Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Report 1
CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM Date: December 20, 2011 To: City Clerk's Office From: Stacy M Tucker Subject: Land Use File Closeout Please complete the following Information to facilitate project closeout and indexing by the City Clerk's Office. Project Name: Cedar River Levee Remediation LLIA (file) Number: LUA-11-056, SME Cross -References: AKA's: Project Manager: Vanessa Dolbee Acceptance Date: July 7, 2011 Applicant: City of Renton Owner: City of Renton Contact: Steve Lee, City of Renton PID Number: 0723059096 ERC Decision Date: ERC Appeal Date: Administrative Approval: July 7, 2011 Appeal Period Ends: July 21, 2011 Public Hearing Date: Date Appealed to HEX: By Whom: HEX Decision: Date: Date Appealed to Council: By whom: Council Decision: Date: Mylar Recording Number: k Project Description: Application requesting a Shoreline Exemption to rehabilitate areas of the 205 Levee Project damaged from the 2009 January flood in the Cedar River. Location: Lower Cedar River at River Mile .20 Comments: DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY p 9-1 of AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLANNING DIVISION CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION FROM SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT EVALUATION FORM & DECISION DATE OF PERMIT ISSUANCE: July 7, 2011 LAND USE ACTION FILE NO.: LUA11-056, SME PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Levee Remediation PROJECT MANAGER: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner OWNER/APPLICANT: City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 CONTACT (if other than Owner): Steve Lee, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton WA 98057 PROJECT LOCATION: Lower Cedar River at River Mile 0.20 and 0.22 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PORTION CW #2 LOCATED ON W BANK OF CEDAR RIVER IN E 1/2 OF SECTION 07-23-05 & MORE PARTICULARY DESCRIBED AS TRACTS 1 THRU 6 AS SHOWN ON CITY OF RENTON ENGINEER MAP B 92-50 DATED MAY 23, 1957 TGW BLOCK A & B OF LAKE WASHINGTON SNORE LANDS 3RD SUPL SEC-TWN-R: WATER BODY/WETLAND: Legal SEC 07 TWN 23 R 05 Cedar River PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting a Shoreline Exemption to rehabilitate areas of the 205 Levee Project damaged from the 2009 January flood in the Cedar River. The 2009 flooding event sheared off embankment soils, damaged gabion and earth toes from the 205 levees at river mile 0.20 for approximately 160 linear feet. Additionally, a 100 linear foot section upstream experienced embankment scour. In its current condition, the levee offers only 10 -year flood level protection. The construction of the 205 Levee was originally approved in 1998 and constructed between 1999 and 2000. The original Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, City file number LUA97-192 was issued in February of 1998 and was accompanied by the adoption of the Existing Environmental Impact Statement completed by the US Army Corps of Engineers. The original 205 Levee Project included a series of interconnected levee and floodwalls to contain river flows greater than the 100 -year flood event. This levee and floodwalls system protects the Renton Airport and Boeing properties as well as other commercial properties City of Renton Department of Commun„r & Economic Development Certificate of Exemp.,,,n from Shoreline Substantial Development Cedar River levee Remediation L UA11-056, SME DATE OF PERMIT: July 7, 2011 Page 2 of 3 and structures adjacent to the Cedar River. The proposed repairs at river mile 0.20 include removal of 160 linear feet of gabion wall, establishment of a rock toe in the footprint of the gabion toe, pull back the bank to a 2:1 slope, install a 12 -inch gravel and/or spall filter blanket underline with 24 inches of riprap armor. At river mile 0.22 the repairs include the placement of small rock along the exposed shoreline to prevent further erosion and scour, placement of riprap material for bank protection at the Ordinary High Water level, and plant willows in the sandbar adjacent to the bank and larger shrubs along the shoreline. These repairs would restore the levee to the 100 -year channel capacity. This restoration project has been reviewed for concurrence with the U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife pursuant to section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act and it was determined the proposed actions are "not likely to adversely affect” Bull trout. Furthermore, the project has been reviewed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS). The review by NMFS resulted in several measures to avoid adverse affection on ESA -listed fish, which included the following: (1) Limit in -water work to August 1- August 31 when aquatic species are at least risk; (2) Replace disturbed vegetation with appropriate plantings; (3) New riparian plantings shall be monitored, and replanted as necessary for a minimum of 3 years following project completion; (4) Minimize soil disturbance and use appropriate sediment control measures; (5) Apply standard BMPs to prevent contaminated spills, and; (6) Monitor the construction reach for turbidity and temporarily halt work if high turbidity results from construction activities. An exemption from a Shoreline Management Substantial Development Permit is hereby granted on the proposed project in accordance with RMC 4-9-190.C.5, and/or for the following reason(s): Normal maintenance or repair of existing structures or developments, including damage by accident, fire or elements. 1. "Normal repair" means to restore a development to a state comparable to its original condition, including but not limited to its size, shape, configuration, location and external appearance, within a reasonable period after decay or partial destruction, except where repair causes substantial adverse effects to the shoreline resource or environment. 2. Replacement of a structure or development may be authorized as repair where such replacement is the common method of repair for the type of structure or development and the replacement structure or development is comparable to the original structure or development including, but not limited to, its size, shape, configuration, location and external appearance and the replacement does not cause substantial adverse effects to shoreline resources or environment. City of Renton Deportment of Commun. Economic Development Certificate of ExemF rom Shoreline Substantial Development Cedar River Levee Remediation Lt1A11-056, SME DATE DF PERMIT: July 7, 2011 Page 3 of 3 The proposed development is consistent or inconsistent with (check one): CONSISTENT XX INCONSISTENT Policies of the Shoreline Management Act. N/A The guidelines of the Department of Ecology where no Master (Program has been finally approved or adapted by the Department. XX The City of Renton Shoreline Master Program. DATE OF DECISION ON LAND USE ACTION: SIGNATURE: C.E. "Chip" Vincent, Planning Director Planning Division Attachments: Vicinity/Neighborhood Detail Map Site Plan Engineering Design Sheets U.S. Fish and Wildlife concurrence NMFS consultation LUA97-192 Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Environmental Determination —Adoption of Existing Environmental Document cc: Owner/Applicant Contact City of Renton Official File 3-1+/, Date CITY OF RENTON SHORELINE MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1871 PERMIT FOR SHORELINE MANAGE?IAENT SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION NO.: HATE RECEIVED: DATE OF PUBLIC NOTICE: DATE APPROVED: DATE DENIED: TYPE OF ACTION(S): LUA-97.192,SP,SM Dooember 19, 1997 December 29, 1997 January ©, 1998 NIA I X I Subetanllal Development Permit I 1 Conditional Use Permit (I Variance Permit Pursuant to Chapter 90.58 RCW, the City of Renton has grantedldenled a pwn* This action was taken on the following application: APPLICANT: PROJECT: DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SEC-TWNP-R: WITHIN SHORELINES OF: APPLICABLE MASTER PROGRAM: SUSWV.DOC City of Renton Surface Water UglitY, Attn.: Ross Hathaway Cedar fter Section 205 Flood Damage Reduction Project CRY of Renton seeks approval of a 10 Year Permit for dredging of the Cedar rRhW from 1ft" Avenue to the mouth of the Cedar River, Project will Include levees and food walls to control f ooding during storm events. and modifications to the South Boeing Bridge to allow It to be fitted during tfood events. The Project also Includes the construction of spawning channel approxima" BD0 bet long and Other habitat enhancements at the Cedar River Regional Park area and temporary erosion contra) for a temporary stockpile area at the MARCO alto. See attached. Sacs 7, 17, 21, 3 22, T23N, RSE Lake Washington 6 Cedar River City of Renton Ash Cr1y or /lento» PiS�Fw Aeyertrnent , Subst nsM DWoW rn.m Awft �1 IAlllgl� -- I.PIP�� The following "don/page of the Master Program is applicable to the development Sodfon Doxw ption pop 4.01 Shoreline Uses S Act Aas Elemant page 14. 4.02 Conservation Element page 16 6.03 Conservancy Environment page 20 6.04 Urban Environment page 22- 7.08 Dredging page 28. Development of this project shall be undertaken pursuant to the bilowing terms and conditions: 1. The City shall ensure that best management prectleas are followed to prevent soll erosion and turbulence in the river to the extent possible. 2. City staff shall coordinate the work In the river with the Aquhr Protection Prograrri 3. The mitigation measures contained within the EIS shall be followed during the fife of the project This permit ie granted pursuant to the Shoreline Management Action of 1971 and pursuant to the following: 1. The issuance of a license under the Shcrellne Management Act of 1971 shall not release the applicant from compllanoo with federal, state, and other permit requirements. 2. This permit may be rescinded pursuant to Section 14(7) of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 In the event the permlttee fails to comply with any condiBon hereof. 3. A construction permit shall not be isepied until thirty (30) days after approval by the City of Renton Development Services Division or until any review proceedings initlatad within this thirty (30) day review period have been completed. Planninglt3 d g Publ orke Admin strator toate SUaaEV.oOC ID CITY'rOF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner. Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator January 47, 9999 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 ®rN. wpw wAaft %,*uVd d mrad,a" rox po,i 0 lw , r r .••ti•t :?E... } :Y'AwrvF T S •! I A .y F•; •1i� �: J:r_ r•:t,+ s''f_. : is •.•s': :i% y�r�,,i'!({i.�"'�[�yl�f{y ,}1 ray�+k- '� 3 a. ty t 3 •{ { ' -ti'?`:. ', �ljFt llt^'•��,}'��'[�i '�J�r ��t`�fa i` yr s! 5r h ! ' '' K�' js. fir., r� �r Washington Slate ' Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 !} '' Subject: Environmental Determinations S Transmitted herewith is a Copy of the notice for on Adoption of Existing Environmental Document. The City of Renton's Environmental Review Committee adopted the EIS for the Cedar River Section 205 Project on January 0, 1298. The EIS was prepared by the US Army Corps of Engineers for the Cedar River 205 Project. Public hearings were held In the City of Renton at the time the document was prepared. Public comment and appeal periods were sattslted during the preparation of the document and Its adoption by the Corps, CEDAR RIVER SECTION 205 LUA-97.192,812,61111 :.;:•`. ' ::. ' S The applicant weeks approval of a 10 year permit to dredge the Cedar River from Williams Avenue to the mount of the Cedar River. The project will also Include levees andlor walls to Control flooding during storm events. Dredge spoils will either be removed by barge or overland by truck. Temporary storage of the dredging spoils would be located at the Cily's NARCO site or will be sold or donated to other projects. The City will also cmale a salmon spawning channel, provide plantings, and other measures to mitigate for the Impact on the river. If you have questions, please call me at (425) 277-5588. For the Environmental Revlew Committee, Maris R. P AICP Senlur Planner i tl. 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 ®rN. wpw wAaft %,*uVd d mrad,a" rox po,i 0 lw , r r .••ti•t :?E... } :Y'AwrvF T S •! I A .y F•; •1i� �: J:r_ r•:t,+ s''f_. : is •.•s': :i% y�r�,,i'!({i.�"'�[�yl�f{y ,}1 ray�+k- '� 3 a. ty t 3 •{ { ' -ti'?`:. ', �ljFt llt^'•��,}'��'[�i '�J�r ��t`�fa i` yr s! 5r h ! ' '' K�' js. fir., r� �r cc: King County Water Pollution Control Dlvtslon, Metro s Larry Flsher, Department of Fisheries David F. Dletzman, Department of Natural Resources Don Hurler, Department of Transportation Shirley Lukhang, Seattle Public Utilities Duwamish Tribal Office Rod Malcom, Fisheries, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (Ordinance) Joe Jainga, Puget Sound Energy 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 ®rN. wpw wAaft %,*uVd d mrad,a" rox po,i 0 lw , r r .••ti•t :?E... } :Y'AwrvF T S •! I A .y F•; •1i� �: J:r_ r•:t,+ s''f_. : is •.•s': :i% y�r�,,i'!({i.�"'�[�yl�f{y ,}1 ray�+k- '� 3 a. ty t 3 •{ { ' -ti'?