The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSEPA E08-006 - CITY OF TUKWILA / PUBLIC WORKS - TUKWILA 205 LEVEE REPAIRSTUKWILA 205 LEVEE REPAIR SITE 3 - 6801 S 180 sri1E 5 - 18000 APW E08 -006 • City of Tgskwg • Jim Haggerton, Mayor Department of Comm i WV Development NOTICE OF DECISION To: Ryan Larson, Senior Engineer, Public Works Dept. La Pianta, Owner Tri -Land Corporation, Owner First Interstate Bank — Kirkland, Owner Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, Fisheries Program Phyllis Meyer, National Marine Fisheries Service State Department of Ecology, SEPA Division King County Assessor (for changes to land use or value) Jack Pace, Director PROJECT: FILE NUMBERS: ASSOCIATED FILES: APPLICANT: REQUEST: LOCATION: Emergency 205 Levee Repairs E08 -006, SEPA L08 -022, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit City of Tukwila, Public Works Department Repair 205 Corps of Engineers Certified Levee in two locations Portion of levee adjacent to 6801 S. 180th St. (Site 3) and levee adjacent to 18200 Andover Park West (Site 5) This notice is to confirm the decision reached by Tukwila's SEPA Official to issue a Determination of Non - significance (DNS) for the above project based on the environmental checklist and the underlying permit application: Project materials including the application, any staff reports, and other studies related to the permits are available for inspection at: Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. The project planner is Carol Lumb, who may be contacted at (206) 431 -3661 for further information. The decision is appealable to the Superior Court pursuant to the Judicial Review of Land Use Decisions, Revised Code of Washington (RCW 36.70C). Initials Page 1 of 1 06/13/2008 1 1:16:00 AM Q:\205 Levee Repairs \E08 -006 Notice of Decision.doc 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 ° Tukwila, Washington 98188 ° Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 ° Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 File Number: Applied: Issue Date: Status: City`f 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 i DETERMINATION OF NON - SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) E08 -006 04/03/2008 06/12/2008 ISSUED Applicant: RYAN LARSON Lead Agency: City of Tukwila Description of Proposal: SEPA FOR 205 LEVY REPAIR WORK AT TWO SITES IN TUKWILA ALONG THE GREEN RIVER. Location of Proposal: Address: Parcel Number: Section/Township /Range: 6845 S 180 ST TUKW 3623049017 The City has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21c.030(2) (c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. This DNS is issued under WAC 197 -11- 340(2). Comments must be submitted by (n Z - v . The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date below. , J oe jack Pac L Responsible Official Date City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 (206)431 -3670 Any appeal shall be linked to a specific governmental action. The State Environmental Policy Act is not intended to create a cause of action unrelated to a specific governmental action. Appeals of environmental determinations shall be commenced within the time period to appeal the governmental action that is subject to environmental review. (RCW 43.21C.075) doc: DNS -4/07 E08 -006 Printed: 06 -12 -2008 dr at* of Eam& w Dept. Of Community Development AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION /, Of ! C VeC.hfl / HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Notice of Public Hearing 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 /_ #' Y / , �di. Planning Commission Agenda Packet • /' 0O , Official Notice Short Subdivision Agenda Mailer's Signature: 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:/ ,ae/g � Was mailed to each of the addresses listed/attached on this Av 2 day of in the year 20 0__?. C:\DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\ TERI -S\ DESKTOP \AFFIDAVITOFDISTRIBUTION.DOC V Project Name: d 4 / , / i Z, /_ #' Y / , �di. Project Number: • /' 0O , / Mailer's Signature: i��C Mailing requested by: Cleie(1,{1K6 C:\DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\ TERI -S\ DESKTOP \AFFIDAVITOFDISTRIBUTION.DOC CHECKLIST: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW /SHORELINE PERMIT MAILINGS FEDERAL AGENCIES kU.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ( ) FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION ( ) DEPT OF FISH & WILDLIFE WASHINGTON ( ) U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY \ , ( ) U.S. DEPT OF H.U.D. V ■`NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE u % P►uiu s l- „eye s STATE AGENCIES ( ) OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY ( ) TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ( ) DEPT NATURAL RESOURCES ( ) OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR ( ) DEPT OF COMM. TRADE & ECONOMIC DEV. ( ) DEPT OF FISHERIES & WILDLIFE ( W t S. Saciccon 5.itt 000 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. ASSESSOR'S OFFICE SCHOOLS /LIBRARIES seoe( iA� 3„ ( ) TUKWILA SCHOOL DISTRICT •pl CTia1 () TUKWILA LIBRARY ( ) RENTON LIBRARY ( ) KENT LIBRARY ( ) CITY OF SEATTLE LIBRARY ( ) QWEST ( ) SEATTLE CITY LIGHT ( ) PUGET SOUND ENERGY ( ) HIGHLINE WATER DISTRICT ( ) SEATTLE WATER DEPARTMENT ( ) COMCAST UTILITIES CITY AGENCIES () KENT PLANNING DEPT v TUKWILA CITY DEPARTMENTS: 'Z1ANti fV1 001 PUBLIC WORKS () FIRE ( ) POLICE ( ) FINANCE ( ) PLANNING ( ) BUILDING () PARKS & REC. () MAYOR ( ) CITY CLERK OTHER LOCAL AGENCIES ( ) PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL 14 SW K C CHAMBER OF COMMERCE MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE ( ) CULTURAL RESOURCES PROGRAM ** FISHERIES PROGRAM** 41t1 Ka,wev� Wb/11ev ( ) WILDLIFE PROGRAM PO1l`( Gocco l e **Send SEPA Checklist and full set of plans w/ NOA ( ) SEATTLE TIMES ( ) SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL DR5 MEDIA Q`t'pE "'�''►� \Q�'i () DEPT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERV. DEPT OF ECOLOGY, , TELAND DIV NW Regional Office � n '.-SEPA '�`' �l ” 2.44(< ADEPT OF ECOLOGY, DIVISION* ( ) OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL * SEND CHKLIST W/ DETERMINATIONS * SEND SITE MAPS WITH DECISION () HEALTH DEPT ( ) PORT OF SEATTLE ( ) K.C. DEV & ENVIR SERVICES -SEPA INFO CNTR ( ) K.C. TRANSIT DIVISION - SEPA OFFICIAL ( ) K.C. LAND & WATER RESOURCES ( ) 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 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 PO 6oy ggoz4 kY�3 L. Lam- P e . Z vWo�n rs 44121w, \.k P:\ADMINISTRATIVE \FORMS \CHECKLIST.DOC �l w T✓\ - Po bay G 11I c.d,4 Rgo53 31 /AK\ sov , �fv4il^aS'o, rte- q '-1.163 PUIC NOTICE MAILINGS FOR PE ITS 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:\ADMINISTRATIV E \FORMS \CHECKLIST.DOC OWNER_N ME APPLE SIX h0SPITALITY HARE DEVELOPMENT LLC TUKWILA TT LLC EJT INC HARNISH GROUPVNC FIRST�INTER BNK - IRKLAND HIGH BEECH LLC HD DEVELOPMENT 0 MARY FIRST INTER BNK -KIR ND <ILY POINTEINVES_T_ME 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 2 7 ADV DEP PD 30 237 85 0111 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 68b4 S 180TH ST 18251 CASCADE AVE S 6700 RIVERSIDE DR OWNER CITY OWNER :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 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 -- -98` ---94163=1"i 98073 30348 94163 98053 - 94163 94163 97754 98040 98250 98032 98032 98188 98188 98188 98055 98188 98188 98188 98188 98188 98188 98188 1' WILA 00 SO ► CENTER BLVD JKWI A .188 IASTA BEVERAGES INC N UNIVERSITY DR LANTATION FL 3324 >ANELLIE LLC -664 95TH AVE NE (ARROW POINT WA )8004 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 • 6200 SO TUKWIL 98188 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 TUKWILA 98188 ANTA LLC • :OX 88028 TUKWILA WA 98138�jj.� 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 1001 KAPOLEI 96707 S CAMPBE OKI BLVD OMPANY L L TENANT 1227 ANDOVER PARK E TUKWILA WA 8188 ENANT 80 ANDOVER PARK W ATTLE WA 188 TENANT 1233 ANDOV TUKWILA W 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 TENANT 18271 ANDOVER PARK W TUKWILA WA 98188 TENANT 6540 S GLACIER ST TUKWILA WA 98188 TENANT 18325 OLYMPIC AVE S TUKWILA WA 98188 City of Tdcwd Jim Haggerton, Mayor Department of Community Development Jack Pace, Director MEMORANDUM June 13, 2008 To: Jack Pace, Director, Dept. of Community Development Fm: Carol Lumb, Senior Plain Re: Project File No. E08 -006: Repairs to COE Certified 205 Levees 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. 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. 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. The levee projects protect an 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 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 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. At Site #5, a 250 linear foot retaining wall will CL Q:\205 Levee Repairs \E08 -006 Staff Rpt.doc Page 1 of 10 06/12/2008 5:02:00 PM 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 o Tukwila, Washington 98188 o Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 0 Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 SEPA Staff Report E08 -09 Corps 205 Levee Repairs June 13, 2008 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." 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. Proponent: Ryan Larson, Senior Engineer, Surface Water, Tukwila Public Works Department Location: Site 3: 6801 S. 180th Street (parcel numbers 362304 -9017, -9079 and -9087) Site 5: 1800 Andover Park East (parcel numbers 352304 -9121, -9055 and 9116) Date prepared: May 12, 2008 Lead Agency: City of Tukwila, Department of Community Development Challenges to Document: None Other Agencies of Jurisdiction: Department of Ecology Recommendation: Determination of Non - Significance (DNS) CL Page 2 of 10 06/12/2008 4:41:00 PM Q:\205 Levee Repairs \E08 -006 Staff Rpt.doc SEPA Staff Report E08 -09 Corps 205 Levee Repairs June 13, 2008 Existing Environmental Information: • Notice of Preparation for Environmental Assessment and Clean Water Act public Notice for 208 Green River Levee Repairs, May 21, 2008. Comments on SEPA Checklist: 5. Animals c. The two sites are located along the Pacific Flyway migration route. Summary of Primary Impacts: Earth The sites are engineered levees with a proposed flat surface (bench) approximately mid- way up the levee that will be planted for habitat improvement purposes and slopes, which are 60% along the face of the levee. The levee itself will be constructed with engineered soils; other soils consist of river deposits such as silts and sands. The repairs are needed due to damage to the levee during the 2006 winter storms. The damage is due in part to the over - steepened character of the existing levees; the repairs will lay back the levee at a 2:1 slope, with a bench mid -way up the slope which will achieve an overall slope of 2.5:1. This is a more natural angle that will hopefully prove more stable than the existing slope angle. Approximately four acres will be cleared and graded for this project. Construction will be completed during the dry, late summer season using erosion control best management practices. No new impervious surfaces are proposed; the existing Green River Trail, which is located at Site 3 will be reconstructed when the levee repair is completed. Erosion and sedimentation will be controlled through the implementation of Best Management Practices as set forth in the King County Surface Water Design Manual and in accordance with City of Tukwila requirements. Disturbed areas will be restored to match existing conditions, which may consist of hydro- seeding disturbed areas, installation of erosion control fabric, planting shrubs and /or planting trees. Air During reconstruction of the levees, minor dust and internal combustion engine emissions will occur. Best management practices will be used during construction activities to reduce and control dust and air emissions. These practices may include covering soil stockpiles, sweeping or washing paved surfaces, minimizing exposed areas, and using construction machinery equipped with emission control devices. CL Page 3 of 10 06/12/2008 4:41:00 PM Q:\205 Levee Repairs\E08 -006 Staff Rpt.doc SEPA Staff Report E08 -00I Corps 205 Levee Repairs June 13, 2008 of which are known to inhabit the Green River. The site is located along the Pacific Flyway migration route. The reconstructed levee will be setback five feet from its current location, the maximum slope angle will be reduced to 2:1, a mid -slope bench will be provided that will allow for the planting of trees, which will provide habitat benefits and large woody debris will be added along the toe of the levee for habitat purposes. These actions will improve habitat functions along these portions of the levee system. Energy/Natural Resources The project will not utilize any energy once the repairs are completed. Environmental Health Accidental fuel or oil spills from the heavy equipment could occur during construction of the levees. To reduce this possibility, any needed repairs or refueling will take place away from the river and any storm water conveyance facilities located in the construction zone. Short term noise impacts from construction operations are anticipated during construction work hours, between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 8:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. Saturday, Sunday and holidays. Construction equipment will be equipped with mufflers and all operations will be in accordance with City of Tukwila noise ordinances. Land/Shoreline Uses Site 3 is located in the Tukwila Urban Center and zoned TUC, while Site 5 is located just south of the Urban Center and zoned Heavy Industrial. Damaged portions the existing levees will be removed and replaced with levees sloped at a more natural angle and that incorporate a bench that can be planted to improve habitat functions along the river. The proposed activity is consistent with both the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning designation. The Shoreline Master Program designation is Urban and the proposed action must obtain a Shoreline Substantial Development permit. Housing No housing exists on the site. Aesthetics The levee will be reconstructed at its current height, which is approximately 10 feet above the adjacent property grade. CL Page 5 of 10 06/12/2008 5:02:00 PM Q:\205 Levee Repairs\E08 -006 Staff Rpt.doc SEPA Staff Report E08 -0") Corps 205 Levee Repairs June 13, 2008 Light/Glare N/A Recreation A pedestrian/bike trail system exists on the top of the levee which contains the Green River along Site 3. The users of the trail will be detoured during construction and the trail location restored once the levee repairs are complete. Historic /Cultural Preservation The COE Notice of Preparation states: "The APEs (Areas of Potential Effect) of Tukwila Levees 3 and 5....are in the near vicinity of known historic properties or encompassed within the boundaries of ethnographically or historically significant places. The APEs for the individual projects have been defined as their respective construction boundaries, which include access roads and staging areas; these APEs were not fully defined at the writing of this report. The individual project area APEs include the levee repair areas, access road construction or improvement, staging areas, seepage berm construction, and will include all other areas where there will be ground disturbing activities related to the projects." The COE Notice of Preparation also states: "A national Historic Preservation Act Section 106compliance report will be prepared that includes all of the proposed levee repairs. The report will include the findings of the investigations for each repair site, recommendations for archaeological monitoring during construction, and a determination of effects to archaeological and historic properties. If archaeological monitoring is recommended at some repair locations, the report will include a monitoring plan and protocols to be followed. The Corps' determination of effects to historic properties, the investigation report, and monitoring plan will be reviewed and approved by the Washington State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and the appropriate tribes prior to construction." Transportation Existing streets will be used to access the two levee repair sites. Site 3 will be accessed via Sperry Drive, just south of S. 180th Street across from the Home Depot store; Site 5 will be accessed via Andover Park West, just south of S. 180th Street. Construction CL Page 6 of 10 06/12/2008 4:41:00 PM Q:\205 Levee Repairs \E08 -006 Staff Rpt.doc SEPA Staff Report E08 -09 Corps 205 Levee Repairs June 13, 2008 vehicle traffic will occur during the repair of the levees. A hauling permit will be required from the Public Works Department for these deliveries. Public Services The levee repairs will not result in the increased need for public services; the repairs are aimed to prevent a breach of the levees in these two areas, which would necessitate emergency response from federal, county and City agencies. Utilities No additional utilities are anticipated to be needed as a result of the building construction. Public Comments Comments were received from the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division (MITFD) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), an agency within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration during the public comment period. The Tribe had the following questions about the project. The questions are in italics with the staff /applicant response following. MITFD Comments: 1. We strongly recommend that a more comprehensive river corridor approach to levee improvements be initiated to adequate mitigate for fish habitat impacts associated with levees along the Tukwila 205 and lower Green River levee system. A key part of the 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. Response: A more comprehensive approach would be helpful, however this is outside the scope of the current project since these are emergency repairs to two sites in the levee system. 2. 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. CL Page 7 of 10 06/12/2008 4:41:00 PM Q:\205 Levee Repairs \E08 -006 Staff Rpt.doc SEPA Staff Report E08 -0• Corps 205 Levee Repairs June 13, 2008 Response: The USACOE is constructing the repairs to the levee, under P.L. 84 -99, which authorizes emergency repairs to flood hazard reduction structures and the City has no ability to require the COE to revise the project in any way. The City has applied for the SEPA and shoreline substantial development permits because the levee repairs trigger these permits, however it has no control over the design or construction of the project. The COE is conducting its own environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and will be issuing an Environmental Assessment (EA) as required by the Act. 3. 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 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...likely providing minimal summer shading when stream temperatures are highest and shade is needed the most...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. Response: We have passed the recommendation on to the Corps; as noted above the City does not have the ability to alter the design of the levee repair. The mid -slope bench that has been incorporated into the design of the project will add native trees and plants, which currently do not exist along these sections of the levee. Unlike other vegetation along the 205 certified levee system, these plants will not be required to be removed after reaching four inches in diameter, which will have a beneficial effect on habitat in the future once the vegetation matures. 4. 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. Response: We have passed the recommendation on to the Corps; as noted above the City does not have the ability to alter the design of the levee repair. 5. 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. Response: We have passed the recommendation on to the Corps; as noted above the City has no control over the design of the levee repair. CL Page 8 of 10 06/12/2008 4:41:00 PM Q:\205 Levee Repairs \E08 -006 Staff Rpt.doc SEPA Staff Report E08 -005" Corps 205 Levee Repairs June 13, 2008 6. 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 this issue. Response: We have passed this request on to the Corps. NMFS Comments: 7. The amount of rock to be used to establish the "launchable toe " portion of the levee may result in higher water temperatures than what currently exists. Replacing soil with rock as specified in the drawings will accumulate more heat. Some of this heat will be transferred into the river during months and at low flows that adult salmon would be migrating upstream, late August through October. Response: The following information is taken from the COE "Notice of Preparation and Clean Water Act Public Notice," issued May 21, 2008, from the section on Anticipated Impacts, Water Quality (pages 9 -10): "...The combination of channel width, depth, and lack of shade - producing riparian vegetation contributes to warming of the river during low flow periods in summer...the proposed repairs at Tukwila, Horseshoe end #1 and #4, Kent Shops/Narita and Meyer's Golf include mid -slope benches. These benches will be planted in spring 2009 with riparian trees and shrubs by the Corps in an effort to provide shade to the river corridor. It should be noted however, that these benches are to be constructed on top of the launchable toe of the levee. If the toe were to "launch" during a flood event, part or the entire bench may also slide into the river resulting in a rock faced levee with no way to replant the vegetation. Over time and assuming bench stability, this addition of riparian vegetation to the lower Green River would greatly improve habitat, lower -water temperatures due to increased shading of the river, and create additional organic input to the river. 8. We are concerned about the effect of the material designed to launch into the river. We calculate over 14,000 cubic yards of riprap would be placed in the launchable toe alone. Additional rock will be imported to the site for the parts of the levee not designed to launch into the river. This rock in the channel would impede formation of channel features, for example pools, needed by salmon. The fact that it is not intended to remain on the river bank makes establishing riparian vegetation even more unlikely. Response: This concern has been forwarded to the Corps for review. As stated earlier, the Corps has determined that if these two sites in Tukwila are not repaired CL Page 9 of 10 06/12/2008 4:41:00 PM Q:\205 Levee Repairs\E08 -006 Staff Rpt.doc SEPA Staff Report E08 -0• Corps 205 Levee Repairs June 13, 2008 before the next flood event, they would present an imminent threat of loss of private and/or public property. As an emergency repair being carried out by the Corps, the City does not have the ability to influence the design of the project. Recommendation Determination of Nonsignificance CL Page 10 of 10 06/12/2008 4:41:00 PM Q:\205 Levee Repairs \E08 -006 Staff Rpt.doc C (07%28%2008) Caroll Lumb - Tukwila LeveRepairs From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments: Dear Ms. Roberts: Page Carol Lumb Mary.J.Roberts @gmail.com 07/28/2008 3:14 PM Tukwila Levee Repairs E08 -006 Staff Rpt.doc; L08 -022 Staff Rpt.doc Thank you for your July 11, 2008 letter requesting information about the levee repairs and the response to the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe's comments on the project. I apologize for the delay in getting back to you. I am attaching below the staff reports for both SEPA (State Environmental Policy Act) review and the shoreline substantial development permit. The comments from the Tribe and from the National Marine Fisheries Service, which also commented on the project, are addressed towards the end of the SEPA staff report. After reviewing the attached information, if you have questions, please give me a call or e-mail me back. I appreciate your interest in this project. 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) eateie 7.ree r;") 042 5.11k/-/Yed-- 7 ( �at ;;la' e/ � 980 9v57-s,' 6e6-& 2 v d` a 70 120)c 1-adcf ,A,70a-&166 teele,“eae 7/-1-;<-) Getie,f Carol Lumb - FW: Shoreline Perm • Page 1 of 2 From: "Levesque, Andy" <Andy.Levesque @kingcounty.gov> To: "Moorehead, Lydia" <LMoorehead @ci.kent.wa.us >, <CAnderson @ci.kent.wa.us> Date: 06/11/2008 11:22 AM Subject: FW: Shoreline Permits CC: "Mactutis, Mike" <MMactutis @ci.kent.wa.us >, "Bleifuhs, Steve" < Steve.Bleifuhs @kingcounty.gov >, "Bean, Tom" <Tom.Bean @kingcounty.gov >, "Scheibner, Deborah" < Deborah .Scheibner @kingcounty.gov >, "Carol Lumb" <clumb @ci.tukwila.wa.us> Lydia, This may shed some additional Tight on the Corps' intentions. It is beyond me how the Corps can determine on their own that they may qualify for an exemption from the SSDP under the local SMP, without submitting anything for review by the local jurisdiction administering the SMP, using only 404(f)(1)(B), but this seems to be what they are saying, as they will only submit to WSDOE for those projects which they find will not be exempt, and which will then need a 401 certification from the state for CZMA consistency. WSDOE will then apparently forward this sub -set of projects to the local jurisdictions for a quick review to see if they are consistent with the local SMP. At the same time, they state they will not actually need an SSDP or exemption (SSDPX), but we (King County or Kent) may wish to apply for one of these as our "prerogative." I have asked for some clear direction from our own management on this latter question, and will let you know what we may decide regarding the SSDPX requests we usually submit. As you can see, this is still a bit murky for my own understanding. Regards, Andy From: Cummins, Andrea K NWS [mailto: Andrea .K.Cummins @usace.army.mil] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 4:35 PM To: Scheibner, Deborah Cc: Levesque, Andy; Bean, Tom; Juckniess, Craig M NWS; Nelson, Siri C NWS; Laufle, Jeffrey C NWS; Jackels, Chemine R NWS; Scuderi, Michael R NWS; Lewis, Evan R NWS; Pozarycki, Scott V NWS Subject: RE: Shoreline Permits Hi Deborah, After a lengthy meeting with our attorney's yesterday here is the outcome, as best as I can paraphrase it. Any Corps folks who think I misspoke or want to chime in please feel free... The Corps must comply with the Coastal Zone Management Act (a federal law) which is the basis for all the local jurisdictions SMP.s. We do this by writing a CZMA consistency determination using the local SMP, in this case City of Auburn, Kent and Tukwila depending on levee location. We then submit this to Ecology (if necessary - in this case it is as we need 401 cert for Horseshoe #1,Dykstra and Galli's so the Auburn and Kent CZMAs go to Ecology) and they send a concurrence letter. Rebekah has the CZM determination for Auburn and Kent will be sent today. My understanding is that she will send this to Jeff Dixon at Auburn, along with a cover letter, and request his review within 10 days (a VERY short timeline I know). I believe the same will be true for Kent, although I don't have confirmation on this. The other sites (the 404 (f)(1) (B) exemptions) we will do a determination and it will be found as an appendix in the EA. That said, the Corps does not need a Shoreline permit (substantial development or exemption) to proceed with construction. If the local jurisdictions wish to apply for exemption or permit that is their prerogative. We are not your agent or vice versa. Does that help explain things? I know there has been a lot of confusion on all sides regarding this issue and I think some of it stems from semantics (often we are talking CZMA and you SMP requirements). Suffice it to say that the Corps will have all the necessary CZMA compliance in place necessary for our construction. Let me know if you need more clarification. Andrea file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \CAROL -L \Local Settings\ Temp\ XPGrpWise \484FB561tuk- mail6300 -... 06/11/2008 • • From: Scheibner, Deborah [mailto:Deborah.Scheibner @kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 4:05 PM To: Cummins, Andrea K NWS Cc: Levesque, Andy; Bean, Tom Subject: Shoreline Permits Andrea, Page 2 of 2 Any word on what the County's responsibilities are regarding getting local shorelines permits? I'm needing to know for sure as soon as possible in order to meet the City's review schedule. Thanks! Deborah Please, note: My email addt css has changed to deborah .scheibner @kingcounty.gov. Deborah Scheibner, P.F. Department of Natural Resources and Parks King County Water and Land Resources Division 201. S. Jackson Street, Suite 600 Seattle, WA 98104 -3555 Voice (206) 263 -72h) or 1 (800) 325.6165 ext. 3 -7269 Fax (206) 205-5134 file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \CAROL -L \Local Settings\ Temp\ XPGrpWise \484FB561tuk- mail6300 -... 06/11/2008 • • COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION Coastal Zone Management Act Consistency Determination Green River Levee Rehabilitation Projects, 2008 The rehabilitation actions are activities undertaken by a Federal agency; the following constitutes a federal consistency determination with the enforceable provisions of the Washington Coastal Zone Management Program. 1. INTRODUCTION The proposed Federal action applicable to this consistency determination is the rehabilitation activities on two levee segments (Dykstra and Galli's) along the Green River, as described in the Environmental Assessment. This determination of consistency with the Washington Coastal Zone Management Act is based on review of applicable sections of the State of Washington Shoreline Management Program and policies and standards of the City of Auburn, Washington Shoreline Master Plan. 2. STATE OF WASHINGTON SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM The Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, requires Federal agencies to carry out their activities in a manner which is consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the enforceable policies of the approved state Coastal Zone Management (CZM) Programs. The Shoreline Management Act of 1972 (RCW 90.58) is the core of authority of Washington's CZM Program. Primary responsibility for the implementation of the SMA is assigned to local government. City of Auburn, in which the proposed levee rehabilitation projects are located, fulfilled this requirement with the Shoreline Management Master Program for the City of Auburn. The proposed repair footprints are located along the Green River which is designated in the City of Auburn's Shoreline Management Program as Urban Environment. 3. CITY OF AUBURN SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM The City of Auburn has designated per the General Regulations for All Use Activities, Shoreline Protection A, of the 1973 Auburn Shoreline Management Master Program that "Any stabilization measures on the Green River in Auburn must conform to the policies set forth by the King County Flood Control Department of Hydraulics" (currently known as the King County Flood Control Zone District). Therefore the King County Shoreline Management Program was used to determine project consistency. Applicable portions of the King County SMP are presented below with the Corps consistency indicated in bold italics. 25.16.180 Shoreline protection. Shoreline protection may be permitted in the urban environment, provided: A. Shoreline protection to replace existing shoreline protection shall be placed along the same alignment as the shoreline protection it is replacing, but may be placed waterward directly 1 abutting the old structure in cases where removal of the old structure would result in construction problems; Consistent. The proposed levee repairs will be built along the same alignment as the protection it is replacing. B. On lots where the abutting lots on both sides have legally established bulkheads, a bulkhead may be installed no further waterward than the bulkheads on the abutting lots, provided that the horizontal distance between existing bulkheads on adjoining lots does not exceed one - hundred feet. The manager may, upon review, permit a bulkhead to connect two directly adjoining bulkheads, for a distance up to one hundred fifty feet. In making such a determination the manager shall consider the amount of inter -tidal land/or water bottom to be covered, the existence of fish or shellfish resources thereon, and whether the proposed use or structure could be accommodated by other configurations of bulkhead which would result in less loss of shoreland, tideland, or water bottom; C. In order for a proposed bulkhead to qualify for the RCW 90.58.030(3) (e) (iii) exemption from the shoreline permit requirements and to insure that such bulkheads will be consistent with this program as required by RCW 90.58.141(1), the Building and Land Development Division shall review the proposed design as it relates to local physical conditions and the King County shoreline master program and must find that: 1. Erosion from waves or currents is imminently threatening a legally established residence or one or more substantial accessory structures, and 2. The proposed bulkhead is more consistent with the King County shoreline master program in protecting the site and adjoining shorelines than feasible, non - structural alternatives such as slope drainage systems, vegetative growth stabilization, gravel berms and beach nourishment, are not feasible or will not adequately protect a legally established residence or substantial accessory structure, and 3. The proposed bulkhead is located landward of the ordinary high water mark or it connects to adjacent, legally established bulkheads as in subsection B. above, and 4. The maximum height of the proposed bulkhead is no more than one foot above the elevation of extreme high water on tidal waters as determined by the National Ocean Survey published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration or four feet in height on lakes; Consistent. No bulkheads will be built during construction of the levee repair project. D. Shoreline protection shall not be considered an outright permitted use and shall be permitted only when it has been demonstrated that shoreline protection is necessary for the protection of existing legally established structures and public improvements or the preservation of important agricultural lands as designated by the Office of Agriculture. Consistent. The proposed levee repairs will protect existing infrastructure, commercial, residential and recreational buildings, and all life and property contained therein. E. Shoreline protection shall not have adverse impact on the property of others. Consistent. The proposed actions are repairs to existing levees and therefore no property values will be affected. F. Shoreline protection shall not be used to create new lands, except that groins may be used to create a public Class I beach if they comply with all other conditions of this section. Consistent. No new lands will be created by this action. 