Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Permit L08-022 - CITY OF TUKWILA - TUKWILA 205 LEVEE REPAIR SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT
TUKWILA 205 LEVEE REPAIR SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT Site 3 - 6801 S 180 St Site - 5 1800 APW L08 -022 June 30, 2008 0 Gity of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor Department of Community Development NOTICE OF DECISION TO: Ryan Larson, Sr. Engineer, Tukwila Dept. of Public Works, Applicant La Pianta, Owner Lily Pointe Investments, Owner First Interstate Bank, Kirkland, Owner King County Assessor, Accounting Division Washington State Department of Ecology Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, Fisheries Division Jack Pace, Director This letter serves as a notice of decision and is issued pursuant to TMC 18.104.170 on the following project and permit approval. Project File Number: L08 -022 Applicant: I. PROJECT INFORMATION City of Tukwila, Dept. of Public Works, Attn: Ryan Larson; Sr. Engineer Type of Permit Applied for: SHORELINE MANAGEMENT Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Project Description: Location: Associated Files` Comprehensive Plan Designation/Zoning District: Emergency repairs to COE certified levee in two locations that were damaged by storm events of November, 2006: Both levee repair sites will be laid back at a 2.5:1 slope overall and reconfigured to incorporate a bench that will be planted next spring with native vegetation and trees. SE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 35, Township 23 North, Range 4 East and the SW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 36 Township 23 North, Range 4 East. E08 -006 Site 5: High Intensity and Tukwila Urban Center; Site 3: Tukwila Urban Center H. DECISION SEPA Determination: The City SEPA Responsible Official has previously: IX determined that the project, as proposed, does not create a probable significant environmental impact and issued a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS). CL Q:205 Levee Repairs \L08 -022 Notice of Decision Page 1 of 2 06/30/2008 11:32:00 AM 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 =3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 =3665 • • Notice of Decision L08 -022, 205 Levee Repairs Decision on Substantive Permit: The City of Tukwila Community Development Director has determined that the application for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit does comply with applicable City and state code requirements and has approved that application based on the findings and conclusions contained in the staff report. The Decision on this Permit Application is a Type 2 decision pursuant to Tukwila Municipal Code §18.104.010. Other land use applications related to this project may still be pending. III. YOUR APPEAL RIGHTS One administrative appeal to the Shorelines Hearings Board of the Decision is permitted. Any person appealing to the Shorelines Hearings Board may raise certain SEPA issues as part of the appeal to the Shorelines Hearings Board. Appellants should consult the rules and procedures of the Shorelines Hearings Board for details. IV. PROCEDURES AND TIME FOR APPEALING The requirements and procedures for appeals to the Shorelines Hearings Board are set forth in RCW 90.58 and WAC 461.08. V. INSPECTION OF INFORMATION ON THE APPLICATION Project materials including the application, any staff reports, and other studies related to the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit are available for inspection at the Tukwila Department of Community Development, 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100, Tukwila, Washington 98188 from Monday through Friday between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. The project planner is Carol Lumb, who may be contacted at 206 - 431 -3661 for further information. Property owners affected by this decision may request a change in valuation for their property tax purposes. Contact the King County Assessor's Office for further information regarding property tax valuation changes. The notice board must be removed at the expiration of the appeal period unless an appeal is filed. amilC lam/ Department of Community Development City of Tukwila CL Page 2 of 2 06/30/2008 11:32:00 AM Q:205 Levee Repairs\L08 -022 Notice of Decision _ °l J uftwita Dept. Of Community Development AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION 4 lQ r r 6Ved911 I HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Project Name: co T �i °�6.O,C'.L C.r_.e/I S' ` .-1/ee, ' f Project Number: LC 5 - C)�� Notice of Public Hearing Mailer's signature: ///'y' //,'72x_107/V4JeV Determination of Non - Significance Notice of Public Meeting Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Board of Appeals Agenda Packet Notice of Action Planning Commission Agenda Packet Official Notice Short Subdivision Agenda Notice of Application Shoreline Mgmt Permit X Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit _ FAX To Seattle Times Classifieds Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111 A Other: (10 /� (7� 6426l5 Was mailed to each of the addresses listed/attached on this / day of in the year 20 K.) g9 X-C/AROv 'et, eg p/, v �V42300 CE ti ►t) "9,,, &' s- - ?.eir (il -Dz®g &ailvrey ` gS llg. Project Name: co T �i °�6.O,C'.L C.r_.e/I S' ` .-1/ee, ' f Project Number: LC 5 - C)�� Mailing requested by: 2' X,7//9---A) Mailer's signature: ///'y' //,'72x_107/V4JeV C: \DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS \TERI- S\DESKTOP\AFFIDAVftOF DISTRIBUTION.DOC I CH111 LIST: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW /SHORELINE PIT MAILINGS • FEDERAL AGENCIES .S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ( ) FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION ( ) DEPT OF FISH & WILDLIFE () U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY \ () U.S. DEPT OF H.U.D. !f QC) NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE MAMAN. P4uitGs ;ivy,/ WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES ( ) OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY ( ) TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ( ) DEPT NATURAL RESOURCES ( ) OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR ( ) DEPT OF COMM. TRADE & ECONOMIC DEV. ( ) DEPT OF FISHERIES & WILDLIFE () DEPT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERV. N DEPT OF ECOLOGY, SHORELAND DIV, NW Regional Office ( ) DEPT OF ECOLOGY, SEPA DIVISION* '(OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL SEND CHKLIST W/ DETERMINATIONS * SEND SITE MAPS WITH DECISION KING COUNTY AGENCIES ( ) BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD ( ) FIRE DISTRICT #11 ( ) FIRE DISTRICT #2 ( ) K.C. WASTEWATER TREATMENT DIVISION ( ) K.C. DEPT OF PARKS & REC ( ) K.C. ASSESSORS OFFICE ( ) TUKWILA SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) TUKWILA LIBRARY ( ) RENTON LIBRARY ( ) KENT LIBRARY () CITY OF SEATTLE LIBRARY ( ) QWEST ( ) SEATTLE CITY LIGHT ( ) PUGET SOUND ENERGY ( ) HIGHLINE WATER DISTRICT ( ) SEATTLE WATER DEPARTMENT ( ) COMCAST SCHOOLS /LIBRARIES UTILITIES CITY AGENCIES ( ) KENT PLANNING DEPT ( ) TUKWILA CITY DEPARTMENTS: e�Q PUBLIC WORKS ( ) FIRE 0/ \ O POLICE ( ) FINANCE () PLANNING ( ) BUILDING ( ) PARKS & REC. () MAYOR ( ) CITY CLERK OTHER LOCAL AGENCIES ( ) PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL ( ) SW K C CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ( ) MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE () CULTURAL RESOURCES PROGRAM ** \1) :(q,FISHERIESPROGRAM**r- p*r1 Y,dn/?.& tAka4°r✓ V () WILDLIFE PROGRAM **Send SEPA Checklist and full set of plans w/ NOA MEDIA ( ) SEATTLE TIMES ( ) SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL ( ) HEALTH DEPT ( ) PORT OF SEATTLE () K.C. DEV & ENVIR SERVICES -SEPA INFO CNTR ( ) K.C. TRANSIT DIVISION - SEPA OFFICIAL (K.C. LAND & WATER RESOURCES OW. Pr tt L - upc')c, ( ) FOSTER LIBRARY () K C PUBLIC LIBRARY ( ) HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) OLYMPIC PIPELINE ( ) VAL -VUE SEWER DISTRICT ( ) WATER DISTRICT #20 ( ) WATER DISTRICT #125 ( ) CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS ( ) BRYN MAWR - LAKERIDGE SEWER/WATER DISTRICT ( ) RENTON PLANNING DEPT ( ) CITY OF SEA -TAC ( ) CITY OF BURIEN ( ) TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS ( ) TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ( ) CITY OF SEATTLE - SEPA INFO CENTER - DCLU ( ) STRATEGIC PLANNING OFFICE* * NOTICE OF ALL SEATTLE RELATED PLNG PROJ. ?UWAMISH INDIAN TRIBE* ) P.S. AIR POLLUTION CLEAN AGENCY ( ) SOUND TRANSIT ( ) DUWAMISH RIVER CLEAN -UP COALITION* * SEND NOTICE OF ALL APPLICATIONS ON DUWAMISH RIVER ( ) HIGHLINE TIMES ( ) CI.TUKWILA.WA.US.WWW Q(w "i (o ulna-✓) - ?,,-- no A 3kV tom✓w4- SO 01/19r , P:\ADMINISTRATIVE \FORMS \CHECKLIST.DOC GutteAte0A/ PAC NOTICE MAILINGS FOR PETS • SEPA MAILINGS Mail to: (comment period starts on date of mailing) Dept. of Ecology Environmental Review Section *Applicant *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list) *Any parties of record * send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination KC Transit Division — SEPA Official would like to receive information about all projects that might affect transit demand Send These Documents to DOE: SEPA Determination (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report, usu. with MDNS) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed or sent to newspaper) SHORELINE MAILINGS: Notice of Application for a Substantial Development Permit must be mailed to owners and to property owners within 500 feet of subject property, comments are due 30 days after the notice of application is mailed/posted. The notice of Application for Shoreline Substantial Development Permit must include a statement that any person desiring to submit written comments on the application or desiring to receive notification of the fmal decision on the application may do so within 30 days of the notice of application. If a hearing will be held on the application, the hearing notice must include the information that written comments may be submitted, or oral presentation made at the hearing. Notice is sent to the NW Regional Office Shorelands & Environmental Assistance Program. Shoreline Permit Notice of Decision: Mail to: (within 8 days of decision; 21 -day appeal period begins date received by DOE) Department of Ecology Shorelands Section, NW Regional Office State Attorney General *Applicant *Indian Tribes *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list). *Any parties of record * send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination Send These Documents to DOE and Attorney General: Permit Data Sheet Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report or memo) Shoreline Permit Application Form (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) — Site plan, with mean high water mark & improvements - Cross- sections of site with structures & shoreline - Grading Plan — Vicinity map SEPA determination (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report or memo) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Any background studies related to impacts on shoreline Notice of Application Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed) P: \ ADMINISTRATIVE \FORMS \CHECKLIST.DOC CHECKLIST: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW /SHORELINE PERMIT MAILINGS U. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ( ) FED _ - • L HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION () DEPT • FISH & WILDLIFE ( ) OFFICE OF AR. HAEOLOGY ( ) TRANS ORTATION DEPARTMENT FEDERAL AGENCIES ( ) U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY \ ` () U.S. DEPT OF H.U.D. �I , r■`NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE ab .'. �k1U1 11/2,rS WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES () DEPT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERV. 1>6 DEPT OF ECOLOGY, SH`OR Office �-t' - f Kca% j,pEPT OF ECOLOGY, SEPA DIV : ION* ( ) OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENE L * SEND CHKLIST W/ DETERMI TIONS * SEND SITE MAPS WITH DEC - ION ( ) DEPT NATURAL RES ( ) OFFICE OF THE GOVE ( ) DEPT OF COMM. TRADE ( ) DEPT OF FISHERIES & WIL URCES OR ECONOMIC DEV. LIFE BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD FIRE DISTRICT #11 FIRE DISTRICT #2 K.C. WASTEWATER TREATMENT DIVISI K.C. DEPT OF PARKS & REC KING COUNTY AGENCIES D DIV NW Regional () HEALTH DEPT ( ) PORT OF SEATTL ( ) K.C. DEV & ENV N () K.C. TRANSIT () K.C. LAND & �1 K.C. ASSESSOR'S OFFICE C. t�r� '•'6 Mao;. (Q'&.,t' SCHOOL 9.4 OA 3QSj ( ) TUKWILA SCHOOL DISTRICT DI q� S j () TUKWILA LIBRARY ( ) RENTON LIBRARY () KENT LIBRARY ( ) CITY OF SEATTLE LIBRARY ( ) QWEST ( ) SEATTLE CITY LIGHT ( ) PUGET SOUND ENERGY ( ) HIGHLINE WATER DISTRICT ( ) SEATTLE WATER DEPARTMENT ()COMCAST () KENT PLANNING DEPT 12•10.01-0414411 PUBLIC WORKS KWILA CITY DEPARTMENTS: ( ) POLICE ( ) PLANNING () PARKS & REC. ( ) CITY CLERK /LIBRARIES SERVICES -SEPA INFO CNTR SION - SEPA OFFICIAL ATER RESOURCES ( ) FO R LIBRARY () K ' PUBLIC LIBRARY () . GHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT UTILITIES OLYMPIC PIPELINE () AL -VUE SEWER DISTRICT () TER DISTRICT #20 ( ) W TER DISTRICT #125 ( ) CI OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS ( ) BRY WR- LAKERIDGE SEWERNVATER DISTRICT RE FINANCE BUILDING MAYOR AGENCIES OTHER LOCAL AGENCIES ( ) PUGET SOU REGIONAL COUNCIL '\ SW K C C BER OF COMMERCE • MUCKLE OOT INDIAN TRIBE ( ) CU RAL RESOURCES PROGRAM** WWN�r HERIES PROGRAM 41fN ( ) WILDLIFE PROGRAM 14011/ Gotco I e **Send SEPA Checklist and full set of plans w/ NO ( ) SEATTLE TIMES ( ) SOUTH COUNTY JOURNA Dt45 4- . "►4.S () RENTON P ( ) CITY OF SEA- () CITY OF BURI ( ) TUKWILA PLAN ( ) TUKWILA CITY C ( ) CITY OF SEATTLE - ( ) STRATEGIC PLANNI * NOTICE OF ALL SEATTL NNING DEPT AC G COMMISSION MEMBERS NCIL MEMBERS EPA INFO CENTER - DCLU OFFICE* RELATED PLNG PROJ. ( ) DUWAMISH INDIAN TRIBE* ( ) P.S. AIR POLLUTION CLEAN A ENCY ( ) SOUND TRANSIT () DUWAMISH RIVER CLEAN -UP C LITION* SEND NOTICE OF ALL APPLICATIONS 0 DUWAMISH RIVER MEDIA P:\ADMINISTRATIVE\FORMS \CHE ST.DOC ( ) HIGHLINE TIMES ( ) CI.TUKWILA.WA.US.WWW PO 6cy goo 2S P lGt,n A\ J ice✓ wa ti 3 Pbut+1 ZN,uo a r5 -i 12--g w es £ b✓ trurir /��°�. - (WA '- ((Li tLM -%-rL 7C at i co 3ai S _ Saw,. f sc cn- v, �( li✓3 City ail/Tukwila • Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 Web site: http: / /www.ci.tukwila.wa.us SHORELINE MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1971 PERMIT FOR SHORELINE MANAGEMENT SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT File Number: L08 -022 Applied: 04/03/2008 Approved: 06/30/2008 Expiration: 07/01/2010 A permit is hereby granted to: TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. to: SHORELINE PERMIT FOR EMERGENCY LEVY REPAIR WORK TO BE CONSTRUCTED BY U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS. Upon the following property: Address: 6845 S 180 ST TUKW Parcel Number: 3623049017 Section/Township /Range: The following master program provisions are applicable to this development: 2. Protect public health & safe 8. Improve aquatic habitat Development under this permit shall comply with the following conditions. This permit is granted pursuant to the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 and nothing in this permit shall excuse the applicant from compliance with any other Federal, State or local statutes, ordinances or regulations applicable to this project, but not inconsistent with the Shoreline Management Act (Chapter 90.58 RCW). This permit may be rescinded pursuant to RCW 90.58.140(8) in the event the permittee fails to comply with the project as approved and any conditions thereof. CONSTRUCTION PURSUANT TO THIS PERMIT MAY NOT BEGIN AND IS NOT AUTHORIZED UNTIL TWENTY -ONE (21) DAYS FROM THE DATE OF FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY (D.O.E.) AS DEFINED IN RCW 90.58.140(6) AND WAC 173 -14 -090, OR UNTIL ALL REVIEW PROCEEDINGS INITIATED WITHIN TWENTY -ONE (21) DAYS FROM THE DATE OF SUCH FILING HAVE TERMINATED; EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN RCW 90.58.140(5)(a)(b)(c). Pursuant to RCW 90.58.180 the decision by the City of Tukwila to issue this Shoreline Substantial Development Permit may only be appealed to the Shoreline Hearing Board. Appeals must be filed with the Shorelines Hearing Board within 21 -days from the filing of this permit with D.O.E. as defined in RCW 90.58.140. For more detail information on appeals, refer to RCW 90.58 and WAC 461.08. 300Q Date: Jack ; ace, Director of Department of Community Development Construction or substantial progress toward construction must begin within two (2) years from the effective date of the permit (the date the permit is filed with D.O.E.), per RCW 90.58.143(4). doc: SHORELINE5 L08 -022 Printed: 06 -26 -2008 RECEIVED JUL 0 9 2008 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT • STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Northwest Regional Office • 3190 160th Avenue SE • Bellevue, Washington 98008 -5452 • (425) 649 -7000 July 7, 2008 Ryan Larson, Sr. Engineer Dept. of Public Works, City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Dear Mr. Larson: I certify that I mailed a copy of this document to the persons and addresses listed herein, postage prepaid i a ?ye tacle for United States mail in t/ C Washington, on Signature Li^ Subject: City of Tukwila Permit # L08 -022 — Approved Ryan Larson - Applicant Shoreline Substantial Development Permit # 2008 -NW -80017 Purpose: Notification of Receipt of Approved Substantial Development Permit (SDP) On June 30, 2008, the Department of Ecology received notice that the City of Tukwila approved your application for an SDP. Your permit is for emergency repairs to COE certified levees in two locations within shoreline jurisdiction of Green River. By law, local governments must review all SDPs for compliance with the following: • The Shoreline Management Act (Chapter 90.58 RCW) • Ecology's Substantial Development Permit approval criteria (Chapter 173 -27 -150 WAC) • The City of Tukwila Local Shoreline Master Program Local governments, after reviewing the SDP for compliance, are required to submit the SDPs to Ecology for filing. Your approved SDP has been received and filed by Ecology. What Happens Next? Before you begin activities authorized by this permit, the law requires you to wait at least 21 days from the date we received the decision letter from the City of Tukwila on June 30, 2008. This waiting period allows anyone who (including you) disagrees with any aspect of this permit, to appeal the decision to the state Shorelines Hearings Board. You must wait for the conclusion of an appeal before you can begin the activities authorized by this permit. Ryan Larson, Sr. Engineer July 7, 2008 Page 2 of 2 If no appeal is submitted you may begin activities any time after July 21, 2008. The Shorelines Hearings Board will notify you by letter if they receive an appeal. We recommend, however, you contact the Shorelines Hearings Board before you begin permit activities to ensure no appeal has been received. They can be reached at (360) 459 -6327 or http: / /www. eho.wa. gov/Boards /SHB. asp. If Lim want to appeal this decision, you can find appeal instructions (Chapter 461 -08 WAC) at the Shorelines Hearings Board website above. They are also posted on the website of the Washington State Legislature at: http: / /apps.leg.wa.gov /wac. Other federal, state and local permits may be required in addition to this shoreline permit. If you have any questions about this letter, please contact Betty Renkor at (425)469 -4309. Sincerely, Betty Renkor, Shorelands Specialist Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program BR:cj a cc: Carol Lumb, City of Tukwila Cizy of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor Department of Community Development Jack Pace, Director MEMORANDUM DATE: June 30, 2008 TO: Jack Pace, Director, Depart e s • f Community Development /1 FM: Carol Lumb, Senior Planner RE: Shoreline Permit: L08 -022, Tukwila 205 Levee Emergency Repairs 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project consists of repairs to U.S. Army Corps of Engineer (Corps) Section 205 levee in two locations along the Green River. The levees that adjoin these properties were damaged by the November, 2006 storm event. Site 3 borders the Carlyle building and a site that has been approved for parking to support several Wells Fargo Bank facilities on Sperry Drive, south of S. 180th Street and consists of approximately 900 linear feet of repair. Site 5 consists of approximately 1,100 linear feet that runs along the east side of a vacant parcel along Andover Park East, just south of S. 180th Street. The Corps has determined that if these two sites in Tukwila are not repaired before the next flood event, they would present an imminent threat of loss of private and /or public property. The levee projects protect a commercial /retail center and industrialized area which lies in a flood plain that extends over 1000 acres. Included in this area are light manufacturing facilities, warehouses, shopping malls and large retail stores. The levee is constructed with earthen material and is armored with riprap in the riverward side. Damage to the levee at both sites 3 and 5 includes toe scour and riverward slope erosion. The COE describes the levee repairs as follows: "Repair at both Site #3 and #5 will consist of laying the existing levee back to establish a 2H:1V riverward slope with a 15 -16 foot mid -slope bench. A launchable toe structure will be constructed using Class IV riprap to prevent future scour. A three foot blanket of Class IV riprap will be placed for armor rock: This slope will then be filled in with earthen material to achieve a 2H:1V slope, creating a planting bench. The mid -slope bench will be hydro- seeded to prevent erosion after construction and planted with native trees and shrubs in spring 2009. The lower slope will be planted with two willow lifts above the OHW elevation. The soil lifts containing the willows will extend to the spall layer allowing the willow roots to contact the native soil. Above the bench the levee prism will continue at a 2H:1V slope, underlain with one foot blanket of quarry spalls and hydro- seeded. CL Q:\205 Levee Repairs\L08 -022 Staff Rpt.doc Page 1 of 10 06/24/2008 12:19:00 PM 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 L08 -022: Tukwila 205 Levee Emergency Repairs Shoreline Substantial Development Permit June 30, 2008 At Site #5, a 250 linear foot retaining wall will be constructed at the furthest downstream reach of the repair in place of the landward side levee prism due to site constraints. Large woody debris (LWD) will be placed at approximately 20 foot intervals, at the riverward edge of the riprap toe and anchored using foot diameter quarry stone at Site #3 and in sections of Site #5. No LWD will be placed at the downstream end of the Site #5 repair due to concerns about bank erosion in this bend of the river." Site 3 Site 5 The property owner of Site #5 has opted to continue the retaining wall along the entire length of the back side of the levee repair. 2. POLICIES OF THE SMA/SMP: The site is within the jurisdiction of the Tukwila Shoreline Management Program (SMP). This program was adopted in June, 1974 and amended March 16, 1982. The City's SMP was reviewed and approved by the State Department of Ecology as being consistent with the State Shoreline Management Act, adopted in 1971. The Shoreline Master Program establishes three management environments adjacent to the Green/Duwamish River: River Environment: An impact buffer area which provides for resource protection, flood control maintenance, pollution control and landscape enhancement. This zone includes the first 40 feet from the mean high water mark. CL Page 2 of 10 06/24/2008 12:19:00 PM Q:\205 Levee Repairs\L08 -022 Staff Rpt.doc • • L08 -022: Tukwila 205 Levee Emergency Repairs Shoreline Substantial Development Permit June 30, 2008 Low Impact Environment: A transition area intended to minimize physical and visual impact on the river zone while accommodating shoreline development. This zone includes the next 60 feet from the mean high water mark. High Impact Environment: An area to provide for more intensive use of the shoreline resource. This zone includes the area from 100 feet to 200 feet from the mean high water mark. The applicable policies of the City's Shoreline Master Program are set forth below along with a discussion of the proposed project. City of Tukwila Shoreline Master Plan: Overall Goals: 1. Promote reasonable and appropriate use of the shorelines, which will promote and enhance public interest. 2. Protect against adverse effects against the public health, the land, its vegetation and wildlife and the waters and their aquatic life within Tukwila. 3. Protect public rights of navigation. 4. Recognize and protect private property rights consistent with public interest. 5. Preserve and protect fragile natural resources and culturally significant features. 6. Preserve and protect fragile natural resources and culturally significant features. 7. Provide safe and reasonable access for the public to the shorelines. 8. Recognize, protect, and improve aquatic habitats and spawning grounds of the Green River, which are invaluable natural resources. 9. Recognize, protect and improve those wildlife habitats, which are valuable natural resources of the State. 10. Encourage recreational activities unique to or dependent upon the use of the river which benefit the public interest. Response: The proposed project is to carry out emergency levee repairs to two sites along the Green River in Tukwila. The levee is a permitted use in the River Environment and the reconstruction will incorporate a mid -slope bench that will be planted at a later date with native trees and shrubs reducing the overall slope of the riverward face of the levee to 2V:1H, add willows and LWD to improve the overall habitat of the river. The levee will be laid back at a more stable slope, which will hopefully prevent future sloughing of the levee. Existing vegetation, which consists primarily of invasive plant species such as blackberries, must be removed in order to replace the existing levee system. As an emergency repair, the project must take place before the rainy season begins this year and thus cannot wait for the "fish window" which does not open until the fall. The river is used by the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe for fishing during the time of year when the levee repairs will take place; the levee repairs will need to be coordinated with the Tribe to ensure their access is preserved. CL Page 3 of 10 06/24/2008 12:19:00 PM Q: \205 Levee Repairs \L08 -022 Staff Rpt.doc • • L08 -022: Tukwila 205 Levee Emergency Repairs Shoreline Substantial Development Permit June 30, 2008 Public access to the river is available on the Green River Trail, which runs along the top of the levee at Site 3. This trail meanders back and forth on either side of the river from Auburn north through the City of Tukwila. Trail users will be detoured temporarily during reconstruction of the levee. Economic Development Element Goals: 1. Encourage economic development along shorelines that will enhance the quality of life for the residents of Tukwila with minimum disruption of the environment. 2. Encourage economic development along shorelines that will result in long -term over short-term benefits for the river shoreline. 3. Recognize the quality of the existing economic activities along the river and discourage any future economic activities that may be of less quality. 4. Encourage inland location of development so that access along the shorelines is enhanced. 5. Encourage commercial development of public recreational facilities consistent with shoreline goals and policies. Response: The construction of the levee system permitted the commercial and industrial development in the Tukwila Urban Center. If the levee system were to fail because the repairs are not made, then portions of the Tukwila Urban Center would be inundated with water probably damaging public infrastructure and buildings. This in turn would have an economic impact on the local economy and possibly the regional economy. Public Access Element Goals: 1. Encourage safe, convenient and diversified access for the public to the shorelines of Tukwila..... 4. Encourage public access to privately owned shorelines, consistent with private property rights. 