRACT. 11. PROPERTY LINES ARE SHOWN FOR REFERENCE ONLY. 72. CITY OF RENTON STANDARD DETAILS ARE LOCATED WITHIN THE BOUND CONTRACT SPECIFICATIONS. r 13. TRENCH SAFETY AND SHORING SHALL MEET ALL OSHA AND WISHA STANDARDS. TRENCHES SHALL BE SEALED TO PREVENT ENTRY DURING NON -WORKING HOURS. 14. WHERE UTILITY PIPE LINE VERTICAL SEPARATION IS LESS THAN (1) ONE FOOT, INSERT ETHAFOAM HS 600 PLANK -FOAM BOARD OF EQUAL AS CLEARANCE SEPARATION. GRASS SEEDED SIDE SLOPES 1 1 3: i SIDE SLOPES �W�"' 3: t SIDE SLOPES 3'-0" FLAT BOTTOM j 3:1 SIDE SLOPES DITCH IMPROVED SECTION A SCALE 1/2" = 1'-C" 18" STEEL CASING PIPE ENDS OF EXISTING CASING; REMOVE WELDED CAP, INSTALL UTILITY PIPE AND INSULATORS, AND SEAL UTILITY PIPE TO CASING WITH CASCADE SYSTEM CCES CASING END SEAL OR APPROVED EQUAL (TYPICAL) CARRIER PIPE OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF JOINT BELL CASING INSULATOR USE 3 PER 20' OF PIPE (CALPICO INC., CASCADE WATERWORKS MFG. CO., OR APPROVED EQUAL) 1. INSULATORS SHALL BE MECHANICALLY CLAMPED TO PIPE: CUSHION BETWEEN PIPE AND INSULATOR SHALL BE LINED WITH RUBBER OR PVC; INSULATOR SHELL SHALL BE A MINIMUM 14 GAUGE STAINLESS STEEL. LOW DEFLECTION UNDER COMPRESSION, AND HIGH RESISTANCE TO ABRASION; INSULATORS SHALL BE MANUFACTURED BY CASCADE WATERWORKS MFG. CO.. CALPICO, INC., OR AN APPROVED EQUAL. 2. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR EXCAVATION SLOPE STABILITY AND DEWATERING DURING UTILITY INSTALLATION WITHIN EXISTING CASINGS. SEWER CASING DETAIL 4 N.T.S. 2 i DR--A—?FT 0 z