2 G. Shoreline protection shall not significantly interfere with normal surface and /or subsurface drainage into the water body. Consistent. The proposed levee repairs will not change or interfere with surface or subsurface drainage into the river. H. Automobile bodies or other junk or waste material which may release undesirable material shall not be used for shoreline protection. Consistent. All riprap and fill materials used in the levee construction will come from a permitted and clean source. I. Shoreline protection shall be designed so as not to constitute a hazard to navigation and to not substantially interfere with visual access to the water. Consistent. The proposed levee repairs are replacing existing structures; there will be no interference with navigatino or visual access to the water. J. Shoreline protection shall be designed so as not to create a need for shoreline protection elsewhere. Consistent. The action will replace existing levee structures and will not change the current path of the river. K. Bulkheads on Class I beaches shall be located no farther waterward than the bluff or bank line; L. Bulkheads must be approved by the Washington State Department of Fisheries; M. Bulkheads shall be constructed using an approved filter cloth or other suitable means to allow passage of surface and groundwater without internal erosion of fine material; N. Groins are permitted only as part of a professionally designed community or public beach management program. Consistent. No bulkheads or groins will be constructed during this action. 25.16.190 Excavation, dredging and filling. Excavation, dredging and filling may be permitted in the urban environment, only as part of an approved overall development plan not as an independent activity provided: A. Any fill or excavation regardless of size shall be subject to the provisions of K.C.C. 16.82.100; Consistent. Excavation and grading activities conform to the provisions of K.C.C. 16.82.100 (Grading standards). No cuts will exceed 2H:1 V in slope. All cleared areas will be hydroseeded or replanted with native vegetation after construction. B. Landfill may be permitted below the ordinary high water mark only when necessary for the operation of a water dependent or water related use, or when necessary to mitigate conditions which endanger public safety; Consistent. Levee repairs require installation of new riprap toe structures to ensure levee stability and minimize the threat to public safety. C. Landfill or excavations shall be permitted only when technical information demonstrates water circulation, littoral drift, aquatic life and water quality will not be substantially impaired; Consistent. An Environmental Assessment is currently being prepared to address any environmental impacts from this project. Approximately 4300 cubic yards of riprap will be placed below ordinary high water to reduce the potential for future levee failure and to provide anchorage for the large woody debris which will be placed in the river channel as a habitat enhancement features. Water quality will be protected to the 3 extent practicable though Clean Water Act Section 401 certification, the development of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan, and utilization of Best Management Practices as described in the SWPPP. D. Landfill or disposal of dredged material shall be prohibited within the floodway; Consistent. No landfill or dredging material will be deposited in the floodway. E. Wetlands such as marshes, swamps, and bogs shall not be disturbed or altered through excavation, filling, dredging, or disposal of dredged material unless the manager determines that either: 1. The wetland does not serve any of the valuable functions of wetlands identified in K.C.C. 20.12.080 and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 33 CFR 320.4(b), including but not limited to wildlife habitat and natural drainage functions, or 2. The proposed development would preserve or enhance the wildlife habitat, natural drainage, and/or other valuable functions of wetlands as discussed in K.C.C. 20.12.080 or U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 33 CFR 320.4(b) and would be consistent with the purposes of this Title; Consistent. No wetlands will be filled or impacted by this construction project. F. Class I beaches shall not be covered by landfill except for approved beach feeding programs; Consistent. No beaches will be covered with landfill by this action. G. Excavations on beaches shall include precautions to prevent the migration of fine grain sediments, disturbed by the excavation, onto adjacent beach areas and excavations on beaches shall be backfilled promptly using material of similar composition and similar or more coarse grain size; Consistent. No excavations on beaches will occur during this action. H. No refuse disposal sites, solid waste disposal sites, or sanitary fills of putrescible or non - putrescible material shall be permitted within the shorelines of the state; Consistent. The Corps will use only designated and permitted disposal sites for any waste material associated with this project. I. Excavation or dredging below the ordinary high water mark shall be permitted only: 1. When necessary for the operation of a water dependent or water related use, or 2. When necessary to mitigate conditions which endanger public safety or fisheries resources, or Consistent. Excavation associated with this project below ordinary high water is necessary for installation of the levee toe structure and is required for operation of the levee to ensure public safety. J. Disposal of dredged material shall be done only in approved deep water disposal sites or approved contain upland disposal sites; K. Stockpiling of dredged material in or under water is prohibited; Consistent. All excavated material will be removed to a permitted disposal site. No material s will be stockpiled in or near the river. L. Maintenance dredging not requiring a shoreline permit(s) shall conform to the requirements of this section; M. Dredging shall be timed so that it does not interfere with aquatic life; N. The county may impose reasonable conditions on dredging or disposal operations including but not limited to working seasons and provisions of buffer strips, including retention or replacement of existing vegetation, dikes, and settling basins to protect the public safety and shore users' lawful interests from unnecessary adverse impact; 4 • Consistent. No dredging will occur during the levee repair work. O. In order to insure that operations involving dredged material disposal and maintenance dredging are consistent with this program as required by RCW 90.58.140(1), no dredging may commence on shorelines without the responsible person having first obtained either a substantial development permit or a statement of exemption; PROVIDED, that no statement of exemption or shoreline permit is required for emergency dredging needed to protect property from imminent damage by the elements; Consistent. The levee repair projects are to be built in the same in -water footprint as the existing levee and are considered emergency actions by the Corps; therefore the Corps believes this action to be exempt from the requirement of a substantial development permit. 4. STATEMENT OF CONSISTENCY Based on the above evaluation, the Corps has determined that the proposed rehabilitation activities comply with the policies, general conditions, and activities as specified in the City of Auburn Shoreline Master Program adopted in 1973, which defers to King County policies. The proposed action is thus considered to be consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the State of Washington Shoreline Management Program and policies and standards of the King County Shoreline Master Program. 5 Carol Lumb - 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 Lumb - RE: COE levee repairs From: To: Date: Subject: Hi Holly: Carol Lumb Holly Coccoli 06/09/2008 1:42 pm RE: COE levee repairs 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.Coccolk 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 fmailto :clumbc(aci.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) 1 AC PAVEMENT SEE TRAIL RESTORATION TYPICAL SECTION. SEE PLATE C -501 97' 86' FENCE �- HYDROSEED (TYP) EL 36'._ o. EXISTING GROUND SURFACE ( APPROX.) 0 :,,,„/"---WALL RETAINING EL 27' : (SEE -- -- -DETAIL PLATE [ APPROX.) e.' ..'. C -5021 , .v'••, • SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL 10' ACCESS ----EL 28' (APPROX.) WSEL 9.000 COIR WRAP.(TYP) TUKWILA 205 — SITE 5 TYPICAL SECTION 2 NOT TO SCALE SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL rr\' / / /::0•/ /I'W / /, \ " /i'\ .WIM iMili:K .. : ; ;=: ; I : `� �.� III ��h iti -", o ::2:t > ? / /\ \Y//..\ \Y //.,\ \7//,e.k,\>Ilti I(IM11.. OUARRY SPALLS WILLOWS IN SOIL, WILLOWS Rl<ACED EVERY 6" ON EL. 24' (APPROX.) WSEL 6.0001CFS OHW EL. 16' L ( APPROX.) 143 Engineers Asap Caps Sank MOM J 1 1 2 0 0 z n 0 m N 7 eN O a W aJ 1' THICK TOPSOIL (TYP) ELM' WSEL 300 CFS EL 8' ( APPROX.) CLASS IV RIPRAP LAUNCHABLE TOE. CLASS IV RIPRAP IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22' X 34' If (8 0 zA a0 K ~ WW -a exg &'O KING COUNTY �,e X302 Plote number: —302 Sheet 10 of 16 J 0 0 0 SEE TRAIL TYPICAL RESTORATION SECTION :SEE PLATE C -502 110' 12' 14' Q HYDROSEED (TYP) EXISTING GROUND SURFACE (APPROX.) SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL - EL 29' ACCESS F EL 27�;`\,`� ' SPALLS UP TO ELEVATION 27' 9,000 CFS COIR FABRIC WRAPS (TYP) 6.000 CFS EL 23' WILLOWS WITH COIR FABRIC "'.SOIL LIFTS, WILLOWS PLACED EVERY 6" ON CENTER (TYP) SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL QUARRY SPALLS W EL 15 1' THICK TOPSOIL (TYP) 2.000 Cr isAfito TUKWILA 205 - SITE 3 TYPICAL SECTION NOT TO SCALE CLASS IV LAUNCHABLE RIPRAP TOE, CLASS IV RIPRAP ANCHOR ROCK, 5' DIPM. EL. 10' WSEL 300 CFS (APPROX.) EL 8' (APPROX.) LWD W /ROOTBALL, ANCHORED TO BOULDER.. ANGLED DOWNSTREAM (WSEL 300 CFS APPROX.), SEE DETAIL PLATE C -501 IF SHEET MEASURES LESST)ON 22' X34' IT IS AREDUCED PRIM; REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. 1 1i 1 • Plate number C -303 Sheet 11 0116 2 ✓ M 7 WO J m CCJ i 0- 0 W W gJ ea La EL 30' CAPPROX. f FENCE —. SEE TRAIL RESTORATION TYPICAL 5TION, SEE SECTION. 101' Q 14' I 24' HYDROSEED (TYP) EL 36'_ (APPROX.) EL 36' (APPROX.) EXISTING GROUND SURFACE (APPROX.) SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL RETAINING MALL (SEE --OETA}E-PL- ATE --- C -5021 • io o_ a 32' 10' ACCESS SPALLS UP TO ELEV. 28' 9,000 CFS ELEV. APPROX. TUKWILA 205 - SITE 5 TYPICAL SECTION 1 NOT TO SCALE 6,000 ,CFS COIR WRAP EL 24' SATISFACTORY COMPACTED F{LL I."i..,,Ii.. QUARRY i / / °�•''�• 7,1 SPACES ' • t' THICK TOPSOIL (TYP) V OHW 'f1,16' 2.0 CFS CLASS IV RIPRAP LAUNCHABLE ANCHOR ROCK, 5' DIAM. CFS ( APPROX.) LWD W /ROOTBALL, ANCHORED TO BOULDER, ANGLED DOWNSTREAM (WSEL 300 CFS APPROX.). SEE DETAIL PLATE C -501 IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN Zr X 3P IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. 1 • • Plate number C -301 Sheet 9 of 16 1,\MISC\CIV \GREEN RIVER•2888 LEVEE REHAB\TUKVILA 2 12 May 2008 • MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE Fisheries Division 39015 -172nd Avenue SE • Auburn, Washington 98092 -9763 Phone: (253) 939 -3311 • Fax: (253) 931 -0752 Carol Lumb City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: Repairs to Tukwila Section 205 Levee Dear Ms. Lumb: The Muckleshoot 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. Sincerely, 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 r r Carol Lumb - Re: Tukwila Levee Repair:_ Page 1j From: <Phyllis.Meyers @noaa.gov> To: Carol Lumb <clumb @ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 05/12/2008 4:21 pm Subject: Re: Tukwila Levee Repairs Comments should be attached. Thank you. Phyllis Original Message From: Carol Lumb <clumb @ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: Wednesday, May 7, 2008 2:17 pm Subject: Tukwila Levee Repairs To: Phyllis.Meyers @noaa.gov > Hi Phyllis: > > Thanks for talking to me about the ESA issues related to the two > proposed COE levee repairs in Tukwila. If you are able to provide > comments to the City on your concerns that would be helpful. I am > attaching below the Notice of Application that I should have sent to > your agency, which requests comments from interested /affected > parties. > My apologies for neglecting to send this notice to you. > > Thanks again for the information. > > 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) > • • Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the City of Tukwila's SEPA review of regarding repairs to the 205 levee at two locations on the Green/Duwamish River. National Marine Fisheries Service is evaluating the potential effects of levee repairs on Puget Sound Chinook. Puget Sound Chinook were listed as threatened in compliance with the Endangered Species Act on June 28, 2005. Much is known and has been published on the adverse effects of levees on salmon and their habitat. These problems are present in the Green/Duwuamish River and have been identified in various recent publications, including documents prepared for the Puget Sound Chinook Recovery Plan. The Chinook Recovery Plan identifies several Habitat Management Strategies for this reach. They include: • Restore tributary access • Rehabilitate riparian areas by establishing suitable native vegetation along banks of the mainstem and tributaries • Substitute loss of slow water areas by creating new off - channel habitats and/or placement of large woody debris along banks • Substitute ecological processes with habitat features The two concerns particularly important for the lower reaches of the Green River are high water temperature, particularly when adults return to spawn, and lack of suitable refuge or rearing habitat for downstream - migrating juvenile salmon in February through June. Although our analysis of these projects is preliminary, we are concerned that they will result in even higher water temperature than existing. Replacing soil with rock as specified in the drawings will accumulate more heat. Some of this heat will be transmitted into the river during months and at low flows that adult salmon would be migrating upstream, late August through October. We commend the COE and the City for a levee design that incorporates vegetation but are concerned that the vegetation will not grow. Surface and shallow ground water is likely to flow along the base of the rock layer on the slope and not reach the bench. We anticipate that riparian functions will be impaired by this. The warmth of the surrounding rock will increase difficulty establishing plants. Finally, we are concerned about the effect of the material designed to launch into the river. We calculate over 14,000 cubic yards of riprap would be placed in the lauchable toe alone. Additional rock will be imported to the site for the parts of the levee not designed to lauch into the river. This rock in the channel would impede formation of channel features, for example pools, needed by salmon. The fact that it is not intended to remain on the river bank makes establishing riparian vegetation even more unlikely. In summary, we are concerned the Tukwila 205 repairs will further degrade channel conditions for Chinook salmon. Phyllis Meyers Biologist National Marine Fisheries Service Notice of Preparation for EA and Clean Water Act Public Notice for 2008 Green River Levee Repairs Page 1 of 1 Carol Lumb - Notice of Preparatio•r EA and Clean Water Act Public •ce for 2008 Green River Levee Repairs From: "Cummins, Andrea K NWS" <Andrea.K.Cummins @usace.army.mil> To: "Cummins, Andrea K NWS" <Andrea.K.Cummins @usace.army.mil> Date: 05/23/2008 8:35 AM Subject: Notice of Preparation for EA and Clean Water Act Public Notice for 2008 Green River Levee Repairs Notice of Preparation and Clean Water Act Public Notice Interested parties are hereby notified that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District (Corps) plans to prepare, pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act, an environmental assessment (EA) for 10 proposed levee repairs at 6 locations on the Green. River, in the Cities of Tukwila, Kent, and Auburn, King County, Washington. In November 2006, heavy rainfall resulted in peak sustained flows of 12,200 cfs in the Green River. This is considered Phase 4 Flood Stage and can result in significant flooding due to levee weakening from saturation and /or seepage. During this event, several levee segments along the Green River sustained damage from erosion or scour. Proposed repairs at the 10 damage sites total about 11,000 linear feet on the waterward side of levees and about 1000 linear feet on the landward side of the levees. Please refer to the attached Notice of Preparation and Clean Water Act Public Notice. «Green River Levee Rehab Public Notice.pdf» Project plan sheets and the Notice of Preparation /Clean Water Act Public Notice are available on line under "Green River Levee Rehabilitation" at: http://www.nws.usace.army.mil/ers/doc_table.cfm. Requests for additional information should be directed to Andrea Cummins, Environmental Coordinator, at 206 - 764 -3641 or Scott Pozarycki, Environmental Coordinator, 206 - 764 -3316. Submit comments no later than June 11, 2008 to ensure consideration. In addition to sending comments via mail, comments may be e- mailed to me or Scott.V.Pozarycki @ usace.army.mil. Cheers, Andrea Cummins Biologist, Environmental Resources Section U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District andrea.k.cummins@usace.army.mil Street: 4735 E. Marginal Way S., Seattle WA 98134 -2385 Mailing: P.O. Box 3755, Seattle, WA 98124 -3755 206.764.3641 206.764.4470 fax file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \CAROL -L \Local Settings\ Temp\ XPGrpWise \483681EDtuk- mail6300 -... 05/23/2008 US Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District Notice of Preparation & Clean Water Act Public Notice Planning Branch P.O. Box 3755 Seattle, WA 98124 -3755 ATTN: Andrea Cummins Public Notice Date: 21 May 2008 Expiration Date: 11 June 2008 Reference: PL- 08 -08, PL- 08 -09, PL- 08 -10, PL -08 -11 Name: Green River Levee Rehabilitation Interested parties are hereby notified that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District (Corps) plans to prepare, pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act, an environmental assessment (EA) for proposed levee repairs at ten sites, at six locations, along the Green River, in King County, Washington. AUTHORITY The proposed levee repairs are authorized by Public Law 84 -99 (33 U.S. Code Section 701 n). Corps rehabilitation and restoration work under this authority is limited to flood control works damaged or destroyed by floods. The statute authorizes rehabilitation to the condition and level of protection exhibited by the flood control work prior to the damaging event. PROJECT LOCATION Levee repairs are proposed for ten sites, at six locations, along the Green River, in King County, Washington. However, the levee repair sites are not interdependent and depending upon circumstances, only some of the projects may be constructed this year. BACKGROUND Historically the Green River has been prone to regular flooding and inundation of surrounding lands. Many of the levees in existence today were constructed in the late 1800s and early 1900s by local landowners using any materials available. In 1961 the Howard Hansen Dam went into operation and, accompanied by an extensive and continuous system of levees, major flooding in the area was moderated. Age, poor construction, and high peak flows from rain events and urbanization have all contributed to a weakening of the existing levee system. These levees serve to reduce the risk of flooding of the surrounding highly urbanized regions of southern King County, including the cities of Tukwila, Kent and Auburn, and all infrastructure and human life therein. Due to the dynamic process of rivers and heavy storm events, damage caused by erosion to levees and other structures is cumulative unless addressed through repair efforts. During high and prolonged flood events of the Green River, such as that of the November 2006, flows could erode through previously weakened or damaged portions of the levees, making them even more susceptible to seepage and leading to a potential • • breach. This project is intended to repair the portions of the levees damaged by the November 2006 floods. NEED AND PURPOSE A heavy rainstorm during November 2006 created flooding in many river basins in western Washington causing damage to levees at a number of sites, including 10 levee segments at 6 locations in the Green River basin in King County, Washington, which are addressed in this Notice. These levees are integral to protecting life, safety, and property, including private residences, commercial and industrial property, retail and recreational centers and farmland, in floodplains along the river. The Corps has determined that if the ten segments of the Green River levees are not repaired before the next flood event, each segment would present an imminent threat of loss of private and /or public property. The flood season in the Green River basin typically begins November 1 of each year. It is important to ensure that the levees meet their design standards before November, in order to minimize chances of increased levee damage and possible breaching, which could have major consequences to life, health, safety, and property. The purpose of the project is to reconstruct certain Green River levees that were damaged in the November 2006 flood event. DESCRIPTION OF DAMAGE The following addresses the ten individual sites, at six locations, proposed for repair: Site Length of Reair . Location of Repair River Bank ' Environmental Compliance Tukwila #3 800 ft RM 14.6 to RM 14.8 Left bank Exempt per Section 404(f)(1)(B) of CWA, 401 Certification not required Tukwila #5 1100 ft RM 15.0 to RM 15.3 Left bank Exempt per Section 404(f)(1)(B) of CWA, 401 Certification not required Horseshoe Bend #1 800 ft RM 25.8 to RM 26.1 Right bank Not exempt from 404 of CWA, 401 Certification required from Ecology Horseshoe Bend #2 150 ft RM 25.3 Right bank Exempt per Section 404(f)(1)(B) of CWA, 401 Certification not required Horseshoe Bend #3 100 ft RM 25.2 Right bank Exempt per Section 404(f)(1)(B) of CWA, 401 Certification not required Horseshoe Bend #4 1000 ft RM 24.9 to RM 25.1 Right bank Exempt per Section 404(f)(1)(B) of CWA, 401 Certification not required Kent Shops /Narita 3600 ft RM 21.0 to RM 22.0 Right bank Exempt per Section 404(f)(1)(B) of CWA, 401 Certification not required 2 Meyer's Golf 1600 ft RM 22.0 to RM 22.5 Right bank Exempt per Section 404(f)(1)(B) of CWA, 401 Certification not required Galli's 1100 ft RM 30.5 to RM 30.8 Left bank Not exempt from 404 of CWA, 401 Certification required from Ecology Dykstra 600 ft RM 30.8 to RM 31.5 Left bank Not exempt from 404 of CWA, 401 Certification required from Ecology Damage descriptions at the various sites are as follows: Tukwila 205 (Public Notice no. PL 08 -08) The Tukwila 205 levee project includes two repair sites, Site #3 and Site #5. Both are located on the left bank of the Green River in Tukwila (T 23N, R 04E, S 35 and 36). Site #3 is located between river mile (RM) 14.6 and RM 14.8 and Site #5 between RM 15.0 and RM 15.3. The levee projects protect an 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 on the riverward side. The November 2006 flood event resulted in approximately 800 linear feet (LF) of damage at Site #3 and 1,100 LF at Site #5. Damage at both Site #3 and Site #5 includes toe scour and riverward slope erosion. Kent Shops /Narita (Public Notice no. PL 08 -08) The Kent Shops /Narita levee project is located on the right bank of the Green River extending from RM 21.0 to RM 22.0 in the city of Kent (T 22N, R 04E, Sec. 22 and 23). This section of levee protects retail and commercial buildings, the Kent Riverbend 18- Hole Golf Course, City of Kent maintenance shops and a recreational ice center. The levee is constructed of earthen material and is armored with rock on the riverward side. The November 2006 flood event resulted in damage to 3600 LF of damaged toe and lost armor rock on the riverward bank. The damage is continuous along the levee and the scour extends approximately 15 feet vertically above the apparent toe elevation. Several severe slumps are evident and appear to result from toe scour. Due to the slope instability following the slumps, large cracks (up to about 3/4" in width) have developed on the crown at some sections along the levee. Additionally, differential settlement as much as 4 inches has occurred in one section of the levee, recently covered by an over -layer of asphalt pavement. Meyer's Golf (Public Notice no. PL 08 -08) The Meyer's Golf levee project is located on the right bank of the Green River between RM 22 and RM 22.5, in the city of Kent (T 22N, R 04E, Sec. 23) and adjacent to the Kent Shops /Narita project. This section of levee protects Kent Riverbend Par -3 Golf Complex Course and Driving Range, and two large apartment complexes. The levee is constructed of earthen material and is armored with rock on the riverward side. The November 2006 flood event resulted in damaged toe and lost armor rock on the riverward levee slope for approximately 1,600 LF. The levee damage consists of varying 3 • • degrees of riprap loss on the riverside of the slope and substantial scour at the toe of the slope. Horseshoe Bend 205 (Sites #2, 3, & 4 - Public Notice no. PL- 08 -08; and Site #1, Public Notice no. 08 -11) The Horseshoe Bend 205 levee project includes four repair sites: Site #1, Site #2, Site #3, and Site #4. All are located on the right bank of the Green River in the city of Kent (T 22N, R 05E, Sec. 30 and T 22N, R 04E, Sec 25). Site locations are as follows: • Site #1 is located between RM 25.8 and RM 26.1 • Site #2 is located at RM 25.3 • Site #3 is located at RM 25.2 • Site #4 is located between RM 24.9 and RM 25.1 The Horseshoe Bend levee system encloses about 75% of a rough circle with approximately 68 parcels of mixed residential and commercial structures. This levee is located on the upstream (south) end of a flood plain that is very roughly 10 -15 miles long and up to about 2 miles wide with similar land use. The levee system is constructed of earthen material with armor rock on the riverward side. The November 2006 flood event resulted in the following damage: • Site #1 - As the river receded a rotational failure developed forming a deep - seated arcing crack in the levee crown along 950 LF. There is noticeable settlement riverward of the crack. • Site #2 - There is extensive toe scour from high flows along approximately 150 LF of the levee. Additionally 10 shallow sink holes have developed on the landward levee slope along a roughly 1,000 foot reach. • Site #3 - The high flows caused deep scour to the riverward toe, and is eroding into the levee prism along approximately 100 LF. • Site #4 - The high flows caused toe scour along 1,000 LF of the levee toe. Galli's (Public Notice no. PL 08 -10) The Galli's levee project is located on the left bank of the Green River between RM 30.5 and RM 30.8, in the city of Auburn (T 21 N, R 05E, Sec. 6 and 7). This section of levee protects an urban area without any agriculture. The structures consist of a mix of single family and multi - family residences, including several homes adjacent to the levee section proposed for repair, retail and office centers, nursing homes and a middle school. The levee is constructed of earthen material and is armored with rock on the riverward side. The November 2006 flood event resulted in damage to 1,100 LF of toe and bank scour. The levee damage at this location consists of varying degrees of riprap loss on the riverward levee slope and substantial scour and loss of material at the toe of the slope. There are signs of rock riprap displaced from the slope that has accumulated on the toe and river bottom. Dykstra (Public Notice no. PL 08 -09) The Dykstra levee project is located on the left bank of the Green River between RM 30.8 and RM 31.5, in the city of Auburn (T 21N, R 05E, Sec. 8). The levee protects 120 single - family residential structures including several homes adjacent to the levee section proposed for repair. The levee is constructed of earthen material and is armored 4 • • with rock on the riverward side. The November 2006 flood event resulted in approximately 600 LF of toe scour. The levee damage at this location consists of varying degrees of rock riprap loss on the riverside of the slope and substantial scour at the toe of the slope. PROPOSED ACTION Multiple alternatives were considered, including the No- Action Alternative, the Non - Structural Alternative, the Repair the Damage Alternative, and a Layback the Levee Alternative. Different alternatives are recommended for different sites. In order for any alternative to be acceptable for consideration, it must meet certain objectives. The alternative must afford flood protection similar to the rest of the levee segment, it must be economically justified, it should be environmentally acceptable, and it should minimize costs for both the public sponsor and the Federal government. The No- Action Alternative must be fully considered under NEPA. It would leave the levees in their current damaged condition. This alternative has high potential for flood damages to the protected structures and lands in behind these levees in the Green River valley. The Non - Structural Alternative would relocate all existing residences, commercial and retail structures, utilities, and public facilities. Relocation of infrastructure prior to the coming flood season is impractical, even if willing sellers were identified. Because the costs associated with flood proofing or relocating the structures in the potential inundation area would significantly exceed the cost of repairing the levee, the non- structural alternative was not selected. The Repair to Pre -Flood Condition Alternative would be to restore 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. This alternative is the recommended alternative for Horseshoe Bend #2 and #3. For the Dykstra and Galli's sites, the recommended alternative includes a 2H:1V riprap slope with willow lifts planted at OHW, and large woody debris (LWD) placed at the levee toe in limited areas. The Layback the Levee Alternative includes moving the landward footprint of the levee 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:1 H, and adding willows and LWD. This alternative is recommended for the following projects: Tukwila 205 #3 and #5, Horseshoe Bend #1 and #4, Kent Shops /Narita, and Meyer's Golf. This is the locally preferred alternative. Under the recommended alternatives the individual projects are proposed as follows: Tukwila 205 #3 and # 5 5 The recommended alternative for the repairs at both sites is to layback the levee. It is the locally preferred alternative. The proposed repair is approximately 800 LF at Site #3 and 1,100 LF at Site #5. Repair at both Site #3 and Site #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 3 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 hydroseeded to prevent erosion after construction and planted with native trees and shrubs in spring 2009. The lower slope will be planted with 2 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 1 foot blanket of quarry spalls and hydro- seeded. At Site #5, a 250 LF 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 5 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. Kent Shops /Narita The recommended alternative for the repair at this site is to layback the levee, it is also the locally preferred alternative and the least cost alternative. The proposed repair is approximately 3600 (LF). Repair at this site will consist of laying the existing levee back to establish a 2H:1V riverward slope with a 12 -18 foot mid -slope bench. A launchable toe structure will be constructed using Class III riprap to prevent future scour. A 3 foot blanket of Class III 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 hydroseeded to prevent erosion after construction and planted with native trees and shrubs in spring 2009. The lower slope will be planted with 2 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 1 foot blanket of quarry spalls and hydro- seeded. Large woody debris (LWD) will be placed along a total of approximately 3000 ft of the levee at the riverward edge of the riprap toe and anchored using 5 foot diameter quarry stone. No LWD will be placed at the farthest downstream 600 linear feet of the repair due to concerns about bank erosion in this bend of the river. The golf course located behind the levee will be impacted by this alternative. King County is working with the City of Kent (Golf Course Owner) to minimize project impacts. 