HomeMy WebLinkAboutMiscCITY OF RENTON
MAY CREEK TRAIL
CRITICAL AREAS REPORT
King County, Washington
RENTOOOO-OO 15
Preparedfor:
CITY OF RENTON
Parks Planning and Natural Resources
1055 South Grady Way
P.O. Box 90012
Renton, WA 98057-3232
Prepared by:
DA YID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
415 118th Avenue SE
Bellevue, W A 98005
April 2012
DAVID EVANS
ANoASSOCIATES INC.
City of Renton
Planning Division
MAY -9 tull
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
C][1I'Y OF JRJEN1I'ON
MAY CR.JEJEJ[{ 1I'R.A][lL
Cru1I'][CAlL AUA§ R.JEPOJR1I'
][(jng County, Washington
. RENTOOOO-OOJ5
Prepared/or:
CITY OF RENTON
Parks Planning and NatwlIl Resources
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057-3232
Prepared by:
8~~
Scott Swarts
Senior Fish and Wildlife Biologist
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
415 118th Avenue SE
Bellevue, WA 98005
Phone: 425.519.6593
Fax: 425.519.5361
April 2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
il
I
I
I
I·
I
I
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 1
2.0 METHODS ........................................................................................................................................ 4
2.1 Preliminary Data Gathering and Review ................................................................................... 4
2.2 Field Investigation .. : .................................................................. : ............................................... 5
3.0 RESULTS .......................................................................................................................................... 6
3.1 Preliminary Data Gathering and Review ................................................................................... 6
3.1.1 WDFW PHS Data ...................................................................................................... 6
3.1.2 WDNR NHP Data ...................................................................................................... 6
3.1.3 Streams ....................................................................................................................... 7
3.1.4 Wetlands ..................................................................................................................... 9
3.1.5 US. Department of Agriculture Soil Data ................................................................. 9
3.1.6 Geologic Critical Areas ............................................................................................. 9
3.1.7 Floodplains ................................................................................................................ 9
3.1.8 Shoreline Master Program ................. : ..................................................................... 13
3.1.9 Amphibians and Reptiles .......................................................................................... 13
3.1.10 Mammals .................................................................................................................. 14
3.1.11 Birds ......................................................................................................................... 14
3.1.12 Federally Listed Species .......................................................................................... 15
3.2 Field Investigation ................................................................................................................... 16
3.2.1 Wetlands ................................................................................................................... 22
3.2.2 Uplands .................................................................................................................... 23
3.2.3 Wildlife ..................................................................................................................... 23
4.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................. , ......................... 25
5.0 IMPACT MINIMIZATION MEASURES ................................................................................... 26
5.1 Conservation and Performance Measures ............................................................................... 26
6.0 PROJECT IMPACTS ..................................................................................................................... 28
6.1 Analysis of Alternatives .......................................................................................................... 29
6.2 Salmonid Impacts ... ; ................................................................................................................ 30
6.3 Wildlife Impacts ...................................................................................................................... 31
6.4 Wetland Impacts ...................................................................................................................... 32
7.0 MITIGATION .......... , .................. : ................................................................................................... 33
7.1 Goals and Objectives ............................................................................................................... 33
7.2 Planting Plan ............................................................................................................................ 33
7.1.1 Plant Establishment and Maintenance ..................................................................... 34
7.1.2 Performance Standards ............................................................................................ 34
7.1.3 Contingencies ........................................................................................................... 36
7.1.4 Year 5 Success and Mitigation Approval ................................................................. 36
7.1.5 Monitoring Plan ....................................................................................................... 36
8.0 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................. 37
9.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................ 38
CitY'ofRenton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
P:W?ENTOOOOOO15\OOOO/NFCYlCriticaJ Areas RepomFlnaIICn'VcsJ Areas Re()Olf CIty of Renton May Creek Tral/.doc
April 2012
LIST OF TABLES
Table I: Rare Plants of King County ............................................................................................................ 6
Table 2: May Creek 2008 Water Quality Assessment.. ................................................................................ 8
Table 3: Amphibians and Reptiles .............................................................................................................. 13
Table 4: Mammal Record Summary for T24N R05E ................................................................................. 14
Table 5: Breeding Bird Summary for T24N R05E ..................................................................................... 15
Table 6: Wetland Summary ........................................................................................................................ 22
Table 7: Salmonid Habitat Project Effects Matrix ...................................................................................... 30
Table 8: Plant Selection and Quantity ......................................................................................................... 33
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure I: Vicinity Map .................................................................................................................................. 2
Figure 2: Aerial Site Map ............................................................................................................................. 3
Figure 3: Aquatic Critical Areas Map ......................................................................................................... 10
Figure 4: Soil Survey -King County Area ................................................................................................. II
Figure 5: Geologic Hazard Areas ................................................................................................................. 12
Figure 6: Site Photos ................................................................................................................................... 17
APPENDICES
Appendix A -Site Plan
Appendix B -Wetland A Rating Form and Data Plot Forms
Appendix C -Mitigation Plan
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
P;'vI.RENTOOOOOOlSi0600INFOICrlIlcal AraBS RepOlflFlnallCrltlcal Areas RepOTt City of Renton Mar Creek Tral/.doc
ii April 2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
BIBI
BMPs
Corps
DEA
DP
Ecology
EFH
ESA
FAC
FACW
FACU
FEMA
GIS
HUC
1-405
lSRA
lWD
NHP
NMFS
NOAA
NRCS
NWI
NTU
OBL
OHWM
PEM
PFO
PHS
POW
RM
RMC
RSRA
SCS
SMP
SWPPP
TESC
TMDL
TSS
USDA
USFWS
USGS
WDFW
WDNR
WRIA
WSGA
ACRONYMS
Benthic Invertebrate Index
Best Management Practices
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
David Evans and Associates, Inc.
Data plot
Washington State Department of Ecology
Essential Fish Habitat
Endangered Species Act
Facultative
Facultative wetland
Facultative upland
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Geographic Information System
Hydrologic Unit Code
Interstate 405
Locally Significant Resource Area
large woody debris
Natural Heritage Program
National Marine Fisheries Service
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Natural Resources Conservation Service
National Wetlands Inventory
Nephelometric turbidity unit
Obligate wetland
Ordinary High Water Mark
Palustrine emergent
Palustrine forested
Priority habitats and species
Palustrine open water
River Mile
Renton Municipal Code
Regionally Significant Resource Area
Soil Conservation Service
Shoreline Master Program
Storm water pollution prevention plan
Temporary erosion and sediment control
Total maximum daily load
. Total suspended solids
U.S. Department of Agriculture
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
United States Geological Survey
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Washington State Department of Natural Resources
Water Resource Inventory Area
Washington State Gap Analysis
P:\MENTOOOOOO1510600INFOIC!ltlcal Ataas RepOlt\FlnanCrftkal Areas Reporl City ofRen/on May Creek Trell.doc
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
iii April 2012
1.0 INTRODUCTION
At the request of the City of Renton (City), David Evans and Associates, Inc. (DEA) conducted
this investigation to document the presence of critical areas, existing habitat conditions, level of
potential wildlife use, potential project-related impacts, and mitigation associated with the
construction of a trail through the project site. This investigation also evaluated priority habitats
and species (PHS) as identified by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)
that could occur in the project vicinity.
The project site is located within the city of Renton, Washington (Section 32, Township 24
north, Range 05 east, W.M.) (see Figures 1 and 2). The site address is 4260 Lake Washington
Boulevard North, Renton, Washington 98065, and is further identified as Parcel Number
3224059109. This parcel is located on the north side of May Creek, and the west side of
Interstate (1)-405, between 1-405 and Lake Washington Boulevard North. The entire parcel
covers approximately 3.08 acres and abuts approximately 900 linear feet of May Creek. The site
is in Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 8: Cedar-Sammamish Basin. More specifically,
the project site is within the May Creek Watershed, 6th Field Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC)
171100120302, while the approximate latitude and longitude is 47.52881 by -122.19966.
The project site is mostly forested with mature deciduous trees. However, the understory is
dominated by non-native species-Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) with pockets of
Japanese knotweed (Polygonum cllspidatum) and reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea). The
site was historically cleared, filled (including wetland fill), and graded; and May Creek was
likely channelized. As such, the project site is an ideal location for stream and wetland
restoration/enhancement actions that would benefit both fish and wildlife.
In summary, the site includes May Creek where it is identified as a Shoreline of the State;
therefore, a large portion of the parcel is regulated under Renton Municipal Code (RMC) 4-3-
090, and Shoreline Master Program (SMP) Regulations. Shoreline jurisdiction extends 200 feet
landward from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) or floodway, whichever is greater. The
predominance of the site is also defined as "areas of special flood hazard." One small (786-
square-foot) Category III wetland (Wetland A) was also identified on the project site. The
standard buffer for a Category III wetland within 'shoreline jurisdiction with a habitat score of
less than 20 points is 75 feet. The project area is also identified as a high seismic hazard area. No .
steep slopes or high erosion hazard areas exist on-site.
The project reach is designated Urban Conservancy. Trails are an allowed use subject to Hearing
Examiner Conditional Use PennitlShoreline Variance and standards outlined in the SMP and
RMC. Based on trail layout, design, and proposed mitigation/restoration, the project is consistent
with all applicable regulatory requirements. The 0.27-mile-Iong trail has been designed to avoid all
significant trees al)d is situated in areas currently dominated by non-native species. The trail width
is 6 feet; it will be composed of permeable materials and would result in clearing 0.20 acres of
non-native vegetation. Mitigation is proposed at a minimum ratio of 4.8: I (Base Area), but may
increase to 6.5: I depending on the availability of additional funding (Additive Alternative No. I).
Therefore, the project meets the design criteria for public access sites, is consistent with SMP and
RMC requirements, and will result in an increase in fish and wildlife habitat function by restoring
between 0.98 acres (Base Area) and 1.33 acres (with Additive Alternative. No. I) of degraded
habitat.
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
P:V\RENTOOOOOO1510600INFOICrltkal Mas RepotnFlnaIICrlUca/ Areas Report City of Renton May Creel! TraO.doc
I April 2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
• • •
I
•
I
••
I
• •
I
I
I
• •
° -:. __ o.'=::::::i' • Mile.
Source : KIng County GIS , Ecology GIS
City
King County
(Unincorporated)
Stream
Waterbody
Vicinity Map
City of Renton -Mey Creek Trail
RENTOO()()'()()15
Figure 1
December 2011 • ... v •• ........".. _.,aoc'''T.'_
C Parcel Boundary
-Proposed Trail
0 ... _.7,:" =:::::;'50 6 -Foot W
Source : King County GIS. City of Renton GIS
Aerial Photo -Site Map
City of Renton -May Creek Trail
RENTOOO0-0015
Figure 2
February 2012 • ... YI •• v ..... _ •• hC",,, •• _
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I .
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2.0 METHODS
The methods to document if critical areas exist on or immediately adjacent to the project site
included a review of public domain information and site visits. This report was prepared following
the review ofthe public domain resource data and multiple site visits.
2.1 PRELIMINARY DATA GATHERING AND REVIEW
Published information about local critical areas was reviewed for evidence of wetlands, streams,
priority habitats and species, steep slopes, coal mine hazards, erosion hazards, floodplains, and
aquifer recharge zones.
The WDFW-PHS program and the Washington State Department of Natural Resources
(WDNR) Washington Natural Heritage Program (NHP) (WDNR 2011) were consulted for
documented occllrrenc.es of priority habitats or species, rare plants, and high quality 'native
ecosystems in the general vicinity of the site. Priority habitats include, but are not limited to,
such features as wetlands, riparian areas, snag-rich areas, caves, cliffs, oak woodlands, rocky'
shorelines, and old-growth forests. Priority species are plants and animals listed by the state or
federal government as endangered, threatened, sensitive, candidate, or species of concern. The
potential use of the project area by mammals, birds, amphibians, and reptiles was investigated
through review of Washington State Gap Analysis (WSGA) data. The information reviewed
included:
o Sensitive Areas Map Folio, King County, Washington (1990)
o A Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmon Utilization, Volume 1, Fuget Sound
Region. Washington Department of Fisheries (Williams et al. 1975)
o Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Limiting Factors Reportfor the Cedar-Sammamish
Basin (Water Resource Inventory Area 8) (Kerwin 200 I)
o Breeding Birds of Washington State: Location Data and Predicted Distributions
(Smith et al. 1997)
o Terrestrial Mammals of Washington State: Location Data and Predicted Distributions
(Johnson and Cassidy 1997)
o Amphibians and Reptiles of Washington State: Location Data and Predicted
Distributions (Dvornich, McAllister, and Aubry 1997)
o WDNR-NHP data (accessed 2011): Sections that Contain Natural Heritage Features
Associatedwith Wetlands. Available at:
hup:ffwwwl.dnr.wa.govfnhpfrefdeskfdatasearchfwnhpwetlands.pdf
o WDNR-NHP Geographic Information System (GIS) data. Available at:
hUp:ffwwwl.dnr.wa.govfnhpfrefdeskfgisfindex.html
o National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Online Mapper, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS): hUp:flwww.fws.govfwetlandsfDatafmapper.html
o City of Renton -GIS data. Available at:
hUp:ffrentonwa.govflivingfdefault.aspx?id=27497
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
P:'lIIRENTOQOOO01!J106001NFOICrltkaJ Areas ReporflFinaflCrltical Areas Report City or Renton May Creek Tra/I.doc
4 April 2012
.0 United States Geological Survey (USGS) mapping via National Geographic TOPO
mapping software
o USGS Real-Time Water Data. Available at: http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis/rt
o United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) -Natural Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS): Web Soil Survey. Available at:
http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/apP/
o Final Adopted May Creek Basin Action Plan dated April 2001. Available at:
http://your .kingcounty. gov I dnrp/l i brary/1998/kcr726/F INAL-May-Creek -Basin-Plan-
4-16-0 l.pdf
o Appendix G: Stream Habitat Conditions Report-Stream Habitat Conditions During
LolV FlolV Conditions. 1-405 North Renton. Prepared by WDFW dated August 2003.
Available at: http://www. wsdot.wa.govINR/rdonlyres/F658E402-ECD0-4F3B-99C 1-
0473AE 14C512/0/G StreamHabitatConditions.pdf
o King County Stream and River Water Quality Monitoring Data -King County Water
and Land Resources Division. Data available at:
http://green.kingcounty.gov/WLRlWaterres/StreamsDatalWaterShedlnfo.aspx?Locat
or=0440
o City of Renton Shoreline Master Program Update. Available at:
http://rentonwa.gov/business/default.aspx?id=15 5 08
Final Adopted May Creek Basin Action Plan. April 200 I. Available at:
http://your.kingcounty.gov/dnrp/library/200 I/kcr726/FINAL-May-Creek-Basin-Plan-
4-16-0I.pdf
2.2 FIELD INVESTIGATION
DEA performed the site visits in March and November 2011 to verify preliminary data findings,
verify if previous OHWM flagging of May Creek was still valid, delineate wetland boundaries,
document existing habitat conditions, and document wildlife use.
Wetlands were delineated based on the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2) dated May
2010 (Corps 2010). Wetlands were categorized based on the Washington State Department of
Ecology (Ecology) Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington (Ecology
2004) with the updated wetland rating form (updated October 2008).
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
P:VlRENT()()(JOOOf5l0600INFOICrItJcaJ MIlS RepOttiFinaflCrltka/ Ateas Report City ofRen/on May Creek Trall.doc
5 April 2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.0 RESULTS
3.1 . PRELIMINARY DATA GATHERING AND REVIEW
3.1.1 WDFW PHS Data
The WDFW-PHS data obtained for this project mapped May Creek as flowing along the
southern edge of the project site. May Creek is mapped by WDFW as being utilized by priority
fish including coho salmon (Gncorhynchus kisutch), fall Chinook salmon (G. tshawytscha),
sockeye salmon (0. nerka), winter steelhead trout (G. mykiss), and resident cutthroat trout (0.
clarki) (WDFW 2011). No other PHSs have been identified as existing on-site.
The closest pr,iority habitat site to the project site is a purple martin (Progne suhis) nest located
near the mouth of May Creek. The purple martin nest is approximately 0.2 miles west of the
project site. Several bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) nests are located along the shoreline
of Lake Washington. Four nests are located along the southern edge of Mercer Island, but are
generally at least 1.0 mile west of the project site. Another bald eagle nest is located in Renton
near the mouth of the Cedar River, but this nest is over 2.0 miles south of the project site.
3.1.2 WDNR NHP Data
A review of Sections that Contain Natural Heritage Features Associated with Wetlands did not
include T24N R05E S32 (data current as of November 5, 2010). The WDNR reports that 27 rare
plants occur in King County (see Table 1).
Table 1: Rare Plants of King County
Common Name Scientific Name State Status 1 Federal Status 1 Historic Record
Swamp Sandwort Arenaria pafudicofa X LE Yes
Vancouver Ground Cone Boschni8kia hookeri Rl No
Stalked Moonwort Bolrychium oeduncufosum S SC No
Alaska Harebell Campanufa fasiocarpa S None No
Brisllv Sedae Carex comosa S None No
Large-awn Sedge Carex macrochaefa T None Yes
Few·fIowered Sedge Carex pauciffora S None No
Lono-stvled Sadae Carex sMosa S None No
Clubmoss Cassiooe Cassiooe IVcooodioides T None No
Golden Paintbrush Castifle '8 /evisecta E LT Yes
Golden Chinguaoin Chrvsofeois chrvsoohvlfa S None No
Tall Bugbane Cimicifuga efala S SC Yes
Spleenwort·leaved Goldthread Coplis aspfeniifofia S None No
Toolhed Wood Fem Dryopleris carthusiana Rl None No
Black Lily Fritillaria camschatcensis S None No
canadian St. John's-wort Hvoericum mejus S None No
Water Lobelia Lobelia dortmanna T None No
Boo Clubmoss Lycopodiella inundate S None Yes
Treelike Clubmoss LVCOPOdium dendroidaum S None No
WhOe Meconella Meconeffa oreaana T SC Yes
Branchina Monia Monlia diffusa S None Yes
Chons' Boo-orchid Platanthera chorisiana T None No
Humped Bladderwort utricularia aibba Rl None Yes
Flat~eaved Bladderwort Ulricufaria inlermedia S None No
Lesser Bladderwort Utricularia minor Rl None No
--Note 1. Status Key. E -endangered, T threatened, S sensitIVe, RI ::::I review group I (potential concern but need more field work), R2
review group 2 (potential concern but unresolved taxonomic questions), LT c listed threatened, SC = species of concern, and
Yes under Historic Record indicates the most recent sighting in the county is before 1977.
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
P:I1'oRENTOOOO0015\06f)O/NFOICrltJcal AreflS RepOlflFInaJ\CrlIJcaI Areas Report City ofRen/on May Creek Trall.doc
6 April 2012
The 27 rare plants identified as potentially occurring in King County by the WONR typically
have very specific habitat requirements. These range from being associated with
prairie/grassland habitats, bogs and fens, freshwater wetlands or lake margins, high
elevation/subalpine habitats, old growth forests, or coniferous forests. A review of Sections that
Contain Natural Heritage Features Associated with Wetlands did not include T24N R05E S32 (data
current as of November 5, 2010). A search of the WONR-NHP GIS data did not produce any
records ofrare plants or high quality native ecosystems in the project vicinity.
3.1.3 Streams
Williams et al. (1975) describes May Creek (stream number 08-0282) as an 8.6-mile-long stream
with numerous tributaries. Fisheries resources in May Creek include anadromous and resident
species. May Creek supports several salmonid species including fall Chinook salmon, coho
salmon, sockeye salmon, winter steelhead trout, and resident cutthroat trout. Numerous other
non-salmon ids utilize this stream. May Creek originates from the slopes of Cougar and Squak
mountains and the highlands of the Renton Plateau. Significant tributaries include Honey Creek;
Boren Creek; and the North, East, and South Forks of May Creek. The project area is within the
Lower Basin Subarea, which starts at the confluence of May Creek with Lake Washington,
upstream to River Mile (RM) 3.9. The project site is located in the vicinity ofRM 0.20, which is
immediately downstream or west of the 1-405 crossing over May Creek. Based on a review of
the May Creek Basin Plan, no stream reaches in the May Creek basin currently meet the criteria
for Regionally Significant Resource Areas (RSRAs). However, May Creek, in the project
vicinity, is identified as a Locally Significant Resource Area (LSRA). Furthermore, the project
reach includes habitat identified as Lower Basin Subarea Recommendation 13. Lower Basin
Subarea Recommendation 13 is the planting of conifers throughout the riparian area in May
Creek Canyon from RM 0.2 to 3.9.
Stream Habitat. Habitat conditions in May Creek are variable, but typical of most urbanized
streams in that they have been degraded. According to the WOFW (2003), the project reach is in
remarkably good condition considering past channel alterations. The riparian canopy is
dominated by deciduous species such as cottonwood (Populus balsamifera), red alder (Alnus
rubra), and to a lesser degree, big-leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum). In-stream large woody
debris (LWO) was mostly absent, but some log/stick jams were reported to be creating pools.
The channel is very straight from being ditched and straightened in the past. The banks are not
armored except at the upstream and downstream bridge crossings. The. gravels were noted as
being of sufficient size for spawning, although they were embedded with mud and fines. Fish
were reported as being present but scarce. Chinook, sockeye, and peamouth chub (Mylocheilus
caurinus) are known to spawn in the project reach (WOFW 2003).
The WOFW (2003) reported the project reach provides opportunities for stream and riparian
enhancement/restoration, and wetland creation associated with channel manipulation. They
stated much of the channel is too narrow for the flows and significant channel enlarging, and
some lengthening is called for prior to adding LWO or major riparian planting. The WOFW
report also recommended using the abandoned site to the north of the project parcel as a
stormwater treatment facility to treat runoff from 1-405.
Water Quality. May Creek is categorized as "Core Summer Salmonid Habitat" for aquatic life
use and "Primary Contact" for recreational use. May Creek has also been assigned an additional
"Supplemental Spawning and Incubation Protection" temperature criteria of 13°C, which is to be
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
P:Ii1RENTOOOO001510600INFQICrltlca/ AraBS ReptXnFInaJ\CrltJca/ Areas Rep9lt City of Renton May Creek Trail.doc
7 April 2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
applied from September 15 through May IS. Under the pre-1997 rules, May Creek was
considered a Class AA waterbody.
Water Quality issues identified by Ecology through the 303(d) listing process include violations
of temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, fecal coliform, ammonia-N, and Mercury (see Table 2).
Table 2: May Creek 2008 Water Quality Assessment
Parameter 2008 Category 1998 303(d) List 1996 303(d) List
Ammonia-N 1 , No No
Temperature 2 Yes Yes
pH 1 No No
Dissolved Oxygen 2 No No
Fecal Coliform 5 Yes Yes
Mercury 2 No No
The categories are defined as follows:
o Category I -Meets tested standards for clean waters.
o . Category 2 -Waters of concern: Waters where there is some evidence ofa water quality
problem, but not enough to require production of a water quality improvement project-
total maximum daily load (TMDL}-at this time.
o Category 3 -Insufficient data: This category will be largely empty. Water bodies that
have not been tested will not be individually listed; but ifthey do not appear in one of the
other categories, they are assumed to belong here.
o Category 4 -Polluted waters that do not require a TMDL: Waters that have pollution
problems that are being solved in one of three ways:
o Category 4a -has a TMDL: Water bodies that have an approved TMDL in place and
are actively being implemented.
o Category 4b -has a pollution control program: Water bodies that have a program in
place that is expected to solve the pollution problems. While pollution control
programs are not TMDLs, they must have many of the same features and there must
be some legal or financial guarantee that they will be implemented.
o Category 4c -is impaired by a non-pollutant: Water bodies impaired by causes that
cannot be addressed through a TMDL. These impairments include low water flow,
stream channelization, and dams.
o Category 5 -Polluted waters that require a TMDL: The traditional list of impaired water
bodies is known as the 303(d) list. Placement in this category means that Ecology has
data showing that the water quality standards have been violated for one or more
pollutants, and there is noTMDL or pollution control plan. TMDLs are required for the
water bodies in this category.
A 25-year trend analysis (1979 -2004) in May Creek indicates water quality has declined with
significant increases in water temperature, conductivity, and ammonia-nitrogen. Other
parameters such as pH have increased, but are still within the acceptable range based on state
standards. Some parameters have improved, as there has been a decrease in total suspended
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
P;\f\RENTOQOOOD1Sl0600INFOICrltlca/ Areas RepodlFinaflCrilical Areas Report City of Renton May Creek TraII.doc
8 April 2012
solids (TSS) and nutrient concentrations (ortho-phosphorus, nitrate, and total nitrogen). Analysis
of sediment samples indicates that nickel exceeded concentration guidelines. Generally speaking,
May Creek had the ninth highest metal concentrations out of 27 streams monitored in King
County. The monitoring of benthic invertebrates indicates that stream conditions are fair
based on benthic invertebrate index (BIBI) scores from 2002 and 2003.
3.1.4 Wetlands
A review of USFWS NWI -Wetland Mapper, King County GIS data, and City of Renton GIS
data did not indicate any wetlands exist on the project site. The closest documented wetland is
identified as wetland W-30 and is located on the east side ofI-405 (see Figure 3).
According to the May Creek Basin Plan, only one wetland within the basin currently qualifies as
a RSRA. This RSRA is identified as Wetland II in the Long Marsh Creek (WRIA #08.0289)
basin. Several wetlands within the May Creek basin have been identified as LSRAs. However,
W-30 is not included as a LSRA.
3.1.5 U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Data
The USDA NRCS mapped soils in the project area as Norma sandy loam (see Figure 4). The
surface layer is typically a black sandy loam about 10 inches thick. The subsoil is typically a
dark grayish-brown and dark gray sandy loam that extends to a depth of 60 plus inches. This soil
type forms on flood plains from alluvium. It is poorly drained with a depth to water table of
about zero inches. The USDA Soil Conservation Service (SCS) Hydric Soils of the State of
Washington (USDA 1991) list for King County includes Norma sandy loam as a hydric soil.
3.1.6 Geologic Critical Areas
Geologic critical areas include landslide hazard areas, high seismic hazard areas, sensitive slopes
25 to 40 percent, protected slopes greater than 40 percent, and high erosion hazard areas (see
Figure 5). The entire project area is identified as a high seismic hazard area.
3.1.7 Floodplains
The project site includes the mainstem of May Creek and is mapped as being within the special
flood hazard area that is inundated by the 100-year flood (Figure 3).
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
P;'v\RfNTOOOOOO1510600INFOICrlt/ca/ AraBS ReprxtlF/na/lCritJcal Areas ReW CIty of Renton May Creek Tran.doc
9 April 2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I::J Parcel Boundary
~ Proposed Trail
~ Area of Special Flood Hazard
~ WeHand
'Naterbody
Shoreline of the State
o _ .... '.2=S==~2S0 ~ _ Feet ~
Source : King County GIS , Ecology GIS,
City of Renton GIS , FWS NWI
Critical Areas -Aquatic
City of Renton -May Creek Trail
RENTOOOO-<XJ15 Figure 3
February 2012 • ~v,. IVAN.
_"' •• OCIAT •• _
1::1 Parcel Boundary
-PropoM d TIlIH
Contour (2' Interval)
Soils
C3 Alderwood graWliIy undy lOam , 8 to 15% "ope . (Ag e)
City of Renton -May Creek Trail • indianola loamy nn. WHt ," to 15,. slopes (InC )
• Noona .. ndy 10Ml (No)
o 75 150 ~ ___ ==:::'::i .... , W
Source: King County GIS , NRCS Soils,
City of Renton GIS
RENTOOOO-OO15 Figure 4
February 2012 • eAV'. IVA",' _A •• OC,,,T •• _
TN • ....,_Of." ..... DIYI<IIY __ HI ...... M. (ou,) .... cay "'''eMH! .-..-.,. ......... .....,_~ ......... _._ " ....... lit
_ .... DlA .......... ''''_II_ .. -......,..l o ... __ ... ''' .... II'IIIMnItIOll ......... 1IW1'I'IIp 1t1l1l'l ..... ~II'~plAMlnfI~
...... teI 10 a.-.n OlA and III III I'M 0IId 1I .. ,.ubllle b el .... , ....... ~ OOII""CIIoII , .. IDtIw, ...... tot atilt, pIG_ . illlll1ctl\' 1oI1IItd .. 1O 1rIOdify.
.... ~ItHlU.(f .. prod"..,.lIW....,b.",._~ .... ~_"'O£A.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~------------~-.---------------------------------------.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
E:J Parcel Boundary
-Proposed Trail
LandsUde Hazard Area
High Se ismic Hazard
o 125 250 ___ ==:5IF .. ,
SensiUve Slopes 25 to 40%
M Protected Slopes >~O%
M High Erosion Hazard
Source : King County GIS , City of Renton GIS
Critical Areas -Geologic
City of Renton -Mey Creek Trail • RENTOOOO-O015
Figure 5 .... yl ........ N. _,. •• oc .... ,. •• _
February 2012
3.1.8 Shoreline Master Program
The City of Renton updated their SMP, which was approved by the City Council per Resolution
4067 on September 27, 20 I O. On March 9, 20 II , Ecology approved the City of Renton SMP
with minor changes. May Creek is defined as a Type S (shoreline) stream from the intersection
of May Creek and NE 31 st Street in the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 32-
24-SE WM. The project reach is identified as MC-2 and is designated as Urban Conservancy.
The extent of shoreline jurisdiction is depicted on Figure 3 and includes:
I . Lands within 200 feet from the OHWM , or land s within 200 feet from floodways ,
whichever is greater;
2. Contiguous floodplain areas ; and
3. All marshes, bogs, swamps, and river deltas associated with streams, lakes, and tidal
waters that are subject to the provisions of the State Shoreline Management Act.
The objective of the Shoreline Urban Conservancy Environment Overlay District is to protect,
conserve, restore, and manage existing areas with ecological functions of open space, floodplain,
and other sensitive lands where they exist in urban and developed settings, while allowing
compatible uses .
3.1.9 Amphibians and Reptiles
The WSGA data for amphibians and reptiles contains limited site-specific occurrence data , but
includes a map for each species outlining its core and peripheral zones (Dvomich, McAllister,
and Aubry 1997). These zones represent the potential distribution of each species based on the
presence of suitable habitat within each zone. Therefore, the species outlined in Table 3 have the
potential to occur in the general project area if suitable habitat is present.
Table 3: Amphibians and Reptiles
CommonNomo ScIontIfIc: Nom. Nota
NottIlwestern Salamandel Ambysloma gracile Probably Pmsent
Long-toed Salamander Ambysloma macrodactytum Probably Present
Pacific Giant Salamander
Roughsl<in Newt
Western Redback Salamander
Ensatina
WestemToed
Pacific Treelrog
Red-legged Frog
BLitrog
Painted TurUe
Slider
NottIlem Alligator Lizard
Western T errestriat Garter Snake
NoMwestem Garter Snake
Common Garter Snake
Rubber Boa
City or Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
Dicamptodon tenebrosus Possibly Present
T aricha grBllUtosa Possibly Present
PIethodonIlOhiClium Probably Present
Ens.,ina eschsd!oIIzii Urlikely Present due to. tacI< ot cooIlerous downed wood
Bufo bolO .. Federat species 01 concern and state candidate
Hyta regina Probably Present
Ranasurora Unlikely Present
R8tla calesbei8tl8 tntroduced, conrnon near stonrr.vater poods and lakes
Ch/'fS8fflys piela Introduced , convoon In/near lakes
T rachemys scrip/a Introduced , convoon in/near lakes
E/garla coerutea Possibly Present
Thamnophls eteg8tlS Possibly Present
Thamncphis oniinoldes Possibly Present
Thamncphis sirlalis Possibly Present
Charin. bolt .. Unlikely Present
13 April 2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.1.10 Mammals
Based on a review of WSGA data (Johnson and Cassidy 1997), nine mammals have been
documented in Township 24 North by Range 05 East (see Table 4). However, this list is not all-
inclusive and only includes species that were documented in the WSGA database prior to 1997.
Table 4: Mammal Record Summary for T24N ROSE
# Common Name Scientiflc Name
1. Shrew-mole Neurolrichus gibbsii
2. Townsend's Mole Scapanus townsendii
3. Little 8 rown MyoUs Myalis fucifugus
4. Yuma MyoUs Myolis yumanensis
5. Eastem Gray Squirrel Sciurus carolinensis
6. House Mouse . Mus musculus
7. Norway Rat Rattus norvegicus
8. Coyote Canis IBtrans
9. Mountain Uon Felis concolor
Other species not documented in the WSGA database that could potentially utilize the project
vicinity include the black bear (Ursus americanus), Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana),
Trowbridge's shrew (Sorex trowbridgil), vagrant shrew (Sorex vagrans), coast mole (Scapanus
orarius), California myotis (Myotis cali/omicus), long-legged myotis (MyOlis volans), hoary bat
(Lasiurus cinereus), silver-haired bat (Lasionycteris nocilvagans), big brown bat (Eplesicus
fuscus), Townsend's big-eared bat (Plecolus townsendii), snowshoe hare (Lepus americanus),
eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus jloridnus), mountain beaver (Aplodontia rufa), Townsend's
chipmunk (Tamias lownsendil), Douglas' squirrel (Tamiasciurus douglasii), northern flying
squirrel (Glaucomys sabrinus), beaver (Castor canadensis), forest deer mouse (Peromyscus
keem), deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus), creeping vole (Microtus oregom), Townsend's
vole (Microtus lownsendii), muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus), pacific jumping mouse (Zapus
trinotallls), porcupine (Erethizon dorsatum), nutria (Myocastor coypus), black rat (Rattus rautts),
red fox (Vulpes vulpes), raccoon (Procyon 1010r), ermine (Mustela erminea), long-tailed weasel
(Muslela frenala), mink (Musteiavison), striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), spotted skunk
(Spi/oga/e gracilis), bobcat (Lynx rufus), and black-tailed deer (Odocoi/eus hemionus).
3.1.11 Birds
Based on a review of WSGA data, 76 bird species could potentially nest in the general area in or
adjacent to T24N R05E (Smith et al. 1997). This determination is based on combining
confirmed, probable, and possible breeding evidence. It is important to note that the species
listed in Table 5 are not necessarily associated with the project area, but could potentially utilize
the project vicinity for nesting, foraging, or during migration.
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
P:VlRENTOOOOO015\0600INFDlCIIlkaJ Areas RepOlflFinaACrIticaI Areas Report City of Renton May Creek Trall.doc
14 April 2012
Table 5: Breeding Bird Summary for T24N ROSE
# Common Name Scientific Name # Common Name Scientific Name
1. Pied-biiied Grebe Podilymbus podiceps 39. American Crow CONUS brachrrhynchos
2. Great Blue Heron Ardea herodias 40. Black-cspped Chickadee Parus alricapil/us
3. Green Heron Butorkies virescens 41. Chestnut-backed Chickadee Parus rufescens
4. Canada Goose Bmnta canadensis 42. Bushtit PsaNrioarus minimus
5. Wood Duck Aix sponsa 43. Red-breasted Nuthatch Silta canadansis
6. Green-winged Teal Anascracca 44. Brown Creeper Certhia americana
7. Mallard Anas olatvrhvnchos 45. Bewick's Wren ThlVOmanes bewickii
8. Gadwall Anas slrepare 46. Winter Wren Troglodytes lroglodytes
9. Common Meraanser Memus memanser 47. Marsh Wren Cislolhorus oaluslris
10. Osprey Pandion haliaelus 48. Golden-erowned Kinglet Regulus salrapa
11. Bald Eagle Haliaeelus leucocephalus 49. Swainson's Thrush Calharus uslulalus
12. Coopers Hawk Accipiler cooperii SO. American Robin Turdus migratorius
13. Red-tailed Hawk Buteo iamaicensis 51. Cedar WaxwinQ Bombvcilla cedrorum
14. California Quail Caffipepla calif arnica 52. European Starling Siurnus vulgaris
15. Viroinia Rail Ral/us limicola 53. Hutton's Vireo Vireo hutton;
16. Amencan Coot Fulica americana 54. Warbling Vireo Vireo gilvus
17. Kiiideer Charadrius vociferus 55. Oranae-crowned Warbler Vermivora celata
18. Spotled Sandpiper Actitis macularia 56. Vellow Warbler Dendroica pelechia
19. Glaucous-winged Gull Larus g/aucescens 57. Black-throated Gray Warbler Dendroica ni(lrescens
20. Rock Dove Columba IMa 58. Common Vellowthroat Geolhlypis lrichas
21. Band-tailed Pipeon Columba fasciala 59. Wilson's Warbler Wilsonia pusilla
22. Vaux's Swift Chaatum vauxi 60. Western Tanager Piranga ludovieiana
23. Rulous Hummingbird Selasphorus rufus 61. Black-headed Grosbeak Pheucticus melanocephBlus
24. Bened Kingfisher Cervle alevan 62. Spotted Towhee Pipilo meculalus
25. Red-breasted Sapsucker Sphyrapicus ruber 63. Savannah Sparrow Passerculu5 sandwichensis
26. Downy Woodpecker Picoides pubescens 64. Song Sparrow Melospiza rnelodia
27. Hairy Woodpecker Picoides vi/Josus 65. WMe-crowned Sparrow Zonolrichia leucophrys
28. Norlhem Flicker Colaples auralus 66. Dark-eved Junco Junco hvemalis
29. Pileated Woodpecker Dryocopus pilealus 67. Red-winged Blackbird Aaelaius phoeniceus
30. Olive-sided Flycatcher Conlopus boraalis 68. Brewers Blackbird Euphagus cyanocephalus
31. Westem Wood-Pewee Conlopus sordidu!us 69. Brown-headed Cowbird Mofolhrus aler
32. Willow Flycatcher Empidonax traillii 70. Bullock's Onole Ic/erus bullockii
33. Pacific-slope Flycatcher EmDidonax difficifis 71. Purple Finch Camodacus Durpureus
34. Tree Swallow Techycinela bicolor 72. House Finch C8rpodacus mexicanu5
35. Violet-Qreen Swallow Tachvcinela Ihalassina 73. Red Crossbill Loxia curvirostra
36. Cliff Swallow Hirundo pyrrhonola 74. PineS~kin Carduelis pinus
37. Barn Swallow Hirundo rustiCB 75. Amencan Goldfinch Carduelis lrislis
38. Stellers Jav Cyanocilta slellari 76. House Sparrow Passer domesticus
3.1.12 Federally Listed Species
The USFWS species list for King County includes 7 species listed as threatened or endangered,
designated critical habitat for 3 species, 5 candidate species, and 21 species of concern. Based on
a review of existing habitat conditions, federally-listed species under the jurisdiction of the
USFWS do not exist within the immediate project area. May Creek does not provide suitable
habitat for bull trout, nor has it been designated as critical habitat. Lake Washington is
considered bull trout critical habitat, but is approximately 0.2 miles downstream of the project
area. There are no documented bald eagle nests within 1.0 mile of the project area. However, an
adult bald eagle was observed utilizing the project site to obtain nesting material during the site
visit. Bald eagles forage along the shoreline of Lake Washington, which is approximately
0.2 miles west of the project area,
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
P;VlRENTOOOOOO15\06(}()/NFCYtCrltJcal Areas Report\FInat.CtItlcal Areas Raporl City of Renton May Creek TraiI,doc
15 April 2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has jurisdiction over federally-listed anadromous
salmonids, marine mammals and turtles, designated Chinook salmon critical habitat, and
essential fish habitat (EFH). Chinook salmon and steelhead trout, which are both listed as
threatened species, have been documented in May Creek. May Creek is not designated as
Chinook salmon critical habitat. Lake Washington is considered Chinook salmon critical habitat,
but is approximately 0.2 miles downstream of the project area. Furthermore, May Creek would
be considered as EFH.
3.2 FIELD INVESTIGATION
DEA performed multiple site visits on March 21, 22, and November 16, 2011 to verify
preliminary data findings, delineate wetland boundaries,. document existing habitat conditions,
and document wildlife use. DEA previously flagged the OHWM of May Creek within the project
reach . Site photos are contained within Figure 6 .
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
16 April20J2
G) VieW of western edge of parcel along Lake 1 Washington Blvd. N Concrete barrier along right Site Photographs
edge of photograph is the May Creek crossing
under Lake Washington Blvd N. City o( Renton ® Parcel edge along Lake Washington Blvd . May Creek Trail
VieW of trail head looking east. RENTOOO().()()15
Figure 6
Februery 2012 • OAVID aVAH.
_" •• OCIAT •• _.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
o Interio r of parcel depicting scattered red alder trees . o Interior of parcel. Trail proposed through thicket
of blackberry .
Site Photographs
City of Renton • May Creek Trail
RENT()()()(j.Q()15
Figure 6 DAVID .VAN •
Februery 2012 ..-..... OCI ... T .......
® Wetland A overview.
® Wetland A Data Plot 1.
Site Photographs
City o( Renton
May Creek Trail
RENTOOOII-0015
Febru8ry 201 2
Figure 6
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
• I
DAVID aVAN. I _ .... OCIAT •• _.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(]') May Creek crossing under Lake washington Blvd . N.
VieW looking west I downstream . ® May Creek immediately upstream or east of
Lake washington Blvd . N.
View look ing upstream .
Site Photographs
City of Renton • May Creek Treil
RENTOQ()().()()15
Figure 6 DAVID .VAHS
February 2012 ._ ..... OC' ... T •• , ....
® May Creek immediately downstream or west of
Interstate 405 . VteW looking west I downstream .
Site Photographs
@ May Creek cross ing under Interstate 405 . City of Renton
May Creek Treil VteW looking east I upstream .
RENT(}()()()-()()15 Figure 6
February 2012 • OAVID eVANa
~_It. •• OC I"'T •• ,_.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
H
g
•
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.2.1 Wetlands
One wetland (Wetland A) was identified as occurring within the immediate project vicinity
during the site investigation (Table 6). Wetland A was delineated and categorized by DEA. The
project site has been historically cleared and at least partially graded. Wetland indicators were
observed at multiple locations. The timing of the site visit was ideal for determining the presence
of wetland hydrology, which was absent at other areas of initial interest.
Table 6: Wetland Summary
Total Wetland Water Quality Hydrology
I Wetland Ecology' Ecology' Functions Functions Functions
Wildlife
Functions
Score
City of Renton ,
Buffer Width I 110 Category WeUand Cia •• Score Score Score
A III Depressional 30 8 4 18 751eet
, Washington State Department 01 Ecology
Wetland A
Wetland A was rated as a Category 11\ wetland based on the Washington State Wetland Rating
System for Western Washington -Revised (Hruby 2004). It is small depression that may be a
remnant of a larger wetland complex. It is located in the eastern portion of the parcel near 1-405
(see Appendix A).
Wetland A received a total function score of 30 points, which consisted of 8 points for water
quality function, 4 points for hydrology function, and 18 points for wildlife function. The
standard buffer width of a Category 11\ wetland within the City of Renton is 25 feet. However,
since Wetland A is within shoreline jurisdiction, the buffer width is 75 feet per the SMP, because
it is a Category 11\ wetland with it wildlife function score of less than 20 points.
Appendix B contains a copy ofthe completed Ecology rating form and the wetland delineation
data plot forms. Site photographs are included in Figure 6.
Soils. Two data plots (DP) were recorded for Wetland A. DP I was located within the wetland,
while DP 2 was within the adjacent uplands. A summary ofthe soils within each DP follows:
DP 1: Located in the deepest portion of the wetland that showed signs of minor/shallow
seasonal ponding. The upper profile from 0 to 8 inches consisted of a black (I OYR 211)
colored matrix with dark reddish brown (5YR 3/4) colored mottles. Soil texture consisted
of silt loam with some sand. The second profile from 8 to 14 inches consisted of a very
dark gray (lOYR 311) matrix with dark reddish brown (5YR 3/4) colored mottles. Below
14 inches, the soil was mostly sand with a gleyed color. Based on this information, it was
determined these soils were hydric.
DP 2: Located immediately west of the wetland in the adjacent uplands. The soil profile
at DP 2 consisted of a silt loam horizon with a very dark grayish brown (lOYR 3/2)
colored matrix from 0 to 2 inches. The soil profile from 3 to 16 inches consisted of a dark
brown (10YR 3/3) matrix color with sand clusters that had a light yellow brownish gray
(lOYR 4/4) color. No mottles were observed in either profile. Based on this information,
it was determined these soils were hydric.
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
P;VlRENTOOO0001510600INFOICrlllcal Areas ReporflFlnaflCrfllcal Areas Report City of Renton May Creek rran.doc
22 April 2012
Hydrology. Hydrology in Wetland A is supported by groundwater. Soils in DP 1 were saturated
to the surface, and groundwater was encountered at a depth of seven inches. This wetland is
isolated from May Creek and no obvious hydrologic inputs other than groundwater were
apparent. Some seasonal ponding in the immediate vicinity of DP 1 is likely, but not enough to
support aquatic organisms.
Vegetation. Wetland A is dominated by red alder (Alnus rubra) and Himalayan blackberry, but
some salmonberry (Rubus speclabilis) is present. Approximately four red alder are present along
the edges.
Classification. Wetland A was rated as a Category III wetland based on the Ecology Rating
system. Wetland A received a total score of 30 points based on functions, which is at the lower
end of this category (Category III = 30 to 50 points). In other words, Wetland A was close to
being rated a Category IV wetland.
Functions. Wetland A was rated low for water quality (8 points) and hydrologic (4 points)
functions, and moderate for wildlife (18 points) functions. The low score for water quality
function is due to the limited area that is seasonally ponded, and lack of opportunity to improve
water quality. The low score for water quality function is due to the minimal depth of storage,
small wetland size compared to basin size, and limited opportunity to reduce flooding and
erosion. The moderate score for wildlife function is not due to the attributes of the wetland itself,
as it is generally degraded, but more related to its location. [t received several high scores on
specific questions due to it being adjacent to a stream within a forested riparian area. Its buffer is
relatively undisturbed and there are several other wetlands within one-half mile. However, it is
dominated by Himalayan blackberry.
3.2.2 Uplands
The uplands in the project vicinity are primarily forested and dominated by deciduous species.
Red alder and black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera) are the most prevalent species, but a few
big-leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum) are also present. The black cottonwood trees are primarily
located along the stream channel, while the red alder are scattered throughout. Many of these
trees are mature and some have fallen down or become snags. The understory is dominated by
non-native species including Himalayan blackberry, reed canarygrass, and Japanese knotweed.
Other species noted include beaked hazelnut (Corylus cornula), dogwood (Comus sericea),
salmonberry, English ivy, and sword fern (Polyslichum munilum). The uplands are generally flat,
although some minor changes in topography exist. Based on the site visit, it appears the area was
previously cleared and graded.
3.2.3 Wildlife
The project area is within a forested riparian corridor that extends from Lake Washington
Boulevard North to Cougar Mountain Regional Wildlife Park. This corridor is relatively
extensive and provides suitable habitat for a wide array of wildlife. Habitat types within the
project area that provide forage, cover, and breeding opportunities include forested uplands,
wetlands, and May Creek.
Wildlife observed during the site visit was limited to a mature bald eagle obtaining nesting
material; deer (Odocoileus hemionus columbianus) tracks, scat, and rub; coyote scat; raccoon
(Procyon IOlor) tracks; eastern gray squirrel; sticks with beaver (Caslor canadensis) gnaw marks
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report .
P:ltlRfNTOOOOOO1810600INFOICritlcal Areas Repw.FirmflCrlI/cal Affl8S Report City of Renton May Creek Trall.doc
23 April 2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
n
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,I
I
I
II
(probably floated downstream); vole (Microtus sp.); crows; robins; spotted towhee; and wren. It
is important to note that the species mentioned are limited to those observed during the site visits
and is not all-inclusive. Numerous species will only use the project area seasonally or during
migration; others may be very rare, cryptic, or nocturnal. Surveys were not conducted to target
specific species. Tree tops and forks were viewed for the presence of raptor nests, but none were
observed.
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
P:IMENTOOOQO0151.06(}()INFOICritJcal Arees RepOlftFlnaflCritica/ Areas Re()O(t City of Renton May Creek TralJ.doc
24 April 2012
4.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The City of Renton is in the process of implementing The Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan
(Master Plan). The Master Plan reflects the desire to create an interconnected trail network to
accommodate both recreational and commuting uses for pedestrians and cyclists. This effort
includes a pedestrian greenway trail along May Creek, with a connection to Lake Washington and
Honey Creek. The Master Plan identified the May Creek Trail as a high-priority project, which,
when completed, would include a six-mile-long trail between Lake Washington and Cougar
Mountain Regional/Wildland Park. This specific project is a critical step toward implementing the
goals outlined in the Master Plan.
The May Creek Trail Project (Project) is defined as the construction of a pedestrian trail, and
implementation of a mitigation/restoration plan within the shoreline jurisdiction and flood hazard
area of May Creek and the buffer ofa small (786-square-foot) Category III wetland (Wetland A).
The Project would construct a six-foot-wide by 0.27-mile-Iong trail composed of bark atop a gravel
base. The trail footprint is approximately 0.20 acres, while the amount of mitigation ranges from a
minimum of 0.98 acres for the Base Area with' an additional 0.35 acres if Additive Alternative No.
I is implemented,
The trail around the wetland has been located primarily in the outer 50 percent of its 75-foot-wide
buffer, except in the southern portion by the stream where a beach access point is proposed. The
trail ranges from 0 to 70 feet from the OHWM of May Creek, but is typically 30 to 40 plus feet
away. The closest point to the OHWM is the beach access point, followed by the overlook pull-out
that is approximately 17 feet from the OHWM.
The trailhead would be located on Lake Washington Boulevard immediately north of its crossing
over May Creek, and would tie into an existing concrete sidewalk. The trail would meander
throughout the project site. One view area that overlooks May Creek, as well as an access point to
a gravel bar, is provided. The trail includes two access points to the north that will eventually
connect to a planned development known as Hawks Landing. The trail loops around the on-site
wetland within the eastern portion of the parcel. The trail will eventually be expanded further to the
east of 1-405. Two benches, two interpretive .signs, a trailhead sign, a low split-rail fence at the
look-out, and a litter receptacle will also be installed. No additional parking, structures, or other
features are associated with this project. No in-water or over-water work is proposed. The majority
of the trail will be constructed on grade. Although some minor cut and fill will be required, the
neat-line quantities will be balanced within the flood hazard area, resulting in no net fill.
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
P:\MENTOOOOOOf5\06OOINFCYlCri1Jcal Areas RepodoFlnaflCrftJcal Areas Report City ofRen/on May Creek Trall.doc
25 April 2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
• u
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5.0 IMPACT MINIMIZATION MEASURES
Potential impacts to water quality could occur during or after construction of the trail or
mitigation area. Potential impacts are primarily associated with temporary increases in turbidity
and sedimentation. Impacts associated with an increase in water temperature are not anticipated
since existing trees will not be removed; and the invasive species to be removed do not provide
shade, and will be replaced by native trees and shrubs. Potential water quality impacts can be
reduced or avoided by implementation of the conservation and performance measures outlined
below.
5.1 CONSERVATION AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES
General
o A Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESC) Plan will be implemented.
o A qualified Erosion and Control Inspector will review all sediment control measures
twice per week during construction. "Qualified" means the inspector will be a Certified
Erosion and Sediment Control Lead(CESCL).
o The Mitigation Plan will be implemented.
Water Quality/Erosion Control
o All Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be installed according to City of Renton
standards and will be inspected and maintained throughout the life of the project.
o Staging and soil stockpile areas will be limited to those outlined in the clearing and
grading permit. Staging areas will be fenced.
o Spill kits will be kept on-site.
o Fuels and other potentially hazardous materials will be kept in a secured area. Secured
means fenced, and locked during non-work hours.
o Secondary containment will be required for all hazardous materials. Spill containment is
required for parked equipment, porta-potty, fuels, solvents, etc.
o Wash water resulting from the wash down of equipment or work areas will be contained
for proper treatment and/or disposal, and will not be directly discharged into state waters.
o There will be no discharge of oil, fuels, or chemicals to surface waters, or onto land
where there is a potential for reentry into surface waters.
o No solvents or chemicals used for tools or equipment cleaning will be discharged to
ground or surface waters.
o The contractor will regularly check fuel hoses, oil drums, oil or fuel transfer valves,
fittings, etc. for leaks, and will maintain and store materials properly to prevent spills.
o BMPs will be used on all project activities to control and prevent sediments from entering
aquatic systems.
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
P:It.RENTOOOOOO15\0600INFOICritlcal At&as Reporfo.Flnal\Cr/tiCBI Areas Rew City of Renton May Cleek TralJ.doc
26 April 2012
The TESC plan includes the use of several BMPs such as clear plastic covering, compost sock,
dust control, filter fabric silt fence, high visibility fence, mulch and/or matting, permanent seeding
and planting, and preserving natural vegetation. The project also includes a Storm water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that requires implementing 12 elements (outlined below). Please refer to
the SWPPP for a detailed description of each.
Element #1: Preserve VegetationlMark Clearing Limits
Element #2: Establish Construction Access
Element #3: Control Flow Rates
Element #4: Install Sediment Controls
Element #5: Stabilize Soils
Element #6: Protect Slopes
Element #7: Protect Drain Inlets
Element #8: Stabilize Channels and Outlets
Element #9: Control Pollutants
Element # 1 0: Control Dewatering
Element # 11: Maintain BMPs
Element # 12: Manage the Project
P:\t\RENTOOOOOO1510600INFOICrltlcal Areas Reporfl.FlnaftCr/lical Areas Repotf City of Renton May Creek Tra".doc
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
27 April 2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
I
• -
I
I
u
u
•
U
I
I
•
I
I
.6.0 PROJECT IMPACTS
The trail alignment has been designed to avoid impacts to existing trees, the few patches of native
shrubs present on-site, Wetland A, and floodplains. Due to the presence of several different critical
areas that encumber the predominance of the site, complete avoidance is not possible. The design
therefore incorporated measures to minimize impacts such as reducing the trail width to six feet,
shifting its alignment, and shifting the trailhead to the north. It has also been designed to be
consistent with RMC and SMP requirements.
The project site includes approximately 3.09 acres. The proposed 0.27-mile-Iong trail would cover
approximately 0.20 acres of the site. The project site includes a flood hazard area, shoreline
jurisdiction, and wetland. The following summary quantifies the presence of each critical area
on-site and the amount of area utilized by the proposed trail within each critical area.
Flood Hazard Area
o Total Flood Hazard Area On-Site = 2.23 acres
o Total Area of Trail within Flood Hazard Area = 0.16 acres
o Total Length of Trail within Flood Hazard Area = 0.21 miles
o Total Amount of Proposed Mitigation within Flood Hazard Area = 1.04 acres
200-foot-wide Shoreline Jurisdiction
o Total Shoreline Jurisdiction Area On-Site = 2.80 acres
o Total Area of Trail within Shoreline Jurisdiction = 0.19 acres
o Total Length of Trail within Shoreline Jurisdiction"" 0.26 miles
o Total Amount of Proposed Mitigation within Shoreline Jurisdiction = 1.33 acres
100-foot-wide Vegetation Management Buffer
o Total Vegetation Management Buffer Area On-Site = 1.98 acres
o Total Area of Trail within Vegetation Management Buffer = 0.15 acres
o Total Length of Trail within Vegetation Management Buffer = 0.20 miles
o Total Amount of Proposed Mitigation within Vegetation Management Buffer = 1.09 acres
Wetland A
o Total Wetland A Area = 0.02 acres
o Total Wetland A Buffer = 0.62 acres
o Total Area of Trail within Wetland A Buffer = 0.06 acres
o Total Length of Trail within Wetland A Buffer = 0.08 miles
o Total Amount of Proposed Mitigation in Wetland A = 0.02 acres
o Total Amount of Proposed Mitigation in Wetland A Buffer = 0.50 acres
Construction of the trail will result in clearing a total of 0.20 acres of existing vegetation. As
outlined above, this area overlaps several different critical areas. An additional 1.33 acres of
existing vegetation would be removed as part of the mitigation/restoration process. Vegetation to
be removed is composed primarily of Himalayan blackberry, but other non-native species such as
Japanese knotweed and reed canarygrass will be cleared and grubbed during construction and
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
P:VlRENTOOO0001510600INFOICriticai Areas RepOlflFinallCritical Areas Report City o( Renton May Creek Trall.doc
28 April 2012
mitigation-related activities. A few native species are present within the vicinity of the proposed
trail, consisting primarily of isolated sword fern and salmonberry. Native species within the trail
footprint will be removed during construction and replanted within the mitigation area. Other
isolated native plants within the mitigation area will be flagged prior to clearing and grubbing, so
they are not impacted.
6.1 ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES
An analysis of alternatives documents different methods of developing a project site, and states the
justifications for each alternative. This assessment generally documents the three-tier process of
first avoiding an impact, then minimizing the impact, and finally mitigating for unavoidable
impacts. The following outlines the process and actions undertaken by the City of Renton -Parks
Planning and Natural Resources:
I. Avoid potential impacts to the stream, lake, or buffer by not taking a certain action, or by
not taking parts of the action, or by moving the action.
No direct impacts to May Creek are anticipated since no in-or over-water work is
proposed. Not taking the action (trail construction) would negate implementation of the
Master Plan. The project site is situated between May Creek and the future Hawks
Landing site to the north. A different site that would suit the needs and intent of the
Master Plan is not available. A to-foot-wide sanitary sewer easement is located along the
northern edge of the project site. The trailhead is located immediately south of the
easement where it intersects with Lake Washington Boulevard North. Constructing the
remainder of the trail immediately south of the easement would be in conflict with goals
of the SMP, specifically in that:
• Activity should bear substantial relationship to the shoreline, providing physical and
visual access; hiking and walking should be located near the shoreline (subsection b);
and
• Accessibility to the water's edge is consistent with safety needs and natural features
(subsection d).
Other goals such as no net loss of ecological function and preservation of the resource
have been achieved.
2. Minimize any stream, lake, or buffer impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the
action and its implementation by using appropriate technology and engineering, or by
taking affirmative steps to avoid or reduce impacts.
Impacts have been minimized by reducing the trail width to six feet, surveying and
avoiding trees and areas dominated by native vegetation, and placing. the trail in areas
dominated by non-native species. As outlined in Section 5.0, numerous conservation
measures are proposed to reduce potential water quality impacts to May Creek.
3. Rectify the impacts by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected area.
The affected area is the trail. There are no plans to repair, rehabilitate, or restore the trail.
4. Reduce or eliminate the adverse impact over time by preservation and maintenance
operations over the life ofthe action.
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
P:'MENTOOOOOO1510600INFOICritica! Areas ReportlFlnaflCrftlcaJ Areas Reeort City 0' Ren/on May Creek Tra/J.doc
29 April 2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
6.2
Impacts have been reduced or eliminated to the maximum extent possible by proposing a
narrow trail, using bark over crushed gravel, and avoiding trees and native vegetation.
The action itself provides preservation in that by obtaining the parcel for purposes of a
public trail, commercial or residential development will not occur. Maintenance of the
trail and mitigation/restoration areas will occur over the life of the project. Once the
mitigation/restoration area is fully established (potentially within five years), annual
monitoring will cease. Howeve'r, should issues arise, additional maintenance of the
mitigation/restoration areas would likely occur. Future or additional restoration activities
will likely occur on-site once additional funding sources are secured.
5. Compensate for any stream, lake, or buffer impacts by replacing, enhancing, or providing
similar substitute resources or environments, monitoring the impact, and taking
appropriate corrective measures.
Compensation is provided in the form of stream buffer, wetland, and wetland buffer
mitigation as outlined in Section 7.0.
SALMONID IMPACTS
Based on project type (a six-foot-wide bark pedestrian trail), the absence of in-or over-water
work, the small project footprint, avoidance of existing trees and shrubs, trail placement within
an area dominated by Himalayan blackberry, implementation of impact minimization measures,
and proposed mitigation/restoration measures, project effects to baseline salmonid habitat
conditions would be minimal and beneficial over time.
Existing stream and watershed conditions were quantified by using watershed and habitat
parameters as defined by the "Matrix of Pathways and Indicators" developed by the National
Marine Fisheries Service. These pathways and indicators summarize important parameters for
six major pathways. The following salmonid effects matrix has been developed to summarize
potential project-related direct and indirect effects to baseline habitat conditions (see Table 7).
Table 7: Salmonld Habitat Project Effects Matrix
PATHWAY INDICATORS BASELINE PROJECT EFFECTS TO BASELINE CONDITIONS
Water Quality Temperature
Sediment
Chemical
Contamination and
Nutrients
Habitat Acce.. Physical 8arriers
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
CONDITION
Not Properly
Functioning
Not Properly
Functioning
May Creek
Maintain -> Improve. No Irees that provide shade to May Creek will be removed.
Vegetation to be removed is primarily non-native invasive species. Mitigation
includes planting native trees and shrubs along the shoreline that will increase
shade and, therefore, maintainlimprove temperature.
Maintain. The project will temporally disturb floodplain soils dunng construction. However,
this disturbanoe will be limited to construction. Areas where milgation is proposed will
initially be deared and grubbed to remove non-native invasive species. These areas will
be re~anted with native trees and shrubs, and covered with hog·fuel. Additional erosion
control measures will be im~emented to further reduoe the potential of sediment reaching
May Creek.
Functioning At Maintain. The project will not resu~ in an inorease in poIlutio"i!enerating impervious
Risk surface that would increase the abundance or distribution of chemical contaminants
associated with motor vehides. Although combustion engines will be used during
construction, their use wiD be limited and of short duration. The use of fertilizers will be
limited to amending planting pits.
Functioning At Maintain. The project win not create fish passage barners. No in-water wort< is
Risk proposed.
P:\r\RENTOOOOOOISlO600INFOICrttica/ Areas ReporflFlnaftCtttJcal Areas ReJ)Ol! City ofRen/on May Creek Troll,doc
30 April 2012
PATHWAY
Habitat Elements
Channel
Conditions and
Dynamics
Flow/Hydrology
Watershed
Conditions
INDICATORS BASELINE
CONDITION
Substrate Functioning At
Risk
LWD Not Properly
Functlonln~
Pool Frequency Not Properly
Functioning
Pool Quality Not Property
Functioning
Off-Channel Habitat Not Property
Functioning
Relugia Not Properly
Functioning
Width/Depth Ratio Not Property
Functioning
Streambank Condition Functioning At
Risk
Floodplain Functioning At
Connectivity Risk
Change in PeakiBase Not Properly
Flows Functioning
Increase in Drainage Functioning At
Network Risk
Road Density end Functioning At
location Risk
Disturbance History Functioning At
Risk
Riparian Reserve Functioning At
Risk
PROJECT EFFECTS TO BASELINE CONDITIONS
May Creek
Maintain. No substrate will be removed or degraded due to implementing the trail
project
Maintain ... Improve. No LWD or trees that could contribute future LWD to May
Creek will be removed as part of this project. Downed trees on the floodplain will not
be removed during construction of the trail. Any downed trees within the proposed
trail footprint will be moved away from the trail but left on-site. Should eny downed
trees be too large to move. an epproximately SiX-loot-long section will be cut and
moved to the trail edge. The project will add trees that could contribute future LWD
to May Creek.
Maintain. No change to this indicator is anticipated.
Maintain. No change to this indicator is antiCipated.
Maintain. No change to this indicator is antiCipated.
Maintain. No change to this indicator is antiCipated.
Maintain. No change to this indicator is anticipated.
Degrade ... Maintain ... Improve. Degradation will be limited to the construction
period when non-native invasive species are removed. After removal, native trees
and shrubs will be planted. Erosion control measures will elso be implemented.
Qnce the mitigation trees and shrubs become established. the streambank condition
will improve within the project reach.
Maintain. No change to this indicator is anticipated.
Maintain. No change to this indicator is anticipated.
Maintain. No change to this indicator is anticipated.
Maintain. No change to this indicator is antiCipated.
Degrade -+ Maintain. As with streambank condition, the disturbance history will be
degraded during construction, but will shift to maintain once the trail and associated
mitigation measures have been implemented.
Maintain ... Improve. Construction 01 the trail will increase the abundance 01 trees
in the project area. Implementing the mitigation plan will remove non-native invasive
species. and will plant native trees and shrubs. The mitigation plan includes planting
numerous conifer trees, which are generally lacking in the project vicinity.
Based on the anticipated effects to the baseline conditions summarized above, most indicators
will be maintained. Some indicators such as streambank condition and disturbance history will
be degraded during construction of the trail and implementation of the mitigation plan, but
degradation will be temporary. Indicators that are anticipated to improve after the project is
completed include temperature, LWD, stream bank condition, and riparian reserve. Based on this
assessment, no net loss of ecological function will occur as a result of implementing the
proposed project.
6_3 WILDLIFE IMPACTS
The project involves clearing 0.20 acres of vegetation for construction of the trail, and 1.33 acres
for purposes of mitigation/restoration. The vegetation to be removed is dominated by Himalayan
City of Rent on May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
P:W?ENTOOOOOO1510BOOINFQl,Crlt1cal Areas Rep«nFlnallCrfllca/ Areas ReW City of Renton May Creek Trall.doc
31 April20t2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
blackberry, with isolated areas of Japanese knotweed and reed canarygrass. These types of
vegetation provide limited functional benefit for wildlife. Blackberry thickets can be used for
nesting by some bird species, the fruit is consumed by some species of wildlife, and when clearings
or tunnels are present the thickets can provide refuge. Blackberry thickets can also be a barrier to
human or pet intrusion. However, once established, such as what has occurred on-site, this invasive
non-native species creates a monoculture that inhibits the establishment of native vegetation. This
can be seen on-site, and is one reason the site does not contain a second or third tree layer. Once
the mature alder trees die off, the on-site forested component will decrease in abundance. Although
some wildlife species can and do utilize non-native vegetation, the subset is small compared to the
number of species that can use native'vegetation for nesting, foraging, or refuge. The project will
result in a net increase in habitat function by improving and increasing native species diversity and
abundance. The species of vegetation selected in the mitigation plan are those known to be
beneficial to wildlife.
6.4 WETLAND IMPACTS,
The trail would traverse through the buffer of a degraded Category III wetland located within the
shoreline of May Creek. The trail would impact 0.06 acres of wetland buffer. All existing trees
have been avoided. The area of impact is dominated by Himalayan blackberry and therefore lacks
species and structural diversity. The trail avoids the wetland, and is 25 feet from the delineated
wetland edge at its closest point but typically is in the outer 50 percent of the buffer.
Wetland A scored a total of 30 points for functions and was rated as a Category III wetland based
on receiving 8 points for water quality function, 4 points for hydrologic function, and 18 points for
habitat function. Construction of the trail or implementation of the mitigation plan would not alter
or change the scores for water quality or hydrologic function.
Construction of the trail would not alter or change the score for habitat function. However,
implementation of the mitigation plan would increase the overall habitat function score. The
wetland would score additional points for vegetation structure and richness of plant species, and
additional points would be added due a reduction of invasive species within the wetland itself.
These additional points would not be significant enough to change Wetland A into a Category II
wetland, but would strengthen its position as a Category III wetland. Wetland A is only one point.
away from being downgraded to a Category IV wetland. Based on this assessment, the project
would result in a measurable functional lift to Wetland A.
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
P;lI1RfNTOOOOOO1510600INFOICrlt1caJ Areas RepottlFlnanCrltJcal Ateas RapOif City of Renton May Creek Trall.doc
32 April 2012
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7.0 MITIGATION
The mitigation plan includes a maximum of 1.33 acres of stream buffer, wetland buffer, and
wetland enhancement as compensation for 0.20 acres of trail development. Enhancement areas
have been segmented into a Base Area (0.98 acres) and Additive Alternate No. I (0.35 acres). The
mitigation plan has been separated into two distinct sections or parts to provide flexibility in
managing construction costs. The minimum area that will be planted is defined as the Base Area
per Appendix C. If bid costs are as estimated, both the Base Area and Additive Alternate No. I
will be planted. In summary, the goal is to plant both areas, but if construction costs are higher than
anticipated the area to be planted will be limited to the Base Area. The resulting mitigation ratio of
the Base Area would be 4.8: I, but increases to 6.5: I when the Additive Alternate No. I is included.
All mitigation activities are proposed within the riparian zone of May Creek.
The following section summarizes the goals and objectives, planting plan, plant establishment
and maintenance, performance standards, approval criteria, contingencies, and monitoring
requirements. Refer to Appendix C for more detail.
7.1 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The primary goals of this mitigation plan are to improve riparian and stream functions impacted
by construction of the trail, and provide a functional lift to May Creek and fish and wildlife that
utilize the project vicinity. This will be accomplished by removing the understory of non-native
invasive species that currently dominate the site, and replacing them with a diverse assemblage
of native species that, once established, will improve habitat for fish and wildlife.
7.2 PLANTING PLAN
The mitigation plan will replace the existing understory dominated by non-native invasive species
with a diverse assemblage of native species. The plan includes installation of a minimum of
320 trees, 390 willow cuttings, 1,324 shrubs, and 146 groundcover species (salal and sword fern) if
mitigation is limited to the Base Area. Table 8 summarizes the species selected and the quantities
to be installed. A plant list, materials, specifications, and details are provided in Appendix C. The
size, spacing, and location are as outlined in the mitigation plan.
# Common Name
1. Douglas fir
2. Western Hemlock
3. Western red cedar
4. Sitka spruce
5. Grand fir
6. Black hawthorn
Total Tr •••
7. Pacific willow
8. Seoular's willow
Total Willows
9. Vine Maple
10. Hazelnut
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
Table 8: Plant Selection and Quantity
Scientific Name Base Alternate Total
Quantity No.1
Pseudotsuga menziesii 112 66 178
Tsuga heterophylla 12 22 34
Thuja plicata 126 20 146
Picea sitchensis 0 78 78
Abies grandis 17 14 31
era/aegus douglasii 53 19 72
320 219 539
Salix lucida 300 0 300
Salix scouferiana 90 0 90
390 0 390
Acer Circinatum 14 9 23
Corylus ""muta 12 2 14
P:VlRENTOOOOOO1510600INFOICrI1icai AreS! Reporl\FinaflCtftJcal Areas Reporl City of Renton May Creek Trs".doc
33 April 2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
o
o
I
n
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
# Common Name Scientific Name Ba.e Alternate Total
Quantity No.1
11. Service berry Arne/anchier 81nOO/i8 9 17 26
12. Mock orange Phi/adelphus lewisii 11 13 24
13. Ocean spray Holodiscus discolor 147 26 173
14. Red osier dogwood Comus sericea 4 0 4
15. Pacific ninebark Physocarpus capitatus 4 0 4
16. Evergreen huckleberry Vaccinium ovaturn 151 63 214
17. Black \Winberry , Lonicera involucrata 7 0 7
18. Nootka rose Rosa nutkana 200 68 268
19. Snowberry Symphoricarpos albus 232 78 310
20. Devil's club Oplopanax horridum 52 23 75
21. Indian plum Oamleria cerasfformis 35 12 47
22. Tall Oregon grape Mahonia aquifolium 247 104 351
23. Red flowering currant Ribas sanguineum 98 51 149
24. Thimbleberry Rubus paNiflorus 101 18 119
Total Shrubs 1,324 484 1,808
25. Sword fern Pofystichum munilum 69 0 69
26. Salal Gauftheria shallon 77 0 77
Total Groundcover 146 0 146
GRAND TOTAL 2,180 703 2,883
7.1.1 Plant Establishment and Maintenance
Plant establishment throughout the monitoring period is essential to plant community
development and the success of the overall mitigation plan. The plant establishment period for
this project is five years. During this time, the City of Renton or their designee will monitor the
site for plant survival, cover, health and growth, herbivory, weeds, trash, and vandalism.
Monitoring will occur quarterly during Year I and on a yearly basis thereafter until performance
standards have been met. Performance Standards are summarized below.
7.1.2 Performance Standards
Year 1 Quarterly
The mitigation area will be monitored quarterly during Year 1 to ensure the planting area is
stable and is not impacted by unforeseen events during this critical period of establishment. The
following items will be documented during quarterly monitoring:
o Signs of herbivory by deer or beaver on newly-installed plants.
o Signs of rapid or potential unacceptably high reestablishment of non-native species.
o Signs of vandalism or illegal dumping.
o Signs of high plant mortality other than herbivory. Potential causes could be disease,
improper plant selection, or exposure to extreme weather conditions or events prior to
initial plant established.
o Stream bank instability or erosion.
P;V'iR£NTOOOOQ(JI5I0600INFOICrltJcal Areas ReprxnFlnaIICrltical Areas Raw City of Renton May Creek TraII.doc
City 0 f Renton May Cree k Trai I
Critical Areas Report
34 April 2012
o Condition of bark mulch to include areas of erosion, thickness, and/or saturation.
o Condition of irrigation system to include breaks or missing/damaged sprinkler heads.
By tile End of Year 1
o All planting zones will achieve a 100 percent survival rate by the end of the first year.
o A minimum of four (4) different native trees and ten (10) different native shrub species
shall be present in the entire mitigation area (overall species diversity shall be greater
than 14).
o Cover of non-native or invasive species shall be less than 10 percent.
