HomeMy WebLinkAboutSeattle Pipe Trade Biol Assessment
1
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
for the
Seattle Pipe Trades Expansion
595 Monster Road S.W.
Renton, Washington 98057-2937
Tax Parcel: 242304-9122 & 242304-9123
NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 24,
Township 23 North, Range 4 East, of the Willamette Meridian
Prepared for: Seattle Pipe Trades 595 Monster Road S.W., Ste. 100
Renton, Washington 98057-2937
(206)
Dated:
November 4, 2015
Prepared by:
Jeffery S. Jones
Certified Professional Wetland Scientist & Wildlife Biologist
November 2015 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. i
Table of Contents
1.0 Purpose of the Biological Assessment ..................................................................................... 1
2.0 Project Description................................................................................................................... 2
2.1 Proposed Activity................................................................................................................. 2 2.2 Construction Activities ........................................................................................................ 2 3.0 Project Action Area.................................................................................................................. 3
3.1 Site Location, Address, and Directions................................................................................ 3
3.2 Site Description .................................................................................................................... 3
3.3 Project Action Area.............................................................................................................. 3 3.4 Project Action Area Physical and Biological Attributes...................................................... 5 4.0 Federally Listed Species in King County ................................................................................ 5
5.0 Federally Listed Species in King County Not Present in the Action Area .............................. 5
5.1 Marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus) ................................................................ 6
5.2 Northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) ............................................................... 6 5.3 Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus) ..................................................................................... 6 5.4 Gray Wolf (Canis lupus) ...................................................................................................... 6
5.5 Grizzly Bear (Ursus arctos) ................................................................................................. 6
5.6 Canadian Lynx (Lynx canadensis) ....................................................................................... 7
5.7 March Sandwort (Arenaria paludicola)............................................................................... 7 5.8 Swamp sandwort (Arenaria paludicola) .............................................................................. 7 5.9 Triangular-lobed moonwort (Botrychium ascendens) ......................................................... 7
5.10 Stalked moonwort (Botrychium pedunculosum) ................................................................ 7
5.11 Golden Paintbrush (Castilleja levisecta) ........................................................................... 7
5.12 Tall bugbane (Cimicifuga elata) ........................................................................................ 8 5.13 White meconella (Meconella oregana) ............................................................................. 8 5.14 White-top aster (Sericocarpus rigius) ................................................................................ 8
6.0 Federally Listed Species in King County Present in the Action Area ..................................... 8
6.1 Puget Sound Chinook Salmon & Fall Chinook (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha).................... 8
6.1.1 Habitat Conditions within the Project Action Area ...................................................... 8 6.1.2 Level of Use in the Project Action Area ....................................................................... 8 6.2 Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) ....................................................................................... 9
6.2.1 Habitat Conditions within the Project Action Area ...................................................... 9
6.2.2 Level of Use in the Project Area ................................................................................... 9
7.0 Effect of the Project on Listed Species .................................................................................... 9 7. 1 Food Sources ....................................................................................................................... 9 7.2 Water Quality ....................................................................................................................... 9
7.3 Vegetation ............................................................................................................................ 9
7. 4 Predation ............................................................................................................................. 9
7.5 Avoidance of the Project Action Area ................................................................................. 9 8.0 WDFW Priority Habitats Within the Project Area ................................................................ 10 8.1 Biodiversity Area ............................................................................................................... 10
8.2 Fort Dent Park, Freshwater Emergent Wetland ................................................................. 10
8.3 Wetland .............................................................................................................................. 10
9.0 Conservation Measures for Potential Impacts ....................................................................... 10
November 2015 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. ii
10.0 Recommended Determination of Effect .............................................................................. 11
10.1 Chinook Salmon............................................................................................................... 11
10.2 Steelhead .......................................................................................................................... 11
11.0 Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) ............................................................................................... 12 11.1 Essential Fish Habitat Background .................................................................................. 12
11.2 Essential Fish Habitat in the Action Area ........................................................................ 12
11.3 Description of the Proposed Activity ............................................................................... 12
11.4 Potential Adverse Effects of Proposed Project on Salmon EFH ..................................... 12
11.5 Essential Fish Habitat Conclusion ................................................................................... 12 12.0 References ............................................................................................................................ 13
Figures
1.0 Vicinity Map ............................................................................................................................4
Attachments USFWS Listed and Proposed Endangered and Threatened Species
Action Area Map
100-Year FEMA Flood Plain Map
Civil Drawings, C1.0 – C6.0 WDFW Priority Habitats and Species Report
DNR WA National Heritage Program (NHP) List for King County
1
1.0 Purpose of the Biological Assessment
The purpose of this assessment is to determine the effects of the proposed project on any of the
federally listed endangered species and their critical habitat within the action area described in
Section 3.3. This document is prepared in accordance with the City of Renton, Renton
Municipal Code 4-8-120, which requires compliance with the FEMA 2010 Floodplain Habitat Assessment, also known as a Biological Assessment, and the Mitigation Regional Guidance.