5. Encourage inland location of development so that access along shorelines is enhanced. Response: The goals of this section relate to providing public access to the river. There is a public trail system that runs the length of the Green River through Tukwila that is used by pedestrians, bike riders and runners.. On this portion of the river, the trail is located on the top of the levee that borders Site 3; the trail is located on the opposite side of the river from Site 5. During the levee repairs, trail users will be re- routed until construction has been completed. CL Page 4 of 10 06/24/2008 12:19:00 PM Q: \205 Levee Repairs \L08 -022 Staff Rpt.doc • • L08 -022: Tukwila 205 Levee Emergency Repairs Shoreline Substantial Development Permit June 30, 2008 Circulation Element Goals: The Circulation Element of the City's Shoreline Master Program applies to the location of proposed major roads, transportation routes and other public facilities within the shoreline. The proposed project does not involve the location of any public roads or public facilities within the shoreline. Recreational Element Goals: 1. Encourage recreational activities and related facilities unique to or dependent upon the use of the river, which benefit the public interest. 2. Encourage diverse, convenient and adequate recreational opportunities along the shorelines for the local residents and a reasonable number of transient users. Response: As noted above, a public trail system runs along the Green River from Auburn to the City of Seattle, alternating sides of the river on which it is located. The presence of the levee system prevents direct access to the river for recreational purposes, other than recreational use of the trail. Shoreline Use Element Goals: 1. Encourage appropriate development in suitable locations without diminishing the quality of environment along the shorelines of the river. 2. Shoreline activities should be consistent with the overall goals for development along the river. Response: The levee system is a permitted use in the River Environment of the shoreline overlay district. Conservation Element Goals: 1. Encourage preservation of unique, fragile and scenic elements, and of non- renewable natural resources; assure continued utilization of the renewable resources. 2. Encourage the preservation of as much as possible of the natural character of the river and its shoreline. 3. Encourage the preservation of resources and ecology of the river and its shoreline. 4. Water quality in the river should be sufficiently high to permit human use and provide a suitable use and habitat for desirable forms of aquatic life. Response: The natural character of the river in the area of the proposed project has been altered to a major extent due to the construction of the levee system that provides flood protection throughout the urban center. The repaired levee will incorporate a bench mid- CL Page 5 of 10 06/24/2008 12:19:00 PM Q: \205 Levee Repairs \L08 -022 Staff Rpt.doc • • L08 -022: Tukwila 205 Levee Emergency Repairs Shoreline Substantial Development Permit June 30, 2008 way up the slope of the levee that will be planted at a future date with shrubs and trees that will improve the habitat of the river over the long term (3 -10 years). Currently, COE regulations prevent the retention of any vegetation above four inches in diameter due to concerns that the trees or shrubs could compromise the integrity of the levee prism. The vegetation planted on the bench will not be subject to the requirement of removal. 3. SHORELINE REGULATIONS: Following are the relevant review criteria as contained in the Tukwila Shoreline Regulations (Tukwila Municipal Code, Chapter 18.44) as applied by the City of Tukwila. A. TMC 18.44.110 General Shoreline Regulations All uses within the shoreline overlay district must conform to the following general regulations: 1. The use is in conformance with the regulations of the underlying zone district. Response: The zoning on Site 3 is Tukwila Urban Center; the zoning on Site 5 is Heavy Industrial. The levee system is a permitted use in the Shoreline Overlay District, which determines uses permitted within the 200 foot shoreline jurisdiction. 2. The use does not conflict with the goals and policies of the shoreline master program or the provisions of the Shoreline Act and shoreline regulations. Response: Section 2 (pages 2 -5), above is a discussion of the goals of the City's adopted Shoreline Management Program. 3. No structures or accessory facilities shall be located over the river unless such structure protects or promotes the public interest. Response: The project involves levees constructed for flood control purposes. The levees are constructed in the river, not over it. 4. There shall be no disruption of existing trees or vegetation within the river environment unless necessary for public safety or flood control, or if allowed as part of an approved shoreline substantial development permit; Response: The existing vegetation on the levee, which consists primarily of blackberries, must be cleared in order to re- construct the levees. COE policy is that no vegetation above four inches in diameter is permitted to remain on the levee or levee prism to avoid the potential for damage in case the tree or large shrub falls over. The replacement levees have been designed to incorporate a bench that will be planted with non - invasive vegetation that will improve, over the long run, the habitat features of the river in these two areas. CL Page 6 of 10 06/24/2008 12:19:00 PM Q: \205 Levee Repairs \L08 -022 Staff Rpt.doc • • L08 -022: Tukwila 205 Levee Emergency Repairs Shoreline Substantial Development Permit June 30, 2008 S. No effluent shall be discharged into the Green River which exceeds the water quality classification as established by the State for the adjacent portion of the river. Response: No effluent will be discharged into the Green River as part of the repair project. 6. All State and federal water quality regulations shall be strictly complied with. Response: The project is being carried out by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; they are undergoing their own process of submitting information to the appropriate state and federal agencies. The COE has issued a Final Environmental Assessment and a Finding of No Significant Impact for the levee repairs. 7. Wildlife habitat in and along the river should be protected. Response: Once the levee is reconstructed along this portion of the river, habitat opportunities will be improved by the addition of the bench that will be planted with trees that will provide shade and other plant materials that will enhance fish and wildlife habitat. 8. All perimeters of landfills or other land forms susceptible to erosion shall be provided with vegetation, retaining walls or other satisfactory mechanisms for erosion prevention. Response: The repaired levee sections are being designed so as to reduce their potential for erosion by re- sloping the levee at an overall slope of 2.5:1. 9. All necessary permits shall be obtained from federal, State, County or municipal agencies. Response: The Corps has stated it "must comply with the federal Coastal Zone Management Act which is the basis for the local jurisdictions' SMPs." The City's Public Works Department has applied for SEPA review and the shoreline substantial development permit for the levee repair project. 10. Dredging for purposes other than for navigational improvements or flood control is prohibited. Response: No dredging is involved with this project. 11. Mining is prohibited along the river shoreline. Response: No mining is involved with this project. CL Page 7 of 10 06/24/2008 12:19:00 PM Q: \205 Levee Repairs\L08 -022 Staff Rpt.doc • • L08 -022: Tukwila 205 Levee Emergency Repairs Shoreline Substantial Development Permit June 30, 2008 12. Solid waste disposal is prohibited along the river shoreline. Response: Solid waste will not be disposed along the river 13. No property will be acquired for public use without dedication by or just compensation to the owner. Response: One of the property owners has dedicated additional easement area to accommodate the set back of the levees; the other two property owners have signed a possession and use document to permit the levee reconstruction. Negotiations on compensation for the use of the easement area will be completed at a later date. 14. Landfilling is prohibited within the river channel unless such landfill is determined by the Planning Commission to protect or promote the public interest. Response: This project does not propose any landfilling within the river channel. 15. ...(R)emoval of any cottonwood tree within the river environment or the low impact environment, which tree is 12 inches or greater in diameter as measured 4.5 feet above grade, shall be subject to the requirements of TMC Chapter 18.54, Tree Regulations. Response: See response to criteria 4, above. B. TMC 18.44.130 Specific shoreline regulations — river environment. The River Environment consists of a 40 -foot wide management zone, measured from the mean high water mark. River Environment uses are restricted to footpaths or trails, recreation facilities, dikes, bridges, or fire lanes. The levee repairs are consistent with the permitted uses in the River Environment. C. TMC 18.44.140 Specific shoreline regulations — low impact environment The low impact environment consists of a 60 -foot wide management zone, beginning at the end of the river environment and proceeding 60 feet landward. Types of uses permitted in the low impact environment include structures not exceeding 35 feet in height, adequately screened or landscaped parking/loading and storage facilities, utilities, public or private streets or signs. The criteria for development in this portion of the shoreline jurisdiction do not apply to this project. CL Page 8 of 10 06/24/2008 12:19:00 PM Q: \205 Levee Repairs \L08 -022 Staff Rpt.doc • • L08 -022: Tukwila 205 Levee Emergency Repairs Shoreline Substantial Development Permit June 30, 2008 4. COMMENTS: Comments were received during the Notice of Application period from the Muckelshoot Indian Tribe and the National Marine Fisheries Service (see Attachment B, SEPA staff report). The issues raised in the e-mail were addressed through the analysis of environmental impacts of the proposed project in the SEPA staff report. 5. SEPA: A determination of non - significance was issued on June 13, 2008. The comment/appeal period closed on June 27,2008 at 5:00 p.m.; no appeals or comments were received on the DNS. A copy of the SEPA determination and staff report are attached (Attachment B). CONCLUSIONS 1. The project sites are located in areas designated Heavy Industrial and Tukwila Urban Center on the Comprehensive Plan map and zoned Heavy Industrial and Tukwila Urban Center. The proposed levee repair project is consistent with the land use and zoning designations. 2. The levee projects protect a commercial and industrialized area which lies in a flood plain that extends over 1000 acres. Included in this area are light manufacturing facilities, warehouses, shopping malls and large retail stores. The levee is constructed with earthen material and is armored with riprap in the riverward side. Damage to the levee at both sites 3 and 5 includes toe scour and riverward slope erosion. 3. The project consists of repairs to U.S. Army Corps of Engineer (Corps) Section 205 levee in two locations along the Green River. These two sections of the levee were damaged by the November, 2006 storm event. Site 3 borders the Carlyle building and a site that has been approved for parking to support several Wells Fargo Bank facilities on Sperry Drive, south of S. 180th Street and consists of approximately 900 linear feet of repair. Site 5 consists of approximately 1,100 linear feet that runs along the east side of a vacant parcel along Andover Park East, just south of S. 180th Street. The Corps has determined that if these two sites in Tukwila are not repaired before the next flood event, they would present an imminent threat of loss of private and/or public property. 4. The construction of the levee system permitted the commercial and industrial development in the Tukwila Urban Center. If the levee system were to fail because the repairs are not made, then portions of the Tukwila Urban Center would be inundated with water probably damaging public infrastructure and buildings. This in turn would have a negative economic impact on the local economy and possibly the regional economy. CL Page 9 of 10 06/24/2008 12:19:00 PM Q: \205 Levee Repairs \L08 -022 Staff Rpt.doc • • L08 -022: Tukwila 205 Levee Emergency Repairs Shoreline Substantial Development Permit June 30, 2008 5. Reconstruction of the levee in these two areas will disrupt temporarily aquatic habitat. 6. Public access is available on the Green River Trail, which meanders back and forth on the right and left banks of the river from Auburn north through the City of Tukwila and in this area is located on the levee along Site 3. The trail will be temporarily relocated during construction. 7. The project is consistent with the General Shoreline Regulations set forth in TMC 18.44.110: a) The use is in conformance with the regulations of the underlying zone district and the use is consistent with the goals and policies of the City's adopted Shoreline Management Program. b) No structures or accessory facilities will be located over the river; c) Vegetation must be removed in order to replace the damaged levee sections, however the reconstructed levee will include a mid -slope bench that will be planted with native trees and shrubs in spring, 2009. d) No effluent will be discharged into the Green River; e) The project is being conducted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, a federal agency; that agency is filing documentation with federal and state agencies to comply with all state and federal water quality regulations. f) Wildlife habitat in and along the river will be disturbed temporarily by the construction of this project. g) All necessary permits will be obtained for this project. h) The project does not involve any dredging or mining. i) No property will be acquired for public use without dedication by or just compensation to the owner. j) No additional landfilling is proposed within the river channel. 8. The project is consistent with the requirements of the River Environment and the Low Impact Environment (TMC 18.44.130 and 18.44.140). 9. No railroad tracks serve the site. 10. Comments were received from the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe and the National Marine Fisheries Service during the Notice of Application period. Issues raised by these comments were addressed in the SEPA staff report. 11. A Determination of Non - Significance was issued on June 13, 2008; no comments or appeals were received by the 5:00 p.m. June 27, 2008 deadline. 6. RECOMMENDATION Approve the shoreline substantial development permit. CL Page 10 of 10 06/24/2008 12:19:00 PM Q: \205 Levee Repairs \L08 -022 Staff Rpt.doc REPLY TO ATTENTION OF • DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY SEATTLE DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS P.O. BOX 3755 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98124 -3755 Environmental Resources Section e &Ac , I C AJ h wtak a-( A5 kAo e_ tam-(, 2008 Green River Levee Rehabilitation Projects King County, Washington FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 1. Background. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), in cooperation with the City of Tukwila and King County Flood Control Zone District, Washington has initiated plans to rehabilitate flood - damaged levees at six projects, Tukwila, Horseshoe Bend, Kent Shops/Narita, Meyers Golf, Dykstra and Galli's, with 10 sites (Tukwila #3 and #5; Horseshoe Bend #sl -4; Kent Shops/Narita; Meyers Golf; Dykstra and Galli's) along the lower Green River. In November 2006 flow rates of 12,200 cfs were recorded in the Green River near Auburn, Washington. During this event, these 6 projects (10 sites) along the Green River levee system from river mile 14.6 to 30.8, totaling about 11,000 linear feet, were damaged. Saturated soils during high peak flow resulted in toe scour, sink holes and rotational failure in some instances. The damaged levees are constructed of earthen material and armored with riprap on the riverward side. All damaged levees are in highly urbanized areas of King County and protect significant infrastructure and/or life. Prior to the flood, the Green River levees offered greater than 100 -year level of protection (LOP). In the current state, the 10 damaged sites offer between 5 and 15 year LOP. Most of the damaged levees have a 2H:1V (horizontal to vertical) (or steeper) slope on the riverward side. 2. Purpose and Need. The purpose of these actions is to repair levees along the Green River that were recently damaged during the November 2006 flooding, and restoring them to provide 100 - year flood protection. There is a high potential that without the repairs the areas in question could fail in a much smaller flood causing considerable harm to human health and safety as well as property damage. 3. Proposed Action. The proposed action is to repair damaged levees at 10 sites totaling about 11,500 linear feet. The sites are located in or near the cities of Auburn, Kent and Tukwila, King County, Washington, along the lower Green River between river miles 14.6 and 30.8. Site location details are provided in Table 1. Table 1: 1 Q{ 3 F k - ,tYh x iii Yy � qq. j'i �. iF f t }.,�, py rt i f't t .�4 it,! ,r1} t, y� n I(TK,f j a yam+ '. C% r yy"� 4 j * JJ p2y� {,J / t } ■ 3i j �, C '� „ T 0 • u 1 onr t w � '�i pJ' Aj� C 3 4Y hi xy i'yr A> 4 }yt ( •yT yWy .} .� �}..'jj '4ftrM1A �•. .. ;`n', .1 ... .J4Y�lJ'�"�Y e y ,S Tukwila #3 RM 14.6 to RM 14.8 Left bank T23N, R4E, Sec 35 1100 ft Tukwila #5 RM 15.0 to RM 15.3 Left bank T23N, R4E, Sec 35 800 ft Horseshoe Bend #1 RM 25.8 to RM 26.1 Right bank T22N, R5E, Sec 30 950 ft Horseshoe Bend #2 RM 25.3 Right bank T22N, R5E, Sec 30 160 ft Horseshoe Bend #3 RM 25.2 Right bank T22N, R4E, Sec 25 100 ft Horseshoe Bend #4 RM 24.9 to RM 25.1 Right bank T22N, R4E, Sec 25 1000 ft Kent Shops/Narita RM 21.0 to RM 22.0 Right bank T22N, R4E, Sec 23 3800 ft Meyer's Golf RM 22.0 to RM 22.5 Right bank T22N, R4E, Sec 23 1700 ft Galli's RM 30.5 to RM 30.8 Left bank T21N, R5E, Sec 6 ,7 1100 ft Dykstra RM 30.8 to RM 31.5 Left bank T21N, R5E, Sec 8 600 ft The preferred alternative for the following six sites: Tukwila 205 #3 and #5, Horseshoe Bend #1 and #4, Kent Shops/Narita, and Meyer's Golf is called the layback alternative. The layback alternative consists of moving the footprint of the levee landward back from the river; the toe location would remain the same. The general design includes creating a mid -slope bench planted with native trees and shrubs, reducing the overall slope of the riverward face of the levee to 2V:1H, and adding willows and LWD. The preferred alternative for Horseshoe Bend #2 and #3, Dykstra, and Galli's levee locations is called the Repair to Pre -Flood Condition Alternative. The Repair to Pre -Flood Condition Alternative consists of restoring the levees to pre -flood conditions. Damaged or lost riprap would be replaced, willow lifts would be planted at ordinary high water (OHW) and the levee slopes hydroseeded and/or planted with shrubs. This alternative is preferred at these sites because the "layback alternative" is not possible to construct at these four sites due to site constraints. 4. Impacts Summary. Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act, the attached environmental assessment (EA) has been prepared. The EA provides an evaluation of the potential environmental impact of the proposed work (repairing 10 levee sites along the Green River) which is briefly summarized below. Each site is considered as having independent utility. Each site may be constructed independent of the other projects. Construction timing is constrained by the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife and Endangered Species Act (ESA) in -water construction fish windows established for these specific projects which are from July 1 to September 15, as well as by the need to complete construction by the following flood 2 • • season, which is generally considered to begin in November. Funding is also a limitation on when construction may occur. Impacts from the repair /rehabilitation actions are typically minor and temporary in nature. At those six site locations where the levee will use the layback alternative the top of the levee will be laid back to provide for a plantable bench while still allowing for a 2H:1 V river side levee slope. Nine of the 10 sites would be constructed with a launchable toe (Dykstra is the lone exception). The bench at the 6 layback sites can be planted with trees and shrubs that will be allowed to grow to maturity. Large wood would be placed at all but the two shortest repair sites. The one levee location where impacts to the habitat are not minor is the Galli's levee, at which the levee toe would be moved riverward 3 -15 feet in order to lessen the slope (the top cannot be moved landward due to the presence of residences immediately behind the levee), and limited spawning does occur downstream of this point, however, spawning gravel are limited at Galli's. Spawning sized gravels are present at the Dykstra site. The estimated total loss of aquatic habitat at this location is approximately 3000 fiz. Construction will end just as Chinook salmon spawning begins. There will likely be some overlap. The Corps considers the impacts at Galli's levee to be mitigated by planting 8800 linear feet of downstream levee benches with a range of vegetation including shade trees. The Galli's site will also be planted with shrubs. Additional environmental features include placement of large woody debris along about 6700 linear feet of levee toe at all project sites, and the layback of the levee at 6 sites allowing the planting of permanent trees and shrubs. Temporary impacts will result from noise disturbance and air quality impacts due to increased emissions from the frequent and nearly continuous operation of equipment, including dump trucks, front end loaders, bulldozers, and track hoes. The Puget Sound airshed is currently in attainment for carbon monoxide, ozone, PM10, and has maintenance plans in place for these pollutants. The levee repair work is considered to be routine maintenance /repair activities that will have only a de minimus impact on air quality (40 CFR 93.153(c )(iv)). Further, preliminary calculations of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers indicate that emissions associated with these sites will not exceed EPA's de minimus threshold levels (100 tons /year for carbon monoxide and 50 tons /year for ozone). The work complies with the Clean Water Act. The CWA 402 NPDES NOI has been provided. For Section 404, three of the sites are not exempt from the CWA. These are Horseshoe Bend #1, Galli's and Dykstra sites. As part of the Section 404 evaluation, the Corps has determined that the fill at Horseshoe Bend #1 and Dykstra that consists of anchoring rock for large woody debris (LWD) mitigation features is the least environmentally damaging alternative. Galli's fill consists of the launchable toe which the Corps has likewise determined is the least environmentally damaging alternative because of site constraints. These three sites are also therefore required to obtain Section 401 Water Quality certification. The Corps has not yet received the CWA Section 401 water quality certification for these sites from the Washington Department of Ecology (WDE). No in water work will occur until the WQC is received. The work has been analyzed pursuant to the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA), and a consistency determination has been provided to the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). To date concurrence has not been received from Ecology. No construction work 3 • • may commence until the concurrence is received or there is a waiver, concurrence from Ecology is expected. The Corps has prepared a biological assessment to address potential effects to species listed under the Endangered Species Act to the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service. Due to the urgent nature of completing this rehabilitation project prior to the oncoming flood season, the Corps may proceed with construction prior to completion of the consultation with the Services pursuant to the "emergency circumstances" provisions of the ESA consultation regulation and complete ESA consultation after the fact, rather than delaying the urgent work in order to complete ESA consultation before construction begins. Though consultation is not complete, the Corps has reached an agency determination, based on the best factual and technical information available at the time of decision, and following preliminary coordination with the Services, that the impacts are not likely to adversely affect ESA - listed species at Tukwila #3 and # 5, Horseshoe Bend #sl -4, Dykstra, Meyers Golf, and Kent Shops/ Narita; and likely to adversely affect ESA - listed species at Galli's. The Corps believes that this work is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the listed species, by reducing appreciably the likelihood of either the survival or recovery of the listed species; nor does the work constitute an adverse modification of critical habitat. The Corps believes the construction of benches with trees and shrubs, and placement of large woody debris at other sites, reduces this adverse effect to the level of insignificance, and also believes that no additional ameliorative actions are necessary to avoid jeopardy to listed species. However, the Corps will also commit to fully funding and performing all Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives necessary to avoid the likelihood of jeopardy to listed species or destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat, as well as Reasonable and Prudent Measures (RPMs) necessary and appropriate to minimize the impact of Incidental Take, that are described if a Biological Opinion is received from the Services. The Environmental Assessment will be reevaluated at the time that consultation is complete. If necessary, this EA will be supplemented with necessary and applicable corresponding modifications to the scope and/or nature of the project, the procedures and practices used to implement the project, and/or the type and extent of compensatory mitigation associated with the project. As required under Section 106 of the NHPA, the Corps has coordinated with the Washington State Office of Archeology and Historic Preservation (OAHP) and the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (MIT). No recorded prehistoric or early historic Native American archaeological deposits are located within any of the individual projects. A cultural resources survey was conducted in the repair area and a cultural resource report was prepared as part of the Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act compliance process. A letter from the State Historic Preservation Officer dated June 11, 2008 concurring with the Corps finding of No Historic Properties Affected, has been received. The Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (MIT) provided comments to the Notice of Preparation indicating that tribal fishing might be disrupted by levee rehabilitation work. They also suggested they may 4 • • require mitigation for impacts to tribal fishing from the Galli's fill and from interfering with the fishery. The Green River is designated as a usual and accustomed fishing area of the MIT. The work is considered to be consistent with the Tribe's treaty rights due to the limited number of sites under construction, the fact that no specific site has been identified as a specific fishing place, the temporal nature of the restriction, the fact that the repairs are necessary to protect human health and safety and is authorized by PL 84 -99, as well as the fact that habitat impacts have been addressed in the design of the project including plantings, placement of LWD, and benches. Coordination with the Tribe will be ongoing during construction to try to further minimize the possible impact to the Tribal fishing. 