The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutRS_South_Boeing_StreamHabitat_Narrative_240129_v1.pdf STANDARD STREAM STUDY/HABITAT DATA REPORT Boeing Renton South Bridge Seismic Retrofit Renton, Washington Prepared for City of Renton Renton, Washington January 2024 Prepared by WSP USA 1001 Fourth Avenue, Suite 3100 Seattle, Washington 98154 31405867.128 Boeing Renton South Bridge Seismic Retrofit WSP USA, 31405867.128 Standard Stream Study/Habitat Data Report January 2024 Renton, Washington Page ii of iii STANDARD STREAM STUDY/HABITAT DATA REPORT BOEING RENTON SOUTH BRIDGE SEISMIC RETROFIT RENTON, WASHINGTON TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................ 1 3.0 PURPOSE (REQUIREMENTS FOR SHORELINE EXEMPTION) .................................... 1 4.0 STANDARD STREAM STUDY NARRATIVE ................................................................... 2 4.1 Stream Classification ............................................................................................. 2 4.2 Vegetative Cover ................................................................................................... 2 4.3 Ecological Function ............................................................................................... 3 4.4 Fish and Wildlife .................................................................................................... 4 4.4.1 Mammals ................................................................................................... 4 4.4.2 Birds .......................................................................................................... 4 4.4.3 Amphibians and Reptiles ........................................................................... 5 4.4.4 Fish ............................................................................................................ 6 4.5 Measures to Protect Trees and Vegetation ........................................................... 7 4.6 No Net Loss of Ecological Function ...................................................................... 7 5.0 HABITAT DATA REPORT ............................................................................................... 8 5.1 Habitat Diversity .................................................................................................... 8 5.2 Migration Corridors ................................................................................................ 9 5.3 Species and Cover Types ..................................................................................... 9 5.4 Identification of Disturbed Areas............................................................................ 9 5.5 Existing Habitat Values and Functions ................................................................ 10 5.5.1 Temperature ............................................................................................ 10 5.5.2 Water Quality ........................................................................................... 11 5.5.3 Reach Sinuosity ....................................................................................... 11 5.5.4 Vegetative Conditions .............................................................................. 11 5.5.5 Floodplain Conditions .............................................................................. 11 5.5.6 Habitat Values and Functions at the Project Site .................................... 12 5.6 Habitat Alterations and Impacts and Proposed Habitat Management Program .. 12 6.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................ 13 Boeing Renton South Bridge Seismic Retrofit WSP USA, 31405867.128 Standard Stream Study/Habitat Data Report January 2024 Renton, Washington Page iii of iii LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Small Mammals Reported to Occur along the Lower Cedar River1 ................................ 4 Table 2. Birds Reported to Occur along the Lower Cedar River1 ................................................. 5 Table 3. Amphibians Reported to Occur along the Lower Cedar River1 ....................................... 6 Table 4. Reptiles Occurring Along the Lower Cedar River1 .......................................................... 6 Table 5. Non-native Fish Species Introduced into the Lake Washington/Lake Union System1 ............................................................................................................................. 7 Table 6. Mean Monthly Water Temperatures in the LCR at Renton 1992 through 2022 ............ 10 Table 7. Aquatic Life Temperature Criteria in Freshwater .......................................................... 11 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A - Drawings Appendix B - Photos Boeing Renton South Bridge Seismic Retrofit WSP USA, 31405867.128 Standard Stream Study/Habitat Data Report January 2024 Renton, Washington Page 1 of 13 1.0 INTRODUCTION The Boeing Company (Boeing) proposes a seismic retrofit to the South Bridge at the Boeing Renton plant in Renton, Washington. The Boeing Renton South Bridge Seismic Retrofit (project) will retrofit the Boeing South Bridge in order to increase the structure’s capability of resisting modern seismic design forces. The bridge foundations will be extended north and south at each end of the bridge and new steel micropiles will be driven as part of the work. Project activities are located within the 200-foot shoreline setback. As part of permit applications for facility improvements adjacent to shorelines, the Renton Municipal Code (RMC) requires a standard stream or lake study and a habitat data report to document existing conditions and describe measures to be taken to protect shoreline resources. This Standard Stream Study/Habitat Data Report has been prepared to meet the requirements detailed in the RMC. 