Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA E2000-029 - CITY OF TUKWILA / PUBLIC WORKS - 180TH GRADE SEPARATIONPUBLIC WORKS GRADE SEPARATION BETWEEN VEHICULAR & RAILROAD TRAFFIC SOUTH 180T" STREET (SW 43RD STREET) E2000 -029 WASHINGTON PLANNING SERVICES FredN:atterstrom AICP . Manager `. Mailing Address 220. Fou rth `Ave. ,. Kent, WA 98032- 5895: ~j Location Address 400 West Gowe Kent,,WA 98032 Phone: 253- 856 -5454 Fax 253 -856 - 6454.: February 16, 2001 Mr. Gary Phillips Berger /Abam Engineers Inc. 33301 Ninth Avenue South, Suite 300 Federal Way, WA 98003 -2250 RE: SOUTH 180TH STREET GRADE SEPARATION IMPACTS TO SPRINGBROOK CREEK 17c E NE � FEB 20 201 TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS Dear Mr. Phillips: I have reviewed your letter dated January 3, 2001 wherein you describe impacts within the required buffer to Springbrook Creek. Springbrook Creek is mapped as a major creek upon the City of Kent Hazard Area Development Limitations map. As a major creek, setbacks are governed by Section 15.08.224(A)(4)(e) of the Kent City Code which identifies a 50 —foot required setback. The impacts you describe are associated with the City of Tukwila grade separation project and the subsequent need to relocate the driveway to the commercial Public Storage facility in Kent. The driveway will be permanently relocated within 40 — feet of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) of Springbrook Creek; however, construction impacts will occur to within 20 —feet of the OHWM. Your letter also included detailed stream and wetland studies, a buffer mitigation planting plan and identified an 8 —acre undeveloped parcel for future open space dedication to the City of Kent. The Kent City Code Section15.08.230(E)(3) affords the Planning Manager authority to waive specific requirements or impose additional requirements within hazard areas in unique or special circumstances. In this case, the grade separation project would be considered a "unique site use" (KCC 15.08.230(E)(3)(d)). Findings \Conclusions 1. Due to the finished grade of the undercrossing, the access to the Public Storage facility must be relocated. 2. The reduced setback to Springbrook Creek was identified in the SEPA Checklist and analyzed by the Lead Agency. The City of Kent was afforded the opportunity to provide comment on this application. 3. The applicant proposes to provide mitigation planting and proposes a future open space dedication to the City of Kent. The buffer will be enhanced to provide shading to the stream and native habitat. The buffer should be planted during the appropriate season and should be maintained and monitored to ensure adequate plant survival. 4. Blackberry, Scot's Broom and Reed Canary Grass dominate the existing vegetation. These weeds should be eradicated prior to revegetating the site Mr. Gary Phillips Page 2 February 16, 2001 5. Some erosion may occur during construction, Best Management Practices should be in place to reduce impacts to the stream system during construction. 6. A City of Kent Civil Construction permit is required for this work. Decision Based upon the above Findings and Conclusions, I hereby APPROVE this request to reduce the setback along this portion of Springbrook Creek to 40 —feet as allowed under Section 15.08.230(E)(3) of the Kent City Code, with the following conditions: 1. A City of Kent Construction permit shall be applied for and obtained prior to any work within the stream buffer area. The application shall include a formal submittal of the stream mitigation \buffer enhancement plan. 2. Appropriate erosion control measures shall be in place to prevent sediment from entering the stream. 3. Existing weeds shall be removed from the buffer area and the buffer shall be planted with an appropriate mix of native trees and shrubs. 4. The mitigation to reduction ratio shall be no less than 3:1. 5. Buffer mitigation planting shall occur at an appropriate time of year to reduce impacts sediment transport into the creek and minimize impacts to fish. 6. The buffer area shall be maintained for a period of no less than 3 years. 7. This project shall adhere to all other provisions of the Kent City Code. Dated this 16th day of February 2001. Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Planning Manager KM \cb \S:\Permit\Plan \GC\2001 \ 180th grade.doc cc: Steve Mullen, Transportation Engineering Manager Bill Wolinski, Environmental Engineering Manager Kelly Peterson, Wellhead Protection Engineer Kim Marousek, Senior Planner Robin Tischmak, PE, City of Tukwila Public Works Department 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 File • \AAP Itsani9 c•-1\--0 aN01.1 00C) 0002u7 • sdpui %ift 61-1 ° a-A-D 5 17 Aft ia ki-NcY? S ip s 1-, -D. \AI (-1551) CI \A \Ang0 c6.1 F-9 _A CA-Aff) F-a,A Too Cl SrAdv-01 axds ■Aracio xa1+0 vrt■ri ra7 -Dci rn oA yff,- — 91, A oy ..\,971.v+ \\ 0 '-d■.1.1- -1-194+ Li (-z) • \Ai )1- s - - O - A Q J J A S 1 , ClCI:disZI-GL‘lid 5 j--.0 A-o ST-1--‘"r4 J-0 014+ Siorn z Inr) :v1(aA"A(•?-- ‘n120_A ad5 rfl -12 40k-4 s■ ts -1---w?-1 9. -A di+-?.1 F-akr41-1:19 -Pkft krait %,\Ai 9 os al s9ns51 X-\ff- \-4Q - d-4(31 'P`l± k/Wr9 o-..)Tt-poOD \A"P901 -?A)2U1 ?cy) ,D? ■ 1,„„0 LArdCk ,1 s(9? LA ‘4\1-1-.1:01 \-A ti (-z 1‘.s,117` lywen Stii--Vc2A Vk 1 c I 5 )19Q-1-P rl?ny c)6,1 95 7 1.19 (Id S-c-N.5•5 1. ( 11)9a) pAV a — 3A-9J-9 Kent Bicycle Advisory Board 220 4`h Ave. S. Kent, Washington 98032 January 30, 2001 Steve Lancaster, Director Deborah Ritter, Planner Department of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 -2599 Robin Tischmak, P.E. Senior Transportation Engineer Public Works Department City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 -2599 Subject: South 180th Street Grade Separation Project The South 180th Street Grade Separation Project (the Project) will solve the conflict between vehicle traffic on S. 180t and rail traffic on the BNSF and UP Railroads. The Project, when completed, will provide unobstructed pedestrian and bicycle use North and. South bound on the Interurban Trail via the new Interurban Trail bridge. The Kent Bicycle "Advisory Board (KBAB) reviewed a packet of data provided by the Project Planner. This packet of data consisted of a Vicinity Map, a Plan view, a Profile View, and Figures 1.1, 13 through 20, 23,:25.'k 27 from the detailed plans (with a date Received of Nov 06,•2000 by: Community .. Development).'' The following are concerns that we agreed should be conveyed to you. 1. On the "Typical Roadway Sections" on Figure 11 of the Plans, the outer lanes are identified as 15' wide combined vehicle "lane/bicycle lane ". The preferred and safer option on S. 180th Street is to have dedicated 5' bicycle lanes which are delineated by striping, bicycle only icons and contain restricted use diamonds. 2. There is a 10' sidewalk connection to the Interurban trail shown on Figure 11, Roadway Section 52 +50 to 55 +50. The 10' width is reduced by the handrail /fence on the street side and the curb on -the south side. This effectively reduces the width to about 8'. A width of 12' would be safer, particularly for meeting cycles. In addition, the sidewalk connection to the Interurban trail and the underpass sidewalk needs to provide a large enough radius for the cycle traffic to successfully do the U -turn from west bound to east bound (or vice versa). We have a couple members of KBAB that would like to see sidewalk connections to the Interurban trail on both the North and South side of S. 1801h. 3. The ends of the safety rails on the Interurban Trail bridge need to tie into the chain link fence and handrail on the top of the retaining walls above S. 180th. 4. The catch basin grates in the Project need to be bicycle friendly (the slots run perpendicular to the -`'lanes and not parallel to the lanes). The catch basin. grate the_pages that were :` reviewed: . •, , 5: •If separate bieycle'traffic signal actuators are not 'provided, then the vehicle traffic signal actuators need to be able to respond to bicycles for the following actions: A. North bound on the inside lane on 72nd Ave. S. and turning left onto west bound 180`h , . . RECEIVED FEB 14 2001 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT • B. West bound on the inside left turn lane on 180th S. and turning left on to south bound 72 "d Ave. S., C. East or West bound in the outside lane of 180th S. and continuing straight through. 6. The Interurban Trail currently provides an energy efficient (short) route to many places in the valley. If the trail is totally blocked during construction and short detour(s) is (are) not available, the bicycle commuters will be really upset. The ability to commute East -West by bicycle would be hampered by all of the following: A. The probable closure of S. 180th to East -West bicycle traffic. The nearest East -West routes over the railroad are listed in item B and C. These routes have problems. B. The Tukwila Train Station construction appears to have the Longacres railroad underpass blocked to bicycle traffic that would like to go East -West to /from S. Renton. C. The new S 196th Street bridge does provide a way over the railroad but forces the rider to go clear to East Valley (84th) to go North -South because of the Metro Sewer construction (south of S. 180th) has 80th Ave. S. blocked to north south traffic. This blockage makes using the new 196th bridge a very time consuming detour for a bicycle commuter. D. If construction on S. 180th closes the north -south Interurban trail to bicycle traffic, then riders may try to use West Valley north bound from S. 180. Using West Valley Highway would not make a safe detour to get to get back on the Interurban Trail at Strander Blvd: The next detour choice is to go west on S. 180, cross the Green River and pick up the trail on the west side of the Green River. Note: It looks like it would be possible to create a north -south Interurban trail detour b' leaving the Interurban trail and going west on S. 181, then north on 72nd Ave. S, across S. 180 , east on. the sidewalk to the north bound driveway into the electrical substation, go east to the Interurban on a "new piece of trail" that runs east -west behind (north of the) two buildings (the former candle shop and the former water bottling plant). 7. Detour routes should be clearly signed at a point where bicycle riders need to choose an alternate route. 8. Kent is in the process of implementing a revision to its Engineering Standards for driveway entrances, and pedestrian curb cuts. This standard would have the "lip" along the curb line in the driveway entrances and curb cuts be 0 to ?-b inch high (formerly'/ to 1 inch high). This provides a smoother; less hazardous path for non-motorized traffic. We appreciate the opportunity to review the Project and provide the City of Tukwila with our suggestions. aty4alhak-LbL Steve Babbitt Chairman City of Kent Bicycle Advisory Board CC: Steve Mullen, City of Kent Engineering Jim Storment, City of Kent Engineering Pete Maas, RTNAC Chairman, 18249 SE 147'' Place. Renton, WA 98059 -8043 • City of °71°rul,4 Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Comm i nity Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMORANDUM To: Steve Lancaster From: Deborah Ritter Date: January 24, 2001 Re: E2000 -029 (SEPA Determination) S. 180th Grade Separation Project Description: This SEPA review is for the reconstruction of 1,660 linear feet of South 180th Street to provide a grade separation between vehicular traffic and railroad traffic. A permanent underpass (for vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians) will be located beneath the existing rail lines, providing for public safety while facilitating improved traffic flow on this high use arterial. The grade separation is to be located at the intersection of South 180th (S.W. 43rd St.) and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe ( "BNSF ") Railroad and the Union Pacific ( "UPRR ") Railroad. This proposed grade separation is to be located near the north boundary of Kent, the southwest corner of Renton and the southeast corner of Tukwila. The proposed roadway (with five lanes, bicycle route, curbs, gutters and sidewalks) will pass under the existing railroad tracks. Bridges will be constructed for the BNSF (3 tracks), UPRR (1 track) and the Interurban Trail to pass over South 180th along the current alignments. Railroad tracks will be detoured during construction. Comment Letters: L On December 11, 2000, we received a comment letter from Renton's Non - Motorized Transportation Advisory Committee ( "RNTAC "). Several of RNTAC's recommendations regarding bicycle - friendly design elements have already been incorporated into the design. RNTAC's remaining recommendations would require a higher bikeway classification (i.e., similar to a Class III), not currently contemplated in the coordinated design efforts of Tukwila and Renton. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 0 Tukwila, Washington 98188 0 Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 0 Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 E2000 -029 S. 180th Grade Separation January 24, 2001 Page 2 We also received a comment letter on December 11th from Public Storage, Inc. (located on the south side of South 180th in Kent). Their concerns focused on access to the facility and the visibility of their signage. During a subsequent meeting with Public Storage, access and on -site maneuverability needs were resolved. Signage issues will be directed to the City of Kent as they are outside the scope of a SEPA Determination. Agencies with Jurisdiction: City of Renton, City of Kent. Summary of Primary Impacts: • Earth The existing site topography is relatively flat. The top 11 to 17 feet of the soil layer is comprised of silty to gravelly fill with another 5 to 17 feet of clayey to silty organic soils below. Approximately 45,000 cubic yards of material will be excavated for the grade separation. Approximately 80,000 cubic yards of native material will be mixed with concrete to form the roadway seal. About 22,000 cubic yards of gravel fill will be used for the railroad temporary detour tracks. Of this amount, 11,000 cubic yards will come from excavated roadway fill and 11,000 cubic yards will be imported. An erosion control plan will be employed during construction. • Air Dust and exhaust emissions will be generated during construction, with watering as necessary to control dust. • Water There are two streams within the vicinity of the proposed project (Mill Creek and Springbrook Creek). Mill Creek flows in a northerly direction through Kent. It then continues northeasterly under the BNSF railroad bridge to a confluence with Springbrook Creek. Springbrook Creek continues its northerly flow for approximately 10 miles before entering the Black River Channel, a tributary to the Green River. E2000 -029 S. 180th Grade Separation January 24, 2001 Page 3 Minor widening of South 180th, grading, roadway reconstruction, creation of a detention pond and a storm drainage outfall are proposed within 200 feet of Springbrook Creek. The City of Renton will require a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit in connection with this work. A temporary widening of the BNSF railroad bridge over Mill Creek must be performed to facilitate completion of the temporary rail line detours. This work will require a Hydraulic Permit Approval from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. A stream buffer enhancement plan will be required for the City of Kent. There are also six wetlands within the project vicinity, described as follows: Wetland A This Type 1 wetland, over one acre in size, is located in the City of Tukwila on the north side of South 180th within a swale running north - south between the BNSF and UPRR rights -of -way. It is to the east of, and parallel to, Wetland B. Wetland B This Type 1 wetland, over one acre in size, is located in Tukwila on the north side of South 180th Street within a swale running north -south along the west side of the UPRR right -of -way. It is to the west of, and parallel to, Wetland A. Wetland C This Category 3 wetland, approximately one acre in size, is located in the City of Kent on the south side of South 180th Street within a depression that runs north -south between the BNSF and UPRR rights -of -way. It is to the south of Wetlands A and B. Wetland D This Type 2 wetland, over one acre in size, is located in Tukwila on the north side of South 180th Street and to the west of the project limits. It is located to the west of Wetland B, within a wide swale running north -south between the Interurban Trail and the commercial - industrial properties. E2000 -029 S. 180th Grade Separation January 24, 2001 Page 4 Herrera Wetland A This Category 2 wetland, approximately 5 aces in size, is located in Renton in the western side of the parcel located east of the BNSF and north of South 180th. Herrera Wetland B This Category 2 wetland, approximately one - quarter of an acre in size, is located in Renton in the southwest corner of the parcel located east of the BNSF and north of South 180th. The development of three temporary detours for the BNSF and UPRR tracks will necessitate the filling of 1.11 acres of wetland (Wetlands A and C) and 0.9 acres of the buffer of Wetland A. Impacts to Wetlands B, D, Herrera A and Herrera B and their associated wetland buffers will be entirely avoided. Mitigation measures will rely on wetland creation along with buffer enhancement as compensation for impacts to Wetlands A and C. Under Tukwila's Sensitive Areas Ordinance, the wetland replacement ratio is 1.5 to 1, with a minimum of 1.67 acres of wetland replacement required. The proposed wetland mitigation is expected to occur in Herrera A and its associated buffer. However, Wetlands A and C will not be disturbed until such time as a detailed mitigation plan for the Herrera A site has been approved by the Cities of Tukwila and Renton. The grade separation will also require the realignment of a pipeline by Olympic Pipe Line ( "OPL ") under a Franchise Agreement with the City of Tukwila dated October 4, 1967. The realignment will require work within the 100 foot wetland buffer of Wetland D, referenced above. Per WAC 197 -11- 800(3) a SEPA exemption is provided for the repair, remodeling, maintenance and minor alteration of existing private or public structures, facilities or equipment, including utilities. For purposes of that section, the wetland buffer is not considered to be "lands covered by water ". OPL was granted a SEPA exemption by the City of Tukwila on November 21, 2000. However, under Tukwila's Sensitive Areas Ordinance disturbances to the wetland buffer must be minimized and after completion of installation of essential utilities, must be restored to pre - project configuration, replanted as required and provided with maintenance care until newly planted vegetation is established. The project requires surface water treatment which has been approved by the Tukwila Public Works Department, Washington State Department of E2000 -029 S. 180th Grade Separation January 24, 2001 Page 5 Transportation, U.S. Fish & Wildlife and National Marine Fisheries Service. It has been designed to King County Surface Water Design Manual standards. Stormwater runoff will be collected by catch basins at the gutter on both sides of the roadway. A 12 -inch mainline will convey the flow through an underground pump station to a new stormwater facility (located 50 feet north of South 180th Street and east of the tracks) for water quality and water quantity control. Discharges from the new stormwater facility will be discharged into a detention pond consisting of two cells separated by a berm, then to Springbrook Creek. An emergency overflow was provided in the detention pond to discharge 100 - year flow for developed conditions. At project completion, approximately 100% of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces. • Plants Site vegetation consists of grasses, weeds, shrubs, blackberry bushes and scattered trees. Plants associated with wet soil or wetlands are present, including reed canary grass, red osier dogwood and willow. A Biological Assessment performed by the City of Tukwila determined that two listed plant species have the potential to occur at the site (Swamp Sandwort and Golden Indian Paintbrush). These plants received a "no effect" determination which has received Washington State Department of Transportation, National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S. Fish & Wildlife concurrence. • Animals • A Biological Assessment performed by the City of Tukwila determined that three listed animal species have the potential to occur at the site (bald eagle, bull trout and chinook salmon). All animal species received a "may affect, but not likely to adversely affect" determination. This determination has received Washington State Department of Transportation, National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S. Fish & Wildlife concurrence. Energy /Natural Resources Electrical, for street lighting and stormwater pumps. Environmental Health Noise generated by heavy equipment will occur during construction. The hours of construction will comply with the City's noise ordinance. E2000 -029 S. 180th Grade Separation January 24, 2001 Page 6 • Land /Shoreline Use • The project is comprised of a four -lane principal arterial (South 180th) which runs east -west across the southern portion of Tukwila and continues eastward into Renton. This arterial also borders the northern city limits of Kent. There is no underlying zone district for 180th Street as it is a right -of -way. Properties located north of 180th and west of the railroad tracks are located in Tukwila and are zoned Commercial /Light Industrial ( "C /LI "). Those properties located to the east of the railroad tracks and north of South 180th are in the City of Renton and are zoned "Employment Area Valley ". Properties to the south of South 180th are located in the City of Kent and are zoned "Industrial ". Housing N/A Aesthetics N/A Light and Glare Street lights will be installed along the corridor of the grade separation. Recreation A detour route will be provided and signed for the Interurban Trail during the duration of construction. Trail traffic will be separated from vehicular traffic via a trail bridge. • Historic and Cultural Preservation As noted in the attached memo dated January 24, 2001, the City of Tukwila has retained Jones & Stokes to conduct a National Register Eligibility Analysis on a property located at 7210 South 180th. There is no clear indication at this time as to whether the property has historical significance. The Washington State Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation ( "OAHP ") is being supplied with the necessary information to make an eligibility determination. If OAHP determines that the property is eligible, revisions will be made to the proposal. E2000 -029 S. 180th Grade Separation January 24, 2001 Page 7 • • • Transportation This project will not generate additional trips. It will enhance mobility and safety for existing vehicular and rail traffic by eliminating the at -grade intersection of vehicular and pedestrian traffic with train traffic. During construction the road will be closed to through traffic at the east and west approaches with the railroad to facilitate construction and to minimize the length of the construction period. During the road closure, detours will be marked. Heading westbound from Renton, the primary detour route will be south on 80th Street South to South 196th, then west on South 196th to West Valley Highway, then north on West Valley to South 180th. Traffic heading eastbound or southbound from Tukwila will travel the same detour (in reverse). Northbound traffic on West Valley Highway approaching South 180th will be detoured via West Valley Highway to eastbound Grady Way and then southbound on Lind Avenue South back to South 180th Street. Two supplemental, signed routes will be provided as advised routes to guide motorists around the general construction zone. These two routes will guide westbound traffic on South 180th in a northerly direction, using East Valley Road and Lind Avenue S.W. Traffic is then routed in a westerly direction using S.W. 16th Street and Grady Way. These two supplemental routes are then combined into one as traffic moves southbound along West Valley Highway. The primary and supplemental detour routes will be in place for 9 to 12 months while the road is closed for construction (approximately May 2001 to May 2002). Signage will be provided indicating that businesses along South 180th are open for business and are accessible to the public. • Public Services The final project will improve emergency responses by eliminating the at -grade crossing with the railroad tracks. However, during construction, emergency services will be rerouted. Fire, police and other emergency services have been notified and a plan will be implemented to meet the response time requirements. • Utilities No additional utilities are proposed. • E2000 -029 S. 180th Grade Separation January 24, 2001 Page 8 Recommendation: Determination of Non - Significance. • • • INTEROFFICE MEMO TO: Steve Lancaster, DCD Director FROM: I awes Morrow, Public Works Director DATE: January 24, 2001 SUBJECT: Status of Property at 7210 S 180th St This is to inform you of the status of the property located at 7210 S 180th St that is included in the S 180th St Grade Separation Project. There has been an inquiry as to if this Victorian style house, that is currently unoccupied, has any historical significance. To respond to this inquiry, we have hired Jones and Stokes Associates Inc, a consulting firm, to conduct a National Register Eligibility Analysis. Jones and Stokes will visit the site to do an architectural analysis and photograph the property to determine it's historical significance. They will also conduct a title search, research the King County Historical Society records and interview the current owner to determine the history of the property and whether there have been any alterations. Jones and Stokes will supply a report with the appropriate information to make a determination if the property is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. The WA State OAHP will then make a final eligibility determination. The City will proceed with what may be required based on OAHP's decision. JM:gi p:projects /87rw09/historical memo to dcd • • CITY OF TUKWILA DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (DNS) DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: RECONSTRUCTION OF 1660 LINEAR FEET OF S. 180TH STREET TO PROVIDE A GRADE SEPARATION BETWEEN VEHICULAR AND RAILROAD TRAFFIC. A PERMANENT UNDERPASS (FOR VEHICLES. BICYCLES-AND _- ,,PEDESTRIANS) WILL BE LOCATED BENEATH THE:EXISTING RAIL.:yLINES. THE GRADE SEPARATION-IS TO BE LOCATED AT THE;:, INTERSECTION OF S. 180TH THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD AND THE UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD PROPONENT: TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT LOCATION OF,' PROPOSAL,- INCLUDING'STREET ADDRESS-?:-, ADDRESS:, . PARCEL�'�NO:' SEC /TWN /RNG: NW 36 23N 4t LEAD AGENCY: CITY OF TUKWILA:� ;.; FILE NO: E2006- 029,: The City has determined that the uroposal,.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) This decision was made rafter r evi ew of a completed environmental' nv i^onmenta T' checklist and other information on.file` with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request .r -:�' **********`}******* : * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **' * * * * * *` *_*.* * * * * ** *. * *_ * *: * * *4(** * * * * * * ** This determination is final and sia`ned;th'is, dl ,day of 92, 200,1 . Steve Lancaster,- Res ponsible Officia'' City of Tukwila, (206) 431-3670 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Copies of the procedures for SEPA appeals are available with the Department of Community Development. 0 3 �o NI N D N < m 0 V L 3 148 St < '0 " S 150 St S 152 St S D S 149 St < 147 St A "D Ci TI\ Q (0 O m 1 3 1 0 to z <+ h 0 C y W c 4' \ > c �t 'Pc, e er C S 149 • St ) S 151 St N m ti ��— S152 St N 1`\ 0 o �5 S 153 St 153 St " M R °ad \ C2 S12 < as ON N A D r`o y S 15_ 6 St SO4�hc Ph I Ph SR 4 p5 v� 8,`^ A c �p � y� \ I I ro t11 C 0 o 3 0 T4kwiln 7� Parkway n j S 1 1:41 58 A Q IH v m h N 7 3 til to !60 S o Fi 0 N �, a 1111 D D D r0 el i < oPc> S 164 St 1 �-L 4 a Strnnder Blvd 4 1 T y o .+ n 3 � r' — y c.) D m N to A I Treck Dr / 3 • to 1 v Corporate a c A Q° PROJECT rt z w Drive N o Corporate o 0 LOCATION I Drive S Upland Drive A xi 3 D a. O D� O Minkler Blvd L o 1 Private -a 3IAN h y P N< r n 9 ,-p .'O O f7 NT$ r• I Private z ' 0 T j r ri � p N in .+ e+ S 1 m h T 3 w o St I S 180 St w 43 St Segale Pk Dr __ Milr O Dr a D f . odd D JRiverside V 4 Pn . , >- "�� City o f Tukwila �' !i = S 180 Street Grade Separation k 9%.► Department of Public Works 2/8/00 Vicinity Map State of Washington County of King City of Tukwila CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E -mail: tukplan(ii1ci.tukwila.wa.us AFFIDAVIT OF INSTALLATION AND POSTING OF PUBLIC INFORMATION SIGN(S) I posit-) Ti Sc-14 MF\ K (PRINT NAME) understand that Section 18.104.110 of the Tukwila Municipal Code requires me to post the property no later than fourteen (14) days following the issuance of the Notice of Completeness. I certify that on 1 " 2.`1 ` CD 1 the Public Notice Board(s) in accordance with Section 18.104.110 and the other applicable guidelines were posted on the property located at V g0 +4\' S\ so as to be clearly seen from each right -of -way primary vehicular access to the property for application file number E woo - 0,D9. I herewith authorize the City of Tukwila or its representative to remove and immediately dispose of the sign at the property owner's expense, if not removed in a timely manner or within fourteen (14) days of a Notice letter. Applicant or Project Manager's Signature On this day personally appeared before me kiwi //SC`trna'/. _ to me known to bathe individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged thaei /she signed the same er voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned therein. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this /_ day of NOTA PUBLIC }n and`for the State o Washington My commission expires on 571 residing at Jack Pace - 180th Grade Separation _ Page 1 From: Gary Schulz To: Steve Lancaster Date: 1/23/01 9:52AM Subject: 180th Grade Separation Hi Steve, I know this project is on the hotplate so I will give my comments here. The requested work regarding demonstrating wetland mitigation can be accomplished on the Renton is conceptual but has calculated areas. We are showing 1.5 to 1.0 replacment of wetland and it appears to be feasible. However, there will not be a full standard buffer of 50 feet. I'm ok with this because there is no standard buffer for the existing wetland areas. The mitigation site makes sense as it incorporates the expansion of wetland and will utilize existing wetland hydrology. also, storage function will be replaced in the same area it is being removed. The City of Renton has indicated in writing that they will allow wetland and buffer mitigation on the site. also a stormwater facility is needed in the same area. We do not have a formal agreement yet to my knowledge but it appears to be forthcoming. The potential snag for the project could be other agency review - I think the BA has been approved but mitigation ratios vary and I don't think we can know for certain. Let me know if you have questions. gary schulz CC: Deborah Ritter MEMORANDUM TO: Gary Schulz FROM: Deb Ritter DATE: January 18, 2001 RE: South 180th Grade Separation Revised SEPA Checklist Revised Wetlands Study Wetland Enhancement Plan SEPA (E2000 -029) Special Permission — Wetland (L01 -005) Attached are the revised SEPA checklist and Berger /Abam's Final Wetlands Study. Robin has incorporated your January 2nd SEPA comments into the revised checklist. The revisions to the Final Wetlands Study appear in Appendix D and also on the two plans which are in the inside pocket of the Study. The revisions in Appendix D appear to respond to the comments you made in our joint meeting on January 2nd. You may have additional comments on the Study plans. Today I received a detailed copy of the enhancement plan for the Herrera A site, which I have also attached. An accompanying narrative is due the week of January 21st. The SEPA determination for the grade separation can't be issued until I have received your comments on the revised checklist and Wetlands study. Please provide me with your comments the week of January 21st. cc: Jack Pace MEMORANDUM TO: Deb Ritter FROM: Robin Tischmak-- DATE: January 11, 2001 SUBJECT: S 180th St Grade Separation - Project No. 87 -RWO9 Response to Public Storage Comment Letter CITY OF TIUKWILA JAN 1 2 2001 PERMIT CENTER This memorandum provides responses to the December 8, 2000 comment letter received from Public Storage, Inc. 1. We need to be assured that existing and future tenants have uninterrupted and convenient access to our facility for storage and related purposes at all times during the construction period. The construction contract will contain language that the contractor will be required to maintain "temporary access to all properties throughout the course of the project" . 2. We need to be assured of access to our facility, after the project is completed, comparable to the present access. This includes, but is not limited, to adequate room for truck loading and unloading and turning around. From prior discussions with the City, we are anticipating, at a minimum, that the City will acquire and dedicate to our use whatever additional land is required to accomplish this. The design team has met with Public Storage representatives and presented an access plan for discussion. Access and on -site maneuverability needs were discussed. The attendees agreed that the proposed plan was comparable contingent upon truck turning template verification. A revised plan was prepared and addresses truck turning concerns. The City is proceeding with the necessary easement acquisition to accommodate the modified driveway. The access easement will run in perpetuity with the Public Storage property's needs. 3. The change in the configuration of 180m Street will severely impact the visibility of our property. At a minimum, we will need to install substantial additional signage. This will require expense as well as possible grants of approval and variances from the City of Kent. No visibility impacts will be created for Public Storage signage approaching from the east. Signage visibility will be improved approaching from the west, until entering the undercrossing, by the project's removal of the existing railroad signal equipment. Signage visibility impacts within the undercrossing itself cannot be quantified until construction is complete. This is not a SEPA issue and will be addressed by Public Works through direct correspondence with Public Storage. • • These issues were discussed in a meeting with Public Storage representatives and general concurrence was reached, pending preparation of final plans and acquiring the necessary easement. A License to Construct will be obtained from Public Storage that will signify their concurrence with the project design. cc: File 87- RW09 -6 LDe•orah Ritter - S. 180th Grade Separ project Page 1 From: Brian Shelton To: Deborah Ritter Date: 1/10/01 10:59AM Subject: S. 180th Grade Separation project Deb, The detour analysis for the project is satisfactory. Let me know if you have any questions. Brian CC: Robin Tischmak MEMORANDUM TO: Deb Ritter RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA FROM: Robin Tischmak JAN 9 2001 DATE: January 9, 2001 PERMIT CENTER SUBJECT: S 180`h St Grade Separation - Project No. 87 -RWO9 Response to the Renton Non - Motorized Transportation Advisory Committee Comment Letter This memorandum provides response to the December 8, 2000 comment letter received from the Non - Motorized Transportation Advisory Committee. The stated understandings of the current design in Item 2 are not correct. The curb lanes are 15 feet wide and there will not be Class III bicycle lanes in each direction. The proposed 15 foot curb lanes provides a lane that can be shared by vehicular and bicycle traffic. The route will not be signed or marked as a bikeway, but is accessible to bicyclists. This design meets standards for both the Cities of Tukwila and Renton. The proposed design has always included a connection between the Interurban Trail and S 180`h St sidewalks. Initial plans showed this connection on the south side of S 180`h St, but this has since been relocated to the north side of S 180`h St. Following are responses to the itemized recommendations from the RNTAC: 1) 6 foot sidewalks with 6 inch curbs are included on both sides of S 180`h St in the underpass. 2) Class III bikeways are not 5 foot striped bicycle lanes. Class II bikeways are striped bicycle lanes. Neither Tukwila or Renton have designated S 180`h St / SW 43rd St as Class II or III bikeways. The current design allows for a Class IV bikeway that meets both Cities standards. This is a shared roadway with no designation that is accessible to bicyclists. 3) The current design includes a 10 foot paved connection from the Interurban Trail to the S 180`h St sidewalk on the north side of S 180`h St. This design was developed by the Cities of Tukwila, Renton, and Kent and included in the August 1999 Final Design Report Plans. 4) A traffic signal currently exists with crosswalks at S 180`h St / 72 "d Ave S and will remain. 5) Curb cut access for bicycles to and from the sidewalk is being evaluated based on safety concerns and proximity of driveway accesses. The coordinated design efforts between the Cities of Tukwila and Renton have arrived at the current design for providing bicycle accessibility. The design meets both Cities standards for the current route designations. Reclassification of the bikeway designations of S 180`h St/SW 43`d St would be required to meet the recommendations requested by the RNTAC. cc: File 87- RW09 -6 • • BERGER/ABAM ENGINEERS INC. 33301 Ninth Avenue South • Suite 300 Federal Way, Washington 98003-2600 2061431.2300 • FAX 2061431.2250 3 January 2001 ,4011111N BERGER /ABAM E N G I N E E R S I N C. Mr. Fred Satterstrom Planning Manager City of Kent Planning Services 220 Fourth Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 -5895 Re: South 180th Grade Separation Project Impacts within the Springbrook Creek Setback • PLANNING ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM MANAGEMENT RECEWFD JAN LOu: TUKWIL A PUBLIC WORKS Dear Mr. Satterstrom: On behalf of the City of Tukwila, BERGER/ABAM Engineers Inc. (BERGER/ABAM) is requesting a waiver of specific requirements regarding impacts within the 50 -foot buffer /setback of Springbrook Creek and to allow for flexibility of design and mitigation. As you know, Springbrook Creek is classified as a major creek within the City of Kent and requires a 50 -foot protective buffer from development activity. The following sections describe the project, proposed impacts, and proposed mitigation. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The City of Tukwila is initiating a grade separation on South 180th Street between vehicular traffic and railroad tracks owned by Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) and Union Pacific (UPRR). The approximate area of construction for the complete project is 20 acres. The corridor is classified as a principal arterial facilitating east -west vehicular traffic in the Tukwila, Renton, and Kent areas of the Green River Valley. The existing four -lane roadway serves not only local connections between State Route 181 (SR 181) (West Valley Highway) and East Valley Highway, it is also part of a central corridor feeding SR 167. Currently, South 180th Street is the only major crossing of the railroads for 3.5 miles between Interstate 405 and South 212th Street. As a result, the existing roadway experiences high traffic volumes. The existing north -south rail corridor currently contains three sets of tracks, two BNSF and one UPRR. These lines are heavily used for both freight and passenger service, with upwards of 60 trains per day. The intersection of these two heavily used corridors results in not only extensive traffic delays but also in numerous accidents. From 1996 through 1998, 24 accidents were reported on South 180th Street. One of the accidents in 1998 resulted in two fatalities when a train hit a car. In addition, the Interurban Trail crosses South 180th Street just west of the UPRR tracks. The trail is widely used as a walking and bicycle path. A regional program, Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB), has been established to help fund the design and construction of grade separations. The main objective of the program is to provide safe and efficient roadways and railroads. In response to the obvious safety issue, the City of Tukwila applied for and received funding for the separation on South 180th Street and the railroad tracks. The project budget has been established at $15 million with the FMSIB, the cities of Tukwila • • Mr. Fred Satterstrom 3 January 2001 Page 2 and Renton, the Port of Seattle, King County, Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), and both railroads contributing a portion. A technical advisory committee (TAC) was formed to oversee the development of the preliminary design of the project because of its importance to regional transportation. Representatives from the cities of Tukwila, Renton, and Kent; WSDOT; King County; and BNSF and UPRR comprise the committee. The design report is the culmination of all the engineering and data gathering efforts to date by the design team for the City of Tukwila's South 180th Street Grade Separation project. The proposed design is based upon a detailed evaluation of several alternatives, and is further described in the South 180th Street Grade Separation Final Design Report (Volumes 1 and 2) (BERGERIABAM, 1999) (attached). The preferred design option is as follows. • The proposed roadway will maintain four lanes. A center left turn or median lane will also be included to accommodate left turns and the center bridge pier. • The right lane will be widened to 15 feet to better accommodate bicycles. • The new roadway will be realigned under the existing railroad tracks. • Bridges will be constructed for the BNSF (three tracks), UPRR (one track), and the Interurban Trail. • To meet stormwater quality requirements, stormwater runoff will be discharged into a combination detention pond and wetpond located on City of Renton property north of South 180th and immediately east of the BNSF tracks. The lower elevation of the pond will provide water quality for the runoff while the upper level provides the detention capacity required. • Approximate quantities of cut and fill are 75,000 and 22,000 cubic yards, respectively. In studying alternatives to meet the project's goals, four main issues were evaluated. They included the number of lanes for the new roadway, method of separation (vertical alignment pass under or over the existing tracks), maintaining traffic during construction, and meeting overall project budget. Refer to Figures 2 to 7 of the Design Report (Volume 2) for corresponding graphical depictions of the following descriptions. ZONING AND DESIGNATION OF THE SITE AND ADJACENT PROPERTIES Adjacent property in the City of Kent is zoned Industrial. The recently completed Public Storage facility is located on the subject property adjacent to Springbrook Creek. IMPACT TO SPRINGBROOK CREEK WITHIN THE CITY OF KENT Springbrook Creek flows northeast in the eastern portion of the project study area. Along the south side of South 180th Street, the stream channel is positioned between the Public Storage facility and the Springbrook Business Park. A Stream Study has been completed for the project and is attached • • Mr. Fred Satterstrom 3 January 2001 Page 3 (BERGERIABAM, 2000). Impacts within the 50 -foot major creek buffer of Springbrook Creek are described below. The project is further described in the Design Report, Volumes 1 and 2. The access driveway to the Public Storage facility will be relocated to the east closer to the Springbrook Creek buffer because the current access will be rendered inaccessible due to the grade separation. The driveway will be permanently located within 40 feet of the ordinary high water of Springbrook Creek; temporary construction impacts will occur within 20 feet of the ordinary high water of Springbrook Creek. A plan showing the proposed impacts is attached. All construction activity will use Best Management Practices to control and limit erosion and sedimentation to Springbrook Creek. A Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan will be developed for the project, according to Kent, Renton, and Tukwila regulations. Mitigation for impacts to the Springbrook Creek buffer will consist of revegetation of the slope adjacent to the relocated driveway, as shown on the attached Stream Revegetation Planting Plans. All plantings will be native species and will provide shading for the creek and visual buffering of the creek from human activity. In addition, an 8 -acre undeveloped parcel of land adjacent to Springbrook Creek and south of the Public Storage parcel will be purchased by the City of Tukwila and dedicated to the City of Kent as permanent open space. WETLAND IMPACTS WITHIN THE CITY OF KENT A Wetlands Study has been completed for the project and is attached (BERGER/ABAM, 2000). One wetland within the City of Kent will be impacted by the project. Wetland C is located in Kent on the south side of South 180th Street within a depression that runs north/south between the BNSF and UPRR rights -of -way. The wetland is classified as a Category 3 wetland according to the City of Kent Wetlands Management Code. The total area of Wetland C is 722 square feet. The BNSF and UPRR tracks will be shooflied (detoured) temporarily to allow for construction of the underpass under South 180th. The shooflies will impact the total area of Wetland C (0.02 acre). Mitigation for these impacts is proposed on land within and owned by the City of Renton immediately east of the BNSF tracks and north of South 180th. Following discussions with the City of Renton, it was determined that the impacted wetlands will be mitigated at a 1.5:1 ratio in accordance with mitigation standards of the cities of Tukwila and Kent. The objective of the wetland mitigation plan developed for the project is to create a mitigation wetland with several habitat types to compensate for the lost functions and values of Wetland C and the filled portions of the impacted wetlands within the City of Tukwila. The created wetland would be consistent with mitigation requirements in both the Kent and Tukwila municipal codes by providing a minimum of a 1.5 to 1 replacement ratio for wetland areas. We believe that the necessity for the undercrossing creates a unique circumstance for which impacts to Springbrook Creek are unavoidable, and that the revegetation of the creek buffer and dedication of 8 acres of land as permanent open space would provide sufficient mitigation to allow you to exercise your authority to waive specific requirements regarding the creek setback of Springbrook Creek and ensure the fulfillment of the stated purpose of Chapter 15.08.220 of the Kent City Code. Mr. Fred Satterstrom 3 January 2001 Page 4 If you have any questions regarding this letter or the project, please feel free to contact me or. Gary Phillips. Sincerely, � / r::ft;k Gail S. Brooks Senior Scientist/Planner GSB:nm Attachments Design Report (Volumes 1 and 2) Stream Study Proposed Impacts to Springbrook Creek Plan Stream Revegetation Planting Plans Wetlands Study cc w/o attach: Steve Mullen, City of Kent Brian Shelton, City of Tukwila Robin Tischmak, City of Tukwila Gary Phillips, BERGERJABAM QI 3 &I NW 1/4 NW 1/4 Wi SEC. 36 J QI 7 �I CITY OF TUKWILA NE 1/4 NW 1/4 SEC. 36 r BEGINNING OF PLAN STA. 10 +00.00 P.O.T. SW 1/4 NW 1/4 SEC. 36 15 /[NU AVt 5 12 T.23N. R.4E. W.M. NW 1/4 NE 1/4 SEC. 36 CITY OF RENTON _7i 1s END OF PLAN STA. 41+07.91 P.O.T. O 35 SW 43RD (5. 180TH ST) SE 1/4 NW 1/4 SEC. 36 /.t ANN - b Os h ]007 r !Am y r /i 7t.r QN00:414 710CAA /WALI•7 Set q► CITY OF KENT SW 1/4 NE 1/4 SEC. 36 ES t CP.1 ROTC (7 irOPEN Sfp/CC-EN. ( izeer.) MATCH LINE MO 6/25/00 BJA 6/25/00 CLP 6/25/00 CCW 6/25/00 CLP 6/25/00 MATCH LINE VICINITY MAP AND TOTAL PARCEL DETAILS 150 0 150 300 SCALE IN FEET 1 1 4 A00084 AS SHOwH 25- Jun -2000 Robin Tischmak - Phone Conversation with Oakesdale Business Park Regarding Wetland Buffer exchange Page 11 From: "Allen Quynn" <aquynn @ci.renton.wa.us> To: <rtischmak @ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 1/3/01 11:09AM Subject: Phone Conversation with Oakesdale Business Park RegardingWetland Buffer exchange Robin, I spoke this morning with Paul Casey, Vice President of the Zelman Companies, owners of the Oakedale Business Park regarding the exchange of their buffer encumbrance with wetland creation for the S. 180th St. Project. He and I reviewed the letter sent to him by Gregg Zimmerman, City of Renton Planning /Building /Public Works Department Administrator explaining the proposal to allow the City of Tukwila to create additional wetland area in exchange for reserving area on the site for the Oakesdale Business Park wetland buffer encumbrance. He had no outstanding issues with the proposal and basically gave his approval to allow us to proceed with the exchange. If you have any questions or need further clarification please call me at 425 - 430 -7247. Thanks. Allen CC: "Gregg Zimmerman" <Gzimmerman @ci.renton.wa.us >, "Lys Hornsby" <Lhornsby @ci.renton.wa.us >, "Ronald Straka" <Rstraka @ci.renton.wa.us> • Cizy of Tukwila • Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMORANDUM TO: Robin Tischmak FROM: Deb Ritter DATE: January 2, 2001 RE: South 180th Grade Separation SEPA (E2000 -029) Gary Schulz has provided me with a copy of his SEPA comments on this file (see attached). I have the following, additional comments: A. Background Page 1, Item 4: This date should be changed to be closer to your signature date. Page 1, Item 5: Should read "City of Tukwila Public Works Department ". Page 8, Item 8: Please revise to include the report dates (and amendment dates, if any). B. Environmental Elements Page 6, Item 3 (a, 2) You have indicated there will be three temporary shooflies. Is this still correct? Page 6, Item 3 (a, 3) Revise amount of wetland buffer to be filled. Clarify location of proposed mitigation area in Renton (you may wish to use same wetland identifiers or names as in the Wetland Report). Page 13, Item 8 (h) Please repeat the same wetland information you provided earlier. Please make these changes and provide me with 3 complete copies of the revised Checklist. As we discussed today, I also need the following prior to issuance of a SEPA Determination: 1. Memo amendment to Wetland Report with map detailing location and size of mitigation area. 2. Your response (in memo format) to the points raised in the two comment letters we have received (December 8th letter from RNTAC and December 8th letter from Public Storage, Inc). 3. Brian's evaluation of the Final Traffic Analysis. 4. Information documenting the approval by Oakesdale Business Park of "Option 2 ". cc: Jim Morrow Brian Shelton Jack Pace Ryan Partee 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 • city of Tukwila • Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMORANDUM TO: Deb Ritter, Associate Planner FROM: Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist ,J4 DATE: January 2, 2001 RE: South 180th Street Grade Separation #E2000 -029, SEPA Review. I have reviewed the current submittal, date stamped Received 11/6/00, including the related project information for the 180t Street Grade Separation project located in Tukwila, Renton, and Kent. The project is subject to sensitive area regulations and is proposing wetland mitigation from apparent unavoidable impacts. Some information in the checklist needs to be corrected to provide consistency with project studies. My comments on the SEPA Checklist are as follows: SEPA Checklist A. BACKGROUND Page 2, 10. — Because there is a wetland in Kent that will be filled, you should add "Critical Area Review Permit — City of Kent ". B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS Page 6, 3. a. 1) — Wetlands in Tukwila are currently considered to be a part of one wetland complex - Wetland #12. Wetland #12 is rated a Type 1 wetland with a standard buffer of 100 feet. Please insert this correction where it states "Wetlands are Categories 2 and 3... ". Page 7, 3. a. 3) — The sentence "Refer to the Conceptual Wetland Mitigation plan attached" needs to be considered. Is this an updated drawing of the mitigation site area as we discussed earlier today? I recommend removing this sentence or providing the documentation that demonstrates the mitigation is feasible where it is proposed. Page 7, 3. b. 1) — Will there be a need to pump groundwater as temporary during construction of the tunnel or permanent after construction? 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 180th Street Grade Separation Memo January 2, 2001 Page 2 B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS Page 8, 3. c. 1) — Is the rate, % the 2 -year consistent with State regulations? Fish and Wildlife may condition this through the IPA permit Page 9, last sentence — Since you have concurrence from US Fish & Wildlife now you should revise to indicate it here. Page 10, 5. b. — Revise as on page 9 above. Page 13, 8. g. — Are you sure Springbrook Creek is not a State Shoreline -in Kent? Please let me know if there are questions. Cc: Steve Lancaster, DCD Director Jack Pace, Planning Manager Robin Tischmak, Associate Engineer • Ciz of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMORANDUM TO: Deb Ritter, Associate Planner FROM: Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist DATE: January 2, 2001 RE: South 180th Street Grade Separation #E2000 -029, SEPA Review. I have reviewed the current submittal, date stamped Received 11/6/00, including the related project information for the 180t Street Grade Separation project located in Tukwila, Renton, and Kent. The project is subject to sensitive area regulations and is proposing wetland mitigation from apparent unavoidable impacts. Some information in the checklist needs to be corrected to provide consistency with project studies. My comments on the SEPA Checklist are as follows: SEPA Checklist A. BACKGROUND Page 2, 10. — Because there is a wetland in Kent that will be filled, you should add "Critical Area Review Permit — City of Kent ". B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS Page 6, 3. a. 1) — Wetlands in Tukwila are currently considered to be a part of one wetland complex - Wetland #12. Wetland #12 is rated a Type 1 wetland with a standard buffer of 100 feet. Please insert this correction where it states "Wetlands are Categories 2 and 3... ". Page 7, 3. a. 3) — The sentence "Refer to the Conceptual Wetland Mitigation plan attached" needs to be considered. Is this an updated drawing of the mitigation site area as we discussed earlier today? I recommend removing this sentence or providing the documentation that demonstrates the mitigation is feasible where it is proposed. Page 7, 3. b. 1) — Will there be a need to pump groundwater as temporary during construction of the tunnel or permanent after construction? 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 180th Street Grade Separation Memo January 2, 2001 Page 2 B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS Page 8, 3. c. 1) — Is the rate, %Z the 2 -year consistent with State regulations? Fish and Wildlife may condition this through the HPA permit Page 9, last sentence — Since you have concurrence from US Fish & Wildlife now you should revise to indicate it here. Page 10, 5. b. — Revise as on page 9 above. Page 13, 8. g. — Are you sure Springbrook Creek is not a State Shoreline in Kent? Please let me know if there are questions. Cc: Steve Lancaster, DCD Director Jack Pace, Planning Manager Robin Tischmak, Associate Engineer • • MEMORANDUM TO: Deb Ritter, Associate Planner Robin Tischmak, Senior Engineer FROM: Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist DATE: January 2, 2001 RE: Project Meeting: South 180th Street Grade Separation #E2000 -029, SEPA and Technical Review. I have reviewed the current submittal, date stamped Received 11/6/00, including the related project information for the 180th Street Grade Separation project located in Tukwila, Renton, and Kent. The project is subject to sensitive area regulations and is proposing wetland mitigation from apparent unavoidable impacts. I have the following questions regarding the wetland mitigation planning: 1) The SEPA & wetland study indicates 1.11 acres of wetland will be filled. It is not clear if all wetland areas were surveyed during the wetland delineation? Is 1.11 acres of wetland the total area of wetland impact as established by survey? 2) Do we have a solid agreement with Renton on the preferred mitigation site? I feel that it is also necessary to have a legal description and accurate area of the mitigation site before the conceptual plan can be approved. 3) How much area will the detention/water quality pond need? How does this "fit" with the area needed for wetland mitigation — approx. 2.15 acres? Do we need to size the pond and include it in the mitigation layout because it is on the same site? The primary question is do we have enough area to provide the wetland replacement at the required 1.5 to 1.0 ratio? I,think this level of detail is necessary before we issue SEPA. My feeling is that we need to show the mitigation is feasible and this includes connecting wetlands or removing old fill material and providing the area. 4) Wetland creation, as planned, will provide a Type 1 wetland because this is the area being impacted. Because there is little buffer being lost from the project, I will recommend that the mitigation site does not need to provide the standard buffer width. Cc: Steve Lancaster, DCD Director Jack Pace, Planning Manager 7 Jesse Tanner, Mayor CIT•OF RENTON Planning /Building /Public Works Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator December 20, 2000 Gary Phillips, P.E. Berger /Abam 33301 Ninth Ave. S. Federal Way, WA 98003 -6395 ECE VED DEC 2 8 2000 PUBLICWORKS SUBJECT: APPROVAL TO CREATE ADDITIONAL WETLAND IN EXCHANGE FOR OAKESDALE BUSINESS PARK WETLAND BUFFER ENCUMBRANCE MITIGATION PLAN FOR THE S. 180TH ST. GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT Dear Mr. Phillips: The City of Renton Surface Water Utility concurs with the conceptual plans to create additional wetland in exchange for the Oakesdale Business Park wetland,buffer encumbrance on the site. The creation of 1.92 acres of wetland on City property north of 180 St. and east of the railroad tracks is consistent with Option 2 outlined in the enclosed letter from Gregg Zimmerman, City of Renton Planning/Building/Public Works, Administrator. to Mr. Jim Morrow, City of Tukwila Director of Public Works, dated_October 4, 2000. The 1.92 acres of creation includes 1.67 acres required for the project and an additional 0.25 acres, which will replace the Oakesdale Business Park wetland buffer encumbrance on the site. If you have any questions, please call Allen Quynn at 425- 430 - 7247. Sincergly, on Straka, P.E. Surface Water Utility Supervisor cc: enclosure Robin Tischmak Lys Hornsby EI:\ DIVISION. S\ UTILITIE .S \DOCS\2000- 620.doc\R.IS\hs 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 ® This paper contains 50 % recycled material, 20% post consumer • • City of Tukwila , ila Steven M Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMORANDUM TO: Robin Tischmak FROM: Deb Rittert- DATE: December 11, 2000 RE: South 180th Grade Separation SEPA (E2000 -029) Attached is a comment letter from Carl Phelps, Senior Vice President of Public Storage Inc., dated December 8th. Their facility is located in Kent at 7421 South 180th Street. As a courtesy, I have faxed a copy of the attached letter to Steve Mullen (Public Works) and Kim Marousek (Planning) at the City of Kent. It is my understanding that you will be meeting with a representative of Public Storage Inc. (as well as representatives from other affected businesses) sometime this week. Please provide me with a memo that outlines the results of your meeting and the steps and /or design changes Public Works will take in response to the concerns outlined in the letter. We should then issue a written response to Mr. Phelps' letter before proceeding with a SEPA Determination. cc: Jack Pace (w /attachment) Jim Morrow (w /attachment) 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 DEC -08 -2000 16, :23. PUBLIC STORAGE ACQ. _ .` 818 241 9489 P.01 /03 • FACSIMILE OVER DATE: December 8, 2000 NUMBER OF PAGES (INCLUDING COVER): RECEIVE') DEC 11 2000 COMMUNITti ©EVELOPMEN•+ TO: Deborah Ritter. FROM: Carl B. Phelps DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENT(S): 12/8/00 Public Storage Letter (206) 431 -3665. TELEPHONE: (818) 244 -8080, FACSIMILE: (818) 241 -9489. EXTENSION, 502 PUBLIC STORAGE, INC. 701 Western Avenue Suite 200 Glendale, California 91201 -2397 DEC -08 -2000. 1623 PUBLIC STORAGE ACQ. • PUBLIC STORAGE 818 241 9489 P. 02/03 701 Westem Avenue Glendale, California 91201 -2349 Tel (818) 244-8080 BY FACSIMILE (206) 431 -3665 .AND.FEDERAL EXPRESS City of Tukwila Department of Community Development. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Suite 100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 .Deborah Ritter Re.: File Numbers E2000 -029 (SEPA Determination) 'South 180th Street Grade. Separation Dear Ms. Ritter:, We operateanddown the. controlling interest in a self - storage facility at 7421 South 18O.th Street in Kent The 'project . referenced above has the potential to seriously impact, in an adverse manner, the visibility, access and operations; and therefore the value, of this'facility. ' If this project is to proceed; we would like to be assured of the following: . 