5. Finding. For the reasons described above, I have determined: A. The proposed actions are in the public interest. These proposed actions, either at the individual sites or combined, will not constitute major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment, and therefore, do not require preparation of an environmental impact statement B. Evaluation of Compliance with Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines [40 CFR 230.10]: For the 3 sites not exempt from the CWA, the work was evaluated pursuant to Section 404(b)(1) of the Clean Water Act in accordance with the guidelines promulgated by the EPA (40 CFR 230) for evaluation of the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States. In addition, consideration has been given to the need for the work and to such water quality standards as are appropriate and applicable by law. Alternatives not requiring the discharge of dredged or fill material into water of the U.S. are not available. The proposed discharge represents the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative and includes all appropriate and practicable measures to minimize adverse effects on the aquatic environment. The work will not result in the unacceptable degradation of the aquatic environment. C. Section 404(b)(1) Compliance/Non- compliance Review [40 CFR 230.12]: The discharges and methods specified in the proposed work are in accordance with the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines. D. Section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act General Conformity Rule Review: The proposed project has been analyzed for conformity with the regulations implementing Section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act. I have determined the activities proposed under this permit will not exceed de minimus levels of direct emissions of a criteria pollutant or its precursors and are exempted by 40 CFR Part 93.153. 2OSowe ZOOS Date •z-f) Michael McCormick, Colonel, Corps of Engineers Commanding 5 snoqualmie levees czma consistency rmination • Page 1 of 8 Carol Lumb - FW: Army Corps of Engineers Levee Rehabilitation Projects -- CZMA Consistency .... ;�.�. •., •.,xu s.. a,. <aw's,.._ ..maa .sA: :#a 4'.Y, tW : ;'3 X. L.t s` a;83::n.., .x s: i-` __- -`n - .44,M1,Tw"z' S^"u `7w3•' & "2fla'Swa' wimp From: "Levesque, Andy" To: , "Carol Lumb" Date: 06/19/2008 3:42 PM Subject: FW: Army Corps of Engineers Levee Rehabilitation Projects -- CZMA Consistency CC: "Mactutis, Mike" , "Bleifuhs, Steve" All, At last we have a thorough explanation of what the Corps is and is not required to do. It appears they are simply exempt from Shorelines regulations, even if we as local sponsor may not be. The text below is written in regards to Snoqualmie River projects, but includes the following reference near the end; .., the Corps is obtaining Ecology concurrence on a number of projects on the Green River, which fall within the application of the substantive standards of the SMPs of the respective cities in which construction will take place." I haven't been able to understand til now how "Ecology concurrence" refers to whether their work meets SMP standards in each city, or not. Debra has told me this refers just to Auburn, where two projects will encroach the river below the OHWM, and will therefore need WSDOE consistency review. WSDOE has referred this review to Auburn, to determine consistency with the local SMP. That's it, apparently. No other Green River project will encroach further into the river, so all seem to be exempt from the Section 404 and 401 review process. These Section 404 Permit exemptions, by the way, apply only to federal agencies doing the work; King County would still need to obtain the relevant NWP's for exactly the same work. The only 404 connection for the Corps, on the other hand, is as the projects relate to categories of compliance under the CZM consistency determinations. So, local jurisdictions doing projects need to get 404 Permits, but do not need to demonstrate CZM consistency. Federal agencies doing the same work do not need to get 404 Permits, but need to demonstrate CZM compliance with respect to certain categories of work spelled out in the Section 404 NWP's. Andy From: Scheibner, Deborah Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 2:41 PM To: Bean, Tom; Loper, Clint Cc: Bleifuhs, Steve; Levesque, Andy Subject: RE: Army Corps of Engineers Levee Rehabilitation Projects -- CZMA Consistency I also forwarded this to Jeff Dixon if he hasn't already seen this or had this explanation from the Corps. The City of Auburn's code references King County's Shorelines, so DDES' issues mirror Jeffs. From: Bean, Tom Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 2:09 PM To: Loper, Clint Cc: Bleifuhs, Steve; Levesque, Andy; Scheibner, Deborah Subject: FW: Army Corps of Engineers Levee Rehabilitation Projects -- CZMA Consistency Here's the latest from the Corps on shoreline exemption requirements raised by DDES. I've read through it once and find the Corps's argument compelling. From: Jansen, Karl MAJ NWS [ mailto: Karl.Jansen.MAJ @usace.army.mil] Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 1:11 PM To: Bean, Tom file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \CAROL -L \Local Settings\ Temp\ XPgrpwise \485A7E7Btuk- mail6300 -... 06/19/2008 snoqualmie levees czma consistency d termination Cc: Laufle, Jeffrey C NWS; Jackels, Chem R NWS Subject: FW: Army Corps of Engineers Levee Rehabilitation Projects -- CZMA Consistency • Tom, Pate 2df8 FYI with respect to our phone conversation yesterday. Our attorney provided the following explanation of the USACE position regarding permit requirements to Ms. Laura Casey. Sincerely, Karl From: Juckniess, Craig M NWS Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 12:18 PM To: laura.casey @kingcounty.gov Cc: Nelson, Siri C NWS; Jansen, Karl MAJ NWS; Weber, Douglas T NWS Subject: Army Corps of Engineers Levee Rehabilitation Projects -- CZMA Consistency Ms. Casey: This e-mail discussion responds to your comment, below, indicating that the County has "determined that maintenance and repair of the County facilities requires an exemption from a shoreline substantial development permit, regardless of who is performing the work." This discussion pertains to the following Snoqualmie River levee rehabilitation projects to be conducted by the Corps' Seattle District this summer: - Mason - Thorson Ells, Mason - Thorson Extension, McElhoe- Pearson, and Raging River Bridge -to- Mouth. The levee rehabilitation projects on the Snoqualmie River are all being conducted pursuant to the authority of Federal Public Law 84 -99. All of these levee repair sites are located on levees that are neither federally constructed nor federally maintained. For these non - Federal levees, pursuant to the P.L. 84 -99 authority, the Corps is providing assistance in the form of repair construction activities, at the request of the applicable non - Federal interest. In each case, the effort is a Federal project — designed, managed, and executed via contract by the Corps. The Federal nature of the project pertains despite the fact that the non - Federal interest is providing a minor cash contribution to supplement Federal funds, and is providing any necessary temporary real estate interests to support the construction; both the cost -share and real estate obligations are mandatory local requirements under Federal statute. Although not applicable to the four Snoqualmie River projects, this summer the Corps also will conduct rehabilitation of facilities that were initially constructed by the Corps, on other western Washington river systems. Despite the historical fact of Federal construction, these facilities are each presently owned and operated by a non - Federal interest. Again, Federal assistance under P.L. 84 -99 is being provided at the request of the local community. Again, the construction effort is a Federal project — designed, managed, and executed via contract by the Corps. The Federal nature of these rehabilitation projects is not affected by the fact that the non - Federal interest is providing any necessary temporary real estate interests to support the construction; in fact, the non - Federal interest is not required under P.L. 84 -99 to pay any cash cost -share of the Federal repair, where a federally - constructed and locally- operated levee is being rehabilitated. In short, even though the Corps is working closely in these rehabilitation efforts with a non - Federal partner which owns and operates the flood control system for which a request for Federal assistance has been made, the construction activities are Federal efforts. The Corps is executing all applicable environmental compliance procedures in connection with each of these Federal projects, including under NEPA, the Clean Water Act, Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and the Coastal Zone Management Act. The coastal zone management obligations pertaining to a federally- executed project are prescribed in the CZMA, 16 U.S.C. sections 1451 et. seq. The CZMA at 15 U.S.C. 1456(c)(1)(A) only requires that "(A) Each Federal agency activity within or outside the coastal zone that affects any land or water use or natural resource of the coastal zone shall be carried out in a manner which is consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the enforceable policies of approved State management programs." The CZMA establishes the full extent of Federal agency responsibilities. Only Congress may waive the sovereign immunity of the Federal government to state and local regulation, pursuant to the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Thus, no procedural or substantive requirements may be placed on a Federal agency or a Federal project, beyond those expressly specified in Federal statute. Moreover, a Federal executive agency has no authority to voluntarily or unilaterally submit to state or local regulation not authorized by Congress -- to do so would be a violation of the constitutional principle of separation of powers between the Federal legislative and executive branches. Notably, the CZMA does not require a Federal agency to obtain any state or local permit, authorization, or documented exemption. Implementing the basic statutory framework of the CZMA are the Commerce Department regulations at 15 CFR Part 930. Federal agencies are obligated to provide State agencies with a consistency determination reflecting assurance that the undertaking is file: / /C:\Documents and Settings \CAROL - L\Local Settings\ Temp\ XPgrpwise \485A7E7Btuk- mail6300 -... 06/19/2008 snogtialniie levees czma consistency lermination • Page 3 of 8 consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the enforceable policies of the approved State coastal zone management program; in the case of Washington State, the designated agency is the Department of Ecology. The regulatory process calls for the designated State agency to be provided an opportunity to concur in or object to the Federal agency's determination of consistency; if the State does not act within the prescribed timeframe, concurrence may be presumed. Thus, there are two distinct steps to the CZMA consistency process: (1) The Federal agency must make a determination of consistency for all projects that fall within the reach of the CZMA. The Corps has prepared and documented determinations for each of the above listed projects. (2) The Federal agency must submit the consistency determination to the Department of Ecology for its concurrence, objection, or waiver, as appropriate. Once these two steps are accomplished, the Federal agency responsibilities under the CZMA are complete. No additional permit, authorization, or approval under the coastal zone management program -- Federal, state, or local -- is required in order for construction to commence. The Corps' levee rehabilitation projects fall into one of three categories of CZMA procedural compliance, depending on the particular circumstances of the repair effort: a) Projects exempted under Clean Water Act Section 404(f)(1)(B): (i) A levee rehabilitation project is exempt from the requirements of Section 404 under the following circumstances: "[T]he discharge of dredged or fill material ... for the purpose of maintenance, including emergency reconstruction of recently damaged parts, of currently serviceable structures such as dikes, dams, levees, groins, riprap, breakwaters, causeways, and bridge abutments or approaches, and transportation structures ... is not prohibited or otherwise subject to regulation under this section. . .." Interpretive guidance as to what activities properly fall within the ambit of Section 404(f)(1)(B) is provided at 33 CFR 323.4(a) (2), which states that "[m]aintenance does not include any modification that changes the character, scope, or size of the original fill design." By clear implication, as long as the reconstruction of a levee does not change the character, scope, or size of the facility as it pre- existed the precipitating event, the rehabilitation activity is exempt from the application of CWA Section 404. (ii) The relevance of a discussion of the application of Section 404 to a CZMA discussion is as follows: Pursuant to 15 CFR 930.53(b), and by extension 15 CFR 930.36(c), a State may establish general concurrences for CZMA consistency purposes. The Department of Ecology has done so in the area of levee reconstruction activities: in the regional conditions under Clean Water Act Section 404 Nationwide Permit #3, which may be found on pages 19 -21 of the following document: http: / /www.nws.usace.army.mil /PublicMenu /documents /REG/ 2007 _NWPs_SPN_7nov2007_final.pdf The general consistency concurrence process hinges on the applicability of Clean Water Act Section 401. Applicability of Section 401 hinges, in turn, on the application of Section 404: If a project is exempt from Section 404 requirements pursuant to 404(f)(1)(B), no Clean Water Act Section 401 certification is required, because Section 401 only applies to discharges for which Section 404 permits /authorizations are required. (iii) The regional conditions for NWP 3 memorialize that the State has generally concurred that levee repair activities meeting the parameters specified in sub - paragraph (a) are consistent with the CZMA. The only exception -- where the general concurrence would not apply — is for levee repair projects requiring project - specific review under Section 401. Because Section 401 certification is inapplicable to activities exempted under Section 404(f)(1)(B), project - specific 401 certification is not required, and the general CZMA consistency concurrence pertains. This pre- determination of concurrence applies by analogy to Corps - executed projects, which are not directly subject to the nationwide permitting process. (iv) Projects that are exempt under Section 404(f)(1)(B) generally also meet the parameters specified in sub - paragraph (a) of NWP 3 (there is one exception that occasionally arises, discussed below). Thus, any project that is exempt under Section 404(f) (1)(B), and is also encompassed within the parameters of NWP 3 sub - paragraph (a), falls under the standing general consistency concurrence issued by the Department of Ecology. For each of these projects, State concurrence with a Federal determination of consistency has been received. For each of these projects, Federal obligations under the CZMA are fulfilled, and the projects require no more state or local authorization or approval to proceed to construction. (v) The following Snoqualmie River projects have complied with the CZMA through operation of the Section 404(f)(1)(B) exemption: Mason - Thorson Ells, Mason - Thorson Extension, and McElhoe- Pearson. b) Repair projects reflecting "minor deviations" from the pre- existing condition: (i) Another category of projects is those that fall outside the scope of the 404(f)(1)(B) exemption, but nevertheless fall within the ambit of sub - paragraph (a) of NWP 3. This circumstance can occur where reconstruction is being conducted which exceeds "the character, scope, or size of the original fill design" but only to a minor extent. NWP 3 provides a general Section 404 authorization for non - exempt activities that would otherwise qualify for the exemption, but for "[m]inor deviations in the structure's file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \CAROL - L\Local Settings\ Temp\ XPgrpwise \485A7E7Btuk- mail6300 -... 06/19/2008 snoqualmie levees czma consistency d ermination configuration or filled area, including tho s Page 4 of 8 a to changes in materials, construction tec niques, or current construction codes or safety standards that are necessary to make the repair, replacement, or rehabilitation ...." (ii) Non - exempt activities that reflect only minor deviations, and thus qualify for NWP 3 authorization, are encompassed within the Department of Ecology's general consistency concurrence under limited circumstances: (A) If the minor deviation involves any variation in structural condition other than an extension of the levee's footprint below the ordinary high water mark, then the general concurrence applies. Once again this pre- determination of concurrence applies by analogy to Corps - executed projects, which are not directly subject to the nationwide permitting process. For projects falling within this category, State concurrence with a Federal determination of consistency has been received. For each of these projects, Federal obligations under the CZMA are complete, and the projects require no more state or local authorization or approval to proceed to construction. (B) If the minor deviation involves a variation that consists of an extension of the levee's footprint below the ordinary high water mark, then NWP 3's regional conditions provide that project - specific review under CWA Section 401 is required, and the general consistency concurrence does not pertain. In such a case, the Corps must submit a consistency determination to Ecology, for its concurrence, objection or waiver. Once concurrence of waiver is accomplished, Federal obligations under the CZMA are complete. (iii) The above analysis may also apply in rare circumstances where the Section 404(f)(1)(B) exemption applies, or where the work falls outside the geographic reach of Section 404. In other words, a project may be excluded from Section 404 regulation, but may fall within the regional conditions of NWP 3 only through application of the "minor deviation" provisions of the sub- paragraph (a). Reference to the circumstances of the Raging River Bridge to Mouth levee will best illustrate this analysis: The Raging River Bridge to Mouth levee will be set back from the river bank in the course of construction, as compared with its pre - flood footprint, by approximately 15 feet along the entire 100 -foot length of repair. Doing so will cause the pre- existing footprint to be exceeded on the landward side by a commensurate 15 feet. Because the levee footprint expansion extends landward, and no portion of the levee repair work falls below the ordinary high water mark — including the footprint extension, the Raging River Bridge to Mouth levee project falls outside the scope of Section 404 regulation. The parameters of sub - paragraph (a) of NWP 3 also apply to the Raging River Bridge to Mouth levee repair: although the levee reconstruction project exceeds the footprint of the pre -flood levee, the 1500 - square -foot footprint extension is minor in light of the landward direction of the extension; the lack of work below the OHWM required to accomplish the footprint extension; the lack of adverse aquatic ecosystem impacts reflected in the footprint extension; the small area reflected in the footprint extension as compared with the area encompassed within the overall levee footprint; and the aquatic improvement manifested in the set -back levee configuration, which affords room for a less confined watercourse in an important salmonid habitat area. Because the Raging River Bridge to Mouth levee repair falls under NWP 3 with application of the minor deviations provision, we look to the nationwide permits regional conditions to assess the applicability of Section 401 review: because the project does not involve activities below the ordinary high water mark reflecting new work outside the pre - existing footprint, project - specific Section 401 review is not required. As a result, the general consistency concurrence applies to the project. (iv) As outlined above, the Raging River Bridge to Mouth levee project has complied with the CZMA, via general concurrence, through operation of the "minor variations" provisions of NWP 3. c) Repair projects requiring project - specific Section 401 certification: (i) There are two sub - categories of project that may require Section 401 certification: (A) Projects that cannot meet the parameters of NWP 3 sub - paragraph (a), because although they involve reconstruction of recently damaged levee segments, the rehabilitation involves more than merely minor deviation from pre- existing conditions. In such a case, the Section 404(f)(1)(B) exemption would not apply, project - specific Section 401 certification would be required, and project - specific CZMA consistency concurrence or waiver would also be required. Once that project - specific concurrence or waiver is obtained from Ecology, Federal obligations under the CZMA are fulfilled, and the project requires no more state or local authorization or approval to proceed to construction. (B) Projects that involve an extension of the levee footprint, as compared with pre- existing conditions, that reaches below the ordinary high water mark. The same consistency result obtains whether the footprint extension is a "minor deviation" or not: if the extension is more than a minor deviation, NWP 3 does not apply at all, so the general consistency concurrence afforded under NWP 3 is inapplicable; if the extension constitutes merely a minor deviation, the NWP 3 regional conditions require project - specific Section 401 review. Thus, in either case where a footprint extension reaches below the ordinary high water mark, project - specific concurrence with, or waiver of, the Corps' consistency determination is required. Once that project - specific concurrence or waiver is obtained from Ecology, Federal obligations under the CZMA are complete, and the project requires no more state or local authorization or approval to proceed to construction. Although there are no Snoqualmie River projects that will require project- specific, as opposed to general, consistency concurrence, the Corps is obtaining Ecology concurrence on a number of projects on the Green River, which fall within the file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \CAROL -L \Local Settings\ Temp\ XPgrpwise1485A7E7Btuk- mail6300 -... 06/19/2008 snoqualrnie. levees czma consistency rmination • Page 5 of 8 application of the substantive standards of the SMPs of the respective cities in which construction will take place. Please bear in mind that the Corps is executing, at the request of local government and other public entities, an unprecedented volume and scope of levee repair activities this summer. In each case, the action is being taken to alleviate substantial risk to life and /or property in the affected communities. The Corps is committed to complying with all environmental prerequisites of these projects to the extent required under Federal law. Initiation of these repair activities is made highly urgent not only by the need to complete construction before the commencement of the next rainy season, which typically commences November 1, but also by the Corps' commitment to abide by the even more restrictive prescribed "work windows" dictated by the habitat needs of listed fish species. Many of the projects taking place on the Green, Snoqualmie, and Cedar Rivers must be commenced literally within days in order to meet these commitments. Craig Juckniess Deputy District Counsel Seattle District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (206) 764 -6943 From: Jansen, Karl MAJ NWS Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 3:45 PM To: Nelson, Siri C NWS; Juckniess, Craig M NWS Cc: Weber, Douglas T NWS Subject: FW: Snoqualmie Levees repair shoreline exemption required Karl From: Bean, Tom [mailto:Tom.Bean @kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 2:08 PM To: Jansen, Karl MAJ NWS Cc: Laufle, Jeffrey C NWS; Jackels, Chemine R NWS; Weber, Douglas T NWS; Loper, Clint Subject: FW: Snoqualmie Levees repair shoreline exemption required Karl, I am writing to follow up my voice mail message, and to share what amounts to the county's statement of deficiency in the shoreline process to date for the four PL84 -99 projects in the Snoqualmie basin. I've called and spoken with the author, Laura Casey, who has promised to expedite review of the required submittals. She is aware that you have planned to hold preconstruction meetings on some of these projects late next week. She did not promise to complete her review by then, but she did say it was not out of the question. I'd like to do anything I can to help see this requirement met. How can we best proceed? Please let me know. Tom Tom Bean, 1'.E., GEM Senior Engineer, River & Floodplain Management Unit: King County Water and Land Resources Division 201 S )a.ckson. Shire 600 Seattle, WA 98104- .385.5 (206) 296-8377 http://www.kingcounty.gov/flood file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \CAROL -L \Local Settings\ Temp\ XPgrpwise \485A7E7Btuk- mail6300 -... 06/19/2008 snoqualmie levees czma consistency ermination From: Casey, Laura Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 2:57 PM To: Bean, Tom Cc: Loper, Clint; Klein, Pesha; Dobkins, Doug Subject: RE: Snoqualmie Levees repair shoreline exemption required Hello, Tom; • Page-6 of8 I met with Pesha Klein, Critical Areas Supervisor, and Doug Dobkins, Site Development Services Supervisor, and described the repair work on County flood control facilities proposed to be accomplished by the US Army Corps of Engineers. These DDES Supervisors determined that maintenance and repair of the County facilities requires an exemption from a shoreline substantial development permit, regardless of who is performing the work. Unlike some other jurisdictions, King County requires an actual written shoreline exemption. The shoreline exemption application materials will be reviewed for conformance with the clearing and grading code, and with the critical areas code, as well as the shoreline regulations. The levee repairs would be exempt from a clearing and grading permit if they meet the criteria in KCC 16.82.051.C.13. All four repair projects can be reviewed under one shoreline exemption application, and we will process the application in a timely manner. I appreciate the Corps' effort in preparing a CZMA Consistency Determination, but there are a errors in the document, primarily based on a misunderstanding that the rivers in question are designated Conservancy, not Rural or Urban. The County's shoreline regulations are based on the specific Conservancy designation of these Rivers. King County's shoreline exemption application packet is found on the web at http: / /apps0l.metrokc.gov /www6 /ddes/ scripts /formsPacket.cfm ?PacketlD =33 . I would need to see a letter explaining the projects, site plans and any construction drawings (plan view, cross section), as explained in the shoreline exemption application, as well as an Affidavit Concerning Critical Areas Compliance, and a Certification of Applicant Status . The information in the link regarding bulkhead development is not relevant for this project. King County requires a deposit of $803 to cover 5 hours of review time plus counter fee; an interfund transfer will be fine. If DDES spends less time to complete the review, we will refund the difference to you. Review will involve me visiting the sites, checking for code conformance, and writing a shoreline exemption letter. You can mail the application materials to: King County Dept of Development & Envr Services Attn: Trudy Hintz, Critical Areas Section 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98057 -5212 Please give me a call or send return email if you'd like to talk about this in more detail. Laura Casey Environmental Scientist III King County DDES, Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98057 -5212 206 - 296 -7158 faura.casey@kingcounty.gov From: Bean, Tom Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 4:32 PM To: Casey, Laura Cc: Loper, Clint Subject: RE: snoqualmie levees czma consistency determination file: / /C:\Documents and Settings \CAROL -L \Local Settings\ Temp\ XPgrpwise1485A7E7Btuk- mail6300 -... 06/19/2008 snogivalmie levees czma consistency determination Laura, IP Page, 7. of 8 I'd like to offer a few words of introduction for the cryptic message below. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is working to help King County with several levee repair projects this summer. All are in response to flood damages suffered in November of 2006. Four are in the Snoqualmie River basin, and all four of those projects are in unincorporated King County. Two of these levee repair projects are on the Middle Fork Snoqualmie (Mason Thorson Ells and Mason Thorson Extension), one is on the Raging (Bridge to Mouth Right), and one is on the mainstem Snoqualmie (McElhoe Pearson). There has been some confusion in discussion of how these Corps projects relate to the county's Shoreline Code. Following is a recent explanation I've received from Corps staff regarding their compliance with SMA for a levee rehab project in Auburn. I understand that they view the logic to be equivalent for unincorporated King County as well: The way the Corps does CZMA is to write a CD and send it to Ecology for concurrence. In order to do this I went through the Auburn SMP, looked for the relevant sections and made a determination of consistency for the projects. After reading through the Auburn SMP it appeared that it deferred to the King County plan as the relevant document so 1 used the KC plan for the CD. The Corps does not apply for a SSD permit or exemption, as a federal agency we are only required to comply with CZMA . The other attached document is the NEPA Notice of Preparation and 401 Certification Public Notice for the Green projects. The public comment period ends today and we are currently writing the Environmental Assessment with hopes of a FONSI in the next couple of weeks. The Corps complies with NEPA rather than SEPA so this is the relevant document for our procedure. The explanation above was sent to Auburn staff along with the Corps's CZMA consistency determination and the associated public notice relative to Clean Water Act compliance. When a copy of that Auburn correspondence was forwarded to me, I asked for a parallel transmittal to you relative to the four sites in unincorporated King County. I'm afraid that the result was perhaps too cryptic to be clear in its purpose. My hope is that you can confirm for me what I'm hearing from the Corps -- that they have satisfied all applicable requirements and need not request shoreline exemption documents from DDES. Please let me know how it looks to you. If it seems that existing products fall short of the need, please let me know the deficiencies you see. Thank you, Tom Tom Bean, P.E. Senior Engineer, River & Floodpla in Management Unit King County Wares and land Resources Division! 201. S la.ckson, Suite 600 Seattle, WA 98104 -3855 (206) 296-8377 http: / /www.kingcountv.gov /flood From: Laufle, Jeffrey C NWS [mailto:Jeffrey.C.Laufle @usace.army.mil] Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 3:58 PM To: Bean, Tom; Casey, Laura Cc: Jackels, Chemine R NWS; Jansen, Karl MA] NWS; Cummins, Andrea K NWS Subject: snoqualmie levees czma consistency determination «snoqualmie levees czma cd.doc» Hi Tom and Laura, Sorry this took awhile, but hopefully it's useful for you. For the Snoqualmie projects, based on Nationwide Permit 3 (by analogy) and the regional conditions it contains, we consider that the state has concurred on this CZMA consistency file: / /C:\Documents and Settings \CAROL -L \Local Settings\ Temp\ XPgrpwise \485A7E7Btuk- mail6300 -... 06/19/2008 snocrualmie levees czma consistency ormination determination, so don't plan on seeking concurrence. --Jeff • Page 8 of 8 file: / /C:\Documents and Settings \CAROL -L \Local Settings\Temp\ XPgrpwise 1485A7E7Btuk- mail6300 -... 06/19/2008 Tukwila levee comments Carol Lumb - Tukwila levee comments From: "Cummins, Andrea K NWS" < Andrea .K.Cummins @usace.army.mil> To: <clumb @ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 06/03/2008 2:38 PM Subject: Tukwila levee comments Page 1 of 1 Hi Carol, I got your message from last night. I apologize for not giving you a call yesterday. We had another "crisis" concerning the levee rehabs on the Green and my day got completely absorbed. Unfortunately, I don't have much news. This latest issue has not allowed us time to get together with the engineers to come up with some talking points needed to address the public comments that will be arriving here soon and that you have already received. I have spoken with some of the other biologists here in ERS and we all agree that we will need both the engineers and the hydraulics folks to get together with us to develop our answers. None of us here in ERS can defend the large amount of rock that is being proposed for all of the levees on the Green other than with "that's what the engineers required" which obviously is not an adequate response. This meeting will not take place until early next week I would guess as our public comment period does not end until the 11th. The way it is working around here at the moment is that if it isn't needed right now it doesn't have priority. Not the best situation. So I suppose my best suggestion would be (and I don't know if this is possible) to defer the SEPA comments until we come up with a response here at the Corps. Again, probably by mid -next week. I will be happy to send you our written response at that time. Again, sorry I don't have answers. Andrea Cummins Biologist, Environmental Resources Section U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District 206.764.3641 206.764.4470 fax file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \CAROL -L \Local Settings\ Temp\ XPGrpWise \48455751tuk- mail6300 -p... 06/03/2008 08/27/2008) Carol Lumb - RE: Questio From: "Cummins, Andrea K NWS" < Andrea .K.Cummins @usace.army.mil> To: "Carol Lumb" <clumb @ci.tukwila.wa.us >, "West, Jennifer L NWS" <Jennifer.... Date: 06/30/2008 4:10 PM Subject: RE: Question Hi Carol, I think your best bet for a quick and reliable answer on the design question would be Jen West who is one of the project engineers. I added her to the address line. She should be able to help you out. Please let me know if you need more info. Good to hear about the SSDP, things are moving along it seems. Andrea Original Message From: Carol Lumb [mailto:clumb @ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 1:31 PM To: Cummins, Andrea K NWS Subject: Question Hi Andrea: This is probably not your area, but our Public Works engineer gave me a copy of the 100% drawings and I have a question about one of the cross sections (sheet C -304). Do you know who I would talk to about the cross section for Station 7 +45? The cross section shows the existing levee with a bench and the final levee with no bench. Our engineer thought maybe this was the area where there had been a slump in the past, but the profile looked too clean for a slump. Anyway, if you have any thoughts on who I could ask about this, I'd appreciate it. Our shoreline substantial development permit was issued today and you should receive a copy in the next day or two. thanks. Carol Carol Lumb, Senior Planner Dept. of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 206 -431 -3661 (Fax: 206 -431 -3665) Page ,1 (10/17/2008) Carol Lumb - RE: Tukwila ?,25 Levee Repairs • Page 1 From: To: Date: Subject: Hi Carol, "Cummins, Andrea K NWS" <Andrea.K.Cummins @usace.army.mil> "Carol Lumb" <clumb @ci.tukwila.wa.us> 05/13/2008 4:56 PM RE: Tukwila 205 Levee Repairs I will see if I can find a representative plan for the bench planting. I have a attached a plant list if that will help and will see if I can find a previous project's planting plan. We are planning on getting our Public Notice for the projects out by the end of the week. I think it is safe to assume that we will get similar (if not identical) comments related to our notice as well. I will address those comments after the 20 day period, roughly June 5th or so. If you would like me to send you my responses at that time I am happy to but don't think I will have a chance to work on anything before then -- way too much on my plate. Let me know if that will work for you. Thanks! Andrea Original Message--- - From: Carol Lumb [mailto:clumb @ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 2:26 PM To: Cummins, Andrea K NWS Subject: RE: Tukwila 205 Levee Repairs Thanks Andrea - it would be helpful particularly for the shoreline permit to have a "sample" or proto -type of landscaping that the COE has used in the past. Is it possible to provide something like that from a previous project? The difficulty with not having anything to review is that once the shoreline permit is issued, we won't have an opportunity to review, comment on and /or require revisions to the type of plantings, spacing etc. On a related matter, yesterday at 5:00 was the deadline for anyone to submit comments on the proposed levee repairs in Tukwila. We received comments from NOAA and the Muckleshoot Tribe. I was hoping you could take a look at them and provide feed back as their comments center on the design of the levee (particularly as compared to county designed repairs such as the Briscoe project) and the habitat implications. If it is not possible for you to review and provide comments, please let me know. Thanks very much. Carol Carol Lumb, Senior Planner Dept. of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 206 -431 -3661 (Fax: 206 -431 -3665) 1((2/17/2008) Carol Lumb - RE: Tukwila 2 5 Levee Repairs — »> "Cummins, Andrea K NWS" < Andrea .K.Cummins @usace.army.mil> 05/13/2008 9:50 am »> Hi Carol, Yes, we are planning on planting the benches at the Tukwila site, but that won't occur under this construction contract. It will be contracted separately and is planned to take place in the spring (Feb- March) following construction. Hopefully 2009, if the construction contract is closed out this year. I think there is still some question about the constructability of this project in one season. Don't quote me on this, as possibly Tukwila is one that will be finished this season. I am working on several and get the current status of each of them confused at it changes regularly. I apologize. Anyway, there are no plans as to date, probably won't be until at least next fall. Suffice it to say that the bench will be planted with native riparian trees and shrubs, very similar to other King County levee bench plantings. Please let me know if you need any more details. Cheers! Andrea Cummins Biologist, Environmental Resources Section U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District 206.764.3641 206.764.4470 fax Original Message From: Carol Lumb [mailto:clumb@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Monday, May 12, 2008 10:28 AM To: Cummins, Andrea K NWS Subject: Tukwila 205 Levee Repairs Hi Andrea: I am the planner working on the SEPA and shoreline substantial development permit applications for the two levee repairs in Tukwila. I believe I saw an e -mail stream a while back that indicated there would be plantings on the benches but haven't seen any landscape plans come through. Are you the right person to talk to about getting a copy of the plans? I would like to review them before finalizing our SEPA staff report and the shoreline permit staff report. thanks. Carol Carol Lumb, Senior Planner Dept. of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Page 2 (10/17/2008) Carol Lumb - RE: Tukwila 205 Levee Rep- epairs Page 31 206 -431 -3661 (Fax: 206 -431 -3665) GREEN / DU W AMISH AND WATERSHED Algona Auburn Black Diamond. Burien Covington Des Moines Enumclaw Federal°Way Kent King County Maple Valley Normandy Park Renton SeaTac Seattle Tacoma Tukwila WATER RESOURCE INVENTORY AREA 9 (WRIA 9) June 11, 2008 Andrea Cummins Biologist, Environmental Resources Section U.S. Army Corps of .Engineers, Seattle District P.O. Box 3755 Seattle, WA 98124 -3755 Re: Comments on Green River Levee Rehabilitation, PL- 08 -08, PL- 08 -09, PL- 08 -10, PL -08 -11 Dear Ms. Cummins: Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments on the notice of preparation of an environmental assessment (EA) for proposed levee repairs at ten sites at six locations along the Green River in King County, Washington. The following comments are offered by staff of the Water Resource Inventory Area 9 Watershed Coordination Services Team, which is jointly funded by local governments in the Green/Duwamish and Central Puget Sound Watershed for the purpose of restoring watershed health and salmon habitat. While we completely support the levee repairs proposed, we have concerns about two aspects of the repairs: • The removal of native vegetation beyond the footprint of the actual construction. At Dykstra (30.02 -30.16 LB) and Kent Shops/Narita (20.34- 21.04 RB) repairs, the Corps proposes to remove mature native vegetation that is not in the way of construction. We understand that the Corps is requiring King County to remove this additional vegetation consistent with PL84 -99. We request: o Documentation that this vegetation jeopardizes the structural stability of the facilities; o An explanation of how the — we believe — unnecessary removal of riparian vegetation is consistent with the Puget Sound Recovery Plan for Chinook salmon. It is important to note that simply requiring off-site re- vegetation is not adequate mitigation if it is not similarly located next to the Lower Green River. • The heavy use of rock armoring in place of proven, bioengineered design elements in most of the repairs. While we understand that a certain amount of riprap is necessary for armoring the levee toe, the extensive use of three -foot thick blankets of Class II.I and IV riprap seems unnecessary based on our discussions with engineers who know the Green River very well. The extensive use of riprap blankets will make it more difficult to plant vegetation Andrea Cummins June 11, 2008 Page 2 of 2 beyond grasses on levee surfaces. We request that the EA consider whether the design can be revised to a "softer" approach that would use less riprap and improve the likelihood that suitable riparian vegetation could be established. These requests stem from our extensive analysis of the needs of salmon in the Green/Duwam.ish Watershed. Protecting and enhancing native riparian vegetation and using bioengineering alternatives for shoreline facilities are key recommendations for the Lower Green River. These can be found in the WRIA 9 Salmon. Habitat Plan: Making Our Watershed Fit for a King (August 2005). These needs and a set of habitat projects for the Lower Green River were incorporated into the Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Plan, which was approved by the federal government in January 2007. Again, while we are entirely supportive of the repair of flood- damaged levees and revetments on the Lower Green River, we request that the Corps alter elements related to non - critical vegetation and riprap armoring to ensure that these projects contribute to — rather than undermine — Endangered Species Act -driven salmon habitat recovery. Please contact WRIA 9 staff Dennis Clark, 206 -296 -1909, dennis.clark @,kingcounty.gov with any questions and regarding future comment opportunities. Doug Osterman Watershed Coordinator Green/Duwamish and Central Puget Sound Watershed (Water Resource Inventory Area 9) Cc: Bob Lohn, Regional Administrator, Northwest Region, NOAA Fisheries Mary Ruckelshaus, Puget Sound Recovery Implementation Technical Team Joe Ryan, Salmon Program Manager, Puget Sound Partnership Mayor Joan MeGilton, City of Burien Councilmember Bill Peloza, City of Auburn Councilmember .Debbie Ranniger, City of Kent Councilmember Tim Clark, City of Kent Mike Mactutis, Environmental Engineering Manager, City of Kent Steve Bleifuhs, Manager, River and Floodplain Management Unit, King County Water and Land Resources Division MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE Fisheries Division • • �� 172 "d Avenue SE • Auburn, Washington 98092 -9763 Pha : (253) 939 -3311 • Fax: (253) 931 -0752 t1G0Citt June 10, 2008 Andrea Cummins Environmental Resources Section U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District P.O. Box 3755 Seattle, WA 98124 -3755 RE: Notice of Preparation and Clean Water Act Public Notice, Reference: PL -08 08, PL- 08 -09, PL- 08 -10, PL- 08 -11, Green River Levee Rehabilitation, Green River, King County, WRIA 09.0091 Dear Ms. Cummins: The Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division has reviewed the "Notice of Preparation and Clean Water Act Public Notice" for the proposed Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Green River levee repair project. This project proposes to repair ten existing levee sites at six locations in the Green River as a result of flood damage. The Green River is located within the Usual and Accustomed Fishing Area of the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, and supports important treaty salmon and steelhead populations. We offer the following comments in the interest of the Tribe's treaty protected fisheries resources. We appreciate the Army Corps' efforts to work with local sponsors and interested parties to incorporate habitat features in the proposed levee repairs including planting benches, willow lifts, and large woody debris. However, we remain concerned about conflicts between the proposed project and from future PL 84 -99 levee repairs and salmonid habitat needs. As the Corp's Notice acknowledges, fish habitat in the lower Green River is severely limited by levees, and the proposed project will perpetuate the already degraded condition of the river. The conversion of existing soil -based levees to rock -based levees in the proposed project will cause additional permanent confining of the river and further decrease opportunities for natural floodplain processes. An improved regional approach is needed to better align the PL 84 -99 and other relevant flood facility programs with salmon recovery and local habitat plans. This approach would incorporate local government experience and innovation in levee design and vegetation management, and allow for continuous adaptation to improve habitat conditions for salmonids. We are especially concerned with vegetation maintenance requirements for eligibility in the PL 84 -99 program where sponsors must clear levees of trees larger than 4 inches in diameter to maintain eligibility for federal funding. This requirement conflicts with the Tribe's fisheries interests; with the Green River's designation as Critical Habitat for Puget Sound Chinook salmon under the Endangered Species Act; with the Clean Water Act; with regional and local salmon habitat plans; and salmonid habitat restoration projects, including the Corps' Ecosystem Restoration Plan for WRI A 9. We urge the Corps and its sponsors to work with the Tribe, the National Marine Fisheries Service and other interested parties develop a regional approach that allows mature trees on and near levees in the PL 84 -99 and other relevant programs, and to implement lower impact levee designs. We understand that this has been pursued in Sacramento River basin where similar conflicts and issues have arisen. Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Comments to Green River Levee Repairs- EA Scoping Notice June 10, 2008 Page 2 The proposed mitigation for the levee repair projects' adverse impacts relies heavily on the success of the mid -slope planting benches to grow native trees for shade and organic inputs, while incorporating some instream large wood and willow lifts. However, the likely effectiveness of the proposed mitigation is questionable since the design of the planting benches may not be conducive to successful riparian tree growth. It is doubtful that adequate moisture will infiltrate the bench soils in the proposed design, and heat from surrounding rip -rap may make it difficult to establish healthy native riparian trees. Furthermore, the planting bench is designed as part of a launchable toe with the potential or design purpose of being washed out during a flood event. Comments from other fisheries agencies NMFS and WDFW suggest that they share similar concerns. Therefore, we recommend that the Corps revise its approach by completing the proposed project levee repairs in two phases. The first phase would be to complete the work necessary to lay back the upper banks could proceed to minimize risk of imminent flood damages and delay the construction of the planting benches and launchable toe and riverward project elements until a consensus design can be worked out with the interested parties including the Tribe, NMFS, WDFW and the local sponsors. Tribal Fishing Access As far as the EA is concerned, it should address the potential for this project to adversely affect treaty fishing rights and activities conducted by the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe. Tribal fisherman routinely fish in the identified project areas. Both construction activities and the constructed levee repairs may interfere with tribal fishing, including in- water construction, bank work, and staging activity. Expansion of levee footprints within the ordinary high water mark of river will cause a loss of fishing area for the Tribe. For example, the proposed Galli's Levee repair will move the levee footprint riverward by 3 to 15 feet along 400 feet eliminating approximately 3,000 square feet of aquatic habitat which means a direct loss of fishing area. Also, the July through mid - September construction work window coincides with potential coho and chinook fisheries and the adult migration period for these species. In addition, noise, turbidity, and habitat disturbance during construction may disrupt adult salmon behavior and result in decreased fishing success. These and other potential impacts to treaty fishing should be discussed in the EA along with measures to avoid or mitigate impacts. Potential Cumulative Impacts The EA notes that the project purpose is to repair levees damaged by the November 2006 floods. The EA should analyze the need for future levee repairs in the Green River. If likely, then these future projects should also be fully evaluated for potential cumulative impacts to the Green River and salmon populations. The EA should evaluate the magnitude and frequency of discharge that the lower Green River levees are capable of withstanding before damage occurs to evaluate the likelihood of future levee repairs at these sites. For example, the Tukwila Section 205 levee appears to be ill- suited to convey the regulated peak flow it was designed to accommodate (12,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) at USGS Gage 211300, Green River near Auburn). According to the Corps March 2008 Project Information Report Rehabilitation of Flood Control Works Tukwila 205, this levee has required repair after every year that the peak flow has reached 12,000 cfs since the original project was constructed in1992. Several other projects under current environmental and permit review in the Green River should be considered in a cumulative effects discussion. These projects include, but are not limited to, the widening of I -405 and the City of Kent's Riverview Park development proposal as well as other projects. Other Alternatives to be analyzed Two additional alternatives should be considered in the EA. One new alternative should consist of a comprehensive river corridor approach to levee improvement and flood risk reduction. This alternative would involve acquiring Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Comments to Green River Levee Repairs- EA Scoping Notice June 10, 2008 Page 3 additional lands and easements over time so that levees can be set back to allow development of increase in natural floodplain processes and improved riparian area within a significantly less - confined urban river channel. The goal would be to improve the river corridors for the purpose of Puget Sound salmon recovery and is further described in Montgomery et al. (2003). River and floodplain habitat processes in the project area are vital to the natural production of chinook and other salmon species but are severely impaired by flood control activities as discussed in the WRIA 9 Limiting Habitat Factors Report for Puget Sound Chinook ( http:// dnr. metrokc.gov/Wrias /9 /Recon.htm). A comprehensive river corridor alternative would be more consistent with stated chinook recovery plan objectives, and would reduce flood risk over the long term by restoring channel flood conveyance capacity. The second alternative to be evaluated in the EA is a phased construction and consensus design approach where bench construction and instream work is deferred until the interested parties can develop consensus designs with less environmental impact than the current proposal. In addition to including the two added alternatives described above, the EA should fully evaluate the four alternatives discussed in the Notice and the specific criteria evaluated for each alternative. For example, in the case of cost, it should not be the sole criteria for evaluating the non - structural alternative; there are other factors to consider including cost savings from reductions in flood hazards to structures and infrastructure. Similarly, for those sites propose to be repaired using the pre -flood condition alternative, the EA should discuss how this alternative impacts habitat processes and salmon production, and describe how the proposed measures successfully mitigate for these impacts. This discussion should include an analysis of the two other less environmentally damaging alternatives, i.e. non - structural alternative and the layback levee alternative, and discuss why these alternatives were not chosen at these sites. Finally, for all of the sites, each alternative should identify and _evaluate specific mitigation measures necessary to offset impacts to fisheries resources. Potential Impacts to Fisheries Resources The EA should evaluate the potential impacts under each alternative at each site: Aquatic habitat impacts The levees have caused loss and impairment of aquatic edge habitat structure and in- channel complexity such as pools, side channels, wetlands, and other complex floodplain habitat types, and restrict the floodplain from dissipating flood energy. All of these habitat losses are detrimental to salmonids. The EA should evaluate the potential for each alternative to impact these habitat conditions and processes at each site both site specific and cumulatively. The levees in lower Green River have also contributed to the near total loss of suitable flood refuge and rearing habitat for juvenile salmonids that are present in the project area from February through June. The concern is that without this habitat, natural origin chinook fry are being flushed into the Duwamish estuary immediately following late winter and spring freshets with a reduction in survival rates. The EA should evaluate how each alternative at each project site will affect rearing and flood refuge habitat availability. As proposed, it appears that the mid -slope benches proposed for the "layback the levee" alternatives may not be located so that rearing habitat is accessible when the juvenile salmonids are present based on the available flow records for the Green River. See our attached comments for the Tukwila 205 levee for additional information. Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Comments to Green River Levee Repairs- EA Scoping Notice June 10, 2008 Page 4 Geomorphic Impacts The EA should evaluate the effects of levees, the proposed repairs, and likely future repairs to maintain the levees on geomorphic and ecosystem processes in the Green River. The proposed hardening of the river banks with that is essentially a rock -lined riprap channel standard, will permanently preclude riverine processes that promote salmon habitat development. Bank hardening is not conducive to promoting favorable habitat conditions as lateral migration and other natural geomorphic processes are encumbered or prohibited. Without these processes, the river will permanently lose the ability to recruit spawning gravels from the banks, recruit trees for large woody debris that promote aquatic habitat structure, form off - channel habitats and side channels for rearing and high -flow refuge, and interact with its flood plain. Research conducted by the Army Corps of Engineers (Fischenich 2003) evaluates the potential impacts of hank - hardening structures. The author states "the prevailing philosophy in ecosystem management is that physical alterations of the structure and character of an ecosystem are most significant if they also impact process -based functions." This author also reports that erosion control measures such as levees are most likely to impact morphological evolution, sediment processes, and habitat. Additionally, he reports that energy reduction measures, which include various techniques to reduce the energy gradient of the stream, have the greatest potential impacts where the functions most likely to be impacted by stabilization measures include stream evolution processes, riparian succession, sedimentation processes, habitat, and biological community interactions. Furthermore, he notes that the impacts of bank hardening are most detrimental to salmonids. Clearly the Corps' own research identifies the adverse effects of levees upon the geomorphic processes that support salmonid habitat. These impacts should be adequately evaluated in the EA using this research. Riparian and water quality impacts The levees have contributed to the near -total loss of riparian functions including shade, woody debris recruitment, and terrestrial insect inputs. The EA should evaluate the potential for each alternative to impact these conditions and processes at each site. The EA should evaluate how each alternative will affect existing impaired water quality conditions. Implementation of vegetation standards under PL -84 -99 will result in the removal of existing vegetation larger than 4 inches in diameter and preclude the growth of mature riparian vegetation necessary to provide shade. In addition, the projects propose to add large amounts of rock that accumulates and conducts heat, which will likely worsen existing temperature problems, particularly during the summer and early fall chinook salmon adult migration period. The proposed planting of willow and dogwood lifts are not likely to provide adequate riparian shade or wood recruitment functions, compared to conifer or broad leaf tree species, let alone in comparison to natural site potential riparian shade development. Furthermore, the current proposal may permanently exclude natural riparian characteristics. Compliance with other laws and regulations The project sites are located with river reaches currently listed as impaired under Section 303(d) list of the Clean Water Act for water temperature. There are requirements to meet the state water quality standards. The EA should explain how this proposed project is consistent with State temperature and dissolved oxygen water quality standards in the Green River. Conflicts with Salmon Habitat Plans The proposed actions are in serious conflict with salmon habitat plans and projects in the Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Plan and in the WRIA 9 Habitat Plan. For example, the Shared Strategy Development Committee, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Comments to Green River Levee Repairs- EA Scoping Notice June 10, 2008 Page 5 represented by Corps, King County, and other local governmental representatives,' developed a strategy for the purpose of salmon recovery. The Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Plan (Shared Strategy Development Committee (SSDC, 2007), adopted by the National Marine Fisheries Service in 2007, states that "Riparian function depends on vegetated banks, and the removal of large trees precludes the recruitment of large woody debris, essential to a varied channel structure. Dikes and levees generally have maintenance requirements that prohibit vegetation, largely eliminating the production of food for salmon and the recruitment of large woody debris for cover and diverse channel structure. Channelization and floodplain structures such as dikes reduce river sinuosity, increasing water velocity and reducing the volume of habitat. In many cases, floodplain structures eliminate the connection to side channels and wetland complexes where salmon once could rest and feed." The Plan includes Chinook recovery Goals. The SSDC write: "The long term goal of the local governments working on habitat is to recover Chinook to naturally sustaining, harvestable levels. The plan developed by the Green/Duwamish and central Puget Sound Watershed Forum is intended to improve the watershed aquatic ecosystem with a focus on the needs of listed salmonid species..." The Plan proposes to increase natural origin chinook in the Green River over the next 50 years, with an eventual equilibrium spawner abundance target of 27,000 adult chinook. Habitat restoration to substantially increase the availability of juvenile chinook rearing and refuge habitat in the lower Green River has been identified as a key strategy to help meet this target. The Plan cites habitat factors limiting salmon recovery in the Green River. Several of these factors are directly associated with the construction and maintenance of levees. These limiting factors stated in the Plan are as follows: "• Reduced water quality - changes to dissolved oxygen, temperature, chemical contaminants and nutrients, suspended sediment/turbidity. Primary causes include stormwater runoff, lack of shade due to loss of riparian vegetation • Hydromodification - changes to estuarine tributary and distributary channels, cutoff of sediment supply (spawning gravels), reductions in the amount of in- channel large woody debris, and alteration of nearshore independent tributary channels. Primary causes include bank hardening, levees, clearing of mature streamside vegetation, dams, channel straightening, dredging, filling, loss of side channel and other off - channel habitats, loss of channel and habitat complexity, loss of connection to floodplain, and loss of channel migration. • Alteration of Habitat Forming Processes - interruption or other modification of processes that form nearshore habitat, such as sediment transport and freshwater input. Primary causes include shoreline armoring, • Degraded Riparian Condition - altering the presence or absence of native riparian vegetation along the shorelines. Primary causes include shoreline armoring." 1 Dow Constantine, King County Council; Max Prinsen, King Co. Conservation District; Judy Taylor, King Co. Agricultural Commission; Noel Gilbrough, US Army Corps of Engineers; Cities of Kent, Auburn, Tukwila, Renton; and others. • • Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Comments to Green River Levee Repairs- EA Scoping Notice June 10, 2008 Page 6 There are conflicts with the WRIA 9 Salmon Habitat plans as well. The WRIA 9 Salmon Habitat Plant specifically identifies preventing and reducing the armoring of stream banks and shorelines as a key salmon habitat need in all subwatersheds of the Green River (Page 1 -10). The goals of the WRIA 9 Habitat Plan are to protect and restore physical, chemical and biological processes and the freshwater, marine and estuarine habitats on which salmon depend; protect and restore habitat connectivity where feasible, and protect and improve water quality and quantity conditions to support healthy salmon populations. To accomplish these goals, the Plan states the following as "Recommended Mechanisms ": "- Protecting and improving riparian conditions would provide greater juvenile growth and survival - Preventing new bank/shoreline armoring and fill would improve juvenile growth, increase available habitat and improve diversity. - Protecting or restoring natural channel geomorphology, sediment recruitment, off - channel habitats, tributary habitats and inaccessible mainstem segments, refugia, riparian areas, water quality" The levees as proposed would impair salmon recovery efforts and conflict with the efforts of representatives from both the Corps and King County agencies. We suggest that improved coordination occur with salmon recovery groups in order to find flood risk reduction solutions that avoid or minimize conflict with salmon habitat objectives. Mitigation Measures The EA should fully disclose and evaluate the proposed mitigation measures for each alternative and each site. As part of this discussion, the EA should identify the proposed mitigation for the temporal impact of removing existing shade producing vegetation at the Dykstra and Galli sites where an unspecified amount of replacement shade vegetation will be planted and it will take 3 -10 years for the willow /dogwood lifts to produce comparable shade. The EA should also discuss the potential for mitigation to fail and the contingency actions that will follow should this mitigation fail. The EA also should also discuss the mitigation that will occur as a result of the permanent loss of habitat at the Galli's site where the levee will be reconstructed waterward of its existing footprint and why the addition of an unspecified amount of wood is sufficient to mitigate for this impact. We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this proposal and its potential impacts to fisheries resources. Please contact Holly Coccoli at 253- 876 -3360 or myself if you have any questions. Sincerely, f} O.,Un.VY &R1 Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Cc: Phyllis Meyers, NMFS Larry Fisher, WDFW Rebekah Padgett, WDOE Andy Levesque, KC DNRP 2 : Making our Watershed Fit for a King (Green Duwamish and Central Puget Sound Watershed August 2005, King County Water and Land Resources Division, prepared for the WRIA 9 Forum.) Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Comments to Green River Levee Repairs- EA Scoping Notice Sandy Kilroy, KC DNRP Carol Lumb, Tukwila June 10, 2008 Page 7 Attachment References Fischenich, J. C. 2003: Effects of Riprap on Riverine and Riparian Ecosystems, ERDC/EL TR -03 -4, U.S. Army Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS. http: / /el.erdc.usace.army.mil /wrap /pdf /tre103 -4.pdf Montgomery, D.R., S. Bolton, and D.B. Booth. 2003. Puget Sound rivers and salmon recovery. In Restoration of Puget Sound Rivers, ed. Montgomery, D.R., S. Bolton, and D.B. Booth. University of Washington Press, Seattle, WA Shared Strategy Development Committee. 2007. Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Plan: Volume 1. Submitted by the Shared Strategy for Puget Sound, Seattle, WA WRIA 9 Forum. 2005. Making our Watershed Fit for a King, Green Duwamish and Central Puget Sound Watershed August 2005, King County Water and Land Resources Division, prepared for the WRIA 9 Forum. 12 May 2008 MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE Fisheries Division 39015 - 172nd Avenue SE • Aubum, Washington 98092 -9763 Phone: (253) 939 -3311 • Fax: (253) 931 -0752 Carol Lumb City of Tukwila Department of Community Developrr_ent 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: Repairs to Tukwila Section 205 Levee Dear Ms. Lumb: The Mucldeshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division (MITFD) has reviewed the notice of application for proposed repairs to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers certified Section 205 Levee along the Green River in Tukwila. The MITFD appreciates the continuing efforts of individuals in the City, King County, National Marine Fisheries Service, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to consider fish habitat when levees repairs are undertaken in the Green River. However, the current piece -meal, emergency approach to levee rehabilitation that relies on the Army Corps' PL 84 -99 emergency repair program is unsatisfactory due to design, time, and funding constraints. We strongly recommend that a more comprehensive river corridor approach to levee improvement be initiated to adequately mitigate for fish habitat impacts associated with levees along the Tukwila 205 and lower Green River levee system. A key part of a comprehensive approach would be to begin to acquire lands and easements so that levees can be set back for a more functional channel and riparian zone. The Tukwila Section 205 levee appears to be ill- suited to convey the regulated peak flow it was designed to accommodate (12,000 c.f.s. at USGS Gage No. 1211300 Green River near Auburn). According to the Project Information Report (PIR) Rehabilitation of Flood Control Works Tukwila 205 (USACOE, March 2008), the levee has required repair after every year that the peak flow has reached 12,000 c.f.s. since the original project was constructed in1992. We recommend that the levee be set back sufficiently to accommodate peak flows regulated by Howard Hanson Dam, using designs that provide the maximum effective mitigation for the levee's impacts to fish habitat. The MITFD requests that the City require modifications to planned repairs for the Tukwila 205 levee to provide more effective mitigation for fish habitat than that which is proposed. The PIR notes that the project is "not intended to lessen habitat conditions as compared with conditions pre - existing the flood." Habitat conditions are so poor and degraded at the project site that just "not making it worse" is insufficient. The project area is used by threatened fish species Chinook and steelhead and other important salmonid resources. The opportunity exists to reduce the impacts the levee has imposed upon their habitat. The PIR cites the 2006 King County Flood Hazard Management Plan to describe structural deficiencies in the Tukwila 205 levee, but omitted the following text concerning levee impacts on fish habitat: "The river adjoining this levee segment lacks adequate aquatic edge habitat structure and complexity such as deep pools, large woody debris and overhanging cover... The riparian buffer is also inadequate." (2006 King County Flood Hazard Management Plan, Chapter 5, p. 248). All future environmental documents concerning levees should cite such relevant information, and include other available information concerning impacts of these and other levees on aquatic habitat. For Chinook, impacts include a near total loss of winter and spring rearing habitat, and degradation of adult holding habitat. For all salmonid species, impacts include .a near -total loss of riparian function including shade, woody debris recruitment, terrestrial insect inputs, and loss of complex channel structure including pools, side channels, wetlands, and other complex floodplain habitat types, and restriction of the floodplain prohibiting dissipation of flood energy. Summer water temperatures along the Tukwila 205 Levee routinely exceed state water quality standards for fish rearing and adult holding. A lack of tree shade along the levees contributes to stream heat loading, an increasingly urgent concern given climate trends. Repair Sites 3 and 5 each provide the opportunity to intercept solar radiation that reaches the river from the west under current conditions. The proposed plans should be modified to achieve much more of their potential to provide vegetative or topographic shade. The typical sections illustrating planned work indicate that willows will be planted no closer than 16 to 21 feet from the water's edge at low flows at Sites 3 and 5 respectively, likely providing minimal summer shading when stream temperatures are highest and shade is needed the most. Similarly, effective shading is likely to be minimal from trees planted along 16 -foot wide benches located no closer than 32 to 37 feet from the water's edge at low flow conditions. Steepening the slope of the banks below the upper elevation at which trees are planted would increase shading along the river. We recommend that the Corps and the City evaluate the feasibility of steepening parts of the levee slope to increase shade from vegetation planted in the bench. We concur with earlier recommendations to deepen and amend soils in the planting benches, and incorporate soils under the benches in the rock materials to improve soil moisture conditions for planted vegetation. We have not had the opportunity to review a planting plan, but would recommend integrating cottonwood, big leaf maple, and Douglas fir to the landscape plan along with regular maintenance to insure adequate survivals and control invasive plants. The typical section drawings indicated that 16 -foot wide mid -slope benches at both sites will only be inundated at flows of about 6,000 cfs or greater. These benches will do little to provide rearing habitat for Chinook, most of which leave the Green River between 01 FEB to 30 JUN when flows are usually much lower. Analysis of regulated flow (WY 1962 -2007) from 01 FEB to 30 JUN at the Green River near Auburn shows that mean daily flows equal to or greater than 6,000 cfs capable of inundating the planned mid -slope benches occur for only 1.2 percent of the time during the Chinook rearing and outmigration period, and thus would provide little Tukwila 205 NOA 2 opportunity for Chinook rearing. Lowering the planned bench to an elevation slightly higher than that of the ordinary high water (i.e., approximately 2,000 cfs) would increase inundation of the bench to about 20 percent of the time during Chinook rearing and outmigration, improving opportunity for useable rearing habitat. We recommend that the City and Corps lower the bench down to 2000 cfs, or alternatively, add a second lower bench in addition to the proposed midslope bench. It seems that if the slope of the banks were steepened, space for a second lower bench could be provided without sacrificing flood capacity or without increasing sheer stress at the toe compared to the proposed 2H:1 V slope. For the large wood installations, we recommend that the tree trunks be angled outward toward the middle of the river more than what is indicated in the section drawings, in order to provide greater hydraulic diversity and habitat value. Finally, treaty fishing activity by Muckleshoot fishers occurs within the project work area. It is possible that treaty fishing will occur at some time during the proposed July 1 — September 15, 2008 construction schedule. To avoid conflicts between construction and tribal fishing, we ask that the Corps coordinate with Karen Walter, MITFD (phone 253- 876 -3116) during the month of June to address to this issue. Thanks very much for your consideration. We request to be included in further notifications, decisions, and materials related to this project. If you have any questions or comments, please call me at 253- 876 -3360 or Dr. Martin Fox at 253- 876 -3121. Holly Coccoli Fisheries Biologist Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Cc: Phyllis Meyer, NMFS Colonel Michael McCormick, US Army Corps of Engineers Steve Bleifuhs, King County River and Floodplain Management Unit Larry Fisher, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Tukwila 205 NOA 3 [Carol Ltmb - COE Drawings From: Carol Lumb To: Karen Walter Date: 06/09/2008 2:11 pm Subject: COE Drawings Hi Karen: I just e- mailed Holly but got a response that she is out for a while. I am attaching below what I sent her - 3 profiles from the 100% drawings we just got from the COE. They are slightly different from the set you received. First change is that Mr. Segale is paying for and constructing a wall at the back of the levee repair rather than have a "back of levee" that takes up an additional 12 feet on his property. They COE drawings are also now showing more soil area on top of the bench and they have added soil to anchor the willows that will be planted along the front of the levee. We will be requesting that they hyrdoseed the bench area until the COE is ready to plant it. Let me know if you have any questions. Carol Carol Lumb, Senior Planner Dept. of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 206- 431 -3661 (Fax: 206 - 431 -3665) Carol Lamb - RE: COE levee repairs 0 From: Carol Lumb To: Holly Coccoli Date: 06/09/2008 1:42 pm Subject: RE: COE levee repairs Hi Holly: We just received the 100% drawings from the COE and I am attaching below 3 profiles that may be of interest. Mr. Segale is going to pay for and construct a wall along the back side of his portion of the levee to avoid having the 12 foot back side of the levee on his property. There will still be a 10 foot access easement behind the wall. On all three drawings the COE is now showing a deeper area of soil on the bench and they have added coir fabric soil lifts to plant the willows in - these will run all the way to the back of the levee where the quarry spalls are located. The bench will be hydroseeded until the landscaping plan is implemented. let me know if you have any questions. Carol »> "Holly Coccoli" <HoIIv.Coccoli @muckleshoot.nsn.us> 06/06/2008 4:20 pm »> Hi Carol Yes, we are working on comments now. Should be out by the deadline. Holly Original Message From: Carol Lumb Jmailto:clumb@ci.tukwila.wa.usl Sent: Friday, June 06, 2008 2:41 PM To: Holly Coccoli; Karen Walter Subject: COE levee repairs Hi: just checking to see if you are going to comment on the COE's Notice of Preparation on the levee repairs - we are waiting for their comment period to close to see what comments come in to them and how they response to any environmental concerns that are raised. thanks. carol Carol Lumb, Senior Planner Dept. of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 206 - 431 -3661 (Fax: 206 - 431 -3665) 0 C B A EL 30' CAPPROX-."` 5E TRAJL TYPICAL S CTIION SEEN E PLATE C-501 101' 3 4 FENCE 14' I HYDROSEED (TYP) EL 36'f, (APPROX.) EL 36' IAPPROX.I i0 SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL RETAINING -WALL (SEE PLATE - -- C -5021 • SPALLS UP TO ELEV. 28' 9,000 CFS ELEV. APPROX. 10' ACCESS Akv TUKWILA 205 - SITE 5 TYPICAL SECTION 1 NOT TO SCALE SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL 6,000 ,CFS EL 24' COIR WRAP WILLOWS PLACED 'ENVY 6" ON CENTER (TYP) 16' -.11 % /ice %��A \���������d \`��� \•��i'�I i��au ii �! QUARRY SPALLS 1' THICK TOPSOIL (TYP) '"\`///., � ',/\ \ \`I //'"//\\\`/f/ :'W/21.1,, 11II \\ \1111 \MIII \ \\ 04.• CLASS IV RIPRAP LAUNCHABLE ANCHOR ROCK, 5' DIAM. eo EL 10' LWD W /ROOTBALL, ANCHORED TO BOULDER, ANGLED DOWNSTREAM (WSEL 300 CFS APPROX.), SEE DETAIL PLATE C-501 CFS (APPROX.) IF SHEET IMMURED LESS THAN 22•X 34' IT 18 AMU= PRINT. REDUCE SCALE A NC Y. • 1 • e 1 i 40 O z 0 O 0' 1. W 1- w If) Q§ 4 Lai '— v)0 CI 1 F-- a 0 " In • toN u , • J U >- 1— 1 Plate number C -301 Sheet 9 of 16 w • -J LL u m D C B A Mom AC PAVEMENT EL 2T' i APPIFox. ) SEE TRAIL RESTORATION TYPICAL SECTION. SEE PLATE C -501 97' FENCE HYDROSEEO (TYP) EL 36' (APPROX.) SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL .- RETAINING WALL (SEE ' DETAIL" -PLATE C -5021 EXISTING GROUND - - - -- SURFACE (APPROX.) ----EL 28' ( APPROX.) WSEL 9.000 CFS 1 10' ACCESS TUKWILA 205 - SITE 5 TYPICAL SECTION 2 NOT TO SCALE SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL " ��\ �// L.. �� •�i� \Q % /�d \� / / /. \ \� /� /. \�.ii�� 1� %1L� miii ��= nip OUARRY SPALLS u.N. •I.N... WILLOWS IN SOIL. WILLOWS R1 ACED EVERY 6" OM EL.24' ( APPROX.) v OHw EL. 16' 1' THICK TOPSOIL (TYP) k�! 10' WSEL 300 CFS EL 8' (APPROX.) CLASS IV RIPRAP LAUNCHABLE TOE. CLASS IV RIPRAP APPROX.) (APPROX.) IF SHEET AAEABURES LF$B THAN ?T X M• rr 18 • 1 r • LY W Pbte number: C -302 Sheet 10 of 16 J 4 u 8 _V s . ll SEE TRAIL TYPICAL RESTORATION SECTION. SEE PLATE C -502 110' 12' 14' Q SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL HYDRO SEED (TYP) EL 29' 10' ACCESS SPALLS UP TO ELEVATION 27' 9,000 CFS SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL i QUARRY SPALLS WILLOWS WITH COIR FABRIC SOIL LIFTS, WILLOWS Pt ACED EVERY 6" ON CENTER (TYP) aieC.`dn��fK V OstW EL 15' 2 000 CF 1' THICK TOPSOIL 1 TYP TUKWILA 205 - SITE 3 TYPICAL SECTION NOT TO SCALE CLASS IV RIPRAP LAUNCHABLE TOE, CLASS IV RIPRAP ANCHOR ROCK, 5' DIAM. WSEL EL 8' (AP PRO X.1 CFS (AP ROX.) LWD W /ROOTBALL, ANCHORED TO BOULDER, ANGLED DOWNSTREAM (WSEL 300 CFS APPROX.), SEE DETAIL PLATE C -501 IF SHEET MEASURES LE88 THAN 2T X St' R I8 AREDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. US Anny Corns s.... Maria 1 1 1 1 • a] 0 z 0 8 c: m N N 1 k • M 0 1 s Plate number: C -303 Sheet 11 of 16 w z 0 0 Jim Morrow - FW: Tukwila Sec 205 Levee Repairs - Site 5 • From: "Gentry, Wanda F NWS" <Wanda.F.Gentry@usace.army.mil> To: "Jim Morrow" <jmorrow @ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 5/28/2008 3:04 pm Subject: FW: Tukwila Sec 205 Levee Repairs - Site 5 Hi Jim: Everyone seems to be away at the moment. I sent the below e-mail in hopes of getting the City some help. Wanda > > From: Gentry, Wanda F NWS > Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 3:02 PM > To: Cummins, Andrea K NWS; Pozarycki, Scott V NWS; Orr, Laura A NWS; > Weber, Douglas T NWS > Subject: Tukwila Sec 205 Levee Repairs - Site 5 > Importance: High > > Hello All: > > I was not sure who to contact, but I received a call from the City of > Tukwila, who is going through its SEPA an Shoreline Management permitting > process. The City is getting comments from DOE, NOAA and the Muckleshoot > Indian Tribe regarding the amount and extent of rock being placed in the > river. > > Perhaps someone from ERS can contact Carol Lumb, the City's SEPA and > Shoreline Management Environmental Specialist at (206) 431 -3661 or Ryan > Larson, PE at (206) 431 -2356 and help them provide a response similar to > our response regarding the questions on the amount and extent of rock in > the riverbed. > > The City is trying to expedite its process to meet the Friday, May 30th > deadline set by Colonel McCormick for solicitation of this project. > > Appreciate if someone can give them a call back to see if you can help them > get over the hump with the questions regarding our design. > > Thanks, > Wanda > X -3669 Carol Lumb - Re: FW: FW: Green River From: To: Date: Subject: Hi Charlene: oreline permit Page 1 Carol Lumb Charlene Anderson 05/15/2008 5:38 pm Re: FW: FW: Green River Shoreline permit We required a shoreline substantial development permit and SEPA for the levee repairs as we viewed the work to go beyond just repairing what is there. If you compare the profiles for the Briscoe repair to what the COE is proposing in Tukwila, there is a marked difference, which would seem to have environmental implications (although I'm not sure how we are going to resolve the issues that have come up). I will attach the comments we've received from NOAA and the Muckleshoot Tribe just so you know what issues are being raised. I asked the COE to respond and they have said they expect to get the same comments during their comment period, which ends June 10 I believe, and so will get some feed back eventually from them. Unfortunately, it seems that we are stuck with the design that the COE wants to use unless we want to foot the bill for the repairs, which of course we cant afford to do. The COE has said they don't have plans to landscape the bench until next year some time so we don't even have some guarantee that the new design will be much of an improvement habitat -wise over what is there now. Hope this helps - let me know if you have any other questions. Carol Carol Lumb, Senior Planner Dept. of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 206 -431 -3661 (Fax: 206 -431 -3665) »> "Anderson, Charlene" <CAnderson(aci.kent.wa.us> 05/15/2008 3:42 pm Hi, Carol. Have you guys rethought whether this is a shoreline exemption or substantial development permit? My initial thought is that the repair needn't be the same old style of repair but could include the latest techniques in repair. Original Message From: Mactutis, Mike Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 10:10 AM To: Anderson, Charlene Cc: Murillo, Alex Subject: FW: FW: Green River Shoreline permit Charlene, FYI, some email traffic regarding Shoreline exemptions on the Green River Levee Improvements proposed for this summer. In the past, your department has issued exemptions because the work was maintenance. Some of the debate below has been that the designs proposed by the Corps of Engineers have less habitat structures and planting than the Flood Control Districts previous designs, and whether that would make the City's rethink the exemption. Tukwila has some other issues with the levee work as well which I am not completely clear about, which is making them rethink the exemption. There will be more to come on this, but I wanted to let you know what is going on. »> Carol Lumb - Re: FW: FW: Green River 'oreline permit Mike Original Message From: Schaefer, Ruth fmailto: Ruth.Schaefercalkingcountv.aov1 Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 2:42 PM To: Carol Lumb Cc: Mactutis, Mike; Ryan Larson; Scheibner, Deborah; Levesque, Andy; Bleifuhs, Steve; Andrea .K.Cumminsausace.army.mil; Stockdale, Erik (ECY) Subject: RE: FW: Green River Shoreline permit Carol, just to clarify, we have build vegetated benches on our Green River repair projects at many, many project sites over the past 20 years - -all of them with SSDPEs. I will gladly provide you a list of the sites in Kent where King County has built levee