Year 2
o All planting zones will achieve a 90 percent survival rate by the end of the second year.
o A minimum of four (4) different native trees and ten (10) different native shrub species
shall be present in the entire mitigation area (overall species diversity shall be greater
than 14).
o Cover of non-native or invasive species shall be less than 10 percent.
Year 3
o All planting zones will achieve an 85 percent survival rate by the end of the third year.
o All planting zones will achieve 60 percent cover by the end of the third year.
o A minimum of four (4) different native trees and ten (10) different native shrub species
shall be present in the entire mitigation area (overall species diversity shall be greater
than 14).
o Cover of non-native or invasive species shall be less than 10 percent.
Year 4
o A minimum of four (4) different native trees and ten (10) different native shrub species
shall be present in the entire mitigation area (overall species diversity shall be greater
than 14).
o Cover of non-native or invasive species shall be less than 10 percent.
Year 5
o All planting zones will achieve 85 percent cover of planted species by the end of the fifth
year.
o A minimum of four (4) different native trees and ten (10) different native shrub species
shall be present in the entire mitigation area (overall species diversity shall be greater
than 14).
o Cover of non-native or invasive species shall be less than 10 percent.
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
P:VlRENT(}()OOOOfSlO6OOINFCYlCrltJcaI Areas RepOrl'oFlnallCrllJca/ Areas Report CIty of Renton May Creek. Tral1.doc
35 April 2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
7.1.3 Contingencies
Failure to meet the proposed vegetation standard of success will result in some or all of the
following contingency actions:
o Additional vegetation planting may be required to meet plant survival standards. Plant
species will be evaluated in relation to site conditions to determine if species substitutions
will be required.
o Control of competitive weed species may be required if plant survival standards are not
met. Methods of weed control could include hand or mechanical weeding, or mulching.
o Appropriate damage control methods may be required if vegetation survival standards are
not met due to herbivory. The wildlife species responsible for plant damage will be
identified, and possible control methods may be used, including fencing, use of
repellents, and temporary barriers.
7.1.4 Year 5 Success and Mitigation Approval
Mitigation success will be achieved during Year 5 if all Year-5 success standards have been met
and the required maintenance tasks completed.
7.1.5 Monitoring Plan
All planting, zones will be monitored annually for a minimum of five years, which includes the
first year warranty inspection. Formal monitoring will occur during Years I, 2, 3, 4, and 5.
Monitoring will be quarterly during Year I and yearly thereafter. The results of the quarterly
monitoring may be reported in memo format and submitted to the City of Renton at the end of
each quarter. Yearly monitoring reports will be submitted to the City of Renton and other
resource agencies for review and comment. These reports will address progress toward meeting
the performance measures and success standards as speci fied, and any recommended
contingency actions taken to correct deficiencies that occurred in meeting these standards.
Report submittals will occur following each monitoring period. Successful mitigation will be
measured by attainment of the performance measures and success standards described in this
mitigation plan.
The City of Renton or their designee will conduct the monitoring at the mitigation site.
Compliance monitoring provides a means for tracking the development of the mitigation site
over time, and for determining compliance with permits issued by federal, state, or local
jurisdictions.
Mitigation site monitoring will utilize a variety of ecological monitoring techniques. Many
standard techniques such as transect lines and sample plots may be used. Monitoring will also
include tracking mortality, photo points, as well as additional methods deemed necessary to
adequately document development of the mitigation area over the monitoring period. Monitoring
methodology will be included in the annual monitoring reports.
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
P:V\RENTOO00001510600INFOICrltlcaJ Areas ReporftFlnaflCrlUcal Areas Report City of Renton May Creek TraII.doc
36 April 2012
.8.0 CONCLUSIONS·
The project reach is within shoreline jurisdiction and is designated as Urban Conservancy. Trails
are an allowed use subject to Hearing Examiner approval and standards outlined in the SMP and
RMC. Based on the trail layout and proposed mitigation, the project is consistent with all
applicable regulatory requirements. Specifically, the project will not result in a loss of ecological
function, meets the design criteria for public access sites, and provides substantial mitigation.
The SMP states that the minimum ratio for mitigating wetland buffer impacts is I: I. The project
provides a minimum mitigation ratio of 4.8: I in the Base Area, but as much as 6.5: I if Additive
Alternative No. 1 is also implemented. Therefore, the proposed mitigation exceeds the minimum
requirements. The mitigation plan also addresses other requirements of the SMP such as enhancing
degraded buffers by planting native species. These habitat improvements are in addition to meeting
the intent of the SMP to provide public access to shorelines, implement the high-priority action
envisioned in The Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan, and implement basin-wide
recommendation #13 (plant conifers in riparian area) in the May Creek Basin Action Plan. The
proposed mitigation has also been designed to provide a functional lift to May Creek and the
existing forested corridor by focusing the replanting effort as close to May Creek as possible,
planting coniferous trees, and increasing overall native plant density and diversity. The plant
selection includes species that will provide forage, refugia, and nesting opportunities for wildlife,
while increasing shade, organic inputs, and eventually L WD to May Creek.
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
P:It1RENTOOOOOO1!M600INFOICrJllca/ mas ReporftFlnallCritJcal Arees Reporl City o( Renton May Cleek Trall.doc
37 April 2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
o·
d
I
I
I
I
9.0 REFERENCES
Dvornich, K.M., K.R. McAllister, and K.B. Aubry. 1997. Amphibians and Reptiles o/Washington
State, Location Data and Predicted Distributions. Washington State Gap Analysis Project
Final Report -Volume 2.
Hruby, T. 2004. Washington State Wetland Rating System/or Western Washington -Revised.
Washington State Department of Ecology Publication # 04-06-02S.
Johnson, R.E., and K.M. Cassidy. 1997. Terrestrial Mammals o/Washington State, Location Data
and Predicted Distributions. Volume 3 in Washington State Gap Analysis -Final Report,
(K.M. Cassidy, C.E. Grue, M.R. Smith and K.M. Dvornich, eds.), Washington Cooperative
Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, University of Washington, Seattle, 304 pp.
Kerwin, J. 2001. Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Limiting Factors Reportfor the Cedar-
Sammamish Basin (Watershed Water Resource Inventory Area 8). Washington State
Conservation Commission. Olympia, Washington.
King County. 1994. Water Quality of Small Lakes and Streams -Western King County 1990-
1993. Publication 946. King County Building and Land Development Division. Seattle,
Washington. .
---. 1990. King County Sensitive Areas Map Folio. King County, Washington.
Smith, M.R., P.W. Mattocks, Jr., and K.M. Cassidy. 1997. Breeding Birds of Washington State.
Volume 4 in Washington State Gap AnalYSis -Final Report, (K.M. Cassidy, C.E. Orue,
M.R. Smilh, and K.M. Dvornich, eds.), Seattle Audubon Society Publications in Zoology
No.1, Seattle, S38 pp.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2).
May.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly Soil
. Conservation Service). 1991. Hydric Soils of the State of Washington.
---. Soil Conservation Service. 1973. Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington.
Washington Agricultural Experiment Station.
Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). 200S. 2004 Water Quality Assessment (Final),
Category 5 Listings for WRIA 8. Available on the www at
http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programslwg/303d/2002/2004 documents/wria pdfs-SfinaVkk-
active-5-wria8.pdf
---.2004. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington.
Washington State Department ofFish and Wildlife (WDFW). 2011. Priority Habitat and Species
Data -Habitats and Species Report in lhe Vicinity ofT24ROSE Section 32 dated May 03,
2011.
City of Renton May Creek Trail
. Critical Areas Report
P:W?ENTOOOOOO15\0600INFOICritical Areas ReporflFlnsnCritic81 Mas Report City of Ren/on May Cleek Trall.doc
38 April 2012
---. 2003. Appendix G: Stream Habitat Conditions Report -Stream Habitat Conditions During
Low Flow Conditions. 1-405 North Renton. Dated August 2003.
Washington Department of Natural Resources CWDNR). 2007. Washington Natural Heritage
Program Rare Plant and High Quality Native Ecosystem Data Search dated March 14,2007.
Williams, R. W., R.M. Laramie and J.J. Ames. 1975. A Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmon
Utilization -Volume 1, Puget Sound Region. Washington Department of Fisheries.
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
P:II\RENTOOOOOO1510600INFO\CrltIc81 Mas RepOlr.FlnaflCrltlcaJ Areas Report City of Renton May Cleek TraII.doc
39 Apri120l2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
APPENDIX A
SITE PLAN
P:W?ENTOOOOOO1510600INFO\Crltica/ Mas RepotnFinaACrlIIcaJ Areas ReW City of Renton May Creek Trall.doc
April 2012
'. [:1
I
I
I
I
I:
I
I .:
I
I,
I~ ~
~
5
Ii ~
" 5
0 I~ '::-lOi 1:':1
,!
~ ~
Ii g
0 • I~ §
0
~ z
I~ ,
E
I~
I ~Ii,
'---------------------------""''''-.,
PORTION OF GOVT LOT 1, SECTION 32, T 24 N, R 5 E, WM
MAY CREEK TRA~L PROJECT
FOR
CITY OF RENTON, WASH~NGTON
"'-.,"'-.,
• ~PORARY "" 40'.:575 ~ON EASEMENT '\. "'" LCONSTR\JC "\
"'" ON _ '__
""', TY Of RENT mAU.,TS '__ '__ \ ' a HAZARD "'"
------>< flOOD ",,"'~. \'__ '__ '__ ""'>-. ----;;;..", " ...-'0'q,,:-----\" ~>::::: "<~~""''''''''''' \"" .~~~ ""'"", \ ""
"'" "
@
"''' " SCALE: 1· = 40'
NOTES
-PARCEL SIZE: 3.09 ACRES (134,531 Sf)
-'M)RIC AREA: 1.SO ACRES (55.352 Sf)
-ORGANIC WI. TERlAl TO BE REWOVEO FROM SITE • O!SP05EO IN AN
APPROVED lANDfU.L FOR TRAIL CONSTRUCTION IS 250 CtJ8IC YARDS
(372 TONS). QUANTITY TO 8[ VERIFIED BY COOTRACTOR.
-CRAVEl BORROW TO BE ""PORTED FROM APPROVED BORROW FACILITY FOR
TRAIL CONSTRUCTION IS 230 CUBIC YARDS (370 T(»I5).
-FINE BARK WlJlCH TO BE IMPORTED fROI,I APPROVEO BORROW fACILITY roR
TRAIL CONSTRUCTION IS 92 CUBIC YAROS (1311 TONS).
LEGEND
o
'*
@
®
OEODUOUS TREE
CONIFEROUS TREE
STORM DRAIN t.lANHOLE
SANITARY IoI..,NHOLE
(3224059OB11 TAX LOT / PARCEl NUt.lBER
-------ROAD CENTERLINE
EDGE OF PAVEr./[NT
------EASEMENT UNE
PROPERTY B()JNOARY
_______ EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY UN[
CREEK CEN TERUNE
ORDINARY HIGH WATER IoIARK (OHWU)
. - - - --- - --. WEilAND BOONOARY UNE
------WEilAND BUffER UNE
--. --. --FENCE UNE (TYPE AS NOTEO)
VEGETATIOO Io4ANAGEIo4ENT BUfFER LINE
- - -flOOD HAZARD AREA LU.lITS UNE
BID ALTERNATE ,1 (SEE IoIITIGATlON PlANS)
"
" • 'jHORf! INE \.
:J:1,AG(M[NT ZONE \.
'--
LOTA-
lJ<l,!I3' SF" (GlOSS)
\
\
100% SUBMITTAL
\
'\ ,
----'\
\
\
"
L
VICINITY MAP
SCALE: 1"=1500'
SHEET INDEX
C1 COVER SHEET & SITE PLAN
C2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
C3 TESCPLAN
C4 TESC DETAILS
C5 TESC & STANDARD DETAILS
C6 TESCNOTES
C7 TRAIL ALIGNMENT HORIZONTAL CONTROL PLAN
C8 TRAIL ALIGNMENT GRADING PLAN
C9 TRAIL ALIGNMENT PROFILES
M1 MITIGATION IMPACT SUMMARY PLAN
M2 MITIGATION IRRIGATION PLAN
M3 MITIGATION IRRIGATION NOTES AND DETAILS
M4 MITIGATION PLANTING PLAN
M5 MITIGATION DETAILS AND SPECIFICATIONS
M6 MITIGATION SPECIFICATIONS AND MONITORING
M7 SITE FURNISHING DETAILS
M8 TREE INVENTORY PLAN
DEVELOPMENT DATA:
O'M>IER/APf'UCANT: CITY OF RENT~
1055 5 GRADY WAY
RENTON, WASHINGTON 98057
(425) 430-6571
A TTENTlON: TOOD BLACK, A.S.LA..
ENGlN(ER/SURVE~: DAVID EVANS ond ASSOCIATEs' INC.
415 118TH AVEMJE S£
SITE ADDRESS
BElli WE. WASHINGTON 98005
(425) 519-6500
ATTENTION: OWG VOGT, P.LS.
4260 LAKE WA.HlNGTOtI BLVU N
RENTON, WASHINGTON 98056
TAX ACCOUNT NUM8ER
322405-9109
DATUM
VERTICAL OATUI.!: NAVU-88 (NCW 29 • NAVO-88 MINUS J.S')
@
• ~
~
~ ,
Z «--I -' -O-(?, ZZ
w 08
!::f-f-t'J fl)~ ZZ
J"'Wo::WI tuwofY~
.. ~ w fY "-LL :s: 'iljo oz
-}"'
,.
· ..... 1
.,"
0::>-w<x: ~8 _z
e;::a: o~
()
.; ~
! iii
coco w:ho ZIII wgfjS
C'(~ ~Sl~ >" 10,; 1110 ~~~
00 ~"ii .. -CO""";~~ ~CO~!l~ oC'(~~
o 0; Z m •
• REVISIONS: APPD.
, .. ,,-----
DATE: APRIL 2012
DESIGN: BRO
DRAWN: OJ(
CHECKED:
REVISION
NUMBER:
SCALE: '-.4(1'
PROJECT NUMBER:
RENTOOOO-O015
DRA1JlNC FILE:
ecllo4001RENTOOOOOO15
SHEET NO.
C1
0,17
"1M 'AlNnOO OND! 'NO.1N3I:1:::10 A.J.K)
NO.1N3l:l :::10 A.J.K)
1:10:::1
1l"1l:I1 )1331:10 A 'Iffl
A3AI:IflS OIHd"II:IOOdO.l
I
I
I
I
I
/
/
!
~ . ~ ~ " II • ~ II . ~ . ~ Jl ~
L~ k b 1> u .. ~ '5! .. ~ ';0 ;: ;,;
~u h~ ~u ~n dl
! ~ ~ • • • a • • • ~ I I I:i I
!::! ~ 2 2 § § § § § § § §
I
I
I
~ ~ ..
't1 \0 1::
II~
I II •
§ § §
,/
,/
,/
~ ~ ~
~ '! ~
~
~u
g :: 3:
§ § §
§
l
I
I q
,--'!l<;RI'JW'" -1
/// .
a
i
~----
~'V
_1,1 f.
Q
~
pi -/'
\ ,
!
l ~ ~ ~ • ~ ~ ~ • ~ " " ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ " ~ ~ ~ " • " ~ " i " ~ " ~ ~
! ~ ~ ~ ~ u u b ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ u u ~ ~ z ~ ~ ~ ! ~ u ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a S i i ! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! I ! i ~ ~ i
! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ iii i ~ ~ ~ i i ~ ; j ; ; ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~
-I ~
~
al
=:l
(J)
~
0
0 .....
~ f/
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
! ~ ~ j ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ i
g
•
~
l • • • ~ " • • • • • • • ~ ~ • : • • ~ " ~ " • • • ~ " • • ~ • ~ ~. ~ • • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ •
~ ~ ~ ~ I I I I ~ I I I I I I I ~ ~ ~ I I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I I I ~ I I ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~
i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~
1;! ~ !! !! ~ !! !! '!? 1I ~ • !:! '!:! !:! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ II • " ';!: 1;! il !i: '!! il i '!! !:! ~ ';!: '2 ~ ~ !: !! ';!: !! II • • ~ ~ R !! 2
,
~
b ~ ~ '5! .. \t ~ \I 'I:j ~ ~ '5! u ~ l! ~ , , ~ it b ~ \0:';\0; '! ~ ~ .!. • ~ ~ , ~ .. '5! '5! ~ l! ~ b ~ '" .. b '5! '5!
In d nl In s I ~ un nn n~ un u~ n ~ an n~ n ~ ~u n
Z'I I: t; :II Hn n~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~n ~n Hn ~n n ~ H~ H~ n ~ ~ ~ n~ n § § § 51 2 S
~----------~-------
I
I
II I, "~I
"
I ;1
I
I
I
I
I
I
~ • I, ~
~ 1>1 0
0
0
0
0
0 ~ z w
"' '" 0
0 I
" u • /'
0; • L ~ 1
" ,.
0
/'
" w
/'
0 1 «
" HI
'" g (~;
0
I,
0
0
0
~ z w
~ I
;;-
n:
~
E I c
~
0
6> t";1
N
"-~ I
"-v
0
~ u I
I
/
/
/
/
/
/
/ /~"'"
/ ""
PORTION OF GOVT LOT 1, SECTION 32, T 24 N, R 5 E, WM
(LUI5 Of 1OIk) IE R[II:MO 8't' HAN)
('S£E l.A/ClSCAP[ PlAN)
ttGtt \/ISIBUTY FENCE _N."""
"""'" """
c •• ,,,, ...
S-If I &.0' I SoO'
/
/ ",.
/ "'---------
/ ------
/ ------------
... """'N ""'~ WHERE IIDlCAltD ff'o(G(TATICIII II TIIS AREA 10
"""'" """ f" TOP or BANK ---~ _ _ I EX CROlHl SURfACE
~1IIA1.1ol2-_ ......
/ ,
1////
/ , /
/ / /
/
I
LEGEND
o
1*
@
@
U224059Ol1l)
®
= • ,. "
OEOOUOUS TREE
CONIFEROUS TREE
STORIoI DRAIN LlANHOLE
SANITARY LlANHOLE
T.u lOT / PARCEL NULl8ER
ROAD CEN TERUNE
EDGE OF PAVEIolENT
[A5[IoIENT LINE
PROPERTY 80UNDARY
EXISTING RIGHT-Of-WAY LINE
CREEK CENTERUNE
ORDINARY HIGH WATER IoIARK (OHwt.I)
V£TlANO 80UNDARY UNE
WETlAND BUrrER lINE
--.--.--FENer LINE (TYPE AS NOTEO)
VEGETATION IoIANAGEiolENT BUFFER LINE
FLOOD HAZARD AREA UIolITS UNE
..
BID ALTERNATE " (SEE IoIITIGATlON PLANS)
r-40'xJ7S' TEIoIPORARY
CONSTRUCTION EASDI£NT
ON OF REN'tON flolxi-:WARil~ - -....... -...
(3224C~9049) ........
~ -...-...
...... ......
......
...... ......
100% SUBMITTAL
......
,
..... ~ .. -~ PR!J>OS[l) m .... I ~ 1
'\,. MAY CREEK
~--
DETAIL -HIGH VISIBILITY FENCE LOCATION
......
......
'\
'\
'\
'\
n ... , .... SCAI.E
'\
'" ~'r( 6,.
~"'-1,
'"
Ifmo
T.E.S.C. CONSTRUCTION NOTES
o
@
o
@
o
o
o
SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR WORK IN THIS AREA.
TIMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEWENT AAe:A TO BE ENCLOSED
WITH TEMPORARy 5' CONSTRUCTION FENCE.
CONTRACTOR SHAlL REt.lO'v£ PORTION OF' EX 4' CHAIN LINK
FENCE FOR ACCESS TO SlAGHG AREA .t R£Pt.ACE "EN SITE
WORK IS COUPLETE.
CONTRACTOR SHALL CREATE .t SUBMIT TRAFFIC CONTROl PLAN
FOR LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD NORTH TO OTY FOR APPROVAL,
CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE INLET PROTECTION (IP) ON ALl STORIoI
DRAINAGE IoIANHDl£S a: CATCH BASINS IN STREET a: ON
ADJACENT PROPERTY WITHIN 200 fT OF CONSTRUCTION AREA.
AREA ENClO5[D BY HIGH VlSl8nJTY FENCE TO REIoIAIN
UNDISTURBED UNlESS BID AlTERNATE 11 IS ACCEPT£D.
AREAS OUTSIDE HIGH VISiBILITY f!NCE TO ROIAIN UNDISTURBED
WITH TliE EXCEPTION OF AREA ENClOSED BY TRAIL 1 a: 2 AS
BID AlTERNATE 11. 5[E NOTE 6.
STANDARD PRACTICE CODING SYSTEM:
= BMPs
@ CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
(OTY OF RENTON STO PlAN 215.10)
@ BlOOEGRAOABl[ COlIPOST SOCK
(WSOOT STO PlAN 1-.30.40-00)
@ DUST CONTROl
(DOE C14D)
@ filTER FABRIC SiLT fENCE
(OrY OF RENTON SID PlAN 214.00)
8 HIGH VISIBILITY fENCE
(OIY or RENTON STO PlAN 212.00)
0 INLET PROTECTION
(WSOOT STO PlAN 1-40.20-00)
8 IoIULCH AND/OR .. A mNG
(DOE C121)
@ Pl..ASTIC COVERING
(OIY or RENTON STO PlAN 213..30)
@ PERYANOH SEEDING AND PlANTING
(SEE LANDSCAPE PlAH)
@) PRESERVING NATURAL VEGETATION
(~OE Cl0l)
EROSION CONTROL MONITORING PLAN
1. 08SE:R'v£ EROSION CONTROl IoIEASURrS AT THE BEGINNING AND
END or EAOl DAY. REPAIR AHO OR RrPLAC( AS NECESSARY TO
ASSURE PROPER FUNCTION.
2. OBSERVE COlLECTION FACIUTIES DURING PERIODS Of HEAVY
RAINfALL AND '1'£1 WEATHER CONDITIONS.
3. OBSERVE AND 1oI000TOR STABlUZATIQN TECHNICUE5. WAKE
REPAIRS AND/OR AlTERATIONS AS NECESSARY TO PREVENT
EROSION.
4. cc..PLY WITH ALl WA STATE OEPARTlIDH 0' ECOlOGY AND OTY
or RENTON REQUlREIoIENTS FOR OlSOiARCE or STORIoIWATER.
\ '" """ ""N", f--
~
,:':1
,;:-'
.ir.1
...J « ZZ O~ c:::
zt-
t-(!)
:s~ z~ o..UJo::UJI UUJOC:::~ ~c:::LLU.:S:
I--() 0",
>-~~ « _Z
::2: ()w 0::
~ 0-
CD CD ~ ZUl~:g~ cu-~~~ >0( :ii<:~ 111-~£.q
C U ~r~ _0 ~ .... > CD ";-~ ~ O(CD~~~
co( .... ~
~ ~ • 1"a-" c:!I
•
REVISIONS: APPD.
DATE: APRIL, 2012
DESIGN: 8RD
DRAWN: CLK
CHECKED:
REVISION
NUIlBER:
SCALE: I" = 4{)'
PROJECT NUKBER:
'," RENTOOOCl-0015
~ll ~:::N%~~'5
SHEET NO.
;,.
~I OF17
C3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~ •
I i
2]
0 ~
I i 0
:> u
I i /'
C>
" I i .,
u
0
II 0
0
0
0
I ! >
I : 0 .,
0
I g
"' .,
I ~
f~, ,
;.~
I~I
f-
,~.-\I
":;:'1
~~I
:)1
I
I
i -~ --T II '-./ '-' r " If " ./ '-' il "
70~
J11 I
----'-Ill
---
I
.....
t. CGIDITI:lIJICFUR
1.t. TO EST~ CUAAltGI.Ml8, In'.-.II:E OR \JIR!! I'EMCI!" w.YIII! USE'O:
e
l.t.l. AT OE ~ OF CRmCAL AREAS, THEIR IUFnItS lIND 0fHElit Nf:EAS ItEl:lM£DTO lIE lEFT .........
'.1.2. ASIEaSSl\R'l'TOCXlNTJIOL THEVS«:lD TO AN) OH THE anE.
PUBUC YORKS
DEPARTMENT
COMPOST SOCK
-SEE NOTE 1
BTAKE AND WIRE FENCE sm. PU!f -212.00
r EROSI_Q~ CONTROL
)lARCH 2008
NOTES
1. Compost Sock shan be in accordance with
Standard SpecifICation 9-14.5(6). Compo$t
Sock shan be a mmunum olS" In diameter
or sized to suit conditions lIS specified by
the Engineer 01' Contract
2. Compost material to be dispersed on site or
lell in place, as determined by the Engineer.
3 When pladn~ Compost Sock on slopes, use
Erosion ControI6lankel ifspeciflOd by the
Engineer and in accordance with Standard
SpecifICation 9-14.5(2}. See SWldard
Plan 1-60.10
4. Always install COmpost Sock pefpeOdk:ular
to slope and aloog contour lines.
5 Re<r(MI sediment from the up slope side of
!he Compost Sod<. when accumulation hII'I
reached 112 of th<:> elfec!ive height 01 the
"""-'Sock.
6 Live stakes can be used in IIdditlDn to wood-
en stakes and shatt be ;n accordance with
Standard SpecifIcation 9-14.6(1). See plans
for speces selection and spacing .
7 Mesh corrtaining compost shan bit biodegradable.
DETAIL -COMPOST SOCK
REF: WSOOT STO PlAN 1-30.40-00
NOT TO SCALE
PORTION OF GOVT LOT 1, SECTION 32, T 24 N, R 5 E, WM
I
I • I
_ .. --II ---
---",,----
I
I • I
........... I'I.-,~~.1I'I.lCQ)
u
-'"......:HJ .... ~. __ /
TO r. _ UOGMcI. UIUI
~
t. COIIIDfTION or usr:
r.ro ..... Oo._OIO
lQIJIVIIllNl.F.,._
~"',,,,,::UIEl)
.... tu,....: ___
-~~ ----7 ~ _u~~ ..
~--~=-/
""lST'"-_OR_OllJef
1.1. Sl.T'ENCE UA"BE USEDOOWNSUJPE OF I'UDIS11..A8I00AA:EA5.
1 ~ Sl.T 'ENCE IS NOT INTENDED TO TR&.T (X)NCl:NTAATED R.OW8. NOR IS Nl9ClEO TO TREAT SUlSTANtW.. -=:urrs OF OVE~ FlOW.
ANr CCJ«::EHlltATED flOW MOST BE caMYED THROUGH THE 0I\I\.fiA0E S"rSTEIIoI TO A SEOIUEHT TRAP OR PC»ID
Z. DESlGNAIIOtoII1"loI..l.ATJOIIIPfCFICATIOIII
u. THE GEOTEXTU USED IoIOST t.IET THE ST~ I..'3TEO BEU.OW. A coPY OF TliE 1oWU'ACTURER"S FAlIRIC SPECIFICATIONS MOST BE
AYM.AIIl.! ON srrE. i. _AMDIISTAl.U:no"~1DIS i""'IoWMDoU5iI 1<0_ lOOt ..... .......:. I.'. P\ASTlCIHEETNlIHCll.U HAVIi! A~TMCIOG!AOFII.Il3~~
U F EROSIONAT tIE TOE Of A aaoE .l.ICB.". A GRoWn --. _. OR ODER SLlTAIILE PAOTECTION SHALl lIE NSl"MJ.£D AT tIE TOE _ ... ~ ..... _ ... ..eo. ..... _
OF "11£ aOPE .... 0R!lER 10 RalUCE tIE \lELOCIT'f OF ftU4OR'.
:I.~"'---Lt. TORN IHHTIlMOITE IW'lACEDNC)OPEN ISEMCSflEPll.ltEo.
PM'l>GlUSt.-__ ::::: =:'===:'._ """"".-....... . ........ ...... -.-.. .. _-. ...... -"""" U F nil!. f'\.UTIC IIEGINS Ttl DETPIIOAAn CIt! lOta.T1Vo'llDl.ET fWIIATICN, rrllClT II! CCIYIUtB." REUCl\lEtlAIC) tIIEPLACEl).
U. WHEN TIE PLASl1C IS NO I.Of«JER 1oEEDED, rr SHALl. CCIMI'I..ETEL y IIEMD'o'ES. 2.2 STNIIWIO STRENGTH'~ REB.IRES WIRE BADlNG TO ~ THE STRENGlH OF THE FENCE. WIRE BACQIO OR a..osER POST
IPACItIG MAY BE ~QUlRED FOR EXTRA STREMGTH FAIIRIC IF FID..O PERFCIRUAHa' WARRANn\ A STRONGER FENCE.
PUBUC WORKS
DEPARTMENT
GRATE FRAME
SEDIMENT AND DEBRIS
2.3 WHERE THE FENCe IS toISTAUEo. tIE SlOI'E SHAlJ..otOT BE SlEEPER. nwt2H;1'l
U IF" rrPICAl. Sl.T FE!tCE IS USED. THE STN«loO!RDoIAA TRaICti MAy NOT eE REDUCED -"lllONO AS THE 8QlTOW • WCHES OF THE SU fatCE
IS \WU. BtlUED AND SECUM: IN A TRENCH n...T ST~ THE '£NCE AND DOES NOT ~WAT£R TO IlYPASS OR I.I'IOERUINE THE $l.T ......
Z. MAIN1"EMNtCIE n~
~.,. INr OMIAGE SHALL BE REP~ 1IAEllIAl"El.Y.
~ 2 IF CCifCEHT"RAT£0 fLOES I<IItE. £VIOOIT UF'I«.I. 00 TIE FENCE. Tl£Y IILIST Of INT£RC£PTEO """ CCNVEYEO TO" SE!"JN£Hl TRAP OR POND.
;'-3. IT IS M'OIttAln" TO CI1fi(;K THE UPHLL SlOE OF THE f"£N(l; 'OR &IGNS OF TtIE I'ENCI: Q.OGGING AND ACtNi AS A BARRIER TO flOW" AND
THEN CAUSING CtwINEtIZ.o\TlOH OF FlOWS PAAAI.la. TO "OlE FEHCE. F fHI8 OCCURS. REPLACE TIE FENCE OR REMOIIED THE TFtAP """""'. ~., IEDIU9rT !IIOST SI1 REMOYI!O ~ SEOIolENT IS IINCIfES HIOIi
U IF THE n.Tl!R F.-oRIC (G£OT£XTU) HAS ~1Ul !lUI! TO ta.TRAVIOl..!T IIREAAlXMN. IT SKAU. lie REPUICED.
PLASTIC COVERING e PUBliC WORKS
DEPARTMENT
SILT FENCE STD. PlAN -214.00
.' ,
FILTERED]
WATER
.' ,
'U:' .. . .. . . .
, , , , , ,
SECTION VIEW
OV£RFt.OW BYPASS
BELOW INlET GRATE DEVICE
NOTES
1. S<ze II1e Below Inlet Grate Device {BIGDl for1he storm wateutruewre it
..nllserviee.
2. The BlGO sIlaIIlIave a buiIt.m ~1Iow re!"l8f system (overI\oW bypass).
3 The re\roeVaI !S)'Stem rrust aIaw removal oIlhe BIGD wrthoot Spilling II1e
cont!ded material.
4. perform maintenance in accordance with Standard Speeificatiol18-01 3(15)
ISOMETRIC VIEW
DETAIL -STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION
REF: WSDOT STO PlAN 1-40.20-00
NOT TO SCALE
MARCil ~OO8
100% SUBMITIAL
...J _ ZZ
C1)~ O~
--'I-I-C!> 4:", ZZ f--'--
WWa::
WI
OWOc::~
Uc::"-u..3:
[flu Oz-
ijf->->-0
« I-f-
I...... :2: u 15 : a::
,
C:'
i
.@
.; ~ Z _
CD cD w~o
ZUI (l)8fE
o(~ ~~::;l
>0( ~~;n 111-<{"&<ri o £.SfJ OO~~ ..
>CD -;-~ g
,(CIl"~~ o c( .... t
1:1 ~ ~
REVISIONS: APPD.
DATE; APRIL. 2012
DESIGN: BRO
DRAWN: CIJ(
CHECKED;
REVISION
NUMBER:
SCA.LE: NONE
PROJECT NUMBER:
RENTOOOO-0015
DRAWING FILE;
ed1ol004R[N TOOOOO015
SHEET NO.
C4
0,17
I
I It I
"
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~ • u
I .n
" 0
0
0
0
0 r z w
ffi
0
0 I
~ u • /
0; • ~
"' / I
" '" 0 -G f§
w
/
0
~ I
u
0
0 v ;;.
~
" I
0
0
0
0
0 r
Z w
"' / I
>
<i
E c I
m
0
,;;
N
'-~ I
'-v
0
~
U I
I
I • !
-"_~YQA.",,","FT>CIIl .... _wrat_ ......
_Q"II04O'~ __
.... 0 .................
-~-------'
1T_.'1>1D1C3S
_ .... __ ft~lO .... pXE
",,1l(I..'OIaOIt1:lINSTM1A~t:.ll<IE
~lNTIIiOIam--.. _Of' __ "
IT"~_'_ ~ __ 'IO""T
~ __ I'H[IO\D
...".
~F1A~,.;:r .. .,. --
1. CC*DmOII OF USE
1.1 COISTRJCTION EHTRNfCE SHAU. BE STA8IIJZEO WHER£VER TRN'FIC WIll. BE lEAVING A ~ SITE AND TRA~ ON
PAVEl) I'ItVoDS OR OTl£R P"VEO AREAS ~ 1.oao FEET CE THE SITE-.. -,-
'SiMN
15 Ill.lT.t.ICWIOUlVllmI
t. OESlCfl NmIJriSTALLAnotIIlI'£aFlCATJOMS
2.1. HOO RJ£l.1WOOO IlAS£O MULCH) ..... Y BE SUB$1T1UT£D FOROR COU8INED WIn! QIJAA{Y SPALlS IN ARES 'fH,I,T WIlL SOT BE USED
FOR PERMANENT ROI\DS. HOG FUEL IS IiIOT RECQMUEN)EO FOR ENTRANCE STABlUZATJ::lN N tJRfIAN HtEAS. l)f( INSPECTOR ~y
AT AN'( TIME ReQllRE THE US!: OF CIUARRY SPAU.S F THE HOG F\JEl1S HOl PRE\IEN1U'iG SEOOoI!ONT FROM BEING TRACKED ONTO
..... VEJe(fOft II' THE HOG FUEL J$ BEN3 CAARlEDON'P PAVDENT.
2.2 FENCN:l SKALL BE INST.t.U.EO AS NECE.SSAR"r TO RESTRICT TAAfflC TO THE CONSTRl.CTlON ENTRANCE
2.3. WI-!DIE\'ER PO$SIII.L.E.. TIE VlTRA...cE IHALLBE CONSTRUCTEDONAFlRJoI. CCIWI'ACTED$l..8GfWlE. THISCAN SU8STAHTW..LY
foICREASE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF Tl1E PAD AND REDUCE n£ NEW FCI'IIoWNTEtWCE.
s.. IIAIIfTEIIIANCE STANDolJIDlI
3.1. 0I.P0RRY SPAlLS SHAU.BE,IJ)()£[) IF"llE PAD lSN::llQNGER IN~ wmI TliE SPEClFCAllONS
3.2. IF" THE E'ITRN<ICE. l5 NOT PRFlENTING SEI».EHT BEING "IRAO(S)otm) PA\oaEHT. TIEN A!. TERNATM Io£ASURES TO KEEP TIE
STREET! FREE OF SEOIIoIEHT Sl-W.l BE USIOO. THIS UAY INCUJOE STREET SWEEPHG, NlINCREASE lit THE C&tEN5IONS OF tHE
ENTRAICE. CA 1l'IE INSTAl..LAT1OHOF TIE Wl£El.WASI1..IF"WASHtIG ISIJSED. IT SHALl BE DONE ON AN AREA CCN'EREDWIlH
CfUSHED ROCK. AIIIOw.\SHED W .... TER SHAll.. DRAlN TO II SEllIUENT TRAP OR POND.
3.3 ANt $EDIME"T THAT IS TRAC([D ONTOPIlVUdENT $HALl. BE REMOIIEDIMMEDIATEl. Y BY SWEEPING. THE S£OIMENTCOLlECTEOBY
SVoEEPNl $tW.l BE ItEUOVED OR STAIIIl.IZED ON 1lrrE. 1l'IE PAVRIEJ«"; swu. NOT BE ClEANED IJY WASHING [)(MIN TI£ STREEl,
EXCEPT 'MiEN SWEEPING IS t<li:.FFECTlVE ~ THERE IS A TlfRL\1 TO PUBUC SAFETY,IJ' rr NECESSARY TO WASH THE STREETS. A
&I.W.L SUIo1P WST BE CCINDOCTEtI. n£ SEONEHT wo.Jl.D nEN BE W-"SHEO PrITO THE S1.AF' wt£RE fT CN.I BE COHTROUED AND
DISCHARGED A.PPROPAI'TEL Y.
U. ANt OUARR"I'SPAI.LS 1*T ARE lOOSENED FROLITHE PAONCl EHOt.I'ON tHE PDAOWAY SHAll. BE R£t.O.'ED IUUEDATn.Y.
3.5 IJ'VEHlCLES.o.RE E~OR EXfTING THE SlTESAT p:)M$ OllER THAH tHe CONST"'-'CTlONEHTRANCt(S). FtHONG StW.L BE
INST AU.ED TO COf,"TROl TRIIFFlC
~.7."'. PUBUC WORKS ~ DEPARTME1o.!
STABIUZED
CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
Sl'D, PUN -216.l0
~CH 2006
PORTION OF GOVT LOT 1, SECTION 32, T 24 N, R 5 E, WM
1/2"1<.
1/2·~4· (XPANSlON I.!ATfRIAL
1/.oI"R ... r JOI"fS
~
1.tr~"· EXPANSION ",,,tERI,,.
1/'"R AT JCl<NTS---'
"'j('-'MOTH Cf Slot'lllAU<
1/2-X~" [j\?AHSlON
... ArrRI,lL CU~ ~ETIJRlI ""' ,
~,lyt"'DlT ~s ~£R PLANS
sr,o"'O.l.RD COol, CONe.
OJRB AND GUn£R
1/2"U" ll(PAtfSlCIII W"IEFllAl-
l/."R A,r JOINTS
I/Z'"
•
om
rPAV'EWDH "'s PER PLMlS , •
ST.o.NO~RD CEIo/.
CONe. CURB .lNO
run",
SECTION A A S~CnQN 8-8
so: 9!ttI2.5..1 rOIl'! R01o(l"lrAVOC"-UOPUtNl SlAt()AROS
Gi"'I!:,!AL "IO'TS.
.... >So ra.-, _'"5 ........ III: OlKCI __ to [..are '$ tit-...... u:-os .....,. .0-C/I:. lIlt' .. >4
"'" II[ LE3S ""'" J/"-. 1IOCA£SS ...., "'"""'" I( E>TUCaI r lUCoo 1'0( ",no U€. 'IT" """ ~ s>U<.L I( '"l..alJ At m CQD.-.,.. AS .... C<m ..... £!GCl> _ $>-AU ... 1OO'-
-~
~ 1><[ ~ IS TO BE >UCm ....... " 1>£ CI.Q _ wntR. THE ..o~,,.. ..... BE A CQtP
.ort. 'Jr_.-(,....."... ............ ltIA;J. I(...-D ..... ~,c.-S "'~,T,~ ....... 0-........... '/T"-, .. _ .. ~ltRI ... 9<AU '" .. ..J<Xl) AT tlO"> '(>.01'" SIlEo ..... F""",-
~~,. ... _sot."""" .......... <CMf"CIIOt '" 'K ~.-s<7Q.A$S.(.f.., _ ... t>o'''.,"oe .. ~,
" ~ ........... lIt: A _.--.......... tDGt$ ~A_ A 7 1/2-TOOlEO ~
"'*"'"""'aooo .. _....u.III: __ o....oclO'O)
"!),I.TE "j;'<Vi$ICN ~
n-PIC",L SIDF.1rALK
~ ~
ADOPTED
=M~
~~~
t.n" I14U' 04/04
owe. NAI-~E: FOO7 SI' PAGE; rOO7
100% SUBMITTAL
VJ
--' I~I « Iii
...J Z2
of:":? ~ Cl
Cl a::
(§
~
VJ
"" <.)
VJ
I-
~
UJ
UJ
a:: o
~
1-(9
Z~
UJI a::a::VJ o ..:
LLLL.'S:
0:2
~f:":? _2 OW
d W f-
~ a::
<;'
'~ ~'.
~I
~ " :;;
.;
~ ~ ~ 11111) W",O ZW ~g~ 0(1-gm,,; >0( £i~ W-
cO ~~!:: _0 ~~I >11)
0(11) o •
:;;~Il. co( ~ c z 0
<
litO
REVISIONS: APPD.
DATE: ",PRIL 2012
DESIGN: BRO
DRAWN: CLK
CHECKED:
REVISION
NUMBER:
SCALE: NONE
PROJEt"I' NUMBER;
RENTOOOO-O015
DRAW1NG FILE:
eclIoIOO5RHITOOOOO015
SHEET NO.
C5
OF17
• •
• I' .'
I '"
I
I
I
I
I
~ • ~
Ii 0 g 1:':,1
~
Ii, " ' " • Ii " /'
Ii
I~
"" u
I!~
o l.iI
0
0
I! /' >
I: c
~ "' r I~ ~ ';
ro '
"' ..
0
I~ [,
STORt.AWATER PQLUJnON PREVENnON PI AN (Swppp)'
THIS STORWWA TER ?ou'UTlQN PR£\OITlCH PLAN IS PROVIDED IN ACCORO.&.NCE
WITH THE TERUS OF THE NATIONAL PCUUTANT DISCHARGE ELlI.4JNATlON SYSl'E1ol
(NPOES) PERI.4JT fOR CONSfRUCllON ACl1V1l1ES fOR THIS PROJECT. THE
CC"HRACT~ IS ADVlsro THAT THE PRo..ECl AREA DRAINS TO WETl..ANOS
AND/OR STATE WATERS ANO THAT THE CONTRACTOR IS REsPONSIBLE TO
PROTECT THE RECEIVING WATERS FROU DELETERIOUS EFFECTS OF"
CONSTRUCTION.
THE CONTRACTOR IS REOUIRED TO HAVE A copy OF Tl-lE NPDES PERIoIIT AS
WELL AS THE SIW"Pf' ON SHE AT ALL TIMES.
THE CONTRACTOR IS RF;SPONSIBLE F"OR PROVIOIHG THE EROSION CONTROL
MEASURES SHQ'MII OR DESCRIBED IN THE CONTRACT DOCUIolENTS AND ANY
ADDITIONAl U[ASURES THAT NAY BE REQUIRED BY !tiE CONTRACTORS IoIEANS
AND I.IETHODS OF CONSTRUCTION AS NEEDED TO CONTROL EROSION ANO
SEDtI.lENT AT THE C()IISTRUCTlON SITE "-NO TO PR£IIENT VlOLAT1()11 OF' SURFACE
WATER QUALITY. GROUND WAl£R QUAlITY, OR SEDIWENT WANAGEWENT
STANDARDS. EROSION CONTROL WEASURES SHALL Be: WAINTAINEO THROUGHOUT
THE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTlDN ANO UNTIL ALL DISTURBED EARTH IS STABILIZED
IN FlNISH GRAOES.
THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBES HOW THE CONSTRUCTION SWPf'P ADDRESSES EACH OF
THE 12 REQUIREO ruWENTS. REFER TO THES£ PLANS FOR DRAWINGS or THE
PROJECT, ""CINITY WAF', SITE WAP, CONVEYANCE SYSTEWS, EROSION ANO
SEDIMENT CONTROL WEASURES, ANO EROSION ANO SEDIWENT CONTROL OETAILS.
EI EMf NT fl· pRfSfRYf \/fGfIATION!t.U,RK q FARING liMITS
1. PRIOR TO BEGINNING LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITIES (INCLUOING a.£ARING ANO
GRADING) CLEARLY WARK ALL CLEARING UUITS AND TREES THAT ARE TO BE
PRESER'v'EO WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION AREA AS SHO',W.I ON THE DRAYIINC5.
2. SIt T FENCE, GEOTEXTILE ENCASED BARftlERS, CONSTRUCTION FENCE, ORANGE
PLASTIC FENCE, OR OTHER APPROVED WEASURES MAY BE USED TO UARK THE
a.£ARING UWITS AT THE CONTRACTOR'S OPTION.
3. THE DUFF LAYER, NATIVE TOPSOIL, AND NATUR.t.J. VEGETATION SHAll Be:
RETAINED IN AN UNDISTURBED STATE TO THE UAXIWUW OEGREE PRACTICABLE.
SUGGESTED BMP,j8I.lP, TO Be: USED:
OTY OF RENTON 212.00: STAKE ANO WIRE FENCE
flfWENT". ESTABliSH CONSTR\JCTION ACC[S5
I. CONSTRUCTION VEHICLE ACCESS AND EXIT SHALL BE UWITEO TO ONE
ROUTE. REfER TO S'oWP PLAN Of' THESE PLANS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION
ENTRANCE LOCATION. ALL ACCESS/EXIT POINTS SHAll BE STASIUZEO ¥11TH
OUARRY SPALLS, CRUSHED ROC!( OR OTHER EQUIVALENT BMP, TO MINIMIZE THE
TRACKING OF SEDIMENT ONTO PUBUC ROADS.
2. IF THE STAEIlLIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE IS NOT EFfECTIVE IN
PRE'lENTING 5£OD,IENT FROM BEING TRACKED ONTO PUBUC ROADS, WHEEL WASH
OR TIRE BATHS SHALL BE LOCATED ON SITE.
3. IF SEDIMENT IS TRACKED OFr SITE, PUBUC OR PRIVATE ROADS SHALL BE
CLEANED THOROUGHLY AT THE END or EACH DAY, OR ... ORE FREOUENTLY
OURING WET ¥fV,THE'R. SEDI"'ENT SHALL Be: REUOVED FROM ROADS BY
SHOVElING OR PICKUP SYI£EPING ANO SHALL BE TRANSPORTED TO A
CONTROLLED SEOI"'ENT DISPOSAl AREA.
•. STREET WASHING IS ALLOWED ONLY AFTER SEOIWENT IS REMOVED AS
DESCRIBED ABO'.£. STREET WASH WASTEWATER SHALL BE CONTROLLED BY
PUWPlNG BACK ON SITE OR OTHERWISE BE PREVENTUl FRClIot DISCHARGING INTO
SYSTEMS TRIBUTARY TO WATERS Of THE STATE.
SUGGESTED BWPs/BwPs TO BE USED:
OTY OF RENTON Z15,10: STAEIlUZED CCIoISTRUCTION ENTRANC(
[I FMFNT". CONTROl fl ow RATES
I. PROPERTIES AND WATERWAYS DOWNSTREAM FRClIot DEVELOPr.lENT SITES SHALl.
BE PftOTECTED rRClIot EROSION DUE TO INCREASES IN THE VELDOTY AND PEAK
VOLUMETRIC FLOW RATE OF STQRMWATER RUNOIT FRQI,j THE PRD.ECT SITE,
SUGGESTED BMPs/BWPs TO BE USED:
EI EMFN! 14· INSTAll SEDIMENT CONTRQI 5
1. THE DUFF LAYER, NATI'o£ SOIl, AND NATURAL VEGETATION SHALL BE RETAINED
IN AN UNDISTURBED STATE TO THE MAXIMUM EX1£NT PRACTICABLE.
2. SEDIMENT CONTROl 6loIPs SHAlL BE CONSTRUCT(O AS ONE OF THE FlRST
STEPS IN GRADING. THESE BMP, SHALL at FUNCTIONAL BEFORE OTHER LANO
OISTURBING ACTI""TlES TAKE PLACE.
3. PRIOR TO LEAVING THE CONSTRUCTION SITE. STORMWATER RUNOf .. FROM
DISTURBED AREAS SHALl PASS THROUGli AN APPROPRIATE SEOIMENT RE ... OVAL
BIoIP. RUNOFF FRClIot ruu. STABIUZED AREAS ... AY BE DISCHARGED WITHOUT A
SEDIt.lENT REt.lOVAL BWP, BUT MUST MEET nlE FLOW CONTROL PERFORMANCE
STANOARO OF ELE ... ENT ,3.
SUGGESTEO BUPs/BlolP, TO BE USED:
Bt.IP CI50: MATERIALS ON HAND
WSOOT 1-.0.20-00: ST~W DRAIN INLET PROTECTION
OTY ~ R£NTON 214.00: SILT FtNCE
COtotPOST SOCK: WSOOT 1-30.040-00
FI EMf NT 15' STAR!! 17E SOIl S
1. ExPOSED ANO UNWORKED SOILS SHAlL BE STABiliZED BY APPLICATION OF
EFFECTIVE 8IoIPs THAT PROTECT THE SOIL FORM EROSIVE FORCES Of RAINOROPS.
FLOWING WATER, ANO WIND.
2. TO pRE'o£NT EROSION, NO SOILS SHAlL REWAIN EXPOSED AND UN'NCIRKED
FOR WORE THAN THE m,lE PERIODS SET FORTH BELOW:
DURING THE Yl£T SEASON (OCTOBER I -APRIL 30): 2 DAYS
DURING THE ORY SEASON (MAY 1 -SEPT. 30): 7 DAYS
THIS STABIUZATION REOUIREMENT APPLIES TO ALL SOILS ON SITE, M-iETHER AT
FlNAL GRADE OR NOT. THESE TIWES MAY BE ADJUSTEO BY THE LOCAL
PERMITTING AUTHORITY IF IT CAN BE SHOv.N THAT SITE CONDITIONS OR THE
AVERAGE TIME Be:TWEEN STORJ,I EV[NlS .lJSTIFlES A DIFFERENT STANDARO.
3. SOILS SHALL BE STABIUZED AT THE END Of THE SHIFT BEFORE A HOlIDAY
OR ~.EKENO IF NEEDEO BASED ON THE Yl£A THER FORECAST.
•. SOIL STOCKPILES SHALL BE STABIUZED FRClIot EROSON, PROTECTED 'MTH
SEOIMENT TRAPPING MEASURES, ANO M-iER£ POSSIBl£, BE LOCATED AWAY
FROM STORM DRAIN INLETS, WATERWAYS, ANO ORAINAGE CHANNELS.
5. APPLICABLE BWP! INCLUOE, BUT ARE NOT UWITEO TO: TEWpQRARY ANO
PERWANENT SEEDING, SOOOING, t.lULCHING, PLASTIC COVERING, EROSION CONTROL
f'ABRICS ANO MATTING, SOIL APPUCATION Of" POLYACR'IVJ,IIDE (PAW), THE
EARLY APPUCATION Of GRA'o£L eASE ON AREAS TO BE PAVED ANO DUST
CONTROL. SEl£CT SOIL STABIUZATION MEASURES SHALL BE APPROPRIATE FOR
THE TIME OF YEAR, SITE CONDITIONS, EsnWATED DURATION Of USE, ANO THE
POTENTIAL WATER QUALITY I ... PACTS.
6. REMOVE ALL TESC ... EASURES AS SOON AS PRACTICAl ArTER
ESTABLISHMENT Of UNIFORW GRASS GROWTH OR INSTAllATION OF OTHER
PERJ,jANENT STABIUZATION UEASURES. REPAIR ANY DA ... AGE TO STABILIZED
SURFACES AFTER REMOVAL Of TESC MEASURES.
SUGGESTEO BIoIP./BIoIP, TO Be: USED:
el.tp CI20: PER10IANENT SEEDING It; pLANTlMG
BIoIP C121: MULCHING
Bt.IP C12J: PlASTIC COVERING
SUP CI40: OUST CONTRO..
SUP C150: MATERIAlS ON HAND
PORTION OF GOVT LOT 1, SECTION 32, T 24 N, R 5 E, WM
[I EMENT 16' PROWCT 51 geES
1. DESIGN, CONSTRUCT, AND PHASE CUT AND FILL SLOPES IN A WANNER THAT
'MLL ... INIWIZE EROSION. APPLICABLE PRACTICES INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED
TO, REDUONG CONT1NUOUS LENGTH Of' SlOPE WITH TERRAONG ANO 0I'o£R9ONS,
REOUONG SlOPE STEEP'NESS, AND ROUGHENING SLOPE SURFACES (e.g" TRACK
WALKING).
Z. OFF-SITE STORMWATER RUN-ON OR GROUNOWATER SHALL BE DIVERTED
AWAY FROM SLOPES ANt) DISlURBED AREAS WITH INTERCEPTOR DIKES, PIPES,
ANO/OR SWALES. OFF-9TE STORMWATER SHOULO BE WANAGED SEPARATELY
FROM STORMWA TER GENERA TEO ON THE SITE.
3. 00 NOT CLEAR ANO GRUB SlOPES GREATER THAN • (HORIZONTAL):1
(VERTICAl) UNL£SS FURTHER WORK R(SULTING IN STABlUZATION Of THE SLOPES
TO BE CLEARED AND GRUBBED IS SCHEDULED.
4. EXCAVATEO WATERIAL SHALL BE PLACED ON THE UPHILL SlOE OF TRENCHES,
CONSISTENT WITH SAFETY AND SPACE CONSIDERATIONS,
5. CHED< OAr.lS SHALL BE PLACED AT R(GULAR INTERVALS WITHIN
CONSTRUCTEO CHANNElS THAT ARE OJT DOWN A SlOPE.
SUGGESTED BWPsj8WP'1 TO BE USED:
BlIP Cl50: "'ATERtALS ON HAND
[1 fhlENT n PROlfCI DRAIN 1"11 EIS
,. ALL STORM DRAIN INLETS OPERABLE DURING CONSTRUCTION AND ALL INLETS
'MTHIN 200' DO'MIISTREAW or THE PRQ.£CT SITE SHAll BE PROTECTEO WITH
CATCH BASIN FILTERS SO THAT STOR1o!WATER RUNOfF DOES NOT ENTER THE
CONVEYANCE SYSTEM WITHOUT FIRST BEING FlL TEREO OR TREATED TO RE"'OVE
SEDIr.rENT. CATCH BASIN FIlTERS IN THE ROADWAY WILL BE OIL/SEDIMENT
fllTERS ANO CATCH BASIN FILTERS OUTSIOE OF THE ROADWAY WILL BE
SEDIMENT FlLTERS.
2. APPROAOi ROADS SHALL BE KEPT CLEAN. SEDIMENT AND STREET WASH
WATER SHALL NOT BE ALlOVot:O TO ENTER STORW ORAINS WITHOUT P'RlaR AND
ADEQUATE TREA1\I[NT,
3, INLH PROTECTION DEVICES SHOULD BE a.£ANEO ~ REMO'o£O ANO
REPLACED WHEN SEQ!M(NT HAS FILLED ONE-THIRD OF THE AVAILABLE STORAGE
(OR WI-lEN FILLED 'MTH SIX-INCHES Of SEOIMENT).
BMP's TO BE USED:
BWP CZZO: STORI.t DRAIN INlET PROTECTION (WSOOT STO PlAN 1-40.20-00)
E! EWENT ,e· STABII IZE CHANNf! SAND QlITI [IS
1. ALL T'EUPQRARY ON-SITE CONVEYANCE CHANNELS SHALL BE DESIGNED,
CONSTRUCTED AND STABlLlZEO TO PRE'o£NT EROSION FROM THE ExPECTEO P(AK
10 IoJINUTE VELOCITY or FLOW FROW A TYPE ,,,, 10-YR, 24-HR FREOt.JENCY
STOR'" FOR THE OE'o£LOPED CONDITION. AL TERNA TIVEL Y, THE 10-YR, I-HR FLOW
RATE INOICATED BY AN APPROVED CONTINUOUS RUNOFF WOOEL, INCREASEO BY A
FACTOR Of" 1,6, MAY BE USED.
2. STAB[JZATION, INCLUOtNG ARWORINC WATERlAL, ADEOUATE TO PREVENT
EROSION OF OUTLETS, ADJACENT STREAr.I BANKS, SLOPES, AND DOWNSTREAr.I
REACHES SHAlL BE PRO""DED AT THE OUTLETS Of ALL CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS.
SUGCESTUl BIoJPs,/BIoIP, TO BE USED:
NOT APPlICA8l£
[I EWENT 19· CONTRa! PO! I ll!ANTS
1. AlL POllUTANTS. INQ.UDINC WASTE WATERIALS AND DEWOUTION DEBRIS,
THAT OCCUR ONSiTE SHAlL BE HANOLEO AND DISPOSED or IN A WANNER
THAT DOES NOT CAUSE CONTAMINATION OF STORMWATER.
2. CO'oUl, CONTAINWENT, AND PROTECTION FROW VANDALIS/.I SHALL BE
PRO""DEO FOR ALL CHEIolICALS, UOUID PROOUCTS, PETROLEUW PRODUCTS. AND
OTHER WATERIALS THAT HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO POSE A THREAT TO HU ... AN
HEAlTH OR THE ENVIRONMENT. ON-SITE FUELING TANKS SHALL INCLUOE
SECONOARY CONTAlNI.IENT.
J, WAlN1£NANCE, FUELING, ANO REPAIR Of HEAVY EOUIPUENT AND VEHICLES
SHALL BE C(lNDUCTUl USING SDlLL P'R(V[NTION AND CONTROL MEASURES,
CONTAMINATEO SURFACES SHALL BE CLEANED IWMEOIATELY FOLLOWING ANY SPILL
INODENT.
4. WHEEL WASH OR lIRE BATH WASTEWATER SHALL BE OISCHARGEO TO A
SEPARATE ON-SITE TREA1\IENT SYSTEM OR TO THE SANITARY SEYI£R WITH
LOCAL SEWER DISTRICT APPROVAl,
5. APPUCAnON OF FERTIUZERS AND PESTICIDES, SHAll BE CONOUCTED IN A
WANNER AND AT APPUCATION RATES THAT WILL NOT RESULT IN LOSS Of
CHEMiCAl TO STORYWATER RUNOFF. MANUFACTURERs' LA8EL REQUIREWENTS
FOR APPLICATION RA.TES AND PROCEDURES SHALl. BE FC1LOYl£O.
6, BWPs SHAlL BE USED TO PREVENT OR TREAT CONTA",INATION OF
STQRIoIWATER RUNOFF BY pH MOOII"TING SOURCES, THESE SOURCES INCLUDE,
BUT ARE NOT UWITEO TO: BIJIJ( CEMENT, CEWENT KIlN OUST, FLY ASH. NEW
CONCRETE WASHING AND CURING WATERs. WASTE STREAMS CENERA TEO FROM
CONCRETE GRINDING ANO SAVIING, EXPOSED AGGREGATE PROCESSES, ANO
CONCRETE PUWPlNG ANO WI)(£R WASHOUT WATERS. PERWITTEES SHALL ADJUST
THE pH Of STORWWATER IF NECESSARY TO PRE'lENT VlQ.ATIONS Of WATER
QUAlITY STANDARDs.
7. PERJ,jITTEES SHALL OBTAIN Vof!ITTEN A.PPROVAL FROW ECOLOGY PRIOR TO
USING CHEWICAL TREA 1\IENT. OTHER THAN CARBON DIOXIDE OR ORY ICE TO
AD.lJST pH •
SUGGESTED B"'Ps,/BIoJP. TO BE USED:
B10IP CI:i1: CONCRETE HANOUNG
BWP Cl:i2: SAWCUTTING AND SURf'AONG POLLUTION PREVENTION
BlIP Cl53: MATERIAL OEU'ot:RY, STCRAGE ok CCiNTAINWENT
[1 EyENT"O= CONffiO! OEWATFRING
I, FOUNOATION, VAULT, ANO TRENCH DE-WATERING WATER, 'M-cIICH HAVE SlIoJILAR
CHARACTERISTICS TO STQRMWATER RUNOfF AT THE SITE.. SHALL BE
DISCHARGED INTO A CONTROLLEO CONVEYANCE SYSTEW PRIOR TO OISCHARGE TO
A SEOIWENT TRAP OR S£DlWENT POND.
2, a.£AN, NON-TURBIO OE-WATERING WATER, SUCH AS WELL-POINT GROUNO
WATER, CAN BE DISCHARGED TO SYSTE ... S TRIBUTARY TO, OR OIR£CTlY INTO
SURFACE WATERS Of THE STATE. AS SPEOFlEO IN ElEMENT 18, PROVIDED THE
DE-WATERING FLOW DOES NOT CAUSE EROSION OR FLOODING OF RECEIVING
WATERS, Cl£AN DE-WATERING WATER SHOULD NOT BE ROUTED THROUGH
STORWWATER SEQlr.t[NT PONDS,
3. OTHER OE-WATERING DISPOSAL OPTIONS WAY INCLUDE:
CI) INFILTRATION.
b) TRANSPORT OFT SITE IN A VEHICLE, SUCH AS A VAOJUM FLUSH TRUCK,
FOR l£GAL DIsPOSAl IN A WANNER THAT DOES NOT POllUTE STATE
WATERS.
c) ECOLOGY APPROVED ON-SITE CHEMICAL TREATMENT OR OTHER suITABl£
TREA1\IENT TE~OLOGIES.
d) SANITARy SEWER OISCHARGE WITH LOCAl. SEWER DISTRICT APPROVAl, IF
THERE IS NO OTHER OPTION.
e) USE OF A SEOII.IENTATION BA.G (DIRTBAG OR APPROVED EOUAL) VIITH OUTFALL
TO A OITCH OR SWAlE fOR S.r.tAll VOLUMES OF LOCALIZEO OE-WATERING.
4. HIGiLY lUREIiD CONTAWINATEO DEWATERING WATER FROt.I CONSTRUCTION
EQUIPMENT OP'ERATlON, ClAWSHELL OIGGlNG, CONCRETE TREr.rIE POUR, OR WORK
INSIDE A COfFERDAM SHALL BE HANOLEO SEPARAlElY FRClIot STORWWATER.
fI EMENT "1' MAINTAIN RMP,
I. INSPECT EROSON CONTROL OEVICES ON A WEEKLY BASIS AND AFTER EACH
RUNOFF E'lENT. WAKE NECESSARY REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE TO ENSURE
CONTINUED PERFORMANCE Of EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS,
2, """'EN SEOIWENT ACCUWlILATION IN S(DIWENTATION STRUCTURES, OTHER THAN
INLET PROTECTION OEVICES, HAS REACHED A POINT ONE-THIRD DEPTH OF
SEDIMENT STRUClURE OR O£VlCE, OR I. FLOW THROUGH THE DEVICE IS REDUCED
BY WORE THAN ONE-THIRD CAPAOTY, THE COfIITRACTOR SHALL R[WOVE AND
REPLACE DISPOSABlE DEVICES OR Cl£AN AND DISPOSE or SEDIMENT.
3. TEWPORARY EROSION AND SEDlWENT CONTROl BIoIP, SHALL 8( R£WOVED
'MTHIN 3D OAYS AFTER fINAl SITE STABIUZATION IS AOilEVED OR AFTER THE
TEMPORARY BMPs ARE NO LONGER NEEDED. mAPPEO SEDIMENT SHAll BE
REMOVED OR STABIUZED ON SITE. DISTURBED SOILS SHALL BE PERMANENTlY
STABIUZED.
fI EMENT '1" MANAGE" THE pgD-fer
I, PHASING or CONSTRUCTION:
CI) OEVELQP1.!ENT PROJECTS SHAll BE PHASED ~ERE FEASIBLE IN OROER TO
PREVENT, TO THE IoJAXI ... UW EXTENT PRACTICABlE, THE TRANSPORT Of
SEDIMENT FROM THE DEVELOPWENT SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION. REVEGETATION
Of EXPOSED AREAS ANO MAINTENANCE OF THAT 'o£GETATION SHALL BE AN
INTEGRAl PART « THE CLEARING ACTI""TIES FOR ANY PHASE.
b) a.£ARING AND GRADING ACTIVITIES FOR DEVELOPl.1ENTS SHALL BE PERWITTED
ONLY IF CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO AN APPROVED SITE DEVELOPWENT PLAN
(e.g., SUBOIVlSION APPROVAL) THAT ESTABUSHES APPROVED AREAS OF
CLEARING. GRADING, CUTTING ANO FllLlNG. """'EN ESTABUSHING THESE
PERWlrrrc CLEARING AND GRADING AREAS, CONSlDERAllON SHOULD BE (;IVEN
TO WINIMIZING REMOVAL OF EXISTING TREES AND MINlWIZING DISTURBANCE ANO
COMPACTION OF NATIVE SOLS EXCEPT AS NEEDEO FOR BUltDlNG PURPOSES.
THESE PER",ITTEO CLEARING AND GRADING AREAS AND ANY OTHER AREAS
REQUIRED TO PRESERVE CRITICAL OR SENSITIVE AREAS, BUFfERS, NATIVE
GROWTH PROTECTION EASEWENTS, OR TREE RETENTION AREAS AS WAY B£
REQUlREO BY LOCAl ..uRlSOICTIONS, SHALL BE DEUNEA TED ON THE SITE
PLANS ANO THE OEVELOPWENT SITE,
2. SEASONAL WORK UWITATIONS:
FRQI,j OCT06ER 1 THROUGH APRIL 30, CLEARING, GRADING, AND OTHER SOIL
OISTUR8lNG ACTIVITIES SHALL ONLY BE PERMITTED IF SHOWN TO THE
SATISFACTION OF THE LOCAL PERWITTING AUTHORITY THAT THE TRANSPORT Of
SEOIUENT rROM THE CONSTRUCTION SITE TO RECEIVING WATERS VIILL BE
PR(VENTUl THROUGH A COt.IBlNA TION Of THE FOllOV/lNG:
0) SITE CONDITIONS INCLUDING EXISTING VEGETATIVE COVERAGE, SLOPE, SOIL
TYPE, AND PRDXI",ITY TO RECEIVING WATERS; AND
b) UMITATIONS ON ACTIVITIES ANO THE EX1£ND or DlSTURBEO AREA$; AND
c) PROPOSED EROSION ANO SEDIMENT CONTROL UEASURES.
BASED ON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED AND LOCAl WEATHER CONOITIONS, THE
PROJECT LEAD IoJAY EXPAND OR RESTRICT THE SEASON.t.J. UMITATION ON SITE
DISlURSANCE. THE PRD.ECT LEAD SHALL TAKE ENFORCEMENT ACTION -SUCH
AS NOTICE OF ""Q.AllON, ADMINISTRATIVE OROER, PENALTY, OR STOP-'M:lRK
OROE:R UNDER THE FOlLOYIING ClRCU"'STANCES:
-IF, DURING THE COURSE OF ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTI""TY OR SOIL
DISTURBANCE OURING THE SEASONAL lIWITATION P£R100, SEDIMENT LEAVES
THE CONSTRUCTION SITE CAUSING A VIOLATION Of THE SURFACE WATER
DUAlITY STANDARD; OR
_ IF CLEARING ANO GRADING UWITS OR EROSIDN AND SEDIIoJENT CONTROLS
MEASURES SHOWN IN THE APPROVEO PLAN ARE NOT WAlNTAINEO.
THE FOLLOWING ACTI'o1mS ARE E)(£I.lPT FROM THE SEASONAl CLEARING AND
GRADING LIMITATIONS:
CI) ROUTINE WAINTENANCE ANO NECESSARY REPAIR Of EROSlON ANO SEDlwENT
CONmOL BWps;
b) ROUTINE MAINTENANCE Of PUBLIC 'AOUllES OR EXISTING unuTY
STRUCnlRES THAT DO NOT EXPOSE THE SOIL OR RESULT IN THE REWOVAL Of"
THE VEGETATIVE CO'o£R TO SOlL: ANO
c) ACTIVITIES WHERE THERE IS ONE HUNORED PERC(NT INFil TRA TlON OF
SURf Act: WATER RUNOFF WITHIN THE SITE IN APPROVED AND INSTAI.l.ED
EROSION AND SEOIWENT CONTROL FACIUTIES,
3, COORDINATE 'MTH UTIUTIES AND OTHER CONTRACTORS
THE PRlUARY PRD.ECT PROPONENT SHALL EVAlUATE, 'MTH INPUT FRClIot UTIUTIES
AND OlHER CONTRACTORS, THE STQIU.1WATER MANAGEWENT REQUIREMENTS FOR
THE ENTIRE PROJECT, INCLUDING THE UTILIllES, WHEN PREPARING THE
CONSTRUCTION S'ftPPP.
•. INSPECTION AND WONITORING:
CI) A CERTIFlED PROFESSIONAL IN EROSION AND S[OIIoJENT CONTROL SHALL BE
IDENTIFIED AT THE PRE-CONSTRUCTION WEETING ANO SHALl BE ON-SITE
OR ON-CALL AT AlL TI"'ES. EWERGENCY CONTACT INFORWATION SHALL B£
KEPT ON-SITE. CERTIFlCATION r.lAY BE THRQUGi THE CONSTRUC1ION SITE
EROSION AND SEOIMENT CONTROL CERTIFICATION PRQGRAr.I OFFEREO BY
WSOOT, ASSOClATED GENERAl CONTRACTORS OF WASHINGTON -EOUCATION
rOUNDATlON, OR ANY EQUIVAlENT LOCAL OR NATIONAL CERTlFlCATION
AND/OR TRAINING PRQGRAW.
b) If' INSPECTION AND/OR WATER MONITORING or SITE RUNOfF REVEALS THAT
THE BMP, IDENTlFlEO IN THE CONSTRUCTION Sv,ppp ARE INADEOUATE, lHE
CONTRACTOR SHALl IWWEDIATEL Y ADO BYP. TO THE S'M"PP AS
NECESSARY.
4, THE CONsmUCTlON S'M'PP SHALL BE RETAINEO ON-SITE. THE
CONTRACTOR'S TESC RECORD Of RAINFAll, TESC IoJEASURES. AND INSPECTION
SHALL 8£COWE PART OF THE SYof'PP, THE CONSTRUCTION SWPPP 9W.L BE
WOOIFlED BY THE CONTRACTOR'S TESC RECORD WI-lENEVER THERE IS A
SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN lHE DESIGN. CONSTRUCTION, OPERATION, OR
WAiNTENANCE Of ANY BMP.
NPOES PERt.lIT REQUIREMENTS
SITE lOG BOO!(
A SIT( LOG BOOI< SHALL CONTAIN A RECORD Of THE IMPlEWENTATION Of' THE SYOf'PP
AND OTHER PERWIT REOUIREWENTS INCLUDING THE INSTALLATION AND WAINTENANC[ OF
8\!Pe, SITE INSP£CTIONS AND STORWWATER MONITORING.
SITE INSPECTIONS
SITE INSPECTIONS SHALL INCLUDE AlL AREAS OISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES,
ALl BWPs, AND ALL STORWWA TER OISCHARGE PONTS. STORMWA TER SHALl BE
""SUALL Y EXAI,IINEO FOR THE PRESENCE Of SUSPENOED SEOII.IENT, TURBIDITY,
OISCC1ORATlON, AND OIL SHEEN. INSP£CT~S SHALL EVAlUATE THE [FF[CTI'lENESS
Of BMP. AND DETERMINE IF IT IS NEcrSSARY TO INSTALl, MAINTAIN, OR REPAIR BMPs
TO Ir.lPROVE THE QUAUTY OF STOR"'WA TER OISCHARGES.
BASEO ON THE RESULTS Of THE INSPECTION, THE CONTRACTOR SHAlL CORRECT THE
PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED AS FOllOWS:
A, MAKE APP'ROPRIATE CORRECTION WITHIN 7 OAYS OF TEH INSPECTION: AND
B. FULLY IWPLEWENT ANO WAlNTAIN APPROPRIATE SOURCE CONTROL AND/OR
TREAllo!ENT BMP. AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, BUT NO LATER THAN 10 DAYS OF TEH
INSPECnON: ANO
C. DOCUMENT BMP IMPLEMENTATION AND WAiNTENANCE IN THE SITE LOG BOOK.
SITE INSPECTIONS SHALL BE CONDUCTED AT LEAST ONCE EVERY CAlENOAR WEEK AND
'MTHIN 24 HOURS Of" ANY Dl5O-!ARGE FROM THE SITE. THE INSPECTION rREQUENCY
FOR TEMP'ORARILY STABILIZEO, INACTIVE SITE WAY BE REOUCED TO ONCE EVERY
CALENDAR WON'TH.
THE INSPECTOR SHALL SUMMARIZE THE RESULTS Of EACH INSP£CTION IN AN
INSPECTION REPORT OR CHECKUST AND BE ENTERED INTO, OR ATTACHEO TO, THE SITE
LOG BOOK. AT A MINIt.lUI.4, EACH INSPECTION REP'ORT OR CHECKLIST SHALL INCLUOE:
o. INSPECTION DATE ANO TlIoJE.
b. WEATHER INFORMATION, GENERAL CONOITIONS DURING INSPECTION ANt)
APPROXIWATE AMOUNT or PREOPITATION SINCE THE LAST INSPECTION, ANO 'MTHIN
THE LAST 24 HOURS.