Major concerns to be addressed in the BA for federally listed wildlife are as follows:
1. Level of use of the proposed project area by listed species
2. Effect of the proposed project on listed species primary food stocks, prey species, and foraging areas in all areas influenced by the project 3. Impacts from proposed project construction (i.e., habitat loss, increased noise levels,
increased human activity that may result in disturbance to listed species and /or their
avoidance of the proposed project area)
Major concerns to be addressed in the BA for federally listed plant species include the following: 1. Distribution of taxon in project vicinity
2. Disturbance (trampling, uprooting, collecting, etc.) of individual plants and loss of
habitat
3. Changes in hydrology where taxon is found Section 10.0 of this report provides a recommended determination for the potential impacts
associated with the proposed project on federally listed species. There are three possible
categories for a determination of effect for each listed species. They include: No Effect, Not
Likely to Adversely Affect, and Likely to Adversely Affect. Detailed definitions for these effects can be found in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service document, Biological Assessments and Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (USFWS, 2000). Only federal agencies may make a
determination of effect and decide whether a formal or informal consultation is necessary.
Direct and indirect effects to listed species are analyzed by quantifying the extent of proposed project related activities, existing habitat conditions, and site specific alterations associated with the proposed project construction. This report also considers effects from interdependent actions
(future actions that have no independent utility apart from the proposed action) and interrelated
actions (future actions dependent upon the proposed action for their justification). Information
was collected from literature review, site visits, engineer and client information, and agency contact.
2
2.0 Project Description
2.1 Proposed Activity The proposed activity is to expand the existing commercial structure and parking lot.
The existing building is 53,400 s.f. with a 27,587 s.f. footprint. The proposed building addition
is 11,814 s.f. total, with a 6250 s.f. building footprint. The structure addition will have an on-grade concrete slab, steel and aluminum frame, and flat roof. The parking lot will moved to the southeast, over an area that is existing railroad grade, to the toe of the steep slope. No additional
stormwater vaults are proposed. Low impact development (LID) techniques will be used to
avoid changes to the existing storm water retention/detention system on the north side of the
building. The existing wetland and 25-foot buffer will not be impacted. 2.2 Construction Activities Construction activities include:
1. Installation of erosion and sediment controls
2. Implement best management construction practices 3. Removal of existing asphalt and tracks 4. Grading & clearing
5. Install of storm drainage pipeline
6. Install of utilities
7. Demolition of existing structure exterior wall 8. Construction of building addition 9. Construction of parking lot
The exterior construction is expected to occur in 2016, depending on permit issuance. Interior
construction may extend into 2017. Hours of construction are expected to occur daily between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m.
Heavy equipment, i.e. excavators, dozers, graders, concrete trucks and pumps, asphalt laying
equipment, and dump trucks, will be used for grading, clearing, concrete work, utilities and
paving. Electric power tools, welders and compressors will be used for building construction. Construction materials may include but are not limited to the following: rock, gravel, sand, asphalt, concrete, steel, aluminum, plywood, framing lumber, nails, screws, adhesives, roofing
materials and tar, paint, insulation materials, caulking, glass windows, carpet, linoleum, plastics,
steel pipes, copper pipes, plastic pipes, sheet rock, and carpet.
A Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESC) Plan and best management practices (BMPs) for erosion prevention, during site grading and construction, will be implemented, see
TESC Plans. Construction activities and the use of construction equipment will generate noise,
dust, and emissions. The vegetation and excess soil will be trucked to a permitted topsoil
handler and fill will be obtained from the nearest material handler. Earthwork will be done during dry weather, as much as possible. Construction vehicles will generate emissions including air pollutants, hydrocarbons and PCB’s. Standard measures to control emissions
include proper maintenance of all vehicles and use of watering vehicles to reduce dust.