and revetment repairs using benches under SSDPEs. SSDPEs have are long been the norm in permitting levee and revetment repair projects in cities such as North Bend, Snoqualmie, Redmond, and unincorporated King County. There are many reasons why benching riverbanks is a good idea structurally and ecologically. Excavating soil above a newly created bench on an existing oversteepened riverbank slope reduces the weight and mass of soil above the bench elevation that would otherwise be prone to saturation slump failure during rapid drawdown after prolonged release of stored floodwater at Howard Hanson Dam. The presence of a bench above a newly stabilized levee or revetment toe helps keep the toe intact by providing a surface that supports woody vegetation, which attenuates water velocities in the vicinity of the bank, helping resist erosive forces on the most vulnerable part of most flood facilities - -the toe. A densely vegetated bench also promotes water velocity attenuation during flood events and thereby provides a modest strip of flood refugia for juvenile salmonids during their downstream migration during late winter and spring freshets. A densely vegetated bench helps shade the margin of the channel, helping moderate water temperatures and provide cover for fish in the form of shade. The branches of overhanging willows also provide direct structural cover along the channel margin, where the vast majority of juvenile salmon congregate. A vegetated bench (not to mention vegetation along the slope between the toe of the facility and the bench surface, and the upper bank above the bench) also provides habitat for terrestrial insects, which provide much of the food for outmigrating salmonids, including adult steelhead that survive spawning and migrate back to the sea before returning to the river to spawn again. In the past, the Corps has regarded benches as "surplus" to the actual levee prism and has allowed trees to be planted on them in addition to native riparian shrubs. Trees growing on benches can potentially provide much more shade than shrubs, as well as contribute a modest supply of large woody debris to the river in future decades as they mature. The function of trees on benches are disproportionately important in the lower Green River, where along very long stretches of the river the growth of healthy stands of riparian trees is precluded by existing land uses, not to mention the fact that the Corps' regulations prohibit tree growth on levee prism surfaces. My biggest issue with the Corps bench designs is that they are composed largely of riprap and will thus not be very conducive to the establishment and persistence of adequate amounts of native riparian vegetation. Looking at the cross - sections of the entire set of drawings Page 2 Carol Lumb - Re: FW:F-V: Green River oreline permit for these 2008 projects within the cities of Tukwila, Kent and Auburn reveals that some benches will remain completely unvegetated, while others will be vegetated only with grass. Devegetated benches and grass- covered benches and levee slopes fail to provide even the minimal habitat benefits available from flood facility repair projects that include vegetated benches. Original Message From: Carol Lumb fmailto:clumb @ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 1:35 PM To: Levesque, Andy; Bleifuhs, Steve; Andrea.K.Cummins @usace.armv.mil Cc: Mike Mactutis; Ryan Larson; Scheibner, Deborah; Schaefer, Ruth Subject: Re: FW: Green River Shoreline permit Hello Andrea, Andy and everyone else: I wanted to respond to one of Andy's items related to whether the work in Tukwila requires a shoreline substantial development permit. We determined that the repair work does require a SSDP because of the way we interpret the definition of "normal maintenance and repair" under the Shoreline Management Act exemptions (WAC 173 -27 -040 (2)(b)). That exemption states that normal maintenance and repair is work that restores a development to a state comparable to its original condition. Since this repair will expand the levee to add a bench it didn't seem that we could call the work exempt. I would be interested to hear from the other jurisdictions who are having the same repairs done how they have interpreted this exemption. Thanks for the update on the planting plan for the bench area - I will look forward to seeing it soon so I can add it to our shoreline permit file. Carol Lumb Carol Lumb, Senior Planner Dept. of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 206 -431 -3661 (Fax: 206 -431 -3665) »> "Levesque, Andy" <Andv.Levesque@kinacountv.gov> 04/17/2008 10:39 am »> FYI All. Some serious consideration of local requirements for adequate revegetation of the mid -slope benches seems in order. This is to let you all know here it stands today, within the Corps' own process. Andy From: Cummins, Andrea K NWS rmailto: Andrea .K.Cummins usace.armv.mill Carol Lumb - Re: FW: FW: Green River" oreline permit Page 4 Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 10:36 AM To: Levesque, Andy Subject: RE: Green River Shoreline permit Thanks Andy! That is greatly helpful as I am hardly an expert on the Shoreline permit process let alone dealing with three different jurisdictions. I am trying to get some of the internal documents which require CZM status out so it appears as though I will use general language that the we are still working on it. It is also good to know that both Tukwila and Kent may require bench vegetation for permitting. It will help with our internal struggle with emergency management. It is always an uphill battle around here. I will make sure and clarify that the requirement for vegetation is not confirmed but it is a possibility. Andrea From: Levesque, Andy jmailto :Andv.LevesaueOkinacountv.gov1 Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 10:28 AM To: Cummins, Andrea K NWS Cc: Scheibner, Deborah; Ryan Larson; clumbftci.tukwila.wa.us Subject: RE: Green River Shoreline permit Andrea, Thank you for confirming the status of Shorelines approvals here. I have a couple of comments. The Kent projects have not yet been confirmed by Kent to be exempt. Normally we request both a letter confirming the projects SSDP exemption status, and a filling and grading permit from Kent. Since we normally demonstrate to Kent through our SEPA documentation and JARPA that we are in substantive compliance with their environmental requirements and are performing maintenance, the SSDP Exemption is normally confirmed in writing by Kent. Kent also usually confirms that since we are doing the grading work on the City's behalf, we can proceed under their own grading authority, acting as their agent without any separate grading approval needed. We have yet to confirm either of these two approvals with Kent in writing, since we have not yet requested them, pending resolution of the questions about vegetation along the benches as you note. This same general approach is common in each of the three cities involved with the PL -99 projects. Usually they confirm the Shorelines SSDP will be exempt for maintenance actions, based on our environmental measures as documented in SEPA and the JARPA. Sometimes they issue us their own permit, as in Kent. More commonly, they issue a separate permit directly to us, as has been the case in the past in both Auburn and Tukwila. Carol Lumb - Re: FW: FW: Green River Deb is best informed about what exactly will be needed for the two Auburn projects. I share your opinion they will not be exempt with the encroachment as recently shown, but she will know more about this. Carol Lumb in Tukwila is puzzling through how to process the Shorelines Master Program requirements there. The question on vegetating the benches keeps coming up, so I would conclude it is a requirement, but this should be directly confirmed with Carol, or through Ryan Larson there. I am not trying to state anyone's actual requirements here, but just to share my own understanding of the communications so far. Andy From: Cummins, Andrea K NWS Jmailto: Andrea .K.Cummins @usace.army.mill Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 10:03 AM To: Levesque, Andy Subject: RE: Green River Shoreline permit Hi Andy, Yes, we are still working on getting a commitment to vegetate the benches (at all the sites) from Doug and the designers. Hopefully it will be resolved today, I will let you know when I know more. Just to be clear then, Horseshoe Bend, Kent Shops and Meyers are both considered exempt. Dykstra and Gaili's I assume are not with the river encroachment and Tukwila is TBD depending on if we vegetate the benches. If we do plant will we get and exemption or is that too simplistic? Thanks! Andrea From: Levesque, Andy Jmailto :Andv.Levesque@kingcountv.4ovl Carol Lumb - Re: FW: FW: Green River oreline permit Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 9:50 AM To: Scheibner, Deborah; Cummins, Andrea K NWS Cc: Ryan Larson Subject: RE: Green River Shoreline permit Andrea, Carol Lumb in Tukwila is attempting to determine the Shorelines requirements there, for the two Tukwila 205 locations (Site 3 and Site 5). They apparently have some questions about vegetation along the bench there. My understanding is that the Corps was going to determine its level of plantings based on the environmental reviews initiated last week. Andy From: Scheibner, Deborah Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 3:09 PM To: 'Cummins, Andrea K NWS'; Levesque, Andy Subject: RE: Green River Shoreline permit The Green River projects located in Kent will fall under a shoreline exemption. We write the City a letter describing the project and asking for a Shorelines Substantial Development exemption, and they usually write us a letter back approving the work. For the Auburn, its my understanding from Andy that we do need to apply for a Shoreline permit, though the process is fairly straight forward. I have a call in to my contact at the City about the permitting process and plan to submit for permits soon with the final plan set. Deb From: Cummins, Andrea K NWS fmailto: Andrea .K.Cummins(ausace.army.mill Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 3:04 PM To: Levesque, Andy; Scheibner, Deborah Subject: Green River Shoreline permit Hi Andy and Deb, Do either of you know if King County has applied for a Shoreline permit for the Green projects or if they are going to fall into the exempt category. We have had some discussion with counsel about the projects being exempt as they are "repairs ". Any info you have would be great as we figure out how to address CZM. Thanks! Andrea Cummins Carol Lumb - Fwd: Re: Tukwila Levee From: To: Date: Subject: rs Carol Lumb Ryan Larson 05/13/2008 2:17 pm Fwd: Re: Tukwila Levee Repairs Ryan: Sandra Lange's e-mail address is: SLAN461 @ECY.WA.GOV I will forward the two responses we got to Andrea and hopefully she will be able to provide a response. Carol »> Ryan Larson 05/13/2008 2:05 pm »> Carol, Could you send me Sandra Lang's email address? Thanks - Ryan »> Carol Lumb 05/13/2008 11:48:39 am »> Hi: I'm forwarding comments we got from NOAA on the SEPA; we also got comments from the Muckleshoot Tribe which I will forward next. Should I forward the comments to the COE to get their repose or will you be providing it? Carol Page 1 of 1 Carol Lumb - tukwila 205 levee notice of application [Scanned] From: "Holly Coccoli" <Ho11y .Coccoli @muckleshoot.nsn.us> To: "Carol Lumb" <clumb @ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 05/13/2008 9:22 AM Subject: tukwila 205 levee notice of application [Scanned] CC: "Erin Slaten" <Erin.Slaten @muckleshoot.nsn.us >, "Karen Walter" < Karen .Walter @muckleshoot.nsn.us >, "Glen St. Amant" < Glen.StAmant @muckleshoot.nsn.us> Hello Carol Thanks for sending the drawings today and for talking with me about the project. Attached is a comment letter. We look forward to talking further with you and others about the levee issue in the lower Green. Thanks again Holly Holly Coccoli Fish Biologist Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division 39015 172nd Avenue SE Auburn,WA 998092 253- 876 -3360 file: / /C:\Documents and Settings \CAROL -L \Local Settings\ Temp\ XPGrpWise \48295DC9tuk- mai16300 -... 05/13/2008 Carol Lumb - Re: Fwd: Briscoe Levee ' - - - it Cross Section From: To: Date: Subject: Carol Lumb Ryan Larson 05/07/2008 11:14 am Re: Fwd: Briscoe Levee Repair Cross Section Thanks Ryan - I will be able to use this info in the shoreline staff report. Carol »> Ryan Larson 05/07/2008 10:07 am »> Carol, We have requested on several occasions for the Corps to change their design so that it more closely matches the Briscoe design. The Corps has repeatedly stated that given the erosive nature of the river that they need the additional rock for an adequate repair. The repair is being conducted by the Corps and we have little say in how they do their work. We could tell them not to do the repair and we would do the work but at a $1000.00 a foot we can not afford to go this route. - Ryan »> Carol Lumb 05/06/2008 11:47 am »> Hi: I wanted to forward to you the e-mail I got from Andy last week when I asked for a cross section of the Briscoe Levee Repair. Do we (City/County) have any options to require a different design of the levee repair or do we have to accept what the Corps is proposing to use? thanks. carol t , • Page 1 of 2 Carol Lumb - RE: Tukwila proj• • From: Ryan Larson To: Andrea K NWS Cummins Date: 05/05/2008 1:30 PM Subject: RE: Tukwila project CC: Carol Lumb Andrea, Thanks for the information. Tukwila did not get a shorelines exemption so we are going through the City's shoreline permit process. - Ryan »> "Cummins, Andrea K NWS" < Andrea .K.Cummins @usace.army.mil> 05/05/2008 9:20 am »> Hi Ryan, No we did not do a JARPA for the Tukwila project as they are considered exempt under 404(f)(1)(b) as the footprint of the repaired levees at both sites falls within the original footprint below OHW. We will prepare a letter to send to Ecology (Rebekah Padgett) regarding this exemption in the next week or so. I can send you a copy of the letter when it is finished if that would help. Let me know if you need anything else. Also, since you brought up the Shoreline permit, can I assume the Tukwila projects did not get the exemption and you are applying for a permit? Or has that not yet been decided? Thanks! Andrea From: Ryan Larson [mailto:rlarson @ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Friday, May 02, 2008 11:38 AM To: Cummins, Andrea K NWS Subject: RE: Tukwila project Andrea, Was a JARPA done for this project and if so, could you email me a copy of it? State DOE is asking me for a copy of it but since all I am doing is getting a Shoreline Permit through the City I did not complete one. Thanks, Ryan Larson City of Tukwila 206.431.2456 »> "Cummins, Andrea K NWS" <Andrea.K.Cummins @usace.army.mil> 04/17/2008 10:39 am »> Thanks Ryan. This is plenty for me to finish up my internal documentation. Andrea From: Ryan Larson [mailto:rlarson @ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 7:45 AM file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \CAROL - L\Local Settings\ Temp\ XPGrpWise \481FOBEFtuk- mail6300 -... 05/05/2008 To: Cummins, Andrea K NWS Cc: Orr, Laura A NWS Subject: RE: Tukwila project Andrea, • • Page 2 of 2 The Shoreline permit application has been submitted to our Community Development Department. The Public Works Department had argued that an exemption could be issued since the the project involves repairing an existing structure under revised standards. The Community Development Department determined that given the scope and visibility of the project that we should go through the SEPA and Shoreline process. I have attached a scanned copy of the notice of complete application issued by the Community Development Department. This letter has relevant contact information in it. Let me know if you need any more information. Thanks, Ryan Larson Senior Engineer City of Tukwila 206.431.2456 »> "Orr, Laura A NWS" <Laura.A.Orr @usace.army.mil> 04/17/2008 6:54 am »> Ryan Larson with the City of Tukwila could help answer this. I have put him in the To box. Laura From: Cummins, Andrea K NWS Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 3:12 PM To: Orr, Laura A NWS Subject: Tukwila project Hi Laura, I need to find out if the City of Tukwila has applied for a Shoreline permit or if they are going for an exemption. Do you have contact info for someone who might be able to answer that question? Thanks! Andrea Cummins Biologist, Environmental Resources Section U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District 206.764.3641 206.764.4470 fax file: / /C:\Documents and Settings \CAROL -L \Local Settings\ Temp\ XPGrpWise \481FOBEFtuk- mail6300 -... 05/05/2008 Carol Lumb - FW: Planting Plan • • Page 1 of 2 From: "Levesque, Andy" <Andy.Levesque @kingcounty.gov> To: "Mactutis, Mike" <MMactutis @ci.kent.wa.us >, <clumb @ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 04/23/2008 8:44 AM Subject: FW: Planting Plan CC: "Schaefer, Ruth" <Ruth.Schaefer @kingcounty.gov >, "Scheibner, Deborah" <Deborah. Scheibner @kingcounty.gov> FYI, regarding plantings on the benches for all the Corps projects. From: Weber, Douglas T NWS [mailto: Douglas.T.Weber @usace.army.mil] Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 5:20 PM To: Levesque, Andy; Ryan Larson Cc: Bleifuhs, Steve; Pozarycki, Scott V NWS; Cummins, Andrea K NWS Subject: RE: Planting Plan Andy and Ryan, The Corps is now planning on planting all of the mid slope benches as part of the Green river levee rehab projects. For Tukwila and Horseshoe, the planting cost will be 100% Federal. (It will be cost shared on the other Green river projects) Assuming the levee rehab projects are completed this fall, the current plan is to plant the benches in early spring (Possibly March). Andrea Cummins is developing the planting plan. Please provide input directly to Andrea. Sorry about the late change in direction. Douglas T. Weber, P.E. Emergency Management Branch Seattle District (206) 764 -3406 (206) 719 -1502 Cell From: Levesque, Andy [mailto:Andy.Levesque @kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 5:35 PM To: Ryan Larson Cc: Bleifuhs, Steve; Weber, Douglas T NWS Subject: RE: Planting Plan Ryan, The Corps conducted an environmental coordination field tour with several agencies present, just last Thursday, April 10. At that time, no agency comments had been received or processed to determine whether or not such plantings would be required in order for the Corps to meet its environmental threshold for mitigation of project impacts. I spoke to Carol Lumb about this the day before the tour. The agencies also discussed this question at the time. This determination was to be forthcoming from the Corps upon consideration of agency comments, and was to have been communicated to us (you and me) when finalized. Since I have not yet heard back, and don't believe the Corps has yet received such comments, I am not yet fully convinced your file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \CAROL - L\Local Settings\ Temp\ XPGrpWise \480EF6DBtuk- mail6300... 05/15/2008 `- -� • • Page 2 of 2 statement reflects the latest update information. I will check with Steve B. and Doug Weber on this tomorrow. To the best of my knowledge, King County has not to date volunteered to provide the Corps with its minimum required environmental mitigation measures for these projects. We would expect the Corps itself to provide sufficient plantings to meet their own minimum vegetation requirements, in coordination and consultation with the agencies involved in the environmental reviews, including your own Shorelines staff for that matter. Where King County has a local cost share obligation as a sponsor of repairs to the non - federal levees, we have discussed negotiating in -kind contributions toward our total cost obligation, which could in fact include any portion of the Corps' construction, including its minimum required' mitigation to be shown as part of the project itself. Since there are no local sponsor shares involved in repairs to the federal (205) levees, there is therefore no opportunity to provide any portion of them as an in- kind contribution, whether this involves vegetation or other construction elements. Just as a note, it would appear Tukwila itself is actually an environmental permitting agency, with regards to City standards for the Shorelines Master Program. It may turn out that additional vegetation would in fact be required by the City itself in order for the Corps' project(s) to meet the required minimum environmental standards here. Whether this means the Corps would have to add the plantings to its project, or whether the City as the local sponsor of the repair would need to provide these regardless of the 100% federal funding of all other project work elements, in order to comply with its own City codes is beyond me. If this turns out to be the case, then I would imagine King County would need to negotiate some further arrangements with the City. This is not part of the County's current understanding here, however, and would need to be resolved at the appropriate administrative levels if so. I will call you from Steve's office tomorrow to discuss in detail. Thanks, Andy From: Ryan Larson [mailto:rlarson @ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:56 AM To: Levesque, Andy Subject: Planting Plan Andy, The Corps is not planning on planting the bench at the two Tukwila Repair sites. Can you tell me if the Flood Control District is planning any planting work once the repairs are completed? If so, do you have a planting plan that I can give Carol Lumb who is working on the Shoreline and SEPA for the project? Thanks - Ryan file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \CAROL -L \Local Settings\ Temp\ XPGrpWise \480EF6DBtuk- mai16300... 05/15/2008 CaKol Lumb - Re: FW: Green River Shor From: To: Date: Subject: Carol Lumb Andrea.K.Cummins @usace.army.mil; Andy Levesque... 04/17/2008 1:35 pm Re: FW: Green River Shoreline permit CC: Deborah Scheibner; Mike Mactutis; Ruth Schaef... Hello Andrea, Andy and everyone else: I wanted to respond to one of Andy's items related to whether the work in Tukwila requires a shoreline substantial development permit. We determined that the repair work does require a SSDP because of the way we interpret the definition of "normal maintenance and repair" under the Shoreline Management Act exemptions (WAC 173 -27 -040 (2)(b)). That exemption states that normal maintenance and repair is work that restores a development to a state comparable to its original condition. Since this repair will expand the levee to add a bench it didn't seem that we could call the work exempt. I would be interested to hear from the other jurisdictions who are having the same repairs done how they have interpreted this exemption. Thanks for the update on the planting plan for the bench area - I will look forward to seeing it soon so I can add it to our shoreline permit file. Carol Lumb Carol Lumb, Senior Planner Dept. of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 206 - 431 -3661 (Fax: 206 - 431 -3665) »> "Levesque, Andy" <Andv. Levesque @kingcountv.gov> 04 /17/2008 10:39 am »> FYI AII. Some serious consideration of local requirements for adequate revegetation of the mid -slope benches seems in order. This is to let you all know here it stands today, within the Corps' own process. Andy From: Cummins, Andrea K NWS fmailto: Andrea .K.Cummins@usace.armv.mill Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 10:36 AM To: Levesque, Andy Subject: RE: Green River Shoreline permit Thanks Andy! That is greatly helpful as I am hardly an expert on the Shoreline permit process let alone dealing with three different jurisdictions. I am trying to get some of the internal documents which require CZM status out so it appears as though I will use general language that the we are still working on it. It is also good to know that both Tukwila and Kent may require bench vegetation for permitting. It will help with our internal struggle with emergency management. It is Carol Lumb - Re: FW: Green River Shor- 'ne permit always an uphill battle around here. I will make sure and clarify that the requirement for vegetation is not confirmed but it is a possibility. Andrea From: Levesque, Andy fmailto :Andv.Levesaue @kingcountv.aovl Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 10:28 AM To: Cummins, Andrea K NWS Cc: Scheibner, Deborah; Ryan Larson; clumb @ci.tukwila.wa.us Subject: RE: Green River Shoreline permit Andrea, Thank you for confirming the status of Shorelines approvals here. I have a couple of comments. The Kent projects have not yet been confirmed by Kent to be exempt. Normally we request both a letter confirming the projects SSDP exemption status, and a filling and grading permit from Kent. Since we normally demonstrate to Kent through our SEPA documentation and JARPA that we are in substantive compliance with their environmental requirements and are performing maintenance, the SSDP Exemption is normally confirmed in writing by Kent. Kent also usually confirms that since we are doing the grading work on the City's behalf, we can proceed under their own grading authority, acting as their agent without any separate grading approval needed. We have yet to confirm either of these two approvals with Kent in writing, since we have not yet requested them, pending resolution of the questions about vegetation along the benches as you note. This same general approach is common in each of the three cities involved with the PL -99 projects. Usually they confirm the Shorelines SSDP will be exempt for maintenance actions, based on our environmental measures as documented in SEPA and the JARPA. Sometimes they issue us their own permit, as in Kent. More commonly, they issue a separate permit directly to us, as has been the case in the past in both Auburn and Tukwila. Deb is best informed about what exactly will be needed for the two Auburn projects. I share your opinion they will not be exempt with the encroachment as recently shown, but she will know more about this. Carol Lumb in Tukwila is puzzling through how to process the Shorelines Master Program requirements there. The question on vegetating the benches keeps coming up, so I would conclude it is a requirement, but this should be directly confirmed with Carol, or through Ryan Larson there. Carol Lumb - Re: FW: Green River Shor ine permit I am not trying to state anyone's actual requirements here, but just to share my own understanding of the communications so far. Andy From: Cummins, Andrea K NWS jmailto: Andrea .K.Cumminsctusace.armv.mill Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 10:03 AM To: Levesque, Andy Subject: RE: Green River Shoreline permit Hi Andy, Yes, we are still working on getting a commitment to vegetate the benches (at all the sites) from Doug and the designers. Hopefully it will be resolved today, I will let you know when I know more. Just to be clear then, Horseshoe Bend, Kent Shops and Meyers are both considered exempt. Dykstra and Galli's I assume are not with the river encroachment and Tukwila is TBD depending on if we vegetate the benches. If we do plant will we get and exemption or is that too simplistic? Thanks! Andrea From: Levesque, Andy jmailto :Andv.Levesaue@kingcountv.govl Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 9:50 AM To: Scheibner, Deborah; Cummins, Andrea K NWS Cc: Ryan Larson Subject: RE: Green River Shoreline permit Andrea, Carol Lumb in Tukwila is attempting to determine the Shorelines requirements there, for the two Tukwila 205 locations (Site 3 and Site 5). They apparently have some questions about vegetation along the bench there. My understanding is that the Corps was going to determine its level of plantings based on the environmental reviews initiated last week. tC�rol Luumb - Re: FW: Green River Shor ne�permit Andy From: Scheibner, Deborah Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 3:09 PM To: 'Cummins, Andrea K NWS'; Levesque, Andy Subject: RE: Green River Shoreline permit The Green River projects located in Kent will fall under a shoreline exemption. We write the City a letter describing the project and asking for a Shorelines Substantial Development exemption, and they usually write us a letter back approving the work. For the Auburn, it's my understanding from Andy that we do need to apply for a Shoreline permit, though the process is fairly straight forward. I have a call in to my contact at the City about the permitting process and plan to submit for permits soon with the final plan set. Deb From: Cummins, Andrea K NWS f mailto: Andrea .K.Cummins(&usace.armv.mill Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 3:04 PM To: Levesque, Andy; Scheibner, Deborah Subject: Green River Shoreline permit Hi Andy and Deb, Do either of you know if King County has applied for a Shoreline permit for the Green projects or if they are going to fall into the exempt category. We have had some discussion with counsel about the projects being exempt as they are "repairs ". Any info you have would be great as we figure out how to address CZM. Thanks! Andrea Cummins Biologist, Environmental Resources Section U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District 206.764.3641 206.764.4470 fax Carol Lumb - Public Notice Board From: To: Date: Subject: Hi Julie: Carol Lumb 157 @fastsigns.com 04/07/2008 12:55 pm Public Notice Board Here is information for the notice board (there may be two, I'm checking to see if we have permission to post on the second site): Type of Action: review) Project Name: Site Address: Applicant: L08 -022, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and E08 -006, SEPA (environmental 208 Levee Repairs Along the levee west of: 18200 Andover Pk. W and 6801 S. 180th St. City of Tukwila Dept. of Public Works I need to know how soon the sign(s) would be ready for posting for our mailing. Please call me as soon as you get this e-mail. I will need to confirm whether you will be doing one sign or two. Thank you. Carol Carol Lumb, Senior Planner Dept. of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 206 - 431 -3661 (Fax: 206 - 431 -3665) • Carol Lumb - Re: Trail Use Disruption From: Ryan Larson To: Carol Lumb Date: 04/14/2008 7:27 AM Subject: Re: Trail Use Disruption Page 1 of 1 Carol, Either the King County Flood Control District or the Corps will provide a detour during construction of the project at Site 3. - Ryan »> Carol Lumb 04/07/2008 11:34:26 am »> Hi: The construction at Site 3 will disrupt the use of the trail. I checked with Paul Surek, and he said that the contractor will be responsible for re- routing the users and putting up signs, and whoever that is just needs to coordinate with him. I don't know if that needs to be part of your contract with whoever is doing the work or not. Carol file: / /C:\Documents and Settings \CAROL -L \Local Settings\ Temp\ XPGrpWise \48030778tuk- mail6300 -p... 05/12/2008 [Carol Lumb - sign locations ry ry Page 1 From: Carol Lumb To: 157 @fastsigns.com Date: 04/08/2008 3:59 pm Subject: sign locations Hi Julie: thanks for your call. I am attaching aerial photos of the two sites where the signs need to be installed. Please let me know if it is not clear where the signs should be placed. thanks very much. Carol Carol Lumb, Senior Planner Dept. of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 206 - 431 -3661 (Fax: 206- 431 -3665) 0 l00ft CityGIS Copyright 02006 All Rights Reserved. The information contained herein is the proprietary property of the contributor supplied under license and may not be approved except as licensed by Digital Map Products. 