`:. ', �ljFt llt^'•��,}'��'[�i '�J�r ��t`�fa i` yr s! 5r h ! ' '' K�' js. fir., r� �r C—D WAC 197-11-965 Adoption YnAice. ADOPTION OF EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL. DOCUMENT Adoption for (check appropriate box) DNS X EIS other Description of current proposal The 2MOCIe I n g the IM FiR=xlmatsly 1.25 Miles of the c2dar River upsireama a ora e of the -dredge 2p2112 ol th C u $ a salmon spabMinp channel wIll stAo be part ote prolW- Proponent City of Rentor Location of current proposal De " "`ect Is located a ontl the lower approximately 1.25 miles of Lh2 51ream of-Lakg Washinutgo, Tom rary slorage the Othech dyer ly,11 I o a e stru a le b e d e a Ced er R f e P is Title of document being adopted FINAL D9161LED EflgAECT RgEORT IME&Qj STATIEMRSC 2Q5—R9t9T0N, W G Agency that prepared document being adopted Unilo fttesAEMy Corps of 900neffl Date adopted document ►vas prepared June 1997 Description of document (or portion) being adopted Final EIS Portion of document If the document being adopted has been challenged (WAC 197-11.630 ), please describe: Docum�nS hu already een finalIzed, a s e pagn a The document is available to be read at (ptaccltime) 139nion C -Hall th rd floor service unter durina regular i ou We have identified and adopted this document as bring appropriate for this proposal after irdq=dent review. The document meets our environmental review needs for the current proposal and will accompany the proposal to the dccisionmaker. Name of agency adopting document City ot_ RUM Contact person, ifothcr than responsible official Ross fiathawav Phone:(425) 277-6205 Responsible official: Gregg Zlmtrtemtan Position/title AdminigMtor Alannino/BuildinutPublie orks Phone 4 5 77 1 Address: 200 mill Ave South: RentDo Washington_ 9805 Date —L4* Signature lSm W7 AuthmitY RCW 43.2lC t t0. C4.05-020 (O.WWO D8 31-3 1 n9 1"965 , filed VIOR4, et&aiw 4!4/84.1 suAADPT.DCc% M CRY aROnrorr 1i8PW DoAa+onrn! Prt+%rrhtrry ItwMla on Mmft Frnn*or tafJAR1PIYlRAIraDRgMa LUA•0 402.0P human Created pond exists an the NARCO do off the extreme south edge of the proposed spoils pile location. The USACE feels this Is a water of the United States; City Code Indicates this Is possibly a Category " wetland (4.32.3 D,3.) and may require a 25 foot setback (4.32-3 F (3)). We will provide a minimum 25 foot setback from the pond. Sediment transport analysis of the selected project design Indicates that maintenance dredging may be required as often as every throe years to maintain the design level of protection. Approximately 50% of the Cmaments] plantings in the Park downstream of Logan Avenue will be removed and several trees along the left bank will also be removed. The Park will be restored after completion of the work. Storm drainage Improvements, Including water quality treatment, will be provided on the NARCO elle if It is used. This would cenelst of ■ grass lined swale marginal to the dredge spoils pile, setting pond with elevated outlet, and normal construction erosion control meawres, it should be noted that the dredge spoils will consist primarily of very clean gravel and rock, which are sooty woll dralning, and will not readily erode In a stockpile. Therefore the dredge spelt stockpile will not be covered, and additional slormwater detention will not be necessary. A spawning channel Is to be Installed upstream at the Coder River Regional Park oust upstream Of the Maplewood Golf Course). The spawning channel will require excavation of approximately 7500 Cy of native material and placement of up to 700 CY of gravel and bank stabilization materlale. Excavated materials will be re.distfibuted on site or transported elsewhere in the project as needed. Excavation of the spawning channel will require the removal of several trees (primarily cottonwoods and broad leaf maples) and some other vegetation. Alter constr u tlon, the areas will be replanted with trees and shrubs. Impervious area will not be changed by the project. Locally, where levees block existing flows, the area will be regraded to prevent ponding. Existing outfalls to the river will be fitted with flap gates to eAminate flow reversal during high flow periods. 2. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and SEPA (RCW 43.21C. 1071 as amended), on January 6, 1990 the Environmental Review Commitee adopted the EIS Issued by the US Army Corps of Engineers. COMPLIANCE WITH ERC MITIGATION MEASURES Tl:e mitigation described above will be constructed as part of this project. The proposed work is In compliance with, and a required part of, the above referenced project. All work will be designed and constructed to comply with all applicable local, State and Federal environmental regulations. 4. STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS Representatives from various city departments have reviewed the application materials to Identify and address alto plan issues from the proposed development. These comments are contained In the official file, and the essence of the comments has been Incorporated Into the appropriate sections of this report and the Departments] Recommendation at the and of the report. HBXRPT3,00C CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: December 30, 1997 TO: ERC FROM: ark R. Pywcil Ross Hathaway SUBJECT: Cedar River Section 205 Proicct Please find herewith a SEPA adoption foam (Adoption of Existing Environmental Document) for the HIS (Final Environmental Impact Statement) for above referenced project. The HIS was written and adopted through the Federal Process with the intent to satisfy both NEPA and SEPA requirements. Public hearings were held in the City of Rcuton for the FEIS, all comment periods have concluded and the FEIS has been published in the Federal Register. The City worked closely with the U.S Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) in writing, reviewing and adopting the FEIS. The Headquarters USACE has requested minor clarifications in the document, this work is scheduled for completion in mid-January 1998. These clarifications will not require further public comment or adoption procedures for the HIS. Q, Rea S4aka UARI IA9'HA WAW,R2asW4RKill ltCMMo. noc q 3' ala+ 4 1tX �'fr hie`"' r v )a ; r - {' CC h^^P��t��'� yry f,' YS. � Y rr �� i i• 5. MITIGATION AND MONITORING PLAN The Corps has selected the minlmaf dredging alternative (4 feet) as the preferred alternative and the proposed mitigation and monitoring plan reflect thA Impacts identified for this alternative. However, the local sponsor previously expressed an interest In pursuing the moderate dredge alternative, possibly after Initial construction If the sedimentation rate in the channel requires more frequent dredging than is anticipated. Therefore, after discussing mitigation for the.preferred alternative, Section 5,7 was Included in the draft EIS and discusses likely additional mitigation.that would be required for the moderate dredge (6 foot) alternative. This section has been retained in the final EIS to show the differences between the alternatives. For the preferred alternative, Impacts have been avoided to the maximum extent practicable while still accomplishing the project purpose of 100 year flood control along the lower Cedar River In Renton. The delta will not be dredged as a part of initial construction because it does not affect flood control levels and may provide significant environmental values to fish and wildlife species. The vegetation along the right bank between Logan Avenue and the south Boeing bridge will be left intact because of the riparian benefits it provides. Headcutting will be avoided or significantly reduced by the additional dredging upstream of Logan Avenue to bring the dredged slope up to the existing grade. This will prevent rapid sediment movement upstream of Logan Avenue following construction and maintenance dredging and avoid impacts to spawning salmon and their eggs. u i u •i311114DIOW1 The preferred alternative minimizes dredging induced impacts to the maximum extent feasible. It provides a balance between dredge depth and levee height to maximize flood control while reducing the extent of lake backwater by minimizing dredge depth to to 4 feet (1.2 m). Possible adverse impacts from the placement of riprap along the left bank for 400 feet (120 m) between Logan Avenue and the south Boeing bridge have been minimized by placing riprap only below the OHWM and during construction the rock will be staggered, rather than creating a smooth rock face, to create holding areas for adult salmon. The construction and maintenance work window (for In -water work) f has been voluntarily reduced to June 15 - August 31, rather than the usual June 15 - .,j September 15 window because of the early sockeye and chinook adult migrants that enter the river In early September. 5.3 Rectification of Adverse lmoact5 Adverse impacts that can be rectified during and after construction Include impacts to riparian vegetation from the construction of levees. Existing vegetation along the left bank will be removed during construction of the sheet -pile fioodwall and rock toe to protect this bank. This impact will be rectified by replanting vegetation along the bank, J 84 u 07/02/2011 ij -.1 5. MITIGATION AND MONITORING PLAN The Corps has selected the minlmaf dredging alternative (4 feet) as the preferred alternative and the proposed mitigation and monitoring plan reflect thA Impacts identified for this alternative. However, the local sponsor previously expressed an interest In pursuing the moderate dredge alternative, possibly after Initial construction If the sedimentation rate in the channel requires more frequent dredging than is anticipated. Therefore, after discussing mitigation for the.preferred alternative, Section 5,7 was Included in the draft EIS and discusses likely additional mitigation.that would be required for the moderate dredge (6 foot) alternative. This section has been retained in the final EIS to show the differences between the alternatives. For the preferred alternative, Impacts have been avoided to the maximum extent practicable while still accomplishing the project purpose of 100 year flood control along the lower Cedar River In Renton. The delta will not be dredged as a part of initial construction because it does not affect flood control levels and may provide significant environmental values to fish and wildlife species. The vegetation along the right bank between Logan Avenue and the south Boeing bridge will be left intact because of the riparian benefits it provides. Headcutting will be avoided or significantly reduced by the additional dredging upstream of Logan Avenue to bring the dredged slope up to the existing grade. This will prevent rapid sediment movement upstream of Logan Avenue following construction and maintenance dredging and avoid impacts to spawning salmon and their eggs. u i u •i311114DIOW1 The preferred alternative minimizes dredging induced impacts to the maximum extent feasible. It provides a balance between dredge depth and levee height to maximize flood control while reducing the extent of lake backwater by minimizing dredge depth to to 4 feet (1.2 m). Possible adverse impacts from the placement of riprap along the left bank for 400 feet (120 m) between Logan Avenue and the south Boeing bridge have been minimized by placing riprap only below the OHWM and during construction the rock will be staggered, rather than creating a smooth rock face, to create holding areas for adult salmon. The construction and maintenance work window (for In -water work) f has been voluntarily reduced to June 15 - August 31, rather than the usual June 15 - .,j September 15 window because of the early sockeye and chinook adult migrants that enter the river In early September. 5.3 Rectification of Adverse lmoact5 Adverse impacts that can be rectified during and after construction Include impacts to riparian vegetation from the construction of levees. Existing vegetation along the left bank will be removed during construction of the sheet -pile fioodwall and rock toe to protect this bank. This impact will be rectified by replanting vegetation along the bank, J 84 u 07/02/2011 N 85 Y. J- V Y 11� !& j above the rock revetment. However, a temporal loss of vegetation will still occur periodic maintenance dredging which will remove Invertebrates during their mexI mum because the existing trees along the left bank are more than 20 years old. Vegetation growth period. Also. the Increase In lake backwater will reduce habitat for organisms along the left bank will be salvaged, and replanted In other locations near the river that prefer higher velocities while Increasing habitat for organisms that prefer lower bank, to the maximum extent practicable to rectify adverse impacts from the loss of this vegetation. 5.4 Unavoidable. Adverse lMogM Unavoidable adverse Impacts remaining after avoidance, minimization and rectification of adverse Impacts are the following for the, 4 foot (1.2 m) dredge I Loss of poor to moderate quality adult salmon (sockeye, chinook, coho feet OW M) and/or steelh ead) spawning habitat between 1000 feet (300 m) and 3300 (I upstream of the mouth, which will likely become embedded with sands and finer sediments due to the lake backwater area Increase. A maximum of 235 redds have been observed In this area during the salmon spawning season. so eflectNe loss of habitat Is estimated to be 2560 -MO te (235-352 rrt�. 