3
3.0 Project Action Area
3.1 Site Location, Address, and Directions The subject property is located within the city limits of Renton. The project is located at 595
Monster Road S.W. (see Figure 1.0). The parcel numbers are 242304-9122 and 242304-9123.
The tax parcels are located in the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 24, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, of the Willamette Meridian.
Directions to the site from Renton City Hall are as follows: head northeast on S. Grady Way
toward Wells Ave. S.; turn left onto S. Grady Way; turn right onto Talbot Rd. S.; short distance
turn left onto S. 7th St.; proceed several miles to Oaksdale Ave. S.W.; turn right onto Oaksdale Ave. S.W.; Oaksdale Ave. S.W. becomes Monster Rd. S.W.; turn left at 595 Monster Rd. S.W.; proceed to second building on the right and metal gate.
3.2 Site Description
The subject property has a commercial building with perimeter parking lot, see the attached existing Grading and Drainage Plan. An old railroad grade with tracks is located between the wetland and existing parking lot. There is a wetland adjacent to a portion of the south parking
lot. The southeast side of the property, opposite the railroad grade, is a steep slope. The slope is
vegetated with Himalayan blackberry. A portion of the steep slope, on the parcel south of the
existing building, is being purchased. The identified wetland southwest of the proposed expansion is a shallow pond. Dominant plant
species include black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera t.), willows (Salix sp.), narrow-leaf
cattail (Typha latifolia) and reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea). The railroad grade is
gravel that was historically treated with herbicides to prevent plant from growing. Himalayan blackberry (Rubus a.) dominates the slope above the railroad grade.
The community has developed into large commercial businesses. A large raised railroad grade
was constructed to the east of the property. In 1916, the Hiram Chittenden Locks lowered the
level of Lake Washington ten feet and the Black River in downtown Renton was filled. Very little of the Black River remains. A large raised railroad grade was constructed to the east of the property.
3.3 Project Action Area
The project action area includes the existing and proposed development area, the area in which noise from construction may be heard, and the area in which land and water activity may be expected to increase.
The project area is determined to be the subject parcel, parcel to the south, parcel to the north,
entrance to Monster Road S.W., and both sides of Monster Road S.W. at the entrance. The action area does not extend over the active raised railroad grade to the west.
4
5
3.4 Project Action Area Physical and Biological Attributes The project area has commercial uses with extensive areas of impervious surfaces. The property
is located within the 100-year floodplain, see the attached floodplain map. Wetlands are located
to the north, west and south of the existing building and parking. It is not clear where these wetlands discharge, but eventually outflows reach the Black River, Green River and Duwamish.
An active raised railroad track system bisects the community. West of the railroad tracks is the
Fort Dent soccer field complex. Northwest of the project area, the Black River discharges into
the Green River. At the confluence of these two streams, the Green River becomes the
Duwamish River.
The few remaining undeveloped areas are mostly steep slopes, parks, or wetlands, which are
tightly surrounded by development. The Black River Wildlife Area lies about 900 feet to the
north. It is a large undeveloped area with mixed coniferous/deciduous forest. Although there is
a significant level of human activity in this park, the park provides refuge for wildlife and has the largest blue heron rookery in Washington State.
4.0 Federally Listed Species in King County
Information on federally listed species known or thought to occur in King County was obtained
from the USFWS web site (see attachment), Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
(WDFW), the National Heritage Program (NHP), and the National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) web site. Candidate Species and Species of Concern are detailed in the USFWS list for King County (see attachments). Listed endangered or threatened species that are documented to occur in King County by the USFWS include the following:
Marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus), Federally Threatened
Northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina), Federally Threatened
Coastal/Puget Sound bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus), Federally Threatened
Puget Sound Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), Federally Threatened
Puget Sound Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss), Federally Threatened
Listed endangered or threatened species that may occur in King County include the following:
Gray wolf (Canis lupus), Federally Endangered, Pacific Northwest Population
Grizzly bear (Ursus arctos), Federally Threatened
Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis), Federally Threatened
Marsh sandwort (Arenaria paludicola), Federally Endangered
Golden paintbrush (Castilleja levisecta), Federally Threatened
5.0 Federally Listed Species in King County Not Present in the Action
Area
Several species that historically occurred in King County include grizzly bears, gray wolves, golden paintbrush, and marsh sandwort. WDFW have no current documented occurrences of these species and/or their habitats within the project action area (USFWS, 2004). None of these
species were identified in the project action area on the WDFW Online PHS (Priority Habitats
and Species) Report.