1 CityGIS N 150ft Copyright © 2006 All Rights Reserved. The information contained herein is the proprietary property of the contributor supplied under license and may not be approved except as licensed by Digital Map Products. uept. UT community Development City of Tukwila AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION I • HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Notice of Public Hearing Determination of Non - Significance Notice of Public Meeting Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance Board of Adjustment Agenda Pkt Gl, Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Board of Appeals Agenda Pkt Notice of Action Planning Commission Agenda Pkt Person requesting mailing: Official Notice Short Subdivision Agenda Notice of Application Shoreline Mgmt Permit Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit _ — FAX To Seattle Times Classifieds Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111 Other Was ma i 1 ed gyp- each of the addresses listed on this year 20 Project Name: 7ZIA/Ze_da c;(Z5,5 Z,ezi_____e__ Gl, Project Number: �' Mailer's Signature: s Person requesting mailing: �� lj(.Z;P • • CITY OF TUKWILA NOTICE OF APPLICATION PROJECT INFORMATION City of Tukwila Department of Public works has filed applications for repairs to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers certified section 205 levee at two locations on the Green/Duwamish River: the portion of the levee west of 6801 S. 180th Street (Site 3) and the portion of the levee west of 18200 Andover Park West (Site 5). Construction is expected to begin in July, 2008 and be completed within 90 —120 days. Permits applied for include: E08 -006, SEPA review and L08-022, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Other known required permits include: Hydraulic Project Approval Permit Studies required with the applications include: Project Information Report Rehabilitation of Flood Control Works Tukwila 205, prepared by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, March, 2008. An environmental checklist has been submitted with the studies identified above. FILES AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC 'REVIEW The project files are available at the City of Tukwila. To view the files, you may request them at the counter at the Department of Community Development (DCD), located at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard #100. Project Files include: L08-022; E08-006 OPPORTUNITY FORPUBLIC COMMENT Your written comments on the project are requested. They must be delivered to DCD at the address above or postmarked no later than 5:00 P.M., Monday, May 12, 2008. To receive notification of the final derision on this project, please submit this request to DCD by May 8, 2008 as well. APPEALS You may request a copy of any decision, information on hearings, and your appeal rights by calling DCD at (206) 431 -3670. The decision by the DCD Director on the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit may be appealed to the State Shoreline Hearings Board. For further information on this proposal, contact Carol Lumb at (206) 431 -3661 or visit our offices at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100, Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Application Filed: Notice of Completeness Issued: Notice of Application Issued: April 3, 2008 April 7, 2008 April 10, 2008 CL Page 1 of 1 04/08/2008 2:42:00 PM Q \205 Levee Repairs \NOA.doc CH LIST: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW /SHORELINE PEIT MAILINGS / �11NA: -bo ,5 (Jibe/ .S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION ( ) DEPT OF FISH & WILDLIFE FEDERAL AGENCIES ( ) U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ( ) U.S. DEPT OF H.U.D. ( ) NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES ( ) OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY ( ) TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ij EPT NATURAL RESOURCES 'OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR DEPT OF COMM. TRADE & ECONOMIC DEV. EPT OF FISHERIES & WILDLIFE ( DEPT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERV. EPT OF ECOLOGY, SHORELAND DIV, NW Regional Office ,DEPT OF ECOLOGY, SEPA DIVISION* ( ) OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL * SEND CHKLIST W/ DETERMINATIONS * SEND SITE MAPS WITH DECISION KING COUNTY AGENCIES ( ) BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD ( ) FIRE DISTRICT #11 ( ) FIRE DISTRICT #2 ( ) K.C. WASTEWATER TREATMENT DIVISION ( ) K.C. DEPT OF PARKS & REC ( ) K.C. ASSESSORS OFFICE ( ) TUKWILA SCHOOL DISTRICT UKWILA LIBRARY 'RENTON LIBRARY () KENT LIBRARY ( ) CITY OF SEATTLE LIBRARY ( ) QWEST ( ) SEATTLE CITY LIGHT ( ) PUGET SOUND ENERGY ( ) HIGHLINE WATER DISTRICT ( ) SEATTLE WATER DEPARTMENT ()COMCAST SCHOOLS /LIBRARIES UTILITIES CITY AGENCIES ( ) KENT PLANNING DEPT ( TUKWILA CITY DEPARTMENTS: .PUBLIC WORKS O FIRE POLICE () FINANCE ( ) PLANNING () BUILDING () PARKS & REC. () MAYOR ( ) CITY CLERK OTHER LOCAL AGENCIES ( ) PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL ( ) SW K C CHAMBER OF COMMERCE KLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE (WULTURAL RESOURCES PROGRAM** ISHERIES PROGRAM** WILDLIFE PROGRAM **Send SEPA Checklist and full set of plans w/ NOA sci.14 3 cie_ CAub ?O& t 5! (05 l^ ( ) SEATTLE TIMES �c a 019 () S( () SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL ✓A,ckick/114tva P.3-toy 2Aug P:\ADMINISTRATIVE \FORMS \CHECKLIST.DOC Sca.I4et ofg I I I ciifQ� ✓ o�vs MEDIA ei () HEALTH DEPT ( ) PORT OF SEATTLE f 1K-C. DEV & ENVIR SERVICES -SEPA INFO CNTR ( .C. TRANSIT DIVISION - SEPA OFFICIAL vj)K.C. LAND & WATER RESOURCES �1j� OSTER LIBRARY (�`K C PUBLIC LIBRARY ( ) HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT () RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) OLYMPIC PIPELINE ( ) VAL -VUE SEWER DISTRICT ( ) WATER DISTRICT #20 ( ) WATER DISTRICT #125 ( ) CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS ( ) BRYN MAWR - LAKERIDGE SEWERNVATER DISTRICT ( ) RENTON PLANNING DEPT ( ) CITY OF SEA -TAC ( ) CITY OF BURIEN ( ) TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS ( ) TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ( ) CITY OF SEATTLE - SEPA INFO CENTER - DCLU ( ) STRATEGIC PLANNING OFFICE* * NOTICE OF ALL SEATTLE RELATED PLNG PROJ. ( ) DUWAMISH INDIAN TRIBE* ( ) P.S. AIR POLLUTION CLEAN AGENCY ( ) SOUND TRANSIT ( ) DUWAMISH RIVER CLEAN -UP COALITION* * SEND NOTICE OF ALL APPLICATIONS ON DUWAMISH RIVER ( ) HIGHLINE TIMES ( ) CI.TUKWILA.WA.US.WWW r1 Nana /b .95911..- A.I.Z�— PIC NOTICE MAILINGS FOR PETS SEPA MAILINGS Mail to: (comment period starts on date of mailing) Dept. of Ecology Environmental Review Section *Applicant *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list) *Any parties of record * send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination KC Transit Division — SEPA Official would like to receive information about all projects that might affect transit demand Send These Documents to DOE: SEPA Determination (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report, usu. with MDNS) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed or sent to newspaper) SHORELINE MAILINGS: Notice of Application for a Substantial Development Permit must be mailed to owners and to property owners within 500 feet of subject property, comments are due 30 days after the notice of application is- mailed/posted. The notice of Application for Shoreline Substantial Development Permit must include a statement that any person desiring to submit written comments on the application or desiring to receive notification of the final decision on the application may do so within 30 days of the notice of application. If a hearing will be held on the application, the hearing notice must include the information that written comments may be submitted, or oral presentation made at the hearing. Notice is sent to the NW Regional Office Shorelands & Environmental Assistance Program. Shoreline Permit Notice of Decision: Mail to: (within 8 days of decision; 21 -day appeal period begins date received by DOE) Department of Ecology Shorelands Section, NW Regional Office State Attorney General *Applicant *Indian Tribes *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list). *Any parties of record * send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination Send These Documents to DOE and Attorney General: Permit Data Sheet Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report or memo) Shoreline Permit Application Form (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) - Site plan, with mean high water mark & improvements - Cross- sections of site with structures & shoreline - Grading Plan — Vicinity map SEPA determination (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report or memo) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Any background studies related to impacts on shoreline Notice of Application Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed) P: \ADMIN1STRATIVE \FORMS \CHECKLIST. DOC CITY 6200 S TUKWI 98188 WILA CENTER BLVD A SHASTA BEVERAGES INC 1 N UNIVERSITY DR PLANTATION FL 33324 DANELLIE LLC 4664 95TH AVE NE YARROW POINT WA 98004 HOUGHTON HARBOR LLC 1233 ANDOVER PARK E TUKWILA WA 98188 BELLWETHER PROPERTIES LLC 18375 OLYMPIC AVE S TUKWILA WA 98188 TENANT 18323 ANDOVER PARK W TUKWILA WA 98188 TENANT 1231 ANDOVER PARK W TUKWILA WA 98188 TENANT 6750 S 180TH ST TUKWILA WA 98188 TENANT 18125 ANDOVER PARK W TUKWILA WA 98188 TENANT 18435 OLYMPIC AVE S TUKWILA WA 98188 • 'CITY 6200 SO TUKWIL 98188 TU LA ENTER BLVD A KMBR LLC B 1232 ANDOVER PARK W TUKWILA WA 98188 AMC FAMILY LLC PO BOX 2720 PORTLAND OR 97208 JAMES CAMPBELL COMPANY L L 1001 KAMOKILA BLVD KAPOLEI HI 96707 PACIFIC METAL COMPANY 10700 SW MANHASSET DR TUALATIN OR 97062 TENANT 18000 ANDOVER PARK W . TUKWILA WA 98188 TENANT 1233 ANDOVER PARK E TUKWILA WA 98188 TENANT 1251 ANDOVER PARK W TUKWILA WA 98188 TENANT 6101 S 180TH ST TUKWILA WA 98188 TENANT 18375 OLYMPIC AVE S TUKWILA WA 98188 LA PIANTA LLC PO BOX 88028 TUKWILA WA 98138 HOUGHTON HARBOR LLC 1233 ANDOVER PARK E TUKWILA WA 98188 TRI -LAND CORPORATION 1325 4TH AVE 1940 SEATTLE WA 98101 RAINIER INDUSTRIES LTD 18435 OLYMPIC AVE S TUKWILA WA 98188 JA S CAMPBE OMPANY L L 1001 OKI BLVD KAPOLEI 96707 TENANT 1227 ANDOVER PARK E TUKWILA WA 98188 TENANT 1180 ANDOVER PARK W SEATTLE WA 98188 TENANT 18271 ANDOVER PARK W TUKWILA WA 98188 TENANT 6540 S GLACIER ST TUKWILA WA 98188 TENANT 18325 OLYMPIC AVE S TUKWILA WA 98188 • • TENAN 18235 OLYMPIC AVE S WACO ENTERPRISE TUKWILA WA PO BOX 88216 98188 TUKWILA WA 98138 OWNER_NAME ILA LA PIANTA LLC SHASTA BEVERAGES INC KMBR LLC B HOUGHTON HARBOR LLC DANELLIE LLC AMC FAMILY LLC TRI -LAND CORPORATION HOUGHTON HARBOR LLC JAMES CAMPBELL COMPANY L L RAINIER INDUSTRIES LTD BELLWETHER PROPERTIES LLC PACIFIC METAL COMPANY JAMES CAMPBELL COMPANY L L TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT OWNER ADDRESS 6200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD 6200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD PO BOX 88028 1 N UNIVERSITY DR 1232 ANDOVER PARK W 1233 ANDOVER PARK E 4664 95TH AVE NE PO BOX 2720 1325 4TH AVE 1940 1233 ANDOVER PARK E 1001 KAMOKILA BLVD 18435 OLYMPIC AVE S 18375 OLYMPIC AVE S 10700 SW MANHASSET DR 1001 KAMOKILA BLVD 18323 ANDOVER PARK W 18000 ANDOVER PARK W 1227 ANDOVER PARK E 1231 ANDOVER PARK W 1233 ANDOVER PARK E 1180 ANDOVER PARK W 6750 S 180TH ST 1251 ANDOVER PARK W 18271 ANDOVER PARK W 18125 ANDOVER PARK W 6101 S 180TH ST 6540 S GLACIER ST 18435 OLYMPIC AVE S 18375 OLYMPIC AVE S 18325 OLYMPIC AVE S 18235 OLYMPIC AVE S 05 M6 '.(R'l2/ OWNER_CITY OWNER_STATE OWNER_ZIP TUKWILA WA 98188 TUKWILA WA 98188 TUKWILA WA 98138 PLANTATION FL 33324 TUKWILA WA 98188 TUKWILA WA 98188 YARROW POINT WA 98004 PORTLAND SEATTLE TUKWILA KAPOLEI TUKWILA TUKWILA TUALATIN KAPOLEI TUKWILA TU KWI LA TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA SEATTLE TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA OR 97208 WA 98101 WA 98188 HI 96707 WA 98188 WA 98188 OR 97062 HI 96707 WA 98188 WA 98188 WA 98188 WA 98188 WA 98188 WA 98188 WA 98188 WA 98188 WA 98188 WA 98188 WA 98188 WA 98188 WA 98188 WA 98188 WA 98188 WA 98188 NER_N I E LA ' ANT LLC SHA BEVERAGES INC KMB' ► C B HOUGH ON HARBOR LLC DANELLIE LLC WACO=ENERERIS.1� AMC FAMILY LLC TRI -LAND CO PORATION J MES CA BELL COMPANY L L ANT NT TE TE TENA TENA TENA TEN TEN: NT TE ANT T. ANT TENANT TENANT OWNER_ADDRESS PO BOX 88028 1 N UNIVERSITY DR 1232 ANDOVER PARK W 1233 ANDOVER PARK E 4664 95TH AVE NE PO BOX 88216 PO BOX 2720 1325 4TH AVE 1940 1001 KAMOKILA BLVD 18000 ANDOVER PARK W 1227 ANDOVER PARK E 1231 ANDOVER PARK W 1233 ANDOVER PARK E 1180 ANDOVER PARK W 1205 ANDOVER PARK W 6750 S 180TH ST 1251 ANDOVER PARK W 18125 ANDOVER PARK W 6101 S 180TH ST 18235 OLYMPIC AVE S OWNER CITY OWNER_STATE TUKWILA WA PLANTATION FL TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA YARROW POINT WA TUKWILA WA PORTLAND SEATTLE KAPOLEI TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA SEATTLE TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA OR WA HI WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA OWNER_ZIP 98138 33324 98188 98188 98004 98138 97208 98101 96707 98188 98188 98188 98188 98188 98188 98188 98188 98188 98188 98188 1 APPLE SIX HOSPITALITY 2007 ADV DEP PD 30 237 85 EJT INC PO BOX 25080 FEDERAL WAY WA 98093 HIGH BEECH LLC PO BOX 463 REDMOND WA 98073 LILY POINTE INVESTMENTS 4128 W AMES LAKE DR NE REDMOND WA 98053 REHN,PAUL 7011 S 182ND ST KENT WA 98032 DEPT 207 PO BOX 4900 SCOTTSDALE AZ 85261 EDWARDS,J MICHAEL 265 CAREFREE WAY FRIDAY HARBOR WA 98250 TENANT 18012 W VALLEY HWY S KENT WA 98032 TENANT 17900 W VALLEY HWY TUKWILA WA 98188 TENANT 6847 S 180TH ST TUKWILA WA 98188 • 'HARE DEVELOPMENT LLC 6511 136TH PL SW C EDMONDS WA 98026 HARNISH GROUP INC PO BOX 3562 SEATTLE WA 98124 HD DEVELOPMENT OF MARYLAND PO BOX 105842 ATLANTA GA 30348 SFP B LTD PTNRSHP OPO BOX 667 PRINEVILLE OR 97754 BCE OWNERS LLC 18215 72ND AVE S KENT WA 98032 JAMES CAMPBELL COMPANY L L 1001 KAMOKILA BLVD KAPOLEI HI 96707 RIVERPOINT TWO LLC 1100 OLIVE WAY 340 SEATTLE WA 98101 TENANT 6820 S 180TH ST TUKWILA WA 98188 TENANT 7100 SW 43RD ST RENTON WA 98055 TENANT 6801 S 180TH ST TUKWILA WA 98188 TUKWILA TT LLC 3300 MAPLE VALLEY HWY RENTON WA 98058 FIRST INTER BNK- KIRKLAND PO BOX 63931 SAN FRANCISCO CA 94163 FIRST INTER BNK- KIRKLAND PO BOX 63931 SAN FRANCISCO CA 94163 SNIDER & ASSOCIATES LLC 18420 68TH AVE S KENT WA 98032 CASCADE TUKWILA LLC 7900 SE 28TH ST 3400 MERCER ISLAND WA 98040 JA AMPBE OMPANY L L 1001 KA o A BLVD KAPOLEI 96707 TENANT 18123 72ND AVE S KENT WA 98032 TENANT 6818 S 180TH ST TUKWILA WA 98188 TENANT 6810 S 180TH ST TUKWILA WA 98188 TENANT 6835 S 180TH ST TUKWILA WA 98188 TENANT ` 6804•S 180TH ST TUKWILA WA 98188 TENANT 18251 CASCADE AVE S SEATTLE WA 98188 TENANT 18260 OLYMPIC AVE S TUKWILA WA 98188 • •TENANT 18420 68TH AVE S KENT WA 98032 TENANT 18340 OLYMPIC AVE S TUKWILA WA 98188 TENANT 6700 RIVERSIDE DR SEATTLE WA 98188 TENANT 7115 S 182ND ST KENT WA 98032 TENANT 18391 CASCADE AVE S SEATTLE WA 98188 TENANT 18200 CASCADE AVE S SEATTLE WA 98188 .! OWNER_NAME APPLE SIX HOSPITALITY HARE DEVELOPMENT LLC TUKWILA TT LLC EJT INC HARNISH GROUP INC FIRST INTER BNK - KIRKLAND HIGH BEECH LLC HD DEVELOPMENT OF MARYLAND FIRST INTER BNK - KIRKLAND LILY POINTE INVESTMENTS SFP B LTD PTNRSHP SNIDER & ASSOCIATES LLC REHN,PAUL BCE OWNERS LLC CASCADE TUKWILA LLC DEPT 207 JAMES CAMPBELL COMPANY L L JAMES CAMPBELL COMPANY L L EDWARDS,J MICHAEL RIVERPOINT TWO LLC TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT OWNER_ADDRESS 2007 ADV DEP PD 30 237 85 6511 136TH PL SW C 3300 MAPLE VALLEY HWY PO BOX 25080 PO BOX 3562 PO BOX 63931 6200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD PO BOX 463 PO BOX 105842 PO BOX 63931 4128 W AMES LAKE DR NE PO BOX 63931 PO BOX 63931 OPO BOX 667 18420 68TH AVE S 7011 S 182ND ST 18215 72ND AVE S 7900 SE 28TH ST 3400 PO BOX 4900 1001 KAMOKILA BLVD 1001 KAMOKILA BLVD 265 CAREFREE WAY 1100 OLIVE WAY 340 18123 72ND AVE S 18012 W VALLEY HWY S 6820 S 180TH ST 6818 S 180TH ST 17900 W VALLEY HWY 7100 SW 43RD ST 6810 S 180TH ST 6847 S 180TH ST 6801 S 180TH ST 6835 S 180TH ST 6804 S 180TH ST 18420 68TH AVE S 7115 S 182ND ST OWNER_CITY OWNER_; OWNER_ZIP EDMONDS RENTON FEDERAL WAY SEATTLE SAN FRANCISCO TUKWILA REDMOND ATLANTA SAN FRANCISCO REDMOND SAN FRANCISCO SAN FRANCISCO PRINEVILLE KENT KENT KENT MERCER ISLAND SCOTTSDALE KAPOLEI KAPOLEI FRIDAY HARBOR SEATTLE KENT KENT TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA RENTON TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA KENT KENT WA 98026 WA 98058 WA 98093 WA 98124 CA 94163 WA 98188 WA 98073 GA 30348 CA 94163 WA 98053 CA 94163 CA 94163 OR 97754 WA 98032 WA 98032 WA 98032 WA 98040 AZ 85261 HI 96707 HI 96707 WA 98250 WA 98101 WA 98032 WA 98032 WA 98188 WA 98188 WA 98188 WA 98055 WA 98188 WA 98188 WA 98188 WA 98188 WA 98188 WA 98032 WA 98032 TENANT 18251 CASCADE AVE S SEATTLE WA 98188 TENANT 18340 OLYMPIC AVE S TUKWILA WA 98188 TENANT 18391 CASCADE AVE S SEATTLE WA 98188 TENANT 18260 OLYMPIC AVE S TUKWILA WA 98188 TENANT 6700 RIVERSIDE DR SEATTLE WA 98188 TENANT 18200 CASCADE AVE S SEATTLE WA 98188 36oa3Q(.(9b�-7 OWN ER\NAME APPLE SI)q-1OSPITALITY HARE DEVELOPMENT LLC TUKWILA TT L C EJT INC HARNISH GROUP NC FIRST INTER BNK- RKLAND HIGH BEECH LLC HD DEVELOPMENT O MARY FIRST INTER BNK -KIR LILY POINTE INVESTME FIRST INTER BNK - KIRKLA FIRST INTER BNK -KIRK SFP B LTD PTNRSHP CASCADE TUKWILA LL EDWARDS,J MICHAEL TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT OWNER ADDRESS OWNER _ CITY 20 %7 ADV DEP PD 30 237 85 6.11136THPLSWC 300 MAPLE VALLEY HWY PO BOX 25080 PO BOX 3562 PO BOX 63931 PO BOX 463 ND PO BOX 105842 PO BOX 63931 4128 W AMES LAKE DR NE PO BOX 63931 PO BOX 63931 OPO BOX 667 7900 SE 28TH ST 3400 265 CAREFREE WAY 18123 72ND AVE S 18012 W VALLEY HWY S 6820 S 180TH ST 6818 S 180TH ST 900 W VALLEY HWY 7 •0 SW 43RD ST 68 4 S 180TH ST 684 180TH ST 6801 ' 180TH ST 6835 S 80TH ST 6804 S 1: 0TH ST 18251 CA • CADE AVE S 6700 RIVE SIDE DR ,19a 3af9oqg EDMONDS RENTON FEDERAL WAY SEATTLE SAN FRANCISCO REDMOND ATLANTA SAN FRANCISCO REDMOND SAN FRANCISCO SAN FRANCISCO PRINEVILLE MERCER ISLAND FRIDAY HARBOR KENT KENT TUKWILA TUKWILA TU KWI LA RENTON TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA SEATTLE SEATTLE A OWNER_: OWN ER_ZIP WA WA WA WA CA WA GA CA WA CA CA OR WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA 98026 98058 98093 98124 94163 98073 30348 94163 98053 94163 94163 97754 98040 98250 98032 98032 98188 98188 98188 98055 98188 98188 98188 98188 98188 98188 98188 OWNER_N ME APPLE SIX OSPITALITY HARE DEVEL PMENT LLC TUKWILA TT L C EJT INC HARNISH GROUP NC FIRST INTER BNK - IRKLAND HIGH BEECH LLC HD DEVELOPMENT 0 FIRST INTER BNK -KIR LILY POINTE INVESTME FIRST INTER BNK - KIRKLA FIRST INTER BNK - KIRKLA SFP B LTD PTNRSHP CASCADE TUKWILA LL EDWARDS,J MICHAEL TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENAN TENA OWNER_ADDRESS 7 ADV DEP PD 30 237 85 11 136TH PL SW C 300 MAPLE VALLEY HWY PO BOX 25080 PO BOX 3562 PO BOX 63931 PO BOX 463 D PO BOX 105842 PO BOX 63931 4128 W AMES LAKE DR NE PO BOX 63931 PO BOX 63931 OPO BOX 667 7900 SE 28TH ST 3400 265 CAREFREE WAY 18123 72ND AVE S 18012 W VALLEY HWY S 6820 S 180TH ST 6818 S 180TH ST 17900 W VALLEY HWY 7100 SW 43RD ST 810 S 180TH ST 847 S 180TH ST 6:01 S 180TH ST 6= 5S180THST 6804 S 180TH ST 18251 CASCADE AVE S 6700 RIVERSIDE DR (log() OWNER_CITY OWNER_E OWNER_ZIP EDMONDS RENTON FEDERAL WAY SEATTLE SAN FRANCISCO REDMOND ATLANTA SAN FRANCISCO REDMOND SAN FRANCISCO SAN FRANCISCO PRINEVILLE MERCER ISLAND FRIDAY HARBOR KENT KENT TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA RENTON TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA TUKWILA SEATTLE SEATTLE WA 98026 WA 98058 WA 98093 WA 98124 CA 94163 WA 98073 GA 30348 CA 94163 WA 98053 CA 94163 CA 94163 OR 97754 WA 98040 WA 98250 WA 98032 WA 98032 WA 98188 WA 98188 WA 98188 WA 98055 WA 98188 WA 98188 WA 98188 WA 98188 WA 98188 WA 98188 WA 98188 OWNER_NAME APPLE SIX HOSPITALITY HARE DEVELOPMENT LLC TUKWILA TT LLC EJT INC HARNISH GROUP INC FIRST INTER BNK - KIRKLAND HIGH BEECH LLC HD DEVELOPMENT OF MARYLAND FIRST INTER BNK - KIRKLAND LILY POINTE INVESTMENTS FIRST INTER BNK - KIRKLAND FIRST INTER BNK - KIRKLAND SFP B LTD PTNRSHP CASCADE TUKWILA LLC EDWARDS,J MICHAEL TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT OWNER_ADDRESS 2007 ADV DEP PD 30 237 85 6511 136TH PL SW C 3300 MAPLE VALLEY HWY PO BOX 25080 PO BOX 3562 PO BOX 63931 PO BOX 463 PO BOX 105842 PO BOX 63931 4128 W AMES LAKE DR NE PO BOX 63931 PO BOX 63931 OPO BOX 667 7900 SE 28TH ST 3400 265 CAREFREE WAY 18123 72ND AVE S 18012 W VALLEY HWY S 6820 S 180TH ST 6818 S 180TH ST 17900 W VALLEY HWY 7100 SW 43RD ST 6810 S 180TH ST 6847 S 180TH ST 6801 S 180TH ST 6835 S 180TH ST 6804 S 180TH ST 18251 CASCADE AVE S 6700 RIVERSIDE DR • April 7, 2008 • City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor Department of Community Development Jack Pace, Director MEMORANDUM NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION TO: Ryan Larson, Senior Engineer, Surface Water FM: Carol Lumb, Senior P1thfiner RE: E08 -006, SEPA and L08 -022 for 205 Levee Repairs The above noted SEPA and shoreline substantial development permit applications for two levee repair projects located at two locations along the Green/Duwamish Rivers have been found to be complete on April 7, 2008 for the purposes of meeting state mandated time requirements. I will be the planner assigned to the project. This determination of complete application does not preclude the City from requesting additional plans or information, if in our estimation such information is necessary to ensure the project meets the substantive requirements of the City or to complete the review process. This notice of complete application applies only to the permits identified above. It is your responsibility to apply for and obtain any other necessary permits issued by other agencies. We will be issuing the Notice of Application this week to get the 30 day comment period under way. If you have any questions, please contact me at 431 -3661. cc: Minnie Dhaliwal, Planning Supervisor CL Q:\205 Levee Repairs \Complete Application.doc Page 1 of 1 04/04/2008 5:54:00 PM 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 COMMUNITY LOPMENT APPLICATION • 1111 CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development SHORELINE 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98181REC EIVED Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 PERMIT E -mail: tukplan@atukwila.wa.us APR 0 a 2008 •a FOR STAFF USE ONLY Permits Plus Type: P -SHORE Planner: File Number: L o 2 - JvZo? Application Complete (Date: ) Project File Number: P QR -v7 (o Application Incomplete (Date: ) Other File Numbers: LOg — O O (, NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: 7 /i<V,/ // / zoo l/ /(e_,/A9 LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. S./Z3" 3 — / S. /12,07-_,-‘ .S/ — /8 el , v/ /4( l9,P /� it/Es7 LIST ALL TAX LOT NUMBERS (this information may be found Qn your tax statement). [2237VOJ7 3(9M/19079 9079 3ZDy9Oc7 35P309?/z/ , ,sa,_)Y 90.6s 3. 3oy9 //d Poi lm".. bteb- DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR : The individual who: • has decision making authority on behalf of the owner /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: RY/9 / 2,1-/i9QJ Address: 7&O 6( e2fi ,tom VD 701,//a 1✓4 Phone: (206) 13) `5 FAX: Ca/ y3I _ 6 E -mail: RL4, i t C' DAL/a- LP . US Signature: a/ (i a144iy/ Date: 3/3—A8 P:\Planning Forrm4lpplicatioro \Shore- 6- 06.doc December 4, 2006 Check items submitted with application Information Req�d. May be waived in unusual cases, upon approval of both Public Works and Planning . OA complete, which meets the King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). Include a Technical Information Report (TIR) including feasibility analysis if required by the Manual. Call out total existing and proposed impervious surface in square feet. Include all storm drainage conveyance systems, water quality features, detention structures, maintenance access and safety features. For additional guidance contact Public Works or go to www.ci. tukwila. wa. us /pubwks /pwpermit.htm #techinfo. (g) Show the 100 yr. flood plain boundary and elevation as shown on FEMA maps. (h) Footprints of all existing and proposed buildings. (i) Fences, rockeries and retaining walls. OTHER: '� N/A 18. If new construction is proposed, provide dimensioned and scalable building elevations with keyed colors and materials. Show mechanical equipment and/or any proposed screening. x M /V/ 19. If site lighting changes are proposed provide a luminaire plan including location and type of street and site lighting. Include proposed fixture cut sheets, site Tight levels (foot - candles), and measures to shield adjacent properties from glare. 4 20. All existing and proposed signage with sign designs and locations. !v �f¢ 21. Any other drawings or materials needed to explain your proposal. P:V'lannmg Forms Applications \Shore- 6- 06 .doc December 4, 2006 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 each Department if you feel that certain items are not applicable to your project and should be waived. Application review will not begin until it is determined to be complete. ADDITIONAL MATERIALS MAY BE REQUIRED. The initial application materials allow project review to begin and vest the applicant's rights. However, the City may require additional information as needed to establish consistency with development standards. City 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). C ems F'f mw� AA Mi g, r 3 a lica n � -� Q, car ti o a -Oil. Required . �'• �' J� S d n `g #' `y ��+ -F.Wi S +' -Y+«.t "k .. W�w3 +e r tY 'S. ""° nFu �k M 3 v rw b 'y, 9i'" 3 y_ 'B' .