6 Meyer's Golf The recommended alternative for the repair at this site is to layback the levee, it is also the locally preferred alternative and the least cost alternative. The proposed repair is approximately 1600 LF. Repair at this site will consist of laying the existing levee back to establish a 2H:1V riverward slope with an 18 foot mid -slope bench. A Iaunchable toe structure will be constructed using Class III riprap to prevent future scour. A 3 foot blanket of Class III 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 hydroseeded to prevent erosion after construction and planted with native trees and shrubs in spring 2009. The lower slope will be planted with 2 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 1 foot blanket of quarry spalls and hydro- seeded. Large woody debris (LWD) will be placed, at approximately 20 foot intervals, at the riverward edge of the riprap toe and anchored using 5 foot diameter quarry stone. The golf course located behind the levee will be impacted by this alternative. King County is working with the City of Kent (Golf Course Owner) to minimize project impacts. Horseshoe Bend 205 The recommended alternative for the repairs at the four sites are as follows: • Site #1 - The recommended plan for the repair is to layback the existing levee and create a mid -slope bench. This is the least cost alternative and is preferred by the sponsor. The proposed repair is approximately 800 (LF). • Site #2 - The recommended plan is to repair to pre -flood condition and repair the approximately 10 sink holes that have developed on the landward side at this location. This is the least cost alternative. The proposed repair is approximately 150 (LF). • Site #3 - The recommended plan is to repair to pre -flood condition. This is the least cost alternative. The proposed repair is approximately 100 (LF) • Site #4 - The recommended plan for the repair is to layback the existing levee and create a mid -slope bench. This is the locally preferred alternative. The proposed repair is approximately 1000 (LF) The proposed plans for the repairs are as follows: • Site #1 - The proposed repair consists of removing damaged material and laying . back the existing levee to a 2H: 1V slope. A Iaunchable toe will be constructed using Class IV riprap to prevent future scour and a 3 foot blanket of Class IV riprap will be placed for armor rock. This slope will be filled with earthen material to achieve a 2H:1V slope, creating a 23 foot planting bench. The mid -slope bench will be hydroseeded to prevent erosion after construction and planted with native trees and shrubs in spring 2009. The lower slope will be planted with 2 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 1 7 • • foot blanket of quarry spalls and hydro- seeded. Large woody debris (LWD) will be placed along the downstream 150 ft, at approximately 20 foot intervals, at the riverward edge of the riprap toe and anchored using 5 foot diameter quarry stone • Site #2 - The proposed repair includes excavating the damaged material and re- grading the slope to 2H:1V. A 3 foot blanket of Class IV riprap placed on a 1 foot lift of quarry spalls over a six inch lift of gravel on the levee slope from the toe to the 100 -year elevation. Two willow lifts will be installed at the OHW elevation and the levee will be hydroseeded. Additionally the approximately 10 sink holes that have developed on the landward side of the levee will be excavated. The cause of the sinkholes will be determined and repairs made. After construction the area will be hydroseeded. • Site #3 - The proposed repair includes excavating the damaged material and re- grading the slope to 2H:1V. The slope will be covered with a 1 foot blanket of quarry spalls and a Iaunchable toe will be constructed of Class IV riprap. One willow lift will be constructed at the OHW and the slope will be covered with a layer of topsoil and hydroseeded. • Site #4 - The proposed repair is to re -grade the damaged slope to 2H:1V creating a 15 foot mid -slope bench. A Iaunchable toe will be constructed using Class III riprap to prevent future scour and a 3 foot blanket of Class III riprap will be placed for armor rock. This slope will be filled with earthen material to achieve a 2H:1V slope, creating a planting bench. The mid -slope bench will be hydroseeded to prevent erosion after construction and planted with native trees and shrubs in spring 2009. The lower slope will be planted with 2 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 1 foot blanket of quarry spalls and hydro- seeded. Large woody debris (LWD) will be placed, at approximately 20 foot intervals, at the riverward edge of the riprap toe and anchored using 5 foot diameter quarry stone. Galli's The recommended alternative for the repair at this site does not impact the structures behind the levee. The residences behind this levee preclude any setback/layback of the levee. The proposed repair is approximately 1100 LF. The recommended repair would require grading the existing bank to a 2H:1V slope. To achieve this slope, the levee footprint will move riverward between 3 -15 feet along the reach of the repair. The estimated total impact to the aquatic habitat is 3000 ft2. A Iaunchable toe will be constructed using Class IV riprap to prevent future scour. The slope will be armored with Class IV riprap underlain by filter spalls. The armored slope will extend to approximately 8 feet above ordinary high water (OHW) line and will be planted with 2 willow lifts. Above 8 ft OHW, the levee prism will continue at a 2H:1V slope and be hydro- seeded. Large woody debris (LWD) will be placed along a total of approximately 450 ft of the levee at the riverward edge of the riprap toe and anchored using 5 foot diameter quarry stone. 8 Dykstra The recommended alternative for the repair at this site does not impact the structures behind the levee. The residences behind this levee preclude setback/layback of the levee. The proposed repair is approximately 600 LF. The recommended repair would require reestablishing a weighted toe for approximately 600 linear feet. The existing bank will be graded to a 2H:1 V slope. A toe will be constructed using Class III riprap to prevent future scour. The slope will be armored with Class III riprap underlain by filter spalls. The armored slope will extend to approximately 8 feet above ordinary high water (OHW) line and will be planted with 2 willow lifts. Above the armoring the levee prism will continue at a 2H:1V slope and be hydro - seeded. Large woody debris (LWD) will be placed along the downstream 300 ft, at approximately 20 foot intervals, at the riverward edge of the riprap toe and anchored using 5 foot diameter quarry stone. Additional LWD will be placed on a mid - channel island across from the construction site. ANTICIPATED IMPACTS The Corps' preliminary analyses of effects of the actions are summarized below. Due to the scheduled timing of the in -water portion of construction (July 1 to September 15), the design of the repairs which include Iaybacks, and the proposed environmental features (LWD and mid -slope bench plantings) at the sites, both long and short term effects of the overall 2008 Green River levee rehabilitation project are expected to be insignificant. Water Quality Historically, water temperatures in the Green River basin were considerably lower than today; this is particularly true in the middle and lower reaches. All proposed projects are located in the lower reaches, in sections of the river on Ecology's current 303d list for temperature. The combination of channel width, depth, and lack of shade - producing riparian vegetation contributes to warming of the river during low flow periods in summer. The proposed repairs will require removing all vegetation within the repair footprint. In the short term this will contribute to continuing higher water temperatures. Except at Dykstra and Galli's, the riverward face of the levees scheduled for repairs are predominately vegetated with invasive species; primarily blackberry and reed canary grass. While this vegetation provides minimal shade to the water it does provide habitat for birds and other small mammals and organic input into the river. During construction, willow /dogwood lifts will be installed above the ordinary high water (OHW) mark at all repair sites. It will take 3 -10 years for these plants to provide increased shade and similar habitat value as exists on the sites currently. Additionally, the proposed repairs at Tukwila, Horseshoe Bend #1 and #4, Kent Shops /Narita and Meyer's Golf include mid -slope benches. These benches will be planted in spring 2009 with riparian trees and shrubs by the Corps in an effort to provide shade to the river corridor. It should be noted however, that these benches are to be constructed on top of the Iaunchable toe of the levee. If the toe were to "launch" during a flood event, part or the entire bench may 9 also slide into the river resulting in a rock faced levee with no way to replant the vegetation. Over time and assuming bench stability, this addition of riparian vegetation to the lower Green River corridor would greatly improve habitat, lower water temperatures due to increased shading of the river, and create additional organic input to the river. Excavation in the water would be necessary at all Green River repair sites, as would individual placement of clean rock. Some short term suspension of solids and turbidity is likely during construction. Wetlands and Aquatic Area The project areas include no jurisdictional wetlands, and no adverse impacts to wetlands are expected. The Galli's project design will result in the loss of approximately 3000 ft2 of aquatic area along about 400 LF of the levee. The aquatic area to be filled is currently river edge habitat that consists primarily of riprap and a large pool on the outside of a river bend. The riprap edge habitat will be replaced by construction of the new levee. In the short term, there will likely be some of loss in area of the existing pool. With time a new riprap edge habitat may develop forming a similar or possibly deeper pool. Vegetation As noted above, all vegetation falling within the repair footprint will be removed resulting in loss of bird and small animal habitat, organic input and shading to the river. The planting of willow /dogwood lifts on the levee prism at OHW and riparian trees and shrubs on the mid -slope benches will, in time, provide shade, small animal habitat, and organic input to the river which may be of better - quality than that which currently exists at the sites. Additionally, as part of the required levee maintenance for eligibility in the PL 84 -99 program, the local sponsor (King County) must minimize the amount of vegetation on levees which are active in the program. This vegetation maintenance occurs as a separate action from this repair and the effects of levee maintenance are addressed in the cumulative effects section of this document. Fish and Wildlife There would be minor and temporary disturbances to fish in the project area due to in- water construction, with possible impacts from noise, vibration and turbidity. Vegetation removal, particularly at Dykstra and Galli's, also has the potential for adverse effects in terms of loss of shade and cooling, input of organic matter and nutrients, and input of terrestrial organisms that provide food for fish. Riparian vegetation also provides shelter, nesting habitat, and movement corridors for small birds and mammals, and its removal would create impacts. All impacts related to removal of vegetation are likely to persist for at least 3 -10 years until new vegetation becomes established, assuming vegetation is allowed to grow a size that provides functional habitat. In addition, 10 terrestrial wildlife species may be temporarily disturbed by noise and mechanized activity during construction. The decrease in aquatic area at the Galli's site due to levee encroachment into the river results in a permanent loss of habitat for aquatic species. The addition of LWD to the lower Green River will improve habitat conditions for aquatic species in these sections of the river and help to offset the habitat loss at the Galli's site. The Corps believes that this action would have no effect on bald eagles (protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act), as no eagle nests are documented near the project sites and the projects should not have any negative effects to eagle habitat or forage. Threatened and Endangered Species Puget Sound /Coastal bull trout, Puget Sound steelhead, and Puget Sound Chinook salmon, listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, are found in the project area. The lower Green River is designated critical habitat for Chinook and bull trout. The projects are scheduled during the in -water construction period to avoid periods of greatest resident fish vulnerability and highest expected use. Adult fish are expected to avoid the construction area, and still be able to access upstream spawning areas. Turbidity will be monitored as deemed necessary to ensure Department of Ecology standards are not exceeded and impacts to fish from turbidity are minimized. Assuming the proposed projects are built within the approved work window, constructed according to design, and the vegetation becomes established over time, it is expected that the proposed projects at the Tukwila, Horseshoe Bend, Kent Shops /Narita, Meyer's Golf and Dykstra sites are not likely to adversely affect listed species. Below is a table detailing the results of the preliminary effects analysis of the federal action on listed species at the above sites: Species Effect Determination Critical Habitat Determination Puget Sound Chinook salmon Not likely to adversely affect Not likely to adversely affect Puget Sound steelhead trout Not likely to adversely affect Critical habitat is not yet determined Bull Trout Not likely to adversely affect Not likely to adversely affect The proposed construction at the Galli's site includes roughly 3000 ft2 of river encroachment. This would result in a permanent loss of aquatic habitat area. Assuming the proposed project is built according to current design which includes levee encroachment into the river channel, the construction at the Galli's site is expected to 11 likely to adversely affect listed species and is likely to adversely affect critical habitat. Below is a table detailing the results of the preliminary effects analysis of the federal action on listed species at the Galli's site: Species Effect;Determination: `., Critical Habitat Determination .. Puget Sound Chinook salmon Likely to adversely affect Likely to adversely affect Puget Sound steelhead trout Likely to adversely affect Critical habitat is not yet determined Bull Trout Likely to adversely affect Likely to adversely affect The incorporation of plantings on the mid -slop benches, installation of willow /dogwood lifts, LWD placement at the toe of the levees, and the decrease in levee slope created by the proposed laybacks will provide habitat benefits and are expected to help substantially to offset any adverse effects caused by strengthening the levees with additional rock and loss of aquatic area at the Galli's site. Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) EFH determination will emulate the ESA analysis and determination for the Green River projects. Consultation will be initiated as necessary for the Galli's site. Cultural Resources To comply with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), a Corps archaeologist conducted a cultural resources reconnaissance survey of the proposed project Areas of Potential Effect with negative results. Cultural resources studies conducted for the project included a search of the Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) Electronic Historic Sites Inventory Database, and other background and archival research. The Corps has also initiated consultation with the Muckleshoot Tribe consisting of the sending of this report and a letter soliciting knowledge or concerns to the Muckleshoot Tribe. The Corps has determined that rehabilitation of the levee system in the vicinity of Kent and Renton in King County is a type of ground disturbing activity that has potential to cause effects on historic properties. The APEs of Tukwila Levees 3 and 5, Kent Shops Levee, Meyers Golf Levee, Horseshoe Bend Levees, Galli's Levee and Dykstra Levee are in the near vicinity of known historic properties or encompassed within the boundaries of ethnographically or historically significant places. The APEs for the individual projects have been defined as their respective construction boundaries, which include access roads and staging areas; these APEs were not fully defined at the writing of this report. The individual project area APEs include the levee repair areas, access road construction or improvement, staging areas, seepage berm construction, 12 and will include all other areas where there will be ground disturbing activities related to the projects. Recreation The Horseshoe Bend 205 and Tukwila 205 projects are part of the King County Green River Trail. The trail is heavily used by joggers, walkers, cyclists, and other recreation enthusiasts. Short term access, but not long -term access to the trail will be impacted by construction activities. The Meyer's Golf and Kent Shops /Narita projects are adjacent to a golf course and driving range. The golf course will be permanently impacted by the construction due to the layback of the existing levee into the current golf course property and by the removal of mature trees in the construction area. King County is working with the City of Kent (Golf Course Owner) to minimize any project impacts. Additionally, the paved walking trail that is located along the top of the levee, which is used by runners, walkers, and bicyclists will be impacted in the short-term, but not in the long -term by construction activities. Along the top of the Galli's levee is an informal trail, assumed to be used primarily by local residents. Short-term access, but not long -term access will be impacted by construction activities. The Dykstra site is adjacent to several residences, and access is limited by a locked county gate. Several local residents appear to use have built and maintained private sitting areas on the top of the levee. These sitting areas will be removed by the project. Air Quality and Climate Use of heavy equipment during construction as well as automobile and truck transportation would result in minor, short-term, insignificant increases in emissions of carbon dioxide and other exhaust components of diesel fuel and gasoline combustion. Effects on climate change are considered negligible and insignificant. Emissions generated by the construction activity are expected to be below the de minimus threshold. Cumulative Effects. This reach of river has had previous levee repair projects, levee upgrades, and dike maintenance over the last twenty -five years. Additional levee repairs /upgrades are likely in the future. The King County Flood Hazard Management Plan was adopted in 2006 and provides guidance for long -term flood reduction and management for all of King County. The goals of this plan are to reduce the risk of future flood hazard, reduce long -term associated costs of maintaining the flood reduction infrastructure, and avoid or minimize the environmental impacts of flood management. Specific project and program recommendations are presented in a 10 -year Action Plan, many of which are in the Green River corridor. It can be assumed that a considerable number of projects, both levee rehabilitations and restorations, will be initiated along the Green River in the next 10 years. 13 • • The lower Green River is almost completely lined with levees. There is Tess that 10% remaining of the river's historical floodplain in the valley. The continued presence of the levees themselves is a limiting factor in the habitat restoration activities that are necessary for ESA listed salmon recovery. The rehabilitations proposed in this Notice, and any future projects, will perpetuate an already degraded condition of the river corridor. Additionally, the conversion of soil based levee to rock based levee will more permanently confine the river to its existing channel decreasing opportunities for natural floodplain processes, and further urbanizing the lower Green River. As part of the required levee maintenance for eligibility in the PL 84 -99 program, the local sponsor (King County) must minimize the amount of vegetation on levees which are active in the program. This maintenance requirement is nationally addressed in ER 500 -1 -1. The Seattle District, has established a variance for this standard. Currently the variance allows for woody vegetation less than 4" in diameter at breast height (dbh) to remain on levees of standard design. This vegetation maintenance by the local government occurs as a separate action from the repairs addressed in this Notice and is expected to be ongoing. This maintenance is required on all levees in the program and includes levees outside of the actions proposed in this document. This will result in continued negative impacts on the riparian habitat, shade and temperature in the river. To be consistent with the program, removal of all trees /shrubs that are larger than 4" dbh along all levees proposed for repair this summer, including the areas outside of the project footprint, is required. The proposed repair site along the Green River corridor most affected by the County vegetation removal action will be Dykstra, where 24 mature trees will be removed prior to the end of the construction. The other rehabilitation sites are primarily vegetated with invasive shrubs (blackberry) and include few large trees; therefore the Toss of vegetation due to maintenance will be less detrimental. However, the regular (it is assumed bi- yearly) removal of 4" or greater woody vegetation by the County required to continue in the PL 84 -99 program, will exacerbate the already compromised wildlife and fish habitat along the Green River corridor. In an effort to mitigate for the adverse impacts of these proposed repairs to the river corridor and future adverse impacts by required levee vegetation maintenance, the levee footprints will be laidback where feasible. This will allow for the construction of a mid -slope bench. This bench falls outside of the vegetation maintenance requirements of PL 84 -99 as it is not considered part of the levee prism. Therefore, the trees and shrubs planted on the benches in spring 2009 (and any future bench plantings) will be allowed to mature. In addition, LWD will be installed in the river below the levee repair footprints to create shade and refuge for fish. Willow /dogwood lifts will be incorporated into the riverward levee prism to increase shade and organic input to the river. To remain in the PL 84 -99 program the local government is required to be maintain these willows /dogwoods according to PL 84 -99 standards. These environmental features may improve fish and wildlife habitat in the lower sections of the Green River in the long- term. Additional Corps activities in the immediate project location include two large civil works projects, the Howard Hanson Dam Additional Water Storage Project (AWSP) and the 14 • • Green - Duwamish Ecosystem Restoration Program (ERP). The AWSP includes storing water from the Green River behind HHD for the City of Tacoma. It also includes a suite of restoration actions including annual additional of gravel and wood to the middle Green River. The ERP includes a number of environmental restoration projects throughout the lower and middle Green River. COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER LAWS AND REGULATIONS The Corps will coordinate the proposed action with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service concerning anticipated effects on threatened and endangered species and their critical habitat, pursuant to Sec. 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act. As necessary based on anticipated adverse effects at Galli's, formal consultation will be initiated with a biological assessment. The Corps has reviewed the work for substantive compliance with the Clean Water Act. Work below the ordinary high water line is planned at all the repair sites. The work proposed at Tukwila #3 and #5, Horseshoe Bend #2, #3 and #4, Kent Shops /Narita, and Meyer's Golf (referenced under PL- 08 -08) is exempt per Section 404(f)(1)(B) of the Clean Water Act, which allows for emergency reconstruction of recently damaged parts of currently serviceable structures such as dikes, dams, levees, groins, riprap, breakwaters, causeways, bridge abutments or approaches, and transportation structures. Therefore, for Tukwila #3 and #5, Horseshoe Bend #2, #3 and #4, Kent Shops /Narita, and Meyer's Golf no analysis is required under Sec. 404(b) (1) of the CWA and a Section 401 WQC is not required. The proposed repair work at Dykstra (referenced under PL- 08 -09), Galli's (reference PL- 08 -10) and Horseshoe Bend #1 (reference PL- 08 -11) is not exempt as per Section 404(f)(1)(B) as construction at these sites will involve a discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States that does not precisely meet the parameters of the exemption for reconstruction of levee structures. These projects will be evaluated for substantive compliance with guidelines promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency under authority of Section 404(b)(1) of the Clean Water Act. The Corps is also obtaining CWA 402 NPDES construction storm water permit for those sites over one acre. In accordance with Section 401 of the CWA, the Corps has requested a certification from Ecology that the sites described in Public Notice Nos. PL 08 -09, 08 -10, and 08 -11 comply with the applicable Water Quality Standards of Washington State. Pursuant to the Coastal Zone Management Act, a preliminary Coastal Zone consistency determination is currently being conducted pursuant to the Coastal Zone Management Act, and will be coordinated with the Washington Department of Ecology as necessary. A National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 compliance report will be prepared that includes all of the proposed levee repairs. The report will include the findings of the investigations for each repair site, recommendations for archaeological monitoring during construction, and a determination of effects to archaeological and historic properties. If archaeological monitoring is recommended at some repair locations, the report will include a monitoring plan and protocols to be followed. The Corps' determinations of effects to historic properties, the investigation report, and monitoring 15 • • plan will be reviewed and approved by the Washington State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and the appropriate tribes prior to construction. In preparation of the environmental documentation for this project, coordination has been conducted or is ongoing with the following public agencies: King County, City of Tukwila, the Muckleshoot Tribe, National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS), Washington Department of Ecology, and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). EVALUATION - CORPS The decision whether to conduct the project will be based on an evaluation of the probable impact on the public interest. That decision will reflect the national concern for both protection and utilization of important resources. The benefit, which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the proposal, must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. All factors which may be relevant to the proposal will be considered; among these are: conservation, economics, aesthetics, general environmental concerns, wetlands, historic properties, fish and wildlife values, flood hazards, flood plain values, land use, navigation, shoreline erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy needs, safety, food and fiber production, mineral needs, consideration of property ownership and, in general, the needs and welfare of the people. Any person who has an interest that may be affected by this disposal of fill or dredged material may request a public hearing. The request must be submitted in writing to the District Engineer within the comment period of this notice, and must clearly set forth the following: the interest that may be affected, the manner in which the interest may be affected by this activity, and the particular reason for holding a public hearing regarding this activity. The Corps has made a preliminary determination that the environmental impacts of the proposal can be adequately evaluated under the National Environmental Policy Act through preparation of an environmental assessment (EA). Preparation of an EA addressing potential environmental impacts associated with the levee rehabilitation project is currently underway. The Corps invites submission of comment on the environmental impact of the proposal. Comments will also be considered in determining whether it would be in the best public interest to proceed with the proposed project. The Corps will consider all submissions received by the expiration date of this notice. The nature or scope of the proposal may be changed upon consideration of the comments received. The Corps will initiate an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), and afford all appropriate public participation opportunities attendant to an EIS, if significant effects on the quality of the human environment are identified and cannot be mitigated. 16 • • COMMENT AND REVIEW PERIOD Submit comments to this office, Attn: Environmental Resources Section no later than the expiration date of this public notice. Requests for information concerning the project should be directed to Ms. Andrea K. Cummins, (206) 764 -3641, andrea.k.cummins @usace.army.mil or to Mr. Scott Pozarycki, (206) 764 -3316 scott.v.pozarycki@usace.army.mil. RONALD J. KENT Acting Chief, Environmental Resources Section 17 • • Site locations: stato Park TT'17'1Dtt Mrtt.thrtt 4 U kW eiT 5116' Kerit KentthOpS/Narita Cieyerit'Golf ' HorsesivaiPend ‘--- 09,- Ity Galli's A Djikitia ° '. • f,..i. . ... ; . i . ... \ , e.' I \ °,, �_ C f,: ( FCJ -i ftfl ii•t fi .if!.'t•fA)fr STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Notice of Application for Water Quality Certification and for Certification of Consistency with the Washington Coastal Zone Management Program Date: May 21, 2008 Notice is hereby given that a request has been filed with the Department of Ecology, pursuant to the requirements of Section 401 of the federal Clean Water Act of 1977 (PL 95 -217), to certify that the projects described in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Public Notice Nos. Dykstra Levee (Public Notice Reference PL- 08 -09), Galli's Levee (Public Notice Reference PL- 08 -10), and Horseshoe Bend Levee Site #1(Public Notice Reference PL- 08 -11, will comply with the Sections 301, 302, 303, 306, and 307 of the Act, and with applicable provisions of State and Federal water pollution control laws. Notice is herby given that a request has been filed with the Department of Ecology, pursuant to the requirements of Section 307(c) of the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. §1451), to certify that the projects described in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Public Notice Nos. PL- 08 -08, PL- 08 -09, PL- 08 -10, and PL- 08 -11- comply with the Washington State Coastal Zone Management Program and that the project will be conducted in a manner consistent with that program. Any person desiring to present views on the project pertaining to the project on either or both (1) compliance with water pollution control laws or (2) the project's compliance or consistency with the Washington State Coastal Zone Management Program may do so by providing written comments within 21 days of the above publication date to: Federal Permit Coordinator Department of Ecology SEA Program Post Office Box 47600 Olympia, Washington 98504 -7600 19 j.CaroILumb - Re: Tukwila Levee Repairilk IP From: <Phyllis.Meyers @ noaa.gov> To: Carol Lumb <clumb @ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 05/07/2008 4:04 pm Subject: Re: Tukwila Levee Repairs Would it be convenient to send me the environmental checklist also? Thank you. Phyllis Original Message From: Carol Lumb <clumb @ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: Wednesday, May 7, 2008 2:17 pm Subject: Tukwila Levee Repairs To: Phyllis.Meyers @noaa.gov > Hi Phyllis: > Thanks for talking to me about the ESA issues related to the two > proposed COE levee repairs in Tukwila. If you are able to provide > comments to the City on your concerns that would be helpful. I am > attaching below the Notice of Application that I should have sent to > your agency, which requests comments from interested /affected parties. > My apologies for neglecting to send this notice to you. > Thanks again for the information. > 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: FW: Green River Shor ine permit vegetation. Looking at the cross - sections of the entire set of drawings 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 [mailto:clumb @ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 1:35 PM To: Levesque, Andy; Bleifuhs, Steve; Andrea.K.Cummins @usace.army.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" <Andy.Levesque @kingcounty.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. Carol Lumb - RE: FW: Green River Shoreline permit Andy 3! From: Cummins, Andrea K NWS [mailto:Andrea.K.Cummins @usace.army.mil] 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 [mailto:Andy.Levesque @kingcounty.gov] 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 project's 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 ;Carol Lumb - RE: FW: Green River Shot" ine permit 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. 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 [mailto: Andrea .K.Cummins @usace.army.mil] 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. i.6arol Lpmb - RE: FW Green River Shor ine permit 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 [ mailto :Andy.Levesque @kingcounty.gov] 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, 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. t Carol Lumb -RE: FW: _Green.River Shc Deb From: Cummins, Andrea K NWS [mailto: Andrea .K.Cummins @usace.army.mil] 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 Page 1 of 1 Carol Lumb - Re: Fwd: Briscollevee Repair Cross Section From: Ryan Larson To: Carol Lumb Date: 05/07/2008 10:07 AM Subject: Re: Fwd: Briscoe Levee Repair Cross Section 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: 1 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 file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \CAROL -L \Local Settings \Temp\XPGrpWise \48217F4Etuk- mail6300 -... 