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project consists of retrofitting the South Bridge at the Boeing Renton plant with seismic upgrades including two seismic retrofit structures, one at each abutment. Project activities are located within the 200-foot shoreline setback. The retrofit structures will consist of new steel micropiles, a pile cap, abutment bolsters, and approach slabs. Approximately 5,744 square feet of existing impervious paved area will be removed and replaced in-kind by the project. Approximately 3,582 square feet of grass, exposed soil and landscaping will be temporarily impacted by clearing and grubbing during construction and will be enhanced and replanted with native vegetation and seed mixes resulting in a net environmental uplift. Project drawings are included in Appendix A. 3.0 PURPOSE (REQUIREMENTS FOR SHORELINE EXEMPTION) Under the RMC 4-9-190C1 (Shoreline Exemption Process), the City of Renton requires the following environmental reports to be included with Boeing’s permit application submittal for the proposed project: · Standard Stream or Lake Study: A report shall be prepared by a qualified biologist, including a narrative report describing the stream or lake classification, vegetative cover of the site, ecological functions, observed or reported fish and wildlife, measures to protect trees and vegetation, and demonstrate the proposal meets the criteria of no net loss of ecological functions as described in RMC 4-3-090D2. · Habitat Data Report: A narrative report shall be prepared to accompany the site plan, which describes the layers, diversity, and variety of habitat found on the site; the location of any migration or movement corridors; species expected to be found; identification of any disturbed areas; summary of existing habitat functions and values; and summary of proposed habitat alterations and impacts and proposed habitat management program. Boeing Renton South Bridge Seismic Retrofit WSP USA, 31405867.128 Standard Stream Study/Habitat Data Report January 2024 Renton, Washington Page 2 of 13 4.0 STANDARD STREAM STUDY NARRATIVE This section presents the standard stream study narrative, providing information about existing habitat conditions and functions of the lower Cedar River (LCR) adjacent to the proposed project site. 4.1 STREAM CLASSIFICATION According to RMC 4-3-050Q4 (City of Renton Water Class Map), the LCR in the vicinity of the project site is Class 1 water. 4.2 VEGETATIVE COVER WSP personnel conducted a site survey on January 19, 2024 to assess habitat conditions and vegetative cover along the LCR shoreline adjacent to and within 100 feet upstream and downstream of the proposed project site. The project site is defined as the South Bridge and those areas within the 200-foot shoreline setback adjacent to the LCR. The Boeing facilities and Renton Municipal Airport in the vicinity of the project that are within the 200-foot shoreline setback consist primarily of concrete and asphalt surfaces. The riparian zone along the east bank of the LCR adjacent to and within 100 feet upstream and downstream of the project site comprises an approximately 70-foot-wide vegetated band. The vegetated band is bisected by an approximate 9-foot-wide asphalt path (Cedar River Trail) that runs in the upland parallel to the river. Existing landscaping is present within 50 feet to the north and south of the bridge and is predominantly mulched with minimal ground cover. Landscaped vegetation includes snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), horsetail (Equisetum hyemale), western swordfern (Polystichum munitum), and Oregon grape (Mahonia aquifolium). Adjacent to the landscaped area, the next 50 feet consist of a narrow strip approximately 16 to 22 feet wide adjacent to the river of primarily planted and volunteer native trees, shrubs, and herbaceous groundcover, with some non-native trees and shrubs present. Vegetation observed on January 19, 2024 is described further below. The riparian zone along the west bank of the LCR adjacent to and within 100 feet upstream and downstream of the project site comprises an approximately 40-foot-wide vegetated band. Approximately 50 percent of this band is grass ground cover or exposed soil. To the west of the vegetated band is a concrete barrier wall and the Renton Municipal Airport. Representative photos of the riparian habitat adjacent to the project site are provided in Appendix B. Native trees and shrubs adjacent to the site include snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), Nootka rose (Rosa nutkana), red osier dogwood (Cornus sericea), western swordfern (Polystichum munitum), Indian plum (Oemleria cerasiformis), Oregon grape (Mahonia aquifolium), horsetail (Equisetum hyemale), Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), shore pine (Pinus contorta contorta), spruce (Abies sp.), and alder (Alnus rubra). Non-native plants were observed primarily along the east banks Cedar River Trail and include red maple (Acer rubrum), horse chestnut (Aesculus hippocastanum), and low cotoneaster (Cotoneaster sp.). A small patch of common reed (Phragmites australis) was observed on the west bank north of the project site. Approximately 25 percent of the upland area Boeing Renton South Bridge Seismic Retrofit WSP USA, 31405867.128 Standard Stream Study/Habitat Data Report January 2024 Renton, Washington Page 3 of 13 on the east bank and approximately 60 percent of the upland area on the west bank within 100 feet upstream and downstream of the project site are grass/lawn. The limited riparian vegetation along the east and west banks adjacent to the project site and the highly developed shorelines along both banks of the LCR (50 percent grass/lawn cover, concrete barriers, and paved impervious surfaces) severely limit habitat availability and use by multiple plant and animal species within the 200-foot shoreline setback. In addition to the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Priority Habitat and Species database, a search of the Washington Department of Natural Resources’ Natural Heritage Program online mapper (https://www.dnr.wa.gov/NHPdata) was performed. No rare plants and rare/high-quality ecosystems were identified in the vicinity of the project site. Critical wildlife species occurring at the project site include the salmonids identified in Section 3.4, Fish and Wildlife. 