� gF �' -'i, }' �''� 3 � [ a �W� %z -�s 'w ' @ Y R !i.� + be =ww?,v�ed in unusual cas�eys, p a proval of bot Pu ?lIc arks and�Planntn(¢y x `. , N ,_. 43T.b ,; ,�„fi�T 'w!" +„ u "� z;"* Y' 3 d` � f k ^� �,'e,'i' =S a¢'. '4ai', "5'� %. + - . .a'I � �.�3,7'i�ac �+r�.'e:��,,..fii;:Ma x;r'" '�inf{2*+�°�h�e.rri -� " �. . . s�`^ �� 4' ���� �i ''+`�`�E`....:L.�""�}�: �"''�`s >.. . >„. u?" �` �:^.�i,�r „�'.:.�d?'���_ .� APPLICATION MATERIALS: 1. Application Checklist (1 copy) indicating items submitted with application. ,% 2. Completed ESA Screening Checklist, SEPA Environmental Checklist and drawings (5 copies). V- 3. One set of all plans reduced to 8 1/2” by 11" or 11" by 17 ". AIM- 4. Application Fee $615. (()7/ L�U`� 1/t' 7 ) 5. Underlying permit application that triggers SEPA review. PUBLIC NOTICE MATERIALS: --Kcegyrnent of a $365 notice board fee to FastSigns T ilaor Provide a 4' x 4' public notice board on site within 14 days of the Department determining that a complete application has been received see Public Notice Si •4 S • ecifications Handout . 7. 4 yment of a $110 mailing label fee to the City of T 1 . or Provide two (2) sets of mailing labels for all properly owners and tenants (residents or businesses) within 500 feet of the subject property. Note: Each unit in multiple - family buildings - e.g. apartments, condos, trailer parks- -must be included (see Public Notice Mailing Label Handout). 8. If providing own labels King County Assessor's map(s) which shows the location of each property within 500 ft. of the subject lot. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS: V 9. Vicinity Map with site location. (a/ &q„ f ,51/4-4- 4119 10. Provide four (4) copies of any sensitive area studies such as wetland or geotechnical reports if needed per Tukwila's Sensitive Areas Ordinance (TMC 18.45). See the Geotechnical Report Guidelines and Sensitive Area Special Study Guidelines (online at www.ci .tukwila.wa.us /dcd/dcdplan.htm) for additional information. /1/42 11. Any drawings needed to describe the proposal other than those submitted with the underlying permit. Maximum size 24" x 36 ". RECEIVED 'APR 0 3 2008 C. ,. OEVEW1-1.1L°IT P: \Planning Forms \ Applications \2007 Applications \SEPAApp- 12 -07.doc 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 each Department if you feel that certain items are not applicable to your project and should be waived. Application review will not begin until it is determined to be complete. ADDITIONAL MATERIALS MAY BE REQUIRED. The initial application materials allow project review to begin and vest the applicant's rights. However, the City may require additional information as needed to establish consistency with development standards. City 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). RECEIVED Check 'items: ,sulimitted;.:.> 'with.; `:; . application :Informatiori Required. AM U d roue =....., . Q, 11�Iay,be waived in. unusual cases, .upon approval of both Publ c'.Wor. ks. and Planni '. r' ":'°P111EMT APPLICATION MATERIALS: ✓ 1. Application Checklist (1 copy) indicating items submitted with application. ✓ 2. Completed Application Form and drawings (5 copies). 3. One set of all plans reduced to 8 1/2" by 11" or 11" by 17 ". , t4 7 4. Application Fee $2,435. (City lfiile Aloite7) iC 5. SEPA Environmental Checklist (see SEPA Application Packet). G y tp I / 0 y n o , , / eL4 ii ;o) PUBLIC NOTICE MATERIALS: 6. Payment of a $365 notice board fee to Fast Signs Tukwila or Provide a 4' x 4' public notice board on site within 14 days of the Department determining that a complete application has been received (see Public Notice Sign Specifications Handout). 7. Payment of a $110 mailing label fee to the City of Tukwila or Provide two (2) sets of mailing labels for all property owners and tenants (residents or businesses) within 500 feet of the subject property. Note: Each unit in multiple - family buildings —e.g. apartments, condos, trailer parks —must be included (see Public Notice Mailing Label Handout). 8. If providing own labels King County Assessor's map(s) which shows the location of each property within 500 ft. of the subject lot. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS: A/ 9. Concurrency test notices for water, sewer, surface water and traffic unless the project is exempt from SEPA (see SEPA Application Packet). 10. Vicinity Map with site location, does not have to be to scale. / . ,./......./ / 11. A written discussion of project consistency with decision criteria. (See Application) Check with a planner if you are unsure what criteria apply to your project. /i✓`A 12. Provide two copies of sensitive area studies if needed per Tukwila's Sensitive Areas Ordinance (TMC 18.45). Provide a geotechnical analysis of river bank stability if alteration is proposed. See Geotechnical Report Guidelines and Sensitive Area Special Study Guidelines (online at www.ci.tukwila.wa.us /dcd/dcdplan.htm) for additional information. SHORELINE SITE PLAN: 13 (a) The site plan must include a graphic scale, north arrow and project name. Maximum size 24" x 36 ". P :'Planning Forms\Applications'2007 Applications\Shore- 12 -07.doc • • CRITERIA FOR PROJECTS SUBJECT TO THE CITY OF TUKWILA SHORELINE REGULATIONS General Shoreline Regulations (TMC 18.44.110) All uses within the shoreline overlay district must conform to the following general regulations: 1. The use is in conformance with the regulations of the underlying zone district; Yes 2. The use does not conflict with the goals and policies of the Shoreline Master Program or the provisions of the Shoreline Act and shoreline regulations; This flood control repair is consistent with the goals and policies of the Shoreline Master Program and the Shoreline Act and shoreline regulations. 3. No structures or accessory facilities shall be located over the river, unless such structure protects or promotes the public interest; No structures will be placed over the river. 4. There shall be no disruption of existing trees or vegetation within the river environment, unless necessary for public safety or flood control, or if allowed as a part of an approved Shoreline Substantial Development permit; The project will disrupt existing trees and vegetation but is necessary for public safety. 5. No effluents shall be discharged into the Green River which exceeds the water quality classification as established by the State for the adjacent portion of the river; No effluent discharges are planned. 6. All State and Federal water quality regulations shall be strictly complied with; Water quality regulations shall be followed during construction of this project. 7. Wildlife habitat in and along the river should be protected; Wildlife habitat will be disturbed during construction of this project but will be enhanced overall by the placement of large woody debris, widened river channel, and mid -slope bench that will allow for vegetative growth. 8. All perimeters of landfills or other land forms susceptible to erosion shall be provided with vegetation, retaining walls or other satisfactory mechanisms for erosion prevention; The purpose of this project is to stabilize eroding levee sections and will have the property mechanisms for erosion prevention. 9. All necessary permits shall be obtained from Federal, State, County or Municipal agencies; Necessary permits will be obtained. 10. Dredging for purposes other than for navigational improvements or flood control is prohibited; Excavation along the riverbank is proposed and is an essential component of this flood control project. 11. Mining is prohibited along the river shoreline; Mining is not proposed as part of this project. 12. Solid waste disposal is prohibited along the river shoreline; RECEIVED APR 0 3 2008 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT • • Solid waste disposal is not proposed as part of this project. 13. No property will be acquired for public use without dedication by or just compensation to the owner; Property will be acquired for this project and will meet this requirement. 14. Landfilling is prohibited within the river channel unless such landfill is determined by the Planning Commission to protect or promote the public interest. Excavation and replacement of bank material will be required. The overall project will not reduce the cross section of the river. 15. Notwithstanding any provisions of this Code to the contrary, removal of any cottonwood tree within the river environment or the low impact environment, which tree is 12 inches or greater in diameter as measured 4.5 feet above grade, shall be subject to the requirements of TMC Chapter 18.54, Tree Regulations. Does not apply. Applicable City of Tukwila Shoreline Policies: Please reference the goals and policies from the Tukwila Shoreline Management Plan that are applicable to your project. A list of goals and policies is available at the Tukwila Department of Community Development. This project meets Goal 5.10 of the Shoreline Management Plan. Specifically, the project will protect public health and safety. Along with this goal, the project will incorporate other components such as a reduced overall levee slope, placement of large woody debris, and providing a mid -slope bench for inclusion of trees on the levee. 24TH AV S 26TH AV S 24TH AV S 15800 AVN N AV 2ND 1.) AV S 4 AV S�o sic �WY 72ND 21200 ky /twig 9661 1.013M100 >I 100ft CityGIS Copyright 02006 All Rights Reserved. The information contained herein is the proprietary property of the contributor supplied under license and may not be approved except as licensed by Digital Map Products. Carol Lumb - Signs From: To: Date: Subject: Hi Julie: Carol Lumb 157 @fastsigns.com 04/08/2008 3:10 pm Signs I wanted to confirm the voice mail message I left for you at approx. 2:45 that I need two information (regarding L08 -022 and E08 -006) on them that I e- mailed to you yesterday. Can you please confirm that the signs will be installed on Thursday, April 10? Also, if you fax number I will fax you a map showing where each of the signs need to be posted. thanks. Carol Carol Lumb, Senior Planner Dept. of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 206 - 431 -3661 (Fax: 206 - 431 -3665) signs with the send me your • • ;--------re-----A_ 1 CityGIS 150ft Copyright O 2006 All Rights Reserved. The information contained herein is the proprietary property of the contributor supplied under license and may not be approved except as licensed by Digital Map Products. US Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District • US Army Carps of Enpn.srs Seattle O6ait PL 84 -99 LEVEE REHABILITATION TUKWILA 205: SITES 3 & 5, GREEN RIVER CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON PN C1972 FY 08 GRE-3-07 DRAWING INDEX SHEET NO. PLATE NO. TITLE I G -001 TITLE, DRAWING INDEX, VICINITY AND AREA MAPS 2 C -001 CONSTRUCTION NOTES 3 C -I01 TUKWILA 205 - SITE 5 GENERAL SITE PLAN 4 C -102 TUKWILA 205 - SITE 3 GENERAL SITE PLAN 5 C -103 TUKWILA 205 - SITE 5 SITE PLAN I 6 C -I04 TUKWILA 205 - SITE 5 SITE PLAN 2 7 C -105 TUKWILA 205 - SITE 3 SITE PLAN 8 C -106 TUKWILA 205 - SITE 3 SITE PLAN 2 9 C -301 TUKWILA 205 - SITE 5 TYPICAL SECTION I 10 C -302 TUKWILA 205 - SITE 5 TYPICAL SECTION 2 II C -303 TUKWILA 205 - SITE 5 TYPICAL SECTION 3 12 C -304 TUKWILA 205 - SITE 3 TYPICAL SECTION 13 C -305 SITE 5 CROSS SECTIONS I (NOT SUBMITTED) 14 C -306 SITE 5 CROSS SECTIONS 2 (NOT SUBMITTED) 15 C -307 SITE 3 CROSS SECTIONS I(NOT SUBMITTED) 16 C -308 SITE 3 CROSS SECTIONS 2 (NOT SUBMITTED) 17 C -501 DETAILS 90% SUBMITTAL 11111111 B R I T I S H C O L U M B I A BELLINCHAM MT. VERNON EVERETT SEATTLE WASHINGTON PR ELLENSG PORTLAND O R E G O N 0 T DEPOT PENDLETON VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE a WALLA WALLA 11111111111111111111111 'IIq�IuIP' 11111 1111111 11111 II 111111111' 11 rAPR 0 3 2008 COMMUN(T+l DEVELOPMENT IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 77 X 34e IT IS A REDUCED PRINT: REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. 111 N N W Recommended by W a Z K w U J N 7 0 u 0 0 m 0 0 Li 0 0 N 2. i a 0 u d o s Y 2 0 ACTG CH. ENC. AND CONST. Submi[Ted —Ey Z Z a a 0 u � 1111 N m 6'0 Z Z a 0 0 Z to Z 02 0 a KING COUNTY Plate number G -001 Sheet 1 of 17 z 0 0 u m 0 O 0 -J N 0 N Q J Z W O Ltd W W J CO m N 0 0 z 0 2 ve LD / 0 DESIGN FILE, II- NAR•200B 22.45 0 0 0 `E W 0 1 D C B A • 1 • (1) PRELIMINARY CLEARING AND GRUBBING, STAGING AREAS AND CONSRUCTION ACCESS RAMP 1. ESTABLISH CONSTRUCTION STAGING AREAS. AS SHOWN ON PLANS. 2. INSTALL TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL MEASURES FOR PHASES OF WORK TO BE CONDUCTED. WORKING AS CONSTRUCTION ADVANCES, CONTINUE TO INSTALL SILT FENCING ALONG FULL LENGTH OF DISTURBED AREAS OF THE PROJECT SITE. INSTALL EROSION CONTROL ADJACENT SWALES, CATCH NEEDED TO AND OFF - SITE. ACCUMULATION ACCUMULATION SED SEDIMENT IN W CENT THE SWALES OR STORM DRAINS WILL BE MONITORED DAILY AND CLEANED TO ENSURE CONTINUED SERVICE THROUGHTOUT CONSTRUCTION. TES RDD TF LITSDAMNTUCTOSOF T GAT INCLUDING BLMTESTG RE NEEDED GRUB PROJECT SITE AND DISPOSE OF CONSTRUCTION AND OHUNUAE ATRIALIN AN APPROVED AND PERMITTED OFFSITE LOCATION. (2) RESTORATION, TRAIL RESURFACING, AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION WORK AREAS. 1. CONSTRUCT CT AS HALTCPAVEDUTR IL ALONG AREAS. OF SET -BACK LEVEE AT SITE 3 AND RESTORE ASPHALT ON ALL DISTURBED AREAS, 2. HYDROSEED ALL DISTURBED SITE AREAS. 3. RESTORE TEMPORARY WORK AREAS TO PRE-CONSTRUCTION CONDITION. REPLACE ANY DAMAGED CURBS. PAINT STRIPES, ETC. IN KIND. CONSTRUCTION NOTES 1. ALL IN -WATER PROJECT WORK SHALL BE COMPLETED DURING THE FISH WINDOW: JULY 1ST - SEPTEMBER 15TH. 2. THE LIMITS OF THE STAGING AREA WILL BE DELINEATED IN THE FIELD BEFORE THE START OF CONSTRUCTION. FOLLOWING CONSTRUCTION. CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS WILL BE REMOVED AND ANY DISTURBED BARE SOIL IN ANY UNPAVED PORTION OF THE STAGING AREA WILL BE HYDROSEEDED. TEXCAORMUELENTEETER L OR FROM THE M1D-SLOPE BENCH WELL KVTHE WATERLINE. HE VATTBCKT WILLERHEWATT ONY TO EXCAVATE TO ALLOWPLACEMENTOFROCANDLOG STRUCTURES. 4. ALL GAS AND OIL CONTAINERS FOR SMALL EQUIPMENT SHALL BE SAFELY AND SECURELY STORED IN UTILITY VEHICLES. EROSION CONTROL AND VEGETATION NOTES 1. T ENGINEER BE ER PRESERVED E AND PROJECT ECOLOGIST. LIMITS WILL BE FLAGGED IN THE FIELD PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION BY THE 2. EROSION CONTROL HYDROSEED MIX WILL BE USED TO ESTABLISH INITIAL GROUND COVER ON ALL DISTURBED AREAS. CONSTRUCTIO\ \OTES WILL BE EDITED FURTHER FOR SITE SPECIFIC CO\DITIO \S PRIOR TO FINAL SUBMITTAL • RECEIVED ' APR Q 3 2008 cOMMU EY PDT IF SHEET MEASURES 22'X34 IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. US Army US Army Corps of Leeds amid 1 .5 L 1 csi n • z 0 ° W fJ • CONSTRUCTION NOTES WASHINGTON Rote number C -001 Sheet of 17 i DESIGN FILE. 11-MAR -200B 22.36 r DATE AND TIME PLOTTED. J.. c OMR B A NOTES: 1. MAPPING COMPILED FROM FEBRUARY 2006 AERIAL PHOTOS. MAPPING BY 3Dii WEST FOR KING COUNTY DNR AND PARKS. MAP SCALE: 1" •100'. CONTOUR INTERVAL: 2 FOOT. HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD83 /91(HARN) WA STATE PLANE NORTH ZONE (FEET). VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD 88. MAP HAS NOT BEEN COMPREHENSIVELY VERIFIED BY FIELD CHECKS. 2. ALL REAL ESTATE REQUIREMENTS AND UTILITY RELOCATIONS NECESSARY--I PROJECT CONSTRUMC�TION SHALL BE PRIORNTO CONSTRUCTION. KING, COUNTY. 3. TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT ALONG TOE DURING CONS RUCTON PLACEMENT 1" • SO' PROPOSED ACCESS PROPOSED STAGING AREA (TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT) TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT PROJECT FOOTPRINT RECEIVED APR 0 3 2008 80' 40' O COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 80' 1s0' IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22• X 34- IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. 1 R=BI uS Army Cams d Ercpsrars S.od. Oaa+a 1 a 0 e � N 1- . w r 0 3 5. z 0 W T SEATTLE. WASSKNGTON WASHINGTON N V a KING COUNTY Plots number C -101 Sheet of 17 II -MAR -2008 22.40 S. • ST. r ._ >Z � S. 18OTH ST. •• r i 0 7z • P� eeeee� eeee4 P ee• ; o ieie — ee ACSSE�I®eeei PARKNG LOT UGH 44 i - - CREATE ACCESS ►e�e. RAMP TO LEVEE tdeee��eiei`se. - �- o4 or eee44 tt to G®ei• ►eel .110 A44' r-,• • • N 163.800 O. O 0 rn 18000TH ST. 0 4• ca I • X i_ 0 • CENTERLINE OF LEVEE.,-` PROJECT FOOTPRINT .163.200.: NOTES: 1. MAPPING COMPILED OM FEBRUARY 2006 AERIAL PHOTOS. MAPPING BY 3Di WEST FOR KING COUNTY DNR AND PARKS. MAP SCALE: 1"•100'. CONTOUR INTERVAL: 200 FOOT. HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD83/91 (HARN) WA STATE PLANE NORTH ZONE (FEET). VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD 88. MAP HAS NOT BEEN COMPREHENSIVELY VERIFIED BY FIELD CHECKS. 2. ALL REAL ESTATE REOUIREMENTS AND UTILITY RELOCATIONS NECESSARY FOR PROJECT CONSTRUCTION 74.MAL'L -8t OBTAINED /PERFORMED 8L KING COUNT"' PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTIO 3. TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT EXTENDS 30'RIVERWARO FOR LWD PLACEMENT ALONG TOE DURING CONSTRUCTION. /// 1" • 50' PROPOSED ACCESS PROPOSED STAGING AREA (TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT) TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT PROJECT FOOTPRINT RECEIVED [APR 0 3 200B 50' 25' 0 OCVE_1_0 ?ia::.lN'T 50' 100' IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN Zr X 34• IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. 1■.-11 US Army Caps of Enpirors Seattle (*kW 1 k ttvl 1 fr CO 0 8 N n N • W a 3 .J Z DO W � J P SEATTLE. WASHINGTON / LJ i- Lfl O (V � Q J LJ Lil Z YL'J W ASHiNGTON KING COUNTY Plate number C -1C2 Sheet of 17 z Lai N 0 w J NN J Ct W W J CO co N N Cr Ul z w w U i II- MAR-2008 22140 � � CD n o 1.) 1 ```__-�__ --�--��_-- --'- .. . . � ______ ------_- /- � _-----_-_' � -1 �� | | z ANDOVER PARK W. • 0 0 rn mr rn C1.2811;700 - -~-~ ___-_- -_----_----_____-__ -TJ m o _-- ..... 0. •••••••• • |/] � —' ~.-,-`~`�'~'—'-�� l o --�-o ^r- `> =`m rn � w0� --- �=�_' � '~.—.—.—.•••^~.~.__~.~'~.~.~.ea .~.~.~,~,~,~.—,__~.^~,�.~.~.~.~^ GREEN RIVER '�� � r x ' Tco " `` ` \ / | ��- ` / / `- -/ 77 ``._'' • -~= o` / -- // _' \ �~��'_ .'�x / ` ------__ v ' '' ' — - -- ' --- ' — /J z� // -`~- /V "c // T----.� ��� �� ' ... / 11/ / / / / / ----- - - _ X /// / // / / ci Til rn PL 84-99 LEVEE REHABILITATION ________ TUKWILA 205 - SITE 5 SITE PLAN 1 KING COUNTY aASHINGTor4 " �s�o, ENGINEER CORPS OF ENGINEERS SEATTLE. WASHINGTON "~w~"� WEST �� ~ 11 MAR 08 ~�by: oJow �' c'`u'r'000 Prepared by. • "��ed"~ FISCHER "ea I ( UATE ANU TIME PLOTTED. n-MAm'200 22.42 E 1.289.300 la MO . EN 80> (//: 0:1 ; ! : Ln Dzri, 00-4-4 oo 33S'SS3D3V GNV F.) = ~ —4 • I t ' m o r 1 ❑ S. 180TH ST. I (PROPOSEO_ACCESS -/ 9/$t- _ FROM 180TH C '0 4 sOSO e 1 SEE GENERAL SITE PLAN FOR CONTINUATION OF ACCESS — • ././././.1',%;;;;; te ,- • :1 ! % /4 ;; • / `. _ / \ PAVED / 7 / /r / : • • S£ STARfTW % j • \ ( / -' / / l PROJECT FOOTPRINT I • • / r U 'rl i 1 .§, lJ ••\ I ' ,' ` ,r a I f if 1 j /.' // •/ / //' " • /, // jj 1//, / / /`, Y • /• ,/ / i I -' / BEGIN TRANSITION/BACK/ /'� // r / TO EXISTING',•LE1'/EE PRISM: , ; (NO LWDIJTRANSITION LENGTH "" ' ' ALONG BENCH' = 130', SEE /'PLATE ;'/ / • C -303, ,(STATION 9.40,/; ,/ J," / 1 / 1 $ TEMPORARY;' j •. WORK 'AREA.' EASEMENT:; 10' ACCESS • BENCH :BEGIN :SITE'S ;TYPICAL /SECTION 3 (LAYBACK! (1. WITH :RETAINING WALL. ';4N0 LYON. SEE : PLATE/ C- 303, ;(5TATION 8,10) i CENTERLINE OF LEVEE N 163,801 i 1 1 1 1 / BEGIN I SITE! 5 TYPICAL, SEC TION'` ICLAYBACK. NO LW01, SEE PLATE I I C- 302.I(STATION; 6780); i 1' MATCH LINE TO PLATE C -103 BEGIN ; TRANSITION' BETWEEN SITE '5 TYPICAL SECTION 7 AND: TYPICAL. SECTION: 2,'MINIMUM :TRANSITION LENGTH I. 100' SEf; 'PLATES :C.;301 AND C -302 / . ,(STATION 5•701 NOTES: 1. MAPPING COMPILED FROM FEBRUARY 2006 AERIAL PHOTOS. MAPPING BY 301 WEST FOR KING COUNTY DNR AND PARKS. MAP SCALE: 1" -100', CONTOUR INTERVAL: 2 FOOT. HORIZONTAL DATUM: NA083/91 (HARN) WA STATE PLANE NORTH ZONE (FEET). VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88. MAP HAS NOT BEEN COMPREHENSIVELY VERIFIED BY FIELD CHECKS. 2. FOR SITE 5 STAGING AND ACCESS, SEE PLATE C -101. • 1" • 30 RECE!V D 'APR 0 3 2008 COMMUNITY DEVELOP;4ENT N 30' 15' 0 30' 60' IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 220.X34' IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. US Anny Corps of Engir..rs S.ards Moil 3. 1- �,3 z aLJ e 0 N f • A f- K U W - N_ Z 5 W w 0 0 Z V) is W 0 r� Z 6 SEATTLE. WASNMCTON ■ W ▪ N Z Lf J CV Q = 1— WASHINGTON KING COUNTY Note number C -104 Sheet of 17 N u c 0 JCO CC J S W -w J 0 N W z W C S nrctr..N rIi v, 4& 5 c 0 D CO n 0 0 T I 1 I I Ica 0 0 Z PL 84.99 LEVEE REHABILITATION TUKWILA 205: SITES 3 & 5. GRE-3-07 TUKWILA 205 - SITE 3 SITE PLAN 1 KING COUNTY PN C1972 WASHINGTON •U.S.ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT,SEATTLE CORPS OF ENGINEERS SEATTLE. WASHINGTON Designed by WEST Dole• • 11 MAR 08 bro... by LEJON File • E -12 -7 -229 Prepared by Checked by FISCHER Nev. / • E 1,290.400 • E 1,290,600 E 1,290,800 A0U - x r Z P2422:-Pc O c—Igi0 yyy m .11c—V Im/1 =Zr -161[11-2 y Z <y( -Z�On <OZOO�O° mpbpDCO!A Ti -< -. "'2 <cx52 >m A�pzmO -D d mg�8m; mZmtoNN -m -C —1—.^'I O W mm' AAODfc oZ0z-',f-1 A -1 0 0 &D mp°' N • • 2E s DATE AND TIME PLOTTED. 11- MAR -2008 22.44 DESIGN FILE. 1. \MIS[ \CIV \GREEN RIVER\2008 LEVEE REHAB\T1KVILA 205 LEVEE\GRTWC- 105501.D0N Op*. meer4r OW. row. _ syeee. Description • • 2E s DATE AND TIME PLOTTED. 11- MAR -2008 22.44 DESIGN FILE. 1. \MIS[ \CIV \GREEN RIVER\2008 LEVEE REHAB\T1KVILA 205 LEVEE\GRTWC- 105501.D0N m n o AT 3g � X z , z 1 " = a ° � � • .» � � � -r—^--~~—^— [ .^1'``. . �._...1._._._._._._._._.....,_._ / � ` '-.. . �. ^ : ' ` \ ,~.~.�. 1 x ,.~�, '~'~ \ i � `� / � ` --` / � ' . -_—� ' ' P. � .` -' `' --_' ` ^, -~_ _._ . .`�__ '`". ` '' ` ' '"^ -_'_-_� ` ` . ' . _ -`` . • m'1000.600 I:1 ~ rn -� • r ■ —^ — 0...0 001 ~',0,`■. ~ mm 0 1:14(1,1foo -.____,-__-.~.-,_.~'-,~,~.�^~.__~,~.�.~ ..,������ . '_ ,.=--_-`=~�`�~_- ~_�������c .~.~ _�- -___-_- ... � • ' --_�==��~° �--------' --^- z�m��` --- ~=c�.=, � z �� �A ) '� ' ( � ---\7----' • | • / / | \L. � — - /-T-` o� � \_ Z_+11114."— rrl TUKVY|LA 205 - SITE 3 SITE PLAN 2 w�m�, �mm ~��n� rn 0 � 'v�ARx �u��mamo/amnz CORPS mENGWEm SE°"LE.,AS"I4G"1.1 ��o� WEST *� ^ 11 MAR 08 Drawn by: LEJON rd._ c'12'7'229 Prepared by Checked by FISCHER *~ \|l E !O;!! om MD Xs< p ^ • '' 0 -4 PI • • DATE AND TIME PLOTTED. 1 1I-MAR-2008 22.44 OF:SIGN FILE, lo\HISC\CIIAGREEN RIVER\2008 LEVEE REHAFIVIIKWILA 205 LEVEMRTWC-106502.00N D B Imam A • 12' • 14' 24' 109' ESTIMATED FOOTPRINT EL 36' (APPROX.) EXISTING GROUND SURFACE (APPROX.) J SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL 32' • tAPPROx: r 10' ACCESS 104 Olio., 1 24' COIR WRAP (T4P1 WILLOWS PLACED EVERY 6" ON CENTER (TYP) TUKWILA 205 - SITE 5 TYPICAL SECTION 1 NOT TO SCALE SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL OHW --EL 16' 2,OCO CFS QUARRY SPALLS 2 1 CLASS IV RIPRAP LAUNCHABLE TOE ANCHOR ROCK, 5' DIAM. EL 8' ao co CONIFER W /ROOTBALL, (30' LENGTH, 2' DIAM.) ANCHORED TO BOULDER, ANGLED DOWNSTREAM (WSEL 300 CFS APPROX.), SEE DETAIL PLATE C -501 RECEIVED ' APR 0 3 2008 COMMUNITY DEVELOPAENT' IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 27 X 34' IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. US Army taps of Engineers Seattle 7Imie 1 1 1 CO 0 0 and 0 N N .w w ° W 3 z 0 7 ° J 1'- 0 ,- W au mJ • cc a tl caw, cn > ` J mp on as a1 WASMNCTON 0 zz HMG COUNTY Mote number: C -301 Sheet of 17 z u ❑ 0 0 W _ w J N -J 5 W J 0 0 0 w U z w -J a U N w II -MAR -2006 22.46 0, n mo-0 rfl rn oG c F1 _°c ca .., nog © 0 PL 84 -99 LEVEE REHABILITATION TUKWILA 205+ SITES 3 8 5. GRE-3-07 TUKWILA 205 - SITE 5 TYPICAL SECTION 2 KING COUNTY PN CI972 WASHINGTON X N) • J . m za —I n U.S.ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT.SEATTLE CORPS OF ENGINEERS SETTLE. WASHINGTON Designed by+ WEST Date+ 11 MAR 08 Tn..n by+ LEJON rd. • E-12 -7 -229 Prepared by Checked by FISCHER Re.. I yy syoeo Description Dole App. Syn... ascription o DATE AND TIME PLOTTED. II- MAR -2008 22.46 DESIGN FILE. 1.\MISC\CIV\GREEN RIVER \2008 LEVEE REHAB\TUKWILA 205 LIVEE\GRTW0- 302T52.00N D C B Immo A AC PAVEMENT EL 27' (A1'PR0X. ) • 1 97' • • FENCE —� EL 36' ( APPROX. l7{t% ESTIMATED FOOTPRINT 86' 4' 24' 10' ACCESS (APPROX.) SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL RETAINING WALL (SEE }_ -..• .- -- DETAIL PLATE C -501) N "- " -EL 28' ( APPROX.) WSEL 9.000 TUKWILA 205 - SITE 5 TYPICAL SECTION 3 a. EXISTING GROUND - SURFACE (APPROX.) 16' 16' 16' EL. 24' (APPROX.I WSEL 6.000 CFS I l \ \Noi:il W4ITA \ \ullili.`tli)\ SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL NOT TO SCALE sy WILLOWS IN SOIL. WILLOWS PLACED EVERY 6" ON LET;tH ( 14)•) v V OHW EL. 16' IAPPRDX.) OUARRY r 1- .4 L SPACES ' s t :..i i. ; i t• WSEL . 00 CFS IA EL 8' CLASS IV RIPRAP LAUNCHABLE TOE. CLASS IV RIPRAP RECEIVED rAPR 0 3 200.8 COMfihLti ;1;: DEVELOPisifo ! IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22' X 34' IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. [Li.L1J: US Army Corp: of Isom S.mw a6asa a i m 0 N N w i ) 0 wro O , I_" Z `av () 0 ev. J mi. 1 F- ? a. 0 s^ L() w W j O (/ ) W >`= N L■4 v. J J < O.0 Q 9' ° U CV J to < C- L as ). r D E- WASHINGTON KING COUNTY Piote number: C -303 Sheet of 17 P N . D EL 29' APPROX.) 10' ACCESS • 107' 12 14' 24' 1444/1444WW6444414441 SAT ISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL_ (0 12' • • EXISTING GROUND SURFACE (APPROX.) EL 27' SPALLS UP TO ELEVATION 27' 9,000 CFS 30' COIR FABRIC WRAPS (TYP) 6.000 CFS EL 23' WILLOWS WITH COIR FABRIC -$OIL LIFTS, WILLOWS PLACED EVERY 6" ON CENTSR (TYP) SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL QUARRY SPALLS ti. p T)HW EL 15 2.000 CF TUKWILA 205 - SITE 3 TYPICAL SECTION NOT TO SCALE CLASS IV RIPRAP LAUNCHABLE TOE. CLASS IV RIPRAP ANCHOR ROCK, 5' DIAM. n EL 8' (APPROX.) Eo CONIFER W /ROOTBALL, (30' LENGTH, 2' DIAM.) ANCHORED TO BOULDER, ANGLED DOWNSTREAM (WSEL 300 CFS APPROX.), SEE DETAIL PLATE C-501 RECEIVED [PR o a 2008 COW MUe`3i? I'Y DEVELOPMENT IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22' X 34' IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. US U Army Caps d Enpnssrs Sod. Rmis s .1 1 O N W 1- N 3 Z J o: W W -J N N CC U W K _N 0 0 W re O z u. Z W 0 0 VI WASHINGTON KING COUNTY Piote number C -304 Sheet of 17 z 0 0 N 0 0 0 W NN J_ CO x W 1 m N W 0 u 0 s J z O Ni D' 2008 22.47 0 W L z a 0 •108" • I 1 15/n" GALV TOP RAIL E EMBEDMENT MIN 1' GRAVEL BACKFILL 3" CLR .,o 2" CLR 2I/2" DIA CALV SCH 40 POST 0 8' -0" 0.C. W /END CAPS CHAIN LINK FENCE WIRE MESH •4o 12" EL 36: T /LEVEE 2" CLR •8 VERT 10" GEOMESH AT EACH WEEP HOLE 10" • • • • •5Q 12" •8 DOWEL 3" CLR LAPPED REINFRT 11' -0" •4 G 12' •4 Q 12' 3" DIA WEEP HOLES 0 10' MAX EL 27= AC PAVMT JO_- RCJ EL 24.25 BOF i/ T KEY HORIZ REINFATING q 4 e 1314 FRONT FACE TYPICAL VERTICAL CONTROL JOINT NOT TO SCALE 1. MAXIMUM SPACING OF CONTROL /CONSTRUCTION JOINT SPACING IS 25'-0 ". 2. CONTROL JOINTS NOT REQUIRED IN FOOTING. 3. HORIZONTAL REINFORCEMENT IS CONTINUOUS THROUGH FOOTING. 2" AC .— 4" BASE COURSE 1 COMPACTED SUBGRADE SIDERF O SIDE OF ASPHALT LOW EDGE 1" ABOVE FINISH GRADE 2 TYPICAL AC TRAIL PAVEMENT SECTION NOT TO SCALE 5' DIAM. QUARRY STONE ANCHOR (TYP) GREEN RIVER 5H 1V MAX. 14'-16' WIDTH DEPENDS ON SITE (SEE TYPICAL SECTIONS) 10' 5H:1V MAX. AC PATH ..,n. \,f \ I. N. 4" BASE COURSE �— COMPACTED SUBGRADE 2" ASPHALT PAVING (AC) LANDWARD SIDE 11:7:11 OF LEVEE TRAIL RESTORATION TYPICAL SECTION NOT TO SCALE 30' 2' DIAM. LWD CONIFER (TYP) 1/2" DIAM. CHAIN (TYP) • Y4" PREMOLDED EXP.JT = SEALANT DOWEL X 0 EH STEEL 1-6" VRT (LIGHTLY GREASE DOWEL) EXPANSION TYPICAL VERTICAL EXPANSION JOINT NOT TO SCALE 1. MAXIMUM SPACING OF EXPANSION JOINT IS 100 FEET. 2. EXPANSION JOINTS NOT REQUIRED IN FOOTING. TYPICAL LOG PLACEMENT (PLAN VIEW) NOT TO SCALE EXISTING GROUND SURFACE (APPROX.) LWD CONIFER (TYP) 2' 5' DIAM. QUARRY STONE ANCHOR ROCK 5' DIAM. QUARRY STONE ANCHOR ROCK • RIPRAP (TYP) SUMMER WATER = SURFACE ELEV. (APPROX. 300 CFS) TYPICAL LOG PLACEMENT (SECTION VIEW) NOT TO SCALE RECEIVED fAPR 03 2008 COMVit:;LJ N1 rY DEVELOP r'+} .; '4T IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22' X 34' IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. US Army Caps •f Enpim•rs S.an% amid 1 'o 0 . W N Z oVI W aZ a0 5 0 z' r— LaJ =i 0n W W V% J m'7' 0 0 N Q a; WASHINGTON KING COUNTY Plate number C -501 Sheet of 17 V 0 II-MAR -2008 22.47 DATE AND TIME PLOTTED.