Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReport 1Carol Nielsen 14830 SE 138th Place Renton, WA 98059 (party of record) Charles Anderson 14906 SE 138th Place Renton, WA 98059 tel: (425) 988-3325 (party of record) PARTIES OF RECORD EAST RENTON LIFT STATION REMOV LUA11-092, ECF, CAR Walter Thurnhofer 5915 SE 2nd Court Renton, WA 98059 tel: (425) 255-2965 (party of record) Maplewood Homeowners' Association PO Box 2594 Renton, WA 98056 tel: (206) 660-1005 (owner) Jim Lyons 208 Orcas Place SE Renton, WA 98059 tel: (425) 228-5295 (party of record) Robert Nunnenkamp King County Parks Capital Planning Business Development Section King Street Center 201 S Jackson Street ste: Rm 700 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 tel: (206) 263-6207 eml: robert.nunnenkamp@kingcounty.gov (owner) Updated; 01/25/12 (Page 1 of 1) CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM Date: February 14, 2012 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: East Renton Lift Station Removal LUA (file) Number: LUA-11-092, ECF, CAR Cross -References: AKA's: Project Manager: Rocale Timmons Acceptance Date: December 5, 2011 3 Applicant: David Christensen, City of Renton Owner: King County Parks Department; Mapelwood Homeowners' Association Contact: Same as applicant PID Number: 5126301030; 1423059007; 1523059055; 1523059230 ERC Decision Date: January 17, 2012 ERC Appeal Date: February 3, 2012 Administrative Approval: January 27, 2012 Appeal Period Ends: February 10, 2012 Public Hearing Date: Date Appealed to HEX: h By Whom: HEX Decision: Date: Date Appealed to Council: By Whom: Council Decision: Date: Mylar Recording Number: 7 Y Project Description: Location: West and south of SE 2"d Court, North of Maplewood Park Comments: Denis Law Mayor February 14, 2012 David Christensen City of Renton 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 b ciY ar Y Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietsch, Administrator SUBJECT: East Renton Lift Station Removal LUA11-092, ECF, CAR Dear Mr. Christensen: This letter is to inform you that the appeal period ended February 3, 2012 for the Environmental Review Committee's (ERC) Determination of Non -Significance - Mitigated for the above -referenced project. No appeals were filed on the ERC determination therefore, this decision is final and application for the appropriately required permits may proceed. The applicant must comply with all ERC Mitigation Measures outlined in the Environmental Review Committee Report dated January 17, 2012. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (425) 430-7219. For the Environmental Review Committee, Roca Timmons Ass ciate Planner Enclosure cc: Robert Nunnenkamp - King County Parks; Maplewood Homeowners' Association / Owner(s) Carol Nielsen, Walter Thurnhofer, Jim Lyons, Charles Anderson / Party(ies) of Record Renton City Hall - 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98057 - rentonwa.gov DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY '"City of AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT F J ! i r PLANNING DIVISION CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION FROM CRITICAL AREAS REGULATIONS EVALUATION FORM & DECISION DATE OF PERMIT ISSUANCE: January 27, 2012 LAND USE ACTION FILE NO.: LUA011-092, CAR PROJECT NAME: East Renton Lift Station Critical Areas Exemption PROJECT MANAGER: Rocale Timmons, Associate Planner OWNER/APPLICANT: City of Renton; 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 PROJECT LOCATION: West & South of SE 2"d Ct, North of Maplewood Park CRITICAL AREA: Wetland Buffer PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: The proposal involves the repairing of an existing 18" concrete culvert that failed during a major storm event. Portions of the culvert would be replaced with corrugated polyethylene pipe and the remaining portions would be rehabilitated. Minor excavation would be required in order to expose the outlet. The slope is proposed to be stabilized with erosion control blankets and hydroseeded. No construction would occur within the adjacent wetlands and would occur solely within the buffers. Additionally, the applicant is requesting the replacement of an existing inlet structure within a new manhole and birdcage trash rack. EXEMPTION JUSTIFICATION: Pursuant to RMC4-3-05OC.5.e.iv. Roads, Parks, Public and Private Utilities, of the Critical Areas Regulations is hereby granted: iv. Modification of Existing Utilities and Streets by Ten Percent (1096) or Less: X Overbuilding (enlargement beyond existing project needs) or replacement of existing utility systems and replacement and/or rehabilitation of existing streets. FINDINGS: The proposed development is consistent with the following findings pursuant to RMC section 4-3-050C.5: 1. The activity is not prohibited by this or any other chapter of the RMC or state or federal law or regulation. Co of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Certificate of EAption from Critical Areas Regulations East Renton Lift Station Critca! Areas Exemption LUAII-092, ECF, CAR DATE OF PERMIT: January 27, 2012 Page 2 of 2 2. The activity will be conducted using best management practices as specified by industry standards or applicable Federal agencies or scientific principles if submitted plans are followed and the conditions of approval of this exemption are met. 3. impacts will be minimized and disturbed areas will be immediately restored, if submitted plans are followed and the conditions of approval of this exemption are met. 4. Where wetland or buffer disturbance occurs during construction or other activities in accordance with this exemption, the site will be revegetated with native vegetation as required as a condition of approval for this exemption. DECISION: An exemption from the critical areas regulations is approved. DATE OF DECISION ON LAND USE ACTION: SIGNATURE: I C.E. "Chip" Vincent, Planning Director Planning Division -4 -L-?w-4z Date APPEALS: Appeals of permit issuance must be filed with the City of Renton Hearing Examiner by 5:00 p.m. on February 10, 2012. Appeals must be filed in writing, together with the required fee to the City of Renton Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110 governs appeals to the Hearing Examiner. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. RECONSIDERATION: Within 14 days of the decision date, any party may request that the decision be reopened by the approval body. The approval body may modify his decision if material evidence not readily discoverable prior to the original decision is found or if he finds there was misrepresentation of fact. After review of the reconsideration request, if the approval body finds sufficient evidence to amend the original decision, there will be no further extension of the appeal period. Any person wishing to take further action must file a formal appeal within the 14-day appeal time frame. EXPIRATION: Five (5) years from the date of decision (date of signature). 0 0 ^o U C N r^, c v; z �-� � �V '� � c =• y c_ �'c �rQ c. �C,�y�a,", ao,,'.f �x 2 L a� W x V co a nt-�Q v b ev*�'J n.u,� G- ❑7 L G O W U c C ;cSr nCJ o c' �r 3a� 3[i L Wr°o� NN ��1k\7�4114 f1i, �rA�4�'041ij FI��`C GCS tt! +�14'�i1114\1\�11��a�e��a O . G tjo �n �z to :~�L3t� r_• .� 3'''off x� c' ° �;��. moo• U �' U Z� zi ° i-o 0u�:°� a U 00°�� a A y 0.7 [-� U 3 r�53 51 o r ° �00 00 p to r7Z�z � cS to� U s w �' afui y L W G c 3�•°ago-a�°'��°' a W Q a°'o u c" P o N a 2 City Ol� _r J f�ii_fl1 =', t NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE - MITIGATED (DNS•M) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTALACTION PROJECT NAME: East Renton UN Station Removal PROJECT NUMBER; LUA31491,ECF,E•gR LOCATION west and Scuthof SE 2' Court, North Of Maplewood Park DESCRIPTION: The applksnt, the Chy Of Renton, Is nw +Ing En."nmenral Rext— and a Crltical Area Exemption In order to remove an existing sewer, pN riatlon, touted west OFSE 2nd Ct; and Imta6 a new wearer pipeline, eaterldingwest and south tramthe INt station location, through Maplewood Para and ending within 148th PI SE. The 1-2 acre subject site is located Primarily within unincorporated King County. NowxVer, the Portion of the Property located within the City Ilmhe Is within the R4 caning cl— icatlon. Seven wetlands and two steams were identified whhln the projed area boundaries. Pr —d construction would require twoPOfwT rsosdng of one of the on -site streams IStewwt Creek) and Its Buffer along with some of the wetland buffers, THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Appeals of the envUOnmental determination roust be Bled In writing on or before 5-00 p.m. an February 3, 2012. Appeals must be fired In writing together with the required fee with: Hearing Eaeminer, Oty of Renton, IO95 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner am governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-g-1I0.8. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be ohtalnad from the Renton City Clerk's Office, 142S) 43"510. IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION 15 APPEALED, A PUBLIC HEAAfNG WILL HE SET AND ALL PARTIES NOTIFIED. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AT 142S} 43D-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION Please Indude the Praject NUMBER when cailing for proper file IderrtlRcatlon. CERTIFICATION I, \ j � � f� hereby certify that —21 copies of the above document were posted in _�— conspicuous places or nearby the described property on Date: 6 '7-D L2 0 V'2 Signed:��"�� STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that i know or have satisfactory evidence that -, signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act fdr the uses an(�egposes mentioned in the instrument. ud QKU t z O , • s, � trjs (� - 9 J- �. ref j��' �1►�'0� `�`���� I.:2 Notary Public W and for the State of Washington Notary (Print): 14,4��- My appointment expires: A 1 s L 2g 2 _ f� Y I� CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 18th day of January, 2012, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing ERC Determination documents. This information was sent to: Name Representing Agencies See Attached David Christensen Contact Maplewood HOA Owner King County Parks Owner Carol Nielsen POR Walter Thu rnhofer POR Jim Lyons POR Charles Anderson POR (Signature of Sender): STATE OF WASHINGTON SS COUNTY OF KING ) $� I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy M. Tucker Nire 00 �� signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntafy*t% `1111114 uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: Notary Public n and Notary (Print): ILA G-f-"d'- My appointment expires: �� 1--- � 2RI d-0 the State of Washington Project Name::;; East Renton Lift Station Removal Project Number:0 LUA11-092, ECF, CAR template - affidavit of service by mailing AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERC DETERMINATIONS) Dept. of Ecology ** WDFW - Larry Fisher* Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. Environmental Review Section 1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201 Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer PO Box 47703 Issaquah, WA 98027 39015 — 1720d Avenue SE Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Auburn, WA 98092 WSDOT Northwest Region * Duwamish Tribal Office * Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program Attn_ Ramin Pazooki 4717 W Marginal Way SW Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 Seattle, WA 98106-1514 39015 172"d Avenue SE PO Box 330310 Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers * KC Wastewater Treatment Division * Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation* Seattle District Office Environmental Planning Supervisor Attn: Gretchen Kaehler Attn: SEPA Reviewer Ms. Shirley Marroquin PO Box 48343 PO Box C-3755 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 Seattle, WA 98124 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 Boyd Powers * Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Serv. City of Newcastle City of Kent Attn! SEPA Section Attn: Steve Roberge Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP 900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director Renton, WA 98055-1219 13020 Newcastle Way 220 Fourth Avenue South Newcastle, WA 98059 Kent, WA 98032-5895 Metro Transit Puget Sound Energy City of Tukwila Senior Environmental Planner Municipal Liaison Manager Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official Gary Kriedt Joe Jainga 6200 Southcenter Blvd. 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-01W Tukwila, WA 98188 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Bellevue, WA 98009-0868 Seattle Public Utilities Real Estate Services Attn: SEPA Coordinator 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 *Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities will need to be sent a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, and the Notice of Application. **Department of Ecology is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice to the following email address: sepaunit@ecy.wa.gov template - affidavit of service by mailing 0 0 r� Clt}r Of ��_�v OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE - MITIGATED (DNS-M) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: East Renton Lift Station Removal PROJECT NUMBER: LUA11-092, ECF, CAR LOCATION: West and South of SE 2"d Court, North of Maplewood Park DESCRIPTION: The applicant, the City of Renton, is requesting Environmental Review and a Critical Area Exemption in order to remove an existing sewer lift station, located west of SE 2nd Ct; and install a new sewer pipeline, extending west and south from the lift station location, through Maplewood Park and ending within 148th PI SE. The 1.2 acre subject site is located primarily within unincorporated King County. However, the portion of the property located within the City limits is within the R-4 zoning classification. Seven wetlands and two streams were Identified within the project area boundaries. Proposed construction would require temporary crossing of one of the on -site streams (Stewart Creek) and its buffer along with some of the wetland buffers. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5.00 p.m. on February 3, 2012. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.€3. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's office, (425) 430-6510. IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION IS APPEALED, A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE SET AND ALL PARTIES NOTIFIED. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AT (425) 430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION Please include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file identification. 0 Denis Law Mayor CltY Of Y o January 18, 2012 Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietsch, Administrator David Christensen Cit of Renton 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL THRESHOLD (SEIPA) DETERMINATION East Renton Lift Station Removal, LUA11-092, ECF, CAR Dear Mr. Christensen: This letter is written on behalf of the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) to advise you that they have completed their review of the subject project and have issued a threshold Determination of Non -Significance -Mitigated with Mitigation Measures. Please refer to the enclosed ERC Report and Decision, Part 2, Section B for a list of the Mitigation Measures. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on February 3, 2012. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8- 110.I3. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. If the Environmental Determination is appealed, a public hearing date will be set and all parties notified. If you have any questions or desire clarification of the above, please call me at (425) 430-7219. For the Environmental Review Committee, Roca Timmons Ass ciate Planner Enclosure cc: Maplewood Homeowners' Association, King County Parks / Owner(s) Carol Nielsen, Walter Thurnhofer, Jim Lyons, Charles Anderson / Party(ies) of Record Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov 9 Denis Law Mayor r City of Y o January 18, 2012 Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietsch, Administrator Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Subject: ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) DETERMINATION Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination for the following project reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on January 17, 2012: DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED PROJECT NAME: East Renton Lift Station Removal PROJECT NUMBER: LUA11-092, ECF, CAR LOCATION: West and South of SE 2nd Court, North of Maplewood Park DESCRIPTION: The applicant, the City of Renton, is proposing to remove an existing sewer lift station and install a new sewer pipeline through Maplewood Park. The 1.2 ac site is located primarily within unincorporated King County. Seven wetlands and two streams were identified on site. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on February 3, 2012. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8- 110.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. Please refer to the enclosed Notice of Environmental Determination for complete details. If you have questions, please call me at (425) 430-7219. For the Environmental Review Committee, Ro le Timmons Associate Planner Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov 0 0 Washington State Department of Ecology Page 2 of 2 January 18, 2012 Enclosure cc: King County Wastewater Treatment Division Ramin Pazooki, WSDOT, NW Region Boyd Powers, Department of Natural Resources Larry Fisher, WDFW Karen Waiter, Fisheries, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Duwamish Tribal Office Melissa Calvert, Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program US Army Corp. of Engineers Gretchen Kaehler, Office of Archaeology & historic Preservation 0 0 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY D City of AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA11-092, ECF, CAR APPLICANT: David Christensen, City of Renton PROJECT NAME: East Renton Lift Station Removal DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant, the City of Renton, is requesting Environmental Review and a Critical Area Exemption in order to remove an existing lift station, located west of SE 2nd Ct; and install a new sewer pipeline, extending west and south from the lift station location, through Maplewood Park and ending within 148th PI SE. The 1.2 acre subject site is located primarily within unincorporated King County. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: West and South of SE 2nd Court, North of Maplewood Park LEAD AGENCY: The City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included within the "Final Geotechnical Evaluation Report", prepared by HWA Geosciences Inc., dated February 2, 2011. 2. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included within the "Stream and Buffer Mitigation Plan", prepared by ESA, dated July 2011. 3. A hydrologist/geomorphologist will develop a proposed plan for the large woody debris replacement. The City shall coordinate with King County Parks to identify and agree to favorable locations for large woody debris placement. The use of cobbles in the stream area will be replaced with appropriate streambed gravels. ERC Mitigation Measures Page 1 of 1 0 0 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY Ciryof AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REVISED ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE - MITIGATED (DNS-M) APPLICATION NO(S): LUA11-092, ECF, CAR APPLICANT: David Christensen, City of Renton PROJECT NAME: East Renton Lift Station Removal DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant, the City of Renton, is requesting Environmental Review and a Critical Area Exemption in order to remove an existing lift station, located west of SE 2nd Ct; and install a new sewer pipeline, extending west and south from the lift station location, through Maplewood Park and ending within 148th PI SE. The 1.2 acre subject site is located primarily within unincorporated King County. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: West and South of 2"4 Court, North of Maplewood Park LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton Environmental Review Committee Department of Community & Economic Development The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). Conditions were imposed as mitigation measures by the Environmental Review Committee under their authority of Section 4-6-6 Renton Municipal Code. These conditions are necessary to mitigate environmental impacts identified during the environmental review process. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on February 3, 2012. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8- 110.13. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. PUBLICATION DATE: DATE OF DECISION: January 20, 2011 January 17, 2011 SIGNATURES: 2,I 0) 1 Z— Gregg Zimmer ministrator Public Works D`e artment Date Mark Peterson, dministrator Fire & Emergency Services Date Terry Higashiyama, Administrator 411exPiets6, Ad nistrator Community Services Department Date Department of Community & Date Economic Development DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY r Q cyoe AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA TO: Gregg Zimmerman, Public Works Administrator Terry Higashiyama, Community Services Administrator Mark Peterson, Fire & Emergency Services Administrator Alex Pietsch, CED Administrator FROM: Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager MEETING DATE: Monday, January 16, 2012 TIME: 3:00 p.m. LOCATION: Sixth Floor Conference Room #620 THE FOLLOWING IS A CONSENT AGENDA Nelson Preliminary Plat (Timmons) LUA11-088, ECF, PP Location: 2008 NE 121h Street. Description: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat approval and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the subdivision of an existing 1.62 acre parcel into 9 lots for the future construction of single family residences and two additional tracts; one for drainage and the other for access. East Renton Lift Station (Timmons) LUA11-092, ECF, CAR Location: West & South of SE 2"d Court; North of Maplewood Park. Description: The applicant, the City of Renton, is requesting Environmental Review and a Critical Area Exemption in order to remove an existing sewer lift station, located west of SE 2nd Ct; and install a new sewer pipeline, extending west and south from the lift station location, through Maplewood Park and ending within 148th PI SE. cc: D. Law, Mayor J. Covington, Chief Administrative Officer S. Dale Estey, CED Director R. Perteet, Deputy PW Administrator - Transportation C. Vincent, CED Planning Director I N. Watts, Development Services Director L. Warren, City Attorney Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner D. Pargas, Assistant Fire Marshal J. Medzegian, Council DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY _.�.� r Ci of AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT .. -� REVISED ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT ERC MEETING DATE. January 17, 2012 Project Name: East Renton Lift Station Owner: Maplewood Homeowners' Association; PO Box 2594; Renton, WA 98056 Icing County Parks, Capital Planning and Business Development; 201 S Jackson St, Rm 700; Seattle, WA 98104 Applicant: City of Renton, David Christensen; 1055 Grady Way; Renton, WA 98057 File Number: LUA11-092, ECF, CAR Project Manager: Rocale Timmons, Associate Planner Project Summary: The applicant, the City of Renton, is requesting Environmental Review and a Critical Area Exemption in order to remove an existing sewer lift station, located west of SE 2nd Ct; and install a new sewer pipeline, extending west and south from the lift station location, through Maplewood Park and ending within 148th PI SE. The 1.2 acre subject site is located primarily within unincorporated King County. However, the portion of the property located within the City limits is within the R-4 zoning classification. Seven wetlands and two streams were identified within the project area boundaries. Proposed construction would require temporary crossing of one of the on -site streams (Stewart Creek) and its buffer along with some of the wetland buffers. Project Location: West & South of SE 2"d Ct, North of Maplewood Park Site Area: 52,272 SF STAFF Staff Recommends that the Environmental Review Committee issue a RECOMMENDATION. Determination of Non -Significance - Mitigated (DNS-M). Project Location Map ERC Report. doc i • City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee Report EAST RENTON LIFT STATION LUA11-092, ECF, CAR Report of January 17, 2012 Page 2 of 6 PART ONE: PROJECT DESCRIPTION / BACKGROUND The East Renton lift station is approximately 10 years old. The lift station serves to pump sewage from nearby residential neighborhoods (Maplewood Estates, Parkside Court, Shy Creek, Liberty Ridge, and others for a service area of approximately 430 acres) to the gravity sewer system located near NE 4th Street. The City prefers to serve customers via a gravity sewer pipeline rather than a lift station whenever feasible. Based on a topographic survey, conversion to a gravity system appears to be possible at this location by crossing through an undeveloped portion of Maplewood Park and connecting to Briar Hills Division No, 4 sewer system to the south. The project site is located on a plateau on the north side of the Cedar River valley. The existing sewer lift station is situated on the north side of the right-of-way for SE 136th St. The lift station occupies the southwest corner of an existing stormwater pond. Within Maplewood Park, the construction corridor to be cleared for the project would be 60 feet wide. The total area of clearing and grading within the park would be 21,948 square feet (0.5 acre). Within the 30-foot wide corridor, the pipeline trench would be up to 10 feet wide, with the rest of the corridor width used for equipment access and material stockpiling. The new sewer line would be a total of approximately 1,030 feet long. Of this total, approximately 270 feet would be located within existing paved or gravel surfaced roads, and 760 feet within vegetated areas (Maplewood Park). Seven wetlands and two streams were identified within the project area boundaries. No streams or wetlands are located in the portion of the site site that is within the City of Renton however, buffers for the streams and wetlands do extend into the City limits therefore the applicant is required to obtain a Critical Areas Exemption for work proposed within a wetland buffer. There are 31 coniferous and deciduous trees, measuring up to 26 inches in diameter, which would be removed from the construction corridor within Maplewood Park. No trees would be removed within the City of Renton jurisdiction. It is estimated that approximately 1,375 cubic yards of material would be excavated from the trench. Staff received comments from the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division regarding water typing, project impacts, and project mitigation (Exhibit 6). PART TWO: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW In compliance with RCW 43.21C.240, the following environmental (SEPA) review addresses only those project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. A. Environmental Threshold Recommendation Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible Officials: Issue a DNS-M with a 14-day Appeal Period. ERC Report.doc 0 0 City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee Report EAST RENTON LIFT 5TAT/ON LUAU-092, ECF, CAR Report of January 17, 2012 Page 3 of 6 B. Mitigation Measures 1. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included within the "Final Geotechnical Evaluation Report", prepared by HWA Geosciences Inc., dated February 2, 2011. 2. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included within the "Stream and Buffer Mitigation Plan", prepared by ESA, dated July 2011. 3. A hydrologist/geomorphologist will develop a proposed plan for the large woody debris replacement. The City shall coordinate with King County Parks to identify and agree to favorable locations for large woody debris placement. The use of cobbles in the stream area will be replaced with appropriate streambed gravels. C. Exhibits Exhibit 1 Zoning Map Exhibit 2 Site Plan Exhibit 3 Critical Area Exemption Exhibit 4 Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Comments Exhibit 5 City Response to Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Comments D. Environmental Impacts The Proposal was circulated and reviewed by various City Departments and Divisions to determine whether the applicant has adequately identified and addressed environmental impacts anticipated to occur in conjunction with the proposed development. Staff reviewers have identified that the proposal is likely to have the following probable impacts: 1. Earth Impacts: The topography of the site gently slopes to the south with an average grade of 2 to 3%; up to 10% in limited areas. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) map states that soils in the project area are Alderwood gravelly sandy loam. The applicant provided a geotechnical report, prepared by HWA GeoSciences Inc., on February 2, 2011. The geotechnical report states that topsoil onsite to consist of silty fine sand and sandy silt with a high organic content. Below the topsoil, loose to medium dense silty sand with gravel is present over deep glacial till. A surface layer of gravel fill approximately one foot deep is present in portions of the site where a foot path was once constructed. It is estimated that approximately 1,375 cubic yards of material would be excavated from the trench. Approximately 760 cubic yards of fill would be imported to the site for trench backfill material. In addition, approximately 24 cubic yards of concrete and sand would be used to fill an existing sewer pipe to be abandoned south of the lift station, and to fill two manholes in this same area to provide the correct grade for the new pipeline. The project would create only 3 square feet of new impervious surface. Existing asphalt surfaces will remain north and south of the park. The geotechnical report provides conclusions and recommendations regarding the geotechnical aspects of design and construction including but not limited to the creek crossing, open -cut trench construction, dewatering, and wet weather earthwork. As such, staff recommends a mitigation ERC Report.doc i • City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee Report EAST RENTON LIFT STATION LUAII-091, FCF, CAR Report of January 17, 2012 Page 4 of 6 measure that the applicant comply with the recommendations included within the "Final Geotechnical Evaluation Report", prepared by HWA Geosciences Inc., dated February 2, 2011, Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included within the "Final Geotechnical Evaluation Report", prepared by HWA Geosciences Inc., dated February 2, 2011, Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations 2. Water a. Wetland, Streams, Lakes Impacts: The applicant provided a Wetland, Stream and Wildlife Study, prepared by ESA, dated July of 2011. Seven palustrine forested wetlands and two streams were identified within the project area boundaries. The wetlands and the stream are hydrologically connected. Most of the wetlands are located directly adjacent to, or near, the on -site streams and receive overbank flow as well as groundwater. The main stream channel, Stewart Creek, enters the northern end of the project area via a plastic culvert, and exits the southern end of the study area via grated concrete culvert. The stream enters the storm drain system south of Maplewood Park and daylights approximately 0.3 mile south of the park. Stewart Creek joins the Cedar River approximately 0.75 miles south of the park. Each of the wetlands received a rating of Category Il which requires a buffer of 140 feet under King County Code (KCC 21A.24.325.A.1). Both streams meet the King County criteria for Type N streams with a buffer of 65 feet per KCC 21A.24.358. The applicant is proposing construction within Stewart Creek and within the buffer of wetlands. No direct wetland impacts are proposed. The applicant submitted a Stream and Buffer Mitigation Plan, also prepared by ESA, dated July 2011, in accordance with the King County Code requirements. No streams or regulated wetlands are located within the project area north of the park. King County regulated buffers for the streams and wetlands in the park do however, extend north into the city limits. The portion of the stream and wetland buffers extending into the city consists mostly of gravel -surfaced access road and existing fenced and graveled pump station area. A critical area exemption is required, from the City of Renton, for work being done within the King County regulated buffer which extends into the city limits (Exhibit 3). For those proposed unavoidable impacts to the wetland and streams within the King County jurisdiction the applicant would be required to comply with mitigation as prescribed by the King County Code prior to construction. The Stream and Buffer Mitigation Plan provides recommendations regarding mitigation and monitoring for unavoidable impacts. As such, staff recommends a mitigation measure requiring the applicant to comply with the recommendations included within the "Stream and Buffer Mitigation Plan", prepared by ESA, dated July 2011. In a response to Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division comments the City answered questions with regard to stream typing and project impacts. Additional mitigation, is proposed, in the form of a plan for large woody debris replacement. Staff recommends a mitigation measure requiring the City coordinate with King County Parks in order to identify appropriate locations for large woody debris placement. The plan shall be developed by a hydrologist/geomorphologist. ERC Report.doc 0 0 City of Renton Deportment of Community & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee Report EAST RENTON LIFT STATION ZUA11-092, ECF, CAR Report of January 17, 2012 Page 5 of 6 Mitigation Measures: 1. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included within the "Stream and Buffer Mitigation Plan", prepared by ESA, dated July 2011. 2. A hydrologist/geomorphologist will develop a proposed plan for the large woody debris replacement. The City shall coordinate with King County Parks to identify and agree to favorable locations for large woody debris placement. The use of cobbles in the stream area will be replaced with appropriate streambed gravels. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations 3. Vegetation Impacts: There are black cottonwood, European mountain -ash, red alder, Douglas fir, western hemlock, and western red cedar trees located on site. There are also Pacific ninebark, salmonberry, Himalayan blackberry, vine maple, willow, and Indian plum shrubs on site. The areas to be cleared include a mixture of native and non-native tree, shrubs. The applicant is proposing to remove a total of 31 trees from the construction corridor. No trees would be removed within the City of Renton jurisdiction. The applicant is proposing to replant with native plant species following installation of the pipeline. Trees that are removed would are proposed to be replaced at a 3:1 ratio. The revegetation would be required to comply with the tree retention and replacement requirements outlined in the King County Code. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation recommended. Nexus: N/A a. Noise Impacts: The only noise that would be generated by the project would be short term during construction. Construction is anticipated to last four months. During this time, the types of equipment expected to be used for construction include a backhoe, trackhoe, bulldozer, dump truck, concrete truck, and submersible pumps. Single-family residences, located in the Parkside Court neighborhood, would be the closest noise receptors which are at least 100 feet from the construction area. King County and the City of Renton both have a noise limits of 55 dBA. Once construction is complete, the project would not generate noise. The project will eliminate a minor source of existing noise associated with the lift station. In order to mitigate construction noise impacts, the applicant is proposing to limit construction activities to between 7:00 am to 5:00 pm typically. Modern construction equipment would also be used to minimize noise and noisy portable equipment would be located as far away from sensitive receptors as practical and would be muffled. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation recommended. Nexus: N/A 4. Utilities Impacts: The project corridor includes numerous existing utilities, including underground stormwater, water, telephone, gas lines, and an overhead utility line. The utility proposed is a new City of Renton gravity sewer pipeline totaling approximately 1,030 linear feet. General construction activities include clearing and grubbing of a forested area and a standard open -cut ERC Report. doc 0 0 City of Renton Deportment of Community & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee Report EAST RENTON LIFT STATION LUA11-092, ECF, CAR Report of January 17, 2012 Page 6 of 6 trench construction in developed and undeveloped areas. Existing aboveground and underground utilities requiring relocation are anticipated to be relocated by others prior to the beginning of work. An existing telephone line (overhead and underground) and power poles would require temporary or permanent relocation. Prior to construction, the applicant would be required to locate all of the utilities within the project area by a contractor. The City plans to coordinate with contractors to avoid impacts to existing Utilities and service interruptions. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation recommended. Nexus: N/A E. Comments of Reviewing Departments The proposal has been circulated to City Department and Division Reviewers. Where applicable, their comments have been incorporated into the text of this report and/or "Advisory Notes to Applicant." ✓ Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File and may be attached to this report. Environmental Determination Appeal Process: Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM, February 3, 2012. Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.8 governs appeals to the Hearing Examiner. Appeals must be filed in writing at the City Clerk's office along with the required fee. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall - 7th Floor, 1055 S. Grady Way, Renton WA 98057. ERC Report.doc E6 - 10 T23N R5E E 1/2 EXHIBIT 1 b$ 14M A. ZONING MAP BOOK G6 - 22 T23N R5E E 1/2 PW TECHNICAL SERVICES PRINTED ON 11/13/09 rMs ms�n,.m n. v+oti� ea.e.erc.wn. ro� e. bess �Momn�an...u.a.,s of �n<ene sha�.n, e ab nn,pw w ,mow 0 200 400 rap or _. � Feel t 14,800 F6 15 T23N R5E E 1/2 5315 74W :- 92 93' 455 456 459 461 t �' B1 :�n Lj I i Ba1 ` ! I I . 6 26TNN R4E 25 T24N R4E s s` ;,� 30-724N R5E BOQ°'17 a9 T24N R5 p 26 T24N RSE, y 27 T24N R5E, — 26 T24N R5E 8 i 94VI1 455V1/ - 460 464 _58 + ;T' \ - 41C2'C31...- 4E ,C 35 T�4N 36 T24N R4E 31 T24N R5E 4'N'R.5 35 T2AN R5E 6 4€ f� t � 307w 8 �- 01 l;, �� 7 Dnr 3D4 r __ D7 723�1 �E 1 2�3[�R4E B T23N RSE -- T23N-R5E i '- 4 T23N R5E R5E4 �� 2 T23N R5E !41 all, 31►,1 319 369 J1t5 _ m -806 -y _ "Et- € l -- f I - q - EE6 3� _a _ 1 T NA4E i ._ i � I �.7 . h',l� I V w 12T23N RAE T23N R5E 3N R5E IT23N R5E' I- ¢ f0 T23N i—€ �j N R5E 32� • 2 I 32 II ;I 370 i; 810 L I irlil: 14 T231�T�R4E;�F2h1 F�4f n (r:T - i - 18T23N R5E .,. _ 17 T23 R5E 16 T23N R5E 1 TMAM 14T23N 1 L �335 r 336 �`� 3311;i 371 815� gt6 �,\ T23N R4�� a,_ 24 T23A R4E 19 T23N R5E: r ' 20 T23N R5E_ _. 21.723N R5E _22 T23 R5E 23 T23N 34 _ 2 44 — 601 600 602 820 821 2- II - -- H"T" o .T23N R4E.. ��� � � � " � � H1�..,� V 25 T23N Fi4E - 30 T23N RSE� 29 T23N RSE 28 T�3N_ R5E -' :w T23N R5E 26 T23N R5E 25 i�o°: 51_ 603 l- 604 6� r� ! 826 g J II I� 12-; I T2 N R46 6 I 36 3 E ' n` 31 T23 R5E,.--. 32 T23N R 33 T2 N R E -�i5 .3 _ ,34 T23N R5E 35 T23N R5E 36 60,E —= 6086W 63II 833 ';:7 I : j2 ;J, 85 ` l7 22N R4E 1 T22NTi4E -i T22N R �/ ro 5 2N. R5 4 T?2N FyrE _ 3 T22N R5E 2 T22N R5E i T2 RESIDENTIAL MIXED USE CENTERS INDUSTRIAL 0 (RC) Resource Conservation w (CV) Center Village €H I (IL) Industrial -Light 0 (R-1) Residential 1 du/ac Ec Nl (UC-N1) Urban Center- North 1 iw (IM) Industrial - Medium U (R-4) Residential 4 du/ac ur Ne (UC-N2) Urban Center- North 2 L (IH) Industrial - Heavy a-s'. (R-8) Residential 8 du/ac FcE (CD) Center Downtown RnH (RMH) Residential Manufactured Homes FT, (R-10) Residential 10 du/ac COMMERCIAL 2-14 (R-14) Residential 14 du/ac Renton City Limits RM-r (RM-F) Residential Multi -Family (COR) Commercial/Office/Residential -- Adjacent city Limit. M-r (RM-T) Residential Multi -Family Traditional _?� (CA) Commercial Arterial (RM-U) Residential Multi -Family Urban Center Fcn (CO) Commercial Office KHplt PAGE cr (CN) Commercial Neighborhood PAG E# INDEX TF; ducr.ment i; a gon'riie e :ptct� —t �uar�,leeL W s very Y. rinrdc: `weciLY VVupypses ly pnb basetl o- the gybes[ in not'on ow labia s pf tM1e tlpte sYpwr. IYis mcrs fp- tl',s:b�purpos9s Orly. `o ii (!} w .. o :So x U y m W • DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY `ciryof- AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT f +r I r. r PLANNING DIVISION CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION FROM CRITICAL AREAS REGULATIONS EVALUATION FORM & DECISION DATE OF PERMIT ISSUANCE: January 27, 2012 LAND USE ACTION FILE NO.: LUA011-092, CAR PROJECT NAME: East Renton Lift Station Critical Areas Exemption PROJECT MANAGER: Rocale Timmons, Associate Planner OWNER/APPLICANT: City of Renton; 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 PROJECT LOCATION: West & South of SE 2nd Ct, North of Maplewood Park CRITICALAREA: Wetland Buffer PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: The proposal involves the repairing of an existing 18" concrete culvert that failed during a major storm event. Portions of the culvert would be replaced with corrugated polyethylene pipe and the remaining portions would be rehabilitated. Minor excavation would be required in order to expose the outlet. The slope is proposed to be stabilized with erosion control blankets and hydroseeded. No construction would occur within the adjacent wetlands and would occur solely within the buffers. Additionally, the applicant is requesting the replacement of an existing inlet structure within a new manhole and birdcage trash rack. EXEMPTION JUSTIFICATION: Pursuant to RMC4-3-05OC.5.e.iv. Roads, Parks, Public ana rrlvare ururt►es , of the unticai Areas Regulations is hereby granted: iv. Modification of Existing Utilities and Streets by Ten Percent (10%) or Less: X Overbuilding (enlargement beyond existing project needs) or replacement of existing utility systems and replacement and/or rehabilitation of existing streets. FINDINGS: The proposed development is consistent with the following findings pursuant to RMC section 4-3-050C.5: 1. The activity is not prohibited by this or any other chapter of the RMC or state or federal law or regulation. EXHIBIT 3 0 0 City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Certificate of Exemption from Critical Areas Regulations East Renton Lift Stotion Critcal Areas Exemption LUA11-09Z ECF, CAR DATE OF PERMIT: January 27, 2012 Page 2 of 2 2. The activity will be conducted using best management practices as specified by industry standards or applicable Federal agencies or scientific principles if submitted plans are followed and the conditions of approval of this exemption are met. 3. Impacts will be minimized and disturbed areas will be immediately restored, if submitted plans are followed and the conditions of approval of this exemption are met. 4. Where wetland or buffer disturbance occurs during construction or other activities in accordance with this exemption, the site will be revegetated with native vegetation as required as a condition of approval for this exemption. DECISION: An exemption from the critical areas regulations is approved. DATE OF DECISION ON LAND USE ACTION: SIGNATURE: C.E. "Chip" Vincent, Planning Director Planning Division Date APPEALS: Appeals of permit issuance must be filed with the City of Renton Hearing Examiner by 5:00 p.m. on February 3, 2012. Appeals must be filed in writing, together with the required fee to the City of Renton Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110 governs appeals to the Hearing Examiner. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. RECONSIDERATION: Within 14 days of the decision date, any party may request that the decision be reopened by the approval body. The approval body may modify his decision if material evidence not readily discoverable prior to the original decision is found or if he finds there was misrepresentation of fact. After review of the reconsideration request, if the approval body finds sufficient evidence to amend the original decision, there will be no further extension of the appeal period. Any person wishing to take further action must file a formal appeal within the 14-day appeal time frame. EXPIRATION: Five (5) years from the date of decision (date of signature). r i Stacy Tucker EXHIBIT 4 From: Rocale Timmons Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 4:10 PM To: Stacy Tucker Subject: FW: East Renton Lift Station Removal, LUA11-092, ECF, CAR, Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non -Significance Attachments: coho and intermittent streams.pdf Rocale T From: Karen Walter[mailto:KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us] Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 10:29 AM To: Rocale Timmons Cc: Fisher, Larry D (DFW); Lull, Lori C NWS Subject: East Renton Lift Station Removal, LUA11-092, ECF, CAR, Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non -Significance Rocale, We have reviewed the Notice of Application for the above referenced project and offer the following comments in the interest of protecting and restoring the Tribe's treaty protected fisheries resources: Water Typing Per the Wetland, Stream, and Wildlife Study (ESA 2011), there are two streams on -site: Stewart Creek and a tributary to Stewart Creek. Stewart Creek is a tributary to the Cedar River. The Study classifies both streams as Type N waters. We disagree. Both streams appear to meet the physical criteria for presumed fish use and fish habitat based on WAC 222-16-031, as both streams are at least 2 feet in bankfull width per the study and appear to be less than 16% stream gradient based on the site plans. Stewart Creek is identified with an average channel width of 5 feet and portions as wide as 15 feet. The unnamed Stewart Creek tributary is identified as being three feet in width. Therefore, at least the bankfull width criterion is met for both streams. We are unaware of any natural barriers downstream that would constitute a fish passage barrier. Previously, King County DOT removed a known fish passage barrier culvert downstream on Stewart Creek as part of the Elliott Bridge replacement project (see http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20050901 &slug=-qlanceO ) which should have resulted in improved upstream passage in Stewart Creek. If there are other existing human created barriers downstream of the Park and above King County's previous work, then they can and should be replaced and not be used to determine potential fish habitat accordingly. Finally, the minnow traps and visual observations on two days described in the Study are too limited to confirm fish absence. We generally recommend that such studies be completed over 10 years to capture a variety of hydrology and rainfall events to document fish absence. There can be a variety of reasons why fish are not present when examined in single observations. As a surrogate for 10 years of monitoring data, we recommend that the physical criteria from WAC 222-16-031 be used along with the Forest Practices Board Manual 13 to determine potential fish habitat, unless there is a documented natural barrier confirmed by the MITFD and WDFW. There was substantial fish electroshocking data used in combination with stream measurements to create the criteria used in the WAC 222-16-031. The photos in the Study indicate features similar to other streams where we have found coho and cutthroat trout. Even seasonal streams can provide habitat for coho and other salmonids when they are flowing. Please see attached paper. 2. Project Impacts Since the impacted streams appear to be capable of providing fish habitat, then the potential project impacts may not have been adequately assessed. For example, the extent of riparian impacts may not be accurate if a larger regulated stream buffer is required based on a Type F classification. It appears that the Category 11 wetland buffer may encompass the larger regulated stream buffer for Type F waters; however, this should be verified. Also, the proposal to use open trenching techniques would not be the preferred stream crossing if these are potential fish bearing streams. Rather, horizontal directional drilling or other techniques with less impacts to the streams would be assessed and implemented if technically feasible. Another consideration is the depth of the sewer line at the stream crossings (minimum 5 feet) may not be sufficient to protect the pipeline over time if the 0 i stream conditions change as a result of changes in upstream hydrology, debris flows, etc. The pipe may need to be located deeper to avoid its exposure over time that causes future bank and bed stabilization that generally results in adverse impacts to fish habitat, all of which can be avoided if located at the proper depth now. 3_ Project mitigation We recommend that all native trees that are 4 inches in diameter (at breast height) and greater and proposed to be removed from within 200 feet of the project streams, be placed back into the streams as partial mitigation for their removal_ The tree replacement ratio of 3:1 will not address the temporal loss of tree growth and future wood recruitment from the removal of these trees. Per the environmental checklist, 31 trees that measure up to 26 inches DBH will be removed as part of this project. It is unclear how many of these trees are within 200 feet of the affected streams and at least 4 inches in diameter that will be removed. The mitigation area also needs to verify that the existing trails are not included in the mitigation ratios as these trails are proposed to be restored and would not be replanted as stream or wetland buffer. The stream buffers will also be further impacted by the pipeline and its requirement to plant only native shrubs within 20 feet of the 30 foot wide construction corridor to avoid tree root damage to the pipe. Additional mitigation will likely be needed to address this permanent impact. Finally, stream bed materials placed back in the affected streams should be similar to what is found currently, i.e. sands and gravel per the Study. The proposed cobbles, for example, may be too large of substrate, whereas gravel sized material and smaller will likely be more suitable. We appreciate the opportunity to review this project and look forward to the City's responses. Please note that the project is seeking a Hydraulic Project Approval permit and a Corps of Engineers 404 permit, at this time as well; therefore, we are also submitting these comments in response to those pending permits. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division 39015 172nd Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 0 0 RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS Coho salmon dependence on intermittent i streams Pi Wigington Jr", JL Ebersole:, ME Colvin, SG Leibowitz', B Miller3, B Hanaen+, HR I.avignes, D White', JP Baker"6,'MR Church', JR Brooks', MA Cairns''', and JE Compton' In February 2006, the US Supreme Court heard cases that may affect whether intermittent streams are juris- dictional waters under the Clean Water Act. In June 2006, however, the cases were remanded to the circuit court, leaving the status of intermittent streams uncertain once again. The presence of commercial species, such as coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch), can be an important consideration when determining jurisdic- tion. These salmon spawn in the upper portions of Oregon coastal stream networks, where intermittent streams are common. in our study of a coastal Oregon watershed, we found that intermittent streams were an important source of coho salmon smolts. Residual pools in intermittent streams provided a means by which juvenile coho could survive during dry periods, smolts that overwintered in intermittent streams were larger than those from perennial streams. Movement of juvenile coho into intermittent tributaries from the main - stem was another way in which the fish exploited the habitat and illustrates the importance of maintaining accessibility for entire stream networks. Loss of intermittent stream habitat would have a negative effect on coho salmon populations in coastal drainages, including downstream navigable waters. Front Cant Envirm 2006; 4(10). 513-518 Intermittent streams only flow during part of the year and are often under -appreciated as aquatic resources. In the western US, over 65% of total stream length is inter- mittent (Stoddard et af, 2005). Whether intermittent streams are included under the jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act (CWA) is not clear. Under the CWA, the defi- nition of "waters of the United States" 6 vague, leading to substantial debate in the courts and federal agencies about the geographic scope of the statute (Downing et al. 2003). Until recently, regulatory interpretations were fairly broad, but a 2001 US Supreme Court ruling (Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v US Army Corps of Engineers, 531 US 159 [20011) re-emphasized the importance of a water body's navigability and its "significant nexus" with navigable waters. In June 2006, the Court issued decisions in two additional cases (United States v John Rapanos and June Carrabell v United States Army Corps of Engbwers and United States Enviyorunertwl Protection Agency, slip op, 547 US — [20061) that concerned the jurisdictional status of non -navigable waters. An issue that retrains unresolved is whether a tributary to a navigable waterbody must be perennial to be included, or whether it can be intermit- tent. Research documenting the impact of intermittent streams on interstate or foreign commerce in navigable waters, in particular, could influence whether such systems are protected under the CWA. US Environmental Protection AUncy, Corvallis, ` OR. 97333 *(u4g.0on.jim0epa.gov); '1.k ndent ccmaartor, Corvallis, OR 97333; 'Oregon Deft of Fish and WWe, Gharleswn, OR 97420; 'USDA Forest Service, Conaks, OR 97333; 'Dymm= Corp, Co�, OR 97333; `Current art Yess: Reat,ercreek, OR 97004; 7CwTent address: lruielzn&wr, OR 97351 Pacific salmon are extremely important to the ecosys- terns and economies of the Pacific Northwest and support valuable commercial and recreational fisheries. Salmon populations have experienced major declines and local extinctions, due in part to loss of freshwater habitat (Lichatowich 1999; CENR 2000). Coastal coho salmon (Oncrrrhynchus kisutch), which use headwater areas where intermittent -streams are common, have experienced declines similar to other Pacific salmon and have been the focus of major restoration efforts (Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board 2005). The potential importance of intermittent streams to coho and other salmonids has been documented (Everest 1973; Erman and Hawthorne 1976; Kralik and Sowerwine 1977; Cederholm and Scarlett 1982; Brown and Hartman 1988), but quantita- tive data are limited. Coho salmon commonly have an 18-month freshwater life cycle. Adult coho return from the ocean in late fall, when streamflows increase, and spawn in the upper por- tions of coastal stream networks. Coho fry emerge in late winter and remain in these streams through the summer and winter before migrating (as smolts) to the ocean the following spring. Juvenile survival during winter flood events is one of the most important factors controlling smolt production (Nickelson er cal. 1992). High stream - flows can physically displace or fatally injure fish unable to find suitable, low -velocity refugia. Larger smolts tend to have higher ocean survival rates (Holtby et aI. 1990). Thus, both the number and size of smolts affect the size and biomass of adult populations. In this paper, we quantify the contributions of intermit- tent streams to coho salmon production in an Oregon coastal watershed. Specifically, we provide estimates of *The Ecoiogicat Scxaety dAmeci� a.ti.-,.`rr• >>. a:..;1 t, 0 0 Salmon and intermittent streams •: a ��r�,y III s � x� s'r-• y s 6 s .a 4 �3 5 , e � Figure 1. West Fork Smith River watershed and stream network streams are shown with dashed tines. the (1) proportion of spawning that occurred in intertnit- tent streams, (2) movement of juveniles into intermittent streams, (3) juvenile survival in intermittent and peren- nial streams during winter, and (4) relative size of smolts produced from intermittent and perennial streams. This effort is part of a larger study that is examining how coho use habitat in the whole stream network of an Oregon coastal watershed during their freshwater life cycle (Ebersole et al, in press). 0 Methods Since 2002, we have studied survival and movement of juvenile coho salmon in the stream network of the West Fork Smith River (WFSR), a 67 km' forested drainage in coastal Oregon (Figure 1). The watershed supports a wild coho salmon population, and produced an average of 24 000 coho salmon smolts per year during 2002-2005 (Jepson et aL 2006). The stream network consists of a mainstem and six major tributaries (Figure 1). Two tribu- taries, Moore Creek and Crane Creek, have intermittent flow during many summers and represent 9% of the total stream network. PJ Wigington et al. Douglas County has measured streamflow continuously on the rnainstem WFSR, near the mouth, since 198l _ During 2003-2005, we periodically measured streamflow in trib- utary streams using Swoffer flowmeters (Swoffer Instruments, Seattle, WA) mount- ed on wading rods (Gordon et al. 1992). We compared mainstem and tributary streamflows to establish mainstem threshold values below which intermittent tributaries ceased to flow. We also deployed an array of Onset Stowaway Tidbit (onset Computer Corp- oration, Bourne, MA) temperature data log- gers in 43 pools in the WFSR stream net- work (Caims et al. 2005), and made recordings at 30-minute intervals. Adult coho salmon spawner abundance was calculated from surveys conducted by Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) personnel, using established field survey protocols (ODFW 2005). Area under the curve estimates were obtained from repeated ODFW surveys throughout the spawning period, and were converted to estimates of abundance assuming a 75% observation probability (Jacobs 2002). Because estimates of observation and asso- ciated variance are not available at the stream level (Jacobs 2002), we developed confidence intervals for the estimate of adult coho spawners using intermittent Intermittent streams. A confidence interval was con- structed using the difference between the spawner estimate and the actual number of coho observed during stream surveys to create upper and lower bounds for each stream. This confidence interval corresponds to an assumed range of observation probabil- ities from 50% to 100%. Coho salmon juveniles were individually tagged from August to October each year, with 11 mm passive inte- grated transponder (PIT) rags (PIT Tag Steering Committee 1999). We collected coho for tagging by sein- ing (Ebersole et al. in press); fish were recaptured as they left the watershed using a rotary screw trap that was oper- ated continuously (February through June, except for brief periods during extremely large hydrologic events), with a trap efficiency of 33-39% (Jepson et al. 2006). Each fish was measured for fork length (distance from tip of snout to indentation in caudal fin) at time of tagging and at time of recapture at the smolt tarp. From August to October 2003, we PIT tagged an average of 328 coho salmon (range = 94 to 469) in each of eight reaches located in the upper and lower sections of Crane, Moore, Beaver, and Gold Creeks, and at ten reaches within the mainstem. Each triburary reach was 800m long and each mainstem reach was 400m long. In total, 3977 coho salmon were tagged in the mainstem, 1214 were tagged in t The Ewlopcal &xiety 4America 9 PJ Wigington et al. the perennial tributaries, and 400 were tagged in the intermittent tributaries. During August to October 2004, we established 30 PIT -tagging reaches, spaced systemati- cally across the WFSR stream network. Each reach was 300 m long. We ragged an average of 149 coho salmon (range = 86 to 185) within each reach, tagging a total of 3012 coho salmon in the mainstem, 2010 coho salmon in the perennial tributaries, and 1156 coho salmon in the intermittent tributaries. We estimated overwmter survival for each tagged group per reach by dividing the number of fish recovered at the rotary strew trap by the number released, after correcting for trap efficiency and the proportion scanned for PIT tags. Variance estimates for overwinter survival were derived using a bootstrap method (a technique for estimating the sampling distribution of an estimator by resampling with replacement from the original sample; Thedinga et a1.1994). Movement of PIT tagged coho salmon between the mainstem and four tributaries (two perennial. Beaver and Gold, and two intermittent: Moore and Crane) was moni- tored using stationary PIT -tag monitoring stations posi- tioned in the tributary near the junction with the mainstem West Fork Smith River. All four antennae were in opera- tion for the winters of 2003-2004 and 2004-2005. Each monitoring station consisted of a Destron-Fearing (South St Paul, MN) FS1001 transceiver powered by deep -cycle batteries. A rectangular antenna (3.3 m x 1.2 m) was posi- tioned in the stream and bracketed with weir panels to cap- ture all but the highest stream8ows. PIT -tagged fish passing through the antenna field were recorded (PIT -tag identifi- cation number, date, and time) continuously on a laptop computer attached to the transceiver. Coho salmon smolts PIT tagged during the autumns of 2003 and 2004 were clas- sified according to the recapture history (where they were located within the stream net- work during the overwinter period) as (1) mainstem, (2) perennial tributary, or (3) inter- mittent tributary habitat users_ We used analysis of covari- ance (ANCOVA; Gotelli and Ellison 2004) to compare the length of PIT -tagged coho salmon smolts recaptured at the smolt trap that used miainstem, perennial tributary, or intermit- tent tributary stream habitats. We used the year of PIT tagging as a categorical variable to account for between -year varia- tions and coho salmon length at the time of PIT tagging as a covariare to control for variabil- ity in initial fish length. Date of recapture at the smolt trap was also included as a covariate, Figure 2. Residual pools during a dry summer in a West Fork Smith River intermittent because juvenile coho salmon a ihurary stream. Salmon