1. We need to be assured that existing and :future tenants_ have uninterrupted and convenient access to our facility -for storage, and related purposes at all times during the construction period. We need to ;be :assured of access to. our facility, after the project is completed, comparable .to the present access.. This includes, but is not limited, to adequate.room for truck loading and unloading and turning around. -From prior discussions with the City, we are anticipating, at a;. minimum,. that the City will acquire. and. dedicate`to our use whatever additional . land is :requiredto accomplish this The change in the configuration of 180th. Street will severely impact the visibility of our property. At a minimum, we will need to, install substantial www. Du blicsto raae.com DEC -08 -2000: 16:23 PUBLIC STORAGE ACQ. 818 241 9489 P.03/03 •additionai.signage. This will require expense aswell as possible grants of approval and variances from the City of :Kent. It is our hope that we will be able to cooperate in and support this project, however, our position is that it must be accomplished in ,a manner that does not result in detriment to us without compensation. The points referenced above need to be addressed., very truly yours,. PUBLIC STORAGE, INC. Carl "B B. Phelps Senior. Vice President TOTAL P.03 December 8, 2000 To Deborah Ritter, Tukwila Planner for S 180- Street Project. Gregg Zimmerman, Public Works Administrator Lin Wilson, Transportation Design Supervisor Sandra Meyer, Transportation Systems Director DEC 1.1i20DQ Tit cc: _ Leslie.Betlach, Renton Parks Director Steve Rolle, Civil Engineer Subject: Concerns of the Non- Motorized Transportation Advisory Committee on the South ,180th Street Railroad Grade Separation Project Our understanding of the current 5.180th Street plan includes the following: , i 1) The road project is designed as an underpass. So the RR and the Interurban Trail I bridges will be at grade and will pass over the traffic lanes. :2) The current plan allows for 6' 6" sidewalks, 11' inside lanes, 14' Curb lanes and Class III bicycle lanes in each direction. This would meet the minimum requirements for bicycle and pedestrianitravel along S 180 Street. However, there is some question:.from recent plan revisions and from the documents.we have j. reviewed as to whether the Class 111 bicycle lanes are actually included. , ; .. . Another concem of the Renton Non - motorized Transportation Committee is the apparent lack of pedestrian /bicycle access between S 180th and the Interurban Trail. On a previous plan drawing, there was an at grade 10' wide sidewalk from 72nd Ave S along the south side of S 180th which intersected the Interurban Trail just south of the bridge overpass. But this does not appear on the recent plans that we reviewed. For the previous plan drawings that included the Interurban /S 180th access, refer to: S 180th Street Grade Separation Project . Plan & Profile sheets 1 & 2 of Volume 2 of 2 of the Design report, Apr 1999, Figures 13 & 14 We would recommend this to be a 12' wide path or sidewalk to accommodate mixed pedestrian and bicycle use. The recommendations of the Renton Non - motorized Transportation Committee are as follows: • 1) Include 6' 6" sidewalks.on both sides of S 180th St in the underpass. 2) Include Class III bicycle lanes along both sides of S 180th St in the underpass. This should be a striped 5' bicycle lane in accordance with the recommendations for a Class III bicycle lane. 3) Include an at grade 12' sidewalk or paved path (as referenced above) that intersects the Interurban Trail at the south end of the bridge. It would continue west and would join the underpass sidewalk along the south side of S 180th St in the proximity of 72nd Ave S. 4) Include a traffic light and crosswalk at the intersection of S 180th St and 72nd Ave S. This ;..., would .allow pedestrian /bicycle access from the north side of S 180th to gain access to the Interurban Trail via the at grade sidewalk. 5) Include appropriate.curb cuts to allow bicycles access to the at grade sidewalk..- Some of the criteria used in reaching these proposed recommendations are as follows: 1. While north /south bicycle and pedestrian routes have continued to be improved to meet . current and future demand, the east/west connectors are inadequate to meet even current needs. The opportunities for east/west traversal,across the valley are extremely limited. The vehicle east/west routes are also very limited, which make these streets particularly high volume traffic routes. This contributes to the importance of providing Class III bicycle lanes as well as pedestrian access along S 1801 Street. 2. ThetS 180th St is a critical east/west connector between the Springbrook Trail and Oakesdale bicycle commuter route to the east and the Interurban and Green • River /Christiansen Trails to the west. The SW.43rd /S 180th St corridor is designated in the Renton Trails Master Plan as being a part of the Petrovitsky'Route, a major east/west bicycle corridor. It is the only current and /or future means for connecting the large number of communities west of Hwy 167 to the existing major north /south trails and • bicycle routes in this vicinity. 3. The proximity of this project to the Tukwila light rail station increases its importance. with regard to bicycle /pedestrian access. Adequate bicycle /pedestrian connections from the communities to the east should be provided to this significant mass transit alternative. As the missing pieces of trails and connectors are completed and the light rail program is implemented, the use of these trails will increase significantly. It would be unfortunate to miss the opportunity to provide this link. We appreciate the opportunity to provide input bn this very important project. Our common: goal should be'to' improve the., quality of transportation alternatives for all people; and�not just.to, move cars. Where it is safe andtconvenientto;use alternative modes of transportation, people will do so. Before the Burke GilmaniTrail was constructed few would 'have `chosen to commute from Kenmore to the UW by bicycle. The trail is now a bicycle freeway. Similarly, with the foresight of our local'public officials, the Cedar River Trail along Maple. Valley Highway 169 now provides a safe means for bicyclists to commute as well as a quality recreational trail for all. We have a very good commuter and recreational bicycle /pedestrian trail system in the Renton /Kent valley. We hope this opportunity to provide a significant connector will not be missed. Pete Maas — RNTAC Chairman 18249 SE 147th Place Renton WA 98059 -8043 Frances Pieper, RNTAC Vice Chair 345 Meadow Avenue N Renton WA 98055 Craig Paynter — RNTAC Secretary 14230 160th Ave SE Renton WA 98059 -7428 05-g3S- 70113 epo+rr.er® • PUBLIC STORAGE, INC. 701 Western Avenue Glendale, California 91201 -2349 ® Tel (818) 244 -8080 December 8, 2000 BY.FACSIMILE (206) 431 -3665 AND FEDERAL EXPRESS City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Suite 100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Attention: Deborah Ritter Re: File Numbers E2000 -029 (SEPA Determination) South 180th Street Grade Separation Dear Ms. Ritter: We operate and own the controlling interest in a self - storage facility at 7421 South 180th Street in Kent. The project referenced above has the potential to seriously impact, in an adverse manner, the visibility, access and operations, and therefore the value, of this facility. If this project is to proceed, we would like to be assured of the following: 1. We need to be assured that existing and future tenants have uninterrupted and convenient access to our facility for storage and related purposes at all times during the construction period. 2. We need to be assured of access to our facility, after the project is completed, comparable to the present access. This includes, but is not limited, to adequate room for truck loading and unloading and turning around. From prior discussions with the City, we are anticipating, at a minimum, that the City will acquire and dedicate to our use whatever additional land is required to accomplish this. 3. The change in the configuration of 180th Street will severely impact the visibility of our property. At a minimum, we will need to install substantial www.publicstorage.com City of Tukwila December 8, 2000 Page Two additional signage. This will require expense as well as possible grants of approval and variances from the City of Kent. It is our hope that we will be able to cooperate in and support this project, however, our position is that it must be accomplished in a manner that does not result in detriment to us without compensation. The points referenced above need to be addressed. Very truly yours, PUBLIC STORAGE, INC. Carl B. Phelps Senior Vice President CBP /bn CITY OF RENTON PLANNINGBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: December 5, 2000 TO: Jim Gray/Fire Department Lys Hornsby/Utility Systems Sandra Meyer/Transportation Jim Shepherd/Community Services CC: Gregg Zimmerman; P/13/PW Administrator FROM: Jennifer Henning; Development Plannin SUBJECT: City of Tukwila Notice of Application South 180th Street Grade Separation File Number E2000 -029 Enclosed is a copy of the subject Notice of Application. Comments must be submitted in writing to the Department of Community Development by 5:00 PM on December 11, 2000. Please refer to the notice for complete details. P/B/PW comments are sent to Gregg Zimmerman for coordination, therefore, please ensure timely submittals. Enclosures Job No. A00084 South 180th Street Grade Separation Final Wetlands Study Submitted to City of Tukwila Public Works Department Tukwila, Washington Submitted by BERGER /ABAM RECEIVED E N G I N E E R S I N C. CITY OF TUKWILA JAN 1 2 2001 PERMIT CENTER December 2000 South 180th Street Grade Separation Submitted to City of Tukwila Public Works Department Tukwila, Washington December 2000 Submitted by BERGER /ABAM Engineers Inc. 33301 Ninth Avenue South, Suite 300 Federal Way, Washington 98003 -2600 Job No. A00084 FINAL WETLANDS STUDY SOUTH 180TH STREET GRADE SEPARATION TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE 1.0 Introduction 1 2.0 Site Description 1 3.0 Project Development 4 3.1 Preferred Grade Separation Design Alternative 4 4.0 Methodology 4 4.1 Wetland Definition 4 4.2 Wetland Delineation Requirements 4 4.3 Review of Existing Information 6 5.0 Wetland Investigation and Determination 15 5.1 Wetland A 15 5.2 Wetland B 17 5.3 Wetland C 17 5.4 Wetland D 18 5.5 Herrera Wetland A 19 5.6 Herrera Wetland B 20 6.0 Wetland Impacts 20 7.0 Wetland Functions and Values 22 8.0 Regulatory Framework 26 8.1 Wetland Regulation and Classification 26 8.2 City of Tukwila Wetland Regulations 26 9.0 Mitigation Goals and Objectives 28 10.0 Wetland Mitigation Alternatives Analysis 29 10.1 Wetland Creation and Restoration Site Selection Criteria 29 10.2 Potential Wetland Creation Site Alternatives • 29 11.0 Conceptual Wetland Creation Planting Plan 34 12.0 Limitations 34 13.0. References 34 Final Wildlife Study BERGERIABAM A00084 South 180th Street Grade Separation ii December 2000 FINAL WETLANDS STUDY SOUTH 180TH STREET GRADE SEPARATION TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) FIGURES Figure 1— Vicinity Map Figure 2 — Project Study Area Figure 3 — National Wetland Inventory Map Figure 4 — City of Tukwila Sensitive Areas Map Figure 5 - City of Renton Wetland Inventory Figure 6 — City of Kent Wetland Inventory Figure 7 — Commuter Rail Project Wetlands Figure 8 — King County Soil Survey Figure 9 — Project Area Wetlands and Riparian Corridor Figure 10 — Wetland Impacts Figure 11— Herrera Wetlands Mitigation Site Figure 12 — Mill Creek Upland Wetland Mitigation Site Figure 13 — City of Tukwila Wetland WL12 TABLES Table 1— Wetland Indicator Status Table 2 — City of Tukwila Sensitive Areas Overlay Wetlands Rating System Table 3 — City of Renton Building Regulations Wetland Rating System Table 4 — City of Kent Wetlands Management Code Wetlands Rating System APPENDIXES Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D • — List of Plant Species Found in the Project Area — Study Area Wetland Data Forms — Wetland and Buffer Functions and Semi- Quantitative Performance Assessment Forms — Addendum to Final Wetlands Study • • • Final Wildlife Study BERGER/ABAM A00084 South 180th Street Grade Separation iii December 2000 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the findings of a wetland delineation, impacts analysis, and mitigation concepts study performed by BERGER/ABAM Engineers Inc. (BERGER/ABAM) for the South 180th Street Grade Separation project. The project is located at the intersection of the northwest corner of Kent, the southwest corner of Renton, and the eastern boundary of Tukwila, Washington, in the vicinity of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) and Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks (in Township 23N, Range 4E, north half of Section 36). A vicinity map is provided as Figure 1. Along South 180th Street, the study area extends 200 feet north and south of the roadway from 72nd Avenue South on the west side to 80th Avenue South on the east side. Along the BNSF and UPRR tracks, the study area extends 1,000 feet north and south of the tracks and within 100 feet of the railroad right -of -way. A map of the study area is provided as Figure 2. In compliance with federal and local wetland regulations for Kent, Renton, and Tukwila, BERGER/ ABAM completed this study in order to determine the presence, extent, and characteristics of wetlands in the study area. In addition, BERGER /ABAM has completed an impacts analysis and provided preliminary conceptual mitigation scenarios in order to mitigate for unavoidable filling and disturbance of wetlands, wetland buffers, and riparian buffer areas within the study area. A wildlife study and stream study have been prepared for the South 180th Street Grade Separation project under separate cover, entitled South 180th Street Grade Separation Project Wildlife Study_ (BERGER/ABAM, 2000) and South 180th Street Grade Separation Project Stream Study. 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION Land uses within the project study area include a mix of commercial, office park, and light industrial uses. Other land uses on the north side of South 180th Street include an undeveloped property located immediately east of the BNSF right -of -way; and the proposed Oaksdale Business Campus site east of the undeveloped property and extending to 80th Avenue South, which has been cleared and is currently undergoing construction. During field investigations, construction was underway on the south side of the roadway on the Creekside Storage Park, a public storage site immediately east of the BNSF railroad tracks. The Interurban Trail, Puget Sound Energy power lines, fiber optic cable, and a gas line cross the project study area. Springbrook Creek flows from northeast in the eastern portion of the project study area. Mill Creek flows northeast under a bridge over the BNSF railroad tracks to a confluence with Springbrook Creek in the southeastern portion of the site (see Figure 2). The project study area is generally flat, with elevated grades for the roadway and the railroad tracks. Vegetation within the project study area includes the following. Scrub -shrub wetland areas dominated by willows and open water between the BNSF and UPRR tracks and between the UPRR tracks and the Interurban Trail, on the northern side of the roadway • Blackberry thickets along the Interurban Trail, along both sides of the roadway, and in the southern half of the undeveloped site on the northern side of the roadway, adjacent to the BNSF railroad tracks Final Wetlands Study BERGER/ABAM, A00084 South 180th Street Grade Separation 1 December 2000 North Sea -Tac International Airport Project Area S 212th Kent 167 167 Source: BERGER /ABAM Engineers, 1998 Vicinity Map South 180th Street Grade Separation Figure 1 •:i• ...... -- _--. • IEMMI1 WOMB Project Area • All Not to Scale VY North Source: U.S.G.S. Renton, Washington Quadrangle, 1994 Project Study Area South 180th Street Grade Separation Figure 2 Weed and reed -canary grass- dominated areas on the south side of the roadway between the BNSF and UPRR tracks A small forested area dominated by bigleaf maple within the northwestern portion of the remediation site; and a small forested area with bigleaf maple and locust south of the public storage site • A willow- dominated corridor adjacent to Springbrook Creek on both sides of the roadway A list of the plant species found within the project study area is shown in Appendix A. 3.0 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT 3.1 Preferred Grade Separation Design Alternative The proposed roadway will consist of four 11 -foot through lanes, two in each direction, with a 12 -foot center lane for the length of the project. This center lane will serve as a turning lane at the beginning and end of the alignment. As the roadway passes under the tracks, the piers supporting the new bridges will be located in the center lane. The center piers will be drilled shafts approximately 4 inches in diameter. To accommodate bicyclists, a 4 -foot shoulder will be constructed along both sides of the road. A 6 -foot concrete sidewalk will extend for the length of the project on both sides. Due to significant change in grade along the corridor, extensive reconstruction of private access driveways is required on both sides of the tracks. The project will add approximately 0.5 acre of new impervious surface to the site. Stormwater runoff will be collected by catch basins at the gutter on both sides of the roadway. A 12 -inch mainline will convey the flow through an underground pump station to a new stormwater facility located 50 feet north of South 180th Street and east of the tracks for water quality and water quantity control. Discharges from the new facility will be discharged into a detention pond consisting of two cells separated by a berm, then to Springbrook Creek. An emergency overflow was provided in the detention pond to discharge 100 -year flow for developed condition. 4.0 .METHODOLOGY 4.1 Wetland Definition Wetlands are formally defined as "... those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas." (Federal Register, 1980, 1982). 4.2 Wetland Delineation Requirements The wetland delineation was conducted using the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) (Corps manual) as required by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and the cities of Tukwila, Renton, and Kent. In February 1997, the Washington State legislature adopted the Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Ecology manual) and require its use by local jurisdictions. This new manual is consistent with, although not identical to, the Corps manual. Final Wetlands Study BERGERIABAM, A00084 South 180th Street Grade Separation 4 December 2000 According to both manuals, an area must exhibit indicators of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology to be considered a wetland. These criteria are mandatory and must all be met for an area to be identified as wetland, except under circumstances when a wetland is considered a disturbed area or problem wetland. These criteria are discussed below. Vegetation Hydrophytic vegetation is defined as macrophytic plant life growing in water, soil, or substrate that is periodically deficient in oxygen. For each plot, the percent areal coverage is estimated for each plant species present, and dominant species is determined. Species are assigned a Wetland Indicator Status (Reed, 1988), which is based on the estimated probability of each plant species' occurrence in wetlands or nonwetland (see Table 1). Table 1. Wetland Indicator Status Wetland Indicator Status Description Estimated Probability of Being Found in a Wetland OBL Obligate: species that almost always occur in >99 % . wetlands under natural conditions. FACW Facultative Wet: species that usually occur in 67% > 99 % wetlands but are occasionally found in nonwetlands. FAC Facultative: species that are equally likely to 34% > 66% occur in wetlands or nonwetlands. FACU Facultative Upland: species that usually occur 1% > 33% in nonwetlands but are occasionally found in wetlands. UPL Obligate Upland: species that almost always < 1% occur in nonwetlands under normal conditions. NL Not Listed: species that are not listed and are presumed to be upland species. NI No Indicator Status: species that have not yet been evaluated. (Adapted from Reed, 1988.) The indicator status of the dominant species within each vegetative unit (tree, shrub, herb) is used to determine if the plant community of an area is characterized as hydrophytic. If 50 percent or greater of the dominant plants in a unit have an indicator status of OBL, FACW, or FAC, the vegetation is considered to be hydrophytic in both manuals. Common plant names are used throughout this text. Scientific nomenclature of all plant species encountered follows that of Flora of the Pacific Northwest (Hitchcock & Cronquist, 1973). Where the taxonomic names of plant species have been changed since 1973, plant names follow the 1988 list of synonymies (Reed, 1988, revised 1993). Soils . . The King County Soil Survey (Snyder, et al, 1973) and Hydric Soils list (Soil Conservation Service, 1985) were consulted for the presence of mapped hydric soils within the project area. Soils were assessed in the field by examining soil for hydric indicators to a minimum depth of 18 inches with a soil auger.. Soil characteristics examined include hue, value, and chroma, as identified on a Munsell soil color chart ( Munsell Color, 1992). Hydric soil indicators include mottles, low soil chroma, Final Wetlands Study BERGER/ABAM, A00084 South 180th Street Grade Separation 5 December 2000 gleying, and high organic content: Mottles are spots or blotches of contrasting color occurring within the soil matrix. Gleyed soils are predominantly neutral gray in color. Hydrology Wetland hydrology is defined as permanent or periodic inundation or soil saturation, to within 12 inches of the soil surface, for a significant period (usually a week or more) during the growing season (Environmental Laboratory, 1987). Where positive indicators of wetland hydrology are observed, it is assumed that wetland hydrology occurs for a significant period of the growing season. Direct indicators of wetland hydrology include areas of ponding or soil saturation. Indirect indicators include dry algae on bare soil, water marks on soil or leaves, drift lines, oxidized root channels associated with living roots and rhizomes, sediment deposits, and drainage patterns. Duration of inundation and /or soil saturation for the Ecology manual is based on the number of days during the growing season that are at 32° Fahrenheit (0° Centigrade) or above. Wetlands in the Pacific Northwest area must have 26 days of continuous saturation or inundation within the growing season to meet the criteria for wetland hydrology. Within the study area, direct and indirect indicators of wetland hydrology were recorded on data sheets and described. Method The "routine on -site determination method" was used to delineate wetlands within the study area. This method is used for areas equal to or less than 5 acres in size, or for larger areas with relatively homogeneous vegetative, soil, and hydrologic properties. A combination of field indicators, including vegetation, soils, and hydrology, were used to determine wetland edges. Sampling results for the three criteria were analyzed to make a wetland determination for each plot. Based on the results of plot determinations and visual observation of site characteristics, an overall assessment of the area was conducted and wetland boundaries were located. For all wetland plots identified, data for a corresponding upland plot was collected to confirm the edge of the wetland. Wetland Data Forms are included as Appendix B. Wetland boundaries were identified with sequentially numbered pink colored flagging. Wetland flagging was surveyed by CTS Engineers, Inc. 4.3 Review of Existing Information Prior to conducting field evaluations, existing literature, maps, and other materials were reviewed to identify potential wetlands within the study area. This information included the following. • City of Tukwila Sensitive Areas Maps (City of Tukwila, 1997) ■ City of Renton Wetland Inventory Maps (City of Renton, 1991) ■ City of Kent Wetland Inventory Maps (1996) ■ Renton, Washington, Topographic Quadrangle (USGS, 1994) • National Wetland Inventory Map, Renton Quadrangle (USFW, 1988) Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington (Snyder et al, 1973) ■ . . Hydric Soils of the State of Washington (Natural Resources Conservation Service, 1985) • Washington State Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage Information System Data Base (1998) Final Wetlands Study BERGER/ABAM, A00084 South 180th. Street Grade Separation 6 December 2000 Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Non -Game. Priority Habitats and Species Data Base (1998) Ecosystems Technical Memorandum: Tacoma -to- Seattle Commuter Rail Project (Herrera Environmental Consultants, 1997) ■ Preliminary Site Plan, Oaksdale Business Campus (CNA Architecture, 1998) ■ Preliminary Draft Grading and Storm Drainage Plan, Creekside Storage Park (Barghausen Consulting Engineers, 1997) Wetland Mapping National Wetland Inventory The National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps portions of three wetlands within the study area (Figure. 3). A Palustrine Forested Temporarily Flooded wetland (PFOA) lies within the northwest portion of the study area; a Palustrine Scrub -Shrub Seasonally Flooded, Excavated wetland (PSSCx) lies between the railroad tracks; and a Palustrine Emergent Seasonally Flooded wetland (PEMC) is associated with Mill and Springbrook Creeks. City of Tukwila Sensitive Areas Maps The City of Tukwila Sensitive Areas Maps, dated 1997, depict one wetland (Wetland 12) within the study area (see Figure 4) extending from the eastern right -of -way of the UPRR tracks, north and west of the project area. City of Renton Wetland Inventory Maps The City of Renton Wetland Inventory Maps (Jones & Stokes, 1991) and the City of Renton Wetland Inventory Update (Jones & Stokes, 1996) depict Wetland 45 within the project area located on the north side of South 180th Street and on the east side of the BNSF railroad right -of -way (Figure 5). This wetland corresponds to "Herrera Wetland A" (see below). City of Kent Wetland Inventory Maps The City of Kent Wetland Inventory Maps (City of Kent, 1996) depict a wetland associated with the riparian corridors of both Springbrook Creek and Mill Creek within the study area (Figure 6). Tacoma -to Seattle Commuter Rail Project Wetlands Two wetlands were previously delineated within the study area north of South 180th Street and east of the BNSF railroad right -of -way and described in a report titled Ecosystems Technical Memorandum: Tacoma -to- Seattle Commuter Rail Project (Herrera Environmental Consultants, 1997). These wetlands are referred to in this report as "Herrera Wetland A" and "Herrera Wetland B" and shown in Figure 7. Both wetlands were delineated on September 30, 1997 using the Corps manual and are described in Sections 5.5 and 5.6. Final Wetlands Study South 180th Street Grade Separation BERGER/ABAM, A00084 December 2000 LEGEND PFOA — Palustrine Forested Temporarily Flooded PSSCx — Palustrine Scrub Seasonally Flooded, Excavated PEMC — Palustrine Emergent Seasonally Flooded Not to Scale North Source: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1988 National Wetland Inventory Map South 180th Street Grade Separation Figure 3 t! 7.1 • . . . • • r r•-■+ ri; 1 NOIN3el celF.Cadiii-gffirs- .1•01// ^•tO .1?-lem+arralirm_ oplilt4•111•20*-ipr--. imierwirmakon gorIP wormilo IMP 1. ..tV 1 . CD 1. a.. I l• 4. ' ' li 4 •I it ( 4(4 i 4 (I. til• (4 ((,(ti 4 (VEt4iii..,-( 1,0 ,Er A,c4 „r „I r, li'.44444 .4 ( ,441.4.,L,..i.44. ( (._•( In; d i I. 4 k 1./‘ 444 1(4'4 / ‘((i• 4 ."( 4 4 4 4 (t' • it • 4 4 (t it A ( 414 z•g 4 t( " '1.44( li"a„.44CliWi '04- tk.r 0,.:,"0-g(4 ( , ( ii1-4...-tut4 • (` L*0 . i i f e44 4 ( 0t" (1(I4,+1 i 1( 0,i'.4At1c(it .4 r lt 1 ii 1t i4, i4"i(. .i411.(.is(-4 404 4..4/0rI14 .”4- 4-, 441 -t(-( I i1 44Iil ,A 1',1 ',4 t" "• (i ii,,tr, .i ,-- • • • • . N lor ______T•i 4.1.01-141f-lrf 1(400- ((:"A.1(1 U, -0 ,4 4 fic,4(441 4 1 (44( ...(4;,, , r 41. A :. 4:4 l:4 4 q(((.i i 1.1(.' • (.4•444(l (0( I' it ' (44 4 (i4 t4 1140 ii4 • lit tit - I (.1 -i 14 • • t'll • 4 •4 < 4 . A l' • .ta.• 1 (011it4f14( 01 it .41.,4 • •, ,J.1.1 -t :,,( 0.<,(,0;0/1iii.k tifitie I ..... g ..1 7, . I - _ :Ell- cy Ic-.3 c■ . 3 — ,. ... i 0 n .1 . jo C.3 2F2 • • 1 - 1 if(11.y....k.9‘7181SnCINI 1- - C.'"---- . ' • ' ' ' ' ''' 0 ......■ .. " .' ' ..... - t......-........ j:,i; (iL,Vd6ON N8314.1.210Ns - N01.9Nnb -Li!gil ?..IV • •••.r Vr,a0 \ •.T1 • 18 -411mimmocommmomoommmm• A.. C CI ANUt.4t' -tits IIII III IN IN MI t. MI MI • III III l• I IN NI IIII • ITC ti) al :C1,1) IttVWI I C 4- CD L. Not to Scale ;12 t W -22 W -32 1 1 W 40 W 3 S -8 S -28 4 W-1-34 Project Area Not to Scale W -1 t 2 0 w r ^r North Source: City of Renton, 1991 City of Renton Wetland Inventory South 180th Street Grade Separation Figure 5 NW 36 -23 -04 WETLAND INVENTORY an OW UMW 010041PRIG M7OWl1pR ,..tell SHEET 351 NW Not to Scale ado r a 10401*O• 10001 M M1. w 11 M11 • teen MONO. M Ott • •Ix nett 4 .01110•10 0 MelMIt M x 11.1 ftMf.. r M MISS 11Y ROM MM MOM 1•00•00 11•MMI 1100001. '(111110 MOO. • ••• •• NMI MYS. annwen MIS mama wr M ooSTTelo 0 M r 01444 MM w1 • 01R019 01111 -Iw. OOIIIO( 1110h 011 •• 010 1101 O w woo •• M �. 01aw (0011 Or. 101/0111 M /IYI 1WIM1te MIMafs Oster 001wr v I M 0110 10.wtis001 en. OW M 110 • ado wMOrO 00s001•t. 40w •0. ..Mt rm OM •10 Q00101 •IMI MOM 1•x.10. w 00. 0 rape (Me- r4 0111•0. •10 h( .11 0 MY OMMO 0.. w U •••. (wa 0 (0111110. 01141 OM11. •sOM01f 010 1100 0 Or 010 •1O „ 1::1 . IM ...• 1• _.p,..O dom. PRINTED: 06 -20 -96 NORTH SCALE: 1"=300' LEGEND — 1/4 SECTION LINE tamaramminogir KENT CITY IJIiftS WETLAND 0001010 •MIRq• l A. 1000OOWTOC Mt aMl[O ntow Ma. 0 1 0 10 1111111 R01M VR. 1111 mummy vas ,RIO• - *050004 MORO I alml51 *01) Source: City of Kent, 1996 City of Kent Wetland Inventory South 180th Street Grade Separation Figure 6 Centerline Westerly BNSF Mainline Centerline Easterly BNSF Mainline (not surveyed) Wetlands Area "B" 1/4 Acres ( Approx.) 1 co 4. •: N Is 4 - -} 60 67'-01 . 352, 1 1 1 1 ` Wetlands Area "A" 5 Acres (Approx.) 41 1 1 0 1 1 A 4 4 1 1 1 J 1 3 1 1 1 Existing Crossing Signal and Gates Not to Scale 1 4 A 1 Access Road (Not Surveyed) <— The wetland extends further to the east. Adjacent property Owner to provide the wetland delineation for this extension. Project Limit LNorth Pavement Edge of South 180th Street LEGEND Wetland Boundary Railroad Centerline I Wetland Symbol Existing Pavement Edge Source: Herrera Environmental Consultants, 1998 Commuter Rail Project Wetlands South 180th Street Grade Separation Figure 7 King County Soil Survey . The Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) (formerly known as the Soil Conservation Service) defines hydric soils as soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part of the soil profile (SCS, 1987). The NRCS, in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils, has compiled lists of hydric soils of the United States (SCS, 1985, 1987). These lists identify soil series mapped by the NRCS that meet hydric soil criteria. The Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington (Soil Survey) maps Woodinville silt loam (map symbol — Wo) as the dominant soil within the study area (Figure 8). Other soils include Puget silty clay loam (map symbol = Pu) in the northern portion of the study area, Newberg silt loam (map symbol — Ng) in the southeastern portion of the study area, Puyallup fine sandy loam (map symbol - Py) along the Springbrook Creek riparian corridor, and Urban land (map symbol — Ur) in the southwestern portion of the study area. The Woodinville series consists of poorly drained soils that formed in alluvium on stream bottoms with a typical profile as a gray silt loam with layers of peaty muck extending from the surface to a depth of 38 inches. Permeability is moderately slow, runoff potential is slow, erosion hazard is slight, and flooding potential is severe unless flood protection is provided. Available water - holding capacity is high and there is a seasonally high water table at or near the surface (Snyder, et al, 1973). Woodinville silt loam is classified as a hydric soil (SCS, 1985, 1987). The Puget series consists of poorly drained soils that formed in alluvium with a typical profile that is dominantly mottled dark grayish brown and grayish brown silty clay loam from the surface to a depth of 60 inches. Permeability is slow, runoff potential is slow to ponded, erosion and slippage hazard is slight, flooding potential is severe, and available water- holding capacity is high (Snyder, et al, 1973). Puget silt loam is classified as a hydric soil (SCS, 1985, 1987). The Puyallup series consists of well- drained soils that formed in alluvium with a typical profile as . . very dark grayish brown and dark grayish brown fine sandy loam from the surface to a depth of 34 inches. Permeability is moderately rapid, runoff potential is slow, erosion and slippage hazard is slight, flooding potential is slight to severe, and available water - holding capacity is moderately high (Snyder, et al, 1973). Puyallup fine sandy loam is not classified as a hydric soil (SCS, 1985, 1987). The Newberg series consists of well - drained soils that formed in alluvium with a typical profile as very dark grayish brown silt loam and very fine sandy loam from the surface to a depth of 20 inches. Permeability is moderate, runoff potential is slow, erosion and slippage hazard is slight, flooding potential is slight to severe, and available water - holding capacity is high (Snyder, et al, 1973). Newberg silt loam is not classified as a hydric soil (SCS, 1985, 1987). Urban land is soil that has been modified by disturbance of the natural layers with additions of fill material several feet thick to accommodate large industrial and housing installations. In the Green River Valley, the fill ranges from about 3 to more than 12 feet in thickness, and from gravelly sandy loam to gravelly loam in texture. The erosion hazard is slight to moderate (Snyder, et al, 1973). Urban land is not classified as a hydric soil (SCS, 1985, 1987). Natural Heritage Program Data Base Washington State Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage Program data base was searched for information on significant natural features within the study area. No records for rare plants or high - quality ecosystems were found for the study area vicinity. . Final Wetlands Study BERGERJABAM, A00084 South 180th Street Grade Separation 13 December 2000 • LEGEND WO — Woodinville Silt Loam ' Pu — Puget Silty Clay Loam Ng — Newberg Silt Loam Not to Scale Source: • U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service, 1973 King County Soil Survey South 1 80th Street Grade Separation Priority Habitats and Species Data Base The Washington State Department of Wildlife Priority Habitats and Species data base was examined for endangered, threatened, or sensitive wildlife species; species of concern; and priority habitats within the project area.. The results of this investigation are discussed in the Wildlife Study prepared for the project (BERGER/ABAM, 2000). 5.0 WETLAND INVESTIGATION AND DETERMINATION A field survey to identify and delineate wetlands within the study area was conducted by Senior Ecologists Gail Brooks and Keith Fabing on July 16 and 20, 1998. Observations of topography, vegetation, soils, and hydrology identified four wetlands within the study area boundaries. Two formal data plots were established within relatively uniform areas of vegetation for each wetland within the study area. Data forms, which correspond to formal data plots, are provided in Appendix B. The wetlands found within the study area are shown in Figure 9. 5.1 Wetland A Wetland A is located in the city of Tukwila on the north side of South 180th Street within a wide swale that runs north/south between. the BNSF and UPRR rights -of -way and extends north beyond the study area boundaries. The total area of Wetland A is estimated to be greater than 1 acre. The wetland is represented by Data Plot Al in Appendix B. Vegetation The dominant vegetation species within Wetland A include Sitka willow (Salix sitchensis, FACW) and black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera, FAC) in the tree layer. The shrub layer was dominated by Douglas spirea (Spiraea douglasii, FACW). Broad - leaved cattail (Typha latifolia, OBL), water smartweed (Polygonum amphibium, OBL), velvet grass (Holcus lanatus, FAC), and field horsetail (Equisetum arvense, FAC) dominated in the herb layer. Based on a dominance of species rated. Facultative or wetter, vegetation in the wetland is considered hydrophytic. Soils Soils in Wetland A were mapped as Woodinville silt loam by the NRCS (Snyder et al, 1973). The soils sampled in the wetland at 10 inches in depth within the A- horizon were dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2) silty clay with yellowish brown mottles from the surface to a depth of 18 inches. Grey gleyed (N5/) silty clay soils were observed below 18 inches in depth. These soils were considered hydric due to a low chroma with mottles within 10 inches of the surface. Hydrology The sources of hydrology to Wetland A include direct precipitation, surfacewater runoff from adjacent areas, a high groundwater table, and potential stormwater from north of the study area. A culvert is located at the southern end of the wetland, adjacent to the South 180th Street railroad crossing. The wetland was inundated in areas to depths varying from several inches to 2 feet at the time of the site investigation. Soils sampled within the data plot were moist to the surface. Classification and Rating According to the wetland classification system established by the USFWS (Cowardin et al, 1979), which is the current federal standard for classifying wetland habitat, Wetland A is classified as a Final Wetlands Study BERGERIABAM, A00084 South 180th Street Grade Separation 15 December 2000 .42.#1 ity of Tukwila Wetland 12 (Approximate: Location)' Or Wetland` ProjeCt Limits Wetland r ,g... 9 9r4 ,Pro ectL'�iniits,� • • a d Project ,Limits Wetland A /Project Limits 1 !t • Springbrook Creek =` Riparian Corridor Mill Creek Riparian Corridor oc CC: oc u- . u). z Not to Scale North Source: BERGER/ABAM Engineers, 1998 Project Area Wetlands and Riparian Corridor South 180th Street Grade Separation Figure 9 palustrine scrub-shrub/palustrine emergent ( PSS/PEM) open water wetland. Although this wetland is subject to disturbance and has no critical habitat for threatened /endangered species (City of Tukwila, 2000), it would likely be classified as a Type 1 wetland by the City of Tukwila because it was historically part of a large Class 1 wetland. 5.2 Wetland B Wetland B is located in Tukwila on the north side of South 180th Street within a wide swale that runs north /south between the UPRR right -of -way and the Interurban Trail and extends north beyond the study area. The total area of Wetland B is estimated to be greater than 1 acre. The wetland is represented by Data Plot B1 in Appendix B. Vegetation The dominant vegetation species within Wetland B include red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa, FACU), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus. discolor, FACU), and red -osier dogwood (Cornus stolonifera, FACW) in the shrub layer; and reed canary -grass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW), (Polygonum amphibium, OBL), and bigroot (Marah oreganus, NL) in the herbaceous layer. Based on a dominance of species rated Facultative or wetter, vegetation in the wetland is considered hydrophytic. Soils Soils in Wetland B were mapped as Woodinville silt loam by the NRCS (Snyder et al, 1973). The soils sampled in the wetland at 10 inches in depth within the A- horizon were grey gleyed N4 /muck from the surface to a depth of 18 inches. These soils were considered hydric due to low chroma and gleying within 10 inches of the surface. Hydrology Like in Wetland A, the sources of hydrology to Wetland B include direct precipitation, surfacewater runoff from the adjacent areas, a high groundwater table, and potential stormwater from north of the study area. The wetland was inundated throughout much of its area within the study area to depths varying from several inches to 2 feet at the time of the site investigation. Soils sampled within the data plot were saturated. Classification and Rating According to the wetland classification system established by the USFWS (Cowardin et al, 1979), Wetland B is classified as a palustrine scrub - shrub /palustrine emergent (PSS/PEM) open water wetland. Although this wetland is subject to disturbance and has no critical habitat for threatened /endangered species (City of Tukwila, 2000), it would likely be classified as a Type 1 wetland by the City of Tukwila because it was historically part of a large Class 1 wetland. 5.3 Wetland C Wetland C is located in Kent on the south side of South 180th Street within a depression that runs north/south between the BNSF and UPRR rights -of -way. The wetland is represented by Data Plot C1 in Appendix B. Final Wetlands Study BERGERJABAM, A00084 South 180th Street Grade Separation 17 December 2000 Vegetation The dominant vegetation species within Wetland C are field horsetail (Equisetum arvense, FAC), reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW), and bigroot (Marah oreganus, NL) in the herbaceous layer. Based on a dominance of species rated Facultative or wetter, vegetation in the wetland is considered hydrophytic. Soils Soils in Wetland C were mapped as Woodinville silt loam by the NRCS (Snyder et al, 1973). The soils sampled in the wetland at 10 inches in depth within the A- horizon were very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) silty silt loam with yellowish brown (10YR 4/6) mottles from the surface to a depth of 18 inches. Dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2) silty silt loam soils were observed below 12 inches in depth. These soils were considered hydric due to a low chroma with mottles within 10 inches of the surface. Hydrology The sources of hydrology to Wetland C include direct precipitation and surfacewater runoff from the adjacent areas. Soils sampled within the data plot were dry at the time of the field investigation. However, given the low matrix color with the presence of mottles and the sustained dry summer weather conditions, wetland hydrology during the growing season was assumed to be sufficient to meet the wetland hydrology criteria. Classification and Rating According to the wetland classification system established by the USFWS (Cowardin et al, 1979), Wetland C is classified as a palustrine emergent (PEM) wetland. This wetland would likely be classified as a Category 3 wetland by the City of Kent, because it equal to or less than 1 acre in size and has two or fewer wetland classes (City of Kent Wetlands Management Code). 5.4 Wetland D Wetland D is located in Tukwila on the north side of South 180th Street within a wide swale that runs north/south between the Interurban Trail and the commercial/industrial properties beyond the western boundary of the study area. Wetland D extends towards the west and north beyond the study area boundaries. The total area of Wetland D is estimated to be greater than 1 acre. The wetland is represented by Data Plot D1 in Appendix B. Vegetation The dominant vegetation species within the shrub layer of Wetland D include Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor, FACU), with Pacific willow (Salix lasiandra, FACW +), and sitka willow in the northern portion; and reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW), field horsetail ( Equisetum arvense, FAC), and Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense, FACU +) in the herbaceous layer. Based on a dominance of species rated Facultative or wetter, vegetation in the wetland is considered hydrophytic. Soils Soils in Wetland D were mapped as Woodinville silt loam by the NRCS (Snyder et al, 1973). The soils sampled in the wetland at 10 inches in depth within the A- horizon were dark gray (10YR 4/1) silty muck with dark yellowish brown (10YR 3/6) mottles from the surface to a depth of 18 inches. These soils were considered hydric due to a low chroma with mottles within 10 inches of the surface. Final Wetlands Study BERGER/ABAM, A00084 South 180th Street Grade Separation 18 December 2000 Hydrology The sources of hydrology to Wetland D include direct precipitation, a high groundwater table, and surfacewater runoff from the adjacent areas. Soils sampled within the data plot were saturated to the surface at the time of the field investigation. Classification and Rating According to the wetland classification system established by the USFWS (Cowardin et al, 1979), Wetland D is classified as a palustrine emergent (PEM/PSS) wetland. This wetland would likely be classified as a Type 2 wetland by the City of Tukwila, because it is greater than 1 acre, is subject to disturbance, and has no critical habitat or threatened /endangered species (City of Tukwila, 1997). 5.5 Herrera Wetland A Herrera Wetland A is located in Renton in the southwest corner of the parcel located east of the BNSF and north of South 180th Street. The area of this wetland was estimated to be approximately 5 acres in size within the study area. This wetland is described as an isolated scrub -shrub wetland that is confined to a swale paralleling the railroad tracks (Herrera & Associates, 1997). A wetland delineation report for Herrera & Associates (1997) delineation has been prepared BERGER/ABAM... Vegetation The dominant vegetation species within Herrera Wetland A were reported as Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia, FACW), red -osier dogwood (Cornus stolonifera, FACW), and reed canary -grass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW) (Herrera & Associates, 1997). Based on a dominance of species rated Facultative or wetter, vegetation in the wetland is considered hydrophytic. Soils Soils in Herrera Wetland A were mapped as Woodinville loam by the NRCS (Snyder et al, 1973). The soils sampled in the wetland data plot were reported as dark gray (10YR 4/1) silt with dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4) mottles from the surface to a depth of 16 inches (Herrera & Associates, 1997). These soils were considered hydric due to a low chroma soils (1OYR 4/1 with mottles). Hydrology Herrera Wetland A hydrology was assumed through observation of indirect indicators of saturation, within the wetland, such as watermarks, drainage patterns, sediment deposits, and water stained leaves (Herrera & Associates, 1997). Classification and Rating According to the wetland classification system established by the USFWS (Cowardin et al, 1979), the Herrera Wetland A is classified as a palustrine scrub - shrub /palustrine emergent (PSS/PEM) wetland. This wetland would likely be classified.as a Category 2 wetland by the City of Renton, because it is greater than 2,200 square feet and is not a Category 1 or 3 wetland (City of Renton, 1992). A large blackberry thicket dominates the southcentral portion of the site between Herrera Wetland A and Herrera Wetland B. Site topography and observed soil characteristics suggested that fill material was placed in the location of the Himalayan blackberry thicket, separating Herrera Wetland A from the larger Herrera Wetland B complex. Herrera & Associates speculated that a Final Wetlands Study BERGERJABAM, A00084 South 180th Street Grade Separation 19 December 2000 house with ornamental plants used to occupy this fill area, as evidenced by the presence of cherry trees, English ivy, red elderberry, and blackberries (Herrera & Associates, 1997). 5.6 Herrera Wetland B Herrera Wetland B is located in Renton and is part of a large wetland system that extends north beyond the study area, where it encompasses shrub /scrub, emergent and open water vegetation classes that are hydrologically connected to Springbrook Creek. The area of the wetland was estimated to be approximately. 0.25 acre within the study area (Herrera & Associates, 1997). Vegetation The dominant vegetation species reported within Herrera Wetland B include Pacific willow (Salix lasiandra, FACW +), red -osier dogwood (Cornus stolonifera, FACW), invading Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor, FACU), hardhack (Spiraea douglasii, FACW), and reed canary -grass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW) (Herrera & Associates, 1997). Based on a dominance of species rated Facultative or wetter, vegetation in the wetland is considered hydrophytic. Soils Soils in Herrera Wetland B were mapped as Woodinville loam by the NRCS (Snyder et al, 1973). The soils sampled in the wetland data plot were reported as very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) silt with dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4) mottles from the surface to a depth of 16 inches (Herrera & Associates, 1997). These soils were considered hydric due to a low chroma soils with mottles. Hydrology Wetland hydrology within Herrera Wetland B was assumed through observation of indirect indicators of saturation, such as with watermarks, drainage patterns, sediment deposits, and water stained leaves (Herrera & Associates 1997). Classification and Rating According to the wetland classification system established by the USFWS (Cowardin et al, 1979), the Herrera Wetland B would be classified as a palustrine scrub - shrub /palustrine emergent (PSS /PEM) wetland. This wetland would likely be classified as a Category 2 wetland by the City Renton, because it is greater than 2,200 square feet and has minimum evidence of human - related physical alteration (City of Renton, 1992). 6.0 WETLAND IMPACTS A total of 1.11 acres of wetland (all of Wetland A and Wetland C within the study area boundaries) will be filled and 2.29 acres of Wetland A buffer will be filled as a result of the development of three temporary detours, or "shooflies," for the BNSF and UPRR tracks. No impacts to wetlands are expected to occur as a result of the roadway and underpass construction. Impacts are shown on Figure 10. Prior to and during construction, Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be used to protect critical areas from development impacts. The following general measures are recommended to avoid or minimize impacts to wetlands and streams and their associated buffers during project construction. Final Wetlands Study BERGER/ABAM, A00084 South 180th Street Grade Separation 20 December 2000 D BNSF SHOOFLY 1 AND UPRR SHO�:iar�Y.' APPROXIMATE SLOPE LIMITS IN WETLAND = 722 sq ft IN BUFFER = 6912 sq ft APPROX WETLAND AREA (NOT SURVEYED) IN WETLAND = 47.550 sq ft IN BUFFER = 92.680 sq ft Source: . BERGER/ABAM Engineers, Inc. 1999 Wetland Impacts South 180th Street Grade Separation Figure 10. A preconstruction meeting on site with the construction contractor, City of Tukwila personnel, and a professional biologist to discuss the construction sequencing • Installing orange construction or other fencing approved by the City of Tukwila on the outside edge of the wetland buffer prior to any construction activity on the site to ensure that no activity occurs within the wetland, stream, or associated buffer • Confining all machinery, stockpiled soils, fill material, waste materials, and construction activity to the construction areas designated and approved by the City for construction- related operations • Hydroseeding of any disturbed areas with an approved native seed mix specified in the planting plan; the purpose of rapid revegetation is to prevent invasion of exotic species, retain the integrity of the plant association and wildlife habitats, reduce erosion of denuded soils, and minimize sedimentation into the study area and downstream wetlands and streams ■ Maintaining erosion control measures until the area has been successfully planted (approximately one year) and approved by a qualified professional biologist • Storing hazardous materials outside of the study area • Restricting the clearing of vegetation to the minimum necessary to complete the project • Establishing temporary erosion and sedimentation control measures and other BMPs as required by the City of Tukwila, including, but not limited to Filter fabric fencing and /or straw bale barriers along the edge of construction areas to capture suspended sediments in construction site runoff discharging into the wetlands Collection of sediments and other fine - grained materials deposited on the road surface periodically during construction to prevent washoff into sensitive areas by precipitation 7.0 WETLAND FUNCTIONS AND VALUES Wetlands are known to play significant functional roles in their respective ecosystems and have uses that are valued by society. These intrinsic features are complex, often inseparable, and difficult to assess and quantify. Evaluations of the functions of individual wetlands are necessarily qualitative and dependent upon professional judgment. A wetland functions and values assessment was conducted for impacted wetlands within the study area (Wetlands A and C) using the Wetland and Buffer Functions Semi- Quantitative Assessment Methodology, Draft User's Manual (Cooke, 1996). Using the Semi - Quantitative Assessment Methodology (SAM), ratings were assessed for eight categories of wetland functions based on a number of variables that were evaluated for each category listed below. Functional assessment data forms are included in Appendix C. Flood /Stormwater Control Wetlands serve in flood/stormwater control through detention of peak flows within a wetland system and the slow discharge of the water to downstream receiving waters. The efficiency of a particular wetland system in performing runoff control is based upon the storage capacity and outlet discharge capacity of the wetland relative to the magnitude of the inflow. The value of wetlands in reducing downstream flooding increases with an increase in wetland area, the magnitude of the flood, the proximity of the wetland to the flooded area, and the lack of other storage areas. Final Wetlands Study BERGERJABAM, A00084 South 180th Street Grade Separation 22 • December 2000 Base Flow /Groundwater Support Functions Wetlands can recharge an aquifer, discharge to a downstream wetland, and/or attenuate surfacewater flows. Wetlands can provide groundwater recharge or discharge, or provide both, at different times of the year. The majority of wetlands serve predominantly for groundwater discharge and only a few are recharge systems. Groundwater recharge replenishes aquifers and filters water. With later discharge elsewhere (often in other wetlands), it provides a perennial water source for wetlands and provides dry season stream flow, benefiting stream dependent species. Erosion /Shoreline Protection Functions Erosion control is closely linked with other wetland functions and is most often of concern in wetland systems with water flow sufficient to resuspend and transport sediments, or in wetlands that have been physically disturbed. Decreased water velocity, vegetative structure, soil root - binding properties, and substrate type will lessen the effect of water - related erosion. This function is especially present in shallow, flood plain wetlands where velocities are slow and vegetation is dense. Such vegetation is composed of species that provide for effective trapping of sediments and which impede or slow water flow so that sediments settle out. Erosion and shoreline protection is especially important in riparian corridors where the vegetation can have strong root systems to hold sediments together and prevent loss of stream banks. This function is not present in isolated wetlands that do not have water flowing through them. Water Quality Improvement Functions The morphology of freshwater wetlands provides simple physical processes that remove sediment. Flood plain morphology, the length and width of the wetland, landscape characterization, vegetation community structure, and productivity have a great influence on the water velocity, type of sedimentation, and rate of sedimentation. Particulate materials are removed through settling, which is controlled by water velocity, particle size, and the residence time of water in the wetland, through physical filtration by vegetation, and substrate. Wetlands remove excessive nutrients, heavy metals, and certain organic compounds through a variety of physical and biological processes. The ability of a wetland to perform these functions is closely related to other functions, such as sediment removal, water quality parameters, wetland hydrology, and vegetation community composition, density, richness, structure, and productivity. The ability of a wetland to perform these functions varies with the nature of the wetland, the degree of disturbance of the wetland, and according to unusual events and seasonal cycles. Water quality parameters, such as dissolved oxygen (DO), pH, and total suspended solids (TSS), influence the chemical form and fate of nutrients, metals, and organic compounds in wetland systems. Nutrients and other pollutants often bind with suspended sediments are incorporated into the soils through sedimentation. Nutrients, metals, and organic materials stored in the soils are taken up by vegetation as biomass, buried in the sediments as peat is deposited, or exported out of the wetland. Natural Biological Support Functions Wetlands generally are characterized by high primary productivity (food production that fuels the food chain). Primary production within wetlands can be important to wildlife and fish that spend part or all of their lives within wetlands. There are two major energy flow patterns in wetlands: the grazing food chain that involves the consumption of living green plants, and the detrital food chain composed of organisms that depend on detritus and/or organic debris for their food source. Areas with surface flow have the potential to export decomposed photosynthetic products beyond the boundary of the wetland. Final Wetlands Study . BERGERIABAM, A00084 South 180th Street Grade Separation 23 . December 2000: , Nutrient cycling in wetlands occurs in both plants and the sediments. Nutrients can be stored in sediments by being bound to organic compounds and clays.. Nutrients that are incorporated into plant tissues are unavailable to the ecosystem as long as the plant material is alive. Annual growth in deciduous plants usually dies back at the end of the growing season, and the biomass ends up falling to the ground. The biomass either decomposes and releases the nutrients as dissolved compounds, or stays bound to organic matter in saturated conditions until conditions become conducive for decomposition. Once the nutrients are released, they become available for uptake by other plants, can be in storage in the sediments, and the cycle continues. Many species of wildlife are adapted to or require wetland habitats for at least a portion of their life cycle. The variety of vegetation, substrate types, hydrologic regimes, and the sizes and characteristics of the edge between habitat types are critical factors for wildlife. The association between adjacent habitats is especially important in riparian areas that are crucial to many species of wildlife. Overall Habitat Functions Plant species occur in distinct communities that are identifiable and often repeated across the landscape. Most species of both plant and wildlife have preferred habitats in specific zones associated with physical gradients, such as light, moisture, hydrologic regime, and elevation. High plant species richness is often associated with areas that have multiple habitats in close proximity. Mature wetland systems are characterized by the presence of many niches accounting for high plant and animal diversity. Rare, large, or unusual habitats are valuable and are often set aside as sanctuaries. The rareness of a wetland community "type" may be due to the lack of a particular set of environmental factors, or species distributions in a particular watershed or region. The rarity of a wetland- associated species may be due to the fact that the species is adapted to a specific set of environmental conditions, which may not be present in very many places. The opportunity for the species to have appropriate conditions for living may, therefore, be rare. Wetlands may also be differentially lost and rare in a region because particular wetland types have experienced more development pressure or are especially sensitive to human impacts. Specific Habitat Functions Invertebrate Habitat. Wetlands near aquatic habitats can be considered to have aquatic invertebrates (insects), even if none are directly observed. Examples of invertebrate habitat are muddy shallow water areas where water velocities are slow; there is no fine sediment build -up; and thin - stemmed emergent plants, such as sedges, rushes, and some aquatic herbs, are present. Amphibian Habitat. Water depth is important, with individual species preferring specific depths. In general, shallow water zones with between 1 and 2.5 feet of water are ideal. Urbanized wetlands where bullfrogs are present are less likely to have a rich amphibian fauna due to their, competition with native species. Fish Habitat. It is assumed that if a stream associated with a wetland has good gravels, permanent moving water, and overhanging vegetation along the banks of the stream is present to prevent water . temperatures from getting too high, it has high fish habitat potential. If the same conditions exist but an obstruction over 15 feet long is present downstream, then the habitat potential is only moderate to low. Mammal Habitat. High habitat potential occurs when a large, very structurally diverse habitat is present within the wetland or adjacent buffer boundary that is at least 100 feet wide. The presence of houses and domesticated pets decreases the likelihood of the presence of native small mammals. Final Wetlands Study BERGER/ABAM, A00084 South 180th Street Grade Separation 24 December 2000 Bird Habitat. High habitat potential is available in seasonally flooded agricultural fields, large structurally diverse wetlands, or lacustrine (lake or large pond) systems with associated wetland and buffer habitats. Cultural /Socioeconomic Functions Cultural and economic characteristics are evaluated from a purely value -based perspective. Most of the human -use opportunities can be quantified by determining the ownership of the wetland and associated buffer, and the proximity of the wetland to humans who could potentially use the wetland for recreational or commercial purposes. Not all wetlands provide all of the functions and values listed above: It should be noted that four wetlands within the study area extended beyond the study area boundaries and were not investigated beyond these boundaries. Functions and values discussed in this report represent only the portions of the wetlands within the study area. For ease of discussion purposes in this report, the numbered rating for each category has been converted to a high, moderate, or low rating as follows. • High = 75 to 100% of maximum score • Moderate = 50 to 74% of maximum score • Low = <50% of maximum score Based on these ratings, each wetland was given an overall low, moderate, or high rating. Wetland A functional values rated • . MODERATE for flood and stormwater control • MODERATE for base flow and groundwater support • LOW for erosion and shoreline protection • HIGH for water quality improvement • MODERATE for natural biological support • HIGH for overall habitat functions • HIGH for specific habitat functions • MODERATE for cultural and socioeconomic. values Wetland C functional values rated • MODERATE for flood and stormwater control • MODERATE for base flow and groundwater support • Erosion and shoreline protection did not apply • MODERATE for water quality improvement • LOW for natural biological support • LOW for overall habitat functions • LOW for specific habitat functions, • LOW for cultural and socioeconomic values Final Wetlands Study BERGER(ABAM, A00084 South 180th Street Grade Separation 25 December 2000 8.2 City of Tukwila Wetland Regulations Wetland impacts are limited to the jurisdiction of the City of Tukwila, therefore, only the City's regulatory requirements will be discussed. The City of Tukwila, through the adoption of the Sensitive Areas Overlay (Chapter 18.45, Tukwila Municipal Code), regulates development activities within and adjacent to wetlands and other sensitive areas. Regulated wetlands are defined as "those ponds or lakes 30 acres or less and those lands subject to the "wetland" definition..." in Section 2.1 of this study. Constructed wetlands are not considered wetlands. However, artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland areas to mitigate wetland impacts as permitted by the City of Tukwila are considered wetlands. Isolated wetlands that are less than 1,000 square feet or smaller in area may not require compensatory mitigation (Chapter 18.06, Tukwila Municipal Code). The City of Tukwila classifies wetlands according to the system developed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (Cowardin et al, 1979). Wetlands are rated by the City of Tukwila according to three categories, as shown in Table 2 on the following page. According to City of Tukwila classification, Wetland A would likely be classified as Type 1 wetland by the City of Tukwila, because although it is subject to disturbance and has no critical habitat or threatened/endangered species it is estimated to be greater than 1 acre in size and was historically hydrologically connected to a large Type 1 wetland complex. Type 2 wetlands require a 50 -foot buffer. Wetland C would likely be classified as a Type 3 wetland because it equal to or less than 1 acre in size and has two or fewer wetland classes. Type 3 wetlands require a 25 -foot buffer. A mitigation plan must be completed for any proposals for dredging, filling, alterations, and relocation of wetland habitat allowed in TMC 18.45.080A, 080B, and 080H. The mitigation plan is developed as part of a sensitive area study by a specialist approved by the planning director. Wetland and /or buffer alteration or relocation may be allowed only when a mitigation plan clearly demonstrates that the changes would be an improvement of wetland and buffer quantitative and qualitative functions. The plan must follow the performance standards of TMC Chapter 18.45 and show how water quality, wildlife and fish habitat, and general wetland quality would be improved. In order to achieve the City of Tukwila's goal of no net loss of wetland functions and acreage, alteration of wetlands require the applicant to provide a restoration, enhancement, or creation plan to compensate for the wetland impacts at a ratio of 1.5 to 1 (area created:area impacted). On -site compensation is preferred, provided, except where the applicant can demonstrate that The hydrology and ecosystem of the original wetland and those who benefit from the hydrology and ecosystem will not be damaged by the on -site loss; and . Final Wetlands Study BERGERIABAM, A00084 South 180th Street Grade Separation 26 December 2000 Table 2. City of Tukwila Sensitive Areas Overlay Wetlands RatinE System Wetland Class Wetland Buffer Type 1 Wetlands: Those wetlands that meet any of the following criteria. a) The presence of species listed by the federal government or the State of Washington as endangered or threatened, or the presence of critical or outstanding actual habitat for those species; b) Wetlands having 40 to 60 percent permanent open water in dispersed patches with two or more classes of vegetation; or c) Wetlands equal to or greater than 5 acres in size and having three or more wetland classes, one of which may be substituted by permanent open water. 