C. A SUWI.4ARY OR UST OF ALL BMP, ....,.,ICH HAVE BEEN IMPLEWENTUl, INCLUOING
OBSERVATIONS OF AlL EROSION/SEDIMENT CONmOL smUCTURES OR PRACTICEs'
d. THE rOllOWlNG SHAll BE NOTED:
I. LOCATIONS or BWP'. INSPECTED,
Ii. lOCATIONS OF ar.t'P. THAT NEED MAINTENANCE,
m. THE REASON r.lAlNTENANCE IS NEEDED,
iv. LOCATIONS Of BWP. THAT FAIlED TO OPERATE AS DESIGNED OR INTENDED, A .... IO
v. LOCA 1IONS WI-lERE ADDITIONAL OR DIFFERENT Br.lPs ARE NEEDED, AND THE
REASON(S) M-iY.
s. A DESCRIPTION Of" STORMWA TER DISCHARGEO FROM THE SITE. THE INSPECTOR
SHAlL NOTE THE PRESENCE OF SUSPENDED SEOI"'ENT, TURBID WATER, OISCOLORATION,
AND/OR OIL SHEEN, AS APf'UCABLE.
f. ANY WATER QUAUTY UQNITORING PERFORMED DURING INSPECTION.
g. GENERAl COMWENTS ANO NOTES, INCLUDING A BRIEF OESCRIPTION or ANY BWP
REPAIRS, WAiNTENANCE OR INSTAl.LA.TlON MADE AS A RESULT OF THE INSPECTION.
h. NAr.lE. TITLE. ANO SlGNAlURE Of' TEH PERSON CONOUCTING SITE INSPECTION: AND
THE FOLLOWING STATEt.lENT: ~I CERTIFY THAT THIS REPORT IS TRUE, ACCURATE, ANO
COt.Ipl£TE. TO THE BEST OF MY KNO'NlEOGE AND BEUn".
Il.ffiBI~CY SAr.rPUNG REOIJIRE. ... ENTS
I, SAMPLING WETHODS/EFfECTI~ DATES
CI.BEGlNN1NG OCTOBER I, 200B. If' CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY WILL INVOLVE THE OISTURBANCE OF I
ACRES OR WORE. THE PERWITTEE SHALl CONDUCT nlRBIDITY SAMPLING PER CONOITION S4.C.
2. SAAJPUNG FREQUENCY
CI.SAr.lPLING SHALL BE CONDUCTED AT LEAST DNc( EVERY CAlENOAR Yl£EK, 'MiEN THERE IS A
DISCHARGE OF STORMWATER (OR AUTHORIZED NON-STQRUWATER) FRClIot THE SITE.. SAr.lPLES
SHAll BE REPRESENTATIVE or THE FLOW AND CHARACTERISTICS OF THE OISOlARGE.
b. WHEN THERE IS NO DISCHARGE DURING A CALENDAR WEEK, SAWPLING IS NOT REQUIREO.
e.SAMPUNG IS NOT REQUIRED OUTSIDE OF NORWAL WORKING HOURS OR DURING UNSAfE CONDITIONS.
IF A PERr.lIfTE[ IS UNABLE TO SAIoIPlE DURING A WONITORING PERIOD, THE DISCHARGE WONITORlNG
REPORT (OIrolR) SHAlL INCLUDE A BRlEF £XPLANAliON.
,s. SAMPLING LOCATIONS
CI.SAWPLING IS REQUIRED AT AlL OISCHARGE POINTS ...,..ERE STORMWATER (OR AUTHORIZEO
NON-STQIU.1WATER) IS DISCHARGED OfF-SITE.
b.ALL SAr.lPUNG POINT(S) SHALl BE I[)(NTlFlED ON lHE SWI"PP SITE WAP ANO BE CLEARLY WARKED
IN THE FlELD WITH A FLAG, TAP'E, STAKE OR OTHER ""SlBLE WARKER.
4. SAWPLING AND ANAlYSIS METHODS
CI.nlRSIDITY ANALYSIS SHALL BE PERFORWED WITH A CAlIBRATEO ruRBIDITY METER (lURBIDIMETER),
EITHER ON-SITE OR AT .AN ACCREDITED LAB. THE RESULTS SHALL BE RECOROED IN THE SITE LOG
BOOI< IN NEPHELClIotElRIC TURBIDITY UNITS (NTU).
b. TRANSPARENCY ANAL YSI$ SHAlL Be: PERFORMEO ON-SITE WITH A I % INCH OIAMETER, 60
CENTIWETER (CM) LONG TRANSPARENCY TUBE. THE RESULTS SHALL BE RECORDED IN THE SITE
LOG BOOK IN CEN1IIoIETERS (CW). TRANSPARENCY lUBES ARE AVAILABLE FROt.I:
hltp' Ilwalermoollm:ioClOO['ip CQ!'D 19aa",Otreom html
PARAMETER I UNITS I ANALYTICAL METHOD SAMPLING BENCHMAR
fRECUENCY VALUE
TURBIDITY I NTU I SH2130 OR EPA IBO.1 'WEEKLY. IF 2:5 NTU
DISCHARGING
TRANSPARENCY I '" 1 IN~~~'ffc~~6~~ROR 'WEEKLY, IF 31 CM
DISCHARGING
ECOLOGY GUIDANCE
:i. lURBIOITY/TRANSPARENCY BENCHWARK VALUES
THE BENCHWARK VALUE FOR TURBIDITY IS 25 NlU (NEPHELOWETRIC TURBIDITY UNITS): AND THE
BENCHWARK VALUE FOR mANSPARENCY IS 31 CW,
CI.DlRAIOIIX?§ 249 NIl! OR TRANsPARENCy 30-7 CM'
IF DISCHARGE TURBIOITY IS eREA TER THAN 25 NTU, BUT LESS THAN 250 NTU: OR If' DISCHARGE
TRANSPARENCY IS LESS THAN 31 001, BUT GREATER THAN 6 001, THE CESCl SHALL:
1. REVIEW THE SWI"f>P FOR COIoJPUANCE WllH CONOITION S9 AND MAKE APPROPRIATE RE""SlONS
VIITHIN 7 OAYS Of' THE OISCHARGE THAT EXCEEDEO THE BENCHMARK; AND
II. FULLY IIoJPLEMENT ANO WAlNTAlN APPRoPRIATE SOURCE CONTROl AND/OR TREATMENT
BI.IP3 AS SOON AS POSSlBl£, BUT VIITHIN 10 CAYS Of THE DISCHARGE THAT EXCEEDED THE
BENCHr.lARK: AND
Ill. OOCUr.lENT BWP IMPLEMENTATION ANO MAINTENANCE IN THE SITE Loo 6001<.
b DIRf!lOIIY ?5O NTII OR GBEAJER re TRANSPARENCY 6 Q,j pR lESS'
IF DISCHARGE IS GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO 250 NTU; OR IF OISCHARGE TRANSPARENCY IS
LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO 6 CIoi. THE CESCL SHALl:
1. NOTIFY ECOLooy BY PHONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CONOITlCiN 55.A.: AND n. RE""EW THE SWI"PP FOR COWPLIANCE WITH CONDITION S9 AND MAKE APPROPRIATE REVISIONS
VIITHIN 7 DAYS OF THE DISOlARGE THAT EXCEEDEO THE BENCHWARK; ANe
m. f\JLL Y IMPLEMENT AND WAINTAIN APPROPRIATE SOURCE CONTROL ANO/OR IREA 1\IENT Br.lPs AS
SOON AS POSSIBLE. BUT WITHIN 10 DAYS Of' OISCHARGE THAT EXCEEDED THE BENOlWARK;
Iv. DOCUWENT BMP IMPLEMENTATION AND IoJAlN1£NANCE IN THE SIT[ LOG BOOK: AND
CONTINUE TO SAMPLE DISCHARGES DAILY UNTIl:
I, TURBIDITY IS Z5 NlU (OR LOWER): OR
2. TRANSPARENCY IS 31 CIoi OR (OR GREATER); OR
J. THE CESCL HAS DEMONSTRATED COMPLIANCE WITH THE WATER QUAliTY STANOARD FOR
lURBIOITY:
CI .NO WORE THAN :i NTU OVER BACKGROUND nlRBIOITY, IF BACKGROUNO IS LESS THAN
50 NlU, OR
b.NO MORE THAN 10 X OVER BACKGROUND lURSIOITY, IF BACKGROUND IS 50 NTU OR
GREATER: OR
•• THE DISCHARGE STOPS OR IS EliWINA TUl
NOIT' AI I SfClIONS RmRfNCfQ IN THE SAWP! INY REOIIiRfMENl'5 C.t.N BE lOCATED !Ii..1I::If...NPDES...ffRMll. 100% SUBMITTAL
j , :::! ZZ
c, « O~
, 0:: I-l'l
'1 en I-z~ , w W J: '~~ en "Ow~o::<{
Zw12u.$:
1;l0:: 02'
I.,WO ~o ~ >-!z « -w
~
" i
-:;j
'~iI
" .,
"
I ",
•
~ o~
. .;
! " ClCD w:ho Z III U)gg
or:( ~ g~:;; >c(~!5;n "0-<&tri £~~ 5!O;:r.liD
>CD ,~§
C(CD~!lif C c( ... ~
o .. z •
<
REVISIONS: APPD.
DATE: APRIL. 2012
DESIGN: BRO
DRAWN: CLK
CHECKED:
REVISION
NUMBER:
SCALE: NON[
PROJECT NUMBER:
RENTOOOO-OO15
~
,:; DRA1rlNG nIE:
eclWOO6REN 100000015
, :~ SHEET NO •
~ OF17
C6
I ~ I
SEE DETAIL 'A' /
PORTION OF GOVT LOT 1, SECTION 32, T 24 N, R 5 E, WM
------------"'-I I IAI<' SE""R EAScM'" '",,-~.'.' V
/~ fr~~~910" : ~
I
/ / I Ir 10 "DE S7~~~230529 ""-:1 < REC 'W "'-
' Ii!-"" , )S<
" I rZI
"" '"'' .,'"'" 'l::~;:;;", " / \ "'-, 'yo CONSTRue " .~ ", \ ,4'~~::-1~~~~~' , ~ ~;O,_ _ _ _ _ ,
\
OF ORWEl "'-",-CI~ AZARD LIMITS _____ \
.... '\.""2\~ "" -"", r= ~ _____ X--_" __ '\ __ ~'~.-<: ----X-, \ __ , ""~~ ~~~----~:-" \ '" .,~~ ~~~""'~ .O~'<'<,o. "'-\"
.; "'c;;;::... o!?l ~'4'f.9 NORTH
=
01530 50
SCALE: 1" = 30'
Pi I I .\JJ '11
I
I II 1/,/7 11/
/
I II 1 / /
/
/
I II /
/
I
/
/
I U /
I
I
~ • Ii
0
0
0
~ I ~ l~1
0
0
" u • I II~I
~ t+-i
I~
'" u
0
I~ 0
0
0
0
I!
/' ;;-
I :
0
'" N
I~
" v
0 I "UM
.-, """" ''>l> '" , ...... -L-7542 ~ % ~~ "'('oi='................. \ " .'~~ -0:'4'41'31' '" \ '",-" .,' ~~ ~~ ---~'-'\ " ' \ ':::l., '''' ~~ _ "'~ "'--", "
\> .• ' "'"" '-c:::~~ '/ \ 200' SHORELIN
rONE
\ >~~, 1$\ I "~. '. '-"\!-.-.,., , r ,,_"" \
-""" i '-" 'v~,"~." / '../ \ 'j'.~~, .:--... -~ \~~~ '''-..... "'-~ "'-, \\
DETAIL 'A'
;:'1..1-\1.1::: 1"=5'
.. "'"-, ~, . '''''., , ~~'. " .. "--::-0-...~;C-~'\ "_"" '#'" ~",~~_ ~ ___ , \ '''''''':';,' ,'" --, "''''11' ''-c'~ '\ '~'''~"",,,~ _1?§4~7' '." ........ , _~.~" ''''>, "'~" , '''''~ '"",,,.~
'1< .,...... .#,;~ 'i... l: '" "'-~%.<'~"-'" / " \ '-'''''."
Q~W!iQ
aTY OF RENTON
STD PLAN Foo7
"". "" '-~>'" '. ~\ \ ·Is." R.15O.1I!'· ~r:' . " "'-..::..,,, "~. "-"'-" \ s,-"<R"NG is.;.\ \ _~. _"""., , _""_', '" \ ''I "-"'~" '--'., ~_ ''1
?, \. \.~ '<t£.' 'CO" '-'::~~,
"i" """~ , ,~ ''''':1''",,, .\.~ 'C' 'it, , , ""'''!i~~' ""-_
L COMPACTED SUBGRAOE
CEMENT CONCRETE SIDEWALK
NOT TO ~~
LOT 1
LUA,05-069,LLA
-_ 4' '~''-'.': "-_ \ --. \_~
'. , ~"' LOTA -\ "~.~~ \~\"' ... ~. '~"45S' SF (GROSS) '" TRAIL 1 \ . rf~,," '\'~ ~
, '''-., ~ " '.-. .," " '-~fl , .•..•... ' .. ,\ oN' OO"\~"". " _ R_6000: \~' R-lO' 1\ "h
""" .. ~, R-5O • R-6<)OO ~ l-9522 , __ \ " \ " " , " "'""" , ~ -' , l "S;~,,'~ i'''''' := ,I, --:: " '--~ .. _;;~ I \ z
OJ"')}-., "'75'5651 '" >< .... ~ ~"'. R_4. \ I "
00 '"" """""
" ~ / 1: "" l-92." J ~,,--, -" -. "'''' / ~~ ~~ "'116'550' J.< ~ I j !; '-. "', , " '~' N83'J5!h • '~~'-~. .~ '%'<" -I
-'0, " . s." R_2500
'.;>' .~... NaYJ5·,.', \ '-30.00'
1-~..>, " ~ '--'. I !to """" .-,:-" " • "" " , ,,\ .UFFtR I \,,' ";':' U~:I'T,OF .>)'.~~....... -, R-25 00' \ ~"~ \ N \1 _, R[ MENT REC. NO. ~~""'. \ L~35.B9: "'~ ,F:f '" R"J5.00' I _:\ / ;~~080741 A'>lO ' . . . """ .. , ~"'I" '" S '-72.29'"If} / \ t 7Sffi..080743 /'~ "" I. . \. "%~>s~1' R"I20Il!" ""16'20'41') L~ ';>~A . . -" " l-6<)" , ~,. I .. ' 0-\ '--\ .. ~\.~ "29"117 \ I ~~" .~<~. '\ /' "'. ~~! \ \7~ / \ I~'" ~r~""
".', <i!'~\tl '/ 1'\ "'<j>
".''''.. ...... \' I \' (1' W,DE SANITARY'\. ''''/is,.. "." __" \ b EASEMENT '\ ·,1,(1,,-.~. .... ~""-,,_ I,-~i~%o 7106230529 .... '::.~.... "', "l I \'\
'-V ........ "-',,~. -.... I " II
6S' ~'" '. ~-.~ ..... 100% SUBMITTAL
5
0..
-' ~
f-Z-,
0-~~ «I-'j f-
.
" Z :::.::: "Ow "N
ZZ
0 0
1-0 z;;: WI
0::0:::CJ) o « u.u.S:
3 .
I-d
II
~¥1
,I
." i,'
-w 0::0:::
§?O
f-)-z« ~~
02
)-0 I-f-_Z OW
z
(9
:::i «
-' ~ f-
.;
~ ! iii GIIIl W~o zw Woo
.O~ ~~ Eg.:~
~ "~ w-«B"<
cO
rn~ 0"' _0 ~~~ >(11 ';"5:~ «(II ;~~ C« i • z •
D
0::
REVISIONS: APPD.
DATE: APRIL, 2012
DESIGN: BRD
DRAWN: OJ(
CHECKED:
REVISION
NUYBER:
SCALE: 1-= .30'
PROJECT NUMBER:
RENTOOOO-0015
DRAWING FILE:
l~ ecIMOO7RENTOOoo0015
Sf{EE.i NO.
C7
';':J OF17
I /
I
~
/'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I @
, ,
o 20 co 80
I ~"
• ~ .n
II
0 r z
II
u •
---I !,'
" '" ---It
0
0 v
Ii
0
0
0
0
Ij
---0:
11
v
N
1 ~~ ..
"-v
o 1')1 I ]
PORTION OF GOV'T LOT 1, SECTION 32, T 24 N, R 5 E, WM
"" "'-",-
"",'75' ru<PORARY '-.....'-.....
( CONSTRUCTION (A5[IoI[NT """
"-OTYJ!.RillON_ -........ \ ........ ..::,.,
@
"
\ .............
\ "
\ "
\ "
/
I
I
\ 200' SHOREUNE' ....... "'" r IoIANAG(IoI[NT ZONE , '" \ "'--'--. \ --'\
~
'--
LOTA-
lJU!! SF (GWSS)
;
;,e'
I
~
6.0' TRAlL 6.0' iRAI.
3.0' ell 3.0' J.o· C(l 3.0' ,
2S1oI1N: I ___ ~~~N~
~ .I'_~ND 6'" ~N ~ ---~dZc: -----,~2J; .•
. "'["['1 " ' ,v~l' ~.-
\
LEFT --;:---, ',-f RIGHT LEFT .1 1 --"1 ' __ j.J 11--) RIGHT J L L 3~ DEPTH, FINE BARK IoIULCH (5[£ NOTE) J L.:. 3"1oI1N DEPTH, FINE BARK MULCH (SEE NOTE) ~:~1D CEOr:~: :;~:A~~ ~PACTED SMOOTH =in~l C£OT£X~Tr~O~~~~n~ COWPACTEO SIo400TH
ROlLER 6"I'tN COUP DEPTH. GRAVEL BORROW ROLlER 6-uJN COUP DEPTH, GRAVEL BORROW
(1oIIRAfl 5O(b OR EOUAL) (YlRAFI 500x OR EOUAl)
FlU IS REQUIRED IN SOW[ AREAS .t SHAlL. flLL IS REQUIRED IN SOME ARrAs .t SHALL
BE CRA\otL BORROW WSOOT 9-0J.14(1) BE GRAVEL BORROW WSOOT 9-03.14(1)
SECTION A-A
NOTE:
FlN[ BARK MULCH SHALL CONSIST Of
flRjI-IEULOCK BARK, ," MrNUS PARTIClE SIZE,
PAOFle TOPSOILs, INC OR APPROVED EOIJAL
SECTION B-B
TYPICAL TRAIL X-SECTION TYPICAL TRAIL X-SECTION
t, '"
'41t{8.j<",.
'lOT TO SCALE
< '"" % (or
L
tlOT TO SCAlE
CONSTRUCTION NOTES
o
o
o
o
CD
@
CONSTRUCT 6' WIDE WALkING TRAIL PER TRAIL 5[CTIONS 'A' .t '8',
REWOVE, HAUl AND DISPOSE or EXISTING ORG.ANlC IoIAlERlAl WITHIN TRAIL
5(CTlClN OffSITE.
INSTAll FILTER FABRIC SILT FENCE AROUND STOCKPILE AREA.
SEE TESC PlAN SHEET C.l.
CONTRACTOR TO INSTALl .&.ll EROSION CONTRa.. 8t,IP'S SHOWN ON SHEET
CJ PRIOR TO COWIolENClNG LAND OISTURBItm ACTl\'1T1[S.
CONTRACTOR SI-IALl LMT OISTURSANCE or EXISTING VEGETATION TO THE
GR(ATE5T EXTENT POSSIBLE. All DISTURBED AREAS SHALL 8[
STABlUZEO PER WltlCAT\ON PlANS.
CONTRACTOR SHAll ACCESS PROPERTY fROU NORTH fOR CONSTRUCTION
AND KEEP LAKE WASHINGTON BLW N CLEAN BY SWEEPING DAILY (SEE
TE5C PlAN SH(ET el). C{).ISTRUCTlQN ActtSS EA5(t.4[NT TO BE
COOROINA TED THROUGH CITY or RENTON 6: PRCf'[RTY OWNER.
AREAS OUTSiOE HIGH "'$IB1l1lY FENCE TO REMAIN UNDISTURBED 'MTH THE
EXCEPTION or AREA ENCLOSED BY TRAIL 1 .t: 2 AS 810 "LlERNA TE ".
5([ NOTE 6, SHEET CJ.
SUMMARY OF GRADING QUANTITIES
-PARCEL SIZE: 3.09 Acm:S ,'34.5Jl Sf)
-WORK AREA: I.SO ACRES (65,352 SF)
-ORGANIC IoI"TERlAL TO BE ROIOVEO FROU SIT[ .t OISPOSED IN AN
APPROVED L.ANOfllL fOft TRAIL CONStRUCnON IS 250 CUBIC YAROS
(372 TQt.lS). QUANTITY TO BE VERIFIED BY CONTRACTOR.
-GRA~L BORROW TO BE IMPORTED fROM APPROVED BORROW fACIUTY fOR
TRAIl CONStRUCTION IS 230 CUBIC YARDS (370 TONS).
-FINE BARK MULCH TO BE IMPORTED rROIot APPROVED BORROW fACUJTY fOR
TRAlL CONSTRUcnON IS 92 CUBIC YARDS (138 TONS).
100% SUBMITTAL
j
0.-, C!)-ZZ ~<:t: 00 00:: I-f-~I-z~ C!)~ WI f-Wa:o::w
z W ° « wo::L1.u..'5:
~o 0"" C!)>->-0 _ I-f-
"'l «-' <:t: -Z ='~ otl!
~ f-
~
CIIII)
ZIII
«I->« 111-
CO _0
>CIl O(CIl 0« • ~
REVISIONS:
00
~
~~
oo~
~~
.~ g.~
:E'¢
:go; <0 ~~
~
APPD.
.,'----
DATE: APRIL. 2012
DESIGN: BRO
DRAWN: ru<
CHECKED:
REVISION
NUMBER:
SCALE:'· .. 40'
PROJECT NUMBER:
RENTOOOO-0015
DRAWING FILE:
I~ ~IMOOSRENTOOOOOO15
. SHEET NO.
C8
OF17
:2 :s:
w
L{)
0::
Z
<;t
C\I
I-
~
Z o
I-
()
W
CI)
I-o
...J
I-
~
(!)
u. o
z o
I-
0:: o a.
--
NO.l8NIHSlfM 'NO.lN3~
N01N3C1 ~O AJ.I:J
~o~
11'vCI1 >i33C1:J A Villi
S311~O~d .lN3V'JN8111f ll~.l
n,
"."
m
~----4-----II-+--~\---~----{------+------I~~~5~'LL,'~~ , ... ,
: '" 1-----4-----;_+--~II--I-----~---·--+------.I-~~r~L·~'-11
""" '" 1-----4-----I~-----'-t------~------_t------II_~~~· ~~
'''''
'" 1-----~----I_+---~" .. l.lf·---'If---f------t------r-~~:·;~~ ~--: 50££
','r
I I I I I I
OOg9'6~S'!1l\l' :9U04d
8~!i£-!:iOOB6 UOIBU!~SIlM an"Elllaa
3S enU911V IlIBI)· 511>'
·ONI 83l.YI:JOSSVON't'
SNVAa alAva •
It;
BL'sr",,,,, I~
SlN31'13/10tldl'li ll'lHl. JO ON]i I
~."IW<I"'" -fXm*0'---';f! I gg·!K'''' .... ru §£ Vi
Z llVtll Vo -£,"S6+1 I
• " llYH! :I -00'00+0 '1
c
:;:
~ I~~,"o",
" .. """.,
,n' I· ,m
'" I" ",,'" .. /",'09'0
8m '3" ~
\.. ~ '-",'" f~~
I" , 'V'" i' .. ,xroo" ~,
c
\
c
C
M
,
~
J
J
I -V 96·Lr .. ,;j'; -r--"-"-----"
L l1YH! :) -Zt'lH I
t------"z :JIYtI! yo 6la'9+
I.!
~
"""7-----. -"
~ I
3 ,
" ,
~r-----..... ---,
N • ,
< "Sf .... 313 z
~ 1""" 'OY"'I" 00'00" [,
~r-1 71:,
§! I~ 1--, l-+--fl'
I
~ ", tr"':
L i ·h~: I !ll\I-l-NlVlc10001U f .~1I'f'1:I1 :>-&6'9l+Z I
•
,
'!09'SC -A]13
I \1I'9C-A313 \
"'" ,,,., . OOOO:l)J
r--tllVI:I1 1/~I"'-;;--OO'OO+or-1
-Z llVI:I1 V:> In:6'H --_ ... --
\ ,
\
--~ --\ 1""--"--
. / c
I ,
i
, ,
, , , ,
i ~8'!it·,\313 ,
L 11vI:I1 1/:> .: ~'69+; ,
• Z rl:l1 1/:> -10'00+0 I
I
I
c 0
M
-- - - - ---- ---
--l
j:!:
I-
:::a:
CC
:::> en
z~ ~:i
~c g'Z£
~~ <N r-nf
~§ w..: nr
8
.. ~ 0
W,II C>
C .... -C> v iL> • .-c Ob ff]f ..,"
c .... " ~ ~w f--~
"' z S"9f
~ ~
00' ..
'w
-" .sru:.
~~ ""'
~
~i ,'"
....!ru:.
~ 0'0'
-!KIT.
1 ,'"
....!!ill:. ,n
c .. 00 • w " 0 .... ~
LL:>
Ob ., ffjf ",,,
<, .... I
~w f--~
"' 8 • c
e ..
0
00
{]'Sf • v
ZOll< .. "
9Z"1!f c v
'" • v
IS'sr ,."
"" 8
L-6f • v
oO'S('
nf
ll'!K'
L"Sf iji
M
CIi'it'
nf
"'" nf
C
':'
M
lO'1lt
Hf
tS'lf :0
9'lf " Og'tt
nt
Klt
Z'lf
trtt
Z'lC
Os'gc
f'lC
08'"
..
W" c .... ~ v LL> • N o~ ff ," ",,,
8 .... "
• ~~ N
f--u
"' rlf
Q£~
9'~
0
00
~
09'gc
... "
O<'~ 0 N
l"SC ~
Olo'OC •. ~
"'." :0
6'~ • 0
OZ'OC
L'"
orgt 0 v
~'gr • 0
00'"
l'~r
06'IOf 0 c
~ to'lOf • 0
~ 99"l:f
~~ S'lif
•
-- - --
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX B
WETLAND A RATING FORM AND DATA PLOT FORMS
P:IrlRENTOOOOOOI5\0600INFOICrltlc81 AraBS RepornFinallCIIticaJ Areas Repo!f CIty of Ren/on May Creek Tran.doc
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Critical Areas Report
April 2012
I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
.1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wetland nrune or number Wetland A
WETLAND RATING FORM -WESTERN WASHINGTON
Version 2 -Updated July 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users
Updated Oct. 2008 with the new WDFW definitions for priority habitats
Name of wetland (if known): __ -'W<!£jet"'la"'n"'duA"-______________ _ Date of si te visit: __ ---"3~-2£!:1-:J121_
Rated by: ___ .....>2S2CO>!!t!.t2S~WCl!a!!rt"-s _____ Trained by Ecology? Yes-x" No __ Date oftraining: __ --ll.!.1-:Jl"'5::'-0~6i..
SEC:_~3~2~_ TWNSHP:_---.£24~N!L RNOE:_~51.JE!L.. Is S/TIR in Appendix D? Yes ___ No X
Map of wetland unit: Figure' _______ Estimated size _____ _
SUMMARY OF RATING
Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland: 1 _____ 11 ____ _ III_--,X=>-_ IV ___ _
Category [= Score> 70
Category [[ = Score 51 -69
Category [II = Score 30 -50
Category [V = Score < 30
Score for Water Quality Functions
Score for Hydro[ogic Functions
Score for Habitat Functions
TOTAL Score for Functions
Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTCS of Wetland 1 ____ 11 __ _
Final Category (choose the "highest" category from above")
Summary of basic information about the wetland unit
Wetland Unit has Special Wetland HGM Class
Characteristics used for Ratin"
Estuarine Denressional X
Natural Herit"'e Wetland Riverine
DOl! Lake-frio!!'.
Mature Forest Slone
Old Growth Forest Flats
Coastal La.won Freshwater Tidal
Interdunal
None of the above X Check if unit has multiple
HOM classes oresent
8
4
[8
30
Does not apply x
III
Does the wetland being rated meet any ortbe criteria below? lfyou answer YES to any of the questions below you will . . ~ need to Drotect the wetland accordinl! to the reR:ulations rel!ardinl! the snecial characteristIcs ound in the wetland.
Check List for Wetlands that Need Additional Protection
lin addition to the orotection recommended for Its cateporv)
YES NO
SPI. Has the wetland unit been documented as a habitatfor any Federally listed Threatened or
Endangered animal or plant species (TIE species)?
X For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate
state or federal database.
SP2. Has the wetland unit been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or
Endangered animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the
X wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species
are categorized as Category 1 Natural Heritage Wetlands (see p. 19 of data for~).
SP3. Does the wetland unit contain individuals of Priority species listed by the WDFWfor the state? X
SP4. Does the wetland unit have a local significance in addition to its/unctions? For example, the
wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or X
in a local management Dian as having soecial significance.
To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to determine the Hydrogeomomhic Class of the wetland being rated.
The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands in to those that function in sinular w.I)'S. This simplifies the questions n«ded to answer how ""u the wetland
fimctions. The Hydrogeomaphic Class of a wetland can be deImnined using the key below. See p. 24 fur more detUled instructions on classifYing wetlands.
Wetland Rating Form -Western Washi.ngton, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 1 of9
Wetland name or number Wetland A
Classification of Vegetated Wetlands for Western Washington
Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides (I.e. except during floods)? 10:il-go to 2 YES -the wetland class is Tidal Fringe
If yes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)?
YES -Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO -Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine)
([your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use theformsfor Riverine wetlands. ([it is a Salovater Tidal Fringe it
is rated as an Estuarine wetland Wetlands that were call estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt
Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earliereditions, and
this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the term "Estuarine" wetland is kept. Please
note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed (see p. ).
2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface water
runoff are NOT sources of water to the unit. 10:il-go to 3 YES -The wetland class is Flats
If your wetland can be classified as a ~~Flats" wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands.
3. Does the entire wetland meet both of the following criteria?
___ The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores ofa body of permanent open water (without any
vegetation on the surface) where at least 20 acres (8ha) in size;
___ At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 (2 m)? 10:il-go to 4 YES -The wetland class is Lake-fringe (Lacustrine Fringe)
4. Does the entire wetland meet all of the following criteria?
___ The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual).
___ The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may
flow subsurface, as sheet flow, or in a swale without distinct banks.
___ The water leaves the wetland without being impounded?
NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these types of wetlands except occaSionally in very small and
shallow de ressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than J foot deep).
-go to 5 YES -The wetland class is Slope
5. Does the entire wetland meet all of the following criteria?
___ The unit is in a valley or stream channel where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or
river.
___ The overbank flooding occurs at least once every two years.
NOTE: The riverine unit can contain depressions thaI are filled with water when the river is not flooding.. 00-go to 6 YES -The wetland class is Riverine
6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time of
the year. This means that any outlet, if present is hi her than the interior of the wetland.
NO -0 to 7 ES -The wetland class is De ressional
7. Is the entire wetland located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding. The unit does not
pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The
wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet.
No -go to 8 YES -The wetland class is Depressional
8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classiJY and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base ofa
slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a depressional wetland has a zone of flocxling along its sides. GO
BACK AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT
AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identiJY the appropriate class to use for the
rating system if you have several HGM classes present within your wetland. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in
the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the class listed in column 2 is less
than 10% of the unit, classiJY the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area.
llGAI Classes H'ithin the wetland unit beil1f! rated HGM Class to Use in Ratim!
Slope + Riverine Riverine
Slope + Depressional Depressional
Slope + Lake-frin~e Lake-frin~e
Depressional + Riverine alon~ stream within boundary Depressional
Depressional + Lake-fringe Depressional
Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with special
freshwater wetland characteristics
Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 2 of9
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wetland name or number Wetland A
WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to improve water quality.
water out
• Unit is a depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) ........................................... b)omts =: 31 Figure_
Unit has an intermittently flowing, OR highly constricted, permanently flowing outlet ........ points = 2
Unit has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet flowing) ..... " points = 1
U is a "flat" depression (Q.7 on key), or in the Flats class, surface 3
and no obvious natural outlet and/or outlet is a ..................... points = I
• Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation> = 95% of area (Himalayan blackberry) ....... lOomts = 51 Figure_
• Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation> = 112 of area ................................................. points = 3
• Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation> = 1110 of area ............................................... points = 1
• Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation < 1110 of area.................................................. = 0 5
2 months, but . during . year. Do not
ponded. Estimate area as the average condition 5 out of J 0 years.
Area seasonally ponded is> 112 total area of wetland .......................................................... points = 4
• Area seasonally ponded is> 114 total area of wetland ........................................................ ..
• Area seasonally ponded is < 114 total area of wetland ...................................................... .
Does the wetland have the opportunity to improve water quality?
Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into
the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes or groundwater down gradient
from 'the wetland? Note which of the following conditions provide the sources of pollutants. A unit
may have pollutants coming from several SOurces, but any single source would qualify as opportunity.
__ Grazing in the wetland or within 150 ft
__ Untreated stormwater discharges to wetland
Tilled fields or orchards within 150 ft. of wetland == A stream or culvert discharges into wetland that drains developed areas, residential areas, farmed
fields, roads, or clear-cut logging
__ Residential, urban areas, golf courses are within 150 ft. of wetland
__ Wetland is fed by groundwater high in phosphorus or nitrogen
Other
• Unit is a water (no outlet) ........................................... k)omts = 41
• Unit has an flowing, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet ......... points = 2
• Unit is a "flat" depression (Q.7 on key) or in the Flats class, with permanent surface
outflow and no obvious natural outlet and/or outlet is a man-made ditch ........................... points = 1
treat . . ")
storage wet
units with no outlet measure from the surface of permanent water or deepest part (if dry).
• Marks of ponding are 3 ft. or more above the surface or bottom of the outlet ....................... points = 7
The wetland is a "'headwater" wetland .................................................................................. points = 5
Marks of ponding between 2 f1. to < 3 ft. from surface or bottom of outlet ........................... points = 5
• Marks are at least 0.5 ft. to < 2 ft. from surface or bottom of outlet ...................................... points = 3
• Wetland is flat to Q.2 or 7 on key)but has small depressions on the surface that trap water
Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008
Multiplier
1
4
o
o
Page 3 of9
I
Wetland name or number Wetland A
""""---04 Does the wetland have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p. 49) I
Answer YES if the unit is in a location in the watershed where the flood storage, or reduction in water velocity,
it provides helpwrotect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive
flows. Answer 0 if the water coming into the wetland is controlled bt a structure such as flood frate, tide
gate, flap valve, reservoir ctc. OR you estimate that more than 90% oft e water in the wetland is rom
groundwater in areas where damaging groundwater flooding does not occur. Note which of the following
indicators of opportunity GIfvlY.
__ Wetland is in a hea water of a river or stream that has flooding problems.
__ Wetland drains to a river or stream that has flooding problems
Multiplier __ Wetland has no outlet and im~ounds surface runoff water that might otherwise flow into a river or
stream that has flooding prob ems nd,
__ Other' Water is from S!roun water. 1
YES multiplier is 2 iNol multiplier is I
<> TOTAL Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from D3 by D4; then add score to table on p. 1 4
I
I
I
{I,,'Oj,' t/rtI'l/illlh arpll' It I HI",ItI~!~I~,,!..!IIIL.VJ duu/!!.. Poinh
HABITAT FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to provide important habitat. (only I scor
per box)
I
HI Does the wetland have the I!otential to provide habitat for many species?
H 1.1 Vegetation structure (see P. 72): Figure Check the types of vegetation classes present (as defined by Cowardin) -Size threshold for each class is -
I
114 acre or more than 10% of the area ifunit is smaller than 2.5 acres.
__ Aquatic Bed
__ Emergent plants
__ Scrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have> 30% cover) I
----X Forested (areas where trees have> 30% cover)
If the unit has a forested class check r 0 __ The forested class has 3 out of strata (canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-
cover) that each cover 20% within the forested polygon.
Add the number of vegetation types that qz:alif!... If you have: Ma~ of Cowardin vegetation .clas~es
4 structures or more ....... pomts - 4 structures ................... nomts - 2
. 2 structures .................... points J J structure .................... OInts
H 1.2 Hydroperiods (see p. 73): Figure_ Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to
I
I
cover more than 10% of the wetland or 114 acre to count (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods).
Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present points = 3
-X. Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 or more types present.. .... points = 2
__ Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present................... OInts
~ Saturated only J tyee present .................... pomts : U I
--Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wet and
--Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland
--Lake-fringe wetland ................. = 2 points
Map of hydroperiods Freshwater tidal wetland ......... = 2 points
I
I
H1.3 Richness of Plant Species (see p. 75):
Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft2 (different patches of the same
species can be combined to meet the size threshold)
You do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian Mi/foi/, reed canarygrass, purple I
loosestrife, Canadian Thistle. If you counted: > 19 species ...................... points = 2
5 -19 species .................... points == I 0 List species below if IOU want to: < 5 sgecies ........................ omts
Wetland is dominate by Himalayan blackberry. with some salmon erO' in one lobe but re alder IS
along edge. I
H 1.4 Interspersion of Habitats (see p. 76): I
Decided from the diagrams below whether interspersion between Cowardin vegetation (described in HI.J), or
the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, low, or none. I
I
I
Wetland Rating Fonn -Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 4 of9 I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wetland name or number Wetland A
Note: If you have 4 or more classes Figure_
or 3 vegetation classes and
H2
H1.5
open water, the rating is
None '" 0 point!; low"" I point Moderate:: 2 points always "high".
Use map of Coward in classes.
Hi h .,.. 3 "nt
[riparian brnidcd channels]
Spe'cial Habitat Features (see p. 77):
Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of pOints
you put into the next column.
~ Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 in. diameter and 6 ft. long)
~ Standing snags (diameter at the bottom> 4 inches) in the wetland
__ Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 flo (2m) andlor overhanging vegetation extends at least
3.3 ft. (1m) Over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the unit, for at least 33 ft. (10m)
__ Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning
(> 30 degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have
not yet turned grey/brown)
__ At least 114 acre of thin-stemmed persistent vegetation or woody branches are present in areas that
are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg-laying by amphibians)
Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in each stratum of plants
NOTE: The 20% stated in early printings of the manual on page 78 is an error.
Add the oints in the column above
Does the wetland have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species?
H 2.1 Buffers (see P. SO):
Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer o/wetland unit. The highest scoring
criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of "undisturbed".
__ ,100m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water
> 95% of circumference. No structures are within the undisturbed part of buffer
(relatively undisturbed also means no grazing, no landscaping, no daily human use) ............. points = 5
100m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water
> 500/0 circumference .................................................................................................... points = 4
--X... 50m (170 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water
> 950/0 circumference .................................................................................................... lPoints = ~
100m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water
> 25% circumference .................................................................................................... points = 3
50m (170 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water
for> 500/0 circumference ................................................ ~ ............................................. points = 3
If buffer does pot meet any of the criteria above:
__ No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25m (80 ft) of wetland >
95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK .................................. points = 2
__ No paved areas of buildings within 50m of wetland for> 50% circumference.
Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK ................................................................... points = 2
Heavy grazing in buffer ..... " ......................................................................................... points = 1
Vegetated buffers are < 2m wide (6.6 ft) for more than 95% circumference
(e.g. tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland) ............................. points = 0
Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above ....................... " ................................... " points = 1
Ai'ial photo showing buffers
H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (see p. Sl)
H 2.2.1 Is the wetland part ofa relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian
or upland) that is at least 150 ft. wide, has at least a 30% cover of shrubs, forest or native
undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at
least 250 acres in size? (Dams in riparian corridors. heavily used gravel roads. paved roads.
are considered breaks in the corridor).
YES = 4 points (go to H 2.3) ~ = go to H 2.2.2
H.2.2.2 Is the wetland part ofa relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian
or upland) that is at least 50 ft. wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to
estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake-
fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above?
S = 2 oints (go to H 2.3) NO = go to H 2.2.3
Wetland Rating Fonn -Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008
2
4
(only 1 scor
er box
Figure_
4
2
Page 5 of9
I
Wetland name or number Wetland A
H.2.2.3 Is the wetland: I
• Within 5 mi (Skm) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR
• Within 3 miles of a large field or pasture (> 40 acres) OR YES = I point
• Within I mile of a lake greater than 20 acres? NO = 0 points I
Comments:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wetland Rating Fonn -Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 6 of9 I
I
I Wetland name or number Wetland A
H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other griorit;i habitats listed by WDFW (see p. 82): (see new and complete
I
descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in the PHS report
hUp:/lwd&. wa.govlhablphslist.htm)
Which of the following priority habitats are within 330 ft. (100m) of the wetland unit?
NOTE: the connections do not have to be relatively undisturbed.
I
__ Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.4 ha (I acre).
__ Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native
fish and wildlife ifull descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 152).
__ Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock.
I
__ Old-growthlMature forests: (Old-growth west of Cascade crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, fonning a
multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 20 treeslha (8 trees/acre) > 81 cm (32 in)
dbh or> 200 years of age. (Mature forests) Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown
cover may be less that 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is
I
generally less than that found in old-growth; 80 -200 years old west of the Cascade crest.
__ Oregon white Oak: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the
oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 158).
_X_ Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and
I
terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other.
__ Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non-forested plant communities that can either take the f<;lrm ofa dry prairie or
a wet prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161). 3
__ Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to
I
provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources.
__ Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. The;se include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore,
and Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptiOns of habitats and the definition o/relatively undisturbed are in
WDFW repo~t: pp. 167-169 and glossary in Appendix A).
I
__ Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils,
rock, ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human.
__ Cliffs: Greater than 7.6 m (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft.
__ Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 -2.0 m (0.5 -6.5 ft), composed of basalt,
I
andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs.
~ Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags ifthey are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay
characteristics to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diwneter at breast height of>
51 cm (20 in) in western Washington and are> 2 m (6.5 ft) in height. Priority logs are > 30 cm (12 in) in
I diameter at the largest end. and > 6 m (20 ft) long.
Ifwetland has 3 or more priority habitats = 4 points
Ifwetland has 2 priority habitats -~ point~
Ifwetland has 1 priority habitat = 1 point No habitats = 0 points
I Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list. Nearby wetlands are
addressed in Question H 2.4) .
H 2.4 Wetland Landscage: Choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that bestfits (see p. 84)
• There are at least 3 other wetlands within 112 mile, and the connections between them are
I relatively undisturbed (light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with some boating,
but connection's should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development. ........ !Points 51
• The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe
I
wetlands within 1/2 mile ......................... " .......................................................................... points = 5
5 · There are at least 3 other wetlands within 112 mile, BUT the connections between them are
disturbed .......... " ................................... " ............................................................................ points = 3
• The wetland fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands
I within 1/2 mile .................................................................................................................... points = 3
• There is at least 1 wetland within 1/2 mile ........................................................................... points = 2
• There are no wetlands within 112 mile .................................................................................. points = 0 ----
I H 2 TOTAL Score -opportunity for providing habitat Add the scores from H2.1. H2.2. H2.3. H2.4 -~-~ TOTAL for H I from page 8
• --..... ....e
Total Score for Habitat Functions Add the points for H I and H 2; then record the result on p. 1 I 18 I ----, I Comments:
I
I Wetland Rating Form -Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WOFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 7 of9
Wetland name or number Wetland A
SCI
~C2
~C3
CA TEGORIZA TION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS
Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below
and circle the appropriate answers and Category.
Wetland Type -Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the Category when the appropriate
criteria are met.
Estuarine wetlands? (see p.86)
Does the wetland unit meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands?
__ The dominant water regime is tidal,
--Vegetated, and
__ With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt.
~-YES = Go to SC 1.1
SC 1.1 Is the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural
Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC
332·30·151 ? YES = Category I NO = go to SC 1.2
SC 1.2 Is the wetland at least 1 acre in size and meets at least two of the following conditions?
YES = Category I NO = Category II
__ The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no dikin" ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has
less than I 0% cover of non-native plant species. I the non-native Spartina sr:g" are only srecies
that cover more than 10% of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a ual rating (I/ I).
The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the relativez undisturbed upper marsh
with native species would be a Category 1. Do not, however, exclu e the area of Spartina in
determinin/ the size threshold of t acre. --At least 3/ of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft. buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed
or un-mowed grassland
The wetland has at least 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water,
--or contiguous freshwater wetlands.
Natural Heritage Wetlands (see p. 87)
Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage Program/DNR as
either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or
Sensitive plant species.
SC 2.1 Is the wetland being rated in a Section/Township/Range that contains a natural heritage wetland? (This
question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact WNHPIDNR.)
S/T/R information from Appendix D or accessed from WNHP/DNR web site X
YES __ Contact WNHPIDNR (see p. 79) and go io SC 2.2 ~
SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as a site with state threatened
or endangered plant species?
YES = Category I NO not a Heritage Wetland
Bogs (see p. 87)
Does the wetland (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use
the key below to identify if the wetland is a bog. If you answer yes you will still need to rate the
wetland based on its function.
I. Does the unit have organic soil horizons (Le. layers of organic soil), either peats or mucks, that
compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches ofsoi! profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to
identify organic soils)? YES = go to question 3 ~ go to question 2
2. Does the wetland have organic soils, either peats or mucks that are less than 16 inches deep over
bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or
pond? YES = go to question 3 ~ = is not a bog for purpose of rating
3. Does the unit have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present,
consist of the "bog" species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more
than 30% of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)?
YES = Is a bog for purpose of rating NO = go to question 4
NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory you may substitute that
criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16" deep. If the pH is
less than 5.0 and the "bog" plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog.
4. Is the unit forested (> 30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western
hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann's spruce, or western white pine. WITH any of
the species (or combination of species) on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant
component of the ground cover (> 30% coverage of the total shrub/herbaceous cover)?
YES = Category I NO = Is not a bog for purpose of rating
Wetland Rating Fonn -Western Washington, Version 2 (7106), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008
I
I
I
I
I
Cat. I I
Cat. I I
Cat. II
Dual I
Rating
I!II I
I
I
Cat I I
I
I
I
I
I
Cat. I
I
Page 8 of9 I
I
I Wetland name or number Wetland A
SC4 Forested Wetlands (see p. 90)
Does the wetland have at least t acre of forest that meet. one of these criteria for the Department of Fish
I and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats? Jfyou answer yes you will still need /0 rale the. wetland
based on its function.
--Old-growth forests: (west of Cascade Crest) Stands of at least two three species forming a
I
multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/acre (20 trees/hectare)
that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of32 inches (81 em or
more).
NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. Two-hundred year old trees
I
in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often slower. The DFW
criterion is nnd "OR" so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter.
--Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80 -200 years old
OR have an average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53 em); crown cover may be less than
I
100%; decay, decadence, num.bers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally
less than that found in old-growth. INOI: Cat. I
YES = Category I 0 = not a forested wetland with special characteristics
I
~C5 Wetlands in Coastal LagoODii (see p. 91)
Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon?
__ The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated
from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks.
--The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains surface water that is saline or brackish (> 0.5
I ppt) during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the
hallam.)
YES = Go to SC 5.1 ~ ___ not a wetland in a coastal lagoon
SC 5.1 Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions?
I __ The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing) and has
less than 20% cover of invasive plant species (see list of invasive species on p. 74).
__ At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 f1. buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed
or un-mowed grassland. Cat. I
I __ The wetland is larger than 1110 acre (4350 square ft.)
YES = Category I NO = Category II Cat. II
~C6 Interdunal Wetlands (see p. 93)
Is the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or
I WBUO)?
~ ___ not an interdunal wetland for rating YES = Go to SC 6.1
If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions.
I
In practical terms that means the following geographic areas:
• Long Beach Peninsula --lands west of SR 103
• Grayland.Wes\I:'ort ·-Iands west ofSR 105
• Ocean Shores-opalis -lands west of SR 115 and SR 109
SC 6.1 Is the wetland one acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is one acre or larger?
I YES = Category II NO = go to SC 6.2 Cat. II
SC 6.2 Is the wetland between 0.1 and 1 acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and I acre?
YES = Category III Cat. III
Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics
I ~ Choose the "highest" rating tfwetlandfalls into several categories, and record anp. I.
Ifyou answered NO for all types enter "Not Applicable"' on p. 1 NA
I
Comments:
I
I
I
I Wetland Rating Fonn -Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions.Oct. 2008 Page 9 of9
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project,Site: Fawcett Parcel City/County: Sampling Date: 3-21-11
Applicant/Owner: Parcel No.: 3224059043
Scott Swarts
King
State: WA Sampling Point DP1 Wet. A
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range: S 32, T24N, R5E
landform (hlllslOpe, terrace, etc.): Floodplain
Lat
Local relief (concave. convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0·2
Subregion (LRR): A Long:
Soil Map Unit Name: Norma sandy loam
Are climatic I hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No
Datum:
NWI classification:
o (If no, explain In Remarks.)
NA
Are Vegetation 181, Soil D. Or Hydrology D. significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances· present? Yes 181 No 0
Are Vegetation D. Soli D, Or Hydrology D, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers In Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS -Attach site map showing sampling point IDeations transects Important features etc . . ,
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Ye. 181 No 0
Hydric Soil Present? Ye. 181 No 0 Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Ye. 181 No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Ye. 181 No 0
Remarks: Area has been historically graded and cleared. Although mature cottonwood along stream channel and other native trees (alder and maple) are
present, the understory Is dominated by Himalayan blackberry, Japanese knotweed, and reed canarygrass. Some native shrubs are prasent.
Some clusters of FACW species are present but these areas lacked hydrology.
VEGETATION -Use scientific names of olants
Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 10) Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet ~ ~ .st!lli!.!
1. Red alder (Alnus rubra) 3. Y •• FAC Number of Dominant Species That Are 1 (A)
2. OSLo FACW, or FAC:
3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across 2 (B)
4. All Strata:
'" Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are 6. (AlB)
~a~lj[]gfSb!l!~ Stral!Jm (Plot Size: 5) OBl, FACW. or FAC:
5. Beaked hazelnut (Cory/us cornuts) 45 Yes FACU Prevalence Index worksheet:
6. Iotal ~ ~~r gt. Multi~1Y: b~f
7. OBl species x1 =
8. FACW species ,2·
9. FAC species ,3·
.. Total Cover FACU species x4 =
Herb Stratum (PlOt Size: 5) UPl species x5=
10. Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armenfacus) 2. Yes FACU Column Totals: (A) (B)
11. Prevalence Index = BfA =
12. Hydrophytlc Vegetation Indicators: .
13. Dominance Test Is >50%
14. Prevalence Index Is ;::'3.0'
15. Morphological AdaptatIOns' (Provide supporting data In
16. Remalts or on a separate sheet)
17. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants'
18. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
19.
20. 'Indicators of hydric soil and weiland hydrology must be present,
.. Total Cover unless disturbed or problematic .
WQQQ:i ~iDe §tratum (Plot Size: )
1.
2.
.. Total Cover
Hydrophytlc Vegetation
% Bare Ground In Herb Stratum 90 Present? Ye. 181 No 0
Remarks: Disregard beaked hazelnut as It Is rooted on upland "hili" while wetland Is at base. Hazelnut Is overhanging DP 1. Red alder along edges.
Wetland Interior dominated by Himalayan blackberry. Wetland Is small and Isolated, situated within low area. DP 1 Is In the lowost area where
water ponds, and most of the ground In this spot Is bare.
US Anny Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast -Interim Version
I
Project Site: Fawcett
SOil Sampling Point: DP 1 Wet. A
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.) I
Depth Matrix Redox Features I
(Inches) Color (moist) % Color (Moist) % TYpe' LOo' Texture Remarks ---------0-8 10YR 211 85 5YR 3/4 15 C M Silt loam Some sand
8-14 10YR 3/1 80 5YR 3/4 20 C M Sendy silt More ssnd
14+ gleyed Gray sand I
I
'Type: C .. Concentration, Q=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PLcPore Lining, M"Matrlx
Hydric Soli Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRa, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic HydriC Sollss: I
0 Histosol (A 1) 0 Sandy Redox (55) 0 2 cm Muck (Al0)
0 Hlstic Eplpedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (56) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2)
0 Black Hlstic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Minerai (Fl) (except MLRA 1) 0 Other (Explain In Remarks) I
0 Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
0 Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) 0 Depleted Matrix (F3)
0 Thick Dark Surface (AI2)' 181 Redox Dark Surface (F8)
0 Sandy Mucky Minerai (51) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 31ndicators of hydrophytlc vegetation and wetland
0 Sandy Gleyed Matrix (54) 0 Redox Depressions (Fa)
hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or
problematic.
Restrfctive Layer (If present):
Type:
I
I
Depth (Inches): Hydric Salls Present? Ve. 181 No 0
Remarks:
HVDROlOGV I
Wetland Hydrology Indleators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
0 Surface Water (AI) 181 water-Stained Leaves (B9) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (B9) I
0 High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 48) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
181 Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (Bll) 0 Drainage Patterns (Bl0)
0 Water Marks (B 1) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (BI3) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
0 Sediment Deposits (B2) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) I
0 Drift Deposits (83) 0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along living Roots (C3) 0 GeomorphIc Position (02)
0 Algal Mat or Crust (84) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (03)
0 Iron Deposits (85) 0 Recent Iron Reduction In Tilled Solis (C6) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (05) I
0 Surface Soli Cracks (86) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (Dl) (LRR AI 0 Raised Ant Mounds (06) (LRR A)
0 Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) 0 Other (Explain In Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
181 Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88)
Field Observations: I
Surface Water Pressnt? Ve. 0 No 181 Depth (inCheS):
Water Table Present? Ve. 181 No 0 Depth (inches): 7
Saturation Present? Ve. 181 No 0 Depth (Inches): surface Wetland Hydrology Present? Ve. 181 No 0 (Includes capillary fringe)
I
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous Inspections), If available:
Remarks: I
I
us Army Corps of Eng/neers Western Mountains, valley, and Coast -Interim Version
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project Site:
Applicant/OWner:
Fawcett Parcel
Parcel No.: 3224059043
Scott Swarts
City/County: King
State: WA
Sampling Date:
Sampling Point
3-21-11
DP2Wet.A
Investigator(s):
Landform (hlllsiope, terrace, etc.):
Subregion (lRR): A
FlOOdplain
Lst:
Soli Map Unit Name: Norma sandy loam
Section, Township, Range: S 32, T24N, R5E
local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0 - 2
long: Datum:
NWI classification: NA
181 No o (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are climatic I hydrologic cond!tions on the site !ypical for this time of year? Yes
Are Vegetation D. Soil D. Or Hydrology D, significantly disturbed?
Are Vegetation D, Soil D, Or Hydrology D. naturally problematic?
Are "Normal Circumstances· present? Yes E8I No 0
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS -Attach site map showing sampling point locations transects Important features etc , , ,
Hydrophytlc Vegetation Present? Ves 0 No 181
Hydric Soli Present? Ves 0 No 181 Is the Sampling Area within a Wetland? Ves 0 No 181
Wetland Hydrology Present? Ves 0 No 181
Remarks: Upland plot near Wetland A'undar old growth beaked hazelnut.. .. Island with one big h,azelnut In middle surrounde.d by a ring of sword farn In
what Is otherwise a sea of mostly Hlmal~yan blackberry.
VEGETATION U Ifl -se sc ent c names of plants
Tree Stratum (Plot Size: 10) Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Wor1(shaet: % Cover Species? ~ ,. Red alder (Alnus IlIbra) ,. No FAC Number of Dominant Species That Are
OSl, FACW, or FAC: • (A)
2.
3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across
All Strata: 1 (B)
4.
= Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are , .. (AlB)
SapUnglShrub Stratum (Plot Size; 5) OBl, FACW, or FAC:
5. Beaked hazelnut (Cory/us comuta) 100 Ves FACU Prevalence Index works heat:
s. IQt§1 ~ Qoy:e( 21' Multil2 ly:by::
7. OBL species xl =
8. FACW species x2=
9. FAC species x3=
.. Total Cover FACU species x4=
t:l~:[t! S~[mYrn (Plot Size: s) UPl species x5=
10. Column Totals: (A) (B)
11. Prevalence Index = BfA =
12. Hydrophytlc Vegetation Indicators:
13. Dominance Test Is >50%
14. Prevalence Index Is .::,3.0'
15. Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data In
1S. Remarks or on a separate sheet)
17. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants'
18. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
19.
20. , Indicators of hydric soli and wetland hydrology must be present,
"" Total Cover unless disturbed or problematic.
W2QQY: ~IDe Slrnlu!D (Plot Size: )
1.
2.
= Total Cover Hydrophytlc Vegetation
% Bare Ground In Herb Stratum 90 Present? Ves 0 No 181
Remarks: Moss
.
us Amy Corps of Engineers Westem Mountains, Valley, and Coast -Intarim Version
I
Project Site: Fawcett I
SOIL Sampling Point: OP 2 Wet. A
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or conflnn the absence of Indicators.) I
Oepth Ma"'" Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (Moist) % Type' Loc' Texture Remarks ---------0-3 lQVR 312 100 M Silt loam Some sand
3-16+ 10YR 3/3 .5 M SUI loam Other 35% sand clusters 10YR 414 I
I
'Type; e .. Concentration, O-Oepletlon, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 'locallon: PL .. Pore lining, M=Malrlx
Hydric Soli Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric SOliS': I
0 Histosol (AI) 0 Sandy Redox (85) 0 2 em Muck (AtC)
0 Hlstic Eplpedon (A2) 0 Stripped Matrix (56) 0 Red Parent Material (TF2)
0 Black Hislic (A3) 0 Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except ML.RA 1) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) I
0 Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
0 Depleted Below Dark Surface (A 11) 0 Depleted Matrix (F3)
0 Thick Dark Surface (A 12) 0 Redox Darll: Surface (FG)
0 Sandy Mucky Minerai (S1) 0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 'Indicators of hydrophytlc vegetation and wetland
0 Sandy Gleyed Matrix (54) 0 Redox Depressions (Fa)
hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or
oroblematic.
I
Restrictive L.ayer (If present):
Type: I
Depth (Inches): Hydric Solis Present? Ve. 0 No I!!I
Remarks: I
HYDROLOGY I
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required;, check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or mora required)
0 Surface Water (A 1) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) 0 Water-Stained Leaves (89) I
0 High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (ML.RA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
0 Saturation (A3) 0 Salt Crust (811) 0 Drainage Pattems (810)
0 Water Marks (81) 0 Aquatic Invertebrates (813) 0 Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
0 Sediment Deposits (82) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) 0 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) I
0 orin Deposits (83) 0 Oxidized Rhlzospheres along living Roots (C3) 0 Geomorphic Position (02)
0 Algal Mat or Crust (84) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aqultard (03)
0 Iron Deposits (85) 0 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (CG) 0 FAC-Neutral Test (05) I
0 Surface Soli Cracks (86) 0 Stunted or Stresses Plants (01) {LRR AI 0 Raised Ant Mounds (06) (LRR A)
0 Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87) 0 Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Frost-Heave Hummocks (07)
0 Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations: I
Surface Water Present? Ve. 0 No I!!I Depth (Inches);
Water Teble Present? Ve. 0 No I!!I Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Ve. 0 No I!!I Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Ve. 0 No I!!I (includes capillary fringe) I
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous Inspecllons). If available:
Remarks: Upland data plot elevated above wetland. I
I
US Anny Corps of Engineers Western MountaIns, Valley, and Coast -Interim Version
I
I
I
••
I APPENDIX C
I MITIGATION PLAN
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I P;'v\RENTOOOOOOf5l0600INFOICrlt1caJ Areas RepOffoFlnaflCrit1ca1 Areas Report City ofRenion May Creek Trall,doc
City of Renton May Creek Trail April 2012
I Critical Areas Report
I 11
I
I
I ~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TRAIL HEAD SECTION 32, TWP 24N, RNG. 5E., W.M. 84", p PORTION OF GOV'T
~.t7M
c lOr ~40'x375' TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT
CITY OF RENTON
flOOD HAZARD LIMITS ------------
OVERlOOK
PUlL-OUT AREA
CITY OF RENTON ~6b1l~G
DEBRIS
MInGA TlON SUMMARY (TYPICAL)
SHOREUNE IMPACT (FROM PEDESTRIAN TRAIL
SHOREUNE IMPACT:
(PEDESTRIAN TRAIL)
S865 SF
TOTAL SHORELINE IMPACT = 8,865 S.F.
~
PROPOSED MITIGATION
@ 1: t ENHANCEMENT
MITIGATION REQUIRED =
BASE MInGA TION PROVIDED
WETLAND 'A' ENHANCEMENT =
SHOREUNE ENHANCEMENT ;;:
Al T 1 MITIGATION PROVIDED
SHOREUNE ENHANCEMENT =
TOTAL
•• (lllGA liON PRO\llOED
8865 S.F (020 AC)
8.865 S.F. (0.20 AC)
786 S.F. (0.02 AC)
42,015 S.F. (0.96 AC)
15,219 S.F. (0.35 AC)I
58,020 S.F. (1.33 AC)
3
/CO
~ ~; --j --r--~
<t F f!: t!; ~
I ~ ~ ~ E GRoo 0 PR f1L£, ~ ~ I I
40 ! i I 40
"
DtiWlol AT TlUE OFt SURvey I ,-
' ... 1-/
---
,
,-
/ , --..... _--
ElEV 33.16 1 '
30, _ I 130
@
---. ---. ---.
---.
DOGWOOD CLUSTER
/
/
/
/
/~
---.
'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-
·200' SHORELINE
MANAGEMENT ZONE
/
/
/
_/ ""--" ---/"
LOT A ------/ 0
134,531 SF (GROSS) ~
I
I
I ----'
, =
o 15.30 60
'-
"\
"\
"\
"\
LEGEND:
WETIAND 'A' ENHANCEMENT
SHOREUNEIMPACT
SHORELINE ENHANCEMENT (BASE)
-----ALTERNATE-1 BOUNDARY
SHORELINE. ENHANCEMENT (AlTERNATE .1)
'" "\
"\
OF GRA~
\
\
,.~ '"
'''' 8<", P~';-I"'G' l
' Or
FUTURE CONNECTION TO
OFF--SITE DEVELOPMENT
'A'
I;.~~~~~Y "
z
:"5 ...J a.
>-~ "'z 0:: « "0 ::;; f-0::0-::;; <f'.Cl
::> ~ z~ (/) UJ gili t; UJ z<
rt. III;>;
0::: 0:: Z ~ o LLO
Z 00-
ij Q -f-
>-~m e:( (30: «
l'l ~ E ::;;
~ ,-
,~. ,
··I~
STATEDI'
.... AS><IN::n».
~ ~,,~ "L TEeT ~ ~.~.
* • , • ~ U
~ ~
lila) ~
ZIII ~~g «I-~~~ >« ~C_
111-<51~
0°
a~ ;$~~ _0 .... '" .. >(1) ~~~ «II) ~.2
0« ;~D..
Q i z «
D
~ REVISIONS: APPD.
"------
DATE: APRIL. 2012
DESIGN: GBK
DRAWN: GBK
CHECKED: JCGA
REVISION
NUlIBER:
SCALE: 1~=30'
PROJECT NUlIBER:
RENTOOOO-O015
DRAWING FILE:
laMPOO1RENn5
SHEET NO.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I~ • ~
"' II
~
~
Ii
'" ~ z
I w
~
~
~
~
I :J-
If
9-
"" ?
" I~ 9-
~
5
" I g §
t5
~
$.
I~
~
~ v Ig
"-v
" I[
/
/
/
"'''f,(
8<S(-PORTION OF GOV'T LOT ON 32, TWP 24N, RNG. 5E., W.M.
/
/
/
/
/
/
~AINuNt-.ClIi-GRADE ,o"ffi>k"Na
OF GRAVEL
--------~~GAP IN FENCl:"---....
......
'Or 40'x375' TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT
CITY OF RENTON
FLOOD HAZARD l~T~
~
{f"'1<~' I. ~Cfu't;
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
¥('1-;~ "' jJbi~(j!D~qhlN
~--32':-:"~:-u~-'<'~ \ ~.rN'&'b'i:Bfl~ -' ~ c' I{QTES}~~DJ!D
_ ~ _~.......... ,~",o-' __ ~~""~ffl'_;:.:,;;a
/
/
/
LEGEND
I~~'wril ALTERNATE -1 AREA
-----ALTERNATE-1BOUNDARY
~ EXISTING SNAG TO REMAIN o EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN
NOTES
1. THE IRRIGATION PLAN IS DIAGRAMMATIC. INSTALL MAINLINE,
VALVES, PIPE AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT IN PLANTER BEDS.
2. SEE SHEET 1.1-3 FOR IRRIGATION NOTES AND DETAILS.
IRRIGATION SCHEDULE
e PRESSURE REDUCER -WATIS USB-Z3 -1~
I WAITS BAll VALVE (ISOLAnON VALVE)-SIZE SAME AS UNE
ell RAlNBIRD 5-RC 1~ QUICK COUPUNG V/JJ..VE WI 55-K-l 1~ VALVE KEYS
'" NIBCO MANUAl DRAIN VAlVE -2~
" RAlNBIRD t DO-PEB REMOTE CONTROL VALVE WITH T80S LATCHING
SOLENOID -SIZE PER PlAN
0 HUNTER XCH-1200 12 STATION CONTROLLER. BATTERY PROVIDED BY OWNER.
SCH 40 PVC LATERAl - 1 S UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON PLAN
-----0-----SCH 40 PVC MAlNUNE -2R UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON PLAN
====== SCH 40 PVC SLEEVE -TWICE THE DIAMETER OF THE WORKING PIPE(S) (MIN.)
VALVE NUMBER-~
N _ VALVE SIZE
GAlLONS PER MINUTE -10
IRRIGATION SPRAY HEAD LEGEND
HEAD MANf. MODEL NO. RAD. PATIERN PSI flOW
@ RAlNBIRD 1 B04-SAM-PRS ". R17-24F 25 2.74
@ RAlNBIRD 1804-SAM-PRS ". R17-24H 25 1.37
'" RAlNBIRD 1804-$AM-PRS ,,' R17-24Q 25 0.68
" RAlN8tRD 1804-SAM-PRS 28' 15CST 20 1.00
[]I RAlN81RD 1804-SAM-PRS ,,' 15E51 20 0.50 ® ,--= ---,
01530 60
POINT OF CONNECTION FOR TEMPORARY / ,
IRRIGATlON SYSTEM IS EXISTING OTY ,. METER I {~
WITH DeVA. CONTRACTOR SHALl COORDINATE I
STUB-INTO
~STlNG 2-MAiNUNE
"-CONNECTION WITH CITY OF RENTON.
'-...... -
"-"-
"-
"-
"-
200' SHORELINE
MANAGEMENT ZONE
LOT A---'"
134.53i SF (GROSS)
f:;:~;::H:;:~::H:;%::U:A::j' Wdjllidj~tlm
/
"-
'\
/
/
/
/
/
'\
'\
'\
/
/
/
/
/
\
'\
'\
OF GRA~
100% FINAL SUBMITIAL
\ £\-CR<lt,
\ S,-qS("
"-'" '"
"--------------
10' WIDE SANITARY SE\o\'ER EASEMENT
REC. NO. 7106230529
-----------
t, "-"'< '1'", ""'-.. 8-1"..-
P,-qRJrfNQ
'Or
"-~ p
"-,,-'4.?~·'G '=;or
"-
EDGE or GRAVEL "-~
~GAP~NC~ >< ~.. "><,' ......
~....----
20' WIDE CITY OF
RENTON UTILITY
I IITEASEMENT REC. NO. I 75)0080741 AND
. 751'0080743
L .10' WIDE SANITARY,,-
,---SEWER EASOAENT "-
NO. 7106230529
~
I
z
:5
Q.
Z o
~
ii':
9::
z o
~
....J
~ ~z
I-o::~
riC!J ~ z~
W OI f-Ul
W i'li~ 0::: 0:: -
()
LLZ o~
11 ~ f-
>-i;i'li « 0 0::
.,
~JJ
·~;I
'~I
~ ~
~ -.,., ~
Z w ~c>§ ~~ g!;
111-~,,~
. 0 =2'~ Eo ~~~ >CI)";"~~ ~~ ~~f
~ ~ •
• REVISIONS: APPD.
DATE: APRIL, 2012
DESIGN: JCGA
DRAWN: XGA
CHECKED: JCGA
REVISION
NUllBER:
SCALE: '·-30'
PROJECT NUllBER:
RENTODDO-0015
DRAlIlNG FILE:
IAlRt.tPOO2RENTI5 I-M 2 ,bi -
~ OF17
I
I
I
I ! Iii
I
I
I
I
I '" [oi " ~
" I! t.1
~
airl w .'..-1 w r
~
~ z
I!
;; • ~ I~ \1
~ ;oJ-
Q Ig .,
~
~
0
0 18 ~
15 oc :>
1 t" ~ ro
0
Ii
"-~
0
II[
IRRIGATION NOTES
1. ALL NEW LANDSCAPE AREAS SHAlL HAVE AN AUTOI.!ATICAlLY CONTROU£D, m.lPORARY ON-GRADE
IRRIGAllON SYSTEM. S'tSTEM SHAlL BE DESIGNED TO CONSERVE WAlER. IRRIGATION SYSTEM WORK INaJJDES
EXCAVAllNG, BACKFlWNG, SUPPLYING AND INSTAWNG VALVES AND FITTINGS, PIPING AND F1TI1NGS, QUICK
COUPlER VALVES, VALVE BOXES, AND ACCESSORIES, TESTING, AND WlNlERlZING AND SPRING START UP.
2. THE IRRIGATION SYSTEfA -HAS BEEN DESIGNED FOR A MAXIMUM FLOW OF 38.5 GPM AT A STAT1C
PRESSURE OF 120 PSt IF AVAILABLE PSI IS LOWER THAN 80 PSI, CONTRACTOR
SHALL CONTACT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION FOR SYSTEM DESIGN ADJUSTMENT.
3. THE IRRIGATION PLAN IS DIAGRAMMATIC. INSTAlL MAiNUNE, VAlVES, PIPE, AND ASSOOATED EQUIPMENT IN
PLANllNG AREAS. FlELD-AIMJST ARooND [XlSTlNG TREES AND PROPOSED lRAIl AS NECESSARY. AlL
ON-GRADE PIPE SHAll BE COVERED WITH HOGfUn "'ULa-!.
4. IRRIGATION CONlROUfR LOCAllQN SHAll. BE COOROlNATED ¥11TH OWNER.
5. LOCAl'E ALl ABOVE AND BElOW GROUND UllUTlES AND PROTECT THEN FROM O~AGE DURING
CCtlSlRUCTlQN. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSlBL( FOR ANY D~AGE INaJRRED DURING, OR AS A RESULT OF,
COOSTRUCllON OF IRRlGAllON SYSTEM.
6. IT SHAll BE THE lANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBIUTY TO COORDINAl'E INSTALLATION OF IRRIGATION
SLrrVES WITH THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR.
7. INSTALL SYSl'EM TO MEET All. APPUCABLE CODES AND INSPECTIONS AND 08TAlN All. REQUIRED PERMITS
PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
8. INSTALL ALl MATERIAlS AND EOUIPMENT IN STRICT ACCORDANCE WITH I.IANUFACTlJRER'S '>mITTEN
SPEaFICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
9. PROVlD£ Otn.Y NEW WATERIAlS, WITHOUT FlAWS OR DEfECTS AND OF THE HIGHEST QUAUTY OF THEIR
SPEaFlED a.ASS AND KIND FOR COt.tlolEROAl USE.
A. PVC IoIAlNUNE AND LATERAl PIPE SHAll. BE CONSTRUCTED Of 5O-IEDULE 40 PVC. ALL PIPES SHALl
BE PERIoIANENTLY PRINTED WITH STANDARD PERTINENT INFQR),IATION.
B. PVC flTTlNGS SHAll. BE SCHEDULE 80 RATED FOR !.IAlNUNE AND SCHEIJ(J\.f 40 RATED FOR LATERAlS
AND MEET AS"N 02466 STANDARDS AND SPEOFICATIONS.
C. PVC NIPPLES SHAll. BE SCHEDUlE 80 RATED AND MEET ASTM 01785 REQUIREMENTS AND
SPEaFICATIONS. All. NIPPLES WIll. HAVE TAPERED THREADS.
D. JOINING MATERIALS USED SHAll. BE MANUFACTURED BY I.P.S. OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT, AND SHAll.
BE USED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MANUFACTURER'S 'l'tRITTEN SPECIFICATIONS AND SAFETY
RECOI.IMENOATIONS.