and intermittent streams 6 The �cn4ncal Society of America grow rapidly in the spring, and smolts that out -migrate later in the spring tend to be larger. A model of the two covariates and two factors and all interactions for the ANCOVA were fit using the mixed procedure (PROC MIXED) in SAS 9.1 (SAS institute; Carey, NC). Model fit, structure, and assumptions were visually assessed using diagnostic plots of predicted values and residuals. ■ Results We were able to use streamflow data from the summer of 2003 to establish mainstent streamflow thresholds below which streamflow ceased at the mouth of the intermittent tributaries (Moore Creek and Crane Creek). Using these thresholds, we estimated that one or both intermittent tributaries experienced periods with no flow during approximately 14 of the 24 years of streamflow record, with 6 years having no streamflow, in intermittent streams for periods of 15 to B? days. During our study, two summers (2002 and 2003) had extended periods with no streamflow in the intermittent streams, but during the summer of 2004 streamflow did not cease at any time (Table 1). During periods with no streamflow, residual pools (Figure 2) were present in Moore and Crane Creeks for a considerable period of time after streamflow had ceased. Water temperature data in intermittent and perennial 0 0 Salmon and intermittent srrearas Figure 3. Proportion of juvenile coho tagged during the fall in maimtem, perennial tributaries, and intermittent tnbutmries, and the estirnated proportion of dw same tagged coho migrating frorrm the West Fork Smith River (based on recaptures at the smolt trap) that were classified as r winstern users, perenr" tributary users, or intermittent tributary users, (a) Coho tagged in fall 2003 and captured in strok trap in sluing 2004; f b) coho tagged in fall 2004 and captured in smolt trap in spring 2005. The numher of coho comprising the bars are shown above the bars. The standard error of the tagged coho smolt emigrants are shown as whiskers above the boars. Coho molts that were located during the over - winter period exclusively in mainstem habitats were classified as mainstem users; molts throat were originally tagged m or located at some time during the over -winter period in the perennial tributaries were classified as perennial tributary users; and smolts that were originally tamed m or located at some time during the over-winwr period in the intermittent tributaries were dassiftedass intermittent tributary users, streams confirm the presence of residual pools. Diel water temperature patterns were consistent in upper and lower Gold Creek throughout the course of the summer of 2003 and are indicative of perennial streamflow. In contrast, water temperature patterns in Moore Creek show moder- ately fluctuating temperatures followed by widely fluctuat- ing temperatures, indicative of a dry channel in the lower stretches during that period. We observed cool, constant temperatures, indicative of a residual pool sustained by PJ Wigington at al. groundwater, aF an upper Moore Creek site from early July into September. Intermittent tributaries were used by coho salmon in several ways. During 2002-2004, 11% (confidence inter- val (C11 = 8 to 14%) to 21% (CI = 16 to 26%) of the adult coho salmon spawned in the two intermittent screams. The total number of spawners in the West Fork Smith were 3451, 3728, and 994 in 2002, 2003, and 2004, respectively. We detected 833 (460 in Moore Creek and 373 in Crane Creek) coho juveniles originally PIT tagged in the mainstem at one or more of the intermit- tent tributary antennas during the winters of 2003-2004 and 2004-2005. Most mainstem-tagged juvenile coho salmon entered the intermittent tributaries during high st rearnflows in the fall months. Juvenile coho that had been tagged in or used intermittent and perennial tribu- tary streams comprised a higher proportion of the smolts that were recaptured at the smolt trap during the subse- quent smolt migration period than coho that had remained in the mainstem (Figure 3). Overwinter sur- vival of who salmon PIT tagged in intermittent streams during the winters of 2002 through 2005 was similar to survival rates in perennial tributaries, but higher than mainstem survival rates in all years (Table 2). After accounting for variation in the length at tagging and smolr migration timing, our statistical analysis showed a significant difference in the length of coho smolts that used perennial (mainstetn and tributary) and intermittent tributary habitats (F2.,61 = 9.06, P - 0.0001) during 2004 and 2005. Significant interaction terms com- plicated direct interpretation of the model, so we evalu- ated differences in smolt length at lower, middle, and upper values of the covariates used in the model for all habitat user classes and cohort years resulting in a total of 54 comparisons. Statistical significance of the differences was set at a P value t 0.0009 (0.05154 pairwise tests). Coho smolts that used intermittent tributaries were larger than coho smolts that used perennial tributary habitats dur- ing both 2004 and 2005 (Figure 4). This difference was sta- tistically significant throughout the smolt migration period in 2004, but only during the middle portion of the 2005 smolt migration. Coho smolts that used intermittent tribu- tary habitats were larger than coho that used the mainstem during 2004 (Figure 4). This difference was statistically sig- nificant for the middle and end of the migration period. On the ocher hand, coho smolts that had used intermittent tributary streams were significantly smaller than coho — ----- --- -- — — Q The Ecological Smxiety of America i� Pj Wigington et al. smolts that had used mainstem habitats through the early and middle portions of smolt migration during 2005. N discussion Although intermittent streams experience periods with no streamflow, they provide valuable habitat for juvenile coho salmon. In the WFSR network, Moore and Crane Creeks provided both spawning and rearing habitat for coho salmon. Even during years in which the streams had extended periods with no streamflow, they accounted for an important component of the coho smolts leaving the WFSR watershed (Figure 3). In addition, overwinter sur- vival rates for juvenile coho originally tagged in the inter- mittent streams were higher than survival rates in main - stem habitats and equivalent to survival in perennial streams (Table 2). How can intermittent streams produce coho smolts even though the streams have extended peri- ods with no streamflow? One reason is that if periods without streamflow are not too long, residual pools (see Figure 2) can sustain juvenile coho until streamflow resumes with autumn rains. May and Lee (20N) found that in Oregon coastal streams, gravel -bed pools sustained by hyporheic flow were able to carry over coho juveniles during the summer, but the pools experienced a decrease in juvenile coho abundance of 36% because of fish mortality caused by pool drying. We observed numerous residual pools in Moore Creek and Crane Creek during late summer periods, when no streamflow occurred at the mouth of the streams. Water temperature patters in the pools were consistent with two types of pools in Oregon coastal streams identified by May and Lee (2004), which may have the potential to maintain water during periods with no streamflow. One pool type is comprised of gravel pools with bedrock contact for which hyporheic flow is the primary source of water during dry periods. Lower Moore Creek was a location that featured this type of pool; in this case, the pool dried out during late summer, as evidenced by the wide fluctuations of tempera- ture, typical of air temperature fluctuations. Bedrock pools that received no surface flow from upstream but are recharged by groundwater from fractured bedrock repre- sents another class of pools. These have relatively low water temperatures and little diurnal fluctuation. The importance of residual or isolated pools in sustain- ing fish populations in intermittent streams has been doc- umented in a wide range of settings, Closs and Lake (1996) found that Gafazias olidus, a small salmoniform fish, was able to survive in scattered small pools through- out the upper reaches of an intermittent stream in Australia. Pires et al. (1999) noted that isolated pools were important habitats for fishes in intermittent streams in Portugal. Labbe and Fausch (2000) reported that, during summer drought, permanent pools were important habi- tats for the Arkansas darter (Edwostrnna cragini) in two intermittent streams in the Colorado plains_ Another reason that WFSR intermittent streams were Salmon and intermittent streams origniagy tagged m 2003 and rempwred at the smolt trap in 2004, and (b) originally tagged in 2004 and recaptured in 2005. The wufth of the box is proportional to the number of coho used to generate the box. able to produce coho smolts was that some coho tagged in the mainstem moved into intermittent tributaries when streamflow resumed in the fall. Once the intermittent tributaries resumed streamflow, coho that had survived in the residual pools or immigrated in the fall probably expe- rienced lower densities and higher food resources com- pared to coho in perennial tributaries. We hypothesize that this provides higher survival and growth of coho that overwinter in intermittent streams via release of density dependence (Chapman 1966). Our observation that, fol- lowing a particularly dry summer in 2003-2004, coho smolts from intermittent streams were considerably larger than smolts that used perennial habitats (Figure 4) is con- sistent with this hypothesis. In conclusion, WFSR intermittent streams provided both valuable spawning and rearing habitat for who salmon. Residual pools in intermittent streams provided one means by which juvenile coho could survive during dry periods. Movement of juvenile coho into intermittent tributaries from the mainstem was another way in which juvenile coho exploited intermittent stream habitat, and illustrates the ---- ---------------------- C The E.cniogical Society of America ' " 0 0 Salomon and intermittent streams importance of maintaining accessibility of entire stream networks to coho. Under particularly dry conditions, smolts that overwintered in intermittent streams were larger than those from perennial streams. Low -gradient intermittent streams, such as chose in the WfSR, are common in water- sheds with sedimentary bedrock, which comprise the prime coho salmon habitat among Oregon coastal drainages. Our results demonstrate that loss of intermittent stream habitat would have a negative effect on coho salmon populations in coastal drainages, and in general, our study illustrates the important role that intermittent streams can play in main- taining the biological integrity of navigable waters. Research and methods that demonstrate these interconnec- tions are critical in helping regulators and policy makers respond to recent US Supreme Court decisions. ■ Acknowledgments The authors thank S Hendricks, C Oyler, R St Claire, R Emig, N Raskauskas, T Mintkeski, C Meengs, S Davis, and S Orlaineta for tireless field work in support of this project, and P Haggerty of Indus Corp, for GIS support. We thank Roseburg Resources and the USDI Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for providing access to research sites, and P Olmstead with the BLM, who pro- vided encouragement and logistical support. We are very appreciative of the efforts of G Cicchetti, J Hall, R Lackey, B McComb, R Ozretich, D Poon, and J Richardson, who reviewed earlier versions of this manu- script. We also acknowledge D Downing for reviewing our discussion of the Supreme Court cases. This paper was funded by the US Environmental Protection Agency, USDA Forest Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management, and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. It has been subject to Agency review and approved for publication. Reference to trade names does not imply endorsement by the US Govemment. 0 References Brown TO and Hartman GE 1986. Contribution of seasonally flooded lands and minor tribe Lanes to the production of coho salmon in Carnation Creek, British Columbia. T Am Fish Soc 117. 546-51. Cairns MA, Ebersole JL, Halter JP, and Wigington )r P). 2005. Influence of summer temperature on black SPCA infestation of juve- nile coho salmon in the Oregon Coast Range. T Am Fish Sac 134: 1471-79, Cederhoim CJ and Scarlett W). 1992. Seasonal immigrations of juve- nile Wmonids into four tributaries of the Clearwater River, Washington 1977-1981. In: Brannon EL and Salo ED (Eds). Proceedings of the sahrion and rrout migratory behavior sympo- sium. Seattle, WA: Fisheries Research Institute, University of Washington. Chapman DW.1966- Food and space as regulators of salmcmid popula- tions in strearrr_c Am Nat 100: 345-55. Clm, OP and Lake PS. 1996. Drought, differential mortality and the coexistence of a native and an introduced fish species in a south east Australian intermittent stream. Envmm Bid Fish 47: 17-26. CENR (Committee our Environment and Natural Resources). 2000. From the edge: science to support restoration of pacific salmon. PJ Wigington et a2. Washingtorn, DC! Cornmirtee an Environment and Natural ResnurcmNariorral Scierce and Technolov (Council. Dnu-ning DM, Winter C, and Wood LD. 2003. Navigating through Mean Water Act)UnSdicrion: a legal review. Weulmu2s 23: 475-93. Ehctsole JL, Wigington Jr Pj, Bahr JP., a aL Juvenile coho salum growth and survival acnn scream nerwark seasonal habitats. Am Fish Sac. In press. Erman DC and Hawthorne VR. 1976. The quantitative importance of an ituernuttent stream in spawning of rainbow trout- Am Fish Sot 105: 675-81. Everest FH. 1973. Ecology and management of summer smelhead in the Rogue River. Portland, OR: Oregon State Game Commission. Fisheries Research Report 7. Gordon ND, McMahon TA, and Finlaysm BL. 1992. Stream hydrol- ogy. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons. Gotelli NJ and Ellison AM. 2004. A primer of ecological statistics. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates Inc. Hoitby LB, Andersen BC, and Kadowaki RK- 1990. Importance of smolt size and early ocean growth to interanmual variability in marine survival of mho salmon (Oncwhyridue kistmch). CrnnI Fish Aqum Sd 47, 2181-94. Jacobs S. W02. Calibration of estimates of coho spawner abundance in the Smith [liver basin, 2001. Portland, OR: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Monitoring program report number OPSW ODF W 2002.06. )epson DB, Dalton T, Johnson SL, et aL 2006. Salmodd life cycle mautoraV in western Orrgtn: streams, 2003-2005. Saluti, OFi Oregon Depanwm of Fish and Wildlife. Mtmi€oring program Mort number OPSW-OOF W-2006.2. Kralik NJ and Sawuwine JE. 1977. The role of two rurrthern California intermittent streams in the life hismq ciarodrornom salmonids (MS thesis). Arcata, CA: Humboldt State University. Labbe TR and Fausch KD. 2000. Dynamics of intermittent stream habitat regulate persistence of a threatened fish at multiple scales Ecd Appl 10.1774-91. Licbatowich J. 1999- Salmon without rivers. Washington, DC: Island Press. May CL and Lee DC. 2004. The relationships among in -channel sedi- ment storage, pool depth, and surnmer survival of juvenile salmonids in Oregon Coast Range scrams. N Am J Fish Mm W 24: 761-74. Nickelson TE, Rodgers JD, Johnson SL, and Solazai W. 1992. Seasonal changes in habitat use by juvenile mho salmon (Oncorltynclnrs kdnurrrlr) in Oregon coastal screams. Corr J Fish Aquat Sci 49: 783--89. ODFW (Oregon Depararient of Fish and Wildlife). 2005. Costal salmon spawning survey pvxvdures manual 2W5. Corvallis, OR: Otegon Adult Salmonid Inventory and Sampling Project. http./lmtgmsmte.edtvt)epdODFW/rpo-f AM2NIes�5 SSManual.pdE Viewed 26 October 2006. Oregon Watershed Enbarvmwnt Board. 2005. The (Ste; at plan for salmon and watersheds, 2003-2005 bietrnial repot, Volume 1. Salem, OR: Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board. Pires AM, Cowrt IG, and Coelho MM- I", Seasonal changes in fish community smct ut of intermitmrit streams in [be middle reaches of the Guadiana basin, Portugal- J Fish Bid 54: 235-49. PIT Tag StmTLng Committee, 1999- PIT tag making procedures man- ual, version 2.0. Portland, OR: Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority. Stoddard JL, Peck DV, Olsen AR, et aL 2005. Environmental mtmitor- inng and assessment program (Elv AK western streams and rivers statistical summary. Washington, DC: US Environmental Protection Agency. EPA 620jR-45f006. The+duiga JF, Murphy Ml., Johnson SW, et aL 1994, Determination of salmonid smolt yield with rotary -screw traps in the SitA River, Alaska, to predict effects of glacial flooding. N Arcs J Fish Mmuw 14: 837-51. - -- -- � a The Ecological &wiery of America _, 0 0 Denis Law City of A4ayor ail Public Works Department - Gregg Zirnmerman, P. E., Administrator December- 23, 2011 EXHIBIT 5 Ms. Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division 39015 172"d Avenue SE Auburn, WA 95092 RE: East Renton Lift Station Removal, LUAU-092, ECF, CAR, Notice of Applications and Proposed Determination of Non -Significance Dear Ms. Waiter; The City of Renton offers the following in response to the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fish Division's comments on the East Renton Lift Station Removal, LUA11-092, ECF, CAR, Notice of Applications and Proposed Determination of Non -Significance, for the letter dated December 19, 2011: Comment 1: Water Typing We agree that the stream does meet the physical criteria for presumed fish use and fish habitat based on WAC 22-016-031. We initially questioned whether or not fish cou€d access this reach due to the extensive portion of the stream that is culverted beneath residential developments south and downstream of the park and the presence of piped segments and stormwater facilities upstream of the park. Therefore, to assist the County in applying the appropriate stream classification for the stream and to assist with development of construction methods, a scientific collection permit (SCP) was obtained from WDFW to conduct an electrofishing study to determine fish presence/absence within that portion of Stewart Creek that flows through Maplewood Park. Upon receipt of the SCP, ESA contacted Larry Fisher, a local area habitat biologist with WDFW, to set up a site visit prior to performing any electrofishing. ESA fisheries biologist Steven Krueger and wetland scientist Sara Noland, City staff, and a Carollo engineer met with Mr. Fisher on -site on March 23, 2011. Based on existing site conditions and follow-up review of site plans, Larry Fisher indicated that electrofishing would not be necessary and instead suggested making visual observations and installing baited minnow traps to assess fish use of Stewart Creek within Maplewood Park. During the site visit we also looked at the downstream culverted portion of Stewart Creek and Mr. Fisher indicated that this was a likely barrier to fish migration. ESA fish biologist Steve Krueger installed two baited minnow traps on March 29, 2011, one located upstream near the proposed crossing and one located at the downstream Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton,Washington 98057 • reritonwa.gov r Ads. V.'a-tir Page 2 of 3 DccemLnr 23, 2011 end of Maplewood"Park. On the same day, Mr. Krueger also performed visual observations by walking the entire stream length within the park using polarized glasses. Steve Krueger returned to the site on March 31, 2011, to inspect and remove the traps and perform additional observations of the stream by walking the entire length again. Upon inspection of the traps, no fish were observed. One small salamander and two aquatic invertebrates were collected and released unharmed. No fish, particularly salmonids, were observed during visual observations conducted along the entire stream length within Maplewood Park. it is assumed that the downstream piped segment in conjunction with steep grades through the ravine may prevent salmonid access to the project area. The results of the field investigation were forwarded to Larry Fisher on March 31, 2011, Mr. Fisher replied on April 1, 2011, that WDFW would allow for open cut excavation through the channel provided that the streambed and vegetation disturbed during construction would be restored, While the downstream fish passage barrier near Elliott Bridge may have been removed, this does not necessarily mean that salmonids can access the stream channel within the park. The piped segment beneath the residential development south of the park is also most likely a fish passage barrier, although this has not been formally identified as a barrier by either WDFW or the Muckleshoot Tribe. The issue is not that the stream does not meet the physical criteria for presumed fish use, but whether or not fish can actually access the site due to downstream barriers. It was concluded based on the use of baited minnow traps, observations along the entire reach, and presence of a significant segment of piped channel, that fish are not present. While ten years of monitoring would be valuable to support this conclusion, this is not feasible given the current timing of the City of Renton. Therefore, the prior assessment that the stream should be classified as a non - fish bearing stream (Type N) stands. Additional Mitigation Agreed To: No additional mitigation required. The City will meet with Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division (MITFD) to demonstrate constraints. Comment 2: Project Impacts The method for the determining fish presence/absence was coordinated with WDFW and open trench excavation was allowed provided that the channel was restored in the excavation area and that vegetation was restored. WDFW was in agreement that this segment of Stewart Creek was non -fish bearing and therefore agreed that open trench excavation could be allowed. The depth of the sewer line was taken into consideration as there is always the potential for bed scour. The topography in this area is relatively flat with good floodplain connectivity. Excessive flows, if they were to occur, would spread out laterally; thus ameliorating the scour potential. In addition, upstream portions of the stream are primarily piped conveyances with the stream being located within a detention pond immediately upstream of the park. Therefore, due to the highly developed nature of the headwaters and the fact that there are piped segments and detention ponds are present, the potential for "debris" flows seems extremely unlikely. To further reduce the H:\File SV5%WWP - Wastewater\wwP-03-0000 Correspondence - Wast2W2ter\DaveC\2011 Correspondence\Response to %Iuckleshoot Tribe Comments on East Renton Lift Station Removal,_Finai.doc\DMCtp 0 11 Ms VYt 11i,?r Pa-,e3ui3 n.;ccmbcr 23, 201i. potential for bed scour, a courser material (cobble) was selected as backfill over the pipeline. Additional Mitigation Agreed To: The use of cobbles in the stream area will be replaced with appropriate streambed gravels. Comment 3: Project Mitigation Mitigation for tree removal and the temporal loss of stream function due to tree removal will be further assessed through other state and federal permit application processes (Corps 404/WDFW HPA). The City could pursue the placement of a portion of the trees to be removed within the channel near the disturbance area and in other areas easily accessible by existing trails. However, the City only has control over the 30-foot wide pipeline corridor through the park and any mitigation outside this would require additional coordination with King County Parks, who may or may not be supportive of placing large woody debris (LWD) within the stream outside the 30-foot corridor- The tree replacement ratio identified (3:1) in combination with using felled trees to supplement stream habitat would provide adequate mitigation for the tree removal and temporal impacts associated with the loss of cover, shade, and LWD recruitment potential. Placement of large felled trees within the stream channel would be limited to the disturbance area to minimize stream impacts where none were previously identified. The stream bed materials specified (cobble) will be replaced with the appropriate streambed gravels such as a general spawning gravel mixture with a higher content of large gravel. Additional Mitigation Agreed To: A hydrologist/geomorphologist will develop a proposed plan for the LWD placement. The City will coordinate with King County Parks to identify and agree to favorable locations for LWD placement. The use of cobbles in the stream area will be replaced with appropriate streambed gravels. If you have any questions regarding this response letter, please contact me at 425-430-7212. Sincerely,' i Da;i�i.d M.: Clrist,�nsen Wastewater Utility Supervisor cc: Rocale Timmons, CED Associate Planner Lori Lull, Us Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District, PO Box 3755, Seattle, WA 98124 Larry Fisher, WDFW, 3190 160t' Avenue 5E, Bellevue, WA 98008 Lara Karnmereck, P.E., Carollo Engineers, 1218 Third Avenue Suite 1600, Seattle, WA 98101 W\rile Sys\W W P - W asteWater\W WP-03-0000 Correspondence - Wastewater\DaveC`ti2011 Correspon dence\Respon se to Muckleshoot Tribe Comments an East Renton Lift Station Rem oval_final.doc\DMC1p 0 ! City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COMMENTS DUE: DECEMBER 19, 2011 APPLICATION NO: LUA11-092, ECF, CAR DATE CIRCULATED: DECEMBER 5, 2011 APPLICANT: David Christensen PROJECT MANAGER: Rocale Timmons PROJECT TITLE: East Renton Lift Station Removal PROJECT REVIEWER: Arneta Henninger SITE AREA: 1.2 acres EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): N/A LOCATION: West & South of SE 2"d CT, North of Maplewood Park PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL_ The applicant, the City of Renton, is requesting Environmental Review and a Crtiical Area Exemption in order to remove an exisiting lift station, located west of SE 2nd Ct; and install a new sewer pipeline, extending west and south from the lift station location, through Maplewood Park and ending within 148th PI SE. The 1.2 acre subject site is located primarily within unicorparted King County. However, the portion of the property located within the City limits is within the R-4 zoning classification. Seven wetlands and two streams were identified within the study area boundaries. Proposed construction would require temporary crossing of one of the on -site streams (Stewart Creek) and its buffer along with some of the wetland buffers_ A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor impacts Probable Major Impacts Mare information Necessary Earth Air water Plants Land/Shoreline Use Animals Environmental Health Energy/ Natural Resources B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Housing Aesthetics Li ht/Glore Recreation utilities Transportation Public Services Historic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10, POD Feet 14 ODD Feet We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signaturp,6f Dirqbor or Authorized Representative Date 0 0 y nis Dena Draw - Clt�r Ofy Public Works Department -Gregg Zimmerman, P. E.,Administrator December 23, 2011 Ms. Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division 39015 172"d Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092 RE: East Renton Lift Station Removal, LUA11-092, ECF, CAR, Notice of Applications and Proposed Determination of Non -Significance Dear Ms. Walter: The City of Renton offers the following in response to the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fish Division's comments on the East Renton Lift Station Removal, LUA11-092, ECF, CAR, Notice of Applications and Proposed Determination of Non -Significance, for the letter dated December 19, 2011.