100 feet Type 2 Wetlands: Those that meet any of the following criteria. a) Wetlands greater than 1 acre in size; b) Wetlands equal to or less than 1 acre in size and having three or more wetland classes; c) Wetlands equal to or less than 1 acre in size, that have a forested wetland class comprised of at least 20 percent coverage of the total surface area; d) The presence of heron rookeries or raptor nesting trees; or e) The presence of native plant associations of infrequent occurrence. 50 feet Type 3 Wetlands: Those wetlands that are equal to or less. than 1 acre in . size and that have two or fewer wetland classes. 25 feet (Chapter 18.45.020.C., Tukwila Municipal Code, City of Tukwila, 1997) • On -site compensation is not scientifically feasible due to problems with hydrology, soils, waves, or other factors; or • Compensation is not practical due to potentially adverse impact from surrounding land uses; or • Existing functional values at the site of the proposed restoration are significantly greater than lost wetland functional values; or • That established regional goals for flood storage, flood conveyance, habitat, or other wetland functions have been established and strongly justify location of compensatory measures at another site. Off -site compensation must occur in the same watershed where the wetland loss occurred. In selecting compensation sites, applicants should pursue siting in the following order of preference. Upland sites that were formerly wetlands ■ Idled upland sites generally having bare ground or vegetative cover consisting primarily of exotic species, weeds, or emergent vegetation ■ Other disturbed upland Wetland enhancement or other mitigation landscaping is a permitted use in sensitive areas or buffers only after review and approval by the planning director. Artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland areas to mitigate conversion of wetlands as permitted by the City of Tukwila shall be considered wetlands. Baseline information of quantitative data collection or a review and synthesis of existing data is required for the proposed mitigation site. Final Wetlands Study BERGERJABAM, A00084 South 180th Street Grade Separation 27 December 2000 9.0 MITIGATION GOALS AND OBJECTIVES According to the Tukwila Municipal Code, mitigation for impacts to wetlands must be considered in the following order. • avoid disturbance to wetlands, streams, and/or. buffers ■ minimize impacts to wetlands, streams, and /or buffers • compensate for any wetland, stream, or buffer impacts • restore any wetlands, streams, or buffers impacted • create new wetlands and buffers to replace those that were lost For this project, the project design team considered all practical efforts to avoid and minimize potential impacts that could occur to wetlands and streams. Impacts to Wetlands B, D, and Herrera A and B, and their associated wetland buffers will be entirely avoided. Mitigation measures will rely on wetland creation along with buffer enhancement as compensation for impacts to Wetlands A and C. A minimum of 1.67 acres of wetland replacement is required. Wetland mitigation goals for the project are as follows. ■ To achieve no net on -site loss of wetland and wetland buffer functions and values within the Springbrook .Creek drainage basin • To compensate for loss of Wetland C and the filled portions of Wetland A • To avoid habitat fragmentation The objective of the mitigation plan developed for the project would be to create a mitigation wetland with several habitat types to compensate for the lost functions and values of Wetland C and the filled portions of Wetland A and its buffer that provide connectivity to existing habitat corridors. The created wetland would be consistent with mitigation requirements as stated in the Tukwila Municipal Code by providing a minimum of a 1.5 to 1 replacement ratio for wetland areas. Based upon the existing functions of the wetlands and wetland buffers to be filled, the created mitigation wetland area would provide at a minimum a net gain in the following functional wetland ratings to the following levels. • HIGH for flood and storm water control ■ HIGH for base flow and groundwater. support • MODERATE for erosion and shoreline protection • HIGH for water quality improvement • HIGH for natural biological support • HIGH for overall habitat functions • HIGH for specific habitat functions ■ HIGH for cultural and socioeconomic values 10.0 WETLAND MITIGATION ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS The above- stated goals and objectives for on -site mitigation would be accomplished by creating a palustrine emergent and palustrine scrub -shrub wetland with an open water component. In order to guide the City's mitigation efforts, several wetland creation and enhancement options were investigated and are discussed below. Final Wetlands Study BERGER/ABAM, A00084 South 180th Street Grade Separation 28 December 2000 10.1 Wetland Creation and Restoration Site Selection Criteria The criteria for selecting wetland creation and restoration areas included the following considerations. ■ A preference for sites located within the same drainage subbasin • Sites located within areas with sufficient hydrology to support wetland vegetation and seasonal amphibian habitat • The potential for connectivity to existing habitat corridors Ideally, the mitigation wetlands would be situated so that they form a continuum with adjacent and nearby habitat corridors that can result in a combined net gain in wildlife habitat function for all associated systems. 10.2 Potential Wetland Creation Site Alternatives Three potential wetland mitigation sites were investigated and are discussed below. Herrera Wetlands Site As previously described, the Herrera Wetlands site is a parcel located within the City of Renton east of the BNSF and north of South 180th Street (Figure 11). The estimated available upland area for mitigation at this site is approximately 2.15, acres. The potential wetland creation area includes the upland area surrounding the wetlands and dominated by a large blackberry thicket. Site topography and observed soil characteristics suggest that fill material was placed in the location of the expansive Himalayan blackberry thicket, separating Herrera Wetland A from the larger Herrera Wetland B complex. This upland area may have historically been part of a larger wetland area prior to historic residential development. Historic aerial photography analysis could provide insight into the nature of the impacts to the site and historic site - specific wetland conditions prior to site development. Fill materials can potentially be removed exposing original hydric soils and restoring historic wetland hydrology. Given the current dominance of blackberry throughout this area, significant improvement in vegetation community structure and diversity is achievable. Significant improvement in wildlife habitat can also be achieved with connectivity to existing study area wetlands and the Springbrook riparian corridor. The site is within the jurisdiction of the City of Renton, therefore, an agreement would need to be established between the City of Tukwila and the City of Renton for use of the site. Mill Creek Upland Site The Mill Creek upland site is a "landlocked" parcel positioned south and east of Mill Creek and immediately east of the BNSF right -of -way within the City of Kent (Figure 12). The parcel comprises approximately 8.4 acres. The parcel is bordered by a warehouse facility on the east and the newly constructed Creekside Storage facility across Mill Creek on the north. Permission to access the site to complete a habitat and sensitive areas reconnaissance level analysis has not been secured to date. Observations were completed from adjoining areas accessible to the general public and from aerial photography. The soil series mapped on the site by the NRCS is Woodinville silt . loam, a hydric soil. Final Wetlands Study BERGERIABAM, A00084 South 180th Street Grade Separation ' 29 December 2000 Herrera Wetland A Wetland A Herrera Wetland B So: 180th St. • 4 • • Not to Scale North Source: BERGER/ABAM Engineers 1999 Herrera Wetlands Mitigation Site South 180th Street Grade Separation Figure 11 Not to Scale InterurbanT Culvert So. 180th St. Railroad`: Trestle • Bridge -•\ Potential Wetland Mitigation Area • • e North Source: BERGER /ABAM Engineers 1999 Mill Creek Upland Wetland Mitigation Site South 180th Street Grade Separation Figure 12 Tukwila Wetland WL12 • Potential Wetland Mitigation Area Not to Scale Wetland' B North Source: BERGER /ABAM Engineers 1999 City of Tukwila Wetland WL12 South 180th Street Grade Separation Figure 13 Within the created wetland and buffer areas, shrubs and trees would be planted in groups designed to duplicate and supplement the plant communities in the existing wetland areas to be filled and, if applicable, in the adjacent wetland areas. Planting in the wetland creation area would be done by hand or using small mechanized equipment that would not compact soils. Within the created wetland, a variety of native tree, shrub, and emergent species will be planted at appropriate elevations with respect to seasonal water levels. Plant species to be used in all mitigation would be commercially available from local sources and native to the Puget Sound region. The created wetland would, at a minimum, be a Type 2 wetland, and would have a 50 -foot buffer as required by the City of Tukwila. 12.0 LIMITATIONS Within the limitations of schedule, budget, and scope of work, BERGER/ABAM warrants that this study was conducted in accordance with generally accepted environmental science practices, including the technical guidelines and criteria in effect at the time this study was performed, as outlined in the Methodology section. The results and conclusions of this report represent the authors' best professional judgment, based upon information provided by the City of Tukwila, the City of Renton, and the City of Kent in addition to that obtained during the course of this study. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. 13.0 REFERENCES Adamus, P.R., E.J. Clairain, Jr., D.R. Smith, and R.E. Young, "Wetland Evaluation Technique (WET), Volume II: Methodology," Waterways Experiment Station, Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg, MS, 1987. Castelle, A.J., A.W. Johnson, C. Conolly. 1994. Wetland and Stream Buffer Size Requirements - A Review. Adolfson Associates, Inc. Journal of Environmental Quality, Vol. 23, No. 5, September- October 1994. Cooke, Sarah: 1996. Wetland and Buffer Functions Semi - Quantitative Assessment Methodology, Draft User's Manual. Cooke Scientific Services. May, 1996. 27 pp. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Publ. FWS /OBS- 79/31. 131 p. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y -87 -1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. Darnell, R.M., W.E. Pequegnat, B.M. James, F.J. Genson, and R.E. Defenbaugh, Impacts of Construction Activities in Wetlands of the United States," U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. 1976. Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation. 1989. Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, DC. Cooperative technical publication. 76 pp. plus appendixes. Federal Register. 1980. 40 CFR Part 230: Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines for Specification of Disposal Sites of Dredged or Fill Material. Vol. 45, No. 249, pp. 85352 - 85353, U.S. Govt. Printing Office, Washington, DC. Final Wetlands Study BERGERlABAM, A00084 South 180th. Street Grade Separation 34 December 2000 Federal Register. 1982. Title 33: Navigation and Navigable Waters; Chapter II, Regulatory Programs of the Corps of Engineers. Vol. 47, No. 138, p. 31810, U.S. Govt. Printing Office, Washington, DC. Federal Register. 1986.40 CFR Parts 320 through 330: Regulatory Programs of the Corps of Engineers; Final Rule. Vol. 5L No. 219. pp. 41206 - 41260, U.S. Govt. Printing Office, Washington, DC. Friday, L.E., "The Diversity of Macroinvertebrate and Macrophyte Communities in Ponds." Freshwater Biol. 18:87 -104, 1987. Fryer, G. "Acidity and Species Diversity in Freshwater Crustacean Fauna," Freshwater Biol. 10:41- 45, 1980. Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. 1997. Ecosystems Technical Memorandum: Tacoma-to- Seattle Commuter Rail Project. Prepared for Adolfson Associates, Inc. and the Regional Transit Authority. October 30, 1997. Herron, R.C. 1985. Phosphorus dynamics in Dingle Marsh, Idaho. PhD Dissertation, Utah State University, Logan, UT. Horner, Richard R., S.S. Cooke, K.O. Richter, A.L. Azous, L.R. Reinelt, B.L. Taylor, K.A. Ludwa, and M. Valentine. 1996. Wetlands and urbanization: implications for the future. Chapter 15. Puget Sound Wetlands & Stormwater Management Research Program. Hitchcock, C.L., and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press, Seattle, WA. Jones & Stokes, Inc. 1996. City of Renton Wetland Inventory Update. Prepared for the City of Renton. Seattle, WA. City of Kent. 1993 Kent City Code. Adopted May 19, 1993. City of Kent. 1996. Wetland Inventory. City of Kent Geographic Information System. Printed June 20, 1996. King County. 1993. Guidelines for Bank Stabilization Projects in the Riverine Environments of King County. King County Department of Public Works, Surface Water Management Division, Seattle, WA. June, 1993. Kollmorgen Instruments Corp. 1988. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Kollmorgen Instruments Corp., Baltimore, MD. Mockler, Anna. 1998. Sensitive Area Mitigation Guidelines. King County Department of Development and Environmental Services, Land Use Services Divisions, December 29, 1998. Munsell Color. 1988. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Kollmorgen Instruments Corp., Baltimore, MD. Reed, P.B., Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: National Summary. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC. Biol. Rpt. 88(24). 244 p. City of Renton. 1991. City of Renton Fish and Wildlife Habitat. Prepared by David Evans and Associates, Inc. Renton, WA. Final Wetlands Study BERGER/ABAM, A00084 South 180th Street Grade Separation 35 December 2000 City of Renton. 1992. Critical Areas Inventory, City of Renton Wetlands and Stream Corridors. Prepared by Jones & Stokes Associates in association with R.W. Beck and Associates. Bellevue, WA. City of Renton. 1992. Critical Areas Maps. Long Range Planning, Planning/Building Public Works, Technical Services. Renton, WA. City of Renton. 1998. Title IV, City of Renton Building Regulations. Snyder, D.E., P.S. Gale, and R.F. Pringle. 1973. Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington. U.S. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, DC. Soil Conservation Service. 1985. Hydric Soils of the State of Washington. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Washington, DC. Soil Conservation Service. 1987. Hydric Soils of the United States. In cooperation with the National Technical committee for Hydric Soils. U.S. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, DC. City of Tukwila. 1990. Sensitive Areas Maps. City of Tukwila. 1997. Tukwila Municipal Code. Washington State Department of Ecology. 1997. Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. Publication 96 -94. Washington State Department of Ecology. Olympia, WA. Welch, E.B. "Ecological Effects of Waste Water." Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1980. Ziser, S.W., "Seasonal Variations in Water Chemistry and Diversity of the Phytophilic Macroinvertebrates of Three Swamp Communities in Southeastern Louisiana," Southwest Nat. 23:545 -562, 1978. Final Wetlands Study South 180th Street Grade Separation 36. BERGERJABAM, A00084 December 2000 APPENDIX A LIST OF PLANT SPECIES FOUND IN THE PROJECT AREA Plant Species Observed within the South 180th St. Grade Separation Study Area ... Common Name Scientific Name Acer macrophyllum Alnus rubra Betula papiryfera Malus fusca Populus balsamifera Pseudotsuga menziesii Robinia pseudoacacia Sorbus aucuparia Thuja plicata Scientific Name big -leaf maple red alder paper birch Pacific crabapple black cottonwood Douglas -fir black locust mountain ash western red cedar SHRUBS, Common Name WIS. FACU FAC FAC* FACW FAC FACU FACU NL FAC Cornus stolonifera, Cytisus scoparius Holodiscus discolor Prunus spp. Rubus discolor Salix lasiandra Salix sitchensis Sambucus racemosa Spiraea douglasii Symphoricarpos albus Scientific Name red -osier dogwood Scot's broom ocean spray Plum (ornamental) Himalayan blackberry Pacific willow Sitka willow red elderberry Douglas' spiraea snowberry HERBS Common Name FACW NL NL CULT FACU FACW+ FACW FACU FACW FACU WIS FACU FAC FACU NL. OBL FAC NL FACU+ OBL. NI FACW FAC+ NI FACU OBL.. Cirsium vulgare Equisetum arvense Galium aparine Hypericum perforatum Iris pseudacorus Lotus corniculatus Marah oreganus Plantago major Polygonum amphibium. Polygonum cuspidatum Ranunculus repens Solanum dulcamara Tanacetum vulgare Taraxacum officinale Veronica americana bull thistle field horsetail bedstraw common St. Johns wort yellow flag . . birdsfoot- trefoil bigroot common plantain water smartweed Japanese knotweed creeping buttercup climbing nightshade common tansy dandelion American brooklime Scientific Name Agropyron repens Agrostis tenuis Festuca arundinacea Glyceria elata Ho lcus lanatus Juncus effi sus . Phalaris arundinacea Typha latifolia Verbascum blattaria GRASSES, RUSHES, AND SEDGES Common Name quackgrass colonial bentgrass.. tall fescue tall mannagrass common velvetgrass soft rush reed canarygrass common cat -tail moth mullein WIS FAC - FAC FAC - FACW+ FAC FACW FACW OBL. UPL 1 Applican Application. -•� Project Name: r^(• tr� 1 bL i2 wit (ex Number: Name : s $D ;,ok• .g • Tovnship:23h1 Range: L4 Section: ;( State: ( County: 44ri Legal. Description: Date: ,1'111pi146 Plot N .: 2) A—� Vegetation [list the three dominant species in each vegetation layer (5 if only 1 or 2.layers)]...Indicate species with observed morphological or known physiological adaptations with an asterisk. Indicator Species Status Trees 1.• SaUix Stte(tit/t IS `AGW • 2. 91,c;LiLLic 1.7t .F•yoej 3. Saplings /shrubs 4.. �, {n.e.? 1:, . A.,,.�.) 3 est.i f V J. S. 6.: Z of species Species. Indicator Status Herbs . i. 71- F.(kii (At Lek' og 8 .' pa [I-a%or,; ,;-1 ,Ettett it II, i U m Woody vines '- (1Lt.tSt.+•uNt 01 Vet,t e 10. 11. 12. that are OBL, FACW, and /or FAC:100. Hydrophytic vegetation: Yes ✓ No- Basis: 061 Soil Series and phase: Wrr ,r Mottled: Yes ✓ No Cleyed: Yes ✓ No Hydr.ic soils:. Yes Other indicators: 121,0 / "•t (11.1 �.rtrf Sat) On hydric soils list? Yes ✓ ; No , • Mottle color: /0 i; 'IS ; Matrix color: 10 Ylt 't� S I+ Ai 10 Other indicators: pet(W 1 trintsrf5crist,I N I Cli S N No ; Basis: ,1-et.,.t.v ... uc kirr)ra 111.ert li 1I4(k05e -uj 1 Hydrology Inundated:. Yes No ✓ Depth of standing eater: Saturated soils: Yes ✓ ; No Depth to saturated soil: r1'io-lSf 40 Su] Other indicators:22Z /,r! tivn.te,,( !,2.�� Wetland hydrology: ` Yes 1✓ No ' V Basis: 5r1-0 Atypical situation: Yes ;. No Normal Circumstances? Yes ✓ No Wetland Determination: Wetland Comments: ct L.2_ ; Nonvetland • • Applicant 11_ Application Project Name: I; -U.lc YUI IA : Number: Name: S / gbt.Gi- State W County: K•IMt, Legal Description: Township: 2 315 Range: *C.. Date Il(p'q $ Plot No.: TP 2. Section: Z C Vegetation [list the threc'dominant species in each vegetation layer (5.if only 1.or 2 layers)J. 'Indicate species vith observed norphological.or known .physiological adaptations with an asterisk: Indicator Indicator Species Status Species Status Trees Herbs 1. 7. Ttorictt.Q -ur1 Uk \GoaYt . AJ1. 2. 8. No.e�.t curt Ic.tRrt A'u.04 . k — 3. 9. U1 Saplings /shrubs Woody vines 4. S rhe‘tlrl:vc. .t,et'S cttuS 101C.■ 10. 5. ':milli $ i,;lt!'.t.,. rz.1 t. })1C;a ," "r ( _t.) 11: 6. 12. Z of species that are.OBL, FACW,. and /or FAC: D . Other indicators: Hydrophytic vegetation:' Yes. No 1.---. Basis: Lkrt.tr"aln_. Soil Series and phase: We.1 l..h,04, Srin On hydric soils list? Yes : No Mottled: Yes ; No ✓ . Mottle color: ; Matrix color: j27C Gleyed: Yes No Other indicators: Hydric soils: Yes No ✓; Basis: Hydrology Inundated: Yes ;'No ✓ Depth of standing eater: Saturated soils: Yes •; No k Depth to saturated soil: Other indicators: 7)R1^. Wetland hydrology: Yes (-I No Basis: Atypical situation: Yes ; No ✓ . Normal Circumstances? Yes ✓ No Wetland Determination: Wetland Comments: 4-17: 01)47: s, rah;,,, • `. J DATA FORM 1 WETLAND. DETERMINATION Application. Project Number: Name: 5 / 30 'Fit S+ State: LOA County: ki n5 Legal Description: Township: 23N Range: 4E Date: '41I(r141g Plot No - 'C3 -I` Section: as- • Vegetation: [list the three dominant species in each vegetation layer .(5 if only 1 or 2 layers)). Indicate species vith'observed morphological or known physiological adaptations with an asterisk. Indicator Indicator Species Status Species Status Trees • 1.. 2, 3. Saplings /shrubs 4. 5n11 (Ac avi,. rAeO S. t Lo ttiS �t r t oi_ f 11. 6 . COI" U S S40107-ti 12 c (v Y)t: 4t. W 11,Yy : I of species that are OBL, FACW, and /or FAC: 3/5. Other indicators: Herbs 7. Pisafarts acur vta� a 8. ?hLiabtr- ,. arrf \tbtu.w� 9. 111 ara,ln. O -e v w.tAs . tvl. Woody vines. 10. 'FiAc»J Hydrophytic.vegetation: Yes ✓ No Basis: I nCt.t:ea r.t. Soil Series and phase: LIktet n•Ji! re 5c! ^ On hydric soils list ? Yes ✓ ; No Mottled: Yes No ✓ Mottle color: ; Matrix color: N Niticz (o — / g `/ } Gleyed: Yes 1"/-* . No J Other indicators: Sa+. 9.Yn.. -' ": Hydric soils: Yes ✓ No ; Basis: SA4- tCNA -:.Fu Hydrology Inundated: Saturated soils: Other indicators: Wetland hydrology Yes ; No _ Depth of standing vater: Yes ✓. ; -No • Yes ►/ ; No Atypical' situation: Yes____; No Normal. Circumstances? Yes Wetland Determination: Wetland Comments: 1_ It Depth to saturated soil: Su(CAce. Basis: 52 -1-0 fat Determined by: •LPL: {. -N7 - WO 1 - ;LY IBC rru: s, i . GV0 '/G 0 _ Applie t Application Project Nava: Number: Nave ScnBv1 44 County: F,,,11* L. =a1 Description: Township: Date: -7-30 -9% Plot No.: 1-A) Section: Vs station [list the three dominant species in each Yesetation.layer (S if- only -1 er. 2 layers)j. Indicsts species with observed morphological or known • physiological adaptations with an asterisk. Indicator `Species Status Species • Trees Herbs r. 1 -).0P A i• so-: &r c' t J 9 r_v J t 7. lr'W". t t A �' (':1 8.R - 'ii>"cMl -t jPrJc(St -J j, 9j7 :Indicator • Status 2. 3. 9. Sapling'.a/shrubs Woody vines 6 .(•jJk3S o1► S L• :X.. t`% -• . 6rZ T C U 10 S. 11. '6.. 12. Z of species that. are OB1., PACW, and /or TAC: Other indicators: Hydrophycie vegetation: Yes ;4_ do Buis: Soil Series and phase :tdx - 1M �NILd.�' c � On hydrae soils list' Yes ; No Mettlad: Yaa : No Mottle color: PIA ;A. ; Matrix color: 10W-1-1 Cloyed: Yes_ No Ocher indicators: Hydzic soils: Yes 3( No Basis: Hydrology Inundated: Yes • No X Depth of standing vater: • Saturated soils Tee. _ : I1o4`. Depth to saturated soil•^'l.cw 1F,t$ -% Other indicators: Wetland hydrology: Yes ; No Basis: Atypical situation: Yes ; No\ Normal Circumstances? Yes)( _ No Wetland Determinafion: Wetland Comments: • Nonum [land '98 15 :25 206 721 3428 PAGE_. 002 VV. low -V.I -17V a • •%. DATA FORM 1. WETLAND DETERMINATION Applica Applitatios: Name: Nusbar; State: County t'itel. Legal Description: Township' Data.'' E) r Plot IN. :,(r)1? D 'Z"— Section: Vs station (list the three dominant species in each vegetation layer (5 if only 1 or 2 layers)).. Indicate species with observed morphological or known physiological adaptations with an asterisk.' Indicator ' Indicator Species Status Species Status Trees Herbs 1. 7. ti15 a-7:1 itgl-V CaSt:� `:;L 2. 8 .C.1 R S 1.J*~t '•1 se ` +C_.,, 1, 3. 9 . P f -i 5 P.-4.10% Ni, . utiA fp,,c,,).,.4,/ Saplings /abrubs Woody vines - 6.p ..C3�S 0.5 c.''l -: j'._ . ( l to. S. 11. 6. 12. 1 of species that era on. !'ACV, and /or TAC: Other indicators:_ Hydrophytic vegetation: Yes AL__ No Soil Series and phase:�� .,)O:..J.MAI:. On hydric /sp�oils list? Yes ; No asor Mottled: Yes ; No X . Mottle color: �M !� 11 ; Matrix color:1i ` —3p Cloyed Yes No X Other indicators:' Hvdric soils: Yes Ho); Basis: . Basis: Hydroior Inundated: Yes ; No ,. Depth of standing rater: Saturated soils: 'Yes - ; lio' . Depth to saturated soil: Other indicators: Wetland hydrology: Yes ; No Basis Atypical situation: Yes No X. Normal Circumstances ? - Y No Wetland Determination: Wetland ; Not:ve[laad Convents: OCT. 5.'98 15:26 Dscersined by: k•i'tit'.11,3-' :206 721 3428 PAGE.003 • Wetland and Buffer Functions and Semi - Quantitative Performance Assessment Staff KF Location: Section 36_ Township _23N_ Range 4E Date 3/17/99 Function Criteria Group 1 1 pt Group 2 2 pts Group 3 3 pts Flood/ Storm Water Control points: 9 (max 15) X X X_ size < 5 acres riverine or Lakeshore wetland <10% forested cover unconstrained outlet located in lower 1/3 of the drainage — ' s size 5 -10 acres mid - sloped. wetland 10 -30% forested cover semi- constrained located in middle 1/3 of the drainage X X. — size > 10 acres depressions, > 30 % forested cover culvert/bermed outlet location in upper 1/3 of the drainage Base Flow/ Ground Water Support points: 11 ' (max 15) X X_ _ _ size < 5 acres riverine or lakeshore wetland located in lower 1/3 of the drainage temporarily flooded or saturated no flow - sensitive fish populations on -site or downstream _ _ _ size 5 -10 acres mid- sloped wetland located in middle 1/3 of the drainage seasonally or semi- permanently flooded or saturated low flow - sensitive fish populations on -site or downstream X _ X_ X_ size > 10 acres depressions, located in upper 1/3 of the drainage permanently flooded or saturated, or intermittently exposed high flow- sensitive populations contiguous with site in highly permeable strata Erosion/ Shoreline Protection points: N/A (max 9) _ _ — sparse grass/herbs or no veg along OHWM wetland extends < 30 m from OHWM highly developed shoreline or subcatchment _ _ _ sparse wood or veg along OHWM wetland extends 30 -60 m from OHWM moderately developed shoreline or subcatchment _ _ dense wood or veg . along OHWM wetland extends >200 m from OHWM undeveloped shoreline or subcatchment Water Quality Improvement points: 11 (max 12) . rapid flow throueh site < 50% veg cover upstream in basin from wetland is undeveloped . holds < 25% overland runoff X _ _ moderate flow throueh 50 -80% cover #50% of-basin upstream from wetland is developed holds 25 -50% overland runoff X X_ X_ slow flow throueh site > 80% veg cover > 50% of basin upstream from wetland is developed holds > 50% overland runoff N/A = Not Applicable, N/1= No information available Final Wetlands Study .South 180th Street Grade Separation BERGER/ABAM, A00084 December 2000 Wetland and Buffer Functions and Semi- Quantitative Performance Assessment Function Criteria Group 1 1 pt Group 2 2 pts Group 3 3 pts Natural Biological Support points: 25 (max 36) X_ size < 5 acres .. _ ag land, low veg structure — . seasonal surface water _ one habitat type PAB POW PEM PSS PFO EST — low plant diversity (< 6 species) _ > 50% invasive species low primary productivity — low organic accumulation X_ low organic export few habitat features — X_ buffers very disturbed isolated from upland habitats . X_ _. _ X_ _ X— X— — — X— size 5 -10 acres 2 level veg permanent surface water two habitat types PAB POW PEM PSS PFO EST moderate plant diversity (7 -15 species) 10 to 50% invasive moderate primary moderate organic moderate organic export some habitat features buffers slightly disturbed partially connected to _ — X_ X_ _ X_ _ — — X — _ .size > 10 acres high veg structure open water pools 3 3 habitat types PAB POW PEM. PSS PFO EST high plant diversity ( >15 species) < 10% invasive high primary high organic . high organic export many habitat features buffers not disturbed well connected to Overall Habitat Functions points: 4 (max 9) X_ size < 5 acres _ low habitat diversity X low sanctuary or refuge — X_ _ size 5 -10 acres moderate habitat moderate sanctuary or — _ _ size > 10 acres high habitat diversity high sanctuary or Specific Habitat Functions points: 11 (max 12) low invertebrate habitat — low amphibian habitat N/A low fish habitat — low mammal habitat — low bird habitat _ — _ X— — moderate invertebrate moderate amphibian moderate fish habitat moderate mammal moderate bird habitat X X_ _ — X— high invertebrate high amphibian high fish habitat high mammal habitat high bird habitat Cultural/ Socioeco- nomic points: 14 (max 21) — low educational opportunities — low aesthetic value . X_ lacks commercial fisheries, agriculture, renewable resources X_ lacks historical or archeological resources — lacks passive and active recreational opportunities X_ privately owned — not near open space X_. _ _ — — — moderate educational . opportunities moderate aesthetic value moderate commercial fisheries, agriculture, renewable resources historical or archeological site some passive and active recreational opportunities privately owned, some public access some connection to open — . , X— — — X_ . — X— high educational opportunities high aesthetic value high commercial fisheries, agriculture, renewable resources important historical or archeological site many passive and active recreational opportunities unrestricted public access . directly' connected to Final Wetlands Study South 180th Street Grade Separation BERGER/ABAM, A00084 December 2000 Wetland and Buffer Functions and Semi - Quantitative Performance Assessment Wetland # C Staff KF Date 3Lr1L99 Location: Section 36 Township 23N_ Range 4E_ Function Criteria Group 1 1 pt Group 2 2 pts Group 3 3 pts Flood/ Storm Water Control points: 9 (max 15) X X — size < 5 acres riverine or Lakeshore wetland <10% forested cover unconstrained outlet located in lower 1/3 of the drainage . _ size 5 -10 acres mid- sloped wetland 10-30% forested cover semi- constrained located in middle 1/3 of the drainage X X — size > 10 acres. depressions, > 30 % forested cover culvert/bermed outlet location in upper 1/3 of the drainage Base Flow/ Ground Water - Support points: 9 (max 15) X X_ X_ size < 5 acres riverine or Lakeshore wetland . located in lower 1/3 of the drainage temporarily flooded or saturated no flow - sensitive fish populations on -site or downstream _ _ size 5 -10 acres mid- sloped wetland located in middle 1/3 of the drainage seasonally or semi - permanently flooded or saturated low flow - sensitive fish populations on -site or downstream X — _ X_ size > 10 acres depressions, located in upper 1/3 of the drainage permanently flooded - or saturated, or intermittently exposed high flow- sensitive populations contiguous with site in highly permeable strata Erosion / Shoreline Protection points: N/A (max 6) _ N/A _ sparse grass/herbs or no veg along OHWM wetland extends < 30 m from OHWM highly developed shoreline or subcatchment _ _ _ sparse wood or veg along OHWM ' wetland extends 30 -60 m from OHWM moderately developed shoreline or subcatchment _ _ _ dense wood or veg along OHWM wetland extends >200 m from OHWM undeveloped shoreline or subcatchment Water Quality Improvement points: 9 (max 12) — X_ raoid flow throueh site < 50% veg cover upstream in basin from wetland is undeveloped holds < 25% overland runoff X moderate flow throueh 50 -80% cover #50% of basin upstream from wetland is developed holds 25 -50% overland runoff X X slow flow throueh site > 80% veg cover > 50% of basin upstream from wetland is developed holds > 50% overland .runoff N/A = Not Applicable, N/1= No information available Final Wetlands Study • South.180th Street Grade Separation C -3 BERGER/ABAM, A00084 December 2000 Wetland and Buffer Functions and Semi - Quantitative Performance Assessment Function Criteria Group 1 1 pt Group 2 2 pts Group 3 3 pts Natural Biological Support points: 12 (max 36) X_ X_ x_ X_ X_ X_ X_ X_ X_ X — . X_ X_ size < 5 acres . ag land, low veg structure seasonal surface water . one habitat type PAB POW PEM PSS PFO EST low plant diversity (< 6 species) > 50% invasive species low primary productivity low organic accumulation low organic export few habitat features buffers very disturbed isolated from upland habitats — — — — — — _ — _ size 5 -10 acres 2 level veg . permanent surface water two habitat types PAB POW PEM PSS PFO EST moderate plant diversity (7 -15 species) 10 to 50% invasive moderate primary moderate organic moderate organic export some habitat features • buffers slightly disturbed . partially connected to size > 10 acres _ high veg structure _ open water pools — 3 3 habitat types PAB POW PEM PSS PFO EST high plant diversity ( >15 species) — < 10% invasive — high primary — high organic high organic export many habitat — - buffers not — well connected to Overall Habitat Functions points: 3 (max 9) X_ X_ X_ size < 5 acres low habitat diversity low sanctuary or refuge — — _ size 5 -10 acres moderate habitat moderate sanctuary or — size > 10 acres — high habitat high sanctuary or Specific Habitat • Functions points: 4 (max 12) X_ X_ N/A X_ X_ low invertebrate habitat low amphibian habitat low fish habitat . low mammal habitat low bird habitat . — — — — _ moderate invertebrate moderate amphibian moderate fish habitat moderate mammal moderate bird habitat — high,invertebrate " _ high amphibian — high fish habitat — high mammal — high bird habitat Cultural/ Socioeco- nomic points: 8 (max 21) X_ X_ X X_ X_ X_ — low educational opportunities low aesthetic value lacks commercial fisheries, agriculture, renewable resources lacks historical or archeological resources lacks passive and active recreational opportunities privately owned not near open space — _ _ _ X moderate educational opportunities moderate aesthetic value moderate commercial fisheries, agriculture, renewable resources historical or archeological site some passive and active . recreational opportunities privately owned, some public access some connection to open — high educational opportunities — high aesthetic value _ high commercial fisheries, agriculture, renewable " resources _ important historical or archeological site — many passive and active recreational opportunities — unrestricted public access directly connected Notes: Final Wetlands Study . South 180th Street Grade. Separation C -4 BERGERIABAM, A00084 :. December 2000 South 180th Street Grade Separation: ADDENDUM. TO FINAL WETLANDS STUDY Prepared by BERGER/ABAMEngineers Inc. January 2001 The purpose of this addendum is to provide the City of Tukwila with an update to the South 180th Street grade separation design in relation to the wetland mitigation being developed for this project as documented in the SEPA Environmental Checklist dated 15 October 2000. Sections within the Final Wetlands Study where clarifications, revisions, or additional details are available are documented below. SECTION 6.0 WETLAND IMPACTS The Wetland A buffer that will be filled has been recalculated to 0.9 acre. The wetland buffer impact was recalculated to reflect impacts to the actual functioning buffer. The new calculated wetland buffer impact area does not include the area that is currently developed and not technically classified as functioning buffer. Figure 10 is revised as attached with the recalculated Wetland buffer. SECTION 10.0 WETLAND MITIGATION ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS Section 10.2 Potential Wetland Creation Site Alternatives Out of the three potential wetland mitigation sites investigated, only the Herrera wetland site (the City of Renton property located east of the BNSF railroad) is functional as wetland mitigation. SECTION 11.0 CONCEPTUAL WETLAND CREATION PLANTING PLAN Figure 11, which describes the potential wetland mitigation area, is supplemented with the attached Wetland Mitigation Plan for the Herrera Wetland Site. Figure 11 is further supplemented with an attached plan that depicts the wetland mitigation area fitting within the City of Renton parcel. Respectfully submitted BERGER/ABAM Engineers Inc. Final Wetlands Study. South 180th Street Grade Separation.. BERGERJABAM, A00084 January 2001 WETLAND AREA "C" ' ' '-'• : 1 AND UPR a a a a a a ...a. 11:40::10.0•721111:1:1••••`..311:".:1•;•:2111WY4WIMIN 11:4111:1•1:.241:1;F:2111.1:10:E3IIVIA , WETLAND AREA "B" • • - • 2•-• • S" .. - . • IN WETLAND WETLAND = 722 sq ft IN BUFFER 6912 sq ft APPROX WETLAND AREA .- • 1 IN WETLAND = 47,550 sq ft IN BUFFER = 30,773 sq ft • ••••• • •■••••••• ■■•■■■ ..•■••■••• WETLAND AREA "A" r- i r., TOTALS FOR WETLANDS • IN WETLAND = 48,272 sq ft (1.1 acre) IN BUFFER = 37,685 sq ft (0.9 acre) APPROX WETLAND AREA /la Alb Ala APPROXIMATE SLOPE UNITS • PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. gib 41, • 6% Samd 111d 2zt 10 2001 .1 2•26a. by Marla, — ENGINEERING— STREETS— WATER—SEWER—PARKS—BUILDING- NY dote GssIWIGG cw CONSULTANTS drool BSA ducked CLP Prai poi A- cw GLP re ARGOVABAM ENGINEERS I NC. 513en mOlut soyno 1,12,13.1. WAY .53.0%. •6003-e3Th (30)431■2X0 (206$3,•=50 I-ER NOR Engineering, inn. WETLAND IMPACTS SOUTH 1 80th STREET GRADE SEPARATION So no A. dabs f1 N It11999‘60900212.aliwynadolsokni-elboirtmadvg Sois 60 scale date T %-r-1 o 1,.4 •Zo ES WASHINGTON PLANNING SERVICES Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP Manager Mailing Address: 220 Fourth Ave. S. ,s. Kent, WA 98032 - 5895 ;. Location Address: 400 West Gowe Kent, WA 98032 Phone: 253 -856 -5454 Fax: 253 - 856 -6454 • November 28, 2000 RECEIVED NOV 3 0 2000 Ms. Rose Ann Lopez COMMUNITY Engineer/Proj ect ManagerDEVELOPMENT 1)442,b Q'2 °— Olympic Pipe Line Company 2319 Lind Ave SW Renton, WA 98057 RE: REQUEST FOR SEPA EXEMPTION PIPELINE BYPASS FOR S 1807" STREET GRADE SEPARATION Dear Ms. Lopez: I have reviewed you letter dated October 24, 2000, wherein you requested a State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) determination for the above - referenced project. Based upon your letter, the scope of the project includes the relocation of the existing Olympic Pipeline to a depth of approximately 100 feet below grade to accommodate the proposed grade separation project by the City of Tukwila. The new placement of the pipeline will be through directional boring. As described the size of the pipeline will remain the same. Since the project involves the relocation of an existing utility line, it is exempt per WAC 197 -11- 800(3) which states: The following activities shall be categorically exempt: The repair, remodeling, maintenance, or minor alteration of existing private or public structures facilities or equipment, including utilities, involving no material expansions or changes in use beyond that previously existing. Although the' City of Kent will not require environmental review pursuant to SEPA, Civil Engineering Plan review and approval will be required through our Public Works Engineering Department. Please contact Barbara Hill, Project Coordinator at (253) 856 -5500 for information regarding submittal requirements. Should you have any additional questions, please contact Kim Marousek, Senior Planner, at (253) 856 -5454 in the Planning Department. Sincerely, A/V /A$¢/ red N. Satterstrom, AICP Planning Manager SEPA Responsible Official KM \cb \S:\Permit\Plan\Env \exemptions \Olympic Pipeline.doc cc: Gary Gill, City Engineer Kim Marousek, Senior Planner Deborah Ritter,. Associate Planner, City of Tukwila ''6300 S':Center Blvd; S #100' • Tukwila; WA 98188 • City of Tukwila DEV CITOY OF•ON ING DEC 0 5 2000 RECEIVED Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director NOTICE OF APPLICATION DATED NOVEMBER 27, 2000 The following application has been submitted to the City of Tukwila Department of Community Development for review and decision. APPLICANT: City of Tukwila, Public Works Department LOCATION: South 180th Street Grade Separation to be located at the intersection of S. 180th St. (SW 43rd St.) and the BNSF Railroad and the UPRR Railroad near the north boundary of Kent, the southwest corner of Renton and the southeast corner of Tukwila. FILE NUMBERS: E2000 -029 (SEPA Determination) PROPOSAL: OTHER REQUIRED PERMITS: The project will reconstruct 1,660 linear feet of S. 180th St. to provide a grade. separation between vehicular traffic and railroad traffic. The proposed roadway (with five lanes, Class 111 bicycle route, curbs, gutters and sidewalks) will pass under the existing railroad tracks. Bridges will be constructed for the BNSF (3 tracks), UPRR (1 track) and the Interurban Trail to pass over S. 180th along the current alignments. Railroad tracks will be detoured during construction. Grading Permits (Tukwila, Renton & Kent) HPA Permit & Water Quality Cert. (Dept. of Fish & Wildlife) Section 404 Permit (Army Corps of Engineers) Shoreline (Renton, Department of Ecology) Critical Area Review (Renton) The SEPA file can be reviewed at. the Department of Community Development, 6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100, Tukwila, WA. Please call (206) 431 -3670 to ensure that the file(s) will be available. OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT You can submit comments on this application. You must submit your comments in writing to the Department of Community Development by 5:00 p.m. on December 11, 2000. If you have questions about this proposal contact Deborah Ritter, the Planner in charge of this file at (206) 431 -3663. Anyone who submits written comments will become parties of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. 148 St m H S 150 St S 152 St S 149 St S 149 St 151 St 153 St 0 o F 111 o - u 111 " =a c 2c - 0' z 0u Cr c S156St D 4.1 Parkway S 164 St Strander Blvd TreCk Dr PROJECT LOCATION Upland Drive Private Private S 180 St Minkler Blvd 43 St Segale Pk Dr City of Tukwila Department of Public Works S 180 Street Grade Separation 2/8/00 Vicinity Map State of Washington County of King City of Tukwila CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E -mail: tukplan(aci.tukwila.wa.us AFFIDAVIT OF INSTALLATION AND POSTING OF PUBLIC INFORMATION SIGN(S) I Rob i r TI SC. \r &I( (PRINT NAME) understand that Section 18.104.110 of the Tukwila Municipal Code requires me to post the property no later than fourteen (14) days following the issuance of the Notice of Completeness. I certify that on 00 the Public Notice Board(s) in accordance with Section 18.104.110 and the other applicable guidelines were posted on the property located at 1.300 S 180 ST so as to be clearly seen from each right -of -way primary vehicular access to the property for application file number 2000- 0-2cr I herewith authorize the City of Tukwila or its representative to remove and immediately dispose of the sign at the property owner's expense, if not removed in a timely manner or within fourteen (14) days of a Notice letter. Applicant or Project Manager's Signature On this day personally appeared before me --T-1 to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged tha fi, she signed the same a;/ er voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned therein. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 7jl day of I � -'`�-� , 000O . NOTA PUBLIC in and for the State o Washington residing at My commission expires on - ©c)- -46 City of Tukwila • Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION November 14, 2000 Robin Tischmak Senior Engineer Public Works Department City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 101 Tukwila, Washington 98188 RE: South 180th Street Grade Separation E2000 -029 (SEPA) Dear Robin: Your application for a SEPA determination on the above - referenced project has been found to be complete as of November 14, 2000 for the purposes of meeting state mandated time requirements. Essentially, this means that you have supplied the required items listed on the application checklist for this type of permit. The next step is for you to install two notice boards on the site (at locations that will allow people to safely access the information). These boards must be installed within 14 days of the date of this letter (on or before November 28, 2000). Please let me know the date that the boards will be installed so I can coordinate the mailing of the Notice of Application. After the boards have been installed I will provide you with two laminated copies of the Notice of Application to post on each of the notice boards. After installing the Notices on the boards, please return the executed and notarized Affidavit of Posting to me (also enclosed). We are about -to commence our technical review process, which is the next phase in the processing of your SEPA non - project application. Although your SEPA application has been found to be "complete ", the items you supplied may have to be revised or amended. The City may also require that you submit additional plans and information to ensure the project meets the substantive requirements of the City and to finalize the review process. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 206 -431 -3663. Sincerely, Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner cc: Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist Mike Alderson, Assistant Fire Chief 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 • CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E -mail: tukplan(a,ci.tukwila.wa.us .. SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR STAFF USE ONLY SIERRA TYPE P- SEPA Planner: b �� File Number: �a� 62- �f v � J Application Complete (Date: i)_ Iii..e6 Project File Number: Application Incomplete (Date: ) Other File Numbers: NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: 5 I80 I ST (RP t E. SE PRRtk-Ti ON LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. LIST ALL 10 DIGIT PARCEL NUMBERS. S I807±- ST / SW 143 RD s-r' ST2,EET RI tm EFT' - OF - wA-Y FRorh 72 "—°- AvE s To SP2c M&162DoK CREEK owN Et BY TftE GITIES OF Tuukwii A ) 2ENTa+U KENT' Quarter: NW Section: NO Township: 23 It( Range: `i E (This information may be found on your tax statement.) DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR : The individual who: • has decision making authority on behalf of the applicant in meetings with City staff, • has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and • is the primary contact with the City, to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: 808, t Ti sc H-rn Ak Address: 10300 SOUTHCE 1JTh BLVD . ) TUkwILPi ) LtiA 98088 Phone: (2o( 433 -011'! FAX: ( Zola) 143/ - 3(5 Signature: G:\ APPHAN\LANDUSE.APP\SEPAAPP.DOC, 06/16/00 Date: it - ip '00 RECEIVED Nov 06 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMPLETE APPLICATION .CHECKLIST The materials listed below must be submitted with your application unless specifically waived in writing by the Public Works Department and the Department of Community Development. Please contact the Department if you feel that certain items are not applicable to your project and should be waived, or should be submitted in a later timely manner for use at the Public Hearing (e.g., revised colored renderings). Application review will not begin until it is determined to be complete. ADDITIONAL MATERIALS MAY BE REQUIRED, TO ENSURE CONSISTENCY WITH CITY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. Department staff are available to answer questions about application materials at 206 -431 -3670 Department of Community Development and 206 -433 -0179 Department of Public Works. COMPLETE APPLICATION CHECKLIST TABLE Information. Regni °red. :: May be waived in unusual cases; upon approval ofboth.Public Works and Planning . g ' Information Waived PbWk /Ping Office Use`Only • , Comments :& Conditions. APPLICATION FORMS: 1. Application Checklist: one (1) copy, indicating items submitted with application. I fJ C L U bE. be 2. Four (4) copies of supporting studies with original signatures and license stamp as needed. { 1. Bout% . i utJ oUi.l b, 3. Complete Application Packet: Six (6) copies of 'application form and full sized plans; one set of all plans reduced to 8.5" by 11" (High Quality Photo Reduction) and other materials and information as specifically listed in Project Description and Analysis, Site Plans, Landscape Plan and Elevations. IN CLLkbEt 4. SEPA Environmental Checklist (6 copies) and fee (S325). 14 / A PUBLIC NOTICE MATERIALS: 5. King County Assessor's map(s) which shows the location of each property within 500 feet of the subject lot. '^ 111P\ 1 SUBMIT ONLY IF UNDERLYING PERMIT SUBMIT PUBLIC NOTICE. 6. Two (2) sets of mailing labels for all property owners and tenants (residents and businesses) within 500 feet of the subject property. See Public Notice Materials. Note: Each unit in multiple - family buildings -e.g. apartments, condos, trailer parks must be included). /� ' V SUBMIT ONLY IF UNDERLYING PERMIT REQUIRES PUBLIC NOTICE. A 4' x 4' Public Notice Board will be required on site within 14 days of the Department determining that a complete application has been received. /PROPERTY INFORMATION 7. Vicinity Map with site location. ( NJ C L U bEb, 8. Surrounding Land Use Map for all existing land • uses within .a 1,000 foot radius from the lot's property lines. I � C L�D� w in a o 5.6 9. Title Report -- Clearly establish status as legal lot(s) of record, ownership, all known easements and encumbrances. > N -0 l /� W MEM c, o (� c, _2_ 10. Lot lines for 300 ft. from the site's property lines including right -of -ways. 0 _ 20 ( N CLVDED LU z Du G AAPPHANLLANDUS E. APPISEPAAPP. D0C. 06/16/00 IDrro4(CJL ASSESM€Ns" Gonl C.6"- LETrEP-S Grr`( oF-r PLA4 1 — R2EL Sh- ci-Es-rp° Ivy RECEIVED wE f�v E BeENJ boo lab rok-r- ii (a.) n-tt CET Op- gai-r-0 NOV 0 6 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT JEN IJ ( FEZ- nr k) — P2r Jcl A- L. Pifsgo Ef�- NOV -02 -2000 THU 10:04 AM FAX NO. 3607056822 P. 01 Number of Pages: 3 To: �0�� AA- `riSdL,I�— Comments: Date: ` From: Ste--. 4/hz% �U)sa9 T 12J- A 47d USA S' fdt e-'. 11,(.12L 444_ dy HIGHWAYS & LOCAL PROGRAMS Main phone: (360) 705 -7370 SERVICE CENTER Fax: (360) 705 -6822 www.wsdot.wa.goviTA/Homepage/HLPHP.html (1,t'— Highways & Local Programs Service Center PO Box 47390 Olympia, WA 98504 -7390 Jesse Tanner, Mayor CIT° OF RENTON Planning /Building /Public Works Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator October 4, 2000 Mr. Jim Morrow, Director of Public Works City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 SUBJECT: OAKESDALE BUSINESS. PARK WETLAND BUFFER ENCUMBRANCE OPTIONS FOR THE S. 180TH GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT Dear Mr. Morrow; My engineering staff has put together two site maps of the wetland mitigation area north of S. 180th St. based on information provided by the design consultant, BERGER/ABAM. The maps show the two existing wetlands and associated buffers, the proposed detention pond, pump station, maintenance road and the upland area available for mitigation. As shown in the map exhibit labeled Option 1, there is not sufficient remaining upland area (21,000 SF) to locate the 21;370 SF required for the Oakesdale Business Park wetland buffer encumbrance on the site. In addition, a portion of the pond maintenance road and pump station occupies approximately 2,800 SF, which would further reduce the available upland area to _18,200 SF. The location of a road in a wetland buffer is not allowed, therefore this option, based upon the current wetland mitigation requirement of 1.67 acres, is not feasible. However, if the project wetland impacts and corresponding mitigation were to be reduced, this option might be feasible. Your consultant has indicated that one of the shoofly track connections will be eliminated from the project, which may reduce the quantity of fill in wetlands A and B in Tukwila. In which case, the reduction in wetland mitigation area needed on the site could be used to accommodate the Oakesdale Business Park wetland buffer area that was encumbered on the site. As you also know, our Mayor's position is that if the Oakesdale Business Park wetland buffer encumbrance, the S. 180'h Grade Separation Project wetland mitigation and storm water management facilities cannot be accomplished on the same site, then Tukwila will need to find an alternative site for the wetland mitigation. To resolve this problem, we have identified an alternative solution titled Option 2. Option 2 would be to create additional wetland area in exchange for reserving the Oakesdale Business Park wetland buffer encumbrance on the site. We believe that this option would provide a greater benefit to the project (see exhibit labeled Option 2) and meets the intent of our buffer encumbrance agreement with the Oakesdale Business Park. We will need to verify that the Oakesdale Business Park. is agreeable to the City of Renton waiving buffer encumbrance in exchange for the creation of additional wetland on the site as part of the S. 180" St. Grade Separation Project wetland mitigation. The project wetland biologist will need to determine what the wetland creations to buffer exchange rate should he, but our minimum acceptable exchange for wetland creation to wetland buffer encumbrance is 0.5:1. Thus, for the 21,370 SF of buffer encumbrance. 10,685 SF (0.25 ac.) of additional wetland area would need to be created as part of the S. 180th Grade Separation Project 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 Page 2 wetland mitigation. This is wetland mitigation that is in addition to the project wetland mitigation. Under Option 2, the total amount of wetland mitigation that would be needed includes the 1.67 acres for the project wetland impacts plus the 0.25 acres for Oakesdale Business Park buffer encumbrance exchange for a total of 1.92 acres. To summarize, due to the current 1.67 acres of wetland mitigation that is needed for the project, there is not enough upland area remaining on the site to accommodate the Oakesdale Business Park wetland buffer encumbrance and the proposed project storm water management facilities (Option 1). The creation of additional wetland area in exchange for reserving area on the site for the Oakesdale Business Park wetland buffer encumbrance can be accomplished on the remaining upland area on the site and still meet the intent of wetland buffer encumbrance agreement (Option 2). If the project wetland impacts were to be: reduced, then Option 1 might be. feasible. In addition, the project design needs to consider wetland buffer requirements for the existing wetlands . that are on the site within the project limits. I trust that this information provides you the direction that is needed for you to proceed with the design. If you have any questions, please contact Ron Straka, Surface Water Utility Supervisor at 425- 430 -7248 or me at 425 -30 -7311. Sincerely, Gregg Zimrherman, P.E. Planning/Building /Public Works Administrator: cc: Lys Homsby Ron Straka 11 \DIVISION S \lJ'I'IIJTIl .S \U(XS\20o0- 451.doc\iJS \ux • Option #1 • Upland Area Rem ning Area required for j itigati (1.67ac) [in sda e Business Development ...I • mina 1 Not to Scale Area available for buffer encumbrance (21.000sf) ..ftr-,2•4\ SD NOV;02 -2000 THU 10:04 AM SEP 1 8 2000 FAX NO. 3607056822 P. 02 United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Western Washington Office 510 Desmond Drive SE, Suitc 102 Lacey, Washington 98503 Phone: (360) 753 -9440 Fax: (360) 753 -9008 Mr, Brian Hasselbach Highways and Local Programs Service Center Washington State Department of Transportation Transportation Building PO Rox 47300 Olympia, WA 98504 -7300 FWS Reference: 1- 3 -00 -I -1267 Dear Mr. Hasselbach: This Ietter is in response to the request for informal consultation on the South 180`h Street Grade Separation project in King County, Washington. Your letter dated May 16, 2000, and Biological Assessment (BA) prepared by the City of Tukwila, was received in our office on May 19, 2000. In your letter you request U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) concurrence with your det :-rinination of "may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect" for the bald eagle (Haliaeeius leuc: >;:c1�halus) and Coastal/ Puget Sound bull trout (Salvelinus conjluentus), in accordance with sections 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of, 1973, as amended (Act)(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). It is our understanding that this request is being submitted by the Highways and Local Programs Service Center of the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) on behalf of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The Service believes that sufficient information has been provided on project effects to listed species for the lead agency to make effect determinations. In order to expedite the environmental review process, if the Federal Highways Administration concurs with your effect determinations for listed species, then you may consider this action to be in compliance with requirements of 50 CFR 402.13, thereby concluding the consultation, process, The project should be re- analyzed if new information reveals effects of the action that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner or to an extent not considered in this consultation; if the action is subsequently modified in a manner that causes an effect to the listed species or critical habitat that was not considered in this consultation;•and/or if a new species is listed or critical habitat is designated that may be affected by this project. NOV -,02 -2000 THU 10:05 AM FAX NO. 3607056822 P, 03 If you have further questions about this letter or your responsibilities under the Act, please contact Jennifer Quan at (360) 753 -6047. Sincerely, igAwmf,mv4 'Xi )1,4 Gerry Jackson, Manager Western Washington Office cc: FHWA WDFW Region 4 Job No. A00084 Soon 1 1 000th StreeR Wade Sospareo© RECEIVED NOV 0 6 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT F0na0 —ratEc Qnally Submitted to City of Tukwila Public Works Department Tukwila, Washington It Submitted by EliG /A f:A E N G I N E E R S I N C. October 2000 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS for the South 180th Street Grade Separation Prepared for: Berger /ABAM Engineers for the City of Tukwila October 2000 Prepared by: The TRANSPO Group, Inc. 14335 NE 24th Street, Suite 201 Bellevue, WA 98007 -3737 (425) 641 -3881 FAX: (425) 747 -3688 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 3 METHODOLOGY 5 EVALUATION CRITERIA 6 Arterial Level of Service 6 Intersection Levels of Service 7 Volume -to- Capacity Ratios 7 ANALYSIS AND RESULTS 8 Existing Conditions 8 Forecast Conditions (2020) 12 ADDENDUM NO. 1 — FOUR -LANE ANALYSIS ADDENDUM NO. 2 — ANALYSIS OF DETOURS FIGURES 1. Site Vicinity Map 2 2. Traffic Analysis Summary - Traffic Volumes and Operations 4 3. Study Area and Existing Roadway Network 9 4. Existing Traffic Volumes 10 5. 