05/07/2008 Carol Lumb - Briscoe Levee Repair�ross Section • Page 1 of 3 From: "Levesque, Andy" <Andy.Levesque @kingcounty.gov> To: <clumb @ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 05/01/2008 2:48 PM Subject: Briscoe Levee Repair Cross Section CC: "Ryan Larson" <rlarson @ci.tukwila.wa.us >, "Bleifuhs, Steve" <Steve.Bleifuhs @kingcounty.gov> Carol, In response to your phone call from yesterday I am enclosing a PDF drawing of the typical cross section used by the Corps for their PL -84 -99 Program assistance to King County in completing the Briscoe Levee Repair in Kent during 2007. This design was developed using lessons learned in earlier work, including repairs previously approved both by the Corps and the City of Tukwila, at the Desimone and Segale Levee repair sites, among others. As noted in the e-mail below, King County is concerned that the Corps has deviated considerably from earlier commitments to continue with this basic levee repair design approach in its proposals for work this coming summer, in Tukwila and elsewhere along the Green River. King County has consistently stated its clear preference and request that this design be used by the Corps for the current repair proposals as well. The Corps has continued to modify its earlier commitments to do so, and has developed a number of major design changes which differ in significant respects from that shown in the enclosed drawing. They appear resolutely focused on implementing their current design modifications, our comments notwithstanding. I hope this is the information you were requesting. Regards, Andy From: Kilroy, Sandra Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 9:47 AM To: OLaughlin, Kate; Latterell, Josh; ZZGrp, WLR Regional Partnerships Team; ZZGrp, WLR Rivers; Higgins, Kollin; Evans, Glenn; Eckel, Bill; Shuman, Randy; Concannon, Diane Subject: Corps Environmental Advisory Board To those interested: Yesterday was the Corps Environmental Advisory Board meeting. As you know they were taking public comment. For your information, below is a copy of the statements I made on behalf of King County. Seattle, Muckleshoots, Redmond, WRIA 7 and WRIA 8, NMFS, boaters, and Skagit drainage district also made comments. Please let me know if you have any questions. - Sandy a King County has partnered with the Corps on numerous projects for many years. Our ongoing ability to continue to work with you to move critical projects is very important to us. King County has a nationally recognized river and floodplain management program. We are a Class 2 rated community in FEMA's Community Rating System program, we have a comprehensive regulatory framework and a robust and leading edge capital and maintenance program. We also play a large role in managing the health of our watersheds in a region that has three salmonid listings under the Endangered Species Act. King County alone has invested millions of dollars in improving habitat conditions for these listed species. file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \CAROL -L \Local Settings\ Temp\ XPGrpWise \4819D85Btuk- mail6300 -... 05/05/2008 • • Page 2 of 3 King County's ability to holistically manage rivers and floodplains for flood protection, public safety, and environmental quality is of utmost importance to citizens of our region. We have three areas of interest to comment on today: 1) Vegetation Management on Levees Under the PL84 -99 program, the Corps of Engineers is requiring that levees be brought into compliance with their national vegetation management policies as a requirement to receive Federal funding for flood damage repairs. These policies require removal of trees greater than four inches in diameter, despite any evaluation or demonstration of any structural deficiencies in these levees as a result of the trees. The Corps continued insistence on cutting trees and vegetation along rivers is in direct conflict with a Federal ESA Recovery Plan and many current day engineering practices recognizing the role that native riparian vegetation plays in contributing to the structural integrity of these facilities and providing fish and wildlife habitat. Managing rivers here is different than other places in the Country. We must find a solution to allow flood facilities and mature trees on our rivers. King County is requesting that the Corps of Engineers: 1) Declare the PL84 -99 program a federal action that requires consultation under the Endangered Species Act. 2) Update its maintenance policies based on new science and recognition of Endangered Species Act listings. and 3) Like in Sacramento — have a conversation, work with the Services, the Tribes and other interested parties on a regional approach allowing fully mature trees and vegetation on facilities in the PL84 -99 and other Corps programs. 2) Design Standards Consistent with the previous comments, the design of flood facilities on our rivers is equally important. King County and the Corps have successfully utilized designs that can offer adequate flood protection as well as environmental benefits. Last year the Corps and King County completed the Briscoe Levee repair on the Green River with a design that provided flood protection and habitat value. The Corps agreed to continue to use this design on future projects. This year, however, the Corps is not utilizing these agreed to design standards on projects on the Green River. file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \CAROL -L \Local Settings\ Temp\ XPGrpWise \4819D85Btuk- mail6300 -... 05/05/2008 Page 3 of 3 King County is requesting thathe Corps apply design standarT consistent t with our goals for floodplain management that also incorporate elements that are necessary to support ESA listed species. 3) Duwamish Green Ecosystem Restoration Program — The County and the Corps have been working on the North Winds Weir project, the highest priority in the Duwamish Green Ecosystem Restoration Program, for more than 5 years. Continuous delays and changes in project agreement conditions from the Corps, in real estate value, in kind credit, and new interpretations of site conditions have blocked the construction of this project. Even though the King County Council authorized our participation in the Project Cooperation Agreement two years ago with support from the Corps. King County is requesting that the Corps 1) Set consistent and timely conditions for cost shares and project cooperation agreements, 2) Not change these conditions once established, and that new conditions not be defined, and 3) Apply federal laws, including new law established by WRDA, to partnership projects. Again, thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today. Finding solutions to these problems is paramount to protecting both our federal and local investments in our communities. King County greatly appreciates your interest in finding ways to ensure the Corps programs are consistent with other federal environmental mandates and can be implemented smoothly, efficiently and successfully. Sandra Kilroy, Manager Regional Services Section King County Water and Land Resources Division 201 South Jackson Street, Suite 600 Seattle, WA 98104 Phone (206) 296 -8047 - Fax (206) 296 -0192 river and tloodplain management - interlocal watershed/salmon recovery services - hazardous waste management - groundwater program - GIS/visual communications/web services PLEASE NOTE: My e-mail address has changed to Sandra.Kilroy @kingcounty.gov and the County has a new website at www.kingcounty_gov file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \CAROL -L \Local Settings\ Temp\ XPGrpWise \4819D85Btuk- mail6300 -... 05/05/2008 40 30 20 10 0 HYOROSEED 6 FT STRIP ON SLOPE HYDROSEE➢ 6 FT STRIP ON SLOPE ■■■■■■■■■ Cob of GRADE. ■■■ -- • - •cOSISTRU.00005ACK EVE 111 E LI 9 FT IS TG MATRIAL ITS OF EXC TO VAIN) FINIS GRADE 10' MI r ASP USN ELE iiVSDOT/AP _C0.OG BORR, V, - 9- 03.11(2 BLOCK ii / -_` M VRAPPED ,VER 1.5 -2 VEGET -IE T jj1 •I.0 FT DE r,➢ FilIZ 111 ,.•i ' / BLOCKS FROM K -� ■■■■■ SELECT f � BAKKE L LAYERS LL THE , IT F EX IT EX[ Y PROJECT ATIDN ECOLOGIST LAVER • ■■■ ■■■ DEFLE[ .9 IPAW11110RIMrR__ -.4, 1... '�- � . COIR EHRIL APP D COVE ER LS -2 DOGWOOD WILLOW UTT[GS AND ■■■■■■■ ■ ra7ATE_- 7___"'�,� INIT , %CAVAT[ONAVEBANKF[ LLTRENCHE' ■■■■■■■■■ ■�, %I AO !��.� /iII� R -Er LAY 'S. WILL A DOGWOOD UTTINGS AND ■■■■■■■■■�■■■ � . \ 114 -•� • .1,11111 . pWR� VCR LIGHT `RRYHSTn ,AVER ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ LD OUT EONELOR EOOLOGY �■ S GOON 9-03t. 4(2) ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ NI -70 -60 -50 TOE BUTTRESS GRADATIONS QUARRY STONE LIGHT LOOSE RIPRAP 015 39' (27008) 3'- 4' D30 51' (66008) 050 60' (10,8008) D85 72' (18,7008) D100 75' (22,0008) LIGHT LOOSE RIPRAP 207. TO 907, 3008 - 1TON 157. TO 80% 508 - 1TON 10% TO 207. <508 4' -4.5' 4.5' -S.5' 5.5' -6.25' <6.5' Sources, USAGE. 1991. Hydraulic Design of Flood Control Channels VSDOT Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, anal Municipal Construction Dlv. 9, Sect. 13 Appendix C, King County Guidelines for Bank Stabilization Projects -40 -30 q!,._ BM KING COUNTY CONTROL POINT -20 -10 SCALE: 1" = 10' 0 RNA 0 10 20 HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL NUMBER 71205, A MAG NAIL IN AERIAL TARGET (FIELDBOOK 1630). VERTICAL DATUM ELEVATION = 37.94 NAVD 88 10 20 30 40 LEGEND DOSTING GRADE, KING COUNTY ROADS SURVEY CROSS-SECTION 2.5:1 COMPOUND SLOPE 40 30 20 10 0 FIOSN GRADE, 21 SLOPE VIER 15 FT MICR TOE BUTTRESS AND SLOPE RENFORCBAIENT. TYPICAL SECTION SNOWS TYPICAL SECTION FOR FULL SET -BACK WR11 BLOCK WALL Date Modified. 5 -15 -07 Source. King County DNRP -WLRD, River and Floodplain Management Unit CALL 2 WCRKWG DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG 1- 800 - 424 -5555 (UNDERGROUND MTV LOCATIONS ARE APPROX> FIELD BOOK: SURy6D. CITY OF KENT SURVEY EASE IMP. CHECKED. 600 PLANS 900 PIAN5 DA5 DA5 5 15/7 2 -6 -07 REVISION Br OATS APPROVED: PROJECT DEBORAH SCHEIBNER 6 -13 -07 OESGNED DEBORAH SCHEIBNER 6 -13 -07 °Eqpt ENTERED. DEBORAH SCHEIBNER 6 -13 -07 Corps Project No GRE -01 -07 PROJECT No 011068 90% kg King County Ospdn.w of 11stas1 Rwoucw ind Pods War ud La1M Rowena. Mellon War Roodplwb limpanol Uo� Pent 9bmmltl,, D1.b BRISCOE SCHOOL LEVEE REPAIR GREEN RNER, RNER MILE 16.5 TYPICAL SECTION SHEET OF SHEETS /VIM -M PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT REHABILITATION OF FLOOD CONTROL WORKS TUKWILA 205 GRE -3 -07 PART 1. PROJECT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PROJECT NAME: Tukwila 205 PROJECT FUNDING CLASS: 310 PROJECT CWIS NUMBER: 091634 NON - FEDERAL SPONSOR: City of Tukwila LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: The Tukwila Section 205 Levee is located on the left bank of the Green River from approximately river mile (RM) 12.6 to RM 17.0, in the City of Tukwila, in King County, Washington. The levees protect a flood plain that extends over 1000 acres of an industrialized area with light manufacturing, warehouses, and major high end shopping malls to major discount warehouses like Home Depot. While the Corps recently re- certified the levees, the County considers them to be over steepened and has prior plans for levee setback and construction of a levee toe buttress at a cost of $1.9 million dollars at one of the damage locations. DESCRIPTION OF DAMAGE: During the November 2006 flood, the Tukwila levee soils became saturated during the peak high flow. The Non - federal sponsor, City of Tukwila, requested that the District review 9 potential damage sites, (sites 1 -9). Approximately 1600 linear feet of damage was seen on the levee on the riverward slope (800 linear feet at site 3 and 800 linear feet at site 5). The damage at these two sites is due to toe scour. The other 7 sites were inspected and it has been determined that no action is required at this time (1, 2, 4, 6 -9). PROPOSED REPAIR: The recommended alternative for Site 3 consists of armoring the riverward slopes over the damaged lengths of approximately 800 lineal feet. The levee will be graded to allow a 2H: 1V slope, a 3 foot blanket of class IV riprap placed for armor rock, then hydro- seeded. The proposed repair will return the damaged portions of the levee, restoring the levee to match the pre -flood Level of Protection (LOP). The recommended alternative for Site 5 consists of laying back the existing levee system to an over all 2 1 /2H 1V slope. This will be achieved by setting back the current levee and constructing a 2H: 1V levee — Bench - 2H: 1V levee system. A toe structure will be constructed to prevent future scour and a 3 foot blanket of class IV riprap will be placed for armor rock, then hydro- seeded. These features are necessary to return the project to its pre -flood LOP. • • PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT REHABILITATION OF FLOOD CONTROL WORKS GRE-3 -07 SUMMARIZED FINANCIAL AND ECONOMIC DATA: TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST Total Construction subtotal $ 1,172,400 S &A (6 %) $ 70,300 Contingency (10 %) $ 117,200 Total Construction Cost $ 1,359,900 Total Engineering and Design (6 %) (Fed Cost) $ 81,600 Total Project Costs, 100% Federal $ 1,441,500 B/C ratio 12 POINT OF CONTACT: Doug Weber, CENWS- OD -EM, (206) 764 -3406 2 • • PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT REHABILITATION OF FLOOD CONTROL WORKS GRE -3 -07 PART 2. PROJECT REPORT 1. Project Identification a. Project Name: Federally Authorized Tukwila 205 Levee b. Project Funding Class: 310 c. Project CWIS Number: 091634 2. Project Authority a. Classification: Federal b. Authority: CAP, Section 205 c. Estimated original cost of project: Unknown d. Construction completion date of the original project: 1992 e. PL 84 -99 rehabilitations have most recently been completed in: 1996 3. Sponsor a. Sponsor Identification: City of Tukwila POC for City of Tukwila: Ryan Larson, Senior Engineer 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 (206) 431 -2456 POC for King County: Andy Levesque, (206) 296 -8379 b. Application for Assistance: (1) Date of Issuance of District's public Notice: 29 November 2006 (2) Date of NFS's written request: 28 December 2006 Additional information: REPORT PURPOSE: This report provides pertinent information regarding the project, the repair plan, estimated quantities, costs and benefit ratios to restore the existing levees to pre -flood condition. Due to the dynamic process of rivers, damages induced by rivers on levees and other structures continuously changes, therefore information including project description, actions etc. contained within this document are subject to change with out notice prior to and during construction. 4. Project Location. a. City: Tukwila County: King State: Washington Basin: Green River River: Green River River Mile: 12.6 to 17 River Bank: Site 3 and 5 left bank 3 • • PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT REHABILITATION OF FLOOD CONTROL WORKS GRE -3 -07 b. Narrative: The Tukwila Section 205 Levee is located on the left bank of the Green River from approximately river mile (RM) 12.6 to RM 17.0, in the City of Tukwila, in the Green River Basin in King County, Washington. The flood plain protection extends over 1000 acres of an industrialized area with light manufacturing, warehouses, and major high end shopping malls to major discount warehouses like Home Depot. 5. Project Design. The Tukwila levee system is an urban Flood Control Works (FCW). The system consists of an earthen material levee with armor rock on the riverward side. Slumping has been observed at some locations since 1990. Part of the levee system is described in the 2006 King County Flood Hazard Management Plan: Levee slope is extremely over - steepened at approximately 1.4H: 1V to 1.8H: 1V, and therefore lacks adequate structural stability to provide minimum factors of safety for several modes of failure. No toe buttress structure has ever been constructed in this sub - reach. The riverward slopes are largely dominated by invasive blackberries and reed canary grass. The Tukwila Levee system was recently re- certified in the Federal Levee Program. Prior to the November 2006 flood, the levee offered greater than 100 -year level of protection (LOP). 6. Disaster Incident: In early November 2006 a large rainfall event fell over Western Washington, including 8.7" inches of rain over a 24 hour period at Howard Hanson Dam. The Green River is regulated by Howard Hanson Dam so that the discharge from the dam combined with the downstream flow doesn't exceed 12,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) at the USGS Auburn gage #12113000. • The combination of excessive rainfall and high freezing level produced daily average discharges above 10,000 cfs in the Green River at the Auburn gage for approximately three days with a peak discharge of about 12,000 cfs for a few hours. • Based on the regulated discharge at the Auburn gage, daily discharges above 10,000 cfs for one or more days have been observed in 9 of the 44 years since regulation began with Howard Hanson Dam, which has an estimated return interval of approximately 5 years. • Peak instantaneous Inflows to the Howard Hanson Dam of 23,500 cfs were observed during this event, which has an estimated return interval of approximately 15 years. • Mean Daily discharges at the Auburn gage of between 10,000 cfs and 12,000 cfs have been observed in 10 out of 44 years, which has estimated return interval of approximately 5 years. This yields an estimated return interval for the November 2006 event on the Green River levees of between 5 and 15 years. 4 • • PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT REHABILITATION OF FLOOD CONTROL WORKS GRE -3 -07 7. Project Damages: The Non - federal sponsor requested that the District review 9 sites for potential damages. Peak high flow in November 2006 resulted in damages to two separate levee sections of the Federally Authorized Lower Green River Flood Control Project. During the site visit on November 18, 2006 flows were —2500 cfs, stage 56.37 ft. The levee soils became saturated during the peak high flow. Prior to the flood the levee offered greater than 100 -year level of protection. In the current damaged state, the levee offers 10 -year level of protection (based on failure at flows of 11,500 cfs, stage of 62.3 ft). Damage Locations: 1. Upstream of S. 180th Bridge, Site 3 — There is observed 800 feet of toe scour on the bench and levee erosion. The levee slope is nearly vertical and there is toe scour. 2. Across from CAT Dealer Site 5 — The Corps observed on the outside bend of the levee approximately 800 feet of toe scour that may have been caused by the high flows. 8. Project Performance Data a. Inspection Results. (1) Date of Last Inspection: Fall 2007 (2) Type of Last Inspection: For site 1 - immediately following a high water period. For sites 2, 3, and 4 - Periodic Inspection of Federal Flood Control Work. (3) Project Condition Code of Last Inspection: Acceptable (4) Status: Eligible b. Sponsor's Annual O &M Costs: Not known c. The levee is well maintained by City of Tukwila. 9. Project Alternatives Considered Multiple alternatives were considered including, the No- Action alternative, the Setback Levee Alternative, the Repair to Pre -Flood Condition Alternative and the Non - Structural Alternative for all four sites. a. No Action Alternative The No Action Alternative was rejected. The levee is intended to provide flood protection for infrastructure and life. The levee will not perform as designed in its current condition. The results of a levee failure would include damages to businesses and infrastructure in the intended protected area. The area is quite urbanized and there are many people within the immediate area behind the levee, a levee failure in this reach could result in loss of life. b. Repair to Pre Flood Condition Alternative The Repair to Pre -Flood Condition would replace the lost levee material. A blanket of riprap would be placed on the levee face from the toe to the 100 -year elevation. The levee side - slopes are steep. There is very little room for an adequate toe. The riprap on the 5 • • PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT REHABILITATION OF FLOOD CONTROL WORKS GRE -3 -07 levee face above ordinary high water (OWH) will be covered with a soil layer and willows would be planted at the OHW line. c. Retaining Wall Alternative This repair would involve excavating the levee below the foundation, installing a wall on the landward side of the levee footprint, installing a PCC retaining wall which would allow adding a toe, and gentler slope which would help reduce the effects of scour along this reach. Willows would be planted at the OHW elevation. This solution would return the levee to pre -flood level of protection. This solution was determined not to be the most cost effective when compared to other alternatives with similar protection and as such was not selected. d. Remove and Repair with Geo- textile Wrap wall Alternative Excavate and remove the levee below the foundation and create a soil wrap wall armoring the riverward face. The steep slopes would be accommodated with this alternative. This solution was determined inadequate to withstand the expected velocities during a 100 -year event without additional backslope footprint and was not evaluated further. e. Layback Levee Alternative This alternative would include removing the existing levee and laying back the top so that it is further landward than the existing levee crest. A new toe and bench on the river side will be created to reduce the effects of scour. This alternative provides the proper level of benefits for the least amount of cost for Site 5 and as such has been selected. This is the sponsor preferred alternative. Note that the new toe of the levee is in the same place as the pre -flood condition — so therefore the levee itself is not being setback from the river. This is appropriately described as changing the slope of the levee as opposed to a levee setback. A setback levee is defined by moving the entire levee landward, including the toe. In either case, additional real estate rights of way need to be acquired. f Non - Structural Alternative This alternative would relocate all existing commercial, industrial and residential structures, utilities and other infrastructure within the damage area protected by this levee system. This was not a viable alternative for our sponsor. The costs associated with this alternative were deemed too high for the level of benefit associated with this alternative. 10. Recommended Alternatives At site 3 (upstream of S. 180TH bridge): The recommended alternative is also the least cost alternative. It is the repair to Pre -Flood Condition Alternative. This would replace the riprap on the levee face and return the levee to the pre -flood level of protection. The levee overburden will be excavated from the bench; the bench will be graded back to 7.5 feet from 15 feet to allow for a 2H: 1V slope. A 3' blanket of Class IV riprap placed on the levee slope from the toe to the approximately 20 feet up the elevation. A lift of topsoil will cover the riprap from the OHW elevation to the crown and hydro- seeded. A 6 • • PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT REHABILITATION OF FLOOD CONTROL WORKS GRE-3 -07 willow lift will be planted above the OHW elevation. The repair of the damages will be a total of 800 lineal feet. At site 5 (upstream of the floodwall): The recommended alternative is the setback levee alternative. This is the least cost technically acceptable alternative. At this location, the "repair to pre -flood condition" is not acceptable since the scour would occur again. The setback levee alternative would involve setting back the existing levee system to an over all 2 1 /2H 1V slope. This will be achieved by setting back the current levee and constructing a 2H: 1V levee — Bench - 2H: 1V levee system A toe structure will be constructed to prevent future scour and a 3 foot blanket of class IV riprap will be placed for armor rock, then hydro- seeded. Willows would be planted at the OHW elevation. The repair of the damages will be a total of 800 lineal feet to allow tie in at the upstream and downstream ends. This solution would return the levee to pre -flood level of protection and reduce the effects of scour. A ramp would be constructed to allow equipment access, and would be removed at the end of construction. Should the appropriate real estate rights of way not be, acquired in time to allow construction of the preferred alternative this summer, the "repair to pre flood condition alternative" will be constructed within the existing footprint and with available real estate. 11. Real Estate The Tukwila 205 Levee Rehabilitation effort consists of repairing portions of the levee located in Section 35, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, Willamette Meridian, King County, Washington. The rehabilitation effort involves restoring Site 3 to pre -flood conditions and Site 5 consists of a levee set back. See Section 10 Recommended Alternative for a more detailed description of the proposed repair. The placing of a single line of willows at the ordinary high water line will not require additional land acquisition, however, the levee set back will. The City of Tukwila is the Non - Federal Sponsor (NFS), and will need to provide written acknowledgement of its continued obligations under the January 31, 1999 Local Cooperation Agreement (LCA), to provide the usual a -b -c's before any work is accomplished. The NFS is also responsible for acquiring all lands, easements, and rights of way, and disposal areas and performing any necessary relocations associated with setback of the levee at Site 5. The NFS must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Corps of Engineers (COE) Real Estate Division that is has sufficient interests and area in the lands identified as necessary for construction, operation and maintenance of the entire rehabilitation effort, including ingress and egress to the levee before the COE advertises for construction. 7 • • PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT REHABILITATION OF FLOOD CONTROL WORKS GRE -3 -07 The NFS will be required to provide the COE Real Estate Division with a fully executed lands certification and authorization for entry document, attorney's certificate and title reports not more than 90 days old at the time it certifies all the necessary lands available. For the lands needed for the proposed levee rehabilitation effort the NFS will need to acquire and certify at a minimum the below perpetual levee flood protection easement, permanent road easement for ingress and egress, and temporary work area easement. Flood Protection Levee Easement -- A perpetual and assignable right and easement in the land described in Exhibit , by this reference made a part hereof, to construct, maintain, repair, operate, patrol and replace a flood protection levee, including all appurtenances thereto; reserving, however, to the owners, their heirs and assigns, all such rights and privileges in the land as may be used without interfering with or abridging the rights and easement hereby acquired. Perpetual Road Easement -- A perpetual and assignable easement and right -of -way in, on, over and across the land described in Exhibit _ for the location, construction, operation, maintenance, alteration and replacement of (a) road(s) and appurtenances thereto; together with the right to trim, cut, fell and remove therefrom all trees, underbrush, obstructions and other vegetation, structures, or obstacles within the limits of the right -of -way; (reserving, however, to the grantors, their heirs and assigns, the right to cross over or under the right -of -way as access to their adjoining land [Include the following language if it applies: "at the locations indicated in (Exhibit _ ")] subject, however, to existing easements for public roads and highways, public utilities, railroads and pipelines. Temporary Work Area Easement -- A temporary and assignable easement and right -of -way in, on, over, and across the land described in Exhibit for a period not to exceed one year, beginning with date possession of the land is granted to the Grantee for use by the United States, its representatives, agents, and contractors as a work area, including the right to borrow and /or deposit fill, and waste material thereon, move, store, and remove equipment and supplies, and erect and remove temporary structures on the land and to perform any other work necessary and incident to the construction of the Lower Green River, Section 205 Flood Control Project (AKA Tukwila 205), Job No. GRE- 03 -07, together with the right to trim, cut, fell, and remove therefrom all trees, underbrush, obstructions, and any other vegetation, structures, or obstacles within the limits of the right -of -way; reserving, however, to the landowners, their heirs and assigns, all such rights and privileges as may be used without interfering with or abridging the rights and easement hereby acquired; subject to existing easements for public roads. 8 • . • PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT REHABILITATION OF FLOOD CONTROL WORKS GRE -3 -07 The NFS may also need to provide a suitable disposal site by acquiring a temporary disposal area (using the above temporary work area easement); however, if the NFS is unable to provide a suitable disposal area, then the material will be taken to a commercial site for disposal. The final location of work area easements to support the construction of the rehabilitation effort, including access routes for ease of construction, and the need for a temporary disposal site will be determined in the next phase — E &D. Additionally, if the COE, Real Estate Division determines the NFS does not have adequate real property interests for the lands needed for the proposed rehabilitation effort, including additional damage not visible at the time of inspection because of the presence of vegetation, then acquisition of property interests may be necessary. The need for the NFS to acquire or cure its existing property interests could result in further delay of repairing the damaged levee as proposed in the project schedule — see section 15 of this report. Also as part of the land certification process for the levee rehabilitation effort and the entire Lower Green River Section 205 Flood Control Project (AKA Tukwila Section 205 Project), the NFS will need to provide title reports, not more than 90 days old at the time of land certification demonstrating its interest in lands. Any questions regarding types or level of property interests needed for the proposed project should be coordinated with COE, Real Estate Division. 12. Economic Evaluation. Benefits attributable to the proposed levee repair are calculated on the difference in probabilities associated with the Level of Protection' (LOP) provided by the levee in the repaired condition compared to the damaged or post event condition. With repair, the levee will be restored to a 100 -year plus level of protection. In accordance with EP500 -1- 1, the economic life applicable to non - Federal urban levees shall be 50- years, or the degree of protection afforded by the project, whichever is less. Therefore, the following economic analysis is based on FY07 discount rate of 4.875 percent with an economic life of 50 years. Prior to the event, this levee provided protection from floods with a greater 100 year recurrence interval. The recent high water event caused damages to the levee that degraded the LOP to an event estimated at a 10 -year recurrence interval. The properties protected by this levee are in the north end of the Kent Valley in the city of Tukwila on the left bank of the Green River. Note concerning the use of the phrase Level of Protection. The US Army Corps of Engineers emphasizes that we do not protect against anything, we reduce potential risks; and, damages and descriptions of this risk reduction are given in terms of performance. For example 100 -year Level of protection in terms of risk reduction performance means that there is a 90% probability of containing inside the banks of the river a flow or stage that is expected to have a frequency or annual probability of 1 %. However, the data requirements and analysis required to define the level of performance is typically out of scope for this level of study, so "Level of Protection" in this document shall imply nothing more than a high probability of containing a flow or stage of the frequency indicated by the specified "Level of Protection ". 9 • • PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT REHABILITATION OF FLOOD CONTROL WORKS GRE -3 -07 The flood plain protected extends over 1000 acres of an industrialized area with light manufacturing, warehouses, and major high end shopping malls to major discount warehouses like Home Depot. There are probably hundreds of parcels of land with hundreds of buildings in this part of the flood plain. An evaluation of the first eight parcels in the immediate vicinity of the damaged sites which covered a little over 26 acres of the 1000 plus similar acres showed 9 structures with a total depreciated replacement value of $16 Million. If the levee is not repaired the expected annual damages (EAD) to just these 9 structures and their contents are approximately $1,292,000. With repair the EAD is about $356,000. Therefore the approximate EAD of at least $936,000 in damages are considered as preventable with rehabilitation and taken as benefits. June, 2007 Prices BENEFITS Annual Damage Prevented (EAD) Greater Than $ 936,000 COSTS First Cost: $ 1,441,500 Annual Cost: Interest and Amortization (50 years @ 4.875 %) $ 77,000 Operation & Maintenance $ 2,000 Total Annual Costs $ 79,000 Benefit -to -Cost Ratio Greater Than 12 to 1 The following checks were performed: 1. Value property protected Greater Than 2. Value of Cropland: Not Applicable 3. Net Farm Income: Not Applicable $ 16,000,000 Distribution of Project Benefits: There are probably 200 to 400, property owners in the protected area with similar properties. Of the 9 properties selected for analysis at least one, the Home Depot warehouse store had more than 25% of the value of properties analyzed, however if a full inventory were done it is unlikely that any individual beneficiary receives greater than 25 percent of the total project benefits. 