E. THREADED COONECTIONS (PVC) SHAll. BE SEALED WITH TEFLON TAPE OR TULON PASTE.
F. IRRIGATION SlEEVES SHALl BE 5O-IEDULE 40 PVC AND SIZED DOUBtI THE ca.fBlNED OUTSIDE
OIAIoIETER a-THE P1PE(S) RUNNING THROUGH IT.
G. ALL IRRIGATION WIRING TO BE "IoIULllSlRANO" WIRING
H. RELOCAl'E MANUAl DRAIN VAlVES TO IoIAINUNE LOW POINTS AS NECESSARY.
I. PIN ABO\"£ GROUND PIPING WITH ~ REBAR 'J HOOKS C 10' D.C. 'J HOOKS SHALL NOT PINCH OR BIND
PIPING.
10. CONTRACTOR SHAll. PROVIDE IRRIGAllON SYSTEM RECORD DRAWINGS lEGIBLY !.lARKED TO RECORD ACTUAl
INSTAllATION. DRAWINGS SHALL INOICATE HORIZONTAl AND VERTICAL LOCATlONS, REFERENCED TO PER!.lANENT
SURfACE IWPROVEt.lENTS. IDENTIFY FIELD CHANGES OF DIMENSION AND DETAIL INa..UDING CHANGES WADE BY
CHANGE ORDER. AN II"X17" PLAN SHALL BE LAMINATED AND PlACED AT THE CONTROU£R LOCATION lEGIBLY
SHO'MNG COLOR-COOED ZONES.
11. CCtlTRACTOR SHAll REVIEW ENTIRE SYSTEM WITH O'fttlER'S REPRESaHAllVE AND SUPPLY OPERAllONS
MANUAl AND WARRANTlES.
12. WINTERIZATION: CONTRACTOR SHALL INSPECT SYSTEW. SHUTOFF AND DRAIN PIPE BEl'IIffN SHUTOFfS AND
DOLIB!..£-CHECK VAlVE AND BLOW OUT SYSTEW COUPl.ET£LY BETh£EN OCTOBER 1 AND OCTCl6ER 15 DURING
lHE WARRAN1Y PERIOO FOR WlNTERlZAllON.
13. SPRING STARTUP: CONTRACTOR SHAll. INSPECT, PRESSURIZE SYSTEM, REPAIR LEAKS AND ANY FAULTY
WORK, ADJUST AND PROGRAM CONTROLLERS AS NECESSARY BEFORE MARCH 31 FOR SPRING STARTUP.
14. CONTRACTOR SHAll. \.fAVE ALl TEMPORARY ON-GRADE IRRIGATION SYSTEM COMPONENTS IN PlACE AT
END OF 1 '!'EAR WARRANTY PERlOO. ALL Io4ITlGATlON SYSTEM COIo4PONENTS SHALL BELONG TO THE O'M'4ER.
15. LATOlING SOLENODS SHAll BE RETRO FITTED ON ALL VAlVES FOR BATTERY OPERAl'ED CONlRotLER.
PORTION OF GOV'T LOT 1, SECTION 32, TWP 24N, RNG, 5E., W,M,
• USE 80TTOt.I INLET FOR
CHECK VALVE TYPE ENOS.
SPRAY NOZZLE
RAlNBlRD 1800-SAY-PRS
SPRAY BODY
STAINLESS STEEL CI..At.IP r S8E-05O 1/2" IoIAl...E NPT XO.49°
BARB ElBOW, TYPICAL eOTH ENOS
3'
2'L
~~~~ MULCH CMR ~PE
~SP-1/2' I.D. TUBING (lENGTH AS REQUIRED) ---='a-TOP OF BARK IoIULCH
PVC LATERAL PIPE
FINISH GRADE
#5 REBAR WITH STAINlESS
STEll. ClAI.IPS ATIACHED TO
RISER (\.fNGTH AS NECESSARY
fOR SUPPORT)
SPRINKLER INSTALLATION (ON·GRADE)
NOT TO SCALE
CAASON VAlVE BOX MOOR
12200-1B W/LOCKING LID
&: EXITNSlON AS
NECESSARY
RDoIOTE CONTROL VAlVE
WITH LATCHING SO\.£NOIO
".
AUTOMATIC CONTROL VALVE (ON GRADE)
NOT TO SCAlE
GRADE
.;-TRNL SURfACE
CLEAN BACKFIll. TO BE SET IN 6"
UFIS.
,.-.----INSTAIl. UNDERGROUND UllUTY UNE
IE INSTALL UNDERGROUND UllUTY UNE
QUICK-CQUPUNG VAlVE
Po/C SCH 80 NIPP\.f
(LENGTH AS REQUIRED)
PVC SCH 40 TEE OR ELl.
:> ~ TRACE COPPER WIRE OVER WAiNUNE ~ 11 :'::: T;~:: ~:;~~E
, ~.:.' .. :.)~>~.~~:~:.::! PRESSURE MNN UNE 'MTH SLEEVE
PVC WJNUNE PIPE (ON GIWlE)
TOP OF HOG FUEl MULCH
'. ~=: ~~~A~~ES StErn:
TRENCHING SHALL ONLY BE FOR
SLEEVING AND OFF·SITE MAINLINE
~
1. ALl SlEE\"£S TO BE PVC. SCH. 40 AND TVIlCE THE DI~ETrR or THE WORKING PIPES.
2. ALL SLEEVES TO RUN A !.lIN. OF 12" BEYOND EDGE Of lRAil
3. EAQi END OfF Sl£EVlNG SHAll BE IoIARKED WllH 2"X4-STAKE.
IRRIGATION SLEEVING AND TRENCHING
NOT TO "''''''LC.
TOP OF HOG
___ nnn ~ ~.cCEl!~"'1&C"
SUPPLY UNE--o
PVG>rr -R
PVC REDUCER
FlTTING
PVC NIPPLE
Of'l
PVC ELl.-"'~
If--VAlVE BOX 10"
,ABffiC
GRADE
'----DRAIN ROCK
MANUAL DRAIN VALVE
NOT TO ~L:AU;.
NOTEo
REBAR 'J' HOOK
NECESSARY PER
!IDIE;.
~~~fli!::gm~TI~IT~n=,w~ ~NI<;;H GRADE
t?J #6 REBAR wrTH STAINLESS
STEEl.. CI..AIoIPS ATIACHEO TO
RISER (lENGTH AS NECESSARY
roR SUPPORT)
1. FURNISH FmlNGS AND PIPING NOI.IINAIl..Y SIZED IDENTlCAI... TO
NOIolINAI.. OUICK COUPUNG VALVE INLET SIZE.
QUICK COUPLER VALVE (ON-GRADE)
NOT TO SCALE
TOP OF HOG
FUEl J,jULCH
VAlVE WITH
WHEEL
~rn's .~ :i'c\iW'lM'S -~-~c=;z;
E=iiFi ~. ;
FINISH GRADE
BALL VALVE (ON GRADE)
NOT TO SCAlE
1. USE TEflON TAPE ON ALl THREADED ~ STANCWW VAl..VE BOX WITH
CONNECTlQNS. ./' LOCKING UO.
c
~:'
,
""x6"x7'
PRESSURE-TREATED WOOD
POST
IRRIGATION CONTROLLER
BATTERY SUPPUED BY
OWNER
___ TOP -.9U:LOG_FUEl IoIU1LCH
COMPACTED SUBGRADE
COMIolERCIAL
CONCRITE POST
FOOTING
IRRIGATION CONTROLLER MOUNT
NOT TO SCAlE
II II
• ';AcA." o''o,??ofo0800t;ldba II 'F-.. 1190" ~O"(JOO"
'" I "4;,,'~ "".°\'li • t
I ::>1 00" ~ "'" gf!. i7D " "q)" !.lIN. 2 CU. n.
GRAVEL SUMP
"'"
..
'iihf I~>
'-CONTINUOUS CONC.
PAVER FOOTING
PRESSURE REDUCER
NOT TO SCAlE
100% FINAL SUBMITIAL
I
P.V.C. THREADED t.IAL.E
CONNECTION
P.V.C. UNION
,~
~I
en
..J
~ W
0
0 z
<{
en w
I-
0 z
z
0
f=
<{
C!> a:
~.
z
0
~ C!>
f=
:E
-.J
~ "'z "0
I-'" l-etc!> ~ z;;;
UJ ~ i1i
UJ d'i ~
0::: "':z
() LLO 01->-~ d'i « tl '"
~
.;
(I)~ wi~ 8 zw Vl :g o(l-! .
>o(f~" 11.10 <g~
!!o !lr >(1) ~~I 0«(1) ~ ~
co( ... !
~ ~ •
• REVISIONS: APPD.
"l:J----__
DATE: APRIL 2012
DESIGN: JCGA
DRAWN: JeCA
CHECKED: JCGA
REVISION
NUlOlER:
SCALE: 1--30'
PROJECT NUlffiER:
RENTOOOO-0015
·;tl DRAWING FILE:
loir!.lPOOJRENT15
SHEET NO.
M-3
OF17
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I ~ • ~
"' II
o
~
" Ii
~
r
I i
.5!-..
I~
'I ;>
~ g
I~ I~
~
I~ <:.
~ o
PM
GS
PLANT SCHEDULE
SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE
SPLIT RAIL
FENCE
SPACING
19G5
EXISTING
WOODY
DEBRIS
(TYPICAL)
REMARKS
PORTION OF GOV'T LOT 32, TWP 24N, RNG. SE., W.M.
TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT
GI1Y OF RENTON
FLOOD HAZARD LIMITS --------.......... ...... ......
(3224059049) .........
BASE ALT. 1
......
I
I
......
/
/
I
......
"-"-......
"-
/~---
/ LOT A
531 SF (GROSS) 134,
"-"-
I
I
"-"-"-
o
TREES ONTY ONTY ' ..... _-) 0· . THUJA PUCATA 0···· .. ··· .. TSUGA HETEROPH'rUA 0· PICEA SrrCHENS\S
0:······ ... PSEUDOTSUGA t.lENZIESlI o ." .. ASIF;:S G~OIS
0· . . CRATAEGUS OOUGlASll
LIVE STAKES 0······ .... SN..JX LUCIDA 0· " ... SALIX SCOULERIANA
WESTERN RED CEDAR 4' HT MIN. 5 GAL PER PLAN WELl BRANCHED, NO DOUBLE mUNK
WESTERN HEMLOCK 4' HI MIN, 5 GAL PER PlAN WELl BRANCHED, NO DOUBLE TRUNK
SITKA SPRUCE 4' HT IoIIN, 5 GAL PER PlAN WELL BRANCHED, NO DOUBLE TRUNK
OOUGLAS FIR 4' Hr MIN,S GAL PER PIAN WEll BRANCHED, NO DOUBLE TRUNK
GRNlD FIR 4' Hr MIN,S GAL p[R PlAN WEll BRANCHED, NO DOUBlE TRUNK
BLACK HAWTHORN 4' HT MIN., 2'GAL PER PLAN WELL BRANCHED.
PACIFIC WILLOW 30· Hr MIN. 3' O.C. LIVE STAKES
SCOUlER'S WILLOW 30· Hr MIN. J' O.C. LIVE STAKES
NOTE: EACH ¥/ILl.OW S'l'MBOL IS EClUAL TO 10 UVE STAKES.
S~.~~ ....... ACER CIRCINATUIoI
0·,· 'COR'rtUS CORNUTA
8······· ... ·AMEI..NlCHIER AlNIFOUA e .... 1"H1LADELPHIS LEWlSlI
® .. · .• HOLOOISCUS DISCOLOR
@) .... 'CORNUS SERICEA
® · 'PHYSOCARPUS CAPrr ..... TUs
o "". ~ACCIN1Ut.l OVATUI.I 1/-........... 'lONICERA INVOLUCRAT.&.
CD .... '"ROSA NlJTKAN,l.
e·· . "'S"(MPHORICARPOS ALBUS
@ ..•.. 'OPLOPANAX HORRIDUM
CD·' . . ...... OEMlERlA CERASIFORMIS
e··· 'IIWiONIA AQUIFOUUr.A
0·· · 'RlSES SANGUlNIEtlI,l.
<D .... 'RUBUS PAIMFLORUS
POLYSTlCHUM r.AUNrTUM
VINE 1oIAPL£
HAZEUM
SERVICEBERRY
MOCK ORANGE
OCEAN SPRAY
RED OSIER DOGWOOD
PACIFIC NINEBARK
2'-4' Hr, 2 GAL
2'-4' Hr, 2 GAl.
2'-4' Hr, 2 GAL
2'-4' Hr, 2 GAL
2'-4' HT, 2 GAL
2'-4' HT, 2 GAL
2'-4' HT, 2 GAL
PER PIAN
PER PlAN
PER PLAN
PER PLAN
4' O.C.
EVERGREEN HUCKLEBERRY 2'-4' HT, 2 GAL
4' O.C.
4' O.C.
4' O.C.
BLACK lW\N8ERR'f
NOOTKA ROSE
SNOWBERR'f
DEVlL'S CLUB
INDIAN PLUM
Till OREGON GRAPE
2'-4' HT, 2 GAL 4' O.C.
2'-4' Hr, 2 GAL. 4' O.C.
2'-4' HT, 2 GAL. 4' O.C.
2'-4' HT, 2 GAL 4' O.C.
2'-4' HT, 2 GAL 4' D.C.
2'-4' HT, 2 GAL 4' O.C.
RED FLOWERING CURRANT 2'-4' HT, 2 GAL. 4' O.C.
4' O.C. THIMBLEBERR'f 2'-4' HT, 2 GAL
1'-2' HT, 1 GAL J' O.C.
MUlTI-STEMMED
MULTI-STEMMED
MULTI-STEMMED
MULTI-STEMMED
FUll, WELl BRANCHED
FUll, WElL 8R.'JIICHED
FUll., WELL BRANCHED
FULL, WELL BRANCHED
FULL, WELL BRANCHED
FUll, WELL BRANCHED
FUll, WELL BRANCHED
FUll, WELL BIW-ICHED
FUll, WELL BRANCHED
FUll, WEll BRANCHED
FUll, WELL BRANCHED
FULL, WEll BR»ICHED
FUll., WEll BRANCHED
126
12
° "' 17
53
300
90
14
"
11
147 , ,
'"
'00
2>,
"
35
'47
" 101
69
20
22
76
66
14
19
°
°
17
"
26
° °
53
° 66
76
2>
12
'0'
" 16
°
9 PM
15GS
13PM
GENERAL NOTES:
1. SEE SHEET M-5 FOR MmGATlON DErAILS
AND SPECIFICATlONS.·
2. SEE SHEET M-3 FOR IRRIGATION NOTES
AND DETAILS.
3. AlL BUFFER PlANTlNG AREAS SHALL RECEIVE
UNIFORM lAYER OF HOG FUEL' MULCH TO A 5"
DEPTH. WETlAND PLANTING AREA SHAll RECEIVE
UNIFORM lAYER OF FINE BARK MULCH TO A 3~
DEPTH.
@ r--= -,
lS 30 60
OBSERVATION
ACCESS TO
COBBLE BEACH
"-"-
\
\
\
\
SWORO FERN
'-'1Al l' HT, 1 GAL. J' O.c. FUll. WElL BRANCHED 77 0
HOG fUEL MULCH S" OEPnl 653 C.Y. 236 C.Y. 100% FINAL SUBMITIAL
\
\
\
\
\
\
ALTERNATE-1
LEGEND:
/:;. PARK SIGN
B INTERPRETIVE SIGN
o TRAlLHEAD SIGN
c::::l lOG BENCH o TRASH RECEPTACLE
SPLIT RAIL FENCE
II.~I ALTERNATE·' AREA
--q-
o
ALTERNATE·1BOUNDARY
EXISTING SNAG TO REMAIN
EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN
FUTURE CONNECTION TO
OFF-SITE DEVELOPMENT
(;<-f;' t:::. ~C"W.t"D'A'
11\~~~~J~,R~oNO.
:II ~8074J
~
~
'-'
• !./., "_",P,. 'l~l" ~ IA II;iU I g. I!l FlNE BARK t.tULCH (WEr\...IJ'{O A ONly) 3" DEPni 7 C.Y .
z
:5 a.
(!) z ;:::
2
:5
Q.
2 o
...J
~
I-
~
UJ
UJ
0::::
()
(/)2
"'0 "'t-it" Z~ ~V5 ~~ ",.
u..Z
00
r:l< ~ ;::: ~ _W u'"
::E ~
STArr or-
'oIASHINGTlJN
RE .. lsTOtED
ARCHIT~T
Ma.
.;
(I)~ ~ zw m~~ ~~ li~
11.10 ~~:!l Co ..,:;: .... ><Il ~~i·· C(CO~~ 0" • ~
D 'ii z m •
• REVISIONS: APPD.
DATE: APRIL., 2012
DESIGN: GBK
DRAWN: GBK
CHECKED: JCGA
REVISION
NUMBER:
SCALE: '-=30'
PROJECT NUllBER:
RENTOOOO-0015
DRA1fING FILE:
IQMPOO4REN T15
SHEET NO.
M-4
0.17
I
I
I
I
I ,.
I
I
I
I
I
I~ • ..,
~
Ii
0
Q.
" 0
I ?
~
t:J
0;
~ z I~ ~ • • ~
~ I!
'" "" I~ ~
0
0 I~ i:J
~ > I:
~
'" n
<D I~
---~
0
I·~
ROOT CROWN 2"-4" ABOVE
PLAATlNG SOIL GtWlE
5" HOG FUEl IdULCH OR
3" FINE BARI< ldutCH (WEltANO A)
HOLD BACK 3" AWAY fROM SlIM
3" HIGH RIM BERM
NAllVE SOIL
EXlSllNG SUBGRADE
FIRMLY HAND COMPACT
3" MOUND BELOW
ROOT8ALL
CONIFER TREE PLANTING DETAIL
,.",o~
ROOT CROWN 1"-2-ABOVE
PlANTING SOIL GRADE
5" HOG FUEL MULCH OR
3-nNE BARK !.IULCH (WEltAND A)
HOlD BACK 3" AWAY fROM STE!.4
~ GROU~~~~-: ~rrsEaAED,
SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL
MIN. I s" ABOVE FlNISHED
GtWlE WITH A 1oI1N1MU!.4
OF 2 l.fAf NODES EXPOSED
USE CUTTINGS ...............
36" MIN.
FINISHED
MIN. BIJRw..
INTO SOIL
TRIM OFF BRANCHES
WITH
CLEAN CUTS
U'<LJ ILJ A !"VI"
EASIER INSTALlATION
~ro~
CUT TOP SOUAR£ FOR
EASIER INSTALlATION,
PROTECT TOP FROM
SPLITTING.
LIVE STAKE PLANTING
~ro~
PORTION OF GOV'T LOT 1, SECTION 32, TWP 24N, RNG. SE., W.M.
PART 1 -SITE PREPARATION
GENERAl SITE CONDITIONS
CONTRACTOR SHALl GIVE THE MITIGATION CONSTRUCTION MONITOR A. MIN1MU1r.4 Of 5 WORKING DAYS
NOTICE PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
NO CONSTRUCTION WORK SHAll COMMENCE UNTil THERE IS A PRE -CONSTRUCTION MEETING BETWEEN
THE em OF RENTON, THE MmGATlON CONSTRUCTION MONITOR AND CDN'TRACTOR TO REVIEW THE
~@GATlON PlANS AND SPECIFICATlQNS.
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY Of THE CONTRACTOR TO: (1) INDEPENDENTLY VERIFY THE ACCURACY OF
unUTY LOCATIONS AND (2) DISCOVER AND AVOID NN UTILITIES Wm-IIN THE MITIGATION AREA WHICH MAY
BE AfFECTED BY IMPl..EMENTATION OF THIS PLAtt SUCH AREAS ARE TO BE ClEARLY MARKED IN THE
FIELD.
CONSTRUCTION MUST BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CODES, PERMIT CONDITIONS, AND OTHER
APPLICABLE ORDINANCES AND POLICIES.
THE APPLICANT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING ALL REQUIRED PERMITS/APPROVAlS PRIOR TO THE
START Of CONSTRUCTION. A COPY Of THE APPROVED PlANS, SPECIFlCATIONS.· PERMITS. AND AGENCY
APPROVALS MUST BE ON SITE WHENEVER CONSTRUCTION IS IN PROGRESS AND SHALl REMAIN ON SITE
UNTIL PROJECT COMPLETlON.
THE IdmGATION CONSTRUCTION MONITOR SHALl BE ON SITE, }S NECESSARY, TO MONITOR
CONSTRUCTION.
ANY CHANGES OR MOOIFlCA TIONS TO THIS PlAN SHALL RECEIVE PRIOR APPROVAL fROM THE MITIGATION
CONSlRUCTION MONITOR.
SlJRYfY/S!A!(E/BAG I!MITS OF WORK
PRIOR TO AN'( CONSTRUCTION, A UCENSED SURVEYOR SHALL SURVEY, STAKE, AND FlAG UMrTS OF
WORK AND WETLAND BOUNDARIES flS SHOWN IN THE PlANS. ELECTRONIC DRAWINGS SHOWING UMITS OF
WORK ARE AVAIlABLE UPON REQUEST. lHE MmGATION CONSTRUCTION MONITOR SHALL APPROVE
FLAGGING OF WORK UMITS PRIOR TO CONSTRucnON. CONTRACTOR SHAll BE RESPONSIBLE FOR
VERIFYING ACTUAl LOCATIONS OF EXISTING VEGETAnON TO BE SAVED AND RESTORING Nf( DISTURBANCE
TO EXISTING VEGETATION LOCA1ED OUTSIDE lHE UMITS OF WORK.
[ROSION CONTROl
All EROSION CONTROL IoAEASURES SHAll BE INSTAlLED AND IIdPL£I,4ENTED flS SHOWN IN THE S.W.P.P.
PlAN (SHEET C~3) PRIOR TO BEGINNING OF WORK.
C! fARING AND GRUBBING
CLEAR AND GRUB ALL AREAS SHOWN IN THE GRADING PlANS TO A 6-DEPTH (SEE GRADING PLAN).
AlL CLEARING AND GRUBBING AND VEGETATION TO REMAIN AREAS ·SHALL BE APPROVED BY MIT1GATION
CONSTRucnON MONITOR PRIOR TO WORK. PRIOR TO GRUBBING THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CLEAR ALL
INVASIVE SPP. TO THE GROUND AND APPLY HERBICIDE. HERBICIDE APPUCATION SHALL OCCUR DURING
THE GROWlNG SEASON BY UCENSED (IN STATE OF W}sHINGTON) APPUCATOR. HERBICIDE SHALL BE
BROAD SPECTRUM AQUATIC HERBICIDE (RODEO 1M OR APPROVED EQUAL).
CONlRACTOR SHALL REMOVE INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES WITH MINIMAl... rnSTUR&.NCE TO TI-IE EXISTING
VEGETATION TO REMAIN. CLEARED AND GRUBBED VEGETAnON SHALL BE EXPORTED FROM THE SITE.
PART1CUlAR CARE SIWl. BE TAKEN TO ENSURE COIoAPLETE REMOVAL OF TOPS AND ROOTS OF INVASIVE
PLANT SPECIES. INV}s1VE PlANT SPECIES TO BE REMOVED AND TREATED INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT UMITEO
TO: HIMALAYAN BLACKBERRY, JAPANESE KN01WITO, REED CANARYGRASS, PURPLE LOOSESTRIFE, HEDGE
BINDWEED (MORNING GLORY), SCOT'S BROOM, ENGUSH rvY. AND CREEPING NIGHTSHADE.
PART 2 -PLANT MATERIAL
PLANT MATERIA! S
PLANT MATERIAL SHALL CONFORM TO AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK (ANSI
Z60.1-20D4) FOR PLANT SIZE AND CONDITION FOR SPECIFIED MATERIAL
PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE LOCALLY GROWN (LOWER PUGET SOUND REGION) OR ALTERNATIVE
APPROVED SOURCE BY MITIGAnON CONSTRUCTION MON!TOR. PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE IN
HEAL lHY VIGOROUS GROW1NG CONOITION.
lHE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT DOCUMENTATiON THAT SPECIFIED PLANT MATERIALS HAVE BEEN
ORDERED AND SECURED. A UST OF SUPPUER NAMES, ADDRESSES, PHONE NUMBERS AND TIiE
STORAGE/GROWING LOCATION OF THE MATERIALS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE M1T1GATION
CONSTRUCTiON MONITOR WllHlN 30 DAYS OF CONTRACTOR AWARD.
PlANT CONDmON
THE MITIGATION CONSTRUCTION MONITOR SHALL APPROVE PLANT MATER!Al AT THE JOB SITE FOR
COMPUANCE WITH REQUIRED STANDARDS FOR PlANT SIZE AND QUALllY PRIOR TO PlANTING. THIS
INCLUDES, BUT IS NOT UMITED TO, SIZE AND CONDmON OF ROOTBAlLS AND ROOT SYSTEMS,
PRESENCE OF INSECTS, LATENT INJURIES AND DEFECTS. TREES MUST BE UNTIED AND SEPARATED
FOR INSPECTIONS. THE MmGATION CONSTRUCTION MONITOR RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REFUSE
mt/1.J.l. PLANT MATER!AL IF IT IS DETERMINED THAT SUCH MATER!AL DOES NOT MEET THE
SPECIFICATIONS /JS DESCRIBED HEREIN. REJECTED MATERIAL SHALL 8E IMMEDIATELY REMOVED FROM
PROJECT SITE.
STORAGE SITE AND METHOD
STORE PLANTS IN THE MANNER NECESSARY TO ACCOMMODATE THEIR HORTICULTURAL
REQUIREMENTS. PROTECT PlANT MATERIAL STORED ON-SITE FROM WEATIiER DAMAGE. CONSTRUCTION
ACTMTY AND TIiE PUBUC. BAlLED AND BURtAPPED· MATERIAL WHICH CANNOT BE INSTALLED
IMMEDIATELY SHALl BE MHEELEO-IN~ TO KEEP FROM DRYING OUT PRIOR TO PUOOTNG. PROTECT
ROOTBALLS BY COVERING WITH MOIST SOIL, MULCH OR SAWDUST. WATER ft5 NECES5.A.RY TO KEEP
ROOTBALLS MOIST.
KEEP PLANT SPECIMENS MOIST (WETlAND SPECIES SATURATED) AND SHADED UNTIL THE ACTUAL
TIME OF INSTAllATION. IF BARE-ROOT PlANTS ARE SPECIFIED, SOAK ROOTS IN WATER ONE-HOUR
MINIMUM PRIOR TO PlANTING. BEFORE AND AFTER pLANTING, IMMEDIATELY SATURATE THE SOILS IN
THE PlANTING AREA TO PREVENT CAPILLARY STRESS.
OF PlANT SPECIES OR SIZES MAY BE PERMmED BASED ON PlANT AVAIlABILITY,
BUT ONLY WITH PRIOR APPROVAL BY THE MITIGATION CONST~UCTION ·MONITOR.
PART 3 -PLANT INSTALLATION
SITE CONDITIONS
lHE CONlRACTOR SHALL VERIFY lHAT PLANT INSTALLATION CONDlTIONS ARE SUITABLE 'NllHIN lHE
MJTlGATION AREAS. ANY UNSATISFACTORY CONDlTIONS SHALL BE CORRECTED PRIOR TO START Of
WORK. WHEN CONDITIONS DElRlMENTAL TO PLANT GROWTH ARE ENCOUNTERED, SUCH AS RUBBLE
FILL. ADVERSE DRAINAGE CONDlTIONS. SIGNifiCANT VEGETATION, OR OBSTRUCTIONS, lHE CONlRACTOR
SHALL NOTiFY lHE MITIGATION CONSlRUCTION MONITOR PRIOR TO PLANTiNG. NO PLANTING SHALL
OCCUR IN STANDING WATER. AND INUNDATED PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE PLANTED WHEN CONDITIONS
PERMIT. BEGINNING Of WORK CONSTITUTES ACCEPTANCE OF CONDITIONS AS SATISFACTORY.
I OCATE IF! AG/yfRIFY PI ANTING AREAS
CONlRACTOR SHALL FIELD LOCATE, AND flAG, PLANTING AREAS AND CONFIGURAT10NS PRIOR TO
PLANTING. lHE MITIGAT10N CONSlRUCnON MONITOR SHALL REVIEW AND APPROVE LOCATiONS PRIOR
TO PLANTING.
Ml.Iill!
MULCH SHAlL INCLUDE HOG FUEL (APPLIED IN ALL BUFFER AREAS) AND FINE BARK (APPUED ONLY
IN WETlAND A).
HOG fUEL MULCH SHALL BE PLACED TO A 5-DEPTH. HOG FUEL SHALL BE A BLEND OF LOOSE,
LONG, THIN NATURAl WOOD PIECES WITH HIGH LENGTH-TO-W1DTIi RATIO. A MINIMUM OF
95-PERCENT SHALL HAVE LENGTHS BETWEEN 2 AND 1 D INCHES, AND NO MORE TfWl 15% BY
LOOSE VOLUME WILL PASS THROUGH A NO. 4 SIEVE. CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SAMPLE FOR
APPROVAl.
FINE BARK MULCH SHALL BE PLACED TO A 3-DEPTH. BARK MULCH SHALL BE DERrvE:O FROM
NATURAL WOOD PIECES, GROUND SO THAT A MINIMUM OF 95 PERCENT OF THE MATERIAL WILL
PASS THROUGH A 1-SIEVE AND NO MORE THAN 25 PERCENT, BY LOOSE VOLUME, WILL PASS
THROUGH A NO. 4 SIEVE. CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SAMPLE FOR APPROVAL.
HOG FUEL AND FINE BARK MULCH SHALL NOT CONTAIN RESIN, TANNIN, OR OTHER COMPOUNDS IN
QUANTffiES THAT WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO PLANT UFE. SAWDUST OR WOOD SHAVINGS SHALL NOT
BE USED AS MULCH.
PART 4 WARRANTY (ONE-YEAR)
THE CONTRACTOR SHAlL WARRANT CRAFTSMANSHIP AND MATERIALS FOR THIS PROJECT FOR A
PERIOD OF 1 YEAR BEGINNING AT FINAl ACCEPTANCE. THIS WARRANTY SHALL INCLUDE
REPLACEMENT OF PlANTS (SAME SIZE AND SPECIES SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS). EXCEPT FOR LOSS
DUE TO EXCESSIVELY SEVERE CLIMATOLOGICAL CONDITIONS (SUBSTANTIATED BY 10-YEAR RECORDED
WEATHER CHARTS), INSTALLED PlANT MATERIALS ARE REQUIRED TO BE GUARANTEED FOR 1 YEAR
AGAINST DEFECTS AND UNSATISFACTORY GROWTH, EXCEPT FOR CASES OF NEGLECT BY OWNER OR
ABUSE/DAMAGE BY OTHERS.
PART 5 -FINAL ACCEPTANCE
UPON COMPLETION, THE CONTRACTOR SHALl. PROVIDE THE MITIGATION CONSTRUCTiON MONITOR WITH
A SET OF CLEARLY MARKED PRINTS DESIGNATING THE ACTUAL LOCATIONS AND QUANTITIES OF
PlANTINGS WITHIN THE MffiGATION AREAS. TIiE CONTRACTOR SHALl. KEEP A COMPLffi SET OF
PRINTS AT THE JOB SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION FOR THE PURPOSE OF "RED-UNING" CfWlGES
OR MOO!FlCATIONS TO THE APPROVED PlANS AND SHALL UPDATE SAID INFORMATION ON A DAILY
BASIS. CONTRACTOR SHALL TAG INDIVIDUAL PlANT SPECIES AT THE TIME OF INSTALLATION. EACH
PLANT SPECIES SHALL HAVE A DIFFERENT COLOR TAG FOR VISUAL IDENTIFICATION. A COLOR CODED
PLANT TAG LEGEND SHALl BE PROVIDED TO THE MITIGATION CONSTRUCTION MONITOR PRIOR TO
SUBSTANTIAL COMPlETION.
MONITOR WILL PERFORM SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION WALK THROUGH
WITH THE CONTRACTOR. IF ITEMS ARE TO BE CORRECTED, A PUNCH UST WILL BE PREPARED BY
THE MITIGATiON CONSTRUCTION MONITOR AND SUBMITTED TO THE OWNER AND CONTRACTOR FOR
COMPLETION. AFTER PUNCH UST ITEMS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED, THE MITIGAnON CONSTRUCTION
MONITOR Will REVIEW THE PROJECT FOR GENERAL CONFORMANCE WITH THE APPROVED PlAN, AND
ACCEPTABLE, WiLL SUBMIT A LEITER OF COMPlETlON TO CITY OF RENTON. THE LEITER WILL
CONSTITUTE FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF lHE PROJECT.
THE DATE OF FINAL ACCEPTANCE WILL CONSTITUTE TIiE BEGINNING OF THE ONE-YEAR
WARRAN1Y /MAINTENANCE PERIOD AND THE 5-YEAR MAINTENANCE/MONITORING PERIOD AS REQUIRED
BY CITY OF RENTON
PART 6 MAINTENANCE
MAINTENANCE IS REQUIRED DURING THE WARRANTY PERIOD. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW
lANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS WITH THE MITIGATION CONSTRUCTION MONITOR WHO IS
fAMIlIAR WITH THE STATED GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Of THE MmGATlON PlAN. MAINTENANCE SHALL
BE PROVIDED BY lHE CONTRACTOR THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTlON AND DURING THE WARRANlY
PERIOD. AND BY TIiE OWNER AffiR THE FIRST YEAR.
MAINTENANCE SHALL INCLUDE TEMPORARY IRRIGATION. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO
ENSURE TIiE PROPER FUNCTIONING OF THE SYSTEM.
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE COMPOST SOCKS AT THE END OF THE ONE-YEAR WARRANTY
PERIOD. SOCKS TO BE CUT AND REMOVED LEAViNG COMPOST IN PLACE.
MAINTENANCE 'NlTHIN THE MIl1GA liON AREAS SHALL BE PERFORMED BY lHE CONTRACTOR OR
OV'I'NER AND REVIEWED BY THE MlllGA nON MONITOR. REQUIRED MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES ARE
INCLUOED IN TABLE 1.
rn z
0 ;::
00: c.>
!!;
c.> w a. rn
0 z
oO:
rn
...J
~
W
0
z
0
'1 ~ .' (!) ~ i=
;l: ~
...J
~ ~z I-",0 «0 ~ o.z z-
UJ oJ: 0-'"
UJ ~~ a:::: '" .
() u..Z
o~
>-~~ « () '"
:2:
.; m Z ~
ClIO; wi~ Z Will i5 ctl-co cg
>.( ~ ~ lIIo~j.~ o iii;"'" >g~;<~
«CII~!~
D.( '01" 1:
~ ;Ii •
• REVISIONS: APPD.
DATE: !.4ARCH, 2012
DESIGN: GBK
DRAWN: GBK
CHECKED: JCGA
REVISION
NUllBER:
SCALE:N/1o.
PRO.1EC'l' NUKBER:
RENTOOOO·0015
DRAlI'ING FILE:
la!.4POO5RENT15
SHEET NO.
M-5
OF 17
I
I
I
I
I
I
PORTION OF GOYT LOT 1. SECTION 32. TWP 24N. RNG. 5E .• W.M.
PART 7 -MONITORING PART 7B -GOALS AND OBJECTIVES TABLE 1: MAINTENANCE TASKS
BASE INSTALLATION (!)
PLANT ESTABUSHMENT THROUGHOUT THE MONITORING PERIOD IS ESSENTIAL TO PLANT COMMUNITY Z
ACl1\1TY SO<EOO..E SPECIAl NOTES DEVELOPMENT AND THE SUCCESS Of THE OVERALl. MITIGATION PlAN. THE PLANT ESTABUSHMENT 1. ENHANCE 42.015 SF Of SHOREUNE AREA BY Q.£ARING EXISTING INVASIVE SPEaES (HIMALAYAN ii':
ONE YEAR Ftl.LOWlNG PER100 FOR n·/ls PROJECT IS RVE (5) YEARS. DURING THIS TIME. THE aTY OR THEIR DESIGNEE BLACKBERRY,'JAPANESE KNOTWEED. AND REED CANARYGRASS) AND REPLANTING WITH NATIVE 0 ... ...J REPLACE All fAA.ED fl..AHTlNG. tHEN AS BY COOlRACTOR TIiE flRST 'rEAR; BY OWNER Af1ER SHAlL MONlTOR THE SITE ANNUAlLY fOR DETERMINING COMPUANCE WITH PERMITS ISSUED BY TREES' AND SHRUB SPEaES TO IMPROVE PlANT DIVERSITY AND HABITAT FUNCTIONS. Z WlllCA. 'T1QII Pl..ANlIfCS. REQUlRD)lOwm fIRST YENt FEDERAl, STATE OR LOCAL JURISDICTIONS. FlRST 'YEAR UONITORING SHAlL BE PERFORMED ~ enz 0 PERI'llRMAN'" . QUARTERLY. RESULTS fOR QUARTERS 1 THRU 3 SHALl BE SUBMITTED TO THE OTY AS A SHORT 2. ENHANCE 786 SF OF HIMALAYAN BLACKBERRY DOMINATED, T'tPE m WETLAND (ON-SITE) BY :!: STANDARDS. REPORT OR MEMO. fOURTH QUARTER MONITOR1NG SHALl INCLUDE YEAR 1 MONITORING RESULTS. "'0
COMPUANCE MONITORING PROVIDES A MEANS FOR TRACKING PLANT SURVIVAL, COVER OF REMOVING INVASIVE SPECIES AND REPLANTING Willi NATIVE TREES AND SHRUBS TO IMPROVE '" I-~0 TEUP<RARY IRRIGATION CF AT LEAST 'IED:l. Y, AU. PlANTS t,lUST RECENE (J£ lNal CF WATER PER 'IIIIHl( lNSTAlLED PlANTS AND UP TO 20 PERCENT OF ANY STRATUM COMPOSED Of DESIRABLE NATIVE PlANT DIVERSITY AND HABITAT fUNCTIONS. en
NEW PlAN""'" WAY 15 THRClJQi DURING ruE FIRST GROWING SEASON; BY CONlRACTOR THE Z ~ z~ OCTOBER J1 FCR THE FIRST "fEAR AND BY ov.t4ER AFTER THE FlRST YEAR. VOlUNTEERS, HEALTH AND GROWTH, HERBIVORY, PRESENCE Of WEEDS, TRASH AND VANDAUSM. ALTERNATE ONE INSTALLATION 0 FIRST "fEAR fCllOWlNG ~ W oiJj
PWlTlN~ MONITORING MElliODOLOGY INCLUDES A VARIETY OF ECOlOGICAL TECHNIQUES. STANDARD W ~~ 1. ENHANCE 15,219 SF Of SHOREUNE MEA BY CLEARING EXISTING INVASIVE SPEaES -(HIMALAYAN
lRASH RDotOVAL FROt,I All INSPECT AT I..EAST ~a: BY CONTRACTOR niE f1RST "fEAR AND O'M'ER AfTER TEQlNIQUES SUCH AS TRANSECT UNES AND SAMPLE PLOTS MAYBE USED. UONITORING INCLUDES BLACKBERRY, JAPANESE KNOl'Vr'EED, AND REED CANARYGRASS) AND REPLANTING WITH NATIVE u:: 0:: '" Z Q4-SlTE F1.00DPl..AIN EAOi "fEAR FOR YEARS " 1HE fIRST ""'-TRACKING MORTAUTY, ESTABUSHING PHOTOPOINTS AND OTHER METHODS DEEMED NECESSARY TO TR~ES AND SHRUB SPEaES TO IMPROVE PLANT DIVERSITY AND HABITAT fUNCTIONS. i3 () "'0 t,l111GA liON AREA. 2. 3, 4 ANO 5 CF THE FIVE AOEOUA ill Y DOCUMENT DEVELOPMENT Of MlTlGA TION AREAS OVER THE LtONITORING PERIOD.
YEAR UCHTOOING PERlOO. W >-~ffi Q.
PART 7C -PERFORMANCE STANDARDS en « i3 a: z J<DlIIIG ANNUM Y foo YEAR " 1REES AND ~ MUST BE 'fI£EOEO TO THE ORIPUNE 0 ::2: 8I-ANNUAlLY FCR YEARS 2. AND HOG FUEL WUlOi t,lAlNTAlNED AT 4 1H000S O£PTH. BY PART 7A -MITIGATION APPROACH ~ l. 4. ANO 5 Of l1iE FNE C(JoIlRACTCR l1iE nRST YEAR; BY 0YIt4ER AFTER THE fIRST PERFORMANCE STANDARDS (TABLE 2) HAVE BEEN ESTABUSHED THAT CORRESPOND TO THE 'I£AR WC»IITOONG PERlOO T£AR,
BASE INSTALLATION STATED UITlGAllON GOALS AND OBJECTIVES. THESE STANDMDS ME THE PRIMARY fACTORS
HERBM:fi:Y REPEI..1.DIT II6I£DtA TEl. Y AfTER APf'i..y ORGANIC REPEl.l.EHT PlANTSKYOO (00 APf>RO't{D THAT SHALL BE USED TO MEASURE THE SUCCESS OF THE SHORELINE ENHANCEMENT, Vt£TlAND E INSTAUAnoo AND EQUAL) PER t.l.4M1FACruRtR'S WRITTEN PROVlDE MITlGAllON fOR 6,865 SF (0.20 AC) OF PERMANENT SHOREUNE IUPACT FROM THE MAY BUFFER ENHANCEMENT AND WEnAND ENHANCEMENT UITIGATION AREAS. IT IS IMPORTANT TO ::;: ANNUAU.YlHEREAFlER RECCIftIDIDAT\ONS. CREEK TRAIL WITH ON-SITE SHOREUNE AREA AND WETLAND ENHANCEMENT. ENHANCEMENT WILL EVALUATE mE DEVELOPMENT OF THE MIllGATION PLAN OVER THE ENllRE MONITORING PERIOD I
I
I
I
I ~ • ..
'" I ~ ~
0 ..
" 0 I §
ili
AMOUNT TO 42.015 SF (0.96 AC) Of SHOREUNE AREA AND 766 SF (0.02 AC) Of EXISTING WHEN DETERMINING WJ-jETHER ALl STANDARDS HAVE BEEN UET. WHILE SPEOnc PERFORMANCE
"""'ODE ANNUAU. Y OURIHG l1iE I.JCtNSED STAlE APPlICATOR. USE BROAD SPEClRlN CATEGORY III W£TlAND, FOR A TOTAL OF 42.801 SF (0.96 AC) OF MlllGATION PROVIDED TO STANDARDS PROVIDE IMPORTANT BENCHMARKS AND SHALl HELP TO DIRECT MAINTENANCE AND ~ """""" SEASON AQUATIC HERBICIDE, ROOEO 'IN (CR APPROVED EQUAL) IMPROVE WETLAND, W£iLAND BUFfER AND SHOREUNE FUNCTION. CONTINGENCY EffORTS. lHE SUCCESS OF MITlGA TlON MUST BE MEASURED AGAINST THE GOALS
PER UAHUFACTURER'S WRITTEN REcaGlENDAn~ AND OB.£CTIVES Of THE OVERALl MITlGA TION PlAN. BY MONITORING THE PRO'£CT AND
ALTERNATE ONE INSTALLATION CQUPARING UONITORING RESULTS TO PERFORMANCE STANDARDS. A DElERMINATION CAN BE UADE
FOR THE NEED TO IMPLEMENT MAINTENANCE EfFORTS OR THE CONllNGENCY PLAN.
a.u.R ANO GRUB UNOESIRABlE AS REQUIRED .. ROtOVAL SH(U.D BE AS OIRECTED BY 'III£1lAND PROVIDE UlTlGATlON FOR B,865 SF (0.20 AC) OF PERMANENT SHOREUNE IMPACT FROM THE MAY INVASVE PLAN15 FROt,I All ~-sn[ ANNUAL t,lCHTCRING CONS1RUCT1(J11 t,leNTOR DURING fIRST 'I£AR. CLEARING AND
SHORn.lNE WllIGAlION AREAS. REPORTS. CRUBBtNG SHAU. BE ActaiPlJSHED BY PHYSICALlY CREEK TRAIL WITH ON-SITE SHORELINE AREA AND Ylt:TLAND ENHANCEMENT. ENHANCEMENT WILL ST .. n:1F UNIlESIlAB.E (tOHIEOWfCAl) REt.I<MNG PLANT WAT£RIAlS {JNQJJDING AMOUNT TO 15,219 Sf (0.35 AC) OF SHOREUNE AREA MITIGATION WETlAND BUFFER AND PART 8 -CONTINGENCY PLAN V~
SPECIES INQ.UO[: ROOT t,lASSES) 00 HAND TRIIAlING BY CONlRACTOR. VfiDS SHOREUNE fUNCTION. . -~ HIMALAYAN BlACKBERRY WST BE PR(HRlY DISPOSED a OFf-SITr. BY CQNlRACTCR ~L """""" """"'BE"'" Tt£ F1RST YEAR; BY 0'fINER AFTER THE fIRST YEAR. IF NECESSARY A CONTINGENCY PLAN WILL PROVIDE REMEOIA TlON fOR THE MITlGA TION GOALS THAT scors~ HAVE NOT BEEN UET. If THE STATED UITIGATION GOALS. AS MEASURED BY lHE MONITORING TJf"lC.oT£ .c· ... ':. "'GUSH M PROGRAM AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS. HAVE NOT BEEN MET AND CANNOT BE ACHIEVED PURPLE lOOS£ STRIf'[
UOOHIHG Q.ORY THROUGH ROUTINE MAINTENANCE, THEN A DETERMINATION BY CITY OF RENTON WILL BE MADE TO
0..-0 NlGHTSIWl< REQUIRE SUBMITIAL OF A CONTINGENCY PLAN. AFTER YtRITTEN APPROVAL BY THE CITY, A .; JAPANESE ICHOT'/IEED CONTINGENCY PLAN SHALL BE IMPLEMENTED THAT COMPENSATES FOR THE FAILED GOALS OF THE ! G
REED CAHAlm:RASS APPROVED MITIGATION PlAN. IF lHE CONTINGENCY PlAN IS SUBSTANTIAL. THE CITY MAY EXTEND ij~~ 111111 THE MONITORING PERIOD. zw
TABLE 2: PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND METHODS ~~ i!la
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS MONITORING METHODS MONITORING INTERVAL w-~i~
A. II111GAllON COST ESlllo1ATE (BASE INSTAl1AllON~ cC) !i~ _0
QUARTERLY OBSERVATIONAL MONITORING SHALL INCLUDE:
BOND ESTIMATE (INQUDES lABOR. MATERIALS, UAINTENANC[
>111 ~ii UITlGA TION PLANTS;
«III
1. SIGNS OF HERBIVORY BY DEER OR BEAVER TO INSTAlLED 1. DOCUMENTED oeSERVA TIONS OF I.1IT1GA TION AREA INCLUDING YEAR 1, QUARTERLY AND MONITORING FOR 5 YEARS, C«
RECOMMENDATIONS TO ADDRESS ITEMS THAT ARE DElRlMENTAL (SHOREUNE ENHANCEWENT AREA. 30% CONTINGENCY AND 10% M08IUZATlON) ~
2. SIGNS OF PLANT t.lORTAUTY. OTHER lHAN HERBIVORY. fROU DISEASE. IMPROPER PLANT TO WTIGA TION SUCCESS. WEllAND A AND WETLAND BUFFER) • SELECTION, EXPOSURE TO EXTREUE CUMATE CONDITlONS. POOR PLANT ESTABUSHMENT TOTAL COST ESlll1A TE: ,136,951.60 »II 3. SIGNS OF UNACCEPTABLE REESTABUSHMENT OF NON-NATIVE SPECIES; B. p[RFQR\jANCE BOND -(BASE INSTAl1AllON) (120l1: OF A) IS
4. SIGNS OF VANDAUSM AND ILLEGAL DUMPING; ESlll1A TED TO BE: S 164.3-11.92
r z I ~ ~ • • ~
I i ~
0 < I ~ ~
'" 0 0 I ~ i5 :;
I : .. ~
5. STREAM BANK INSTABILITY /EROSION; REVISIONS: "'D.
6. CONDITION OF HOG FUEL UULCH THAT IDENTIFY AREAS 0:-EROSlON, DEPTH LESS THAN 5",
AND SA TURA TlON AT SURF ACE AND; PART 9 -LONG TERM VEGETATION MANAGEMENT
7. CONDITlON OF IRRIGATION SYSTEM THAT INCLUDE UISSING OR DAMAGED UNES AND HEADS OR
EROSION RESULTING fROt.t LEAKS OR DAMAGE.
ANNUAL MONITORING SHALL INCLUDE: THE MITIGATION PLAN (PARTS 1-8) IDENTIFIES THE REQUIRED ACTIONS TO BE IMPLEMENTED BY
THE aTY TO ENSURE THE ESTABUSHMENT OF THE SHOREUNE ENHANCEMENT AREAS. THE CITY
1. 100 PERCENT SURVIVAL OF ALL INSTALLED NATIVE TREES AND SHRUBS ONE-YEAR POST 1. TOTAL PLANT COUNT OF ALL INSTALLED TREES AND SHRUBS. YEAR 1, SHALL COMPLY WITH PROVISIONS DESCRIBED IN THE VEGETATION MANAGEI.4ENT CODE (RMC
INSTALLATlON OF AU. SHOREUNE MITIGATION PLANTS. (SHOREUNE ENHANCEMENT AREA. .... 3-0901'.1.1).
II£TLAND A AND WETLAND BUFFER) THE CITY SHALl CONDUCT ANNUAL UONITORING INSPECTIONS DURING THE REQUIRED FIVE YEAR
• PERCENT SURVIVAL OF AU. INSTALlED CONIFEROUS TREES, ~AR 2. AND J . (POST CONSTRUCTION) MONITORING PERIOD.
".n, APRIl. 2012
TREE AND SHRUB SURVIVAl: 100% BY 'I"£AR 1. DESIGN: GIIK
PERCENT SURVIVAL or SHRUBS MEASURED BY AN APPROVED
SHORillNE ENHANCEMENT AREA, DR.l1l'N: GIIK
• TREE AHD SHRUB SURVIVAl.; 9~ BY YEAR 2, 85X BY YEAR 3. ~TLAND A AND WETLAND BUFFER) THE OTY SHAl!. CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN THE SHOREUNE ENHANCEMENT AREAS fOR THE UFE Of CBE"""'" """ MONITORING TECHNIQUE SUCH AS TRANSECTS AND JOR SAMPLE PLOTS. THE USE. ANNUAL INSPECTIONS SHALL VERIFY YEAR 5 PERFORUANCE STANDARDS ARE REVlSJON
~~R J AND 5.
MAINTAINED. IF INSPECTIONS 00 NOT MEET YEAR 5 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, CORRECTIVE """""'" 2. ANNUAl. MONITORING FOR COVER OF ALL INSTALLED TREES AND SHRUBS. VQUNTEER NATIVE 2. PERCENT COVER OF INSTALLED TREES AND SHRUBS SHALL BE ACTIONS SUCH AS INSTAWNG ADDITIONAL OR REPLACEMENT VEGETATION AS DEEMED NECESSARY
~FS AND SHRUBS IN SHORELINE ENHANCEMENT, WETLAND • A'. AND WERAND BUFFER MEASURED BY AN APPROVED MONITORING TECHNIQUE SUCH ~S (SHOREUNE ENHANCEMENT AREA, TO MAINTAIN ECOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS UAY BE REQUIRED. SCALI: NIA
HANCEMENT MONITORING AREAS. lRANSECTS AND/OR SAMPLE PLOTS. ~TLAND A AND WETLAND BUFFER) """""'-iIREE AND SHRUB COlIER, 6"" BY YEAR J. 85X BY YEAR 5. RENTQOOO-OO15
3. AT LEAST 4 NATIVE TREE SPECIES AND 10 NATIVE SHRUB SPECIES SHALL BE PRESENT IN THE 3. TALlY SPEOES DIVERSITY IN UITlGATION AREAS. ~AJ<_ 1. ,Z. '. 4. AND 5.
(SHOREUNE ENHANCEMENT AREA, DIU. WING I1IB:
SHOREUNE MITIGATION AREA. OVERALL SPEaES DIVERSITY SHALL BE GREATER THAN 1 •. WETLAND A AND WETLAND BUFFER) """"""",,n,
'" I ~ ~
"-..
0 I f.
4. NO MORE THAN lOX COVER OF NON-NATIVE OR OlHER INVASIVES, E.G., HIMALAYAN 4. PERCENT COVER OF NON-NATIVE OR INVASIVE SPEaES SHALL BE YEAR 1. 2. J. 4. AND 5. SHUT NO.
BLACKBERRY, EVERGREEN BlACKBERRY. REED CANARYGRASS. SCOTS BROOM, ENGlISH IVY, MEASURED BY AN APPROVED UDNITORING TECHNIQUE SUQl AS (SHOREUNE ENHANCEMENT AREA, M-6 MORNING GLORY, ETC. IS PERMISSIBLE. AND NO JAPANESE KNOTWEED, IN ANY MONITORING YEAR. TRANSECTS AND/OR SAMPLE PLOTS. ~TLAND A AND WEllAND BUFFER) BONO HOLDERS ARE ENCOURAGED TO UAiNTAlN MITIGATION SITES WITHIN THESE STANDARDS 100% FINAL SUBMITI AL THROUGHOUT THE MONITORING PERIOD, TO AVOID CORRECTIVE MEASURES. 0.17
-_._-
I'
I
I
I
I I~"I
I
I
I
I ~.,
~ .n
II r11 a ,
D. , I
I
~
~ w w
iJj
>-
~
'" '"
I i
~
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
" §
~
'" a g
~
~
0:
E
~
8
N ,
m ,
v a
~
FlNlSHED GRADE
CONCRElE FOOliNG
(m»
12" BASE COJRSE.
COMPACTED
(lW)
EXISTING
SUBGRADE
(m»
WIN. 4" ANY oo.EMSION
CEDAR RAlLS
CEDAR SPLIT RAIL FENCE
GENERAL NOTES:
1. FINAL PLACEMENT OF SITE FURNISHINGS SHALL
BE APPROVED BY OWNER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.
2. ADDITIONAL DETAIL HAS BEEN PROVIDED FOR
OWNER FURNISHED CONTRACTOR INSTALLED (OFCi)
ITEMS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. SEE
DETAILS FOR CLARIFICATION.
3. TRAILHEAD SIGN DETAIL IS NOT SHOWN. INSTALLATION
SHALL BE PER THE INTERPRETIVE SIGN BASE DETAIL.
HOT TO 5CALE
'QU"
;~
36·
,-, -I
I I
I I
PORTION OF GOV'T LOT 1. SECTION 32. TWP 24N. RNG. 5E .• W.M.
b ,
;,
+ " ,
N
NOTE:
SlGN IS OWNER RJRNISHED.
CQNTRACT(1! INSTAllED (OFCI),
MAY CREEK TRAIL PARK SIGN
'"' ~
~.=
6" EXTRUDED ALUWlNUW
POST PAINTED BtACK
rFlNlSHED GR.4.OE
(m')
INTERPREllVE SIGN BASE
SIGN
~
~ FINISHEtI GRADE
NOTE!
INTERPREnVE SIGN BASE AND
PORCElAIN PANEl
IS OWNER FURNISHED,CONTRACTOR
INSTAillO (OfCl).
~m"""
'" -'
"'I" 1-,-'
h
1
N
5'-0· SPUT CEDAR LOG
00",-
LOG SUPPORT
~ FINISHED GRADE
HOlE: spur CEDAR lOG AND LOG SUPPORT
IS OYoNER FURNISHED,CONTRACTOR
INSTAllED (ora).
SPLIT CEDAR LOG BENCH
2 #4 REBAR, 1'-0· MIN.
LENGTH
CONCRETE FOOlING
EXlSl1NC SUBGRAOE
~.-
EbMt
1"lieu FOR OI/otIIER
SUPPUED CHAIN AND LOCK.
GALVANIZED OOME TOP
w/ FlM'
30 GAI..1.00 G,A,lVANIZED
CAN
GAlVANIZED OGlE TOP
~TH FlAP
f4:eJvbi16'2p~§TIl!KJ.~TS~RO~
F A1RYIEA lHER SIT[ FURNISHINGS -
lR-2 STRAIGHT TRASI-l RECEPl1a..E
(OR APPROVED EOUAl).
FINISHED GR.4.OE
(lW)
~ EUBED PEDESTAL BASE ffiQEll.E..
20" LENGTH -2" SCH 40
PIPE ~;----~ CQNCRElE FOOTING ~ EXISTING SUBGRADE
FRONT
TRASH RECEPTACLE
lOOT to..;IU
~ ~ c
i
...J
«'" g: ~~
[6 ~I w m~ a: a::z
~I ~
o 15~ ~ 5M!
~
'%.I
<\1
~);
.'.I
:{;
t~(
ci ~ z ~
lIIa;w~o
Zbl~8f5
0('" ~:i~ ~o=! £i~ s_~ 90 ~;iP >111 .~.
o(CI)~ID&.
Co(· j
o .. z m <
• REVISIONS: APPD.
DATE: APRIL 2012
DESIGN: GBt<
DRAWN: GBt<
CHECKED: JCGA
REVISION
NUMBER:
SCAlE:
PROJECT NUHBER:
RENTOOOO-OOI5
DRAWING FILE:
lat.lPOO6RENT15
<<;t SHEET NO.
M-7
OF 17 I ~~ -
u..i
Lfl
z o -= u w
(f)
~
~
i
"
~
!
NOJ.ONJHS\fM 'NOlN311
S)lH'fd NOlN3II :10 A.lJO
llVl:il )1331::10 AVV\!
N'I1d AI:IOlN3AN1 331:il.
~ ~ ;, l! " • " • • " • " "
b , ~ ~ ~ " ~ b ~ , ~ ~ ,
~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ffi ~ • • 8
• • " ~ • 2 • • 0 ;I • • ~ § § § § § § § § § § §
d z w
0 ~
l! • ;, • " "
); " • • .. ,
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 8 8 0
0
• • • ~ • ~ § § § §
~ ~
::I > >
i1 ~ ~ ::I ~ t! ~ ~
" > ~ ~ ~
,
• § ~ > ~
~ r , r § ~ ~ § ~ z
~ ~ ~ • ~ ~
0*@@ ~
§
!
,t
I
<r
2
@ •
~ ~§
"' ~~ 0
o.
OO!i9'6~9'9~t :BU04d
9~SE-W096 UOllIul48BM erv.8n8EI
3senU8AVIfl8H'9~v
·ONI83J.'tIIOOSS'1fCNV
SN",1\3 011\",0
3 ~ i z
S ~
15
, ~ 0 • [ 3 ~ 3 ~ " ! is ~ • r ~ • ~ § • H 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ •
I I I I 1 ~ I I
I
~
I
~
I
3
~ I I I I I I
~ ~ il ~ ~ ,
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
!I ~ ~ 00 .., " g I
" ~ ~ :2t:, '-~ § ~ ~ 0 II:! ~ ~ ~ • ~ ~ • o E ~
5 _.' ,.'4.;, l1'dit''lP'MiM$;:j
~
j
Jl----
....J
~
::2:
CO
:::::l en
....J «
Z
LL
... . .
~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ~
o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
" , , " " , " .. " l! • " , ~ " ;, " ;; " ;, • • " ;; , ;, ~ • " • ~ .. , " " ;, , , ;; ;, ;; .. • • ~ , ;; ~ ;: ;, • ,
~
b b .. ;, ~ • • ~ • " b " ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , , .. ;, ~ ;, • ~ ~ .. " ~ .. I. ~ , • , , ~ ." ~ , ." .. b , , ~ b ;, ~
~ i ~ s ~ s
~ ffi ~ ffi ~ ffi ~ ~ r~ ~ ~ ~ ~ u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ffi ~ ~ ~ ffi ~ ~ ~ ffi ffi ~ ~ ~ ffi ~ ~ ~ ffi ~ ~ ~ ffi ffi ~ ~ ~ • • • ~ 8 8 • 8 • • • • • 8 • •
• • • • • • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ " ~ i ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ " ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ " ~ ~ § § § § § § ~ ~ ~ ~ •
6Mp'SllN3~BOOOd'fiOI\S133HS IN3~:H::InO\laa4S\~Ma\Vl\OV:JOOtO\SlOOOOOOlN3~\J\:d -UJd9t:t ZVM/tO >1q6 -------------------
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
AGENCY
NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM
CITY OF RENTON
PARKS PLANNING & NATURAL RESOURCES
MAY CREEK TRAiL
King County, Washington
RENTOOOO-OOJ5
Prepared/or:
CITY OF RENTON
Parks Planning and Natural Resources
1055 South Grady Way
P.O. Box 90012
. Renton, W A 98057-3232
Prepared by:
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
415 118th Avenue SE
Bellevue, W A 98005
April2012
DAVID EVANS
ANDASSOCIATES INC.
c· tty Of Rellto
Planning o. .. 11 IVISlon
MAY -:I \)IZ
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
lBlIOJLOGlICAJL ASSlESSMEN1I'
lFlE]llERAJL lEMlERGlENCY MANAGlEMlEN1I'
AGlENCY
NA1I'lIONAJL lFJLOO]) lINSlURANClE ]PROGRAM
ClI1I'Y OlF RlEN1I'ON
]PARKS ]PJLANNlING &, NA1I'lURAJL RlESOlURClES
MA.. Y C]lmlEK 1I'RAlIlL
King County, Washington
RENTOOOO·0015
Prepared for:
CITY OF RENTON
Parks Planning and Natural Resources
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, W A 98057·3232
Prepared by:
Scott Swarts
Senior Fish and Wildlife Biologist
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
415 118th Avenue SE
Bellevue,WA 98005
Phone: 425.519.6593
Fax: 425.519.5361
AJll'il2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1
2.0 STUDIES AND COORDINATION ................................................................................... 4
2.1 Field Investigation ........................................................................................................ 4
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................ 5
4.0 PROJECT AREA AND ACTION AREA DEFINITION ................................................. 7
4.1 Project Area .................................................................................................................. 7
4.2 Action Area .................................................................................................................. 7
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE ...................................................................................... 9
6.0 SPECIES ANALySIS ........................................................................................................ 18
6.1 Puget Sound Chinook Salmon .................................................................................... 18 .
6.2 Puget Sound Steelhead Trout ..................................................................................... 19
6.3 Southern Resident Killer Whales ............................................................................... 20
7.0 ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT ......................................................................................... 22
8.0 IMPACT MINIMIZATION MEASURES ...................................................................... 23
8.1 Conservation and Performance Measures .................................................................. 23
9.0 EFFECTS ANALYSIS ...................................................................................................... 24
9.1 Floodplain Habitat Alterations ................................................................................... 24
9.2 Effects to Salmonid Baseline Habitat Conditions ...................................................... 27
9.3 Southern Resident Killer Whale Impacts ................................................................... 28
9.4 Interrelated and Interdependent Actions .................................................................... 28
10.0 DETERMINATION OF EFFECTS ................................................................................. 29
10.1 Chinook Salmon ......................................................................................................... 29
10.2 Chinook Salmon Designated Critical Habitat ............................................................ 29
10.3 Puget Sound Steelhead Trout .......................................................... : .......................... 30
10.4 Southern Resident Killer Whale ................................................................................. 30
10.5 Southern Resident ~iIIer Whale Critical Habitat ....................................................... 31
10.6 Essential Fish Habitat ................................................................................................. 31
11.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................... 33
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Biological Assessment
P;IMENTOOOOOD1510600INFOlBiOloglcal AssessmentV'lna/ BA plus figures and ap,06ndlcesIMay Creek Troll BA-dOC
April 2012
LIST OF TABLES
Table I: NMFS Species, Critical Habitat, and EFH Addressed in this BA ......................... 1
Table 2: May Creek 2008 Water Quality Assessment... ................................................... .15
Table 3: Matrix of Pathways and Indicators Summary ..................................................... 16
Table 4: Wetland Summary ............................................................................................... 17
Table 5: Salmonid Habitat Project Effects Matrix ............................................................. 27
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure I. Vicinity Map ......................................................................................................... 2
Figure 2. Aerial Photo -Project Area Map ........................................................................ .3
Figure 3. Action Area Map .................................................................................................. 8
Figure 4. Site Photographs ................................................................................................. 10
Figure 5. FEMA Floodplain Map ..................................................................................... .26
APPENDICES
Appendix A -Site and Grading Plan
Appendix B -Mitigation Plan
P;\i\RENTOOOOOO t 5\0600INFOlB/oloq/ca/ Assessmenllf/nal BA pius figures and appendlces\May Creek Tmil BA.doc
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Biological Assessment
ii April 2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
°C
OF
ASL
BA
BFW
BIBI
BMPs
BO
CESCL
cfs
CRS
dbh
DEA
DPS
Ecology
EFH
ESA
ESU
FEMA
HUC
1-405
LWD
mm
NFIP
NHP
NMFS
NOAA
NWI
OHWM
PCE
PFMC
PHS
PS
RM
SRKW
TESC
TMDL
TSS
USFWS
USGS
WDFW
WDNR
WRlA
degrees Celsius
degrees Fahrenheit
above sea level
Biological Assessment
bankfull width
benthic invertebrate index
best management practices
Biological Opinion
Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead
cubic feet per second
Community Rating System
diameter at breast height
DavidcEvans and Associates, Inc.
Distinct Population Sequence
Washington State Department of Ecology
essential fish habitat
Endangered Species Act
Evolutionarily Significant Unit
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Hydrologic Unit Code
Interstate 405
large woody debris
millimeter
National Flood Insurance Program
Natural Heritage Program
National Marine Fisheries Service
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Wetlands Inventory
ordinary high water mark
Primary Constituent Element
Pacific Fisheries Management Council
Priority Habitats and Species
Puget Sound
river mile
Southern Resident Killer Whale
Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control
total maximum daily load
total suspended solids
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
U.S. Geological Survey
Washington Department ofFish and Wildlife
Washington State Department of Natural Resources
Water Resource Inventory Area
P;It\RENTOOOODOf5l0600INFOlBloIogJcal Assessment'oFinaJ BA plus f1gUfeS 1100 IIppendlcesWay Creek T raJl SA.doc
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Biological Assessment
iii April 2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1.0 INTRODUCTION
At the request of the City of Renton, David Evans and Associates, Inc. (DEA) prepared this
Biological Assessment (BA) for a proposed trail adjacent to May Creek that includes crossing a
portion of the special flood hazard area inundated by the 100-year flood. The project site is
located within the City of Renton, Washington (Section 32, Township 24 north, Range 05 east,
W.M.) (see Figures 1 and 2). The site address is 4260 Lake Washington Boulevard North,
Renton, Washington 98065, and is further identified as Parcel Number 3224059109. This parcel
is located on the north side of May Creek, and the west side ofInterstate(I)-405, between 1-405
and Lake Washington Boulevard North. The entire parcel covers approximately 3.09 acres and
abuts approximately 900 linear feet of May Creek. The site is in Water Resource Inventory Area
(WRIA) 8: Cedar-Sammamish Basin. More specifically, the project site is within the May Creek
Watershed, 6th Field Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 171100120302, while the approximate
latitude and longitude is 47.52881 by -122.19966.
This Biological Assessment (BA) was prepared to address City of Renton requirements
associated with projects that include development activities within the 100-year floodplain. This
requirement is, in part, associated with the findings of the Biological Opinion (BO) prepared by
the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (NMFS 2008) at the request of the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to be consistent with the judicial order in National
Wildlife Federation, et al v. FEMA, et al (345F. Supp. 2d 1151; 2004 U.S. Dis!., Nov. 15,2004),
which found that FEMA violated its responsibility to consult under Endangered Species Act
(ESA) section 7(a)(2). FEMA submitted a BA to NMFS evaluating the effects of the National
Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The NMFS then prepared the BO, evaluating the effects of
three discretionary elements of the NF1P on 18 federally-listed species and designated critical
habitat in Washington State. Phase I of the BO is specific to listed species in the Puget Sound
(PS) region including PS Chinook salmon (Dncorhynchus tshawytscha), PS steelhead trout (D.
mykiss), Hood Canal summer-run chum salmon (0. keta), Lake Ozette sockeye salmon (D.
nerka), and the Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of endangered southern resident killer whales
(SRKW) (Drcinus orca). The three discretionary elements of the NFIP that were subject to
evaluation by NMFS in the BO are:
1. The floodplain mapping program;
2. The minimum floodplain management criteria for community inclusion in the NFIP;
3. The community rating system (CRS).
Listed species, critical· habitat, and essential fish habitat (EFH) specific to the NMFS BO
addressed in this BA are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1: NMFS Species, Critical Habitat, and EFH Addressed in this BA.
i Species
Puget Sound Chinook Salmon
Puget Sound Steelhead Trout
Southern Resident Killer Whale
Essential Fish Habitat
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Biological Assessment
Sclenliflc Name Federal Slalus Crillcal Habllal
Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Threatened Designated
Oncorhynchus mykiss Threatened Under Review
Orcin us orca Threatened Designated
NA NA NA
P:IIIRENTOOOOO015\0600INFOlBloJog/cai Assessment'IFlna/ BA plus II'qures and apeendlcesIMay Creek Trail BAdoc
April 2012
City
King County
(Unincorporated)
-r-: .~ -~ Stream
o 0.5 1
C::hiii' "'·'",w,m;e==' Miles
<; Waterbody
Source: King County GIS, Ecology GIS
, ,
Vicinity Map
City of Renton -May Creek Trail
RENTOO00-0015
Figure 1
December 2011
, "
DAVID .V ......
_/l. •• OCIATe. __
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
C Parcel Boundary
-Proposed Trail
Source : King County GIS . City of Renton GIS
Aerial Photo -Site Map
City of Renton -May Creek Trail • RENTOOIJO-OO15
Figure 2 ~y ............ . _ ... 'OC .... T •• _
February 2012
2.0 STUDIES AND COORDINATION
DEA reviewed FEMA NFIP ESA floodplain information, and existing literature and scientific
data to determine species distribution, habitat requirements, and other pertinent biological
parameters specific to the action area. TIlis BA was prepared following the review of project plans,
public domain resource data, and multiple site visits. The potential use of the action area by listed
species was investigated through review of the following information:
• FEMA NFlP and ESA: http://www.fema.gov/aboutlregionsiregionxinfipesa.shtm
• Washington Department ofFish and Wildlife (WDFW)-Priority Habitats and Species
(PHS) data: http://wdlW.wa.gov/conservation/phsi
• WDFW -SalmonScape: http://wdlW.wa.gov/mapping/salmonscape/
• King County Salmon Watcher Reports:
http://www.kingcounty.gov/environmentianimalsAndPlantsisalmon-and-troutlsalmon-
watchersireports.aspx
• Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Natural Heritage Program
(NHP) data:
http://www.dnr.wa.govlResearchScience!TopicslNaturaIHeritagelPagesiamp_nh.aspx
• National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Online Mapper:
http://www.lWs.gov/wet lands/Data/mapper.html
• A Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmon Utilization -Volume I -Puget Sound
Region. Washington Department of Fisheries (Williams et al. 1975)
• Salmon and Steel head Habitat Limiting Factors Report for the Cedar -Sammamish Basin
(Water Resource Inventory Area 8) (Kerwin 200 I)
• Final Adopted May Creek Basin Action Plan (April 2001):
http://www.kingcounty.gov/environmentlwatersheds/cedar-river-Iake-wa/may-
creeklmay-creek-basin-plan.aspx
2.1 Field Invest/gat/on
DEA performed mUltiple site visits during March and November 20 II to verify preliminary data
findings, document existing habitat conditions, and document wildlife use. The ordinary high
water mark (OHWM), wetlands, and areas with native vegetation were flagged by a DEA
biologist. Wetlands were delineated based on the Re gio nal Supplement to the Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0)
(U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2010). All flags and significant trees (>6 inches diameter at
breast height [dbh]) on the project site were surveyed by DEA. Plant species were identified
according to Cooke (1997), Pojar and MacKinnon (1994), Washington State Department of
Ecology (Ecology) (2001), and Hitchcock and Cronquist (1973).
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Biological Assessment
4 April20J2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
I
D
I
o
•
I
o
o
o
u
-
I
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The City of Renton is in the process of implementing The Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan
(Master Plan). The Master Plan reflects the desire to create an interconnected trail network to
accommodate both recreational and commuting uses for pedestrians and cyclists. This effort
includes a pedestrian greenway trail along May Creek, with a connection to Lake Washington and
Honey Creek. The Master Plan identified the May Creek Trail as a high priority, which, when
completed, would include a six-mile-Iong trail between Lake Washington and Cougar Mountain
RegionallWildland Park. This specific project is a critical step toward implementing the goals
outlined in the Master Plan.
The May Creek Trail Project (Project) is defined as the construction of a pedestrian trail, and
implementation of a mitigation/restoration plan within shoreline jurisdiction and flood hazard area
of May Creek and buffer of a small (786-square-foot) Category III wetland (Wetland A). The
Project would construct a 6-foot-wide by 0.27-mile-Iong trail composed of bark atop a gravel base.