2020 Planned Roadway Improvements 13 6. 4 lanes without Strander Extension - 2020 Traffic Volumes and Operations 15 7. 6 lanes without Strander Extension - 2020 Traffic Volumes and Operations 16 8. 4 lanes with Strander Extension - 2020 Traffic Volumes and Operations 17 9. 6 lanes with Strander Extension - 2020 Traffic Volumes and Operations 18 TABLES 1. Level of Service Criteria for Arterials 6 2. Level of Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections 7 3. Existing AM and PM Peak Hour Arterial Levels of Service - S 180th Street 11 4. Existing AM and PM Peak Hour Intersection LOS Results. 11 5. Existing and 2020 AM and PM Peak Hour Arterial LOS - S 180th Street 19 6. 2020 AM Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service. 20 7. 2020 PM Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service 20 8. 2020 Daily V/C Ratios along Study Area Arterials 22 Traffic Analysis for the S 18■0, Street Grade Separation September 4. 1998 INTRODUCTION S 180th Street is a principal arterial serving the Tukwila, Renton, and Kent areas of the Green River Valley. It connects SR 181 (West Valley Highway) with SR 167 (East Valley Highway). The City of Tukwila has identified a Capital Improvement Project (CIP) to grade - separate S 180th Street over the existing BNSF and UP railroad tracks. The grade separation will help reduce traffic delays and potential safety hazards at the crossing with existing train traffic and Sound Transit's (ST) planned Commuter Rail service in the corridor. The grade separation will also enhance rail travel speeds in the corridor. Figure 1 shows the general vicinity map of the project study area, as well as the arterial and freeway system that serves traffic in the vicinity of the project. The purpose of this traffic study is to assist the project design team and the City of Tukwila in defining the number of lanes needed to safely and efficiently carry traffic on S 180th Street. The study also identifies potential traffic impacts to the major arterial and freeway routes in the study area of the planned grade separation project. The primary study area includes S 180th Street between SR 181 and Oakesdale Avenue SW (80th Avenue S). The potential extension of Strander Boulevard between SR 181 and Oakesdale Avenue SW is an essential component of this study since it has the potential to relieve east /west travel on S 180th Street. Four analysis scenarios were evaluated. The basic alternatives, as defined by the project team with the City of Tukwila, evaluated possible 4 -lane (two lanes in each direction) or 6 -lane (three lanes in each direction) configurations. These same scenarios were analyzed with and without a potential extension of Strander Boulevard, located approximately 1.1 miles north of S 180th Street. The evaluations of conditions with the possible extension of Strander Boulevard were included based on coordination with the City of Renton. The following summarizes the four analysis scenarios: • 4 lanes without Strander Extension. This scenario includes 4 lanes (2 in each direction) on S 180th Street with a center left -turn lane . It does not include the extension of Strander Boulevard from SR 181 to Oakesdale Avenue SW. • 6 lanes without Strander Extension. This scenario includes six lanes (3 in each direction) on S 180th Street with a center left -turn lane, and does not include the extension of Strander Boulevard from SR 181 to Oakesdale Avenue SW. • 4 lanes with Strander Extension. This scenario includes 4 travel lanes on S 180th Street, with a center left -turn lane. The extension of Strander Boulevard from SR 181 to Oakesdale Avenue SW is also assumed. • 6 lanes with Strander Extension. This scenario includes six travel lanes on S 180th Street with a center left -turn lane, and the extension of Strander Boulevard from SR 181 to Oakesdale Avenue SW. The analysis focuses on the evaluation of traffic operations at the following three signalized intersections, as well as overall arterial operations along S 180th Street: • S 180th Street /West Valley Highway (SR 181) • S 180th Street /72nd Avenue S • S 180th Street /Oakesdale Avenue SW -80th Avenue S Traffic forecasts were prepared for 2020 to be consistent with the regional travel demand model and other recent planning efforts. The 2020 forecasts also help ensure that the project can meet the travel demands for approximately a 20 -year horizon. The next section of the report summarizes the key study findings and conclusions. It is followed by a review of the study methodology and evaluation criteria used in the analysis. The final sections then present the detailed analysis results. Mt97t970781WP197078R2. DOC © The TRANSPO Group, Inc. 1998 Page 1 S 180th Street Grade Separation City of Tukwila Figure 1 Site Vicinity The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Traffic Analysis for the S 180Y. Street Grade Separation SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS September 4, 1998 The following summarizes the findings and conclusions of the traffic analysis for S 180th Street. Figure 2 summarizes the traffic volumes and operations on S 180th Street for each of the four scenarios in 2020. • Traffic forecasts for S 180th Street were developed using the Puget Sound Region Council's (PSRC) EMME /2 travel forecasting model for the year 2020. The following four scenarios were analyzed: > 4 lanes on S 180th Street, without the extension of Strander Boulevard to Oakesdale Avenue SW via SW 27th Street in Renton. > 6 lanes on S 180th Street, without the extension of Strander Boulevard. > 4 lanes on S 180th Street, with the extension of Strander Boulevard. > 6 lanes on S 180th Street, with the extension of Strander Boulevard. • The traffic analysis for the study focused on the arterial operation of S 180th Street from SR 181 to Oakesdale Avenue SW, and the levels of service (LOS) at the signalized intersections within this section. Weekday AM and PM peak hour conditions were analyzed for each of the four scenarios in 2020. Volume -to- capacity (v /c) ratios were also used to evaluate traffic impacts. • The average daily traffic (ADT) that currently utilizes S 180th Street is over 35,000 vehicles per day (vpd). If the Strander extension is not constructed, average daily traffic on S 180th Street is expected to increase to over 50,000 ADT, an increase of 42 percent over existing daily traffic volumes. The ADT are expected to increase to almost 44,000 vpd on S 180th Street in 2020 if the Strander Boulevard extension is constructed; this represents an increase of almost 25 percent. These traffic forecasts for the year 2020 would warrant six travel lanes (three in each direction) on S 180th Street with or without the extension of Strander Boulevard. A center, two -way, left -turn lane is recommended to serve turning vehicles at the signalized intersections on either side of the grade separation. • With six lanes on S 180th Street, and without the extension of Strander Boulevard to Oakesdale Avenue SW, S 180th Street could accommodate 10 to 15 percent more traffic beyond the 2020 forecasts. With six lanes and the extension of Strander, S 180th Street could accommodate 25 to 30 percent additional traffic beyond 2020 travel demands. • If the extension of Strander Boulevard is not constructed, and assuming six travel lanes on the section of S 180th Street between SR 181 and Oakesdale Avenue SW, the arterial is expected to maintain average travel speeds of 17 mph (LOS D) during the PM peak hour. However, the SR 181 and Oakesdale Avenue SW intersections are forecast to operate at LOS F during the PM peak hour. Either additional lanes are needed at each intersection, or another east -west connection like Strander Boulevard is necessary to make the SR 181 and Oakesdale Avenue SW intersections operate at LOS E or better in 2020. • If the Strander Boulevard extension is constructed, and assuming six travel lanes on the section of S 180th Street between SR 181 and Oakesdale Avenue SW, the arterial is expected to maintain adequate operations during both the AM and PM peak hour. Average travel speeds on S 180th Street would be 17.8 mph, which would maintain LOS D operations, and the three signalized intersections would operate at or above LOS E during the AM and PM peak hours. Thus, based on the intersection LOS analyses, the Strander Boulevard extension appears to help maintain adequate peak hour operation of S 180th Street between SR 181 and. Oakesdale Avenue SW in the year 2020. M:19 7L970781 WR9 707882. DOC © The TRANSPO Group, Inc. 1998 Page 3 SCENARIO ADT LOS DELAY EXISTING D (C) 32.7 (24.8) 4 W/0 ST. F (C) >60 (23.8) 6 w/0 ST. F (C) >60 (23.9) 4 W/ ST. D (C) 39.6 (22.6) ' 6 W/ ST. E (C) 41.1 (22.7) 72ND AVE S N . WEST VALLEY Hly UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD BURLINGTON NORTHERN -SANTA FE RAILROAD SCENARIO ADT LOS DELAY EXISTING C (C) 20.4 (18.9) 4 W/0 ST. F (F) >60 (>60) 6 w/0 ST. F (E) >60 (42.9) 4 W/ ST. F (0) >60 (33.4) 6 W/ ST. D (C) 27.0 (25.0) 80TH AVE S SCENARIO ADT LOS DELAY EXISTING B (8) 10.6 (7.5) 4 W/0 ST. B (B) 9.7 (7.4) 6 W/0 ST. B (8) 8.3 (6.3) 4 W/ ST. B (B) 9.7 (6.8) 6 W/ ST. B (8) 8.0 (5.8) PA 0 ARTERIAL LOS RESULTS SCENARIO ADT SPEED LOS EXISTING 35,200 16.8 (18.6) E (D) 4 W/0 ST. 50,200 10.0 (16.5) F (E) 6 W/0 ST. 52,600 17.0 (18.6) D (D) 4 W/ ST. 43,300 14.7 (17.6) E (D) 6 W/ ST. 44,300 17.8 (19.1) D (D) OAKESDALE AVE SW SCENARIO DESCRIPTION 4 W/0 ST. 6 W/0 ST. 4 W/ ST. 6 W/ ST. 4 Lanes on S 180th St. without Strander Extension 6 Lanes on S 180th St. without Strander Extension 4 Lanes on S 180th St. with Strander Extension 6 Lanes on S 180th St. with Strander Extension LEGEND SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION (XX) = AM PEAK HOUR XX = PM PEAK HOUR ADT = AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC SPEED = AVERAGE TRAVEL SPEED (MPH) LOS = LEVEL OF SERVICE (B)M:1971970781Cad1graphic Idk 09/03/98 07:52 S 180th Street Grade Separation City of Tukwila Figure 2 Traffic Analysis Summary Traffic Volumes and Operations The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Traffic Analysis for the S 180^ Street Grade Separation September 4. 1998 METHODOLOGY TRANSPO evaluated the traffic models for the City of Renton and the City of Tukwila, as well as the Puget Sound Regional Council's (PSRC) regional model for use in estimating future traffic volumes in the study area. The model for the City of Renton was not used since it had a future year of 2010, and the discussions with City staff indicated that the model was not well "calibrated" in this area of the City. The model for the City of Tukwila has not been updated in a number of years and has a horizon year of 2010. TRANSPO is currently under contract with the City of Tukwila to update their traffic model as part of the City's updated Transportation Plan, however, the model will not be complete until at least early 1999. The PSRC model is a regional model for the Central Puget Sound Region. The PSRC model does not contain a detailed roadway network in the study area; however, the model does include the major arterials in the area, and has a 2020 forecast year. Based on the evaluation of all three traffic models, it was determined that the PSRC model would be used for this analysis since it provided updated forecast conditions for 2020, and it included the major arterials in the study area. As part of the development of the traffic forecasts, TRANSPO met with transportation staff from the Cities of Renton and Tukwila to review the transportation analysis zone (TAZ) system in the study area, and to determine the planned transportation improvements that may affect the traffic forecasts in the study area. The PSRC model was then updated to be consistent with the Renton and Tukwila plans. Note also that the PSRC model is a daily model that provided traffic forecasts for average daily conditions. The transportation network coded in the PSRC daily model includes peak hour roadway capacities. These capacities are multiplied by a factor of 10 to establish estimated daily roadway capacities. The model includes a peak hour capacity of 800 passenger cars per hour per lane (pcphpl) along S 180th Street in the study area. SR 181 has a peak hour capacity of 850, while Oakesdale Avenue SW has a peak hour capacity of 800. The Strander Boulevard extension was coded with a peak hour capacity of 650 for scenarios that include the extension. The 2020 model forecasts for each scenario were adjusted to account for the difference between actual daily traffic volumes collected in 1997, and the model's existing (1995) traffic assignment. The existing PSRC model assignment estimated that daily volumes on S 180th Street to be approximately 25 percent less than actual traffic counts. As such, the 2020 forecast volumes from the model were increased by these percentage factors to account for the difference in the model volumes versus actual counts. Factors based on existing traffic count data were also used to estimate morning (AM) and afternoon (PM) peak hour conditions for the PSRC daily traffic model. These factors were derived from the existing daily traffic counts collected on S 180th Street, just west of Oakesdale Avenue SW, in June of 1998. The AM peak hour, which occurred between 7:15 and 8:15 a.m., accounted for 5.5 percent of the daily traffic volumes along S 180th Street. The PM peak hour, which occurred from 4:30 to 5:30, accounted for approximately 8.0 percent of the total daily traffic. These peak hour factors were then applied to the 2020 daily forecasts from the PSRC model to estimate the AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes on S 180th Street. As part of the coded roadway network, PSRC's existing and 2020 models do not include the southern leg of the S. 180th Street /Oakesdale (80th) Avenue S intersection. The intersection of S 180th Street /72nd Avenue S is also not included as part of the existing and 2020 model roadway networks. To estimate 2020 volumes from the model at these intersections, the existing traffic volumes (from the actual traffic counts) at these locations were increased by the percent increase in daily trips associated with the transportation analysis zone (TAZ) located immediately south of S 180th Street between SR 181 and SR 167. This increase was determined to be approximately 10 percent between the existing and 2020 model forecast. This 10 percent factor was applied to the turning movements not represented in the model. Eastbound and westbound through volumes at these intersections were based on the forecast volumes from the 2020 model. 11:1971970781WP197078R2.DOC © The TRANSPO Group, Inc. 1998 Page 5 Traffic Analysis for the S 186th Street Grade Separation EVALUATION CRITERIA September 11 1998 The evaluation of traffic operations, in terms of determining the number of travel lanes needed on S 180th Street, was based on three criteria: (1) arterial level of service, (2) intersection level of service, and (3) volume -to- capacity (v /c) ratios. The first two criteria are based on methodologies described in the Highway Capacity Manual (Special Report 209 published by the Transportation Research Board, 1994). The level of service results of this study were then compared to the LOS threshold standards established by the Cities and Tukwila and Renton. The third criteria (v /c ratios) used in this evaluation is based on a comparison of the forecast traffic volumes to roadway capacity coded in the PSRC traffic model. The arterial and intersection LOS criteria are based on the existing and 2020 forecast traffic volumes on S 180th Street and the major arterials intersecting it. The future year 2020 traffic volumes were developed using the PSRC EMME /2 travel forecasting model. The following describes the arterial and intersection LOS methodology in more detail. Arterial Level of Service Arterial level of service (LOS) is a qualitative measure that incorporates the collective factors of average speed, travel time, traffic interruptions, freedom to maneuver, safety, driving comfort and convenience, and operating costs of a facility under a particular volume condition and roadway capacity. An arterial's traffic operation can be evaluated by calculating average peak hour speeds along the roadway and determining the corresponding LOS (LOS A -F). The travel speeds are determined from both delays experienced at signalized intersections along the arterial, as well as the time to travel between intersections on the arterial. The City of Tukwila considers LOS F an unacceptable level of service for an arterial route, thus requiring either an improvement to the facility, such as additional capacity, or an appropriate reduction in traffic volumes. The operational characteristics associated with the calculated speeds (and corresponding LOS) is described in Table 1. Table 1. Level of Service Criteria for Arterials Average Travel LOS Speed (mph) Operational Characteristic A >35 B >28 and <35 C >22 and <28 D >17 and <22 E >13 and <17 F <13 Free -flow in which there is little or no restriction on speed or maneuverability caused by the presence of other vehicles Stable flow in which operating speed is beginning to be restricted by other traffic Stable flow in which the volume and density levels are beginning to restrict drivers in their freedom to select speed, change lanes, or pass Approaching unstable flow in which tolerable average operating speeds are maintained but are subject to sudden variations Unstable flow in which operating speeds are lower with some momentary stoppages. The upper limit of this level of service is the capacity of the facility Forced -flow in which speed and rate of flow are low with frequent stoppages occurring for short or long periods of time For purposes of this study, arterial level of service methodology contained in the Urban and Suburban Arterials section of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) was used to estimate peak hour travel speeds and levels of service on S 180th Street between SR 181 and Oakesdale Avenue SW. The HCM methodology for an arterial uses peak hour (AM or PM) volumes, and the resulting delays at the signalized intersections along the arterial, to determine the resulting LOS of an entire arterial. M.1971970781 WP9 7078R1. DOC © The TRANSPO Group, Inc. 1998 Page 6 Traffic Analysis for the S 180'^ Street Grade Separation September 4, 1998 ANALYSIS AND RESULTS The following summarizes the existing traffic volumes and levels of service along S 180th Street and at the study intersections. It also presents the resulting 2020 traffic volume forecasts and operational results for the four scenarios. The 2020 analyses for each of the four scenarios provides a basis for determining the number of travel lanes needed on S 180th Street to safely and efficiently move traffic during peak time periods, and to also meet the adopted LOS standards for the S 180th Street arterial and the signalized intersections along it. Existing Conditions This section of the report identifies the existing roadway system in the study area, as well as the existing traffic volumes and operations of the S 180th Street arterial and intersections bisecting it. Figure 3 also presents the study area and existing conditions. Roadway System S 180th Street is a principal arterial serving the Tukwila, Renton, and Kent areas of the Green River Valley. It is an east -west route that connects SR 181 (West Valley Highway) with SR 167 (East Valley Highway). S 180th Street is a five -lane road with two travel lanes in each direction, and a center, two -way, left -turn lane. Within the study area, the arterial has signalized intersections with SR 181, 72nd Avenue S, and Oakesdale (80th) Avenue S. The posted speed limit is 35 mph. The SR 181 intersection at S 180th Street was improved a few years ago jointly by the City of Tukwila and WSDOT to provide additional turn lanes and signal modifications. S 180th Street is bisected by two sets of railroad tracks, one operated by Burlington - Northern Santa -Fe (BNSF), and the other by Union Pacific (UP). Both sets of railroad tracks cross S 180th Street at -grade approximately 630 feet east of 72nd Avenue S. Flashing lights and automatic gates control the crossing. Data provided by both railroad operators indicate that approximately 58 trains (total for both directions) utilize this crossing during an average weekday. Of these daily crossings, the BNSF line generates approximately 34 trains (approximately 8 are from Amtrak), while the UP line generates approximately 24 trains. During the AM and PM peak hours (7:00 to 9:00 a.m., and 4:00 to 6:00 p.m.), approximately five to seven trains cross S 180th Street. Field observations indicate that trains crossing during the peak hours caused delays of approximately two minutes per crossing; however, these delays vary depending on the length of the train. Traffic Volumes and Operations Study Area Traffic Volumes. Existing weekday peak hour traffic volumes at the three study intersections are illustrated in Figure 4. Traffic volumes were collected during the peak morning (AM) commute period (7 to 9 a.m.) and afternoon (PM) peak period (3:30 -6:30 p.m.) on Wednesday, June 17, 1998. The highest hour of traffic in the corridor during the AM and PM peaks was from 7:15 to 8:15 a.m., and from 4:30 to 5:30 p.m., respectively. Existing average daily traffic (ADT) volumes along S 180th Street were collected by the City of Renton's Public Works Department in 1996 and 1997, and are also illustrated in Figure 4. East of SR 181, the existing ADT on S 180th Street is approximately 31,000 vehicles per. day (vpd). East and west of Oakesdale Avenue SW, the existing ADT on S 180th Street is approximately 29,000 vpd and approximately 35,000 vpd, respectively. M:1971970781WR97078R1.DOC 0 The TRANSPO Group, Inc. 1998, Page 8 LOS D (C) DELAY = 32.7 (24.8) SEC V/C .= 0.90 (0.78) 25.000 ADT (500 1320 1120. - (890) 1720 (930) WEST VALLEY HIGHWAY (1160) 1370 -- 1710 (880) 1160 1520 — 22,000 ADT LOS B (B) DELAY = 8.6 (7.5) SEC (850) 31,000 ADT (8/96) V/C = 0.64 (0.59) 1320 1350 72ND AVE S x--100 (300) (1130) 100 260 UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD 4 4 4 (800) 1460 t 1330 (1280) 1 BURLINGTON NORTHERN — SANTA FE RAILROAD 1,290 (730) (120) 30 J (30) 90 (70) 170 \(180) 70 1,260 (1,100) 80TH AVE S (730) 1540 f 590 (370) (90) 480 50 (40) JL 060 630 160 960 — x.060 630) (160) 170 360 (360) LOS E (D) 16.8 (18.6) MPH 770 (560) 1,260 (480) (150) 220 60 (100) (210) 160 150 (80) (30 70 —; 50 50 ((60 100 - ( 10 10 1280 (1260) (60) 40 20 (10) 35,200 AOT (8/97 -- 310 (260) (300) 330 --- LOS C (C) DELAY = 20.4 (18.9) SEC V/C = 0.84 (0.72) (A) M:1971970781Cad'graphic Idk 09/03/98 07:48 —210 140 OAXESDALE AVE SW (140) 150 --- �;F -� 29 000 ADT (8/97) (550) 1370 1030 $ (1040) NOTE: TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS COLLECTED ON WEDNESDAY. JUNE 17, 1998. 970 (970) LEGENQ (XX) = AM PEAK HOUR XX = PM PEAK HOUR V/C = VOLUME TO CAPACITY RATIO = SICNAUZED INTERSECTION S 180th Street Grade Separation City of Tukwila Figure 4 Existing Traffic Volumes Average Daily and Peak Hours The TRANSPO Group, Inc. LOS D (C) DELAY = 39.6 (22.6) SEC V/C = 1.00 (0.77) 1750 (900 (1310) 1750 LOS B (8) (710) 1420 f 1630 (1090) --1580 120�HWAY WEST VALL (1170) 1380 ..181) DELAY = 9.7 (6.8) SEC V/C = 0.65 (0.54) 72ND AVE S 110 (330) (80) 190 UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD (970) 1600 f 1610 (1290) t (9 1) 1 1 50:(126590 0) BURLINGTON NORTHERN —SANTA FE RAILROAD I 1 1,560 (830) (140) 30 ' J (30) 100 (80) 190 �1I \(190) 80 1,510 (1,260) 80TH AVE S 820 (530) (140) 550 50 (40) JL 770 980 930 530) �1 I r (230) 270 350 (360) 990 (700) LOS E (D) 14.7 (17.6) MPH N 1910 (970) — 350 (290) (320) 370 --- LOS F (0) DELAY = >60 (33.4) SEC V/C = >1.2 (0.94) (C) M :1971970781Caddgraphic Idk 09/03/98 07:52 1620 (1500) —750 500 (550) 770 -- 1480 (1350) (800) 1770 1,370 (550) (170) 250 290 (250) (230 ) 180 _l L 400 30 80 - 60 (60 110 ( 290 (60) 40-.1 1 400 (270) 1,040 (1,020) OAKESDALE AVE SW LEGEND (XX) = AU PEAK HOUR XX = P11 PEAK HOUR V/C = VOLUME TO CAPACITY RATIO = SIGNAUZED INTERSECTION S 180th Street Grade Separation City of Tukwila Figure 8 4 Lanes on S 180th St. with Strander Blvd. Extension 2020 Traffic Volumes and Operations AM and PM Peak Hours The TRANSPO Group, Inc. LOS E (C) DELAY = 41.1 (22.7) SEC V/C = 1.01 (0.77) 1750 1310 1730 900 (730) 1440— 1680 + ° (1130) r 1580 (820))AY WEST VALLEY (1170) 1370 LOS B (6) DELAY = 8.0 (5.8) SEC V/C = 0.53 (0.44) 72ND AVE S 110, 330) (110), 290 (930) 1770 (990) 1620 f 1670 (1330) UNION PACIF /C RAILROAD I 1 t f 1650 (1490) 840 (550) (1 40) 550 � 0 (40) (350) 520. k_ 110 770)) 970 —0- 930 190 240 --)'`�I r- 540 (230) 270 1 350 (360) 1,050 (740) / I 1 1 1 1 i I i t 1 1 i BURLINGTON NORTHERN —SANTA FE RAILROAD t t 1 1 i ft 1 1 1,580 (850) (140) 30 J (30) 100 (80) 190 �1I \(190) 80 1,570 (1,300) CC (990) 1920 80TH AVE S 350 (290) (320) 370 LOS D (c) DELAY = 27.0 (25.0) SEC V/C = 0.87 (0.82) (E) M:1971970781Cad1graphic Idk 09/03/98 07:53 LOS D (0) 17.8 (19.1) MPH 1670 (1540) (810) 1780 f 1530 (1390) 1,380 (560) (170) 250 290 (260) J (230 180 k— 400 30 80 -- -•— 60 (60 110 ( 290 (60) 40 1400 (270) 1,090 (1,060) —750 (500) OAKESDALE AVE SW (560) 770 -- 40) 530) 250) 250) 60) 190) LEGEND (XX) = AM PEAK HOUR XX = PM PEAK HOUR V/C = VOLUME TO CAPACITY RATIO = SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION S 180th Street Grade Separation City of Tukwila Figure 9 6 Lanes on S 180th St. with Strander Blvd. Extension 2020 Traffic Volumes and Operations. AM and PM Peak Hours The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Traffic Analysis for the S 180" Street Grade Separation September 4, 1998 As illustrated in Figure 2, the model projects that daily traffic volumes on S 180th Street will increase by as few as 8,000 vehicles (4 lanes with Strander Extension), to over 17,000 (6 lanes without Strander Extension). These increases in daily traffic volumes represent increases of nearly 25 and 50 percent, respectively by the year 2020. The future model includes a number of roadway improvement projects that are not part of the existing roadway network, including the extension of Oakesdale Avenue SW. As a result, there are recognizable shifts in peak hour traffic volumes, especially to north -south traffic along SR 181 and Oakesdale Avenue SW. Strander Boulevard Extension. The traffic impacts of the Strander Boulevard extension were qualitatively evaluated in terms of daily traffic volume impacts along the major arterials in the study area. The following summarizes this qualitative evaluatiori: • The extension of Strander Boulevard is forecast to carry over 21,000 vehicles per day (vpd). • Approximately 7,000 to 8,000 less daily traffic would utilize the S 180th Street grade separation between SR 181 and Oakesdale Avenue SW, with the extension of Strander Boulevard. • The extension would shift about 8 to 10 percent more traffic onto Strander Boulevard west of Andover Park East. This traffic shifts from Tukwila Parkway and S 180th Street. • Approximately 25 to 30 percent more traffic would shift to SR 181 north of Strander with the extension. These trips would shift primarily from Oakesdale Avenue SW, S 180th Street, and Grady Way due to better access of Boeing traffic to I -405, I -5, and Interurban Avenue S. • The extension of Strander Boulevard would reduce traffic on Oakesdale Avenue SW by about 20 percent north, and 10 percent south of Strander Boulevard. • About 15 percent less traffic would occur on SR 181 south of the extension. Arterial LOS Analysis. AM and PM peak hour arterial LOS were calculated for each of the 4 scenarios in the year 2020 along S 180th Street using the same methodology used to calculate existing arterial LOS. Lane geometries at study intersections were updated for the scenarios that include six lanes of travel along S 180th Street. The calculated results are shown in Table 5 for all 4 scenarios, including peak hour speeds and the corresponding LOS. Arterial LOS worksheets for 2020 traffic conditions for all four scenarios are also included in the Appendices of this report. Table 5. Existing and 2020 AM and PM Peak Hour Arterial Levels of Service - S 1800 Street. No. Lanes W/ Strander ADT AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Scenario on 180th St Extension? Volume1 Speed2 LOS2 Speed LOS Existing3 4 No 35,200 18.6 D 16.8 E 4 lanes without Strander Ext.(2020) 4 No 50,200 16.5 E 10.0 F 6 lanes without Strander Ext�(2020) 6 _ No 52600 18.6 D 17.0 r 64lanes with Strander Ext.(2020) 4 Yes 43,300 17.6 '.D,_ 14.7 lanes with Strander Ext.(2020) 6 Yes 44,300 19.1 D 17.8 D 1. ADT Volume = Average daily two -way traffic volume. Future average daily traffic volumes are based on the P— g ound Regional Council's 2020 travel demand model. 2. Peak hour average travel speeds and arterial levels of service were calculated using Highway Capacity Software's (HCS) Arterial Planning module- release 2.1f 3 Existing speeds and arterial levels of service do not account for delay incurred by peak hour railroad crossings of S 1860 Street. AI:1971970781WR97078R2.000 © The TRANSPO Group, Inc. 1998 Page 19 Traffic Analysis for the S 180t' Street Grade Separation September 4, 1998 As is shown in Table 5, S 180th Street is forecast to operate at LOS D during the AM peak hour for three of the four future scenarios in 2020. Under the 4 -lane scenario without the extension of Strander Boulevard, S 180th Street is anticipated to operate at LOS E during the AM peak hour. Similarly, S 180th Street is forecast to operate at or better than existing PM peak hour LOS for all future scenarios except the 4 -lane scenario without the extension of Strander Boulevard. The forecast travel speed of 10 mph would also result in an unacceptable arterial level of service (LOS F) with is scenario. This indicates that if S 180th Street remains only 4/5 lanes wide, its peak hour operation would reach LOS F unless Strander Boulevard is extended to Oakesdale Avenue SW, or other east /west capacity is provided. With the extension of Strander Boulevard, S 180th Street would operate at LOS E, which is similar to existing conditions; however, travel speeds would be reduced to some extent. The grade separation would reduce delays associated with existing rail crossings. Table 5 also shows that if S 180th Street were widened to six lanes, it would operate at better than existing LOS during the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. This would result with or without the extension of Strander Boulevard. Intersection LOS Analysis. AM and PM peak hour intersection LOS were calculated for 2020 average weekday conditions. Existing signal timings were not used to evaluate future intersection levels of service. Instead, a vehicle progression software package (Synchro 3.2) was used to optimize the overall peak hour operation of the three- signal system and as such, develop peak hour signal timings at each location. These timings were based on projected 2020 peak hour traffic volumes, as well as the number of approach lanes at study intersections for each future scenario. Using projected peak hour volumes and optimized signal timings, AM and PM peak hour levels of service were calculated using HCS. The results are illustrated in Tables 6 and 7 for AM and PM peak hour conditions, respectively. Intersection LOS worksheets for 2020 traffic conditions (all scenarios) are also included in the Appendices of this report. Table 6. 2020 AM Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service. 4 lanes w/o Strander 6 lanes w/o Strander 4 lanes w/ Strander 6 lanes w/ Strander Sig.Intersections4 LOS1 Delay2 V /C3 LOS Delay V/C LOS Delay V/C LOS Delay V/C S 180th St / SR 181 C 23.8 0.80 C 23.9 0.86 C 22.6 0.77 C 22.7 0.77 S 180"' St / 72nd Ave S B 7.4 0.60 B 6.3 0.50 B 6.8 0.54 B 5.8 0.44 S 180t' St I Oakesdale Ave F5 >60.0 - E 42.9 1.02 D 33.4 0.94 C 25.0 0.82 1. LOS = level of service (A -F). 2. Delay = average delay in seconds per vehicle. 3. V/C = volume -to- capacity ratio. 4. Levels of service, delays, and v/c ratios reflect the intersection as a whole. 5. LOS exceeds capacity, and cannot be accurately calculated since the v/c ratio exceeds 1.2. Table 7. 2020 PM Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service. 4 lanes w/o Strander 6 lanes w/o Strander 4 lanes w/ Strander 6 lanes w/ Strander Sig.Intersections4 LOS1 Delay2 V /C3 LOS Delay V/C LOS Delay V/C LOS Delay V/C S 180th St / SR 181 F5 >60.0 F >60.0 D 39.6 1.00 E 41.1 1.01 S 180th St / 72nd Ave S B 9.7 0.80 B 8.3 0.58 B 9.7 0.65 B 8.0 0.53 S 180e, St / Oakesdale Ave F5 >60.0 F >60.0 - F >60.0 - D 27.0 0.87 1. LOS = level of service (A -F). 2. Delay= average delay in seconds per vehicle. 3. V/C = volume- to-capacity ratio. 4. Levels of service, delays, and v/c ratios reflect the intersection as a whole. 5. LOS exceeds capacity, and cannot be accurately calculated since v/c ratio exceeds 1.2. M.%971970781 WR97078R1.DOC © The TRANSPO Group, Inc. 1998 Page 20 Traffic Analysis for the S 186th Street Grade Separation September 4, 1998 Table 6 shows that under all future scenarios, the intersections of S 180th Street /SR 181 and S 180th Street /72nd Avenue S would operate at LOS C and LOS B, respectively, during the AM peak hour. However, the S 180th Street /Oakesdale Avenue SW intersection would operate at LOS F under the 4 lane scenario without Strander Boulevard extension, and in the LOS C -E range under the remaining three scenarios. It should be noted that during the AM peak hour, the intersections of S 180th Street /SR 181 and S 180th Street /72nd Avenue S currently operate at LOS C and LOS B, respectively, and are forecast to continue to operate at these levels of service in 2020. Although traffic volumes will increase in the future, a comparison of Tables 4 and 6 indicates that future delays at these intersections will be slightly less than the delays calculated for existing conditions due to the grade separation, as well as other future planned transportation improvements in the study area. As described earlier, the 2020 model includes a number of roadway improvement projects that are not part of the existing roadway network, including the extension of Oakesdale Avenue SW. As a result, there are recognizable shifts in peak hour traffic volumes along study area roadways, and these shifts, together with the difference in existing and future signal timings, accounts for the slight decrease in average delays at these locations. During the PM peak hour, the S 180th Street /72nd Avenue S intersection is forecast to operate at LOS B for all future scenarios. The intersection of S 180th Street /SR 181 would operate at LOS F under the scenarios without the Strander Boulevard extension. The intersection of S 180th Street /Oakesdale Avenue SW is also forecast to operate at LOS F for all scenarios except the scenario that includes six-lanes with the Strander Boulevard extension. This indicates that the extension of Strander Boulevard is necessary to allow these two intersections to operate at LOS E or better during the PM peak hour with either four or six lanes on S 180th Street. With six lanes along S 180th Street and the extension of Strander Boulevard to Oakesdale Avenue SW, the S 180th Street /SR 181 intersection is forecast to operate at an acceptable level of service in 2020 (LOS E). If the extension of Strander Boulevard is not constructed, additional turn lanes would be needed at these intersections, or another east -west connection to accommodate the forecast traffic volumes. To reach acceptable levels of service at these intersections, additional turn lanes could include dual eastbound and westbound left -turns, and /or right -turn lanes. As was presented earlier, during the PM peak hour, S 180th Street /72nd Avenue S is operating at LOS B and is forecast to operate at LOS B in 2020 with all four scenarios. However, due to the difference in existing and future signal timings, and the aforementioned shifts in peak hour traffic volumes, future peak hour delays at S 180th Street/ 72nd Avenue S will be slightly Less than the existing calculated delay. Volume -to- Capacity Ratios The third criteria used in this report is based on a comparison of the forecast 2020 traffic volumes to the roadway capacity on S 180th Street. The forecast traffic volumes for 2020 conditions were compared to the roadway capacities from the PSRC 2020 model to determine the resulting volume -to- capacity (v /c) ratios. Table 8 summarizes the v/c ratios at the primary arterials in the study area for each 2020 scenario. M: t97t970781 WP,97078R2. DOC © The TRANSPO Group, Inc. 1998. Page 21 Traffic Analysis for the S 18CO3 Street Grade Separation September 4, 1998 Table 8. 2020 Daily V/C Ratios along Study Area Arterials. Location V/C Ratio for each Scenarios 4 lanes w/o 6 lanes w/o 4 lanes w/ 6 lanes w/ Direction Existing Strander Ext Strander Ext Strander Ext Strander Ext S 180th Street Eastbound 1.07 . 1.18 0.89 1.03 0.74 (72nd Ave to Oakesdale Ave) Westbound 0.98 1.12 0.83 0.94 0.69 SR 181 Northbound 0.81 0.82 0.83 0.81 0.80 (S 180th St to Strander Blvd) Southbound 1.01 0.96 0.94 0.93 0.93 Oakesdale Ave SW Northbound 0.23 0.71 0.72 0.57 0.57 (S 180th St to Strander) Southbound 0.33 0.64 0.65 0.55 0.55 Strander Blvd Extension Eastbound 0.81 0.78 (SR 181 to Oakesdale Ave) Westbound - - 0.85 0.85 1. The transportation network coded in the PSRC daily model includes peak hour roadway capacities, which are then multiplied by a factor of 10 to establish estimated daily roadway capacities As shown in Table 8, S 180th Street would operate over capacity if only four lanes were constructed on the grade separation. With six lanes on the grade separation, and without the Strander Boulevard extension, 10 to 15 percent more traffic could be accommodated before S 180th Street would be at capacity (v /c =1.0). Even if the extension of Strander Boulevard were constructed, and four lanes were implemented on S 180th Street, the grade separation would operate over capacity (v /c> 1.0). With both six lanes on S 180th Street, and with the Strander extension, the grade separation could accommodate approximately 25 to 30 percent additional traffic demand. Thus, based on the v/c ratio criteria, six travel lanes are needed for the grade separation to maintain v/c ratios less than 1.0, and the Strander Boulevard extension would supply additional capacity to S 180th Street. Table 8 also indicates that the v/c ratios on SR 181 would decrease, which is due primarily to the Oakesdale Avenue SW extension. This extension would serve both local traffic in the area, as well as north /south through traffic, and is forecast to relieve some of the congestion on SR 181. M. t.9 7%9 70781 WPt97078R2. DoC © The TRANSPO Group, Inc. 1998 Page 22 Addendum No. 1 Four -Lane Analysis Transportation and Trallic Engineering PL 4NNING •DESIGN MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT Gary Phillips Berger /ABAM Engineers Larry Toedtli / Jeff Schramm The TRANSPO Group, Inc. A9 .00 -2— ►1113196 &:AP The Transpo Group DATE: November 10, 1998 TG: 97078.00 SOUTH 180TH STREET GRADE SEPARATION STUDY: TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ADDENDUM NO. 1 This memo serves as an addendum to the Traffic Analysis for the South 180th Street Grade Separation Study, dated September 4, 1998. The purpose of this memo is to provide a discussion of traffic impacts if only four lanes were maintained for the grade separation by 2020. This memo is structured to first provide a brief summary of the relevant conclusions of the original traffic analysis. The second section provides discussion of the traffic iir pacts and additional improvements needed to maintain adequate arterial and intersection operations on South 180th Street with only four lanes. Conclusions of the September 4th Traffic Analysis Six -Lane Grade Separation. The original traffic analysis noted that six-lane arterial section of South 180th Street, and the signalized intersections on either side of it, would operate at LOS E or better with the Strander Boulevard extension. Without the Strander extension, the SR 181 and Oakesdale Avenue intersections on either side of the South 180th Street six-lane arterial would operate at LOS F during the PM peak hour in 2020. Therefore, either additional lanes would be needed at each intersection, or an additional east -west connection such as Strander Boulevard would be neces?ary to m:Ike the SR 181 and Oakesdale Avenue SW intersections operate at LOS E or better in 2020. Four -Lane Grade Separation. The traffic analysis noted that if only four lanes are maintained on the South 180th Street arterial, between SR 181 and Oakesdale Avenue, it would operate at LOS E (14.7 mph) during the PM peak hour in 2020 with the Strander Boulevard extension. However, the intersection of South 180th Street with Oakesdale Avenue would operate at LOS F during the PM peak hour in 2020, unless intersection improvements were made. Without the extension of Strander Boulevard, the four -lane arterial would operate at LOS F (10 mph), and both the SR 181 and Oakesdale Avenue intersections with South 180th Street would operate at LOS F during the PM peak hour in 2020. Note that with either four or six lanes, a center two -way left -turn lane is recommended on South 180th Street to serve turning vehicles at the SR 181 and Oakesdale Avenue intersections on either side of the grade separation. The. TRANSPO G:ou. I^: 11730 l'5:n .. e --. PJ.... S_oe 600 K rkia .d. Washingt.:n .93034-7120 FAX 425.325 -3434 423 33' -3555 Mr. Gary Phillips S 180th Street Grade Separation Traffic Analysis Addendum No. 1 November 10, 1998 Page 2 The Transpo Group Additional Improvements Necessary with a Four -Lane Grade Separation Based on the traffic analysis for the South 180th Street Grade Separation project, either Strander Boulevard or another east -west connection in the area would be necessary by the year 2020 to maintain adequate arterial operations on South 180th Street if only four lanes are maintained on the arterial. The extension of Strander Boulevard was specifically identified because both the Cities of Renton and Tukwila identified this connection in their long -range transportation plans and this extension is currently being studied within the City of Renton Planning Department. However, no funding for construction has been established in either of the City's adopted Transportation Improvement Plans (TIP). In addition to the extension of Strander Boulevard or another east -west connection, additional lanes would be needed at the intersection of Oakesdale Avenue and South 180th Street to maintain adequate operations during the PM peak hour in 2020. If only four lanes are maintained for the South 180th Street Grade Separation project, by the year 2020. additional study of this intersection will be needed to identify specific improvements (turn lanes, signal phasing, etc.) to improve the operation of the intersection to LOS E or better. JLS /lwt M:1971970781WPIADDENDUM 1A.DOC Addendum No. 2 Analysis of Detours SOUTH 180TH STREET GRADE SEPARATION ADDENDUM NO 2 TO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS FOR DETOURS DURING CONSTRUCTION INTRODUCTION The purpose of this analysis is to evaluate the potential impacts created by closing South 180th Street between 72nd Avenue South and a point approximately 1,200 feet west of Oakesdale Avenue South to accommodate the grade separation construction. The results of this analysis will be made available to the cities of Tukwila, Kent, and Renton and to the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) for their use in facilitating management of the revised traffic patterns created by the elimination of this primary east -west link across the Green River Valley. It is proposed that the following signed routes will be provided as primary detours for a period of 9 to 12 months while the road is closed for construction as described above. DETOUR ROUTE A Eastbound and southbound traffic approaching the intersection of South 180th Street and West Valley Highway will be detoured via southbound West Valley Highway to eastbound South 196th Street, and then northbound on 80th Street South back to South 180th Street. DETOUR ROUTE B Westbound traffic on South 180th Street approaching Oakesdale Avenue South will be detoured via southbound 80th Avenue South to westbound South 196th Street and then northbound on West Valley Highway back to South 180th Street. DETOUR ROUTE C Northbound traffic on West Valley Highway approaching South 180th Street will be detoured via West Valley Highway to eastbound Grady Way and then southbound on Lind Avenue South back to South 180th Street. In addition to the primary detour routes, it is anticipated that the following supplemental signed routes will be provided as advised routes to guide motorists around the general construction zone. GUIDE ROUTE 1 Westbound SW 43rd Street (South 180th) traffic approaching State Route 167 and East Valley Road will be guided to Grady Way via northbound East Valley Road, westbound SW 16th Street and northbound Oakesdale Avenue South. From here, traffic will be guided westbound on Grady Way and then southbound on West Valley Highway back to South 180th Street. GUIDE ROUTE 2 Westbound SW 43rd Street (South 180th) traffic approaching Lind Avenue South will be guided to Grady Way via northbound Lind Avenue. From here, traffic will be guided westbound on Grady Way along Detour Route A to southbound on West Valley Highway and back to South 180th Street. See Figure 1 for map of Detour and Guide Route locations. South 180th Street Grade Separation BERGER/ABAM, A00084 Addendum No. 2 to Traffic Analysis for Detours 1 October 2000 ID SW 16th St. ton 7th St Strander Blvd Guide Route 1 Tukwila. Scheduled to Be Qs ' Closed to Through m Traffic in May 2001 for 9 -12 Months - ' LI' S .180th St Project Location SW 41st St SW 43rd St North i© 192nd St Ill 196th St D Scheduled to Be Completed About October 2001 dule piete h 20 to Be About 1 LEGEND F F F Existing LOS Detour LOS (Existing Timing and Channelization) Detour LOS (Revised Timing and Channelization) S 212th St illn1111111111K, Figure 1 Detour and Guide Route Map South 180th Street Grade Separation Addendum No. 2 to Traffic Analysis for Detours 2 BERGERJABAM, A00084 October 2000 SUMMARY OF STUDY RESULTS The following summarizes the findings of the supplemental traffic analysis for conditions during construction of the South 180th Street Grade Separation. Redistribution of Traffic Analysis of the regional travel forecasting produced by EMME /2 traffic modeling indicates that the elimination of the South 180th Street link between 72nd Avenue South and Oakesdale Avenue South will create a reasonable redistribution of traffic along a number of different roadways. This is primarily due to the fact that there will be a new parallel east -west link created by South 196th Street just south of the closed roadway. Early Detour Congestion The redistribution of traffic due to the closure of South 180th Street, however, will take some time to establish equilibrium. During the first month or two of roadway closure, significant delays are anticipated at a number of intersections in the vicinity of the closure. Traffic signal timing will need to be revised at the time of the closure to best accommodate these first peak volumes and will need to be adjusted over the first few months of the detour condition as traffic volumes redistribute to more efficient routes. Public Notification The sooner the general public is made aware of this closure condition, the more rapidly this early detour congestion will be dissipated. An affective public notification plan, as well as notification to motorists by means of roadside signing, is recommended to facilitate this transition. Impacts to North -South Arterials The redirection of traffic approaching the closure on South 180th Street to South 196th Street will be carried by the primary north -south roadways of West Valley Highway and 80th Avenue South. Results from the EMME /2 traffic modeling indicate that these added volumes, however, are significantly offset by the reduction in demand that will result from the opening of South 196th Street to the south. In addition, there will be a slight reduction in volume on these links due to the cutting off of vehicles that currently contribute to these links by way of South 180th Street through the construction zone. Level of Service Impacts The most significant impact of the redirection of the traffic from South 180th Street is that existing through movements are forced to become left and right turning movements that conflict with heavy opposing through movements. Analysis of existing and forecasted turning movements with the use of Synchro traffic signal coordination software identified the following five intersections as having significant depreciation in level of service (LOS). ■ South 196th Street at West Valley Highway (LOS "E" to LOS "F") ■ South 180th Street at Oakesdale Avenue South (LOS "C" to LOS "F ") ■ South 180th Street at Lind Avenue South (LOS "C" to LOS "F") ■ South 180th Street at East Valley Road (LOS "D" to LOS "E ") ■ Southwest 16th Street at Oakesdale Avenue (LOS `B" to LOS "C ") See Columns 1 and 2 of Table 1 for a complete listing of existing and detour intersection LOS. South 180th Street Grade Separation BERGER/ABAM, A00084 Addendum No. 2 to Traffic Analysis for Detours 3 October 2000 TABLE 1 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) IMPACTS As predicted by Synchro 4, Traffic Signal Coordination Software INTERSECTION LOCATION COLUMN 1 COLUMN 2 COLUMN 3 Existing LOS Detour LOS Detour LOS (Exist. Timing (Revised Timing East -West Arterial North -South Street & Channelization) & Channelization) (delay in sec.) (delay in sec.) (delay in sec.) S. 212th Street : West Valley Highway (SR 181/68th Ave. S.) F(98) F(92) F(96) East Valley Road (84th Ave. S.) C(30) D(42) C(31) I S. 196th Street: West Valley Highway (SR 181/68th Ave. S.) E(61) F(81) E(62) Oakesdale Ave. (80th Ave. S.) Non - Signalized B(11) ** B(14)*** East Valley Road (84th Ave. S.) Non- Signalized E(64) ** D(52) I I S. 180th Street (SW 43rd): West Valley Highway (SR 181/68th Ave. S.) F(101) F(86) E(60) Oakesdale Ave. (80th Ave. S.) C(25) F(92) B(15) Lind Ave. SW C(29) F(100) C(34) East Valley Road (84th Ave. S.) D(49) E(69) D(51) Talbot Road S. C(29) C(30) C(30) I SW 16th Street: Oakesdale Ave. (80th Ave. S.) B(16) C(25) 8(12) Lind Ave. SW B(11) B(13) B(13) Grady Way: West Valley Highway (SR 181/68th Ave. S.) E(55)* E(62)* E(63)* Oakesdale Ave. (80th Ave. S.) E(59) E(63) E(63) Lind Ave. SW D(51) D(51) D(51) Including revised signal timing * Does not take into account coordinated operation with adjacent signals. Requires further coordination with WSDOT. ** Existing timing assumed since signal is under construction and timing plan has not yet been established. * ** Signal timing is the same as used for existing (see * *), but may need adjustment depending on actual timing plan established. COLUMN 1 is based on the current existing condition with S. 196th Street closed at the railroad crossing (East of W. Valley Hwy.) COLUMN 2 is based on turning movement volumes that are estimated to occur during the closure of S. 180th St. during const. COLUMN 3 is the same as Column 2 except that timing and channelization have been adjusted to revised traffic patterns. South 180th Street Grade Separation BERGER/ABAM, A00084 Supplement to Traffic Analysis for Detours 4 October 2000 Level of Service Mitigation In order to mitigate the impact to LOS that is anticipated as a result from the road closure condition, it is estimated that approximately nine existing traffic signals will need timing adjustments.. In addition, it is recommended that the existing channelization be modified at 3 of the 15 signalized intersections as follows. • South 180th Street at West Valley Highway: Revise four -lane west approach to include dual left - turn lanes, and to permit right turns from the third lane. The fourth lane should remain an exclusive right turn. Revise signal indication accordingly. • South 180th Street at Oakesdale Avenue: Revise westbound through curb lane to be an exclusive right -turn lane. Revise signal indication accordingly. • South 196th Street at East Valley Road: Revise eastbound middle lane to permit left, through - and right -turn movements and implement split phase operation that provides minimal green time for the westbound approach (a driveway). Revise signal indication accordingly. The combined result of recommended channelization and signal modifications described are presented in Column 3 of Table 1. Optional Mitigation during Construction The following modifications should also be considered for implementation during construction if necessary. • South 196th Street at 80th Avenue South: Revise southbound approach to provide one through - left lane and two right -turn lanes. Implement a split phase operation with only minimal green time for the northbound approach (a driveway). • South 192nd Street at 80th Avenue South: Eliminate the stop condition for northbound and southbound approaches to the existing four -way stop. STUDY PROCESS AND FINDINGS The following summarizes the process and findings of the supplemental traffic analysis for conditions during construction of the South 180th Street Grade Separation. Travel Forecasting with EMME /2 The City of Renton's existing EMME /2 travel forecasting model for the PM peak condition was modified to include forecasts for the following two conditions. • The existing condition at the time of construction that will include the South 196th Street link between West Valley Highway and East Valley Road. This project will be complete prior to closing South 180th Street. • The existing condition described above except that the South 180th Street segment between 72nd Avenue South and Oakesdale Avenue south is removed to simulate the roadway closure condition. South 180th Street Grade Separation BERGER/ABAM, A00084 Supplement to Traffic Analysis for Detours 5 October 2000 Arterial Volume Impacts Volumes resulting from modeling of the two conditions described above were compared to each other and compared to the original existing condition. Then on a percentage basis, this information was used to identify general trends and redistribution of traffic as a result of both the opening of South 196th Street and the closing of South 180th Street. A summary of the EMME /2 forecasted Arterial Volume Impacts is provided in Table 2. TABLE 2 ARTERIAL VOLUME IMPACTS As predicted by EMME /2 model Arterial Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound West Valley Highway South of Grady Way * -10% North of S. 180th St. -20% -20% South of S. 180th St. 10% 20% North of S. 196th St. 10% -5% South of S. 196th St. * * Lind Avenue North of S. 180th St. 10% 20% East Valley Road North of S. 180th St. 5% -5% South of S. 180th St. * * North of S. 196th St. 10% -5% South of S. 196th St. 5% 5% Grady Way W. Valley Hwy. to Lind 10% 10% South 180th Street West of W. Valley Hwy. -25% -25% East of E. Valley Rd. -5% -10% East of Lind Ave. -35% -50% East of Oakesdale Ave. -95% -95% South 196th Street West of W. Valley Hwy. 30% * East of W. Valley Hwy. +1400 veh. ** +1400 veh. ** West of E. Valley Rd. +1500 veh. ** +1200 veh. ** South 212th Street West of W. Valley Hwy. * * East of W. Valley Hwy. -5% -5% West of E. Valley Rd. * * East of E. Valley Rd. * * *Volume within 5% of existing ** Volume not likely to actually occur due to channelization restrictions at intersections. NOTE: All indicated values are increases or decreases in PM peak volumes for the S. 180th Street road closure condition vs. the existing condition prior to the opening of S. 196th Street between West Valley Hwy. and East Valley Road. South 180th Street Grade Separation BERGERJABAM, A00084 Supplement to Traffic Analysis for Detours 6 October 2000 Detour and Guide Route Volumes The results of the EMME /2 modeling, along with existing turning movement counts, were used to estimate the following Detour and Guide Route Volumes for the PM peak hour. Detour Route A (South 196th Street from the West): Detour Route B (South 196th Street from the East): Detour Route C (EB Grady Way from NB West Valley Hwy): Guide Route 1 (NB East Valley Road from WB SW 43rd): Guide Route 2 (WB Grady Way via NB Lind Avenue): Estimate of Vehicles per Day 350 V (7,000 VPD) 350 V (7,000 VPD) 125 V (2,500 VPD) 40 V (800 VPD) 175 V (3,500 VPD) The estimated number of vehicles per day (VPD) indicated above are based on the assumption that 5 percent of the daily trips will be during the PM peak hour. This number, which is less than the 8 percent that is currently being experienced, is based on the following assumptions. Off -peak users are more likely to unknowingly arrive upon the closure and will, by default, follow the signed routes. ■ Reduced congestion on these routes during off -peak hours provides more capacity and less motivation for users to explore alternate routes than it does during the PM peak. In addition, they are generally the best and most direct routes around the closure anyhow. Existing LOS The City of Renton provided a Synchro 4 traffic signal coordination model that was expanded for this project to also include City of Tukwila, City of Kent, and WSDOT signals within the area (between West Valley Highway and East Valley Road from South 212th Street in the south to Grady Way in the north). Available turning movement counts and signal timing plans were used to update the model and to identify the PM peak LOS for intersections within the area. The LOS results for existing signalized intersections are shown in Column 1 of Table 1. Forecasted LOS with Existing Timing and Channelization Forecasted traffic data from the EMME /2 models and detour /guide route volumes were used to estimate turning movement volumes during the roadway closure condition. Preliminary Synchro analysis of the forecasted volumes indicated that the PM peak volume forecasted by EMME /2 for the new South 196th Street was unrealistic due to intersection capacity restrictions at its termini with West Valley Highway and East Valley Road. In order to present a more realistic picture of the volumes on South 196th Street, a volume of 350 vehicles was redistributed to South 212th Street. This shift of 350 vehicles was found to have a negligible affect on the LOS at the intersections on South 212th Street, however, there were still five intersections that were found to experience a significant depreciation in LOS. The LOS results for the forecasted detour volumes with existing intersection channelization and signal timing are shown in Column 2 of Table 1. South 180th Street Grade Separation BERGER/ABAM, A00084 Supplement to Traffic Analysis for Detours 7 October 2000 Forecasted LOS with Revised Timing and Channelization The revised Synchro network was then used to evaluate potential traffic signal timing revisions and channelization modifications to improve traffic operation during the road closure condition. As a result of this analysis, it is recommended that the timing at 9 of the 15 evaluated intersections be adjusted to accommodate the revised traffic patterns. In addition, it is recommended that the existing channelization be modified at 3 of the 15 signalized intersections. A description of these modifications is identified in the Summary of Study Results above. The LOS resulting from the forecasted detour volumes with revised intersection channelization and signal timing are shown in Column 3 of Table 1. Signalized intersections recommended timing revisions are shows shaded. South 180th Street Grade Separation BERGER/ABAM, A00084 Supplement to Traffic Analysis for Detours 8 October 2000 4. SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: South 180th Street Grade Separation 2. Name of applicant /proponent: City of Tukwila 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Address: 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 Contact Person: Robin Tischmak, PE City of Tukwila Public Works Department 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 206/433 -0179 4. Date checklist was prepared: 15 October 2000 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Tukwila Public Works Department 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Design — June 2000 to December 2000 Construction — May 2001 to May 2002 RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA JAN 1 0 2001 PERMIT CENTER 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. This project will provide substructure for the future addition of one track to the BNSF Railroad facilities. Widening of the superstructure and adding the track would be done at a future date by the railroad. The railroad's schedule is not known at this time. 1 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. South 180th Street Grade Separation - Stream Study (BERGER/ABAM Engineers Inc., Draft April 1999, Final July 2000) South 180th Street Grade Separation - Wildlife Study (BERGER/ABAM Engineers Inc., Draft April 1999, Final July 2000) South 180th Street Grade Separation - Wetlands Study (BERGER/ABAM Engineers Inc., Draft April 1999, Final December 2000 ) South 180th Street Grade Separation - Technical Information Report (BERGER /ABAM Engineers Inc., Draft April 1999, Final July 2000. South 180th Street Grade Separation - Traffic Analysis (BERGER/ABAM Engineers Inc., Draft April 1999, Addendum No. 1, November 1998, Final and Addendum No. 2, October 2000) 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Grading Permit - Cities of Tukwila, Renton, and Kent Department of Fish and Wildlife - HPA Corps of Engineers - Section 404 Shoreline Management - Renton (Department of Ecology) Critical Area Review Permit - City of Renton Critical Area Review Permit - City of Kent Water Quality Certification - Section 401 (Department of Ecology) Concurrence on Biological Assessment - National Marine Fisheries and U.S. Fish and Wildlife 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) The project will reconstruct 1,660 linear feet of South 180th Street to provide a grade separation between vehicular traffic and railroad traffic. The proposed roadway, with five lanes, Class III bicycle route, curbs and gutters, and sidewalks will pass under the existing railroad tracks. Bridges will be constructed for the BNSF (three tracks), UPRR (one track), and the Interurban Trail to pass over South 180th Street along the current alignments. Railroad tracks will be detoured (shooflied) during construction (see attached Figures 11, 13 to 20, 23, 25, and 27). 2 • 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The project is located at the intersection of South 180th Street (SW 43rd Street) and the BNSF Railroad and UPRR Railroad near the north boundary of Kent, the southwest corner of Renton, and the southeast corner of Tukwila, King County, Washington, in the NW 1/4 of Section 36 of Township 23N, Range 4E. The vicinity map is attached. 