- Comment 1: Water Typing We agree that the stream does meet the physical criteria for presumed fish use and fish habitat based on WAC 22-016-031. We initially questioned whether or not fish could access this reach due to the extensive portion of the stream that is culverted beneath residential developments south and downstream of the park and the presence of piped segments and stormwater facilities upstream of the park. Therefore, to assist the County in applying the appropriate stream classification for the stream and to assist with development of construction methods, a scientific collection permit (SCP) was obtained from WDFW to conduct an electrofishing study to determine fish presence/absence within that portion of Stewart Creek that flows through Maplewood Park. Upon receipt of the SCP, ESA contacted Larry Fisher, a local area habitat biologist with WDFW, to set up a site visit prior to performing any electrofishing. ESA fisheries biologist Steven Krueger and wetland scientist Sara Noland, City staff, and a Carollo engineer met with Mr. Fisher on -site on March 23, 2011. Based on existing site conditions and follow-up review of site plans, Larry Fisher indicated that electrofishing would not be necessary and instead suggested making visual observations and installing baited minnow traps to assess fish use of Stewart Creek within Maplewood Park. During the site visit we also looked at the downstream culverted portion of Stewart Creek and Mr. Fisher indicated that this was a likely barrier to fish migration. ESA fish biologist Steve Krueger installed two baited minnow traps on March 29, 2011, one located upstream near the proposed crossing and one located at the downstream Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov 0 0 Wis. Ww�cr Fagg 2 04 3 Cecember 23, 2011 end of Maplewood Park. On the same day, Mr. Krueger also performed visual observations by walking the entire stream length within the park using polarized glasses. Steve Krueger returned to the site on March 31, 2011, to inspect and remove the traps and perform additional observations of the stream by walking the entire length again. Upon inspection of the traps, no fish were observed. one small salamander and two aquatic invertebrates were collected and released unharmed. No fish, particularly salmonids, were observed during visual observations conducted along the entire stream length within Maplewood Park. It is assumed that the downstream piped segment in conjunction with steep grades through the ravine may prevent salmonid access to the project area. The results of the field investigation were forwarded to Larry Fisher on March 31, 2011, Mr. Fisher replied on April 1, 2011, that WDFW would allow for open cut excavation through the channel provided that the streambed and vegetation disturbed during construction would be restored. While the downstream fish passage barrier near Elliott Bridge may have been removed, this does not necessarily mean that salmonids can access the stream channel within the park, The piped segment beneath the residential development south of the park is also most likely a fish passage barrier, although this has not been formally identified as a barrier by either WDFW or the Muckleshoot Tribe. The issue is not that the stream does not meet the physical criteria for presumed fish use, but whether or not fish can actually access the site due to downstream barriers. It was concluded based on the use of baited minnow traps, observations along the entire reach, and presence of a significant segment of piped channel, that fish are not present. While ten years of monitoring would be valuable to support this conclusion, this is not feasible given the current timing of the City of Renton. Therefore, the prior assessment that the stream should be classified as a non - fish bearing stream (Type N) stands, Additional Mitigation Agreed To: No additional mitigation required. The City will meet with Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division (MITFe) to demonstrate constraints. Comment 2: Project Impacts The method for the determining fish presence/absence was coordinated with WDFW and open trench excavation was allowed provided that the channel was restored in the excavation area and that vegetation was restored. WDFW was in agreement that this segment of Stewart Creek was non -fish bearing and therefore agreed that open trench excavation could be allowed. The depth of the sewer line was taken into consideration as there is always the potential for bed scour. The topography in this area is relatively flat with good floodplain connectivity. Excessive flows, if they were to occur, would spread out laterally; thus ameliorating the scour potential. In addition, upstream portions of the stream are primarily piped conveyances with the stream being located within a detention pond immediately upstream of the park. Therefore, due to the highly developed nature of the headwaters and the fact that there are piped segments and detention ponds are present, the potential for "debris" flows seems extremely unlikely. To further reduce the H:Vile Sys'%VMIP - WasteWater`WWP-03.0000 Correspondence - Wastewater\OaveC\2011 Correspond ence\Response to Muckleshoot Tribe Comments on East Renton Lift Station Removai_Final.doc\QMCtp 0 Nis. LJalter Pa"e 3 of 3 December 23, 201'- potential for bed scour, a courser material (cobble) was selected as backfiil over the pipeline. Additional Mitigation Agreed To: The use of cobbles in the stream area will be replaced with appropriate streambed gravels. Comment 3: Project Mitigation Mitigation for tree removal and the temporal loss of stream function due to tree removal will be further assessed through other state and federal permit application processes (Corps 404/WDFW HPA). The City could pursue the placement of a portion of the trees to be removed within the channel near the disturbance area and in other areas easily accessible by existingtrails. However, the City only has control over the 30-foot wide pipeline corridor through the park and any mitigation outside this would require additional coordination with King County Parks, who may or may not be supportive of placing large woody debris (LWD) within the stream outside the 30-foot corridor. The tree replacement ratio identified (3:1) in combination with using felled trees to supplement stream habitat would provide adequate mitigation for the tree removal and temporal impacts associated with the loss of cover, shade, and LWD recruitment potential. Placement of large felled trees within the stream channel would be limited to the disturbance area to minimize stream impacts where none were previously identified. The stream bed materials specified (cobble) will be replaced with the appropriate streambed gravels such as a general spawning gravel mixture with a higher content of large gravel. Additional Mitigation Agreed To: A hydrologist/geomorphologist will develop a proposed plan for the LWD placement. The City will coordinate with King County Parks to identify and agree to favorable locations for LWD placement. The use of cobbles in the stream area will be replaced with appropriate streambed gravels. If you have any questions regarding this response letter, please contact me at 425-430-7212. Sincerely, .laa`vid M. Christensen Wastewater Utility Supervisor cc: Rocale Timmons, CEO Associate Planner Lori Lull, US Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District, Po Sox 3755, Seattle, WA 98124 Larry Fisher, WDFW, 3190 160th Avenue SE, Bellevue, WA 98008 Lara Kammereck, P.E., Carollo Engineers, 1218 Third Avenue Suite 1600, Seattle, WA 93101 H:\File Sys\W W P - WasteWater\WW P-03-0000 Correspondence - Wastewater\DaveC\2011 Correspondence`Response to M uckles hoot Tribe Comments on fast Renton Lift Station Removal_Final.doc\DMCtp ' Stacy Tucker From: Rocale Timmons Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 4:10 PM To: Stacy Tucker Subject: FW: East Renton Lift Station Removal, LUA11-092, ECF, CAR, Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non -Significance Attachments: coho and intermittent streams.pdf Rocale T From: Karen Walter[mai Ito: KWalter@muckleshoot. nsn. us] Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 10:29 AM To: Rocale Timmons Cc: Fisher, Larry D (DFW); Lull, Lori C NWS Subject: East Renton Lift Station Removal, LUA11-092, ECF, CAR, Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non -Significance Rocale, We have reviewed the Notice of Application for the above referenced project and offer the following comments in the interest of protecting and restoring the Tribe's treaty protected fisheries resources: Water Typing Per the Wetland, Stream, and Wildlife Study (ESA 2011), there are two streams on -site: Stewart Creek and a tributary to Stewart Creek. Stewart Creek is a tributary to the Cedar River. The Study classifies both streams as Type N waters. We disagree. Both streams appear to meet the physical criteria for presumed fish use and fish habitat based on WAC 222-16-031, as both streams are at least 2 feet in bankfull width per the study and appear to be less than 16% stream gradient based on the site plans. Stewart Creek is identified with an average channel width of 5 feet and portions as wide as 15 feet. The unnamed Stewart Creek tributary is identified as being three feet in width. Therefore, at least the bankfull width criterion is met for both streams. We are unaware of any natural barriers downstream that would constitute a fish passage barrier. Previously, King County DOT removed a known fish passage barrier culvert downstream on Stewart Creek as part of the Elliott Bridge replacement project (see http://community seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20050901&sluq=glance0le) which should have resulted in improved upstream passage in Stewart Creek. If there are other existing human created barriers downstream of the Park and above King County's previous work, then they can and should be replaced and not be used to determine potential fish habitat accordingly. Finally, the minnow traps and visual observations on two days described in the Study are too limited to confirm fish absence. We generally recommend that such studies be completed over 10 years to capture a variety of hydrology and rainfall events to document fish absence. There can be a variety of reasons why fish are not present when examined in single observations. As a surrogate for 10 years of monitoring data, we recommend that the physical criteria from WAC 222-16-031 be used along with the Forest Practices Board Manual 13 to determine potential fish habitat, unless there is a documented natural barrier confirmed by the MITFD and WDFW. There was substantial fish electroshocking data used in combination with stream measurements to create the criteria used in the WAC 222-16-031. The photos in the Study indicate features similar to other streams where we have found coho and cutthroat trout. Even seasonal streams can provide habitat for coho and other salmonids when they are flowing. Please see attached paper. 2. Project Impacts Since the impacted streams appear to be capable of providing fish habitat, then the potential project impacts may not have been adequately assessed. For example, the extent of riparian impacts may not be accurate if a larger regulated stream buffer is required based on a Type F classification. It appears that the Category II wetland buffer may encompass the larger regulated stream buffer for Type F waters; however, this should be verified. Also, the proposal to use open trenching techniques would not be the preferred stream crossing if these are potential fish bearing streams. Rather, horizontal directional drilling or other techniques with less impacts to the streams would be assessed and implemented if technically feasible. Another consideration is the depth of the sewer line at the stream crossings (minimum 5 feet) may not be sufficient to protect the pipeline over time if the stream conditions change astesult of changes in upstream hydrology, As flows, etc. The pipe may need to be located deeper to avoid its exposure over time that causes future bank and bed stabilization that generally results in adverse impacts to fish habitat, all of which can be avoided if located at the proper depth now. 3. Project mitigation We recommend that all native trees that are 4 inches in diameter (at breast height) and greater and proposed to be removed from within 200 feet of the project streams, be placed back into the streams as partial mitigation for their removal. The tree replacement ratio of 3:1 will not address the temporal loss of tree growth and future wood recruitment from the removal of these trees. Per the environmental checklist, 31 trees that measure up to 26 inches DBH will be removed as part of this project. It is unclear how many of these trees are within 200 feet of the affected streams and at least 4 inches in diameter that will be removed. The mitigation area also needs to verify that the existing trails are not included in the mitigation ratios as these trails are proposed to be restored and would not be replanted as stream or wetland buffer. The stream buffers will also be further impacted by the pipeline and its requirement to plant only native shrubs within 20 feet of the 30 foot wide construction corridor to avoid tree root damage to the pipe. Additional mitigation will likely be needed to address this permanent impact. Finally, stream bed materials placed back in the affected streams should be similar to what is found currently, i.e. sands and gravel per the Study. The proposed cobbles, for example, may be too large of substrate, whereas gravel sized material and smaller will likely be more suitable. We appreciate the opportunity to review this project and look forward to the City's responses. Please note that the project is seeking a Hydraulic Project Approval permit and a Corps of Engineers 404 permit, at this time as well; therefore, we are also submitting these comments in response to those pending permits. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division 39015 172nd Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 9 RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS RESEARCH COMMUNICA 1ON5 _ -- Coho salmon dependence on intermittent streams PJ Wigington Jr'*, JL Ebersole', ME Colvin, SG Leibowitz', B Miller', B Hansen4,11R Lavignes, D White', JP Baker", MR Church`, JR Brooks', MA Cairns''', and JE Compton' - In February 2006, the US Supreme Court heard cases that may affect whether intermittent streams are juris- dictional waters under the Clean Water Act, in June 2006, however, the cases were remanded to the circuit court, leaving the status of intermittent streams uncertain once again. The presence of commercial species, such as coho salmon (Oncorhynchus khutch), can be an important consideration when determining jurisdic- tion. These salmon spawn in the upper portions of Oregon coastal stream networks, where intermittent streams are common. In our study of a coastal Oregon watershed, we found that intermittent streams were an important source of coho salmon smolts. Residual pools in intermittent streams provided a means by which juvenile coho could survive during dry periods; smolts that overwintered in intermittent streams were larger than those from perennial streams. Movement of juvenile coho into intermittent tributaries from the main - stem was another way in which the fish exploited the habitat and illustrates the importance of maintaining accessibility for entire stream networks. Loss of intermittent stream habitat would have a negative effect on coho salmon populations in coastal drainages, including downstream navigable waters. Front Ecol En%ir 2006; 4(10): S 13-518 ntermittent streams only flow during part of the year are often under -appreciated as aquatic resources. In the western US, over 65% of total stream length is inter- mittent (Stoddard et al. 2005). Whether intermittent streams are included under the jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act (CWA) is not clear. Under the CWA, the defi- nition of "waters of the United States" is vague, leading to substantial debate in the courts and federal agencies about the geographic scope of the statute (Downing er ad. 2003). Until recently, regulatory interpretations were fairly broad, but a 2001 US Supreme Court ruling (Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v US Anny Corps of Engineers, 531 US 159 [2,0011) re-emphasized the importance of a water body's navigability and its "significant nexus" with navigable waters. In June 2006, the Court issued decisions in two additional cases (United States v John Rapanos and June Carabell v United States Army Corps of Engineers and United States Envirvnmenzal Protection Agency, slip op, 547 US _ [20061) that concerned the jurisdictional status of non -navigable waters. An issue that remains unresolved is whether a tributary to a navigable waterbody roust be perennial to be included, or whether it can be intermit- tent. Research documenting the impact of intermittent streams on interstate or foreign commerce in navigable waters, in particular, could influence whether such systems are protected under the CWA. tUS Environmental Protection Agency, Cmruak, OR .97333 *(wigir0inn-@epa.gou); 'Independent ca=aam, Corvallis, OR 97333; 'Orgm Depmarneru of Fuh and Wildlife, Charlesrm, OR 9742Q; 'USDA Forest Service, COndlis. OR 97333; SDyna,= Corp, Cm?vak, OR 97333; `Cu;Tent address: Beatmyeek, OR 97D04;'CtaTentaddrew- Irudepentlence, OR 97351 Pacific salmon are extremely important to the ecosys- tems and economies of the Pacific Northwest and support valuable commercial and recreational fisheries. Salmon populations have experienced major declines and local extinctions, due in part to loss of freshwater habitat (Lichatowich 1999, CENR 2000). Coastal coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisu ), which use headwater areas where intermittent -streams are common, have experienced declines similar to other Pacific salmon and have been the focus of major restoration efforts (Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board 2005). The potential importance of intermittent streams to coho and other salmonids has been documented (Everest 1973; Erman and Hawthorne 1976; Kralik and Sowerwine 1977; Cederholm and Scarlett 1982, Brown and Hartman 1988), but quantita- tive data are limited. Coho salmon commonly have an 18-month freshwater life cycle. Adult coho return from the ocean in late fall, when streamflows increase, and spawn in the upper por- tions of coastal stream networks. Coho fry emerge in late winter and remain in these strearns through the summer and winter before migrating (as smolts) to the ocean the following spring. Juvenile survival during winter flood events is one of the most important factors controlling smolt production (Nickelson et nl. 1992). High stream. flows can physically displace or fatally injure fish unable to find suitable, low -velocity refugia. Larger smolts tend to have higher ocean survival rates (Holtby et al. 1990). Thus, both the number and size of smolts affect the size and biomass of adult populations. In this paper, we quantify the contributions of intermit- tent streams to coho salmon production in an Oregon coastal watershed. Specifically, -we provide estimates of 0 The EoAopcal Society of America '"x•.:, r Salmon and intermittent streams PJ Wigingtor► et at. 1 _- _2, ���`�e i �FLr✓t��l ' N' /�� r S r F rr '- r_✓ .�,% TM w, Figicre I. West Fork Smith River watershed and stream network streams are shoun with dashed tines. the 0) proportion of spawning that occurred in intermit- tent streams, (2) movement of juveniles into intermittent streams, (3) juvenile survival in intermittent and peren- nial streams during winter, and (4) relative size of smolts produced from intermittent and perennial screams. This effort is part of a larger study that is examining how coho use habitat in the whole stream network of an Oregon coastal watershed during their freshwater life cycle (Ebersole et al. in press). ® Meuloft Since 2002, we have studied survival and movement of juvenile coho salmon in the stream network of the West Fork Smith River (WFSR), a 67 kmZ forested drainage in coastal Oregon (Figure 1). The watershed supports a wild coho salmon population, and produced an average of 24000 coho salmon smolts per year during 2002-2005 (Jepson et al. 2006). The stream network consists of a mainstem and six major tributaries (Figure 1). Two tribu- taries, Moore Creek and Crane Creek, have intermittent flow during many summers and represent 9% of the total stream network. Douglas County has measured strearnflow continuously on the mainsterr WFSR, near the mouth, since 1981. During 2003-2005, we periodically treasured streamflow in trk- utary streams using Swoffer flowmeters (Swoffer Instruments, Seattle, WA) mount- ed on wading rods (Gordon et aL 1992). We compared mainstem and tributary stream lows to establish Mainsterri threshold values below which intermittent tributaries ceased to flow. We also deployed an array of Onset Stowaway Tidbit (Onset Computer Corp- oration, Bourne, MA) temperature data log- gers in 43 pools in the WFSR stream net- work (Cairns et al. 2005), and made recordings at 30-minute intervals. Adult coho salmon spawner abundance was calculated from surveys conducted by Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) personnel, using established field survey protocols (ODFW 2005). Area under the curve estimates were obtained from repeated ODFW surveys throughout the spawning period, and were converted to estimates of abundance assuming a 75% observation probability (Jacobs 2002). Because estimates of observation and asso- ciated variance are not available at the stream level (Jacobs 7002), we developed confidence intervals for the estimate of adult coho spawners using intermittent Intermittent streams. A confidence interval was con- stwcred using, the difference between the - - spawner estimate and the actual number of coho observed during stream surveys to create upper and lower bounds for each stream. This confidence interval corresponds to an assumed range of observation probabil- ities from 50% to 100%. Coho salmon juveniles were individually tagged from August to October each year, with 11 mm passive inte- grated transponder (PIT) tags (PIT Tag Steering Committee 1999). We collected coho for tagging by sein- ing (Ebersole et al. in press); fish were recaptured as they left the watershed using a rotary screw trap that was oper- ated continuously (February through June, except for brief periods during extremely large hydrologic events), with a trap efficiency of 33-W39% (Jepson et a[. 2006). Each fish was measured for fork length (distance from tip of snout to indentation in caudal fin) at time of tagging and at time of recapture at the smolt trap. From August to October 2003, we PIT tagged an average of 328 coho salmon (range = 94 to 469) in each of eight reaches located in the upper and lower sections of Crane, Moore, Beaver, and Gold Creeks, and at ten reaches within the mainstem. Each tributary reach was 800 m long and each mainstem reach was 400m long. In total, 3977 coho salmon were tagged in the mainstem, 1214 were tagged in _ .. ... _- - •:,, : ,;;,; 0 The Ecological Sudety 4Amenc2 0 Salmon and intermittent streams P) Wigington et al. the perennial tributaries, and 400 were tagged in the intermittent tributaries. During August to October 2004, we established 30 PIT -tagging reaches, spaced systemati- cally across the WFSR stream network. Each reach was 300 m long. We tagged an average of 149 coho salmon (range = 86 to 185) within each reach, tagging a total of 3012 coho salmon in the mainstem, 2010 coho salmon in the perennial tributaries, and 1156 coho salmon in the intermittent tributaries. We estimated overwinter survival for each tagged group per reach by dividing the number of fish recovered at the rotary screw trap by the number released, after correcting for trap efficiency and the proportion seamed for PIT rags. Variance estates for overwinter survival were derived using a bootstrap method (a technique for estimating the sampling distribution of an estimator by resampling with replacement from the original sample; Thedinga et al.1994)• Movement of Prr ragged coho salmon between the mair*stem and four tributaries (two perennial: Beaver and Gold, and two intermittent: Moore and Crane) was moni- tored using stationary PIT -tag monitoring stations posi- tioned in the tributary near the junction with the mamstem West Fork Smith River. All four antennae were in opera- tion for the winters of 2003--2004 and 2004-2005. Each rnorutoring station consisted of a Destron-Fearing (South St Paul, MN) FS1001 transceiver powered by deep -cycle batteries. A rectarigu1aantenna (3.3 m x 1.2 m) was posi- tioned in the stream and bracketed with weir panels to cap- ture all but the highest streamfiows. PIT -tagged fish passir►g through the antenna field were recorded (PIT -tag identifl- ration number, date, and time) continuously on a laptop computer attached to the transceiver. Coho salmon smits PIT tagged during the autumns of 2003 and 2004 were clas- sified according to the recapture history (where they were located within the stream net work during the overwinter period) as (1) mainstem, (2) perennial tributary, or (3) inter^ mrttent tributary habitat users. We used analysis of covari- ance (ANCOVA; Gotelli and Ellison 2004) to compare the length of PIT -tagged coho salmon smolts recaptured at the smolt trap that used mainstem, perennial tributary, or intermit- tent tributary stream habitats. We used the year of PIT tagging as a categorical variable to account for between -year varia- tions and coho salmon length at the time of PIT tagging as a covariate to control for variabil- ity in initial fish length. Date of recapture at the smolt trap was also included as a covariate, Figure 2. because juvenile coho salmon tributary stream. C- The F-w1ogieal Society of America grow rapidly in the spring, and smolts that out -migrate later in the spring tend to be larger. A model of the two covariares and two factors and all interactions for the ANCOVA were fit using the mixed procedure (PROC MIXED) in SAS 9.1 (SAS institute; Carey, NC). Model fit, structure, and assumptions were visually assessed using diagnostic plots of predicted values and residuals. W Results We were able to use streamflow data from the summer of 2003 to establish mainstem streamflow thresholds below which strearnflow ceased at the mouth of the intermittent tributaries (Moore Creek and Crane Creek). Using these thresholds, we estimated that one or both intermittent tributaries experienced periods with no flow during approximately 14 of the 24 years of streamflow record, with 6 years having no streamflow in intermittent streams for periods of 15 to 87 days. During our study, two summers (2002 and 2003) had extended periods with no streamflow in the intermittent streams, but during the summer of 2004 streamflow did not cease at any time (Table 1). During periods with no streamflow, residual pools (Figure 2) were present in Moore and Crane Creeks for a considerable period of time after streamflow had ceased. Water temperature data in intermittent and perennial Residual pools during a dry summer in a Jest Fork Smith River interrrrittsnc 0 0 Salmon and intermittent streams Figure 3. Proportion of juvenile coho wagged during the faU in muinstern, perennial tributaries, and intermittent cribu mien, and the estir w=d proportion of the sarne tagged coho emigraung from the West Fork Smith River (based on recapwres at the srncdt trap) that were classified as mainstern users, perennial tributary risers, or intermittent tributary users. (a) Coho tagged in fag 2003 and captured in smolt trap in spring 2004; (b) calm tagged in fall 2004 and captured in smolt trap in spring 2005. The nwnber of coho comprising the bars are shown above the bars. The standard mw o f die tagged coho smolt emigrants are shown as whiskers above the bars. Coho smolts that were located during the over - winter period exclusively in mamstem habitats were classified as mainstem users; smolts that were originally tagged in or bcated at sorne tune during the over -whiter period in the perennial tributaries were classified as perennial tributary users; and smelts that were originally ragged m or iocAted at some time during the over -winter period in the ir�tteru vibaumes were classified as intermittent tributary users. streams confirm the presence of residual pools. Diet water temperature patterns were consistent in upper and lower Gold Creek throughout the course of the summer of 2003 and are indicative of perennial srreamflow. In contrast, water temperature patterns in. Moore Creek show moder- ately fluctuating temperatures followed by widely fluctuat- ing temperatures, indicative of a dry channel in the lower stretches during that period. We observed cool, constant temperatures, - indicative of a residual pool sustained by P) Wigington ec al. groundwater, at an upper Moore Creek site from early July into September. Intermittent tributaries were used by coho salmon in several ways. During 2002-2004, 1196 (confidence inter- val 1C11 = 8 to 14%) to 21% (CI = 16 to 26%) of the adult coho salmon spawned in the two intermittent streams. The total number of spawners in the West Fork Smith were 3451, 3728, and 994 in 2002, 2003, and 2004, respectively. We detected 833 (460 in Moore Creek and 373 in Crane Creels) coho juveniles originally PIT tagged in the mainctern at one or more of the intermit- tent tributary antennas during the winters of 2003-2004 and 2004-2005. Most mainstem-tagged juvenile coho salmon entered the intermittent tributaries during high strearnflows in the fail months. Juvenile coho that bad been tagged in or used intermittent and perennial tribu- tary streams comprised a higher proportion of the smolts that were recaptured at the smolt trap during the subse- quent smolt migration period than coho that had remained in the mainstem (Figure 3). Overwinter sur- vival of coho salmon PIT tagged in intermittent streams during the winters of 2002 through 2005 was similar to survival rates in perennial tributaries, but higher than mainstem survival rates in all years (Table 2). After accounting for variation in the length at tagging and smolt migration timing, our statistical analysis showed a significant difference in the length of coho smolcs that used perennial (mainstem and tributary) and intermittent tributary habitats (Eisen = 9.06, P - 0.0001) during 2004 and 2005. Significant interaction terms com- plicated direct interpretation of the model, so we evalu- ated differences in smolt length at lower, middle, and upper values of the covariates used in the model for all habitat user classes and cohort years resulting in a total of 54 comparisons. Statistical significance of the differences was set at a P value < 0.0009 (0.05/54 pairwise tests). Coho smolts that used intermittent tributaries were larger than coho smolts that used perennial tributary habitats dur- ing both 2004 and 2005 (Figure 4). This difference was sta- tistically significant throughout the smolt migration period in 2004, but only during the middle portion of die 2005 smolt migration. Coho smolts that used intermittent tribu- tary habitats were larger than coho that used the mainstem during 2004 (Figure 4). This difference was statistically sig- nificant for the middle and end of the migration period. On the other hared, coho srnolts that had used intermittent tributary streams were significantly smaller than coho .t 7; r�!_g;-; ,;r_g r'4 1 .,�Yy - 0 nie Ezokogical Samleq of America 0 0 Pj Wigington et al. smolts that had used man -stem habitats through the early and middle portions of smolt migration during 2005. 9 Discussion Although intermittent streams experience periods with no streamflow, they provide valuable habitat for juvenile coho salmon. In the WFSR network,, Moore and Crane Creeks provided both spawning and rearing habitat for coho salinnn. Even during years in which the streams had extended periods with no streamflow, they accounted for an important component of the coho smolrs leaving the WFSR watershed (Figure 3). In addition, overwinter sur- vival rates for juvenile coho originally tagged in the inter- mittent streams were higher than survival rates in main - stem habitats and equivalent to survival in perennial streams (Table 2). How can intermittent streams produce coho smolts even though the streams have extended peri- ods with no streamflow? One reason is that if periods without streamflow are not too long, residual pools (see Figure 2) can sustain juvenile coho until streaatflow, resumes with autumn rains. May and Lee (Z004) found that in Oregon coastal streams, gravel -bed pools sustained by hyporheic flow were able to carry over coho juveniles during the summer, but the pools experienced a decrease in juvenile coho abundance of 36% because of fish mortality caused by pool drying. We observed numerous residual pools m Moore Creek and Crane Creek during late summer periods, when no streamflow occurred at the mouth of the streams. Water temperature patterns in the pools were consistent with two types of pools in Oregon coastal streams identified by May and Lee (2004), which may have the potential to maintain water during periods with no strearnflow. One pool type is comprised of gravel pools with bedrock contact for which hyporheic flow is the primary source of rater during dry periods. Lower Moore Creek was a location that featured this type of pool; in this case, the pool dried out during late summer, as evidenced by the wide fluctuations of tempera- ture, typical of air temperature fluctuations. Bedrock pools that received no surface flow from upstream but are recharged by groundwater from fractured bedrock repre- sents another class of pools. These have relatively low water temperatures and little diurnal fluctuation. The importance of residual or isolated pools in sustain- ing fish populations in intermittent streams has been doc- umented in a wide range of settings, Closs and Lake (1996) found that GalaxW ohdus, a small salmoniform fish, was able to survive in scattered small pools through- out the upper reaches of an intermittent stream in Australia. Pires et al. (1999) noted that isolated pools were important habitats for fishes in intermittent streams in Portugal. Labbe and Fausch (2000) reported that, during summer drought, permanent pools were important habi- tats for the Arkansas darter (Ethewwria cragini) in two intermittent streams in the Colorado plains. Another reason that WFSR intermittent screams were 0 The EcaWcal Society of Amenm Salmon and intermittent streams Fw ure 4. (a) Date of capture and length of coho srrmtts ongmauy tagged m 2003 and recaptured at the smelt trap in 2004, and (b) migimZy tagged in 2004 and recaptured m 2005, The width of the box is proportional to the number of coho used to generate the box ----- able. to produce coho smolts was that some coho tagged in the mainstem moved into intermittent tributaries when strearnflow resumed in the f0. Once the intermittent tributaries resumed streamflow, coho that had survived in the residual pools or immigrated in the fall probably expe- rienced lower densities and higher food resources com- pared to coho in perennial tributaries. We hypothesize that this provides higher survival and growth of coho that overwinter in intermittent streams via release of density dependence (Chapman 1966). Our observation chat, fol- lowing a particularly dry summer in 2003--2004, coho smolts from intermittent streams were considerably larger than smolts that used perennial habitats (Figure 4) is con- sistent with this hypothesis. In conclusion, WFSR intermittent streams provided both valuable spawning and rearing habitat for coho salmon. Residual pools in intermittent streams provided one means by which juvenile coho could survive during dry periods. Movement of juvenile coho into intermittent tributaries from the mainstem was another way in which juvenile coho exploited intermittent stream habitat: and illustrates the 0 Salmon and intermittent streams importance of maintaining accessibility of entire stream networks to coho. Under particularly dry conditions, smolts that overwintered in intermittent screams were larger than those from perennial streams. Low -gradient intermittent streams, such as those in the WFSR, are common in water- sheds with sedirnentary bedrock, which comprise the prime coho salmon habitat among Oregon coastal drainages. Our results demonstrate that loss of intermittent stream habitat would have a negative effect on coho salmon populations in coastal drainages, and m general, our study illustrates the important role that intermittent streams can play in main- taining the biological integrity of navigable waters. Research and methods that demonstrate these interconnec- tions are critical in helping regulators and policy makers respond to recent US Supreme Court decisions. 