4.3 ECOLOGICAL FUNCTION Riparian habitats have important ecological functions other than providing habitat for birds and other wildlife. Healthy riparian vegetation protects banks from erosion, influences in-channel aquatic habitats, maintains favorable water temperature for fish through shading, filters runoff, and provides nutrients. Riparian vegetation increases habitat complexity, creates off-channel habitat, and can protect against scour during severe storm events. Riparian habitats link upland and aquatic habitats. Upland habitats have a critical role in watershed function and affect riparian and aquatic habitats, particularly in drier, low-elevation sites. The riparian zone along the east bank of the LCR adjacent to and within 100 feet upstream and downstream of the project site located on the east side of the LCR is a relatively narrow vegetated band consisting of trees, shrubs, and manicured lawn. A paved pedestrian trail occurs in this area as well. Several invasive species also were observed, as discussed in Section 3.2, Vegetative Cover. The riparian zone along the west bank of the LCR adjacent to and 100 feet upstream and downstream of the project site located on the west side of the LCR consists of trees, shrubs, and grass within 40 feet of the LCR, and impervious paved surface within the remaining riparian buffer. The primary ecological functions provided by riparian vegetation along the east and west banks of the LCR within 100 feet upstream and downstream of the project site include: · Nesting and foraging habitat for birds and small mammals · Input of terrestrial insects from overhanging vegetation · Input of allochthonous organic matter (via leaf fall) · Limited erosion control · Limited habitat complexity Boeing Renton South Bridge Seismic Retrofit WSP USA, 31405867.128 Standard Stream Study/Habitat Data Report January 2024 Renton, Washington Page 4 of 13 The LCR is a man-made channel created in 1912 when the river was diverted as a tributary to the former Black River directly to Lake Washington. The LCR is channelized and substantially altered, so that there is very limited riparian area to provide all the potential ecological functions of an unaltered habitat. Riparian vegetation provides very little, if any, shading to the LCR because of the dominance of small shrubs and the lack of large trees. Both banks of the river in the project area are contained within levees and/or flood-control walls, so there is no potential for the creation of off-channel habitat. Because of extensive development along both banks of the river in the project area, there is little, if any, transition between riparian and upland habitats. 4.4 FISH AND WILDLIFE This section addresses fish and wildlife species that may use the LCR in the vicinity of the project site. 4.4.1 Mammals An Eastern cottontail rabbit (Sylvilagus floridanus) was observed during the site visit. Given the level of development and paved surface area in the project area, it is likely that only small mammals, such as beaver, squirrels, mice, rats, voles, moles, raccoons, opossums, muskrats, and river otters, use the riparian areas along the LCR shoreline adjacent to and within 100 feet upstream and downstream of the project areas. While conducting small mammal surveys in a wetland along the LCR, Klaus Richter and Amanda Azous (Azous and Horner, 1997) reported 13 species of mammals (Table 1). These, as well as other small mammals common to the Puget lowlands, may occur along the LCR adjacent to the project site. Table 1. Small Mammals Reported to Occur along the Lower Cedar River1 Common Name Scientific Name Common Name Scientific Name Creeping vole Microtus oregoni Montane shrew Sorex monticolus Deer mouse Peromyscus maniculatus Shrew-mole Neurotrichus gibbsii Ermine Mustela ermine Southern red-backed vole Clethryonomys gapperi Forest deer mouse Peromyscus oreas Townsend’s chipmunk Tamias townsendii Long-tailed vole Microtus longicaudus Trowbridge’s shrew Sorex trowbridgei Marsh shrew Sorex bendirei Vagrant shrew Sorex vagrans Masked shrew Sorex cinereus 1Source: Azous and Horner, 1997. 4.4.2 Birds Several bird species were observed during the site visit, including American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), an immature gull species (Larus spp.), and several unidentified songbird species. Richter and Azous (Azous and Horner, 1997) conducted bird surveys in a wetland of the LCR between late May and mid-June in 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, and 1995 to determine distribution and relative abundance. They reported 58 species of birds (Table 2). It is likely that these, as well as other species of birds common to the Puget lowlands, nest or forage in the project vicinity. Boeing Renton South Bridge Seismic Retrofit WSP USA, 31405867.128 Standard Stream Study/Habitat Data Report January 2024 Renton, Washington Page 5 of 13 Table 2. Birds Reported to Occur along the Lower Cedar River1 Common Name Scientific Name Common Name Scientific Name American crow Corvus brachyrhynchos Northern pygmy owl Glaucidium gnoma American goldfinch Carduelis tristis Orange -crowned warbler Vermivora celata American robin Turdus migratorius Pine siskin Carduelis pinus Black-capped chickadee Parus atricapillus Pacific-slope flycatcher Empidonax difficilis Belted kingfisher Ceryle alcyon Purple finch Carpodacus purpureus Bewick’s wren Thryomanes bewickii Red-breasted nuthatch Sitta Canadensis Brown-headed cowbird Molothrus ater Red-breasted sapsucker Sphyrapicus ruber Black-headed grosbeak Pheucticus melanocephalus Red crossbill Loxia curvirostra Brewer’s blackbird Euphagus cyanocephalus Red-eyed vireo Vireo olivaceus Brown creeper Certhia Americana Rufous-sided towhee Pipilo erythrophthalmus Black-throated gray warbler Dendroica nigrescens Ruffed grouse Bonasa umbellus Bushtit Psaltriparus minimus Ruby-crowned kinglet Regulus calendula Chestnut-backed chickadee Parus rufescens Red-winged blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus Cedar waxwing Bombycilla cedrorum Sora Porzana Carolina Cooper’s hawk Accipiter cooperii Song sparrow Melospiza melodia Common raven Corvus corax Sharp-shinned hawk Accipiter striatus Common yellow throat Geothlypis trichas Steller’s jay Cyanocitta stelleri Dark-eyed junco Junco hyemalis Swainson’s thrush Catharus ustulatus Downy woodpecker Picoides pubescens Townsend’s warbler Setophaga townsendi European starling Sturnus vulgaris Vaux’s swift Chaetura vauxi Evening grosbeak Coccothraustes vespertinus Violet-green swallow Tachycineta thalassina Fox sparrow Passerella iliaca Virginia rail Rallus limicola Great blue heron Ardea herodias Warbling vireo Vireo gilvus Golden-crowned kinglet Regulus satrapa Western tanger Piranga ludoviciana Hairy woodpecker Picoides villosus Willow flycatcher Empidonax traillii Hermit thrush Catharus guttatus Wilson’s warbler Cardellina pusilla Marsh wren Cistothorus palustris Winter wren Troglodytes hiemalis MacGillivray’s warbler Geothlypis tolmiei Wood duck Aix sponsa Northern flicker Colaptes auratus Yellow warbler Dendroica petechia 1Source: Azous and Horner, 1997. 