3 Evaluation for Agency Use Only TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (underline one): flat, rolling, hilling, steep slopes, mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? 2.5 percent. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. The top 11 to 17 feet is silty to gravelly fill. Below that is 5 to 17 feet of clayey to silty organic soils. Below that is 5 to 35 feet of silty to sandy medium dense to dense alluvium. All construction is proposed to take place within these layers. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Excavation for the undercrossing is estimated at 45,000 cubic yards (cy). Approximately 80,000 cy of native material will be mixed with concrete to form the roadway seal. About 22,000 cy of gravel fill will be required for the railroad shooflies. Approximately 11,000 cy will come from excavated roadway fill and 11,000 cy will be imported. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Sedimentation could occur during construction in excavated areas if rainfall is encountered. Because the project creates a low spot due to excavation, surfacewater runoff will remain on 4 2. g. 1 Evaluation for Agency Use Only site and will be treated with BMP erosion control measures. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? The site (outside face of new wall to outside face of new wall) will change from 80 to 100 percent of impervious surface cover after project construction. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plans will be prepared with the final construction plans. These plans include a combined detention /wet pond through which all of the underpass storm drainage will be processed. a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Vehicle exhausts from construction vehicles, dust during clearing, and grading preparation. These impacts are not expected to be significant. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Watering will be required, as necessary, to control dust emissions. 3. Water a. Surface 1) Is there any surfacewater body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year -round and seasonal streams, saltwater, 5 Evaluation for Agency Use Only lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. In the vicinity of the project, there are six wetlands and two streams: Springbrook Creek and Mill Creek. Mill Creek is a tributary to Springbrook Creek and Springbrook flows into the Green River. A wetlands map is attached. Wetlands in Tukwila are currently considered to be a part of one wetland complex — Wetland #12. Wetland #12 is rated a Type 1 wetland with a standard buffer of 100 feet. Wetlands are palustrine emergent and shrub scrub complexes with low to moderate functional values. 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. Fill material outside the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) will be constructed for three temporary detour tracks (shooflies) within 200 feet of Mill Creek. Fill for railroad shooflies, grading, roadway reconstruction, storm drainage facilities, bridge construction, and wetland mitigation will occur within some wetlands and adjacent to others. Minor widening of South 180th Street, grading, roadway reconstruction, a detention pond, and a storm drainage outfall are proposed within 200 feet of Springbrook Creek. Springbrook Creek is considered a state - monitored shoreline in Renton, but not in Kent. For Springbrook Creek impacts within Renton, a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Application has been submitted. Within Kent, a stream buffer enhancement plan is in development. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surfacewater or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. 1.11 acres of wetlands will be filled and 0.9 acres of wetland buffer will be filled as a 6 • Evaluation for Agency Use Only result of the development of the three (3) shooflies for the BNSF and UPRR tracks. Wetland mitigation will occur within the watershed to the east of the BNSF railroad tracks and north of South 180th Street. New wetlands will be created adjacent and connected to existing wetlands located east of the BNSF tracks within property owned by the City of Renton. Refer to the Conceptual Wetland Mitigation plan and the City of Renton parcel boundary plan attached. The documents demonstrate the proposed wetland mitigation is feasible within the site. Fill material will be from approved off -site quarry sources and from underpass excavation. Truck routes for fill material will depend on the contractor and the off -site source. Truck routes will be subject to approval by Tukwila City Engineer. Will the proposal require surfacewater withdrawals or diversions? Give general . description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Dewatering of the wetland areas to be filled is expected prior to placement of fill material. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. The portion of the project crossing Springbrook Creek is in the FEMA floodplain. FEMA map is attached. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surfacewaters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. Proposal would not discharge any waste materials to surfacewaters. 1 Evaluation for Agency Use Only b. Ground 1) Will groundwater be withdrawn or will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate .quantities, if known. No groundwater would be withdrawn or discharged either temporarily during construction or permanently after construction. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example, domestic sewage, industrial containing the following chemicals ..., agricultural, etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be serviced (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) is expected to serve. No waste material would be discharged to groundwater. c. Water Runoff (including stormwater) 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Catch basins and storm pipes will collect runoff within the roadway and pump it into a treatment /detention pond. From the pond, it will drain by gravity through a pipe to discharge into Springbrook Creek. Water from the pond will discharge at the rate of half of the 2 -year event and match the 10- and 100 -year events per Department of Ecology (DOE). 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surfacewaters? If so, generally describe. Any waste materials collected during construction or from the roadway will pass through the new pond. This will enable the waste materials to be caught and removed prior to discharge into Springbrook Creek. 1 Evaluation for Agency Use Only d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: TESC plans will be developed to control siltation and contamination during construction. Treatment and detention facilities will be designed for runoff from the completed facility. 4. Plants a. Check or underline types of vegetation found on the site. X deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other: cottonwood X evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other X shrubs: willows X grass pasture crop or grain X_ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bull rush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other X other types of vegetation: weeds b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Wetland vegetation, including reed canary grass, red osier dogwood, and Salix spp. Upland grasses and shrubs, including three deciduous trees, blackberry, elderberry, orchard grass, tall fescue, and velvetgrass. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. A Biological Assessment performed by the City of Tukwila determined that five listed species had potential to occur at the site. The bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus), chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), swamp sandwort (Arenaria paludicola), and the golden indian paintbrush 9 AO Evaluation for Agency Use Only (Castilleja levisecta). All animal species received a "may affect, but not likely to adversely affect" determination. Plants received a "no effect" determination. These determinations have received WSDOT, NMFS, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife concurrence. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Wetland mitigation and replanting and enhancement of area with native plants will be implemented as required by permitting agencies. Landscaping will be provided outside of the roadway at adjacent properties. 5. Animals a. Underline any birds and animals that have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: hawk (redtail), green heron, eagle, songbirds, other: sparrows, ducks mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: coyote, muskrat, weasel fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: amphibians, garter snakes. b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Chinook salmon (threatened), bald eagle (threatened). Not likely to use area; have not been known to occur, but do occur several miles north. A Biological Assessment performed by the City of Tukwila determined that five listed species had potential to occur at the site. The bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus), chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), swamp sandwort (Arenaria paludicola), and the golden indian paintbrush (Castilleja levisecta). All animal species received a "may affect, but not likely to adversely affect" determination. Plants received a "no effect ". determination. These determinations have received WSDOT, NMFS, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife concurrence. 10 1 Evaluation for Agency Use Only c. Is the site part of migration route? If so, explain. Juvenile chinook may use Springbrook and Mill Creek for out migration. Adults are not known to spawn in the project vicinity. Current creek conditions are poor for salmon return and spawning. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Postconstruction restoration and enhancement including stormwater treatment and detention and wetland creation, may increase habitat value. Project not likely to adversely effect chinook salmon. 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electrical, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electrical — for street lighting and stormwater pumps. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. N/A 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: N/A 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. No environmental health hazards are anticipated. Evaluation for Agency Use Only 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Site is accessible to emergency service vehicles. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: N/A Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area that may affect your project (for example, traffic, equipment, operation, other)? None. 2) What types and levels would be created by or associated with the project on a short- or long -term basis (for example, traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Short -term construction noise during daytime. Diverted traffic will increase noise levels along detour routes. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None proposed. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Roadway, open space, Interurban Trail and greenway, railroad, commercial, office, and residential. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. The site has not been used for agriculture in recent (20 +) years. c. Describe any structures on the site. Several buildings abut the roadway throughout the project area. 12 d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? One 840-square-foot adjacent commercial building with 2,400 square feet of parking. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Renton — Employment Area Valley Tukwila — Commercial/Light Industrial (C/LI) Kent — Industrial f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? g• Renton — Employment Area Valley Tukwila — Commercial/Light Industrial (C/LI) Kent — Industrial If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Renton — Springbrook Creek is zoned urban. Tukwila — N/A Kent — Springbrook Creek is not considered a shoreline of the state. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. J• In the vicinity of the project, there are six wetland and two streams: Springbrook Creek and Mill Creek. Mill Creek is a tributary to Springbrook Creek. Springbrook Creek has shoreline and stream buffers. The wetlands in Tukwila are currently considered to be a part of one wetland complex — Wetland #12. Wetland #12 is rated a Type 1 wetland with a standard buffer of 100 feet. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? None. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? Workers within the small displaced business. 13 • Evaluation for Agency Use Only k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: The project is being designed to minimize impacts to adjacent businesses. Detouring traffic outside of the project area avoids displacement. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land use and plans, if any: The improvements of the roadway are compatible with existing and projected land use. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high -, middle -, or low- income housing? N/A b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high -, middle -, or low- income housing. N/A c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: N/A 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Tall structures: signal poles, light poles. b.. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? No views would be obstructed by the proposal. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic, if any: N/A 14 • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Street lighting during nighttime. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None. 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? The Interurban Trail. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? Is so, describe. No permanent displacement of existing recreational uses; however, a detour route for the Interurban Trail will be provided and signed for the construction duration. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Trail traffic will be separated from vehicular traffic by construction of a trail bridge. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. No. 15 Evaluation for Agency Use Only Evaluation for Agency Use Only b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: N/A 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: This project is a public street improvement. Vicinity map is attached. b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? The corridor is served by King County Metro Transit. The nearest transit stop is located approximately 1 block west of the Green River vehicular bridge, at the intersection of 180th Street and Sperry Drive (King County Rider Information Office). At Metro's option, the route will be detoured or abandoned during construction. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? N/A d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). No. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. The project will provide grade separation between vehicular traffic and train traffic on tracks owned by BNSF.and UPRR. 16 g• • Evaluation for Agency Use Only How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. None. This project will not generate additional trips. This project will enhance mobility and safety for existing vehicular and rail traffic. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: This is a transportation improvement project. The purpose of this project is to improve safety by eliminating the at -grade intersection /crossing of vehicular and pedestrian traffic with train traffic. During construction, the road will be closed to through traffic at the west and east approaches with the railroad to facilitate the construction and minimize the overall time that this corridor is interrupted with construction activities. During the closure, detours will be clearly marked and will include notices alerting the public that local businesses along South 180th Street on each side of the rail crossing are open for business and accessible. The congestion and travel time impacts of this temporary closure have been evaluated and are attached. 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 describe. No. The final project will improve emergency responses by eliminating the at -grade crossing with the railroads. The project will, however, result in the need to reroute emergency services during the construction. Fire, police, and other emergency services have been notified and a plan will be implemented to meet the response time requirements. 17 C. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any: Public services will be impacted during construction. Advance notification of detours will be used to reduce impacts. See attached public notification plan. 16. Utilities a. Underline utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. 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 that might be needed. No additional utilities are proposed. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: 1.lAtiVI&Oh Date Submitted: /f- tD " 00 ADMIN /SEPA/180th.dx Attachments Figures Vicinity Map Wetlands Map FEMA Map Public Notification of Detours Plan South 180th Street Grade Separation South 180th Street Grade Separation South 180th Street Grade Separation South 180th Street Grade Separation South 180th Street Grade Separation — Stream Study — Wildlife Study — Wetlands Study — Technical Info Report — Traffic Analysis 18 • Evaluation for Agency Use Only ATTACHMENTS Figures Vicinity Map Wetlands Map FEMA Map Public Notification of Detours Plan South 180th Street Grade Separation — Stream Study South 180th Street Grade Separation — Wildlife Study South 180th Street Grade Separation — Wetlands Study South 180th Street Grade Separation — Technical Info Report South 180th Street Grade Separation — Traffic Analysis figure 1 vicinity map Herrera.,. s- TV lar1d �4 ., 3 .r0 So. 180th St. Not to Scale Source: BERGER /ABAM Engineers 1999 Wetlands Mitigation Site South 180th Street Grade Separation City of Tukwila Wetland 12 (Approximate.. _. - d Location) r� �t Project Limits Project Limits to Scale •Project Limits AIMS — — — i —.ma. m m — - ! 'Project Limits 1 1 1 a Wetland.C. 0 Springbrook Creek Riparian Corridor 7, Mill ,Creek Riparian Corridor r -- 1 1 S..)urce l3ERCER•ARAM F.ng ineitr r; 1998 Project Area Wetlands and Riparian Corridor South 180th Street Grade Separation rt North I Figure 9 • • South 180th Street Grade Separation City of Tukwila Public Works Department Draft Public Notification Program Outline Group Presentations — 2 each (Need to begin scheduling with each) Valley General Hospital IKEA Boeing Costco Southcenter Tukwila Chamber of Commerce Kent Chamber of Commerce Renton Chamber of Commerce Renton Transportation Commission — July 18, 2000 4 -6PM Renton City Council Tukwila Transportation Committee — July 24, 2000 5 PM Tukwila City Council Kent Public Works Committee Kent City Council WSDOT Metro Rotary? Newsletters City Police Departments City Fire Departments Utilities and Transportation Commission Adjacent Business Owners Along South 180th Street/SE 43rd Street Along West Valley Highway Along East Valley Road Utility Owners Service Providers (ie. garbage, paper, mail, etc.) General Public (Existing Mailing List) Mailing Milestones — September 2000, December 2000, March 2000, May 2000 Press Releases Seattle Post Intelligencer Seattle Times South County Journal Renton Reporter Tukwila and Kent quarterly newsletters TV? (KIRO, KOMO, KING) Radio? (KIRO, KOMO, KVI) Press Milestones - September 2000, December 2000, March 2000, May 2000 Internet On Tukwila's website with links from Kent and Renton Public Access Channels Tukwila, Kent and Renton Signs WB just east of Springbrook Creek EB between Farmers Insurance and Eyeglass repair Message — South 180th Street Grade Separation Project Public Meeting on South 180th Street Construction Detour October ? ?, 2000 ? PM at ? Public Meetings October 2000 January 2000 May 2000 Schedule Construction May 2001 Road Closed to Through Traffic June 2001 Road Re -Opens to Through Traffic No Later Than June 2002 South 196th Street Opens March 2001 (Detour) Oakesdale Completed June 2001 (Alternate Detour) Debora Ritter - S. 180t Street Grade .ration From: To: Date: Subject: Robin, "Mary H. Murphy" <Mary.Hanna @worldnet.att.net> tuk- mail.6300- po(Robin) 8/31/00 2:33PM S. 180th Street Grade Separation Thank you for speaking with me this day regarding the current status of the above referenced project. To formally reiterate, Public Storage is very concerned with possible impacts to their business as a result of this project, particularly as it relates to visibility and access. Based on your conversation with me today, it is my understanding that an alternative ingress /egress driveway for the existing Public Storage facility has not been secured. Further, there is uncertainty as to who actually owns the adjacent open space parcel which is the proposed alternate access point for Public Storage. We have serious concerns about this proposed road improvement. Please consider this a formal request to be included as a formal party of record. Public Storage has also asked me to include them as a formal party of record. Please forward all information to: Mary Hanna Murphy & Associates, 7350 Alonzo Avenue NW Seattle, WA 98117 ATTN: Mary Murphy Public Storage, Inc.7 701 Western Ave., Suite 200 Glendale, CA 91201 ATTN: Carl Phelps If you should have any questions regarding this request, please call me at (206) 784 -1133. Thank you. Page 1 Washington State Department of Transportation Sid Morrison Secretary of Transportation August 11, 2000 Mr. Robin Tischmak, P.E City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: South 180`1' Street Grade Separation NM FS Concurrence HP- 1998(024)/TA -1269 Dear Mr. Tischmak: N Northwest Region 15700 Dayton Avenue North P.O. Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133 -9710 (206) 440-4000 RECEIVED AUG 182G TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS Attached is a concurrence letter from National Marine Fisheries on the biological assessment for this project. We are still awaiting concurrence from United States Fish and Wildlife. If you have any- questions, contact Ed Conyers at 206 -440- 4736. Sincerely, /-0 EDWARD R. CONYERS. P.E. Assistant Local Programs Enineer ERC:ec Attachment UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE Northwest Region 7600 Sand Point Way N.E., Bldg. 1 Seattle, WA 96115 August 1, 2000 Brian Hasselbach Washington State Department of Transportation Olympic Region P.O. Box 47300 Olympia, Washington 98504 -7300 Re: Biological Assessment for South 180th St. Grade Separation (WSB -00 -268) Dear Mr. Hasselbach: RECEIVED AUG 14 2000 Northwest Region Local Programs The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has reviewed the above referenced Biological Assessment (BA) that is undated. According to the BA, the City of Tukwilla Public Works Department is proposing to construct an underpass of South 180th Street beneath existing railroad tracks for public safety. We concur with your effect determination of "may affect but not likely to adversely affect" for Puget Sound chinook (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)or their critical habitat. The proposed project may have the following potential impacts to habitat: 1) Construction activities that include movement of soils may result in potential direct effects including short-term increases in turbidity from delivered fine sediments. The riparian areas that exist in the proposed action area are dominated by Himalayan blackberry and reed canary grass and do not provide properly functioning condition for fish habitat. All areas proposed for disturbance are located above the ordinary high water mark and will be replanted with native vegetation. With the erosion control measures proposed with the project, we can expect this potential short-term impact to be discountable or insignificant. 2) Accidental spills of petroleum -based chemicals associated with heavy machinery can harm fish at any life stage. With the Spill Prevention and Control Plan proposed with the project, we can expect this potential short-term impact to be discountable or insignificant. 3) The proposed project will result in 0.60 acres of new impervious surface. Storm water will be treated at 140% for water quality and 100% for water quantity for the new impervious surfaces. Since the amount of runoff from the site will be treated before discharge, we can expect this potential impact to be discountable or insignificant. 4) The proposed project will fill 1.11 acres of wetlands. These wetlands are isolated from a any surface water connection by two existing rail lines. The proposed wetland fills are not expected to impact flows in nearby streams. Nearby lands within the same basin have been purchased to ® Printed on Recycled Paper create new wetlands at a 1.5 ratio mitigation for the fill. Due to the lack of surface connection to these isolated wetlands, we can expect this potential impact to be discountable or insignificant 5) The BA states that some work may be conducted within the ordinary high water mark for the temporary railroad. According to Robin Tischmak of the City of Tukwilla, current plans are to stay above the ordinary high water mark for this work. If however, work must be conducted below the ordinary high water mark, a HPA will be applied for and work will be conducted within the permitted work window. Any disturbance of the stream bank below the ordinary high water mark will be restored with a vegetated geogrid. With the minimization and avoidance measures proposed, we can expect this potential impact to be discountable or insignificant. NMFS concurrence with your finding is contingent upon using the erosion control and spill control measures identified in the BA, and compliance with the HPA if required. The regulations (50CFR 402.08) implementing section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act), allow a Federal Agency to designate a non - federal representative to conduct informal consultations or prepare biological assessments by giving written notice to the Director of such designation. The Service has received the letter written May 10, 1999 from Federal Highways Administration, Gene Fong, Division Administrator, so designating Washington Department of Transportation as their non - federal representative. The ultimate responsibility for compliance with section 7 remains with the Federal agency. This concludes informal consultation on these actions in accordance with 50 CFR 402.14(b)(1). The Federal Highway Administration must reinitiate this ESA consultation: (1) if new information reveals effects of the action that may affect listed species in a way not previously considered; (2) if the action is modified in a manner that causes an effect to the listed species that was not previously considered; or if a new species is listed or critical habitat designated that may be affected by the identified actions. Thank you for your effort to protect threatened Puget Sound chinook. If you have any questions, please contact Steve Butkus of the Washington State Habitat Branch Office_at (360) 753 -9594. Sincerely, Vel/2„, William W. Stelle, Jr. Regional Administrator Job No. A00084 South 180th Street Grade Separation Final Wildlife Study Submitted to City of Tukwila Public Works Department Tukwila, Washington Submitted by BERGER /ABAM E N G I N E E R S I N C. RECEIVED CITY OF TIJKWII_A JAN 1 0 2001 July 2000 PERMIT CENTER FINAL WILDLIFE STUDY South 180th Street Grade Separation Submitted to City of Tukwila Public Works Department Tukwila, Washington July 2000 Submitted by BERGER /ABAM Engineers Inc. 33301 Ninth Avenue South, Suite 300 Federal Way, Washington 98003 -2600 Job No. A00084 FINAL WILDLIFE STUDY SOUTH 180TH STREET GRADE SEPARATION TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE 1.0 Introduction 1 2.0 Site Description 1 3.0 Methodology 1 3.1 Review of Existing Information 4 3.2 Field Surveys 4 4.0 Findings 4 4.1 Priority Habitats and Species Data Base 5 4.2 On -Site Investigations 5 5.0 Species of Concern 8 6.0 Wildlife Habitat Assessment 8 7.0 Impacts to Wildlife 8 8.0 Mitigation 9 9.0 Regulatory Implications 11 10.0 References 11 FIGURES Figure 1— Vicinity Map Figure 2 — Project Study Area Map Figure 3 — Wildlife Habitat Observation Areas Figure 4 — Habitat Impacts APPENDIXES Appendix A — Wildlife Species Expected in King County Appendix B — Wildlife Species Observed in the Project Study Area Final Wildlife Study South 180th Street Grade Separation ii July 2000 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the findings of a wildlife study performed by BERGER/ABAM Engineers Inc. (BERGER/ABAM) for the South 180th Street Grade Separation project. The project is located at the intersection of the northwest corner of Kent, the southwest corner of Renton, and the eastern boundary of Tukwila, Washington, in the vicinity of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) and Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks (in Township 23N, Range 4E, north half of Section 36). A vicinity map is provided as Figure 1. Along South 180th Street, the study area extends 200 feet north and south of the roadway from 72nd Avenue South on the west side to 80th Avenue South on the east side. Along the BNSF and UPRR tracks, the study area extends 1,000 feet north and south of the tracks and within 100 feet of the railroad right -of -way (ROW). A map of the study area is provided as Figure 2. The project proponent, the City of Tukwila, is proposing a grade separation between South 180th Street and the BNSF and UPRR tracks for the purposes of improved public safety. 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION Land uses within the project study area include a mix of commercial, office park, and light industrial uses. Other land uses on the north side of South 180th Street include an undeveloped property located immediately east of the BNSF ROW; and the proposed Oaksdale Business Campus site east of the undeveloped property and extending to 80th Avenue South, which has been cleared and is currently undergoing site cleanup for contaminated soils. During field investigations, construction was underway on the south side of the roadway on the Creekside Storage Park, a public storage site immediately east of the BNSF tracks. The Interurban Trail, Puget Sound Energy power lines, fiber optic cable, and a gas line are located on the west side of the project study area. Springbrook Creek flows from northeast in the eastern portion of the project study area. Mill Creek flows northeast under a bridge over the BNSF tracks to a confluence with Springbrook Creek in the southeastern portion of the site (see Figure 2). The project study area is generally flat, with elevated grades for the roadway and the railroad tracks. r 3.0 METHODOLOGY The wildlife study was conducted according to Wildlife Study Guidelines for SEPA promulgated by King County Resource Planning (1993). These guidelines provide consistent, standard, and quantitative methods for describing impacts to wildlife resources. According to the guidelines, projects less than 10 acres requiring a grading permit and that contain priority habitat or species require a habitat survey and/or a threatened and endangered species study. The South 180th Street Grade Separation project contains no threatened or endangered species; however, it does contain wetlands and riparian corridors, areas considered priority habitats in King County. General surveys of wildlife habitat and wildlife use were conducted on June 20, July 9, 10, and 16, 1998 within the project study area. Final Wildlife Study South 180th Street Grade Separation 1 July 2000 North _518 Sea -Tac International Airport S 212th Kent (161) Project Area ( 167 (1671 Source: BERGER /ABAM Engineers, 1998 Vicinity Map South 180th Street Grade Separation Figure 1 • .i •. •••' • ._ aisgmmll sin= Project Area Subs =ME I 3= ObN. Not to Scale North Source: U.S.G.S. Renton, Washington Quadrangle, 1994 Project Study Area South 180th Street Grade Separation Figure 2 3.1 Review of Existing Information Prior to conducting field evaluations, existing literature, maps, and other materials were reviewed to identify potential wildlife species and habitats within the study area. This information included the following. • Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Priority Habitats and Species Data Base (1998) • National Wetland Inventory Map, Renton Quadrangle (USFW, 1988) • Hunn, E.L. 1982. Birding in Seattle and King County. Site Guide and Annotated List. Audubon Society Trailside Series • Lower Puyallup Watershed Management Committee. 1992. Lower Puyallup Watershed Phase 1 Report. March 1992 • Corkran, C.C. and C. Thoms. 1996. Amphibians of Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia. Lone Pine Publishing. Redmond, Washington • Kricher, J.C. and G. Morrison. 1993. A field guide to the ecology of western forests. Peterson Field Guides Series • Peterson, R.T. 1980. A Field Guide to the Mammals of North America North of Mexico. Third edition. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, New York • National Geographic Society. 1994. Birds of North America. Second Edition • Stokes, D. and Stokes, L. 1996. Stokes Field Guide to Birds. Western Region. Little, Brown, and Co., Boston 3.2 Field Surveys In addition to reviewing the literature, general surveys of wildlife habitat and wildlife use were conducted on June 20, July 9, 10, and 16, 1998 within the project study area. Direct and indirect observations (scat, nests, tracks, vocalizations) were made of vertebrate species in these habitats, mainly concentrating on avian and amphibian species. Special habitat features, such as snags and ponds, were also noted. Amphibians were observed through lifting of rocks where appropriate. No formal transects were established, as they were not required. For bird species, one observation station was established within each of four habitat types identified within the project study area or vicinity. Observations were conducted at each station for 10 minutes during each site visit, starting at 6 a.m. 4.0 FINDINGS The following sections describe the results of the literature search, existing information review, and the field investigations conducted within the project study area and vicinity. Final Wildlife Study South 180th Street Grade Separation 4 July 2000 4.1 Priority Habitats and Species Data Base The Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Priority Habitats and Species Data Base was examined for endangered, threatened, or sensitive wildlife species; species of concern; and priority habitats within the project area. Priority species include all state endangered, threatened, sensitive, and candidate species, vulnerable animal aggregations; and those species of recreational, commercial, or tribal importance that are also vulnerable (WDFW, 1998). Waterfowl, including Canadian geese, canvasbacks, and mallards, have been documented as using the study area. Two great blue heron (Ardea herodias) colonies are within 2 miles of the study area. A bald eagle nest (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) is located on Mercer Island north of the study area. 4.2 On -Site Investigation The four different habitat types were identified within the study area and vicinity (Figure 3). • Scrub -shrub wetland • Blackberry shrub /open • Riparian corridor • Urban weedy /open area The following sections discuss these habitat types, the species that were observed during the site visits, and wildlife species that may use the habitats, but that were not observed. Wildlife use of an area is dependent upon the richness and diversity of the vegetative community and the proximity of other habitats. A list of species likely to occur in King and Pierce Counties is included as Appendix A. Several of these species, such as owls, bitterns, and opposums, may likely be present in the project area, but remain unobserved due to their nocturnal habits, camouflage, and avoidance of humans. A list of species observed or heard within the project study area is provided as Appendix B. Habitat A: Scrub -Shrub Wetland (Station 1) Scrub -shrub wetlands are wetlands dominated by woody vegetation under 6 meters tall and include open water. For a more detailed description of the wetlands on the site, see the Wetlands Study (BERGER/ABAM, 2000). The scrub -shrub wetlands within the study area are located along the BNSF and UPRR tracks, and along the Interurban Trail north of South 180th Street. They are characterized by shrub vegetation dominated by willows and include small ponded areas with open water and emergent vegetation. Dominant plants in this habitat include Pacific, Scouler, and sitka willow; red alder; broadleaved cattail; hardhack; reed canarygrass; field horsetail; brooklime; and water smartweed. Final Wildlife Study South 180th Street Grade Separation 5 July 2000 03 03 mo c DC) m D coD m co co cocn m co U) 0 5 op 0 CD 0 a3 0 CD CD 0 Sealy uoRenJasgp ° PIPI!M t1 t0 (D W suoiiels uoileMesgo anipuM • r m 0 m Z 0 co 7•Fs,t;� InterurbanTrail UP RR BNSF RR 1 -i nfi 1 1' „� 1 1 )t 1 c 11 � �.. 1 1 M- -- I I S 1- ......................................... ■.............................. MI MI Ell O ---. IN N NM WI NV X.. \-0 4 7 o Vto ff ., 't Project Limits L. Potential wildlife species that may occur here include raccoon, porcupine, striped skunk, Townsend's vole, song sparrow, American robin, common yellowthroat, willow flycatcher, northwestern salamander, Pacific chorus frog, and common garter snake. Actual wildlife or wildlife signs observed or heard during the site investigations include great blue heron, green heron, American robin, barn swallow, violet -green swallow, willow flycatcher, red - winged blackbird, American goldfinch, mallard, marsh wren, black- capped chickadee, song sparrow, pigeon, cedar waxwing, muskrat, European rabbit, and coyote scat. Several marsh wren nests were also observed in the cattails within this habitat. Habitat B: Blackberry Shrub /Open (Station 2) This habitat type is located along the Interurban Trail on the south side of South 180th Street. The site is comprised primarily by low shrubs and forbs, including Himalayan blackberry, snowberry, baldhip rose, nettle, and reed canarygrass. This site contains less structural and species diversity than the scrub -shrub wetlands, and is more likely to be dominated by human - accustomed species, such as raccoons and skunks. Wildlife or wildlife signs observed or heard in this habitat during the site investigations include American crow, violet -green swallow, house sparrow, song sparrow, Savannah sparrow, white - crowned sparrow, American robin, house finch, black- capped chickadee, willow flycatcher, belted kingfisher, American goldfinch, European starling, weasel, and European rabbit. A frequent user of the Interurban Trail reported seeing coyote and beaver as well. Habitat C: Riparian Corridor (Station 3) The dominant plant species on this site are reed canarygrass and willows. Riparian corridors are known as areas of high species diversity. Approximately 85 percent of Washington's terrestrial vertebrate species use riparian habitat for essential life. activities (Thomas et al. 1979, Brown 1985), and many researchers also note high avian and amphibian diversity and abundance in these areas. Wildlife species expected along the riparian corridor include duck species, great blue herons, songbirds, northwestern salamanders, Pacific chorus frogs, and garter snakes. However, diversity of animal species often parallels diversity of plant species. Because this area contains little plant diversity, a high diversity of animal species is not expected. Wildlife observed or heard within this habitat during the site investigations include mallard with young, song sparrow, European starling, American goldfinch, common yellowthroat, house finch, violet -green swallow, brown - headed cowbird, and black- capped chickadee. A dead Norway rat was observed on the roadway just east of the riparian corridor. Habitat D: Urban Weedy /Open Area (Station 4) This habitat type is located within the proposed Oaksdale Business Campus on the eastern fringe of the study area. The site has been cleared and is currently undergoing site cleanup for contaminated soils under a Washington State Department of Ecology cleanup order. The site is predominantly a disturbed, open area dominated by weedy, invasive forbs. A few scattered willows and red alder occur along Springbrook Creek, which flows northeasterly across the site. Plant species at this site include common tansy, common plantain, Japanese knotweed, bull and Canada thistle, field horsetail, bedstraw, Klamath weed, birdsfoot treefoil, climbing nightshade, dandelion, red alder, and Scot's broom. Final Wildlife Study South 180th Street Grade Separation 7 July 2000 Due to the disturbed and cleared nature of the site, the predominant wildlife species expected in this area are those that are human - adapted, such as crows, robins, skunks, raccoons, and some songbirds at the fringes of the site. Wildlife or wildlife signs observed or heard in this habitat during the site investigations include house finch, northern flicker, violet -green swallow, common yellowthroat, song sparrow, house sparrow, fox sparrow, great blue heron, domestic duck, red - winged blackbird, American robin, barn swallow, coyote, and common garter snake. A single large cottonwood remains at the site. The tree contains a nest that is reported to be a red - tailed hawk nest, however, no hawks were sited near the tree or in the vicinity of the project. 5.0 SPECIES OF CONCERN Species of concern include those classified by the WDFW (1998) as endangered, threatened, sensitive, candidate, or monitor. The great blue heron, a state monitor species, was observed within areas of the study site. There are two great blue heron nesting colonies within 2 miles of the study site — in the vicinity of Springbrook Springs and in the area of the Black River Corporate Park. Great blue herons feed on aquatic and marine animals found in shallow water, as well as mice and voles found in upland fields. Typical foraging areas for great blue herons range from 2.5 to 18 miles from rookeries. Great blue herons likely use the wetland and streamside areas of the site, as well as other nearby wetlands associated with Springbrook Creek, Mill Creek, and the Green River for foraging. Management guidelines promulgated by the WDFW (1991) recommend buffer zones around the periphery of nesting sites varying from 3,280 feet during the nesting season to a year - round "no activity" zone of 75 feet or greater. A bald eagle nest site is located on Mercer Island, north of the study area. Bald eagle prey species include anadromous and warm -water fish, small mammals, carrion, and waterfowl. Bald eagles may forage in the area of the study site, but are expected to be infrequent visitors due to the small size of the study area wetlands and the proximity of commercial land uses and traffic. Under the Washington State Bald Eagle Protection Rules (WAC- 232 -12 -292), site - specific management plans are recommended for potential impacts to bald eagles. 6.0 WILDLIFE HABITAT ASSESSMENT The wetlands on the site were evaluated for their natural biological support functions. A detailed description of the wetlands within the project study area is found in the Wetland Study (BERGER/ABAM, 2000). The scrub -shrub and riparian corridor habitat areas provide good nesting, resting, and foraging habitat for a variety of species. Based on observations of species diversity and density, wildlife use appears to be most intensive within the scrub -shrub and riparian corridor habitats. The remainder of the study area provides limited wildlife habitat due to the disturbed nature of these habitats. 7.0 IMPACTS TO WILDLIFE Direct impacts to wildlife are usually associated with habitat destruction and alteration (also see Vegetation section). Wildlife in the immediate vicinity of construction activity is likely to be disturbed by noise, dust, and traffic associated with construction activities. However, most of the construction would occur in areas with high ambient noise levels and traffic volumes (i.e., South Final Wildlife Study South 180th Street Grade Separation 8 July 2000 180th Street and the Railroad). Therefore, short -term impacts on wildlife resulting from construction are not expected to be significant. The development of four temporary detours, or "shooflies," for the BNSF and UPRR tracks will result in the filling of a total of 1.09 acres of wetlands within Habitat Area A, and the 0.01 -acre Wetland C within Habitat Area B (Figure 4). No impacts to wildlife or wildlife habitat areas are expected to occur as a result of the roadway and underpass construction. Removal of vegetation within the scrub -shrub wetland within Habitat Area A would reduce the amount of scrub -shrub wetland habitat available within the immediate project area. Birds and most mammals (i.e., muskrats) would likely be able to relocate to the adjacent wetland areas on the east and west sides. Smaller animals (i.e., amphibians, reptiles, small rodents) may not be able to migrate out of the impacted area. Wildlife impacts resulting from the removal of Wetland C are expected to be minimal due to its small size. Birds, mammals, and reptiles would easily be able to relocate to adjacent areas. Amphibians are not expected to use Wetland C, so no impacts are anticipated on amphibian species. 8.0 MITIGATION Mitigation for the loss of wetland areas is described in detail in the South 180th Street Grade Separation Wetland Study (BERGER/ABAM, 2000). The criteria for selecting wetland creation and restoration areas include the following considerations. • A preference for sites located within the same drainage subbasin • Sites located within areas with sufficient hydrology to support wetland vegetation and seasonal amphibian habitat • The potential for connectivity to existing habitat corridors Ideally, the mitigation wetlands would be situated so that they form a continuum with adjacent and nearby habitat corridors, which can result in a combined net gain in wildlife habitat function for all associated systems. Several mitigation measures may be implemented to reduce or eliminate potentially adverse impacts on wildlife species, including • Minimize the extent of vegetation disturbance • Revegetate disturbed areas with native vegetation previously identified from the site (i.e., willow species, grasses) to enhance use of and return to these areas by wildlife • Schedule construction to avoid impacts on species, such as the bald eagle, great blue heron, green- backed heron, all of which may use the area • Where appropriate, implement recommendations described in Management Recommendations for Washington's Priority Habitats and Species (WDFW, 1991) • Minimize damage to vegetation and soil compaction from construction equipment • Avoid the removal of trees and shrubs where possible Final Wildlife Study South 180th Street Grade Separation 9 July 2000 co co m 0 c 0 a m co m co 0 c73 co co co m cct epos of ION InterurbanTrail UP RR 4:20 BNSF RR 4.7 . . . ..,,,,„ . -., •.. . >1 • cl,. • CD ...4. '1, 13,1 .••• ' .. •-s. 1 0 'fa) . = '"X:' ' 0 .• ''' "11* , . —...... ,,, 1, . \\.7c % .4. c CD• • . ) > "1 CO th(D cr 6 , •-• F ^ .............. . ...• .. ............................................... .117 Zior- A,/ 'r • > \.* .• CO .4ekr , • . t 4. • • n m :71 9.0 REGULATORY IMPLICATIONS The Washington State Growth Management Act requires jurisdictions to designate Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas for protection. These areas include 1) areas with which endangered, threatened, and sensitive species have a primary association; 2) habitats and species of local importance; 3) commercial and recreational shellfish areas; 4) kelp and eelgrass beds, herring and smelt spawning areas; 5) naturally occurring ponds under 20 acres and their submerged aquatic beds that provide fish or wildlife habitat; 6) waters of the state; 7) lakes, ponds, streams, and rivers planted with game fish by a governmental or tribal entity; and 8) state natural area preserves and natural resource conservation areas. The cities of Renton, Kent, and Tukwila provide protection for fish and wildlife through sensitive /critical areas ordinances and regulations that protect wetlands and streams /riparian corridors. However, the habitats that occur within the project area have not been formally designated by these cities as Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas. 10.0 REFERENCES Brown, E.R. Technical Editor. 1985. Management of Wildlife and Fish Habitats in Forests of Western Oregon and Washington. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. Portland, Oregon. Corkran, C.C. and C. Thoms. 1996. Amphibians of Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia. Lone Pine Publishing. Redmond, Washington. Hunn, E.L. 1982. Birding in Seattle and King County. Site Guide and Annotated List. Audubon Society Trailside Series. Washington, DC. King County Resource Planning, Environmental Division. 1993. Wildlife Study Guidelines for SEPA. Bellevue, Washington. King County, 1994. The 1994 King County Comprehensive Plan. King County Department of Development and Environmental Services. Bellevue, Washington. Kricher, J.C. and G. Morrison. 1993. A field guide to the ecology of western forests. Peterson Field Guides Series. National Geographic Society. 1994. Birds of North America. Second edition. Washington, DC. Peterson, R.T. 1980. A Field Guide to the Mammals of North America North of Mexico. Third edition. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, New York. Stokes, D. and Stokes, L. 1996. Stokes Field Guide to Birds. Western Region. Little, Brown, and Co., Boston, Massachusetts. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 1998. Priority Habitats and Species Data Base. Olympia, Washington. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 1991. Management Recommendations for Washington's Priority Habitats and Species. Olympia, Washington. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1988. National Wetland Inventory Map, Renton Quadrangle. Washington, DC. Final Wildlife Study South 180th Street Grade Separation 11 July 2000 APPENDIX A. WILDLIFE SPECIES EXPECTED IN KING COUNTY Wildlife Species Expected in King County BIRDS Common Name Scientific Name American bittern Botaurus lentiginosus American goldfinch Carduelis tristis American kestrel Falco sparverius American robin Turdus migratorius Arctic tern Sterna pradisaea American widgeon Anas americana Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Band - tailed pigeon Columba fasciata Barn swallow Hirundo rustica Belted kingfisher Megaceryle alcyon Black brant Branta bernicla Black- capped chickadee Parus atricapilus Black- crowned night heron Nycticorax nycticorax Black marlin Falconidea columbarius Brandt's cormorant Phalacrocorax penicillatus Brown- headed cowbird Molothrus ater Blue- winged teal Anas discors Bushtit Psaltriparus minimus Bewick's wren Thryomanes bewickii Canada goose Branta canadensis California quail Callipepla californica Caspian tern Sterna caspia Cedar waxwing Bombycilla cedrorum Common coot Fulica americana Common crow Corvus brachyrhynchos Common merganser Mergus merganser Common snipe Gallinago gallinago Common yellow- throat Geothlypis trichas Cooper's hawk Accipiter cooperii Dark -eyed junco Junco hyemalis Dipper Cinclus mexicanus Downy woodpecker Picoides pubescens European starling Sturnus vulgaris Flycatchers Muscicapidae spp. Finches Fringillidae spp. Golden- crowned kinglet Regulus satrapa Golden- crowned sparrow Zonotrichia atricapilla Great blue heron Ardea herodias Great horned owl Bubo virginianus Green - backed heron Butorides striatus Great horned owl Bubo virginianus Hooded merganser Lophodytes cucullatus Horned grebe Podiceps auritus House finch Carpodacus mexicanus House sparrow Passer domesticus Hummingbird Selasphorus spp. Killdeer Charadrius vociferus Final Wildlife Study South 180th Street Grade Separation A -1 Appendix A July 2000 Lesser yellowlegs Tringa flavipes Mallard . Anas platyrhynchos Marsh wren Cistothorus palustris Merlin Falco columbarius Northern flicker Colaptes cafer Northern harrier Circus cyaneus Orange- crowned warbler Vermivora celata Osprey Pandion haliaetus Peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus Pied billed grebe Podilymbus podiceps Pileated woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus Pine siskin Carduelis pinus Purple finch Carpodacus purpureus Red - breasted nuthatch Sitta canadensis Red - tailed hawk Buteo jamaicensis Red - winged blackbird Agelaius phoenicens Ring- necked pheasant Phasianus colchicus Rock dove Columba livia Ruddy duck Oxyura jamaicensis • Ruffed grouse Bonasa umbellus Rufous -sided towhee Pipilo erythrophthalmus Scaup Aythya spp. Sharp- shinned hawk Accipeter striatus Short -eared owl Asio flammeus Song sparrow Melospiza melodia Spotted sandpiper Actitis macularia Steller's jay Cyanocitta stelleri Sora Porzana carolina Swainson's thrush Catharus ustulatus Tree swallow Tachycineta bicolor Varied thrush Ixoreus naevius Virginia rail Rallus limicola Violet -green swallow Tachycineta thalassina Warblers Dendroica spp. Western grebe Aechmophorus occidentalis White- crowned sparrow Zonotrichia leucophrys Winter wren Troglodytes troglodytes Wood duck Aix sponsa Woodpeckers Picinae spp. MAMMALS Beaver Castor canadensis Big brown bat Eptesicus fuscus Black bear Ursus americanus Black rat Rattus rattus Black- tailed deer Odocoileus hemionus columbianus Bobcat Lynx rufus Canada elk Cervus canadensis Coyote Canis latrans Deer mouse Peromyscus maniculatus Douglas squirrel Tamiasciurus douglasi Eastern cottontail Sylvilagus floridanus Final Wildlife Study South 180th Street Grade Separation A -2 Appendix A July 2000 Eastern gray squirrel Sciurus carolinensis European rabbit Oryctolagus cuniculus Fisher Martes pennanti House mouse Mus musculus Little brown bat Myotis lucifugus Long- tailed weasel Mustela frenata Marsh shrew Sorex bendirii Marten Martes americana Mink Mustela uison Mountain beaver Aplodontia rufa rufa Muskrat Ondatra zibethica Norway rat Rattus norvegicus Opossum Dedelphis uirginiana Porcupine Erethizon dorsatum Raccoon Procyon lotor Red fox Vulpes uulpes River otter Lutra canadensis Sasquatch Bipedus giganticus Sea otter Enhydra lutris Shrew mole Neurotrichus gibbsii Short - tailed weasel Mustela erminea Striped skunk Mephitis mephitis Townsend's vole Microtus townsedii Townsend's mole Scaparus townshendii REPTILES AND AMPHIBIANS Bull frog Rana catesbeiana Common garter snake Thamnophis sirtalis Ensatina Ensatina eschscholtzii Northern red - legged frog Rana aurora aurora Northwestern garter snake Thamniphis ordinoides Northwestern salamander Ambystoma gracile Pacific chorus frog Hyla regilla Rough- skinned newt Taricha granulosa Western fence lizard Sceloporus occidentalis Final Wildlife Study South 180th Street Grade Separation A -3 Appendix A July 2000 Wildlife Species Observed in the Project Area BIRDS Common Name Scientific Name American goldfinch Carduelis tristis American robin Turdus migratorius Barn swallow Hirundo rustica Belted kingfisher Megaceryle alcyon Black- capped chickadee Parus atricapilus Brown- headed cowbird Molothrus ater Canada goose Branta canadensis Cedar waxwing Bombycilla cedrorum Common crow Corvus brachyrhynchos Common yellow-throat Geothlypis trichas European starling Sturnus vulgaris Great blue heron Ardea herodias Green - backed heron Butorides striatus House finch Carpodacus mexicanus House sparrow Passer domesticus Mallard Anas platyrhynchos Marsh wren Cistothorus palustris Northern flicker Colaptes cater Red - winged blackbird Agelaius phoenicens Rock dove Columba livia Rufous -sided towhee Pipilo erythrophthalmus Savannah sparrow Passerculus sandwichensis Song sparrow Melospiza melodia Tree swallow Tachycineta bicolor Violet -green swallow Tachycineta thalassina White- crowned sparrow Zonotrichia leucophrys Willow flycatcher Empidonax traillii MAMMALS Coyote Canis latrans European rabbit Oryctolagus cuniculus Long- tailed weasel Mustela frenata Muskrat Ondatra zibethica Norway rat Rattus noruegicus REPTILES AND AMPHIBIANS Common garter snake 1 Thamnophis sirtalis Final Wildlife Study South 180th Street Grade Separation Appendix B July 2000 South 180th Street Grade Separation Final Stream Study Submitted to City of Tukwila Public Works Department Tukwila, Washington Submitted by BERGER /ABAM E N G I N E E R S I N C. Job No. A00084 July 2000 10.0 Mitigation Goals and Objectives 19 Final Wildlife Study South 180th Street Grade Separation ii July 2000 FINAL STREAM STUDY SOUTH 180TH STREET GRADE SEPARATION TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) SECTION PAGE 11.0 Limitations 20 12.0 References 20 FIGURES Figure 1— Vicinity Map Figure 2 — Project Study Area Figure 3 — Springbrook Creek Watershed Boundary Figure 4 - King County Soil Survey Figure 5 — Stream Transect Locations Figure 6 — Railroad Bridge Extension/Stream Buffer Impacts TABLES Table 1 —Adult Salmonids at the Black River P -1 Pump Station: 1983- 1990 APPENDIXES Appendix A Stream Habitat Types Appendix B - Data Sheets Final Wildlife Study South 180th Street Grade Separation iii July 2000 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report provides a discussion of the stream habitat assessment performed by BERGER/ABAM Engineers Inc. (BERGER/ABAM) for Springbrook Creek (WRIA No. 005) and its tributary, Mill Creek (WRIA No. 0012), within the South 180th Street Grade Separation project study area. The project is located at the intersection of the northwest corner of Kent, the southwest corner of Renton, and the eastern boundary of Tukwila, Washington, in the vicinity of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) and Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks (in Township 23N, Range 4E, north half of Section 36). A vicinity map is provided as Figure 1. Along South 180th Street, the study area extends 200 feet north and south of the roadway from 72nd Avenue South on the west side to 80th Avenue South on the east side. Along the BNSF and UPRR tracks, the study area extends 1,000 feet north and south of the tracks and within 100 feet of the railroad right -of -way (ROW). A map of the study area is provided as Figure 2. The project proponent, City of Tukwila, is proposing a grade separation between South 180th Street and the BNSF and UPRR tracks for the purposes of improved public safety. The fish habitat of Springbrook Creek and Mill Creek contributes to the viability of the lower Puget Sound salmonid fishery.. Fish habitat assessments are routinely conducted as part of the impact analysis associated with land use actions that may adversely affect fisheries resources. These assessments typically include information about the conditions of the stream channel habitat and stability, and riparian communities, which is presented in a stream survey report. The goal of this stream habitat assessment is to examine the structure and quality of the stream reaches of Springbrook Creek and Mill Creek within the study area, and to determine whether and how these creeks provide habitat support for salmonids and other aquatic species. Information presented in this report will contribute to an analysis of the project alternatives and development of a conceptual mitigation plan. 2.0 METHODOLOGY The cities of Kent and Renton do not have an official stream survey or reporting manual. Accordingly, BERGER/ABAM conducted the stream survey according to criteria outlined in the Stream Survey Report Criteria (King County, 1991). Guidelines developed by King County as outlined in the Stream Survey Report Criteria (King County, 1991) use methods developed by the U.S. Forest Service Fish Habitat Relationships (FHR) Program presented in Stream Habitat Classification and Inventory Procedures for Northern California (FHR Methodology) (McCain et al, 1990). These guidelines were used to characterize the stream within the study area. Information was obtained from a review of existing information, field investigations, and discussions with fisheries resource professionals and agency staff knowledgeable about the study area. BERGER/ABAM performed the stream survey of Springbrook and Mill Creeks on July 10 and 16, 1998. In compliance with King County stream survey methods, fish resources and fish habitat were identified by assessing the physical characteristics of the stream within the study area, including ■ Stream width • Stream depth ▪ Stream bank characteristics and vegetation • : Stream bed composition ■ Presence of large woody debris (LWD) Final Stream Study South 180th Street Grade Separation North 518 Renton Sea -Tac International Airport Tukwil S 212th Project Area S 180th a Kent \ 167 Source: BERGER /ABAM Engineers, 1998 Vicinity Map South 180th Street Grade Separation Figure 1 Project Area 1. am ►�i��A; i ii► -..�•� 1111IMwti Not to Scale fr North Source: U.S.G.S. Renton, Washington Quadrangle, 1994 Project Study Area South 180th Street Grade Separation Figure 2 3.0 STREAM CHARACTERISTICS Streams may be categorized according to certain habitat features common to all salmonid species that, if found in sufficient quantity, comprise high - quality habitat. These features are generally classified as pools, riffles, glides, and runs. 3.1, Pools Pool quality indexing conforms to the criteria developed by the U.S. Forest Service in Methods for Evaluating Riparian Habitats With Applications to Management ( "Pool Quality Index ") (Platts, et al, 1987). Pool habitat provides resting and feeding habitat for salmonid species. Quality pool areas are typically areas of slow, nonturbulent water with surface dimensions that are wider than and/or longer than the average width of the stream within the reach being evaluated. A pool that is 76.2 cm (2.5 feet) deep or deeper is considered to provide good habitat if it meets the width and length criteria. Pool cover is typically made up of substrate material, including rocks and boulders, submerged LWD, mildly turbulent surfacewater, overhanging streambanks and LWD, and overhanging vegetation within 1.8 meters (6 feet) or less of the water surface. A pool having greater than 80 percent cover in conjunction with other criteria is considered to provide good habitat. No pool habitats were identified within the study area. 3.2 Riffles Riffles are characterized by faster water with turbulent flow. Quality riffle habitat contains uncompacted gravels that are loose enough to move under moderate to high force, but are not very easy to move.. Small pockets of slack water form behind large cobbles and boulders within the riffle, . which provide escape, resting, and feeding cover for juvenile salmonids. Riffles also provide productive habitat for aquatic insects that serve as a food source for salmonids and other aquatic species found in the stream. Low gradient riffles are shallow reaches with a gradient of less than 4 percent with swiftly flowing turbulent flow and some partially exposed cobble- dominated substrate. High gradient riffles are steep reaches with a gradient of greater than 4 percent of moderately deep, swift, and very turbulent flows over a boulder- dominated substrate. A cascade is the steepest riffle habitat, consisting of alternating small waterfalls and shallow pools over a substrate of bedrock and boulders. One reach of riffle habitat was observed within the study area and classified as low gradient riffle habitat. 