6
The Washington Natural Heritage Program provides a list of priority plant species that may
occur in King County, see the attached NHP list. The NHP field guide pages for each plant
species are attached. The field guide pages provide information on the plant range and suitable
habitat. 5.1 Marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus) Marbled murrelets and their nesting habitats were not identified in the project action area.
Marbled murrelets use forest stands typically characterized as old-growth. Their primary nesting
habitat is within two miles of the shoreline of Puget Sound, in mature conifer tree stands with north aspects.
5.2 Northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina)
The Northern spotted owl or its’ habitats are not identified in the project action area. Northern
spotted owls prefer mature old growth forests and wooded canyons (Peterson, 1990). The federal and state definitions of suitable habitat include old forest, sub-mature, or young forest marginal habitat.
5.3 Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus)
Bull trout do not occur in the action area. Migratory forms of bull trout require migration corridors upstream and downstream for repeated spawning and use of seasonal habitat (USFWS, 2004). Bull trout population may give rise to several life history strategies including anadromous, fluvial,
adfluvial, and resident. Adults spawn repeatedly, moving upstream as early as April and spawning
from September through mid-November. Juveniles rear in their natal streams for one to four years
before migrating downstream to lakes, large rivers, or the ocean (USFWS, 2004). Anadromous bull trout enter non-natal watersheds to overwinter and forage (USFWS, 2004). Dolly Varden (Salvelinus malma) is a proposed species for western Washington because its appearance is
indistinguishable in the field from bull trout.
5.4 Gray Wolf (Canis lupus) Gray wolves do not occur in the action area. They may be present in Western Washington. A wolf was hit by a car in April 2015, between North Bend and Snoqualmie Pass. They need a
large range, 60 miles or more in diameter, in which to hunt (Burt, 1976). The major source of
food for wolves are ungulates. Gray wolves typically spend winters in the vicinity of the
ungulate winter range. Gray wolves are not well adapted to human activities (Larrison, 1976). Wolf mortality is increased with road density. The project action area is highly developed urban land, surrounded by miles of roads and development. There is no significant ungulate habitat in
the project action area.
5.5 Grizzly Bear (Ursus arctos) Grizzly bears do not occur in the action area. Grizzly bears are found from the Cascade
Mountains east along the Canadian border. Grizzly bears live in remote high mountain
environments in Washington State, preferring sub-alpine forests and alpine meadows (Larrison,
1976). Grizzly bears typically spend winter in high elevation dens and spring in lower-elevation
drainages and ungulate ranges. In summer and fall, they move back to higher elevations for plant food sources, including nuts, berries, and herbaceous vegetation. This species does not
tolerate contact with humans and avoids open roads. The action area is characterized by intense
7
urban development that bears avoid. The action area does not provide habitat for grizzly bears
because it does not provide habitat characteristics found in sub-alpine forests or alpine meadows.
5.6 Canadian Lynx (Lynx canadensis) The project action area does not provide habitat for Canada lynx. The Canada lynx is found in the Cascade Mountains. Suitable habitat is subalpine and boreal forest, generally above 4,000
feet in elevation. North aspects and snow depths greater than one meter are preferred (Stinson,
2001). The project action area is a highly urbanized environment, 30 miles from the foothills of
the Cascades. Snow is uncommon and their main food source the snowshoe hare does not live in the project action area.
5.7 Marsh Sandwort (Arenaria paludicola)
Marsh sandwort does not occur in the action area. No populations have been identified in King
County. Marsh sandwort grows in coastal swamps and freshwater marshes from sea level to 1,480 feet (Parikh, 1998). It favors saturated acidic bog soils or soils that are predominantly sandy with a high organic content (NatureServe, 2005). It grows in plant communities
associated with stream orchis (Epipactis gigantea), bur-reed (Sparganium sp.), sedges (Carex
sp.), and rushes (Juncus sp.). In recent decades marsh sandwort populations have been decreased
by a measurable shift from open water, marsh, and bog habitats to plant communities dominated by grass, willows, and trees (USFWS, 1993).
5.8 Swamp sandwort (Arenaria paludicola)
Swamp or marsh sandwort does not occur in the action area. A physical search for Swamp
sandwort in the proposed development area was performed. Swamp sandwort grows in organic soils and wetlands. There are no known populations in Washington State. Swamp sandwort is listed as Endangered.