4.4.3 Amphibians and Reptiles No amphibians or reptiles were observed during the site visit; however, it is likely that amphibian (e.g., anurans) and reptile species (e.g., turtles) found in the Lake Boeing Renton South Bridge Seismic Retrofit WSP USA, 31405867.128 Standard Stream Study/Habitat Data Report January 2024 Renton, Washington Page 6 of 13 Washington basin may use the areas within the site vicinity. Richter and Azous (Azous and Horner, 1997) reported the occurrence of six amphibian species in the LCR, as listed in Table 3. Table 3. Amphibians Reported to Occur along the Lower Cedar River1 Common Name Scientific Name Common Name Scientific Name Ensatina Ensatina eschscholtzii Pacific tree frog Pseudoacris regilla Long-toed salamander Ambystoma macrodactylus Red-legged frog Rana aurora Northwestern salamander A. gracile Western red-backed salamander Plethodon vehiculum 1Source: Azous and Horner, 1997. No information was located listing reptile species occurring along the LCR in the project vicinity; however, reptiles listed for King County (King County, 2008) that could occur in the project vicinity are listed in Table 4. Table 4. Reptiles Occurring Along the Lower Cedar River1 Common Name Scientific Name Common Name Scientific Name Common garter snake Thamnophis sirtalis Rubber boa Charina bottae Northern alligator lizard Elgaria coerulea Slider Trachemys scripta Northwestern garter snake T. ordinoides Western fence lizard Sceloporus occidentalis Painted turtle Chrysemys picta Western terrestrial garter snake T. elegans 1Source: King County, 2008. 4.4.4 Fish No fish were observed in the LCR adjacent to the project site during the site visit. The Lake Washington system, including the LCR adjacent to the project site, hosts many fish species, including five salmonid species: Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), coho salmon (O. kisutch), sockeye/kokanee salmon (O. nerka), coastal cutthroat trout (O. clarkii), and steelhead/rainbow trout (O. mykiss). Anadromous forms of each of these species use the Cedar River system as migratory, forage, nursery, and spawning habitat, so individuals are present in the river both as adults during migrations to spawning grounds and as juveniles (Kerwin, 2001). All these species occur seasonally in the LCR adjacent to the project site. Additionally, there have been isolated reports of coastal/Puget Sound bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) occurring in the Lake Washington system; however, it is believed that few bull trout occur in the Lake Washington system, if they occur at all. Puget Sound Chinook salmon, Puget Sound steelhead trout, and bull trout are federally listed species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Species endemic to the Lake Washington system include the northern pike minnow (Ptychocheilus oregonensis), peamouth (Mylocheilus caurinus), sculpins (Cottus spp.), and longfin smelt (Spirinchus thaleichthys) (Weitkamp et al., 2000; Wydoski and Whitney, 2003). Twenty-four non-native fish species (Table 5) have been identified in the Lake Washington/Lake Union system. A number of these species are now believed Boeing Renton South Bridge Seismic Retrofit WSP USA, 31405867.128 Standard Stream Study/Habitat Data Report January 2024 Renton, Washington Page 7 of 13 to be no longer present in the system. Some of these species are known to prey on juvenile salmon (e.g., smallmouth bass) while others are potential competitors with juvenile salmonids for food (Kerwin, 2001). Table 5. Non-native Fish Species Introduced into the Lake Washington/Lake Union System1 Common Name Scientific Name Common Name Scientific Name American shad Alosa sapidissima Goldfish Carassius auratus Atlantic salmon Salmo salar Grass carp Ctenopharengodon idella Black bullhead Ictalurus melas Lake Trout Salvelinus namaycush Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus Lake whitefish Coregonus clupeaformis Bluegill Lepomis macrocheilus Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides Brook trout Salvelinus fontinalis Pumpkinseed sunfish Lepomis gibbosus Brown bullhead Ictalurus nebulosus Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieui Brown trout Salmo trutta Tench Tinca tinca Channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus Warmouth Lepomis gulosus Cherry salmon Oncorhynchus masou Weather loach Misgurnus angillicaudatus Common carp Cyprinus carpio White crappie Pomoxis annularis Fathead minnow Pimephales notatus Yellow perch Perca flavescens 1Source: Kerwin, 2001. 4.5 MEASURES TO PROTECT TREES AND VEGETATION The proposed project footprint is approximately 9,326 square feet within the 200-foot shoreline setback on the banks of the LCR. Of this, approximately 5,744 square feet is existing impervious paved area that will remain paved impervious. The remaining 3,582 square feet is approximately 50 percent grass and exposed soil on the west bank and is landscaped on the east bank with mulch and minimal ground cover. This area of the buffer will be temporarily impacted by clearing and grubbing during construction and will be enhanced and replanted with native vegetation and seed mixes resulting in a net environmental uplift. Temporary erosion and sediment control, including straw waddles and silt fence, will be installed to prevent erosive conditions during construction and reduce impact to the existing adjacent vegetation and habitat. 