3.3 Glides Glides are characterized by moderately shallow water (10 to 30 cm deep) with an even flow lacking pronounced turbulence. Although they are most frequently located at the transition between a pool and the head of a riffle, glides are occasionally found in long, low gradient stream reaches with stable banks and no major flow obstructions. The typical substrate is gravel and cobbles. No glides were observed within the study area. Final Stream Study South 180th Street Grade Separation 3.4 Low Gradient Glides The category of "low gradient glide" is not defined by the FHR Methodology. This classification was created by Harza Northwest, Inc. in the report Comprehensive Fisheries Assessment of the Springbrook, Mill and Garrison Creek Watershed for the City of Kent (Harza Northwest, 1995) to categorize a habitat type common in the Springbrook Creek watershed. The majority of the stream habitat within the study area consists of low gradient glide habitat with no major flow obstructions. 3.5 Runs Runs are swiftly flowing reaches with little surface agitation and no major flow obstructions. Runs often appear as flooded riffles. Typical substrates are gravel, cobble, and boulders. No run habitat was identified within the study area. 4.0 FISH HABITAT The procedures outlined in the FHR Methodology (as modified by King County Surface Water Management) use a system of naming 22 habitat types derived from work on stream channel morphology, pool -riffle and step -pool formation, and fish habitat utilization in western Washington and Oregon. Riffles are differentiated on the basis of water surface gradient. Pools are differentiated at two levels: (1) the position of the pool in the stream channel (secondary channel, backwater, lateral or main channel); and (2) the cause of the scour (obstruction, blockage, constriction, or merging flows). Run habitat types have low gradients and are differentiated on the basis of depth and velocity. These main channel features, along with others formed by smaller scale local effects, such as logjams and slides, can be recognized as distinct channel units or habitat types. The 22 habitat types are listed in Appendix A. Generally, a given stream will not contain all 22 habitat types. Instead, the mix will be dominated by a few habitat types that reflect the overall channel gradient, flow regime, cross - sectional profile, and substrate particle size of the stream. A stream that has habitat composition ranging from 40 percent pool/60 percent riffle to 60 percent pool/40 percent riffle is considered to provide quality salmonid habitat, if the following factors are also present. • The pool and riffle areas meet the criteria for quality habitat. ■ The streamside vegetation is indigenous, vigorous, functional, and has LWD recruitment potential. ■ There is an appropriate amount of LWD present in the channel and floodplain. ■ The floodplain areas and/or side channels provide good quality refuge and over - wintering habitat. The habitat units are relatively stable and do not change drastically in response to ordinary high -water events. • The adjacent land uses do not present a high risk of causing the quality of the habitat to change significantly overtime. Final Stream Study South 180th Street Grade Separation 5 July 2000 5.0 OTHER STREAM HABITATS Other stream habitats that can provide information on the degree to which a stream provides quality habitat for salmonids and resident fish species include the following. • . Riparian plant communities • Presence and amount of LWD adjacent land uses ■ Areas of existing and potential erosion hazard • Overflow and side channel habitat ■ Floodplain characteristics • Edgewater areas ■ Cascades • Bedrock chutes • Large in- channel boulders that provide resting areas for fish 6.0 EXISTING INFORMATION 6.1 Springbrook Creek Springbrook Creek drains a watershed subbasin defined by the City of Kent as the "Springbrook, Mill and Garrison Creek Watershed" (SMG Watershed) (Harza Northwest, 1995). The SMG Watershed covers about 15,763 acres (24 square miles) and can be delineated into two distinct topographical areas: the valley floor and the foothill zone. The valley floor, located in the western portion of the watershed, is relatively flat and of alluvial origin and covers about 5,928 acres. The foothill zone, found in the eastern portion of the watershed, consists of rolling and bench slopes and comprises about 7,554 acres. Elevation in the watershed ranges between 10 and 525 feet above sea level. Slope in the watershed ranges from 0 to 70 percent. The steepest slopes are in upper Mill Creek, upstream of the Earthworks Park Detention Pond (EWP) in Kent. Nearly 50 miles of total channel exists within the entire watershed. Springbrook Creek is formed by four east valley tributaries, including the mainstem, a tributary originating from Springbrook. Springs; Mill Creek; and Garrison Creek. These tributaries flow westerly and northwesterly through Kent and Renton, picking up additional tributary flow from the eastern portion of Renton. From its headwaters located in the eastern portion of Kent, Springbrook Creek flows north for approximately 10 miles along the east valley hillside before entering the Black River channel, a tributary to the Green River (Williams, et al, 1975). The watershed boundary is depicted in Figure 3. The Black River Pumping Station (BRPS) was constructed at the mouth of the Black River channel by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) in 1971 and 1972 to prevent waters from the Duwamish River from backing up into the old Black River channel and Springbrook Creek (Jones & Stokes, 1991): The Black River today is a small remnant of the former Black River that drained Lake Washington before construction of the Lake Washington Ship Canal, which lowered Lake Washington and diverted flows from the Black River (R.W. Beck & Associates, Inc., 1997). The BRPS is located in Renton approximately 1,000 feet upstream from the confluence of the Black and Green Rivers, and is currently operated and maintained by the King County Surface Water Management Division. An earthen, culverted, outfall structure is located approximately 500 feet downstream of the BRPS site. The purpose of the dam was to prevent the flows of the Green River from backing up into the Black River /Springbrook Creek floodplain at high stage (Harza Northwest, 1995). Before the valley was developed, Springbrook Creek regularly overflowed its channel and floodwaters would spread out in the low gradient valley (Shapiro & Associates, Inc., 1997). In 1984, Final Stream Study South 180th Street Grade Separation 6 July 2000, Ji d iii ;�io. 1:5: It f !SCI, Limn i rt:: it North Source: Harza Northwest Inc. 1994 • :.t . .n Springbrook Creek Watershed Boundary South 180th Street Grade Separation Figure 3 Springbrook Creek was channelized to contain increased peak flows from local drainages north of Interstate 405 (I -405) and the Southcenter area. The channel is approximately 8.5 miles long and is called the P -1 (primary) Channel, as well as Springbrook Creek because it follows the former creek channel. In- stream dredging is currently limited to protect fish habitat in those portions of the SMG Watershed under King County jurisdiction.. Dredging does occur in certain circumstances to control invasive vegetation, such as reed canarygrass and blackberry, and to remove stream substrate for flood protection. Dredging is only allowed during the summer when no anadromous fish are migrating (Harza Northwest, 1995). The City of Renton, with assistance from the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS, formerly the SCS), completed P -1 Channel improvements between Grady Way and Southwest 16th Street in 1995. Improvements included a parallel channel along this reach that passes through the previously constructed I -405 box culvert (R.W. Beck & Associates, Inc., 1997). Stream discharges within the study area at the time of low-flow surveys measured 1.49 cubic feet /second (cfs) in Springbrook Creek downstream of the confluence with Mill Creek (Harza Northwest, 1995). 6.2 Mill Creek Mill Creek is a tributary to Springbrook Creek and drains a watershed located east of the Green River and west of the UPRR, in the western portion of Kent, Washington. The creek flows northerly through Kent, picking up additional tributary flow just south of River Mile 1 and just north of River Mile 2. Mill Creek enters the study area from the south between the BNSF and the UPRR just north (downstream) of River Mile 4 of Springbrook Creek. From the study area boundary, the stream flows approximately 990 feet to its confluence with Springbrook Creek. In a stream inventory in September 1993, Harza Northwest reported that dredging had occurred in Mill Creek between the UPRR right -of -way and South 196th Street as part of the cleanup of the Western Processing Superfund site. The dredging created vertical cutbanks, denuded streambank vegetation, and appeared to increase in- stream sedimentation. In 1993, dredging also took place in Mill Creek along Kennebeck Street from Smith Street to James Street adjacent to the Western Processing Superfund site. In the latter case, dredging was done to remove potentially toxic substances from the stream bottom (Harza Northwest, 1995). Stream discharges within the study area at the time of low -flow surveys measured 1.42 cfs in Mill Creek, upstream of the confluence with Springbrook Creek (Harza Northwest, 1995). 6.3 Riparian Vegetation and Fisheries Habitat The City of Renton Critical Areas Inventory of Wetlands and Streams (Jones & Stokes, 1991) indicates that bank vegetation cover for Springbrook Creek within the project area consisted of shrubs and grasses and that this section of the creek is characterized by poor water quality and provides limited habitat for salmonids. A fisheries report was completed by Watershed Dynamics, Inc. (WDI) in June 1998 for the portion of Springbrook Creek from South 180th Street north to Oakesdale Avenue SW. The report describes the riparian community' along this section of the creek as dominated by reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) and willow (Salix spp.) with a few black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera) in the area near South 180th Street (WDI, 1998). The report characterized the fisheries habitat as generally poor for salmonids and would be used "primarily as a migration channel for up- migrating adults and down - migrating juveniles. Some rearing may occur in the early spring when water temperatures are Final Stream Study. South 180th Street Grade Separation s July 2000 suitable, but the fish do not appear to stay in the system for any extended period of time." (WDI, 1998) Near the Mill Creek confluence, ribbonleaf pondweed (Potamogeton epihydrous), a plant that prefers very slow - moving water, was identified within Springbrook Creek (Harza Northwest, 1995). 6.4 Substrate Composition and Bank Stability The geology of the SMG Watershed is dominated by the underlying Vashon till deposit, which was laid down during the Fraser glaciation in the Pleistocene. The Vashon till consists of very dense, consolidated till that ranges in thickness from 6 to 100 feet. As the Vashon glacier receded, large quantities of meltwater were discharged leaving gravelly and sandy terraces in the uplands of the Springbrook Creek Watershed. Alluvium accumulated in the valleys in post - glacial times (Harza Northwest, 1995). The soils in the valley floor are predominantly silt loams with some silty clay loams, fine sandy loams, peat, and fill.. This fill material, used to prepare sites for construction, ranges from about 3 to 13 feet in thickness, and varies from gravelly sandy loam to gravelly loam in texture. Most of the indigenous soils in the valley floor are poorly drained (Harza Northwest, 1995). The Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington (Soil Survey) describes the soil within the Springbrook Creek riparian corridor as Puyallup fine sandy loam (Figure 4). The Puyallup series consists of well- drained soils that formed in alluvium with a typical profile as very dark grayish brown and dark grayish brown fine sandy loam from the surface to a depth of 34 inches. Permeability is moderately rapid, runoff potential is slow, erosion and slippage hazard is slight, and flooding potential is slight to severe. Rooting depth extends to 60 inches and beyond and available water - holding capacity is moderately high (Snyder, et al, 1973). The Soil Survey describes the soil within the Mill Creek riparian corridor as Woodinville silt loam (Figure 4). The Woodinville series consists of poorly drained soils that formed in alluvium on stream . bottoms with a typical profile as a gray silt loam with layers of peaty muck extending from the surface to a depth of 38 inches. Permeability is moderately slow, runoff potential is slow, erosion hazard is slight, and flooding potential is severe unless flood protection is provided. Rooting depth extends to 60 inches and beyond, but in undrained areas, rooting depth is restricted. Available water - holding capacity is high and there is a seasonally high water table at or near the surface (Snyder, et al, 1973). The fisheries report completed by WDI (WDI, 1998) described the channel bottom immediately north of South 180th Street within the study area as dominated by sand and fine gravel with only limited larger geologic material. No LWD of significance and little recruitable material was reported in this reach of the riparian corridor. Major rainfall events currently result in rapid runoff, increased surface erosion, and degraded water quality. These rapid runoff events, or "freshets," result in increased creek velocities that downcut and can destabilize streambanks, denude riparian vegetation, and degrade water quality. In. 1993, severe downcutting was observed in Mill Creek, and low to moderate downcutting was observed in. Springbrook Creek (Harza Northwest, 1995). 6.5 Water Quality Degraded water quality in the lower reaches of Springbrook and Mill Creeks may limit salmonid use of the creek under certain conditions. Nonpoint source pollution occurs throughout the watershed. The Western Processing site on Mill Creek upstream of the study area near South 196th Street. in Final Stream Study South 180th Street Grade Separation July 2000 Not to Scale . . MIMI* =Nom Py - Puyallup Fine Sandy Loam Ur - Urban Land . . • • 1111111k, • 21141 ■ilia:,461. fr North Source: U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service, 1973 King County Soil Survey South 1 80th Street Grade Separation Figure 4 Kent may be considered a potential nonpoint source of pollution. The site has been designated as an EPA Superfund site and will be cleaned up over several years. Recent data have documented high levels of zinc and cadmium contamination in sediments in Mill Creek (R.W. Beck & Associates, Inc., 1997). The Springbrook Creek channel provides limited juvenile rearing habitat due to poor water quality (e.g., elevated summer water temperatures and low dissolved oxygen levels) (Jones & Stokes, 1991). During the summer of 1994, a U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) stream monitoring gauge was installed on Mill Creek about 600 feet upstream of the Springbrook Creek confluence, between the train trestles. The gauge records water temperature, specific conductivity, dissolved oxygen, pH, and water elevations every 15 minutes. Available records covering the period between September 16 and December 22, 1994 were compared with the requirements of adult salmon that were actively migrating during this time period (Harza Northwest, 1995). Harza Northwest reported standards were exceeded for turbidity, as well as acute and chronic toxicity criteria for lead and chromium. Low levels of phthalate esters and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons were also found. Of the standards that have been exceeded in Springbrook Creek, phosphorus, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, and fecal coliform bacteria consistently do not meet DOE water quality standards or guidelines (R.W. Beck & Associates, Inc., 1997). Fish mortality may occur from chronic exposure to concentrations of other metals that exist at levels lower than the acute levels because of synergistic affects experienced by fish when exposed to high levels of more that one metal or other water quality problems. These factors, especially when the synergistic affects are considered, likely cause changes in fish distribution within the watershed, poor growth and survival, and direct mortality to salmonid populations (Harza Northwest, 1995). The Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) has established numerical standards for specific water quality parameters in part to protect fish and wildlife resources. Springbrook and Mill Creeks are designated as Class A (excellent water quality) in conformance to present and potential water uses and in consideration of the natural water quality potential and limitations in these systems. In compliance with Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act, DOE has listed Springbrook Creek as not meeting state surfacewater quality standards for fecal coliform, temperature, dissolved oxygen, cadmium, copper, mercury, and zinc. Sampling along Springbrook Creek channel suggests that total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) concentrations exceed soil cleanup levels, thus requiring treatment (i.e., on -site bioremediation) or restricting disposal of these sediments, if dredged, to an approved landfill (R.W. Beck & Associates, Inc., 1997). Low dissolved oxygen is known to directly affect the growth and survival of fish. Dissolved oxygen levels above 10 mg/1 are optimum for salmon and trout. Dissolved oxygen levels below 8 mg/1 can cause stress in salmon and trout, and levels below 4 mg/1 can be lethal. Swimming ability of juvenile coho salmon can drop in unsaturated water. Dissolved oxygen sample sites in Mill Creek have often been less than optimum, whereas levels below the lethal limit for salmonids have been documented in the lower gradient reaches of Springbrook and Mill Creeks (Harza Northwest, 1995). Some of the low dissolved oxygen levels may be due to influx of low - oxygen groundwater, lack of gradient, low flow velocities, lack of in- stream structures (i.e., woody debris), and lack of riparian vegetation cover (R.W. Beck &Associates, Inc., 1997). 6.6 Water Temperature Water temperature is often a limiting factor in aquatic ecosystems and is directly related to the health and distribution of aquatic organisms at all life stages. Optimal temperatures for salmonids generally range from about 7 to 19 degrees C and lethal temperatures are generally in the range of 24 to 25 degrees C, depending on the. species. Reported water temperatures . were generally warmer in downstream reaches of Springbrook and Mill Creeks. Water temperatures in excess of 18 degrees C (the Class A standard) have been documented in Springbrook and Mill Creeks, although Final Stream Study . South 180th Street Grade Separation 11 July 2000 occurrences of these temperatures were reported as infrequent. Out of approximately 8,750 temperature readings taken at 15 minute intervals at the Mill Creek USGS gauge within the study area between September 16 and December 22, 1994, 174 (2 percent) exceeded State water quality criteria. None of these exceedances occurred later than early October: Water temperatures outside . the optimal range but below the lethal limit would tend to decrease salmonid viability, especially if these conditions persist (Harza Northwest, 1995). 6.7. Turbidity Behavioral changes have been observed in coho salmon, rainbow trout, and other fish as a result of increased turbidity. Turbidity may increase energy expenditures in capturing prey and affect the production of aquatic ecosystems by smothering fish eggs, destroying benthic organisms, and limiting primary productivity. Turbidity standards for Class A streams have been exceeded in lower Springbrook Creek (Harza Northwest, 1995). 6.8 Obstructions Anadromous fish are only able to access the lower 5.4 miles of Springbrook Creek due to a 30 -foot culvert oriented with a 100 percent slope located immediately downstream of Talbot Road in the upper reaches of Springbrook Creek. This culvert poses a complete barrier to fish migration (Harza Northwest, 1995). Adult salmon have been reported ascending the fish ladder at the BRPS and entering the P -1 Channel, which suggests that spawning occurs farther upstream in the creek and its tributaries (Jones & Stokes, 1991). 6.9 Fish Utilization Springbrook Creek is identified by the Priority Habitats and Species map (WDFW, 1998) as providing important fish habitat for anadromous fish runs. The Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmon Utilization identifies Springbrook Creek as habitat for coho salmon (Williams, et al, 1975). Prior to channelization, Springbrook Creek supported runs of coho salmon (Oncorhyhnchus nerka) and other anadromous species, such as steelhead (Onchorhynchus mykiss), cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii), and Dolly Varden (Salvelinus malma). A downstream and upstream salmonid fish passage facility was incorporated into the pump station facility at the mouth of the Black River channel. A denil fish ladder was installed in the pump station to allow upstream passage of adult salmonids. According to the Washington State Department of Fisheries, however, the operation of the pumping plant precluded the upstream migration of cutthroat and steelhead trout. This could also indicate that upstream passage of juvenile coho salmon during the winter may also be restricted. The airlift pump station that passes downstream migrant salmonids typically operates from April 1 to mid -June (Jones & Stokes, 1991). Currently, accessible fish spawning areas exist in the upper tributaries of Springbrook and Mill Creeks. Sediment buildup in the lower reaches of these systems along the valley floor, combined . with poor water quality, eliminates these lower reaches (including the study area) for anadromous fish spawning, however, lower Springbrook Creek (including the study area) serves as an essential link between the Green River and headwater spawning grounds (R.W. Beck & Associates, Inc., 1997). During the low -flow period of 1993, Harza Northwest captured fish at sample sites in the SMG Watershed. The three - spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) was the most abundant fish observed in the low- gradient valley floor portion of the watershed. One pumpkinseed sunfish was caught within the study area in Springbrook Creek downstream from the confluence with Mill Creek. Fish species diversity was greatest in transition reaches between the low - gradient valley floor and the high - gradient foothills area. These transition reaches are upstream of the study area. In Final.Stream Study South 180th Street Grade Separation 12 July 2000 general, coho salmon sampled from other low gradient glides were significantly smaller than coho from other habitat types. When present in glide or riffle habitats, these fish were generally found near structural cover or velocity breaks (Harza Northwest, 1995). Juvenile coho salmon have been observed in a pool in the North Fork of Mill Creek, indicating that anadromous fish use extends up to 104th Avenue Southeast and possibly further (Harza Northwest, 1995). One June 2, 1998, WDI completed an electroshock fisheries survey from a 300 -foot reach of Springbrook Creek approximately 100 feet upstream of the entrance to the culverts under Oakesdale Avenue Southwest. Electroshocking was also completed in a 400 -foot section immediately north of the study area within the Oakesdale Business Park property (between RM 1 and RM 2). The survey was conducted to remove the fish from these areas in support of an Ecology cleanup order. WDI measured the two salmonids captured. In the Oakesdale Business Park reach, WDI captured a 280 -mm cutthroat trout. In the Oakesdale Avenue Southwest reach, WDI captured a 110 -mm coho salmon.. In addition to the two salmon, WDI captured approximately 50 three - spined stickleback. These fish are generally more tolerant of thermal and chemical pollution than the salmonid species. 6.10 Fisheries Enhancement The Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) stocked coho salmon fry in Mill Creek as early as 1976. Between 1981 and 1992, an average of 96,000 coho fingerlings was released into Mill Creek annually. In 1992, after fish production potential in Mill Creek was analyzed, the WDFW decided to limit the number of fish stocked in Mill Creek to 50,000 annually. The fish were placed in various locations along Mill Creek in Kent (Harza Northwest, 1995). Since 1995, coho have been stocked in Springbrook Creek (R.W. Beck & Associates, Inc., 1997). As part of an ongoing fisheries enhancement project on Springbrook Creek, 10,044 coho fingerlings were . planted into the stream in 1997 (Schneider, personal communication, 1998). As of 1990, adult progeny from coho fingerling releases returned to Springbrook Creek to spawn. A fish counter at the pump station indicated that 47 to 166 adult coho ascended the fish ladder each year between 1983 and 1990 (Table, 1). Table 1. Adult Salmonids at the Black River P -1 Pump Station: 1983 - 1990 Year Quantity 1983 —1984 155 1984 —1985 119 1985 1986 47 1986 —1987 83 1987 -1988 166 1988 —1989 95 1989 —1990 77 Source: Jones & Stokes, 1991 Harza Northwest completed a study of the water quality impacts on the fish resources of the Springbrook Creek watershed in 1995, which listed recommendations for preservation and restoration of these resources. • Some of the major findings include the following. ■ Water samples taken during the 1994 upstream migration fish run indicated that dissolved oxygen levels at low flows were often below the lethal limit to fish. Dissolved oxygen levels were marginally acceptable for adult salmon during the period of upstream passage and would seem to be one of the most likely reasons for inhibiting fish from reaching spawning areas. Final Stream Study South 180th Street Grade Separation 13 July 2000 • Water temperatures at low flows were higher than optimal conditions. Levels of metals were high and in some instances may be acutely toxic to fish. Macroinvertebrate densities were low throughout the watershed and types of macroinvertebrates found in the low gradient habitats indicated poor water quality. The streambed movement also limited the abundance, type, and diversity of macroinvertebrates, as the low diversity and lack of long -lived macroinvertebrates seemed to suggest. • Streams in the watershed had very little in- stream structure (i.e., woody debris) or pool habitat. Riparian habitat was also poor in many reaches. • Based on capture of fry-sized coho in the system before the WDFW stocked Mill Creek in 1994 indicated some natural reproduction, but the number of spawning fish was very low. General recommendations that pertain to the study area include the following. • Stabilize stream channels and create in- stream or side channel pool habitat. • Minimize dredging in the low gradient portion of the watershed to decrease turbidity.. • Improve water quality for the entire watershed with emphasis on dissolved oxygen, temperature, high turbidity, and heavy metal concentration. 7.0 STREAM SURVEY 7.1 Methods Because the local jurisdictions within the study area have no official stream survey or reporting manual, guidelines developed by King County for a Level 1 Basic Stream Survey (King County, 1991) were utilized for the Springbrook Creek/Mill Creek stream survey. Data corresponding to each stream reach are provided in Appendix B. Invertebrates were not sampled and fish shocking was not applied as part of this study, because they are usually sampled as part of a more complex, Level 2 stream survey. A total of seven transects spanning the width of the stream were established at 300 -foot intervals within the stream (Figure 5). Approximately 450 feet of Springbrook Creek was evaluated south of 180th Street and approximately 830 feet of Mill Creek from its confluence with Springbrook Creek to 200 feet south of the BNSF bridge. A 100 -foot Teflon measuring tape was used to estimate the "reach point" along the transect where specific habitat features were located in the stream channel. Transects describing Reaches SB1 and SB2 represent Springbrook Creek. Reaches MC1A, MC2A, MC3A, MCI, and MC2 represent Mill Creek (Figure 5). Stream transect locations were identified with sequentially numbered orange flagging on both sides of the stream. Riparian vegetation, riparian structures, unique features. (natural and man - made), and other notable features were also recorded. Data is presented in Appendix B. 7.2 Findings The habitat type within the reaches of Springbrook Creek and Mill Creek within the study area is predominantly low gradient glide habitat. A small reach (approximately 100 feet) of riffle habitat is located beneath the BNSF bridge spanning Mill Creek. The stream reaches within the study area Final Stream Study • South 180th Street Grade Separation 14 July 2000 um Project Limits' 1:. y1, 'i •, Railroa 'tl !Trestle • ' , Bridge. tai ,. ...... LEGEND o Transect tai Gr. North Source: BERGER/ABAM Engineers, Inc. 1998 Stream Transect Locations South 180th Street Grade Separation Figure 5 lack meanders, significant in- stream woody debris, and significant woody riparian vegetation. The creek channels essentially resemble drainage ditches. Springbrook Creek mean channel depths within the study area range from 1.61 to. 1.88 feet with maximum depths ranging from 2.2 to 3.7 feet. These depths are subject to continual change due to the storm events and seasonal high water moving the unconsolidated silt substrates in addition to importation of silts from upstream erosion within the watershed and subbasin. Stream,banks within the study area appeared stable during the field investigation and well anchored with upland grasses dominated by reed canarygrass and Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor), along with occasional small stands of forested and scrub -shrub vegetation dominated by red alder (Alnus rubra) cottonwood and Pacific and Sitka willow. No evidence of recent failures or slides was observed. With the exception of a few points along the stream reaches, there was a lack of an overhead canopy and subsequent creek shading throughout the study area. LWD and boulders were absent from the stream channels and the culvert beneath South 180th Street was free of debris at the time of the field investigation. Flow velocities were measured at each transect. A 6- inch -wide piece of floating debris traveled at a rate of 0.5 foot per second in Springbrook Creek. Flow velocities in Mill Creek ranged from 0.15 foot per second upstream from the confluence of Springbrook Creek to 2.4 feet per second in the riffle area underneath the BNSF railroad trestle. There was no evidence of algal mats or blooms within either stream channel. The in- stream habitat within the study area is primarily composed of low velocity glides. High quality pools, which are important for over - wintering habitats that provide refuge for fish during high -flow events, were not present within the reaches evaluated. Substrate is dominated by fine organic silts within the glide habitat, with gravel and cobble substrate within the riffle habitat reach. This type of sediment provides no in- stream cover for juvenile or adult fishes. Gravels that may be suitable for spawning were only observed in a small reach beneath the BNSF bridge spanning Mill Creek. LWD is an important structural element in Pacific Northwest streams, particularly smaller streams like Springbrook and Mill Creeks. Logs form deep scour pools, capture organic matter that is a fundamental energy source for aquatic organisms (including fish), sort substrate, and dissipate energy. Pools formed by large organic debris jams can be stable structural components of stream systems and are often important refuges for fish during high flow events. No LWD jams and little woody debris were observed within the study area. Large native, streamside vegetation has been mostly removed, which has reduced LWD recruitment and formation of debris jams. The corrugated metal arch culvert under South 180th Street and the BNSF bridge do not appear to be potential barriers to upstream passage of anadromous and resident salmonids. The culvert could present a potential velocity barrier during high -flow conditions. There were no prominent morphological features, such as eroding banks, landslides, slumps, or debris jams, observed within the study area. No other obstructions were observed within the study area that would prevent juveniles and adults from migrating both upstream and downstream. The lack of habitat diversity, riparian vegetation structure and diversity, shading, and overall water turbidity do not provide generally suitable habitat for anadromous fish populations in the reaches of Springbrook and Mill Creeks within the study area. Final Stream Study South 180th Street Grade Separation 16. July 2000 8.0 STREAM IMPACTS A temporary railroad bridge extension over Mill Creek will be constructed to provide stream crossing for. four "shooflies," or detours for the BNSF and UPRR tracks. The temporary bridge area of disturbance will be approximately 90 feet long by 30 feet wide. No in- stream work below the ordinary high water mark is proposed. Small pilings will be driven into the streambank within the. 50 -foot stream buffer (Figure 6) to support the bridge deck. The existing 50 -foot upland buffer for Mill Creek immediately adjacent to the proposed temporary bridge expansion zone have buffer functions and values that are rated as follows. • LOW in maintaining water quality, including pollution assimilation, sediment entrapment, and temperature moderation • LOW in reducing hydrological fluctuation, including surface runoff absorption ■ MODERATE stabilization of stream banks • LOW protection of uplands from flooding • LOW in providing streams with nutrients and woody debris • LOW in providing recreational opportunities • LOW in providing fish and wildlife habitat • LOW in providing human impact deterrence, including noise and visual screening 9.0 REGULATORY IMPLICATIONS 9.1 City of Renton The length of the creek within Renton from its mouth to South 180th is designated a Shoreline of Statewide Significance by the City of Renton, and is under the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971. In compliance with the Shoreline Management Act, the City of Renton has adopted a Shoreline Master Program (SMP; Chapter. 19 of the Renton City Code) for regulating activities within shoreline areas. Springbrook Creek is designated as an Urban shoreline within the study area. Impacts to the creek would require a Shoreline. Substantial Development Permit from the City of Renton and would be subject to a 25 -foot buffer. 9.2 : King County King County has classified Springbrook Creek as a Class 2 stream with salmonids (King County, 1990). Streams are defined by the County as "those areas of King County where surfacewaters produce a defined channel or bed." (King County, 1990). A Class 2 stream with salmonids is defined as a stream that is smaller than a Class 1 stream that flows year -round during years of normal rainfall, or a stream used by salmonids. 9.3 • City of Kent The City of Kent regulates development activities adjacent to streams through the Kent City Code (Section 15). Springbrook and Mill Creeks are classified as major creeks by the City of Kent. The Final Stream Study South 180th Street Grade Separation 17 July 2000 • co co m 0 = 0 a m co m 5' a) (0 (0 a). 0 p) w CD o cia cCD m co CD 0 5t (ci- cn (0 CD 53 o_ CO CDC (/) CD SD 3 53 1:2) 5. o emus Ol lON InterurbanTrail ; • -11T.'1,4'0:, . t .4 04 .44 7.772W7b, %Ore :17-7,;•.77-3■77-:" . • --.^-`■•••41,• • • '• • . . „ BNSF.RR..• • 2,: • • • = , 4.4 o'"'"V• ' :R4 vf. , Code requires that all major and minor creeks in the city, where they flow on or across undeveloped land, shall be retained in their natural state and location. Setbacks from major creeks are 50 feet. 9.4 - Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife WDFW protects fisheries in Washington streams through the Hydraulic Code (RCW 75.20.100 and 75.20.103; 220 -110 WAC). A Hydraulic Project Approval is required for projects that may result in impacts on streams or riparian habitat. 10.0 MITIGATION GOALS AND OBJECTIVES For this project, the project design team considered all practical efforts to avoid and minimize potential impacts that could occur to wetlands and streams. Impacts to the Springbrook Creek buffer include land clearing for placement of an outfall structure. The goals of a stream mitigation plan include • Achieve no net on -site loss of stream buffer functions and values within the Springbrook Creek drainage basin. Enhance the disturbed portion of the Mill Creek stream buffer in the vicinity of the temporary shoofly bridge. To reach this goal, the impacted portion of the Mill Creek buffer will be restored and enhanced. The enhanced stream buffer will be consistent with mitigation requirements as stated in the Kent City Code. Based upon the existing functions of the stream buffer to be disturbed, the enhanced mitigation stream buffer area will provide at a minimum a net gain in the following functional buffer ratings to the following levels. • MODERATE in maintaining water quality, including pollution assimilation, sediment entrapment, and temperature moderation MODERATE in reducing hydrological fluctuation, including surface runoff absorption • HIGH stabilization of stream banks ■ MODERATE protection of uplands from flooding ■ MODERATE in providing streams with nutrients and woody debris ■ MODERATE in providing recreational opportunities MODERATE in providing fish and wildlife habitat ■ MODERATE in providing human impact deterrence, including noise and visual screening Steep slope erosion protection is needed within the Mill Creek buffer immediately adjacent to the proposed temporary bridge expansion area for risk hazard reduction and to minimize adverse impacts on the project area and downstream riparian habitat. Study area steep slopes are made up of mostly sands, silts, and other noncohesive materials that can be sources of fine sediment and debris that may adversely affect study area and downstream fisheries habitat. When this fine material is mobilized, eroded, and deposited into the riparian zone, it fills voids between larger gravels in downstream streambeds. Final Stream Study. • South 180th Street Grade Separation 19 July 2000 As compensation for stream buffer impacted by the temporary bridge expansion, the disturbed streambank and buffer would be restored and enhanced upstream above the ordinary high water mark. Buffer plantings would consist of native tree, shrub, and emergent plant species that are . known to provide high wildlife habitat value in addition to extensive branching fibrous root systems that provide high utility for steep slope stabilization. Riparian associated stream bank plantings would provide stream bank stabilization, stream shading, and wildlife habitat and cover, resulting in a significant improvement in site - specific vegetation community structure. If feasible, following discussions with the City of Kent and the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), large woody debris shall be placed within the stream channel adjacent to the impact area. A detailed planting plan will be developed following consultation with WDFW for the Hydraulic Project Approval. 11.0. LIMITATIONS Within the limitations of schedule, budget, and scope of work, BERGER/ABAM warrants that this study was conducted in accordance with generally accepted environmental science practices, including the technical guidelines and criteria in effect at the time this study was performed, as outlined in the Methodology section. Habitat classification is a somewhat subjective and occasionally imprecise practice. Classification can vary depending on flow conditions at the time of an inventory experience of inventory personnel. The results and conclusions of this report represent the authors' best professional judgment, based upon information provided by the cities of Renton and Kent in addition to that obtained during the course of this study. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. 12.0: REFERENCES. R.W. Beck & Associates, Inc. 1997. City of Renton East Side Green River Watershed Project Plan and Environmental Impact Statement. Volume 1. Final. In association with Jones & Stokes, Inc., Northwest Hydraulic Consultants, and Herrera Environmental Consultants. Seattle, Washington. Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1995. Flood Insurance Rate Map, No. 53033C0976F, 53033C0977F, 53033C0978F, and 53033C0979F. King County, Washington, and Incorporated Areas. May 16, 1995. Hitchcock, C.L., and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press, Seattle, Washington. Harza Northwest, Inc. 1995. Comprehensive Fisheries Assessment of the Springbrook, Mill and Garrison Creek Watershed for the City of Kent. Prepared for the City of Kent, Environmental Engineering. June 1995. Bellevue, Washington. Jones & Stokes. 1991. City of Renton Critical Areas Inventory of Wetlands and Streams. Bellevue, Washington. In association with R.W. Beck & Associates, Inc., Seattle, Washington. King County.' 1991. Stream Survey Report Criteria. King County, Building & Land Development - Division, Parks, Planning and Resources Department, Bellevue, Washington. King County. 1990. Sensitive Areas Map Folio. Division of Planning and Community Development. Bellevue, Washington. Final Stream Study South 180th Street Grade Separation 20 July 2000 Knutson, K.L. and V.L. Naef. 1997. Management Recommendations for Washington's Priority Habitats: Riparian. Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia, Washington. McCain, M., D. Fuller, L. Decker and K. Overton. 1990. Stream Habitat Classification and Inventory Procedures for Northern California. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region 5, Fish Habitat Relationships Technical Bulletin No. 1. Platts, W.S.; G. Armor, G.D. Boot, M. Bryant, J.L. Bufford, P. Cuplin, S. Jensen, G.W. Lienlaemper, G.W. Minshall, S.B. Monsen, R.L. Nelson, J.R. Sedell and J.S. Tuhy. 1987. Methods for Evaluating Riparian Habitats With Applications to Management. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, General Technical Report INT- 221. Schneider, Phil. 1998. Area Habitat Biologist, Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. Personal communication with Keith Fabing July 27, 1998. Shapiro & Associates, Inc. 1997. Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Extension Project Wetland Assessment and Mitigation Plan. Prepared for the City of Renton. Seattle, Washington. Snyder, D.E., P.S. Gale, and R.F. Pringle. 1973. Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington. U.S. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, DC. Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. 1998. Priority Habitats and Species Data Base. Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington. Watershed Dynamics, Inca 1998. Fisheries Report — Springbrook Creek. Letter to Mr. Paul T. Casey, Zelman Development Company, June 12, 1998. Williams, R.W., R.M. Laramie and J.J. Amos. 1975. A Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmon Utilization, Volume 1: Puget Sound Region. Washington State Department of Fisheries, Olympia, Washington. Final Stream Study South 180th Street Grade Separation 21 July 2000 APPENDIX A WILDLIFE SPECIES EXPECTED IN KING COUNTY Appendix A: Stream Habitat Types Pools Code Dammed Pool DPL Channel Confluence Pool CCP Plunge Pool PLP Mid- Channel Pool MCP Secondary Channel Pool SCP Lateral Scour Pool — Log LSP -L Lateral Scour Pool — Boulder LSP -B Lateral Scour Pool — Rootwad LSP -RW Lateral Scour Pool — Bedrock LSP -BR Backwater Pool — Log BWP -L Backwater Pool - Boulder BWP -B Backwater Pool — Rootwad BWP -RW Corner Pool CRP Pocket Water POW Riffles High Gradient Riffle HGR Low- Gradient Riffle LGR Runs Run RUN Step -Run SRN Other. Habitat Types Glide GLIDE Trench/Chute TRC Corner Pool CRP Cascade CAS Edgewater EGW APPENDIX B WILDLIFE SPECIES OBSERVED IN THE PROJECT STUDY AREA lirk) i IZB LS a 05 1 WRIA BASIN #: STREAM #:-5 • WEATHER C ND INVESTIGATORS: KC BASIN #: DATE: ." - I 0 - 4 S TIME: STREAM ORDER SURVEY LENGTH: RX ONS: �ecc q ti th . Sttfr t Alm TO RX: KEY: RF = reference HT = habitat type CW = Channel width at ohwm CD = mean channel depth at ohwm L = length of HT W = mean width of HT (> 5 msrmts) D = mean depth of HT (> 5 msrmts) SS = streamside structure: 0 = no riparian zone [if 0, indicate lawn, road, buildings, etc.] 1= mature complex forest 2 = immature/even- age/disturbed 3 = shrub - dominated ( <20' high) 4 = grassland/meadow /pasture 5 = wetland vegetated (WIDTH)/LB -RB = left bnk -rgt bnk (TY) PE = ( C)oniferous/(D)eciduous/(M)ixed SBST = dominant /subdominant substrate throughout HT: 1= bedrock 2 = silt/organic 3 = sand 4 = gravel ( <25 mm) 5 = gravel (25 mm —100 mm) 6.= cobble (100 mm — 256 mm) 7 = boulder PQI = pool quality index LWD = large woody debris: (LE)ngth MEAN (DI)ameter . (ST)ability: (A)nchored, (U)nanchored, ( ?) unknown (V)ariety: (C)oniferous/(D)eciduous/( ?) uncertain CN = condition: (S)olid: (R)ecent/(0)ld (M)oderate: (R)ecent/(0)ld (R)otted: (R)ecent/(0)ld (TY)pe: (J)am LOGS: (F)loating /(S)tranded (B)ridge: (C)ollapsed/(P)artial (L)ateral (W)eir: (P)artia]/(F)ull (S)tump SS/WIDTH/TY ., :: LW D RF HT W D L CW CD (LB -RB) , ' SBST PQI LE , DI ST V CN TY 221 — 22.• _3 4. it /?C/D - 4i l Za'LD. Z . toN j- 3, a W / / /___/ ft co, 6/ i 2, Z al- 12.' 3, z' 44 is / /_-_/ i._ 2, S ad- zd / /,_�- /_/ . . iq' — 141 r / !1.D_- ` /I2' /-j2. 2 Y2tj 4ntan 2144a 2" ad- 141' __//_-__/ /_ i.9'a-r5 ' .:_/ / - / / R 3 2.2' At /2' .. 2.1'at 9' /.....- ._L_ /- _. 2.1'q► +to' ___/ 1,t'a$3f —( /_-__/ / A 1(0' . 11 g/32.-11,15_7 D . 2 kl ((ow;;.en, !-g.- .stock . . . (riatituu c .5'`a} te .: Ca►eA .c.it._ 06. 5(2. ,. b( i. 1' of 12'''' _ ..1_1_-_.1% / / - / / J :.. 1.3' sd. ::.ro' I. 51 4ef gi > . 1. Sr A la' / 1_,_-__I / . 5'.Af. 4-' 0' . - Z'. / /_-__/ / 1 - / / `✓ / 1_-__/ /, // -__./ / _ / / / /_ .__/ /_-___/ /,,.__, KEY: RF = reference HT = habitat type CW = Channel width at ohwm CD = mean channel depth at ohwm L = length of HT W = mean width of HT (> 5 msrmts) D = mean depth of HT (> 5 msrmts) SS = streamside structure: 0 = no riparian zone [if 0, indicate lawn, road, buildings, etc.] 1= mature complex forest 2 = immature/even- age/disturbed 3 = shrub - dominated ( <20' high) 4 = grassland/meadow /pasture 5 = wetland vegetated (WIDTH)/LB -RB = left bnk -rgt bnk (TY) PE = ( C)oniferous/(D)eciduous/(M)ixed SBST = dominant /subdominant substrate throughout HT: 1= bedrock 2 = silt/organic 3 = sand 4 = gravel ( <25 mm) 5 = gravel (25 mm —100 mm) 6.= cobble (100 mm — 256 mm) 7 = boulder PQI = pool quality index LWD = large woody debris: (LE)ngth MEAN (DI)ameter . (ST)ability: (A)nchored, (U)nanchored, ( ?) unknown (V)ariety: (C)oniferous/(D)eciduous/( ?) uncertain CN = condition: (S)olid: (R)ecent/(0)ld (M)oderate: (R)ecent/(0)ld (R)otted: (R)ecent/(0)ld (TY)pe: (J)am LOGS: (F)loating /(S)tranded (B)ridge: (C)ollapsed/(P)artial (L)ateral (W)eir: (P)artia]/(F)ull (S)tump WRIA BASIN #: KC BASIN #: DATE: - 1 D - 8 TIME: / Z ' 3• furl STREAM #: STREAM ORDER: SURVEY LENGTH: RX _ TO RX: WEATHER CONDITIONS: INVESTIGATORS: K F , 633 KEY: RF = reference HT = habitat type CW = Channel width at ohwm CD = mean channel depth at ohwm L = length of HT W = mean width of HT (> 5 msrmts) D = mean depth of HT (> 5 msrmts) SS = streamside structure: 0 = no riparian zone (if 0, indicate lawn, road, buildings, etc.] 1= mature complex forest 2 = immature/even- age/disturbed 3 = shrub - dominated ( <20' high) 4 = grassland/meadow /pasture 5 = wetland. vegetated (WIDTH)/LB -RB = left bnk -rgt bnk (TY) PE = ( C)oniferous/(D)eciduous/(M)ixed SBST = dominant /subdominant substrate throughout HT: 1= bedrock 2 = silt/organic 3 = sand 4 = gravel ( <25 mm) 5 = gravel (25 mm –100 mm) . 6 = cobble (100 mm – 256 mm) 7 = boulder PQI = pool quality index LWD = large woody debris: (LE)ngth MEAN (DI)ameter (ST)ability: (A)nchored, (U)nanchored, ( ?) unknown (V)ariety: (C)oniferous/(D)eciduous/( ?) uncertain CN = condition: (S)olid: (R)ecent/(0)ld (M)oderate: (R)ecent/(0)ld (R)otted: (R)ecent/(0)ld (TY)pe: (J)am LOGS: (F)loating /(S)tranded (B)ridge: (C)ollapsed/(P)artial (L)ateral (W)eir: (P)artial/(F)ull (S)tump SS/WIDTH/T LW D RF HT W D L CW CD (LB -RB) . SBST PQI LE DI ST V CN TY 2'i yd° 13' 13' L, /Zo /D-2±./ 20/j1 Z 2, 1' a+ 11' __/ / _/ / -ttrst . ge c 2.S' tef q' _ /_ /_- / 3.1' at. 3' 3.z're 5' _ / ._-_/.......f_ Z' a+ 3' / /_,- / / 3A. eh. 1s' 3E/ 8' /Ja - ?Lt / D 1.5 ' 4+ 13' _/ _ -/ Z 2 ' o+ t l ' /_ - /./ Z 2' of 9' -__J / 2 nuktk. Z' c f- I-' ,I I Co co1o1e1r, 2' 5 ' _/ /_-__I I to cobble I • S' at 3' / / -/ / Sr2 FtAtek 1rt,l,tek, /_!_ -/ -.,/ /— Co Rem bJ btivac,4:.bt. situm / / - / / / /._.:- / / w/ /_-_/ / / / - / / _/ 1_-__I / 1._-_,/ / _ / 1 1 / / / _1 / KEY: RF = reference HT = habitat type CW = Channel width at ohwm CD = mean channel depth at ohwm L = length of HT W = mean width of HT (> 5 msrmts) D = mean depth of HT (> 5 msrmts) SS = streamside structure: 0 = no riparian zone (if 0, indicate lawn, road, buildings, etc.] 1= mature complex forest 2 = immature/even- age/disturbed 3 = shrub - dominated ( <20' high) 4 = grassland/meadow /pasture 5 = wetland. vegetated (WIDTH)/LB -RB = left bnk -rgt bnk (TY) PE = ( C)oniferous/(D)eciduous/(M)ixed SBST = dominant /subdominant substrate throughout HT: 1= bedrock 2 = silt/organic 3 = sand 4 = gravel ( <25 mm) 5 = gravel (25 mm –100 mm) . 6 = cobble (100 mm – 256 mm) 7 = boulder PQI = pool quality index LWD = large woody debris: (LE)ngth MEAN (DI)ameter (ST)ability: (A)nchored, (U)nanchored, ( ?) unknown (V)ariety: (C)oniferous/(D)eciduous/( ?) uncertain CN = condition: (S)olid: (R)ecent/(0)ld (M)oderate: (R)ecent/(0)ld (R)otted: (R)ecent/(0)ld (TY)pe: (J)am LOGS: (F)loating /(S)tranded (B)ridge: (C)ollapsed/(P)artial (L)ateral (W)eir: (P)artial/(F)ull (S)tump Lf-) WRIA BASIN #:T_ KC BASIN #: DATE: - (Cr, - q'R T] E: 1l ' Op ct vr1 STREAM #: )')un STREAM ORDER SURVEY LENGTH: RX TO RX: WEATHER CONDITIONS: Cum., S /art' INVESTIGATORS: KEY: RF = reference HT = habitat type CW = Channel width at ohwm . CD = mean channel depth at ohwm L = length of HT W = mean width of HT (> 5 msrmts) D = mean depth of HT (> 5 msrmts) SS = streamside structure: 0 = no riparian zone [if 0, indicate lawn, road, buildings, etc.] 1= mature complex forest 2 = immature/even- age/disturbed - 3 = shrub - dominated ( <20' high) 4 = grassland/meadow /pasture 5 = wetland vegetated_ (WIDTH)/LB -RB = left bnk -rgt bnk (TY) PE = ( C)oniferous/(D)eciduous/(M)ixed SBST = dominant /subdominant substrate throughout HT: 1= bedrock 2 = silt/organic 3 = sand 4 = gravel ( <25 mm) 5 = gravel (25 mm —100 mm) 6 = cobble (100 mum — 256 mm) 7 = boulder PQI = pool quality index LWD = large woody debris: (LE)ngth • MEAN (DI)ameter (ST)ability: (A)nchored, (U)nanchored, ( ?) unknown (V)ariety: (C)oniferous/(D)eciduous/( ?) uncertain CN = condition: (S)olid: (R)ecent/(0)ld (M)oderate: (R)ecent/(0)ld (R)otted: (R)ecent/(0)ld. (TY)pe: (J)am LOGS: (F)loating /(S)tranded (B)ridge: (C)ollapsed/(P)artial (L)ateral (W)eir. (P)artial/(F)ull (S)tump SS/WIDTH/TY .LWD RF HT W D L CW CD (LB -RB) SBST PQI LE DI ST V CN TY 513_11.- LI ILIA_ toll tic` ca- 1' Li_ -_ /_/ 1 - q q Color �: f Mu.me& lir0' 44- 2' _/ / l_f Rg , g'. ",i- 2' _./ /......-__/ /_ 4((p a►f - it i 3!Lo ad- S` I" qi-(n' _./ /_-__/ / \_ Da +4` / 1 - / / 1/ Ivia-TiTui Z i. 3 . Sad- 31 ._/ 2. C41 4' / L..- / / 2, ' at- 51 a... of t,' I 4_7 1 , /•i 1 /_ / / 1 / /I_ / / / / /_ / 1 - 1 1 / 1._-__/ / KEY: RF = reference HT = habitat type CW = Channel width at ohwm . CD = mean channel depth at ohwm L = length of HT W = mean width of HT (> 5 msrmts) D = mean depth of HT (> 5 msrmts) SS = streamside structure: 0 = no riparian zone [if 0, indicate lawn, road, buildings, etc.] 1= mature complex forest 2 = immature/even- age/disturbed - 3 = shrub - dominated ( <20' high) 4 = grassland/meadow /pasture 5 = wetland vegetated_ (WIDTH)/LB -RB = left bnk -rgt bnk (TY) PE = ( C)oniferous/(D)eciduous/(M)ixed SBST = dominant /subdominant substrate throughout HT: 1= bedrock 2 = silt/organic 3 = sand 4 = gravel ( <25 mm) 5 = gravel (25 mm —100 mm) 6 = cobble (100 mum — 256 mm) 7 = boulder PQI = pool quality index LWD = large woody debris: (LE)ngth • MEAN (DI)ameter (ST)ability: (A)nchored, (U)nanchored, ( ?) unknown (V)ariety: (C)oniferous/(D)eciduous/( ?) uncertain CN = condition: (S)olid: (R)ecent/(0)ld (M)oderate: (R)ecent/(0)ld (R)otted: (R)ecent/(0)ld. (TY)pe: (J)am LOGS: (F)loating /(S)tranded (B)ridge: (C)ollapsed/(P)artial (L)ateral (W)eir. (P)artial/(F)ull (S)tump City of Tukwila South 180th Street Grade Separation Biological Assessment for: Bald eagle (Huliaeetus Ieucophulus) Chinook salmon (Oncorhynch-us tshawytscha), and Bull trout (Saivelinus confluent:0 RECEIVED JUL 2 4 2000 TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS I. Summary - The City of Tukwila is proposing a grade separation on South 1806 Street between vehicular traffic and the railroad tracks owned by Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) and Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR). The South 180`h Street corridor is classified as a principal arterial facilitating east -west vehicular traffic in the Tukwila, Renton, and Kent areas of the Green River Valley. The existing four -lane roadway serves not only local connections between SR 181 (West Valley Highway) and East Valley Highway, it's also part of a central corridor feeding State Route 167 (SR 167). Currently, South 180th Street is the only major crossing of the railroads for 3.5 miles between Interstate 405 (I -405) and South 212th Street. As a result, the existing roadway experiences high traffic volumes. The existing north -south rail corridor currently contains three sets of tracks two BNSF and one UPRR. These lines are heavily used for both freight and passenger service, with upwards of 60 trains per day. The intersection of these two heavily used corridors results in not only extensive traffic delays but also numerous accidents. From 1996 through 199.8,_24 accidents-were moo., , t a ., �►, Street reportcu vn South 180th Street. One of the accidents in 1998 resulted in two fatalities when a train hit a car. In addition, the Interurban Trail system crosses South 180th Street just west of the UPRR tracks. The trail is widely used as a walking and bicycling pathway. In addition to the trail, South 180th Street has sidewalks that abut it to north and south that allow pedestrian traffic access to cross the rail lines. A project site map is available in Appendix B. The intent of this project is to construct an underpass beneath the existing rail lines to provide for public safety, both vehicular and pedestrian, and to facilitate improved traffic flow on this high use arterial. 1' During the Biological Assessment of this project, it was determined that for the identified species, this project falls into the effect determination of "may effect, not likely to adversely effect" category. II. Introduction A species listing for this project was received from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on 03/14/2000 (FWS ref # 1- 3- 00- SP- 0657). The letter indicated that the following species may be present in the vicinity of the project area. LIST OF SPECIES NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME FEDERAL STATUS STATE STATUS bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Threatened bull trout Salvelinus confluentus Threatened Not provided Not provided A species listing was also received from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service on February 10th, 2000. The letter indicated that the following species may occur in the area. NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME Chinook salmon FEDERAL STATUS STATE STATUS Oncorhynchus tshaxytscha Threatened Not provided 1 ` A species listing was received from the Washington Department of Natural Resources (Washington Natural Heritage Information System) on 03/20/2000. The letter indicated that the following species "may occur" in the area. NAME swamp sandwort golden indian paintbrush tall bugbane water lobelia choris' bog orchid SCIENTIFIC NAME Arenaria paludicola Castilleja levisecta Cimicifuga elata Lobelia dortmanna Platanthera chorisiana FEDERAL STATUS Endangered Threatened Species of Concern Not provided Not provided STATE STATUS Pos Extirpated Endangered Threatened Threatened Threatened A species listing was also received from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife on 03/08/20Q6.—The letter indicated that the following species "may occur" in the area. NAME SCIENTIFIC NA STATUS Great Blue Heron ME FEDERAL S = - - -- -- — — — — Arden_,hefodia^ Not provided STATE STATUS Monitor The City of Tukwila consultant for this project, Berger /Abaco, has conducted extensive pre - project studies on the project site wetlands, streams, and wildlife. These studies were completed in April of 1999 and have provided the City of Tukwila with a comprehensive understanding the project site including it's wetland habitat, stream habitat, and wildlife attributes. Additional field reviews of the project site have also been conducted the City's Fisheries Biologist, Urban Environmentalist and Senior Transportation Engineer. The purpose of the site visits was to determine the status of the listed and proposed species within the area and to evaluate how the potential impacts of the project may effect them. In addition to the site evaluations A thorough literature revievyhas also conducted, including information received from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Database in addition to the Natural Heritage Database presence of any listed or proposed species oridid it indc ate he presence of signindicate ca the related to listed or proposed species. The NHD reported that the following species "may occur" within the vicinity of the project. They include; swamppsandwort (Arenaria paludicolay olde n indian paintbrush (Castilleja levisecta), tall bugbane (Cimicifuga elata), water lobelia (Lobelia dortmanna), and choris' bog orchid (Platanthera chorisiana). Resource agency responses are located in Appendix A. In addition, the City of Tukwila's lead consultant for this o'ect Berger /Abaco, has also completed draft reports on a Wetlands Study, a Stream Study, and a Wildlife Study. Information provided in these studies was correlated and corroborated in th production of this Biological Assessment the III. Setting The project is located in King County and intersects the boundaries of three Cities. This includes the southeast corner of Tukwila, the southwest corner of Renton, and the northern part of K m The project site is located in the NW% of Section 36 off Township 23N, Range 4E of the Kent. Willamette meridian. • 2 • Land use within the project area includes a mix of commercial, office park, and light industrial use. Land use on the north side of South 180th Street includes: an undeveloped property located immediately east of the BNSF right of way, and the proposed Oaksdale Business Campus site. This location has recently been cleared and has undergone site cleanup for contaminated soils. On the west side of the project site are located the Interurban Trail, Puget Sound Energy power lines, a fiber optic cable routing, and a jet fuel line. • Habitat in the vicinity of the project consists of two waterways, Springbrook Creek and Mill Creek, and several wetlands are located within the project limits. In addition, the City of Renton has recently constructed a flood storage bench and completed approximately 150 meters of bank stabilization with riparian vegetation restoration and enhancement on the west bank of-Springbrook Creek on the north side of South 180th Street. • Disturbance in the immediate vicinity project area consists of heavy car and truck traffic nn_ !1 a 'i 1:.. es .