13. Environmental The Green river contains spawning populations of fall Chinook, Coho, Pink, and fall chum salmon, and winter and summer steelhead. Small numbers of sockeye salmon are also found. Bull trout use the lower river for feeding and rearing. The project area contains limited rearing habitat for these species. No spawning occurs in the project area. 10 • • PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT REHABILITATION OF FLOOD CONTROL WORKS GRE -3 -07 The following species are listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and may be found in the project area: Puget Sound Chinook Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Threatened Coastal/Puget Sound Bull Trout Salvelinus confluentus Threatened Marbled Murrelet Brachyramphus marmoratus Threatened Northern Spotted Owl Strix occidentalis Caurina Threatened Puget Sound Steelhead Oncorhynchus mykiss Threatened The project area is critical habitat for Chinook salmon and bull trout. No critical habitat has yet been designated for steelhead. All in -water work will be conducted will be targeted for construction during the in -water work window (July 1 — September 15), which was approved for this project by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (the published work window for the Green River is August 1 -31). Assuming the preferred alternative is built within the approved work window, it is expected that the project is not likely to adversely affect listed species. Issues: a. Water Quality. Short-tern, discountable adverse impacts may result from the repairs to the levee. A temporary increase in turbidity due to fill placement is expected. Turbidity will be monitored during construction. If turbidity exceeds water quality standards, construction will recommence when turbidity returns to acceptable levels. b. Fish and Wildlife. When completed the repair is not intended to lessen habitat conditions as compared with conditions pre- existing the flood event. Short-term, discountable adverse impacts may result from construction activities during repairs to the levee. If present, fish and wildlife may be temporarily displaced from this area by short- term increases in noise and turbidity. Proposed plantings should increase the vegetative cover along the levee in the long -term. In water construction will likely occur during the approved WDFW work window. Re- sloping along 800ft of the levee will result in widening of the Green River channel resulting in slight increases in fish habitat. Limited vegetation other than non - native Himalayan blackberry currently exists at the project site. Willow plantings will aid in shading the river and developing a vegetative riparian corridor. 11 • • PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT REHABILITATION OF FLOOD CONTROL WORKS GRE-3 -07 c. Wetlands. A wetlands biologist will determine if a reconnaissance of the proposed access alignment, staging area, and construction footprint will be necessary. Currently no jurisdictional wetlands have been identified. d. Cultural Resources. A search of the Department of 'Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) electronic Historic Sites Inventory Database did not produce evidence for the presence of an historic property listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or the Washington State Historic Sites Register at or near the two damaged levee locations. The Area of Potential Effects (APE) will include the area to be repaired, new access points and all other area where new ground disturbing activities will take place. Prior to levee repairs a Corps or contract archaeologist will survey the two damaged areas at low water and determine if there is a potential for the proposed levee rehabilitations to cause effects to historic properties. Ground disturbing activities on the landward side of the existing levee, such as those associated with the setback of a levee, would have a higher potential of encountering archaeological deposits or materials. If during the survey it is determined that the proposed repairs have a potential to cause effects to historic properties, then archaeological testing may be necessary as part of the survey work. Construction monitoring may also be necessary during certain phases of construction. A National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 compliance report will be prepared that includes the two levee repair sites. The report will include the findings of the investigations for each repair site, including possible subsurface testing, recommendations for archaeological monitoring during construction (if found to be necessary) and a determination of effects to historic properties. If archaeological monitoring is recommended at one or both of the repair locations, the report will include a monitoring plan and protocols to be followed during construction. The protocols will include an inadvertent discovery clause that will apply when an archaeological monitor is not present. The Corps' determinations of effects to historic properties and monitoring plan, if one is required, must be reviewed and concurred with by the DAHP, and reviewed by the Muckleshoot Tribe prior to construction. e. Recreation. This section of levee is part of the Green River Trail in King County. This trail is heavily used by walkers, joggers, cyclists, and other recreational enthusiasts. Construction to repair this part of the levee will temporarily close this section of the trail and cause recreational activities to be routed around the area. f. Coordination. The proposed work is formally coordinated throughout the planning, design, and construction phases with the following agencies and Tribe: (1) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (2) NOAA Fisheries (3) Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (4) Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (5) Washington Department of Ecology 12 • • PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT REHABILITATION OF FLOOD CONTROL WORKS GRE -3 -07 (6) State Historic Preservation Office (7) King County (8) City of Tukwila Their recommendations will be considered and implemented as appropriate. The design will be coordinated with and reviewed by the above listed agencies. In accordance with ER 200 -2 -2, Procedures for Implementing NEPA, paragraph 8, Emergency Actions, the environmental effects of the proposed levee rehabilitation will be considered during the planning process. An environmental assessment (EA) is being prepared to evaluate probable impacts of the project on the existing environment. Factors addressed by the evaluation include public safety, water quality, wetlands, threatened and endangered species, noise, economics, fish, and wildlife. The EA will be coordinated with applicable Federal and State resource agencies. The NEPA process will be concluded as pursuant to requirements in ER 200 -2 -2. In addition, the requirements for compliance with the ESA will also be completed. The Non - federal sponsor will be required to obtain all applicable local and state permits. Pursuant to 33 U.S. Code Section 1344(f)(1)(B), emergency reconstruction of recently damaged parts of levees does not require a Clean Water Act Section 404 evaluation, provided that the work is conducted for maintenance purposes. Analogizing to 33 Code of Federal Regulations section 323.4(a)(2), rehabilitation may not include any modification that changes the character, scope, or size of the original fill design. Concerning scope and size, the proposed repair will not require a Section 404(b)(1) evaluation as long as the footprint of the levee repair that falls within waters of the United States is no larger than the pre- damage footprint. All work on this project either will be conducted outside the limits of Section 404, or will result in restoration of the pre- existing levee profile, will remain within the existing footprint, and will be conducted with the same character and materials. Since the application of Section 404 is not triggered, a Section 401 water quality certification from the Department of Ecology is not required. A Coastal Consistency Determination will be completed prior to construction. Analogizing to the Regional Conditions accompanying Nationwide Permit 3, which addresses repair and maintenance of levee structures within Washington, where a Section 401 Certification is not required due to application of 33 U.S. Code section 1344(f)(1)(B), the Coastal Consistency determination need not be submitted to the State for concurrence. g. Environmental enhancement features. Project construction will include the following environmental enhancement features: Approximately 800 linear feet of the levee is proposed to be re- sloped resulting in a slightly wider river channel. Willow stakes will be planted along the repair sections. 13 • • PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT REHABILITATION OF FLOOD CONTROL WORKS GRE -3 -07 14. Interagency Levee Task Force HQUSACE has not directed activation of an Interagency Levee Task Force for the flood event associated with the November 20.06 floods in Western Washington. However, informal coordination with FEMA is ongoing. 15. Project Management a. Funding Authority (1) Program and Appropriation: FCCE, 96x3125 (2) Project Funding Class: 310 (3) Project CWIS Number: 091634 b. Project Funds - Project Cost Estimate at April 2007 Price Level The cost estimate is presented by the details of each damage site first, followed by a project summary table that adds S &A, Contingency, and E &D. Lower Green River Flood Control Project, Site 5 -800 feet of toe scour and levee erosi Item Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Cost Amount Material Site 5 Class IV Riprap 7,300 TONS $ 36 $262,800 Spal1 Rock (2 " -4 ") 2,000 TONS $ 20 $40,000 Gravel Filter Material 1,000 CY $ 20 $20,000 Granular Fill 1,000 CY $ 20 $20,000 Topsoil 400 CY $ 26 $10,400 Asphalt (repair damage from trucks /equip on path & parking lot) 3,600 SY $ 22 $79,200 Saw cut and dispose of Asphalt Path and Parking Lot 350 TONS $ 100 $35,000 Create access ramp (4' high x 60' long x 12' wide) from pkg. lot 50 CY $ 20 $1,000 Cut out asphalt/levee & create ramp to bench then replace 600 CY $ 5 $3,000 Disposal of access ramp 50 CY $ 2 $100 Disposal of 4,000 CY $ 10 $40,000 PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT REHABILITATION OF FLOOD CONTROL WORKS GRE -3 -07 unsatisfactory material Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Cost Amount Clearing and grubbing 500 TONS $ 100 $50,000 Willows 500 EA $ 5 $2,500 Hydroseeding 2,000 SY $ 10 $20,000 Total Materials $588,000 Equipment Site 5 HRS (REG) $ /HR HRS (OT) $ /HR Total Rubber Tire Loader 644, 5 cy bucket with teeth 80 $ 135 40 $ 150 $16,800 Mobilization/Demobi lization 1 LS $2,500 200 Excavator with hydraulic Thumb and muck bucket 160 $ 150 80 $ 165 $37,200 Mobilization/Demobi lization 1 LS $2,500 10 ton roller (for compacting levee when replacing) 80 $100 40 $115 $12,600 Mobilization/Demobi lization 1 LS $2,500 Truck and trailer for material disposal 80 $125 40 $140 $15,600 Subtotal $89,700 Total Equipment and Materials $677,700 Lower Green River Flood Control Project, Site 3 - 800 feet of toe scour and levee erosion Item Quantity Unit of Measure Unit Cost Amount Material Site 3 Class IV Riprap 7,200 TONS $ 36 $259,200 Spall Rock (2 " -4 ") 2,500 TONS $ 20 $50,000 15 • • PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT REHABILITATION OF FLOOD CONTROL WORKS GRE -3 -07 Gravel Filter Material 250 CY $ 20 $5,003 Topsoil 75 CY $ 26 $1,952 Asphalt (repair damage from trucks /equip on path & parking lot) 3,600 SQ $ 22 $79,200 Saw cut and dispose of Asphalt Path and Parking Lot 350 TONS $ 100 $35,000 Create access ramp (4' high x 60' long x 12' wide) from pkg. lot 55 CY $ 20 $1,107 Cut out asphalt/levee & create ramp to bench then replace 600 CY $ 5 $3,000 Disposal of access ramp 55 CY $ 1 $55 Disposal of unsatisfactory material 1,000 CY $ 1 $1,000 Clearing and grubbing 100 TONS $ 100 $10,000 Willows 100 EA $ 5 $500 Total Materials $446,100 Equipment Site 3 HRS (REG) $ /HR HRS (OT) $ /HR Total Rubber Tire Loader 644, 5 cy bucket with teeth 40 $ 135 20 $ 150 $8,400 Mobilization/Demobi lization 1 LS $2,500 200 Excavator with hydraulic Thumb and muck bucket 80 $ 150 40 $ 165 $18,600 Mobilization/Demobi lization 1 LS $2,500 10 ton roller (for compacting levee 40 $100 20 $115 $6,300 16 • • PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT REHABILITATION OF FLOOD CONTROL WORKS GRE -3 -07 when replacing) Total Construction subtotal $ 1,172,400 S &A (6 %) $ 70,300 Mobilization/Demobi lization 1 LS $ 1,359,900 Total Engineering and Design (6 %) (Fed Cost) $2,500 Total Project Costs, 100% Federal $ 1,441,500 B/C ratio 12 E &D review finalized and complete March 6, 2008 Truck and trailer for material disposal 40 $125 20 $140 $7,800 City of Tukwila Non - federal Sponsor certifies lands April 4, 2008 City of Tukwila Non - federal Sponsor provides cash contribution April 18, 2008 Subtotal RE Division Certifies Lands Available May 2, 2008 COE Solicit contractors $48,600 COE Award contract June 20, 2008 COE I Initiate construction July 1, 2008 Total Equipment and Materials Com lete construction Se.tember 15, 2008 $494,700 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST Total Construction subtotal $ 1,172,400 S &A (6 %) $ 70,300 Contingency (10 %) $ 117,200 Total Construction Cost $ 1,359,900 Total Engineering and Design (6 %) (Fed Cost) $ 81,600 Total Project Costs, 100% Federal $ 1,441,500 B/C ratio 12 c. Project Repair Schedule The Work Window (work allowed in the water) is 1 August — 31 August. Work performed outside this window will only consist of work that is not in the water. RESPONSIBLE PARTY MILESTONE TAKS MILESTONE DATE COE _ PIR Approval January 29, 2008 COE E &D complete February 15, 2008 COE LOA and LER Cert Documents to Non - federal Sponsor, and Designs for Review NLT February 15, 2008 COE Obtain E &D funds Obtained COE E &D review finalized and complete March 6, 2008 City of Tukwila Sign LOA by Non- federal Sponsor March 7, 2008 COE Environmental Documentation March 18, 2008 City of Tukwila Non - federal Sponsor certifies lands April 4, 2008 City of Tukwila Non - federal Sponsor provides cash contribution April 18, 2008 COE RE Division Certifies Lands Available May 2, 2008 COE Solicit contractors May 5, 2008 COE Award contract June 20, 2008 COE I Initiate construction July 1, 2008 COE Com lete construction Se.tember 15, 2008 17 • • PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT REHABILITATION OF FLOOD CONTROL WORKS GRE-3 -07 d. Project Authentication Prepared by: Laura Orr, (206) 764 -3575 Emergency Management approval by: Paul Komoroske, (206) 764 -3406 District -level approval by: Diane Parks (206) 764 -3431 e. Technical Points of Contact Emergency Management: Doug Weber, (206) 764 -3406 Economics: Don Bisbee, (206) 764 -3713 Environmental: Rustin Director, (206) 764 -3636 Cultural resources: Ron Kent, (206) 764 -3576 Engineering and design: Cathie Desjardin, (206) 764 -3542 Program Management: Doug Weber, (206) 764 -3406 Real Estate: Cindy Luciano, (206) 764 -3748 Hydraulics and Hydrology: Lynne Melder, (206) 764 -6471 18 • • PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT REHABILITATION OF FLOOD CONTROL WORKS GU-3 -07 Appendix A: Project Sponsor's request for Rehabilitation Assistance. King County Water and Land Resources Division p'nartmant vt Natural acscurssar.1 Yorks Klnp Strr_t Certer • 201 South ]uckcvu 5Lrtit, Suite flea Scartr„WA9E1C4. :).4 6 1a6•x06.63I9 2t►S- 7196.0192 Fax December 28, ?006 Doug Weber U.S. Army Coresof1 nglneers PO Box 01755 4735 East Marginal Way Smith . Seattle, WA 93124 -2255 RE: KQyctutsr.2E16 Flood Dame e - Rcqucst forn_$_492 i,gt,aow Dear Mr. Weber, I fast want to lake this opportunity to thank you and your col1eaguea.al the 11.S. Curs of Fngineers- Searle District O lice 6or your wa i:ianceend support as x renti or the Nr.wemher 2i106 flood event. Ma close communication an .land operations and flood damage inspections was integral to the success of the coordinated regional response throughout line County, 1 took forward to our continued work together on these efforts. The purpose of this 1 elder is to notify you of flood re:ated damages to several levees on the Gran, Mainstetn Snoqualtrie, South Fork Snoquaitvic, Middle Fork Snoqualn» e, Ra,gioe,' old, and Cedar Rivers that occurred as a result of the Nover.nbecr2006 tlood event, and to Ldiicially request the assistance oldie U.S. Asmv Corps of Engineers. Staid: District 0ITteu in' constructing levee repairs at the locations. Requests for assistance on the White, South Fort Skykomish the Santnlamish Rivers are not ben pursued at this time - The attached table contains brief summaries of the &triaged lovcc locations, approximate Ierkgtbs of damages, prcliminary cost estimate,:, and notes on thcir eligibility for assistance under the Pi. 84.99 plograin, These summaries of observed damages are based wi observations made by King Coanty r:taff an , is somc instances, were observed jointly i,it4 U.S. Array Corps of Engineers staff following the 1luud event • it is anticipated that joint lo,v\vatcr inspections! of the levee damages identified in this terror will he neck-led in the ticAr futurc to more accurately assess, quantify and prioritize damages and associated repair needs along with rnon: detailed cost estimates based on the preferred desig;r alternative. Please note that oar requests for assistance may uiso be augnunoed as additional damages are idcnti6ed es we coutinuc to thotonphly inspect levee systems tlta,tLeh the county. 19 • • PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT REHABILITATION OF FLOOD CONTROL WORKS GRE-3 -07 Doug Woi=' Decent/et 2P.. XII)I rage 2 i would also like to include with this request for assistance an immediate re- inspection ofrhe pnrti n of :he i-Incz.shos Jlend t,evee just up am of Central Place to determine uh Cher an emergency repair is v.arrantod. Both King Cosine• and C.S. Army Corps of Engineers staff recently observed three new sinkholes an the back scope of this levee, one of which is in tlrc e.3me location as evidence of front slope move:tent. if emergency repairs are warranted_ 1 would litre to request that we take immediate action to address the damages atthis location. Xing County would like to remain aelivc participants in the.deveiopment of levee repair design alternatives during preparation of the project iffihanar]on report for these sites. In addition, we would like to explore options drat would allow the County anti the District to ploy an active role in the design and cons r ue:ion of these projects consistent with the suecestK ul approach currently underway at the Brixoe Levee repair site. 7ibauk you for your consideration io this matter. 1f yva have any questions or r.eed adiitinnal information regnrdir:5 this request, or would like to suhetlule u meelinb or joint inspection of t eve sites, please contact me al 2116- 296.8U! 1. 5' .:r4lp; 1, r st cJJ'uhs, Mitaagar River and Phxrdplain Management Unit act Andy Levesque, Senior Engineer, King County saver and Fion dptain Management Unit Tom Been, Senior Enyinerr, Kling County River and Floodptain Management Unit John Koun, CRFCZ1'i Program COVrdlttaWr, King County River and Floodplaiii Management IAN Nancy Facgcnbwg, ProgranvProject Manager, King County River and Fluudplain allagornent Unit Priscilla Kaufmann,. Pmgrum•Project hfurttnner, King County River and Plnr dplain twiisrr>i, invent Unit Deborah Seheihner, Engineer, King Cnte ty River and Flocvtpinin Management Unit Attachment 20 • • PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT REHABILITATION OF FLOOD CONTROL WORKS GRE -3 -07 Appendix B: Project location and design data, maps, and related information MAPQ■JE S T �- ;� tr,reenbank Mat ana L,ranite r ans ,- I"y km �' k� ®`� p �Cw„'of P7rBmill-_ I' 111 �--' Rote, • : :, .v 1yhPprt H adto�kc;aV "= ts', . r Langley i ~ . .. T Everett -� 2 p 119' i.. t, Pace -i Clinton v: ,'i..Port Ludlp:v Ooe3n tMtikdE n 21 •.Hansville w526N 5rohomish )1 ympiC •Nati. Qu, cene For, c, hi7,lt Creek n ? Sultan Gold Bar a o silver Lake , ° la Z Index Edmo ds i ? ' - N,:REchmond Highlands ) arin Richmond Beath ," � l > " Bothell uvall > , (_ I� �:: � .: o `Suquarntsh ` -Ingl good. I1 irkland �...,,. Grotto, s *: Carnation Bellevue \gall City w�. -445—.... `90 4)ssa tiah North Bend to Traryiop ?Holly 'gremertgn.',._ 9 `^f Park.'e o0 , L,II Vaal p: odsport 300', -_ �..t • Taritrya (3 Belfair Project location Maple Valley " F,edgral Way Black Diamond �!.::=!,* i `-::':Tacoma'�o Auburn Pacific �\ F) ;-' 0 , -O numclaw !fit UnivGrsttyPlac'r4 �I r u i_� V t Grezn.vater LakOWood --1'14 ...� raitie.Ridge F..- :(416f`�'``-v- o 'Carbonado Oiling o, ,; .. •;'Map Data, C 2C07; A9apOuest Iris. or AND: > :: ;< >•, t7410 .Olympia Cd 2C0' M ipOuest l c' ( ' y NEF _ , pariaway 17, t '' ; <Llk Plain 21 — . . ' -• • . • •.. Ittititt3W- •:-.,.. • . .,... I • 1 ICREAaithicifdESS,.1.', • . ' ' TAMP it) LEyEE '. ‘7--±'--- : -- - ---4- ---------i ,I:, tt Y. • - - I - PRORNSEC ...t --"" \ ..;,'' ... .z. FE.- STAG NG 1 , .......- _ \\___--- .„,-.1.,%..- PROPOSED ' -*'- • c THPOUSR PARE I t413 LOT \ ' rf:E ., RAMP TO LEVEE PROPOSED ..----s 'PORK AREA t t , \.' .1. , ., , . ..• . , zt,F1-44,11,s:TH -- TIE -1-t - ASPHAL PATFE I NOTES: era Ur arta E Xc ATE MEReOPEEO r.PEATITir, A 2H: I v OP (;ENTLEF SLOPE. DISPOSE trF Eso::E1A HATERIAL. 2. CREATE A WALL 1C1 BENCH AITH 2H:1V SLOPE. 3. CREATE A, SHALL ;" TiE ANC' .-POOR LEvEE F1:1 LP TO BENcH ELEvATION. SNAE AITR 1' TUP-UL 1. HIEROSEBE DISTURBED SOIL. 4. PLANT 1 LIFT (F 'flt.lotc OH 6 ':.ENTER Jw.;1* ABOVE OFT* ELEvATIo“. W140\1 AND F EFL. ACE 2:HAIN L INK FENCE A NECESSAFty. 6. PEYEGETATE 5Act0I0PE w1TH :-AmFLFLBLE LANESCPING. 7. sITE 114FRAsTi;WINFE N'W,T PE FETURNEU. Ti) EBB—CONSTRUCTION C.ONCITIOH E. ASPHALT PATH. At1cUS RAMPS. FENCE. ETC:- S. FARKM; LUT BAR1Im. 'RILL 6E UsEE Al ACCESS PoAD. CAM AIMS ME Manta 02a}e 747470 OtalGal eati. Vegase,tet - Greta Itrtc, taa‘SITC 3aNtaarla PROPOSED APE A RE Will oNS : 1 — 111,ataillaa 1.T. A TE A T I E INTO E',(1'.TIN; E PROPOSED THE 01..T,H F APE INC; LOT ATE A C,C.E F ANF' TO LE'IEE TIE INTO £ x 1 . 1 1 NI; ASPHALT PATH PROPOSED ...04.1t AREA. PRIIPOGED STAGING 0111210 Ca 1.1i O. VENIft• "(7-/:,///7>..-4 PROP ME 0 Tr:PK 4PE 4 LE EE PEP IF I PPF03X IMATEL FEET F Ic AsPH PATH NOT TO .11.CALE A 00000 taa....e. TtLL .414, rt.:Arum u. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT. SEATTLE CORPS OF ENGINEERS SEAT TLE . WASH !NUT ON LOWER GFLEN RI vEP FLOOD CoNTPOL PPoJE T Tur?:1L 4 LEVEE S I TE 7 iavi 44, Ma NO. Es. AFE 111C Ittart PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT REHABILITATION OF FLOOD CONTROL WORKS GRE-3-07 T 7.14. - L tut. rrrk 14T ./ / . F ;It T 'OFT Extiqr PPE :;1.411 FRE AND POST FL 000- COND T I ON roz-ruroo LRAM `41f.rt-r7Tr £AtSt / IONALI FAIN t.IFT FAN . , . . ELISTINC. LE AG. ithINNntC T LEVEE • 4P1 In L1 E11-4 1- *441.1.64.466di ',ova cEr.nrnursr. LuITENILL FINN* stosc • • - rt,c'140: — art <34.1r4 ! }NW FIrCE UILt1* Fret • ‘-r r rn-rturc PAIN 1ST rl.s:c oLis* LIFT 'et. Wirt as+. k FAT ikOSMEC- t£,ELE- is-- nos- isw, 9.41.t.'. • Th. thqs-,Ei ex7:13- ILL FCC CNA IN; f • PEPR4TU P rup:rert REF IP •-..]()140 rT [oil FoR LEVEE ::_LIFE TO THE EuILDIrr; 1 FEET REF 4 I P CiiND T ION DE P OS I T °NAL MA TER i RE1,10vED DATF AND TIME PLOTIFD 9,20,2007 1032-G7 AM DESIGN Ell": 1,\Intsc \civ \Grecu Rircr‘SITE 3 Tulswila.dos 23 PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT REHABILITATION OF FLOOD CONTROL WORKS GRE-3-07 - PP1? PP ;-Pl.r--'1,1r4::: PLATuRLI. HIE LEP : 05A 1,14H1.41)LL E E4I PflivEY V1J1 T / =7472 12P It: 114PF.1 P. FIFE WI,RAnT ,EnLLAPC7 PP R1 :AT-0E-w41 1 i I i r'r I 1 / . - '''N SPR Imy LEp/ SYSTEM - ,?)'SEC 10V E. F1IIL 1JEW oNcERGRoptio FUWER PPORO', EL - 4PPC AEU_ E J1LC EIIT RAUF • r -I I- / I /". tiblarENTRANcE RA4P--d. ij T A-,A TRANS I T ION viEw , I • i / / SOUTIKINTOIS9pTH , 4DtISI1A1 F14111 1 , . f i -....,:-...., _ --; i -__ ! i r ,......„... LEAE RERA1P 1i AFFPOKIMATELY 03t;CI FEET ilTEPS L0',5TEC- APE =,FFPNWATE: 1..Y1.71.1 krFINIONs 414, C.11190 EMT PLMp ra TV ENTRAW:E FROM 160th I-) ,Jw:N FROPWED weRly AREA EXISTIW; •AcCESS PPOPOSEC ACCESS alf.0 1011 VaaValla 114 tan: aVaile OE i 1r10. ia. ! •••■ i %cop 41. ENO ATI UT I LI TIES I IIF4sTRuc TUP.F. r ATLI* 6.,LII.F! L4VEIC:4401141: Fz1.E0 FF, rE.ussIIP, 1140 VIVAEP E..rt 4 5F-E II1ELEF. t TEN .5 , 044II4iNLE flO41k 147't 10 ATI Ti..**114 1:11:4 /1:1 10 FIIP 4 1-5. EEIT (IOW AtE, `,131.1114 I FG,tr, FILL. PF 1 3141 5! 1:414 1f41. LOT 11■HT !Uri 41 1rt14 43 444( It (1f'( HYIF4ti 141: zP.Lt KEE U. S. OW ENGINEER 1flSR1CT. SEATTLE CORPS OF ENIANEEPS SEA/ILE. WASHINGTON LOwER RIvER FLOOD ,CONTROL PPOJEcT TOKwILA LEVEE SITE 7; —1TVA VC, 1 A 24 EIJ' tlfN rFt. 4C- 1.2 oi DEW 1144,.(1.'•-‘ —12 -a Ll2T2P2X N=AN,ITIOr4 vIEw - ,LECTION SITE 7- - FFOPOSEE. REpz.; p MEP ••2 I vt‘cs itr son. ,.oj 410 1.11 L-411. ar-A.r.,.. - ' --- • I ' I 1 1 f if , I 1 '.1 1 ' f I —..- fll '1 ' 4 I I ' '''-'.711 0, 1 taIL CA* 110l1... -- l‘t ' l'• I s 1134 AL- ilfT . •-- , - ,Azt..., , 1 ., --- • - -- 1 I .-=--, ...rz- 1111 ,*,i, ,14 ..., AG b . ' 4, 1 i 1 , 1..._ ,i- „r: -. . . .... ----+ , 4.1 r`,..:, .. . i I , I- I , ,, ,..,., .1 ,114,4,. 1 I I I , I f i i _t I 1 , I I I I — - , I , •: —12 -a Ll2T2P2X N=AN,ITIOr4 vIEw - ,LECTION SITE 7- - FFOPOSEE. REpz.; p MEP ••2 -0) -16 tii.,ve.f 11 ' -I 7 FULL vIEh - SECTION 6-E- 1TE - PP. °POSED PEP4 I PIP :JP L21:1 la .221-.-2,...2.e....1-.2r•20,2 - 07, ir.art,:z..x., I 1 ...-.."-- 0 1..,_ ..., —.1.--- 1' . f 1 2 . ... 1 l 'll' I i - . -'1' tf i s i IT wet e4tp I *1.• --' N. . I 14 t , .. , ,,, .. 401 I • 4, .0 , 1..._ ,i- „r: -. . . .... ----+ .. . i I , I- I , ,, ,..,., .1 ,114,4,. 1 I I I , I f i i _t I 1 , I I I I — - , I , •: , 1 .1- 1 -0) -16 tii.,ve.f 11 ' -I 7 FULL vIEh - SECTION 6-E- 1TE - PP. °POSED PEP4 I PIP :JP L21:1 la .221-.-2,...2.e....1-.2r•20,2 - 07, • • Appendix Z: PIR Review Checklist • • PROJECT INFORMATION REPORT REHABILITATION OF FLOOD CONTROL WORKS GRE -3 -07 ATTACHMENTS 27 Carol Lumb - FW: Planting Plan • From: "Levesque, Andy" To: "Mactutis, Mike" , Date: 04/23/2008 8:44 AM Subject: FW: Planting Plan CC: "Schaefer, Ruth" , "Scheibner, Deborah" • Page 1 of 2 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 statement reflects the latest update information. I will check with Steve B. and Doug Weber on this tomorrow. file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \CAROL -L \Local Settings\ Temp\ XPgrpwise \480EFB09tuk- mail6300 -p... 06/26/2008 Page 2 of 2 To the best of my knowledge, King Countyy 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 1 00% 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 \480EFB09tuk- mail6300 -p... 06/26/2008 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development File Number Eog - Gb(a L08 - 022 LAND USE PERMIT ROUTING FORM sue. TO: Building Planning 2 Public Works J4 Fire Dept. MI _! Police Dept. Cam' Parks /Rec Project: 1 uV.,w(1c, 2.-D5' 1_0.,1/4) cc. a%✓ Update date: Address: Z Si A.- c..._5 Date transmitted: t — � Response requested by: 5-‘ Staff coordinator: Date response received: REVIEWERS: Please specify how the attached plans conflict with your ADOPTED development regulations, including citations. Be specific in describing the types of changes you want made to the plans. When referencing codes, please identify the actual requirement and plan change needed. The Planning Division review does not supplant each department's ability to administer its own regulations and permits. However, project consistency at the Planning review stage is important to minimize significant later design changes. More than minimal design changes require further Planning Commission review, even if alteration is required to satisfy a City requirement. This further review is typically a minimum 60-day process. Requirements based on SEPA (e.g., not required by an adopted development regulation) MUST identify the impact being mitigated, the policy basis for requiring mitigation, and the method used to calculate the mitigation required. Calculations of project impacts and the mitigation required (e.g., water capacity, road level of service analyses, or turning analyses) may be required of the applicant. COMMENTS (Attach additional comment sheets and/or support materials as needed.) Plan check date: Comments Update date: prepared by: 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 FOR PUBLIC 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 decision on this project, please submit this request to DCD by May 8, 2008 as well. 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 Repairal0A.doc April 7, 2008 City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor Department of Community Development MEMORANDUM NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION TO: Ryan Larson, Senior Engineer, Surface Water FM: Carol Lumb, Senior P}ai ner RE: E08 -006, SEPA and L08 -022 for 205 Levee Repairs Jack Pace, Director 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 hifn .Cnnthrpntpr Rnnlpvarrl .Cuitp #lnn • Tukwila Wachinotnn OR1RR • -Phnna• 91M_A21_2A9Y1 • An... 911,4_A21_2AAC •-• • •••••••'. 205 Levee Repairs, Site 6 Elmwma••5(")1( CityGIS N Copyright (D2006 All Rights Reserved. The information contained herein is the proprietary property of the contributor supplied under license and rrigy not be approved except as licensed by Digital Map Products. /4 H ., , ''''' ' ,•,. , ,",, .4 V'.,,ery, , ..> ' t'' .0 4' ■,,,,,, ' .,,. , K 'ttt tiliati ".• 205 Levee Repairs, Site 0 1.111".1111m" 45" CityGIS N Copyright @ 2006 All Rights Reserved. The information contained herein is the proprietary property of the contributor supplied under license n d may not be approved except as licensed by Digital Map Products. • • Preliminary Environmental Checklist WAC 197 -11 -960 Environmental Checklist APR 0 3 2008 O L p� N Purpose of Checklist: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21 C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of Proposed Project: Tukwila 205 Levee Repair 2. Name of Applicant: City of Tukwila, Public Works Department 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 6300 Southcehter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 (206) 433 -0179 Contact: Ryan Larson, P.E. 4. Date checklist prepared: March 10, 2008 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Tukwila 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): It is anticipated that the project will be advertised for construction in May 2008. Construction will begin in July 2008 and should be completed within 90 to 120 calendar days. The exact construction schedule will be determined as the design and permitting processes are finalized. All work below the Ordinary High Water Mark will be completed within the WDFW fish window. 1 • • 7. Plans for future additions, expansion or further activity related to or connected with this proposal: As other levee repairs are needed, they will tie into this completed project. 8. Environmental information that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal: The US Army Corps of Engineers is preparing an Environmental Assessment (EA) and Biological Assessment (BA) for the project. 9. Applications that are pending for governmental approval of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by the proposal: Parcel # 3623049017 and 3623049094 are owned by Wells Fargo and are at the City for site improvements. 10. List of governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for the proposal: The following permits are anticipated: Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA), Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 11. Brief, complete description of the proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site: This proposal consists of two (2) project locations that were identified by the US Army Corps of Engineers as requiring immediate levee reconstruction to provided 100 -year flood protection to the Tukwila Urban Center. The two sites are; Site 3 with approximately 900' of levee repair work, and Site 5 approximately with 1,100' levee repair work. See attached plan for further detail. 12. Location of the proposal, including the street address, if any, and section, township and range, if known; a legal description, site plan, vicinity map and topographic map, if reasonably available: The two project sites are located within the City of Tukwila at the following locations: Site 3: 6801 S. 180th St, Parcel Nos. 3623049017, 3623049079, 3623049087 Site 5: 18000 Andover Park East, Parcel Nos. 3523049121, 3523049055, 3523049116 2 B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (underline one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate slope percentage)? 60% along the face of the levee c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? Specify the classification of agricultural soils and note any prime farmland. The levee is constructed with engineered soils. Other soils consist of river deposits (silts, sands). d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. This project is to stabilize an existing failing levee. e. Describe the purpose, type and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. The purpose of this project is to reconstruct the Tukwila 205 to a stable slope geometry and add toe rock. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction or use? If so, generally describe. g. Yes, approximately 4 acres will be cleared and graded for this project. Construction will be completed during the dry, late summer season using appropriate erosion control best management practices and minimizing disturbed areas. about what percentage of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? No net new impervious surfaces are proposed. The existing trail will be reconstructed and covers approximately 10% of the site. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion or other impacts to the earth, if any. 3 • • Erosion and sedimentation will be controlled through the implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) as described in the King County Surface Water Design Manual, and in accordance with City of Tukwila requirements. Disturbed areas will be restored to match existing conditions, which may consist hydro- seeding disturbed areas, installation of erosion control fabric, planting shrubs, and /or planting trees. 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e. dust. Automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? Generally describe and give approximate quantities, if known. Minor dust and internal combustion engine emissions will be in the air only during construction. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odors that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to the air, if any: Best management practices will be implemented during construction activities to reduce and control dust and air emissions. These practices may include covering soil stockpiles, sweeping or washing paved surfaces, minimizing exposed areas, and using construction machinery equipped with emission control devices. 3. WATER a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site, including year -round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. The project sites are located along the west bank of the Green River. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Yes, the site is located within 200 feet of the Green River. 4 • 3) Estimate the amount of dredge and fill material that would be removed from or placed in surface water or wetlands, and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Approximately 30,000 cubic yards of material will be removed from the two sites. This material primarily consists of the existing levee material. Approximately 21,000 cubic yards of material would be placed to form the new levee consisting of engineered levee material and Class IV riprap. It is anticipated that some of the existing levee material will be reused to construct the new levee; all other materials will be transported from an offsite approved source. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose and approximate quantities, if known. No. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year flood plain? If so, note location on the site plan. The project is located within the Green River Floodway. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. b. Ground 1) Will ground water be withdrawn or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose and approximate quantities, if known. No. 2) Describe any waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources (e. g., domestic sewage, industrial, agricultural, etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served, or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None proposed. c. Water Runoff (including storm water) 5 • 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method(s) of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Will this runoff water be discharged or flow into surface waters or ground water? If so, describe. The only source of storm water runoff will be what falls onto the construction site. Water will infiltrate and could flow into the Green river. BMP's will be used to reduce potential impacts. 2) Could waste materials or toxic materials enter ground or surface waters during or as a result of this proposal? If yes, generally describe. Excavation materials could enter the surface waters through erosion. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground and runoff water impacts, if any: Appropriate BMPs will be installed to prevent sediment transport into the Green River. 4. PLANTS a. Underline types of vegetation found on the site: x deciduous trees: other x conifer trees: x shrubs: other wet soil plants: other water plants: _x_ other types of vegetation: alder, maple, birch, black cottonwood, willow fir, cedar, pine, other blackberry, salmonberry, vine maple, buttercup, rushes, sedge, grasses, water lily, milfoil, eelgrass, other grasses, lawn, ivy. b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Approximately 4.0 acres will be disturbed by construction. Vegetation to be removed consists primarily of non - native grass species and blackberry. c. List threatened or endangered species or critical habitat known to be on or near the site: None known d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: • • All disturbed areas will be hydroseeded following construction. Willow layers will be used to stabilize slopes. A mid -slope bench will be incorporated into the design to allow a location where trees may be planted at a later date. 5. ANIMALS a. Underline any birds and animals that have been observed on or near the site, or are known to be on or near the site: x invertebrates: insects, mollusks, other x fish: salmon, trout, bass, herring, shellfish, other amphibians: frogs, salamanders, toads, other reptiles: snakes, lizards, turtles, other x birds: songbirds, owls, hawks, eagles, heron, other x mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, rabbits, rodents, other b. List any threatened or endangered species or critical habitat known to be on or near the site. Chinook Salmon, bull trout, and Puget Sound steelhead c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, describe. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any. The reconstructed levee will be set back 5 feet from its current location, the maximum slope angle will be reduced to 2:1, a mid -slope bench will be provided that will allow for the planting of trees, and large woody debris will be added along the toe of the levee. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. The completed project will not require any energy. b. Would the project affect the use (potential or actual) of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. 7 • • c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans for this proposal? List any other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any. None. 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals or hazardous wastes, risk of explosion or fire that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. Yes, accidental fuel or oil spills from the heavy equipment could occur during construction. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None known. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Repairs and refueling of construction equipment would be done away from the river and storm conveyance facilities. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect the project (e.g., traffic, heavy equipment, operation, industrial, other)? None. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by, or associated with the project, on a short -term or a long -term basis (for example, traffic, construction, operation, other)? State what hours noise would come from the site. Short-term noise impacts from construction operations are anticipated during work hours (typically 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM) for the duration of construction. No long -term impacts are anticipated. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Construction equipment will be equipped with mufflers and all operations will be in accordance with City of Tukwila noise ordinances. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE 8 • • a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The project locations are along the Green River. The adjacent land use is light manufacturing. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. The site areas have a historic agricultural history but have not been used for this purpose for approximately 35 years. c. Describe any structures on the site. The sites contain the existing Tukwila 205 Levee. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? The existing Tukwila 205 Levee will be removed. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Tukwila Urban Center f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Tukwila Urban Center g. What is the current shoreline master program designation of the site, if any? Urban h. Has any part of the site been classified as an environmentally sensitive area? If so, specify. Not known. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? None. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any. 9 • . • None. I. Proposed measures to ensure the project is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans in the area. None. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many housing units would the project provide, if any? Indicate whether high, middle or low income housing. None. b. Approximately how many housing units would be eliminated, if any? Indicate whether high, middle or low income housing. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None. 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The levee will be reconstructed at its current height, which is approximately 10 feet above the adjacent property grade. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? None. 10 b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any. None. 12. RECREATION a. What designated or informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? The Levee at Site 3 has a paved access road that is used as a regional trail system. b. Would the project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. Yes, the trail will be closed for approximately 3 months throughout the construction project. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation including any recreational opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant. A trail detour will be provided. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any sites, structures or objects listed on, or proposed for national, state or local preservation registers known to be on or near to the site? If so, generally describe. None known. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historical, archaeological, scientific or cultural artifacts of importance known to be on or near the site. None known. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any. 11 None. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The project sites are located off of Sperry Drive and S. 180th Street. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? N/A c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? The project will not create nor eliminate any parking. d. Will the proposal require any new roads, streets or improvements to existing roads or streets (not including driveways)? If so, generally describe, and indicate whether public or private. No. e. Will the project use (or be in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated as a result of the project? Indicate when peak traffic would occur, if known. None. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any. None proposed. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (e.g., fire and police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. 12 • • No. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None proposed. 16. UTILITIES a. Underline utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, telephone, refuse service, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. b. What utility service will be needed by the project? Who (which utility) will provide the service, and what utility construction will be required on or in the immediate vicinity of the site? None needed. 13 C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead - agency is� relying on them to make its.decision. Signature: Date submitted: 3/9/48 The following checked items are included with the Checklist: X Vicinity Map X Project Plans SEPA 205 Repair 3/21/08 14 RECEIVED APR 0 3 2008 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT City of Tukwila Department of Community Development File Number Avg -- 00G, Log - oza LAND USE PERMIT ROUTING FORM TO: 1 Building Planning L Public Works Fire Dept. rE! Police Dept. ! Parks /Rec Project: comments Address: Z s; J. L� 7 Date transmitted: 5-1-°1 Response requested by: 5- a Staff coordinator: Date response received: REVIEWERS: Please specify how the attached plans conflict with your ADOPTED development regulations, including citations. Be specific in describing the types of changes you want made to the plans. When referencing codes, please identify the actual requirement and plan change needed. The Planning Division review does not supplant each department's ability to administer its own regulations and permits. However, project consistency at the Planning review stage is important to minimize significant later design changes. More than minimal design changes require further Planning Commission review, even if alteration is required to satisfy a City requirement. This further review is typically a minimum 60-day process. Requirements based on SEPA (e.g., not required by an adopted development regulation) MUST identify the impact being mitigated, the policy basis for requiring mitigation, and the method used to calculate the mitigation required. Calculations of project impacts and the mitigation required (e.g., water capacity, road level of service analyses, or turning analyses) may be required of the applicant. _30 1 COMMENTS S` (Attach additional comment sheets and/or support materials as needed.) 5- c3 I l ow s s kP S? 6e Ada couvn'i ` V c6 ..reAc, Sync -3 4 S i 1-e 3 - S Gi Vr•e. o (a 4l , 0.c_ r co m vr-e Rs ci b o -- o )) j I OD (AJ % S S1A 0w" 809^S - Re p + -- As sd S Pac f j P v\c1,, 1q 4\1,,, 5 �� O �2 P� — 1 'Ca a VI is Plan check date: ` comments `) Update date: v r 7 6---9-08 prepared by: SG (-�% •. 41 City of Tukwila Endangered Species Act Screening Checklist Date: / o8 Applicant Name: 1 ` 4 / I/Oit/ /e) / 0,‘ 7/.n // Street Address: (23Q) 2/>7 zzvz) City, State, Zip: /i '%/ /? h//7 Nl88 Telephone: Directions This Screening Checklist has been designed to evaluate the potential for your project to result in potential "take" of Chinook salmon, Coho salmon, or Cutthroat trout as defined by Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act. The checklist includes a series of "Yes" or "No" questions about your project, organized into four parts. Starting with Part A on Page 1, read each question carefully, circle "Yes" or "No," and proceed to the next question as directed by the checklist. To answer these questions, you may need to refer to site plans, grading and drainage plans, critical areas studies, or other documents you have prepared for your project. The City will evaluate your responses to determine if "take" is indicated. RECEIVED ' APR 0 3 2008 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT P: \Planning Forms \ Applications \ SEPAApp-6-06.doc December 4, 2006 s. • • Part A: Please review and answer each question carefully. Consider all phases of your project including, but not limited to, construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 1 -0 Will the project require any form of grading? Grading is defined as any excavating, filling, clearing, or creation of impervious surface, or any combination thereof, which alters the existing ground surface of the earth (TMC 18.06.370). Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2 -0 Continue to Question 1 -1 (Page 3) 2 -0 Will the project require any form of clearing? Clearing means the removal or causing to be removed, through either direct or indirect actions, any vegetation from a site (18.06.145). Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -0 Continue to Question 2 -1 (Page 4) 3-0 Will the project require work, during any time of the project, below the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers or in wetlands? Ordinary high water mark is the mark that is found by examining the bed and banks of a stream and ascertaining where the presence and action of waters are so common and usual as to distinctly mark the soil from that of the abutting upland, in respect to vegetation (see TMC Chapter 18.06, Page 18 -15). Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 4 -0 o- Continue to Question 3 -1 (Page 5) 4 -0 Will the project result in the processing or handling, storage, or treatment of hazardous substances? This does not include the proper use of fuel stored in a vehicle's fuel tank. Hazardous substances are any liquid, solid, gas, or sludge, including any material, substance, product, commodity, or waste, regardless of quantity, that exhibits the characteristics or criteria of hazardous waste as defined by Washington Administrative Code 173 -303 (TMC 18.06.385). This includes fuel or other chemicals stored on -site during construction. Please circle appropriate response. N - Continue to Question 5 -0 YES - Continue to Question 5 =0 5 -0 : Will the project result in the withdrawal, injection, or interception of groundwater? Examples of projects that may affect groundwater include, but are not limited to: construction of a new well, change in water withdrawals from an existing well, projects involving prolonged construction dewatering, projects installing French drains or interceptor trenches, and sewer lines. For the purpose of this analysis, projects that require a geotechnical report pursuant to the requirements of TMC 18.45.060 or would require a geotechnical report if not exempt should answer Yes. Please circle appropriate response. 1- Continue to Question 6 -0 • YES - Continue to Question 6 -0 P: \Planning Forms \ Applications \ SEPAApp-6-06.doc RECEIVFD APR 0 3 2008' DEVELOPMENT E December 4, 2006 Part A (continued) • City of TukwiSA Screening Checklist 6 -0 Will the project involve landscaping or re- occurring outdoor maintenance that includes the regular use of fertilizers, pesticides, or herbicides? This does not include the one -time use of transplant fertilizers. Landscaping means natural vegetation such as trees, shrubs, groundcover, and other landscape materials arranged in a manner to produce an aesthetic effect appropriate for the use of the land (TMC 18.06.490). For the purpose of this analysis, this includes the establishment of new lawn or grass. Please circle appropriate response. Checklist Complete YES — Checklist Complete Part B: Please answer each question below for projects that include grading. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 1 -1 Will the project involve the modification of a watercourse bank or bank of the Green /Duwamish or Black Rivers between the ordinary high water mark and top of bank? This includes any projects that will require grading on any slope leading to a river or stream, but will not require work below the ordinary high water mark. Work below the ordinary high water mark is covered in Part C. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 1 -2 - Continue to Question 1 -2 1 -2 Could the construction, operation, or maintenance of the project result in sediment transport off site or increased rates of erosion and /or sedimentation in watercourses, the Green/Duwamish rivers, or the Black River? Most projects that involve grading have the potential to result in increased erosion and/or sedimentation as a result of disturbances to the soil or earth. If your project involves grading and you have not prepared a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan specifically designed to retain 100 percent of the runoff (including during construction) from impervious surface or disturbed soils, answer Yes to this question. If your project is normally exempt under the Tukwila Municipal Code and would not require the preparation of a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan, BUT may still result in erosion or sediment transport off site or beyond the work area, answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 1 -3 Continue to Question 1 -3 1 -3 Will the project result in the construction of new impervious surfaces? Impervious surfaces include those hard surfaces which prevent or restrict the entry of water into the soil in the manner that such water entered the soils under natural conditions prior to development; or a hard surface area that causes water to run off the surface in greater quantity or at an increased rate of flow from the flow presented under natural conditions prior to development. Such areas include, but are not limited to, rooftops, asphalt or concrete paving, compacted surfaces, or other surfaces that similarly affect the natural infiltration or runoff patterns existing prior to development (TMC 18.06.445). Please circle appropriate response. Continue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 1 -4 • Part B (continued) City of Tukwila ESA Screening Checklist • 1 -4 Will your project generate stormwater from the creation of impervious surfaces that will not be infiltrated on site? For the purpose of this analysis, infiltration includes the use of a stormwater treatment and management system intended to contain all stormwater on site by allowing it to seep into pervious surface or through other means to be introduced into the ground. If your project involves the construction of impervious surface and does not include the design of a stormwater management system specifically designed to infiltrate stormwater, answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2) Part C: Please review each question below for projects that include clearing. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 2 -1 Will the project involve clearing within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 2) OID- Continue to Question 2 -2 2 -2 Will the project involve clearing of any trees within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? A tree is defined by TMC 18.06.845 as any self - supporting woody plant, characterized by one main trunk, with a potential diameter - breast - height of 2 inches or more and potential minimum height of 10 feet. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2 -3 43ar0 Continue to Question 2 -3 2 -3 Will the project involve clearing of any evergreen trees from within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis evergreen means any tree that does not regularly lose all its leaves or needles in the fall. Please circle appropriate response. 0- Continue to Question 2 -4 YES - Continue to Question 2 -4 2 -4 Will the project involve clearing within 100 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 1) - Continue to Question 2 -5 2 -5 Will the project involve clearing within 40 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green /Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 2) YE - Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 2) RECEIVED APR 0 3 2008 �Q MVN(TY d'�'rV�dL,.' Eby �.; r City of TukwitiSA Screening Checklist Part D: Please review each question below for projects that include work below the ordinary high water mark of watercourses or the Duwamish /Green or Black Rivers or in wetlands. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to, construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 3 -1 Will the project involve the direct alteration of the channel or bed of a watercourse, the Green /Duwamish rivers, or Black River? For the purpose of this analysis, channel means the area between the ordinary high water mark of both banks of a stream, and bed means the stream bottom substrates, typically within the normal wetted -width of a stream. This includes both temporary and permanent modifications. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -2 YE - Continue to Question 3 -2 3 -2 Will the project involve any physical alteration to a watercourse or wetland connected to the Green/Duwamish River? For the purpose of this analysis, "connected to the river means" flowing into via a surface connection or culvert, or having other physical characteristics that allow for access by salmonids. This includes impacts to areas such as sloughs, side channels, remnant oxbows, ditches formed from channelized portions of natural watercourses or any area that may provide off channel rearing habitat for juvenile fish from the Duwamish River. This includes both temporary construction alterations and permanent modifications. Watercourses or wetlands draining to the Green/Duwamish River that have a hanging culvert, culvert with a flap gate, diversion, or any entirely man -made or artificial structure that precludes fish access should answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. - Continue to Question 3 -3 YES - Continue to Question 3 -3 3 -3 Will the project result in the construction of a new structure or hydraulic condition that could be a barrier to salmonid passage within the watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, a barrier means any artificial or human modified structure or hydraulic condition that inhibits the natural upstream or downstream movement of salmonids, including both juveniles and adults. Please circle appropriate response. 4 Continue to Question 3 -4 YES - Continue to Question 3 -4 3 -4 Will the project involve a temporary or permanent change in the cross - sectional area of a watercourse or the Green /Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, the cross - sectional area is defined as a profile taken from the ordinary high water mark on the right bank to the ordinary high water mark on the left bank. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -5 YE Continue to Question 3 -5 3 -5 Will the project require the removal of debris from within the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, debris includes, but is not limited to fallen trees, logs, shrubs, rocks, piles, rip -rap, submerged metal, and broken concrete or other building materials. Projects that would require debris removal • • City of Tukwila ESA Screening Checklist • from a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers as part of a maintenance activity should answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -6 Continue to Question 3 -6 3 -6 Will the project result in impacts to watercourses or wetlands that have a surface connection to another watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers but do not contain habitat conditions that support salmonid use? Such areas may include, but not be limited to hillside seeps and wetlands isolated from the watercourse or river that have a surface water connection to the watercourse or river but are not assessable, nor would be assessable to salmonids under natural conditions. Wetlands with a "functions and values" rating for baseflow /groundwater support of 9 and. above (or moderate) as described in Cooke (1996) should be included. Please circle appropriate response. Continue to Question 3 -7 YES - Continue to Question 3 -7 3 -7 Will the project include the construction of artificial waterways or wetlands connected to a watercourse containing salmonids? For the purpose of this analysis, the construction of artificial waterways or wetlands includes wetlands, channels, sloughs, or other habitat feature created to enhance wildlife use, particularly waterfowl use, or may be attractive to wildlife, particularly waterfowl. Please circle appropriate response. - Continue to Question 3 -8 YES - Continue to Question 3 -8 3 -8 Will the project include bank stabilization? For the purpose of this analysis, bank stabilization includes, but is not limited to, rip -rap, rock, log, soil, or vegetated revetments, concrete structures, or similar structures. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 4 -0 (Page 2) (y1.§)- Continue to Question 4 -0 (Page 2) RECEIVED APR 0 3 20001 GOMMUNIIY ZIEVELCIPMENT • • 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 2OfJ 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. B R I T I S H C O L U M B I A P.L 84 -99 LEVEE REHABILITATION TUKWILA2O5: SITES3 & 5, GREENRIVER DRAWING INDEX SHEET PLATE TITLE NO. NO. 1 G -001 TITLE, DRAWING INDEX, VICINITY AND AREA MAPS 2 C -OOI CONSTRUCTION NOTES 3 C -101 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 1 6 C-104 TUKWILA 205 - SITE 5 SITE PLAN 2 7 C -105 TUKWILA 205 - SITE 3 SITE PLAN 1 8 C -106 TUKWILA 205 - SITE 3 SITE PLAN 2 9 C-301 TUKWILA 205 - SITE 5 TYPICAL SECTION 1 10 C -302 TUKWILA 205 - SITE 5 TYPICAL SECTION 2 11 C -303 TUKWILA 205 - SITE 3 TYPICAL SECTION 12 C -304 SITE 3 CROSS SECTIONS 13 C -305 SITE 5 CROSS SECTIONS 14 C -501 DETAILS 1 15 C -502 DETAILS 2 16 C -503 DETAILS 3 BELLINGHAM SEATTLE W A S H I N G TON oWALLA WALLA 0 i DEPOT VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE P N C 1972 FY 08 GRE -3 -07 FINAL SUBMITTAL 100% 1111111 Mil NOT ALL UTILITIES SHOWN ON PLANS CALL 2 WORKING DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG 1- 800 - 424 -5555 IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22' X 34' IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. Plate number: G -oo1 Sheet 1 of 16 1 1 2 (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 MEASURES AS NEEDED TO PREVENT THE DISCHARGE OR ACCUMULATION OF SEDIMENT INTO THE RIVER, ADJACENT SWALES, CATCH BASINS AND STORM DRAINS AND OFF -SITE. ACCUMULATION OF SEDIMENT IN ADJACENT SWALES OR STORM DRAINS WILL BE MONITORED DAILY AND CLEANED TO ENSURE CONTINUED SERVICE THROUGHTOUT CONSTRUCTION. 3. CLEAR AND GRUB PROJECT SITE AND AREAS IN VICINITY OF CONSTRUCTION ACCESS RAMP, INCLUDING REMOVAL OF EXISTING TREES NEEDED TO FACILITATE ACCESS RAMP CONSTRUCTION. DISPOSE OF VEGETATION AND OTHER UNSUITABLE MATERIALS IN AN APPROVED AND PERMITTED OFFSITE LOCATION. (2) RESTORATION, TRAIL RESURFACING, AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION WORK AREAS. 1. CONSTRUCT GRAVEL TRAIL ALONG TOP OF LEVEE AT SITE 5. CONSTRUCT ASPHALT PAVED TRAIL ALONG TOP OF LEVEE AT SITE 3 AND RESTORE ASPHALT ON ALL DISTURBED AREAS, INCLUDING TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION WORK 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. 4. RESTORE ACCESS ROAD CONDITIONS AND FEATURES (FENCING, GATES, ETC...) TO PRE CONSTRUCTION CONDITIONS. GENERAL 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. 3. HEAVY EQUIPMENT WILL OPERATE EITHER FROM THE TOP OF BANK, OR FROM THE MID -SLOPE BENCH WELL ABOVE THE WATERLINE. THE EXCAVATOR BUCKET WILL ENTER THE WATER ONLY TO EXCAVATE MATERIAL TO ALLOW PLACEMENT OF ROCK AND LOG STRUCTURES. 4. ALL GAS AND OIL CONTAINERS FOR SMALL EQUIPMENT SHALL BE SAFELY AND SECURELY STORED IN UTILITY VEHICLES. 5. CONTRACTOR MAY PROPOSE AN ALTERNATIVE LWD ANCHORING METHOD TO THE GOVERNMENT FOR APPROVAL (SEE SPECIFICATIONS). 6. PERMANENT ACCESS RAMPS DOWN TO MID SLOPE BENCH SHALL MEET REQUIREMENTS OF EM 385-1 -1. EROSION CONTROL AND VEGETATION NOTES 1. VEGETATION TO BE PRESERVED AND CLEARING LIMITS WILL BE FLAGGED IN THE FIELD PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION BY THE PROJECT ENGINEER OR THE PROJECT ECOLOGIST. 2. EROSION CONTROL HYDROSEED MIX WILL BE USED TO ESTABLISH INITIAL GROUND COVER ON ALL DISTURBED AREAS, USING WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION HYDROSEED MIX. CONCRETE RETAINING WALL CONSTRUCTION NOTES 1. MINIMUM CONCRETE COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH • 4,000 PSI AT 28 DAYS. SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR ADDITIONAL INFO. 2. STEEL REINFORCEMENT SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A615, GRADE 60. 3. DESIGN DATA EQUIVALENT FLUID PRESSURE • 53 PCF SATURATED SOIL UNIT WT • 130 PCF EQUIVALENT PASSIVE SOIL PRESSURE - 317 PCF COEFFICIENT OF FRICTION ASSUMED - 0.31 SURCHARGE LOAD EQUIVALENT TO 3 FEET OF SOIL ALLOWABLE SOIL BEARING - 2000 PSF 3 ABBREVIATIONS AC ASPHALTIC CONCRETE ALIGN ALIGNMENT APPROX APPROXIMATELY Q AT q CENTERLINE CF CUBIC FEET CFS CF PER SECOND DBH DIAMETER BREAST HEIGHT E EAST EL, ELEV ELEVATION EXIST EXISTING FT, ' FEET GA GAGE IN, " INCHES KCFS THOUSAND CFS LWD LARGE WOODY DEBRIS N NORTH NTS NOT TO SCALE OHW ORDINARY HIGH WATER PC POINT OF CURVATURE PI POINT OF INTERSECTION POB POINT OF BEGINNING POE POINT OF END PT POINT OF TANGENCY R RADIUS RM RIVER MILE S SOUTH STA STATION TYP TYPICAL U/S UPSTREAM WSEL WATER SURFACE ELEVATION W WEST US Anny Corps of Engineers Sean% Mario 1 8 NOT ALL UTILITIES SHOWN ON PLANS, CALL 2 WORKING DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG 1- 800 - 424 -5555 IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22' X 34' IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. I 1 0 0 z c0 2 N N N . I- 17) 33 A z O J P . w a 0 W v r C V W 2 o K o Z N Z W o r V N 6 SEATTLE. WASHINGTON Prepared by I 0 zn rW Q r V =m N Q � W an W!n W W W rn Cn a,N 0 0 O Q a3 Y CONSTRUCTION NOTES WASHINGTON rn 0 a KING COUNTY Plate number, C -001 Sheet 2 of 16 z 0 0 z 0 0 0 w J I a J 0 0 0 J m N O W • J z 0 N 0 19 -JUN -2008 09.32 PROJECT F00TP14INT - CENTERLINE OF • RAILROAD ,r CENTERLINE OF LEVEE PROJECT FOOTPRINT ACCESS ROAD N 163,200 5 NOTES: 1. MAPPING COMPILED FROM FEBRUARY 2006 AERIAL PHOTOS. MAPPING BY 3Di 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 FOR PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE OBTAINED /PERFORMED BY CITY OF TUKWILA PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 3. TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT EXTENDS 30'RIVERWARD FOR LWD PLACEMENT ALONG TOE DURING CONSTRUCTION. /// ACCESS PROPOSED STAGING AREA (TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT) ACCESS ROAD TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT PROJECT FOOTPRINT 80' 40' 0 1" - 80 11-11-(1-i )-1 80' 160' US Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 27 X 34' IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. I t t 1- aw G z 0 21 W -� SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 0 0 z 0 t9 0 W W w -J 2) N CC J CO CC w W W W J m N K • CC W O W U Li) La.1 Q i w I— n O Cr) N J 0. W z LJ �0 H WASHINGTON KING COUNTY Plate number C -101 Sheet 3 of 16 18- JUN -2008 15,33 1 S. 180TH ST. O O 2 S. 180TH ST. 3 1 4 S. 180TH ST. rn _CREAT.E_ACCESS •_RAMP TO LEVEE ..ACCESS tj N 163,800 PROPOS p. STAGIN TAGW EA ( TEMPORARY. ' WORK= •:. AREA' EASEMENT) PROJECT FOOTPRINT CENTERLINE _ OF_LEVEE.