0 Acknowledgments The authors thank S Hendricks, C Oyler, R St Claire, R Emig, N Raskauskas, T Mintkeski, C Meengs, S Davis, and S Orlaineta for tireless field work in support of this project, and P Haggerty of Indus Corp, for GIS support - We thank Roseburg Resources and the USDI Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for providing access to research sites, and P Olmstead with the BLM, who pro- vided encouragement and logistical support We are very appreciative of the efforts of G Cicchetti, J Hall, R Lackey, B McComb, R Ozretich, D Poon, and J Richardson, who reviewed earlier versions of this manu- script. We also acknowledge D Downing for 'reviewing our discussion of the Supreme Court cases. This paper was funded by the US Environmental Protection Agency, USDA Forest Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management, and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. It has been subject to Agency review and approved for publication. Reference to trade names does not imply endorsement by the US Government. K References BrownTG and Hartman GF 1988. Contribution of seasonally flooded Lands and minor mbutarks to the production of coho salmon in Carnation Creek, British Columbia. TAm Fish Soo 117: 546-51. Cairns MA, Ebersole jl , Balter JP and Wigington Jr PJ. 2005. Influence of surivacr trmpe=lm on black spot infestation of juve- nile coho salmon in the Oregon Coast Range_ T Am Fish Soc 134: 1471-79. Cederholm CJ and Scariett W). 1982. Seasonal unmigrari a -a of juve- rule Amonids mm four tributaries of d-c Clearwater River, Washington 1977-1981. 1n: Brannon EL and Salo EO (Fds). Proceedings of the salmon and trout migratory behavior sympo- sium Seattle, WA: Rsheries Research Institute, University of Washington. Chapman DW 1966_ Food and space as regulators of salmonid popula- tions in streams Arn Nat 100: 345-55. Ck-m GP and Lake PS. 1996. Drought, differential mortality and the coecisterice of a native and an intro iucrd fish species in a south east Australian mtermittrnt seam. Ensri m Bial Fish 47: 17-26. CENR (Committee on Ertvironme= and Natural Resources). 2000. From the edge: science to support restoration of pacific salmon. PJ Wigizngton et cd. Washington, DC: Commirtr:e on Fr vironment and Narsral Resources, National Science and Tedincr ogy Council Lkaartirio D.M. Winer C, and Wood LD. 2W3. Na garitV rlvmgb Clean Water Act jurisdicrion: a legal review. W alands 23: 475-93. Ebergol£ ,jL, Wigicrgtnn Jr PJ, 3-A- JP, a aL Juvenile calm salmon growth and su m-iml across stream nerwa-k seasonal haiitam Am Fish Soc_ in press. Erman DC and Hawthorne VP_ 1976. The quantitative importance of axe irueanitwnt s== in spawning of rainbow trout Am Fish Soc 105:675-31_ Everest FH_ 1973. Ecology and ma 2g mem of summer medhead in the Rogue River. Portland, OR: Oregon State Game Commission. Faierics Research Report 7. Gordon ND, McMahan TA, and Finlayson B1_1992_ Stream hydrol- ogy New York NY: John Wiley and Sons_ Got,1h NJ and Ellison AM. 2004_ A primer of ecological statistics. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates Inc. Holtby LB, Andersen BC, and Kadowaki RK. 1990. Importance of smolt sire and early ocean growth to inteian ual variAthry in marine survival of coho salmon (Orrnrhrxhm kpom h). C-] Fish Aqua Sa 47: 218144. Jacobs S. 2A02. Calibration of estimates of coho spawner abundance in the Smith River basin, 2001- Portland, OR: Oregon Deparrment of Fish and Wildlife. Monitoring program report number OPSW- ODFW 2002-06. Jepson DB, Dalton T, Johm m Sl-, er aL 2W6. Saiuronid Iife cycle monitoring in western Orcgrm screams, 2,W3-2W5. Salem, OR Oregon Dcpartrrrertt of Fish and Wildlife. Msatirariiig pro�ram report number 0PSW-ODFW-200&2- Kralik NJ and Sowerwine JF- 197T Tne rule of two northem California intermittent streams in the life history of arradramous salmonids (MS thesis). Arcata, CA: Humboldt State Univemiry. Labbe TR and Fisch KD. 2000. Dynamics of intermittent stream habitat regulare pence of a direaeenrcl fish at multiple scales_ EcolApplIC} 1774-91. Ldwtowich J. 1999. Salmon without rivers. Washington, DC: Island Prew May C L and Lee DC_ 2004- The relatiosr►sirips =Ong in-clnarmel sedi- ment storage, pod depth, and summer anvival of Juvenile salmonids in Oregon Coast Range streams. N Am J Fish Mawge 24: 761-74. Nickelson TE, Rodgm JD, Johnm SL, and Solaxzi hull= 1992_ Seasonal changes m habitat use by juvenile mho salmon (onawfryrbchee ksurch) in Oregon coastal streams. Can] Fish Aqua Sd 49: 783--89. ODFW (Oregon Dep rnnrrrt of Fish and Wildlife). 2005- CcrasW salmon spawning survey procedures manual 2005. Corvallis, OR -- Oregon Adult Salmorad Inventory and Sampling Project- h�d1�t;�.edr�Qepr10D�l���t�`5 SS\4arnual pdf. Viewed 26 Ckmbcr 2006, Oregcm watershed Frthanc=w= Board. 2005. The Oregin plan for xdmrrn and vratenheds, 2003--2005 himmal tepo:t, Volume 1- Salem, OR, Oregon Watershed Enhancerna►t Board. Pires AM, Cowrc 10, and Coelho MM. 1999. Seasonal charges in fish om=unity structure, of interrt,itumt streams in the middle reaches of the Guadiana basin, Portugal, J Fish Binh 54- 235-49. PIT Tag Sneering Committee. 1999. PIT tag marking procedures man- ual, version 2.0. Portland, OR: Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority. Stoddard J1, Perk DV, Olsen AR, et aL 2005. E nvmonmenml monitor- ing and assessment program (E AP): western streams and rivers sraristical summary. Washington, DC: US Environmental Promctim Agency EPA 6201R-05/006. Thedinga IF, Murphy Ml., Johnson SW, et aL 1994. Dcterinatiotn of salmonid smolt yield wits, rotary -screw traps in the Situk Rivet, Alaska, to predict effects of glacial flcading. N Ann J Fish Mwi4v 14: 837-51_ CT ,Emlopcal&xketyofAmer= City of R� n Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: - �/ , � COMMENTS DUE: DECEMBER 19, 2011 APPLICATION NO: LUA11-092, ECF, CAR DATE CIRCULATED: DECEMBER 5, 2011 APPLICANT: David Christensen PROJECT MANAGER: Rocale Timmons PROJECT TITLE: East Renton Lift Station Removal PROJECT REVIEWER: Arneta Henninger SITE AREA: 1.2 acres EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): N/A LOCATION: West & South of SE 2"d CT, North of Maplewood Park PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant, the City of Renton, is requesting Environmental Review and a Crtiical Area Exemption in order to remove an exisiting lift station, located west of SE 2nd Ct; and install a new sewer pipeline, extending west and south from the lift station location, through Maplewood Park and ending within 148th PI SE. The 1.2 acre subject site is located primarily within unicorparted King County- However, the portion of the property located within the City limits is within the R-4 zoning classification. Seven wetlands and two streams were identified within the study area boundaries. Proposed construction would require temporary crossing of one of the on -site streams (Stewart Creek) and its buffer along with some of the wetland buffers. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Earth Air Woter Plants Land/Shoreline Use Animals Environmental Health Energy/ Natural Resources Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Housing Aesthetics tight/Glare Recreation utilities Transportation Public Services Historic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS L C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with lcb)or attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additiopal informatio is needekto propfrly assess this proposal. Signature of Director6rAuthorized Representative Date EXHIBIT "A" SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT LEGAL DESCRIPTION TRACT "K" AND THAT PORTION OF TRACT "H" MAPLEWOOD ESTATES, PHASE 1, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED IN VOLUME 205 OF PLATS, PAGES 51 THROUGH 62, INCLUSIVE, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID TRACT "H", BEING THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 00°i5'57" EAST ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT "H" 3 0. 01 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88000'31" EAST 120.03 FEET; THENCE NORTH 01 °59'41" EAST 16.04 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY EDGE OF A CHAIN LINK FENCE; THENCE FOLLOWING ALONG SAID FENCE SOUTH 84"58'39" EAST 91.69 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88026'53" EAST 87.51 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89"23'21" EAST 37.68 FEET; THENCE NORTH 87002'56" EAST 37.68 FEET; THENCE NORTH 82"23' 15" EAST 29.89 FEET; THENCE NORTH 67028'37" EAST 32.18 FEET TO THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF AFOREMENTIONED TRACT "K' ; THENCE SOUTH 38056'04" EAST 30.00 FEET TO THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF SAID TRACT "IK' ; THENCE SOUTH 51003'49" WEST 28.63 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88001'43" WEST 49.89 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 46029'58" WEST 18.16 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88001'43" WEST 21.47 FEET; THENCE NORTH 57"44' 14" WEST 25.67 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88001'43" WEST 105.40 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 84"05'32" WEST 87,69 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88001'43" WEST 114.48 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 57"59'32" WEST 20.68 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 13,843 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS. SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. a a mLU fU x W UJ a z a V) N n M rn � O z 0 cc a- 0 0 City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COMMENTS DUE: DECEMBER 19, 2011 APPLICATION NO: LUA11-092, ECF, CAR DATE CIRCULATED: DECEMBER 5, 2011 APPLICANT: David Christensen PROJECT MANAGER: Rocale Timmons PROJECT TITLE: East Renton Lift Station Removal PROJECT REVIEWER: Arneta Henninger :� c SITE AREA: 1.2 acres EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): N/A Z LOCATION: West & South of SE 2°d CT, North of Maplewood PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A (Pm d' m O Park r � SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant, the City of Renton, is requesting Environmental Review and a Crtiical Al�" Exemptio in order to remove an exisiting lift station, located west of SE 2nd Ct; and install a new sewer pipeline, extending wesPand south from the lift station location, through Maplewood Park and ending within 148th PI SE. The 1.2 acre subject site is located primarily within unicorparted King County. However, the portion of the property located within the City limits is within the R-4 zoning classification_ Seven wetlands and two streams were identified within the study area boundaries. Proposed construction would require temporary crossing of one of the on -site streams (Stewart Creek) and its buffer along with some of the wetland buffers. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor impacts Probable Major impacts More Information Necessary Earth Air Water Plants Lond/Shoreline Use Animals Environmental Health Energy/ Natural Resources B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Housing Aesthetics Li ht/Giore Recreotion utilities Transportation Public Services Historic/cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative lm --17- '?0// Date City of Renton Department of Community & Economic D�lopment ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT COMMENTS DUE: DECEMBER 19, 2011 APPLICATION NO: LUA11-092, ECF, CAR DATE CIRCULATED: DECEMBER 5, 2011 APPLICANT: David Christensen PROJECT MANAGER: Rocale Timmons PROJECT TITLE: East Renton Lift Station Removal 77d PROJECT REVIEWER: Arneta Henninger SITE AREA: 1.2 acres EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): N/A LOCATION: West & South of SE 2nd CT, North of Maplewood Park PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant, the City of Renton, is requesting Environmental Review and a Crtiical Area Exemption in order to remove an exisiting lift station, located west of S£ 2nd Ct; and install a new sewer pipeline, extending west and south from the lift station location, through Maplewood Park and ending within 148th PI SE. The 1.2 acre subject site is located primarily within unicorparted King County. However, the portion of the property located within the City limits is within the R-4 zoning_ classification. Seven wetlands and two streams were identified within the study area boundaries. Proposed construction would require temporary crossing of one of the on -site streams (Stewart Creek) and its buffer along with some of the wetland buffers_ A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS Elementofthe Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Earth Air Water Plants Land/Shoreline Use Animals Environmental Health Energy/ Natural Resources �In S. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS C. COME -RELATED COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Housing Aesthetics Light/Glare Recreation utilities Transportation Public Services Historic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10, 000 Feet 14, 000 Feet We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where oddj4io9Rl information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date 0 0 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT D Cry of M E M D R A N D U M DATE: December 14, 2011 TO: Rocale Timmons, Planner FROM: Arneta Henninger, Plan Review /�A' SUBJECT: EAST RENTON LIFT STATION REMOVAL WEST & SOUTH OF SE 2N0 CT NORTH OF MAPLEWOOD PARK LUA 11-092 Parcel 1523059055 et al I have completed the review for the above -referenced project, which involves removing an existing lift station located west of SE 2"d Court. The project also includes installing a sanitary sewer pipeline, extending west and south from the lift station location through Maplewood Park, and ending within 148th Place SE, all in Sect. 15 Twp 23 N Rng 5 E. EXISTING CONDITIONS WATER This project is served by King County Water District 90. The District will need to be contacted for location of existing utilities. SANITARY SEWER There are existing sanitary sewer mains on the north and south sides of Maplewood Park. STORM There are storm drainage facilities in SE 2nd PI and to the north in Nile Ave N. CODE REQUIREMENTS STORM DRAINAGE The project will be required to comply with the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual and the City of Renton Amendments. STREET IMPROVEMENTS All trench restoration shall be per City of Renton and King County standards, as applicable. GENERAL As a City CIP project construction permit and mitigation fees do not apply. i • City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: '. APPLICATION NO: LUA11-092, ECF, CAR COMMENTS DUE: DECEMBER 19, 2011 DATE CIRCULATED: DECEMBER 5, 2D11 Ut•VCLV� Mr -:iv 1 Oc-nv APPI ICANT: David Christensen PROJECT MANAGER: Rocale Timmons nTV (]F RPNT0 PROJECT TITLE: East Renton Lift Station Removal SiTE AREA: 1.2 acres PROJECT REVIEWER: Arneta Hennin EXISTING BLDG AREA (Bross): N/A LOCATION: West & South of SE 2°d CT, North of Maplewood I PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A Park ICES RECEIVED SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant, the City of Renton, is requesting Environmental Review and a Crtiical Area Exemption in order to remove an exisiting lift station, located west of SE 2nd Ct; and install a new sewer pipeline, extending west and south from the lift station location, through Maplewood Park and ending within 148th PI SE. The 1.2 acre subject site is located primarily within unicorparted King County. However, the portion of the property located within the City limits is within the R-4 zoning classification. Seven wetlands and two streams were identified within the study area boundaries. Proposed construction would require temporary crossing of one of the on -site streams (Stewart Creek) and its buffer along with some of the wetland buffers. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major impacts More Information Necessary Earth Air Water Plants Land/Shoreline Use Animals Environments! Health Energy/ Natural Resources B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS O CODE -RELATED COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Housin Aesthetics Li hVGlore Recreation utilities 7ron5 ortation Public Services Historic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14, 000 Feet We have reviewed this application with porticulor otten ion to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where odditionll information is n eded to ro erly assess this proposal �. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date 0 City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Apment ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET C REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: L yJ COMMENTS DUE: ❑ECEMBER 19, 2011 APPLICATION NO: LUA11-092, ECF, CAR DATE CIRCULATED: DECEMBER 5, 2011 )EVELC)�'MENT SE APPLICANT: David Christensen "ITYk,"F. REhtiTC PROJECT MANAGER: Rocale Timmons PROJECT TITLE: East Renton Lift Station Removal PROJECT REVIEWER: Arneta Henninger DEC 06 201' SITE AREA: 1.2 acres EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): N/A 10 Carl LOCATION: West & South of SE 2 d CT, North of Maplewood Park PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A VE SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant, the City of Renton, is requesting Environmental Review and a Crtiical Area Exemption in order to remove an exisiting lift station, located west of SE 2nd Ct; and install a new sewer pipeline, extending west and south from the lift station location, through Maplewood Park and ending within 148th PI SE. The 1.2 acre subject site is located primarily within unicorparted King County. However, the portion of the property located within the City limits is within the R-4 zoning classification. Seven wetlands and two streams were identified within the study area boundaries. Proposed construction would require temporary crossing of one of the on -site streams (Stewart Creek) and its buffer along with some of the wetland buffers. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Earth Air Water Plants Land/Shoreline Use Animals Environmental Health Energy/ Natural Resources N z- T>wiF B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS �'VIC:Eu YN ICJ Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts probable Major Impacts More Information Necessary Housing Aesthetics Light/Glare Recreation Utilities Trans rtation Public Services Historic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment Y o 000 Feet 14, 000 Feet We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date i City of Renton Deportment of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: (;tj'b�j COMMENTS DUE: DECEMBER 19, 2011 APPLICATION NO: LUA11-092, ECF, CAR DATE CIRCULATED: DECEMBER S, 2011 rN APPLICANT: David Christensen PROJECT MANAGER: Rocale Timmons CITY OF R.ENTONJ PROJECT TITLE: East Renton Lift Station Removal PROJECT REVIEWER: Arneta Henninger DEC 06 2011 SITE AREA: 1.2 acres EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): N/A LOCATION: West & South of SE 2°d CT, North of Maplewood Park PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A - ' SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant, the City of Renton, is requesting Environmental Review and a Crtiical Area Exemption in order to remove an exisiting lift station, located west of SE 2nd Ct, and install a new sewer pipeline, extending west and south from the lift station location, through Maplewood Park and ending within 148th PI SE. The 1.2 acre subject site is located primarily within unicorparted King County. However, the portion of the property located within the City limits is within the R-4 zoning classification. Seven wetlands and two streams were identified within the study area boundaries. Proposed construction would require temporary crossing of one of the on -site streams (Stewart Creek) and its buffer along with some of the wetland buffers_ A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor impacts Probable Major impacts More Information Necessary Earth Air Water Plants Land/Shoreline Use Animals Environmental Health Energy/ Natural Resources B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS Mews C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor impacts Probable Major impacts More Information Necessary Housing Aesthetics Li ht/Glore Recreation Utilities Transportation Public Services Historic/Cultural Preservotion Airport Environment 10, 00O Feet 14, 000 Feet We hove reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas .ere additional information is needyd to properly assess this proposal. ZZ ylg:�_�_ _4 �4 Signature of Directpigr Authorized Representative Date 0 0 City of Renton Department of Community & Economic development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: 1— CC COMMENTS DUE: DECEMBER 19f 2011 APPLICATION NO: LUA11-092, ECF, CAR DATE CIRCULATED: DECEMBER 5, 2011 APPLICANT: David Christensen PROJECT MANAGER: Rocale Timmons PROJECT TITLE. East Renton Lift Station Removal PROJECT REVIEWER: Arneta Henninger SITE AREA: 1.2 acres EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): N/A LOCATION: West & South of SE tad CT, North of Maplewood Park PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant, the City of Renton, is requesting Environmental Review and a Crtiical Area Exemption in order to remove an exisiting lift station, located west of SE 2nd Ct; and install a new sewer pipeline, extending west and south from the lift station location, through Maplewood Park and ending within 148th PI SE. The 1.2 acre subject site is located primarily within unicorparted King County. However, the portion of the property located within the City limits is within the R-4 zoning classification. Seven wetlands and two streams were identified within the study area boundaries. Proposed construction would require temporary crossing of one of the on -site streams (Stewart Creek) and its buffer along with some of the wetland buffers. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Nan -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major Impacts More information Necessary Earth Air Water Plants Land/Shoreline Use Animals Environmental Health Energy/ Natural Resources Element of the Environment Probable Minor Impacts Probable Major impacts More Information Necessary Housing Aesthetics Li hVGlom Recreation Utilities Transportation Public Services Historic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet 1VQ M.'e B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS lvo` " t We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal_ / 0- / 7 /IQ - Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date 0 CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 5th day of December, 2011, 1 deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Notice of Application documents. This information was sent to: Name Representing Agencies See Attached 300' Surrounding Property Owners See Attached (Signature of Sender): STATE OF WASHINGTON j SS COUNTY OF KING /ff/rrr� �5�i4G�l��,;:�s4ti � �. I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy M. Tucker �� �c ; . 0 signed this instrument and acknowledged it t be his/her/their free and voluntary act rti Mi rposes w mentioned in the instrument. f� : a•�.; Dated: Notary Public in and for the Sty t - Notary (Print): My appointment expires: �2` Project Name: Renton Lift Station Removal 'Project Number: LUA11-092, ECF, CAR template - affidavit of service by mailing 0 AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERC DETERMINATIONS) Dept. of Ecology * WDFW - Larry Fisher* Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. Environmental Review Section 1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201 Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer PO Box 47703 Issaquah, WA 98027 39015 —172"d Avenue SE Olympia, WA98504-7703 Auburn, WA98092 WSDOT Northwest Region * Duwamish Tribal Office * Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program Attn: Ramin Pazooki 4717 W Marginal Way SW Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 Seattle, WA 98106-1514 39015 172nd Avenue SE PO Box 330310 Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers * KC Wastewater Treatment Division * Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation* Seattle District Office Environmental Planning Supervisor Attn: Gretchen Kaehler Attn: SEPA Reviewer Ms. Shirley Marroquin PO Box 48343 PO Box C-3755 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 Seattle, WA 98124 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 Boyd Powers * Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Serv. City of Newcastle City of Kent Attn: SEPA Section Attn: Steve Roberge Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP 900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director Renton, WA 98055-1219 13020 Newcastle Way 220 Fourth Avenue South Newcastle, WA 98059 Kent, WA 98032-5895 Metro Transit Puget Sound Energy City of Tukwila Senior Environmental Planner Municipal Liaison Manager Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official Gary Kriedt Joe Jainga 6200 South center Blvd. 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-01W Tukwila, WA 98188 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Bellevue, WA 98009-0868 Seattle Public Utilities Real Estate Services Attn: SEPA Coordinator 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 *Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities will need to be sent a copy of the checklist, Site Plan PMT, and the notice of application. template - affidavit of service by mailing 165753036004 102305912804 165753005009 11:30 LUNCH LLC 4TH & UNION RENTON BARTZ LORI C/O JSH PROPERTIES 601 108TH AVE NE 4028 NE 4TH PL BELLEVUE WA 98004 10655 NE 4TH ST #300 RENTON WA 98056 BELLEVUE WA 98004 165753033001 165753045005 165753041004 BASSIG RAQUELLE A CRAMPTON SUSAN DANG TRACY TRANG 432 SHELTON PL NE 461 TACOMA AVE NE 5216 UNIVERSITY WAY NE RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 SEATTLE WA 98105 165753043000 102305937405 165753042002 DELOOF SUSAN A EQUIVA SERVICES LLC FELDMAN GARY+CAROLYN 469 TACOMA AVE NE PROPRETY TAX DEPT 472 SHELTON PL NE RENTON WA 98056 PO BOX 4369 RENTON WA 98059 HOUSTON TX 77210 165753056002 165753010009 165753063008 FITZGERALD AMY L FRICKER TODD A GOLL DANIEL J 440 TACOMA AVE NE 4006 NE 4TH PL 438 TACOMA PL NE RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 165753061002 165753011007 162305908400 GUNDERSON CONTANCE D HAY KIMBLERY+RONALD L HEARTLAND AUTO SERVICES IN 428 TACOMA PL NE 4002 NE 4TH PL 11308 DAVENPORT ST RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98059 OMAHA NE 68154 092305916501 165753046003 165753047001 HOU SOMERA S HUYNH THANH IGE DAVID+CYNTHIA 521 UNION AVE NE 457 TACOMA AVE NE 447 TACOMA AVE NE RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 165753060004 165753049007 165753035006 ]ELKS JOHN H JR JOHNSON MONICA D+GAINES TRA JOSEPH KIMBERLEY A 424 TACOMA AVE NE #60 439 TACOMA AVE NE 442 SHELTON PL NE RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 165753040006 165753012005 165753066001 KENNEDY JASON S+BETHANY M KIM ERIC H+JINSOON KLUDIKOFSKY KIAN P+KIM LISA 464 SHELTON PL NE 3940 NE 4TH CIR 450 TACOMA PL NE RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 102305902904 165753050005 165753059006 LALL CHANDER P+MARIA LAM MERCEDES SANTAELLA+KEV LARIVIERE SETH A+JETTA M 4710 SOMERSET AVE SE 437 TACOMA AVE NE 426 TACOMA AVE N BELLEVUE WA 98006 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 165753048009 165753039008 165753009001 LAU CHIN PONG LEE JULIE L LEE THOMAS YOUNG 443 TACOMA AVE NE 6460 131ST AVE SE 4010 NE 4TH PL RENTON WA 98056 BELLEVUE WA 98006 RENTON WA 98056 0 165753006007 165753054007 LIEN VINH LOCKE SHEILA E 4024 NE 4TH PL 448 TACOMA AVE NE RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98055 165753034009 165753055004 LUI AMANDA MALMQUIST CHELSEA M 436 SHELTON PL NE 444 TACOMA AVE NE RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 092305920404 165753002006 MCNEIL CEATRICE MIRZOYAN RUBEN+NUNE 517 UNION AVE NE 4042 NE 4TH PL RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 165753037002 165753052001 NOLD KURTIS A+GWEN D NWANNE ANGELA E 450 SHELTON PL NE 429 TACOMA AVE NE RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 165753058008 165753038000 PHILLIPS KATHLEEN A PRITHIANI SANJAY+PINKY MULC 430 TACOMA AVE N 454 SHELTON PL NE RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 165753044008 165753004002 RAMACHANDRAN RAJIV SERNA JEANETTE R+GABRIEL J 465 TACOMA AVE NE 4034 NE 4TH PL RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 165753064006 165753008003 SIMKO CHARLES A+LINDA R SLOBODKIN ISRAEL M+HYLAN N+ 442 TACOMA PL NE 4016 NE 4TH PL RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 165753007005 165753057000 SPEARMON SHAUN+BROOKE SUZUKI ANTONY H+YUKO 4020 NE 4TH PL 434 TACOMA AVE NE RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 165753062000 165753015008 VALDIVIA MA LORECEL VASILEV NIKOLAY+ZLATKA 432 TACOMA PL NE 3926 NE 4TH CIR RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 165753065003 165753013003 VIGIL DIEGO+REBECCA VINSON MARION H 446 TACOMA PL NE 3936 NE 4TH CIR RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 165753014001 LOGAN KATHERINE B 3930 NE 4TH CIR BG5 RENTON WA 98056 165753032003 MARIN KRIS P 428 SHELTON PL NE RENTON WA 98056 165753053009 NGUYEN LOI K+LORENZO LAURA 452 TACOMA AVE NE RENTON WA 98056 162305903104 PALMER DONALD 351 UNION AVE NE RENTON WA 98055 092305916402 PUGET SOUND ENERGY/ELEC PROPERTY TAX DEPT PO BOX 90868 BELLEVUE WA 98009 102305913208 SHILSHOLE & RENTON HIGHLAND 3300 MAPLE VALLEY HWY RENTON WA 98058 162305908905 SOUTH HILL PROFESSIONAL CENTER LLC DBA EASTWAY CTR PO BOX 1059 SNOHOMISH WA 98291 165753051003 TREDICI INC 534 N 68TH ST SEATTLE WA 98103 165753001008 VASILEV PETKO N+HRISTOV RUM 4046 NE 4TH PL RENTON WA 98056 092305916907 VISION HOUSE PO BOX 2951 RENTON WA 98056 518210000908 165753016006 165753003004 WALGREEN COMPANY WONG ONSING+SUZIE SIU YEE YIU BETTY W ATTN TAX DEPT 3922 NE 4TH CIR 4038 NE 4TH PL 104 WILMOT RD #MS 1435 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 DEERFIELD IL 60015 329590051002 108030023007 512630035008 AGUAS REYNALDO+ESPERANZA AMERICAN EMBASSY SINGAPORE AVEY GREGORY A 13728 152ND PL SE GILBERT JOHN+INSOOK FAA 24913 THORNBERRY DR RENTON WA 98059 UNIT 4280 BOX 35 PLAINFIELD IL 60544 FPO AP 96507 512630015000 107203043008 108030015003 BALL KORY BEAULAURIER PAUL E+DIANA K BERGAMIN ANTON 5903 SE 2ND CT 14824 SE 138TH PL 13827 146TH PL SE RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98055 233629005007 108030013008 512630001000 BETTELLI BENJAMIN+MARY BIBEAU RAYMOND J+KATHLEEN M BIDWELL DEAN+KALAYA 5605 SE 1ST PL 13811 146TH PL SE 203 ORCAS PL SE RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 146340002105 108030007000 512630051005 BILL GEORGE & RUTH BJARKE CHRIS B & DAWN L BODENSTAB TIMOTHY A+JANET E 13818 152ND AVE SE 14644 SE 138TH PL 5907 SE 2ND ST RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 107203029007 666903010005 233629006005 BOYD THOMAS C BRADLEY RANDALL C+CATHERINE K BRIDGMAN KRISTINE A+TERRY M 15109 SE 138TH PL 5620 SE 2ND CR 5611 SE 1ST PL RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 329590047000 512630028003 107203040004 BROWN PATRICK W+HEIDI A BULLER JUSTIN W+JULIA K BULLION KEVIN & DIANA 15239 SE 136TH LN 212 QUINCY PL SE 14914 SE 138TH PL RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 107203032001 330430073008 666903019006 BURNS BRADLEY S CAMDEN LLC CARKEEK STEPHANIE+DAVID S 15126 SE 138TH PL 11980 NE 24TH ST #200 5513 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 BELLEVUE WA 98005 RENTON WA 98059 329590024009 512630034001 512630008005 CHANG BENJAMIN+LIM SONY CHAU VY CHI+TU TO+TRUONG BI CHEN YUPING+XU YOU 15255 SE 137TH PL 6010 SE 2ND CT 5807 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 512630025009 512630010001 329590046002 CHIN SCOTT D CHOW PAUL S CHOW TONY+AMY+DANA+BOB 6029 SE 2ND CT 5819 SE 2ND CT 15245 SE 136TH LN RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 E 0 107203027001 666903016002 666903014007 CHRISTENSEN SCOTT+DIANE L CONKLIN GARY R+DEBORAH E COOK NICOL R+CHADEK ROBERT 15019 SE 138TH PL 5531 SE 2ND CT 5609 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 512630027005 107203033009 666903009007 CORONADO PETER A COTTRILL DAVID C DAHL TERESA 218 QUINCY PL SE 15118 SE 138TH PL 5614 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 512630032005 512630023004 512631114000 DEA MARK H+CECILLE M E DELORME RICHMOND Y DENTON MARSHA H 207 QUINCY PL SE 6017 SE 2ND CT 5719 NE 1ST PL RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 512630030009 329590015007 329590020007 DIAZ RAFAEL JR DO CATUYEN T+NGUYEN THANH DO HIEN 200 QUINCY PL SE 15246 SE 136TH LN 6111 SE 3RD PL RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 512630005001 233629011005 329590001007 DORCY MICHAEL H DREAMCRAFT DUNNE MICHAEL+MARGARET J 221 ORCAS PL SE 3502 B ST NW 15205 SE 136TH ST RENTON WA 98059 AUBURN WA 98001 RENTON WA 98059 108030010004 108030009006 084710009006 EARL S & EVVELYN L ROBINSON ENZMINGER DAVID P FACILITIES & OPERATIONS CTR 14626 SE 138TH PL 14632 SE 138TH PL OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIR RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 300 SW 7TH ST RENTON WA 98055 146340001503 512630048001 512631113002 FATTORE ROBERT L & DEBORAH FRANGELLO WILLIAM J FRITZ LARRY L+NANCY L 13810 152ND AVE SE 5859 SE 2ND ST 9018 W MAUNA LOA LN RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 PEORIA AZ 85381 512630044000 329590003003GALANG GINA+HECITA ELBERT 512630036006 FROMHERZ JO ANN ASTURIAS GEERHART DARLA J+BYRON W 5818 SE 2ND CT 5932 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 15217 SE 136TH ST RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 512630021008 107203035004 107203021004 GERBER JUSTIN J+MELISSA K GIBBS JEFFREY S GIDNER RICHARD V & GRITA L 6005 SE 2ND CT 15102 SE 138TH PL 14825 SE 138TH PL RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98056 107203041002 512630024002 107203046001 GIORGETTIFIX ANITA M+ANDER GOSSARD STACEY LANE+ROXANNE GRABERAMIRA CHARLENE 14906 SE 138TH PL 6023 SE 2ND CT AMIRA SAM RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 14715 SE 138TH PL RENTON WA 98059 512630013005 666903006003 329590023001 GUAY PATRICK V+LI PING HALLIGAN SAU WAN HAMILTON BRUZZI GINETTE 5837 SE 2ND CT 5530 SE 2ND CT 6129 SE 3RD PL RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 108030022009 512630043002 329590019009 HARR LESLIE A HAVER KIRK R+REBECCA M HAYNES WARREN R JR+PATTI A 14629 SE 138TH PL 5826 SE 2ND CT 15225 SE 137TH PL RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 512630037004 512630026007 329590005008 HENDRICK MICHAEL T+CHRISTINA HOCKETT ROGER W HONG ANH 5926 SE 2ND CT 14311 SE 77TH CT 15229 SE 136TH ST RENTON WA 98059 NEWCASTLE WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 512630011009 666903021002 329590050004 HU DANIEL CHINHAO+JEANNIE HUNG REK+CECILIA SHUM HUYNH TRI VAN+NGOCTHANH T CHINGI 5501 SE 2ND CT 13722 152ND PL SE 5825 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 512630053001 107203026003 107203034007 IRVINE JON A ISAACSON DONALD+YVONNE JONES GEORGE R&SANDRA R 5919 SE 2ND ST 15011 SE 138TH PL 15110 SE 138TH PL RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 108030024005 107203036002 512630039000 JORGENSON MARTY A+DEBORAH L KELLY BYRON D+PAULA M KEM MATTHEW F+NANCY LYNN 13823 147TH PL SE 15020 SE 138TH PL 5914 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 107203024008 329590022003 510420067009 KENNEDY JAMES C+KATHLEEN M KILLORAN JOHN C + VIVIAN A KING COUNTY 14913 SE 138TH PL 15243 SE 137TH PL 500 KC ADMIN BLDG RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 500 4TH AVE #600 SEATTLE WA 98104 329590018001 108030014006 108030008008 KING RYAN KIRCHNER JAMES F+WENDY O KNEISLER ORIANA YANG+ROBERT 13731 152ND PL SE 13819 146TH PL SE 11319 SE 216TH CT RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 KENT WA 98031 512630029001 512630050007 512630040008 KONO ANNE M KWONG SUNNY LAW STEVEN W 206 QUINCY PL SE 5901 SE 2ND ST 5908 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 512630018004 107203037000 512630004004 LEE BEN K Y+LE QUYNH NGUYEN LINDSAY RICHARD A LITZAU JEROME F+RONDA S 5921 SE 2ND CT 15012 SE 138TH PL 12819 SE 38TH ST #259 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98056 BELLEVUE WA 98006 `-A 0 512630049009 LIVENGOOD GREGORY L+ALEXANDRIA P 5865 SE 2ND ST RENTON WA 98059 512630055006 LU NHAN KIM 6003 SE 2ND STREET RENTON WA 98059 512630046005 LYONS JAMES 208 ORCAS PL SE RENTON WA 98059 107203045003 MARCOE EDWARD 3 & SUSAN B 14714 138TH PL RENTON WA 98059 107203030005 MAXWELL MYRON C & MARION J 15117 SE 138TH PL RENTON WA 98059 107203038008 MEDVED JERRY B 15004 SE 138TH PL RENTON WA 98056 666903002002 NELSON WILLIAM LEWIS+BARBARA AN N 5506 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 107203031003 OBERG DUANE C+PATRICIA L 15125 SE 138TH PL RENTON WA 98059 666903018008 OKEEFE JOSEPH+ALISON M 5519 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 512630038002 LOCKE DEBRA ALMEDA 5920 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 666903020004 LUI ED GUN 5507 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 512630054009 MANSFIELD PATRICK J+KRISTINE E 5925 SE 2ND ST RENTON WA 98059 512630020000 LOUCKS GRAHAM D+JULIE A 5933 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 512631112004 LUNDIN LAURA THOMAS+JASON E 5704 NE 1ST PL RENTON WA 98059 512630104002 MAPLEWOOD HOA PO BOX 2594 RENTON WA 98056 512630007007 512630052003 MARTIN JEANNE M+GAVIGAN JANET L MASUNAGA MARIA E+VERNON Y 5801 SE 2ND CT 5913 SE 2ND ST RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 666903012001 MEADOWS BRIAN C+REBECCA 5621 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 512630019002 MORALES JAVIER E 5927 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 329590021005 NGUYEN BINH 15237 SE 137TH PL RENTON WA 98059 512630045007 OCHOA TERESA+TORRES ARMANDO 214 ORCAS PL SE RENTON WA 98059 329590016005 PANTER GREGORY P+ELLEN M 15240 SE 136TH LN RENTON WA 98055 108030021001 MEDCALF CARLA LYNN 14621 SE 138TH PL RENTON WA 98059 107203020006 MOYE_MARVIN C+SARAH J PEROT 13900 149TH PL SE RENTON WA 98059 107203042000 NIELSEN KENNETH L+CAROL MAR 14830 SE 138TH PL RENTON WA 98059 329590006006 OH KWANG DUCK+HYE KYONG YANG 15235 SE 136TH ST MAPLE VALLEY WA 98059 666903017000 PARTRIDGE KENNETH & CARRIE 5525 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 108030006002 666903003000 512630009003 PENNER WARRICK V+LINDA KAIS PHAM GIOI V+NGA TRAN PHAM LOAN HONG 14702 SE 138TH PL 4714 S GRAHAM 5813 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 SEATTLE WA 98188 RENTON WA 98059 0 666903013009 PHUNG QUYEN K 5615SE2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 107203044006 QUINN JOHN R+VICKI FINESILV 13741 148TH PL SE RENTON WA 98056 666903011003 ROBBINS JOHN C.+KRISTEN M 5626 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 107203047009 RYAN ROBERT A 13825 148TH PL SE RENTON WA 98059 108030012000 SCUDDER JAMES L 19862 DRIFTWOOD BAY DR EAGLE RIVER AK 99577 107203025005 SILVER LINING PROPERTY 1029 MARKET ST KIRKLAND WA 98033 512630031007 SMITH DESMOND L 201 QUINCY PL SE RENTON WA 98059 512630047003 SUEN DAH H 202 ORCAS PL SE RENTON WA 98059 512630017006 THURNHOFER WALTER C 5915 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 512630057002 POST CRAIG 6015SE2ND ST RENTON WA 98059 107203022002 REICH EDWIN D+KAREN M 14901 SE 138TH PL RENTON WA 98059 512630006009 ROBERTS DARRELL+AIELLO NADI 227 ORCAS PL SE RENTON WA 98059 329590052000 PULLEY MELANIE M 15256 SE 137TH PL RENTON WA 98059 512630014003 REYNOLDS JOHN ]+KAREN T 5841 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 329590048008 RYAN MICHAEL E+ALISON K 0 13710 152ND PL SE RENTON WA 98059 329590017003 108030020003 SADUCOS FLORENTINO P JR+BRENDA SCHEUFFLE DOROTHY R G 13832 146TH PL SE 15234 SE 136TH LN RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 512630042004 SHIN HYUK+EUN HAE WI 5834 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 329590053008 SINDAYEN MARIA IMELDA R 15300 SE 137TH PL RENTON WA 98059 512630002008 SOLIVEN CHARITO 12025 38TH AVE SE EVERETT WA 98208 329590004001 SUNKEL IGNACIO A 6119 SE 2ND PL RENTON WA 98059 512630016008 TIOTUICO VOLTAIRE M+TIOTUICO LI LI B ETH A 5909 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 666903008009 SHIN KYUNGSOO+YUKIKO 5608 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98055 108030025002 SKINNER LINDA L 13831 147TH PL SE RENTON WA 98059 108030005004 SPYKSMA ALYSSA ]+REGAN ]ERR 14708 SE 138TH PL RENTON WA 98059 512630056004 TANNAN NEIL+MANIXAYVONG 6009 SE 2ND ST RENTON WA 98059 107203023000 TRAN HOANG 5513 NE 1ST PL RENTON WA 98059 666903007001 329590002005 107203039006 TRUITT ELISA D USORO AKAN+MANDU VANRHEENEN NATHAN T+EMMA D 5602 SE 2ND CT 15211 SE 136TH ST 14922 SE 138TH PL RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 • i 512630041006 WAI KON & JENNY LEUNG 5902 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 108030004007 WALSH THOMAS W+LYNN K 13822 147TH PL SE RENTON WA 98059 512630022006 WI KUM L+SUNG H 6011 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 329590045004 WAINSCOTT LANA 15251 SE 136TH LN RENTON WA 98059 666903005005 WANG VICTORIA+WAND VILAY 5524 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 512630012007 WILKINSON MATHEW B+DAWN R 5831 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 329590014000 666903015004 WONG NATHAN K+RACHAEL L RIVERA WOODBRIDGE BRENDA+MICHAEL 15252 SE 136TH LN 5603 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 108030003009 WORSING FRANK 13830 147TH PL SE RENTON WA 98059 512631111006 YASUTAKE BRUCE AND JUDY 5708 NE 1ST PL RENTON WA 98059 512630033003 XAYARATH STEVE K+LAKY K 213 QUINCY PL SE RENTON WA 98059 666903004008 ZHANG FANGZHI+XIEH ZHI 5518 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 512630003006 WALES JASON M+IESCA M 211 ORCAS PL SE RENTON WA 98059 329590049006 WHITTINGTON MATTHEW H LOT 49 HIGHLAND ESTATES RENTON WA 98059 108030011002 WILLIAMS DAVID & CHRISTINA 13804 146TH PL SE RENTON WA 98059 666903001004 WOODBRIDGE MARK G 5500 SE 2ND CT RENTON WA 98059 107203028009 YAMAGUCHI ROSE T 15101 SE 138TH PL RENTON WA 98059 0 0 City of NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS-M) DATE: December 5, 2011 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA11-092, ECF, CAR PROJECT NAME: East Renton Llft Station Removal PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant, the City of Renton, is requesting Environmental Review and a CrtFcal Area Exemption in order to remove an exisiting lift station, located west of SE 2nd Ct; and install a new sewer pipeline, extending west and south from the lift station location, through Maplewood Park and ending within 148th PI SE. The 1.2 acre subject site is located primarily within unicorparted King County. However, the portion of the property located within the City limits is within the R-4 zoning classification. Seven wetlands and two streams were identified within the study area boundaries. Proposed construction would require temporary crossing of one of the on -site streams (Stewart Creek) and its buffer along with some of the wetland buffers. PROJECT LOCATION: West & South of SE 2Id Court; North of Maplewood Park OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE, MITIGATED (DNS-M): As the Lead Agency, the City of Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 43.21C.110, the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS-M process to give notice that a DNS- M is iikely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS-M are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non - Significance -Mitigated {DNS -MI. A 14-day appeal period will fnliow the issuance of the DNS-M. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: November 15, 2011 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: December 5, 2011 APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Dave Christensen, City of Renton; 1055 S Grady Way; Renton, WA 99057; Eml: dchristen@rentonwa_gov Permits/Review Requested: Environmental (SEPA) Review, Critical Areas Exemption Other Permits which may be required: Clear and Grade, R-O-W, and HPA Permits Requested Studies: Geotechnical Report, Stream & Wetland Study, and Drainage Report Application may be reviewed: Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) — Planning Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 PUBLIC HEARING: N/A CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Zoning/Land Use: The subject site is designated Residential Low Density (RLD) on the City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and Residential -4 (R-4) on the City's Zoning Map. If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CED — Planning Division, 1055 So, Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, Name/File No.: East Renton Lift Station Removal/LUA11-092, ECF, CAR NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO f� Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: Proposed Mitigation Measures: Environmental (SEPA) Checklist The project will be subject to the City's SEPA ordinance, RMC 4-3-100 and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. The following Mitigation Measures will likely be imposed on the proposed project. These recommended Mitigation Measures address project impacts not covered by existing codes and regulations as cited above. • FoRow recommeadotions provided in the supplied Geotechnical Report. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Rocaie Timmons, Associate Planner, CED — Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 PM on December 19, 2011. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additiona# notificatfcn by mail, contact the Project Manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. CONTACT PERSON: Rocale Timmons, Associate Planner; Tel: (425) 430-7219; Eml: rtimmons@rentonwa.gov PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY p o `t Of AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE. December 5, 2011 TO, Dave Christensen, Utilities FROM: Oocale Timmons, Planning SUBJECT: Notice of Complete Application East Renton Lift Station Removal, LUA11-092, ECF, CAR The Planning Division of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, is accepted for review. It is tentatively scheduled for consideration by the Environmental Review Committee on December 19, 2011. Prior to that review, you will be notified if any additional information is required to continue processing your application. Please contact me, at x7219 if you have any questions. cc: Yellow File h;\ced\planning\current planning\projects\11-092.rocale\acceptance memo 11-092.doc City of Renton LAND USE PERMIT MASTER APPLICATION PROPERTY OWNER(S) NAME: See attached. ADDRESS: CITY: ZIP: TELEPHONE NUMBER: APPLICANT (if other than owner) NAME. David Christensen COMPANY (if applicable): City of Renton Public Works ADDRESS. 1055 S. Grady Way CITY: Renton ZIP: 98057 TELEPHONE NUMBER: 425-430-7212 CONTACT PERSON NAME: David Christensen COMPANY (if applicable): City of Renton Public Works ADDRESS: 1055 S. Grady Way CITY: Renton ZIP: 98057 TELEPHONE NUMBER AND EMAIL ADDRESS: 425.,430-7212; Dchristen@Rentonwa.gov City of ��jUj51��rJ Renton PROJEC TION PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: East Renton Lift Station Elimination PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION AND ZIP CODE: West and south of SE 2nd Court, north of Maplewood Park, Renton WA. Additional portions of project are located in unincorporated King County within Maplewood Park and 148th Place SE. KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): In City of Renton: 666903TRCT, 5126301030, 512630TRCT In King County: 1523059055, 1423059007, 1523059230 EXISTING LAND USE(S): Gravel access road, sewer lift station, detention ponds. King County park to the south. PROPOSED LAND USE(S): Eliminate lift station and install new gravity sewer line belowground. EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: Residential Low -Density PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION (if applicable) n/a EXISTING ZONING: R-4 PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): n/a SITE AREA (in square feet): 52,272 sf (1.2 acres) SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO BE DEDICATED: n/a SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS: Existing easements plus approx. 13,843 square feet of new easement. See attached Exhibit A — Sanitary Sewer Easement. PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET ACRE (if applicable) n/a NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable): n/a NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): n/a GAN.ATUkAL SCIENCES1201012I034�}_FostRentonl_iftSlalion1d13_Working lloeumentslDraft_Rcpoils.IKenum 1>e1mitA[-TLS masterapp.doc I a AJECT INFORMA7 NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): none SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): n/a SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): n/a SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): n/a SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): 0 NET FLOOR AREA ON NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): n/a NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): Project will be maintained by existing City staff. TION contlTfued PROJECT VALUE: $480,000 IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): see attached. ❑ 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. ❑ WETLANDS sq. ft. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Attach legal descri tion on separate sheet with the following information included SITUATE IN THE QUARTER OF SECTION , TOWNSHIP , RANGE , IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Name/s) (::::� ��rrw 1A ��ideclare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that I ple one) the current owner of the property involved in this application or � the authorized represent ' e to act a corpora (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contain and the ' for ation h � ith are in all respytruen correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. 6 Signa ure of Owner/Repre entative Date Signature of Owner/Representative Date STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that M \ signed this instrument and acknowledge it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purpose mentioned in the instrument. 6_Q: `1 ac Dated G:ANATURAL r ✓( Notary Public in and fort a State of Washington Notary (Print): H L .A- My appointment expires: 2 cj 3 _EactlicntunLifiSlationlQ3_Woi-king_I)t)cumenislllrafi_Rcixn-ts.lRcnum permiMERLS Mastcrapp.doc - "_' - LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Attach legal descri tion on separate sheet with the following information included SITUATE IN THE QUARTER OF SECTION , TOWNSHIP , RANGE , IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Name/s) (::::� ��rrw 1A ��ideclare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that I ple one) the current owner of the property involved in this application or � the authorized represent ' e to act a corpora (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contain and the ' for ation h � ith are in all respytruen correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. 6 Signa ure of Owner/Repre entative Date Signature of Owner/Representative Date STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that M \ signed this instrument and acknowledge it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purpose mentioned in the instrument. 6_Q: `1 ac Dated G:ANATURAL r ✓( Notary Public in and fort a State of Washington Notary (Print): H L .A- My appointment expires: 2 cj 3 _EactlicntunLifiSlationlQ3_Woi-king_I)t)cumenislllrafi_Rcixn-ts.lRcnum permiMERLS Mastcrapp.doc - "_' - &JECT INFORMATION (confRued) Property Owners Within City hinds: Maplewood Homeowners' Association (new and existing easements) PO BOX 2594 RENTON WA 98056 206-660-1005 Additional existing easement within Parkside Court stormwater tract. Within unincorporated King County. King County Parks Capital Planning and Business Development Section King Street Center, 201 S Jackson St Rm 700 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 206-263-6207 robert.nunnenkamp@ kingeounty_gov Legal description for East Renton Lift Station Project THE NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M,, IN ICING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; EXCEPT THE WEST 30 FEET THEREOF; AND THE NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY WASHINGTON; EXCEPT THOSE PORTIONS OF SAID SECTIONS 14 AND 15 HERETOFORE CONVEYED TO KING COUNTY BY DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 9401060M. ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREAS The project would require work within approximately 16,300 square feet of buffer area within city of Renton limits (see attached figure). No streams or wetlands are located within the project area inside city limits. Work within the buffer area inside City of Renton limits would include construction access and staging, relocation of fencing, removal of the existing lift station, decommissioning of an existing sewer line, installation of a new sewer line, and operation of a temporary wastewater bypass system. The affected areas within city limits are currently gravel surfaced or weedy, and native vegetation would not be removed. Several wetlands and Stewart Creek are located within Maplewood Park, in unincorporated King County. One stream crossing and additional buffer impacts would occur within county jurisdiction as a result of the project. See enclosed Wetland Delineation Report and Buffer Mitigation Plan. C:ANATLJRAL SC[ENCESI'010%210349_EactRenionLiltStatiimk 0W Working _Doc umcntclf]raft_Reports.lRentan permitslERLS inawterapp,dne 3 - 0 EXHIBIT "A" SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT LEGAL DESCRIPTION TRACT "K" AND THAT PORTION OF TRACT "H" MAPLEWOOD 1;STAT S, PHASE'. 1. ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF. RECORDED IN VOLUME 205 OF PLATS, PAGES 51 THROUGH 62, INCI,I7SI'lfF, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; BEGINNINU AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID TRACT -I-Ft, BEING `1HL; WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 00315'57" WEST ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT "H" 30.01 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88°00'3I"EAST 120.03 FEET; THENCE NORTH 01 °59'41" EAST 16.04 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY EDGE OF A CHAIN LINK FENCE: THENCE FOLLOWING ALONG SAID FENCE SOUTH 84058'39" EAST 91.69 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88°26'53" EAST 87.51 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89°23'21"' EAST 37.69 FEET; THENCE NORTH 87°02'56" EAST 37.69 FEET: THENCE, NORTH 82°23' 15" EAST 29.89 FEET: THENCE NORTH 67°28'37" EAST 32.18 FEET TO THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF AFOREMENTIONED TRACT "K": THENCE SOUTH 38°56'04" EAST 30.00 FEET TO THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF SAID TRACT "K"; THENCE SOUTH 51 °03'49" WEST 28.63 FEET: THENCE NORTH 88001'43" WEST 49.89 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 46°2958" WEST 18.16 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88001'43" WEST 21.47 FEET; THENCE NORTH 5744'67" WEST 25.67 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88`01'43" WEST 105.40 FEET: THENCE SOUTH 84005'32" WEST 87.69 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88001'43" 'VEST 114,48 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 575932" WEST 20.68 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 13,843 SQUARE FEET. MORE OR LESS. SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. 9 0 M ()� W w x {f ) W >- Q Z Q IS w� n r w2 l f c i g Wa w o O ,b0'9l i CV r.�, W— I1 l ;r j.r--y�- do i 1 tW z �M1w w <nv i z I w �;d' q 1 � "Iwn -� w �-` w� q 2_ [:IO W �i�dz p 75 O W 2 O J G p N oJ M N Z— U U �o rw �� vJ W U x m J 5 IL O I ,n w cr I G} n O O 0 v w m n n U � � Z a O 7f 2 T r co � N � C � C 4� a 00 m E Cj r Y U a v I Ln iO I a n V J C Di Q li La.f Q U ti 1 Web date: 0E128=07 CERTIFICATION & TRANSFER King County OF APPLICANT STATUS Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98057-5212 206-296-6600 TTY 20fi-295-7217 Far alternate formats, call 206-296-6600. Permit Number: FOR CURRENT OWNER: 1, Robert Nunnenkam , King County Parks Property Agent (print name) hereby certify that I am an/the owner of the property which is the subject of this application for permit or approval. If I am not the sole owner of the property, I certify that I am authorized by any and all other owners of the property to make this certification and transfer any and all rights 11we have to apply for this permit or approval to the person listed below, 1, therefore certify that David Christensen, City of Renton (print name) is the "applicant" for this permit or approval and shall remain the "applicant" for the duration of this permit or approval unless "applicant" status is transferred in writing on a form provided by this department. By being the "applicant," that individual assumes financial responsibility for all fees and will receive any refunds paid. cer fy under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct, 09-23-11 Signature of Owner Date Signed FOR INDIVIDUALS: I, , (print name) hereby certify that I am the "applicant" for this permit or approval. I shall remain the "applicant" for the duration of this permit or approval unless "applicant" status is transferred in writing on a form provided by this department. I accept financial responsibility for all fees associated with this permit or approval and will receive any refunds. My mailing address is: I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct. Signature of Applicant Date Signed pe .a iL`L I, _ 4,1."y , (print name) hereby certify that I am an authorized agent of 1/iJ ��,�-1ftr a corporation or other business association authorized in the State of Washington and that this business association is the "applicant" for this permit or approval and is financially responsible for all fees and will receive any refunds paid. This association shall remain the "applicant" for the duration of this permit or approval unless "applicant' status is transferred in writing on the form provided by this department. The mailing address of this business association is: I certify finder pen ty 4perjuryr a laws of the State of Washington that the f reg 'ng is true and correct. nt Date Signed CertAndTransferApplicantStatusFORM lc-cer-trapstal.pdf 06/28/2007 Page t of 2 4 E i W C N Q � Q W Q S Ir rr LL) OO LL LL } D Z m p Z w a O LL O 0 r z Y C? i L CE D O w ; sPDjv1 etlWI.d-'711l" FjdaPS £36i.J :3WHN IIIA PLANNING DIVISION 0 WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMEN FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS icjp NO 15 This requirement may be waived by: 1. Property Services PROJECT NAME: 2. Public Works Plan Review 3. Building DATE: 4. Planning H:\CED\Data\Forms-TemplateslSelf-Help Handouts\Planninglwaiverofsubmittalregs.xls 06109 PLANNING DIVISION WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS jib :Pl6n'ji:::Pr�:jM Wetlands Report/Delineation 4 7.1 Applicant Agreement Statement 2 AND 3 Inventory of Existing Sites 2 AND 3 Lease Agreement, [Draft 2 AND 3 Map of Existing Site Conditions 2ANE)3 Map of View Area 2 AND 3 PhotosimulationS 2 AND 3 This requirement may be waived by: 1. Property Services 2. Public Works Plan Review 3. Building 4. Planning PROJECT NAME: DATE: H:10ED1Data\Forms-TemplatesNSelf-Help HandoutsNPianninglwaiverofsubmittairLqs.xls 06109 0 EAST RENTON LIFT STATION ELIMINATION SEPA Checklist Prepared for: City of Renton Public Works Department July 2011 " 15 Z0.11 0 SEI'4 Environmental Checklist Fast Renton Lift Station Elininralion TABLE OF CONTENTS ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST.........................................................................................................1 A. BACKGROUND............................................................................................................................ ] B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS..............................................................................................4 1 . EARTH................................................................................................................................. 4 2. AIR...................................................................................................................................... 7 3. WATER........................................................................ ....--•---- ......................................... 8 4. PLANTS..............................................................................................................................11 5. ANIMALS........................................................................................................................... 12 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES................................................................................ 13 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH............................................................................................... 14 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE.............................................................................................. 16 9. HOUSING........................................................................................................................... 18 10. AESTHETICS...................................................................................................................... 19 ]I. LIGHT AND GLARE............................................................................................................ 19 12. RECREATION•..............................•-•.---..----.........................--.........--................................... 20 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION....................................................................... 21 14. TRANSPORTATION.............................................................................................................21 15. PUBLIC SERVICES. ..................................................................................... 