2) Periodic loss, of approximately 45.000 feet' (4100 m) of bank scour holding areas for adult salmon, juvenile salmonArout and resident trout. This habitat will be lost Immediately after periodic maintenance dredging due to the trapezoidal shape of the dredged channel. It Is expected that during the first winter season after dredging, the channel will readjust Itself and create bank scour pool habitat. The 253,000 ft' (5.8 acres or 23,230 m) of Increased lake backwater will provide additional lower velocity holding habitat below 3300 feet (1000 m) from the mouth, but will not provide any effective holding habitat upstream. 3) Loss of 253.000 feet' (5.8 acres or 23,230 rn�of possible coastrange and torrent sculpin habitat due to lake backwater Increase; this habitat will now be suitable by An for prickly sculpin and will increase prickly sculpin habitat an equal amount. increase In prickly sculpin habitat and population will likely cause a decrease In sockeye and ehinook fry survival in the lower river. 4) Probable decline of brook lamprey populations due to periodic maintenance dredging operations. 85 Y. J- V Y 11� !& j Probable decline In aquatic Invertebrate diversity and abundance due to periodic maintenance dredging which will remove Invertebrates during their mexI mum growth period. Also. the Increase In lake backwater will reduce habitat for organisms that prefer higher velocities while Increasing habitat for organisms that prefer lower velocities. Therefore, diversity and abundance of aquatic Invertebrates are expected to decrease. 85 Y. J- V Y 11� !& j To compensate for unavoidable impacts, the Corps proposes to: (see Figures w! 16,17&18) 1) Plant riparian vegetation along both banks. Along the right bank from the F south Boeing bridge down to the mouth, In approximately a 10.15 feet (3-4. mat wide, This will replace predominantly non-native vegetation and lawn with app 52,000 square teat (4,821 0) of native riparian vegetation. On the right bank, this vegetation will include willows, Oregon ash, mock orange, snowberry, salmon berry, currants, salal and other species. 'these plantings will have several public access and access the river, It desired. On the lest bank, openings to allow park users to view x ' willows will be planted riverward of the floodwall from Logan Avenue down to ,r approximately 2000 feet (60D m) from the mouth, In approximately a 6-1D feet (nm wide strip. These plantings will temporally replace vegetation lost on the left ba -10 nk during construction and also contribute In and detrital material to the river to compensate for possibly reduced aquatic Invertebrate production. Additionally this ` riparian vegetation because of its roots and downed limbsArees will likely create scour pools for additional adult salmon holding habitat. On the right bank the trees will be planted on 20 foot centers, and the shrubs will be plant grouped with the trees; approximaL'!V 6 shrubs per tree. Ground eillbe d on 3 foot centers. This planting scheme will provide a total of approximately00 tes, 1200 shrubs, and 3500 groundcovers of various types. The openings for public access and viewing will be approximately 30 feet wide, with a minimum of 4 access locations .;: provided. 2) Create a groundwater fed pool and side channel at an upstream floodplain location with groundwater near the surface (upper Elliot levee site, see Figures 178.19). This pool and side channel will be connected at the downstream and A to the Cedar River to allow use of the channel by both adult salmon for spawning F; habitat and juvenile salmon for winter refuge and rearing. The channel will be approxlmately 9000 to (826 Wf in size with additional pond habitat. It is expected that this channel will replace the poor to moderate quality spawning habitat lost due to the project and will additionally increase survival for the eggs in the gravel, over existing conditions, end will compensate for probable Increased predation In the lower river. Survival of the eggs will be increased because the channel will have moderate velocity flows except during flows X6300 cis and will not be scoured as easily as mainstem areas. Native trees and shrubs will be planted (or lett in place) in two acres *r, surrounding the side channel and pond. 'The groundwater ted channel will be oversized to allow for less than complete spawning coverage. It is r -i expected that only 50% of the channel will actually be used for spawningthis will adequate lY ' compensate for lost spawning habitat, as well as providing additional area for increased production of try. ;N B6 yrty..} yiTST __� rwwr�FM.srrr..w._" t a i y yY�+c ` { _ `i i �W . f F , 31 i ri: '�r�? n� �"FH h•'' � �{J + t � t z z s F i _..'h �a "Kt'�i(sslyr y 4 kFr 2g ri �♦ iy�x N ti + _ 1 + - lie a! ,:�3��1`�f I5+ ��'� }Fy LJ•i � v J f -}. i 4 . 1,rillYf. `r rif4 {I'+ff?){k l'x1�f+�"T'7�4 hu} ♦{Sfi {'1 F Y 1 Y< k�fr 5S • ,� Yr v4�d 3 El., s t 7 - t i {� n t ,?t7 rx� 4y --ri � �s �r� �r 1• � t rFf a F [i � tw ? r r' K, +. JJ.z S.{15 MIN" r Y 0 7 0 GYM s, Mohoring Plan .y � Studies are currently g g P oin on at the upstream mitigation site to determine the depth to ri r? groundwater and the flow during summer. Preliminary Investigations Indicate that the y' groundwater ranges from 3.8 feet (0.9.2.4 m) below the surface In the area of the r " proposed channel. The site Is In approximately the 10 year floodplaln and would begin receiving water at flows above 8300 cis. All measures to protect the site from flood i : •; scouring or deposition will be Investigated. The channel will be designed to ensure that it functions as a moderate velocity channel during most river flows and to avoid the for H- •, ". -. ill need continued maintenance to keep the channel functioning. ,. 3) Provide mainstem rearing habhat for Chinook try by either of the fallowing Place h , : a) LWD In the mainstem Cedar (for approximately 500 linear feet) adjacent to O r: the upstream groundwater fed channel site for chinook rearing. Chinook fry survival will be reduced and this habitat improvement will create an area of reduced velocity for UO feeding and cover for chinook fry as they rear In the mainstem river. Or b) Revegetate r..: and place LWD at the levee at the Maplewood Golf Course to provide cover and rearing habitat for Chinook. -77 W". :§��'�i ;,-F •: 1 '- -: 1 �s 7��'P-h���:-err}�it.i.�la'�� 07/02/2011 Mohoring Plan monitored. Specifically, bird species and numbers will be monitored on the delta, park ri a 4, In order to confirm the extent of impacts on key species and determine if the mitigation r ... ` pian is successful, monitoring will be conducted for a period of five years. Monitoring of r r the mitigation elements will include: : •; t) In years 1,2 and 5 after construction, the riparian vegetation plantings will H- •, ". -. ill be evaluated for percent cover, canopy cover over the river and percent survival. Percent cover must be In the range of 40-60% In year 1, 75% In year 2 and 80-90% In h , : year five, Shrub and some tree canopy cover by year five should be within 5°% of the O '! cover found upstream of the south Boeing bridge where riparian vegetation already E;.. y exists. Percent survival should remain steady at 90-95%. if excessive mortality occurs in year 1, the contractor will be responsible for replacing plants. It is assumed that the _ contractor will provide supplemental watering during year 1. After year 1, the City of ' Renton will be responsible for supplementing if the plants continue to die. Monitoring will occur during the August -September timeframe to encompass the maximum growth of each season. Photos and a brief report will summarize each year's findings. D -77 W". :§��'�i ;,-F •: 1 '- -: 1 �s 7��'P-h���:-err}�it.i.�la'�� 07/02/2011 In connection with the vegetation monitoring, bird use of the project area will ile monitored. Specifically, bird species and numbers will be monitored on the delta, park a 4, and riparian zone at varying times of day (early morning, mld-day, evening times monitored each month) in years 1 and 2 after construction. Effort will be focused on the r lower 3900 feet (1200 m) of the river (below the south Boeing bridge), to specificy all : •; determine changes that may affect airport operations. H- •, ". -. ill 2) In years 1,2 and 5 after construction side channel will be evaluated to ,the determine: it excessive sediment embedding has occurred, it access Is sufficient to allow adult salmon utilization and the canopy cover from riparian plantings. The O channel will be constructed with a gravel substrate. The sediment will be monitored to 87 -77 W". :§��'�i ;,-F •: 1 '- -: 1 �s 7��'P-h���:-err}�it.i.�la'�� 07/02/2011 5 T' determine If sediment accumulation has occurred, to what depth and what size of substrate. 18% or more embedding fine material (sands and silt) is unacceptable and Q egg survival Is significantly reduced In such areas. The channel will also be periodically monitored to determine use by adult'salmon'for holding or spawning (redd r} counts, live fish counts). Canopy cover will be measured during August -September ZJ timeframe to encompass the maximum growth of each seasons. By year 2, canopy cover s'tould be In the rangf of 50.80%, by year 5, canopy cover should be 70-80%. Photos and a brief report will summarize each year's findings. q if during the five year monitoring period, it is determined that any of the mitigation n elements are not successful; for example, the riparian vegetation is not 4� grow[ng/surviving or the side channel has filled with sediment, then a contingency plan will be implemented. Contingency actions have not yet been determined, but will be determined during the permitting process, with the appropriate state and federal �i resource agencies and the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe. it Is expected that additional plantings to replace dead plants, or an alternate mitigation site for salmon spawning would need to be accomplished as a contingency measure. The evaluation of Impacts In the planning process and this EIS Indicates, based on three years of data, that longfin smell spawning will not be significantly affected by the construction of a flood control project. In order to confirm and document that this Is the case, longfin smelt spawning will be monitored. A Eggs will be collected for longlin smelt in years 1,2 and 4 following construction (one low year and two high spawning population years, 1899, 2000, and 2002). Eggs will be sampled at 300 meter Intervals similar to the study conducted in 1998. Three samples will be collected at each transect up to 1800 meters from the mouth on a monthly basis from late January to May. Egg abundance and distribution will be compared to the pro - dredging studies. OIn order to ensure that the mitigation measures are adequate, sockeye redd counts will be conducted yearly for five years from Wells Street to the mouth. These counts will occur once monthly in October, November and December (if possible). Spawning distribution will be compared to counts prior to construction. The side channel will also be observed for spawning as described above, 5.7 Imogets and Mitigation for hdgdwWa Dredge Aftemative The moderate dredge alternative would not avoid and minimize adverse Impacts to the extent that the preferred alternative (minimum dredge alternative) does. The same and additional unavoidable adverse Impacts would likely occur compared to the preferred alternative, primarily due to the increased area of lack backwater that would result from a deeper dredge depth. Expected additional unavoidable adverse Impacts are: 1) Lass of poor to good quality adult salmon (sockeye, chinook, coho and/or steelhead) spawning habitat between 1000 feet (300 m) and 4200 feet (1300 m) �. 88 i„r �7' o.2/2`o 1 r t`�. 0 upstream of the mouth, which will become embedded with sands and finer sediments 1 due to the lake backwater area Increase. A maximum of 435 redds have been -...:Y observed In this area during the salmon spawning season, so effective loss of habitat Is estimated to be 4740-7100 fe (435.850 m'). 2) toss of 352,000 ft' (8 acres or 32,320 m') of probable coastrange and torrent sculpin habitat due to lake backwater increase; this habitat will now be suitable for prickly sculpin and will Increase prickly sculpin habitat by an equal amount. An Increase in prickly sculpin habitat and population will likely cause a decrease in sockeye fry survival In the lower river. Other unavoidable adverse Impacts would be similar to that described for the preferred allernative'ln Section 5.4. In order to adequately mitigate for these additional impacts, it is expected that y Increasing the size of the proposed groundwater fed pond and channel (Section 5.5) would suffice. Increasing the size of the pond/channel to 18,000-20,000 fl' (11352.1840 rn j and Increasing plantings to three acres surrounding the pond/channel should O adequately mitigate for the Increase In lake backwater area due to additional dredging depth. Additional rearing habitat for chinook would also need to be created to compensate for reduced survival due to predation In the lower river. h: f ,a.'t Sx1 , F - � �ib 4 � i ✓ r It r�; � r 1+ +���� '� •' 'iJr'.i,a 3.�L!`S.