5.9 Triangular-lobed moonwort (Botrychium ascendens)
Triangular-lobed moonwort does not occur in the action area. A physical search for Triangular-lobed moonwort in the proposed development area was performed. Triangular-lobed moonwort grows in a variety of habitats including roadsides. The area adjacent to the existing parking lot is
similar to a road side. There are no known populations in Washington state. Triangular-lobed
moonwort is listed as a Species of Concern
5.10 Stalked moonwort (Botrychium pedunculosum) Stalked moonwort does not occur in the action area. A physical search for Stalked moonwort in
the proposed development area was performed. Stalked moonwort habitats include meadows,
springs, stream terraces, coniferous forest and forest edges. Plant species that it is associated
with are not present in the action area. Stalked moonwort is listed as a Species of Concern
5.11 Golden Paintbrush (Castilleja levisecta) Golden paintbrush does not occur in the action area. There are no potential habitats for golden
paintbrush within the action area because it is a dense commercially developed environment with
no native meadows. Golden paintbrush is found in grassy, low elevation meadows of western
Washington (Pojar, 1994). The project action area does not provide habitat for golden paintbrush because the remaining undeveloped areas are heavily overgrown with Himalayan
8
blackberry and English ivy, and there are no native meadows. Golden paintbrush is listed as a
Threatened species.
5.12 Tall bugbane (Cimicifuga elata) Tall bugbane does not occur in the action area. A physical search for Tall bugbane in the proposed development area was performed. Tall bugbane habitats include old growth forests
with canopy openings and forest edges. Tall bugbane is listed as a Species of Concern.
5.13 White meconella (Meconella oregana)
White meconella does not occur in the action area. A physical search for White meconella in the proposed development area was performed. White meconella habitat is open grasslands. Plant species that it is associated with are not present in the action area. White meconella is listed as a
Species of Concern.
5.14 White-top aster (Sericocarpus rigius) White-top aster does not occur in the action area. A physical search for White-top aster in the proposed development area was performed. White-top aster habitat is open grasslands. White-
top aster is listed as a Species of Concern.
6.0 Federally Listed Species in King County Present in the Action
Area
Information regarding federally listed threatened and endangered, proposed, and candidate
species in the action area was obtained from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Priority Habitats and Species Online Report and the Washington Natural Heritage Program list of priority plant species that may occur in King County, see the attached PHS Report and NHP list. The NHP field guide pages for each plant species are attached. The field guide pages
provide information on the plant range and suitable habitat.
6.1 Puget Sound Chinook Salmon & Fall Chinook (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)
6.1.1 Habitat Conditions within the Project Action Area The Black River no longer connects to the Cedar River, White River or Lake Washington. It
acts as a side channel or remnant stream, providing floodplain connectivity necessary and refuge
from seasonal high flow velocities (NOAA, 2005). The Black River provides stream habitat
complexity generally absent in the Lower Green River or Duwamish River. The Black River is used for refuge during migration. Habitat complexity is generally a major factor in meeting salmon survival requirements. Chinook require cover such as large woody debris, aquatic
vegetation, large rocks, and undercut banks to avoid predators.
6.1.2 Level of Use in the Project Action Area Records of fish use are not available for the Black River. There has been considerable work and debate about how to estimate fish use. Fish count methods in the Green River changed from
harvest based to hatchery escapement. “Escapement for the Green/Duwamish River summer/fall
chinook stock from 1986 to 1997 is shown in Figure CSP-1, averaged 6,031 and ranged from
2,027 to 10,059” (http://your.kingcounty.gov/dnrp/library/2000/kcr728/vol1/partI/no3/no3.pdf, page 3-8).
9
6.2 Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) 6.2.1 Habitat Conditions within the Project Action Area
Steelhead in the Lower Green River/Duwamish basin are native winter steelhead and summer
hatchery fish. Habitat conditions for steelhead in the Black River are poor because of low flow. They spawn in rivers and streams, in medium to high gradient sections, at the heads of riffles, or
at the tails of pools (NMFS, 2000).
6.2.2 Level of Use in the Project Area
Records of steelhead use are not available for the Black River. Escapement estimates for the Lower Green River/Duwamish are between 1,000 and 2,700 fish annually from 1977 to 1989
(http://your.kingcounty.gov/dnrp/library/2000/kcr728/vol1/partI/no3/no3.pdf, page 3-15). The
level of use by steelhead in the Black River is probably low.