The trail around the wetland has been located primarily in the outer 50 percent of its 75-foot-wide
buffer, except in the southern portion by the stream where a beach access point is proposed. The
trail ranges from 0 to 70 feet from the OHWM of May Creek, but is typically 30 to 40 plus feet
away. The closest point to the OHWM is the beach access point, followed by the overlook pull-out
that is approximately 17 feet from the OHWM.
The trailhead would be located on Lake Washington Boulevard immediately north of its crossing
over May Creek. The trail would meander throughout the project site. One view area that
overlooks May Creek, as well as one access point to a gravel bar, is provided. The trail includes
two access points to the north that will eventually connect to Hawks Landing. The trail loops
around the on-site wetland within the eastern portion of the parcel. The tniil will eventually be
expanded further to the east of 1-405. Two benches, two interpretive signs, a trailhead sign, a split-
rail fence, and a litter receptacle will also be installed. No additional parking, structures, or other
features are associated with this project. No in-water or over-water work is proposed. The majority
of the trail will be constmcted on grade. Although some minor cut and fill will be required, the
neat-line quantities will be balanced within the flood hazard area, resulting in no net fill.
The trail has been designed to avoid existing trees, as well as the few patches of native shrubs
present on-site. Vegetation to be removed is composed primarily of Himalayan blackberry
(Rubus armeniacus), but other non-native species such as Japanese knotweed (Polygonum
cuspidatum) and reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) will be cleared and grubbed during
construction and mitigation-related activities. A few native species are present within the
footprint of the proposed trail, consisting primarily of isolated sword ferns (Polystichum
munitum) and salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis). Native species within the trail footprint will be
removed during constmction and replanted within the mitigation area. Other isolated native
plants within the mitigation area will be flagged prior to clearing and gmbbing, so they are not
impacted.
The project site includes approximately 3.09 acres. The proposed 0.27-mile-Iong trail would cover
approximately 0.20 acres of the site. The project site includes a flood hazard area, shoreline
jurisdiction, and wetland. The following summary quantifies the presence of each critical area
on-site and the amount of area utilized by the proposed trail within each critical area.
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Biological Assessment
P:IMENTOOOOOO1510600INFOlBloJoglcai Assessment\FlnaJ SA piUS figures and appendlcesWay Creek Trail SA.doc
5 April 2012
-------------------
Flood Hazard Area
o Total Flood Hazard Area On-Site = 2.23 acres
o Total Area of Trail within Flood Hazard Area = 0.16 acres
o Total Length of Trail within Flood Hazard Area = 0.21 miles
o Total Amount of Proposed Mitigation within Flood Hazard Area = 1.04 acres
200-foot-wide Shoreline Jurisdiction
o Total Shoreline Jurisdiction Area On-Site = 2.80 acres
o Total Area of Trail within Shoreline Jurisdiction = 0.19 acres
o Total Length of Trail within Shoreline Jurisdiction = 0.26 miles
o Total Amount of Proposed Mitigation within Shoreline Jurisdiction = 1.33 acres
100-foot-wide Vegetation Management Buffer
o Total Vegetation Management Buffer Area On-Site = 1.98 acres
o Total Area of Trail within Vegetation Management Buffer = 0.15 acres
o Total Length of Trail within Vegetation Management Buffer = 0.20 miles
o Total Amount of Proposed Mitigation within Vegetation Management Buffer = 1.09 acres
Wetland A
o Total Wetland A Area = 0.02 acres
o Total Wetland A Buffer = 0.62 acres
o Total Area of Trail within Wetland A Buffer = 0.06 acres
o Total Length of Trail within Wetland A Buffer = 0.08 miles
o Total Amount of Proposed Mitigation in Wetland A = 0.02 acres
o Total Amount of Proposed Mitigation in Wetland A Buffer = 0.50 acres
The mitigation plan includes a total of 1.33 acres of stream buffer, wetland buffer, and wetland
enhancement as compensation for 0.20 acres of trail development. Enhancement areas have been
segmented into a Base Area (0.98 acres) and Additive Alternate No. I (0.35 acres). The
mitigation plan has been separated into two distinct sections or parts to provide flexibility in
managing construction costs. The minimum area that will be planted is defined as the Base Area
per Appendix B. If bid costs are as estimated, both the Base Area and Additive Alternate No. I
will be planted. In summary, the goal is to plant both areas, but if construction costs are higher
than anticipated the area to be planted will be limited to the Base Area. The resulting mitigation
ratio of the Base Area would be 4.8: 1, but increases to 6.5: 1 when the Additive Alternate No. I is
included. All mitigation activities are proposed within the riparian zone of May Creek.
Project-related construction equipment is anticipated to include a backhoe, bobcat, dump truck,
flatbed truck, utility truck, and various hand tools. Construction is proposed to occur during the
summer of2012, and will take approximately one month to complete.
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Biological Assessment
P:IMENTOOOOO015\0600INFOIBIOIoq/cal Assessment\F/na/ BA piUS figures and appandlCaslMay Creek Trail BAdoc
6 April 2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4.0 PROJECT AREA AND ACTION AREA DEFINITION
4. 1 Project Area
The project area is defined as the immediate vicinity of the proposed action. The project area
includes the footprint of the proposed trail, mitigation area, and the proposed staging area.
4.2 Action Area
The action area includes all areas that could be affected directly or indirectly by the proposed
project and is not limited to the actual work area (project area). The action area represents the
geographic extent of the physical, biological , and chemical impacts from the project (see
Figure 3). The project area and secondary project features are considered when defining the
action area. The action area will include potential effects from visual and audible disturbance,
terrestrial habitat impacts , and impacts to aquatic environments.
Terrestrial Action Area. Project-related construction and maintenance does not require pile
driving or blasting. Equipment will include backhoes, bobcats, dump trucks, and mi scellaneous
hand tools. No in -or over-water work is required or proposed . The project area is within forested
habitat located between 1-405 and Lake Washington Boulevard North. These roadways define
th e western and eastern edges, while the northern edge is commercial and the southern edge
residential. New developments are proposed to the north and south sides of the project site.
Based on these parameters, the terrestrial action area is as depicted on Figure 3 .
Aquatic Action Area. No in -or over-water work is required or proposed. The use of large
equipment such as excavators or bull dozers is not required or proposed . The primary potential
aquatic effects are associated with erosion after the project area is cleared and grubbed to remove
invasive species during construction. The extent of turbidity and sedimentation effects can vary
widely depending on the area of disturbance , soil composition and compaction, particle size,
topography, precipitation , plant composition and density, and effectiveness of erosion control
measures. Ba sed on the project consisting of trail construction and mitigation, the absence of
in-water work, and no proposed outfall of storm water runoff, the extent of the aquatic action area
is defined as the project rea c h and 100 feet downstream of the Lake Washington Boulevard
Bridge (see Figure 3).
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Biological Assessment
7 April 2012
C Parcel Boundary
-Proposed Trail o Terrestrial Action Area
• • • Aquatic Action Area
e.3 Area of Special Flood Hazard
~ WeUand
Action Area
o 12. 2.0
Faa'
Source : King County GIS , Ecology GIS ,
City of Renlon GIS , FWS NW
walerbody
Shoreline of the State City of Renton -May Creek Trail
RENTOOOO-OO15
Figure 3
February 2012 • .................. _" • .0'.". __
TNtI..., _ 0' .... .,. o..w (v_ .,.,,~ ~ IOEAI "" .... c., oIlt~ ""one, 1II1II ClUomoey_pw04lo1poft .... _. detlilliIM .....
...... CIEA .... Io:eII,.. ...-111li0ii .,_ ...... 10 "'" _.c ..... fIl .... ~1:IIrN_ftpicU4 .. 11M map. II" 1'1 ..... ..,.,.... .......... """"'"'"
.. ..-iii ~ O£A..., It dent ..... Il0l ....... b ''''''' _Ii: ... ..,.~. or .,.. ...... "' __ '11"0"':-' .11 otricIIIl' IINtIoIddWl l1li IIIOOIif\l,
.... " .......... ptOOll_lIII' ...... ,.."'_wt/llllllthI ........ _tolou'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE
The project site is primaril y forested and dominated by deciduous species. Red alder (AlntlS
rubra) and black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera) are the most prevalent species, but a few
big-leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum) are also present. The black cottonwood trees are primarily
located along the stream channel, while the red alder are scattered throughout. Many of these
trees are mature and some have fallen down or become snags. The understory is dominated by
non-native species including Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniaclls), reed canarygrass
(Phalaris arllndinacea), and Japanese knotweed (Polygonllm cllspidatum). Other species noted
include beaked haze lnut (Corylus cornu/a), do gwood (Comus sericea), salmonberry (Rubus
spec/abilis), English ivy (Hedera helix), and sword fern (Polys/ichum munitum). The project area
is generally flat , although some minor changes in topography exist. It appears the project area
was historically cleared and graded. Site photos of the project area are shown in Figure 4.
May Creek. Williams et al. (1975) described May Creek (stream number 08-0282) as an
8.6-mile-Iong stream with numerous tributaries. Fisheries resources in May Creek include
anadromous and resident species. May Creek supports several salmonid species, including fall
Chinook salmon, coho salmon, sockeye salmon, winter steelhead, and resident cutthroat trout
(WDFW 20 II). Numerous other non-salmon id s utilize this stream. Sockeye salmon and kokanee
were observed spawning immediately up stream of the Lake Washington Boulevard Bridge
crossing over May Creek and in a few other areas in the lower reach during the November 16,
20 II site visit.
May Creek originates from the slopes of Cougar and Squak mountains and the highlands of the
Renton Plateau. Significant tributaries include Honey Creek; Boren Creek; and the North , East,
and South Forks of May Creek. The project area is within the Lower Basin Subarea, which starts
at the confluence of May Creek with Lake Washington, upstream to River Mile (RM) 3.9. The
project site is located in the vicinity of RM 0.20 , which is immediately downstream or west of
the 1-405 crossing over May Creek.
Habitat conditions in May Creek are variable, but are typical of most urbanized streams in that
habitat conditions have been degraded. According to the WDFW (2003), the project reach is in
remarkably good condition considering past channel alterations. The riparian canopy is
dominated by deciduous species such as cottonwood, red alder, and to a le sse r degree big-leaf
maple . In-stream large woody debris (L WD) was mostly absent, but some log/stick jams were
reported to be creating pools . The channel is very straight from being ditched and straightened in
the past. The banks are not armored except at the upstream and down stream bridge crossings.
The gravels were noted as being of sufficient size for spawning, although embedded with mud
and fines. Fish were reported as being present, but scarce.
May Creek is categorized as "Core Summer Salmonid Habitat" for aquatic life use and "Primary
Contact" for recreational use . May Creek has also been assigned an additional "S upplemental
Spawning and Incubation Protection" temperature criteria of 13 °C, which is to be applied from
September IS through May IS. Under the pre-I 997 rules , May Creek was considered a Class AA
waterbody.
C ity of Renton May Creek Trail
Biological Assessment
9 April 2012
CD View of western edge of parcel along Lake 1 Washington Blvd . N. Concrete barrier along right
edge of photograph is the May Creak crossing
under Lake Washington Blvd . N
® Parcel edge along Lake Washington Blvd .
VieW of trail head looking east.
Site Photographs
City of Renton
May Creek Treil
RENTCJOOO.OO15
Fobruo'Y 2012
Figure 4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
• I
I .AVID IV4NI
_""OCIAT •• _.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
® Interior of parcel depicting scattered red alder trees . o Interior of parcel. Trail proposed through thicket
of blackberry.
Site Photographs
City of Renton
" May Creek Trail
RENTOOOO-OO15 Figure 4 DAVID .VAN.
Februery 2012 _ ..... OCIAT .......
® Wetland A overview. Site Photographs
® WeHand A Data Plot 1.
City o( Renton
May Creek Trail
RENT()(J()().()()15 Figure 4
Fobruory 2012 " DAVID .VAN.
_ ..... OC I AT •• _.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
o May Creek crossing under Lake Washington Blvd . N.
View looking wes t I downstream . ® May Creek immediately upstream or east of
Lake Washington Blvd . N.
VieW looking upstream .
Si te Photo graph s
City o( Renton • May Creek Trail
RENT()()()().(}()15 Figure 4 DAYID aYAH.
Febru./}' 2012 _" •• OCt ... T •• , ....
® May Creek immediately downstream or west of
Interstate 405 . VieW looking west I downstream . Site Photographs
@ May Creek cross ing under Interstate 405 . City o( Renton
May Creek Treil VteW looking east I upstream .
RENTCJOO(}{)015 Figure 4
FebflJOry 2012 • DAVIO ."'AHa _ ..... OCIAT •• _.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
o
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Water quality issues identified by Ecology through the 303(d) listing process include violations
of temperature, dissolved oxygen, fecal coliform, and Mercury (Table 2).
Table 2: May Creek 2008 Water Quality Assessment
I Parameter 2008 Category 1998 303(d) List 1996 303(d) List !
Temperature 2 Yes Yes
Dissolved Oxygen 2 No No
Fecal Coliform 5 Yes Yes
Mercury 2 No No
The categories are defined as follows:
o Category I -Meets tested standards for clean waters.
o Category 2 -Waters of concern: Waters where there is some evidence ofa water quality
problem, but not enough to require production of a water quality improvement project-
total maximum daily load (TMDL)-at this time.
o Category 3 -Insufficient data: This category will be largely empty. Water bodies that
have not been tested will not be individually listed, but if they do not appear in one of the
other categories, they are assumed to belong here.
o Category 4 -Polluted waters that do not require a TMDL: Waters that have pollution
problems that are being solved in one of three ways:
o Category 4a -has a TMDL: Water bodies that have an approved TMDL in place
and are actively being implemented.
o Category 4b -has a pollution control program: Water bodies that have a program
in place that is expected to solve the pollution problems. While pollution control
programs are not TMDLs, they must have many ofthe same features and there
must be some legal or financial guarantee that they will be implemented.
o Category 4c -is impaired by a non-pollutant: Water bodies impaired by causes
. that cannot be addressed through a TMDL. These impairments include low water
flow, stream channelization, and dams.
o Category 5 -Polluted waters that require a TMDL: The traditional list of impaired water
bodies is known as the 303(d) list. Placement in this category means that Ecology has
data showing that the water quality standards have been violated for one or more
pollutants, and there is no TMDL or pollution control plan. TMDLs are required for the
water bodies in this category.
A 25-year trend analysis (1979 -2004) in May Creek indicates water quality has declined with
significant increases in water temperature, conductivity, and ammonia-nitrogen. Other
parameters such as pH have increased, but are still within the acceptable range based on state
standards. Some parameters have improved as there has been a decrease in total suspended solids
(TSS) and nutrient concentrations (ortho-phosphorus, nitrate, and total nitrogen). Analysis of
sediment samples indicates that nickel exceeded concentration guidelines. Generally speaking,
May Creek had the ninth highest metal concentrations out of 27 streams monitored in King
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Biological Assessment
P:It.RENTOOOD001fA0600INFOlBloJogicai AssessmenflFlnal BA plus figures and appendlces\May Cree/( Trail BA.doc
15 April 2012
County. The monitoring of benthic invertebrates indicates that stream conditions are fair based
on benthic invertebrate index (BIB!) scores from 2002 and 2003.
Habitat Summary. Existing stream and watershed conditions were quantified by using
watershed and habitat parameters as defined by the "Matrix of Pathways and Indicators"
developed by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries. The
"Matrix of Pathways and Indicators" summarizes important parameters for six major pathways,
including:
I. Water Quality
2. Habitat Access
3. Habitat Elements
4. Channel Condition and Dynamics
5. FlowlHydrology
6. Watershed Conditions
These six major pathways are further broken down into a total of 18 indicators. As an example,
the water quality pathway is composed of 3 indicators: temperature, sediment/turbidity, and
chemical contamination/nutrients. The indicator conditions are classified as either "properly
functioning," "at risk," or "not properly functioning." Criteria for each condition is defined by a
range or goal based on the best scientific data available, but criteria are not absolute, and may be
adjusted for unique watersheds (NOAA Fisheries 1996). Table 3 summarizes the baseline
conditions based on NOAA Fisheries and USFWS criteria.
Table 3: Matrix of Pathways and Indicators Summary
Pathway
Water Quality
Habitat Access
Habitat Elements
Channel Conditions and Dynamics
Flow/Hydrology
Watershed Conditions
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Biological Assessment
Indicators
Temperature
Sediment
Chemical Contamination & Nutrients
Physical Barriers
Substrate
lWD
Pool Frequency
Pool QualityfDepth
Off-Channel Habitat
Refugia
Width/Depth Ratio
Slreambank Condition
Floodplain Connectivity
Change in PeakiBase Flows
Increase in Drainage Network
Road Density and location
Disturbance History
Riparian Reserve/ConselVation Areas
Baseline Conditions
May Creek
Not Properly Functioning
Not Properly Functioning
Functioning at Risk
Functioning at Risk
Functioning at Risk
Not Property Functioning
Not Property Functioning
Not Property Functioning
Not Properly Functioning
Not Properly Functioning
Not Properly Functioning
Functioning at Risk
Functioning at Risk
Not Properly Functioning
Functioning at Risk
Functioning at Risk
Functioning at Risk
Functioning at Risk
P:\t\RENTOOOOO01510600INF0\8/oIoqlcal Assessment\F/naJ BA plus figures fmd appendlceslMar Creek Trail BA.doc
16 April 2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
m
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wetlands. One wetland was identified during the site visit. Wetland A is a very small (786-
square-foot) depressional wetland dominated by Himalayan blackberry and red alder, with a few
salmonberry. Table 4 summarizes the wetland data. The location of Wetland A is depicted in
Appendices A and B.
Table 4: Wetland Summary
, Total Water City of I
i Wetland
Wetland
Ecology' Size
: 10 Category (acres)
A III 0,018
I Washington State Department of Ecology
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Biological Assessment
Ecology' Wetland Quality Hydrology Wildlife Renton
Wetland Functions Functions Functions Functions Buffer
Class Score Score Score Score Width
Depressional 30 8 4 18 75 feet
P;I1\RENTOOOO(J01510600/NFOIBio/og/aJ1 AssessmenflFlna/ BA plus ngures and appendJceslMay Creek Trail SA-doc
17 April 2012
6.0 SPECIES ANALYSIS
6. 1 Puget Sound Chinook Salmon
Federal Status
Puget Sound Chinook salmon are listed as a threatened species in Washington under the ESA.
Critical Habitat
The Lake Washington Subbasin (HUC 17110012) has been designated as Chinook salmon
critical habitat, as published in the final rule on September 2, 2005 (70 FR 52629). However,
May Creek was not included. The closest designated critical habitat is Lake Washington, which
is approximately 0.2 miles downstream from the project area. Therefore, designated critical
habitat for Chinook salmon occurs near the downstream extent of the action area where May
Creek enters Lake Washington, but does not occur on-site.
Within areas designated as critical habitat, the Primary Constituent Elements (PCEs) essential for
the conservation of this Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU) are those sites and habitat
components that support one or more life stages. The PCEs are further described as:
(1) Freshwater spmvning sites with water quantity and quality conditions and substrate
supporting spawning. incubation. and larval development (this PCE occurs ou-site).
(2) Freshwater rearing sites with (tbis PCE occurs on-site):
(i) Water quantity andjloodplain connectivity to form and maintain physical habitat
conditions and support juvenile growth and mobility;
(ii) Water quality andforage supportingjuvenile development; and
(iii) Natural cover such as shade, submerged and overhanging large wood, logjams and
beaver dams, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, side channels, and undercut
banks.
(3) Freshwater migration corridors free of obstruction and excessive predation with water
quantity and quality conditions and natural cover such as submerged and overhanging
large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, side channels, and undercut
hanks supportingjuvenile and adult mobility and survival (tbis peE occurs on-site).
(4) Estuarine areas (not present in the action area)free of obstruction and excessive
predation with:
(i) Water quality, water quantity, and salinity conditions supporting juvenile and adult
physiological transitions between freshwater and saltwater;
(ii) Natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation,
large rocks and boulders, side channels; and
(iii) Juvenile and adult forage, including aquatic invertebrates andjlshes, supporting
growth and maturation.
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Biological Assessment
P;\J\RENTOOOOOO f 5\O~OOINFOIBIOIogJcaJ AsS8ssment1flnai SA plus Hqures end eeeendJces\M'ay Creek Trail BA.doc
18 April 2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
B
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I '.
I
(5) Nearshore marine areas (not present in the action area)free of obstruction and excessive
predation with:
(i) Water quality and quantity conditionf andforage, including aquatic invertebrates and
jishes, supporting growth and maturation; and
(ii) Natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation,
large rocks and boulders, and side channels.
(6) Offshore marine areas (not present in the action area) with water quality conditions and
forage, including aquatic invertebrates andjishes, supporting growth and maturation.
Based on this summary, PCEs I through 3 occur in the action area, while PCEs 4 through 6 do
not.
Habitat Requirements
Migrating adult Chinook salmon seek cover in deep pools, log jams, and undercut banks, until
ready to spawn. They require a steady supply of clean, cool, well-oxygenated water, and clean
gravel for successful spawning. Factors influencing the survival of all juvenile salmon ids include
the availability of suitable habitat, prey, and refuge from predators and' floods. Habitat
complexities in the form of pools and rimes, with interspersed downed woody debris of varying
size classes are additionally important for the in-stream survival of both adult and juvenile
salmonids. Chinook salmon from the Lake Washington Subbasin are referred to as ocean type fish
since most spend only a few months in freshwater after emergence.
Occurrence
Small numbers of Chinook salmon have been reported to utilize May Creek. These are likely
strays from either the Cedar River or Issaquah Hatchery. According to Salmonscape, Chinook
salmon utilize approximately 3.2 miles of May Creek, with the lower 0.40 miles being used for
rearing and the remaining 2.8 miles for spawning. Mapped spawning habitat includes the upper
portion ofthe project reach. This is consistent with WDFW 2003.
Based on a review of Chinook salmon juvenile and adult life-history data, this species of
salmonid should not be present in the project area during the months of July and August.
Therefore, construction activities will be timed to avoid direct impacts to both juvenile and adult
Chinook salmon, since juvenile Chinook salmon will have migrated out of May Creek and
returning adults will not have arrived yet. Adults could potentially migrate into the project reach
to spawn after construction activities have been completed, but the site should be fully stabilized
prior to their arrival into the action area.
6.2 Puget Sound Steelhead Trout
Federal Status
Puget Sound steelhead trout are listed as a threatened species in Washington under the ESA.
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Biological Assessment
P:II\RENTOOOOOO1510600INFOlBioiog/cal Assessmenflflnal 8A plus nfl!J(eS end eeeendlceslMay Creek Trail SA.doC
19 April 2012
Critical Habitat
The NMFS is currently reviewing the need to designate critical habitat for steelhead trout. At this
time, critical habitat for Puget Sound steelhead trout is not designated.
Habitat Requirements
Steelhead trout occur in two forms-the anadromous steelhead and the resident rainbow.
Steel head trout are reported to occasionally utilize the lower few miles of May Creek. The life
histories of steel head can vary considerably. Adult steel head trout are divided into two races,
depending on the time of year they enter freshwater-summer-run and winter-run. Winter-run
steel head are native to the Lake Washington Basin, while summer-run are not known to be
present. Numerous plants of hatchery stocks have occurred. Wild steelhead in the Lake
Washington Basin generally run from mid-December to mid-May and spawn from early March
to mid-June (WDFW 1994). After emergence from the gravel, steelhead fry are heavily
dependent upo~ streamside vegetation and submerged cover for protection from predators.
Juveniles spend one'to four years in freshwater before migrating to sea. The outmigration
generally occurs in the spring (April through June), and most spend up to four years maturing in
the ocean before returning to their natal stream. Some return early as jacks, and some survive to
spawn multiple times.
Occurrence
Steelhead trout have been documented in the mainstem of May Creek but abundance is low.
Based on a review of steelhead trout juvenile and adult life-history data, it is assumed that
juvenile steelhead trout could be present in the project area during construction of the trail and
associated mitigation measures. This conclusion is based on the extended freshwater rearing
exhibited by this species.
6.3 Southern Resident Killer Whales
Federal Status
The Southern Resident Killer Whale (SRKW) is listed as a threatened species in Washington
under the ESA.
Critical Habitat
Critical habitat was designated on November 29, 2006 (50 CFR Part 226). Puget Sound is
designated as critical habitat, excluding areas less than 20 feet deep. Primary PCEs include water
quality, prey, and passage. No critical habitat occurs in the action area.
Habitat Requiremellls
Southern residents travel extensively throughout the year, ranging from central California to the
Queen Charlotte Islands of British Columbia. Beginning in Mayor June and through the summer
months, all three pods (J, K, and L) are typically located in the protected inshore waters of Haro
Strait, the Strait of Juan de Fuca, and Georgia Strait near the Frasier River. During the fall, all
three pods occur in areas where migrating salmon are concentrated, such as the mouth of the
Frasier River. They may also occur in Puget Sound where migrating Chinook and chum salmon
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Biological Assessment
P;\l\RENTOOOOOOI5l.0600INFO\B/oIoglcal AssessmenllFlna/ SA piUS flguras and apeendlceslMay Creek Trail BAdoc
20 April 2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
are concentrated. J pod typically expands into Puget Sound during the fall to feed on
late-returning chum salmon, especially during the months of October and November. In the
winter months, K and L pods typically depart for coastal waters, while J typically stays near the
San Juan Islands and surrounding marine waters.
Occurrence
SRKW do not occur in the action area.
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Biological Assessment
P:Ii1RENTOOOO001510600INFOlBlo/og!ca1 AssessmenflFlnal BA plus ngures lind aopendlces\May Creek Trail BA.doc
21 Apri12012
7.0 ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT
The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, as amended by the
Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996, requires Federal agencies to consult with NMFS on activities
that may adversely affect EFH. The Pacific Fisheries Management Council (PFMC) has
designated EFH for the Pacific Salmon Fishery and federally-managed ground fish and coastal
pelagic fisheries (NOAA Fisheries 1999; PFMC 1999). Federal agencies must consult with
NMFS on all activities authorized, funded, or undertaken by the agency that may adversely affect
EFH. Project-related activities occur in a stream with salmonids. Therefore, this analysis
addresses the Pacific Salmon Fishery, including Chinook, coho, and pink salmon. Federally-
managed groundfish and coastal pelagic fisheries do not occur in the action area and will not be
addressed.
The EFH designation for the Pacific salmon fishery includes all those streams, lakes, ponds,
wetlands, and other water bodies currently or historically accessible to salmon in Washington,
Oregon, Idaho, and California, except above the impassible barriers identified by PFMC (1999).
In the estuarine and marine areas, EFH for salmon extends from nearshore and tidal submerged
environments within state territorial waters out to the full extent of the exclusive economic zone
offshore of Washington, Oregon, and California north of Point Conception (PFMC 1999).
Use of the action area by federally-managed salmon is limited. The most abundant species is
likely coho salmon. Chinook salmon use of May Creek is extremely limited, and pink salmon
have not been reported to use this system.
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Biological Assessment
P:I!1RENTOOOO(J0151Q600INFO\Bloiogical AssessmentlFlnal 8A plus figures and appendlcesWay Creek Trell BA.doc
22 April 2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
8.0 IMPACT MINIMIZATION MEASURES
Potential impacts to water quality could occur during or after construction of the trail or
mitigation area. Potential impacts are primarily associated with temporary increases in turbidity
and sedimentation. Impacts associated with an increase in water temperature are not anticipated
since existing trees will not be removed; and the invasive species to be removed do not provide
shade and will be replaced by native trees and shrubs. Potential water quality impacts can be
reduced or avoided by implementation of the conservation and performance measures outlined
~~ .
8.1 Conservation and Performance Measures
General
o The Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESC) Plan presented in Appendix A
will be implemented.
o A qualified Erosion and Control Inspector will review all sediment control measures
twice per week during construction. "Qualified" means the inspector will be a Certified
Erosion and Sediment Control Lead (CESCL).
o The Mitigation Plan presented in Appendix B will be implemented.
Water QualitylErosion Control
o All Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be installed according to City of Renton
standards and will be inspected and maintained throughout the life ofthe project.
o Staging and soil stockpile areas will be limited to those outlined in the clearing and
grading permit. Staging areas will be fenced.
o Spill kits will be kept on-site.
o Fuels and other potentially hazardous materials will be kept in a secured area. Secured
means fenced, and locked during non-work hours.
o Secondary containment will be required for all hazardous materials. Spill containment is
required for parked equipment, porta-potty, fuels, solvents, etc.
o Wash water resulting from wash down of equipment or work areas will be contained for
proper treatment and/or disposal, and will not be directly discharged into state waters.
o There will be no discharge of oil, fuels, or chemicals to surface waters, or onto land
where there is a potential for reentry into surface waters.
o No solvents or chemicals used for tools or equipment cleaning will be discharged to
ground or surface waters.
o The contractor will regularly check fuel hoses, oil drums, oil or fuel transfer valves,
fittings, etc. for leaks, and will maintain and store materials properly to prevent spills.
o BMPs will be used on all project activities to control and prevent sediments from entering
aquatic systems.
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Biological Assessment
P;ItIRENTOOOOOO15\0600INFOlBioloqlcal Assessment\F1na1 BA plus figures and appendlceslMay Creek Trail BA.doc
23 April 2012
9.0 EFFECTS ANALYSIS
The proposed project includes clearing approximately 0.20 acres of land for construction of a
trail, 0.15 acres of which is within City of Renton Flood Hazard Limits. The trail was located to
minimize its influence on the flood hazard area. Due to the presence of several different critical
areas that encumber the predominance of the site, 'complete avoidance is not possible. The design
therefore incorporated measures to minimize impacts such as reducing the trail width to six feet,
shifting its alignment, and shifting the trailhead to the north. It has also been designed to be
consistent with RMC and SMP requirements. Based on the implementation of the mitigation
plan, riparian conditions will improve, thereby improving salmonid habitat conditions.
Specifically, the project will increase the amount of streamside shade, organic inputs, plant
diversity, and potential for future recruitment of LWD into May Creek.
9. 1 Floodplain Habitat Alterations
The project site is encumbered by a floodplain. Figure 3 depicts the City of Renton Flood
Hazard Limits, while Figure 5 depicts the FEMA floodplain. Regardless of the difference, both
influence the predominance of the project site.
The following 12 a.Iterations can have a significant impact on habitat (FEMA 20 II):
I. Relocating channels. The project will not relocate any portion of the May Creek channel.
No in-water or over-water work is proposed.
2. Destroying pools and riffles. The project will not destroy any pool or riffle habitat. Nor
will the project remove any LWD /Tom the channel, or trees along the stream bank, that
could create future pool habitat.
3. Disrupting the continuity of the habitat along a stream. The project includes
constructing a trail and improving riparian habitat along May Creek (see Appendix B). The
trail will be approximately 6 feet wide and 0.27 miles long, covering approximately
0.15 acres within the flood hazard area. Mitigation will result in an additional 1.04 acres of
temporary disturbance within the flood hazard area. However, mitigation involves the
removal of Himalayan blackberry, reed canarygrass, and Japanese knotweed, which will be
replaced with native vegetation. This will result in a short-term disruption, but long-term
improvement of habitat along May Creek.
4. Removing natural debris and rock that form in-stream shelters. No natural debris or
rocks will be removed from the stream channel. No in-water work is proposed. No trees
that could potentially add future LWD to May Creek will be removed as part of this
project. The project will add numerous conifer trees that could create future habitat in May
Creek.
5. Erecting dams or other barriers to flow and fish passage. No dams or other barriers will
be installed in May Creek. No in-or over-water work is proposed.
6. Constructing levees to prevent channel migration or seawalls to stop erosion. No
levees are proposed as part of this project.
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Biological Assessment
P;It\RENTOOaoo015'10600INFOlBloiog/ca/ Assessmenllflnal BA plus figures and 8ppendicesWay Creek Trail BA-doc
24 April 2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
7. Redncing stream flow. No change in stream flow is anticipated since the trail will be
composed of bark.
8. Clearing banks or removing tree canopy. The project will not result in the removal of
any trees along the stream bank. The project will clear Himalayan blackberry along
approximately 900 linear feet of stream channel. All areas cleared of non-native vegetation
will be replanted with native trees and shrubs per the approved mitigation plan.
9. Disturbing rooted plants on the banks. In order to reduce or limit the degree at which
Himalayan blackberry re-infests the mitigation area, the plan is to remove their roots to the
maximum extent possible. These areas will be replanted and covered with "hog-thel."
Therefore, the disturbance of rooted plants along the stream bank will be limited to
invasive species, short-term, and result in an improvement in habitat conditions once the
native species become established.
10. Armoring banks and shorelines. No bank armoring is proposed as part of this project.
I I. Increasing flow velocity. No increase in flow velocity is anticipated to occur as a result of
this project.
12. Increasing sediment in the water. The project includes numerous measures to limit or
eliminate additional sediment from the project site from reaching May Creek. High
visibility fencing and compost sock will be installed along the stream edge during
construction. Once clearing and grubbing is completed, the entire site will be covered with
hog-fuel and densely planted with native trees and shrubs. Native species within the project
area will be preserved. The implementation of these measures, along with monitoring, has
been designed to limit or eliminate sediment from the project site from entering May
Creek.
Additional impacts associated with floodplain development include the potential for entrapment,
flood debris and pollutants, and changes to the baseline flood elevation due to the addition of fill
material. These three potential impacts are summarized below.
Entrapment occurs when floodwaters recede, leaving either adult or juvenile salmonids trapped
in ditches, depressions, or backwater behind an obstruction. The project will not create any
ditches, depressions, or obstructions that could entrap salmon ids. Therefore, no impacts
associated with entrapment are anticipated to result from implementing the proposed project.
Impacts associated with flood debris and pollutants typically occur when houses, barns, or other
human-related structures flood, thereby releasing or dispersing trash, debris, oil, gas, and other
pollutants. The project will not result in the construction of any structure. No pollutants or
chemicals will be stored on-site. Although some trash could occasionally be discarded along the
trail, this is anticipated to be minor and would be removed by the City during periods of routine
maintenance. Therefore, no impacts associated with flood debris and pollutants are anticipated to
result from implementing the proposed project.
Cily of Renlon May Creek Trail
Biological Assessment
P;\i\RENTOOOO0015\0600INFOlBioiogical Assessmeni\Flnal BA plus flQures and appendlcesWay Creek Trail BA.doc
25 April 2012
LIMIT OF
DETAILED STUDY
NORTH 38TH STREET
NORm
NORTH 37TH STREET
NORTH 38TH STREET
NORTH 35TH STREET
NORTH 34TH STREET
NORTH 33RD PLACE
33RD STREET
32NO STREET
31ST STREET
Source: FEMA·FIRM
Map Number 53033C0664 F
Map Revised May 16, 1995
~
~
~
MEADOW
~\J'r. NORTH
37TH STREET
!
NORTH 38TH STREET
z
I
!
NORTH 32ND STREET
z
~ ~
I
52
o z
i
~ ZONE
ZONE X
;
32 NE 36TH STAEE
KING COUNr
UNINCORPORATED
530071
MGJ'
Creek
I+---:ZONE X
CITY OF F
S300~
RM2'~
FEMA Floodplain Map
N City of Renton A _~~ ~
., y RENTOOOO-OOI5 0 .., FI"gure 5 DAVID _VANS ~ I' " .... A •• DCIATIl.' .. c . ~L-N_O_TT_O~S~C_Al~E ______________________________ L-~D~ec~e~m~be~r~20~1~1~ __________________ ~ ________ ..1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Changes to the baseline flood elevation can increase flooding in other areas as it decreases the
holding capacity in one location that is then shifted to another area. This type of situation can
increase overall flooding and expose new areas to floodwaters. This, in turn, can increase
impacts associated with entrapment, flood debris, and pollutants.' The proposed trail will be at
grade and will not result in a net increase of fill within the floodplain. Furthermore, the project
will remove thickets of Himalayan blackberry and Japanese knotweed. Since the proposed
project will not increase the baseline flood elevation, no associated impacts are anticipated to
result from implementing the proposed project.
9.2 Effects to Salmonid Baseline Habitat Conditions
Based on project type ( a six-foot-wide bark pedestrian trail), the absence of in-or over-water
work, the small project footprint, avoidance of existing trees, trail placement within an area
dominated by Himalayan blackberry, implementation of impact minimization measures, and
proposed mitigation/restoration measures, project effects to baseline salmonid habitat conditions
would be minimal and beneficial over time. The following salmonid effects matrix has been
developed to summarize potential project-related direct and indirect effects to baseline habitat
conditions (see Table 5).
PATHWAY
Water Quality
Habitat Acce ••
HabHat Elements
Table 5: Salmonid Habitat Project Effects Matrix
INDICATORS PROJECT EFFECTS TO BASELINE CONDITIONS
May Creek
Temperature Maintain -> Improve. No trees that provide shade to May Creek will be removed.
Vegetation to be removed is primarily non-native invasive species. Mitigation
includes planting native trees and shrubs along May Creek that will increase
shade and, therefore. maintainlimprove temperature.
Sediment Maintain. The project will temporari~ d~turb floodplain soHs during oonstruction.
However, this disturbance win be limited to oons!ruction. Areas where mitigation ~
proposed will initiaUy be cleared and grubbed to remove non-naive invasive species.
These areas 10m be replanted with native trees and shrubs, and oovered WIth hog-fuel.
Additional erosion oontrol measures will be implemented to further reduoe the potential
of sediment reaching May Creek.
Chemical Contamination and Maintain. The project wiU not resuR in an increase in poIlution-generating impervious
Nutrients surface that 'It'Ould increase the abundance or distribution of chemical contaminants
associated with motor vehicles. Although combustion engines will be used during
construction, their use will be limited and of short duration.
Physical Barriers Maintain. The project will not create fish passage barriers. No in-water work is
proposed.
Substrate Maintain. No substrate will be removed or degraded due to implementing the trail
project.
LWD
Pool Frequency
Pool Quality
Off-Channel Habitat
Refugia
Maintain -> Improve. No LWD or trees thai oould contribute future LWD to May
Creek will be removed as part of this project. Downed trees on the floodplain will
not be removed during construction of the trail. Any downed trees within the
proposed trail footprint will be moved away from the trail but left on-site. Should
any downed trees be too large to move, an approximately six-foot-Iong section win
be cut and· moved to the trail edge. The project ",II add trees that could contribute
future LWD to May Creek.
Maintain. No change to this indicator is antiCipated.
Maintain. No change to this indicator is antiCipated.
Maintain. No change to this indicator is anticipated.
Maintain. No change to this indicator is anticipated.
P;\J1RENTOOoa001510600INFOlBJologlcal Assessment\F/nal SA plus ligures and appendlcesWay Creek Trail SAdoc
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Biological Assessment
27 April 2012
PATHWAY
Channel Conditions and
Dynamics
Flow/Hydrology
Watershed Conditions
INDICATORS
Widlh/Depth Ratio
Streambank Condition
Floodplain Connectivity
PROJECT EFFECTS TO BASELINE CONDITIONS
May Creek
Maintain. No change to this indicator is anticipated.
Degrade -+ Maintain -+ Improve. Degradation will be limited to the construction
period when non·native invasive species are removed. After removal, nalive trees
and shrubs will be planted. Erosion control measures will also be implemented.
Once the mitigalion trees and shrubs become established, the streambank
condition will improve within the project reach.
Maintain. No change to this indicator is antiCipated.
Change in PeaklEase Flows Maintain. No change to this indicator is anlicipated.
Increase in Drainage Network Maintain. No change to this indicator is anticipated.
Road Density and Location Maintain. No change to this indicator is antiCipated.
Disturbance History
Riparian Reserve
Degrade -+ Maintain. As with streambank condition. the disturbance history will
be degraded during construction. but will shift to maintain once the trail and
associated miligation measures have been implemented.
Maintain -+ Improve. Construction of the lrail will increase the abundance of
trees in the project area, Implementing the mitigation plan will remove non-native
Invasive species, and will plant native trees and shrubs. The mitigation plan
includes planting numerous conifer trees, which are generally lacking in the project
vicinity,
Based on the anticipated effects to the baseline conditions summarized above, most indicators
will be maintained. Some indicators such as streambank condition and disturbance history will
be degraded during construction of the trail and implementation of the mitigation plan, but
degradation will be temporary. Indicators that are anticipated to improve after the project is
completed include temperature, L WD, stream bank condition, and riparian reserve.
9.3 Southern Resident Killer Whale Impacts
No direct impacts to SRKW are anticipated due to their absence in the action area. The project
will not adversely impact salmon ids or salmonid habitat. Therefore, a primary food source that
does utilize the action area will not be impacted by implementing the proposed project.
Furthermore, the primary salmonid species consumed by killer whales is Chinook salmon, which
typically do not spawn in May Creek. The project will not increase pollutant loading to Puget
Sound. Furthermore, the project will not degrade floodplain habitat, and will actually improve
riparian habitat along May Creek. Therefore, the proposed project will not degrade SRKW
habitat or abundance of prey.
9.4 Interrelated and Interdependent Actions
An interrelated action is part of a larger action and depends on the larger action for its
justification. An interdependent action has no utility apart from the project.
This proposed section of trail would be part of a larger trail network. Additions to this section of
trail are proposed to occur in the future, assuming additional lands can be obtained. Although
this section oftrail is potentially part of a larger action, it does not depend on the larger action for
its justification, as it is being built as a stand-alone trail that could be expanded in the future.
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Biological Assessment
P;\r.RENTOOOOOO1S10600INFO\BJolog/cal Assessmenl\Flna/ BA plus ligures and appendlces\May Creak Trail BAdoc
28 April 2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
10.0 DETERMINATION OF EFFECTS
The following section outlines the effect determination for all species, critical habitat, and EFH
previously described in this report. The rationale for each determination is also summarized.
10.1 Chinook Salmon
The proposed project will have no effect on Chinook salmon because:
o Chinook salmon rarely utilize May Creek, and those that do are likely strays from the
Cedar River or of hatchery origin;
o The project will not permanently degrade baseline conditions (see Table 5);
.0 The project will improve some baseline conditions (see Table 5);
o The project is limited to construction of a pedestrian trail and mitigation;
o The project will not remove trees along the stream channel;
o The project will install a minimum of320 trees, 390 willow cuttings, 1,324 shrubs, and
146 ground cover species on the project site (see Appendix B); .
o Land-clearing activities will occur primarily in areas dominated by non-native species;
o No in-water work is proposed;
o The project does not create pollution-generating impervious surface;
o The project will not result in an increase of fill within the floodplain;
o The project will not measurably alter topography within the floodplain;
o The project does not include any structures; and
o The project includes erosion control and monitoring requirements (see Appendix A).
10.2 Chinook Salmon Designated Critical Habitat
The proposed project will have no effect on Chinook salmon critical habitat because:
o Chinook salmon critical habitat does not occur in the action area since May Creek has not
been designated as critical habitat;
o The closest critical habitat to the action area is approximately 0.2 miles downstream in
Lake Washington;
o The project will not permanently degrade baseline conditions (see Table 5);
o The project will improve some baseline conditions (see Table 5);
o The project is limited to construction of a pedestrian trail and mitigation;
o The project will not remove trees along the stream channel;
o The project will install a minimum of320 trees, 390 willow cuttings, 1,324 shrubs, and
146 ground cover species on the project site (see Appendix B);
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Biological Assessment
P:\J1RENTOOOO001510600INFOlBJolog/cai AssessmerllFlnal BA pIllS "gures and appendlces\May Creek TrallBAdoc
29 April 2012
o Land-clearing activities will occur primarily in areas dominated by non-native species;
o No in-water work is proposed;
o The project does not create pollution-generating impervious surface;
o The project will not result in an increase offill within the floodplain;
o The project will not measurably alter topography within the floodplain;
o The project does not include any structures; and
o The project includes erosion control and monitoring requirements (see Appendix A).
10.3 Puget Sound Steelhead Trout
The proposed project will have no effect on steelhead trout because:
o Steelhead trout rarely utilize May Creek;
o The project will not permanently degrade baseline conditions (see Table 5);
o The project will improve some baseline conditions (see Table 5);
o The project is limited to construction ofa pedestrian trail and mitigation;
o The project will not remove trees along the stream channel;
o The project will install a minimum of 320 trees, 390 willow cuttings, 1,324 shrubs, and
146 ground cover species on the project site (see Appendix B);
o Land-clearing activities will occur primarily in areas dominated by non-native species;
o No in-water work is proposed;
o The project does not create pollution-generating impervious surface;
o The project will not result in an increase of fill within the floodplain;
o The project will not measurably alter topography within the floodplain;
o The project does not include any structures; and
o The project includes erosion control and monitoring requirements (see Appendix A).
10.4 Southern Resident Killer Whale
The proposed project will have no effect on SRKW because:
o The SRKW does not occur in the action area;
o The project will not adversely impact SRKW prey (Chinook salmon);
o The project will not permanently degrade baseline conditions (see Table 5);
o The project will improve some baseline conditions (see Table 5);
o The project is limited to construction of a pedestrian trail and mitigation;
o No in-water work is proposed;
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Biological Assessment
P:IttRENTOOOOOO1510600/NFO\B!oIogIcaJ Assessment\Flnal BA plus figures and appeoo/ces\May Crook Trail BA.doc
30 April 2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-
I
m
m
g
o The project does not create pollution-generating impervious surface;
o The project will not result in an increase of fill within the floodplain;
o The project will not measurably alter topography within the floodplain; and
o The project includes erosion control and monitoring requirements (see Appendix A).
10.5 Southern Resident Killer Whale Critical Habitat
The proposed will have no effect on SRKW critical habitat because:
o Critical habitat does not occur in the action area.
o Chinook salmon rarely utilize May Creek, and those that do are likely strays from the
Cedar River or of hatchery origin;
o The project will not permanently degrade baseline conditions (see Table 5);
o The project will improve ~ome baseline conditions (see Table 5);
o The project is limited to construction of a pedestrian trail and mitigation;
o No in-water work is proposed;
o The project does not create pollution-generating impervious surface;
o Toe project will not result in an increase offill within the floodplain;
o The project will not measurably alter topography within the floodplain; and
o The project includes erosion control and monitoring requirements (see Appendix A).
10.6 Essential Fish Habitat
The proposed project will have no adverse effect on EFH for Pacific salmon because:
o The project will not permanently degrade baseline conditions (see Table 5);
o The project will improve some baseline conditions (see Table 5);
o The project is limited to construction of a pedestrian trail and mitigation;
o The project will not remove trees along the stream channel;
o The project will install a minimum of 320 trees, 390 willow cuttings, 1,324 shrubs, and'
146 ground cover species on the project site (see Appendix B);
o Land-clearing activities will occur primarily in areas dominated by non-native species;
o No in-water work is proposed;
o The project does not create pollution-generating impervious surface;
o The project will not result in an increase of fill within the floodplain;
o The project will not measurably alter topography within the floodplain;
o The project does not include any structures; and
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Biological Assessment
P:IJI.RENTOOOO001&'0600INFOIBloiog/ca/ AssessmenflFinal BA piUS IIquteS and appendlceslMay Creek Trail BA.doc
31 April 2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
11
I
I
11.0 REFERENCES
Cooke, Sarah Spear. 1997. A Field Guide to the Common Wetland Plants of Western Washington &
Northwestern Oregon. Seattle Audubon Society. Seattle, Washington.
Hitchcock, c.L., and A. Cronquist, 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington
Press, Seattle, Washington.
Kerwin, J. 200 I. Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Limiting Factors Report for the Cedar-
Sammamish Basin (Watershed Water Resource Inventory Area 8). Washington State
Conservation Commission. Olympia, Washington.
King County. 1994. Water Quality of Small Lakes and Streams. Western King County. 1990-1993.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 2008. Endangered Species Act -Section 7
Consultation, Final Biological Opinion And Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act Essential Fish Habitat: Implementation of the National Flood Insurance
Program in the State of Washington, Phase One Document-Puget Sound Region. Prepared
by the United States Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service. Northwest Region. Seattle, Washington.
NMFS Tracking No.: 2006/00472. September 22,2008.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA Fisheries). 1999. Federal Register,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 50 CFR Part 660. Department of
Commerce, Washington D.C.
---. 1996. Making Endangered Species Act Determinations of Effoct for Individual or Grouped
Actions at the Watershed Scale. National Marine Fisheries Service, Environmental and
Technical Services Division, Habitat Conservation Branch. Lacey, Washington.
Pacific Fisheries Management Council (PFMC). 1999. Amendment 14 to the Pacific Coast Salmon
Plan. "Appendix A. Identification and Description of Essential Fish Habitat, Adverse
Impacts, and Recommended Conservation Measures for Salmon. Pacific Fisheries
Management Council." Portland, Oregon.
Pojar, J., and A. MacKinnon. 1994. Plants of the Pacific Northwest Coast. B.C. Ministry of Forests
and Lone Pine Publishing. Redmond, Washington.
USFWS.1998. A Framework to Assist in Making Endangered Species Act Determinations of Effect
for Individual or Grouped Actions at the Bull Trout SubpoPlllation Watershed Scale. Lacey,
Washington.
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 20 II. Priority Habitats and Species (PHS)
Program Data. Olympia, Washington. May 3, 2011.
---.2003. Enhancing Transportation Project Delivery through Watershed Characterization: 1-
405 Case Study. Appendix G: Stream Habitat Conditions Report -Stream Habitat
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Biological Assessment
P;IIIRENT(){)()(J()() I5\0600INFOIBioI09lcal Msessmenf\F/na/ BA plus figures and appendlcesWay Creek Trail BA.doc
33 April 2012
Conditions during Low Flow Conditions -Coal Creek, May Creek, Lower Cedar River and
Selected Tributaries. 1-405 North Renton. August 2003. Prepared by WDFW with edits by
WSDOT. Available on the www at: http://www.wsdot.wa.govINRIrdonlyresIF658E402-
ECD0-4F3B-99C 1-04 73AE 14C512/0lG _ StreamHabitatConditions.pdf
Washington Department ofFish and Wildlife (WDFW) and Western Washington Treaty Indian
Tribes. 1994. 1992 Washington State Salmon and Steelhead Stock Inventory. "Appendix
One: Puget Sound Stocks." Olympia, Washington.
---. 2002. 2002 Washington State Salmon and Steelhead Stock Inventory. "Appendix One:
Puget Sound Stocks." Olympia, Washington.
Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). 2001. Stomrwater Management Manual/or
Western Washington. Olympia, Washington.
Williams, R.W., R.M. Laramie, and J.J. Ames. 1975. A Catalog a/Washington Streams and Salmon
Utilization, Vol. 1, Puget Sound Region. Washington Department of Fisheries, Olympia,
Washington.
City of Renton May Creek Trail
Biological Assessment
P:\MENT(}(J()()()Of5l0600INFOlB/oIogJcaJ Assessmen(l,flnal BA plus figures and appendicesWay Creek Trail BA.doc
34 April 2012
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENmXA
I Site and Grading Plan
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I City of Renton May Creek Trail
P:IflRENT000000151060DINF0\8/o1oq!cal Assessmen!lfinal SA plus flqures and appendlcesWay Creek Trail SA.doc
April 2012
I
Biological Assessment
I
\
PORTION OF GOV'T LOT 1, SECTION 32, T 24 N, R 5 E, WM
---------------------------
MAY CREEK TRA~L PROJECT
FOR
CiTY OF RENTON, WASH~NGTON 10' .r£ su.TAII'f' SElI(R EASOIENl ........... '-
REC. NO. 710U305l9 ........
~ ~
,--=
NOTES
-PARCEL SIZE: 3.09 ACR[S (ll4.!lJl Sf)
-WORK AR[A: 1.50 Acm:S (65.352 Sf)
'" ~ " SCAlE: ,. = 40'
-ORGANIC MATERIAL TO BE REMOVED FROU SITE a: DISPOSED IN AN
APPROVED LANDflLl FOR TRAIL CONSTRUCTION IS 250 CUBIC YARDS
(372 TONS). OUANllTY TO BE VERIFIED BY CONTRACTOR.
------
-CRAVEL BORROW TO BE ""PORTED rROU APPROVED BORROW fAOUTY FOR
TRAL CONSTRUCl1CH IS 230 CUBIC YAROS (.no TONS).
-FINE BARK MULCH TO BE 'IoIPORTED fROM APPROVED B~OW FACIUTY FOR
TRAl. CONSTRUCTION IS 92 ruBle YARDS (1.38 TONS).
LEGEND
o
*" @
®
OEODUOLIS TREE
CONIFEROOS TREE
STORM DRAlN t.lANHOlE
SANITARY MANHOLE
(J12~lI TAX lOT I PARCEL NUMBER
-------ROAD C(NTERUN[
EDGE OF PAVEMENT
[ASUIENT UNE
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
EXlSllNG RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE
CREEK C(NTERUNE
ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK (OH'MoI)
WETlAND BOONOARY UNE
------WETLAND BumR UNE
--.--.--fENCE UNE (TYPE AS NOTED)
VEG£TATlON ~ANAGEt,lENT BUFFER UNE
- - -flOOD HAlA.RO AAEA ULlJTS UNE
BID AlTERNATE f1 (SEE LlmGATlON PLANS)
""-"'" '" ~ 40'.375' TEWPORARY "
CONSTRUCTION !:A.SOI[NT ""
"-art OF RtNTON _ \
FUlCO HA1ARo AREAuIllTS -...-..
1J1240~i1 ....... \ \-" .......
\ "-,,-
""-\ "-""-"-""-\ "-""-"-
'-, \ "-
/" 200' SHORE! !NE " "~ MANAGEMENT ZONE " '" '\ '--'\ ---\
"
'-:--,.-.
LOT A "-
I.).t,SJl Sf (CiAOSSj "
100% SUBMITTAL
'\
'\ ,
\\ -----\
\
\
L
VICINITY MAP
SCALE: 1"=1500'
SHEET INDEX
C1 COVER SHEET & SITE PLAN
C2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
C3 TESCPLAN
C4 TESC DETAILS
C5 TESC & STANDARD DETAILS
C6 TESC NOTES
C7 TRAIL ALIGNMENT HORIZONTAL CONTROL PLAN
C8 TRAIL ALIGNMENT GRADING PLAN
C9 TRAIL ALIGNMENT PROFILES
M1 MITIGATION IMPACT SUMMARY PLAN
M2 MITIGATION IRRIGATION PLAN
M3 MITIGATION IRRIGATION NOTES AND DETAILS
M4 MITIGATION PLANTING PLAN
M5 MITIGATION DETAILS AND SPECIFICATIONS
M6 MITIGATION SPECIFICATIONS AND MONITORING
M7 SITE FURNISHING DETAILS
M8 TREE INVENTORY PLAN
DEVELOPMENT DATA:
OWNER/A.PPUCA.NT: CITY OF RENTON
1055 S GRADY WAY
RENTON, WASHINGTON 96057
(425) 430-6571
A TTENTlON: TODD BLACK, A..S.LA..
ENONEERj'SURVEYm: OA\o10 EVANS and ASSOOATES, INC.
415 118TH AVENUE SE
SITE ADDRESS
BELlEWE, WASHINGTON 98005
(425) 519-6500
ATTENTlON: DOUG YOGT, P.LS.
4260 LAKE WA.HINGTON BLVO N
RENTON, WA.SHlNGTON 98056
TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER
322405-9109
DATUM
V[RTlCAl OATUt.I: NAVO-S8 (NGVO 29 _ NAVO-B8 MINUS 3.6')
®
• ~
~
Z
::i
0..
~
...J
~
ZZ
0° 1--0
'I Ui -011
I--ZZ ~ -wocWiJj Woo::« f-
W
W
I
(/)
o::LLLL'?= o 0 z-
~8 ffi
.t .. ~ > ~ ° , U
~
~
_z OW oc
,:'-
"~j
• • ! :D
rom w~S<! zw CIl8i:/S
cOo. ~~6l
>0(!§:D Wu ~g.~
~g ~ji
i(m~~a.
Q 0( • .! · .. z • •
D
REVISIONS: APPD.
DATE: APRIL. 2012
DESIGN: BRO
DRAWN: CLK
CHECKED:
REVISION
NUMBER:
SCALE: ,"-40'
PROJECT NUMBER:
RENTOOOO-0015
DRAWING J1LE:
eclIoIOO1R[NTOOOOOOI5
SHEET NO.
C1
OF17
---... -- - --.. ,--,-elk 04/17/12 9: 31 am -P: \r\RENTO0000015\0400CAO\EC\DWG\Sheet\eclM009RENTO0000015.dwg
(¥W ij A elf #m"'kH@,@'p;iI .. dij''''A'£f'I'AA~ iJffl\'\Io.·§I;<··,~~t,/",<,,;,., ',;;, <.
~
o o
~ o
en c
OJ :s:::
~ ,
f'
0 ~
~ .....
ggg
w
~ ~ ~
()~
CD
• 0 ~ ~
§ ;
~ n z ~ ~ p
~
, , , , ~
,
; ~
~ , ~
, , , ~
~ ~
lL ...
je ~ 't ~ r= 8
~'" i~ ~ ~ ~ .!..;= 0
Il'm
'"
l'l .... ~~
~ , , , , ~
~ , , ':
~
• • " ,
• i
· • s
~
g:
~ , ~
~;= <.;'
.:.. to) t:; i"tJ q~
<" -;;~ <.;'
'" g:
~
l'l ....
f= ~ ? ~ -8 ~r
~ ..
1!;g
<;;J 0 ?
<" ~ , -0 -r lI'm
'"
;0 ~
m = z E .... ~ a ~
8 ~ ~ l5 a ~
~ Pi'
W n ~
~
z
0
" c
is ~ ~
~ --
Ii ~ 35.9 ~
35.66 ~ '" 0+00.0 -C/lT'RAll2-I ".,., 5+69.2 -elL TRAIL 1 1 , ruV_l5.85
35.7
J6.00
36.5 1
J6.IO
1
36.7
36.20 1
06.9 1
O6.JO 1
36.4 /
J6." / P 1 ~
J>7 1 ~
".5O
[ I \
36.1 \
36.60
I \
36.6
36.70 11+95.37 -elL TRAIL 2 •
37.1 iV'_O±'QO'OO--=-qt..lR~~IL~
J6." \ :EL[V_J6,BJ I
31.3 ------l2+oo.00 • GRAD( BREAI<
36.90 II [LEV. J6.8i
37.2
37.13
37.2 .. _._--_ . ----_ ..... -
J7.J7
37.3
37.60
I 12+16.98 -Cl!, TRAIL 2 -37.6 I ~OOOPlAlN-U~T J1.8J :_~~I. I 37.4
Jao'
37.7 "~~i~ I JIlJO
38.9 '~ 38.53
39.1
38.17
'97.0.00 -GRACE """ 39.3
~ •
I!
§
39.00 ~ 39.1
JIl75
". JIl"
Ja2
Ja26 .!.---T---
~
".1 at 4-.6-4;59--eA-TRAIt; 2-w-38.02
I 1+47.42 -C/I. TRAIL 1
39.0 _---:-:---__ L.". __ I_~~~_~6."""J __ """ __
" • N
~
I~
w " .... ~~
~~
g; i"tJ <;;J~ is o
<" .:..r::: lI'm
'"
o
w I ~ g; -II u
33.4
~ I-'
3.12 0+00.00 -e TRAIL 3 •
ll.28 z ~. 3+52.66 -e TRAIL 1 0 ~ nrV.3~28
JJ.2 ;;I
ll.28 §; -0+10:00--CRAOE-BR All
:1-~ ELEY -JJ."
32.9
32.98 l'. ~
N> 0+60.0 J2.5 Or I -GRADE BR All
32.48 o. [lEV. 2.48
32.8 •• ~ 32.7J " •
33.0 1+00.29 PROPERTY L E
33.00 1 END TRAl L IIoIPROVEMEN
WATCH EX GROUND ELE -33.00
... . g; b o
w ;!; g; --
".5 z
;;I l.! 37.3 -£ .... 0+00.00 C TRAIL 4 •
8" .J.~ 1+95.37 -C TRAIL 2
~ fl.EY-36.88 J
36.2 ~ Q. ,O+'~ -AOE"1lREAK"-0> ~ 'END Of TRAILIIMPROVEWEN S ." J26 c. .;-_.... !:! II iELEY_35.78 .' i;j~ I-~
.. , ~ .
b ~ o g;
'f"h.1 • it
~~~~ 0 ~ ~ ~ • DAVID EVANS ~8 ~ .. z a CI AND ASSOCIATES INC • . Z!? • ~ ..
415 -118thAvenueSE • .. n BelievueWashlnglon98oo~3518 ~~~ Phone: 425.519.6500
~ • I I I [ I [
~
~
~
~ g ~
~ (
t , 'i'
1l
~ ~
\ , ~
~
~
~
~ ,
I ,
~
§
~
~ ,
t ,
~
~
~
I I
g ,
34.5
34.8
34.&4-
32.3
34.27
32.0
33.29
31.3
32.29
JO.2
31.29
JO.'
JO.68
31.2
JO.86
31.5
31.43
31.1
32.01
31.9
32.58
32.3
ll.15
32.6
33.05
32.7
32.95
32.5
32.85
32.6
32.75
32.6
32.65
32.9
32.89
33.2
ll.12
33.3
33.36
.3.3.6
JJ.W
34.1
ll.S4
34.2
34.07
34.3
.14.31
34.4
34.55
34.5
34.79
35.0 >000
35.4
35.26
35.7
35.50
35.8
35.74
35.5
35.97
36.2
36.21
36.7
36.45
37.1
36.69
37.4
36.92
37.5
37.16
37.7
31.40
37.9
37.63
38.0
37.87
JIlO
37.89
37.9 ---37.17
37.7
-.. ' -----"'-'1' ';1,'.\" ,-ij iillll" jI§ gt.Ji4ifli!iif¥ ; ri4t !i1!l!lI!'li!! iii
w ~ g; 0 0
-8A~X SlOEWAU(
1/ BE~~ EMENT CONC AO
MAT X_SlOEWAUL ;RACE
/ [lEY-3 .54
0+03.50 -eft. TRAIL 1
I, JL ~~g~ctT~~~LTr,~~~:~ ~~ , ELEV-34.17
+~~ ,,--~ Ii
~~
BIICE: 34.14 q I ~>
"", 0+-25"-~-g; , .. ( I [veE: 34.04 ..... ~~ ~~
/J; (;-.= 0+,. "U"Ui~
BIICE: 31.29 ~:s:s~!
\ 0+94.12 • P~"l"l~ FLOOO_ AZARD_lIMI.T q • • < >->-
1 ~ ~ ....... I
1 ~ 8:~+-' Eves: "" . 8 + ~
1 EveE: 30.86 ~ $q,
~.
._--~ \\
1 ,
I TA 2+00.00 1-
1 ~~[ BR[AK
1 v. ll.15
:1--~ !~-TI ;n-1 ,
5TA 3+00.00 , GRADE BREA
ELEV • 32.6 ~ • • " z 3 .52.66 -C/L TRAIL 1 -§--~~Qj1.:~.28 cA TRAIL 3
" • ~
\ ~ ---, , ~
\
---"-1
1
5+69.2 ejL TRAI
1 _
1 0+00.0 -ejL TRAI 2
[Ltva3 . .,=-
\
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
¥
1
1
1 , +27.02
1 FLOOO H lARO LIMIT
7+47.42 -e TRAIL 1 _
4+64.59 -C rL TRAIL 2
ru:VooJl..96
~ ~
7+99.2 -PROPER UN(
END TR IL IMPROVEM 'TS
MATCH X GROUND E [Y.37.67
Wi,
TRAIL ALIGNMENT PROFILES
MAY CREEK TRAIL
FOR
CITY OF RENTON
RENTON, WASHINGTON
"'0 o
;:0
-I o
Z
o
"T1
G) o < ~
r o
-I .....
CIJ m
()
-I
o
Z
w
'" -I
'" .I>-
Z
;:0
(11
m
~ s::
I
I
I B
I .,1
I
I
1
1
I
I; ,
/
I
I ~ • " I~ 0
0 ~ z
II u • ./
I! " '" 0
I¥ <.>
0
0 ..
I(~
0
0
0
0
I~ .-.--:: ./
0:
I K '" ..
N
I~
"-..
0 I ~
1
1
I
1
1
/
I
1
I
1
I
1
I
I
1
/
1
1"'-
1 "" / '\.
1 '\.
@
,
".. '"
" '"
"" ----------
~"
14$f ">lI1-\:
l'o'c '0,.
PORTION OF GOV'T LOT 1, SECTION 32, T 24 N, R 5 E, WM
---------------"-""'-""'-
r-40'x37S' T[\IPQRARY
CONSTRUCTION EASE~ENT "" " CITY rs RENTON' ~ --', \
'~
\"" \ '
@
"
\ "
\ "
/
I
I
\ " ""'-/200' _UN' ,
"" IoIANAGEW(NT ZON'E \ "" '\ ----'\
~ I
~
/
/¥ "-
LOTA-
lJ4.5J1 5' (CROSS)
I
""
6.0' TRAIl. 6.0' TRAIl
J.~' C{l .J.D' J.D' C(L J.D'
-1-I I .Q_GR.f!I~___ I~ 2SWlN' I ___ ~~~
-'~""".''''. ----------"i~$ts~ .. , ... ]
\
'\
OF GR~l ,
I
LEFT ~ '~'[-; ". V,-~GHT LEFT J+"11ll:;( ~ ~GHT J l~ __ ~_~__ ] __ ~_~ __
ROLLER L 6""'1N CQIi4P DEPTH. GRAVEL BORROW ROUER 6-uJN COMP DEPTH, GRAVEL BORROW
COIoIPACTtD WSDOT 9-0J.l~I), ROLLER COMPACTED SMOOTH COMPACTED WSOOT 9-0J.I4{I}. ROLLER COMPACTED SMOOTH
SUBGRAOE GEOl[XllLE FOR SEPARATION SUBGRAOE GEOTEXTlLE FOR SEPARATION
(t,lIRAfl 500~ OR EQUAL) (MIRAfI 500x OR EOUAL)
FILL IS REQUIRED IN SOUE AREAS & SHAll Fill IS REQUIRED IN SOME AREAS A: SHALL
BE GRA\otL BORROW WSDOT 9-03.14(') 8[ GRAVEL BORROW WSOOT 9-0l.14(1)
SECTION A-A
TYPICAL TRAIL X-SECTION
NOT 10 SCIU
l'¥~1<{ ..... '" ~C(O,
NOTE:
FINE BARK IoIUlCH SHALL CONSIST Of
FlR/HEMlOCK BARK, ," IoIWUS PARntLf SIZE,
PACIFIC TOPSOILS. INC OR APPROVED [QUAL.
L
SECTION B-B
TYPICAL TRAIL X-SECTION
NOT TO SCALE
CONSTRUCTION NOTES
o
o
o
o
@
@
CONSTRUCT If WIDE WAUC1NCl TRAil PER TRAIL SECTIONS ',.,' a: 's',
REWOVE, HAUL ANO DISPOSE OF EXISTING ORGANIC MATERIAL 'MTHIN TRAlL
SECTION Off SITE.
INSTAll filTER FABRIC SILT fENCE AROUND STOCKPILE AREA.
SEE TESC PLAN SHEET CJ.
CONTRACTOR TO INSTALL AU. [ROSION CONTROL rAlP'S SHOWN ON ~E[T
CJ PRIOR TO COIoIIoIENClNG LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITIES.
CONTRACTOR SHAll LlWiT DiStuRBANCE Of EXISTING VEGETATION TO THE
GR£ATEST [Xl[IH POSSIBLE. All DISTURBED AREAS SHALl BE
STABIlIZED PER ,,'lIGATlON PlANs.
CONTRACTOR SHALl ACCESS PROP£RTY fROM NORTH FOR CONSTRUCTION
AND KEEP lAK( WASHINGTON BlVD N Q.fAN BY SWEEPING OAU (s(E
TESC PLAN SHEET CJ). CONSTRUCTION Act£SS [ASEl.IENT TO BE
COORtIINAlEO lHROUGH OTY OF RENTON a: PROPERTY OWNER.
AREAS ClJT5IDE HIGH VISIBILITY fENCE TO REt.tAlN UNDISTURBED WlTIi THE
EXCEPTION OF AREA ENClOSED BY TRAIl 1 a: 2 AS BID AlTERNATE fl.
SEE NOTE 6, SHEET C3..
SUMMARY OF GRADING QUANTITIES
-PARCEL SllE: .1.09 ACRES (134,~' Sf)
-WORK AREA: 1.50 ACRES (55,352 SF)
-ORGANIC 1,1" TERIAL TO BE REI.IOVED rROI.I SITE '" DISPOSED IN AN
APPROVED LANDflLL FOR TRAIL CONSTRUCTION IS 250 CUBIC YAROS
(372 TONS). QUANTITY TO BE VERIfIED BY CONTRACTOR.
-GRAVEL BORROW TO BE IMPORTED rROt.I APPROVED BORROW fACIUTY FOR
TRAIL CONSTRUCTION IS 2JO CUBIC YARDS (370 TONS).
-nNE BARK I.IULo-I TO BE II.IPORTED fROtoI APPROVED BORROW fAOUTY fOR
TRAIl CONSTRUCTION IS 92 CUBIC YARDS (IlB TONS).
100% SUBMITTAL
z
5
Q....J
Cl-~C2 ~I-
Cl~
Zz
0° 1-0
z~ WI
a:~
LL'S:
02
I-W 0:: zWO wa: LL
~o
52>--'« ~~ _z
:5~ O~
~
u ~
! '" COCl) w:bo ZlU~g~
0(~~:Jl~ >o(~iS;;:;
1110 ~~~ eo~; 4:i
>CI) '~iS
o(CI) '{! ~~
Q 0( ... ~
o 0;
Z m
<
REVISIONS: APPD.
DATE: APRIL. 2012
DESIGN: BRD
DRAWN: CIJ(
CHECKED:
REVISION
NUKBER:
SCALE: '" • 40'
PROJEct' NUKBER:
RENTOOOO-0015
DRAWING FILE:
ecII.lOO8RENTOOOOQOI5
SHEET NO.
C8
0,17
N R5E, WM
--------=================;~~~ 'T LOT 1, SECTION 32, T 24 , -============----~~--pPOD~~~T~~O~~~O:FGOV ~
-"'-NORTH
I SEE DETAIL 'A' , / /
I'W-I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
·I~ \8 o o o
·1 ~
. 0
" u
Ii /'
" " Ii « g
I J ,~ o o o o
II /' > I:
.!l
N Ig
" v o I '0
•
~'
~;,
L_~,
~I
':)'
:;.,
l'
1-;;1
/
I
I
/
I
I
I (I' I I / ... ,
1
/ ;A 0+(1100/ ."..,."
""'"", I
""" 0 I~ , T£~PORARY "-P4·~'~G 40'.375 TIDN EASEMENT " 'YOCONSTRUC " " , . "
SCALE: 1" = 30'
", OF RENT~ _ _ __ __ \ \
GRAVEL '",---cr~ _ ARo LIMITS '-___ \
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
"',-, ,r-"~----X--"~ "" w><_., \,,_ ~~< ~><" -::::', \ -', -", <--" ~ • ... , \, ~~,:""" ""4~~~~~ "'---"" \"" ~ '~ -~=75'" »" ~~ O"iJ!\, \ ", \ "" . ---'-'" -, , \ .~. -~~ -",,~ " , t~,\\ \ ~i. "'. 7'~, '~~" " \ "
" ---'-00-"" " \ . OREUNE '''~"" '-':. '~' / 'V20A~A~~MENT ZONE "
.:". o. • ._. ""~~ "" , \~,",." \ , . "'. -..c ,"t,,~., / , -. '" .--'" "-~ . '-\ '\~. ' .. ''''---,---~-:,'" \ ':t ~~_... \
" "'-"~~~.-" . ,,! "~~ -~---, \ '''" "'" --~ \ "" ~~ "'---.-.....:"~. "\ I
I
I
I
I
I
I
WIN DEPTH GRAvEL BORROW
PER WSOOT 9-0.1I4(1)
COMPACTED TO 95~
COMPACTED SUBGRAOE
"'~5~.~ ,--.... -.. -', ;;. ,.,oo.~11 "'---:::::::.~ ",
.. -",. • ". '_0'" ",.~_ ...