#e.t.a tiF Gi''✓�h1r t„4 1L s' t•� - :3Ey + _rte 1L .fi t'. nY 6 t� J'"✓ +1:+' ,,Ya.. t' a j1 ar : t p ryXr' r Ar �$ war 22 r -_. Rvfr J - F1 ��`� 5, Ffi •.t. +i r 7� t 5 f* h ry. } y t5:b h •y S��`r _4� ����ri �ti � k�1r i.�r r.° tr tt tp - '}sof �f � �r �i l}�rt4� ' }c�k �� �+'�.r.� j'�1- i J: r �'r"„(r}' r�' ;l��i �{ � �r yy, # '+ �i. '1 ' ���':js. L ♦t'- V-6j''�� +r -«.k �?�'��''i4 ��dV��EY� -- � �i.. - 6i 'V 1 n-6, rl, ( S . S• j- �. i + � s r - G� 'Y ^•E s- f li' ��ita��i�,�i - �k. ,ts�.�`7 !"���k� t J �" '`, � � ' >1 � tr I �.,, - '�#.•�q"`C}Cn7' -.i7t-,*�s.. tf_�.X��k'y Y'i' -0 7/0 2/2 011 as ,a.'t Sx1 , F - � �ib 4 � i ✓ r It r�; � r 1+ +���� '� •' 'iJr'.i,a 3.�L!`S.#e.t.a tiF Gi''✓�h1r t„4 1L s' t•� - :3Ey + _rte 1L .fi t'. nY 6 t� J'"✓ +1:+' ,,Ya.. t' a j1 ar : t p ryXr' r Ar �$ war 22 r -_. Rvfr J - F1 ��`� 5, Ffi •.t. +i r 7� t 5 f* h ry. } y t5:b h •y S��`r _4� ����ri �ti � k�1r i.�r r.° tr tt tp - '}sof �f � �r �i l}�rt4� ' }c�k �� �+'�.r.� j'�1- i J: r �'r"„(r}' r�' ;l��i �{ � �r yy, # '+ �i. '1 ' ���':js. L ♦t'- V-6j''�� +r -«.k �?�'��''i4 ��dV��EY� -- � �i.. - 6i 'V 1 n-6, rl, ( S . S• j- �. i + � s r - G� 'Y ^•E s- f li' ��ita��i�,�i - �k. ,ts�.�`7 !"���k� t J �" '`, � � ' >1 � tr I �.,, - '�#.•�q"`C}Cn7' -.i7t-,*�s.. tf_�.X��k'y Y'i' -0 7/0 2/2 011 a cf FIGURE 16: r MITIGATION PLAN SWIG N . or v N J 4, N N O N W G FIGURE 16;(CCNT.) un nn I.i Rorr[s rrrui•iwr Mn ocsrw ru. rrwPa..eaw f�' 1 ? F � l 1� � • l 1 ��• 1 1 I ; V y1! ! f 1 I I- �'r' 1 .i 5 r•1 { 1 y i �. ii, . '' : . r ..•1 '..15 , il� rP rf� `yS ! t A , Ay ' y Y il�l...l: i . • . . . q'. a4 �`',_ +i , ' •i+� fid^? i, 4y s� _�' z r RPM.'•. 3C gr`�. 4 .� ' i•w , + t�' : ;, [, :# j y s �� i C, ' i r it ` d Rif ON i . r� � ti'�li bila � s t� as•I• ..s. ■f_"�"�� ®--mom ��a�iiF Se�uon uuy Mitigation site, Elliott Levee Section 22, Range S E, Township 23 N +29 acre she; +b acres requirad for spawning channel and access. 1' Site diagram nol to scale. Legend Streets Cedar River Mitigation Site }11;11,111 Golf Course Source Information VL140 boundaryry lnrormAlfPn abmMaa from V4titRM2ton Rfrara Jn'brmatloa WAr�lrlmn2�fan OSM mnortt o ' IM1�lQllr (yypW�, Gry boundada; savatr, pent and fluor h Lbruon o 1r�ed hon, KM2 Coungr. FIGURE 17: Upstream Mitigation Site N r r ,.a.r..w .I.L r t .. c«r. a E w +�mmrrl , r LIS Army Corps of Engineers PAO T ' w ■u.. ■ +�. r.l. w i �, Dale: 8!6!87 A30D 0 3001300 Feel w , '0rb a WM a,°'*w„`�,A M IAMT INATao 10 Pfeparer: LOD ® WMRNiT1E/ ar YER=FAaiUlt oa R� S FOR A ►AR=NM JA NCR ARE ANr •UfJI WARAANTEiE * aE RPM W" Pa"CT ro Tw NirowArCN, CAT4 OR SEmrroE iIMINlIN[O NEREIN. . 4 3 t ✓ .k ! .! � r i•. F4 r nr t 1 � 7 J r F X TYPICAL PLANTING SCHEME FOR RIPARIAN VEW i i ��/'1 .._.rr ~� � =;•NG ; iii $9. CHANNEL CONNECTS AT DOWNSTREAM END TO RIVER FIGURE 18 SIDE CHANNEL PLAN PREVIOUSLY USED AT ELLIOT LEVEE (FROM KING COUNTY) $0.140 I ir DUSLY USED AT ELLIOT LEVEE '�`��?M11R1Ab+h`1WM�ncw ...wins. I.avww`.- ••-+...'��`ti.wa. -, �Wn. - - 6. STATUS OF COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAWS AND REGULATIONS Throughout the planning process, coordination with representatives from federal, state and local agencies, and the Muckleshoot Indlan Tribe has been conducted. Table 5, below, summarizes the status of compliance with various applicable laws and regulations. r This will be In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act �;u4 proposed project (NEPA) and the State Environmental Policy act (SEPA) as a result of this EIS process and the serious consideration of comments received. The public review of the draft EIS revealed that there was no significant controversy about the proposed protect and ;,. preferred alternative. In general, most agencies and individuals support the project (see Appendix A). There were concerns about impacts to chinook salmon, especially in "` ` •.!; light of their potential listing as an endangered species. There were also requests for more information about the proposed mitigation site. In several sections, information ' has been added to clarify confusion which some commentors had about statements made in the draft EIS. Interested parties and agencies will continue to be Involved in the final designs of the project and mitigallon, This proposed project will be in compliance with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) and Endangered Species Act (ESA) per consultation with the U.S. Fish 8 Wildlife Service (FWS). The Corps has submittad a biological assessment (BA) of potential effects of the project on threatened or endangered species and the FWS has concurred with that assessment. The FWS has prepared a draft and final FWCA Report and the final report is enclosed as Appendix B to this final EIS. Responses of the Corps to the comments and recommendations within the final FWCA Report are included in Appendix B. The Corps has consulted with the Stale Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) on the possible effects on cultural or historic resources. The SHPO has concurred that no a, effects are expected (enclosed with DPR). The Corps is conducting an evaluation and review of compliance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the Coastal Zone Management Act, and Executive Orders 11988 and 11990. •requlred The local sponsor is to obtain the following permits prior to construction of the proposed project: Water Quality Certification and Water Quality Modification Hydraulic Project Approval City of Renton Shoreline Substantial Development Permit City of Renton Grading Permit 94 '�`��?M11R1Ab+h`1WM�ncw ...wins. I.avww`.- ••-+...'��`ti.wa. -, �Wn. - - �;u4 '07%DL %�2 City of Renton City a9gen'on LAND USE PERMIT uo., MASTER APPLICATION JUL—1411 PROPERTY OWNER(S) NAME: Clry o� Rt:knVt ADDRESS: fpr✓ ra $ • �►"'d`f CITY: (Mora .3 ZIP: '960$7 TELEPHONE NUMBER: (4Z5) 430 - -72-o5• APPLICANT (if other than owner) NAME: COMPANY (if applicable): ADDRESS: CITY: ZIP: TELEPHONE NUMBER: CONTACT„PERSON NAME:i�N 11 O r + ,m W COMPANY (if appli&ble}:: t���� yp�;t�``jt�'��,` ” C?fys'rf+verrtNlrt+sf,C\t ''+,iirri,rr►Is�i+�i ADDRESS: JOSS 5. cgfz4ov a" CITY: l�e�f ZIP: TELEPHONE NUMBER AND EMAIL ADDRESS: LqiS) *50 -72-oS S Ica @ Re4 nw2.YOV nR_ PROJECT INFORMA I PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: 2 o t l � G12 Ot1� J2� vt� C�ve1Er RgN A$ fU'TA'�7 PROJECTIADDRESS(S)ILOCATION AND ZIP CODE: L vwwz- [ zv ML 121 vcR R'vwxt t i k) Rati nwj 98055 'i KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): D•�23GSH�lDfZ i9•tirD d�23o5.-9o9(r EXISTING LAND USE(S): NA1'vv t_ Ra.SowA!ss, rvaVimc P*ev,_ PROPOSED LAND USE(S): g�E EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: N//Ir PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION (if applicable) EXISTING ZONING: 1J /.or PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): AJA SITE AREA (in square feet): 3,200 sF SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO BE DEDICATED: N/�F SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS: PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET ACRE (f applicable) - NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable) +U/IF NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): Ill�,4 • H 10ED\DataTorms-TemplateslSelf-Help Handouts0anningNmanerspp.doc - 1 - 03111 wv PROJECT INFORMAL NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable):. fflk SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): #J/4 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): FIIpr SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): N1h SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): NET FLOOR AREA ON NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): . 11 l NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): rL1+P. Uur+ te�Sfi'- ION continued PROJECT VALUE: if9aw ^ AO IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): ❑ AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA ONE ❑ AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA TWO ❑ FLOOD HAZARD AREA sq. ft. ❑ GEOLOGIC HAZARD sq. ft. ❑ HABITAT CONSERVATION sq. ft. ❑ SHORELINE STREAMS & LAKES sq. ft. 17 WETLANDS sq. ft. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Attach legal description on separate sheet with the following information, included SITUATE IN THE I~ Vi_ - QUARTER OF SECTION 0-7, TOWNSHIP Z1, RANGE _a,.IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AFFIDAVIT.OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Names) STry I t NG. E Lehi declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that I am (please check one) the current owner of the property involved in this application or X. the authorized representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, d aoG Signature o Owner/Representative Date Signature of Owner/Rep iit�rept�r+lDate STATE OF WASHINGTON) SS +`� �r COUNTY OF KING ) ` �i +o qG I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence than ���,�fj O signed this instrument and admowledge it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purpose mentioned in the instrument. WAsr� +IOw Dated Notary Public in and for the State of as-hii�n`gton(� Notary (Print):1� AT My appointment. expires: l l H:ICEDOats\Forms-TemplatesLSelf--Help HandoutsTimmmglmasterapp.doc - 2 - 03111 annrn enforl JU/ aft iexa �`y G 1 zo» STATE OF WASHINGTON z DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY ea:e§ PO Sox 47600 + Olympia, WA 98504-7600 - 360-407-6000 V eo 711 for Washington Relay Service - Persons with a speech disability can call 877-833-6341 May 31, 2011 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District Environmental and Cultural Resources Branch ATTN: Mr. Joshua Fitzpatrick P.O. Box 3755, Seattle, WA 98123-3755 RE: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) Reference No. PL -11-10 Cedar River Section 205 Levee Rehabilitation, King County, Washington, Dear Mr. Fitzpatrick: This letter is to confirm that the above -referenced project will not require an individual water - quality certification from the Department of Ecology (Ecology). Upon review of the May 4th, 2011 Memo that the Corps submitted, Ecology has determined that the project meets the requirements for Washington State 401 Water Quality Certification under Nationwide Permit (NWP) 3, Maintenance. Therefore; an Individual 401 certification will not be required for this project. If at any time the project changes from what is described within the May 4t' memo the Corps shall notify Ecology in writing before the new work begins. At that time Ecology will determine if any additional review is required. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this letter at (360) 407-6068 or e-mail lom461(g7ecv.wa og_v. Sincerely, r Loree' Randall 401/CZM Policy Lead Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program ECY RE FEDPERMITS Rebekah Padgett, Ecology HQ City of Renton Development Services Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 June 30, 2011 City Of/?L,4 P'annrt9 ' '�Qn '"`Sion JU( 1 �UII e�bie D RE: PROJECT NARRATIVE Shoreline Exemption Request for "Cedar River 205 Levee Rehabiliation Project" To City of Renton Development Services: The City of Renton Surface Water Utility is requesting Shoreline Exemption through the City of Renton Shoreline Master Program and State Shoreline Management Act. This project proposes to rehabilitate areas of the 205 Project damaged from the 2009 January flood which sheared off embankment soils, damaged gabions and earth toes is on the Cedar River Section 205 levee system at River Mile 0.20 {just upstream of the river boat launch). n The proposed project briefly described above repairs the original 205 Project that was approved in 1998 and built in 199912000. The original shoreline permit included V" construction of levees, dredging, tree planting, and construction of floodwalls. Damages caused by the recent 2009 January floods on the levee is necessitating repair of the original project that erected the right levee (Parks side). The Surface Water Utility is requesting an exemption for emergency construction based upon the following eligible list: 1. The project is repairing an existing structure that was damaged by the January 2009 flood that was previously permitted through the Cedar River Section 205 Project. 