4.6 NO NET LOSS OF ECOLOGICAL FUNCTION The project will result in no net loss of ecological function in the riparian zone of the LCR adjacent to and 100 feet upstream and downstream of the project site. There will be no change in impervious surface area within the shoreline setback. The existing habitat condition on the site is approximately 50 percent grass and exposed soil on the west bank and is landscaped on the east bank with mulch and minimal ground cover. The west bank will be replanted and stabilized with 55 percent riverbank mix and 45 percent hydroseed mix. The east bank will be replanted with a mix of subalpine Boeing Renton South Bridge Seismic Retrofit WSP USA, 31405867.128 Standard Stream Study/Habitat Data Report January 2024 Renton, Washington Page 8 of 13 spiraea (spiraea densiflora), red osier dogwood (cornus sericea), pacific ninebark (physocarpus capitatus), nootka rose (rosa nutkana), and Oregon grape (mahonia aquifolium compacta) and will result in reduction of open mulched area. Under the bridge and within the bridge footprint, each bank is stabilized above the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) with existing rip rap fill. The project will replace this with light loose rip rap within the same footprint. The concept of “no net loss” means to create, restore, and/or enhance an area so that there is no reduction to total acreage and/or function. The project will restore the buffer area temporarily impacted and will result in no reduction of vegetated area. The buffer area temporarily impacted will be replanted with native vegetation and seed mixes that will improve LCR habitat value and result in a net environmental uplift. The river bank under the bridge will be stabilized with rip rap within the existing rip rap and bridge footprint. 5.0 HABITAT DATA REPORT This section presents the habitat data report, providing information about pertinent habitat and ecological function at the proposed project site. 5.1 HABITAT DIVERSITY The LCR downstream of Interstate 405 (approximately 1.6 miles) is an artificial channel created early in the twentieth century and is completely constrained between levees and revetments. This reach was regularly dredged to prevent flooding from the time of its completion in 1912 until the mid-1970s. Portions of the reach were again dredged in 1999 for the first time since the mid-1970s. Flood control dredging was conducted during the summer of 2016. In-stream habitat in the reach is almost entirely glide, with little habitat complexity. Land uses prevent floodplain connectivity and have eliminated the potential for reconnection with a natural floodplain or the establishment of a riparian corridor. Channelization and existing land uses also prevent significant large woody debris (LWD) from accumulating in the channel. The reach is also very low gradient and depositional, and the substrates have high levels of fine sediments (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers [USACE], 2004). The shoreline along the LCR adjacent to the project site consists of developed property belonging to Boeing and the City of Renton. With realignment of the Cedar River into Lake Washington in 1912, the zone of sediment deposition was localized through the City of Renton (Perkins, 1994). The vast majority, if not all, of the non-suspendable sediment load is now deposited along this reach because Lake Washington lies at the river’s mouth. With the path of the river fixed by armored banks, progressive infilling of the channel resulted. Sediment is continually deposited in the downstream 2 miles of the river and in an enlarging delta in Lake Washington. Aquatic habitat within the LCR adjacent to the project site consists of a low relief benthic habitat composed of small cobbles with some gravel and no boulders. LWD in the stretch of the LCR adjacent to the project site is extremely limited. River discharged at the time of the site visit on January 19, 2024 was approximately 504 cubic feet per second (U.S. Geological Survey [USGS], 2024). Channelization of the LCR has eliminated meanders within the lower river, such that the lower 1.6 miles of river Boeing Renton South Bridge Seismic Retrofit WSP USA, 31405867.128 Standard Stream Study/Habitat Data Report January 2024 Renton, Washington Page 9 of 13 consists of a uniform glide habitat with a nearly complete absence of riffles and pools. Habitat diversity along the LCR adjacent to the project site is extremely limited. 5.2 MIGRATION CORRIDORS A search of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Priority Habitat and Species database (http://wdfw.wa.gov/mapping/phs/) identified five salmonid species that use the LCR as a migration corridor: · Chinook salmon · Coho salmon · Sockeye salmon · Steelhead and rainbow trout · Coastal cutthroat trout Two of the above species, Puget Sound Chinook salmon and Puget Sound steelhead trout, are listed as threatened under the ESA. Bull trout, a member of the char family, may also be found in the LCR and is also listed as threatened under the ESA. Population status information and extent of use of this area are currently unknown. Adult and subadult size individuals have been observed infrequently in the LCR (below Cedar Falls), Lake Washington, and at the Locks. 5.3 SPECIES AND COVER TYPES The almost complete absence of riparian vegetation along the west bank of the LCR within the 200-foot shoreline setback and the relatively narrow zone of riparian vegetation along the east bank within the 200-foot shoreline setback adjacent to the project site and the highly developed nature of the adjacent upland along both banks of the LCR severely limit habitat availability and use by multiple plant and animal species. The concrete flood-control wall on the west bank of the LCR adjacent to the project site severely limits the width of the riparian zone and eliminates the transition zone from riparian to terrestrial habitats. Typical plant and animal assemblages and associations that would be expected along the riparian corridor of the LCR are, for the most part, very limited or absent along the stretch of the LCR adjacent to the proposed project site. A search of the Washington Department of Natural Resources’ Natural Heritage Program online database did not identify any plant or terrestrial animal species of special concern in the vicinity of the project site (http://www.dnr.wa.gov/ResearchScience/HowTo/ConservationRestoration/Pages/ amp_nh_data_order.aspx). Critical wildlife species occurring at the project site include those salmonids identified in Section 4.2 above. 