•' N '163, 500 ACCESS WITHIN EXISTING PERMANENT. ;. '''LEVEE EASEMENT • PROJECT ...FOOTPRINT • BENCH -N- 163,200 5 NOTES: 1. MAPPING COMPILED FROM 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 REQUIREMENTS AND UTILITY RELOCATIONS NECESSARY FOR PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE OBTAINED /PERFORMED BY CITY OF TUKWILA PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 3. TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT EXTENDS 30'RIVERWARD FOR LWD PLACEMENT ALONG TOE DURING CONSTRUCTION. ACCESS PROPOSED STAGING AREA (TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT) EXISTING PERMANENT LEVEE EASEMENT TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT PROJECT FOOTPRINT 50' 25' 0 50' 100' 1" - 50 Ir+f+t+f'F+ US Army Corps of Engineers Snub District IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22' X 34' IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. I t rn N r` N L.11 rr o Z .o o J • rn W z Q cn O r c.J 1f7 (n- o N J Q J_ UJ W W Y D F- WASHINGTON a KING COUNTY Plate number. C -102 Sheet 4 of 16 z 0 w 0 N tS 0 w --W m N .2 C M w J m N W O w 0 >> i J w z 0 N 0 18- JUN -2008 15.34 R 150.00' L 3.99' \.. 00' De.ta 1°31'32" -Doi' 38°11'50" A 2 3 MATCH LINE TO PLATE C -104 4 R 120.00' L 11.46' T 5.73' Delta/ 5°28') Dc ,%7°44147" E 1.289.300 E 1,288,955.71 D 10' ACCESS., CENTERLINE OF LEVEE A N 163,200 R 150.00' L 5.85' T 2.93' Delta 2 °14'05" Dc 38 °11'50" PROJECT FOOTPRINT N 163.373.83 E 1,288,938.15. • • EXISTING LEVEE TO RETAINING WALL TRANSITION, SEE PLAN AND PROFILE DETAILS ON PLATE C -503 BENCH BEG! 'Sill 'S ; TYPICA(J. �I SECTION: 1 (LAYBACK WITH LWD); SEE PLATE • ;C -. 01,(STATION;1.30) • h�TEMPORARY WORK AREA / EASEMENT; N 163,154.05 E 1,288,921.84 BEGIN RETAINING WALL AT STATION 0.00, SEE PLATE C -502, RETAINING WALL BETWEEN STATION 0.00 AND 8.50 OPTIONAL BID ITEM i 1 . • AT STATION,.QQ00 • : TRANSITION FOR 130' FROM EXISTING: LEVEE 'PRISM INTO i$ITE 5 TYP. .0. SECTION' 1, 1EEE PLATE C-.301 • (NO LWD FOR ?30')' .5 NOTES: 1. MAPPING COMPILED FROM FEBRUARY 2006 AERIAL PHOTOS. MAPPING BY 3D1 WEST FOR KING COUNTY 0NR 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. FOR SITE 5 STAGING AND ACCESS, SEE PLATE C -101. 3. LEVEE TOP ELEVATION AT THE UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM ENDS OF THE PROJECT SHALL MATCH THE EXISTING GRADE ELEVATIONS. A CONTINUOUS SLOPE BETWEEN THE UPSTREAM AND'DOWNSTREM END ELEVATIONS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED FOR THE FINAL GRADE OF THE LEVEE BASED ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE LEVEE. 30' 15' 0 30' 60' 1" • 30 11-11-i FtHI -I US Army Corps of Engineers Santa aGstrin IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22• X 34' IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. I s S N N N • 1— 1— oW z .0 aW o J SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 0 Zn O W a¢ r0 mJ G: S rz W W w • J M m'n o N co _J a3 LL-1 F- (7) I� Q i/ ED a. Ld < 1-- _J N 1— 0 2 KING COUNTY Plate number, C -103 Sheet 5 of 16 0 N 0 0 w --6 N - J a w W W CO 0 N ¢ W 2 W ¢ 0 L) 0 0 E 2008 15.35 2 0 3 S. 180TH ST. J,IO —\ 2F:T.lT O PROPOSED ..ACCESS...- —FROM 180TH C? �d •¢y .SAS LTOE FACE COtc? V 28.1' TOE OF I.,54., • �a1e� -- -:- -- TOP OF �-... 4 TOP FACE OF CIAO • SEE GENERAL •' 2E.1' .G' SITE PLAN FOR �"• CONTINUATION OF ACCESS ACECONC RETW eco r• TOP OF' (cEVEE. .•� - _•x...332'.' END -WING L1KACC2-1- N 164,181.25 K E.1;289,133.43 vs.i.• SEE RETAINING WALL? DETAILS, PLATE C -502 BEGIN. WING WALL N-164,187.35 E. 1,289,158.89 E, RETAINING WALL DETAILS, PLATE C -502, PROTECT EXISTING OUTFALL EDGE s ' 'ATERNEG 13 1' N 164,215.60 E 1,289,209.34 — r N..l6`4.100 RETAINING WALL OPTIONAL BID ITEM, STATION 0.00 TO 8.50, SEE PLATE C -502 1.4 .70 1,289,096:8 R L , Del46,�"•22 °5.8..': .':'Dc•, 212 °'5 7'.2.8 -;; R 100.00' L 2.64' T 1.32' N 16 14 E 1,289,010 17 PROJECT FOOTPRINT / / / / TEMPORARY' BEGIN TRANSIT.I.ON BACK TO EXISTING •LEVEE PRISM. WITH RETAINING, WALL (NO LWD), • ' TRANSIT,ION •'LENGTH ALONG , BENCH 130'; SEE PLATE' • C -3027 (STATION 9.60)•'. WORK AREA. j EASEMENT • _. L R 50..00' _L-3143' T Delta .305'53" Dc 114°-55'30" -' 10' ACCESS BENCH E 1,288,982.99 CENTERLINE- OF LEVEE SEE NOTE: 4 (T.YP.) w-,._ _+•`•. _ r__ s-- �.:.,....� _ ._ TOE OF LE R 20..00' 3.73' Delta 21 °09'01" Dc 2 -86 °. 28' 44 " tr_ 01 E 1,288,950.96 4 6' • E7'.. OF A'ATk•BVEG 132 1. N 163,800 R 150.00' L 3.82' T 1.91' ADelta 1 °27'39" Dc 38 °11'50" N E 1,288,953.74 L I_ MATCH LINE TO PLATE C -103 BEGIN SITE; 5 T,YPICAL SECTION 2 (LAYBACK WITH RETAINING' WALL. NO LWD), SEE PLATEc -302, (STATION 6.95) Lu ce ce2 W BEGIN TRANSITION' BETWEEN SITE 5 TYPICAL' SECTION 1 AND TYPICAL SECTION 2 „NO LWD, MINIMUM TRANSITION LENGTH '- 100' SEE' PLATES C -301 AND C -302 ; (STATION 5.70) 5 NOTES: 1. MAPPING COMPILED FROM FEBRUARY 2006 AERIAL PHOTOS. MAPPING BY 3Di 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: NAVD88. MAP HAS NOT BEEN COMPREHENSIVELY VERIFIED BY FIELD CHECKS. 2. FOR SITE 5 STAGING AND ACCESS, SEE PLATE C -101. 3. LEVEE TOP ELEVATION AT THE UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM ENDS OF THE PROJECT SHALL MATCH THE EXISTING GRADE ELEVATIONS. A CONTINUOUS SLOPE BETWEEN THE UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM END ELEVATIONS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED FOR THE FINAL GRADE OF THE LEVEE BASED ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE LEVEE. 4. SURVEY CROSS SECTIONS BASED ON MAPPING COMPILED FROM FIELD SURVEY PERFORMED FEB- MAR 2008. SURVEY BY DAVID EVANS & ASSOCIATES. MAP SCALE: 1 -40'. HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD 83/91, WA STATE PLAN N. ZONE. VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD '88 (FEET). 30' 0 3060' 1" 30 (N N 4•i H rt , IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22- X 34- IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. L adf US Army Corps of Engineers Seams D'unid 1 a) 0 z c0 C. N . w rc AL z ro w o 3 (A m� SEATTLE. WASHINGTON LiJ (j) N I Z LC) O d N Q F- 1— WASHINGTON 0 a KING COUNTY Plote number: C -104 Sheet 6 of 16 z 0 0 0 CO 0 NJWLai w-J CC N 0 0 0 W J u. z 0 0 18 -JUN -2008 15.36 0 0 0 a 0 W 0 A E 1,290,400 N 163,600 2 E 1,290,600 REMOVE - FENCE 3 MATCH 4 E 1,290,800 LINE T� PLATE `CENTERLINE OF LEVEE R 297.00:' L 224.24' T 117.77' Delta 43 °15'31" Dc 19 °17'29 "H TO OF 34.. C-106 231 ............. i ........... / N 163.493.44 E 1,290.779.69 R 317.00' L 177.05'1 T. 90 :90' Delta 32°00'00" Dc 18 °04'28" 1• 4 E 1,290,702.89 N 163,400 PROJECT FOOTPRINT 5 E 1,290,544.30 / TOP,OF L VEE SEE NOTE' 3:(TYP.): / • EDGE OF WATER•VEG / 12..0' • • AT STATION 0.00 TRANSITION FOR 130' ROM .EXISTING LEVEE • PRISM INJO- SITE 3 TYP. SECTION. SEE'' PLATE C -303 N 163.2 -t WD "FOR.. 1301 BENCH= /. TEMPORARY WORK AREA ' EASEMENT BEGIN SITE 3 TYPICAL SECTION (LAYBACK WITH LWD), SEE PLATE C-303, (STATION 1.30)___ -_ NOTES: 1. MAPPING COMPILED FROM FEBRUARY 2006 AERIAL PHOTOS. MAPPING BY 3Di WEST FOR KING COUNTY DNR AND PARKS. MAP SCALE: 1" -100', CONTOUR INTERVAL: 2 FOOT. HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD83 /91 (HARN) WA STATE PLAN NORTH ZONE (FEET). VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD 88. MAP HAS NOT BEEN COMPREHENSIVELY VERIFIED BY FIELD CHECKS. 2. LEVEE TOP ELEVATION AT THE UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM ENDS OF THE PROJECT SHALL MATCH THE EXISTING GRADE ELEVATIONS. A CONTINUOUS SLOPE BETWEEN THE UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM END ELEVATIONS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED FOR THE FINAL GRADE OF THE LEVEE BASED ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE LEVEE. 3. SURVEY CROSS SECTIONS BASED ON MAPPING COMPILED FROM FIELD SURVEY PERFORMED FEB- MAR 2008. SURVEY BY DAVID EVANS & ASSOCIATES. MAP SCALE: 1 -40'. HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD 83/91, WA STATE PLAN N. ZONE. VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD '88 (FEET). 30' 15' 0 1" • 30 I 30' 60' f US Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22' X 34' IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. t. & 1 0) N r • w w m3 5. O Z 0 a J P SEATTLE, WASHINGTON i 0 Z a0 r0 wn W w W W _,- OiN rn0 N CO Q J_ a3 D WASHINGTON KING COUNTY Plate number: C -105 Sheet 7 of 16 z 0 m 0 m 0 w J m J 3 cc x W J m N C zCC 0 YJ W U S JUN-2008 15.37 w 0 a E t= — a 1- 0 N 164,000 • 0 0 0 i0 0 0 fV R 997:00' /032-i-59 114.\71 Delta ' S °08',3" Dc 5 °4449,'' 2 3 TIE 'INTO EXISTING ASPHALT PATH • '••• _ N 163,936.16 •`� E 1,290,762.92 1 1 1 OP OFLEsEE`♦ .6 S !TOP OF LEVEE F� - 134.4' 1 1• .. 1 2'.D' 1 K i o+2f / -- m 1 '1 ' gEOFNIA(ERNE =`L 1 W W < C rn r i , ASF'rY' 1 1 O N i f -< 261 Of, .LEV"aE -- , .` 1 1 ,1� `, J -< • fQ �/ �� N 163 770 71 1' `..' 1 �s I•! END t)F SITE 3 TYPICAL SECTION E 1,290,772.56 1 ; ( LAYBACK SECTION,WITH LW9) :- BEGIN. TRANSITION BACK TO 1 ' i EXISTING LEVEE PRISM (NO LWD). .f (STATION 6•70) 1 ; 1 1 I AR 1 WORK . ', WORK AREA S , EASEMENTS 0 O O o+ N w --' N 163,600 'PROJECT!' _ '—FOOTPRINT • N 163 1, N 163,681.40 - - 1,290,-775.37 N •3611.17 9. 4.4 _,r_10"1,CCESS 22A' is SEE NOTE 3 :(TYP.) f I i MAT CF-j LINE -`?TO '''' - EDGE OF WAG 12.0' 1 _105 -� 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: NAD83 /91 (HARN) WA STATE PLAN NORTH ZONE (FEET). VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD 88. MAP HAS NOT BEEN COMPREHENSIVELY VERIFIED BY FIELD CHECKS. 2. LEVEE TOP ELEVATION AT THE UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREM ENDS OF THE PROJECT SHALL MATCH THE EXISTING GRADE ELEVATIONS. A CONTINUOUS SLOPE BETWEEN THE UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM END ELEVATIONS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED FOR THE FINAL GRADE OF THE LEVEE BASED ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE LEVEE. 3. SURVEY CROSS SECTIONS BASED ON MAPPING COMPILED FROM FIELD SURVEY PERFORMED FEB- MAR 2008. SURVEY BY DAVID EVANS & ASSOCIATES. MAP SCALE: 1•40'. HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD 83/91, WA STATE PLAN N. ZONE. VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD '88 (FEET). 30' 15' 0 1" • 30 (N NHFiN 30' 60' IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22' X 34• IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. I US Army Corps of Engiro.rs- S.anl. D'u+rid 1 N i i 0 z N w 1- o a3 .1' z 0 w J O w U vi D i WASHINGTON n V a KING COUNTY Plote number: C -106 Sheet 8 of 16 0 0 0 w w — w J N J a w w w w J CO cr 0 0 N W ¢ z w w i u s 18-JUN-2008 15.37 EL 30' (-APPROX.) SEE TRAIL RESTORATION TYPICAL SECTION, SEE PLATE C -501 101' FENCE EL 36' (APPROX.) Q 14' I HYDROSEED (TYP) EL 36' ( APPROX.) EXISTING GROUND SURFACE (APPROX.) SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL RETAINING WALL (SEE -D €TAIL -RL- ATE - - -44. C -502) SPALLS UP TO ELEV. 28' 9.000 CFS ELEV. APPROX. 5 16' 10' ACCESS SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL -"I` % /L= Q♦T♦7 / /di�� / /.♦ \Y -'4411‘6 &._1141216k8.-141111111.111111, 6,d0G,CFS EL 24' COIR WRAP (TYP )WILLOWS PLACED 1=•V.1zRY 6" ON CENTER (TYP) 16' QUARRY SPALLS 1' THICK TOPSOIL (TYP) Mgr ' TUKWILA 205 - SITE 5 TYPICAL SECTION 1 NOT TO SCALE CLASS IV RIPRAP LAUNCHABLE TOE ANCHOR ROCK, 5' DIAM. EL 10' WSEL 300 EL 8' CFS (APPROX.) LWD W /ROOTBALL, ANCHORED TO BOULDER, ANGLED DOWNSTREAM (WSEL 300 CFS APPROX.), SEE DETAIL PLATE C-501 L US Army Corps of Engineers Seat& District IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22' X 34' IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. 1 ♦ 1 CO 0 O z CO N N N . W r 03 z 0 J W N N C o W K Z • — 0 � i N Z • 0 r " Vi 6 • WASHINGTON KING COUNTY Plote number, C -301 Sheet 9 of 16 0 0 0 cc cn u W J N J CO CCx w > -J CO 0 CC La W w 0 0 N_ x 18-JUN-2008 15.24 D C B A AC PAVEMENT EL 27' (APPROX.) 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 SEE TRAIL RESTORATION TYPICAL SECTION. SEE PLATE C -501 97' 5 1 86' FENCE HYDROSEED (TYP) EL 36' (APPROX.) EXISTING GROUND SURFACE (APPROX.I T SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL RETAINING WALL (SEE - EL 28' ( APPROX. ) -PLATE PLATE WSEL 9.000 CFS C -502) COIR WRAP- (TYP) EL. 24' (APPROX.I WSEL 6.000 ACFS WILLOWS IN SOIL, WILLOWS 'PLACED EVERY 6" ON 16' 10' ACCESS TUKWILA 205 - SITE 5 TYPICAL SECTION 2 NOT TO SCALE SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL ''' 7i aid /,A \♦%/ ♦%//.w+Q♦ % / ' QUARRY SPALLS y OHW EL. 16' N 1' THICK TOPSOIL (TYP) EL 10' WSEL 300 CFS EL 8' (APPROX.) (APPROX.) (APPROX.) CLASS IV RIPRAP LAUNCHABLE TOE. CLASS IV RIPRAP IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 27 X 34' IT IS AREDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. mit US Anny Corps of Engineers Seattle Merin ' 1 8 co 0 O z r0 0 rn N N w r vn z 0 ew E 'J a SEATTLE. WASHINGTON LIJ N • z (n CD I: U tf) LLJ 0 (n N J Q Q U ^ ^_ LL >- • F— F— O z N U a KING COUNTY Plote number. C -302 Sheet 10 of 16 0 0 r M m s W W W J N J 0 a x w w w w J 0 Q N > w z 0 U s DESIGN FILE. l8- JUN -2008 15.25 2 1 3 1 4 1 SEE TRAIL TYPICAL RESTORATION SECTION. SEE PLATE C-502 110' 12' 14' Q 24' X 0 Co 0 EL 29' APPROX.) 10' 2 ACCESS SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL EL 35' ( APPROX.) EL 27' SPALLS UP TO ELEVATION 27' 9,000 CFS 2 • —11 HYDROSEED (TYP) • EXISTING GROUND SURFACE (APPROX.) 15' 30' COIR FABRIC WRAPS (TYP) 6,000 CFS EL 23' SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL QUARRY SPALLS 1 THICK TOPSOIL (TYP) TUKWILA 205 - SITE 3 TYPICAL SECTION NOT TO SCALE WILLOWS WITH COIR FABRIC _SOIL LIFTS, WILLOWS RtACED EVERY 6" ON CENTER (TYP) 5 N p Uh{W EL 15' 2 1 2 000 CF A Radio CLASS IV RIPRAP LAUNCHABLE TOE, CLASS IV RIPRAP ANCHOR ROCK, 5' DIAM. 5 EL 10' WSEL 300 EL 8' (APPROX.) LWD W /ROOTBALL, ANCHORED TO BOULDER. ANGLED DOWNSTREAM (WSEL 300 CFS APPROX.), SEE DETAIL PLATE C -501 CFS (APPROX.) US Army Corps of Engineers Saone Devoid 1 IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22- X 34• IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. I O z rn • N N w .. v �+ z 0 W a in 0 cc U W Ft w m4 w0 z N z • } V vn SEATTLE, WASHINGTON N 0 0 au w w N wEh J N 0' m0 N CO aQ J J 3 aj 0 z 3 a 0 a • 0 0 Z Plote number C -303 Sheet 11 of 16 Z 0 0 N M ✓ 0 0 w w w m a -J m LIJ CC w w J m m Cr La▪ i z w w 0 c� U N x J 0_ N 0 18-JUN -2888 15.26 O H r O a w 0 z — w r 0 ELEVATION (FT)' ELEVATION (FT) 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 45 40 35 ,_ 30 z 25 0 a 20' W a 15 10 5 0 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 0' 2 3 f11VAt--tfVEE EXISTING GROUND -50 . -25 0 STATION 7 +45 SCALE 1H:1V 25 DISTANCE (FT) 50 75 100 FINAL LEVEE EXISTING GROUND -50 -25 0 25 DISTANCE (FT) STATION 4 +58 SCALE 1H:1V FINAL LEVEE 50 75 100 EXISTING GROUND -50 -25 0 25 50 75 100 STATION 2 +23 SCALE 1H:1V DISTANCE (FT) 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 4 5 NOTE: 1. EXISTING GROUND BASED ON MAPPING COMPILED FROM FIELD SURVEY PERFORMED FEB -MAR 2008. SURVEY BY DAVID EVANS & ASSOCIATES. MAP SCALE: 1"=-40'. HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD 83/91. WA STATE PLANE N. ZONE. VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD '88 (FEET). DATA BELOW EDGE OF WATER BASED ON MOST RECENT FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY DATA PROVIDED BY KING COUNTY. 2. NEW LEVEE ELEVATION BASED ON MAPPING COMPILED FROM FEBRUARY 2006 AERIAL PHOTOS. SEE NOTE 1 ON PLATES C -105 AND C -106 FOR SPECIFIC INFORMATION REGARDING THE 2006 SURVEY. THERE IS AN ELEVATION DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE 2008 EXISTING GROUND SURVEY CROSS SECTIONS AND THE 2006 AERIAL SURVEY. THE INTENT IS NOT TO RAISE THE OVERALL CURRENT LEVEE TOP ELEVATION. SEE NOTE 2 ON PLATES C -105 AND C -106. LEVEE TOP ELEVATION AT THE UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM ENDS OF THE PROJECT SHALL MATCH THE EXISTING GRADE ELEVATIONS. A CONTINUOUS SLOPE BETWEEN THE UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM END ELEVATIONS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED FOR THE FINAL GRADE OF THE LEVEE BASED ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE LEVEE. US Army Corps of Engineers Seattle Mono IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22' X 34' IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. 1 • 1 8 0 z D S 1 N w 1- U) r3 1- 1- w Cm O SEATTLE. WASHINGTON WASHINGTON KING COUNTY Plate number. C -304 Sheet 12 of 16 z 0 0 U) 0 0 — 0 W J a s mCO cc J z 0 >> U i J 0 z 0 0 2008 15.26 0 0 a z 1- 0 z 0 c B A ELEVATION (FT1 ELEVATION (FT) 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 2 3 EXISTING GROUND -50 -25 0 25 STATION 11+32 SCALE 1H:1V 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 DISTANCE (FT) FINAL LEVEE 50 75 100 FrNliC-"CE✓EE 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 EXISTING GROUND 0 N -50 -25 0 STATION 7 +05 SCALE 1H:1V 25 DISTANCE (FT) 50 75 100 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 4 5 NOTE: 1. EXISTING GROUND BASED ON MAPPING COMPILED FROM FIELD SURVEY PERFORMED FEB -MAR 2008. SURVEY BY DAVID EVANS 8 ASSOCIATES. MAP SCALE: 1 "=40'. HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD 83/91. WA STATE PLANE N. ZONE. VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD '88 (FEET). DATA BELOW EDGE OF WATER BASED ON MOST RECENT FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY DATA PROVIDED BY KING COUNTY. 2. NEW LEVEE ELEVATION BASED ON MAPPING COMPILED FROM FEBRUARY 2006 AERIAL PHOTOS. SEE NOTE 1 ON PLATES C -103 AND C -104 FOR SPECIFIC INFORMATION REGARDING THE 2006 SURVEY. THERE IS AN ELEVATION DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE 2008 EXISTING GROUND SURVEY CROSS SECTIONS AND THE 2006 AERIAL SURVEY. THE INTENT IS NOT TO RAISE THE OVERALL CURRENT LEVEE TOP ELEVATION. SEE NOTE 3 ON PLATES C -103 AND C -104. LEVEE TOP ELEVATION AT THE UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM ENDS OF THE PROJECT SHALL MATCH THE EXISTING GRADE ELEVATIONS. A CONTINUOUS SLOPE BETWEEN THE UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM END ELEVATIONS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED FOR THE FINAL GRADE OF THE LEVEE BASED ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE LEVEE. IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22 X 34• IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. I US Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District 1 s 1 0 z D N w VI VI >`3 0 w Tm 0 x N 0) U a KING COUNTY Plate number C -305 Sheet 13 of 16 0 0 N M 0 • W J N J W w w N 5 z 0 18•JUN•2008 15.27 0 0 0 a 0 0 zz _W 0 0 0 NOTE. FOR ADDITIONAL LWD REQUIREMENTS (SEE SPECIFICATIONS) TRAIL RESTORATION TYPICAL SECTION - SITE 5 NOT TO SCALE EXISTING GROUND [ SURFACE (APPROX.) z 0 C-F) 0 Lr) 0 0 w w > --w 0 ; 7 CO X IJJ CC LAJ CO CEO CC w CC 0 0 0 LWD CONIFER (TYP) TIGHT CONNECTION < 0.33 FT OF CHAIN ANCHOR POINT 1 FT. ABOVE BED 2 QUARRY STONE, NO ROOT WAD AT UPSTREAM END SINGLE, TIGHT WRAP SUMMER WATER SURFACE ELEV. (APPROX. 300 CFS) 5 DIAM. QUARRY STONE ANCHOR ROCK, 50% BURIED IN RIVERBED tsJ —J z- 0 w U_ 0 TYPICAL LOG PLACEMENT (SECTION VIEW) UPSTREAM END LOG PLACEMENT (PLAN VIEW) 18 -JUN -2008 15028 0 uJ 0 Q. w 0 z 1- c 0 TYPICAL LOG PLACEMENT EVERY 10 LOGS (PLAN VIEW) NOT TO SCALE TYPICAL LOG PLACEMENT (PLAN VIEW) NOT TO SCALE IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22" X 34' IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. II 4 RIVERWARD SIDE OF LEVEE— 5 14' ASPHALT LOW EDGE 1" ABOVE FINISH GRADE NOTE: 1 1. AT APPROXIMATELY STATION 6.90, THERE IS AN APPROXIMATELY 3 FOOT CHANGE IN THE EXISTING GRADE ON THE LANDWARD SIDE OF THE RETAINING WALL. RETAINING WALL SECTION DEPICTS APPROX. LOWER LANDWARD EXISTING GRADE ELEVATION. WHERE EXISTING GRADE IS HIGHER ALONG THE LANDWARD SIDE OF THE WALL, THE TOP ELEVATION OF THE BACKFILL MATERIAL SHALL BE ADJUSTED UPWARD AND MATCH EXISTING GRADE WHERE INDICATED ON DETAIL. WEEP HOLE LOCATIONS SHALL BE ADJUSTED UPWARD WHERE BACKFILL HEIGHT IS ADJUSTED TO MAINTAIN VERTICAL DISTANCES ABOVE GRADE AS SHOWN IN DETAIL. BOTTOM OF FOOTING (BOF) AND TOP OF FOOTING ELEVATION SHALL REMAIN AS SHOWN IN DETAIL. EL 36: lOP N RAIL TOP OF LEVEE (SEE PLANS AND NOTES REGARDING TOP OF LEVEE ELEVATION) MIN 1' GRAVEL BACKFILL FULL HEIGHT .(TYP) GEOTEXTILE BEHIND DRAINAGE GRAVEL •9 12 ", OC m PIPE EMBEDMENT t0 2 2�/ " DIA GALV SCH 40 POST e 13' -0" 0.C. W /END CAPS CHAIN LINK FENCE 9 GA GALV WIRE MESH 4 -1/2' DIA. GROUT HOLE 2" CLR 0 2' -0" •3 0 1' -0" •4 & 1' -0" 3" DIA WEEP HOLES 0 10' MAX STAGGERED GEOTEXTILE AT EACH WEEP HOLE 3 2" AC 4" BASE COURSE — COMPACTED SUBGRADE TYPICAL AC TRAIL PAVEMENT SECTION NOT TO SCALE BACKFILL ON TOP OF WALL FOOTING TO MEET EXISTING GRADE WITH SATISFACTORY FILL MATERIAL AND A SIX INCH THICK (6 ") MINIMUM GRAVEL TOP COURSE 2/. SLOPE •9 12" 3" CLR — '/IA \ \em VA\\�Ih\\ •5 12" BOF EL 24.25 3" CLR COMPACTED SUBGRADE •9 DOWEL LAPPED W /VERT REINF MATCH BAR SIZE •5 TYP 16' -0" KEY TYPICAL RETAINING WALL SECTION NOT TO SCALE CUT ALTERNATING HORIZ REINF imoM " 1Y1/2 4 " FRONT FACE TYPICAL VERTICAL CONTROL JOINT NOT TO SCALE 1. MAXIMUM SPACING OF CONTROL /CONSTRUCTION JOINTS IS 25' -0 ". 2. CONTROL JOINTS NOT REQUIRED IN FOOTING. 3. HORIZONTAL REINFORCEMENT IS CONTINUOUS THROUGH FOOTING. T 90° STANDARD MATCH HOOK EXISTING GRADE •4 X 2' -0" 2' -0" LAPPED W/ HORIZ REINF 314" PREMOLDED EXP. JT SEALANT SA" DIA X 9" SMOOTH STEEL OWEL 0 1' -6" VERT (LIGHTLY GREASE DOWEL) 1I. FRONT FACE OF WALL VARIES TYPICAL CORNER DETAIL NOT TO SCALE EXPANSION TYPICAL VERTICAL EXPANSION JOINT NOT TO SCALE 1. MAXIMUM SPACING OF EXPANSION JOINT IS 100 FEET. 2. EXPANSION JOINTS NOT REQUIRED IN FOOTING. JOINT SEALANT BACKER ROD e4 CONTROL JOINTS CRACK ,/2„ REINF CONT THRU JOINT 2 5H :1V MAX. 1. 9' • 5H :1V MAX. AC PATH 2% 7 4" BASE COURSE 1R T\\`ul,\"�'�I1I r COMPACTED SUBGRADE 2" ASPHALT PAVING (AC) LANDWARD SIDE OF LEVEE TRAIL RESTORATION TYPICAL SECTION — SITE 3 NOT TO SCALE WING WALL EXISTING LEVEE ACCESS RAMP RETAINING WALL EL •/- 31' WALL FOOTING WING WALL (RETAINING WALL) CONCEPT DETAIL NOT TO SCALE TYPICAL SLAB —ON —GRADE CONTROL JOINT DETAIL NOT TO SCALE NOTE: MAX CONTROL JOINT SPACING IS 25 FEET IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22• X 34• IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. f US Army Corps of Engineers Seattle Mono • 2 8 a .e • 1 i m 0 z m N n 1- W n3 E • z z 0 a0 o° tij • W rCC V W F- = 5 CC 0 W0 zy i0 W 0 rC.) 6 • SETTLE. W/SNNGTON 0 a0 mJ N Q � W N W N co 0 m0 N N .0 Q J 3 aY DETAILS 2 WASHINGTON n 0 a KING COUNTY Plote number C -502 Sheet 15 of 16 z 0 N to s cc u w — > m N a cc w W W J 0 N W O W 0 0 N 18-JUN-2008 15.30 IRMO PL 84 -99 LEVEE REHABILITATION TUKWILA 205: SITES 3 & 5, GRE-3 -07 DETAILS 3 KING COUNTY PN C1972 WASHINGTON 31VOS 01 10N X DV) n -42 j ) D zr m C< Om z ^O z Dm •� D 2 0 Fk rk z z 0 mm r• mA <— mm 0 m r1r PO mm0 mOW RIVERWARD SIDE OF LEVEE STATION 0.00 om mx rN mZ mo m m1 0 A 1 U.S.ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT,SEATTLE CORPS OF ENGINEERS SEATTLE. WASHINGTON Designed by, WEST Date 18 JUN 08 brawn by LEJON File • E -12 -7 -229 Prepared by ♦ Checked by FISCHER Rev. ■ 31VOS 01 10N �Tm 0-1 *rn X DU) r-1 —1z X1C7 Zr m m OM z "O xj Om rD mz z 0 STATION 0.00 v r 1 MO r< MO m y / ,Symea Description Date Mp Symbol Description I OMNI w Ln DATE AND TIME PLOTTED. 18 -JUN -2008 15.30 DESIGN FILE. I. \MISC\CIV \GREEN RIVER \2008 LEVEE REHAB \TUKWILA 205 LEVEE \GRTMC•503003.DON • • D C B A m N 122.300 N N 121.700 22N0 ST NE 2 .TEMPORARY FENCING AND SIGN . "AREA CLOSED TO PUBLIC ACCESS" I CONSTRUCTION ACCESS -0 STAGRIG' A EA- f 5 .4144 It Itt,Oinx £ { 1 ' kft li 3 C 0r00, 4 5 1 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 /9l(HARN)WO STATE PLANE NORTH ZONE (FEET). VERTICAL DATUM: NAVE) 88. MAP HAS NOT BEEN COMPREHENSIVELY VERIFIED BY FIELD CHECKS. 2. ALL REAL ESTATE REQUIREMENTS AND UTILITY RELOCATIONS NECESSARY FOR PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE OBTAINED /PERFORMED BY KING COUNTY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 3. TEMPORARY WORK AREA EXTENDS 30'RIVERWARD FOR LWO PLACEMENT ALONG TOE DURING CONSTRUCTION. 60 ACCESS /STAGING AREA (TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT) TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT PROJECT FOOTPRINT 60' 30' 0 60' 120' IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22' X 34' IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. US Army Corps of Erq:ron s..:e. Ram:: aN 6m 7 t Plate number C -101 Sheet 3 of 7 I ISC\CIV\GREEN RIVER\2888 LEVEE REHAR\DVKSTRR LEVEE \GRDKC -181GEN.DGN Plate number, C -301 Sheet 5 of 7 , APPROX EL. 65.0 APPROX EL. 65.0 1 2 COMPACTED SATISFACTORY FILL 15 FT GRAVEL. SEE TRAIL RESTORATION TYPICAL SECTION. PLATE C -501 29.5FT HYDROSEED (TYP) EXISTING GROUND ( APPROX.) WILLOW SOIL LIFTS. WILLOWS PLACED EVERY 6" ON CENTER COMPACTED SATISFACTORY FILL 2 1).5FT SPALLS (TYP) 5 FT TYPICAL SECTION - DYKSTRA NOT TO SCALE GRAVEL. SEE TRAIL RESTORATION TYPICAL SECTION. PLATE C -501 29.5FT HYDROSEED (TYP) EXISTING GROUND (APPROX.) 3 RIP RAP CLASS 111 3' WSEL e 9 kcfs. EL. 60.0 (APPROX.I WSEL e 6 kcfs. EL. 57.0 (APPROX.) WSEL a 300 cfs. EL. 49.8 ( APPROX.) EL. 49.5 EXCAVATE 2' FOR TOE. PLACE CLASS III RIPRAP WILLOW SOIL LIFTS. WILLOWS PLACED EVERY 6" ON CENTER RIP RAP CLASS I11 1 11.5FT SPALLS (TYP) WSEL e 9 Fcfs. EL. 60.0 (APPROX.) WSEL_9 6 Fcfs. EL. 57:0 (APPROX.1 WSEL e 2 kcfs. EL. 52.2 ( APPROX.) _________________ WSEL a 300 cfs: EL. 8 49. ( APPROX.) LWD W /ROOTBALL. ANCHORED TO BOULDER. ANGLED DOWNSTREAM SEE DETAIL PLATE C -501 EXCAVATE 2' FOR TOE. PLACE CLASS 111 RIPRAP TYPICAL SECTION W /LWD - DYK.STRA NOT TO SCALE 4 5 PLACE 6" LIFT OF TOPSOIL ABOVE AND BELOW WILLOWS 3' VERTICAL SPACING BETWEEN WILLOW LIFTS WILLOW LIFT PLANTING SECTION NOT TO SCALE L IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 27 X34" IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. US Army Corps of Eng veers Seattle District 0 o o m vi 00 30- APR -2008 13,55 2 I I i i r l .. ;' I BRANNAN PARK ACCESS FROM 26TH ST NEE < 26TH ST -NE 24TMrST-.NE 1 i Y ALL I LM- UKAKI'ttNLt. MD SIGN, -CLOSED: TO. PUBLIC ACCESS' 1111♦ ♦ tto fete. %I'�♦ OD F —L_ 1.. - -T_.1_ – • -v 4 I 5 NOTES: L BACKGROUND MAPPING COMPILED FROM FEBRUARY 2006 AERIAL PHOTOS. MAPPING BY 311 WEST FOR KING COUNTY ONR AND PARKS. MAP SCALE: I'=I00'. CONTOUR INTERVAL: 2 FOOT. HORIZONTAL DATUM: NA083 /91 (HARN) WA STATE PLANE NORTH ZONE (FEET). VERTICAL OATUM: NAV088. MAP HAS NOT BEEN COMPREHENSIVELY VERIFIED BY FIELD CHECKS. 2. ALL REAL ESTATE REOUIREMENTS AND UTILITY RELOCATIONS NECESSARY FOR PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE OBTAINED /PERFORMED BY KING COUNTY - PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 3. TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT E %TENDS 30'RIVERWARO FOR LWD PLACEMENT ALONG TOE DURING CONSTRUCTION. /// ACCESS STAGING AREA AND TRUCK TURNAROUND (TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT) TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT PROJECT FOOTPRINT US Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District Q 6 -FOO.ZRIDGE T0. REMAIN - OPEN DURING: CONSTRUCT TELEPHONE/POWERI POLE PRESERVE /PROTECT' -, VAULT AND•.' J I, UNDERGROUND YJIR NC , I PRESERVE /PROTECT '.!. •0 PL NE °.3'.• ACCESS 1 { - _A•. I' ',FROM -2.�NQ: ST–NE VI • i T L _ 4 -,.rl • - IY Q CC w - z s uo o u ,—INSTAEL TEMbORARY,FENCE / . AND. SIGN. **CLOSED TO IPUBLIC ,ACCESS" c'_ 80' 40' 0 80 Iw wwti 80' 160' F SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22' X 34' IT IS A REDUCED PRIM. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. Plate number: C -101 Sheet 3 of 8 US Army Corps 0f Engineers Seattle Oistrict PLACE 6" LIFT OF TOPSOIL ABOVE AND BELOW WILLOWS D 33.4FT GRAVEL, SIL RESTORATIOEE N TYPIC SECTION. PLATE TRA C -501 AL HYDROSEED (TYP) EXISTING GROUND ( APPROX) EL 64.0 3' VERTICAL SPACING BETWEEN WILLOW LIFTS "TAPPROX.) C dlr� WILLOWS a OHW +. WILLOWS PLACED VERY 12.7FT(APPROX.) 6” "I- 02749 FILTER. A� �i i��:�� 1 ' SPALL S 3F T �Q /J W /Na�ii/ /AA`� //!SN /AiK��w � � r .�i , ra4. 1FT *_ WSEL 9 300cfs _ EL 48_ t APPROX LAUNCHABLE TOE. CLASS IV WSEL 9 6kcfs EL 55' (APPROX) WSEL a 2kcfs EL 51_ (APPROX) RIPRAP SLOPE PROTECTION CLASS IV WILLOW LIFT PLANTING SECTION NOT TO SCALE EXISTING GROUND CROSS SECTION BASED ON RM 29.582 TYPICAL CROSS SECTION NOT TO SCALE GRAVEL. SEE TRAIL RESTORATION TYPICAL SECTION. PLATE C -501 HYDROSEED (TYPI EXISTING GROUND ( APPROX) EL 64.0 ... „APPRDR-. EL 47.0 �W.T1 ILLOWS a OHW a^::,'��e��i 11y;�7 I LLOWS PLACE�� 4 ^�" ON CENTER ILTER •;, ?. __wit ' SPALLS 3FTt "�� /A'�. TYPICAL CROSS SECTION NOT TO SCALE WSEL a 6kcfs _EL 55_ (APPROX) LAUNCHABLE TOE. CLASS IV RIPRAP SLOPE PROTECTION LWD W /ROOTO TBABLL, CLASS IV ANCHORED OULDER, ANGLED DOWNSTREAM ANCHOR ROCK, (WSEL 300 CFS APPROX.), SEE DETAIL PLATE C -501 WITH LWD EXISTING GROUND CROSS SECTION BASED ON RM 29.582 IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22 X 34• R IS A REDUCED P W NT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. • • D C B N 137.600 L', 1 N 137.300 :I I I:I t REAL.ESTATE/ -. CONSTRUCTION LIMIT JI I' ALDER LN 1 L, I N 137.000 ! I,� ( ICI Ire 1.4 I 11 .I !1 i ...S ACING AREA .t a A N 136,700 �I k i A/AZ • ST ACING AREA � 1 ! EXIS T,NG LE VEE 1 \ `\ ss :?*127647441fit e ACCESS ,„ , 1 %\\.,4k14,,_:., PROJ T; FOOTPRII Ntitilt: I!i-iL 2 5 Il___________ TOP 0E-LEVEE —` i I I _i_ N44 LWD PLACEMENT -AREA. \1� SS /EGRESS AT CENTRAL '1 5.. _�: SEE PLATE C�t02 1-. NOTES: 1. SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN. KING COUNTY, WA. 2. MAPPING COMPILED FROM FEBRUARY 2006 AERIAL PHOTOS. MAPPING BY 3Di WEST FOR KING COUNTY DNR AND PARKS. MAP SCALE: 1 "•100'. CONTOUR INTERVAL: 2 FOOT. HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD83/91 (HARN) WA STATE PLAN N. ZONE (FEET). VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD 88 MAP HAS NOT BEEN COMPREHENSIVELY VERIFIED BY FIELD CHECKS. 3. ALL REAL ESTATE REQUIREMENTS AND UTILITY RELOCATIONS NECESSARY FOR PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE OBTAINED /PERFORMED BY KING COUNTY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 4. TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT EXTENDS 30 FEET RIVERWARD FOR LWD PLACEMENT ALONG TOE DURING CONSTRUCTION. .M%444 ACCESS STAGING AREA (TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT) TEMPORARY —'—' —'—'• WORK AREA EASEMENT PROJECT FOOTPRINT 60' 30' 0 1" • 60' IHHHHH } 60' 120' NOT ALL UTILITIES ARE SHOWN ON THE PLANS CALL 2 WORKING DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG 1- 800 - 424 -5555 IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 27X34• R IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. US Army d r Erpi Marier 0 m Q 30 O 4 5 Plate number. C -101 Sheet 3 of 19 5 —a 0 NOTES: 1. SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, KING COUNTY, WA 2. MAPPING COMPILED FROM FEBRUARY 2006 AERIAL PHOTOS MAPPING BY 3D. WEST FOR KING COUNTY DNR AND PARK. MAP SCALE 1 "•100' CONTOUR INTERVAL 2 FOOT HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD83 /91(HARN) WA STATE PLAN N. ZONE (FEET) VERTICAL DATUM' NAVD 88. MAP HAS NOT BEEN COMPREHENSIVELY VERIFIED BY FIELD CHECKS 3. ALL REAL ESTATE REQUIREMENTS AND UTILITY RELOCATIONS NECESSARY FOR PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE OBTAINED /PERFORMED BY KING COUNT, PRIOR T0, CONSTRUCTION N 135 800 0 0 • m • 4 r 2 ACCESS INGRESS/ EGRESS AT ALDER LANE; SEE PLATE • • C. 101, • LTG 1 i _ - ,5_266TH-1-STREET. ^� I ' 'ACCESS FOR SITE 2, —T. ACCESS STAGING AREA (TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT) TEMPORARY • WORK AREA EASEMENT PROJECT FOOTPRINT 50• 25 0 r 50' 1Hti'awK 50' 100' NOT ALL UTILITIES ARE SHOWN ON THE PLANS CALL 2 WORKING DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG 1- 800 - 424 -5555 IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22" X 34• IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. US Army tarps of Engineers Swags Mein T 0 _ o 6 o� am z 0 4 oW Z I- mN u W Q O CC SW r Ww (n0 O x S Plate number C -102 `Sheet 4 of 19 NOTES 1. SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, KING COUNTY. WA. 2. MAPPING COMPILED FROM FEBRUARY 2006 AERIAL PHOTOS. MAPPING BY 301 WEST FOR KING COUNTY DNR AND PARK. MAP SCALE: 1" -100'. CONTOUR INTERVAL: 2 FOOT. HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD83/91 (HARN) WA STATE PLAN N. ZONE (FEET). VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD 88. MAP HAS NOT BEEN COMPREHENSIVELY VERIFIED BY FIELD CHECKS. 3. ALL REAL ESTATE REOUIREMENTS AND UTILITY RELOCATIONS NECESSARY FOR PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE OBTAINED /PERFORMED BY KING COUNTY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. STAGING AREA (TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT) GREEN RIVER NOT ALL UTILITIES ARE SHOWN ON THE PLANS CALL 2 WORKING DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG 1 -800- 424 -5555 MATCH LINE TO PLATE C -105 ACCESS FOR SITE 4 (THROUGH - COUNTY GATE)." - I SEE PLATE C -105 NOTES: 1. SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, KING COUNTY, WA. 2. MAPPING COMPILED FROM FEBRUARY 2006 AERIAL PHOTOS. MAPPING BY 3D1 WEST FOR KING COUNTY DNR AND PARK. MAP SCALE: 1 "•100'. CONTOUR INTERVAL: 2 FOOT. HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD83/91 (HARN) WA STATE PLAN N. ZONE (FEET). VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD 88. MAP HAS NOT BEEN COMPREHENSIVELY VERIFIED BY FIELD CHECKS. 3. ALL REAL ESTATE REOUIREMENTS AND UTILITY RELOCATIONS NECESSARY FOR PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE OBTAINED /PERFORMED BY KING COUNTY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 4. TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT EXTENDS 30 FEET RIVERWARD FOR LWD PLACEMENT ALONG TOE DURING CONSTRUCTION. ACCESS N 135.800 STAGING AREA (TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT) TEMPORARY • WORK AREA EASEMENT PROJECT FOOTPRINT 5. 266TH STREET N 135.500 N 135.200 - ``- ^e �_��i _ !•J 41144/004814 =—FOOTPRINT _ -_ _, _. ._ - -- —i•.' _ - -'— FOOTPRINT - r _ ACCESS'FOR -` •i'.. .. SITE 4 . + \ + • 60 11.1-11-10 „w T• 6133ti HN 60• 120 NOT ALL UTILITIES ARE SHOWN ON THE PLANS CALL 2 WORKING DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG 1- 800 - 424 -5555 IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22• X34• R IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. Plate number: C -104 Sheet 6 of 19 N 137,300 ACCESS FOR SITE 4 (THROUGH COUNTY GATE) NOTES. 1. SECTION 25. TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, KING COUNTY, WA 2. MAPPING COMPILED FROM FEBRUARY 2006 AERIAL PHOTOS. MAPPING BY 3DIWEST FOR KING COUNTY DNR AND PARK. MAP SCALE: 1" -100' CONTOUR INTERVAL: 2 FOOT. HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD83 /91 (HARN) WA STATE PLAN N ZONE (FEET). VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD 88. MAP HAS NOT BEEN COMPREHENSIVELY VERIFIED BY FIELD CHECKS. 