7.0 Effect of the Project on Listed Species
7. 1 Food Sources
The square footage of impervious asphalt will be reduced because the new parking area will be pervious asphalt and impervious asphalt will be removed for the building expansion. The project will have “no effect” on Chinook salmon and Steelhead food sources.
7.2 Water Quality
New paving will be pervious asphalt, to reduce the impervious area and treat runoff directly. The existing stormwater vaults, north of the building, discharge north then west then south thru ponds and wetlands to the shared regional pump station. The existing stormwater vault system
will not be changed.
Water quality in the Black River is poor due to the stagnant conditions and high pollutant levels. Construction activities could decrease water quality if adequate erosion control measures and pollution preventions are not used. Leaking oil or hydrocarbons from construction equipment
and vehicles could contaminate runoff. Turbidity and hydrocarbons have been shown to
decrease Chinook vitality (Kahler, 2000).
7.3 Vegetation The project area is a considerable distance from the shoreline of the Black River.
Removal of 6,000 square feet of Himalayan blackberry’s and weeds will have “no effect” on
Chinook salmon and Steelhead.
7. 4 Predation There will be no direct or long-term effects on fish predation.
7.5 Avoidance of the Project Action Area
No in-stream work is proposed. The development impacts are the minimum necessary for the building addition and parking. Most of the expansion is on existing parking surface area.
10
8.0 WDFW Priority Habitats Within the Project Area
PHS identifies three priority habitats within the action area, Biodiversity Area, Freshwater
Emergent Wetland and Wetland. WDFW defines priority habitat based on wildlife utilization.
A priority habitat may be a unique vegetation type, a successional stage, or a specific habitat element of key value to wildlife. 8.1 Biodiversity Area
The Biodiversity Area is Terrestrial Habitat, site name Renton Riparian Forest, associated with
the Black River Wildlife Area. A wetland is also identified as associated with the Black River Wildlife Area. The Renton Riparian Forest is 93 acre forest with wetlands along the remaining section of the Black River. The Black River Wildlife Area has the largest great blue heron
rookery in Washington State. These heron are a subspecies of the Puget Sound Lowlands. The
Black River Wildlife Area is located north of Monster Road. No impacts to the Black River
Wildlife Area or Renton Riparian Forest will occur from the proposed project. 8.2 Fort Dent Park, Freshwater Emergent Wetland The Freshwater Emergent Wetland is located in the Fort Dent Park, west of the active railroad
grade, see attached NWI map. It has not been determined if there is a culvert connecting the
wetlands on both sides of the active railroad grade, or where the water from these wetland outflows. However, no impacts to the Fort Dent Park emergent wetland are proposed.
8.3 Wetland
The identified wetland southwest of the proposed expansion was evaluated in a J. S. Jones and
Associates, Inc., Wetland Assessment, March 25, 2009. The wetland was rated as a Category III with a 25-foot buffer requirement. The proposed expansion will have “no effect” on the wetland.
9.0 Conservation Measures for Potential Impacts
The proposed building expansion will use best management construction practices to protect
water and air quality. There is a high noise level in the area from trains, automobiles and heavy
equipment that wildlife is accustom to. The following conservation measures will be used to
protect priority species and habitats:
1) A sediment and erosion control plan will be followed. 2) A spill response plan will be followed.
3) The 25-foot on-site wetland buffer boundary will be signed identifying the critical area.
11
10.0 Recommended Determination of Effect
10.1 Chinook Salmon This project will have “no effect” on Chinook salmon or critical habitat for Chinook salmon.
This recommended determination is based on the following points:
Chinook salmon critical habitat is separated from the proposed development by existing development, railroad tracks and streets.
In-water or near-water work is not proposed.
Water quality will be maintained by using best management practices to prevent
erosion.
Water temperatures will not be altered.
Increased predation will not occur.
Structural complexity along the on-site shoreline will not be affected.
10.2 Steelhead
This project will have “no effect” on steelhead or habitat for steelhead. This recommended determination is based on the following points:
Steelhead critical habitat is separated from the proposed development by existing
development, railroad tracks and streets.
In-water or near-water work is not proposed.
Water quality will be maintained by using best management practices to prevent erosion.
Water temperatures will not be altered.
Increased predation will not occur.