2. The project is related to emergency construction necessary to protect property from damage by the elements prior to start of 2011 winter river flows. The following project narrative, maps, figures, and proposed construction activity explains the extent of the repair project. Proiect Narrative: The proposed repair project, "Cedar River Section 205 Levee Rehabilitation Project", is located within the City of Renton, in King County, Washington. The City of Renton and Army Corp of Engineers (ACOE) jointly constructed the Section 205 Flood Control project in 1999 with mitigation elements completed in 2001. The 205 Project is located between the mouth of the Cedar River to the Williams Street Bridge or approximately 1.5 miles upstream of the mouth. The original project components included a series of interconnected levee and floodwalls to contain river flows greater than the 100 -year flood event. This levee and floodwall system protects the Renton airport to the west and Boeing properties to the east as well as other commercial properties and structures adjacent to the Cedar River. The location of the repairs within the original 205 Project limit is at Cedar River Mile (RM) 0.20 on the right bank (Parks side), and at RM 0.22 on the right bank (at the sand bar location and immediately upstream of the gabion section). R�0.2�0, will be referred to as " q eA" and Q22will be referred to as " _ite B". See Figure 1 for site plan project locations. CONSTRUCTION START AND END DATES: The proposed rehabilitation work needs to begin in -water work for Site A and Site B during August l" to August 31 st, as allowed by the Cedar River in water work window by NMFS and USFWS. The remaining out of water work would be completed after before August l" and some after August 31". These dates are within the "fisheries" construction period where any disturbance will not greatly affect migrating fish in the Cedar River. If work cannot be started before August 15`x, then this project will be scheduled to begin during the summer 2012. The project is anticipated to be finished in approximately 20 working days with 12 to 14 days of in -water working days. OTHER PERMITS: Other permits required for the proposed project include NOAA Fisheries approval with mitigation proposed `on-site' to compensate for placement of interwoven rock and spawning gravels to fill in voids in the rock. Vegetation is proposed to replace trees and brush disturbed during construction and includes additional willow plantings in the sand bar area. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) has been contacted 1 to inquire about any state HPA requirements. The original NEPA/SEPA is still enforce for this project and was developed by the Army Corp of Engineers (ACOE) via the Final Environmental Impact Statement that was adopted by the City of Renton as our SEPA. Public hearings were held in the City for the FEIS that the City worked closely with the USACE with in writing, reviewing and adopting the FEIS. EXISTING AND PROPOSED LANDUSE: The current use of the site is primarily as a levee and park area for the setback portions. No proposed landuse changes are proposed with this project. This project is primarily to remedy -damaged property from the January 2009 storm event that caused high river flows on the Cedar River. SPECIAL SITE FEATURES: The project site includes levees with vegetation near the river shore. No steep slopes or wetlands exist on-site excluding the Cedar River in stream area. Vegetation that will be disturbed was part of the original project and will be replaced with 15 gallon trees and brush. Grass areas disturbed will also be replaced. SOIL TYPES AND FEATURES: Soils in the project area consist of Oridia-Seattle-Woodinville association types with somewhat poorly drained with nearly level soils in major stream valleys. Gravels exist on the stream bank bottom with fill and side slopes occupying more organic and sandy material. Drainage onsite in the park all drain directly into the Cedar River. ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS: The estimated construction cost to construct the project is approximately $297,000.00, which includes costs for engineering and design by ALOE. The estimated fair market value of the project is negligible with all post -construction values of the property remaining the same. One can even argue that if left to deteriorate with future high river flows of the lower Cedar River, than the future value of the surrounding properties would be greatly diminished if flooding were to occur and left to deteriorate. The benefit to the immediate commercial properties is approximately $14,000,000.00 as assessed by the ACOE in their benefit to cost analysis. ESTIMATED UANTITIES: Class III riprap of approximately 4,000 tons (or 300 cubic yards) are estimated to be placed to stabilize the levee. The floodway storage will be increased as a result of the project due to pulling back the slope from it's existing toe. NUMBER, TYPE, AND SIZE OF TREES TO BE REMOVED: Approximately 27 project planted trees are expected to be removed in the project vicinity area and replaced with 15 gallon bucket trees approved by City Parks. Mostly ash trees and bush plantings will be removed in order to place rock at the toe of the bank. Trees and brush will be re -placed where they were removed. In addition, additional willow trees will be planted in the sand bar area. DISTANCE FROM ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK OHWM OF THE SHORELINE: Work will be constructed immediately within the OHWM to stabilize the levee. No equipment is anticipated to be placed in the Cedar River streambed, but will be staged on the bank with rock placed one at a time to minimize turbid flow in the Cedar River. EXISTING SHORELINE: The existing shoreline conditions along the project site include sections of eroded soil sloughing into the river, some ash and brush on the top of the vertical banks, some previously planted 205 brush along the levee slope/bench, and grass on the slope. ..t4 0 a CITY OF RENTON SHOREUNE MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1971 PERMIT FOR SHORELINE MANAGEMENT SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL, DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION NO.: DATE RECEIVED: DATE OF PUBLIC NOTICE: DATE APPROVED: DATE DENIED: TYPE OF ACTIO LUA-97-192,8P,SM December le, 1997 December 29, 1967 January 0, low NIA I X I Subatantlal Development Permit O Candltlonal Use Permit i 1 VOW= Permit Pursuant to Chapter 90,58 RCW, the City Of Renton has grentWdenled a permit: This scum was taken On IM following eppticallon: APPLICANT: C PROJECT: DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SEC-TWNP-R: WITHIN SHORELINES OF: APPLICABLE MASTER PRt]GRAM: SUMEV.DOC ly of Renton Surface Water Utility, Attn.: Ross Hathaway Cedar River Section 205 Flood Damage Reduction Project Cly of Renton sesks approval of a 10 year permit for dredging Of the Cedar River (ram WlHlarng Avenue to the mouth of the Cedar Rhrer. Projea will Include bvees and flood walk b control floodino during storm events; and mWiAcatlOns to the South Boeing Bddge to allow it to be pfted during flood events. The project @iso Includes the ooratr dM of spawning channel approximately 1100 het long and other habitat enhancements at the Cedar RIw Regional Park area and temporary erosion control for a t@mporary, stockpile area at the NARCO alto. Bee attechad. Sec.@ 7, 17, 21, & 22, T23N, R5E Lake Washington & Cadar River City of Renton r r Ivry of Rovrron PvarpwGvurmMt t SuDatanrW DrwkprrM�f pMrnlr MON POP 2 Of 3 The following sectio gMe of the Master Program Is applicable to the development: BOOM 0"*ft pop 4,01 Shorellns Uses & Activities Element page 14. 4.02 Conservation Element page 18 5.03 Conservancy Envlronment page 20 5.04 Urban Wronment page 22, 7.08 Dredging page 28. Development of this project shell be undertaken pursuant to the fogowhg terms and conditions: 1. The Cly shell ensure that best management practices are followed to prevent call eroslon and turbulence in the river to the extent possible. 2. Cly staff shall coordinsts the work In the river with the Aquifer Protectlon Program. 3. The mitigation measures contained within the EIS shall be followed during the life of the project. This permit is granted pursuant to the Shorellns Management Action of 1871 and pursuant to the ibllowlng: 1. The Issuance of a Iloense under the Shoreline Management Act of 1871 shall not release the apoicent from Compliance with federal, stats, and other permll requirements. 2. This permit may be rescinded pursuant to Section 14(7) of the Shoreline Management ACI of 1671 in the event the permltbe fails to comply with any condition hereof. 3. A construction permit shall not be Issued until thirly (30) days oflar approval by the City of Benton Development Services Division or until any review proceedings Initiated within this thirty (30) day review period have been completed, A( --w . - ;Q� h PlannlnO4dp,Publ Administrator I toots SUBDEV.DOC Awe'' CIT'&OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department ;42n Tanna. Mover Gregg Zimmerman P.L, Administrator January 07, 1990 nu AGXC f N 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 7, TrftpmWewA@kAW% scycl fflm*Wt N% pW Dmwww fflA �i ... g A' N 4 . ...... IS ;r -Inix A � -sq- q 7/02 cc: King County Water Pollution Control Division, Metro Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98604-7703 Subject: Environmental Determinations Transmitted herewith Is a copy of the notice for an Adoption of Existing Environmental Document. The City of Renton's Environmental Review Committee adopted the EIS for the Coder River Section 206 Project on January 0, 1098. The EIS was prepared by the US Army Corps of Engineers for the Cedar River 205 Project. Public hearings were hold In the City of Renton at the time the document was prepared. Public corment and appeal parlocls were satisfied dudq the preparation of the document and Its adoption by the Corps. CEDAR RIVER SECTION 106 LUA47492,SP,SM The applicant seeks approval of a 10 year permit to dredge the Cedar River from Williams Avenue to the mount of the Ceder River. The project will also Include levees and/or walls to control flooding during storm events. Dredge spolls will either be removed by barge or overland by truck. Temporary stomp of the dredging spoils would be located at the City's NARCO site or will be said or donated to other projects. The City VAII also emote a salmon spawning channel, provide plantings, and other measures to mitigate for the Impact on the river. if you have questions, please call me at (425) 277-5580. For the Environmental Review Committee, Senior Planner nu AGXC f N 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 7, TrftpmWewA@kAW% scycl fflm*Wt N% pW Dmwww fflA �i ... g A' N 4 . ...... IS ;r -Inix A � -sq- q 7/02 cc: King County Water Pollution Control Division, Metro Larry Fisher, Department of Fisheries David F. Dietzman, Department of Natural Resources Don Hurter, Department of Transportation Shirley Lukhang, Seattle Public Utilities Duwamlsh Tribal Office Rod Malcom, Fisheries, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (Ordinance) Joe Jainga, Puget Bound Enemy nu AGXC f N 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 7, TrftpmWewA@kAW% scycl fflm*Wt N% pW Dmwww fflA �i ... g A' N 4 . ...... IS ;r -Inix A � -sq- q 7/02 WAC 197-11-965 Adoption mice. ADOPTIONOF EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT Adoption for (check appropriate box) DNS x EIS other Description of current proposal Proponent City of Renton Location of current proposal I �' I aaela-2 r Agency that prepared document being adopted UnIled sjpje� Army Qg[Ra of Enal eers Date adopted document was prepared June 1997 Description or document (or portion) being adopted Final EIS Portion RLdQMLMQM If the document being adopted has been challenged (WAC 197-11-630 ), please describe: 1300A 41 hilg already Imen finall&00 cA3M The document is available to be read at (plawAime) l3enlon City Hall jhjrd floor BMW V)Hnter duJ0 reaularAr!�O 0 We have identified and adopted this document as being appropriate for this proposal after independent review. The document meets our environmental review needs for the current proposal and will accompany the proposal to the decisiorunaker. Name Of agency adopting document gily of ROOM Contact person, if other Chan responsible official 8gLj±jiijhAM Phone: A211.ZMM Responsible official: GE1100 MmOrmfin position/title Administ[glar pillnnirta/Buliding/Publir, Wfh$ Phonc L42AIZU&M Address: 200 Mill AV.Q. soulb, Renton Washington 98055 Date 4-L* Signature 2 ,010 V4 istatwDry Auffiortly'. FLCW 43.21al 10. 84 -CS -010 D 3-3 11 %5, Bled 2110194. eff0dive 414134.1 118PAADITDOM Z ri Z ^3 e� i• I: FC'rr sr F,tcr�''^r �trk =��5. n4 /''�ry f Y "� \ '9l�p`h+a �!'� • , " - ] 4 a .}Sfi fp!(�k yy �� niiv'f .� uyFFu1.. }}i q`�, riX a1�1 34Y 4�jarii✓ t� +' 6r,,�jry n i'Y'...wG_�-•,.w^».+. wrn ry,..Mr.7... J y �jn�: wV•' t+: �:. ..w» ... i..a �`r ��.'p'�I.K �1't.�Ity, x r 1 S'w "� -: I � t°r- nr '. •.i v5 1'y}t- }" rG yµ.5"'..9` 1. 1w. M� C' % y[ i f d �'. i�W '^., •iL,IW st A.b r. I _t i I�.. ^i.l��ir ; f e rl}a Ly I B � I � •� Y+, '�r { t q r� 11 ... .. • - .fir• Gv" � ki a � -� di� t � rd ' J B .e o i� i ;w f� SFe n �'1 ,r f I F . {{ #` II f•Ya Y Ss S 1 I.. v ,1 r�' ¢..t r 'r I I a n5} .ev¢rra�cva - Irl r c. 9 s1 e 1 I � a. � N ra:..• c r' Il , b !k • "i i ,�s x pI�=�lA( f� '�f �ti,,,lh• qY � ii$� .I r nj1F'e� Rrj�Sl�hv'6�}'c, �\drS ��"�I lf\FI ix� rJ�a- , .. �..._, aaRsf. ..;5.� �•;.. i �..,h..,�... ., ., { Yc s.:.d,ro.� ^..1.., �. , b,,, -...l... A.�ill,":. , \��": ly�j il%G}j Sl�rpiS 1J-0rl'\T. e+c.�4S •�J.y �f1f`�;-.;h- €3fyvL 1)',!'k S}. 1. S'• V,�j/�S ,.�l-�J �Tlf lit IN'. . •L���II {r+'Mi fz \.:�t�r' v -✓; srs. Iv... �` r� .f f !# � a- � I 5 .�. I dk -f 3 � �t i>,r �1 1� 4\ f� �'I �(.V ! S;' rr 1 si�4lrv� LSC - - f F •r ne 4r, t Fj3! J'; if all, f w 5e? .jr i? s T�ili �''�•,i�i�- �. � 3��� IJf�i �l�ly ( .% i1. 4J 3. ♦ i , ><...y.! ti l I � 1 s.4P I. (1+• • .- ;;�,., ;' •, s .� i'-� y , 614 .rir �,,.lti., .a: ,':: �.t e' I ;� %'n i+- N•Is2'L' . ,:^sre.• :,�, Figure 1: Project Vicinity Map C Y0f Planning �����n vision JUL -! 6Q E E§VEID ~7 i ,_• Project < \' & Location • ., , «, 2 � � , » � -+- x _ � _.