3. ALL REAL ES1ATE REQUIREMENTS AND UTILITY RELOCATIONS NECESSARY FOR PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE OBTAINED /PERFORMED BY KING COUNTY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. ACCESS 'N 137,000 STAGING AREA (TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT( • ED N 136.700 r .7: MATCH LINE TO PLATE C -104 60' 30' 0 - 60' I I' - to t 60' 120' NOT ALL UTILITIES ARE SHOWN ON THE PLANS CALL 2 WORKING DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG 1- 800 - 424 -5555 Plate number: C -105 IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22' X 34' IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. Sheet 7 of 19 AC PATH ON TOP OF LEVEE, SEE TRAIL RESTORATION DETAJL. PLATE C-501 34.5' VARIES ELEV. 55.2 (APPROX.) 2 APPROX. 30' WSEL C 6 kcfs 40. ASO' TOPSOIL AND HYDROSEED SPALLS ELEV. 46.8 MATCH EXIST GRADE WILLOWS W/ CCIR COIR FABRIC (TYP) FABRIC WRAPPED SOIL LIFTS, WILLOWS PLACED EVERY 6" ON CENTER (TYP) BENCH ELEV. 42.8 COMPACTED SATISFACTORY FILL MATERIAL WSEL C 2 kcfs WSEL C 300 cfs u. CAZ:=NEIROMMANWA A ■rdillagare?- ------ ,AtaxwaMmIvawhisiannierEMBINESEMEg4". 1' QUARRY SPALLS 3' OF CLASS IV RPRAP TOP OF L. TOE ELEV. 34.9 LAUNCHABLE TOE CLASS IV RIPRAP I' TOPSOIL ELEV. 30.0 ELEV 29.1 3' OF CLASS IV RIPRAP — LWD W/ROOTBALL. ANCHORED TO BOULDER, ANGLED DOWNSTREAM. SEE DETAIL, PLATE C-501. LWD AND ANCHOR ROCKS SHALL BE PLACED ONLY BETWEEN STATION 5•25 AND STATION 7.55, SEE PLATE C-106 HORSESHOE BEND - SITE 1 TYPICAL SECTION NOT TO SCALE IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22. X se IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. Plate number: C-301 Sheet 13 of 19 m is PL 84 -99 LEVEE REMABILITATION HORSE540E BEND, 51TE5 1- 4. GREEN RIVER CRE -02 -07 HORSESHOE BEND SITE 2 - TYP SECTION KING COUNTY PN C1975 WASHINGTON 31VDS 01 ION 31IS - ONO] 30HS3SbOH N N011O3S 1VOIdA± U.S.ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT,SEATTLE CORPS OF ENGINEERS SEATTLE, w80 TON DenPi•a a BR ANDT Saw 08 APR 08 o-e.. by' BRANDT N. • E-12 -7 -226 Prew•e AT' Uec•ee by' FISCHER Rey. D••n•ru. • .9-. GATE AND TIME PLOTTED. 01-MAY -2880 I6.47 I I DESIGN FILE. I•\NISC\CIV\GREEN RIVER\2008 LEVEE RENAB\HORSESHOE BEND LE VEE\GPMBC-302TS2. WN • D C 8 A SYSE:L .0 9 "acts" IELEV 45.1) _.._.. WSEL 41C(s -. ELEV 41.0 WSEL e 2 1, cfs WSEL 0 300 cfs WIDTH VARIES. MATCH EXISTING BENCH WIDTH AND ELEVATION AT D/S END AND TAPER TO 0 AT U/S — 20.6 TOP ELEVATION VARIES. MATCH EXISTING 10' APPROX. 20' tl , "'�� eilfg16 WILLOW LIFTS. � "�T '� 1'OUARRY SPALLS WILLOWS PLACED —:� yj,NVbycv EVERY 6" ON CENTER a . 3' CLASS IV RIPRAP 2 1' TOPSOIL EXISTING AC PATH TOPSOIL OVER 1' OF QUARRY SPALLS, AND HYDROSEED 1' QUARRY SPALLS ELEV. 32.5 ELEV. 30.0 ELEV. 25.9 ELEV. 23.0 LAUNCHABLE TOE CLASS IV RIPRAP HORSESHOE BEND - SITE 3 TYPICAL SECTION NOT TO SCALE EXISTING GRADE AT RM 25.216 IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22' X 34' R IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. IN Ann), Caps d Engineers S..I6 a4dil 0 0 0 s O 2 Plate number C -303 Sheet 15 of 19 8 8 81•MAY 2888 16.48 WSEL @ 9 kcfs (APPROX) WSEL 6 6 kcfs (APPROX) 5' ALLOWANCE FOR LWD PLACEMENT WSEL @ 2 kcfs (APPROX) WSEL 6 300 cfs (APPROX COIR FABRIC WRAPS (TYP) WILLOWS W/ COIR FABRIC WRAPPED SOIL LIFTS, WILLOWS PLACED EVERY 6" ON CENTER ITYP) — 12.9 3 16.9' 18' 'IW�..mv:�.vn. nm_ min\ \'Yft LWD W /ROOTBALL. ANCHORED TO BOULDER. ANGLED DOWNSTREAM SEE DETAIL PLATE C -501 LAUNCHABLE TOE CLASS III RIPRAP EXCAVATE APPROXIMATELY 2' BELOW WATER LEVEL TO PLACE LAUNCHABLE TOE I' TOPSOIL APPROXIMATE EXISTING GROUND 8.2' EXISTING TOP OF LEVEE APPROX. ELEV 51.8 0�� ' 6\ \° YDROSEED ELEV. 44.2 RIPRAP 1' QUARRY SPALL FILTER 3' CLASS III RIPRAP ELEV. 40.1 TOE ELEV. 31.7 ELEV. 25.2 ELEV. 23.2 HORSESHOE BEND - SITE 4 TYPICAL SECTION NOT TO SCALE IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22 X 34' IT IS AREDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. US Ann, Ceres s•a. Pone 8 o: om d Plate number C -304 Sheet 16 of 19 4 el N 143,200 • STAGING -• AREA ( TEMPORARY • WORK, AREA EASEMENT) . ' • `;N 141,4001" T. NOTES: 1. THE PROJECT IS LOCATED ALONG THE RIGHT BANK OF THE GREEN RIVER. TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF KENT, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON 2. BACKGROUND MAPPING COMPILED FROM FEBRUARY 2006 AERIAL PHOTOS. MAPPING BY 3Di WEST FOR KING COUNTY ONR AND PARKS. MAP SCALE: 1" -100', CONTOUR INTERVAL: 2 FOOT. HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD83/91 IHARN) WA STATE PLANE NORTH ZONE (FEET). VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD 88. MAP HAS NOT BEEN COMPREHENSIVELY VERIFIED BY FIELD CHECKS. 3. TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT EXTENDS 30' RIVERWARD FOR LWD PLACEMENT ALONG TOE DURING CONSTRUCTION. 4. ALL REAL ESTATE REQUIREMENTS AND UTILITY RELOCATIONS NECESSARY FOR PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE OBTAINED /PERFORMED BY KING COUNTY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. //, ACCESS STAGING AREA/TRUCK TURNAROUND AREA (TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT) TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT PROJECT FOOTPRINT } 1- 100 I'+ .+>° NOT ALL UTILITIES ARE SHOWN ON THE PLANS CALL 2 WORKING DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG 1 -800- 424 -5555 IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22 x34• IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. [,.,,; � US 1� t m 13 3 GENERAL SITE PLAN 1 Plate number: C -101 Sheet 3 of 14 1 NOTES 1. THE PROJECT 15 LOCATED ALONG THE RIGHT BANK OF THE GREEN RIVER. TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF KENT, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON 2. BACKGROUND MAPPING COMPILED FROM FEBRUARY 2006 AERIAL PHOTOS. MAPPING BY 3Di WEST FOR KING COUNTY DNR AND PARKS. HAP SCALE, 1" -100', CONTOUR INTERVAL: 2 FOOT. HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD83 /91 (HARM WA STATE PLANE NORTH ZONE (FEET/. VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD 88. MAP HAS NOT BEEN COMPREHENSIVELY VERIFIED BY FIELD CHECKS. 3. TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT EXTENDS 30' RIVERWARD FOR LWD PLACEMENT ALONG TOE DURING CONSTRUCTION. 4. ALL REAL ESTATE REOUIREMENTS A140 UTILITY RELOCATIONS NECESSARY FOR PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE OBTAINED /PERFORMED BY KING COUNTY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. ACCESS STAGING AREA/TRUCK TURNAROUND AREA (TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT) TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT PROJECT FOOTPRINT 100' 50' 0 1" • 100' 1 ly `+'+ ey H 100' 200' NOT ALL UTILITIES ARE SHOWN ON THE PLANS CALL 2 WORKING DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG 1- 800 -424 -5555 IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 27 X 34• R 13 A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. ' atia of Amy s.e. almil 8 0 0 03 8 r12 A' A 6 GENERAL SITE PLAN 2 Plate number: C -102 Sheet 4 of 14 I, \MISC \CIV \GREEN RIVER \2008 LEVEE REM 89 -APR -2008 04.52 2 U5 Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District SEE TRAIL RESTORATION TYPICAL SECTION DETAIL. SEE PLATE C -501 EXISTING GROUND SURFACE (APPROX.) LEVEE PRISM ACCESS EL 45' PROX.) EL 42' HYDROSEED (TYP.) COMPACTED SATISFACTORY FILL • WILLOWS W/ COIR FABRIC WRAPPED SOIL , LIFTS. WILLOWS PLACED EVERY 6" ON CENTER tTYP) EL. 24' OH (APPROX.) EL -33' -WSLL 6,000 CFS ( APPROX.) COIR FABRIC WRAPS (TYP)— s .. vl " 1' TOPSOIL UPPER LIMIT OF OUARRY SPALLS EL. 37' WSEL 9.000 CFS (APPROX.) 1' THICK TOPSOIL (TYP.) TWIN.) BLANKET QUARRY SPALLS COMPACTED SATISFACTORY FILL EL. 16' WSEL 300 (FS ( APPROX.) 14' (A X.1 LWD W /ROOTBALL. ANCHORED TO BOULDER. ANGLED DOWNSTREAM (WSEL 300 CFS APPROX.). SEE DETAIL PLATE C -501 V(MIN)BLANKET QUARRY SPALLS LAUNCHABLE TOE. CLASS 111 RIPRAP CLASS 111 RIPRAP KENT SHOPS - NARITA TYPICAL SECTION 1 NOT TO SCALE ANCHOR ROCK (5' DIAM.) 2 s IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 27 X 34' R IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. Plate number: C -301 Sheet 8 of 14 EL. 16' (APPROX.1 B A 14' WILLOWS W/ COIR COIR RA FABRIC W FABRIC WRAPPED SOIL WRAPS (TNT) LIFTS, WILLOWS PLACED EVERY 6" ON CENTER STYP) EL. 24' -,, OH 38' EL 33' EXISTING GROUND SURFACE (APPROX.)�\ 15' 10' 24' 16' SEE TRAIL RESTORATION TYPICAL SECTION DETAIL. SEE PLATE C -501 HYDROSEED ( TYP. ) LEVEE PR ISM CAPPROX. 2 1 EL. 14' I' (MIN.) BLANKET OUARRY SPALLS 5' LWD W /ROOTBALL ANCHORED TO BOULDER. ANGLED DOWNSTREAM (WSEL 300 CFS APPROX.), SEE DETAIL PLATE C -501 LAUNCHABLE TOE, CLASS CLASS III n1 RIPRAP RIPRAP ANCHOR ROCK (5' DIAM. ) 1' TOPSOIL COMPACTED SATISFACTORY F ILL 2 1 UPPER LIMIT OF �+ QUARRY SPALLS EL. 37 WSEL 9,000 CFS ( APPROX.) 1' THICK TOPSOIL (TYP.) 1' (MIN.) BLANKET QUARRY SPALLS 10' ACCESS EL 45' A'PROX.1 EL 42' COMPACTED (APPROX.I SATISFACTORY FILL �..W _- KENT SHOPS - NARITA TYPICAL SECTION 2 NOT TO SCALE IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 27 X 34' IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. RFDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. US Army Corns of Engineers Secttle District 8 0 0 ry N 0 o: 0 0) b 6 Oo sd ao SECTION 2 Plate number: C -302 Sheet 9 of 14 1, \MISC \CIV \GREEN RIVER\2088 LEVEE REH 38-APR -2888 17.38 0 —2 0 ■ • D C B A EL. 16' — -WSEL 300CFS (APPROX. ) EL. 14' (APPROX.) 'PROX. EXIST. MOUND SURFACE 116.5' 38' EL 33' APPROX. EXIST. GROUND SURFACE • WSLL 6.000 L66 APPHUX.) LEVEE PRISM WILLOWS W/ COIR COIR FABRIC FABRIC WRAPPED SOIL WRAPS (TYP) LIFTS. WILLOWS PLACED EVERY 6" ON CENTER (TYP) EL. 24' OHW" WSEL 2.000 CFS = (APPROX.) gass YeaaY�vivas�. YP @rA l!A. \� 18.5' 2 HYDROSEED ( TYP. ) LEVEE }.••. /� PRISM r • 1' .+ EL 33' WILLOWS PLACED EVERY 6" ON CENTER (TYP) LAUNCHABLE TOE. CLASS III RIPRAP CLASS m RIPRAP HYDROSEED (TYP.) MATCH EXISTING SLOPE (A 1' (MIN.) BLANKET OUARRY SPALLS 6.4' 3' VERTICAL SPACING BETWEEN WILLOW LIFTS EL. 24' OHW (APPROX.) EL. 16 W L (APPROX.) EL 10' (APPROX ) COMPACTED SATISFACTORY FILL 1' THICK TOPSOIL UPPER LIMIT OF OUARRY SPALLS EL. 37 WSEL 9.000 CFS (APPROX.) i' THICK TOPSOIL (TYP.1 1' (MIN.) BLANKET QUARRY SPALLS 16' SEE TRAIL RESTORATION TYPICAL SECTION DETAIL. SEE PLATE C -501 10' 10' EL 45' 07. 1 1 SATISFACTTORY FILL. KENT SHOPS — NARITA TYPICAL SECTION 3 COMPACTED SATISFACTORY FILL UPPER LIMIT OF OUARRY SPALLS EL. 37 WSEL 9.000 CFS (APPROX.) 1' (MIN.) BLANKET OUARRY SPALLS 3' CLASS 111 RIPRAP PLACE 6" LIFT OF TOPSOIL ABOVE AND BELOW WILLOWS EXISTNG BANK PROTECTION DETAIL NOT TO SCALE NOT TO SCALE ACCESS EL 40' (APPROX.) 3 'n JI I P IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN Yl X 3/• IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. US Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District 8 0 d TYPICAL SECTION 3 Plot, number C -303 Sheet 10 of 14 ^f»„ 1 NOTES: T-14-1 1. THE PROJECT SITE LOCATION IS I L N i I , ( j' SECTION 23. TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH. RANGE �; •.tt 4 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, KING COU WA. —�-� 2. BACKGRORUNTY• UND MAPPING COMPILED FROM FEBRUARY 2006 AERIAL PHOTOS. MAPPING BY 30) WEST FOR KING COUNTY ONR AND PARK. _ - - MAP SCALE: 1' =100'. CONTOUR INTERVAL: 2 FOOT. HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD83/91 (HARN) WA STATE PLAN N. ZONE (FEET). VERTICAL Ov E FY NOT BEEN COMPREHENSIVELY RIIEO HAS _ FIELD CHECKS. • 1— 3. TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT .EXTENDS 30' RIVERWARD FOR LWD PLACEMENT ALONG TOE DURING CONSTRUCTION. 4. ALL REAL ESTATE REOUIREMENTS AND UTILITY RELOCATIONS NECESSARY FOR PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE OBTAINED /PERFORMED BY KING COUNTY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. INCRESS/ECRESS•ACCESS OFF OF RUSSELL ROAD • INGRESS /EGRESS ACCESS OFF OF w. MEEKER ST n, 10' ACCESS y .� 140.700 ACCESS STAGING AREA AND TRUCK TURNAROUNO (TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT) TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT PROJECT FOOTPRINT 100' 50' 0 100' 200' r • 100 I .i .a rr .... 1� IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THIN 27 X 34' ff IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. Plate number C -101 Sheet 3 of 8 • D C B A 103' to 125' 97' - 101' 89' - 91' EXISTING GROUND SURFACE (APPROX.) HYDROSEED (TYP) - 10' EL 45' (APPROX.) 1' TOPSOIL 2 EL 34' SEL 6 KCFS (APPROX) COIR FABRIC WILLOWS WITH WRAPS (TYP) COIR FABRIC SOIL LIFTS. WILLOW PLACED EVERY 6" ON CENTER (TYP) —, 10" COMPACTED SATISFACTORY FILL EL 25' OHW WSEL Z'KCFS (APPROX) 2 EL 18' WSEL 300 CFS ( APPROX) EL 16' ANCHOR ROCK (5' 01A) LWD W /ROOTBALL. ANCHORED TO BOULDER. ANGLED DOWNSTREAM (WSEL 300 CFS APPROX). SEE DETAIL PLATE C -501 LAUNCHABLE TOE. CLASS III R)PRAP CLASS III R IPRAP 1' THICK TOPSOIL 1' (MIN) BLANKET QUARRY SPALLS . MEYERS GOLF TYPICAL SECTION NOT TO SCALE COMPACTED SATISFACTORY FILL SPALLS UP TO EL.39' 9 KCFS EL (APPROX) _2 EL 35' to 42' (APPROX.) SEE "TRAIL RESTORATION TYPICAL SECTION' DETAIL. PLATE C -501 IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22. X 34' It IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. US Arm, Carps .1 EMI.... smog. (Tao-kg } 0 U Plate number: C -301 Sheet 5 of 8 ITO 01-MAY -2008 14.2q _,:i.,:-_-,-.:_::,...4,-,,,_.), ;€05tor r= , 1•1-T I ,,, w_ m ;ii i e- • •_ filli !PROJECT FOOTPRINT i CENTERLINE OF 112 w1EORK RAREk'Y IRA CENTERLINE if,� /EASEME NT' / // S. 180TH ST ACCESS FPOM /. 180TH A ' NOTES 1. MAPPING COMPILED FROM FEBRUARY 2006 AERIAL PHOTOS. MAPPING BY 3Di 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 FOR PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE OBTAINED /PERFORMED BY CITY OF TUKWILA PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 3. TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT EXTENDS 30' RIVERWARD FOR LWD PLACEMENT ALONG TOE DURING CONSTRUCTION. ACCESS PROPOSED STAGING AREA (TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT) ACCESS ROAD TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT PROJECT FOOTPRINT .ACCESS it •ROAD N 163.200 ACCESS. ROAD -,1 80' •0' 0 Plate number. C -101 Sheet 3 of 16 5 180TH ST S. 180TH ST. 5 180TH ST - O 0 NOTES 1. MAPPING COMPILED FROM FEBRUARY 2006 AERIAL PHOTOS MAPPING BY 3Di WEST FOR KING COUNTY DNR AND PARKS. MAP SCALE: r -100'. CONTOUR INTERVAL; 200 F00T. 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 SHALL BE OBTAINED /PERFORMED BY CITY OF TUKWILA PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 3. TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT EXTENDS 30' RIVERWARD FOR LWD PLACEMENT ALONG TOE DURING CONSTRUCTION. ACCESS ACCESS • N 163.800 • v- PARK IN LOT OUGH PROPOS 0 ' STAGIN EA - . .I TEMPORARY' WORK'A �..' AREA EASEMENT) • PROPOSED STAGING AREA (TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT) EXISTING PERMANENT LEVEE EASEMENT TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT PROJECT FOOTPRINT CENTERLINE OF LEVEE 'S • N 163,500 • ACCES▪ S - WITHIN`' ••• -EXISTING PERMANENT.: '`.',LEVEE EASEMENT PROJECT FOOTPRINT BENCH 50' 25' 0 • N.:163.200 IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 72 X 34' IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. Plate number C -102 Sheet 4 of 16 SEE TRAIL RESTORATION TYPICAL SECTION, SEE PLATE C -501 112' 10' ACCESS 12' 14 Q 24' EL 36' 1 APPROX.1 SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL �1 SPALLS UP TO ELEV. 28' 9,000 CFS ELEV. APPROX. TUKWILA 205 - SITE 5 TYPICAL SECTION 1 NOT TO SCALE HYDROSEED (TYP) EXISTING GROUND SURFACE (APPROX.) 15' 11' 32' 6,000 CFS EL 24' COIR WRAP (TYP3, WILLOWS PLACED EVERY 6" ON CENTER (TYP) 16' SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL QUARRY SPALLS ♦ OHW Et, 16' 2,0 1' THICK TOPSOIL (TYP) 2 CLASS IV RIPRAP LAUNCHABLE TOE 0 CFS au. fio EL 10' WSEL 30 EL 8' ANCHOR ROCK, 5' DIAM. CFS (APPROX.) LWD W /ROOTBALL ANCHORED TO BOULDER, ANGLED DOWNSTREAM (WSEL 300 CFS APPROX.), SEE DETAIL PLATE C -501 IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22'X34' IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. 05 Army Caps of Egirra Srm6 (Maid 8 z 0 3 W I— Z v) 0 1- U to O N N J Qa U a Y } H- Plate number. C -301 Sheet 9 of 16 AC PAVEMENT EL 21' ---(APPROX:-T OM. 114' 10' ACCESS EL 36' (APPROX. SEE TRAIL RESTORATION TYPICAL SECTION. SEE PLATE C -501 86' 14 24' SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL HYDROSEED (TYP) ,k.'. 'EL 28' ( APPROX.) WSEL 9.000 CIS EXISTING GROUND SURFACE (APPROX.) 16' 16' TUKWILA 205 - SITE 5 TYPICAL SECTION 2 NOT TO SCALE SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL COIR WRAP.(TYP) 16' �.`C \'V •v: el'II JImu : s lit ki tv �� °r4:, F9/ / /A\ / / /.W /2a Rl 1 JIt ll `7p r •.1 OUARRY SPALLS 1' THICK TOPSOIL (TYP) WILLOWS IN SOIL, WILLOWS PI,ACED EVERY 6" ON EL. 24' (APPROX.) WSEL 6.000 M;FS 1 p OHW CLASS IV RIPRAP LAUNCHABLE TOE. CLASS IV RIPRAP EL 10' WSEL 300 CFS EL 8' (APPROX.) (APPS (APPROX.) IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22' X 34' IT IS AREDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. (re. aratt s z o 3 tf') 0 n w CV o^ Z ' <� I/) p `s 04 ■ 0 ow LA ONN ? Q J 0 a YQ- } o 2 H u I— x Plate number: C -302 Sheet 10 of 16 • PL 84 -99 LEVEE REHABILITATION TUKWILA 205 SITES 3 1 5. GRE -3.07 TUKWILA 205 - SITE 5 TYPICAL SECTION 3 KING COUNTY PN C1972 WASHINGTON soz vilm>ini •0 N • r < o m • Z D 0 9' IAPPROX.1 • U.S.ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT,SEATTLE CORPS OF ENGINEERS SEATTLE. WASP/HM.4 u.. En.d oy' wES T o . 08 APR 08 LEJON T..• E- 12-7-229 Primed by' Checked ny FISCHER Pe.. ST^.w D..nbtl.. Sew —. Symbol GATE AND TIME PLOTTED 01- MAY -2008 11.22 I I DESIGN FILES 1. \NI SC \CIV \GREEN RIVER\2009 LEVEE REHAB \TUKMILA 205 LEVEE\GRTWG•303T53.000 D C B A SEE TRAIL TYPICAL RESTORATION SECTION, SEE PLATE C -502 110' 12 14' 24' a EL 29' t ' APPROX. 1 10' ACCESS 1� EL 35' (APPROX.1 SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL HYDROSEED (TYP) 15' EXISTING GROUND SURFACE ( APPROX,) EL 27' SPALLS UP TO ELEVATION 27' 9,000 CFS 30 COIR FABRIC WRAPS (TYP) 6,000 CFS EL 23' SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL OUARRY SPALLS 1 THICK TOPSOIL (TYP) TUKWILA 205 - SITE 3 TYPICAL SECTION NOT TO SCALE WILLOWS WITH COIR FABRIC SOIL LIFTS, WILLOWS PLACED EVERY 6" ON CENTER (TYP) • 1 EL 15' 2,000 CF I. ..,`•?`� is �:�S..r� CLASS IV RIPRAP LAUNCHABLE TOE, CLASS IV RIPRAP ANCHOR ROCK, 5' DIAM. 5' oa EL 10' WSEL 300 EL 8' ( APPROX.) CFS (APPROX.) LWO W /ROOTBALL, ANCHORED TO BOULDER. ANGLED DOWNSTREAM (WSEL 300 CFS APPROX.), SEE DETAL PLATE C -501 IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THIN 22• X 34' IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. ri Leda MON VI a3 2 O Plate number C -304 Sheet 12 of 16 D 1 1 1 • • US Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District �U of Army Corps Engineers Seattle Diann PL84-99LEVEE REHABILITATION TUKWILA 205: SITES 3 & 5, GREEN RIVER CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON A P N C1972 FY 08 GRE -3 -07 DRAWING INDEX SHEET NO. PLATE NO. TITLE 1 G -001 TITLE, DRAWING INDEX, VICINITY AND AREA MAPS 2 C -001 CONSTRUCTION NOTES 3 C -101 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 -104 TUKWILA 205 - SITE 5 SITE PLAN 2 7 C -105 TUKWILA 205 - SITE 3 SITE PLAN I 8 C -106 TUKWILA 205 - SITE 3 SITE PLAN 2 9 C -30I 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 1 (NOT SUBMITTED) 16 C -308 SITE 3 CROSS SECTIONS 2 (NOT SUBMITTED) 17 C -50I DETAILS 90% SUBMITTAL 11 B R I T I S H C O L U M B I A BELLINGHAM MT. VERNON EVERETT SEATTLE WASHINGTON PR ELLENS'G PORTLAND O R E G O N 0 Y DEPOT PENDLETON VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE 0 WALLA WALLA 111111111111111111111111 '111111 11111,. 111111 ,I I 11111111 11111 III 'APR 0 3 2008 COMMUN3TY DEVELOPMENT C Recommended by 0 Z W J N D L� 0 u 0 0 0 >, d 0 n a. Ic W • 9 > 01 D: 8 t- Ul o 0 - . 0 � w Y � � a Submitted by Z 0 r v 0 5 T a 0 f ; L'> N 00_ Z Z 0W. 1- SEATTLE. WASHINGTON -o 0. WASHINGTON 0. KING COUNTY Plate number G -001 IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22' X 34' IT IS Sheet 1 of 17 A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. z 0 0 m s OCE J Nis 6 f m i w 0 w J m m w i 0 LL .z N 0 11•MAR•2008 22.45 0 La 0 0 X 0 —c 0 0 • 2 ,A„ nrpm e Co • rps Seattle Varlet CO PRELIMINARY CLEARING AND GRUBBING, STAGING AREAS AND CONSRUCTION ACCESS RAMP 1. ESTABLISH CONSTRUCTION STAGING AREAS, AS SHOWN ON PLANS. ADVANCES` CONTINUE �TOEINSTIALL SIILTTFENCINGSALONGFFULL LENGTH OF DISTURB D WORKING EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AS NEEDED TO PREVENT THE DISCHARGE OR ACCUMULATION OF SEDIMENT INTO THE RIVER, ADJACENT SWALES, CATCH BASINS AND STORM DRAINS AND OFF-SITE. ACCUMULATION OF SEDIMENT IN ADJACENT SWALES OR STORM DRAINS WILL BE MONITORED DAILY AND CLEANED TO ENSURE CONTINUED SERVICE THROUGHTOUT CONSTRUCTION. TREES NEEDED TO BFACILLIITATE ACCESSAND RAAMMPCONSTRUCTION. DISPOSE OF AND OTHER INCLUDING OF AN APPROVED AND PERMITTED OFFSITE LOCATION. (2) RESTORATION, TRAIL RESURFACING, AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION WORK AREAS. 1. CONSTRUCT TEMPOR CONSTRUCTION IL WONG AREAS, OF SET -BACK LEVEE AT SITE 3 AND RESTORE ASPHALT ON ALL DISTURBED AREAS, INCLUDING 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. 3. HE EXCAVATORMBUCKETL WIOLLEENTERETHE WATER ONLY TTOO EXCAVATEOMATERIAL TO ALLOW OPLACEMENTWOFL ROCK VAND H WATERLINE. LOG 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. EGETATION TO B ER PRESERVED CLEARING ERING SILIMITS 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. C0 \STRUCTIO\ \OTES WILL BE EDITED FURTHER FOR SITE SPECIFIC C0 \DITIO \S PRIOR 10 FI \AL SUBVITTAL ♦ 1 C oo O rn t` W 1- o N t3 C Z 0 ° W c • RECEIVED .'APR 0 3 2008 COMMUNfTY DEVELOPMENT IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22' X 34' IT IS AREDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. ' W J 1- r a W Vf 1-7 1Z W Z Z w K w w ▪ O Z Z W 0 r " vi 6 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON CONSTRUCTION NOTES WASHINGTON O. U n KING COUNTY Plate number C -001 Sheet of 17 z u 0 0 0 r9 m 0 0 w w -J N m w W w J m m N K W w CC 0 > u U N II-MAR•2008 22136 • NOTES: 1. MAPPING COMPILED FROM FEBRUARY AERIAL PHOTOS. MAPPING BY 3Di WEST 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--FOR: PROJECT PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE PR ORNTO CO S R7 BY ION, KING_ COUNTY . . 3. TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT ALONG TOE DURING CONSTRUCTION. PLACEMENT PROPOSED ACCESS PROPOSED STAGING AREA (TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT) TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT PROJECT FOOTPRINT RECE 'APR 0 3 ED 2008 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 80' AO' 0 B0' V. 80' 160' IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 27 X 34• IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. US Army Corps of Enp'.x.rs S..td. Markt t N N w En aW C Z O w aw J J r W V K U W Z N 2 5 W 2 W W Z Z W 0 > i • D z 0 WASHING TON m z 0. KING COUNTY Plote number: C -101 Sheet of 17 z — z 0 m s 0 w J N N J y3 6 2 0 W C W W W CO CC m > z 0 U W LL z M W.' 0 m' m N 0 0 W 0 cr a z 0 W 0 S. 180TH ST. 0 S. 180TH ST. ' N \,.:-,.. S. 180TH ST. • 1. • e N 163,800 PROJECT FOOTPRINT .1. PROPOSED ACCESS'`" (TEMPORARY WORK • ' AREA EASEMENT) BENCH • 1. J_ I NOTES: 1. MAPPING COMPILED FROM FEBR 2006 AERIAL PHOTOS. MAPPING BY 3Di W 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 1+HALC'Be OBTAINED /PERFORMED Btf KING COUNT" PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 3. TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT EXTENDS 30'RIVERWARD FOR LWD PLACEMENT ALONG TOE DURING CONSTRUCTION. /// PROPOSED ACCESS PROPOSED STAGING AREA (TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT) TEMPORARY WORK AREA EASEMENT PROJECT FOOTPRINT RECEIVED rAPR1" 0 30' LU'Jrr o so__�io0• US Army Corps of Eng s Seattle Markr 1 E 8 Mel COMMUNITY DEVEL(WASURES LESS THAN 22' x34' IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. ' 0 0 2 N N n • 3 Z TO ° W J SEATTLE. wASHNGTON WQ P" J (n 0- Lr.J LC) (f O ) N J Q J EJ W Y Lil D 1— WASHINGTON KING COUNTY Plote number: C -102 Sheet of 17 u z u N i u wN x CC LIS J N K Z. W z 0 N t -J LL -0 N O O W 0 a La — Q 0 N 0 z ANDOVER PARK w. i'1 1 mm ox 00 '1 m vm z 00 z O mm m Ar C7 % mZ m, R1 0 (J E' 1; 288;700- T "I • D C) 2 r- 2 m en Z 0 -x GREEN RIVER • Z PL 84 -99 LEVEE REHABILITATION TUKWILA 205, SITES 3 & 5, GRE -3 -07 TUKWILA 205 - SITE 5 SITE PLAN 1 KING COUNTY PN C1972 WASHINGTON rn /s�% 0 m rn '' U.S.ARMY ENGINEER DI,SEATTLE CORPS OF ENGINEERS SEATTLE. WASHINGTON Designed by, WEST Deter 11 MAR 08 Drown by' LEJON File • E-12 -7 -229 Prepared by CbecI ed by FISCHER Rev. 1 E I.28%3S 1 D m 0 0 vN (iv V72 �7c D:' z T„,...„ o >-io. Z O -Dim - C-Di -00- m m0 xI MO -0F' V A m•' z O v nN T'Zr --' ICICSZ 0-I z<Atrz�00 C,1 oomOO -<oo r000 -4AZ v <Kx�ZDZ1O Zm T czi �_, Ob <°Z: 010 Alms Miig N�zm 0-4-< 33S 'SS333V ar, x 0 1D D'+1N , rAo 0 m 1 � yi `SyrrOe Description Dal. sppr. SyrneM Oneripdan • 1 mcc sru cn c.I vsGRGLN RI VCR \9RRR IFVFE REHAB \TUKWILA 205 LEVEE \GRTVC- 103S01.DGN • 1 • I ' r L_ Ls___ 3 i' 1 L S. 180TH ST. m m c -- m w .j / • - I:7- p ! yj. I ( PROPOSED_ACCESS_ • 9�ti: —/ ' -FROM 180TH SEE GENERAL SITE PLAN FOR CONTINUATION OF ACCESS — • �' I • of • • / ri . L ` • _ o . .1 a 0 F 1 • 1 • / / . •,• / I• , / // /• - /// i /, ' / / . /. / ,''. - %/ .j, '/,//2 // /' / i / j/. • 1 • sechv R see P AT pTAN,A, S01 ' '' BEGIN TRANSITION 'BACK • / /' ' , TO EXISTING' -LEVEE PRISM:' (NO LWD), TRANSITION LENGTH / ; ALONG BENCH' 130', SEE PLATE. T/ C -303, ISTAT1ON '9.40)• ' \ ' • } •J / •\/ PROJECT FOOTPRINT • i r . i / / / TEMPORARY/ / WORK AREA i EASEMENT • r,` •• 1 10' ACCESS BENCH CENTERLINE OF LEVEE BEGIN SITE'S , TYPICAL:: SECTION 3.(LAYBACK, WITH RETAINING WALL, NO LWD), SEE PLATE . C- 303, .(STATION 8•10) N )63,80 / 1 1 1 1 1 1 BEGIN SITE 5 TYPICAL SECTION 2 (LAYBACK, NO LWD). SEE PLATE C-302.(STATION 6.80).: _J z Cr L MATCH LINE TO PLATE C -103 BEGIN TRANSITION BETWEEN • SITE 5 TYPICAL SECTION 1 AND TYPICAL SECTION 2. 'MINIMUM ' TRANSITION LENGTH •. 100' SEE' 'PLATES C -301 AND C-302 (STATION 5.70) L NOTES: 1. MAPPING COMPILED FROM FEBRUARY 2 06 AERIAL PHOTOS. MAPPING BY 3Di 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: NAVD88. MAP HAS NOT BEEN COMPREHENSIVELY VERIFIED BY FIELD CHECKS. 2. FOR SITE 5 STAGING AND ACCESS, SEE PLATE 0-101. RECEIVED 'APR 0 3 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1" • 30' 30' 15' 0 30' 60' [RIM US Army Corps of Engnws IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22' X 34• IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. rice. Maria • 8 4A CO 0 m N N r1- 3 z .0 r� 1 -' 0 • SEATTLE. WASHINGTON WASHINGTON KING COUNTY Plate number C -104 Sheet of 17 z 0 0 cc U) s r 0 u LU CO -- J CO m w w CC 6 iS 2 a [: i 1. u • u u c • B P. 0 0 0 0 N W N 163.600 • • E 1,290,600 -j---- --------- -- MATCH i; 1 .� CENTERLINE % OF LEVEE i E 1,290,600 LINE TO PLATE C -106 1 ... • • • I 1 • / • • ACCESS N 163, 400 PROJECT \. FOOTPRINT / • • •I, • • / AT STATION 0.00 . TRANSITION FOR 130' -' ;ROM EXISTING LEVEE ".PRISM INTO -SITE 3 TYP. .SECTION, SEE .PLATE C-303 N 163;2bd0 LD- FOR_�30'l, i' • • I• / TEMP0f PRY WORK AREA EASEMENT. GRE�VER 7 BEGIN SITE 3 TYPICAL SECTION (LAYBACK WITH LWD). SEE PLATE C -303. (STATION 130) NOTES: ILMJJ US Army taps • of Engineers Sp„~, 1. MAPPING COMPILED FROM FEBRUARY 2006 AERIAL PHOTOS. MAPPING BY 3Di WEST FOR KING COUNTY DNR AND PARKS. MAP SCALE: 1" -100', CONTOUR INTERVAL: 2 FOOT. HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD83 /91 (HARM WA STATE PLAN NORTH ZONE (FEET). VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD 88. MAP HAS NOT BEEN COMPREHENSIVELY VERIFIED BY FIELD CHECKS. RECEIVED rAPR 0 3 2008 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 30' 15' 0 1" • 30' Ir ' 30' 60' IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 2Y X 34• IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. 1 1 • CO O rn N N r. N • W V) vl 0 3 5. C Z 0 a J • SEATTLE. WASNNGTON • N) • LLJ <� N WASHINGTON o, 0 O. KING COUNTY Plote number C -105 Sheet of 17 z 0 CC 0 CC W _> J ys ti W W CO CC N 0 W CC W 0 u u N 2 2008 22.44 C-) 0 0 z PL 84 -99 LEVEE REHABILITATION TUKWILA 205. SITES 361 5. GRE-3-07 TUKWILA 205 - SITE 3 SITE PLAN 2 KING COUNTY PN C1972 WASHINGTON lU.S.ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT,SEATTLE CORPS OF ENGINEERS SEATTLE, WASHINGTON Deergned br: WEST Dole, s 11 MAR 08 Drown by: LEJON File • E -12 -7 -229 Prepared by: Checked by' FISCHER Rev. • /7OlAS 7 2 OD-10: ZmJ 0 -4 0 DD m -oz 0 v SZ(r. DyOCXZ �gl -Z�0C) < °zoo 0o GDOaco. ; m�-'_z v yC A ;r < ; = ;—ZiD Aop mtl.(zM22v A 0>A02-t1 nDm O0 -Ct•UMw <!AVo OM wm ,i mSO;> m V m ° r < •t m °Z23 0 -If 0 2 n D V 0 0C F. m730 V) DATE AND TIME PLOTTED, II-MAR-2009 22144 DESIGN FILE I. \MISC \CIV \GREEN RIVER\200B LEVEE REHAB \TUKW LA 205 LEVEE \GRTMC- 106S02.0GN • / / SHY/. Descrier Dal. App. Symbol Deecrbda, DATE AND TIME PLOTTED, II-MAR-2009 22144 DESIGN FILE I. \MISC \CIV \GREEN RIVER\200B LEVEE REHAB \TUKW LA 205 LEVEE \GRTMC- 106S02.0GN • D c B A • • 109' • E 3.' tAPPROX.1 10' ACCESS 12' 14' 24' ESTIMATED FOOTPRINT 2 tik44414414446441441 y,ikk EL 36' ( APPROX. ) SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL 2 EXISTING GROUND SURFACE (APPROX.) 32✓ 11' SPALLS UP TO ELEV. 28' 9.000 CFS ELEV. APPROX. 32' 6,000. CFS EL 24' COIR WRAP (Tl'P) WILLOWS PLACED • EVERY 6" ON CENTER (TYP) TUKWILA 205 - SITE 5 TYPICAL SECTION 1 NOT TO SCALE SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL QUARRY SPALLS OHW -EL 16' 2,00 2 —11 0 CFS 1- CLASS IV RIPRAP LAUNCHABLE TOE ANCHOR ROCK, 5' DIAM. m EL 8' 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 Plote COMMUNITY ' number DEVELOPMENT C — 3 01 Sheet of 17 IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22' X 34 IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. 1 WI US Andy Corps of Enpnsars Soon. CCorkt 00 0 N O' ,w F- r ° W e3 z 0 rw ° J • a N y ¢ U Z N Z O W cc 4 w0 2 N z a W 0 O • ¢� U ui SEATTLE. WASNWGTON WASHINGTON KING COUNTY z 0 0 ✓ m o- r m v w w CC J N J J CD CC N > z w 0 u z w -J LL z N 0 i N N m C0 N E D- ty v= CCA GE 8C G) PL 84 -99 LEVEE REHABILITATION TUKWILA 205, SITES 3 T. 5. GRE-3 -07 TUKWILA 205 - SITE 5 TYPICAL SECTION 2 KING COUNTY PN C1972 WASHINGTON w (7 0 P1 m za —+n U.S.ARMY ENGINEER MSTRI,SEATTLE CORPS OF ENGINEERS SEATTLE. WASHINGTON ugea0 by: De WEST Dates ■ 11 MAR 08 Drown by: LEJON rd. • E -12 -7 -229 PreDered by. Checked by FISCHER Rev. DATE AND TIME PLOTTED. II-MAR -2008 22.46 DESIGN FILE. 1. \MISC \CIV \GREEN RIVER \2008 LEVEE REHAB \TUKW LA 205 LEVEE \GRTWG- 302TS2.DON 4. ■ f/ ,Synbo D.crOon Dole Akc, Sr... Oe.aneee II-MAR -2008 22.46 DESIGN FILE. 1. \MISC \CIV \GREEN RIVER \2008 LEVEE REHAB \TUKW LA 205 LEVEE \GRTWG- 302TS2.DON 4. g� V CA PL 84-99 LEVEE REHABILITATION TUKWILA 205: SITES 3 & 5, GRE-3.07 TUKWILA 205 - SITE 5 TYPICAL SECTION 3 KING COUNTY PN C1972 WASHINGTON 31V OS 01 10N TUKWILA 205 - SITE 5 TYPICAL SECTION 3 1 0 m • r n r z -D n .-- V1 S 'D in >J CA D- r- -0 < m • • • • 1 v v 0 O m r N r 9' (APPROX.I 12' vm yr d O S r m r U.S.ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT,SEATTLE CORPS OF ENGINEERS SEATTLE. WASWNGTON Delved by WEST Dale. 11 MAR 08 Drawn by: LEJON Fee • E -12 -7 -229 Pr ,pared by Checked by FISCHER Rev • / / Drnriphron Dale Apr, Symbol Dnagbon DATE AND TIME PLOTTED, II-MAR -2008 22,46 DESIGN FILFe I, \MIS,. \CiV \f.RFFN RIVER \700R IFVFF RF.HAR \TUKWLA 205 LEVEE \GRTMG -303TS3.DGN 1 • ) L • 107' D EL 29' APPROX.I 10' ACCESS C B A '.0 12' 14' 24' 0 a SATISFACTORY _ COMPACTED FILL - EL 35' (APPROX.) EXISTING GROUND SURFACE ( APPROX.) 12' 30' EL 27' SPALLS UP TO ELEVATION 27' 9,000 CFS COIR FABRIC WRAPS (TYP) 6,000 CFS EL 23' tft.]�1 -11� WILLOWS WITH COIR FABRIC $0IL LIFTS, WILLOWS PACED EVERY 6" ON CENT (TYP) SATISFACTORY COMPACTED FILL 1 QUARRY SPALLS p bHW EL 15' 2,000 CF • CLASS IV RIPRAP TUKWILA 205 - SITE 3 TYPICAL SECTION NOT TO SCALE LAUNCHABLE TOE, CLASS IV RIPRAP ANCHOR ROCK. 5' DIAM. N EL 8' (APPROX.) co CONIFER W /ROOTBALL, (30' LENGTH, 2' DIAM.) ANCHORED TO BOULDER, ANGLED DOWNSTREAM (WSEL 300 CFS APPROX.), SEE DETAIL PLATE C -501 U • e mers of E d rp( Seat& Mario RECENT-11 rAPR 0 3 2808 IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 22' X 34' IT IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALEACCORDINGLY. I .$ 0 8 0 2 • W 2 a3 0 0 w n J • WASHINGTON u a KING COUNTY Plate number, C -304 Sheet of 17 z 0 0 0 X O 0 w J m J CO x a w w m CDN IXz z 0 U 0 x 11-MAR -2008 22.47 INEJM O1 • • •10a8" '/I� \\Ya% 15/" GALV TOP RAIL EMBEDMENT w a a •,0 MIN 1' GRAVEL BACKFILL . 3" CLR 2" CLR •8 VERT . a 10" GEOMESH AT EACH WEEP HOLE 27" DIA GALV SCH 40 POST a 8' -0" 0.C. W /END CAPS CHAIN LINK FENCE 9 GA GALV WIRE MESH •4 a 12" I 11'8" EL 36: T /LEVEE J oo ' /4)V,9%n \ CLR 10" •4 4 12' •4 4 12' 3" DIA WEEP HOLES a 10' MAX EL 27= ^� AC PAVMT •5 a 12" •8 DOWEL 3" CLR LAPPED W /VERT REINF 11' -0" Z KEY x,72,. _13'4„ I 72" CUT HORIZ REINFATING 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. L RCJ EL 24.25 BOF 2" AC -- 4" BASE COURSE COMPACTED SUBGRADE TYPICAL AC TRAIL PAVEMENT SECTION NOT TO SCALE 5' DIAM. QUARRY STONE ANCHOR (TYP) 3'4" PREMOLDED EXP. JT LIMM SEALANT 55//a DIA X 9" SMOOTH STEEL DOWEL & 1' -6" VERT (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. GREEN RIVER RIVERWARD SIDE OF LEVEE 5H•1V MAX. 14'-16' WIDTH DEPENDS ON SITE (SEE TYPICAL SECTIONS) 10' 5FI :1V MAX. AC ASPHALT LOW EDGE 1" ABOVE FINISH GRADE PATH 4" BASE COURSE '1 COMPACTED SUBGRADE 2" ASPHALT PAVING (AC) LANDWARD SIDE OF LEVo TRAIL RESTORATION TYPICAL SECTION NOT TO SCALE 30' 2' DIAM. LWD CONIFER (TYP) 1/2" DIAM. CHAIN (TYP) • t' -4 11 ® r .i .1 23' 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 N RIPRAP (TYP) SUMMER WATER = SURFACE ELEV. (APPROX. 300 CFS) TYPICAL LOG PLACEMENT (SECTION VIEW) NOT TO SCALE RECEIVED !APR 011 CCGOMMUI',! 110.1 • IF SHEET MEASURES LESS THAN 27 X 34' R IS A REDUCED PRINT. REDUCE SCALE ACCORDINGLY. J US Any Corps of Eng:woos SsoM• Cubit 8 `(0 0 N •W N 11) oCC r z °o ;w c r0: ax 5 CZ • 0 z a cc =m N Qy CCn w N W W 0' a,o as J T� a? WASHINGTON Q 1— a L1J KING COUNTY Plate number. C -501 Sheet of 17 U 0 0 m N 0 w J 0 0 J 0 w w w w J 0 0 N C La W z 0 0 u u N II- MAR -2088 22.47