Structural complexity along the on-site shoreline will not be affected.
12
11.0 Essential Fish Habitat (EFH)
11.1 Essential Fish Habitat Background The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA), as amended by the
Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-267), requires Federal agencies to consult
with MFS on activities that may adversely affect Essential Fish Habitat (EFH). The objective of this EFH review is to describe potential adverse effects to designated EFH for
federally managed fisheries species within the proposed action area. It also describes
conservation measures proposed to avoid, minimize, or otherwise offset potential adverse effects
to designated EFH resulting from the proposed action. 11.2 Essential Fish Habitat in the Action Area The Black River provides habitat for Chinook and Steelhead. The Black River is EFH for
juvenile rearing, juvenile migration, and adult migration. Important features of EFH in the Black
River are water quantity and depth, food, cover and habitat complexity, space, access, and flood plain connectivity (PFMC, 1999).
11.3 Description of the Proposed Activity
The subject property has a commercial building with perimeter parking lot, see the attached
existing Grading and Drainage Plan. See Section 3.0 for a more complete project description. 11.4 Potential Adverse Effects of Proposed Project on Salmon EFH There are no potential adverse effects to salmonid EFH. Floodplain connectivity will not be
altered.
11.5 Essential Fish Habitat Conclusion The proposed project will have “no effect” on essential fish habitat. The project is not in close
proximity to the Black River or Green River.
13
12.0 References
Burt, W. 1976. A Field Guide to the Mammals. Houghton Mifflin Company. Boston, MA.
Kahler, Tom. 2000. A Summary of the Effects of Bulkheads, Piers, and Other Artificial
Structures and Shorezone Development on ESA-Listed Salmonids in Lakes. The Watershed Company. Kirkland, WA.
Larrison, E. 1976. Mammals of the Northwest. Durham and Downey, Inc. Portland, OR.
NatureServe. 2005. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life: Arenaria paludicola [web application]. Version 4.2. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Obtained from http://www.natureserve.org/explorer. January, 2005.
NMFS. 2000. Biological Opinion: Unlisted Species Analysis, and Section 10 Findings for
proposed issuance of a Section 10 Incidental Take Permit to the City of Seattle, Seattle Public Utility, for the Cedar River Watershed Habitat Conservation Plan. Nation Marine Fisheries Service, Norwest Region, Washington State Habitat Branch. Seattle, WA.
NOAA. 2005. Final Assessment of NOAA Fisheries’ Critical Habitat Analytical Review Teams
For 12 Evolutionarily Significant Units of West Coast Salmon and Steelhead. NOAA Fisheries Protected Resources Division. Portland, OR.
PFMC (Pacific Fishery Management Council). 1999. Amendment 14 to the Pacific Coast
Salmon Plan. Appendix A: Description and Identification of Essential Fish Habitat, Adverse
Impacts and Recommended Conservation Measures for Salmon. NOAA Award Number NA07FC0026. Pacific Fishery Management Council. Portland, OR.
Parikh, A. K., et. al. 1998. Recovery Plan for Marsh Sandwort (Arenaria paludicola) and
Gambel’s Watercress (Rorippa gambelii). USFWS. Portland, OR.
Peterson, R. T. 1990. Western Birds. Houghton Mifflin Company. Boston, MA.
Pojar, 1994. Plants of the Pacific Northwest Coast, Washington, Oregon, British Columbia &
Alaska. B.C. Ministry of Forests and Lone Pine Publishing. Canada.
USFWS. 1993. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Endangered Status for Two Plants, Arenaria paludicola (Marsh Sandwort) and Rorippa Gambellii (Gambel’s
Watercress): Final Rule. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. Ventura,
California. Obtained from http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/es/estext/fb080393.txt. January, 2005.
USFWS. 2000. Biological Assessments and Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. USFWS. Lacey, WA.
14
USFWS. 2004. Draft Recovery Plan for the Coastal-Puget Sound Disticnt Population Segment
of Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus). Volume I (of II): Puget Sound Management Unit.
Portland, Oregon. 389 + xvii pp.
USFWS. 2004. Listed and Proposed Endangered and Threatened Species and Critical Habitat; Candidate Species; and Species of Concern in Western Washington: King County. USFWS
Western Washington Fish and Wildlife Office. Lacey WA. Obtained from
http://westernwashington.fws.gov/se/SE_List/endangered_Species.asp. October, 2004.
15
Attachments