| � •�-• / . % _ {} . It |39 x_ 61 N_._ ._., ■ � $ f 12N . . | ®-| ._. - \ ®-- | |•--s i -� , .._� ' i £ . � 6 \ - -- /� | � f U.S. at % _ , m ƒ •_-'_ ? ' ~_, ' } _ F. ` ~ —, . ® % {| |! ■! t a, `�`/: } : . Figure 1: Project Vicinity Map C Y0f Planning �����n vision JUL -! 6Q E E§VEID P18458 ME 10766 Pl 8459 P18450 m P18483 RENTON AIRPORT "90 Hl N:07-- c PROJECT SITE NEIGHBORHOOD I JUL - I 7U11 NORTH SCALE 1'=200' r ENGINEERING DESiwN SHEET OFFICE SYMBOL: C E IIJW S- F AJ Lj i3- S 5 PROJECT COMPUTED BY DikTE: Z Dj I CODA[- ZOS ZL,jEIC RF NA %! SIE^/ H-iEM y ^Ar z°l I SUBJECT CHECKED BY SHEET: 1 OF: 5 C � 'DAR (zI vER R- CC E O - Z - O y) DESJARDIN PART: PROJECT SITE MAP CitY of Req "" E NOT TO SCALE ' lanning Division S JUL - I zoll fn--)E(CE r.4 ENGINEERING DESIuN SHEET OFFICE SYMBOL: C EIJW S - AJ y I -S S S PROJECT Zoll UDA2 205- LLVE-L- R) PASS SUBJECT CPDAR Vz)vf-R Ra (cko- 2 - o/S FAILS o A` 1 1 �. TIE-►,� 70 - LF _r 1 Futis7►.Jtj CiAl�latJ aAak �,4 J$HT 3 FOR DETAIL) FI Qi,) UpAtZ COMPUTED BY SIF JF Hs1:/v1 CHECKED BY DESJARDIN DATE: N /%iqr zaI SHEEN: 2 OF: 6 PART: T]6 -),J To F.xts7►,Jy scoPE SlreaLC. L-XISlINCj (4A(�11> J (MOT 0AMayF4) WILL60S PI-Adl oAJ SANO QAR - SFS ,-"a7F5— TIE-i,J -To Ex+sl►,j<7 G A l3 r b rJ (SHT a FOR DETAIL) Q � r 4 t �'. U/5 TOE SCOUfz NOTES: 1. UPSTREAM SCOUR REPAIR IS 100 LF. 2. DOWNSTREAM GABION REPAIR IS 160 LF. 3. PROJECT EXTENTS WILL BE MARKED IN THE FIELD PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 4. SALIX SITCHENSIS WILLOWS PLACED 12" O.C. LIVE STAKES 2-3 FEET IN LENGTH SHALL BE DRIVEN VERTICALLY INTO THE SAND BAR WITH A MAXIMUM 6" EXPOSED AT THE SURFACE. TIE -/A,' To FJ(I4>T1Aj67 5 j-4. P6 I NOT To SCALE IV ^. U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS CI:�JfJS- FA)- yl3- SS PROJECT: ?_ Oil CEDAR. 10T Zf vEL- Rf yA kS SUBJECT: CcE�Z CPOAR 9kvER PC, - o� COMPUTED BY: DATE: S7EA,'- I-1.j1=M ql-1 Ar2oi 1 CHECKED BY: SHT: 3 OF 5 DESJARDIN PART: x,sr+rw4 Ex,s,►,,-- S Pr 15 Go,�ra, T,u+v Z� + �' ,, 8 I I�SPAt1 ��4Y�F. T3L+wKET Sr • 2-5, -rovK Gt A-� TT[ —._- 'R'%PCAP ll".L 4NKF'r --- --- CAI.57%041 I AI L -ED C?A$IaN W ALL. DOWNSTREAM TYPICAL SECTION A A N OT 70 KCAL r F-XJSTING EXTEND ROCK TOE GaeloN I O/ MAINTAINING A 21 SLOPE cLnss Iu c 2_3' RIPRAP 1 2 SECTION C -C NOT TO SACLE I )05TI,Q y I d" EMBED EXISTING GABION ii�Ib�1 p� INTO REPAIRED SLOPE RCPAI0rD TYPICAL _ PLAN VIEW R I PRAP SLOPE 2-:1 Nay- To SC -A L F - NOTES: 1. DOWNSTREAM REPAIR IS APPROXIMATLEY 160 LF. 2. REMOVE FAILED GABION WALL AND DISPOSE OF PROPERLY OFFSITE. REMOVE OR DISPOSE OF CONCRETE BENCH, PICNIC TABLE, AND OTHER 3. ENCROUCHMENTS OFFSITE OR MOVE ONSITE FOR REUSE AT END OF PROJECT. 4. VERIFY LOCATION OF UTILITY AND IRRIGATION LINES WITH SPONSOR PRIOR TO EXCAVATION, THE SPONSOR SHALL TURN OFF IRRIGATION LINES DURING CONSTRUCTION. THE SPONSOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR REPAIRING DAMAGED IRRIGATION LINES. 5. CLEAR AND REGRADE SLOPE TO 2HAV. STAGE EXCAVATED SOIL FOR REUSE OVER RIPRAP ARMOR AS TOPSOIL. NO TREE REMOVAL. 6, SALIX SITCHENSIS WILLOWS SHALL BE PLACED AT OHW WITH 12" D.C. SPACING. WILLOWS TO HAVE T STEMS WITH 2' EMBEDDED INTO SOIL AND V EXPOSED WITH A 4" LAYER OF TOPSOIL ABOVE AND BELOW. 7. REPAIRED RIPRAP SLOPE NEEDS TO TIE INTO THE EXISTING GABIONS. SEE TYPICAL DETAIL. e, HYDROSEED ALL DISTURBED AREAS. SEE SHEET 5 FOR CITY OF RENTON'S PLANTING DETAILS. NPD FORM 7A -R (REV) FEB 10 ( FOR SEATTLE DISTRICT USE) (5 Grid) ENGINEERING DESIuN SHEET OFFICESYMBOL: CEn►r.JS- PROJECT COMPUTED BY Z olI ,z zos «ur-l~ REuA(I 5'fsE,4�1 SUBJECT CHECKED BY C E 'DAR RIVER R- C-� DESJARDIN tixls1lfjy --,-\ Co,u 0 IT lod 2.S Z.3 I i DATE: y .-1 ,1 I : l i SHEET: 4 OF: 5 PART: 0XLSTIM4 Lawf t ?cvs^A l iSPALL F".rrr- SL~W- r Z.SI THl<K CtAss 1M RWRAP fSLAIJK E T I IOCTMC Aii -rVril +AI CCfl TIf%k1 6 in Nor Ta SCALE CLASS III RIPRAP GRADATION ROCK Roca: PERCIN4' w r 30" iN.YN 1"% Is" ilFJN §$% W 21406 16% SPALL GRADATION PIRCENT PASSING 4" 0% 2" 90% NOTES. 1. UPSTREAM REPAIR IS APPROXIMATELY 100 LF. 2. REMOVE TREES AND DISPOSE OF REMOVED VEGETATION OFFSITE. 3. CLEAR AND REGRADE SLOPE TO 2HIA V. STAGE EXCAVATED SOIL FOR REUSE OVER RIPRAP ARMOR AS TOPSOIL. 4. LEVEE TOE IS TRENCHED. 5. REPAIRED RIPRAP SLOPE NEEDS TO TIE INTO THE EXISTING GABION. SEE DETAIL ON SHEET 3. B. HYDROSEED ALL DISTURBED AREAS. SEE SHEET 5 FOR CITY OF RENTON'S PLANTING DETAILS. G J M NT Op r'yic "Macuv�cn'D1is're United States, Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 0 Washington Fish and Wildlife Office 514 Desmond Dr. SE, Suite 102 1n Reply Refer To; Lacey, Washington 98503 MAY 2 5 2011 13410-2011-1-0263 City of Renton Planning Division Evan Lewis, Chief Environmental and Cultural Resources JUL - 1 LUl1 Seattle District, Corps of Engineers ATTN: Environmental and Cultural Resources Branch (Fitzpatrick) P.O. Box 3755 V L5 Seattle, Washington 98124-3755 Dear Ms. Walker: Project: Cedar River Levee Rehabilitation of Flood Control Works This is in response to your January 21, 2011, letter requesting our concurrence with your determination that the proposed action in Puget Sound, King County, Washington, would "not likely adversely affect" federally listed species. A photocopy from your transmittal document(s) describing the proposed action is enclosed. Specifically, you requested informal consultation pursuant to section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) for the federally listed species identified below (only those species that have been checked are addressed in this consultation request (See Enclosure). ® Bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) If you requested consultation for the bald eagle, please note that the bald eagle was removed from the Federal List of Threatened and Endangered Wildlife, effective August 8, 2007. Given that your project will be implemented after that date, consultation under section 7(a)2 of the Endangered Species Act is not required. We have therefore not provided concurrence on your effect determination for the bald eagle. Based on the information provided in and/or with your cover letter and any additional information, we have concluded that effects of the proposed action to the above -identified federally listed resources would be insignificant and/or discountable. Therefore, for the reasons identified in the enclosures to this letter, we concur with your determination that the proposed TAKE PRIDE'* .� Michelle Walker 2 action is "not likely to adversely affect" the above -identified federally listed resources. This letter and its enclosures constitute a complete response of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to your request for informal consultation. This concludes consultation pursuani to the regulations implementing the Endangered Species Act (50 CFR 402.13). This project should be re -analyzed if new information reveals effects of the action that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner, or to an extent, not considered in this consultation. The project should also be re -analyzed if the action is subsequently modified in a manner that causes an effect to a listed species or critical habitat that was not considered in this consultation, and/or anew species is listed or critical habitat is designated that may be affected by this project. Our review and concurrence with your effect determination is based on the implementation of the project as described. It is the responsibility of the Federal action agency to ensure that projects that they authorize or carry out are in compliance with the regulatory permit and/or the ESA, respectively. If a permittee or the Federal action agency deviates from the measures outlined in a permit or project description, the Federal action agency has the obligation to reinitiate consultation and comply with section 7(d). If you have any questions about this letter or our joint responsibilities under the Endangered Species' Act, please contact the consultation biologist identified below, of this office. U.S: Fish and Wildlife Service Consultation Biologist(s): ® Shirley Burgdorf (360 / 534-9340) Sincerely, mro/� (, �5X— Ken S. Berg, Manager Washington Fish and Wildlife Office Enclosures Appendix 1 Checklist(s) cc: ® WDFW, Region 4, Mill Creek, WA ® WDOE, Bellevue, WA (R- Padgett) U.S: FISH AND WILDLIFE- SERVICE WASHINGTON FISH AND WILDLIFE OFFICE BULL TROUT ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SECTION 7 INFORMAL CONSULTATION CONCURRENCE RATIONALE Project Name: Cedar River Levee Rehabilitation of Flood Control Works DIRECT EFFECTS 1, Buil trout are not expected to be in the action area either because of the location of the action or because the action would occur during the recommended work window when bull trout are not anticipated to occur in the project area: Therefore, direct effects to bull trout from the proposed project would be discountable because of the following: ® The action area of the proosed Project is located in the lower Cedar River, where at the resent time bull trout occurrence is rare. Also all construction activities will occur in the dry. INDIRECT EFFECTS 1. Bull trout are not expected "to be in the action area; therefore, indirect effects from operation of the proposed action and use of the facility after construction (if applicable) would be discountable because of the following: . ® The action area of the DrQposed prJect is located in the lower Cedar River where at the present time, bull trout occurrence is rare. 2. Bull trout may or may not occur in the action area; however, effects to bull trout via their prey resources would be insignificant because of the following: ® All construction activities will occur during low flows and outside the wetted channel in the -dry of the Cedar River. 3. Bull trout occur in the action area; however, with regard to other indirect effects ® Recreational use ofwatercraft'that would result from the proposed project would not exceed normal background sound levels in the project area. Therefore, effects are expected to be insignificant. Many areas of Puget Sound contain high-value spawning habitat for bull trout prey resources such as surf smelt (Hypomesus pretiosus), sand lance (Arnmodytes hexapterus), and Pacific herring (Clupea harengus). This determination may not be appropriate for projects that would have significant, long-term negative effects to bull trout prey resources. Bull Trout — Page 1 Consulting Biologist: Shirley Bergdorf FWS Project Biologist Concurrence approved by: • ' MAA" L, �� Federal Activities Branch Supervisor Date: May 24 2011 Date: aW Note: The rationale expressed in this informal section"7 concurrence rationale checklist represents our current understanding of the effects of some commonly permitted federal actions to bull trout. This document does not express all possible rationale for insignificant or discountable effects to bull trout. This document is subject to change at any time due to the collection of new information or the need to clarify our rationale. However, any future changes to this concurrence rationale document would not be expected to necessitate reinitiation on previously completed consultations. Please see the "reinitiation" paragraph of the cover letter for a discussion of reinitiation triggers. Bull Trout — Page 2 2. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT AREA AND PROPOSED ACTION In the project area, the Cedar River is a confined, single -thread, low gradient artificial channel (the historic channel flowed into the Black River). Renton Airport occupies the left bank, while the right bank contains a city park and a Boeing. manufacturing plant. The thalweg of the river is primarily located adjacent to the left bank. Within the project reach, the river is highly modified and provides generally poor habitat for fish and other aquatic species. The channelized lower Cedar River lacks complex habitat features such as pools and off -channel areas because of armored banks and residential land uses (Puget Sound Recovery Plan 2005). The river at this point primarily functions as a backwater for Lake Washington during the summer high pool, but is a riffle or run during winter low water levels in Lake Washington. River substrate consists of gravel and cobble, but is embedded with sediment. The gravel is sometimes used for spawning by"Chinook salmon, but is more often used for spawning -by sockeye salmon. The levee at this site is a berm, set back a few yards from the water, covered with mowed lawn, planted with trees and is part of a park area used by the public for recreation. The bank has been planted with Nootka rose; it also has willows, ash, and alders. There are small embayments where sediment accumulation has occurred. Damage to the bank has occurred, with some bank erosion and gabion deterioration. The repair will restore 100 -year channel capacity, but does not necessarily meet USACE or FEMA levee certification standards. The action will include approximately 260 linear feet (LF) of repair along the right bank of the levee. Repair work will begin at RM .20 and move upstream. The project consists of removing 160 LF of gabion wall. In place of the gabion wall the following repairs will occur: A rock toe will be established at the location of the gabion toe. The slope will be pulled back to achieve