23 16- UTILITIES.......................................................................................................................... 23 REFERENCES................................................................................................................... 25 ESA Page Jul4- 2011 0 SEPA Environmental C'11cc •liv East Renton Liti Station Elimination ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of the proposed project: East Renton Lift Station Elimination 2. Name of Applicant: City of Renton Public forks Department Utility Systems Division 3. Address and telephone number of applicant and contact person: Dave Christensen Wastewater and Utility and Technical Services Supervisor Utility Systems Division 1055 Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 425-430-7241 4. Date checklist prepared: July 2011 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton Current Planning 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): The City plans to construct the project in summer/fall of 2012. Construction is expected to take approximately four months. 7. Plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal: No future additions or other further activity is connected with this proposal. 8. Environmental information that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this project: East Renton Lift Station Wetland, Stream and Wildlife Study. Prepared by ESA Adolfson. June 2009; revised July 2011. Cite of Renton 2009 Wastewater- Lift Station Pre -Design East Renton Sewer Route Analysis. Prepared by Carollo Engineers. March 2010. ESA Page 1 Ah, 2011 0 • SEPA Environnmental Chee list East Renton Lift Station Elimination Geolechnical Evaluation Rel3ort - East Renton Lift Station Elimination. Prepared by HWA Geosciences, Inc., January 2011. East Relrton Lift Slation Elit7ainatiota Stream and Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan, Prepared by ESA, July 2011. 9. Applications that are pending for governmental approvals or other proposals directly affecting the property covered by the proposal: No other government approvals or other proposals would affect the property. 10. List of governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for the proposal: Critical Areas Review (King County) Clearing and Grading Permit (King County) Right-of-way Permit (King County) Hydraulic Project Approval (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife) Section 404 Permit (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) Section 401 Water Quality Certification (Washington State Department of Ecology) Coastal Zone Management Certification (Washington State Department of Ecology) SERA Review (City of Renton) Construction Permit (City of Renton) Critical Areas Exemption (City of Renton) 11. Brief, complete description of the proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site: The East Renton Lift Station is just under 10 years old. It is located north of Maplewood Park near the end of the NE 2nd Court cul-de-sac (Figure 1). The lift station serves to pump sewage from nearby residential neighborhoods (Maplewood Estates, Parkside Court, Shy Creek, Liberty Ridge, and others for a service area of approximately 430 acres) to the gravity sewer system located near N.E. 4th Street. The City of Renton (City) prefers to serve customers via a gravity sewer pipeline, rather than a lift station whenever feasible. A gravity system eliminates electricity costs for pumping and equipment maintenance, which Page 2 ESA duly 2011 SEPA Environmental Checkhyi Easl Renton Lrfi Station Ehininalion greatly reduces annual OperatioI] and Maintenance (O&M) Costs. Lased o11 survey data, conversion to a gravity system is possible at this location by installing a new pipeline crossing through an undeveloped portion of Maplewood Park and connecting to the Briar Hills Division No. 4 sewer system to the south. The new pipeline alignment is shown in Figure 2. It will consist of approximately 1,030 linear feet of 12-inch-diameter and 15-inch-diameter pipe. The new pipe will be installed using open trenches. Trench excavations ranging from 3 to 10 feet deep would be required to maintain the desired gradient along the alignment. In addition, the existing lift station structure will be demolished. The following general sequence of construction activities is anticipated for pipe installation. Survey and mark construction limits. 2. Install temporary erosion and sediment control (TESC) measures in 148th Place SE. Remove existing 8-inch-diameter gravity sewer and existing 48-inch- diameter manhole, and install 15 -inch -diameter gravity sewer and new 60-inch-diameter manhole in 148`' Place SE. 4. Confirm operation of new 15-inch-diameter gravity sewer by television inspection, air test and inspection of manholes with channeling. 5. Relocate fencing to provide equipment access at East Renton Lift Station. 6. Clear and grub 30-foot-wide corridor and install remaining TESC measures for installation of the gravity pipelines. Temporarily divert stream flow (Stewart Creek) by bypass pumping and install temporary stream crossing. Install 15-inch-diameter gravity sewer in Maplewood Park. 9. Install 12 -inch -diameter gravity sewer between existing manholes in existing gravel access area north of the park. 10. Confirm operation of new 15-inch and 12-inch-diameter gravity sewer by television inspection and air test. 11. Install temporary wastewater bypass pumping systems and test. ESA Page 3 Ali, 2011 0 SEPA Environmental Checklist East Renton Gift Station Elhnh84aion 12. Perform improvements to existing manholes north of the park and fill existing 12-inch-diameter gravity sewer. 13. Inspect manhole channeling. 14. Decommission bypass pumping systems and commence gravity sewer operation. 15. Remove temporary stream crossing, and revegetate work areas within the park. lb. Decommission and demolish existing lift station facilities. 17. Construct miscellaneous site improvements at East Renton Lift Station site. 18. Perform asphalt overlay in 148th Place SE. 12. Location of the proposal, including street address, if any, and section, township, and range; legal description; site plan; vicinity map; and topographical map, if reasonably available: The project is located in and adjacent to Maplewood Park in unincorporated King County and within the city limits of Renton (Figure 1). Maplewood Park is an approximately 45-acre King County park that is surrounded by residential development. The park is bounded by SE 136th Street to the north, SE 138th Street to the south, 144th Avenue SE to the west, and 152nd Avenue SE to the east. The project will be located in a north -south corridor approximately 30 feet wide in the north -central, undeveloped portion of the park (Figure 2). B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS "I. Earth a. General description of the site (underline): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other ...... Gently sloping to the south. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Average 2 to 3 percent; up to 10 percent in limited areas. Page 4 ESA AN 2011 SGPA Environmenlal Checklist East Renton Lift Station Ohnination C. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? Specify the classification of agricultural soils and note any prime farmland. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) maps soils in the study area as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes. The site is not currently used for agriculture and there is no indication it has been farmed historically_ Geotechnical investigations found the topsoil onsite to consist of silty fine sand and sandy silt with a high organic content. Below the topsoil, loose to medium dense silty sand with gravel is present over deep glacial till. A surface layer of gravel fill approximately one foot deep is present in portions of the site where a foot path was constructed at some time in the past (HWA, 2011). d. Are there any surface indications or a history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. None observed. King County has not mapped any landslide, erosion, or seismic hazard areas on or near the project site (King County iMap, 2011). e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate the source of the fill. The new sewer line would be a total of approximately 1,030 feet long. Of this total, approximately 270 feet would be located within existing paved or gravel surfaced roads, and 760 feet within vegetated areas (Maplewood Park). Within Maplewood Park, the construction corridor to be cleared for the project would be 30 feet wide (Figure 2). The total area of clearing and grading within the park is 21,948 square feet (0.5 acre). Within the 30- foot-wide corridor, the pipeline trench would be up to 10 feet wide, with the rest of the corridor width used for equipment access and material stockpiling. Following construction, the trench would be backfilled and the construction areas recontoured to match adjacent grades. It appears that some of the native soil from the site may be suitable for backfilling of the sewer line trench. However, unsuitable materials such as large cobbles or boulders, stumps, or organic soils cannot be reused and will need to be removed from the site and replaced with suitable imported soil. Gravel bedding material for the pipe will need to be imported to the site. It is estimated that approximately 1,375 cubic yards (CY) of material would be excavated from the trench. Approximately 760 CY of fill would L• SDI Page 5 Juh,2011 SEPA Envivoinnentul Checklist East Renton Gift Station Ehooriioation be imported to the site for trench backfill material. Fill material would be obtained from an approved location. In addition, approximately 24 CY of concrete and sand would be used to fill an existing sewer pipe to be abandoned south of the lift station, and to fill two manholes in this same area to provide the correct grade for the new pipeline. Small amounts of asphalt and gravel would be needed to repair the surface of the gravel access road north of the park and the surface of 148'h Place SE following construction. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? Clearing of vegetation within the pipeline corridor, trenching to install the pipe, and other construction activities will disturb soils and could cause minor erosion and sedimentation. increased erosion and sedimentation could result in a short-term increase in turbidity in the onsite stream or wetlands. However, with the implementation of erosion control measures and construction best management practices (BMPs), these impacts would be avoided and minimized as much as possible. Following construction, no additional soil disturbance or erosion is anticipated during the operation of the project. The pipeline would be accessed from the manholes at the north and south ends of the park property for maintenance. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example buildings or asphalt)? The project would create approximately 3 square feet of new impervious surface. Existing asphalt and gravel surfaces will remain north and south of the park (gravel access road and 1481h Place SE, respectively). h. Describe the proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any. The following mitigation measures will be implemented to minimize erosion and protect nearby water bodies and groundwater during construction: As part of the project's Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESL) plan, install silt fence along the construction corridor to protect nearby wetlands from sedimentation. • Temporarily bypass the onsite stream prior to trenching the pipe across the stream or installing the temporary stream crossing for equipment. • Place straw, mulch, or commercially available erosion control blankets in areas that require additional protection. Page 6 ESA Ady 2011 0 0 SEPA Envii-ovinetaul Plecklist East Renton Lift Station Elhothtation Revegetate disturbed areas as soon as possible after completion of construction. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (e.g. dust, automobile, odors, industrial, wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities, if known. The project would involve construction activities which will cause small increases in emissions from equipment used during site preparation and pipe installation. Construction activities will involve the use of heavy- duty diesel and gasoline -powered equipment. In addition, fugitive dust emissions will be generated. These impacts are expected to be minor and short-term. The project would result in minor increases in greenhouse gas emissions. The primary sources would be increased vehicular traffic of construction workers and equipment accessing the site and on -site construction equipment. The increased greenhouse gas emissions are expected to be minimal because of the small scale and short timeframe (four weeks) of the project. Once complete, the project would not generate any emissions. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odors that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No off -site sources of emissions or odors will affect the proposal. C. Describe proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any. Best management practices (BMPs) would be used to minimize fugitive dust emissions during construction, including wetting and covering disturbed soils, washing tires, covering open -bodied trucks, and shutting off idling equipment. ESA Page 7 Juiv 2011 SEPA Environmental Checklist .Fast Renton Lift Station Elimination 3. Water a. Surface: 1. Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, and wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Seven palustrine forested wetlands (designated Wetlands A through G) and two streams were identified within the study area boundaries (Figure 2; ESA Adolfson, 2011). The main stream channel, known as Stewart Creek, enters the northern end of the study area via a plastic culvert, and exits the southern end of the study area via a grated concrete culvert. The stream enters the storm drain system south of Maplewood Park and daylights approximately 0.3 mile south of the park. Stewart Creek joins the Cedar River approximately 0.75 miles south of the park. 2. Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Yes, construction will require crossing one onsite stream (Stewart Creek). Work will occur in upland areas within 10 to 20 feet of two wetlands; the other five onsite wetlands are at least 30 feet from the construction corridor (Figure 2). The project corridor will cross the upland buffer areas of Stewart Creek and wetland buffers. 3. Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that could be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill materials. No direct wetland impacts (filling or dredging) will occur. A temporary crossing of Stewart Creek will be installed to allow equipment access from both ends of the work area (north and south) (Figure 2). This temporary stream crossing will be located adjacent to the permanent trenched pipeline crossing of the stream to minimize disturbance of the streambed and banks. The temporary crossing will consist of riprap or quarry spall placed in the stream channel. A culvert placed under the riprap will carry streamflow through the work area until construction is complete. Page 8 ESA Aly 2011 SEPA E171-h-OMu(1)M11 C'h('Ckli%t East Reato7 Lift Station Elimination The temporary stream crossing would require approximately 30 CY of temporary fill (riprap) within the stream channel and adjacent streambanks. Approximately 5 CY of material would be excavated from the streambed to install the pipeline; a similar amount of backfill would be placed in the trench after the pipe is installed. Together the temporary crossing and pipeline crossing would temporarily disturb up to approximately 437 square feet of the stream channel. Following construction and pipeline installation, the temporary crossing will be removed, and the streambed and banks will be restored and revegetated. 4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversion? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. Stewart Creek will be temporarily diverted to protect water duality and aquatic life during in -stream work. Cofferdams will be placed in the stream channel, both upstream and downstream of the work area, encompassing the locations of both the temporary equipment crossing and the adjacent pipeline trench. Streamflow will be pumped from above the upstream cofferdam into a temporary flexible pipe. Flows will be discharged from the flexible pipe back to the stream, at a location downstream of the lower cofferdam. The temporary equipment crossing will then be constructed while the streamflow is being diverted by the pump. A culvert will be installed through the temporary equipment crossing, extending from the upper cofferdam, through the culvert, to a point downstream of the lower cofferdam. Once the culvert is in place, flows will be diverted through the culvert and the pump will be removed. The temporary equipment crossing and culvert will remain in place throughout the construction period. This will serve to isolate the work area from streamflows and minimize sedimentation in the stream. The quantities of streamflow to be diverted around the work area are unknown. However, the City intends to construct the project during the dry season, during low flows. 5. Does the proposal lie within a 1 QO-year flood plain? If so, note location on the site plan. The project is not located within a 100-year floodplain. ESA Page 9 Ad)- 2011 0 0 SEPA Environmental Chmkiist Fast Rewoo? Lift Station Elimimtimi 6. Does the proposal involve discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. b. Ground 1. Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Trench dewatering may be necessary during installation of the pipeline, particularly in areas near the stream where groundwater levels are likely to be higher. Quantities are unknown. Water from dewatering will be discharged to the existing sanitary sewer system in accordance with applicable permit requirements. 2. Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any. Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) is expected to serve. No waste material will be discharged into the ground. The project involves installing a new sewer pipeline which is intended to safely convey wastewater across the site and ultimately to a sewage treatment plant. The pipe will be designed and maintained to prevent leakage of wastewater to the ground. C. Water Runoff (including storm water) 1. Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (including quantities if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. The potential for runoff and erosion associated with construction of the project was described in Section B.1. The project would create only three square feet of new impervious surface and would not increase runoff from the site following construction. Page 111 ESA AN 2011 0 • SEPA Ernvinmiucutul Chcckhyl Gust Renlon Lilt Slution Eiji) rinatimr 2. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. The release of waste materials to groundwater or surface water would be unlikely because of construction BMPs that will be implemented to minimize runoff and erosion from the construction work area_ The pipeline will be designed and maintained to prevent leakage of wastewater. d. Describe proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any. In addition to the measures described in Section B.1.h to minimize erosion from the construction site, the following measures will be used to minimize impacts to groundwater and surface waters. • Maintain construction equipment in good working order, free of leaks of fuel, hydraulic fluids, or other chemicals. • Keep fueling and equipment maintenance areas within designated staging areas and away from streams and wetlands. In the unlikely event that a construction accident or spill releases contaminants into waterways or the surrounding environment, BMPs (such as oil booms and adsorbent pillows) would be employed and utilized to contain and minimize the spill. • Route all water from trench dewatering to the existing sanitary sewer system in accordance with permit requirements. 4. Plants a. Types of vegetation found on -site: Deciduous trees: black cottonwood, European mountain —ash, red alder Evergreen trees: Douglas fir, western hemlock, western red cedar Shrubs: Pacific ninebark, salal, salmonberry, Himalayan blackberry, vine maple, willow, Indian plum Grass: None Pasture: None Wet Soil Plants: creeping buttercup, lady fern, slough sedge Water Plants: None ESA Pcr=e 11 AN 2011 0 i SEPA Environmental Checklist East Renton Lift Station Eliniination b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? The project will require clearing a 30-foot-wide construction corridor within Maplewood Park (Figure 2). The total area of clearing and grading within the park is estimated at 21,948 square feet (0.5 acre). Of this area, approximately 3,000 square feet consists of dirt -surface foot paths or grassy areas. The area to be cleared includes a mixture of native and non- native tree, shrub, and herb species. Thirty-one trees measuring up to 26 inches diameter at breast height (dbh) would be removed from the construction corridor. C. List threatened or endangered species or critical habitat known to be on or near the site. No threatened or endangered plant species are known to be on or near the site. d. Describe proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on -site. The construction corridor within Maplewood Park will be revegetated with native plant species following installation of the pipeline. Trees that are removed will be replaced at a 3:1 ratio along the construction corridor. The revegetation plan will meet King County requirements, as described in the Strewn and Wetland Buffet' Mitigation Plan (ESA, 2011). 3. Animals a. Underline any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Fish: None Amphibians: Pacific treefrog Reptiles: None Birds: spotted towhee, American robin (nesting), song sparrow, American crow, black -capped chickadee, Anna's hummingbird, red -breasted sapsucker (excavations in trees), Steller's jay Mammals: rabbit, raccoon (tracks), coyote (scat), deer (tracks) Page 12 - ESA AN 2011 0 0 SEPA Environmental Checklist East Renton Lilt Station Elimination b. List any threatened or endangered species or critical habitat near the site. The WDFW priority habitats and species (PHS) database does not identify sensitive species or habitats within Maplewood Park or the immediate vicinity. C. Is the site part of a migratory route? If so, explain. The project area is located within the Pacific Flyway, which is a flight corridor for migrating waterfowl and other birds. The Pacific Flyway extends from Alaska south to Mexico and South America. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any. The construction corridor within Maplewood Park will be revegetated with native plant species following installation of the pipeline (see the Stream and Wetland Brtffer Mitigalion Plan, ESA, 2011). The native vegetation will provide wildlife habitat. 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. The project would not use any energy and would eliminate the current electricity used by the existing pump station. b. Would the project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, explain. The project would not affect the potential use of solar energy. C. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any. The project would conserve energy by eliminating the need for electricity to operate the pump station. ESA Page. 13 dul�� 2011 SEPA Environmental Checklist East Renton Lift Station Elimination T. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spills, or hazardous waste that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. Construction would require vehicles and equipment that could result in spills of petroleum products. Describe special emergency services that might be required. No special emergency services would be required. 2. Describe proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards. Spill Prevention and Control Plans would be developed to minimize potential spills and to contain any spills on site during construction. During construction, the East Renton lift station will be operational and sewage will be routed through the existing system until construction is complete to avoid potential sewage spills. b. Noise 1. What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment operation, other)? There are no noise sources in the area that would affect the project. The project is located in a residential area and a park. 2. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? The only noise generated by the project would be short-term construction noises. Construction is anticipated to last approximately four months. During this time, the types of equipment expected to be used for construction include a backhoe, trackhoe, bulldozer, dump truck, concrete truck, and 5 to 10 HP submersible pumps. This equipment would generate noise ranging from approximately 78 to 84 decibels (dBA) at a distance of 50 feet from the construction site (FHWA, 2010). Page14 ESA Ault 2011 0 0 SEPA Enviremmenial Checklist East Renton Lill Station Ehnlir1416017 The nearest sensitive noise receptors are single-family residences located in the Parkside Court neighborhood along NE 2nd Court, northwest of the project; and in the Briar Hills Division No. 4 neighborhood along SE 138th Place and 148th Place SE, at the south end of the project (Figure I ). Construction noises in the area are regulated by both the City of Renton and King County regulations. The City of Renton regulations (RMC 8-7-2) apply to the area north of Maplewood Park. Renton has adopted the state of Washington Regulations (WAC 173-60-020 through 050 and 090). The noise limit for residential areas is 55 dBA. Construction noises are exempt from noise limits between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. King County noise regulations also have a noise limit of 55 dBA for residential areas (KCC 12.88.020). Construction noises are allowed to exceed those limits between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m., but the amount of exceedence is restricted_ Typical equipment used for construction can exceed the 55 dBA residential limit by 25 dBA (or up to 80 dBA) measured at the property line or at a distance of 50 feet from the equipment, whichever is greater. Additional limits are placed on impact equipment such as pile drivers and jackhammers. No impact equipment is expected to be used on this project. Residences in the Parkside Court neighborhood are at least 100 feet from the construction area. Noise from construction sites typically decreases by about 6 dBA with each doubling of distance from source to receptor. Therefore, the maximum noise level that would likely be experienced at the Parkside Court residences is around 78 dBA. Two residences along 148th Place SE in the Briar Hills neighborhood are located along the pipeline corridor and within 50 feet of the construction area; they could experience noise levels up to 84 dBA. It is anticipated that trenching work in 148"' Place SE would take one week or less. Noise levels at other residences in this neighborhood would be less as distance from the work area increases. Once construction is complete, the project would not generate noise. The project will eliminate a minor source of noise associated with the lift station. ESA Page. 15 Juh,2011 SEPA Environmeutol Checklist East Renton Lift Station Elirrriiration 3. Describe proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any. Measures to mitigate construction noise impacts include: • Construction activities would typically occur during weekdays between permitted construction hours, 7 a.m. to 10 p.m, and would likely only occur between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. • Modern construction equipment would be used to minimize noise. • Noisy portable equipment would be located as far away from sensitive receptors as practical and would be muffled. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Most of the project site is within an undeveloped section of King County's Maplewood Park. The northern end of the pipeline corridor is located along an existing gravel road near the Parkside Court residential neighborhood which is within the City of Renton. The southern end of the project is located in the Briar Hills Division No. 4 residential neighborhood along SE 1381h Place and 148"' Place SE. Maplewood Heights Elementary School is northwest of the park. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. The site does not appear to have been used for agriculture. C. Describe any structures on the site. The only aboveground structures on the park property are an overhead powerline, gravel surface trails, and an old concrete foundation that is likely a remnant of a demolished house. The existing East Renton lift station is located in a small building surrounded by chainlink fence. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? The existing East Renton pump station would be demolished since it will no longer be needed. The building and fencing will be removed. Future use of the pump station site is unknown at this time. Page 16 ESA July 2077 0 0 SEPA E vire mmental Clmrklisl East Re nlor Lift Station Elimination e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Maplewood Park and the residential areas to the south are in unincorporated King County and are designated R-4, Residential, with a four unit per acre density. The residential areas to the north are designated R-4 by the City of Renton. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The residential areas within King County are designated Residential and Maplewood Park is designated Park. The comprehensive plan designation for the areas within the City of Renton is Residential Low -Density. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? There are no shoreline master program designations in the project area. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. The project area includes wetlands and streams. The project would cross the stream in one location and occur in wetland and stream buffer areas. See the discussion of these features in Section B3, Surface Water and in the East Renton Lift Station Wetland, Stream and Wildlife Study (ESA, 2011). The area overlies the Cedar Valley Aquifer which is designated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a "sole source" aquifer under authority of the Safe Drinking Water Act. A sole source aquifer is defined as an aquifer that supplies at least 50 percent of the drinking water to the area overlying the aquifer and in an area where physical, legal, or economic considerations limit the reliability of an alternative drinking water source (U.S. EPA, 2011). The sole source designation is intended to protect such aquifers from contamination. The primary mechanism for protection is the requirement that all proposed federal financially -assisted projects that have the potential to contaminate the aquifer be reviewed by the EPA. Proposed projects that do not have any federal funding are not required to be reviewed by EPA. This project has no federal funding. The project area is located outside the City of Renton designated aquifer protection zones. ESA Page17 Add 2011 0 SE•PA Environmental Checklist East Renton Lift Statism Elhnivation i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? No people would reside or work in the completed project. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? The project would not displace any people. k. Describe proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any. There would be no displacement; therefore, no measures are needed to reduce impacts. I. Describe proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any. The project is compatible with existing and projected land uses. It is an improvement to an existing utility system and will be located in an area currently used as a utility corridor. The corridor is located within a park, but is a buried pipeline and would not interfere with park uses. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. No housing units would be provided. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. No housing units would be eliminated. C. Describe proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any. No impacts to housing would occur; therefore, no measures are needed to reduce impacts. Page18 ESQ Alv 2011 0 0 10. aesthetics SEP.A Enr•irorinrental Checklist Lase Remora Litt Stafion Elimination a. What is the tallest height of any of the proposed structure(s), not including antennas? What is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? All of the proposed structures would be underground. The existing lift station will be removed. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? The project will affect a corridor approximately 30 feet wide within a forested section of Maplewood Park. The southern portion of the construction site will be visible from SE 138"' Place and 148"' Place SE. Approximately 100 feet of construction will occur on 148"' Place SE, between two houses in the Briar Hills Division. Residents in these areas will observe construction equipment and worker activity. The immediate construction area will be closed to recreational use for safety. However, people using trails within other nearby parts of the park will observe construction equipment and vegetation being cleared. These aesthetic changes will be largely temporary, occurring during the four -month construction period. However, a permanent 20-foot-wide easement will be maintained along the pipeline corridor through the park. This easement will be revegetated with shrubs, but due to the need to protect and maintain the pipe, trees will not be allowed to grow in this area. This may represent an aesthetic change for residents or trail users who are accustomed to seeing large trees in this area. C. Describe proposed measures to reduce aesthetic impacts, if any. Once construction is complete, disturbed areas would be revegetated per King County requirements as described in the Stream and Wethind Buffier Mitigation Plan (ESA, 2011). 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light and glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? The project would not produce any light or glare. ESA Page 19 AlY 2011 SEPA Environmental Checklist East Renton Lilt Station Elimination b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? There will be no light or glare to cause a safety hazard or interfere with views. C. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? No off -site sources of light or glare would affect the proposal d. Describe the proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any. There would be no light or glare impacts; therefore, no measures are needed to reduce impacts. 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? The project would cross Maplewood Park, an approximately 45-acre park currently owned by King County. The park is largely undeveloped with a multi -purpose court, play equipment, and picnic facilities located on the western side, approximately 1,400 feet from the project. The portion of the park where the project is located provides informal walking trails and opportunities for wildlife observation. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. The project would require temporary closure of public access to the work area, including informal foot trails. The closure would encompass a narrow corridor of the park and last for approximately four months. However, the remainder of Maplewood Park would remain open to public recreational use. C. Describe proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreational opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant. Areas of Maplewood Park that are disturbed during construction, including walking trails, would be restored and revegetated. Existing foot paths through the construction corridor would be restored following construction to allow continued recreational access through the park. Page 20 ESA July 2011 0 0 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation SEPA Environmenial ChccUist Lust Renton Lifi Anion Elimination a. Are there any places or objects listed on or eligible for national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. There are no known eligible historic or cultural resources at or within 0.5 mile of the project site. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. A background records search at the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation indicates that there are no landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific or cultural importance on or next to the site. The site has been extensively disturbed in the past with previous utility work. C. Describe proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any. No historic or cultural resources have been identified in the project area. If any historic or cultural resources are inadvertently discovered during construction, work will stop and the City will consult with the Department of Archaeology and Historic Places and affected Tribes including the Muckleshoot Tribe. 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on -site plans, if any. Maplewood Park is located in a residential area on the southeast side of the City of Renton. The Renton Maple Valley Highway (State Route 169) is located approximately 1 mile south of the park and NE 4th Street is 0.5 mile to the north. Streets accessing the park area are 144th Avenue SE on the west and 152nd Avenue SE on the east. The project area would be accessed from 148th Place SE on the south and a gravel road from NE 2nd Court on the north. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? The project area is not served by public transit. Metro buses run on the Renton Maple Valley Highway approximately 1 mile to the south. ESA Page 21 Jtely 2011 0 SEPA Environmenial CheCA-fist Fast RentonLift Station Elimination C. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? The completed project would not have any parking spaces and the project would not eliminate any existing parking spaces. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe. The project would require open trenching of 148th Place SE north of SE 138th Place. The street segment provides the only driveway access to one house. The street may not be accessible for short periods of time; however, temporary trench covering will be utilized to provide driveway access. Construction equipment would access the site from 148th Place SE and NE 2nd Court, travelling on residential streets to those access points. Approximately 140 truck trips would be required to export excavated material and bring fill material to the site. Construction staging would occur along 148th Place SE and the gravel road between NE 2nd Court and the project site. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. The project would not use or occur in the immediate vicinity of water, rail, or air transportation. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. The completed project would generate only occasional vehicular trips to inspect the pipeline. Vehicular trips to maintain the existing East Renton lift station would be eliminated. g. Describe proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any. Mitigation measures that could be implemented to minimize construction - related impacts to transportation include: Flaggers to control and coordinate traffic flow; • Signage to alert drivers to the presence of construction activities; Page. 22 ESA Ali, 2011 0 0 SEPA Emviro nitcwlal Checklist East Renton Lift Staliou Elinfinalion a Maintenance of temporary access to driveways; and • Construction workers would be requested to not park on residential streets. The project would not generate transportation impacts following construction, so no mitigation is required. 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally explain. The project would not result in an increased need for public services. b. Describe proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services. There would be no impacts on public services; therefore, no measures to reduce impacts are required. 16. Utilities a. Underline utilities currently available at the site: The project corridor includes numerous existing utilities, including underground stormwater, water, telephone, and gas lines, and an overhead utility line. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. The utility proposed is a new City of Renton gravity sewer pipeline totaling approximately 1,030 linear feet. General construction activities include clearing and grubbing of a forested area and standard open -cut trench construction in developed and undeveloped areas. Existing aboveground and underground utilities requiring relocation are anticipated to be relocated by others prior to the beginning of work. An existing Qwest telephone line (overhead and underground) and power poles would require temporary or permanent relocation. Prior to construction, all of the utilities in the project area will be located by the contractor. The contractor and City will coordinate with utility service providers to avoid impacts to existing utilities and service interruptions. ESA Page 23 Add 2011 SE;PA Environmental Checklist East Renton I if? Station Elimination C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best the lead agency is relying on them tojtake its de ;si Signature: Name (print): Title: Date Submitted: v-knowledge. I understand that f Page 24 ES.4 July 2011 SEPA EavirormentalOieckli.tit East Renton Lift Station Elimination REFERENCES Cavanaugh, W.J. and G.C. Tocci. 1998. Environmental Noise: The Invisible Pollutant. USC institute of Public Affairs. Available: littp://www.nonoise.ors� 'library/envarticleiindex.litm. Accessed January 21, 2010. FHWA (Federal Highway Administration). 2010. Construction Noise Handbook Section 9.0 Construction Equipment Noise Levels and Ranges. Available: littp://www.tli a.dot.gov/cnvironnieiit/noise/construction_ noiscihartdbook/handbook09.c fin. Accessed January 21, 2010, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2011. Sole Source Aquifer Protection Program. Available: litty://w,itei-.epa.gov/infrastructure/drinkingwater/soui-ccwaten'protectl'onisolesoui-ceaquife rxi'm. Accessed January 19, 2011. ESA Page 25 AN 2011 j, . ri� r IV T -UnInc orpoitited XJng CoUhty MA S SE I�Blh 4" L 7i:0 '-Y, A 7,15 AA7 jr, IMF Tp't A A g q 6 T--,44 Al p..J LkA *36g,t4unty r LZ Legend Project Area Roads Unincopporst4d Parks King County [nits City Li Av �x C. P J m a� ow I �Xcc I- 1o ` d Ll iw I• 1-f { x f W I 1 1 1 \ � � � I z F .'Id LASCr3g w4ziZ 0 :a] uvOdN-isvi 31V4 0 m y N LL 0 5 U o � 0 Z ieveldu4S 606.3 BWVN 3113 0 REQUEST FOR CRITICAL: AREAS EXEMPTIaN (FOR SEPA EXEMPT ACTIVITIES) City of Renton Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way -Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 Applicant Name Project Name Phone Number Renton Public Works East Renton Lift Station Elimination 425-430-7212 Parcel Number Project Address In City of Renton: 666903TRCT, 5126301030, 512630TRCT west and south of 5E 2nd Court, north of Maplewood Park. Brief Description of Project The project will convert a portion of the City of Renton sewer system from a pumped system to a gravity sewer system. This involves installation of approx. 1,030 feet of new sewer pipeline (approximately 270 feet within existing paved or gravel surfaced roads, and 760 feet within vegetated areas of Maplewood Park) and elimination of an existing lift station north of the park. The pipeline will be installed using open trenches. City of Renton jurisdiction includes the lift station and pipeline north of Maplewood Park; project elements within and south of the park are in unincorporated King Co Type of Critical Area StreamJwetland buffer ❑ Work Occurs in Critical Area ® Work Occurs in Buffer PURPOSE: Exempt activities provided with a letter of exemption from the Development Services Administrator may intrude into a critical area or required buffer (Subject to any conditions or requirements provided by the Administrator) - APPLICABILITY OF EXEMPTIONS: The following is a general list of activities that may be exempt from the critical areas regulations. More specific descriptions of the activities are contained in the Critical Areas Regulations. Some of the listed activities may not be exempt in certain critical areas. The Planning Division will evaluate you request according to the City of Renton Critical Areas Regulations in RMC 4-3- 050C, J, L, and N. I AM REQUESTING A CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION FOR ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING ACTIVITIES: ❑ Conservation, Enhancement, and Related Activities: • Conservation or preservation of soil, water, vegetation, fish, and other wildlife • Enhancement activities as defined in chapter 4-11 RMC i • Any critical area, buffer restoration, or other mitigation activities that have been approved by the City ❑ Research and Site Investigation; • Nondestructive education and research • Site investigative work necessary for land use application submittals such as surveys, soil logs, etc. ❑ Agricultural, Harvesting, and Vegetation Management: -6- 06109 inty. H:10ED1DatalForms-Templalesl5elf-Help HandoutsVPlanninglcritareasexempl.doc • Harvesting wild foods • Existing/Ongoing agricultural activities' • Removal of dead, terminally diseased, damaged, or dangerous ground cover or hazardous trees which have been certified as such by a forester, registered landscape architect, or certified arborist ❑ Surface Water Alteration: New surface water discharges provided the discharge meets the requirements of the Storm and Surface Water Drainage Regulations' 2 3 • New or modified regional stormwater facilities' 2 3 • Flood hazard reduction' 3 4 6 © Roads, Parks, Public and Private Utilities: • Relocation of Existing Utilities out of Critical Area and Buffer • Maintenance, operation, and repair of existing parks, trails, roads, facilities, and utilities' 2 • Installation, construction, replacement, or operation of utilities, traffic control, and walkways within existing improved right -if -way or easement' 2 • Modification of existing utilities and streets by 10% or less' 2 5 Management and essential tree removal for public or private utilities, roads and public parks ❑ Wetland Disturbance, Modification, and Removal: • Any activity in small Category 3 wetlands' 2 3 4 5 • Temporary disturbances of a wetland due to construction activities that do not include permanent filling' 2 3 5 ❑ Maintenance and Construction for Existing Uses and Facilities: Remodeling, replacing, or removing existing structures' 2 • Normal and routine maintenance and repair of any existing public or private uses and facilities where no alteration of the critical area and required buffer or additional fill materials will be placed ' 2 • Construction activity connected with an existing single family residence or garage, provided that no portion of the new work occurs closer to the critical area or required buffers than the existing structure' 2 • Existing activities which have not been changed, expanded or altered provided they comply with the applicable requirements of chapter 4-10 RMC' ❑ Emergency Activities: • Removal of trees or ground cover by a City department, agency, public, or private utility in an emergency situation • Public interest emergency use, storage, and handling of hazardous materials by governmental organizations in an Aquifer Protection Area ADDITIONAL PERMITS: Additional permits from other agencies may be required. It is the applicant's responsibility to obtain these other approvals. Information regarding these other requirements may be found at http://apps.ecy-wa.gov/opas/ -7- 06/09 H:%CEDIDatalForms-7emplateslSelf-Help HandoulslPlanninglcr4oreasexempt.doc I, the undersigned, declar nder pen y of per' ry'under the laws of the State of Washington, that to the best of my knowled the v i ormati s true and complete. Applicant Signature: Date: X t GC For City flee Only ❑ Exemption Granted ❑ Exemption Denied C.E. "Chip" Vincent, Planning Director Planning Division Signature; Date: Conditions of Approval: 'Exemption does not apply in Aquifer Protection Areas 2Exemption does not apply in Flood Hazard Areas 3Exemption does not apply in Geologic Hazard Areas &Exemption does not apply in Habitat Conservation Areas 5Exemption does not apply in Streams and Lakes: Class 2 to 4 6Exemption does not apply in Wetlands -B- 06/09 H:VCEDIDatalForms-Templateslself-Help HandoutsVPlanninglcritareasexempt.doc CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION DESCRIPTION afar"!I�'C? i�,rjrif)ii East Renton Lift Station Elimination City of Renton Public Works Department - Utility Systems Division October 2011 NOV 1 ;rtr �f�%� r , Proposed construction dates: _ L�J The City plans to construct the project in summer/fall of 2012 during dry conditions. Construction is expected to take approximately four months. Exact beginning and end dates have yet to be determined. Hours and days of operation: Construction activities would typically occur during weekdays between permitted construction hours of 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. and would likely only occur between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. Proposed hauling/transportation routes: Construction equipment would access the site from 148th Place SE and NE 2nd Court, travelling on residential streets to those access points. Impact minimization measures: The construction contractor will be required to use the following measures to minimize impacts to neighboring properties and natural resources during construction: Erosion Control: • As part of the project's Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESC) plan, install silt fence along the construction corridor to protect nearby wetlands from sedimentation. • Temporarily bypass the onsite stream prior to trenching the pipe across the stream or installing the temporary stream crossing for equipment. • Place straw, mulch, or commercially available erosion control blankets in areas that require additional protection. • Revegetate disturbed areas as soon as possible after completion of construction. Water Qualih% Maintain construction equipment in good working order, free of leaks of fuel, hydraulic fluids, or other chemicals. Keep fueling and equipment maintenance areas within designated staging areas and away from streams and wetlands. Page 1 of 2 Construction Mitigation - EasTRe'Won Lift Station Elimination 0 In the unlikely event that a construction accident or spill releases contaminants into waterways or the surrounding environment, BMPs (such as oil booms and adsorbent pillows) would be employed and utilized to contain and minimize the spill. Route all water from trench dewatering to the existing sanitary sewer system in accordance with permit requirements. Air Qualith: Best management practices (BMPs) would be used to minimize fugitive dust and exhaust emissions during construction, including: wetting and covering disturbed soils, • washing tires, • covering open -bodied trucks, and • shutting off idling equipment. Noise: * Construction activities would typically occur during weekdays between permitted construction hours, 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. and would likely only occur between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. • Modern construction equipment would be used to minimize noise. • Noisy portable equipment would be located as far away from sensitive receptors as practical and would be muffled. Utilities: • Prior to construction, all of the utilities in the project area will be located by the contractor. • The contractor and City will coordinate with utility service providers to avoid impacts to existing utilities and service interruptions. Special construction or hauling hours: None anticipated. Preliminary traffic control plan: The following measures would be implemented to minimize construction impacts to transportation: r Flaggers to control and coordinate traffic flow; • Signage to alert drivers to the presence of construction activities; + Maintenance of temporary access to driveways; and • Construction workers would be requested to not park on residential streets. Page 2 of 2 PROJECT NARRATIVE 'fcrr3 East Renton Lift Station Elimination City of Renton Public Worms Department - Utility Systems Divisio*?/Z,-- ., October 2011 Site Location, Use, and Zoning The East Renton Lift Station Elimination project is located within and adjacent to Maplewood Park in the city of Renton and unincorporated King County, Washington. The project includes (1) removal of an existing City of Renton lift station located west of SE 2nd Court, and (2) installation of a new sewer pipeline extending west and south from the lift station location, through Maplewood Park and ending within 148th Place SE. Most of the project site is within an undeveloped section of King County's Maplewood Park. The northern end of the proposed sewer pipeline corridor is located along an existing gravel road near the Parkside Court residential neighborhood. The southern end of the project is located in the Briar Hills Division No. 4 residential neighborhood along SE 138th Place and 148th Place SE. The only aboveground structures on the park property are an overhead powerline, gravel surface trails, and an old concrete foundation that is likely a remnant of a demolished house. The existing East Renton lift station is located in a small building surrounded by chainlink fence. The portion of the project north of Maplewood Park is within city limits and zoned R-4 by the City of Renton. Maplewood Park and the residential areas to the south are in unincorporated King County and are zoned R-4, Residential. The total area of clearing and grading is 0.72 acre. The entire construction site, including staging areas, is 1.2 acres. Permit Requirements Permits required for the project include the following: City of Renton • SEPA Review (City of Renton) • Construction Permit (City of Renton) • Critical Areas Exemption (City of Renton) King Coun y • Critical Areas Review (King County) * Clearing and Grading Permit (King County) • Right-of-way Permit (King County) Page 1 of 4 9 Stare and Federal • Hydraulic Project Approval (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife) Section 404 Permit (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) * Section 401 Water Quality Certification (Washington Department of Ecology) • Coastal Zone Management Certification (Washington Department of Ecology) Soils and Drainage Conditions The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) maps soils in the project area as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes. Geotechnical investigations found the topsoil onsite to consist of silty fine sand and sandy silt with a high organic content. Below the topsoil, loose to medium dense silty sand with gravel is present over deep glacial till. A surface layer of gravel fill approximately one foot deep is present in portions of the site where a foot path was constructed at some time in the past (HWA, 2011). The project would create approximately 3 square feet of new impervious surface (for access manholes). Existing asphalt and gravel surfaces will remain north and south of the park (gravel access road and 148th Place SE, respectively). The forested area within Maplewood Park is currently pervious soil and will be restored to this condition following construction. Proposed Use and Project Scope The proposed scope is to demolish the existing East Renton Lift Station and replace it with a gravity sewer pipeline. The lift station serves to pump sewage from nearby residential neighborhoods (Maplewood Estates, Parkside Court, Shy Creek, Liberty Ridge, and others for a service area of approximately 430 acres) to the gravity sewer system located near N.E. 4th Street, The City of Renton prefers to serve customers via a gravity sewer pipeline, rather than a lift station whenever feasible. A gravity system eliminates electricity costs for pumping and equipment maintenance, which greatly reduces annual Operation and Maintenance (O&M) costs. Based on survey data, conversion to a gravity system is possible at this location by installing a new pipeline crossing through an undeveloped portion of Maplewood Park and connecting to the Briar Hills Division No. 4 sewer system to the south. Current and future use of the site will remain the same. The new sewer pipeline will consist of approximately 1,030 linear feet of 12-inch- diameter and 15-inch-diameter pipe. The new pipe will be installed using open trenches. Trench excavations ranging from 3 to 10 feet deep would be required to maintain the desired gradient along the alignment. In addition, the existing lift station structure will be demolished. Page 2 of 4 9 0 Site Access Construction equipment would access the site from 148th Place SE and NE 2nd Court. travelling on residential streets to those access points. Following construction, the pipeline would be accessed from the manholes at the north and south ends of the park - property for maintenance. Fair Market Value The fair market value of the project is estimated at $480,000. Earthmoving Quantities Approximately 1,375 cubic yards (CY) of material would be excavated from the trench. Approximately 760 CY of fill would be imported to the site for trench backfill material. An additional approximately 24 CY of concrete and sand would be imported and used to fill an existing sewer pipe to be abandoned south of the lift station, and to fill two manholes in this same area to provide the correct grade for the new pipeline. Small amounts of asphalt and gravel would be needed to repair the surface of the gravel access road north of the park and the surface of 1.48ti, Place SE following construction. Fill material would be obtained from an approved location. Approximately 600 CY of unusable excavated material would be exported from the site. Tree Removal Thirty-one coniferous and deciduous trees measuring up to 26 inches diameter at breast height (dbh) would be removed from the construction corridor within Maplewood Park (King County). No trees would be removed with City of Renton jurisdiction. Land Dedication No land would be dedicated to the City as part of this project. The new sewer pipeline would be located within public street rights -of -way and utility easements. Temporary Construction Structures The need for a construction trailer or job shack will be determined by the construction contractor, but is unlikely to be necessary due to the short construction period (four months). Streams and Wetlands Seven palustrine forested wetlands and two streams were identified within the project area; all are located in Maplewood Park. These resources are described in the critical areas report prepared for the project (ESA Adolfson, 2011). The main stream channel, known as Stewart Creek, enters the northern end of the study area via a plastic culvert, Page 3 of 4 and exits the southern end of the study area via a grated concrete culvert. The stream enters the storm drain system south of Maplewood Park and daylights approximately 0.3 mile south of the park. Stewart Creek joins the Cedar River approximately 0.75 mile south of the park. Installation of the sewer pipeline will require one crossing of Stewart Creek within unincorporated King County. Work will occur in upland areas within 10 to 20 feet of two wetlands; the other five onsite wetlands are at least 30 feet from the construction corridor. The project corridor will cross the upland buffer areas of Stewart Creek and wetland buffers. Proposed Modifications The City of Renton Public Works Department - Utility Systems Division is requesting a Critical Areas Exemption for the project for proposed work within the buffer of Stewart Creek and wetlands. While the stream and all of the wetlands are located in King County, the County -required buffers extend north of the park into city limits. The construction work proposed in the city would occur within an existing gravel - surfaced access road and the gravel area around the existing lift station. Even though a portion of this area falls within the King County designated stream and wetland buffer widths, these areas are unvegetated and provide essentially no buffer functions (such as wildlife habitat or water quality improvement) for the stream and wetlands to the south. Erosion control measures would be used to ensure that construction activities do not result in runoff or sedimentation that could impact streams or wetlands. Following installation of the sewer pipe, the gravel areas would be restored to pre -construction conditions. Proposed Off -site Improvements There are no off -site improvements proposed as part of this project. Page 4 of 4 Printed: 1 1-15-20 1 1 CITY OF RENTON 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Land Use Actions RECEIPT Permit#: LUA11-092 Payment Made: 11/15/2011 02:23 PM Total Payment: 1,030.00 WORKS Current Payment Made to the Following Items: � rSif�r1 Nlt 16 z11rf Receipt Number: R1104611 Payee: INTERFUND TRANSFER FROM PUBLIC Trans Account Code Description Amount ------ 3080 ------------------ 503.000000.004.322 ------------------------------ Technology Fee ----_--___-_--_--_-- 30.00 5010 000.000000.007.345 Environmental Review 1,000.00 Payments made for this receipt Trans Method Description Amount ---------- -------- --------------------------- --------------- Payment TOT PW 1,030.00 Account Balances Trans Account Code Description 3021 303.000000.020.345 Park Mitigation Fee 3080 503.000000.004.322 Technology Fee 3954 650.000000.000.237 Special Deposits 5006 000.000000.007.345 Annexation Fees 5007 000.000000.011.345 Appeals/Waivers 5008 000.000000.007.345 Binding Site/Short Plat 5009 000.000000.007.345 Conditional Use Fees 5010 000.000000.007.345 Environmental Review 5011 000.000000.007.345 Prelim/Tentative Plat 5012 000.000000.007.345 Final Plat 5013 000.000000.007.345 PUD 5014 000.000000.007.345 Grading & Filling Fees 5015 000.000000.007.345 Lot Line Adjustment 5016 000.000000.007,345 Mobile Home Parks 5017 000.000000.007.345 Rezone 5018 000.000000.007.345 Routine Vegetation Mgmt 5019 000.000000.007.345 Shoreline Subst Dev 5020 000.000000.007.345 Site Plan Approval 5021 000.000000.007,345 Temp Use, Hobbyk, Fence 5022 000.000000.007.345 Variance Fees 5024 000.000000.007.345 Conditional Approval Fee 5036 000.000000.007.345 Comprehensive Plan Amend 5909 000.000000.002.341 Booklets/EIS/Copies 5941 000.000000.007.341 Maps (Taxable) 5998 000.000000.000.231 Tax Balance Due .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 Remaining Balance Due: $0.00 1 D *NANCE AND INFORMATION SIR I .�V (.FS �- + DEPARTMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: TO: Sue Olson, Finance & Information Services Department FROM: SUBJECT: Re: INTERFUND TRANSFER REQUEST Instructions: Please note that failure to provide all digits will result in processing delays. All Signatures and correct documentation must be included. Please prepare the following inter -fund transfer: Department Charted: Account Number Project, function, task, sub -task Description Amount c L"4 j' Total APPROVAL SIGNATURE: Printed Name CREDIT: Date /%116 lz_4�i Account Number Project, function, task, sub -task Description Amount F , �Sf 134-9 n 7000, Total(030,00 Reason: Note_ .Documentation to support this transfer request must be attached and all signatures are required. Cash Transfer FomJFinance/bh Revised 01109