(2. T_ ..nd. 1_T JPRR) and ,]' --- _- 31o..b S- 1-80 - -St., three-railroad-lines �c BT�S� and 1 Vl 1\1 \f, altu surrounding — - commercial/industrial development (see aerial illustration with site photos in Appendix B). IV. Project Description S 180th St (SW 43rd St) is an east -west principal arterial that crosses the Green River valley approximately 1 mile south of I -405 and carries 35,000+ vehicle trips per day. Approximately 1/4 mile east of the Green River, S 180th St intersects, at grade, the north -south mainline railroad tracks of both BNSF and UPRR. The current daily train volume is approximately 60 trains per day and is proje,ted.to•increase in the future beginning 'with new commuter trains e )Zpected to be put into service in 2001. The convergence of these high volumes of vehicles and trains causes significant delay throughout the day for vehicular traffic as well as safety issues. This project proposes to grade separate the vehicular traffic using S 180th St from the train traffic by constructing a roadway undercrossing the railroad tracks. This will enable vehicular traffic to move more efficiently through the corridor by removing an obstacle that causes somewhat unpredictable delays. The work will include constructing temporary shooflies for the railroads, bridge construction, roadway excavation, utility relocation, roadway construction, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, illumination, stormwater treatment and detention, landscaping (including wetland and stream • mitigations), and other items of work. A temporary closure of S 180th St during construction is expected to facilitate project completion. Other elements of the project include grade separation of the Interurban Trail from S 180th St and providing a connection to S 180th St. Construction of this project will create an estimated 26,350 square feet of net new impervious surface. Storm water treatment and detention will be provided through construction of a wet pond. The pond will be designed to provide treatment capacity of 140% and detention capacity of 100% for storm water runoff from the new impervious surfaces created by this project. The site available for construction of the wet pond will also be used for wetland mitigation. In an effort to balance construction of both mitigation areas on the site, the above treatment and 3 detention capacities were the maximum achievable. The storm water treatment effect for this project will be "no effect" while the storm water detention effect will be "may effect, not likely to adversely affect" listed fish species and their habitat. A temporary erosion and sediment control plan using best management practices will be developed and implemented during construction to control erosion and sedimentation. Department of Ecology regulations will be followed and include the following measures: • Filter fabric fencing and straw bale barriers to capture stray and suspended sediments. • Stockpiling any excavated materials away from the streambank so that loose material cannot sloughtfbe transported into either creek and move downstream. • Spill Prevention and Control Plan will be employed during the project. ------ConstruCtion-is- anticipated to-ut..gin -iri- early- .uu i' arid be -co gpletcd vy the-end-of 2001. V. Description of Habitat and Species Water Resources A. Existing Habitat Description Four different habitat types were identified within the project area and localized vicinity. These are: • Scrub /shrubvetland • Himalayan blackberry thicket • Limited riparian corridor • Weedy /disturbed open area 1. scrub /shrub wetland The scrub /shrub wetlands within the project area are located along the BNSF and UPRR tracks, and along the Interurban Trail north of South 180t Street. They are characterized by shrub vegetation dominated by willows, and include small ponded areas with open water and emergent vegetation. Dominant plants in this habitat include: himalayan blackberry, reed canary grass, pacific, scouler, and sitka willow, red alder, broad- leaved cattail, hardhack, reed canary grass, field horsetail, brooklime, and water smartweed. 2. himalayan blackberry thicket This habitat type is located along the Interurban Trail on the South side of South 180th Street. The site is comprised primarily by low shrubs and forbs, including: himalayan blackberry, snowberry, baldhip rose, nettle, and reed canary grass. This specific habitat area contains less structural and species diversity than scrub /shrub wetlands and is more likely to be dominated by human accustom species. 3. limited riparian corridor 4 This area lies adjacent to Mill Creek and Springbrook Creek throughout the project site. The dominant plant species through this specific habitat reach are himalayan blackberry, reed canary grass and several species of willow. This riparian corridor is typical for streams that exist within a commercial /light industrial area that have, over time, become degraded due to being manipulated for stormwater conveyance or development. In addition, a flood storage bench has been constructed for Springbrook Creek and approximately 150 meters of bank stabilization and riparian vegetation restoration and enhancement has been recently completed on the north side of South 180t Street on the west bank. 4. weedy /disturbed open area This specific habitat is located within the proposed Oaksdale Business Campus on the eastern fringe of the project area. The site was cleared and has undergone site cleanup for contaminated soils unde- a-Washington State Department of Ecology Cleanup Order. The site is predominantly a disturbed, open area dominated by weedy invasive forbs. A few scattered willows and red alder occur along Springbrook Creek which flows northeasterly across the site. — Pla t -Jpeci eJ -at the site in clude h m414yW black berry,-reed VW nar-grass, VoAmmon tan sy, - - -- - common plantain, Japanese knotweed, bull and Canada thistle, field horsetail, bedstraw, Klamath weed, birdsfoot trefoil, climbing night shade, dandelion, red alder, and scot's broom. B. Existing Species Water Resources Description The project site has two types of water resources available for dependant species. These are several surrounding wetlands and the two creeks, Springbrook and Mill. The wetland habitats are fairly limited and are consistent with those typically found within a disturbed commercial/light industrial zone. VI. Vegetal ion Vegetation that occurs within the project site consists of the previously mentioned species. These species include but are not limited to: himalayan blackberry, reed canary grass, willows, big leaf maple, locust, red alder, black cottonwood, douglas spirea, broad - leaved cattail, water smart weed, velvet grass, field horsetail, red elderberry,Ted -osier dogwood, bigroot, and canada thistle. According to the Washington State Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage Program data base, no records for rare plants or high - quality ecosystems were found for the project area vicinity. Field studies and site visits have also not discovered any threatened or endangered plant species present within the project site or within the 1.5 mile Biological Assessment radius. VII. Species Occurrence The following listed species were identified by the resource agencies as "may occur" on the project site or within a 1.5 mile radius of the project site. • Bald eagle • Chinook salmon • Bull trout 5 • Swamp sandwort • Golden Indian paintbrush A. Bald Eagle Occurrence Bald eagles occur in Washington State as both resident and wintering populations. Wintering populations tend to congregate around areas where food sources are available such as spawning salmon or large concentrations of waterfowl. They will also congregate around communal roosts. Wintering use generally occurs from October 31st to about March 315`. Bald eagles have been sighted a many places along the Green/Duwamish corridor as well as within the City of Tukwila. However, the portions of Springbrook creek and Mill Creek that flow through the project site -do not provide conditions preferred by spawning salmonids. In addition, as the creeks. flow through the project site, they do not exposed any significant gravels or sandbars during low flow conditions and as such, don't easily offer bald eagle foraging opportunities on salmon - carcasses: There are several black cottonwood trees within the project Site that may be used by eagles for perching because of their unobstructed view of the Green/Duwamish River Valley, Springbrook, and Mill Creek, but the current habitat conditions do not support the wintering behavior typical of bald eagles. B. Chinook Salmon Occurrence Chinook salmon occur all around the Pacific Rim. Fall chinook salmon are known to use the Green/Duwamish River system, Springbrook Creek, and Mill Creek, and will migrate through the project site as both adults and juveniles. As migrating adults they may be present within the project site between mid June and the end of October. Although the project is located near the Green/Duwamish River at approximately river mile 14.4, the project should not impact chinook at RM 14.4. However, Springbrook and Mill Creek do pass through the project area and are known to support chinook and other salmonids. A portion of the project involves the widening of the existing train bride structure that currently crosses Mill Creek. This is necessary part of the project as it will allow for the temporary realignment of the rail lines to facilitate construction of the underpass for South 180th Street. Construction of the widened bridge will not involve the modification of the exiting Mill Creek streambed below the ordinary high water mark (OHWM). The sections of Springbrook Creek and Mill Creek that are within the project site do not provide conditions preferred by chinook for spawning. The preferred spawning areas for chinook exist further up the watershed. Residence times for chinook juveniles within Spring Brook and Mill Creek are expected to vary between 1 to 4 months after emergence from the substrate. Typically this time period is from January through April. After this period the highest densities of outmigrating juvenile chinook salmon may be found within the Duwamish estuary and•tyliically occur from April and July as they complete the smoltification process and prepare for life in the sea (Warner and Fritz, '95). Outmigrant chinook juveniles may find foraging and rearing opportunities within the project site as they migrate through to the lower estuary. C. Bull Trout Occurrence Bull trout have not been identified within either Springbrook or Mill Creek. Bull trout have more specific habitat requirements as compared to other salmonids, particularly important being water temperature, cover, channel form and stability, valley form, 6 spawning and rearing substrates, and migratory corridors. They are associated with colder water, often seeking out the coldest areas within a watershed (King County, 1998). Bull trout favor conditions in small headwater streams that provide cold water, clear water, complex habitat structure, and connected habitats, which together allow movement through a system and support the range of life history stages. The project site is located on the Green River at approximately river mile 14.4 (of 90.5). This area of the river does not support conditions preferred by bull trout for spawning or rearing. Although the project area does not support their favored habitat conditions, adult bull trout may have an incidental or occasional migratory presence through the project site. A single bull trout was collected by the Muckleshoot tribe in the lower estuary during a sampling program conducted in 1994 (Warner and Fritz,,1-995). This is the only confirmed sighting of this species (specimen was genetically identified) within this general area of the river. - -It is not expected that this-project-will have an impact upon preferred-bull trout habitat or their life cycle as habitat within this project area of the WRIA 9 watershed does not support conditions favored by bull trout. D. Swamp Sandwort Occurrence Historically, Swamp sandwort was found in swampy places, mostly along the coast of Washington, from Tacoma "prairies" and southwest Washington to California (WSDOT, `99). Swamp sandwort may possibly be already extirpated from within the State of Washington. Field reviews conducted by the City of Tukwila and Berger /Abam did not discover any occurrence of swamp sandwort the project site. P if E. Golden Indian Paintbrush Occurrence Golden indian paintbrush is a rare species of grassy, low - elevation meadows of southern Vancouver Island and western Washington (Pojar and Mackinnon '94). Historically, golden indian paintbrush has been reported from over 30 sites in the Puget Trough of Washington and British Columbia, and as far south as the Willamette Valley of Oregon. Golden indian paintbrush is currently known from 10 extant populations. Eight populations occur in Washington State. 1 population south of Olympia in Thurston County, 5 populations on Whidbey Island in Island County, 1 population on San Juan Island in San Juan County, and 1 population on Lopez Island, Island County (Federal Register Vol. 62 Num. 112). Field reviews conducted by the City of Tukwila and Berger /Abam did not discover any occurrence of golden indian paintbrush on the project site. VIII. Designated Critical Habitat On February 16th, 2000, the NMFS designated critical habitat for 19 ESUs of chinook, chum, coho, and sockeye salmon, and steelhead trout previously listed under the Endangered Species Act. Critical habitat occurs in the states of Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and California and encompasses accessible reaches of all rivers (including estuarine areas and tributaries) within the range of each listed ESU. For all ESUs, critical habitat includes all waterways, substrate, and adjacent riparian zones below longstanding, naturally impassable barriers (NOAA, 2000). 7 The Green/Duwamish River, Springbrook Creek, Mill Creek and their adjacent riparian zones are considered to be critical habitat for chinook salmon. IX. Analysis of Effect: Potential Impacts to Listed Species The listed species, which may be impacted by this project, include: • Bald eagle • Chinook salmon • Bull trout • Swamp sandwort • Golden Indian paintbrush A. Bald Eagle • Construction Bald eagles may pass through the project area on occasion, and may possibly perch in trees that are located on the project site. Eagles utilizing the lower reaches of the Green/Duwamish River have most likely become accustomed to noise levels generated by existing traffic and human activity in the general area. Although an increase in noise levels is expected at the project site for approximately 24 months, construction activities will not interfere with the bald eagle wintering period (October 31 to March 31), or nesting period. Bald eagles do not winter or nest in or near the project site and there are no known wintering or nesting sites within the 1.5 mile radius of the project site. • Long -term Impacts The project will not alter what foraging, nesting, or roosting opportunities are currently available to bald eagles at the project site. • Effect Determination This project may effect but is not likely to adversely affect this species. B. Chinook Salmon • Construction Chinook salmon may pass through the project site as both adults and juveniles. Returning adults may migrate pass the project site on their way to preferred spawning areas that are not located' within the project site. Adult migration may begin as early as mid June and last into October. Returning adult chinook do not spawn in the vicinity of the project and adults will typically not feed after entering fresh water. Impact on adult foraging is not expected. Juvenile outmigration may begin as early as the end of January and may continue into the month of July with a peak outmigration period during the months of March and April. During the outmigration period, juveniles may forage and seek shade within the project area as they move down river (shade at the project site is produced almost entirely by the existing railway bridge span and the S. 180th St. overcrossing). 8 bridge that crosses Mill Creek and the relocation of the Public Storage driveway. These are described as follows: 1. mill creek: temporary railroad bridge widening: A temporary widening of the current BNSF bridge over Mill Creek will need to be completed to facilitate the completion of the temporary rail line shooflies (diversions). These shooflies will allow for the construction of the underpass to begin by temporarily diverting rail traffic. Construction activities should not adversely impact water quality. Erosion control methods will be implemented and installed to prevent off site sediment transport to Mill Creek. It is anticipated that the construction activities will not alter the prevailing stream temperatures, or negatively influence the dissolved oxygen content Mill Creek. The temporary bridge widening design calls for it to be constructed above the OHWM. A Hydraulic Permit Approval from the Washing Department of Fish and Wildlife will be applied for and adhered to during the construction and removal of this structure. Construction and the subsequent removal of the temporary bridge structure will not occur during the presence of adult chinook and will be done to minimize any potential impacts to juvenile chinook. Construction and removal of the temporary bridge structure will be conducted between May and August when juvenile chinook presence will be minimal. Upon the completion of the temporary bridge removal, appropriate bank stabilization will be conducted followed by native vegetation plantings to restore the shoreline area. 2. public storage: driveway relocation This part of the project involves relocating the existing driveway servicing the Public Storage Facility approximately 75 feet to the east. In doing so, approximately 0.2 acre of King County Open Space will required. This location encroaches into the limited but existing buffer for Springbrook Creek. Some vegetation, primarily himalayan blackberry and reed canary grass, will be removed during the construction of the relocated driveway. Upon the completion of the driveway relocation, appropriate bank stabilization will be conducted followed by native vegetation plantings to restore the top of the bank. To mitigate for both of these construction activities, a formal land purchase may be made from Fly Away Inc. This 8.5 -acre land locked parcel is located directly east of the BNSF rail lines and directly south of Mill Creek. It is legally described as "Henry Adams Donation Claim # 43 P. If purchased, this land will be used to replace King County Open Space used for the Public Storage Driveway Relocation as well as for additional mitigation area for the wetland fill. Please see the attached photographs and illustrations for this location in Appendix B. • Long -term Impacts There are no long -term impacts expected to occur for chinook as a result of this project. Post restoration and enhancement work should provide a quantitative increase in habitat value, complexity, and diversity. The restoration and enhancement work includes: a. Bank stabilization and native plantings for the temporary bridge site b. Bank stabilization and native plantings for the relocated drive way site. 9 b. Bank stabilization and native plantings for the relocated drive way site. c. Potential Land purchase to do 4 things. 1. Mitigate for driveway relocation 2. Replace Open Space taken by relocated drive way 3. Restore and enhance streamside corridor and riparian features 4. Provide a quantitative increase in localized habitat complexity and diversity. • Effect Determination This project may effect but is not likely to adversely affect this species. C. Bull Trout • Constrtfa on Bull trout have not been identified to have a presence within the Springbrook or Mill Creek system. - - -- • - -Long- -term Impacts- — - No long -term impacts are anticipated. • Effect Determination Bull trout have not been identified to have a.presence within the Springbrook or Mill Creek system. However, Mill and Springbrook Creek are tributaries to the Green/Duwamish River system. This project may effect but is not likely to adversely affect this species. D. Swamp Sandwort • Construction Swamp sandwortt has not been identified to have a presence within the 1.5 mile radius of the project site. Long -term Impacts No long -term impacts are anticipated. • Effect Determination Swamp sandwort has not been identified to have a presence within the 1.5 mile radius of the project site. There is "no effect" on this species E. Golden Indian Paintbrush • Construction Golden Indian paintbrush has not been identified to have a presence within the 1.5 mile radius of the project site. • Long -term Impacts No long -term impacts are anticipated. • Effect Determination Golden Indian paintbrush has not been identified to have a presence within the 1.5 mile radius of the project site. There is "no effect" on this species F. Indirect Impacts A traffic analysis has been completed for both the existing and potential future use conditions. These analyses have been projected to the year 2020 and illustrate that future volumes may vary depending on which, if any, similar projects are constructed during the projected time. This 10 analysis considered two (2) scenarios: 1) an additional east -west corridor is constructed connecting Strander Blvd. to SR 181(approximately 6000' north of S. 180th St.) and 2) no additional east -west corridor is constructed. The existing level of service for the segment of South 180th St. affected by the grade separation is LOS "E ". The existing level of service of the controlling intersections at each end of the project are LOS "D" to the west (West Valley Hwy / S. 180`h St.) and LOS "C" to the east (Oaksdale Ave / S. 180th St.). The current average daily traffic (ADT) on S. 180th St., is 35,200 vehicles per day. There is some development potential in the vicinity that could allow for an increase in trips. However, this increase is not expected to be significantly different as the area is approximately %85 developed. Scenario 1 of the 2020 forecast expects the ADT to grow to 43,300 vehicles per day at LOS "E ". Scenario 2 for .the p2T020Cforecast anticipates that the ADT may reach 50,200 vehicle trips per day - -at a LOS" � -','Y e-LQS at tl e 1n erse do o Oak dale ! l ��e.� i expected to deteriorate to .LOS_ ___ ___.____ "F" in each scenario. The intersection with SR 181 is expected to operate at LOS "D" in scenario 1, while deteriorating to a LOS "F" in scenario 2. In either case the existing LOS is poor due to the existing large traffic volumes. The construction of this grade separation project will provide for an improvement in public safety, as both pedestrian and vehicular traffic will not be impeded by rail traffic. However, increases in total traffic volumes will be limited by the controlling intersections located on either end of this project as no improvements are anticipated or programmed for either intersection in the near future. Long -term impacts to Springbrook or Mill Creek have been addressed with water quality and detention facilities included in the project that provide positive improvement to the localized environment. A re- vegetation plan for the perimeter of the pond will also be conducted. The most current BMPs for preventing spills and siltation will minimize potential impacts to either creek during construction. Failure of these BMPs during construction could cause some indirect impacts to the creeks. However, the extent of these impacts is expected to be limited to 50 -150 meters downstream. This is largely due to the existing 'water quality, the quantity of water being carried by Springbrook and Mill Creek and the small amounts of soil being disturbed within the streamside area requiring siltation control. In addition, spill prevention will be enhanced during construction. It is not expected that the BMPs for this project will be inadequate or be prone to failure. Our evaluation of the indirect impacts related to an increase in traffic volumes through this corridor is negligible when compared to that of the existing conditions and the high hurnaif related use of the project area. The growth of daily traffic volumes from the existing 35,000 to a potential 50,000 will have little affect on species currently utilizing the available habitat within the area. Surface water quality and storm flush quantity impacts to listed species will be significantly reduced by the inclusion of a stormwater treatment and detention facility that does not currently exist. In addition, an oil /water separator will be included within the project design. Current stormwater management at the site consists of direct discharge of stormwater runoff to Springbrook Creek without any detention or treatment. Since the existing stormwater management system does not treat or detain these flows, it is our evaluation that the new 11 detention and treatment facilities planned for this project will provide a significant and overall net benefit to water quality and aquatic habitat quality. It is our evaluation that the potential for indirect impacts to listed species due to an increase in traffic volumes may affect, but are not likely to adversely affect any listed or candidate species within the project vicinity. A map of the action area is attached and shown in Appendix B. X. Mitigation Recommendations There are three (3) project activities that may effect but are not likely to adversely effect chinook during the construction of this project. These consist of: 1 • Wetland and associated buffer filling, • Temporary bridge widening of the BNSF bridge that crosses Mill Creek, _• -.The relocation of the. Public .Storage These are described as follows: A. Wetland and Associated Buffer Filling To facilitate the construction of the underpass, temporary shooflies for the BNSF and UPRR rail lines will need to be constructed. The construction of these shooflies will involve the filling of one small wetland area and a portion of a second. A total of 1.11 acre of wetland habitat and 2.29 acre of wetland buffer habitat will be filled as a result of the construction of the temporary shooflies for the NSF and UPRR lines. The total fill area is currently limited to thewetlands existing betweedthe BNSF rail lines and the UPRR line (See Appendix B). Mitigation at 1.5 to 1 requires a total of 5.1 acres of mitigated wetland. B. Mill Creek: Temporary Bridge Widening A temporary widening of the current BNSF bridge over Mill Creek will need to be completed to facilitate the completion of the temporary rail line shooflies (diversions). These shooflies will allow for the construction of the underpass to begin by temporarily diverting rail traffic. Construction activities should not adversely impact water quality. Erosion control methods will be implemented and installed to prevent off site sediment transport into Mill Creek. It is anticipated that the construction activities will not alter the prevailing stream temperatures, or negatively influence the dissolved oxygen content Mill Creek. Construction and the subsequent removal of the temporary bridge structure will not occur during the presence of adult chinook.' and will be done to minimize any potential impacts to juvenile chinook. Construction anal removal of the temporary bridge structure will be conducted between May and August when chinook presence will minimal. Upon the completion of the temporary bridge removal, appropriate bank stabilization will be conducted followed by native vegetation plantings to restore the shoreline area. A Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Hydraulic Permit Approval will be applied for and adhered to during this portion of the project. 12 C. Public Storage: Driveway Relocation This part of the project involves relocating the existing driveway servicing the Public Storage Facility approximately 75 feet to the east. In doing so, approximately 0.2 acre of King County Open Space will required. This location encroaches into the limited but existing buffer for Springbrook Creek. Some vegetation, primarily himalayan blackberry and reed canary grass, will be removed during the construction of the relocated driveway. Upon the completion of the driveway relocation, appropriate bank stabilization will be conducted followed habitat restoration using native vegetation plantings to restore the top of the bank and the shoreline area (Photos in Appendix B). D. Wetland Mitigation Options There are' ve eral possible wetland mitigation options for this project. Mitigation locations have been identified, but the option locations are dependent on available land. At the time of the production of this BA, no land has been purchased or committed for the mitigation of wetlands for this project. Actual property acquisition cannot occur until after this Biological Assessment-- is approved, thus some assumptions are necessary to provide the following mitigation options. Wetland mitigation will occur at a replacement value of 1.5 to 1. The total area of wetland habitat fill is 3.40 acres. The total area to be>.replaced is 5.10 acres. Preferred Option Wetland mitigation will take place in two locations. Mitigation area "A" is located north of S. 180th St., and east of the BNSF rail lines. This area is approximately 2.15 acres in size. Approximately 1.7 acres of this location will be mitigated into wetland habitat. This will link a small existing wetland with a large existing wetland. The other 0.45 -acre portion o!this site will be used for the placement of a new stormwater detention/wetpond facility (See Appendix B). The second mitigation location consists of an 8.5 -acre land locked parcel that is located directly east of the BNSF rail lines and directly south of Mill Creek. It is legally described as "Henry Adams Donation Claim # 43 P ", and is currently owned by Fly Away Inc. This land may be purchased and used complete the remaining 3.4 acres of wetland mitigation. The remaining 5.1 acres of this parcel will be used to replace the 0.2 acres of King County Open Space used for the Public Storage Driveway Relocation and possibly set aside for future enhancement, restoration, or mitigation. Please see the attached photographs and illustrations for this location in Appendix B. Option B Wetland mitigation will take place in two locations. First, the wetland area that was filled-to accommodate the shoofly construction will be restored. This involves the removal of the fill material, restoration of the wetland, and the replacement of native wetland vegetation. This activity will restore the 3.40 acres of existing wetland habitat. The second location will be mitigation area "A" which is located north of S. 180th St., and east of the BNSF rail lines (See Appendix B). This area is approximately 2.15 acres in size. Approximately 1.7 acres of this location will be mitigated into wetland habitat. This will link a small existing wetland with a large existing wetland. The other 0.45 -acre portion of this site will be used for the placement of a new 13 stormwater detention/wetpond facility (See Appendix B). This option does not provide for the opportunity to replace the 0.2 acres of King County Open Space needed for the driveway relocation. Mitigation goals for this project areas follows: • To achieve no net on -site loss of wetland and wetland buffer functions and values within the Mill Creek and Springbrook Creek basin. • To compensate for the loss of filled wetland habitat with a minimum of a 1.5 to 1 replacement ratio in the most beneficial location for wildlife, water quality and storage capacity. • A comprehensive design to maximize the mitigated wetland's diversity and complexity will be prepared to provide the most direct benefit to the local ecology. • To avoid any additional habitat fragmentation and restore habitat connectivity within the project area. -The-objective of the mitigation plan developed for the projeci would be to create two mitigation wetlands with several associated habitat types to compensate for the loss of functions and values of the filled wetland area and associated adjacent buffers. This wetland mitigation plan will also provide for habitat connectivity to the existing habitat corridors in an effort to increase the overall habitat and species complexity and diversity while also providing a quantifiable improvement in the existing water quality conditions. The created wetlands would be consistent with the mitigation requirements as stated in the Tukwila Municipal Code by providing a minimum of a 1.5 to 1 replacement ratio 41'' wetland areas. Based upon the existing functions of the wetlands and wetland buffers tobeilled, the created mitigation wetland area/s would provide at a minimum a net gain in the following functional wetland ratings to the following levels: • Flood and storm water control; • Base flow and ground water support; • Erosion and shoreline protection; • Water quality improvement; • Natural biological complexity and diversity; • Overall habitat functions; and • Cultural and socio- economic values. XI. Conclusion This Biological Assessment was performed to determine whether bald eagles, chinook salmon, or bull trout would be disturbed or impacted by project construction. Consultant studies on the project site wetlands, streams, and wildlife were conducted, a literature review was performed, multiple site visits were conducted by the City of Tukwila and it's consultant, and state agency biologists were contacted to determine habitat occurrence within the project area. 14 Significant impacts to bald eagles, chinook salmon, and bull trout are not likely for the following reasons: • The level of use of the project area by bald eagles, chinook salmon, and bull trout will not significantly change. Noise levels generated during the construction activity will only contribute slightly to the existing everyday noise level. The project site is located on busy South 180t Street and BNSF and UPRR rail line intersection. There are also two pedestrian/cyclist corridors located on the project site. These include the Interurban trail system and the South 180t Street sidewalks. There are no known nesting sites for bald eagles within the 1.5 mile radius of the project site. - - -C'lnvOk rCddshu v6 not- been, obscr v eu _f it u un -the project--s to__nnd the a ea- .c_not-consistent-with - -' -' habitat conditions preferred by bull trout. • The project will not effect habitat attributes that are known to be associated with the typical foraging behavior of bald eagle, chinook salmon, or bull trout. Bald eagle feeding behavior will not be any further disrupted as the project site occurs within a previously existing high volume traffic and high noise corridor. Bald eagles are known to utilize gravel bars while foraging on spawned out or stranded salmon. There are no existing gravel bars within the immediate project vicinity. There is also little use of the area by other tcal bald eagle prey species. This project is not anticipated to cause any significant disruption to bald eagle foraging behavior. Any work below the OHWM will be conducted per the provisions stipulated in an approved Hydraulic Permit Approval (HPA). This work will be completed per the HPA construction window an avoid any interference with chinook migration. No impact on adult feeding behavior is expected as feeding behavior in adult chinook during their upstream migration occurs very infrequently. Impact to juvenile foraging should only minor given that work to be conducted below the OHWM will not be scheduled to occur during the outmigration season. Behavior modification of possible migrating adult bull trout should not be significant as they have only an incidental presence and have not been identified to use habitat within the immediate project area. A single bull trout was collected by the Muckleshoot tribe in the lower estuary during a sampling program conducted in 1994 (Warner and Fritz, 1995). It is not anticipated that an impacfio bull trout will occur as a result of this project. • Project construction will not result in permanent disturbance to bald eagles, chinook salmon, or bull trout, or in their permanent avoidance of the area. Neither bald eagle nests nor permanent roosting sites have been identified within the project area. The bald eagles that pass through the project area and which may perch on available trees 15 are most likely acclimated to the noise levels generated from the surrounding high volume traffic /rail corridor and human activity within the area. The project will not impede the migratory behavior in either adult or juvenile chinook or in bull trout. Work below the OHWM will adhere to the approved HPA and will be coordinated to facilitate it being done quickly and safely to minimize the amount of time spent working within the water. To reduce both construction and long -term environmental impacts, best management practices will be employed to control erosion and sedimentation. These measures will protect the aquatic resource and reduce potential impacts on bald eagles that might use the project site, on chinook salmon that migrate through the project site, and the incidental bull trout. Existing trees will be left in place where possible and riparian areas disturbed by construction will be replanted with native vegetation to stabilize soils, minimize erosion, and eventually provide an increase to the available shade and diversity along the adjacent riverbanks. XII. References King County, 1998. www.metrokc.gov /exec /esa/bull fs.htm NOAA, 2000. Federal Register 7764, Vol. 65, No. 32 Pojar, J., and A. MacKinnon. 1994. Plants of the Pacific Northwest Coast B.O. Mirftry of Forestry Pine Publishing. B.C., Canada. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1997. Green/Duwamish Ecosystem Restoration General Investigation, Green/Duwamish River, King County, Washington. Seattle Washington. Warner, E., and Fritz, R. 1995. The Distribution and Growth of Green River Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) and Chum Salmon Outmigrants in the Duwamish Estuary as a Function of Water Quality and Substrate. Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, Fisheries Dept. Auburn, WA. WSDOT, 1999. www.wsdot.wa.sov /eesc /environmental /MarshSandwort.htm XIII. Appendix A. Resource Agency Species Lists B. Photos, Overhead Plans and Site Map C. Construction Schedule 16 ( / Appendix A. Resource Agency Species Lists 17 MAR 1 0 2000 RECEIVED United States Department of the Interior MAR 1 4 2000. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE PUBLIC ILA North Pacific Coast Ecoregion Western Washington Office 510 Desmond Drive SE, Suite 102 Lacey, Washington 98503 Phone: (360) 753 -9440 Fax: (360) 753 -9518 Dear Species List Requester:. You have requested a list of listed and proposed threatened and endangered species, candidate _:; .___.___ _sperirsa.nd.speciesofconcern ( Attachment A, )thatmayhe presentwithinthe _area_ofyourprnpnseri project. This response fulfills the requirements ofthe U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). We have also enclosed a • copy ofthe requirements for Federal agency compliance under the Act (Attachment B). Should the Federal agency determine that a listed species is likely to be affected (adversely or beneficially) by the project, you should request section 7 consultation through this office. If the Federal agency determines that the proposed action is "not likely to adversely affect" a listed species, you should request Service concurrence with that determination through the inform consultation process. Even if there is a "no effect" situation, . we would appreciate receiving: copy for our information. Species of concern are those species whose conservation standing is of concern to the Service, but for which further status information is still needed. Conservation measures for species of concern are voluntary, but recommended. Protection provided to these species now may preclude possible listing in the future. There may be other federally listed species that may occur in the vicinity of your project which are under the jurisdiction of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). Please contact NMFS at (360) 753 -9530 to request a species list. In addition, please be advised that federal and state regulations may require permits in areas where wetlands are identified. You should contact the Seattle District ofthe U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for Federal permit requirements and the Washington State Department of Ecology for State permit requirements. ;; Your interest in endangered species is appreciated. If you have additional questions regarding your responsibilities under the Act, please contact Yvonne Dettlaff (360) 753 -9582 or Bobbi Barrera - (360) 753 - 6048. Sincerely, 44,ty- Gerry A. Jackson, Manager Western Washington Office yd Enclosure(s) C: FHWA WDFW R4 ATTACHMENT A March 08, 2000 LISTED AND PROPOSED ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES, CANDIDATE SPECIES AND SPECIES OF CONCERN WHICH MAY OCCUR WITHIN THE VICINITY OF lift PROPOSED SOUTH 180 STREET GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT (87 -RW09) IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (T23N RO4E S36) FWS REF: 1- 3 -00 -SP -0657 LISTED Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) - wintering bald eagles may occur in the vicinity of the project. Wintering activities occur from October 31 through March 31. Bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) - occur in the vicinity of the project. Major concerns that should be addressed in your biological assessment of the project impacts to listed species are: 1. Level of use of the project area by listed species. 2. Effect of the project on listed species' primary food stocks, prey species, and foraging areas in all areas influenced by the project. 3. Impacts from project construction (i.e., habitat loss, increased noise levels, increased human activity) which may result in disturbance to listed species and/or their avoidance of the project area. PROPOSED None. CANDIDATE None. "Construction project" means any major federal action which significantly affects the quality of the human environment (requiring an EIS), designed primarily to result in the building or erection of human -made structures . such as dams, buildings, roads, pipelines, channels, and the like. This includes federal action such as permits, grants, licenses, or other forms of federal authorization or approval which may result in construction. ; http://www.wsdot.wa.govieesc) ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT STATUS WASHINGTON STATE ANADROMOUS SALMONIDS —NOVEMBER 1999 • species ... • loglitfip333;3,3130i00333.3.3.33000:3, -1:300,43333F,I3:33:3•533;33e-t!39.....r.1....0 . .e . :tligra,r —e- angere. . ne. .. .aigas,,r ,.11e , ,r11- . ,, egist,e,Di "11"eret"40iffircliggEtilligii 13333. 3, , 13, , - ::3: V gr i 11 le' : . .. 1 MT-. VIM.. . ••••••• ' h Coo (0 ncorhYnchu5 )i5ut h) ill ' iiierfliiNNFigir . Ji JIM; PI 131 4131“mtglInt, 11111>313111:h . i:i-r;..-:"5.•-::‘,•:.z<I'...v.4.$;.;;;•'“,:. • . :. • . . ...„ it...,..?,. • - • - - : V. iir'' 'Irani' ....7..... .-•'.• - •••,. .. :2.... . ..- .:i.• .. . • 1} ..:- . . V '..... ir g41izaE;GetirgiA ... • .....c91 T S te ead e lh 1_ .<0 . TAYItiss) . - - •i3A Rzt - Iii. I :II 19-, 7.),Plini .3,,.• ;•• p4431.i. kilbrriz* fi • ig ' , Igmlginglity'll.;, ..4 ia a 3 3P.Atifhtrtii*elgOrttlirtz:/lLr-• .3,4y3 • k! 4:8;igT3P99.1.0. • 4 -A.. -,..-•• - -.• ..-- -. - ...,•` 7•:;••.:...i.' ... ,.i... ,,r Ss ... , . .. ..... . • - - ;None• " .• . • ' • : Chum . (0 . keta) - iiii..=1,30.33m.ro.:4:333! Figivit pr•::::,,,p3,,,,,v...2,,, 13 '2) AI I.-3 1?)(11 11, MP -fr ig,4n.,•16immiii{:iii;wik.:;, :.,:::3 •• .. ''' • •• - v-.,.:,:::••••• • • • , • :Now . • ..•.. “..• _ 'broxie .. . . Chino ok (0 . tshavytsche) 11Piirillitiiiriigieglifi4),.,Tir --- ..... 3- .:ie ...... 4 • iiilif - 1 4.: ;r.1) e --0 .. ii3 -3' :,vii.. ,.. -fl. tiNter. ., „ ,? .: . ...,p1F, ,,,..... , .... - i ,...-:: - . . . . :.: None • : • • • None Sockeye (0 . rterka) - ............................ ; — ' 0 ,r . . 3.:,? • ii10 iig'3'3: .... .................... ' ' . . :14clue • • Note Pink (0 . gorbux ha) . , ,,,, 3 ................. ...-., , . 33 3 3,13 3 • ,3 1 ' ••::,: .... : . io,.....t., . • None :::Ji' Sea-run Cutthroat (0 . clarld clarki) Vii.ii:Zi;K:inr.r.. ."'.......... ..........' . !;:;;;Inir.- --- n. n .... -...:'.'iVVAtC63.R.(T-4/99) 4: .1011:1:31: "Ii?:;i:Ri4i;13 -31: ...... ::iiiii: , ....:....:..'... • *. , • . .. : ... .. :',. .:: : . ti . "- .. '-'‘ : : ...• ' • ' • • Nou • ' • . - B ull Trouro (S. co nflue ntus) in -:, .. -)•,3 ,,,, :i 33, *A. 1 r .... :.iii, y •:, ii,-.• ...... , .. , •• • • : . : . : • . • - - - -None ' . -: .. . Abbreviations re fer to Columbia Rive r, Snake Rive r, Fuze Sound., Straits of Georgia, sprineslunme r runs * Maier the juridic tion L113. Fish & Vibille Se nice ; NATIONAL MARINE FISHERRIES SERVICE Northwest Region Habitat Conservation Division Northwest Region Species List Endangered, Threatened, Proposed, and Candidate Species under National Marine Fisheries Service Jurisdiction that Occur in Oregon, Washington, and Idaho - -. Listed Species Coho Salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) • Southern Oregon/Northern California Coasts Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU) (Threatened) • Oregon Coast ESU (Threatened) Chinook Salmon (0. tshawytscha) • Snake River Fall -run ESU (Threatened) • Snake River Spring/Summer -run ESU (Threatened) • Puget Sound ESU (Threatened) • Lower Columbia River ESU (Threatened) • Upper Willamette River ESU (Threatened) • Upper Columbia River Spring -run ESU (Endangered) Chum Salmon (0. keta) • Hood Canal Summer -run ESU (Threatened) • Columbia River ESU (Threatened) Sockeye Salmon (0. nerka) • Snake River ESU (Endangered) • Ozette Lake ESU (Threatened) Steelhead (0. mykiss)1 • Upper Columbia River ESU (Endangered) • Snake River Basin ESU (Threatened) 12/17/1999 11:01 AP • Lower Columbia River ESU (Threatened) • Upper Willamette River ESU (Threatened) • Middle Columbia River ESU (Threatened) Sea -run Cutthroat Trout (0. clarki clarld) • Umpqua River ESU (Endangered) Proposed for Listing Chinook Salmon • Southern Oregon/Northern California Coastal ESU (Proposed Threatened) • 2 or2 Sea -run Cutthroat Trout • Southwestern Washington/Columbia River ESU (Proposed Threatened) Candidates for Listing Coho Salmon • Puget Sound /Straight of Georgia ESU •. Lower Columbia River /Southwest Washington ESU Steelhead • Klamath Mountains Province ESU • Oregon Coast ESU Sea -run Cutthroat Trout • Oregon Coast ESU Species Lists 1 List of BiOps 1 Habitat Home 1 NWR Home Updated 8/16/99 Species List Updated April 1999 12/17/1999 11:01 M 3. NM•J 1.41nnas oL mannc AMU v. ••.� • • Threatened and Endangered Species Found in Washington State under the Jurisdiction of the National Marine Fisheries Service _October 1999 update. The following marine mammals and sea turtles may be found off the coast of the State of Washington. Many of these species are in danger of becom,ng extinct and have been listed under the Endangered Species Act. Humpback Whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) Blue Whale ( Balaenoptera musculus) Fin Whale (Balaenoptera physalus) Sei Whale ( Balaenoptera boreali) Sperm Whale (Physeter macrocephalus) . Steller Sea Lion (Eumetopias jubatus) Leatherback Sea Turtle (Dermochleys coriacea) Loggerhead Sea Turtle (Caretta caretta) The following-marine mammals and sea turtles may occur in the Puget Sound of Washington State. Humpback Whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) Steller Sea Lion (Eumetopias jubatus) Leatherback Sea Turtle ( Dermochleys coriacea) The National Marine Fisheries Service also has jurisdiction over Salmonids which are found along the coast in Puget Sound and in many of our rivers, streams and lakes. 12!17!19'') 10:30 AD ..■ cir72 Washington State Departrnent of Transportation IECErvz FEB 4 D 20O PUBIC it ACS National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Listing Date: February 10, 2000 To: Robin Tischmak -City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Suite 4100 Tukwila, WA 98188 _. From: WSDOT Local Piogi ams = Northwest Kegion " • 1. Dear Robin: Per your request, attached is the NMFS species listing. Included are the following: • Species Listing: ESA Status - Washington State Anadromous Salmonids - November 1999 • Species Listing: Endangered and Threatened Marine Mammals'and Sea Turtles Under the Jurisdiction of National Marine Fisheries Service That May Occur Off Washington and Oregon • Map: ESA - Listing Status for Chinook Salmon • Map: ESA - Listing Status for Coho Salmon As a reminder, please be aware you will need to submit a written request to the following agencies for their species listing: 1. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 2. Washington State Departrnent of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 3. Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR). Also attached is a copy of the WDFW map for the Bull Trout. This is riot-part of the NMFS listing package, but is provided for your information. Sincerely, Terrence G. Paananen, P. E. Local Programs Engineer • March 17, 2000 WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF Natural Resources Robin Tischmak City of Tukwila Public Works Department 6300 Southcenter Blvd - Suite 100 Tukwila WA 98188 SUBJECT: S 180 St Grade Separation - Project No. 87 -RWO9 (T23N RO4E S36) RECEIVED MAR 2 0 2000 PUBLIC WORKS JENNIFER M. BELCHER Commissioner of Public Lands We've searched the Natural Heritage Information System for information on significant natural Currents. wP ave no- records.for. rare plants nr_high.quality --features-in-your-project-area- - .�<..- � - ---y� �'_ . - r - ecosystems in the vicinity of your project. For your information, I have enclosed a list of rare plant species known to occur in the county in which your project is located. The information provided by the Washington Natural Heritage Program is based solely on existing information in the database. In the absence of field inventories, we cannot state whether or not a given site contains high quality ecosystems or rare species; there may be significant natural features in your study area of which we are not aware. The Washington Natural Heritage Program is responsible for information on the state's endangered, tl neatened, and sensitive plants as well as high quality ecosystems. We have begun to add information on selected groups of animals of conservation concern, such as freshwater mussels, butterflies and bats, to our database. We now make this information available in our reports along with information on rare plants and high quality ecosystems. The authority for protection of animal species in Washington rests with the Department of Fish and Wildlife which manages and interprets data on wildlife species of concern in the state. To ensure that you receive information on all animal species of concern, please contact Priority Habitats and Species, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, 600 Capitol Way N, Olympia, WA 98501 -1091, or by phone (360) 902 -2543. If you have the opportunity, visit our website at http: // www.wa.gov /dnr and click on Conservation/Protection. Please call me at (360) 902 -1667 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Sandy Swope"Moody, Environmental Coordinator Washington Natural Heritage Program PO Box 47016 Olympia WA 98504 -7016 Enclosure FOREST RESOURCES 1 1111 WASHINGTON ST SE 1 Po BOX 47016 1 OLYMPIA, WA 98504-7016 FAX: (360) 902 -1783 1 TTY: (360) 902 -1125 1 TEL (360) 902 -1340 Eaual O000rtunity /Affirmative Action Employer RECYCLED PAPER Ci Washington Natural Heritage Information System Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive Vascular Plantslof Washington March 2000 Scientific Name Arenaria paludicola Aster curtus Botrychium lanceolatum. Botrychium lunaria Botrychium minganense Botrychium pedunculosum Botrychium pinnatum Campanula lasiocarpa Carex buxbaumii Carex comosa Carex pauciflora Carex saxatilis var major Carex stylosa Cassiope lycopodioides Castilleja levisecta Cimicifuga elata Cyperus bipartitus Fritillaria camschatcensis Galium kamtschaticum Hydrocotyle ranunculoides Hypericum majus Lobelia dortmanna Lycopodiella inundata Lycopodium dendroideum Platanthera chorisiana Platanthera obtusata Utricularia intermedia King County Page l of 1 Common Nawe Swamp sandwdrt White -top aster Lance - leaved grape -fern Moonwort Victorin's grape -fern Stalked moonwort St. john's moonwort Alaska harebell Buxbaum's sedge Bristly sedge Few - flowered sedge Russet sedge Long - styled sedge Clubmoss cassiope Golden paintbrush Tall bugbane Shining flatsedge Black lily Boreal bedstraw Floating water pennywort Canadian st. john's -wort Water lobelia Bog clubmoss Treelike clubmoss Choris' bog- orchid Small northern bog- orchid Flat - leaved bladderwort State Status Federal Status* Pos Extirpated LE -Sensitive SC Sensitive Sensitive Review Sensitive SC Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Endangered LT Threatened SC Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Review Sensitive Threatened Sensitive Sensitive Threatened Sensitive Sensitive Historic Record ** H H H H H * LE = Listed Endangered, LT = Listed Threatened, PE = Proposed Endangered, PT = Proposed Threatened, C= Candidate for listing, SC = Species of Concern (an unofficial status) ** H = Known only from historic record • )ICE DATE: 7/00 ARED BY: `. 1H gni I 1 1 n PHONE : TAT PROGRAM - PH! WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE PUBLIC DATA REQUEST INVOICE VIZATION: CITY OF TUKWILA ACT _PERSON: ROBIN _TT SGF.;mA SS:' 6300 SOUTHCEIvl'>=R BLED SUITE 100 TUKWILA' STATE: WA ZIPCODE: 98188 OF REQUEST: 2/07/00 ST DESCRIPTION: ST GRADE. SEPARATION PROJECT NUMBr -R, 87 -RW09 TYPE: Pi-TWO r:JORITY RARITATS ;. F'!::'J:i.:S (PHS ) ILDLIFE HERITAGE (I3RTG) ATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY (NWT) ASH. RIVERS INFORMATION SYSTEM (WARIS) DOTTED OWL SITE CENTER DATABASE IHER DATA TYPE Z OF MAPS REQUES'1E7.) : ALS: SING EEE: COST' REVENUE CODE: 0010421001004C202 BUTION: WHITE COPY - BILLING AGENCY YELLOW COPY - RETURN WITH PAYMENT PINK COPY - ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE GOLDENROD COPY - GIS SECTION 1.00 0.00 20.00 1 (360)902 -2543 LNtiOICE #: DATA FORMAT N "i =MAPS D = DIGITAL R = TABULAR REPORT L = SPECIES & HABITAT LIST Please make checks payable to: WASH. DEPT. OF FISH & WILDLIFE 600 CAPITOL WAY NORTH OLYMPIA WA 98501 -1091 FED. TAX ID = 911632572 261 State of Washington DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Mailing Address: 600 capitol Way N, Olympia, WA 98501 -1091 - (360) 902 -2200; TDO (360) 902 -2207 Main Office Location: Natural Resources Building, 1111 Washington Street SE, Olympia, WA Date: MC1l`c ii MAR 0 8 2000 PUBLIC WORKS • Dear Habitats and Species Requester. Enclosed are the habitats and species products you requested from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). This package may also contain documentation to help you understand and use these products. These products only include information that WDFW maintains in a computer database. They are not an attempt to provide you with an official agency response as to the impacts of your project on fish and wildlife, nor are they designed to provide you with guidance on interpreting this information and determining how to proceed in consideration of fish and wildlife. These products only document the location of important fish and wildlife resources to the best of our knowledge. It is important to note that habitats or species may occur on the ground in areas not currently known to WDFW. biologists, or in areas for which comprehensive surveys have not been conducted. Site - specific surveys are frequently necessary to rule out the presence of priority habitats or species. Your project may require further field inspection or you may need to contact our field biologists or others in WDFW to assist you in interpreting and applying this information. Generally, for assistance on a specific project, you should contact the WDFW Habitat Program Manager for your county and,ask for the area habitat biologist for your.project area. Refer to the enclosed directory for thole contacts. Please note that sections potentially impacted by spotted owl management concems are displayed on the 1:24,000 scale standard map products. If specific details on spotted owl site centers are required they must be requested separately. These products are designed for users external to the forest practice permit process and as such does not reflect all the information pertinent to forest practice review. The Forest Practice Rules adopted August 22, 1997 by the Forest Practice Board and administered by the Washington Department of Natural Resources require forest practice applications to be screened against marbled murrelet detection areas and detection sections. Marbled murrelet detection locations are included in the standard priority habitats and species products, but the detection areas and detection sections are not included. If your project is affected by Forest Practice Regulations, you should specially request murrelet detection areas. WDFW updates this information as additional data become available. Because fish and wildlife species are mobile and because habitats and species information changes, project reviews for fish and wildlife should not rest solely on mapped information. Instead, they should also consider new information gathered from current field investigations. Remember, habitats and species information can only show that a species or habitat type is present, they cannot show that a species or habitat type is not present. These products should not be used for future projects. Please obtain updates rather than use outdated information. Because of the high volume of requests for information that WDFW receives, we need to charge for these products to recover some of our costs. Enclosed is an invoice itemizing the costs for your request and instructions for submitting payment. WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE REGIONAL HABITAT PROGRAM MANAGER CONTACTS For assistance with Priority Habitats and Species Information contact a regional habitat program manger and they will direct your questions to a biologist. County project is in... Asotin, Columbia, Ferry, Garfield Lincoln, Pend Oreille, Spokane, Stevens, Walla Walla, Whitman Adams, Chelan, Douglas, Grant, Okanogan Benton, Franklin, Kittitas, Yakima d Island, King, San Juan, Skagit, Snohomish, Whatcom Clark, Cowlitz, Klickitat, Lewis, Skamania, Wahkiakum Iallam, Grays Harbor, Jefferson, Kitsap, Mason, Pacific, Pierce, Thurston Contact... John Andrews 8702 North Division Street Spokane, WA 99218 -1199 Phone: (509) 456 -4082 Tracy Lloyd 1550 Alder Street NW Ephrata, WA 98823 -9699 Phone: (509) 754 -4624 Ted Clausing 1701 24th Avenue Yakima, WA 98902 -5720 Phone: (509) 575 -2740 Ted Muller 16018 Mill Creek Blvd. Mill Creek, WA 98012 -1296 Phone: (206) 775 -1311 Rich Costello 2108 Grand. Blvd. Vancouver, WA 98661 Phone: (360) 696 -6211 Sue Patnude 48 Devonshire Road Montesano, WA 98563 -9618 Phone: (360) 249 -4628 State of Washington DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Mailing Address: 600 Capitol Way N, Olympia, WA 98501 -1091 - (360) 902 -2200; TDD (360) 902 -2207 Main Office Location: Natural Resources Building, 1111 Washington Street SE, Olympia. WA Dear Habitats and Species Requester: Thank you for requesting habitats and species information from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). Your request includes information that is deemed - sensitive by WDFW's Sensitive Fish and Wildlife Information Policy. An authorized representative of your organization must sign the enclosed Memorandum of Understanding - (MOU). Enclosed is a copy of the MOU and the sensitive information policy. Please retum the signed MOU to me. We will return a completed MOU to you for your files upon our signature. The Authorized Representative is an individual who has the authority to ensure conformance with the MOU. This includes informing other users in your organization of the nature and restrictions imposed by the MOU. Future written requests for sensitive information signed by the Authorized Representa #ive can be honored by the WDFW under an existing MmU.' The Technical Contact is someone who the Authorized Representative may want to delegate to work with WDFW. You may have multiple Technical Contacts if you wish. Written requests for sensitive information signed by the Technical Contact can be honored by WDFW under an existing MOU. The Description of Data section of the MOU may be filled out for a specific project or filled out generically to make it applicable to your current request and to your future projects. If you anticipate making future requests for information, I recommend that you make the Thank you for your attention to this matter. If you have any questions, please call me at (360) 902 -2543. Sincerely, Lori Guggenmos, Cartographer Priority Habitats and Species Enclosures 7. Sensitive Wildlife information Should Not Be Released To Persons Or Institutions Not Included In 4 Or 5 Of This Policy. Sensitive wildlife information should not be released in a form that discloses the specific sensitive species name or the specific locations of sensitive species to persons or institutions not included in 4 or 5 of this policy. 8. Sensitive Wildlife Information May Be Released During Government Activities. Because government activities often involve unique circi1mctances, the following special guidelines for releasing sensitive wildlife information should be applied: • a). Citizen Advisory Committees are considered agents of the government agency that they are advising. They may have access to pertinent sensitive. information and should operate under the agencies' Sensitive Wildlife Information MOU. b). In public meetings /hearings, government officials may present maps of sensitive information displayed at 1:100,000 scale or smaller. They may answer specific questions relative to what sensitive species exist on a particular parcel of land. These traps, however, may not be reproduced or distributed. c). Small scale maps (1:250,000 scale or smaller) containing sensitive information may be reproduced and distributed to the general public. 9. Sensitive Wildlife Information Release Requirements Can Be Waived In Emergencies. In the event of an emergency, as defined by either the Administrative Procedures Act, the Director, or a designee, restrictions on release of sensitive data may be waived if the information requested will assist in minimizing negative impacts to wildlife, assessing damage, or otherwise assist managing the emergency. Such a waiver will be approved by Assistant Directors of the Wildlife Management or Habitat Divisions. Sensitive wildlife data release restrictions may also be waived in other circumstances if necessary. All such waivers will be approved by Assistant Directors of the Wildlife Management or Habitat Divisions. 10. Sensitive Wildlife Information Is Subject To Public Disclosure Laws. The disclosure or nondisclosure of sensitive wildlife information is subject to the Public Disclosure Law (RCW 43.17). Requests for such information will be processed as Public Disclosure Requests (See POL- 1005). • IN THE VICINITY OF T23R04E SECTION 36 Report Date: March 06, 2000 This map contains the following species and /or habitats that are deemed sensitive by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Sensitive Fish and Wildlife Policy. PHS CODE/ SPPCODE COMMON NAME.. USE CODE USE DESCRIPTION ARHE GREAT BLUE HERON HALE BALD EAGLE PHS POLYGON FORM LIST IN THE VICINITY OF T23R04E SECTION 36 FORM NUMBER/ PHSPOLY# PHS CODE*USE CODE 2 900000 .- 3 900000 .- 4 902725 WET` - 5 902724••_ WET*- 6 902725 WET` - — PHS POLYGON - SPECIES AND HABITAT LIST B B BREEDING OCCURRENCE BREEDING OCCURRENCE PHS FORM# PHS CODE COMMON NAME USE CODE USE DESCRIPTION 900,000 902,525 WET WETLANDS 902,689 UNOS URBAN NATURAL OPEN SPACE 902,723 WET WETLANDS 902,724 WET WETLANDS 902,725 WET WETLANDS 903,683 HALE BALD EAGLE B BREEDING OCCURRENCE Form number 900000 indicates presence of PHS is unknown or the area was not mapped. Form numbers 909998, 909997, or 909996 indicate compilation errors. WILDLIFE HERITAGE POINT - SPECIES LIST AND REPORT IN THE VICINITY OF T23R04E SECTION 36 QUADPT SPPCODE COMMON NAME USE CODE USE DESCRIPTION 4712242004 ARHE GREAT BLUE HERON B BREEDING OCCURRENCE quadpt: 4712242004 sppcode: ARHE use: B name: GREAT BLUE HERON year: 1992 class: SA accuracy: C state status: SM fed status: township - range - section: T22N ROSE S06 NEOFNE occur #: 285 seqno: 1 general description: GREAT BLUE HERON COLONY. 