a 2H:1 V slope. This will enable more water to be conveyed naturally. Lastly, a 12, inch gravel and/or spall filter blanket overlain by 24 inches of riprap armor will be installed. Large rock will be placed individually to minimize vibration and turbidity; however, staging of rock near the work site would involve dumping in an adjacent upland location. Moving 150 LF upstream of the failed gabion wall, 100 LF of small rock will be placed along the exposed shoreline to prevent further erosion and scour, as well as deter the public from entering the area. For specific site rehabilitation locations see Figure 1. Willowg will be planted in the sand bar adjacent to the bank, and larger shrub -like foliage will be planted along the shoreline. Riprap material will be placed for bank protection at the Ordinary High Water (OHW) level. See -Appendix B for complete site designs. Between the two reaches, the 150 LF of gabion protection is intact and in good shape. Streambank material is stable, and has been colonized by numerous tree and brush species. Removal of this gabion protection to repair with currently accepted standards (rock revetment) would disturb additional sections of the existing streambank and would only provide minimal additional protection. The gabion ends in this reach as well. Removal of trees including willow, ash, shore pine, alder and nootka rose shrub species will occur within the project reach. in total, 26 trees and 75 shrubs will be removed. Replanting of willows as well as native red -osier dogwood in the riparian area will occur from October -December for potted stock and January -February for bare -root stock. Willow plantings on the adjacent sandbar will be undertaken -the following March. The willows will promote shading for salmonids. Willows on this sandbar will be considered temporary features and may be washed out during a flood event if root growth does not establish prior to a large flood event. All access will be on City of Renton roadways, including existing utility roads on City of Renton park lands, and staging will occur on these same park lands (Figure 2). Construction is scheduled to start August 1, 2011 and be'completed by August 31, 2011. This alternative offers the least expensive repair and the best solution to the repair of flood control damage, while considering the pre -flood condition. All bank protection material will consist of clean, non -contaminated material. The equipment to be used includes: hydraulic excavator, backhoe, dump truck, and bulldozer. Repairs to both sites will be within the footprint of the existing levee. 3, CONSERVATION MEASURES The NMFS approved work window for instream construction in this reach is 1 August to 31 August. Utilizing these dates, the levee repair is scheduled to occur between August 1 and August 31, 201 L The terrestrial environment at this site is highly urbanized and provides very limited wildlife habitat. Following construction, the riprap slope will be covered with soil above the ordinary high water line (OHWL), hydroseeded. Red -osier Dogwood and willows will be replaced in kind. Increased planting density at the site will occur where practical. -No offsite plantings will take place. 1n addition, several construction best management practices (BMPs) will be implemented: • A construction representative will visually monitor the project reach for presence of adult salmonids through the use of polarized sunglasses; • A construction representative will monitor for turbidty changes in the water. Visual monitoring will continue throughout the construction period. Monitoring shall recommence with erosion control failure or observable high turbidity due to project activities; + Biodegradable hydraulic fluids will be used in the machinery at the site; + Refueling will occur in the staging area on the landward side of the levee; no equipment fueling or servicing will occur within 200 feet of the water; • At least one fuel spill kit with absorbent pads will be onsite at all times; • Drive trains of equipment will not operate in the water, • Soil disturbance will be minimized during vegetation removal by cutting the stems and using a portable stump grinder to grind all stumps to ground level; • Understory vegetation will be hand cleared and all invasive species will be disposed of Offsite; • Care will be taken to ensure that vegetation inputs to the Cedar River will be nominal (e.g. falling leaves during stem cutting); 0 • Native hydroseed application following vegetation removal will be applied to land only; • Care will be taken to ensure no hydroseed enters the river; • Willow stakes will be planted using hand installation methods to minimize soil disturbance; and • All work will be performed in the dry. 4. Environmental Coordination Because of the emergency status of this PL 84-99 project, the planning and design process for the rehabilitation of Cedar River at Renton FCW are on a compressed schedule. Attempts have been made by the Corps to perform as much environmental coordination as practicable prior to construction to allow other resource agencies to comment on the.design possibilities and aid in determination of the erects of the project on fish and wildlife species. This action has been and will continue to be formally coordinated throughout the planning, design, and construction phases with the following agencies as needed: • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • NOAA Fisheries • Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife • Washington Department of Ecology • Muckleshoot Indian Tribe 5. ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE AND EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION 5.1 Vegetation The common riparian community along most of the downstream reaches of the Cedar River includes a cottonwood -alder forest, with an understory of snowberry, salmonberry (Rubes spectabilis), and sword fern (Polystichum munitum). ,In places, vine maple (Acer circinatum), Himalayan blackberry, Indian plum (Oemleria cerasiformis), Japanese knotweed, bleeding heart (Dicentra spectabilis), giant horsetail (Equisetum telmateia), and Pacific waterleaf (Hydrophyllum tenuipes) occur. In contrast to the general riparian condition along the Cedar River, the terrestrial environment at Cedar River FCW rehabilitation sites is highly urbanized and provides very limited wildlife habitat. Riparian vegetation here is limited to a few willows (Salix sp.), ash and shore pine, alder, and nootka rose. Following construction, the riprap slope will be covered with soil above the ordinary high water line, hydroseeded, then planted with red -osier dogwood, and willows where practical. The tree removal will alter the right bank, resulting in an alteration in stream shading and a reduction in leaf fall, cover, and wood recruitment from the removed trees. Additionally, the planted native deciduous shrubs and trees, when mature, will help to mitigate loss of organic material formerly contributed to the river by the removed trees. Willows will be planted on an adjacent sandbar at the site as well as along the levee repair. 10 `+ Tor co, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NATIONAL_ MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE Northwest Region 1%reaos ,7600 Sand Point Way N.E., Bldg. 1 Seattle, Washington 98115 NWS Tracking No.: June 14, 2010 City. of Renton 2011/02024 Planning Division Evan Lewis, Chief JUL 1 LU11 Environmental Resources Section Department of the Army n ECEIVED Seattle District, Corps of Engineers En7 P.O. Box 3755 Seattle, WA 98124-3755 RE: . Endangered Species Act Section 7 and Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat Consultation for the Rehabilitation of Flood Control Works, Cedar River Levee, Cedar River at Renton, King County, WA. HUC 171100120106 (Lower Cedar River) Dear Mr. Lewis: This correspondence is in response to your request for consultation under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 1531. Additionally, this letter serves to meet the requirements for consultation under the Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA, 16 U.S.C. 1855). Endangered Species Act The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has reviewed the Biological Evaluation (BE) for the Rehabilitation of Flood Control Works, Cedar River Levee, on the Cedar River at Renton, King County, WA and received on May 13, 2011. The Corps of Engineers (COE) requests concurrence with its determination that the proposed action "may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect" ESA threatened Puget Sound (PS) Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), ESA threatened PS steelhead (O. mykiss) and designated PS Chinook salmon critical habitat. This consultation with the COE is conducted under section 7(a)(2) of the ESA, and its implementing regulations, 50 CFR Part 402. The COE is proposing to complete emergency repairs to the Flood Control Works (FCW) on the Cedar River Section 205 Flood Control Project at river mile (RM) 0.2 on the right bank of the Cedar River in Section 7, Township 23 N., Range 5 E. The action area is riverine and riparian habitats in the floodplain of the Cedar River within the described 260 feet along the right bank of the river and downstream 300 feet to account for turbidity effects. 6 44'• M OF . 2 The Cedar River Section 205 FCW project, constructed between 1998 and 2000, included the building of earthen levees combined with steel and concrete floodwalls along both banks of the river and dredging in the river channel. Levees and floodwalls were raised along both banks from the confluence of the Cedar River with Lake Washington to Williams Avenue, 1.25 miles upstream. Dredging lowered the river channel approximately four feet from the mouth to the Logan Avenue Bridge (RM 1), gradually decreasing the slope upstream another 0.5 mile to meet the existing grade. The goal was to reduce potential flood damage along approximately 1.5 miles of the lower Cedar River through downtown Renton, primarily protecting the Boeing aircraft manufacturing plant -and the Renton Municipal Airport. Major flooding occurred on the Cedar River in January 2009 with a 30 -year flood event which caused damage to a 160 linear foot (LF) gabion along the right bank of the 205 Levee. Additionally, a 100 LF section upstream of the gabion wall experienced embankment scour. In its current condition, the levee offers only 10 -year flood level protection. The repair will restore 100 -year channel capacity, but does not necessarily meet COE or FEMA levee certification standards. The proposed action includes approximately 260 LF of repair along the right bank of the levee and includes the following actions: (1) Remove 160 LF of gabion wall; (2) Establish a rock toe in the footprint of the gabion toe; (3) Pull back the bank to a 2:1 slope; and (4) Install a 12 inch gravel and/or spall filter blanket overlain with 24 inches of riprap armor. Upstream, the following actions are proposed along 100 LF of the right bank: (1) Place small rock along the exposed shoreline to prevent further erosion and scour; (2) Place riprap material for bank protection at the Ordinary High Water (OHW) level, and; (3) Plant willows in the sandbar adjacent to the bank and larger shrubs along the shoreline. Existing trees including willow, ash, shore pine, alder and nootka rose will be removed, totaling 26 small trees and 75 shrubs in the project reach. Trees and shrubs will be replanted at a minimum of 1:1 replacement and greater where practical. Additional project detail can be found in the BE and in the informal consultation request letter from the COE. This project.has the potential to affect listed fish in the Cedar through construction activities that will; (1) disturb stream bank and adjacent stream bed habitat; (2) disturb riparian vegetation; (2) increase the possibility for contamination from petroleum-based products; (3) perpetuate degraded conditions of the streambank, and; (4) increase stream temperatures due to a net decrease in shading from canopy. The project will be completed during the approved in -water work window of August 1 to August 31 when Cedar River flows are low and ESA -listed salmon are at least risk. To minimize potential effects on PS Chinook salmon and PS steelhead it is expected that all conservation measures and best management practices (BMPs) as noted in the BE and the HPA will be followed. In particular, NMFS highlights several conservation measures to avoid adverse affects on ESA -listed fish: (1) Limit in -water work to August 1 — August 31 when aquatic species are at least risk; (2) Replace disturbed vegetation with appropriate plantings; (3) New riparian plantings will be monitored, and replanted as necessary, for a minimum of 3 years following project -completion; (4) Minimize soil disturbance and use appropriate sediment control measures; (5) Apply standard BMPs to prevent contaminant spills, and ; (6) Monitor the construction reach for turbidity and temporarily halt work if high turbidity results from construction activities. It is notable that NMFS conducted informal consultation in December, 2009, on a similar project by the City of Renton and funded by FEMA to repair 290 feet of failed gabion basket embankment at