--~' ~"" • -". """"'. '---G-or GRA""
" < , • • ....... "~~ ;,-. /-"1 c \
~ ~ \ 'l.~.@ ~ " " •• ~ , ... ~.\ ", """"00' rr)ff' '" "'~"" ~~.~ "-\
'&.\ ,'6\.... + " ""~,, '. ... "1" .,~,' ", "', _~ "'-_ "
'. . ~"', -."" "'--. '. ",C, ,.' ''\,'1::" "CO" "C::,~,_ CEMENT CONCRETE SIDEWALK
'-I' e,
"'l'<iIfL
NOT TO SCAl[
'''. ' H ""'. ", ... -~ '--l-'~ \ ~ ~, "<?>'~~"5000: '--\ "'---,,~ " , , ,~ LOT A I 1
\\:'" .. , ~ ..... "'-, " -, , \ . §--:~.$
8<~
,o41i'k1lvC
'or
'-0' _ _ "
',,, ~ ~ ~ ~'", \'''.'' '. ,,\ ., <>1' \ "'~ ~ "~"" ... ~ , ~=;g,.: ,,~ '\~ ~=~~:. 0"""-~~54· ~ L UA-{)~~d-LLA ~S;.:~'''.'~_'_ .: 6=6S413J'" ~l;~~' • ~ ~ 6-40'37'0:1_ o~':;;-." .. "75'56".-" . , ~. (3224059081) .~~ ,
'e~ , / \' \ ""00:
-, '.-'~, ' \" ;1/ \ \ \ L'".''' ,
-sIC" 0/ , ,
" '. .~'" ' "~,'. , Ii -..."" '-."" = ~~>,~ "'I I f1t~l ~,.,~ ,--:-~~~r~~ ~ >'~""-' ". ,.,,"': \ ~ , \ ~i,;."~,<~ \ l.J~e~".~ ~ ? '''''' 0-""" -11-,>,. • • ,
?' '~'\ ~ \ :tf"R;~"S:-b~ R-l20O!" .-'~> . .~" "..>. L'"''
0, '. "" \ .. ~~ 6=29'0111' -'.,' '-" i" ~~ ~ '.-.'~'~'.\.. ""~.& 7.7 ':::-'::::-2:;E:::::===,\ '-',..' <i3' />. ,.," \
"", "--"
"""'."";;> ""-. -
'o.f
i :1.t.jy ------,..,--
'., .. -.::-~-~." .. -,'"
,]J.5S · ... ~ .•. -'.
~"" ..... 100% SUBMITTAL
00 ""-,
'i'T+1
/
.fr~~~ 5
0..
..J
~
I-
Z...J ZZ 8« 08
..JO:: I-(!)
I-Z
z~ W Owoco::~ ~~~u.!;:
0" OZ
I,-, ~o 1->-I-Z« _z w "w ::;;;2 '-'0::
Z (!)
:J «
..J
~
I-
.;
! ~
CD CD 17 zw ~:g§
«I-!l~<L! >< i <:~
W -< E.~
"" (,) £.EN ~O ~-r~· >", '7~:!1 c(CD~~~ C c( ~ 6;
11:1 'ijj
Z ~
C
REVISIONS; APPD.
DATE: APRil. 2012
DESIGN: BRO
DRAWN: Q.K
CHECKED;
REVISION
NtnmER:
SCALE: I~ .. .30'
PROJECT NtnmER:
RENTOOOO-0015
DRAWING FILE:
ecDoIOO7RENTOOOOOOI5
SHEET NO,
C?
0,17
::;!;
$:
UJ
In
c:::
Z
~
l-
N
'" z o
I-
()
UJ
(J)
I-o
--I
~
t9
u.. o
z o
~ o a.
-
N01ElNIHSIIM 'N01N3l:l
NO.lN3}:1 .:10 A.l18
l:lO=l
llVCI.l >l33}:18 A'v'v\!
S310N :)S31
----
OOS9·6~!"SZ:v :lluOlld
tH9NOOll6 lJOj6U14!!IIM BnJlBllea
3S enua.'oV 411H ~ -g~1'
·ONI S3J.VI:)08SYGNY
SN"'''!! 01""'0
-
I I I I I I
I
I
I
I
I I I ;1
I III
I .' I .~,
,I' frl
~ • '0
Ii
0
0
0 ~
Ii 0
" u • II /'
" " 0
" ;:; [,I ~
0 «
L>
0
0
I/~ 0
0
0
0
IJ
/' >
I :
0
'" 0
Ii
" " I ~
...,..
..sr ..... ~ .. QA.Vill!fF~ .... _111_..-"'._
_DTf~I'T_
,.. ... ~ ....... I
~
1, CCIMD!1X*OFUSE
_Vl-.tU..-oronEEIliQ(i
go-~_l:I...st;l<1.A~QF_
coo.s~emwaltlC>G:l --... -~
n .. ~_fl'Hf ornwoa; __ 30_
___ CI'I'1l<lHC
~~--~.,. --
1.1. CClNSTRLJCT10N EH'fRArICE SHAlL BE STA8Il..lZED 'M1EREVER TRAFFIC WIll. BE lEAVING .. COfIST!WCTION Sill: AND TRAII'ElMG ON
P"YED RQlrDSOfI. OllER PAYEO IIIREAS WfTH:N I. FEET C6 THE SITE
tlJiSUSlIltNGTM UNDCISJ ."._.
Gflt,8lnSU El~llI;JN A$lN mMUI
IoU.IDI aorsTS'II8tCitlf ASn.I D .'51 MN.
A§N1M1511 _ JT .. N!) .... "ItVE!Jlf
1. DUIOIIAMDINSTAUATIO'IPECRc;ATJDIQ
2.1. HOG FUn ('M)OO &A$EO ..... CH) IllAr (IE $U8$1llUlEO FOROR CCUIIrED wmt QUAM'( SPALLS IN ARES THAT wu. BOT BE USE)
FOR PERWoNDflfiOAOS. HOG FUEllSfrIOT RECOMMENOEDfOR ENTRANCESTABlUZAllON IIIl/RlIAH AAE./lS. TM£IN$F'ECTOR MAY
AT ANY IlIoE REQUIRE THE USE OF CIUoIoRRY SPAU.S IF THE HOG FUEl tS 101)1 PREVEN'T1JIO 8EIDEMf FROU BEING TWOtEo OHTO
PA~ OR IF THE HOG f1JEI. IS 8EIH3 CAAR1ED ClNl't) PAVEtoIO/T.
2-2. FENCWO SHALl. Be IICST...u.EO ASIr!ECESSARY TO Rli:STRICT tRAfl'1C TO THE CONSTRUCTION 0lTRAHCE-
2.1 WI-£HEVER PO$SIII.£. TIE ENmA..'tCE ISHALL BE COtISTRUCTtOON A FIW. OOMPACTEOSl8CIW:IE. THIS CAN SL$STANTW.lV
N:REASE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF llE MD AND RalUCE TI£ NEW FeR MNNTEHANCE.
I. IIIINN'TEJIAIfCIt STAIIO.UtD8
:t.l. Ql.IA,RRV SPALLS$I-W.l BE ADIJEl)IF TI£ PJID IS NO LONGERIN N;~ IMTHTHESPECJfICA'TlOUS
3.2. IF THE E"fl'lWQ IS NOT PRS'ENTlNO SEOULHT BEING l'RACKEDONTO PA~. TtENALTEIIHo'.Tl\IE Io£~S TO KEEP THE
$-mEETS Fm:E OF &DIoIENT SlW.l BE U$£C. TKIS ..... V N:UJOE STREET SWEEPHG. Nt INCREASE IN T'HE CD,lENSION$ Of ':'HE
ENl'RANCE, OR THE INSlAJ..LATlON OF TIE WIlER W.f,$tL IF W~ IS USED, IT SHAU BE DONE ON AN AItE.A CCNE RID wnH
CRJSIoEI ROCK. MID WASHED WII.l'ER SHAll. CRAIN TO A SEDIUEHT TRAP 011 POND.
3.3. N« SEDCMIOJl.TTAATI$ fRA(;(EOOHTOPAVEMENT SHAU BE REu:)YED IUMEDIAmy BYSWEEPWG. T!-!£ SEm.ENTCOllECTED8V
!MEEPM3 StW.lIE Ra.JYEO OR STAIIUlED~sm::. THE PA"<IEl.IDI"O!ItW.l.. NOT lIE ClEAI'I.£D IYWASHING DOWN llE STREET.
EXCEPT 'MIEN SWEEPING IS INEFFECTl'IE NoD THERE IS A TMR£AT to PUIItlC SAFETY. F rr NECESSARY TO WA,$t1 THE STREETS."
$.WU !UP WST lIE CONDUCTED. THE SEDIMeNT wo..n.o THEN lIE WASHED INTO THE SI.U" wtERE IT CNJ lIE COHTROU.EO IIIl/)
DC!CHARGED~TELY.
3.4 ANt QUARRYSPAI.1.S TAAT ARE LOOSENED FROUncE PAD N..:J ENOUPONTHE f'IO,O,OWAYSl-W.1.8E ~'ED IUlUEl)ATaY.
U. F VEHIClES ARE E\ITEFDIO OR ~TNG THE $ITE.S AT roMTS 0Tt£R THAH TlfE COKSllIUCTlON ~~ FENCING SHAll. BE
INSTALLED TO COfiTROl. TRMFlC
E) PUBUC WORKS
DEPART1IEr.'
STABIUZED
CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
STD. PUN -216.10
~CH 2008
PORTION OF GOV'T LOT 1, SECTION 32, T 24 N, R 5 E, WM
1/2"u' [Xl'AI-lSiON UA1£RIAL
1/~""lIAT..K»ITS -..
1/2·U" ElCPfoHSiD' IoIU£RlA.L "c£~ COllIe. CUll"B AND G!lH[R
1/·"/Ff.
1/2"R
I/'"R AT ..oMS
SCOAt Ut..tS TO B£ 1l.lOl"l ~ \-.... ':r TOW~B~OCUTit!l: • _ ••
I/2"J.-£W~NS'ON 1.O~l[RIAL/ ~ I
I/~'II ~T ..oNTS sc..., .. ,; .... <;
""" -'NOTH OF 510["1'.',.1{
1/1'~~" [~P.o.NSKIt.
1of .... 1tFI1 ... ~ CUl'tB RERI'm
~d
-F'.t.'<'[lofnn "S PE~ pt""S
Sf"""O"!!O CEIof. c~c.
Q;RB AND CUn£R
SfCTION A A
II
112"R
H-iI ! I
II ~ I
• J
D I
~/ •• ;rI.Sl.QP[
,4" 1/2"11
rI>A"[~T AS Pg PLAN:>
P~KW"VJ LANDARO CE:t,!.
CCl:"lC CURB foHD "H""
SECTION 8 8
5U !>HEn 2.51 rOIl ROADWAY Ot:'<O.OP"'Er.T STANO"'~DS
ffNf'W "OIf$
""",ISo ~.'OO<>5 ....... PIC,....aD..or «l E= ". ,Il; _ U'5S ""J' ,0' tIC-..... St ...
..01 PIC<CS _ J".-" ~...., ......... fYII.JC)Itl T ~l>O(ampLM.l/r
....., .om; 1>< .... at PL.O.ttD AT ...... COW _15 05!101ttlI1) .. ...-ro _ -... ~ "
--~ e€JIE "'l~'" lQ.l'\.AaC _Sf ..... 0;0. .... _ o.mtR.1\oo£ _0''' ~0I..L •• tQ.C
..... _ 'IT<'" ['"'_ w.lrII:IOL ~ I( IU(:t'IO ....... Pt. .. T~ •. f ..... At, ~ ............. 'm'" , ... _ .. ~I[IO ... ~ !IE .........., or <\lin" fCUI'" SOE-..: p"",,---
...:~ ....... _ sor.....n t><AU-"""""" III _ ~ .. <Y (1.<$$ • ('I".n. ~
f\olll~.
l>< ~ ........ ~ ... 0 IO'O(JO'--' ",no ..... <0IlUj "",.,,,. 2 1/2" TOOtro rwtSH
s..co ... COOOf'ono:Jo 9<"<1 lIE ,.,.. \~ "'OCTlll<)
Oi;,~ IW,IlSlON ~
~ ~
TYPICAL SIDEw-ALK
""'PTED
=M~
~-~ m 114T&-04/04
OWG. NAME:: roo? Sp PAGE:: rOO7
I I
100% SUBMITTAL
m~...J ZZ ..:->-<l: O~ wo:: I-<!>
1!1I 0 1-z~ .~~
'i"
.,:;
.,
"
~I
WJ::
0::0::(1) ..:W Ow o ..: ILLL~ ~o::
tijO Oz
... >-u<l: ~~
(I)~ -W
00:: W >-
.; . z _
IDeO w~o
ZW ~gffi ~~ ~"'~ w-~t~ cg ~i~ >CD~~~ « III ~.~
Q 0( .... i
• Z
C
~
REVISIONS: APPD.
DATE: APRIL. 2012
DESIGN: 8RO
DRAWN: CLK
CHECKED:
REVISION
NUMBER:
SCALE: NONE
PROJECT NUKBER:
RENTOOOO-0015
DRAWING FILE:
eclIolOO5R£NTOOOOOO15
~I SHEET NO.
C5
op17
I
I
•
I
I;
I
1\
~. ;,1 .. I. "'
I
.1:
~ • Ii a
)1 i
a
:> u
Ii ~
" " IJ a .,
u a
I~ a a a a I;
/' .>
I :
0 v a
I~
"-v
I ~
I
I
i ~~ --T Ii'J "', "Ii' "L '-'II " .-
J
111
---
-III
.....
1. COIIDf11OtI Of' UIE
1.1. TO I!lITAILISH a.J!ARH) I..MTf" ITNCI! OR VWIE I'e«::I! IMY BE URO<
1.1.1, AT THe \IIOI,INEWf'I' 01' t:NT'ICo\L NIEAS, THEIItaJII'FERS AND onE::RAREAS Im:IUItED 10 IE lEFT
""""'-t.U. AS~TOCOHT1ICI.. TH!V&CI.DTONC)CWntl!~
:I. ~AIID"" '''' 2.1. IF tHI FliNCi IS DUW3ED OR 'III1BILm' AEtIUCED. IT lItWL III!' REMlm>OR I'IEPUCED 1MIIElM1iI..Y N«J
""..,." """'"'" :u.. ~ Of A atrnCW-AIU!A, ~ IIlFfER MEA. "'TlYE GROWTH RETENTlON MIV.. ClRontEJI:
AREA REOUlRED to IE LEFT ~ DW..L IE It£PCIInED TOnE art OF ItEJIfTa.I FOR RESOI.l1TlON.
U THE aTV .... " ~ MORI aafAN1'll'l 'IJOrIG • TIt! FSCl! DCI!S NOT ""!'I/aff1NCRQlOAlBfJ
lITO THOR AREAS THAT AlE NaI' to IE DIIt\RIED.
e PUBUC WORKS
DEPARTWENT
2_2 _ 3'·0" WOODEN STAKE
COMPOST SOCK
-SEE NOTE 1
STAKE AND WIRE FENCE sm. I'LI!f -112.00
EROStON CONTROl
BlANKET
-SEE NOTE 3
MARCH 2008
NOTES
1. Compost Sock mal be in a~ wilh
Standard 5peclficatioo 9-14.5(6). Compost
Sock shaR be • minimum of e" in diameter
or sized to suit oondillons as specmed by
the Englnaar or Contract.
2. Compost matarialto be di$persed!Xl site or
lett in place. e delennine<l by the Englleef.
3. When pladng Compost Sock on slopes. USB
Erosion Con!rot Blanket If spacified by Iha
Engineer and on BCCCIfdance W1th Standard
Spaafication 9-14.5(2). See Standanj
Plan 1-60.10
4. Always Ins!al1 CcxnposI Sock perpendK:u\ar
to slope and along contour Ioes.
S. Re-rnove sediment from the up stop<! side of
the Compost Sock when aocumulatlon has
rvached 112 of the effective heigtltoflha
Corn!xJsl Scxk.
6. Live stakes can be used In addition to w0od-
en stakes and shaH be in BCO:lrdance with
Standard 5pedfic:ation 9-14.6(1). See plans
lor species selection and splicing.
1. Mesh contalolng compost shalt be biodegradable.
DETAIL -COMPOST SOCK ---. .,-------_ ..... --.---REF: WSDOT STD t"" ........ ~ J-UV."V-VV
NOT TO SCALE
PORTION OF GOVT LOT 1, SECTION 32, T 24 N, R 5 E, WM
----.. -~~
~=,,.r:"-~
-..
1. cucrncaCl'IJII
1.1. PU8'nC CCI\I!RIOICI .... " III! USED ON DISTURaED MEM lWoT RECIlIItED CCIWR M!ASlRS RIft I.LSS 1lWI .. MY$.
1.2. PlASt'IC IS ~y USEJU. f'OR I'RJTlCTK) cut NCI FIJ. ILOI'B AM) STCQCPI..ES.
1.3. CUAR PI..ABJ1CIt££I1NO ..... y IE USED OIlER NEW!.Y.-E£DEO NIEAS 10 CR!!ATE A 0AE£N<lUSE El'F£CT II!iD ENC(UW;E GRAIS:II
0R0W'TIi. Q.EAA PLUTIC SHOU.D NOT. USED FOR '"IS PlRPOSE IX.RNG ntE SI.UoIER MONntS ,.4. ntIS METHOD.wJ. Ncr!' IE USED tJI'II..Cft: OF AREAS tHAT MIOHT IEIOJEIIIS!l.Y -...creD BY IUO'I'. IUCHNfEAS INCl.UOl! InEEP ~ _ .........
i. DI!SIOIIAIID-.rJoUAntIIII~~
2.1. kUtlCSJEafJrIOIHCUJlHAVIIA-...THIQCNIAOFG.CQMIIJ.JMETERS, :u. IF EItOSICNAT THe TOE OF A 1lQ>E IS ~., ... GlW.lEL ISM, RIPIW", OR OTHER anA&.! PAICITECTION IIW.lIE 1oISTAU£D ArnE TOE
Of THe IUII'I:" 0ADBl1O AECUCETlE. VELOCm' OF IIUCJFF.
s..~ST"""'" .. t. l'CRf II-EEn IIOST IE REPUoCED NC) OPBI SEMIS ~D.
11 IF TH! PI.AS1lC .GINS TO ~T!: DIll! tolA.f1'IIl'llDlET 1III\O!oII,1lCH, IfIlOST IE COMt'lflB. Y RDICJoIB)N«J IIP\ACED.
U WHEW THe PlASTIC IS NO LCN3ERNEEDED, IT DW..L bE CCMP\..ElUY ImIIIMS.
e PUBUC WORKS
DEPARTWEHT
PLASnc COVERING BID. PLd -21a.30
»ARCH 2008
NOTES
.-u /
J'OSf.....ac .... v .. --" ro ... _.....-"usm
~
I. (;(IIICII1"OIC#1,III!
~
au fEtICE W.YllEustD DOWNSLOPE Of IIU~AREAS.
2""I4""a,,000-_0II
............ EHT •• .,..........,
.,--..... .-:UIEl
~--
T><r_POSf1,.Sl"inO;:NC:l! ___ 0lIl ......... _
1.1.
" SILT Faa IS NOT INfBCIEO TO TREAT CONCENTRATED I'l.OIIII'S. NOR IS Hf9IDED TO TREIo' SUIISl"",,,,,," >\MOUNTS OF CYERI.NC) FLOW,
INr CCN.:ENTRATED FLOW MOST lIE CCH\I£TED nflOUGH THE ~ 8'!1ITDI TO A SEDIUEHT TIW" OR PCN:l
t. ODIGNAIID..-TAlLAnQNSPI!CW'ICAT1DMI ... 1"Hf. GEOTiXTU USED MOST MET TliE IT f'H)NlJ) LIITl:D BalOW. " rx:Rt OF THE r,w.lJFACT1JRER'8 fHIRIC SPECFICA11CWS IoIO$T BE
AVALtolllt:~SItt-
<-1ASfM_ ..... 1M _... ..It~ .... _
JDalLlJlIDIC>tII.<$NOOll:I ::::::: :~'---... ..mJI ... ..,..,...,.I .....
2..2 STANDARD STRl:NOTH fABRIC Rl:CUlRf:5 WIRE 8ACKINQ TO ~ THE STRl:NGTH CW DE feNCE. W1R£ IW:KN3 OR Q.OSER POST
IPAClNG ..... Y BE REOI..IIU:O FCI'I EXTRA STREHG"TH F.o.8RIC .. FIElO PERFORtoIANCE. WARAAHTII A STRONGER FENCE.
2..l Wt£RE THE FEMCEIS INSTAUED. THE SI.DPe stW.l.NOlIIE IlTEEPEll:n-wl2H:1V 2... If A TYPICAl. .... , F£NCe IS USED. THE STIIIOOoRO 4lIoI "fRENCH lIMY NOllIE Rl:DUC£O ASlONO AS THE IIOTTOU. !NOES Of THE It.T FENCE
IS "M:I.I. 6l.IU£O ~ SECU'IE IN A ntENOI ran S1'AI$UlE$ THE P"!NIC£ AJID DOEll NOT .IoUOIN"WATLIl TO IIYPASS 0. ~ THE SLr ,-
s. IWNmIINICI! S1'AICONIOS
3-1. NIT CWIAGE StWJ.BE R(P_~-ra.,.
3.2 .. ~T£O flOES I\RI: EVIIJEtfT UPHl.L 00 floE ra.a. THEY MUST Be ~~ a:H.'E'I1:D TOA SE*IEKJ TlW"OR POND
3.3 IT IS......::IIUANT TO QtEQ( nE lJ>IiIU. SIDE OF THE 'ENCe FOR u::;NS OF THE feNCE Cl.OGGNlNm AC1WG AS "BNUIIEIt TO n.OW N«l
TI-IEH CAUSlNO OWIPEUZA TION Of FlCIW3 PAAALl.ElTO THE. FENCE if no OCCURS. IW'I.AC£ THE FENCE OR REaiI7YED THE lfW' '''''''''" . 3.. 8ED1UENlI«I$T BE REMOIIED \JItEN SED*fN1" IS • INCHES HIOH.
3.5 '" "floE FLTBI FHIRIC (GtOTtXTLl!) HAS ~TI!:O DUE 10 I.l. TRAVIOLET IIAEMIXJIWI. IT SIW.lIIE -...em.
e PUDUC WORKS
DEPARllIENT
SILT FENCe
STD. PLAN -214-.00
MARCH 2008
1. Size the Below lnlet Grate Oevice (SIGO) for the $tOOll waterstruchR it .......
1'--BELOW tNLET GRATE DEVtCE
SECTION VIEW
2. The BIGO shalt have D buitt-in hlgh·1\aw rerle! system (overflow bypass~
3. The reIliev;.II system II"U$I allow removal of !he SiGn without spit!ing the -""""".
4 PefIonn ITIlIinklnance In accordance with Starldard Specifalion 8-01.3(15).
ISOMETRIC VIEW
DETAIL -STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION 100% SUBMITTAL REF: WSDOT S10 PlAN 1-40.20-00
NOT TO SCALE
-l
cn~
ZZ
0°
:!I-
1-0
«~ ZZ
tiiwo::wJ: owOO::~
uc::"-u...3:: ~() OZ
f->->-0 « I-f-_z
:2: OW 0::
.;
! . .
CD (0 w~o ZlIJ (l)gfjS
<C( ~ ~~~ > <II( ~ aUi
1110 ~~~ go ~~o;
>(0 '~a C(O~!!:ls: C C ... .! . ..
Z m <
REVISIONS: APPD.
DATE: APRIL. 2012
DESIGN: BRD
DRAWN: CLK
CHECKED:
REVISION
NUMBER;
SCALE: NONE
PROJECT NUMBER:
RENTOOOO-001S
DRAWING FILE:
eclhAOO4R[NTOOOOOOI5
SHEET NO.
C4
·<.\:1 0F17
I
~
I I'" .,
I
I
I [,
'1
I
I
I
~ • ~ I~ '0 '0
0
0
0 ~
I~ 8
'" u • 1\ !
" ~
0 li~
'" u
0
0
Ii
0
0
0
IJ .'" -C
,/
I~
~
0
Oi I~
" V
0 I '0
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
/
I
I
PORTION OF GOVT LOT 1, SECTION 32, T 24 N, R 5 E, WM
I / ,~ /1/, / "',,-
I I "-" I I '-... I I _ /h' / ----I
.; _ "-"" ;; ~-""""", "-
"''''''''N'''''';l .... -.."" ff'ol£CilTATDlIll 1MS AR[A 10 (LUIS C6 'KIItIQ 8( ItElIOVED BY ItA/CI
(SEE I...lICSCAP( I'I.ANJ
0"'.'''''''' f" ... ".-
- --~ EX GRCl.IC) WIIIACE
PIICPOSED lit ..... ;.2" - -...... [ , ....
~ ... --
, MAY CREEK
~--
MCI+ VlSl8lJTY FtNa: .... -..""
,,, ... ,,, """
0: CAOJNO su:tf'ACE,
---
!.MIS" IORK
" .. ..
"'-~
PIIIlPOS[D lIUI. 1 a 1
/ 0 ;i/fjq;z r':;;-"'''''-"" -/ &, , "~, , "
" , DETAIL -HIGH VISIBILITY FENCE LOCATION
I
I
I
1
I
LEGEND
o
* @
®
(J22405908\J
@
=
"''' "
DECIDUOUS TREE
CONIFEROUS TREE
STORI.l DRAIN I.IANHOLE
SANITARY I.IANHOLE
TAX LOT / PARCEL NUIoiBER
ROAD CENTERLINE
EDGE OF PAVEt.4[NT
------EASEI,IENT LINE
PROPERTY BOUNOARY
EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE
CREEK CENTERLINE
ORDINARY HIGH WATER !.lARK (OHW)
.... ULAND BOUNOARY UNE
WETLAND BUFFER LINE
--,--,--FENCE LINE (TYPE AS NOlED)
VEGETATION MANAGEI,IENT BUfFER UNE
flOOD HAZARD AREA UMITS LINE
BID AL TERNA TE 11 (SEE /,IlnGA nON PLANS)
O~ '!2"" ,.;;-_ -___ \
Fta:o HolZARD 02240~*,9) \ __
~ ........ ,
\ '"
"
""'-"'~EHTlO<'E
100% SUBMITTAL
"
\
\
\
\
\
NOrTO~
l".rQ;o.j~
~''''''' -~lO,
T.E.S.C. CONSTRUCTION NOTES
o
@
o
o
@
@
@
SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN fOR WORK IN THIS AREA.
TEYPORARY CONSlRUCTION EASEwENT AREA TO BE ENClosrn
WITH TEYPOOARY 6' CONSTRUCTION FENCE.
COHTRACTOft SHAll. R£WO'ot: PORTION or EX 4' CHAIN UHK
FDIC[ fOR ACCESS TO STACHG AREA a: REPlACE 1IIH[N SITE
WORK IS COWPlETE.
CONTRACTOR SHALL CREATE a: SUSVIT TRAme CONTRCl PlAH
FOR LAKE WASHINGTON BlW NORTH TO CITY FOR APPROVAL
CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE INlET PROTECTION (IP) ON AU. STORY
ORAINAGE WANHOL£S a: CATCH BASINS IN STRUT 6: ON
ADJACENT PROPERT'I' WITHIN 200 n or CONSlRUC1ION AREA..
AREA ENClOSED BY Hlf.I-t VISIBlUTY FINCE TO REwAJN
UNDISTURBED UNLESS BtO ALTERNATE 11 IS ACCEPTED.
AREAS OUTSIDE: HIGH "'Sl8!UTY FENCE TO REWAIN UNOISTURBED
NTH THE EXCEPTION or AR[A ENClOSED BY TRAIL I a: 2 AS
BID ALTrRNATE fl. SEE NOTE 6.
STANDARD PRACTICE CODING SYSTEM:
s;QIlE llMEi
@ CONSTRUCTION [NTRANCE
(CITY or RENTON S10 PlAN 21~10)
@ BIODEGRADABLE C(lt.lPOST SOCK
(WSOOT sm PLAN 1-.30.40-00)
@ DUST CONTROl
(DOE C140)
(0 fiLTER FABRIC SILT fENCE
(CITY or RfNTON SID PlAN 21<4.00)
e taGH VlSlBlUTY F'ENCE
(CITY Of RENTON SID PlAN 212.00)
0 INLET PROTECllON
(WSDOT SID PlAN 1-40.20-00)
e r.lULCH AND/OR W"TnNC
(DOE C121)
§ PLASTIC COVERING
(ClTY OF RENTON S10 PLAN 213.30)
e PERMANENT SE£DlNG ANO PlANTINC
(SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN)
@) PRESERVING NATURAL VEGETATION
(DOE Cl01)
EROSION CONTROL MONITORING PLAN
,. OBSERVE EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AT THE BEGINNING AND
[H(l OF EACH DAY. REPAIR AND OR REPlACE AS NECESSARY TO
ASSURE PROPER FUNCTION.
2 (SSERVE COLlECTION FACiUTIES DURING PERIODS U HEAVY
RAINFAll AND WET WEATHER CONOITIONS.
1 oestR'IE AND MONITOR STABILIZATION TECHNIOUES. !.lAKE
REPAIRS AND/OR ALT£RATIONS AS NrCESSARY TO PREVENT
EROSION.
4. COMPLY WITH AU WI. STATE O(PARTldENT OF ECOLOGY AND CITY
OF RENTON REQUIR[WENT'S FOR DISCHARGE OF STORI.IWATER.
\ """'" '''N,,,
I
I
I
I
if:
...J
<{
ZZ O~ 0::
zf-
f-(!)
z~ 5::.:: a.wo::Wilj
uwoO::« cno::LLu..:S: ~u oz-
>->-0 f-f-
<{ _z
U W :2
.; .
! ill
CDm w:bo zw ~82
.(1-E:;:~
>ct ~g;n 1110 ~ g>~
Do;o:;:'"
:;: CD ~~ ~
i(cn~<IOif
DC • ~
a 0;
Z m <
REVISIONS:
0::
"PPD.
I{j ___ _
DATE: APRIL, 2012
DESIGN: 8RD
DRAWN: CLK
CHECKED:
REVISION
NUMBER:
SCALE: ,. • 40'
PROJECT NUMBER:
RENTOOOO-0015
DRAWING FILE:
edt.!OOJRENTOOOOOOI5
SHEET NO.
C3
0,17
---.--~-~------~---gbk 0-4/16/12 10: 50am -P: \r\RENTOOOOOO15\04OOCAD\EC\OWG\Sheltt\ecIMOO2RENTOOOOOO1~.dw9
n n ~ ~ n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ H H H H n H n H H H H H n H n 9 9 § 9
I • • 3
n sa sa ~ I as n n n n n n p n n II sa is as n ~ I n n as as
i;\ 1:\ ~ ~ • • ~ 'i " . C\ C\ ~ . , . • • ~ <Ii >i ., " . ~ . i\ G ~ ~ , , . " q, '\ q ~. ~ ~ "!. 0. • • q ii\ -, N, ,
~ ;; ~ ~ ~ iii ~ ~ iii ~ iii ~ "i i:i & •. "i "i i\ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ot ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..... ;:{ 0. ;:( "i tt ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ iii it •. iii -. iii
~ ~ ! ~ ! ~ n n H n n H H H n n q n H H H n H n q
" N
OJ •
n n sa Ii 8 • I ~ Ii P n n n n n II n a I II II II a i II P Ui
~ ~ ~ 0\ N, ~ i ~ " ~ ~ t, -N U .. ~ ~ ! ~ " • r " , • ~ ~
"
~ !t. ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i\ ~ 11. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ t\ 0. t;
H n § ~ n n n n u n n if n
n n ~ I~ n n n n n n n n n
9. ii, i$, 0. i\ 'i ; ... ~ q . " N, "I. .., ... ~ . N, ~ ., N. N, ! ,
~ ~ .. ... ~ c. tt iii. ~ ~ 0. N. ~ ... tt t;. ;:{ ii " ~ .. ~ ~ ~
H n H n n n H n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .. " N
n n • 9 ~ i H n n u u n n n n
~ ~ . ~ ~ 'i ~ 'i " -Ci lit, II!, ;; ;; ~ -N =, ~ ~ ~ ' q .. , .. , "'i
" •
~ ~ " ~ ~ q ~ ~ tA. ""' <.\ ;:{ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~
----n-
i
~ ", ~ 'i
~ ~ ~ ;.
u n
n n
0\ III 'i ~
~ .. ~.~
n H
n n
, ~ • •
<\ ~ Ci q
~ ;; ~ ~ ~ t, ~ " ~ ~ ~ ~ Of. lit, ~ !
~ .. ... ~ o. tt ~ . ~ ~ t;. >t ~ ~ q
i
n n ~ ~ ~ ~ Hi •
n n n n an
.., ClIo ;; i\ ! ~ ~ . ~ ;; I " ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;; i\H
i
H ~q
n ~p
9. q , ' -. i
" ~ ~ ;; Ii
Ii
. ,/
'?if::!' ~./ .... ' _--,v
DAVID EVANS
ANDA8S0CIATES IMO.
415-11I1thA ..... SE
BdIwe WBIt*Ig\rItI 9SOIJ5..3518
Phone: 425.51V.1IISXI
'" ~
If
f
I
~
9 9 : e
sa
G .,
"i ~
./
./
9 9
:I !!
p
;; ~
~ ~
/
./
9 9 9 § § 9 § § § § § § § § Hi ! I C • • c : e e • 8 • " " " OJ
II II n n n sa q n~ . ~ ~ iii, . " . " ~ . -r. 9. ~ ~ "I
q ~ ~ ~ iii ~ ;; ~ ~ ;; ~ ~ ~ ~ ;; q
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
i
TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY
MAY CREEK TRAIL
FOR
CITY OF RENTON
CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WA
I
I
I
I
I
il
APPENDIXB
I Mitigation Plan
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I City of Renton May Creek Trail
P:\t1RfNTOOOOOO151OS00INFOIBioIogIcaI AssessmetNinaJ BA plus figures 8nd 8ppendkesWsy Creek TIBII BA.doc
April 2012
I
Biological Assessment
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~ • ~
II It,
.~l
I ~ I" z: ; w
~ a
:? /-'11 >E o Ii
vo
~ z I ! 'l! /' h_ ;; • If
7-
51 I i
~
I B
C? z w
I :s: a: ,
E
,If
I <D
N
~
i
TRAIL HEAD .~ p PORTION OF GOV'T
'<1>""" c lOr ~40'x375' TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT
SECTION 32, TWP 24N, RNG. 5E., W.M.
LEGEND:
~D '~ ENHANCEMENT CITY OF RENTON FLOOD HAZARD LIMITS --------..........
OVERLOOK
PULL-OUT AREA
CITY OF RENTON ~c\'bll~G
MITIGATION SUMMARY ~'I'&')
SHOREUNE IMPACT (FROM PEDESTRIAN TRAll
SHORELINE IMPACT;
(PEDESTRIAN TRAil)
8865 S.F
TOTAL SHORELINE IMPACT = 8,B65 S.F.
50
PROPOSED MITIGATION
o 1: 1 ENHANCEMENT
MITIGA TlON REQUIRED =
BASE MITIGATION PRO~DED
WETLAND 'A' ENHANCEMENT =
SHORELINE ENHANCEMENT =
AL T 1 UI11GA nON PROVIDED
SHORELINE ENHANCEMENT =
TOTAL
MIllGA liON PROVIDED
8865 SF (0.20 AC)
B.B65 S.F. (0.20 AC)
7B6 S.F. (0.02 AC)
42.015 S.F. (0.96 AC)
15.219 S.F. (0.35 AC)
5B.020 S.F. (1.33 AC)
w z
~
~
50
401 I 1 ~11 1 1 °1 1 1 1 1 v, I I I ~ II I Iii I I ~ N g
OHVAA AT llt.1E OF, SUR'
B..£V = 33.16
" EX CI
\
Y \-r-?I \ 1_ ....
-----,-, , ---
301 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I 130
~I " ~
2+70 2>40 0+00
CROSS SECTION A-A'
\1_1"_1:;.'
~
..... ..... .....
.....
I
I
.....
/
I
I
/""
.....
'-'-'-'-'-"-'-'-'-'-
·200· SHORELINE
MANAGEMENT ZONE
I
/
/ I
/ ""-i':' ----/'
,--= ------.
01530 60
LOT A ------/ 0
134,531 Sf (GROSS) ~
I
I
, I '-___ .1
OBSERVATION
ACCESS TO
COBBLE BEACH
'-
\.
\.
\.
\.
SHORELINE IMPACT
SHORELINE ENHANCEMENT (BASE)
-----ALTERNATE-1 BOUNDARY
SHORELINE ENHANCEMENT (ALTERNATE -1)
\
\.
\.
OF GRA~
\
\
c~ '" ~~ 84-S,t
,.Q -t?k'I,yC l.
' Or ~
FUTURE CONNECTION TO
OFF..$ITE DEVELOPMENT
100% FINAL SUBMITTAL
\.
40
z
:)
0.. -l
~ «
1i.·:··1 ::;: :::;:
t, =>
~ ~z
I-'" 0 «I-~'" a.~ ..... z-
:r'
~I
C/) o
rf.
~
z o
~
E ::;:
W 0:1: I-(J)
W z«
0::: ~ ':
()
,,-z o~
>-~iD « u '"
~
<i z ro
Ill';; iii z 111 ~8~
>
0( I-~~«> 0( <:-oi w-~.9;;:;
D O =~~ _O$!'i ..... >(1) ';"~~ Oo«(I)~~.§
0( ..... ~ D-
o ~ ~ :8
REVlSIONS: APPD.
---
DATE: APRIL. 2012
",1 DESIGN: GBK
DRAWN: G8K
CHECKED: JCGA
~I REVISION -" NUIlBER:
SCAlE: 1~=3O'
PROJECT NUllBER:
RENTOOOO-0015
DRAlrING FILE;
loI.IPOO1RENn5
SHEET NO.
M-1
OF17
I SCALE: H=='--'I"I' :g, tI ..... ....,"'LL. "-, -........ , • --. ----. --..•. _... ?/~'"'' '1-,*"1-,"\'y'\ LJ
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I! .n
" z I~
" "5 h
? I~ ~ ~~II
Z
W
I~ ~ • • ~
~11.1
I~ 9-
~ 1';1
<0 -<
0 1£1<.
~ h'l
0
0
0
I ~ :>
11
~
~
I ~~ '-, ~
0
0 I~
'''-' s~'" PORTION OF GOV'T LOT
MAINLi'Nt-QtL-GRADE ,c-4RIr/Ivt:>
. 1..0,. r-40'x375' TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
/
/ LEGEND
I
I
/
I
I I '~""~' 'I ¥~;;~~~ ALTERNATE~1 AREA
NOTES
-tr o
ALTERNATE-1BOUNDARY
EXISTING SNAG TO REMAIN
EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN
1. THE IRRIGATION PLAN IS DIAGRAMMATIC. INSTALL MAINLINE,
VALVES, PIPE AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT IN PLANTER BEDS.
2. SEE SHEET 101-3 FOR IRRIGATION NOTES AND DETAILS.
IRRIGATION SCHEDULE
e PRESSURE REDUCER -WAns U58-Z3 -,.
r WATTS BAlL VALVE (ISOLATION VALVE)-SIZE SAME f.S LINE
Q RAlNBIRD 5-RC 1· QUICK COUPLING VALVE WI 55-K-l 1" VALVE KEYS
A NIBCO MANUAL DRAIN VALVE -2"
" RAlNBIRD lOO-PEB REMOTE CONTROL VALVE WITH T80S LATCHING
SOLENOID -SIZE PER PLAN
0 HUNTER XCH-1200 12 STATION CONTROLLER. BATTERY PROVIDED BY OWNER.
SCH 40 PVC LATERAL -1.5" UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON PLAN
----.@-----SCH 40 PVC MAlNUNE -ZR UNLESS OTHERWISE NOITO ON PlAN
====== SCH 40 PVC SLEEVE -lWlCE THE DIAMETER OF THE WORKING PIPE(S) (MIN.)
VAlVE NUM8ER-~
H _ VALVE SIZE
GALlONS PER MINUTE -10
._--_.
IRRIGATION SPRAY HEAD LEGEND
HEAD ",,"F. MODEL NO. RAO. PATTERN PSI FLOW
@ RAlNBIRD 1804-SAM-PRS 19' R17-Z4F 25 2.74
G RAlNBIRD 1804-SAM-PRS 19' R17-24H 25 1.37
" RAlNBIRD 1804-SAM-PRS 19' R17-24Q 25 0.68
"' RAIN BIRD 1804-SAM-PRS 28' 15CSI 20 1.00
[J RAlNBIRD 1804-SAM-PRS 14' 15EST 20 0.50
---
CITY OF RENTON
_ FLOOD HAZARD UMITL
~ '"-"4"'~'t; 'I'c.#('~;~~
'-'"&~
\
®
32. TWP 24N. RNG. 5E.. W.M.
~ = ,--= ----,
01530 60
POINT OF CONNECTION fOR TEMPORARY~I
IRRIGATION SYSTEM IS EXISTING CITY ," METER
WITH OCVA. CONTRACTOR SHAll COORDINATE
CONNECTION WITH aTY OF RENTON.
STUB-INTO
~SnNG 2" MAINLINE
'"
I
I
I
I
I
I
/ ,]0' I
"-"-
"-"-"-
I
I
I
'" r 200' SHORELINE "-
"-/ MANAGEMENT ZONE '\ '" '\ '" '\ '----'\ --\
""------LOT A------
134,531 SF (GROSS)
~rurnru'" tndj~~~
100% FINAL SUBMITIAL
'\
'\
t> "_ """-4/tt:
8-4 Sf"
~
~
~
\... ------------'-
10' WIDE SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT
REC. NO. 7106230529
tk ~ GI?-4l-ft
~ B-4S(
P4I?kINC,
0,
""---""---",,---·4.k'~G (0,/
EDGE OF ~"-.."-..
~GAP IN FENC~ """-Z >< %.. ><.
---------
~.
'"
10' WIDE SANITARY,,-
SEWER EASEMENT "-
REC. NO. 7106230529
~
I
z :s a.
z o
~
1<
0::
Z o
~ ;::
~
.;
....I
;:;s (J) Z
u.. "'0
I-~b ,,, a. z
..1.. z-
UJ o:r: ,..(J)
UJ a'i ~ 0::: 0:: -
()
u.Z o~ >-~a'i « 0'"
~
cn~ ~ z w m:g~ ~~ ~~;
UI-h.~ O.c.:!f~ eo ~=i~ >cn:~1D ~.,~~.
cc(-.tot:
a 'i z m •
D
REVISIONS: APPD.
DATE: APRIL 2012
DESIGN; JCGA
DRAWN: JCGA
CHECKED: JCGA
REVISION
NUMBER:
SCALE: 1" .. 30'
PROJECT NUllBER:
RENTOOOO-0015
DRAWING FILE:
IA1RI.4P002RENT15
SHEET NO.
M-2
OF17
I
I
I I
:'J: I 1,\,
~.
I
I
I
I
I
I~ • u .n
II
0
~
l'
I '0
?
~
i:J r ~
~
II
/' ;; • I~ ! tqJ
~
/'
0 I~
/'
~
0
18
~ z w
!?
I~
E
~ ro
0 I i l~
" v
0 Is:
IRRIGATION NOTES
1. ALL NEW lANDSCAPE AREAS SHAll HAVE ~ AUTOMAl1CALLY CONTROLLED, TEt.4PQRARY ON-GRADE
IRRIGAllON SYSTEM. S'lSTEM SHALL BE DESIGNED TO CONSERVE WATER. IRRIGATION SYS1EM WORK INCLUDES
EXCAVATING, BACKFlWNG, SUPPLYING AND INSTAWNG VAlVES AND FITTINGS. PIPING AND FITTINGS, QUICK
COUPLER VALVES, VAlVE BOXES, AND ACCESSORIES, TESllNG, AND WNTERIZING AND SPRING START UP.
2. n-lE IRRIGATION SYSTEt.4 HAS BEEN DESIGNED fOR A MAXIMUM flOW OF 38.5 GPM AT A STATIC
PRESSURE OF 120 PSI. IF AVAlLABLE PSI IS LOWER THAN 80 PSI, CONTRACTOR
SHALL CONTACT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION FOR SYSTEM DESIGN ADJUSTMENT.
3. THE IRRIGATION PLAN IS DIAGRAMt.4ATlC. INSTAll I.IAlNUNE, VALVES, PIPE, AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPt.4ENT IN
PLANTING AREA$. F1ELD-ADJJST AROUND EXISTING TREES AND PROPOSED TRAIL AS NECESSARY. AlL
ON-GRADE PIPE SHAll. BE COVERED WlTIl HOGFUEL MULCH.
4. IRRIGATION CON'TROllER LOCATION SHALL BE COORDINATED WlTIl OWNER.
5. LOCATE All. ABOVE AND BELOW GROUND UTlUTlES AND PROTECT TIlEM FROM DAMAGE DURING
CONS'TRUCTION. CONlRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE fOR ANY DAMAGE INCURRED DURING, OR AS A RESULT Of,
CONS'TRUCTION OF IRRIGATION SYSTEM.
S. IT SHALL BE TIlE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBIUTY TO COORDINATE INSTALlATION Of IRRIGATION
st£EVES YrlTIl TIlE GENERAL CON 'TRACTOR.
7. INSTAll. SYSTEM TO I.4EET ALL APPUCABLE CODES AND INSPECTIONS AND OBTAIN ALL REQUIRED PERMITS
PRIOR TO CONSlRUCTlON.
B. INSTAll. ALL MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT IN SlRlCT ACCORDANCE YrlTH MANUfACTIJRER'S ....,.ITTEN
SPECIfiCATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
9. PROVIDE ONLY NEW I.4ATERIALS, WlTIlOUT FLAWS OR DEFICTS AND OF lHE HIGHEST QUAUTY OF TIlEIR
SPEaFIED CLASS AND KIND FOR COMMERCIAL USE.
A. PVC MAINUNE AND LATERAL PIPE SHAlL BE CONSTRUCTED OF SCHEDULE 40 PVC. AU. PIPES SHALL
BE PERMANENTLY PRINTED WlTI-i STANDARD PERTINENT INFORMATION.
B. PVC fiTTINGS SHAll. BE SCHEDULE 80 RATED FOR MAINUNE AND SCHEDULE 40 RATED FOR LATERALS
AND MEET ASlM 02486 STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS.
C. PVC NIPPLES SHALL BE SCHEDULE 80 RATED AND MEET ASTM 01785 REQUIREMENTS AND
SPECIFICATIONS. ALL NIPPLES Will. HAVE TAPERED TriREADS.
D. JOINING MATERIAlS USED SHAll. BE MANUFACTURED BY I.P.S. OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT, AND SHALL
BE USED IN ACCORDANCE WlTIl TriE MANUFACTURER'S WRlntN SPECIfiCATIONS AND SAFETY
RECOMMENDATIONS.
E. TIlREADED CONNECTIONS (PVC) SHALL BE SEAlED YrllH lEFLON TAPE OR TEFLON PASTE.
F. IRRIGATION st£EVES SHALL BE SOiEQULE 40 PVC AND SIZED DOUBLE THE COMBINED OUTSIDE
DIAMETER OF TIlE PIPE{S) RUNNING TIlROUGH IT.
G. ALL IRRIGATION YrlRING TO BE "MULTlSlRAND" WIRING
H. RElOCAlE MANUAL DRAIN VALVES TO MAiNUNE LOW POINTS AS NECESSARY.
I. PIN ABOVE GRWND PIPING WlTIl f4 REBAR 'J' HOOKS @ 10' O.C. 'J HOOKS SHALL NOT PINCH OR BIND
PIPING.
10. CQNlRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE IRRIGATION SYSTEM RECORD DRAWINGS LEGIBLY MARKED TO RECORD ACTUAL
INSTAllAllON. DRAWINGS SHAlL INDICATE HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL LOCATIONS, REFERENCED TO PERMANENT
SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS. IDENTIFY FIElD CHANGES OF DIMENSlON AND DETAIL INCWDING CHANGES MADE BY
CHANGE ORDER. AN 11"X17" PLAN SHALL BE LAMINATED AND PLACED AT lHE CONTROLLER LOCATION LEGIBLY
SHOWING COlOR-CODED ZONES.
II. CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW ENllRE SYSTEM WITH O'M'lER'S REPRESENTATIVE AND SUPPLY OPERATIONS
I.tANUAL AND WARRANTIES.
12. WINTERIZATION: CONTRACTOR SHAll. INSPECT SYSTEM, SHUTOff AND ORAIN PIPE BETWEEN SHUTOFfS AND
DOUBLE-CHECK VALVE AND BLOW OUT SYSTEM COMPLETElY BETWEEN OCTOBER 1 AND OCTOBER 15 DURING
THE WARRANTY PERIOD FOR 'MNTERIZATlON.
13. SPRING STARTUP: CONlRACTOR SHALL INSPECT, PRESSURIZE SYSTEM, REPAIR lEAKS AND ANY fAULTY
WORK, ADJUST AND PROGRAM CONTROll.£RS AS NECESSARY BEFORE MARCH 31 FOR SPRING STARTUP.
14. CON'lRACTOR SHALL LEAVE Al.l. TEMPORARY ON-GRADE IRRIGATION SYSTEt.I COt.lPONENTS IN PlACE AT
END OF 1 YEAR WARRANTY PERIOD. ALL MITIGATION SYSTEI.t COMPONENTS SHALL BELONG TO THE O'M'lER.
15. LATCHING SOLENOIDS SHALL BE RE'lRO FITTED ON ALL VALVES fOR BAnERY OPERATED CONTRDU.ER.
PORTION OF GOV'T LOT 1, SECTION 32, TWP 24N, RNG. 5E., W.M.
SPRAY NOZZLE
* USE BOTTOM INLET FOR
CHECK VAlVE TYPE ENDS
RAlNBIRD 1800-SAM-PRS
SPRAY BODY
r
3'
"~a ~ll!!Ij 2'L
STAINLESS STEEL CLAMP
SBE-05O 1/2" IdALE NPT X0.49*
BARB ELBOW, TYPICAl. BOTH ENDS
/ HOG FUEL I.tULCH OVER PIPE ~(TYPICAL)
SP-l!2" I.D. TUBING ~ ___ (LENGTH AS REQUIRED)
~ TOP OF BARK MULCH
01-
PVC lATERAL PIPE
FINISH GRADE
#6 REBAR WITH STAlNl£SS
STEEL CLAMPS ATTACHED TO
RISER (LENGTH AS NECESSARY
fOR SUPPORT)
SPRINKLER INSTALLATION (ON-GRADE)
NOT TO SCALE
CARSON VAlVE BOX t.lOOEL
L2200-18 W/LOCKING UD
& EXTENSION AS
NECESSARY
REMOTE CONTROL VALVE
WITH LATCHING SOLENOID
G
/14 FINISH GRADE
"-DRAINAGE GRAVEL
AUTOMATIC CONTROL VALVE (ON GRADE)
NOT TO SCALE
~I
NI
SURFACE
CLEAN BACKfiLL TO BE SET IN 6"
um
~ INSTALL UNDERGROUND UTIUTY UNE
MARKING TAPE OVER MAINUNE
QUICK-COUPUNG VALVE
PVC SCH 80 NIPPLE
(LENGTH f.S REQUIRED)
PVC SCH 40 TEE OR ELL
PVC MAlNUNE PIPE (ON GRADE) 'L TOP OF HOG FUEL MULCH
--------------
~ :R~l~:~:~.:~:::.:~::,f:::~.~~ .. :~-:;,~; .. ;.~j~"f, .. :~:j. ------~f~~~A?~:~~~:~~~
, ~ ~~~O~A~ORES SLEEVE
-~~ffi~ -~~-= ~=-~
" TRENCHING SHALL ONLY BE FOR
SLEEVING AND OFF-SITE MAINLINE
l~n~II~~m_lT~ 31 S::I 1 1",1 I§ II:=m=11 en-~" "NiSH GRADE
t #6 REBAR WITH STAINLESS
NOTES: STEEL CLAMPS ATTACHED TO
RISER (LENGTI1 I>S NECESSARY
fOR SUPPORT) 1. All. SLEEVES TO BE PVC. SCH. 40 AND TWICE TIlE DIAMETER Of TIlE WORKING PIPES.
2. ALL stEEVES TO RUN A MIN. Of 12" BEYOND EDGE Of TRAIL = 1. FURNISH FITTINGS AND PIPING NOMINALLY SIZED IDENTICAL TO
NOMINAL QUICK CQUPUNG VALVE INLET SIZE. 3. EACH END OFF SlEEViNG SHAlL BE t.lARKED WITH 2"X4" STAKE.
IRRIGATION SLEEVING AND TRENCHING QUICK COUPLER VALVE (ON-GRADE)
NOT TO SCALE . -"'.
SUP;l; l~;-- -:e---E:':3. ~ TOP OF HOG PVC TEE II ~ Ir-- -EJ,JE\, .MUJ.CH ~~EDUCER ,---VALVE BOX ~o· ~n=-,-NOM. 0 .. PVC
, ... PIPE
PVC NIPPLE
OF 3)
PVC ELL--./ ---=m=
1· MANUAL DRAIN
V&'"
FABRIC
GRADE
ROCK
MANUAL DRAIN VALVE
c
NOT TO ;'I,.AU:,
4·x6"x7'
PRESSURE-TREATED WOOD
POST
IRRIGATION CONTROLLER
BATTERY SUPPUED BY
OWNER
___ TQP ...9LI:IWJUEL MUILCH
COMPACTED SUBGRADE
COMMERCIAL
CONCRITE POST
fOOTING
IRRIGATION CONTROLLER MOUNT
NOT TO SCAli
!
NOT TO SCALE
FUEL MULCH
VAi.VE WITH
WHEEL
TOP OF HOG}
REBAR 'J' HOOK I>S ~
NECESSARY PER r-::::,:,,,!9n~PVC MALE
OWNER'S
REPRESENTATIVE'S -- - - - ---FINISH GRADE
DIRECTION.
BALL VALVE (ON GRADE)
NOT TO SCALE
NOTE:
1. USE TEFLON TAPE ON ALL TIlREADED ~ STANDARD VAl.VE BOX WITH
CONNECTIONS. / LOCKING UD.
II II
.
"'&.r:fl:",,, 0"0??"'3 00(5,,09db o
" '11" " "c;>o" :1j'''''' S0<:>" " <:! ~~"rr cfI:j" °408 ",..a...
i 71 U"3..~ 't<.~-
/7" " " "tt,'f MIN. 2 CU. Fr.
GRAVEL SUMP
1ft,
........ CONTINUOUS CONC.
PAVER FOOTING
..
",,' 't<.~-I -'..-"I....... !
PRESSURE REDUCER
NOT TO SCALE
100% FINAL SUBMITTAL
P.V.C. TIlREADED MALE
CONNECTION
P.V.C. UNION
en
..J 1i'I;;:
,
;';
'~
I-
W
0
0 z ..: en
W
I-
0 z
Z
0
~
CJ
" Q;'
Z
0
~
CJ ;::
~
...J
« (/) z 0::: "0 I-'" I-etc)
~ z:;;:
UJ ~ 1)5
UJ i'5 ~
0::: '" z
() '" 0 01->-~ i'5 « 6'"
::::2:
,; z ~
o"j) ~ zwll:l:£S;
A I-!o" >~A 08 '
....... <:~ 111_ ~.sll'! Il OE~~ O~.<:"" :> (I) ';~ ~
c( (I) ~!!:~
Q c( "" it
~ ~ <
• REVISIONS: APPD.
H DATE: APRIL, 2012
DESIGN: JCGA
DRAWN: JCGA
CHECKED; JCGA
REVISION
NUlIBER:
SCALE: 1"=30'
PROJECT NUlIBER:
RENTOOOO-001S
DRA1fING FILE:
loirMPOOJRENT15
,~'. SHEET NO. ,
'-:>"1 M-3
'?~I OF17
I
I
I
I I "
I
I
I ~I
~~
I
I
I~ • " ~
II
0
~
" 0
Ii
~
~ z I~ ~ • • ~ Ii :;
?
0
I~ ~
" I§ "' is ~
/ I:
~
'" ~
Ii
"-~
0
I~
ROOT CROWN 2"-4" ABOVE
P!.ANTlNG SOIL GRADE
5" HOG FUEl MULCH OR
3" FINE BARl< IAULCH (WETLAND A)
HOlD BACK 3" AWAY FR0t.4 STEM
3" HIGH RIM BERM
"""---------NATIVE SOIL
~ EXISTING SUBGRADE
FlRt.llY I-W'IO COMPACT
3" MOUND BElOW
ROOTBAI.I.
CONIFER TREE PLANTING DETAIL
_, ,OlC/U
ROOT CROWN 1"-2" ABOVE
PlANTING SOIL GRADE
5" HOG FUEL i<lUlCH OR
3" FINE BARK MULCH (WEllA.ND A)
HOLD BACK 3" AWAY FROM S1E~
~ GROU_NDCO~ AS SPECIFIED, - . NOTES
SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL
WIN. 18" I-8NE FINISHED
GRADE WITH A MINIMUM
OF 2 lEAf NODES EXPOSED
F1N5HEO
TRI~ DFF BRANCHES
WITH
CI.EA.N CUTS
~m~
LIVE STAKE PLANTING
~m~
PORTION OF GOV'T LOT 1, SECTION 32, TWP 24N, RNG. 5E., W.M.
PART 1 -SITE PREPARATION
MmGATlON CONSTRUcnON MONITOR A MINIMUM OF 5 WORKING DAYS
NOTICE PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
NO CONSTRUCTION WORK SHALl COMMENCE UNTIL THERE IS A PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETlNG BElWEEN
THE CIlY OF RENTON, THE MmGATlON CONSTRUCTION MONITOR AND CONTRACTOR TO REVIEW THE
MmGATlON PlANS AND SPECIFICATIONS.
IT IS THE RESPONSIBIUlY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO: (1) INDEPENDENTLY VERIFY THE ACCURACY OF
lJTlUTY LOCATIONS AND (2) DISCOVER AND AVOID ANY UTIlITlES 'NITHIN THE MmGATION AREA WHICH MAY
BE AFfECTED BY IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS PLAN. SUCH AREAS ARE TO BE CLEARLY MARKED IN THE
FIELD.
CONSTRUCTION MUST BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CODES, PERMIT CONomONS, AND OTHER
APPLICABLE ORDINANCES AND POUCIES.
THE APPLICANT IS RESPONSIBLE fOR OBTAlNING ALL REQUIRED PERMITS/APPROVALS PRIOR TO THE
START OF CONSTRUCTION. A COPY OF THE APPROVED PlANS, SPECIFICATIONS, PERMITS, ANO AGENCY
APPROVALS MUST BE ON SITE WHENEVER CONSTRUCTION IS IN PROGRESS AND SHALl REMAIN ON SITE
UNTIL PROJECT COMPLETION.
THE MmGATION CONSTRUCTION MONITOR SHAll BE ON SITE, fJ5 NECESSARY, TO MONITOR
CONSTRUCTION.
ANY CHANGES OR MoolFlCA ilONS TO THIS PlAN SHAll RECEIVE PRIOR APPROVAL FROM THE MITIGA ilON
CONSrnUCTION MONITOR.
SURYfY/STAKEIfLAG LIMITS OF WORK
PRIOR TO AtN CONSTRUCTION, A UCENSED SURVEYOR SHALl SURVEY, STAKE, AND FLAG UMrTS OF
WORK AND WETlAND BOUNDARIES fJ5 SHOWN IN THE PlANS. ElECTRONIC DRAWINGS SHOWING UMITS OF
WORK ARE AVAIlABlf UPON REQUEST. THE MITIGATION CONSTRUCTION MONITOR SHALl APPROVE
RAGGING OF WORK UMITS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. CONTRACTOR SHAll BE RESPONSIBlf FOR
VERIFYING ACTUAl LOCATIONS OF EXISTING VEGETATION TO BE SAVED AND RESTORING AtN DISTURBANCE
TO EXISTING VEGETATION LOCATED OUTSIDE THE LIMITS OF WORK.
EROSION CONTROL
All. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHAll BE INSTALLED AND IMPlEMENTED fJ5 SHOWN IN THE S.W.P.P.
PLAN (SHEET C-3) PRIOR TO BEGINNING OF WORK.
C! FARING AND GRIJBBING
ClEAR AND GRUB All AREAS SHOWN IN THE GRADING PLANS TO A 6" DEPTH (SEE GRADING Pl..AJI.I).
All ClEARING AND GRUBBING AND VEGETATION TO REMAIN AREAS SHAll BE APPROVED BY MmGATION
CONSTRUC1]ON MONITOR PRIOR TO WORK. PRIOR TO GRUBBING THE CONTRACTOR SHAll ClEAR AlL
INVASIVE SPP. TO mE GROUND AND APPLY HERBICIDE. HERBICIDE APPUCATION SHAll OCCUR DURING
THE GROWING SEASON BY UCENSED (IN STATE OF WfJ5HINGTON) APPUCATOR. HERBICIDE SHALL BE
BROAD SPECTRUM AQUATIC HERBICIDE (RODEO 1\4 OR APPROVED EQUAl).
CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES WITH MINIMAL. DISTURBANCE TO THE EXISTING
VEGETATION TO REMAIN. ClEARED AND GRUBBED VEGETATION SHAll BE EXPORTED FROM THE SITE.
PARTICUlAR CARE SHALl BE TAKEN TO ENSURE COMPlETE REMOVAl OF TOPS AND ROOTS OF INVASIVE
PLANT SPECIES. INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES TO BE REMOVED AND TREATED INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT UMITED
TO: HIMAlAYAN BlACKBERRY, JAPANESE KNOTWEED, REED CANARYGRASS, PURPLE LOOSESTRIFE, HEDGE
BINDWEED (MORNING GLORY), scoT's BROOM, ENGUSH WY, NolO CREEPING NIGHTSHADE.
PART 2 -PLANT MATERIAL
PLANT MATERIALS
PLANT MATERIAL SHALL CONFORM TO AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURsERY STOCK (ANSI
Z60.1-2004) FOR PLANT SIZE AND CONDITION FOR SPECIFIED MATERIAL.
PLANT MATERIALS SHAll BE LOCALLY GRO'NN (LOWER PUGET SOUND REGION) OR ALTERNATlVE
APPROVED SOURCE BY MITlGA TION CONSTRUCTION MONITOR. PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE IN
HEALTHY VIGOROUS GROWING CONOITlON.
THE CONTRACTOR SHAll SUBMIT DOCUMENTATION THAT SPECIFIED PLANT MATERIALS HAVE BEEN
ORDERED AND SECURED. A LIST OF SUPPLIER NAMES, ADDRESSES, PHONE NUMBERS AND THE
STORAGE/GRO'MNG LOCATION OF THE MATERIALS SHALL BE SUBMlffiD TO THE MITlGATlON
CONSTRUCTION MONITOR WITHIN 30 DAYS OF CONTRACTOR AWARD.
PLANT CONDmON
THE MITIGATION CONSTRUCTION MONITOR SHALL APPROVE PLANT MATERLA.L AT THE JOB SITE FOR
COMPLIANCE WITH REQUIRED STANDARDS FOR PLANT SIZE AND QUAlITY PRIOR TO PlANTING. THIS
INCLUDES, BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO, SIZE AND CONDmON OF ROOTBAlLS AND ROOT SYSTEMS,
PRESENCE OF INSECTS, LATENT INJURIES AND DEFECTS. TREES MUST BE UNTIED AND SEPARATED
FOR INSPECTIONS. THE MmGATION CONSTRUCTION MONITOR RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REFUSE
Am//JJJ.. PlANT MATERLA.L IF IT IS DETERMINED THAT SUCH MATERIAL DOES NOT MEET THE
SPECIFICATIONS AS DESCRIBED HEREIN. REJECTED MATERIAL SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY REMOVED FROM
PROJECT SITE.
STORAGE SITE AND METHOD
STORE PLANTS IN THE MANNER NECESSARY TO ACCOMMODATE THEIR HORTICULTURAL
REQUIREMENTS. PROTECT PlANT MATERLA.L STORED ON-SITE FROM WEATHER DAMAGE, CONSTRUCTION
ACTMTY AND THE PUBLIC. BAlLED AND BURlAPPED-MATERIAL WHICH CANNOT BE INSTALLED
IMMEDIATELY SHALL BE ~HEELED-IN~ TO KEEP FROM DRYING OUT PRIOR TO PlANTING. PROTECT
ROOTBALLS BY COVERING WITH MOIST SOIL, MULCH OR SAWDUST. WATER AS NECESSARY TO KEEP
ROOTBALLS MOIST.
KEEP PLANT SPECIMENS MOIST (WETlAND SPECIES SATURATED) AND SHADED UNTIL THE ACTUAL
TIME OF INSTALLATION. IF BARE-ROOT PLANTS ARE SPECIFIED, SOAK ROOTS IN WATER ONE-HOUR
MINIMUM PRIOR TO PlANTING. BEFORE AND AffiR pLANTING, IMMEDIATELY SATURATE THE SOILS IN
THE PLANTING AREA TO PREVENT CAPILLARY STRESS.
.UBSTITUTIONS
;UBSTITUTIONS OF PLANT SPECIES OR SIZES MAY BE PERMmED BASED ON PLANT AVAIlABILITY,
BUT ONLY WITH PRIOR APPROVAL BY THE MmGATION CONSTRUCTION 'MONITOR.
PART 3 -PLANT INSTALLATION
SITE CONDI]ONS
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THAT PLANT INSTALLATION CONDITIONS ARE SUITABLE WITHIN THE
MITIGATION AREAS. ANY UNSATISFACTORY CONDITIONS SHALL BE CORRECTED PRIOR TO START OF
WORK. WHEN CONDITIONS DEiRlMENTAL TO PLANT GROWTH ARE ENCOUNTERED, SUCH AS RUBBLE
FILL, ADVERSE DRAINAGE CONDITIONS, SIGNIFlCANT VEGETATION, OR OBSTRUCTIONS, THE CONTRACTOR
SHALL NOTIFY THE MITIGATION CONSTRUCTION MONITOR PRIOR TO PLANTING. NO PLANTING SHAll
OCCUR IN STANDING WATER, AND INUNDATED PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE PLANTED WHEN CONDITIONS
PERMIT. BEGINNING OF WORK CONSTITUTES ACCEPTANCE OF CONDITlONS AS SATISFACTORY.
lOCATE m AG !VERIFY PI AN]NG AREAS
CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD LOCATE, AND FLAG, PLANTING AREAS AND CONFIGURATIONS PRIOR TO
PLANTING. THE MITIGATION CONSTRUCTION MONITOR SHALL REVlEW AND APPROVE LOCATIONS PRIOR
TO PLANTING.
Ml!l.Qj
MULCH SHALL INCLUDE HOG FUEL (APPLIED IN ALL BUFFER AREAS) ANO FINE BARK (APPLlEO ONLY
IN WETlAND A).
HOG FUEL MULCH SHAlL BE PLACED TO A 5" DEPTH. HOG FUEL SHAll BE A BLEND OF LOOSE,
LONG, THIN NATURAL WOOD PIECES WITH HIGH LENGTH-TO-WiDTH RATIO. A MINIMUM OF
95-PERCENT SHAlL HAVE LENGTHS BETWEEN 2 AND 10 INCHES, AND NO MORE THAN 15% BY
LOOSE VOLUME WILL PASS THROUGH A NO. 4 SIEVE. CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SAMPLE FOR
APPROVAL
FINE BARK MULCH SHALL BE PLACED TO A 3" DEPTH. BARK MULCH SHALL BE DERIVED fROM
NATURAL WOOD PIECES, GROUND SO THAT A MINIMUM OF 95 PERCENT OF THE MATERIAL WILL
PASS THROUGH A 1" SIEVE AND NO MORE THAN 25 PERCENT, BY LOOSE VOLUME, WILL PASS
THROUGH A NO. 4 SIEVE. CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SAMPLE FOR APPROVAL
HOG FUEL AND FINE BARK MULCH SHALl NOT CONTAIN RESIN, TANNIN, OR OTHER COMPOUNDS IN
QUANTITIES THAT WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO PLANT LIFE. SAWDUST OR WOOD SHAVINGS SHALL NOT
BE USED AS MULCH.
PART 4 WARRANT( (ONE-YEAR)
THE CONTRACTOR SI-W.L WARRANT CRAfTSMANSHIP AND MATERIALS FOR THIS PROJECT FOR A
PERIOD OF 1 YEAR BEGINNING AT FINAL ACCEPTANCE. THIS WARRANTY SHAlL INCLUDE
REPLACEMENT OF PlANTS (SAME SIZE AND SPECIES SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS). EXCEPT FOR LOSS
DUE TO EXCESSIVELY SEVERE CLIMATOLOGICAL CONDITIONS (SUBSTANTIATED BY lO-YEAR RECORDED
WEATHER CHARTS), INSTALlED PlANT MATERIALS ARE REQUIRED TO BE GUARANTEED FOR 1 YEAR
AGAINST DEFECTS AND UNSATISFACTORY GROWTH, EXCEPT FOR CASES OF NEGLECT BY OWNER OR
ABUSE/DAMAGE BY OTHERS.
PART 5 FINAL ACCEPTANCE
UPON COMPLETION, THE CONTRACTOR SHAll. PROVIDE THE MITIGATION CONSTRUCTION MONITOR WITH
A SET OF CLEARLY MARKED PRINTS DESIGNATING THE ACTUAL LOCATIONS AND QUANTITIES OF
PLANTINGS WITHIN THE MITIGATION AREAS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL KEEP A COMPLffi SET OF
PRINTS AT THE JOB SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION FOR THE PURPOSE OF "RED-LINING" CHANGES
OR MOOIFlCATIONS TO THE APPROVED PLANS AND SHALL UPDATE SAID INFORMATION ON A DAILY
BASIS. CONTRACTOR SHAlL TAG INDMDUAL PLANT SPECIES AT THE nME OF INSTALLATION. EACH
PlANT SPECIES SHALL HAVE A DIFFERENT COLOR TAG FOR VISUAL IDENTIFICATION. A COLOR CODED
PLANT TAG LEGEND SHALL 8E PROVIDED TO THE MITIGATION CONSTRUCTION MONITOR PRIOR TO
SUBSTANTIAL COMPlEl10N.
AT SUBSTANTIAl COMPl ETlON
THE MITIGATION CONSTRUCTION MONITOR Will PERFORM SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION WALK THROUGH
wrTH THE CONTRACTOR. IF ITEMS ARE TO BE CORRECTED, A PUNCH LIST Will BE PREPARED BY
THE MmGATION CONSTRucnON MONITOR AND SUBMITTED TO THE OWNER AND CONTRACTOR FOR
COMPLETION. AFTER PUNCH UST ITEMS HAVE BEEN COMPlETED, THE MITIGATION CONSTRUCTION
MONITOR WILL REVIEW THE PROJECT FOR GENERAL CONFORMANCE WITH THE APPROVED PLAN, AND
ACCEPTABLE, Will SUBMIT A _lETTER OF COMPLEflON TO CITY OF RENTON. THE LETTER W!LL
CONSTITUTE fiNAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROJECT.
THE DATE OF FINAL ACCEPTANCE WILL CONSTITUTE THE BEGINNING OF THE ONE -YEAR
WARRANTY/MAINTENANCE PERIOD AND THE 5-YEAR MAINTENANCE/MONITORING PERIOD AS REQUIRED
BY CITY OF RENTON
PART 6 MAINTENANCE
MAINTENANCE IS REQUIRED DURING THE WARRANTY PERIOD. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW
lANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS WITH THE MmGATION CONSTRUCTION MONITOR WHO IS
FAMILIAR WITH THE STATED GOALS AND OBJECTNES OF THE MmGATlON PLAN. MAINTENANCE SHALL
BE PROVIDED BY THE CONTRACTOR THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION AND DURING THE WARRANlY
PERIOD, AND BY THE OWNER AFTER THE fiRST YEAR.
MAINTENANCE SHALl. INCLUDE TEMPORARY IRRIGATION. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO
ENSURE THE PROPER FUNCTIONING OF THE SYSTEM.
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE COMPOST SOCKS AT THE END OF THE ONE-YEAR WARRANTY
PERIOD. SOCKS TO BE CUT AND REMOVED LEAVING COMPOST IN PLACE.
MAINTENANCE WITHIN THE MITlGATION AREAS SHALL BE PERFORMED BY THE CONTRACTOR OR
OWNER AND REVIEWED BY THE MITlGA TlON MONITOR. REQU!RED MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES ARE
INCLUDED IN TABLE 1.
100% FINAL SUBMITTAL
en z
Q
f-« u u::
(3
W
0. en
0
Z « en
-' ~
W
0
Z
;;;1 Q
!;;=
(!)
E ::;;
-I
~ ~Z
I--~~ a." ~ z~ W o::C f-C/)
W a'i~ a:::: '" . o u.
Z
o~
>-~ a'i « u '"
~
STATE OF'
....ASHjNG;oN
'~ '-'jL
~
.; z ~
eng) ~
zw ::l~~ ~~ 2~; w-~l!~ o ,,~ eo~~~ >(I)";'~:! o(I)~~. Dc('" wti:
a 'ii z ~ •
--REVISIONS: APPD.
DATE: i<lARCH, 2012
DESIGN: GBK
DRAWN: GBK
CHECKED: JCGA
REVISION
NUMBER:
SCALE: N/A
PROJECT NUltIBER:
RENTOOOO-0015
DRA1rING FILE:
loMPOO5RENnS
SHEET NO.