5.4 IDENTIFICATION OF DISTURBED AREAS The entire project area is highly developed and disturbed. As stated in Section 4.1, Habitat Diversity, the lower 1.6 miles of the LCR is an artificially created channel with extensive development along both banks. The majority of the 200-foot shoreline Boeing Renton South Bridge Seismic Retrofit WSP USA, 31405867.128 Standard Stream Study/Habitat Data Report January 2024 Renton, Washington Page 10 of 13 setback and adjacent upland within the project vicinity is impervious asphalt and/or cement with various structures, such as office buildings and aircraft hangers. 5.5 EXISTING HABITAT VALUES AND FUNCTIONS The LCR adjacent to the project site has very limited habitat value and is low functioning. A combination of two habitat assessment methods was used to provide a qualitative assessment of the existing habitat values and functions. These habitat assessment methods were the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for Use in Wadeable Streams and Rivers (Barbour et al., 1999) and the U.S. Forest Service’s Stream Inventory Handbook: Levels I and II (USFS, 2012). Both methods incorporate the use of physicochemical and biological parameters to assess habitat value and functionality. The EPA’s Rapid Bioassessment Protocols incorporate both benthic invertebrate and fish assemblages’ data in evaluating habitat value and function. For the purposes of this project, neither benthic invertebrate nor fish assemblage data were collected as part of the evaluation process due to the necessity of applying for and receiving the necessary permits to gather such data. The habitat assessment is based on physicochemical conditions observed at the project site: · Temperature · Water quality · Reach sinuosity · Vegetative conditions of the stream banks and the riparian zone · Condition of the floodplain (e.g., accessibility from the bank, overflow, and size) Each of the above parameters is discussed below. 5.5.1 Temperature Mean monthly water temperatures in degrees Celsius in the LCR at Renton for the period of March 1992 through September 2022 (USGS, 2024) are listed in Table 6. Table 6. Mean Monthly Water Temperatures in the LCR at Renton 1992 through 2022 Month Mean of Monthly Temperature °C January 6.1 February 6.4 March 7.6 April 9.5 May 11.6 June 13.5 July 15.8 August 16.1 September 13.9 October 11.0 November 8.2 December 6.4 Boeing Renton South Bridge Seismic Retrofit WSP USA, 31405867.128 Standard Stream Study/Habitat Data Report January 2024 Renton, Washington Page 11 of 13 The warmest water temperatures occur during the months of June, July, August, and September; however, even the highest mean monthly temperatures are compliant with Washington State aquatic life temperature criteria (WAC 173-201A Table 200 (1)(c)) listed in Table 7, with the exception of the char spawning and rearing and core summer salmonoid habitat. Char (e.g., bull trout) do not spawn in the LCR, and it is highly unlikely that they use the LCR as rearing habitat. Table 7. Aquatic Life Temperature Criteria in Freshwater Category Highest 7-DADMax °C Char Spawning and Rearing 12.0 Core Summer Salmonoid Habitat 16.0 Salmonoid Spawning, Rearing, and Migration 17.5 Salmonoid Rearing and Migration Only 17.5 Nonanadromous Interior Redband Trout 18.0 Indigenous Warm Water Species 20.0 Note: 7-DADMAX = 7-day average of the daily maximum temperatures 5.5.2 Water Quality No site-specific water quality data were found for the project site; however, water quality monitoring has been conducted in south Lake Washington by the Washington State Department of Ecology. Washington State’s Water Quality Assessment (303[d] and 305[b] Report) (Ecology, 2018) identified exceedances of water quality standards for temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, and fecal coliforms in the LCR. No chemical exceedances of state water quality criteria were identified for the LCR adjacent to the project site. 5.5.3 Reach Sinuosity As discussed above, the lower 1.6 miles of the LCR are channelized and much of the shoreline on both banks is restrained by bulkheads. There is no sinuosity within the entire 1.6 miles of the LCR. Stream sinuosity can provide increased habitat complexity through the creation of pools, riffles, and glides, as well as the creation of off-channel habitat. 5.5.4 Vegetative Conditions As described previously, riparian vegetation is sparse along both banks of the LCR within 100 feet of the project site. As such, habitat diversity and functionality along this reach of the LCR is severely limited. 5.5.5 Floodplain Conditions The LCR is an artificially created channel confined by levees and bulkheads on each bank. Except in extreme discharge conditions, the LCR has very little connectivity with its floodplain and virtually no potential for formation of off-channel habitat within the floodplain. Because of the low gradient of the LCR, it functions as a sediment depositional zone. The City of Renton and the USACE periodically dredges the LCR for flood control purposes. Flood-control dredging was conducted during the summer of 2016. Boeing Renton South Bridge Seismic Retrofit WSP USA, 31405867.128 Standard Stream Study/Habitat Data Report January 2024 Renton, Washington Page 12 of 13 5.5.6 Habitat Values and Functions at the Project Site A qualitative assessment of the LCR adjacent to the project site indicates that it provides very low habitat value and function due primarily to the sparse riparian vegetation and habitat complexity. 5.6 HABITAT ALTERATIONS AND IMPACTS AND PROPOSED HABITAT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM The project will not involve any in-water components or work below the OHWM. Approximately 3,582 square feet of buffer consisting of existing grass and exposed soil on the west bank and landscaping on the east bank will be temporarily impacted by clearing and grubbing during construction and will be enhanced and replanted with native vegetation and seed mixes. The project will restore the buffer area temporarily impacted and will result in no reduction of vegetated area. Temporary erosion and sediment control, including straw waddles and silt fence, will be installed to prevent erosive conditions during construction and reduce impact to the existing adjacent vegetation and habitat. The buffer area temporarily impacted will be replanted with native vegetation and seed mixes that will improve LCR habitat value and result in a net environmental uplift. No habitat management or mitigation programs are required for the proposed tasks and none are proposed. Boeing Renton South Bridge Seismic Retrofit WSP USA, 31405867.128 Standard Stream Study/Habitat Data Report January 2024 Renton, Washington Page 13 of 13 6.0 REFERENCES Azous, A.L. and Horner, R.R. (eds.) 1997. Wetlands and Urbanization – Implications for the Future, Final Report of the Puget Sound Wetlands and Stormwater Management Research Program. Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, King County Water and Land Resources Division, Seattle, Washington, and University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. Accessed at https://your.kingcounty.gov/dnrp/library/archive- documents/wlr/wetlands-urbanization-report/wet-rept.pdf. January 16, 2024. Barbour, M.T., Gerritsen, J., Snyder, B.C., and Stribling, J.B. 1999. Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for Use in Streams and Wadeable Rivers. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, EPA 841-B-99-002, Washington, DC. Kerwin, J. 2001. Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Limiting Factors Report for the Cedar- Sammamish Basin (Water Resource Inventory Area 8). Washington Conservation Commission, Olympia, Washington. Accessed at: https://www.govlink.org/watersheds/8/pdf/WRIA_8_LimFactors_Summary.pdf. January 16, 2024. King County. 2008. King County Biodiversity Report 2008. King County, Seattle, Washington. Accessed at: http://www.kingcounty.gov/environment/animalsAndPlants/biodiversity/king-county- biodiversity-report.aspx. January 16, 2024. Perkins, S.J. 1994. The shrinking Cedar River – channel changes following flow regime regulation and bank armoring, in Proceedings of Effects of Human-Induced Changes on Hydrologic Systems. American Water Resources Association 1994 Annual Summer Symposium, p. 649-658. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2004. Cedar River at Renton Flood Damage Reduction Operation and Maintenance Manual – Cedar River Section 205 (Renton, Washington). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District, Seattle, Washington. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2024. USGS Surface-Water Monthly Statistics for Washington – USGS 12119000 Cedar River at Renton. Department of the Interior, USGS, National Water Information System, Accessed at: https://nwis.waterdata.usgs.gov/wa/nwis/uv/?cb_all_00010_00060_00065=on&cb_00010 =on&cb_00060=on&cb_00065=on&format=gif_default&period=&begin_date=2013-05- 27&end_date=2016-12-31&site_no=12119000. January 16, 2024. Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). 2018. Washington State’s 2018 Water Quality Assessment (303[d] & 305[b] Report). Ecology. Accessed at: https://geo.wa.gov/datasets/waecy::water-quality-assessment-305b-report-current/about. January 16, 2024. Weitkamp, D.E., Ruggerone, G.T., Sacha, L., Howell, J., and Bachen, B. 2000. Factors Affecting Chinook Populations – Background Report. City of Seattle, Seattle, Washington. Wydoski, R.S., and Whitney, R.R. 2003. Inland Fishes of Washington. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland, and University of Washington Press, Seattle. APPENDIX A DRAWINGS COVER SHEET G01 BOEING RENTON FACTORY SHARED SERVICES GROUP RENTON, WASHINGTON 98057 NORTH 6TH STREET THE COMPANY VICINITY MAP CODE SUMMARY DRAWING INDEX CIVIL STRUCTURAL LANDSCAPING SOUTH BRIDGE SEISMIC RETROFIT PROJECT WORK LOCATION · ·PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION GENERAL NOTES G02 PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION SITE PLAN G03 PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION BRIDGE PLAN AND ELEVATION S01 PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION BUILDING 4-100 CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE S02 S-- ABUTMENT RETROFIT PLAN AND ELEVATION S03 PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ABUTMENT RETROFIT DETAILS S04 PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION PILE CAP DETAILS 1 S05 S-- PILE CAP DETAILS 2 S06 S-- WINGWALL DETAILS S07 S-- · · · MICROPILE DETAILS S08 PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION APPROACH SLAB DETAILS S09 S-- MISCELLANEOUS DETAILS S10 S-- 1 SCALE: 1" = 0 FT 10' 10 20 SITE PREP AND TESC PLAN C01 S-- LEGEND: STRAW WATTLES PER CITY OF RENTON STD PLAN 213.40 SAWCUT REMOVE PIPE SILT FENCE PER CITY OF RENTON STD PLAN 214.00 CLEAR AND GRUB LINE FULL DEPTH PAVEMENT REMOVAL CLEAR AND GRUB GENERAL NOTES: 1.LOCATIONS OF EXISTING SUBSURFACE UTILITIES ARE APPROXIMATE CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY CONSTRUCTION NOTES: CATCH BASIN INSERT PER CITY OF RENTON STD PLAN 216.30 1.APPROVAL OF THIS EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL (TESC) PLAN DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN APPROVAL OF PERMANENT ROAD OR DRAINAGE DESIGN (E.G., SIZE AND LOCATION OR ROADS, PIPES, RESTRICTORS, CHANNELS, RETENTION FACILITIES, UTILITIES, ETC.). 2.THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THESE ESC PLANS AND THE CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, REPLACEMENT, AND UPGRADING OF THESE ESC FACILITIES IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE APPLICANT/ESC SUPERVISOR UNTIL ALL CONSTRUCTION IS APPROVED. 3.THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CLEARING LIMITS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN SHALL BE CLEARLY FLAGGED BY SURVEY TAPE OR FENCING, IF REQUIRED, PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION (SWDM APPENDIX D). DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD, NO DISTURBANCE BEYOND THE CLEARING LIMITS SHALL BE PERMITTED. THE CLEARING LIMITS SHALL BE MAINTAINED BY THE APPLICANT/ESC SUPERVISOR FOR THE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION. 4.STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE BEGINNING OF CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTAINED FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. ADDITIONAL MEASURES, SUCH AS CONSTRUCTED WHEEL WASH SYSTEMS OR WASH PADS, MAY BE REQUIRED TO ENSURE THAT ALL PAVED AREAS ARE KEPT CLEAN AND TRACK OUT TO ROAD RIGHT OF WAY DOES NOT OCCUR FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. 5.THE ESC FACILITIES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN MUST BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO OR IN CONJUNCTION WITH ALL CLEARING AND GRADING SO AS TO ENSURE THAT THE TRANSPORT OF SEDIMENT TO SURFACE WATERS, DRAINAGE SYSTEMS, FLOW CONTROL BMP LOCATIONS (EXISTING AND PROPOSED), AND ADJACENT PROPERTIES IS MINIMIZED. 