approximately river mile 1.3 on the Cedar River (NMFS tracking number 2009105636). GWons are an outdated and undesirable material for instream or stream embankment use. The NMFS suggests the COE and the City of Renton consider alternative bioengineered bank materials in this reach to avoid future repairs which can create regular and unnecessary disturbance to aquatic resources. Species Determination Puget Sound Chinook Salmon Puget Sound Steelhead Puget Sound Chinook salmon are distributed throughout the Cedar River, utilizing the project area for adult migration, spawning and juvenile rearing. No adult or juvenile Chinook salmon will be in the action area during the construction window of August 1 to August 31. Typically, 0+ juvenile Chinook will have emigrated prior to August 1, and adults are not in the river until mid to late October. Therefore, because there is very little risk of exposure of individuals to construction activities, effects on this species are discountable. Puget Sound steelhead may be present year-round in the action area. Water quality impacts from sediment and temperature will be localized and temporary and easily avoided by any juvenile steelhead present in the area. Additionally, juvenile steelhead favor faster water and not the slower unprotected waters adjacent to the gabion basket embankment. Appropriate use of BMPs as listed above will ensure that project effects are insignificant for this species. NMFS concurs the proposed action "may affect, but not likely to adversely affect" PS Chinook salmon and PS steelhead. Critical Habitat Determination Puget Sound Chinook Salmon The final rule designating critical habitat for PS Chinook salmon was published on September 2, 2005 (70 FR 52630) and became effective on January 2, 2006. The Cedar Riveris designated as critical habitat for PS Chinook salmon. Primary constituent elements (PCEs) essential for the conservation of this ESU that support one or more life stages include: (1) Freshwater spawning sites with water quantity and water quality conditions and substrate supporting spawning, incubation and larval development; (2) Freshwater rearing sites with: (i) Water quantity and 4 floodplain connectivity to form and maintain physical habitat conditions and support juvenile growth and mobility; (ii) Water quality 'and forage supporting juvenile 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, and: (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 banks supporting juvenile and adult mobility and survival. Sediment introduced to the river from construction activities will be minimized by using standard BMPs and turbidity should be temporary and not persistent for more than approximately 300 feet downstream of the project site. Because the conservation value of PCEs in the action area, though degraded, will be maintained, and following all BMPs will ensure that effects to existing PS Chinook salmon habitat are insignificant, NMFS concurs that this project "may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect" PS Chinook salmon critical habitat. One of the strategies in the Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Plan, Lake Washington/Cedar/Sammamish Chapter (Shared Strategy, 2007), is to "restore the Cedar River mainstem to add more rearing habitat for ESA -listed Chinook salmon". Currently the lower Cedar River in the action area is a single -thread artificial channel and lacks complex habitat such as pools and off -channel areas due in some respect to armored banks and adjacent land use. Because potential for significant restoration of this reach of the Cedar River is limited, NMFS encourages the COE to seek opportunities to use conservation or in -lieu fee banks within the Cedar River watershed to compensate for local loss of riparian ecological function that affects designated PS Chinook salmon critical habitat. This concludes informal consultation on these actions in accordance with 50 CFR 402.14(b)(1). The COE must reinitiate ESA consultation if. (1) new information reveals effects on the actions that may affect listed species in a way not previously considered; (2) the actions are modified in a manner that. causes an effect to listed species that was not previously considered; or (3) a new species is listed, or critical habitat is designated, that may be affected by the proposed actions. Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Federal agencies are required, under section 305(b)(2) of the MSA and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 600 Subpart K), to consult with NOAA Fisheries regarding actions that are authorized, funded, or undertaken by that agency that may adversely affect Essential Fish Habitat (EFH). The MSA section 3 defines EFH as "those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity". If an action would adversely affect EFH, the Federal action agency is required to provide EFH conservation recommendations (MSA section 305(b)(4)(A)). This consultation is based, in part, on information provided by the Federal action, agency and descriptions of EFH for Pacific salmon contained in Appendix A to Amendment 14 to the Pacific Coast Salmon Plan (August 1999) developed by the Pacific Fishery Management Council and approved by the Secretary of Commerce (September 27, 2000). The proposed action and action area are described in this letter and in the BE. The action area includes habitat which has been designated as EFH for various life stages of coho salmon (O. kisutch) and Chinook salmon. EFH Conservation Recommendations: Despite riparian replanting, NMFS is concerned about long-term adverse effects on salmon EFH from the continued loss of riparian ecological function at the 205 Levee, including shade, insect -drop, and litterfall. The NMFS recommends that the COE seek opportunities to use a conservation bank or in -lieu fee bank within the lower Cedar River watershed to compensate for local loss of riparian ecological function that affect salmon EFH. Implementation of this conservation recommendation has the potential to enhance the habitat value of the 0.12 acres of EFH within the action area. Federal agencies are required to provide a detailed written response to EFH conservation recommendations made by NMFS within 30 calendar days of receipt of these recommendations (MSA (section 305(b)(4)(B)) and 50CFR 600.920(k)). The response must include a description of the measures proposed to avoid, mitigate, or offset the adverse effects of the activity on EFH. In the case of response that is inconsistent with EFH conservation recommendations, the response must explain the reasons for not following the recommendations, including the scientific justification for any disagreements over the anticipated effects of the proposed action and the measures needed to avoid, minimize, mitigate, or offset such effects. This concludes consultation under the MSA. If the proposed action is modified in a manner that may adversely affect EFH, or if new information becomes available that affects the basis for NMFS' EFH conservation recommendations, EFH consultation will be reinitiated in accordance with implementing regulations for EFH at 50 CFR 600.920(k). If you have any questions, please contact Randy McIntosh at 360-534-9309 or randy.mcintosh@noaa.gov. Sincerely, {"William W. Ste1le, Jr. Regional Administrator cc: Karen Walter, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Joshua Fitzpatrick, COE Larry Fisher, WDFW Z bc: F/NWR -- PDF (Nickerson) WSHO - File Copy WSHO --PDF (Chron) WSHO — PDF (McIntosh) cc Addresses: Karen Walter Fisheries Division Muckleshoot Indian Tribe 39015 172n° Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092 Joshua Fitzpatrick U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District P.O. Box 3755 Seattle, WA 98124-3755 Larry Fisher WDFW, Region 4 c/o DOE 1775 12th Avenue N.W., Suite 201 Issaquah, WA 98027 s:\admin\correspondence\mcintosh\201102024—cedar—river-6-14-201 Ldoc - 1 47028'07." t22011'15" NATIONAL FLOOD INSURAI. PROGRAM FIRM. 1 FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND INCORPORATED AREAS PANEL 977 OF 1725 [SEE MAP INDEX FOR PANELS NOT PRINTED CONTAINS: . COMMUNITY NUMBER PANEL SUFFIX KING COUNTY, UNINCORPORATED AREAS X77 F RENTON, CITY OF MAP NUMBER 53033CO977 F MAP REVISED: MAY 16,1991~► of Renton Pi nnin9 Division 6 JA —j '1011 Federal Emergency Management gen - M m M rn m Z SpnOU0E]r z m M m M -Noixax 30 XIM t33H1S •D • z c �• M 133H1S HJR Hlif ON z o z z H19 H1li0N 122011'15" =--, 47030'00" .LEGEND SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD -AREAS 1NUNL.... cD BY 100—YEAR FLOOD ZONE A No base Hood elevations determined. ZONE AE. Base flood elevations determined. ZONE AH Flood sof 1� 3 f eN flood�elevat am ally areas of ponding); determined. ZONE AO Flood depths of t to 3 feet (usually sheet flow on sloping terrain(; average depths determined. For areas of alluvial fan flooding, velocities also determined. ZONE A99 To be protected from 1"aem system under Federal flood protection construe ian; no base elevations determined. ZONE V Coastal hood with velocity hazard (wave actioni; no base hood elevations determined, ZONE VE Coastal Rood witheloc ty hazard (wave ( ave action); base Rood "t FLOODWAY AREAS IN ZONE AE OTHER FLOOD AREAS FZONE X Areas of 500 year Rood; areas of 100 year flood with average depths' of less than 1 foot or with drainage areas less than 1 square mile; and areas •protected by levees from 100 -year Rood. OTHER AREAS ZONE X Areas determined to be outside 50"ar floodplain ZONE D Areas in which flood hazards are undetermined. UNDEVELOPED COASTAL BARRIERS Identified Otherwise Identified 1483 1990 protected Arcas Coastal barrier areas are normally located within or adjacent to Special Flood Hazard Areas, Flood Boundary Floodway Boundary _ Zane 0 Boundary Boundary' Dividing Special Flood Hazard Zones, and Boundary. Dividing Areae of Different Coastal Base Flood Elevations Within Spacial Flood Hazard Zones. Base Flood Elevation Lina: "'--513^ Elevation In Feet. Sae Map Index �. for Elevation Datum. D D Crass Section Line Basq., Igod_Eloyption __iA7-:t.eet- r y'tlhera Uniform Within Zona, Sae Map Index for Elevation Datum. RM7 X Elevation_ Reference Mark 0 M2 River Mile Horizontal Coordinates Based on North 97007'30", 32022'30' American Datum o1 1927 (NAD 271 Projection, NOTES This map Is for use In administering the National Flood Insurance Program; it foes not necessarily identify all areas subject to flooding, particularly from local drainage, sources of small size, or all planimetric features outside Special Flood Hazard Areas. Ccestalbase flood elevations apply only landward of 0,0 NGVD, and Beaute the effects of wave action; these elevations may also differ sip frcm those developed by tho National Weather Service for hurricane evacuation planning. Afaas of Special Flood Hazard (100 -year flood) include Zones A, AE, AH, A0, A:9, V. end VE. Certain areas not in Special Flood Hazard Areas may be protected by _,IF Lu Z 'ONE X OVIcuatlOn—" Jan—hing. BBa of Special Flood Hazard (100 -year flood► include Zor AE. AH, A0, 9, V, and VE. Certain areas not in Special Flood Hazard Areas may be protected by flood control structures. Bcundarles of the floodways were computed at cross sections and Interpolated between cross sections. The floodways were based on hyirauiic considerations with regard to requirements of the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Floodway widths in some areas may be too narrow to show to scale. Roadway widths are provided, in the Flood Insurance Study Report. Ths map may incorporate approximate boundaries of Coastal Barrier Resource System Units and /or Otherwise Protected Araas established under the Coastal Barrier Improvement Act of 1990 (PL 101-591). Corporate limits shown are current as of the data of this map. The user sh)uld contact appropriate community oHiclals to determine If corporate Ilrrits have changed subsequent to the issuance of this map. Fo• cummunity map revision history prior to countywide mapping, see Senlon 6.0 of the Flood Insurance Study Report. Fat adjoining map panels and base map source see separately printed Mi p Index. MAP REPOSITORY Refer to Repository Listing on .Map Index EFFECTIVE DATE OF COUNTYWIDE FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP: SEPTEMBER' 29,1989 EFFECTIVE DATE(S) OF REVISION(S) TO THIS PANEL: Revised May 18, 1995 to update map format. T:) determine If flood insurance is available, contact an insurance agent or cell the National Flood Insurance Program at 1800) 638-8820. APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET 500 0 500 reeeeer _ NATIONAL MOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM FIRM FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND INCORPORATED AREAS PANEL 971 Of 1725 (SEE MAP INDEX FOR PANELS NOT PRINTED) rnureuic• 122°13'07" 47° ' 3000" hoe af I I 'on C * d a r LQari Cedar rk. Iht Logan over 10011 idpt k. :t of Prntr ipany 1 h CH2M two I k i a r a y of most west Ittl of 20 250 S i n shad of h of g In Th• Iht Way toss b at Orth Iht Dmaw 122°13'07" 47° ' 3000" hoe af I I 'on C * d a r LQari Cedar rk. Iht Logan over 10011 idpt k. :t of Prntr ipany 1 h CH2M two I k i a r a y of most west Ittl of 20 250 S i n shad of h of g In Th• Iht Way toss b at Orth Iht