M-5
0.17
! ..;
1= z
I n.
" ~
l:l
iJi
r
gj
or
~
11
~
~
i
~
I
i5
S a:
I
E
~
Ui
N
'-m
'-;:!;
~
TABLE 1
At,
REPlACE ,
IoIITlGAllQN
T[UP{R,\R'
NEW PlAN;
1RASH '" ON-SITE F1 "111';'''''"
WEEOIHG
~
"""'OOC
Q.EAR "'" INVASI'lEp'
SHOREUNE:
UNDESR'"
SPECIES It+
HIMALAYAN
""""""" SCol'S SRI
[NQJSH 1'1,
PURPlE LO
WORNING G
ClJIj8(NG N
JAPANESE I
REED CAN.'
TABLE,
PER~
QUAi
I
1. SIGN
I
2. SIGN
SELECTi
3. SIGN
4. SIGN
5. STRI
6. CON
AND SJ
7. CON
EROS10
ANNI
1. 100
INSTAU
TREE ~
• TREE
3. AT I
SHOREl
I
4. NO i
BLACKI
UORN1~
BOND I
THRQU(
jJ, ;;;.-..;;;;;;;;;;;;;
r 1
,
:ru!
H,
~Al1
~--"
: I 5TH
: I
SHA
p
KL>
f f.
m • ~ ..;
1= z w
'" v
I:>;'
I~I
I.:
-!I
"~
;i
~I
g ~I
If I
1 B~
[)N;
L~
, ~
n.
'" o
?
~ . W £'\1 I
W
r z
~
'" ~
~ ;; • i
~
5' o a a SH v 5-
L ~ ,""
~
8 a g
g
z w
~ SH! 0..:
ST I
E
~
~
!E <D
PORTION OF GOV'T LOT 32, TWP 24N, RNG, 5E., W.M.
40',375' TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCnON EASEMENT
PLANT SCHEDULE
OVERLOOK
PULL-OUT AREA
SPLIT RAIL
FENCE
----rGAP IN FEN~
..--..--
EXISTING WOODY
DEBRIS
(TYPICAL)
SY~BOL BOTANICAL NA~E COMMON NA~E SIZE SPACING REMARKS BASE ALI. 1
TREES QNTY ONTY o ... ~".'. :: =PHYUA WESTERN RED CEDAR 4' 1fT ~IN, 5 GAL PER PLAN WRl BRANCHED. NO DOUBLE TRUNK 126 20
WESTERN HOILOCK
SIT'r<A SPRUCE
DOUGLAS FIR
GRAND FIR
~m_5~
~m_5~
~m_5~
~~_5=
PER PLAN
PER PLAN
PER PLAN
PER PLAN
WELL BRANCHED, NO DOUBLE TRUNK
WRL BRANCHED, NO DOUBLE TRUNK
WRL BRANCHED, NO DOUBLE TRUNK
WELL BRANCHED, NO DOUBLE TRUNK
" o
22
78
66
14
19
0· PICEA SITCHENSIS
0······· . PSEUDOTSUGA ~ENZIESII o .... ABIES GRANDIS
8· . CRATAEGUS OOUGlASll
LIVE STAKES o ....... . SALIX LUCIDA o . ' ... SAUX SCOULERIANA
BLACK HAWTHORN
PACIFIC WILLOW
SCOUL£R'S WILLOW
4' HT MIN., 2 GAL PER PLAN WELL BRANCHED.
30" HT I.4IN.
3D" HT I.4IN.
3' D.C.
3' D.C.
LM STAKES
LM STAKES
NOTE: EACH WILLOW S"YhIBQl IS EQUAl TO 10 UVE STAKES.
S~.~~ ....... ACER CIRCINATUI.I
0··· 'CORYLUS CORNUTA
E) .......... ·A/.IELANCHIER AlNIF()UI. e .... "PHlLAOO.PHIS lEWISH
IV, ····HOLOOISCUS DiSCOlOR o .... 'cORNUS SERICEA
® ............ PHYSOCARPUS OPITATUS
o ..... "VACCINIUM QVATUM
CfI' .......... 'LONICERA II'NOLUCRATA
CD ..... -ROSA NUTKANA
0·· .......... "S'(I.IPHORICARPOS .'.LEIUS
@9 ..... 'OPLOPANA)( HORRIOUM
0" . 'OEMLERIA CERASIFORf.1IS
e '.,. MAHONIA AQUIFOUUf.1
0·· ······RIBES SANGUINIEUM
CD ..... 'RUBUS PARVIFLORUS
VINE WPLE
HAZEU<UT
SERVICEBERRY
IolOCK ORANGE
OCEAN SPRAY
RED OSIER OOCWOOD
PACIFlC NINEBARK
2'-4' HT, 2 G.'L.
2'-4' HT, 2 G.AL
2'-4' 1fT, 2 GAL
2'-4' 1fT, 2 GAL.
2'-4' 1fT, 2 GAL.
PER PLAN
PER PLAN
PER PLAN
PER PlAN
4' O.C.
2'-4' 1fT, 2 GAL 4' D.C.
2'-4' 1fT, 2 GAL 4' D.C.
EVERGREEN HUCKLEBERRY 2'-4' 1fT, 2 GAL. 4' O.C.
BLACK lWINBERRY
NOOTKA ROSE
SNOWBERRY
DEVIL'S CLUB
INDIAN PLUM
TALl. OREGON GRAPE
2'-4' HT, 2 GAL. 4' D.C.
2'-4' 1fT, 2 GAL 4' D.C.
2'-4' HT, 2 GAL. 4' D.C.
2'-4' 1fT, 2 GAL. 4' D.C.
2'-4' 1fT, 2 GAL. 4' D.C.
2'-4' 1fT, 2 G.'L. 4' D.C.
REO FLOWERING CURRANT 2'-4' HT, 2 GAL 4' D.C.
4' D.C. THlMBlEBERRY 2'-4' 1fT, 2 GAL.
I.IULl1-STEI.II.IED
I.IUll1-STlJ,IMED
I.IULTI-STEI.IMED
MULn-STEloIMED
FULL, WELl BRANCHED
FULL, WELL BRANCHED
FULL, WElL BRANCHED
FUll, WELL BRANCHED
FULL, WELL BRANCHED
FULL, WElL BRANCHED
FULL, WElL BRANCHED
FUll, WELL BRANCHED
FULL. WELL BRANCHED
FULL. WELL BRANCHED
FULL, WELL BR#lCHEO
fULL, WELl BRANCHED
112
17
53
JOO
90
14
12
"
147
151
200
232
52
35
247
98
101
o
o
9
2
17
" 26
o
53
o
68
78
23
12
10'
51
18
CITY Of RENTON
FLOOD HAZARD LIMITS ------..........
------<3"22405g049)
'-----,-----
'-----
---
---
I
I
---
/
/
/
---" " " "
/~---
/ LOT A
GENERAL NOTES:
1. SEE SHEEr M-5 FOR MITIGATION DErAILS
AND SPECIFlCAllONS.·
2. SEE SHEEr M-3 FOR IRRIGATION NOTES
AND DETAILS,
3. ALL BUFFER PlANTING AREAS SHALL RECEIVE
UNIFORM LAYER OF HOG FUEL MULCH TO A 5~
DEPTH. WETlAND PLANTING AREA SHALL RECEIVE
UNIFORM LAYER OF FlNE BARK MULCH TO A Y
DEPTH.
I -c:::::J
" '" ro
134,531 SF (GROSS)
" " " " " " SHOREUNE "
,GEMENT ZONE '\
N ~Yn ~ II t'M POL'I'STICHUI.I MUNITUIoI SWORD fERN 1'-2' 1fT, 1 GAL. 3' D.C. FULL, WELL BRANCHED 1'-2' 1fT, 1 GAL. 3' D.C. o
@
'\
'\
'\
P
G
SWORD fERN
~ l' 1fT, 1 GAL. 3' D.C.
o ;: HOG FUEL I.IULCH 5" OEPTli
69
77
653 C.Y. 236 C.Y.
7 r y
100% FINAL SUBMITTAL
\
'\
'\
'\
\
\
AL TERNATE-1
LEGEND:
A PARKSIGN
B INTERPRETIVE SIGN
o TRAlLHEAD SIGN
c:::J LOG BENCH o TRASH RECEPTACLE
SPliT RAIL FENCE
--4-o
ALTERNATE -1 AREA
AlTERNATE·1BOUNDARY
~snNGSNAGTOR~N
EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN
FUTURE CONNECTION TO
OFF-SITE DEVELOPMENT
~~: GS w ;;;;.m GAUUliERIA SKALLON SALAL l' 1fT, 1 GAL. 3' D.C. FULL WELL BRANCHED
§> -. FINE BARK I.IUlCH (wmANO A ONLy) 3" DEPTH .~ J.'<oI-'" "\,\ ..... <lo. V\
z
:5 a.
(!) z
F
5 a.
z o
~
(!)
E ::;;
-I
~
I-
~
UJ
UJ
0:::
()
~
:2:
,; . ~ ;n
1/11/1 wio ZW CI) ~
c( ~!! "!
>0( h~ IdO~~~ ~~ ~!~ «CI)~!ls:
Do( i
~ ;Z
<
Wz
"'0 ~I-0.'-"
z:;!; ~~ 1i'i~ ",. ,,-z
00 ~!z _w u'"
REVISIONS: APPD.
DATE: APRIl, 2012
DESIGN: GaK
DRAWN: GSK
CHECKED: JCGA
REVISION
NUMBER:
SCALE: '"=30'
PROJECT NUIfiIER:
RENTOOOO-0015
DRAWING FILE:
laMPOO4RENT15
SHEET NO.
M-4
,,17
I
I
I
1
1
I
PORTION OF GOI/T LOT 1, SECTION 32, TWP 24N, RNG. 5E., W.M.
TABLE 1: MAINTENANCE TASKS PART 7 -MONITORING PART 78 -GOALS t,ND OBJEQTIVE;S
(!)
PLANT ESTABUSHUENT lHROUGHOOT lHE MONITORING PERIOD IS ESSENTIAL TO PLANT COtJUUNITY BASE INSTALlATION z
ACll' .. UY SCHEDW: SPEOAl NOTES DEVELOPMENT AND lHE SUCCESS OF THE OVERAlL MITIGATION PlAN. THE PLANT ESTABUSHMENT 1. ENHANCE 42,015 SF OF SHOREUNE AREA BY (l£ARlNG EXISTING INVASIVE SPEaES (HIMALAYAN a:
(IE YEAR fCllOWlHG PERroo FOR THIS PRo..ECT IS FIVE (5) YEARS. DURING THIS TIME, THE aTY OR tHEIR DESIGNEE BLACKBERRY. JAPANESE KNOTWEED. AND REED CANARYGRASS) AND REPLANTING WITH NATIVE g ....J REPlACE All FAIlED PlANllNC. mEN AS BY o:..lRACT~ lHE FIRST YEAR; BY o.NER AfTER SHAll UONITOR THE SITE ANNUALLY FOR DETERMINING COMPUANCE 'MTH PERMITS ISSUED BY lREE$' AND SHRUB SPECIES TO IMPROVE PLANT DIVERSITY AND HABITAT FUNCTIONS. Z t.IIllGA TION Pl..ANTlNGS. REQUIRED TO wm FIRST ruR. FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL .AJRISOICllONS. FIRST YEAR UONITORING SHAll BE PERFORMED 0 ~ Wz """""""'''' QUAR1ERLY. RESULTS fOR QUARlERS 1 THRU 3 SHAll BE SUBMITTED TO THE aTY AS A SHORT 2. ENHANCE 786 SF Of HIMALAYAN BLACKBERRY DOMINATED. TYPE JJJ WETLAND (ON-SITE) BY ::;: STANDARD.S. REPORT OR MEMO. FOURTH OUARTrR MONITORING SHAll INCLUDE YEAR 1 MONITORING RESULTS. "'0 REMOVING INVASIVE SPEOES AND REPLANTING WllH NATIVE TREES AND SHRUBS TO IMPROVE "" I-'" I-AT lEAST VfilQY. COMPUANC[ UONITORING PROVIDES A MEANS FOR TRAa<ING PlANT SUR'v1VAL. COVER Of PLANT DIVERSITY AND HABIT AT FUNCTIONS. '" ct" trUPCRARY IRRIGATION CF All. PLANTS WUST RECEI-.£ ON£: ~Oi OF WI. 1ER PER ..uK INSTALLED PLANTS AND UP TO 20 PERCENT Of ANY STRATUM COMPOSED Of DESIRABLE NATIVE NEW PlANllNGS. WAY 15 THRCtJGH DURING THE fIRST GROfItNG SEASCtI; BY COHRACTCII: THE Z :::.:::: z"; OCTOBER 31 fOR lHE fIRST YEAR AND BY OWNER AFTER THE fIRST YEAR. VOLUNTEERS. HEAlTH AND GROWTH. HERBIVORY. PRESENCE OF WEEDS, TRASH AND VANDAlISM. ALTERNATE ONE INSTALlATION 0 W oiJi fIRST YEAR fCUcnING i= PlANllNG. MONITORING METHODOLOGY INCLUDES A VARIETY Of ECOLOGICAL TECHNIQUES. STANDARD 1. ENHANCE 15,219 Sf OF SHOREUNE AREA BY MARING EXISTING INVASI\O£ SPEOES (HIMALAYAN « W ~~ 0
1RASH REWOVAl FROM ALl INSPECT AT lEAST ~C[ BY COOTRACTOR 1HE fIRST YEAR ~ OVINER Af"l'tR TECHNIQUES SUCH AS TRANSECT UNES AND SAMPLE PLOTS MAY BE USED. MONITORING lNQUDES BLACKBERRY. JAPANESE KNOTWrED. AND REED CANARYGRASS) AND REPlANTING \'11TH NATIVE u: 0:::: "':z' ON-SITE fLOOOPI..AIN EACH YEAR fCII: '\'EARS I, 1H[ FIRST """-TRACKING MORTAUTY. ESTABUSHING PHOTOPOINTS AND OTHER METHODS DEEMED NECESSARY TO TREES AND SHRUB SPECIES TO IMPROVE PLANT DIVERSITY AND HABITAT FUNCTIONS. U () U.o r.nTJGA TI~ AR£A. :z. J, • AND 5 Of THE FlVE ADEQUAffiY DOCUMENT DEVELOPMENT Of MITIGATION AREAS OVER THE MONITORING PERIOD. 01-
YEAR WONITOOlNG PERIOO. W ~ ~n'i c..
'" PART 7C -PERFORMANCE STANDARDS z <C u '"
IIEEIlIIIG ANNUALlY FCR YEAR 1. TREES AND SHRUBS WUST BE YIEEOED TO THE ORIPI.INE 0 ~ BI-ANNUALLY fOR YEARS 2, AND HOG FUEl. WUlOi WAINTAINED AT • INCH£S DEPTH. BY PART 7A -MITIGATION APPROACH ~ 3, ., AND 5 Of THE F1VE !::OOTRACTCR mE fIRST YEAR; BY OWNER AfTER 1HE fIRST PERFORMANCE STANDARDS (TABLE 2) HAVE BEEN ESTABUSHEO THAT CORRESPOND TO THE YEAR WCNTORING PERIOD >tAR.
BASE INSTALLATION STATED MITIGATION GOALS AND 08.£CTIVES. THESE STANDARDS ARE THE PRIMARY FACTORS (!)
HERBIVORY REPn.lENT IWWEDIAlaY AfTER APPLY OOGANIC REPEllENT Pl.AH1SKYllO (CR APPRO'i'tD THAT SHALl. BE USED TO MEASURE THE SUCCESS OF THE SHORELINE ENHANCEMENT, WETLAND i=
INSTAI.lATI~ N'W EQUAl) PER WANUfAClURER'S 'fIRITlEN PRO'v1DE MITIGATION fOR 8,865 SF (0.20 AC) OF PERMANENT SHOREUNE IMPACT fROId THE MAY BUFfER ENHANCEMENT AND WETlAND ENHANCEMENT MITIGATION AREAS. IT IS IMPORTANT TO :§ ANNUAll. Y 1HEREAFlER RECOWWENDA TIONS. CREEK TRAIL MlH ON-SITE SHOREUNE AREA AND WETlAND ENHANCEMENT. ENHANCEMENT WlU EVAlUATE THE DEVELOPMENT Of THE UIllGATION PlAN OVER THE ENTIRE MONITORING PERIOD
I
I
I
I ~
" ~ I" ~
!1l
0
~
" 0
II
AMOUNT TO 42.015 SF (0.96 AC) Of SHOREUNE AREA AND 786 Sf (0.02 AC) Of EXISTING WHEN DETERMINING M-IETHER All STANDARDS HAVE BEEN MET. WHItE SPEOFlC PERFORMANCE
ANNUALlY (lURING 1HE lICENSED STAlE APPUCATCII:, USE BROAD SPECTRUW CATEGORY III WETLAND, FOR A TOTAL OF 42,801 Sf (0.98 AC) Of MITIGATION PRO'v1DED TO STANDARDS PROVIDE IMPORTANT BENCHMARKS AND SHAlL HELP TO DIRECT MAINTENANCE AND
"ER!lIODE GROWING SEASON AQUATIC HER9ICIOE, ROOEO Tt.I (CII: APPRO\£[) EQUAl) IMPROVE WETlAND. WETlAND BUfFER AND SHOREUNE fUNCTION. CONTINGENCY EffORTS. THE SUCCESS OF MIllGATION MUST BE MEASURED AGAINST "THE GOAlS ~ PER WAHUF AClURER'S WRI11!H R[COWI.rEH[)A nONs. AND OBJECTIVES Of THE OVERAll MITIGATION PlAN. BY MONITORING THE PRO.£CT AND
AL TERNA TE ONE INSTALlATION COMPARING MONITORING RESULTS TO PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, A DETERMINATION CAN BE MADE ~~
FOR THE NEED TO IMPlEMENT MAINTENANCE EFFORTS OR THE CONTINGENCY PlAN.
Q.EAR AND GRUB UNDESIRABlE AS REQUIRED IN REMOVAl SHOULD BE AS DlR£ClED BY 1I£n.AND PROVIDE UI11GATION FOR 8,865 Sf (0.20 AC) OF PERMANENT SHOREUNE IMPACT fROU THE MAY INVASIVE PlANTS fRCIII ALl at-snr ANNUAl WCHTORINC WfSTRUClJa. WCHTCII: OURIHG fIRST YEAR. Q.EARlNG AND
SHOREUNE MITIGATION AREAS. REl'ORl> GRlIBB!NG SHALl BE ACCOWPUSHED BY PH'1'SCALl Y CREEK TRAIL \'11TH ON-SITE SHOREUNE AREA AND WETlAND ENHANCEMENT. ENHANCEMENT Will IT",TE IF
UNIlESRAIll£ (NOHiEOiANICAl) REUCMNG PlNH WI. TERIAl.S (INCLUDING AMOUNT TO 15,219 SF (0.35 AC) OF SHOREUNE AREA M!TIGATION WETlAND BUFfER AND PART 8 -CONTINGENCY PLAN
__
SPECIES lNa.tJOE: ROOT WASSES) OR HAND lRDAIING BY COOTRACTOR. 'I'EIDS -KlMALAYAN BLACKBERRY WUST BE PROPERLY DISPOSED OF Cff-snr. BY ~TRACTOR SHOREUNE FUNCTION. ~~'
"""""" 1ltA00lERRY THE fIRST YEAR: BY OWNER Af1ER niE fRST YEAR. IF NECESSARY A CONTINGENCY PLAN WIll PROVIDE REMEDIATION FOR THE t.l.ITIGA TION GOAlS THAT
scors BROOt.I HAVE NOT BEEN MET. IF THE STATrD UITIGATION GOAlS, AS MEASURED BY lHE MONITORING
::11-
ENGUSH IVY PROGRAM AND PERfORMANCE STANDARDS. HAVE NOT BEEN MET AND CANNOT BE ACHIEVED
n~_
PIJRPl£ lOOSE STRlFE
UORNING a.a;:y THROUGH ROUTINE MAlNTrNANCE, THEN A DETERM!NATION BY CITY OF RENTON Will BE MADE TO
aJUSlNG NIGHSHAI)( REOUIRE SUBMITIAl Of A CONTINGENCY PlAN. AFTER WRITTEN APPROVAl BY THE CITY, A .; JAPANESE KNOTWEID CONTINGENCY PLAN SHAll BE IMPLEMENTED THAT COMPENSATES FOR lHE FAILED GOALS OF THE ! m
REED CAHARYmASS APPROVED MITIGATION PLAN. If THE CONTINGENCY PlAN IS SUBSTANTIAl, THE CITY MAY EXTEND l:!~~ til til lHE MONITORING PERIOD. zw
TABLE 2: PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND METHODS «l-it >c
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS MONITORING METHODS MONITORING INTERVAL w-<i~ aU fica Ie MITIGAllON COST ESlIMATE (BASE IHSTAllAllON): _0 -I QUARTERLY OBSERVATIONAL MONITORING SHALL INCLUDE:
BOND ESTIMATE (INClUDES lABOR, WATERIAlS. MAINTENANCE
> til ~"i
YEM I, QUMTERl Y
Ctll ~I 1. SIGNS OF HERBIVORY BY DEER OR BEAVER TO INSTAllED MIllGATION PLANTS; 1. DOCUMENTED OBSERVATIONS Of MIllGATION AREA INCLUDING AND WON1TORING FOR 5 YEARS, ac
RECOMMENDATIONS TO ADDRESS ITEt.l.S THAT ARE DE.TRIMENTAl SHOREUNE ENHANCEMENT AREA, 30" CONTINGENCY AND 10" MOBIUZATION) ~ :ii
2. SIGNS Of PLANT MORTAUTY, OTHER lHAN HERBIVORY. FROM DISEASE. IMPROPER PlANT TO MIllGA TION SUCCESS. WETlAND A AND 1<£TlANO BUFFER) •
SELECTION, EXPOSURE TO EXTREME CUMATE CONDIllONS, POOR PLANT ESTABUSHMENT TOTAL COST ESllMA 1£: , 136,951.60 II 3. SIGNS Of UNACCEPTABLE REESTABUSHMENT Of NON-NATIVE SPECIES; B. PERfORMANCE BONO -(BASE IHSTAllAllON) (12OX Of A) IS
4. SIGNS OF VANDAlISM AND IU£GAl DUMPING; ESllMATED TO BE: $ 164.341.92
~
I ~ ~ • •
5. STREAt.I BANK INSTABIUTY /EROSION; REVISIONS: APPD.
6. CONDITION Of HOG FUEL MULCH THAT IDENTIfY AREAS OF EROSION, DEPTH LESS THAN 5-,
AND SA lURA TION AT SURF ACE AND; EART 9 -LONG TERM VEGETATION MANAGEMENT
7. CONDIllON OF IRRIGATION SYSTEM THAT INClUDE MISSING OR DAMAGED UNES AND HEADS OR
~ ~
I~ ~
Ii
~
5
0
EROSION RESULTING fROM LEAKS OR DAMAGE.
ANNUAL MONITORING SHALL INCLUDE: THE I.1I11GATION PlAN (PARTS 1-8) IDENTIFlES THE REQUIRED ACTIONS TO BE II.IPlEMENTED BY
THE CITY TO ENSURE THE ESTABUSHIdENT Of THE SHOREUNE ENHANCEMENT AREAS. THE CITY
1, 100 PERCENT SURVIVAl Of All INSTAlLED NATIVE TREES AND SHRUBS ONE-YEAR POST 1. TOTAl PlANT COUNT OF AU INSTAllED TREES AND SHRUBS. YEAR 1. SHALL COMPLY WITH PROVISIONS DESCRIBED IN THE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT CODE (RMC
INSTAllATION OF All SHOREUNE MI11GATION PlANTS. (SHOREUNE ENHANCEMENT AREA, 4-3-09OF.I.I).
WETlAND A AND 1<£TlAND BUFFER) lHE CITY SHALl. CONDUCT ANNUAl MONITOOING INSPECTIONS CURING THE REOUIRED FlVE YEAR DI.,.., APR!.. "'02
TREE AND SHRUB SURVIVAl: 100% BY YEAR 1, • PERCENT SUR'v1VAl Of All INSTAU£Q CONIFEROUS TREES, ~.M 2, AND 3. (POST CONSTRUCTION) MONITORING PERIOD . DESIGN: G8K
(SHOREUNE ENHANCEMENT AREA, DUYN: G8K
• TREE AND SHRUB SURVIVAl: 90% BY YEAR 2, 85" BY YEAR 3. PERCENT SUR\I1VAl OF SHRUBS MEASURED BY AN APPROVED iWETlAND A AND WETlAND BUITER) THE OTY SHAll CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN ruE SHOREUNE ENHANCEMENT AREAS FOR THE UFE Of CBECDD: JCCA
1A00ITORING TECHNIQUE SUCH AS TRANSECTS ANDioo SAMPLE PlOTS. THE USE. ANNUAl INSPECTIONS SHAll. VERIfY YEAR 5 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS ARE RmSION
0 I ~
!>->
I ~
~
MAINTAINED. IF INSPECTIONS DO NOT MEET YEAR 5 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, CORRECTIVE -2. ANNUAl MONITORING FOR COVER OF All INSTAllED TREES AND SHRUBS. VOLUNTrER NATIVE 2. PERCENT COVER Of INSTAllED TREES AND SHRUBS SHALl. BE YEAR 3 AND-5. ACTIONS SUCH AS INSTAlUNG ADDIllONAl OR REPLACEMENT VEGETATION AS DEEMED NECESSARY
~~S AND SHRUBS IN SHORElINE ENHANCEt.lENT, WERAND 'A'. AND ~TlAND BUfFER MEASURED BY AN APPROVED MONITORING TECHNIQUE SUCH AS (SHOREUNE ENHANCEMENT AREA, TO MAINTAIN ECOlOGICAL FUNCTIONS MAY BE REQUIRED. SC£LE:H/A
ENHANCEMENT MONITOOING AREAS. lRANSECTS AND/OR SAMPLE PLOTS. iWETlAND A AND WETLAND BUfFER)
PROlICT NV1lBER:
lRIT AND SHRUB COVER: 60% BY 'rEAR 3, 85% BY YEM 5. RENTOOOO-OO15
3. AT LEAST 4 NATIVE TREE SPEaES AND 10 NATIVE SHRUB SPEaES SHAll BE PRESENT IN THE 3. TAllY SPECIES DIVERSITY IN MIllGATION AREAS. (~~U~E ~N~:""~M~T MEA. DR.l1rING f'ILI:
SHOREUNE totlllGA TION AREA. OVERAll SPEaES OIVERSITY SHAll BE GREATER THAN 14. tWE..TlANO A AND 1<£TlAND BUFfER) """"""",n,
~
oii I N "'-m
"'-v
0
4. NO MORE THAN 10X COVER OF NON-NATIVE OR OTHER INVASIVES, E.G •• HIWAlAYAN 4. PERCENT COVER OF NON-NATIVE OR INVASIVE SPEClES SHAll BE YEAR 1, 2. 3, 4, AND 5. SBDT NO.
BLACKBERRY, EVERGREEN BLACKBERRY, REED CANARYGRASS, SCOTS BR()()M, ENGUSH IVY, MEASURED BY AN APPROVED MONITORING TECHNIQUE SUCH AS (SHOREUNE ENHANCEMENT AREA, M-6 MORNING GlORY, ETC. IS PERMISSIBlE. AND NO JAPANESE KNOmED, IN ANY LlQNITORING YEAR. lRANSECTS AND/OR SAMPLE PLOTS. ""'TlANO A AND 1<£TLANO BUFfER) BOND HOLDERS ARE ENCOURAGED TO MAINTAIN MI11GATION SITES WlTHlN THESE STANDARDS 100% FINAL SUBMITIAL THROUGHOUT THE UONITORING PERIOD, TO AVOID CORRECTIVE MEASURES. or 17 I t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I ~
~ on
PORTION OF GOV'T LOT 1, SECTION 32, TWP 24N, RNG. 5E., W.M.
1 -"-~~ •. No 1 j , ,,--~ ~~~:~ ~, , 1::;)ElE FOOTING ~ .' t +
CONPAClED
(rn»
EXISTING
SUB~AOE
(rn»
NOTE::
SlGN IS OWNER FURNISHED,
CONiRACTOR INSTAllED (ora).
CEDAR SPLIT RAIL FENCE MAY CREEK TRAIL PARK SIGN
~.= ~.=
36"
I ~ GENERAL NOTES;
1. FINAL PLACEMENT OF SITE FURNISHINGS SHALL
BE APPROVED BY OWNER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. I !-! I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
o o
a'
" o
?
is w
I
V>
....
~ I~.I '" . ~
~
~
If ;;.
t r§" "'. () .~ ~ ~.;;'. o t~
/'
00 a o o o o
C'
~
5->
0:
I
E
~ o
'" " m
"
2. ADDITIONAL DETAIL HAS BEEN PROVIDED FOR
OWNER FURNISHED CONTRACTOR INSTALLED (OFCI)
ITEMS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. SEE
DETAILS FOR CLARIFICATION.
3. TRAILHEAD SIGN DETAIL IS NOT SHOWN. INSTALLATION
SHALL BE PER THE INTERPRETIVE SIGN BASE DETAIl. ~
'0
N
FINISHED GRADE
(rn»
INTERPRETIVE SIGN BASE
SIGN
MSE.
''''
~
6" EXTRUDED AlUMINUM
POST PAINTED BtACI<
NOTE:
INTERPRETIVE SIGN BASE AND
PORCELAIN PANEL
IS O'MIIER FURNISHED,CONTRACTOR
INSTALLED (ora).
~m",",
!I
"'I ,~
,,~
" ,
N
5'-O~ 'r / sPur CEDAR LOG
00""
LOG SU~T
k ---{!. ===--,,",,' ~/1 @ m/ r FlNISHEO GRADE
'lUr l.i~ -----~~EBAR. 1'-0· MIN.
CONCRElE FOOTING
EXISTING SU8GRAOE
NOTE:
SPUT CEDAR lOG AND LOG SUPPORT
IS-O'MIIER FURNISHED,CONTRACTOR
INSTALLED (ora).
SPLIT CEDAR LOG BENCH
Eb6li
I"HOLE FOR O'M'lER
SUPPUED DVJN AND LOCK.
GALVANIZED DOlliE TOP wi FIN'
30 GAU.ON GALVANIZED
C'"
GALVANIZEO OOl.lE TOP
~TH FlAP
~
(18)1-1/2 ~ 3-1/~ OARK BRO'M'l
RECYClED PLASTIC EL£UENTS.
F AIR'II(A Tl-1ER sm: FlJRNISH1NGS -:
TR-2 STRAIGHT lRASH RECEPTla.E
(OR APPRO'ifil EOUAl).
RNlSHED GRADE
(rn»
m-:-1!OI~ EMBED PEDESTAL BASE eB..QElL£.
20" LENGlH -: 2" SCH 40
POP' ,k ~ CONCRETE FOOTING
EXISTING SUBGRADE
FRONT
TRASH RECEPTACLE
_m~
m ...J
~ <to) I~ ~ ~~ 0' C
'0 m Ii ~; w ~
a: LL5 , ~ () om
II ~ ~§
~
,,~
STAn: OF
WASHINGTON
~~n:GT
/~".J'I1t-
en! ~ ZUJ~8~
c( ~ ~8<1:! > c( !2 c~
1L1-<%.~
0 °,6.E'" _O:2;~ >11) ~~~ c(en~!!lc..
Q c( .... ii
D 'il z m •
REVISIONS: APPD.
·,'1 ___ _
';;)----
,II ;:;;::::;:;;::::=
'"[~ ~!s~~N: APR~i'K2012
DRAWN: GBK
CHECKED: JCGA
REVIStoN
N1JJIB"'"
SCALE;
PROJECT NUlIBER:
RENTOOOO-OO15
DRAWING FILE:
IQMPOO6RENT15
tl SHEET NO.
M-7
OFV
::::;: :;::
W
lO
0
Z
0::
Z
"<l-
N
~
N to
Z a
1=
()
w
(/)
~
f-a
...J
f->-a
(!)
u... a
z a
1=
0:: a
Q..
~
~
i
0
~
!
i
NOlDNJHSIIM 'NO.1N31:1
6)l!fVd NO.1N31:1 ,j() .uJO
ll'<tl::l.l >l33l:iO A '<tV\!
NVld AI::IOlN3ANJ 331:1l
I
I
I
I
I
§
i l ;
!~ §! iii If u(f
~ , ~ • II II ;, II II ;, II ;,
;, -.. ;, ;, " " ;, ;, " ;, " ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~ • ~ • • • ~ ~ ~ ~ •
• ~ " • • • • • ~ 0\ ~ • !l !l !l !l !l !l !l !l ;; ;; ;;
I
~
" ~
~
~
I
I
I
I
I
• II ~ II
); " " ;,
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ • ~ 8 8 8
• • • ~ ;; !l !l
15 z ~
./
./
~ il
~ " ~
~ • ~ 8
~ ~ ;;
::I
~ ::I " " ~ > " ~ ~ • ~ •
i a ~ ,
~ • ~ ~ ~
o*@@
i ~ >
" • B ;
~ ~ • , ,
§ ~
~ ~
~ "
§
l ;
§!
If (f
~ ~ ~
~
00!l9'6~S'SZ1" :etJ04d
8~!it'"90086 UOl6UI4t8M anMIlIlJ8
3S 9f\U9Ay L.fl8~~ • S~,.
·ONI S3.1.VIOOSSYONY
SNVA3 alAva
~ ~ , , • ~ , , ~ g ~ , • ~ ~ w ~ " ~ a ~ ~ ~ , • 0
g " • Q ~ § • • ~ • ~ 0 ~ " ~ g ~ B ~ ~
I I I I I I I I 1 ~ I I I I •
I
" I I
~
I
,--./ -1 ~"hV""
/ .
./
@
~§ .,
~~
2
•
~
0
~ I I I I I I
Ii ~ ~ 00
ci I
h o ~ z :2t:: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~ • w 0
~
~UUI i
'NNRt i't' '0> ''''.'" ,;1,-""£,,,,1
I
~ ~----~ 5l ~ ,
:.
o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
0 0 • II ~ • " '. II ;, ;, ;, ;, ;, ;, ;, ;, " • II il ;, ;, , ~ , '! " ~ ;, II ~ '! ;, il ~ " il ~ ;, ;, ;, '! ;, ;, , '! , '! ;, ;, " ~
, " b ;, " " ;, " " ;, " " ;, " ;, " ;, ;, " , , ':I " ;, " " , " • " ;, ~ • " " " , " " ;, ;, " ;, ~ , " " " , ;, ;, --
~ I ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ • , • ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ • • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ • , ~ ~ ~ , ~ • • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ " • ~ ~ • ~ ~ • • 8 • • 8 8 8
• ~ • ~ • • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ " 0 ~ " . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ " ~ § g g ,; ~ ;; ;; ;; ;; • • •
t_'
5MP'g ~lN3~SOOOdV'lOI\S133HS IN3~~n:::>\1;HH!S\~Ma\ V1\0\>,:::>00-v0\£ ~OOOOOOlN3~\1\:d -wdg l : l ll/St!tO >tq5 -------------------
TJEC1H[NJ[CAlL ][NFORMAT][ON REJP>ORT (T][R)
AND CON§TRlUCT][ON §TOJRMW ATJER
JP>OlLlLlUT][ON JP>R1EVENT][ON JP>LAN (C§WlPPlP)
May Creek. Traill
Rentml1 City 1H[allll -6tlbt Flloor
HD55 §mntlbt Grady Way
Renton, W A 98057
JP>arcell No. 322~05-9li09
RENTOOOO-0015
Prepared by:
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOClATES, INC.
415 -118th Avenue SE
Bellevue, W A 98005
February, 2012
Revised April, 2012
CityOfR
P1annin ento n
9 D,II/Sion
,\fAY -9. lUll
" • @ DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES INC.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION 1 PROJECT OVERVIEW ...................................................................................................... 1
Existing Drainage System ...................................................................................................................... I
Proposed Drainage System ..................................................................................................................... 1
. SECTION 2 CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY ..................................................... 3
Drainage Review Type ........................................................................................................................... 3
Surface Water Management Design Manual Core Requirements .......................................................... 3
Surface Water Management Design Manual Special Requirements ...................................................... 4
Sensitive Areas Ordinance Requirements .............................................................................................. 4
SECTION 3 OFF-SITE ANALYSIS ......................................................................................................... 5
Study Area Definition ............................................................................................................................ 5
Resource Review of Existing Drainage Problems .................................................................................. 5
Upstream Analysis ......................................................................................................... : ..................... : .. 5
Level I Downstream Analysis ................................................................................................................ 6
SECTION 4 FLOW CONTROL & WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS & DESIGN ....... 10
SECTION 5 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN .................................................. 11
SECTION 6 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES .............................................................................. 12
SECTION 7 OTHER PERMITS ............................................................................................................. 13
SECTION 8 CSWPPP ANALYSIS AND DESIGN ................................................................................ 14
SECTION 9 BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES, AND DECLARATION OF
COVENANT ....................................................................................................................................... 16
SECTION 10 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL ...................................................... 17
FIGURES
Figure I: Vicinity Map .................................................................................................................................. 2
Figure 2: Project Site and May Creek near Lake Washington Blvd ............................................................. 7
Figure 3: Typical May Creek Condition ....................................................................................................... 8
Figure 4: Typical Existing On-site Vegetation (looking west toward Lake Washington Blvd) ................... 9
Appendix A
Appendix B
Improvement Plans
NRCS Soil Map
DA VIO EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
April 2012
APPENDICES
P;\t\RENTOOOOOOlS\06OOINFOlStonnwater\2012-4-16 TIR,doc
May Creek Trail
Technical Information Report
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SECTION 1
PROJECT OVERVIEW
City of Renton intends to construct approximately 1,300 lineal feet of a 6-foot-wide trail·adjacent to May
Creek, located at 4260 Lake Washington Boulevard North, Redmond, Washington, King County Parcel
Number 322405-9109. Trail construction will include striping approximately 9 inches of organic material
in the trail section, installation of geotextile, and backfilling with gravel borrow. This will provide a solid
base for the bark mulch trail. Most of the site is overgrown with invasive species. Following trail
construction, a large portion of the invasive species will be removed. The area disturbed during invasive
removal will be stabilized with compost and/or bark mulch. The stabilized area will then be landscaped
and irrigated. No permanent utilities or stormwater facilities are proposed. This Storm Drainage / Site
Development Technical Information Report (TlR) provides stormwater requirements and design
calculations for the developed site.
The project site is located within Section 32, Township 24 North, Range 5 East, Willamette Meridian.
Figure 1 is a vicinity map showing the location of the site relative to the surrounding area. The site is
bordered by a commercial property to the north, Interstate 405 to the east, residential properties to the
south, and Lake Washington Boulevard to the west. The predominate soil type is Norma Sandy Loam
(National Resource Conservation Service [NRCS) Soil Map is located in Appendix B), which is a poorly
drained alluvial soil.
EXISTING DRAINAGE SYSTEM
The project site is heavily forested and is almost entirely within the 100-year flood plain. During a recent
site visit, no evidence of flooding within the trail limits was noted. With the exception of May Creek,
there is little drainage that enters the project site. Roadways that border the site to the west and east drain
. directly into May Creek. Property to the north drains into Lake Washington Boulevard, and May Creek
borders the site to the south. There are no defined drainage channels draining into May Creek from the
project area. Instead, rainfall drains into the creek via sheet flow or interflow. May Creek flows from east
to west along the southern border of the property. At the west edge of the project boundary, May Creek
flows under Lake Washington Boulevard via a bridge. May Creek then turns southwest in a defined
channel and continues approximately 1,000 feet, where it discharges into Lake Washington .
. PROPOSED DRAINAGE SYSTEM
No changes to the existing drainage system are proposed. The bark mulch trail will be constructed on a
geotextile and gravel borrow backfill to reduce soft spots; however, the trail will match existing grades to
the greatest extent possible. Gravel borrow is a porous material that will not impede the sheet flow and
interflow characteristics of the existing site. No trees will be removed, and the existing vegetation will be
improved with the removal of invasive species and planting of native species.
DA VID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
April 2012
P:\r\RENTOOOOOOI5\06OOINFO\Stormwater\1012-4-16 TIR.doc
May Creek Trail
Technical Infonnation Report
Figure 1: Vicinity Map
N 42nd PI
N 40th St
VICINiTY MAP
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
April 2012
SCALE: 1"=1500'
2
P:\r\RENTOOOQOOISI0600INFO\Stonnwater\2012-4·16 TIR-doc
May Creek Trai I
Technical Infonnation Report
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SECTION 2
CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY
The drainage design will be in accordance with the February 2010 City of Renton Amendments to the
King County Surface Water Design Manual (Manual) and, where referenced, the 2009 King County
Surface Water Design Manual.
DRAINAGE REVIEW TYPE
The proposed trail project is within a flood hazard area and will disturb more than 7,000 square feet.
According to Table 1.1.2.A from the Manual, a Targeted Drainage Review Project Category #1 is
required. A list of the core requirements and the applicability of each follows.
SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT DESIGN MANUAL
CORE REQUIREMENTS
1. Discharge at the Natural Location: Sheet flow and interflow will be maintained, and no change to the
natural discharge location into May Creek is proposed.
2. Off-site Analysis: A Level 1 downstream analysis has been prepared. The project is located within
one Threshold Drainage Area (TDA).
3. Flow Control: N/A. The project creates less than 2,000 square feet of new, plus replaced, impervious
surfacing and less than 35,000 square feet of new pervious surface.
4. Conveyance System: N/A. No conveyance system is proposed.
5. Erosion/Sedimentation Control: A Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control (TESC) plan is
located in Appendix A as part of the improvement plans. A Construction Storm water Pollution
Prevention Plan in the form of a detail sheet is included in the TESC plans. Additionally, a
Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan analysis and design is located in Section 8.
6. Maintenance and Operations: N/A. No stormwater facilities are proposed. Maintenance and
operations standards are included on the mitigation plans for the landscape improvements. After
construction, the trail and plants will be maintained by City of Renton Parks Department.
7. Financial Guarantees and Liabilitv: N/A.
8. Water Qualitv: N/A. The trail will not be regularly used by motor vehicles and is exempt from water
quality treatment.
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
April 2012
3
P:\r\RENTOOOOOOI!l\0600INFO\Stonnwater\1012-4-16 TIR.doc
May Creek Trail
Technical Information Report
SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT DESIGN MANUAL
SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
1. Other Adopted Area-Specific Requirements: There are no area-specific requirements applicable to
this project.
2. Floodplain/Floodway Delineation: The project is within a floodplain as depicted on the improvement
plans.
3. Flood Protection Facilities: No flood protection facilities are proposed.
4. Source Control: N/A. No permanent source control facilities are necessary for a pervious trail.
5. Oil Control (1.3.5): N/A.
SENSITIVE AREAS ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS
A separate Critical Area Report and mitigation plans have been prepared by David Evans and Associates,
Inc. (DEA) as separate documents for review.
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
April 2012
4
P:Ir\RENTOOOOOOIS\0600tNFO\Stormwater\2012·4·16 TIR.doc
May Creek Trail
Technicallnfonnation Report
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SECTION 3
OFF-SITE ANALYSIS
This section identifies the tributary basin areas upstream of the project site, and evaluates upstream and
downstream drainage system problems. The intent of this section is to demonstrate that the proposed
project will neither aggravate existing problems nor create new drainage problems.
STUDY AREA DEFINITION
The drainage study area is defined by the subject property and May Creek within its drainage course to
Lake Washington.
RESOURCE REVIEW OF EXISTING DRAiNAGE PROBLEMS
Documents reviewed for existing andlor potential drainage problems, and the findings of each, are listed
below:
o 2001 May Creek Basin Action Plan. City of Renton & King County
The proposed project is located within the Water Resources Inventory Area 8. King County and the
cities of Renton and Newcastle adopted the 2001 May Creek Basin Action Plan. The proposed project
and associated landscape improvements is in compliance with The May Creek Basin Plan.
o May Creek Drainage and Restoration Plan. King County
o
The improvements outlined in this document are located upstream and have no direct impact on the
proposed project.
Hydraulic and Hydrologic Analyses of the May Creek Channel Restoration Project
The improvements outlined in this document are located upsiream and have no direct impact on the
proposed project.
o U.S. Department of Agriculture. King County Soils Survey
The soils within the project limits are predominately Norma Sandy Loam, which is a poorly drained
alluvial soil.
o Wetlands
There are wetlands identified within the project boundaries. For further information on critical areas,
refer to the Critical Areas Report prepared by DEA as a separate document.
UPSTREAM ANALYSIS
With the exception of May Creek, there is little off-site drainage that enters the project site. Roadways
that border the site to the west and east drain directly into May Creek. Property to the north drains into
Lake Washington Boulevard, and May Creek borders the site to the south. There are no defined drainage
channels draining into May Creek from the project area. The trail project will have no impact on upstream
drainages and will not result in a backwater condition.
DA VlD EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
April 2012
5
P:\r\RENTOOOOOOIS\0600INFO\Stonnwater\2012-4-16 TIR.doc
May Creek Trail
Technical Infonnation Report
The project will not impact May Creek's hydraulic capacity or existing drainage channel. The landscape
improvements adjacent to May Creek will benefit the overall ecology of May Creek by removing invasive
species and establishing native vegetation.
LEVEL 1 DOWNSTREAM ANALYSIS
The downstream analysis includes a Level I downstream analysis of the existing drainage system, which
consists of a defined stream channel and three bridges.
FIELD INSPECTION AND NARRATIVE
A site visit was conducted on January 25, 2012 (Figures 2 through 4). The weather was clear and
partially cloudy. The temperature was approximately 50 degrees Fahrenheit.
May Creek flows west from the property, crossing under Lake Washington Boulevard via a concrete
bridge. After approximately 100 feet, the stream passes under a railroad via a wood bridge structure.
Approximately 200 feet downstream, the creek turns southwest in a defined channel. Approximately
1,000 feet from the project site, the stream crosses under N 40th Place via a concrete bridge structure and
enters Lake Washington. The proposed project will have no impact on the downstream drainage or
crossings.
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
April 2012
6
P:'ls\RENTOOOOOOIS\06OOfNFO\Stormwater..2012-4-16 TIR.doc
May Creek Trail
Technical Information Report
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Figure 2: Project Site and May Creek near Lake Washington Boulevard
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC .
April 2012
7
P:ItJU:NT OOOOOO I ,\0600 INFOIS lormwatm20 12-4-1 6_ TIR.doc
May Creek Trail
Technical Information Report
Figure 3: Typical May Creek Condition
DA VID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
April 2012
8
p;\r\REN'TOOOOOO I.5\06001NFO\Slonnwale1\2()12 ... ·16 T1R.doc
May Creek Trail
Technicallnfonnation Report
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Figure 4: TypJcal Existing On-slte Vegetation (looking west toward Lake Washington Boulevard)
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
April 201 2
9
P:\M.ENTOOOOOO 1.5\0600INFO\S lonn wl tcr\20 12-4·1 6 TIR.d oc
May Creek Trail
Technical Information Report
SECTION 4
FLOW CONTROL & WATER QUALITY
FACILITY ANALYSIS & DESIGN
Not applicable.
The project is exempt from Flow Control and Water Quality because it creates less than 2,000 square feet
of new, plus replaced impervious surfacing and less than 35 ,000 square feet of new pervious surface.
The project does result in approximately 8,900 square feet of new pervious surfacing consisting of a bark
mulch trail underlain with gravel borrow. According to the Manual , projects that create more than 7,000
square feet of new pervious surfacing must show how the moisture-retaining capacity of the new pervious
surface will be protected. According to the NRCS Soil Survey, most of the site is Norma Sandy Loam , a
Type D soil with poor infiltration rates and a high runoff potential. Gravel borrow is a sandy material with
a small percentage of fines «No. 200). The proposed bark mulch and gravel borrow trail section will be
equivalent or better at retaining moisture compared to the native materials. Additionally, the trail is being
designed to match the existing grades to the greatest extent possible, matching the existing drainage
patterns.
DA VID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC .
April 2012
10
P ;~ENTOOOOOO I '\0600 I N FQ\S lorm w.ter\20 1 2 -4 ·1 6 TI R.doc
May Creek Trail
Technical Information Report
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SECTIONS
CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
Not applicable.
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
April 2012
II
P:\r\RENTOQOOOOI.5\06OOINF0'5tormwater\2012-4-16 TIR.doc
May Creek Trail
Technical Information Report
SEC'fION6
SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES
The following list identifies special studies that have already been completed or may be required:
o Critical Areas Report, May Creek Trail, David Evans and Associates, Inc. (February 2012)
o Biological Assessment, David Evans and Associates, Inc. (February 2012)
DA VID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
April 2012
12
P:\r\RENTOOOOOOI5\0600lNFO\Stormwaler\2012-4-16 TlR.doc
May Creek Trai 1
Technicallnfonnation Report
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SECTION 7
OTHER PERMITS
Permits required for this project include:
o City of Renton -Grading Permit, Critical Areas Review
o Other permits may be necessary
DA VID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
April 2012
13
P:Irl.RENTOOOOOO15\0600INFO\Stonnwate,\2012-4-16 TIR.doc
May Creek Trail
Technical Infonnation Report
SECTD:ON8
CSWPPP ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
The following minimum requirements for erosion and sediment control will be implemented during the
design and construction of this project as shown on the TESC Plan and described herein.
I. Clearing Limits. The trail improvements and invasive vegetation removal will require disturbing the
existing native duff layer. Existing native vegetation (trees, bushes, shrubs, grasses) shall be
preserved when removal is not necessary for construction. The Contractor will be required to survey
and install high visibility fence on the construction limits, as shown in the Improvement Plans
(Appendix A), before any construction can begin. The high visibility fence will be checked daily and
repaired immediately if disturbed.
2. Cover Measures. All exposed and unworked soils shall be stabilized with appropriate Best
Management Practices (BMPs) according to the following criteria:
o From October I to April 30. No exposed and unworked soils shall remain unstabilized
(exposed) for more than two days.
o From May I to September 30. No exposed and unworked soils shall remain unstabilized
(exposed) for more than seven days.
Appropriate BMPs for cover measures identified on the Improvement Plans include mulching, clear
plastic covering, and permanent seeding and planting.
3. Perimeter Protection. The property generally slopes south into May Creek. The north, west, and east
property limits do not require perimeter protection. May Creek will receive perimeter protection
consisting of a compost sock installed on the edge of the creek. A compost sock was chosen because
it does not require a trench to be cut adjacent to a sensitive area, and provides similar perimeter
protection compared to silt fence. In some areas where trail construction and invasive removal is
buffered by undisturbed native vegetation, no perimeter protection is required. The native vegetation
and flat on-site slopes will provide adequate perimeter protection.
4. Traffic Area Stabilization. The Contractor staging area delineated in the Improvement Plans is on
adjacent property that is stabilized with gravel or asphalt. All construction vehicles will access the site
through this stable area without driving onto exposed soils. If sediment is transported onto a road
surface, the road shall be cleaned thoroughly at the end of each day. Sediment shall be removed from
roads by shoveling or sweeping, and be transported to a controlled sediment disposal area. Street
washing will be allowed only after sediment is removed in this manner. Catch basin inserts will be
installed in catch basins within 100 feet of the construction entrances.
5. Sediment Retention. During construction, stormwater runoff will filter through undisturbed native
vegetation andlor a compost sock prior to entering May Creek.
6. Surface Water Collection. No conveyance system is proposed for the project. Concentration of
surface water will be avoided to the greatest extent possible. If surface water collection is
encountered, it will be dispersed into undisturbed vegetation and allowed to infiltrate into the duff
layer.
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
April 2012
14
P:\z\RENTOOOOOOI5\0600INFOlStormwater\2012-4·16 TIR.doc
May Creek Trail
Technical Information Report
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
7. Dewatering Control: No dewatering is anticipated for this project. If water is encountered during
construction, it will be dispersed on the northern end of the property in undisturbed vegetation.
8. Dust Control: Preventative measures to minimize wind transport of soil shall be implemented when a
traffic hazard may be created, or when sediment transported by wind is likely to be deposited in water
resources.
9. Flow Control: No flow control measures are proposed. Rainfall will be allowed to disperse through
vegetated areas with an undisturbed duff layer.
10. Removal of Temporary BMPs. All TESC BMPs shan be removed within 30 days after final site
stabilization is achieved, or when the Engineer determines that the temporary BMPs are no longer
. needed. The Contractor shall remove the item, then clean, restore, and permanently stabilize the
surrounding area to the Engineer's satisfaction. Trapped sediment shall be removed or stabilized on
site.
II. Maintenance. All temporary and permanent erosion control BMPs shall be maintained and repaired
as needed to assure continued performance of their intended function. BMPs shall be inspected daily.
Weekly inspections shall take place at the end of the week to verilY installed BMPs are functioning
effectively and any needed repairs shail be completed before the job is shut down for the weekend.
DA VID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
April 2012
15
P :\r\RENTOOOOOO lS\06001NFOlStonnwaler\20 12-4~ 16_ T1R.doc
May Creek Trai I
Technical Information Report
SECTION 9
BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES,
AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT
Not applicable.
DA VlD EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
April 2012
16
P:\r\RENTOOOOOOIS\06001NFO\Stonnwaterl2012-4·16 TIR.doc
May Creek Trail
Technical Information Report
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SECTION 10
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL
Not applicable.
No stormwater facilities are proposed. Maintenance and operation standards are included on the
mitigation plans for the landscaping during construction and the plant establishment period. After
construction, the trail and plants will be maintained by the Contractor for one year. Thereafter, the City of
Renton Parks Division will assume all maintenance responsibilities.
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
April 2012
17
P:\r\RENTOOOOOO15\0600INFO\Stormwater\2012-4-16 TIR.doc
May Creek Trail
Technical Infonnation Report
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX A
Improvement Plans
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
April 2012
P:\r\RENTOOOOOO15\0600INFO\Stonnwau:r\2012-4-16 TIR.doc
May Creek Trail
Technical Infonnation Report
I
I !!
Ii
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I,
I!
I i
~ • o o
~
Ii
J It
~
?-
~ Ii
z
I~
E
It •
'11
~
I ~RI
$-o
I~
"---------------------"'-",-
PORTION OF GOVT LOT 1, SECTION 32, T 24 N, R 5 E, WM
MAY CREEK TRAIL PROJECT
FOR
CiTY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
"'-",-
40'.375' TEIoION~"(NT ", L CONSTRVcn "-
JON ___ \
"'-",-OlY !!.~"" ",,,""'TS ____ -\
-----~ ,<--FlOOO H 0,,,".... '\ __ __
/' ~ki;:-=----\ ' , /' "<~, "'-",-, ~ '-, \ ""
~.~. /
~ AI.,." CJrh.:. <::::1 ...... ~_ '\
@
= "'.. '" SCAlE: 1" = 40'
NOTES
-PARCEL SlZ(: .109 ACRES (134,531 sr)
-WORK AREA: 1.50 ACRES (65,352 Sf)
-ORGANIC IoIATERlAL TO B£ REMOVED FROM SITE &: OISPOSEO IN AN
APPROVED LANOflU. FOR TRAn.. CONSTRUCnC»l IS 250 CUBIC YAROS
(372 TONS). QUANTITY TO BE VERIFIED BY CONTRACTOR.
-GRA VEL ~ROW TO BE "'PORTED FROU APPROVED BORROW F ACIUTY FOR
TRAIL CONSTRUCTION IS 230 CUBIC YAROS (J70 TONS).
-FINE BARK MULCH TO BE lloIpolntD FROM APPROVED BORROW FACILITY FOR
TRAIl CONSTRUCTION IS 92 CUBIC YAROS (138 TONS).
LEGEND
0
* @
®
1322~O
-----
----
-------
OEOOUOUS TRff
CONIFEROUS TREE
ST()RI,I DRAIN MANHOLE
SANITARY IoIANHOLE
TAX LOT / PARCEL NUIoIBER
ROAD CENTERlINE
EDGE Of PAVEMENT
EASEIoIENT UNE
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
EXlSTING RIGHT-Of-WAY LINE
CREEK C(N TERUNE
ORDINARY HIQi WATER MARK (OHW)
• - - --- - - - -• WETlAND BOUNDARY UNE
------WETlANO BUFFER LINE
--,--,--FENCE LINE (TYPE AS NOTED)
VEGETATION IoIANAGEIoIENT BUFFER UNE
- - -FLOOO HAZARD AREA LIIoIITS UNE
BID ALTERNATE " (SEE IoCITIGATIQN PLANS)
\ 200' ,"<>lEi INE ONE ' '\ "'-'-.(';"'A""EN1 Z '\ '\
"'"-----\
'.
"
'--:-0-
LOT A "-
1)4,5J1 V (CROSS) "\.
100% SUBMITTAL
'\
'\
\
\\ -----\
\
\
"
,
'j;
L
,/
~
j"
• ~
~
VICINITY MAP
SCAlE: '"=1500'
SHEET INDEX
C1 COVER SHEET & SITE PlAN
C2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
C3 TESC PLAN
C4 TESC DETAILS
C5 TESC & STANDARD DETAILS
C6 TESCNOTES
C7 TRAIL ALIGNMENT HORIZONTAL CONTROL PLAN
CB TRAIL ALIGNMENT GRADING PLAN
C9 TRAIL ALIGNMENT PROFILES
M1 MITIGATION IMPACT SUMMARY PLAN
M2 MITIGATION IRRIGATION PLAN
M3 MITIGATION IRRIGATION NOTES AND DETAILS
M4 MITIGATION PLANTING PLAN
M5 MITIGATION DETAILS AND SPECIFICATIONS
M6 MITIGATION SPECIFICATIONS AND MONITORING
M7 SITE FURNISHING DETAILS
MB TREE INVENTORY PLAN
DEVELOPMENT DATA:
OIWER/APPlICANT; CITY OF RENTON
1055 S GRADY WAY
RENTON, WASHINGTON 98057
(425) 4JO-6571
ATTENTION: TOOD BLACK, A..S.LA.
EHGlNEER/SUR'IEYOR: DAII10 EVANS ond ASSOCIATES, INC.
"15 118n; AVENUE SE
SITE ADDRESS
BELlE 'AlE, WASHINGTON 98005
(425) 519-6500
ATTENTION: DOUG veGT, P.L5.
4260 LAKE WAHINGTON BLVD N
RENTON, WASHINGTON 96056
TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER
322.05-9109
DATUM
VERTICAL OArot.l; NAVU-B8 (NC"'" 29 = NAW-88 UINUS J.6')
@
i
Z
<i...J ZZ
...J-° <[1.« Of-,~g: !z~ ~en~ WI to<5WO::C:::~ \f-W°u.:s: ~ w c::: U-~!i!U Oz
" en i:: ° )0::>-~ '::':W<c -w
'>:2 Uo::
1* 8
,.,1
! :' .
-:t_
o ~ ! ~
'IlIII ~
w~
ZUJ w8 «I-.~
>« ~§ UJ-<" ~ c U ~~ _c ~~ " ~: ~ !!: :~ c« "'i • z m
"~I •
1-
~j
~~R-EV~I-SI-O-N-S'---AP-P"O.
----
1,1----
;1----
DATE: APRIL 2012
DESIGN: BRC
DRAWN: CLK
:->1 CHECKED:
-1:
REVISION
NUMBER:
SCALE: 1" .. 40'
PROJECT NUMBER:
RENTOOOO-O015
DRAlrING f1LE:
edUOOIR(NTOOOOOOI5
SHEET NO.
C1
OF 17
VM 'A..LNnOO ONI)I 'NOlN31::1:::f0 JJ.IO
NOlN31::1 :::f0 AlIO
1::IO:::f
1M:I.L )1331::10 A vn
A3AI::Ins OIHd'tI::IOOcIOl
~
~ ~ " ~ ~ ~ ~ " ~ ~ " ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
L ~ ~ ~ ~
--
b ~ . ~ -;,
· , · " S s Ii H ~ ~ i ~ U U n n 8 8
! ~ • • • • •• • • • • • • • • § € ~ ~ § § § 2 § § § 2 § 2
~ ~ ~ ~
_ II
~ ~
I ~ I ~
•• • • § § § §
!::! 'e ~ ~
b b ~ ~
n n
• • . " § § § §
~ !
I
~
I
I
~ I I I I I I
'ONI sa.LYI!)OSSYQNY
SN'lfl\a OII\'lfO I
~
~
i
~----
9;0 @ ~
::i " ~ ~ ~-;::::-=~
~.~ •
~ " ~ ~ • ~ • • • ~ ~ " ~ • • ~ • • • • • " • ;, • • • • I • • • •
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ iii ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ iii ~ ~ ~ ~
! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; ~ ~ ¥ ~ ~ ~ i
. ~ ~ " " . . . . . . ~ ~ . " . . . . . . " " " . ~ " " " ~ . ~ ;, . . . , , . .
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ .~ ~ i ~ ~ j iii ~ ~ i ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ • " I ~ • • • • I I I I ~ , • • • ~ • I • ~ • • • • • • ;, ~ • • • • • ~ ~ • • • •
~ ~ ~ ~ I I I I ~ I I I I I I I ~ ~ ~ I I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I I I ~ I I ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~
! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ i ~ ~ i i ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i£ ! " " ~ !:! ~ ~ l.! '!:! '!:! :.: ~ '!:! '!:! :: ~ :.: ;, ~ ~ ;, , I " " ~
, -;, ~ " ~ " . b ~ ~ " ~ ~ " , , ."
" b ! \0 ~ \00 ; ! b ~ J.. 'io " " , " .. ~ ~ " ;, ~ ~ " " " b ~ ~
n u d n n u I ~ d I ~ n n I ~ n u u n n n d n ~ ~ n ~
•• H n H ~ :: n H n ~ ~ i i H H H H H H ~ ~ n i ~ , . . ~ U ~ § § ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
t • ¥ EM iMWMlfjiW tew -------------------
I
I
~,: I I"
I
I
I II /
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/ ..,
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
III //,/
/ / I" / / /
/ I " /
I
~ • ~ Ii
0
0
0 r
It,
:> u • I] ~
" " 0 Ie; ~
0
(j t~ g
I ~I~
0
0
0
0
Ilr'l /'
I :
0
~
0
I ~~
.q-I;
o " I ~ u
LEGEND
o
"*
@
®
(J22~ll
@
= ----. o 20 4() 80
DECIDUOUS TREE
CONifEROUS TREE
STORN DRAIN MANHOLE
SANITARY MANHOLE
TAX LOT I PARCEL NUIoIBER
ROAD CENTERLINE
EDGE or PAVEMENT
------EASEIoIENT LINE
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
------EXISTING RIGHT-Of-WAY LINE
-• --CREEK CENTERLINE
ORDINARY HIGH WATER WARt< (OHW)
- - - - - - - - --Y£1lAND BOUNDARY LINE
------WETLAND BUfFER LINE
--.--.--fENCE liNE (TYPE AS NOTED)
VEGETATION MANAGEt.tENl BUffER LINE
flOOO HAZARD AREA LIMITS UNE
BID ALTERNATE '1 (SEE t.lITlGATION PlANS)
PORTION OF GOV'T LOT 1, SECTION 32, T 24 N, R 5 E, WM
....... ", """;1 .... , .... ", "'''' ~ 1fCDICA.1tD \lEC[TATO til nn _A TO w.tERt NJlCAIED
(LMT'S Of '«l1lI:) rr BE IDICMll BY K.VCI (SEE LNIDSCAf'£ PlNI) .,...", """ f ~O' CCM'OST SOCK
1tP or a...NM U ata.Kl Sl,WA(( - - --=====-_ _ [EX CRO.II) 9If6Ai:l '\
I'RCPOSEDlRAl.IA2 -_ ..... ___ _
, .. ~ ..-----
, MAY CREEK
~--
LMIl'S or 1IitR(
!l.0'1 1.11' f ~a'
"--=-==-
PRtPOSED m .... , II; 3
DETAIL -HIGH VISIBILITY FENCE LOCATION
~.""""",
IoIM/ACEIItNT l(H;
100% SUBMITTAL
NOT Ta __ _
QQ;>"1tl
6..!SE p~~
~.((),
T.E.S.C. CONSTRUCTION NOTES
(2) o
<D
o
<D
o
o
SEE LANDSCAPE PlAN FOR W(R( IN THIS AREA.
TrMPCRARY CCJGTRUCTlON EASEMENT AREA TO BE [NQ.05[O
WITH TUIPORARY 6' CONSTRUcn(J.I FENCE.
CONTRACTOR SHALL REWOVE pamCtt CI" EX 4' OtAIN UNK
RNCE FOR ACCESS yo STAGNG AREA at REPlACE 'MiEN SIT[
'fICRK IS CCliPLETE.
CONTRACTOR SHALL CRE" TE &: 9JBMIT TRAffiC CONTRa. PLAN
fOR lAl([ WASHINGTON BLW NORTH TO OTY FOR APPROVAL.
CONTRACTOR TO PRO\1OE INlET PROTECTION (IP) ON AU. STem.
DRAINAGE MAHHQ.ES " CATOt BASINS IN STREET 4: ON
ADJACENT PROPERTY YIIIlHlN 200 rT Cf" CONSTRUCTION AREA.
AREA [NClOSED BY HIQI YlSiBIUTY fENCE TO REMAIN
UNDISTURBED UNlESS BID ALTERNATE " IS ACCEPTrO.
AREAS OUTSIDE HIGi \1S1B1UTY FINe( TO RENAIN UNOISTURSED
'MTH lliE EXCEPTION (F AREA ENCLOSED BY TRAIL I a: 2 AS
BID ALTERNATE fl. SEE NOTE 6.
STANDARD PRACTICE CODING SYSTEM:
!;QIlE IlME>
@ C()ISTRUCTI(fl ENTRANCE
(OrY Cf" R[NTON SID PLAN 215.10)
@ BIODEGRADABLE COMPOST SOCK
(WSOOT SID PLAN 1-30.40-00)
@ DUST CONTRCl.
(DOE C140)
0) FILTER fAeRIC SiLT FENCE
(OTY (F RENTON SID PlAN 214.00)
e HlCH VISIBILITY FENCE
(OIY OF RENTON SID PLAN 212.00)
0 INLET PROTECTION
(WSOOT SID PLAN 1-40.20-00)
e MUlCH AND/OR ..... TTING
(DOC e121)
e PLASTlC COVERING
(orY a: RENTON sm PlAN 21J.3O)
@ PERMANENT SEEOIHG AND PLANTING
(SEE lANDSCAPE PLAN)
@ PR£SER~NG NATURAL VEGETATION
(~Cl0l)
EROSION CONTROL MONITORING PLAN
\ '" "" ......... ,
L OBSERVE EROSION CONTRa. "'EASlJRES AT THE BEGINNING AND
END a: EAOi DAY. REPAIR AND eA REPLACE AS NECESSARY TO
ASSURE PROP£R FUNCTION.
2. OBSERVE CQl...ECTION fAOUTIES OURlHG PERlOOS a: HEAVY
RAINfALL AND WET WEATHER CONDITIONS.
3. OBSERVE AND .... CNlTOR STABILIZATION TECHNIOOE5. MAKE
REPAIRS ANO/eA AlTERATIONS AS NECESSARY TO PREVENT
EROSION.
4. COt.IPlY WITH ALL WA STA1£ DEPARTMENT OF EC<l.OGY AND OrY
OF RENTON REQU1REMENTS FOR DISCHARGE CF STQRMWA1£R.
,I -I
« ZZ
'~ Z g:
0° 1-0
;« ZZ
..J::'::: -
a.W OCWI OWoo::~
,I ffl 0:: LL Ii. $:
t--O 02'
>->-0
« I-t--_z
:2: OW OC
',1
'~I
ci m ! ~
,1 111111 W';'O ZIII Woo
.00 ~~ ,mo i"''';
111-~EU1
cO 6 2'::G ",:2~ _0 _ .... _ ..
.~ >111 ~~~ 0(111
Co( ~ 0
Z m
<
• ['l-:j REV1SIONS: APPD.
DATE: APRil, 2012
DESIGN: BRD
DRAWN: CLK
CHECKED:
REVISION
NUWBER:
SCALE: ,. -40'
PROJECT NUWBER:
RENTOOOO-0015
DRAWING FILE:
edMOO3RENTOOOOOOI5
SHEET NO.
C3
OF17
~
$:
UJ
LO
0::
Z
'<t
N
l-
N
(")
Z o
I-o
UJ
rJ)
I-o
..J
I-
~
(9
u. o
z o
~ o
0..
N01ElNIHS\fM 'N01N3~
N01N3~ :lO All8
~O,j
llV~l >i33~8 AWII
Sll\f130 8S31
-_ .... -
ClOS9·6~9·9C:v :auo4d
9 L 91:-90096 UOj5U!I.lS9M 901\91198
3S anual\'V 419LL -!Hv
'ONI S3.LYIOOSSYQN¥
SN..,l\a 011\..,0
I
~ ..
~ I I I I I I .. "' = ~ ~ 0
.0
~O ~ z g z to
: a ~ ~ g: 0::
6MP'~ IOOOOOOlN3~vOOjl'jpe\~ea4S\<JMO\03\aVJOOvo\g L0000001N3~\J\:d -WOvD:6 (; LI L VtO >tP -------------------
-------------------------------------I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I ['i'"[
;J
I
~ • Ii
0
0
0
~
Ii 0
~
" 0
II
;' .tl
" ~
Ii
-< u
0
I~
0
r.~[
0
0
0
I 0
0
~ z w
'" ;' >
I ~
E
0 m
0
I Oi
N
'-~
'-~
0
I ~
"
..,..
..,. ...... _v'"-vtJIT.,--
." __ ""00-''''.''''
_cmllOol:lJ1'»IIoo\!CS
...... 0.-.. ... _'
~
.,..,-."'"
_n .......... l\IOo'CIn;I""'lEDQI!i
"''''O' ...... .,..,.IUATDIO''' ....
1Xlf'>I.....:noH_TQ~_
_Of"lK_Y
tTlS~THoI.l_
DIlIIIUICIi!': e><;MltCllIO_' -----
1'MOWIl ........ ""O.HOI' --1. CONDfTJOIIIOf"USE
1. T. COHSTR.ICT'ICW EKTRMCE StW.L fIE STA8I.IZED M£RE\IER TRAfl'IC WIll. IE lEAVING" COHSl'aJCTION SITE IHO TRAVElING OH
PAVED R<l'D$ OR CJn1ER PAVEO ~ WI1l1IN 1 JIIXI fttT a: THE SITE
•
• .SI.vGUID~sl!n
2.1. HOG RJEl foN'OOO&ASED uutCH) ..... Y fIE SUlS1TlUreO FORORCOUBlNEOWIlHQUARRYSI'AU.51N ARES TtlAT"IVILL BOTE.: USED
FOR f'ERIoW,lEHT FiOAOS. HOG FUEl IS NOT RECOMMEIClED FOR ENTRANCE STNlIUZATION IN URIIAN AREAS-. THE INSPECTOR ~y
AT /Io.1«TlMEREQl.lRE THE USE OF QUARRY &PALlS F THE HOG FUEl.ISNOT ~ SEOIM9ITFROU BEING TRACKED ONTO
PAVEMENT OR F THE HOG FlJEL IS BElNQ CARRIED ONTO PAVDEHT.
2.2. FEHCING SKALl. BE INST.\U.ED ot.S NECESSAR'f TO RESTRICT TAAI'flC TO THE CONSTRu::noN ENTRANCE.
2.~. WI-EtoEVER POS$I8.t.E. THE EWTRA'tCE SHAlL BE CONSTRUCTED ON A FIRM. CCM'ACTED 8l.8GfWlE. THIS CAN SUBSTAHTWl. Y
INCRE/Io.SE THE EFFECTlVENESS OF Tt£ PAD AND REOUCe Tl£ NEED ~ ~
t. IWIITEJU,JoICE STA.Nt1AJtD3
3.1, OUARR'I' SPALLS SHALL BE /Io..DDE'OIF hE PAOIS NO LONGER .... ACCORDo\NCE WITH THE sPECIFl:ATlON$.
U F THE E'flRANCE IS NOT PREVENTlHO SEOOoENT IEING TRACKEO ONTO PA'v9.IEI(f. THEN AI.. TERNA.T1YE UEMURES TO K1'EP 11-£
STREETS FfU:E OIFSEOIWENTSHAU BEUSEC, TInS ..... y INCUJI)E STREET SWEEPHG. NIINCREA.SE IN ntE CIUEHSIOHSOf' 7HE
ENTRAN::E. OR THE INSTALLATION Of' THE WHEEL .... ASH. IF WASHING 15 USED. IT $tW..l BE tONE ON M AREA COVEREO WTTH
CFUSHED ROCI(. MID WASHED WATER SHALL DR.AlN TO A SSlIMEHT TRAP OR P()N)
3.3 AH1 SE1JIME).T THAT IS TRACl(£OOHTOPAVEr.EN1' QW.L BE Rf'.1oCIYEO OAIEDlATnV IIVSWEEJ'ING. TMESEDIUENT COIJ.EI:Tm BY
SWEEPING SHAlL fiE REMOVED OR STABllaEO ON SlTE. 1lE PAVEMEN! $tW.L NOT BE CLE.oNEO BY WA$HIIIlG DOWN THE STRffT.