6.THE ESC FACILITIES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN ARE THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR ANTICIPATED SITE CONDITIONS. DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD, THESE ESC FACILITIES SHALL BE UPGRADED AS NEEDED FOR UNEXPECTED STORM EVENTS AND MODIFIED TO ACCOUNT FOR CHANGING SITE CONDITIONS (E.G. ADDITIONAL COVER MEASURES, ADDITIONAL SUMP PUMPS, RELOCATION OF DITCHES AND SILT FENCES, PERIMETER PROTECTION, ETC.) AS DIRECTED BY KING COUNTY. 7.THE ESC FACILITIES SHALL BE INSPECTED DAILY BY THE APPLICANT, ESC SUPERVISOR AND MAINTAINED TO ENSURE CONTINUED PROPER FUNCTIONING. WRITTEN RECORDS SHALL BE KEPT OF WEEKLY REVIEWS OF THE ESC FACILITIES. 8.ANY AREAS OF EXPOSED SOILS, INCLUDING ROADWAY EMBANKMENTS THAT WILL NOT BE DISTURBED FOR TWO CONSECUTIVE DAYS DURING THE WET SEASON OR SEVEN DAYS DURING THE DRY SEASON SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY STABILIZED WITH THE APPROVED ESC METHODS (E.G., SEEDING, MULCHING, PLASTIC COVERING, ETC.). 9.ANY AREAS NEEDING ESC MEASURES THAT DO NOT REQUIRE IMMEDIATE ATTENTION SHALL BE ADDRESSED WITHIN SEVEN (7) DAYS. 10. THE ESC FACILITIES ON INACTIVE SITES SHALL BE INSPECTED AND MAINTAINED A MINIMUM OF ONCE A MONTH DURING THE DRY SEASON, BI-MONTHLY DURING THE WET SEASON, OR WITHIN TWENTY FOUR (24) HOURS FOLLOWING A STORM EVENT. 11.AT NO TIME SHALL MORE THAN ONE (1) FOOT OF SEDIMENT BE ALLOWED TO ACCUMULATE WITHIN A CATCH BASIN. ALL CATCH BASINS AND CONVEYANCE LINES SHALL BE CLEANED PRIOR TO PAVING. THE CLEANING OPERATION SHALL NOT FLUSH SEDIMENT-LADEN WATER INTO THE DOWNSTREAM SYSTEM. 12. ANY PERMANENT RETENTION/DETENTION FACILITY USED AS A TEMPORARY SETTLING BASIN SHALL BE MODIFIED WITH THE NECESSARY EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AND SHALL PROVIDE ADEQUATE STORAGE CAPACITY. IF THE FACILITY IS TO FUNCTION ULTIMATELY AS AN INFILTRATION SYSTEM, THE TEMPORARY FACILITY MUST BE ROUGH GRADED SO THAT THE BOTTOM AND SIDES ARE AT LEAST THREE FEET ABOVE FINAL GRADE OF THE PERMANENT FACILITY. FLOW CONTROL BMP AREAS (EXISTING OR PROPOSED) SHALL NOT BE USED AS TEMPORARY FACILITIES AND SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM SEDIMENTATION AND INTRUSION. 13. COVER MEASURES WILL BE APPLIED IN CONFORMANCE WITH APPENDIX D OF THE KING COUNTY SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL. 14. PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF THE WET SEASON (OCT. 1), ALL DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE REVIEWED TO IDENTIFY WHICH ONES CAN BE SEEDED ON PREPARATION FOR THE WINTER RAINS. DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE SEEDED WITHIN ONE WEEK OF THE BEGINNING OF THE WET SEASON. A SKETCH MAP OF THOSE AREAS TO BE SEEDED AND THOSE AREAS TO REMAIN UNCOVERED SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE DLS-PERMITTING INSPECTOR. NOTE: ALL INSTANCES OF "APPLICANT/ESC SUPERVISOR" ABOVE SHALL BE CONSIDERED "CONTRACTOR/CONTRACTOR'S ESC LEAD". TESC NOTES: 1 SCALE: 1" = 0 FT 10' 10 20 CIVIL PLAN C02 S-- LEGEND: APPROACH SLAB, SEE SHEET S09 FOR DETAILS HMA 6" CL 1/2" PG 58H-22 OVER 4" OF CSBC STORM DRAINAGE PIPE CATCH BASIN TYPE 1 PER CITY OF RENTON STD PLAN 200.00 GENERAL NOTES: 1.SURVEY ELEVATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTRACTOR TO SURVEY EXISTING PAVEMENT LOCATIONS AND CONFIRM EXISTING GRADE. 2.CONTRACTOR TO FIELD VERIFY RIM ELEVATIONS BASED ON EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY. 3.OUTFALL ELEVATIONS ARE FIXED, HOWEVER UPSTREAM INVERTS AND CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING PIPES NEED TO BE FIELD VERIFIED AND SYSTEM CONFIRMED TO MIN 1% SLOPE PRIOR TO ORDERING DRAINAGE STRUCTURES. CORNUS SERICEARED OSIER DOGWOODPHYSOCARPUS CAPITATUSPACIFIC NINEBARKHYDROSEED MIXMAHONIA AQUIFOLIUM 'COMPACTA'OREGON GRAPEROSA NUTKANANOOTKA ROSESPIRAEA DENSIFLORASUBALPINE SPIRAEAAPPROX. LIMIT OF FLOOD CONTROL WALL (VERIFY IN FIELD)APPROX. LIMIT OFDISTURBANCE (VERIFY IN FIELD)APPROX. LIMIT OFDISTURBANCE (VERIFY IN FIELD)RIVERBANK MIX PLANTINGPLANTING PLANL01S--SCALE:PLANTING PLAN1"=1'-0"1SCALE: 1" =0FT10'1020NEWSGENERAL NOTES:1.IRRIGATION - PROTECT IN PLACE. FIELD MODIFY AS REQUIRED.G UY MICHAELSENNO. 730 EXP. 2/12/ 2 025 STA T EOFWASHINGTONLANDSCAPE ARCHIT E CT BACKFILL W/ PLANTING SOILSCORE ROOTBALL ON (3)SIDES TO 1/2" DEPTHUNDISTURBED ORCOMPACTED SUBGRADEPROVIDE WATERSAUCER BELOW MULCHFERTILIZER (NOTSHOWN) AS SPECIFIEDINSTALL 1" BELOWMULCH FINISH GRADEGROUNDCOVER PER PLANMULCH AS SPECIFIEDSPACING PER PLAN(TRIANGULAR UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)WEED BARRIER2X ROOT BALL DIAMTER1111ROOT BALL DIAMETERUNDISTURBED ORCOMPACTED SUBGRADEBACKFILL W/PLANTING SOILTAMP SOIL AROUND ROOTBALL W/ FOOT SO ROOTBALL DOES NOT SHIFTSHRUB PER PLANINSTALL 1" BELOWMULCH FINISH GRADEMULCH AS SPECIFIEDFERTILIZE (NOT SHOWN)AS SPECIFIEDPROVIDE WATERSAUCERWEED BARRIERSHRUBSQTY BOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZE SPACINGCOMMENTS79CORNUS SERICEARED OSIER DOGWOOD3 GAL18" O.C.47MAHONIA AQUIFOLIUM 'COMPACTA'OREGON GRAPE5 GAL30" O.C.39PHYSOCARPUS CAPITATUSPACIFIC NINEBARK5 GAL48" O.C.46ROSA NUTKANANOOTKA ROSE1 GAL30" O.C.42SPIRAEA DENSIFLORASUBALPINE SPIRAEA3 GAL30" O.C.GROUNDCOVERS, PERENNIALS, GRASSESQTY BOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZE SPACINGCOMMENTS565 SFRIVERBANK MIX10% CAREX OBNUPTASLOUGH SEDGE1 GAL12" O.C.20% CAREX STIPATASAWBREAK SEDGE1 GAL12" O.C.20% JUNCUS EFFUSUSCOMMON RUSH1 GAL12" O.C.10% JUNCUS ENSIFOLIUSDAGGERLEAF RUSH1 GAL12" O.C.10% JUNCUS TENUISSLENDER RUSH1 GAL12" O.C.10% JUNCUS PATENSGRAY RUSH1 GAL12" O.C.10% IRIS MISSOURIENSISWESTERN BLUE IRIS1 GAL12" O.C.10% SCIRPUS MICROCARPUSSMALL-FRUITED BULRUSH1 GAL12" O.C.470 SFHYDROSEED MIXPT 652 PACIFIC NORTHWESTWILDFLOWER MIX FROM PT LAWN SEEDSCALE:SHRUB PLANTING1"=1'-0'1SCALE:GROUNCOVER PLANTING1-1/2"=1'-0"2PLANTING SCHEDULE AND DETAILSL02S--G UY MICHAELSENNO. 730 EXP. 2/12/ 2 025 STA T EOFWASHINGTONLANDSCAPE ARCHIT E CT APPENDIX B PHOTOS Photo 1: East Shoreline Looking South Photo 2: East Shoreline Looking North Photo 3: East Shoreline Landscaping Photo 4: West Shoreline Looking South Photo 5: West Shoreline Looking North Photo 6: West Shoreline