17 NESTS, ACT - 92;4 -5 NESTS, AT LEAST 1 OCCUPIED, IN 96 (PG 9600256) Note: If known occurences of spotted owls and marbled murrelets exist they will be displayed on the accompanying map, however, detailed information for them are not included in this report. WAJh .NlaLUN UtrAtt,mr -IN. v: :. n ANL - rna rvi.il NVN ALrvAl Report Date: 03/06/2000 form: 902,525 species /habitat: WET species use: season: accuracy: 1 sitename: GREEN RIVER WETLANDS (LOWER RIVER). general description:• _ VARIOUS TYPES OF WETLANDS THROUGHOUT THE LOWER GREEN RIVER VALLEY (DOWNSTREAM FR OM FLAMING GEYSR PARK). SOME OF THESE ALSO HAVE OPEN WATER COMPONENTS. source: RING COUNTY SENSITIVE AREAS MAPS. date: 12 90 code: GSMAP synopsis: A USGS BASED MAP SYSTEM ALSO USING NWI INFORMATION. source: MULLER, TED; ET AL; WDW, SCS, AND COUNTY. date: 91 code: PROF synopsis:• MANY OF THESE SITES HAVE BEEN VISITED BY FIELD STAFF. form: 902,689;.s¢ecies /habitat: LINOS species use: season: accuracy: 1 sitename: CITY /COUNTY PARKS (SOUTH SEATTLE)9 general description: PARKS IN THE BURIEN /DES MOINES AREA. MOST AREAS ARE SEMI - FORESTED AND PROVIDE HA - -- - BITATS- FOR_.MORE . COMMON - SPECIES . _ _ . _ _ . _ . _ _. .. _ _ _ ___ . .. _. _ _. source: MULLER TED date: 05 93 code: MAP synopsis: MAP EDIT; 08/95; CLARIFY PARK BOUNDARIES OF PARKS IN SEC. 13; T23N; RO3E. AND SEC. 07; T22N; RO4E. source: MULLER, TED, WDW; PERSONAL OBSERVATIONS date: 90 code: PROF synopsis: PERIODIC SITE VISITS IN PAST 20 YEARS. source: THOMAS BROS. STREET ATLAS. date: 89 code: GSMAP synopsis: USED STREET ATLAS 'O ESTABLISH BOUNDARIES. form: 902,723 species /habitat: WET species use: season: accuracy: 1 sitename: BLACK RIVER WETLANDS. general description: SCRUB SHRUB AND EMERGENT WETLANDS. AREA INCLUDES PANTHER LAKE. source: KING COUNTY SENSITIVE AREA MAPS. date: 12 90 code: GSMAP synopsis: MAPS BASED ON NWI MAPS. source: OPPERMANN, TONY; WDW; PERSONAL OBSERVATION date: 041991 code: PROF synopsis: SITES OBSERVED WHILE DOING SEPA REVIEWS. • Report Date: 03/06/2000 form: 902,724 species /habitat: WET species use: season: accuracy: 1 sitename: PANTHER CREEK WETLANDS general description:.. SHRUB AND EMERGENT WETLAND ADJACENT TO SR 167. source: OPPERMANN, TONY; WDW; PERSONAL OBSERVATION, ORTHO AND GSMAPS. date: 042291 code: PROF synopsis: SITE DRIVEN BY ON OCCASION. ORTHO AND GSMAP USED TO DETERMINE BOUNDARIES. form: 902,725 species /habitat: WET species use: ' season: accuracy: 1 sitename: LONGACRES WETLANDS general description: FORESTED, SCRUBY -SHRUB AND EMERGENT WETLANDS. EXCELLENT WATERFOWL, PASSERINE BIR D AND RAPTOR HABITAT. LIKELY TO SUPPORT POPULATIONS OF AMPHIBIANS, REPTILES AND SMALL MAMMALS. source: OPPERMANN, TONY; WDW; PERSONAL OBDSERVATION, ORTHO AND GSMAPS. date: 042291 code: PROF synopsis: _AREA VISITED_ON_A..FEW OCCASIONS DURING SEPA REVIEWS OF LOCAL AND ADJACENT PROPOS ALS FOR DEVELOPMENT. source: FINAL REPORT, LONGACRES PARK BY THE BOEING CO. date: 010391 code: LIT synopsis: DOCUMENT CITES PRESENCE OF BALD EAGLE, CANADIAN GOOSE, MALLARD, CANVASBACK, GREA T BLUE HERON, NORTHERN HARRIER AND AN ACTIVE RED TAILED HAWK NEST. form: 903,683 species /habitat: HALE species use: B season: WSU accuracy: 1 sitename: ANGLE LAKE general description: BALD EAGLE NEST ON HIGHLY RESIDENTIAL LAKE. TOP OF DOUGLAS FIR. FIRST SEEN 1995. INACTIVE IN 1996. source: PATRICIA THOMP,SON WDFW date: 06 96 code: PROF synopsis: REPORTED BY RESIDENTS AND VERIFIED BY SITE VISIT. . • • PRIORITY ANALnunuw nNL IN THE VICINITY OF T23R04E SECTION 36 Report Date: March 06, 2000 PRIORITY ANADROMOUS FISH PRESENCE CODE COMMON NAME STREAM NAME STREAM LLID RECORD DATE SOURCE COHO Coho Salmon CHFA Fall Chinook CHUM Chum Salmon COHO Coho Salmon SOCK Sockeye Salmon STSU Summer Steelhead STWI Winter Steelhead COHO Coho Salmon COHO Coho Salmon COHO Coho Salmon Black River Green River Green River Green River Green River Green River Green River Stream name(s) not in database Stream name(s) not in database Stream name(s) not in database PRIORITY RESIDENT FISH PRESENCE CODE COMMON NAME STREAM NAME 1222505474742 1222505474752 1222505474752 1222505474752 1222505474752 1222505474752 1222505474752 1222202474158 1222243474300 1222362474538 STREAM LLID 04 -21 -97 05 -21 -97 07 -07 -97 04 -21 -97 07 -07 -97 06 -17 -97 01 -18 -97 04 -21 -97 04 -21 -97 04 -21 -97 C. Boranski, "WDFW C. Smith, WDFW R. Egan, WDFW C. Boranski, WDFW R. Egan, WDFW P. Castle, WDFW T. Crop, WDFW . C. Boranski, WDFW C. Boranski, WDFW C. Boranski, WDFW RECORD DATE SOURCE CCT Resident Cutthroat Black River 1222505474742 07 -15 -97 DBT1 Dolly Vanden /Bull Trout Green River 1222505474752 09 -15 -98 The fish information in this report only includes data that the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) maintains in a central database. This information only documents the location of important fish resources to the best of our knowledge. It is not a complete inventory of the fish species in the state. Fish are identifed as priority by WDFW if they meet 1 of 3 criterion as listed in the Priority Habitats and Species List. For questions on the StreamNet Database, please contact Martin Hudson at (360) 902 2487. WDFW Staff Fish Program Appendix B. Site Map, Site Photos, and Detail Illustrations ■ "to a •a7 fooa9hN01d3 1 1 t 1 4 • V 7 r+i c . c d • o Ul Co r o R. .,3 • CD rn - Z_.M -4 1 5 • a D N 0 A. S. 180th St.. and railroad iiiterseetion: Sipa] has just heen activated. *Mr,. 41. 'N. -".ivemFITA.r7.7747 • 8. S. 180th St. and railroad intersection: Amtrak train passing, at approxirnatel> (ifn-nph, C. S. 1 SO''' and railroad. intersection: Open to vehicular traffic -. D. View looking NW at. wetpond.locatic :n. E. View looking NE at wetpond location. t • ,.. .41:11tt • . - : • • . ' • •1,744- .,31§1L:,.• • F. View looking north at wetland area "A" to be filled io accommodate shooflies, View of wetland "C" lookint.... North . rail road maintenance access road passes through the ‘velland, ..Nest side of the Mill Creek Bridge IA hen.' temporary widening \ 1 lake piact:. 1..noking NF. N. West side of the Mil? Creek F3ridt.,e %there tchtr'or ir} widening will lake place.. 1:ookii?_y cast. L. West side of the Mill Creek Bride where temporary widening will take place. Look.inL south. M. Fast side ,of the Mill Creek Bridee 1001611.2 south. Tile acres ol. land :wall:Ise will occur here between he tracks :11 d the apparent tree hue. h.. View is htokinn SW lit Public Storae.e- huilkhIT Ecre dr \ c!‘\.;1■ relocated approxiniatck..7 11 to the eaq [his () L' acres ol King )rell Space. will h.' initipted It in the photo • r 441:fA4400.1" (.). View is lookinQ. SW on Snrinc:brook Creek- at eventual wetpond outioll that \vill focatcd Spring rteNt to pipe-arch UpStrcatp of rcd alikl• P. Vic is looking NE on Springbrook Creek from S. 180th St.. at a recently completed flood storage bench with vegetation plantings and habitat enhancements. • -� ri ) 011/ WAZER. SEPARATOR - ) -J COMBINED DETENTION \-- AND WETPOND i 1 ( PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY PROPOSED 12' WATER MAIN 4ByERS) 12 WP (5) - 21.00 12tC• C (C) - 23. ► 1 SECANT PILE WALL BENEATH DRIVEWAY r Clues INK MCC SECANT PILE WALL last or NAY e,= T,r-r-. t — • .,• r —. /% - / / //% . /i /ii, / , // z ' la 5 m g 11 4 r //// / / N 7 i ti / / /1/ A /*/// 44„(,_ i---1 // -, Y RI BR J l '14- . --:2 // . h REMO BOX / ,1./ 1/ II _ 0� T CUL / / M1M1 ti/ ' ✓ NEED w• TO / / �QQ` CONS UCT TREMIc' S BA A \ + �• A 2..- TREMIE SEAL BELOW ROADWA ..4116. - _ `�.�� ��- .� " �� P -- i 7 L ..+� ?* 1 W !N 1 CO/C — — Ctt'Sir• "! •a •• 1• k. �aYl I I i — i Nth i�1L4 24 ,-'741115ACT ATTENUATOR. TYP rrrf -- sc 61- 2-0611 -7 g-- PgRFORATED DRAIN PIPE GAS 14 (BY OTHERS) 11' c ANT PILE MOVE AIO PANKMG 26 ITAR BYIbTHER • 61+00 : Lounol• 'II. r . r:. vin • S ex sn ill =/���s`�� R1BOX -mmir-v•Ertv - 1 -.4:,^7"r .: PAIN) R I --F— I OSED RICH • 11 Y L- R11 TW •, II� APPROXI 1„fi= • TTON��O�pF�• i CREEK O 4 r• W. (EL 3; FT STATION : / ERS1 it /� ',MOOT INC WALL i 2�E '75' ►i PraVEWt>,•Y R5I.DCA•Tlonl ROP 2+ • • r O PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. — ENGINEERING — STREETS— WATER — SEWER— PARKS— BUILDING- Co w donipowl Da.1.%/E4VPH Rao CA••nDr1 4 WentitsID De-tA,'_ SOUTH 180th STREET GRADE SEPARATION .w. nylsione DEML B Ms .. .COl. data • Allail 1111411. -.W.%WaStfilil SAM _ -..,4, Wie4,.....___ • 1 1 1 1 111. I I ;On 1 1 i .., V(1\Ij , !*/ N, \\ s\\ `� N \ NN PLAN SHOOFLY TRACKS EXISTING BRIDGE EXISTING. TRACKS MILL CREEK TIMBER PILES ELEVATION 40 1"=40' 0 40 40 30 20 10 80 ! scale feet PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. -ENGINEERING- STREETS-WATER- SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- 1 SOUTH 180TH STREET GRADE SEPARATION MILL CREEK BRIDGE WIDENING Exposed face of geotextile material Live brush Vegetated Gecgrid Vegetated geogrids are useful where slopes cannot be cut back or in bank locations requiring addition protection against strong erosive flows. The level of protection afforded by geogrids is greater than solely vegetative methods but may be less than rock methods. Vegetated geogrids are useful where fill is needed to repair local or gen- eral scour. They may be used to abate bank failure caused by toe erosion when combined with struc- tural toe protection. If constructed with adequate . soil compaction, geogrids can be constructed with a steep face and thus are valuable for repairs at sites where the banks can not be sloped back. Vegetated geogrids immediately reinforce the bank. While the benefits are similar to those of brush layers, vegetated geogrids can be placed at a steeper angles. Vegetated geogrids capture sedi- ment that rapidly rebuilds and stabilizes the bank. They produce rapid growth for habitat and be- comes very natural in appearance and function. Geotextile material Fill material Excellent overhanging material is provided im- mediately for aquatic habitat, and cover increases over time. Unless rooted stock is used, geogrids are best installed while plants are dormant. At sites such as upper bank areas, irrigation during the first grow- ing season may enhance growth and survival. Plants may be installed during the growing season if the plants are watered during the planting pro- cess. BANK STAt3tuz.anonl DER L foR NtLL C2EEK ? NPDeAeA4 6R{c(E 1r4DEf'11� '• } Appendix C. Construction Time Tables 19 10 1 e Task Name Duration NOTICE TO PROCEED 0 days Stan Wed 2/9/00 2 PRELMINARY MEETINGS 13 days Wed 2/9100 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 VALUE ENGINEERB4G (VE) STUDY SUPPORT 10 day. Mon 320/00 Prefect Overview 1 day Mon 320'00 On-Cal Support 2 days Tue 321/00 Response to VE Study Comments 7 days Thu 323,00 ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING .155 days Mon 2/14/00 Environmental Check651 15 days Mon 228'00 Permit Supper 145 days Mon 2/28/00 Shoreline Substantial Development 144 days Mon 228/00 Prepare Perm Application 15 days Mon 228/00 Submit Permit Application 0 days Man 32000 Macy Review 129 days Mon 3/20000 Permit Approved 0 days FA 9/15/00 Critical Areas Review 129 days Mon 3/20/00 _ . .' Prepare Permit Application 15 days Mon 321000 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Submit Permit Application 0 days Mon 4/10x00 Agency Review 114 days Mon 4/10'00 Permit Approved 0 days FA 9/15/00 Clearing and Grading 114 days Mon 4/10/00 Prepare Permit Application 15 days Mon 4/10"0 Submit Permit Application 0days Mon 5/1/00 Agency Review 99 days Mon 5/1/00 Permit Approved 0 days FA 9/15/00 ?XRPA 100 days Mon 5/1/00 Prepare Permit Appic:5tion Submit Permit Application 45 days Mon 5/1/00 0 days Fri 6/30/00 Agency Review 55 days Mon 7/3/00 Permit Approved 0 days Fri 9/15/00 Biolog;cal Assessmenn 85 days Mon 2/14/00 31 32 33 34 35 Prepare Biological Assessment 15 days Mon 2/14/00 Submit Biological Assessment 0 days Mon 3/0/0 Agency Review of Biological Assessment 40 days Mon 3/6/0 Agency Concurrence with Biological Assessment 0 days Mon 511/00 Environmental Classification Summary 10 days Mon 5/1/00 Awry Corps of Engineers Review 20 days Mon 5/15/00 Rnlsh Wed 2/9/00 FA 2/29/00 Fri 3/31/00 Mon 320'00 Wed 322/00 FA 3/31/00 FA 1115/00 Mon 320130 FA 9/15/00 FA 9x15/00 Mon 320x00 Mon 320/00 FA 9x15/00 FA 9x15/00 FA '3,15/00 FA 4/7/00 Mon 4/10/00 FA 9/15/00 FA 9/15/00 FA 9/15/00 FA 428/00 Mon 5/1/00 FA 9'15/00 FA 9'15/00 Fri 3,15/00 FA 6x30/00 Fri 6/30/00 FA 9/15/00 FA 9/15/00 Fri 6/9/00 Fri 3/3/00 Mon 3/6/00 FA 428/00 Mon 5/1/00 Fri 5/12/00 FA 6/9/00 South 19001 Suoet Grad. S.paradon Phase 2 kss1M Schedule 30 7 14 21 28 4 11 18 25 16 23 30 6 13 20 27 10 17 24 1 8 15 22 29 5 12 F /15 31 Protect Master Schedule Date: Tut 229/0( Task Spit Progress Milestone Summary . v' Rolled Up Split ♦ R01)ed Up Task .._.. Rolled Up Milestone O Rolled Up Progress Edema! Tasks Project Summary Page 1 r ID Task Name 37 RALROAD COORDINATION Duration 158 days Starr Fbish Wed 2/9100 FA 9/15/00 South 18001 Stnet Grade Separation Phase 2 Master Schedule Feb 00 Mar 20 RlghtcbErtry Pemlrts 23 daps Wed 2/9'00 Fri 3/10/00 30 6 13 20 27 5 12 19 26 30 7 DO Jun 'CO 14 1 21 1 29 1 4 1 1 1 1 18 125 1 9 1 16 1 23 1 30 1 3 20 27 3 1 10 °17 24 . hd '00 Oct DO 6 u V 29 0© 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52. 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 Safety Training 5 days Mot 306100 FA 11000 Railroad Construction Agreements and Easements 55 days W17/3/00 Fri W15/00 Approval of Bridges 10 days Mon 9/4/00 FA 9/15/00 SURVEYING 40 drys Mon 310100 Fri 428/00 Draft Basemaps 30 days Mon 3/6100 FA 4/14/00 'On -Car Ub3ty Location 5 days Mon 3/6/00 FA 3/10/00 Fled Survey 15 days Mon 3/13/00 Fri 3131/00 Prepare Draft Basemen 10 days Mon 4/3/00 Fri 4/14/00 Submt Draft Basanapa b BERGER/ABAM 0 days FA 4/14/00 Fri 4/1000 Review of Draft Basemaps 5 days Mon 4/17/00 FA 4/2100 Prepare Final Basofups 5 days Mon 424100 Fri 428/00 Submit Find Basemaps to BERGER/A8AM 0 days FA 428/00 FA 428/00 GEOTECHWCAL ENGINEERING 35 days Mon 3113400 Fri 4/28/00 Draft GeoteehniCal Report 25 days Mon 113/00 Fri 4/14/00 Borings 10 days Mon 3113/00 FA 32400 Laboratory Tests 5 days Mon 327/00 Fri 3131/00 Prepare Draft Report 10 days Mon 4(3/00 Fri 4/14/00 Submit Draft Geoedavcal Report to BERGER/ABA/A 0 days FA 4/14/00 Fri 4/14/00 Review Draft Geotedvlical Report 5 days Mon 4/17/00 FA 421/00 Prepare Final Geotechnical Report 5 days Man 42420 Fri 428000 Submit Fret Geotednical Report to BERGER/ABAM 0 days FA 4/28/00 Fri 4/28/00 UTILITIES 145 days Mon 2/28/00 Fri 9/15/00 Ubity Gootdinabon 45 days Man 228/00 Fri 428/00 Willy Agreements 102 days Thu 4/27/00 FA 9/15/00 CONSTRUCTION METHODS 20 days Mon 3/6/00 Fri 3/31/00 414 4128 Prole= Maser Schelde Date Tu. 2/2920 Task Progress Spat Maestros • Summary ^ Railed Up Split Robed Up Progress Project Summary Rolled Up Task Retied Up Milestone 0 Eudemei Tasks k 'te r" Page 2 Q Soue, 18061 Skeet Grade Separation Phase 2 Master Schedule ID 66 Task Name Duration Stan Finish „ , „ Feb '00 . .. I .00 ,16 •16 Oct TO Nov 90 30 6 13 20 27 5 12 19 26 2 9 23 30 7 14 21 28 4 11 18 25 2 9 23 30 ®Q' ® 3 10 17 24 1 8 75 22 29 S 1707 . 12 �Ey':'�© 1 24 3 PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATE 125 days Mon 4/17/00 Fri 10/6100 -• r 2 67 30% Plate and Estimate 30 days Mon 4/17100 Fri 5/26/00 - - . 68 Plan Preparation 15 days Mon 4117/00 Fri 5/5/00 • 98 BERGER/ABAM Review d 30% Subm10ai 2 days Mon 5/8/00 Tue 59'00 99 /ncorporallom of BERGEFVABAM 30% Review Comments 3 days Wed 5110470 Fri 5/12100 = = 100 30% Submittal b C8y. 0 days FA 5/12100 FA 5/12100 701 City Review of 30% Submitta1 • 10 days Mon 5/1500 FA 5/26/00 102 70% Plans, Specification Outline and Estimate 45 days Mon 5/15100 Fri 7/14810 0 103 Imorporate Clays 30% Review Comments 5 days Mon 529/00 FA 62/00 104 Plat Preparation 30 days Mon 5/15100 Fri 623/00 134 BERGER/ABAM Review of 70% Submittal 2 days Mon 626/00 Tue 627/00 135 Incorporation of BERGER/ABAM 70% Review Comments 3 days Wed 6/28/00 FA 62000 136 70% Submittal to City 0 days FA 6/30470 FA 6/30'00 137 City Review bf 70% SutrNttal 10 days Mon 7/3/00 FA 7 /14/00 138 95% Plans, Specification and Estimate SS days Mon 7/3810 Fri 9115/00 J I 5 .. - - . 139- Incorporate Clys 70% Review Comme t s 10 days Mon 7/17/00 FA 728470 140 Plan Preparation 30 days Mon 7 /3/00 • Fri 8111/00 172 BERGER/ABAM Independent Review of 95% Submittal 5 days Mon 8/14/00 FA 8/18470 173 S it W Review of 95% Submittal 5 days Mon 6/14/00 Fri 8/1&00 174 Incorporation of BERGER/ABAM 957. Review Comments 5 days Mon 821/00 Fri 825/00 175 Incorporation of S & W 95% Review Comments 5 days Mon 8/21/00 FA 825/0 176 95% Submittal to City 0 days Fri 825/00 FA 825/00 177 City Review of 95% Submittal 15 days Mon 82800 Fri 9/15/00 178 Contract Ooarments 15 days Mon 9/16100 Fri 106/00 j ♦10/6 179 uncorporate Clys 95% Renew Comments and Permit Requirements 10 days Mon 9/18/00 Fri 929/0 180 Assemble Contract 5 days Mon 10/2/00 FA 10/6/00 181 Submit Cantrad Doarrr#nts to 'City 0 days FA 10/6/00 FA 10'6100 182 RIGHT-OF -WAY APPRAISAL, ACOUISITION, AND COORDINATION 165 days Mon 5/15/00 Fri 1229/00 - • . . .. .. .. , -.. _ . _.._ _ _ .. - • . - _ .. - ... 183 Compete Tito Searches 45 days Mon 5/15470 FA 7/14/00 184 Preparation and Administration 45 days Mon 5/15/00 Fri 7/14/00 185 Prtlaninary Funding Estimate Preparation and Review 45 days Mon 5/1 5/00 Fri 7/14470 .. .... . - •. ..... _ . 786 Appraisal and Appraisal Review 45 days Mon 7 /17/00 FA 9/15/00 .. ......... 187 Negotiations 75 dap Mon 9/18/00 Fri 1229/00 188 Relocation 75 days Man 9/18100 FA 12/29/00 189 Close Transaction 75 day Mon 9118/00 Fri 1229/00• 190 SUBMITTALS, oUAIuTY ASSURANCE, ANO PROJECT COORDINATION 231 days , Wed 2 /9/00 Wed 12/27/00 199 A0. 810. AND AWARD 60 days Mon 1009100 Fri 1229/0 ..,... .. .. ._... _. , 200 Contract Assembly and Distribution by City 10 days Mon 1019/00 Fri 1020/0 201 Advertise and Bid 30 days Mon 102310 FA 17/1/00 202 Avant 20 dap Mon 12/4/00 Fri 1229/00 203 CLOSE 180TH AND BEGIN CONSTRUCTION 0 dap Tun 12101 Tue 1/2/01 P*111414 Master Schedule Date Tue 229/00 Task .. Summary ^ Rolled Rolled Up Progress Project Summary progress . Up Spit SP61 Mies/axe • Rolled Up Task .. Relied Up MBsxstone O 611071111 Tasks %•--•1: i. I I i?,Washington State Department of Transportation Sid Morrison Secretary of Transportation May 16, 2000 Mr. Gerry Jackson U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 510 Desmond Dr. SE, Ste. 102 Lacey, WA 98503 -1273 o6i0 Transportation Building P.O. Box 47300 Olympia, WA 98504 -7300 DECEIVED MAY 1 ti 2000 • E $ C IN' South 180th Street Grade Separation Biological Assessment HP -1998 (024) Dear Mr. Jackson: This is in response to your letter, which indicated the possible presence of listed species in the vicinity of a grade separation project which the City of Tukwila Public Works Department is proposing to complete (FWS ID #1- 3- 00- SP- 0657). Enclosed is a copy of a Biological Assessment (BA) prepared by the City of Tukwila, for this project. The Highways & Local Programs Service Center of the Washington Department of Transportation is submitting this BA on behalf of the Federal Highways Administration. The City is proposing a grade separation on South 180th Street between vehicular traffic and the railroad tracks owned by Burlington Northern Santa Fe and Union Pacific Railroad. The intent of the project is to construct an underpass beneath the existing rail lines to provide for public safety, both vehicular and pedestrian. Proposed activities include bridge construction, roadway excavation, utility relocation, roadway construction, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, illuminations, stormwater treatment and detention, and landscaping (including wetland and stream mitigation). The City has concluded that the project, as described, may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the Coastal/Puget Sound bull trout DPS and the bald eagle species. WSDOT concurs with the City's findings. It is our understanding that, with federal concurrence, this satisfies our responsibilities under Section 7 (c ) of the Endangered Species Act at this time. Please contact Robin Tischmak at (206) 433 -0179 or myself at (360) 705 -6975, if you require additional information or have any questions about this project. BH:ds Enclosures cc: Terry Paananen, NW Region, NB82 -121 Don Petersen, FHWA, 0943 Robin Tischmak, City of Tukwila PWD Sincerely, Brian Hasselbach Environmental Engineer Highways & Local Programs Service Center j71Washington State Department of Transportation Sid Morrison Secretary of Transportation May 16, 2000 Mr. Steven Landino National Marine Fisheries Service 510 Desmond Dr. S.E., Suite 103 Lacey, WA 98503 -1273 Transportation Building P.O. Box 47300 • Olympia, WA 98504 -7300 South 180th St. Grade Separation Biological Assessment HP -1998 (024) Dear Mr. Landino: This is in response to your letter, which indicated the possible presence of listed species in the vicinity of a grade separation project which the City of Tukwila Public Works Department, is proposing to complete. Enclosed is a copy of a Biological Assessment (BA) prepared by the City of Tukwila, for this project. The Highways & Local Programs Service Center of the Washington Department of Transportation is submitting this BA on behalf of the Federal Highways Administration. The City is proposing a grade separation on South 180th Street between vehicular traffic and the railroad tracks owned by Burlington Northern Santa Fe and Union Pacific Railroad. The intent of the project is to construct an underpass beneath the existing rail lines to provide for public safety, both vehicular and pedestrian. Proposed activities include bridge construction, roadway excavation, utility relocation, roadway construction, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, illuminations, stormwater treatment and detention, and landscaping (including wetland and stream mitigations). The City has concluded that the project, as described, may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the Puget Sound chinook ESU and will not result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated Puget Sound chinook salmon critical habitat. WSDOT concurs with the City's findings. It is our understanding that, with federal concurrence, this satisfies our responsibilities under Section 7 (c) of the Endangered Species Act at this time. Please contact Robin Tischmak at (206) 433 -0179 or myself at (360) 705 -6975, if you require additional information or have any questions about this project. Sincerely, 561tee...eVw Brian Hasselbach Environmental Engineer Highways & Local Programs Service Center BH:ds Enclosures cc: Terry Paananen, NW Region, NB82 -121 Don Petersen, FHWA, 0943 Robin Tischmak, City of Tukwila PWD South 180th Street Grade Separation Draft Technical Information Report RECEIVED NOV 0 6 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Job No. A99002 April 1999 Submitted to City of Tukwila Public Works Department Tukwila, Washington Submitted by BERGER /ABAM E N G I N E E R S I N C. .:l DRAFT TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT South 180th Street Grade Separation Submitted to City of Tukwila Public Works Department Tukwila, Washington April 1999 Submitted by BERGER/ABAM Engineers Inc. 33301 Ninth. Avenue South, Suite 300 Federal Way, Washington 98003 -2600 Job No. A99002 DRAFT TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT SOUTH 180TH STREET GRADE SEPARATION TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE 1.0 Project Overview 1 2.0 Preliminary Conditions Summary and Off -Site Analysis 6 3.0 Flow Control and Water Quality Facility Analysis and Design 10 14 4.0 Conveyance Systems Analysis and Design 5.0 Special Reports and Studies 19 6.0 Basin and Community Plan Areas 20 7.0 Other Permits 21 8.0 Erosion/Sedimentation Control Design 22 9.0 Bond Quantities Worksheet, Retention/Detention Facility Summary Sheet and Sketch, and Declaration of Covenant 23 10. Maintenance and Operations Manual o())(te6-3 SCE A-XtP-a-'1\ No-00 4favv-J r , b 1176h roA L 24 Draft Technical Information Report South 180th Street Grade Separation ii April 1999 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW South 180th Street, an east -west principal arterial located in the Tukwila, Renton, and Kent areas of the Green River Valley, will be reconstructed to provide a grade separation between vehicular traffic and railroad tracks. The proposed roadway with five lanes, Class III bicycle route, curb and gutter, and sidewalks will pass under the existing railroad tracks and Interurban Trail. The project location and project limits are shown on the vicinity map in Figure 1. A system of catch basins and closed lines is proposed to collect and convey runoff. The runoff collected from the depressed roadway will be pumped to a new stormwater facility. The project will add approximately 0.502 acre (21,867 square feet) of new impervious surface to the site. Following is the summary of the surface areas of the project. Impervious area (sidewalk) Impervious area (roadway) Total impervious area Pervious area Total project area Existing 0.368 acre 2.017 acre 2.385 acre Proposed Net (increase) 0.439 acre 0.071 acre 2.448 acre 0.431 acre 2.877 acre 0.502 acre 0.502 acre 0.0 acre 2.887 acres 2.887 acres Water quality and water quantity controls are required for this project. Draft Technical Information Report South 180th Street Grade Separation 1 April 1999 Source: BERGER/ABAM Engineers, Inc. 1999 Vicinity Map South 180th Street Grade Separation Figure 1 King County Department of Development and Environmental Services TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Project Owner City of Tukwilla Dept. of Public Works Address 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Suite 100 Tukwilla. WA 98118 Phone (206) 433 -0179 Project Engineer Chris Walcott Company BERGER /ABAM Enaineers Inc. Address/Phone (206) 431 -2300 Par€ 3`" TYPE "QPPE1 APPLICATION Subdivison Short Subdivision Grading Commercial Other JARPA Project Name South 180t Street Grade Separation Location Part 4 - Cn-fewREVIE NSAND P.E. ., ...r;; •<si�r n s , t�'.; �- .a.�zrw�a.'s.5:4���:�cc,�s`"y JDFW HPA Shoreline Management /COE 404 Rockery DOE Dam Safety Structural Vaults FEMA Floodplain Other COE Wetlands Part 5 ;SITE`C{? UNl t3RAI A(1E BAStht • Community N/A Drainage Basin Soringbrook Creek Part 6; SITECHARAC thkitedeeP River Stream Sorinabrook Creek. and Mill Creek Wetlands See Wetlands Study Critical Stream Reach Seeps/Springs Depressions /Swales High Groundwater Table Lake Groundwater Recharge Steep Slopes Other Floodplain FEMA (see Fig. 2) Draft Technical Information Report South 180th Street Grade Separation 3 April 1999 Soil Type Woodinville Silt Loan Puyallup Fine Sandy Loam Urban Land Slopes 0 -3% 0 -3% 0 -3% Additional Sheets Attached Erosion Potential moderate moderate moderate Erosive Velcoties Part'bE ELOPMEN+ UMfl Ai REFERENCE Ch. 4 — Downstream Analysis Additional Sheets Attached LIMITATION/SITE CONSTRAINT '?EQIRENt�tt • r.44b,.. i -tacz?,'4,, o ,'$1: !..:.... ..d .... n ,.3ct MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION ✓ Sedimentation Facilities ✓ Stabilized Construction Entrance ✓ Perimeter Runoff Control ✓ Clearing and Grading Restrictions Cover Practices ✓ Construction Sequence Other . MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS AFTER CONSTRUCTION Stabilize Exposed Surface ✓ Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities ✓ Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris ✓ Ensure Operation of Permanent Facilities Flag Limits of SAO and open space preservation areas Other Draft Technical Information Report South 180th Street Grade Separation 4 April 1999 Part 10 'SURFACE WATER SYSTEM Grass Lined Channel Pipe System Open Channel Dry Pond Wet Pond Tank Infiltration Vault Depression Energy Dissapator Flow Dispersal Wetland Waiver Stream Regional Detention Method of Analysis SBUH. RATIONAL Compensation/ Mitigation of Eliminated Site Storage Brief Description of System Operation Catch basins and closed lines collect and convey runoff to pump station. Runoff is lifted to pond for WQ and flow control Facility Related Site Limitations Reference Facility Limitation Part 11 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Cast in Place Vault Retaining Wall Rockery > 4' High Structural on Steep Slope Other Part 12 EASEMENT'S! RACTS Drainage Easement Access Easement Native Growth Protection Easement Tract Other Part 13 SIGNATURE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER I or a civil engineer under my supervision have visited the site. Actual site conditions as observed were incorporated into this worksheet and the attachments. To the best of my knowledge the information provided here is accurate. Signed/Date Draft Technical Information Report South 180th Street Grade Separation 5 April 1999 a-1 2.0 PRELIMINARY CONDITIONS SUMMARY AND OFF -SITE ANALYSIS The existing drainage system consists of two separate closed pipe systems, one on either side of the tracks. On the west side, the runoff collected along South 180th Street is conveyed to the system on 72nd Avenue South. East of the tracks, all runoff is collected and eventually discharged to Springbrook Creek via a 36 -inch outlet. There are no water quality or water quantity controls for the roadway runoff. The portion of the project adjacent to Springbrook Creek is in a FEMA floodplain. See Figure 2, FEMA Floodplain. The entire project lies within a watershed defined by the City of Kent as Springbrook, Mill, and Garrison Creek Watershed. See Figure 3 for the watershed boundary. Springbrook Creek crosses South 108th Street via a 12 -foot by 19 -foot elliptical metal culvert located about 500 feet east of the tracks. The subbasins and drainage systems are described in more details in the following sections. Schematics of existing and proposed subbasins boundary are shown on Figure 4. Subbasin West 72nd Avenue South (Station 51 +00) to Railroad Tracks (Station 56 +10) Runoff from the roadway and few adjacent properties is collected along South 180th Street and conveyed to a 12 -inch trunk line on 72nd Avenue South. This system flows south to South 182nd Street, then east under the railroad, and finally discharges to Mill Creek, a tributary to Springbrook Creek. Subbasin East Railroad Tracks (Station 56 +10) to End of Project (Station 66 +70) Roadway runoff from this section is collected by a system of catch basins and conveyed to a deep system of 36 -inch RCP located on the north side of the road. The 36 -inch RCP system also drains the off -site areas adjacent to South 180th Street. Flow from the 36 -inch RCP system discharges to Springbrook Creek at a location about 30 feet north of South 180th Street. Draft Technical Information Report South 180th Street Grade Separation 6 April 1999 t SOUTHWEST 39TH STREET R M337 BOULEVARD South Center Pump Station CITY OF TUKWILA 530091 CITY OF RENTON 530088 /Bike Tray Bridge ZONE X FLOODING: EffEGT$ FROM SMUNGSROOU cREat ZONE AE, (EL 231 ' /Tez6.0.• JOINS PJANEL 0988 • r22ei3'OT" N 0) LL Q C. c o 2 teg ¢� 2 n u. () a 0) 0) En s co w VJ rn rn 2 < 2 o w co u_ Source: Harza Northwest Inc. 1994 Springbrook Creek Watershed Boundary South 180th Street Grade Separation Figure 3 West Valley HWY Existing Subbasins 180th St 72nd Ave. +- . U 0) 00 + L r• a m 4- co 0 —c } t- - 0� y N m Subbasin West O to c 0 O 4- v discharges to creek 12'x19 culvert + co co c 0 0 t N 1 drain south then east to Mill Creek Proposed Subbasins 180th St N 0, > a v N 4- U co O O "' + O 0 N .+,.a N u+,F c co 0 oc • +. O 4- .� t N CO Subbasin West Subbasin East discharges to creek WO & Flow control pond 12'x19' culvert -Pump t 0 0, 0 L a 4- 0 •0 c W cc ee" 0 SQL discharges to creek O '.D '.D 0 t O +- N Idrain south then east to Mill Creek Contributing area Flow line Subbasin East t 0 0r 0 L a • 0 c w 0) 0 0 O O 80th Ave. s Oakdale Ave. Source: BERGER/ABAM Engineers, Inc. 1999 Subbasins South 180th Street Grade Separation Figure 4 3.0 FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Flow Control The detention facility was designed to meet Level 1 Flow Control Standards as specified in the King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). The detention pond was sized to detain the proposed peak discharge rates to the limit of the existing discharge rates for the two -year and ten - year storms. Hydrologic models for detention facility design were developed using the SBUH method with 24 -hour storm events, and Type la Hyetograph as implemented by the WaterWorks computer program. Table 1 shows the peak flow rates for the existing and proposed condition of roadway in Subbasin East and the required detention volume. Table 1. Subbasin East Peak Flows WaterWorks outputs are attached at the end of the section. Water Quality Roadway improvements will add 0.431 acre of roadway surface to the site. Water quality volume was determined for an area equal to 0.431 acre in Subbasin East using the method listed in the KCSWDM for basic wetpond. Computations for the required volume are attached at the end of this section. Combined Detention and Wetpond The new pond was designed using the guidelines listed in the KCSWDM for combined detention and wetpond with 3H:1V interior slopes, 2H:1V exterior slope, and 1 foot of freeboard. A permanent pool of water at the bottom of the pond will provide water quality treatment while a live storage at the upper level provides detention capacity. An emergency overflow was provided to discharge 100 -year flow for developed condition. An access ramp of 12 feet wide was provided to the wetpool cell at a maximum grade of 15 percent. Draft Technical Information Report South 180th Street Grade Separation 10 April 1999 Existing • Proposed Pond Limits of drain area Station 56 +10 to 62 +70 Station 52 +08 to 62 +70 Pervious area 0.502 acre 0.000 acre Impervious area 0.909 acre 1.877 acres Two-year flow 0.44 cfs 0.83 cfs 0.43 cfs Ten -year flow 0.71 cfs 1.23 cfs 0.70 cfs Detention volume 3394 cf Right -of -way required 0.5 acre WaterWorks outputs are attached at the end of the section. Water Quality Roadway improvements will add 0.431 acre of roadway surface to the site. Water quality volume was determined for an area equal to 0.431 acre in Subbasin East using the method listed in the KCSWDM for basic wetpond. Computations for the required volume are attached at the end of this section. Combined Detention and Wetpond The new pond was designed using the guidelines listed in the KCSWDM for combined detention and wetpond with 3H:1V interior slopes, 2H:1V exterior slope, and 1 foot of freeboard. A permanent pool of water at the bottom of the pond will provide water quality treatment while a live storage at the upper level provides detention capacity. An emergency overflow was provided to discharge 100 -year flow for developed condition. An access ramp of 12 feet wide was provided to the wetpool cell at a maximum grade of 15 percent. Draft Technical Information Report South 180th Street Grade Separation 10 April 1999 SOUTH 180TH STREET GRADE SEPARATION DETENTION VOLUME (WaterWorks Outputs) Drainage Area: Existing Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd Peak Factor: 484.00 Storm Dur 24.00 hrs Area Pervious 0.5020 ac Impervious 0.9090 ac Total 1.4110 ac Supporting Data: Pervious CN Data: Impervious CN Data: Pervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Sheet Shallow Channel Channel Impervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Sheet Shallow Channel Channel CN 79.00 98.00 79.00 98.00 Loss Method: SCS Abs: TC 0.11 hrs 0.06 hrs 0.5020 ac 0.9090 ac Length: 20.00 ft 370.00 ft 200.00 ft 100.00 ft Length: 32.00 ft 370.00 ft 200.00 ft 100.00 ft SCS CN Number 0.20 Slope: 2.00% 2.00% 0.50% 2.00% Slope: 2.00% 2.00% 0.50% 2.00% TC of 3.63 min < 5 min, program will use a tc of 5 min in computations. 2 yr 10 yr Precipitation 2.0 in 2.9 in Drainage Area: Proposed Hyd Method: Peak Factor: Storm Dur SBUH Hyd 484.00 24.00 hrs Area Pervious 0.0000 ac Impervious 1.8770 ac Total 1.8770 ac Supporting Data: Impervious CN Data:. PAVED Impervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Sheet Shallow Channel Channel Flow 0.4392 cfs 0.7075 cfs CN 0.00 98.00 98.00 Time 7.83 hrs 7.83 hrs Loss Method: SCS Abs: TC 0.00 hrs 0.08 hrs 1.8770 ac Coeff: 0.1500 27.0000 42.0000 42.0000 Coeff: 0.0110 27.0000 42.0000 42.0000 Travel Time 3.42 min 1.61 min 1.12 min 0.28 min Travel Time 0.62 min 1.61 min 1.12 min 0.28 min Volume 6807.43 cf - 0.1563 acft 10840.58 cf - 0.2489 acft SCS CN Number 0.20 Length: Slope: Coeff: 32.00 ft 2.00% 0.0110 260.00 ft 5.00% 27.0000 180.00 ft 2.70% 42.0000 150.00 ft 0.50% 42.0000 TC of 2.61 min < 5 min, program will use a tc of 5 min in computations. Travel Time. 0.62 min 0.72 min 0.43 min 0.84 min Draft Technical Information Report South 180th Street Grade Separation 11 April 1999 Precipitation Flow Time Volume 2 yr 2.0 in 0.8290 cfs 8.00 hrs 12088.10 cf - 0.2775 acft 10-yr 2.9 in 1.2303 cfs 8.00 hrs 18182.18 cf - 0.4174 acft 100 yr 4.0 in 1.7162 cfs 8.00 hrs 25651.81 cf - 0.5889 acft RLPCOMPUTE [POND -3] SUMMARY 2 yr Match Q: 0.44 cfs Peak Out Q: 0.43 cfs, Peak Stg: 1.31 ft Active Vol: 2616.30 cf 10 yr Match Q: 0.71 cfs Peak Out 0: 0.70 cfs Peak Stg: 1.51 ft Active Vol: 3394.02 cf DISCHARGE [D -003] Lowest Orif Elev 0.5 ft Distance to 2nd orif. 0.45 ft Overflow opening: 0.5 ft x 1.5 ft Orifice dia. 5 in. Orifice dia. 3.5 in Draft Technical Information Report. South 180th Street Grade Separation 12 April 1999 E N G 1 N E E R S 1 N C. Pro_ S ign "1-14 ST. Subject .&TP GluALATY Sheet of Job Number Aog2. Designer Date A/ISicfq REF : KC_SWDN't a.4.1. I BASIC- WET PokLb VUETfOOL VOLUME E V = (0,61,4; 1- 0.2.S + O. I 't4 o.ot A0) umplAVi OiJ 0. .4 31 .4c = rg,774 SF A = A At = A0 R = 0,47 0 o,47 = 0,6y ( 18 , 774) X 6.6 CF I 2, V6 = VA 3 , Vb = 3x 6G 2- Draft Technical Information Report South 180th Street Grade Separation vo I wrn e- dorL. 1, GI cc. cF R 13 April 1999 Z 4.0 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN General The proposed conveyance system was analyzed and designed in accordance with the current guidelines listed in the KCSWDM. The Rational Method was used to compute peak discharges for all pipelines and to determine pump capacity. Table 2 shows the precipitation coefficients and calculated peak flows. Gutter flows and inlet spacing were determined by using the method listed in the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Hydraulics Manual. The Backwater Analysis method was used to analyze the new system to verify adequate capacity. Computations are attached at the end of this section. Table 2. Precipitation Intensity Coefficients for Rational Method Precipitation aR bR Flow 3.4 inches 2.66 0.65 4.626 cfs 4.0 inches 2.61 0.63 5.543 cfs Source: King County Surface Water Design Manual Runoff from South 180th Street will be collected by catch basins along the gutter on both sides of the roadway. No modifications are proposed for the off -site lines. Subbasin West 72nd Avenue South (Station 51 +00) to Station 52 +08 No modifications are proposed to the existing system west of 72nd Avenue South. The existing roadway storm sewer system east of the intersection must be removed. New catch basins and 12- inch pipe will collect and convey runoff from Station 52 +08 to the west. This system will be tied to the existing system on 72nd Avenue South. Subbasin East Station 52 +08 to. Springbrook Creek Culvert (Station 62 +70) Runoff will be collected by catch basins along the gutter on both sides of the roadway. The mainline of 12 -inch pipe will convey the flow to the underground pump station located approximately at Station 58 +15, under the sidewalk on the north side of the road. The station will have two pumps that alternate pumping the runoff. This allows for even wear on both pumps and provides for a backup pump during the maintenance or replacement of one pump. The runoff then will be pumped to the new stormwater facility located 50 feet north of South 180th Street and east of the tracks for water quality and water quantity control. Discharges from the new facility will be conveyed via 12- inch pipe under the existing driveway to Springbrook Creek. The existing system west of the culvert will be removed. Springbrook Creek Culvert (Station 62 +70) to End of Project (Station 66 +70) No major modifications are proposed to the existing system. New catch basins will be connected to the existing system on both sides of South 180th Street. Draft Technical Information Report South 180th Street Grade Separation 14 April 1999 /") BERGER/ABAM E N G I NEE R S I NC. Prow S. !LOT ST. Subject PEAK r LOW S Few nUVEYAI)CE Sheet_! d Job Number Aggora2 Designer Nt . D. Date 2/Z it frier REFERENCc KGSWDM RAT IONA L r= METHOD L A60kR�) bR aR T PL CIA L = 6.07 k4= 20 S = 0.027 A - I. gg aC'2L G = O.qO T = G07 (6o x2.0 x 0.0 7) = 3.O8. ri it. Ler T = 6 , 3 int,n,. FOR .25 -yR FOR 100 -YR o.65 I = Z . 66 �6.3) = 0, 804 I = 3.4 X 0.804. = 2.734 = o.gXZ734X1.8g = 4.626 CFS V = a.61 (6,3) �,G3 _ p,gIaI I - 4.0 X O,g t9 = 3.276 = 0,gx3,276X1.88 = 5,543 CFS Draft Technical Information Report South 180th Street Grade Separation 15 April 1999 BERGER /ABAM E N G I N E E R S 1 N C. Project Sheet d Job Number ,4 cRO 0.2 subject DRAI kJ44F Designer Ni D GuTTE2 rLOw Date 2111/l0/ REFEREJJC,F : wS1)OT 41)11). MANUAL- 5.4- ) 5, S 4'1 o,s 011,1 = q,S GI ae ETL = 0,12/ II ' TRAVELED LANE 5.5/ 9.5 0. l 9 0.19 x 5,5 `I.5 a < 0,12, OK C�. cu4S,b 0,11 Draft Technical Information Report South 180th Street Grade Separation 16 April 1999 180inlet.xl5 HIGHWAY DRAINAGE (English Units) T= 5 m = 6.89 n = 0.539 C = 0.9 I = 2.89384 (25-yr 24 -hour storm) GW = 1.67 Width= 38.5 (1/2 of roadway width + sidewalk) Project Name: S. 180th St. Grade Separation Project Number: A99002 S.R.: NA Designed By: MD Date: 2/11/99 dmax = Zmax = 0.19' (depth of flow at face of curb) 9.50' (from curb to 1/2 of lane) Sta. 1 Width 'Distance' Delta QJSum Q1 Slope I SuperIG.W.I d 1 Zd 1 V 1 Q bp 52 +00.00 - - -- - - - - - -- - - -- - - -- - -- 54 +60.00 38.5 260.00 0.598 0.598 0.0420 0.02 1.67 0.09 4.45 3.54 0.171 standard grate 56+40.00 38.5 180.00 0.414 0.585 0.0180 0.02 1.67 0.10 5.17 2.61 0.207 standard grate 57 +07.00 38.5 67.00 0.154 0.361 0.0020 0.02 1.67 0.13 6.51 1.04 0.164 standard grate 57 +27.57 38.5 20.57 0.047 0.211 0.0005 0.02 1.67 0.14 6.91 0.54 0.101 standard grate 62 +70.00 - - -- - - - - - -- - - -- - -- 59 +80.00 38.5 290.00 0.668 0.668 0.0430 0.02 1.67 0.09 4.62 3.69. 0.202 standard grate 58 +15.00 38.5 165.00 0.380 0.581 0.0180 0.02 1.67 0.10 5.16 2.61 0.205 standard grate 57+48.00 38.5 67.00 0.154 0.359 0.0020 0.02 1.67 0.13 6.50 1.04 .0.163 standard grate 57 +27.57 38.5 20.43 0.047 0.210 0.0005 0.02 1.67 0.14 6.89 0.54 0.100 standard grate Reference: WSDOT Hydraulics Manual 5.4, 5.5 Draft Technical Information Report South 180th Street Grade Separation 17 April 1999 A99002 - South 180th Street Grade Separation Backwater Calculation 25-yr 24-lrs Storm IN AREA BARREL VEL ENTR. EXIT OUTLET INLET APPR. BEND d)NC. STRUCT.8 DESIGN LAT. PIPE PIPE PIPE n Ke Kb K) OUT VEL d (Dot)/2 TW FRICT. ENTR. HEAD HEAD CONTROL CONTROL VEL HEAD HEAD HMI RIM FREE- TO • 02 01 03 SLZE LENGTH SLOPE ELEV. ELEV. HEAD (dr.) ELEV. LOSS HGL RL. LOSS LOSS ELEV. ELEV. HEAD LOSS LOSS ELEV. ELEV. BOARD (ds) (di) (ds) (r") (11) (N6) (6) (6L 01') (b/s) (11) (11) 110 (6) P9 (11) (6) (14 (6) P9 (6) (1A () (6) P.S. 12 2.018 2.018 0.000 12.00 70.00 0.006 0.012 0.5 0.01 0.00 .5.80 6.20 0.79 2.57 2.50 0.10 0.80 0.80 &000 0.189 8.19 0.05 010 8.34 7.11 0097 0.00 0.00 an 7.20 8.95 8.92) 0.70 1.72 12 10 1.987 1.967 0.000 12.00 20.00 0.005 0.012 0.5 0.01 0.00 .8.30 6.40 0.79 0.10 0.59 0.79 7.095 0.051 7.15 0.05 0.10 7.29 7.27 0092 0.00 000 10 8 1.916 1.916 0.000 12.00 20.00 0.005 0.012 0.5 0.01 0.00 8.50 6.80 0.79 2.11 0.09 0.58 0.79 7.291 0.049 7.34 0.05 0.09 7.48 7.50 0.071 0.00 0.00 7.42 &96 1.54 ' 8 6 1.749 1.149 0000 12.00 65.00 0.005 0.012 0.5 0.01 0.00 8.70 7.00 0.79 2.23 0.08 0.56 0.78 7.478 0.132 7.81 0.04 0.08 7.73 7.83 0.042 0.00 0.00 7.79 9.51 1.72 8 4 1.289 .1.289 0.000 12.00 180.00 0.023 0.012 0.5 0.01 0.00 7.10 11.30 0.79 1.84 0.04 0.48 0.74 7.838 0.199 8.04 0.02 0.04 8.10 11.98 0.000 0.00 0.00 11.98 14.68 2.70 P.S. 16 1.535 1.535 0.000 12.00 165.00 0.031 0.012 0.5 0.01 0.00 5.80 10.90 0.79 1.95 0.08 0.52 0.78 6560 0.258 6.82 0.03 0.08 8.91 11.86 0.000 0.00 0.00 11.66 14.26 2.80 Retsstoes: Keg Canty Surface Water Oeffipn Manuel, and WSOOT HHdaulics Mental 5.0 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES Because there are no new roadway developments proposed within the floodplain, a flood hazard study is not needed for this project. However, the project will impact the wetlands located within the project site thus impacting their flood storage capacity. The impacts to these wetlands will be analyzed in the following sections. See South 180th Street Grade Separation Wetlands Study, (BERGER/ABAM Engineers Inc., 1999) for detailed descriptions of the wetlands. The project proposes to fill part of the wetlands located between the existing tracks to construct the shooflies for the railroad tracks. Approximately 1.09 acres of Wetland B, which is located north of South 180th Street, will be filled. Assuming that the displaced volume of 170,000 cubic feet of water in this impacted area is added to the remaining of 24.5 acres of Wetland B and the connecting wetlands, the water level would be raised by 1.9 inches. This small change in water elevation will not create or aggravate any existing drainage problem in the Springbrook Creek floodplain. Wetland C, which is located between the existing tracks and south of South 180th Street will be completely filled. Because Wetland C is less than 0.1 acre in size, and its flood storage capacity is low, impacts to downstream flooding is minimal. A wetland mitigation plan was developed for the project to compensate for impacts on Wetland B and Wetland C at a ratio of 1.5 to 1 (area created to area impacted). The impacted flood storage capacity is thus compensated. Other Studies A geotechnical engineering report, studies of wetlands, streams, and wildlife were completed for this project. Draft Technical Information Report South 180th Street Grade Separation 19 April 1999 6.0 BASIN AND COMMUNITY PLAN AREAS Not applicable for this project. Draft Technical Information Report South 180th Street Grade Separation 20 April 1999 7.0 OTHER PERMITS The required permits needed for this project are listed below. Grading DFW HPA COE 404 JARPA Draft Technical Information Report South 180th Street Grade Separation 21 April 1999 8.0 EROSION /SEDIMENTATION CONTROL DESIGN A Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan will be submitted with the final construction plans to the City of Tukwila for approval with the construction permit application. At a minimum, filter fabric fences will be installed downslope of all construction areas and sediment traps will be used to protect new and existing catch basins. Further measures will be considered when construction methods and schedules are set. Draft Technical Information Report South 180th Street Grade Separation 22 April 1999 9.0 BOND QUANTITIES WORKSHEET, RETENTION/DETENTION FACILITY SUMMARY SHEET AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT Bond Quantities Worksheet The stormwater facilities will be bonded per the requirements of the City of Tukwila. Draft Technical Information Report South 180th Street Grade Separation 23 April 1999 10.0 MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS MANUAL A Maintenance and Operations Manual will be prepared for the stormwater facilities as outlined the KCSWDM. Draft Technical Information Report South 180th Street Grade Separation 24 April 1999 FRED N. SATTERSTROM, AICP PLANNING MANAGER CITY OF KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT MAILING ADDRESS: 220 4TH AVE. SO LOCATION ADDRESS: 400 W. GOWE KENT, WASHINGTON 98032 -5895 a�3 PHONE: ) 859 -3390 FAX: (206) 859 -3334 DIRECT LINE: (206) 859 -3362 laaaur- X13. 148 St S 150 St S 152 St }Z c=• , • 1-W C Ea O CD 0> M UW 0 Parkway S 164 St Strander Blvd PROJECT LOCATION Upland Drive Private Private S 180 St Minkler Blvd Segale Pk Dr D City of Tukwila Department of Public Works S 180 Street Grade Separation 2/8/00 Vicinity Map ITEM g -u =n ls= 11= 11::II— u— R— u— u— = 11- 11- 11 —,1 —., TYPICAL ROADWAY SECTION STA 51 +05 TO STA 52 +50* MEDIAN/ TURN LANE TYPICAL ROADWAY SECTION . STA 55 +502 TO STA 81 +702 8' CHAIN URN FENCE (BOTH SIDES) PRE CAP 8• CHAIN LINK FENCE DOSING 32• ROADWAY 32' HANDRAIL MOUNTED TO TOP OF WALL 10'. SIDEWALK CONNECTION TO INTERURBAN TRAIL 2'• I .ITY Im • I I 1 21< t L PRE FACADE 21< 0 �i'I b2t3 2 I ItI I G3 L�nl I I I+IIIti 2l II J I I+I I+I I+I i 1;2 +2 3 Lt _I. I' 1.•' ,j,..a: Z I .I% .;L IY .,.z. �..;�: • + • .:�; . � �..:I;: I,.)•;I;: 0 TYP FACE OF SECANT TYPICAL ROADWAY SECTION STA 52 +502 TO STA 55+502 • CURB. CUTTER. AND PAVEMENT FROM STATION 52 +75 TO 54+45 TYPICAL FILL SLOPES FOR OTHER AREAS I_= Ili �1-�1-1�-• - -1 11-11- •11=11 ;' I- II- II-•II-.II-11-II-II-II-II-.11-. TYPICAL ROADWAY SECTION STA 81 +702 TO STA 65 +50 OCEMENT CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER OFINISH COURSE. / -1/2• ASPHALT CONCRETE. CLASS 8 0 PRE -LEVEL 1 -1/Y ASPHALT CONCRETE. CLASS B O4. ASPHALT TREATED BASE (A.T.B.) 0 COMPACTED 9U8CRADE HANDRAIL MOUNTED TO TOP OF WALL RETAINING WALL. 00511NG GROUND • RETAINING WALL FROM STATOR 61 +60 TO STATION 63 +00. TYPICAL TILL SLOPES FOR REMAINING AREAS OA• CEMENT CONCRETE SIDEWALK 0 2• CRUSHED SURFAONC TOP COURSE O12 GRAVEL BASE OA' TOPSOIL & HYDROSEED LANH 0 GRAVEL BAO(FILL FOR DRAIN OVER IREMIE SEAL SEE DETAIL O 'L. , PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. o _ '-' - ENGINEERING - STREETS - WATER - SEWER- PARKS - BUILDING- +n " "` CONSULTANTS TYPICAL ROADWAY SECTIONS Figure 11 -I.Doc •�.-• zoo / r ........... 1L��\ HOR Engineering, Inc. r� eV SOUTH 180th STREET GRADE SEPARATION . - cL.P m•5 .. _ .1. ,.vino.. Oo(. RECEIVED NOV 0 6 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Ron Q Wn 014 � & RAC 140. 13.54 Inr IAC (4) 1041 - SOUTH 180TH STREET Apt Ni atom Wn NIO[a PA R -40 1( 6- SS 'eY OTHERS) I . 52 +45 9- *RANG W l. % �Ttsr7' REY r.. L 1 ' MEI RE PARK T EAS11N5 LOT PROPOSED RICHT Or WAY PROPOSED 12- WATER MAR/ (00 OTHERS Y • STA 50+00.00 - 221 N 154140 • 1120 E 1291357 RELOCA SONAL POLE MAST ARY 10¢ of MPIM.1 ss• •CO MCI PM 1001 STATION 50+10 BEGIN PROJECT LIMITS •NA WID SWN RY . 1044 IN 4Y 00 - 11.1E 40 IY08C (h -12.48 430 (1) - t1A m¢a AwL0_ • W '1 E SEAL OW ROADWAY , SECANT PILE RETAINING WALL PROPOSED WHO. GUTTER & ASPHALT CONCRETE PATCH IS 54113 PROPOSED 16- PM1lt GAS MAIN 430 1P1 (9Y OTHERS) 00 CONCRETE TRAIL ~PROP /T OF WAY TO INTERURBAN 1RAIL /r Z EASING :GROUND 10 TG • 0 1:(11) • Pk�i1lE : : 500 (W' ROWE Au WM: 360'' 11C i< � ':::::::: a• i .xi:�$ 82z Qi1N1511E0 PROiRE:.Wpm ����K PRgs05[D:IiALXWALL .. �� PROPO61r�.WAIER:■■ .S;i: 3, •){ .. .. MEE GAS: YAIKS LRNiEC IO- EASfIRC: YAWS � ����� IN .. NNW • 52:5053 00 51 00 ... PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. — ENGINEERING — STREETS —WATER —SEW ER —PARKS — BUILDING- M 0W CONSULTANTS ,DY OP Cff OP 1 11 411 4 1/ 4 1 4 6 Hi HOR Engineering, Inc. PLAN AND PROFILE — SHEET 1 SOUTH 1 80th STREET GRADE SEPARATION . NER DATU Y:: NAND 988: imions Figure 13 Re no PP -ID•G' ecole 1•-20':1• -5/ dole L11/99 RECEIVED NOV 0 6 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT —I Paz 1Dr PROPOSED 12' WATER MAN (BY OTHERS RDD PROPOSED at G[9Dl aua UPME.'.'.1 TRAFFIC BARAIkTi:.'.') MEAT TYPE µ' •'.,:.% 11 I - A.P-' STA 56l4ftJ6 . ..#_ : i**iii iri TiMONW: Dao 11 SIM �;:.. +1••.• =v.:: ••„O • S7: W111�L• w{VV SLID ��!�n w. •� ,moo III• BU0.OING r 0 _ _ _ PROPOSED {IIBJURB - I eE RFL• �� TRAIL BRIDGE PROPOSED 16' f0' CONCRETE CAS MAT! - n CONSTRUCT e (BY OTHERS) N9mK wugTa µ BR6)GE APPROACH D RIG1/T OP AY ir:D BA N BRGE TO BE RELOCATED ONTO TRA W 2 PROPOSED CURB. W ASPHALT CONCRETE ELAN DIPACT ATTENUATOR.' TYP MENEM-MEE �::ItU10C {SO' NC! VAKINIMMERNEEMISMEME MEMIELIEMEN MIEMEMEN. Ell 1 . "Mil EsfigLE . 1iA EMENERIMEEMEEM rv8VM • M UNDEP :::FR.91*E0-WATE TIMMEMARESSELVIIIIIMIMMIE MEE S.. -6-57ZET'RE:776-0-- 16 HOPE 10 20 1 C. EL (11) Q PROFILE.. T.C. EL (RT): MOLE 10.62 SBf VERTIC 1L: DATUM: NASD 1966' 59 06 PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. — ENGINEERING — STREETS— WATER— SEWER — PARKS - BUILDING- CONSULTANTS �aB /A aA Dili\ HOR Engineering. Inc PLAN AND PROFILE — SHEET 2 SOUTH 1 80th STREET GRADE SEPARATION feviaions 0 1 Figure 14 N. no PP -2.DwC scale r- zD:r ■s' Ease 7./23/99 RECEIVED NOV 0 6 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 5 5 I -PROPOSED I2-,. WATER RAN ar/, 8 (91eo1HER5) t2 . (q • O. PROPOSED RIGHT Cr WAY SECANT PILE WALL Port K tar SECANT PRE WALL BENEATH DRIVEWAY O1W Inn WISE OUTLET TO IDLE OF SUER J sou or PRR . 4 ` SPPoNGBRROK CREEK I 1 I 1 REYOat BOX GuL As Naa1 a. TO CONS CT WINE SEAL BAIXWALL ANA ,S— IREYIE SEAL rwuc ■a• ��- BELOW ROADWAY — - D011RtrfS REBR .cr -m.m_ 111mm�: =� • - _� Ita • 010. "ir ".s = t ' WPM!�ili�►Ii 1 - 1 • • • ■ GAS MAN 8c e1-2- 08117 -7 (BY OTHERS) . 6- PERFORATED DRAIN PIPE CANT PILE 111 PK NO MC 1i SANTARY '•Y OTHERS) A G BASIN SOUTH IROTTT STRRRT 6h �� r■.-71. �;= -7�n-_. -- :ice APPROX EXIS ._ ^i •. ., BURRO BO% a a a' w! /�� - C eln 2 t SANT SEWER TYPE 1 MOT ■ If, a (FORCE MAIN) RETAINING WALL Y11tlO I \ PROPOSED RIGHT t WAY PILEIWALL APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF ORt&EWAY CREEM OVERFLOW (EL 22.0) SANITARY SERER UFT STATION (BY OTHERS) SECANT BEREA PR ELAN • 4 3 2 650 110 PROPOSES MATER. AND CAS RAIN UNDER 'OR WADE: :': iiiI1.■ . A MOE Via' = E ...: ;1! :. :t�'.RPoSIICDI ks: *$st:� ■ etwillimmigintsmoramt_e_ 11111111tallirtA -id ... . _ley LF la t m r TBA O E I RN u C1W G - MEE EOM PROFILE j :25,27 62450 no uc - TICAL)::: RCP..... ... 0 28-36 :V£RSC1L SATUY N4110 :1996 .: T.0 EL (LT)! F RO[XE.. YC EL (81): PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. — ENGINEERING — STREETS — WATER— SEWER — PARKS— BUILDING- 81 dram MI +.+..a -w CONSULTANTS -- 0* r ai • Gil' Wa. VON 11..111012 122,12 REM 1121. 12,21212211 .02412 1M NOR Engineering. Inc. PLAN AND PROFILE — SHEET 3 SOUTH 1 80th STREET GRADE SEPARATION evknone RECEIVED NOV 0 6 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. Figure 115 r,e no PP -3.094 enne t'- 2P.1•.S� dale 2/23/99 2 RETAIN EXISTING 4DEWALX 4 •N SCRII ICY - 75 NS 1' WRO RW/CE t WOOD MCC CAW POSTS Cr IOI . N.Q • •Y 65+00 WN Cw(0- 21.2 68 +00 • • 00 --06 R'0 00- _'13W 2L2_ • SW 43RD ST (S 180T70 RETAIN EXISTING SIDEWALK CDR Or INN 0) 5C 11 -2- 00117 -7 ... !!.. 7 - .11.76 •M e'r7c �- . 17.13 W 17.37 PLAN STATION 66+70 END PROJECT LIMITS 10 (MI CERN CONSTRUE GI Q:F104107. PRRILE • • 0.9X: ... COW PU1NE a'6KRLAK ..... ..� WOBN ROADWAY EDGES::: CS = -8... •1.1• m��^2 • • . {•s. ..W +rte El zs,s1 is S Ni DOSDNG GROUND 30 20 N ii (I • ICU' Ir'Ie i 10 269 ..2549— .. . : 64150: APPROX 0055 :38' HOPE - 2559.... YS.75-.. ... ... -' ...: 7510 :..: i ".J: 25.22 ..... ... .... BSt00 65+50 • :: 66 • :.... .... .... ..66450:: : :. 87 00.:::::'. ... ..67 +50 . pROFlLE -68 -90 . ... . • ...T.C. 1: (L1) t• PROFILE • T.G' "L' (RT) VERDOAL: DATUM : NAM). 7958 O , PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. - ENGINEERING - STREETS - WATER- SEWER - PARKS - BUILDING - • " CONSULTANTS LTANTS PLAN AND PROFILE — SHEET 4 Figure 16 no N•PP- .OWE +...e ... � Z NDR Engineering, Inc" .W ..I ., GLP C• /�M F W W 1 a ....... ....11-ma SOUTH 1 80th STREET GRADE SEPARATION >Y a rite scale 1•- 20•:1• -: NI0 ra _ rN. ratta.nW dote 2fl3,09 RECEIVED Nov 0 6 2000 NITY DEVECOMMULOPMENT =t07tO r.. z\ 1 ri- 1 COMBINED DETENTION AND WETPOND IJ CANT PILE WALL BENEATH DRIVEWAY au. VW MCI fl rrx TBDrx FMB!! • GAS M,. fs ` I ,f�`� SC u- i-arn_ (BY OTHERS) �� +i•✓1_ >' = PE�IiFORAIED ... � MAIN � � DRAW PIPE `CANT PIU: ` ) RE - NING �I Y I:i iuoi ' BYrATHE � 25E 1 �',IIIII 7 .� / AnoH of i. CREEK O �+` f (EL 2 PROP. S'N Y ��� F7 STAnON . ERSY MM6ACT ATTENUATOR. TIP r Illr ,■III ( _ - — —2a— — ELM. C 11 0 ' °°° PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. — ENGINEERING— STREETS — WATER— SEWER — PARKS— BUILDING — ../ ` CONSULTANTS DRAINAGE & DETENTION POND SITE Figure 17 �. no »+.-� �/q u` °. °- - ° °° H]. MDR Engineennq, Inc. a,ya SOUTH 1 80th STREET GRADE SEPARATION or* ... _ ,„. r..,.„n. dote RECEIVED NOV 0 6 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT /~ '| '/ ' I // / —________-________`��� ~ . / ~/' STA/,55+39.54 '/ / / '' s/180m STREET 55-4:00 n / � ' /�| ! Y�\|�/| / ..' . | / III \' || ' ` F | ~~ TRACK 1 |���s�w ^ ��n �n� / --`- BRIDGE) ! | / \ ‘‘.4] \\ . _-__ __--- ` [�] 1., \\�F`- [--- ||/ -- -- � /m/ � |/U1 -``"' 11! � ' i // '' | || . . | !/ . i /. DEPT. o -""CI"""=NG-ST""","-°°,""-""°""-~^"""-""."DIN=- • `��' � ~~ CONSULTANTS INTERURBAN TRAIL BRIDGE LAYOUT SHEET 1 Figure 18 _ ~_ ------�� �=—=m== ����*,�^w�^~� SOUTH 1 80th STREET GRADE SEPARATION �� �� �� �.. -.. _-~ RECEIVED NOV - 6 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BRG 61' -0•t - BRG 7-PRE- FABRICATED STEEL BRIDGE AIM AMMO 1 =11 =11. FASCIA WALL CURB & SIDEWALK 2X 0 15' -o- LANE & SHOULDER I 1I' —o' LANE �- 2x 17 —Cr TURN LANE - 16' -6' MITI. CLEARANCE 1P -o• 15• -0' 6'-6' PAVEMENT 0 !ti TREMIE SEAL INTERURBAN TRAIL BRIDGE ELEVATION (STA 55 +40 ±) 1ar -o' ax 50 -0' VERTICAL CURVE 0 MATCH EXISTING GRADE ax R UNDERPASS ROADWAY MATCH EXISTING GRADE- INTERURBAN TRAIL BRIDGE PROFILE SECANT PILE WALL SECTION H C II u K.IL, ,PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. '.'♦ _ - ENGINEERING - STREETS - WATER- SEWER- PARKS - BUILDING- ,.s 9 •: CONSULTANTS INTERURBAN TRAIL BRIDGE LAYOUT — SHEET 2 Figure 19 .. ,o5 -1DWn �+.-• KIR Engineering, Inc. -N.. -,3 SOUTH 1 80th STREET GRADE SEPARATION s,sl r .tale » ... r.•. «.. scale RECEIVED NOV 0 6 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 8 A 8 A 8 8 R : R 1 8 8 8 30 — 20 — 10- 0- - 10 - - 20— NORTH WALL ELEVATION VIEW (SOUTH WALL SIMILAR) O SECTION R BOTTOM OF SECANT PILE WALL 6 CO DRUM SHAFT Mg PRIMARY PIES (TTP) I 10 DRILLED SHAFT SECONDARY PRES (TYP) PRECAST 411! Qi CDNETE PANEL (FASCIA WALL) s i SECANT PILE WALL PLAN CLI 0 H PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. — ENGI NEERI NG— STREETS — WATER— SEW ER— PARKS— BUILDING- M A6 CW ILA CONSULTANTS olooloal OP Ma.. c. Poi W DU. I... .&4 Fill MDR Engineering, Inc. SECANT PILE WALL LAYOUT & DETAILS SOUTH 1 80th STREET GRADE SEPARATION Figure 20 T10 no5 -1.01K rovosono dol. RECEIVED NOV 0 6 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT C, STUN 4V -6' 41' -6' PILE CAP 6' -6' 15' -0' CURB & SIDEIWALX LANE & SHOULDER 4' -0' 0 SECANT PILE WALL 0 H U • PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. ? ` , — ENGINEERING — STREETS— WATER — SEWER— PARKS— BUILOING —� . ` " CONSULTANTS . BRIDGE ELEVA710N Figure 23 Me s. .w.. ....-S. �� '� MI MDR Engineering. Inc. �.. SOUTH 180th STREET GRADE SEPARATION ti • - ... �, •Y•- dab RECEIVED Nov 0 6 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 110'+ EXIST UP TRACK 1 3 SHOOFLY TRACKS 53' MIN. EXIST. GROUND LINE ® PGL EXIST BNSF TRACK 1 EXIST BNSF TRACK 2 SECANT PILE WALL H 0 PUBLIC WORKS DEPT• �♦ 1 A. — ENGINEERING — STREETS— WATER — SEWER— PARKS — BUILDING — CONSULTANTS BASELINE ALTERNATIVE — 3 SHOOFLY TRACKS Figure 26 no o 6+-4 �weanN��' `e �« ° °� HDR Engineering, Inc. asked SOUTH 180th STREET GRADE SEPARATION �: W.. _ «..Oats; RECEIVED NOV 0 6 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 110'+ EXIST UP TRACK 1 EXIST. GROUND 1— LINE @ POI EXIST BNSF TRACK 1 G EXIST BNSF TRACK 2 SOUND TRANSIT TRACK ETraii.K7V4AEgikA JERSEY S.180th St. BARRIER, PGL TYP. SECANT PILE WALL 1 a H O E� U _PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. — ENGINEERING — STREETS— WATER — SEWER— PARKS — BUILDING — • .. dn. CON SULTAN TS PIER ELEVATION: ALTERNATIVE 103 Figure 27 �• no •++ t MI HDREnQIneeArq.Ic. ewer .r SOUTH 1 80th STREET GRADE SEPARATION ,.. "" r.. ,Or.. dots RECEIVED NOV 0 6 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT V..JV I.J.VV 1 I.VV 1 I.VV 1/ ) ..0..+.•• CFS, • 17 1 , =a: 1747 El .7t "a wi . ' • sarieli I 11.. :3 Nei S 164TH ST • ••••••••-•=1. •-•■-• s •.• • .• • '• • .• S 168TH ST t Industrial 3 avy Industrial PRoec-r- 1-ocknori v4 (TR I coo Pr gAbILAS MaTacr Loc ArrIbln.1 wiTi4 boo r 4I L'S inferno/lona/ Airport J) 5 188 ST CITY OF KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN NORTH SCALE: 1"=4000' THIS MAP IS INTENDED RS RN RIO IN GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION ONLT RNO IS NOT R LEGAL 00CUMENT. LEGEND p1=F11 ram 1111111111 A a 1EVArAll POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA CITY LIMITS AGRICULTURAL OPEN SPACE COMMUNITY FACILITY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SF-1 ONE UNIT/ACRE MAXIMUM SP-3 THREE UNITS/ACRE MAXIMUM SF-8 SIX UNITS/ACRE MAXIMUM SF-8 EIGHT UNITS/ACRE MAXIMUM MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY MULTIFAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIFAMILY MOBILE HOME PARK COMMERCIAL AND MIXED USE COMMERCIAL CITY CENTER MIXED USE MIXED, LIMITED MULTIFAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES INDUSTRIAL INDUSTRIAL MAPACTURING CENTER COUNTY RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATIONS URBAN RESIDENTIAL 1 UNIT/ACRE URBAN RESIDENTIAL 4-12 UNITS/ACRE URBAN RESIDENTIAL 12+ UNITS/ACRE IJA\D LS FIGURE 4.7 PLAN MAP : LANDUSE TMLU -BW.DW CITY OF RENTON COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN • - $:;:■:+4 • : • • • , • • • • • • • ; • 141 1111: 46;1.21.PH6. vvvuvv 2:gggg goal:10000 Ong IllhIIIIIIJIIIIII RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATIONS Low Density Single Family Single Single Family Residential — 8 du/ac Family/Up to 4 Units Mix Existing Multi—Family District Planned Neighborhood CENTER DESIGNATIONS Mixed Use — City Core Community Center Neighborhood Center Office/Residential Center Institution Center EMPLOYMENT AREA DESIGNATIONS Employment Area Employment Area Employment Area — Commercial — Industrial — Office MISCELLANEOUS DESIGNATIONS Convenience Commercial City Limits — — Sphere of Influence 0 5500 11000 : • 1:66,000 17 June, 1993 Figure 1 Page 2-3 0 0 e 0 0 0 8 0 0 8 u 8 a 8 N 00 m 0 0 00 m 0 0 e 00 0 0 0 + 00 0 0 + + 0 0 a 1 32.2 0 0 0 31.3 30.2 • 4 0 0 29.4 28.8 28.6 28.5 28.8 0 BVCS: 1 +26.32 28.62 BVCE: 28.49 28.9 27.76 28.8 26.40 28.7 24.41 28.8 21.81 29.5 • 131. EVCE: 21 18.81 30.7 15.81 32.1 BVCS: 14+83.81 BVCE: 13.78 12.85 33.3 10.45 34.0 8.77 34.0 7.82 33.6 7.60 33.5 8.11 32.5 r 6 y F 4. x Z1= • 4 DEP 0 N o-. 4 < O u • O 1 to. + V O U !0 u 9.34 31.3 11.29 29.5 EVCS: 16 +96.81 13.97 27.8 idCE 111971814.79 BVCE: 14.86 16.87 26.6 ' 19.37 25.9 21.45 25.6 23.12 25.6 24.36 25.6 25.20 25.6 EVQS: 22 +33.40 $ EVCE: 25.52 26.0 26.3 0 0 0 • 1 1 1 1 w=•1111•21, 11