EXCEPTWl£N ~ IS Nl'F£CTNE IIKJTHERE IS A THREAT TOPU3UC SAFETY. IF ITNECESSA.RY TOWA$I-j THESTREETS ....
SlMU.!AAF YJST BE OONCUCTEO. TlE SEODoIENT'M)'AO THEN8EW4SlEDIHfOTHE SlAPwt£RE1T CAN BE CONTROLUDAND
DISCKARGEO~TELY. 3.... N« OUARFIYSPAU.S THAT ARE LOOSENEO FRCJ.Il'HE PADANO EHDOP ()fj THE ROADWAYIIHAlLBE R91Q','EODAEQATELY.
3~ IF VEHICUS Qa;: E\ffERING OR EXmNG TtE SfIUlAT POINTS OTt£R THAN THE 00NSTlU:TI0N EHTRANCE(S). FEHCING $tW.lBE
!NSf AILED TO ca.-tROt. TRAFFIC
e pueuc \fORKS
DEPAR'fNEt-"T
STABILIZED
CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
STD. PUN -2115.10
~RCH 2006
PORTION OF GOVT LOT 1, SECTION 32, T 24 N, R 5 E, WM
1/2"):4" (XPN.lSlON l.t ... rrRI .....
II'''? ... r JC!lH$ :\
1/2·~4· £XI>~SIGN v"'r£I!lAl-• ~ " """ '\'" ""C. "'" ... "" ,,"
SCCfIE LJ>;ES TO Sf: lIoW1"l ~. ffi TO CURB ",,"0 GtJn!1I \.-.' •• .' . :;;::';,'~~'" " .. ,,"" 1 """ u~,
f--
·.,....-'IIIDTH OF $lD[w4K I ..
t::=
1/l"X:;" (l!P.o.NSION
VA1UlIAL CIfllB /iETuRN
ON~T
°H . U-I~
,/::.~ l/'1."R
;;
l/'"/H SUlPr \~.""
f 1 ;""·<_·,·,·""'''"'·-;= ...... 5 POl: FLMS ,"
LSTAhDAAD e:c"'. Col'iC.
CURB ANO GUTTV<
SECTION A A
" I 2"11
pl>R"'''l<yj L~O"ffO CEI.!.
CQP.Ic. CURB ... HD
""roo
S~CTlQN 8-8
SEE 9IEET 2.!>.1 'OR !lOAD ....... ! ocvo.C"'''DlT STAAQAIIDS
G£NER)L:NOlTIic
..... "'" 1l,MU" D><-s .......... O\.JICQ ""lIIt>CtW \~. ~oQI~ _'O"t/t--IIC<!>WI,.
IOQT 8£ US! _ ]"'0· .. _ss _ ~ ~ utt!Clm l' W.J)IO T>lr cu'1'f.R L.IOI!. 'Il'
....... .oN", lO<'U lIE ......em ., "'-'-D;Ul ", ... r~ AS IJO'fCllIl ,. Eh<:H:1_ ""'0 »''''-'-£nO<!> "
1D.'*~tt
OOGC "'" -=~ oS 10 lIE oven: _5' f>€ co. ...... ..,nat. I><l n-o',......... II: ~ CCUI _'. 'm~' h~_ 104-....!>1'''-'-lit OUC" _ Pc.,. Ttl 0,',,. ~T .......... "" ........
'n"~" , ... _ "4~ ......... IE .-.....cu ., VoID" ._ .... SlDh"", ~4\fL
~~T_""'~ ......... ~TtI"'-~"'f1'~.(!/.;_ ..
t><1Ii~".
"'" CO'ICIOC" ,. .......... " • ___ .'" AU CIIII'5 ......... ~ 1/2' TOOUD fNSI<.
....,. .... ecr.o>t.t:_9<AU.IIE_lloOIXIOI'!£D""OC1:)It)
'(j,i..T[ REVISION
e TYPICAL SIDE;W'ALK
"""PrED
arr 0' IIQI1'!I1I
~-~ I.5f DAlY 0904
owe. NAA![; FOC7 SP PAGE; r007
100% SUBMITTAL
'<I
)al
en
:!..J «-t;j~
~I-
ZZ
0 0
1-0
a::~ « LlJ a:: o LlJ 0 ~ 0::: u.
ti° "">-0«
ZZ
LlJI o:::~
ll.;;: o z
8 ~
~:2: ° f-
• z ~ ~~ ~~8 ~~ !!~:g >c [iQ>~
111-~§'"
cO ~~~
>-2;:: ~ CD _ .3:0::
O(CIJ~CI,g
ell( .... ~a.
/!I 'iii z • c
•
Z w a::
REVISIONS: APPD.
DATE: APRIL. 2012
DESIGN: BRO
DRAWN: CLK
CHECKED:
REVISION
NUMBER:
SCALE:NOH[
PROJECT NUMBER:
RENTOOOO-0015
DRAWING FlU::
edIolOO5RENTOOOOOO15
1:-:' SHEET NO.
C5
0.17
I ,~ .,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I .fl
~I
I
~ [,<,I 1;\
o [ ..
o
"' Ii o
" u
" If' -G [/.,
I ~
~
S' u
I ~ ;>
"' §
o o II
/-
I~
~
"' I ~ i·:1 ~ ~I
:;:-.¥
o
STORM WATER POI! [mON PREVENTION PLAN (SWPppl:
THIS STORWWATER POLlUTION PRE\lENTIQN PLAN IS PROVIDED IN ACCORDANce:
WITH THE TERMS or THE NATIONAL POLLUIANT DISCHARGE ELlt.llNATION SYSTEM
(NPOES) PERMIT fOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES fOR THIS PROJECT. THE
CONTRACTOR IS ADVISED THAT THE PRo.£CT AREA DRAINS TO WETLANDS
AND/OR srATE WATERS AND THAT THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSlBt£ TO
PROTECT THE RECEIVING WATERS FROM DELETERIOUS [FrEeTS OF
CONSTRUCTION.
THE CONTRACTOR IS REOUIRED TO HAVE A copy Of Tl-IE NPOES PERMIT AS
WELL AS THE SWPPP ON SHE AT ALL TIME$.
THE CONlRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE fOR PROVIDING THE EROSION CONTROL
WEASURES SHO'NN OR DESCRIBED IN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS A.ND ANT
ADDITIONAl MEASURES THAT MAY B'E REOUIRED BY 1liE CC»ITFlACTORS WEANS
ANO IoIETHOOS OF CONSTRUCTION AS NEEDED TO CONTROl EROSION AND
SEOII.I[N1 AT THE CONSTRUCTION SITE ...,.0 TO PREVENT VIOLATION OF SURfACE
WAlER OUAUTY. GROUND WATER OUAUTY. OR SEDIWENT I.IANAGEMENT
STANDARDS. EROSION CONTROl "("SURES SHAlL BE ... AlNTAlNEO THROOCHOUT
THE CO\JRSE OF CONSTRUCTION AND UNTIL All DISTURBED EARTH IS STABILIZED
IN FINISH GRADES.
THE FQUOWlNG DE$CRIB£S HOW THE CONSTRUCTION S'M"PP ADORESSES EACH or
THE 12 REOUIREO ELEMENTS, REFER TO THESE PLANS mR ORAWINGS OF THE
PROJECT, VICINITY "'AP. SlTE MAP, CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS, EROSON ANO
SEOI ... ENT CONTRCL MEASURES, ANO EROSON AND SEDI ... ENT CONTRCL DETAILS.
ElEMENT 11· PRESER'v'£ VfGfTATlONIMARK grARI!:jG liMITS
I. PRIOR TO BEGINNING lAND DISTURBING AcnVlTlrS (INCLUDING ClEARING AND
GRADING) CL£ARLY MARK ALL CLEARING UMITS ANO TREES THAT ARE TO BE
PRESERVEO WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION AREA AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS.
2. SILT FENCE, GEOTEXTllE ENCASED BARRIERS, CONSTRUCTION FENCE. ORANGE
PLASTIC FENCE, OR OTHER APPROVED MEASURES MAY BE USED TO MARK THE
CLEARING LI"'ITS AT THE CC»ITRACTOR·S OPTION.
3. THE OUFF LAYER, NATIVE TOPSOIL, AND NATURAl VEGETATION SHALL BE
RETAINED IN AN UNDISTURBED STATE TO THE MAXlMUM DEGREE PRACTICABLE.
SUGGESTED BMPs/BMPs TO BE USED:
CiTY Of RENTON 212.00; STAKE AND WIRE F'ENCE
EI fMENT 12-[STARI ISH CONSTRIIGJlON ACCfSs
I. CONSTRUCTION VEHICLE ACCESS AND EXll SHALL BE LIMiTED TO ONE
ROUTE, REFER TO SWP PLAN Of THESE PlANS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION
ENTRANCE lOCATION. AU ACa:SSj'EXlT POiNTS SHAll BE STABILIZED WITH
OUARRY SPAlLS, CRUSHED ROCK OR OTHER EQUIVALENT BMP, to MINIJ,jIZE THE
TRACKING OF SEDIMENT ONTO PUBLIC ROADS.
2. IF THE STABiliZED C!»ISTRUCTION ENTRANCE IS NOt EFFECTIVE IN
PREVENTING SEDIMENT fROM BEING TRACKED ONTO PUBLIC ROADS, WHEEL WASH
OR TIRE BATHS SHAll BE LOCATED ON SITE,
3. IF SEDIMENT IS lRACKED OFF $lIE. PUBLIC OR PRIVA1£ ROADS SHALL BE
CLEANED THOROOGHlY AT THE END Of EACH DAY, OR MORE FREQUENTLY
DURING WET WEATHER. SEOiIolENl SHAU BE REIoIDVEQ FRQI,j ROADS BY
SHOVELING OR PICKUP SWEEPING AND SHAll BE lRANSPQRTED TO A
CDNTROLLEO SEDIMENT DISPOSAl AREA.
4. STREET WASHING IS AllOWED ONLY AfTER SEDIMENT IS REMOVED AS
DESCRIBED ABOVE. SlREET WASH WASTEWATER SHAll BE CONTRCLLED BY
PUIoIPING BACK ON Sl1£ OR OTHERWISE BE PREVENTED FRQI,j DISCHARGING IN10
SYSTEIoIS lRlBUTARY TO WATERS OF lHE STATE.
SUGGESTED BIoIPs/BlolPs TO BE USED:
CITY Of RENTON 215.10; STABlUZEO CONSTRUCTION ENlRANCE
r, EMf NT '3· CONJRD! EIOW RATfS
I. PROPERTIES AND WATERWAYS OOWNSlREMI fRQI,j DEVElOPt.lENT SITES SHALL
BE PROTECTED FROM EROSION DUE TO INCREASES IN THE VELOCITY AND PEAK
VOLUMETRIC FLOW RATE Of' STORMWATER RUNorF FROM THE PROJECT SITE.
SUGGESTED BWPs/BIoIPs TO BE USED;
EI EJ,jENT 14· INSTAl I SEPIMENT CONlRO! S
I, THE DUFF LAYER, NATIVE SOIL AND NATURAL VEGETATION SHALl BE RETAINED
IN AN UNDISTURBED STATE TO THE MAlCIloIUt.I EXTENT PRACTICABLE.
2. SEDIMENT CONTROL BIoIPa SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AS ONE OF THE FlRST
STEPS IN GRADING. THESE BJ,jPs SHAll BE FUNCTIONAL BEFORE OTHER LAND
DISTURBING ACTIVITIES TAKE PlACE.
3. PRIOR TO lEAVING THE CONSTRUCTION SITE, STOR ... WATER RUNorF fROM
DISTURBED AREAS SHAiL PASS THROUGH AN APPROPRIATE 5£""IoI£NT REMOVAL
BMP. RUNOfF f"ROM FUU STABILIZED AREAS 101,0.'1' BE D1SCHARGED 'NITHOUT A
SEDIMENT REMOVAL BMP. BUT MUST IoIEET THE FLOW CONTROL PERFORMANCE
STANDARD OF ELEIoIENT IJ.
SUGGESTED BMPa/B .... Ps TO BE USED;
BWP Cl~ WATERIALS ON HAND
WSDOT 1-40.20-00: STORhI ORAIN INLET PROTECTla.!
CITY or RENTCI'oI 214.00 SIlT FENCE
~POST SOCK: WSOOT 1-30.40-00
n [MENT ffr STAR!! 'IT SOO S
I. EXPOSED AND UNWORKEO SOILS SHAll BE STA8lLIZEO BY APPUCATla.! or
EFFECTI'v£ BIoIPs THAT PROTECT THE SDll FORM EROSIVE FORCES or RAINDROPS.
FlO'NING WATER, AND WIND.
2, TO PREVENT EROSIOf( NO SOILS SHAll REIoIAlN EXPOSED AND UNWQRKED
FOR MORE THAN THE TIME PERiOOS SET FORTH BELOW:
DURING THE WET SEASON (OCTOBER 1 -APRIL 30); 2 DAYS
OIJRING lHE DRY SEASON (J,jAY I -SEPT. 30): 7 DAYS
tHIS STABILIZATION REOUIREIoIENT APPLIES TO All SOILS ON SITE, v.ti£THER AT
FlNAl CRADE OR NOT. THESE TIMES J,jAY 6E ADJJSTED BY lHE LOCAL
PERt.lITlING AUTHORITY IF IT CAN BE SHOWN THAT SITE CONDITIONS OR THE
AVERAGE TIME BETWEEN STORM EVENTS JJSTIFIES A DiffERENT STANOARO.
J. SOILS SHAll BE STABIUZED AT THE END OF THE SHIft BEFORE A HOLIDAY
OR 'llEEKEND IF NEEDED BASED ON THE WEATHER FORECAST.
4. SOIL STOCKPILES SHALL BE STABiliZED f"ROM EROSION, PROTECTED WITH
SEDI),IENT TRAPPING !l!EASURES, AND WHERE POSSIBLE, BE lDCATED AWAY
FRON STORW DRAIN INLETS, WATERWAys' AND DRAINAGE CHANNELS.
5. APPLICABLE BMP, INCLUDE. BUT ARE NOT UIolITED TO: TEMPORARY AND
PERMANENT SEEDING, SOODING. MULCHING, PlASTIC COVERING, EROSION CONTROL
FABRICS AND IoIATTlNG, SOil APPLICATION Of POLYACRYLA!I!IDE (PAM), lHE
EARLY APPLICATION Of' GRAVEL BASE ON AREAS TO BE PAVED AND DUST
CONTROL. SELECT sal STABIUZATION MEASURES SHAlL BE APPROPRIATE FOR
lHE TIME Of YEAR, SITE CONDITIONS, ESTIMATED DURATION or USE, AND THE
POTENTIAL WATER OUAllTY I"'PACTS.
6. REMOVE ALL TESC J,jEASURES AS SOON AS PRACTICAL Arlt:R
ESTABUSHIoIENT or UNtFORM GRASS GROwrti OR INSTALLATION OF OTHER
PERiolANENT STABtUZATlON !l!EASURES. REPAIR ANY DMIAGE TO STABIUZED
SURFACES AfTER REIolOVAl Of TESC MEASURES.
SUGGESTED BIoIPs/BVP' TO BE USED:
8MP C120; PERMANENT SEEDING 6; PlANTING
StolP C121: MULCHING
eMP C12J: PLASTIC COVERING
ElMP CI40: OUST CONtRCl.
StolP CI~ MATERIALS ON HAND
PORTION OF GOVT LOT 1, SECTION 32, T 24 N, R 5 E, WM
f! EMENT 16' pg01fCT S CPfS
1. DESIGN, CONSlRUCT. AND PHASE CUT AND Fill SlOPES IN A WANNER THAT
Will MINIIoIIz[ EROSION. APPUCABLE PRACTICES INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT Ut.llTEO
TO, REDUCING CONTINUOUS LENGTH Of Sl~ WITH TERRACING AND DIVERSlDNS,
REDUCING SlOPE STEEPNEss. AND ROUGHENING SlOPE SURl'ACES (e.g., lRACK
WALKING).
2. orF-STE STORIoIWATER RUN-ON OR GROUNDWATER SHALL BE DI'J[RTEO
AWAY f"ROW SLOPES AND DISTURBED AREAS WITH INTERCEPTOR DIKES, PIPES,
AND/OR SWALES.. OfT-SITE STOR"'WATER SHOULD BE t.lANAGEO SEPARATELY
FR()t,j STORt.lWATER GENERAlt:O ON THE SITE.
J. DO NOT CLEAR AND GRUB SLOPES GREATER THAN 4 (HORIZONTAl):1
(VERTICAl) UNLESS FURTHER WORK RESULTING IN STABILIZATION OF' THE SLOPES
TO BE Q.EAREO AND GRUBBED IS SCHEDULED.
4. EXCAVATED IoIATERIAl SHALl. BE PLACED ON THE uPHIU SlO£ OF' TRENCHES,
CONSSTENT WITH SAFETY AND SPACE CONSDERATIONS.
5. CHECK OMIS SHALL BE PLACED AT REGULAR INTERVAlS WITHIN
CONSTRUCTED QiANNELS THAI ARE CUT DOWN A SL~.
SUGGESTED BMP,/BMPs TO BE USED:
ElMP CI50: IoIATERiALS ON HAND
f! ELIENT fl' PROIfC! DRAIN IN! US
I. All STOR\I DRAIN INLETS OPERABLE DURING CONSTRUCTION AND All INLETS
WITHIN 200' DOWNSTRE ..... Of THE PROJECT SITE SHAll BE PROTECTED WITH
CATCH BASIN FilTERS SO THAT STORMWATER RUNOF'f DOES NOI EN1£R THE
CONVEYANCE SYSTEM WITHOUT FlRST B£ING filTERED ~ TREATED TO REIolOVE
SEDIMENT. CATCH BASIN FILTERS IN THE ROADWAY WILL BE OIljSt:DIMENT
FilTERS AND CATCH BASIN FilTERS OUTSDE Of THE ROADWAY 'NIlL BE
SEDIMENT filTERS,
2. APPROACH ROADS SHAll BE KEPT CLEAN. SEDIWENT AND STREET WASH
WATER SHAll NOT BE ALlOWED TO ENTER STORM DRAINS WITHOUT PRIOR AND
ADEQUATE TREATIoIENT.
3. INLET PROTECTION DEVICES SHOULD BE CLEANED OR REMOVED ANO
REPlAa:O 'MfEN SEDIMENT HAS FilLED ONE-THIRD (F THE AVAILABlE STORAGE
(OR 'M-IEN FillED WITH SIX-INCHES or SEOiMENT).
BMP, TO aE USEO;
ElMP C220: STQRt.I ORAIN INLET PROTECTION ('tI'SDOT SID PLAN 1-40.20-00)
EI EMENT ,a· STABiliZE CHANNEl S AND OUTlETS
1. ALL TEIoIPORARY ON-SITE CONVEYANCE CHANNELS SHAll BE DESIGNED.
CONSTRUCTED AND STABlLlZED TO PREVENT EROSION FROW THE EXPECTED PEAK
10 MINUTE VELOCITY OF FLOW fRQt.! A TYPE 1.4, 10-'TR. 24-HR FREQUENCY
STORM FOR THE DEVELOPED CONDITION. AlTERNATIVELY, THE 10-YR, I-HR FLOW
RA1£ INDICATED BY AN APPROVED CONTINUOUS RUNorF MOOEL, INCREASED BY A
FACTOR or 1.6, MAY BE Use:D.
2. STABILIZATION, INCLUDING ARIoIORING MATERiAl, ADEQUATE TO PREVENT
EROSION OF OUTLETS, ADJACENT STREAM BANKS, SLOP£S, AND DOWillSTREMI
REACHES SHAlL BE PROVIDED AT THE OUlLETS OF' ALL CONVEYANCE SYSTEWS.
SUGGESTED BMPs/Bt.lPs TO BE USED:
NOT APPliCABLE
EI ELIENT 19' CQNTRC) Pc) I !!TANTS
1. ALL POLLUTANTS, INCLUDING WASTE MATERiAlS AND DEMCLITION DEBRIS,
lHAl OCCUR ONSiTE SHAlL BE HANDLED AND DISPOSED Of IN A IoIANNER
THAT DOES NOT CAUSE CONTAMINATION or STORIoIWATER.
2. COVER, CONTAINMENT, AND PROTECTION FR()t,j VANDALISiol SHALL BE
PROVlOt:D fOR All CHEMICALS, LIQUID PRODUCTS, PETROLEUM PROOUCTS, AND
OTHER IoIATERIAlS THAT HAVE THE POTENTIAl TO POSE A THREAT TO HUWAN
HEALTH OR THE ENVIRONwENT, ON-STE FUEUNG TANKS SHAll INCLUDE
SECONDARY CONTAINMENT.
3. MAINTENANCE, FUELING, AND REPAIR or HEAVY EOUIPt.lENT AND VEHICLES
SHALL BE CONDUCTED USING SPill PREVENTION AND CONTROL t.lEASURES.
CONTAWINATEO SURFACES SHAiL BE CLEANED IMt.lEQlATElY FCLLOWING ANY SPill
INCIOENT.
4. WHEEL WASH OR TIRE BATH WASTEWATER SHAll B£ DISCHARGED TO A
SEPARATE ON-SITE lREATIoIENT SYSTEM OR TO 1I-IE SANITARy SEWER WITH
lOCAl SEWER QlSTRICT APPROVAL.
5. APPUCATION or FERTILIZERS AND PESTICIDES, SHAlL BE CONDUCTED IN A
MANNER AND AT APPUCATION RATES THAT WlU NOT RESULT IN LOSS OF
CHEMICAl TO STORIoIWATER RUNorF. MANUFACTURERS' lABEL REQUlREIlENlS
FOR APPLICATION RATES AND PROCEDURES SHALL BE FCLLOWEO.
6. BMPs SHAlL BE Use:D TO PREVENT OR TREAT CONTAMINATION OF
STORMWATER RUN(FF BY pH MOOIfYlNG SOURCES. THESE SOURCES INCl.UDE,
BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO: BULK CEIoIENT, CEMENT KIlN OUST, FLY ASH, NEW
CONCRETE WASHING AND CURING WATERS, WASTE STRE ..... S GENERATED fROM
CONCRETE GRINDING AND SAWING, EXPOSED AGCREGATE PROCESSES, AND
CONCRETE PUt.lPlNG AND t.lIXER WASHOUT WA 1£RS. PERMITTEES SHAlL AOJJST
lHE pH or STORMWATER IF NECESSARY TO PREVENT VlCLATlONS (F WATER
QUALITY STANDARDS.
7. PERMITTEES SHAlL OBTAIN WRITTEN APPROVAL FROt.l ECCLOGY PRIOR TO
USING CHOIICAL TREA"'ENT, OTHER THAN CARBON DIDXlOE OR DRY ICE TO
AlUJST pH.
SUGGESTED B"'Ps/Bt.lP. TO BE USED;
Bt.IP C151; CONCRETE HANOUNG
Bt.IP 052: SAWClJTTlNG AND SURf'AONG PQUUTlON PRE'ot:NTlON
BWP Cl~; IoIATERlAl DEUVERY, STORAGE '" CONTAINMENT
EI EWENT flO-CfJNTRC) DEWATERING
1. FOUNDATION, VAULT, AND TRENCH DE-WATERING WATER. WHICH HAVE SIMIlAR
CHARACTERISTICS TO STORMWATER RUNOfF Al THE SITE, SHAlL BE
DISCHARGED INTO A CONlROLlEO CONVEYANCE SYSTEM PRIOR TO DISCHARGE TO
A SEDIMENT TRAP OR SEDlt.lENT POND.
7. CLEAN, NON-TURBID DE-WATERING WATER, SUCH AS WELL-POINT GROUND
WATER, CAN BE DISCHARGED TO SYSTEt.lS TRIBUTARY TO, OR DIRECTLY INlO
SUR~ACE WATERS or THE STATE, AS SPEaFlEO IN ELEIoIENT 18. PROVIDED THE
DE-WATERING FLOW DOES NOT CAUse: EROSION OR FLOODING OF RECEMNG
WATERS. CLEAN DE-WATERING WATER SHOULD NOT BE ROUTED THROUGH
STORMWATER SEOlt.lENT PONDS.
3. OTHER DE-WATERING DISPOSAL OPTIONS MAY INCLUDE:
0) INfIl.TRATlON.
b) TRANSPORT Off SITE IN A VEHICLE, SUCH AS A VACUVIol FLUSH TRUCK.
FOR LEGAl OISPOSAL IN A IoIANNER THAT DOES NOT POLLUTE STATE
WATERS.
c) ECOLOGY APPROVED ON-SITE QiEWICAL TREATMENT OR OTHER SUIlABLE
TREA1t.4ENT TECHNOLOOES.
d) SANIlARy SEWER DISCHARGE WITH LOCAL SEWER OISTRICT APPROVAL, If
THERE IS NO OlHER OPTION.
.) USE or A SEOtt.IENTATlON BAG (OIRTBAG OR APPROVED EQUAl) WITH OUTfALl
TO A DITCH OR SWALE FOR SIoIAlL VOLUMES OF LOCALIZED DE-WATERING.
4. HIGHLY TURBID CON1AlolINATED DEWATERING WATER FROt.I CONSTRUCTION
EOtJIPt.!ENT OPERATION. CL ..... SHEU OIGG1NG, CONCRETE TREIoIIE POOR, OR WORK
INSIDE A CarfERO ..... SHAll BE HANDLED SEPARATELY fRON STORt.lWATER.
El EWENT 01· MAINTAIN RMp!!
1. INSPECT EROSION CONTROL DEVICES ON A WEEK!. 'I' BASIS AND AfTER EACH
RUNOfF EVENT. MAKE NECESSARY REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE TO ENSURE
CONTINUED PERFORMANCE OF EROSION AND SEDlIoIENT CONTROLS,
2, WHEN SEOiMENT ACCUwULATlON IN SEDIMENTATION STRUCTURES, OlHER lHAN
INLET PROTECTION DEVICES, HAS REACHED A POINT ONE-THIRD OEPlH or
SEDIMENT STRUCTURE OR DEVICE, OR IF flOW THROOCH THE DEVICE IS REDUCED
By MORE THAN ONE-THIRD CAPAaTY, THE CONTRACTOR SHAiL REMOVE AND
REPlAC£ DISPOSABLE DEVICES OR CLEAN AND DISPOSE OF SEOIWENT.
3. TEIoIPDRARY EROSION AND SEDIt.lENT CONTROL BIoIP. SHAiL BE REIoIOVED
WITHIN JO OAYS AFTER FINAl SITE STABILIZATION IS ACHIEVED OR AfTER THE
T(WPORARY BIoIPs ARE ND LONGER NEEDED. TRAPPED SEDIMENT SHALl BE
REMOVED OR ST A9LIZED ON SITE. DISTURSEO sot.s SHAL!. BE P[RMANENJlY
STABILIZED.
Et EMENT IlZ' MANAGf THE pRO,fCT
1. PHASiNG Of' CONSTRUCTION:
0) DE'vt:lOPt.lENT PROJECTS SHAll BE PHASED WI-IERE FEASIBLE IN ORDER TO
PREVENT. TO THE IoIAXlt.lUJ,j EXTENT PRACTICABLE, lHE TRANSPORT or
SEDIIotENT FRQt.! THE OEVElOPIoIENT STE DURING CONSTRUCTION. RE'vt:GETATlON
OF EXPOSED AREAS AND MAINTENANCE OF' 1I-IAT VEGETATION SHAlL BE AN
INTEGRAL PART or THE CLEARING ACTIVITIES fOR ANY PHASE.
b) ClEARING AND GRADING ACTIVITIES FOR OEVElOP!.IENTS SHALL BE PERt.lITTEO
ONLY If CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO AN APPROVEO SITE OEVELOPIoIENT PLAN
(e.g .. SlJBOIVlSON APPROVAL) THAT ESTABLISHES APPROVED AREAS or
CLEARING, GRADING, CUTTING AND FllLlNG. WHEN ESTABLISHING THESE
PERIoIITlED CLEARING AND GRADING AREAS, CONSIDERATION SHO\JlD BE GIVEN
TO IoIINIIoIIZlNG REt.lOVAl or EXlSTlNG TREES AND loIiNllotlZING OISTURBANCE AND
CQIoIPACTION or NATIVE sexlS EXCEPT AS NEEDED fOR BUILDING PURPOSEs.
THESE PERMITTED CLEARING AND GRADING AREAS AND ANY OTHER AREAS
REQUIRED TO PRESERVE CRITICAL OR SENSTIVE AREAS. BU~FERS, NATIVE
GROWTH PROTECTlCI'oI EASEMENTS, OR TREE RETENTION AREAS AS MAY BE
REQUIRED BY lOCAl .JJRISDICTIONS, SHAL!. BE DELINEATED ON THE SITE
PLANS AND THE DEVElOP!.IENT SITE.
2. SEASONAL WORK liIolITATIONS;
fROM OCTOBER 1 THROUGH APRIL 30. CLEARING. GRADING. AND OTHER SOIL
DiSTUR8ING ACTIVITIES SHALL ONLY BE PERMlmO IE SHOWIII TO THE
SATISFACTION Of THE LOCAL PERt.lITTlNG AUTHORITY THAT THE TRANSPORT OF
SEOlt.lENT FROt.l THE CONSTRUCTION SITE TO RECEIVING WATERS WILL BE
PRE'vt:NTED THROUGH A COIoIBINATlON Of' THE FOUOWlNG;
0) SITE CONDITIONS INCLUDING EXISTING VEGETATIVE COVERAGE, SLOPE, SO!L
TYPE, AND PROXIMITY TO RECEIVING WATERS: AND
b) LIMITATIONS ON ACTIVITIES AND THE EXTEND or DISTURBED AREAS; AND
c:) PROPOSED EROSION ANO SEOIWENT CONTRCL !.IEASUREs'
BASED ON THE INFORIoIATlON PROVIDED AND lOCAl WEATHER CONDITIONS, THE
PROJECT lEAD 1011.'1' EXPAND OR RESTRICT THE SEASONAL LIMITATION ON SITE
DISTURBANCE. lHE PROJECT LEAD SHAll TAKE ENFORCEMENT ACTION -SUCH
AS NOTICE or VIOLATION, AOIoIINISTRATlVE ORDER, PENAlTY, OR STOP-WQRI(
ORDER UNDER THE FOLLOWING CIRCUMSTANCES:
-IF, DURING THE COURSE Of ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTlVlTY OR SDll
DlSTURSANCE DURING THE SEASONAL LlIoIITATION PERIOD, SEOIJ,jENT lEAVES
THE CONSTRUCTION SITE CAUSING A VIOLATION Of THE SURfACE WATER
QUALITY STANDARD: OR
-IF CLEARING AND GRADING LlIoIITS OR EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS
Io'IEASURES SHOWN IN THE APPROVED PLAN ARE NOT IoIAINTAINEO.
THE fOLLOWiNG ACTIVITIES ARE EXEMPT FRQt.! THE SEASONAL CLEARING AND
GRADING Llt.lITATlONS:
c) ROUTINE IoIAlNTENANCE ANO NECESSARY REPAIR or EROSION AND SEOlt.lENT
CONTROL 8t.IP$;
b) RO\JTINE MAINTENANCE or PUBLIC FACILITIES OR ElaSTlNG UTlUTY
STRUCTURES THAT DO NOT EXPOSE lHE SOIL OR RESULT IN THE REMOVAL Of'
1I-IE VEGETATIVE COVER TO SOIL; AND
c) ACTIVITIES WHERE THERE IS ONE HUNDRED PERCENI INFILTRATION Of
SURf'ACE WATER RUNOff WITHIN THE SITE IN APPROVED AND INSTAllED
EROSION AND SEDlIo'IENT CONTROL FAOLITIES.
J. COORDINATE WITH UTIUnEs AND OTHER CONTRACTORS
THE PRIMARY PROJECT PROPONENT SHAL!. EVALUATE, WITH INPUi FRQI,j UTILITIES
AND OTHER CONTRACTORS, THE STORMWATER t.lANAGEMENT REQUIREt.lENTS FOR
THE ENTIRE PROJECT, INCLUDING THE UTILITIES, WHEN PREPARING THE
CONSTRUCTla.! SWPPP.
4. INSPECTION AND MONIlORING:
0) A CERTIfiED PROFESSIONAL IN EROSION ANO SEOiMENT CONTROL SHAll BE
IDENTIFIED AT THE PRE-CONSTRUCTION t.lEETlNG AND SHALL BE ON-SITE
OR ON-CAll ,0.1 AlL TIMES, EIoIERGENCY CONTACT INFORMATION SHAll BE
KEPT ON-SITE. CERTIFICATION WAY BE THROUGl THE CONSTRUCTION SITE
EROSON AND SEOIM£Nl CONTRCL CERTI,ICA TlON PROGRAM OFFERED By
WSDOT, ASSOCIATED GENERAl CONTRACTORS Of' WASHINGTON -EOUCATION
FOtJNDATlDN, OR ANY EOtJIVALENT LOCAL OR NATIONAl CERTIFICATION
AND/OR TRAINING PROGAAM.
b) IF INSPECTION AND/OR WATER MONITORING or SITE RUNorF REVEALS THAT
THE BMPs IDENliFlEO IN THE CONSTRUCTION Sv.f'PP ARE INADEQUATE, THE
CONTRACTOR SHALl. IMIoIEDIATElY ADO B"'Ps TO THE SWPPP AS
NECESSARY.
4. THE CONSTRUCTION SWPPP SHAll BE RETAINED ON-SITE. THE
CQNlRAC1OR'S TESC RECORD OF RAINFALL. TESC t.lEASURES, AND INSPECTION
SHAll BECOtoIE PART Of THE SWPPP. THE CONSTRUCTION SWPPP SHALL BE
1o'I00IFIED BY THE CONTRACTOR'S TESC RECORO WHENEVER THERE IS A
SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN THE OESGN, CONSTRUCTION, OPERATION, OR
IoIAlNTENANCE or ANY Bt.lP.
NPO£S PERMIT R[CUIREIoI'ENTS
SIIE 100 BOOK
A SITE lOG BOOK SHAll CONTAIN A RECORD or THE IIoIPlEMENTATlON or THE SWPPP
AND OTHER PERMIT REQUIREIolENTS INCLUDING THE INSTAlLATION AND MAINTENANCE or
8t.tP,., SITE INSPECTIONS AND STQRMWATER MONITORING.
SITE INspECTIONS
Sl1£ INSPECTIONS SHALL INCLUDE ALl AREAS DlSTURSED By CONSlRUCTlON ACTIVITIES,
ALL BMP,., AND All STORIoIWATER Dl5O-!ARGE patHS. STORMWATER SHALL BE
VISUAlLY EXAIoIINED fOR THE PRESENCE OF SUSPENDED SEDIMENT, TURBIDITY,
DISCOLORATION, AND Oil SHEEN. INSPECTORS SHAlL EVALUATE THE EFFtCTlVENESS
or BIoIPs AND DETERIoIINE IF IT IS NEC£SSARY 10 INSTALL, MAINTAIN, OR REPAIR BMPs
TO IMPROVE THE OOAUTY or STORMWATER DlSCI1ARGEs'
BASED ON THE RESULtS OF' THE INSPECTION, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CORRECT THE
PROBLEJ,jS IDENTIFIED AS FCLlOWS:
A.. WAKE APPROPRIAT( CORRECTION WITHIN 7 DAYS or TEH INSPECTION: AND
B. FULLY IMPLEIoIENT AND IoIAlNTAlN APPROf'fMTE SOURCE CONTRCL AND/OR
lREATMENT Bt.lPs AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, BUT NO lATER THAN 10 DAYS Of" TEH
INSPECTION: AND
C. DOCUMENT BMP IWPLEIoIENT A liON AND MAINTENANCE IN THE SITE lOG BOOK.
SITE INSPECTIONS SHALL SE CONDUCTED AT LEAST ONCE EVERY CALENDAR WEEK AND
WITHIN 24 HOURS OF ANY DISCHARGE FROIol THE SITE. THE INSPECTION FREQUENCY
FOR TEIoIPORARllY STABlU2ED, INACTIVE SITE IoIAY BE REDUCED TO ONCE EVERY
CALENDAR WONTH.
THE INSPECTOR SHALL SUt.llolARIZE THE RESULTS or EACH INSPECTlON IN AN
INSPECTION REPORT OR CHECKLIST AND BE ENTERED INTO, OR ATTACHED TO, THE SITE
LOG BOOK. AT A IoIINlloIUt.I, EACH INSPECTION REPORT OR CHECKLISI SHALL INCl.UO£;
O. INSPECTION DATE AND TIME,
b. WEATHER INFORt.lATION, GENERAL CONDITIONS DURING INSPECTION ANO
APPROXl!.lATE AMOUNT OF PREDPITATION SINCE THE lAST INSPECTION, AND WITHIN
THE LAST 24 HOURS.
c. A SUIolMARY OR UST OF All BWPs WI-lICH HAVE BEEN IMPlEMENTED, INo..UDlNG
OBSERVATIONS Of' All EROSION/SEDlIo'IENT CONTROL STRUCTURES OR PRACTICES.
d. THE FOLLOWING SHALL BE NOTED:
i. lOCATIONS or BMPs INSPECTED,
ii. LOCATIONS Of 8t.tPs THAT NEED t.lAlNTENANCE, m. THE REASON IoIAlNTENANCE IS NEEDED,
iv. lOCATIONS OF BMPs THAT FAILED TO OPERATE AS DESIGNED OR IN1£NOED, AND
v. lOCATIONS 'M-IERE ADDITIONAl OR DIFFERENT BIoIP, ARE NEEDED, AND THE
REASON(S) WHY.
e. A DESCRIPTION Of STORt.lWATER DISCHARGED FR()t,j THE SITE, THE INSPECTOR
SHALL NOTE THE PRESENCE Of SUSPENDED SEDIJ,jENT, TURBID WATER, DISCOLORATION,
AND/OR OIL SHEEN, AS APPLICABLE.
I. ANY WATER QUALITY IoIONITORING PERfOR!.IED DURING INSPECTION.
g. GENERAL COMMENTS AND NOTES, INCLUDING A SRIEF OESCRIPTION Of ANY BMP
REPAIRS, IoIAlN1£NANCE OR INSTAUATION !l!AOE AS A RESULT Of THE INSPECTION.
h. NAUE, TITLE, AND SIGNATURE OF TEH PERSON CONDUCTING SITE INSPECTION: AND
THE FCLlOWING STATE),IENT: "I CERTIFY lHAT THIS REPORT IS lRUE. ACCURATE, AND
COMPLETE, TO THE BEST OF 101'1' KNDW1..EDGE AND BELIEf".
TURBIDITY ITRANSPARENCY SAMPliNG REOIJIRfMENTS
1. SAMPLING IoIETHDDSj'EFFECTI'vt: OATES
o.BEGlNNING OCTOBER I. 2008, If CONSTRUCTlDN ACTIVITY Will INVOLVE THE DISTURBANCE OF 1
ACRES OR IoIOR£. THE PERMITTEE SHAll CONOUCI TURBIDITY S ..... PlING PER CONDITION S4.C.
2. S ..... PLING fREOUENCY
O.SAMPLING SHALL B£ CONDUCTED AT lEAST ONCE EVERY CALENDAR WEEK. 'M-IEN THERE IS A
[)jSCHARGE or STORWWATER (OR AUTHORIZED NON_STORMWATER) FROt.l THE SITE. S ..... PlES
SHAll BE REPRESENTATIVE OF lHE flOW AND CHARACTERlSTlCS Of' THE DISCHARGE.
b. WI-IEN THERE IS NO DISCHARGE DURING A CALENDAR WEEK, S ..... PLING IS NOT REQUIRED.
c. SAMPLING IS NOT REQUIRED OUTSIDE or NORIoIAl WORKING HOURS OR DURING UNSAFE CONDITIONS.
If A PERIoIITTEE IS UNABLE TO S ..... PlE DURING A MONITORING PERIOD, THE DISCHARGE IoIONITORING
REPORT (DMR) SHAll INQ.UO£ A BRIEF EXPLANATION.
3. SAMPLING lOCATIONS
o.SAMPLING IS REOOIREO AT ALl DISCHARGE POINTS 'MiERE STORMWATER (OR AUTHORIZED
NON-S1OR ... WATtR) IS DISCHARGED Off-SITE.
b.ALl S ..... PLlNG POINT(S) SHAll BE IDENTlFlEO ON THE S'M"'PP SITE MAP AND BE CLEARLY MARKED
IN THE FIELD WllH A FLAG, TAPE, STAKE OR OTHER VlSBlE MARKER.
4. S ..... PUNG AND ANALYSIS IoIETHODS
o. TURBIDITY ANALYSIS SHALl. B£ PERFORMED WITH A CAliBRATED TURBlOiTY WETER (TURBIOi"'ETER),
EITHER ON-SITE OR AT AN ACCREDITED lAB. THE RESULTS SHALL BE RECCRDED IN THE SITE LOG
BOOK IN NEPHELOMETRIC TURBIDITY UNllS (NTIJ).
b. TRANSPARENCY ANAl'T'SlS SHAlL BE PERFORMED ON-SITE WITH A 1 ~\ INCH DIMIETER, 60
C£NTlt.lEl(R (Ct.I) lONG TRANSPARENCY TUBE. THE RESULTS SHALL 8E RECORDED IN THE SITE
lOG B()()I( IN CE:NTlMETERS (CIo'I). TRANSPARENCY TUSES ARE AVAILABLE fRQt.!:
iltto: Ilwot~m0l'11tarinae<luio.com/Doon/slre<lm.html
PARAMET(R I UNITS I ANALYTICAL METHDD SAHPLING BENCHHARk
FREQUENCY VALUE
TURBIDITY 1 NTU 1 SH2130 DR EPA 1BO.1 IJEEKLY, If 25 NTU
D1SCHAR(;ING
TRANSPARENCY --I
CH 1 lN~~~~~6~~RDR IJEEKlY, If 31 eH
DISCHARGING
ECOLOGY GU!OANCE
5. TURBIOITyjTRANSPARENCY BENCHMARK VALUES
THE BENCHMARK VAlUE FOR TURBIDITY IS 25 NTU (NEPHELOMETRIC TURBIDITy UNITS): AND THE
BENCHMARK VAlUE FOR TRANSPAREN.CY IS Jl CM.
o.D!RBlmTY 26 2i9 NTI! ()R TRANSPARfNCY »--7 cy.
IF DISCHARGE TURBIDITY IS GREATER lHAN. 2~ NTU. BUT lESS THAN 250 NTU: OR IF DISCHARGE
TRANSPARENCY IS lESS lHAN 31 CM. SUT GREATER THAN 6 Ct.I, THE CESCl SHAll:
i. REVIEW THE SWPf'P FOR COt.IPUANCE Wl1I-I CONDITION S9 AND MAKE APPROPRIATE REVISIONS
WITHIN 7 DAYS Of' THE Dl5O-!ARGl: THAT EXCEEDED THE BENCHMARK: AND
II. FULLY It.lPLEMENT AND IoIAlNTAlN APPROPRIATE SOURCE CONTROL AND/OR lREATMENT
BMPs AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, BUT WITHIN 10 DAYS Of THE DISCHARGE THAT EXCEEDED THE
BENCHt.lARK: AND
la. DOCUMENT BIoIP IIoIPlEMENTATlON AND IoI.AlNTENANCE IN THE SITE lOG BOOK.
b DjRRIQITX 250 ND! OR !jREAITR OR mANSPAf~ENCY 6 CM OR lESS·
IF DISCHARGE IS GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO 250 NTU; OR Ir OISCHARGE lRANSPARENCY IS
lESS THAN OR EOUAl TO 6 Clot, lHE CESCL SHALL:
t NOTIFY ECOLOGY SY PHONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CONDITION 55.A..; ANO
ii. REVIEW THE SWPPP FOR COIoIPLIANCE: WITH CONDITION S9 AND MAKE APf'ROPRIA TE REVISIONS
WITHIN 7 DAYS OF THE DISCHARGE lHAT EXCEEDED THE BENCHMARK; AND
iii, ruUY IMPLEWENT AND MAINTAIN APf'ROPRlATE SOURCE CONTROL AND/OR TREATIoIENT BIoIP, AS
SOON AS POSSIBLE, SUT WITHIN 10 OAYS or DISCHARGE lHAl EXC£EOEO THE 8ENCHIolARK:
iv. DOCUt.lENT BMP IMPLEMENTATION AND IoIAINTENANCE IN THE SITE LOG BOOK; AND
v, CONTINUE TO SAIoIPLE DISCHARGES OAllY UNTIL:
1. TURBIDITY IS 25 NTU (OR LO'N[R); OR
2. lRANSPARENCY IS 31 Ct.I OR (OR GREATER); OR
3. THE CESCL HAS DEMONSTRATED COMPLIANCE WITH THE WATER QUALITY STANDARD FOR
TURBIDITY:
o .NO MORE THAN 5 NTU OVER SACKGROUNO TURBIDITY. IF BACKGROUND IS LESS THAN
50 NTU. OR
b.NO MORE THAN 10 X OVER BACKGROUND TURBIDITY, If BACKGROUND IS 50 NTU OR
GREATER: OR
4. THE DISCHARGE STOPS OR IS ruMINA TEO
NOli· All SECTIONS REFERENCED IN THE SAMPliNG REOIIIREt,jENTS CAN BE LQC"TED IN THE NPDES PERMIT
I~I
;,1
-l
'i Ci ffll-
'j~ f-~ Ow 0::
ZWO
Uc:::u.
ZZ
0° 1-0
z~ WI c:::(fJ ~
fflu
" f->-
<t:
~
~
l.L. o
~
U
Z
8
Z w
0::
". .
: ~ ~?
[i" ~
:oil
~I
ji!
~
.;
~
GUIJ ~ ZWm:gg c(1-~~~ >c(c~;:! W-lB~ ..... 0 ,s g'~ .... 0 "':;: ....
>CIJ ~~~
'( CIJ ~ ~* Q c( .... ~~
o ~
z ~ •
D
REVISIONS: APPD.
DATE: APRIL, 2012
DESIGN: BRD
DRAWN: CLK
CHECKED:
REVISION
NUMBER:
SCALE: NONE
PROJECT NUMBER:
RENTOOOO-O015
DRAWING FILE:
edMOO6RENTOOOOOOl5
SHEET NO.
C6 I]ru ~ 100% SUBMITTAL ~I OF17
I
SEE DETAIL 'A' I
PORTION OF GOVT LOT 1, SECTION 32, T 24 N, R 5 E, WM
----------~~ 'I , RY SEWER 'ASE"ENT ",,-<;; , II" " ~"!~" "-/"-,( . r REC. NO "-!'". , 'I"" "'" . '" ," /71 ~~ <",. "<·"NC 40',375' CT~~~O~:~EMENT ", \ -\ ~ '0' CONSTRU '\
/ e"" \
/ ''""'''-----I ~ ~_. . \ ••• .",'" r ""-"",. '"'' __ \""
@
NORTH
/~ '~..,,;:, "'::'>"0. :;,1 .'1 ...... ".~
!:?!
1
/ ~o .. :.., ~/~' ~ _ ~ __ "~, '"'."~ __ '.~ -I __ _~, __
/ .• ' "~'" ->< '-,,;-, \ "
' !l.,c , ~~, _ ,",', " \',
/ ~-,~ "'~"".,. , \ "-' ...... ~~."". ""\', " ',,,,"=--".. .~. \ ~~ \ "-I I '.40.00 ~ _ ~____ • "'-~~~'" ~ \ "-
' , · '-'""., "'~'" , ,
' /', ••• , , ~, ... ""oW"
&:::=::i -"1
o " " " SCALE: '"=30'
., \ \ "'., . ,~ " ,
", " '. ,
' / '''~. , ... ' , ,~" / \ V20~A~EMENT ZONE \
' '~"''', ',-. ,.~,% ..... \
/ ":'" \ i .. " '" "\:'''''''~. "'1::" /, \
I '., " ~ &l.:f ~ ~0 ~"''' ~, \ ' , -. ' ., , '. " ". ... / ~< ~,~, ~~~ · \ "I '-'"", "'~"'.,." '--___ --. \.
DETAIL 'A'
.......... MLI:. '"=5'
.Q...QRgJ~
4" .... IN DEPTH, CE"'ENT
CCI'ICR[T[ SIDEWAlK PER OTY
CT RENTON 510 PLAN FClO7
6-JolIN D[PTH GRAvtL aMROW
PER WSDOT 9-0~14(1)
COUPACTEO TO 95:l
I -s~. __ ____ ~ '-\ ~ ~'''''~ "\
/ "-"'" ..... . .. ,.. ... '""". ...
I .... :-.."'"-<:.. :"128<7' ,..... ' ..... , ~ "; L'''''!/I'''' ~~.~" ,,\.,
I _ ~ .... ;'..~. "~ ','"'' , '~ ____ • ', ......
• •. ~. ""'~ /->c, I '~"" / " ','.~ ". '" '" , " ...
I
-;0,,' \~. "'50~'~ r~'· "-~'~'" "I "<."'''''' '" " "''', "-\." , 'Y., ~... '. ' \ , \ .. ~" , .. '-. ' .... ~ '1
/ ~ \\ ~",,, ~~~{:" ',~, '..,~~.~~ """"" ' ",.. ~.J;.f: 0.. "69.LLA "'-.<,." ~ CONPACTEO SUB(;RAD[
CEMENT CONCRETE SIDEWALK
NUl IU SCALE
" . . ~', '""'" , " "-'\' ~. ", , ~ .. .~.,. 'l> ~ '.5000' "-\ ~~~,,,-,
. • •• " -Co-.~"'" ' , ,~" LOT A->, ""~ " \~\"'~ , :::::-=-.. '34.;31 Sf (""OSS)" TRAIL 1 II _~~,," "'\'$~~ '"
\, "', ..... ~ '\ ""'~ ,,~ ~ -,.,. ~' '-::)::.~ "',.,'''' ","" -5000' ~ • '.60.00. I '-/0' 'I I
LOT 1
LUA-05-069·LLA
", ,-. '.60.00 1">2' ,. "", " ,., _. !y'j"'~ .... ,.~.. ". . ~ ~6.Y41'.tr' R,.5000,' 'l ~ ~40"3ro2· I I <'B.·.~". L.6"."
-(;J" '~""" "75"'" ~,_O ~'" , ...
' .... ~:-.. 'N8J'J5'~"E • e~" . '04 , '.2>00
"e', . -NB""'~"E , ~ I \ I '" , I/. ----. I I
"7 .. .. _ _ '~~~~: I ' I .".'l """" '-......,~ "50'32',,' I \I~ I 1 ' ;;'''~, \'--'::' 1 ~ . I~" , "'" I II
" , -~" .' " ' •••• , ,. """ --A \ 8UFf£R I No ''NIDE CITY or ~"'. " .-.----.---\ 20 TILITY >~'~""" "\ I '.2>00: '..t: J, \ i'L I 1_ ~~~;~:N~ REe NO "J", . \ I·"" <" '.35.00' :1 / -'0080741 AND "'" '-".,.... ., "'" -;" -, ,,~.. \ \ ~>sfo;4ft '·120.00' .. II.",,':}), J I ~,
"J .~..;: oil/ -6099' ~ " I I ""q,. ">0 \ ...... \ ~ ~,~ ~".r17' \ I! ~~'" ., "". ... ~ ~ /1 \ '<-~r "''.~''\ ,,' ,.,,r.,& TT7 I r <¥;.~q"
".' ~!IJ ,_/0' \ / I 'Oq,. ".~,,, .... I '"
". " ..A I ' DE SANITARY "'4l:, .... , __ "-'0 'M '''E"ENT ~"lfJ.,,_ ~---"-_I ~\ -snw::~o 7106230529 . , " 'l' REe
...... "."", " ... I ~ .............. •.. ~... ,
'""6:" ~. " " I "-~
"
100% SUBMITIAL
z :s a.
...J
0
0::
~!z...J Z '0 -Z 0 ui:2 Of-
...J I-l? 0/«1-z~
f-WI 2m15~~
-WU.LL:l: '115~ 02'
"IU ~o
f->-f-d]« -d] ;1~~ Uo::
; l? '-...J «
...J ;;:
0:: il f-
,,,'
1:,,1
.;
CD: ~ Zlll~:g~
«>!; g~~ ..... ~,,-
111-~ s,::;
o():5-'='" _0 ~~:: > II) 7.! <CI)~~&
Oil( ~s;
~ ji •
• "I REVISIONS: APPD.
,,-----
,;-,1 ____ -
DATE: APRIL, 2012
DESIGN: BRO
DRAWN: OJ(
CHECKED:
REVISION
NUMBER:
SCALE: I· • 30'
PROJECT NUMBER:
RENTOOOO·0015
DRAWING FILE:
edt.lOO7R[NTOOOOOO15
SHEET NO •
C7
OF17
I
I
I I
. . I i
I
I ~I /
!
I I·] /
I iiI /
I
I ~ • ~
I i ~
0
0
~ z
II
u •
---I! " " 0
---I~
" 0
0
~
Ii
0
0
0
0 Ii
---Q.
I ~
~
N
I ~
'-~
0 I ~
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! ....
!
!
!
!
@
10' IIro[ SANITARY S£lIU! U\S[Ijl:-'lT
REC. !<C. 710ti2lO52!1
20" m
PORTION OF GOV'T LOT 1, SECTION 32, T 24 N, R 5 E, WM
r-40'u15' TDtPQRARY
CONSlRUCTlON EASEMENT
-~~ ~~~~~.nS-" ..... .....
o
""
..........
"-"-"-"-"-"-"-
/
200' SHOREUNE "-
IoIANA('£MENT ZONE \
/
/
I I~ ~
"-
LOTA-
IJ4.~t SF (CROSS)
\
\
"-
6.0' lRAlL
J.D' C(l J.~'
!X~_ -f~dll22
LEFT ~~i~r:!-::fI,:!J:: =~"=-
nt.llNi I __ ~~~~
.....• , '--y 1...-..;. $ft:"".
L£FT "'-~J~lt;; -r:L-J~1N =~. FINE BARK MULCH (SEE HOrr)
\
ROUER
COWPACTEO
SUBGRAOE
"OHT
O(PTH, flNE BARK MULCH (SEE NOTE)
6-W1N CQt,IP DEPTH, GRAVEl BORROW
WSOOT 9-OJ.I4{I), ROl..LER COtIPACTEO SIroIOOTH
aotEXTlLE fOR SEPARATION
(WlRAFl 500x OR EOUAL)
IS REQUIRED IN SOME AREAS .t: SHALL
BE GRAVEL BORROW WSOOT 9-0.114(1)
NOTE:
Ra.J.ER L 6-1,ltN COWP DEPTH. GRAVEl BORROW
COIlPACTID WSOOT 9-OJ 14{1), RCUER COWPACTED SMOOTH
SU8GRAOE (;£OTEXTILE FOR SEPAAA nCH
(MIRAF1 500x OR EOUAL)
FlU. IS REQUIRED IN SOloIE AREAS .t: SHAlL
BE GRAVEL BORROW WSOOT 9-03.'4(1)
FINE BARK WUlCH SHAlL CONSIST Of
FlRjHOILOCk BARK, ," VINUS PARTICLE 9ZE,
PAone TOPSOIlS, INC OR APPROVED EOUAL
SECTION A-A SECTION B-B
TYPICAL TRAIL X-SECTION
NOT TO SCAlE
" '" "' ....
.c,(O!
L
TYPICAL TRAIL X-SECTION
"OT TO SCALE
CONSTRUCTION NOTES
o
o
o
o
o
o
CONSTRUCT 6' WID[ WAlKING TRAIL PER TRAIL SECTIONS ',.; a: 'B'.
R[l.IOIJE, HAUL AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING ORGANIC WATERIAl WITHIN TRAIL
SECTION OfFSiTE.
INSTAll fiLTER FABRIC Sft.T FENCE AROUND STOCKPItf ARl:A.
SE[ TtSC PlAN SHEET C3.
CONTRACTOR TO INSTAll All EROSION CONTRa.. BWP'S SHOWN ON SHEET
CJ PRIOR TO COI""'ENCING lAND DISTURBING ACTIVITIES.
CONlRACTOR SHALL UMIT DISTURBANCE Of EXISTING VEG[TATION TO TH[
GREATEST EXlENT POSSIBlE. All DISTURBED AREAS SHAll. BE
STABIlIZED PER WlTIGATION P\..AN5.
CONlRACTOR SHAll ACa:SS PROPERTY FROU NORTH FOR CONSlRUCTION
AND KEEP lAKE WASHINGTON 8L\'O N ClEAN BY SWEEPING DAllY (SEE
TESC PlAN SHEET CJ). CONSTRUCTION ACCESS [A5OI[NT TO BE
COORDINATED THROUGH CITY Of RENTON a: PROPERTY O'IItlER.
AREAS OlfT'SIOE HIGH VISIBIlITY FENCE TO REUAlN UNDISTlJR8[O WITH TH(
EXCEPTION ~ AREA ENClOSE~ BY TRAn. 1 a: 2 AS BIO AI. lERNA TE ft .
5[[ NOTE 6, SHEET CJ.
SUMMARY OF GRADING QUANTITIES
-PARCEL SIZE: 3.09 ACRES (134,531 SF)
-WQRl( AREA: 1.50 ACRES (65.J52 SF)
-ORGANIC WA TERIAl TO BE REWOVED FROM SITE a: DISPOSED IN AN
APPROVED LANDfill FOR TRAIL CONSlRUCTION IS 250 CUBIC YARDS
(J72 TONS). QUANTITY TO B[ VERIFI[D BY CONTRACTOR.
-GRAVEL BORROW TO B[ IIoIPORTED FROM APPROVED BORROW FACILITY FOR
TRAIL CONSTRUCTION IS 230 CUBIC YARtlS (370 TONS).
-fiNE BARK MULCH TO BE IWPORTED FROU APPROVED BORROW FACILITY FOR
TRAil CONSTRUCTION IS 92 CUBIC YARDS (138 TONS).
100% SUBMITTAL
5
"---I
(!)-z«
150:::
~I
(!)~
f--W 0:
Z W 0
W 0::: "-
~()
£1>--'« ::;:2:
~
ZZ O~ I-C>
Zz WI o:::~
u...S:
02 >-0
I-f--_z
()W 0:
~J f--
'I ~~.
,; 00
! ;;;;
CD CD iii:;: 0 ZUlU)g:1l
4 I-~til:;l
>4 ~ 5;:;:;
&11 0 ~g.~
gO;:~: >CD '~5
4 CD ~!!l& c C ... ii
• 0;
Z m
C
• REVISIONS: APPD.
DATE: APRil, 2012
DESIGN: BRD
DRAWN: QJ(
CHECKED:
REVISION
NUMBER:
SCALE: I" • 40'
PROJECT NUKBER:
RENTOOOO-O015
DRAWING FILE:
edWOO8R[NTOOOOOO15
SHEET NO.
C8
OF17
---.. ----' ---.~ -- -----... "\' \ 0400CA 0 \E C\D WG \ Sh ee t \ eel M 009REN T0000001 5. d wg
h ·\\l;':w¥-w;:,i>· ; m'~)-_ ~h-,'.,' eo.£,. k-%;W'! ie' .};; i S><i~,;;,;"mii;:6· f.,', iHy€a'tt.·,·> .. '" .,fM,·,·I_'". '"""i'-~~.' 'A '.'·'r'-"'"' '''''''d,~'''''' 9:,§i,~\, d" ; ,bi ~q;)'f:,-",J4iMi"i¢ffi\
r-_--j~~-_iS t s
35.9 . it; \
,S." ~
? 35. 4 ~ ____ I O+CXI.OO -ejL TRAI 2-
8 35.90 I S+69.2~ -eft. TRAIL 1
35.7 ( (LEV-35.S!>
36.00 ~ ~ ~
? 36.S ... __ • __ ._ :--+---+---1 ~ 36.10
36.7 I 0+00. I="BAClC(J"" X 9D(WAlK
36.20 I L BEGIN !.lENT CONe AD
\ _MATCH ~:-SlDEWM.K pACE ~ 36.9 __ """ __ f-_ .. --. .\ / [LEV-J .84
g 36.30, 34.5 0+03.60 -/l TRAIL I
/ £NO-ttl.trtH CONe-PAD
36.4 1 / / BEGIN TRAlL IIoIPRO\OlEN "1l
36.40 / ~ 0 348 " -.lL EL[V-J<4.77 $ ~
-\ ~ .±. 34 B4 " . ~ 0.05 :0;; ,.,
+ 35.7 \-~ . ... ... _~ 8 eva:· 3474.... ~ ~ ~ 36.;,u i \ \ a:i .• 0.1 <~ I 32.3 I L Eves 0+25-".Pl, I M U
36.1 \ 34.21 I ! [VCE; 34.04 ~ ~ ~?
36.60 \ 1> J20 L_ l'"'it;:;
:: 36.6 i:; 33. .. 9 --t-) J:,
~ 36.70 1-I-95.J7 -CIL TRAIL 2 -J1.3 /_IB_
J7.1 O-tOO,OO -clL TR~~....L-32.29 I -"~--j~-~-t----t----l r
~ -I .36.80 I '\ / IELEY-36.83 I ? JO.2 ( evcs: 0+80 'tI 'tI i ~
f! ~ ':l:' J7.J ~ .2-1-00.00 -GRADE BREAK ~ 31 ... 9 ~--C eYeE: 31.29 ::0; ;.-! s ~ ~
.I'!l _ 8 36.90 El(Y .. Ja8S: \ 0+94.12 .... ? I;j ~ VI [!J
:r. r I 30.8 FLOOIL AZARO...LJMI C!. II II < ~ ~ ~
~,.", J7.2 JO.68 I ~P'-.j ••• <
• "0 J7.13 \ £ g ~ -~ &::u _.. -: J12 EVCS:1+20 ;..,,8~!.<'
-0 '+' J7.2 ~ 30.86 \ EveE: 30.86 '" Y' ~ -::::!!..,. .n.37 \i t; U' ~ r a --. Jl.5_\ ~ m J7.J 1--3f,1~.'~3-1----+---+-\\---t----t-1---+----I
,)/.60 ....!t
r.J 2+76.98 -C TRAIL 2 _ + J1.7 -.--I_"'~. ,--t-----!-I---+----I
+ J7.6 FLOOOPI;AIN-UI.IIT g 32.01 I g J.aJ I,... I I
r -S1J Jl.9 I.\--r---++--I----I ~ J~h -f\ J8.07 I J~ § r.J 323 '/ TA 2+0000 ~ J7.7 1-.-~I_~ ;t g JJ.'15 ~-~<AOE BREAK --~ J8.3O r,¢j I LEY" JJ.15 I~ ~ J2.6
38.9 ~ E 33.OS \1-h"6 "'0
38.50 IY'I ./ iii ~ 32.7 I ~ 0 0 ~ 39.1 V.-g £ J2.9:l :~-~~-B---;;0
a JB.77 I ~ J2.5 t~-~ ~ ~
39.3 3+00.00 -GRADE BREAK ~ 32.85 I i -i 0
39.00 ELEY -39. 0;' r.J I !I! ~ I .... + 32.6 I _ 9-_ ______ Z
t 391 I :t ~ 32.75
8 38.7~ I ~ 326 STA 3+0000 0
3a8 ) a 32.65 GRAOE BREI. "T1
38.51 ~ 32,9 ELEY .. 32.6 ~ G)
t 36.2 , ~ 32.89 ~ 0
..,. JlI.26 . Cf) !I < a . ~ ~-I 33.2 ; _
J80i H +6-4;59----C TRAJt.-'l r.; ~ .)3,12 3 52.66 -.fLb TRAIL 1 .. --I
lB.C I +-47.<42 C TRAIL I I :r. r ~ lJ.3 ~ 0 OO.QO Cjl, TRAIL 3 r t 36.0 I IilEY-37.96 I. ~...... g: J.).36 S--EL Y-lJ:-28 0
~ (.oJ ..,. U1 II"U x a a a ~ ~ 33.6 ~ ~ ; ~ ,3.'" ~'---t---~
-;r ~ t 34.1 \ c: -
u:!8JJ·84 I ~ en
~ m _ n
t ~ ~
!~ 0
~ Z
34.55 -CN
\:;' t 34,5 (\)
~ I ~ s ~ 34./9 \ --I
~--~---,----T'----Tlll 35.0 f'V
I~ BOO ~
33.4 If '--;:3~S.~.,+---+---+---_III---_t-I---I_---,~V ~1 "26 Z
';' 332 r-'0+00.00 _ C TRAil 3.. a' -
8 lJ.28 z . !;+52.66 -C TRAIL I 35.7 _ :::0
Cf) ~ ~ h IELEY"33.28 ! J:l.:JU \ c..n
.. -<?i J3.2 .. 1_\ IOOO:---CRAOE-BR 1.1(-01 358 I
t-3:\28""'" . + . m ~ _ -_. ~~ §11.!. ELEY -JJ.48 g J5./4 5+69.2 _ C/l mAl 1 ..
t= ~ l! 32.9 15 A{ 1 _ 8 -35 5' .t ----jc-O+OOJ] -C/l TRAI 2 < l' "0 ~ 32.98~;il I H I 3.' --1 ELEv.;J ;85"----<: ~ :::0 32.5 ~~ 2i 0+60,0( -GRACE BREAK en .. ;;>.,.. :5:
• ~ 32.48 alii ~ ELEY .. 32.48 .; 1--;:"rr,'-1----+---+----t-\.---t-I---1----1 .!:r: ~:! g ,... a 36.21
,,' m ';' 32.8 --Di ~. ,--367 I
u:! ~ 32.73 z,~ .:. j""-_____ I
33.0 1+00.29 • PROPERTY LI E en 36.4!1 \
33.00 I END mAIL IIoIPRO'vf.:MENTS t.. 3r6~ \,---!-I---+----I
"'ATCH EX CRCUNO ElE\I-33.oo a' " ~ '--~_-'_~_..L ___ _!_:_---.l----!:------..-l-____; 374 I ~ ~ ~ g: J6 92 ..... _-_ .... --r--····,,--1"-.......... ·1
. I
Cf 37.5 :,.--1H---t-----t ~ 37.16 r:
;i:.~ r-_ .. _ .. _ .. -----.--
I
~ 3~9 I
~ 37.63 I "'+~':02
38.0 I .,," f'L~~. Z~ UIoIIT
37.87 7+47.42 -C TRAIL I _
"-J 4+64.59 -CVL TRAIL 2
.t 38,0 El£V .. J1.96+' __ --j o 3/.~ e'
37.9 ~_ .. _
". 7
37.7 7+99.2 -PROPE~ UNE
, ___ ,-___ , ___ ~iS'-----, .. _.--f?---.... __ ._ ..... _8: ~~~; 'i ~~~~~ N~37.67
36.5 ,,'c--J----1----t-.---f-----!-----1 ~-I r.
f! s; ';' 37.3 --.1?'" I 0+00.00 -ck TRAIL 4 -~ ~ g
f1:I _ g~.... 1M? 1+95.37 CIL mAIL 2
:I: r ~ ~ l::fjli ELEY-36.88 i 1 ~ 36.2 ~.;j §p ttT1S-.00-=-CRAO£-BRr..M:
R ;0 ~ ~ <.. [ENO Cf' TRAIL' IIoIPROWIENTS ~ ~,' ~ t 32.6 a iii \~ ~-~I-[~l,,[V~.~3.S.~78'-1I_--_ __1 o ... raI:,l: \ .. ~ ~ 4 m ~i i~I+--+----t
c ~ ~ ~ 8:
OJ s:::
~ r
j, fh¥""¥-"'¥"~'"riAi?I.''' t ijrf,@!li'1'i?s¥@.·-·iMf·,.f."ft5ak,·,,,u .... ",,'M""'11·,4t 61.Wilwal'.I§i'ii!ii§i'.W ... ).; .,_.,"-', 1':" •• """,,, _l>"~ '-R',.} t;~'M-;"~"'J"''#'~r'''' """yA4k-r¢@/l<.'Uffi'*ffiFik ,
~ ~ ~ ~ ill ~ ~ ~~ E ~ iil ~ ~ .. ~;!I"""t. TRAIL ALIGNMENT PROFILES
..... ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~~H~~~ ~. DAVID EVANS l¥ ~r\ MAY CREEK TRAIL O ~ ~ 10'1 g VI r.'z!:? .. ~ ~ a a ANDASSOCIATE8INC. frl ._i
• .... ~ 0 ~ ~;g 415· 1161h Avenue SE ~.~~ f-j FOR
(0 ~!; ~ ~ 8 e~~ .. D Bellev~~o~::s~~~~~9~:~~518 ~~~ CITY OF RENTON
~ ",' " I I I I I I ~ .-RENTON, WASHINGTON
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIXB
NRCS Soil Map
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
April 2012
P;\r\RENTOOOOOO15\06{)OINFOlStonnwater\2012-4-16 TIR.doc
May Creek Trail
Technical Information Report
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Surch
ond
SoU ChemIca l
SoIl Erosion Factors
View Option.
H.p I"
Table I"
Desa1pUoo of I"
Rati ng
RatinQ Options P
r Detailed Oesa1pHon
I Advoncod options ~
Agg~tion 00rriM'1t Condition
Hethod
Component
Percent Cuto"
lle-brt:ak Rule Low ...
• Higher
I •• A I
WI.m,'n,,, 5011 Rating. Map may not be nlld at thl. Ieille.
zoomed In beyond the scale: at which the soli map for this area Is Intended
partlaJlar scalf!. The soil surveys that compr1se yoor AOI were mapped at "''''''>''''
the lev~ of detail shown In the resuttlng soU map Ire d4!pendent on that map
e"'.rgement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of
accuracy of soli l ine pta cement. The maps do not show the smell areas of contrasting SOlis that
shown at • more detailed scale .
Summary by Mlp Unit -King County Area, Washington (WA,")
Mapuntt.ymbol Map unit n.m.
.. e AId~oocI gravelty sandy
loam , 6 to 15 percent slopes
InC Indianola loamy nne sand, 4
to 15 pe~t ,lopes
No Norma sandy 10000m
Totlil. for Ar .. or Inwr .. t
btl"g
e
•
0
AC .... In AOI
I ••
••• .. ,
I.'
Percent of "or
lUi%
7 .2%
81.2%
100.0'"
Hvdroaoglc soli groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Solis are asslgned to one of four
I ,p~.~"~nt.!:!!~:!!!.!!!~,--__________ ~ I groups according to the rate of water Inflttntlon when the soils art: not protected by veoetatlon , are
r thoroughly wet, and rKt'lve predpltatlon from kxlg--durltlon storms.
~~!!!!!!!~!.!!~!...-----------1;IThe solis In the United States are assigned to four oroups (A, B, C, and 0) and three dual dasses (AID,
BID, and C/O). The groups are defined as follows:
~~~~!!!::!!~~~'-'~"""'------:;;"",.I Group A. SOils having I high Infiltration ICIIte (low nMlOff potential) when thorouohly wet. These consist:
mainly of deep, wet! drained to excesslvefy dlClllned SIMS or gravelty sands. These SOIls have a high ICIIte ""'-"''-''''''''''''-_____________ .J of water transmission.
Group B. SOils having a moderate InfiltratIOn rate when thoroughly wet. TheA consist dllerty of . ~'u •.• 11I
~tely deep or deep, moderatefy well drained or wei drained soils that have moderate*y fine tt
to moderately coar$(! texture. These soils have a modC!f'lte rate of water transmission .
C. Solis having a slow Innltratlon rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chlerty of SOI ls having a
Inat Irnp ..... the downward movement of water or soils of moderatety nne texture or nne texturt: •
• slow rate of water transmission.
O. Solis having II very sl ow Infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These
conSist chlefty of eIIys thlt hi". a high $hr1nk·swef! potentlll, SOIls that hi". I high water table, SOUS
that hi". I eIIypan or eIIy layer at or near the swtace, Ind soils that Ire shallow OYer nearty
Impervious mlterial. These SOI ls have a "ery Slow rate of wlter transmission.
If I soil Is Is~gned to • dua l hydrologic group (AID, BID, or C/O), the nrst letter Is for dl1llned areas and
the second 's fOf' undfliined arell. Only the solis that In their natullli condit/on Ire In group 0 are
asSinned to dual dasses.
R.Una Oatlon. -Hvdroloalc SoU Groun
Aggrega tion M4tthoch Dominant Condition
Component P.n:e nt Cutoff: None Specified
TI ... bre.k RuJ.: Hlo her
fOtA I Accessibility Statement I Privacy Policy I NOl'I~OIsa1m1nation statement I Information Quality I USA. go" I White House
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I